I''ve noticed that in many RPG''s/games/stories, the hero must go somewhere to GET something. Example: Get an amazing item to save the world, rescue and get a girl, etc. But in Lord of the Rings, I''ve noticed that the hero''s quest isn''t to go get an amazing item, it''s to go and destroy an amazing item. I just thought I''d voice this. It''s an interesting thing that Tolkien did. - Rob Loach Current Project: Go Through Object-Oriented Programming in C++ by Robert Lafore "Do or do not. There is no try." - Yoda

That is a neat, innovative situation, but not so much as it might seem. After all, it was made clear that the ring had a mind and will of its own, and so destroying it was more like defeating a malificent enemy than merely breaking an object.

I think you would be hard-pressed to find a truly unique and original plotline. Maybe a nuance or two, but a whole new objective? They''ve all been done.

The thing I find most interesting about LOTRs isn''t the fact that they have to destroy something, rather that they are powered up to the max already.

They have the thing that destroys the world is already on the Bilbo/Frodo''s finger. The thing I find interesting is that the characters power up using items rather than skills, kinda like Zelda.

In the Hobbit, Bilbo gets the giant ruby, which levels him up above the dwarves. The inclusion of gullum in the group, the elven silver armer, the fellowship, ent wash, the broken sword, etc.

Unlike normal movies or RPGs, where characters "work hard", and level up, or summon strength from somewhere else. LoTR rely on leveling up using items. Which is less RPG than adventure.

Overall, IMHO, I feel destroying something is about the same, in gameplay terms, as defeating someone. However, how the characters develop in the story is something I would like to apply to a video game.

That''s a neat observation, dede. I have long thought of that as one of the weaker points of RPGs in general. The constant levelling to get better just plain sucks. In other forms, having the right tools, or some kind of technological advantage, or superior training is the way to get a leg up. Sure, you can call levelling "training", but it simply isn''t the same thing. If I could come up with a better system, then I would, but I can''t, so to Hell with me.

Actually, I have a number of ideas on the topic, but I''m not prepared to oust the tried-and-true goblin genocide systems.

In LOTR, all the fighters are already supertough. Aragorn''s a ranger, which makes him tough as rocks and rugged as bears. Gimli''s a dwarf, which alone would be enough if he wasn''t trained to fight and fight well. Boromir''s the heir-apparent of a nation of great warriors. Legolas is an elf, which means he''s been in his physical prime for a few hundred years, and he''d be hard-pressed to be anything but awesome. Gandalf, of course, is Gandalf.

With the notable exception of the hobbits, the Fellowship is filled with guys that have already spent their lives fighting evil and training to fight more evil, making them mythically tough characters. To do that in a game, you''ve have to change the very nature of the RPG. It''d really be more like Halo, with the hero being unstoppable the moment he hits the ground, and just getting different guns.

But even in LOTR, Merry and Pippin get notably tougher over the course of the ten years or so that they''re on the job. You see them training in the first movie, with Boromir, and the next time they''re called upon to fight, they do a little bit better. So sure, there''s levelling even in that world. I just wish games would make levelling look more like that and less like a thousand tiny annoying battles.

Is there any game out there that has you training and practicing and working out and only occasionally encountering and actual bad guy? I''d like to see a game where you practice in towns and camps, and if you find yourself faced with five enemies, you have to noodle your way through it.

Okay, that went on and on. I''m done.

quote: Original post by Iron Chef Carnage
But even in LOTR, Merry and Pippin get notably tougher over the course of the ten years or so that they''re on the job. You see them training in the first movie, with Boromir, and the next time they''re called upon to fight, they do a little bit better. So sure, there''s levelling even in that world. I just wish games would make levelling look more like that and less like a thousand tiny annoying battles.

I wouldn''t necesarily call it "training" in LOTR. I would say they had more "experiences" in the "real" world. In Hobbiton, they didn''t have to worry about anything. When they were making their journey, they had soo many experiences (For example, Tom Bombadil rescuing them in the forest).

Bear in mind first that LOTR was never intended to be an RPG. Tolkien himself had no notion of such things; he merely combined history, mythology, and his own ideas into a brilliant epic adventure story. Bilbo himself, and Frodo too, make explicit reference multiple times to the fact that the story is about an adventure.

But as in any adventure story that is worth being told, or any story at all for that matter, it is a story about the changes in the characters themselves through the experiences they endure, good or ill.

Quality P&D RPG adventures often try to emulate that inner progression (instead of the characters merely getting physically tougher), and a very few do so successfully. I''d even venture to say that the Baldur''s Gate games achieved that objective. But these games of course still rely on the characters gaining experience primarily through combat, and their physical attributes are increased as a result.

As a story, LOTR takes a realistic approach to character development. As in real life, an individual''s skills are developed through practical experience, and their life experiences give them wisdom that guides them through future experiences.

VERY occasionally they acquire items that allow them to exercise their existing skills in new ways. Those items usually come at some price however -- the Ring, being the most extreme example, grants Bilbo and Frodo the ability to turn invisible, but using this ability exposes them directly to great evil -- and merely posessing the ring subjects the posessor to being hunted by the hosts of Sauron, not to mention eventually going mad and other nasty things.

