Why Do Our RPGs Still Need Numbers? @ Kotaku

Remove all ads!

Kotaku asks Why Do Our Role-Playing Games Still Need Numbers Everywhere?

Compare, for example, the experience of Mass Effect 2 with that of a more traditional RPG. You're still doing largely the same things: you're leading a party, you're exploring worlds, you're engaging in dialogue with characters, you're increasing the strength of your party and gaining access to new and improved equipment along the way.

Yet if you asked somebody to play Mass Effect 2 and then play a more "traditional" RPG - whether Western or Japanese - and they'd tell you it would feel like playing two completely different games, the former's fast pacing and action sequences contrasting with the latter's obsession with statistics, percentages, numbers and inventory management.

Whether you like one or the other (or both!) is entirely subjective, but to me, the very purpose (and appeal!) of a role-playing game is to, well, role-play. Create a character and go on an adventure. Like playing dress-ups as a kid, only with (hopefully) better writing and props. I don't know about you, but my fantasies would involve exploring worlds and kicking ass, not seeing numbers everywhere and juggling inventories.​

Fortunately, Jay 'Rampant Coyote' Barnson has already replied:

Long ago, I tried the suggestion given in some tabletop RPGs to not reveal to players the exact damage that they had received, but instead to describe it and track the values secretly. I tried to be as descriptive as possible. I thought it would add tension and drama to the game. It did, but not in the way I wanted it to. My players hated it. It drove them crazy. The experiment didn't even last an entire session. They didn't want to hear, "You are badly hurt." They needed to know HOW badly hurt. As exactly as possible. I couldn't just say, "You might not survive another hit with a sword blade." They wanted to know - a strong hit with a sword blade, an average hit with a sword blade, or a weak hit with a sword blade? Because, you know, it changes everything. And from that, they extrapolated a number range in their heads.

Because from that quantification, they could then extrapolate. What about a dagger hit. What about a fireball? Most importantly, how likely was their character to survive another round of combat without healing?​

 

I don't know that you have to have an "obsession with statistics" to want the numbers.

I'm not one of those who calculates all the various statistical possibilities in D&D as relates to 'builds' and their BAB, AC, to-hit modifers, et al, but I still like to know what I rolled now and then. That doesn't make me obsessed.

 

Gaear, the sooner you can admit your obsession with statistics, the sooner you can begin to cope with it. It sounds to me like you're completely out of control!

If a game gives me the option to see attack roles and the like, I almost always enable those options. Oh geez, I guess that makes me a nutcase too! Well, I guess that's not likely news to anyone, so what the hell!

 

This is the blind leading the blind - we're both so out of our minds for stats that we can't see the forest for the trees. BTA too. It's sad.

 

Because numbers force us to think instead of just click.

 

In total honesty, I think this comes from the early idea that a CRPG was supposed to be a new platform to experience what had previously always been a pencil, paper, and dice based experience.

In P&P, rolling dice was a pivotal part of the experience. You needed to understand certain mechanics, and one of the most important questions raised during such a gaming session was "what did you roll."

It was quite the innovation when a computer could start handling the "dice rolls" for you, but many of us didn't want to give up on knowing what was happening below the covers, so we continued to pay attention to those values. It wasn't enough to know that your sword connected with its target. You also wanted to know how well it connected. Did it just barely make it? Or were you able to hit your foe with ease?

I'm not sure about the younger generation, who may never have rolled a die in their life, but I think some of us old timers want to see the rolls, because it's still a fundamental part of the roleplaying experience. And as Merlanni alludes to, it causes us to think and evolve our characters in different ways based on what the numbers are telling us.

 

The way I see it, the "numbers" are a necessary evil to situations that you cannot resolve with roleplaying. In the pen & paper RPG group that I played with for several years we generally tried to do that, roleplay as much as possible, but of course you have to compare stats sooner or later and maybe throw a die or two. But in a CRPG it just is not possible without statistics, be it Mass Effect or some old school indie CRPG. It is just a question of how much of it do you show to the player.

 

The article/question is silly and somewhat misinformed. A lot of people wrongly presume that the "Role Playing" part of the term "Role Playing Game" is somehow more important than the "game" part.

News flash people: We already have something called "acting" where you do not need to quantify ANYTHING with numbers and the only goal is to convincingly and smartly play your role.

Role Playing GAMES are an almost entirely different thing. While the game design itself DOES allow for and strongly supports whatever 'acting' and storytelling you want to engage in, the primary purpose of these games are to simulate, through quantified mechanics, the experience of being a hero(or similarly epic character). Maybe you just got done watching a marathon of martial arts movies and are daydreaming about what YOU would do if you were a Shao-lin monk fighting off a horde of ninja assassins. An RPG can allow you to do that...to become that master martial artist taking down scores of ninja with his bare hands. But the ONLY way this is possible is through quantified mechanics...numbers representing degrees(of skill, health, intellect, etc.) and probabilities.

"Cops and robbers" was "roleplaying" but it was not a "game" and any attempt to turn it into one by children resulted in the "I shot you!/No you missed me because I was behind the cop car!" argument.

Roleplaying GAMES resolve this by random number generation against quantified skill and attribute levels.

 

If they want us to stop caring about the numbers, they should remove the level up system and generally make RPGs less combat heavy. After all, if a game tells you that you have levelled up and thus presumably have grown stronger, it would make sense to ask just how much stronger you have become. It's just not as satisfying if there is not some measurable improvement.* Traditionally, CRPGs have been defined by the fact that they have some sort of levelling system, so you could say it is actually part of the system.

The same goes for combat - it's satisfying to see how much damage you are doing. As Dr. Skepticus said, it's the game part of Role Playing Game. In a game like Heavy Rain, numbers are unimportant because the game mostly takes care of the combat and your only input to these sequences is a few timed button presses. And you don't level up either. But then again, Heavy Rain is not considered an RPG either. Some don't even consider it a game.

Another aspect is that as long as you have an inventory and items, you'll need to have numbers as well. How will you otherwise know if one item is better than another?

I actually do think that it's possible to make a game without all the numbers. After all, the numbers didn't add all that much to PS:T either - combat could be avoided to a high degree and there weren't that many items to worry about either.

On the other hand, a levelling system and searching for items have long been considered traditional RPG elements, so would a game without these elements still be considered a RPG?


* This is also where the level scaling system fails for me: there is no feeling of progression.

 

Even PS:T had statistics, generally numbers will be necessary as the engine can't just process words in its calculations and where numbers are involved - players will try and access them. Whether as a means to make their choices more obvious and understandable or as a method of improving their gear.

I however do not consider the 'numberless' RPG to be impossible, even I've delved into the concept, but their needs to be an indication to the player of these numbers that is precise, relevant and comparable... which I'm sure you can see why numbers come out on top

 

I agree with Blackthorne completely. I don't need to see the roll but I want to be able to tell if something is worth trying or which option is best. In KOTOR I'd often find a big gun would have lower stats than a medium gun of the same quality . I'm sure there must have been something which made the heavy gun more powerful but it didn't show it.