Weapon mechanics

[Karranthain]

Maybe it was already said, but I searched and can't get any closer than this. Please be patient if I'm repeating something already "obvious".

 

GRAPPLING

 

In the update they say it's difficult to grapple a centaur. Fine. Give monsters a physical attribute that says "Morphology: Humanoid". Only humanoids may be grappled. Non-humanoids (like "Morphology: Quadruped") cannot be grappled. That even adds to tactical depth, because if you can grapple onto everything, it's less complex, so that reason to NOT implement grappling sounds like a reason to actually DO IT!

 

PRONE ATTACKS

 

Animation cannot be done for both, standing and proning attacks. Good. Then don't. Just do all standing attacks and then *ONLY* one prone attack animation for "elongated weapons". Then test all those weapons and when the animation is acceptable (which means, the weapon is actually "elongated" like all pole arms) the stick a label to it that says "May be used to stab while prone". This, again, adds depth to tactical/strategic decisions.

 

GENERALLY

 

Having differentiation on weapons (see above), stance (aggressive/defensive), relative position to foe (like, "backstabbing only from behind", "blank-point shot only at range below 3 meters", "bonus for shooting arrows from above and malus from below", etc.), *ALL* add to the tactical depth of combat, and is welcome! Obviously, some are more fun and used than others, but if you do only the basic stuff there's no way to "improve" for the player. So I think there should be some exotics in here, so that the player may continue to learn to fight better even after the initial learning curve. That also adds to longevity.

 

Good point about grappling, but I don't find prone attacks essential, personally.

And I absolutely agree on the topic of weapon differentiation (check the first post in this topic, it has some ideas covering this concept).

[pid]

 

Good point about grappling, but I don't find prone attacks essential, personally.

And I absolutely agree on the topic of weapon differentiation (check the first post in this topic, it has some ideas covering this concept).

 

It's ok to drop some less popular mechanics like prone attacks, but with this reasoning a lot of flair may be lost.

At some point, some "other" mechanics to spice up the soup are necessary, otherwise we're reduced to left-clicking as in asian MMOs.

I'm not saying prone attacks are essential, in fact I'm not trying to push on that, but on the whole concept of having more options and ways to act.

 

About the weapon differentiation, when I wrote (see above) I actually meant the first 20+ posts of this thread, yours included

[Karranthain]

It's ok to drop some less popular mechanics like prone attacks, but with this reasoning a lot of flair may be lost.

At some point, some "other" mechanics to spice up the soup are necessary, otherwise we're reduced to left-clicking as in asian MMOs.

I'm not saying prone attacks are essential, in fact I'm not trying to push on that, but on the whole concept of having more options and ways to act.

 

About the weapon differentiation, when I wrote (see above) I actually meant the first 20+ posts of this thread, yours included

 

There isn't much you could do from a prone position anyway, maybe fire a musket - so that's why I wouldn't miss it personally.

But I agree in principle - the "flavour" mechanics such as grappling really make the combat that much more interesting - particularly because fighters have been traditionally boring in the IE games (with the possible exception if IWD2).

[Karranthain]

Dunno if it's been said yet but I hope they move away from basically requiring your character to specialise in one weapon. I'd like the characters to be able to switch between weapons without feeling like they have just gimped themselves immensely, letting you experiment with other weapon types when you pick them up.

 

Perhaps that could be one of the perks of being a warrior?

[Tsuga C]

But guns can work in rain, just not as reliably.

 

I've shot a number of traditional flintlocks (not the modern in-line ones) and they're not much good in the rain even with the frizzen covering the pan. Wheel locks rely upon a lit match/cord touching the powder in an open pan. Sorry, but rain + wheel locks = no joy. Rain should negate the use of these early firearms in P:E.

[Karkarov]

Fighters and other melee/ranged combat classes are always about how you build them and how you deploy them. A lot of the stuff in this thread is neat and cool, but you also don't want to bog down the game with an insane number of rules and minutiae.

