It's an interesting question. Different things can be randomized and to different degrees and it kind of gives you different games. Suppose only RPG-like mechanics (PC has stats, they level up with encounters, etc.).
If you have a (roughly) fixed map where the PC-level appropriate mobs spawn randomly, so you always know the path to victory (or paths) but the challenge is subtly altered by these random encounters, I think you have a JRPG.
If you have a roughly fixed map, random mobs, but which path to take gets randomized (left leads to the boss in one run, right in another run) you're pressing into roguelike territory. But you could also call it Hunt the Wumpus: The RPG.
Roguelikes, again this is opinion, significantly randomize the map as well as having random encounters. I think it changes the way the game is played and explored and why it's replayed.
In the first, you replay the game because you want to try focusing on different stats or classes, an optimal build, the story was fun, etc.
In the second, you replay it because of the general challenge, maybe a bit about optimal builds and such, but also (to whatever extent there is) the puzzling nature of it. I hear a wind in this room, so that means the pit is in one of those two. Better be careful.
In the third, you replay it for all of those reasons and because you genuinely don't know what's coming next. You can have a game where there are a series of holes in the ground and your 2nd level character is suddenly 20 dungeon levels down. Well shit, can my tourist actually survive this?
And these are only three discrete points along a wide spectrum of randomness and its utilization in a game. I think roguelikes tend to be more roguelike when the randomness is somewhere above the second example, up to the extreme of the third. But you could also find other elements of the game to randomize that give you non-physical spaces to explore in a similar manner.
Again, randomness isn't sufficient, but it is necessary. And the degree of randomness or its utilization can be reduced if you keep other "roguelike" qualities present in the game.
If you have a (roughly) fixed map where the PC-level appropriate mobs spawn randomly, so you always know the path to victory (or paths) but the challenge is subtly altered by these random encounters, I think you have a JRPG.
If you have a roughly fixed map, random mobs, but which path to take gets randomized (left leads to the boss in one run, right in another run) you're pressing into roguelike territory. But you could also call it Hunt the Wumpus: The RPG.
Roguelikes, again this is opinion, significantly randomize the map as well as having random encounters. I think it changes the way the game is played and explored and why it's replayed.
In the first, you replay the game because you want to try focusing on different stats or classes, an optimal build, the story was fun, etc.
In the second, you replay it because of the general challenge, maybe a bit about optimal builds and such, but also (to whatever extent there is) the puzzling nature of it. I hear a wind in this room, so that means the pit is in one of those two. Better be careful.
In the third, you replay it for all of those reasons and because you genuinely don't know what's coming next. You can have a game where there are a series of holes in the ground and your 2nd level character is suddenly 20 dungeon levels down. Well shit, can my tourist actually survive this?
And these are only three discrete points along a wide spectrum of randomness and its utilization in a game. I think roguelikes tend to be more roguelike when the randomness is somewhere above the second example, up to the extreme of the third. But you could also find other elements of the game to randomize that give you non-physical spaces to explore in a similar manner.
Again, randomness isn't sufficient, but it is necessary. And the degree of randomness or its utilization can be reduced if you keep other "roguelike" qualities present in the game.