PDA

View Full Version : Should CRPG Paladins be completely exempt from falling?



taltamir
2010-04-12, 03:10 PM
CRPG DnD Games need an option to make paladins unable to fall.

that would basically "trust" the player to roleplay his alignment honestly and will not penalize him/her for the developers disagreeing with s/he considers to be just and morally right.

I would go so far as saying such an option should be on by default... where you have to manually select "allow paladins to fall" to even GET the option of falling based on what the game thinks of your action rather then what you yourself do.

People play games to have fun, not be slapped in the fact with the moral convictions of a game developer. Paladins are weaker then fighters, barbarians, and rangers (stronger then monks though).

Anyone playing a paladin plays it because they think it is cool and want to roleplay a person dedicated to justice. People have varying concepts of what justice and righteousness and good are, and its not the place of a video game to "correct" them or "punish" them due to it when they are playing.

EDIT:
I actually put this forth to co8, the "Temple of Elemental Evil" modding project (a DnD 3e based CRPG). Please vote there, with enough response it might be implemented.
http://www.co8.org/forum/showthread.php?t=7984

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-12, 03:15 PM
CRPG DnD Games need an option to make paladins unable to fall.

that would basically "trust" the player to roleplay his alignment honestly and will not penalize him/her for the developers disagreeing with s/he considers to be just and morally right.

I would go so far as saying such an option should be on by default... where you have to manually select "allow paladins to fall" to even GET the option of falling based on what the game thinks of your action rather then what you yourself do.

People play games to have fun, not be slapped in the fact with the moral convictions of a game developer. Paladins are weaker then fighters, barbarians, and rangers (stronger then monks though).

Anyone playing a paladin plays it because they think it is cool and want to roleplay a person dedicated to justice. People have varying concepts of what justice and righteousness and good are, and its not the place of a video game to "correct" them or "punish" them due to it when they are playing.


I don't think this is the right forum for this.
But
It realy depends on when the game was put out. Alot of older style games would penalise you for things. Look at like nethack and such. Now adays Game developers tend to make games for more casual players so there not as hard core with there rules.

shadow_archmagi
2010-04-12, 03:17 PM
I would indeed agree that having Paladins fall in a video game is a poor choice because often following the developer's train of moon logic is difficult.

IE:

Villagers: Clearly this attractive young woman is a witch!

Woman: No I am not honest

Villagers: If we leave her alive she will tell the demons where we are and they'll raid the place.

Paladin 1: I have no way of knowing whether the villagers are correct, but if they are, then stopping them from killing you is the same as killing all of them. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one.

Game 1: Oh man way to let an innocent die you fall.

Paladin 2: I will save you, damsel in distress!

Game 2: You're just saving her because she's hot. SIN OF LUST. Also, she really was a witch everyone is killed by demons.

EDIT: Extra fun is when these are your only two options and the only two responses. For example, in Knights of the Old Republic, if you help the starving beggar, Kreia will rant at you because by helping him you denied him the opportunity to become strong, and made his friends jealous of him.

If you abuse the beggar, Kreia will rant at you for pointless cruelty.

Those are your only two options.

taltamir
2010-04-12, 03:17 PM
I don't think this is the right forum for this.
But
It realy depends on when the game was put out. Alot of older style games would penalise you for things. Look at like nethack and such. Now adays Game developers tend to make games for more casual players so there not as hard core with there rules.

It isn't a matter of rules, its a matter of morality and a game.
I don't want to the game developers to comment on my moral judgement in a game. It isn't their place to judge me, its their place to provide me entertainment.

taltamir
2010-04-12, 03:19 PM
I would indeed agree that having Paladins fall in a video game is a poor choice because often following the developer's train of moon logic is difficult.

IE:

Villagers: Clearly this attractive young woman is a witch!

Woman: No I am not honest

Villagers: If we leave her alive she will tell the demons where we are and they'll raid the place.

Paladin 1: I have no way of knowing whether the villagers are correct, but if they are, then stopping them from killing you is the same as killing all of them. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one.

Game 1: Oh man way to let an innocent die you fall.

Paladin 2: I will save you, damsel in distress!

Game 2: You're just saving her because she's hot. SIN OF LUST. Also, she really was a witch everyone is killed by demons.

to name just a FEW of the possible interpretations of that situation.
Interestingly, I have had a DM ask me to justify my actions before and have occasionally surprised them with my reasoning (which was not metagaming or shallow at all, also not what they expected)

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-12, 03:20 PM
It isn't a matter of rules, its a matter of morality and a game.
I don't want to the game developers to comment on my moral judgement in a game. It isn't their place to judge me, its their place to provide me entertainment.

again thats a differentiation between old and new style..

though even newer games have a moral scale thats hard coded.
Look at Kotor, fable, etc.
Moral scales have always been hardcoded into video games.

Even NWN kinda has that with the alignment system.

Siegel
2010-04-12, 03:25 PM
EDIT: Extra fun is when these are your only two options and the only two responses. For example, in Knights of the Old Republic, if you help the starving beggar, Kreia will rant at you because by helping him you denied him the opportunity to become strong, and made his friends jealous of him.

If you abuse the beggar, Kreia will rant at you for pointless cruelty.

Those are your only two options.

But that was quite nicely done. It was not to punish you but to enforce Kreias believe that Light and Dark Side are the wrong choice. You don't get punished for doing it in a mechanical sense, the punishment is just fluff.

shadow_archmagi
2010-04-12, 03:26 PM
again thats a differentiation between old and new style..

though even newer games have a moral scale thats hard coded.
Look at Kotor, fable, etc.
Moral scales have always been hardcoded into video games.

Even NWN kinda has that with the alignment system.

True, and there are some definite cases of MOON LOGIC in those games where you get darkside/lightside points unexpectedly.

(I can't actually call any to mind, but I think there's one where I used my mind powers in somewhere rather than resort to violence, and it gave me dark side points for manipulation rather than light side for pacifism.)

The thing is though, in KOTOR you can suffer the occasional darkside point because it doesn't affect much.

PALADIN: Screw up once and you lose all.
JEDI: Screw up too many times and force powers become slightly more expensive.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-12, 03:26 PM
But that was quite nicely done. It was not to punish you but to enforce Kreias believe that Light and Dark Side are the wrong choice. You don't get punished for doing it in a mechanical sense, the punishment is just fluff.

it's been a while but didn't you gain or loose light/darkside points for picking one?

shadow_archmagi
2010-04-12, 03:29 PM
it's been a while but didn't you gain or loose light/darkside points for picking one?

You do, but the real punishment is listening to kreia rant and knowing that no matter what happens, no matter what choice you make, she will rant. Even if you leave her at home, she will break into your mind and explain why you are wrong all the time always.

Zeful
2010-04-12, 03:32 PM
I would indeed agree that having Paladins fall in a video game is a poor choice because often following the developer's train of moon logic is difficult.

IE:

Villagers: Clearly this attractive young woman is a witch!

Woman: No I am not honest

Villagers: If we leave her alive she will tell the demons where we are and they'll raid the place.

Paladin 1: I have no way of knowing whether the villagers are correct, but if they are, then stopping them from killing you is the same as killing all of them. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one.

Game 1: Oh man way to let an innocent die you fall.

Paladin 2: I will save you, damsel in distress!

Game 2: You're just saving her because she's hot. SIN OF LUST. Also, she really was a witch everyone is killed by demons.

EDIT: Extra fun is when these are your only two options and the only two responses. For example, in Knights of the Old Republic, if you help the starving beggar, Kreia will rant at you because by helping him you denied him the opportunity to become strong, and made his friends jealous of him.

If you abuse the beggar, Kreia will rant at you for pointless cruelty.

Those are your only two options.

Unless Bioware made the game, then there would be option 3: I am fighting some monsters/evil lords/what have you. Join me and prove your innocence.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-12, 03:32 PM
You do, but the real punishment is listening to kreia rant and knowing that no matter what happens, no matter what choice you make, she will rant. Even if you leave her at home, she will break into your mind and explain why you are wrong all the time always.

I'm pritty sure Paladins even in NWN didn't fall right away.

taltamir
2010-04-12, 03:34 PM
again thats a differentiation between old and new style..

though even newer games have a moral scale thats hard coded.
Look at Kotor, fable, etc.
Moral scales have always been hardcoded into video games.

Even NWN kinda has that with the alignment system.

Oh god did that ever piss me off... Fable especially was extremely OFFENSIVE to me in its moral scale. And there are tons of jokes about that one.
I wouldn't specify WHICH are offensive though because that would probably violate forum rules (don't go there either). but let me tell you it offended the hell out of me (that is ok to say by forum rules)... plus the game was designed very poorly.


But that was quite nicely done. It was not to punish you but to enforce Kreias believe that Light and Dark Side are the wrong choice. You don't get punished for doing it in a mechanical sense, the punishment is just fluff.

Exactly, she gives you a speech, she does not take away 90% of your powers.

Kylarra
2010-04-12, 03:34 PM
Meh, I don't really mind sliding scale morality the way NWN/2 or various other systems do it, provided that there are enough ways to earn back your "positive" points. Not a huge fan about gotcha Rube Goldsberg-esque fall scenarios, but hey, that's what quicksaves are for.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-12, 03:37 PM
Oh god did that ever piss me off... Fable especially was extremely OFFENSIVE to me in its moral scale. And there are tons of jokes about that one.
I wouldn't specify WHICH are offensive though because that would probably violate forum rules (don't go there either). but let me tell you it offended the hell out of me (that is ok to say by forum rules)... plus the game was designed very poorly.



Realy? that blows. I thought the game was well made. However I knew it wasn't going to do very well for the similar reasons why morrowind and other games like that don't do well.

I havn't heard of any one being offended by it, nor did any one seem to protest it atleast not around where i am.

taltamir
2010-04-12, 03:38 PM
True, and there are some definite cases of MOON LOGIC in those games where you get darkside/lightside points unexpectedly.

(I can't actually call any to mind, but I think there's one where I used my mind powers in somewhere rather than resort to violence, and it gave me dark side points for manipulation rather than light side for pacifism.)

The thing is though, in KOTOR you can suffer the occasional darkside point because it doesn't affect much.

PALADIN: Screw up once and you lose all.
JEDI: Screw up too many times and force powers become slightly more expensive.

Moon logic all over the place...
Jade Empire failed hard in this respect, they set up way of open hand and closed fist very well, wrote them out exceptionally... and then completely disregarded it and used ham fisted "pure unadulterated evil and meanness" vs "altruistic to a fault".

