Given the amount of work you''re putting in the combat system, I suppose it''s a great part of the game experience...

But I''ve seen plenty of topics with people asking for RPG with more Role and less Rules...

Do you really want to make yet another Diablo or even NeverWinter Nights ?

Just a completely off-topic thought.

-* So many things to do, so little time to spend. *-

quote: Original post by Ingenu
Given the amount of work you''re putting in the combat system, I suppose it''s a great part of the game experience...

I''ve since moved away from the combat system - in fact, my "new" system rules will describe ways to expand it, with explicit rules for keeping all other sections just as detailed and important as combat. It''s hard to do, but if I keep to that premise from the start, something may grow from it.

In other words, I''m not going to add anything to physical combat that I cannot mirror in mental or social contests.

quote: Magic as an ability... Yes I can see some advantages to that, because it leads to "magic is an innate thing, not something learned".

Actually it''s both. I''m not going to limit player stats to what they start with. It''s just silly, when you consider the real world. Even intelligence can be learned, it''s just a matter of learning new ways of thinking of things. Magic and Piety are going to be attributes that aren''t trained though, they will go up (or down) based upon actions.

quote: I personally disagree with "charisma" being a mental stat, I find it separate,

Actually Charisma is the combination of Leadership and Charm. Since it''s impossible to emulate thousands of different personalities in a computer with any accuracy and it''s impossible to accurately fake being more charming, you have to use attributes. It''s just like faking being more intelligent for role-playing purposes... you really can''t do it. You can act dumber, but not more intelligent, that''s why there is an intelligence attribute/stat.

quote: though perhaps there is one more factor that comes into play at this level of detail: reach.

It''s already there. All weapons have ranges. Whether it''s a long sword (3-6 feet), a dagger (0-3 feet), a bardiche (6-16 feet) or a bow (5-200 feet). If you''re outside that range, very little chance of getting a hit. I''m also considering making ''break through'' from a weapons closest range (except projectile weapons) allow a free attack with none of the avoidance checks.

quote: My next post will be about that, but I still need some time to polish the idea some more and form some objections/thoughts on my own idea, specifically concerning this kind of division.

I''m handling mine with encumbrance. Each item that you are wearing has an encumbrance rating and as you increase your encumbrance it will reduce the effect of the avoidance skills. Thus, if you can find some magical armor with little encumbrance, you can get the benefit of your avoidance skills while keeping the armor benefits.

I spent a lot of time working on that logic and I''m almost done now. About another week and my physical combat system should be in it''s Alpha stage.

Alright, here's the promised, technical post on the new resolution system that I and a friend (thanks, Sidyan, for brainstorming with me!) are cooking up....

It's called (jokingly, and VERY temporarily) SATAN's PMS. That's an acronym for "System ArcTan, Supernatural, Physical, Mental, Social". And it sounds funny.

The central crux of the system is the Arc Tangens function, because it has a very unique and specific curve that has an upper and a lower limit. Abusing this limit, you get a system with an infinite progression upwards and downwards, but above/below a very definate limit.

So, with a bit of math magic (and a lot of help from a graph-drawing program ehehe) the following exact formula rolls out:
(100/PI())*ArcTAN(x/5)+50
This amounts to 50 when x = 0, going towards zero for x -> -infinity, and 100 when x -> infinity. A nice percentile spread! With a look-up table, this is even doable in pen-and-paper, but perhaps a little cryptic. The reason for the /5 is scaling the taper of the function. With /5, 75% is at +5 for x, and 25% at -5, which is the average spread of ability scores that we intend to use. You can adjust this to your own liking.


The ability scores themselves now have four categories, and as many subdivisions:
Physical: Might, Reflex, Endurance, (Stamina)
Mental: Intellect, Perception, Will, (Concentration)
Social: Sway, Wit, Influence, (Patience)
Supernatural: Selfconfidence, Luck, Soul, (Mana)

This may seem a bit opaque, but that's because naming things isn't always easy. The underlying idea is the following: for each "aspect" (the four categories), you have four subvalues: aspect power, aspect agility, aspect durability, and aspect energy. Energy is expended for actions of that aspect, durability determines how much energy you have and how dangerous it is to fall without. Power determines your brute force at the aspect, and agility determines how "quick" you are at using it.
Energy is different from the rest, in that it goes from 0-100, and is based on the percentile value of the durability of the aspect (i.e. if you have 0 durability, you'll have 50 Energy, if you have -5 it'll be 25, if you have 5 it'll be 75 ). It's a "pool" to be used up and which replenishes. Rate and such to be determined though, since there are no definate "system rules" yet.

Onto the next really important thing: the resolution mechanic. It is quite simple: your chance to be successful at a task is running the following number through the ArcTan formula: Relevant ability + any relevant skill - task difficulty modifier. A moderate task has modifier 0, easy tasks have high negative values (-5 is easy, -10 is very easy, etc... not entirely fixed on the numbers yet). This also means that having 5 skill is equivalent to boosting your relevant ability score by 5. Nice and easy to understand.

That's about as far as we got with definate decisions so far. There have been some more ideas, such as for combat (if attacking costs 2 energy points per round, defending 1, then defending is essentially letting your opponent wear himself out, etc.) We're moving on to the actual icing of the system soon.

[edited by - MadKeithV on August 7, 2002 4:52:20 AM]