This week, I'm going to be putting the majority of my focus on the class mechanics, keeping in mind flexibility for which ever combat style I wish to implement. This is a daunting task, however. Without a combat system set in stone, only a skeleton system for classes can be made. Though my hope is that by going through in this fashion, the combat system itself will emerge out of the brainstorming.
I also have brought a friend of mine somewhat into the project. While he may not quite know how I do things yet, I think he has a good perspective on RPGs, one that rounds out my tastes with his own. Where I am more a fan of the Western RPG, he is a true blue JRPG fan. Where I stopped playing the Final Fantasy series after 7, he has been playing the games later in the series. Where I love The Elder Scrolls, he prefers Dragon Quest.
This should hopefully keep the overall theme of the game in check, providing the true hybrid of East and West that this RPG is really all about.
So, classes! We already went over the different kind of class systems, and how they interact with the combat system. Now its time to get a little bit more specific on what classes actually are in the game. How do the classes fill the roles seen in most RPGs? First, we take a look at the Arch-Triangle.
The Archetype Classes
In all RPGs, there are the 3 Archetype classes: Warriors, Magic Users, and Stealth Users. All the classes in an RPG fall into one or more of the archetypes. Picture a triangle in your mind, with each of the archetypes as a meeting point on the triangle. Now in the center, you "place" the classes in the spot most appropriate. A warrior-mage would be somewhere between the 2, and something like a pirate might be between warrior and stealth user.
Now we have to work out what the 3 archetypes are all about, and this is simple. Warriors beat things up, magic users cast spells of either a defensive or aggressive style, and a stealth user usually sticks to the shadows, using opportunity as their weapon. Now, what kind of classes would fall under these categories? This is more difficult than you may think, and really tries on your creative limitations. So far, I have been able to put 3 or 4 "classes" under each category, and give them a short paragraph description.
The reason this portion is a bit difficult is because there is no combat system in place yet. You could come up with 20 classes for each category, but without the specifics of the combat system in place, they all seem like carbon copies of themselves with different aesthetics. So this is when we take a look at the finer points of how a character works, specifically the things that also integrate into combat: Statistics.
Statistically Speaking...
Statistics in RPGs are usually the same, if not worded differently. Almost by definition, a statistic is a numerical value associated with the physical and mental attributes of a character. The attributes range from raw strength, to how fluent a character is in speaking. Skills, which are usually a separate numerical value, are derived from statistics. So, in essence, a statistic is the driving number, the umbrella. There are 2 different ways games use statistics, depending on how complex they wish the system to be.
The first, and most common in Western RPGs, is what I like to call the Grand 7. The 7 is the most common because each of the 3 Class Archetypes receive 2 statistics tailored to them, and each of those 2 determines a different facet of the classes mechanics. Now, with the 7, it makes creating a hybrid class easier, because the 2 statistics can be split, giving the hybrid one of each of their parents statistics to the hybrid. What are the 7 statistics? Well they go by few names, though in any case they perform the same function. They are:
Strength - Warrior Stat
Endurance/Constitution/Vitality - Warrior Stat
Intellect - Caster Stat
Wisdom/Willpower - Caster Stat
Agility/Dexterity - Stealth Stat
Speed - Stealth Stat
Personality/Charisma - Universal
It is important to note that many of those statistics went by several names. What is important is that they are all the same in nature, it's just the designers choice as to what to name them. The reason that this is the most common form of statistics is because of Dungeons and Dragons, a game that built the frame work for all RPGs that came after it in the Western scene. The best thing about this system is that each stat has a smaller purpose. This means that at least 1 stat from a different class type is important to everyone, regardless of their actual class. Warriors still use Agility/Dexterity to help them maneuver, a caster still uses Endurance/Constitution/Vitality to not die, stealths use Strength to actually do damage... While it isn't one of their primaries, it is still important.
Please note that occasionally there is an 8th stat, Luck, which is also a Universal stat.
Again, this brings about how hybrid classes are made. A Paladin (Holy warrior that uses defensive and support spells in addition to his heavy armor and melee skills) would probably focus on 1 warrior stat and 1 caster stat. A Shadow Dancer (A thief that uses magic to assist in her endeavors) would focus on 1 stealth stat and a caster stat. Lets do some math, shall we?
We have the 3 archetypes, which are classes in themselves: A Warrior, a Mage, and a Thief. Each of these 3 specifies their own important statistics, bringing the most homogenized classes.
3 classes.
Now we have the possibilities of hybrids, using the 6 class based statistics. Since I'm terrible at writing out equations, I will list them in order, effectively coming out with every combination.
Strength+Intellect
Strength+Wisdom
Strength+Agility
Strength+Speed
Endurance+Intellect
Endurance+Wisdom
Endurance+Agility
Endurance+Speed
Intellect+Agility
Intellect+Speed
Wisdom+Agility
Wisdom+Speed
That is all possible combinations using the 6 Archetypical stats. This means a total of 15 "classes" (12 Hybrid, 3 Archetype). But now we have the Personality/Charisma Stat! And what about Luck? That adds a whole new set of classes!
Of course, this is only 1 possible way to interpret the Grand 7. You could use it as DnD used it, where yes, each stat is tailored to a certain class style, but the classes themselves aren't based upon that particular reasoning on 15 combinations.
The other common statistical system is a more watered down version of the 7, using just 3 stats: Strength, Agility, and Intellect. Sometimes there is also a 4th stat thrown in to cover the needs of the games systems, but primarily it is just those 3. That system style is easier for the player to understand, and is mostly intuitive. It also correlates well with a "Fixed Class System" (See "A Class Act" post).
I'm not much a fan of this statistic set, I find it boring. Though I know I won't use it, I feel it necessary to let you all know about its existence, and how it functions on a base level.
If we think of how statistics work, it makes it much easier to come up with effective class designs that are different from one another. On paper, a Soldier and a Knight may sound exactly the same. But when you mention that a Soldier focuses on Strength and Agility, while a Knight uses Endurance and Agility (Just throwing random examples out!) then their advantages and disadvantages become clear, and the classes become distinct from one another.
How the stats themselves will exactly work is still up in the air, of course. There are inherent effects, however. Having a high level of Endurance means it will be harder for that character to die, where as an Intelligent character probably doesn't talk like an un-educated fool and has a better potential to learn magic. In terms of numerical, combat functionality, that will all come later.
Now that we can see how to integrate statistics into our class design, we need to figure out how the class system itself functions, at a base level, with a character. There are a handful of ways I would like to do it, but this decision is a lot easier to make than the actual classes themselves when put at the forefront of the class system.
I Was Once A Great Warrior...
Some games let you pick a class, and then change it at any given time. Others let you pick a class, but it is a one time choice. Then there are some where the game gives you a group of characters with a specific skill set and thats it. While I really am going to avoid the last of those options, I would like to keep the first two in mind. While the latter of the 2 really doesn't have any "options" as to how its done, the first can be done in many forms.
Again, I like to make broad categories with this. The broader the better, because it allows you to really think about the minor details on your own time, and in your own way.
The first way it can be done is the Final Fantasy style. If we look at FF5, any character can be any class at any time. The longer they are a certain class, the more skill they gain in that class. When they switch to another class, they can use the skills they learned from other classes and combine them to make their own hybrids, giving way to a huge spectrum of possibilities.
Then there is the Dungeons and Dragons style. After a certain point, a character can opt to have a secondary class as well as their main class, leading to unique combinations. With this system, the primary class takes precedence in the overall play style, but the second class adds flavor to it. By example, a Thief-Wizard is drastically different than a Wizard-Thief.
The third category isn't really a namesake of any game in particular, though it does exist in many forms. Its a limited choice system. Taking Final Fantasy Tactics (Different than standard FF!) as an example: Each race in the game has a set list of classes they can be. Some races share classes amongst one another, while some have classes specific to their species. A Viera, Moogle, and Human can all be theives, but only a Viera can be a Fencer, for example.
Since I don't plan on having races play a major role in game play elements, if I were to involve a limited choice system, it would have to be character specific. Jimmy can a Knight, Barbarian, or Archer. Claude can be a Mage, Priest, or Tennis Player. Maria can be a Knight, Tennis Player, or Alcoholic. That kinda stuff.
