Indie RPGs should have simplified item systems

[Whiny-Butthurt-Liberal]

Specifically, armor should always be one item, rather than four/five/twenty. Not only does it remove the tedium of juggling different armor pieces, but it also makes sense from a both gameplay and graphics perspective. Nobody wants to walk around wearing a golden chestplate, red wizards skirt, barbarian foot wraps, Edward's scizzor-hands, Mexican sombrero, and a ragged cloak. Not only do you look like a retard, but you also miss out on those sweet set bonuses.
Which is why all armor should always be one piece - in 3D games with AAA-level graphics, preferably, with a toggleable helmet invisibility option (just a matter of making the helmet model invisible for those who want to see their character's face).
Additionally, armor should be mostly decorative, to prevent an internal dispute between making your character look awesome, and making xem strong enough to solo the ironman mode. The biggest impact of your choice of armor should be heavier armors reducing your character's mobility at the cost of extra protection.
As for weapons - they should affect gameplay in terms of different mechanics for different types of weapons, - a longsword should not swing the same way as a staff, axe, or club. And no, it shouldn't be just longswords - other types of weapons are just as fun, and variety is a big plus. Witcher 3 comes to mind as a grievous offender, where 90% of weapons are swords, and the other 10% are garbage-tier blunt weapons that Geralts swings to slash the enemies somehow.
All the real bonuses should be on rings/amulets/belts/earrings/other invisible equippable items, as well as potions/scrolls/spells/etc that add an effect to your armor'weapons. Here, you can go apeshit with the complexity, and have multiple parallel categories with several items in each.
In other words, instead of having an obsidian longsword of fire +3 that swings the exact same way as a celestial club of virgin power, you should have a longsword (that you crafted from a block of obsidian you found in an ancient mine), a ring of +3 strength (and -2 intellect as a trade-off), and a flask of fire that, when activated, adds a flame effect to your equipped weapon.

P. S. Yes, making your character look awesome is an important part of playing an RPG.

 

[Neanderthal]

No.

 

[Falksi]

Yes & No.

For me it should be a bout playstyle, and interlinking different sets of armour (& weapons) to tailor your own.

 

[Okagron]

A transmog/illusion system pretty much solves the issue of not looking like a murder hobo.

 

[Lurker47]

Dumb, baby opinions.

As for weapons - they should affect gameplay in terms of different mechanics for different types of weapons, - a longsword should not swing the same way as a staff, axe, or club. And no, it shouldn't be just longswords - other types of weapons are just as fun, and variety is a big plus.

This would be nice but it has nothing to do with your main point.

 

[Jokzore]

So ... Dark Souls with Ass Effect onesies?

 

[Grampy_Bone]

nah

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[aweigh]

Specifically, armor should always be one item, rather than four/five/twenty. Not only does it remove the tedium of juggling different armor pieces, but it also makes sense from a both gameplay and graphics perspective. Nobody wants to walk around wearing a golden chestplate, red wizards skirt, barbarian foot wraps, Edward's scizzor-hands, Mexican sombrero, and a ragged cloak. Not only do you look like a retard, but you also miss out on those sweet set bonuses.
Which is why all armor should always be one piece - in 3D games with AAA-level graphics, preferably, with a toggleable helmet invisibility option (just a matter of making the helmet model invisible for those who want to see their character's face).
Additionally, armor should be mostly decorative, to prevent an internal dispute between making your character look awesome, and making xem strong enough to solo the ironman mode. The biggest impact of your choice of armor should be heavier armors reducing your character's mobility at the cost of extra protection.

 

[Drowed]

You don't say.

About the weapons, yeah, that's would be interesting.

 

[Bladeract]

You don't need 500 dressup dolly items to give depth to a game system. I definitely agree on that part. However it should have depth like DnD, not be a joke/linear system like diablo or oblivion.

 

[Covenant]

and making xem strong enough to solo the ironman mode

Er, I think you meant ironperson mode, shitlord.

 

[frajaq]

P. S. Yes, making your character look awesome is an important part of playing an RPG.

True enough, but you don't need to sacrifice caring about equipment for it. It's the entire point of transmog systems in MMOs these days.
The two can co-exist with each-other, even in single player RPGs

 

[Ellef]

Stick to politics forums, Liberal.

 

[Whiny-Butthurt-Liberal]

transmog systems in MMOs

You mean, garbage garbages in GARBAGE?

 

[Whiny-Butthurt-Liberal]

However it should have depth like DnD

Elaborate, please.

