Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
AVERTING LEVEL GRINDING
Posts
Darken
3952
Darken
View playlists
Closeauthor=ChuJooRi
Here's a strange idea. What if instead of level grinding, it was level poisoning (or some other fancy word). The leveling mechanics would be completely reversed. When you defeat enemies you lose experience instead of gaining experience, so the challenge would be to avoid fighting too many enemies or else your character will become weaker and weaker.
It could be worked into the story like if the main characters have powers that weaken them every time they use them.
I guess it would be a bit of a challenge to make it work though. Since you can't have enemies become impossible to defeat if the player fought too many battles.
...why not just have a game where you avoid enemies that lower your health or kill you? I hear this idea all the time and it never makes any sense. It doesn't eliminate grinding it eliminates having an RPG progression system in the first place.
Kaliesto
583
Well if your looking for ideas to avoid level grinding boredom, I would implement them into anything of your choice:
Side-Quests
Bounty hunting (Arc the lad anyone)?
Monster-hunting (The FFXII idea was awesome)
Treasure-hunts
Arena Battles
Rare Monster Encounters (like the cactaurs in FF that give good stuff)
Secret Dungeons (I mean real secrets, not out of the open secrets, secrets that have to be triggered and then search for).
That's the only things I can think of at the moment.
If you need more inspiration, I recommend the Baldur's Gate Series of handling of such situations to have the game be fun. Yes their lvling system is DnD based, but just giving ideas how they handled exp. points.
Side-Quests
Bounty hunting (Arc the lad anyone)?
Monster-hunting (The FFXII idea was awesome)
Treasure-hunts
Arena Battles
Rare Monster Encounters (like the cactaurs in FF that give good stuff)
Secret Dungeons (I mean real secrets, not out of the open secrets, secrets that have to be triggered and then search for).
That's the only things I can think of at the moment.
If you need more inspiration, I recommend the Baldur's Gate Series of handling of such situations to have the game be fun. Yes their lvling system is DnD based, but just giving ideas how they handled exp. points.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
So you pop into a topic about how to stop the negative effects of level grinding... and post a bunch of ways to make people level grind even more? Heh. I'm not sure you thought this through all the way. I gave FF12's loot system as an example of what NOT to do.
Neverm0re
341
I don't think he was trying to think of more ways to grind, just ways to make grinding tolerable by masking it with intent.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
Making grinding more tolerable makes people more willing to grind, which makes them grind more.
TheNecromancer
3160
If a game is good and there is good reason, I prefer to grind over a game with no grinding.
See, the assumption seems to be that EXP must be given out after every battle, but if you want to avert level grinding, rethink how the player achieves levels.
Perhaps only dole out EXP upon successful completion of quests, or milestones?
Perhaps only dole out EXP upon successful completion of quests, or milestones?
author=kentona
See, the assumption seems to be that EXP must be given out after every battle, but if you want to avert level grinding, rethink how the player achieves levels.
Perhaps only dole out EXP upon successful completion of quests, or milestones?
With balance, this could be a potential solution to many problems; namely overgrinding to remove challenge from necessary battles, and reduce the desire to grind.
LockeZ made a good point on the last page: if you give players a not-fun way to play your game, some will play that way without realizing it's not the only option. Everyone has their own idea of fun, but if you haven't spent any time designing grinding to fun or enjoyable, you might not want to present it as an option at all. If you make it fun for people who enjoy grinds, make sure others know it's not the only way to play.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
author=KaliestoOkay yes I think most people would rather have a goal than be aimless, but that's irrelevant because this topic is about averting level grinding. Or at least about averting the bad effects of it.
I prefer grinding with intent than simple grinding.
I mean you've not only utterly failed to solve the main problem with grinding, but you've actually made it significantly worse. The main problem being that the ability to fight trivially easy enemies until the challenging enemies stop being challenging removes 100% of the challenge from the game. This problem exists in any game that allows you to gain power sheerly through time spent and not through skill, but once you start making grinding fun, it's much more likely that the player will actually do it, and it even becomes likely that the player will accidentally do it, and so the problem is a much bigger one. I mean, yes, you've made part of the game more fun, so you've solved some problem, but not the right one.
author=kentona
See, the assumption seems to be that EXP must be given out after every battle, but if you want to avert level grinding, rethink how the player achieves levels.
