RPGs allowing you to invest skill points freely

[Johannes]

If you want realism, a character's skill levels should stay mostly at what they are at character creation. No zero to hero in a week bullshit.

Then again, if you mow down thousands of trash mobs, that's some legit combat experience right there...

 

[Iucounu]

Learn-by-doing is a design nightmare that usually fails.

yea it always ends up with players exploiting the system and 8 zillion youtube videos with titles like "how to max lockpicking in 30 minutes"

The Long Dark avoids most of that due to scarcity of time and materials. You can't ice fish for hours without freezing to death, unless you gather lots of firewood to keep a fire burning, and then you won't have time for all that fishing anyway...

 

[Iucounu]

A huge number of the skills in Skyrim have a serious design flaw that's inextricable from the learn-by-doing system. Light Armor, Heavy Armor, Alchemy, Smithing, Enchanting, Speech, Pickpocket, and Illusion all require extensive grinding/spamming in order to attain or maintain usefulness.

That's one of the big problems with the Elder Scrolls system. You know who does this system much better? Maxis with The Sims. One simple and should be obvious reason, too. The Sims only uses this system on skills that the Sim actually actively does and it's typically for things that are done for an extended duration.

I recall ARK Survival Evolved gives you skill points for doing anything, then you can invest the points how you like. So instead of grinding a specific task, you can just keep playing the game to level up. To me this kind of general reward is different from the quest reward skill points in the OP, where they are artificially tied to some random event (like a conversation).

 

[Morpheus Kitami]

A game giving you skill points for doing something important is really no different than that game giving you XP that eventually results in a level up where you can put your skill points freely. Is putting a skillpoint you got from a conversation into a weapon skill really worse than getting enough XP to level up and then raising your weapon skills?

 

[Daemongar]

What if those skill points represented where the player wanted to go, rather than what they accomplished?

You mean "go" as in what the player (or character?) wants to learn? And then the player imagines that the character learns that behind the scenes, so to speak? I suppose that could work, if the skill points rewarded by the quest conversation (in the thread start) symbolize an increased willingness by the character to learn new things. Like: hero speaks to ex-girlfriend, get lots of new energy, decides to learn lockpicking and magic in his spare time.

No. Players as well as the characters they create are usually pragmatic in their approach. You invest in skills because you believe you will use them later. It's like studying for a test. Players put points into lockpick in the understanding that there will be locks to pick down the road. Pen and paper games had you actually pay for training at level up, but crpgs did away with that (some exceptions like M&M, etc) as it didn't fit with a game. So, part of your training would be the increase in skills.

Speaking to their old girlfriend and getting skill points? That's a problem with poor game design, not with how skill points and how they do or don't reflect reality. Even speaking to Deionarra in PS:T (your stalker), you get some xps, and maybe a skill applicable to the situation. There, you spoke with your girlfriend and the game handled it well. On level up, you can put points in lock picking, even though some of your current experience was conversation related. No big deal.

Now that I think about it - what specific game are you talking about that works how you explain?

 

[NecroLord]

You should only gain XP from performing those various tasks, not skills.
Uncovering a deeply buried mystery, successfully completing a quest through diplomacy (perhaps even earning bonus XP for the clever way in which you completed it) or slaying monsters.
Skills should only be gained at a levelup.

 

[Iucounu]

A game giving you skill points for doing something important is really no different than that game giving you XP that eventually results in a level up where you can put your skill points freely. Is putting a skillpoint you got from a conversation into a weapon skill really worse than getting enough XP to level up and then raising your weapon skills?

Experience from general playing is not that bad. And if a conversation is about combat, I see no problem with it increasing your combat skill. But if the conversation is about say gardening it makes no sense for the player to suddenly become much better at combat.

 

[Falksi]

Scenario: main quest sends your character visiting plot NPC, and after just a brief conversation the game suddenly gifts your character with multiple skill points, to be freely invested in any skill you like.

To me it's absurd. I can accept that your character gets better stats by doing something related to the skill, like better combat skill from actual combat, or talking shop with a sword instructor, or reading a skill book. But you shouldn't be able to increase combat skill from talking to your ex-girlfriend (unless she's a sword instructor).

