[Merged] Combat Friendly Fire

[rjshae]

Friendly fire should be on for the spells that are simple explosions like fireball, but I do think there should also be 'intelligent' area spells that don't hurt friendlies (just like there is in PnP d&d).

 

Agreed. It should also be possible to write the targeting interface in such a manner that it informs you when friendly fire is a possibility. (Maybe by having the targeting area change color when an ally or neutral is in the area.) That situation may change during the delay needed to cast the spell, but at least you wouldn't have unknowingly targeted a non-foe.

Edited September 25, 2012 by rjshae

[Sylvius the Mad]

2. Dry hair is for squids.

 

Seriously. Jack Deth? Is that a Trancers reference?

Yes

That is awesome. I don't think I've ever come across a Trancers reference on the internet.

Edited September 25, 2012 by Sylvius the Mad

[Sylvius the Mad]

The best thing about friendly fire, I think, is that we can sometimes trick the enemy AI into killing itself.

 

At release, NWN and NWN2 were both great for this. Then friendly fire was patched out of both games, kind of ruining them.

[Shadenuat]

It should be, and without an option of turning it off. Because turning FF off always ruins the balance of the game in a favor of spellcasting parties and turns everything in a cakewalk. It also, like some mentioned here, makes abilities like Evasion less useful and could potentially break a large chunk of encounters in the game (for example, almost every battle in tight environment like corridors or maybe rooms with innocent NPCs which designers made with FF in mind).

 

Some AoE spells could be made without it, however. For example, I never understood why druid can't call his god's powers only on enemies to entangle them with vines.

Edited September 25, 2012 by Shadenuat

[Sylvius the Mad]

To be fair, my sense of the difficulty of the IE games might be tainted by having re-played them quite a few times and thus not really remembering how hard they were the first.

In BG1, especially, how difficult those "wandering monsters" were depended very much on when you met them. If you travelled east out of Beregost early in the game, the Vampiric Wolves there would almost certainly kill you. Similarly, heading south from Candlekeep rather than staying on the road led you to Droth the Ogre Mage. Other enemies that could be reached early in the game that would be very difficult for a low-level party to defeat included Ankhegs and Sirens.

[Wolfenbarg]

Friendly fire on please. It adds a dimension to combat that is essential for it to be considered tactical, in my opinion. If you can just drop your most powerful spells anywhere you want, then you get closer and closer to making a game where you just roll your face on the keyboard and win. Add challenge, not facerolling.

[AwesomeOcelot]

Combined with spells and items that mitigate the effects on your allies that you want to use on your enemies. You don't want a situation where most spells can't be used because most of the time you're locked in melee combat. As long as AI appreciate line of sight, and doesn't cast powerful AoE by itself, it should be fine. Should be an option to turn it off though.

[ogrezilla]

Combined with spells and items that mitigate the effects on your allies that you want to use on your enemies. You don't want a situation where most spells can't be used because most of the time you're locked in melee combat. As long as AI appreciate line of sight, and doesn't cast powerful AoE by itself, it should be fine. Should be an option to turn it off though.

did the ai party members in any of the IE games cast spells at all?

[Gorth]

To be fair, my sense of the difficulty of the IE games might be tainted by having re-played them quite a few times and thus not really remembering how hard they were the first.

I've yet to beat the guardians of the Holy Avenger sword in a fair fight in Icewind Dale 2

[anek]

I've yet to beat the guardians of the Holy Avenger sword in a fair fight in Icewind Dale 2

 

If by "fair fight" you mean without reloading and then taking advantage of the fact that you know where exactly each of them will spawn, then neither have I...

[Bos_hybrid]

Friendly Fire is important, if you don't have it the game gets all arcane howitzer with no real thought. Skilful use of cloudkills and fireballs mitigated against excessive cheeze in BG1/2. A bit.

 

Ah yes, the deploy cloud kill, watch as every enemy survives multiple rolls then a mage throws fear/etc at the party, which cause them to walk into the cloud and fail the first roll.

 

I am for this, despite the annoyance caused by the above happening.

[Knott]

Friendly fire certainly makes things a lot more interesting and it should be part of the "normal/default" difficulty setting.

 

But I would also opt for a customizable difficulty setting, not just preset ones.

[Wintersong]

Should be in because of realism (I hate saying that word though). But not just for spells but also bows/slings/crossbows/guns/darts/javelins/chairs/...

 

Option to disable it? I'm ok with that. Options are usually a good thing.

[duskwind]

Lets take this sentence to the middle of the Sigil, and consider how many "non-combatant" characters would actually flee and how many would decide it's time to teach you some manners. 'Fleeing for everyone' is fine when we're talking about game with overpowered dragon-slaying champion fighting ultimate evil bastard, in the middle of humble village, but I hope we aren't

 

I wasn't including characters who can potentially join in a fight as non-combatant bystanders. Or perhaps special NPCs who are particularly unflappable by design (though they need to be very special if they're not bothered by a fireball going off in their face). But generally everyone in the immediate vicinity of a fight should either join in or try to get out of the way, rather than stand there continuing to chat to their neighbour while swords are whirling all around them. Potentially the flee-from-combat distance could be determined by the relative levels of the bystanders and the combatants; humble villagers will run as far as they can and not look back if a dragon lands in their midst, while a band of mercenaries could gather round quite close to watch a couple of drunks engage in fisticuffs outside the tavern. The use of ranged or area effect attacks would add substantially to the flee distance, while special situations like a formal duel could reduce it even if the combatants are high level.

[Mabster]

Tactical combat without friendly fire doesn't sound like much fun. I'm definitely all for it being in the game.

