Good setup for litrpg?

[ThisAdamGuy]

[THIS POST HAS BEEN CONSUMED BY THE VOID]

 

[DismaiNaim]

Here's my question: what's the story you want to tell?

 

[RepresentingSilence]

Stop worrying about these things and just write even if it fails it's practice and it will make you better and your future stories better

 

[ThisAdamGuy]

If someone could actually answer my question instead of giving me vague inspirational posts, I'd appreciate it

 

[John_Owl]

If someone could actually answer my question instead of giving me vague inspirational posts, I'd appreciate it

yes, it's a good set-up. honestly, better than most of the "good" litRPG stories I've read. but my biggest concern is that there's a LOT that goes into LitRPG. That's why I don't write it. you have to basically make an entire TTRPG, but rather than release it, use it as a basis for a story. and since so much goes into it, it's hard to actually get started.

 

[Evinoran]

It looks good on paper, but to actually judge whether it is good, I’ll have to see the actual execution.

 

[CharlesEBrown]

Wish I could remember the title - about ten or so years ago I read a book about an NPC in a video game becoming self-aware (he was a soldier killed and reanimated as a skeleton, who kind of rebelled against the necromancer and went off on his own); the author did not include game stats - partly because LitRPG was not a "thing" when he wrote it - but you could "feel" the game-like power ups... especially when a glitch had him turn up in the offices of the guys programming the game - IIRC this happened twice, the first time the coder reset the scene, the second time was at the end of the book and the Necromancer came through with him to fight in the real world.
After the first "reset" he almost slipped back into being an NPC but did not completely, and managed to find a few others like himself to help his quest. I'm probably mixing up a few details because I was reading a lot of stuff like it at the time, but it essentially had the NPC becomes aware, and can slip back into NPC mode if they "lose focus" thing. I think he even lost an ally to that after the first time he confronted the Necromancer and one of his allies was badly hurt and lost themselves to panic.

So the set-up can work. It will be compared to the works of others, who trod similar ground, but I have not heard nor read anything EXACTLY like it, just one story that was similar.

 

[RepresentingSilence]

The only reason I posted a "vague inspirational post" is because I constantly see you posting about weather this or that would be a good idea for your story and it's reached a point where I feel YOU aren't even the author you're merely the leading member of a committee trying to write something resembling a story

Stop looking for affirmation before you've done anything
Do something first then ask for opinions and criticisms

I'm not trying to tear you down or discourage or anything it's actually the complete opposite I want you to have the courage and confidence to write your stuff and post it so that we have something real and tangible to help you with instead of just ideas

 

[ThisAdamGuy]

Stop looking for affirmation before you've done anything
Do something first then ask for opinions and criticisms

I've written over a dozen books, so maybe you should keep your pretentious attitude to yourself. This is a genre I have no experience writing in, and this is a forum full of writers, many of whom do have experience writing it. If you don't think this kind of question is exactly what these forums were made for, you need to reevaluate why you're even here. And the next time you see a question you don't feel like answering, try not answering it.

 

[Evinoran]

Redemit is kinda correct, OP.

I can’t say I’m super experienced with LITRPG either - it’s a massive brainstorming for game mechanics that needs to be translated into actually readable stories, and not many can achieve that (I don’t think I can, personally. Kudos for you for coming up with an idea for it.

But the thing is, good idea =! good execution. Many people can have good ideas, sure, but what separates “good novel with original concept that people love” and “bad novel with overly bogged down mechanics that people skip over” is unfortunately execution.

Even shallow or bad or common ideas, with good execution, they become good stories. Easiest example I can think of is… generally many of the older RPGmaker indie games. Their base idea tend to be simple, such as you go to haunted museum, you go to a haunted house owned by a witch, and so on. The execution is what makes them loved.

Personally, I think the idea itself looks good on paper - but refer to that point above.

 

[ThisAdamGuy]

But the thing is, good idea =! good execution

I'm aware of this. My goal wasn't to be awarded a Pulitzer for a story I haven't written yet, it was to make sure nobody's first reaction was "That sounds like a ripoff of [other similar story]!" And if I can get a couple pointers from people who have written litrpgs in the past, even better.

 

[RepresentingSilence]

I'm aware of this. My goal wasn't to be awarded a Pulitzer for a story I haven't written yet, it was to make sure nobody's first reaction was "That sounds like a ripoff of [other similar story]!" And if I can get a couple pointers from people who have written litrpgs in the past, even better.

