There’s a thread over at the MMO Round Table on death penalties. Wizzel of Wondrous Inventions posted a nice bit focused on XP debt and alternatives.
“Take the case of the average MMO player. He is grinding to the level cap [...] He probably dies [...] To recover from the experience debt incurred by the death, he grinds some more. Therein lies the rub: it is simply no challenge, much less fun, to recover from death by doing exactly what one was doing beforehand.”
XP debt is a fairly benign death penalty, but as Wizzel points out, it misses more interesting alternatives.
Wizzel goes on to express a preference for item loss.
“In an MMO that has no penalty for dying to another player … there is often little positive reason for killing another player-character beyond the sadistic thrill [... but] item loss both serves as a penalty for the loser of a particular encounter and benefits the winner. [...] It is that risk vs. reward dynamic that keeps players motivated to try new things and gives death the potential to be worthwhile.”
This is where I have to disagree a little. Item loss is only slightly different than XP loss. Excepting the slight probability of taking back what was looted, you still end up grinding to recoup your loss.
Balancing risk and reward is difficult. At least for the grief-prone, PvP attacks are directed against those known to be weaker. In an asymmetrical competition, the stronger aggressor has typically a negligible chance of death and therefore a lower expected loss ( P(Death) x Loss ). For the very weak (new characters), even the loss of a minor item can be a substantial setback.
I haven’t yet seen a convincing approach that successfully balances risk and reward. Rules can be and have been implemented to govern who can attack whom: such rules restrict player choice (bad) and are often fertile ground for exploit (even worse).
The quote from Wizzel’s post that I liked the most is: “Frodo didn’t have a rez in his group when he climbed Mount Doom.” But Frodo also didn’t die. Not once!
The “death mechanic” in MMORPG’s is just a metaphor for failure (and only bears a fleeting resemblance to it namesake). As a metaphor for failure, it’s boring and adds nothing to the story or world. I’ve blogged the topic before. But let’s look at it from a different perspective. What alternatives to death might Tolkien have used if he’d designed a MMORPG?
Late, Not Dead
When the old Willow Tree defeats Merry and Pippin, Tom Bombadil rescues them and takes them back to his home for some feasting. Rather than failure equating to death, Tolkien occasionally rescued his hapless players ‘deus ex machina’, annoyed them with silly songs and delayed them somewhere nearby for a banquet. Realistically, it’s no worse than an extra half hour’s grind.
Players like freedom of choice. Our little group of hobbits could have called Tom an annoying fool and left at any point. Instead, they stayed. As a reward, Bombadil taught them how to summon him in times of need: a sort of one-time-use special power.
Later, the Nooblets … erm Hobbits … summon Tom to their aid in the Barrow Downs when they were at peril of having their souls sucked out (or whatever it is that Wights do). Nobody likes wasting a rare and powerful single use ability, so this variation on the failure metaphor carries a bit of sting. Still, it beats a naked corpse run to the Barrows.
Failure is its own Reward
Tolkien’s approach isn’t to equate failure with death and punishment. After rescuing the Hobbits, Tom gave them each swords from among the Wight’s collection. Later, the enchanted swords were critical in slaying the Lord of the Nazgûl.
What if Bombadil hadn’t rescued the Hobbits: would they have selected the right swords from among the barrow’s contents? Why is it that every mission requires the group to clear the zone or die trying? Why not build the occasional quest where failure is required to receive the greater reward. The only way to ensure selection of the correct swords was to fail and call on Tom’s aid.
Not Just a Flesh Wound
On Weathertop, the group is attacked by the Ringwraiths, Frodo is critically hit and incapped. Frodo doesn’t immediately respawn at his bind point. Nor does he drop a little bag of gold. And the Nazgûl did not get loot rights. Perhaps if the Witch-king of Angmar had played UO he’d have looted the One Ring.
Instead, Frodo was out of the game for a while. None of this “60 seconds and you’re back up” crap: he was out of the game for some time.
I’m sure players would be up in arms if they had to sit out of the game for extended periods. If Sigil were asked how to make being incapped for extended periods ‘fun’, they might add some sort of ‘resist poison’ mechanic … perhaps you’d have to manually make your heart beat and your lungs breathe. Not the approach I would take.
Instead, I’d suggest the game permit players to bring alt’s along. The spare character would follow as pets (accepting commands and helping in fights). When one toon is down, you’d switch to your backup.
(Aside: I suspect Samwise Gamgee was Frodo’s alt: the two were virtually inseparable. Myself, I would have brought another fighter, not the mule … maybe Frodo was expecting more looting opportunities and wanted the pack space.)
