My freind and I are working on a primarily RTS game, but we want certain RPG elements. For example, we want main characters, that you let cant die. We dont want infinite units. We want good plot, plot twists, connection to the characters, the ability to define who your main character is. And we dont want a mission based game. Every event is going to need to affect everything else. We also want mind bending strategy, planning, and the exileratrion of executing an amazing tactic. It is an isometric game. The problem is integrating the RPG factor in to the primary RTS. THe other thing that has been bothering me, is when we started the game design it was originally going to be an empire building pure RTS game. It had a dark mood, primarily created by that humans were used a resources to build things, and your units were heartless killing machines. When the game evolved to a non-empire building, character based RPG/RTS, the human using stuff was still there. The problem witr this is the player cannot really develop a connection with a heartless monster whos a human killing machine. What do you think. Should we get rid of the using human souls and blood for "mana"? Please help me with these two problems.

actually I would leave that in there...could actually make it a borderline situation don''t know if you ever played the original blood omen for the playstation, but my opinion the better characters are the non storybook ones.

I''ve never been a big fan of RTS''. I played warcraft when it first came out and then command and conquer and then mech commander. To me warcraft was the best because it was mostly low tech. I don''t like the fact that in the games with hi tech weapons like mech commander you can''t see enough of the screen at one time. A modern weapon system is going to have ranges of measured in kilometers and looking at a small section of the map when my units can see so much more is just to much to ask of me as a game player. In a way the Baldurs gate games where rts like in that they where iso and you moved your guys around in real time.

Good idea. But what is your idea of a few characters, assumiong I leavein the killing humans for resources part

OK, have you looked at what Blizzard is doing with WC3?

Don''t do that, it might work for them, but it isn''t all that elegant a solution.

Build your RTS engine, with the thought in mind that you will want your player to create (or inherit) a few key characters. So you''ll basically want to build something along the lines of individuals who are made up of parts. You can give a very RPG feel to the game if, instead of having units be standalone objects with given characteristics (damage x to y, movement speed m, armour d sight range f) make it so that each unit is made up of say five objects: Race Armour Item 1 Item 2 Item 3. Then you know that humans can walk with speed a, but if they are using full plate armour, they have speed reduced by t. Item 1 would be a weapon or spellbook, item 2 could be a weapon or shield or spellbook, and item 3 would be like a ring, or amulet/pendant.

Example : A basic Footman is Human, wears Chain-Mail, and carries Sword, Shield, Potion.

All you have to do is take it further with key characters. maybe after a certain number of kills a unit gains a level, and one item slot, as well as a chance to increase a racial attribute (health, strength, speed, magic affinity, etc.). The crux is that after say third level, special dudes get abilities. So a Footman who gains three levels becomes a Seargent, and gets to choose from three abilities (e.g. Rally - all units nearby get defense bonus - Charge! - self and all nearby units get movement speed bonus - Resistance - temporarily becomes immune to magic damage).

If you''re looking for individual character ideas try posting in the Writing Forum.

George D. Filiotis

I like the idea how you''ve gone to RTS/RPG beacause RTS games are just becoming to big for any control.

I think your game should be on the strategy with the characters making "Friends" and "foes" instead of your people just getting near enogh and killing them. So in a way i think it should sway a little more off the killing machine idea.

I agree with everything Symphonic suggested. If you want lots of RPG feel you might want to add in dialogue or story cut scenes to put the player in the character''s shoes. Also add in xp and char building for everyone if possible. Id suggest looking into FF Tactics and Ogre Battle for ideas too.

Ever Played Commandos?
thats a nice Isometric Game that gives strategy a twist, you get 5 commandos, each with a specialty, you cant afford to lose them cos you dont get any more, I wonder why there arent games like that one comming from everywhere (as there are FPS comming from all sides).

I thing Adding some RPG to the Commandos Recipe would make a best of the year Game.

Maybe the humans generate resource by worshiping at whatever it is that needs their "soul" and "blood"?

As far as role playing goes - if you''re hoping to pump up characters, maybe they could also occasionally find special items that give them extra abilities so the player can customize them more. Adds replayability too.

Random maps! Allow random maps!

And what you do in one mission can have an effect on what happens in the next one? Destroying a village that provided supplies to another area reduces its strength? (But don''t hurt villages that in turn provide to you!)

Just brain blurbs, do with them as you will.

This is a pretty good idea in general. Useful hints:

1) The starting point here is define what RTS and RPG are to you, and go from there.

2) I would argue that baldurs gate 2 and icewind dale are very much rpg/rts hybrids already. I mean combat is pretty tactical and RTS like at times.

3) Like another user suggested, maek sure your engine has lots of environmental involvement capability (item use, item handling, etc)

In general though, success is going to be heavily reliant on what you consider RPG elements and what you consider RTS elements -- the distinction is a bit unclear, and I dont think ther is any real consensus on this. For instance, I dont consider Diablo2 to really have significant RPG elements -- I just think its a progressive character action game.

Zileas