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.

The best structure for an RPG?

Which one's the best?


  • Total voters
    102

barghwata

Savant
Joined
Sep 13, 2019
Messages
504
One word ...... Fallout.

Yes, I probably should have said after reading some of the posts here: I'd consider something like Fallout to be branching. Well-done branching, but still branching.

So we probably use different definitions of what we consider branching/goal-based.

I am not going by my own definition of what it means, i am going by the OP's definition and i assumed you were doing the same, here is what he says:

There are different ways to structure an RPG, some of which are better than the others. But which one is the best? Let's find out!
The player is given a goal early on, something he wants/has to do. In our hypothetical game example, the player crashlands on an alien fantasy planet with wizards and shit, and his goal is to find a new spaceship to get off the planet. How he gets it doesn't matter, and the steps he takes to reach that goal don't matter either. In the two example paths on the image, the player can either find out about a local wizard who owns a spaceship and is researching its tech. The player can either work for the wizard in order to receive the ship as a reward, offer the wizard a deal, or kill him and take the ship. Or the player can explore the world, find another ancient ship in an abandoned facility. He can either recruit someone who has enough technical expertise to repair the damaged old vessel, or find a technical manual in a different ruin which tells him how to repair it himself. Or maybe the player can find a way to repair his original crashed vessel.

In a goal-based game like this the sequence doesn't matter. If the player has played the game before and knows the wizard owns a working spaceship, he can just barge into the guy's tower, grab his keys, and steal the spaceship. Of course, he's unlikely to succeed as a low level character, but he can try. The player can also decide to go for any of the possible other solutions at any time. If he starts working for the wizard in the hopes of being given the spaceship as a reward but then decides that the wizard is actually an asshole and doesn't want to work for him anymore, the alternatives can be attempted.

Fallout is somewhat of an example for this. The player has to get the waterchip and kill the master. What he does in-between these major plot points doesn't matter. A new player will spend a lot of time exploring and hunting down clues, while a player who is replaying Fallout for the 7th time can just hightail it to Necropolis and nab the water chip.

So, which of these is your favorite RPG structure?

Goal-based simply means there is no structered sequence of steps or plot points that the player has to go through to finish the game; all the player has to do is to achieve the main goal that they're presented with at the start of the game in any way they see fit. Fallout falls right into this category since getting the water chip and killing the master is all you need to do, how you do it doesn't matter, which is why it's possible to finish it in 10 minutes.
 

Peachcurl

Cipher
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
8,794
Location
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
That definition is not unambiguous. From my point of view, Fallout has structured sequences, they are just less obvious. You can't solve the goal in any way you see fit, you are limited to a discret set of options made available by the devs. To give an example with regards to the water chip: the main sequence is to find the vault 15 entrance; progress to last floor; take chip [or rather we'd hope so :D ]; move on to next quest. Each of these steps has some potential branches, but you are not free to do what you want.

Of course, you have the option to explore the wasteland and shady sands first, but so what? That's a side-show, not really part of the quest you are supposed to solve. It adds little else but entertainment and more power for your character.

Of course, one could strictly follow the original definition. In that case, any game with side-quests and free exploration would be goal-based. Not very helpful, since many such games have extremely linear main quests. That's why I initially stated that a truly goal-based structure only works in a sandbox.


Edit: maybe I just misremember too much about Fallout, and should take this as an incentive to start a replay...
 
Last edited:

samuraigaiden

Arcane
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
1,954
Location
Harare
RPG Wokedex
Goal based structure looks good on paper, but can lead to excessively gamey interactions with NPCs. I like the branch structure because I feel it can potentially resemble human interaction the most.

A game could very well use all three structures in different "chapters".
 

samuraigaiden

Arcane
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
1,954
Location
Harare
RPG Wokedex
Goal based structure looks good on paper, but can lead to excessively gamey interactions with NPCs. I like the branch structure because I feel it can potentially resemble human interaction the most.

