| |
Site Navigation
Main
News
Forums
Games
Games Database
Top 100
Release List
Support Files
Features
Reviews
Previews
Interviews
Editorials
Diaries
Misc
Download
Gallery
Music
Screenshots
Videos
Miscellaneous
Staff Members
Privacy Statement
|
|
|
|
ThouShaltNot
Eager Tradesman
Joined: 27 Feb 2003
Posts: 32
Location: New Zealand |
| My vision of a perfect CRPG |
|
I just thought I’d share a few things that I would change with regards to CRPGs if I were a game developer.
Hit Points. Every single CRPG I have played has high level characters ending up with at least double (sometimes hundreds of times more) hit points than they started with. This is just plain stupid when you think about it. How does training with a sword let you survive being hacked at with an axe 50 times? I am aware that some people like to think of it as more of a “blow avoidance mechanism” where at high level all of the hits you receive are glancing blows. But developers always make HP dependant on physical toughness and constitution, whereas if it were an issue of avoidance, things like dexterity would be more important. Also in computer games these so-called “glancing blows” are never shown as such. It’s always the axe striking solidly on flesh, sometimes complete with spurting blood.
I once read a series of pen & paper books (forget the name) that seemed to have the perfect HP system. You started off with 20 or so HP and as you levelled up you gained 1 HP every level or two (dependant on class). Thus you would end up maybe 150% tougher by the end, which is not outside the bounds of reasonable expectation. This sort of system may seem rather un-fun in that you will die after one or two hits even at high level, but they can adjust that by simply reducing the odds of getting hit as you level up. With this system there’s no need to make opponents (and the player) artificially do more and more damage as the game progresses. After all, you can die just as easily from an axe to the face as from having your head bitten off by a three-headed shazwazit. Instead players and opponents should gain more and more tricks – ie fancy combat moves or spells – as well as better protective gear.
Combat. Most combat in CRPGs looks, quite frankly, feeble. Neverwinter Nights has probably the best combat animations I’ve seen in an RPG, but even it has a way to go. Especially at low levels, the characters stand in front of each other, taking wild swings every minute or so. I have done kendo for less than a year, and even my real life fighting skills are better than what is shown on the screen. Rather than standing around waiting for the next round, combatants should be swinging and parrying all the time.
Time span. Every RPG seems to feature a young hero who sets out on an adventure with the experience and skills of a dead gnat, and in the space of a few days or weeks or months they turn into the Ultimate Hero™. There are two solutions to this: (a) Make the hero not start out as such a wimp, or (b) Make the time frame of the game reflect the level of change the hero must go through.
Setting. I am SO SICK of those damned elves! Why can’t developers be more imaginative about their game settings, rather than using some bastardised version of Tolkein’s Middle Earth? If they were novelists the critics (and probably the readers) would crucify them! I’ll admit I have played and enjoyed Baldurs Gate 2 and other generic fantasy cliché games, but that enjoyment was in spite of the setting, not because of it. The sad fact is, of course, that games that did break the mould, such as Planescape: Torment and Fallout, didn’t sell as well. But we can always dream…
Character interaction. OK, some games such as BG2 and PT featured excellent interaction with NPCs, but they are the exception not the rule. Most games have the main character interacting with a group of characters, solving their problems, then moving onto the next group. This lack of dynamic, recurring characters kills the plot. Which is a shame, because the story is the single most important aspect of an RPG for me. Personally I find that only party based games have the level of interaction that I desire, but this is obviously a matter of personal preference.
Anyway, enough ranting for today. What do you guys think? Any other pet peeves about the genre you can think of? |
Fri Jul 11, 2003 3:43 am |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor
Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
quote:
Hit Points. Every single CRPG I have played has high level characters ending up with at least double (sometimes hundreds of times more) hit points than they started with. This is just plain stupid when you think about it. How does training with a sword let you survive being hacked at with an axe 50 times? I am aware that some people like to think of it as more of a “blow avoidance mechanism” where at high level all of the hits you receive are glancing blows. But developers always make HP dependant on physical toughness and constitution, whereas if it were an issue of avoidance, things like dexterity would be more important. Also in computer games these so-called “glancing blows” are never shown as such. It’s always the axe striking solidly on flesh, sometimes complete with spurting blood.
