RandomAccount
Guest
Probably not, but I'm gonna tell you anyway. I'm a bitch like that.
1. Emeralds, Rubies, Diamonds, Sapphires, trinkets and baubles, art, yeti-skins et al.
Junk money drops that don't take up any inventory but confer a sense of wealth accumulation reward which permits the player to enter into a state of imagination whereby their adventurer has a life beyond the game, a level of post-game wealth that infers the adventurer will have benefited greatly from their pursuits.
Yes, from a gamer perspective, they have no in-game use beyond selling them to a trader, but from an imagination roleplay perspective, when you want to roleplay an 'in it just for the cash' character, I find it imperative that the ending should permit the character to be pictured in the mind of the player as literally swimming in it like a gold dragon. And the game should offer the player somewhere to stash all this loot while they adventure, preferably in a 'reality' type environment, perhaps with an Iron Golem or equivalent guard, or whatever.
What both Obsidian and Bioware have forgotten in their drive to make character communication more of a thing is to forget other equally immersive elements of roleplay. It's all very well having the option to choose the 'selfish, for the money' verbal conversation choice from the dialogue wheel, but if there's nothing else in the game which backs up that imagination then it's a weaker roleplay choice than either saving the world or just being evil for the lols of being evil.
You see these elements in games sometimes, but it's never expected for the player to hoard these items. My natural instinct is to hoard these items, but the games never offer me a roleplay where hoarding them is either understandable or relevant to my immersion.
2. Summoned/Controlled small army.
When I used to pen and paper I used to abuse the the control spells to make certain control spells permanent. When I came to cRPGs I used to love abusing the necromancing/cleric/druid spells so that, in each battle, I was more of a back seat commander of troops than an absurdly overpowered adventurer. When I play a lot of modern RPGs it seems that the term 'roflstomp, requires a nerf' bandwagon has deemed this approach to roleplaying a no-go area.
In my p&p days I'd have in tow a Sabre-Toothed Tiger, a Unicorn, a Pegasus, some Satyrs, loads of Wolves, some dogs, and a loads of other alternatives and variations. It wasn't King's Bounty or Heroes of Might and Magic style, the numbers weren't insane, but it was just enough to feel thoroughly awesome while still providing a steep challenge should one encounter a Dragon or hoard of Dark Elves or whatever.
I'm not a great fan of Diablo, I'm not a great aRPGer (I do get the genre and find myself more tempted to follow that RPG path as the regular big houses get more and more bogged down with inane +10 to banality friendship systems) but one thing I do most definitely notice whenever I find myself reading a Diablo thread is that there's always that guy who lavishes wonderful memories on his time roflstomping with a necromancer and his small army of doom.
And this is another area where I feel let down by most cRPGs. Wouldn't the Ranger be so much more of a 'role' class if, throughout a game, the guy could tame and train a small army of animals. Instead we just get druids summoning one animal or a small pack of useless animals. Well, I have news for you, animals don't require magic to be tamed and trained, they require skill. There's no need for the Druid to hog what should be an awesome Ranger trait.
So, if I want to roleplay an enigamtic leader, I don't want to be given nothing but 'loser' companions and the odd summons, I want to roleplay a frightening 'posse' of pure dictatorship - a small army of darkness to any would be antagonist. I want my screen full to the brim of front-line mashing goodness. Give me one Necromancer and one Ranger in this mold and I'll offer you many a thoroughly delighted Rpger.
Ah, but what about making the game so easy it's pointless? Well the Ranger doesn't summon the animals, they are a finite resource as dictated by the game world, they would require as much equal management as any other finite resource, and this is where the R of RPG comes into play - one would need to actually 'care' for one's animals survival, apportion finite healing resources to them, and, as with the 'in it for the loot' RPGing, this character would have an end-game goal to open a farm or a zoo or some kind of environmental agenda or whatever.
3. Spells as a finite resource.
So many arguments about how best to allocate Mage (or whatever) spells. Should it be rest and recoup, permanent, mana or what?
Well, I thought they got it pretty much right with Wands. Make spells a finite resource. Make Mages the archaeologist R in RPG. Magic items can produce X number of spells before being depleted, the better the spellcaster, the higher level of magic item he can manipulate.
This allows the game so much more room for the fun of interesting objects combined with excuses to impart game-law while at the same time forcing the player to, once again, deal with the concept of 'finite resources'. And, like the previous two points, give the player an R in RPG sense that this character has a life beyond the end-game - as a world renown owner and curator of powerful ancient artifacts. He collects the artifacts by nature and has a desire not to deplete them all because he might need them later in his life.
TL:DR - getting back to basics to solve some persistent modern RPG irritations from my own perspective drawn from both my and other's experience over many years of playing and foruming.
I'd be delighted to know what others feel about such ramblings, either positive or hostile or whatever. I'm genuinely interested to know how the elements above have slowly vanished in favour of what I consider to be inferior RPG concepts.