And the arcanum "gnome conspiracy" thing? rape, genetic experiments, etc... You can't do squat about it despite having the ears of the most powerful RULERS of nations in the world (and being godlike in magical power yourself) and killing them turns you evil because they are marked as "good". That caused a whole lot of rage quitting there.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-12, 03:40 PM
And the arcanum "gnome conspiracy" thing? rape, genetic experiments, etc... You can't do squat about it despite having the ears of the most powerful RULERS of nations in the world (and being godlike in magical power yourself) and killing them turns you evil because they are marked as "good". That caused a whole lot of rage quitting there.
Wasn't that patched. I do remember that being rediculous.

RiOrius
2010-04-12, 03:42 PM
I don't think CRPG Paladins should be completely immune to falling, especially not by default.

If there is a problem with the game wherein it's too easy to fall accidentally, fix that problem (make it take more than one mistake, make it clear to the player what is considered Good and what is considered Evil). But don't take out the entire concept of having to maintain good moral standing.

taltamir
2010-04-12, 03:44 PM
Realy? that blows. I thought the game was well made. However I knew it wasn't going to do very well for the similar reasons why morrowind and other games like that don't do well.

I havn't heard of any one being offended by it, nor did any one seem to protest it atleast not around where i am.

Are you kidding? even if you disregard the moral issues the game was crap.
They tauted "choice" but your choices were riddiculous evil vs absurd purity.
People loved or hated you based on clothes, so if you dress nice everyone proposes (and your spouse is a cheating whore/manwhore, always... who gives you babies of all colors of the rainbow).
I took a quest to woo some girl... well, I just did it so i don't have to run back if i want to take it later... In ever needed to talk to her, I WALKED by her and my expensive clothes made her fall in love with me and offer engagement, now the game was stuck with only two options "complete the quest by marrying her" or "complete the quest by breaking her heart"... so i got myself my first wife of the game...

then there was the ridiculous finale... CHOOSE!
EVIL: More gold then you have ever seen! 1 million! (I had 2.6 million in cash and twice that in investments).
Neutral: Resurrect your family and dog who were killed last month, and ONLY them.
Good: Resurrect every single of the countless tens of thousands who were killed in the tower of evil over the past ~50 years...

Gee if I can resurrect countless can't I resurrect my family plus countless - family? And couldn't an evil person would choose to resurrect countless because he doesn't care about his family and would rather use the gratitude and heroic stature granted by doing so to forcibly seize control of the government crowning himself king? actually, lets just cut to the chance and wish myself to be immortal, a king, ultimate magical power or any countless USEFUL wishes... bah.

taltamir
2010-04-12, 03:47 PM
I'm pritty sure Paladins even in NWN didn't fall right away.

In NWN you got points.. out of 100, drop below a certain value and your alignment changes... paladin fell for changing alignment... where 50 is neutral, 100 pure good, 0 pure evil. And they were CAPPED at those values

Murdering innocents was usually only -5 on alignment, stealing might be -1 or -2 to Law vs Chaos...
You could easily exploit the mechanic but it was at least somewhat sensibly implemented... and if you had a "whoopsie" you didn't immediately get messed up...

but the actual things had plenty of moon logic.. being nice is good, mean is evil. Risking your life to save a baby is ok, but ask for more reward and its evil. Do it for free and its extra good... (so if you murdered a bunch of people, go do some simple quests for free)


Meh, I don't really mind sliding scale morality the way NWN/2 or various other systems do it, provided that there are enough ways to earn back your "positive" points. Not a huge fan about gotcha Rube Goldsberg-esque fall scenarios, but hey, that's what quicksaves are for.

yes, at least then you don't get hit as hard per issue.. but its still infuriating to see that -X alignment for an action you believe to be good. it just isn't as penalizing, but it isn't coming from a CHARACTER, its coming from the game ENGINE... this makes it worse...

Bioware got better about it... the Mass Effect model is nice, so is the dragon age model.
If ashly williams disapproves thats ok, she isn't the only person on the team.


I don't think CRPG Paladins should be completely immune to falling, especially not by default.

If there is a problem with the game wherein it's too easy to fall accidentally, fix that problem (make it take more than one mistake, make it clear to the player what is considered Good and what is considered Evil). But don't take out the entire concept of having to maintain good moral standing.

A good moral standing according to whom? If I do something that is totally just and moral in my opinion in a GAME who are THEY to tell me "you are wrong"?
Saying "just don't have moon logic trap falls" is easy, but in reality they are found in almost every game that has the concept. Because lets face it, game developers are not exactly world class philosophers.

taltamir
2010-04-12, 03:52 PM
PS. I would really appreciate it if people followed the link:
http://www.co8.org/forum/showthread.php?t=7984
and voted on this.

Nero24200
2010-04-12, 04:10 PM
The problem with trusting the code of conduct to the player is that you're assuming the player and the DM will have the exact same idea of what is good/not good/evil.

I've played with a few different groups, and in one group I've even been playing for about...I think it's 7 years now? Even then, we still have the occasional debate about what we think certain actions come under. Granted, the longer people seem to play with a particular group, the less debates there will be, but there will still be debates.

On the same hand however, I don't think the default good is the best way to go. Personally, I would prefer a system where the code is divivded into sections, and you simply have to follow X number of sections, like vows maybe. It would mean different paladins have different codes, but it also means the players would have clear-cut rules about what's acceptable and what isn't (since if one aspect is ambigious, it's easier for the DM to just say "Don't pick that one").

Edit: Wait sorry, is Circle of Eight an online game? In that case, drop the code, drop it hard and fast. Paladin codes are already considered problematic in Pen'n'Paper...where the DM is able to view every action taken and discuss with the players at lengh. Online, it's a different story. I've seen paladins fall for being attacked or because online DM's have "heard" that the paladin was doing un-paladin like things (even without evidence).

If someone decides to be a little antagonistic and make paladins fall willy-nilly, it becomes far easier to acheive online.

shadow_archmagi
2010-04-12, 04:15 PM
I mean, it's this way with any new group. Every DM will at some point present a scenario to the players and then the players will pick the "wrong" option and he'll start spouting moon logic.


For example, I had a Shadowrun DM complain about us "Constantly weaseling out of every fight." The party exclaimed that this is Shadowrun and that attracting attention is bad by default, and furthermore, we were waiting for them to take us to their leader! Fighting random henchmen in the street is much less productive than finding their HQ and killing everyone there. We were hired to INVESTIGATE the assassination.

The difference is that after a week or so the DM and the PCs change their standards and get used to each other and agree on what is what.

A CRPG can't be asked to explain reasoning or made to see your point of view.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-12, 04:22 PM
Are you kidding? even if you disregard the moral issues the game was crap.
They tauted "choice" but your choices were riddiculous evil vs absurd purity.
People loved or hated you based on clothes, so if you dress nice everyone proposes (and your spouse is a cheating whore/manwhore, always... who gives you babies of all colors of the rainbow).
I took a quest to woo some girl... well, I just did it so i don't have to run back if i want to take it later... In ever needed to talk to her, I WALKED by her and my expensive clothes made her fall in love with me and offer engagement, now the game was stuck with only two options "complete the quest by marrying her" or "complete the quest by breaking her heart"... so i got myself my first wife of the game...

then there was the ridiculous finale... CHOOSE!
EVIL: More gold then you have ever seen! 1 million! (I had 2.6 million in cash and twice that in investments).
Neutral: Resurrect your family and dog who were killed last month, and ONLY them.
Good: Resurrect every single of the countless tens of thousands who were killed in the tower of evil over the past ~50 years...

Gee if I can resurrect countless can't I resurrect my family plus countless - family? And couldn't an evil person would choose to resurrect countless because he doesn't care about his family and would rather use the gratitude and heroic stature granted by doing so to forcibly seize control of the government crowning himself king? actually, lets just cut to the chance and wish myself to be immortal, a king, ultimate magical power or any countless USEFUL wishes... bah.

Hmm never happened to me. I played neutral the first time through then good then evil. as that is generally how i run through those types of games. I do agree that they did go to the two extremes of good and evil which for the setting and the feel of the game i can understand that. Kinda going for a fairytale/classic fantasy type game.

Though when good and evil are involved in a game generally game developers are more inclined to go with extremes and stereotypes. I know there are exceptions. I can think of a few my self but generally speaking they tend to go that way.

shadow_archmagi
2010-04-12, 04:27 PM
Oh, yes, Fable 1 was extra fun.

"Leave a super powerful psycotic bandit lord alive? HAPPY KARMA!"
"Slaughter anyone that is at all evil? HAPPY KARMA!"

The only game where you can pillage and burn a village, buy all the newly unoccupied houses, and then put them out for rent, and then donate 1/4th of the money to the church and receive the title "Paladin"

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-12, 04:31 PM
Oh, yes, Fable 1 was extra fun.

"Leave a super powerful psycotic bandit lord alive? HAPPY KARMA!"
"Slaughter anyone that is at all evil? HAPPY KARMA!"

The only game where you can pillage and burn a village, buy all the newly unoccupied houses, and then put them out for rent, and then donate 1/4th of the money to the church and receive the title "Paladin"

LOL.

Didn't something like that happen in RL during the crusdades/ early Catholicism where you could buy your way into good graces.

taltamir
2010-04-12, 04:34 PM
The problem with trusting the code of conduct to the player is that you're assuming the player and the DM will have the exact same idea of what is good/not good/evil.
Actually the whole PURPOSE of trusting the code of conduct of the PLAYER is because you assume that he will NOT have the exact same idea of what is good/not good/evil. but instead will have an opinion that varies from yours.
And there is no such thing as a DM in a CRPG. CRPG stands for Computer Role Playing Game.


Edit: Wait sorry, is Circle of Eight an online game? In that case, drop the code, drop it hard and fast. Paladin codes are already considered problematic in Pen'n'Paper...where the DM is able to view every action taken and discuss with the players at lengh. Online, it's a different story. I've seen paladins fall for being attacked or because online DM's have "heard" that the paladin was doing un-paladin like things (even without evidence).

Heh... I see we agree.. its not an online game, its an offline single player game. But it is a computer RPG...

The original developers included a gem such as, if anyone in your PARTY participated in a drinking contest the paladin of the party will fall (its a scripting mess, they probably intended it to be if the paladin himself drank...)

In online NWN games there are online DMs and as you described yourself they often exercise their powers wrongly and unfairly penalized paladins. I agree there.... but at least there IS a DM online that you can petition to... a buggy script cannot be petitioned.


Oh, yes, Fable 1 was extra fun.