Is this a normal and accepted mechanic in CRPGs? Do TTRPGs work the same, or do they hand out skill points in a more believeable manner?

 

[Iucounu]

What if those skill points represented where the player wanted to go, rather than what they accomplished?

You mean "go" as in what the player (or character?) wants to learn? And then the player imagines that the character learns that behind the scenes, so to speak? I suppose that could work, if the skill points rewarded by the quest conversation (in the thread start) symbolize an increased willingness by the character to learn new things. Like: hero speaks to ex-girlfriend, get lots of new energy, decides to learn lockpicking and magic in his spare time.

No. Players as well as the characters they create are usually pragmatic in their approach. You invest in skills because you believe you will use them later. It's like studying for a test. Players put points into lockpick in the understanding that there will be locks to pick down the road.

True, but what does this skill point currency represent for the character, in the game world? What in the game world prevents the character from investing in everything?

Now that I think about it - what specific game are you talking about that works how you explain?

I recall The Witcher 3 used to reward you (with experience or levelling I can't remember) after silly main quest conversations, but I could remember wrong. If no games are actually doing it it's fine with me.

 

[Morpheus Kitami]

A game giving you skill points for doing something important is really no different than that game giving you XP that eventually results in a level up where you can put your skill points freely. Is putting a skillpoint you got from a conversation into a weapon skill really worse than getting enough XP to level up and then raising your weapon skills?

Experience from general playing is not that bad. And if a conversation is about combat, I see no problem with it increasing your combat skill. But if the conversation is about say gardening it makes no sense for the player to suddenly become much better at combat.

I don't disagree that it's odd if you get an increase in your combat skill from a random conversation, unless it's supposed to be a metaphor, but putting skill points wherever you want isn't that odd. Put it another way, what's the difference between getting 20 XP, which gives you another level and then putting skill points in a combat skill, and getting 1 skill point from a conversation, taking that and 5 skill points you had previously, and putting that in a combat skill?
A random conversation, even a meaningful one, should not be giving you a meaningful amount of points either way, so unless you're raising a skill you have zero points in, it shouldn't be enough on it's own for any skill you have a meaningful amount of points in.

 

[Iucounu]

You should only gain XP from performing those various tasks, not skills.

Good point, I may have mixed those up in this thread. Though sometimes you may get so much experience at once that you're almost certain to level up on the spot.

 

[motherfucker]

The Oddity Experience System didn't ruin Underrail, as an example of a wacky system in a CRPG.

Oddity XP worked GREAT, in stark contrast to classic XP which ended up being broken in many ways. Goes to show how little the XP system itself matters compared to how well does the rest of the game interact with it. Kenshi is another example of this, as I said earlier.

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

The singular game I have ever enjoyed which featured improvements through use was Betrayal at Krondor. There were no character levels either. Skills were 0-100%, but could be boosted over with consumables if I remember correctly. Your Health and Stamina only increased by time spend in game. You could tag skills to increase the rate at which they improve, find/pay trainers, and use educational books to increase skills, but they aren't terribly abundant. Enough to matter, but your adventures will be doing the heavy lifting.

RPGs that use "improve through use" tend to be grindy MMOs. Dungeon Siege also comes to mind, but that was woefully bland. This sort of approach is not going to work in RPGs that aren't fairly open world. Betryal at Krondor has a strong narrative, but is huge and open with tons of things to do. It was satisfying to see some skills improve, like Haggle and Barding. Initially you might get thrown out of the place. Barding especially. As you improve over time you might get groans, then indifference, scattered applause, and finally showered with coin. It felt good. Man that game was great.

 

[Gargaune]

Aside from being a chore, learn-by-doing has adverse effects on builds and itemisation. Skyrim clearly showcases this - to keep all possible build options viable, equipment has to be reduced to interchangeable generics on leveled tiers. A designer can't place a Varscona +2 in Riverwood because then everyone would become longsword warriors (instead of everyone becoming magical stealth archers).

