Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'Choice and Consequence'.
There doesn't seem to be much discussion on the elements that, in my opinion, are the most important in a role-playing game. The elements that gave the Infinity Engine games the quality that they are renowned for: Narrative, Setting, Depth, Immersion and Choice and Consequence. Here are the topics analyzed by a youtube personality called MrBtongue in a insightful, articulate and entertaining way: Narrative: TUN: The Shandification of Fallout Setting and Immersion: TUN: The Elder Scrolls VI - Youtubia Depth: Creepy, Obsessive Nerdlove: Planescape: Torment: Colons Choice and Consequence: TUN: Choice and Consequence What is your opinion on these topics? Do you agree with MrBtongue on all of them? How important are these elements to you?
For my sins, I'm starting this topic based on some things I've seen in other folks' threads. What I'd like to see is a living world where stuff happens that doesn't relate entirely to my character. On the other hand, I don't want to feel like I'm constantly missing content. There's a reason the PC is the mover and shaker in cRPGs.... the players want it that way. However, if you make the PC part of a larger movement, or at least an independent operator amid larger movements, then you have more leeway. What I'd like to see is other groups trying to accomplish things. We have factions, and that provides at least some of the other groups working on their own ends. Celsius had his own take on this: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/60534-player-the-only-competent-force-in-the-universe/ What I want is for the player to either be in competition with another adventuring group or cooperating with them. If they are at odds, then both groups can vie for both items, objectives, vital information, and other things. If the groups are cooperative, I'd like to see the other group be able to borrow npcs (for either martial prowess or vital non combat skill), items, share information, and help in any other number of ways. The PC and the other group can accomplish more and perhaps have their own relationship that begins in one way, perhaps cooperative, but ends another way, enmity born of betrayal perhaps. Alternately, the groups could start at odds and then fall in together either for practical reasons or personal friendship. Here's another thing. I remember having to sacrifice stats and other goodies for my companions in both PS:T and BG2. That's going to be the typical good/evil sort of choice with which folks identify. What I'd like to see is something entirely. You can sacrifice a companion not for selfish vs selfless reasons but because you have a choice between saving thousands at the cost of one or perhaps it could serve the greater good in one way or another. I tell you what folks committed to playing a good two shoes character won't bat an eye at losing some stats to be able to show their 'golden haired savior' capacity. The same player will agonize over choosing between personal love and friendship and the community. Here's something similar: There's an NPC companion with a special skill, such as pathfinding, tracking, and hunting. The party is in a bind because the enemy is chasing them. The companion, being a noble bastard, decides to throw off the trail of the enemy. He volunteers to do so and the PC discusses the issue with him. If the companion goes, he cleans up the party's trail, creates a new trail for the enemy, and draws as many of them off as long as he can. It could be a simple skill check affected by things such as: loyalty to the PC, loyalty to the party, skill, stamina, and any other number of factors. Alternately, the companion says he's going to draw them off, but just runs away to save his own skin. That's always an option. I'd like the PC, from the very beginning, to feel like he's a part of the world rather than central to its every working and I'd like the game to reflect that fact in a variety of ways.