# The Problem with "RPGs" **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [May 23, 2016, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459 "2016-05-23T14:31:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2016, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459/41 "2016-05-24T21:01:47Z")
> [@bump](#): > > RPG implies something a little different, and while I think the OP is protesting too much, I do agree that we haven’t really got there yet; probably the closest thing to a real RPG that you’ll see online is actually more of the MMORPG style of games; interaction with other players requires a certain amount of role-playing. That’s one reason I hate MMORPGs - they \*should \*be pure role-playing experiences, but every single aspect of their gameplay seems to encourage min-maxing and “gaming”, making them ironically much less immersive than more traditional CRPGs. There at least I can pretend I’m actually on an adventure, instead of standing in line waiting to raid the same monster for the 47th time. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Pearse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/richard_pearse/32/13144_2.png) [@Richard\_Pearse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Pearse)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2016, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459/42 "2016-05-25T00:11:53Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > That’s one reason I hate MMORPGs - they \*should \*be pure role-playing experiences, but every single aspect of their gameplay seems to encourage min-maxing and “gaming”, making them ironically much less immersive than more traditional CRPGs. There at least I can pretend I’m actually on an adventure, instead of standing in line waiting to raid the same monster for the 47th time. “You are the one true hero who can save the land from the mighty evil of DOOM!” “Ok, and these other people hanging around, who are they?” “They are also the one true hero who can save the land from the mighty evil of DOOM!” “Ah, it seems everything is under control then, I might nip off and play something else instead. Bye!” ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2016, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459/43 "2016-05-25T00:43:43Z")
Ideally, in an MMORPG, all the players would fill the same role for each other that the NPCs do for the players in a standard RPG, including generating quests for each other. In practice, though, it never seems to work out that way. ---
**Author:** ![dzeiger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/46a35a/32.png) [@dzeiger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dzeiger)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2016, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459/44 "2016-05-25T03:17:28Z")
> [@bump](#): > > I’ve often felt like CRPGs ought to probably be renamed “interactive cinema” or something along those lines, as that’s essentially what they tend to feel like to me, especially the games like Fallout 3 and later, and the Mass Effect games. You’re essentially the hero in the story, and have a degree of control over the outcome, but it’s ultimately an action movie that you’re part of. At best right now they reach Choose Your Own Adventure levels. The problem is, attempting to advance anywhere close to the tabletop RPG level of flexibility would require an immense amount of resources for what I suspect is a marginal amount of gain. If it took twice as much cost/effort to make a much more flexible dialogue/questing system in Fallout 4, would it sell twice as many copies? (voice acting problems alone might be one big issue with this) ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Pearse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/richard_pearse/32/13144_2.png) [@Richard\_Pearse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Pearse)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2016, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459/45 "2016-05-25T04:24:14Z")
> [@bump](#): > > I’ve often felt like CRPGs ought to probably be renamed “interactive cinema” or something along those lines, as that’s essentially what they tend to feel like to me, especially the games like Fallout 3 and later, and the Mass Effect games. You’re essentially the hero in the story, and have a degree of control over the outcome, but it’s ultimately an action movie that you’re part of. Which is the same or better than other computer games. The story, if present, in any computer game is essentially a motivator for you, the player, to engage in some hand/eye coordination fun. The fighting is normally the primary activity with the story providing some background. If you want a truly variable interactive story experience that is the focus of the game with the fighting/adventuring being secondary then a computer game is currently not the right format. If you wanted a table top RPG experience you’d play table top RPGs. Or maybe it would be possible to combine the best of both worlds and design a computer RPG with a human dungeon master. The game would act as the interface between the DM and the players as well as handling all of the maths. The DM would basically be free to write the story on the fly and the players would get a different experience each time. The quality of the writing would depend on the quality of the DM. DMs would either be provided locally (by a friend for example) or you could make use of professional DMs. DMs could use the same game engine to provide canned stories to single players who are happy to have a more rigid story experience. The actual in game experience of traversing the world and fighting monsters would be the same or better quality as current games but the story side of it would be a living thing. Meanwhile you develop AI that can take the place of the DMs at some point in the future. Every now and then you swap a trial AI DM for a real one. Once the players can no longer tell the difference you know the AI is good enough. ---
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2016, 1:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459/46 "2016-05-25T13:07:46Z")
