Things I’ve Learned from… The Witcher 3 (1/5)

Disassociated Mechanics

One of the most distinctive elements of The Witcher is Geralt’s silver and steel swords. While a nice world building detail the double swords also cleaves the game’s fighting mechanics in two. This simple separation hides one of the games most interesting mechanics.

Monsters and more mundane human and animal enemies are better damaged by the two different types of swords. When attacking an enemy with the wrong type of sword they take much reduced damage. As you play the game and increase your level the damage of your swords increase. But from sword to sword the rate  of increase between steel and silver are different.

According to the Witcher 3 wiki relic steel swords have a damage range of about 57 to 401, an increase of 344 while relic silver swords have a range of 127 to 846 an increase of 719. Monsters have much higher health overall and are trickier to fight.

By separating the groups of enemies you fight the game can keep the difficulty of monsters versus humans very different. Most fights with human (or non-humans) are in groups with multiple types of attackers. Geralt has to scramble between archers, melee fighters mixed in with the odd hammer or shield wielding bandit. Monsters on the other hand are generally in ones or twos or in groups of very similar creatures. Monsters become more of a puzzle, without the range of other attacks (signs, potions, bombs, etc) Geralt will struggle in most fights.

Use in RPGs

In my own game design I usually try to keep mechanics even across the board, but the Witcher’s use of different levels of challenge by separating the mechanics teaches a clear lesson, monsters are dangerous and are very different from human enemies.

Its insistence on monsters being harder also puts the spotlight on using techniques that will counter the strengths and defenses of monsters. Ghost that goes immaterial? Use Yrden runes to trap them. Angry necrophages barreling towards you? Use fire to drive them away. Building enemies with an idea of a strength and how the PCs can counter it and then making sure the difficulty inclines them to learn those counters.



Journal of an Archaeologist in Assassin’s Creed 4

Day 1: Gosh darn I’ve done it! I managed to get Abstergo Entertainment to agree to let me use their memory system thingy to do research. I have so many theories about the ancient civilizations of the Caribbean. And it just so happens that this “Edward” fellow is my ancestor!

Day 2: Finally my interview with Abstergo. A very friendly lady with one of those, “better take notes or I’ll kill you” demeanors. She explained how their “animus” memory system is supposed to work. Essentially I don a VR headset and relive the life of Edward Kenway, a pirate and one of my ancestors. The memories implanted in my DNA (the repercussions of such genetic memories seems less then well thought out) will allow me to explore a good portion of the world around Kenway, so long as I indulge in actual events that took place under his watch.

So now and then I might be bothered by having to replay some violent act, but otherwise I should be happy to explore the ruins around the Caribbean to my heart’s content.

As long as its all recorded Abstergo is happy to let me do my research, the lady reminds me. Shame I didn’t catch her name.

Day 3: I have a desk and electronic passport to Absertgo now! I can log in and browse Kenway’s memories however I want.

I can’t help but be annoyed by Kenway already. He’s brutish and seems to only want money. He was a pirate I suppose… but no motivation like misguided loyalty, or mistaken identity, or even romance like other more famous pirates. I guess that’s why he doesn’t have any mentions in the Lyfe of Pyrates. 

I’ve already discovered a fair number of ruins. Surprisingly in Kenway’s time many wooden structures seem to be in good condition.

Jotted notes:

  • paint still on walls
  • huge temples in several places
  • diffusion among islands
  • obsession with patterns and “key stones” involving a religion based around puzzles and locks? Opening the way to paradise? (Too christian?)
  • Weight based locks that involve climbing – gymnastic peoples
  • Cavernous temple structure – extreme use of water as decoration/protection involving very advance engineering
  • weird prey = predator symbology

I’ll formulate my notes into some more complete ideas later. Meanwhile the Abstergo company people have been acting really weird. The IT guy wants me to hack into computers here. Not to mention what my supervisor is going to say when I tell her that my research will also involve an interactive media product sold by a private company.

