Incline What can be done about excessive loot?

[Gangrelrumbler]

The best way is converting shitloot into money instantly like in that silly Bard's Tale reboot seems to be the best way. All the other solutions just seem to introduce more busywork:
Loot isn't worth much -> It's still a waste not to sell it
Loot weights a ton -> The best thing to do is to just make several trips to sell it in the stores
Inventory Tetris -> Just make several trips
Merchants don't have the money -> Hoard it in your house/base until you find the ones that do
Realistically items should disappear after you leave them to return alter as locals would steal them -> Then players should realistically be able to get a cart and hirem people to loot the battlefield for him

It might seem like dubming-down the game but it's not dumbing-down if you're removing a part that doesn't require any thinking.

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

Limited mobs and limited cash the store owners have.

Item deterioration and durability.

In no time they'll be nude and weaponless..... and THEY'LL LEARN TO LOVE IT!!

 

[Norfleet]

Second, once you find/craft some uber consumable (say supersoldier drug in Underrail), seeing how powerful the buff is you probably don't want to use it during the first random mobs you encounter. Logic should tell you that if shit's powerful/rare, you should keep it for really special occasion.

Right, but that's the situation that leads to "But I might need it later!" logic. Because yes, this is an arrow of instant vampire slaying, and yes, the current and expected boss right now is a vampire, but WHAT IF THERE ARE MORE? WHAT IF I NEED IT LATER?

D2 isn't a good example, as you don't have multitude of options with potions, basically mana and health ones. See second point - I'm not for hoarding every bottle of whatever that you can buy/craft/loot, but only the most powerful ones, that you can expect that are limited and meant to be used in boss/huge battles.

Potions are potions. It doesn't really matter what exactly they do. What matters is whether my mentality is being pushed into hoarding mode. That's why you hoard stimpacks in Fallout, but not health potions in Diablo.

 

[laclongquan]

On the matter of different scale of potions, say light/normal/heavy/critical healing potions.

Let's discuss IWD2, a game that made great case of managing them to prevent excessive loot.

As a heavy and difficult combat game, Healing potions can get used often in combat due to casters dont have spare hands to cast healing spell incombat. Thus in early game, light healing potions do get used. But in late game stage where character level up and a light one recover maybe 1/10 of total HP per gulp, it become untimely to use them. So heavy and critical healing potions get used more, despite being waaaaaay expensive than light healing potions. The hoarded light potion stack now become trade goods to be sold.

So right before a major battle, characters' inventory only have some crit heal potions, and maybe some unsold light ones. This deal with the excessive loot problem well, even with the presence of potion case.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

The best way is converting shitloot into money instantly like in that silly Bard's Tale reboot seems to be the best way. All the other solutions just seem to introduce more busywork:
Loot isn't worth much -> It's still a waste not to sell it
Loot weights a ton -> The best thing to do is to just make several trips to sell it in the stores
Inventory Tetris -> Just make several trips
Merchants don't have the money -> Hoard it in your house/base until you find the ones that do
Realistically items should disappear after you leave them to return alter as locals would steal them -> Then players should realistically be able to get a cart and hirem people to loot the battlefield for him

A simple method to discourage excessive looting is to avoid having any means of selling the items (or of storing items separately from character inventory), meaning the only choice the player is concerned with is whether to immediately place a piece of loot into the inventory of the player-character(s), which will add to the character's encumbrance, while the amount of items in inventory is limited by volume/spaces. Before long, the player will be glad to deposit less valuable items on the ground and never look back.

 

[Not.AI]

Limited mobs and limited cash the store owners have.

Item deterioration and durability.

In no time they'll be nude and weaponless..... and THEY'LL LEARN TO LOVE IT!!

Feature: Clothes degrade over time.

Even if not damaged, just over time.

As in maybe the PC needs to wash them every day and night cycle. In the same way the PC needs to not forget to eat.

When their durability reaches 0, they are marked Broken and unequipped.

To be consistent with how armor is treated. Games should be consistent, it's important.

 

[Norfleet]

A simple method to discourage excessive looting is to avoid having any means of selling the items (or of storing items separately from character inventory), meaning the only choice the player is concerned with is whether to immediately place a piece of loot into the inventory of the player-character(s), which will add to the character's encumbrance, while the amount of items in inventory is limited by volume/spaces. Before long, the player will be glad to deposit less valuable items on the ground and never look back.

