Assassins Creed Karma system

Now I put this in the 'E3 hands on' thread here but I thought it deserved it's own thread.

I actually think AC3 (or the next one) should have a karma system... Wait, don't leave in disgust!

First rule of the Assassins creed (something you'd think is kind of essential to the game) is don't kill the innocent, only those who deserve it. The poor guard watching the rooftops is hardly as deserving as the templar grand master.

The game could have moves/weapons that only incapacitate enemy soliders (e.g posion knocks you out, not kill you) meaning you can take out guards without killing them. Kill lots of 'inncoent' guards and you get negative karma and start to become feared by everyone. The side effect of this could be civilians don't help you as much, guards detect you faster, etc.

But there are some guards who deserve a knifing. Maybe they beat up civilians or destroy peoples homes. If you get close to these guards you see a little marker and if you kill them the people see you protect them, earning positive karma, earning admiration and help from civilians. Things like civilians giving you tips for a mission or more hiding spots.

This could go a way to getting away from just cutting through hundreds of grunt soldiers to kill your target in the least stealthy way possible.

Thoughts?

As an extra; since my side effects seem a bit biased towards being good, can anyone think of negative side effects for good karma and positive side effects for bad?

No, why would you add a karma system, just let me downright kill the nasty civilians without punishment Ubisoft. This is supposed to be a game and games are supposed to be fun.

Nah fuck it. If I wanted a self imposed challenge to not kill anyone but the target I'd do it myself.

I think the protagonists in the AssCred series are verging closer to anti-heroes anyway, what with killing ANYONE who they think is in line with the Templars, such as, like you said, that nice guard patrolling the roof.

No. Don't get your Dues Ex in my Assassin's Creed.

Edit: Also, guards are not innocent. They provide a clear and obvious obstacle to the order and their objective and are thus dispatched. They work for the villain willingly, they are evil by association.

Seems dumb. And arbitrary. Let's just keep it as it is.

Better idea would be too just make stealth the better option in most situations by making combat against several opponents actually be hard. I'm always annoyed that the best option for an assassin seems to be to rush in and just spam the counterattack button over and over again untill all enemies basically kill themselves.

Oh thank god, I came here to rant about this if they'd actually put it into the game. We all need to indiscriminately murder the whole town guard every once in a while.

That said, I definitely think they should have a greater emphasis on stealth in the game. The first one was reasonably hard unless you did a lot of preparation before a kill like recon, and clearing out archers on rooftops. In all the others it's quite easy to just take on all the guards and kill the target that way.

So I don't think they should implement a karma system, but they should make it harder (but not impossible) to kill your target if you don't follow the creed.

Someone forgot the assassins motto... "Nothing is true, Everything is permitted" It rejects morals by nature.

maddawg IAJI:
No. Don't get your Dues Ex in my Assassin's Creed.

Edit: Also, guards are not innocent. They provide a clear and obvious obstacle to the order and their objective and are thus dispatched. They work for the villain willingly, they are evil by association.

Deus Ex. And, what, your objection is that you have more options in how to handle guards? At the very least, other characters mentioning whether you're a pacifist or a nutjob would be a good acknowledgement of a person's playstyle.

(And you can never have too much Deus Ex in anything.)

OT: Not a bad idea, it'd certainly edge things back towards encouraging you to get yourself to targets stealthily. At the minute you can just beat the ever-loving shit out of everyone.

Although if they nerfed the combat your idea probably wouldn't even be needed. But I would like my playstyle reflected, at least through dialogue.

I shall give you one half of a thumbs-up.

As much as the idea of a Deus Ex set in the American Revolution intrigues me, I'm going to have to reject this idea. Assassin's Creed does the whole indiscriminate murdering of enemies with no semblance of guilt thing well, so it should keep doing it, or do it better.

I think I would rather they just force you to actually be stealthy.

Woodsey:

maddawg IAJI:
No. Don't get your Dues Ex in my Assassin's Creed.

Edit: Also, guards are not innocent. They provide a clear and obvious obstacle to the order and their objective and are thus dispatched. They work for the villain willingly, they are evil by association.

Deus Ex. And, what, your objection is that you have more options in how to handle guards? At the very least, other characters mentioning whether you're a pacifist or a nutjob would be a good acknowledgement of a person's playstyle.

(And you can never have too much Deus Ex in anything.)

