Implementing the Element of Risk

[Tzarhunt]

Well, in my sense (and please believe I have some experience as a rolemaster), what people like in RPGs is doing things, an not idle IC chat. Problem is, idle IC chat is the only type of RP available so far (unless you have high description skills and a great proficiency in English (which is, for instance, not my case)). 'Doing stuff' is highly repulsive to RPers as of now because the rules/mechanics corpus is so far from a model representing a reality. Fights are not deadly at all, if your skill is low you don't even have the slightest chance to do what a high-ranker can do (actually you can't even try), there is no coded 'cognition' stat, and much, much more.

I din't think there is sense in trying to emulate a tabletop RPG, which itself is designed to emulate a reality (note that I said A reality, not THE reality). The very thing that makes a tabletop what it is is the absence of direct interface, so I don't think we can achieve this. I think the mechanics should stick to a realist model rather than trying to get close to a RPG-concept. Beside, I don't think a realist model would impair the grinders' fun, and I'm convinced it might even help them feel an inclination to RP, as it will make much easier to identify their character's actions as their. Now, I'm only an occasional grinder (it's rare there is more than 30 on when I log in), and I'd love to hear a 'professional grinder''s opinion on that.

[Catlemur]

I beg you.No more RP..

[Aramara Meibi]

Problem is, idle IC chat is the only type of RP available so far

this is absolutely not true. Currently there are many great, engaging story lines taking place that are much, much more than idle chat.

And I don't believe that implementing such detailed mechanics is at all impossible. Currently I'm playing a game which has such detailed, engaging mechanics which through the simple act of gameplay produce wonderfully immersive and hands down epic narratives. That game has been in development for about as long as PS, and is only being coded by one guy. It's not impossible, it can be done. It's been done in roguelikes and MUDs. It can be done here.

The only thing is that DF is a single player. I love the communicative storytelling aspects of PS, being able to work with other players to forge the narrative, but, like I mentioned in the original post, that usually comes at the cost of ignoring the mechanics of the game completely. That is an affront to the developers who've worked on the mechanics side of things. Also, the players who spend every second of gameplay grinding away are in no way engaging other players, which is an affront to the stated purpose of the game.

I'm sorry to keep going back to combat as an example, but it's probably the easiest aspect of the game in which this disparity can be illustrated. If there was a fight between two players taking place, and Player A says "/me thrusts his saber at Player B's side while it is exposed" there should be a mechanic that coincides with that action and dictates its results, results that each player/character has to live and deal with, and react to appropriately.

[Pakarro]

What you want is a tabletop rpg, which this one is not...

[Tzarhunt]

I'm not sure you can use DF as a comparison; fortress mode implies no direct control over the characters, and Adventure mode is turn-by-turn (I fail to see how a 'aim your hits' system would work in a real-time game, as an example). However, the effort put in avoiding any nonsensical abstraction such as hit points is to be noted. So far, the 'random' aiming system is rather satisfying, even if a high skill superiority over your target should probably increase the chances to hit most vital / unprotected location (rather than having an effect on the amount of damage, how absurd is that... almost as absurd as dying only by being hit at the hands).

So far PS is getting more and more of a hack-and-slash, and a boring one.

Problem is, idle IC chat is the only type of RP available so far

this is absolutely not true. Currently there are many great, engaging story lines taking place that are much, much more than idle chat.

Well you invent story lines, but you get none of the action they involve ingame (at least not mechanic wise). You have to tell everything. Rules supporting creative actions would help greatly reducing the writing-skill barrier and eliminate the need to reach a consensus between all involved party (also, a tested-out system that would take account of numbered stats and skills would give a concrete interest in character progression related to RP).

I think the narrative approach is popular only among a restricted class of roleplayers, and well above the capabilities of an engine-ruled game.

[Aramara Meibi]

Adventure mode is turn-by-turn (I fail to see how a 'aim your hits' system would work in a real-time game, as an example).

If you've ever RPd a combat scenario, you'd know that it's near impossible to do without taking turns. So why not build mechanics around that? Yes, this is a real-time game, but how about combat mechanics which are turned base, so that when a duel challenge is accepted, a turn-based mechanics takes over between the two players (or between player and mob).

So far PS is getting more and more of a hack-and-slash, and a boring one.

Exactly! And what if, instead, when our characters ventured out for a hunt, it was a real dynamic experience, an ADVENTURE, in which they had to make choices, take risks, make a sacrifice here and there and come out victorious (or die in an epic struggle)?

What you want is a tabletop rpg, which this one is not...

Let's try to remain open minded here, since when was the world so divided into black and white? Why does it have to be one or the other? Why can't we develop a system that brings the two halves together?

In my original post, I was not asking for a further divide. The idea of a strict RP server was brought up and I agreed that it may be worth a try, but the ideas being discussed in this thread are meant to forge a link between RP and mechanics. The two should be reflective of each other, intrinsically intertwined, not dividing lines.

[Aiwendil]

And now to something completely different: The Larch

[Illysia]

Aramara, while it may be possible, I'm pretty sure you can't do that with this medium, for all practical purposes. You more or less have to change the foundational structure of MMOs to make it work. This is probably why RP is retreating across the board in this medium.

[Pakarro]

What you want is a tabletop rpg, which this one is not...

Let's try to remain open minded here, since when was the world so divided into black and white? Why does it have to be one or the other? Why can't we develop a system that brings the two halves together?

