Annoying Games Mechanics – Companions & Romance

It’s been a while, hasn’t it, since a game mechanic has bothered me so much that I had to unpack the Annoying Game Mechanics section of The Mental Attic for a nice rant. But as I’ve been streaming and recording Let’s Plays in the past few months, and perhaps because of my choice of games, there are two that have really gotten on my nerves.

As with every Annoying Game Mechanic in the past, this is a mechanic that when done right it’s awesome but when done improperly it just makes you groan. A friend once said that the definition applies to all mechanics, and he might be right, but some mechanics are always awesome and others are always bad. Those in the middle, I call them annoying.

But let’s get down to business. The mechanics I’m bothered about right now are Companions and Romance. Yes, since it’s been a while and these two are connected, I’ve decided to go for a twofer. But it’s going to work a bit differently. I’m not gonna go into multiple examples, just a couple for each and explain why they’re good or bad.

Annoying Game Mechanics - Companions | Romance
It’s up to you to decide is this is a romance or just friendship, but it’s indubitably pure human contact!

You might wonder: is Romance a mechanic, or is it part of the narrative? In most cases I’d say narrative, just an element of the storytelling, to connect two or more characters together, to give us something to care about. But when the relationship is quantified, when the attraction and the closeness and intimacy have defined values that you can alter with items or a choice in a conversation, then it becomes a mechanic.

The problem with Romance as a mechanic is that as I mentioned in last week’s Writing a Novel guide, one of the pitfalls of the romance genre is the lack of characterisation on the couples. You have characters with barely any personality and you expect the players to feel love for them. Or maybe they’re bland and live and breathe by your words and your gifts. How can that mechanic be satisfactory? How can it convey the beauty that is human relations or the heartbreak of a love lost when it’s so artificial? You fall in love with people who challenge you, who make you realise the stupid things you think or say, the ones you tell yourself or told to you by others. You fall in love with people who make you change for the better, who make you question the things you just accepted so you form your own conclusions. You fall in love with those that force you to face your fears head on, because just being with them brings out the courage you thought you never had.

Annoying Game Mechanics - Companions | Romance
She has doubts, dreams, joys and fears, just like any other person! (Image Credit: Giantitp.com)

One of the best romances in games for me has always been Revan and Bastila in Knights of the Old Republic. Your character is a blank slate, but you give him the personality with every choice you make. You embody him and he becomes a well-rounded character. Bastila on the other hand has a defined personality, she’s haughty and proud but it’s all a front for doubts and impossible burdens placed on her. She’s vulnerable and that makes it hard for her to connect. And it’s not through gifts that you connect with her, or a simple choice of “let’s do this,” but something gradual, through hundreds of conversations. You talk to her about her worries, about her values, you get to know her fully before you pass that romance checkpoint, so when you do get to that place it feels more natural, because you got there through the gaming equivalent of pure human contact.

The worst romances on the other hand are in Dragon Age origins and Jade Empire, two Bioware games released after Knights of the Old Republic. Each has one of the sins and rides it into the sunset. Dragon Age Origins lets you buy affection with gifts and you can skip the human contact of dozens of conversations by just showering your would-be partner with lavish gifts. It doesn’t feel like a romance, more like a business transaction that ends in an intimate moment.

Annoying Game Mechanics - Companions | Romance
To be fair, it’s not just the romance, but also the dialogues that are wooden! (Image Credit: Penny Arcade Forums)

Jade Empire on the other hand suffers from bland characters, women and men with almost no personality. They rarely have their own opinions and some even state yours is all that matters to them. They don’t feel human even if the most basic of ways: thought. How can you connect with them then, how can you connect to a doll or a puppet? Jade Empire romantic interests have no soul.

 

Companions are a part of a game that goes beyond the narrative and extends to the gameplay itself. A companion is a supporting character, someone there to help you fight or to give out clues on how to solve a certain puzzle. You might have a single companion or you might have a few of them trailing behind you. Sometimes you can play as the companions, choosing their abilities in battle or just making them your main character for a while.

