Removing quantitative descriptions

Clockwork Knight · Apr 11, 2010

An Excel sheet? Hilarious. So having the specific info what an item does disturbs your frail immersion and your *roleplay*. Seems as if games that enable true roleplaying and don't require autism to comprehend are right up your alley. Nice to see that Bios streamlining efforts are not wasted.

I didn't say they require autism to comprehend (I said more than once that having extremely specific numbers doesnt make the game harder, in fact quite the opposite), but that excusing deatailed values as "the character doing it" is stretching it. It's meta knowledge.

so, nice try

VentilatorOfDoom · Apr 11, 2010

Clockwork Knight said:
I didn't say they require autism to comprehend (I said more than once that having extremely specific numbers doesnt make the game harder, in fact quite the opposite),

Yet games become easier and easier, while at the same time hiding *the numbers*, how come?

Clockwork Knight said:
but that excusing deatailed values as "the character doing it" is stretching it.

So detailed values - depicting the specifics of an RPG - now need an excuse?

Clockwork Knight · Apr 11, 2010

VentilatorOfDoom said:
Yet games become easier and easier, while at the same time hiding *the numbers*, how come?

Unrelated. I was saying that it's easier to manage items if you have meta knowledge available, like very detailed "2d6 ice damage + 15% chance of wounding". Not that the games become easier as a whole.

And don't say *the numbers*. I'm not saying they're scary.

So detailed values - depicting the specifics of an RPG - now need an excuse?

I was referring to J1M's "the party wizard / seasoned fighter does it".

And no, they don't need an excuse, but we're discussing how a rpg would work without detailed specifics and someone came up with how it's justified in the game world, and not meta knowledge.

VentilatorOfDoom · Apr 11, 2010

Clockwork Knight said:
Unrelated. I was saying that it's easier to manage items if you have meta knowledge available, like very detailed "2d6 ice damage + 15% chance of wounding". Not that the games become easier as a whole.

Yes it's easier to manage items/abilities/spells whatever if you have detailed knowledge about how they work. And I dare say that contributes towards enabling a tactically challenging game. I understand though that in modern RPGs which largely revolve around story/romance and other forms of larping these things lose their significance.

Clockwork Knight · Apr 11, 2010

VentilatorOfDoom said:
Yes it's easier to manage items/abilities/spells whatever if you have detailed knowledge about how they work. And I dare say that contributes towards enabling a tactically challenging game.

Only if the game requires that knowledge to be tactically challenging. There can be tactics outside of item managing.

I understand though that in modern RPGs which largely revolve around story/romance and other forms of larping these thing lose their significance.

Is that directed at me and what you suppose are my tastes?

VentilatorOfDoom · Apr 12, 2010

Clockwork Knight said:
Only if the game requires that knowledge to be tactically challenging. There can be tactics outside of item managing.

Name a tactically challenging RPG that doesn't require knowledge.

Is that directed at me and what you suppose are my tastes?

It's directed at modern RPGs that are shifting the focus towards *immersion*, *emotional engagement* and the like.

Clockwork Knight · Apr 12, 2010

nyaaa...can't think of any RPG at the moment.

But the more recent Rainbow Six games are a good example, I think. Vegas 2 at least has a mode where you just have to clean a map with your regular character. Thinking of better ways to approach and hit the target is much more important than just gathering good guns/armor in the campaign mode.

t's directed at modern RPGs that are shifting the focus towards *immersion*, *emotional engagement* and the like.

Well, I wasn't thinking of that kind of immersion ("it's like I'm really sheapard")

J1M · Apr 12, 2010

Looks like you've finally hit the point I mentioned at the start of the thread:

J1M said:
Once you correctly identify the problem you are trying to solve you will see that this is a stupid idea.

Zeus · Apr 13, 2010

J1M said:
Looks like you've finally hit the point I mentioned at the start of the thread:

J1M said:

Once you correctly identify the problem you are trying to solve you will see that this is a stupid idea.

Click to expand...

I can't believe you've been taking your posts in this thread seriously.

J1M · Apr 13, 2010

Zeus said:
J1M said:

Looks like you've finally hit the point I mentioned at the start of the thread:

J1M said:

Once you correctly identify the problem you are trying to solve you will see that this is a stupid idea.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I can't believe you've been taking your posts in this thread seriously.

Don't be butthurt. The first post was serious. And all the posts that I quoted it in. It is possible to get across a message in more than one way. Explicitly stating it didn't work for everyone, so I used another method too.

