|
Post by N3B on Jan 14, 2004 21:26:50 GMT -5
1-14-04: 10:13 PM
Added some things, review and make and post here to suggest changes and such.
|
|
|
Post by Draxas on Jan 14, 2004 23:10:45 GMT -5
Interesting, and a pretty good start. My suggestions:
Weapons and armor: Define "one set of armor". Does this mean you can equip, for example, Leather Boots, Leather Gloves, Steel Breastplate, Iron Helm, Iron Bracers, and a Round Shield, all as separate items? Or is a "set of armor" a blanket term for equipping, say, Chainmail, which would include all the extras? While we're on the subject, would Shields cound as a separate armor item, or could this be used in conjunction with a melee weapon and a set of armor for added defense?
Stats: There is no reason people cannot equip weapons that are above their strength score, to a limited extent. They would just have a hard time using them. If their strength stat is less than the strength requirement of the weapon, they divide the weapon damage by the number of points below the required score +1. However, if they are 5 or more points below the requirement, they simply cannot wield the weapon effectively in combat. Example:
Draxas wishes to wield a Greatsword as his weapon. The Greatsword has a strength requirement of 20, and Draxas has a strength score of only 18. Draxas can wield the Greatsword, but with a penalty. Normal Greatsword damage is 30. This is divided by the amount below the requirement +1 (20-18=2, 2+1=3), so the Greatsword will inflict 30/3=10 damage in the hands of Draxas. Oftentimes, this means weapons which seem very powerful may be outclassed by weapons with a lower base damage if the wielder's strength is not up to snuff.
The same case as above would apply with dexterity and ranged weapons, magic and runes, and for equipping armor.
Speaking of armor, that would make more sense if it was based on strength as well. Defense could be changed to a small armor bonus (say defense/10 = bonus armor points, then again, this could be feasibly done with dexterity as well), or could be eliminated entirely for simplicity's sake.
Combat: Just one quick question about this, if it takes 7 turns for you to slay the wolf, wouldn't the wolf only have 6 turns to damage you before it is killed? Or are all blows considered to be simultaneous for game purposes?
There's my comments for now.
|
|
|
Post by N3B on Jan 15, 2004 14:49:19 GMT -5
armor: i had figured there'd just be a set of armor, like
"Knights Armor" - which could have steel platemail, kite shield, gauntlets, full helmet, etc. and we give a defense for the total.
or
"Fire Robe" - which could be a robe which protects against magic greatly and not much against physical attacks. speaking of which, i need to add something to what i left out earlier...
as for the battle, all attacks are assume simulatenously for easy efficiency.
your weapon thing would be extremely tedious trying to control everything, better to just have a fine required stat so that there's no confusion with everything
|
|
|
Post by Draxas on Jan 15, 2004 15:18:22 GMT -5
Fair enough.
I still do like the idea of a separate shield though. After all, it's really hard (read: impossible) to operate a longbow with a tower shield... This would allow melee weapon users a bit of extra defense in combat, to make up for the fact that when they get up to "uber-weapon" level, all of the PD weapons are guns...
|
|
|
Post by N3B on Jan 15, 2004 16:18:05 GMT -5
well then, would you be saying that anyone with a bow equipped can't use a shield? if we made shields optional, and according to realism, users with ranged weapons equipped couldn't use a shield.
how about we just do away with shields all together?
if we were going to restrict shields to melee weapon-equipped only, we'd have to give some sort of equality measure for ranged and magic weapons so that they don't seem inferior.
|
|
|
Post by Draxas on Jan 15, 2004 16:54:22 GMT -5
I'm sure we could think of something...
Seriously though, ranged weapon users wouldn't be able to realistically use a shield (with the possible exception of bucklers, and those still wouldn't work well with most).
I imagine equipping runes would boost both magic attack and magic defense, giving them an equivalent bonus.
From the way I understood it, ranged weapons were supposed to have higher overall attack at the cost of defense anyway. That's a bonus right there. Ranged weapon users could also get a "first strike" bonus, one "free" attack at the start of battle before their opponent closes the distance and can counter normally. This would, of course, be negated if the opponent also had a ranged weapon.
Which brings a couple of additional points to mind:
Are there going to be generalized "skills" everyone can learn (by spending XP, just like boosting stats), or are we doing away with this idea? If we do use them, then maybe "shield use" and "first strike" could be earned skills instead.
Another question: Will the average monster have magical attacks? If not, that makes MDEF only useful for player vs. player combat, or special monsters that actually CAN use magic.
Speaking of, I am forced to assume every monster will now have a stat for both PDEF and MDEF.
|
|
|
Post by N3B on Jan 15, 2004 17:07:05 GMT -5
methinks these skills will be bought with exp. The "first strike" might be a bit weird, let me see if i can fit something easily into the formula.
*ponders*
we could quite possibly do that.
|
|
|
Post by N3B on Jan 19, 2004 1:44:35 GMT -5
1-19-04: 1:44 AM
Added the experience being the currency thing.
|
|
|
Post by Draxas on Jan 19, 2004 11:12:27 GMT -5
Not bad, keeps our lives simple.
What about the skill system?
|
|
|
Post by N3B on Jan 19, 2004 16:01:40 GMT -5
eh, define skill system.
|
|
|
Post by Draxas on Jan 19, 2004 17:50:31 GMT -5
Skills purchased using XP. Things like "Two weapon style", "First strike", "Thick skin", etc. A generalized skill system, so that stats and equipment aren't the only thing that differentiates one character from the next in combat.
This can be as simple or complex as you like. You could go with only very basic skills, like Thick Skin: Adds (some arbitrary number) to PDEF naturally (even without armor), for example. Intermediate would be things like First Strike: When armed with a ranged weapon, allows you one "free" strike against your foe at the start of combat, without retaliation. Or Two Weapon Style: Allows you to wield 2 one-handed melee or ranged weapons in each hand, adding both to your weapon damage. Advanced skills would be much more complex, requiring certain equipment or other conditions. Or with an advanced skill system, you could even include an individual skill to represent competency in a type of weapon, for example, Weapon skill: Crossbow, or Weapon skill: Dagger. You could even go so far as to break this down into subsets of an individual weapon type, like Weapon skill: Shortsword, Weapon skill: Broadsword, Weapon skill: Katana, and Weapon skill: Greatsword as examples. This could be extended to magic, with skills like Rune skill: Fire, Rune skill: Darkness, Rune skill: Non-elemental, etc.
As I said, as simple or complex as you like. Or you could leave it out entirely, but I think it would only add to the game.
|
|
|
Post by niff on Jan 21, 2004 1:00:42 GMT -5
I think Draxas plays D&D..
|
|
|
Post by Draxas on Jan 21, 2004 10:00:58 GMT -5
I used to, ages ago. I haven't played in at least 5 years or so now.
Actually, the skill system I'm proposing really spring from a combination of a number of other sources. Diablo 2, Various MUDs I've played on, Fallout, a number of other video games as well.
|
|
|
Post by niff on Jan 21, 2004 19:48:43 GMT -5
Isn't Fallout a Deus Ex-esque game?
|
|
|
Post by Draxas on Jan 22, 2004 0:00:07 GMT -5
It's an RPG, set in a post-apocalyptic world. It's in an overhead 3/4 view, and has turn-based combat. So yeah, nothing like Deus-Ex. It is an awesome game though, and a copy will run you 10 bucks or less at this point, and will probably have Fallout 2 bundled in for free. Win XP may have some trouble running it though, I'm not sure.
|
|