Okay first of all I''m not a programmer yet. The most I can do in C++ is right a console application in VC++ 5 allowing the user to add two numbers. Just saying this so you don''t get all: well are you using Direct X or OpenGL, is this gonna be text or do you know Win32 API, how much API do you know? I don''t know jack. Now onto my idea. I have an idea (doh) for an RPG (doh again). Visually, it''s view from a Isomectric Prospective. The landscape is 3D, made with polygons and such, but the characters are sprites. All objects are sprites, drawn for each animation in 8 directions (the cardinals). Like Final Fantasy Tactics. The battle system is what I can''t decide. I want it to be a seemless transistion to battle mode, unlike those annoying random battles. But should it be a turn-based like battle (would probably take ages to work into a free roaming map) or a more interactive diablo-like engine (less time probably). By more interactive I mean, pressing an attack key, and there would be dodging. I want it to be a bit realistic but still mythical. Like you can''t take a billion slashes from a longsword just because your level 70 legend. You get cuts and bleed and die from bleeding just like real life. But it''s not as easy to die like you can be cut like 10 times but the cuts might not be deep and such. I could really use some input on the battle system. *Note: BTW this won''t be my first game, I''m gonna take it slow with clones and such. I just want to get this idea out into the public for advice That''s all I really have right now, I''m still working on the story. The setting is around King Arthur time but mythical with dragons and magic. More of a Dungeons and Dragons theme.

In my opinion there are too many fast action games like Diablo claiming to be RPGs when all they really are are actions of a different format.

Turn based ''RPGs'' are much better because they let you have some thought control over what sort of action you wish to take when fighting, much like the traditional pen and paper RPGs.

On a personal note, overall I detest these so called RPGs for computers. They have nothing to do with Role Playing at all.

Anyway, back to the constructive point of this post.

have you ever given thought to the games of old? Being an avid gamer of 14 years now, I have been lucky enough to see the beginnings of computer games and their transition through the ages. Sadly, imo, it hasn''t improved in quality. That isn''t to say that there are no good games, but so many games these days are solely to make money and have nothing to do with quality.

I often sit and reminisce about the RPGs of old - Like Ultima IV, and just about any RPG you could get on console.

These RPGs, although old, often held my attention for long hours, and even if I finished them, I''d re-hire them the next month or something. In fact, I have made a point of getting them on emulators.

The ''old school'' RPGs worked for me because they were simple. Simple in design, simple in battle, simple in stats, etc. Even the old graphics were perfect.

I recommend you take a look at some of the older RPGs - there is a lot to be learnt from them. I mean, I am not saying that you should make your game in the form of the old ones (Although that would be really cool) but you could definetly take some pointers from them.

As for your theme, well, it''s been done billions of times. That is to say, the GENERAL theme has been done billions of times. Perhaps adding your own touches might make it more interesting? King Arthur was really Queen Betty or something ... you get the picture, right?

Cheers.

quote: Original post by PSWind
The battle system is what I can't decide. I want it to be a seemless transistion to battle mode.

That means your battle system will have to be isometric too, unless you're going to make a full 3D world... with that in mind, on to my ideas/opinions/rambles...

quote: But should it be a turn-based like battle (would probably take ages to work into a free roaming map).

have you ever played Fallout Tactics in turn-based mode instead of real time?? I'd recommend giving it a try.. a battle can take HOURS in a system like that...

quote: or a more interactive diablo-like engine (less time probably).

the obvious compromise between the 2 systems is the Bioware Infinity combat system... it's pseudo real time but you can pause whenever you want... maybe that's an option?

quote: By more interactive I mean, pressing an attack key, and there would be dodging.

I don't want to be pedantic but if you allow the character to dodge, based on player input, at any tmie during combat, then wouldn't that be real time combat? I mean you're allowing the player an "action" outside his "turn"...

You mentioned Final Fantasy Tactics in your post and personally, I'm a huge fan of that game.. but it does take a long time to play

I think your best bet would be an FFT style system with a limited radius of combat. I'm not sure exactly how you'd implement this so I'll just blurt it all out and see if someone can make sense out of it.

