Conflict resolution Overton window

[J1M]

I'd like to discuss the acceptable and preferred means of resolving conflict (aka combat) in an RPG.

I greatly enjoyed Golf Story, which is an RPG where the player is tested by participating in golfing activities and a full round of golf stands in for a boss battle. I found this very refreshing and I am open to more RPG conflict resolution straying from traditional combat. What I'm not clear on is if that is a common or rare opinion.

It seems like most people here are fine with grid combat and will choke down rtwp if needed. I also imagine that a random roll (skill check) is acceptable as long as it isn't the only resolution mechanism.

What is the edge of what you would be excited to see? The limit of what you would try?

What if an RPG conflict was resolved by a game of Magic: The Gathering? Chess? A test of FPS skill? A round of Golf?

What is the appropriate length of time for a standard encounter? The length of time for a boss encounter?

[maidenhaver]

I draw the line at Monkey Ball.

[Vergil]

A boring repetitive mini game would be the limit for me. Imagine if you had to do persuasion pie from Oblivion to defeat a boss.

[Xenich]

I'd like to discuss the acceptable and preferred means of resolving conflict (aka combat) in an RPG.

I greatly enjoyed Golf Story, which is an RPG where the player is tested by participating in golfing activities and a full round of golf stands in for a boss battle. I found this very refreshing and I am open to more RPG conflict resolution straying from traditional combat. What I'm not clear on is if that is a common or rare opinion.

It seems like most people here are fine with grid combat and will choke down rtwp if needed. I also imagine that a random roll (skill check) is acceptable as long as it isn't the only resolution mechanism.

What is the edge of what you would be excited to see? The limit of what you would try?

What if an RPG conflict was resolved by a game of Magic: The Gathering? Chess? A test of FPS skill? A round of Golf?

What is the appropriate length of time for a standard encounter? The length of time for a boss encounter?

Seen several card games that are applied in manner to look like an RPG. I guess it just depends on taste. Though I would not see this as an RPG system, rather an adventure system with various mini-games in place to resolve the conflict. At that point, I think it really depends on what your goals are in terms of the game play itself.

[OnTilt]

I wouldn't mind if more rpgs had alternate conflict resolutions for specific, story related elements. Say you're quest is to get a guys money back from a goon and you do this by beating the goon at a game of poker, rather than just smashing his head in. It's even better if you get to choose between the two, and best when the method you choose affects the story going forward somehow.

A whole game like that though, especially when it's all the same and not specific to a particular quest/story element? Where is the line between 'RPG' and just 'golf game with rpg-esque elements'? That seems like it would get boring really fast unless what I really wanted was to play a golf game.

Wouldn't a better question just be, "Do you like it when your golf games have RPG-like elements?"

[Xenich]

I wouldn't mind if more rpgs had alternate conflict resolutions for specific, story related elements. Say you're quest is to get a guys money back from a goon and you do this by beating the goon at a game of poker, rather than just smashing his head in. It's even better if you get to choose between the two, and best when the method you choose affects the story going forward somehow.

A whole game like that though, especially when it's all the same and not specific to a particular quest/story element? Where is the line between 'RPG' and just 'golf game with rpg-esque elements'?

Ah, ok... now I understand. Yeah, that is an interesting addition to play.

[maidenhaver]

I wouldn't mind if more rpgs had alternate conflict resolutions for specific, story related elements. Say you're quest is to get a guys money back from a goon and you do this by beating the goon at a game of poker, rather than just smashing his head in. It's even better if you get to choose between the two, and best when the method you choose affects the story going forward somehow.

Is this a gwent thread?

[Gregz]

Victory is taken at the edge of the sword.

[Xenich]

You could have a system that has no combat involved, but is established by detailed traits and abilities that can be improved and then those traits are placed into a contest to overcome a given obstacle.

Dialogue for instance could be far more involved. Instead of simple gate checks, it could be a detailed line of arguments, social interactions, and mannerisms to effect different outcomes. Those abilities would be measured to a skill level in each tactic used and then and then a dice roll could be used with your skills in those tactics deciding the outcome. Based on that outcome, the dynamics of the conversation would shift.

It could be a very detailed system, applying the mathematical nature of logical argument, emotional impression and manipulation, etc...

You take the premise of being a Lawyer, where your goal is to argue cases in trial. In that play, your intelligence, social skill, wisdom, topic knowledge, charm, speaking skills, education and vocabulary, psychological profile ability, human sense, etc.. could all be skills and abilities that decide what types of options you have in dialogue and how you would form them into an argument to establish points to win the case.

No combat grid, no swinging a sword, but the concept of contest according to statistical tests measured to developed character abilities and stats applied through strategic use would determine the outcome and future options.

Is that what you mean?

[J1M]

A boring repetitive mini game would be the limit for me. Imagine if you had to do persuasion pie from Oblivion to defeat a boss.