"Leave a super powerful psycotic bandit lord alive? HAPPY KARMA!"
"Slaughter anyone that is at all evil? HAPPY KARMA!"

The only game where you can pillage and burn a village, buy all the newly unoccupied houses, and then put them out for rent, and then donate 1/4th of the money to the church and receive the title "Paladin"

ha! yea that was hillarious...

in fable 2 its even worse "slaughter the whole village and then eat 10 sticks of celery"...

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-12, 04:37 PM
Actually the whole PURPOSE of trusting the code of conduct of the PLAYER is because you assume that he will NOT have the exact same idea of what is good/not good/evil. but instead will have an opinion that varies from yours.
And there is no such thing as a DM in a CRPG. CRPG stands for Computer Role Playing Game.



Heh... I see we agree.. its not an online game, its an offline single player game. But it is a computer RPG...

The original developers included a gem such as, if anyone in your PARTY participated in a drinking contest the paladin of the party will fall (its a scripting mess, they probably intended it to be if the paladin himself drank...)

In online NWN games there are online DMs and as you described yourself they often exercise their powers wrongly and unfairly penalized paladins. I agree there.... but at least there IS a DM online that you can petition to... a buggy script cannot be petitioned.

Right which meens you need to hard code moral values if you are going to include a good/bad path and or a fall mechanic

taltamir
2010-04-12, 04:43 PM
Right which meens you need to hard code moral values if you are going to include a good/bad path and or a fall mechanic

That is totally not how computers work.
Hard coding means you cannot fix easily... but it could be the exact same script and the exact same bugginess... only difference is that one is a txt file and one is some digits in your dll or exe. But it can literally be the exact same code with the exact same problem regardless of which of those it is packed it.

deuxhero
2010-04-12, 04:44 PM
A cRPG doesn't let you shoot the DM with a hammer if he acts stupid. Personlly I prefer lacking any sort of morality system in the first place though.

taltamir
2010-04-12, 04:47 PM
btw, I couldn't find a way to make a poll... are polls disabled in GITPG forums?

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-12, 04:55 PM
That is totally not how computers work.
Hard coding means you cannot fix easily... but it could be the exact same script and the exact same bugginess... only difference is that one is a txt file and one is some digits in your dll or exe. But it can literally be the exact same code with the exact same problem regardless of which of those it is packed it.

I know I'm a programmer. I didn't meen it as in hard coding as in hard coding programmers speak of. I meen hard coding as in

If option 2 is selected +1 dark side.
If option 1 is selected +1 light side.
could be a script could be a xml file could be alot of things. eaither way every time you select said option in a game you are gonna get the same points.

I was trying to explain that when developing a game any encounter/scene what ever needs to have x amount of out comes. Most openness in games is a smoke and mirror trick. Especialy in the games that have been mentioned. Fable Kotor are notoriously coded for becuase there is not alot of open ended ness.
Kotor for example.
If you go into a conversation with a NPC all the out comes are coded for there is no openness. its just a tree structure of events.

My point was that developers have to code morality into games with a hard fast set of rules. ususaly this morality is what the developers think or what they think people will belive as a sterotypical good/evil.

Some thing's probably where not accounted for like the aformentioned slaughtering of a town and renting out all the houses and then donating the money to regain your "morality". Though most games only look at one encounter vs the over all picture.

krossbow
2010-04-12, 05:08 PM
Kreia was an angry old bag who i would have thrown out the airlock if the game let me. Seriously, I got tired of her posturing and acting like she knew everything. I never saw any real basis for her delusions being of a truly wise nature.




But on topic, Being good in computer RPG's is hilarious. In KOTOR I i passive aggressively goaded evil people into attacking me just so i could slaughter them. Hell, if i was evil i would have killed less people than i did as a paragon of good.

taltamir
2010-04-12, 05:21 PM
Well, she IS Sith Lord Darth Traya
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Kreia

Sith Lords by definition are universally evil... so being morally judged by a person who is literally being marked as evil by the very universe itself is very different than having your character literally being judged by the very universe itself and then PENALIZED for your beliefs (as a player).

krossbow
2010-04-12, 05:26 PM
Well, she IS Sith Lord Darth Traya
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Kreia

Sith Lords by definition are universally evil... so being morally judged by a person who is literally being marked as evil by the very universe itself is very different than having your character being judged by the very universe itself.


True, but the way the game presented things, much of the story tried to play off her true neutral philosophy as being inherently superior. She may have been evil, but her ultimate goal was to convince the player character that neutrality was inherently better than the light side or the darkside, using the middle ground fallacy (with strawman jerkass jedi's to back up the whole light side being wrong arguement).

trmptfnfr
2010-04-12, 05:43 PM
You do, but the real punishment is listening to kreia rant and knowing that no matter what happens, no matter what choice you make, she will rant. Even if you leave her at home, she will break into your mind and explain why you are wrong all the time always.

On subsequent playthrough her praddling on might get annoying, but on my first playthrough I didn't mind.
It gave her the feel of actually being a mentor, rather than just being so in name.

taltamir
2010-04-12, 05:50 PM
On subsequent playthrough her praddling on might get annoying, but on my first playthrough I didn't mind.
It gave her the feel of actually being a mentor, rather than just being so in name.

I entirely agree


True, but the way the game presented things, much of the story tried to play off her true neutral philosophy as being inherently superior. She may have been evil, but her ultimate goal was to convince the player character that neutrality was inherently better than the light side or the darkside, using the middle ground fallacy (with strawman jerkass jedi's to back up the whole light side being wrong arguement).

Yes, she, a sith lord, is trying to convince me, a jedi, that neutrality is the path to go...
Of course she would... I don't see anything abnormal or out of character about it... and that is all there is to it, characterization...

I didn't think "wow bioware is full of racist pricks" when ashly williams in mass effect 1 said "I can't tell the difference between the aliens and the animals". If anything they were going too far to try to make them "believable characters" that the heroic is somewhat lost.

RiOrius
2010-04-12, 06:28 PM
A good moral standing according to whom? If I do something that is totally just and moral in my opinion in a GAME who are THEY to tell me "you are wrong"?

Saying "just don't have moon logic trap falls" is easy, but in reality they are found in almost every game that has the concept. Because lets face it, game developers are not exactly world class philosophers.

THEY are the DM. They have just as much a right to tell you that "you are wrong" as you have the right to say that "you are right."

And it is easy to not have "moon logic trap falls." Possible solutions:

-If someone is about to make a choice that will insta-fall him, put up a confirmation box: "What you are about to do is considered Evil and will cause you to lose your Paladin status. Do you wish to proceed?"

-Don't put in any insta-falls. Have a clear point system whereby consistently doing Evil things will cause a Paladin to fall, but the occasional misstep (or "moon logic" issue) won't.

Or, heck, put in one or two insta-falls that are completely obvious, just 'cause that can be really awesome, but have the rest be point based. For example, the game inFamous (not an RPG, but had a morality scale):

Most of the choices and actions you make just affect your karma level a little. A few affect your karma a lot, and are pretty obvious. One action you can take, however, instantly bottoms out your karma level, 'cause it's ridiculously evil (triggering an explosion that kills, IIRC, thousands of civilians but bestows you with great power).

Is inFamous's morality system perfect? Hell no. Most of the options were too blatantly black and white; a few were too morally gray (which would mean that some people might consider them "moon logic" issues). But you don't have to worry about accidentally falling, while you do have enough options that you can roleplay the occasional misstep (or giant leap into evil).

taltamir
2010-04-12, 06:54 PM
I know I'm a programmer. I didn't meen it as in hard coding as in hard coding programmers speak of. I meen hard coding as in

If option 2 is selected +1 dark side.
If option 1 is selected +1 light side.
could be a script could be a xml file could be alot of things. eaither way every time you select said option in a game you are gonna get the same points.

I was trying to explain that when developing a game any encounter/scene what ever needs to have x amount of out comes. Most openness in games is a smoke and mirror trick. Especialy in the games that have been mentioned. Fable Kotor are notoriously coded for becuase there is not alot of open ended ness.
Kotor for example.
If you go into a conversation with a NPC all the out comes are coded for there is no openness. its just a tree structure of events.

My point was that developers have to code morality into games with a hard fast set of rules. ususaly this morality is what the developers think or what they think people will belive as a sterotypical good/evil.

Some thing's probably where not accounted for like the aformentioned slaughtering of a town and renting out all the houses and then donating the money to regain your "morality". Though most games only look at one encounter vs the over all picture.

I see now... although wouldn't that just be "make really simple and concise predetermined moral scale and coding scripts" rather then "make it hardcoded"? forgive me if I am mixing up coder jargon.

taltamir
2010-04-12, 06:56 PM
THEY are the DM. They have just as much a right to tell you that "you are wrong" as you have the right to say that "you are right."
No, they WROTE a program that pretends to be a DM and doesn't account for all possibilities.
If I was to personally game with the programmer in troika who wrote the above mentioned script he would probably have not made me fall even though his script would.


And it is easy to not have "moon logic trap falls." Possible solutions:

-If someone is about to make a choice that will insta-fall him, put up a confirmation box: "What you are about to do is considered Evil and will cause you to lose your Paladin status. Do you wish to proceed?"

-Don't put in any insta-falls. Have a clear point system whereby consistently doing Evil things will cause a Paladin to fall, but the occasional misstep (or "moon logic" issue) won't.

Or, heck, put in one or two insta-falls that are completely obvious, just 'cause that can be really awesome, but have the rest be point based. For example, the game inFamous (not an RPG, but had a morality scale):

Most of the choices and actions you make just affect your karma level a little. A few affect your karma a lot, and are pretty obvious. One action you can take, however, instantly bottoms out your karma level, 'cause it's ridiculously evil (triggering an explosion that kills, IIRC, thousands of civilians but bestows you with great power).

Is inFamous's morality system perfect? Hell no. Most of the options were too blatantly black and white; a few were too morally gray (which would mean that some people might consider them "moon logic" issues). But you don't have to worry about accidentally falling, while you do have enough options that you can roleplay the occasional misstep (or giant leap into evil).

I agree with most of your suggestions... but thats not how it happens in most games. And as you said yourself, it still has its issues...

what do you think of dragon age "cause-effect" based system?

Eldonauran
2010-04-12, 07:02 PM
Should CRPG Paladins be completely exempt from falling?

I would say, no. The road of the Paladin is a long, narrow and dangerous road. One mistep is all it takes to fall and that is why playing a Paladin is so fulfilling if you succeed.

If you don't want to fall, play a fighter/cleric. Its the same thing with better spells.