Why not give your party a radius. They move around in real time, walking, performing actions etc doesn't eat into thier Action points or whatever, but the party has a radius (maybe based on the weapons/spells that they have equipped. Enemies also have a radius. If the 2 radiai (I have no clue what the plural is overlap, your game goes into turn based combat. Obviously if you had a player with a Bow & Arrow equipped you'd have a much larger "attack range" than a guy with a club.. you could pincushion him before he got near you.... if you were in combat and you wanted to retreat you'd just move out of range of the enemy... this would be impossible if you were surrounded.. but that adds a strategic element to the game..

obviously you'd have to have something in place to handle situations where you wanted to escape and the enemy kept chasing you.. and situations where they had not seen you but combat had been triggered and you wanted to drop back to real time and run past them... I dunno.. I'm sure you can work that stuff out yourself..

just my $0.02


Edited by - CatalystJones on August 21, 2001 8:12:13 PM

First of all, you can create a new type of battle system. It works depending on the type of game. RPG''s arent a specific genre anymore. Final Fantasy vs. Baldurs Gate? If you consider one an RPG whats the other one? Think of your type of game, final fantasy kind og games are turn based, where as Baldurs Gate and Diablo 2, though I dont know if I can compare them, they seem quite different too, are real time. Real time is more advanced, and I personaly think it is better. If you are looking to make rules like AD&D, they should really be turn- based, but BioWare decided to make it real time. You really should just look deep into it, simulate a fight in your mind, and then see which one you think is better for you.
Good Luck.

Expanding on CatalystJones' idea;

When the two radiuses overlap and play goes into combat mode, don't change view. If you want to go turn based (better for RPGs imo, as I have stated in the previous post) then do the old hexagonal battlefield. Characters are now given specific movement points in which they can move, cast spells, fire arrows, charge, use items, rest, bandage wounds, etc ...

Hexagons are outlined upon the battlefield and each hexagon might take up 3 standar movement points, and incread/decrease depending on current terrain. Defence and offence can vary depending on terrain, too. Menus, character stats etc can be accessed via f5 f6 f7 etc ...

Nice and neat, turn based, allows you to strategise your battles as well as use other weapons such as bows, etc AND it keeps your current view, which means no evil screen changes, etc.


(I should learn to read posts properly .. that is EXACTLY what Jones was talking about ... still, it's 10:40 am and I haven't slept .. gimme a break!! As for retreating, you could have a retreat option for each character in your party. If they are not surrounded completely by enemies, then retreat shouldn't be a hassle.

Edited by - Sarazen on August 21, 2001 8:43:38 PM

CatalystJones and Sarazen your ideas seem perfect for the battle system to me. I don''t think

CatalystJones: When you said that the player activated dodging would be considered real time, in a sense it wouldn''t. Because it would be like those scense in Shenmue when you press a button as it flashes onto the screen. And the dodge button would only flash when your able to dodge, as in the computer would normally dodge for you.

Thank you guys for your help. Okay so here''s what I have so far:

Turn-based battle systems using a grid of hexagons (maybe they should be octagons, for the 8 directions?). Party emmits a radius and when an available target''s radius overlaps your you can go into battle mode. If the target is hostile you immediatly go into battle mode. Characters have a Stamina linked directly to HP, MP, and Move bars. Stamina goes down when your hit, cast a spell, or perform an action. Zero stamina rapidly drains HP. Stamina recovered through food, water, and rest. HP recovered through magic, potion, and rest. MP recovered from rest, and potions. MV recovered from rest. Isometric view. Sprites on Polygonal landscape (FFT style).

Please tell me if there is anything I''m missing or flaws. I''m still working on the story.

With the stamina option, you have to be careful. People will get too frustrated if Stamina runs out too quickly, so having so many reasons as to why Stamina drops may not be such a good idea. Unless you give a high base level of Stamina to each character, that is.

I am assuming that the battles are to be over quickly, but, for another side of RPGs and strategic battles, you may want to have a look at Koei''s collection of games that, IMO, were a brilliant and innovative addition to the gaming realm.

