Automatic regeneration of hit points during combat

[Captain Shrek]

snip

I am not against stamina. I am against regenerating stamina (And cooldowns). All you said is irrelevant. It can be equally well be in a classic IE game where simply there is no place to rest between two towns.

[Tamerlane]

Stamina is very explicitly not "action points", unless you're using some different definition of the term than I.

Edited October 17, 2012 by Tamerlane

[Captain Shrek]

Stamina is very explicitly not "action points".

 

Yes. It is not action points either as long as one uses that word with Fallout context (probably the game with best mechanics ever in RPGs).

[Grand_Commander13]

Can you guess why that is being called Case 2?

No I cannot, because neither of your cases seem to make sense. They are not the full list of potential options for how a dual Stamina/Health system can work, for one, and your case one seems to assume that your current Health affects your max Stamina somehow. Your second case seems to assume a relationship between Stamina and attack damage, somehow. All I wanted to know is if these were merely hypothetically decided upon during the thread or if a developer had actually suggested them. Because neither of them are good, and the smart thing to do is to have your attacks at full strength regardless of your Health/Stamina and have your maximum Stamina remain the same regardless of current Health. Edited October 17, 2012 by Grand_Commander13

[light487]

From the definition I read, Stamina does seem to imply an Action Points like setup.. maybe not identical.. but similar. You perform an action (like attacking), you lose stamina.. you take a hit, you lose stamina.. don't have enough stamina? then you can't take an action. action points. Call it what you want.. the result is the same really when talking about "doing things in combat". Is it ONLY Action Points? No.. it's not.. because when you hit 0 stamina, you pass out.. and AP doesn't affect that.. but it has the same effect as AP do.

[Grand_Commander13]

From the definition I read, Stamina does seem to imply an Action Points like setup.. maybe not identical.. but similar. You perform an action (like attacking), you lose stamina.. you take a hit, you lose stamina.. don't have enough stamina? then you can't take an action. action points. Call it what you want.. the result is the same really when talking about "doing things in combat". Is it ONLY Action Points? No.. it's not.. because when you hit 0 stamina, you pass out.. and AP doesn't affect that.. but it has the same effect as AP do.

What definition? Where? The update mentioned nothing about your Stamina being drained when you performed an action.

[Captain Shrek]

Can you guess why that is being called Case 2?

No I cannot, because neither of your cases seem to make sense. They are not the full list of potential options for how a dual Stamina/Health system can work, for one, and your case one seems to assume that your current Health affects your max Stamina somehow. Your second case seems to assume a relationship between Stamina and attack damage, somehow. All I wanted to know is if these were merely hypothetically decided upon during the thread or if a developer had actually suggested them. Because neither of them are good, and the smart thing to do is to have your attacks at full strength regardless of your Health/Stamina and have your maximum Stamina remain the same regardless of current Health.

 

That is why it is nice thing to read the entire conversation first. I was replying to a person who suggested the idea that there MAY be a relation between Health AND your effectiveness.

 

Either way, the two options are mutually exclusive and all inclusive nevertheless.

[light487]

Then I am wrong.. maybe that is how I read it and it made sense that way to me.. so it stuck

 

And havign said that, I hope that is indeed the way it works

Edited October 17, 2012 by light487

[Nixl]

Stamina is not shield resource, it don't protect you health in anyway.

 

Stamina is fast consumable combat resource which lose will weaken character combat performance right up nothing (character is unconscious), but character can aslo get stamina poinst back fast via abilities, spells and items.

Health is slowly consumable combat resource which lose will lead character's dead/maiming depending on difficulty level. Character can gain his/her/it health back only by resting.

 

I haven't thought through a lot of the details, but I was considering something similar to Darklands, where characters have both Endurance and Health. Most damage taken in combat would Endurance, which is relatively easy to restore (through abilities and magic) and regenerates rapidly on its own, both in and out of combat. Damage to Health would be more serious and much harder to restore (probably only through consumables and/or rest). Having your Endurance lowered to 0 would knock the character out. Having your Health knocked to 0 would kill the character outright (though there may be some optional, lesser version of this effect for non-Expert players).

 

This is best interpreted (unless clarified) as heath (HP) shield.

