I've been working on a Magic: the Gathering inspired RPG for months now, but I haven't had much of a chance to work on it recently (working late, getting married, having a car crash, visiting relatives...life in general really get in the way of hobbies!) Now that I come back to it, examining with fresh eyes, I'm not sure where I want to take the gameplay. I found that I enjoyed the highly deterministic nature of spell and attack resolution in M:tG. Few things annoy a player more than wildly inconsistent attacks that never seem to fail for NPC monsters, but are practically useless to your team. Thus, I strove for simplicity in gameplay. However, I am having trouble deciding on exactly how complicated to make this. For instance, I had arranged battles to take place on a chessboard-like grid, as seen in most SRPGs. I also wanted to allow summoned allies to "interrupt" physical advances by intercepting opponents. We all know how frustrating it is when a slow-moving swordsman just walks around your knights to bonk your healer on the head. When a hostile NPC makes a move, you can press the "interrupt" button to pause his action and bring up a menu of allies with sufficient stamina to block the offending monster's advancement, if the offendor's movement path intersect's the blocker's interception radius. The trouble with this arrangement is that you need to mentally track various statistics: which of my allies has enough stamina to block? What are the blocking radii of my units? Are their blocking radii arranged to prevent melee opponents from reaching the main character? Will I remember to time my "interrupt" button press during the opponent's move in a turn-based game? Is this too much? Should I reduce the battlefield to two abstract "sides" as in JRPGs like Final Fantasy and cardgames like M:tG? I originally wanted to avoid making it more similar to the game it's obviously based on, but I worry the alternative will suck the fun out of the game. tl;dr Give examples of the line you draw between complexity adding depth and complexity making games too much to keep track of. Also, suggest ways in which to mitigate the frustrations of complexity in a SRPG.

An idea from traditional wargames would be to give units a "zone of control" of one square. This stops enemy movement when they encounter the zone.

Zone of control kind of mechanism that is consistant (so that they player will begin to expect the capabilities of various units). Reach of weapons around each unit (including quick sidesteps/lunge actions...)

Also have opportunistic attacks made by your units when an enemy walks by and offers a flank or a rear (or any similar 'easy' attack). The NPC then have to have their AI built to avoid putting themselves in those vulnerable positions.

Momentum type attacks (charging the enemy to knock them over) and/or multiple units attacking the enemy seeking out vulnerabilities (and again the NPCs trying to avoid/counter those more complicated tactics).

The enemy will then not waltz past what realisticly should prevent them and your placement/control will be more significant in the game.

If I were you, what I would do is buy a paperback copy of the first Magic The Gathering novel ever written (1994), Arena. (amazon, b&n)



The way that the author describes the use of Magic in that novel is awesome, and it changed how I felt about the card game. Be warned it's a pretty mature novel, and even if the writing isn't astounding (cmon, it's a book based on a card game), it isn't bad.

As far as intercepting goes, you should look into D&D attacks of opportunity. Let that slow moving swordsman move by your knight, but that knight gets at least one free hit on him along the way.

Attacks of Opportunity (Part One)

The range that the unit threatens is probably the same as the range of their attack. I haven't played D&D but I'm pretty sure it doesn't allow attacks of opportunity from ranged and magic attacks. Normally a character only gets one attack of opportunity but some unit special ability could be they get more then one attack of opportunity.

I should clarify that the "interception" mechanic will cause the defender and the attacker to "tangle" so that the attacker cannot complete his movement unless he both defeats the defender and has enough stamina left over to complete his movement. If the attacker survives the interception, but does not have enough stamina, he will stop in place.

@ID Merlin: I did think about giving all minions equal interception radii, but allies with long reach like dragons or quick feet like ninja might seem silly with these constraints.

@wodinoneeye: Those varying ranges were what I had in mind, but I wondered if that was too much information to keep track of. Even in a SRPG as simple as Final Fantasy Tactics, I often lost track of things like turn order, spell charging time, etc. Would this be too much when combined with all the other elements of a card-based spell system and traditional SRPG battles?

@Funkymunky: Those books have been recommended to me before, but I never found them available in any brick & mortar or online stores. It seems amazon has a few used copies now; do you know if you buy directly from other users or if they are in amazon's possession? I'm a little wary after some ebay debacles.

@tstrimp: Hah! That's a pretty accurate summary of my concept of interceptions. Thanks for the link, that could prove very useful. However, my interceptions are a bit more complicated in that interceptors may move (stamina permitting) to get in front of another moving character. Since stamina regenerates every clock tick (100% stamina grants you a regular turn), a minion's effective radius of interception can vary greatly.

Given my clearer description of interception mechanics, does this become too unwieldy?

