ChrisTalbot.com

For a man who seems to focus his games so heavily on conflict and battle can you explain why he insisted on trying to force roleplaying on the poor residents (PC and otherwise) of Norrath (Read: EverQuest)?

L.Speak.
 

That's a very good question. Hmm... Now that I think about it, the only game Lawrence has run that I've been involved in that had less combat than roleplaying was his Chicago Chronicles Vampire: The Masquerade game. The rest have been quite heavy on combat.

I'll have to ask him. ;)
 

A super hero game is bound to have a lot of combat — especially for a combat-strong character like Dr. Strong. Even the "detective" type character isn't heavily focused in ability on much more than combat. M&M is bound to have a good degree of combat, especially given the characters. But should have some subplots and other interactions.

A fantasy game like D&D will either have a lot of combat or not — I find there's a little more of a mix than a superhero game, until one in inside a dungeon, then people seem to kill everything they meet.

Vampire doesn't have as much combat, but some people get bored if there isn't any. In fact, I find a fair bit the players take care of that themselves by fighting each other or starting unneccessary battles with strangers.

The Law
 

A good point about superheroes. However, that just supports my own description of a superhero adventure -- supervillain does something supervillainy, the superheroes fight him, the end. While that's fun for some, that's not my thing.

On the flip side, what's being described there is a stereotypical comic book. As comic book artists and writers have shown today, you don't have to fill space with combat, although the likes of Marvel and DC still often do. A comic book (and I would argue a superhero RPG) can be deeper than the typical superhero slugfests we've all grown up with. It just takes a lot of work.
 

Ok I have no problem with your reasoning there but explain to me now why you'd expect to find a significant or even notable role-playing side to a game which is by and large a giant dungeon crawl?

According to your above logic you'd expect people to kill everything they find. Which, by and large is exactly what they do. In a game whose main focus has always been the dungeon crawl I'm at a loss to explain why you'd expect anything else.

L.Speak.
 

I can only assume you're referring to EQ as a large-dungeon crawl. The reason I would look to do more role-playing in a game like EQ is the main reason I would play a game like EQ, cause of character interraction. From the "dungeon crawl" perspective, I can play Morrowind or TOEE. I don't need other players/people or the MMORPG scene for a dungeon crawl. That's the reasoning. That being said, I love Morrowind and like TOEE a lot.
 

This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
 

Uh...Mr. The Law, so what you're saying is there's no reason to play D&D because all it's for is to kill monsters and forget about the roleplaying?

If you just wanted to have a tabletop game with killing monsters, you needn't play D&D or even have friends with you. You could always set yourself up to play something like HeroQuest alone. Or you can turn to a computer game like NetHack, which is all about dungeon crawling and killing monsters without the roleplaying element.
 

Ok Law, let's try this again.

Yes I know and love the wonderful single player dungeon crawl games out there. Baldur's Gate, ToEE, Marrowind, etc, etc, etc.

The fact is EverQuest is nothing more than a multiplayer 3D version of one of these games. I mean Baldur's Gate & Icewind Dale both have multiplayer options and if I recall so does ToEE. This means you and a few friends can hop online and play through the dungeons. If you're playing those multiplayer you don't hang around in the local pub (and there is one in each of those games) chatting about your character. What do you do? You head out, track down the nearest dungeon and then run through it wasting everthing in sight. I mean sure there might be a quest or reason for you to go through the afore mentioned dungeon but in the end it's a loot/xp grab pure and simple.

Now take that and apply the same pattern of thought to EverQuest. People don't hang around taverns chatting or talking about their characters. They get a group together, haul ass out of town and beat poor hapless monsters for loot and xp.

Same idea. Different game. Larger scale. Changes nothing.

EverQuest is a big dungeon crawl. It has a pretty chat interface put overtop of it all so you and your closest, bestest buddies can shoot the shit while slaughtering orcs but it is in no way set up as a role-playing game. The quests are all, go here, kill this, bring back what it drops in return for xp and/or loot. Rinse, repeat.

Titles are granted not for achievements in roleplaying or unique and interesting characters. Instead they're reserved for people who put their nose to the grindstone and level like mofo's. Which again plays into the run the dungeon, kill the monster and loot the treasure template.

I hate to break it to you but no matter how you look at it and despite the designers best attempts to make it something more, the sole purpose of EverQuest is to constantly strive for bigger and better. Be it your character, your stuff, or your guild. If you're not trying to get the new item, the new ability or to run the newest dungeons, that game gets old incredibly fast.

If I recall correctly, this was exactly the reason you quit. There simply wasn't a roleplaying aspect to EQ. Given how it was laid out though, I'm still at a loss to explain why you expected one.

L.Speak.