Assume that whatever the resolution mechanism is, it is made in a way that player progression is relevant. Example from Golf Story: stats that affect how far you hit the golf ball, how much spin you can put on it, varied courses, etc.

In the case of a card battle, you would grow and modify your deck instead of upgrading a paper doll with equipment.

[maidenhaver]

Just say you like yugioh.

[J1M]

Just say you like yugioh.

Never played it. Can't read that many words on each card.

[Emphyrio]

sometimes the whole game is combat and "non-combat" options are just skipping combat ie the only content

[A Chinese opium den]

Just say you like yugioh.

Never played it. Can't read that many words on each card.

Filtered

[Val the Moofia Boss]

Crafting gameplay. Atelier and Final Fantasy XIV dabble in this, where in the story you're part of a shop or guild that is struggling to remain above the red line, or has a lien on it, or the government is trimming the fat and thinks you're a waste of taxpayer dollars, etc, and you have to keep the shop open by meeting quotas or wowing people with an exquisite craft. In FFXIV you have crafting stats, and there is a crafting minigame with abilities and traits where you try to craft an item as high quality as possible with a limited amount of turns, and it can be quite difficult, and the higher quality your final craft is the greater your quest reward is. FFXIV crafting questlines have you rebuild relations between two strained factions by rebuilding monuments as a symbol of friendship, cook a delicious dinner of a head of state. Etc.

The climax of the Banner Saga trilogy is not a battle, but a negotiation. After the final battle, you confront the last bad guy (who is too powerful to be fought in gameplay) and have to negotiate a deal for the fate of the world, and your ending depends on 5 choices you made throughout the trilogy and how you are trying to persuade the characters involved. If Eyvind witnessed you behave less than admirably, then you probably shouldn't leave the final decision to him and should instead settle for one of the two more pragmatic compromises even if they are less than ideal.

[rusty_shackleford]

and will choke down rtwp if needed.

I like good RTwP more than turn-based.

---

The best example of a non-combat RPG is Harvest Moon and its progeny.

[Humbaba]

I think we should vehemently combat the Cain school of thought as exemplified by Fallout, according to which talking your way out of things is always the best and easiest option. I'm not against using speech no jutsu at all, but having one kind of option always be objectively better is bad design. PST sorta gets away with it because it was a soviet style subversion of tropes and the writing is very good. Oftentimes though, encounters in something like New Vegas go like:

"I WILL KILL YOU"
"[SPEECH] Heh, killing me will only prove that you have no arguments "
"Holy shit, you're right *commits suicide*" EXP 1'000'000

I'd have much rather had an interesting combat encounter but the violent options in those kinds of gayms usually only award you with 5 exp, so what's the point.






-Humbaba

[Emphyrio]

The best example of a non-combat RPG is Harvest Moon and its progeny.

[rusty_shackleford]

The best example of a non-combat RPG is Harvest Moon and its progeny.

What about it? It's still not really an RPG, but if you were going to actually try going in that direction it's a game I'd look at.

[Shillitron]

and will choke down rtwp if needed.

I like good RTwP more than turn-based.

---

The best example of a non-combat RPG is Harvest Moon and its progeny.

What's your favorite Harvest Moon game?

[rusty_shackleford]

and will choke down rtwp if needed.

I like good RTwP more than turn-based.

---

The best example of a non-combat RPG is Harvest Moon and its progeny.

What's your favorite Harvest Moon game?

Stardew Valley is objectively the best Harvestmoon-style game.

[Xenich]

I think we should vehemently combat the Cain school of thought as exemplified by Fallout, according to which talking your way out of things is always the best and easiest option. I'm not against using speech no jutsu at all, but having one kind of option always be objectively better is bad design. PST sorta gets away with it because it was a soviet style subversion of tropes and the writing is very good. Oftentimes though, encounters in something like New Vegas go like:

"I WILL KILL YOU"
"[SPEECH] Heh, killing me will only prove that you have no arguments "
"Holy shit, you're right *commits suicide*" EXP 1'000'000

I'd have much rather had an interesting combat encounter but the violent options in those kinds of gayms usually only award you with 5 exp, so what's the point.

-Humbaba

Agreed, I would prefer most systems of these optional paths to be less influenced by the developers individual position on a given solution (ie what they deem good or bad) and design around what is "typical" to a given line of progression (maybe based on historical analysis of some behaviors and possible interaction paths). With this in mind, you could result in the story going in many different directions where they player could end up completely siding with the antagonist, or even betraying them both, or maybe other options due to the possible solutions available.

I think this would need the help of an AI though to see it through in both application and that of researching the behavior reactions and decision trees needed to permeate it through the entire game. It would be quite the undertaking without it, and even with it I can see it as requiring a lot of work to provide the modular components of play.

What I hate about a lot is the forced progressions that are obvious social engineering and not really game play.