The Greater General Codex Theory of 'What is an RPG?'

[Carrion]

What the fuck? why would anyone want to imitate the feeling of sitting around a table?

I have no idea. The point is that wanting to recreate, imitate or emulate a particular aspect of another game doesn't mean that the game is an emulation as a whole. A game may want to offer the strategic depth of chess without being an emulation of chess. PnP RPGs have many aspects that are pointless to try to recreate in a (single-player) cRPG, human interaction being the most obvious but by no means the only one. It goes both ways, of course, and every developer worth his salt knows this.

 

[Lhynn]

I have no idea. The point is that wanting to recreate, imitate or emulate a particular aspect of another game doesn't mean that the game is an emulation as a whole. A game may want to offer the strategic depth of chess without being an emulation of chess. PnP RPGs have many aspects that are pointless to try to recreate in a (single-player) cRPG, human interaction being the most obvious but by no means the only one. It goes both ways, of course, and every developer worth his salt knows this.

The point is trying to bring the interesting parts of PnP, character customization, locales designed for exploration and interaction, the abstracted combat and growth in power and/or prestige and how said growth affects your interaction with said world, etc. This is why rulesets brought from PnP are better than rulesets especially made for cRPGs, because PnP rulesets have a layer of depth when it comes to PC interaction with the world, its the reason you used to have divination spells, or semingly useless spells like animate object, talk with the dead, etc.The itemization can also be brought to this, from magical objects to mundane shit.

You also have the advantage of having tried systems that are easily understandable by human beings and have depth, instead of the shallow shit with big, incomprehensible and incoherent numbers we see in "RPGs" today like "+582 to critical damage rating".

 

[Carrion]

The point is trying to bring the interesting parts of PnP, character customization, locales designed for exploration and interaction, the abstracted combat and growth in power and/or prestige and how said growth affects your interaction with said world, etc.

Yeah. With all of those things the ideal execution in a cRPG may be very different from a PnP RPG, though.

This is why rulesets brought from PnP are better than rulesets especially made for cRPGs, because PnP rulesets have a layer of depth when it comes to PC interaction with the world, its the reason you used to have divination spells, or semingly useless spells like animate object, talk with the dead, etc.The itemization can also be brought to this, from magical objects to mundane shit..

I'd say that the best examples of interaction with the game world are actually seen in games that are mechanically quite far detached from PnP, like Deus Ex or Morrowind, which allow you to consistently manipulate the environment in various ways based on your character's skills and abilities. Then again, cRPGs using existing PnP rulesets tend to do a pretty half-assed job with non-combat things, almost completely ignoring many of the more interesting aspects of the PnP rulesets, so you often end up with just a few isolated skill checks, possibly some throwaway gimmicks and lots of near-useless spells with maybe one or two actual uses throughout the game.

 

[Lhynn]

The point is trying to bring the interesting parts of PnP, character customization, locales designed for exploration and interaction, the abstracted combat and growth in power and/or prestige and how said growth affects your interaction with said world, etc.

Yeah. With all of those things the ideal execution in a cRPG may be very different from a PnP RPG, though.

Obviously it is, you need to emulate a DMs hand with in a systemic approach.

I'd say that the best examples of interaction with the game world are actually seen in games that are mechanically quite far detached from PnP, like Deus Ex or Morrowind, which allow you to consistently manipulate the environment in various ways based on your character's skills and abilities.

Im confused about this point, you had the same or even better shit in some nwn modules like the ones for the bastard of kosigan. Deus ex is most definitely not the one that did it best, or with the most elegant design. As for morrowing, it actually did it a lot better by allowing characters with good athletics to reach places and move in a gay character with poor athetics couldnt, same with magic, etc. But if this isnt an imitation of PnP i dont know what is.
An abstracted stat to enable you to better interact with the world comes directly from the table, that morrowind doesnt have its own pnp rulebook doesnt mean that the game itself wasnt designed to imitate one. Down to its most bizarre shit, like its accuracy implementation.

