Hi all!
I haven't been on here for awhile, but in the meantime I've been working a lot on my game. The theme has come along great and figured out especially.
I have run into an issue though concerning combat in my game.
To go over briefly what the game mechanics are like:
It takes place in a dark fantasy setting.
You adventure around a board (referred to as the "Oerworld") and when you encounter enemies you enter into combat. Combat is handled in a turn based system, there is no map or grid. I am working upon the details of it, but the one in particular I'm thinking about is how armor should work.
Most of the systems I've seen in games that have combat and armor have armor simply have a set # of AP (armour points); you determine damage from a strike and then subtract AP from the damage to determine how much damage the individual takes. It is quite a straightforward system, but I feel like there must be a better way of handling armour...
Armour for my game would simply be an entire set the individual wears (so no rules for separate pieces like hands, legs, chest, etc...). There are also 3 main types of damage weapons can have/armour can protect against: Physical, Magical, and Elemental.
Mage Knight has an interesting armour system, I like how you take a wound automatically even with armour. An idea I had too would be for armour to have a strength value and you compare the strength value of the weapon to it, that in turn would determine what number you have to roll to make a wound otherwise the armour is considered to have absorbed the hit.
So basically my question is, what are some other ideas for armour besides just the simple "Damage-AP=damage done"?
Armor Mechanics in turn-based rpg combat
There are many ways to calculate true damage. But each way has its own balancing issues.
One of my favourites with just damage, armor and their subtraction is. Having piercing damage.
Where piercing damage is the number of dice you can throw any way, with the weapon that you are using. Piercing works great against high armor value's.
Of course having damage that is way beyond the maximum armor works the same way.
***
If you don't like that. Perhaps throwing dice to see if the armor is effective at all. It doesn't matter if the armor is godlike. Once a weapon hits a weak spot, the damage is done.
I think the way most games use armor is odd too since, realistically, if I'm a knight fighting a goblin and the goblin takes a shot at me with an arrow, either the armor deflects the arrow completely or it somehow pierces my armor and hits for a lot of damage. It would rarely ever be a matter of "Oh, you have armor, so it hurts less." Seems like a yes or no situation (except for magic-based armor, those might function differently depending on your system).
Perhaps have each type of armor have a dice check towards each type of attack (Physical, Magical, Elemental). Some attacks/armors have various traits, though.
For example, Lodai's Chain Mail might have automatic 100% defense against all Magical attacks, and a dice check of 5 on a d6 for whether or not it defends against Physical or Elemental attacks. This armor is also 100% defensive against Spear weapons.
Or perhaps the dice check could be structured to something like "Roll a d6. With [armor] a 5 or 6 will defend completely against the attack, a 4 will halve the damage, and a 1-3 does nothing."
I think it's about time the gaming world had a fresh new fantasy combat system. Good luck!
Oh! Or also have a system for your armor to "fall apart" with each battle? Have different parts of it become more vulnerable until you take it to a blacksmith or dwarf? Roll a d6 to see if the attack hit on your left leg, right leg, left arm, right arm, torso, or head.
In reality, a knight's armor surely wouldn't be the same shiny, rounded piece of material it was when he first got it. Multiple shots to his right arm would eventually destroy that plating and leave it completely vulnerable.
RyanRay,
Thanks for the tips, I do like the idea of it either blocking the hit fully or taking damage fully from it.
Durability of equipment might be something I do in the game, though as said, I won't have the rules be covering different sections of the armor, it is to be more streamlined and just cover it as a whole with everything the individual is wearing.
If you don't plan to use the different-parts-of-armor thing, let me know. I might have to use that in a game for myself...
I can't recall seeing it anywhere else, even in mech games. The only thing I can think of that comes close is Galaxy Trucker, which is WAY different all together.
I can't recall seeing it anywhere else, even in mech games. The only thing I can think of that comes close is Galaxy Trucker, which is WAY different all together.
Check out some of the 40k rpgs they use rules for armor on different body parts and a wounds system.
I can't recall seeing it anywhere else, even in mech games. The only thing I can think of that comes close is Galaxy Trucker, which is WAY different all together.
