New Game: Wizardry

Done! It's free to join if for some reason I didn't invite someone.

Note on game theory:

Read the question about "experience points" (ie, ability increasing with time).

Experience points were originally presented in paper-based RPG/battle games to reflect an expected gain in experience as a warrior fights over time. Since experience in such games could not be properly reflected in activities (die roll for an expert the same way they roll for a beginner), experience was a logical game factor.

I've seen this concept carried over into some computer-based 3d-melee systems. The result? The "experienced" players (who gain experience rather rapidly) become so powerful that even a skilled lower-level has a very difficult time of beating them. The reason is that in 3d-real-time RPG/melee... there actually is experience that is gained. The player becomes more proficient as he learns the battle system, becomes more used to spell and power casting, etc. So with such games, adding artificial experience to the scene actually boosts the character's ability abnormally. (In truth, that was the case even in many paper-based games. Ever try to fight a high-level warrior in D&D? Totaly unbalanced. In RL, there's only so much better an experienced warrior can get; some of the D&D high-lev warriors are nigh invincible).

One of the mistakes I see GMs/DMs make in coming to Second Life is trying to bring the game theory concepts from D&D and other games to SL... including the cumbersome charts and outmoded concepts such as experience. SL has brilliant potential for RPG-- if the GMs become aware of the fact that this is an entirely new environment, with entirely new requirements and RPG concepts. Our biggest problem in running RPGs in Elf Clan is in finding Game Masters who understand the need to throw out the charts and are capable of converting their thinking to a virtual environment (which is instant-action).

How is this done? By realizing that in 3d virtual gaming-- the basic scenario and a decent, simple-concept melee system are more important than all the game charts that one can come up with. In our designing a melee system, some folks suggested putting in extensive fight factors which would influence the ultimate outcome of the game. The result of course, was that during the melee, the players were totally unaware of all the stuff that was going on internally. It's not like playing a dice game where you see the results of everything you do. In SL, when you're in a fight, it's basically punch/defend, no matter how many "charts" are working internally in the script.

The more complex a fighting script, the laggier and the more potential for something going wrong. That's part of what happened with SimCast I think; they spent so much time and effort trying to fine-tune an ultra-complex fighting system that they never really got down to just having fun. There was a time when the Willow-fighting system was a lot of fun; the willows were mean and died begrudgingly, but it was possible to kill them and the fight was fast-paced. But then a modification was made and there was a delay between blows of up to 8 seconds and newbies fell like flies-- and players just didn't like it as well after that. SimCast was hands down some of the most incredible scenery and high-potential games I have seen on SL. Nothing else even came close. But it is possible (and even easy) to over-complicate a game system.

In the end, in our Elf Clan RPG we discovered that a very simple hit/defend/score melee system was as effective (if not moreseo) than the most complex melee system we could devise. To the end-players, it was all the same. They either won or splatted, one of the two.

So I agree with Keiki that in game systems such as presented here, less is better. I'd rather play a well-designed, well-balanced simple game than a complex one that really doesn't manifest itself properly in the SL environment.

hehe, thanks Wayfinder. I like the way you think about this. Even if I made a more complex, fully featured RPG system, it would some of these things in common with Wizardry. I don't think I would have levels at all or experience or bonuses unless they were both subtle and temporary. Collecting spells over time might be an option, but the new spells shouldn't be "I Win" buttons either.

Anyway, when someone is dueling, I want them to outthink their opponent and also think 1 or 2 moves ahead. You need to do both to do well in Wizardry.

One thing I've found very disappointing about PvP systems in MMO's has been levels. I hate playing a game where I need to spend weeks or months leveling a character before I can have a prayer to be competitive. I can't see myself making something like that in SL.

I totally disagree.
A combat system that does not allow the skill of a player to get better by accumulating experience bonus in one form or other is good for those who enjoy hack & slash type of games. If one just want to fight, that may be ok, but...

If you include roleplaying and have some form of established power structure in a cultural context, then the fighting element is only one part of the game. It is used to climb the ranks and gain access to abilities that are not available to players of lower ranks.

When high level players become invulnerable, the hope is that they have gained a sense of responsability that will add depth to their roleplaying. Of course, this may be rare because most people are only interested in hack & slash.

I don't mean that just enjoying a game of hack & slash is wrong or anything. I like shoot them up games as much as the next person. But I also enjoy those games where roleplay takes precedence over the fighting element.

respectfully,

I guess chess is a hack & slack type of game then. There is a fair degree of skill in this game, in making judgements on what your foe will do and how best to repond to it.



So rather then personal skill, an artificial skill system should be added? I’m sorry, but if I wanted to play everquest I would. In online games, such systems tend reflect time online and who figured out how to exploit the system rather then any role-play earned skills.



So, why not just remove the problem of invulnerable players and allow everyone to have fun with the game.



The short is, no online system is going to replace a GM and a devoted handful of players. EXP based online systems don't lead to roleplaying. Such systems result in botting, farming, and exploiting.

Exactly. Experience based systems remove much of the thinking involved in the game. For instance, Anarchy Online. The point of the experience is to limit access to higher level equipment and spells, but with a bit of bending the rules you can manage to equip stuff intended for level 200 people while you're still only level 30 or so. The only people capable of that however are the people who have spent months, years, playing in AO and have a vast amount of resources. At that point AO is just a grind for experience rather than an enjoyable game.

