• Advertisement

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Health affecting Attributes

This topic is 6380 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

Rather than upgrading attributes at the end of each level, why not have the health change the attributes. The more healthy you are the stronger, more dextile, mentally alert etc you become. How would this affect the gameplay of your average RPG? Your character goes into battle weilding madly but if you don''t fight well then your character suffers because of you. This would bring a lot more emphasis on the weapons and armour that a character has. In turn bringing a lot more emphasis to money in the game. So you would actually "value money more becuase your health affects your attributes". Interesting little formula/yes?! I love Game Design and it loves me back. Our Goal is "Fun"!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
Deus Ex does this slightly, and I think Crusaders does it slightly as well, but not to the extent you are suggesting. The main limitation of that idea is the level lords will have to spend a bit more time balancing the level than they do now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why even have levels?

As you use skills (ie: fight, pick locks, lift weights)
you gradually increase your stats which are stored as
floating point. Then at any given time, ALL your stats
are modified by your current health. So if you have 100%
health, you move at 100% of your speed, can carry 100% of your
max weight, can do 100% of your able damage. This means normaly
invincible high level players *could* be defeated through
swarming.

----------
Erick: i think that all this talking and such is paining my head to astounding annoyance
Disco Love For Everyone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by SpazBoy_the_Mitey

Why even have levels?

As you use skills (ie: fight, pick locks, lift weights)
you gradually increase your stats which are stored as
floating point. Then at any given time, ALL your stats
are modified by your current health. So if you have 100%
health, you move at 100% of your speed, can carry 100% of your
max weight, can do 100% of your able damage. This means normaly
invincible high level players *could* be defeated through
swarming.

----------
Erick: i think that all this talking and such is paining my head to astounding annoyance
Disco Love For Everyone


I like that idea, we definity need a more dynamic attribute system. They should work more like an ecosystem i think. Just for the fun of it

I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you are describing a system that exist in *some* paper RPG. Basically, when your health get low, you start to suffer penalties. If you are wounded, your attributes are lowered accordingly. Since tests are all done absed on attributes, those modifications are VERY annoying, but "realistic" in a way. This makes you much MUCH more careful about going into a fight, as you couldn''t run away if your legs are damaged for instance.

e.g. a wound to the head disturb all intellectual actions and your ability to move around (confused). a wound to the arms would decrease your manual abilities, wounds at the legs slow you down, etc.

Of course this implies a good combat system, and damage location.

One thing I am really interested in :
If we go with the idea of permanent death, we should make it so that the players are more vulnerable, without making them always encounter potentially lethal situations (fights). So the idea is to take the health of the characters more seriously by introducing a bit more stuff, like hunger, thirst, deceases, and other annoying things that would make the players think more heavily about fragility, and hopefully makle them realise that if drinking from this water in a marsh can make you die from malaria, then certainly fighting a horde of goblins is NOT a good idea neither...
of course, this would also mean that health management should be a bit deeper than "gimme the extra healing potion" !

youpla :-P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can see it now: Gondorolo the Mighty Barbarian king slain
by the flu (he should have worn more than just wooly jocks).

But seriously, its a good idea. Make the user realize he can''t
afford to go on rampages, but if niggling details like that are
to taxing on the player, it stops being fun.

ie: make them eat once every hour or so, not every 10 min.

R.I.P. MeekRat the Thief. Killed by Scurvy (he forgot to eat
fruit)

----------
Erick: i think that all this talking and such is paining my head to astounding annoyance
Disco Love For Everyone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In my current game, I have it so that damage is per body part. And if the player or NPCs' legs are damaged the movement rate is slower. I'll probably have the other body parts affected also.

Edited by - Nazrix on August 30, 2000 5:20:42 PM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paul, what are you working on at the moment? What type of game and what features does it have? Thanks!

-------------------------------
That's just my 200 bucks' worth!

..-=gLaDiAtOr=-..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
By Gladiator
Paul, what are you working on at the moment? What type of game and what features does it have? Thanks!


Sorry, i should have been a little more specific in the thread title. RPG is the answer. I''m just bouncing ideas around

quote:
By SpazBoy_the_Mitey
I can see it now: Gondorolo the Mighty Barbarian king slain
by the flu (he should have worn more than just wooly jocks).


Alexander the Great died from the flu.

But seriously, the issue is more about wear and tear rather than death. If a player gets greedy and they want to keep battling on then the risk of death keeps increasing. Naturally the character would be a little more resistant to damage then they would be in your average rpg as well, to balance out this system.



