Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Dungeons and Dragons Online Module 7 Rears its Head

Comments Filter:
  • The Websense category "Games" is filtered.
    Anybody care to post a little more of a summary? It is not yet detailed on Wikipedia.
    • TFA: "DDO's Module 7 goes live today, and boy, if you're looking for information about it, you're in the right place. Massively has been covering Module 7 since before Module 6 dropped, and just in case you missed out on any of our great coverage, it's right here for your perusing pleasure. Live at Connect '08, we provided coverage of the DDO panel, including a first look at the Monk class Turbine released in this patch. Shortly after that, we chatted with the woman herself, DDO Senior Producer Kate Paiz,
  • by CogDissident (951207) on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @12:39PM (#23640899)
    Ugh, a page that has 20 links to the various articles, most of them short one paragraph blurbs about it. And we get to read them in a tiny column smushed between two sides of ads? I was going to read it, but no thanks.

    Main page needs to have most of the info, not just a bunch of links that say "here are things we said before, we're lazy and don't want to type".
    • No doubt. Because, it's not like other sites do similar things *cough/.cough* (mostly sans ads of course).
  • Irony? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by argStyopa (232550) on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @01:00PM (#23641171) Journal
    Interestingly, D&D4th edition is coming out in what, a week?

    This is a radical departure from the previous iterations of the PnP game, making it much more CRPG-like. Not worse, just significantly different. So will the online game be running the PnP rules, while the PnP game is running MMO-style rules?
  • by Khopesh (112447) on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @01:23PM (#23641521) Homepage Journal

    Let's just hope they didn't forget the dragons this time.

    As a matter of fact, this isn't the first time that has happened. Back in the early 80s, TSR (then-makers of D&D) had a brain-storming session to determine where the game should go. They concluded that they had tons of dungeons but not much by way of dragons. So somebody got the kooky idea that dragons could be the focal point of a world, and there would be annoying klepto midgets [], loopy mad scientists [], exploding humanoid dragons [], knights that rode dragons instead of horses, and the gods would suck and then die. The Dragonlance [] world resulted.

    Frankly put, the Kender and Tinker Gnomes were an awful addition to playable races - they make great non-player characters, but the genre was already riddled with an over-capacity of socially inept players; why egg them on? Dragonlance ruined gnomes in D&D, ultimately leading to their exclusion from playable races in 4th edition. Hopefully, their new role as "monsters" will remove the notion of "all gnomes are tinker gnomes" and we can see them returned in 5th edition.

    • by Bieeanda (961632) on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @02:09PM (#23642171)
      Actually, gnomes are just omitted from the Player's Handbook. They and a decent number of other races in the Monster Manual have rules for use as PCs, and there are persistent rumours that they'll be getting the full-blown PC race treatment when the PHB2 comes out in June 2009.
      • Oh goody, so now instead of buying a second player's handbook to get a bunch of new stuff/rules, I'll get to buy a second book to get what has always been in the first? And each of them for $15 more than the previous set of core books at launch? [trollish]And then when 4.5 comes out.....[/trollish]

        You'll excuse me if I'm not too excited.
    • by Chris Burke (6130)
      Dragonlance ruined gnomes in D&D, ultimately leading to their exclusion from playable races in 4th edition. Hopefully, their new role as "monsters" will remove the notion of "all gnomes are tinker gnomes" and we can see them returned in 5th edition.

      Er, I guess it ruined them if you forgot that worlds other than Dragonlance existed... And I was a super Dragonlance fanboy, and played lots of Dragonlance campaigns, and I never forgot that a gnome in Forgotten Realms wasn't a tinker...
      • by Khopesh (112447)

        Er, I guess it ruined them if you forgot that worlds other than Dragonlance existed... And I was a super Dragonlance fanboy, and played lots of Dragonlance campaigns, and I never forgot that a gnome in Forgotten Realms wasn't a tinker...

        Congratulations, you aren't in the norm. As mentioned below, even the developers of World of Warcraft's gnomes were influenced by tinker gnomes, thus further biasing a significant portion of the RPG genre in that direction. Perhaps it was because you were so knowledgeable about Dragonlance; you knew the distinction for DL gnomes was very world-specific and less applicable in other worlds. Most people fail to mke that distinction.

        Don't forget that the novels and model characters greatly influence play

    • by Remillard (67835)

      Hopefully, their new role as "monsters" will remove the notion of "all gnomes are tinker gnomes" and we can see them returned in 5th edition.

      I suspect this association is sealed for good for generations to come, solely because that's pretty much their role in World of Warcraft.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by aeschenkarnos (517917)
      Without "tinker", what are gnomes other than short dwarves?
      • by Minwee (522556)

        Without "tinker", what are gnomes other than short dwarves?


      • Gnomes are a jolly-natured people of the highlands (hills, woods, and the like). I used to think (back in the 2e days) of gnomes as like "dwelves" - as much dwarves as they are elves.