How does goal-based create more gamey conversations compared to branching?

It's less context dependent and tends to allow more brute forcing.
 

JarlFrank

I like Thief THIS much
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
33,052
Location
KA.DINGIR.RA.KI
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Goal based structure looks good on paper, but can lead to excessively gamey interactions with NPCs. I like the branch structure because I feel it can potentially resemble human interaction the most.

How does goal-based create more gamey conversations compared to branching?

It's less context dependent and tends to allow more brute forcing.

Sure, but I don't think that makes naturally flowing conversations harder/less likely.
 

samuraigaiden

Arcane
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
1,954
Location
Harare
RPG Wokedex
Goal based structure looks good on paper, but can lead to excessively gamey interactions with NPCs. I like the branch structure because I feel it can potentially resemble human interaction the most.

How does goal-based create more gamey conversations compared to branching?

It's less context dependent and tends to allow more brute forcing.

Sure, but I don't think that makes naturally flowing conversations harder/less likely.

In a branching structure when you are in one branch you are locked in and cannot swap branches at will, which in itself represents a consequence to the actions that led you into that branch.

In a hypothetical purely goal based structure you can be constantly shifting goals, which can make the player actions feel inconsequential and in some cases reward illogical behavior.

The individual conversations aren't affected, but the overall "thread" of the interactions can become a lot less natural.
 

JarlFrank

I like Thief THIS much
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
33,052
Location
KA.DINGIR.RA.KI
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Goal based structure looks good on paper, but can lead to excessively gamey interactions with NPCs. I like the branch structure because I feel it can potentially resemble human interaction the most.

How does goal-based create more gamey conversations compared to branching?

It's less context dependent and tends to allow more brute forcing.

Sure, but I don't think that makes naturally flowing conversations harder/less likely.

In a branching structure when you are in one branch you are locked in and cannot swap branches at will, which in itself represents a consequence to the actions that led you into that branch.

In a hypothetical purely goal based structure you can be constantly shifting goals, which can make the player actions feel inconsequential and in some cases reward illogical behavior.

The individual conversations aren't affected, but the overall "thread" of the interactions can become a lot less natural.

Depends on how "pure" your approach is. There should, of course, be exclusive branches in individual conversations. You say thing A, you piss off the NPC, he won't talk to you anymore. You say thing B, the NPC is reminded of a different detail he informs you about. Etc.

Having an open-ended goal structure doesn't mean you can't close off and open up certain approaches based on your words and actions.

Even in the most open-ended goal-based game you shouldn't be able to suddenly change your allegiances and expect the NPCs and factions to all go along with it.
 

jungl

Augur
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
1,420
The solution to gamey players is add RNG to decision results. Say adventuring party is locked in a haunted residence being haunted by a wraith. A companion passes religion checks figuring out that embracing the wraith would cleanse the wraith and the haunting. Now this where rng comes into play. It does and the wraith is cleansed. It does not work the companion is paralyzed and most likely dead and now the party is also being pursued by giant undead hound like creatures.

So basically like a choose your own adventure book that you never know whats the best route but pick one you prefer.
 

Interesting

Educated
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
39
None of the above.
"End game" being part of design concept is wrong. It has to be removed out of players/developers minds. And many others concepts with such words as "power creep" or "class" or "levels", which only create problems to those who dont know what they are designing.
Design intending for an end is wrong, focusing on an end is foolishness. "Speed running" or "fast eating", all foolishness altogether.
You can have a little berry at the top of the cake, where the little berry is representative of the "end". Any more significance to the little berry, compared to the cake itself (99%+) is simply put: wrong. Longevity is key, below 10 thousand hours expectation and your not a true passionate hardcore game as art designer.

Get out of the game design field if you disagree. Therefore I said none of those. I will explain better, but for that I will have to give examples of many games in different genres.

