[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/vrpg/ - Video Games/RPG

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: 1608635018344.jpg (50 KB, 728x1098)
50 KB
50 KB JPG
>PC kills a bunch of orcs with a spear
>she gets xp from that
>it's enough to level up
>spends her points to increase her lockpicking skill

>PC kills a bunch of orcs with a spear
>her skill with the spear increases
>other skills like combat experience, skirmishing, combat initiative, etc. might increase as well
>if the PC wants to increase her lockpicking skill she has to pick locks, practise lockpicking, read lockpicking manuals, train with tutors, etc.

Why does /v/ prefer the first option when it's objectively inferior to the second one for handling level up mechanics?
>>
>>1915699
>pc is a she
That's where you're wrong, kiddo.
>>
>>1915699
I don't know, go ask them.
>>
> A woman
> Using weapons
> Killing men

Why are you creepy trannies and male feminists using videogames to pretend women are competent and capable?
They can't even win against trannies in sports and you think a woman killing a giant swole orc makes sense?

Why do you resort to fantasy worlds to spread this creepy feminism?
>>
>>1915726
Oh, hey, I remember you from the nearby Mass Effect thread.
You should play Tyranny, where every ranked military officer is a woman and every grunt is a man.
>>
>>1915735
>where every ranked military officer is a woman and every grunt is a man.

No thanks, I'm playing ESO right now and every single captain, general, commander is the same strong empowered serious woman meanwhile all male characters are reduced to comic relief or evil.

Baldur's gate 3 is doing the same.

What compels writer to make all women in a videogame the same bitchy feminist powerfantasy? At least they realized women can't be funny so they don't give them the comic relief role, but men not having a single leading role? Bullshit.
>>
File: orc.jpg (198 KB, 1280x1024)
198 KB
198 KB JPG
>>1915699
I don't mind Skyrim-style levelling but it has its drawbacks. Sometimes certain skills just don't have enough uses in the gameplay loop to level them naturally, so you have to go out of your way to get them up to par.

>Spending tedious hours crafting daggers to level blacksmithing
>Having to play sneaky melee as a mage because magic bolts of lightning might as well be a water gun at low levels
>Speech is fucking useless despite the perks being pretty good for it

The first option is honestly just easier to implement and still lets you invest in skills you know you will need at some point without the tedium of having to hunt out the esoteric edge cases where lockpicking (to use your example) will come in handy.
>>
>>1915735
It's just a larper, probably a leftist
>>
>>1915740
I really do think you should lighten up a bit, for your own mental health if nothing else.
I spent quite a bit of time getting worked up over this sort of shit. But there's not much point, seeing as the corporations aren't interested in making money anymore. They'll continue make this pozzed garbage, every hero will be a mary sue and every ginger will be played by a nigger.
The best we can do is make our own shit, be it writing or games or movies.
But if you learn to laugh this sort of shit off, it'll lessen your stress levels tremendously.
>>
>>1915742
What you're describing is a problem with how balanced the game is, not a problem with the levelling system itself. If the only way to level up your blacksmith skill is to craft 1000 daggers then that's a problem with how it's implemented.
>>
File: 1616088918618.jpg (67 KB, 720x687)
67 KB
67 KB JPG
>>1915760
>IT'S NOT THE SYSTEM IT'S THE IMPLEMENTATION
Well no shit. But realistically what other solution is there? If you want to level skills by using them, there are only so many scenarios you can use to level those skills. And by the nature of gameplay loops some will be more esoteric and useless than others, despite the few use cases they have being great.
>>
>>1915699
It might be fine depending on the game.

>>1915726
kys third worlder
video games don't have to reflect real life
>>
>>1915765
If you have multiple ways of increasing your skills other than just using them, such as reading manuals and books, training with teachers, rewards from quests and so on, then what you're saying isn't a problem.

Also I don't see it as a problem if certain skills (within reason) are harder to increase than others. Like maybe shooting lightbolts is quite a rare skill and the pc can become more efficient at it if they go out of their way to find that crazy hermit in the middle of nowhere that happens to be a master teacher at shooting lightbolts.
>>
>>1915759
> Just give up goy, get brainwashed

A man without values and convictions is nothing. The fact that you threw yours away for your "mental health" shows how much of a pussy you are.
>>
>>1915785
>video games don't have to reflect real life

So they have to reflect fantasy? Why your fantasies involve feminazi man hating dykes killing men and smashing the patriarchy?

You're sick in the head.
>>
>>1915818
I didn't tell you to get brainwashed. I explicitly told you to shield yourself and your family from the kikery. Take an interest in your local community and try to steer it in the right direction, away from all the degeneracy.
And, as I've said, unless you're willing to directly change everything through political violence, there's not much to be done on the world wide scale.
Getting infuriated at some anonymous losers on the internet isn't going to change anyone's mind.
>>
>>1915699
Because you can make a character build that you want without idiotic skill grinding. Casting an illusion spell 100 times or smithing 100 daggers isn't a fun gameplay. Or afking while your character runs/swims in a corner to train Athletics, or sits near an NPC to train Stealth.
>>
>>1915850
>Casting an illusion spell 100 times or smithing 100 daggers isn't a fun gameplay. Or afking while your character runs/swims in a corner to train Athletics, or sits near an NPC to train Stealth
That's just poor implementation. For example one solution to the concerns you have is that after a certain point crafting daggers shouldn't increase smithing anymore, you'd have to craft other items or train with master blacksmiths or something else.
>>
>>1915699
In the latter you have to perform an action multiple times WHILE being dogshit at it, and some games with that system don't even let you try again once a skill has improved, so leveling lockpicking involves permanently locking yourself out of things.
>>
>>1915874
>so leveling lockpicking involves permanently locking yourself out of things
First of all I think failing to pick a lock shouldn't always break the lock especially for low level locks.

If you want to easily pick low to mid difficulty locks then that's what character creation is for. You create a character with decent enough lockpicking skills

I've already mentioned other ways for increasing your skills in addition to using said skills, such as reading books and hiring tutors.
>>
File: opisafaggot.jpg (132 KB, 493x639)
132 KB
132 KB JPG
>>1915884
>people have valid reasons for preferring one system or another
>NOOOOOOOO YOU CAN'T JUST LIKE THAT THING YOU HAVE TO HATE IT AND PREFER THIS ONE
>People continue to point out valid drawbacks to OP's preferred system
>NOOOOOOOO YOU'RE NOT LISTENING THIS IS STILL SO MUCH BETTEEEERRRRR
At what point do we just call you a faggot and be done with this nonsense?
>>
>>1915726
Who said the orcs were male?
>>
>>1915893
You and others are pointing out that in the second system a problem arises, that is the PC might have to do tedious and menial tasks to increase their skill, such as that if the PC wants to increase their smithing skill they'll have to craft 1000 daggers. That is indeed quite tedious but the levelling up system can avoid such pitfalls.

In the smithing example, crafting daggers might level up a PCs smithing skill only to a certain point. Afterwards the PC would have to craft other items that require more resources and money, or better yet train with a weaponsmith to learn new smithing techniques instead of relying on trial and error. Also if the game has an in depth economic system then it might be not even worthwhile (and in certain cases maybe even prohibitive) to level up by crafting numerous daggers as the price for all the materials and tools required (for all the daggers) would be so expensive. In such a system you wouldn't be able to even profit from all these daggers as an introduction of daggers into the market in such a short span of time would send the price through the floor (especially if the demand for daggers was already low).

Crafting daggers should also take time. The PC shouldn't be able to just gather the materials, click a button and done, they now have a dagger. Add that with quests with time limits and life needs for the PC (food, sleep) and it would further prevent the player from overproducing daggers.
>>
>>1915759
I just pirate most things now.

Sometimes they make things so unbearable I can't even play things I got for free.
>>
>>1915765
You're using the word esoteric wrong. Esoteric means intended to be understood by a select few. A better word in the context of your sentence would be 'uncommon', 'scarce' or maybe 'sporadic'.
>>
>>1915956
>Reeeeeeeeealism!
Your solution is still tedious as fuck. I recall runescape had a halfway decent smithing minigame where you tried to make a blade as accurately as you could, using the strength of your hammer blows to shape the blade.

The underlying issue is that there is no fun way of training the skill. Real market shit would only add to the tedium if all I had to do was collect different resources, spend more time, and click 'okay.' Then it's just a slightly different arbitrary button to press.
>>
>>1915708
is he not talking about party members?
>>
>>1915699
The first option is very easy to do well. The second option is extremely difficult to do well. So most would prefer a good implementation of the former over a sloppy implementation of the latter.
>>
File: levar.jpg (210 KB, 1000x750)
210 KB
210 KB JPG
>>1917080
>Points out improper usage with no hint of malice or mockery
Based literacychad
>>
File: 1532278250448.jpg (15 KB, 320x290)
15 KB
15 KB JPG
>>1915759
>every ginger will be played by a nigger
Imagine being ginger - pariah among white-skinned people, if you're not strong enough mentally you end up a recluse just because of your hair. The times change, suddenly people are trying to stand up for all kinds of folks faced with disdain on racial, ethnical and cultural basis.
And then, you get put into the same box with normie bastards that propagated the hatred against differences because you have white skin. It doesn't matter that you were also a victim of social exclusion on base of your looks, you are fucking white and you should suffer because your skin colour is a wet dream of neonazi.
You will always be at the bottom of the social ladder because some dumb monk in medieval was probably rejected by red-haired girl and decided to connect red hair with all worst character traits and it even went so far that christian tradition gives red hair to Judas. You are an eternal victim, while people venerate every other combination of traits depending on what is their political alignment.
It gets even worse in countries of Eastern Europe or other ethnically monolithic countries, as modern leftists are too busy looking up to America and propagate it's problems to their countries, despite them being unapplicable.
Being ginger is suffering, and, it seems like it will never end and it's not your fault in the slightest.
>>
>>1915726
Dangerously based
>>
File: 1605590404401.jpg (21 KB, 334x393)
21 KB
21 KB JPG
>ITT: no one ever played RuneQuest or has even heard of BRP
This is exactly why you should always disregard /v/'s opinion on RPG systems (or RPGs in general desu). The fact that every time an RPG deviates even a little bit from the D&D formula, /v/ starts whining should speak volumes for the quality of this board.
>>
>>1915699
Not like I PREFER the first one, but second is just rare. Besides obvious tes series I can name only Tyranny or new Colony Ship maybe also a fuckton of obscure indies no one plays and something like kenshi or rimworld that isn't rpg
>>
>>1915740
What? Kagha and Minthara are both decidedly in the wrong. Halsin and Zevlor are wholly in the right. 2/3 of the evil companions are female, with 2/3 of the male characters being good to neutral. I’ve only seen complaints that people think the female characters are too bitchy and aggressive, even from SJWs. I even saw one claim that the game is sexist, with all of the men being charming and polite, while the opposite is true for the girls. There’s pozzed shit in BG3, but this isn’t it.
>>
>>1915765
IMO the best systems are having the XP gated behind major plot points and/or quest rewards.

Therefore it doesn't matter how you completed the quest you progress. So you don't have to F around like a clown gaming the system doing unnatural things like killing random NPCs or disarming every trap, or jumping up and down in place, casting useless spells etc.

Like traps alone should be actually deadly show stoppers not dumb XP candy you have to go around and vacuum up, simple shit that autistic devs can never let go of which ruins immersion desu.
>>
>>1915699
because they're casual and they like being granted and given permission to do things and be cool because they're raised under the toxic educational system modeled after prisons and factory floors that instructs children to obey and conform so that they honor their social contract
>>
>>1915699
Experience is just an abstraction. In table top experience contributions have come from various tasks such as using class skills and so on, and even for the gold value of treasure taken from a dungeon. Typically the class defines what a character can train effectively. Less time is spent on disentangling the minutiae of downtime. Typically leveling up represents training in time and material investment over 2 weeks, only once the character has reached the experience threshold. Another example that demonstrates the absurdity of your logic is when the PCs return an ancient relic and finish the quest they receive experience points. The character levels up and increases combat skills and skill with fighting with a spear. It doesn't make sense because delivering the object doesn't involve any real skill itself. It's an abstraction and assumptions are made about training that are determined by the level up choices.
>>
>>1915699
Have you never worked with someone who's been on the job for decades, but never seems to learn a single fucking thing?
>>
>1915740
>eso and bg3
shit opinions, shit mental and shit taste, very impressive
>>
File: knight.jpg (288 KB, 1920x2716)
288 KB
288 KB JPG
>>1915699
it isn't
the second system pigeonholes you into having the same playstyle the entire game
>>
>>1915699
>PC beats the shit out of level 1 rats for half an hour
>this somehow makes the PC better at fighting sapient humanoid enemies
Neither system makea much sense.
>>
>>1915699
Because TES games will always be crappy flavourless RPGs, in large part because of that freeform system.
Leveling systems allow for a lot more exciting new things to happen to your character.
>level up your eldritch scion
>now you can cast a spell and deliver it through your weapon in the same round
And no, Skyrim perks don't compare, because they are too generic and can't have the same oomph ad class features.
>>
>>1915699
because the first option is closer to the best option:

>PC kills a bunch of orcs with a spear
>she gets xp from that
>it's enough to level up
>XP is an abstract concept representing overall experience in their class. Class is not simply a role or a set of skills, but a world view drilled in by the training and instruction in that class she had as a novice. Therefore any experience gained in the real world is going to be partially cross trained in all class abilities as her further understanding of the world unlocks a deeper understanding overall, and thus a higher performance.
>>
>>1920897
>assuming an RPG has classes
Classes are utter garbage
>>
>>1920921
classes are great. classless systems are just scams for free will retards.

choice occurs when you are restricted, the more restricted you are the more meaningful the choice. Freedom forces you to conform to your nature. The more you are able to do what you want the less options you have to do different things.
>>
>>1920925
Based take
Freeform tr*nnoids on suicide watch
>>
>>1920925
Play something else other than DnD for once. All classes do is introduce silly restrictions.
>>
>>1920936
d&d is not even a true class based system because it lets you multiclass. A flaw if you ask me.
The best rpgs have hard class based systems
>>
>>1915699
Because the first system is what you actually use when you realize that pure learn by doing is trash and you add shit like trainers to allow you to raise your skills while abstracting away the repetitive busywork.

>PC kills a bunch of orcs with a spear
>she gets gold from that
>it's enough to pay for one week of training with Herbert the locksmith
>spends her gold to increase her lockpicking skill
This is literally just the first system with a slight reskin to not offend realismschizo sensibilities too much. It is still based on the same fundamental idea of giving the player a resource that can be acquired in whatever way they see fit, which they can afterwards invest, either directly or indirectly into whatever skills they want, decoupling the direction of your character's progression from the actual motions you go through in active gameplay. And once you have achieved this decoupling, there's little reason to not just throw away the whole concept of learn by doing together with all the balance issues it implies and implement something like Gothic's progression where you level up at XP thresholds, but only your HP increases and apart from that you gain Learning Points that you need to spend at a trainer to increase your skills.
>>
>>1915699
>Game has thing
>Thing isn't like real life
>That bad

>Game has thing
>Game is slightly more like real life
>That good

It's a game you fucking idiot, "this game abstraction is more realistic" is not an argument, what matters is what makes for a better game.
>>
>>1915830
Some of these beta cucks are such feminist soi boos they actually want to fuck women. May as well be race mixers at that point. The only truly straight sex us between two white conservative males.
>>
>>1915699
The same reason players prefer to get gold from monsters rather than body parts that they can sell for gold; it makes the game more fun to play.
>>
>>1915735
>You should play Tyranny, where every ranked military officer is a woman and every grunt is a man.
Retard spotted. Graven Ash and the Voices of Nerat are both men. Almost all the Disfavoured and Scarlet Chorus officers are men.
>>
File: 1605453925517.png (228 KB, 800x640)
228 KB
228 KB PNG
>player gets exp for everything
>they get enoguh to level up
>they are automatically better at everything they do
>if they wish they put points to learn new skills or further enhance the ones they know
Tabletop games and rpgs like etrian is the best leveling system. Fuck this absolute shit that only encourages min maxing
>>
>>1915956
>Afterwards the PC would have to craft other items that require more resources and money
Old system: craft 1,000 daggers.
New system: craft 250 bronze daggers, 250 iron daggers, 250 steel daggers, 250 blue steel daggers.

This is even more tedious to do as now you need to get 4 different metals.

>better yet train with a weaponsmith to learn new smithing techniques instead of relying on trial and error.
Old system: craft 1,000 daggers.
New system: craft 250 daggers, get trained to the next level, 250 daggers, get trained to the next level, 250 daggers, get trained to the next level, 250 daggers.

This is even more tedious as now you need to find 3 teachers.

>it might be not even worthwhile (and in certain cases maybe even prohibitive) to level up by crafting numerous daggers as the price for all the materials and tools required (for all the daggers) would be so expensive
Daggers are made of a metal ore, so unless you buy up all the metal in an area it won't increase the price of metal ore. Also if you do that then every blacksmith should hate you for making them unemployed.

Also why can't you melt down the daggers to get more metal ore, to craft more daggers?

>In such a system you wouldn't be able to even profit from all these daggers as an introduction of daggers into the market in such a short span of time would send the price through the floor (especially if the demand for daggers was already low).
If there's a shortage of metal ore then the price of anything made of metal will increase because people will be buying them and melting them down to make the metal tools they need.

So you hoarding all the metal in the country to make daggers would increase the price of daggers because metal is now so rare.

The Spiffing Brit explains this in more detail:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u372HKrw5eA

>The PC shouldn't be able to just gather the materials, click a button and done, they now have a dagger.
That's even more tedious.
>>
>>1921232
>min maxing
Every game where choices cancel out other choices, you will get min maxing. The only way to get rid of min maxing, is to allow a player to become the best at everything - which is how games should be designed.

Instead we get "replay value" to artificially increase player retention so shareholders have a nice graph to look on.
>>
>>1921253
You might as well make levelling up automatic at this point. Why waste time every so often clicking on buttons on the character screen when you can let the game do it
>>
File: buff dawgs.jpg (31 KB, 360x345)
31 KB
31 KB JPG
>>1921232
>encourages min maxing
Good.
>>
>>1921264
The core gameplay loop, the thing that makes the game fun, is very rarely collecting materials and spamming crafting selections. Pointless tedium is not gameplay, and removal of tedium is not letting the game play for you.

Crafting is usually in games to allow players to create combat items with the choice of defining the equipment parameters. Unless there's a progression method that works alongside that particular use, then it's useless busy work to make it require it's own progression method.
>>
>>1920938
>d&d is not even a true class based system because it lets you multiclass.
You realize that multiclassing was originally made because it reduced class bloat? Prior to multiclassing, you had race-as-class hybrids like Elf, who were fighter-mages.
>The best rpgs have hard class based systems
Hard class-based systems are inherently flawed, since they prevent hybrid archetypes from existing or demand the creation of a separate class as a fix.

If you're going to implement a class-based system, you aim for simple, archetypal classes (e.g. fighter, cleric, wizard) and use multiclassing to hybridize those roles while ensuring that there's ample customization within an archetype.
>>
>>1921275
>PC wants to craft a sword
>PC gives a weaponsmith money to train for a week on how to craft a sword
>he then crafts the sword

What's so fucking tedious about that?
>>
itt: people arguing whether TES or D&D are better systems without having played anything else
>>
>>1921288
Then that's just money as EXP.
>>
>>1915699
Wizardry lets you increase your skills through use or with points gained at level-up, though.
>>
>>1921293
Which is an infinitely better system
>>
>>1915699
Penalizes not always using the same options to solve problems and forces you to assign singular unique roles in party based games.

You are objectively retarded.
>>
>>1915726
lol what a fucking incel, its so very clearly obvious you shit yourself at the thought of a woman being equal, is your masculinity that fragile? Pathetic
>>
>>1921314
I mean, sure, but it has nothing to do with "use skill to increase skill", it's just Dark Souls.
>>
>>1915699

That`s actually a valid point. OP is not a fag for once... Techniques and skills should be dependent on the player`s actions instead of on predefined trees where the player has access to whatever. I don`t think there is any game like that though. I blame the devs, or rather the suits for always playing it safe and not trying to make something like this.
>>
>>1921358
Meant for >>1921306
>>
>>1921397
Lets say you have a bunch of Sawyers on the team who think RPGs can be balanced. The one easy thing which can be balanced in non-grindable games are skill checks.

So now on harder difficulties you get forced to always use the same skills on the same characters to meet the balance point. Solve some challenges with the "wrong" skills or wrong party members and they are not tall enough to ride any more.

In a XP limited games, levelling skills by use is as utterly retarded as hero/renegade in ME. The illusion of choice gets destroyed and you have to commit to just doing the same thing over and over.
>>
>>1921434
A game can have multiple ways of solving quests
>>
>>1921358
That's actually older than Dark Souls, and even most video games. Originally, D&D editions had gold as XP, since they were all about dungeon crawling, and that method has survived into the present (primarily in the form of OSR games, but you can also see it in the Souls series).
>>
>>1921434
>In a XP limited games, levelling skills by use is as utterly retarded as hero/renegade in ME. The illusion of choice gets destroyed and you have to commit to just doing the same thing over and over.
These are horrible assumptions. Most games where you level skills through use have solutions to that problem, one way or another. Since TES is the flagbearer, I'll use it as an example.
In the Elder Scrolls, you are encouraged to use trainers to increase your skills, especially your weaker ones (since training costs are very low for getting a skill better). However, increasing those skills takes up more and more money and requires better and better trainers. Thus, you can easily get a broad variety of knowledge but are encouraged to devote your energies to a few skills if you want to master them.

>Solve some challenges with the "wrong" skills or wrong party members and they are not tall enough to ride any more.
That is just bad game design, but level by use wouldn't change that. If one skill is needed for everything, then it should get enough use that it levels fast. Furthermore, if "illusion of choice" matters, your problem is that there are a fixed number of "viable" skills, not that you level skills by using them.
>>
Second option is the most immersive one
>>
>>1921449
That's a little different, because gold was still gold, and exp was still exp, it was just that you earned exp through acquiring gold, but it was still spent as a seperate resource pool, and D&D also, of course, follows a leveling system. The closest thing in D&D to "money as exp" was probably spells often costing exp (which is a thing that stuck around for a while).
>>
>>1921492
Fair, but it's still a "gold as XP" system, even if it differs from the more popular modern renditions.
>>
>>1921479
>These are horrible assumptions. Most games where you level skills through use have solutions to that problem, one way or another. Since TES is the flagbearer, I'll use it as an example.
>In the Elder Scrolls, you are encouraged to use trainers to increase your skills, especially your weaker ones (since training costs are very low for getting a skill better).
Okay so your system is so good that you are encouraged to use NPCs to circumvent it and just raise whatever skill you want directly. The absolute state of levelling by use autists.
>>
>>1921694
>Okay so your system is so good that you are encouraged to use NPCs to circumvent it and just raise whatever skill you want directly
You use NPCs to get a skill to a level where you can use it without too much trouble. It's similar to how, in real life, you want someone to teach you the basics before you start doing something on your own. Try cooking when you don't even know the difference between baking and grilling, or try getting in a fight when you don't know how to make a fist. Is that circumventing your skill growth?

If you can't understand that, XP systems have rotted your brain.
>>
>>1915699
Both options have pitfalls.
All-purpose xp gains from specific tasks means players are free to minmax to hell and back or to use up all their skill points on useless stuff: thus devs put more power into the level up itself and less into the player choices to try and balance things, lessening the RPG elements and the replayability of the game.
Specialized xp for specific tasks leads to players doing weird stuff to get xp, for example a player might pick a lock first then sweet talk a guard into opening the same door he just picked to get xp for both actions: in the most extreme yet common case, this devolves into the "knock everything out for maximum xp plus stealth bonus" of modern deus ex games, where player actions are wholly disconnected from their supposed goals and completely determined by metagaming considerations.

Alternatives include xp only from objectives (you get xp from completing the mission/finding a secret/whatever, how you got there does not matter), mixed systems (you can always put your level up points towards getting better at lockpicking, but some lockpicking skills you can only earn by actually picking locks), xp-less systems a la Souls games where your upgrade currencies come in the form of various resources that aren't freely interchangeable...

As an aside, I love the new captcha, thanks Hiroshimoot.
>>
>>1921760
>You use NPCs to get a skill to a level where you can use it without too much trouble
The problem with that kind of progression isn't getting to the point where you can use a skill without too much trouble, it's that some skills are fundamentally more situational than others and in order to raise them effectively you are encouraged to circumvent the process of learning by using and just directly raising them at trainers. Which defeats the whole purpose of implementing a system where you need to use your skills to get better at them. If you can't understand that realism has rotted your brain.
>>
>>1921785
>it's that some skills are fundamentally more situational than others and in order to raise them effectively you are encouraged to circumvent the process of learning by using and just directly raising them at trainers
First of all: if some skills are so situational that you'll never use them enough for them to level, why do those skills exist?
You are saying that, if impractical skills exist, a "learn by use" system doesn't cater to them. And that's a good thing, since it shows poor game design and encourages you to make the skills useful or accessible.
>>
>>1921760
You're trying way too hard to defend a mediocre system.
A better implementation of what you talk about would be hard locks, you simply can't use/learn a skill until you've invested sufficient resources into it: it could be giving 5000 gold to a trainer, or acquiring an artifact, or completing a relevant questline.
Implementations such as Skyrim's or Oblivion's don't solve the issue and punish experimentation.
>>
>>1921803
How are you going to design a game where all skills are used in equal measure? Lockpicking is by its nature more niche than hitting people with a sword. Do you just drop lockpicking as a skill if it isn't used often enough in your gameplay loop? Put in an unreasonable number of locks to make sure you get enough chances to increase that skill?
>>
>>1921827
>A better implementation of what you talk about would be hard locks, you simply can't use/learn a skill until you've invested sufficient resources into it
And plenty of mods do that. In Requiem, a Skyrim mod, it's generally advised to get your heavy armor trained up before using it in bulk, since you want to get the perks that make it as practical and comfortable as light armor.
My point was that the basic system works to encourage training skills to a point where they're usable. TES is my example just because it's one of the few mainstream games that has a "learn through use" system; if I knew a better system, I'd have brought it up.

>>1921828
>How are you going to design a game where all skills are used in equal measure?
By ensuring that all skills are useful. Speech shouldn't be a skill if you only have combat encounters, for example.
>Lockpicking is by its nature more niche than hitting people with a sword.
Its main uses have been getting more treasure and avoiding traps, both of which are of great help in a dungeon crawler. In some games, those are essential skills and are more useful than melee ability.
>Do you just drop lockpicking as a skill if it isn't used often enough in your gameplay loop?
Yes. If it has no value, I wouldn't use it.
>>
>>1921434

I don`t necessarily disagree that it would somewhat lead to less efficient builds but at the same of time it would improve the sense of immersion if done correctly. Some times one does not have the skills or talents needed to solve a situation but those circumstances don`t change just because one is lacking. But there are several workarounds those limitations. Another party member or NPC could have the talents one needs or maybe those aspects of the game should remain locked on that playthrough you know.

Obviously making informed choices, knowing before hand which skills are available, what the conditions are and what other skills those skills ultimately unlock allow for planning ahead in ways figuring shit out as one go just don`t but i think there would be value on a game where the growth of the characters is actually determined by what they actually do instead of what they want to do.
>>
>>1921828
If that was the only issue, you'd just make a single picked lock give far more xp than a single sword swing to compensate for how you pick a few locks while you swing swords a lot more often.
The real issue is that once you've spent 5 hours swinging a sword, you might want to try swinging a big warhammer instead, and then you find out you'll suck at it unless you invest 5 more hours into swinging warhammers, and then it will still kinda suck because you got less level ups from it so you have only a few perks to boost your warhammer while you have a ton of perks boosting your sword.

>>1921855
>My point was that the basic system works to encourage training skills to a point where they're usable.
But the actual implementation, especially in Skyrim and Oblivion, leads to abuse: why pay a trainer to get better at illusion when you can spamcast muffle?
And now that you've spammed illusion, stealth, and archery, why bother spamming any other skill? Just spam stealth archer through the whole game, as a bonus you avoid the dogshit combat!

When millions and millions of casual gamers can find such an obvious path of least resistance, your game is busted.
>>
>>1921855
>By ensuring that all skills are useful. Speech shouldn't be a skill if you only have combat encounters, for example.
What if you don't have only combat encounters.If your system cannot handle some skills being realistically more situational than others and requires you to either give them all equal use or just drop them it's a shitty, inflexible design.

>>1921855
>Its main uses have been getting more treasure and avoiding traps, both of which are of great help in a dungeon crawler. In some games, those are essential skills and are more useful than melee ability.
How many dungeons have you crawled where you picked locks in comparable amounts to the trash mobs you killed? Being able to pick locks and disable traps is obviously crucial when crawling dungeons but it's more niche than hitting people. Do you just remove it as a skill because it doesn't get used enough and have everyone be equally able to pick locks and disable traps? Do you make picking locks give 100x more xp than hitting an orc so you become a master locksmith after 50 chests?

What exactly is it that you are trying to accomplish with this system of yours anyway? What actual advantages does it offer over the classic way of gaining XP by doing whatever and raising your skills when levelling up? What advantage does it have over just using trainers?
>>
>>1921875
>once you've spent 5 hours swinging a sword, you might want to try swinging a big warhammer instead, and then you find out you'll suck at it unless you invest 5 more hours into swinging warhammers, and then it will still kinda suck because you got less level ups from it so you have only a few perks to boost your warhammer while you have a ton of perks boosting your sword.
That's just the cost of specialization. Swords and warhammers are totally different beasts, so it's only natural that they wield differently.

>especially in Skyrim and Oblivion, leads to abuse: why pay a trainer to get better at illusion when you can spamcast muffle?
Morrowind outright tells you to practice your magic by spam casting, so it's not too bad. But also, is repeatedly casting a spell, and thus practicing, bad in itself? If you feel that you're too weak, it means that you can improve yourself to a necessary level.

>Stealth archers are busted
And? That doesn't have much to do with level by use systems, since stealth archer was garbage in Morrowind and Oblivion. All that example shows is that stealth and archery were made more useful in Skyrim.
>>
>>1921916
>Morrowind outright tells you to practice your magic by spam casting, so it's not too bad.
>Morrowind outright tells you to go out of your way and do boring grinding to account for its inherent design flaws so it's okay
Just stop posting.
>>
>>1921902
>What if you don't have only combat encounters
Then you make speech a useful skill.

>Being able to pick locks and disable traps is obviously crucial when crawling dungeons but it's more niche than hitting people
If you've ever played the Baldur's Gate games, look at their implementations of traps. Traps are downright debilitating and can instantly kill party members. The fact that only one person needs to know it doesn't make it any less useful.
Almost any NPC can kill trash mobs, so melee is in many ways less valuable.

>What actual advantages does it offer over the classic way of gaining XP by doing whatever and raising your skills when levelling up?
It's more natural, and encourages a playstyle more in line with your build. Furthermore, it doesn't force you to complete quests or kill enemies, and thus provides more player freedom.
>What advantage does it have over just using trainers?
That would be an interesting system, but I don't know any games that exclusively tie leveling to trainers, so I can't accurately compare the two.

>>1921923
>Boring grinding
You've never played Morrowind, then. If anything, it makes travel more fun, since you're not just sitting and waiting to arrive at the location.
>>
>>1921946
>Then you make speech a useful skill.
But it is useful. Even extremely so in certain cases. But simply hitting fuckers in the head naturally comes up more often.

>If you've ever played the Baldur's Gate games, look at their implementations of traps. Traps are downright debilitating and can instantly kill party members. The fact that only one person needs to know it doesn't make it any less useful. Almost any NPC can kill trash mobs, so melee is in many ways less valuable.
That's good and all but in Baldur's Gate you can just dump points into the appropriate skill at level up and don't have to worry about going out of your way to train the thief. Which is one of the problems with learn by doing games.

>That would be an interesting system, but I don't know any games that exclusively tie leveling to trainers, so I can't accurately compare the two.
Gothic doesn't exclusively tie leveling to trainers, but it's probably the closest thing. You gain XP in the old fashioned way by defeating enemies and completing quests, but the points you receive when levelling are useless on their own and you need to find trainers to actually spend them to improve your skills. I think it's a superior approach to a more immersive way of increasing your skills than just clicking some pluses in a level up screen and magically getting better, while still freeing up your active gameplay and not pigeonholing you into certain routines like learn by doing does.
>>
>>1921916
>That's just the cost of specialization.
The problem is that the cost here is player time, not in-game resources.
A player will gladly spend 5000 in-game gold or 5 titanites or whatever to try out a new weapon, but he won't spend his free time to grind for the same goal.
Titanites in Souls games are a particularly good example: they're tiered, so after upgrading your main equipment as far as you can with that given tier you'll keep getting extra titanites whose sole purpose is to allow you to branch out and upgrade some new weapon to the same level.
>Morrowind outright tells you to practice your magic by spam casting, so it's not too bad.
Morrowind is atrociously designed, trivial to break, and in no way a good example.
>But also, is repeatedly casting a spell, and thus practicing, bad in itself?
Yes, especially when it serves no purpose but to grind xp: casting fireball at generic mooks one hundred times is repetitive, but casting fireball at a wall one hundred times is pure metagaming madness.
>If you feel that you're too weak, it means that you can improve yourself to a necessary level.
If your best catchup mechanic is barely disguised cookie clicker, your game has issues.
At least older games made you grind against weaker enemies instead of letting you grind against nothing.
>All that example shows is that stealth and archery were made more useful in Skyrim.
The example shows that as soon as two skills are good enough to be used wihout grinding, the player decides to avoid all grinding and sticks to two skills instead of exploring hundreds of potentially interesting combinations.
TL DR don't make players spend basic gameplay time grinding.

>>1921946
>hurr durr if you don't enjoy any single aspect of Morrowind you must never have played it
>>
>>1922047
>But it is useful
Then it's fine.

>That's good and all but in Baldur's Gate you can just dump points into the appropriate skill at level up and don't have to worry about going out of your way to train the thief. Which is one of the problems with learn by doing games.
I brought that example up because the skill itself is useful. My point is that you can make lockpicking and thief skills useful enough to warrant frequent, natural use. A "level through use" system can (and should) do just that.

>Gothic doesn't exclusively tie leveling to trainers, but it's probably the closest thing
It doesn't sound too bad, but I haven't played enough Gothic to either critique or defend it.
>>
>>1915699
it works for d&d because its all about combat, for rpgs that aren't entirely combat focused, obviously it makes less sense
>>
>>1922047
>>1922063
Not him but you guys have made the wrong assumption that a system where skills are increased by using skills, leads to boring grinding. I think you believe that, because of TES games and afaik they are the only video games which use such a system. But in TES games skills advance way way too often and that's not really how the system works in trpgs. In Skyrim it feels like even if you don't know what you're doing, your skills increase every five minutes.
>>
>>1921283
>Hard class-based systems are inherently flawed, since they prevent hybrid archetypes from existing or demand the creation of a separate class as a fix.
So does multiclassing.
You should stop looking at systems from the perspective of 'what can you do', because that is an unrealistic and disingenuous approach.
Being able to put on a character sheet some combination that is absolutely mechanically terrible has not allowed that kind of character to be made in a genuine sense. Only builds that meet a certain minimum level of viability count as real options for the player to take, and class based systems tend to have just as many if not more distinct viable playstyles than you can produce with multiclassing.

Look at what people actually do in multiclassing systems. They just build towards a hand full of archetypes and take dips in what ever mechanically aids them in this. They end up having a convoluted looking character sheet that could mechanically have just been handled by a single class that makes thematic sense instead of having what would be, if strict roleplaying was enforced, an absurd character backstory.

If we take your example, a system that has a fighter, a cleric, and a wizard, it would be far better to add a paladin, a spellsword, and a theurgist class to the mix, because those can all be balanced properly. With multiclalssing what you end up with is a situation that looks something like cleric-wizard hybrid is never actually used because it inevitably stays too weak as it only has low level spells, the fighter-wizard hybrid becomes a gimmick where a weaker fighter uses mainly utility cantrips and actually the player realizes next time they shouldnt bother, and the fighter-cleric becomes the only really heavily used hybrid and it develops a cult following which argues over optimization of it.
So the game gets changed with special rules for multiclassing try and fix them, and so on.
Best to just design complete balanced classes.
>>
>>1922063
>A player will gladly spend 5000 in-game gold or 5 titanites or whatever to try out a new weapon, but he won't spend his free time to grind for the same goal.
If you're using the Souls games, that's not what happens. You try out a weapon BEFORE upgrading it and specializing in it, especially when resources are scarce. In DS3, you can only get 4-5 +10 weapons, so you won't have every weapon available to use.

>If your best catchup mechanic is barely disguised cookie clicker, your game has issues.
To be fair, you only need to catch up if you're playing with an unleveled world mod. In vanilla Skyrim, you generally level up fast enough and the world scales well enough that you don't need to catch up ever.
>as soon as two skills are good enough to be used wihout grinding, the player decides to avoid all grinding and sticks to two skills instead of exploring hundreds of potentially interesting combinations.
And Skyrim, for example, is great in that regard, since most skills can be used without grinding - your combat skills get better by fighting, your thief skills by thieving. The only skills that really demand grinding are the crafting ones, which you want to engage in because they make you wealthy. Many XP-based systems are even worse, since they don't let you explore combinations(if they use classes, like with Dragon Age or D&D games) or make the process of reaching a combination incredibly tedious and dull (such as Dark Souls, where some hybrids are useless until mid or even late game).
In Skyrim, grinding mostly exists if you want to power level a skill to get to the high-end content, but that's to skip the beginning and mid levels, when you never need to.

>don't make players spend basic gameplay time grinding.
XP systems are worse in that department. MMOs are notorious for their grinding, since you have to kill hundreds of trash mobs to level up.
>>
>>1922090
>you guys have made the wrong assumption
Nope, all "do X to get better at X" systems automatically lead to issues because of their specializing nature.
The issue won't necessarily be increased grinding, at the end of the day you might spend less time spamming muffle than you'd spend using illusion spells in combat, the issue will always be distorted player behaviour.
It's not that different from stealth takedown bonuses turning into "let's knock out everyone instead of sneaking by", perverse incentives lead to unnatural gameplay.

>>1922101
>in DS3
DS3 is shit and irrelevant and the limit on +10s is completely artificial due to the limited amount of slabs for NG cycle (no limit on +9s which are 95% of the way there in terms of power, +4 vs+5 for boss weaps is rougher tho), let's talk literally any other game in the series including BB.
Of course you try the unupgraded weapon out to gauge the moveset and shit like that, but you try weapons out AT ALL because you know it will only take a few minutes to upgrade the weapon to be nearly on par with your main gear.
If weapon level was upgraded by directly using the weapon, you wouldn't even bother looking at new unupgraded gear, same way most people didn't even consider maxing out weapons in DeS: too much time for too little return.
>but pure XP systems are worse!
Never said there were good either: there are a million hybrid solutions possible.
>>
File: 1599292302791.png (309 KB, 468x468)
309 KB
309 KB PNG
>>1922063
I don't think there is any getting through to that anon. No matter how much you point out that repetitive grinding of mundane no risk no challenge uninteresting activities isn't fun. No matter if you point out that realistically walking around talking to basic generic NPCs looking for a trainer and living a boring apprentice's life isn't exciting to play or watch. No matter if you point out that anon's example game actually has some flaws and it's boring and immersion breaking to level up some skills. No matter if you point out that fade to black training with an NPC is not really different than fade to black training as you level up. No matter if you point out that all of their options are tedious busy work and that buying training shows that players don't want to spend a long time slowly grinding an unfun activity.

That anon is repeating the same argument, using unrealistic 'what if it's done way better than ever before this time'. As if a hypothetical unrealistic outlier would make it a good design in general. What if there's as many uses of every ability, so every fight has a locked chest and there are locked doors all over the place that you're supposed to go in? What if lockpicking isn't repetitive but actually super fun, just as fun or even more fun than combat somehow? What if going to train in lockpicking can be done in any town with generic NPCs but they're actually amazingly detailed, and interesting, and they leads you to a unique super awesome questline and story that is so interesting for each and every single NPC? What if every single ability in the game is like this, yet there are tons of different abilities?

What if bullshit. There's no game that does that. What if their ideal game falls into development hell with their ridiculous feature creep and never actually releases? What if instead of being unrealistically better than so many other games it's actually mostly average and none of what they imagine happens so it's still boring?



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.