I do like your idea a lot concerning having saving throws that either can protect fully, half, or not at all depending upon the roll and have the difficulty of the roll dependent upon how well the armor works against Physical/Magical/orElemental attacks.
So from this thread it seems there are 3 main ideas:
1. Armor functions as AP you subtract from damage, any left is applied.
2. Saving throw to cancel out all damage
3. Saving throw to either cancel out all damage or to halve it (or whatever other %)
Does anyone have/know of any other mechanics?
quick reply
An easy way to manage armor is like in final fantasy tactics, it simply add HP to the character.
An easy way to manage armor is like in final fantasy tactics, it simply add HP to the character.
True that.
What I'm also looking for though is a reason for a player to want to use lighter armour instead of heavy armour. Like some way to convey in the rules the choice between mobility or extra defense. Weight limits could be one way but I'm still contemplating other ways
What i used to like to do is to apply the following rules:
0 armor is worth 1.
1 armor is worth 3.
2 armor is worth 6.
Etc.
1 damage is worth 1.
2 damage is worth 3.
3 damage is worth 6.
Thus high armor means low health. And low armor means high health. If 0 armor means 60 health. Then 3 armor means only 6 health. But a weapon with 3 damage or lower doesn't hurt an unit with armor 3 or higher.
Of course is piercing damage worth just as much as the highest damage that you ever would apply.
5 damage is worth 15 in total. (1+2+3+4+5)
1 piercing damage is worth 5. 5 x 1.
3 piercing damage is worth 15. 5 x 3.
Although. This is a very old mechanic of mine. 10 years old. Now that i take a look at it. I am unsure about the balance though. But low armor had its use here. A little tweaking with the worth of numbers should improve balance.
Sended from my mobile. :)
You could make them move slower. Or like in my Wizardry Legacy RPG, characters get a penalty on their attack roll.
0 armor is worth 1.
1 armor is worth 3.
2 armor is worth 6.
Etc.
1 damage is worth 1.
2 damage is worth 3.
3 damage is worth 6.
Thus high armor means low health. And low armor means high health. If 0 armor means 60 health. Then 3 armor means only 6 health. But a weapon with 3 damage or lower doesn't hurt an unit with armor 3 or higher.
Of course is piercing damage worth just as much as the highest damage that you ever would apply.
5 damage is worth 15 in total. (1+2+3+4+5)
1 piercing damage is worth 5. 5 x 1.
3 piercing damage is worth 15. 5 x 3.
Although. This is a very old mechanic of mine. 10 years old. Now that i take a look at it. I am unsure about the balance though. But low armor had its use here. A little tweaking with the worth of numbers should improve balance.
Sended from my mobile. :)
I don't like the idea of health being related to armor that much. In effect that makes them essentially fully equal so the choice of wearing it or not doesn't really matter then
Penalty on attack roll is a good idea although I've already implemented something similar in regard to using heavy weapons in the game so I don't think it'd be wise to stack the two.
Slower movement in and/or out of combat may be a good thing to consider though so I'll test that out thanks
Check out the Dice Tower review of a recent game called Super Fantasy: Snout Something Something. The combat/armor/health system in it is very unique and allows for nice strategy.
I'll bet you get an idea or two from it.
I'll bet you get an idea or two from it.
I read through the rulebook a little while ago, it is quite an interesting system indeed.
I much prefer the way this type of system works compared to the average set # of actions each turn type of layout in a game.
The armour system is a bit odd in the Snout game, I can still utilize some ideas from it though. I do like the idea of an armour system that isn't a static value but one that is determined by a dice roll with stats affecting it to a degree; so I may implement something similar in my game perhaps.
Concerning again the combat system, one idea I was contemplating on with regard to my game was to have a combination between a set number of actions allowed per combat round as well as an energy points type of system which would make you have to rest once in awhile to recover them so you have to think about when to block/dodge/parry and when to strike/strike hard, etc.
Perhaps different could have different limitations on how far you can boost them at max with energy points during an action; so for example, a shortsword could allow you to use up to 3 energy when aiming the hit, but only gets 1 dice when rolling to see how much damage is done whereas a large axe could get 1 dice max to hit and up to 3 dice (or just a damage boost) for damage (or roll to see if damage...).
This is something I'll have to think about more...