 

This isn't D&D anymore in other words.

 

Attacks of opportunity, the ability to use defensive actions like counters, parries, etc all good. The discussion about chain or combo moves is a nice idea. Maybe something like a Hamstring attack that does lower damage but makes the enemy "vulnerable" to a power attack that auto crits or some sort of status effect move like a stun or disarm. Or maybe even a charge attack that if it hits gives you the option to do a tackle move. Or ala many games like World of Warcraft when you parry or block you can counter with X attack.

 

But things like long swords get penalties versus chain, rapiers do less damage to plate, etc. Shields give bonus ac when worn on the back. No. The simple fact that only bludgeoning weapons work on everything make them the defacto best weapons in the game for no other reason. Realism is nice, but it is a fantasy RPG.

 

I would also suggest staying away from crit specials unless they were maybe tied into skills a player can learn. Instant death should be a no no either way, it is just too overpowered unless you make it so uncommon it just about never happens. Maybe as a very high level skill that requires under 50% enemy HP if it has to be there at all.

 

If you want weapons to have a different feel stick to the basics. Weapon reach, speed, damage, and crit multipliers. If you really want to make weapons more unique than that give them bonuses to certain skills, such as Maces give a bonus to a skill that causes stuns, slashing weapons give a bonus to moves that hamstring or bleed an enemy, two handed or "spear" weapons give bonus damage on charge attacks, etc etc. If you have to have reach weapons then you must give them real penalties when used inside their reach zone. I don't mean like a minor minus to hit, I mean like a reasonable hit penalty and a damage penalty. That way you are forced to use them tactically instead of just as regular weapons with a better range.

 

Options are great, but keep it simple and based around character development, not gear loadout. Not everyone knows D&D and with the license not being involved in this game I wouldn't expect them to follow the old Infinity Engine games rulesets. Lastly if you are going to talk theoretical damage numbers don't say 10+2d10 just say 12-30. Yes there is some mathematical difference in the average between the two but, again, no D&D license and making the game clear and more accessible is pretty important. While Project Eternity is definitely a nostalgia product it needs to be able to bring in gamers that have never rolled a d12 or played Baldur's Gate too.

[Karranthain]

Well, in my opinion, since it's a computer game, there's little danger of bogging down the game with detailed rules - after all, we aren't game-masters, we don't have to handle them ourselves That's the perk of having a system designed to work in computer game from the get go.

[Karranthain]

We're not sure about reach weapons yet (we need to figure out if that attribute on a weapon will be worthwhile enough in combat and will supportable with the appropriate UI)

 

source : http://forums.obsidi...n/#entry1226369

 

I hope reach weapons will be in, I loved using them in Temple of Elemental Evil. That said, it was a turn-based game, so the question is how do you implement them in a RTwP setting? Here's a few ideas :

 

1) Altering stats

 

Spear users would receive defensive boni (e.g. decreasing opponents to hit chance) - but only until first hit connects; afterwards, the defensive bonus would be removed and opponents would receive an offensive bonus. This would simulate warding off attackers with the spear. After they get close, it becomes a liability. This would make attacking them a risky move, but one that could pay off handsomely.

 

2) Attacks of opportunity

 

Whenever an opponent gets within a certain range, reach weapon user gets an automatic free attack against them. It could be limited by an internal cooldown (which in turn, could be reduced with better training). Some perks (feats) could, for an instance, make all of those hits critical. That however, leaves us with a problem - how do we balance this?

 

3) Weapon swapping

 

Whenever an opponent gets too close to the reach weapon user, it's no longer usable - and has to be swapped to a close combat weapon (perhaps done automatically, to reduce the tedium).

 

In any case, reach weapons should behave very different from other types - i.e. not just have a bigger range, but all of the perks. On the other hand, their proper use should be rewarded.

 

What are thoughts, ideas?