Thing’s I’ve Learned From… 13 Demons

13 Demons is a 2016 low budget horror film that recently was added to Netflix. While the cover image might make you think it is a fantasy film it really isn’t. Instead it is a bizarre psychological twist on a board game. Two men covered in blood (and this isn’t a spoiler, this is literally the first shot of the film) tell police interrogators that they paladins of the realm hunting the 13 demons of the apocalypse. They are forced to explain how with another friend they began playing a board game. The movie progresses as they grow more obsessed with the titular board game and slowly descend into madness. If you like horror and role playing games this should be a great watch.

But the movie struck a note for me about concepts. The movie ends in a very particular way that I have to respect a great deal. You see every Halloween I run a role playing game where each person plays as themselves in a horror scenario revolving around the real world. It’s usually good fun with a variable amount of actual scares. But as I started watching 13 Demons I wondered what it would be like to run a game where I ask the players to start with D&D characters and slowly reveal that they’re in reality themselves killing innocent people around them. This seems like a valid horror game idea. In fact I’ve played several video games that do just that.

But in reality it probably isn’t a great concept. For one letting players think they are in one type of game where killing things is a valid way to solve conflict and then revealing that they were wrong and you never hinted at it at all is as they say “a dick move.” But also doing this while the players are literally themselves is an even worse idea. Not only are the players forced to commit immoral acts that in hindsight you will chastise them for, but you will make it extremely personal. The players would have to condemn their own actions.

Horror games, and ones like Call of Cthulhu with sanity mechanics especially, let players be rather lose about their morals. I to this day slightly regret that I formed my main group with a CoC game instead of DnD. Something about the risk of going insane, (or the things going insane allows) lets players play really morally corrupt people. I was rather distressed recently when I ran a game with a very clear villain, anti suffragette cultists, yet a player not only sided with the misogynists, but nearly murdered the head suffragette.

I recently posted about the rather depressing EAT 3, where players discover that the human race has decimated a dungeon’s ecosystem and institutionalized colonialism has doomed the world.  On reflection it is very important to consider the implications of a game. In EAT 3 (not unlike 13 Demons) I’m not sure I know how I would excuse and eventually payoff the players  behavior.

Indeed it was the ending of 13 Demons that really made me think. I won’t spoil it, but you may be a bit surprised. But the more I thought about it the more I liked it. The movie let the characters reach a point of no return. Sometimes I forget to do this with the insane and irredeemable PCs. Take a step back explain why what the player did was bad and turn them into an NPC, or if they are really that bad simply have them die off screen, they’re either too crazy to have around, or two guilty to interact anymore.

Things I’ve Learned from… Fallout New Vegas

Guidance is not railroading in an Open World

There is a lot of things written about what is allowed in open world sandbox rpgs. But if a Fallout game doesn’t know how to make a sandbox I don’t who can. Infinite choices open up as you wake up in the Mojave. You are pushed out of the Doctor’s comfortable home with a mission, get to New Vegas, learn who shot you and why. Throughout the game you can see the shining light of Vegas over the mountains.

It struck me like a recent moment in one of campaigns. Many of the players had met people who were meeting at a specific cafe. The character were dubious about the cafe because they knew at least one of these people was connected to a criminal organization. But the constant stream of people mentioning it began to turn into a joke to the players. “Haha Nick, you want us to go that cafe don’t you?” There are warnings with this sort of gaming that it becomes a railroad.

Everyone in the Mojave mentions the lights of Vegas, quests to discover your past point to Vegas, the lights are there on the horizon. Aren’t you being railroaded to go to Vegas? Of course not. You make your own path. Guiding players down one path and not another is not railroading. Fallout even discourages you from taking the quick route to Vegas. You can just head North past a quarry and go East a little and its a minutes walk, not the trek across the map Fallout seems to want of you. But there are Deathclaws, lots of them.

