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.

what progression system in RPGs you think fits video games the best

what progression system in RPGs you think fits video games the best


  • Total voters
    30

eli

Learned
Joined
Aug 30, 2020
Messages
187
and by video games i mean video games tropes
 

V_K

Arcane
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
7,714
Location
at a Nowhere near you
I'd vote for second option, but Divinity is the exact opposite of that - it's very simplistic and at the same time needlessly convoluted (assuming you mean DOS - the original DivDiv is just simplistic, without any illusions of complexity).
Easy to understand but still complex is something like early TES, DnD 5e or most blobbers not made by Fargo - where the rules themselves are simple and straightforward, but work together to create complex situations.
And arguably there also exists a tier between that and Witcher 3 for games like Quest for Glory or Geneforge whose systems are simple but still support vastly varied playstyles.

In principle though any of those could work. The real issues with character systems in RPGs are not of complexity but of managing expectations. The first is trap builds which are rarely clearly communicated - for example, at first glace at character creation, you might assume that Underrail supports a fully diplomatic playthrough, which it doesn't. Fortunately, in UR you don't have to play for long to realize that. Much worse is something like Bloodlines which allows you to get by with non-combat skills for half of the game and then suddenly requires you to fight hordes of enemies.
The second issue is with TT adaptations. These are just impossible to balance properly - either you aim them at newcomers to the system and then grognards who have learnt the system by heart go boohoo too easy. Or you aim it for grognards and make it unplayable for anyone who hasn't played TT or other adaptations of the same system for years on end.
 
Last edited:

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.
Computer RPGs can afford to be more complex than pen and paper RPGs because the computer will handle all the under the hood calculations and dicerolls (if you even use dicerolls - you can use other forms of randomness to affect outcomes rather than using dice).
You can add a dozen modifiers onto player actions without it becoming convoluted.
The best example is in tactical combat: you can add things like cover bonus, height advantage, different penetration factors for different weapons and armors, etc etc. All of that stuff is very obvious and logical and most people have little issue understanding how it works, but in a pen and paper RPG having a lot of complexity means having to do a lot of manual work during each combat turn. Lots of calculating and record keeping. In a computer RPG - no such issue. The computer handles all the number crunching, you just focus on the tactics.

It's funny how CRPGs are often less complex in their character systems than some pen and paper RPGs.
Systems like GURPS offer very detailed character creation and progression where you can use points to buy a lot of very game-changing abilities and there's a shitload of different characters you can play.
Meanwhile the majority of CRPGs keep funneling you into the same old fighter-mage-thief trinity.
 

Hellraiser

Arcane
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
11,303
Location
Danzig, Potato-Hitman Commonwealth
The choices in this poll are shit. I expected we would have a discussion about things such as "learn by use" vs "generic skill points, allocate as you wish", arbitrary levels vs awarding skill points for tasks, or what stats/skills and how should grow and which should not grow. Or what is the best abstraction approach when designing stats/skill growth. Instead we have vague statements about complexity and learning curve. Considering the poll options OP did not even mean the actual progression system, but the ruleset or mechanical complexity rather than how character growth and capability are addressed by the game.

Anyway for both the mechanics and progression my answer is the same, they should be complementary to the gameplay vision. An arbitrarily high level of complexity can be introduced in a ruleset, the question is why do it, what is the goal? The goal should be to deliver better gameplay in the form of tools the player can use to overcome challenges and to introduce new challenges. If I pick or lack skill X what happens or what I can do during my playthrough should noticeably change, because I have a different tool set to use in those challenges.
 

Axioms

Arcane
Developer
Joined
Jul 11, 2019
Messages
1,486
Incredibly wrong. Complexity itself can be fun. Creating fun builds, different play types, etc. It isn't all about "challenge". Challenge is only 1 of 4 major gameplay types for one thing.
 

Trashos

Arcane
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
3,413
What is the point of complexity or being convoluted if there is no challenge?

That's the exact issue I had with PoE, btw. (the base game, never played the expansions)
I ironmanned it before I knew how most of the stuff worked, so I saw no point in trying any harder.

Easy games are better served by simple systems.
 

Axioms

Arcane
Developer
Joined
Jul 11, 2019
Messages
1,486
Its called a "role play" game not a fantasy olympics game. Sometimes I wanna be an aoe nuker and sometimes i wanna do DoT combos with debuffs, etc.
 

Hellraiser

Arcane
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
11,303
Location
Danzig, Potato-Hitman Commonwealth
Incredibly wrong. Complexity itself can be fun. Creating fun builds, different play types, etc. It isn't all about "challenge". Challenge is only 1 of 4 major gameplay types for one thing.

Read again what I wrote, I am not directly talking about difficulty. By challenge I meant obstacle or objective. Complexity should introduce new tools and new options that different builds would have access to, at the cost of opportunity of losing out on other options. This should lead to builds that result in meaningfully different playthrough experiences. Difficulty can but not necessarily has to be a factor in achieving different playthrough experience.
 

DraQ

Arcane
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
32,828
Location
Chrząszczyżewoszyce, powiat Łękołody
RPGCodex said:
fakenews.png


The choices in this poll are shit. I expected we would have a discussion about things such as "learn by use" vs "generic skill points, allocate as you wish", arbitrary levels vs awarding skill points for tasks, or what stats/skills and how should grow and which should not grow. Or what is the best abstraction approach when designing stats/skill growth. Instead we have vague statements about complexity and learning curve. Considering the poll options OP did not even mean the actual progression system, but the ruleset or mechanical complexity rather than how character growth and capability are addressed by the game.

