Examples of alternatives to skill-checks that aren't "I win" buttons?

[Mr. Hiver]

Biggest mistake with dialogues are when they are designed as separate from the gameplay.
As just talk in which you search for a tagged option or magically have extra options because speech skill is over some exact level. But thats not really connected with anything you actually do in the game.

Finding hints, secret details, relevant research, personal details and motivations - in the game, through your whole gameplay C&C - which you then use in dialogues is the right approach.
Because it involves you and what you do and discover in the game with the dialogues and options in them.
And frankly, some dialogue options shouldnt even be there depending on your play style, regardless of any skills.

This is of course complicated to create and thats why most companies go for simpler but ultimately cheap or dumb dialogues.

For lockpicking... i dunno, seems whatever you do it isnt good enough and best you can aim for is not make it into a borefest.
Skill should provide some threshold barrier and it should never be done by "percentages for success" ... but maybe there is a way to let the player have a role there, when specific thresholds are passed by character skill.
In true RPGs, it should be down to the character skill alone but maybe it can be made more interesting with additions of requirements of no noise, necessities of not being seen or heard by guards etc.
Instead of just walking to any lock and just clicking on it while other NPCs just stand around.

Of course, someone should be upset something was lockpicked and stolen, stolen items should be known in that location, guards should stop and frisk any strangers... and so on.
all of these additional concerns and requirements would make it less of "click to open" which became like that because all these other details were removed - to make the players not cry about it.

 

[JarlFrank]

Finding hints, secret details, relevant research, personal details and motivations - in the game, through your whole gameplay C&C - which you then use in dialogues is the right approach.
Because it involves you and what you do and discover in the game with the dialogues and options in them.
And frankly, some dialogue options shouldnt even be there depending on your play style, regardless of any skills.

This is of course complicated to create and thats why most companies go for simpler but ultimately cheap or dumb dialogues.

Not really you just need to script a couple of triggers.

Read book X.
Trigger "Book X read" is activated.
Dialogue options associated with "Book X read" are now unlocked.

Tieing dialogue options to the player's in-game discoveries (which places he visited, which objects he interacted with, which other quests he solved, etc) isn't much more complicated than tieing them to stat checks.

 

[Mr. Hiver]

Well, yeah... probably. Thing is in most AAA games they have no use for more complex dialogues since its all linear anyway.
And in most AAA mass market rpgs the situation is the same. It depends on the content of the game, does it require that much dialogue and options within it.

I havent actually designed a game myself so cant talk from experience but in general, it seems like it shouldnt be some crazy complex feature to achieve in True RPGs.
Especially if the whole game dev cycle is started with that in mind and as one of the main features. No need to make every single dialogue into a complexity matrix, but for most important ones it should be doable.
And some measure of it should be included for medium important NPCs, constrained to that location items and discoveries you and your character make.

One of the biggest reasons why nobody complained about dialogues in PST is because options within it were integrated into the gameplay, exploration, getting items, changing your stats, opening quests, solving quests - everything. It wasnt just a story, just a block of text to read through.

 

[JarlFrank]

Well, yeah... probably. Thing is in most AAA games they have no use for more complex dialogues since its all linear anyway.
And in most AAA mass market rpgs the situation is the same. It depends on the content of the game, does it require that much dialogue and options within it.

Who cares about AAA mass market RPGs though? They already have big constraints on dialogues due to full VA (thanks, Divinity: Original Sin 2 and Pillars of Eternity 2 for making people expect it from mid-mudget isometric RPGs too, you idiots). And the AAA market isn't where you're going to see any new ideas anyway.

I havent actually designed a game myself so cant talk from experience but in general, it seems like it shouldnt be some crazy complex feature to achieve in True RPGs.
Especially if the whole game dev cycle is started with that in mind and as one of the main features. No need to make every single dialogue into a complexity matrix, but for most important ones it should be doable.
And some measure of it should be included for medium important NPCs, constrained to that location items and discoveries you and your character make.

