4 ms·

Both game designers and role-players thought that D&D-style game mechanics were obsolete. Instead of classes and levels, popular RPG systems of the time had yo

Both game designers and role-players thought that D&D-style game mechanics were obsolete. Instead of classes and levels, popular RPG systems of the time had you develop each skill independently. Some options could only be taken at character creation. A common solution was a pool of character creation points that could be used for magic, other special abilities, status and wealth, or additional points in abilities and skills. Combat systems focused on injuries over abstract hit points and were often more deadly than in D&D. Mostly to emphasize the narrative impact of combat.

chongli 2y ago
Japanese game designers, such as the creators of the Final Fantasy series, were inspired by D&D (having been avid players themselves) and they leaned pretty hard into the class-based, experience-based, level-based, and HP-based mechanical systems. While western RPG designers might have abandoned such ideas in the late 80s / early 90s the arrival of JRPGs for Nintendo consoles, translated into English, brought up a whole new generation of players who loved these more mechanically rich systems. By the late 90s D&D experienced a major revival with the release of Baldur’s Gate. I believe the popularity of JRPGs among western gamers went a long way to prove that there was a market for these D&D-style games. So it may have been the case, as you said, that game designers and players (in the west) lost interest in these games but it was only a temporary dip. Even if TSR had disappeared without fanfare the JRPG market had already been established, so this style of gameplay was not in any danger of disappearing.
- djur 2y ago
  Non-level systems showed up in JRPGs and CRPGs, too. Just like in tabletop, they carved out a decent foothold without ever completely defeating level systems. If anything, you'd think that more flexible systems would be more attractive on a computer, but people just seem to like levels and classes.
  - chongli 2y ago
    I think the issue with computer (and console) RPGs is that they tend to have a very rigid goal state which leads players to want to optimize. Game systems that are more open-ended on the character development front can then suffer from “first order optimal” strategies: players experiment a bit until they find one thing that works well and then never deviate from it. Class-based systems, on the other hand, at least break up the FOO strategies into a few separate lanes which give players multiple opportunities to try different things. I think in general, open-ended systems suffer when they present the player with too many options all at once and it’s hard to design an open-ended system which doesn’t do this. When players are overwhelmed with options they tend to go into “analysis paralysis” mode which can be a frustrating enough experience that they prefer to use a FOO strategy over revisiting that zone of complexity and confusion.
djur 2y ago
And yet classes and levels and HP have endured, far beyond D&D. Skill point systems and injury systems have their own shortcomings. One form of gameplay isn't superior to or more advanced than another. I'd argue that the concept of "obsolete" gameplay is itself archaic.

chongli 2y ago

Japanese game designers, such as the creators of the Final Fantasy series, were inspired by D&D (having been avid players themselves) and they leaned pretty hard into the class-based, experience-based, level-based, and HP-based mechanical systems. While western RPG designers might have abandoned such ideas in the late 80s / early 90s the arrival of JRPGs for Nintendo consoles, translated into English, brought up a whole new generation of players who loved these more mechanically rich systems. By the late 90s D&D experienced a major revival with the release of Baldur’s Gate. I believe the popularity of JRPGs among western gamers went a long way to prove that there was a market for these D&D-style games. So it may have been the case, as you said, that game designers and players (in the west) lost interest in these games but it was only a temporary dip. Even if TSR had disappeared without fanfare the JRPG market had already been established, so this style of gameplay was not in any danger of disappearing.

djur 2y ago
Non-level systems showed up in JRPGs and CRPGs, too. Just like in tabletop, they carved out a decent foothold without ever completely defeating level systems. If anything, you'd think that more flexible systems would be more attractive on a computer, but people just seem to like levels and classes.
- chongli 2y ago
  I think the issue with computer (and console) RPGs is that they tend to have a very rigid goal state which leads players to want to optimize. Game systems that are more open-ended on the character development front can then suffer from “first order optimal” strategies: players experiment a bit until they find one thing that works well and then never deviate from it. Class-based systems, on the other hand, at least break up the FOO strategies into a few separate lanes which give players multiple opportunities to try different things. I think in general, open-ended systems suffer when they present the player with too many options all at once and it’s hard to design an open-ended system which doesn’t do this. When players are overwhelmed with options they tend to go into “analysis paralysis” mode which can be a frustrating enough experience that they prefer to use a FOO strategy over revisiting that zone of complexity and confusion.

djur 2y ago

And yet classes and levels and HP have endured, far beyond D&D. Skill point systems and injury systems have their own shortcomings. One form of gameplay isn't superior to or more advanced than another. I'd argue that the concept of "obsolete" gameplay is itself archaic.