View Single Post

Default 

June 30th, 2011, 16:33
It makes sense.
Here's how:
The article does not describe the game as a RPG, giving causes for that.

But it follows the trend of defining RPGs as games including certain elements called RPG elements, exclusive to the genre and therefore, suitable to be used as markers of the genre (if the game has these elements in, then it is a RPG)

In this regard, a character advancement system is a socalled RPG element. In an article sustaining the thesis that the First Templar is not a RPG while maintaining the approach of identifying RPGs through socalled RPG elements, it is better to forget that advancing health and skills combat is also a character advancement system.
If not, it adds one RPG element to the game, endangering the conclusion that the game is not a RPG. It would be destructive to the entire effort to build up a point in the article.

Character advancement as a RPG element is all subjective. If it suits best not to see a system of progression as it exists in the First Templar as character advancement, as it is the case in the article, well, it is the sensible path to take.

The guy is intelligent enough not to shoot himself a bullet in the foot.
ChienAboyeur is offline

ChienAboyeur

SasqWatch

#7

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,886