Then there is a "class-up" system (Which I thank my friend for reminding me of!). It can be used in a variety of fashions, but in a nutshell, when a character reaches a certain point, its class changes. An Archer, for example may become a Ranger. There could be some choice involved in this, as well. A Knight could become a Paladin, or a Black Knight, for example. Using a system like this could also bring about a tree, of sorts, where one choice leads to another choice of class even further on down the line.
Depending on which system I choose to go with makes a huge impact on the game overall: Again, the meat and bones of any RPG is its class system. From the basic "Fixed" style, to the complex "Make Your Own" (Which I'm probably going to avoid doing a full blown version of), a class system makes the RPG. This decision also factors into how combat will work, at the end of the day.
Addendum
While I have a ton of choices ahead of me, I think narrowing them down to a select group, then broadening the description of those options, allows me to really look at them all with flexibility in mind. Over the course of the week, I'll be taking the next step in class system design, where I take each of my options and work through them, and how they could work, one by one. Again, I'm not designing the classes yet, but the class system!
Which selection do you like best? Do you have any suggestions of systems that I didn't cover here? Or maybe you have a system you've never seen before, and would like to have it tested out? Would you like to help test a system out with me? All this can be yours if you comment down below!
Monday, October 22, 2012
Saturday, October 20, 2012
Story Time
Throughout the week, I've taken a look at the possibilities of mechanics behind the game, and given my own analysis as to how they can work in a game setting. Almost any and all combinations of class and combat systems can work if done properly, and it is a very heavy and daunting aspect to designing a thick RPG. Yet today, we put that on the back burner to talk about the last major component behind a game of playing roles, the story.
For this topic, I already know the general direction I wish to write in, and I kind of have an idea of what the major plot device could be, so this entry will be a bit shorter than the previous. First on my talking list is how I go about writing a story, watered down of course, because I could be here all damn day talking about the finer points of my world building techniques, which make almost no sense anyway.
My World Building Process
When making a brand new universe from scratch, I take two different approaches depending on the worlds purpose. For something like my Magestone Chronicles, a story few people outside of my circle know of, I take a wider approach. I build things like the deities, the landscape, and historical events first, and then zoom in on the finer bits one at a time. This is not the style I'm really going for with this, though, as it isn't a game that would need a sequel, spin offs, or anything like that.
This style of world building, I have coined "One Hit Wonder-World". It serves the purpose of telling 1 story, and that's it. From a game world perspective, this means I only have to focus on what is necessary for the game itself. I don't give a damn about what happens across the sea (If the world has one. And heck I may not even care enough to think about whether or not it does). This gives the strength more to the characters and the main plot, instead of where the characters fit in history.
To do this, I come up with the main plot point first. When that is done, I try to figure out how to make it believable in context, and why it's happening. Then, who is involved? What are the general possible outcomes of the plot, depending on the actions (Or lack thereof) of the main character(s)?
With the big picture plotted out as vaguely as possible, it is time to "draw a map" of the world. Typically this just takes place in my head, and morphs over time to fit into whatever is going on. The final form of the land is hardly ever definite; even in my long going project, it changes at least once a year, up to 5 times!
The Writing Style
This is the fun part! I like my worlds how I like my women: Well spoken, well thought out, and clever. The only thing missing is red hair, but I think if you gave a planet any kind of hair-do, it would look rather stupid, so I just keep the hair on the ladies.
I employ a few different styles for each new universe I make, mashing them together in different combinations to make each one feel different than the last. Some are bright and shiny, some diabolic. Some are grim, some are over the top. For this one though, I want to try something I actually (Believe it or not) have never tried before...
Fourth wall breaking humor. After playing Cthulhu Saves The World, I've been obsessed with the concept of not only breaking the 4th wall, but tearing it down to pure rubble. This is a huge stretch for me, I've never done it before. I know I can incorporate my sense of humor into it easily, but making it work is going to be the hardest part, because I'm not just rusty at it, I'm fracking unforged for it.
How Will It Work?
Thats a great question, me! Well, think about the first section. Go back and read it, if you must, I'll wait.
...
...
...
Done? Good. Now, the first thing I said I do for a small world is to come up with the plot point first before anything else. While I was racking my brain for a plot point, I was reaching into my sack-o-writing styles, and pulled out the 4th wall, and thus, the plot has been laid! In egg form, it hasn't hatched yet, that will be a few weeks of incubation under my bum first.
The world of <BLANK> is in danger, for the mystical walls that separate their world from those of "The Creators" are being torn down by a mad man bent on achieving the power of creation! With the first 3 walls falling rapidly, it is only a matter of time before the 4th is breached...
Yes, the plot point is actually about the fourth wall being broken.
I like this idea, and I'm going to really try my hardest to mold it into something special. One reason I like this idea is because of the art style for the game. Being made of crayons and grid paper, the game automatically takes you out of the world from the aesthetics alone. Any attempt to subvert that would be really difficult, due to the inherent "silly and cute" look of it. Heck, as I work on a test portrait, which you will see in due time, it already looks cheesy, the exact way I had hoped it would look. The obvious mistakes of color leaking onto other "pixels", the limited color pallet, the thin blue lines that dictate the "pixels"... It just looks too "obviously hand-crafted" to try and pull it off in ANY serious manner. Hell I could hardly take the art seriously myself if it weren't for the vision I have of it being fricken AWESOME!!!
I'm excited.
Weekly Summary
This was a short week, as I started on Tuesday, and Tuesday was just an intro post anyway, and I skipped Thursday due to massive brain storming on my part. Tomorrow is what I will from now until release my only day off each week. Even if I don't actually blog that day, I am still working on it. If I have all my fingers that day, I'm either typing, writing, or coloring. Heh. I wanna know if any other person designing games can say "Oh yea, my job involves coloring with crayons." I may not be getting payed for this but damn it, I may as well make it a job, right?
So this week, we went over my ideas for classes and combat, and how each different form functions along with ups and downs for each. Then, I stated the direction I wanted to go in terms of the story, and... Thats it!
Tomorrow, though it will be my self designated "day off", I will be working out which direction I want to take my class and combat system in. So far, I have had only ONE PERSON indulge their input! One!
I'm not saying I need help, I'm saying I want to help you. I want to make a game you guys (And girls) want to play! If you never pipe up, or say what you wish to say, it will never happen! Hoping that someone else will say it won't work, either. Chances are, they won't, because they are thinking the same thing.
While I don't plan on having the class and combat system ready to begin the design phase until the end of next week, that doesn't mean you shouldn't act on any ideas you may have to contribute. I love hearing about what you guys think is kick-ass, because that is what a game should be at the end of the day: Kick-ass!
I would prefer to see any thoughts or ideas you may have to be put in the comments section of this blog, not messaged to me privately. Why? Because your thought can begin a whole discussion between you, me, and any one else who may have something to contribute as well. I'm not asking you to design the whole game with me. I'm asking you to say things like: "Hey, know what would be cool? Giant moose robots from space that shoot acid out their nostrils!" or "I think a cool side quest would be to rescue a stranded meerkat from the evil clutches of the underwater amoeba-men ." Maybe even something as simple as "I think you should have a Tennis Player class, because that would be cool." (For the record, not *everything* can/will be put into the game... No Tennis Player class).
And share with your friends! Send them a link to the blog! Let me know that you did so, as well! Of course, this would be a lot cooler if you were already a regular commenter, and then your buddy comes through and is all like "Hey, I'm his/her friend, cool stuff man!", cuz then we can be all like "Nice dude!".
I'm tired, this is tough work, this game stuff.
That is it, and I wish you all a fantastic day of rest tomorrow! Make sure to come back on Monday, for I have something a little more satisfying, as the concrete for it has been set, it just needs to dry!
For this topic, I already know the general direction I wish to write in, and I kind of have an idea of what the major plot device could be, so this entry will be a bit shorter than the previous. First on my talking list is how I go about writing a story, watered down of course, because I could be here all damn day talking about the finer points of my world building techniques, which make almost no sense anyway.
My World Building Process
When making a brand new universe from scratch, I take two different approaches depending on the worlds purpose. For something like my Magestone Chronicles, a story few people outside of my circle know of, I take a wider approach. I build things like the deities, the landscape, and historical events first, and then zoom in on the finer bits one at a time. This is not the style I'm really going for with this, though, as it isn't a game that would need a sequel, spin offs, or anything like that.
