Shotguns and leather armor versus futuristic arsenal

[Solomize]

Could be a "what to include/avoid"-kind of topic, but I will try to explain what I mean in a "mood" view.

If I remember correctly, Wasteland had some futuristic settings at some place, with sentient robots and laser guns or such. Fallout had plenty of it. It is alright. What troubles me is how it quickly becomes a mandatory tier. The game(s) kept being fun, but from a "mood" perspective, it lost something, I think. How could I describe it ? it is about counting your spared shotgun shells while sweating in your patched leather jacket. Sun, dust and crass. Bold Cassidy covering you while you hide behind a corner, the smell of gunpowder, blood and pissed whiskey.

And then : Power armor. Energy weapons. So clean, so effective, so hygienic. Surely, it adds something in terms of game mechanics (using metal armor against energy weapons, etc), but, not that immersive. You giant mechwarrior. Some impersonal 400 pounds robot fighting supermutants, Enclave exo-skeletons or else. Then you find yourself in one of those streets where "real" people are (workers and poor people, prostitutes, farmers, merchants, gamblers, assholes and good guys without integral helmets, much closer to what you were). And... some of the magic is gone.

[Bushbaby]

Solomize, I couldn´t agree with you more. "Post apocalypse" in gaming have had the unfortunate tendency to become mixed up with "sci-fi". These are two different genres altogether.

One thing that bothered me in Fallout 1&2 was the amount of firepower needed to take out an opponent. A heavy, gun powder handgun hardly killed a human with one shot. A 9mm pistol had virtually no stopping power unless you aimed for the eyes.

What I like about post-apocalypse is just what you point out, makeshift armor, counting every bullet and being able to dress cool!

I have played every Fallout game until the point I start wearing some weird "knights of the round table"-armor with tubes in it. When I no longer can recognize my character, I loose interest.

[Harpo]

I agree 100% and I might be able to help you describe it:

You envisage your characters to look cool, like this:


What they end up looking like in mid-game is this:


And I'm not talking about one of your guys looking like that, but the entire squad. All the diversities and all the characteristics are lost. The guy you imagined being the hardened combat medic that proud himself in being close to the nature and being able to survive in the wasteland on his own is suddenly turned into a mechanized combat platform instead of a cool guy in leather jacket, cowboy hat and shotgun and wild grown beard. Your sniper? Same. Your Technician? Same.

Give all types of gear both advantages and disadvantages so the diversity helps selling the story of the wasteland. I do not imagine my ranger squad being 4 identical mechanized dudes with heavy machine guns (yeah, didn't I mention that? The heavy machine gun is the best weapon in the game. Not subjectively, but objectively. It does the most damage, it is as light as a pistol, as flexible as a sub-machine guns and has the accuracy of a sniper rifle*).

*I'm not saying it is in WL1, but that's a common scenario in many games. One tier of equipment becomes automatically obsolete with the next tier.

[Toadvine]

I just want to chime in here. Please 'o' please do not make a "Superior" armor type. When you have that kind of thing in your game it nearly eliminates all role playing aspects. I remember the one thing in Fallout that always bothered me is that in order to justify the continued use of leather armor was forced role playing aspects. I think in order to maintain the mood of the game there should be advantages to wearing all kinds of armors. As was posted before, a party wearing full power armor removes the feel of the game.

[krellen]

Wearing leather armour when you have power armour available is stupid and deserves to get you killed.

Some things actually are better than others, and having a bunch of Wastelanders running around in leather jackets instead of kevlar vests or suits "cause it's cool" is misguided at best.

[Toadvine]

Wearing leather armour when you have power armour available is stupid and deserves to get you killed.

Some things actually are better than others, and having a bunch of Wastelanders running around in leather jackets instead of kevlar vests or suits "cause it's cool" is misguided at best.

We're talking about a role playing game here. Also, it's not about "cause it's cool". Medium armor such as Kevlar vests could decrease speed and mobility ratings. Leather armor, while having low defense, could have increased mobility and speed. There needs to be room for role playing or else you defeat the purpose. While you may think wearing leather instead of a massive metal armored suit is stupid, some of us are looking for a different feel.

Just look at these iconic images:







Now imagine replacing their leather armor with metal power armor and Kevlar.

[Harpo]

No. It is not stupid. You look for the qualities of those other armors. However, these qualities are often "left out" in games due to cost, laziness or other reasons. Heavy armor is available today but not worn by the majority of the soldiers. These armies value flexibility instead of the extra protection. This kind of encumbering armor is worn by those who do not need the flexibility, like the bomb squad.

[krellen]

Mad Max and the gangs he fought didn't have access to anything more protective than leather. Wanting to look like Mad Max because it's iconic is "because it's cool".

[Harpo]

You do know this is a role-playing game, right?

[Toadvine]

Mad Max and the gangs he fought didn't have access to anything more protective than leather. Wanting to look like Mad Max because it's iconic is "because it's cool".

Isn't "because it's cool" part of role playing? I isn't the idea to maintain the image you have set in your head. I think there are justifiable ways to implement wearing different types of armor, but you're looking for many flavors of vanilla. I'm sure it would not make the best sense to have melee characters, the use of crossbows, but I think they would all add flavor. I don't think for a video game to be great it's required to be steeped in hard realism. Michael Stackpole the writer of the game has a background in Star Wars which featured laser swords as the superior weapon to laser rifles.

