"My name''s Forest. Forest Gump..."

Many posts here touched on this, but I''d like to try to center some attention on the big picture: What''s the payoff for not min-maxing? Whether I have a Charisma of 18 or a description that says "Drop Dead Gorgeous" the ultimate goal of the game is going to determine what I care about.

In many pen & paper RPGs, the payoff for playing an idiot or a weakling often times is the fun of acting and goofing around with your friends. Even with voice over IP in MMO games its hard to duplicate the comraderie of being in a group around a table.

Part of the problem stems not just from players seeing themselves as a collection of numbers, but seeing the game world as objects that are no more than a means to an end. Whether I see the numbers or not, if I know that I have to meet a certain threshold in something (wealth, fame, friends, whatever) in order to "win" the game, I''m going to be tempted to play the game strategically (i.e., numerically).

Consider the case of playing a complete loser (call him Gump). In a social setting, I can enjoy playing my character because of the reactions I get from other characters: How they have to save me from myself; how I cause entertaining problems for the group; etc., etc. In a single player game, you''re going to need some pretty impressive heuristics to mimick the kind of feedback I would get from friends at the table.

But most games are very arbitrary and binary in determining success or failure. Either I make the skill check or I don''t. Playing Forest Gump isn''t going to win me the game (which I think was alot of IronOtaku''s point). Since the sole focus on the game is often winning, you''ll need to tempt me with some other reward for playing Gump in character .

--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

restating a couple of Wavinator points in my own words, feel free to ignore first part("I" does refer to myself, not him):
Since when does the village idiot save the world? I''ve only played CRPGs. Also, I min/max in real life, so why not in a game? Basic decision making requires that there be a best way to go.

(this is part to be read intently)
Instead of focusing on the player''s experience, let us change the perceptions of the NPCs.
This will require good pattern matching and an ai which can use it, but to make sure everyone stays in character, we need a system where NPCs can basically detect lies. They will notice if you do something your stats shouldn''t allow. Also, to make this more believable, PCs should look their parts, otherwise we don''t justify the ai engine(but obviously not the agent) from knowing the exact stats of a character.

Just a few random thoughts:

When playing P&P RPG many of my friend will role play a stupid character because it is funny. One way to encourage a player role play a stupid character would be to add stupid but funny conversation options. Also low intelegence usually means "no magical aptitude" rather than stupid. A warrior may not have the first idea when it comes to magic but could still be a brilliant tactitian.

Some players will only be interested in killing and plundering no matter what you do. That is fine, IRL there are people like this to. However, such people will not have meaningfull relationships will other NPC (you may be big and tough, but I have powerfull friends...). Players who role play there characters can be rewarded with extra quests, and the ability to make friends and call in favours from NPC''s.

Stuart

[quoteSome players will only be interested in killing and plundering no matter what you do.

for the sake of diversity in game, let''s just forget them!!!
there is a lot of game which fit their interest, while other kind of player has very little, let''s concentrate on these kind of player rather the bloody going one to have something different









>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
be good
be evil
but do it WELL
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

imho, the player should be defined through game.
imagine this scenario:
- the player has to get inside of a secured building

many ways are possbile:
- roof window climbing
- kick guard''s ass
- seduce/flirt with guard to get a free pass
- hack underground garage

all these actions would require some skills from the real player (ie: arcade climbing/fighing...) and each action would leave a "mark" on your characther. after enough marks, you get a skill (or just enhance it), like a gigolo, climber, hacker, etc..

quote:


for the sake of diversity in game, let's just forget them!!!
there is a lot of game which fit their interest, while other kind of player has very little, let's concentrate on these kind of player rather the bloody going one to have something different

But such people do exist. In real life they are mercenaries or similar, and are generaly viewed with distrust. What this would mean in game terms is that the player would be able to follow the path of the mercenary, but they will not be able to gain the trust of NPC's which will mean that certain quests are unavalible etc. A mercenary would be less likely to have a romantic interest in the game as well.

Stuart


[edited by - StuartD on November 26, 2003 1:47:23 AM]

It was questioned earlier wether there were any benefits to having a stat-less system, I wanna bring up this point because it is interesting.

