Levels!

[Bad Santa]

I HATE levels!!!

That's what I LOVE with Ultima Online. Just skills and stats. That's it. It works beautifully. No level caps, no level scaling, no level requirements (some stat requirement for equipment, but that's fair. Maybe just stat reqs for proper use of equipment. 90 lbs weakling can't hit the side of a barn with an M60. ez to code too str-reqxskill=accuracy), no xp to chase around, no nothing of the sort. And no xp from quests.

Maybe karma reqs instead, or fame reqs. Mr Big Boss doesn't talk to just anyone, you know.

With a skills and stats based games you gain by using them. If you use more strenght as an MG gunner, you get stronger. You use more intelligence and reflexes as a hacker you get smarter and faster. You learn more about hacking as a hacker so then you get more skilled at it, that's it. No need to parse around your precious stat and skill pts to be able to "play" the game. Your not playing the game when you do that, you're playing the game mechanics.

[Brother None]

Did you play Wasteland? It didn't have abstract "levels", it had a system where you were promoted within the Ranger ranks as you gained experience. Wasteland 2 will likely have the same system.

[Bad Santa]

You gain levels by gaining experience. If you should be promoted maybe a test should be given or a certain accomplishment should be attained. A raid, a scouting mission... that kind of thing but no levels, please. Not having levels solves SO MANY problems. That's probably why I even play Elder scrolls games anyways.

[Brother None]

The Elder Scrolls games have levels.

However, the original Wasteland had a learn-by-doing system too. I don't think we've ever seen a learn-by-doing system that wasn't fundamentally broken and unbalanced. I'd rather see a hybrid.

[Vryheid]

Stop trying to fix what isn't broken. Levels are a fundamental mechanic of the RPG genre and they do an excellent job at representing player progression. There are deeper, more philosophical reasons why the level system became so popular in RPGs but I don't feel like getting into them here.

[BlackGauntlet]

Stop trying to fix what isn't broken. Levels are a fundamental mechanic of the RPG genre and they do an excellent job at representing player progression. There are deeper, more philosophical reasons why the level system became so popular in RPGs but I don't feel like getting into them here.

Please do. I love it when people get verbose and we all go tl;dr.

[YoungFreud]

The Elder Scrolls games have levels.

However, the original Wasteland had a learn-by-doing system too. I don't think we've ever seen a learn-by-doing system that wasn't fundamentally broken and unbalanced. I'd rather see a hybrid.

Levels only really affected the base stats. Your skills improved the more you used them, like climbing the hill with Acrobatics. It would be nice to see another way to improve your attributes, like a purchasing attributes and skills with XP, but I think "levels-disguised-as-ranks" is probably going to be the best way.

[Ronin73]

As old as Wasteland is the level and skill system they had still holds up well even today IMO. They may refine it a little and hopefully add a lot more skills, but I do hope they keep the core in place.

[Gatt9]

Levels exist whether you put the number on the screen or not. Every system has them. Levels are a rating of a character's power, whether you call it Level 10, or you add up the total skill points the character has, they both result in the same thing.

Whether you gain 1,000xps, gain a level and get a skill point, or you get 1,000xps and gain a skill point, it's the same system. One of them just shows you the overall number and the other hides it from you.

Whether you cap levels, or cap skills, it's the same effect.

Use-based systems also tend to be extremely highly exploitable, as The Elder Scrolls has consistently shown us. Throw a fireball at a tree for 4 hours, and suddenly you're the best battlemage in the world. Even their attempts to solve that problem consistently failed to do so, it's trivial to exploit Oblivion to get optimal results with each level.

Use-based systems encourage "Playing the game mechanics" a great deal more than any level based system. In a level based system, I make concious choices in how I want to spend my points, and then just play the game. In a use based system, I figure out the optimal pattern to gaining the maximum number of skills and adjust my playing to exploit that. Like TES: Shoot critter with magic once, block one of his attacks once, then hit him with a sword once, gaining the optimal "Experience" in my skills with each fight. Always make sure I'm running, press space bar every few seconds to jump, etc. A Use-based system is far more about "Playing the game mechanics" than a level based system.

I don't particularly care either way, but in honesty, use-based systems are consistently more broken, and consistently encourage grinding to a much higher degree than a level based system.

[YoungFreud]

Use-based systems also tend to be extremely highly exploitable, as The Elder Scrolls has consistently shown us. Throw a fireball at a tree for 4 hours, and suddenly you're the best battlemage in the world. Even their attempts to solve that problem consistently failed to do so, it's trivial to exploit Oblivion to get optimal results with each level.

Use-based systems encourage "Playing the game mechanics" a great deal more than any level based system. In a level based system, I make concious choices in how I want to spend my points, and then just play the game. In a use based system, I figure out the optimal pattern to gaining the maximum number of skills and adjust my playing to exploit that. Like TES: Shoot critter with magic once, block one of his attacks once, then hit him with a sword once, gaining the optimal "Experience" in my skills with each fight. Always make sure I'm running, press space bar every few seconds to jump, etc. A Use-based system is far more about "Playing the game mechanics" than a level based system.

I don't particularly care either way, but in honesty, use-based systems are consistently more broken, and consistently encourage grinding to a much higher degree than a level based system.

Use-based systems tend to be a more realistic abstraction of skills. The only reason why it takes 4 hours of fireballing trees to become the best battlemage in the world is because, in real life, it would take 10,000 hours of practice and learning to become a master at something. That's why you have things like college, schools, drilling, etc. A major difference between an infantry grunt and a special forces operator is the operator is constantly training his skills past the basics. And if it's broken in TES, then it's because Bethesda isn't putting enough challenges that can't be defeated by a fireball.

[Khaal]

Hi guys!

I accidently sunk into the Wasteland and can't find my way out... but on the other hand it's, why should I?

As for the topic of leveling... I HATED TES leveling system, I would jump the hell of Balmora's stairs in Morrowind
In Oblivion I made a class that would suit my "immersion" AND have stats ideal to level it. I kept a sheet of paper for keeping score on my skills so I'll get max stats per level. So I'm a power level freak, what can I do.
As for WL1, I was overjoyed when my party of four (at the begining) run into Shadowclaw and only one member left standing, with my most badass chick being SERious and this still standing party member was not only able to improve her to UNConcious but also gained 1 point in Medic!
I wouldn't really want pure use-skills based system, but that's me.

[StarkeRealm]

Honestly, STALKER eschewed levels, and for that matter character customization. Call of Pripyat is still unmistakably an RPG, but it does so without a level system. It's certainly a viable option. Characters are mostly similar except for their items, where the real customization comes in, but I'm not sure if that would be terribly satisfying, in a full on RPG like Wasteland 2.

[Color Blotch]

Levels exist whether you put the number on the screen or not. Every system has them. Levels are a rating of a character's power, whether you call it Level 10, or you add up the total skill points the character has, they both result in the same thing.

Whether you gain 1,000xps, gain a level and get a skill point, or you get 1,000xps and gain a skill point, it's the same system. One of them just shows you the overall number and the other hides it from you.

Whether you cap levels, or cap skills, it's the same effect.

Use-based systems also tend to be extremely highly exploitable, as The Elder Scrolls has consistently shown us. Throw a fireball at a tree for 4 hours, and suddenly you're the best battlemage in the world. Even their attempts to solve that problem consistently failed to do so, it's trivial to exploit Oblivion to get optimal results with each level.

Use-based systems encourage "Playing the game mechanics" a great deal more than any level based system. In a level based system, I make concious choices in how I want to spend my points, and then just play the game. In a use based system, I figure out the optimal pattern to gaining the maximum number of skills and adjust my playing to exploit that. Like TES: Shoot critter with magic once, block one of his attacks once, then hit him with a sword once, gaining the optimal "Experience" in my skills with each fight. Always make sure I'm running, press space bar every few seconds to jump, etc. A Use-based system is far more about "Playing the game mechanics" than a level based system.

I don't particularly care either way, but in honesty, use-based systems are consistently more broken, and consistently encourage grinding to a much higher degree than a level based system.

I can sign under every word here. And even if you try to ignore the skill system altogether and just play without concerning yourself with doing an optimal build, the level scaling system will come back to bite you when you find you physically cannot move around the map anymore because now it's filled with minotaurs and what not all because you mixed too many potions.

[Game_Exile]

There is a similar thread in the game mechanics forum here. I'd like elaborate on a point I made in that thread.

You can have any sort of system to represent the power of your party, but it won't be all that interesting if there's nothing, in the long term, so to speak, that works against your gaining power. This is the reason why people are so drawn to the idea that Brian Fargo mentioned, of having something like a rival party that is doing the same things you are. They want something to challenge them and push them to be stronger, smarter, and more efficient in the long term (this is what rivals do in real life). A timer/deadline on your main quests like in Fallout 1, is the simplest way to do this. Having e.g. a rival party or a bunch of factions "actively" working against you would be a more complex and interesting way of doing this (in actuality, this works out to being just a more complex network of timers/deadlines with triggers, but that's beside the point).

The mechanics the devs use to represent party power should be designed with the long term obstacles in mind. And the long term obstacles need to be more interesting, which is the same thing as saying more challenging than just scaling up the stats of the monsters you kill in tactical combat. They need to be more complex!

There are (lol) "deeper, more philosophical" reasons why so many videogames get harder, the further you get in the game, and I DO feel like getting into them. In short, it is because players want to get better at a game, in order to increase their power over it. And when they improve, they want more challenges to push them to get even better. This is what drives things forward (lol), and why the highest things in life are so refined and narrow (like the sciences, all the way up until post-modernity, luulz).

