Interview Josh Sawyer Interview on IGN Unfiltered

[vonAchdorf]

I think he doesn’t try to make the games boring but maybe in his view he is trying to make them equally fun; if each character class is equally viable to be useful maybe then they all are fun to play?
I don’t think he deliberately seeks to make things boring

That's MMO thinking, which ultimately reduces each class to a DPS number.

 

[Bohrain]

Josh just doesn't understand that the aim for balancing in single player games should only be making as many options viable to some extend without making something so broken early on that it trivializes a sizeable amount of content. Something being OP isn't necessarily bad if it happens later on so that it makes character progression feel fulfilling.

 

[Lady_Error]

He doesn’t get it how half of the fun in RPGs is looking for ways not of “breaking” the game per se but certainly getting an edge like an overpowered weapon, spell or strategy

You can get tons of those in Deadfire early on if you know where to look. So he learned his lesson at least to some degree.

 

[jdmatson]

Josh just doesn't understand that the aim for balancing in single player games should only be making as many options viable in some extend without making something broken early on that it trivializes a sizeable amount of content. Something being OP isn't necessarily bad if it happens later on so that it makes character progression feel fulfilling.

I'm even okay with something being OP early on for casuals as long as it doesn't wreck a certain playstyle. Like if there's a OP "thermonuclear blast" spell, there should be a very similar "fireblast" spell with a more balanced power level so that you can have the same style of gameplay with a normal character. But if there's no way to play for instance, a sniper without it being OP then I agree it should try to be balanced early on.

 

[Aim1ess]

I think he doesn’t try to make the games boring but maybe in his view he is trying to make them equally fun; if each character class is equally viable to be useful maybe then they all are fun to play?
I don’t think he deliberately seeks to make things boring

The overwhelming majority of players do not want to be able to make a character that can't succeed. Many would also feel shafted if they made a class that is harder to play the game with than another class. Many will basically give up what they want to play for what is optimal. Having characters, items, etc balanced is a way to alleviate that set of issues.

That being said, a lot of people will realize they weren't careful what they wished for when they said they wanted single player games balanced, as it creates it's own set of problems like losing the joy of discovering an OP item or skill combo.

 

[Dorateen]

So I cannot really understand this idea that "an RPG is an RPG only when you can create your character". This was never part of the definition of tabletop RPGs

Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Players Handbook, page 8. Chapter and verse.

"Each participant in the campaign created by the referee must create one or more game personas. The game personas of each participant is called the player character in order to differentiate it from personas created by the referee, called non-player characters."

E. Gary Gygax

 

[Chaotic_Heretic]

If I'm playing a premade character I just don't feel like its an RPG.

I don't really get this. I mean, maybe because my first contact with RPGs was tabletop games, it's not uncommon for you to have to use pre-made characters, or at least with severe limitations on backstory/race/appearance. The GM won't always have the patience to come up with miraculous explanations to fit your paladin/bard half-orc or whatever into the setting. The most common thing in my experience is that we have a general idea of the starting point of the campaign (for example, "you're all soldiers of an elite group of the kingdom X") and was our responsibility to create a story that fit the context of the adventure, and the GM obviously had the veto power. Sometimes I even got pre-made characters already planned for the adventure.

So I cannot really understand this idea that "an RPG is an RPG only when you can create your character". This was never part of the definition of tabletop RPGs, I don't see why it should be considered that way in CRPGs. Of course it's often interesting to be able to create your own character, but it is equally interesting to play characters that already have their own story and opinions. For me, those who feel the need to create their own characters aren't usually playing a character, but creating an avatar of themselves in the game and "interpreting" it.

You speak like a shill cuck.

You should have FULL CUSTOM PARTY CREATION in a crpg.

 

[Wunderbar]

For me example is ToME4 which has many classes, many of them obviously weak in terms of power, but almost all somehow fun to play.

what is ToME4? Temple of Metal Evil?

 

[Archibald]

Tales of Maj'Eyal: https://te4.org/

 

[Excommunicator]

So I cannot really understand this idea that "an RPG is an RPG only when you can create your character". This was never part of the definition of tabletop RPGs, I don't see why it should be considered that way in CRPGs. Of course it's often interesting to be able to create your own character, but it is equally interesting to play characters that already have their own story and opinions. For me, those who feel the need to create their own characters aren't usually playing a character, but creating an avatar of themselves in the game and "interpreting" it.

The point is not so much about premade characters (plural) it's that you're given a premade character without any alternatives. It's a good way to alienate anyone who doesn't like or relate to your character and puts the game at an immediate disadvantage when it comes to offering a breadth of choice to players.

Offering multiple premade characters is an acceptable remedy to this, custom made characters are still the ideal. Even better to offer both

 

[Tim the Bore]

So I cannot really understand this idea that "an RPG is an RPG only when you can create your character". This was never part of the definition of tabletop RPGs, I don't see why it should be considered that way in CRPGs.

I think there is a difference beetwen characters with established events that created their personality vs characters with established opinions of these events. For example, in Mass Effect, Shepard already has very strong opinion about pretty much everything that s/he saw, so it's more of a simulator of his/hers life, but not much of an RPG. Not only his goals, but also his feeling about them are already set in stone. But player character in, say, Baldur's Gate, while being strongly shaped by the enviroment in which s/he was raised (Candlekeep, being an orphan), will not have an opinion of it, untill you, as the player, won't tell him to have one. Or her, whatever. You have to be able to participate in a process of making character whom you gonna play.

For me, those who feel the need to create their own characters aren't usually playing a character, but creating an avatar of themselves in the game and "interpreting" it.

Don't worry, it will pass once you grow up. You'll get bored with yourself.

inb4 bad spelling - I'm barely literate, I can be a moron.

 

[luj1]

RPG Design Guru Josh Sawyer

 

[Diggfinger]

Great interview from Josh, hopefully we'll know soon what (tactical?) title he will be working on. He seems to imply it could be a smaller scale (tactical????) game.

Anyhoot, hope that 2nd Pillars thing is a success so we can start seeing 1st person PoE (in the GameBryo engine).

 

[Fenix]

I guess it is a joke right?

 

[Lexx]

In style of Bloodlines? I'd play that.

 

[Paul_cz]

RPG Design Guru Josh Sawyer

Is that bud dwyer? Poor guy