This style of world building, I have coined "One Hit Wonder-World". It serves the purpose of telling 1 story, and that's it. From a game world perspective, this means I only have to focus on what is necessary for the game itself. I don't give a damn about what happens across the sea (If the world has one. And heck I may not even care enough to think about whether or not it does). This gives the strength more to the characters and the main plot, instead of where the characters fit in history.
To do this, I come up with the main plot point first. When that is done, I try to figure out how to make it believable in context, and why it's happening. Then, who is involved? What are the general possible outcomes of the plot, depending on the actions (Or lack thereof) of the main character(s)?
With the big picture plotted out as vaguely as possible, it is time to "draw a map" of the world. Typically this just takes place in my head, and morphs over time to fit into whatever is going on. The final form of the land is hardly ever definite; even in my long going project, it changes at least once a year, up to 5 times!
The Writing Style
This is the fun part! I like my worlds how I like my women: Well spoken, well thought out, and clever. The only thing missing is red hair, but I think if you gave a planet any kind of hair-do, it would look rather stupid, so I just keep the hair on the ladies.
I employ a few different styles for each new universe I make, mashing them together in different combinations to make each one feel different than the last. Some are bright and shiny, some diabolic. Some are grim, some are over the top. For this one though, I want to try something I actually (Believe it or not) have never tried before...
Fourth wall breaking humor. After playing Cthulhu Saves The World, I've been obsessed with the concept of not only breaking the 4th wall, but tearing it down to pure rubble. This is a huge stretch for me, I've never done it before. I know I can incorporate my sense of humor into it easily, but making it work is going to be the hardest part, because I'm not just rusty at it, I'm fracking unforged for it.
How Will It Work?
Thats a great question, me! Well, think about the first section. Go back and read it, if you must, I'll wait.
...
...
...
Done? Good. Now, the first thing I said I do for a small world is to come up with the plot point first before anything else. While I was racking my brain for a plot point, I was reaching into my sack-o-writing styles, and pulled out the 4th wall, and thus, the plot has been laid! In egg form, it hasn't hatched yet, that will be a few weeks of incubation under my bum first.
The world of <BLANK> is in danger, for the mystical walls that separate their world from those of "The Creators" are being torn down by a mad man bent on achieving the power of creation! With the first 3 walls falling rapidly, it is only a matter of time before the 4th is breached...
Yes, the plot point is actually about the fourth wall being broken.
I like this idea, and I'm going to really try my hardest to mold it into something special. One reason I like this idea is because of the art style for the game. Being made of crayons and grid paper, the game automatically takes you out of the world from the aesthetics alone. Any attempt to subvert that would be really difficult, due to the inherent "silly and cute" look of it. Heck, as I work on a test portrait, which you will see in due time, it already looks cheesy, the exact way I had hoped it would look. The obvious mistakes of color leaking onto other "pixels", the limited color pallet, the thin blue lines that dictate the "pixels"... It just looks too "obviously hand-crafted" to try and pull it off in ANY serious manner. Hell I could hardly take the art seriously myself if it weren't for the vision I have of it being fricken AWESOME!!!
I'm excited.
Weekly Summary
This was a short week, as I started on Tuesday, and Tuesday was just an intro post anyway, and I skipped Thursday due to massive brain storming on my part. Tomorrow is what I will from now until release my only day off each week. Even if I don't actually blog that day, I am still working on it. If I have all my fingers that day, I'm either typing, writing, or coloring. Heh. I wanna know if any other person designing games can say "Oh yea, my job involves coloring with crayons." I may not be getting payed for this but damn it, I may as well make it a job, right?
So this week, we went over my ideas for classes and combat, and how each different form functions along with ups and downs for each. Then, I stated the direction I wanted to go in terms of the story, and... Thats it!
Tomorrow, though it will be my self designated "day off", I will be working out which direction I want to take my class and combat system in. So far, I have had only ONE PERSON indulge their input! One!
I'm not saying I need help, I'm saying I want to help you. I want to make a game you guys (And girls) want to play! If you never pipe up, or say what you wish to say, it will never happen! Hoping that someone else will say it won't work, either. Chances are, they won't, because they are thinking the same thing.
While I don't plan on having the class and combat system ready to begin the design phase until the end of next week, that doesn't mean you shouldn't act on any ideas you may have to contribute. I love hearing about what you guys think is kick-ass, because that is what a game should be at the end of the day: Kick-ass!
I would prefer to see any thoughts or ideas you may have to be put in the comments section of this blog, not messaged to me privately. Why? Because your thought can begin a whole discussion between you, me, and any one else who may have something to contribute as well. I'm not asking you to design the whole game with me. I'm asking you to say things like: "Hey, know what would be cool? Giant moose robots from space that shoot acid out their nostrils!" or "I think a cool side quest would be to rescue a stranded meerkat from the evil clutches of the underwater amoeba-men ." Maybe even something as simple as "I think you should have a Tennis Player class, because that would be cool." (For the record, not *everything* can/will be put into the game... No Tennis Player class).
And share with your friends! Send them a link to the blog! Let me know that you did so, as well! Of course, this would be a lot cooler if you were already a regular commenter, and then your buddy comes through and is all like "Hey, I'm his/her friend, cool stuff man!", cuz then we can be all like "Nice dude!".
I'm tired, this is tough work, this game stuff.
That is it, and I wish you all a fantastic day of rest tomorrow! Make sure to come back on Monday, for I have something a little more satisfying, as the concrete for it has been set, it just needs to dry!
Friday, October 19, 2012
Combat Systems in RPGs
First, I would like to thank those that have been keeping up with me, and reading the entries as they come out. Out of the 50 some odd views, I suspect that between 20-30 of them were my own, before I figured out how to not track my own, which leads me to believe I have maybe a good 5-10 unique visitors for each entry. Thank you so much! Its with your reading that supports me to keep going, I don't want to let you down!
Are you a regular? Lemme know in the comments section, there is huge benefit on your part to not be seen as just a view count! :D
Today, we take a look at some of the combat system ideas that I have towards the game. They range from a simplistic turn-based, left vs. right design, all the way to a more complex tactical DnD board style. We balance the ups and downs of each, so that the ideas are laid out in front of us and we can begin making comparisons between them, ultimately coming to a conclusion for what will be the best option.
Keeping in mind the previous entry on class systems, a combat system must fit in well with its classes, and vice versa. The two go hand in hand, a synergy is necessary. If you build a class system that doesn't work with its combat, the results can be disgustingly bad and utterly broken.
Now, lets talk maths real quick. I'm terrible at maths! So terrible in fact, that I have been known to obliterate simple equations that involve simple addition and subtraction. But math is extremely important for RPGs, namely in the combat system itself. Maths determine how much damage one does, what chance you have to dodge an attack, or how much mana you'll have left after casting a spell. RPGs and numbers might as well be married! I have no idea of any game that has any remote level of RPG aspects that doesn't involve math to even a minor degree, and if there are any, I guarantee that they are abominations.
How, then, should they be incorporated in the battle system? Well, there are 2 broad ways to do such: A high value system, and a low value system.
Low Value Systems
In a low value system, each number has a very significant weight behind it. A +1 to damage is a lot more powerful than it may seem, and having 100 health may be a very beefy amount. Games that incorporate a low value system are games like Pokemon, Dungeons and Dragons, and Magic the Gathering, even though it's a card game.
Low value systems are typically much easier to min-max with for those, like myself, that can't figure out the square root of 20 without a calculator and scrap paper. It also allows the more generic items and abilities to retain their usefulness throughout a game. Since something like a boost of 5 HP becomes a more significant bonus, the weight behind the decision of who to give it to becomes much more important. Do you give it to your beefy tank, who can always use more health? Or do you give it to your healer, who is more important to keep alive at all times?
High Value Systems
High value systems take larger numbers in an attempt to make tweaking that much more hands on. With higher values, a +20 increase to Mana isn't all too important, but with 5 +20 increases, you now have a larger mana pool. Games like World of Warcraft, Dragon Age: Origins, Borderlands, and Diablo 2 incorporate higher values in their maths. While sometimes it borders between low and high, overall the distinction is that a single boost to a stat is much less significant than it would be in a true low value system.