Besides, all of the games with good/evil axis of alignment have a save feature for easy resets should you screw up. Pity that isnt true with fable 2, but oh-well.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-12, 07:12 PM
I see now... although wouldn't that just be "make really simple and concise predetermined moral scale and coding scripts" rather then "make it hardcoded"? forgive me if I am mixing up coder jargon.

I was using them interchangable. Not in a code sense.
from a developer sense.

Most developers don't code some do but alot don't.

I probebly shouldn't have used the word hardcoded as this is the internet and some one is bound to take me to literaly.
Not all games use scripts but i understand what your getting at and i can sense that you understand what i am getting at... which = win.

taltamir
2010-04-12, 07:14 PM
I was using them interchangable. Not in a code sense.
from a developer sense.

Most developers don't code some do but alot don't.

yap, certain types of software engineering and design doesn't involve a single line of code and is absolutely vital for producing good programs.


I probebly shouldn't have used the word hardcoded as this is the internet and some one is bound to take me to literaly.
Not all games use scripts but i understand what your getting at and i can sense that you understand what i am getting at... which = win.

I agree, as long as we managed to understand each other all is good

TheCountAlucard
2010-04-12, 07:14 PM
If you don't want to fall, play a fighter/cleric. Its the same thing with better spells.Fixed it for you.

As for my vote on the matter, I say they shouldn't be completely exempt, but the paladin's fall should be obvious enough to see coming a mile away.

taltamir
2010-04-12, 07:16 PM
Fixed it for you.[/QUOTE]

lol... nice, and actually correct...
which is kinda an issue...

might as well say "if you don't want the DM to put 20 times the effort into destroying your wizard's spellbook as he does destroying the fighter's magical gear then play a sorcerer".

The poor paladin already has a hard time being so weak... if you play one its either because you don't know the game or are practicing stormwind... i don't see a reason to spoil the roleplay of a stormwinder.

Eldonauran
2010-04-12, 07:32 PM
The poor paladin already has a hard time being so weak... if you play one its either because you don't know the game or are practicing stormwind... i don't see a reason to spoil the roleplay of a stormwinder.

I, uh ... completely disagree. While playing a paladin has a lot to do with roleplaying, it doesn't necessarily point immediately to stormwind. There are plenty of means available to bring up the power level of a paladin or you might be playing in a low power-level type of game. Though, one generally shouldn't take the paladin to level 20. Though thats the same as with all other classes. Prestige, prestige, prestige. And multiclass.

Drakyn
2010-04-12, 07:40 PM
I entirely agree
Yes, she, a sith lord, is trying to convince me, a jedi, that neutrality is the path to go...
Of course she would... I don't see anything abnormal or out of character about it... and that is all there is to it, characterization...

I didn't think "wow bioware is full of racist pricks" when ashly williams in mass effect 1 said "I can't tell the difference between the aliens and the animals". If anything they were going too far to try to make them "believable characters" that the heroic is somewhat lost.

I'm sorry if this is a bit of a callback AND a derail in one, but I think there's some things that throw monkeywrenches into that "this is the character not the author speaking" argument.
-Chris Avellone hates Star Wars and used that as a creative force while the game was being made.
-It's really hard to argue against Kreia, because 9 times out of 10 she gets the last word and your "I think you are wrong" dialogue is either immature "SHUT UP HAG I NEED NO WORDS" or eyes-shut-bweebweebwoo "the light side is the best thing ever and that is my argument be nice be nice." The epitome of this is that beggar conversation that was mentioned back aways, where you have two options, both of which get you lectured, and a choice of "maybe you're right" or "WAAAAAH STOP WORDS HEAD HURT" at the end of them. And you can bet she treats the latter option as scornfully as it's deserved. From the moment that conversation starts you are railroaded hard into either being a dingus or agreeing with her.
Both of these things combined make me consider Kreia less a well-written character and more a tool designed by Chris to beat the stuffing out of Star Wars morality in every way possible, aided by the fact that he's in control of not just everything the NPCs say, but what YOU say. A DMPC used as the spikiest point on a blunt instrument.

EDIT: VV There was no real upside to being that evil either, was there, except for the whole "evil companions won't get pissed and leave because the guards aren't trying to murder you every five steps?" Seems sort of a nice solution to the whole "how do I rationalize NPCs interacting with a horrible mass-murdering psycho?" dilemma in retrospect. Make them treat them EXACTLY THAT WAY.

Mark Hall
2010-04-12, 07:42 PM
Actually, Baldur's Gate handled this pretty well. You had a reputation stat... do evil, and it drops. Drop below point X, and you fall. However, if you've been playing a straight-up paladin, it's hard to NOT have a maximum reputation... unless you occasionally let yourself get caught stealing, or kill an annoying innocent (f***ing Noober).

Tiki Snakes
2010-04-12, 07:50 PM
I'm sorry if this is a bit of a callback AND a derail in one, but I think there's some things that throw monkeywrenches into that "this is the character not the author speaking" argument.
-Chris Avellone hates Star Wars and used that as a creative force while the game was being made.
-It's really hard to argue against Kreia, because 9 times out of 10 she gets the last word and your "I think you are wrong" dialogue is either immature "SHUT UP HAG I NEED NO WORDS" or eyes-shut-bweebweebwoo "the light side is the best thing ever and that is my argument be nice be nice." The epitome of this is that beggar conversation that was mentioned back aways, where you have two options, both of which get you lectured, and a choice of "maybe you're right" or "WAAAAAH STOP WORDS HEAD HURT" at the end of them. And you can bet she treats the latter option as scornfully as it's deserved. From the moment that conversation starts you are railroaded hard into either being a dingus or agreeing with her.
Both of these things combined make me consider Kreia less a well-written character and more a tool designed by Chris to beat the stuffing out of Star Wars morality in every way possible, aided by the fact that he's in control of not just everything the NPCs say, but what YOU say. A DMPC used as the spikiest point on a blunt instrument.

If this is indeed the case (that he is on record as not being entirely pro-star-wars), this would answer a hell of a lot of questions.
I generally found both of them to be suspiciously wide of bat as far as the treatment of light and dark side, personally (starting with little miss 'No, Anger doesn't lead to the darkside apparently' Bastila and progressing nicely through the truly insane idea of 'grey side' Jedi. Whut?).
But in comparison to KOTOR 1, 2 was a lot more disappointing.

Frosty
2010-04-12, 08:24 PM
LOL.

Didn't something like that happen in RL during the crusdades/ early Catholicism where you could buy your way into good graces.
I think they're called Indulgences, and they were part of the reasons why someone named Martin Luther brough about the Protestant Reformation.

shadow_archmagi
2010-04-12, 08:38 PM
If this is indeed the case (that he is on record as not being entirely pro-star-wars), this would answer a hell of a lot of questions.
I generally found both of them to be suspiciously wide of bat as far as the treatment of light and dark side, personally (starting with little miss 'No, Anger doesn't lead to the darkside apparently' Bastila and progressing nicely through the truly insane idea of 'grey side' Jedi. Whut?).
But in comparison to KOTOR 1, 2 was a lot more disappointing.

To be fair 2 was super-rushed and so a lot of things that were incomplete were just left in and made no sense.

taltamir
2010-04-12, 09:31 PM
I'm sorry if this is a bit of a callback AND a derail in one, but I think there's some things that throw monkeywrenches into that "this is the character not the author speaking" argument.
-Chris Avellone hates Star Wars and used that as a creative force while the game was being made.
-It's really hard to argue against Kreia, because 9 times out of 10 she gets the last word and your "I think you are wrong" dialogue is either immature "SHUT UP HAG I NEED NO WORDS" or eyes-shut-bweebweebwoo "the light side is the best thing ever and that is my argument be nice be nice." The epitome of this is that beggar conversation that was mentioned back aways, where you have two options, both of which get you lectured, and a choice of "maybe you're right" or "WAAAAAH STOP WORDS HEAD HURT" at the end of them. And you can bet she treats the latter option as scornfully as it's deserved. From the moment that conversation starts you are railroaded hard into either being a dingus or agreeing with her.
Both of these things combined make me consider Kreia less a well-written character and more a tool designed by Chris to beat the stuffing out of Star Wars morality in every way possible, aided by the fact that he's in control of not just everything the NPCs say, but what YOU say. A DMPC used as the spikiest point on a blunt instrument.

EDIT: VV There was no real upside to being that evil either, was there, except for the whole "evil companions won't get pissed and leave because the guards aren't trying to murder you every five steps?" Seems sort of a nice solution to the whole "how do I rationalize NPCs interacting with a horrible mass-murdering psycho?" dilemma in retrospect. Make them treat them EXACTLY THAT WAY.

I am probably remembering it via the rose tinted glasses of nostalgia... what you describe does sound terrible and you make a very good point.


To be fair 2 was super-rushed and so a lot of things that were incomplete were just left in and made no sense.

hence the kotor2 restoration project
http://www.team-gizka.org/

graymachine
2010-04-13, 11:18 AM
Hm. I think that part of being a paladin is that you should have the capacity to fall. That seems like to would be part of being a holy warrior, the same as a cleric of bees setting fire to every beehive he sees. Playing through (most) games with a moral system I've never had any difficulty keeping a paladin or paladin-like character from falling unless I want to do so. I just keep in mind that I'm playing a paladin. The possibility of falling is suppose to help the player to stay in the mindset of someone raise and trained in a church, not to mention being completely faithful; see the above cleric-of-bees comment. That said, I would expect in general for there to be ways of redeeming yourself, especially in games based on tabletop D&D; specifically the Atonement spell.

I generally am ok with the morality systems in Bioware games, but they could be better. I actually approve more of the morality in the KoToR games, mainly because the morality of the Star Wars universe is very black-and-white, as well as simplistic. The systems (as well as the dialogue options) accurately reflect the moral and ethical depths of both the Jedi and the Sith.

Jade Empire is the one that bothers me the most; the morality of the Open Palm and the Closed Fist that they set up in the beginning is excellent material, most notably in that it isn't "good" and "evil", but philosophical points-of-view. Unfortunately, it is the same system in-game as the others, making it very disappointing is an otherwise outstanding game. However, I suspect it turned out like that because of the writing difficulties in applying such a system.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-13, 11:21 AM
I think they're called Indulgences, and they were part of the reasons why someone named Martin Luther brough about the Protestant Reformation.

aaa thats what i was thinking of thanks frosty.


Still in a computer game there has to be cleer cut good and evil.
its the nature of the beast so to say.

Tiki Snakes
2010-04-13, 11:38 AM
To be fair, 'falling' as a paladin is only really a problem in computer games based on editions of DnD. What with it, as far as I see, only really being something that exists in DnD.

