Temple of The Roguelike Forums
Development => Programming => Topic started by: Endorya on July 20, 2013, 12:08:27 PM
-
Ahhh... Elves, trolls, dwarves, halflings, orcs, trolls, humans,... Whenever I'm about to choose my main charater's race from the extensive list of races available, I know I will end up being either a human or an Elf. For some reason I simply can't stand the idea of having my character reincarnate as a dwarf, halfling or a dumb troll. Unless there are other new races worth exploring like an Elemental, Beastlord or Drake, this is how it usually ends, me being an Elf or a Human.
I fully understand that having such "common" races in a game might be a good thing because people are already familiar with them and may be specially attached to some. These common races usually share the same strengths and weaknesses allowing players to quickly foreseen the expected game play. A dwarf usually excels in fortitude and stamina while an elf will mostly certainly have magic bonuses making it a strong candidate to become a great wizard.
Then you have roles. Certain roles will be only available to certain races, which I guess it makes sense. Having "The Great Troll wizard" or the "Champion Halfling Gladiator" would sound an utter non-sense. But this however does restricts possibilities, which is something I'm usually not fond of. Having to choose roles itself at the beginning of the game feels already castrating, not to mention you will have to try each race with each role until its outcome will be something you might appreciate or that may suit your gaming style.
Races and roles can also be a decisive factor to enjoy or letting someone getting into the game. I hated when I first played ADOM because I choose a race and role with a poor outcome. That combination didn't let me to perceive ADOM's game play as expect.
The Elder's Scrolls have the concept I like most for character generation. You do choose a race and possibly a role or you can create a role of your own and even if you create your own role, the character won't be limited to those skills you have chosen, you will still be able to train whatever you want throughout the whole playing without restriction whatsoever, though you won't become good at every field of course. But there is something I really hate even in skyrim. Something that affects a huge stack of games, which is failing miserably on not telling the player what exactly will be those bonuses / penalties they mention regarding that particular race the player is viewing information about. Lets have a look at this example in Skyrim:
The High Elves, also commonly known as Altmer, are a race of Elves which reside in the region of Tamriel. The High Elves, or Altmer try their utmost to follow their ancestors which are the Aldmer in as many ways as possible, namely though, through traditions involving Marriage and Reproduction. (...)
Altmer/High Elves are, on average smaller than humans in body size, which means that in general they are not as strong. Being very tall creatures, this makes them less Agile than the Bosmer, and therefore more vulnerable. Altmer are among the most intelligent and magically skilled races within Nirn, which surpass even the Bretons in magical ability. (...)
Ok, so we can conclude the High Elves are good with magic but what is good with magic? What exactly are their bonuses? I need numbers and I need to see what is considered average so that even if they show those numbers players can understand what the magnitude of the bonuses they refer about.
Anyway...
What do you prefer? Races with or without established roles?
Having or not common races? Do you prefer to have races you never heard before or keep playing with traditional ones?
-
I fully understand that having such "common" races in a game might be a good thing because people are already familiar with them and may be specially attached to some.
This is a weakness, not a strength. You can put literally anything into your supernatural/fantastic setting, so why do the exact same thing as everyone else? The best dwarves and elves are the ones people really believed in - frightening aliens with incomprehensible motives.
They're mechanically worthless too. A good rule of thumb for game design is that you should include exactly as many rules as you need and no more. Race and class do the same thing, so you're adding another layer of complexity without a meaningful increase in depth. Like, if elf wizards and dwarf fighters are good, but not the reverse, all you've gained by adding races is a few trap options. Why not have one race that's good at everything instead?
-
Races shouldn't be too much more than novelty. They shouldn't alter the paradigm from which you play the game. For example, if you want to fully experience the magical system, you shouldn't be compelled by the mechanics of the game to be a gnome so that you aren't missing content.
What happens here, with races and classes, is that the player's ability to explore certain content is heavily confined. it's better to allow classes to emerge from a composition of skills and items. If a player wants to learn a bit of magic, he should be able to- and it shouldn't be ineffectual just because he's not a 'pure caster.' Games can get pretty stupid with how they make distinctions between classes. Every character should be able to at least learn how to do things.