 

 

Actually, that sounds more like the fatigue system in Morrowind to be honest. There was HP and then there was fatigue. Fatigued governed the success of certain actions such as spell success or hit accuracy. If a player hit low or zero fatigue then certain attacks could knock the player down for a time. Fatigue was entirely independent of health, so even though your fatigue slowly regenerated your health did not. That is how fatigue worked in Morrowind.

 

In this system, it sounds like the opposite. Rather than actions depleting fatigue, taking attacks depletes fatigue. To be honest, if this is the system, I do not see how it is dumbed down or ultra casual. If anything it reinforced the weakeness of mages in close combat, because unlike a warriors/fighters they would not have the fatigue/stamina to withstand many blows.

 

I actually think a fatigue system brings its own dynamic to the balance of character classes. This assumes, however, that the stamina system is a mirror to the fatigue system.

Edited October 18, 2012 by Nixl

[Jarrakul]

So, I think this thread could use a discussion of what different types of health regeneration do in terms of gameplay. Because right now we've got a lot of people shouting back and forth about how it's good or bad, and a lot of people giving examples of games they don't like (or holding up IE games as flawless, which is silly), but not a lot of discussion of how the health regen actually affects the game. So here we go.

 

Out of Combat

• Regenerating: Allows designers to tailor the difficulty of each fight independently, without worrying about the fight before it. This places an emphasis on tactical, rather than strategic, gameplay. At its best, this leads to each fight being exciting and difficult. At its worst, this leads to everything being pitifully easy.
  
• Non-Regenerating: Forces players to consider long-term resource management, promoting strategic gameplay at the cost of making most fights boring (the only interesting one is the last fight before each rest, because that's the only fight where you'll be low on anything important). This also makes it much more difficult to design encounters, as it can be hard to anticipate when players will rest. At its best, this leads to players carefully considering the long-term effects of every combat choice. At its worst, this leads to the game becoming unwinnable because you didn't do well in the last fight and you didn't know there was a dragon in the next room.
  

It's important to note here that unlimited resting (as was typical of IE games, except in the early game when you were afraid of hobgoblins and wolves, and was most significantly exemplified by Neverwinter Nights) is essentially the same as out of combat regeneration. The only difference is that it forces the player to click a button, which isn't really a problem, but it certainly isn't a strength.

 

In Combat

• Regenerating: Rewards micromanagement (because you can pull injured characters back to regenerate) and reduces reliance on dedicated healing classes. It also encourages some cheap tactics, like kiting, and can make prolonged battles less threatening. It also tends to make back-liners (mages, etc) somewhat more durable than intended, as they don't usually get hit often. At its best, regenerating health allows for some really interesting tactical gameplay. At its worst, it turns the game into a "ring-around-the-ogre."
  
• Non-Regenerating: Makes long battles into epic desperate struggles for survival, and makes every stage of the battle really matter (the goblin that hits you in the first 5 seconds actually does something). At its best, this forces players to be very careful about everything they do. At its worst, this turns battles into a mindless slugfest.
  

Note that the kiting problem can be solved by requiring characters to stand still and take no actions. This would still allow a character to fall back and rest while other characters covered their retreat, maintaining much (though not all) of the tactical complexity that regenerating health can potentially provide. Of course, you could regenerate while being attacked, but the regenerating would only serve to offset the damage. Think of it as fighting defensively. You only get to regain health while being attacked if the enemy's attacks are so pitiful that they can't overcome your regen (in which case the defense is clearly very easy).

 

Incidentally, I'm in favor of the system proposed. Semi-regenerating health (the health/stamina system) allows for an element of strategy while making it much harder to get screwed over due to a single fight. In other words, it seems like a pretty good middle ground. In combat regen is very much to my taste, as it matches the "clash and separate" dynamic I experienced in my fencing days, although I do worry about kiting (which is why I proposed the standing still rule, above).

 

Finally, I just want to say that I'm an old school PnP DM (depending on your definition of old school; I've been gaming for about 15 years, DMing for 10 of them), and I have no problem whatsoever balancing in-combat regen. If the Obsidian folks are half as good at this as I am (and I suspect they're better), they shouldn't have any problems.

[Tamerlane]

Get the **** out with that balanced look that doesn't rely on a bizarre misunderstanding of the system proposed.

[Jarrakul]

Right, sorry.

 

Helth regen is teh best and u r stupid for not agreing ie sux cuze it dosnt have healt regan u r dumb gtfo

 

Better?