High value systems are a min-maxers dream, for they allow the most control over your numbers, and a character can be tweaked to your perfect combination. The downfall of these systems is that many times, like in games like WoW, the equations can be difficult to find, and even difficult to understand without a decent knowledge of mathematical procedures.
In high value systems, the prevalence of magical gear and skills/spells/abilities are much less impactful: It requires a lot of condensing things to make a powerful combination of numbers to achieve your goals, instead of a single item or level up. This results in taking more time, and careful consideration, in how to level up or gear your characters. This, in turns, means for a longer game as a whole. These systems also are much more difficult to reach a wider audience, as the RPG elements are a lot heavier than others, and unless you've been playing games like these for years, you might be hard pressed to get any good at the game, or even finish it.
With basic number theories out of the way, we can begin looking at the real meat of the combat systems I have in mind. As usual, we'll start off with the simplest forms, and move on to the more complicated, and how it could be done with each style.
Left vs. Right Turn Based
Popularized by the Final Fantasy series, the Left vs. Right style includes basic "I move, then you move" combat style. Other iterations, like in Dragon Warrior, feature a "top vs. bottom" style, though the game play is identical, even if the perspective is different.
The upside to a style like this is lack of extreme complexity, meaning a wider audience, a more nostalgic feel to really bring out the old school aspect of the game, and a much less design time over all.
The downsides are almost the same as its ups, however. There is a lack of complexity, and those that find extreme tactical depth wouldn't be able to find much. The nostalgia goggles you would be putting on always wear out, no matter how much you may love the style, and there is little to no innovation behind it, depending on how its done.
I have 2 basic ideas behind how to do a left vs. right style, one of which being almost a carbon copy of the Final Fantasy system. For those who understand the system, there is little need to explain its inner workings. The battle starts showing your characters on one side, the enemy on the other. You pick each characters actions, then watch as the battle unfolds. Lather, rinse, repeat.
The other idea, while similar, does require an explanation. Using a 3x3 grid system, you make the formation of your party a major tactical decision. This adds a layer of depth to combat, something the left vs. right has less of than other systems.
How it would work is as such. Lets say you have 5 characters in your party: 2 warrior types, a mage, a healer, and an archer. You decide to form the party as such, with the left side being the front row, and the right side the back row:
With that positioning, our warriors block any melee access to the other 3 members of the party. The archer and mage can pelt people with projectiles from behind the shields of our front fighters, and the healer has a thick, two character wall in which one must fight through to actually damage him. Of course, ranged attackers could hit them in the back rows, but there could be abilities to assist in that. Let that be an after thought though.
Then, we can incorporate a flanking mechanic. Lets say your party is attacked from behind. Now the grid would look like this:
Now, your mage and healer are vulnerable, and your warriors are out of position to do their job properly. This mechanic would add to that tactical depth. Should I put my squishies (In RPG lingo that means mages or cloth armor wearers) in the back row, or put them in the middle row, so that they can be protected from more than one angle?
To add to it, perhaps throw in a movement system, so that when attacked from an inopportune position, allow the party to re-configure their formation on the fly to make up for them being flanked. Considering the inherit lack of tactical depth of a left vs. right system, this gives some flare to the combat system, and even adds a couple mechanics that can be integrated into skills and spells. Mages could light a square on fire, for example, making any enemy that re-positions to that tile take continual damage. Or maybe a warrior can perform a sweeping blow that damages the entire front row of attackers.
This, over all, bridges the gap between the standard left vs. right style, and the pure tactical RPG style found in games like Ultima, Final Fantasy Tactics, and Fire Emblem, which is one of my absolute favorite genres of RPG.
Tactical RPG Style
In a tactical RPG, your group of characters take turns moving on a grid of either squares or hexes, and the emphasis is on critical positioning techniques and strategic thinking. This adds extreme depth to combat systems, and mistakes can be punishable by death of characters, or making a battle more difficult than it had to be.
The ups to a tactical style is the depth, of course. With this style, I can incorporate a lot more class mechanics such as movement abilities, active flanking mechanics, and ultimately longer and more engaging battles. It also makes good use of the art style, using the graph paper aesthetic as a game play mechanic.
The negatives? Well, tacticals are a somewhat niche genre: You're either a fan, or you're not. This closes up the audience to a select crowd, something that can be seen in a negative light as a game designer. While it's one of my favorite genres, it isn't the most popular, tacticals are more a cult genre.
Another heavy negative is that there would be less battles than in a left vs. right: With a standard Final Fantasy build, random encounters make the meat of the combat. Battles happen frequently, and grinding can be made possible. With tactical combat, each battle can take upwards of an hour, and it turns the true focus of the game on its combat. Exploration and dungeons become almost unnecessary, as the games driving point is going from battle to battle, defeating the purpose of adding a new school twist to a genre mostly seen as true retro gaming.
A way I see as combining the tactical prowess of a pure tactics game, and the exploration and discovery of a left vs. right style, is do something similar to how the pen and paper DnD game works.
For those unfamiliar with how standard DnD plays, the DM (Or Dungeon Master) creates a dungeon on a grid. Each room can have a monster or two, some traps, or secret passage ways. The players (Each with a character, sometimes two characters) do their own thing. Jimmy may want to check out that wall using his keen senses, and Barbara may want to go try figuring out the puzzle on the pedestal in the center of the room. While the party is exploring the chamber, goblins appear! Now the room becomes a battleground. Since the party has dispersed itself about the room to do their own thing, they all have a position on the grid, and the goblins do as well. Combat ensues using dice and the like, all within the layout of the room that also acts as a non-combat mechanic. When the battle end, unless something within the battle changed the environment, the room stays the same, and the party can continue what it was doing before the ambush.
Something like this would allow for the same combat depth of a tactical RPG, but still enable the mapping and discovery of other RPG styles. What are the negatives? Well, a huge design time, for one. Each dungeon, while being hand crafted, wouldn't have many random encounters. Each engagement would be different, and would have to be designed in its own special way. While the world itself can be enlarged, this makes the design process super long, as extreme attention must be put into dungeons beyond its layout.
Addendum
I'm somewhat leaning towards the "DnD based" style of tactical combat, though that is extremely ambitious. The safer, more conservative route would be a basic left vs. right style, which would be easier to design and take less time over all without rushing it. I'm torn maybe 55-45 between it. I think that a comprimise on the grid based LvR would be a fun twist to throw in, even if it still doesn't have the same level of depth as a true tactical. What are your thoughts? This one I would really love to hear your opinion, so make sure to comment below, and lemme know what you think!
Are you a regular? Lemme know in the comments section, there is huge benefit on your part to not be seen as just a view count! :D
Today, we take a look at some of the combat system ideas that I have towards the game. They range from a simplistic turn-based, left vs. right design, all the way to a more complex tactical DnD board style. We balance the ups and downs of each, so that the ideas are laid out in front of us and we can begin making comparisons between them, ultimately coming to a conclusion for what will be the best option.
Keeping in mind the previous entry on class systems, a combat system must fit in well with its classes, and vice versa. The two go hand in hand, a synergy is necessary. If you build a class system that doesn't work with its combat, the results can be disgustingly bad and utterly broken.
Now, lets talk maths real quick. I'm terrible at maths! So terrible in fact, that I have been known to obliterate simple equations that involve simple addition and subtraction. But math is extremely important for RPGs, namely in the combat system itself. Maths determine how much damage one does, what chance you have to dodge an attack, or how much mana you'll have left after casting a spell. RPGs and numbers might as well be married! I have no idea of any game that has any remote level of RPG aspects that doesn't involve math to even a minor degree, and if there are any, I guarantee that they are abominations.
How, then, should they be incorporated in the battle system? Well, there are 2 broad ways to do such: A high value system, and a low value system.
Low Value Systems
In a low value system, each number has a very significant weight behind it. A +1 to damage is a lot more powerful than it may seem, and having 100 health may be a very beefy amount. Games that incorporate a low value system are games like Pokemon, Dungeons and Dragons, and Magic the Gathering, even though it's a card game.
Low value systems are typically much easier to min-max with for those, like myself, that can't figure out the square root of 20 without a calculator and scrap paper. It also allows the more generic items and abilities to retain their usefulness throughout a game. Since something like a boost of 5 HP becomes a more significant bonus, the weight behind the decision of who to give it to becomes much more important. Do you give it to your beefy tank, who can always use more health? Or do you give it to your healer, who is more important to keep alive at all times?
