RPG Mechanics: Skill Progression and Roles

[Sardukhar]

Now that news may be approaching at last, my biggest hope for this game is that it fulfills the promise Bloodlines chickened out on and lets you play someone who is not primarily a combatant.

Yes, very much this.

 

[Meccanical]

Now that news may be approaching at last, my biggest hope for this game is that it fulfills the promise Bloodlines chickened out on and lets you play someone who is not primarily a combatant. I can be a badass in pretty much every game, but I struggle to think of any who let you suck under fire and make do otherwise.

This is also my greatest wish. For too long have RPGs taken the path of forced combat encounters.

 

[BaalNergal]

I would enjoy a true chance to talk my way out of things most of the time.

 

[Suhiira]

Now that news may be approaching at last, my biggest hope for this game is that it fulfills the promise Bloodlines chickened out on and lets you play someone who is not primarily a combatant. I can be a badass in pretty much every game, but I struggle to think of any who let you suck under fire and make do otherwise.

Yes, very much this.

This is also my greatest wish. For too long have RPGs taken the path of forced combat encounters.

Agreed.

 

[Snowflakez]

My guess is that forced combat encounters will absolutely be in, but not because CDPR is trying to make the game an action title. But simple because, sometimes your actions will have violent consequences. Sometimes, you'll be backed into a corner and have no choice but to fight or die.

But they shouldn't be the majority, not by any means.

 

[Shavod]

Now that news may be approaching at last, my biggest hope for this game is that it fulfills the promise Bloodlines chickened out on and lets you play someone who is not primarily a combatant. I can be a badass in pretty much every game, but I struggle to think of any who let you suck under fire and make do otherwise.

Yeah, this is also my hope for the game and since they already named DX one of their main inspirations and in job offers they mentioned various playstyles, including stealth, I think it's definitely a possibility. Of course, just like Snowflakez, I do believe that there will be some forced combat encounters, I mean even original Deus Ex had couple of them, but if at least 90-95% combat encounters are purely optional, I would already consider it a huge success on the game's part.

 

[Suhiira]

My guess is that forced combat encounters will absolutely be in, but not because CDPR is trying to make the game an action title. But simple because, sometimes your actions will have violent consequences. Sometimes, you'll be backed into a corner and have no choice but to fight or die.

But they shouldn't be the majority, not by any means.

CDPR pretty much has to make combat an option because that's what most people expect.
The challenge is going to be:
Typical video game combat where one character can take on small armies?
Or CP2020 combat where it's a last resort because it's realistically dangerous?

That said I REALLY hope almost every quest/mission has some sort of non-combat solution.

That doesn't mean I expect to be able to talk my way out of a street mugger encounter; but maybe, just maybe, I can distract or trick him/her and get a running start!

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

The challenge is going to be: Typical video game combat where one character can take on small armies? Or CP2020 combat where it's a last resort because it's realistically dangerous?

There's also something to be said about the core combat design.... Working like any other shooter out there to set an easy entrance to the wiiiiide mainstream audience that might not have any brand loyalties or interests, or risking with different design methods to underline the want to push the envelope and the game intentionally not being 'an every saturday combat game' even when combat is as valid an option as any other.

 

[Gwydden]

On the topic at hand, I just came upon a Kotaku article on “Hilariously Bad Skills” from the tabletop, and not for the first time realized the general audience seems to expect this to be a glorified shoot-em-up *sigh*. It’s like they can’t fathom a video game making anything other than combat fun, even though there are a lot of enjoyable stealth games out there, and DX:HR’s dialogue battles were the best part of it, and if CDPR could make Gwent into a cool mini game then surely they can at the very least implement netrunning in a similar way. Hell, combat never was the standout feature in TW series, so I doubt CDPR would be hurt by deemphasizing it.

And to address some of what’s been said, I agree the game doesn’t have to be beatable without ever getting into a fight (though I wouldn’t mind that, I would expect such a playthrough to be difficult to achieve without meta gaming, if at all). Rather, I would like for the more grounded approach to combat: instead of making it the standard way of interacting with the world and therefore low-stakes, as in many video games, just make it one possible approach, a risky one, and therefore to be used with discretion. That reads far more “dystopian cyberpunk future” than blowing everything in your way to smithereens without a care in the world.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

What a disheartening and unimaginative article that is.

Much more creative way to look at things would’ve been to figure out ’how’ things could actually be made to work. But instead it’s a ”lol omg I can’t even....”

Buuut, that’s how things work now.

 

[Sardukhar]

What a disheartening and unimaginative article that is.

I felt the same!

It was very much like, "Hey. We don't need all this stuff because it's not shooting or sneaking past something. Also, perks!"