And in computer games, a lot of the time all it would mean is that you hit quick-load and the action that did it is un-taken, because without instant atonements (Or instant trade-in-for-blackguardness), it's just a game-over screen without the courtesy of being honest about it.

As far as Kotor2's incompleteness goes, that was never really the element that annoyed or disappointed me, so much as the bits they had finished. It took directions and themes that really didn't impress me. (Though it was passable enough for me to actually complete.)

[edit] Oh, and I disagree that a computer game necessarily needs clear-cut good and evil. I don't believe that to be the case, even if so many CRPG designers do.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-13, 11:46 AM
[edit] Oh, and I disagree that a computer game necessarily needs clear-cut good and evil. I don't believe that to be the case, even if so many CRPG designers do.

Coming from a code standpoint there does.
For any given action that would effect, we shall call it, "moral" there needs to be a finite amount gained or not gained.

so for examples
Killing a peasent -10 moral
Giving a peasent food/stuff +5 moral
Stealing gold(per piece) -3 moral
Giving gold(per Piece) +3 moral



so I could kill a peasent take his stuff. give it to another peasent and take a net -5

I could take 100 gold from some one and donate it to a peasent and gain +5 moral...

Its all "hard coded/scripted" Though a game may play on moral norms or that fine line between good and evil the good and evil acts are all done before hand. Its to difficult/impossible from a code perspective to "look at the bigger picture".

awa
2010-04-13, 12:07 PM
paladins fall in games based on dnd becuase that's an integral part of paladins. its an integral part of paladins becuase it has been that way for a long time even though the reason for them to have this disadvantage (that they were like fighters + back then) is gone

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-13, 12:10 PM
paladins fall in games based on dnd becuase that's an integral part of paladins. its an integral part of paladins becuase it has been that way for a long time even though the reason for them to have this disadvantage (that they were like fighters + back then) is gone

I 100% agree with this statement.

IF they kept them as powerfull as they where in 1st and 2nd ed then all would be fine.

satorian
2010-04-13, 12:14 PM
hence the kotor2 restoration project
http://www.team-gizka.org/

Or you could, you know, play the restoration project that has actually been finished (gizka's never will).

http://www.deadlystream.com/forum/f123/sith-lords-restored-content-mod-final-1-5-version-here-1158.html

On morality: like many ethical choices themselves, it is a conundrum. In any RPG, morality has to play some role. It adds to your sense of interacting with the world. If killing peasants has no consequences, it makes the world seem inert to your interactions. If being a villain as a paladin has no effect, why play a paladin? It surely isn't for the mechanics... On the other hand, every morality system that has so far been implementable has the failing that the game can only judge you by actions and dialogue tree choices. When it does so, inasmuch as a programming a shades-of-gray moral standard by which the software can judge each action has so far proven impossible, it is bound to judge by what people see as moon-morality.

In short:
even poor moral barometers (MBs) improve the cRPG experience.
better MBs would only improve he experience
programming a good MB is hard, a perfect one probably impossible
until the programming improves so that complex MBs can be well-stated, we should probably just apply suspension of disbelief and say that in THIS FANTASY WORLD we are playing in, the morality has few shades of gray.
For games like Fable, where some of the effects can be silly, you can easily avoid the silliness by not trying to game the morality system. It's a game. The system can be gamed. Avoid doing so and you'll have a more immersive experience.

Mystic Muse
2010-04-13, 12:50 PM
*snip*.

that was Fable 2. I disliked that much more than Fable 1 but you probably wouldn't like Fable 1 either. (I'm a big fan fo the first. I've beaten it 9 times)

the third is going to suck.

taltamir
2010-04-13, 01:17 PM
that was Fable 2. I disliked that much more than Fable 1 but you probably wouldn't like Fable 1 either. (I'm a big fan fo the first. I've beaten it 9 times)

the third is going to suck.

I am probably clouded by nostalgia but I liked fable 1... it had a bunch of issues though...


To be fair, 'falling' as a paladin is only really a problem in computer games based on editions of DnD. What with it, as far as I see, only really being something that exists in DnD.

And in computer games, a lot of the time all it would mean is that you hit quick-load and the action that did it is un-taken, because without instant atonements (Or instant trade-in-for-blackguardness), it's just a game-over screen without the courtesy of being honest about it.

As far as Kotor2's incompleteness goes, that was never really the element that annoyed or disappointed me, so much as the bits they had finished. It took directions and themes that really didn't impress me. (Though it was passable enough for me to actually complete.)

[edit] Oh, and I disagree that a computer game necessarily needs clear-cut good and evil. I don't believe that to be the case, even if so many CRPG designers do.

I agree with every single word you typed :P
Its like you are reading my mind.

Beowulf DW
2010-04-13, 01:40 PM
Morality systems in any game are going to fall short in one way or another because the system tries to quantify an abstraction. Morality systems in Tabletop RPGs tend to work better because there's more room for interpretation.

Personally, I like Mass Effect's morality system. Choosing Paragon makes you a nice guy who cares about others and is polite, but it still let's you be a bad ass. Renegade makes you obsessed with getting the mission done at all costs, but doesn't really make you an uncaring villain, because at the end of the day you're still saving the galaxy. Best of all, Paragon and Renegade don't cancel each other out, which allows much more leeway in deciding how you think Shepard would react to certain situations.

Mystic Muse
2010-04-13, 01:41 PM
I am probably clouded by nostalgia but I liked fable 1... it had a bunch of issues though....

I agree it had a bunch of issues. (Lightning does not decapitate people) but it was still so much better than fable 2. The "co-op" in that game wasn't even co-op. it was just dissapointing.

taltamir
2010-04-13, 01:43 PM
I agree it had a bunch of issues. (Lightning does not decapitate people) but it was still so much better than fable 2. The "co-op" in that game wasn't even co-op. it was just dissapointing.

oh yes... I didn't like fable 2 at all and I liked fable 1 :P. disappointing is a good way of putting it.

~LuckyBoneDice~
2010-04-13, 01:44 PM
We, at one time, had a party of all paladins (many versions, many gods, many alignments) and the codes made it impossible to accomplish a darned thing

Optimystik
2010-04-13, 02:58 PM
Jade Empire failed hard in this respect, they set up way of open hand and closed fist very well, wrote them out exceptionally... and then completely disregarded it and used ham fisted "pure unadulterated evil and meanness" vs "altruistic to a fault".

Sadly, I agree - there was no mechanical difference between being a true follower of the Way and simply being an ass.

In fact, being a mindless ass generally made you better off. WHAT??? :smallfurious:

Spoilers:

I remember when you save that slave girl from the pirates. There are two evil options - you can force the slaver to pay you to look the other way while he takes her (since you massacred most of his men and all,) or you can encourage her to stab him and win her freedom, without lifting a finger to help her. The latter option is very Closed Fist - no reward besides knowing you made somebody tougher and stronger.

You can also choose to break the Dam controls around Tien's Landing to because the greedy wine-seller hires you to do it, or decline his offer and do it anyway to make the town stronger through trial-by-fire. Again, the latter option is truly Closed Fist.

The most memorable example is when I met the ghost of the founder of the Closed Fist philosophy - Bladed Thesis. He duped a scholar into seeking an artifact that would grant him great power; in reality, the artifact just lets Bladed Thesis steal the user's soul. You can choose to help Bladed Thesis punish him for seeking the easy route to power. But there's more...

It gets really interesting once you do. You have two options - Bladed Thesis will thank you and teach you a technique (Chaotic Strains), or you can challenge Bladed Thesis; in your character's words, "while he's at full strength."

So they took a step in the right direction - letting you choose whether your character was Stupid, Baby-Eating Evil or Tough Love Evil. They just didn't follow through. In all my examples above, you're actually penalized for taking the more CF option, in the first two because you miss out on quite a bit of cash, and in the last one because you don't learn the damn technique even if you win the fight!

Vitruviansquid
2010-04-13, 03:15 PM
Should paladins fall in CRPG's? OF COURSE!

The falling mechanic for paladins is like Chekhov's Gun. If it exists, it has to be fired. The falling mechanic doesn't exist for the DM to go, "ah-ha! This action you did is actually evil! Bend over!" It's there to give a paladin's storyline the tragedy of having multiple, conflicting obligations where neither action is the "right" one.

The Shadowmind
2010-04-13, 03:25 PM
I say CRPG paladin's shouldn't fall, until the options start making sense, and the options aren't typically the "Send a puppy to college" or "Push a bus of orphan's into a pit of lava", and the "Send a puppy to college" option is also evil because he would never fit it.

So, I think paladin shouldn't fall until things start making sense.

Starbuck_II
2010-04-13, 03:26 PM
Should paladins fall in CRPG's? OF COURSE!

The falling mechanic for paladins is like Chekhov's Gun. If it exists, it has to be fired. The falling mechanic doesn't exist for the DM to go, "ah-ha! This action you did is actually evil! Bend over!" It's there to give a paladin's storyline the tragedy of having multiple, conflicting obligations where neither action is the "right" one.

There is no DM in a CRPG. There is the unfeeling, unremoseful game AI.

Do you agree that Paladins fall if they enter a drinking contest? Doesn't matter the gamr think so. You fall.

As you can agree that is stupid: tunless the game gives you an option in the menu: click if you want the chance of falling.

Then those that wants the chance fall because they like that, and those that don't want to won't.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-13, 03:31 PM
There is no DM in a CRPG. There is the unfeeling, unremoseful game AI.

Do you agree that Paladins fall if they enter a drinking contest? Doesn't matter the gamr think so. You fall.

As you can agree that is stupid: tunless the game gives you an option in the menu: click if you want the chance of falling.

Then those that wants the chance fall because they like that, and those that don't want to won't.

In that context it depends. People keep referencing that what game was it in?

Starbuck_II
2010-04-13, 03:33 PM
In that context it depends. People keep referencing that what game was it in?

Temple of Elemental Evil. There is no clue, no hint. All you know if after entering drinking contest (win or lose) you fall.

Vitruviansquid
2010-04-13, 03:38 PM
There is no DM in a CRPG. There is the unfeeling, unremoseful game AI.

Do you agree that Paladins fall if they enter a drinking contest? Doesn't matter the gamr think so. You fall.

As you can agree that is stupid: tunless the game gives you an option in the menu: click if you want the chance of falling.

Then those that wants the chance fall because they like that, and those that don't want to won't.

See, you're assuming that Falling is inherently bad, where in fact, it is inherently good. Like I said before, Falling is not a punishment, but a plot development.