An approach hybridized (a cross between only the best fractionized aspect of each) and evolved from:
similar to true old school MMORPGs (over 51% of the content has to be non combat: but professions/tradeskills, but for Christ sake no more medieval themed, but sci-fi futuristic metaphysical [your mature pedagogic spiritual, instead of simply magic, fantasy equivalent]), free form open world single player games where the focus is not the end; examples: games from X-Series,
Minecraft, Terraria and Starbound.
or the games designed with foundations and structures of simulation of a virtual world/galaxies that is organic, living, breathing, fauna, flora, interactions, etc. Such as Dwarf Fortress, Rimworld, likes.

Recently we reached the age of "procedurally generation". Which not properly explained, cannot be perceived.
You want a system always online, massive in all aspects with multiple players and artificial ai disguised/non disguised, think Space Rangers HD heroes simulating competition/cooperation with the player, rolling procedurally random generated or consequential/causal events that sprawl more branching events, as one that watches the news in many online newspapers worldwide never runs out of, or as God designed different cyclic systems for nature, animals, weather, humans, etc. Not everyone can complete the same events at the same time, etc. Keep the rule of "if everyone player is a hero noone is", instead of the fake/secret rule of "balance win loss ratio to 50% x 50%".
Soldak Interactive games such as Depths of Peril give an idea of a procedural system of events.
Games with the "Nemesis System", the Lord of the Rings and recently the Warframe.
Games such as Mount and Blade, its clones and Battle Brothers.
You want something that feels neverending story, like Star Wars Galaxies, or Saga of Ryzom, or Uncharted Waters Online.

Justice systems similar to Ultima Online, Haven and Hearth, EVE Online but actually taken seriously.
Political systems similar to Shadowbane, but with the mechanical limitations you find on big diverse empires on those 4x or grand strategy games, such as Stellaris and Distant Worlds to prevent a 1000 chinese players community numeric imbalance that you can see of Life is Feudal or other games with free numeric field (absence of field design).

The design of the "playable areas" has to follow Rock Star studios level of proper city building, but even more interaction (and futuristic), gta type playground, so whatever concrete logistics design (traveling) is acceptable and interesting (radios/news/socialization/streaming systems).

Those are some of the light boxes I could think in the few minutes I wrote this that need to be properly assembled together.
Game world virtual reality escape, social, pedagogic, entertainment, spiritual evolution (the place where sins, evil, wickedness, foolishness are TO BE BOUND) and the most wide amount of human factor that can be gathered together to be trained/exercised/tested in a system. Therefore, 6d of freedom for gameplay, strafe to aim accuracy equivalent (left hand to right hand such as in arena shooter Unreal Tournament, or old shooters such as precursors of Star Citizen: Elite and Freelancer online pvp) all camera angles, etc. Combat has to be severely reduced to some 20% of the bulk of content in the game, but high ratio of player to player interactions per minute to keep "true viewership", like cats/dogs interacting with balls.
Something with depth complexity on the skinner box Progression "rpg", with 4-5 stars, like Path of Exiles, Warframe, or old chinese games such as Conquer Online, Eudemons Online (without the whale soul hook of greedy monetization)
It has to have a refresh/shuffle/cycle system like Realm of the Mad God, 24/7 active, instantaneous to get in and get hooked.
Proper risk reward penalties systems, with acceptable consequences to teach players wisdom with ressurrection/reincarnation/inheritance/legacy subsystems, but not of Roguelikes and not of Roguelites, give it a new name that is more proper.

