• Create Account

Need scary sound effects or creepy audio loops for your next horror-themed game? Check out Highscore Vol.3 - The Horror Edition in our marketplace. 50 sounds and 10 loops for only \$9.99!

# Why are RPG combat systems so boring?

Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

108 replies to this topic

### #81Veovis  Members   -  Reputation: 443

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 20 December 2003 - 02:35 PM

If a block stops the attack ... and a parry stops the attack AND gives the player a timing advantage over his opponent .... then why would anyone ever choose to block?

You may as well just eliminate blocking unless each option has their own strengths and weaknesses.

### #82krez  GDNet+   -  Reputation: 439

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 20 December 2003 - 03:12 PM

give blocking a better success rate than parrying, and it fixes your problem.

### #83Washime  Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 20 December 2003 - 03:19 PM

The difference between block and parry is that typically a block is a lower line of defense... You typically have a parry attempt THEN a block attempt if the parry fails...

### #84Iron Chef Carnage  Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1443

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 20 December 2003 - 08:26 PM

Against multiple opponents, it may be preferable to block, since a good parry requires an investments be made in one adversary. It you''re fighting two or more guys, getting into a serious phrase with one may be foolish.

### #85dede  Members   -  Reputation: 132

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 20 December 2003 - 08:42 PM

I just like to point out that Quest for Glory III or IV implemented a SFII style battle system with a RPG element. You could choose to fight SFII style, or you could choose to let an AI fight it out, simular to the Luna series.