That only makes sense in a game where the player is not expected to ever interact with a friendly civilization, like a game that entirely occurs inside of a single dungeon or a wilderness. Not so much if the player ever goes into a town, where it would be unrealistic that nobody is willing to trade for anything.

 

[laclongquan]

I can tell you a counter example in Unreal World.

Unreal World has limited inventory (carryweight) so if you want to hoard you generally put it into a pile for ease of searching (stand on it and scroll the arrow button). You can sort several piles if you want but that's the main thing. You also cant trade much away because very limited shops (in one immediate neighborhood) and tradegoods to buy or sell.

Problem is, by 12 months later, if you survive you generally have a massive hoard of tools, weapons, clothes, foods, animal skins etc... Anything you can name it~ Excessive hoarding is the name of the game in 2 year later. You cant buy any more~ You cant sell any more.

The key problems we can identify:
- Food consumption is not enough. They tried to do realistic but when the number approach realistic they... dare not follow that mark~ Too high.
- Crop production is way too high. A return of 12 or higher, aka one pound of seeds planted can get 12+ pounds of crops. You know that's modern number with super fertilizers coming in, not stone age~ This come from not enough small vermins eating crops and sudden rain waste the plants.

They can be condensed into one sentence: game is not hard enough.

Though I can certainly understand why the dev dares not push thing realistic: damn game is hard enough for the current crowd, which do contain most hardcore players. Push it realistic and nobody dare play it~

 

[Butter]

A simple method to discourage excessive looting is to avoid having any means of selling the items (or of storing items separately from character inventory), meaning the only choice the player is concerned with is whether to immediately place a piece of loot into the inventory of the player-character(s), which will add to the character's encumbrance, while the amount of items in inventory is limited by volume/spaces. Before long, the player will be glad to deposit less valuable items on the ground and never look back.

Deus Ex lets you buy items, but never sell them. An interesting design choice that, as far as I'm aware, has never bothered anyone.

 

[SharkClub]

A simple method to discourage excessive looting is to avoid having any means of selling the items (or of storing items separately from character inventory), meaning the only choice the player is concerned with is whether to immediately place a piece of loot into the inventory of the player-character(s), which will add to the character's encumbrance, while the amount of items in inventory is limited by volume/spaces. Before long, the player will be glad to deposit less valuable items on the ground and never look back.

Deus Ex lets you buy items, but never sell them. An interesting design choice that, as far as I'm aware, has never bothered anyone.

Not true! You can become a drug baron and sell Zyme in Paris!

 

[Lhynn]

If Im mowing down an army worth of enemies, I should have the financial resources to maintain an army, if that makes the economy entirely worthless, then so be it, who gives a shit?
Money sinks can always be a thing, and they arent exactly hard to implement. Enchanting weapons and armor could be expensive, and those hundreds of swords and armors you sold could barely be enough to cover a mild enchantment. Or you could buy lands and noble titles, or bribe some enemies to change the outcome of quests, etc.

End of the day, when you take decisions based on the world being coherent, like full loot, and they bring problems, they also bring reasonable and coherent solutions to those problems as a possibility, which improves the experience.

 

[Arulan]

Abstraction is the simple answer to cut down on excessive quantities of loot. We already commonly abstract numerous other aspects of the world simulation, from combat, dialogue, and various other interactions. Why not which items we deem important as well? You could even rationalize it in-game by a brief description of what you see vs. what's worth taking (e.g. The fallen ranger's wounds soak through his vestments. The soles of his boots barely held together. Something does catch your eye... [Nobleman's Dagger]). Perhaps even social or religious reasoning for not looting corpses.

That's not to say that having every physical item represented as loot is incorrect either, but it does bring a lot more challenges with player behavior. Limiting inventory capacity to the point where it becomes tedious might be a deterrent for some players, but some players will always opt for any advantage they can get, even if it's the most dull experience possible.

I'm reminded of a conversation I've had with a friend. They chose to lookup where to find some of the best weapons and armor in Morrowind, right from the start. Morrowind is an open-world and gives a lot of freedom to the player. If you happen to know (in this case from meta knowledge) where a very powerful item was in the game and you took it, should the game prevent this from being possible? I don't think so. An alternative where the game has to carefully balance every possible acquisition (of items) to when it determines is the most appropriate time is not enjoyable. You should be allowed the joy of exploration and finding unique and powerful items on your own. What can be done about the scummy behavior then? I don't know, perhaps nothing at all. Even if said item were guarded in a shopkeeper's display, players can save scum to avoid the risks of being caught. Should reloading be removed as well? I'm also not saying that design shouldn't encourage or discourage certain behaviors, but there comes a point where actually preventing it comes at the detriment to the players not engaging in this at all.