Then again, cRPGs using existing PnP rulesets tend to do a pretty half-assed job with non-combat things, almost completely ignoring many of the more interesting aspects of the PnP rulesets, so you often end up with just a few isolated skill checks, possibly some throwaway gimmicks and lots of near-useless spells with maybe one or two actual uses throughout the game.

Sure, most games suck. Dont see your point here.

 

[Carrion]

Im confused about this point, you had the same or even better shit in some nwn modules like the ones for the bastard of kosigan.

How does it differ from base NWN?

Deus ex is most definitely not the one that did it best, or with the most elegant design.

Almost everything in the game world can be interacted with: picked up, carried, destroyed, pushed, thrown, jumped on, climbed on, eaten, read, hacked, picked... You can throw random items around to create noise that characters in the game world will react to, destroy locked doors with explosives, move items around to create new routes or block existing ones, hack security cameras and turrets or take control of them remotely, use augmentations to gain access to otherwise inaccessible places and do a ton of other things, and it's all completely seamless and systemic. Of course, in vanilla DX the effect of character skill is mostly tied to just your augmentations, but if we're including mods here, GMDX adds extra depth to the system and also put more focus on your character build, like allowing strong characters to hurl stuff around at lethal speeds. Can't think of a single cRPG based on PnP system that would nearly as well have integrated interacting with the game world into the game.

As for morrowing, it actually did it a lot better by allowing characters with good athletics to reach places and move in a gay character with poor athetics couldnt, same with magic, etc. But if this isnt an imitation of PnP i dont know what is.
An abstracted stat to enable you to better interact with the world comes directly from the table, that morrowind doesnt have its own pnp rulebook doesnt mean that the game itself wasnt designed to imitate one. Down to its most bizarre shit, like its accuracy implementation.

The discussion comes full circle here, to a point where it again seems to just come down to semantics. Yes, Morrowind shares a lot of similarities with PnP RPGs right down to its basic philosophy, creating a world that is built around a certain set of rules and then releasing the player into that world, allowing him/her to interact with the game world in the way that he/she sees fit based on those rules. However, I don't see it as an imitation of PnP — on the contrary, in many ways Morrowind manages to skip the step of resembling a PnP RPG. Morrowind is a computer simulation of a fantasy world with rules that are built around the fact that it's a computer simulation, and a game like that could theoretically exist even without PnP RPGs.

Defining cRPGs recursively via PnP RPGs is the problem here — PnP RPGs evolved from wargames, which in turn took inspiration from historical events and fantasy literature, and based on this definition cRPGs only try to emulate another type of game in a completely different medium that is already a highly abstracted version of something else. I see a game like Morrowind more as parallel to PnP RPGs rather than a derivative of them, sharing some of the same influences, goals and basic principles and drawing from the same sources while utilizing different methods. Of course it still owes a lot to tabletop games, but a similar thing could be said about computer strategy games, which early on shared a strong tabletop influence but nowadays don't much resemble their tabletop counterparts.

 

[Lhynn]

Im confused about this point, you had the same or even better shit in some nwn modules like the ones for the bastard of kosigan.

How does it differ from base NWN?

In every way that matters. We are discussing how Taking more inspiration from PnP makes cRPGs better.

Almost everything in the game world can be interacted with: picked up, carried, destroyed, pushed, thrown, jumped on, climbed on, eaten, read, hacked, picked... You can throw random items around to create noise that characters in the game world will react to, destroy locked doors with explosives, move items around to create new routes or block existing ones, hack security cameras and turrets or take control of them remotely, use augmentations to gain access to otherwise inaccessible places and do a ton of other things, and it's all completely seamless and systemic. Of course, in vanilla DX the effect of character skill is mostly tied to just your augmentations, but if we're including mods here, GMDX adds extra depth to the system and also put more focus on your character build, like allowing strong characters to hurl stuff around at lethal speeds. Can't think of a single cRPG based on PnP system that would nearly as well have integrated interacting with the game world into the game.

We are still not talking about an RPG. And we are still praising the RPG elements within that non RPG.