Perhaps only dole out EXP upon successful completion of quests, or milestones?
This is a solid solution that I like; it's similar to my earlier suggestion to only give out XP the first time you complete a battle, except you replaced my "battle" with your more generic "objective." Chrono Cross does something different but also similar, and probably better suited to JRPGs; you only get XP from bosses and the first five(I think it's five) normal battles you fight after each boss.
systems where the greater part of a character's power comes from gear/equipment rather then levels serve nicely to limit the benefit gained from grinding, even if Last Town Equips +1 are available via random drops. You either make do with storebought/found equipment for the standard level of challenge, or you can grind a little while for better equipment, stop when you have enough, and go on your way.
Crystalgate
694
I only try to avert unintentional level grinding. If the player gets lost and fool around in a dungeon for thrice the time I expected him to be there, I don't want that to make the upcoming boss fight a cakewalk. However, if the player is determined to grind his way past the challenge, that's not my problem.
If you do want to avert level grinding period, the most obvious solution is to straight out make it impossible. Some already suggested solutions are limiting the number of encounters, make enemies give 0 exp once the player hits the maximum level you want to permit them to have in an area and make the player get stronger from other sources.
Which of the solutions you should use depends on what other consequences you want. Limiting the encounters for example, also stops gold grinding while the 0 exp solution doesn't. Limiting the encounters also means that any area the player has been to will most likely be encounter free, something that may not suit well for your game.
I would also recommend against trying complicated solutions such as "you can grind as much as you want, but when you level up you won't get a status increase until you use an essence orb which there is a limited quantity of" since that can easily lead to other exploits. Keep it simple.
If you do want to avert level grinding period, the most obvious solution is to straight out make it impossible. Some already suggested solutions are limiting the number of encounters, make enemies give 0 exp once the player hits the maximum level you want to permit them to have in an area and make the player get stronger from other sources.
Which of the solutions you should use depends on what other consequences you want. Limiting the encounters for example, also stops gold grinding while the 0 exp solution doesn't. Limiting the encounters also means that any area the player has been to will most likely be encounter free, something that may not suit well for your game.
I would also recommend against trying complicated solutions such as "you can grind as much as you want, but when you level up you won't get a status increase until you use an essence orb which there is a limited quantity of" since that can easily lead to other exploits. Keep it simple.
thatbennyguy
1612
RPGs are valued for their randomness and flexibility. Repetitiveness is not design, but rather anti-design. Forcing players to play certain parts of your game again and again without any real new challenge is boredom, not good design. Grinding must be a flexible and adaptive mechanic, giving you interesting decisions and trade-offs, instead of repetitive forced continuations that may lead to success or failure indeterminately.
Killer Wolf
1235
Fair warning: I'm trotting out Deus Ex as an example again.
Coming from the console rpg mindset, when I first got Deus Ex, I killed a ton of people. I knew the game had exp and "levels", so I wanted to level up. By the end of the first mission, I realized that the game only gave you exp for exploration and plot progression.
Paradigm shift. I started over and played the game as a total stealth build. I conserved bullets, lams, bioelectric for when I REALLY needed it to explore or advance the plot. That mindset stuck with me through all four games in the Deus Ex expanded grab bag, and carried over every other game where that approach was applicable.
That said, I'm currently working on a game in the basic Shin Megami Tensei template. Having the right party and being able to exploit a number of enemy weaknesses at a time is key. In order to recruit, you require Sek (energy/money), your main source of Sek is combat.
Fighting is required, and the encounter rate is high (currently painfully so, planning to adjust), but the "grind" is still optional. Just getting from point A to point B pumps the players level up enough that, if they've been paying attention and forming smart team ups, they should find the boss fairly challenging, but entirely beatable.
They can grind to pump up their demons' stats and powers, but every fight comes with a risk. If any summon other then whichever one is currently Imprinted as the PC's Guardian falls in battle, it is removed from your stock and you'll have to catch it again, at whatever level it occurs in the game. If you leveled your flame spewing Jackolantern up six levels to get the area of effect fire spell and you carelessly let him die in battle, you'll have to capture another and start over.
