Quote:Original post by Wavinator Very true, and as you note this is rarely expressed in a meaningful fashion. I think one of the biggest challenges is that it is very difficult to make a game world or story that is dynamic enough to be impacted by taking on a really different identity. In your example, there would need to be an opportunity to kill the dark king-- and then what? What happens to the world or story?
But it wouldn't be so hard to change NPC dialog, quests, and the player's dialog options for typical interactions. For example, a specific NPC may never ask a paladin to do something that he would ask of a thief, or vice versa.
I don't even think it needs to be integrated through the whole game. Just where it should make a difference for the class types. How many games have you played where the game or NPC characters ask things of you that contradict your class or role identity? Why would an assassin want to help a man find his missing wife with no promise of reward? And how many people would offer a "hit" on someone's life to a typical adventurer? Just the little things would really help to solidify a sense of identity.
Quote:Original post by JasRonq Same roles, very different identities though. Honestly though, I'm not really sure how to take this into account in a character creation system. How do you let a player choose the identity and combat role separately? Make the class the identity alone and then allow them to choose combat abilities separately?
Well, in your example, you are defining identity through race, so you can separate them by letting every race be any class. (So you can have an elven priestess knife fighter and an undead archer in the trees). You just need to add other elements besides class to character creation and put more identity into them, so the player can mix and match. Race is an obvious one. Alignment is one that's in many games. You could also include factions, and have the player pick one at creation or early in the game. Or just let the player start off as a mostly blank slate, and put a lot of morally/physically/intellectually interesting scenarios in the first hour of your game: let the player define themselves.
It seems a little backwards to me - linking race to identity. Should it not be race that determines physical traits and abilities, while class/career determines identity? A certain career can be a measure of what type of person you're dealing with, while a certain race can not. An orc, elf, ghoul, dwarf, or human can be good, bad, protective, deceitful, cunning, powerful, sneaky, crazy, or strategic. There's no intuitive identity there. Just a general concept of natural weakness and ability.
true, I think class gets all of that though because class as your combat career defines abilities and skills. Personality gets blended into that or else left to race. Honestly, I ask because for my game at least, I only want one race. So I need other ways to create identity separate from the combat role.
Zodiac Birth Sign. Oblivion had this but the system can be much more than just receive an extra benefit if you are an X sign. For instance, the Western Zodiac is divided into four elements each with three signs. You have the logical air, the emotional water, the active fire, and the practical earth.
Aquarius (air) would be emotionally detached, logical, playful, always seeking knowledge. Taurus (earth) would be practical, sensual, money-oriented. Libra (air) would be about to bring balance to things, as well as seek beauty in things. Aries (fire) to lead others, and Leo (fire) to be a rockstar, etc etc.
Aspirations. The game The Sims 2 (imagine that!) had an Aspirations system; to adapt it to here it could govern which jobs you are most likely to get/succeed at, your character, your morality, and your drive all at once. For instance, the Aspiration Make Money could make you a business man, a thief, or a mercenary, as you place it relatively above everything else. Pleasure would make you adventurous, want to travel a lot (ranger, etc). For Battle, For Glory, there could be anything you want your game to cover.
Well, you know where I stand. I would define classes that allow player flexibility in skills. A warlock can use a sword more than magic, if he chooses to. That doesn't stop him from being a warlock. Gandalf was better with a sword than half of the soldiers in middle earth. And even though his magic was impressive, he didn't rely on it all that much. Or it's possible that his magic was being used as a fortification for sword techniques or melee combat damage. The point is that he didn't fight like a wizard. Most of the time, he fought like a warrior, just with the occasional nuke or solar flare.
On the other hand, I don't find the wizard class to be very descriptive for identity. So maybe that was a bad example. There are plenty of classes that are descriptive, though.
Personally, I don't enjoy the concept of classes that restrict growth. I only enjoy them when they have a minor effect on growth. I don't like for a game to rail me at the very beginning and prevent me from growing outside of my very first choice.
Perhaps a solution might be to eliminate classes entirely, and instead provide a set of abilities and attributes to define the character's capabilities and have the character's identity come from the players choice in these, actions in the world, choices of accoutrement and the reactions of NPCs.
