Analysis of character advancement systems and systems rarely seen

[rusty_shackleford]

Reflecting on a remark I made in the Caves of Lore thread:

But I'm not a fan of the skills-go-up-when-used mechanic at all.

"Skill XP" systems where you receive XP in return for using a skill or ability inadvertently encourage a gameplay style that causes players to overuse a skill regardless of its current strategic or narrative importance due to the player's desire to level up said skill. I place this on the same level as any RPG that encourages grinding monsters for leveling.


As for other methods, there's the experience/level system used by most RPGs that exist. I don't think much needs to be said here about the system itself, but the way advancements work tends to differ greatly. I have a personal deep dislike of any system that allows you to accumulate skill points and spend them when needed, which heavily encourages metagaming as an optimal strategy for playing. On the other hand, systems that encourage learning through in-game mentors or trainers are probably my favorite.

The EXP/level system comes in many forms that might not be so obvious. e.g., Underrail's Oddity system is effectively a traditional XP system. You get oddities for defeating enemies, overcoming challenges, and exploring which generally parallels how EXP is often awarded. If you disagree, consider this: oddities represent XP in much the same way gold did in early D&D editions. Gold was an abstract representation of how successful your adventure was.

There are games provide little vertical progression for characters and instead move the progression to item-based, this is commonly seen in online RPGs. This can definitely be considered an alternative form of character advancement.

As for one I've never seen but would like to see, a system based on classic experience/leveling but instead of getting results when you level up you pick them at the start of a new level and your EXP represents you working towards the goal your character set for himself. To realize the new level once the character has the required experience, the character could be required to visit a mentor or trainer. Do any games do this?

[wndrbr]

There aren't all that many RPGs with skill teachers, the amount of RPGs with skill teachers that also have this "working towards the goal" idea is probably zero.

[wndrbr]

BTW the upcoming Colony Ship RPG also uses the dreaded "learn by using" skill system. In order to avoid players grinding skills by repeating the same action, Vince made the amount all possible actions limited - you can't grind lockpicking skill because there's a limited number of pickable locks, you can't grind persuasion because there's a limited number of persuasion checks, etc. It's an interesting solution to the problem, though I can already see it backfiring and making skill levelling overly "meta" - just like how in Underrail in order to level faster you must rummage through every garbage bin in search for oddities, and on subsequent playthroughs keep a mental map of every oddity in order to hit specific level milestones before starting major dungeons.

[MadPreacher]

To realize the new level once the character has the required experience, the character could be required to visit a mentor or trainer. Do any games do this?

Yes, the early SSI Gold Box games had this. Pool of Radiance, Curse of the Azure Bonds, Secret of the Silver Blades, and Champions of Krynn all had training halls that were needed to advance your character's levels. The later games dropped this from what I can tell.

[rusty_shackleford]

There are games provide little vertical progression for characters and instead move the progression to item-based, this is commonly seen in online RPGs. This can definitely be considered an alternative form of character advancement.

Offline example: Outward

[Lich]

BTW the upcoming Colony Ship RPG also uses the dreaded "learn by using" skill system. In order to avoid players grinding skills by repeating the same action, Vince made the amount all possible actions limited - you can't grind lockpicking skill because there's a limited number of pickable locks, you can't grind persuasion because there's a limited number of persuasion checks, etc. It's an interesting solution to the problem, though I can already see it backfiring and making skill levelling overly "meta" - just like how in Underrail in order to level faster you must rummage through every garbage bin in search for oddities, and on subsequent playthroughs keep a mental map of every oddity in order to hit specific level milestones before starting major dungeons.

Depends on how it's implemented specifically in Colony Ship, but generally you'd still feel obligated to use the same skills you'd been upgrading, unless upgrading skills makes available other skills that help you avoid overly relying on the same narrow group of skills. Preventing grinding reduces the number of ways you can enjoy the game, and it doesn't address the main problem, which is the restrictiveness of the learn-by-using system; people should be able to play however they want, just don't balance the game too much around such extreme playing habits.

[Tweed]

I like the bankable level/skill point system.

Gothic uses it, though it doesn't just use it all willy nilly. You usually have to pay for training and in the case of NotR it costs more points the higher you go up.

[Kalarion]

I like Vince's philosophy re: meta character development (that is, he makes the most powerful possible characters a reward for meta knowledge/mastery). That's probably why he's stayed with "saving" skill points. To people like Rusty it's an aggravation to have to develop meta knowledge, to Vince it's kind of the whole point.

I agree about learn-by-doing. I hate it, I feel like a hamster on a wheel. If I had to choose from what's generally available out there, I'd probably go with Might and Magic's later chardev system. There you have standard xp, levels and skills. But you have to go to a training hall etc to actually level up, and each skill has a trainer at varying levels (expert, master, grandmaster) that unlocks increasing functionality. I had a lot of fun wandering the world, finding the trainers I needed, and (in the case of grandmasters) running various quests.

WFRP did something like you're asking @rusty_shackleford. There you picked professions. Each profession had its own advancement scheme, which had to be completely filled in order to pick a new profession. Players needed trainers, in either the desired profession (for profession changes) or the desired skill at a greater level than the player (for skill advancements) in order to advance. I really liked it. Unfortunately WFRP got binned years ago. I don't know how their new TT RPG systems work.

[Norfleet]

"Skill XP" systems where you receive XP in return for using a skill or ability inadvertently encourage a gameplay style that causes players to overuse a skill regardless of its current strategic or narrative importance due to the player's desire to level up said skill. I place this on the same level as any RPG that encourages grinding monsters for leveling.

Interesting fact, though: Real life uses this system. It turns out if you overuse a skill regardless of it would actually be important in the current situation, you WILL actually improve at it for no other reason than because of this. It's just that society seems to frown on this behavior, likely because it would make you overpowered and thus make them look bad. Totally tick that "always run" checkbox and run everywhere while bunny hopping to train your jumping skill. It really works.

[rusty_shackleford]

"Skill XP" systems where you receive XP in return for using a skill or ability inadvertently encourage a gameplay style that causes players to overuse a skill regardless of its current strategic or narrative importance due to the player's desire to level up said skill. I place this on the same level as any RPG that encourages grinding monsters for leveling.

Interesting fact, though: Real life uses this system. It turns out if you overuse a skill regardless of it would actually be important in the current situation, you WILL actually improve at it for no other reason than because of this. It's just that society seems to frown on this behavior, likely because it would make you overpowered and thus make them look bad. Totally tick that "always run" checkbox and run everywhere while bunny hopping to train your jumping skill. It really works.

Let me know how good at drawing you get when someone starts punching you and you pull out a sheet of paper.

[wndrbr]

[Emphyrio]

"Levels" aren't even necessary. They are another D&D cargo-cultism. Characters can get stronger by getting better gear, more spells, or direct stat and skill increases.

Instead of even "gold is exp", gold is what you use to get better gear, pay to learn new skills and train up your stats. Or else those things can't be bought and need to be found out in the world.

[GhostCow]

Levels aren't necessary、but they are a good indicator of power level

[Norfleet]

Let me know how good at drawing you get when someone starts punching you and you pull out a sheet of paper.

Very, if you've gotten so much practice that you can draw even while getting the **** beaten out of you. Drawing Skill 100: Immune to interruptions while drawing. Probably not doing your fighting skills any favors, though.

[Val the Moofia Boss]

Another issue with skill systems is that often obfuscate what abilities or builds are available and the path to achieving them, since it is not clear at character creation what is possible. You have to get further into the game and open the menu (and hopefully, you will be able to see all of the unlocks, and not have to skill up to see them...), or do a lot of online research.

There are games provide little vertical progression for characters and instead move the progression to item-based, this is commonly seen in online RPGs. This can definitely be considered an alternative form of character advancement.

I don't like how this is usually implemented, which is that your character hits a level cap and then you are grinding for items with arbitrarily higher numbers, and constantly throwing out your old gear to equip item with higher numbers will somehow make you stronger. Except it doesn't, because the level 120 bear you are fighting in the new zone takes just as long to kill as that level 20 bear you fought five years ago when you were starting the game. It has the exact same model too. It's a bear, but inexplicably if you go back to that level 20 zone and touch that bear, it will die instantly. So even one bear is arbitrarily more powerful than another.

I think ultimately, games need to have set endings, or at least you are going to reach a point where you graduate from one stage of play to another. Maybe you start out a game and the first few expansions as a weak adventurer who needs a six man party to fight a bear. Then you reach the point where you can solo a bear, though it would be difficult, but at the point the challenging content becomes about fighting stronger enemies like mechs, not just higher numbered bears. That at a certain point, you either become a demigod or a mech pilot, and can start soloing mechs, but then the next challenge is either participating in huge battles with lots of things going on and you having to race across the map to defend areas, or you are now facing huge kaiju monsters. Etc. But spending years and years getting higher numbers but still taking 30 seconds to kill a bear doesn't work.

[UltraFan123]

Now that I have Final Fantasy in my mind, I'm reminded of the original FF2 which to my knowledge is the only mainline title that didn't used levels nor EXP, and was entirely stat-growth based.

I'm aware that said system was easily exploitable by having the party attack itself over and over again, but I also felt that if Squaresoft had bothered to simply patch it in a way that self-inflicted damage couldn't be used for the stat growth, then the game would've been more interesting.

[Val the Moofia Boss]

Now that I have Final Fantasy in my mind, I'm reminded of the original FF2 which to my knowledge is the only mainline title that didn't used levels nor EXP, and was entirely stat-growth based.

I'm aware that said system was easily exploitable by having the party attack itself over and over again, but I also felt that if Squaresoft had bothered to simply patch it in a way that self-inflicted damage couldn't be used for the stat growth, then the game would've been more interesting.

The FF2 designer went on to make the SaGa games and The Last Remnant, which was one of the main offenders I was thinking of when it came to esoteric skill based progression systems. You choose to equip a lance or spam a lightning spell over and over again to raise your skill, but you don't know what exactly - if at any - abilities you will learn as a result of levelling that skill. There is no skill tree to view up front. And in the case of TLR, there are certain mandatory spells like Cachexia that you MUST have to in order to beat certain superbosses like The Fallen, and those spells require setting up certain characters a certain way and having them spam a certain attack for dozens and dozens of hours. You have to have outside knowledge that you need Cachexia, the requirements to learn it, and know when you can start progressing towards it as soon as possible so that your characters have learned that spell by the time you reach The Fallen.

[Tangerine]

but you don't know what exactly - if at any - abilities you will learn as a result of levelling that skill.

The Japs have a habit of designing systems with obtuseness and obfuscation in mind, thinking those are equivalent to depth. Tales of Zesteria's crafting system is a prime example.

[Demonic Fate]

My favourite power-up system is one where you gain the skills and abilities of defeated enemies, through whatever in-universe justification (magic gear, soul drain, pokeball, whatever).

You need to pair it with a deck system where you have a limited number of "slots" to activate though, otherwise you'll become the same master of all skills in every game.