   RPGs: Full customization or fixed characters?
  I am in a team and we are aiming to make an RPG. We are still at the brainstorming step, but it's going well. We have a cool story, cool characters, good music and all... However, for the actual game, there is one point we really don't agree and I'd like to have the opinion of the community. The game will play mostly like JRPGs, but this could apply to WRPGs and probably MMORPGs too.It is concerning how the characters would be raised. I want to give players great freedom and flexibility on how they "build" their characters. For example, I plan on giving healing magic to the main characters, but players would be able to teach healing spells to other characters if they want to use the main character for other purposes. I want them to be able to adapt their characters with their play style. This isn't to say that every character would be generic though. There would be many differences amongst them, and I would make sure they are meaningful enough, I just don't want to dictate how every player will be raised. Some builds would be more natural to some characters, while they will be pretty bad for others. Giving a two-handed axe to a magic-oriented character would be a pretty bad idea because not only the character has sub-par strength, but it would mean putting a character with low HP, low vitality and low evasion, (and probably low defense too unless the player taught him platemail skill or something) on the front row with no shield, while that character could do much more damage with spells. Some other characters would be "jack-of-all-trades" and it would be up to the players to determine which "path" they take. I want the players to figure by themselves which build is good for a character and which isn't. On their first playthrough, they could train abilities a bit randomly and end up with sub-optimal characters, giving them trouble against many bosses. On their second playthrough, now that they know more about the system, they would put a lot more thought in how they build their characters  and breeze through the game without too much trouble. The player would learn too, not just the in-game characters! It's good for replay value.Well... here's the thing: my teammates really don't care about that kind of system and would like to implement a rigid system that leaves little place for customization, in which each character having his or her own weapons, armors and skillsets, with a pretty linear growth. And forget about dual-wielding and 2-handed weapons, everyone has his own weapon class so we might as well remove the distinction. If you're sick of having to bring that cleric dead weight everytime you know the next boss will need good healing, you'd better know some assembly 'cuz you aren't allowed to! I think that is pretty lame. I think the players like to have their word to say in what a characters does in a fight. The artist, in particular, would want that kind of rigid system. I can understand his point of view because he loves to design weapons, and he designs weapons that are customized for a character's story and personality, but I don't think it is worth sacrificing gameplay for that. Besides, I'm pretty proud of our cast of character and I really don't think they absolutely need a customized weapon to define who they are. This isn't a fighting game! My teammates also say that a customizable system would make all characters more generic and less distinct. Can't say it wouldn't; of course, if all characters share a bunch of skills, they will be closer to each other, but I'm not speaking about making them carbon copies of the next one. (ie: not like FF12)My design philosophy is more like "Hmm... This character could make a good caster, but raise her as you see fit." If the player hates playing casters and wants to raise all characters as warriors anyway, so be it, it's his party and he may play as he wants. Not like there won't be ooze-like monsters... *cackle*Well, that's pretty much it. I'm asking you, what kind of design philosophy do you like better? More customization and freedom on how you raise and use your characters (but with a few significant differences between the characters so they keep some uniqueness) or making all characters completely unique with absolutely no sharing of skill and weapons between characters?   
