Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Character Progression and the Minimal Elements of an RPG

Spazmo

Erudite
Joined
Nov 9, 2002
Messages
5,752
Location
Monkey Island
Drakron said:
Sorry but as a DM I never did that and its my impression very few DM use that system since its retarded as hell.

So every time your PCs do anything you stop the game to whip out your pocket calculator, consult the XP table and dole out XP? And then you'll pause the game for who knows how long so a character can level up, choose a new feat, get new spells etc? And I'm retarded? Shine on, you crazy brainfart.
 

Drakron

Arcane
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
6,326
Spells only come at rest, there is no actuall need to select the spells just then since they cannot use then until after rest.

HP calculations are easy, skill gain might take longer that HP and feats ... its not the same as creating a character, most players have their character advancement planed.

Also level up is only going to happen 20 times without going into epic levels, there no much diference is its at the end/start of the session or at the middle of it after a battle or quest completation ... its going to be rare anyway unless you are a munchkin powerlevel group.
 

Spazmo

Erudite
Joined
Nov 9, 2002
Messages
5,752
Location
Monkey Island
Well, maybe that works for you, but every group I've known does it the way I do, and in fact the books reccommend doing it that way (for whatever that's worth).

And in any case, would you care to explain what relevance this bit of ultra-pedantry has to the actual argument I was making or do you just enjoy calling people retarded?
 

Solik

Scholar
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
377
There are free electronic tools for XP calculation. They're very handy. I always hand out XP when it's earned thanks to those tools.
 

Breaking3po

Novice
Joined
Jan 26, 2006
Messages
12
I guess the general consensus here is that an RPG without character progression (but even given role progression) is simply an adventure game like Monkey Island. More stuff in an inventory and more things to say to NPCs does not make an RPG.

But like someone said, labels are never right on target. When someone plays MW after playing nothing but jRPG's, they believe that it is a "deep RPG." Alot of codexers wouldnt agree with that because they have played other RPGs and find MW to be a shallow action game with stat progression.
 

Chefe

Erudite
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
4,731
Breaking3po said:
But like someone said, labels are never right on target. When someone plays MW after playing nothing but jRPG's, they believe that it is a "deep RPG." Alot of codexers wouldnt agree with that because they have played other RPGs and find MW to be a shallow action game with stat progression.

How could that be possible? JRPGs have stories.
 

Crichton

Prophet
Joined
Jul 7, 2004
Messages
1,213
You don't need to let characters improve and get better at anything (though it's a good game mechanic and I can't see why you'd want to get rid of it),

This seems to be a common idea among RPG players and if anoyone cares to elaborate, I'd like to know why.

I hate charecter progression systems. I can tolerate them if they don't interfere with the aspects of the game that I do enjoy, but there seems to be a large segment of the gaming community that will play a game solely for the joy of watching their charecter's stats increase or slightly sharper swords ala Diablo, MMOs, Fable, Dungeon Siege, etc.

I'd really love it if instead of this constant tired rags-to-riches tale, we just distributed our stat/skill/feat/special ability/race/class points at the beginning and our charecters had to make do with that for the rest of the game. I can understand the desire to slowely introduce new abilities / weapons to the player to give him time to appreciate each of them, but even that is probably redundant in a game with different character builds. I find it particularly egregious in games that are primarily small unit tactics rather than immersion games anyway like FFT, Tactics Ogre, Icewind Dale or Silent Storm.

As it stands, I feel less like I'm participating in some tale of heroism than I'm working the 9-5 trying to move on up to that delux apartment in the sky. Not every story needs to be "the little tailor". Beowulf doesn't need to train to grow stronger to fight grendel. Conan never needs to kill a village's worth of goblins before he's ready to face that story's monster. Sigfried doesn't level up in the Nebelungenleid and Odessyus can cut his way back home and reclaim his kingdom without needing to go to a store to buy SUPA WEPONZ.
 

Zomg

Arbiter
Joined
Oct 21, 2005
Messages
6,984
Crichton said:
I hate charecter progression systems. I can tolerate them if they don't interfere with the aspects of the game that I do enjoy, but there seems to be a large segment of the gaming community that will play a game solely for the joy of watching their charecter's stats increase or slightly sharper swords ala Diablo, MMOs, Fable, Dungeon Siege, etc.

Offhand, I'd guess that it's just a matter of trying to serve two niche tastes in one game, both the "advancement junkies" and people who are interested in roleplaying and interactive narrative gaming. There's been a subterranean connection between the rules- and winning-focused wargamers and roleplayers since the beginning. If you're asking why character progression can be a good gameplay mechanic look at my earlier post in the thread.