        Gnomes differ most from dwarves in terms of magic. Dwarves are very attached to their religions and draw most of their magic from divine paths, whereas gnomes have innate arcane abilities and a natural predisposition to arcane disciplines (e.g. illusionist). Their jolly nature makes them natural entertainers (e.g. bard). I

  • by scumdamn (82357) on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @01:32PM (#23641641)
    Apparently there's a game called DnD Online that is an MMORPG or something and their new module is called Module 7. It adds a monk class and some other crap that is linked to from the page o' links that TFA resembles. I didn't even know there was a DnD Online. I'm still playing Neverwinter Nights 2 multiplayer with my wife and friends (you can find it and the expansion at Target in the clearance aisle for five to ten bucks). I think I'll stick with NWN2 until a game comes out based on the 4e rules, frankly. They seem to be a little more compatible with CRPGs anyway.
    • I can understand random folks not knowing about DDO, but you really expect us to believe someone that plays NWN2 and reads /. and has friends that do is not aware of it? Try the /. search feature and you'll bring up a dozen articles on DDO. Both of those games came out in 2006, and there was obviously a lot more media attention and hype about DDO than "yet another sequel", (which some of us did not buy because we played the NWN linux version and NWN2 dropped that. :)
      • I should probably also mention that I only played DDO for about 6 weeks. It was quite a buggy game designed for people that like repetition. :)
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by scumdamn (82357)
        I didn't hear about it because I prefer to play well crafted single-player games than MMORPGs. I've bought 3 copies of the OC and 3 copies of MoTB and only spent about 60 bucks. With that, my wife and a bud of mine can play as much as we want, join persistant worlds, etc. and pay no additional monthly fee. So yeah, I just hadn't heard of DDO. Sue me. :)
        • Sorry if that came across as accusatory, I was just incredulous. :) NWN isn't a single-player game, though. hrm, but playing with wife and friends doesn't really gibe with what you said about preferring single-player. Well, anyway, if you do want single-player, I recommend you check out The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. Sacrifices have to be made for network playability in multiplayer games like NWN that Oblivion did not have to do and it is gorgeous because of that. Plus true single-player games are muc
          • by scumdamn (82357)
            I think I've played five characters in Oblivion. I've done every single quest in that game and Shivering Isles, Mehrune's Blade (or whatever), and the Knights of the Nine expansion. LOVED Oblivion. There's nothing even close yet. And yeah, I dig a well-crafted single player game and played NWN2 alone first. Now I'm helping the above mentioned people go through enjoying it as a multiplayer experience.
      • //Raises hand

        I knew there was a online pay to play coming out - and then just ignored it.

        I was surprised to find out they are on a version seven, and people are all a twitter about it.

        I still play NWN 1 and 2, and I have an intense hatred of "renting games" to play online.

        I know it'll surprise you, but there's a good portion of the population that looks at monthly fees as a really bad thing when it comes to gaming.

        I'd rather play x-com or moo 2 then forever be behind some kid who can put 10 hours a day into
  • Does anybody play DDO anymore? I tried it out maybe year ago for a couple of months. It was the first time I cared enough about an MMO to go out and buy it (and a game card so I didn't have to use my Credit Card if I wasn't going to keep it) because I love D&D.

    The game was actually a good deal of fun when it worked, but I just lagged so damn bad. I tried it on two different computers: one was my gaming machine (AMD 64 x2 4400+ 4gb RAM nvidia 7800gt at the time), not to mention is was on University i
    • by garylian (870843)
      It is quite stable, or at least it was before today's Module 7 patch.

      During Closed Beta, the game ran quite smoothly, but Open Beta really showed them they needed a LOT of work on server side stability. They didn't get it done in time, and the release was not good because of that, and several other factors. (A major lack of solo content, and the fact that you have to run most dungeons/adventures several times before you reached max level.)

      I started to play again for about a month or so before AoC came out
    • I'm on an Athlon (less than 2000) with a gig of RAM and a Radeon AIW 9500 plugged into a Comcast cable modem that I share with a habitual bittorrent user. I turn down some of the visual settings and I'm fine in instances. There are lag spikes every now and again, but they're not generally any worse than "annoying". I haven't found a game that doesn't get those from time to time.

      The real trick is finding a good group. The solo play, while better than it was when you played first, is still a bit light. W
  • half dragon. It's nice that they put rules around doing that.

    Dragons, there back, baby!

    On a side note, it's a completly different game now.
    And it's pretty good.

    I normally don't say this, but I think it's relevant.
    I've been playing since 1977. I've played all the version. I hate 3.0 and 3.5. Both were clearly duct taped to the previous rules to 'fix' perceived problems.

    4E is pretty fun, but don't try and stuff it into previous thought models of the game.

    • And in Rifts, you can play as a full dragon. From the primary sourcebook. With a plasma gun.

      Ah. Rifts.

Dealing with the problem of pure staff accumulation, all our researches ... point to an average increase of 5.75% per year. -- C.N. Parkinson