I'm working on a rpg and I'd like suggestions or ideas on limiting or at least slowing power playing. I was considering a mandatory time period that must pass between trainings or something. Also wanting a way to prevent high levels from just giving everything to newb..they need to start from bottom too
Any thoughts or ideas?
ID:153562
 Sep 25 2003, 4:04 pm
|
|
Well in area to area make a code that checks the usr level and if they are under the LV requirments of what ever it doesnt let them in
And or a leveling log for the server host that tracks all leveling time of characters so you can tell who cheating where and how! | |
I think the best way to discourage powerleveling is to discourage combat in general - or at least make it something that the game isn't primarily built around. A few plain suggestions.
1) Make combat rare, not something that happens two dozen times in a trip to the next village. If combat is a serious situation where even an experienced fighter risks his or her life, then players may try to avoid it rather than get better at it. Or else they might just get bored with fighting since there's nothing to fight. 2) Make PVP illegal outside of organized situations such as arenas or events. Powerful players aren't so powerful when they have 20 guards after them wherever they go. 3) Peramdeath is an excellent way to eliminate powerleveling. If a powerful player dies, he's not powerleveling anymore now is he? 4) Make things that make players powerful degrade or break - skills and items. Skills wear down, or have to be focused on a specific area to be efficient at it - weapons and armor dull and break, even powerful ones. 5) Eliminate stat growth of the powerleveling form altogether. If the best way you can powerlevel is just to earn lots of money and buy a suit of full plate armor and a fancy sword, it isn't really powerleveling anymore. It really all depends on the RPG you build anyway. If you build an RPG where stat growth, PKing, and slaying monsters are the point of the game, powerleveling is just something that comes with the territory. If the game, on the other hand, is based on social interaction with other players and following a story that other players participate in, then stat growth isn't important. Its all about where the fun in the game comes from. | |
Powerlevelling isn't limited to combat. You cannot prevent a player from playing a lot and using his time wisely (Basically what powerlevelling is), but you can prevent the rewards from being too good.
If there is no reason to powerlevel, no one will powerlevel. That's an extreme case, since there will almost always be a reason; but thats the basic guideline I use when looking at this problem. Some things that have been mentioned are good suggestions: Decrease Power over Time, to stop permanent exponential power possibilities. Decrease impact of Power on gameplay. Associate high power with high risk. Some things I want to discourage or warn about, should you get the idea (Perhaps from commercial MMORPGs): The No Nerf Rule - AC (Asherons Call) uses this rule, and it is extremely, extremely BAD. This means that you never attempt to balance game issues by lowering things; instead you up everything else to be at the same level. Guess what the effect is? An ever-rising pillar of power for everyone. Zero Sum Rule - This rule is based around a scale. The scale must always be even. This means if you add a dagger that thieves can use, you must add one that everyone else can use as well (Extreme example, but it follows that concept). While it is good for some things and some games, it is not always a positive rule to strictly follow. Use it with caution, as it is almost always impossible to foresee all the variables. How do you balance a spell that stops someone from moving against a spell that does X amount of damage, for example. The following is a great site for theory on (MMO)RPG design, and while I dont follow its concepts religiously (Especially the Zero Sum Rule), it has helped me... get into the right mindset for thinking about things properly. Check out Musashi's Unbelievably Long and Disjointed Ramblings on RPG Theory | |
Alathon wrote:
Check out Musashi's Unbelievably Long and Disjointed Ramblings on RPG Theory That's a brilliant site, thanks for the link! *goes off to completely redesign his game* | |
You can set levels to artefacts and items, in order to even use it, you have to be X level. This would eliminate the problem of a newbie picking up a "Vorpal greatsword of ungodly might +98" *snicker*
Dragonstone at it's finest. | |
As for the item problem, I suggest you make it so you have to be skilled to use an item. (Ie, a Deathbringer Blade is almost useless in the hands of a level 3, since they just aren't strong/skilled enough to use it effectively) That doesn't help matters any. All that does is stop the experienced heroes from twinking newbies -- if an experienced fighter gets his hands on the Deathbringer Blade, then they can powergame with it all they want under this system. From my experience, if there are minimum level requirements, all that does is encourage everyone to power play so they can achieve that goal. I say let even the smallest man find or use the Deathbringer Sword. Assuming you've balanced it so that everyone is mortal, it gives even the advanced players something to be afraid of. | |
