Lancer

What enemies do you suggest at lvl 12-22? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well, I GM using the Mystara setting. And converted to AD&D rules, Level 20 would theoretically be the highest that the PCs can achieve. Beyond that point, the only way to get much more powerful would be to achieve Immortality. So in my case, things would be handled a bit differently but.... If you are allowing epic level campaigns via 3.x edition rules then I would suggest using the avatars of powerful Gods or very , very powerful and intelligent dragons as appropriate villains. At THAT level, I am assuming that the PCs would be challenging demigods rather than mere mortal villains. Unless in your particular campaign, epic level NPCs are relatively common. If not, then I would look at demons, devils, divine avatars, and immensely powerful and intelligent red dragons as villains. And an extremely ancient red dragon would make an *awesome* villain. Imagine all the tricks up his sleeve he would have in his lair!

And here is my last tip for today: 3) There is always something bigger and grander than the PCs. If the PCs are the strongest, most powerful beings in your campaign you may be doing it a major disservice. Instead take a hint from the Planescape setting and always have a healthy dose of rulers, and higher-up NPCs that can kick the PC's a$$es. If the PCs gets full of themselves, and they think they can get away with stuff, have the appropriate NPC hand their butt to them on occasion.

Another good tip: 2) Goblins and orcs have brains too! People tend to use weakling races such as "goblins" and "orcs" as cannon fodder. It is alright to use them in this manner sometimes, but sometimes it is better to show off their muscle too. Remember that goblins and orcs (particularly goblins as per the MM) are extremely tactical creatures and tend to use the environment to their advantage. Use these "weak" monsters to set up all manner of traps and ingenious fomations and pseudo-military tactics. Even a large group of wimpy goblins can give a 10th level party a run for their money... For example, say the PCs infiltrate the location of a goblin camp but the savvy creatures instead of ganging up on the far stronger PCs, decide to lure them into a narrow and very DARK tunnel--creating a bottleneck. Let's close the entrance once the PCs are inside... Now, goblins have infravision so they will be able to see. Unbeknownst to the PCs, the goblins have devised a lot of small holes on the ceilings and walls that only they can fit in through. Then just have a bunch of goblin archers pummel them with arrows coming from the ceiling, from little holes in the walls and from every which way. Put in a couple of traps the PCs step in just to complicate things further...Maybe a lava pit, here or there... Remember this is a narrow corridor so you can significantly reduce the number of attacks the PCs can launch back.. Not only that, but unless they have the appropriate spell ,item, an elf, or a blindfighting proficiency, most or all of them will have major penalties to their attack rolls since they can't see. In fact, they won't for a while know where the arrows are coming from. The PCs will be in utter panic. So much so that even if they happen to survive, this will force them to stop executing frontal assaults and use their brains more next time. Because the PCs realize that even 1st level creatures can kill them with a coordinated attack, they will realize for the first time that their characters are indeed mortal and vulnerable. As a result, your players will respect and fear battle more and will be hesitant to attack right away the next time. They will be open to using less combat-oriented methods such as talking or stealth.

You want some good ways for your PCs to think first before pulling out their swords? Here are some good tips: 1) Don't forget the "law" in your game. I mentioned this point before on these threads some time ago but it will definitely make your PCs think twice before attacking first. Say the PCs start slaightering orcs in an orc nation. The higher-up or ruler will surely take notice of this and it won't be before long that a horde of the best bounty hunters that the ruler has to spare will come after the PCs. Some of which may opt to assassinate them in their sleep rather than fight them one-on-one. Just think about this in real life terms. You can perform "crimes" and wanton acts of destruction but like in reality, most things come with a price and will one day come back to haunt you. PCs can attempt to cover their tracks once committing an atrocious act but the enemy can launch investigation teams, find clues, and track down the PCs with appropriate force. Remember this: The PCs always seem to have a good habit of uncovering the villain's plans, tracks, and what not.. Why can't the bad guys do the same thing? Imagine the surprise on the PCs' faces when the General of the Orcish army came upon hard-to-find evidence which disclosed the location of the PC hometown? Imagine the horror on the PCs' faces when the enemies do a background check and find out whom the PC's loved ones are.. And if the PCs do a frontal assault, they will have no remorse sacrificing these loved ones? The GM can so easily blackmail and frame the PCs and keep them in check. Use these powerful tools at your disposal.

