I'll go the veriax roleplaying route. Do things if I remember to and compensate if I don't.

I'll come up with personalities for my characters, and maybe make one or two "civilian" characters.

If roleplaying means eating, sleeping, no fast travel, and other such tedious things, then I won't be roleplaying. However, I do plan on becoming totally immersed in the game world and having a blast.

Probably because most of the people I played PnP RPGs with were math/engineering geeks, not theatre geeks.

Our games were strategy & tactics, not improvisational acting. (If you wanted to do improv, you were playing those goofy LARPs with all the goth-dressed kids running around being vampires.... heh)

The only RPing I usually do in these kind of games (single player, anyways) is to be myself in the world. I make my character do what I would do in the world, but, if there is a hardcoe mode I will probably play it. And I probably won't fast travel much if they do horses right this time, especially if the environments are as awesome to look at as I hope they will be.

You must have a bowal issue?


I am a pretty hardcoe roleplayer for everything from making my character get out of a bed at a certain time every day to eating a type of food to hunting...It all depends how the game is and what it lets us do really for me to come up with something, since i dont know if there will be werewolves and ability to become one i dont know how it will turn out :toughninja:

Then it's the same old question of definition.

If a role playing game is not primarily about playing a role, but instead about tactic and strategy - why not call it a strategy game then, but a role playing game?

Would a tabletop strategy game, such as Warhammer, not be more suited for that playing style than an RPG rule system that was designed with improvisational acting in mind?

Or in the case of Skyrim - why not call it an Action Adventure if that's what it is? Or, what I'd prefer, why not keep calling it a Role Playing Game but put more focus on acting?

Besides, I've played with theatre geeks as well as math geeks. Quite literally actually; one was a german and history teacher, theater group leader and someone who used to actually be on stages. The other was a math and physics teacher. Both could play in the same group, and both had their moments. A good game can have strategical and tactical combat situations as well as being immersive.

Moreover, your average math geek isn't even a rare sight at LARPs. And I don't mean combat focussed ones.

if there's a hardcoe mode, i'd use it. i enjoy challenges. i also roleplay my characters quite a bit. if there isn't a hardcoe mode however, i only have a couple personal rules that fall along the lines of what people are talking about here.

no fast travel, no health back from waiting, and i quicksave after anything that happens. no matter how much i didn't want it to. failing to steal an apple and accidentally killing a bystander during the escape, for instance.

you can call it roleplaying, because an amount of roleplaying does come out of choosing to play like this. but i'd call it more immersion stuff. games are just more fun to me when there's a challenge, a possibility of failure, and challenges can't just be easily circumvented. the food and water thing always struck me as busywork in games, though. even in the STALKER series, which were a lot more survivalistic in nature than new vegas' survival mode, it was never a struggle to stay completely topped off in those regards and still be completely rich.

teleporting wherever i want to be and getting all my health back by pretending to stand around for an hour just make things a little too easy for my taste. and, on that note, i think it's important to note that when it comes to all this stuff, it really is just personal taste. there is no universal right or wrong to the amount of these little 'hardcoe' choices one does or doesn't make. simply find the most enjoyable way to play through the game for you.

By those standards, maybe 1% of all the non-LARP "RPG" games sold and sessions held were ever actually RPGs. It's just the nature of the thing - most pen-and-paper RPGs have been about writing lots of stats on record sheets and rolling dice, for decades upon decades. And in the digital realm, the term "RPG" has been applied to everything from story-heavy/gameplay-light Squenix cutscene-fests to "story, what story?" roguelike hack-n-slashers like Diablo.


(And even among the players, you get a million definitions of what makes a digital "rpg"..... on RPGamer.com, I've seen arguments over "why do you even cover Diablo" and people saying Mass Effect 2 wasn't an RPG because you didn't have to manage a huge inventory of loot.)

I don't know if "most" pen and paper RPGs have been about dice rolling more than acting, but I haven't heared of many. Even DnD, which is usually considered relatively action-oriented, is still not really that sort of game. That'd be a different genre, as I said, tabletop strategy, such as Warhammer.

I do like character sheets and dice, btw. The RPG I play has like 1000 pages of basic rules, excluding any background information. You could write essays about the mathematical aspects of that, and few people can claim to really know every rule, such as on mounted combat or what the exact likelyhood of fever caused by a wound worth 7 damage points commited by an undead with a blunt weapon is and what the exact penalties at night in a cold environment in bright starlight during light wind on combat stats are (and how the weapon material affects the penalties caused by the cold environment are; I believe wooden weapons take more structural damage from that) without double-checking. But it still is mostly character interaction.

I guess ones' experiences depend on the groups you played with. Obviously, with the "right" group of people, any of the PnP rpgs could be played "theatrically" even when they all have stats/charts/tables/dice. I just played with people who were more into numbers. (Over my pnp career, I've played D&D/AD&D, Shadowrun, Rolemaster/Rulemonster/Rollmaster :rofl: , Runequest, Call of Cthulhu, and a few others. Ars Magica was probably the least number-y. The only no-RNG rpg that I'm familiar with was the Chronicles of Amber rpg, but I didn't play that one, only knew some folks who did.)

