New EXP Mechanic? — Rewarding strategy over grinding

[GMDev997]

Hi all,

This idea came to me in response to another thread (here) and I thought it was innovative enough to warrant its own thread. Tbh, I haven't played a ton of RPGs, so I don't know how "new" this mechanic idea is, nor how well it would work in practice compared to other RPGs, but here goes anyway.

The idea is this: what if using more powerful traits (equipment/spells/etc.) decreased the amount of EXP you receive? This would mean that if you wanted to level up faster, you'd have to rely more on strategy than power. It makes logical sense because if all you do is spam your most powerful attack while wearing legendary armor, you aren't gaining any actual experience.

There are lots of benefits to this system. For one, it shortcuts the grind. Rather than fighting the same enemies using the same traits over and over, you could opt to reduce your own power level to level up quicker, granted you don't die in the process. It also varies the grind, so it isn't as monotonous; given a range of enemies with different tactics, you may be forced to use different combinations of traits, making each battle unique.

What I think is the biggest benefit, however, is the payoff: once you've reached a level you're comfortable with and you don't care about leveling up anymore, then you can use all of the powerful traits you've acquired without any drawback. It's the cherry on top after working so hard to get there.

Unfortunately, I've been having trouble getting my thoughts together for this post, so there are probably more interesting details I'm forgetting, but this is the gist of the idea. Would love to hear a more experienced dev's opinion

 

[Dororo]

It's not a new thing.
In D&D and practically a lot of JRPG, you have an equation between party level vs "encounter level" that determine the amount of XP you collect by defeating such menace.
At higher levels, the starting pack of goblins deal you 0 exp.
That equation could include also skills and equipments, just a matter of computing a modifier for them and add it to levels.
For example, a good sword can add +2 to the "party level".
I'm really positive about such a system: it could be harsh to compute in tabletops, the device can compute the level for you and that's better.

Drawback: you must compute VERY precisely checkpoints, to avoid sending a low tier party against a boss/menace they can't possibly overcome due the lack of grinding.

 

[Seacliff]

The idea is this: what if using more powerful traits (equipment/spells/etc.) decreased the amount of EXP you receive? This would mean that if you wanted to level up faster, you'd have to rely more on strategy than power. It makes logical sense because if all you do is spam your most powerful attack while wearing legendary armor, you aren't gaining any actual experience.

I'm having trouble not seeing a contradiction here. This seems to encourage just spamming the attack command every turn. I guess that depends on a variety of other factors, but how are tatics still encouraged if you are discouraged using spells/equipment/abilities? What tools can you still use without these abilities that still encourage strategy?

I think if your goal is to reduce grinding, I think you need to find the synergy rewarding efficiency gained by time saved using tactics. Other games that reward additional EXP bonuses have their rewards determined by the number of turns it takes to finish the fight, the amount of damage the party has taken, etc.

As for the skills, If you have issues with players spamming certain powerful skills undermining the difficulty of combat, then it sounds like the issue is in the skills themselves. If a skill is doing a lot of damage, then either reduce the damage it does, increase the MP/TP needed to use it, or replace it with a skill with a different effect, because you can have skills that can do more than just multiply your damage output.

 

[Dororo]

I guess that depends on a variety of other factors, but how are tatics still encouraged if you are discouraged using spells/equipment/abilities?

Equip "Fire 1" spell instead of "SuperNovaBomb" and face the ultimate dragon. If you'll overcome the dragon using basic buffs and stuff, more exp to you (prizing the savvy use of low tiers stuff instead of rely on SuperNovaBomb).
You practically play underleveled volountarily, and such risk is prized by more exp.
It's quite logical indeed: you set the game difficulty when you want.

 

[Shikamon]

oh is it sounds like an exp based rate which how well you did in the battle? Like more quickly you finish the battle, the more you gained exp.. so you have to choose the most efficient strategy to deal with different kind enemies.

 

[GMDev997]

In D&D and practically a lot of JRPG, you have an equation between party level vs "encounter level" that determine the amount of XP you collect by defeating such menace.
At higher levels, the starting pack of goblins deal you 0 exp.
That equation could include also skills and equipments, just a matter of computing a modifier for them and add it to levels.

Of course, party level vs encounter level determining XP isn't anything new. I would like to hear more about the XP altering items/equipment systems though; do you have an example that's close or identical to what I'm suggesting? I go into what I'm thinking in more detail below.

