In RPGs, should Party Members who don't participate in combat earn experience?

[Burnouts3s3]

So, to get ready for Final Fantasy XV, I've been replaying previous Final Fantasy titles and writing up my opinion on them. (For the record, X is cheesy and linear but enjoyable, X-2 is a very guilty pleasure of mine, XII had interesting ideas but limited itself trying not to alienate the fans and I just don't like the XIII series at all). And one of the things I noticed was how much time I spent, not just grinding but grinding for party members I don't frequently use.

For the uninitiated, characters earn experience to level up and get more powerful when they participate in combat. However, there are only so many members a game will allow at once and so party members and companions who do not participate in combat do not gain experience. There have been exceptions to this. For example, in Pokemon, a player can give the leading Pokemon exp share so even Pokemon not in combat gain experience. In KotOR, party members gain experience even if they don't participate in battle. However, in other RPGs, the player must switch out their present party for inactive party members in order to level them up.

Note that I'm not really talking about characters as I am talking about the roles they play. Certain characters, such as a mage class, only have access to spells that a Warrior or a Rogue class doesn't and sometimes priority is given to them. Sometimes classes can be interchangeable with a character while other times classes cannot be traded with another character at all.

Do you think giving experience to party members who participate is a good mechanic or something that's just annoying?

 

[WhiteFangofWhoa]

Acceptable break from reality.

Particularly if all party members have specific roles, meaning they will all be needed at some point and if you haven't been levelling your bench-warmers you could get stuck. Especially if there is any sequence where a party member is forced to fight alone (hello there, Highfort in Breath of Fire 2, now go back to monkey hell). FFXII made it necessary in a different way since having reserves you can swap in any time is a major boon against some of the tougher bosses and enemies.

Anything that reduces the need to grind can only be good. The further behind a character gets, the less likely you are to use them. It's a vicious cycle.

 

[DefunctTheory]

Really depends on whether you have to use some of those guys you usually keep in the bank. If the game is never going to force you to use one of your not-so-favorites, I don't really care. But if the game is going to spring a 'Surprise! X party members only!' moment on you, yes, everyone should get some XP. If not the same as everyone else, then at something so they don't fall too far behind.

I still remember fighting that one weapon in FF7 where you can't use Cloud or Tifa, and getting smeared in a fight you're not really supposed to be able to lose.

 

[Aerosteam]

There are many RPG's where I'm not using the party members that I want to pick, but instead use the ones that are the lowest levels so everyone is as close to the same level as possible.

Anything that doesn't allow that problem to happen I appreciate.

In Pokemon Super Mystery Dungeon, a game that essentially has over 720 party members... thank fuck that game has shared exp across all pokemon you've recruited because if it didn't, I'd either only have 3 pokemon that are of proper level or grind to all hell to have a decent number of party members to choose from.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

That's how XP works in Ni no Kuni. If anything, it makes grinding considerably less annoying.

 

[CrimsonBlaze]

In class-based RPGs, it's a godsend, as it greatly detracts from having to spend extra time leveling up characters that you might need later on in the game, but don't fondly use.

Final Fantasy X has a habit of doing this, as some characters are needed for their range to hit enemies that are too far for close combatants and you will constantly be paired with Rikku, who only excels at stealing and dismantling robot enemies. The benefit of the Sphere Grid is that you can customize your characters to have skills and traits to go around these limitations, but that means that it also necessitates to grind with those particular characters; in many instances, they might not even survive the fight before they gain the necessary XP.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

A lot of people are saying it takes away from the grind, but we're talking about RPGs. Half of it is enemy grind and the other is weapon grind. Like would Pokemon still be the time-sink it is if all your Pokemon leveled up, even the ones in the Bank, during battles? Or if all your WOW toons dinged when your main dinged?

It would be better gameplay, sure, but we're talking about a genre with deliberately tedious gameplay. sorta' not in the spirit of things. It'd be like if there was just a generic 'AMMO' crate in FPS, or just 'STUFF' in crafting survival games.