[Feynt]

Something I'd really like for a change is staves used as primary tier weapons as opposed to backup weapons or the mage's schtick. There are martial arts schools dedicated to the staff, both asian and european, and I've only seen two games do it part ways right. One of them is a TMNT arcade game. o.o

[Karranthain]

Something I'd really like for a change is staves used as primary tier weapons as opposed to backup weapons or the mage's schtick. There are martial arts schools dedicated to the staff, both asian and european, and I've only seen two games do it part ways right. One of them is a TMNT arcade game. o.o

 

I was hoping monks could use those as their main weapon, actually.

[TrashMan]

The simple fact that only bludgeoning weapons work on everything make them the defacto best weapons in the game for no other reason.

 

This is where you are wrong.

Why is damage the only thing yo uare looking at?

Is it the only thing that defines a weapon? No.

 

For one, bludgeon isn't the best of all. Especially lighter bludgeon weaponry. They'd have a hard time agaisnt plate.

It is true that such weapons work great agaianst anything that isn't rigid (lighter armors) - however, such weapons are also more sluggish and more easily dodged, and they lack the finesse of many other weapons.

[rjshae]

Something I'd really like for a change is staves used as primary tier weapons as opposed to backup weapons or the mage's schtick. There are martial arts schools dedicated to the staff, both asian and european, and I've only seen two games do it part ways right. One of them is a TMNT arcade game. o.o

It would also be good if the game somehow reflected the amount of room needed to properly wield a weapon. Staves and Zweihänders should be difficult to employ in narrow passages or when fighting shoulder to shoulder.

Edited October 14, 2012 by rjshae

[Osvir]

Sorry, read the first couple of posts only (don't want to forget what I want to suggest):

 

Reach weapons are simply a must, period. Out of discussion. Spears need to reach further, Halberds and Quarterstaves too. Why?

Because it's freaking badass.

 

So I'm replaying Icewind Dale, I've got a Paladin and Fighter (that I had to make into a Fighter/Thief at my foremost dislike, now I'm loving it) up front, with a Cleric that joins in every now and then. My Fighter/Druid is fighting with a Quarterstaff behind the Paladin and Fighter/Thief shield. And just as usually, my Wizard is sitting this one out (except when there's lots of enemies and/or smaller foes).

 

It is a great tactical advantage and it "needs" to be in there. Can I reach further with a spear then I should be able to hit further away with a spear.

 

Loving the idea of "narrow space" vs "big weapons": This could be a trigger, because I don't think the animation is going to be in the game (which means that in a narrow space, the trigger could simply be "-10 to [big Weapons]".

 

Also, different types of enemies should take different type of damage depending on the different type of weapons (Slashing/Piercing/Crushing/Explosive etc. etc. whatever there might be in this one). Skeletons were super weak against Bludgeon/Crushing as an example, Trolls are super weak against Fire. Because "slashing" is so common, and piercing too, I never really understood if it was/is better towards anything?

 

Also, bringing this with me from another thread:

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/61306-armour-weapon-designs-a-plea-part-ii/

I'd love to see two-handed mace's (cudgel's?) or giant swords, but my character should be almost dragging them and attack very slowly (Unless having a ridiculous amount of Strength). Giant weapons generally, within reason and with realism/authenticity taken into consideration.

 

EDIT: One tactical aspect of this could also be to buff my Warrior a lot with a Chanter, making him even more capable of wielding the two-handed weapons. So if he attacks super slow without buff's, I can buff him so he attacks "slow" or even "average".

 

In other words it would almost be a disadvantage having a giant weapon, because it'd need an upkeep of 2 characters. However, tactically the two handed weapons could be advantageous (as they should be) against a large crowd of enemies (sweeping and cleaving attacks).