Have you played the IE games? (Baldur's Gate, IWD etc.) IF you're a REALLY powerful fighter, you'll get like 200-250 HP when you're like level 20+. Wouldn't say that's completely unrealistic considering you start out with 20-30 HP (depending on your constitution).
Furthermore, many RPGs have experience points, which you gain by FIGHTING monsters. You know, they hit you constantly? Ever seen Fight Club?
Avoidance is in AC, not HP.
You also have to think about that RPGs shouldn't be COMPLETELY realistic, otherwise you'd die from like 5 axe chops, no matter how powerful you are (unless you got an armor). That would be pretty boring.
EVEN with that system you mentioned, I mean, you have to think about your opponents being MORE ABLE to hit you as well. Furthermore, how is armor (reducing ability to move) incorporated in that system?
We ARE talking about a FANTASY setting... RIGHT???
HOW good would your chances be once you fight someone who casts a fireball on you? Or when you fight a dragon or a demon? Seems you would do a lot of time rerolling then.
quote:
Combat. Most combat in CRPGs looks, quite frankly, feeble. Neverwinter Nights has probably the best combat animations I’ve seen in an RPG, but even it has a way to go. Especially at low levels, the characters stand in front of each other, taking wild swings every minute or so. I have done kendo for less than a year, and even my real life fighting skills are better than what is shown on the screen. Rather than standing around waiting for the next round, combatants should be swinging and parrying all the time.
I THINK one should view it SYMBOLICALLY.
I, at least, would find it pretty annoying having my characters loosing their health at extreme speeds, while running around, doing maneuvers and all kinds of crazy stunts while trying to get a hit on the opponent. Especially with PARTY RPGs.
Besides, those who make the game probably don't want to sit around, making it so your monk does flip flops over your enemies then a round-kick which melts into a back flip etc. etc.
quote:
Time span. Every RPG seems to feature a young hero who sets out on an adventure with the experience and skills of a dead gnat, and in the space of a few days or weeks or months they turn into the Ultimate Hero™. There are two solutions to this: (a) Make the hero not start out as such a wimp, or (b) Make the time frame of the game reflect the level of change the hero must go through.
Uh, you have to consider that it's a game. People want to experiance PROGRESSION with their characters. There are several RPGs which make you start off pretty powerful (example: BG 2). But that's also a bit boring since you'll become spoiled with SUPER WEAPONS, and only fight extreme opponents.
I would find it pretty boring starting off with slaying dragons and gods, while walking through the wilderness unscratched.
Plus, it's pretty unnecessary showing off that a year or so has passed while your character increased one level. It doesn't ADD anything to gameplay, unless you start to incorporate AGEING, which I don't think would be THE best thing to do.
Also, isn't that like many sotries/novells? A young hero who after a while becomes really really powerful. I don't remember several years passing before characters like Rand (The Wheel of Time) or Belgarion (The Belgariad) got their extreme super powers.
You have to remember, that your charater is SPECIAL in many RPGs (prophecies etc., you name it).
As for setting, I agree, it would be nice to see something else (Arcanum had one of the coolest settings I've seen yet). But a medieval setting works for me, and so thinks many others. And why would a developer try something that MIGHT work, when they have something that workS.
_________________
Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
|
Fri Jul 11, 2003 8:29 am |
|
|
Dhruin
Stranger In A Strange Land
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1825
Location: Sydney, Australia |
I think most of your points are valid but I'm not sure some of them are practical or fun.
Realistically a single significant blow from a sword should at least seriously injure an individual, but clearly it's not fun to be dead or unable to continue after one blow. Increasing the players ability to avoid blows certainly seems a reasonable alternative but I would suggest it's still not fun. I remember playing PoR: RoMD and watching frustrated as I took swing after swing not hitting anything. So, as flawed as it is, I think it's more fun to have more hitpoints and take more blows despite the lack of realism.
Regarding alternative settings, I couldn't agree more. When RPGVault recently started it's 'Roundtable' series by asking why fantasy was so popular, more people posted news comments here saying "well, I like fantasy more. I read Tolkien or Brookes or Feist, anyway", so I guess there's simply less of us that would like more variety in our settings.