"For example, the Solo's "Combat Sense" allows a character to almost always react first in a fight, which is quite strong in a game with very deadly, very automatic weapons."

Quite strong..if, you know, the game is fight fight fight. ROLE PLAYING. How much use would that skill be in -your- life today?

Then this,

"Of these, I'd say the Corp, Rocker and Media are ripe for exclusion, though an argument could be made for the Netrunner, depending on the direction CD Projekt Red goes in relation to the 'net."

Yeah. "Could be made" in a Cyberpunk game. Uh huh.

"The way skill checks work in 2020 is straightforward: roll a ten-sided die, add the relevant attribute and skill (both of which max out at ten) to get your total. Beat 15 and you're golden (usually), though harder tasks may demand a 20 or 25 to pass."

Almost every part of that is wrong. Stats can easily go higher than 10. You add in gear. You add in Luck. You subtract and add a crap ton of other factors. Harder tasks may demand anywhere from 16 to 30 or higher - it's a difficulty based on factors. Sigh. But that makes sense, because they leave out the Luck stat altogether, even though it provides an important buffer to failure. Whatever.

"If you have zero points in this skill (almost all tabletop characters do), it means you rock up to all your important meetings naked or, at the very least, wearing a modest sock / pavlova.

I can't see a world where CD Projekt Red selects this for a premium place in the game, lest it's forced to model and texture said modest sock / pavlova."

I know of almost no PNP characters that have zero points in ATTR skills after a couple sessions. Want to get hired or laid? These. Are a social character? These skills.

Etc.

The rest of the list is equally ill-informed and, well, stupid. I think the high point might be how he laughs at Swimming. Heh. Yeaaaah...who needs to swim? You can just take a helicopter, right?! Also how he mocks the guy with Heavy Machinery and says he will be in the forklift while everyone else is in the tank. Well, you know what genius? Drive is a skill used just to drive a tank, but you know what other skill is used to operate ALL the tank functions, including drive -and- shoot? Yes. Heavy Machinery. Listed right there: tank.

Sigh.

This article is not the brightest, but there are some skills that could use a trim and aren't likely to feature in a CRPG. Teaching, Geology, etc. Of course, things like Stock Market, which high Int and Resources PCs use to get rich, will hopefully be in game. But we'll see.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

I can't even begin to pick it apart. It's frankly a bit depressing to read even.

there are some skills that could use a trim and aren't likely to feature in a CRPG. Teaching, Geology, etc.

There's that... BUT... There's always room for flavor skills (as in, a skill that does not have (nor require) the same impact or density as the more relevant and more frequently used skills, but still carries its load where it is relevant). Teaching and geology - as per your examples - might be something you only have a few instances of use in the game, but that's ok, it's all the more rewarding to find out that your seemingly unusual picks paid off. That's your character - a geologist teacher - and if the game responds to those choices in some way, it's good, and it's enough. The game is only richer by the inclusion.

 

[Snowflakez]

Kotaku is by no means a bad outlet (though they are certainly very politically biased) and they've released numerous excellent investigative journalism pieces (particularly the bit about the collapse of that EA singleplayer Star Wars game), but from what you guys have explained, this does seem like a poor piece of journalism.

I'll read it in a bit and report back with my thoughts, but I'm generally in the camp that the more skills, the more class choices, and particularly the more non-combat oriented roles and skills, the better.

 

[Suhiira]

I think it comes from the "Anything not combat related is pointless" mindset.

That or a total lack of imagination ... If it isn't a standard feature in Triple A games it's obviously impossible to implement.

 

[Sardukhar]

I can't even begin to pick it apart. It's frankly a bit depressing to read even.



There's that... BUT... There's always room for flavor skills (as in, a skill that does not have (nor require) the same impact or density as the more relevant and more frequently used skills, but still carries its load where it is relevant). Teaching and geology - as per your examples - might be something you only have a few instances of use in the game, but that's ok, it's all the more rewarding to find out that your seemingly unusual picks paid off. That's your character - a geologist teacher - and if the game responds to those choices in some way, it's good, and it's enough. The game is only richer by the inclusion.

I think there is an argument that the game is less Cyberpunk if you're playing a geology teacher, frankly. Those skills also take time and effort and, let's be frank, appeal to only the hardest of hard-core RPers. Not even I need them in a CRPG, or really want them. And a certain kind of RPer, too. Games like Unknown Armies use skills like "Drive Really Well" and "Science is Great!" to embrace a less-crunch approach.

And in PnP, they were a skill point sink in a dangerous world, forcing Refs to hand out more skill points if they wanted well-rounded players, but then limit skill maximums because silly.

In context, I don't think a trimming of the 1-in-100-used skills is bad at all - but if PCs want them, fine. I'm not, as a Ref, likely to use certain skills. I have enough on my plate without trying to make the botanist carpenter feel suitably used in a session.

