Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Egan_BW]

It works in dark souls!
But yes, obviously the best thing is rapier and offhand dagger.

[kj1225]

It works in dark souls!
But yes, obviously the best thing is rapier and offhand dagger.

Or a pistol. Because that's why moved into using fast slashing weapons a low armor.

[NAV]

The most problematic thing with your post is the implication that someone would use a shield with a rapier.

Bucklers and rapiers fucking dominated dueling for centuries so what the hell are you talking about?

[Radio Controlled]

Did you consider this idea for combat from some time ago?

for combat, one thing you could do is that people, when monsters are encountered, describe the kind of tactics they'd use, and then you run combat (multiple rounds) until something big happens (eg extra monsters appear from the walls) or you think they might have reason to change tactics (eg somebody got wounded bad).

So people still get a chance to react to the situation and such, without going through the battle blow by blow. Also helps prevent people having/trying to set up enormous flowcharts that dictate possible actions and counters, which might happen if the whole battle is done through preset actions.

I did, but there's the problem of how are weapon skills and such like that used? Automatically in the right situation?

Not to mention it kinda pulls players out of the game if I'm doing all their combat for them.

It's a conundrum that I can't even look to other systems to solve because everything else is based on doing things at a table or at least online over something like skype or IRC. The issue always comes back to the fact that I can't rely on players to post multiple times a day, and that they can't always rely on me to do that either.

Maybe have a set of variables, and when combat starts players have to specify the 'behavior' they go for, after which you take it into account and run the turn. For example, level of aggressiveness, magic use, how much attack vs defense they focus on.

Eg. encounter starts, you describe it, a player then (if he chooses to engage in straight-up combat) specifies
-aggressiveness: keep on pressure/retaliate but don't pursue/stay on defensive/try to disengage orderly
-What weapon to use (if he has multiple)
-what to target (specific enemy, or specific part of large enemy, or to just engage targets as convenient)
-magic use: are you willing to use ability/item X in this combat or not, about how much of your magic are you willing to use (none, a little (10%), a lot (50%), all out (100%, just shy of getting corrupted).
-attack vs defense: all out attack/balanced/focus on defence

Just a short example of course. Could get a little bit of rock-paper-scissors effect perhaps, with certain stances/styles/techniques being better against certain others/against certain monsters or working better or worse in conjunction (eg: 'focus on defense' combined with 'keep up pressure' effectively means just following your target if he tries to flee, but not actively attacking it, so you might just end up in a prolonged staring contest).

And of course, even if you use something like this, you can chose how large the time increments are to give players more or less chances to change tactics.

[kj1225]

The most problematic thing with your post is the implication that someone would use a shield with a rapier.

Bucklers and rapiers fucking dominated dueling for centuries so what the hell are you talking about?

Bucklers are barely shields.

[piecewise]

I've selected egan to look at the stuff. We'll see what he says.

[The Lupanian]

The most problematic thing with your post is the implication that someone would use a shield with a rapier.

Bucklers and rapiers fucking dominated dueling for centuries so what the hell are you talking about?

Bucklers are barely shields.

A buckler can be as effective or even more effective if you use it actively instead of passively, for one thing you hold a buckler further away from yourself so it occupies more of your opponents field of vision. Now a buckler wouldn't be affective against anything, but they are not useless if used right.

[piecewise]

Still no reply from egan

[syvarris]

You know, if you have any non-spoilery system stuff that won't prevent me from playing the game, I'm also willing to be consulted.  I'm not good at evaluating flavor, but I'm very good at breaking systems.

...Also, I believe you've mentioned allowing players to GM the "on-ship" thread equivalents?  If helping out would secure me a place as one of those co-GMs, I'd be willing to lose my player rights too.  I just wanna be involved with the game.

[piecewise]

Egan got back to me and said he liked it but that maps would probably have to be involved because the areas can be rather complex. We'll see.

You know, if you have any non-spoilery system stuff that won't prevent me from playing the game, I'm also willing to be consulted.  I'm not good at evaluating flavor, but I'm very good at breaking systems.

...Also, I believe you've mentioned allowing players to GM the "on-ship" thread equivalents?  If helping out would secure me a place as one of those co-GMs, I'd be willing to lose my player rights too.  I just wanna be involved with the game.

You'd be a good pick for a "on-ship" gm.

As per non-spoilery stuff, nothing yet. If you can think on a way to handle combat quickly but still with enough control to be fun, that would help.

[Egan_BW]

Hmm. Could do something similar to that test game I did in IRC however long ago. You announce that combat is about to begin, and figure out how many turns it will last based on how many creatures are fighting, and possibly other factors. Each player and each enemy then comes up with a "queue" of actions to take in order. Every actor then procceeds to take their action symotainiously and with no chance to change course midway. Once every turn is used up, each combatant is disengaged and the players have an opportunity to flee or begin a new round of combat.

[FallacyofUrist]

By the way, what exactly is "ORO" anyway?

[Egan_BW]

Forgot to mention, my last idea would fit best if the demons were known to move unnaturally quickly, the idea being that the players only have time to come up with a plan before combat starts. Probably also meaning that if demons manage to ambush them, they're gonna have a bad time.

[piecewise]

A cue system might work...I'll think on it, try to get some kind of prototype running when I can muster the energy.

By the way, what exactly is "ORO" anyway?

Oroboropolis, the wandering city of the damned.

[piecewise]

Part of the problem is that I wanted to have reach of a weapon play a part. So that in order to do damage, you'd have to get within a certain range (nothing fancy, weapons just have a range of 1-4 or so (melee)) and someone  with a range of 3 could hit someone with a range of 1 before they could be hit back. So a spear could hit someone wielding a dagger from a distance while the dagger wielder would have to get very close.  This would make weapons different, along with damage types and speed, which can also make enemies behave differently; using different tactics.

Automating this is tricky, as someone with an advantage in range would realistically attempt to keep that advantage via strategic placement. I could handle that via simply giving a character with a range advantage extra turns over the disadvantaged player, which depending on the speed of the weapon could mean free attacks (at least ones where they don't have to worry about being attacked back).

I could do an AI card bank, which is something that boardgames use sometimes, where each enemy has a certain handful of moves or attacks and I "Draw" a few at random and then draw from that chosen "Deck" to create their actions; that way I don't get any knowing or unknowing tactical advantage over players who choose their attacks beforehand.

I could theoretically do the same thing with players, having them build their own decks of "moves" and then drawing one for each turn. Could have special abilities exist as either instants or conditional cards which would sit waiting for the right condition and then activate. This would allow counter moves to exist and activate when they should, which just normal queuing wouldn't allow; or at least allow in any meaningful way.

But It would have to be balanced right...If too many turns went without input then overtaxing faith would be common. Hmm.