Closest thing to the best game yet to be ever made: with proper field design, balance and progression ratios, volumetric player interaction, viewership attractiveness, longevity, progression, player skill, was a vietnamese game that got forbidden because of all the US war and China punitive war on Vietnam.. It was called Battleswarm or Field of Honor, which I played the Beta and it closed down on the beta, not because it failed or anything, but because the government shut it down due to violence culture law design. A true buried treasure that the big franchises wish they have had a glimpse of. Deep Rock Galactic barely scratch that feel, which is properly found in Starship Troopers, Starcraft, Warhammer 40k universes. It had all the structure check marks that todays popular games (MOBAs, BattleRoyales, Shooters, RPGs) are lacking in one or two aspects, matching rts players vs action shooters, interacting with and against each other. A little bit like Planetside and Helldivers ongoing global wars narrative.
A close second is a game called Ace Online, initially called Space Cowboys. Which also had proper structural design to be popular: viewed and played, for a long time, but of course, what was built on top was what ruined it, things like monetization, localization, server wipes, slow content, etc. But still, the structure of both games mentioned above are the top ones, one for earth, the other for heaven :D

A "Christ" game that we have been waiting for many years have to emulate the best trait of those games in perfect harmony, so that we can have a proper "escapist plataform", until the current human estate systems (both in west and east) are changed to acceptable high spiritual levels of equality, morality, and every aspect, through a true Christ for human earthly systems.

with all that said,
Call my system "Natural" or "emergent" (misused word from Bethesda)
all those awesome hand crafted settings/stories/dialog/immersion will still exist, but within the procedurally events systems... fuck those branching, linear, goal, fake etc options, they are history in my mind already and bothersome to witness.
nothing but a bloodstain in the wall as the Vampire Sabath ruler said on the Bloodlines radio.
 
Last edited:

DalekFlay

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
14,118
Location
New Vegas
I'm going with 3. I'm really into faction play, discovering allegiances in a make-believe world and playing groups off each other in interesting ways. New Vegas for example has the perfect story structure for me. It's focused more on presenting a world than a single narrative and it allows you to make alliances and choices within that world based on role-playing a particular character. NCR soldier? NCR spy? Mercenary for House? Legion true believer? Legion powerplay? Wannabe monarch with Yes Man? Altruistic Yes Man? You make a decision for your character and then watch how that plays out in the world designed with different groups and agendas reacting to it.

4 can be just as good of course when designed properly. Morrowind is a great example... get in the volcano and kill Dagoth Whatever, but how you do it all is up to you. I like that kind of design, and Morrowind of course still has factions and such. However I do prefer when the faction/choice gameplay is more focused on, which I think tends to be with 3.
 

DraQ

Arcane
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
32,828
Location
Chrząszczyżewoszyce, powiat Łękołody
The dividing line between branching and goal based seems to be that in goal-based the game's mechanics forms the connections between the goals and actions available to achieve them. The game may be set up to allow for particular sequences but without them being scripted outright. It is the best kind of structure for a cRPG, caveat being that we cannot really make workable mechanics for everything - all the other structures or bits of those structures embedded in goal based are effectively acknowledgement of that, admission of defeat and necessary crutch.

The best structure is PnP. It's endless, indomitable, unlimited.
And also wholly inapplicable to cRPGs. Next!
 

mondblut

Arcane
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
22,205
Location
Ingrija
Goal-based obviously. The real meaning of branching is to allow the marketing people add "Can be replayed multiple times!111" to USP bulled point list.
 

Darth Canoli

Arcane
Joined
Jun 8, 2018
Messages
5,687
Location
Perched on a tree
The best structure is PnP. It's endless, indomitable, unlimited.

And also wholly inapplicable to cRPGs. Next!

It's not exactly inapplicable, you could just plan a lot of different solution to solve quests, a lot of different quests, even different starting points.

Also, something probably hard to do but a modding tool allowing users to add different solutions to existing quests would get the experience as close to PnP as it gets.
And of course, allowing modders to easily expand the world (quests, dungeons, regions, NPC, companions ...) instead of creating alternative adventures.

If someone achieves something like that with an optimized engine, a great TB combat system and an interesting enough settings, his game will be played for decades (allowing to sell more DLC eventually so it's a win-win)
 

Sherry

Arcane
Joined
Jan 17, 2017
Messages
404
Location
Shrine of Compassion
JarlFrank

Out of curiosity, would you say that Realms Beyond is leaning toward the third structure? I don't necessarily have a problem with this approach. I do think sometimes, it can lead to developers trying to show how clever they are by offering all these alternative narratives, but if it gets too complex, risks falling apart and potentially breaking content. In the end, it might revert back to the second structure anyway, by giving lots of choices but the players end up in a relatively same place regardless.