[TrashMan]

Something I'd really like for a change is staves used as primary tier weapons as opposed to backup weapons or the mage's schtick. There are martial arts schools dedicated to the staff, both asian and european, and I've only seen two games do it part ways right. One of them is a TMNT arcade game. o.o

It would also be good if the game somehow reflected the amount of room needed to properly wield a weapon. Staves and Zweihänders should be difficult to employ in narrow passages or when fighting shoulder to shoulder.

 

Staves would fare worse in such a situation.

 

You can always use half-swording with a zweihander. Even in narrow corridors it can be used to stab.

Quaterftaffs lose much when you can only thrust with it.

 

But yes. Large weapons would be less effective.

I'm thinking penalty to hit and/or defense?

 

Altough forming a phalanx in a corridor would be funyn to see. The enemy can't flank you.

[Karkarov]

The simple fact that only bludgeoning weapons work on everything make them the defacto best weapons in the game for no other reason.

 

This is where you are wrong.

Why is damage the only thing yo uare looking at?

Is it the only thing that defines a weapon? No.

 

For one, bludgeon isn't the best of all. Especially lighter bludgeon weaponry. They'd have a hard time agaisnt plate.

It is true that such weapons work great agaianst anything that isn't rigid (lighter armors) - however, such weapons are also more sluggish and more easily dodged, and they lack the finesse of many other weapons.

Thanks for pulling one sentence out of like three paragraphs and quoting it completely out of context. I was only responding to thoughts from earlier in the thread and saying that giving damage penalties to weapons versus specific armor types was a bad idea. That was just one reason among many.

 

Also in response to more recent comments, again, penalties for size of corridor, need to "half" hand weapons to wield them in certain spaces, penalties for only thrusting, etc etc. It is just not a good idea. It is a fantasy RPG, not a medieval combat simulator. If someone switches to a different weapon set in combat it shouldn't be because they don't have enough room to swing their two hander or they need a weapon strong against chain mail. It should be because for this fight the tactical options the other weapon set gives them is more valuable. Be that due to added defense, offense, control, buffs, debuffs, or mobility.

 

When a player chooses their weapons and playstyle it should be because that set up is more fun and or interesting for them to play. Not because rules say in this situation you use a one handed weapon or take a penalty to this or that. Focus shouldn't be on minute rules, it should be on the skills surrounding the weapons and how you can use them.

[TrashMan]

Also in response to more recent comments, again, penalties for size of corridor, need to "half" hand weapons to wield them in certain spaces, penalties for only thrusting, etc etc. It is just not a good idea. It is a fantasy RPG, not a medieval combat simulator. If someone switches to a different weapon set in combat it shouldn't be because they don't have enough room to swing their two hander or they need a weapon strong against chain mail. It should be because for this fight the tactical options the other weapon set gives them is more valuable. Be that due to added defense, offense, control, buffs, debuffs, or mobility.

 

When a player chooses their weapons and playstyle it should be because that set up is more fun and or interesting for them to play. Not because rules say in this situation you use a one handed weapon or take a penalty to this or that. Focus shouldn't be on minute rules, it should be on the skills surrounding the weapons and how you can use them.

 

Can't it be both?

 

I tend to disagree with you on the notion that simulating real combat is worthless. Real combat has real tactics.

[SKahn]

As cool as many of these ideas are, it sounds like most of you are engaging in WILDLY unrealistic fantasies about the kind of combat mechanics to expect in this game. Some of these ideas: factoring in fatigue, encumberance, injury and training into the effectiveness of an attack; then factoring in the relative reach of the weapons, and the way the combatants are holding their weapons; choosing which part of the body to attack; having armor effectiveness based on their actual physical properties rather than simple numbers; having armor providing different degrees of protection to different parts of the body; Not to even begin to mention the difficulty of a comparable level of detail in ranged weapons and magic.

 

Some of this stuff would be possible... difficult, but possible, in a game where this was the primary focus. But we are going to be controlling six characters, small on the screen, through a complex narrative. I am expecting some advancement in the combat mechanics from the last IE games, but this thread has left reality far far behind. Sorry.