Anyway for both the mechanics and progression my answer is the same, they should be complementary to the gameplay vision. An arbitrarily high level of complexity can be introduced in a ruleset, the question is why do it, what is the goal? The goal should be to deliver better gameplay in the form of tools the player can use to overcome challenges and to introduce new challenges. If I pick or lack skill X what happens or what I can do during my playthrough should noticeably change, because I have a different tool set to use in those challenges.
Weird flex a wordy way of saying "thread sux, OP is a subnormal", but ok.

Wholeheartedly agreed about both the complexity (complexity is a cost, not some sort of badge of honour, what makes it worth it is whatever was *bought* with that complexity) and what should have been the options.
And then there is the point that the complexity doesn't necessarily correlate with system being complicated and difficult to grasp.
A rules governing some physical action or event can be very complex, yet the result can be easy to comprehend and intuitive, OTOH rules can also be very simple (take ThAC0) and yet pointlessly counterintuitive.

Its called a "role play" game not a fantasy olympics game. Sometimes I wanna be an aoe nuker and sometimes i wanna do DoT combos with debuffs, etc.
No, it's more of a fantasy special olympics game.
Probably explains the Codex better than anything else too.
 

Bloodeyes

Arcane
Joined
Jan 30, 2007
Messages
2,908
I don't think I'm especially smart with numbers and I'm having a hard time thinking of a character system that was too complicated for me to make whatever kind of character I wanted. I've certainly never used a spreadsheet to play an RPG or anything. Most RPGs are pretty easy. Build optimization only becomes an issue with more difficult games like Kingmaker and Underrail because they require build optimal builds to play on normal diff. I wouldn't even say their character systems are any harder to understand than any other RPG, it's just the difficulty means you need a deeper understanding than you need to play something relatively easier like Fallout, which you can beat with basically any character. I like the Kingmaker approach better. It's much more engaging to need to make an optimized party I think. It feels more like you succeeded at something challenging rather than just having a game inflate your ego with hollow praise for phony accomplishments.
 

Axioms

Arcane
Developer
Joined
Jul 11, 2019
Messages
1,486
Incredibly wrong. Complexity itself can be fun. Creating fun builds, different play types, etc. It isn't all about "challenge". Challenge is only 1 of 4 major gameplay types for one thing.

Read again what I wrote, I am not directly talking about difficulty. By challenge I meant obstacle or objective. Complexity should introduce new tools and new options that different builds would have access to, at the cost of opportunity of losing out on other options. This should lead to builds that result in meaningfully different playthrough experiences. Difficulty can but not necessarily has to be a factor in achieving different playthrough experience.

Are you not a native English speaker? Because challenge and obstacle are the same thing and in either case you are using it wrong. Goal or objective would have been better.

Fighting with a DoT build is a different experience from a nuker or a control mage. The play in role "play". Having a ton of different classes and progression options is an end in and of itself. So you can "play" with builds and such. Doing a pure fighting playthrough still feels different with different classes. Similarly Rogue vs Bard or something for non-combat.

The key issue is that not all games are for all people or should be designed the same. So you can have some games challenge based and some play based and some exploration based, etc.
 

TheImplodingVoice

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck
Joined
Oct 29, 2018
Messages
1,955
Location
Embelyon
and by video games i mean video games tropes
Do you like Phil Collins? I've been a big Genesis fan ever since the release of their 1980 album, Duke. Before that, I really didn't understand any of their work. Too artsy, too intellectual. It was on Duke where, uh, Phil Collins' presence became more apparent. I think Invisible Touch was the group's undisputed masterpiece. It's an epic meditation on intangibility.

At the same time, it deepens and enriches the meaning of the preceding three albums. Listen to the brilliant ensemble playing of Banks, Collins and Rutherford. You can practically hear every nuance of every instrument. In terms of lyrical craftsmanship, the sheer songwriting, this album hits a new peak of professionalism. Take the lyrics to "Land of Confusion". In this song, Phil Collins addresses the problems of abusive political authority. "In Too Deep" is the most moving pop song of the 1980s, about monogamy and commitment. The song is extremely uplifting. Their lyrics are as positive and affirmative as, uh, anything I've heard in rock.

Phil Collins' solo career seems to be more commercial and therefore more satisfying, in a narrower way. Especially songs like "In the Air Tonight" and, uh, "Against All Odds". But I also think Phil Collins works best within the confines of the group, than as a solo artist, and I stress the word artist. This is "Sussudio", a great, great song, a personal favorite.
 

Hellraiser

Arcane
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
11,303
Location
Danzig, Potato-Hitman Commonwealth
Are you not a native English speaker? Because challenge and obstacle are the same thing and in either case you are using it wrong. Goal or objective would have been better.

I used "challenge" because goal or objective implies that the complexity should be tied directly to solving quests, rather than to more general "meta" aspects of a playthrough that might indirectly aid you in finishing the main questline, such as resource management of the party/PC or use in non-quest related combat encounters (ex. random encounters on the world map).
 

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