But following the guidance to Vegas is still a choice. Not traveling through Deathclaw territory at first level is a choice. What sets this guidance apart from iron clad tracks is that it is giving you information to make a choice. Fallout New Vegas constantly excels at these choices, it hints over and over so that you know what you are choosing. Sometimes you have to search for those hints, but those hints are never forcing you to do one thing or another.

Little Stories can add up to Big Stories

I screwed up Veronica’s quest. I don’t remember the exact decision I made, but I screwed up big. Veronica went to talk to the Follower’s of the Apocalypse, people who want to help humanity with old world tech. But jealous Brotherhood soldiers turned up and killed the followers. Veronica was exiled. It was bad. And I didn’t have the saves to fix it.

So I had to live with that. A little personal problem with Veronica that I screwed up. And when I had to make other decisions later it was there to think about. Later when I had to choose who to bring ED-E to, or how to help Arcade Gannon, or whether to ask the Brotherhood to help the NCR that personal story between me and my punch happy companion mattered.

I also helped Boone, and god damn did I want to help the NCR more for it.

You don’t need Dice Rolls

As a table top gamer dice might seem like the be all and end all of gaming. But Fallout has a nice crips system for skill checks, do you have the high enough number?

Dialogue options are often opened up if you have 30 or 40 in whatever relevant skill. Some things are opened up by having the right perk, the most memorable were my uses of the Black Widow perk. No dice rolls, no random chance used at all.

Because failing a dialogue option would have been miserable. Instead I was rewarded for investing in skills. But since I could chose to use them I could chose how my character  approached problems. I might know that a high GUNS skill would get information, but so does high SURVIVAL, or SPEECH.

To top it off the game gave you magazines so you could temporarily up your skill, when you really wanted to talk someone down, or earn their respect but had just a little less than what was needed.

Often these sorts of tests were also just an expression of how much more information I might get. Without every test being at the expense of progressing they were easy to forgive if I couldn’t make it.

Game’s Cheat, and it’s Okay

Fallout New Vegas is an old game with an older engine. It cheats a lot. In a game about your impact on a huge landscape it has to cheat to trick you into thinking there is real change. But the game can’t have two or three versions of every location, instead it can use simple tricks to make you think there are.

The obvious example is the Battle of the Dam, the end of the game. And spoilers to anyone like me who has waited a long time to play this game. Unless you are evil enough to join Cesar, any of the other three choices lead you to the same side of the dam.

In other places the game tricks you into thinking things have changed by allowing you or stopping you from entering certain places. Blow something up and the door is now locked. Stop a bomb on a train and now guards are posted who refuse to let you pass because they’re still investigating. It might be a trick, but in the end its easy to believe.

These tricks are harder to use in table top games, but you should remember that it’s okay to cheat. When I’m struggling to generate new stats for a new boss or a new monster I often just use the stats of something different and rename the powers. What’s the real difference between a troll without its regeneration and an ogre? (I don’t need real answers to that, thanks.)

The simple change of where the players are allowed to go can often be an easy way to show that things have changed without needing a whole new description.

And a branching choice laden game might all boil down to one battle where the only difference is what allies the players have while they storm the same enemy fort.

Thing’s I’ve Learned From… Left 4 Dead 2

Monsters Affect The Team

Left 4 Dead 2 is famous for its clever four person party mechanics. You don’t hoard med kits or pills from your friends, you help them, because in the end it will be them saving your butts. It’s this principle, stick close to your friends and they stick close to you, that powers Left 4 Dead and its sequel.

Besides snappy and clear dialogue the game pushes you to rely on your friends by designing the “special” zombies to hit you in the team work. Several of the specials like the hunter or the smoker will incapacitate a team member completely necessitating a team member stopping the attacker or at least scarring it off.

Tanks and spitters do this work by simply being very dangerous, covering a large area of the ground with a line of acid, potentially cutting you off from your friends, or just bashing team members away from you before crushing you into pulp.