I'm having trouble not seeing a contradiction here. This seems to encourage just spamming the attack command every turn. I guess that depends on a variety of other factors, but how are tatics still encouraged if you are discouraged using spells/equipment/abilities? What tools can you still use without these abilities that still encourage strategy?

Good point, I guess I seemed to imply that everything makes your XP gain low. But that's not the case. Some traits can actually increase or just not change you XP gain. These would include restoration, status infliction, and buff/debuff spells. As for straight-up damage inflicting traits, the weaker ones will simply net you more XP than the stronger ones. Note, you can still use the stronger spells if necessary, it'll just come at a bit of an XP loss.

Let me go into more detail (although I thought up most of this on the spot):

Spoiler: In-Depth XP System

Enemies give out a fixed amount of XP depending on their stats. Then, that fixed XP amount is reduced depending on your stats; the stronger you are, the less XP you receive. Equipment that increases your stats will thus reduce your XP gain in this way. So before you start the battle, you gain some set amount of XP depending on your stats and the enemy's stats. Then, how you battle will influence XP gain. The exact formulae are less clear here, but the guiding principle is that the more positive or neutral XP gain actions you make, vs the fewer negative XP gain actions you make determines how much more or less XP you gain.

Here are some battle scenarios that outline the effect I'm trying to create.

Scenario 1
Enemy: ATK 100, DEF 100; Fixed XP: 100
Player: ATK 50, DEF 50; Reduced XP: 90
Action Selection: Attack x9 (Neutral), Regen x2 (Positive), Buff x2 (Positive); Battle XP: 35
Total XP: 125

Scenario 2
Enemy: ATK 100, DEF 100; Fixed XP: 100
Player: ATK 100, DEF 100; Reduced XP: 75
Action Selection: Damage Spell x3 (Negative), Regen x1 (Positive); Battle XP: -15
Total XP: 60

Scenario 3
Enemy: ATK 100, DEF 100; Fixed XP: 100
Player: ATK 130, DEF 130 (+30 equipment); Reduced XP: 40
Action Selection: Damage Spell x2 (Negative); Battle XP: -30
Total XP: 10

The first thing to notice is the curve from underpowered to overpowered. Being underpowered reduced XP gain only a little bit, on level only a bit more, but overpowered a whole lot. Then, being able to win the battle via buffs and regen while using normal attack net the player a ton of positive XP, bringing their total above the initial fixed XP. This is almost double Player 2's total XP gain, but that's because they relied on damage spells, and could have gotten more XP by trying a strategy similar to Player 1. And, of course, Player 3 got peanuts because they relied on strong equipment and spells.

There are some imperfections I can see so far. For example, it seems like as long as you just keep buffing and healing, you'll get more XP. That wouldn't be the case, though I'm not sure how I would impede that (probably by taking # of turns + stats into account). Also, these are just random numbers I came up with, so they might not be consistent.

I think if your goal is to reduce grinding, I think you need to find the synergy rewarding efficiency gained by time saved using tactics. Other games that reward additional EXP bonuses have their rewards determined by the number of turns it takes to finish the fight, the amount of damage the party has taken, etc.

As for the skills, If you have issues with players spamming certain powerful skills undermining the difficulty of combat, then it sounds like the issue is in the skills themselves. If a skill is doing a lot of damage, then either reduce the damage it does, increase the MP/TP needed to use it, or replace it with a skill with a different effect, because you can have skills that can do more than just multiply your damage output.

I think you're right that the problem of grinding or overpowered traits could be solved in other ways, but I do want to explore this option further. Also, this isn't for a game I'm making yet, but if I do make a full-on RPG, I would want to implement this battle system.

You practically play underleveled volountarily, and such risk is prized by more exp.

Comical picture of fighting the almighty dragon in your underwear aside, you've pretty much got it. And don't forget the payoff; once you have enough exp, you get to don all the ultimate armor you want! It could also get you out of tight situations if you find yourself low on health in an enemy infested area. Just put equip the more powerful stuff and try to just get out of their alive, not worrying about levels.

@Shikamon I think I've clarified enough in this post to answer that question haha.

Sorry for long post btw, hope it isn't too much of a nuisance

 

[Dororo]

Instead of computing stats (the computing is already made for balance) you should give items/skills a power level modifier and have all of them equippable (before the battle).
Then you should have a "PARTY POW LEVEL" indicator for player feedbacks.
I don't think using sheer stats could work, your stats could be low but your potential high based on the type of encounter (4 clerics against an horde of undead are incredibly more powerfull than 4 warriors, for example).
I'll go instead for a meta-statistic: sum up character levels for the power level, normal stuff change nothing, advanced stuff increase the power level, you can also equip cursed items that decrease the pow level. You can play with this by having very advanced stuff that give you substantial bonuses while not increase the POW level - hidden stuff.
That way a buff count as an overall POW increase if you'll equip the skill in battle despite the number of uses (not speaking the debuffs that could become EXP gathers your way!) and that simplify your math a lot.

