quote:
Original post by krez i don''t see why everyone complains that such a system would be "too complex, with nearly the same results"... isn''t that what computers are for? it''s not like somebody''s going to have to roll an additional 300 dice and then perform calculations with those values...
Because it isn''t computers who play the game, its people. If people have to deal with a more complex(confusing) combat system, but has simular results to a simpler one, then we''ve turned off casual players, while adding nothing of interest for the hardcore gamers. A lose-lose situation.
However, if we have a simple(understandable) combat system, we''ve help casual players understand game mechanics, and allow gamers to focus on what is important in the game: quests, gold, story, unforgettable characters, etc. A win-tie situation.(its a tie because we hardcore gamers arn''t penalized, but arn''t rewarded either)
For RPGs, I usually implement a location HP system, where each body part has HP, but I usually also do this turn based, not real-time.
Where are people getting off that this is too complex?
Player hits goblin in the arm. Does this wound the goblin? Yes. Is it a critical hit? No. Goblin''s arm is now lightly wounded. Player hits arm and wounds again. Goblin''s arm is now moderately wounded. Goblin now has -10% penalty to actions with that arm (either attacking or shield use or whatever) and is bleeding.
THAT is what I''m aiming for in terms of user visibility. In terms of code, it can be governed by similar structures to any other rules system.
The difference in terms of realism is that your average hit is far more deadly: critical hits have a one hit kill potential, and a player (or an NPC) can only accumulate a wounds.
One thing some of you don''t realize, is that simply because it seems that one system has the same results as another, doesn''t mean it''s necesarily true. An emulated system, one in which you try to model the appearance of the system, can work; but you never can be sure you''ve modeled the system fully unless it is a very simplistic thing you are trying to emulate. A simulated system can have much more realistic results.
In other words, you don''t really know what kind of output you will get from this more realistic damage model. Common sense may dictate that the results are the same as with a typical hp damage model. But without testing it out under a variety of circumstances it can be hard to tell. Look at wave physics. The underlying physics are fairly simple. But look at the interesting patterns the waves can form! You can''t look at the wave physics and guess offhand what the waves will look like under a given circumstance. But people can write models that simulate wave behavior, put them in the computer, and have it produce similar results as reality.
So what I suggest, is to model this realistic system with a very simple application, either paper-pencil or in the computer, and play test the system with many different circumstances. In the same application, put in a more traditional hp system and test using the same circumstances as with the realistic damage. See which one produces results more to your liking, and go with that. Might be a little bit of work, but if the realistic one doesnt work out, you didnt spend too much time on the actual game to switch systems. If the realistic one does work out, youve already done have the work of coding it, all you have to do is integrate it with the main game.
Just wanted to give my 2 cents on the realism issue. IMO more realism does not make a game any better or worse, too much realism can make a game boring, but only if you choose to concentrate on things of no great significance. Just because a game is an RPG doesn''t mean every single last element of the game has to be entirely fantastical... I mean hey, it''s a role playing game, anything that immerses a player more in a role should be a good thing. To me, the idea of a RPG is to allow you to realistically partake in an unrealistic environment.. the inhabitants, cultures and so on are works of fiction, but the aim is to let the player act out his fantasies as if the world were real. In some cases bearing away from realism can work, it all depends on the role the player wants to take and the exact setting, and I think there is demand enough for both fantastical and realistic roles that realism factor should not be much of a concern, just go with what you prefer and I''m sure there will be demand for whichever style you prefer.
Personally, I''m all for the realism, the player need not know the complex in''s and outs of the hitpoint system so long as it is presented to him in a simple manner. The player engages in combat, the results of the combat are made obvious in whichever manner, be it a hitpoint meter, wound effects, multiple locational hitpoint meters... or whatever you choose. If the player finds it necessary to know the entire behind-the-scenes workings of the combat system, chances are they are a hardcore gamer anyway, and so will dedicate the time to learning the system... if not, the system has a simple front presented to the gamer anyways, so they need not be concerned over it.
