A
Anonymous01/18/26, 04:49No.3911550Why are there no Japanese murderhobo CRPGs?
Isn't it odd how there are all of these animes and light novels based off of D&D tabletop? Record of Lodoss War, Slayers, Overlord, Goblin Slayer, etc. But where are the JRPGs that play like those tabletop sessions where you can just kill whoever you want? Where is Japanese Baldur's Gate?
131
Replies
A
Anon01/18/26, 04:55No.3911551
You play a murderhobo in many jRPGs.
A
Anon01/18/26, 05:16No.3911555
>those tabletop sessions where you can just kill whoever you want? Where is Japanese Baldur's Gate
You can't do that in tabletop because you'll just piss off the DM and all the other players for ruining the planned campaign and then you most likely won't be invited back to play again.
Murderhoboing is basically just a single player cRPG thing because at least you're only fucking around in a single player game and not ruining anyone else's fun, but BG3 (not "Baldur's Gate" btw) is also a poor example of this because that game is also ran by a petty DM who gets assblasted if you do anything other than what he wants
>be BG3
>try to kill Gale at the start of the game
>DM insists you resurrect him or else you get a game over for killing his self-insert
>if you don't, yup, game over
>try to kill the Emperor when you first meet him
>DM flips the table over in a rage and gives you a game over for derailing his gay fanfic railroaded campaign
>try to go down the road in the act 2 for a sweet huge battle with the absolute's army camp, you can even get close enough to sit on the hills and lob fireballs at the ogres and goblins and shit milling about aimlessly but it does nothing
>DM instead teleports you to the oubliette under moonrise towers, ventriloquist DM forces your character to say "I should have known better!"
>try to go across the bridge in act 3 to have a cool fight with the big bad and sequence break things a bit
>DM teleports you away "to safety" because it's for your own good of course, you're not allowed to pick fights you can't win
A
Anon01/18/26, 06:35No.3911606
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fkTiopwwCs
A
Anon01/18/26, 06:51No.3911628
Idea of game freedom isn't exactly the same thing over there in the way it is in the west. Mainly because they skipped the tabletop origins of RPGs. Sure, they exist in Japan as a niche hobby, but they're not the foundation of JRPG the way they are for CRPGs, even if only in ethos if nothing else.
A
Anon01/18/26, 06:52No.3911629
There's no one right way. It’s a preference and playstyle issue. Some people like playing with players that try to break out of bounds of the planned campaign.
A
Anon01/18/26, 06:57No.3911637
You can kill anyone you meet in Lunatic Dawn games (most of the times they'll kill you instead because the games are full of OP gank fights you'll never beat without minmaxing), especially in entries like Lunatic Dawn 3 where you're not limited by menu based interactions and can just get behind a shop counter and wack the shit out of the owner.
It doesn't make the games interesting though outside of the reputation system pretty much softlocking your runs if you piss off enough people, Passage of the Book goes to extra lengths with its wanted system and strict resource management so you don't want to mug and kill random people just because you can, you'll be branded as a felon and hunted down on sight in any given city of a nation where you're a felon and this means you can't access quests easily, which means you can't get money and since everything costs a lot of money including simply moving on the world map you're basically asking for your character to get killed by a bunch of guards or simply starve to death.I don't think being free to kill NPCs just because of "muh freedumb" is good design honestly, also because that necessitates some sort of punishment for that which inherently makes the very freedom of killing anyone sorta counterproductive and a waste of dev time, not to mention there's never any sort of real interesting systems at play for actual long term consequences that aren't downright crippling to the point where again, it makes no sense to kill people freely, if you have any real consequences at all.
I think it's much more interesting to have murder as specific quest choices that have real consequences and actually contextualize the act of killing an NPC with major implications on the game's narrative, but that requires one hell of a writer to pull it off and that's an extremely rare breed, a DM can just improvise something on the fly but you can't do that in vidya.
A
Anon01/18/26, 07:15No.3911664
>succesfully derailed the thread the way a murder hobo derails a campaign
>thus proving the other anons right that such behavior should not be tolerated
You're welcome.