But all is not lost; there's Fallout 3, Vampire Bloodlines, Deus Ex 2 and KotOR for starters and lots of smaller efforts like Restricted Area. Admittedly many of them are hybrids: I'd love to see a hardcore, turn-based, party-based, planet-hopping sci-fi ISO RPG but I'm not holding my breath *g* . |
|
Fri Jul 11, 2003 10:45 am |
|
|
ThouShaltNot
Eager Tradesman
Joined: 27 Feb 2003
Posts: 32
Location: New Zealand |
quote:
Have you played the IE games? (Baldur's Gate, IWD etc.) IF you're a REALLY powerful fighter, you'll get like 200-250 HP when you're like level 20+. Wouldn't say that's completely unrealistic considering you start out with 20-30 HP (depending on your constitution).
A human has the potential to get a little bit tougher – maybe their heart becomes more efficient, or their skin gets a little tougher from all the nicks and scars, but there is no way that you can get 10 times stronger (without cybernetic body replacement or some such thing).
quote:
Furthermore, many RPGs have experience points, which you gain by FIGHTING monsters. You know, they hit you constantly? Ever seen Fight Club?
Fight Club has them punching each other, not slicing with swords. A human being can actually survive a fair number of punches. 
quote:
You also have to think about that RPGs shouldn't be COMPLETELY realistic, otherwise you'd die from like 5 axe chops, no matter how powerful you are (unless you got an armor). That would be pretty boring.
This is my ideal CRPG I’m talking about here, and I DO want it to be completely realistic (although I would omit mundane details like eating and going to the toilet). What I’m envisaging is more of a simulation of real medieval/futuristic/whatever life than the bend-the-rules-if-you-need-to style of current RPGs. And you could avoid being hit by those 5 axe chops by doing 5 spectacular parries or rolling dodges. That’s what they do in the movies, and IMO it’s a lot less boring than watching a little red health meter reducing.
quote:
We ARE talking about a FANTASY setting... RIGHT???
Not necessarily. My discussion applies to any setting. But even in fantasy settings, unless it is otherwise explained in the plot, the hero is a humanoid being, subject to the limitations of flesh. Aragorn from LOTR would still die from a misplaced sword thrust no matter how skilled he is.
quote:
HOW good would your chances be once you fight someone who casts a fireball on you? Or when you fight a dragon or a demon? Seems you would do a lot of time rerolling then.
You survive like they do in books or movies, by either getting the hell out of the way of said fireball, or erecting some sort of magic barrier/force field to deflect it.
quote:
I THINK one should view it SYMBOLICALLY.
I, at least, would find it pretty annoying having my characters loosing their health at extreme speeds, while running around, doing maneuvers and all kinds of crazy stunts while trying to get a hit on the opponent. Especially with PARTY RPGs.
They wouldn’t lose health any faster than normal. There would just be “filler” animations to liven things up.
quote:
Uh, you have to consider that it's a game. People want to experiance PROGRESSION with their characters. There are several RPGs which make you start off pretty powerful (example: BG 2). But that's also a bit boring since you'll become spoiled with SUPER WEAPONS, and only fight extreme opponents.
I’m not envisaging a monty-haul adventure where +2 swords or powered armour are thrown around like candy. There are plenty of other RPGs that provide this already.
quote:
Plus, it's pretty unnecessary showing off that a year or so has passed while your character increased one level. It doesn't ADD anything to gameplay, unless you start to incorporate AGEING, which I don't think would be THE best thing to do.
It would adds immensely to the story, and make it feel much more epic and, of course, realistic. Suspension of disbelief is important to any story, no matter what medium it is told in.
quote:
Also, isn't that like many sotries/novells? A young hero who after a while becomes really really powerful. I don't remember several years passing before characters like Rand (The Wheel of Time) or Belgarion (The Belgariad) got their extreme super powers.
I haven’t read WoT, but I’m pretty sure the Belgariad and Mallorean spanned a reasonable length of time, not the days or weeks of most games. Anyway, I can’t say these are very good books IMO. What I would prefer is a level of realism more akin to George R.R. Martin’s “A Song of Ice and Fire” series.