Lumpy · Apr 13, 2010

Clockwork Knight said:
VentilatorOfDoom said:

Yes it's easier to manage items/abilities/spells whatever if you have detailed knowledge about how they work. And I dare say that contributes towards enabling a tactically challenging game.

Click to expand...

Only if the game requires that knowledge to be tactically challenging. There can be tactics outside of item managing.

Are you some sort of a moron? RPG tactics = number crunching, that's the way it was and that's the way it will be.

It's not for no reason that 90% of the studies in military academies are focused on firearm accuracy, damage, weight and speed penalty.

Clockwork Knight · Apr 13, 2010

By that point I was thinking of games in general, going on a tangent. That's why I said "game"

And since I already explained this to Ventilator, I guess that makes us brothers in moroncy

Zeus · Apr 13, 2010

J1M said:
Zeus said:

J1M said:

Looks like you've finally hit the point I mentioned at the start of the thread:

J1M said:

Once you correctly identify the problem you are trying to solve you will see that this is a stupid idea.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I can't believe you've been taking your posts in this thread seriously.

Click to expand...

Don't be butthurt. The first post was serious. And all the posts that I quoted it in. It is possible to get across a message in more than one way. Explicitly stating it didn't work for everyone, so I used another method too.

Hey, if you want me to take you seriously in this thread, don't respond with open disbelief when I take you seriously in this thread.

Awor Szurkrarz · Apr 24, 2010

Lumpy said:
Would it work to entirely skip quantitative descriptions of items, letting the player judge their approximate power by the description text? The stats would still exist, of course, but they would be hidden.
Thus, the player would no longer simply choose the item with the highest stats. He would have to make judgements, perhaps experiment with different items to see which one works best. A fancy new sword will not go directly to the vendor, but rather see at least a bit of battle until the player decides whether to use it or not.

It would make sense only in a game that would drop the whole anti-realism thing that is so popular in cRPGs. Otherwise you need numbers because you don't get any sensible results from your actions.
If you can cut off a limb of any un-armoured person with any sensible sword when hitting in a correct way, then the quantitative become unnecessary.
If that person has 60hp and the sword just does 1D10 damage, then the quantitative descriptions are necessary because the system doesn't make sense and the only reasonable thing one can do is number-crunching.

Disconnected · Apr 24, 2010

Lumpy said:
Would it work to entirely skip quantitative descriptions of items, letting the player judge their approximate power by the description text? The stats would still exist, of course, but they would be hidden.
Thus, the player would no longer simply choose the item with the highest stats. He would have to make judgements, perhaps experiment with different items to see which one works best. A fancy new sword will not go directly to the vendor, but rather see at least a bit of battle until the player decides whether to use it or not.

In conjunction, a skill system that isn't based on weapon type would work best. Skills such as Fast attack, Power attack, Parry, Critical strike, so that each weapon the player finds is potentially useful, rather than only those that fit his particular weapon specialization.

There's at least two issues you'll need to address thoroughly to not screw players by refusing to describe stuff numerically.

Firstly, descriptions need to make the differences very, very clear. There's no real reason for me to assume a rusty dagger, for example, is less efficient than a shiny new one. The only seemingly-obvious conclusion I'd draw from those different descriptions, would be that the rusty dagger probably won't fetch as good a price as the shiny new one.

Secondly, RPG systems (especially the combat-related bits) tend to use variables that are much greater than the range of modifiers. Take D&D, for example: the hit roll has a range of 20 (+1 to +20), while the weapon modifier has a range of 11 (-5 to +5). And in practise the modifier range is virtually always between 2 and 4.
The result is that a player will have to do a frustrating amount of testing to have even a vague idea of what piece of gear is more efficient in a given situation, and indeed, might get the altogether wrong idea despite intensive testing.

Finally, it is much easier to relate to stuff you fully understand. How do I determine whether or not my character is able to snatch a purse from an alert guard? How do I determine how great a distraction I need to devise if snatching the purse from the guard isn't possible when he's paying attention? Numbers usually won't tell me what the outcome will be, but they usually will make it perfectly clear what the odds are. Without that knowledge, I can't play my character. At least, not unless my character is supposed to behave as if he's impulsive to the point of insanity and severely brain damaged.

Kaucukovnik · Apr 27, 2010

How exactly is tactical challenge crucial for roleplaying? Are you sure that tactics is closer to RPG than LARP?

crufty · May 5, 2010

without bothering to read the past 3 pages

I think stats are worthless.

What has meaning is the relative difference.

Strength: Childlike, Weak, Average, Strong, Super Strong, Arnold, Demigod, Godlike
sword skill: untrained, basic, advanced, master
sword damage: dull, sharp, lethal
sword attributes: light, heavy, short, long, fire, ice, etc

so I would expect a super strong PC w/ advanced sword skills wielding a heavy, lethal blade to do slay an unarmed peasant in the first blow that connects.

Sceptic · May 5, 2010

crufty said:
I think stats are worthless.

What has meaning is the relative difference.

Strength: Childlike, Weak, Average, Strong, Super Strong, Arnold, Demigod, Godlike
sword skill: untrained, basic, advanced, master
sword damage: dull, sharp, lethal

So how is that any different from:

Strength: range 1-8
sword skill: range 0-3
sword damage: 1d6, 1d8, 1d12

crufty · May 5, 2010

Sceptic said:
Strength: range 1-8
sword skill: range 0-3
sword damage: 1d6, 1d8, 1d12

not different...if range is 1-8 (as opposed to 1-100 or 3-25). internal mechanics would likely deal with numbers vs words. a prime difference might be damage: instead of doing points of damage, attacks cause a degredation of damage state

a sword strike vs armor generates a light wound
target wound state subtracts light wound from its current state. maybe when severely wounded a light wound doesn't do anything? or perhaps its random (# of light wounds @ severe state * x% = % target goes from severe wounds to mortally wounded state). this light wounds from severe to mortal could be a defining stat for monsters. Is it like hp? yes.

one thing to consider is pnp uses numbers for playability; in crpgs, the computer can do that for us automatically. trying to matrix a description to +3 would suck when rolling dice around the table.

another consideration is how opposing tests are resolved

easy vs skilled
hard vs unskilled

I think it is easier to design a mechanic around that then
4 vs 13, 4 vs 15
20 vs 5, 20 vs 1

Awor Szurkrarz · May 8, 2010

crufty said:
without bothering to read the past 3 pages

I think stats are worthless.

What has meaning is the relative difference.

Strength: Childlike, Weak, Average, Strong, Super Strong, Arnold, Demigod, Godlike
sword skill: untrained, basic, advanced, master
sword damage: dull, sharp, lethal
sword attributes: light, heavy, short, long, fire, ice, etc

so I would expect a super strong PC w/ advanced sword skills wielding a heavy, lethal blade to do slay an unarmed peasant in the first blow that connects.

What is a "lethal" blade?
Sword doesn't need to be very sharp to be able to sever limbs, it shouldn't be heavy (heavy swords are either for strength/endurance training or for display), the PC doesn't need to be super strong and doesn't need to have advanced swords skills.
Averagely strong guy with basic training and a properly balanced sword with a proper blade geometry can easily sever limbs of unarmored opponents.

Still, if you have a basic training and are facing a master, I would expect you to be very dead within a few minutes.

1eyedking · May 9, 2010

I like to have both of them, thank you very much.

crufty · May 10, 2010

Awor Szurkrarz said:
What is a "lethal" blade?

Brain toot.

lethal -> vorpal

J1M · May 12, 2010

crufty said:
Awor Szurkrarz said:

What is a "lethal" blade?

Click to expand...

Brain toot.

lethal -> vorpal

And how exactly does someone who hasn't played D&D for 15 years know that vorpal in the description means a magical enchantment with a chance of an instant beheading? At what point does it become painfully obvious that "greatly magical sword with a slightly better than rare chance of doing grievous wounds to someone's neck" is just a babblefish translation of "+3 Vorpal (10% chance of beheading target)" from sane to LARPer?

Awor Szurkrarz · May 12, 2010

Yeah. Again, if you make a system where swords aren't designed to kill people by default, but you need a special sword that has a special property that allows to behead people, then you're better off with quantitative descriptions.

crufty · May 15, 2010

J1M said:
And how exactly does someone who hasn't played D&D for 15 years know that vorpal in the description means a magical enchantment with a chance of an instant beheading?

What is this next gen faggotry?

In the days of Bards Tale, you knew you had something special when you'd go to sell a "item i - Sword" and the shop keeper would offer you 10000gp off the bat.

In those old days, you had a guy with an identify spell, or found an identify scroll, or paid a shop keeper 25gp, and the result would be:

"This is a <vorpal sword of the rpg codex> . It is worth [ 2000 gp ]:
+10% beheading vs trolls
+25% resistance to trannies/nazis
-25% buggery"

Removing quantitative descriptions

Arcane

Administrator

Arcane

Administrator

Arcane

Administrator

Arcane

Arcane

Cipher

Arcane

Arcane

Arcane

Cipher

Arcane

Scholar

Cipher

Arcane

Arcane

Arcane

Arcane

Erudite

Arcane

Arcane

Arcane

Arcane