You can find similarities between just about any story nowadays nearly all fantasy genre takes massive inspiration (often unknowingly) from authors like Tolkien and Lewis (some being near enough a direct ripoff) and heck I recall reading somewhere years ago that the first story resembling a "litrpg" was written in like the 18th century or something

It's reached a point now where people need to stop caring if their story looks like a "rip off" or "sounds like a good idea " and just write again
Yourself being a prime example

 

[goblinquest]

So when writing litrpg you need to decide do the game mechanics control the world, or does the world control the game mechanics.

Here is an example; say you have a move Cleave. It is a melee ability that requires you to be wielding a two handed sword, or axe. It has a 10 second cooldown. It can hit 1 to 3 enemies that are within melee range, and deals 100 physical damage. Now this is a very basic move, which can probably found in a lot of RPG games.

Here is the thing though, this move makes absolutely zero sense outside of a game. First off the weapon requirement, now obviously to cleave through someone you need a sharp weapon, but why would it need to be two handed, a one handed sword could also be used to cleave. What about the hit limit, you can hit 1 to 3 enemies, does that mean there is no difference if you're cutting through 3 fat ogres, or 3 skinny goblins? What happens if there is a 4th goblin standing right next to the third, does your weapon magically bounce off them, or just phase right through them? Then what about the cooldown, why do you have to wait 10 seconds just to swing your weapon from side to side? What happens if you try to cleave before the cooldown is up, will your body freeze up, does your weapon bounce harmlessly off your enemies?

For some litrpg the author will actually apply the weird game logic to their world. Even have it so the world will contain glitches and exploits that the characters can take advantage of. Like avoiding the bosses instant death kill beam attack by standing behind a flimsy knee high wooden fence. Other writers use the RPG element more loosely, mostly for easy exposition, or a way of granting power ups, for example a class and level system. For these stories the world isn't controlled by the game elements, the game elements are merely a vector to help the story along.

 

[DireBadger]

You want it to take off?
Write it as the protagonist has a DIFFERENT system from the majority of the world. Something that's unique. That way the original system could be humdrum ordinary, and you could spill out your irritation as an author with tried-and-true systems into your work.
It could all sorts of cool potential, drama, maybe a little god vs god politics, and a hell of a reason to fight, to change the world so that all the NPC's ditch the old system to become players in the new one.
The conflict could be epic.

remember that there are a ton of potential system cores out there, check out something like steam for ideas. maybe the new system lets you attach spirits to your soul to boost your powers and attributes, or you have to find cards (been done a lot, though) that give you abilities. Maybe it's item-based with a core of human history, sort of like warehouse 13 where you can put 'human historical cultural artifacts' into your 'soul warehouse' to gain abilities. Or possibly something awful like getting tortured every time you advance and each scar gives you more powers. Tattoos are always fun, and if you want it to be a haremlit, banging girls that give you power could be the key.

 

[beast_regards]

I know you are never going to read this post, but I'll try anyway...

There is a difference between GameLit and LitRPG (even if the difference wasn't realized when the GameLit was conceived)

And those have two different audiences.

In GameLit, there is a story about a game.

The Ender's Game is GameLit. If you didn't read it, it's the sci-fi about the military recruit that is "playing" a supposedly a training simulation, but in the end, he founds out that the supposed training wasn't training at all, and he was directing actual war, with people dying, and the entire alien civilization driven extinct.

It's technically about the game, technically, but the game is not that important in the scheme of things, it is an anti-war story. The novel came out in 1985 where there wasn't yet a community about games, even if the games exist, it is more about the vague and mysterious computer doing computer things, about the new technology.

It speaks to people who have no attachment to game and to people who don't know how the game mechanic works, because, well, there is a story with the universal message that has nothing to do with the game mechanic per se.

The LitRPG is, however, different.

The LitRPG isn't technically about the game. It's about the mechanic that enables you to do things. It's about empowerment, and it speaks to the generation which grew with games, and it's not necessarily about games per se even if it is choke-full of things that doesn't make sense without the game being present, and I think that's what confuses you.

It is blatantly clear that you are the first category of the guy.

You want to write the story about games, and mostly against games, which is more in line with the Ender's Game kind of story, hence GameLit as a subgenre.

 

[CharlesEBrown]

I know you are never going to read this post, but I'll try anyway...

There is a difference between GameLit and LitRPG (even if the difference wasn't realized when the GameLit was conceived)

And those have two different audiences.

In GameLit, there is a story about a game.

The Ender's Game is GameLit. If you didn't read it, it's the sci-fi about the military recruit that is "playing" a supposedly a training simulation, but in the end, he founds out that the supposed training wasn't training at all, and he was directing actual war, with people dying, and the entire alien civilization driven extinct.

It's technically about the game, technically, but the game is not that important in the scheme of things, it is an anti-war story. The novel came out in 1985 where there wasn't yet a community about games, even if the games exist, it is more about the vague and mysterious computer doing computer things, about the new technology.

