Horror games About a decade ago I read an article that discussed horror elements in an RPG and although I don't remember much else, one section stuck in my mind. Paraphrased:

quote: What does a player do when he sees a vampire? He pulls out his lightsabre and chops it in half, the same as he did to the werewolf on the previous level. This is not horror.

At the local used bookstore I picked up a few horror RPG supplements for source material and thought I'd share some inspirations with the crowd here. a) When it comes to combat, the beasties fall into roughly three areas. Ones that follow standard combat rules for damage. Usually lesser minions, these are chopped up just fine - it gives the player some false confidence. Giant rats might be an example. Ones that look like they can be killed by normal means, but are usually just incapacitated and return to plague the characters again (usually rather quickly). They can usually only be destroyed by some minor ritual (holy water, fire, sunlight). Of course the players might not know what the ritual is.... Ones that simply aren't affected by normal combat, and can only be damaged or destroyed by some other means. This doesn't have to be obscure, just not easy, and something that cannot be solved by brute force. A ghost that can only be laid to rest by finding its remains and giving it a proper burial, for example. b) The beasties have a wide variety of powers that might only make sense in the context of its lair. Most general RPGs have careful balance to avoid places where a powergamer would abuse the system, and in horror that's where they fail. There's no need to stick with generalized mechanics when you're trying to give the players the heebie jeebies and using abilities that only the beasties have. Tailor the beastie to its environment or history. Example: a ghost in the woods. When players first enter the area (screen) they see a few scattered glowing lights. One of these is the ghost, the rest are illusions hovering near or over minor traps (bogs, for example). Not instant death, but something to keep the players on edge. When they approach the ghost, it does mumbo jumbo that makes a handful of the trees turn into twisted evil shapes (see Wizard of Oz). Maybe the effect only lasts a few turns, *but the player doesn't know that*. The trees try to thwack the heroes. The heroes should be free to attack the trees, but they're really only trees, so who cares. Maybe the ghost summons some wolves (don't make it instant, have the players hear a wolf howl and then have the wolves arrive a few turns later - just enough time for the O-Sh** factor to seep in) Give the ghost the power to rearrange or scramble the paths, replacing clear tiles with bramble tiles and vice versa. Have the new paths head straight into the aforementioned bogs, or even scramble the bog / non-bog tiles too. These are potentially powerful effects, which would be out of place in a general setting or in the hands of the player, but they can be put to good use in the hands of the computer. The goal of the computer-as-GM is to provide a challenge, not to simply kill the heroes. So coming up with effects that don't cause direct damage is a good thing. c) Give the player a nice simple, crunchy character stat or skill system. Give the monsters a similar system, but with plenty of skills and effects outside of it. In other words, don't restrict your beasties to the same limitations or rules that the players have. Keep a lot of them the same, but feel free to deviate. Simple example: A vampire dies when exposed to sunlight. This is not something that is normally measured on a player character. It's a special rule that applies separately. There's no reason that this should only apply to limitations. There's a power in the game Chill called Haywire that causes electrical or mechanical devices to malfunction. It doesn't matter if they are a flashlight or a flamethrower, it all suffers and the player is reduced to pitchforks and torches. From the player point of view, the cost of an item (in money or points) is related to usefulness or size, but here the beasties have a power that measures items on a completely different scale (technological complexity). A player might realize that his flamethrower is working again when the flashlights come back on, but some players might not notice and continue to try and use (less-effective) low tech methods. d) Spend plenty of focus on mundane, useful tools. You can't dig up graves with a sword or a gun. Food is useful for those overnight ventures in a haunted house, not to mention opening the door for beasties tainting the food. In a normal urban setting you can rarely just light a (dead) beastie on fire without setting off smoke alarms and catching the room on fire. Human size bodies don't stack that well in a fireplace. But with liberal use of a hacksaw or fire ax... If one of the heroes is possessed, you can't very well kill him, but with rope (or manacles) they can be bound and perhaps exorcised. e) Slower healing. Some slow or long term effects. No more insta-heal potions. Slower healing also implies less lethal damage vs the heroes, so you can space out your beasties and traps. No insta-death traps. Anticipation of suffering and a sense of risk can work as great headology on the player. Long term effects might be infection from enemy claw wounds. The player doesn't lose 1 health per turn, but 1 health per 100 turns, and the infection is not immediately apparent. The preventative, heavy antibiotics, is either limited or causes its own limitations (groggy for 2 days, with appropriate skill penalties) that makes it not worthwhile to simply dope everyone up. Another long term effect: incubating a beastie within one of the heroes. Nasty and effective. You could keep it hidden by making it a consequence of another normal activity, like sex with a particular NPC. Other long term problems might arrive from a beastie that has been improperly disposed of. the player thinks they got the right incantation, and the thing did disappear, but not forever, only for few days. Or it comes back in a different form, looking for revenge. f) Use some numbers, but don't focus on them. Numbers detract from horror because they are simple, easily recognizable, and comfortable. Don't simply obscure the numbers - it won't work. Instead focus on the story or events that the numbers are supposed to support. Compare: The ghoul hits you for 10 points. Your left arm is damaged (health bars shift). The ghoul breaks your arm with a sound like a snapping twig. (small picture of a person holding a broken arm is displayed for minor shock value and an appropriate wav is played. health bars shift) Now, you can't use that example over and over without the player getting numb (and running out of arms), but for minor damage levels keep it a simple message (Ouch, you are lightly wounded), and have a handful of more interesting ones available as needed. In the same vein, if your combat mechanics are simple, make combat fairly short so the player doesn't go numb to the hit-foo-damage-foo process. g) Flatten the power-up curve. Reward the player as necessary to motivate them, but nothing scares Superman. Maybe use a different reward system. Example: Some slightly better equipment, a few new skills, but no massive hp increases. Instead the player is rewarded with occult knowledge that can be used against more powerful beasties. h) Avoid the standard beasties. Try and stay away from generic vampires, werewolves, and Lovecraft crud. You are forced to fit the generic mold that everyone knows about or your deviations will be criticized by the masses. If you do stick with a traditional style beastie, then definitely use a deviation, and make sure you have plenty of things in the game that either point to or explain the differences (this can be done subtly). In crafting the beastie, surprise the players. Use multiple layers. Player thinks they are dealing with giant rats, but it turns out the rats are simply fleeing the cemetery that has occupied by ghouls. The ghouls in turn serve a more powerful beastie who is the real villain. The villains machinations should be hinted at or evident in some other plot that the players are dealing with at the same time. So if the players follow one thread there may be leftovers from the other one that come back to haunt them. Give what appear to be similar beasties strongly different abilities. The tactics that work on the ghost in the woods might not work against a ghost haunting a house. Even if you use a randomly generated scenario, force the players to deal with each as an individual or unique problem. Well, this is long enough for now. Feel free to comment, criticize, or add to this. Edited by - JSwing on 12/28/00 4:51:47 AM

