Esoteric Ebb - Disco-like using 5e ruleset where you are cleric uncovering political conspiracy with goblin sidekick

[cyborgboy95]

Exciting Esoteric Events
It's that time again. Time for an Esoteric Update.

I've been hard at work these last couple of weeks working on patches for the demo release (that went rather well, if I'm being honest), checking out the massive amount of feedback you've left me, and of course preparing for the rest of development.

Things are moving. 2024 will be an interesting year for Ebb. Starting off, I'm happy to announce two Steam events coming up!

Games in Sweden

Esoteric Ebb will also be featured in the Games in Sweden event, hosted by Fireshine! A brand new event, it's set to feature a bunch of amazing games. I want to give a shout-out to some of my local dev-neighbors featured in the event, whose projects you should absolutely check out right now (and wishlist!):

• Fae & Fauna - a gorgeous open-world pet collector RPG. Just look at that trailer! I can highly recommend keeping an eye on it.
• Odinfall - a thrilling viking-rogueish-topdown-shooter! I got the chance to try it last year, and it's a damn good game. Can't wait for it to come out!

The Storyteller's Festival

Esoteric Ebb will also be featured in The Storytellers Festival 2024! Back again this year, on January 29th, the event will showcase a ton of narrative-focused games – which, if I had to guess, would probably be quite interesting to you if you're into Ebb. So check them out! Try out some demos!

Development Update

In the wake of this PC Gamer article (which is very well-written in my humble opinion) it turns out that a lot of other people also enjoyed playing as the world's worst cleric. In the last two weeks, Ebb has more than QUADRUPLED in wishlists and demo downloads. It's even inching closer every day to being in the top 500 wishlisted games on Steam.

So I'm pretty happy with the demo release overall. Thanks to everyone who's played the demo, left feedback on the Steam discussion, checked out the Discord, or just generally sent well-wishes on social media. I keep repeating myself, but I really do mean it when I say that 2024 will be a very interesting year for Esoteric Ebb.

-Christoffer Bodegård

 

[cyborgboy95]

 

[cyborgboy95]

 

[Infinitron]

https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/2057760/view/7024009805563618323

An Esoteric Campaign - Alignment
You can start by asking:
why even use alignments
?

In modern TTRPGs
, the mechanics of alignment (or the like) are more or less fading away. I don't have any statistics on it, but I'd wager that very few people actually play with them these days. Partly I'd say due to a moralist argument of anti-determinism - that sentient beings are not born to be good or evil or anything else, and that we have full culpability over our own actions. And also partly because alignment can be really, really
annoying
.

Not as annoying as these apples, though.

By default, a 5e setting has an omnipotent force that determines each creature's placement on a matrix: good to evil and lawful to chaotic. Usually a player only encounters this (if ever) when making a character. You choose where you're at on the matrix. An argument for alignment is that it's a tool to help craft an interesting personality, or understand what kind of actions a character would take in any given situation. Do you follow the laws of the land, or do you break them? Do you protect the innocent with your life, or are you rude to people in the service industry? Just glance at your alignment, and you'll know.

But what happens when we make things more of a gray zone? What happens when multiple laws contradict each other? When ostensibly evil actions can lead to a greater good? All the classic examples have been debated to death, but I've never seemed to be very happy with any answers. Mainly because it's a flawed discussion to begin with - because it all depends on that previously mentioned omnipotent force.

You know,
the DM
.

If your fantasy world has actual objective alignments, then that means there's an objective truth. Whatever the DM says,
is
good. If your DM has a really strange world view, then you can end up with some very wacky alignment. So in my eyes, the number one reason why alignment just doesn't work in practical play, is that it requires the DM to have an incredibly strong grip on their beliefs. And, of course, the fact that every single one of your players will probably disagree with them at some point. That means I don't use alignment in Ebb, right?

Oh no, I do. I use alignment
a lot
. Mainly because I find it absolutely fascinating.

Um, I'll have a lawful good, please. Thanks.