Point-buy, on the other hand, allows the player to commit to and pursue a role of their choosing regardless of the designer's loot distribution. You can decide you wanna go for halberds and actively invest in that and if you find Varscona +2 before you find a nice halberd, you can still make use of it without deviating from your planned build.

 

[Butter]

Aside from being a chore, learn-by-doing has adverse effects on builds and itemisation. Skyrim clearly showcases this - to keep all possible build options viable, equipment has to be reduced to interchangeable generics on leveled tiers. A designer can't place a Varscona +2 in Riverwood because then everyone would become longsword warriors (instead of everyone becoming magical stealth archers).

Point-buy, on the other hand, allows the player to commit to and pursue a role of their choosing regardless of the designer's loot distribution. You can decide you wanna go for halberds and actively invest in that and if you find Varscona +2 before you find a nice halberd, you can still make use of it without deviating from your planned build.

Skyrim devs were way ahead of you. They collapsed all weapons into one-handed, two-handed, and archery (they still didn't add any interesting uniques to the world though).

 

[Raghar]

Yes this is normal in CRPGs. There's nothing stopping you from investing the points into the skills you deem appropriate. Learn-by-doing is a design nightmare that usually fails.

Stonekeep was nice.

 

[Daemongar]

Aside from being a chore, learn-by-doing has adverse effects on builds and itemisation. Skyrim clearly showcases this - to keep all possible build options viable, equipment has to be reduced to interchangeable generics on leveled tiers. A designer can't place a Varscona +2 in Riverwood because then everyone would become longsword warriors (instead of everyone becoming magical stealth archers).

Point-buy, on the other hand, allows the player to commit to and pursue a role of their choosing regardless of the designer's loot distribution. You can decide you wanna go for halberds and actively invest in that and if you find Varscona +2 before you find a nice halberd, you can still make use of it without deviating from your planned build.

Skyrim devs were way ahead of you. They collapsed all weapons into one-handed, two-handed, and archery (they still didn't add any interesting uniques to the world though).

If the game doesn't have a bec de corbin, it ain't worth playing!

 

[Axioms]

In Axioms Of Dominion regular skill learning is sorta learn by use but as a turn based game where the world simulation actually advances every turn you can't just grind forever to become OP.

Additionally you get skill gains not only by actions but by osmosis, based on what other characters you spend your time with even if you aren't doing something related to a particular skill.

Families/organizations predispose their members to certain broad skillsets, with exceptional circumstances subverting that mechanic in some cases.

Also there's knowledge/books/magic other factors so you can study specific skills and this engages the somewhat complex two stage skill system of theory/practice.


Obviously in so-called crpgs where the world simulation is fake news you have to have more abstract systems, and especially in cases where so-called crpgs are creating a dissonance in contrasting time scales for the game.

 

[huskarls]

i never liked grinding or having to do every stupid quest for my rat race points. Wizardy IV and underrail you can just explore for your power...

for me I rather just get a set amount of skill mana at the beginning of each chapter, remove exterior motivation for content other than itself. or even stalker where there is no skills and its all itemization

 

[Axioms]

i never liked grinding or having to do every stupid quest for my rat race points. Wizardy IV and underrail you can just explore for your power...

for me I rather just get a set amount of skill mana at the beginning of each chapter, remove exterior motivation for content other than itself. or even stalker where there is no skills and its all itemization

Milestone exp is really becoming more popular these days. The debate about pros and cons is pretty interesting.

I think a major issue with games is that there's no internal clock, which would prevent grinding. Milestone exp avoids the issue entirely.

Use based skill exp or level based skill points both suffer specifically because of the lack of timer.

 

[Bad Sector]

Personally i like Morrowind's system (which is certainly different from Skyrim's so i do not see why every comment uses Skyrim as an example of what "Elder Scrolls" do, especially since almost every game seems to have a different approach): you get points to distribute to your stats at level up but the stat growth is affected by whatever skills you use. IMO this allows for both improving what you actually use but also allows you to improve stats regardless of what you did while playing - just not as much.

Having said that, i don't like all aspects of Morrowind's character progression system: i don't like how reaching a new level is done, i prefer the more traditional "you get a new level after some XP threshold".