You can get their games at www.theunderdogs.org, due to the fact that they are all out of production. Just do a company search for Koei. They have their first games in this genre - ''The Bandit Kings of Ancient China'' etc - and their more up to date versions - Ghenghis Khan (something Wolf Clan, I think)

You can''t miss them, really and, even if it isn''t what you''re looking for in a battle system, they''re still great games to play

Cheers!

quote: Original post by PSWind
Because it would be like those scense in Shenmue when you press a button as it flashes onto the screen. And the dodge button would only flash when your able to dodge, as in the computer would normally dodge for you.

like the linking/combo system in Vagrant Story?? Ok that makes sense... in that case I guess you''re not really breaking the turn based system.. cool

quote: Characters have a Stamina linked directly to HP, MP, and Move bars. Stamina goes down when your hit, cast a spell, or perform an action. Zero stamina rapidly drains HP. Stamina recovered through food, water, and rest.

I see a slight problem with this. Stamina is a value that would not be reset at the end of each turn, which means that in a long battle, the player would be forced to rest (in the middle of a swordfight?!?) or eat ("excuse me Mr Goblin while I eat my lunch")... which sort of messes the concept up a bit.. maybe you could combine traditional action points with stamina.. so the players stats determine how many action points they can spend each "turn" and action points are regenerated at the begining of a turn (unless you''re afflicted with something), but the player can sacrifice stamina (which is NOT regenerated) for extra action points in any one turn... so the average player could swing his sword and move 2 hexes in a turn... but if he wanted to he could exert himself (and wearhimself out) by sacrificing stamina to swing his sword, move 2 hexes and throw a dagger.. or something... I''m just rambling at the moment

anyway just my $0.02

I like that Action Points (AP) idea. How about each turn you get a set number of AP based on your characters statistics, which are based on thier level/power-ups/current enchantments/etc., Each character can also gain extra AP for sacrificing some of thier stamina. Stamina is depleted at time of usage. For instance it is depleted right before the action occurs, after you have confirmed it. And not like, you select ''Sacrifice X Stamina for X AP.'' Movement is based upon Battle Movement Points (BMV), in which the amount gained depends on your Constituion at the time of level gain. Is this idea better for the Stamina thing?

Mages in the battle field suck stamina though, that''s the idea so that Mages aren''t able to cast giant spells over and over without killing themselves, because the wizard class I''m going to use does need MP, because they have to take the time to read the spells from thier book and then cast them. Sorcerors on the other hand use MP to cast spells. I guess Spells can be sort of pumped up a bit when sacrifing extra stamina for them. By extra I mean if your already sacrifing stamina to cast the spell in the first place.

I''ll get into classes once I get the main engines completed. Or should I define my classes now and then work the engine around them. So it''s either work the engine around the classes or work the classes around the engine.

I don''t want to bog down people to answer a million questions so I''ll stop here. Thanks for all the help.

I like Jones'' idea on the AP system. Characters should have a base Stamina that, IMO, should NOT be modified. I envisage your story spanning over minimum a few months and maximum a few years (If I am wrong, please correct me) and I cannot see anyone''s stamina increasing that significantly without sufficient training.

I think it is better to give them AP based on stamina, and that is IT throughout the whole game. Don''t make it complicated by depleting it, etc ... just give them ''AP per Turn'' and that''s it. And I wouldn''t include the ''sacrifice stamina'' option ... battle shouldn''t be ''bulky'' - it should be fairly smooth with little options to choose from. That''s my opinion anyway.

Same rules apply for mages. Bigger spells call for bigger MP. Perhaps for mages you can have a ''movement pooling'' system. A skill that they are taught at Mage School or whatever that allows them to ''meditate'' during battle. The ''meditate'' option basically just leaves them out of that round of combat and pools whatever MP points they have over to the next round of combat. This allows them to cast one or two BIG spells per combat round or to cast smaller spells every round. Again, don''t touch Stamina. Use it only as a measurement for MP.

Again, only my opinion.