Here's my idea.
I call it "Ishpeck's Keywording Magical Mixing Pot." So remember, when the idea makes you famous (we know better than to think you'll make any money) and has all those imaginary gamer-babe bikini models wanting to jump your bones, you owe me the first dozen or so that show up at your door.
This magic system was inspired by the way Google's GMail labels work -- as well as some other stuff I've done in MySQL and at work.
RESONNANT FIELDS
Whenever a spell is cast, it leaves a metaphysical "footprint" on the area around it. When you cast a "Water" spell, the arcane properties of that element affect the world around you. Typically this has no noticable effect on mundane perceptions but it can noticably affect other magical effects created in that same space. The area that is affected (both noticably by the intended spell effects as well as unnoticably by the magical "footprint") is called the RESONNANT FIELD. For the purpose of a game, a RESONNANT FIELD is confined to the area in-which combat occours.
I would describe the RESONNANT FIELD as a queue with a list of the "traits" of the last ten (or so) spells cast inside the area. (More on "Traits below.")
SPELL TRAITS
Each spell has a trait (think like gMail labels or like "keywords" people like to use to describe their web sites) that describes part of its nature in a magical, and physical sense. The possible traits are not predefined but are simply vlaues that allow the magic system's scripting language (yes, you'll have to script it -- but it shouldn't be too complicated) can reference.
SPELL SCRIPTS
Each "spell" consists of two major parts: A traits listing -- which is just a series of unique words that are relevant to this spell as well as others that look into the "RESONNANT FIELD" as well as a small script that describes the spell's effect.
Here's an example of a spell:
SPELL: ROASTY DOOM
TRAITS: Fire, Line-of-Sight, Projectile
EFFECT: This spell travels along a linear trajectory and burns the first thing it comes into contact with. The damage it inflicts is equal to the number of "FIRE" traits that appear in the RESONNANT FIELD minus the number of "WATER" and "SHIELD" traits in the RESONNANT FIELD.
So if someone has previously cast a "WATER" spell, it will dampen (that pun was not intended but I am deliberately leaving it in there) the effects of this fire spell. If they've cast any spell with the "SHIELD" trait, that will also weaken the possible effects of the spell.
The idea here is that everyone's spell effects can affect everyone else's. Strategic measures can be taken on behalf of the players to throw certain TRAITS into the RESONNANT FIELD that will weaken certain kinds of spells and strengthen others. Because each spell is dynamically scripted, you can have a vast array of traits and spells that key off of them and as long as you avoid really stupid "UBER-SPELLS" the game dynamics can scale with the economic challenges implicit in big, PVP games.
With the example above, you can have other spells key off of the "Line-of-Sight" trait and the "Projectile" traits -- do wonky stuff with whatever traits you can. Try to avoid having too many superfluous triats and make sure there's a tangled web of power-balance with what spells key off of which traits.
Heck, this magic alone could constitute an entire game by itself.
Then you could have metaspells that substitute "counterspell" concepts. Something like this:
SPELL: Parched Earth
TRAIT: Fire, Ambient, Metaspell
EFFECT: Remove a number of WATER traits from the RESONNANT FIELD equal to the number of FIRE traits in the RESONNANT FIELD.
Things like that will make the magic world like a chess board. Very interesting.
This also leaves room for "Materia-like" objects that just constantly put traits into the RESONNANT FIELD to aid the casting of other spells. The possibilities are limitless.
[Edited by - ishpeck on July 14, 2006 2:13:37 PM]
Meaningful Magic, or Leveraging Synergies
Quote:Original post by BeigeQuote:SPELL: ROASTY DOOM
The system is good but this example name is excellent.
*Bows*
Combos can be thought of as being one of two types: Leverage combos and ecology combos.
I'm making the terms up here, so I'll go over them.
A leverage combo is one in which one card/spell makes another more powerful. The key to this is simply to make an interaction circumstantial; making a spell that combos well is as simple as having it's effects determined by the current state of the game, then making other spells which alter those states in a favorable way or amplify a change to the game state that was already made. An example may be a spell that inflicts damage equal to a character's Magic Skill, and a spell that increases Magic Skill. These become more interesting when they can be multi-stage; for example, you may have a spell that lowers an enemy's magic resistance by half, then another spell which increases the damage they take from spells by half, then finally, an attack spell that inflicts a flat amount of damage but doubles if the enemy has less than 25% magic resistance. By playing these cards in combination you'd be getting much more damage than by playing them one or two at a time. Such an example is simple and not terribly strategic simply because it's so straightforward, but leverage combos can become quite complex with careful consideration.