In the demo
you can see characters' alignments on their sheets, by using the
Behold
feature. Beholding is a silly mechanic, that essentially allows you to take a peek on the DM notes. It feels a bit like a 4th wall break initially, but you can imagine it as an
esoteric vibe
that the cleric taps into. You get a bunch of info when Beholding, including tips on how to deal with the character, some backstory hints, ability score distribution, level/backstory, and of course, their alignment. But when you discover the alignment of a character, it doesn't really mean anything other than where this character lands on the matrix - a matrix used in this fantasy world of JOR. A matrix determined by some mad wizard a couple of thousand years ago, unlike the usual divine judgement. So how can you learn more about the definition of good and evil in Esoteric Ebb? Do you have to go on some deep, internal journey? Maybe seek spiritual enlightenment?

No. You go talk to a scholar, obviously! Ebb is set during an age that comes right after a, more or less, technological revolution. There's been a ton of research on esoteric events and effects around the Coast, and in-game you can learn more about the practical functions and philosophical implications of alignments by finding an expert on the subject. As per usual in Ebb, you get to hold a very strange conversation and ask wildly inappropriate questions.

Find out more by playing the game, eventually.

Thank you for following the development of Esoteric Ebb!
The pieces are very much falling into place here. I'm working with some great artists to bring a great visual overhaul to the game, and we're continuing to drop breadcrumbs on social media and on the official Discord.

We'll see how many updates I'll be able to write in the coming months, since I've got
a lot
of writing to get done. But man, it's exciting times. Last week I wrote about hugging a skeleton to death, and next week I'll be making a scene where you feed a steak to a magical house. Fun stuff.
-Christoffer Bodegård

https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/2057760/view/4248669523807328994

Taking Down The Second Draft Demo! (And Some Fun Reflections)
"No demo rules forever."

It's time.


On the 6th of December, 2023, I released what I called the Second Draft Demo, of Esoteric Ebb. It was more or less a polished and updated version of the First Draft Playtest, (hence the name) which featured:

• 11 characters
• 15 very cool inanimate objects
• Thousands of apples
• 3 quests branches
• Over 50k words written
• ~1 hour of gameplay on average

I'm still shocked at how playable it was.


And best of all, it turned out to be actually kind of fun. In the first couple of weeks, a couple of hundred people were trying it out. Mostly those of you that tried the First Draft Playtest (the OGs!) and came back for more. It was great to spend that time releasing bug fixes and optimizing the build, but while the reactions were positive, it didn't end up receiving too much attention. That is, until February 2024.

Ted Litchfield tried the demo. He kind of liked it and wrote an article for PC Gamer about it. I remember waking up that morning with a bunch of notifications and messages about people seeing it in their feeds, and whatnot. That got me in a real good mood- and considering the previous mentions Ebb had gotten in PCGamer, I figured this would give a big boost to the game's visibility. At the time, Ebb had around 8000 wishlists, so I expected to gain maybe one or two thousand from the article.

It got 30,000 wishlists. In two weeks.

Now, that's not an insane amount on the grand scale of things. But for a tiny game like this, it was most certainly a kind of sort of almost
life-changing event
. Thanks, Ted.

To compare, those first eight thousand took me over a year to gather. All of a sudden I had a massive and clear indication that, on some level,
I was doing something right
. Which, after about five years working on this thing, really meant a lot. So here we are. It's been eight months. Nine? Something like that. After all this time, the Demo has finished its run.
I'll be taking down the Second Draft Demo on Sunday, August 18th.
At what time? I don't know, let's say 12:00 CET.

That means: now's the last chance to try it! If you've been following the development you've probably seen that the current state of the game looks VERY different from this Demo. As you can imagine, a lot changes in a year. Also, collaborating with a bunch of amazing artists tends to increase the visual fidelity of a game.

I can't wait to show you what I've got COOKING.


And of course, as you can imagine, me taking down the demo means that there's some stuff in the works that I am eager to share with you all soon. So stay tuned.

Ultimately, the demo has gotten
20,000 downloads
(actually it's more like ~19,500 but let's say it's a nice round number), and over 300 of you filled out the survey. Many of your write-ups and feedback there have been invaluable in designing the current iteration of Esoteric Ebb.