Poor Frodo spent a lot of time playing his alt to rescue his main after Shelob’s jab on Cirith Ungol. But it’s a win-win approach. Failure has some sting and the player stays in the game.
He Who Runs Away
After Frodo was mortally wounded, he was taken with haste to Rivendell for a cure, with the Ringwraiths in close pursuit. Glorfindel arrives to help.
(Aside: Who picks a name like Glorfindel anyway? That’s just asking for the wrong type of attention. I suspect Glorfindel is one of Bilbo’s alts: he did have a thing for elves and suggestive names).
But anyway, the great elf-lord Glorfindel (who once slew a Balrog) doesn’t engage the Nazgûl in combat; first, he attempts to evade them and speeds Frodo to the Ford of Bruinen.
Evasion and escape are important mechanics that Tolkien used frequently. Twice in Khazad-dûm the group was nearly overwhelmed but escaped.
In other games, if you draw a little too much aggro the party is wiped. In LotR, aggro volume is carefully managed: just enough to stress the group without causing a total wipe. And there’s always an escape route.
But In The End
Tolkien didn’t entirely shy away from death. Gandalf died slaying the Balrog, but luckily had a self-rez handy. Good thing, the peak of Zirakzigil would have been quite the corpse run.
Borromir’s death was far more interesting. Seeing his party in trouble, he invoked /sacrifice. Think of this as a powerful AoE taunt, with a permadeath kicker. Believing a group wipe was inevitable, Boromir chose to draw all aggro and help his team escape.
What a great mechanic. In every group there’s always somebody that wants to role-play the tragic hero. Give them the chance!
Sadly, it was a wasted attempt as Merry and Pippin were captured anyway. But they weren’t killed. They were trussed up and carted across Rohan by the Uruk-hai, with the remainder of the Fellowship (their alt’s, perhaps) in pursuit.
Occasions of failure are a great opportunity to spawn related and personally interesting side quests. What could be more meaningful to players than rescuing their own toons?
Conclusion
It’s clear to me that death should not be the over-used metaphor for failure that it is. Always give your players the chance to run away and try another day or another way.
When defeat does occur, use it as an opportunity to reward your players with interesting side quests … and what could be more interesting that rescuing your own alts from a bad situation.
Perhaps even reward failure as if it’s the preferred outcome: not every mission has to end with the players clearing the zone.
Finally, reserve death for those rare and special circumstances where it has the greatest impact on the story that players experience.
Epilogue
Despite really enjoying Lord of the Rings, my memory is particularly bad. Add to this the conflicting accounts of the book and the recent movies, and I needed a plot refresher. Thanks to this guy for the LotR summary.
By Wizzel Cogcarrier Wizzleton IV October 12, 2006 - 6:41 pm
He took an enormous risk (“permadeath,” “end of world”) with an enormous potential reward (“save the world”). Just because it paid off doesn’t mean he didn’t take the risk.
Also, item loss in PvP isn’t just wasted time. The loss of quested items, “lore” or no-drop items, etc represents a permanent setback; it gives the winner of a particular battle a boost. As for griefing, players assume an innate risk by rolling a character on a PvP server. Shit happens. But since newbies are so naturally impoverished, imposing some sort of EQ2-like PvP system with no loot given for ganking easy targets could work. The zone-specific “hard” limits need to go, though.
Other than that, your points were good.
By tuebit October 12, 2006 - 7:26 pm
Heya Wizzel.
Yes, he did take an enormous risk, and he succeeded but that’s not really what I’m ranting about.
In any game I’ve played, it’s really not unusual to die (and hopefully get rezed) at least once per session (usually more). My issue is that there are only two ways to fail a mission: to not try; and to die.
Maybe it would be more fun if you could get captured; be severly incapped; spend as much time escaping as you do whacking; or perhaps even find that being defeated is better than winning. In a word: variation.
As for item loss … for lore / unique / very rare items, I can see how looting these might add to the game. But these items are typically the province of higher level characters. At the lower level, anything you’re likely to lose is likely to be replaced by grinding and so is similar to xp loss / debt.
On the topic of level differences. In most games I’ve played a 10 level difference (just as an example, I know it’s game specific) guarantees that the higher level player will win. There’s virtually no risk.
Rather than limits on who can attack whom, why not make sure that the risk never entirely drops to zero. Devise a system whereby the maximum level still has, for example, a 10% chance of losing to the lowest.
