The Trouble With Using D&D Rules In Videogames?

An anonymous reader writes "There's a new article on kuro5hin.org about the trouble with porting pencil and paper RPG games (such as d20 3.5) to RPG video games. One such rules-snatching video game is examined, The Temple of Elemental Evil. The article is also an introduction to a new RPG Standards Compliance system that is currently under development and will be online soon, in hopes of bridging the gap between computers and those lovable PnP evenings we all enjoy."

Comments

The problem is

[timothv]

Problem is that D&D's number-crunching sucks and instead of focusing on giving the player a thousand numbers to concern himself with, it'd be better to make a fun game.

Re:The problem is

[Aglassis]

You said: " Problem is that D&D's number-crunching sucks and instead of focusing on giving the player a thousand numbers to concern himself with, it'd be better to make a fun game."

Thats why the White Wolf games are so lax on numbers and vague on what some attribute to your ability will do. The point of a RPG is to role play, not to kill monsters and powergame. Unfortunately, most of the public thinks the latter is what an RPG is. It is painstakingly difficult to talk about a pen and paper RPG without others thinking your are a D&D powergaming freak. Its sad really, since RPGs are a great intellectual game. Once anyone focuses more on making the RPG compliant so that the numbers balance out, they've lost the point of the game altogether.

Re:The problem is

[crashfrog]

Powergaming is roleplaying.

Not everybody wants to play the role of a whiny, neurotic, tortured Gothic denizen of the night. Some of us think vampires are about as sexy as ticks.

Some of us want to play the role of a master of fighting prowess. who puts evil abominations to the sword. Some of us are into kicking down doors and divying up the loot. Since we don't do that IRL but rather construct personas to do it in a game, it's still role-playing. Just because I'm not interested in exploring the many facets of a character that, in real life, would be in a padded room, don't pretend like your games are somehow more legitimate than mine, ok?

Powergamers are role-players. They're just playing a role that you apparently don't like. Well, stuff it. You play Vampire: The Wearing of Stupid Dog Collars and I'll stick with D20 and hopefully, we'll never be at the same gaming table, ok?

Re:The problem is

[Aglassis]

You said: "Powergamers are role-players"

This reminds me of an old problem that existed in Ultima Online. At one point the halberd was the best weapon for a fighter. Now if people were actually roleplaying they would probably pick weapons more suited to different fighting roles than the halberd which is a fairly exotic military weapon. You could probably expect some people to play knights using swords as their weapons, others as archers, etc. But did this happen? No of course not, everyone picked the halberd. Later when a game patch came out that made the kitana the most powerful weapon, did those people stay with the halberd? Nope. They jumped ship for statistical reasons.

How is this roleplaying? How is knowing that your weapon will deal 2 points more of damage a turn on average versus a competitor the deciding factor for someone who wants to play a role as a knight (as an example)?

Its powergaming, not roleplaying. Roleplaying is taking all the good and the bad of a character and making due with it. When you powergame, there is no role being explored; it more like fun with statistics.

Re:The problem is

[Feanturi]

Its powergaming, not roleplaying. Roleplaying is taking all the good and the bad of a character and making due with it. When you powergame, there is no role being explored; it more like fun with statistics.

I understand what you find Roleplaying to mean, and that's cool. However, the guy saying powergaming is roleplaying is right. It's taking on a role enacting things you don't normally do. Does it lack character depth? Sure, yeah, but it's still playing a role that is not one's normal life. You're just into two different types of roleplaying.

depends on your playing style

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're mostly into Hack & Slash, then video game D&D is workable. In fact, it's been around a long time: Rogue was released in the mid-80's wasn't it? Man, I still love that game.
But if you're mostly into grand sweeping epic storylines, or intricate political manipulative shenannigans, or just the camaraderies of hanging out at the gaming table, eating pizza & diet coke (or cheetos & Mt. Dew) and rolling dice and making bad puns or acting out like your character, then the computer version is very, very tame.
I can handle both styles fine though. THey both have merits.
BTW (off-topic) how many people still play older editions? I'm very much into old-school Basic/Expert D&D (those old boxed sets from 1981). That's what I started out with back in the day, and it's what I keep going back to for some reason. I know the new editions are technically better, but I just don't like 'em that much. *shrug*

Re:Mature and robust

[Bagheera]

The D&D systems/rulesets are always robust and mature, having been in the making for the better part of forty years. Furthermore, they always translate very well to any medium, be it paper and pencil or PC video game.

Come again? The D&D rules have, historically, had a large following but a lousy game mechanic. They ALWAYS had a lousy game mechanic, all the way back to the original Dungeons and Dragons and the "Three book set" that came before. D&D worked as a game system more because of the extensive source material and the huge number of pre-packaged modules than because it was actually any good. D20 is a little better than old versions, but it's still a Level and Hit Point based system - at least in it's AD&D incarnation.

I would say that it is a much better idea to use the tried-and-true D&D rulesets than to create your own on the fly. Heck, for starters, it saves you a huge amount of time.

Actually, since the programmers have to implement it, there are a number of considerably better and more versatile systems that would make a good base for a CRPG.

Considering that any CRPG that's run by the machine (rather than an active GM, as you could get in, say, NwN) lacks the dynamic "Rules Bender" called the Game Master (A good GM makes the STORY run the game, not the DICE. CRPG's don't know when to fudge a roll so the hero can survive, or kill a monster, or whatever is needed to tell a good story.) they're ALL going to basically suck.