The discussion comes full circle here, to a point where it again seems to just come down to semantics. Yes, Morrowind shares a lot of similarities with PnP RPGs right down to its basic philosophy, creating a world that is built around a certain set of rules and then releasing the player into that world, allowing him/her to interact with the game world in the way that he/she sees fit based on those rules. However, I don't see it as an imitation of PnP — on the contrary, in many ways Morrowind manages to skip the step of resembling a PnP RPG. Morrowind is a computer simulation of a fantasy world with rules that are built around the fact that it's a computer simulation, and a game like that could theoretically exist even without PnP RPGs.

Na it wouldnt.

Defining cRPGs recursively via PnP RPGs is the problem here — PnP RPGs evolved from wargames, which in turn took inspiration from historical events and fantasy literature, and based on this definition cRPGs only try to emulate another type of game in a completely different medium that is already a highly abstracted version of something else. I see a game like Morrowind more as parallel to PnP RPGs rather than a derivative of them, sharing some of the same influences, goals and basic principles and drawing from the same sources while utilizing different methods. Of course it still owes a lot to tabletop games, but a similar thing could be said about computer strategy games, which early on shared a strong tabletop influence but nowadays don't much resemble their tabletop counterparts.

But this is wrong, that RPGs evolved from wargames doesnt mean RPGs want to be wargames bro, thats some fucked up logic right there.
I see morrowind as a pale imitation of the freedom to explore a PnP module would give you.
Strategy games are strategy games and RPGs are RPGs, the difference between one and the other is immeasurable, just taking into consideration that strategy games always have a VERY rigid set of rules constantly enforced, while PnP RPGs have freeflowing rules and a ton more unpredictability, and offer an infite range of possibilities of interaction thanks to this.

 

[Carrion]

But this is wrong, that RPGs evolved from wargames doesnt mean RPGs want to be wargames bro, thats some fucked up logic right there.

Didn't say they did. The point was that wargames (and in extension RPGs) are already a simulation of something else, which I guess turns cRPGs into an emulation of a simulation when they could be, well, just a simulation.

Strategy games are strategy games and RPGs are RPGs, the difference between one and the other is immeasurable, just taking into consideration that strategy games always have a VERY rigid set of rules constantly enforced, while PnP RPGs have freeflowing rules and a ton more unpredictability, and offer an infite range of possibilities of interaction thanks to this.

The common factor is that both cRPGs and strategy games have their roots in tabletop games, yet for some reason with cRPGs the "tabletop experience" is seen as a defining factor for the entire genre whereas with strategy games the whole notion would be laughable. A computer strategy game is usually a simulation of war and/or politics of some sort, and it doesn't give a fuck about how a tabletop game does things. Besides, RPGs being more unpredictable and flexible only makes it more obvious that you can never achieve a similar experience in a computer game which always has to play by a strict set of rules.

 

[Lhynn]

Didn't say they did. The point was that wargames (and in extension RPGs) are already a simulation of something else, which I guess turns cRPGs into an emulation of a simulation when they could be, well, just a simulation.

A shitty simulation that probably wouldnt even belong to the genre.

The common factor is that both cRPGs and strategy games have their roots in tabletop games, yet for some reason with cRPGs the "tabletop experience" is seen as a defining factor for the entire genre whereas with strategy games the whole notion would be laughable. A computer strategy game is usually a simulation of war and/or politics of some sort, and it doesn't give a fuck about how a tabletop game does things. Besides, RPGs being more unpredictable and flexible only makes it more obvious that you can never achieve a similar experience in a computer game which always has to play by a strict set of rules.

Because a computer can enforce said strict rules. But a computer cant deal with the infinte possibilities that PnP offers.
And true, you may never achieve a similar experience, but that doesnt mean you shouldnt try.

 

[Electryon]

This is really an impossible question that falls into the same category as "pornography, I know it when I see it". The fantasy aesthetic is a HUGE part of it, though obviously that doesn't mean all RPGs have to be fantasy. But I'd venture to say 99% of them are either fantasy OR sci-fi. After that, some combination of leveling up/items/skills/spells, along with at least a marginal (and up to a massive) focus on numbers and statistics.