My main goal in my game in regard to the combat system is to capture the feel of, and also give interesting choices as far as what one should do each round in combat, a turn based rpg similar to video games one of the past such as Nocturne and Digital Devil Saga or Final Fantasys.
If I simplify it on the other hand another alternative combat system would be similar to the gamebooks of old like the Fabled Lands ones...
Those are my main influences with the mood of the combat.
This is something I'll have to think about more...
My main goal in my game in regard to the combat system is to capture the feel of, and also give interesting choices as far as what one should do each round in combat, a turn based rpg similar to video games one of the past such as Nocturne and Digital Devil Saga or Final Fantasys.
If you're looking for an rpg-like system, there are obviously a ton of directions to go. Some considerations for how to have armor affect the player:
-Armor adds HP to the character.
-Armor prevents/reduces certain types of damage (fire, magic, melee).
-Armor increases experience gain, money gain, etc.
-Armor boosts certain other attributes like attack, evasion, etc.
-Gives special abilities like Levitation, Teleportation, Thievery, etc.
-Have the ability to "build" armor, not just find it or buy it.
-Armor can be in the form of shields (uses a free hand), helmets, gauntlets, gloves, and body armor/robes (think of how many Job systems work).
-The Final Fantasy 2 system was to have players improve certain attributes the more they used their abilities or equipment. Example, the more I had my archer use a bow, the more accurate and stronger he was whenever he used a bow.
When I think of how rpg armors work, there's almost always a really good "debate" between why I should choose between 2 or 3 different armors. For example, I can afford a Mythril Helmet which gives 75% reduction to magic/elemental damage, or a Knight's Helm, which gives 25% reduction to physical damage and a +50% boost to speed. Depending on my strategy I can choose either one.
This is something I'll have to think about more...
My main goal in my game in regard to the combat system is to capture the feel of, and also give interesting choices as far as what one should do each round in combat, a turn based rpg similar to video games one of the past such as Nocturne and Digital Devil Saga or Final Fantasys.
If you're looking for an rpg-like system, there are obviously a ton of directions to go. Some considerations for how to have armor affect the player:
-Armor adds HP to the character.
-Armor prevents/reduces certain types of damage (fire, magic, melee).
-Armor increases experience gain, money gain, etc.
-Armor boosts certain other attributes like attack, evasion, etc.
-Gives special abilities like Levitation, Teleportation, Thievery, etc.
-Have the ability to "build" armor, not just find it or buy it.
-Armor can be in the form of shields (uses a free hand), helmets, gauntlets, gloves, and body armor/robes (think of how many Job systems work).
-The Final Fantasy 2 system was to have players improve certain attributes the more they used their abilities or equipment. Example, the more I had my archer use a bow, the more accurate and stronger he was whenever he used a bow.
When I think of how rpg armors work, there's almost always a really good "debate" between why I should choose between 2 or 3 different armors. For example, I can afford a Mythril Helmet which gives 75% reduction to magic/elemental damage, or a Knight's Helm, which gives 25% reduction to physical damage and a +50% boost to speed. Depending on my strategy I can choose either one.
Excellent suggestions thanks.
I'm not sure if I mentioned it earlier in the thread, but another possiblity for armour could be that weapons have a strength value and armor has armor value, you compare the two if a hit is achieved and depending upon how they compare to each other that determines a saving throw (or reduction in damage) that you get.
I'm leaning towards having the game more "action" like in the sense that you don't upgrade your gear, there's simply a minimum and maximum that gear can be at with regard to stats (considering it's a board game and not full on rpg I figured this would be better way to go).
"When I think of how rpg armors work, there's almost always a really good "debate" between why I should choose between 2 or 3 different armors. For example, I can afford a Mythril Helmet which gives 75% reduction to magic/elemental damage, or a Knight's Helm, which gives 25% reduction to physical damage and a +50% boost to speed. Depending on my strategy I can choose either one."
I really like the idea of some armour/gear giving nondefense bonuses. As a side example, some shields could add to attack for instance, so you don't have to do a specific shield bash move it simply is factored in. Smaller shields would be easier to parry weapons with but provide less defense (rules concerning parrying i'll cover in another thread). Concerning percentages of block, do you think that having a 25/50/75% damage reduction as a mechanic for some or all defenses in the game would slow down the game too much or be too mathy for the players?
Concerning the video game rpg influence: this is another topic not related to original post, but I've also noticed in a lot of turn based video game rpgs that people usually don't do defense as it takes a full action to do it and simply reduces the damage from an attack. The only time people do it is if they know a huge attack from the enemy is coming up. I want integrate defense in either a full passive way (such as boost to stats) or give the PCs an option once a combat round to block and/or parry, this way defense is something you do when attacked rather than your full action for the round as the way it is handled in most games.
I don't think 25/50/75% fractioning would be to mathy as long as the numbers you use are conducive. Don't have really big odd or prime numbers appear at all.
Being able to Parry might work for you since it's essentially Defending with a purpose. e.g., if someone has Karin's Gloves equipped, they can Parry attacks from short-range weapons and Dark Magic, returning 25% of the full damage back to the user (possibly after a successful dice check).
I know exactly what you mean when you say that RPG's rarely have an effective Defend function.
One of the games that I think of immediately in this case is Final Fantasy 9, where having certain things equipped would allow the player to learn new techniques over time. At first they could only use it when they wore the item, but eventually they'd learn it for good. Some examples of abilities the player could learn:
-Get Crits on undead enemies 100% of the time.
-Immunity to Fire/Ice.
-Can Steal from enemies.
-No Back-Attacks.
-Use any weapon as a long-range weapon.
-Auto-Haste.
-Boost certain attack or item types.
Is your game anything like the Pathfinder:ACG?
For parrying I was thinking of having it so that some weapons (e.g. parrying dagger) and certain shields (medium and small ones mainly) could parry.
As an aside, one mechanic I thought of for parrying works like this: When attacked you can (or the AI of a monster may choose to parry) attempt to parry. You have to choose before they roll to hit (you can choose instead to attempt after they roll to hit if using a small shield, that would be the advantage of using small shield). They roll to hit on 2d6. You then roll a number of dice equal to the parry # of item you're using to parry with. Two of those dice you roll have to both be of a higher number each, if that occurs then you parry it aside. Example: Monster attacks PC, needs to roll a 8 or higher on 2d6 to hit, rolls a 3 and a 5 which is enough to hit. In response the PC chooses to parry with their small shield, which has a parry # of 4d6. PC rolls 1, 4, 2, and 6. the 4 and 6 results are both higher than 3 and 5 and thus the hit is parried.
For blocking with a shield I'm thinking perhaps of doing something similar to Descent where you roll dice and get a certain number of shield results against the damage done by opponent...perhaps armor could be handled in same way. I'll post again on this thread later today and summarize all the different methods of doing armour we've discussed thus far.
You can only do one block and one parry max each combat round.
The Final Fantasy 9 gear stuff you mentioned is an interesting system but I don't think I'll implement that for my game. I've been reading rulebooks for various rpgs all day practically lol, and am seeing how different games handle these things for ideas.
Ah, Pathfinder Card Game...I owned that at one point, I traded it away. It was a fun game overall but what I didn't like about it was just how easy it was to win, there was no tension and that game has a problem in it that I am trying to avoid coming up in my game...that is, you get so many modifiers to your rolls and extra dice that it's next to impossible to lose to an encounter/monster that you face. For things in general for my game I'm trying to avoid the whole "+X to your die roll" because in some games that stuff can stack up too much and make things too easy/certain of what will come up. I've been liking how games like Darkest Night and Eldritch Horror handle things: you have a target number you have to roll or get to and getting "+x" to a roll isn't adding a number to the roll but rather how many extra dice you get to roll.
My game may have some similarities to it but overall it's not the same format as Pathfinder. What I am doing the same from that game though is having it so you can connect your results from one game to another (Space Alert's expansion also did the same thing but with an EXP/new abilities rather than stats type of system). Since my game though is semi-co-op I am working on ways for players that have EXP from past games don't have a strict advantage over new players. Basically, I like the idea of board games that connect multiple games...almost like the concept of New Game+ found in many video games where new challenges and new stuff in general comes up in later playthroughs (such as Dark Souls 2 etc...)
Didn't realise that you where going for a RPG type of game. So that armor suggestion won't work.
Further, you don't want +X to your roll.
How about +X to the number of rolls for an attack? Where the armor could reduce the rolls. Or be a number of rolls itself. A great example would be Risk. Where the dice are placed in high to low and compared.
No need for tables or modifications to the worth of an attack. Just some modifications to the number of dice.
Some examples for modifications:
A basic weapon has 4 dice. A basic armor has 4 dice.
If the attack is selective, like being a fire weapon. Then it gets +2 dice against wooden armor. Or, the wooden armor has -2 dice for protection instead. Making other weapons more useful in that same attack round. Therefor you could make an effective attack pattern too. And there isn't really need for calculations for the players.
If you have doubts about having overkill with weapons (9 dice against 2 armor dice, where 7 are certain hits). You could introduce special armor that always equals the number of attacking dice.
How about this for Parrying:
Golem attacks, the number he rolls on 2d6 dictates the power of his attack, +/- any traits, items, etc. (e.g., Golem rolls 2d6). Let's say Golem rolls an 8. You then CHOOSE if you want to simply Defend or Parry before the monster's dice are rolled.
To Defend, you roll 2d6 and must meet or beat his roll (+/- any items/traits you have to affect the rolls). But to Parry, you must BEAT his roll on 3d4 (or 1d12) instead.
If you use 3d4 to parry, you still have the chance to get the same max number as 2d6 (a 12), but the odds are tougher to get (1/64 as opposed to 1/36). The numbers are skewed much greater towards the middle (6, 7, 8) and very, very slim on the edges.
The odds of the Golem rolling 8 or higher is 42%.
The odds of you BEATING his roll on 3d4 is 31%.
The odds of you BEATING his roll on 1d12 is 33%.
If he rolls a 9, the odds would be 28%, 16%, and 25%, respectively.
If he rolls a 10, the odds would be 16%, 6%, and 16%, respectively.
If he rolls an 11, the odds would be 8%, 1.5%, and 8.3%, respectively.
The more towards the high end you go, the more valuable it is to roll a d12. The odds are evenly skewed at 8.3% on every single number. Depending on the other mechanics in the game, either 1d12 or 3d4 could work well to balance the combat in whatever direction you choose.
Also, it'd be impossible to get a 2 on 3d4.
Rolling 1d4+1d8 has interesting outcomes too. The chances of rolling a 5, 6, 7, 8, or 9 are all the exact same.
X3M,
+X # of dice may work. As said, I like how games like Darkest Night and Eldritch Horror handle dice rolls, I'm just trying to translate that over to a game where PCs/NPCs have hit points and such.
I haven't played Risk since I was a little kid so I'll have to look into that game's rules again to understand it but I do like your suggestion with it, I like when games have a lot of dice to roll (like warhammer 40k for instance).
I was looking over the rules for the A Song of Fire and Ice roleplaying game and they have an interesting system in that where you have a set # of dice you roll depending on your stat's score, plus you can also have "Bonus Dice." So say for instance you were trying to hit an opponent with a bow's shot and you have a marksmanship of 2 as well as a 2b from bow training. You would have a target number (the difficulty number) you'd have to roll equal to or higher on the base 2 dice in order to achieve the hit. You roll 4 dice in total and choose the highest two (so the 2 in the stat means the most you can keep, bonus dice are extras you roll and then can choose from in the total pool of dice).
The example you gave of the fire sword against wood armour is something I'd like to implement for sure (weaknesses/strengths against certain elements/magic/weapon types etc..). I like your example overall but something i'd like to point:
AN IMPORTANT POINT I'D LIKE TO MAKE CONCERNING EVERYTHING: I'd like to avoid three things in my game, namely: 1. Tests becoming overly easy/impossible to fail (e.g. how it is in games like Pathfinder ACG) due to standard +x to rolls. and 2. Tests that are impossible. I'd like in all combat for it to be possible to hit the target for at least 1 hp of damage, even if it is a really tough chance. So I wouldn't want something like "-x dice" reducing all attack dice down to 0 (if I use the mechanic you mentioned)...or if I were to using the standard armour mechanic (damage-ap=total hp lost) then to avoid having armour that can completely block all attacks. and 3. Having the level of the PC's stats affecting things too much. They can give a slight bonus/penalty but I don't want foes in the game to be unkillable simply because you are not high enough level/high enough stats to do so. If you have a great axe for example, you should be able to kill the fire demon regardless of level. So it's more "action game" in its set up than "rpg game" with regard to importance of levelling, gear is simply gear and not totally dependent upon stats. Sorry if I'm a bit confusing with trying to convey what I mean...
"If you have doubts about having overkill with weapons (9 dice against 2 armor dice, where 7 are certain hits). You could introduce special armor that always equals the number of attacking dice."
True that.
RyanRay,
Those are some very interesting ideas you posted, thanks for sharing them!
You guys are going to hate me for this, I should've mentioned it earlier during the thread but: This isn't set in stone, but I would like to keep my game only to use d6s. I could also use d3s (half the result of a d6 result) for things as well.
At it's basic core, I envision parrying working as a test against your opponents accuracy of their hit, whereas blocking with a shield functions against the damage. So: - slower weapons are easier to parry and dodge/evade - weaker weapons are easier to block with a shield. - dodge/evade I haven't settled on a mechanic for how it works yet but some ideas i had for it are: first you use an action or energy points to do it and then the way it works is either by 1. the difficulty # to hit you is increased by a bit for the opponent or 2. you make the opponent have to reroll a hit.
You get one dodge, parry, or block each round that you can do.
With armour (what the thread is mainly about though we've gone onto other things now it seems, sorry for the derailing...) I've been going over the ideas on this thread of various ways in which armour can work and I appreciate all the input.
I'd love to see the current rulebook (obviously in proto stages still) to get a feel for how the game as a whole works. Post it if you get a chance.
Most of it is just written in notes and in my head at the moment. I'm going to start working on some basic rules for the battle system now that I've talked on this thread and got some ideas, things are more clear now. I'll share it with you when I finish it up for sure.
Feel free to send it as a PM, or post it here and send me a PM reminder to make sure I see it.
Having at least 1 damage?
How about having 1 dice presenting piercing damage? That is the certainty of 1 damage. Each character can have different damages for what you throw with the 1 piercing dice. But the minimum is 1 for each option.
Since you said you'd have a limited pool of armors, how about a custom table for every armor. Like when the opponent rolls for hit:
Heavy armor: 0-5 hits = 0 damage, 6-7 hits = 1 damage, 7-9 hits = 2 damage, 10+ hits = 3 damage.
Light armor: 0-2 hits = 0 damage, 3 hits = 1 damage, 4-6 hits = 2 damage, 7-10 hits = 3 damage, 11+ hits = 4 damage.
Of course those numbers need to be changed for each dice mechanic and the amount of HP each dude has.
Heavy armor: 0-5 hits = 0 damage, 6-7 hits = 1 damage, 7-9 hits = 2 damage, 10+ hits = 3 damage.
Light armor: 0-2 hits = 0 damage, 3 hits = 1 damage, 4-6 hits = 2 damage, 7-10 hits = 3 damage, 11+ hits = 4 damage.
Of course those numbers need to be changed for each dice mechanic and the amount of HP each dude has.
I'm not sure what you mean by your tables with damage increasing with hits with the armour or am I missing something?
I recently read the rulebook for Fighting Fantasy rpg and that pretty much was what i was looking to do with armour and weapons, I'm going to modify it to fit my game. Basically each piece of gear has variable damage or defense it can have.
One of my favourites with just damage, armor and their subtraction is. Having piercing damage.
Where piercing damage is the number of dice you can throw any way, with the weapon that you are using. Piercing works great against high armor value's.
Of course having damage that is way beyond the maximum armor works the same way.
***
If you don't like that. Perhaps throwing dice to see if the armor is effective at all. It doesn't matter if the armor is godlike. Once a weapon hits a weak spot, the damage is done.
You're right about piercing attacks and I already have that in mind for the game. I like the way those are handled in Descent, another thing I'm doing is factoring in critical hits with rules similar to how it works in Mage Wars.
An important point I should mention that I forgot to in the original post of the thread is that the combat system will be 2d6 based at its core.