1. Emeralds, Rubies, Diamonds, Sapphires, trinkets and baubles, art, yeti-skins et al.
Junk money drops that don't take up any inventory but confer a sense of wealth accumulation reward which permits the player to enter into a state of imagination whereby their adventurer has a life beyond the game, a level of post-game wealth that infers the adventurer will have benefited greatly from their pursuits.
Yes, from a gamer perspective, they have no in-game use beyond selling them to a trader, but from an imagination roleplay perspective, when you want to roleplay an 'in it just for the cash' character, I find it imperative that the ending should permit the character to be pictured in the mind of the player as literally swimming in it like a gold dragon. And the game should offer the player somewhere to stash all this loot while they adventure, preferably in a 'reality' type environment, perhaps with an Iron Golem or equivalent guard, or whatever.
What both Obsidian and Bioware have forgotten in their drive to make character communication more of a thing is to forget other equally immersive elements of roleplay. It's all very well having the option to choose the 'selfish, for the money' verbal conversation choice from the dialogue wheel, but if there's nothing else in the game which backs up that imagination then it's a weaker roleplay choice than either saving the world or just being evil for the lols of being evil.
You see these elements in games sometimes, but it's never expected for the player to hoard these items. My natural instinct is to hoard these items, but the games never offer me a roleplay where hoarding them is either understandable or relevant to my immersion.
2. Summoned/Controlled small army.
When I used to pen and paper I used to abuse the the control spells to make certain control spells permanent. When I came to cRPGs I used to love abusing the necromancing/cleric/druid spells so that, in each battle, I was more of a back seat commander of troops than an absurdly overpowered adventurer. When I play a lot of modern RPGs it seems that the term 'roflstomp, requires a nerf' bandwagon has deemed this approach to roleplaying a no-go area.
In my p&p days I'd have in tow a Sabre-Toothed Tiger, a Unicorn, a Pegasus, some Satyrs, loads of Wolves, some dogs, and a loads of other alternatives and variations. It wasn't King's Bounty or Heroes of Might and Magic style, the numbers weren't insane, but it was just enough to feel thoroughly awesome while still providing a steep challenge should one encounter a Dragon or hoard of Dark Elves or whatever.
I'm not a great fan of Diablo, I'm not a great aRPGer (I do get the genre and find myself more tempted to follow that RPG path as the regular big houses get more and more bogged down with inane +10 to banality friendship systems) but one thing I do most definitely notice whenever I find myself reading a Diablo thread is that there's always that guy who lavishes wonderful memories on his time roflstomping with a necromancer and his small army of doom.
And this is another area where I feel let down by most cRPGs. Wouldn't the Ranger be so much more of a 'role' class if, throughout a game, the guy could tame and train a small army of animals. Instead we just get druids summoning one animal or a small pack of useless animals. Well, I have news for you, animals don't require magic to be tamed and trained, they require skill. There's no need for the Druid to hog what should be an awesome Ranger trait.
So, if I want to roleplay an enigamtic leader, I don't want to be given nothing but 'loser' companions and the odd summons, I want to roleplay a frightening 'posse' of pure dictatorship - a small army of darkness to any would be antagonist. I want my screen full to the brim of front-line mashing goodness. Give me one Necromancer and one Ranger in this mold and I'll offer you many a thoroughly delighted Rpger.
Ah, but what about making the game so easy it's pointless? Well the Ranger doesn't summon the animals, they are a finite resource as dictated by the game world, they would require as much equal management as any other finite resource, and this is where the R of RPG comes into play - one would need to actually 'care' for one's animals survival, apportion finite healing resources to them, and, as with the 'in it for the loot' RPGing, this character would have an end-game goal to open a farm or a zoo or some kind of environmental agenda or whatever.
3. Spells as a finite resource.
So many arguments about how best to allocate Mage (or whatever) spells. Should it be rest and recoup, permanent, mana or what?
Well, I thought they got it pretty much right with Wands. Make spells a finite resource. Make Mages the archaeologist R in RPG. Magic items can produce X number of spells before being depleted, the better the spellcaster, the higher level of magic item he can manipulate.
This allows the game so much more room for the fun of interesting objects combined with excuses to impart game-law while at the same time forcing the player to, once again, deal with the concept of 'finite resources'. And, like the previous two points, give the player an R in RPG sense that this character has a life beyond the end-game - as a world renown owner and curator of powerful ancient artifacts. He collects the artifacts by nature and has a desire not to deplete them all because he might need them later in his life.
TL:DR - getting back to basics to solve some persistent modern RPG irritations from my own perspective drawn from both my and other's experience over many years of playing and foruming.
I'd be delighted to know what others feel about such ramblings, either positive or hostile or whatever. I'm genuinely interested to know how the elements above have slowly vanished in favour of what I consider to be inferior RPG concepts.