 

Hopefully the game will be designed with friendly fire in mind, even if it ends up as a toggleable feature. Stuff like the ability to customize the follower AI, so that it doesn't touch anything with an AoE or attack enemies affected by one, should come as standard. I would also like to see nice overlays for the spell and ability AoEs with the affected characters clearly highlighted (like in ToEE).

[Volourn]

It should be in the game.

 

If people whine enough, there should be an option to turn it off but friendly fire should be the default. It also shouldn't have nothing to do with 'diffculty level' either.

[Seldon]

It should be an option; many people just aren't a fan of it due to brain dead AI in games.

So they can't beat brain dead AI if friendly fire is on? How does that work exactly?

 

 

2 basic cases:

1) AI of your team is so wonderful, that your companion decides that using minigun in narrow corridor is great idea, even if other team members are between him and the target (Fallout 1&2, actually 2 mostly , with Marcus). No, permanent AI turn off is not really good option for many gamers (me included). Telling every single person, every single battle, what to do, even if it's rat-killing, is simply boring and not really helping to stay in the role of single character. I can take control of a party if threat is serious, but not every god damn fight.

 

2) Bystanders, or opponents AI is so great, that seeing their action I simply don't know if this is easter egg, or AI is so damn stupid. Another Fallout example: there was a fight in a bar. One of the customers, a woman,got hit, fled, I killed one or two fellows and the fight mode turned off. The very same lady walked in ten seconds later, passed next to me, only to enter fight mode and flee using second exit....

Edited September 26, 2012 by Seldon

[ogrezilla]

It should be an option; many people just aren't a fan of it due to brain dead AI in games.

So they can't beat brain dead AI if friendly fire is on? How does that work exactly?

 

 

2 basic cases:

1) AI of your team is so wonderful, that your companion decides that using minigun in narrow corridor is great idea, even if other team members are between him and the target (Fallout 1&2, actually 2 mostly , with Marcus). No, permanent AI turn off is not really good option for many gamers (me included). Telling every single person, every single battle, what to do, even if it's rat-killing, is simply boring and not really helping to stay in the role of single character. I can take control of a party if threat is serious, but not every god damn fight.

 

2) Bystanders, or opponents AI is so great, that seeing their action I simply don't know if this is easter egg, or AI is so damn stupid. Another Fallout example: there was a fight in a bar. One of the customers, a woman,got hit, fled, I killed one or two fellows and the fight mode turned off. The very same lady walked in ten seconds later, passed next to me, only to enter fight mode and flee using second exit....

 

serious question.

1. did the AI in BG or IWD ever cast spells without your input? If so, I must have always had it turned off.

2. is there any other source of friendly fire or splash damage that would cause those problems in a typical fantasy game?

Edited September 26, 2012 by ogrezilla

[Cthulhu0316]

If there is, I'd like an option to turn it off. I've never had problems with it (beyond initial experimentation with AoE spells where I inevitably kill my entire party) but I know some people don't want the hassle.

 

I'd like to have it but also the ability to turn it off. I mean literally a button on settings that says "Friendly Fire: ON/OFF"

[Seldon]

serious question.

1. did the AI in BG or IWD ever cast spells without your input? If so, I must have always had it turned off.

2. is there any other source of friendly fire or splash damage that would cause those problems in a typical fantasy game?

 

1) Yes it did. It actually worked pretty good for simple tasks like auto counter-casting, or healing. There were several scripts available, on each character card, to chose from.

 

2) We don't know if it's "typical fantasy" (i hope it's not), but to answer your question: it's not really a problem for me, as I've usually played by standard DnD rules with ff on, but I also see no problem turning ff off option for sake of people who simply don't enjoy battles in RPG games.

Edited September 26, 2012 by Seldon

[ogrezilla]

serious question.

1. did the AI in BG or IWD ever cast spells without your input? If so, I must have always had it turned off.

2. is there any other source of friendly fire or splash damage that would cause those problems in a typical fantasy game?

 

1) Yes it did. It actually worked pretty good for simple tasks like auto counter-casting, or healing. There were several scripts available, on each character card, to chose from.

 

2) We don't know if it's "typical fantasy" (i hope it's not), but to answer your question: it's not really a problem for me, as I've usually played by standard DnD rules with ff on, but I also see no problem turning ff off option for sake of people who simply don't enjoy battles in RPG games.

 

1. Alright, well apparently I never used those scripts and feel kind of dumb right now.

2. ya, 2 is sort of null since the answer to 1 was yes. I just meant without AI spell casting there was no AI friendly fire to worry about, but since I was wrong about the AI my point is void. I really am all for having an option for turning FF off. I will keep it on but there's really no reason not to have the option available.

[Ancoron]

Why is there even a discussion lets have a toggle on/off feature and be done with it

everyone can play like he wants to and is happy. Never understand why people need to

force other people to use stuff that they don`t want.

[ogrezilla]

agreed Ancoron. Though the game will need to be designed and balanced around having it one way or the other. In this case, I think they pretty much have to balance around FF being on. People can then choose to make it easier.

Edited September 26, 2012 by ogrezilla

[1varangian]

I would really like friendly fire to be taken to the next level. Firing arrows into melee should risk hitting your companions. There could be a Safe Shot type of feat that would slow down your rate of fire but eliminate the risk of hitting friendlies.

 

Betrayal at Krondor had that as I recall. Realistic friendly fire just makes combat more engaging. Games these days are too dumbed down in this regard as they try so hard to be "fun" and "awesome". Well... having to use your head is fun and limitations are awesome.

[Delterius]

Friendly fire is a must.