I imagine having the character creations screen offer a pool of available points, which the player may spend on a variety of statistic upgrades (strength, intelligence, etc.) and abilities (swordsmanship, shield-training, blood magic, sorcery, combat channelling, etc.), from which the player can construct a character that suits their preferences. For example, someone wanting to create a battle-mage might select upgrades to strength and intelligence, the ability to use melee-related magical buffs (perhaps drawing from a handful of magic types), a selection of combat-related non-sorcerous powers, and skill with a sword.
Note that I'm envisaging character attributes and character skills being selected as part of the same step, drawing from the same pool of points. This means that a player could create a character with low attributes (not having spent any points on them), but many abilities - albeit perhaps, depending on the abilities, reduced by the character having low statistics.
After character creation, the player's identity could be "seeded" by a concentration of "personality-oriented" gameplay at the beginning (morally-charged quests, a selection of paths that cater to various combat styles, etc.), and perhaps a few minor initial questions.
Finally, I would suggest having NPCs gather information about the player in order to inform their reactions. Noting, for example, that the player character is wearing dark grey clothing, including hood and mask, is carrying a variety of unpleasant-looking knives (and perhaps a crossbow), and has a few cold-blooded murders attributed to him, an NPC that wishes to have another NPC assassinated might approach the player about it. The same NPC, however, might not approach a player character who is known for doing good deeds, is wearing robes and, despite having no apparent weapons, is surrounded by an aura of power.
Implementing this latter feature could probably be modelled in a fairly simple manner, of course, at its base perhaps nothing more complex than setting flags or altering values based on the player's actions, coupled with some clever writing. For example, killing a character that is at the player's mercy might increment a "cold-blooded" variable, which, if positive, could lead to NPCs approaching the player about dastardly deeds (such a choice might make for a good initial "seeding" choice, for that matter). On the other hand, saving kittens and waiving rewards might subtract from that value, with negative values leading to NPCs approaching the player character about good deeds.
Thus player identity could arise from the player's selections and the actions and reactions of NPCs, with a blank slate beign provided by the lack of complete classes.
Quote:Original post by Thaumaturge Thus player identity could arise from the player's selections and the actions and reactions of NPCs, with a blank slate beign provided by the lack of complete classes.
I just want to throw a few concepts out that might help those choose this route. It's not meant to be an argument against it. Just some points that may need to be considered while planning.
1. It's often very difficult to predict a player's reasoning. Some actions which may seem suited to one identity may lead to conclusions suited to another. Even if the game purposely designs its choices to be suited to a specific identity, the player may not know that, and may believe the choice will lead elsewhere. A very simple and generic example is of a paladin picking a lock on a door to kill a zombie inside. Picking the locked door is the action being observed. Even if there is no zombie, the player needs to look inside to make sure.
2. Many players agree to just about all types of quests. Whether an NPC is asking the player to kill someone or save a princess, there are some players who will do both just because they've been asked, and because it may lead to reward. In the end, it doesn't sort out their identity. It just confuses the game's identity-choosing engine.
3. Allowing players to define a type of identity through action will motivate them to perform certain actions, some of which they may hate, in order to steer their identity in certain directions. This works against the proposed concept, since the player's natural choices are not being used to measure their identity. One solution might be to completely hide a player's identity definition from them. But it's really just a hack solution. Players are too smart to hope they just won't figure it out.
I think in many situations, players simply dont feel like role playing the characters that much. They are greedy bastards and will take what opportunities they can get and will take the best rewards unless they have major objections. even then some players will play with no moral compass at all and just do anything. Its a sort of laziness I think.
A situational question. I am planing on making itemization in my game very one-leveled in that all the equipment is essentially equal in utility to the player. there will be other items and ways of adding function to the equipment, but the items as you find them will not be any better or worse than something of the same type. This means the players can choose the items they want freely based on appearance. I intend on using this and a color scheme choosing system to allow the player to craft their own appearance how they like. Beyond this appearance customization, how else might I allow the player to create identity In a reliable and player controlled way that is fun.
I think NPC interactions really wouldnt be very good for the reasons that Kest mentioned and that most players are too greedy and too lazy to roleplay characters and deny themselves quests.
