Non-Combat Gameplay: Myths & Reality (article)

[aVENGER]

Since everyone's ok with solving ALL problems with combat skills, I don't see why solving ALL problems with non-combat skills should be an issue, but that’s not what we are talking about here today. We are talking about paths. An RPG can have many optional quests, but as long as it offers several distinctive paths through the game, I'm happy. There are few things worse than playing a diplomatic character through the game and then suddenly being forced to fight because we’ve entered the “REAL MEN only!” area of the game, so it should be a complete and distinctive path through the game. I’d settle on at least Combat Boy, Charisma Boy, and Stealth Boy, but would prefer to see more. Combat is definitely a great and enjoyable way to beat a game, but it shouldn’t be the only way

Link

A very good article by the lead designer of the upcoming Indie RPG Age of Decadence. Be warned that it contains a few stray bits of harsh language.

[Kulyok]

Thank you for sharing. I enjoyed reading it.

(There are some cool quests in TBH with non-violent solution.  I know, I know, it's off-topic, but still, there's one or two I'm deeply in love with.)

I think the character *should* fight at some point, though. I mean, you've got to be a hell of a shouter diplomat otherwise, right?

[aVENGER]

Basically, my own beliefs mirrors those of the article's author in so far that a good RPG should offer multiple paths through the game and that one of them can be completely combat free. I admit that this is somewhat idealistic and I hardly expect such an approach from mainstream games. AFAIK, so far, only Fallout (and possibly Torment as well) managed to pull that off in a somewhat reasonable manner.

BTW, note that having a combat-free path does not indicate that every single situation can and should be solved through diplomacy. It is logical that certain things can only be resolved through violence. For example, you can't exactly talk out a pack of hungry wolves from attacking you. However, wandering into a forest teaming with wolves, alone in the middle of winter is probably not such a good idea for a non-combat oriented character. Therefore, quests which absolutely require combat and offer absolutely no alternatives are best left out of the critical path. OTOH, an optional side quest involving pure combat would be perfectly fine in my view.

[shiroryu]

Interesting stuff. I think that you could have a critical path that could be resolved through either combat or diplomacy. The sidequests could be pure combat( the jungle full of wolves) or diplomatic ( such as capital politics, which I guess is another jungle full of wolves ) and there would be suitable penalties for the 'wrong' side.

A point that should be kept in mind is that, as always, there are shades of grey about it. Threats are part of diplomacy, and having the combat strength to back it up would be a vital part of the setup.

[berelinde]

How do you use diplomacy on mustard jelly?

[Daulmakan]

Basically, my own beliefs mirrors those of the article's author in so far that a good RPG should offer multiple paths through the game and that one of them can be completely combat free. I admit that this is somewhat idealistic and I hardly expect such an approach from mainstream games. AFAIK, so far, only Fallout (and possibly Torment as well) managed to pull that off in a somewhat reasonable manner.

Toment definitely fits the bill. There's only 4 unavoidable fights in the entire game (and one of them is dead easy, at the very beginning of the game).

Thanks for the article, aVENGER.

How do you use diplomacy on mustard jelly?

Polymorph Self (Mustard Jelly)? 

[aVENGER]

How do you use diplomacy on mustard jelly?

You don't.

In general, it's not so much about using diplomacy to bypass combat situations. It's more about providing alternate (non-combat) solutions to plot critical quests.

[Lord Ernie]

While an interesting read, I think the article (if that's what it is) simplifies things a bit. For starters, alternate solutions are everywhere in every single Tabletop RPG I've ever played; yeah, there are fights - lots of them - but just as many times we have the 'gate guard' scenario. Hell, I remember our legendary "Dress up the donkey as a walking bomb' session quite vividly, as well as some "let's get the hell out of here" situations.

Thing is, this sort of thing is much harder to pull off in a computer game - you can account for some player creativity, but a lot of it comes down to 'out of the box thinking' and simply cannot be easily simulated. Note, also, that some of the games lately have been moving in the 'multiple solutions' direction, prime examples of this being Vampire: Bloodlines, and the first Deus Ex - yeah, there were parts where killing everything was pretty much unavoidable, but a big part of both games could be solved with a combination of stealth and fast talking.

[shiroryu]

How do you use diplomacy on mustard jelly?

Who's a slimy, goeey mess then? You are, yes you are!

[Lord Ernie]

Nice one . I would not recommend petting it while you say that, though.

[Mongoose87]

How do you use diplomacy on mustard jelly?

Who's a slimy, goeey mess then? You are, yes you are!