Stat-Tinkering in an RPG is often the only gameplay function to work with. This is usually because the games are so combat heavy. Not that combat heavy is bad, on my list of favorites is Breath Of Fire:Dragon Quarter which is for the most part just a combat game. With 7 stats (Atk, Def, Mag, Spd, Mov, Hp, Ap) and a very small active skill pool, the game is mostly about using strategy (laying traps) and tactics.

A game geared around the absense of stats would make a poor combat heavy game, because often you need to know how much a dent you can put into an enemy. BOF:DQ was kind in that respect to let you see the enemy level and hp from outside of the combat context.

So, I know we''re trying to avoid implementation specifics, but consider this type of system.

We make a small set of numeric stats, and their range is small. If so desired, its either within 1d6 or 2d6, I.E. a stat of 1 means weakling and 6 means paragon. Supposing it''s 2d6, then 7 would be the stat that every generic character has. We let out players stat-tinker by adjust the stats according to some point system, Stat-2=Point+3, Stat-1=Point+3, Stat+1=Point-1, Stat-2=Point-3, you''ve seen this plenty time before. However, we limit stat tinkering to just this. For the rest of the game, its just the skills, and the skills, you either have it or you don''t, and the stats just provide a +1 bonus. Situations that are easy get a +1, situations that are difficult get a -1. When rolling, you take the skill needed, add the related stat, apply the difficulty modifer, and roll "under".

Lockpicking + Dexterity - Deadbolt. 1 + 7 - 1 = roll under 7.
Lockpicking + Dexterity + Latch. 1+7+1 = roll under 9.

Not that this is some PNPRPG that you should play, but rather by locking the player into stats and just making them better at situations, you sort of have an environment where they need to play their roles. As for combat, its hard to figure this out, making a formula is easy, but the more resolution you provide to a number, the more the player will stat-tinker.

Some of the initial posts and thoughts had some great ideas and got me to thinking about some of my habits while playing. I, like many of the posters, loved DeusEx - primarily because I tend to like to sneak and ambush enemies rather than kick the door down and growl at them, although occasionally that has its merits. I am much more a player than a designer, but I do have some observations and ideas I''d like to share:

I don''t play many RPGs mainly because of the aspects that are being discussed here. The point of the game becomes not the story but how do I improve stats, accumulate wealth, so that I can defeat monster, complete quest, level up, improve stats...etc. Ultimately, the point of the game becomes how do I create a powerful character so I can win. I would be inclined to do this more "in character" if the reward system rewarded characters who were ugly, dumb, slow, less witty, etc.

Solving this problem has more to do with overall game design rather than your interface to your character. I like the ideas of removing stats, at least visibly, and I like the idea of character creation being a derivative of a questionnaire - although that should be a choice. I also like the idea of my character being composed of attributes, interests and abilities rather than stats dictating my capability of performing various tasks. However, to achieve the results that this thread is discussing I think more needs to be done.

There is no motivation for me to create a dumb, ugly, slow, unskilled, etc. character if it only acts as a hindrance toward my goals. I have NEVER seen an rpg where I gained the same "experience" for making a fair maiden puke as I did for sweeping her off her feet with my charm. Id love to play a character where you have the attributes of Mr. Bean and could get the same results as the brawny handsome 007 in any situation.

In addition, the only way for me to gain attributes that allow me to "defeat" enemies is combat - dumb, slow, and unskilled are just obstacles to achieve a result and therefore my stats become my focus. If I were allowed to cower, whine, cry, moan, and disgust my opponent and achieve a result that is on par with bashing him/her with a sword then I''d be inclined to play that sort of character. Currently, the only way to really complete the bulk of quests in any RPG is standard combat. How about if you bore the dragon to sleep with your idle banter about dog pooh - and when (s)he curls up to sleep it off you steal the magic ring or imprison him/her in a orb? If being an absolute klutz allowed me to clear a room of enemies by sheer luck in a Monty Python manner - you bet I would play that character. There *has* to be rewards and advantages for those types of attributes though.

