I'd say terms in D&D are generally drastically different from that of MMOs. Even when talking battlefield roles.
In D&D in combat half the time it is broken down by lines of battle. Like you're frontline fighters, your midline or ranged, and your back line.
Party make up is generally referred to by things like spellcasters, skill monkeys, fighters and clerics. This the general make up of a Party in D&D. While you dont need exact specifics for it. Hell you can literally have a bunch of pcs that do a little of everything and succeed.
You cant do that in MMOs though you need a dedicated healer or healers, dedicated tanks, dps, etc.
Now as more and more MMO players move over they bring their terminology with them. I'm not saying MMO players moving to D&D is bad at all and the terms can very well be blurred but it does dilute from the mechanics that D&D does not fit into an MMO bubble of function.
You seem to be not understand what directly effecting a pc vs effecting chance means.
Directly effecting is a spell like feeble mind that directly reduces your intelligence and charisma to 1. This is directly effecting stats.
Directly effecting is not improving you're odds of success. Advantage/disadvantage, addition d4s etc. Are not direct effects but indirect effects. Bless, guidance, and enhance ability all fall under this.
This is a discussion on the mechanics and thus it is very important to seperate what effects chance and what is literally a boost to stats.
Look I'm not saying the terminology is not understandable when used. I'm saying from a mechanical point it's not the same. You yourself pretty much says the same later on. The bulk of the reason I started this discussion is I have recently first hand witnessed many people believing it works the same. It doesnt. Simple as that.
As for Aggro I've noticed some people are saying compelled duel, and command and stuff is similar to what tanks in MMOs do. I'm sorry it's not. On a very very general comparison I'll give you it can be related but that's as far as it goes. In D&D everything for the most part boils down to battlefield control and action economy. Battlefield control for "tanks" in D&D is more often than anything only positioning. I'd know this specifically as for 15 years my main go to class is S&B Paladins. Positioning on keeping the enemy from getting past you is how to protect your squishy spell casters. Nothing Agro about it.
When we start comparing things like Compelled Duel and command and trying to compare then to MMO terms you miss the simplest thing. In D&D spells can fail. It's not a reliable way to do it. Furthermore very Rarely is a singular person in D&D going to stand toe to toe with a big bad for any period of time like the do in MMOs. Especially cause in these MMO games where they do this the "Healer" is focused on keeping the "tank" alive to do this while the party damages it or adds. Yes compelled duel and command both allow you to target a creature to single them out for a time. In commands sense a single round. In compelled duel sense a minute or until your party does anything to it what so ever. This is fundamentally different from how Aggro and pulling work in MMOs.
Anyways this discussion here as jdahveed stated is more so to put out there while there are similarities between these in D&D and MMOs they operate compeletely different from one another both in function and in mechanics.
The primary purpose of all abilities in 5e is to effect probability. If you reduce a creature's STR by 4, it will have a 10% less chance to hit you. If you make all its rolls -4, it will have a 20% less chance to hit you. But according to you, only one of these things is a debuff.
Blindness, deafness, paralysis, poison, exhaustion, etc are all not debuffs according to you because they don't lower a stat, they just make you unable to use those stats. Making a wizard unable to cast spells or a fighter unable to use a weapon is not a debuff according to you. You are wrong. These are debuffs, because they make the character less powerful (less buff, debuffed if you will).
I'd say terms in D&D are generally drastically different from that of MMOs. Even when talking battlefield roles.
In D&D in combat half the time it is broken down by lines of battle. Like you're frontline fighters, your midline or ranged, and your back line.
Party make up is generally referred to by things like spellcasters, skill monkeys, fighters and clerics. This the general make up of a Party in D&D. While you dont need exact specifics for it. Hell you can literally have a bunch of pcs that do a little of everything and succeed.
You cant do that in MMOs though you need a dedicated healer or healers, dedicated tanks, dps, etc.
Now as more and more MMO players move over they bring their terminology with them. I'm not saying MMO players moving to D&D is bad at all and the terms can very well be blurred but it does dilute from the mechanics that D&D does not fit into an MMO bubble of function.