It is absolutely not a crazy complex feature as long as your tools are up to the task. If you can assign certain functions to pretty much any action in the game, you're set.
Dialogues can easily check for:
- what items you carry in your inventory
- what items you have equipped
- if you don't have an item equipped in a certain slot
- if you talked to a certain NPC before and are familiar with him/her
- if you visited a certain location before and are familiar with it
- if you pass a certain stat or skill check
- if you have read a certain document
- if you have received a certain piece of information in another dialogue
- if you have started a different quest
- if you have finished a different quest
- what standing you have with a certain faction

etc.

Such conditions aren't even hard to implement for the writers/designers as long as the toolset is sufficiently powerful.

 

[Sigourn]

New Vegas' Dead Money DLC had a skill check that was the opposite of an "I win" button. Selecting it meant that a certain NPC would turn against you later on the DLC.

My opinion with skill checks is that:

• They should ALWAYS be visible. I want a giant tag next to them that says [REPAIR] because I spent points in Repair and I want to know when I can put those skills to use. Repair may not be the best example, but [SPEECH] most certainly is because technically anything you say has to do with "speech". And this ties into my second point, which is
• Said skills checks shouldn't be instant wins. You should be able to fail them. Not by a roll of the dice, skill checks are usually very precious few options you get in RPGs, so I'm not about to fail them because of dice rolls. But they should let me use them appropiately, and they shouldn't always have a positive outcome, like Dead Money's [BARTER] check. e.g., a town needs income to pay off raiders, and you suggest the town mayor the brilliant idea of [BARTER] Your daughter's pretty attractive. Haven't you thought of putting her natural talents to use?. So the natural response is that the mayor turns hostile on you, bam, there you have your character 1) Using the skill you used points in, and 2) Having a non-winning outcome.

 

[Mr. Hiver]

Dialogues can easily check for:

They can but you have to write dialogue for all those differences and options, and more dialogue that gives proper reactions and consequences for such differences, and then more dialogue that takes all those in account,... which increases the word count and time spent on writing considerably.

Full VA is of course utter shite and done only to get the good initial marketing points. It has no other use and nobody actually listens to it. While it does constrain the writing, as we have found out numerous times so far.

 

[volklore]

As far as speech is concerned, I somewhat liked what Deus Ex :HR tried to do with the scripted persuasion sequences where investing in social type augments made it easier to pick-up body language and stuff like that.
Not that I think there should be scripted persuasion scenes everywhere but at least for major story points. Linking persuasion to the ability of reading characters' ( can be a skill like social or just perception, whateever) body language could easily be done in text form by revealing body language related info ( that is often times included in PoE or PST for example) to characters with the appropriate skill level. The persuade skill would only allow you to pass hard checks to allow you to enter the persuasion options leading to DX:HR style persuasion trees in which paying attention to previous dialogue and body language infos can give you a real edge. So as to increase the difficulty of persuasion, the game makers could vary the number of actual 'answers' the player has to give and the amount of which he can get 'wrong' to actually succeed the persuasion check.
It requires a lot of work just for one aspect of gameplay but I feel it would greatly increase the 'gameplay' of social characters in games that want to promote such path to the game.
The problem is that to get this kind of treatment for non-combat skill, devs should make that the focus of the game and drop superficial stuff like state of the art graphics, Full VA... and allocate most of the actual AAA budget to writing and gameplay. But that ain't going to happen.

 

[V_K]

Speaking of barter, it'd be a rather interesting thought experiment to design a dialog system that would literally amount to "trading information". Say, each dialog option has a cost in NPCs personal favor, if you don't have enough, it'll fail. And you can gain said favor by "selling" the NPC things like information he'd be interested in, faction favors, or precious items. Persuasion skill would then affect the "prices" of dialog options, much like the barter skill would affect prices of regular items.