I also suspect that in many cases munchkin treadmillers are a larval form of roleplayers, so there are generational connections. Lots of P&Pers fondly recall their own teenage munchkin days when you start swapping stories with them.
 

LCJr.

Erudite
Joined
Jan 16, 2003
Messages
2,469
Let me see if I'm getting this straight.

Say you make two versions of the same game. Our hypothectical game is composed of everything Codex'ers hold dear and sacred in a CRPG. In version A yourself, and the challenges, start off weak and level up as you progress through the story. In version B you start off with a developed character and don't do the level mill. Now you're saying A would be a RPG and B wouldn't simply because you don't "level"?

Isn't the main determination of whether or not a game is an ROLEPLAYING GAME whether or not you're allowed to play a ROLE? Granted CRPG's are extremely limited in what the player is allowed but some are clearly better than others.
 

Voltare

Liturgist
Joined
Feb 14, 2004
Messages
113
heh

In my rpg, i plan on turning the leveling aspect upside down.Stat progression( hehehe----sorry, an injoke to myself until you see what i got planned) is central to the game's plot.You will actually have to plan your attacks and which/what creature to attack, and when to run when the heat is on.


as i am now getting into fallout....i must say i like the way it does everything.......even if i'm kinda ....well....not really liking the setting.
 

Spazmo

Erudite
Joined
Nov 9, 2002
Messages
5,752
Location
Monkey Island
The main point of character progression, I'd say, is to provide the player with new options. If all gaining a level means is +0.1% chance of hitting a particular monster and +2 damage, then yeah, it's boring and crap. But if gaining a level means choosing new spells, combat maneuvers, skils, or whatever, well that's more interesting. And not just bigger fireballs and triple sword twirls instead of a double (+50% damage!), but actual new options. D&D is actually very good at this since there's a great deal of variety in the spells and feats you can choose as you go along and your choices will significantly affect how your character plays (for example, a feat like spring attack can really change how a melee fighter works). Mostly in combat, of course, but that's how D&D is.

But like I said, I figure a static character RPG could work--provided you get to build that character yourself and that the character system is robust enough to provide some meaty options that make for genuinely different characters.
 

Human Shield

Augur
Joined
Sep 7, 2003
Messages
2,027
Location
VA, USA
If your character is static what challenges him and how do challenges increase?

If you designed your character wrong you can't get anywhere instead of being able to change over the course of the game?
 

EvoG

Erudite
Joined
Mar 25, 2003
Messages
1,424
Location
Chicago
Human Shield said:
If your character is static what challenges him and how do challenges increase?

Do they need to increase? When player skill is involved yes, as the player learns better timing, better control...but in a game based on character stats...not as much. For example, puzzles, be it inventory, dialogue or stealth based, can become more difficult without the 'character' actually getting better, but rather the player learning how to exploit his abilites better...when to employ them. Also, stats dont need to be poor, just set. So the character could conceivably be BETTER than his early challenges require, and as the player learns the game, the challenges start to fall more inline with his characters base abilites.

Human Shield said:
If you designed your character wrong you can't get anywhere instead of being able to change over the course of the game?

This is poor game design, not a failure in the concept. If you CAN design a character in this game that CAN'T get anywhere, the design of the game failed.
 

Breaking3po

Novice
Joined
Jan 26, 2006
Messages
12
Spazmo said:
But like I said, I figure a static character RPG could work--provided you get to build that character yourself and that the character system is robust enough to provide some meaty options that make for genuinely different characters.

I agree that would be a fun game but that just based on that criteria does not an RPG make. Sounds, again, more like an adventure game.

The player is given obsticles, you basically make the choice about how you get by those obsticles at the begining of the game. Now, he is playing a role, so it could be labeled RPG, (Again, labels suck) but with no devepment of that role outside of story I wouldnt put the label on it as rpg.

Take prince of persia, and replace the fighting with dialog, and the climbing acrobatic puzzles with thief skills, then say you can get thru the game using only one of those skills, if not both. Your still not making it an RPG even if at the beginning you can choose diplomat or rogue as your character.

Now add in the ability as a diplomat to talk someone into come along to help you fight or take care of other obsticles, you are advancing something about your character (+1 follower); you are adding RPG elements. An RPG needs advancement in the initially created character's ability to make it labeled as an RPG. Metroid had rpg elements, river city ransom had rpg elements but take that one thing out that they had and they're straight action/adventure games with no RPG element.

I think some kind of ability or stat advancement or the ability to change the character within the rules gives rpg elements.
 

Breaking3po

Novice
Joined
Jan 26, 2006
Messages
12
sorry for the double post but this made me think about a particular game that might help describe what im saying here: Zork.