Also, the player can only Rest in safe areas, and it costs Sek to recharge your Demon's MP. The player also gets the opportunity to select either an Health restore, a Mana Restore, or an EXP bonus if they manage to kill a group of monsters before they can take a turn. They also get the option to bank the bonus, letting it stack if they are able to do this multiple times in a row, for greater gains.
My goal was to reward players who put the basics of the combat system together well a little better than people who will just march up and down that stretch of hallway where the higher level encounters spawn until they get that next level/skill.
Coming from the console rpg mindset, when I first got Deus Ex, I killed a ton of people. I knew the game had exp and "levels", so I wanted to level up. By the end of the first mission, I realized that the game only gave you exp for exploration and plot progression.
Paradigm shift. I started over and played the game as a total stealth build. I conserved bullets, lams, bioelectric for when I REALLY needed it to explore or advance the plot. That mindset stuck with me through all four games in the Deus Ex expanded grab bag, and carried over every other game where that approach was applicable.
That said, I'm currently working on a game in the basic Shin Megami Tensei template. Having the right party and being able to exploit a number of enemy weaknesses at a time is key. In order to recruit, you require Sek (energy/money), your main source of Sek is combat.
Fighting is required, and the encounter rate is high (currently painfully so, planning to adjust), but the "grind" is still optional. Just getting from point A to point B pumps the players level up enough that, if they've been paying attention and forming smart team ups, they should find the boss fairly challenging, but entirely beatable.
They can grind to pump up their demons' stats and powers, but every fight comes with a risk. If any summon other then whichever one is currently Imprinted as the PC's Guardian falls in battle, it is removed from your stock and you'll have to catch it again, at whatever level it occurs in the game. If you leveled your flame spewing Jackolantern up six levels to get the area of effect fire spell and you carelessly let him die in battle, you'll have to capture another and start over.
Also, the player can only Rest in safe areas, and it costs Sek to recharge your Demon's MP. The player also gets the opportunity to select either an Health restore, a Mana Restore, or an EXP bonus if they manage to kill a group of monsters before they can take a turn. They also get the option to bank the bonus, letting it stack if they are able to do this multiple times in a row, for greater gains.
My goal was to reward players who put the basics of the combat system together well a little better than people who will just march up and down that stretch of hallway where the higher level encounters spawn until they get that next level/skill.
Hi, my name is Zack, and I had to register in order to express how much I like this topic. The idea in here is really pivotal to modern RPG design, and I had these thoughts while making my own RPG complete with EXP, levels, HP, MP, and... grinding.
If we aren't talking about a game made for the sole purpose of artistic expression, commercial games need to create value for the amount of money they cost to produce, and the amount of profit needed for a company to stay in the black. This is why we might be presented with tedious grinding episodes, especially in older RPGs, before the idea of RPG gameplay because fully refined. Development studios needed to recreate the role-playing experience in the only way they could back then, through statistics like ATK and DEF. Due to the amount of money and the pace of development involved, many studios didn't have the time or resources to innovate away from the pioneers of this model. A culture of grinding was born.
This culture of grinding is especially apparent in instances such as the one Locke mentioned in Kingdom Hearts, where the two items had to be gained from defeating enemies, and then combined. This kind of role-playing gameplay is really ingenious for its ability to offer the conceit of value, which the player can then role-play into enjoying.
But here, many people aren't making games for money. We have a little more freedom here.
We can boil the role-playing video game down to its core essences, role-playing and gameplay. We can play with the boundaries of a role-playing game. Do we need HP and MP? Is EXP necessary? If the player hits an enemy with 90 HP 3 times, it doesn't matter if there's 30 HP or 40 HP worth of damage, the enemy is dead either way. All the programmer is really doing is reducing the number of turns it takes for the player to end this one battle.
We can only move so far before starting to enter the Action genre or the Puzzle genre, but it's worth thinking about the precepts this genre is founded on and whether they're applicable any longer in terms of gameplay.
Grinding might be nice, not because there's any in-game reward, but because it offers a sense of security to the player. Not many game genres can give the player the option to finetune the difficulty level like that. In this way, the thing doing the role-playing is the game itself, not the player.
