Most RPGs have you out to save the world, or at least resolve some personal stakes, claim a macguffin or complete a prophecy. Dustgrave: A Sandbox RPG (just launched into early access) seems happy to let you pick your own goals in a procedurally generated world, as morally questionable as those goals may be.
As is the trend, Dustgrave is a fairly traditional party-based CRPG with real-time navigation, grid-based combat and a simple 'take 2-3 actions per turn' flow. There's some wrinkles in there, like a more modern tabletop-inspired take on how partial successes on rolls (both in and out of combat) play out, but if you've played Baldur's Gate or Pathfinder, you'll know the ropes. But what sets Dustgrave apart is its political focus and sandbox nature.
You're no hero, or even vaguely important. You start the game as a caravan guard, and whether you feel like investigating the bandits that attack the people that hired you is entirely optional. The world is procedurally populated, and the game's setting is a crumbling empire fought over by three major local factions, a bunch of smaller groups, and some foreign forces at the borders muscling in, and everything is up for grabs, with wandering armies capturing territory, Mount & Blade style. Oh, and there's some skellingtons too. This is fantasy, after all.
The world seems pleasantly reactive so far. Even small actions like looting from local houses and trying to sell the goods to a merchant got me called out and thrown into a (surprisingly intricate) conversation check to talk my way out of being reported to the local authorities. Stealth plays out in real-time, and crimes leave behind evidence that sticks around and which guards may notice and investigate. But it feels like the meat of the game is in the big factional power-plays changing who owns towns, villages and resources.
From the couple hours I played, it feels like everything in Dustgrave revolves around its conflicts and rivalries. Obviously doing quests and
Read more on pcgamer.com