Okay, I may have missed previous posts to this effect, but can the player designate the target area of the opponents body in any more meaningful way than Fallout does? Is it easier to swing at the enemy''s left arm after parrying their attack?
I fence a little (saber), and no two lines of attack ever offer the same opportunities and challenges. If someone is dumb enough to start an attack in 4, the I can parry-riposte with ease, but I''ll only ever hit them in either the right arm, the side of the head, or maybe the chest.
Now, don''t get started on the differences between fencing for sport and sword-fighting, that''s not the point. The point is that this phenomenon of different attacks being more or less likely to succeed is a critical deciding factor is choosing an anatomical target. If you seek to make the local wound system more meaningful that just simulating a dice roll for the point of impact, then this sort of thing should be taken into consideration.
Even with guns, two guys shooting at one another while one or the other descends a closed staircase will be aiming for shins, while the only available hit on a barricaded opponent is often a head shot. Taking this into account, your battel engine will have to rival any real-time shooter. Can it be done such that it really matters to the player?
Well I''m not aiming for ''realistic'' sword fighting in that sense; I''m not looking to implement the ''accepted'' methods of combat: this is, after all, a game, and I want to see things in it like dual wielding and elaborately cool combos =).
What I''m trying to do is this: The player has 5 attacks, governed by the direction they are moving. Each of these attacks is specifically targeting a ''zone''
Now, each of these attacks would ''aim'' at a certain area, for example, the high attack would be far more liable to hit the head that the legs.
In terms of player defense, there are 6 ''zones'': head, chest, 2 legs, 2 arms, each of which have their own defense ratings individually (based on the armor and such).
If an attack hits any part of the body, and succesfully wounds it, then it continues travel, and can possibly hit another body part in its arc.
Finally, the player can execute longer ''chains'' of attacks as their skill in the relevant weapon increases, but one stipulation is that they cannot do the same attack twice in a row (and a chain is not likely to be more than 4 hits). If the player is chaining and kills his enemy midway, the game should automatically switch target to the nearest enemy, so a player fighting a group could theoretically execute a multi-kill combo. (A big part of my vision for the game is less of a focus on big bad meanies and more on multiple target fights, not in the Diablo sense but I think 3-4 on 1 sounds about right)
Therefore, the player must decide how they want to kill a target. Let''s say they are fighting a fast, evading, and hit ''n'' run enemy. They may want to execute low and side attacks in order to reduce his speed and attack power, before moving in with the more killing (but slower) overhead blows or the killing, but easy to evade, thrusts (in gaming terms, thrusts are easy to evade because they are linear attacks, since they do not travel in an arc they can be sidestepped handily).
On the other had, a player fighting a slower enemy might ignore the legs in favor of deadlier attack zones.
Finally, a player fighting weak enemies may want to go for as much deadly force as possible, so as to eliminate as many threats in one chain as possible.
The main inspiration for this combat system is Blade of Darkness. A great game, but not an RPG. What I want to do is take that kind of combat and apply it to an RPG context, with truly important stats, etc.
quote:
Original post by ElAntonius If an attack hits any part of the body, and succesfully wounds it, then it continues travel, and can possibly hit another body part in its arc.
I would think that a hit on the arm might be stopped, and not continue through other target areas.
Anyone remember Rune? The little localized blood splatters reflect where the player had been hit. You could lose arms or your head, but no incremental cripples were used. With that system, and some action penalties, would you have what you''re describing here?
If so, I say that the swordfighting would be crazy difficult. Especially against a respectable AI, you won''t be able to just walk up there and slash his legs, you''d be concerned about getting whacked. 3 or 4 on one? Unless you''re Yojimbo, that''s suicide. You''d have to give the enemies a good Chuck Norris One-at-a-time AI. Dynasty Warriors had it, Zelda 64 had it, and you will have to have it, because three guys with spears are going to kill you, grasshopper.
The problem is that any game control scheme will be essentially robotic. The mastery of martial arts that Miyamoto Musashi called ''emptiness" is impossible to represent with four keys and a mouse. Really, HP may be the best way to get this going on, but the Syphon Filter system does it, too.