I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, in the game I want to make, health will sort of be subsumed into something called ''mood''. If you spend a lot of time shot to heck, then you''re just not going to be very happy. Unhappiness has a negative effect on all your abilities. Which means that after a sound pummelling, your character will need to spend time not just healing, but taking some R&R to cheer himself up...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Chiroptera

Well, in the game I want to make, health will sort of be subsumed into something called ''mood''. If you spend a lot of time shot to heck, then you''re just not going to be very happy. Unhappiness has a negative effect on all your abilities. Which means that after a sound pummelling, your character will need to spend time not just healing, but taking some R&R to cheer himself up...

That sounds quite funny. Is it a serious rpg-like game? Or is the mood got something to do with the fact that the character is not quite human? Sorry if this offends.



I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Paul Cunningham
Alexander the great died from the flu



And St Louis died from the black plague that he got during the crusades... jsut to say that, sometimes Nature takes it toll, and no hero is above that.
I think it would be kindof nice.
Some argued that death should be permanent, because it would occur during a fight, which would be extremely rare.
I guess there would be less heroism fighting a flu than fighting a horde of trolls. But I am thinking that we shoudn't make deceases too lethal, they would just be a reminder that life is short, and that you should take care of yourself. After that, if the players think that going out and rampage everything is a way of taking care of themselves ...

youpla :-P

Edited by - ahw on August 31, 2000 12:12:14 PM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
ahw said
I am thinking that we shoudn''t make deceases too lethal



hmm, whenever I''m sick, stressed or unhappy, I get worn down -
you could say my attributes are lowered. But when I recover I
am as good as gold again.

So maybe we can teach players to treat there personas right.
If they are malnourished, under dressed, or whatever, then they
catch cold. This should *severely*, though *temporarily* reduce
their stats. I mean, REALLY make them weak. They ought to learn
their lesson and look after themselves after a little orphan boy
comes up and beats the crap out of them.

----------
Erick: i think that all this talking and such is paining my head to astounding annoyance
Disco Love For Everyone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I really like this idea. But again implementing them in a game is another thing.

MMMM, With this rule Lara Croft would have die of cold (tomb raider 2) because of her way to dress....but would the sell have drops?

Will your game will be medival?

I can see it now: Gondorolo the Mighty Barbarian king slain by the plage (he shoul''d have stay in the poor part of the city).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Delisk
Will your game will be medival?


I hope not, for gods sake



I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Excuse me, but what is wrong with medieval?

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft
"The Philosophers' Stone of Programming Alchemy"
IOL (The list formerly known as NPCAI) - A GDNet production
Our Doc - The future of RPGs
Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, there is nothing wrong with the medival setting. I can see why you''d be tired of it though...I just hope you can stomach one more when my game comes out

Nobody has mentioned the implications of this system. If someone gets hit, they are at an immediate disadvantage. Depending on how you do it, this could mean the end of the match. You have to remember to avoid things like "One lucky shot, and the knight was felled by the old woman with the frying pan".

-------------------------------------------
"What's the story with your face, son?!?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Paul Cunningham

Original post by Delisk
Will your game will be medival?

I hope not, for gods sake




Yeah, a convert!!!!! (just kidding...)

--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The character could start with a lot more health than in a normal rpg. This extra health would act as an attribute that i think has been missing in many a medieval rpg's called "hardness". With this in place character damage would be stumped so that it would allow the player to realise ahead of time that if they continue they are going to suffer more and more. So the player gets good warning that they should retreat for some medicine/health-uppers.

It reminds me of that saying - if you put a frog in hot water it will jump out but if you put it in cold water and heat that water slowly it will boil to death -

I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!

Edited by - Paul Cunningham on September 2, 2000 4:53:33 AM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''d intended a fairly serious MMORPG. The mood idea was sort of a gestalt of things. For instance, I wanted cooking to actually be a useful skill. So food is one of the things that affects your mood. If all you ever eat is charred lizard innards because you''re a lousy chef, then you''ll get unhappy. And possibly suffer from malnourishment, but I don''t think I''ll make the players worry about a balanced diet...
Other things to affect mood would be being too hot because you''re wearing 8 layers of armor and treking through a radiation zone, or too cold because you stripped to your underwear in order to carry more stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Perhaps we worry too much about the world engine anyway.
All my favourite RPGs are the ones that flow like a good fantasy
novel. When done well, the story takes the users focus away from
the surroundings, and plants it directly on the story itself.
When you go to pains to make the user aware of the mechanics of
your game, it becomes sci-fi. I have never liked any sci-fi
that I have seen or read.

Note: By fantasy & sci-fi I do not refer to time-periods, merely
styles. Star Wars (epidodes 4,5,6) are fantasy. Star Wars
episode 1 & star trek are sci-fi.

In a fantasy game, the action would go like this:

"The mitey hero charged at the alien menace, waving his mitey
hero laser sword like a deranged baboon. He bravely ducked
the alien''s clumsy swipe and easily lopped his head off. Then
he made merry with some busty space wenches..."