It's somewhere between the 3rd and the 4th structure, I would say.

Hi.

gosh I was just thinking about this when I came across this post because I had always wondered the depth of the game you were working on that you are no longer working on but still must have some emotional attachment to because you worked on it so long and here we are right? I know Josh is working with the team to create one of the most difficult combat situations in the game with their Lich purchase during the fund raising and that is really awesome because Josh did a really good job with the combat in Pillars of Eternity and DEADFIRE so I truly hope that also reflects in the 3rd and 4th structure unless it only pertains to the main plot arc but that is okay too because exploration is always a big part of any game just like in the Ultima series if you have not played them I highly recommend them because they are really free form games that allow you to do what you want when you want and how you want from A to B but B is always the same regardless of what you do so learning that Realms Beyond: Ashes of the Fallen will experience a lot more detail and depth is exciting it is one of those games I am looking forward to not just because of our long history here on the Codex but because it has a sense and feel that comes off as Ultima. I understand it is going to be delayed but has not been announced yet to the backers. Have you heard anything to the contrary?

Thanks,
Sherry
 

DraQ

Arcane
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
32,828
Location
Chrząszczyżewoszyce, powiat Łękołody
The best structure is PnP. It's endless, indomitable, unlimited.

And also wholly inapplicable to cRPGs. Next!

It's not exactly inapplicable
Since it involves putting an actual intelligence in the loop it is exactly inapplicable unless you have either written Shodan in your garage or have offshore farm of bare sustenance level workers, at least as big as your projected playerbase in some third world shithole*.

you could just plan a lot of different solution to solve quests, a lot of different quests, even different starting points.
That's just #3 or #4. PnP solution, or at least PnP-specific part of it is putting a brain in the loop to improvise when all the planning doesn't survive first contact with the player(s).

Also, something probably hard to do but a modding tool allowing users to add different solutions to existing quests would get the experience as close to PnP as it gets.
Modding tools are great but "mod missing quest solutions here" is not an acceptable solution to cRPG structure.

If someone achieves something like that with an optimized engine, a great TB combat system and an interesting enough settings, his game will be played for decades (allowing to sell more DLC eventually so it's a win-win)
It's called "Elder Scrolls" and, sadly, :fix the game here: is very much part of the picture as well.

The quality of PnP structure delivered may vary.
 

JarlFrank

I like Thief THIS much
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
33,052
Location
KA.DINGIR.RA.KI
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
The solution to gamey players is add RNG to decision results. Say adventuring party is locked in a haunted residence being haunted by a wraith. A companion passes religion checks figuring out that embracing the wraith would cleanse the wraith and the haunting. Now this where rng comes into play. It does and the wraith is cleansed. It does not work the companion is paralyzed and most likely dead and now the party is also being pursued by giant undead hound like creatures.

So basically like a choose your own adventure book that you never know whats the best route but pick one you prefer.

That would just create an inconsistent world where things don't work or not work because of certain underlying rules, but because randomness decided this method is appropriate right now or not.

Sure, dice rolls for skill checks are a valid option but your example was terrible. If that particular method of banishing a wraith works, it works. If it doesn't, it doesn't. But you are proposing that the RNG decides whether it works or not.
Instead, try introducing a dice roll skill check at a different point of the sequence. Maybe during the knowledge check itself: your character fails the check and comes up with a plan that won't work. He passes the check, he comes up with a plan that does work.
Or during the embracement of the wraith, there could be a check, too. Maybe based on a "ritual performance" skill or something, because this is clearly a magic ritual and things could go wrong during it.

Things need to make sense and be consistent. You can't just let an RNG decide whether something works or not, completely divorced from the character system and game world logic.

None of the above.
"End game" being part of design concept is wrong.

No. You are wrong.

An approach hybridized (a cross between only the best fractionized aspect of each) and evolved from:
similar to true old school MMORPGs (over 51% of the content has to be non combat: but professions/tradeskills, but for Christ sake no more medieval themed, but sci-fi futuristic metaphysical [your mature pedagogic spiritual, instead of simply magic, fantasy equivalent]), free form open world single player games where the focus is not the end; examples: games from X-Series,
Minecraft, Terraria and Starbound.
or the games designed with foundations and structures of simulation of a virtual world/galaxies that is organic, living, breathing, fauna, flora, interactions, etc. Such as Dwarf Fortress, Rimworld, likes.

We're not even talking about the same fucking genre. I enjoy playing stuff like Terraria, Starbound, Rimworld, etc but they're not RPGs. They don't even pretend to be RPGs. They're crafting games/simulations where you manage one character or a group of characters and build up a little fortress with a functioning economy. There aren't even any quests whatsoever. It's just freeform "you're in this world now, your goal is to survive, have fun". It's a cool genre but it's not RPG.

Also, MMO tradeskills/professions are usually lame grind. Stand in front of a mining spot and watch your character hack his pick against a clump of ore until you've gathered 100 pieces of ore so you can fashion them into 50 ingots so you can fashion them into 5 swords... yawn. That's not engaging gameplay, that's mindless grind.

In fact, I would argue that generic crafting systems have no place in an RPG and should stay within their genre (crafting/simulation games in the style of Rimworld, Space Engineers, etc). I wanna explore deep dungeons and unearth legendary ancient artifacts, not mine the same ore vein for 2 hours and grind up my crafting skill to 100 so I can craft the most powerful weapon in the game. Exploring an ancient dungeon to find a legendary artifact is adventurous and cool, grinding a crafting skill is lame and boring.

Recently we reached the age of "procedurally generation".

Yes. And I hope it's a fad that will soon pass and give way to proper level design again. I haven't encountered a single procedurally generated game that even remotely reached the quality of the best hand-made levels. It's going to take at least another decade until procedural shit can compete with proper hand-crafted content. Likely it will take much longer than that.

You want a system always online

No.

The design of the "playable areas" has to follow Rock Star studios level of proper city building, but even more interaction (and futuristic), gta type playground, so whatever concrete logistics design (traveling) is acceptable and interesting (radios/news/socialization/streaming systems).

GTA's cities may look cool visually, but there's not that much to do in them, is there? There are a bunch of repeatable side activities, a bunch of main quests (following a structure and having an endgame - the exact thing you don't want to have), but other than that all you can do is jack cars, run over people, and fight the police. It's fun for the first dozen times you do it, but then it gets old and you keep focusing on the hand-crafted main quest missions.

Combat has to be severely reduced to some 20% of the bulk of content in the game, but high ratio of player to player interactions per minute to keep "true viewership", like cats/dogs interacting with balls.

What the fuck are you even talking about

Also this thread isn't about MMOs, go fuck off to the MMO subforum.

Something with depth complexity on the skinner box Progression "rpg", with 4-5 stars, like Path of Exiles, Warframe, or old chinese games such as Conquer Online, Eudemons Online (without the whale soul hook of greedy monetization)

No. Nobody wants skinner box progression "rpg", this thread is about real Role Playing Games like Fallout and Arcanum. Fuck off with your skinner box bullshit.
 

Buster

Novice
Joined
Nov 29, 2019
Messages
13
I like Betrayal at Krondor's structure best. A linear chapter progression to present the story and a lot of freedom within those chapters. Best of both worlds!

After that I think number 4. It works for Fallout because there is a time limit. Titan Outpost does that as well, with complete freedom but a timeline that moves along.
 

DraQ

Arcane
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
32,828
Location
Chrząszczyżewoszyce, powiat Łękołody
a great TB combat system

It's called "Elder Scrolls" and, sadly, :fix the game here: is very much part of the picture as well.