[krellen]

You do know this is a role-playing game, right?

And this is relevant how? My role-playing games aren't games of "dress up the hero" (well, okay, the superhero ones are, but that's another matter). My Paladins don't run around in chain mail because it's cool. My barbarians don't restrict themselves to leather because that's the image I have in my head. My Vault Dweller doesn't wear his vault suit while battling Super Mutants, and my Rangers don't wear leather when they have access to Kevlar.

[Toadvine]

You do know this is a role-playing game, right?

And this is relevant how? My role-playing games aren't games of "dress up the hero" (well, okay, the superhero ones are, but that's another matter). My Paladins don't run around in chain mail because it's cool. My barbarians don't restrict themselves to leather because that's the image I have in my head. My Vault Dweller doesn't wear his vault suit while battling Super Mutants, and my Rangers don't wear leather when they have access to Kevlar.

Yes, but you almost made my point for me. Different classes of wastelander could have less or more Armour depending on class/weapon use. Take fore example the Scottish archer:



No armor, for high mobility.



Simo Haya AKA "White Death" Killed 700 soviets protecting his homeland. No armor.

I think your idea of what is "realistic" is flawed, but even if it wansn't it doesn't matter. This is a role playing game after all.

[krellen]

Wasteland doesn't have classes. Everyone's a Ranger.

[Harpo]

You do know this is a role-playing game, right?

And this is relevant how? My role-playing games aren't games of "dress up the hero" (well, okay, the superhero ones are, but that's another matter). My Paladins don't run around in chain mail because it's cool. My barbarians don't restrict themselves to leather because that's the image I have in my head. My Vault Dweller doesn't wear his vault suit while battling Super Mutants, and my Rangers don't wear leather when they have access to Kevlar.

It is relevant because in a role playing game you want to have choices that shapes the character(s) you play. When you start taking away those choices (be it in dialogue, equipment, characteristics) it becomes less and less of a role-playing game. To give the player a choice but let bad game mechanics give unrealistic advantages/rewards for only one of them is a kind of pseudo-choice, which is as close to no choice you can get.

I think this is just a matter of how much of a role-player you are. While you would probably have you ranger team wear the pink bunny-suits if they had the highest protection value, some would not.

[Harpo]

Wasteland doesn't have classes. Everyone's a Ranger.

This is really starting to smell like trolling. Either that, lack to understand someones' point, or arguments run dry and the urge to get the last word is too high

I'll try to elaborate a bit. While all your player-made characters are rangers, they still have functions within the group that create the group dynamics. They don't have the same skills. It is not likely that all these functions within the group would benefit from wearing power armor. In fact, for some functions it would probably be a disadvantage to wear one.
When all those disadvantages does not make it to the game, it takes away from the role playing experience.

[krellen]

It is relevant because in a role playing game you want to have choices that shapes the character(s) you play.

Sorry, "choice" is not the defining element of a role-playing game. Especially not in the realm of computerised role-playing games. RPGs are defined by your character's skill determining the success of your actions, not the player's skill.

Any game can have choices - FPS are full of choices, especially in the realm of gear.

[Toadvine]

It is relevant because in a role playing game you want to have choices that shapes the character(s) you play.

Sorry, "choice" is not the defining element of a role-playing game. Especially not in the realm of computerised role-playing games. RPGs are defined by your character's skill determining the success of your actions, not the player's skill.

Any game can have choices - FPS are full of choices, especially in the realm of gear.

How is choice not the major defining aspect of role-playing games? It's been that way since pen and paper D&D and was a major part of Wasteland, Fallout, and Fallout 2. Choice was everything. Maybe not in JRPGs or other linear story driven rpgs, but without choice I wouldn't classify it as a true western crpg.

[CookieEatingHuskarl]

1) Make a group of 4 identical grunts.
2) Wear power armor and use LMG.
3) ????????????
4) Profit.

[Harpo]

It is relevant because in a role playing game you want to have choices that shapes the character(s) you play.

Sorry, "choice" is not the defining element of a role-playing game. Especially not in the realm of computerised role-playing games. RPGs are defined by your character's skill determining the success of your actions, not the player's skill.

Any game can have choices - FPS are full of choices, especially in the realm of gear.

Oh, sorry. I didn't realize I said "defining element of a role-playing game". I'll rephrase that:

"in a role playing game you want to have choices"

There, now I got it right (hopefully).

So, the skills that determine the success of your actions defines and RPG. What if Wasteland 2 implemented 2 skills that where so overpowering and important for you to complete the game that you basically had to max them, leaving no points for other skills and making your characters near identical and generic. Would that lack of real choice add to, or take away from your role playing experience?

[krellen]

How is choice not the major defining aspect of role-playing games?

I already answered you in the post you quoted. I'll narrow it down for you:

Any game can have choices - FPS are full of choices, especially in the realm of gear.

Something that is duplicated throughout several genres by definition cannot "define" a single genre.

JRPGs and WRPGs are all still RPGs, and the unifying design between them - the defining characteristic - is character ability trumping player ability. No other genre of game has that feature.