Anyway, thanks for the response. |
|
Fri Jul 11, 2003 12:01 pm |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor
Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
quote:
Fight Club has them punching each other, not slicing with swords. A human being can actually survive a fair number of punches.
Ok, bad example on my part. What I meant is that they at least become "tougher".
quote:
This is my ideal CRPG I’m talking about here, and I DO want it to be completely realistic (although I would omit mundane details like eating and going to the toilet). What I’m envisaging is more of a simulation of real medieval/futuristic/whatever life than the bend-the-rules-if-you-need-to style of current RPGs. And you could avoid being hit by those 5 axe chops by doing 5 spectacular parries or rolling dodges. That’s what they do in the movies, and IMO it’s a lot less boring than watching a little red health meter reducing.
Fair enough, but you would have to consider that you are controlling your character via a keyboard + mouse. You will have limited movement (i.e. you can't move all limbs etc. unless you want it utterly cluttered up).
Besides, having something like that in a PARTY rpg would be horrible, IMO.
Switching constantly, telling your character their every next step.
quote:
Not necessarily. My discussion applies to any setting. But even in fantasy settings, unless it is otherwise explained in the plot, the hero is a humanoid being, subject to the limitations of flesh. Aragorn from LOTR would still die from a misplaced sword thrust no matter how skilled he is.
Well, it depends... did you see LoTR when Boromir dies? Or when Gandalf fights the Balrog?
quote:
You survive like they do in books or movies, by either getting the hell out of the way of said fireball, or erecting some sort of magic barrier/force field to deflect it.
When you're a warrior? Just running around dodging? In your full plate mail?
quote:
It would adds immensely to the story, and make it feel much more epic and, of course, realistic. Suspension of disbelief is important to any story, no matter what medium it is told in.
Not really. If I suddenly level up while fighting a group of monsters and then see that 2 months have passed, does that mean ANYTHING?
Anyway, the way I see it, it's your warrior who's supposed to be good at fighting, NOT you. Your wizard is supposed to be the spell caster, not you.
Too much control means limiting your player character.
Remember; in an RPG you should decide WHAT you character shall do, not HOW he does it.
_________________
Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
|
Fri Jul 11, 2003 12:22 pm |
|
|
ThouShaltNot
Eager Tradesman
Joined: 27 Feb 2003
Posts: 32
Location: New Zealand |
quote:
Fair enough, but you would have to consider that you are controlling your character via a keyboard + mouse. You will have limited movement (i.e. you can't move all limbs etc. unless you want it utterly cluttered up).
Besides, having something like that in a PARTY rpg would be horrible, IMO.
Switching constantly, telling your character their every next step.
I didn’t actually mean that you would have to control any more aspects of the character than in other RPGs. I meant that the game would automatically show your character parrying and dodging more often, and getting smacked in the face by an axe less often. Think of a movie where the hero is fighting away and suddenly gets stabbed. Dramatic music plays as he slumps to the ground. Then he gets back up and continues fighting. A second later he gets stabbed again. Dramatic music. Gets up and continues fighting. Stabbed. Music. Gets up. If this happened 200 times you’d think it was a pretty bad movie, right? Well this is exactly what happens in most RPGs. This is what I want developers to consider changing.
quote:
Well, it depends... did you see LoTR when Boromir dies? Or when Gandalf fights the Balrog?
Boromir was killed by 3 arrows – not superhuman IMO. Gandalf got smacked around a bit, but there’s nothing to suggest he wouldn’t survive even if he was human (which he isn’t – he’s the Tolkein equivalent of an angel).
quote:
When you're a warrior? Just running around dodging? In your full plate mail?
And that’s less realistic than being hit by a 10 fireballs (or rockets/bombs) and surviving? And if armour CAN provide protection against these sorts of things, then only the unarmoured types would need to dodge.
quote:
Not really. If I suddenly level up while fighting a group of monsters and then see that 2 months have passed, does that mean ANYTHING?
