Sidequests Options

[Kaust]

So I'm thinking on the organisation of sidequests. The questboard has been an increasingly popular feature in the rpgs I've played. The benefits of this are clear; you know where to look and their organised. But do they become formulaic? In latter towns in these games I tend to just breeze in, look at the board and the objectives and accept 'em all without really paying attention to the background info (if any is even provided, which is rare)
On the other hand, npcs provide that personal touch, its not just 'kill so many monsters' or 'find this' there tends to be a because, and you have to pay attention to the because as it usually appears before the opportunity to accept the quest. But that means expecting the player to talk to every npc, and sometimes several times if the quest only becomes available after a certain event.
A compromise I'm considering is a hub for starting quests (kinda thinking like the PSO hunters guild) but having to finish the quest by meeting the npc that posted the request. But that actually just seems to incorporate all the worst elements of each system (all the impersonality with all the legwork) so what would you guys recommend? Have you come up with any distinct systems for this?

[Shaddow]

honestly I like the MMO approach, make something stand out about the npc that gives the quest. They could have something as blatant as a giant ! above their heads, to something as simple as just looking unique. This keeps it personal but doesn't leave the player in the dark.

[kayden997]

I attempted to include side quests in my previous RPG and found out that it was a lot of work.
Although I didn't do the whole "go to the bar and request gossip for a side quest," I did an independent clan where the leader hands out quests when you are X% through game.
It was actually interesting idea.

I believe that games that require a lot of free hand battles to gain exp should include different methods to gain exp, such as side quests.

Then again, you have to think "can the game still be completed without doing a single side quest?"
Like, do you gain the ultimate sword for doing the hardest side quest.

Just a little food for thought.

[Turkwise]

Sidequests can, and in my view, should appear in a variety of ways.

For example:

-Those that the player seeks out (quest boards, marked NPCs, guilds, etc.)
-Those that the player discovers ("There appears to be a cave hidden behind these bushes, should we check it out?")
-Those that present themselves to the player (The player witnesses a robbery in town and is given the option to intervene)
-Reward quests (Like in the fire emblem series, where one's performance can lead to extra battles being available)

Depending on the game, some should be used more sparingly than others. A game that is quest-driven should rely more on easy-to-find quests, while a game that has only a handful of quests should try to avoid such obvious, impersonal quests. But variety is the spice of life, or at the very least the spice of a good game. Switch things up, make the player feel involved in the world, not just another drone lining up to the quest board - even if the quest board is the main source of quests...just keep in mind that the player is very likely to ignore the stories of the by-the-dozen quests, save the good ones for more intriguing presentations.

[TheBen]

Quest guilds have their place, because they're a centralized location for sidequest pickups, but I prefer the approach where you're encouraged to explore the place for quest-givers. Now, I don't want it to be a case where one random bum out of 30 will give you a quest - there needs to be some sort of sign (ex.an exclamation point over their heads) that shows that they'll give you a quest. That means that, if the quests are engaging, you'll get the player to explore the town looking for quests.

On the minus side, this can discourage the players from talking to "regular" NPCs because they provide no additional content other than some small talk. As with all game design, it's a balancing act between "TALK TO EVERY NPC.... TWICE!" and "LOOKIE, HE'S GOT A BIG EXCLAMATION POINT ON HIS HEAD!".

[Kaust]

I was gna make a new thread for this but why clutter the forums?

What I was wondering was if anyone had any stock quests that are just a bit more imaginative than collect this item, kill these enemies, find this guy.

Thanks in advance (and to everyone who helped out before )

[Lydyn]

I was gna make a new thread for this but why clutter the forums?

What I was wondering was if anyone had any stock quests that are just a bit more imaginative than collect this item, kill these enemies, find this guy.

Thanks in advance (and to everyone who helped out before )

Mysteries, finding love interests, getting captured / escape, stealth, theft, assassination, explore ... though in all honesty, I think the spice really come from the story / dialog. What's the most boring part of the 'fetch this' quest? Weak story. "Yes, I lost my hat in that cave, mind getting it?" Boring.

"H-hi ... um ... sorry to bother you, but ... d-do you mind ... exploring that cave for me? I'm trying to document that natural locations around here, but ... I'm scared. Please?" (Hero) "Sure." (Man, after hero enters) "Haha, what an idiot, those monsters will tear him apart and when they're sleeping, I'll just take his stuff." Better. Comparatively, much better.

[incarnum]

I really strongly agree with Lydyn. Personally I've always felt that strategic placement is everything, and getting more than one quest from the same place is usually a fast way for the player to stop caring why hes doing something, and it starts feeling like a world of warcraft grind where you start collecting 30 quests just for the benifates of finishing them. wave good bye to plot rewards.

[rewells]

Is the system you are proposing similar to FFXII Kaust? In that game I liked the quests because they were easy ways to get more exp/money/items whatever and it was better than running around in dungeons level grinding. But overall I dislike quests. I like sidequests that I discover through exploration (I'm an EKAS) and it actually gives me something that's worth my time, like a new level, extra story content, challenging bosses etc. If I wanted to do quests though, I would design it without a questboard/hub. The player would accept quests directly from the people who need something. I'd make them simple requests like "I need three of this item" or something, so you accept it and if you happen to find three of those items you get a prize, so th player gets the reward of "Ooh! Did something special!"

So I'm thinking on the organisation of sidequests. The questboard has been an increasingly popular feature in the rpgs I've played. The benefits of this are clear; you know where to look and their organised. But do they become formulaic? In latter towns in these games I tend to just breeze in, look at the board and the objectives and accept 'em all without really paying attention to the background info (if any is even provided, which is rare)
On the other hand, npcs provide that personal touch, its not just 'kill so many monsters' or 'find this' there tends to be a because, and you have to pay attention to the because as it usually appears before the opportunity to accept the quest. But that means expecting the player to talk to every npc, and sometimes several times if the quest only becomes available after a certain event.
A compromise I'm considering is a hub for starting quests (kinda thinking like the PSO hunters guild) but having to finish the quest by meeting the npc that posted the request. But that actually just seems to incorporate all the worst elements of each system (all the impersonality with all the legwork) so what would you guys recommend? Have you come up with any distinct systems for this?