So I want to give a big final thank you to everyone who's played the game, talked about it with their friends, sent over feedback, and ESPECIALLY thank you for enjoying this stupid thing I've put together. One of the things I've enjoyed the most over the last couple of months is watching people play it on streams/Youtube. Every time I see someone cheering when getting a nat 20, or laughing at some silly joke, it feels like it was all worth it.
-Christoffer Bodegård

The Cleric sends his regards as well.

 

[MjKorz]

Visual novel with no gameplay. Has nothing to do with RPGs. The Aryan wargamer marches on (right past this gameplay-less turd).

 

[Hydro]

Duno, I like the idea. Though for this to succeed it has to look and sound exceptionally good which is not the case here.

 

[Tyranicon]

Didn't the dev say there will be combat, it's just not a focus?

 

[Christoffer Bodegård]

The design has changed a lot in the last year, but EBB does not contain any actual combat.

It does contain turn-based 'encounters'. These are mostly optional scenes, where all participants roll initiative, and then take turns to perform one action each round. On your turn, you have to choose one dice to roll, or spell to cast, with the DC varying depending on the turn order, previous actions, your companion's actions, etc. It's essentially my attempt at simulating the experience of playing D&D combat with a really lenient DM as a very poor player. While also keeping it wrapped in the interactive narrative. It's basically inspired by my latest play-through of PST, when I thought about how the experience would change if the quality of the interactive writing could somehow be transferred over to the combat.

But EBB does NOT have combat! Before I wasn't sure exactly how to market it, since it's a bit of a weird mechanic - but I think it's important to set it apart as something unique. The last thing I want is people being disappointed if they play EBB thinking it has tactical combat. So I'll try to do a better job at that going forward.

When I started working on EBB in 2018, I did try doing proper 5e combat, and it just sucked. I am not a good combat designer. So I scrapped the entire project, since I obviously couldn't realistically compete with any of the big RPGs that could 'do it all' as a tiny developer. Then DE came out a couple of months later, and changed my mind.

 

[Hydro]

The design has changed a lot in the last year, but EBB does not contain any actual combat.

It does contain turn-based 'encounters'. These are mostly optional scenes, where all participants roll initiative, and then take turns to perform one action each round. On your turn, you have to choose one dice to roll, or spell to cast, with the DC varying depending on the turn order, previous actions, your companion's actions, etc. It's essentially my attempt at simulating the experience of playing D&D combat with a really lenient DM as a very poor player. While also keeping it wrapped in the interactive narrative. It's basically inspired by my latest play-through of PST, when I thought about how the experience would change if the quality of the interactive writing could somehow be transferred over to the combat.

But EBB does NOT have combat! Before I wasn't sure exactly how to market it, since it's a bit of a weird mechanic - but I think it's important to set it apart as something unique. The last thing I want is people being disappointed if they play EBB thinking it has tactical combat. So I'll try to do a better job at that going forward.

When I started working on EBB in 2018, I did try doing proper 5e combat, and it just sucked. I am not a good combat designer. So I scrapped the entire project, since I obviously couldn't realistically compete with any of the big RPGs that could 'do it all' as a tiny developer. Then DE came out a couple of months later, and changed my mind.

Nice to know the detials.
Just market it as a “100% combat free” or “no combatfags allowed”.

 

[NJClaw]

The design has changed a lot in the last year, but EBB does not contain any actual combat.

Pretty arrogant of you to assume you know what combat is, but ok.

 

[Christoffer Bodegård]

Just market it as a “100% combat free”

What kind of city guard would be violent, anyhow?

Pretty arrogant of you to assume you know what combat is, but ok.

At this point I'm open to being gaslit into believing anything you tell me, I swear.

But honestly, marketing seems to me to be all about statistics. If I start calling Ebb a Hardcore Tactical Combat Game™ then I'd guess 97% of my potential players would call me out on that bullshit. But there'd still be those 3% that agree with me, for some reason. Same thing with the entire debate on whether or not these 'Disco-likes' should be called RPGs to begin with. I'm not sure what the statistics on that would be, but I'm guessing it's somewhere around 80/20 at this point? Hard to say. But like I've mentioned before, I don't really have a dog in that fight, beyond just not wanting to confuse my players. So feel free to call me out on my bullshit if you see me spouting something dumb!