An interesting idea, but the fighting game aspects were not great. The monsters had too many "objects" sticking out of them, that a light kick could hit. It was too easy to attack the far reaching appendages of the monsters and kill ones you were not spose to yet.

~~~~~
"If a million monkeys on a million keyboards can produce Shakespeare, why hasn''t the lounge composed Macbeth yet?" - Name Withheld

### #86Anthony Serrano  Members   -  Reputation: 733

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 21 December 2003 - 01:10 AM

Blocking is the act of putting something, such as a shield, between the incoming weapon and the intended target.
Parrying is the act of diverting the incoming weapon off its intended trajectory.

Example 1: Someone fires a pistol at me, but I manage to raise my riot shield right before she pulls the trigger. I have blocked the bullet.

Example 2: I am a Jedi™ knight. Someone fires a blaster at me, but I use my lightsaber to bounce it right back at him. I have parried the beam.

As far as gameplay is concerned, the primary distinction is that blocking is a "passive" action, and can stop multiple attacks at once, whereas parrying is an "active" action, and any given parry can only stop one attack.

EDIT: (for the sake of completeness)
Dodging (also known as evading) is when the intended target moves out of the weapon's path.

Mind you, these are just the defensive maneuvers that prevent damage.

[edited by - Anthony Serrano on December 21, 2003 8:17:59 AM]

### #87Raghar  Members   -  Reputation: 92

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 21 December 2003 - 10:34 AM

So much to type where should I begin?
So I could start by this.
quote:
Computer solutions have included more variables, higher resolution in randomness, and extra modifiers. Each of these developments has served to complicate the mathematical computations and multiply the possible outcomes. This is good, and couldn''t be done without computers (See Helios''s Cows). But things like Armor Class, HP, and item-based stats continue to be anachronistic.

I remmember to optimize combat in PnP to have not so tedious rolling and to have equations stay exactly same. It might turn that it could be made more difficult again when special cases would appear.

In computer games there isn''t richness of widely used proper combat systems. Majority of them are based on junior highshool equations. You could look if they are using calculations "how much is that event in 100 cases" it''s offten 17/19 and you need that precission.

So when you are wielded by gloves of giant strength +2 your strength is increased by two fold. What do you have againts item based stats?
Armor class is an abstraction. If you''d like to do calculation differently it would have 200x more computing difficulty. I''m not sure if computers are that fast.
Hp? You lose one and lose hand. You append hand and regenerate it and you''d gain one Hp and a shock from temporaly losing hand, bleedning, and simillar until regeneration properly kick in. I hope you are not mistaking Hp with stamina.

quote:
Fallout had all kinds of target zones. You could break limbs or blind other characters, and although I never really had one do it to me, the status screen seemed to indicate a possibility of such crippling blows being dealth to the player as well.

Fallout was supposed to be based on GURPS, thought designers decided to build rather its own model based on GURPS. You didn''t obviously played in enough dangerous style, or as demonspa... Advanced bounty hunters were pretty skilled to try such shot. Critical hit from a minigun was nasty too. It was one of features that made Fallout famous, but GURPS alows to go in better detail. Were they scared or lazy?

quote:

Think of how an actual fight between two swordsmen of matched caliber might go. They close, one initiates an attack, the other has a choice to dodge, block, pre-empt, or do any number of other things. Beat attacks, distance parries, blade parries, etc. are all available to a trained swordsman, so the average straight attack is generally unsuccessful, but can be used to facilitate a more successful attack combination, or else used to kill puppies and much slower opponents. I myself have received blurringly fast straight attack to the noggin as a saber fencer, and know that it works, but generally it only works once.

In medieval periode there were two schools that tried to discover with one is better. They had duel- few were choosen from one school x few were choosen from second school. We will never know with one is better. Master of one school decided to fight too and choosed he would start. We will not know what school was better, becose he was standing at the end.

Or we could look at Spain in medieval age.: One of two fighters would decide to attack and either, he''d win, or he will be in severe danger of being hit. These oversimplified examples doesn''t matter, becose fantasy isn''t about medieval. Majority of fantasy settings is significantly more advanced, and both fighters are using magic.

Gotcha. You newer seen real fight. Fencing tournaments and medieval like shows don''t count. Some heroes are more than able to rebound arrow that hit theirs eye and do that without blinking. Do you remmember DragonBallz? You seem forgeting that they are heroes, they are using magic even when fighting with swords. And heroes are able attack each other both at same time.