 

[JarlFrank]

Dialogues can easily check for:

They can but you have to write dialogue for all those differences and options, and more dialogue that gives proper reactions and consequences for such differences, and then more dialogue that takes all those in account,... which increases the word count and time spent on writing considerably.

Yes of course, but RPG writers should be expected to provide multiple options and reactive dialogues. Otherwise they can just go and write books instead.

 

[Egosphere]

I think an interesting mechanic could be impersonation. Say you want to infiltrate some faction: first you'd have to dress like them, then find someone who could teach you the inner workings of the faction, then find weaknesses that you could exploit etc. Then approach a member and pretend you're one of them. If you're convincing enough, you're allowed in. AoD had something like this, but the only impersonation that stuck in my mind was when you're pretending to be a loremaster when you try to infiltrate the mines. When you're infiltrating the palace in Maadoran, it reverts to a simple series of skillchecks.

Speaking of barter, it'd be a rather interesting thought experiment to design a dialog system that would literally amount to "trading information". Say, each dialog option has a cost in NPCs personal favor, if you don't have enough, it'll fail. And you can gain said favor by "selling" the NPC things like information he'd be interested in, faction favors, or precious items. Persuasion skill would then affect the "prices" of dialog options, much like the barter skill would affect prices of regular items.

There's a primitive version of this in Sunless Sea. Bring reports of different places to the admiral and you can gain favours, which you can then use to repair your ship or resupply some fuel when you're short. Then when you're trusted, you're given more demanding tasks.

 

[deuxhero]

Spycraft 2.0 rules for opposed skill checks? Never seen them in action, so no clue if they're actually fun, but I know they're a thing.

 

[Mr. Hiver]

Whatever integrates dialogue more into the gameplay itself, whatever you are doing in the game, increases the versatility and value of dialogue. Bringing in new information, items or whatever else is a part of the content of the game into the dialogue opens possibilities to change it from simple "i win" skill checks - which are like that because they are unrelated to anything else in the gameworld.
Then you could have a situation where you discovered something but cant use it because your character Int and speech arent high enough, or have enough Int and speech but not posses the required info, or an item or whatever.

Barter, impersonation, integrating all other stats and gameplay achievements are all good additions. All of such suggestions are good, it just depends on the exact game and its setting and location design which ones could be used.

JarlFrank
Sure, only its not as easy as just establishing checks for different accomplished things. And those things can bloat out very easily so it should be all planned well in advance and used only when appropriate.

 

[Thal]

Finding a lot of flowers in her garden hints you that she likes flowers, so initiating by gifting her flowers is a good idea. By sneaking into her bedroom and reading her diary, you find out more things she likes, which helps you decide which dialogue choices during the flirt are the most effective ones.

Flowers are a terrible example, because it's entirely reasonable and common to have them in a garden. A large number of players would pay no attention to them, and for a good reason. Clues like these should be obvious enough so the player doesn't mistake them for clutter. It's the process of getting them that should be a challenge (like sneaking to the diary).

 

[Mr. Hiver]

No, the clues should not be obvious. Thats the path to retardation. Clues should just be clues. Hints.

Maybe that wasnt the best example, and it was just a simple example not the finished complete subplot. But something else can be done with it. Depending on the character and exact conditions or situation.

 

[U-8D8]

Using skillchecks to point out the problems with Dean Domino's plans in Dead Money will sabotage any attempt to reason with him later which eventually leads means you'll have to kill him.

I admit, though it isn't an "I win" button it's hardly a "You lose" button either. Dean isn't exactly important to the overall plot nor is he an upstanding example of a human being. Still, I always try to keep him alive; partially because I like the idea of the old huckster scamming his way through New Vegas, but mostly because the late great Barry Dennen knocked the voice acting out of the park, and it just feels wrong somehow to kill him.

 

[Darth Canoli]

Flowers are a terrible example, because it's entirely reasonable and common to have them in a garden. A large number of players would pay no attention to them, and for a good reason. Clues like these should be obvious enough so the player doesn't mistake them for clutter. It's the process of getting them that should be a challenge (like sneaking to the diary).

