Incline How to properly enjoy an RPG

[JarlFrank]

Let me add that half the fun is not knowing what to expect and making characters with unanticipated flaws or strengths. Death to metagaming.

When I was a teen, I got my games from my Romanian pal who brought pirated disks back from Romania every year after the summer holidays. He bought them from local crackers, and they didn't give him much info beyond "this is an RPG" or "this is an RTS" or "you have to play this one, it's awesome".

So when we installed the games he brought, we had no idea what we would be getting into beyond knowing what genre it is.
We started games like Arcanum, Morrowind, Baldur's Gate 2 without knowing anything about them, we didn't even see any box art or screenshots before. The first glimpse we got from these games was the artwork in the installer (remember installing a game and it would show you artwork in the background?)

We had no manuals, nothing. For our first Arcanum characters we just went with pre-generated ones until we fiddled with the interface and found out you can actually create your own! Whoa! Didn't even know it at first lmao
(It also took us literal years until we discovered that Arcanum has a turn based mode, we just didn't know)
So of course the characters we made weren't optimized at all. Just pick the skills that sound cool and go ahead.

This 100% blind way of playing games was the absolute best, and nowadays I deliberately avoid looking at previews so I can get a mostly blind experience on my first playthrough.
I wanna jump into an adventure without knowing even the slightest thing about it.

 

[Viata]

Can't be called an adventure if I know everything about it.

 

[luj1]

We had no manuals, nothing.

Precisely why I never read a manual in my life.

 

[Cat Headed Eagle]

About metagaming... Certain systems are intuitive enough for you to guess what everything does. If you're a melee fighter, you want to be sturdy and strong. If you're a mage, you want to be smart and agile. Etc... If you feel the need to metagame in a single player game it's probably because the game system was designed like shit and you need that extra insight to build the character you want. You should never be questioning or guessing what these stats would do.

 

[gurugeorge]

I think if you could trust developers, then jumping in blind with whatever build suits your mental image of a character would definitely be the best. But the problem is you often have wonky systems with useless dangling levers, and you don't know whether you've picked a build with a useless dangling lever or not.

It's a conundrum isn't it? On the one hand, if the focus is on "winning" then you min-max, but that kind of takes the fun out of everything about the game except the power fantasy aspect. Yet these are games, and you are supposed to "win" them On the other hand, playing with a bad build can be its own kind of fun if there are other compensating factors (e.g. if the story and characters are well-drawn and engaging) - then the journey and living through the adventure simulation is more important than the destination

 

[Cat Headed Eagle]

I think if you could trust developers, then jumping in blind with whatever build suits your mental image of a character would definitely be the best. But the problem is you often have wonky systems with useless dangling levers, and you don't know whether you've picked a build with a useless dangling lever or not.

It's a conundrum isn't it? On the one hand, if the focus is on "winning" then you min-max, but that kind of takes the fun out of everything about the game except the power fantasy aspect. Yet these are games, and you are supposed to "win" them On the other hand, playing with a bad build can be its own kind of fun if there are other compensating factors (e.g. if the story and characters are well-drawn and engaging) - then the journey and living through the adventure simulation is more important than the destination

The main objective of a game is to win it. That's a given. But *how* you do it is a different story. Power Fantasies aren't wrong per se, but builds only become relevant to me when stats and skills have an impact outside of combat instances as well.

 

[POOPERSCOOPER]

If I put a giant dildo on my chair then sit on it and load up an RPG on my computer will it make it more proper?

 

[Lacrymas]

Why is this thread from 5 years ago still ongoing.

 

[KainenMorden]

About metagaming... Certain systems are intuitive enough for you to guess what everything does. If you're a melee fighter, you want to be sturdy and strong. If you're a mage, you want to be smart and agile. Etc... If you feel the need to metagame in a single player game it's probably because the game system was designed like shit and you need that extra insight to build the character you want. You should never be questioning or guessing what these stats would do.

I think it's tough to paint with such a broad brush.

Some game systems are complex and can be confusing when creating/building a character. For example, any dnd crpg with an iteration of 3e rules. The use of feats and multi classing increase the complexity of builds over 2e. Sure, some things are intuitive but not all. Feat selection can be especially daunting and not having metagame knowledge of the systems at play can cause you to gimp your character.

I don't think the need to meta game means the game is designed badly, it's just tougher to make an optimal, or close to optimal, character in certain systems.

I have always been a min maxer and metagamer. I play crpgs mostly for combat and secondarily, for the story/dialogue. The exploration and puzzles have never been that important to me so I'd usually just use a walkthrough but Id just use the walkthrough as I went instead of reading the whole thing then playing. There's times I wouldn't use a walkthrough or I wouldn't be using a good one and I'd miss out on a certain items for example and get frustrated.