I don't think it's worth the effort to make the geology teacher feel great about his skill picks in CP2077. Not really the setting for that. Feel great about picking Crytank operation or Forgery or Personal grooming, yeah, very Cyberpunk. But landscaping or Modify Ski-doo or whatever estoric skill exist IRL but isn't reasonably needed in Cpunk? Nah.

 

[Snowflakez]

I think there is an argument that the game is less Cyberpunk if you're playing a geology teacher, frankly. Those skills also take time and effort and, let's be frank, appeal to only the hardest of hard-core RPers. Not even I need them in a CRPG, or really want them. And a certain kind of RPer, too. Games like Unknown Armies use skills like "Drive Really Well" and "Science is Great!" to embrace a less-crunch approach.

And in PnP, they were a skill point sink in a dangerous world, forcing Refs to hand out more skill points if they wanted well-rounded players, but then limit skill maximums because silly.

In context, I don't think a trimming of the 1-in-100-used skills is bad at all - but if PCs want them, fine. I'm not, as a Ref, likely to use certain skills. I have enough on my plate without trying to make the botanist carpenter feel suitably used in a session.

I don't think it's worth the effort to make the geology teacher feel great about his skill picks in CP2077. Not really the setting for that. Feel great about picking Crytank operation or Forgery or Personal grooming, yeah, very Cyberpunk. But landscaping or Modify Ski-doo or whatever estoric skill exist IRL but isn't reasonably needed in Cpunk? Nah.

Agreed. It's well and good to let the player have an infinite number of roleplaying possibilities, but video games have budgets, and ultimately, it's just not feasible (or probably even possible, unless you make a text-based RPG) to introduce every little thing everybody wants.

 

[Sardukhar]

Agreed. It's well and good to let the player have an infinite number of roleplaying possibilities, but video games have budgets, and ultimately, it's just not feasible (or probably even possible, unless you make a text-based RPG) to introduce every little thing everybody wants.

Well and again, in terms of flavour, I think it does the game no favours to encourage non-cyberpunk-type characters. At least for the first game, where theme-setting is so important.

I don't want everyone to be a Netrunner or Fixer, but, you know...everyone should be mostly Cyberpunk. Dangerous, scared, cool. Blurring the line between prey and predator. There is LOTS of room for character creation and variety without having knitting-club presidents who cross-specialize in crossword-puzzle design as main characters.

Maybe a knitting-club president who -also- owes organized crime for his illegal spinal enhancements and had to change his name after he bailed on the political social-engineering job he was doing for them because his son never made it out of the hospital after all. Now he works as a Tech and watches his (enhanced) back 24/7 because Yakuza don't forget - especially not after their candidate doesn't get the seat on City Council...

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

I think there is an argument that the game is less Cyberpunk if you're playing a geology teacher, frankly.

I don't think that way. If it so happens that those are the only skills the player picks, it's his loss when he notices how severely limited his options are. I think geology and teching would be a good for a Nomad, for example, or a slightly eccentric Corp. Or... whoever. I mean, in the context of the game, they appear more as hobbies or other kind of similiar sidelines, but variety is a good thing. Not everyone needs to be a gun toting, self grooming, mechanist.

What I'm saying, is that there is true calling for skills and interactions in cRPG's that are not among the obvious picks.

Those skills also take time and effort and, let's be frank, appeal to only the hardest of hard-core RPers. Not even I need them in a CRPG, or really want them.

Everything takes time and effort. I'd say - unsurprisingly perhaps - that gameplay variety is the most important one for a gamelike this, and a game in the first place. It doesn't matter whom they appeal to or not, nor does it matter if you or I want or need them, or not. The crux of the point is that 'they are there' for people who do wish or by chance end up with them and that they work to their end where their application is relevant (which might be scarce, but nonetheless).

And in PnP, they were a skill point sink in a dangerous world

I think that's a fair trade. Unconventional characters should be an option, even if they make the game more difficult in general. They don't require IP bloat, just consideration from the player on what he wants to pursue. The key, I suppose, though, is to communicate what those skills are used for more thoroughly than just the basics. The player can do the math from there.

I don't think it's worth the effort to make the geology teacher feel great about his skill picks in CP2077.

Not to you. And perhaps not to me either in the first run. But it's not really a loss to either of us if they are there; although, when we do decide to pick them and find out that they actually pay off in certain places... what could go wrong?

This isn't really a case for specifically "geology" and "teaching", but more on embracing the variety and the unconventional. Those simply were the skills you picked as examples, and it wouldn't take long to figure out some subtle use for them (teaching street kids something for rep gain or something else; recognizing certain minerals and metals that could be refined for great value by some homebrew blackmarket manufacturer; narrative-specific use for either in some branches... for example).

 

[Snowflakez]

I don't think that way. If it so happens that those are the only skills the player picks, it's his loss when he notices how severely limited his options are. I think geology and teching would be a good for a Nomad, for example, or a slightly eccentric Corp. Or... whoever. I mean, in the context of the game, they appear more as hobbies or other kind of similiar sidelines, but variety is a good thing.

What I'm saying, is that there is true calling for skills and interactions in cRPG's that are not among the obvious picks.



Everything takes time and effort. I'd say - unsurprisingly perhaps - that gameplay variety is the most important one for a gamelike this, and a game in the first place. It doesn't matter whom they appeal to or not, nor does it matter if you or I want or need them, or not. The crux of the point is that 'they are there' for people who do wish or by chance end up with them and that they work to their end where their application is relevant (which might be scarce, but nonetheless).



I think that's a fair trade. Unconventional characters should be an option, even if they make the game more difficult in general. They don't require IP bloat, just consideration from the player on what he wants to pursue. The key, I suppose, though, is to communicate what those skills are used for more thoroughly than just the basics. The player can do the math from there.



Not to you. And perhaps not to me either in the first run. But it's not really a loss to either of us if they are there; although, when we do decide to pick them and find out that they actually pay off in certain places... what could go wrong?

This isn't really a case for specifically "geology" and "teaching", but more on embracing the variety and the unconventional. Those simply were the skills you picked as examples, and it wouldn't take long to figure out some subtle use for them (teaching street kids something for rep gain or something else; recognizing certain minerals and metals that could be refined for great value by some homebrew blackmarket manufacturer; narrative-specific use for either in some branches... for example).

I agree with you in spirit, but temper your idealism with a bit of realism.

How could CDPR feasibly introduce all of these mechanics, no matter how small they may seem to you, in 2077? Obviously, not having voiced dialogue is one option, but then they have to code entire scenarios (even small scenarios) designed around the consequences of those decisions, otherwise the decisions themselves are largely meaningless.

If all you want is extra dialogue options for a specific little-used skills with no reactivity, that's fine and probably more doable, but if you want it to actually affect anything (Which I assume you do, based on what I know of your preferences), it's going to take a hell of a lot more time and effort. Little things add up.

It simply makes business, and probably game design, sense to include a few unconventional elements, but largely stuff that fits the core of the game and fits a more specific design direction. Whether that means 2077 will be super combat-heavy, super non-combat heavy, or some happy blend of the two, I can't say. But there's only so much you can do with a single team and a single budget.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

I agree with you in spirit, but temper your idealism with a bit of realism.

It's all purely theoretical and making a general point. I'm not expecting them to implement all the 100 or so skills.

How could CDPR feasibly introduce all of these mechanics, no matter how small they may seem to you, in 2077?

You'll have to be a bit more specific here. What do you mean with "all those mechanics"? What mechanics specifically? The two skills that were used as examples are just two skills and were just examples.

Obviously, not having voiced dialogue is one option, but then they have to code entire scenarios (even small scenarios) designed around the consequences of those decisions

They have to do that with all of the skills, why should these (suggested as smaller ones) be the ones breaking the camels back? And more over, if the application of the skill is practical, rather than vocal, it's already a different situation.

If all you want is extra dialogue options...

Oh no, that's not the case. Little bits of dialog is not enough and it depends greatly on the skill at hand. In fact, dialog could well be on a lesser note here. Teaching, for example, might be a 'blank' dialog check that says nothing, but implies action: [Teach the kid to tie a noose 67%], or it could be straight applied to a situation where someone is trying to accomplish something (i.e. the kid is trying to make a card trick, you point there at the cards and the default action is to [Teach trick 80%].

it's going to take a hell of a lot more time and effort.

That's not a reason to say "Ok, just skip it, there's plenty enough with the obvious stuff like locks pick and terminals to hack." There's plenty of stuff that will take a lot of time and effort, and plenty of it more than this stuff whilst being of lesser impact on the game. It doesn't need to be a piece of cake to implement this stuff, and the customer shouldn't feel "pity" for the developer in the same manner a mom would try to restrain a demanding dad over the kids household chores.

I mean, I am asking for some stuff (theoretical stuff, nothing really specific here), but not that much. The opposition usually is about "I don't need that" or "a lot of people probably wouldn't need that"; which I think is a tad faulty logic.

It simply makes business, and probably game design, sense to include a few unconventional elements, but largely stuff that fits the core of the game and fits a more specific design direction.

I'm not asking for anything that I wouldn't think fits with the core, though. Not as per our current knowledge of the game. I don't think I'm talking about stuff that would feel "outrageous" or "totally off the mark".