Editorial RPG Roundtable #2 at RPGVault

[Spazmo]

Tags: Black Isle Studios; Chris Avellone

<A HREF="http://rpgvault.ign.com" target="_blank">RPG Vault</a> have posted the <a href=http://rpgvault.ign.com/articles/436/436852p1.html>second installment</a> of their RPG Roundtable series. This one discusses character development with <a href=http://www.bioware.com>BioWare</a>'s <b>Brent Knowles</b> (funny, BioWare is notorious for having diddly-squat in the character development department), <a href=http://www.arxfatalis-online.de/index_eng.php>Arkane Studios</a>'s <b>Raphael Colantonio</b>, <a href=http://www.piranha-bytes.com/>Piranha Bytes</a>' <b>Kai Rosenkranz</b>, <a href=http://www.spiderwebsoftware.com>Spiderweb Software</a>'s <b>Jeff Vogel</b> (Yay!) and the one, the only, <a href=http://www.obsidianent.com>Obsidian Entertainment</a>'s <b>Mr. Chris Avellone!</b> Here's a part of MCA's thoughts on the topic:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote>I want to see development outside of stats, and more related to the character's personality developing. Granted, you can't throw out stats without ruining the enjoyment a lot of players have with stat crunching, but I'd love to see a system that blends a PC's personality and stat development together in one package, and then dumps them in a world where both are important. For me, the key moment of a role-playing game (at least pen and paper) is the interaction you get from other player characters and NPCs and any changes that occur in your character as a result. I would like to see more games that take advantage of (and track) personality types and traits to help a player define a character and give them more tangible benefits (some of this was done in the SPECIAL system in Fallout, and it was a refreshing change, though there was no tracking throughout the game). Before I left Black Isle, Josh Sawyer had worked up some nice personality-tracking mechanics for the Jefferson project, which were a breath of fresh air.</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
See, now, that sounds like a damn fine idea. Perhaps now that they're unburdened by Interplay's horribleness, Obsidian can make some damn fine games. If they can escape BioWare's crushing horribleness, of course.
<br>
<br>
Spotted at <a href="http://www.rpgdot.com">RPGDot</a>

 

[Briosafreak]

My bet is that they will get stuck with a final expansion to NWN to start... but i can be pretty pessimistic some times...

 

[Crazy Tuvok]

Wow. Maybe I am just too out of touch and old school but that is a scary discussion. Thief *is* an RPG!? Then so is Half-Life right? Then so is every freaking videogame ever made.
Everyone 'cept Chris and Jeff reiterated the same bs - make things simpler, people don't like stat pages, etc. Has the attention span of the human race deteriorated to the point that people can't be bothered to look at a stat page or deal at all with numbers?
My fav part is the Bioware guy arguing for his class-based system as preferable cuz he wants to play Gandalf. or Drizzt or whatever. Nevermind the fact that a skill-based system allows you to do exactly that w/o hamstringing people who want to create their own *unique* charcter, I for one have never created a character that was meant to be an exact recreation of some famous character. See when I play an RPG I am not afraid to exert a little creativity, but I guess that is me.

Chris was right on and with any luck Obsidian won't be stuck working on some damn NWN expansion.

 

[Volourn]

I have to agree. I don't create characters to copy some famous literary one. I try to make my own characters, and this can easily be done with a class, or skill based system.

And, I for one, hope Obsidian works on a NWN expansion. The more NWN expansions there are; the better.

 

[Vault Dweller]

The more NWN expansions there are; the better.

Ok, I'll bite: why?

 

[HanoverF]

He's a glutton for punishment?

 

[Volourn]

'Cause I'm retarded and brainwashed enough to like the game...

 

[Voss]

Pardon me while I froth.
Numbers don't matter at all vs. numbers are the only thing that truly matters.
A'wha?

Its a *game*, not some weird-ass VR SimLife experience. Or a spreadsheet.
It needs plot and numbers and, surprise, surprise, it needs to be good at *both*, and both need to be done well.