:abyssgazer:

I don't remember that shit being TB but i barely touched it and ran away and i meant implicitly party-based as well with controllable party members.
Sigh. My apologies for sloppily neglecting to redact the living shit out of your post just to get my point across.
 

jungl

Augur
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
1,420
The solution to gamey players is add RNG to decision results. Say adventuring party is locked in a haunted residence being haunted by a wraith. A companion passes religion checks figuring out that embracing the wraith would cleanse the wraith and the haunting. Now this where rng comes into play. It does and the wraith is cleansed. It does not work the companion is paralyzed and most likely dead and now the party is also being pursued by giant undead hound like creatures.

So basically like a choose your own adventure book that you never know whats the best route but pick one you prefer.

That would just create an inconsistent world where things don't work or not work because of certain underlying rules, but because randomness decided this method is appropriate right now or not.

Sure, dice rolls for skill checks are a valid option but your example was terrible. If that particular method of banishing a wraith works, it works. If it doesn't, it doesn't. But you are proposing that the RNG decides whether it works or not.
Instead, try introducing a dice roll skill check at a different point of the sequence. Maybe during the knowledge check itself: your character fails the check and comes up with a plan that won't work. He passes the check, he comes up with a plan that does work.
Or during the embracement of the wraith, there could be a check, too. Maybe based on a "ritual performance" skill or something, because this is clearly a magic ritual and things could go wrong during it.

Things need to make sense and be consistent. You can't just let an RNG decide whether something works or not, completely divorced from the character system and game world logic.

.

I think it works fine. The player doesn't know WHAT to expect all you know is the residence is haunted. RNG affects what type of haunting scenario it is. There a sinister greater undead at work at the residence or a tale of lost soul finding peace. Skill checks would still be there to allow the player to avoid catastrophic results and get good ones given the scenario they in.

Think resident evil 3 where you have to select a action within a cutscene. In that game some actions are better choices then other ones. My game would have both actions have RNG determine how they play out but still allow player skill checks salvage and make the best of the situation.

btw if you guys never played resident evil 3 the 3d rendered backgrounds look really nice with ai upscaling download the emulator and grab iso from google and give it a go. https://www.reshdp.com/re3/
 

Darth Canoli

Arcane
Joined
Jun 8, 2018
Messages
5,687
Location
Perched on a tree
That's just #3 or #4. PnP solution, or at least PnP-specific part of it is putting a brain in the loop to improvise when all the planning doesn't survive first contact with the player(s).

Modding tools are great but "mod missing quest solutions here" is not an acceptable solution to cRPG structure.

The other option is to make the game multiplayer, co-op + a GM or partially MMO with some GM tools allowing some creative solutions for some quests with a lot of options to spice up the exploration in order to challenge the party (and i don't mean level scaling).

The solutions exist, they just haven't been tried yet.
 

DraQ

Arcane
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
32,828
Location
Chrząszczyżewoszyce, powiat Łękołody
That's just #3 or #4. PnP solution, or at least PnP-specific part of it is putting a brain in the loop to improvise when all the planning doesn't survive first contact with the player(s).

Modding tools are great but "mod missing quest solutions here" is not an acceptable solution to cRPG structure.

The other option is to make the game multiplayer, co-op + a GM or partially MMO with some GM tools allowing some creative solutions for some quests with a lot of options to spice up the exploration in order to challenge the party (and i don't mean level scaling).

The solutions exist, they just haven't been tried yet.
The solutions may exist but they solve different problems. The thing is it is then no longer a single-player game.
Combination of live GM and more computing power in service of mechanics and world is not necessarily a bad idea in general, but cRPGs are generally what you play when you don't necessarily have other people at hand or don't necessarily want to socialize, so from the POV of a cRPG player this may well be completely useless.

Basically, your fridge may well be a better fridge than my car, too bad I happen to need a car rather than fridge.
 

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