At the end of the day, video game heroes take hits that storybook heroes dodge, and to keep up with their literary counterparts, they need to take those hits manfully. Or else take the abstract "dodge" capability that HP represents, and make it real.
Secret of mana had a good system of auto-dodging. My level 86 character simply couldn''t be hit by weak enemies, because while I moved around trying to line up a shot, he was ducking and weaving and back-hand-springing away from all attacks. Get some Chow Yun Fat head-jukes and some Bruce Lee torso contortions and some Jackie Chan spins, and let the player deal with the offensive hacks and slashes. That level 50 knight might get stilettoed by the stable boy, but there''s no way he''d let some drunken sailor land a punch on his face without at least TRYING to get out of the knuckle-zone.
I want the hit to continue travel not from a realism perspective, but a gameplay one; but this is something that I won''t be able to balance until I actually apply it.
In the case of a 4 on 1 fight, you hit it right on the nose. I don''t want a player to be able to take the brunt of 4 guys with spears.
Defensively speaking, the player has a few options.
Armor Soak-the easiest (since it requires no player input) but also the riskiest (since you have to trust in some random numbers to carry the day)
Parry-The player brings up his weapon(s)/shield and blocks attacks. I want to bring ripostes in but I''m rather unsure of how ATM. Probably a parried attack will bring out a stun time or something, but again, the parry brings some trust in random numbers (and in the wounds system that can be deadly)
Parry2-Comes into play when two weapons strike each other. If the attacks are roughly equal, they nullify each other.
Evasion-The player executes a dodge. As their evasion skill increases, the player dodges faster and further (since its planned as a lockon system, dodging sideways travels around the enemy). This requires player reflexes, however, because dodging early leads to them hitting you when you exit it, and dodging late...well...you know. On the flip side, there is no random factor: if you execute the dodge well you avoid the hit every time.
So, in the scenario against 4 spearmen (in theory).
Low level character-probably has to rely mostly on traps and archery to carry the day, at least until he can thin it out to a 1 on 1 scenario.
Mid level-is more skilled, but could still benefit from some softening up through less direct methods.
Uber level-By this point, his dodge is practically a teleport. His swordsmanship is high enough that he can 1 hit KO the spearmen. His armor skill is high enough that the occasional hit shouldn''t be too bad, but he should take care of the odd critical. So in theory, the high level player can evade about, or use a 4 hit string of attacks to take them out. Of course, his skills should be well developed enough by this point that he could snipe them, or use deadly traps, etc.
The point of all this is that I WANT players to approach the game with some care...rather than go wading through 50 enemies at a time.
/me just realized the implications that archery could carry in this system...might be too powerful...oh the woes of rules design =)
I can understand why people want a more realistic system. In many ways it seems like a good way to go. Everyone is talking about the mechanics of hit points and ways to make it more realistic (critical hits, wounds, etc). But one major problem with all these systems is they make the weaker player even weaker.
What I mean by this is than with a wound a player is now weakened, more so than just decrementing their HP by 10 points. They are now less able to defend themselves and less able to attack. I agree that this system is more realistic. However, I also think it might not be much fun.
Actually, I think your system is fundamentally flawed, because it breaks an important rule: don''t punish bad players. The worse a player is, the more likely they are to be hit. This makes them injured and less effective, which will only cause them to get hurt even more. IMO this could be a very frustrating system. It needs some way to balance that affect.
You stated you wanted a more "cinematic" version of combat. I''m suggesting your system will result in just the opposite. In your system as battle continues the player will accumulate more and more injuries and they will slow down and become weaker. However in every movie I''ve ever seen the hero gets stronger. Sure they look weaker, but as they get injured they also increase in ability, in spite of their increased weaknesses.
To accomplish this I think you should add some added bonuses as injury increases. More speed, strength (call it adrenline), or better still even more luck. As the heat of battle rages, and the fighting gets more and more intense, the player is able to perform better. Monsters begin to miss him more often, because, well, he''s the hero. This doesn''t remove the risk to the player, especially since at low health he''s only a hit or two away from death. But, I think it could increase the excitement level more.