> [@Richard\_Pearse](#): > > If you wanted a table top RPG experience you’d play table top RPGs. Not always available, of course. Back in the 80s, games like Might & Magic, Bard’s Tale, Pool of Radiance, etc were written about in Dragon as “It’s not a real campaign of course but, if you can’t game in person that night and want a dungeon crawl then these can provide a fun time”. I think that still holds true for the latest crops of CRPGs. The “realism” talk again reminds me of Everquest and how it was originally guided by “the vision” of Brad McQuaid. That included a bunch of stuff designed to make the game immersive like needing food/water, needing to talk to NPCs to find out what they sell or if they have any quest info, no detailed spell info (mana cost, damage or even detailed effect info), casters had to sit with a book in their face to meditate and regain mana, no in-game map and so on. The idea was to make it like you were there in the world. Over time, almost all of that stuff has gone away: NPC merchants have titles of what they sell, spells have detailed info, there’s in game mapping, etc. That was all at player demand, either directly or from competition by other titles who didn’t assume that blundering through a town looking for the iron ore merchant (who is on the second floor of a nondescript building) means good times. There’s very much such a thing as too much realism when talking about entertainment. ---
**Author:** ![Airk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9de053/32.png) [@Airk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airk)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2016, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459/47 "2016-05-25T15:54:43Z")
Oh god, “The Vision” I am having flashbacks to all kinds of awful things. ---
**Author:** ![dracoi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/90db22/32.png) [@dracoi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dracoi)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2016, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459/48 "2016-05-25T16:09:09Z")
> [@Richard\_Pearse](#): > > Or maybe it would be possible to combine the best of both worlds and design a computer RPG with a human dungeon master. The game would act as the interface between the DM and the players as well as handling all of the maths. The DM would basically be free to write the story on the fly and the players would get a different experience each time. The quality of the writing would depend on the quality of the DM. DMs would either be provided locally (by a friend for example) or you could make use of professional DMs. DMs could use the same game engine to provide canned stories to single players who are happy to have a more rigid story experience. The actual in game experience of traversing the world and fighting monsters would be the same or better quality as current games but the story side of it would be a living thing. Meanwhile you develop AI that can take the place of the DMs at some point in the future. Every now and then you swap a trial AI DM for a real one. Once the players can no longer tell the difference you know the AI is good enough. Neverwinter Nights circa 2002 had much of this capability. A DM Client allowed a dungeon master to take control of the server and NPCs, and you could build custom content. It’s still not the same experience as sitting around a table, though. The game also had single-player and DM-less modes that ran more like traditional CRPG and MMORPG games. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2016, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459/49 "2016-05-25T16:17:33Z")
> [@Richard\_Pearse](#): > > Or maybe it would be possible to combine the best of both worlds and design a computer RPG with a human dungeon master. The game would act as the interface between the DM and the players as well as handling all of the maths. The DM would basically be free to write the story on the fly and the players would get a different experience each time. The quality of the writing would depend on the quality of the DM. DMs would either be provided locally (by a friend for example) or you could make use of professional DMs. DMs could use the same game engine to provide canned stories to single players who are happy to have a more rigid story experience. The actual in game experience of traversing the world and fighting monsters would be the same or better quality as current games but the story side of it would be a living thing. Meanwhile you develop AI that can take the place of the DMs at some point in the future. Every now and then you swap a trial AI DM for a real one. Once the players can no longer tell the difference you know the AI is good enough. They have a sort of proto version of that, you know. I forget what the names of the ones we used were, but they were basically like a virtual D&D game- the DM could load up maps, and show where you were, and you could do all your math with the program, etc… In practice, most of us pen and papered the math, and just used the virtual dice for transparency (i.e. so that everybody else saw the roll). But still very cool- we had a weekly D&D campaign for months on end with some players in Houston, some in Dallas, some in North Carolina, and a few guys in the Bay Area. We used Skype for the actual party-line part. I imagine it could be improved by getting away from the virtual tabletop paradigm, and into a more CRPG-style interface for the players, so that there’s no actual dice rolls or fiddling or whatever- you just run your guy around and do your thing. The trick would be how to let the DM have as much flexibility as they do in a pen & paper game, and allow the insane and funny stuff like **Left Hand of Dorkness** told us about. It would be easy to make it pretty and video-game like, and also by virtue of the limitations of the system, disallow the crazy stuff. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Angel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d26b3c/32.png) [@Johnny\_Angel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Angel)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2016, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459/50 "2016-05-25T19:23:35Z")
When I’m playing through a CRPG, I generally have an idea who my character is to begin with, and I interpret the few dialogue choices I get through that filter. I keep a meta-narrative in my head about what the protagonist cares about and is willing to do about it. The actual interactions with members of your party are either representative examples of interaction or certain lynchpin interactions. It works, unless the game is seriously built with a specific idea of who they think your character will be. For example, suppose your meta-narrative had you and your lifelong friend Imoen developing an inevitable romance. Not what the game designers had in mind. Or, was it? ---