Also, if you''re doing a horror game, it''s sometimes best to keep it in short episodes that can be completed in around 10 minutes each so that you can quit at periodic intervals without losing the horror effect that''s been built up the next time you play.

Great thoughts, JSwing!

I agreed with most of what you said, but I have a small contention: I think that repetitive combat should be toned down or removed whenever possible. Why? Because I think it deadens the effect of horror.

Repetitive combat gives you the impression that you''re equal. But you''re not supposed to be equal, you''re supposed to be soiling your pants. Once you fight them a number of times, you become desensitized to them.

Instead, why not have fewer monsters, but more detailed, involved fights? It''d be great if they could knock your weapon out of your hand, or throw you through a window. I''d like the see the player panicked to the point of having to run away in terror. Or I''d like to see the player able to hastily erect a barricade, only to have the monster start smashing its way through it ("Here''s Johnny!!!!" )

I also think, as Hitchcock once talked about, that horror isn''t effective in what you show, but what you make the viewer wonder about. What they have running around in their skull can be worse than anything you could expose them to.





--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

quote: Original post by Wavinator

I also think, as Hitchcock once talked about, that horror isn''t effective in what you show, but what you make the viewer wonder about. What they have running around in their skull can be worse than anything you could expose them to.

I couldn''t agree more. Battling wave after wave of zombies, wherewolves or vampires is not scary. Make players feel like they''re being hunted , but only give them small, subtle clues of the enemy''s presence. You can use visual clues, like seeing the monster''s shadow creep over a wall, slime trails, mutilated bodies of the monster''s earlier victims, ... Or you can use audio - e.g. howling wolves or the sound of snapping branches.

After the player has been scared to the point of wetting his pants, you can make the bad guy give up his stealthy approach and let him confront the player. Preferably by means of a sneak attack, of course

The only thing that worries me about this approach is keeping it playable. If the player can expect an alien to drop down on him and slash his guts open at any time, how long will he keep playing the game? To avoid frustration, the player should always be able to see an attack coming before he gets killed. How do you allow this while still building up the suspense and the shock effect?

One more thing, JSwing: IMHO, RPGs aren''t the ideal medium for horror. I think the numbers really should be hidden, to keep them from distracting the player. The complex rules would ruin the player''s immersion and thus detriment the horror aspect. However, when you create an RPG without the complex character management, what you''d have left is basically an adventure?

- Tom

Whoops, I didn''t mean for the post to sound so combat-centered. I agree that the amount of total game time spent in combat should be smaller than a typical hack-n-slash.