So your argument is that because D&D does not require dedicated roles, the characters that are built to have high durability, healing ability, or high damage are not tanks, healers, or dps. Even though they are built with very similar abilities, because their role is not required, they are not what they are.
D&D differs because it does not require dedicated roles. Even though there are similarities between class in D&D and MMOs a DPS in MMOs can not be a tank as well, like the can in D&D if built to be that way.
Now some classes are far better at given roles in D&D because of design. I've been one to argue this myself. However, these classes while there are similarities to MMO classes are absolutely different.
Example a tank in MMOs dont deal large amounts of damage. Both Paladins and Barbarians are what you would consider tanks. However, unlike their MMO counterparts the Paladin has the highest Nova damage of any class in D&D by a long shot, while the Barbarian deals the highest avg damage round over round.
So tell me in what MMO do the tanks deal the most damage?
D&D differs because it does not require dedicated roles. Even though there are similarities between class in D&D and MMOs a DPS in MMOs can not be a tank as well, like the can in D&D if built to be that way.
Now some classes are far better at given roles in D&D because of design. I've been one to argue this myself. However, these classes while there are similarities to MMO classes are absolutely different.
Example a tank in MMOs dont deal large amounts of damage. Both Paladins and Barbarians are what you would consider tanks. However, unlike their MMO counterparts the Paladin has the highest Nova damage of any class in D&D by a long shot, while the Barbarian deals the highest avg damage round over round.
So tell me in what MMO do the tanks deal the most damage?
No you are missing the point of what everyone else has said. MMOs and D&D are different, but the terms that the players use to refer to things mean roughly the same thing.
Whether or not a character can be a dps and a tank doesn't change the fact that a tank is a tank and a dps is a dps.
I'd say terms in D&D are generally drastically different from that of MMOs. Even when talking battlefield roles.
In D&D in combat half the time it is broken down by lines of battle. Like you're frontline fighters, your midline or ranged, and your back line.
Party make up is generally referred to by things like spellcasters, skill monkeys, fighters and clerics. This the general make up of a Party in D&D. While you dont need exact specifics for it. Hell you can literally have a bunch of pcs that do a little of everything and succeed.
You cant do that in MMOs though you need a dedicated healer or healers, dedicated tanks, dps, etc.
Now as more and more MMO players move over they bring their terminology with them. I'm not saying MMO players moving to D&D is bad at all and the terms can very well be blurred but it does dilute from the mechanics that D&D does not fit into an MMO bubble of function.
I gotta say I'm baffled by this hard line you're trying to draw between MMOs and DnD, considering that DnD served as the inspiration for MMOs as we know them today. The idea of "classes" that have different skills/roles? DnD came up with that. Using randomly generated numbers and probability to determine whether you hit your target? DnD came up with that. There always has been and always will be massive overlap between MMOs and DnD in terms of players, mechanics, and terminology because MMOs have DnD in their DNA.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"We're the perfect combination of expendable and unkillable!"
The terms you're arguing as being pollutants and poisonous to D&D, Khaldo, have been in the gaming lexicon for so long that they have become Generic Gaming Terms, not "MMO" terms. The same way that "boss" is Universal Gamer Speak for "big bad high-power nasty at the end of the dungeon/encounter" despite the fact that when you step back, using the term 'boss' makes no sense in that case. It's descended from Ye Olden Dayes when the high-power character at the end of the dungeon was always the lich or crime boss or orc chieftain or whatever that was leading the goons you'd been slaughtering - he was the actual boss, the Guy In Charge, and given extra special importance because of it.
These terms get used because they're useful. People understand what you mean when you say them. People who come into D&D for the first time ever and try to build their MMO character in D&D are going to miss some of the nuance, yes. They will not be as in tune with the system as someone who's played it deeply and understands it intimately.
News Alert: they would be in the same boat even if they didn't know MMO terms. New players are going to miss the nuance regardless of why they decided to start playing in the first place. And in the MMO guy's case, at least he HAS a goal for his character and an idea of how team combat in systems broadly similar to D&D work. Better (in a combat efficiency sense) than bringing your boyfriend to the table, sitting him down in front of a character sheet, and having him ask "Soooo...is there a reason these dice are all kinds of funky shapes?"