As for races, I think that our idea of what classes are is a disease. An animistic shaman may be more like a wizard than a priest, and there is no reason why a Troll Shaman may be less powerful or interesting to play than a wizard or a priest. It's important to rationalize how magic works in your world-- are their multiple sources of magical energy? If so-- everyone should have a near equal opportunity to tap that magic in some way that is meaningful to that character.
Lastly, the worst thing you can do is set ANY arbitrary restrictions on the usage of items found within the game. Everyone should, to some degree, find some degree of usefulness with any piece of equipment they find.
-
I really liked IVAN's system. You're just a guy, and you get better at what you use. This goes from combat types (swords, maces, spears, etc) to specific weapons you've used for a while, and other skills too.
That said, I don't see anything wrong with having races being better at certain things than others. I'll agree with everyone else on classes though: they are mostly useless. They should be, at most, a preliminary startup skillset.
In the limit, races could also be randomly generated - I've seen a few interesting proposals in this forum :)
-
Thank you all for the replies!
I'm planning to leave every skill or profession unlocked so the player can decide what to train at any given time; I'm definitely following up Skyrim's path towards skill progression and availability. I'm also planning having factions instead of races. I'm studying a method (on second thread in my mind) to generate them dynamically, attached to the terraforming seed which breeds the whole planet.
The output should be having factions favoring different types of life styles. Some factions might favor melee, others might favor ranged or hunting, crafting, trading or even magic.
What do you think about this and what suggestions / ideas would or could you share with me?
-
I'm of 2 minds on this. If you create a nice deep system where all classes can be fun, that's great. They don't need to be balanced, some can be harder. You can label them as 'advanced'.
It's hard to make that sort of system though, but it's fun. D&D I played as a kid, Red Box, had races that WERE classes. So there was Fighter, Cleric, Thief and Magic User as well as Elf, Halfling and Dwarf. Race = Class, so 7 classes. Pretty fun.
Then there is the way that Brogue does it. You start as a blank slate and the gear you find determines your abilities. It's entirely gear based. You don't even level in Brogue anymore.
-
Balance is still important in single player and cooperative games. The main thing to be aware of is that single player/co-op balance isn't necessarily the same thing as good competitive multiplayer balance. Advanced classes can be good, but personally, I prefer the ones that offer great rewards for those who master them over gimp classes. If you've ever played DoDonPachi Daioujou, its expert-type ships are a good example of what I'm talking about.
Many modern developers seem to think that balancing is the same as homogenization, and that leads to boring games. Ideally, every class should be capable of completing the game and feel powerful in its own way while also being clearly distinct from the other classes. You know you've done your job well when every class makes you feel confident that you made the right choice, but at the same time you find yourself wishing you had some other class's advantages too.
This applies to races as well. Mechanically, race and class are the exact same thing.
-
Then you have roles. Certain roles will be only available to certain races, which I guess it makes sense. Having "The Great Troll wizard" or the "Champion Halfling Gladiator" would sound an utter non-sense.
On the other hand, it could indicate that the character in question is truly exceptional. Maybe because they know their strengths (and weaknesses) and use them accordingly?
What do you prefer? Races with or without established roles?
Races without established roles. Race should modify how a character performs a certain role. A Troll warrior won't be doing gracious swordplay, while a troll mage probably won't go into the finer points of illusionism or mental manipulation. A troll rogue is probably going to be more of a thug than his sneaky halfling colleague.
-
On the other hand, it could indicate that the character in question is truly exceptional. Maybe because they know their strengths (and weaknesses) and use them accordingly
Well, it could happen, having an exceptional great troll wizard or a champion halfling gladiator. But they would only be considered exceptional among other trolls an halflings as they would need also to compete against other exceptional wizards and gladiators existing in other races, which would have, by far, a greater disposition to excel in such roles.