High Value Systems
High value systems take larger numbers in an attempt to make tweaking that much more hands on. With higher values, a +20 increase to Mana isn't all too important, but with 5 +20 increases, you now have a larger mana pool. Games like World of Warcraft, Dragon Age: Origins, Borderlands, and Diablo 2 incorporate higher values in their maths. While sometimes it borders between low and high, overall the distinction is that a single boost to a stat is much less significant than it would be in a true low value system.
High value systems are a min-maxers dream, for they allow the most control over your numbers, and a character can be tweaked to your perfect combination. The downfall of these systems is that many times, like in games like WoW, the equations can be difficult to find, and even difficult to understand without a decent knowledge of mathematical procedures.
In high value systems, the prevalence of magical gear and skills/spells/abilities are much less impactful: It requires a lot of condensing things to make a powerful combination of numbers to achieve your goals, instead of a single item or level up. This results in taking more time, and careful consideration, in how to level up or gear your characters. This, in turns, means for a longer game as a whole. These systems also are much more difficult to reach a wider audience, as the RPG elements are a lot heavier than others, and unless you've been playing games like these for years, you might be hard pressed to get any good at the game, or even finish it.
With basic number theories out of the way, we can begin looking at the real meat of the combat systems I have in mind. As usual, we'll start off with the simplest forms, and move on to the more complicated, and how it could be done with each style.
Left vs. Right Turn Based
 |
| This style is 100% self-explanatory, and requires little practice to understand the nuances in the mechanics |
The upside to a style like this is lack of extreme complexity, meaning a wider audience, a more nostalgic feel to really bring out the old school aspect of the game, and a much less design time over all.
The downsides are almost the same as its ups, however. There is a lack of complexity, and those that find extreme tactical depth wouldn't be able to find much. The nostalgia goggles you would be putting on always wear out, no matter how much you may love the style, and there is little to no innovation behind it, depending on how its done.
I have 2 basic ideas behind how to do a left vs. right style, one of which being almost a carbon copy of the Final Fantasy system. For those who understand the system, there is little need to explain its inner workings. The battle starts showing your characters on one side, the enemy on the other. You pick each characters actions, then watch as the battle unfolds. Lather, rinse, repeat.
The other idea, while similar, does require an explanation. Using a 3x3 grid system, you make the formation of your party a major tactical decision. This adds a layer of depth to combat, something the left vs. right has less of than other systems.
How it would work is as such. Lets say you have 5 characters in your party: 2 warrior types, a mage, a healer, and an archer. You decide to form the party as such, with the left side being the front row, and the right side the back row:
 |
| W = Warrior, A = Archer, H = Healer, M = Mage |
With that positioning, our warriors block any melee access to the other 3 members of the party. The archer and mage can pelt people with projectiles from behind the shields of our front fighters, and the healer has a thick, two character wall in which one must fight through to actually damage him. Of course, ranged attackers could hit them in the back rows, but there could be abilities to assist in that. Let that be an after thought though.
Then, we can incorporate a flanking mechanic. Lets say your party is attacked from behind. Now the grid would look like this:
 |
| Uh oh! This could end up being bad news for an un-prepared party |
Now, your mage and healer are vulnerable, and your warriors are out of position to do their job properly. This mechanic would add to that tactical depth. Should I put my squishies (In RPG lingo that means mages or cloth armor wearers) in the back row, or put them in the middle row, so that they can be protected from more than one angle?
To add to it, perhaps throw in a movement system, so that when attacked from an inopportune position, allow the party to re-configure their formation on the fly to make up for them being flanked. Considering the inherit lack of tactical depth of a left vs. right system, this gives some flare to the combat system, and even adds a couple mechanics that can be integrated into skills and spells. Mages could light a square on fire, for example, making any enemy that re-positions to that tile take continual damage. Or maybe a warrior can perform a sweeping blow that damages the entire front row of attackers.
This, over all, bridges the gap between the standard left vs. right style, and the pure tactical RPG style found in games like Ultima, Final Fantasy Tactics, and Fire Emblem, which is one of my absolute favorite genres of RPG.
Tactical RPG Style
 |
| Tactical RPGs involve a ton of thinking, and critical decision making, with an emphasis on efficient strategy |
The ups to a tactical style is the depth, of course. With this style, I can incorporate a lot more class mechanics such as movement abilities, active flanking mechanics, and ultimately longer and more engaging battles. It also makes good use of the art style, using the graph paper aesthetic as a game play mechanic.
The negatives? Well, tacticals are a somewhat niche genre: You're either a fan, or you're not. This closes up the audience to a select crowd, something that can be seen in a negative light as a game designer. While it's one of my favorite genres, it isn't the most popular, tacticals are more a cult genre.
Another heavy negative is that there would be less battles than in a left vs. right: With a standard Final Fantasy build, random encounters make the meat of the combat. Battles happen frequently, and grinding can be made possible. With tactical combat, each battle can take upwards of an hour, and it turns the true focus of the game on its combat. Exploration and dungeons become almost unnecessary, as the games driving point is going from battle to battle, defeating the purpose of adding a new school twist to a genre mostly seen as true retro gaming.
A way I see as combining the tactical prowess of a pure tactics game, and the exploration and discovery of a left vs. right style, is do something similar to how the pen and paper DnD game works.
For those unfamiliar with how standard DnD plays, the DM (Or Dungeon Master) creates a dungeon on a grid. Each room can have a monster or two, some traps, or secret passage ways. The players (Each with a character, sometimes two characters) do their own thing. Jimmy may want to check out that wall using his keen senses, and Barbara may want to go try figuring out the puzzle on the pedestal in the center of the room. While the party is exploring the chamber, goblins appear! Now the room becomes a battleground. Since the party has dispersed itself about the room to do their own thing, they all have a position on the grid, and the goblins do as well. Combat ensues using dice and the like, all within the layout of the room that also acts as a non-combat mechanic. When the battle end, unless something within the battle changed the environment, the room stays the same, and the party can continue what it was doing before the ambush.
Something like this would allow for the same combat depth of a tactical RPG, but still enable the mapping and discovery of other RPG styles. What are the negatives? Well, a huge design time, for one. Each dungeon, while being hand crafted, wouldn't have many random encounters. Each engagement would be different, and would have to be designed in its own special way. While the world itself can be enlarged, this makes the design process super long, as extreme attention must be put into dungeons beyond its layout.
Addendum
I'm somewhat leaning towards the "DnD based" style of tactical combat, though that is extremely ambitious. The safer, more conservative route would be a basic left vs. right style, which would be easier to design and take less time over all without rushing it. I'm torn maybe 55-45 between it. I think that a comprimise on the grid based LvR would be a fun twist to throw in, even if it still doesn't have the same level of depth as a true tactical. What are your thoughts? This one I would really love to hear your opinion, so make sure to comment below, and lemme know what you think!
GET INVOLVED!
Those who comment get recognition! The more you comment, and say what you think, the more and more you get credited for assistance. Heck, who doesn't like seeing their name on something? I know I do! In the future, I plan on having incentives for being a part of it, from simple signed pictures of sprites and art, to conceptual demos, and maybe even a position on the design team. I know I'm not capable of doing everything by myself without intense amounts of learning and discovery, and adding new people to the team not only enables faster development time, but allows more than my own creative influence on the game. You can be a part of game design to what ever degree you want, as long as you put your mind and mouth into it!Wednesday, October 17, 2012
A Class Act
When you go out and buy an RPG, what do you look at with the most criticism? Would it be the story? The art and graphics? How about dialogue? Maybe its the gear. For me, its how the class system works, and how it interacts with the combat system on an intimate level. To me, if the class system is lack-luster, I find it hard to get involved with. Sometimes things like the story make up for it, though very rarely does that ever occur.
There are 2 class/character system archetypes, with so many different sub categories that it's impossible to define them all in any reasonable length of time. With these 2 styles in mind, I would like to go over them and how they impact a games play style with regards to player interaction and customization, along with how they immerse you in the world you are about to invest time in.
The Controlled Class System
In a controlled class system, you have limited to no control over the characters statistical development. Old JRPGs were typically the games to follow such a system, with almost all Final Fantasy and Dragon Warrior games incorporating it. Occasionally you may come across an item that will boost a stat by a minuet amount, though overall this does so little that it hardly constitutes as customization.
