Create Party or Create Character

[Death Knight]

Ive thought on this for a while about party-based roleplaying games and want to see what you all think.

 

My preference would most-likely be about equal. I used to not be able to play the create a party rpgs, but now I like them as much as the create a character rpgs.

 

What do you all feel about these types of rpgs? Create a party like Avernum and Nethergate? or create a character like Geneforge and Avadon?

[Trenton.]

First poller

 

Does Geneforge REALLY count I mean, you can add serviles to your crew, and creations. Not to mention Alwan and Greta.

 

Then there are the seven creation slots...

[keira]

I put 'like both', because I like doing party-based setups as a singleton. I have never really liked the just-singleton setups though, for some reason

[Parakeet]

I selected party, as my experience with singletons was one didn't get to do much customizing. Parties provided varied talents & raw meat for the way one got pulverized at the start of the game. (Note I started serious gaming with The Bard's Tale on C64. Even capable gamers muttered about dying alot in the first few levels however careful they were. It made me feel better as I lost count of my Klutzy fatalities.)

Parakeet

[Death Knight]

As for the geneforge setup, I guess you could say that its a create a party rpg, although it leans towards the summoning the party members when you need them.

 

I chose like both but I would say that there really should be more create a party rpgs in general.

[BMA]

Originally Posted By: GuItAr ZeRo - PiNk It Up

First poller

u want a cookie or something ?

I've only read about singleton parties in the Avernum's; I usually take all of the four characters. But I did play as an agent in Geneforge once as I got tired of selecting and managing my creations as a shaper.

[Death Knight]

Originally Posted By: Future Wonderbolt

I put 'like both', because I like doing party-based setups as a singleton. I have never really liked the just-singleton setups though, for some reason

Interesting. I used to like the singleton ideas too, but party based eventually had me give in. If anything, I like the geneforge and avadon games alot more, but still would like to see the next series jeff makes be more like avernum and nethergate's create a party system. There's too few of them altogether.

[Dire Hobbit]

Voted for - Create a Single Character (With party members or others who join along the way).

 

Proviso that there is a respectable number of prospective party members as per classic Ultima and Magic Candle.

[Death Knight]

There are some games that allow both sometimes although they are rare. I remember when playing Avernum 1 one time, I created 2 characters (a fighter and a mage/priest) and was allowed the chance to join up with one other warrior.

 

Knights of the Chalice didnt allow that, nor did Pools of Radiance-Ruins of Myth Drannor.

 

The only other game that had that that Ive played was temple of elemental evil. The cool thing about that particular case was that, some of the party members that joined, were literally worse for your party than most of the monsters and would stab you in the back at their first chance.

[Dire Hobbit]

Might and Magic and SSI DnD 'Gold Box' games had that: hirelings to make-up or supplement your party.

[Cairo Jim]

I've never quite liked the singleton party. Having a full party always helps to make things go smoother and easier.

[Harehunter]

Party of six, table #1. I just like combined arms teams, fire and maneuver, point and vanguard.

[The Ratt]

Depths of Peril had an interesting balance of party vs. single. There were three classes, you could choose one for your main character, then you could recruit up to six randomly generated recruits. Only one could accompany you in the field, all the others stayed at your home base.

[Cairo Jim]

I'm with Harehunter with this one. Pretty much sums up what I was trying to think to say.

[Death Knight]

Wow, cant believe I slipped and forgot BAK. I probably should have listed Betrayal at Krondor and other games as you playing as a party of characters that are already made, allowing you to make them anyway you want.

 

I myself have never played those games so I wouldnt know just how the characters react. Has anyone played the krondor series at all?

[Prince of Kitties]

Prefer creating single characters. Yes, I'm attracted to the romantic notion of the solo jack-of-all-trades hero, despite the idea being OMG FASCIST, like most fantasy and most music that isn't jazz. Ahem.

 

I do like having NPCs that can join the party though. And on occasion I've create two and three person parties, for BoE scenarios where I feel like a singleton would get lonely.

 

(Yes, I left my sanity at the door long before I showed up on the Spiderweb forums...)

[Lilith]

I'm more interested in CRPGs as tactical/strategic exercises than as vehicles for story, and being able to create a party of characters gives me a wider range of strategic options. Having said that, recruitable NPCs who can be customised and controlled by the player are almost as good. What does annoy me is when games only give you meaningful control over one character and leave everyone else's actions up to the AI.

[Death Knight]

Originally Posted By: Lilith

I'm more interested in CRPGs as tactical/strategic exercises than as vehicles for story, and being able to create a party of characters gives me a wider range of strategic options. Having said that, recruitable NPCs who can be customised and controlled by the player are almost as good. What does annoy me is when games only give you meaningful control over one character and leave everyone else's actions up to the AI.

Yeah it would be really cool if there were more games like that. But Im not really sure that jeff would make his new/next series off of that. He said in his blog/interviews that when making games in the future, he would draw on everything he did in geneforge series.

[Callie]

I guess I prefer a party for nostalgia's sake.