**Author:** ![Airk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9de053/32.png) [@Airk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airk)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2016, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459/51 "2016-05-25T19:44:25Z")
> [@bump](#): > > They have a sort of proto version of that, you know. I forget what the names of the ones we used were, but they were basically like a virtual D&D game- the DM could load up maps, and show where you were, and you could do all your math with the program, etc… > > In practice, most of us pen and papered the math, and just used the virtual dice for transparency (i.e. so that everybody else saw the roll). But still very cool- we had a weekly D&D campaign for months on end with some players in Houston, some in Dallas, some in North Carolina, and a few guys in the Bay Area. We used Skype for the actual party-line part. > > I imagine it could be improved by getting away from the virtual tabletop paradigm, and into a more CRPG-style interface for the players, so that there’s no actual dice rolls or fiddling or whatever- you just run your guy around and do your thing. The trick would be how to let the DM have as much flexibility as they do in a pen & paper game, and allow the insane and funny stuff like **Left Hand of Dorkness** told us about. It would be easy to make it pretty and video-game like, and also by virtue of the limitations of the system, disallow the crazy stuff. There are several virtual tabletops that allow you to run tabletop RPG games with people across the net, and which have pretty powerful maths/tables/dice rolling/tabulating/mapshowing capabilities. The one I use is Roll20, but it’s REALLY just a tabletop RPG aide, not a game of its own. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2016, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459/52 "2016-05-25T20:03:59Z")
> [@Airk](#): > > There are several virtual tabletops that allow you to run tabletop RPG games with people across the net, and which have pretty powerful maths/tables/dice rolling/tabulating/mapshowing capabilities. The one I use is Roll20, but it’s REALLY just a tabletop RPG aide, not a game of its own. I know; we used a couple of different ones, and I’m pretty sure Fantasy Grounds was one of them. You’re right- they were literally virtual tabletops. I’d think though, you could do something similar that would put the DM into more of a game builder / story-runner type role, where they’d define the maps, define the creatures, and define a lot of other stuff, and then sort of monitor the game as the players progress, without, say… having to manage a dozen kobolds attacking the players. He could say… tweak the kobold numbers, or armament or treasure, or even override their movements though. ---
**Author:** ![Airk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9de053/32.png) [@Airk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airk)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459/53 "2016-05-26T01:03:21Z")
> [@bump](#): > > I know; we used a couple of different ones, and I’m pretty sure Fantasy Grounds was one of them. You’re right- they were literally virtual tabletops. > > I’d think though, you could do something similar that would put the DM into more of a game builder / story-runner type role, where they’d define the maps, define the creatures, and define a lot of other stuff, and then sort of monitor the game as the players progress, without, say… having to manage a dozen kobolds attacking the players. > > He could say… tweak the kobold numbers, or armament or treasure, or even override their movements though. Yeah, but what do you do when they’re not in a fight? Are you reduced to typing really fast to produce “convincing” reactions for NPCs or what? ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459/54 "2016-05-26T04:35:49Z")
> [@iLemming](#): > > “RPG’s” are not **role-playing games**. I’ll use bullet points to illustrate my contention, to avoid expatiation – > > • **The character used - be he/she/it human, elven, orc, robot… whatever - has no baring on narrative beyond the canned story strands a developer may (or usually won’t) include in the game –** Agree. > [@](#): > > • **Upgrading and progression are merely ‘pay walls’ that prevent a player from accessing game content and are not reflective of individual player / character gameplay traits –** Skills and traits are not honed or granted after one perfects them – they’re simply transacted for in-game currency. This is not progression - as, for example, acquiring a “double-jump” action for using the jump action repeatedly, would in fact be This isn’t a difference between CRPG and PnP RPG. Skill/traits “transacted for in game currency” occurs in PnP RPG and skills being acquired by practice occurs in CRPGs. > [@](#): > > • **There are no ‘pure’ classes in RPG’s, irrespective of how many character customisation skill options may be present –** And classes are only a feature of _some_ PnP RPGs. In fact, it’s a feature I always disliked for its arbitrary limitations, prefering skill-based games. The less class-system there’s in a game, the better it is from my point of view. During my role-playing years, past the beginning when I played DnD, I hardly ever played any game that involved classes. And regarding CPRGs, they generally are too often class-oriented for my tastes. What you would see as “not enough pure classes” I presumably would see as “too much of a class system” if we were both playing the same CRPG. So, out of your three points, only the first one separates CPRGs and PnP RPGs (granted, it’s a huge difference). Your two other points are just a matter of game system and of personal preferences, and aren’t tied to either kind of game. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 5:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459/55 "2016-05-26T05:07:29Z")