I respect that some people like to play that way, living with their in game "mistakes" or enjoy playing gimped characters and parties.

I just preferred to make a powerful character and solo if possible like in the IE games, NWN, Toee, dark sun, fallout 1+2, etc

I have come up with my own builds but typically after a first playthrough and always using quite a bit of metagame knowledge. I see looking up a good build as giving myself the tools to succeed in the game.

Again, I respect the opinion of those who choose to do blind play throughs and spend significant time through trial and error/restarts on coming up with an effective build/efficient way to get through a game but also can't t blame anyone who plays like I do.

 

[Old Hans]

Why is this thread from 5 years ago still ongoing.

because there is always that one new guy who's like "I better leave my opinion in this Morrowind release thread"

 

[Cat Headed Eagle]

About metagaming... Certain systems are intuitive enough for you to guess what everything does. If you're a melee fighter, you want to be sturdy and strong. If you're a mage, you want to be smart and agile. Etc... If you feel the need to metagame in a single player game it's probably because the game system was designed like shit and you need that extra insight to build the character you want. You should never be questioning or guessing what these stats would do.

I think it's tough to paint with such a broad brush.

Some game systems are complex and can be confusing when creating/building a character. For example, any dnd crpg with an iteration of 3e rules. The use of feats and multi classing increase the complexity of builds over 2e. Sure, some things are intuitive but not all. Feat selection can be especially daunting and not having metagame knowledge of the systems at play can cause you to gimp your character.

I don't think the need to meta game means the game is designed badly, it's just tougher to make an optimal, or close to optimal, character in certain systems.

I have always been a min maxer and metagamer. I play crpgs mostly for combat and secondarily, for the story/dialogue. The exploration and puzzles have never been that important to me so I'd usually just use a walkthrough but Id just use the walkthrough as I went instead of reading the whole thing then playing. There's times I wouldn't use a walkthrough or I wouldn't be using a good one and I'd miss out on a certain items for example and get frustrated.

I respect that some people like to play that way, living with their in game "mistakes" or enjoy playing gimped characters and parties.

I just preferred to make a powerful character and solo if possible like in the IE games, NWN, Toee, dark sun, fallout 1+2, etc

I have come up with my own builds but typically after a first playthrough and always using quite a bit of metagame knowledge. I see looking up a good build as giving myself the tools to succeed in the game.

Again, I respect the opinion of those who choose to do blind play throughs and spend significant time through trial and error/restarts on coming up with an effective build/efficient way to get through a game but also can't t blame anyone who plays like I do.

What I said is not opposite to min maxing, though. A simple, two or three sentence explanation should be enough to tell the player what each ability does, like in Neverwinter Nights. The problem with these is that you have premium abilities "hidden" in epic levels and etc, and some players don't know when or how they'll be able to reach them if they play a game somewhat blindly. I think more transparent explanations are better instead of the opposite.

 

[KainenMorden]

About metagaming... Certain systems are intuitive enough for you to guess what everything does. If you're a melee fighter, you want to be sturdy and strong. If you're a mage, you want to be smart and agile. Etc... If you feel the need to metagame in a single player game it's probably because the game system was designed like shit and you need that extra insight to build the character you want. You should never be questioning or guessing what these stats would do.

I think it's tough to paint with such a broad brush.

Some game systems are complex and can be confusing when creating/building a character. For example, any dnd crpg with an iteration of 3e rules. The use of feats and multi classing increase the complexity of builds over 2e. Sure, some things are intuitive but not all. Feat selection can be especially daunting and not having metagame knowledge of the systems at play can cause you to gimp your character.

I don't think the need to meta game means the game is designed badly, it's just tougher to make an optimal, or close to optimal, character in certain systems.

I have always been a min maxer and metagamer. I play crpgs mostly for combat and secondarily, for the story/dialogue. The exploration and puzzles have never been that important to me so I'd usually just use a walkthrough but Id just use the walkthrough as I went instead of reading the whole thing then playing. There's times I wouldn't use a walkthrough or I wouldn't be using a good one and I'd miss out on a certain items for example and get frustrated.

I respect that some people like to play that way, living with their in game "mistakes" or enjoy playing gimped characters and parties.

I just preferred to make a powerful character and solo if possible like in the IE games, NWN, Toee, dark sun, fallout 1+2, etc

I have come up with my own builds but typically after a first playthrough and always using quite a bit of metagame knowledge. I see looking up a good build as giving myself the tools to succeed in the game.

Again, I respect the opinion of those who choose to do blind play throughs and spend significant time through trial and error/restarts on coming up with an effective build/efficient way to get through a game but also can't t blame anyone who plays like I do.