[Karranthain]

Well, to be fair, I don't think anyone was expecting to see all of it implemented; Personally, I'd be happy to see at least some of these ideas in the game

Edited October 18, 2012 by Karranthain

[Karranthain]

To anyone that's interested, here's a compilation of the posts pertaining to the weapon mechanics (wall of text critical damage imminent, so be warned), each topic is highlighted with red colour :

 

In most cRPGs weapons are usually fairly similar to each other; most of the time the only difference is the amount of damage dealt. I think every weapon type (well, within reason of course) should offer a unique set of boni and (ideally) ought introduce a different playstyle. Here are a few ideas and suggestions (some may be obvious, most are pretty abstract, so be warned) :

 

1) Weapon reach :

 

e.g. Pikes or Spears should allow your team members to attack from a greater distance, confering a serious advantage in some cases, but becoming a liability in close quarters.

 

2) Critical hit effects are different for each weapon type. E.g. :

 

a) Greatswords would deal 200% more damage on critical hits and have a 5% chance to dismember the foe, resulting in an instant death.

b) Rapiers would deal 100% more damage on critical hits and apply a bleeding effect.

c) Hammers would deal 150% more more damage on critical hits and stun the target.

 

 

3) Smaller and generally obvious things :

 

a) Different damage ranges (e.g. Greatsword 1d10x2, Longsword 1d6x3 - this would result in a vastly different performance.

b) Armour Boni and penalties - (e.g. Swords are worse at piercing chainmail, but great against leather, Rapiers are useless against plate).

c) Various speeds - self-explanatory.

d) Weapon perks - (e.g. Greatswords are harder to parry, Pikes can impale, Pistols can jam).

e) No weapon type should ever be considered "the best". They should all have their uses.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

First of all, one thing that's worth pointing out is that most games featuring those contraptions make the mistake of treating them like reskinned bows with different animations. I find such design majorly flawed; not because it's unrealistic (it obviously is), but mainly because it's a missed opportunity. I feel firearms should operate differently, simply because it opens up interesting gameplay options. With that said, here are some ideas (and again, some are largely obvious, but I'm including them as well to present a coherent solution) :

 

 

1) General thoughts :

 

Firearms should deal devastating damage, particularly at close ranges; gunpowder based weapons' niche should be primarily armour penetration.

They're also quite easy to use effectively, even with little training (unlike bows).

Such power comes at a price, however. Effective range should be fairly low and there's always a risk of a misfire (more on that later).

 

 

2) Reload time :

 

In order to further differentiate firearms from other projectile weapons, reloading times should be fairly long (that'd also balance the devastating damage dealt by those). Generally speaking, once a firearm is discharged in a combat encounter, it means it probably won't be used again in that particular clash. Unless, of course, the player elects to reload, which should be fairly time consuming (not prohibitively so, but long enough so that that decision wouldn't be made lightly).

 

E.g. Pistols would be usually used as a close range weapon, to quickly dispatch a foe; misses would be costly, however. Unless the user is festooned with them.

 

That, I think, would be in line with what Josh has said about firearms (i.e. "Their use is uncommon and for specific purposes").

 

 

3) Misfires :

 

While powerful, early firearms could also be dangerous. There should be a chance of weapon not firing at all, or even (in very rare cases) blowing up. Rain should render guns unusable. That'd not only reinforce their uniqueness, but it'd also serve as a balancing measure. On top of that, it'd bring wonderful tension into combat (Space Hulk anyone?).

 

 

4) Affecting morale :

 

If there'd be morale checks in combat, firearms should definitely be considered frightening, particularly because they're supposedly uncommon in the game world.

 

 

5) Keeping in line with the unique critical hits effect idea :

 

Firearms would deal 200% more damage on critical hits and ignore armour completely.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Expanding on the idea, here's an example of a full weapon description (it's mainly abstract) :

 

Claymore of Eír Glanfath

 

 

Type : Greatsword.

