I understand what you are saying Paul, and I agree, to a point.

However, there are ( again ) two ways to go about it:

1. The traditional way.
   Here, you create or roll your stats in whatever shape or form they come. The stats you have gained guide you in your role, define your role really, because they are usually the only thing in your character that really influences the outside world in any significant way.
   
2. The way I''m trying to work out.
   Here, the role you are playing, defines the stats you have. If you''re trying to solve a lot of the obstacles using strength, you''ll have a strong character. If you don''t, something else will pop up.
   
   
   
   Some "real" role playing games try to find a middle ground, by requiring you to figure out a role and path for your character before you define the stats. However, I don''t think this is a very good way. The only thing I''d like the player to be able to define are some fuzzy "characteristics".
   
   Like "Tall", "Fat", ...
   
   In the system I''m designing, using vagueness like this would actually be possible...
   
   
   Give me one more medicated peaceful moment.
   ~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~
   ERROR: Your beta-version of Life1.0 has expired. Please upgrade to the full version. All important social functions will be disabled from now on.

Are you basing the game around rewards though, one way or another?

What about having i choice of things to say (fallout style) but using the choice which contains more "character" is more rewarding? This would promote role-playing to an extent/yes?

I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!

How would you define the most suitable response to a multiple choice question? Especially at the start of the game where whatever the player roles up for a character could have very little bearing on the attitude and decisions the player wants to make?

Of course, I can see how this kind of idea could work really well if you were to try and build up a reputation system for the character - initally the NPC will have a very limited stock set of responses based on the physical appearance of the character, but after a while of talking, different types of points could be awarded depending on responses given, thus the computer can come up with some kind of profile for the character and gauge it''s reputation, the NPCs response and also how well the player keeps it in character. But however at the start it would be almost impossible for the computer to judge how in character the player is being, but the idea has alot of merit!

Choosing the character''s body before you have a taste of the world can be something of a problem. You could come up with this great nerdy guy that is a sick ass mage/hacker or whatever only to find out that the bulk of the game needs a character with more cool. Of course, this means that you''d need to spend some wasted time in the world with a "Null" body, which is bad. I''m not sure how to combat this problem other than to try and develop a system which either adapts the character to the majority of ways the player tries to solve a problem or alternatively jsut go with the tried and true.

Here''s how we solved the "null body" problem in our real-life roleplaying a few years ago.

There''s a short pre-campaign "quest" ( this was Vampire - The Masquerade I believe ) in which you play a single scene in your childhood. It''s a scene in which you have to face a terrible issue ( possibly of your own choice ), and role-play it out in order to get a feeling for your character and what you''d like to do with it.

This could work in a CRPG as well. Playing as a child removes the need to have very differentiated stats at that point, playing a generic character doesn''t matter. Also, during that pre-quest you won''t face any real physical challenges, just emotional/ethical ones.

Then, depending on your handling of that quest, your character could be "aged", and you''re left with an extrapolation of what you played before.
You have a character that suits the role you chose to play.


Give me one more medicated peaceful moment.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~
ERROR: Your beta-version of Life1.0 has expired. Please upgrade to the full version. All important social functions will be disabled from now on.

That kind of concept will work in some cases - but I''m having difficulty thinking how I''d manage that in a game I''m designing. Which means I think this is another one of those problems that u just have to tackle depending on what the game has to offer in terms of flexibility.
I guess there''s not really any such this as the perfect solution anyway
It''s too late for me to think, I''ll just pass out now.

Paul, I have to disagree with you here. I think you are thinking of the role more as a class, like in AD&D. Stats define classes: chars have to have 8 str to be a fighter. Stats do not define roles. Actions and attitudes define roles. BTW, if the only purpose for the int stat is to tell the player how they should role play, then why not just leave it up to the player, and why have that stat at all? This is their char, after all.

Keith, it really sounds like your way is just development by use (ala skills in Daggerfall). Am I wrong? BTW, that child thing is a great idea. Not only does it let the player get a feel for the char, it bonds them be letting the player see how the char grew up. I may steal that idea

-------------------------------------------
"What's the story with your face, son?!?"

Calling most RPG''s "murder based" isn''t exactly fair.

Killing goblins is not murder. No court in the world (this or any other) would convict you of murder for killing a goblin.

Well ok, maybe a Goblin Court, but they don''t count if you kill them all.

quote: Original post by Buster

Calling most RPG''s "murder based" isn''t exactly fair.

Killing goblins is not murder. No court in the world (this or any other) would convict you of murder for killing a goblin.

Well ok, maybe a Goblin Court, but they don''t count if you kill them all.

Hey, it''s deconstruction time! Sentence diagramming!

In "most RPGs" you must kill living things; often called "murder" to progress to a higher power level. Hence, calling "most RPGs murder-based" is entirely fair, and I think it is quite a poigniant commentary on the ridiculous assmutions we make as designers.

Goblins are portrayed as having an economy, a language and a culture. Claiming that it is not murder is essentially what we used to do with indians, africans and everyone else not white. Ignorant, selfcentered and disgusting. As a rule of thumb, any creature that could hold a court is sentient enough not to kill arbitrarily.

Now, if we give the players a REASON to kill for once... (revenge, self-defense, war) it''s a different issue. But this a matter for another thread. Sorry guys, I had to.

=====
Are you aware that the people who bring you television actually refer to it openly as "programming?"

quote: Original post by pacman

Keith, it really sounds like your way is just development by use (ala skills in Daggerfall). Am I wrong?

Yes, you are
( well, not entirely, but let me explain ).
The idea is not to "increase the skills you use" when you''re playing the child character, but rather to "analyse the playing pattern of the player and adjust his in-game-mechanics accordingly".
These in-game-mechanics can be very varied, from stats, over skills, to traits, advantages and disadvantages, psychology,...
It can be a very long or a very short list. However, the system used to decide should at least ATTEMPT to be smart about it.
Something along the lines of "if the player had a clickfest trying to get high strength, we''ll give him high strength, but also a ''health freak'' disadvantage and an addiction to steroids."

I''m not sure if that makes my point clear enough though




Give me one more medicated peaceful moment.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~
ERROR: Your beta-version of Life1.0 has expired. Please upgrade to the full version. All important social functions will be disabled from now on.

Keith, I''m sorry, I should have been more clear. I understood the child idea (which is great, do I have your permission to use it?), I was more referring to :

Quote by MadKeithV: (don''t know how to do the real way)
The way I''m trying to work out.
Here, the role you are playing, defines the stats you have. If you''re trying to solve a lot of the obstacles using strength, you''ll have a strong character. If you don''t, something else will pop up.

That''s actually the parallel I drew to the Daggerfall system. Aside from the realistic system you mentioned, am I still wrong? Don''t get me wrong here, I think that is a great way of char development (read: I was planning on doing something similar, man, why do you get all the good ideas first?!?).

-------------------------------------------
"What's the story with your face, son?!?"