To Ingenu
quote:

I''ll never say enough how stupid it is to use Pen & Paper RPG rules in a computer game. Those rules were made for easiness, so that every player around the table can compute the results and everything goes smooth.
Computer can do much more complex things, just like you don''t simulate physics in a P&P RPG, but computer games do...

I would rather say, it''s silly to use rules from PnP without thinking. I know people that claims RPGs helped them with a Math becose they learned to count quickly, guess and even do complex equations. Like: you have numbers 0..10 How many numbers? -1-10 = 11 If you look into monster manual you could find this equation x*x^2 = x^3
Majority of Computer games used combat rules from RPGs only in basic version. I think it was becose developers were scared of compexity, and didn''t have experience with developing RPGs. It might be interesting how could look gameplay of BG2 if combat would have more depth and BG2 didn''t happened on predrawed maps.
RPGs by deffinition should rely on character, not on input device. To by able to finish at least 1/3 game by roleplaying is much better than be able to finish 1/4 game by buying better gamepad. And then being stuck becose developer didn''t believe in 50 hours games.

***
As far I remmember this post started as an post after eating up a Turkey. It''s dangerous to eat that thing, it could jump over 5 pages. ~_^

I wouldn''t recomment however to slip in the discusion into: "How we would employ player fingers". It''s more about doing repetitive things and let them not be annoying. You know there were already abstracted things like food, water (remmember realms of Arcania?), sleeping (in some games), weight of equipment, complex NPC interaction, and so on. The list could be probably long and interesting, becose it could be a part of the problem. Deadly combat could be repetitive, but you would like to have some chance to avert biggest problems with it. Auto combat where you''d be stonned at the end wouldn''t be nice surprise. Cockatrice could be weak, but still.
One of possible solutions for repettitive combat is to have more detailed enviroment. So no such simple map as in FF5 and more interactive enviroment than just a Morrowind.

### #88Raghar  Members   -  Reputation: 92

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 21 December 2003 - 10:38 AM

thanx Anthony Serrano, nice clarification.

### #89Iron Chef Carnage  Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1443

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 21 December 2003 - 07:52 PM

Raghar, I''m not sure I understood your post, but I''ll try to respond to the part that concerns my ideas.

quote:
In computer games there isn''t richness of widely used proper combat systems. Majority of them are based on junior highshool equations.

Sure, they aren''t differential equations, but the number of factors and the number of equations being calculated for each combat turn would be time-consuming if it had to be done without a serial processor. I''m not saying all game designers are engineers or mathematicians, I''m just pointing out that computers open doors to them.

quote:
Hp? You lose one and lose hand. You append hand and regenerate it and you''d gain one Hp and a shock from temporaly losing hand, bleedning, and simillar until regeneration properly kick in. I hope you are not mistaking Hp with stamina.

What? One hit point is your hand? I''m not familiar with the system you''re alluding to. And what is the difference between HP and stamina? They''re both abstract numbers, the only thing that sets them apart is the equations into which they are factored. For the sake of clarity, please define the difference for me.

quote:
In medieval periode there were two schools that tried to discover with one is better. They had duel- few were choosen from one school x few were choosen from second school. We will never know with one is better. Master of one school decided to fight too and choosed he would start. We will not know what school was better, becose he was standing at the end.
Or we could look at Spain in medieval age.: One of two fighters would decide to attack and either, he''d win, or he will be in severe danger of being hit.

This is largely incoherent, but I assume you''re referring to the period after the 14th-century advent of man-portable firearms during which large, broad-bladed swords were supplanted by the estoc and its descendents. Usually heavy, with long reach (six feet or more sometimes), pointy blades and poor balance, duels with such weapons generally went to the man who struck first. Later stylistic developments, such as the parry, favored shorter, faster, better balanced weapons, like the French rapier.

quote:
These oversimplified examples doesn''t matter, becose fantasy isn''t about medieval. Majority of fantasy settings is significantly more advanced, and both fighters are using magic.

First, define "significantly more advanced". If you mean all the crap they steal from Hollywood and Hong Kong action flicks, fine. But that''s mostly cosmetic content. It''s not a matter of game design, it''s a matter of graphics and animation. Same thing with magic. Magic is just a few different types of attacks and defenses, with the ability to place modifiers on existing variable. Back to the discussion of computers, neither of these pose a real challenge to the hardware.

