Community

Feb 3, 2013 -- 12:41PM, Qmark wrote:

Feb 3, 2013 -- 9:58AM, malcapricornis wrote:

People's characters may die 50+ time in a session in World of Warcraft. World of Warcraft has over time lessened penalties on death. World of Warcraft has 8-10 million paid subscriptions which approximates $90,000,000+/month revenue from subscriptions.

I bet I know where this is going.


...excuse me while I get some popcorn.

Pinkie Pie will share.

Feb 3, 2013 -- 12:47PM, malcapricornis wrote:

Where'sit going!  You don't deny WotC is a company and would like to make a profit off of the D&D brand?

Just wait.  You'll see soon enough.

Feb 3, 2013 -- 9:58AM, malcapricornis wrote:

People's characters may die 50+ time in a session in World of Warcraft. World of Warcraft has over time lessened penalties on death. World of Warcraft has 8-10 million paid subscriptions which approximates $90,000,000+/month revenue from subscriptions.  D&D may want to take notes. These forums and surveys are such a small, self-selected sample that I think it's counter productive to listen to 90% of them, if WotC wants to increase market share.

There are at least two reasons I can think of off the top of my head why these two games are not comparable at all in this regard:

a)  In some aspects of WoW, death is actually something that is expected to happen to your character a lot.  Sometimes, over and over again about every 5 minutes.  In D&D, the assumption is usually that death is a very serious event that is to be avoided at most costs.

b)  You can't ignore rules you don't like in WoW.  Think the death penalty is too harsh in D&D?  Change it.  Think the death penalty is too harsh in WoW?  Tough.

Feb 3, 2013 -- 9:58AM, malcapricornis wrote:

Feb 2, 2013 -- 3:27PM, MeCorva wrote:

Everyone wants a different game, and so wizards should be working on a sidebar that explains what happens if you choose certain options. For instance: 1). No ressurection: pro: death is very serious - gives the opportunity for heroic sacrifices. Con: can make players feel a beloved character died before the story is complete. Best used: when creating characters is fast, and when shorter campaigns mean less time for complex stories. 2). Gold only, or temporary setbacks. Pro: players can choose when their characters story ends. Con: some people find death is too temporary, leading to reduced interest/engagement. 3) permanent drawbacks: pro: Keeps death a disincentive, increasing "edge of seat feeling". Con: Permanent drawbacks can feel like the player is being permanently punished for bad rolls or bad decisions previously. IMHO, permanent drawbacks seem the worst of all worlds - cheapening death compared To "no resurrection" and punishing players. But, as long as the dm who is makin the permanent drawback understands the players who like that kind of thing, I'm happy.

People's characters may die 50+ time in a session in World of Warcraft. World of Warcraft has over time lessened penalties on death. World of Warcraft has 8-10 million paid subscriptions which approximates $90,000,000+/month revenue from subscriptions.  D&D may want to take notes. These forums and surveys are such a small, self-selected sample that I think it's counter productive to listen to 90% of them, if WotC wants to increase market share.

World of Warcraft is a VIDEO GAME.  D&D is an RPG.  They are very, very different types of games.

Feb 1, 2013 -- 5:30AM, Orzel wrote:

Should be a setting/DM dial.

Agreed. Each group should decide how each campaign will be -- death is final, death is fixable with a LOT of effort and expenditure, death is fixable, death is merely a speed bump in the campaign road. Wizads can provide dials for different options.

Each player will have opinions on how his characters are handled. I have one I'd rather see keep campaigning forever. I had another that (story wise) it made sense that she would decide "no more resurrections or raises -- if Sif wants me that badly, I'd better listen." and then she went out in a glorious battle with a demon a few months later. She's now becoming the focus of a "personality cult," much like veneration of a saint.

Unlike in computer and video games, each group is able to bend or change the rules to suit the world, the campaign, and the people around the table. It's not revenue-related; it's gameplay- and group preference-related.