Hello. Im Mr. Buff. I walk around all day a nd kill stuff, and then I level up and my lockpicking inceases even though I was out in the woods all day. I am sorry, but it just doesnt make any sense to me that you could go around killing stuff, and then when you level up, your knowledge increases, or your intelligence, or you lockpicking skill, or your barding skill.... The only way to learn thisgs is through practicing them... I think Betrayl at Krondor (best experience point system ive ever seen IMHO) was the only game that instituted this, except for a lot of old Sierra adventure games... I would like to see it again. And I dont think that it is realistic for a theif to be standign somewhere and repeatedly clicking on Lockpick->LLocpicks->Door->Roll random saving throw check->failed->retpeat process In the real world, if someone fails at something they will keep trying until they decide not to. So here is what I think about lockpicking. Say the guard walks by every 12-15 seconds, say that is random so you dont really know when the guard will walk by, but close enough for the player to observe. So the guard leaves. You have a lockpick skill of 3 out of 10. So you click lockpick, with the lockpick set, click on the door, and...you see your theif crouch down, pull the stuff out of his pocket, fiddle with the lock, then there is a transparent random roll, and he fails then check....and he still fiddles with the lock (reroll)...and fiddles (reroll), fiddles (rerolld), you hear the guard coming around the corner, closer, should you stop or should you give it another go? And either the lock will jam, he gets in, the guard walks by, or you cancel the action. It would stop people from constantly clicking lockpick, it would be more realistic, and it would be easy to implement. What do ya think?

Totally true. This is the primary problem with level based experience systems. You kill rats with your bare hands, and somehow that teaches you how to cast fireballs.

Skill-based experience systems, IMHO, are far superior. The main problem is that characters have trouble gaining new skills or improving rarely-used skills. Given that most RPGs are combat-heavy, this means the non-combat skills never get very high.

I agree that the experience needs to be genuine, or players will just write macros to make their characters pick a lock over, and over, and over again.

Betrayal at Krondar was far from the only game to have a skill-based system. Darklands and the Jagged Alliance series both used systems where you gained skill points for using the actual skill. Both also offered opportunities for players to train or practice skills outside of combat, allowing you to develop non-combat skills.

I would add a tiered system of skill costs, so that it takes more uses to go up as your level improves. When you''re first starting out, you learn a lot from every attempt, and your skill rises quickly. But once you''re a master at picking locks, your average peasant''s hut just doesn''t offer much to improve your skills.

I thought Ultima Online had a usage-based system? And many MUDs do it these days. So I think there are more games that do it the way you suggest than you might think.

[ MSVC Fixes | STL | SDL | Game AI | Sockets | C++ Faq Lite | Boost ]

Yep... UO had about 40-50 different skills. Just for melee combat alone they had fencing, swordsmanship, mace fighting, and wrestling. All 4 had different uses depending on the weapon you used. Fencing was pokey things like spears, swordsmanship was anything that slashed, mace fighting was things that bonked and wresting was when you were unarmed. (What then would ''armed wrestling'' be? ) In addition, you also had a general tactics skill.

In the above example of wrestling bunnies with your bare hands, the only thing that would increase is wrestling and tactics - and maybe your appetite.

Dave Mark
Intrinsic Algorithm Development
"Reducing the world to mathematical equations!"

I agree that skill based is best, and it should especially apply to magic. But instead of automatically learning new spells as skill increases (where do those spells come from?), the player has to go on quests to find people to teach them new spells or spend a reasonable amount of time tracking down ancient manuscripts in a library. In the latter case, learning new spells becomes a plot device because the player will have to search through the histories of the land to find clues to lead him in the right direction of more research or questing. Of course, unless you have a truly brilliant history for your world, or it''s very well written, the player shouldn''t spend too much time in the library.

---------------------------------
"It''s groin-grabbingly transcendent!" - Mr. Gamble, my teacher, speaking of his C++ AP class

Dr.Mol, I would LOVE to have you post constantly on my Brain Picking post. I feel the same way about advancement systems.. and thats why I am working to design a fresh way to deal with skills and abilities. We are working on a mmorpg with more than it''s fair share of twists and changes to the genre. I tend to refine things through proper argument and considering other peoples opinions. So far you seem to have a lot of good ones when it comes to RPG''s.