-
On the other hand, it could indicate that the character in question is truly exceptional. Maybe because they know their strengths (and weaknesses) and use them accordingly
Well, it could happen, having an exceptional great troll wizard or a champion halfling gladiator. But they would only be considered exceptional among other trolls an halflings as they would need also to compete against other exceptional wizards and gladiators existing in other races, which would have, by far, a greater disposition to excel in such roles.
That's so racist.
-
I liked what ADOM did with paladins. Instead of all paladins being Holy White Knight Champions of Virtue(tm), each race's paladins were champions of said race's natural alignment. So troll paladins were actually *supposed* to be evil!
-
That's so racist.
Totally!
-
Mechanically, race and class are the exact same thing.
Right. They give penalty or bonus in some attribute and helps you play a "role" that way. In raceless/classless system the gear determines the same thing, so it's not that different. I also like the "unbalanced" way to create classes and races, because it's effectively same as difficulty level and it makes the game more interesting since you get different kind of experience with each race and/or class.
-
Right. They give penalty or bonus in some attribute and helps you play a "role" that way. In raceless/classless system the gear determines the same thing, so it's not that different. I also like the "unbalanced" way to create classes and races, because it's effectively same as difficulty level and it makes the game more interesting since you get different kind of experience with each race and/or class.
That's in fact an interesting way to see it.
-
You can have other things depend on race & class too, like game beginning and ending, allies (based on the race).
-
You can have other things depend on race & class too, like game beginning and ending, allies (based on the race).
I'm going to replace races by factions. Nonetheless, the faction your character belongs to will define who is your ally and foe.
-
I had the idea of a 'prisoner' role, where you've just escaped from your cell somewhere deep in the dungeon with just a knife and have to work your way up (quite likely there is RL game based on this theme already).
Or an escaped convict, having everyone against you and having to hide and survive in the wilderness
-
Races do give a lot of the fantasy feel to a game - although I am personally more partial to a more nearly realistic or historical theme, which the system you are describing represents better. Still I find it harder to believe that "everyone from Kingdom X is better at archery from birth"... which is kind of what you are saying when certain skills level up faster for people from Kingdom X. Races give a slightly more realistic feel.
Though honestly it makes little to no difference ;)
-
In the original Dungeons and Dragons (at least I think it was original, I played it in the 1980s), the classes if I recall correctly were "fighter", "mage", "thief", and "dwarf", "elf", and "halfling". It wasn't possible to make endless combinations of race and class. Doing it that way rules out silly combinations like Dwarf wizards and Elf barbarians. You might find that something similar works fine for your game.
-
Races do give a lot of the fantasy feel to a game - although I am personally more partial to a more nearly realistic or historical theme, which the system you are describing represents better. Still I find it harder to believe that "everyone from Kingdom X is better at archery from birth"... which is kind of what you are saying when certain skills level up faster for people from Kingdom X. Races give a slightly more realistic feel.
Though honestly it makes little to no difference ;)
Historically, that isn't untrue though. There are many bow cultures who both genetically select for natural talent and require its usage as an adolescent (and typically as an adult as well).
-
Point taken :)
I guess another example is european swordfighting and japanese swordfighting, two styles of melee combat. It's still unclear to me whether this involves genetics or not though - are Japanese or Europeans more physically adapted to their style of swordfighting? Can we claim that a couple of dozens of generations of natural selection through warfare are enough to ensure an entire population becomes better at that type of fighting?
If not, then it simply comes down to culture and preference. In that case there's no reason to have inherent aptitudes or ineptitudes. You would simply use what is available, and therefore become proficient at that. Which leads us back to the notion that everyone starts the same, and you simply level things that you use, without regard to innate abilities.
Anyway, from a gameplay perspective I feel it makes sense to have some choice determining aptitudes towards certain skills. Conceptually, I feel race explains this better than a faction or a "class", which just an arbitrary restriction. Ultimately, what matters it the gameplay though, so the explanation is sort of moot :)
-
Point taken :)
I guess another example is european swordfighting and japanese swordfighting, two styles of melee combat. It's still unclear to me whether this involves genetics or not though - are Japanese or Europeans more physically adapted to their style of swordfighting? Can we claim that a couple of dozens of generations of natural selection through warfare are enough to ensure an entire population becomes better at that type of fighting?