Sorry that I didn’t make myself more clear. I didn’t mean that the game would artificially throw in time lapses every time you level up. Instead, travelling across continents (or between planets) would take weeks or months (not real time, obviously!). Also, at certain parts of the story, there could be delays thrown in. For example, after defeating Lord Goblygook and his evil Hoozameewatsits the hero could settle down for a couple of years. Then one day news arrives that Goblygook escaped across the ocean, so the quest is resumed. Devices such as these are used all the time in stories, and there’s no reason not to use them in games. As an example, look at Grim Fandango, considered by many to be one of the best adventure games ever made.
quote:
Anyway, the way I see it, it's your warrior who's supposed to be good at fighting, NOT you. Your wizard is supposed to be the spell caster, not you.
Too much control means limiting your player character.
Remember; in an RPG you should decide WHAT you character shall do, not HOW he does it.
As I said, none of these ideas needs to affect the amount of control over your character(s). |
|
Fri Jul 11, 2003 1:12 pm |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor
Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
quote:
Sorry that I didn’t make myself more clear. I didn’t mean that the game would artificially throw in time lapses every time you level up. Instead, travelling across continents (or between planets) would take weeks or months (not real time, obviously!). Also, at certain parts of the story, there could be delays thrown in. For example, after defeating Lord Goblygook and his evil Hoozameewatsits the hero could settle down for a couple of years. Then one day news arrives that Goblygook escaped across the ocean, so the quest is resumed. Devices such as these are used all the time in stories, and there’s no reason not to use them in games. As an example, look at Grim Fandango, considered by many to be one of the best adventure games ever made.
Oh... I see.
Take Baldur's Gate for an example, you're basically in one region constantly. This goes for almost all other RPGs. And when you travel, it takes time. I've yet to see a game that makes this completely unrealistic (at least, I can't think of one).
Most RPGs end as soon as the evil guy is defeated.
Then a sequel comes around if the hunt continues...
quote:
Boromir was killed by 3 arrows – not superhuman IMO. Gandalf got smacked around a bit, but there’s nothing to suggest he wouldn’t survive even if he was human (which he isn’t – he’s the Tolkein equivalent of an angel).
Well, I don't think anyone would survive a fall like that and still keep on fighting. Plus being burned.
_________________
Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
|
Fri Jul 11, 2003 1:28 pm |
|
|
ThouShaltNot
Eager Tradesman
Joined: 27 Feb 2003
Posts: 32
Location: New Zealand |
quote:
Well, I don't think anyone would survive a fall like that and still keep on fighting. Plus being burned.
Haha, true. I forgot about that whole falling thing. But he did land in water. Of course, at the speed he was travelling, that would be like hitting concrete... |
|
Fri Jul 11, 2003 2:47 pm |
|
|
chillingfields
Village Dweller
Joined: 18 May 2003
Posts: 9
|
I gotta agree with ThouShaltNot... especially about the hit points. Growing 800% more able to take a blow is ridiculous. It can be hard to circumvent certain problems that arise by having less ways of growing, but an inventive person should be able to figure something out. And about the timespan.. a small cutscene maybe, where you settle down for awhile before the next evil guy shows up seems a reasonable possibility.
There are probably lots of reasons why certain things haven't been implemented yet but the possibilities are luckily ever growing. |
|
Fri Jul 11, 2003 4:45 pm |
|
|
corwin
On the Razorblade of Life
Joined: 10 Jun 2002
Posts: 8376
Location: Australia |
An interesting discussion with not much more to be said. Might and Magic had years passing. Have you played the Gothic series? It attempts to address a couple of your points.
_________________
If God said it, then that settles it!
I don't use Smileys, I use Emoticons!!