It speaks to people who have no attachment to game and to people who don't know how the game mechanic works, because, well, there is a story with the universal message that has nothing to do with the game mechanic per se.

The LitRPG is, however, different.

The LitRPG isn't technically about the game. It's about the mechanic that enables you to do things. It's about empowerment, and it speaks to the generation which grew with games, and it's not necessarily about games per se even if it is choke-full of things that doesn't make sense without the game being present, and I think that's what confuses you.

It is blatantly clear that you are the first category of the guy.

You want to write the story about games, and mostly against games, which is more in line with the Ender's Game kind of story, hence GameLit as a subgenre.

I'd almost say GameLit and LitRPG are cross-genres; a lot of commonalities but a lot of differences (and several examples that fit solidly in both "camps"

And the way you describe Ender's Game it sounds like a longer version of the Star Trek episode "A Taste of Armageddon"... except both sides were playing the game (and one decided the Enterprise was a casualty...)

 

[Anonjohn20]

The idea was that the few sentient "players" that were left were stuck in a world where everyone acts like Oblivion NPCs.

Sounds like a tragedy. Imagine your children lose their sentience and free will but you kept yours.

a big part of the plot is them trying to find and awaken their friends and family, and then keep them awakened.

Sounds like "The Matrix." lol

But my main question is, is this even a good setup?

It does sound good. I think.

 

[beast_regards]

I'd almost say GameLit and LitRPG are cross-genres; a lot of commonalities but a lot of differences (and several examples that fit solidly in both "camps"

And the way you describe Ender's Game it sounds like a longer version of the Star Trek episode "A Taste of Armageddon"... except both sides were playing the game (and one decided the Enterprise was a casualty...)

They do, but are ultimately different.

If you are curious about the Ender's Game, there is the movie adaptation, but it came like thirty years later and thus feels very different.

I looked it up, and the movie adaptation is 2013, made with different people in mind.

... but it is still very different in spirit from the LitRPG.

There is a huge point in the both book and the movie where Ender (that's the protagonist's name) thinking he is playing the simulation sacrifices the entire fleet so the doomsday canon has a clear shot against the alien planet. He wins, and then he is told it wasn't the simulation (hence the title), but was ordering the ships manned by actual humans to die, and eventually finds out that the alien could have been negotiated with if only...

It's completely different in tone than the LitRPG is.

Even the darker LitRPG are about empowerment, and even the ones that are definitely not a power fantasy are more about the use of mechanic the games might have, rather than vague game....

But in the Ender's game, it's not about Ender having some strategy to win, even if that is what happens at the cost of many, many lives...

It is not about Ender being empowered through the game mechanic, not even remotely.

The lesson is that the war was stupid in the first place, and as far the plot goes, it isn't important that any game was involved in the first place. After all, the callous commander, knowing the people would die, could order the charge either way...

It's also the point that generals understand they fucked up when they deceived the fresh recruit, hooked him to the computer so he could override their authority and then ... well, sh*it.

As I said, it is anti-war sci-fi.

 

[CharlesEBrown]

They do, but are ultimately different.

If you are curious about the Ender's Game, there is the movie adaptation, but it came like thirty years later and thus feels very different.

I looked it up, and the movie adaptation is 2013, made with different people in mind.

... but it is still very different in spirit from the LitRPG.

There is a huge point in the both book and the movie where Ender (that's the protagonist's name) thinking he is playing the simulation sacrifices the entire fleet so the doomsday canon has a clear shot against the alien planet. He wins, and then he is told it wasn't the simulation (hence the title), but was ordering the ships manned by actual humans to die, and eventually finds out that the alien could have been negotiated with if only...

It's completely different in tone than the LitRPG is.

Even the darker LitRPG are about empowerment, and even the ones that are definitely not a power fantasy are more about the use of mechanic the games might have, rather than vague game....

But in the Ender's game, it's not about Ender having some strategy to win, even if that is what happens at the cost of many, many lives...

It is not about Ender being empowered through the game mechanic, not even remotely.

The lesson is that the war was stupid in the first place, and as far the plot goes, it isn't important that any game was involved in the first place. After all, the callous commander, knowing the people would die, could order the charge either way...

It's also the point that generals understand they fucked up when they deceived the fresh recruit, hooked him to the computer so he could override their authority and then ... well, sh*it.

As I said, it is anti-war sci-fi.

I did see the movie (I think on the cruise where I may have caught COVID before it got all the press coverage, or shortly before we went on it). Have never read the book though.

It does sound a lot like a more emotional (and detailed) version of the Star Trek episode... which I heard was based on a short story but I don't know the title.