 

[Harthwain]

Same thing with the entire debate on whether or not these 'Disco-likes' should be called RPGs to begin with. I'm not sure what the statistics on that would be, but I'm guessing it's somewhere around 80/20 at this point? Hard to say.

The Codex is not really reflective of the mainstream. You won't find many people outside of here who doubt that Disco is an RPG, because it is pretty obvious it was built upon solid PnP RPG foundation. This is called into question here, because there is a sizeable number of people who played dungeon crawlers and combat-heavy games marketed as cRPGs who can't fathom an RPG where you don't have to fight mobs all the way from start to end. That's pretty much the only reason.

Frankly, your game seems to be the best Disco-like out of all Disco-likes I have seen to this point, so I think you'll do pretty well with anyone who is a fan of Disco and I'd wager there are plenty of people out there who are waiting for anything close to Disco experience. Keep up the good work.

 

[Gandalf]

I've never played Disco or Disco-like. What's fun in the game like this? Is it the dialogues and exploration? How does it differ from adventure game?

 

[MjKorz]

The Codex is not really reflective of the mainstream. You won't find many people outside of here who doubt that Disco is an RPG, because it is pretty obvious it was built upon solid PnP RPG foundation. This is called into question here, because there is a sizeable number of people who played dungeon crawlers and combat-heavy games marketed as cRPGs who can't fanthom an RPG where you don't have to fight mobs all the way from start to end. That's pretty much the only reason.

No, that's not the only reason. The other reason is that this "Disco-like" blight on the genre deviates from the triple S archetypal solution design. In many good RPGs like Fallout and Bloodlines, for example, quests and encounters can usually be solved via methods that are a certain combination of Sneak, Speak, Slay archetypal solutions with each of these archetypal solution methods having their own dedicated gameplay mechanics. Disco-likes remove the Sneak and Slay archetypal solutions from the equation, leaving you with but a single possible solution: Speak.

Gygax has a very important quote on the nature of roleplaying: "I do not, and I stress NOT, believe that the RPG is "storytelling" in the way that is usually presented. If there is a story to be told, it comes from the interaction of all participants, not merely the Game Master--who should not a "Storyteller" but a narrator and co-player! The players are not acting out roles designed for them by the GM, they are acting in character to create the story, and that tale is told as the game unfolds, and as directed by their actions, with random factors that even the GM can't predict possibly altering the course of things. Storytelling is what novelists, screenwriters, and playwrights do. It has little or no connection to the RPG, which differs in all aspects from the entertainment forms such authors create for."

Note how he defines the process of roleplaying: acting in character to create the story. When you cut out the Sneak and Slay archetypal solution methods from your game, you are actively limiting the ways a player can act in character: solving in-game problems in ways based on player character building choices during character generation. In other words, you are actively reducing roleplaying depth by removing alternative quest solution methods.

When this insult to the genre flops, just like many other upcoming "Disco-likes", I will laugh at its grotesque corpse. And the genre will heal, if only a little bit.

 

[Christoffer Bodegård]

Same thing with the entire debate on whether or not these 'Disco-likes' should be called RPGs to begin with. I'm not sure what the statistics on that would be, but I'm guessing it's somewhere around 80/20 at this point? Hard to say.

The Codex is not really reflective of the mainstream. You won't find many people outside of here who doubt that Disco is an RPG, because it is pretty obvious it was built upon solid PnP RPG foundation. This is called into question here, because there is a sizeable number of people who played dungeon crawlers and combat-heavy games marketed as cRPGs who can't fanthom an RPG where you don't have to fight mobs all the way from start to end. That's pretty much the only reason.

Frankly, your game seems to be the best Disco-like out of all Disco-likes I have seen to this point, so I think you'll do pretty well with anyone who is a fan of Disco and I'd wager there are plenty of people out there who are waiting for anything close to Disco experience. Keep up the good work.

That's fair. I do really enjoy the Codex as a litmus test on on that exact viewpoint though. It's always good to anticipate potential players' thoughts and address them in the promises of the marketing. Especially since I'm going to show off a lot of stuff in the future that might look like more traditional cRPG gameplay, like fighting monsters in dungeons, exotic isometric maps, etc.