 

[FriendlyMerchant]

I think the solution is to have realistic carry weight, the requirement for supplies and tools to camp/travel/etc. as well as punishments for having deficits, the need for donkeys/horses/oxen and carts to carry more loot, weapon/item durability, and an extensive economic system with legal usury.

 

[Ladonna]

Just have ever higher training costs for leveling. Then you will be looking at those healing potions and wondering if you should keep it, or sell it to get hold of enough money to go up a level.

Worked pretty well in Pool of Radiance (until the inevitable DnD/Goldbox money mountains kick in later, but then even PoR didn't have scaling costs for training).

 

[Not.AI]

Just have ever higher training costs for leveling. Then you will be looking at those healing potions and wondering if you should keep it, or sell it to get hold of enough money to go up a level.

This is basically how it worked out in Gothic 1 / 2, unless you found all the hidden treasure. Ditto for the Call of Chernobyl / Clear Sky / Call of Pripyat games where there was always really cool stuff the player wanted to buy but was super expensive.

Worked well, true.

Question though is can we trust the modern big team (as opposed to one lead guy) to coherently manage the ingame economy? Probably not, that's the problem in the first place. Either they price random stuff too high and the game is a grind, or they underprice it.

 

[Not.AI]

donkeys/horses/oxen and carts to carry more loot

Would be nice if more games gave the option...so far it's just Geralt's horse...and before that...the big pack lizard that follows the player around in Morrowind.

 

[SiegfriedsTod]

You're never gonna find a method that pleases everyone.
Me myself I loath farting around playing inventory tetris but other people like it, Good on them.
Realism is something I also think detracts from gameplay, but others enjoy it.
I subscribe to the 'if the person had it, let me take it school' In a world or magic/sci-fi why could there not be bags of holding/tardis's

 

[Lhynn]

I think the solution is to have realistic carry weight, the requirement for supplies and tools to camp/travel/etc. as well as punishments for having deficits, the need for donkeys/horses/oxen and carts to carry more loot, weapon/item durability, and an extensive economic system with legal usury.

All that shit could be worth it in some rpgs, but not in others. Depends on the themes you are trying to push.

What I do know is that if I kill a dude I want his sword and maybe his shoes, if they are nice.

 

[FriendlyMerchant]

I think the solution is to have realistic carry weight, the requirement for supplies and tools to camp/travel/etc. as well as punishments for having deficits, the need for donkeys/horses/oxen and carts to carry more loot, weapon/item durability, and an extensive economic system with legal usury.

All that shit could be worth it in some rpgs, but not in others. Depends on the themes you are trying to push.

What I do know is that if I kill a dude I want his sword and maybe his shoes, if they are nice.

It's desirable in all rpgs. Part of roleplaying is dealing with the necessities of adventuring.

 

[copebot]

Abstracting away logistics and making game worlds too small creates this problem. The real world is really, really big. Useful things, especially weapons and armor, break down very easily. Horses and other draft animals are such hungry bastards that it almost beggars belief if you aren't familiar with their requirements. Most food spoils very quickly. You can see this for yourself using bladed tools like axes or things like chainsaws. Without GPS or even maps (maps being an artifact of the early modern era) it is also very easy to get lost. Outside of the late medieval or early modern eras, the cash economy also tends to be tenuous to nonexistent. Taking away magic spell components also tends to add to the loot spam problem. So, a lot of the problems have crept in to a more serious degree because of "quality of life" features added in to both P&P and CRPG genres. Logistical challenges can make for fun gameplay: it's what Oregon Trail was built around, for example. At a smaller and more abstracted scale, Darkest Dungeon (haven't played the second) does this well in a limited fashion.

A more modern era RPG is going to have different issues, but the typical RPG setting is supposed to be from a more archaic time.

 

[Victor1234]

Logistical challenges can make for fun gameplay: it's what Oregon Trail was built around, for example.