In an RPG, a player should improve and "increase their power" by understanding more and more about how the game "world" works, and how to take advantage of it. This is boring if the game world actually works in a way that's just willy-nilly and random like in so many CRPGs. Sure, they all pretend to work in complex, organized, and interesting ways through superficial representations, or "setting". But people who are not, themselves, stupidly superficial (runaway imaginations, lol) can easily see how shallow the facsimile is. What RPG developers should be doing is adding more and more complex and interesting (and well represented!) game mechanics into and underneath the facsimile (i.e. depth).

[Phaederuss]

Please no use based system, that is all.

[Bad Santa]

What RPG developers should be doing is adding more and more complex and interesting (and well represented!) game mechanics into and underneath the facsimile (i.e. depth).

I agree with that. I also agree that use based systems can lead to massive gridning. I used to play Ultima Online and people would literally download macro apps to raise their skills. Saved HOURS of repeating absolutly identical key strokes. BUT on the other hand THE problem with level scaling and waiting for ages before you can use that haxxor gun that you ACTUALLY have but can't use because you're not at the right level is because of LEVELS. Levels are artificial. That's it. Playing by the rules in a single player game is like hiding in a closet to eat fat free yogurt. I mean nobody cares if you're doing something nobody finds anything wrong with. I mean casting fireballs at a tree in the TES games is probably the result of eating paint chips or buying "hash" from some guy with a mullet. Hit ~ and type something like "setskill destruction 100". Or just pick up the construction set and write up your own class and race and starsign and drop yourself a chest full of uberlewt right outside the jail door.

The problem with levels is that they are almost always tied to some kind of character template whereas if you do NOT raise certain skills you're toast past a certain level. I ran into that problem with LEVEL scaling in the TES games where I had to stop playing a character precisely because it was too generalized and had leveled too far and would get constantly killed. Or in NWN where you could choose a character class and there you are, on rails with very little leeway for customization. I like to experiment. I like to do it all. I like to play a sniper/theif/medic/tank... But you can't do that if the game gets ahead of you with level scaling, or if you get tied down by being forced to stick your points into some skill or another. I LOVE usebased skill sets but the problem with grinding is that they usually rise too slowly so grinding is necessary.

[Drool]

That's not a fair comparison. MMO's are grinding simulators. They have to be to fill the hundreds of hours people will play them. Goes all the way back to the earliest MUDs.

Wasteland had use based and it worked just fine. Mainly because it wasn't based on 100. Once you get a basic skill to 7 or an advanced (non-combat) skill to 3 or 4, you're pretty much done. That's expert mastery. And some advanced skills were sufficient with a single point. There's no need to grind. Your weapon skills will hit level 7 just through normal progression through the game.

[Vaeliorin]

The only reason why it takes 4 hours of fireballing trees to become the best battlemage in the world is because, in real life, it would take 10,000 hours of practice and learning to become a master at something.

The problem isn't the 4 hours...it's the fact that you can become the best battlemage in the world by casting fireballs at trees.

To my mind, in any learn-by-use system, you should only have the potential to gain points in a skill when failing at the task has a consequence. Thus, no gaining ranks in skills for attacking trees, or standing in one place jumping up and down, or swimming endlessly into a dam by setting a weight on your w key while you go watch TV or read a book.

Anyway, I don't care about levels one way or the other. Levels, spending xp directly on skill upgrades, a good learn by doing system...all of them are fine with me.

[Drool]

What's the difference between fireballing a tree and fireballing a goblin 100 feet away? People don't become marksmen by shooting people, they do it by shooting targets.

No, what was silly in Oblivion was becoming an expert battlemage by casting fireball on yourself.

[Ronin73]

The problem with levels is that they are almost always tied to some kind of character template whereas if you do NOT raise certain skills you're toast past a certain level. I ran into that problem with LEVEL scaling in the TES games where I had to stop playing a character precisely because it was too generalized and had leveled too far and would get constantly killed. Or in NWN where you could choose a character class and there you are, on rails with very little leeway for customization. I like to experiment. I like to do it all. I like to play a sniper/theif/medic/tank... But you can't do that if the game gets ahead of you with level scaling, or if you get tied down by being forced to stick your points into some skill or another. I LOVE usebased skill sets but the problem with grinding is that they usually rise too slowly so grinding is necessary.

What you find a problem is what I consider great about old school gaming. The fact that you take a specialized character in something like NWN, complete it, then play again with a different character and have a different experience on the next play through. TES offers an idiot proof, mundane skill system where you can pretty much master every freaking skill in the game with a bit of work, which at the end of it all offers next to no replay value because after every play through you pretty much end up with the same character. I like a system that offers choices for my character development not a system that encourages a jack of all trades character.

Sorry for the rant as it is a little off topic I just feel this is something that has been largely lost by so called computer role playing games today.

Overall there really isn't much value in comparing a skill system used in a single character game like TES and a party based system like Wasteland.