And thank you! The fact that I spent about 4 years learning how to create actually good interactive writing before I even started on this iteration on Ebb really helps a lot. I'm still not as proficient as I want, but hopefully by my third or fourth game I'll be able to master it.

I've never played Disco or Disco-like. What's fun in the game like this? Is it the dialogues and exploration? How does it differ from adventure game?

It is basically just the dialogs and exploration, I guess? Like I mentioned before, I do have a weird simulacrum of D&D encounters in EBB, but mostly this subgenre(?) is just interactive fiction/adventure game mixed with all the stats and non-combat progression stuff from TTRPGs.

When this insult to the genre flops, just like many other upcoming "Disco-likes" I will laugh at its grotesque corpse. And the genre will heal, if only a little bit.

It's really good that consumers hash this out. Confusion in genre definitions is such an annoying issue for so many game devs I talk with - basically, if you can't be sure what your players will think that they're buying, how can you even begin to design something with that in mind?

 

[Harthwain]

Disco-likes remove the Sneak and Slay archetypal solutions from the equation, leaving you with but a single possible solution: Speak.

If we are going this route, then the issues is larger. In narrative-driven games the narrative overwhelms everything else. This is true for any such game, not just Disco or Disco-likes. That's why your "choices and consequences" are more often than not "smoke and mirrors". Sandboxes allow players more room to roam around the game world so it is less visible, but it is still true there nevertheless.

Going further with this argument; most cRPGs are biased towards the Slay. To the point when it is not even an option, but what you'll be doing 95% of the time. Some games have the option to Sneak (sometimes), but it is very, very limited. Same goes for different options in terms of NPCs reaction to the player's build and actions (Troika games being the shinning beacon here).

Note how he defines the process of roleplaying: acting in character to create the story. When you cut out the Sneak and Slay archetypal solution methods from your game, you are actively limiting the ways a player can act in character: solving in-game problems in ways based on player character building choices during character generation. In other words, you are actively reducing roleplaying depth by removing alternative quest solution methods.

Define "acting in character". Because to me it sounds like LARPing backed up by what kind of build you decided to have (in short: you're building the character you want to play as). Even Sneak and Slay achetypal solution methods make use of what kind of build the player picked and makes in the corse of the game.

It is also worth mentioning that you can have Sneak and Slay options, even in a Disco-like. You simply have to design the encounter. For example, Disco Elysium does have at least two "proper" combat encounters. There is no reason not to have more, and not to implement more ways to be a sneaky kind of character, thereby accommodating Sneak and Slay playstyles as well.

Lastly, Disco Elysium was designed in a way that you always have ways to interact with the world, regardless of your build. It may not be the archetypal Sneak or Slay (mainly because the developers didn't want the player to play as a murderhobo), but you still can intimidate or beat up NPCs, for example.

When this insult to the genre flops, just like many other upcoming "Disco-likes", I will laugh at its grotesque corpse. And the genre will heal, if only a little bit.

Disco-likes fail mainly because it is not easy to replicate good writing and interesting world to explore. And both are needed when that's your main way to interact with the game. It has nothing to do with the lack of combat. Otherwise Disco Elysium itself would be a flop as well (as I originally thought it will be, mainly because I thought text-heavy games don't sell, before it became such a smash hit).

I've never played Disco or Disco-like. What's fun in the game like this? Is it the dialogues and exploration? How does it differ from adventure game?

Take Planescape: Torment and take out shitty combat out of it. That's about it.

 

[MjKorz]

Sandboxes allow players more room to roam around the game world so it is less visible, but it is still true there nevertheless.

Sandboxes also do not have the depth of narrative-driven games in terms of social roleplaying. A game being "narrative-driven" is not a problem, the problem is the lack of C&C or alternative quest solutions. Good RPGs like the recently released Colony Ship have plenty of alternative quest solutions using the entirety of the Sneak-Speak-Slay archetypal solution spectrum despite being "narrative-driven".

most cRPGs are biased towards the Slay

Being biased towards a certain archetypal solution method is not the same as lack of other archetypal solution methods outright. There is no RPG where every quest presents you with a plethora of alternative solutions for every possible permutation of S-S-S, roleplaying depth in CRPGs (as in Computer RPGs) is always finite, but it doesn't mean it cannot accommodate the entire spectrum of solution archetypes over the entirety of the game in general (not over every single quest).

Some games have the option to Sneak (sometimes), but it is very, very limited. Same goes for different options in terms of NPCs reaction to the player's build and actions (Troika games being the shinning beacon here).

I don't care about "most" or "some", I care about "good". Take the relatively recently released Colony Ship as an example: each solution archetype is represented in many quests with many of those quests offering alternative solutions covering multiple archetypes. Each archetypal solution is distinctly separated from another by dedicated gameplay mechanics: you have combat, you have stealth sections, you have persuasion challenges. Amazing implementation of the triple S design philosophy, my proverbial hat goes off to Vince.

Define "acting in character".

Already did: solving in-game problems in various ways based on your role definition (represented in-game as the character generation/advancement process). In more blunt terms, this translates as the ability to solve in-game quests and encounters in different ways that impose certain requirements on your character, be they skill/stat/perk/class checks or whatever else you can cook up, requirements that can be met through character building (the process of role definition).

It is also worth mentioning that you can have Sneak and Slay options, even in a Disco-like.

It is necessary to separate Sneak/Slay archetypal solution methods from the Speak solutions trying to masquerade as them. For example, passing an in-dialogue skillcheck that allows you to kill a character is not a proper implementation of Slay, because it is not accompanied by the corresponding dedicated gameplay mechanics. Yes, accompanying gameplay mechanics matter, because we are talking about games, not visual novels.

There is no reason not to have more, and not to implement more ways to be a sneaky kind of character, thereby accommodating Sneak and Slay playstyles as well.

Correct, so where are those implementations in Disco-likes? You can only judge games based on what they have, not on what they can potentially have. If a Disco-like game has proper and plentiful implementation of multiple S-S-S solution archetypes, then it won't be a Disco-like anymore, it will be a proper RPG, because Disco-likes are pretty much interactive visual novels.

but you still can intimidate or beat up NPCs

Those are Speak solutions (intimidate) and Speak solutions masquerading as Slay (beat up, because it is not accompanied by dedicated gameplay mechanics that separate the archetypal solutions).

 

[sosmoflux]

Name ten Disco likes

 

[Modron]

Esoteric Ebb, Broken Roads, Sovereign Syndicate, Rue Valley, Hollow Home, Glass House, Ad Memoriam, Morriton Manor Stories: Nordic Whisper, Gamedec, and Necromancer's Tale (Some of these are actually more involved and have combat like Necromancer's Tale). Just listing ones not made by zaum related studios.

Not popular enough to spawn that many direct clones (besides Glasshouse) but there are other things Norco and maybe Let Bions be Bygones that took some inspiration.

 

[MjKorz]

Broken Roads

Broken Roads has combat, both as random encounters and as alternative quest solutions, if you want to go that way.

Necromancer's Tale

Confirmed to have combat.

 

[Modron]

Broken Roads has combat, both as random encounters and as alternative quest solutions, if you want to go that way.

DE was going to have combat and early artwork shows mockups of it, then they just gave up and turned it into an adventure game without puzzles.

 

[Harthwain]

Sandboxes also do not have the depth of narrative-driven games in terms of social roleplaying.

Neither do many cRPGs, because their focus is not there.

A game being "narrative-driven" is not a problem, the problem is the lack of C&C or alternative quest solutions. Good RPGs like the recently released Colony Ship have plenty of alternative quest solutions using the entirety of the Sneak-Speak-Slay archetypal solution spectrum despite being "narrative-driven".

Being narrative-driven is the problem, because by its very nature of being entirely hand-crafted it limits what the player can do and how much content creators can make. System-based games don't have that problem, but we don't have many systemic games that play off their own mechanics.

Being biased towards a certain archetypal solution method is not the same as lack of other archetypal solution methods outright.

That's technically true, but it depends on the level of bias.