 

[chrisbeddoes]

people don't like stat pages, etc

WTF

Right.

 

[Nomad]

Brent Knowles:
I agree that class based systems allow people to quickly identify with the archetypes they wish to play. This makes it easier for them to get into and enjoy the rest of the game.

Attention span has nothing to do with it because most people don't have the time to read the manual or scrap several hours worth of gameplay in order to compensate for a poor choice made earlier in the game. Games should not be some badge of honour that proves how dedicated a fan you are because you spent 15 hours reading the manual or restarted the game 12 times in order to figure out how to min/max it.

Raphael Colantonio / Kai Rosenkranz:
While an argument can be made that almost any computer game (except things such as board and card games) is an RPG, I don't really agree. I do like the idea of trying to use the computer to hide a lot of the details for people who aren't really interested in order to allow the player to focus on the story.

Jeff Vogel:
He didn't really add anything constructive to the roundtable except to offer his opinion as to why statless RPGs aren't really popular.

Chris Avalone:
I don't really agree with him because I grew up with D&D and like class based systems. I actually had a really tough time wrapping my head around 3rd Edition D&D (which is more skill based) and all those Prestige Classes.


N.

 

[EEVIAC]

Attention span has nothing to do with it because most people don't have the time to read the manual or scrap several hours worth of gameplay in order to compensate for a poor choice made earlier in the game.

Fail-states should have ended with the death of horribly linear adventure games. A choice shouldn't be included if its not usefull. That's just poor game design.

Games should not be some badge of honour that proves how dedicated a fan you are because you spent 15 hours reading the manual or restarted the game 12 times in order to figure out how to min/max it.

That's a huge exageration and it still doesn't constitute an excuse for making games more simple and automated. I have nothing against steamlined systems (I loved parts of Freelancer's simple interface,) but not when its to the detriment of depth (which is one the things I despise about Freelancer.) Arcanum had a large manual and a fairly complex system and I didn't need to read the manual to understand anything in the game (I read it anyway because it was entertaining.) It also provided basic archetypes (magic, technical or neutral) for which to base your characters on. There are highly optimal combinations in the game for those that need to be super powerfull, but most of the fairly obvious other archetypes (melee-mage, pure tech gunslinger, tech thief, etc) can still complete the game without achieving a fail state. The only character I can concieve of that would be inept in the Arcanum game-world is an offensive mage/gunslinger, and reasons for why this is a pretty silly thing to do are well explained in the game, or could be found in the ten minutes you could read the manual while the game installs.

Raphael Colantonio / Kai Rosenkranz:
While an argument can be made that almost any computer game (except things such as board and card games) is an RPG, I don't really agree. I do like the idea of trying to use the computer to hide a lot of the details for people who aren't really interested in order to allow the player to focus on the story.

The one advantage that computer games have over other story-telling mediums like TV, film, and books is interactivity. By its nature, story limits choice - freedom of choice is the reason I like RPG's. I'd be happy to see more "world based" games rather than story-driven games. Statless systems have a part in this but technology needs to improve. As Kai explained, a visual indicator of muscles is just another way of showing the player strength. So show the muscles and also on a character sheet, show a number. How hard is that?

Jeff Vogel:
He didn't really add anything constructive to the roundtable except to offer his opinion as to why statless RPGs aren't really popular.

Really? I think Jeff summed up RPG's perfectly :

The great joy of playing RPGs is the sense of building something, of starting with something small and weak and, though time and skill, making it bigger. When you get up from the computer, you have the illusion of having made something better, and this satisfying feeling is a huge part of the appeal.

Obviously it doesn't necessarilly have to be for the "better" but the general sentiment is spot on. I've never completed a Vogel game, but I've poured countless hours into many of them and enjoyed every moment. Who needs to save the princess or reach whatever pointless win-state when I'm having fun in an interesting world?