Quote:

Original post by templewulf @tstrimp: Hah! That's a pretty accurate summary of my concept of interceptions. Thanks for the link, that could prove very useful. However, my interceptions are a bit more complicated in that interceptors may move (stamina permitting) to get in front of another moving character. Since stamina regenerates every clock tick (100% stamina grants you a regular turn), a minion's effective radius of interception can vary greatly. Given my clearer description of interception mechanics, does this become too unwieldy?

The stamina concept would work well with attacks or opportunity (AoO). I'm assuming an attack takes a certain amount of stamina similar to X-COM and it's TU. Things to get much, much more complicated when you get to move your units on your opponents turn however. It would be much, much simpler to let them attack automatically whenever an enemy moves into a position that your unit threatens.

This leaves some strategic options on both sides. You have to consciously leave enough stamina for your unit to do an AoO. You opponent could send a sacrificial unit to take that AoO then move the real unit passed your knight in order to bonk your healer on the head. When you add in the ability for possible multiple AoO from a single unit then your has a lot more to think about if he wants to get to your healer.

I think this is one of those places where the KISS principal applies.

Quote:

Original post by tstrimp The stamina concept would work well with attacks or opportunity (AoO). I'm assuming an attack takes a certain amount of stamina similar to X-COM and it's TU. Things to get much, much more complicated when you get to move your units on your opponents turn however. It would be much, much simpler to let them attack automatically whenever an enemy moves into a position that your unit threatens.

I thought about that, but what about fast units with short weapons? The ninja I mentioned earlier would have great interception ability if he could move during that phase, but extremely poor interception if he could not. Should this be one of those times where gameplay trumps versimilitude, and just tell the player not to ask any questions?

Quote:

This leaves some strategic options on both sides. You have to consciously leave enough stamina for your unit to do an AoO. You opponent could send a sacrificial unit to take that AoO then move the real unit passed your knight in order to bonk your healer on the head. When you add in the ability for possible multiple AoO from a single unit then your has a lot more to think about if he wants to get to your healer.

That's exactly what I'm going for, but I wonder if it becomes too obtuse at that point, or the point at which I add moving interceptors, or even if moving interceptors aren't too complicated and that line gets drawn even farther down.

Quote:

I think this is one of those places where the KISS principal applies.

I was afraid you'd say that. [lol] What do you suggest for nimble interceptors, then? A stand-still AoO policy, and just don't draw attention to the possibility of moving interception?

Rating++ btw.

If you add the it could be implemented as easily as allowing some units to have increased AoO range even though they are using a shorter weapon. Maybe at a higher stamina cost, maybe not. I the ninja example, perhaps his weapon range is only one, but if he is freakishly fast then you might justify increasing it by 1 or 2 and doubling / tripling the cost for the attack. For example, his normal AoO range is one which would cost him 10% stamina to do. He could use his AoO at a range of 2 for 20% or 3 for 30% of his stamina. I would recommend keeping this as a special ability however and restrict most units to only attacking within their weapons AoO range.

Quote:

Original post by templewulf @ID Merlin: I did think about giving all minions equal interception radii, but allies with long reach like dragons or quick feet like ninja might seem silly with these constraints.

Silly to some people, but not to me. You say you play on something like a chess board, so I'd probably see it as something like chess. This is how I see Final Fantasy Tactics. I don't ask why my units patiently wait their turn while being beaten on, and I don't know of any real bishops OCD enough to only walk on white tiles.

Quote:

@wodinoneeye: Those varying ranges were what I had in mind, but I wondered if that was too much information to keep track of. Even in a SRPG as simple as Final Fantasy Tactics, I often lost track of things like turn order, spell charging time, etc. Would this be too much when combined with all the other elements of a card-based spell system and traditional SRPG battles?

There's actually a lot of information in Final Fantasy Tactics' UI. When casting a spell, it tells you on what turn it'll be cast and you can find when a unit's turn is coming up by hovering over it. If you want to know when an enemy's spell will be cast, press X to unselect your character, then triangle, then select AT list (I do wish this was more convenient, but it is there).

Quote:

@tstrimp: Hah! That's a pretty accurate summary of my concept of interceptions. Thanks for the link, that could prove very useful. However, my interceptions are a bit more complicated in that interceptors may move (stamina permitting) to get in front of another moving character. Since stamina regenerates every clock tick (100% stamina grants you a regular turn), a minion's effective radius of interception can vary greatly. Given my clearer description of interception mechanics, does this become too unwieldy?

Maybe. If you really don't want to simplify it, and attacks of opportunity are going to be the main point of interaction during the enemy's move, then perhaps, as the enemy moves, you could highlight your own units as the enemy moves into/out of their current (as determined by stamina) intercept radius. When moving your own units, perhaps you could draw a circle of some sort to indicate the unit's intercept radius (e.g. a line at their current intercept radius or a gradient from their current radius to where it will be at the start of their next turn).