 

[Saelune]

A lot of people are saying it takes away from the grind, but we're talking about RPGs. Half of it is enemy grind and the other is weapon grind. Like would Pokemon still be the time-sink it is if all your Pokemon leveled up, even the ones in the Bank, during battles? Or if all your WOW toons dinged when your main dinged?

It would be better gameplay, sure, but we're talking about a genre with deliberately tedious gameplay. sorta' not in the spirit of things. It'd be like if there was just a generic 'AMMO' crate in FPS, or just 'STUFF' in crafting survival games.

Pok?mon has been more generous with XP as games have gone on, and I am fine with that. Your WoW characters aren't all in a party together though.

As for your boxed pokemon leveling with you though, Id hate that, but that's for the same reason I don't leave pokemon in the daycare for anything but breeding. I don't want the wrong moves learned, or some pokemon evolving.

 

[Foolery]

Hell yes. Otherwise it's a tad annoying. I'm not fond of having to go back and grind, just to get a character up to speed with the other ones. It saves time and is convenient for the player.

A lot of people are saying it takes away from the grind, but we're talking about RPGs. Half of it is enemy grind and the other is weapon grind. Like would Pokemon still be the time-sink it is if all your Pokemon leveled up, even the ones in the Bank, during battles? Or if all your WOW toons dinged when your main dinged?

It would be better gameplay, sure, but we're talking about a genre with deliberately tedious gameplay. sorta' not in the spirit of things. It'd be like if there was just a generic 'AMMO' crate in FPS, or just 'STUFF' in crafting survival games.

Meh. Grinding for the sake of grinding isn't fun, nor is it good game design. Some of the best JRPGs don't waste your time. Like Chrono Trigger, or Final Fantasy IV. Also Pokemon has EXP share.

 

[Fox12]

A lot of people are saying it takes away from the grind, but we're talking about RPGs. Half of it is enemy grind and the other is weapon grind. Like would Pokemon still be the time-sink it is if all your Pokemon leveled up, even the ones in the Bank, during battles? Or if all your WOW toons dinged when your main dinged?

It would be better gameplay, sure, but we're talking about a genre with deliberately tedious gameplay. sorta' not in the spirit of things. It'd be like if there was just a generic 'AMMO' crate in FPS, or just 'STUFF' in crafting survival games.

So JRPG's shouldn't innovate so that they can stay in the spirit of things? If anything it's a lack of innovation that's killing the genre. JRPG's were once the genre where new and interesting things were happening. Now it's fan base is amongst the most conservative in gaming.

OT: I think it's a great idea to have group XP. Anything that cuts down grinding is a positive.

 

[Sonmi]

Not in my opinion, grinding is part of the fun, it's when you'll learn to optimize your party setups if you take the time to level up your whole party.

I prefer the absence of party-wide XP even more in games where XP is a finite resource, it makes choices more meaningful.

 

[meiam]

Depend on the game, usually they should so that you don't have to grind exp for certain character, but some game make not sharing exp work:

Fire emblem (older one): since there's limited amount of exp, managing how you level the different character is part of the experience.

FFX: you could swap character mid battle, imo the battle system is a lot more fun if you try to use every character every fight to keep them all leveled up (although it makes boss fight a joke since you can just overdrive spam them).

Pok?mon: Since fight are 1 on 1 and not group based and you can split the exp by trading pokemon mid fight, again here leveling become something you have to manage rather than something that just happen, it allow for interesting pokemon, like magikarp.

Same game do it in a very stupid way, tactics ogre: let us cling together has one of the worse exp system ever, class, not character level up but you don't start with all the class unlock, so whenever you get new class you have to level them up from 1, its even worse for special character class, you can fight a character and he's level 30 and as soon as he join you he goes down to level 1 and can't even use the weapon he was wielding against you 5 minute ago! On top of that every character as gain skill point which can be used to buy skill, but those aren't shared (and some skill level up, which is also not shared). This is the worst of all world, if you get a new character you still have to grind skill for them or there useless and at the same time even if you use the same party the entire game you still have to grind for class level!

