Thursday, August 20, 2009
Frayed Knights - Ding!
This week, in discussing Frayed Knights, I decided I'd find one of the most boring parts of the game and make a YouTube video of it. Since I'm really a YouTube n00b and didn't know what I was doing anyway, I thought I might not embarrass myself too much. Well, more than I usually do.
I attended the standing-room only session at GDC one year when Michael Abrash spoke about the development of Quake. While some of the technical details of what they had to do don't have too much relevance with today's technology, the talk had a number of anecdotes that still hold up. He said that he and John Carmack tried a number of different rendering methodologies over the course of a year before arriving at one which - surprisingly - brought them full-circle back to the BSP trees Carmack had used for Doom. After going through about eight different flawed rendering engines before getting it right, Carmack remarked to Abrash that if they'd known exactly what they were making before they started, the engine would have taken less than two months to write.
That's how I'm feeling with some aspects of Frayed Knights. Like character progression.
Character progression is a critical feature of an RPG, so it's important to get it right. Maybe not all-important - we've put up with horrible old-school D&D style leveling up for years, but it still works. And I have enjoyed games with worse. Far worse. It's much more challenging in a massively multiplayer environment, with players competing with each other, but you still want to get it right.
My own system has undergone a significant overhaul since I first started committing parts of the design document to code. The sad truth of it is that my quick-and-dirty hacks are probably superior to the painstakingly devised original system. And what I have now could probably use some more simplification. But the end result is that my whole leveling up system - which was incomplete and disabled for the pilot episode - has had to be completely re-designed and re-written. Sometimes on-the-fly.
What we've got now is surprisingly simple, and should probably be made simpler still (check back in three months when I talk about how I've changed it all AGAIN). Now, characters "level up" immediately when they receive enough experience points, receiving the bonuses to their health, endurance, and pretty much an automatic +1 to everything they do (since everything is level-based now).
But they also get a character point which they can spend at their leisure. (I may end up making this more than one, but I keep waffling on this one - which probably means it is not a good idea).
A character point can be used to increase a single attribute (Might, Brains, Reflexes, etc.) by one point - which generally means an extra bonus to any check that uses that attribute.
It can also be used to buy a feat. Feats are either significantly better enhancements to existing abilities across a narrower range of checks (for example, a bigger bonus to attacks and damage with a specific class of weaponry, reduced endurance cost for spellcasting, or reduced time cost to repeat the same spell multiple times in a "spell volley"), or give you new actions or re-actions in combat. Or - let the character cast spells, though they aren't of the caster class.
So here's my first YouTube video of the whole thrilling process. I've got Dirk leveling up with 4 character points here, though there's a bug (now fixed) since I made the video that still shows him at level 3. As you can see in the video, there are tool-tips, and all point-spending is reversible until you hit the commit button. That may be an overkill if you are generally only spending one point at a time, but hopefully it's worth the inconvenience of a confirmation button-press.
One of the issues I've been dealing with is that a single feat that allows spellcasting is pretty dang powerful as compared to one that gives you extra success with a spear. So I may have to break that one up a bit into... uh, "basic," "intermediate," "advanced," and "epic" spellcasting abilities for each field of magic (each higher-level one dependent upon the lower-level one as a prerequisite, naturally).
Speaking of spellcasting, I'm getting rid of "fizzles" entirely. This will no doubt please --- um, EVERY playtester. There are just too many other ways a spell can fail (like, not hitting the target, getting countered, etc). Instead, a botched casting roll will cost more endurance - you have to push that much harder to activate the spell.
I'm resigning myself to the realization that I'm not gonna have the entire first act playable by the end of the month. I'll call it a victory if the Western Wilderness is fully playable and the Caverns of Anarchy are at least accessible.
Labels: Frayed Knights, Game Design
- posted by The Rampant Coyote @ 8:28 AM (Permalink)
Comments:
Links to this post:
<< Home
You know, you're extremely close to the way WoW handles leveling up. Automatic increases in relevant (class-specific) stats, plus points to spend on customizing your character's capabilities through talents (feats, perks, or whatever you want to call 'em). It's actually a pretty simple, yet surprisingly satisfying system, and I expect it's easier to deal with from the development side as well, both in terms of implementing character advancement, and in terms of making it easier to tune encounters (since you know what the character's minimum capabilities will be at any given level...)
And now that I think of it, isn't this (more or less) the same system that Neverwinter Nights used as well?
NWN uses the D&D 3.x system. You have your levels, and then you get an attribute increase every 4 levels, which is separate from a new feat which you get every 3 levels (plus bonus feats for some classes).
I admit, the D20 rules system did have something of an influence - I like the hybrid skill / level system - but I was fortunately not shackled to some semblance of compatibility with an older system, so I was able to streamline and do something different with it.