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please do not contact or message me.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'd say terms in D&D are generally drastically different from that of MMOs. Even when talking battlefield roles.
In D&D in combat half the time it is broken down by lines of battle. Like you're frontline fighters, your midline or ranged, and your back line.
Party make up is generally referred to by things like spellcasters, skill monkeys, fighters and clerics. This the general make up of a Party in D&D. While you dont need exact specifics for it. Hell you can literally have a bunch of pcs that do a little of everything and succeed.
You cant do that in MMOs though you need a dedicated healer or healers, dedicated tanks, dps, etc.
Now as more and more MMO players move over they bring their terminology with them. I'm not saying MMO players moving to D&D is bad at all and the terms can very well be blurred but it does dilute from the mechanics that D&D does not fit into an MMO bubble of function.
The primary purpose of all abilities in 5e is to effect probability. If you reduce a creature's STR by 4, it will have a 10% less chance to hit you. If you make all its rolls -4, it will have a 20% less chance to hit you. But according to you, only one of these things is a debuff.
Blindness, deafness, paralysis, poison, exhaustion, etc are all not debuffs according to you because they don't lower a stat, they just make you unable to use those stats. Making a wizard unable to cast spells or a fighter unable to use a weapon is not a debuff according to you. You are wrong. These are debuffs, because they make the character less powerful (less buff, debuffed if you will).
So your argument is that because D&D does not require dedicated roles, the characters that are built to have high durability, healing ability, or high damage are not tanks, healers, or dps. Even though they are built with very similar abilities, because their role is not required, they are not what they are.
Your missing the entire point of what is said.
D&D differs because it does not require dedicated roles. Even though there are similarities between class in D&D and MMOs a DPS in MMOs can not be a tank as well, like the can in D&D if built to be that way.
Now some classes are far better at given roles in D&D because of design. I've been one to argue this myself. However, these classes while there are similarities to MMO classes are absolutely different.
Example a tank in MMOs dont deal large amounts of damage. Both Paladins and Barbarians are what you would consider tanks. However, unlike their MMO counterparts the Paladin has the highest Nova damage of any class in D&D by a long shot, while the Barbarian deals the highest avg damage round over round.
So tell me in what MMO do the tanks deal the most damage?
No you are missing the point of what everyone else has said. MMOs and D&D are different, but the terms that the players use to refer to things mean roughly the same thing.
Whether or not a character can be a dps and a tank doesn't change the fact that a tank is a tank and a dps is a dps.
I gotta say I'm baffled by this hard line you're trying to draw between MMOs and DnD, considering that DnD served as the inspiration for MMOs as we know them today. The idea of "classes" that have different skills/roles? DnD came up with that. Using randomly generated numbers and probability to determine whether you hit your target? DnD came up with that. There always has been and always will be massive overlap between MMOs and DnD in terms of players, mechanics, and terminology because MMOs have DnD in their DNA.
"We're the perfect combination of expendable and unkillable!"
The terms you're arguing as being pollutants and poisonous to D&D, Khaldo, have been in the gaming lexicon for so long that they have become Generic Gaming Terms, not "MMO" terms. The same way that "boss" is Universal Gamer Speak for "big bad high-power nasty at the end of the dungeon/encounter" despite the fact that when you step back, using the term 'boss' makes no sense in that case. It's descended from Ye Olden Dayes when the high-power character at the end of the dungeon was always the lich or crime boss or orc chieftain or whatever that was leading the goons you'd been slaughtering - he was the actual boss, the Guy In Charge, and given extra special importance because of it.
These terms get used because they're useful. People understand what you mean when you say them. People who come into D&D for the first time ever and try to build their MMO character in D&D are going to miss some of the nuance, yes. They will not be as in tune with the system as someone who's played it deeply and understands it intimately.
News Alert: they would be in the same boat even if they didn't know MMO terms. New players are going to miss the nuance regardless of why they decided to start playing in the first place. And in the MMO guy's case, at least he HAS a goal for his character and an idea of how team combat in systems broadly similar to D&D work. Better (in a combat efficiency sense) than bringing your boyfriend to the table, sitting him down in front of a character sheet, and having him ask "Soooo...is there a reason these dice are all kinds of funky shapes?"
Please do not contact or message me.