 

[Celerity]

Ya know, when I read the OP, containing what is actually pretty useful and well written information I knew it wouldn't be long before 1: Someone randomly made a homophobic joke. 2: Someone conclusively proved that a sports game is an RPG by this metric. I expected Madden, but regardless the Codex did not disappoint.

 

[WhiskeyWolf]

 

[Sukhāvatī]

Antisocialfatman shoutbox talk reminded me of his definition of what an RPG is, which I agree with:



tl;dw It allows for differing playstyles in the way the game is fundamentally played, not merely whether you kill your enemies with a sword, bow, or spell. Additionally your character not being a master of all skills at once a la Oblivion, but one's playstyle choices meaning other choices are locked out, a la SS2. Which is why Oblivion cannot truly be called an RPG, but Deus Ex, Bloodlines etc. despite being usually called 'hybrids', can.

A.K.A. rat diplomacy and C&C.

 

[laclongquan]

What the fuck?

Based on this 12 criteria, Jagged Alliance 2 and Fallout Tactic are definitely RPG because it has everything. And both games (still) are considered to be lite RPG.

Diablo, however, seems to lack puzzle quality which is 9. Otherwise it has 11/12.

It is a good list but the results are quite startling to me.

 

[laclongquan]

12 criteria

1. Character creation has some form of in-game consequences
2. Statistics which define character(s) abilities are subject to change throughout the game
3. Character(s) have skills or abilities which may improve or be altered over the course of gameplay
4. Character(s) accrue experience which can be spent or result in gaining levels or abilities
5. Character(s) accumulate items which enhance or otherwise alter gameplay
6. Character(s) accumulate currency which may be spent to enhance the character(s) in some way (items, guild membership, training, etc.)
7. Character(s) gain levels throughout the game which result in some form of mechanical change (not just a change in character title, or description)
8. The game offers some form of exploration over terrain, water, space, etc.
9. The game has some form of puzzle solving, which is resolved through combat, problem resolution, or some choice made by the player
10. A choice made by the player alters the narrative, or some other significant part of the game (an item is found or lost, stats or skills are gained or lost, different ending, etc.)
11. Character(s) interact with NPCs in some form of dialogue which have in-game consequences depending on what the character(s) say.
12. Optional quests (defined here as some kind of task made available after the game has started, and which can be resolved by the player before the game ends, but is not required to complete the game) are available

SM Alpha Centaury and SMAX has 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10. which is 8/12, borderline RPG. It has no xp and no NPC but otherwise fit. If you consider faction leaders as NPC which we only interact through diplomacy screen, then it has 9/12, lite RPG. If you accept unit experience/kill record as XP then we also has 4,7, which mean SMAC(X) has 10/12, definite RPG.
==========================
Let's check Sengoku Rance. It doesnt have 1 and 8, but 10/12 say it's a RPG.

I'm actually hoping someone can think of a game that doesn't fit the scale above.

YO Gregz

 

[cepheiden]

Those 12 Critera are obviously written from a player point of view, so they are redundant and not very significant or precise.
Just take criteria 2 through 7 for example. They all talk about the same element: having abstract displays of your characters competences and being able to improve them over the course of the game. He just gives 6 different examples of how that can be handled.
Every other of his criteria is completely optional and basically just a List of things that he likes in RPGs.
But it's fine for him to be that subjective on the matter. You don't need a clear definition in order to enjoy a game.

However, it's that kind of thinking, even among devs, that leads to RPGs being the same boring stuff with the same flaws all over again. People getting stuck on concepts such as "experience" or "levels", without being able to understand what those actually represent and what their purpose is.

It's kind of stupid trying to put too many limits and criteria on what an RPG is. All it does is kill creativity.
Though it's not stupid to research which elements in games people like. However, that is also an excercise in futility unless you actually plan on making a game.

The genre, as in naming convention, of a game comes down to what you do most of the time in the game, the defining features. If you shoot most of the time, it's a shooter. If you order units around on a larger scale, it's an RTS. If you solve puzzles, it's a puzzle game. Maybe you got some abstract character development in any of those, but it doesn't make it an RPG, it's just a shooter/RTS/puzzle with rpg elements. Beyond that lies just endless nitpicking.