I'd agree, if role-playing when applied to computer gaming was exclusively dependant of the player, except it's not. The ability to roleplay is contained in the player, but the methods and expression of said roleplaying are contained in the electronic RPG. I can't roleplay something in an electronic RPG if said RPG doesn't allow for what I am roleplaying to be expressed. Roleplaying in a medium that doesn't recognize what I'm roleplaying seriously questions if role-playing strictly depedant of me, or instead, of a process that requires player input and computer, or videogame, output and recognition. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> As Roleplayer so eloquently stated, if the programmer didn't allow for a particular aspect to be roleplayed in an electronic media, I (you) as the player can't roleplay that aspect. The extent of one's ability to roleplay in a CRPG is highly dependent on what the programmer coded in a CRPG. Interestingly, this goes into why many hardcore PnPers believe that CRPGS can never be true RPGS. You are just not allowed the total gamut of freedom of expression that only a tabletop RPG can provide.

Newsflash.. KOTOR uses rules based on d20. It doesn't use 3rd edition rules. There is a difference. I am not going to beat a dead bush. I already have expressed my view on this topic in several threads as to what qualifies as an RPG. Like others have said the term is so amorphous that what an RPG is, is really dependent on the eye of the beholder. No pun intended. Needless to say by your definition, many strategy and aventure games are also RPGs.

I saw Spiderman 2 over the christmas break. I thought that was the best superhero movie ever made. And, yeah, Batman Begins was a tad overrated. It lacked soul.

hack and slash RPG? Isn't that an oxymoron? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Diablo 2 the best thing ever released by Blizzard. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Possibly. But it still doesn't make it an RPG. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You play a role, it's a role-playing game. Peroid. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Semanatically speaking, so are Super Mario Bros. and John Madden Football.

hack and slash RPG? Isn't that an oxymoron? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Diablo 2 the best thing ever released by Blizzard. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Possibly. But it still doesn't make it an RPG.

Exactly. Because it is not an RPG. Therefore, it shouldn't have been marketed as one. So go shoot Diablo's marketing team.

There has never been a REAL rpg.. at least outside of PnP. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> This may be true on a philosophical level (although I would argue that games like Fallout and Torment are close enough to being real RPGs). But there are MANY games that have come a lot closer to being like PnP than Diablo has. Diablo didn't even try.

I'll admit, I didn't expect that. I apologize. Only RPGs I remember enjoying on Genesis were Shining Force games and Phantasy Star. Don't remember what else was on there. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I liked the Genesis RPGs better because they had a good variety of both JRPGS and CRPGS. EDIT: As for other Genesis RPGs-- For JRPGS, Shining Force and Phantasy Star were the main ones (Don't forget Shining in the Darkness!). However, there were quite a few quality PC-style RPGS that were neglected by the JRPG community such as: Warriors of the Eternal Sun, Shadowrun, Buck Rogers, Sword of Vermillion, and Super Hydlide were among the good PC-style RPGs on the Genesis. It was unfortunate that equivalent games were not made for the SNES (and don't even mention that horrible Ultima VII port!)

I enjoyed the Phantasy Star series, Xenogears, and even Legend of Dragoon. What a shock.. I play both! But yeah, the Genesis ones were better

7th Saga stinks that's for sure. As a matter of fact, most of the SNES RPGs did.

Fallout is not D&D and it is an RPG. KOTOR is not D&D and it is an RPG. Vampire: Bloodlines is not D&D and it is an RPG. Ultima is not D&D and it is an RPG. Avernum is not D&D and it is an RPG....etc ad nauseum. But Diablo isn't.

There are strategy games I have played with those elements. Check out the old game PC game "Stronghold" or "Warsong" on the Genesis. Yet they are still not RPGs. Whether it is a good game or not is subjective. But an RPG, Diablo is not.

The problem is that the market labels Diablo as an RPG. Which I agree is just plain wrong. That was the essence of my pointing out that calling Diablo a hack and slash RPG was an oxymoron. At best Diablo is an action game with strong strategy elements but not an RPG. People also want to label it an RPG because it takes place in a fantasy setting... lol

hack and slash RPG? Isn't that an oxymoron? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Given that RPGs are an evolution of the Strat game... no, it's not. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The operative word is "evolution" and according to dictionary.com : "A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form" Many believe humans are evolved from monkeys. Yet we are not monkeys. And in almost every possible way we are "better" and more intelligent than monkeys. The same way humans are not monkeys is the same way that RPGs aren't wargames or strategy games. Although they have evolved from those games doesn't mean RPGs are wargames. RPGs are a different breed altogether and a better one too. So the take-home message is this: Leave the pure hack and slash to the strat games, and leave the REAL roleplaying to the RPGs.

Sorry.. But I just don't buy that. How can you forget the impact that a game of the likes of Ultima VII in just 5 years? You don't think the development team of BG1 ever played the game? Ultima VII wasn't just some average RPG that nobody knew about. Like BG itself, it is considered one of the biggest classics ever and was extremely revolutionary in its own right. I would know because I finally played the game a couple of years ago after wanting to play this game so freakin' bad for nearly half my life. And the Dark Ages analogy is not apt because that is on the order of a few hundred years and we are just talking about 4-5 years tops here.. I don't think the industry "forgot" about Ultima VII in 4-5 years . I'd be willing to gander that it had more to do with trying to find a way to satisfy the most consumers... And maybe a little laziness had to do with it too. What happened to Ultima VII is not unlike what happened with Torment. How many games like Torment were made after it came out? It wasn't that game-makers forgot about the game and we entered some dark ages-- but rather Torment just didn't make enough profit to justify making future games like it. Although both games have enormous cult followings... MAXIMUM PROFITS always seem to be the key driver.

Interesting that there are actually more RPG elements in games such as System Shock and Deus Ex than say Diablo or even Baldur's Gate.

hack and slash RPG? Isn't that an oxymoron?

Worst Computer RPG I ever played is probably Dungeon Hack. Worst console RPG I ever played- Chrono Trigger.

Recall that not only did Ultima VII (both parts) but both of the Fallouts had a better/more advanced dialogue system than Baldur's Gate I. Fallout I came out the year before BG and Fallout II came out the same year as BG. The GB games were interesting though, your skills/proficiences and how well you were able to perform non-combat tasks were based on your stats though. They were still RPGs (at least the GB games I played). But in terms of character interaction, yes, they were lacking. I don't get this. Just because it is a D&D game you can't have good character interaction? I don't see any reason why BG1 couldn't have a dialogue system like Ultima VII's (or even better, an improved version..). A game can have interesting and well-developed NPCs with a dialogue system which is both well-written and variable via your stats regardless of the ruleset you use.

First off.. An adventure game doesn't rely much on stats to describe how well the character performs non-combat tasks nor do stats have a high level of customization as the character levels up like honest-to-goodness RPGs do. This is one of the key *real* differences between an adventure game and a true RPG. Planescape Torment was actually very similar to the Fallouts in how your stats dictated both what your character was capable of doing in non-combat situations and what your dialogue options were. No adventure game does that. Although you couldn't make a character from scratch, you had a GREAT degree of control over how your character was developed. Aside from deciding what spells, weapons/armor (etc..) you want your character to have in adventure games, you have minimal control over the development of your character. Not to mention that Planescape Torment , like the Fallouts, offered many different solutions to many, many problems.. Effectively, give you the choice as to HOW you want to ROLEPLAY your TNO. Now THAT is roleplaying. Something no adventure game I am aware of does. If you want to define an adventure game as a game that doesn't allow you to make your own character from scratch, you must keep in mind that many PnP RPGs and (It is ironic that even the Fallouts do this) CRPGS give you custom-made characters in case you don't want to build your own from the get-go. From that perspective, the ability to make your own character from scratch is not a defining criteria for a game to be considered an RPG. And come to think of it.. Planescape Torment was more of an RPG than even games such as BG1 were in many respects.

This is just obviously not true. I don't recall in BG1 spending upwards of 3-4 or more hours per dungeon just hacking away at enemies only to be thrust into ANOTHER dungeon right after finishing that one... again.. and... again... and again. I could hardly take a step in IWD1 before getting ambushed by some random horde (sometimes army) of monsters here and there.. Only to repeat the trite cycle over and over... Except for the very beginning and the very end, very little time was spent in IWD1 speaking to town NPCs gathering information that would have served well to break the monotony. If nothing else, BG1 actually had wilderness areas to explore and TOWNS (some with interesting NPCs and quests!) which added much needed variety to the gameplay.. Something IWD really didn't have. And the dungeons weren't nearly as long nor repetitive as they were in IWD. Really, the only thing that IWD and BG1 had in common was that they both were based on Forgotten Realms, used AD&D 2ndEd rules and the Infinity Engine.