Your example works because, frankly, having a drinking contest determine whether a Paladin falls is silly. Besides, I would like to think a serious game wouldn't railroad the paladin into participating in the drinking contest.

Now imagine the game sets up a situation where the Paladin's king commands him to put down a rebellion. The rebels are committing atrocities across the countryside, like burning crops, razing buildings, and exterminating the ruling class. However, the rebels' grievances are not entirely unsound, as the king had been burdening them with harsh taxes, a severe form of serfdom and whatnot. Now, whether the paladin puts down the rebellion or allows it to continue, he's going to commit evil and Fall either way. This situation necessitates a Fall, is dramatic, and is true to real-life, where morality isn't black and white.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-13, 03:40 PM
Temple of Elemental Evil. There is no clue, no hint. All you know if after entering drinking contest (win or lose) you fall.

Hmm Understand able. Wasn't that a 2nd ed module?
I belive, though i am probebly wrong, that drinking in excess is a fall worthy act in 2nd ed.

Though havning never played the game im not sure if you are railroaded into the drinking contest.

Starbuck_II
2010-04-13, 03:45 PM
See, you're assuming that Falling is inherently bad, where in fact, it is inherently good. Like I said before, Falling is not a punishment, but a plot development.

Your example works because, frankly, having a drinking contest determine whether a Paladin falls is silly. Besides, I would like to think a serious game wouldn't railroad the paladin into participating in the drinking contest.

Now imagine the game sets up a situation where the Paladin's king commands him to put down a rebellion. The rebels are committing atrocities across the countryside, like burning crops, razing buildings, and exterminating the ruling class. However, the rebels' grievances are not entirely unsound, as the king had been burdening them with harsh taxes, a severe form of serfdom and whatnot. Now, whether the paladin puts down the rebellion or allows it to continue, he's going to commit evil and Fall either way. This situation necessitates a Fall, is dramatic, and is true to real-life, where morality isn't black and white.

Difference is you should have hints it is either. If you hear that they are acting evil (like your above rebels) then you know they are evil.

I don't think putting down rebellion is evil. Harsh taxes are lawful not evil.

I also can't imagine that happening in a video game. Only D&D has falling paladins.
Maybe FF 4 if you consider Cecil a dark knight who became a paladin, but he fell up rather than down.

Mystic Muse
2010-04-13, 03:45 PM
See, you're assuming that Falling is inherently bad, where in fact, it is inherently good. Like I said before, Falling is not a punishment, but a plot development.

Is a wizard losing his spellbook also a good thing and a plot development? The only way a Paladin falling is a plot development and not a punishment is if you and the player work out that the player is going to fall before hand for character development. Otherwise, yes, it is a punishment.

Kish
2010-04-13, 04:12 PM
Hmm Understand able. Wasn't that a 2nd ed module?
Temple of Elemental Evil is one of the only two 3.5ed CRPGs I know of. Participate in a drinking contest, Fall. "Associate" with an evil NPC (you have no way of knowing that's what you're doing until you get the "You Fell!" message; Detect Evil is not implemented in the game), Fall.

Participating in the drinking contest is entirely optional, but, not to put too fine a point on it, unless you happen to have exactly the same idea of what a paladin's code should be that the game designers do, you have no reason to opt out of it. If you win the drinking contest, your journal notes that you're known for winning the drinking contest, but "heavy drinking goes against the will of St. Cuthbert"...so you Fall for going against the teachings of one particular Lawful Neutral god, who your character(s) may or may not have the slightest interest in.

Nero24200
2010-04-13, 04:19 PM
See, you're assuming that Falling is inherently bad, where in fact, it is inherently good. Like I said before, Falling is not a punishment, but a plot development.

Your example works because, frankly, having a drinking contest determine whether a Paladin falls is silly. Besides, I would like to think a serious game wouldn't railroad the paladin into participating in the drinking contest.

Now imagine the game sets up a situation where the Paladin's king commands him to put down a rebellion. The rebels are committing atrocities across the countryside, like burning crops, razing buildings, and exterminating the ruling class. However, the rebels' grievances are not entirely unsound, as the king had been burdening them with harsh taxes, a severe form of serfdom and whatnot. Now, whether the paladin puts down the rebellion or allows it to continue, he's going to commit evil and Fall either way. This situation necessitates a Fall, is dramatic, and is true to real-life, where morality isn't black and white.

You see, it's all well and good to say it's "RP potential", but falling isn't only an RP thing, it's mechanical as well. Being a fighter without bonus feat's isn't fun, deserved or not. Now, if falling simply meant not being able to gain any more paladin levels (ala standard NWN), that would be far less of an issue, but it isn't like that in D'n'D and (to my knowledge) this game either.

Besides, the paladin code causes alot of problems in D'n'D games, mostly because people will argue about what's good and evil. Game developers will be the same - some options in the game might not seem evil to you, but if the game developers did, they still might make the paladin fall, regardless of whether or not you beleive they should.

Ravens_cry
2010-04-13, 04:27 PM
Is a wizard losing his spellbook also a good thing and a plot development? The only way a Paladin falling is a plot development and not a punishment is if you and the player work out that the player is going to fall before hand for character development. Otherwise, yes, it is a punishment.
I played a fallen paladin for two levels with no cleric. We got on all right, and it made it all the sweeter when I received the full blessing of my goddess once again. Was it fun to lose the abilities? No. But it made for some great, in my view, role play. And I was still a competent warrior, so it wasn't like I was useless to the party.
And no, it was not an intentional fall. But it was deserved.

Vitruviansquid
2010-04-13, 04:44 PM
Is a wizard losing his spellbook also a good thing and a plot development? The only way a Paladin falling is a plot development and not a punishment is if you and the player work out that the player is going to fall before hand for character development. Otherwise, yes, it is a punishment.

Does Samus lose most of her powers at the beginning of Metroid Prime?
Does Raiden lose his guns and clothes (O_o) in Sons of Liberty?
Does the PC lose his body right after the tutorial in Demon's Souls?

This kind of thing happens in all sorts of games and nobody seems to have a problem with it.

Starbuck_II
2010-04-13, 04:53 PM
Does Samus lose most of her powers at the beginning of Metroid Prime?
Does Raiden lose his guns and clothes (O_o) in Sons of Liberty?
Does the PC lose his body right after the tutorial in Demon's Souls?

This kind of thing happens in all sorts of games and nobody seems to have a problem with it.

Yes, but they had reasons for that. That were reasonable. It wasn't like, " oops Samus, you stepped on a crack, breaking your mother's back. Lose all your gear."

Give an example of losing your stuff from your own actions.


I played a fallen paladin for two levels with no cleric. We got on all right, and it made it all the sweeter when I received the full blessing of my goddess once again. Was it fun to lose the abilities? No. But it made for some great, in my view, role play. And I was still a competent warrior, so it wasn't like I was useless to the party.
And no, it was not an intentional fall. But it was deserved.
How do you unintentionally fall?
I'm calling crock on that.
It was either intentional or you didn't deserve it.

Vitruviansquid
2010-04-13, 05:01 PM
Yes, but they had reasons for that. That were reasonable. It wasn't like, " oops Samus, you stepped on a crack, breaking your mother's back. Lose all your gear."

Give an example of losing your stuff from your own actions.

Demon's Souls has exactly that. You lose your body in the end of the Tutorial if you lose a fight to the Tutorial boss, which you could actually win.

Mystic Muse
2010-04-13, 05:07 PM
Does Samus lose most of her powers at the beginning of Metroid Prime?


Being the only game I've played of the three yes. However, that was due to a malfunction in her suit by getting hit by an explosion and crashing into the side of an elevator. However, she could have gotten out of it if she'd just gone into the elevator instead of looking back. It's more like

"Okay, you can either save the town from the big bad or you can save his enslaved minions before he blows up the town. Either way you fall."

"uh, can't I just kill the big bad?"

"maybe. Can you hit an AC of 150 and deal 10,000 HP worth of damage in 10 rounds?"

"we're level three. why are you sending us up against a guy like that?"

"I'm not. You guys aren't supposed to kill him yet. It doesn't work for my plot. My plot also requires that you fall."

Vitruviansquid
2010-04-13, 05:26 PM
Being the only game I've played of the three yes. However, that was due to a malfunction in her suit by getting hit by an explosion and crashing into the side of an elevator. However, she could have gotten out of it if she'd just gone into the elevator instead of looking back. It's more like

"Okay, you can either save the town from the big bad or you can save his enslaved minions before he blows up the town. Either way you fall."

"uh, can't I just kill the big bad?"

"maybe. Can you hit an AC of 150 and deal 10,000 HP worth of damage in 10 rounds?"

"we're level three. why are you sending us up against a guy like that?"

"I'm not. You guys aren't supposed to kill him yet. It doesn't work for my plot. My plot also requires that you fall."

It's been a long time since I played Sons of Liberty, but I believe this is exactly what happens in that game. By advancing the plot, you would reach a point where Raiden is captured, tortured, and stripped naked by the big bad. There's no way it could be prevented.

krossbow
2010-04-13, 05:29 PM
Could someone tell me why the demon's and other villians abstain from cracking your non-magical, depowered self open like a can of coke and chugging your vital organs?


because its all well and good to say its good plot, but that giant is still a giant, and unless sever DM fiat steps in, your worthless against his two-ton *%^.



It's been a long time since I played Sons of Liberty, but I believe this is exactly what happens in that game. By advancing the plot, you would reach a point where Raiden is captured, tortured, and stripped naked by the big bad. There's no way it could be prevented.


yes. But other characters aren't having to drag your sorry butt through the game while they retain their uberness. A single player situation does not have to consider the others in the party.

In order to not turn you into a fine paste, the DM specifically has to dumb down the situation drastically.

Knaight
2010-04-13, 06:00 PM
Coming from a code standpoint there does.
For any given action that would effect, we shall call it, "moral" there needs to be a finite amount gained or not gained.

so for examples
Killing a peasent -10 moral
Giving a peasent food/stuff +5 moral
Stealing gold(per piece) -3 moral
Giving gold(per Piece) +3 moral

Its all "hard coded/scripted" Though a game may play on moral norms or that fine line between good and evil the good and evil acts are all done before hand. Its to difficult/impossible from a code perspective to "look at the bigger picture".