Some things that have been mentioned are good suggestions: My solutions: -- Associate combat in general with high risk. Getting better at combat makes you able to tackle bigger things, and comensurately be at less risk with smaller things, but face it: if you get breathed on by a fire-breathing dragon, you're toast (literally and figuratively). -- Make injuries more jarring (i.e. realistic); after all, even a tiny scratch takes real human beings two or three days to heal. Now imagine being hacked up into an inch of your life. We're talking five months minimum, and the chance of regaining full functionality afterward is so remote as to be laughable. And let's not forget that your skills and muscles (even the one between your ears) will probably atrophy while you're taking time off to heal. -- Keep everyone at roughly the same mortality level. If an expert swordsman attacks a thug with a dagger, then yes, that expert swordsman will make short work of him. But if the swordsman doesn't notice that other thug behind him, he's done for. -- Make every artifact in the world unique (or at most, have a limited number of a single type of unique artifact, like the Twelve Rings from Tolkien). If everyone can walk around with a Doomslayer, it defeats the purpose of the weapon. Create a new random weapon, assigning its stats at run time, and you have a piece of treasure that no one else can claim. Even Diablo II failed in this regard, though at least they gave a demonic effort. (Teehee.) The only true unique weapons in Diablo II were the Rare (yellow) weapons, and those had no structure to them, making them somewhat useless. Some things I want to discourage or warn about, should you get the idea (Perhaps from commercial MMORPGs): The system I use is simple -- I call it the Expansion Rule. Basically, when people start pushing the upper bounds of skill, you make new areas with more challenging opponents to occupy their time. (Of course, if you integrate level/skill caps, then you won't have to do this indefinitely.) The less experienced players have nothing to worry about, because a Gruesome Grey Warg-Eater won't ever find its way to their location. | |
-- Make injuries more jarring (i.e. realistic); after all, even a tiny scratch takes real human beings two or three days to heal. Now imagine being hacked up into an inch of your life. We're talking five months minimum, and the chance of regaining full functionality afterward is so remote as to be laughable. And let's not forget that your skills and muscles (even the one between your ears) will probably atrophy while you're taking time off to heal. The one thing to remember though is that if you're trying to make a game instead of a simulation your prime concern should be entertainment not realism. Something like this I would highly doubt would add to the entertainment and might as well be a permanent death as it would be faster and less painful to just make a new character. I think some people around here are missing the point and are trying to make overly complicated systems that will probably end up being as entertaining as a math class with a bland instructor! Keep things simple and to the point. Most of the best selling games aren't innovative or complex, just well balanced with a clean effective interface. | |
Personally I can't make up my mind between the two (They are both evil, I just can't figure out which is lesser). I just suggested that since it was a potential answer to his problem.
Another "almost acceptable answer" is to simply not have gold/item transferes in the game. That's a pretty lame system, but if you don't have a gold/item trading system from the beggining no one seems to question it. | |
You've got it exactly - My rule of thumb for RPG-creation is this: stray from reality far and often. People want to exist in a fantasy world, not be dragged through a realistic world!
| |
Lord of Water wrote:
You've got it exactly - My rule of thumb for RPG-creation is this: stray from reality far and often. People want to exist in a fantasy world, not be dragged through a realistic world! I prefere to take it case by case, with three simple factors. 1. Is it going to be funner if it's unreal. 2. Is it going to be rediculously unreal. 3. Will it suit the game? (Having a scale of 1 to 10, then keeping everything within a certiant range) | |
Theodis wrote:
I think some people around here are missing the point and are trying to make overly complicated systems that will probably end up being as entertaining as a math class with a bland instructor! Keep things simple and to the point. Most of the best selling games aren't innovative or complex, just well balanced with a clean effective interface. The goal is to entertain the programmer, not the player. Its not like we're making a huge profit off this stuff. :) | |
Spuzzum wrote:
The system I use is simple -- I call it the Expansion Rule. Basically, when people start pushing the upper bounds of skill, you make new areas with more challenging opponents to occupy their time. (Of course, if you integrate level/skill caps, then you won't have to do this indefinitely.) The less experienced players have nothing to worry about, because a Gruesome Grey Warg-Eater won't ever find its way to their location. You have to be careful with this; You have to make sure you don't invalidate previous content and create a power slide like most MMORPG's have now (EverQuest being a prime example). In EverQuest, they kept adding higher zones / items. Now you have Plane of Time, where you slaughter all the gods of Norrath (The game world in Everquest). All other zones are completely useless to those who are in a guild who can access / destroy Plane of Time. Not to mention, if players could do more damage to eachother than is possible in EverQuest, this would have an absolutely disastrous effect. Plane of Time equipment is roughly 10-20 times better in terms of stats than stuff just a few area's under it. | |
I haven't read the replies but here is my advice. Don't even try, they will always find a way around it.