Zork at first glance is an RPG (lots of text makes RPG right? =P) but if you played it you realize its just an adventure game.

>> Use sword on dwarf.

Not RPG until you could...

>> Entice dwarf to join party.
"Arr, me thinks i should come along and help ye!"

or

>> Use Scroll of Fire on self
You learn a magic spell.
 

EvoG

Erudite
Joined
Mar 25, 2003
Messages
1,424
Location
Chicago
Breaking3po said:
An RPG needs advancement in the initially created character's ability to make it labeled as an RPG.

Why? Where has the definition of RPG been sealed in concrete, forever to be mandated as law?

What part of 'playing a role' includes "level advancement"?

How is playing a "role" of the smarmy merchant who finds a mysterious magical trinket in one of his monthly goods delivery in any way limited by his inability to become "merchant taskmaster +2"?

To paraphrase, by your statement - Level Advancement = Role Playing. Why?
 

EvoG

Erudite
Joined
Mar 25, 2003
Messages
1,424
Location
Chicago
So far, the strongest elements that would help define an RPG are:


  • * Freedom of Role Definition; Character Creation

    * Freedom to Explore a World of Options; Non-Linear and/or arbitrary progression. Your role affects your influence in the gameworld.

    * Interaction Density; There must be something to do.

As for other "RPG" conventions...

  • * Combat should be a choice, not a necessity.

    * Level Advancment is a product of reward, but its procedure is arbitrary.

  • Types of advancement are:


    Usage (swing sword til you're better)

    Assignment (spend those XP wisely)

    Acquired(you meet a swordsman who teaches you a new combat technique).


Precedence makes it difficult to look outside the box, but the fact is that nothing is set in stone. This doesn't help someone looking for a "specific" experience, but in order to avoid stagnation, there needs to be attempts to explore variations on the known term.
 

EvoG

Erudite
Joined
Mar 25, 2003
Messages
1,424
Location
Chicago
The one thing that trumps this is "fun". The most important reason we play games are to be entertained, and combat and level advancment happen to be enjoyable experiences. So my last post doesn't hold up if there isn't an entertainment value to be found. Some elements are forgiven for the strength of others, so committing to a game with no combat or no advancement requires more effort and emphasis be placed on the other components.
 

Drain

Scholar
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
215
Location
Here
In my opinion, it is necessary to distinguish between two types of roles. One type refers to character's personality, beliefs, principles, etc. The other type refers to character's abilities and skills. They(abilities and skills) define the character in terms of what he can do and how. Full-fledged RPGs allow playing both types roles simultaneously. If the first type is absent, you get hack and slash, dungeon crawler a la Diablo. If the second type is absent, you get basically an adventure game or whatever.
Now, as you progress through the story and as you use your skills to tackle the problems you face, it is only logical to have corresponding skills increase.
Almost all stories that RPGs get inspiration from(fantasy, mythology, etc.) have some sort of progression, some personal growth that the main character(s) experiences. To take it away from an RPG is to take away something important, which turns it into a very different type of game.
 

Wysardry

Augur
Patron
Joined
Feb 26, 2004
Messages
283
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Character advancement/progression does not necessarily mean increasing levels. It can also include raising skills, reputation, fame, knowledge, wealth, social rank etc.

For many people, it would be less enjoyable to play the role of a character that remained static for extended periods. It is acceptable in single PnP sessions/adventures, but most CRPGs are more akin to a series of adventures a.k.a. a campaign.
 

kingcomrade

Kingcomrade
Edgy
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Messages
26,884
Location
Cognitive Elite HQ
I've already posted a bunch of stuff about this in another thread:
kingcomrade said:
Things don't have to be leveled. Say, in Fallout, where everything is mostly hand crafted, it would make sense to allow equipment to take on more difficult enemies.

I was thinking of a system a bit like Metroid's, where you never really change, but you find equipment and stuff that allows you to do things that you couldn't before.

That way, almost all items (I'm intending that they also be handcrafted, or something like) become useful, so long as they have their advantages and disadvantages. Fallout already had something along these lines, as most guns did similar damage to each other, but had greater ammunition capacity/firing rate/armor piercing ability/whatever. You might give pistols the ability to become concealed, which allows you to take a weapon into a place where you couldn't before, and need one to progress (or finish a quest, or whatever). After all, pistols aren't battle weapons.

Someone earlier used an example of some monster in the woods in Gothic. I haven't played it, but it would be just as meaningful to get something that allows you to overcome that obstacle without just being +5 levels from the last time you met?