Really don't put tabletop miniatures games (played more than a few of those, too) in the same category, since they're about one person maneuvering masses of generic troops against another person, not several people with single customized characters against the plot & conflicts that a referee confronts them with. :shrug:

Time is 30:1 in the game. (15 minutes = 7? hours)

---

Dice in RPGs (PnP or cRPG), are used to reflect probability. In a game where your PC is picking a lock and the dice roll indicates failure, it is implying that they made a mistake had some bad luck, or are just not good enough at the task. When the die is used for combat (like in Fallout and Morrowind), failure implies minor (or major) mistakes, bad luck, or a skilled opponent (one not so easily hit). When the die determines damage (like 3D6 for a blade; meaning 3 to 18), the roll reflects the severity of the hit, and distinguishes a nick from a deep cut.

With that experience, I guess you're familiar with the (not excellent, but relatively useful) threefold model?

You are right, every PnP can be played in all sorts of ways, and in Threefold terms most cRPGs are very much "gamist" as opposed to "dramatist" or "simulationist". As it happens, the latter two are closer to what I want, but you pretty much understood that anyway.

What I believe is that all three playing styles and their variations could be easily included into a game like this, for example with difficulty and realism sliders. Eating and drinking for the simulationists - can be turned off for those who don't care. Deep story and background for the dramatists - can be ignored by those who don't care (as it already was in the previous Elder Scrolls games). Lots of skills, combat, and heroism for the gamists - number of enemies and deadliness of combat can be changed for those who're rather challenged in every fight. A damatist might not be interested in constant fighting and lower the number of encounters and size of enemy groups. A simulationist might turn the realism slider up so that these numbers are only perfectly logical, and would turn the combat realism slider up so that every fight is very dangerous - of course that'd mean that the game would, on that realism setting, offer aid by friendly units or something in larger battles, who are not just red-shirts to instantly die.

It really wouldn't take much effort. The game'd just ask you a few questions at the beginning to find out what playing style you like. You could even try different approaches to see how they work out, increasing replayability. And with people like myself being more interested in the game, it'd also not be bad for sales.

Pretty much this.

Permadeath?

Can someone please explain how this exactly works? Is it a feature or what?

I'm going to roleplay, yeah.

I don't how how "hardcoe" it's going to be, because I don't think of it in terms like that.

My characters are people in a world, just living their lives or doing their personal quests. Nothing more, nothing less.

A way of roleplaying, another term is "dead is dead". Basically it means that if you die you don't reload, you start a new character.




My own roleplaying mostly circles around sleeping at night and not excessively using fast travel.

Cheers

That sounds to much for a game, but i think the eating, sleeping at night and not using fast travel are the ways to go in my opinion

I don't understand people hating real time scale.
I hate going inside a dungeon at 6 AM and going out at 11 PM and I just went inside for 10 minutes.
That's just silly.

Wasn't there an MMO like this? Can't remember the name but I heard if you died in-game, you had to restart and make a new character. You basically lose everything you had.
Some people killed themselves for real because of that.

Diablo 2 had a "hardcoe" mode if I'm not mistaken. I was pretty amazed at how uber some people got their characters. If I invested that many hours into a barb/necro/pali and had it die for good... Wow, I'd lose my [censored]. The idea of applying a "permadeath" rule to Skyrim intrigues me though.

I play around a character concept (thief/fighter/ranger-type/mageassassin). Just do what makes sense to me. Plus on my first playthrough of Oblivion (and Morrowind) I didn't fast travel til MUCH later in the game. Like when I'd nearly finished it.

My character will use weapons and armor suited for him.
I will allow him to carry only one suit of armor or five weapons as loot. Anything more would be too much of an encumberance.
My character will be very powerful in his intended role but otherwise very vulnerable. This will force me to play him properly or face the consequnces.
I will almost immediately modify loot tables to decrease loot.
I will review and rebalance weapons and damage.
I will review level scaling to widen it for some areas and remove it for others. Bandits and the like will never have top of the line armor. In fact, only top NPCs will be so equipped.
I will do eat/drink/sleep mods if not available directly in the game.

Going to the toilet mods are not strictly necessary.
Dead is dead is a bit too much.
Staggering from starvation after a day without food is overkill.

In the end TES has to reach a wide audience, and that audience is not necessarily representitive of what I want. Fortunately, TES games are the most modifiable out there.

I don't do the Dead is Dead or Premdeath stuff, I like my role playing but I think that is just stupid IMHO specially if I have spent 40 hours in the game than i die, why the hell would i want to start all over again? I can understand why people WOULD but its not for me, if I die I normally just reload a save file and pretend it never happend, otherwise i could ask the people who are into the Dead is Dead kinda logic as Why do you choose to create a save file than for your character? I mean you are reloading the game up every time you turn if off so why not just make a new character every time you turn off the game? Its not like WE as people IRL can just "TURN OFF"