In my original post, I was not asking for a further divide. The idea of a strict RP server was brought up and I agreed that it may be worth a try, but the ideas being discussed in this thread are meant to forge a link between RP and mechanics. The two should be reflective of each other, intrinsically intertwined, not dividing lines.

Actually, I fully agree with you in that respect. But, as Illysia said, the mechanics to implement this would be extremely cruel - probably going Elder Scrolls way ... .

The element of risk would be nice to have, to go back. Maybe mobs should stop attacking after you are almost dead, then you have to find a healer... Otherwise, a stronger mob or player attacks, you are dead, finish. So you must have a way out, somehow. More trouble, but doable, and probably worth it.

What I really would like is magic without fighting (hypnosis, taming, or similar), but this will have to be a different thread.

[Talad]

I think there are definitely good comments in this thread, the basic point is in fact risk. As we designed the death realm, we envisioned it as a place where you may roam for days before coming out, in an ever changing set of puzzles and places. The issue is that we didn't yet develop it as much as we would like. With a bigger Death Realm, dying will become definitely more scary, at least for the ones who want to live in Yliakum, and will make every fight more adrenalinic. This is still in our plans, just not implemented fully.

The second point is true death, we have plans and actually half-developed a true death area, where the players willing to, will have the risk to really die, so their char will be deleted from the database in that case. This is will be at the option of the players anyway, in very limited places, where you explicitly enter and approve to be in.

These are the two parts of risk we planned already long time ago and are still on plan.

[Aramara Meibi]

What I really would like is magic without fighting (hypnosis, taming, or similar), but this will have to be a different thread.

there was a really nice thread a while back with spell suggestions, a good amount of them not associated with combat, ie red way spells that deal with metalcrafting. I was looking for it to offer you a link, but I can't find it now.


Talad, I really look forward to the expansion of the Death Realm, as well as the expansion of other locales in the game. That's the kind of development that promotes RP rather than hinders it.

Now, restricting Permanent Death to certain areas I feel is a more dubious solution. I think the proper steps that need to be taken are this, first, let's come to a consensus in settings as to what can cause Permanent Death, how does Dakkru and the Death Realm fit into Permanent Death, what exactly happens at Permanent Death. Then, design the mechanics for Permanent Death around those settings. In other words, I don't think location is the circumstance which should dictate a permanent death, as much as cause of death should.

[Aramara Meibi]

Aramara, while it may be possible, I'm pretty sure you can't do that with this medium, for all practical purposes. You more or less have to change the foundational structure of MMOs to make it work. This is probably why RP is retreating across the board in this medium.

Yes, we're in total agreement, and that's basically what I'm asking for here, a total restructuring of the system. Here's the thing, the games that everyone refers to as MMORPGs are really mislabeled. They should be called MMOGs. PS included, as it stands. A player can log into PS, and play the entire game on their own, without any player/player interaction. Can you train skills and stats without interacting with others? certainly. Can you craft your own armor and weapons and gain all the glyphs necessary to becoming an all powerful war-mage without interacting with other players? why, yes of course. It's just neat to see other people running around doing the same, makes you feel included right?

But that's not what RP is about. RP is about interaction, engagement. So far, the only way development has made interaction necessary is to make gameplay as obscure and unintuitive as possible, and asking politely that players stay IC in main.

So what we have here is a game where every player's experience is basically the same. We've all done the same quests, fought the same mobs endlessly, and it's only the players who've taken it upon themselves to spin their own story threads that are having a unique experience, and trying our hardest to create a unique experience for everyone else as well. It's the player community which makes this game unique. It's about time the system catches up to that. This game shouldn't be able to function without players.

[Illysia]

This is true, but the kind of overhaul you are proposing it not very likely to ever get implemented. The workload for it is just too large. Not to mention, It is hard enough just to get mechanics that don't hinder RP much less reinforce it. This is a battle I would not suggest taking on, it's just too large. It's more likely to just leave you burnt out rather than accomplish something... I've seen many people, myself included, fall to that one.

[weltall]

it's possible to notice someone plays too much when there are many people around to notice the problems of what is being said.

[tman]

What about a different approach?  Instead of overhauling the mechanics to include things like loss of limb, true death, etc. in order to encourage roleplay (but still not enforce it), what about adding features that require, or at least reward, teamwork.  For example, quests that can be completed in groups, dungeons with difficult hostile enemies so that it would be hard to make it through alone, hostile monsters and rogues along the roads so that people actually have a reason to hire mercenaries and travel in groups for safety.  Maybe have a random event every once in a while where creatures climb out of the sewers and attack civilians, requiring nearby players to work together to stop them.

Most of these things require hostile enemies in order to work.  Once we have hostile monsters this will open so many doors for other gameplay elements.

As for the issue that we all have the same in-game experience, how about randomly generated quests?  A courier could ask you to deliver a letter or package to any randomly generated NPC, a baker or cook could ask you to bring any guard their dinner or specialty pie or whatever.  An alchemist could ask you to deliver a potion to pretty much anyone.  The guards could tell you that there have been an increased number of attacks by [insert creature] and ask you to bring x number of [that creature's loot] as proof that you've killed them.  The type of creature could be randomly selected based on the character's combat abilities (always choose an enemy that is "about as strong as you" to keep things interesting).