No, the problem I have is that you can never MAKE a game as good as Dues Ex without proper planning and years of thinking, Dues Ex requires complete and utter player control over the plot, a fair mix of RPG elements in the gameplay and levels diverse enough to allow the player to both explore, find their objective and then complete their objective. I don't believe Assassin's Creed could replicate that without tearing up the groundwork that the first 4 games created. I would prefer that the developers do their own thing over copying another series.

maddawg IAJI:

Woodsey:

maddawg IAJI:
No. Don't get your Dues Ex in my Assassin's Creed.

Edit: Also, guards are not innocent. They provide a clear and obvious obstacle to the order and their objective and are thus dispatched. They work for the villain willingly, they are evil by association.

Deus Ex. And, what, your objection is that you have more options in how to handle guards? At the very least, other characters mentioning whether you're a pacifist or a nutjob would be a good acknowledgement of a person's playstyle.

(And you can never have too much Deus Ex in anything.)

No, the problem I have is that you can never MAKE a game as good as Dues Ex without proper planning and years of thinking, Dues Ex requires complete and utter player control over the plot, a fair mix of RPG elements in the gameplay and levels diverse enough to allow the player to both explore, find their objective and then complete their objective. I don't believe Assassin's Creed could replicate that without tearing up the groundwork that the first 4 games created. I would prefer that the developers do their own thing over copying another series.

Alright, you need to spell it properly because right now I'm getting subliminal messages to 'Do Sex' with you, and I don't know how long I can subdue it.

And it's just offering a little more response to player actions. That's just a natural evolution of what is already in the games now, it doesn't require ripping it out from the ground up in the slightest.

Woodsey:

maddawg IAJI:

Woodsey:

Deus Ex. And, what, your objection is that you have more options in how to handle guards? At the very least, other characters mentioning whether you're a pacifist or a nutjob would be a good acknowledgement of a person's playstyle.

(And you can never have too much Deus Ex in anything.)

No, the problem I have is that you can never MAKE a game as good as Dues Ex without proper planning and years of thinking, Dues Ex requires complete and utter player control over the plot, a fair mix of RPG elements in the gameplay and levels diverse enough to allow the player to both explore, find their objective and then complete their objective. I don't believe Assassin's Creed could replicate that without tearing up the groundwork that the first 4 games created. I would prefer that the developers do their own thing over copying another series.

Alright, you need to spell it properly because right now I'm getting subliminal messages to 'Do Sex' with you, and I don't know how long I can subdue it.

And it's just offering a little more response to player actions. That's just a natural evolution of what is already in the games now, it doesn't require ripping it out from the ground up in the slightest.

It would require reworking and rewording the NPCs so that they can and will respond to the players playstyle. It would require the introduction of non-lethal weaponry in order to incapacitate guards, none of which exist in the game so far outside of diversionary bombs and tactics. It would also require redrawing some areas to allow players to take a more stealthy and evasive route to their objective. Do Sex does that well because they plan it well in advance. Assassin's Creed 3 is due out in a little over 4 months and they'll probably be finished with it in about a month.

I don't think I'd enjoy it very much, seeing as how I have a tendency to kill minstrels and beggars. Anyone who gets in my way, really.

What? Ezio is a giant douche anyway. I'm just being 'in character.'

Yes, I have a tendency to be kind of a psychopath in certain games. If they didn't want me to kill civilians, they shouldn't have made them so annoying though.

maddawg IAJI:

Woodsey:

maddawg IAJI:

No, the problem I have is that you can never MAKE a game as good as Dues Ex without proper planning and years of thinking, Dues Ex requires complete and utter player control over the plot, a fair mix of RPG elements in the gameplay and levels diverse enough to allow the player to both explore, find their objective and then complete their objective. I don't believe Assassin's Creed could replicate that without tearing up the groundwork that the first 4 games created. I would prefer that the developers do their own thing over copying another series.

Alright, you need to spell it properly because right now I'm getting subliminal messages to 'Do Sex' with you, and I don't know how long I can subdue it.

And it's just offering a little more response to player actions. That's just a natural evolution of what is already in the games now, it doesn't require ripping it out from the ground up in the slightest.

It would require reworking and rewording the NPCs so that they can and will respond to the players playstyle. It would require the introduction of non-lethal weaponry in order to incapacitate guards, none of which exist in the game so far outside of diversionary bombs and tactics. It would also require redrawing some areas to allow players to take a more stealthy and evasive route to their objective. Do Sex does that well because they plan it well in advance. Assassin's Creed 3 is due out in a little over 4 months and they'll probably be finished with it in about a month.