An ecology combo is one that changes the way future actions by a player will impact the game; changing the game's ecology, in other words. Building an ecology combo is usually a matter of making two or more spells that alter the game mechanic in a way that is somewhat advantageous, but when played together become much more powerful. An example might be this set of three cards:
Rage: Each of your characters gains a free counterattack when hit with a melee attack.
Destiny: Once per character, instead of dying when reduced to 0 HP, the character will be reduced to 1 HP.
Courage: All of your characters' damage is vastly increased when they are close to death.
Each of these cards are sort of useful by themselves, but if you use all three at once, your enemy has to be very careful about hitting you with melee attacks--if he does, your character will survive and deliver a devastating counter hit.
Ecology combos don't have to hit every character or change the rules of the game--they just need to be something that will last long enough for other long-lasting cards to affect.
Generally, to make an ecology combo, you simply take a look at what an existing enhancement spell does--the free counterattack, for example--and think of another beneficial effect a spell could have that would have the side-effect of making the first spell more powerful or more applicable (or vice-versa).
The biggest difference between ecology and leverage combos is leverage combos usually work numbers whereas ecology combos work with rules changes. Both can be powerful and both can become broken, but that's a discussion for another day...
I'm making the terms up here, so I'll go over them.
A leverage combo is one in which one card/spell makes another more powerful. The key to this is simply to make an interaction circumstantial; making a spell that combos well is as simple as having it's effects determined by the current state of the game, then making other spells which alter those states in a favorable way or amplify a change to the game state that was already made. An example may be a spell that inflicts damage equal to a character's Magic Skill, and a spell that increases Magic Skill. These become more interesting when they can be multi-stage; for example, you may have a spell that lowers an enemy's magic resistance by half, then another spell which increases the damage they take from spells by half, then finally, an attack spell that inflicts a flat amount of damage but doubles if the enemy has less than 25% magic resistance. By playing these cards in combination you'd be getting much more damage than by playing them one or two at a time. Such an example is simple and not terribly strategic simply because it's so straightforward, but leverage combos can become quite complex with careful consideration.
An ecology combo is one that changes the way future actions by a player will impact the game; changing the game's ecology, in other words. Building an ecology combo is usually a matter of making two or more spells that alter the game mechanic in a way that is somewhat advantageous, but when played together become much more powerful. An example might be this set of three cards:
Rage: Each of your characters gains a free counterattack when hit with a melee attack.
Destiny: Once per character, instead of dying when reduced to 0 HP, the character will be reduced to 1 HP.
Courage: All of your characters' damage is vastly increased when they are close to death.
Each of these cards are sort of useful by themselves, but if you use all three at once, your enemy has to be very careful about hitting you with melee attacks--if he does, your character will survive and deliver a devastating counter hit.
Ecology combos don't have to hit every character or change the rules of the game--they just need to be something that will last long enough for other long-lasting cards to affect.
Generally, to make an ecology combo, you simply take a look at what an existing enhancement spell does--the free counterattack, for example--and think of another beneficial effect a spell could have that would have the side-effect of making the first spell more powerful or more applicable (or vice-versa).
The biggest difference between ecology and leverage combos is leverage combos usually work numbers whereas ecology combos work with rules changes. Both can be powerful and both can become broken, but that's a discussion for another day...
New thought about "resonating field":
The resonance thing has triggered some thoughts. It sounds to me like "having echoes" around it. It means that, maybe, the "footprint" can be seen many rounds later, but it also blurs as new spells are added on top of it. Maybe the resonance is a little like M:tG's graveyard. Or maybe just like it's five first cards. Or whatever.
Maybe (if we keep the M:tG mechanics for the sake of the exmaple) we could have a five card resonance chamber. This means that the first card on top gives five "mana" worth of resonance effects, the second, four, the third only three, the fourth wto and the last, only one "mana" worth of effect. The effect will be calculated by going back through the mana needed toc ast the spell.
The spells are cast by putting in sequence manas (like, for Roasty Room, you could use a sequence of two fire mana, two air mana, and one fire mana again. So this means that if the card is on top of resonance chamber, then you can gather three fire mana for resonance effects, and two air mana, but if it is second, then you can only get two fire and two air, then two fire and one air, two fire, and ultimately one fire, until nothing remains from it in the lingering athmosphere.