It doesn't have to be equipment, it can be abilities. Metroid and newer platformers, like Psychonauts, generally allow you to unlock more content by gaining abilities that allow you to do things you couldn't before. Like, as a simple example, in Psychonauts, once you get Invisibility, though, you gain the ability to do a lot of things you couldn't overcome before. You can easily sneak up and damage or set on fire mega-censors and psychic bears and psychic cougars, you can sneak up and steal the gold watch from the squirrel, etc.

Psychonauts even has an EXP system for those abilities. You don't really get more health, I think you get that for accomplishing objectives, but as you get EXP for doing and collecting stuff, you get closer to new (or upgraded) abilities. That way you don't have leveled characters, but if you couldn't do without EXP you could still use that system. Like, you level up, and you get 20 skill points to spend, or whatever you like, but you don't just magically gain HP or anything like that, though this is smudging the line from a "pure" system. It would make more sense that at certain points or as rewards for certain accomplishments, instead of EXP, you are rewarded with skill points directly, or to choose a new ability. That way you can still develop your character the way you want without having to deal with levels.

Personally, I would like a tag system. Where, you don't have skill points, but when the game rewards you, you get to tag a skill. Like, if you tag Small Arms, which allows you to use small arms. You can tag it a second time (or a second skill to go in combination) which allows you to use scoped rifles competently. Or something like that.

The only snag, which I think could probably be dealt with, is how do deal with random monsters lurking about. There would have to be some sort of reward for killing them. In a post-apoc game, ammunition would be nice, or health kits or other things. In Psychonauts, killing got you ammunition, health, money, and grenade recharges. The enemies were also typically in your way and had to be dealt with. There might even be some benefits in the role-playing arena. After all, if you don't need their equipment, why would you want to get into fights? The only time you would need to fight is when something is in your way, or you are surprised, or you need some ammo, etc.

I mean, why would a Vault Dweller actually take the time to clear the cave rats out, or get into fights with 50 Enclave patrols? The player does it for EXP, of course, but otherwise it doesn't make sense unless they attack him or are in the way.

One of the things that happens here is that the world becomes MORE dangerous. You have to pick your battles, and you have to employ tricks to deal with some enemies. I mean, no human is ever going to become powerful enough to take on a dragon, or anything like that. He would have to have abilities and equipment. Goblins will still be a problem unless those equipment and abilities help him deal with them. Why does everyone think goblins should be pushovers, anyways? If they were pushovers, they wouldn't survive in your average fantasy world, especially in their typical large numbers.
...
Seriously, I think my idea has merit, especially in this case. Monsters are dangerous, but if you have the tools to overcome them they aren't that much of a threat. Mighty heroes are just men, after all, but what is a goblin with a knife going to do against armor? How will it defend itself against your <s>crossbow spear lance</s> er, longsword or whatever?
The point is that early on you might be vulnerable to goblins, but they are reduced to a minor threat compared to other monsters because you have tools/abilities designed to combat them later on.
 

LCJr.

Erudite
Joined
Jan 16, 2003
Messages
2,469
After reading the replies in this thread I've come to the conclusion that a lot of you are being brainwashed into becoming level treadmilling munchkins by the CRPG industry. Not only do you expect a CRPG to have the level treadmill, or it's equivalent, but many of you seem to consider it be an essential and defining feature of the genre. The option to roleplay your character seems to be a secondary concern. And a game that has ample roleplaying opportunities but no level scheme is now labeled an Adventure game. Didn't the motto of this site used to be "Putting the ROLE back in roleplaying"?

Character development seems to be defined as stronger, faster, deadlier, more skilled, etc... Back in the old days of PnP, when dinosaurs still ruled the Earth and home computers were rare, character development was roleplaying your character by starting with a basic concept and using your imagination to create a fully fleshed out alter ego with it's own personality. Geeky? Hell yes but entertaining. BTW didn't the motto of this site used to be "Putting the ROLE back in roleplaying"?

Just for shits and giggles I looked up "roleplaying game" on the Wikipedia.

A role-playing game (RPG) is a type of game in which players assume the roles of characters and collaboratively create narratives. Gameplay progresses according to a predetermined system of rules and guidelines, within which players may improvise freely. Player choices shape the direction and outcome of role-playing games

You can read the whole thing here if you so choose. BTW no mention of leveling being a fundamental requirement. Most frightening thing in this entry is the celebrity section. Try and imagine what a RPG session with Dave Chapelle would be like.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roleplaying_game
 

Solik

Scholar
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
377
1. People are talking about (single-player) CRPGs, which do not allow for collaborative creation of narratives or rule improvisation.

2. This thread is about whether progression is a needed / important element, not "should all RPGs be level treadmill munchkin games."

3. Wikipedia is to be taken with a grain of salt at all times. That's a decent-enough defintiion for the PnP games, though.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom