Combat in RPGs

[Dasale]

Acually, it was Alrik who said that...

What I don't like about your definition is that it completely neglects (the forgotten element, not just here) puzzles.

I agree puzzles are too often forgotten in the RPG equation. But it's not really puzzles, it's problems to solve, here is the gaming core. Fights involves problems to solve, puzzles can do that too.

And I agree with Horace's general idea, the story in itself doesn't make for a good cRPG, and that it needs some gameing element to acually be fun. What I disagree with is that this gameing element by necessity has to be tactical combat, because even tactical combat gets old if that's all you do in between the storyelements. This is where puzzles should enter the equasion IMO. Rarely it does though.

Mixing character development and puzzles isn't easy to imagine. If the character development solve the puzzles for you there's a problem. But well something is perhaps possible, not sure it could attract modern gamers.

 

[horace]

Hey guys,

After all is said and done it really just comes down to "How do we label certain games?"

Not really. The differences between games such as Wizardry 8 and Planescape will exist regardless of what people choose to label them as.

I'm attempting to use well-known and well-understood words such as adventure game and CRPG in their historical context as a short hand but if I can't use those words without getting bogged down in useless semantics debates then I'm fine with just describing what I'm talking about in more detail.

Like I mentioned above, all PnP game systems describe a set of rules within which one's character is given certain capabilities, limitations, and avenues for advancement in power, in strictly quantifiable terms. Those 'stats' tend to be used within easily quantifiable contexts, such as combat.

If there are other quantifiable ways in which to test one's character's advancement, then they can also be easily added into the system. Lock picking, persuasion, etc. Many of these things get pretty nebulous and end up requiring a lot of "DM discretion" because it turns out that they're not as quantifiable as one might like them to be. Combat is a perfect fit and has served the role of providing a measuring stick for player advancement for that reason.

Without something quantifiable like that which can provide the hooks for a rich combination of options and choices for character definition and development, we're a group of people sitting around a table playing make-believe.

Or, sitting in front of a computer working though a choose-your-own-adventure with pictures.

Whoever said above that they don't understand why I brought up trading card games or board games in this discussion... that's my point.

it's because the game design principles in those games are the same ones used in PnP rulesets, broadly speaking. But one would have to understand the first thing about game design before that became apparent.

it's beyond debate that a good ruleset for quantifiable, balanced, and rich advancement in power of one's character in an RPG promotes fun.

But if all you're interested in is an escapist story or a fantasy world to explore, then even the best such system will be meaningless to you.

 

[Dasale]

...
I suggest that the following definition be adopted, that an RPG need NOT have combat, but it must have conflict in which the player can participate. (that means no passive situations that are resolved without PC-input, such as by cut-scenes).

For "conflict" I'm not sure, I think it could be more general: problems to solve.

As an example of a game that could be developed utilizing this definition as the standard for an RPG, while foregoing combat, imagine a diplomatic-based game. Irregardless of setting, the PC would be an ambassador of some sort, engaging entirely in negotiations of various sorts (from quests regarding mundane matters such as the price of certain exports, to more heinous things such as the deportation of immigrants, criminals and so forth, perhaps even underhanded deals involving narcotics, police stings, etcetera). With a little imagination myriad quests could be invented that could (or could not) be tied to the character's base statistics of charisma, political savvy, knowledge and so forth, all of which would allow the player access to further lines while in discussions. For the "loot" lovers out there, the player would be able to acquire all manner of wardrobe items, which would play a part in their reception during discussions. See where I'm going with this?
In short, combat is not necessary, nor are games required to have such in them in order to be "fun," as the first person to give me a game like the one I described can look forward to at least one purchase...mine.

I roughly see what you suggest. Instead of diplomatic, perhas more fun would be something more based on infiltration/spies/thieves. Where weapons would be various tools to help to do some activities linked. For example art of disguise would be one way to help solve some quests when sneaking would be an alternate road and acrobat skills one more. For sure, dialog skills could play a role too or more NPC relationship skills, with stuff like charisma but also knowledge to get more options, anti charisma (people nobody notice) and so on. Computer skills like for hackking, technology skills for being able to use or even build some items and some items builds could be the occasion of some funny puzzling. And so on.

 

[Dusk]

Hey guys,

I guess I'm the one that caused this mess I didn't know that this discussion would take on a life of it's own. I just always assumed that a roleplaying game had a story, a character with some kind of skills to increase and creatures that want to take your head off.

Games like Diablo have taken the character part and combat of traditional RPGs to the extreme while mostly getting rid of the story. It still has one but it is paper thin. While games like The Witcher, Planescape:Torment and Betrayal at Krondor have tried to mix a healthy narrative with the combat and character development.

All of these games have had all three parts. If you get rid of the combat then you're heading in a whole new direction. If the RPG is on the computer then getting rid of combat turns it into an adventure game. If it is P&P RPG then I haven't a clue as to what it would be because my P&P rpg experience is only limited to the more traditional D&D fare.

I like both adventure games and RPGs and you could argue that adventure games are "role-playing" games because you are role-playing a certain character like in the King's Quest games. To me role-playing games will always have all three components. Let me repeat this just in case someone misinterprets my meaning again. From my point of view any role-playing game that I want to play will have all three components and any adventure game that I play will not have combat.

After all is said and done it really just comes down to "How do we label certain games?"

I have a problem with point-and-click adventure games since I experienced some silly situation where I missed a tiny piece of a puzzle and failed to solve mystery. Beside the piece being tiny, the drawing wasn't good enough. I don't think I failed in role-playing. I like some well-designed puzzles but especially in story-driven games, I don't think I'd like to be blocked by a puzzle especially when it is not well-designed.

If the story and characters are good and enough number of non-combat abilities are presented, I don't think there is a need for combat especially with settings such as modern cities. Because of the need for combat, most of CRPGs limit their setting to more violent ones. This is limiting role-playing experience somehow when we are into the world and settings.

That said, I agree that this is mostly genre argument mixed with game-play preference except the point of the limitation on the alternative settings. Also, somehow, I don't think either CRP gamers or console ones would like to see a narrative heavy role-playing game without combat. Some of console gamers seem not to be able to stand even the dialog of Mass Effect...and I even thought the "solution" patronizing.

 

[skavenhorde]

I have a problem with point-and-click adventure games since I experienced some silly situation where I missed a tiny piece of a puzzle and failed to solve mystery. Beside the piece being tiny, the drawing wasn't good enough. I don't think I failed in role-playing. I like some well-designed puzzles but especially in story-driven games, I don't think I'd like to be blocked by a puzzle especially when it is not well-designed.

When the puzzles make sense like you said but some of these game designers come up with some off the wall solutions to their puzzles. Those are the ones that really get my little whiskers steamed. Here I am spending hours trying to solve the puzzle in the game and the solution is so ludicrous that there is no way on this green Earth that I would of ever thought of that.

If the story and characters are good and enough number of non-combat abilities are presented, I don't think there is a need for combat especially with settings such as modern cities. Because of the need for combat, most of CRPGs limit their setting to more violent ones. This is limiting role-playing experience somehow when we are into the world and settings.

I think someone earlier said which if you don't up the right skills you maybe in trouble in those kinds of games. I guess a way around that would be to give multiple solutions to the same problem. Also these kind of RPG would be heavily dependent on a solid story. In today's world getting a great story with the game is a crapshoot. For example NWN2 original campaign was not that interesting (I still haven't finished that game) but along comes NWN2 MOTB. By far a much better narrative than the previous one.

If what you said was done right I could see myself playing that and actually having fun

 

[GothicGothicness]

First about RPG's without combat... well maybe a lot of dialogue options and exploration, could also make a RPG there is a game cult, without any combat, but still plays a lot like a RPG. There are a lot of japanese games, that in some ways are a lot more RPG's THAN any of the roleplaying games popular here at the WATCH, I will take a game as example a very great one at that Kana - Little Sister ( one of my favourite games of all time ) in this game, there is no combat what-so-ever instead the entie game consist of exploration and character options ( and some adult scenes but that is beside the point ). In each conversation you get some different choices to choose from, and each of these choices will take the story in different directions, there is a lot of different story branches each with its own ending!! Isn't this what a lot of us are looking for in a combat based RPG?

In kana there is no character building,,, but there are other this kind of games that has a lot of character building ( and no adult scenes ), where you live life as a normal university boy for example, and you develop your strengh ( by sports and going to the gym ), if you take painting class you can paint pictures and win compeition, you have money management, you can buy gifts, better equipment for sports or painting etc etc, you can study and become smarter, and graduate and get married, or you can become a sports star, or famous painter it all depends on your choices and there is no combat what so ever!

I like these games, but the thrill and excitement and danger of combat is missing! That's what I love,, having that one HP left and desperatly trying to get out of the dungeon and cure that disease that's nothing these kind of RPG's will ever have I have to say that these japanese games are also a sort of RPG though, they have EVERY aspect of a RPG in it is much better, except the combat!

 

[Alrik Fassbauer]

I agree puzzles are too often forgotten in the RPG equation. But it's not really puzzles, it's problems to solve, here is the gaming core. Fights involves problems to solve, puzzles can do that too.

I agree.

But often fights have become the "standard measure" for "solving problems". See Blizzard for that. There's nothing else than that.
And what sells good, is likely to become copied - or even considered an "industry standard".

 

[Alrik Fassbauer]

I have a problem with point-and-click adventure games since I experienced some silly situation where I missed a tiny piece of a puzzle and failed to solve mystery.

Runaway is said to be notorious in that.

Try Monkey Island instead, or even better: Indy Jones & the Fate of Atlantis, which is imho still the best adventure game there ever was (completely subjective, of course) (with Monkey Island coming with a *very* short distance behind that).

 

[Corwin]

GG, your games sound more like Sims than RPG's to me!!

 

[dteowner]

Actually, GG's game sounds more like a Choose Your Own Adventure book done on the PC.

 

[Dusk]

There are a lot of japanese games, that in some ways are a lot more RPG's THAN any of the roleplaying games popular here at the WATCH, I will take a game as example a very great one at that Kana - Little Sister ( one of my favourite games of all time ) in this game, there is no combat what-so-ever instead the entie game consist of exploration and character options ( and some adult scenes but that is beside the point ). In each conversation you get some different choices to choose from, and each of these
choices will take the story in different directions, there is a lot of different story branches each with its own ending!! Isn't this what a lot of us are looking for in a combat based RPG?

Seems like it has something to do with Japanese romance simulation games probably with focus on the story. Interestingly, Shin Megami Tensei: Persona 3 seems to have interesting mix with combat with special abilities and high school life. In this game, the protagonist's activities (sim aspect) and social relationship (role-playing game aspect) in the daytime develops as a persona, which determines combat abilities of him/her.

[Off Topic]

Ruinaway is said to be notorious in that.

Try Monkey Island instead, or even better: Indy Jones & the Fate of Atlantis, which is imho still the best adventure game there ever was (completely subjective, of course) (with Monkey Island coming with a *very* short distance behind that).

Thank you for the information. I was thinking of playing some Frogware adventure games with Victorian theme but, at the moment, I have my hands full.

 

[GothicGothicness]

GG, your games sound more like Sims than RPG's to me!!

OO yeah the reason is, because there is no combat? But every other option is there!

Character Development CHECK
Exploration CHECK
Choices and Consequense CHECK
Inventory and economy CHECK
Multiple endings CHECK
Characters & Conversation CHECK
Puzzles CHECK

Anything else aside from Combat that you think makes an RPG??

 

[skavenhorde]

It has one big thing against it though. Its THE SIMS Just kidding it isn't that bad.

I actually tried liking that game (bought six of the expansion packs) but its just too boring after awhile. I'm just not that into interior decorating or the latest fashion. The gameplay is ehhh so so. It's difficult for me to switch from person to person to meet their needs. If I'm playing a RPG game I want to stick with one guy dang it. Once you get married and start having kids all hell breaks loose. Although the vampire wife was pretty cool Though she was pretty kinky. I would revert back to human and three seconds later she bites me on the neck again

What puzzles? I don't remember any puzzles. Also the conversation isn't really conversation. It's more like a stat boost with certain characters. Be friendly and their stats towards you go up. Get caught cheating and you get yelled at in simminese.

 

[Dusk]

OO yeah the reason is, because there is no combat? But every other option is there!

Character Development CHECK
Exploration CHECK
Choices and Consequense CHECK
Inventory and economy CHECK
Multiple endings CHECK
Characters & Conversation CHECK
Puzzles CHECK

Anything else aside from Combat that you think makes an RPG??

I think I have already mentioned what I think role-playing factor is. Putting the genre argument, which might continue infinitely, aside, one disturbing thing with anime is that there is too much idealism for characters of opposite sex both from girls and boys.

 

[dteowner]

OO yeah the reason is, because there is no combat? But every other option is there!

Character Development CHECK
Exploration CHECK
Choices and Consequense CHECK
Inventory and economy CHECK
Multiple endings CHECK
Characters & Conversation CHECK
Puzzles CHECK

Anything else aside from Combat that you think makes an RPG??

Take a look at your description of the game. You say "There is no character building". I haven't played the game, so I have to rely on your description. Uncheck that check, GG!

 

[GothicGothicness]

I've listed two type of games, now I am refering to the second one in my post.

In kana there is no character building,,, but there are other this kind of games that has a lot of character building ( and no adult scenes ), where you live life as a normal university boy for example, and you develop your strengh ( by sports and going to the gym ), if you take painting class you can paint pictures and win compeition, you have money management, you can buy gifts, better equipment for sports or painting etc etc, you can study and become smarter, and graduate and get married, or you can become a sports star, or famous painter it all depends on your choices and there is no combat what so ever!

so all those remains checked! what else is their in a RPG besides combat? there is some oo forgot one.

Quests CHECK

 

[Ubereil]

But if all you're interested in is an escapist story or a fantasy world to explore, then even the best such system will be meaningless to you.

That and roleplaying a character. The setting and story is way more interesting than the acuall system to me.

That probably comes down from my image of RPG's as putting you in the main character's position. When I'm watching movies and (especially) reading books I allways imagine what I'd do if I was in the main character's place. And that's why I play RPG's.

Übereil

 

[dyze]

i just like to crawl around in dark dungeons killing monsters and taking their stuff

 

[Alrik Fassbauer]

Then I should be afraid of you.

 

[Lucky Day]

Does anyone remember if the Gold Box games allowed you to skip the combat and let the computer determine it for you based on some of its algorithms?

Most of SSI's games at the time allowed for this and I remember some other games did this too. IIRC I think HoMM and Wastland allowed for this.

In Wizardry and most other games running away was also an option.

Starting with Diablo a lot of games now allow you to quickly zip back to your safe zone with the tedium (aka danger) of actually having to retrace your steps. Many reviewers can't stand games that still require you to do it manually.