The "grind" in RPGs (particularly MMORPGs) has been discussed to death amongst game designers. A common response is that RPG players are divided into those who want their time invested to be rewarded and those who want their own skill to be rewarded. I'm currently exploring a design for a project that is going to focus on the player skill oriented RPG players. I realize this sounds contradictory given that the RPG genre is generally defined by the character progression component, but I'll leave my broader conception of what constitutes an RPG to another discussion ;). The design I am working on emphasizes character attributes as means to diversify the range of tactical options available to the player rather than as rewards for completing various quests/tasks. All the skill points that would normally have to be collected over time would be available the moment the player creates a character; you start the game "maxed out", in other words. Skill points could then be redistributed to wherever the player saw fit. For example, a new character starts with 50/100 skill points in 10 of 50 available skills, giving him 500 skill points to move around. Ideally, skills would be balanced (don't laugh) so that choosing to focus on one skill over another doesn't raise the character's overall power or advantage. The distinctions would all be tactical in nature and the success of the skillset selected would depend entirely on how the player utilized them and what kind of skillset their opponent has. This system leaves a lot of variables open, and there are some issues I haven't been able to think of great solutions for:

• When and how should the player be allowed to redistribute skill points? On the fly? Once every X hours? As part of a quest? Should this cost the player something?
• Given the open-endedness of the system, is there a uniform guideline that could be applied to all skills to make balancing manageable? Every skill having a counter skill, for instance.

Any thoughts? Also, could anyone point me to games that have used a similar system? I know its been done before in various types of games, but the only one that really comes to mind for me is Double Dragon 5, and it's implemented on a very rudimentary level there. Any input is appreciated.

Quote:

When and how should the player be allowed to redistribute skill points? On the fly? Once every X hours? As part of a quest? Should this cost the player something?

If the player can never advance at all, then you need to let them redistribute points pretty easily. Otherwise, people will just keep deleting and recreating new characters with slightly different names (KewlDude7, KewlDude8, KewlDude9...) As for "costing" them something, they are apparently not going to have anything to pay with, since they won't have xp or gold if there's no grind or advancement. Guild Wars only lets you switch points around in towns, not in the middle of quests or battle, which seems like a good comprimise.

Quote:

Given the open-endedness of the system, is there a uniform guideline that could be applied to all skills to make balancing manageable? Every skill having a counter skill, for instance.

I'd have to say not really. If the game is supposed to be tactical, then you can't just use a simple paper-rock-scissors balance on the skills, because that basically just makes every battle completely dependent on chance, not skill. You will just need to do a ton of playtesting with skilled players to see what combinations they latch on to, and decide which are overpowered. Once you release the MMORPG of course, you watch it and then endlessly nerf skills as people discover new combinations that you deem too powerful, and learn to accept the wailing, namecalling, death threats, and posts to gamedev.net talking about how your MMORPG sucks and some guy's going to make one that is actually good.

Quote:

Original post by makeshiftwings Quote: When and how should the player be allowed to redistribute skill points? On the fly? Once every X hours? As part of a quest? Should this cost the player something? If the player can never advance at all, then you need to let them redistribute points pretty easily. Otherwise, people will just keep deleting and recreating new characters with slightly different names (KewlDude7, KewlDude8, KewlDude9...) As for "costing" them something, they are apparently not going to have anything to pay with, since they won't have xp or gold if there's no grind or advancement. Guild Wars only lets you switch points around in towns, not in the middle of quests or battle, which seems like a good comprimise. Quote: Given the open-endedness of the system, is there a uniform guideline that could be applied to all skills to make balancing manageable? Every skill having a counter skill, for instance. I'd have to say not really. If the game is supposed to be tactical, then you can't just use a simple paper-rock-scissors balance on the skills, because that basically just makes every battle completely dependent on chance, not skill. You will just need to do a ton of playtesting with skilled players to see what combinations they latch on to, and decide which are overpowered. Once you release the MMORPG of course, you watch it and then endlessly nerf skills as people discover new combinations that you deem too powerful, and learn to accept the wailing, namecalling, death threats, and posts to gamedev.net talking about how your MMORPG sucks and some guy's going to make one that is actually good.

lol QFT

Quote:

Given the open-endedness of the system, is there a uniform guideline that could be applied to all skills to make balancing manageable? Every skill having a counter skill, for instance.