Training required : Yes.

Damage type : Slashing and Crushing.

Damage dealt : 10 + 2d10.

Speed : Slow.

Reach : Moderate.

Critical Effect : 200% more damage on critical hits and a 5% chance to dismember the foe, resulting in an instant death.

Armour Boni : +5 against cloth, leather and chain armour.

Armour Mali : None.

Perks :

a) Harder to parry against.

b) Tiring to use.

Attack chains :

a) Parry - Disarm.

b) Pommel Strike - Eviscerate.

 

 

Just an example of different weapon statistics that could be used in PE.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

On the topic of Shields :

 

IE games didn't have elaborate shield mechanics : they simply improved the Armour Class of the wearer. And that's usually the case in most games. A few ideas on how shields could be treated mechanically in PE (as usual, most of this will be pretty obvious) :

 

1) Shields as weapons

 

Shield users should be able to use them offensively (e.g. bashing, pushing back)

 

2) Penalties

 

Carrying a shield can be tiring and it also limits the wearer's maneuverability. Having penalties for using a shield would also encourage using only a 1-handed weapon, with the second hand free. It could end up being a genuine playstyle option.

 

There could be some exception to that rule, like bucklers - the mali would be reduced, but so would be the boni (so it would probably end up as a sort of compromise).

 

3) Blocking

 

And perhaps the most important part. I've mentioned that shields usually just raise the armour value, which is an abstract representation of blocking, but ultimately if feels very unsatisfying. Other solutions :

 

a) There's a block rating (e.g. 25% chance to block any incoming attacks or any variations of that system)

 

Personally, I reckon it's a bit "gamey". It also doesn't, obviously, involve any input from the player.

 

b) Blocking stance. The player can assume a defensive stance and block incoming attacks (either on a timer, or just a certain amount of attack made against the player get blocked).

 

This options offers some tactical possibilities, so it has that as a big advantage.

 

Additionaly, shields could also be used to block incoming spells.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Expanding on the ideas in the first post (http://forums.obsidi...s/?do=findComment&comment=1190501) :

 

Personally, I'd rather have access to a smaller amount of weapon types, as long as each and every type offers a completely unique playstyle. A few notes :

 

1) Attack modes

 

It has been mentioned more than a few times by several people - a halberd, for an instance should be a multi-purpose weapon, e.g. :

 

1) Used as a spear, dealing piercing damage.

2) Used as a axe, with crushing and slashing damage.

3) Used as a hook.

 

Ideally, the player would be able to switch between those modes at will.

 

2) Unique animations

 

A rapier is, obviously, handled very differently than a simple broadsword. The animations should emphasize quick precise thrusts etc.

 

3) Different uses

 

And perhaps the most important part. Each type should vastly differ from the other; some would excel against plate users, others would be multifunctional, but fairly weak etc.

 

4) Closing thoughts

 

These solutions would most definitely reduce the number of available weapon types, but in return we'd be offered a truly unique arsenal. Each piece of weaponry would serve a different purpose and feel different. In most cRPGs, the player picks their weapon based solely on its look, because they don't differ mechanically (at least not in a sufficient manner).

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

I hope reach weapons will be in, I loved using them in Temple of Elemental Evil. That said, it was a turn-based game, so the question is how do you implement them in a RTwP setting? Here's a few ideas :

 

1) Altering stats

 

Spear users would receive defensive boni (e.g. decreasing opponents to hit chance) - but only until first hit connects; afterwards, the defensive bonus would be removed and opponents would receive an offensive bonus. This would simulate warding off attackers with the spear. After they get close, it becomes a liability. This would make attacking them a risky move, but one that could pay off handsomely.

