In my previous article on the subject, I talked about how the streamlined, all-plot-no-guff attitude of the modern CRPG detracted from the sense of world and immersion. What I'd like to talk about in this article is how the same problem is exacerbated by some of the elements which are, ostensibly, designed to improve the sense of immersion.

Specifically, the Influence mechanics.

Any CRPG fans out there will know the basic setup: you control your character, and throughout the course of the game you will pick up a variety of quirky minions whose primary purpose will be to carry your loot, and get in the way in a fight. Your interaction with these companions (or followers, or henchmen, depending on what you call them) ranges, depending on the game from "none whatsoever" to "scads of detailed side-quests and sub-plots, along with some variety of romantic interest."

In an effort to make your relationships with your companions that little bit more complex, Neverwinter Nights 2, borrowing from Knights of the Old Republic 2, uses a system of "influence", whereby your companions genuinely react to your actions, and you become closer or more distant depending on whether or not they like what you do. No more do you have to wonder precisely why your Paladin companion doesn't bat an eyelid at your trucking with demons, or why Jack the Necromancer is still hanging out with your zealously good-aligned party.

This is, in theory, a fine idea.

In practice, however, it has some very big and (I would suggest) very obvious flaws. Games, all games, boil down to a series of rewards and penalties. The act of playing a game is all about maximising your rewards and minimising your penalties. In most games, this is very simple: you do well, you advance through the game, and you win, or you do badly and you lose. End of story.

Role-playing games (both pen and paper and CRPG) have a much harder time of it, because there is an expectation that you will be presented with decisions, and that your decisions will be supported. For this to work, there has to be a tangible reward for both decisions. NWN2, for the most part, does this fairly well: you regularly have to choose how an encounter will progress, and you genuinely feel that whichever choice you make will be equally supported by the game. Diplomats and berserk maniacs both have an equally good time when it comes to sidequests.

The Influence mechanics, however, fail to reward your legitimate choices. Either you pick the option that gives you influence, in which case you will get an explicit, game mechanical reward which will go towards unlocking more of the game (and frequently also unlocking even more explicit game mechanical bonuses). If you pick the option which loses you influence, you get nothing.

Not only does this, essentially, penalise you for playing your character (which is a cardinal sin for any RPG, C or otherwise) but it creates a deeply, deeply peculiar party dynamic, in which you are constantly second-guessing your companions, doing your level best to grab influence wherever possible.

It also makes bugger all sense from a narrative standpoint. Frequently, your "influence" with your companions is the key to making them develop as characters, put aside their prejudices and grow as people. Which is great, except the way that you gain influence in the first place is always to pander to the very personality traits that you will, later, convince them to put aside. I'm sure it's all very zen that you can make the arrogant characters humble by telling them how great they are, and get the violent characters to show restraint by encouraging them to fight at every opportunity. It doesn't make much sense though.

I've been working for a while now on a theory that choice in an RPG is a paradox: for a choice to be meaningful, it must have consequences, but consequences by definition penalise some choices, and that negates the original choice, because it turns a character decision into a tactical decision. I've now come around to the idea that it isn't actually a "paradox" at all, it's just a rule for how to do these things right. A meaningful choice in an RPG has to lead to an equal reward whichever path you choose.

To put it more succinctly: a real choice needs to have consequences, none of which suck.