I admit, the D20 rules system did have something of an influence - I like the hybrid skill / level system - but I was fortunately not shackled to some semblance of compatibility with an older system, so I was able to streamline and do something different with it.
Looks like you did pretty well with the video. I went ahead and subscribed to your channel too. ;)
Character development is a tough nut to crack (same as balance as far as spells go). Since I've never really tried to develop my own system I've found I've had to rely on all the old pen and paper games I've played. The problem is sometimes (usually) they don't translate well for what you are trying to do. So I don't envy you in the ever progressive quest to implement the leveling system.
On another note, it's been interesting to read some of the earlier articles you've done on Frayed Knight and read up til now. The game has certainly come a long way.
Character development is a tough nut to crack (same as balance as far as spells go). Since I've never really tried to develop my own system I've found I've had to rely on all the old pen and paper games I've played. The problem is sometimes (usually) they don't translate well for what you are trying to do. So I don't envy you in the ever progressive quest to implement the leveling system.
On another note, it's been interesting to read some of the earlier articles you've done on Frayed Knight and read up til now. The game has certainly come a long way.
This has been a monster learning process.
When I was younger, it all seemed so easy, and I made some of my own dice & paper systems. No problem. Hardly any testing done on 'em (I think we playtested them twice), so they were permitted to remain awesome in my mind.
And of course, I've played a lot of systems, which makes me feel like I'm qualified to critique and design. And having some experience developing games and even being involved in the design made me feel confident.
But getting down to the nitty-gritty and juggling the thousands of factors involved in the process of game design is a lot more challenging than it looks.
When I was younger, it all seemed so easy, and I made some of my own dice & paper systems. No problem. Hardly any testing done on 'em (I think we playtested them twice), so they were permitted to remain awesome in my mind.
And of course, I've played a lot of systems, which makes me feel like I'm qualified to critique and design. And having some experience developing games and even being involved in the design made me feel confident.
But getting down to the nitty-gritty and juggling the thousands of factors involved in the process of game design is a lot more challenging than it looks.
I just abandoned levels and "leveling up" entirely in my vintage CRPG design.
Basically, it was annoying to track, and even more annoying to have to build more interfaces for players to do things. So I did away with it and just have static health/stamina by class. Weapons, armor, and trinkets adjust your statistics, so my game is entirely equipment-driven.
Will it work, though, is what I wonder... my combat will be very turn-based tactical, and now that there's no experience to earn, I'll probably make combat much less frequent than other CRPG's.
Basically, it was annoying to track, and even more annoying to have to build more interfaces for players to do things. So I did away with it and just have static health/stamina by class. Weapons, armor, and trinkets adjust your statistics, so my game is entirely equipment-driven.
Will it work, though, is what I wonder... my combat will be very turn-based tactical, and now that there's no experience to earn, I'll probably make combat much less frequent than other CRPG's.
Looking at the video, you seem to have a lot of D&D style weapon specialisation feats.
This is an aspect of modern D&D which I really find quite frustrating because it requires you to plan your character "in advance" rather than being able to adapt to the gear you find. In table top roleplaying, I guess that's OK because you're playing a character, but in a CRPG, it's more about the "fun factor".
If I find a "Uber Greataxe of 1-hit monsterkilling", I want to be able to use it right away (perhaps with one axe-specialisation option available later), without feeling like I've wasted all the other feets I've been accumulating.
The worst example of this in current D&D is probably 2 weapon fighting, or the exotic weapons. To get past the deficiencies imposed, you need to get a whole bunch of feets, which basically means you have to lock into that way of playing right from the get-go.
This is an aspect of modern D&D which I really find quite frustrating because it requires you to plan your character "in advance" rather than being able to adapt to the gear you find. In table top roleplaying, I guess that's OK because you're playing a character, but in a CRPG, it's more about the "fun factor".
If I find a "Uber Greataxe of 1-hit monsterkilling", I want to be able to use it right away (perhaps with one axe-specialisation option available later), without feeling like I've wasted all the other feets I've been accumulating.
The worst example of this in current D&D is probably 2 weapon fighting, or the exotic weapons. To get past the deficiencies imposed, you need to get a whole bunch of feets, which basically means you have to lock into that way of playing right from the get-go.
# posted by 
: August 21, 2009 4:55 AM
: August 21, 2009 4:55 AM
@Irien - those are prime candidates for streamlining or simplification, though I am not gonna go away. Since you get (at least) a new point every level, it's not too significant of an impact to add a new weapon to your specialization roster.