There are 2 class/character system archetypes, with so many different sub categories that it's impossible to define them all in any reasonable length of time. With these 2 styles in mind, I would like to go over them and how they impact a games play style with regards to player interaction and customization, along with how they immerse you in the world you are about to invest time in.
The Controlled Class System
 |
| Final Fantasy 4 is a fantastic example of a controlled system |
The negatives of such a style can be quite large. Unless there are severe story elements, you garner little connection to the characters, because you were never personally involved in their statistical development. As such, when a character is an ass-kicking beast, there is no feeling of accomplishment, as you were not the one making the decisions on his skills or attributes: He/she was a concoction of the developers design. By the same token, when a severely weak character comes along, there is absolutely nothing you can do to alter its pathetic stats, and utterly useless abilities.
This doesn't mean that a controlled system is terrible, however. If the story is strong, then a controlled development style places the story front and center. You don't need to focus on min-maxing all of your characters, and battles become less experimental so as to speed the process along so the next cinematic sequence can occur. It also helps if the combat system itself is streamlined and simplistic, so beyond finding new equipment, the characters are in much less need of tedious micromanagement to be fully effective.
A game that implemented a controlled environment poorly was Dragon Warrior 1. The story was rather sparse, with no true sequences involved to spur on the tale. A silent protagonist made it worse, as you never had a reason to become attached to the main character. To make matters worse, there was only 1 controlled character in battle, and only ever 1 monster to fight. This made combat tedious, and turned random encounters into the hated thing it is today. I myself actually enjoy random encounter RPGs, if the combat system is solid and engaging, but DW1 was slow in terms of combat. However, to give credit where credit is due, DW1 was before the time of the Active Battle Systems (ABS) that were popularized by the FF series after the fourth iteration. They were a thing of the future then, and I find it hard to blame a game on the lack of worldly development.
Final Fantasy 4 (Can you tell its one of my favorites yet?) took the controlled system and turned it into a master piece. The story itself was the true driving point of the game, even going so far as to make cinematic battles. While there was next to no direct interaction with the characters development, this was offset by the need to find out what happens next, and what the next boss fight would entail.
The ABS was also a huge factor in making the controlled system work. Combat was fast paced, and if you were too slow to make a decision, you could find yourself with a dead group of adventurers, and a title screen. While customization of the characters could do nothing but strengthen the involvement, it is easy to overlook its lack purely because the combat was still fun, and the story was one you will remember for a very, very long time.
The Custom System
After awhile, the controlled style began to phase itself out. While there are still a few, select games that use such a style, it is easy to say it is much less popular, and for good reason. A custom system allows direct control over what skills and abilities your character(s) obtain, allowing for specialization catering to your own style of combat. Giving an RPG replayability was also great, as unless you are the type of person to read a book twice, you had little reason to play the same game again if it never, ever changed.
There are also so many different ways you could possibly implement a customization system, that it becomes mind boggling. You could do it how FF5 did it, for example. There are tons of pre-set classes (Or in FFs case, "Jobs") that you can swap in and out of, and as you master them you can use their abilities on other classes. Or you could pull an Elder Scrolls, giving you a giant set of possible skills, and allowing you to craft your own class within those bounds.
The custom system is definitely the most profound and modern choice, giving the most amount of benefits. However, there are a small handful of negatives to it as well. There is, what I like to call, the "power gaming complex", and I think it is by far the worst thing in RPGs.
The power gaming complex is based on the idea that power gaming is such a meta mindset, that it draws you out of the game to the point where you are no longer playing the game, but instead working it. You lose interest in the story and layers of possibilities, and instead focus your attention on making sure your character(s) are the best at everything, at all times.
The problem is not necessarily the game, its the player. And, honestly, it isn't the players fault, but rather the games. See why it becomes a complex? Lets put it into perspective from a true example, the worst offenders to this problem: Morrowind, and the people who play it.
With the way the character advancement system works in Morrowind (And TES overall) is that you gain skill points by performing those skills in game. You get better via repetition and practice, a rather intuitive system that was intended to mirror realism as much as possible. However, there was one major flaw in the plan: It was way too easy to abuse. It was so easy, in fact, that it was almost necessary. The enemies in the game became progressively more difficult as you went on, and many class archetypes weaknesses weren't offset by their strengths.
To open a lock, thieves could pick it, mages could cast a spell on it, and warriors were screwed. They would have to work on their lockpicking skills. Now, normally this wouldn't be bad at all. So you learn how to lockpick, where is the negative in that?
Well, the other part of Morrowinds skill advancement was how it affect statistics. Lets say you were to level lockpicking, as mentioned. In Morrowind, lockpicking (Formally known as the Security skill) is an Intelligence based skill. This means that whenever Security levels up, you gain a modifier to the Intelligence gain you can receive upon your character actually leveling. While this sounds just as intuitive as the "learn-by-doing" system, it once again brings in a major debacle.
Since it is impossible (Outside of going to jail to deteriorate your skill levels, which has a huge negative impact on NPC interaction) to undo skill levels without cheating, you need to plan out meticulously what skills you want to level, and within what character level to gain those skill levels. Going back to the lockpicking example, if you neglected lockpicking for too long, the locks in the game would end up extremely difficult to open up as time went on: They have scaled to your character level. I'm level 30, but my security is only level 25, so I can't open the doors or chests with all the good stuff inside without the true key, and I can't level my lockpicking because I can't open any doors or chests!
Or, by the same token, say you did level lockpicking early on, knowing you needed to open these doors and chests. As a warrior, intelligence is typically an ignored stat, and is reserved for mages and many times thieves/rogues as well. Warriors smash first, and often forget to ask questions later. So if you are leveling Security, you are gaining Intelligence modifiers. You don't have to level intelligence when you level up, but with such a high modifier, it looks too juicy to ignore. But then you won't be as buff, and Fargoth may ask if you even lift...
But lets say you do ignore leveling up intellect in favor of brute force. That's great, you're living up to what a warrior actually should be. Though, there is one aspect of the game mechanics that gets in the way, and is completely unavoidable, and that is how enchanted equipment works. To enchant a weapon or piece of armor, you need to know a version of the spell with the effect you wish to enchant said gear with. Sounds intuitive, but the fundamental flaw is as such: Without the intelligence or willpower (The other magey stat), the enchantment drains from the weapon faster, depending on the spells derived statistic. The only way to recharge the weapon is with a filled soul gem. Aside from buying the soul gem pre-souled (Which is quite rare), you have to capture them on your own. This requires the spell Soul Trap, which is a rather heavy spell to cast. You may not have the Magicka (Mana pool) to cast it, which means you need to level up your intelligence to get the mana to cast the spell. But then you lose a bit of points in your warrior stats, and you feel like a puss-n-iron-boots.
Due to this circular development the game places on you, it became nearly impossible to fully enjoy the game without a decent amount of power-leveling. There are many other facets to the way the mechanics worked that also encouraged this style of play, though I could go on and on about it even more so than I already have.
In another, more easily explained example of this complex, take a look at World of Warcraft, and other cloned MMOs. While there is this aspect of customization in the talent trees (A set of skills and passive abilities for each class), there was a clear good and bad way to build your character determined by the game mechanics. Only a select few variations actually worked, and any attempt at innovation or personalizing your set of talent points was null and void: It just didn't work.
Another flaw to the custom system is being an altoholic, or someone that continuously starts new characters and never finishes because they are given so many options that they feel the need to try them all before making a decision, and/or they never find the "perfect" mix for their play style. While being an altoholic is all a mind over matter problem, many people are inflicted with it, myself included.
Addendum
With all that being said, I am really leaning towards a custom style. Not only is it a personal biased, but being that I have little in ways of the story set just yet, the only way I could make a controlled system work before anything else is set in stone is with a great battle system: And I can almost guarantee that the battle system can become enhanced with a custom system anyway.
The question is, how in-depth should said system be? Final Fantasy 5 level of depth? Sure it was a custom system, but it wasn't layered so deeply that someone unfamiliar with RPGs could make use of it. Or how about a supreme level of depth seen in TES series? The major problem with depth is complexity, and the kind of loop holes described above.
