How to prevent party NPCs from disbalancing the game?

[shihonage]

How would one go about balancing out the increased firepower and skill specialization that you get with additional NPCs ?

If the game is made for one player, and said player has helpers of comparable skill or firepower, it will get broken. On the other hand, there's no point in having your party consist of retarded paraplegics and 95-year-olds.

As I understand, in Fallout you simply couldn't use their skills, and they were also annoying and weak (F1), so they became less helpful with time until their inevitable demise.

In KOTOR you could use their skills, which kind of negated the significance of your own?

_________

Here are some solutions I was thinking of:

a) if you play a WeakSmart, then you can convince a brute of an NPC to follow you around and wield weapons you cannot use effectively. Voila, the "you don't have to fight" solution, because the NPC fights for you!

b) if you're a StrongDumb, then you get a geek to follow you around and pick those lockpicks and repair equipment. Maybe you only get them to follow you because you reek of adventure and violence, something they don't have in their life.

But then these scenarios are kind of limited. What if you choose not to have a party NPC? The game should be an enjoyable experience with a variety of character builds and choices.

What if you choose more than one?

Maybe there should be a form of punishment for having a party? For instance, taking their differences into extremes, and constantly having to stop them from killing one another, or making members "incompatible" with others by belief/etc ?

Making them require you to maintain their equipment, because they're little babies who can't do it themselves?

Making you provide them with ammo?

Any thoughts/ideas on proper ways to prevent party NPCs (or lack thereof) from breaking game balance?

 

[Johannes]

Sharing xp between party members is pretty proven way to accomplish this.

Or make the PC really powerful, cause he's the chosen one or whatever, then a normal guy NPC won't be so imbalancing in combat at least. Still you can easily cover up some of your weaknesses by having a dude with skill X, then you don't need to invest in said skill for your PC. But that's not necessarily bad thing.

Enemies doing AoE damage also levels the playing field a bit between party sizes.

 

[deuxhero]

Balance the game around a party, ala JA2.

 

[shihonage]

Sharing xp between party members is pretty proven way to accomplish this.

Interesting. So this will slow down your progress... or rather... you kill enemies faster but level slower, which means you grow in power at about the same rate as without NPCs...

Oh yeah, I am also thinking, NPCs shouldn't be allowed to level. You should outgrow them eventually, and move on to others, and your ability to evolve past the other inhabitants of the world IS your "hero" quality.

So then, you may control the progress to a degree by making sure that Autolycus The Thief can only break into crates in his neighborhood, but never into armored safes in the King's Castle.

Or make the PC really powerful, cause he's the chosen one or whatever, then a normal guy NPC won't be so imbalancing in combat at least. Still you can easily cover up some of your weaknesses by having a dude with skill X, then you don't need to invest in said skill for your PC. But that's not necessarily bad thing.

Can't hardcode the PC as overly strong, because you should also be able to create a playable weakling.

Enemies doing AoE damage also levels the playing field a bit between party sizes.

Interesting and unexpected. Though in a Fallouty setting there are no spells, and the AOE would have to be accomplished thru BURST and rocket launchers.

 

[Malraz Alizar]

Oh yeah, I am also thinking, NPCs shouldn't be allowed to level. You should outgrow them eventually, and move on to others, and your ability to evolve past the other inhabitants of the world IS your "hero" quality.

This is how NPCs worked in Fallout. I think it's a pretty good starting point! If I were to design a companion system around it, I'd introduce a "Leadership" skill that the player develops just like any other - ie, every skill point spent in Leadership is one not spent in, say, Small Guns or Lockpick or whatever. Then I'd assign a point cost to every recruitable NPC in the game, and make your character's Leadership skill determine how many points worth of NPCs he can have with him at any given time. For example, a character with 75 skill points in Leadership could bring with him three crappy 25-point NPCs (who can only perform the most basic tasks), or one 25-pointer and one half-decent 50-pointer, or one really pretty useful 75-pointer. Balancing the system would simply entail making sure that having 75 points worth of NPCs wasn't substantially MORE useful than having 75 points in any one of your character's other skills - easy enough when NPCs are valued as game pieces, rather than potential soulmates for your stubbly heroic space marine.

 

[shihonage]

It seems like this Leadership system would throw a wrench into the intended mechanic of convincing NPCs to go with you based on their attitude toward your specific attributes and accomplishments.

 

[Yeesh]

This is how NPCs worked in Fallout. I think it's a pretty good starting point! If I were to design a companion system around it, I'd introduce a "Leadership" skill that the player develops just like any other - ie, every skill point spent in Leadership is one not spent in, say, Small Guns or Lockpick or whatever. Then I'd assign a point cost to every recruitable NPC in the game, and make your character's Leadership skill determine how many points worth of NPCs he can have with him at any given time. For example, a character with 75 skill points in Leadership could bring with him three crappy 25-point NPCs (who can only perform the most basic tasks), or one 25-pointer and one half-decent 50-pointer, or one really pretty useful 75-pointer. Balancing the system would simply entail making sure that having 75 points worth of NPCs wasn't substantially MORE useful than having 75 points in any one of your character's other skills - easy enough when NPCs are valued as game pieces, rather than potential soulmates for your stubbly heroic space marine.