quote:
Gotcha. You newer seen real fight. Fencing tournaments and medieval like shows don''t count.

First off, I don''t know what kind of sword-weilding household you grew up in, but competitive fencing and medieval re-enactments are all I ever had. I was a passable fencer in the IFA (with a saber), though not great, and dabbled a little in epee, foil, and some very informal kendo with a member of my team. I enjoy medieval faires and History Channel specials as much as the next guy, though I''ve never been affiliated with the SCA. I once had a brown belt in Goshin Jutsu Karate, and have had police training in hand-to-hand defensive tactics, pistolcraft and shotgun operation. I''ve read a handful of seminal texts on combat, most notably Miyamoto Musashi''s "A Book of Five Rings", Sun Tsu''s "The Art of War", and Morihei Ueshiba''s "The Art of Peace", and like to think that I have a fair grasp on the nature of physical conflict between human beings.

quote:
Some heroes are more than able to rebound arrow that hit theirs eye and do that without blinking. Do you remmember DragonBallz? You seem forgeting that they are heroes, they are using magic even when fighting with swords. And heroes are able attack each other both at same time.

Besides the fact that this statement is wholly incongruous with the rest of your argument, what sort of person could take an arrow in the eye without blinking? Your DBZ example is a poor one, since the supernatural nature of those characters was a major premise of the metaphysic of the universe. In a different context, it is patently absurd.

I''m looking for a way to represent combat, not exciting new ways for people to fight each other. If I could find a satisfactory method by which to emulate two drunks trying to knock out the other guy''s teeth, without using HP or making them stand in a ring, I''d be pleased. From that foundation, I could factor in weapons, magic, and sensu beans.

### #90Raghar  Members   -  Reputation: 92

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 22 December 2003 - 10:39 AM

//Note to next posts: finishing post that you started few days before is bad for readibility.
quote:
Original post by Iron Chef Carnage
quote:
Hp? You lose one and lose hand. You append hand and regenerate it and you'd gain one Hp and a shock from temporaly losing hand, bleedning, and simillar until regeneration properly kick in. I hope you are not mistaking Hp with stamina.

What? One hit point is your hand? I'm not familiar with the system you're alluding to. And what is the difference between HP and stamina? They're both abstract numbers, the only thing that sets them apart is the equations into which they are factored. For the sake of clarity, please define the difference for me.

In almuric it was Lp. And hit dragon for one Lp even when dragon had more than 40 was awsome task.

You could find other examples even in ADnD. I remmember some nice critical rolls when legs flied off and so on.

HP in computer games was simple abstraction of person health. This means amount of wounds and theirs severity that person received. I remmember games where this was used for each arm and other parts of body. I didn't find them much better, however.
Stamina was measure of tireness and it was used fairly differetly. Sometimes as pay per action system with additing points each turn. Sometimes as and action up to stamina system with max level of stamina based on health and previous action. In second case deadliest actions wasn't possible at start of the combat.
quote:

This is largely incoherent,

I reffered to various styles and differences between personalities of combatnants. Style and personality affects combat nearly as much as a weapon. If you'd like to implement some type of reasonable combat system, you should add this into.
quote:

quote:
These oversimplified examples doesn't matter, becose fantasy isn't about medieval. Majority of fantasy settings is significantly more advanced, and both fighters are using magic.

First, define "significantly more advanced". If you mean all the crap they steal from Hollywood and Hong Kong action flicks, fine. But that's mostly cosmetic content. It's not a matter of game design, it's a matter of graphics and animation. Same thing with magic. Magic is just a few different types of attacks and defenses, with the ability to place modifiers on existing variable. Back to the discussion of computers, neither of these pose a real challenge to the hardware.

For example majority of persons in fantasy setings were litereate. Actually all, and that is much higher amount than in advanced countries, or in US. Persons in fantasy were independent on goverment and have strong opinion about it. They and theirs goverment were ulikely to step on each other toes willingly or ever. Structure of society was much more effective than is now. (and when thieves guild would like to be the one without any moral it's hard to be fucking bastard becose they would take it as steping into theirs teritory and kill you quickly, or turn into the stone statue) This however implies also ability to use better combat tactic and higher skills of fighters. Compare it to Medieval where knowledge of all dirty practice in combat was offten suficient. I didn't mean that no person from fantasy settings would use dirty practice, I mean they would use skill too.