I know this changes quite a lot from the previous post, but it may trigger some interesting mechanics on the part of the players, who may choose to play only spells with long mana casting chains, in order to play with more powerful resonances, maybe with unicolored decks, in order to benefit from a single resonance more powerfully, maybe a five colored deck, in order to play a more balanced resonance, and be able to counter mots spells; or any other thing you can think of. And it would probably force you to think at least five turns in advance...
The resonance thing has triggered some thoughts. It sounds to me like "having echoes" around it. It means that, maybe, the "footprint" can be seen many rounds later, but it also blurs as new spells are added on top of it. Maybe the resonance is a little like M:tG's graveyard. Or maybe just like it's five first cards. Or whatever.
Maybe (if we keep the M:tG mechanics for the sake of the exmaple) we could have a five card resonance chamber. This means that the first card on top gives five "mana" worth of resonance effects, the second, four, the third only three, the fourth wto and the last, only one "mana" worth of effect. The effect will be calculated by going back through the mana needed toc ast the spell.
The spells are cast by putting in sequence manas (like, for Roasty Room, you could use a sequence of two fire mana, two air mana, and one fire mana again. So this means that if the card is on top of resonance chamber, then you can gather three fire mana for resonance effects, and two air mana, but if it is second, then you can only get two fire and two air, then two fire and one air, two fire, and ultimately one fire, until nothing remains from it in the lingering athmosphere.
I know this changes quite a lot from the previous post, but it may trigger some interesting mechanics on the part of the players, who may choose to play only spells with long mana casting chains, in order to play with more powerful resonances, maybe with unicolored decks, in order to benefit from a single resonance more powerfully, maybe a five colored deck, in order to play a more balanced resonance, and be able to counter mots spells; or any other thing you can think of. And it would probably force you to think at least five turns in advance...
Quote:Original post by Fournicolas
New thought about "resonating field":
The resonance thing has triggered some thoughts. It sounds to me like "having echoes" around it. It means that, maybe, the "footprint" can be seen many rounds later, but it also blurs as new spells are added on top of it. Maybe the resonance is a little like M:tG's graveyard. Or maybe just like it's five first cards. Or whatever.
Maybe (if we keep the M:tG mechanics for the sake of the exmaple) we could have a five card resonance chamber. This means that the first card on top gives five "mana" worth of resonance effects, the second, four, the third only three, the fourth wto and the last, only one "mana" worth of effect. The effect will be calculated by going back through the mana needed toc ast the spell.
The spells are cast by putting in sequence manas (like, for Roasty Room, you could use a sequence of two fire mana, two air mana, and one fire mana again. So this means that if the card is on top of resonance chamber, then you can gather three fire mana for resonance effects, and two air mana, but if it is second, then you can only get two fire and two air, then two fire and one air, two fire, and ultimately one fire, until nothing remains from it in the lingering athmosphere.
I know this changes quite a lot from the previous post, but it may trigger some interesting mechanics on the part of the players, who may choose to play only spells with long mana casting chains, in order to play with more powerful resonances, maybe with unicolored decks, in order to benefit from a single resonance more powerfully, maybe a five colored deck, in order to play a more balanced resonance, and be able to counter mots spells; or any other thing you can think of. And it would probably force you to think at least five turns in advance...
This is basically the same principle with different details. Precisely how it's implemented is up to the developer as long as the cardinal rule of elegant game dynamics is upheld.
The "Resonnant Field" as I originally envisioned it was intended to force players to fight over metaphysical space as much as soldiers would fight over tactical geography.
Making "Fire" spells more powerful with the presence of "Air" traits in the Resonnant Field means that you'd want to plan for a big, doomsday spell about (as you said) five turns in advice but also means that you want to be sure that you're not setting your oponent up for an awesome spell combo.
Depending on how you structure your spells' "Trait-Keying," this can be a both strategic AND tactical gameplay mechanic.
I always encourage designers to consider the fact that they don't have $2million+ at their disposal so they don't have a lot of time/manpower/resources to build their games. Emphasizing elegant game dynamics is of paramount importance -- shooting for as few special rules as possible. The simplest arithmetic can be leveraged to make the development process comparatively easy for how sophisticated the game evolvs.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