This would be nice but it has nothing to do with your main point.

Except, it does. CRPGs typically have a lot of same-type weapons, which differ in stats only. I'm saying that the Dark Souls system, where different types of weapons actually swing differently, and have different mechanics/timings/trade-offs. Making it so that finding a single axe is more than enough to carry you through the game, if you use (and upgrade) it properly.

 

[HoboForEternity]

Dressing up is awesome. Shut the fuck up.

 

[Bester]

but you also miss out on those sweet set bonuses.

Remove set bonuses from games, problem solved.

 

[fantadomat]

When we talk about strange itemization systems:

 

[Feyd Rautha]

Which is why all armor should always be one piece

Yes, making your character look awesome is an important part of playing an RPG.

 

[Lagi]

armor should always be one item

I support armor items working like in D&D.
Everyone who try to balance pnp rpg, know the pain of adjusting the stats for multi pieces/ layers armor. If armor is only 1 dimensional stat, then it can be designed with single shoulder giving +0,05*quality of armor. But what if you like to add some armor type special abilities? left stone shoe giving +0,3* knockback protection (with other items, need to meet "1" threshold or you have no benefit)?

With armor being treat as a whole, its lots easier to design the gear that fit the gamestyle.
And if characters find some magic/better gear, then player implicitly replace plate gloves [from plate armor] with +2 virgin-powered mittens.

 

[Kyl Von Kull]

Don’t treat armor as a whole, treat body parts as discrete areas. This is one thing Kingdom Come: Deliverance does well. If your arm gets smashed by a warhammer with no protection, your arm will break. Hit your head and you’ll get a concussion. Fall and you twist your ankle. There are like 12 different armor slots, some overlapping and some protecting different body parts. I think it was a good system even if the game got absurdly easy at higher levels.

Generally speaking, I’d like to see RPGs where everyone gets hit less often, but when you do get hit it’s really devastating with lots of crippling injuries and a very limited pool of hit points. Like some GURPS modules. Good armor should prevent the body part in question from being insta-crippled.

 

[Lurker47]

Except, it does. CRPGs typically have a lot of same-type weapons, which differ in stats only. I'm saying that the Dark Souls system, where different types of weapons actually swing differently, and have different mechanics/timings/trade-offs. Making it so that finding a single axe is more than enough to carry you through the game, if you use (and upgrade) it properly.

You could argue that stats are the "mechanics" to any non-RT game- in a sense they often mimic the attributes you're describing. You didn't specify it being RT nor does this really directly tie into simplifying item systems (you had to outright explain this). What you said in the OP is the exact opposite of simplifying item systems for weapons.

As for weapons - they should affect gameplay in terms of different mechanics for different types of weapons, - a longsword should not swing the same way as a staff, axe, or club. And no, it shouldn't be just longswords - other types of weapons are just as fun, and variety is a big plus. Witcher 3 comes to mind as a grievous offender, where 90% of weapons are swords, and the other 10% are garbage-tier blunt weapons that Geralts swings to slash the enemies somehow.

The whole thing about "rings" and armour sets is just a fancy way of saying "muh aesthetic"- 8 or whatever different ring slots is just as tedious as multifaceted armour. The only reason why your ring-centric system is better is because your character won't look as goofy which is the epitome of and casual mindsets.


And a single axe isn't even enough for you to be carried through Dark Souls. And really, a better title for this thread should be "Make more games like Dark Souls" which is truly something the game industry needs to fixate more on. That and Battle Royales and also the whims of people who think armour in an RPG should only be there to make you look cool and rabidly shitpost on anyone who says otherwise.

 

[Whiny-Butthurt-Liberal]

Don’t treat armor as a whole, treat body parts as discrete areas. This is one thing Kingdom Come: Deliverance does well. If your arm gets smashed by a warhammer with no protection, your arm will break. Hit your head and you’ll get a concussion. Fall and you twist your ankle. There are like 12 different armor slots, some overlapping and some protecting different body parts. I think it was a good system even if the game got absurdly easy at higher levels.

Generally speaking, I’d like to see RPGs where everyone gets hit less often, but when you do get hit it’s really devastating with lots of crippling injuries and a very limited pool of hit points. Like some GURPS modules. Good armor should prevent the body part in question from being insta-crippled.

Muh realismm!!!

 

[Aqualung]

Talking about KCD, I felt a huge relief when I put a full helmet on that damn Henry.