Then, I’d say … gank all you want. Sooner or later, some noob will take you out and loot your epic armour.
By Wizzel Cogcarrier Wizzleton IV October 12, 2006 - 9:34 pm
Meh, level differences are bunk anyway in EQ2. I can consistently take out a non-summoner mage 12 levels above me. Now, I happen to be particularly good at playing my class effectively without any sort of I Win button. (I left the game in May at level 46; “assassinate” is level 50.) But all the same, it was very much a rock-paper-scissors-nuke situation, with monks and summoners immune to just about everything you threw at ‘em and the rest of the classes following the normal RPS model. I digress.
Who needs levels anyway? Skill systems are where it’s at for PvP
By emi October 12, 2006 - 11:06 pm
He would have totally made some kind of punishment include a song. Death by bard, if you will.
By Neil October 14, 2006 - 1:33 am
I seem to remember plot points in FFIV and FFVI that involved the party (or at least Cecil) dying to make way for a new character or plot point that would swoop in and either change the party lineup or significantly alter the job of a protagonist. That’s such an event-charged scenario, most players might see right through it, but it was harrowing at the time. Deus ex machina is a cliche that is far more annoying and has far deeper roots than respawning in the afterlife.
By Steven Rokiski October 14, 2006 - 9:56 am
From an MMO design perspective…
Frodo died. Shelob gets him. End of Two Towers.
But instead of permadeath, Tolkien instituted a system that forces the remaining protagonists in the party onto a sidequest. Sam ventures into Ciroth Ungol and rescues Frodo.
The four Hobbits almost got killed by Old Man Willow; the penalty for failing such a test was being forced to watch a very long scripted scene (Tom Bombadil).
The party froze to death going over Caradhras; as a result, they were forced to venture through Moria.
When Boromir dies (fails to defend the Hobbits), the remaining characters in the Fellowship (party) are required to go on a sidequest to recover the Hobbits. It ends up leading half the party onto a very interesting branch to the main quest story arc. This is an interesting way to branch quests to add replayability imho.
What if the death-penalty sidequest is failed? Gandalf fails the Moria death-grind sidequest when the Balrog gets him. He is forced onto an even longer and more dangerous sidequest, before he gets back into the main arc to get the job done. Deus Ex machina maybe (as with Frodo), but far more dramatic and acceptable than “rez please” I think.
So Tolkien as a game designer would penalize failure, but not with death; thats a hard hole to dig a character out of. Instead, they are forced to take the long way around, possibly picking up more resources (allies, items, etc.) to help them proceed in the main quest arc. This rather neatly penalizes failure, but it compensates for perhaps innapropriate difficulty levels by giving the player a couple more resources/abilities in the long run.
Think: if the dwarves hadn’t failed the fight the goblins off, Bilbo never would have found the One Ring…
By tuebit October 14, 2006 - 12:05 pm
Steven Rokiski wrote: “Frodo died. Shelob gets him.”
I see what you’re suggesting … it in some ways resembles MMORPG death. But only in some ways … there was no request for a rez … Frodo was up again, at the location of his body (ie, no corpse run) after a period of time. In this way, for me, it more resembles an incap. Not quite dead, but unable to do anything for a while.
Other than that, we’re very much on the same page! You expressed the point quite cogently.
By Tachevert October 14, 2006 - 8:56 pm
I really like where a lot of this discussion goes in general… In all cases, we’re taking a current model of “Do a standard XYZ quest, fetch me a foozle and slay 17 wombats; if you die trying you can be rezzed, or maybe you lose the quest” and saying “Y’know, if the world was just a little more interesting, maybe quests just roll along, one into another, and your goals / rewards change with it.” That is, if I’m not paraphrasing incorrectly. It’s an interesting idea, and a good analog to RL. For instance, when I realized I couldn’t afford music school, I didn’t delete and reroll — I changed class to Computer Engineer instead, and received a new set of objectives!
<offtopic>Oh, and just to nitpick: I don’t remember Cecil dying in FFIV; the closest I think he came was when newly-minted Paladin Cecil withstood the attacks of Dark Knight Cecil. However, Tellah did bravely (and selfishly) sacrifice his own life for revenge on Golbez. Er.. (Even more off-topic, but FFIV also has probably the funniest single line of dialog I’ve ever seen in an RPG…. toward the end, upon gaining a new party member, the story to date is summarized in a single screen that reads similarly to “We’re going to defeat Zemus who controlled Cecil’s brother from the moon.” It makes me laugh every time.)</offtopic>