|
The Galaxy is Just Packed!
United States
Madison
Wisconsin
-
This should be an interesting discussion.
Expanding upon this thread:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/318040
I propose that the new Dungeons and Dragons 4th Edition can be classified as a board game, and added to the BGG database.
D&D's main hook is fantasy combat, and in the new 4th edition all combat in the game has moved to a 1" grid with miniatures. This is not option, like in the past. The rules state that combat will work this way.
Combat is the roll of a die, attempting to roll a target number, modified by stats and stuff. Just like a million other fantasy board dungeon crawls.
Even special abilities are in terms of the board. For example, one of the races is able to teleport short distances, and the distances are reflected in the number squares on the board.
In effect, D&D has turned into an "advanced Warhammer Quest. All the "action" now happens on a board, and all the rest of the rules are there with the purpose of setting up the next board.
What does everyone think?
(Dibs on adding the game to the database.) 
-
Paul DeStefano
United States
Long Island
New York
It's a Zendrum. www.zendrum.com
-
Re: Is the new D&D 4th Edition a board game? Discuss....
I think I hate threads that have "Discuss...." asa tagline. As if I thought someone would post and NOT allow participation? Or is it a general order, like: Ready, Set, DISCUSS! Either case rubs me the wrong way.
-
Aaron Tubb
United States
Fuquay Varina
North Carolina
-
Re: Is the new D&D 4th Edition a board game? Discuss....
No, it's still a role-playing game. The DM does not try to kill the characters, like in a dungeon crawl board game. Neither the DM or the players can "win" the game. It sounds like the main difference between 4th ed and previous editions are the rigid combat mechanics. It's still an RPG, though.
If RPGs are board games, though, then they should ALL be on here.
Editted for seplling
-
Aaron Tubb
United States
Fuquay Varina
North Carolina
-
Re: Is the new D&D 4th Edition a board game? Discuss....
Geosphere wrote: I think I hate threads that have "Discuss...." asa tagline. As if I thought someone would post and NOT allow participation? Or is it a general order, like: Ready, Set, DISCUSS! Either case rubs me the wrong way. Me, too, usually. They make me want to give a one word answer and then never check the thread again. 
-
Kristian Madsen
Sweden
Uppsala
-
Re: Is the new D&D 4th Edition a board game? Discuss....
You can certainly see it as a form of minatures skirmish game. Any roleplaying is strictly optional, from a rules point of view...
/kgm
-
The Galaxy is Just Packed!
United States
Madison
Wisconsin
-
Geosphere wrote: I think I hate threads that have "Discuss...." asa tagline. As if I thought someone would post and NOT allow participation? Or is it a general order, like: Ready, Set, DISCUSS! Either case rubs me the wrong way.
OK, I took it out. I was channeling Coffee Talk.
Now...DISCUSS!
-
Andrew Goenner
United States
Superior
Wisconsin
Running 5 PbFs
And still sane...mostly
-
I miss real role-playing. If I want to play a miniatures game, I'll go and get one. It seems since WotC took over, they just keep changing D&D to make it into another game they can sell booster packs for.
What happened to the days when the character said he shoots his bow at an orc and the DM says "You misjudged the distance and the arrow falls short." Or the non-combat-heavy bard who traveled along to spread the tale of the group in towns? It just seems to me like all of this is being shoved aside for mechanics. I don't know, I guess if this is what 4th edition is, I'll just play a game of descent and stick with 3rd edition, which at least gives feet instead of squares in the mechanics.
-
Paul DeStefano
United States
Long Island
New York
It's a Zendrum. www.zendrum.com
-
OK, then the answer is NO.
I don't know what D&D you've been playing, but every Player's Handbook I have gives spell effects in inches or other units. It has always been that way. The game was designed for a board. Always.
4Ed without the roleplay is 4Ed D&D minis. Which is in the database.
-
Christopher Dearlove
United Kingdom
Chelmsford
Essex
SoRCon 5 2-4 Feb 2012 http://www.sorcon.co.uk
-
kgm3219 wrote: You can certainly see it as a form of minatures skirmish game. Any roleplaying is strictly optional, from a rules point of view.
And so the wheel turns full circle. (Back to Chainmail.)
-
Nick Warcholak
United States
State College
Pennsylvania
-
Aarontu wrote: No, it's still a role-playing game. The DM does not try to kill the characters, like in a dungeon craw board game. Neither the DM or the players can "win" the game. It sounds like the main difference between 4th ed and previous editions are the rigid combat mechanics. It's still an RPG, though.
If RPGs are board games, though, then they should ALL be on here.
Aaron said it for me. Even if you can treat 4E like a miniatures skirmish game, there are still no "win" conditions in the rules as written.