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

My fav part is the Bioware guy arguing for his class-based system as preferable cuz he wants to play Gandalf. or Drizzt or whatever. Nevermind the fact that a skill-based system allows you to do exactly that w/o hamstringing people who want to create their own *unique* charcter, I for one have never created a character that was meant to be an exact recreation of some famous character. See when I play an RPG I am not afraid to exert a little creativity, but I guess that is me.

Classes nearly always suck because they're restrictive and promote restrictive play. Even with 3E D&D, you can't really make a good thief/magic user because of all the restrictions like hit point restrictions for the magic user levels, armor restrictions for the spells, statistic limitations on how good either the fighter or the magic user can be, and so on. You end up severely gimping yourself in one or more areas.

I'd say the reason BioWare likes them is because they're easier to impliment than a good, classless system and they're easy to balance. They're simple things, all the way around.

Numbers don't matter at all vs. numbers are the only thing that truly matters.

Any developer who claims players don't like to see statistics in a CRPG probably needs to get out of the business and find a new career because they've totally lost touch. Any player who claims they don't like to read statistics needs to find a new genre of game to play as well. The fact of the matter is, numbers are required because they're the only universal way of telling the player exactly what's going on, what they can do, and what things take or how long it takes to get there.

Try to imagine a CRPG with no numbers at all, none. How would you know what weapon you have is better than the weapon you just found? How would you be able to rate yourself versus what's going on around you? How would you know how much you can endure before you die? How would you know how much better you got every time you advanced? Or how would you know you DID advance in the first place? Could you even make any progress if there weren't numbers floating around?

Numbers are the easiest way to communicate everything about the character to the player. That's precisely why they're used.

Brent Knowles:
I agree that class based systems allow people to quickly identify with the archetypes they wish to play. This makes it easier for them to get into and enjoy the rest of the game.

Attention span has nothing to do with it because most people don't have the time to read the manual or scrap several hours worth of gameplay in order to compensate for a poor choice made earlier in the game. Games should not be some badge of honour that proves how dedicated a fan you are because you spent 15 hours reading the manual or restarted the game 12 times in order to figure out how to min/max it.

You wouldn't have to read a manual very long to understand what a sneak skill is, or what a lockpick skill is, and so on. However, you probably would need to read a manaual to keep track of all the bonus feats and things you get based on class in 3rd Edition D&D. What bonus does a 13th level monk get? Fuck if I know, but I do know that a 12% Sneak Skill means I shouldn't try to sneak passed some guards.

 

[EEVIAC]

Try to imagine a CRPG with no numbers at all, none. How would you know what weapon you have is better than the weapon you just found? How would you be able to rate yourself versus what's going on around you? How would you know how much you can endure before you die? How would you know how much better you got every time you advanced? Or how would you know you DID advance in the first place? Could you even make any progress if there weren't numbers floating around?

Actual numerical stats aren't that abstracted from the real world anyways. If I can lift 100 kg, and the strongest man in the world can lift 400 kg, my strength can be expressed as a numerical value of 25 out of a possible 100. You can do the same thing with perception, endurance, intelligence, agility (simple reflex tests,) luck (perhaps.)

If, over the course of a game session, I develop my strength from 25 to 50, actually being able to see the number 50 is an awful lot more usefull to me than two mm of extra muscle texturing.

 

[Crazy Tuvok]

If it takes you 15 hours to read a game manual and you restarted 12 times, maybe you should get a different hobby and take some remedial reading courses.
The "restart 12 times to min-max" is an example of poor design. You could play just about anything you want in Fallout and Arcanum to name but two and finish the game.
And I have yet to see the character creation system so complex that it baffled me as to how to create a viable character. "Small arms what does that do? The paragraph explanation right here on on the char genreation screen confuses me" "Magic you say, will that help me make sword-wielding Barbarian?"
Don't even get me started on rtfm. Personally I say if you don't want to read it play an FPS or a console game.