Personally, the hypothetical "best" CRPG would allow GM interaction at whatever level was required. A fast and clean implementation. And a good way to make characters ballance within the rules. Any game that tries to port the inherently unbalanced AD&D rules over is going to have holes.

That's the fact.

Knights of the Old Republic

[tm2b]

Knights of the Old Republic used essentially the same rules as D&D, the d20 game, Star Wars Roleplaying Game. I've played the RPG, it works well as a table top game.

I think that KotOR makes it pretty obvious that a great game *can* be based directly on a table-top RPG. But a crappy game is a crappy game, no matter what property they license to go under it.

Re:Temple of Elemental Evil is SO BAD

[Babbster]

I haven't played the game, but the bug point seems to be key to the "op-ed" piece linked to in this story, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with the D&D system and it somehow "failing" computer RPGs.

Just because someone does a shitty game based on D&D doesn't make it a failure of D&D. It's a failure of the developer. D&D rules have served quite well in many computer RPGs over the years (my first true D&D CRPG was "Eye of the Beholder," which was a blast).

Of course, this is a failure of videogame reviews in general. If a game element is poorly implemented, that means to some reviewers that the game element itself is flawed as opposed to the way it was integrated into the game.

I have to say

[Aexia]

The article pretty much seems to ignore its premise.

The fact that TOEE is bug-ridden doesn't say *anything* about the suitability of adapting Pen N Paper RPGs to the computer. It just means there were sloppy programmers.

God, are we ever nerds...

[softspokenrevolution]

All I got from this article was that the guy wasn't happy about the d20 system, he really didn't seem to be all that coherent, which he warns us of this ("this is no review of TOEE, although it could be"), it apparently could also be a rambling condemnation of WotC, or a big circle jerk about how great J.R.R. Tolkien was.

As people pointed out in the thread below, a computer is more than capable of performing the functions that the d20 system has laid out. I for one have never found it difficult to comprehend, as everything is simply a plus or minus on a random interger 1-20. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it really isn't that tough (compared to say, creating some good content) to establish these scripts and commands?

I mean really, for now all we're going to get is a fairly modular design, but the rules are not the problem, shit games with tons of bugs are the problem. Who wrote this article, why are they qualified to make these statements, why is it on /. aside from the usual comments about the editors?

Re:Mature and robust

[Zalgon 26 McGee]

That's why Paranoia is the best game system - players are forbidden to know the rules, and the GM's one main rule is: Keep it lively. If a player is boring, they're dead.

I'd disagree

[rsilvergun]

The problem with D&D rules is they're set up for long term (years and years) campaigns, not 30-40 hr games. So you're characters get just a few skill points and new abilities per level; so few in fact that it's a waste to spend them on anything other than what the game intended for that character. This makes leveling up a linear and dull event, better handled by just clicking 'automatic level up'.

Re:I'd disagree

[geekoid]

not true anymore.

They designed the system so that you quickly get to about 8th level, and in 40 hours, you could get to 20th, reasonably.
However, level pails compared to a good, challenging, and exciting adventure.

Hell, if you played for 40 hour, only gained 3 levels, but had a kickass time playing, wouldn't that be alright?
The goal of the game should nopt be to make the character as high level as possible.

Re:I'd disagree

[rsilvergun]

Yeah, but if all I wanted was adventure, I'd play the old Sierra Quest games. I'd like some gameplay with my adveture, perferably of the min/max kind. I like fiddling with stats and trying out new spells and abilities. If I'm role playing a character, I want to feel like my decisions matter, or at least like I have decisions.

What follows is my Kotor rant:

Kotor's problem is it's so damn linear. Yeah, I can be dark side/light side, but when the choices boil down to stuff like, "kill this innocent person in cold blood, or don't", that's hardly a choice. You know exactly which path you're taking. I was hoping for better writing from Bioware. I know they're capable of it (see Baldur's Gate). Come on, why don't my light side companions abandon me when I do evil? Why don't I pick up dark side companions? Why aren't my light side/dark side choices (at least the inital ones) more grey area? Well, the answer's probably that Bioware needed to get the game out the door, and didn't have time for all of that. Either that, or they wanted to dumb things down to improve the game's mass appeal. What would have been cool is a slow, steady decent into darkness that's genuinely hard to avoid and that traps you once you're in.

Re:I'd disagree

[Syberghost]

If I'm role playing a character, I want to feel like my decisions matter, or at least like I have decisions.

But you're not role-playing a character. You're playing a video game.

If you want the pen-and-paper role-playing experience, you have two options:

1) Wait until artificial intelligence has advanced to the point that a home PC or console game can be as smart as a human GM.

2) Put down the controller, turn off the Orbital Mind Control receiver, pick up an actual pen and paper, get out of the house and GO PLAY GAMES WITH ACTUAL PEOPLE. Social interaction will be a side benefit that will help you in your future dealings with other human beings at work.

More standardized?

[nnnneedles]

Video game RPGs need to be *less* standardized if you ask me.

The rules aren't really that important in a video game, as opposed to a pen and paper RPG. It's mostly done behind the scenes.

What we need is games with more imagination than "kill rat 500 times, then kill spider 1000 times".

Because you know these rpg developers are too focused on "standards". How about a mafia rpg where you start with collecting money for loan sharks, then move up the ladder? Yeah, you never thought about that, assholes. Thanks for all the spiders and small poisoned rats. I want to kill you by drilling a hole in your eye.

Please. Change.