Ultimately an RPG is an interactive adventure story with abstract character development.
Anything else is optional and not a defining element.
Though obviously you will want a lot of that optinal stuff, such as quests, consequences to choices, exploration, crafting...

 

[Darth Canoli]

Additionally your character not being a master of all skills at once a la Oblivion, but one's playstyle choices meaning other choices are locked out, a la SS2. Which is why Oblivion cannot truly be called an RPG, but Deus Ex, Bloodlines etc. despite being usually called 'hybrids', can.

Weapon masters master multiple weapons, because the more skilled you are in multiple weapons, the easier it gets to master a new one, besides, mastering different weapons helps you to improve your overall fighting skills as you understand every weapon strengths and weaknesses.

Locking every weapons skills but the one you specialize in isn't a cRPG requirement, just the opposite, it puts the game in the trash category.

RPG equals freedom, ideally, not that it's absolutely required if everything else is well done but it's one criteria.

 

[Gregz]

Ultimately an RPG is an interactive adventure story with abstract character development.
Anything else is optional and not a defining element.
Though obviously you will want a lot of that optinal stuff, such as quests, consequences to choices, exploration, crafting...

I agree that it's important to eliminate redundancies, and to use a list of purely orthogonal RPG elements for accurate analysis.

12 criteria

1. Character creation has some form of in-game consequences
2. Statistics which define character(s) abilities are subject to change throughout the game
3. Character(s) have skills or abilities which may improve or be altered over the course of gameplay
4. Character(s) accrue experience which can be spent or result in gaining levels or abilities
5. Character(s) accumulate items which enhance or otherwise alter gameplay
6. Character(s) accumulate currency which may be spent to enhance the character(s) in some way (items, guild membership, training, etc.)
7. Character(s) gain levels throughout the game which result in some form of mechanical change (not just a change in character title, or description)
8. The game offers some form of exploration over terrain, water, space, etc.
9. The game has some form of puzzle solving, which is resolved through combat, problem resolution, or some choice made by the player
10. A choice made by the player alters the narrative, or some other significant part of the game (an item is found or lost, stats or skills are gained or lost, different ending, etc.)
11. Character(s) interact with NPCs in some form of dialogue which have in-game consequences depending on what the character(s) say.
12. Optional quests (defined here as some kind of task made available after the game has started, and which can be resolved by the player before the game ends, but is not required to complete the game) are available

SM Alpha Centaury and SMAX has 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10. which is 8/12, borderline RPG. It has no xp and no NPC but otherwise fit. If you consider faction leaders as NPC which we only interact through diplomacy screen, then it has 9/12, lite RPG. If you accept unit experience/kill record as XP then we also has 4,7, which mean SMAC(X) has 10/12, definite RPG.
==========================
Let's check Sengoku Rance. It doesnt have 1 and 8, but 10/12 say it's a RPG.

YO Gregz

Unfortunately I haven't played SMAC or Rance so I can't personally confirm your analysis.

As for TBS in general, I didn't intend for unit XP to qualify since they are non-persistent entities (not present from start to finish). This non-persistence argument applies to cities as well if that's how you are accounting for 2-6.

The type of NPC interaction found in a TBS (diplomacy) wasn't what I had in mind at all when I drew up this list, but you are correct that it's a problem. This gets even more janky when trying to analyze games like King of Dragon Pass. We could eliminate this RPG element, but it's such a staple of the genre that I'm loath to do it.

 

[laclongquan]

Those 12 Critera are obviously written from a player point of view, so they are redundant and not very significant or precise.
Just take criteria 2 through 7 for example. They all talk about the same element: having abstract displays of your characters competences and being able to improve them over the course of the game. He just gives 6 different examples of how that can be handled.

You are missing the points. Point 2 to 7 are put up there to reflect different games with just one or two point in them but lacking other points, which is why if it's lumbered together it might mean they are not RPG. WHich is just wrong because they really are.