I wish to avoid the power-gaming complex as much as possible. I want people to have fun, not math problems! To reach that goal, of having a good level of depth and yet still be simplistic in nature, is a difficult one indeed. To be fair, there will always be min-maxers in the RPG world. Just remember, a min-maxer is different from someone within the complex: A min-maxer has fun min-maxing, someone trapped in the complex is forced to do so because of the games mechanics.
What are some of your favorite implementations of class systems? Do you prefer one style of system over the other? Maybe you're such an avid fan of the controlled system that you wish to see a new game made with it: Convince me!
Comments help the game grow to your wildest dreams, my friends!
Game On, Spoony Bards!
~BurnAsEmbers~
Embarressed to put your name on the internet? Don't wish to make an account on Google/Blogger just to comment? Email me at burnasembers@gmail.com, or follow me on Twitter @BurnAsEmbers!
 |
| Lookin' at you, you spoony bard. |
A game that implemented a controlled environment poorly was Dragon Warrior 1. The story was rather sparse, with no true sequences involved to spur on the tale. A silent protagonist made it worse, as you never had a reason to become attached to the main character. To make matters worse, there was only 1 controlled character in battle, and only ever 1 monster to fight. This made combat tedious, and turned random encounters into the hated thing it is today. I myself actually enjoy random encounter RPGs, if the combat system is solid and engaging, but DW1 was slow in terms of combat. However, to give credit where credit is due, DW1 was before the time of the Active Battle Systems (ABS) that were popularized by the FF series after the fourth iteration. They were a thing of the future then, and I find it hard to blame a game on the lack of worldly development.
 |
| Oh golly! Another slime! How could this get any better?! |
Final Fantasy 4 (Can you tell its one of my favorites yet?) took the controlled system and turned it into a master piece. The story itself was the true driving point of the game, even going so far as to make cinematic battles. While there was next to no direct interaction with the characters development, this was offset by the need to find out what happens next, and what the next boss fight would entail.
The ABS was also a huge factor in making the controlled system work. Combat was fast paced, and if you were too slow to make a decision, you could find yourself with a dead group of adventurers, and a title screen. While customization of the characters could do nothing but strengthen the involvement, it is easy to overlook its lack purely because the combat was still fun, and the story was one you will remember for a very, very long time.
The Custom System
 |
| With a slew of options for customizing your characters combat style, an RPG fan would be hard to turn off from your game |
There are also so many different ways you could possibly implement a customization system, that it becomes mind boggling. You could do it how FF5 did it, for example. There are tons of pre-set classes (Or in FFs case, "Jobs") that you can swap in and out of, and as you master them you can use their abilities on other classes. Or you could pull an Elder Scrolls, giving you a giant set of possible skills, and allowing you to craft your own class within those bounds.
The custom system is definitely the most profound and modern choice, giving the most amount of benefits. However, there are a small handful of negatives to it as well. There is, what I like to call, the "power gaming complex", and I think it is by far the worst thing in RPGs.
The power gaming complex is based on the idea that power gaming is such a meta mindset, that it draws you out of the game to the point where you are no longer playing the game, but instead working it. You lose interest in the story and layers of possibilities, and instead focus your attention on making sure your character(s) are the best at everything, at all times.
The problem is not necessarily the game, its the player. And, honestly, it isn't the players fault, but rather the games. See why it becomes a complex? Lets put it into perspective from a true example, the worst offenders to this problem: Morrowind, and the people who play it.
 |
| I wanna be a warrior type. Better select mage and thief skills! |
To open a lock, thieves could pick it, mages could cast a spell on it, and warriors were screwed. They would have to work on their lockpicking skills. Now, normally this wouldn't be bad at all. So you learn how to lockpick, where is the negative in that?
Well, the other part of Morrowinds skill advancement was how it affect statistics. Lets say you were to level lockpicking, as mentioned. In Morrowind, lockpicking (Formally known as the Security skill) is an Intelligence based skill. This means that whenever Security levels up, you gain a modifier to the Intelligence gain you can receive upon your character actually leveling. While this sounds just as intuitive as the "learn-by-doing" system, it once again brings in a major debacle.
Since it is impossible (Outside of going to jail to deteriorate your skill levels, which has a huge negative impact on NPC interaction) to undo skill levels without cheating, you need to plan out meticulously what skills you want to level, and within what character level to gain those skill levels. Going back to the lockpicking example, if you neglected lockpicking for too long, the locks in the game would end up extremely difficult to open up as time went on: They have scaled to your character level. I'm level 30, but my security is only level 25, so I can't open the doors or chests with all the good stuff inside without the true key, and I can't level my lockpicking because I can't open any doors or chests!
Or, by the same token, say you did level lockpicking early on, knowing you needed to open these doors and chests. As a warrior, intelligence is typically an ignored stat, and is reserved for mages and many times thieves/rogues as well. Warriors smash first, and often forget to ask questions later. So if you are leveling Security, you are gaining Intelligence modifiers. You don't have to level intelligence when you level up, but with such a high modifier, it looks too juicy to ignore. But then you won't be as buff, and Fargoth may ask if you even lift...
But lets say you do ignore leveling up intellect in favor of brute force. That's great, you're living up to what a warrior actually should be. Though, there is one aspect of the game mechanics that gets in the way, and is completely unavoidable, and that is how enchanted equipment works. To enchant a weapon or piece of armor, you need to know a version of the spell with the effect you wish to enchant said gear with. Sounds intuitive, but the fundamental flaw is as such: Without the intelligence or willpower (The other magey stat), the enchantment drains from the weapon faster, depending on the spells derived statistic. The only way to recharge the weapon is with a filled soul gem. Aside from buying the soul gem pre-souled (Which is quite rare), you have to capture them on your own. This requires the spell Soul Trap, which is a rather heavy spell to cast. You may not have the Magicka (Mana pool) to cast it, which means you need to level up your intelligence to get the mana to cast the spell. But then you lose a bit of points in your warrior stats, and you feel like a puss-n-iron-boots.
Due to this circular development the game places on you, it became nearly impossible to fully enjoy the game without a decent amount of power-leveling. There are many other facets to the way the mechanics worked that also encouraged this style of play, though I could go on and on about it even more so than I already have.
In another, more easily explained example of this complex, take a look at World of Warcraft, and other cloned MMOs. While there is this aspect of customization in the talent trees (A set of skills and passive abilities for each class), there was a clear good and bad way to build your character determined by the game mechanics. Only a select few variations actually worked, and any attempt at innovation or personalizing your set of talent points was null and void: It just didn't work.
Another flaw to the custom system is being an altoholic, or someone that continuously starts new characters and never finishes because they are given so many options that they feel the need to try them all before making a decision, and/or they never find the "perfect" mix for their play style. While being an altoholic is all a mind over matter problem, many people are inflicted with it, myself included.
Addendum
With all that being said, I am really leaning towards a custom style. Not only is it a personal biased, but being that I have little in ways of the story set just yet, the only way I could make a controlled system work before anything else is set in stone is with a great battle system: And I can almost guarantee that the battle system can become enhanced with a custom system anyway.
I wish to avoid the power-gaming complex as much as possible. I want people to have fun, not math problems! To reach that goal, of having a good level of depth and yet still be simplistic in nature, is a difficult one indeed. To be fair, there will always be min-maxers in the RPG world. Just remember, a min-maxer is different from someone within the complex: A min-maxer has fun min-maxing, someone trapped in the complex is forced to do so because of the games mechanics.
What are some of your favorite implementations of class systems? Do you prefer one style of system over the other? Maybe you're such an avid fan of the controlled system that you wish to see a new game made with it: Convince me!
Comments help the game grow to your wildest dreams, my friends!
Game On, Spoony Bards!
~BurnAsEmbers~
Embarressed to put your name on the internet? Don't wish to make an account on Google/Blogger just to comment? Email me at burnasembers@gmail.com, or follow me on Twitter @BurnAsEmbers!
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Crayons, Graphs, And Games!
Greetings! My name is BurnAsEmbers, and I'm here to go through my game design process, step by step, pixel by pixel, and idea by idea.
Want to know the best part about it? I have absolutely no idea how to code, draw, or program. Funny, how people immediately jump to those 3 major principles when they think of game design. While they are the 3 fundamental professions necessary to game design, my skill set derives from a conceptual point, instead of an implementation device.