Companions have their own mechanics associated to them. They have underlying systems controlling their behaviour, abilities and even power levels. Sometimes you can talk to them and find out more about them, even romance them if you give gifts or engage them in meaningful ways. Sometimes you can raise your connection or affinity to them to unlock personal quests or just more bonuses in battle.

Annoying Game Mechanics - Companions | Romance
By the time you get here, the AI and you will be an unstoppable team! (Image Credit: Bored Nations)

Good Companion mechanics are those where the party NPCs don’t get in your way, or their AI is good enough they fight battles as well or even better than you would. Knights of the Old Republic, as fun as it, is has horrible companions in this regard. They’ll often get lost on the way, walking or running slower than you do, making you waste precious time because you can’t exit a room unless your party is all there. In combat they rush their enemies even if they’re ranged characters and unless you take the time—which you often have to—to select their abilities, they won’t use their powers or weapons effectively. Force using characters are worse at this, missing out on disabling enemies because their AI just goes for Saber Flurry.

Dragon Age: Origins (and only Origins) companions are fantastic. They react to your attacks, often creating combos that you might not be aware of, or setting those up for you if you have the right spells. Through their automated example you learn how to create proper strategies when fighting most enemy types.

Jade Empire, despite its wooden romances, has an interesting take on companions, as you can set them to offense and support. In offensive mode, they attack enemies just as you, often taking some of the heat off your back and giving you a chance to take out enemies one by one. In support though, they sit around in a meditative pose and give you a passive bonus, though those are quite unbalanced to be honest. Only Dawn Star is of particular use, as she can restore your Chi—read Mana.

Annoying Game Mechanics - Companions | Romance
They help in combat, but they have their own love interests! (Image Credit: A Most Agreeable Time)

Companions and Romance often go hand in hand, especially in Bioware, they can’t NOT do romance and companions—and it’s why I used them for my examples and not others. It’s their signature and people expect it, though I wish all their games had the depth of humanity that the Knights of the Old Republic romances had. But sometimes you get games were companions and the romance are independent of one another, where the affection is left to the narrative. Xenoblade Chronicles fall into this category, where the companions’ feelings towards one another are part of the script. Their affinity with you only determines mechanical benefits, but there is no pursuit of romance, and it’s better that way to be honest. I’d rather have my character pick their partner because it’s part of the script, than have to romance a character with no soul.

But what do you think about companions and the mechanics of love in video games? Do you have memories of a truly human connection in a game, or do you ignore them because they’re pointless and artificial? How about just companions, do you have any thoughts on those? I skimmed on examples this time just to rant a bit more, but I’m keen to hear other examples of good and bad!

Let me know in the comments!

Writing a Novel – Emotional Impact

One of the hardest things writers have to do is engage the reader, make them feel as if the world they’re exploring through your words is their world, so they become invested in the characters’ fate and feel their joy, happiness and sadness. I have read works where a single chapter made me cry and gone through clumsy novels where the authors try their best to make me sad by piling on the misery but l just don’t care.
Continue reading Writing a Novel – Emotional Impact

I love Uncharted! But I hate Uncharted!

Last month, with an unusual amount of disposable cash in hand, I bought a Wii U and a PS4. As soon as I got them, I started playing Bloodborne—a game that has since been replaced by Xenoblade Chronicles X as my main title—and died over and over as you tend to do in Souls games. But last week I decided to take a little break from it and give the other games that came bundled in with my PS4 a chance. As a long-time fan of Tomb Raider, and from hearing many people call Drake, “Dude-Croft,” I decided it was time to play the Uncharted Collection.

I love Uncharted…but I hate Uncharted too. Continue reading I love Uncharted! But I hate Uncharted!