Using magic would change all persons. No hero is representative of it's xxx if xxx is even definable. Heroes are always exceptional. Otherwise you would have RPG with story without a character.
quote:

quote:
Gotcha.

seminal texts on combat, most notably Miyamoto Musashi's "A Book of Five Rings", Sun Tsu's "The Art of War", and Morihei Ueshiba's "The Art of Peace", and like to think that I have a fair grasp on the nature of physical conflict between human beings.

I ment it half seriously, but smilie somewhat fell out.
Is Ueshiba book freely avilable on the Internet?
quote:

quote:
Some heroes are more than able to rebound arrow that hit theirs eye and do that without blinking. Do you remmember DragonBallz? You seem forgeting that they are heroes, they are using magic even when fighting with swords. And heroes are able attack each other both at same time.

Besides the fact that this statement is wholly incongruous with the rest of your argument, what sort of person could take an arrow in the eye without blinking? Your DBZ example is a poor one, since the supernatural nature of those characters was a major premise of the metaphysic of the universe. In a different context, it is patently absurd.

Most? It's nice question... Is possible for arrow to hit a person, into the eye, without being able to blink? ~_^ You might have different persons in the combat, so artifical restriction on just a common person TM is useless.
If we will consider FF7 hero as an example he might be able to do so.
quote:

I'm looking for a way to represent combat, not exciting new ways for people to fight each other. If I could find a satisfactory method by which to emulate two drunks trying to knock out the other guy's teeth, without using HP or making them stand in a ring, I'd be pleased. From that foundation, I could factor in weapons, magic, and sensu beans.

From my experience it's better to start with more complex system then modify it depends on experience with the system, than start with a simple system and force features into it.

That two drunk person example wasn't simple one. Drunks are often unpredicable and could lose balance at anytime. It would be bad start with this as a combat simulation. (too much artifical enviroment effects for example)

I, for example, would rather like to have combat with a lots of AI inside. But of course fast combat would mean that some strikes would be very badly visible. Thus fast combat would result in high level of abstraction anyway. Probably best way would be to at the start of the turn try to define actions that would be attempted and then have move all characters at same time.

[edited by - Raghar on December 22, 2003 5:46:37 PM]

### #91 Anonymous Poster_Anonymous Poster_*   Guests   -  Reputation:

Likes

Posted 22 December 2003 - 01:40 PM

quote:

For example majority of persons in fantasy setings were litereate. Actually all, and that is much higher amount than in advanced countries, or in US. Persons in fantasy were independent on goverment and have strong opinion about it.

i didn''t read the rest of your post after this because allready you have very biasted opinions. fantasy settings are whatever the author of them makes it to be. there is no standard to them because they are nothing but the author''s fantasy. You''re talking as if there are distinct set rules to what fantasy should be and thats exactly what fantasy is completely not about. fantasy is about breaking the rules. doing what the other guy wouldn''t. creating what hasn''t been creating. believing what is unbelievable. you can''t debate fantasy setting politics cause a fantasy setting could even have zero politics.

### #92 Anonymous Poster_Anonymous Poster_*   Guests   -  Reputation:

Likes

Posted 23 December 2003 - 01:13 PM

they are boring because they are turn based and full of mind numbing stats ;-)

will increasing the complexity -really- make them more fun?

### #93Iron Chef Carnage  Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1443

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 23 December 2003 - 02:51 PM

But AP, if you increase the design complexity in the right directions, you can effectively hide all that boring computing from the player. Not having to stare at stats all the time would definitely improve my gameplay experience. Of course, I''d like to be able to see them. I think every system should have a manual override.

### #94Raghar  Members   -  Reputation: 92

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 24 December 2003 - 08:29 AM

quote:
Original post by Anonymous Poster
i didn''t read the rest of your post after this because allready you have very biasted opinions. fantasy settings are whatever the author of them makes it to be. there is no standard to them because they are nothing but the author''s fantasy. You''re talking as if there are distinct set rules to what fantasy should be and thats exactly what fantasy is completely not about. fantasy is about breaking the rules. doing what the other guy wouldn''t. creating what hasn''t been creating. believing what is unbelievable. you can''t debate fantasy setting politics cause a fantasy setting could even have zero politics.

Surely I have. I somehow start to understand Bishop pass. Fantasy is a genre. It''s divided into:
Heroic fantasy.
Techno fantasy. (IMHO this isn''t genre)
High fantasy. (Hard to describe it)