[Bonecrusher]

Once out of combat, the stamina will regen very quickly but, as stated above, the health will not unless first aid is given and rest taken. So what might happen if you're on a time limited quest is that you will end up at the destination quite battered and bruised and barely able to stand because you don't have time to regen your health but could still fight (though at a much reduced ability/efficiency) because your stamina has regen'ed.

 

So we basically have regenerating health, but only renamed and reflavored.

Basically they try to sell us the same casual and dumbed down mechanic under new name.

 

Miss classic cRPG's like Baldur's Gate,Icewind Dale, and Planescape: Torment? So do we!

Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale and Planescape Torment didn't try to sell us dumbed down casual mechanics. Yes, they are right. I miss those games. For sure.

 

I really don't understand some gamers. They really want to hate different systems.

 

It is being discussed to put mechanics of older and more complex games than Baldur's Gate, but still being accused that they are dumbing down the game, because they will use "rejenerashuuun"...

 

by the way, for a side note, Baldur's Gate was not that much a complex and detailed game. It was casual and dumbed down game compared to older crpgs or tabletop systems.

 

D&D 2e was not "the perfect system".

Edited October 18, 2012 by Bonecrusher

[HansKrSG]

I am a little wary when it comes to the system of stamina+health myself. Regenerating HP (stamina) in combat, without reasonable cause (magic of some kind), would be strange. As someoen said, you don't gain stamina from running in circles. I would go further and say that they should probably use stamina (if at all), for doing tiresome actions, not as a buffer to your health when you are hurt. Being hit with a weapon should hurt your vitality/health, not just make you more tired. They could at least call it something different, like health for normal wounds, and vitality for serious wounds, or something like that. Warhammer (pnp rpg, not crpg) has the system that loss of health in itself does not kill you, but when you are down to 0 or less you get criticals (worse as you get further under 0), that can hamper you, cripple you or kill you outright. That approach would seem the better in my opinion.

[TrashMan]

Weather fights are balanced /dificult /interesting depends on so much more than just health regeneratnig mechanics.

 

Peronsally I'm against such cheesy mechanics.

-Unless you got a powerfull regenerating spell or item, no regeneration

[ComMcNeil]

I think that stamina should not regenerate completly on its own in combat, you should either use a spell/potion or maybe an ability (for a fighter perhaps) that gives back some stamina, but other than that it should not regerate.

Out of combat, it may very well regenerate on its own. Yeah, it is like a regenerative health mechanic in other games, but I believe that it may very well make the combat much more balanced.

 

You could tweak the system, lets say, like, if you have sustained damage to you health, you only regenerate a portion of your stamina. Example, you have 30 stamina and 10 health - after the first combat you took 4 health damage, and now you cannot regain 30 stamina but only 18. So if you go into the battle without proper treatment of the wounds, you are not at full capacity.

 

It may then not sound like much of a difference to the earlier systems, but the main difference is, easy encounters (which do not damage your health) do not really drain your resources - that may be a good, or a bad thing.

[Soranor]

I can imagine a hit to my full plate hurting my 'stamina' more than my health, as in making me fight worse afterwards due to light bruises and the strain to withstand the blow. I can also imagine being able to regenerate stamina in combat, fighting defensively pausing for a moment while trying to anticipate my opponents next move. That kind of regeneration would be quick compared to health regeneration, which should be so slow that it won't matter in a fight that doesn't last for more than a few minutes.

 

I won't have a problem with very rare magic items/potions/spells that increase the regeneration of stamina and/or health, but they'd have to be very carefully balanced. Ideally health regeneration should only in a few cases make a difference of one hit you take (or just leave that out of the game) while stamina regeneration should make a difference of 2-3 hits you can take or 2-3 special attacks for fighter classes (I imagine stamina being a resource for special attacks as well as a damage buffer for everything that tires you).

[teknoman2]

its more or less what soranor said

in a fight, you take a blow from a mace to the forearm. the actual damage that hit causes are some minor bruises and scratches on the arm (4hp lost), but the force of the impact made the bone reach its breaking point without snapping however, which was extremelly painful (12sp lost)

the enemy priest uses a sling and throws a metal bullet that hits your helmet with great force. you take no actual damage from the hit (no hp lost), but you get disoriented and dizzy and your head hurts (7sp lost)

the enemy archer makes a shot that pierces your armor, skin and muscles and stops as it comes in contact with a bone. considering also the loss of blood you lose 8hp and the pain is unbearable making you scream. you lose 15sp

[Uomoz]

The main difference i see with IE games is that in PE you won't fully recover after each fight (rest spam) and you'll be forced to manage your HP and non-rechargeable spells\abilities.