Aligned Narrative – The Mass Effect 3 Endings

A couple of weeks ago I spoke about the issues in Mass Effect 3’s storytelling, primarily how bad its characterisation was. I’ve been playing the game since Extra Life in November. I went through the first game on a Renegade playthrough and then got as far as I could in the second one before the charity event ended. I picked it up again when I launched the LawfulGeek channel and decided to complete the trilogy with my renegade FemShep, the one I lovingly call Darth FemShep.

I remember one of the issues people had with the endings was that the three doors didn’t exactly work for both “alignments.” Some said control didn’t work with a Paragon character, or that Synthesis didn’t work with a Renegade. Continue reading Aligned Narrative – The Mass Effect 3 Endings

Dropping the Pen – The Storytelling Flaws in Batman Arkham

Let’s face it, we all love the Arkham Batman Series. They’re fun and (for the most part) make us feel like the Dark Knight, prowling the streets of Gotham, beating justice into the faces of criminals. But that’s not to say they don’t have flaws, tremendous ones, when it comes to storytelling.

Batman fans can nitpick away at the game’s timeline and portrayal of some secondary characters, but I’ll leave those alone. Continue reading Dropping the Pen – The Storytelling Flaws in Batman Arkham

Dropping The Pen – The Storytelling Flaws of Mass Effect 3

When people think of storytelling and Mass Effect 3, they immediately think of the highly controversial ending, where all your choices up to that point boil down to a three-door scenario: control, destruction and fusion. The endings themselves aren’t bad but they commit the serious crime of wrestling control away from you, making all your choices be in vain.

But we’re not here to talk about the endings because to be fair, that subject’s been beaten so much it’s no longer a dead horse, it’s an undead one. Instead what I’d like to focus on are the other often-ignored shortcomings in Mass Effect’s writing, be it general storytelling or characterisation. There are good things as well and I’ll make sure to mention them, of course. Continue reading Dropping The Pen – The Storytelling Flaws of Mass Effect 3

Grounded Fantasy – Why I’m Tired of the Genre

I love fantasy, I really do but I’m tired of it, tired of how it plays out in novels, books and TV series. I’m tired of the tropes and styles, the clichés and approaches, the worlds and the people. I have read good and bad fantasy, played atrocious games in the genre as well as amazing ones. I’ve written terrible stories and some good ones. More than any other genre, I feel fantasy has reached a stagnation point. Continue reading Grounded Fantasy – Why I’m Tired of the Genre

Types of GMs & Players

So far in these series of pieces covering one of my passions, P&P Roleplaying Games, I’ve gone over my own Storytelling style and a few Tips & Tricks & Advice for GMs, but now I’m focusing on the types of GMs & Players you’re sure to find when you play.

I started played about 10 years ago, give or take a year, and since then I’ve run about 3 successful games and a slew of failed or interrupted ones, as well as playing even more, so I’ve had a chance of playing with pretty much every type of player and storyteller under the sun. Your average players & storytellers are somewhere in between a few of these, but you can also have purebloods and while some are good to have in your game, count yourself lucky if others aren’t in your game, or even worse, running them!

I want my Wallsword!

Let’s get down to them and let’s begin with the players:

The Baby: Players always want something, even things they know they can’t get, and they try to get their GMs to approve it, and then they’re shot down and things move along, but not for The Baby, for him that’s just the start, and he better get what he wants or he’ll throw temper tantrum after tantrum, escalating in frequency, hostility and offensiveness, until either the GM gives in, or he’s kicked out.

The Power Player: The PP spends hours, sometimes even late-nights, poring over the rules to find every single exploit, trick, synergy and bonus and will build his character around it. Doesn’t mean he’s not a good player, no, most are; in fact, they’ll often build their character’s stories around the exploits, to explain in-game how he’s so good, but in the end, the use of their Empowered character is the most important for him, to show just how good he is at building them (I’m like that with Magic-types, I’m that good! XD)

The Number-cruncher: This is the bad evolution of the Power Player. The number cruncher isn’t so much a role-player, more like a role-accountant. His entire time and energy will be spent going over his stats, figuring out the numbers and what to do to get more numbers. He doesn’t care about the game or the story or the other players, he’s too focused on his stat blocks. This is the type of player who won’t even participate in the game; instead, you’ll see him reading his character sheet every second of the night, only showing signs of life when the time comes to put his stats to use.

