What's more important for an RPG: Char creation/customization or leveling up?

[Thac0]

How the poll is currently worded only levelups are asked, not overall progression in form of items or other weirder stuff like information advantage. How the poll is worded levelups are less important but that misses the point of the comparison.
Both customisation and progression are absolutely paramount to rpgs.

While there are some rpgs that do not have character progression in the form of the level up, you usually still get stronger from the first gameplay hour to the last in the sense that you aquire new weapons, consumables or other inventory based upgrades.
And for customisation even JRPGs like Chrono Trigger have it, as you might not be able to choose the abilities of an individual unit, but you can choose which units you take to combat and how you equip them. Leading to a different combat experience.

I don't think I have ever played an rpg that has absolutely zero in either progression or customisation.
The only real "maybe" rpg that had zero customisation but progression was Dragon Warrior 1. But that game, while fun, is so archaic that it can fall between the cracks of usable definitions.

So I want option 3, Kingcomrade, having completely zero progression or customisation makes it not an rpg. Both are too essential to the genre for that.

 

[Jigby]

Given the RPG development that has transpired in the last 30 years, chargen is more important to me. Lvl UP progression is way too easy to transplant to other genres, pretty much every genre nowadays has some game in it with lvl up progression. And ParagonSoft made those RPGs with no progression or very limited progression and then you've got RPGs where the progression is inversed. There's stuff like Ishars/Albion that you have to wrap your head around, but I'm not trying to create some hollistic definition of RPGs, I'm just expressing what's more important to me. Obviously, it's going to be imperfect. U7 is an adventure game.

 

[V_K]

The only real "maybe" rpg that had zero customisation but progression was Dragon Warrior 1.

Probably the most prominent Western example would be Al-Qadim: The Genie's Curse. Your class and statistics are predetermined, and by virtue of it being a melee ADnD class, there are no choices to make during level-ups. There isn't even much in way of equipment upgrades.
Something like Nox or Hexen also comes quite close - while you do choose one of three classes at the beginning, there are no other choices to make beyond that and all level-ups are automatic.

 

[Gargaune]

Which of these is more of an RPG? Game A or game B?

I think that's a false dichotomy, whether one-off at the beginning at the game or recurring throughout the entire experience, as long as they're both instances of meaningful character customisation, gameplay-wise, you're probably dealing with an RPG. Emphasis on meaningful, since automatic +1s as you progress, without any choice in allocation or impact, is just vapid window-dressing. But I believe that was a bit of a strawman, right?

Rather than these hypothetical extremes you suggest, I think this becomes a lot clearer when you consider the very real middle ground - take Baldur's Gate and Pathfinder: Kingmaker as examples. Both games feature meaningful character customisation at the beginning and throughout, but simply because PFKM goes levels 1 to 20 relative to BG's 1 to 7, doesn't make the former "more RPG" than the latter. Nor is Planescape Torment "less RPG" than Mask of the Betrayer because the latter lets you pick 18 levels' worth of multiclasses and paraphernalia at the start.

Really, this isn't a matter of "what is an RPG", it just boils down to good RPG design in the context of the desired experience, game length in particular. A 50-hour long Baldur's Gate 2 would certainly be a lesser experience without regular level-ups, whereas a 10-hour long Swordflight Chapter 1 could still be compelling even if you didn't gain a single level.

TLDR: Your poll isn't so much a test as it is validation for KC as a legitimate option.

 

[JarlFrank]

But I believe that was a bit of a strawman, right?

No it's literally this game:

http://crpgaddict.blogspot.com/2021/01/game-396-lagoon-1990.html

"RPGs" with linear and hands-off character development like this exist. And some people genuinely consider them RPGs.

Meanwhile RPGs with complex char creation but barely any, if any at all, leveling up exist too. Mondblut already mentioned Megatraveller, but there's also obscurities like Defender of Boston that work that way.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

No it's literally this game:

http://crpgaddict.blogspot.com/2021/01/game-396-lagoon-1990.html

this is the game I tricked Falksi into playing
https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads/revisiting-old-games-again.128515/page-4#post-6462508
:D

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Option A and it isn't even close.
If you picked option B you are retarded

 

[Gargaune]

No it's literally this game:

http://crpgaddict.blogspot.com/2021/01/game-396-lagoon-1990.html

"RPGs" with linear and hands-off character development like this exist. And some people genuinely consider them RPGs.

Huh. Well, don't take it too hard. Apparently, some people even "play" idle clickers.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

I don't get it. Since when is levelling up as important or more important than character progression?