There is no RPG where every quest presents you with a plethora of alternative solutions for every possible permutation of S-S-S, roleplaying depth in CRPGs (as in Computer RPGs) is always finite, but it doesn't mean it cannot accommodate the entire spectrum of solution archetypes over the entirety of the game in general (not over every single quest).

It is finite, because people are too focused on creating everything by hand, rather than coming up with a system to handle "every possible permutation of S-S-S". That's precisely the problem. Especially in a genre that is supposed to thrive on player's freedom and creativity.

I don't care about "most" or "some", I care about "good".

It is not the matter of opinion. It's the matter of public record.

It is necessary to separate Sneak/Slay archetypal solution methods from the Speak solutions trying to masquerade as them. For example, passing an in-dialogue skillcheck that allows you to kill a character is not a proper implementation of Slay, because it is not accompanied by the corresponding dedicated gameplay mechanics. Yes, accompanying gameplay mechanics matter, because we are talking about games, not visual novels.

Actually, we're talking about RPGs here. PnP RPGs don't have "corresponding dedicated gameplay mechanics". It is always simply "My character does X" and a roll the dice (modified by equipment, etc.). Which is pretty much what you do in Disco Elysium also. So, yeah, I am not buying this argument. Especially considering that Disco Elysium is so close to Planescape: Torment in pretty much everything (including the presentation) and the only thing that sets them apart is [the lack of] shitty combat.

Correct, so where are those implementations in Disco-likes?

I have no idea. I have yet to play any Disco-like. Esoteric Ebb is very likely to be it as it seems to understand better what made Disco Elysium "click".

 

[Hydro]

I’d rather a game to succeed in one thing like narrative, than having a shitty combat just so that some spergs could call it a RPG.

 

[MjKorz]

Being narrative-driven is the problem, because by its very nature of being entirely hand-crafted it limits what the player can do and how much content creators can make. System-based games don't have that problem, but we don't have many systemic games that play off its own mechanics.

First of all, roleplaying depth is always limited in RPGs so it doesn't matter if the game is narrative-driven or a sandbox: you're still going to be limited in terms of what you can do relative to tabletop. A game being narrative-driven allows for better NPC/companion characterization and thus more complex social roleplaying. I haven't seen any RPGs that have AI-driven content generation capable of providing anything even close to the level of social roleplaying that exists in handcrafted games, so even if your "system-based" games can generate more content to interact with, it won't necessarily make them better RPGs. Moreover, since the quality of roleplaying opportunities generated in your "system-based" games cannot compare with handcrafted scenarios, then these "system-based" games you're proposing are limited as well, except in a different fashion.

It is finite, because people are too focused on creating everything by hand, rather than coming up with a system to handle "every possible permutation of S-S-S". That's precisely the problem. Especially in a genre that is supposed to thrive on player's freedom and creativity.

I don't know any "system-based" games that have roleplaying depth anywhere near hand-crafted RPGs. Can you provide examples? Sure, you can generate more situations to roleplay in, but I doubt they will be of the same complexity and/or quality as the hand-crafted ones.

Actually, we're talking about RPGs here.

No, we are literally talking about CRPGs. All examples presented and discussed are CRPGs.

PnP RPGs don't have "corresponding dedicated gameplay mechanics".

That is way too broad of a statement. Some PnP RPGs actually do have dedicated mechanics for speech, combat and stealth. I don't think I need to explain that PnP RPGs have dedicated mechanics for combat with DnD being the most obvious example. For dedicated Stealth mechanics, I can name World of Darkness as an example which has a set of rules designed specifically to cover sneaking:

1. If a character tries to sneak without being observed, they make a Dexterity + Stealth skill + equipment roll.
2. When trying to remain unseen in a crowd, you roll Wits + Stealth skill.
3. When a character tries to shadow another character, they have to make contested rolls against the target's Wits + Composure.

And of course for every degree of success or failure (dramatic/exceptional), you get uniquely defined results.

So no, your broad statement is wrong. PnP RPGs do have different gameplay mechanics that correspond to different archetypal solutions, but not all PnP RPGs. PnP RPGs are not CRPGs, though, so the comparison is meaningless.

It is always simply "My character does X" and a roll the dice (modified by equipment, etc.).