Speaking of Jagged Alliance, they accomplished a similar, much more granular weighting of NPCs by assigning each one a price (which of course increased with level). That way, you could afford many cheap people or just a few awesome ones, and it didn't seem like an arbitrary cap since experienced and effective fighters naturally would have much higher rates.

Even fantasy crpgs could take a page out of Jagged Alliance. What a game.

 

[GarfunkeL]

The NPCs in F1 do level up, though very, very slowly and since the game is so short, there's a very good chance of player never observing it happen as it's only announced by a quick floating text over their heads.

I wouldn't go with the leadership system unless you go without CHA/speech or such. The fact that XP is shared always works and if combat is lethal enough, the NPCs should kick the bucket easily when encountering tough enemies. Still have nightmares of trying to keep them all alive through Military Base...

 

[Malraz Alizar]

The NPCs in F1 do level up, though very, very slowly and since the game is so short, there's a very good chance of player never observing it happen as it's only announced by a quick floating text over their heads.

Wow, I guess you learn something new every day. Do you have any information about what changes when they level up? I've never had the good fortune to see it for myself, and based on my own observations (using the Awareness perk) their hit points never seem to increase, so a FAQ or something spelling out all the details would be most interesting to me!

 

[laclongquan]

Perl's ultimate guide to Fallout, what else. DO a google search to find the repository.

As to keep them from overbalance your game, there's two ways to go around:

1. Random encounter increased difficulty: Since the party is bigger, it's become harder to slip through Random Combat Encounters and enemies are more numerous. Do try to make it so the extra enemies got no loots or we will farm RE with larger party.

2. Shared XP: mentioned above.

3. specialist NPCs: they are not very good combat musclemen but they are proficient in certain skills that free you from them. Kinda like a repair-specialist Vic, Science-specialist Myron. Vic and Myron in F2 is not as good as our own PC if we had spent halfway our SP in them skills.

 

[mondblut]

Balance the game around a party, ala JA2.

 

[Jim Cojones]

The NPCs in F1 do level up, though very, very slowly and since the game is so short, there's a very good chance of player never observing it happen as it's only announced by a quick floating text over their heads.

They don't. Levelling mechanics for NPCs were introduced in Fallout 2.

 

[SimpleComplexity]

I'm assuming your Fallout-like game is designed around a single character and not designed around a party. You can't suddenly turn a game which was designed around a single character into a partybased game. Yes you can but the results are awkward.

Having one more character traveling with you means:
One more 'turn' each round
Double the HP (Damage Puffer)
Double the firepower
Double of everything

To balance it the enemies have to change accordingly, either you double up the enemy numbers or you have to change the enemy stats:
Double the amounts of 'turns
Double the HP
Double the firepower
Double of everything

Furthermore it means you can have a companion who can lock the picks for you, a companion who can disarm traps or plant explosives etc. This automatically makes the game easier and the replayability factor gets lower. On top it requires much more developing time.

Shared XP brings up further questions:
-Which level does the companion starts with?
-When he dies or leaves you what happens with the XP points?
-If you give him a good enough armor doesn't he suck away all the damage for you? Every companion starts with X HP, that means a free damage buffer of X HP for you. Solution: Shared HP ?

It's not just shared XP, it's shared HP, shared skillpoints, shared carry weight, shared everything.

The balancing logic is: Your character with a companion is as good as a character without a companion. This begs the question: why have companions at all?

Your options:
a)Screw the balance.
b)Try to make it as balanced as you can. Results: Awkwardness.
c)Design the game build around a party. No balancing problems.
d)No companions. No balancing problems.

 

[MicoSelva]

Balance the game around a party, ala JA2.

This is one of the solutions. Make solo run possible, but (very) difficult.

XP sharing is ok, but unless there's no level cap, it only works up to a point. Eventually, a party will be stronger than a single NPC.

No companions. No balancing problems.

Remove elements that we are unable to do the right way - The Bioware Solution (TM).

Another solution: create a 'potential' stat (football manager games have/had something like that) which limits ability grow. Make PC have maximum potential of 99 (for example), but set joinable NPCs at around 50 (or more or less - depending on the NPC). Make this stat affect max char level/XP gain rate/ability cost/something similar.
This way PC - who is The Hero - will eventually outgrow his companions and they won't imbalance the game so much, being more of a supplement.

 

[SimpleComplexity]

I do believe my post wasn't a oneliner unlike this one.

 

[MicoSelva]

I have no snarky comment towards Your other points, SC. Removing companions does not seem like a valid solution for me. The same for uber-balancing, but since You already wrote what the result of that is (awkwardness), I have nothing to add.

 

[laclongquan]

Of course one party is stronger than one-man army, otherwise what is the point? The problem is that you scaling the game so that even with more companions the game doesnt get easier noticably. That's the key.

