Top 10 Roleplaying Clichés at IGN

Remove all ads!

IGN is celebrating the advent of Oblivion with a list of top ten roleplaying clichés. No. 10 is humble beginnings:

Though I am but a simple pig farmer, it appears that I have the potential to become the most powerful hero the world has ever known. Don't let my youth and inexperience fool you; my destiny will carry me to far greater heights than my lowly origins might suggest. At least that's what the mysterious stranger who has only just now dropped into my life is saying. The timing is perfect too; it seems that the world is currently being confronted with a cataclysmic danger that only I can prevent. While it seems odd that I should suddenly be hailed as "The Chosen One," I can only assume that my potential has merely gone unnoticed until now. Perhaps I am suffering from amnesia. Perhaps I have been adopted. That no one seemed to expect much of me will make it all the sweeter when I get to rub my newfound fame in their stupid faces.

Yes. Friggin' enough of that. Even if you're the adopted son of a friggin' potent harper, they call you a peasant. You can be the member of a knightly order or a temple pundit or a friggin' archdruid, you're still peasant. In the Elder Scrolls series, you're always a friggin' prisoner. NWN OC beginning wasn't that bad, actually, if still cliché... But think BG1 or KotOR 2 where you pick level-up abilities for people who are so obviously helluva lot older than you that they are your menthors (Jaheira and Kreia respectively). It's like picking feats for mum and dad at your own level, really. Enough, I say. But no. I'm still up for some in NWN2 but heck, I'm still going to play it. I wish I was in the land of cotton... but not as a slave. So to say. Oh, but it's not as bad as I'm saying now. Just sometimes annoying. Damn well annoying.

But humble beginnings all the time are nowhere near as bad as people not recognising your status. If you wear a million GP worth of metal on you, you can't really be a beggar, can you? Or if you run an organisation, especially a temple. Or when you have an heroic reputation. I wish there would be more consistency and accuracy in this respect in future games. Enough ranting. I love the games anyway. Now is your turn. Rant on, I'm daring you.

Read the rest at IGN.

 

since half the characters I use in RPs are aristocrats (especially my Paladins), I would love the ability to at the very least carry a signet ring and have local nobles greet me as something other then commoner (speifically when I'm a Paladin with 18+ cha).

I've always hated the zero to hero crap. I have a disgusting habit of perfering privillaged (very at that) heroes.

To be honestly, I don't remember ever actually playing an RPG where animals and the likes gave you normal loot (in DAoC they gave stuff like meat and hide).

However the lootable, well stocked crates in BG, BG2, IWD, IWD2 and NWN really irritates me (specifically in so called looted areas in NWN, apparently looting means leaving most of the goods in the city untouched). This is medieval themed area, theft is a big problem because of extreme economic stratification, people don't just leave loot out for you to take, on the contrary, they should expect people to try to steal from them. I get to the point where I refuse to look in crates/barrels and what not, because why would any one just leave healing potions or magic weapons lying around?

 

The zero to hero thing doesn't bother me much because I don't play many RPGs where that actually happens. What gets me is all the "destiny" crap. People who have lead a perfectly normal (well, normal for an adventurer type) life up to this point are suddenly under some sort of geas to "fulfill their destiny and save the world". And they always do it like the good little pawns they are.

I'm also a little peeved at the idea that 10 year olds are the only ones who can save the world. These little pukes probably couldn't even save their beds from wetting. The youngest I ever want to see my adventurers is 14 or so; old enough to be an adult in medieval times, but young enough that they have just barely grown into their skills and don't have a life-career yet. Still a little cliche, but not quite as bad.

What I really like is the ones where an established officer of a tyrannical system finally sees the light and turns against his liege (a la Final Fantasy 2, damn what a game). Actually, most of the ones I like involve a rebellion of some kind. Weird, huh?

Um, BG1, BG2, IWD1 (don't know about IWD2), need I go on? Most games simply don't give any loot to animals, but monsters have an acquisitiveness brought on by low intelligence and shiny things. Ooh, shiny.

Ditto.

On #4, rampant gigantism:

Actually, that's pretty true. But I do still have a problem with all the giant animals; that just shows a lack of imagination by the creature creators. The same goes for #6, "an apple a day, or as needed". Really, is it that hard to think up things that would actually, oh, I don't know, heal you?

On #9, "A Boss So Nice, We Fought Him Twice", I can't agree more. Nothing pisses me off quite so much as thinking I've beaten someone only to have them come back. But it can be a pleasant surprise - and challenge, since I've likely expended some resources to beat the first form - so long as it's actually a surprise. But after seeing almost every single final boss undergo a transformation, I save up my biggest blows for when it looks like I might actually need it. Of course, the end result is that I typically don't use them at all, which also pisses me off because I've been hoarding the damn things all game!

