Why Do RPGs Still Need Numbers?

Kotaku has up a new editorial in which they argue stats are needless baggage from the roots of RPGs, and need to go.

Old-time fans of the genre (and JRPG fans especially) may scream at this, but games like Mass Effect 2 – and to a lesser extent Oblivion and Fallout: New Vegas – have already taken large steps in this direction, sweeping much of the number-crunching that was once the lifeblood of an RPG under the rug, letting sophisticated programming take care of it while you worried about more superficial concerns.

Compare, for example, the experience of Mass Effect 2 with that of a more traditional RPG. You’re still doing largely the same things: you’re leading a party, you’re exploring worlds, you’re engaging in dialogue with characters, you’re increasing the strength of your party and gaining access to new and improved equipment along the way.

Yet if you asked somebody to play Mass Effect 2 and then play a more “traditional” RPG – whether Western or Japanese – and they’d tell you it would feel like playing two completely different games, the former’s fast pacing and action sequences contrasting with the latter’s obsession with statistics, percentages, numbers and inventory management.

Whether you like one or the other (or both!) is entirely subjective, but to me, the very purpose (and appeal!) of a role-playing game is to, well, role-play. Create a character and go on an adventure. Like playing dress-ups as a kid, only with (hopefully) better writing and props. I don’t know about you, but my fantasies would involve exploring worlds and kicking ass, not seeing numbers everywhere and juggling inventories.

I don’t even know where to begin in response to this, and so was glad to see indie RPG developer Jay Barnson has a reply up on his blog.

Long ago, I tried the suggestion given in some tabletop RPGs to not reveal to players the exact damage that they had received, but instead to describe it and track the values secretly. I tried to be as descriptive as possible. I thought it would add tension and drama to the game. It did, but not in the way I wanted it to. My players hated it. It drove them crazy. The experiment didn’t even last an entire session. They didn’t want to hear, (You are badly hurt.) They needed to know HOW badly hurt. As exactly as possible. I couldn’t just say, (You might not survive another hit with a sword blade.) They wanted to know a strong hit with a sword blade, an average hit with a sword blade, or a weak hit with a sword blade? Because, you know, it changes everything. And from that, they extrapolated a number range in their heads.

Because from that quantification, they could then extrapolate. What about a dagger hit. What about a fireball? Most importantly, how likely was their character to survive another round of combat without healing?

Yes, quantification can be done without showing the numbers. It may even be a superior way to present the data in digestible form. Comparative charts and graphs exist for that very reason. But numbers provide detail in its most accurate form, and the further you move away from that, the less control over the situation you give to players.