If not, then it simply comes down to culture and preference. In that case there's no reason to have inherent aptitudes or ineptitudes. You would simply use what is available, and therefore become proficient at that. Which leads us back to the notion that everyone starts the same, and you simply level things that you use, without regard to innate abilities.
Disagreed for two reasons.
1. Just being in the presence of said culture increases your aptitude. You might've witnessed pugilist matches or lived next to a budokan temple as a child. Being the product of a culture necessarily exposes you to the concepts and intricacies valued in that society. Even the games you play as a child are preparing you for activities that that particular culture values (that's why games exist).
2. It's incredibly boring for a player to play through the entire existence of a single character. The culture they grow up in defines they're early experience and exposure to different things- this necessarily increases their aptitude. Genetics may play a larger role for survival elements (samoans are especially adapted to periods of famine and plenty, arabs for resistance to drought, africans to resist sunlight, and europeans for wearing clothing and high latitudes), but that's just a matter of categorization.
Say we divvy it up into intrinsic bonuses, aptitudes, and actual skills and experience.
Race defines our intrinsics.
Culture defines our aptitudes.
Lineage defines our skills.
With each crossing over into the other by varying orders of magnitude.
Anyway, from a gameplay perspective I feel it makes sense to have some choice determining aptitudes towards certain skills. Conceptually, I feel race explains this better than a faction or a "class", which just an arbitrary restriction. Ultimately, what matters it the gameplay though, so the explanation is sort of moot :)
It isn't moot if it plays an important part of the narrative.
-
Doing it that way rules out silly combinations like Dwarf wizards and Elf barbarians.
Neither of those combinations are silly at all unless you're approaching them from the incredibly limiting standards of modern mainstream fantasy.
The dwarves from Norse myths were totally into weird magic. Making amazing, powerful tools out of the sound of a cat's footsteps, and who knows what else. Elves/elf-analogues (nymphs, faeries, etc) were often considered frightening and dangerous monsters that should be appeased or avoided. What's strange about an embodiment of nature using an animalistic fighting style?
-
Doing it that way rules out silly combinations like Dwarf wizards and Elf barbarians.
Well, AD&D rules were originally meant for tabletop battles, not roleplaying. Hence they have extreme levels of abstraction in some places (combat, etc) to speed up gameplay.
I wouldn't call dwarf wizards and elf barbarians silly. Dwarf wizards might be more inclined toward earth and maybe fire elemental magics. Warriors of tribal, primitive, nature-dwelling elves might well be considered "barbarians" (but don't call'em that, or they'll make shishkabob out of you).
-
D+D was a naked ripoff of (or "homage to") Tolkein, with classes and races taken right out of the Lord of the Rings. In that context, allowing a player to play a dwarf wizard or elf barbarian would indeed be silly. I did not mean to imply that those combinations would not work in your game, only to suggest that the idea of having races as classes might be a valuable one for simplifying your players' choices and imposing some context to the choice. If any of your races can play any of your classes, then whatever backstory you create about the races is irrelevant. The race choice has no context and there's no real reason to have more than one race anyway.
-
I agree that having races just give bonuses to stats or skills is boring, but you can make races give other unique bonuses or penalties as well.
Crawl does this to some extent. As a few examples, they have snakemen who are resistant to poison but move slowly, vampires which feed on blood rather than food, a species of dwarves that can't heal naturally on their own but have high damage resistance, mummies which don't need to eat but can't use potions either, trolls who regenerate wounds quickly, but have to eat constantly or risk starving to death, etc.
The idea of having some enemies be friendly towards you based on your race/faction is interesting too.
-
I had the idea of a 'prisoner' role, where you've just escaped from your cell somewhere deep in the dungeon with just a knife and have to work your way up (quite likely there is RL game based on this theme already).