6 different ways of looking through that abstract concept is a really good method to look at a game's aspect to see if it has that quality. The different ways to handled that aspect lead to (or come from) different gameplay designs, after all.
From the numbers in your character sheets.
To gameplay number of your char (which is different from above, mind, as devs can alter this derivative number system with hidden qualifiers)
From the start, through the changes in the game.
And from the most-used concept define character's ability: LEVEL.

 

[Grauken]

Ultimately an RPG is an interactive adventure story with abstract character development.
Anything else is optional and not a defining element.
Though obviously you will want a lot of that optinal stuff, such as quests, consequences to choices, exploration, crafting...

Eh wrong, RPGs are abstract objects whose very definition is rewritten everytime someone discusses what an RPG is, hence the endless discussion on the board here, they're basically a culture war in a water glass over how to define that abstract object

Also, RPGs are clearly dungeon crawler with optional stuff like cities or NPCs

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

So the NBA 2K series is an RPG after all. I always argued this.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

So the NBA 2K series is an RPG after all. I always argued this.

Honestly? Most modern sports games probably are.
Characters with extensive stats, talents/perks, branching narrative, choice & consequence in campaign modes, etc.,
Some sports games could put a lot of games actually considered to be RPGs to shame

 

[cepheiden]

Point 2 to 7 are put up there to reflect different games with just one or two point in them but lacking other points, which is why if it's lumbered together it might mean they are not RPG.

That approach is very inefficient and exclusive, because there are way more than those 6 ways to implement character development.
On the other hand those 6 and any possible other measures fit perfectly into the more ecompassing category of abstract character development.

Eh wrong, RPGs are abstract objects whose very definition is rewritten everytime someone discusses what an RPG is

Sure. That's what happens if you try to conclusively define an artistic and varied product such as a game.
But again, on average games are defined by the most defining, common element. A shooter will never be called an rpg.
You have stuff like Fallout 4, which uses shooter mechanics, but for the most part the game is about experiencing the story (with all the dialogues, quets, characters etc.) in the game world and improving your character, so ultimately it's called an RPG.
In recent Far Cry games, you have different ranks of craftable weapons that ultimately are a form of abstract character development, an rpg element. But nobody would call it an RPG, because first and foremost what you do is shooting stuff. So it's a shooter.

Honestly? Most modern sports games probably are.

Those games are still mostly about sports. So not really an RPG.
They could be an RPG if they had a story that only uses the sport as a tool to achieve a goal and includes lots of dialogues, quests and characters. But as far as I know, the story in for example the NBA games is just a pretense to give some connection between the games the player plays.
Are there any actual sports themed RPGs?


It's not rocket science and some of you guys are probably overthinking stuff.
I never really encountered a game that has been labeled wrongly by the developers and usually got what I expected.
Except maybe for interactive movies like Witcher2/3 or the latest God of War, which hardly deserve being called games...

 

[Grauken]

You have stuff like Fallout 4, which uses shooter mechanics, but for the most part the game is about experiencing the story (with all the dialogues, quets, characters etc.) in the game world and improving your character, so ultimately it's called an RPG.

Good joke calling Fallout 4 an RPG

I never really encountered a game that has been labeled wrongly by the developers and usually got what I expected.

Developers are usually the most clueless people when it comes to genre classifications, mostly due to not having the time to play a lot of games

 

[laclongquan]

Point 2 to 7 are put up there to reflect different games with just one or two point in them but lacking other points, which is why if it's lumbered together it might mean they are not RPG.

That approach is very inefficient and exclusive, because there are way more than those 6 ways to implement character development.
On the other hand those 6 and any possible other measures fit perfectly into the more ecompassing category of abstract character development.
.

Then said it clearly. Because you are being very inefficient and exclusive, not saying what other way other than those 6.

 

[cepheiden]

Cmon you have a brain, you can imagine that for yourself.
Also, dude, I just noticed you have like 1 gigamillion posts. No way I'm gonna waste my time discussing anything with a nolifer like you. How much shitposting do you have to do to get to that point... wtf seriously fucked up