 |
|
Sat Jul 12, 2003 1:03 am |
|
|
hoyp
High Emperor
Joined: 02 Oct 2002
Posts: 501
|
I would love to see a realistic rpg but I'm not sure how it would work. |
|
Sat Jul 12, 2003 6:29 pm |
|
|
Windwalking
Fearless Paladin
Joined: 05 Jul 2002
Posts: 227
|
As someone else replied, I think the original poster's points are valid, but some seem mostly concerned with aesthetic issues that, if applied more realistically, may detract from game play. For example, the point about Hit Points is true enough. It doesn't make sense realistically. However, let's take a game like Fallout, which has you growing from around 30 HP to well over 100 HP. Realistically, a single shot from any decent sniper rifle will kill you (even if it only hits your thigh or something, the shock to your system from the high impact sniper rifle rounds is usually lethal). Would it really be so fun to play a game where you make it through some battles unscathed, but in some you die in one hit? Let's say factoring in the enemy's "to hit" rating with your "evasion" rating (AC?), you get a 20% chance to hit. So if he gets off one shot a battle, you'll waltz through 80% of your encounters without getting hurt, and will die and reload the other 20%. This is realistic, but not very fun, in my opinion. The abstraction that is Hit Points makes the game more fun because it allows for incremental damage to be done, and allows you to react accordingly, turning the game less into pure % probabilities and more into how to direct the ebb and flow of combat. As my karate instructor told me, most real street fights between 2 people end within 5 seconds. Plain and simple, down and dirty. I don't think games would be as fun or successful if they accurately portrayed that.
- Wind |
|
Thu Jul 24, 2003 10:47 am |
|
|
ThouShaltNot
Eager Tradesman
Joined: 27 Feb 2003
Posts: 32
Location: New Zealand |
quote:
Originally posted by Windwalking
As someone else replied, I think the original poster's points are valid, but some seem mostly concerned with aesthetic issues that, if applied more realistically, may detract from game play. For example, the point about Hit Points is true enough. It doesn't make sense realistically. However, let's take a game like Fallout, which has you growing from around 30 HP to well over 100 HP. Realistically, a single shot from any decent sniper rifle will kill you (even if it only hits your thigh or something, the shock to your system from the high impact sniper rifle rounds is usually lethal). Would it really be so fun to play a game where you make it through some battles unscathed, but in some you die in one hit? Let's say factoring in the enemy's "to hit" rating with your "evasion" rating (AC?), you get a 20% chance to hit. So if he gets off one shot a battle, you'll waltz through 80% of your encounters without getting hurt, and will die and reload the other 20%. This is realistic, but not very fun, in my opinion. The abstraction that is Hit Points makes the game more fun because it allows for incremental damage to be done, and allows you to react accordingly, turning the game less into pure % probabilities and more into how to direct the ebb and flow of combat. As my karate instructor told me, most real street fights between 2 people end within 5 seconds. Plain and simple, down and dirty. I don't think games would be as fun or successful if they accurately portrayed that.
- Wind
There are a couple of ways around this "instant death" problem that I can think of (if you consider it a problem):
1) Implement damage reduction for all armours (or force fields, or protective spells). Then as you get better armour the amount of damage for each hit reduces, thus having the same effect as increasing your hit points.
This system is already implemented to a limited degree in games like Fallout. In fact one of my characters in Fallout had very low endurance (and thus low hit points), but once he got power armour he was able to survive quite easily (except when the enemy got in a critical hit!). After all, I think even a sniper rifle has trouble penetrating powered armour.
This would of course make the unarmed, unarmoured monk-type character quite useless, but really, how effective would this sort of person be against enemies with guns or swords?
2) Implement some sort of stamina system like Morrowind's unarmed fighting, where hits at first damage stamina (which WOULD increase as you get fitter with each level-up), until you get worn down enough that you make a careless mistake and let in a lethal hit. These stamina hits should NOT be animated as sword meeting flesh, but rather something like an especially hard blow that you just manage to deflect in the nick of time. This system would probably only be workable for one-on-one melee combat, but some similar system could possibly be devised for other combat types.
Now you're probably thinking, "What possible difference does it make, if the game plays the same anyway?" Well the only answer I can give you is that it makes all the difference to a pedantic person like me.
Oh, and one other thing. I don't think dodging ability really enters into gun fights. I don't know anyone other than Neo who can dodge bullets. |
|
Fri Jul 25, 2003 10:59 am |
|
|
Lintra
Elf Friend
Joined: 23 Apr 2002
Posts: 9448
Location: Bermuda, the triangle place with SANDY BEACHES |
On the hit point/AC thing. My favorite P&P game was called Dragon Quest. The comat was very deadly, and forced real role playing instead of slaughter fests. Players get much more realistic about jumping into the fray when a single very luck shot can take them out.
What follows is a quick summary of the mechanics of hitting (or missing) and the damageg.