Or an escaped convict, having everyone against you and having to hide and survive in the wilderness
Somehow that reminds me of Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim.
There is a bunch of ideas that I'm building on how you, the main character, will start its adventure. That one is included!
-
Races do give a lot of the fantasy feel to a game - although I am personally more partial to a more nearly realistic or historical theme, which the system you are describing represents better. Still I find it harder to believe that "everyone from Kingdom X is better at archery from birth"... which is kind of what you are saying when certain skills level up faster for people from Kingdom X. Races give a slightly more realistic feel.
Though honestly it makes little to no difference ;)
What I meant was having factions specializing themselves in particular features. Though "anyone" in any faction can be a good archer, a particular faction could have discovered the best bow building technique or the best bow training method, making them particular good at shooting with a bow, on the other way, some other faction founded by a wizard, could have passed a higher magic level throughout its followers which were then passed down to these followers' descendents.
Taking history itself as an example, the Japanese forged the best sword and developed the best swordsmen the world as seen (Samurai). Many other types of soldiers such as the housecarl, mamluk or the english longbowmen, appeared only in a certain realm or region.
The faction the player will born in (which can be randomized or specified), will in fact slightly change its mental and physical attributes for obvious reasons. A faction dedicated to the use of blunt weapons will definitely possess a higher strength, the same way a faction dedicated to dexterity and calculation would possess a superior aptitude to breed better bowmen.
-
So are you looking to do something like this?
(Race <---> Culture ---> Locale ---> Parents <---> Apprenticeship) <---> (Events)
Race: Species, special traits, abilities, size, weight, sexual dimorphism, propensities (chance to 'be a natural' at something they've never tried before).
Culture: Highly valued skills are emphasized in education, games, and lifestyle.
Locale: A subset of culture, whereby special demands of the land and interactions with inhabitants further specify what sort of exposure an individual has to certain ideas.
Parents: A player is likely to be more exposed and knowledgeable about things that his/her parents specialize in.
Apprenticeship: The occupation that the player trains for throughout young adulthood.
Events: Special events that provide additional unique context to the origin story-- such as being cursed by a witch, inheriting an heirloom from a distant uncle, or being captured and tortured by goblins as a young child.
If you could describe your plans as a simple formula, how would you do it?
-
So are you looking to do something like this?
(Race <---> Culture ---> Locale ---> Parents <---> Apprenticeship) <---> (Events)
Race: Species, special traits, abilities, size, weight, sexual dimorphism, propensities (chance to 'be a natural' at something they've never tried before).
Culture: Highly valued skills are emphasized in education, games, and lifestyle.
Locale: A subset of culture, whereby special demands of the land and interactions with inhabitants further specify what sort of exposure an individual has to certain ideas.
Parents: A player is likely to be more exposed and knowledgeable about things that his/her parents specialize in.
Apprenticeship: The occupation that the player trains for throughout young adulthood.
Events: Special events that provide additional unique context to the origin story-- such as being cursed by a witch, inheriting an heirloom from a distant uncle, or being captured and tortured by goblins as a young child.
If you could describe your plans as a simple formula, how would you do it?
That's a rather nice approach! I think you basically said pretty much all that could be done. However, my approach would be a bit simpler. Since there are no races, the start point would be similar to every faction.
The formula should start with the following structure and order:
Locale » Culture » Parents » Apprenticeship » Events
I think the locale has more influence over the culture than the other way round. I mean, if you live in a forest you will build stories and games around that place; the forest will dictate the available resources and bind their crafting and life style accordingly.
The mentioned formula should start with the following structure and order:
1 - Generate the world
2 - Pick a random spot in the world
3 - Check selected spot for temperature, amount of wild life, conflict level etc...
4 - Build the culture around step 3 elements (with some level of randomness).
5 - Set parents: their alignment, wealth, social class and their profession
6 - Choose apprenticeship
7 - Apply events from a huge event library
8 - Apply all variables and settings to the player's character
I think this will be the way to go.