This doesn't mean that the same mechanics will be used to resolve an action. PnP RPGs can have different mechanics for each of the archetypal solutions, but as I've already said - the comparison is meaningless, because we're talking about CRPGs.

Especially considering that Disco Elysium is so close to Planescape: Torment

No, it isn't, it's nowhere near close, because PST allows you to solve a shitload of situations through sheer violence and there's pickpocketing outside of dialogue as well.

the only thing that sets them apart is [the lack of] shitty combat.

No, what sets them apart is the lack of two whole archetypal solutions in DE, which is why PST is a RPG and DE is a dogshit visual novel.

 

[Harthwain]

First of all, roleplaying depth is always limited in RPGs so it doesn't matter if the game is narrative-driven or a sandbox: you're still going to be limited in terms of what you can do relative to tabletop. A game being narrative-driven allows for better NPC/companion characterization and thus more complex social roleplaying.

Icewind Dale 1 doesn't have companion characterization, despite the game being narrative driven and there isn't "complex social roleplaying" in it either (unless you count an extra line of dialogue if you have a specific class/stat/alignment, but I wouldn't call that "complex").

Baldur's Gate 2: Shadows of Amn is really dumb in this way in particular, because you can create a main character who is a half-Orc with 1 INT and the game won't acknowledge that in any way.

I haven't seen any RPGs that have AI-driven content generation capable of providing anything even close to the level of social roleplaying that exists in handcrafted games, so even if your "system-based" games can generate more content to interact with, it won't necessarily make them better RPGs. Moreover, since the quality of roleplaying opportunities generated in your "system-based" games cannot compare with handcrafted scenarios, then these "system-based" games you're proposing are limited as well, except in a different fashion.

The reason system-based games are better RPGs is because they offer options that aren't scripted (meaning they aren't limited only to things that developers came up with) and tend to resonate with other mechanics (think about freezing a puddle of water, or calling down rain to put out a fire).

I don't know any "system-based" games that have roleplaying depth anywhere near hand-crafted RPGs. Can you provide examples? Sure, you can generate more situations to roleplay in, but I doubt they will be of the same complexity and/or quality as the hand-crafted ones.

Streets of Rogue is a good starting point. NEO Scavenger and Starsector are both lite on RPG elements, but are also good examples of systemic games that should be more common than they are.

No, we are literally talking about CRPGs. All examples presented and discussed are CRPGs.

Both PnP RPGs and cRPGs are RPGs. Some cRPGs are even based on PnP RPGs.

That is way too broad of a statement. Some PnP RPGs actually do have dedicated mechanics for speech, combat and stealth. I don't think I need to explain that PnP RPGs have dedicated mechanics for combat with DnD being the most obvious example. For dedicated Stealth mechanics, I can name World of Darkness as an example which has a set of rules designed specifically to cover sneaking:

1. If a character tries to sneak without being observed, they make a Dexterity + Stealth skill + equipment roll.
2. When trying to remain unseen in a crowd, you roll Wits + Stealth skill.
3. When a character tries to shadow another character, they have to make contested rolls against the target's Wits + Composure.

And of course for every degree of success or failure (dramatic/exceptional), you get uniquely defined results.

[...]

You're pretty much confirming here what I said earlier.

This doesn't mean that the same mechanics will be used to resolve an action. PnP RPGs can have different mechanics for each of the archetypal solutions [...]

Using "Dexterity + Stealth", "Wits + Stealth" and "Wits + Composure" doesn't change the fact all of they rely on math and rolls, so trying to make it seem as if they are "different mechanics" is a ridiculous excuse.

No, it isn't, it's nowhere near close, because PST allows you to solve a shitload of situations through sheer violence and there's pickpocketing outside of dialogue as well.

It doesn't really matter whether pickpocketing is done via dialogue or outside of it. At the end of the day you're still pickpocketing.

No, what sets them apart is the lack of two whole archetypal solutions in DE, which is why PST is a RPG and DE is a dogshit visual novel.

Apparently what makes an RPG is not having RPG mechanics (such as stats defining what you can do), but shitty combat and shitty pickpocketing done as separate "mechanics". Neither for which the game is renowned for as an RPG.