Each character gets a Fatigue (FAT) and Endurance (End) rating when generated. There are no character levels, instead characters get experience to increase skills with. Examples of skills: Proffessions (eg: Healer, Merchant, Ranger), Weapons (Rapier, Unarmed, Bow), Spells, or what ever else the GM sees fit (eg: squirrel cooking, knitting).
Endurance is pretty much fixed. Normal adventurers get about 15, with 25 being human max. You can spend TONS of experence to increase your End, and slight less to increase your Fat.
Each weapon does a d10 of damage with modifiers running from -3 (for a dart) to about +6 for a great sword.
Some definitions:
BTH = Base % Chance to hit = Base (varied by weapon) + adjusted Manual Dexterity + (Rank with weapon) x 4.
Def = Defence % = Adjusted Agility + (Rank with Shield) x (mod - based on shield) + situational modifiers + (Rank with weapon if in parry mode)x4.
TH = MAX ( 5%, BTH - Def)
If dice < TH damage applied normally.
If dice <= THx15% then damage comes of endurance (your hit drew blood)
If dice <= THx5% (or an 01) then a critical injury.
Normal damage comes off FAT first, then comes off End. When End = 0 you are dead. When Fat = 0 you get combat penalties.
Armor absorbs damage (leather is 1 or 2 points, full plate 8 or so).
Critical injuries ignored armor - you slipped between the joints, or got a blow in the eye socket, what ever. Each critical hit had special effects, including a 1% chance of instant death.
So, what this system means is that even the lowliest peon has a small chance of getting REALLY lucky and killing the most experienced and heavily armored knight - BUT in general, skill with weapons, good tactical play, and good equipment pays off.
Face it ... no unarmored human, no matter how experienced they are can take a direct hit with a battle axe and continue the fight unimpaired. And the second or third hit will certainly kill them (with out great luck intervening).
PS - I am sure I left something out of the defence modifiers, but it has been over a year since I've played DQ.
_________________
=Member of The Nonflamers' Guild=
=Just plain clueless= |
|
Fri Jul 25, 2003 3:09 pm |
|
|
Dinzy
Village Dweller
Joined: 26 Jul 2003
Posts: 19
|
This is an Interesting topic. I don't really concern myself with some of the details like HPs. I never pay attention to what my HPs are when they are displayed by a red bar. All I see is how full , or empty for you pessimists, the red bar is.
I would definately like to see a better inclusion of the passage of time and more varied settings. Games like Arcanum and Fallout have passage of time when you travel, but it is very artificial in its connection to the events of the game. PAssage of time has to be integrated into the sidequest structure. If one quest is to find a missing kid it really doesn't make sense to be able to find him months later. Perhaps with random quest generators devs could find a way to make time sensitive quests expire and be replenished by other time sensive quests later in the game.
As far as setting goes, I think Fantasy is Fantasy whether it be Tolkeinesque, scifi or something in between. I'd like to see more developers realize this and take games into varying fantasy settings. Look at Japanese console RPGs for a good example. (Now I am rather sick of Japanese RPGs due to their immature and cliched stories, but that is not what I am trying to get at.) The worlds in these games are more like something in an anime series. They alll have different artistic styles, weapon types, armors, monsters, etc. I wish computer RPg's had settings that were as varied from title to title.
I too read thorugh the RPGVault roundtable on fatasy settings. It seems that developers are stuck in a rut in some senses. They do a middle earth type setting because that is what they are familiar with. Many of the devs mentioned Fallout as a great counter example, but refused to recognize that the game could have been done equally as well in any setting. Any good game can. I think D&D is the main culprit here though. Many of the sucessful games were based on D&D so new games will either use D&D or try to emulate that if they don't have the license. Plus it takes a lot of time and money and effort to create a fantasy setting that is new and original. Publishers are probably more likely to want the cheaper, familiar settings rather than the more time consuming original ones.
Hopefully KotOR's apparant run away sucess will pave the way for more SciFi Fantasy settings and not simply more Star Wars games. |
|
Thu Jul 31, 2003 5:49 pm |
|
|
|
Goto page 1, 2 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Sat Apr 13, 2019 4:36 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