Also keep in mind that EVERY character in LOTR is simply trying to achieve a goal, regardless of scale. Frodo is trying to do whatever he has to do to get rid of the Ring, Samwise is trying to protect and support Frodo, Sauron is trying to get the ring back and take over the world, Saruman is trying to help so that he can gain power, and Gandalf is trying to ensure that the Dark Lord fails so that Middle Earth can be free. In The Hobbit, the dwarves are trying to reclaim the Lonely Mountain and Bilbo is pretty much just trying to stay alive. Not ONE character in all of Tolkien''s works is trying to "level up" and about the only examples of physical character progression (or lack thereof) are Gandalf turning "White" and the hobbits learning to use a sword... and Sauron''s inability to obtain the Ring and return to his former might.

So really its kind of silly to think of LOTR in terms of typcial RPGs.

****************************************

Brian Lacy
ForeverDream Studios

Comments? Questions? Curious?
brian@foreverdreamstudios.com

"I create. Therefore I am."

quote: Original post by irbrian
So really its kind of silly to think of LOTR in terms of typcial RPGs.

Perhaps this is a good reason to move the ''ladders'' that measure progression to track different events? Instead of having your average combat prowess as your main indicator of ability, why not count things such as:

Amount of area explored
Distance travelled
Worth of treasure retrieved
Number of people saved
Quests completed

This way you can rank your players on a different scale and unify powergamers and the ''real players'' (term used incredibly loosely) with a common goal. And if you rank them on several such scales simultaneously it encourages diversity.



[ MSVC Fixes | STL Docs | SDL | Game AI | Sockets | C++ Faq Lite | Boost
Asking Questions | Organising code files | My stuff | Tiny XML | STLPort]

It might be interesting to have multiple scoring areas to track experience in, but the question is, to what end? I mean what does the player get out of each? The benefits should be logical..

Something just hit me.. in LOTR, probably the most significant variable that sets characters apart is their fame. If you think about it.. Aragorn is merely a ranger that no one listens to until people realize Oh Hey, He''s a King. Bilbo is just a hobbit until he goes on the quest with the dwarves, after which he is notorious in the Shire, reknowned by the Dwarves, and admired by others who wouldn''t have given him the time of day before. When Frodo shows up at the council with the Ring, and then when he offers to take it, he becomes incredibly important.

So if there''s any outward character progression in LOTR, I''d say it would be how famous or well known a character is. It doesn''t necessarily change in small increments over time though -- specific events, quests, or actions make all the difference.

Ultima Online is my current MMORPG flavor of choice.. its got a great Fame/Karma system that is having more and more effect on the game as time passes, which I feel is a good thing.. for example, the new Paladin and Necromancer professions rely on Karma, and the new Virtue system takes Fame into account on one of its pursuits. I just wish it was a little bit more dynamic and player-influenced than it is.

****************************************

Brian Lacy
ForeverDream Studios

Comments? Questions? Curious?
brian@foreverdreamstudios.com

"I create. Therefore I am."

quote: Original post by Iron Chef Carnage
...I have long thought of that as one of the weaker points of RPGs in general. The constant levelling to get better just plain sucks...

Of course this doesn''t apply to cRPGs yet (wish someone would do it soon though), but a great deal of p&p rpgs gives the player much more space to evolve "in character", rather than just boosting numbers. A good Werewolf GM for example rarely allows player to increase their skillpoints, they''re pretty much set once created..other p&p rpgs have pretty much scrapped all numerical stats, relying only on "pure" roleplaying.

quote: Original post by Iron Chef Carnage
Unlike normal movies or RPGs, where characters "work hard", and level up, or summon strength from somewhere else. LoTR rely on leveling up using items. Which is less RPG than adventure.

This is a major disagreement among different schools of roleplayers. Some say that the character building classifies a game as a rpg, other say that rpg is a matter of acting out their character (the way I use the term). Thus, Diablo was a RPG by the first definition, however, I call it hack''n''slash.

''nuff rambling.

-Luctus

Statisticly seen, most things happens to other people.
[Mail]

quote: Original post by irbrian
It might be interesting to have multiple scoring areas to track experience in, but the question is, to what end? I mean what does the player get out of each? The benefits should be logical...

''Amount of area explored'' and/or ''Distance travelled'' might gain you entry to explorer guilds or quests.

''Worth of treasure retrieved'' might earn you bounty hunter quests? Not to mention the intrinsic value of the treasure you''ve acquired.

''Number of people saved'' and ''Quests completed'' could, as you correctly suggest, tie into an artificial Fame system that would have an effect on NPC reactions, or again the quests offered, etc.

Just as increased skills and powers are essentially ''keys'' that open up doors to further game content, these other ladders of advancement can open up new quests, or memberships, or reactions.

[ MSVC Fixes | STL Docs | SDL | Game AI | Sockets | C++ Faq Lite | Boost
Asking Questions | Organising code files | My stuff | Tiny XML | STLPort]