What I said is not opposite to min maxing, though. A simple, two or three sentence explanation should be enough to tell the player what each ability does, like in Neverwinter Nights. The problem with these is that you have premium abilities "hidden" in epic levels and etc, and some players don't know when or how they'll be able to reach them if they play a game somewhat blindly. I think more transparent explanations are better instead of the opposite.

I feel there's more to consider than that. For example in NWN, taking a spell focus. Choosing the correct one depends on several factors and you can easily gimp yourself here. Most experienced players probably wouldn't bother with anything besides evocation or necromancy.

Spell penetration as a feat is also overrated. The epic spells in general are overrated. Discipline as a skill is overrated, etc.

There's a lot to it that even clearer descriptions wouldn't necessarily make it easy to optimize a character.

Then again, nwn was made pretty easy on purpose so a variety of builds could beat it even if the builds aren't very good.

Swordflight doesn't require an optimal build but it will have to make sense and be fairly powerful to get through. It is a fan made module focused on combat so I suppose that changes things a bit but I would have a tough time coming up with my build for it if I didn't metagame.

The game providing some example builds would be helpful as well but most games don't bother to do this

 

[boluch]

He bought them from local crackers, and they didn't give him much info beyond "this is an RPG" or "this is an RTS" or "you have to play this one, it's awesome".

That's how I used to buy games. Going to the pirate kiosk and vaguely describing the type of game I was looking for. Got some gems. Got a lot of crap too, "100 games on one disk", 99 of which were indie crap or shovelware with one being a gimped version of a proper game. I think I saw Yahtzee's Art of Theft on one of these disks. Quaint.

 

[JarlFrank]

I think if you could trust developers, then jumping in blind with whatever build suits your mental image of a character would definitely be the best. But the problem is you often have wonky systems with useless dangling levers, and you don't know whether you've picked a build with a useless dangling lever or not.

It's a conundrum isn't it? On the one hand, if the focus is on "winning" then you min-max, but that kind of takes the fun out of everything about the game except the power fantasy aspect. Yet these are games, and you are supposed to "win" them On the other hand, playing with a bad build can be its own kind of fun if there are other compensating factors (e.g. if the story and characters are well-drawn and engaging) - then the journey and living through the adventure simulation is more important than the destination

Most RPGs are easy enough that you don't have to metagame in order to win them.

And even in very hard RPGs it's possible to win with suboptimal builds if you use your skills and consumables in a clever way.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Why is this thread from 5 years ago still ongoing.

because a lot of you keep ruining games for yourselves

 

[luj1]

Most RPGs are easy enough that you don't have to metagame in order to win them.

yeah, metagaming is the fun killer

 

[luj1]

BTW that's an inherent weakness of games that use manual saves instead of autosaves. It's very hard to use the save function sparse enough that you retain the challenge without making the experience frustrating (by having to replay filler sections, or annoyingly big chunks of gameplay). That should be the designer's job, not the player's.

interesting point

 

[Vic]

BTW that's an inherent weakness of games that use manual saves instead of autosaves. It's very hard to use the save function sparse enough that you retain the challenge without making the experience frustrating (by having to replay filler sections, or annoyingly big chunks of gameplay). That should be the designer's job, not the player's.

interesting point

that's true, certain games do not allow you to save during combat for example, all part of good (or bad) game design. 3D Fallouts cough cough

 

[NecroLord]

A good soundtrack is essential to properly enjoying an RPG.

 

[JarlFrank]

Most RPGs are easy enough that you don't have to metagame in order to win them.

yeah, metagaming is the fun killer

Playing blind is the only way to enjoy an RPG, if you read guides beforehand you're NGMI

 

[anvi]

Reading guides before you play something is like reading the last page of a book before you start it.

 

[luj1]

Most RPGs are easy enough that you don't have to metagame in order to win them.

yeah, metagaming is the fun killer

Playing blind is the only way to enjoy an RPG, if you read guides beforehand you're NGMI

whats ngmi

 

[JarlFrank]

Most RPGs are easy enough that you don't have to metagame in order to win them.

yeah, metagaming is the fun killer

Playing blind is the only way to enjoy an RPG, if you read guides beforehand you're NGMI

whats ngmi

not gonna make it

 

[Wayward Son]

The best way to enjoy an RPG is around the table with your friends in person, a bottle of wine for each person.

 

[deama]

When you're getting into more weirder genres, or genres that you haven't experienced yet, like Quest for Glory, or disco elysium.
It's generally best to allocate at least 1 day, with nothing else scheduled for it, no meetups with friends, no chores to do, nothing to distract you much from things.

And sometimes a bottle of cider helps too to get you into it.