Actually, I think that the appropriate choice of action would be using "Craft: Sandwich".

[KIrving]

Interesting article.  I tend to enjoy non-combat solutions to problems/quests.  I like being able to talk my way out of trouble and find alternative solutions to fulfilling quests, especially if it involves probing conversations (my adventure gaming influence).  Although if I'm required to stick various things together in my inventory I might get annoyed.

The game sounds like it is strongly influenced by Arcanum and maybe even a bit by Morrowind. 
No romances  , although you can at least choose the gender of the PC.  Hmmm....for me it will come down to how well the story is written then, especially the dialogue.

[Dark Raven]

Non combat? How dull. I prefer the kill and the experience points that comes from it. 

[Pigeon]

Blood Raven, I challenge you to respond to anything with more than one line of text.

[shiroryu]

Excuse my ranting, and I'm sure you've heard this before, but this was a big part of why ToB sucked relative to SoA. ToB is just pure fight after fight, with revelatory lectures in between. And the customary pats on the back from Volo and Elminster. Your choices in the lecture do decide your epilogue, but that's a sop thrown towards roleplaying. I want to see the results in-game. Not being able to save Saradush was a sore point with me.

No sooner do I finish a ToB fight than I'm strategizing for the next. They're great battles, but it gets tiring eventually. In SoA, you could pick your battles and intersperse them with dialogue-based/easy-combat ones. These admittedly were Fedex rather than true diplomatic quests, but there was a semblance of change-of-pace that you, as a player, control.

In ToB, you could have visited another nation - Tethyr, for example, and convinced the Tethyrian army to aid Saradush. You could have negotiated treaties or made things worse - but no, the world is doomed to pain and suffering until you finally get that Throne of Blood. Even the only 'good' guy in the Five is after your ass, with no chance of an alliance. And Melissan plays you and the Five like a harp through the game, and there's nothing you can do about it, even as you deduce that she's not this Bhaalspawn savior, turning up like a bad penny everywhere you go. You can't play the Five against each other, can't help Gromnir against Yagashura. Bah. Throne of Bah is what it is.

[Kulyok]

There were numerous projects to get ToB better, secret or not, but most of them are in limbo... or became TBH.

[aVENGER]

Non combat? How dull.

Providing a non-violent approach to the critical path quests doesn't automatically mean that the game won't feature any battles at all. In a good RPG, the combat focused path should be equally valid and equally enjoyable as the non-violent path.

I prefer the kill and the experience points that comes from it. 

An understandable perspective which is unfortunately valid in most current day RPGs. My personal view is that a goal-based XP system (i.e. like the one used in VTM:Bloodlines or as described in HARP) would pretty much negate this line of thinking.

[shiroryu]

VtM: Bloodlines is a good roleplaying game. The roleplaying depth they packed into it was amazing. Realtime combat and buggy, slow gameplay, however, prevented me from playing it through more than once. I understand that it's been user-patched extensively, so I might return to it later.

The Haunted Hotel was one of the best gaming experiences I've had. Sure, Silent Hill does horror better, but I was pleasantly surprised to find a genuinely scary haunting in a roleplaying game.

[Dark Raven]

Blood Raven, I challenge you to respond to anything with more than one line of text.

Nah

[Dark Raven]

Non combat? How dull.

Providing a non-violent approach to the critical path quests doesn't automatically mean that the game won't feature any battles at all. In a good RPG, the combat focused path should be equally valid and equally enjoyable as the non-violent path.

I prefer the kill and the experience points that comes from it. 

An understandable perspective which is unfortunately valid in most current day RPGs. My personal view is that a goal-based XP system (i.e. like the one used in VTM:Bloodlines or as described in HARP) would pretty much negate this line of thinking.

I'm mostly a power gamer which is why I commented like that. That is with computer games. Now in a PnP type of setting I prefer seduction, intimidate, brib or talk my way in a given situation. If an RPG (computer game) is well written and has interesting dialog options, I'll use the power of speech like in a PnP game.

VtM: Bloodlines is a good roleplaying game. The roleplaying depth they packed into it was amazing. Realtime combat and buggy, slow gameplay, however, prevented me from playing it through more than once. I understand that it's been user-patched extensively, so I might return to it later.

The Haunted Hotel was one of the best gaming experiences I've had. Sure, Silent Hill does horror better, but I was pleasantly surprised to find a genuinely scary haunting in a roleplaying game.

One of the best RPGs ever. Like the setting, the rules, the characters, everything about it. The Haunted Hotel was the best part of the game.