First a reply to pacman's comment about numbers being natural to humans: actually, numbers are used because they're natural to computers. When you deal with stats in CRPG's, you usually use all kinds of formulas that would choke on estimates. Even if you don't show the actual numbers, you still need to use them inside the code, of course.
On the other hand, numbers are frequently used in table-top RPG's as well because it's the easiest way to quantify things that aren't physical. We don't say one guy has 12 strength and the other has 25; we say the first is weak and the second is very strong. It's too difficult to qualify those kinds of things for a game system and keep it fair, so we quantify it instead.
Now, can an RPG without stats still be considered an RPG? Of course. The rule of CRPG's is simple: the player develops a character by guiding it. Most people think RPG means skill advancement or experience levels, but that's not true. You could just as easily lead your character to despair and self-destruction, and it would be role-playing. You don't need stats to play a role.
Anyway, I really like all these ideas about qualified instead of quantified attributes. I don't believe players would quantify all non-explicit values if you hid them well enough. People will see the levels as being quantitative, but they'll never express their skill using numbers. It's easier just to say, "I'm a complete badass with swords."
Edited by - Tom on June 21, 2000 12:43:46 AM
🎉 Celebrating 25 Years of GameDev.net! 🎉
Not many can claim 25 years on the Internet! Join us in celebrating this milestone. Learn more about our history, and thank you for being a part of our community!
What's with stats? (RPG)
I have to agree with Maitrek. (Long Post)
Roleplaying taken down to its lowest level is acting, and acting is the art of representing a character from a script in real life. Pen and paper roleplaying is almos the same thing, its acting out a character that you have made for yourself in a multitude of interesting situations. There are stats in this type of roleplaying but you can do as well without them, and you can have more fun too. And this last form of roleplaying is what an RPG is based upon.
My opinion is that you can do just as well hiding all the stats from the player in an RPG. I mean remember when you were little kids, going into places that you shouldn''t have been, remember the thrill? This was because you didn''t know if you were going to be caught or not, and that was an adventure. Just like and RPG. And somehow I find going into a cave not knowing if I would be able to make it more thrilling than going into a cave with a clear knowledge that "I''m gonna kick some arse". Sure that last statement might be fun at first, but that''s what I play Quake and Doom for! Its the thrill and excitement of seeing another world that makes me paly RPG''s. It''s an escape for me, and if I go into an RPG and see numbers then that reminds me of real life, and I get slightly depressed.
The way that I see of resolving this is to make the internal variables of the RPG, internal. (Gee what a novel idea?). Then you can show the most important aspects of the palyers status to them in terms of their character (3rd Person), like for health the amount of cuts scratches bruises and so forth on their body, for energy or stamina the speed at which they walk, puffing, and drooping (shoulders etc), therefore the player could play the character just like in real life. The internal variables would improve relative to how much the character tests themselves, like for stamina/energy, they would run, and after a bit of runnning they would get tired start puffing etc, and after a while of the game they would be able to run further before getting to the same state.
As with weapons there would be a system of relativeness, like in the previous example where the player needed to buy a weapon but didn''t know which one. They would ask the shopkeeper about their opinion of a weapon and they would reply something like "That is a nice axe, great for chopping trees with", or "That is a good sword, excellent craftsmanship and durability", and then you''d have to choose one that you liked. Just like in real life where shopkeepers (salespeople) try and sell you their goods, most often the more expensive the better. And initially they would try and con you badly depending on their disposition towards you, then after a while of you going to the shop they would give you better advice and service. Back to the weapons it wouldn''t really matter what they said because they would be biased towards some thing, highest profit, price, axes etc. And you would be biased to different weapons anyway, depending on what you have trained and used before, and also who or what you tended to kill the most. This system has got a lot of variety and internal numbers, just try and represent them all in a list to the user!
Oh well those are my selected ideas on RPG''s, this is rather a long post so I''ll cut it here...
"Numbers are maths, games are not meant to teach you Maths" - Me
Dæmin
(Dominik Grabiec)
sdgrab@eisa.net.au
CyberPunk RPG
http://www.eisa.net.au/~sdgrab/index.html
Roleplaying taken down to its lowest level is acting, and acting is the art of representing a character from a script in real life. Pen and paper roleplaying is almos the same thing, its acting out a character that you have made for yourself in a multitude of interesting situations. There are stats in this type of roleplaying but you can do as well without them, and you can have more fun too. And this last form of roleplaying is what an RPG is based upon.
My opinion is that you can do just as well hiding all the stats from the player in an RPG. I mean remember when you were little kids, going into places that you shouldn''t have been, remember the thrill? This was because you didn''t know if you were going to be caught or not, and that was an adventure. Just like and RPG. And somehow I find going into a cave not knowing if I would be able to make it more thrilling than going into a cave with a clear knowledge that "I''m gonna kick some arse". Sure that last statement might be fun at first, but that''s what I play Quake and Doom for! Its the thrill and excitement of seeing another world that makes me paly RPG''s. It''s an escape for me, and if I go into an RPG and see numbers then that reminds me of real life, and I get slightly depressed.
The way that I see of resolving this is to make the internal variables of the RPG, internal. (Gee what a novel idea?). Then you can show the most important aspects of the palyers status to them in terms of their character (3rd Person), like for health the amount of cuts scratches bruises and so forth on their body, for energy or stamina the speed at which they walk, puffing, and drooping (shoulders etc), therefore the player could play the character just like in real life. The internal variables would improve relative to how much the character tests themselves, like for stamina/energy, they would run, and after a bit of runnning they would get tired start puffing etc, and after a while of the game they would be able to run further before getting to the same state.
As with weapons there would be a system of relativeness, like in the previous example where the player needed to buy a weapon but didn''t know which one. They would ask the shopkeeper about their opinion of a weapon and they would reply something like "That is a nice axe, great for chopping trees with", or "That is a good sword, excellent craftsmanship and durability", and then you''d have to choose one that you liked. Just like in real life where shopkeepers (salespeople) try and sell you their goods, most often the more expensive the better. And initially they would try and con you badly depending on their disposition towards you, then after a while of you going to the shop they would give you better advice and service. Back to the weapons it wouldn''t really matter what they said because they would be biased towards some thing, highest profit, price, axes etc. And you would be biased to different weapons anyway, depending on what you have trained and used before, and also who or what you tended to kill the most. This system has got a lot of variety and internal numbers, just try and represent them all in a list to the user!
Oh well those are my selected ideas on RPG''s, this is rather a long post so I''ll cut it here...
"Numbers are maths, games are not meant to teach you Maths" - Me
Dæmin
(Dominik Grabiec)
sdgrab@eisa.net.au
CyberPunk RPG
http://www.eisa.net.au/~sdgrab/index.html
Just a random thought that flew into my brain...there could be a skill that allows you to examine the weapon and perhaps see which ones are made the best, and so on...
Edited by - Nazrix on June 22, 2000 1:50:33 AM
Edited by - Nazrix on June 22, 2000 1:50:33 AM
quote: Original post by Nazrix
Just a random thought that flew into my brain...there could be a skill that allows you to examine the weapon and perhaps see which ones are made the best, and so on...
Edited by - Nazrix on June 22, 2000 1:50:33 AM
This represents real-life, not that that''s bad, far from it. I''m thinking "PC Cognition".
If you use a computer then you learn more about them. You soon realise that you need this aspect of a computer for this purpose. Now apply this to a sword-fighting RPG. The PC who is a swordsman gains knowledge about weapons because they use them.In other words they (the character) learn exactly what''s best for them and what they are more comfortable using.
WE are their,
"Sons of the Free"
Author
That;s actually a very good idea, cause generally when you start out something you don''t know much about it and can''t always make the best pruchase (salesmen can be misleading).
Another thing I was thinking about, is how often do players actually buy equipment from NPCs - more often that not I pick my equipment up in the field? Which kinda makes the purchasing idea a little bit obsolete if no stats therefore no guarentee is presented. Which may change the entire social nature of the game (ugh)
Still a much better alternative to stats.
Another thing I was thinking about, is how often do players actually buy equipment from NPCs - more often that not I pick my equipment up in the field? Which kinda makes the purchasing idea a little bit obsolete if no stats therefore no guarentee is presented. Which may change the entire social nature of the game (ugh)
Still a much better alternative to stats.
Am I missing something ?
It seems that you''re thinking about using proficiencies in a ''RPG'' ?
We (pen & paper players) are using attributes (wisdom, strength, will, dexterity...) and proficiencies (weaponcraft, dance, deep dive...) since eons !
RPG systems:
XP: experience points, most of the time won after a murder.
(Yeah, bad system that the AD&D2nd is)
CP: Character Points, won after having tried to solve a problem, to get ride of a problem.
(You don''t get experience by killing anymore)
Basicaly : a proficiency is upgraded by spending the amount of CP required to reach the next number (this is 2 points to go from 1 to 2).
You earn more CP by failing than by succeding.
(Like in real life)
Their is no more abstract and stupid levels, but rather attributes and proficiencies that cannot be upgraded if not used.
This is the new RPG (pen & paper) style of rules.
The kind of games using those kind of system are called : ''interactive storrytelling games'' rather than RPG cause of the image presented by the RPG name.
Sorry if I''m off topic.
[BTW the system I described is the one I use in both pen&paper RPG and in my upcoming CRPG]
-* So many things to do, so few time to spend *-
It seems that you''re thinking about using proficiencies in a ''RPG'' ?
We (pen & paper players) are using attributes (wisdom, strength, will, dexterity...) and proficiencies (weaponcraft, dance, deep dive...) since eons !
RPG systems:
XP: experience points, most of the time won after a murder.
(Yeah, bad system that the AD&D2nd is)
CP: Character Points, won after having tried to solve a problem, to get ride of a problem.
(You don''t get experience by killing anymore)
Basicaly : a proficiency is upgraded by spending the amount of CP required to reach the next number (this is 2 points to go from 1 to 2).
You earn more CP by failing than by succeding.
(Like in real life)
Their is no more abstract and stupid levels, but rather attributes and proficiencies that cannot be upgraded if not used.
This is the new RPG (pen & paper) style of rules.
The kind of games using those kind of system are called : ''interactive storrytelling games'' rather than RPG cause of the image presented by the RPG name.
Sorry if I''m off topic.
[BTW the system I described is the one I use in both pen&paper RPG and in my upcoming CRPG]
-* So many things to do, so few time to spend *-
Ok, i''m gonna touch on what Naz said because it''s the best there is. I''ve had this idea for a while, but until i re-read this thread, i couldn''t get it all sorted out in my head 
Sure, you don''t need to give players a quantity. But to discourage them from making it a quantity, give them the ability to examine themselves. Your intelligence and/or wisdom will determine how well you know yourself.. or you could even make it a third stat. And people can take time out to sit and reflect upon themselves, just like we''ve got Landfish doing lately As they sit and think, they get to know themselves better. Honestly, how many egotists have spent time to really get in touch with themselves? They THINK they''re better.. and they might be, but they''re not sure! 
Call it modesty factor!
Now, combine this with an appraisal skill, and BAM! you''ve got it nailed. The better you can appraise a weapon''s value to your needs, the better you can tell if it''ll work for you. You feel the weapon, turn it over, feel the balance of it. The more you know about swords, the more accurate you''re going to be in your appraisal of the sword. You get a good feel for it, and you think "yeah, this feels nice" or "man, this thing''s too heavy" or something! This allows the player to pick up two weapons and feel them, and decide which would be best for them. The better they know themselves, their strength and weaknesses, the more likely they''ll pick the right one. Same goes for the appraisal and sword skills. Appraisal modified by your sword skill means you know what to look for in swords. That combined with your own self appraisal will show which one is truely better. So, to quantify this: (appraisal skill % sword skill) * sword + (appraisal skill % modesty stat) * self = overall value.
Now, to clarify.. many games provide stupid things when they impliment this. You look at yourself and you see one thing, then you look again and see another! stupid! now, if you don''t know yourself, have it say "you''re not sure, but you think.."! This is important! you want to let players know that they''re not sure of themselves. Perhaps people way out of touch with themselves will be totally opposite Perhaps certain actions actually decrease your modesty stat? and the more negative it goes, the more egotistical you are?
I agree, stats can get old, and can give power maxing players too much info.. but there''s no saying there''s not a way around it It''s just a matter of working out a COMPLETE solution to this problem. Give people a reason not to quantify the stats!!! This is the key to keeping this problem OUT of your game. Sure, someone will still do it.. but it''ll be on a very small scale. I mean, how many people honestly want to LEARN how your system translates to numbers when they can merely have the character quantify it for them And since the quantifications will never be exact, or the same as someone else.. well
J
Sure, you don''t need to give players a quantity. But to discourage them from making it a quantity, give them the ability to examine themselves. Your intelligence and/or wisdom will determine how well you know yourself.. or you could even make it a third stat. And people can take time out to sit and reflect upon themselves, just like we''ve got Landfish doing lately
As they sit and think, they get to know themselves better. Honestly, how many egotists have spent time to really get in touch with themselves? They THINK they''re better.. and they might be, but they''re not sure! Call it modesty factor!Now, combine this with an appraisal skill, and BAM! you''ve got it nailed. The better you can appraise a weapon''s value to your needs, the better you can tell if it''ll work for you. You feel the weapon, turn it over, feel the balance of it. The more you know about swords, the more accurate you''re going to be in your appraisal of the sword. You get a good feel for it, and you think "yeah, this feels nice" or "man, this thing''s too heavy" or something! This allows the player to pick up two weapons and feel them, and decide which would be best for them. The better they know themselves, their strength and weaknesses, the more likely they''ll pick the right one. Same goes for the appraisal and sword skills. Appraisal modified by your sword skill means you know what to look for in swords. That combined with your own self appraisal will show which one is truely better. So, to quantify this: (appraisal skill % sword skill) * sword + (appraisal skill % modesty stat) * self = overall value.
Now, to clarify.. many games provide stupid things when they impliment this. You look at yourself and you see one thing, then you look again and see another! stupid! now, if you don''t know yourself, have it say "you''re not sure, but you think.."! This is important! you want to let players know that they''re not sure of themselves. Perhaps people way out of touch with themselves will be totally opposite
Perhaps certain actions actually decrease your modesty stat? and the more negative it goes, the more egotistical you are?I agree, stats can get old, and can give power maxing players too much info.. but there''s no saying there''s not a way around it
It''s just a matter of working out a COMPLETE solution to this problem. Give people a reason not to quantify the stats!!! This is the key to keeping this problem OUT of your game. Sure, someone will still do it.. but it''ll be on a very small scale. I mean, how many people honestly want to LEARN how your system translates to numbers when they can merely have the character quantify it for them And since the quantifications will never be exact, or the same as someone else.. well J
Reading the last post I ask myself :
Is it because that are shown that players tries to improve them to the max, or is it because the players want to improve their character to the max that number are shown ?
I mean, many quake and FPS players are only playing to prove themselves skilled.
They find that prooving their skill is fun (if it wasn''t the case they won''t play).
The same about RTS.
You play to be good or the best, or one of the best.
So isn''t it normal that players do the same in any game ?
A GAME IS made FOR the PLAYERS NOT FOR your EGO.
All IMO.
-* So many things to do, so few time to spend *-
Is it because that are shown that players tries to improve them to the max, or is it because the players want to improve their character to the max that number are shown ?
I mean, many quake and FPS players are only playing to prove themselves skilled.
They find that prooving their skill is fun (if it wasn''t the case they won''t play).
The same about RTS.
You play to be good or the best, or one of the best.
So isn''t it normal that players do the same in any game ?
A GAME IS made FOR the PLAYERS NOT FOR your EGO.
All IMO.
-* So many things to do, so few time to spend *-
Author
Ingenu - while you make a point about stats being different from proficiencies (or skills as they are called in computer games) it''s much easier to not bother showing stats than skills. Because skills can be hard to "qualify" compared to how easily you can "quantify" them using a computer, it makes them a slightly more difficult thing.
Giving the player the ability to determine what they think of themselves without giving them a number is a good idea, at least a good alternative, but I think it''s dragging the player around a bit. To me, it kinda feels like "unnecessary force" to get the character to tell the player how good he is? Still, in some places that can''t be easily avoided.
Giving the player the ability to determine what they think of themselves without giving them a number is a good idea, at least a good alternative, but I think it''s dragging the player around a bit. To me, it kinda feels like "unnecessary force" to get the character to tell the player how good he is? Still, in some places that can''t be easily avoided.
Combining some of these ideas, and some that have come up while talking about roleplaying systems ( not games ) with a friend of mine:
1. You don''t need to show the player his stats. The player measures his own skill by his successrate. If he is successful a lot in something, he''s good at it.
That doesn''t mean you don''t have stats internally in the game ( that''s been mentioned above, keeping internal numbers internal )
There can be a number of feedback systems to show you how good you are. The simplest is just failure/success. If you failed, you weren''t good enough. This is hard for things like how much "damage" you''ve taken, since it''s not really an on/off thing. Visual feedback, or simply text, can be added for additional, more gradual information.
2. Improvement is important in most RPGs. You want your character to grow. Sometimes, and in certain games, emotional and philosophical growth is enough, but I doubt you''d be able to convince "hardcore CRPG players" that you in fact have a CRPG if you can''t have physical improvement. So we''ll leave it in.
How does a character improve? Well look at real life:
a) Natural aptitude. These are your "ability scores", you are born with them ( actually it represents average skill at the average starting age of a character, but you know what I mean ). You can''t change them a lot - you can naturally be born to be strong, with little mental capacity, and you can''t influence it much afterwards.
b) Practice. You practice whacking things with that sword, and you WILL get better.
c) Self-study. You get a book on swordplay, and read it, study it, tear it apart. You WILL get better.
d) Being taught/trained. Someone who knows more or different things about a certain skill tells you about them, and helps you train your skills. You WILL get better.
b, c, and d are all forms of training, some more efficient than others. Practicing might allow you to get better in the obvious skills, but there might be tricks that are very easy to use, but hard to find. Reading from a book is nice, it can tell you all the little tweaky things you need to know, but you won''t have ACTUALLY handled the skill. Being taught is the best, since you have both sides - some practical experience, and someone who ( hopefully ) knows what they are doing teaching you.
What use is this? I propose a three-fold scheme ( internally )
1. Ability scores. Your natural aptitude towards certain general tasks. It includes "self-teaching ability" to allow yourself to improve a training score without outside help.
2. Training scores. Your potential in certain general skills - this amounts to how well you can improve in the next category.
3. Skills. These are the actual numbers added to your ability scores when "trying" something. Getting better at a skill amounts to using your training score that applies to that skill, and spending the required amount of effort/time/xp/whatever you use to improve.
Being taught does NOT directly improve a skill, it improves your training score. Book reading = ONLY your training score. Same with "Self-teaching ability". Practicing ONLY improves your skill score. Being taught by a teacher does both, because you will have practice, while being spoon-fed theory.
I think this way allows for most flexibility - and you can STILL hide all those stats from the player. The only way he/she will know if she has trained enough, is by trying again, and seeing if she succeeds this time.
Just like real life
Give me one more medicated peaceful moment..
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~
1. You don''t need to show the player his stats. The player measures his own skill by his successrate. If he is successful a lot in something, he''s good at it.
That doesn''t mean you don''t have stats internally in the game ( that''s been mentioned above, keeping internal numbers internal )
There can be a number of feedback systems to show you how good you are. The simplest is just failure/success. If you failed, you weren''t good enough. This is hard for things like how much "damage" you''ve taken, since it''s not really an on/off thing. Visual feedback, or simply text, can be added for additional, more gradual information.
2. Improvement is important in most RPGs. You want your character to grow. Sometimes, and in certain games, emotional and philosophical growth is enough, but I doubt you''d be able to convince "hardcore CRPG players" that you in fact have a CRPG if you can''t have physical improvement. So we''ll leave it in.
How does a character improve? Well look at real life:
a) Natural aptitude. These are your "ability scores", you are born with them ( actually it represents average skill at the average starting age of a character, but you know what I mean ). You can''t change them a lot - you can naturally be born to be strong, with little mental capacity, and you can''t influence it much afterwards.
b) Practice. You practice whacking things with that sword, and you WILL get better.
c) Self-study. You get a book on swordplay, and read it, study it, tear it apart. You WILL get better.
d) Being taught/trained. Someone who knows more or different things about a certain skill tells you about them, and helps you train your skills. You WILL get better.
b, c, and d are all forms of training, some more efficient than others. Practicing might allow you to get better in the obvious skills, but there might be tricks that are very easy to use, but hard to find. Reading from a book is nice, it can tell you all the little tweaky things you need to know, but you won''t have ACTUALLY handled the skill. Being taught is the best, since you have both sides - some practical experience, and someone who ( hopefully ) knows what they are doing teaching you.
What use is this? I propose a three-fold scheme ( internally )
1. Ability scores. Your natural aptitude towards certain general tasks. It includes "self-teaching ability" to allow yourself to improve a training score without outside help.
2. Training scores. Your potential in certain general skills - this amounts to how well you can improve in the next category.
3. Skills. These are the actual numbers added to your ability scores when "trying" something. Getting better at a skill amounts to using your training score that applies to that skill, and spending the required amount of effort/time/xp/whatever you use to improve.
Being taught does NOT directly improve a skill, it improves your training score. Book reading = ONLY your training score. Same with "Self-teaching ability". Practicing ONLY improves your skill score. Being taught by a teacher does both, because you will have practice, while being spoon-fed theory.
I think this way allows for most flexibility - and you can STILL hide all those stats from the player. The only way he/she will know if she has trained enough, is by trying again, and seeing if she succeeds this time.
Just like real life
Give me one more medicated peaceful moment..
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