I understand it is a PvP game?
My take is, if the possibilities are varied enough, the players will balance themselves using their own creativity. Tactics will come and go just as fashion does.

It reminds me when we tried to take down a Dragon using siege weapons in DAOC. Until then the "standard" way to take it down was a zerg rush. Then some one thought, what if we ambushed it with 200 balistas? Ok we DID get slaugthered, but it was lots of fun, and for half a second, it was working.

Just give the players a maximum of possibilities, and they will always find a counter to the current "best way".

What you *do* what to avoid, are skills that prevent other people from acting. Mezz, stuns, freeze, roots, call em what you want. These are balance destroyers. The only thing more powerfull than preventing your enemy from acting is a death skill.

Use your imagination! IMO, diversity is the key to balance.

Quote:

When and how should the player be allowed to redistribute skill points? On the fly? Once every X hours? As part of a quest? Should this cost the player something?

Perhaps a "one player, multiple characters" approach. For a pay MMO it could be part of the pricing scheme. You could also win/buy premade characters via in-game competition/assets. When you log in a character it spawns where you last logged it out, so you can't just morph from one to the another when convenient. A death penalty could be that you can't use the character again for 12 hrs. Creating a new character should be time-consuming enough that people won't be able to do so on a moment's whim, but certainly not a "grind". Maybe 30 minutes of work, involving visiting trainers at different locations and doing some tasks with them.

Keep in mind that if you have equipment and money in your game and they can be used to significant advantage that these can become a grind just as easily as stats.

Perhaps instead of moving stats around you would want to set the stats and use items.

For example, you could only wear one kind of armour and that would boost/ take away from different fighting styles, stealth, speed, visibility etc.

This would be easier because you could construct much more reasonable times to change -- whenever a player gets to where his clothes are kept, to a store, or to a point in a game where he picks up something new.

(You could also redistribute stat points at that time if you have your heart set on it.)

Thanks for all the responses guys.

I should probably have said more about what the game is. It is indeed online and PvP oriented, but I'm not sure I would call it "massive". It has qualities like an MMORPG such as one shared persistent world, but the scale of the world is much smaller than MMORPGs traditionally are. The world initially will be built around one town and the surrounding area only. Gameplay will focus on PvP conflicts between players using a combat engine that emphasizes player skill and tactics more than trying to offer the complete "be anyone, do anything" virtual world experience.

Quote:

Original post by makeshiftwings If the player can never advance at all, then you need to let them redistribute points pretty easily. Otherwise, people will just keep deleting and recreating new characters with slightly different names (KewlDude7, KewlDude8, KewlDude9...) As for "costing" them something, they are apparently not going to have anything to pay with, since they won't have xp or gold if there's no grind or advancement. Guild Wars only lets you switch points around in towns, not in the middle of quests or battle, which seems like a good comprimise.

Making redistribution reasonably accessible yet not available during PvP encounters does seem necessary to prevent scenarios like you describe. There will be an economy of money and items, however, which will enable the player to acquire wealth. So advancement does exist in this way, but traditional character advancement through gaining character stats over time is what I'm trying to avoid. Given that they will have money available to spend through playing the game, do you think that requiring them to pay for skill redistribution would be too big of a deterrent (or even spawn KewlDude clones)?

Quote:

I'd have to say not really. If the game is supposed to be tactical, then you can't just use a simple paper-rock-scissors balance on the skills, because that basically just makes every battle completely dependent on chance, not skill. You will just need to do a ton of playtesting with skilled players to see what combinations they latch on to, and decide which are overpowered. Once you release the MMORPG of course, you watch it and then endlessly nerf skills as people discover new combinations that you deem too powerful, and learn to accept the wailing, namecalling, death threats, and posts to gamedev.net talking about how your MMORPG sucks and some guy's going to make one that is actually good.