The Deeply Invested: The polar opposite of the Number-cruncher, the DI cares only about the character from a plot point of view. Stats are irrelevant to him, he doesn’t care if his character is the best at what he does, he just wants to play them as much as he can, finding out more about them, sharing in their victories and defeats, the joys and sadness.

The mask hides a good RPlayer!

The Shyguy: Shyguys are good players, often having fantastic ideas, but grow mute the moment it’s time to role-play, to act as if they were other people, their embarrassment or stage fright keeping them quiet, often talking in the third person: “My character agrees” or “My character explains”, without actually doing the role-play themselves.

The Goldfish: These are the bad short-term memory players, the one people need to explain things every time they come up, be it in different sessions or during the same one. They’ll forget how to use skills, or how to fight, or how to do X ability their character has, prompting the same explanation for the umpteenth time, making the other players and GM consider maybe writing down a tutorial for them.

The Stagehand: This type of player will always try to “help” the storyteller, often playing music he thinks helps set the scene the GMs painting, mostly oblivious to the fact he’s probably doing the opposite and is instead distracting people away from the descriptions. Other times he will cut in to further explain something he feels the GM left incomplete, even if that was the point. In general, the stagehand will always try to “help”, but will

I need 3 natural 20s? There…please make it harder next time – The Unbeatable

often just hinder the GM.

The Unbeatable: Entire planets have to die out for the universe to balance the equations when it comes to the Unbeatable’s luck. You have 3 dice and need to get three 6s? The Unbeatable will roll them and get four of them. This is the player that’ll instant-kill your hard-worked villains, whose roll of the dice in a negotiation will be so obscene he won’t only get what he wants, but with a bonus. Is there a chance for him to survive the car blowing up? If the possibility exists, no matter how statistically improbable it is, he’ll do it. He doesn’t need loaded dice, he doesn’t need to cheat, he’s just that lucky.

The Black Cloud: The antithesis of the Unbeatable, the black cloud can’t catch a break. Out of 30 dice in a night, he’ll get above average results in maybe 3, and that’s being optimistic. His die rolls will always be low, sometimes the lowest possible, and no matter how much you stack things on him, it’ll be useless, since his luck is abominably bad. Is there a chance of failure? If the answer’s yes, then it’s almost certain he’ll cause the worst possible outcome.

That’s it for the players, the types I can remember, now let’s go with the GMs:

You should have knocked the giant down! That takes away its invulnerability… — The Hardmoder

The Hardmoder: Nothing is ever easy. Every encounter needs strategy and care to make it through, and getting out unscathed is a miracle. Negotiations can quickly go out the window, fights will always be challenging, and bad decisions meet with extreme prejudice.

The Elitist: The elitists consider themselves the top of the hill, and will only play with those experienced enough for his advanced skills. He doesn’t have patience for new players, and if he has to suffer through them, he’ll pass the explaining buck to someone else in the group, since he can’t waste time to do it himself.

The Evil Bastard: Don’t give your character a purpose in life, or a family, or even a background. The Evil Bastard will use it against you in extremity, often turning them into tragic points of your character’s life, or even enemies, and not because it’ll add to

You will be a Dwarf with a limp and “performance issues”, and your family will die, sorry, but I need them to…and you too. – The Controller

the story, but because it’s fun for him to screw with you like that. If he does it enough (and repeatedly to the same player(s)) then he should be considered a Mercilessly Evil Bastard.

The Filmmaker: Rules are irrelevant to the filmmaker, as are most character decisions. The most important thing is his vision of the story; the players are just spectators with the illusion of free will and the ability to change the outcome of the story. If it means pushing the story where he wants it to go, he’ll kill your character, no questions asked or ways to stop him, often doing things cinematically (aka, no dice or mechanics involved).