Well I was speaking from a figurative point of it being a good inclusion for the series (and a natural fit), not "quick! Cram this in!".

Karma systems only make sense in games where you the player are in control of the character's morality.
It's established in the first Assassin's Creed that in order to properly access your ancestral memory that you must not act outside of the bounds that your ancestor would. Thus why killing civilians takes away your health.
Now it would be interesting if this latest ancestor was a little more dubious morality wise, but given the vibes AC3 is handing out it's unlikely.
In summery I think it's far too late in the franchise to be introducing something as potentially game-changing as a karma system. You need a lose narrative for that sort of thing and AC's is very much so tight.

"There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt"

This quote fits the Assassin order, even if it's not about them, as they tend to play a bit fast and loose with the concept of who is and who is not innocent.

They're very morally grey and are international terrorists who are against the idea of a perfect world because it would be controlled by a, possibly brainwashing, elite but by fighting it they also make everyone else's choice for them without asking them.

From their actions it seems that if you are at all in their way then you are *not* innocent.

You want to add a morality system to this?

This argument totally brought to you independant of the fact that if this system was in place I'd be neck deep in negative karma for killing beggers

Aw no...I like killing the rooftop guards and now I will be hated for doing so?

Don't judge me, they secretly deserve it!

Assassins Creed is a great game series but they have ALWAYS done stealth horribly, how come the guy who caught a 0.5 second glimpse at me who I cut down immediately without anyone else knowing make me fail the mission, the only guy who knew I was there was killed immediately. Assassins Creed fails miserably in that respect.

It's not a bad idea and I wouldn't have a problem with it, but only if it was optional, if it was forced i'd probably just get frustrated with it.

I play with my own moral system already. Clearly your not a 3 time veteran of the games :D

If you have a sword or knife selected but sheathed and you attack an enemy before entering combat then you will not kill him, you will see the poor bastard rolling around on the floor in pain yet not dead. Throw the body of a roof top and they are then dead.

My moral system is simple, if they are in the loop they are fair game, if not then try to avoid their deaths unless my target is too important.

Guards on rooftop I will knock out if possible.
I will not Kill guards in the street randomly or for equipment.
In later games you have in Constantinople the city guard and the templars. Here all templars are fair game while only the city guards are "spared".
Enemies of high rank in a Templar region in earlier games are fair game as it is assumed they are in the loop. ie AC2 in Florence before and after the Medici Pazzi war.
In combat aim to kill officers and lieutenants first to destroy the moral of foot soldiers.
Guards no matter rank or affiliation who are guarding Templar area's are fair game as assumed in the loop, corrupt or in desguise.

That is my moral system. The only time I break it is when mission failure would result if a semi-innocent guard does not die in order to attack/access target or if I have attracted an army of enemies and people need to die so I don't (like in ACB outside the Castello in Roma where you mush hold off for a few mins).

-----------

To th OP...

Bit late mate... a Karma system would have worked better in earlier games. In AC3 your fighting in the Americas against faceless uniform guards who all follow orders. It's a whole new shade of Grey.

Firstly I don't like the idea of Karma system as... your a fucking ASSASSIN! You kill people.

Now if there was to be a Karma system I'd want it to be hidden and severely passive.
I'd hate there to be a real impact in the game.

Ideally I would want it to be small things. What people in crowds talk about, rumours going around, what guards talk about and occasionally in dialogue people would give you nicknames. No real effect, merely superficial. You walk into the room and are adressed by your name (neutral), assassin slight positive or negative with the tone if their voices appropriate, hero of 'location', scourge of 'location' etc etc. The title isn't fixed but you have different levels of reputation.
I'd really love to see a superficial system but if there was a Karma system that affected real things........ D:
I mean there should be an achievement for being really good only killing the wicked or extremely unnecessarily brutal killing everyone in sight not allied to you... and the fact you single handedly almost made the buffalo extinct :P

maddawg IAJI:
No. Don't get your Dues Ex in my Assassin's Creed.

Edit: Also, guards are not innocent. They provide a clear and obvious obstacle to the order and their objective and are thus dispatched. They work for the villain willingly, they are evil by association.

Ah, but do they fight for the the evil knowingly? I'd wager the general foot soldiers (not the officers or elites) can be divided into two main groups: those who want to protect their family and homes and those who want power. Officers and elites will then be drawn from the later group as they are slowly enveloped by the templars proper.