I have been doing this since I was maybe 6-7 years old. I never "finished" a game, obviously. But I have crafted a few board games, beyond your Sorry! and Monopoly style. The one game I made that I remember vividly was as such:
After spending a day drawing out a grid pattern on multiple pieces of 8.5x11 computer paper, I drew out a basic map, with resources and terrain features. Then, cutting up the extra sheets to provide pieces for the game, which would represent units such as Archers, and Knights, I played against a friend of mine with a very early rule set.
The idea behind the game was to capture resource points with your units, which would allow you to build more and more units. The goal was to either A) Capture the opposing castle or B) Take and hold all the resource squares for a set amount of turns. Using dice and a "rock-paper-scissors" combat system, it was a decent, if not unfinished, little board game.
I've toyed around using similar approaches for years, never getting beyond the basic concept point due to many negatives. Lack of motivation, no one to share it with, no actual skill set beyond imagination... All this has held me back in the past from going beyond the very basic ideas. However, I think it is time to break out of that shell, and actually make a freakin' game!
It shall be an old school RPG, "16" bit. I use quotes for this reason: the "pixels" will actually be .25 inch square grid paper, each colored with crayon. Why? Because I can, and because I want to.
Lets make this clear from the get go, however. I am certainly not a visual artist, and I certainly have no experience with pixel art itself. As I move through this project, I hope to improve my skill set with pixel art, and doodling/sketching as a whole. While it won't be my major focus, it is a skill set that is necessary in this field. Ya gotta do what ya gotta do!
In the overall, the game will be simple enough where someone unfamiliar with old school RPGs could jump in and understand the base mechanics, and make it through the game. However, it can also be played by an experienced, veteran RPG player without boredom. While that may sound like a very difficult scale to balance, I think I know how I can at least start going about it.
The key, I think, is to mix the simplistic outer shell of a JRPG, with the open ended, open world aspects of a Western RPG.
Think of the fundamentals of Dragon Warrior. You moved about, square by square, in a town, dungeon, or the world map, with random encounters that played out in a turn based style. The combat wasn't overly complicated. Attack or cast a spell, gain levels that in turn allowed you to do more damage or cast better spells, and take less damage. Lather, rinse, repeat. While extremely basic, there eventually was a thin layer of tactics. When do I attack instead of cast a spell? What turn should I heal? It was simplistic logic, but was still effective in its ways of drawing a player in because of that. There wasn't some crazy equation, or multiple kinds of dice rolls you needed to memorize.
Now, take the fundamentals of an Elder Scrolls game. A giant open world, with tons of control over character skill development, as well as a dynamic and open ended story line. This aspect gives an entire layer of complexity, and if mixed in properly, could be ignored to its own extents to keep a player ill-accustomed to RPGs as a whole engaged without losing them to the deeper layers of strategy, yet still keep veterans to the genre immersed into the world and its mechanics.
Of course, I don't have the details in place as of this moment. I have some general ideas as to what I wish to have, and a few options in mind for things like the combat system and character mechanics. As I go through the design process, I may very well become overwhelmed with the different routes I could take with the mechanics and game play. This, my dearest readers, is where you come in.
I frequently will ask for input. I may present a selection of different ways I could go about doing something, or I may just ask for general opinion on something as a whole. I would love hearing from you all, as I almost consider this entire project a love-letter to RPG gamers of old. I have my own dream game ideas, but those are mine and mine alone. What about you? What would you want to see in an RPG? Do you like crafting? What about morality scales? Do you like basic turn based combat, or do you prefer a tactical-RPG approach? What kind of stories do you like to be a part of?
Over all, I do have the final say. That doesn't mean I won't listen, and engage in civil discussion about the games design. I plan to have an entry a day, even if it is just a short list of things accomplished. I know for a fact that the hardest part will be the art direction: I've been proving myself terrible at pixel art so far. Examples of the graphics will show up as I deem them acceptable for display. My main focus for the time being is the mechanics and stories, however.
Thank you for reading this long intro post, and I look forward to providing an entertaining read, a (hopefully) fruitful project, and getting to know you all!
~Jeff Lee, AKA BurnAsEmbers~
Want to know the best part about it? I have absolutely no idea how to code, draw, or program. Funny, how people immediately jump to those 3 major principles when they think of game design. While they are the 3 fundamental professions necessary to game design, my skill set derives from a conceptual point, instead of an implementation device.
I have been doing this since I was maybe 6-7 years old. I never "finished" a game, obviously. But I have crafted a few board games, beyond your Sorry! and Monopoly style. The one game I made that I remember vividly was as such:
After spending a day drawing out a grid pattern on multiple pieces of 8.5x11 computer paper, I drew out a basic map, with resources and terrain features. Then, cutting up the extra sheets to provide pieces for the game, which would represent units such as Archers, and Knights, I played against a friend of mine with a very early rule set.
The idea behind the game was to capture resource points with your units, which would allow you to build more and more units. The goal was to either A) Capture the opposing castle or B) Take and hold all the resource squares for a set amount of turns. Using dice and a "rock-paper-scissors" combat system, it was a decent, if not unfinished, little board game.
I've toyed around using similar approaches for years, never getting beyond the basic concept point due to many negatives. Lack of motivation, no one to share it with, no actual skill set beyond imagination... All this has held me back in the past from going beyond the very basic ideas. However, I think it is time to break out of that shell, and actually make a freakin' game!
It shall be an old school RPG, "16" bit. I use quotes for this reason: the "pixels" will actually be .25 inch square grid paper, each colored with crayon. Why? Because I can, and because I want to.
Lets make this clear from the get go, however. I am certainly not a visual artist, and I certainly have no experience with pixel art itself. As I move through this project, I hope to improve my skill set with pixel art, and doodling/sketching as a whole. While it won't be my major focus, it is a skill set that is necessary in this field. Ya gotta do what ya gotta do!
In the overall, the game will be simple enough where someone unfamiliar with old school RPGs could jump in and understand the base mechanics, and make it through the game. However, it can also be played by an experienced, veteran RPG player without boredom. While that may sound like a very difficult scale to balance, I think I know how I can at least start going about it.
The key, I think, is to mix the simplistic outer shell of a JRPG, with the open ended, open world aspects of a Western RPG.
Think of the fundamentals of Dragon Warrior. You moved about, square by square, in a town, dungeon, or the world map, with random encounters that played out in a turn based style. The combat wasn't overly complicated. Attack or cast a spell, gain levels that in turn allowed you to do more damage or cast better spells, and take less damage. Lather, rinse, repeat. While extremely basic, there eventually was a thin layer of tactics. When do I attack instead of cast a spell? What turn should I heal? It was simplistic logic, but was still effective in its ways of drawing a player in because of that. There wasn't some crazy equation, or multiple kinds of dice rolls you needed to memorize.
Now, take the fundamentals of an Elder Scrolls game. A giant open world, with tons of control over character skill development, as well as a dynamic and open ended story line. This aspect gives an entire layer of complexity, and if mixed in properly, could be ignored to its own extents to keep a player ill-accustomed to RPGs as a whole engaged without losing them to the deeper layers of strategy, yet still keep veterans to the genre immersed into the world and its mechanics.
Of course, I don't have the details in place as of this moment. I have some general ideas as to what I wish to have, and a few options in mind for things like the combat system and character mechanics. As I go through the design process, I may very well become overwhelmed with the different routes I could take with the mechanics and game play. This, my dearest readers, is where you come in.
I frequently will ask for input. I may present a selection of different ways I could go about doing something, or I may just ask for general opinion on something as a whole. I would love hearing from you all, as I almost consider this entire project a love-letter to RPG gamers of old. I have my own dream game ideas, but those are mine and mine alone. What about you? What would you want to see in an RPG? Do you like crafting? What about morality scales? Do you like basic turn based combat, or do you prefer a tactical-RPG approach? What kind of stories do you like to be a part of?
Over all, I do have the final say. That doesn't mean I won't listen, and engage in civil discussion about the games design. I plan to have an entry a day, even if it is just a short list of things accomplished. I know for a fact that the hardest part will be the art direction: I've been proving myself terrible at pixel art so far. Examples of the graphics will show up as I deem them acceptable for display. My main focus for the time being is the mechanics and stories, however.
Thank you for reading this long intro post, and I look forward to providing an entertaining read, a (hopefully) fruitful project, and getting to know you all!
~Jeff Lee, AKA BurnAsEmbers~
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)