The Rules of Role-Playing Games
So what role (if you'll pardon the double-meaning) should numbers & stats play in a computer roleplaying game (CRPG)? For that matter, can you take them out of a computer RPG and still have it be an RPG when you are done?

This rant was inspired principally by an old Developer Roundtable by RPGVault. It was just made more current by the recent review of Neverwinter Nights 2 in 1Up, where the reviewer seemed to be slamming the game for its use of the Dungeons & Dragons license.

In the NWN2 reviewer's his opinion, computer RPGs have evolved, and should leave the dice-and-paper world behind in favor of transparent simulations of entire fantasy worlds. Many game developers - including Chris Avellone, who's studio CREATED Neverwinter Nights 2 - seem to agree according to their opinions in the roundtable.

To quote from the review:

"As if the pencil and paper "module" approach were a virtue that computers -- by now demonstrably capable of simulating entire worlds with considerably more depth -- should emulate. It's like we're supposed to park half our brain in fea-ture mania and the rest in nostalgic slush, and somehow call bingo... Call me crazy -- I guess I'm just finally weary of being led around on a pencil-and-paper leash and batting numbers around a glorified three-dimensional spreadsheet in a computer translation that should have synthesized, not forklifted."

Is This The Inevitable Course of Evolution?
Now, nevermind for a minute the silliness of slamming a game for being true to the license it's based on. (Apparently, if you happen to LIKE Dungeons & Dragons, it's worth an 8 or a 9, according to the review). Roleplaying games have a heritage based on wargames and statistical "simulations." But is it time to move past it?

This isn't exclusive to RPGs. In the 90's, the advent of more roleplaying and 'storytelling'- oriented tabletop games led to what some might consider a bit of snobbery and cliqueishness in what is already a niche hobby. Clark Peterson of Necromancer Games once told (if memory serves) of an experience he had at Gen-Con (probably the biggest RPG-oriented convention in the world). Because the gaming rooms were full at the convention, they were forced to play at a table in the hall. Passers-by who were obviously players of a specific, popular "modern" roleplaying game made mocking comments about people playing such a "primitive" game. What they didn't realize was that some of the other people at the table playing D&D were the very creators of their more "sophisticated" game.

Just because these guys wanted to make something new and different doesn't mean they didn't enjoy and love the original. In fact, it was their love of the original that compelled them. It's just that now they had more choices. Novelty may not age well, but "fun" has never become obsolete.

Better Gaming Through Automation!
We can have computer model the world for us. According to the NWN2 reviewer, and many of the game developers interviewed for the RPG roundtable, all those stats were simply there for the convenience of human players. But with the computer handling those game rules, we don't need those stats anymore, do we?

Well, Doom (including all sequels) has stats. Only a few of them are visible to player - ammo counts, health, armor, and what weapons are currently being carried. There are a bunch more hidden beneath the surface. Like how many points of damage does a rocket-launcher do? What's the Armor and Health level of an imp? What's his movement speed relative to the player's? What's the range in which a zombie can detect the player?

If the rule system of Doom was put into a book and marketed as a tabletop game, it could very easily be an RPG. But that doesn't mean Doom the Computer Game was an RPG. But if you take the suggestions of some of these designers to their ideal point, what is the difference between Doom and their vision of "what an RPG should be?"

Very little.

So What Is An RPG and Why?
The goal of "pen-and-paper" RPGs (as I see it) is to provide a framework for players to participate in an interactive story from the perspective of one (or sometimes more than one) of the characters. Dungeons & Dragons was a rule system to allow players to jump into a distant-enough-not-to-be-sued facsimile of the worlds of Tolkien, Vance, Howard, and others and to be their own variation of one of those characters and have a chance to show how THEY would have handled being chased by nine Ringwraiths. It was fantasy fulfillment for literate, imaginative geeks.

The thing is, many computer games have similar goals. The stories may be trite and minimal, made interesting only by the player's participation. Whether it's slaying dragons, managing a goofy space station, participating in an underground blood-sport martial-arts competition, or acting as a commander-in-chief of an army in an interplanetary war, computer games combine that same objective of putting the player into an interesting fantasy context (even if it's "realistic" fantasy, such as The Sims) and combining it with interesting game-play mechanics --- ways in which they can affect the outcome.

Just because two activities have the same goal doesn't mean they are the same activity. I agree that the Thief games probably achieved the goal of making you feel like a medieval thief better than any roleplaying game I've ever played. But it doesn't make it an RPG.

The Rules of Role-Playing Games
I think it's the mechanics that make a game an RPG. And in my opinion, the mechanics of an RPG are characterized by the following:

1. In A Roleplaying Game, the level of success of a player's intended actions are determined by the attributes of his character(s).

This isn't an iron-clad definition of an RPG. Again - pretty much any computer game where you control some kind of avatar has attributes that limit the player. After all, your avatar in Doom has a limited run speed. His abilities were somewhat dynamic, modified temporarily by pick-ups.

But it's the emphasis on this that makes the difference. In Doom, the emphasis is on the player's personal ability. The avatar's characteristics are simply there to make it a challenge.


2. In A Roleplaying Game, some unpredictability should influence the outcome of critical actions.

There have been some great articles about why randomness (AKA "variance" or non-determinism) is a good thing in games. Me, I'll just leave it as a characteristic. If the outcome is perfectly predictable by the player, then it's not an RPG. Exceptions exist in the pen & paper world (and in the "Live Action Role-Playing" world), so I won't say it's an absolute characteristic. But if I click on a monster and always hit under certain circumstances, doing a constant amount of damage given the monster type and my avatar's current state, then I'm suspicious that I'm not playing an RPG.

It may be a very fun game with some fun timing challenges, but it's not an RPG.

3. In A Roleplaying Game, the player's character's attributes should (generally) improve over the course of the game.

I'll defer to Jeff Vogel, Indie RPG designer, for a response to this one (from the RPG Roundtable): "The great joy of playing RPGs is the sense of building something, of starting with something small and weak and, though time and skill, making it bigger. When you get up from the computer, you have the illusion of having made something better, and this satisfying feeling is a huge part of the appeal... Whether this is silly and lame or not is beside the point. This is why statless systems have never really caught on. They shift the focus entirely away from where it should be."

Be it from accomplishing goals, killing monsters, acquiring items, or just putting in your time, that's a fairly central characteristic of RPGs. Remove it, and I argue it's your game is no longer an RPG

But Do The Stats And Rules Detract From The Experience?
"Computer RPGs have inherited mechanics coming from the old paper RPGs, when random and statistics were needed to simulate actions that could not be simulated in a paper game. For instance, the Search statistic would define how good a player was at finding hidden objects in a room. Obviously that is necessary in a game that doesn't provide any images, while I find it awkward and totally anti-immersive in a virtual environment where you can simply hide the object and see if the player finds it as he explores the area." -- Raphael Colantonio, Arkane Studios

I loved the fact that you could find secret doors in Ultima Underworld by discovering what appeared to be texture glitches on the walls. That was very cool. But if the other elements of the game played that way, it wouldn't have been an RPG. As it was, Ultima Underworld was an "action RPG" hybrid. Raphael's contention may make for a very fun, cool game that accomplishes the same objective as an RPG - and perhaps be even more immersive - but it's not an RPG.

Do the characteristics of an RPG get in the way of it being immersive? Maybe. But as the Final Fantasy games and action-RPGs such as Diablo and Oblivion have shown, they can be tucked out of the way and forgotten about much of the time. I'm vaguely aware of stats in Aveyond - I mostly use the stat modifiers as a way to compare equipment.

While statistics and quantified damage numbers may not appear in glowing characters over objects in nature, the human mind is hard-wired to build statistical models of real-world events, if not necessarily to mathematical precision. Just listen to a commentary during a professional sports game. Or listen to people discussing options about a serious decision. And what does the weatherman say about whether or not it will rain today? Will you make money if you invest in such-and-such a mutual fund? Just how powerful is that new pickup truck? Who is stronger, Flash Gordon or Tarzan?

Our brains like to compare and quantify. We may not do it with exact precision, but we all do it. It helps us cope with an otherwise random world. Particularly in competitive computer games, players will often go through great pains to analyze game-data and determine hidden stats and game rules.

So maybe the stats and rules options presented in computer RPGs are simply saving players the trouble? While they may not appear as real life appears in nature, they may be acting as a something of a short-hand to help players deal with an extremely limited interface into a virtual world. After all, no matter HOW awesome your graphics get, there's still only so much realism that will fit on even a high-definition screen.

So please, don't take my stats away.


UPDATE: The Neverwinter Nights 2 Review has been PULLED from 1Up, and will not be appearing in the January issue of Computer Gaming World.... er, I mean, "Games For Windows Magazine." It came after a "long meeting between 1UP and GFW" because of issues of "tone/fairness" according to Jeff Green. He claims to stand by the reviewer, but admits that there were "valid issues with the review," and blames the editorial staff (specifically himself) for letting the review through.

The complete retraction can be found HERE.

Once again, thanks to Lum of BrokenToys.org for monitoring the quarter-to-three boards and breaking this news.



(Vaguely) related products of an infinite number of monkeys masquerading as me:
* The Evolution of Computer RPGs
* Are Hybrid RPGs Just The Poor Man's RPG?
* Original Dungeons & Dragons Trivia
* Scorpia's New Tale: An Interview
* RPG Design Seed Challenge
* No Design Survives Contact With The Players
* RPG Combat Design
* Non-Combat RPG: A Fool's Errand?
* The ORIGIN of Fun

Labels: Game Design, Roleplaying Games

- posted by The Rampant Coyote @ 8:18 AM (Permalink)