Medieval (fantasy)/ stories.
Psychologicaly done fantasy. (Fantasy as a fantasy genre, not commonly used dictionary meaning)
Goth fantasy.
Dark fantasy.
And a lot of books that don''t fall straithly into one of that categories.

The fantasy as a genre started by some kind of disappointment by technology. In fantasy wasn''t important if hero has sword of heroeness, but if he is able to use it, or rather if he has skills and abilities to use it even if there is risk. Sometimes that risk is unavoidable.

It seems that you actually described psychedelic story, or something like Kurt Vonegut''s books. ~_^ Believe or not there are some rules in the Fantasy genre. That Rules are much more hard to deffine than rules for more "normal" genres, however.
It would be very hard to find fantasy that wasn''t about politic. Death gate, Amber, Dragonlance, FF7 were about political combat. In FF7 it was terrorist x corporation. If they''d know there would be third group, they''d try to reach some kind of agreement. (FF isn''t called final for nothing. When they discovered theirs real situation it was too late)
Well accept it politic is fun. Everyone likes to read about Kings, Quens, Dictators, Minstrels that move whole kingdoms... It would be actually very hard to write fantasy that has no politic.

### #95Raghar  Members   -  Reputation: 92

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 24 December 2003 - 08:34 AM

Back to the combat without arenas. I remmember two games that didn't have battle arenas. One was Dark sun. Other Might and Magic. What implementation would you like more?
The problem with no battle arena is decision who is active in the combat. I mean who is part of the combat. IT's not hard to implement several layers of hero's health to do damage reasonably, but one problem is with numbers of combatnants. It could easily end with a^2-a type of calculatons. Another problem is how to implement health damage when you have slime as another combatnant. It offten ends in crazy damage calculations.

 combatnants =Groups.getCombatnants(InitialGroup);For cobatnants.group countParticipation(group.character)for each <combatnants>?group.character count(action):\update xxx xxx And there we are. We will need somewhere hide small drag when we will do this calculation. Actually it wont be neccessary if we would use this code, but it will be neccessary if we will change to Java or oh terror C++. A little exercise on how small drag it would be. Starting values calculations could be. 1200 combatnants. Test them for will to combat. 1200+Declare their opponents. 1200^2 -1200. Chose combat Strategy. AI calculation (depends on severity it might be even higher than 1200^2 -1200. It could be of course precalculated in different thread. And then chosen from situation. Calculation of the situation could be difficult as ell.)

So it would looks like this:
Screen apears with text precalculations. Then caracter would choose attack from several different strategies. Then it would run. Character would move to dragon carefully. At same time his coumpanion would strike him from behind and then after main character would fall on the ground. He would say "Oh mighty dragon would you take that pig as gift of our gratitude and alows as to go?" It would be even nastier, if this would be generated at runtime and story would be modified aproperiately.

re AP2
More complex games looks more lively. They are much more like a story than a mathlike spreadsheet. You just need to be carefull to do it nice way. MOO3 could be example of things that could go wrong. (too much hiding)

[edited by - Raghar on December 24, 2003 4:31:22 PM]

### #96Thermodynamics  Members   -  Reputation: 439

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 24 December 2003 - 09:21 AM

quote:
Original post by Iron Chef Carnage

I''m looking for a way to represent combat, not exciting new ways for people to fight each other. If I could find a satisfactory method by which to emulate two drunks trying to knock out the other guy''s teeth, without using HP or making them stand in a ring, I''d be pleased. From that foundation, I could factor in weapons, magic, and sensu beans.

The way I see it, ICC, you are limited to several options.
1.) Turn based: you run the combat at a slowed pace so it becomes more cereberal about what the next correct move would be. This can be simplified into something like FF where one characters actions has no significant impact on what the next one does. Or it can be more along the lines of moo3 what would be in a fight. Here every one moves at the same time and your success directly depends on guessing what your opponent will do.
My father has an old game called "Ace of Aces" which consisted of two books. In each book you would have a picture of your current view of the other plane and a list of options to choose from. Each option had a page number associated with it. Some how (I can not remember the exact process) you would trade page numbers and the new page you looked at would be your new view. It was quite an ingenous system for being done with two books. But back to the topic. You not only had to decide how you were going to move, but you also had to base that decision on what you knew about the opponent. (Has ANYONE else seen, played of even heard of this game).