And finally, I'd just like to say that a well-made RPG has absolutely no problems with any of these except maybe #9 (it seems to be a requisite, for some reason).

#1 is simply unnecessary.
#2 is also unnecessary.
#3 should not happen with plot-specific NPCs, and should not be all-consuming with others either. A certain amount of them is a given for variety.
#4 is downright stupid.
#5 is downright stupider.
#6 is beyond comprehension.
#7 is poor planning for treasure giving.
#8 is taken care of with proper triggers for "undesirable" activites.
#9 makes me .
#10 is another lack of imagination. Multiple endings, people!

 

I only remember trolls and ettercaps being the odd horders. I don't mind trolls and ettercaps picking up gems, but carrying gold was a little odd.

 

What's nice is when you can get some hide to make into a part of armour. In Morrowind, you can get meat which you can use in creating potions with various effects.

 

i saw goblins and/or kobolds dropping greatsword in neverwinter nights, that count?

 

Should halflings be allowed to use them at all?

 

No. There's a little comething in D&D called weapon size (unless they got rid of that too in 3e ).

There's S, M, & L for normal weapons (Tiny and Giant for humanoid races' weapons). Using a weapon the same size category as your character, you can wield it one-handed or two-handed, with no bonus for two-handed wielding unless the weapon specifically has it. Using a weapon a size category smaller means you can only wield it one-handed, and wielding a weapon a size bigger means you have to wield it two-handed, again with no bonus unless the weapon specifcally has one.

So a halfling wielding a long sword would have to hold it with two hands, and a (shorter) dwarf with a battle axe would not have a hand free for a shield. And of course, wielding a weapon two sizes bigger than you would require more than two hands, which you simply don't have. So a Small character (2-4 feet) could not possibly wield a Large weapon like a two-handed sword.

 

3.5 impliments weapon size so a halfling could wield a greatsword that deals 1d10 points of damage instead of 2d6. A halfling's weapon always must be of the "small weapon damage", which means a halfling's weapon will always deal less damage then a human with the same str (I guess it's to make up the halflings +4 to hide, +1 attack bonus and +1 dodge armor bonus, and having a 20 foot run speed and only being able to carry 3/4s of what a medium creature with the same str can carry)

[ March 23, 2006, 18:12: Message edited by: Taluntain ]

 

Ugh. I should have known they'd mangle it like everything else. Never mind me, then.

P.S. Fix your quote.

 

It was a rhetorical question.

 

But's it's so fun the way it is

Looks like Tal beat me to it.

 

Well, the article did at least get one thing right:

In fairness, most of those I've seen in RPGs through the years. Less so nowadays, but many of them do follow the same template. The whole thing about monsters dropping random treasure I mostly remember being a problem in Diablo (1&2) & the Ultima games. Of course, Ultima is guilty of the 10th cliche on almost a dozen occasions, assuming that you can include Akelabeth and the Underworld games.

Still, at least you weren't a peasant. Unless you happened to choose "Shepherd" as your starting class, that is. Fortunately, no-one was usually that daft (or humble )

 

Of course goblins can fight with greatsword if they want to, but it is another thing when a goblin fights with dagger but drops a greatsword from its backpack, stomach, whatever.

Also, HotU starts with a pretty "famous" character instead of a nobody-farmer, no?

 

I don't really have a problem with the zero to hero idea. It is kinda annoying when everything seems to fall into place and the hardest parts of the quests are the battles. The hardest parts should be getting to the battles. Let's do a little more figuring out, a little more problem solving. Perhaps once in a while we can find out we were fighting for the wrong side, or perhaps we want to fight for the wrong side. What's wrong with being a tyrranical dictator once in a while? On pen and paper D&D you can become a minor noble, or even a major one. Why can't you become a major noble who's people are the ones trying to revolt from your "rule with an iron fist motto?" I don't mind saving the world, but once, just once I would like to sit back and watch the world blow up, maybe even be the one pulling the trigger.

 

*cough* Dungeon Siege *cough*

I agree with Ilmater's point way up there, about using aristos as characters. Hmm, maybe it's my snobbery coming out.

The thing that really annoys me about the farmer= hero thing is that the new warrior always seems able to hold his sword correctly, and kill anything that attacks.

A farmer wouldn;t be able to get his grip right, and MR Goblin would gut him easily. Game Over

 

Erm, I think the biggest problem is everyone shoving your peasantness down your throat even if you manage to get a stronghold, huge level, a million GP, whatever. Except maybe those little folks who call you milord invariably anyway.