 

[rusty_shackleford]

I don't get it. Since when is levelling up as important or more important than character progression?

discreet thread to expose jrpgfags so they can be tarred and feathered

 

[ERYFKRAD]

discrete thread

But that's every thread.

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Rather awful premise. Particularly in that premise B is not an RPG. This reads more like the OP has an axe to grind and is seeking validation.

 

[Jedi Master Radek]

Make it simple at the start and then progressively more complex and difficult. As a rule I play games on the hardest difficulty unless it means single life or obnoxious HP-bloat of enemies. So it is not that I am against challenge, complexity or difficulty, I am simply not having the time nor patience any more to waste getting into the game that I may drop mere hours into it if I find out I dislike it.

Play game on the hardest difficulty only after you learn how character system works. It's for what this difficulty is, for veteran players who play the game x-time and seek challenge.

 

[Lurker47]

But if we're taking gear into account, the same can be done with A - using gear to make the character more powerful and/or overcome the initial build's limitations.

That's compensation though; you can't really swerve the character into another direction completely by making suboptimal decisions. You don't have "all of the toolkit" to make it worthwhile.

it's just Jarl's description in the beginning isn't very good for the question it's meant to answer.

I agree, but only because he emphasized how literally everything in B gave you experience for some reason.

There's zero point to introduce too many gameplay systems or alternative solutions in a B-type game.

But this I don't understand. Games like B with a ton of gameplay systems exist- the fact that B could care less about "balance" actually encourages there to be a ton of things to play around with. Similarly, why can't there be C&C if there are no preexisting archetypes. It just means choices can't be as restricted by your statistics. Again, games like B with C&C exist (the initial premise's "you get exp for literally everything" weakens this but that aspect isn't really important to the fundamental question here.) B's restrictions should (and seemed to have) given developers more leeway to experiment. With A, you're railroaded by the fundamentals. Your character, your "role" might be just as distinct but your role in creating it is a lot less involved, and consequently less fun.

Granted you can see B veering into the worst kind of "roleplaying"- the "I am going to pick the combat option every time even though every character can do the speech or science or whatever option" but there are ways to force the player to actually be internally consistent. "why would i let you into the control room? you just go around murdering things" and "why would i risk you getting yourself killed? hearing what you did in that other town, you'd be much more useful in the control room." These are easy fixes for this problem but devs don't bother. And, as boring and antithetical to the real meaning of roleplaying those "you can pick any choice no matter what so go 'role play' i guess" C&C systems may be, they're still C&C systems.

 

[V_K]

there are ways to force the player to actually be internally consistent. "why would i let you into the control room? you just go around murdering things" and "why would i risk you getting yourself killed? hearing what you did in that other town, you'd be much more useful in the control room."

That would already constitute some form of character building/customization though. It might be hidden from the player, but it's fundamentally not different from the learn-by-doing levelling.

That's compensation though; you can't really swerve the character into another direction completely by making suboptimal decisions. You don't have "all of the toolkit" to make it worthwhile.

Depends. If the economy is tight, you'll be just as locked into your gear choices as you'd be into level-up choices, at least for the time it takes to make money for a different gear set.

 

[Darkzone]

"RPGs" with linear and hands-off character development like this exist. And some people genuinely consider them RPGs.
Meanwhile RPGs with complex char creation but barely any, if any at all, leveling up exist too. Mondblut already mentioned Megatraveller, but there's also obscurities like Defender of Boston that work that way.

Games with no character advancement (skill or level increase) of any sorts are called adventures and are not RPGs. I suggest that you read the "Character Improvement" chapter of Megatraveller in the Players Manual and figure out what ATs are. Never believe any shit without verifying it.

 

[Lurker47]

That would already constitute some form of character building/customization though. It might be hidden from the player, but it's fundamentally not different from the learn-by-doing levelling.

I don't know what you mean by this. I was showing you could have character building without robust character customization aka "my base statistics won't let me do this."

Depends. If the economy is tight, you'll be just as locked into your gear choices as you'd be into level-up choices, at least for the time it takes to make money for a different gear set.

Also keep in mind the potentialities of you deciding your moveset, possibly a job system, and maybe even a slot-based perk system. None of these are "character customization" because every character has the same toolkit and can switch out at any time, but they do blur the lines and can completely change how you play solely based on preference.

 

[Takamori]

Make it simple at the start and then progressively more complex and difficult. As a rule I play games on the hardest difficulty unless it means single life or obnoxious HP-bloat of enemies. So it is not that I am against challenge, complexity or difficulty, I am simply not having the time nor patience any more to waste getting into the game that I may drop mere hours into it if I find out I dislike it.