Boomers are one of the most interesting, if not killed at a distance (don’t forget L4D2 was the entry that introduced melee combat) it will spit up boomer bile onto whatever unlucky team members are around. The spit instantly attracts a hoard of zombies, ignoring all else including other non spat on team members. This not only creates a strategic decision in combat – when to kill the boomer – if the bile comes out you’ll have to scramble to defend a team mate.

Variety is the Spice of Life

I said this in the Dark Souls II post, but it bares repeating because L4D2 does it just as well. Challenge is increased through variety and numbers. While a Tank is scary, the lumbering hulk like zombie can take out a team easily, there’s something more challenging about a jockey and a spitter at the same time. The spitter covers the ground with acid while the jockey drags a team mate into it taking them down. Likewise a boomer and a pretty much any other zombie can be a TPK very quickly if things go sideways.

Line of Sight is Important

Now I don’t mean this as a “be persnickety about what a player’s character see and can’t see. Don’t worry about screwing rangers over. Instead L4D2 uses line of site to create distinct encounters. If you like dungeon crawl style encounters with distinct rooms line of site can create more natural divisions that door like openings every 60feet or so. It can also be used to create fun surprises. A fight on a ledge might be easy, but introduce several more enemies below the ledge that the players don’t see at first might spice things up.

Breaking Down Abilities

The Angry GM just posted this interesting article about the problems with ability scores in D&D 5e:

With Angry’s usual antagonistic and “I told you so” manner he made some great points that made me think I should explain a little about my “Thing I Learned From…” series.

As Angry puts better than I can the idea of D&D’s abilities are pretty well baked into all modern RPGs, which… isn’t necessarily the best thing. Which brings me to video games and why you should learn from them.

Video games have a different set of challenges from table top games, namely they can’t tell you how it works in person. A good video game has to make what you do obvious. They show you a challenge and you need to learn what you use to overcome it.

TV shows also deal with this. With recurring characters they need to define the strengths and skills each person has so when a challenge pops up the audience can know how hard to easy it will be for that character.

Since I’ve recently been re-watching Doctor Who this is very evident. Doctor Who had a secondary problem that they need to define different versions of the same character. Tennant’s doctor is very smart and knowledgeable while his reluctance to be violent and his compassion for the human race gets him through problems while Matt Smith instead has his comedy, brilliance, and extreme care for his companions.

Angry does a good job describing this process in RPGs: the GM must constantly be making action resolution decisions. How is a problem broken down and what can the players do to over come it?

So with this in mind I try to use these ideas to build RPGs. As an example let me talk about some of my upcoming projects.

Ever Green is a game about magicians in the Pacific Northwest. It’s supposed to be non-violent, whimsical, and based around mystery. Currently the attributes (or abilities whatever you want to call them) are: Survival, Agility, Strength, Intelligence, and Magical Power.

But when I got thinking about how I want people to play Ever Green I started to wonder if this was right. They might fit into the rough RPG ability list of everything post D&D, (or at least in my case post CoC) but did it convey what players should be using to overcome problems in Ever Green?

The answer is probably no. Survival was included with this already in mind. Ever Green players are meant to explore and travel around the Pacific Northwest and that includes a fair bit of camping, long drives, and staying in flea bitten motels. Survival is important to keeping players interested in doing that and reflecting how good or bad a character is at that type of challenge. Magic Power also folds into the main mechanic of the game. But here I have to stop myself. Is strength and agility things that should matter to quirky magicians trying to work out other people’s emotional problems? Should Intelligence be the only mental stat?

So here’s some alternatives I’m considering:

  • Empathy – how well do you read other’s emotions.
  • Intuition – how likely are you to notice stuff.
  • Know-how – mechanical, technical, just gets stuff done ability.
  • Inspiration – how well you get ideas.

Or how about?

  • Comedy – how easy it is for you to laugh about something.
  • Romance – can you solve things with flirting?
  • Notoriety – how obvious your quirkiness is to everyone else.

For another example I began thinking about how problem resolution should work in a fantasy system I’ve wanted to design. Based on a friend’s game I really enjoyed being able to make really tactical decisions based on my feats in combat. So in my own version I would want each ability to represent how much of something you can do and then work out based on more modular mechanics exactly what I do with that.