Clues doesn't have to be obvious, as long as there's a pattern and everything is there for a reason, you'll adapt, maybe some hints in the manual or an intro/ short tutorial can put the players on the right tracks so they know they have to search for not obvious clues.

 

[Thal]

I said they should be obvious enough. A garden of flowers isn't obvious enough. A garden full of violet flowers, when everyone else's garden is is mix of different types would qualify.

 

[Sigourn]

Using skillchecks to point out the problems with Dean Domino's plans in Dead Money will sabotage any attempt to reason with him later which eventually leads means you'll have to kill him.

I admit, though it isn't an "I win" button it's hardly a "You lose" button either.

It isn't a "you lose" button, but it certainly has unexpected consequences: players will believe the Barter check means everything will turn out fine. I believe that's how skill checks should be handled.

 

[c2007]

Base stats and skills should interact and typically have - are there many games that will let a high persuasion/low charisma char succeed in all persuasion checks?

I would be interested in seeing more accidental skills/bonuses, ie: low charisma/high strength char gets an intimidation bonus at a certain point, regardless of other stats.

Trying to respond to the OP, stat conditioned skill checks may be too RNG for you. I can live with it - I sure don't want a mini-game in addition to the check.

 

[JarlFrank]

Finding a lot of flowers in her garden hints you that she likes flowers, so initiating by gifting her flowers is a good idea. By sneaking into her bedroom and reading her diary, you find out more things she likes, which helps you decide which dialogue choices during the flirt are the most effective ones.

Flowers are a terrible example, because it's entirely reasonable and common to have them in a garden. A large number of players would pay no attention to them, and for a good reason. Clues like these should be obvious enough so the player doesn't mistake them for clutter. It's the process of getting them that should be a challenge (like sneaking to the diary).

Yes, and the quest of seducing a woman who isn't even a major NPC is minor enough that the optimal path to winning her heart doesn't need to be signposted with big, obvious signposts. Most players will ignore the flowers. Some players will think "hey she's keeping a lot of purple flowers in her garden maybe she likes purple flowers" then gift her purple flowers and be pleasantly surprised by the NPC appreciating the gift.
"Hey nice, the designers of this game took care to put in little details!" thinks the player. "This makes the world feel a lot more alive!"

Hidden things that are lightly hinted at and can easily be missed if you're not observant have enriched games since the fucking 80s. Yes, main quest content should be obvious enough that average players can find solutions to it. But when it comes to side content and secrets, you can become more subtle. Scratch that, you should become more subtle, because that's the fun of discovery.

 

[JarlFrank]

I said they should be obvious enough. A garden of flowers isn't obvious enough. A garden full of violet flowers, when everyone else's garden is is mix of different types would qualify.

Yeah that's a valid point. A clue should stand out. If every NPC has a garden of flowers, this particular NPC also having a garden of flowers would mean nothing.

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[MpuMngwana]

I liked the approach they took in The Council, where using dialogue skills would deplete a finite resource (well it was pretty generous but it's the thought that counts). In a similar vein, I'm fond of the way picking locks and bypassing electronic devices worked in Deus Ex - there is a finite number of lockpicks/multitools in the world, better skill means you use less of them on each target. So even someone who doesn't focus on those skills can open some of the doors, but a skilled character would be able to do more.

I'm not sure how these mechanics could be integrated in a more open environment, where you could, say, hoard 50 lockpicks or replenish the resource consumed in dialogue by resting.

 

[huskarls]

having fake speech routes next to the correct one really doesn't change the difficultly, its better than nothing but its just flavor when you can metagame or reload. To change the insta-win aspect, you could have them open alternative, non-combat routes with puzzles, reduce rather than eliminate combat, or have un-prompted perquisites, like figure out to read a book on plumbing before entering a sewer or disguising yourself