Play game on the hardest difficulty only after you learn how character system works. It's for what this difficulty is, for veteran players who play the game x-time and seek challenge.

I don't agree 100% with the statement, some people dive through the hardest difficulty to learn the system in the fastest way possible. Of course they are veteran players of the genre but at the same time it don't require then to invest X time on new game to pick it up, lower difficulties will teach you the basics, but will never put you on the stress enough to require you to master the system.

 

[markec]

In System Shock 2 you dont level up, you find modules that upgrade your abilities. This makes it more of a RPG and a better game then to start the game with all abilities maxed out and just getting flat hp/damage boosts when killing certain number of enemies.

 

[Jedi Master Radek]

Make it simple at the start and then progressively more complex and difficult. As a rule I play games on the hardest difficulty unless it means single life or obnoxious HP-bloat of enemies. So it is not that I am against challenge, complexity or difficulty, I am simply not having the time nor patience any more to waste getting into the game that I may drop mere hours into it if I find out I dislike it.

Play game on the hardest difficulty only after you learn how character system works. It's for what this difficulty is, for veteran players who play the game x-time and seek challenge.

I don't agree 100% with the statement, some people dive through the hardest difficulty to learn the system in the fastest way possible. Of course they are veteran players of the genre but at the same time it don't require then to invest X time on new game to pick it up, lower difficulties will teach you the basics, but will never put you on the stress enough to require you to master the system.

I assume that we are talking about difficulties when hard difficulty is really hard not just normal with different name.

 

[Takamori]

Make it simple at the start and then progressively more complex and difficult. As a rule I play games on the hardest difficulty unless it means single life or obnoxious HP-bloat of enemies. So it is not that I am against challenge, complexity or difficulty, I am simply not having the time nor patience any more to waste getting into the game that I may drop mere hours into it if I find out I dislike it.

Play game on the hardest difficulty only after you learn how character system works. It's for what this difficulty is, for veteran players who play the game x-time and seek challenge.

I don't agree 100% with the statement, some people dive through the hardest difficulty to learn the system in the fastest way possible. Of course they are veteran players of the genre but at the same time it don't require then to invest X time on new game to pick it up, lower difficulties will teach you the basics, but will never put you on the stress enough to require you to master the system.

I assume that we are talking about difficulties when hard difficulty is really hard not just normal with different name.

Indeed, for example Battle Brothers if I were to start without Iron Man and normal difficulty. It will allow me to save scum, but at the same time I will be missing party management key elements and knowing how to recruit. Also without Iron Man you end up being attached to your soldiers, thats a fucking big no if you want to master the game.

 

[orcinator]

Can you imagine a D&D game with that experience? If you can then it is an RPG.

Unzips fully random character gen with no levelups

This experience is unquestionably an RPG despite having any of the things we would otherwise associate with RPGs. Goes on to prove that only stats -> player skills are the true determinant of making an RPG.

Unzips a room with a puzzletrap in it.

What does this mean? That you should return to tradition and/or an RPG is a game where you play a role.
And that the poll needed a kingcomrade option.

 

[Nifft Batuff]

I have listen some players complaining that CP2077 is less an RPG than TW3 because in CP2077 there are no hairdressers.

 

[Darth Canoli]

The intention was from an argument I had in CRPG Addict's comments. He recently played a shitty JRPG which played exactly like game B: no character creation, no customization, just grinding for XP and fixed levelups.

But he considers it more of an RPG than a game with character creation but no levelups, because he thinks the levelups are one of the most important elements of the genre.

I think character customization is more important. So let's take two extreme games that only have one but not the other, and ponder which one qualifies as more of an RPG.

Both are important and necessary but it depends.
Good character creation is absolutely necessary, good character dev as well.

Examples of good ones :
Wizardry 8 (both)
Knights of the Chalice / Temple of Elemental Evil (both)
Fallout (both)

Mediocre
Arcanum (char dev is slightly lacking without the fallout-like perks but character creation is alright)
PST (character creation is fairly basic, character dev is good but only because of all the improvements you get outside of level-ups)

Bad
In most JRPG, there is no character creation and when there is one, it's fairly basic, wome of them have a early wizardry character creation though, which is decent but their character dev is still lacking.

After clarifying this, i'd say a good character creation is slightly more important than a good character development, even if both are necessary, like 60/40.
I'm not surprised i disagree with the retard crpg addict yet again.

 

[Funposter]

How many campaigns of D&D were abandoned before the players made it to Level 2?