The sci-fi game, however, goes like this:

"Sir SpazBoy put on his 16th century battle armour that provides
him with an X level of protection. He drew his double edged
sword thad does Y damage, and Q loaves of bread because he was
hungry. He inocculated himself against the flu, put on his
magic cape that doubles his speed and went to an inn where he
drank Z beers."


My point: Simplify mechanics, hide statistics and promote the
STORY

In RPG the best success is achieved when the player suspends his
disbelief and actually feels as if he/she is the main character.
No engine, no matter how sophisticated can achieve that.

(btw: sorry if this rant is off topic, it just came to me then
and I''m lacking sleep big time and stuff.)

----------
Erick: i think that all this talking and such is paining my head to astounding annoyance
Disco Love For Everyone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I find myself agreeing with you, about the sci-fi & fantasy regime. I found Dune to be of the fantasy genre more than the sci-fi. What you need is the ability for the player to feel a part of the game, the way you feel like you are in the novel. A good novel that I read never feels like I am ever reading the words. It is all images in my head doing everything for me...

A story should involve the player and as such, we should diverge from statistics and how we use them. This is kind of heading back to "What''s with stats" but I think most things here in the Game Design Corner (niche) are linked anyway... Less tedium and more abstraction. Instead of having a number for health, you should just have a bar. It is then up to the player to judge. Even better, just have a face with varying ammounts of gore or painful expressions. Then it is abstract and really would be up to the player to judge.

Pull the player in, use simple systems that don''t require a numeric value. This is what I believe as truth

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft
"The Philosophers' Stone of Programming Alchemy"
IOL (The list formerly known as NPCAI) - A GDNet production
Our Doc - The future of RPGs
Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I never realised that difference between Sci-fi and fantasy. Thank you SpazBoy_the_Mighty Going by the deffinitions you gave us, it seems that it would be quite difficult to bring more fantasy into a RPG. It has most deffinity got me thinking. Actually i was just thinking of something about an hour ago that would be very relevent to this issue come to think of it. It had to do with creating "Feel" during the process of creating the animations for enemies. There''s another thread that sparked this thought where Dwarfsoft was having a laugh about dodging dragons and NPC''s getting into arguments as i recall. When reading this i was thinking how important it is to have an elaborate amount of animations in order to allow each individual enemy to have a distinctive way of moving. If you want to create this sort of fantasy feel in a rpg you have to give an enemy the correct motion. A motion that decieves their biology in order to make them more believable. Thats it! The issue is "Motion". With good motioning techniques you will create a more believable sence and get closer to the world of fanasy. Sorry about not breaking this up better with paragraphs its just that i''m writing as i think.

Anyhow, there''s something to think about

I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would you happen to remember which thread that was Paul? I cannot seem to recall, yet it has been mentioned to me by Ingenu from time to time.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft
"The Philosophers' Stone of Programming Alchemy"
IOL (The list formerly known as NPCAI) - A GDNet production
Our Doc - The future of RPGs
Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paul, you are rethinking the way Walt Disney thought years ago . If I am not mistaken, he is the one who started the idea of ''elastic'' characters. The idea is that we can''t really draw exact beings, so we have to emphasize their defining characteristics, one of them being the way to move.
This is why most animated 3D graphics characters suck big time, because the guy doing it assume that since the technology now allow us to create realistic models, then we can do realistic motion-captured animation... but most of the time, it jsut feels ''cold''. Well ... that''s what you are talking about, you have to give some elasticity to the animations.
I think there is something about that in the SIGGRAPH workshops, you would have to check it out. Or just check out any good book about drawing comics ! (there is a french one by a guy called Duc if I remember, an encyclopedia in two volumes, a must read for a comic artist).

About the sci-fi/fantasy :
Well, if you come to think about it, sci-fi means Science Fiction, which means a fiction based on scientific facts, isn''t it ? Fantasy being the opposite. We just assume that sci-fi is set in the future, and fantasy in the past.
But if you look at P&P RPG, you''ll see that limiting yourself to only those two definitions is not enough.
for instance, Conan the Barbarian is Dark Fantasy, while Tolkien is Medieval Fantasy, I think some old games that are more wargames than RPG are sometimes called Hard Science (usually very strict, with very real physics and scientific based stuff).
Cyberpunk is a genre on its own. It''s science taht ''could'' be, but not totally fantasy, and too dark to be called sci-fi (usually). The term used for Star Wars (as far as I know, in france at least) is space opera, which is very much what it is. The action goes from one planet to another jsut like the acts of an opera, with heroic battles, dramatic duels, love, honor, etc
mmm, I am probably forgetting some, but anyway, all this to say that yeah, SpazBoy is making a very good point here

but are we not off topic anyway ? Ah well, I guess you can cross this thread with the Toughness thread anyway.

youpla :-P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Advertisement