The only experience based RPG I can think of that doesn't follow this trend is Guild Wars; experience levels improve the quality of your skills yes, but it's easy to obtain your maximum level before the end of the game. It's even possible to obtain maximum level inside of a day with the right group. The reason GW is fun is the fact that you're on an even footing with everyone else. Even when you're not max level it's possible with some crafty skill mixing to kill someone who is. Intelligence is promoted by skill and class diversity.


There SHOULD be some form of improvement possible in the long run. Access to better spells or counters, but it should be something that could be purchased by way of experience as a kind of currency. Supposing there's a fireball that does 1 damage to 1 target, perhaps a better fireball would be available with some experience that hits for 2 damage to 1 target, or 1 damage to multiple targets. However these better spells should not be so advanced that a smarter newbie can't beat a dumber highbie. More play time != superior skill.

Another thing these online games are trying to do is just create a huge timesink so that you have to spend months playing the game to experience the best content. They want you paying their monthly fee for a long time. I just wasn't trying to make that game.

I was trying to create something that was very easy to learn, completely fair, and yet still a challenge. When you won you really were beating the other person because you made better decisions, had a better strategy or simply guessed your opponent's moves better. I wasn't trying to create a complete RPG system.

Now I may try to do that in the future, be it Advanced Wizardry or some other game. So I find this discussion interesting. I'm thinking that no matter what I do, I'm not going to make everyone happy.

Tomorrow I start work on creating a scoreboard/dueling arena to go along with Wizardry and I've posted a thread in the group forum about it. If you have ideas about what you would like to see in scoreboard, post here: /275/c9/95215/1.html

Keep up the geat work Keiki

Good point Armandi. One of the best RPGs I ever saw was hosted by a guy who sat there with no charts, one ten-sided die, and a good imagination. The game was fast-paced, fun, non-chart bound, and when a "chance" decision had to be made, he'd throw the die or have the player throw the die to see what happened.

I always remembered that concept. Nothing replaces a good GM. When I began my gaming career-- I based it on that simple principle.

We had two such experiences in Elf Clan. We tried setting up, as an experiment, an RPG system with lots of internal charts and standards. The different races all had different hit points, defense points, accuracy, dodge etc etc. Know what happened in the end play? None of that was visible to the players. They just duked it out until one of them fell. It quickly became obvious that what works on pencil-and-paper games simply does not transliterate well to a virtual environment.

On the other hand, our most popular game, BattleMace, has a simple premise: hit/defend and see who gets knocked out of the ring three times. There could be no simpler-concept PVP on Second Life... and it is loads of fun. Not only that, but the "skills" people develop are real. No fake experience, no multipliers; they either practice and get good, or they don't practice and don't get good. There are people who play BattleMace... and there are champions.

So yes, all the charts in the world won't help if a GM is bad. And a good GM can do without charts. An online RPG system can be a load of fun with almost no rules. And a game system can be loads of fun with only simple concepts-- if those concepts are right in the first place. That's why I'm a fan of simple game concepts in online games. The less the player has to worry about rules, the more he can concentrate on having fun.

Tournament Thursday at 4:30pm SL time! 750 linden in prize money. Try out the game for free! Also, check out the snazzy new scoreboard at HUDDLES Headquarters.

I just opened a new arena to play Wizardry in Baker. That's where I'll be holding future tourneys. Stay tuned, I have a big one in the works!



BTW, if you play Wizardry at the new arena, the scoreboard automatically adds small amounts to the pot depending on how long the game goes on.

Four tournaments Mon-Wednesday this week:

Monday, 8:30pm
Tuesday, 4:30pm
Wednesday, 4:30pm
Wednesday, 8:30pm

Wow, Bravo. It looks like one of those fighting , turn based games... Final Fantasy?

It is a turn based magical fighting game. Only six spells, but there is definitely some fun strategy involved trying to outthink your opponent's next move.

I have surprisingly good intuition, but bad judgement in this game. Gotta stop second guessing myself. ^.^;

The Wizardry Arena scoreboard system is now for sale.

This might be a "yeah I already thought of that" idea, but I think it would be cool to expand the game somehow to allow for team battles. I realize you built this for duels, it was just a thought I had while looking at your game.

That will most likely what I will tackle for my next game. As you might imagine, I can't just tweak the existing game. It needs to be done from scratch.

This game seems like real fun. You need to post this game on www.slprofiles.com under Second Life Places. Good Job!
Johan

I want to commend you on a really fun game you've created here!

Are there still active tournaments?

I'm looking for a time to post another tourney soon. I like to post them a few days in advance.

Also, you can often find people to play through the Wizardry group.

I was reading through the comments on game balance and experience. I've been doing a lot of reading about game design lately, so I thought I'd jump in here -- I think there's definitely a place for a game without "levels," but for the sake of keeping things interesting as time goes on, you might want to consider new "spells" that simply have different visual effects (and sound effects, if you do that currently). That allows people to:

1 - keep trying to find new spells, so you can hide them or give them out as prizes or whatever

2 - personalize their characters a bit, give a bit of style

3 - keep the game balanced, even for new players

So you might have "ice bolt" as well as "fireball," and they might do the same thing, but they would look different -- that's fun by itself. Or I might want green fire because I usually wear green. Stuff like that. (In "Champions" RPG terms, don't change the game mechanics, just change the special effects.)

I'd suggest implementing this with a small set of attachables, each with one spell, such that you can swap them around, but only have a limited number enabled at any given time and you launch them using the fixed launch mechanisms existing in your system now.

Just some thoughts,

neko

Kuddos - this game looks really good. Please make sure to submit this game at www.slprofiles.com --- there is a special Second Life Places category where you can submit your popular Second Life games in it and this one clearly belongs there!