So you might only have four stats, Talking, Fighting, Thinking and Exploring. (Hmm, I stopped after the first three… I like the idea of exploring or surviving in the wild being an actual stat thing. Maybe Surviving would be better?)

Then whenever the character wants to do something the GM can go: how good are you at Talking? Then the player will test their ability with a dice roll and that will dictate how much Talking she gets to do. Then the player can look at the feats she’s got and decide how to use that amount of talking.

A feat called Convincing Argument might push the negotiations her way, but it takes a lot of Talking to do. Instead she could use the feat Little Smile and Sudden Show of Force and do a lot more by combining them. The simplicity at first leads into more interesting tactical decisions. And those tactics are what I want out of this game.

Meanwhile to look at this from the opposite direction I’ve also been re-watching Durarara!!! Which is an amazing anime that any one interested in large scale RPG story telling should probably watch.

Durarara has a huge host of characters each with very different and quirky personalities, stories, and skills. Somehow it manages to keep these things straight even as every story is told and retold from different perspectives and the whole world opens like an onion.

To build a Durarara RPG I would have to create a system where every character has their one and only skill that is special to them. Sonohara would have parasitic magical sword. Izaya has incredible manipulation. Even characters that are more normal have basic character traits that keep them apart. Kida has optimism and jokes. Then on top of that uniqueness you’d pile a couple more skills and a dramatic backstory for why they have that one unique trait.

Each detail of any given character is eventually explained, down to why one character always dresses like a bar tender.

Then the players and GM would know that when a challenge came up for that character that trait was what they would face it with.

Which come to think of it is a little bit like how Fate works. But add to that an element of knowledge. The way Durarara creates stories and challenges is by determining what information each character knows, one person going into a fight might not understand what the other person is even fighting for. Discovering that fact later might throw the fight into a completely different light.

You can do this easily for most TV, books, and movies. Most video games already do this for you. Watch Doctor Who and try to come up with completely different attributes that describes each character: maybe compassion, knowledge, empathy, will power, and love? Watch any show and try to figure out what abilities are being tested, what is being skipped over, (like gun fights in Doctor Who, or even war fare in Game of Thrones) and what actually informs the story. Then use that practice to do the same for your games.

Thing I’ve Learned From… Dark Souls II

New Things Are Scary

In the Forest of Giants the game plays with your expectations. You are fighting infantry men, short zombie like guys who pose a threat in a group but not much one on one. Then at the end of a long corridor you see something new. It’s thin and tall and look like it has a large sword. Immediately you start thinking about what this new thing will do. It’s tall and skinny – probably fast. Terrified I used up my throwing knives and barely survived the fight. Ten minutes later I’m slashing identical enemies apart with no thought. The initial moment of something new made it scary. It felt pretty badass later being able to ignore that threat.

Combination of Circumstances

Difficulty in Dark Souls is infamously high. But in some places its surprising how little it increases – instead it combines. In the dark cavern of a pirate den you face two main enemies. A weak infantry man who you’ve seen before. They flail around and sometimes shoot arrows – in this zone the arrows are on fire. The second is a bandit, bigger and quicker than the infantry. When far away they throw bottles of oil. Neither enemy is too hard. But when you’ve been splashed with oil and catch a fire arrow, you suddenly lose all of your health. Difficulty then is increased not because of a harder enemy but because of a combination of factors.

Let Players be Clever, but Make it Cost

Dark Souls is difficult, but it also lets you remove that challenge in many ways. In the pirate den there are blind creatures that flee light. Using a high cost item you can light a huge lantern that will make the creatures run, removing them from your path. Otherwise you have to conserve your torch fuel and scare them off by hand. Either way you can manage to scare off some of the most dangerous monsters in the area. But it costs. Dark Souls is always about choices, use up an important item here, or keep it for later. You can be clever, but you’ll have to use your resources to do it.