 

[Lhynn]

I think the solution is to have realistic carry weight, the requirement for supplies and tools to camp/travel/etc. as well as punishments for having deficits, the need for donkeys/horses/oxen and carts to carry more loot, weapon/item durability, and an extensive economic system with legal usury.

All that shit could be worth it in some rpgs, but not in others. Depends on the themes you are trying to push.

What I do know is that if I kill a dude I want his sword and maybe his shoes, if they are nice.

It's desirable in all rpgs. Part of roleplaying is dealing with the necessities of adventuring.

Not all rpgs are about adventuring, and not in all rpgs about adventuring does it make sense to have merchants readily available. And not in all rpgs about adventuring with an economy does it make sense to do weapon/armor durability, or an extensive economic system.

 

[copebot]

I think the solution is to have realistic carry weight, the requirement for supplies and tools to camp/travel/etc. as well as punishments for having deficits, the need for donkeys/horses/oxen and carts to carry more loot, weapon/item durability, and an extensive economic system with legal usury.

All that shit could be worth it in some rpgs, but not in others. Depends on the themes you are trying to push.

What I do know is that if I kill a dude I want his sword and maybe his shoes, if they are nice.

It's desirable in all rpgs. Part of roleplaying is dealing with the necessities of adventuring.

Not all rpgs are about adventuring, and not in all rpgs about adventuring does it make sense to have merchants readily available. And not in all rpgs about adventuring with an economy does it make sense to do weapon/armor durability, or an extensive economic system.

The existence of "always-on" retail merchants is an early modern phenomenon. Even in the current era, only a small number of specialized merchants will purchase heavily used and damaged merchandise. Those that do buy it at a steep discount, especially if the products have an unknown provenance.

So, not to pick on Skyrim, but the existence of a town full of shops that are open seven days a week to the general public during 9-5 working hours is not an 800 AD phenomenon, and not even really a 1550 AD phenomenon, but is more of a 19th-20th century phenomenon. Before the industrial era, there just was not a mass population of urban and semi-urban consumers that could support such enterprises. Retail was mostly limited to market days and direct transactions. Most people, most of the time, were working hard to coax highly perishable and difficult to transport food out of the earth during a pre-electric-refrigeration time. What was always-on and everyday in cities was craft production.

An issue with the concept of an adventurer is that if you make the setting TOO modern (which is what a lot of them do) it makes no sense for there to be adventurers because there is nothing to adventure to, and institutions are so developed that it makes no sense that local notables would need to rely on itinerant wilderness violence specialists.

 

[FriendlyMerchant]

Not all rpgs are about adventuring,

Yet you should have necessities associated with running a shop or something else along those lines or the expenses/physiological requirements/etc. during downtime/between scenarios.

and not in all rpgs about adventuring does it make sense to have merchants readily available.

Of course a merchant is not available in a dungeon in the wilderness but the merchant was available before that and you should be expected to gather the supplies necessary to ensure you can feed yourself or to have adequate resources to make it through the dungeon and then back to the town.

And not in all rpgs about adventuring with an economy does it make sense to do weapon/armor durability,

No. It always makes sense to have weapon/armor durability. Your sword gets blunt and chipped if you hit things that are too hard or use it improperly which may need sharpening or repair after a while and weapons can break so it's always good to have backups. Armor can get holds and dents in it which can weaken its integrity or straps can get cut so you might need to have some spare pieces and tools to do some minor field repairs. Also, a broken weapon would justify taking a weapon in fairly good condition from a dead enemy and using that instead making all that extra useless loot now have a potential purpose other than selling for a minor amount of currency. Resource management is a necessity for roleplaying and armor&weapon durability is just a form of resource management. It should be there in all rpgs just like the need for rations, water, etc.

or an extensive economic system.

Part of roleplaying is dealing with the things that would happen in the world like the increased prices from a supply shortage or wait times for services like armor/weapon repairs during wartime.

 

[Victor1234]

If you want to get super specific, even lots of merchants that are in a fixed single place are a modern phenomenon. Market days were days that the roving band of merchants (and other wanderers like troupes of actors) would appear at a place before moving on to the next market town in the circuit. So for Skyrim trading to make sense, you'd have to figure out which are the market towns/stops in the circuit (wouldn't be every town), what the market day for each town is (Wednesday for X, Thursday for Y, etc) and show up at the right time and place to catch anything more than the single local merchant.