Hiding the details is one thing as I understand there are people who don't want to know what is going on, tho I do not understand these people. Not having the details available if you want is another thing altogether. So if you want to have your avatar look more muscular for people under such time constraints that they cannot be bothered to click on a stat page and read: Strength 17 or whatever fine; but don't eliminate the stat page altogether. And what are these people doing who are under such pressure that they do not have time for this?

3E is less classless but still class based. So yes it is more complex and therefore allows you to make a much more unique character. In 2E one fighter pretty much looked like any other fighter. In Fallout my gunslinger might look *very* different from yours. I am at a loss as to why this is not preferable.

 

[Nomad]

I think Brent was talking about how people identify with certain archetypes, not how they want to play, specifically Gandalf or Lancelot. Class-based systems support the player and get them into the game sooner without requiring them to spend a lot of time reading the manual in order to generate their character.

They also reduce the risk of the player getting into a situation where he or she has to restart the game because of some poor skill choice made earlier in the game. I agree, that this shouldn't happen, but I have friends who even played Arcanum that said they couldn't finish because of how they built their character.

As for why BioWare uses class-based systems, SP, you're wrong. It's not because they're "easier", it's because their publisher asked them to make RPGs based on pnp games that also use a class-based system. They _couldn't_ make a classless version of D&D or SW when they're using the WotC licenses.


N.

 

[Crazy Tuvok]

I agree, that this shouldn't happen, but I have friends who even played Arcanum that said they couldn't finish because of how they built their character.

As for why BioWare uses class-based systems, SP, you're wrong. It's not because they're "easier", it's because their publisher asked them to make RPGs based on pnp games that also use a class-based system. They _couldn't_ make a classless version of D&D or SW when they're using the WotC licenses.N.

What kinds of chars did they create that prohibited them from finishing? I have played wildly different kinds of characters in several play thrus and never had any problems.

It is however possible that Bio used licensed class systems because they are easier than creating one from scratch (granting of course the brand-recognition which equals more $)

Interestingly even WotC recognized the benefits to a skills based system as evident in the changes made for 3E; so even the owners of the mother of all class based systems realized it wasn't as good as a skills based system. Telling, don't you think?

 

[Jed]

Try to imagine a CRPG with no numbers at all, none. How would you know what weapon you have is better than the weapon you just found? How would you be able to rate yourself versus what's going on around you? How would you know how much you can endure before you die? How would you know how much better you got every time you advanced? Or how would you know you DID advance in the first place? Could you even make any progress if there weren't numbers floating around?

Moron indicators?

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

As for why BioWare uses class-based systems, SP, you're wrong. It's not because they're "easier", it's because their publisher asked them to make RPGs based on pnp games that also use a class-based system. They _couldn't_ make a classless version of D&D or SW when they're using the WotC licenses.

When LucasArts wanted them to make a Star Wars CRPG, they didn't say, Hey, BioWare, use this WotC system. BioWare chose it.

 

[Spazmo]

At this point, BioWare has enough clout and brand recognition to get a publisher to pick up a game by Bio that doesn't have any liscenses attached to it. But BioWare keeps on churning out liscenced stuff.

 

[Zetor]

Try to imagine a CRPG with no numbers at all, none. How would you know what weapon you have is better than the weapon you just found? How would you be able to rate yourself versus what's going on around you? How would you know how much you can endure before you die? How would you know how much better you got every time you advanced? Or how would you know you DID advance in the first place? Could you even make any progress if there weren't numbers floating around?

Moron indicators?

*ZZZZZZZZZINGGGG!*

Really though, how is the concept of the numerical representation of stats that different from LH's moron indicators? Both provide OOC information that alter the way the player plays the game [in this case, to min-max their attributes... it's fun, of course, but not "roleplaying"]
Or was this already covered in one of the 10-page Skorpios vs. the World threads? :shock:


-- Z.

 

[Voss]

its quite different.
Quantifying an ability (and expressing what that number means in a meaningful way) is a far cry from having to give an idiot a visual representation that if he clicks the response that reads "Goodbye" he'll be exiting dialogue.