  Depends on the game. I don't think a rigid characters system has to be a problem. And I suppose that in certain games, adding those choices might be adding too much.In RPGs, in general, yeah, I like having some choices when building my characters. But if half of those choices are sub-optimal ones, I'd rather they weren't there. If my melee barbarian-ish person gets to pick between wielding axes and hammers, adding a wand-option to that won't make it a more interesting choice. In a story-driven game, with a set cast of characters, it might even sort of break the game (eg. having people realize that they can't beat that mid-game boss because they messed up their characters at the beginning of the game).   ;  Personally, I prefer going so far as making my own party altogether. Though having the party be a complete unknown makes for some pretty stringent storytelling limitations. *shrug* Gameplay over story any day.   ;  My preference is a fully custom player character with fixed [potential] party member characters that can be tweaked and leaned toward specific talents by the player during the game.I prefer to have party members that have real backgrounds in the game world. Even homes and families that I, as the player, can interact with. Their initial skills are also a large part of their identity to the player, so that's important to me as well. But I would also want to teach them new things as they travel with me. Finally, I also like to have the choice to swap party members on a per-mission basis, to have the perfect crew for a specific job.If you give me too much control over my party member characters, they won't feel like real people. An example of this is the typical AI selection process - turning them into obvious robots. My favorite system is the most realistic. They're their own person. They'll usually do what you suggest, but usually in their own style.   ;  If it "isn't a fighting game," then why bother with this sort of character management? Personally, as a player, I don't want to spend my time figuring out which build fits which character, even if fighting is central to the game. I'd rather be figuring out how to apply those characters' various skills in a particular fight. Also, like Kest said, it breaks the illusion that they're people if you get to control everything about them.   ;  I used to love customizing my character as I went through the game. However, all too often I would find that I made "bad choices" without any way to redistribute my skill points. Now I find myself hording them all until the last possible minute or saving a million times in case my idea of a cool character didn't match with the designer's.So I would say that if you allow customization, allow re-customization too.   ;Quote:Original post by darkpegasusI used to love customizing my character as I went through the game. However, all too often I would find that I made "bad choices" without any way to redistribute my skill points. Now I find myself hording them all until the last possible minute or saving a million times in case my idea of a cool character didn't match with the designer's.So I would say that if you allow customization, allow re-customization too.That's a pretty serious problem in just about all games with character development. I don't think there would be any way to let the player undo changes after they've had sufficient time to test them without ruining certain aspects of the leveling system.Some players actually see this entire problem as one of the main attractions to character development. Tweaking the perfect warrior is often what it's all about. But I think the best design would find some way to allow devoting time to do this without starting the game over each time. Unfortunately, I don't know what that best design is.   ;Quote:Original post by LogodaeIf it "isn't a fighting game," then why bother with this sort of character management? Personally, as a player, I don't want to spend my time figuring out which build fits which character, even if fighting is central to the game. I'd rather be figuring out how to apply those characters' various skills in a particular fight. Also, like Kest said, it breaks the illusion that they're people if you get to control everything about them.This is pretty significant.  I think in any system you choose, strike a balance.  Character building should be fun and meaningful, and never tedious.  Ever.  When it starts to need microscopic attention, it's headed in the wrong direction.  Sure, make it so that hardcore players have access to maximum tweakage, while making it so that players who just want to dive in can do so effectively without being a mathematician or engineer.Also, the more you complicate the character advancement system, the more time and resources will need to be spent on on development and balancing.  If you've got the time and resource, i say make it as flexible and customizable as necessary without the tedium.Diablo did this very well.  No healer/tank/cc classes really.  Everyone was designed to kill.  However a sorceress could wield axes and plate as long as she trained enough points in strength.  In that way, while strength wasn't a desirable stat for a sorc, it definitely allowed players maximum flexability and the capability to literally use any item in the game regardless of class.  It's also worth noting that the class skill trees in that game were extremely forgiving and flexible; you literally could have the best of most worlds with 99 skill points to allot into around ~50 (dont quote me) or spells.  It was a very flexible skill system, with a little rigidity. And it worked.I'd say stick to meaningful character building options.  If it's not essential to progression and entertainment, it's not likely worth implementing.  While immersion is important, thats not the kind of thing you want to force.   ;Quote:Original post by KestI don't think there would be any way to let the player undo changes after they've had sufficient time to test them without ruining certain aspects of the leveling system.Why not have the game adjust itself based on what character skills and attributes you build.  For example if a character is bulking up on magic defense, have the enemy use more magic attacks.  Of course this needs to be done in such a way that it is not noticeably obvious to the player so it doesn't frustrate them when leveling up.   ;  Well... one thing that came to mind was Final Fantasy 6.  Each character has its own stats (and stat growth, I assume), and its own special skill.  So each character started out as something, but you did have the option of helping them in a different direction.  The swordsman with no magic skill, given enough time, and the right equipment (Esper) could raise his magic skill to a sufficient level, while maintaining his swordfighting, albeit sub-par compared to if you had focused  on it, but now he's a hybrid.  Just take it to the next level.  Giving characters a pre-set stat allotment and "class" allows you to use some of those things in your storytelling.  Just allow things to be changed/enhanced by the player.  Make it so I can turn my pure fighter into a decent hybrid, my thief into a speedy caster, and my balanced, even hybrid into an all out war machine + 1/2 dozen useful, tank-like spells.  That way, you can give a player his/her characters, and they can build them or allow them to grow in a way that's predetermined, but if they want to change things, perhaps on a second time through, they can.  Or if they don't like casters, they can do whatever your system allows that they grow stronger and be more warrior-like.  Basically preset, predetermined classes (Strengths/weakness combinations) with undefined growth.  Allows for customization, not creation (ie not a blank slate).  Not sure if it works with your other ideas, but it's my suggestion/ideas.   