You're very right about this. Interesting combat means interesting choices that enable the player to achieve victory through utilizing the abilities available to him rather than solely having the better skillset by chance. I was definitely over simplifying this issue.

Quote:

Original post by Steadtler I understand it is a PvP game? My take is, if the possibilities are varied enough, the players will balance themselves using their own creativity. Tactics will come and go just as fashion does. It reminds me when we tried to take down a Dragon using siege weapons in DAOC. Until then the "standard" way to take it down was a zerg rush. Then some one thought, what if we ambushed it with 200 balistas? Ok we DID get slaugthered, but it was lots of fun, and for half a second, it was working. Just give the players a maximum of possibilities, and they will always find a counter to the current "best way". What you *do* what to avoid, are skills that prevent other people from acting. Mezz, stuns, freeze, roots, call em what you want. These are balance destroyers. The only thing more powerfull than preventing your enemy from acting is a death skill. Use your imagination! IMO, diversity is the key to balance.

I had not considered the effects of immobilizing abilities on game balance, and I think you're right about this. Particularly given the kind of combat system I am after, I always want to allow a player to have an outside chance of recovering even if on the verge of defeat.

Quote:

Original post by Hollower Perhaps a "one player, multiple characters" approach. For a pay MMO it could be part of the pricing scheme. You could also win/buy premade characters via in-game competition/assets. When you log in a character it spawns where you last logged it out, so you can't just morph from one to the another when convenient. A death penalty could be that you can't use the character again for 12 hrs. Creating a new character should be time-consuming enough that people won't be able to do so on a moment's whim, but certainly not a "grind". Maybe 30 minutes of work, involving visiting trainers at different locations and doing some tasks with them.

With the rules for PvP engagement I have planned, death will likely be a fairly common thing so I'm not sure if I want to punish the player too heavily for it. Loss of items will be the main reason to avoid death. Multiple characters as part of the pricing scheme is something I will consider, though.

Quote:

Keep in mind that if you have equipment and money in your game and they can be used to significant advantage that these can become a grind just as easily as stats.

I have considered this, and you're absolutely right. I want items to function similar to how I want skills to function: their advantage is mainly tactical rather than adding raw power. Obviously, there is going to be disparity between the haves and the have-nots, as a guy running around in a loin cloth and no weapon is going to have a hard time against someone fully equipped and wielding a sword. But those that choose to use items to their advantage are also taking an economic risk: items can be lost if you die and also break over time. So again, the goal is for combat to be skill based and not item or stat based.

Quote:

Original post by JamesGreaves Perhaps instead of moving stats around you would want to set the stats and use items. For example, you could only wear one kind of armour and that would boost/ take away from different fighting styles, stealth, speed, visibility etc. This would be easier because you could construct much more reasonable times to change -- whenever a player gets to where his clothes are kept, to a store, or to a point in a game where he picks up something new.

This would be easier to design and balance, and may be something to fall back on if the skill system doesn't work out. But as I mentioned above, I want to try and have both items and skills be factors in the player's tactical decisions.

Quote:

Original post by Khantrah When and how should the player be allowed to redistribute skill points? On the fly? Once every X hours? As part of a quest? Should this cost the player something?

I suggest redistribute on the fly, but with a slight different approach. Like in real life, whenever you learn something and don't use it for a long time, your skills in that something will drop over time. My idea is to simulate this: players are able to add any skill freely, but the skill that have the lowest rank will drop accordingly.

Quote:

Original post by Khantrah Given the open-endedness of the system, is there a uniform guideline that could be applied to all skills to make balancing manageable? Every skill having a counter skill, for instance.

Unfortunately, this is best done by player's feedbacks

your skill system sounds alot like the deus ex system and to a point the planetside system. i suggest you look at how these games used the system to see if it may work for you also