 

[CraneSoft]

It makes logical sense because if all you do is spam your most powerful attack while wearing legendary armor, you aren't gaining any actual experience.

The opposite is also true. People get stronger by pushing the body to their limits, using their best weapons or magic and improving from them. It doesn't make logical sense if I gain extra strength and experience swinging a wooden stick or a pocket knife rather than a real katana or a broadsword, or trying to fry an enemy with weak fire when I can make volcanos erupt (which theoretically should be much more difficult to control and thus should logically reward more experience). All standard RPG experience pretty much runs on this logic as you face stronger foes and thus get more experience from fighting them with your improved skills, not outdated ones.

Reducing anything (including experience gain) for ANY reason is a no-no when it comes to mechanics because any minus becomes a punishment which is the exact opposite of what a player would want. If your goal is to reward a player with extra EXP, provide ways for the player to gain bonus EXP instead for doing the more risky stuff (such as the infamous Death Rings or double EXP equipments that literally physically handicaps you), without forcing them to it in case they don't want to deliberately handicap themselves or taking that risk just to level up properly. Make it an option or a choice, not a mechanic.

 

[Volourn]

A developer 'punishing' players for using abilities that said developer put in the game presumably to be used seems odd to me. To me, it is just smart strategy to use the best tools at your disposal. Rewarding the player for making the worse decision seems weird. A trait or skill should never be 'overpowered', anyways. It makes no sense as adeveloepr to give a skill to the player that lets him attack twice per round but reward him more if he (foolishly) just does the single basic attack. That is poor playing on the aprt of the player and should not get any benefits for it. In fact, if balanced properly, if all they do is spam single attacks when they have more powerful abilities available they *should* die not get rewarded (barring them fighting in 'lower level' areas.

If a players wants to 'challenge' themselves by limiting what they use that is on them but ti also means you likely didn't balance the more powerful skills to begin with if they make the game *too* easy. If I can beat a 'boss' battle by just spamming 'auto attack' instead of 'mega damage x' skill than that boss battle likely wasn't balanced properly to begin with...

 

[GMDev997]

The opposite is also true. People get stronger by pushing the body to their limits, using their best weapons or magic and improving from them. It doesn't make logical sense if I gain extra strength and experience swinging a wooden stick or a pocket knife rather than a real katana or a broadsword, or trying to fry an enemy with weak fire when I can make volcanos erupt (which theoretically should be much more difficult to control and thus should logically reward more experience). All standard RPG experience pretty much runs on this logic as you face stronger foes and thus get more experience from fighting them with your improved skills, not outdated ones.

Powerful argument there, friend. It doesn't completely contradict my idea, but it does raise good points. In fact, while writing this, you've gave me plenty of ideas on how to improve the system. Let me go into another in-depth explanation:

Spoiler: In-Depth Stat System

To address your concerns, I propose two different XP types: Fighting XP (FXP) and Gear XP (GXP). FXP applies to your player's base stats, whereas GXP applies to the stats of upgradable gear, such as weapons and spells.

Gear XP increases depending on how much (and how successfully?) you use a particular piece of gear and as you level up gear, the boost to your stats is greater (obvious, right?). Gear also has skill caps, depending on what type of gear it is. You can only do so much with a wooden stick, so its skill cap will be low, whereas more powerful gear with more potential will have high skill caps.

Fighting XP, as you can imagine, is the XP that the player receives from every battle, and this is the XP that you gain depending on the XP system outlined above. However, leveling up (by gaining enough FXP), doesn't directly add to your base stats. Rather, you don't really have base stats, like 100 ATK and 50 DEF; instead, you have base multipliers . That is, your direct stat numbers come from your gear (weapons and armor), and that number is multiplied (in some way) by your base multipliers.

The flavor/logic of this system is that you have some level of generic fighting skill that amplifies how well you battle using whatever gear you have. However, you can get even stronger by learning how to use your gear effectively. Furthermore, because FXP gives a multiplier rather than adding stats, it will grow your stats at a much faster rate to focus on FXP rather than relying on strong gear and GXP. So it maintains the same spirit of my original idea.