This assumes that one isn't using a more complex system where one triggers reactions in NPCs instead of modifying a variable. For that matter, it also assumes a 1 axis system, make it more than a 1 axis system, and all sorts of fun mathematical tricks show up to mitigate individual patterns of actions past a point. Lets assume something like Pendragon, which had 6 different numerical measures. Were one to implement those in a video game, one could, for instance, center them around zero and then take the square root of the absolute value on each scale, so extremes in one of the 6 measures doesn't affect the total as much, if using the total for falling. Of course, there are ways to mitigate individual actions on a 1 scale system as well. If each evil action made the cube of the total go up a certain number, then individual actions matter less and less. Lets say the scale measures violence, there is a bigger difference between someone who gets in 1 fight and someone who gets in 3 than there is between someone who gets in 50 and someone who gets in 52, and the use of the cube or cube root (depending on how this is handled) simulates that.

Another method would be to have each action have a set value on the scales, that forces an approach to the value if the current total is less extreme than the total. Lets assume a dishonesty scale this time. Cheating on a test might be a 40, plagiarism 80, and each one lowers the downward gap by half. If someone has a 0 and cheats on a test, they now have a 20. If they plagiarize instead, they have a 40 instead. If the guy who cheats on a test cheats on another, it goes to 30, another 35. Basically the impact is reduced constantly.

Now, all this assumes the use of scales, which I would state are unnecessary most of the time, but there are ways around a linear system, and mixing something like target numbers or cubic roots with multiple scales is the first improvement.

taltamir
2010-04-13, 06:27 PM
Temple of Elemental Evil. There is no clue, no hint. All you know if after entering drinking contest (win or lose) you fall.

its worse than that... if ANYONE in your party enters the contest, win or lose, you fall...
so if your party is comprised of a dwarf fighter, a human paldin, an elf rogue, and a gnome druid... and the dwarf fighter enters the contest, the human paladin falls for having "participated" (due to buggy script).


See, you're assuming that Falling is inherently bad, where in fact, it is inherently good. Like I said before, Falling is not a punishment, but a plot development.

That MIGHT be true if you have a DM and if you fell for knowingly doing something "bad"...
Not a CRPG where the plot is set in stone and you fell for something that shouldn't cause falling.


Hmm Understand able. Wasn't that a 2nd ed module?
I belive, though i am probebly wrong, that drinking in excess is a fall worthy act in 2nd ed.

Though havning never played the game im not sure if you are railroaded into the drinking contest.

It is a 3e PC game.


I played a fallen paladin for two levels with no cleric. We got on all right, and it made it all the sweeter when I received the full blessing of my goddess once again. Was it fun to lose the abilities? No. But it made for some great, in my view, role play. And I was still a competent warrior, so it wasn't like I was useless to the party.
And no, it was not an intentional fall. But it was deserved.

1. it was well deserved.
2. you chose to go through with it.
3. it was with a DM and friends, not a CRPG. (where it wasn't an integral part of the plot that is... there is an excellent NWN1 module where your paladin does fall as an integral part of the plot; and that is intentional)


Does Samus lose most of her powers at the beginning of Metroid Prime?
Does Raiden lose his guns and clothes (O_o) in Sons of Liberty?
Does the PC lose his body right after the tutorial in Demon's Souls?

This kind of thing happens in all sorts of games and nobody seems to have a problem with it.

The problem here is that losing all those is equal for all players...
A better example would be if in mass effect, those who chose to play a biotic character might lose all their powers HALFWAY through the game if they chose to play renegade, and don't gain them back until the end.

For it to equal falling it has to:
1. happen in the middle of the game.
2. last some time.
3. only trigger if certain in game conditions are met
4. be restricted to specific class/es

So lets take the semus aran example:
1. No, It happens at the begining, thats the premise.
2. Yes, it does indeed last a good amount of time
3. No, it ALWAYS triggers as part of the game.
4. No, there is no "class choice" in the beginning of metroid where only those who chose class C can lose their powers and those who chose class A,B, or D are immune to it.

To avoid #4, you could have a preset situation where doing something would cause the paladin to fall, the cleric to fall, the wizard to lose his spellbook, and sorcerer to lose his magic, and the fighter to be cursed with the inability to touch weapons.


Demon's Souls has exactly that. You lose your body in the end of the Tutorial if you lose a fight to the Tutorial boss, which you could actually win.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/1321-Demons-Souls

MCerberus
2010-04-13, 06:40 PM
In 4e, Paladins and Clerics don't lose powers but instead face RP punishments for abandoning their church's principles. It's something I'd like to see in more games that have these strict guidelines.

Going evil should have the uncaring AI robot have former comrades disliking you or maybe a few random encounters, as opposed to suddenly no powers. Of course, recently a developer has shown that this can be bad as well.

Fallout 3 has mercs that come to kill you if you're evil, you're not evil, or because you're neutral. There's very few results from your morality, and tiny effects that happen can be abused by using someone's computer repeatedly or by dumping a minor amount of cash at (local charity).

taltamir
2010-04-13, 06:44 PM
Going evil should have the uncaring AI robot have former comrades disliking you or maybe a few random encounters, as opposed to suddenly no powers. Of course, recently a developer has shown that this can be bad as well.

In many games, doing certain actions will alienate certain members of the party. Up to the point where you have to fight and kill them. I think this is the way to go about such things.
This is one of the best things about dragon age.

Starbuck_II
2010-04-13, 07:01 PM
In 4e, Paladins and Clerics don't lose powers but instead face RP punishments for abandoning their church's principles. It's something I'd like to see in more games that have these strict guidelines.

Going evil should have the uncaring AI robot have former comrades disliking you or maybe a few random encounters, as opposed to suddenly no powers. Of course, recently a developer has shown that this can be bad as well.

Fallout 3 has mercs that come to kill you if you're evil, you're not evil, or because you're neutral. There's very few results from your morality, and tiny effects that happen can be abused by using someone's computer repeatedly or by dumping a minor amount of cash at (local charity).

Even better in Fallout 3 I had a evil character who had mercs after him for being too good. Talons and those Good mercs both came after me. Apparently, blowing up megaton wasn't evil enough.

Mystic Muse
2010-04-13, 07:08 PM
Even better in Fallout 3 I had a evil character who had mercs after him for being too good. Talons and those Good mercs both came after me. Apparently, blowing up megaton wasn't evil enough.

wait, what's bad about blowing up Megatron?

taltamir
2010-04-13, 07:19 PM
wait, what's bad about blowing up Megatron?

some heathens don't believe in the church of the split atom. They think it was a senseless slaughter of innocents rather then the birthing of infinite new universes.

Mystic Muse
2010-04-13, 07:20 PM
some heathens don't believe in the church of the split atom. They think it was a senseless slaughter of innocents rather then the birthing of infinite new universes.

no. not megaton.

Megatron. the decepticon.

Starbuck_II
2010-04-13, 07:21 PM
no. not megaton.

Megatron. the decepticon.

I don't think anyone has mentioned him. :smallconfused:

Mystic Muse
2010-04-13, 07:25 PM
I don't think anyone has mentioned him. :smallconfused:

Yeah, I should have made my post more clear that I was purposely misreading yours. apologies for that.

taltamir
2010-04-13, 07:31 PM
no. not megaton.

Megatron. the decepticon.

Megatron is the only one with the desire and foresight to acquire the cube in order to resurrect their species. Blowing him up means letting optimus and his compatriots win and condemn their race to extinction. In effect, blowing up megatron is genocide.

NOTE: going by the movie's canon

krossbow
2010-04-13, 08:30 PM
Megatron is the only one with the desire and foresight to acquire the cube in order to resurrect their species. Blowing him up means letting optimus and his compatriots win and condemn their race to extinction. In effect, blowing up megatron is genocide.

NOTE: going by the movie's canon


I blame the fallen.


starscream for supreme leader!

Thurbane
2010-04-13, 08:40 PM
I have played ToEE many, many times (too many times?), and apart from being miffed the first time a paladin fell from the drinking contest, it was really a non issue for me. Revert to previous save game, and don't do the drinking contest. It's only one extremely minor "sidequest" anyhow.

taltamir
2010-04-13, 08:41 PM
I have played ToEE many, many times (too many times?), and apart from being miffed the first time a paladin fell from the drinking contest, it was really a non issue for me. Revert to previous save game, and don't do the drinking contest. It's only one extremely minor "sidequest" anyhow.

but its part of a trend. And this thread is about said trend. I had another thread about that issue SPECIFICALLY.
I am saying that its not enough to say that "this specific case shouldn't be there" but that it should be taken further and that PC implementations of DnD paladins should be immune to falling, period.

Vitruviansquid
2010-04-13, 08:53 PM
its worse than that... if ANYONE in your party enters the contest, win or lose, you fall...
so if your party is comprised of a dwarf fighter, a human paldin, an elf rogue, and a gnome druid... and the dwarf fighter enters the contest, the human paladin falls for having "participated" (due to buggy script).



That MIGHT be true if you have a DM and if you fell for knowingly doing something "bad"...
Not a CRPG where the plot is set in stone and you fell for something that shouldn't cause falling.



It is a 3e PC game.



1. it was well deserved.
2. you chose to go through with it.
3. it was with a DM and friends, not a CRPG. (where it wasn't an integral part of the plot that is... there is an excellent NWN1 module where your paladin does fall as an integral part of the plot; and that is intentional)



The problem here is that losing all those is equal for all players...
A better example would be if in mass effect, those who chose to play a biotic character might lose all their powers HALFWAY through the game if they chose to play renegade, and don't gain them back until the end.

For it to equal falling it has to:
1. happen in the middle of the game.
2. last some time.
3. only trigger if certain in game conditions are met
4. be restricted to specific class/es

So lets take the semus aran example:
1. No, It happens at the begining, thats the premise.
2. Yes, it does indeed last a good amount of time
3. No, it ALWAYS triggers as part of the game.
4. No, there is no "class choice" in the beginning of metroid where only those who chose class C can lose their powers and those who chose class A,B, or D are immune to it.

To avoid #4, you could have a preset situation where doing something would cause the paladin to fall, the cleric to fall, the wizard to lose his spellbook, and sorcerer to lose his magic, and the fighter to be cursed with the inability to touch weapons.



http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/1321-Demons-Souls

I'm not saying you can't take a good idea and totally drop the ball on it through such things as faulty coding. I'm getting the feeling that you're trying to prove to me that paladins falling in one game is bad, whereas I'm really saying that paladins falling in games, in general, is good.

Also, Yahtzee is not the God of all that's true and right. >_>

taltamir
2010-04-13, 08:56 PM
I'm not saying you can't take a good idea and totally drop the ball on it through such things as faulty coding. I'm getting the feeling that you're trying to prove to me that paladins falling in one game is bad, whereas I'm really saying that paladins falling in games, in general, is good.