A
Anon01/18/26, 08:47No.3911718
>this entire thread
A
Anon01/18/26, 09:18No.3911725
I just wanted to know why the Japanese haven't made anything like BG3 where you can kill people. :(
A
Anon01/18/26, 11:42No.3911760
Because killing whoever you want isn't actually a common or desirable roleplaying option for most players.
Murderhobos are tyically people that lack imagination, don't really care about the roleplaying session or just wants to be dicks and fuck with the DM.
In PnP roleplaying, murderhobos are frowned upon.
A
Anon01/19/26, 06:21No.3912062
GTFO to your own board 3DPD loving, plebbit immigrants >>>/tg/ [//boards.4chan.org/tg/]
This is vidya game board for vidya game people>B-b-b-but in D&D..,
STFU and kill yourself
A
Anon01/19/26, 06:33No.3912065
JRPGs are generally a cringe compilation.
A
Anon01/19/26, 10:51No.3912120
Are there any JRPGs that even have choice or freedom? I haven't played one in ages but they were all on the rails turn based combats and cringe anime plots from what I've seen
A
Anon01/19/26, 16:08No.3912178
AI has all the answers, no need to actually research a claim, after all. Did you know America made Earthbound?
A
Anon01/19/26, 16:14No.3912180
1d4chan has it right:
>Murderhobo (or murder hobo, etc.) is a term used (originally pejoratively, but occasionally affectionately) for the player characters in RPGs, both in video games and tabletop games.
>The term arises due to the fact that most adventuring characters and parties are technically homeless vagrants, generally living on the road and sometimes in temporary accommodation, and the default solution to problems faced by the typical adventurer boils down to killing things until the problem is solved or treasure is acquired.
>In many games (especially older pure hack and slash-types of the type that Gary Gygax despised) killing things and taking their stuff is simply the order of the day, all morally acceptable and proper, either because that's all the players are interested in doing or all the GM can come up with.
>In more nuanced settings, "Murderhobo(s)" is used especially to refer to characters (or entire parties) of looser morals who tend to regard massive collateral damage as an inevitable and unremarkable consequence of their actions, or who are quite happy to slaughter otherwise friendly NPCs at slight provocation or the prospect of financial gain (basically, munchkins).
Emphasis on
>The term arises due to the fact that most adventuring characters and parties are technically homeless vagrants, generally living on the road and sometimes in temporary accommodation, and the default solution to problems faced by the typical adventurer boils down to killing things until the problem is solved or treasure is acquired.
>In many games (especially older pure hack and slash-types of the type that Gary Gygax despised) killing things and taking their stuff is simply the order of the day, all morally acceptable and proper, either because that's all the players are interested in doing or all the GM can come up with.
A
Anon01/19/26, 16:39No.3912190
While I have little experience playing tabletop RPGs and have little interest in this argument, to my eyes this simply looks like another case of a term having multiple usages. Considering that we're on a board for video game RPGs where player/DM social dynamics are meaningless, it makes sense people who are mostly into video game RPGs would care more about the adventurer archetype definition than that player behavior definition.
>“wandering adventurers who solve problems with violence”
>"players who are more interested in violence and loot than anything else about the campaign, potentially to the point of being disruptive"
One is a more neutral but humorous description of how stereotypical fantasy adventurers act, the other is about how player behavior in tabletop games. Naturally, video game players care more about the first definition, since the second is mostly irrelevant to them. Either way, a quick search shows the term being used both ways over the years.
A
Anon01/19/26, 19:19No.3912230
Lunatic Dawn 3 (psx)
A
Anon01/20/26, 04:28No.3912446
Murderchads won bte
A
Anon01/20/26, 18:09No.3912740
Japan has no experience with D&D tabletop. JRPGs are imitating early Western dungeon crawlers like Wizardry, not actual tabletop RPGs.
A
Anon01/20/26, 18:13No.3912742
Local murderhobos, please murder everybody arguing about fucking definition of a hobby trend where both meanings are still regularly used in this thread for days, please.
A
Anon01/21/26, 04:49No.3913087
>Noooo stop arguing
No.