The biggest issue with that isn't so much getting new-and-cool weapons that you can't use immediately, but leaving the value of your specialization more in the hands of the DM (or game designer). You specialize in exotics and axes only to find that the best weapons in the game are neither exotics or an axe, but instead the boring ol' blades. That's a suck. Or maybe not even the best weaponry, but the steady flow. You have potential upgrades of bows and blades coming out your ears in every single dungeon, but a good spear? You only upgrade once every five levels.
That is, assuming upgrading is part of the game. Which is lame from a dramatic/storytelling standpoint, but it's been a tried-and-true "fun" factor of RPGs for 35 years. (Scars of War, at least, is attempting to do something different here. But I'm not - at least not with this game).
@Adamantyr - heh, and I like to swing the other way entirely if given the choice - where most of the progression is in ability gains rather than accouterments. I always liked adventures where the player characters were (temporarily) robbed of their gadgets and had to rely on their own skills and cleverness to survive.
But having that equipment-upgrade and discovery of powers in the form of magical items is a pretty powerful fun factor in RPGs.
The biggest issue with that isn't so much getting new-and-cool weapons that you can't use immediately, but leaving the value of your specialization more in the hands of the DM (or game designer). You specialize in exotics and axes only to find that the best weapons in the game are neither exotics or an axe, but instead the boring ol' blades. That's a suck. Or maybe not even the best weaponry, but the steady flow. You have potential upgrades of bows and blades coming out your ears in every single dungeon, but a good spear? You only upgrade once every five levels.
That is, assuming upgrading is part of the game. Which is lame from a dramatic/storytelling standpoint, but it's been a tried-and-true "fun" factor of RPGs for 35 years. (Scars of War, at least, is attempting to do something different here. But I'm not - at least not with this game).
@Adamantyr - heh, and I like to swing the other way entirely if given the choice - where most of the progression is in ability gains rather than accouterments. I always liked adventures where the player characters were (temporarily) robbed of their gadgets and had to rely on their own skills and cleverness to survive.
But having that equipment-upgrade and discovery of powers in the form of magical items is a pretty powerful fun factor in RPGs.
I'm a big fan of using a preexisting system if one can, it saves a lot of design work, hassle and the balance issues are a known entity.
I actually kinda disagree with ya there, Stu. Here's why:
#1 - As pointed out by Shamus Young some time ago, dice & paper RPG systems really don't usually translate well to the computer. It often needs to be changed, re-balanced, and you get an all new hassle. (For example: Some feats in NWN didn't work nearly as well - or worked TOO well - in a real-time combat system as opposed to turn-based. Or on their IMPLEMENTATION of real-time combat... I mighta done it differently. But the balance was blown all to hell).
#2 - Licensing issues can also be kind of a bear.
#3 - Every game system has some kind of specialization - even the so-called "generic" ones. They have a bias towards one kind of a game style. Having the flexibility to change things and rewrite things to encourage the kind of gameplay you are looking for is handy. Sure, you can do that with an existing system, but see #2, and you get to a point where you might as well have done it yourself from scratch, anyway. For example: Using the Hero system for gritty Cyberpunk style gaming. Sure, it's been done (we played Cyber Hero for a while), but even with extensive modifications to the rules, it still didn't feel as "right" as other systems custom-designed for the genre.
#4 - While later in development it's not the case (as it is now), at least at the beginning creating the rule system is a big part of the fun. For me, at least.
However, I acknowledge that it's helpful to have a solid understanding and foundations in various types of rule systems so you know its strengths and weaknesses and can have a good idea of how the various factors effect the overall feel and play.
I think I got a little too ambitious with Frayed Knights' system coming out of the gate, so I have had to reign it in a bit.
#1 - As pointed out by Shamus Young some time ago, dice & paper RPG systems really don't usually translate well to the computer. It often needs to be changed, re-balanced, and you get an all new hassle. (For example: Some feats in NWN didn't work nearly as well - or worked TOO well - in a real-time combat system as opposed to turn-based. Or on their IMPLEMENTATION of real-time combat... I mighta done it differently. But the balance was blown all to hell).
#2 - Licensing issues can also be kind of a bear.
#3 - Every game system has some kind of specialization - even the so-called "generic" ones. They have a bias towards one kind of a game style. Having the flexibility to change things and rewrite things to encourage the kind of gameplay you are looking for is handy. Sure, you can do that with an existing system, but see #2, and you get to a point where you might as well have done it yourself from scratch, anyway. For example: Using the Hero system for gritty Cyberpunk style gaming. Sure, it's been done (we played Cyber Hero for a while), but even with extensive modifications to the rules, it still didn't feel as "right" as other systems custom-designed for the genre.
#4 - While later in development it's not the case (as it is now), at least at the beginning creating the rule system is a big part of the fun. For me, at least.
However, I acknowledge that it's helpful to have a solid understanding and foundations in various types of rule systems so you know its strengths and weaknesses and can have a good idea of how the various factors effect the overall feel and play.