 

2) Attacks of opportunity

 

Whenever an opponent gets within a certain range, reach weapon user gets an automatic free attack against them. It could be limited by an internal cooldown (which in turn, could be reduced with better training). Some perks (feats) could, for an instance, make all of those hits critical. That however, leaves us with a problem - how do we balance this?

 

3) Weapon swapping

 

Whenever an opponent gets too close to the reach weapon user, it's no longer usable - and has to be swapped to a close combat weapon (perhaps done automatically, to reduce the tedium).

 

In any case, reach weapons should behave very different from other types - i.e. not just have a bigger range, but all of the perks. On the other hand, their proper use should be rewarded.

 

What are thoughts, ideas?

[Hormalakh]

All of these ideas are great, but I think we forgot to mention one very important mechanic that should be implemented when dealing with weapons of different types having pros/cons; all weapons users (and maybe mages) should be allowed to spend skill points in improving their skill with these weapons! (I never understood why my mage couldn't use a sword in BG2)

[Karkarov]

Can't it be both?

 

I tend to disagree with you on the notion that simulating real combat is worthless. Real combat has real tactics.

No you tend to disagree on the idea that this game is a real combat simulator. Real combat doesn't involve fireballs, elves, dragons, swords that emit lightning, or magic armor. There are plenty of real combat simulators out there such as the Mount and Blade games. Uber realistic combat doesn't work well in a fantasy rpg, because nothing about the setting is uber realistic nor is hyper realism the point of the game or the combat.

 

Over half of this threads suggestions are just needlessly complex and make the simple act of stabbing a dude with a sword considerably more complex than it needs to be for Project Eternity.

[PsychoBlonde]

e) No weapon type should ever be considered "the best". They should all have their uses.

 

This, so much. Every weapon type should have an answer to the question: "why should I prefer this weapon type over another one?" If you can't answer it, don't include that weapon type.

 

However, I am NOT opposed to having there be cosmetic differences between weapons within a type. So, if you have a one-handed blunt weapon type, you can have maces, morningstars, clubs, whatever, that are all mechanically identical but look different. Or, heck, if you REALLY want to be nice about it, let people SELECT the cosmetic appearance of the item, so if they're playing a barbarian type, they can wield a big club with a nail in it, but if they're a civilized knight type they can have a nice ball mace or something.

[Karranthain]

Can't it be both?

 

I tend to disagree with you on the notion that simulating real combat is worthless. Real combat has real tactics.

No you tend to disagree on the idea that this game is a real combat simulator. Real combat doesn't involve fireballs, elves, dragons, swords that emit lightning, or magic armor. There are plenty of real combat simulators out there such as the Mount and Blade games. Uber realistic combat doesn't work well in a fantasy rpg, because nothing about the setting is uber realistic nor is hyper realism the point of the game or the combat.

 

Over half of this threads suggestions are just needlessly complex and make the simple act of stabbing a dude with a sword considerably more complex than it needs to be for Project Eternity.

 

I don't see how "fireballs, elves, dragons, swords that emit lightning, or magic armor" somehow render real world combat principles completely obsolete (for that matter, only the elves are confirmed at this point). A magical halberd is still a halberd. Not that the goal is to make the combat "uber realistic", as you've put it; the basic idea is that each and every weapon type should be unique.

 

On that note, Temple of Elemental Evil features a very robust combat system and it's widely considered one of the best combat-focused cRPGs out there.

[Sensuki]

Game won't use dice. I'm gonna guess it'll be using static numbers. That makes the most sense to me, although I wouldn't be surprised if there is a min-max damage threshhold (kind of like using dice).

 

Reach weapons shouldn't be that hard to implement. It depends how they go about designing the game.

 

If they borrow heavily from RTS game aspects such as Warcraft 3, reach weapons will not be a problem. In that game weapons all have a range. All you have to do is assign a weapon an attack range, in whatever measurement units they're using for the engine, and then that character will be able to attack from that range. This could be used for bows, crosswbows, slings and firearms as well.