štvrtok 4. apríla 2019

Gameplay: Lockpicking and trap disarming

Lockpicking and trap disarming with the help of lockpicking tools.

 


 

 


 

Since the weekend, I'm back to another batch of work on the rules and systems in my own tabletop RPG project. Yesterday, I covered riding and driving skills, it was pretty fun. Still needs a few additions, but I'm pleased with the write-up, especially with keeping things simple.

Do you know what cliché in RPGs (whether tabletop or CPRGs) annoys me to no end ? Constantly breaking lockpicks. In some titles, even constantly breaking weapons. I'm sorry, but if something breaks with that frequency, it might as well be made from a breadstick or something... Curiously, I've seen this cliché a lot less or not at all in various stealth games, regardless of how different they were from each other. I suppose the breaking of lockpicks is meant to add tension, but in my honest opinion, it comes across as more of an annoyance to players than anything actually immersive. (As for weapons, though I like the idea of use wearing weapons down and a lack of maintenance potentially causing serious faults and failure in weapons, I also find them easily breaking after a short while to be even less believable than lockpicks. It's important not to be overzealous about these sorts of "immersive ideas" and avoid extreme depictions that aren't realistic or believable in the slightest.)

The way I've dealt with designing lockpicking for my system and my setting is that the probability of them outright breaking is very low and happens only very rarely. If the player happens to have absolute rotten luck during lockpicking, in every factor that... erm, factors into it... then there's a high probability it might bend severely or just break. But in all other cases, the player's lockpick should be safe from damage that extreme. An extremely worn lockpick or a very cheapo one made of inadequate material might be a better candidate for outright breaking, but an at least half-decent lockpick made of steel breaking makes no real sense. In my setting, locks are mostly in the 15th to 17th century mold, so lockpicking tools are accordingly sturdy and robust to avoid getting bent or otherwise damaged.

The way I've handled lockpicking is to keep it simple, have it be based around the correct choice of specific tool (different locks requiring different combinations of specific lockpick types) and around the player character orienting themselves purely via sound and tactile feedback. Of course, the GM equivalent (I call him the Narrator in my particular project) provides the description, i.e. whether a lockpick seems to be fitting inside or not, and once the lockpicking itself begins, on whether the player can feel any vague feedback in their hand, through the lockpick itself (and its behaviour inside the lock), as well as whether the player is hearing any sounds that might indicate the lock mechanism being loosened with the lockpicking tools.

Since you have to keep certain things reasonably game-y, I present it in-universe that certain types or styles of locks emit certain types of specific sounds, depending on whether the player's lockpicking is getting closer to outsmarting a tumbler (or other internal mechanism) or isn't anywhere close. As an aural indicator, there's some four or so "levels" of " getting closer" sounds for each type of lock. With tactile feedback described by the Narrator, it's even more straightforward, directly indicating whether certain sensations are felt in the hand holding the lockpick and doing the lockpicking.

A small touch to the rules that's both game-y and fairly realistic (I suppose) is that your character can remember from personal experience what types of lockpicks tend to work on what types or styles of lock, and he or she can keep using that newly-gained knowledge in future lockpicking. Few locks will match each other directly, but there will be some traits to them that a player character can keep in mind or write down for easier differentiation/orientation later. I feel this slight degree of consistency is a bit more believable than everything being presented as "you might as well be starting over again, you have no idea", which would also kind of defeat the point of roleplaying and gradually gaining experience, whether in lockpicking or other areas. There's not much to a lockpicking mechanic if it's either too easy or too convoluted or even useless, and if you have the feeling you're never progressing in it, not even marginally and within reasonable limits. And I consider lockpicking to be one of the (pun intended) key exploration skills in my project, so it's not a feature that's there for show or out of tradition, but an essential feature available to player characters.



----

It also wouldn't make much sense in my project and my setting, because I consciously set out to create an RPG that's heavily narrativist, heavily focused on exploration, social skills, etc., rather than the proverbial "murder hobos wandering around and fighting something every other minute". While I have prepared a fairly deep and varied combat system for the project, the way things are set up, both in gameplay and in-universe, is that you should avoid fighting if you can, and try to outsmart adversaries instead. Using the fighting route as a solution for problems is far less rewarded than dealing with things cleverly and skillfully, and even gets the player in increasing trouble if used often.

So, there's actually a built-in de-incentivization for the player character to prefer using violence over other skills, and there's even in-universe justifications of why going the fighting route is not the right solution in the vast majority of situations. I'm not going to include combat and write "pretty please don't fight, I don't have any other reason for asking you not to". If I approached it like that, of course they'd gleefully go for combat and violence at the slightest opportunity. (I feel it's better to tell people, "We're playing it like this, because X and Y and Z are your believable motivations in-universe for why your characters are not all-powerful and why combat won't solve everything in this RPG.".) Combat in my project is also focused mostly on a player's self-defence, or the defence of a team member, ally, or bystander. The world doesn't revolve around the players, they instead have to learn how to exist within the world. The way combat is set up in particular, you have basically zero chance getting into a solo fight with 10-20 people and not getting killed or taken prisoner. Players are therefore encouraged to be good at exploration, stealth, talking, diplomacy, good at being cunning and reasonably inventive, and if necessary, using non-lethal tools at their disposal.

Being a clever player gets you far in my overall system, focusing on violence and being a munchkin gets you nowhere and only gets you frustrated. Tellingly, one of the social skills you can use on both sapients and animals is... "Compassion". Not a lame skill at all, it can earn the player a lot of friends over time, especially if the PC is being sincere in their actions. My NPCs not being dumb as boxes of rocks and the player's interactions relying on a "Trust" and "Reputation" meter of sorts, there's only so many occassions of the PC being superficially nice, until the NPCs start catching onto that behaviour.

 

----

Copyright

(C) 2017, 2019 - 2024 P. Molnár
(C) 2017, 2019 - 2024 Knight-Errant Studios


 

Žiadne komentáre:

Zverejnenie komentára