 

Also: Jarrakul post

 

/thread

Edited October 18, 2012 by Uomoz

[Lan]

What if you are not wearing any armor or only light armor and you get hit by a bolt from heavy crossbow, should the majority of the damage (as Josh has stated) taken from your stamina? In my opinion weapons are made to kill/seriously hurt opponents, the bruises/greater stamina loss is understandable if the damage roll was not that successful (it hurts but no internal organs damaged, no heavy blood loss/broken bones) but shouldn't it be otherwise if the attack/damage roll was high enough/max? What I mean here is that in the example that Josh gave stamina and health was approx. the same (32/30), now if the rule is that attacks deal minimal (something like 3-4) damage to health and "much more" (15-20) to stamina, after 2 successful hits the character is knocked out although the health loss was minimal (20%). Is this realistic at all? We are talking about adventurers, fighters who have been trained to withstand pain, why would they collapse with such minimal health loss?

The system could take into account the result of the attack/damage roll, the effectiveness of different weapons against different types of armor (armor piercing rules) and determine what portion of the damage should be substracted from stamina and the remaining would be taken directly from health. There could be different rules if you have lost 20% of your stamina/health (bleeding, dizziness, etc.) in a result of a single blow and so on...

 

The other thing is why should knocked out characters be ignored in battle? Let's say there are 3 characters and 7-8 bandits attacking. Again, in my honest opinion they should not just ignore barely wounded enemies who are taken out from battle temporarily. In real world battles those guys could be ignored safely as they were no threat not even after the battle, their injuries were so serious that they bled to death, looters killed them or if they were lucky they survived and got treated after battle, in any case they could not return to fight.

What about not-so-intelligent monsters who are after the party members' blood/lifeforce/soul, they should be very happy with some unconscious source of "food"...

Perhaps there should be some feats / spells / whatever to give characters the option to fight to the last breath and the "ignore unconscious enemies" could be switched on/off...what do you think?

[Uomoz]

I think that stamina damage is not when you get hit. The *hit* part is the damage on health while stamina is what you dodge\absorb(moving so the sword don't hit the lungs)\deflect. A gun-shot or an arrow will probably be mostly health damage.

[Lan]

I'm sorry but I have to disagree with you. Update #24 states: "Stamina and Health

In Project Eternity's combat, players need to be concerned with two elements of a character's vitality: Stamina and Health. The majority of damage a character takes is subtracted from his or her Stamina. Stamina represents how much general abuse a character can take before falling unconscious. Characters lose it quickly and regain it relatively rapidly, even without assistance."

[Captain Shrek]

More so:

 

In order to avoid rest "spamming" the damage to health will have to be proportionately little.

[ComMcNeil]

ok, that is really interesting. I first thought, this was more a system like in the Star wars P&P, which was based upon D&D/D20 ruleset. There you also hat hitpoints and wound points, former being the ability to dodge, latter being physical woulds.

 

If party members first go unconcious when their stamina is empty, I think most if not all monsters or enemies should then focus to the ones that are left standing, even monster that feed upon the party members in some way. At least normally - there may be predator type monsters that try to down a char relativly fast and if he is unconcious, grab him and run away. This may as well be tied into a sub-quest, or just a general mechanic for fights: characters are practically dead if they fall down...may be a bad suprise for some players :D

[Uomoz]

Yeah but you don't understand my point. What I say is that mechanically they will be detracted as HP but on the realistic side they are meant to emulate the NON-INJURIES that characters suffer. Like scratches\dodges\fatigue etc. Ofc they are represented as "HP" from a mechanical point of view.

 

The damage on health will be "little" as it should be. This means that a party can get to the brink of defeat every battle and still recover relatively quickly (not instantly as it was after each battle in IE games). There's no healing magic so if your character gets a broken leg what would you do? Waiting months in-game? Heroes do not get destroyed after each battle, they usually gets out of a bad situation worn, with injuries and scratches, not half-dead.

 

EDIT: I see your point Lan.

Edited October 18, 2012 by Uomoz