Explaining (in the manual or in the game) that an 18 strength in D&D gives you a +4 to hit and damage (and related skills, encumberences effects and so on) is a necessary thing, because no one besides Mister Psychic Master is just going pick that up out of the air.

Without an explanation a stat becomes meaningless. You have a 10 strength. Is that good, bad or average? Does it have any actually effect on the game, or your character? Unless you know the rules and the relative value of the number, Not every game needs stats, but the ones that don't are fairly limited in some way. FPS or a video clip adventure/puzzle game seem to be the usual alternatives.

Games that involve strategy and long range planning (which includes most RPGs, but on a smaller scale) almost have to have stats.

 

[Zetor]

Well, I dunno... when the mechanics for the game, calculations, etc. aren't apparent, it does seem to increase immersion or at least shift focus away from the stat-building / min-maxing aspect of the game. Of course having a min-maxing game can be fun (think of the Wizardry series or Might & Magic), but I wouldn't say it's a better (or worse) concept overall.
One example of this is The Summoning - you didn't have any XP bars (though you gained levels if you cast spells, fought with a weapon, etc), the only stats you knew of at any time were your basic stats (str, mana, etc) and damage pools (hp, mp), but you didn't know exactly what effect they had on your skills / abilities. Despite this, it WAS apparent when you gained levels as your spells / potions became more potent, you did more damage with a weapon and became harder to hit. Same with gaining stats - if you used an agility runestone (Uraz? I forgot the name ), you became a lot faster for a while.
Also, online RPGs. I've found that most UO roleplaying (unofficial, ie. free to play and privately run) servers that give the player exact feedback on their skillz tend to attract powergamers (or get people to focus on powergaming), while those that only give a generic description like "novice", "apprentice", "expert" (usually with no indication when you learned a new style or became better at crafting a certain item), etc. tend to attract roleplayers (and get people to focus on roleplaying). YMMV.

Edit: A better example: the Ultima games. I don't remember the manuals stating how much damage a sword does / how much damage your armor absorbs / what your stats exactly do, so it all came down to common sense: "if I use a shield, I'll get hit less", "if I use heavy armor, I won't be hit as hard", "if I use a magic sword, it'll do more damage than a normal one", "if I gain strength, I'll hit harder and carry more", etc. It's interesting to replay U7 with Exult and see how different combat is with Exult's damage numbers and stat bars.


-- Z.

 

[Voss]

I always have a problem with the 'immersiveness' factor.
I'm staring at a computer screen- at no point is it possible for me to forget that I'm playing a game.
Its still fun for me, but 'immersiveness' that I can't achieve doesn't rate very highly in my wants.

 

[Crazy Tuvok]

I always have a problem with the 'immersiveness' factor.
I'm staring at a computer screen- at no point is it possible for me to forget that I'm playing a game.
Its still fun for me, but 'immersiveness' that I can't achieve doesn't rate very highly in my wants.

Unless one has some *serious* problems I don't think anyone means immersion to the point that you completely forget you are playing a game. But there are degrees of immersion and the more the better. As we were talking about in another thread, most people agree that whatever degree of immersion that does exist is shattered when there is a tutorial with in-game NPCs telling the PC that in order to save your game hit F8 or whatever.

Mafia and GTA3 for example offer very nice levels of immersion by making the city around the player feel alive and this adds materially to my enjoyment of the game.

 

[Voss]

Hey, I've met lots of people with serious problems.
At a recent PnP session, one of the players show'd up in a black cloak. He was of course playing a drow. That dressed in black. And had a black bow. And his sword was black. And the guy will be appearing on Goth Talk any day now.
The overall effect was slightly ruined by the minor detail of it being noon in a university student union of a rather bright day. I felt kinda bad for him... the weather didn't share his overdeveloped sense of drama.


I agree that that sort of thing can break up the flow of the game, I'm just not sure immersiveness is the right word.