Anywho, I''m done but-kissing? Did it work? lol.


astrum@euclideantheorem.com

"Don''t tell me it can''t be done, tell me how far I have to go to do it."

astrum, glad to help you. most of my days were spent playing RPGs and thining about how they s**k. As they pop up in my head, i post em here, so keep reading.

email if you want. joltman@prodigy.net and well do some more talkin bout game concepts and how todays games s**k.

OOProgrammer, how could being in a library interest a player? I mean, how could spell esearch interest a player? What would the hook be? I personally think it would be cool to browse through stuff and pull out stuff and look at the coold designes, but it would become a risk of being too puzzle oriented. Ill have to think about that...Maybe accidents like little msihaps and the spell turns you into a chicken, but its not supposed to, and testing on live subjects. Dissections, parts in jars, developing fireballs, like on a holograph propjector where you project it and tweak what it looks like. Maybe mix stuff, but the reading and all that, that is the tough part. I think the research angle has potential for toung in cheek stuff, but some really serious stuff if the PC is inclined to go there.

Maybe a mage knows all the spells aready, but needs the..um..favor of the gods, in the form of sacrifices, fasting on their days, going to massess, abstinence, daily prayers, cursing only with his name (or not depending on the god)...and how long youve been doing it for. Make it detached from experience. Maybe even casting would set his favor of you lower, or he would expect some sort of offering in return...Say you want to raise someone, it souldnt be a loss of mana then you sleep it off and feel better, it should be a trade, or at lease the sacrifice of something important.

Anyways, M2C.

quote: Original post by OOProgrammer
But instead of automatically learning new spells as skill increases (where do those spells come from?), the player has to go on quests to find people to teach them new spells or spend a reasonable amount of time tracking down ancient manuscripts in a library.

I''m already doing this too. *yawn*



[ MSVC Fixes | STL | SDL | Game AI | Sockets | C++ Faq Lite | Boost ]

quote: Original post by DrMol
astrum, glad to help you. most of my days were spent playing RPGs and thining about how they s**k. As they pop up in my head, i post em here, so keep reading.

email if you want. joltman@prodigy.net and well do some more talkin bout game concepts and how todays games s**k.

This is getting to be a really tired statement from people like you. First of all, you have proven admirably that you aren''t familiar with a bulk of the games out there - or else you would have been able to recognize that a majority of the ORPGs already have a skill system similar to that which you have suggested. Therefore, if you haven''t played all of these major titles... or even some of them, your premise that all of today''s games suck is inherently inaccurate.

What is even more amusing - and smacks of you being all of 14 years old - is your insistance that you are the Great White Hope (or the great pasty-white programmer) that has come to save us all. It is an admirable ambition to make better games than are already available... but that ambition is shared by 98% of developers already. Perhaps there are forces beyond your awareness (posing as a nebulous concept known as "the Real World") that make it more difficult than you believe. Therefore, saying "damnit! How come no one is as brilliant (and cocky) as me?" begins to grate on the nerves of those around you. Just something to ponder.

Dave Mark
Intrinsic Algorithm Development
"Reducing the world to mathematical equations!"

*applaudes InnocuousFox*

I remember when I had such hopes and dreams, and at least I started off on the right foot, but as with all hopefuls, theorists and theologists - eventually everyone learns the truth (which is out there btw) its really f***ing hard to do it right.

Hell, I have such high expectations of myself after making my claims that I am unsatisfied with where technology forces my game, and the sacrifices I have to make in order to get it functional.

Also, the vast majority of games that are coming out these days have greatly improved systems that cater for your specifications, and if you had played them you might learn to appreciate what some game-developers have been able to achieve.

First learn to Tolerate that which is greater than you or what you could achieve (in this case, the games that are so intollerable in your eyes), Respect that which is beyond you (in that the developers of these games have had to sacrifice high ideals to create something that is usable and is functional) and Learn from what good things these games can teach us and how we may grow from the experience of them.

Only once you have the power to create such a game are you worthy to criticise that which is beyond your current scope of expertise. This has been something I have slowly had to come to terms with. I used the term "Suck" many times a year and a half ago when I first came here. I haven''t proven to be able to meet my own demands and therefore have not proven that the games suck, but instead that I suck in comparison to those who make the games.

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - The future of RPGs GPA Thanks to all the goblins in the GDCorner niche