Now let's get back to people ignoring the OP completely so they can complain about the new edition.
-
The Galaxy is Just Packed!
United States
Madison
Wisconsin
-
Aarontu wrote: No, it's still a role-playing game. The DM does not try to kill the characters, like in a dungeon craw board game. Neither the DM or the players can "win" the game. It sounds like the main difference between 4th ed and previous editions are the rigid combat mechanics. It's still an RPG, though.
[Devil's Advocate Mode]
The only fantasy dungeoncrawl boardgame I can think of where the DM tries to kill the characters is Descent: Journeys in the Dark. In all the other ones that have a DM (HeroQuest, Advanced Heroquest, Dragonfire, etc.) the DM is just that, a DM. How is D&D now any different from those games?
Aarontu wrote: If RPGs are board games, though, then they should ALL be on here.
I disagree. Only the ones with actual, required board game mechanics. I can't think of any except the new D&D (off the top of my head). Although there are probably a few out there.
-
Stephen Crouch
United States
Chapin
South Carolina
-
One of the guys in the group (arguably the most wizened in the ways of DnD of our group) said 'they took out the flavor matrix!'
The general opinion appears to be that it's still an RPG in that it gives you *some* guidelines to a world, but it's more a 'combat RPG'. I personally wouldn't call it a board game just yet, for reasons that others have said above, although it is VERY possible to play it that way. Perhaps by 4.5 or 5 it will just well and truly be the DnD minis game and they tell you to role play around it that if you want to (as long as you keep buying those boosters and tile packs).
Yes, it was a load of complexity that wasn't needed IF you added in supplements. Basic DnD wasn't overly complex by any stretch if you just use the core three, and that's all you need for the game. But that's for the other thread.
EDIT: Yes, the combat requires boardgame-like mechanics, but the rest of the game doesn't. There just isn't as much of the 'rest of the game' anymore. They're dangerously close to just being an elaborate, expensive boardgame though. Might as well sit around playing Warhammer Quest and using crazy accents.
-
Tom Grant
United States
Washington
DC
-
What's the scarier alignment, lawful evil or chaotic evil? Discuss!
-
David Matchen
United States
Baltimore
Maryland
-
Geosphere wrote: OK, then the answer is NO.
I don't know what D&D you've been playing, but every Player's Handbook I have gives spell effects in inches or other units. It has always been that way. The game was designed for a board. Always.
4Ed without the roleplay is 4Ed D&D minis. Which is in the database.
Olsen Johnson's right about Howard Johnson's being right. The old Chainmail rules were designed specifically for miniatures play. It's just that setting up a dungeon and getting the right minis (not to mention--(shudder)--painting them) was a lot more preparation than many players wanted, so it kinda morphed into a "miniature-optional" game. Back in those days, minis were made out of lead (oops), and then pewter, and TSR licensed its "official" lines to Grenadier, IIRC (Citadel may have done some, too, but I think they were "unofficial"). Now that Wizards is firmly in the minis game (and they're made of pre-painted plastic--much cheaper than pewter), there's a strong incentive to emphasize the miniatures aspect of it again. And the secondary market is robust enough to make getting just the right ones for a play session feasible.
-
Daniel Corban
Canada
Newmarket
Ontario
-
Considering this appears to be a very touchy issue for the new D&D haters and fanboys, I can't believe you had the balls to start this thread.
You could probably dissect every edition of D&D and say it is a board game.
-
The Galaxy is Just Packed!
United States
Madison
Wisconsin
-
Geosphere wrote: I don't know what D&D you've been playing, but every Player's Handbook I have gives spell effects in inches or other units. It has always been that way. The game was designed for a board. Always.
The new book has all ranges in terms of squares.
Geosphere wrote: 4Ed without the roleplay is 4Ed D&D minis. Which is in the database.
That's a good point.
-
Andrew Goenner
United States
Superior
Wisconsin
Running 5 PbFs
And still sane...mostly
-
Geosphere wrote: OK, then the answer is NO.
I don't know what D&D you've been playing, but every Player's Handbook I have gives spell effects in inches or other units. It has always been that way. The game was designed for a board. Always.
4Ed without the roleplay is 4Ed D&D minis. Which is in the database.
4ED perhaps. But 3rd edition gave incerements in feet, not in squares. A non-attack-of-opportunity-allowing movement in combat is a five foot step, not a one square step. The books say 30-foot radius, not six square radius.
Anyway, I digress. I do apologize for hijacking the thread, there. I haven't had the opportunity to look at 4 ed. in depth, and it came as a shock finding out everything was put into terms of playing on a grid. As for it being a boardgame or a actual RPG, I don't think we're goign to be able to have a real discussion until we can come to a consensus on the definition of RPG.