I also like the idea of your game play being recorded or monitored. You should be rewarded for playing "in character" vice out of character - it is a ''ROLE playing'' game after all - shouldn''t the advancement of your character be based on your ability to "role" play vice whack the dragon? If you play a strong, less intelligent, fighter and seek to solve a quest by discussing nuclear physics, you should be rewarded less than the klutz who solves the problem by careening across the room on a banana peel. Ideas such as these would, IMHO, create a *very* rewarding game to play as well as create a lot of replay. It would almost be worth playing 4 characters at once through the game so you could enjoy the unique way the story unfolds as you complete quests. Albeit this sort of game would be complicated and very challenging to create but epic nonetheless.

I think DeusEx had a great idea but the world of an RPG has the canvas to take the idea, and much that is being discussed here, further. To accomplish that a complete re-do of the system is in order. I''d love to play that game though and I hope these ideas I''ve read materialize into something.


#dth-0

Usually no one agree''s with me when i say this but there were many succesful non combat crpgs in the past with a statless system. All the quest games put out by sierra. You played the role of one character and went through the linear story written by the designers. Your character grew and developed through the aquisition of items, yet the entire experience was linear and could only ever be done one way. The genre that they are labeled is Adventure games, yet they are pretty much a pseudo role playing game.
Here is an example of a plethora of situations you can gain inspiration from that are non combat. Sure some parts of the game contain combat, but they don''t use a dedicated combat system in the game that drowns out the whole poitn of what the game is. They''re not ment to be a hack and slash but rather an interactive story. Design a game that works like these classic adventure games, with the different interaction cursors, and implement a fully explorable world and dozens of hidden stats the player never sees. An open ended adventure game with an abstracted system of hidden stats, could define a new generation of cRPGS.
Combat could be done so its seemless and you''re not jumping into a new mode of the game. Equip your sword and people around you run away if they''re cowards, or approach you for a fight. When you slaughter someone in the city street, you gain the murderer stat on your character that affects how the whole game world will see you, unless of course news of your actions hasn''t reached them yet.

Currently i''m working on a design document for a game that ties a fallout style game world in with quest series game mechanics. The discussion of abstracted character stats has intrigued me alot and has given inspiration for a whole new section in my design document. Its currently only in rough note form in my black book though so I am unable to share it. I like pen and paper better for the flow of ideas.

quote: Original post by iNfuSeD
Usually no one agree''s with me when i say this but there were many succesful non combat crpgs in the past with a statless system. All the quest games put out by sierra. You played the role of one character and went through the linear story written by the designers. Your character grew and developed through the aquisition of items, yet the entire experience was linear and could only ever be done one way. The genre that they are labeled is Adventure games, yet they are pretty much a pseudo role playing game.
Here is an example of a plethora of situations you can gain inspiration from that are non combat. Sure some parts of the game contain combat, but they don''t use a dedicated combat system in the game that drowns out the whole poitn of what the game is. They''re not ment to be a hack and slash but rather an interactive story. Design a game that works like these classic adventure games, with the different interaction cursors, and implement a fully explorable world and dozens of hidden stats the player never sees. An open ended adventure game with an abstracted system of hidden stats, could define a new generation of cRPGS.
Combat could be done so its seemless and you''re not jumping into a new mode of the game. Equip your sword and people around you run away if they''re cowards, or approach you for a fight. When you slaughter someone in the city street, you gain the murderer stat on your character that affects how the whole game world will see you, unless of course news of your actions hasn''t reached them yet.

Currently i''m working on a design document for a game that ties a fallout style game world in with quest series game mechanics. The discussion of abstracted character stats has intrigued me alot and has given inspiration for a whole new section in my design document. Its currently only in rough note form in my black book though so I am unable to share it. I like pen and paper better for the flow of ideas.

reminds me of the quest for glory series. They where great games, that allowed you to bring your character from one game to next. They where a combination of RPG and adventure games. Essentially choose one of three character types to play as a warrior, wizard and theif. Each had there own advantages and disadvantage they also had there own unique abilites the changed how you played the game. They where lots of fun pity they only made 5 games...


-----------------------------------------------------
Writer, Programer, Cook, I''m a Jack of all Trades
Current Design project
Chaos Factor Design Document