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

SNIP

Dude, I was playing JRPGs on my SNES in the 90s, and they were grind-tastic. It was a grindalypse. FF6 anyone?! Getting every character to 100% every Esper to even have a chance against Kefka?

Super Mario RPG was a grind.

Fire Emblem, Dragon View, the Castlevenaia/Metroid games to a somewhat lesser degree. Grind Grind Grind. More grinds than a industrial-scale coffee factory with really bored stippers.

And from what I've heard modern JRPGs are a nightmare of breakfast blend Krystles and Brandys.

Taking the grind out of RPGs is like taking the puzzles out of Myst. That was the whole point! Without the grind RPGs are just angtsy people with easily solved problems who just talk endlessly for 4+ hours of cutscenes and then the credits.

 

[Saelune]

SNIP

Dude, I was playing JRPGs on my SNES in the 90s, and they were grind-tastic. It was a grindalypse. FF6 anyone?! Getting every character to 100% every Esper to even have a chance against Kefka?

Super Mario RPG was a grind.

Fire Emblem, Dragon View, the Castlevenaia/Metroid games to a somewhat lesser degree. Grind Grind Grind. More grinds than a industrial-scale coffee factory with really bored stippers.

And from what I've heard modern JRPGs are a nightmare of breakfast blend Krystles and Brandys.

Taking the grind out of RPGs is like taking the puzzles out of Myst. That was the whole point! Without the grind RPGs are just angtsy people with easily solved problems who just talk endlessly for 4+ hours of cutscenes and then the credits.

Just because that's how it was, doesn't mean it is how it should be.

Not exactly the same, but when I DM in DnD, I don't make my players grind. I just want the different levels feel different. To be level 1 and fighting wolves and rats, to level 10 fighting Trolls and Minotaurs, to level 20 fighting Dragons.

It is a sign of a good game that doesn't force you to grind to meet the challenge.

 

[Erttheking]

Yes. I can stand grinding up to a point, and having to swap out party members for more grinding is where I draw the line.

It's what put me off of FF 6 towards the end when I had to train up three teams worth of members for the final dungeon.

 

[Silvanus]

Like would Pokemon still be the time-sink it is if all your Pokemon leveled up, even the ones in the Bank, during battles? Or if all your WOW toons dinged when your main dinged?

Not the ones in the bank, perhaps that's a bit far, but later Pokemon games have given you the option of XP-share. You can turn it on or off depending on preference. I see no downside to that. Focus if you want your killer 'mons, or share if you need to drag some up to speed.

 

[Gennadios]

Not in story based RPGs. And especially not in games with individual party members that have personal backstories that might need to be switched in/out at random intervals.

The only games that can get away with that nowadays are the more tactical/indie/less story focused games where building up your team/characters is an implicit part of the experience. (I'm talking Tactics/XCom/Pokemon like games at this point, the RPG games that lean more on mechanics than story.)

I don't really have much free time on my hands nowadays, if I'm playing anything with a story I'm much more interested in burning through it than grinding.

 

[happyninja42]

I think it depends on how the game mechanics work. Take FF 10 for example. In that game, you had the capability, and the necessity, the swap out people on the fly, to deal with the threat at the time. This means that at any time, your entire team might be utilized for the fight. But, perhaps not everyone has time to actually do an action, to get credit for xp. So, you have to arbitrarily force them in, just to do 1 action, so they can get some XP. So that they don't get left behind in the progression. I did this, and it was annoying as fuck.

Personally, I have zero issue with the idea that they level up with you. In games like the Dragon Age series, or Mass Effect, the understanding, is that the entire crew is coming with you on these missions (or at least most missions). They are there for the cutscenes, but somehow weren't there for the combat. But, when you load them into your team after a break, they've got levels to spend. I find this WAY more practical.

The game gives me a huge list of characters, and then forces me to shave that list down to a smaller list to use. And then, it might, just to fuck with me, decide to take those people hostage, and now I've got to use my B-List heroes in fights that are tough for my A-Team? No thank you. That's a level of annoyance and frustration that I don't need in my entertainment.

Let them stay on par with the rest of the group, so I can switch out as I need.