2.) Your other option is to do it in real time or at least continuously. This unfortunately results in a twitch reflex game. Even a game that was slowed down would require that final component of timing. Do you want timing as part of your play?

The best way to simulate a drunken fight would be to use two people in the same room. Feed the liquor. Give them lines to taunt each other with. ("you''re a shmelly farmer") and finally let them duke it out. Unfortunately I don''t think this is what you had in mind. Judging from what you have said about your history with fencing and the like, you should know that you need to use your sense of balance and touch during a battle. Driving simulators are terrible because you don''t get to use your sense of inertia to let you know when the vehicle will lose control. Unfortunately, no program can simulate these feelings yet. It is more of a hardware issue. Once we get those direct spinal implants I am sure gaming will be much more realistic.

Stick a fork in me, I''m done.

### #97_buu_  Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 26 December 2003 - 04:40 PM

quote:
Original post by Raghar
Fantasy is a genre. It''s divided into:
Heroic fantasy.
Techno fantasy. (IMHO this isn''t genre)
High fantasy. (Hard to describe it)
Medieval (fantasy)/ stories.
Psychologicaly done fantasy. (Fantasy as a fantasy genre, not commonly used dictionary meaning)
Goth fantasy.
Dark fantasy.
And a lot of books that don''t fall straithly into one of that categories.

Thats a nice, random, made up list. I''m sure most other people could pull out darts and a dictionary to make another random list just as valid.

Apple Fantasy
Red Fantasy
Blue Fantasy

quote:
Original post by Raghar
The fantasy as a genre started by some kind of disappointment by technology. In fantasy wasn''t important if hero has sword of heroeness, but if he is able to use it, or rather if he has skills and abilities to use it even if there is risk. Sometimes that risk is unavoidable.

What the hell does this paragraph mean? "fantasy [...] started by some kind of dissapointment by technology". What the hell? Thats so ridiculously wrong it''s hard to choose which spot to attack. Fantasy has many more roots in age old, epic legends and tales then anything involving a "disappointment by technology".

quote:
Original post by Raghar
It seems that you actually described psychedelic story, or something like Kurt Vonegut''s books. ~_^ Believe or not there are some rules in the Fantasy genre.

No, there isn''t a magic set of rules that god laid down for all fantasy to ascribe to. You could, possibly, argue that there are certain rules "good stories" must follow, or things of that nature, but saying (or implying) theres a magic set of rules for fantasy is just rankest stupidity.

### #98Iron Chef Carnage  Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1443

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 26 December 2003 - 08:03 PM

I''d have to go at east somewhat turn-based, though I''d like to see less in the way of "turns" in the classic sense. I tell you, coming up with a way to properly represent time in an RPG is a lot like trying to work out a good MMO bullet-time system. There are so many tradeoffs, there can never be one "right answer". I guess each designer will just have to use the system that works best with the game that they are making.

### #99Raghar  Members   -  Reputation: 92

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 29 December 2003 - 01:11 PM

How can I say it. EEEEEK BUU-chan you are so MEAN. I thought that I provided nearly complete list of fantasy sub genres and you

quote:

...ridiculously wrong it''s hard to choose which spot to attack

If you can''t attack it, it could be most likely true.
quote:

No, there isn''t a magic set of rules that god laid down for all fantasy to ascribe to. You could, possibly, argue that there are certain rules "good stories" must follow, or things of that nature, but saying (or implying) theres a magic set of rules for fantasy is just rankest stupidity.

Star Trek woulnd''t be Star Trek without xxxx. Dune wouoldn''t be Dune without... Goth fantasy would be strangely empty without horror from realisation... There are some commonly shared features that are defining the genre. Doesn''t matter if it would be a Cyberpunk, or a Heroic fantasy.
To don''t aknowledge such restrictions means that story would suffer.

to Iron.

Simultaneous, phased, or semi realtime are also option. It''s more important to consider freedom of the player. If he could use just one specified character in the combat or if he could swith characters so he would modify behaviour where it would count. I think first is better for role playing.

### #100Iron Chef Carnage  Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1443

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 29 December 2003 - 01:21 PM

But simultaneous action has too much of a rock-paper-scissors feel to it. I''d like to get a bit more action-reaction, expecially with more skilled characters fighting against less skilled characters. Maybe a high perception level will give you a clue as to what the other guy is doing during the command phase, like a peek at the other guy''s play in a football game. That way, the more skilled character would be able to help the player choose the most advantageous course of action, without actually doing it autonomously.

Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

PARTNERS