I think I got a little too ambitious with Frayed Knights' system coming out of the gate, so I have had to reign it in a bit.
I think its very different if you understand the mechanics and have played several different systems. You come to know what works and if you adapt one you know what your getting.
if your a programmer who's writing an rpg and has never played real rpgs and doesn't know the different between a roll under vs roll over system or how point buy character builds work then I think rolling your own might not be the best way to go about it.
obviously you dont just import an entire system hole hock, there are always things that dont translate.
I think rolling your own when you dont understand how they work is a bad thing.
(obviously not looking at you here);
I agree with shoehorning things in where they dont fit, I'm very familiar with interlock (cp2020) and no way would I shove it into a fantasy setting.
if your a programmer who's writing an rpg and has never played real rpgs and doesn't know the different between a roll under vs roll over system or how point buy character builds work then I think rolling your own might not be the best way to go about it.
obviously you dont just import an entire system hole hock, there are always things that dont translate.
I think rolling your own when you dont understand how they work is a bad thing.
(obviously not looking at you here);
I agree with shoehorning things in where they dont fit, I'm very familiar with interlock (cp2020) and no way would I shove it into a fantasy setting.
That leveling system should work fine, but consider some alternatives.
You could use separate points for stats and feats, but that would complicate things a bit. Maybe each level something grows depending on class, and you get 1 feat, 1 statpint, and 1 point that you can spend either on stat or feat, unless that would make the characters too powerfull.
Please add descriptions to feats.
I'm personally not a fan of leveling systems, especially if you get XP mostly from killing monsters. In that kind of games I almoust inevitably end up farming a level I completed just for XP, because fights get too tough. XP grind and fights are boring, I prefer to get to the next part of the story.
Another kind of system is like in UO or BaK. You have a few skills that go from 1 to 100, and some stats that occasionally increase This often leads to finding creative ways to farm and makro said skills and stats, but is slightly less annoying. It also limits character power to a degree, which is good. If you start with 0% rezist, 50 HP, and 30 fighting skill, and end up with 60% rezist, 150 HP, and 85 skill your character is definietly more powerfull, but not ridiculosly so (as in some XP leveling systems where through the game everything is increased by 3+ orders of magnitude.)
Another system, which is may favorite is WoD / Bloodlines. You get XP mostly from quests and can spend it directly on varoius things.
I also don't like it, when equipment dominates things too much. Sure, Legendary Knikht's helmet should be better than that smelly Orc chamber bucket, but not 30x better, which is often the case in leveling games.
I'd also personally leave magic to casters. It is a difficult skill to learn, yet alone to master, and having dirk and Arianna casting spells would imo mess things up too much.
I agree, that choosing the wrong feats in a game that puts emphasis on "development tree" sucks. Maybe just make feats fairly weak, so it won't matter that much which of them player chooses, or every few levels give a reset point.
Weird, this site asks me for my email *and* its asocciated password.
Post a Comment
You could use separate points for stats and feats, but that would complicate things a bit. Maybe each level something grows depending on class, and you get 1 feat, 1 statpint, and 1 point that you can spend either on stat or feat, unless that would make the characters too powerfull.
Please add descriptions to feats.
I'm personally not a fan of leveling systems, especially if you get XP mostly from killing monsters. In that kind of games I almoust inevitably end up farming a level I completed just for XP, because fights get too tough. XP grind and fights are boring, I prefer to get to the next part of the story.
Another kind of system is like in UO or BaK. You have a few skills that go from 1 to 100, and some stats that occasionally increase This often leads to finding creative ways to farm and makro said skills and stats, but is slightly less annoying. It also limits character power to a degree, which is good. If you start with 0% rezist, 50 HP, and 30 fighting skill, and end up with 60% rezist, 150 HP, and 85 skill your character is definietly more powerfull, but not ridiculosly so (as in some XP leveling systems where through the game everything is increased by 3+ orders of magnitude.)
Another system, which is may favorite is WoD / Bloodlines. You get XP mostly from quests and can spend it directly on varoius things.
I also don't like it, when equipment dominates things too much. Sure, Legendary Knikht's helmet should be better than that smelly Orc chamber bucket, but not 30x better, which is often the case in leveling games.
I'd also personally leave magic to casters. It is a difficult skill to learn, yet alone to master, and having dirk and Arianna casting spells would imo mess things up too much.
I agree, that choosing the wrong feats in a game that puts emphasis on "development tree" sucks. Maybe just make feats fairly weak, so it won't matter that much which of them player chooses, or every few levels give a reset point.
Weird, this site asks me for my email *and* its asocciated password.
# posted by : August 26, 2009 4:17 PM
: August 26, 2009 4:17 PMLinks to this post:
<< Home