I like the idea of an RPG where the character doesn't level-up, or even acquire currency. The player must role-play the character's strengths, from finding or making items to devising situations where the character can be at an advantage, like ducking behind a boulder when a dragon looks as if it's about to spew fire.
Video games today are made the way they are because they have created their own culture about the way they are, a culture which allows them to sell and continue to survive. But role-playing originated from across a tabletop, and with enough time and effort, one might be able to emulate that in a video game now.
If we aren't talking about a game made for the sole purpose of artistic expression, commercial games need to create value for the amount of money they cost to produce, and the amount of profit needed for a company to stay in the black. This is why we might be presented with tedious grinding episodes, especially in older RPGs, before the idea of RPG gameplay because fully refined. Development studios needed to recreate the role-playing experience in the only way they could back then, through statistics like ATK and DEF. Due to the amount of money and the pace of development involved, many studios didn't have the time or resources to innovate away from the pioneers of this model. A culture of grinding was born.
This culture of grinding is especially apparent in instances such as the one Locke mentioned in Kingdom Hearts, where the two items had to be gained from defeating enemies, and then combined. This kind of role-playing gameplay is really ingenious for its ability to offer the conceit of value, which the player can then role-play into enjoying.
But here, many people aren't making games for money. We have a little more freedom here.
We can boil the role-playing video game down to its core essences, role-playing and gameplay. We can play with the boundaries of a role-playing game. Do we need HP and MP? Is EXP necessary? If the player hits an enemy with 90 HP 3 times, it doesn't matter if there's 30 HP or 40 HP worth of damage, the enemy is dead either way. All the programmer is really doing is reducing the number of turns it takes for the player to end this one battle.
We can only move so far before starting to enter the Action genre or the Puzzle genre, but it's worth thinking about the precepts this genre is founded on and whether they're applicable any longer in terms of gameplay.
Grinding might be nice, not because there's any in-game reward, but because it offers a sense of security to the player. Not many game genres can give the player the option to finetune the difficulty level like that. In this way, the thing doing the role-playing is the game itself, not the player.
I like the idea of an RPG where the character doesn't level-up, or even acquire currency. The player must role-play the character's strengths, from finding or making items to devising situations where the character can be at an advantage, like ducking behind a boulder when a dragon looks as if it's about to spew fire.
Video games today are made the way they are because they have created their own culture about the way they are, a culture which allows them to sell and continue to survive. But role-playing originated from across a tabletop, and with enough time and effort, one might be able to emulate that in a video game now.
Mateui
1175
Zack, welcome to RMN. I'd say you definitely deserve to win the "best first post ever" award if such a thing existed.
You bring up a lot of great points, especially the one about grinding being a means for the player to finetune his own difficulty.
I view grinding as an unnecessary evil and I applaud any game that strives to minimize or eliminate it completely. Whenever I play an RPG I do so for the story and the characters. The battlesystem is not very important to me and I'd rather continue the story than being forced to battle random enemies over and over in order to proceed onwards.
In my envisioned perfect world, the difficulty would be scaled in such a way that if you proceed directly through the game without intentionally getting into battles the game is still beatable. A lot of times games are purposely designed to force you to grind and that just irks me as I see it as a cheap way to lengthen playtime.
I like the idea of no experience or currency gained from battles. It never made much sense to me why random creatures would be carrying gold on themselves in the first place anyway. From a game designer's point of view, no experience makes the game a lot easier to test and balance since you'll always be in control of the characters' levels, and this will ensure that from player to player, everyone will have a similar overall difficulty experience.
You bring up a lot of great points, especially the one about grinding being a means for the player to finetune his own difficulty.
I view grinding as an unnecessary evil and I applaud any game that strives to minimize or eliminate it completely. Whenever I play an RPG I do so for the story and the characters. The battlesystem is not very important to me and I'd rather continue the story than being forced to battle random enemies over and over in order to proceed onwards.
In my envisioned perfect world, the difficulty would be scaled in such a way that if you proceed directly through the game without intentionally getting into battles the game is still beatable. A lot of times games are purposely designed to force you to grind and that just irks me as I see it as a cheap way to lengthen playtime.