Also, Yahtzee is not the God of all that's true and right. >_>

I am saying that it is near impossible to attempt to implement such a mechanics with an unfeeling uncaring inhuman non-AI and NOT drop the ball.. dropping the ball is the default for every CRPG on such a mechanics, it is near impossible to do it right in such a medium.

And yes yatzhe is often full of it (plus he is getting overly critical about the USA republican party in his game reviews, and he isn't even american but an Australian... doesn't he have anything to say about his own government for a change?)
But his points about demon's souls stand. Demon souls is not an example of a good game or successful implementation of "fall like mechanism".

Kylarra
2010-04-13, 08:57 PM
I find it weird that the centerpiece of your argument that paladins should not fall is a bit of coding that you say is buggy.

I do not see a problem with Paladins falling in general, as it is part and parcel of their class. I wish personally that the 3.x paladin had more to make up for their restrictions as they did in 2e, but that is neither here nor there. So long as the falling isn't some contrived sequence of events, but rather the result of a logical conclusion from deliberate choice, I have no issues with it.

taltamir
2010-04-13, 09:04 PM
I find it weird that the centerpiece of your argument that paladins should not fall is a bit of coding that you say is buggy.

1. Code has bugs in it, always... and as there is no DM to appeal to this is a major issue with CRPGs; so it is a completely legitimate argument and holds in of itself.

2. this is not the centerpiece of my argument, it is but one example.

3. Even had the code not had such a bug and it was coded perfectly and the paladin only fell if he personally participated in the drinking contest it is STILL a wrong move by a game. because various reasons such as lack of DM to appeal to, misunderstanding WOTC paladins by PC game adaptation developers, moon logic, etc.

PS. We are assuming that it is a bug, it is potentially possible that the developers thought a paladin should fall for merely being in the same party as someone who participates in a drinking contest...

PPS. another issue is consistency, throughout the game you can murder innocents without triggering falling because they lack the right scripts.


I do not see a problem with Paladins falling in general, as it is part and parcel of their class. I wish personally that the 3.x paladin had more to make up for their restrictions as they did in 2e, but that is neither here nor there. So long as the falling isn't some contrived sequence of events, but rather the result of a logical conclusion from deliberate choice, I have no issues with it.

Did I argue that paladins should not fall in PnP games? Falling in general is not what I argued against, I argued against falling via automated scripts where there is no DM to "appeal" to.

Vitruviansquid
2010-04-13, 09:08 PM
I am saying that it is near impossible to attempt to implement such a mechanics with an unfeeling uncaring inhuman non-AI and NOT drop the ball.. dropping the ball is the default for every CRPG on such a mechanics, it is near impossible to do it right in such a medium.

And yes yatzhe is often full of it (plus he is getting overly critical about the USA republican party in his game reviews, and he isn't even american but an Australian... doesn't he have anything to say about his own government for a change?)
But his points about demon's souls stand. Demon souls is not an example of a good game or successful implementation of "fall like mechanism".

Not only did Demon's Souls get rated highly by most critics, but it also sold very well.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/95574-Atlus-Thrilled-With-Sales-of-Demons-Souls

While I can't speak for how others reacted to it, I found the fall-like mechanism extremely appropriate, conforming well to the extremely gloomy and depressing setting of the game.

Even not counting Demon's Souls, didn't I just name two other extremely successful games that *did* implement the fall-like mechanism?

taltamir
2010-04-13, 09:10 PM
most critics rate games based entirely on the advertising contracts they receive.
http://kotaku.com/328244/gamespot-editor-fired-over-kane--lynch-review

Kylarra
2010-04-13, 09:12 PM
1. Code has bugs in it, always... and as there is no DM to appeal to this is a major issue with CRPGs; so it is a completely legitimate argument and holds in of itself.It is not a legitimate argument in and of itself that something should not be in RPGs. It simply means that it will be constrained.


2. this is not the centerpiece of my argument, it is but one example.
I've yet to see any others actually. If you've made them, please point me to them.


3. Even had the code not had such a bug and it was coded perfectly and the paladin only fell if he personally participated in the drinking contest it is STILL a wrong move by a game. because various reasons such as lack of DM to appeal to, misunderstanding WOTC paladins by PC game adaptation developers, moon logic, etc.False dilemma. You're assuming that one piece of bad coding is indicative necessarily of a greater problem. Perhaps it is, but it is by no means a given. I am not arguing that this particular issue isn't poor coding or poor decision, but the fact of the matter is, there are ways to code it, and were suggested in your other thread or the cross thread, that retain the fall mechanic, but in a more logical chain of events.



Did I argue that paladins should not fall in PnP games? Falling in general is not what I argued against, I argued against falling via automated scripts where there is no DM to "appeal" to.I'm only responding to this to point out that I was not claiming that first statement at all, but rather making a general statement involving paladins in video games.

Mystic Muse
2010-04-13, 09:14 PM
Even not counting Demon's Souls, didn't I just name two other extremely successful games that *did* implement the fall-like mechanism?

Yes, (or so I assume of the other one. can't confirm that) However, that's at the very beginning of the game and there's a justified reason. It's not in the middle of the game because you decided to get an alcoholic drink instead of a soda or because an evil guy gives you a coin on a whim.

Thurbane
2010-04-13, 09:49 PM
but its part of a trend. And this thread is about said trend. I had another thread about that issue SPECIFICALLY.
I am saying that its not enough to say that "this specific case shouldn't be there" but that it should be taken further and that PC implementations of DnD paladins should be immune to falling, period.
It's all just a matter of style preference.

In any CRPG, there is not going to be the flexibility of adjudicating that you have with a flesh and blood DM. Either you trust the game writers to implement RP/moral aspects, or you don't. With all due deference, I can't see why this particular (the falling mechanic) issue is a problem. Is the falling mechanic houseruled away in your pen and paper game perhaps?

Also, AFAIK, the falling mechanic has been done away with in 4E (I don't play it, so I freely admit I may be wrong), and I seriously doubt that WotC would license any more pre-4E games. This only leaves user made mods for games like ToEE and NWN. I think you'll find that most modders will hold their own ideas about whether falling should be used in game or not.

Thurbane
2010-04-13, 09:58 PM
It isn't a matter of rules, its a matter of morality and a game.
I don't want to the game developers to comment on my moral judgement in a game. It isn't their place to judge me, its their place to provide me entertainment.
Um, wow...OK, now I see your viewpoint. It sounds like you don't want a game with a story, you want more of a sandbox type game.

Like it or not, moral decisions are becoming more and more an aspect in computer games. I just recently finished Bioshock 2, and the entire ending is dependent on your in game actions.

Like I said, it's a matter of play style preference. Some people are OK with this type of game, others are not. I don't think all the nerd rage in the world would change a game designer's fundamental view on whether he wanted to implement moral choices affecting gameplay into a particular game or not.

Speaking for myself, I have more of an issue with games that force save points down your throat. Nothing worse than playing a game while waiting for a friend to come over and pick you up while you are mid-game with no option to save. Either you abandon the last X minutes (hours?) of gameplay, or be a rude jerk and tell your friend to wait while you get to the next save point once he arrives. :smallfrown:

Mystic Muse
2010-04-13, 10:16 PM
Speaking for myself, I have more of an issue with games that force save points down your throat. Nothing worse than playing a game while waiting for a friend to come over and pick you up while you are mid-game with no option to save. Either you abandon the last X minutes (hours?) of gameplay, or be a rude jerk and tell your friend to wait while you get to the next save point once he arrives. :smallfrown:

That or you only have a certain amount of time you're allowed to play a day (like I used to have.) and you have to get off and do something else right in the middle of a level.

taltamir
2010-04-13, 10:18 PM
False dilemma. You're assuming that one piece of bad coding is indicative necessarily of a greater problem. Perhaps it is, but it is by no means a given. I am not arguing that this particular issue isn't poor coding or poor decision, but the fact of the matter is, there are ways to code it, and were suggested in your other thread or the cross thread, that retain the fall mechanic, but in a more logical chain of events.


The logical fallacy of false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy) involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are other options. Closely related are failing to consider a range of options and the tendency to think in extremes, called black-and-white thinking. Strictly speaking, the prefix "di" in "dilemma" means "two". When a list of more than two choices is offered, but there are other choices not mentioned, then the fallacy is called the fallacy of false choice, or the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses.

Strawmen argument. I did not present a false dilemma.

reread my statement. I am explicitly NOT assuming that one piece of bad coding is indicative necessarily of a greater problem. I am talking about a problem that exists regardless of bugs.

I am explicitly saying that even if the paladin only fell when he personally drank it is still wrong implementation for CRPGs.

I am saying that even if the paladin falls from stealing, or killing a specific individual, or any other number of causes that would make one fall in NWN or other games that involve paladins... that all of these are wrong.

Heck we veered away from DnD only games and mentioned failure of alignment systems in CRPGs in general.. such as how in fable 1 you could slaughter a town, buy their homes, rent them, and donate all the money it makes you to get perfectly good alignment and the title paladin.
Or how the closed fist was beautifully thought out in jade empire but wrongly implemented, clearly the person who it did not have much input on quest alignment rewards.

I praised the implementation in dragon age, where your choices have consequences... no "alignment" changes BS, no falling... but party members may disapprove, may go hostile... for big acts even if they weren't there. That your choices affect the world rather then a number on your character sheet.

I have explained my reasoning for why paladins should not fall in CRPGS already but let me summarize:
1. The inability to be given a chance to explain your reasoning.
2. A game should not pass moral judgement but seek to entertain
3. Different people have different ideals of what is "good" and what is "evil".
4. Scripting errors are bound to occur.
5. it unfairly penalizes people for playing a paladin, an already weak class.
6. It only targets paladins while exempting other classes (I have never seen a wizard lose his spellbook or spell component pouch in a DnD game, but paladins can fall)
7. Creating a consistent implementation is highly impractical, and I have never seen one.
8. A CRPG can only give a few premade responses to chose from, limiting your selection of options, so that an ideal option might not be given and the closest one frowned upon by the game.
9. Moon logic on the part of writers.

For a few of those its important to remember that a CRPG is made by a team not a single person. By making the decision early on that the player cannot fall, leaving the choice of following the moral code up to him, all of those are avoided. Including the chance for writers to create moon logic traps (drink = fall), inconsistencies (due to multiple people working on different portions of the game).

there were probably a few more reasons I mentioned but I am a bit tired now and having trouble concentrating so lets leave it at those.

2xMachina
2010-04-13, 10:19 PM
1 advantage of having a real DM. It's more free.

Computer games are very limited. No creative solutions.