The Controller: This is the Ultimate Evolution of the Filmmaker. As his name implies, he needs to control every single aspect of the game, from the story to the characters, his vision is of so vital importance, the players have to accommodate to it. He directs character creation, making sure every choice is tailored to his desires, from skills to background stories.

The Recursive: The recursive will, before even the first word’s been uttered in the first session, already built sprawling, multi-branching storylines for all characters and will constantly update those branches with even more branches, going over the again and again, making sure every character decision has the appropriate impact and building a web of both independent and converging storylines.

The RAWmonger: The RAWmonger or Rulemonger deals only with the rules as written, no house rules, no exceptions; what’s on the book is the law, no second guesses. A storyteller can only be considered a RAWmonger if they’re experienced, as new GMs tend to grab firmly to the rules as support while running their first games while they find their own rhythm and style.

The Tolkien: The Tolkiens are extensive in their descriptions, sometimes overly so. No room is ever a room, but a 30-minute tirade explaining how each chair was made, where the wood came from, the fascinating stories about the carpenter’s wife and how two of their three children died in the plague last year. No weapon if ever just a weapon, a simple crossbow will instead be a work of amazing craftsmanship, the rail where the bolt goes so intricately carved, if you look down it, you realize it’s the shape of a rose. They’ll often trick players into believing things are more important than they actually are, if only because of their evocative descriptions.

No one forced you to kick the king’s daughter…now off with your head! – The Arbiter

The Coach: They know everyone started as a newbie, so he’ll make sure those less experienced are appropriately supported so they pick up the gist of things as quickly as possible. They’ll also keep things amiable and movingforward, making sure everyone is playing nice. He’s firm but fair in his decisions, sometimes slipping on the firmness, because not wanting conflict among the group extends to him.

The Carebear: This is the Coach’s mutation. The Carebear will put people’s feelings first, making sure nothing makes them uncomfortable or unhappy, and will often employ Deus Ex Machina moments to make sure everyone survives and even comes out winning.

The Arbiter: His job is just to mediate between you and the world, aside from his duties setting the story. Players often have a greater degree of liberty than with other GMs, but they’re forewarned everything they do is at their own discretion and peril. He will intercede for the players, but in general will let things play out.

The Indoor Larper: LARP stands for Live Action Role Playing and this GM type acts and plays as if he’s doing just

Winging into Action!

that, often pulling out various costumes during gameplay, as well as using music and props extensively, sometimes to his own detriment.

The Wingman: Called such because nothing is every prepared in advance, not even the plot or major characters or NPCs or anything, instead he wings it all the time, improvisation taken to a professional level. Nothing will ever have a character sheet or be put on paper even. And if, or better yet, when he forgets everything he’s made up till then, he’ll make shit up as he goes along, hoping someone in the group will remind him where the plot ended up last time!

I may have missed a few more player & GM types and maybe I’ve focused on the more extreme, so hit me up in the comments with more suggestions and I’ll add them to the post, and hey, maybe you’ll remind me of a few more types!

Image sources:

What kind of a DM/GM/ST are you?

What kind of a Dungeon Master/Game Master/Storyteller are you?

There are plenty of Pen & Paper RPGs out there and for each there’s probably a different term for the Storyteller, the person behind the plot, the villains, the conspiracies and sometimes the loot (which you’ll find in EVERY SINGLE GAME, be it a +1 Ballbusting Sword of Awesomeness or a Renraku Hyperdeck or a simple meaningless necklace of human fingerbones; so stop lying to yourself when you divide games into “loot-fests” and “real storytelling”). But in the end, what you call this person is meaningless, what is important is what kind of storyteller they are. I for one am quite evil. Well, not exactly evil, just not nice.

I think I should explain that a bit further. Continue reading What kind of a DM/GM/ST are you?