But does this mean that you'll get much more XP for beating the demon lord with a wooden sword rather than a more practical weapon? Not necessarily. Add to the XP system I outlined previously considerations for turn count and damage taken—where more of each decreases potential XP gain—and it is very unlikely that you'll gain an unrealistic amount. Rather, using more practical weapons and defeating the demon lord in a reasonable amount of time using equally good strategy will net you more XP.

I think that assessment should address your concerns. Also, as one last note, it's unlikely you'll actually be able to fight the demon lord with a wooden stick (although I think that would make for some fun challenge runs) since you still have to have the stats to win in the first place, requiring stronger gear. So you'll naturally upgrade from stick to katana to divine blade of the gods.

Reducing anything (including experience gain) for ANY reason is a no-no when it comes to mechanics because any minus becomes a punishment which is the exact opposite of what a player would want. If your goal is to reward a player with extra EXP, provide ways for the player to gain bonus EXP instead for doing the more risky stuff (such as the infamous Death Rings or double EXP equipments that literally physically handicaps you), without forcing them to it in case they don't want to deliberately handicap themselves or taking that risk just to level up properly. Make it an option or a choice, not a mechanic.

Good points again, though I think one could frame the XP system such that it isn't inherently negative. For example, if we hide the details of XP reduction from the max XP an enemy gives from the player, then all those negatives might not be apparent, and having Gear XP always increasing could hide that effect also.

Either way, thanks for the critique! Made me have to think more critically about the design.

 

[Milennin]

Sounds lame to me. I want to use the big skills, because they look cooler. A better way would be to incentivise correct play. I could see encounter EXP rewards be based on your actions, like:

+200 EXP: Encounter clear
+25 EXP: No HP loss clear
+25 EXP: Countered enemy attack
+25 EXP: Hitting enemy weakness
+10 EXP: Cleared status ailment

 

[Beregon]

Regardless of how good the concept itself is (myself, I am leaning towards the "bad" category), this approach to XP gain would make balancing the game even harder, especially if the game was complex with many tactical choices. Determining XP value per item and skill would be really hard. Especially if some skills end up being stronger than they should be. Let's say the Rain of Fire skill is stronger than the Fireball skill and thus Fireball has a bigger XP bonus. But Fireball also gets boosted by Skill X and this unintended combination would end up being stronger than casting Rain of Fire and with more XP to boot. So you nerf Skill X to bring it in line, but accidentally end up breaking Skill Y, which is now much weaker than it used to be etc. It's just a lot of added complexity and I'm not sure it's worth it.

It also depends on what leveling system you use exactly. Is this the typical JRPG, where you say, learn Fireball at level 4 and Rain of Fire at level 32? If so, I don't see the reason for this, the skills are already gated behind levels and adding an XP penalty for using high level stuff feels redundant. Is this a game where you know both Fireball and Rain of Fire from the start and relying on Rain of Fire as a crutch will ultimately leave you weaker and less good at eventually using Rain of Fire? That seems to have a lot more potential, but still, I think more than an XP penalty, a high cost or say a miscast chance for high level spells that decreases with character level might be a better way to go about it.

Also, I have no idea how this by itself is supposed to stop the level grind. You will still level grind, just instead of grinding with your highest level spells, you will be forced to use the low level ones if they are the most efficient for XP farming. So, you will still grind, but instead of replacing your spells, skills and gear with higher level ones, you will mostly keep using the same stuff you started with. To me, that seems like a net loss of fun.

 

[RachelTheSeeker]

I honestly think The Grind isn't as bad as folks think. I used to hate grinding for the longest time, and a sign of a bad RPG is when grinding isn't fun when it's necessary (*coughdigimonworld3cough*). A good game will make grinding optional, but won't be a big chore if you decide to.

If you're dead-set on limiting grinding by nerfing EXP gain, there's likely a way to do this similar to your idea. Rather than force a player to use crummy equipment, there may be a script or plugin to alter EXP gain based on character-vs-enemy levels. If the characters get too strong, there's a diminishing return from weaker foes. I think the Castlevania games on the Nintendo DS do this?

I'm still don't think nerfing EXP gain is needed. If one is that concerned about grinding, then limit the amount of combat. Find a way to turn off random encounters. Disable encounters in cleared dungeons. But personally, don't punish players for playing a game their way. I like playing default difficulties, and hate excessive grinding. Doesn't mean I'm going to police gamers for playing on Easy, or condemn players who likes to break the game mechanics over their knee.