I''m not in favor of insta-death though. Insta-death removes hope, and hope prolongs the suffering of man (player). [paraphrased from Nietzche]

I agree that armies of minions is a bad idea. Fewer, more interesting enemies is certainly the way to go. Or even having the horror elements as something other than a direct enemy (more like an enemy of circumstance).

An adventure game is probably a better format than an RPG, but I think something in-between is even better. Crunchy on the inside, smooth on the outside, like a candy bar.

Giving players some stats to control or tweak gives them a feeling of control - which makes it that much more engaging when you start doing things that are out of their expectations (the Haywire ability as an example).


Running away - excellent idea! Allow the players to get in over their heads and not get stuck in a kill or be killed situation.


Re: the 10 minute intervals. Is 10 minutes too short?

My turn:

Lull the player into a false sense of security, and then let him have it. Eg. attack them with a rather pathetic monster and let them win. Now they''re feeling cocky so when a bloody scary (and highly formidable) monster jumps out they will be caught out.

Also, use the movie techniques for horror: Long periods of silence/quiet followed by a sudden noise; something running at you out of the shadows; children''s laughter from behind you, but when you turn, nobody''s there.

On this note, utilise 3D sound in your game. Put whispering or breathing in the surround, and a low frequency heart beat...


"NPCs will be inherited from the basic Entity class. They will be fully independent, and carry out their own lives oblivious to the world around them ... that is, until you set them on fire ..."
"When you are willing to do that which others are ashamed to do, therein lies an advantage."

Personally, I love those spooky moments in games where there''s no
music whatsoever. Makes you try to tune into your surroundings a
bit more, looking for and to every noise you might come across.

You should turn on the music once the horror is there.

I think the top 3 games that stand out in my mind for horror are:
3. Shadowgate for the NES...
2. Sanitarium for the PC...Now that game just oozes eerieness.
1. Silent Hill for the PSX...Those little children in the school
made for some interesting dreams, let me tell you. Do NOT fall
asleep while playing this game.

...That''s odd. They all start with the letter S. Wonder if
that''s a fluke?

-Hyatus(random Vorhees)

I agree to most of the thing written in the above posts.
Very nice stuff!

I started thinking on how to do a really scary game
for over one and a half year a ago and since then I
have watched loots of movies, read books and played
lots of games dealing with horror.
When making a horror game I think that you can make 2
types: The story based and the action based.
I''ll explain the 2 types briefly:

The story based:
This typs is as you can figure out based on a story. Its
is the story that makes the character scared. To advance
in the story you talk to characters, read notes, read books
and stuff. This type of game must be a 3rd person game because
I can''t see how to make nice dialogs otherwise.
Many people think that you should leave out numbers in the
statics of the player. I think not. Ok it would be more realistic
if you left out numbers as 5 in in strength and 38 in gravedigging
but would it be more fun I think not. I think that the experince
points system works just fine. I think that it is very fun to let
me choose how my caharcter will become. It makes me care more about
my character in the game, allthough it may not be realistic. The
only important thing to think about is that you shouldn''t get to much
experince so that you can master all things, either you specialice
or know little about many things.

The action based:
In the action based the gaol is to make the player feel that the
screen is his eyes. This style of game must also have a nice plot,
the the story can''t be advanced by conversionation since I think that suck
in first person. You have to find out more by reading notes or listen
to recorded messages (and stuff like that).
Another thing you should try to take away is menus. To check how much
ammo you have left, take out the mag and see for yourself and stuff like that.
A very important thing is that all the stats you see must be weel defined.
The energy for instances can''t just be that you look down on your body and see some
scratches. A good thing would be to look att your hand the more coverd with blood
the closer to death you are. When the hand is full with blood then you
are dead. Things donät have to be reality realistic all time. If you
make the player get involed with your game then everything that you
you show him is reality (sort of...)

When saving in this type of game I have thought of a way that I have never seen
in a game, scripted/auto saving. The game saves by it self but you never
know when. You can only save the game when exiting the game and when you return to the game
your exit-game-save is destoyed. One thing to think about when making auto/scripted save
is that you should be able to survive no matter how little ammo or health you might have.
And another thing as the first post said...no instant deat!! they suck.

Some peole say that you should just put free save in the game and let it
be up to the player if he/she wants to save load all the time.
But I actually don''t like the free save, when I play
System shock 2 I was really scared sometimes, and because of that whenever
I was hurt I loded the last save game and tried to do better know that
I knew where the enemy was. It spoils some of the experince for me.

What did everyone think about the above?
I have lots of other ideas but I am to tierd to write em down now.
be usre to check out my own lovecraft inspired game at
fiend.ingava.com



-------
Me Hardguy.
and here is my game...