| |
The one thing to remember though is that if you're trying to make a game instead of a simulation your prime concern should be entertainment not realism. That depends on the target demographic. I want players who enjoy plenty of realism, because I enjoy plenty of realism. There are plenty of ways to make being wounded fun, especially if you make the act of being wounded make the player sweat a little. Wounds can worsen, reopen, get infected, etc. -- you'd quickly find that someone afflicted with a serious injury would actually actively seek treatment, which is definitely rare in the gaming world (what with inns healing you overnight and all). Something like this I would highly doubt would add to the entertainment and might as well be a permanent death as it would be faster and less painful to just make a new character. I doubt it. Creating a new character means you lose everything you've gained -- skills, friends, property, etc. Besides, the more critical point is that violence doesn't solve much in the world of Haven. People who live by the sword won't last long. I think some people around here are missing the point and are trying to make overly complicated systems that will probably end up being as entertaining as a math class with a bland instructor! Keep things simple and to the point. Most of the best selling games aren't innovative or complex, just well balanced with a clean effective interface. I hate simple things -- they can entertain me for a while, but I can only truly be engaged in something that has nearly infinite diversity and unlimited possible ways it can play out. That's why I prefer most everything in a game to at least have a small element of randomness. A goblin in one game could be a low-level monster but it could be a high-level in the next; that's fun because it keeps you on your toes. | |
There are plenty of ways to make being wounded fun, especially if you make the act of being wounded make the player sweat a little. Wounds can worsen, reopen, get infected, etc. -- you'd quickly find that someone afflicted with a serious injury would actually actively seek treatment, which is definitely rare in the gaming world (what with inns healing you overnight and all). That's cool on paper but I see it as turning into a annoyance fast. If I run into combat shortly after preparing myself well, find a rat who should be an easy kill, but it's first attack is lucky and hurts my leg badly and spreads disease. Since my character didn't have medical knowledge to properly handle the wound it just festers. I prompty slay the rat. Then knowing that the wound in my leg isn't good I hobble slowly back to town, bugging random people for directions to the nearest healer. After spending time seeking the healer and using a good percentage of my money to get properly patched up I then prepare myself for my next trip in dangerous areas. After leaving I get ambushed by goblins and take a poisoned arrow in the back. Being a talented fighter I dispatch the goblins but now I have no more money to get properly healed up. At this point I'd stop playing as it's just annoying. This may be realistic but it isn't fun it's just frustrating. That and the fact that realisticlly even the greatest fighter could die to a simple farmer just from chance. This may be real but it's also not very fun to die in a completly random situation. I doubt it. Creating a new character means you lose everything you've gained -- skills, friends, property, etc. If you become too weak to do anything but socialize it'll get boring fast unless socializing is something you're into, but then you might as well just join chatters :P. Besides, the more critical point is that violence doesn't solve much in the world of Haven. People who live by the sword won't last long. That's cool as long as you can come up with something that is fun besides combat which I haven't seen done in any multiplayer RPGs. I hate simple things -- they can entertain me for a while, but I can only truly be engaged in something that has nearly infinite diversity and unlimited possible ways it can play out. Chess is a very simple game and yet it is very diverse in the ways it can play out. Just because a game's rules are simple doesn't mean the game itself is simple. That's why I prefer most everything in a game to at least have a small element of randomness. A goblin in one game could be a low-level monster but it could be a high-level in the next; that's fun because it keeps you on your toes. I don't see how this makes the game more complex. Tetris randomly selects the pieces that drop but it is by no means a complex game. A simple game is one with fewer rules, but it could be entirely random. | |
Slowing down gains and such will only punish the normal players (Since the average power gamer sits there with a DSL line for 12 hour periods).
I suggest rather then attacking the source of the power, you attack the power. Make it so that power isn't the main focus of the game, and when you have it your not some sort of unstoppable force.
As for the item problem, I suggest you make it so you have to be skilled to use an item. (Ie, a Deathbringer Blade is almost useless in the hands of a level 3, since they just aren't strong/skilled enough to use it effectively)
A "Weapon Skill" stat makes it so that you have to use the appropriate equipment for your strength, reguardless of how much money you have.
It's ultimately annoying and unrealistic, but its one of those cases where realism has to be shot for the sake of the game.
Anyway, thats just what I think.