> [@Jophiel](#): > > Now that you mention it, I remember setting my Skyrim character up at one point with a weight placed on my hotkey to spam Detect Life over and over to raise my spell skill. Meanwhile, I sat on the couch and read stuff on my tablet. When you have a system that encourages doing this sort of thing, it’s just not a good system. No. It’s bad design if you can’t succeed in the game without doing this. It’s not a bad design if it happens because you can’t resist the temptation to grind in order to artificially increase your skill. In the latter case, the issue is with you, not with the game. And the problem in Oblivion and to a lesser extent Skyrim is monsters leveling up with you, so forcing you to be “efficient” in your character build, not in itself the fact that your skills improve with practice. I hate the “leveling monsters” system. I’m a very cautious player because I absolutely hate dying and reloading. I feel I failed and that I’m cheating. I also like creating non-optimal builds, taking up skills according to my whims. Both are a problem with monsters leveling. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459/56 "2016-05-26T05:53:23Z")
I dislike classes. I wish we had an Ultima Online 2. Until then WoW is a lot of fun. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 5:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459/57 "2016-05-26T05:54:36Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > No. It’s bad design if you can’t succeed in the game without doing this. It’s not a bad design if it happens because you can’t resist the temptation to grind in order to artificially increase your skill. In the latter case, the issue is with you, not with the game. > > And the problem in Oblivion and to a lesser extent Skyrim is monsters leveling up with you, so forcing you to be “efficient” in your character build, not in itself the fact that your skills improve with practice. I hate the “leveling monsters” system. I’m a very cautious player because I absolutely hate dying and reloading. I feel I failed and that I’m cheating. I also like creating non-optimal builds, taking up skills according to my whims. Both are a problem with monsters leveling. Monster leveling is fine. Otherwise in a huge non-linear world you run into inappropriate challenges far too often. That’s no fun. You either get one-shotted or you one shot everything. Tedium imho. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Pearse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/richard_pearse/32/13144_2.png) [@Richard\_Pearse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Pearse)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 8:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459/58 "2016-05-26T08:11:59Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > Monster leveling is fine. Otherwise in a huge non-linear world you run into inappropriate challenges far too often. That’s no fun. You either get one-shotted or you one shot everything. Tedium imho. I disagree but obviously it comes down to personal preferences. I think non-levelling monsters can be done well. Although I like playing some RPGs, I haven’t played many and don’t have a lot of experience, but I far prefer my experience with the Witcher 3 where I will sometimes stumble onto a monster I can’t handle and have to get out of there in a hurry to the Oblivion/Skyrim experience where the game is essentially static in terms of challenge as long as you take some care in how you level. I think the way to handle non-levelling monsters is to increase the difficulty/level of enemies the further off the beaten track you go. So if you follow the main roads around the world you will rarely meet any enemies at all and you can use it as a relatively safe way to travel. If you choose to stray off the main roads then your chances of meeting enemies increases and the further away from civilisation/roads you are, the more powerful the enemies. In this way you give the player a certain amount of control over the challenges they face. Another thing that I think is important if monsters and enemies don’t level is that any enemy that is supposed to have some kind of intelligence (a bandit for example) should not attack a player character that seriously out powers them. This is done a little bit in the Witcher with some low level NPCs choosing not to fight the Witcher, but it could be done a lot more/better. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 8:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459/59 "2016-05-26T08:24:09Z")
> [@G0sp3l](#): > > I agree with you about the new “Action” rpgs. Which is why Dragon Age: Inquisition was such a disappoint to me. I wanted Dragon Age: Origins, Part III. > > I have similar gripes about Skyrim and Fallout 4. No defined classes. I’m not saying those games can’t be fun but they lack something for me. One of the things I liked about the MERP/LotR gaming system was that picking your class affected the costs of skills but did not define what could you learn, only at what cost. My illusionist paid through the nose to be able to swing a sword proficiently, but by Jove swing it he did! And in the Champions system classes, what classes? The roles were completely player-defined. We used it to play superheroes, then we’d use it to play spy adventures. “RPG” doesn’t mean “DnD”. ---
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459/60 "2016-05-26T14:58:12Z")
I prefer non- or limited- leveling monsters. I don’t mind if forest goblins are level 5-12 and spawn higher when you’re level 11 and lower when you’re level 4. But I strongly dislike having to tangle with wolves at level 50 who are still hanging around outside the town. I’m totally cool with the Swamps of Eternal Despair crushing anyone below level 30 who enters and creatures in the Gardens of Newbie Delight ignoring me entirely once I’m past level 5 rather than trying to hassle me for the entire game. > [@clairobscur](#): > > No. It’s bad design if you can’t succeed in the game without doing this. It’s not a bad design if it happens because you can’t resist the temptation to grind in order to artificially increase your skill. In the latter case, the issue is with you, not with the game. Since when is practicing a skill “artificial”? Sounds like practicing your skills outside of being beaten on by minotaurs would be “common sense”, not some temptation luring the weak to… ummm… have honed skills before facing the minotaurs? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-problem-with-rpgs/755459.md?page=4)