I like the idea of no experience or currency gained from battles. It never made much sense to me why random creatures would be carrying gold on themselves in the first place anyway. From a game designer's point of view, no experience makes the game a lot easier to test and balance since you'll always be in control of the characters' levels, and this will ensure that from player to player, everyone will have a similar overall difficulty experience.
When it comes down to it I think you should always first strive to make a game that is entertaining to play. Addressing level grinding is a smart idea.
If you replaced EXP from battles with some other incentive, it could change things up enough to actually make the random encounters exciting. For example, if monsters dropped unique items that could be used to craft weapons, armor, potions etc.. it might just provide enough incentive to stay in the battles, while giving them a bit of randomness and excitement.
If you replaced EXP from battles with some other incentive, it could change things up enough to actually make the random encounters exciting. For example, if monsters dropped unique items that could be used to craft weapons, armor, potions etc.. it might just provide enough incentive to stay in the battles, while giving them a bit of randomness and excitement.
McBick
1339
I'm surprised to see so many people against grinding/random battles and wanting to remove it from RPGs. It would just be an interactive movie if you removed all the battles in an RPG.
To me battles are half the fun in RPGs and the other half is the story and character development. I don't see grinding as a bad thing, but a way to learn your enemy's tactics and be able to find the best way to defeat them. Although, I have played a lot of RMN games where all you do is spam the action button until you win and I can see that as a problem because it makes the game repetitive and boring.
I think TC is trying to create a game that isn't really an RPG and would be better off making a different type of game that would remove battles/grinding altogether.
To me battles are half the fun in RPGs and the other half is the story and character development. I don't see grinding as a bad thing, but a way to learn your enemy's tactics and be able to find the best way to defeat them. Although, I have played a lot of RMN games where all you do is spam the action button until you win and I can see that as a problem because it makes the game repetitive and boring.
I think TC is trying to create a game that isn't really an RPG and would be better off making a different type of game that would remove battles/grinding altogether.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
I don't think you understand the topic. No one has suggested removing or even reducing the number of battles.
At least no one I was paying attention to, anyway.
At least no one I was paying attention to, anyway.
amerk
2539
Going along with some comments about limiting and/or reducing the grind. I've played a lot of rpg's in my current lifetime, beginning with crappy Adventure game on Atari. Most of them have always required grinding of sorts, and even random battles. Lately, though, I've been trying to find ways to limit this.
First, I've decided to get rid of random encounters for my current project (still in the works). Although it does require minimal grinding, most of these are from enemies you meet in the course of your travels, versus having to replay a dungeon multiple times until you level up enough.
For my next project, though, I was contemplating a few new ideas. The idea to control grinding by limiting encounters certainly helps, but as others have said, this also impacts other resources people need, like limiting gold and item drops. But here's a solution to that:
In the database, creating two of each enemy. One enemy will drop EXP/Gold, the duplicate version just the gold. When setting up troops, you will also need two of each enemy groups, one that uses enemies with EXP, and one that does not.
Event your battles, so the first time fought, it will be the troop that drops EXP, and each time after that the same troop but without EXP.
However, you still have to account for people who will grind for gold for the best equipment and resources, and those who will save their money and purchase equipment with average stat growth. You could potentially end up in the same boat as with level grinding, where people will range from poor to superior equipment which will make the boss fights range from hard to easy. You can't win them all, though.
First, I've decided to get rid of random encounters for my current project (still in the works). Although it does require minimal grinding, most of these are from enemies you meet in the course of your travels, versus having to replay a dungeon multiple times until you level up enough.
For my next project, though, I was contemplating a few new ideas. The idea to control grinding by limiting encounters certainly helps, but as others have said, this also impacts other resources people need, like limiting gold and item drops. But here's a solution to that:
In the database, creating two of each enemy. One enemy will drop EXP/Gold, the duplicate version just the gold. When setting up troops, you will also need two of each enemy groups, one that uses enemies with EXP, and one that does not.
Event your battles, so the first time fought, it will be the troop that drops EXP, and each time after that the same troop but without EXP.
However, you still have to account for people who will grind for gold for the best equipment and resources, and those who will save their money and purchase equipment with average stat growth. You could potentially end up in the same boat as with level grinding, where people will range from poor to superior equipment which will make the boss fights range from hard to easy. You can't win them all, though.