To me a RPG has always had to meet certain criteria.
1. There is some sort of a gamemaster controlling the NPCs.
2. The gamemaster is not out to get the players, it's about the storytelling, not the winning.
3. Players get into character to some extent or another.
I think those are things most people agree upon, and as far as I can tell you can do this with 4th ed.
Where points of contention may arise are from further things each person thinks of when roleplaying is mentioned. For example, I have a few other things I look for when determining if something is an RPG.
1.Can I create my own character?
2.Can I bring my roleplaying books and be able to play?
3.Do I have to have miniatures, or can I leave it up to the imaginations of those playing?
It sounds like the last two of those don't go well with 4 ed, at least from what I've heard. If I'm incorrect, I apologize. To me, the core of an RPG is the imagination, picturing what's going on in my head, and evoking the same thing in those playing with me (I'm almost always GM when we play). I guess 4 ed. is close to being a standard RPG, but for me I don't know if it would quite cut it. I see it as more of a roll-playing game than a roleplaying game. A hybrid over a thoroughbread of either type.
-
David Matchen
United States
Baltimore
Maryland
-
Geosphere wrote: I think I hate threads that have "Discuss...." asa tagline. As if I thought someone would post and NOT allow participation? Or is it a general order, like: Ready, Set, DISCUSS! Either case rubs me the wrong way.
A peanut is neither a pea, nor a nut. Discuss.
-
The Galaxy is Just Packed!
United States
Madison
Wisconsin
-
dcorban wrote: Considering this appears to be a very touchy issue for the new D&D haters and fanboys, I can't believe you had the balls to start this thread.
Haha!! Yeah, can of worms indeed. Some exposition: I have not purchased a D&D product in YEARS, and totally skipped 3.0 and 3.5. My friend bugged me to pick up 4 and I have to admit I was surprised by all the changes, most notedly the board game elements.
To me, it's a fascinating grey area.
I hope this does NOT divulge into a "which version is better" discussion!
-
If Actions Speak Louder Than Words, Then Actions x2 Speak Louder Than Actions
United States
Hutto
Texas
One of the Original Twelve
-
Art thou feeling it now, Mr. Krabs?
-
Nick Warcholak
United States
State College
Pennsylvania
-
bryanwinter wrote:
I haven't played HeroQuest in a while and have never played Dragonfire, but I recall specific win conditions in HeroQuest. The HeroMaster or whatever couldn't simply screw with the players if he wished in an effort to deny them victory. There is still a level of trust that players must have with their DMs in 4th edition to keep things balanced. There's a kind of social contract players engage in that you don't see in board games.
-
Ken H.
United States
Amherst
Ohio
-
Nick Warcholak wrote: Aaron said it for me. Even if you can treat 4E like a miniatures skirmish game, there are still no "win" conditions in the rules as written.
But if you're treating it like a miniatures game, you can give it a win condition, and do away with the game master. Then you have a pure board game. I've played other RPG's in this fashion before, Champions in particular. There is no character progression, no continuity, etc. Just a good fight, using a rule system that was specifically designed for good fights.
I'm in favor of adding it, but I doubt it will happen. Man to Man is basically the combat system for GURPS. It's in the database, but Gurps is not. Melee and Wizard are the combat system for The Fantasy Trip. They're in, TFT is not. On the other hand, games that clearly have role-playing elements (like Werewolf) are allowed in, even with no board.
Simply put, the powers that be have decided that RPG's shall not be entered in the database. The presence or absence of a "board" is not the determining factor.
-
Nick Warcholak
United States
State College
Pennsylvania
-
Rubric wrote: But if you're treating it like a miniatures game, you can give it a win condition, and do away with the game master. Then you have a pure board game.
You've said it. You have to alter the game. D&D miniatures is what you're describing.
-
Ken H.
United States
Amherst
Ohio
-
bryanwinter wrote: Haha!! Yeah, can of worms indeed. Some exposition: I have not purchased a D&D product in YEARS, and totally skipped 3.0 and 3.5. My friend bugged me to pick up 4 and I have to admit I was surprised by all the changes, most notedly the board game elements.
To me, it's a fascinating grey area.
I agree with that. I had very little interest in 4th edition until I heard about the board game elements. Now I will almost certainly buy it.
-
The War Chief
United States
Parkville
Unspecified
-
It's exactly what Hasbro ordered it to be. A mandate to sell more randomly packed mini boosters, boards, dungeon tiles, and a $14.95 a month subscription fee for the on line support needed to actually play the game.
Gary Gygax isn't even listed on the cover any more. 
-
|
|
Posted Thu Jun 12, 2008 6:22 pm