Increase combat REs with more lootless enemies.

Make enemies's awareness very high so that you can sneak by with your own but your clumsy, doenst-invest-instealth, NPCs get you unwanted notice.

Learn from JA2. Its system allow that your solo characters got a totally different tactic than your squad. A map of 30+ enemies are the same dangerous thing for 1 character as to 6, but one can play stealth why it's damn hard to do so with 6.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Shared XP.

 

[Johannes]

And another thing from JA2 - make NPCs demand decent payment for their help. Possibly depending on how good loot you keep finding. And make the player also pay to their wife or boss or whatever in case the fellow dies while in your service (or get a shit reputation & other bad consequences).

A smooth guy could talk his way into paying less of course.

 

[SimpleComplexity]

Paying is actually a good idea. Traveling from town to town should cost food or water or money. More people = more resources needed. Guns and armor have to be maintained. Simply put more people means more costs.

Add to that their individual point of view, good natured doctors won't help you killing people they'll simply leave you if do it in front of their eyes. Thiefs will steal without your orders and get you into trouble and if you get too rich your once loyal companion will leave you and you'll find yourself in the desert moneyless. Or the case where a companion agrees to follow you to a certain location but leaves you when you reach it and when you try to go into another direction he'll complain "hey where the fuck are you going?"

 

[GarfunkeL]

The NPCs in F1 do level up, though very, very slowly and since the game is so short, there's a very good chance of player never observing it happen as it's only announced by a quick floating text over their heads.

They don't. Levelling mechanics for NPCs were introduced in Fallout 2.

Tycho just told me, two days ago: "I feel stronger now" in white text-float over his head. Had never seen it before, either. And since I don't remember his HP before that text, I have no idea if it actually affected anything. But this playthrough I deliberately got all the companions as early as possible and then proceeded with the quests, so both Ian and Tycho have received nearly as much XP as my PC.

EDIT: just checked Per's guide and it doesn't say anything about the subject.

 

[shihonage]

Removing companions is not the greatest idea, because I already have companion mechanics in the engine, and because getting one to go with you should be interesting in itself. It's not just some generic Mass Effect gurgledialoguegurgle. If you convince them to go, it should feel like you hit the right notes with them.

I like the idea of crippled (or removed) leveling for companions.

If they do start soaking up the damage after you give them great armor, maybe great armor should have level requirements?

Though level requirements for equipping items are considered lame?

NPCs "demanding" _regular_ payment for help is not good IMO. I have naive hopes of player being able to generate a silent rapport with his party, and I don't pay my friends IRL to go do stuff with me. Hookers don't count as friends

In Fallout, you may start off by paying Ian in some cases, but that's because you don't know each other yet.

I don't mind using companions as inventory mules. It's not a "disbalance" IMO.

The idea of equipment wear n'tear is good. I wonder if this will just work itself out naturally when your NPCs keep getting pounded, their equipment is disabled, and you either let them die off or repair it...
Though that may also be a bit soulless

I really like the thought of companions freaking out, refusing to enter certain locations, and disliking each other. I.E. female NPC freaking out at you having a rapist in your party and refusing to join until you drop him.

Also, NPCs shouldn't always disband in peace. Said rapist could get upset.

 

[zenbitz]

Followers should not be your sock puppets. FO sort of did this right when they would accidentally shoot yo ass.

I actually muck up my one play through of PS:T because I was very reliant on my NPCs to fight. On the final level they were stripped from me and I was not powerful enough to finish the game...

Your game has some kind of internal "difficultly" of encounter setting doesn't it? Just have it adjust based on the combined fire power of Party.

I am not really sure what "balance" has to do with anything anyway.... eventually the PC will be powerful enough to roll over everything in his way, right?

 

[shihonage]

Not all combat is encounter-based. The obvious solution - racking up HP on EVERYONE, would result in a number of oddities, such as weak and medium critters suddenly devouring strayed gunmen. Equipment becoming disproportionately weak to the point beyond which common sense cannot be stretched.

Also, I do not subscribe to the inevitability of the endgame concluding in eventually donning on the most powerful armor and wrecking shit.

For once, I want to give the player the ability to play a smart, but physically inept guy, without having to jump through hoops to finish the game.

I want you to be able to go through the game by just whispering the right words in people's ears, and eventually have them do the hard work for you. Destroy each other. Etc.

You should be able to finish it without any armor at all. Of course, that presents considerable problems, since, in a typical RPG, combat is always used as 80% timefiller, with other 20% being travel.

 

[Jim Cojones]

Tycho just told me, two days ago: "I feel stronger now" in white text-float over his head. Had never seen it before, either. And since I don't remember his HP before that text, I have no idea if it actually affected anything. But this playthrough I deliberately got all the companions as early as possible and then proceeded with the quests, so both Ian and Tycho have received nearly as much XP as my PC.

EDIT: just checked Per's guide and it doesn't say anything about the subject.

Do you use the mod that allows companions to change armor and tell them to change tactics? It allows few selected NPCs to level up.