Most the guards are pretty bad anyway. Not to mention the urge to kill them rises when they start pushing me!

I always found it funny that when you poisen a guard and knock him over (like shoving him) before the poisen kills him off he just rolled on the ground in agony instead for a long time.

I like to think he's having the worst day ever instead of dying.

OT: no, as stated above, assassins are more anti-hero by their very nature, pulling a moral system on em is like putting someone in charge of guilt-tripping them over all those guard's children you've left fatherless.

acknowledging that would be cool, but don't tie a mechanic to it.

I actually agree in a way. It would give you an incentive to just kill your target instead of everyone and be discreet. That is what makes assassins creed fun. Get to a target without being seen, kill him then flee from the pursuers and hide.

Atrocious Joystick:
Better idea would be too just make stealth the better option in most situations by making combat against several opponents actually be hard. I'm always annoyed that the best option for an assassin seems to be to rush in and just spam the counterattack button over and over again untill all enemies basically kill themselves.

I hope they do that at least when it comes to assassination targets. If you don't assassinate him and try to kill him with a sword other enemies will surround you and fuck you up. Or after the assassination you have to run because you can't beat the horde of enemies after you. I hope the rewrite the enemy AI and make them vicious, at least after an assassination.

But you're in the animus...who cares if you kill virtual people?
Do you feel like you're a worse and worse person for every enemy you kill in a video game?

The only way this would work for me is if the ratio of "evil" guards vs "innocent" guards was stacked like 15:1 in the evil guys favor. Half of the joy of the Assassin Creed games is fighting tons of guys and running together combo kills. Trying to punish me for taking out that annoying guard right on the roof I want to be on would irk me. Besides, its not like if you don't want to kill a particular guard you have to (generally speaking).

I'd rather they make it so you could actually play like an assassin and sneak around and have the option to only kill your target.

Having notoriety kinda is already like a karma thing. You kill more people, you get noticed quicker and if you don't you don't get noticed. There doesn't need to really be anything more than that for AC, besides, killing random guards is part of the fun of the game.

Karma168:
Now I put this in the 'E3 hands on' thread here but I thought it deserved it's own thread.

I actually think AC3 (or the next one) should have a karma system... Wait, don't leave in disgust!

-------------

if you get close to the 'innocent' guards they start to act like dicks.

the only ones who dont do that are the ones posted on the rooftops. and they are by default hostile.

plus isnt striking fear in your enemies the point of being an assassin?
and do you think the guard will have mercy on you?
plus if you kill too much civilians you get desynchronized. thats enough.

Adam Grove:
Someone forgot the assassins motto... "Nothing is true, Everything is permitted" It rejects morals by nature.

and, of course, this thing right here.

I beat up most guards with my fists anyway. Also to increase the challenge. They lay there writhing in pain. They're not dead. I r happy.

Karma168:

First rule of the Assassins creed (something you'd think is kind of essential to the game) is don't kill the innocent, only those who deserve it. The poor guard watching the rooftops is hardly as deserving as the templar grand master.

Mooks aren't innocent. Just because a guard wasn't involved in the decision making process doesn't mean he won't stab you in the service of his masters. And, to be fair, you are completely allowed to let guards go without penalty if they break and run or plead for mercy. The game still desyncs you for killing civilians, which works fine for me as a "karma meter".

Besides, in the heat of a big swordfight I don't want to have to think about who I am allowed to kill and not kill. Ezio isn't Batman, killing is the very foundation of the Assassin Order.

I've never felt particularly bad for killing guards in the assassins creed series. It was really easy in #1 where the guards were constantly dragging people off for no reason, extorting money from random people. They were criminals in uniform.

In AC2 and it's (too many) sequels, if you accidentally bumped into a guard they would try and beat the crap out of you. If you dared climb a ladder to a rooftop, they would shout once and then start shooting at you, even if you're in a normal area of the city. I mean what, some shmuck goes to hand his laundry on the roof and "HEY! YOU ARE NOT-A ALLOWED UP-A HERE!" "But, I own this house, it's my roof... OH MY GOD YOU SHOT ME WITH AN ARROW! WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?!"

I did eventually start to wonder if the rooftop guards got hazard pay though, given that I went out of my way to kill every one of them I could... especially in brotherhood where having the crossbow just makes it way too easy to pick them off.

TL;DR Fuck the guards. Kill 'em, loot 'em, toss their bodies on to the street as a warning to others to consider less fatal occupations.

 

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked