Josh Sawyer on Miss and Hit

[Sacred_Path]

I find the fun in these games to be developing and testing out new tactics, not in hoping the RNG will allow me to execute them perfectly. The minimum damage mechanic goes a long way to support a more strategic focus. However, I think some players genuinely enjoy the drama of waiting on a perfect roll, and pride that comes with beating a tough monster as a result. From some of the voices I heard in this thread, I believe we need to decide as a community which kind of focus we want in PE.

 

I think the ultimate test that occurs in a CRPG isn't just how skilled/ shrewd a player is, but how well a character or party of characters perform in a given situation if used to their (preferrably) fullest effect. This is only to some degree influenced by chance (although too much randomness can obfuscate the results). If you want to put more emphasis on the player's strategy, that's fine, although I'm not sure I'd like to see chess translated 1:1 to a CRPG; say you're pre-determined/ very limited in your setup and both sides can only take the exact same measures, so it's all down to player strategy. Ideally I want to be able to take on fundamentally different characters, perceive their performance and failures if used in a certain way, then compare them to a different set of characters that I've built using prior experience.

 

tl; dr I've liked the IE games but their new approach sounds interesting too.

[Sylvius the Mad]

If we design a system that rewards resting every 5', the gamer isn't at fault for using it.

But he also has no right to complain about it. If he doesn't like it, he could not use it.

 

Yes, it's not his fault the feature is available, but the availability of a feature doesn't make its use mandatory.

If we design a system that rewards savescumming, we (the designers) are the ones to blame.

There's no need to assign blame for that. Personally, I like having that option available.

[Tsuga C]

If we design a system that rewards savescumming, we (the designers) are the ones to blame.

There's no need to assign blame for that. Personally, I like having that option available.

 

Hey, in NWN2 there's even a loadscreen tip of "Save early, save often". I follow that one religiously as I have absolutely no desire to replay the last 45 minutes of the game because of a glitch, distraction, poor AI, or mouse mistake on my part. Perhaps others have unlimited time in which to game, but that's far from my situation and I don't like having to re-take ground. It gets old very quickly and it kills the fun of an encounter.

[Rostere]

I see no reason why any element of fighting that could occur in real life should not be in the game.

 

Dodge/miss, parry, deflection, damage reduction, critical miss/hit and so on. Frankly I don't see any reason at all why the game should not include these. Don't fix that which is not broken (IE games lacked critical miss, I know, but Arcanum had that feature). The game is for fans of the old-school games, right?

[Kaz]

If we design a system that rewards resting every 5', the gamer isn't at fault for using it.

But he also has no right to complain about it. If he doesn't like it, he could not use it.

 

People have every right to complain, criticize, praise, make frowny faces (within the forum's rules ofc), regardless of the validity of their claims. And you have every right to consider / ingore it. I'm glad things like rest spamming are addressed because it blurred the intended rules, thus diluting the challenges set by the game. While I'm capable of self imposing limitations, that's not the reason I buy these games.

 

Hey, in NWN2 there's even a loadscreen tip of "Save early, save often". I follow that one religiously as I have absolutely no desire to replay the last 45 minutes of the game because of a glitch, distraction, poor AI, or mouse mistake on my part. Perhaps others have unlimited time in which to game, but that's far from my situation and I don't like having to re-take ground. It gets old very quickly and it kills the fun of an encounter.

 

I could be wrong, but I don't think the devs have said anything about limiting your ability to save the game. I personally feel the way to approach save scumming is not to limit the player's ability to save but rather minimize the benefit / incentives of reloading by tweaking the mechanics.

 

(IE games lacked critical miss, I know, but Arcanum had that feature). The game is for fans of the old-school games, right?

 

IE games did include critical misses iirc. Baldur's Gate had it for sure.

[Osvir]

Attack roll:

you critically hit enemy = [x*2 full damage (always health damage) Does the player pay stamina?

you hit enemy = full damage ("health or stamina" or "stamina+health"? Depends on the hit?) Does the player pay stamina?

you graze enemy = half damage (health or stamina? Depends on the graze?) Does the player pay stamina?

you miss = no health damage is inflicted (X stamina damage) Does the player pay stamina?

you critically miss = stamina damage to yourself or penalties to defense rolls for next incoming hostile attacks.

 

Defense roll:

character does not block or parry = damage (from attack roll) is inflicted (health/stamina? Depends on the attack?) Does the player pay stamina?

character blocks = less damage (from attack roll) is inflicted (stamina damage to both parties involved) Does the player pay stamina?

character parries = no damage (from attack roll) is inflicted (stamina damage to both parties involved) Does the player pay stamina?

character dodges = same as miss/critical miss. Does the player stamina?

 

Missed the bottom one in the original post~

 

Baldur's Gate had critical miss, even a line in the sound set.

Edited January 4, 2013 by Osvir

[Gfted1]

If we design a system that rewards resting every 5', the gamer isn't at fault for using it.

But he also has no right to complain about it. If he doesn't like it, he could not use it.

 

Yes, it's not his fault the feature is available, but the availability of a feature doesn't make its use mandatory.

If we design a system that rewards savescumming, we (the designers) are the ones to blame.

There's no need to assign blame for that. Personally, I like having that option available.

 

Thats whats disappointing to me, that all these mechanics are being "fixed" to cater to the .5% of the backers that complain about not being able to control themselves.

[Tsuga C]

4E, a system people didn't like.

Do you think that miss effects on dailies were one of the things that people didn't like? I don't think that's accurate.

 

First, the tactics were always important as they impacted the probabilities. The outcomes weren't always predictable, but that's a positive feature of the RNG, not a drawback. As long as the mechanics are understood by the players, they should know the range of possible outcomes and not be surprised at all when the outcome falls within that range.

As Homalakh and I have already stated, what players "should" understand and what they actually understand are not the same thing. If people actually understood probability, casinos would shut their doors tomorrow.

 

Players can only be confused by the system if they don't understand it. Document the mechanics, and this problem goes away.

It doesn't.

 

Please, please stop trying to cater to the shallow end of the gaming and educational pool. I certainly didn't back this effort to accommodate the desires of 4E players as that particular system turned it's back on much of what I found enjoyable about AD&D through 3.5. Sylvius is as right as the day is long and the concept of doing damage without actually striking an opponent is more than a little suspect.

 

I suppose one might take "stamina damage" from blocking repeated strikes from a mace with your shield, but I'm looking at this with a gimlet eye, Mr. Sawyer, and it rankles more than a bit.

[rjshae]

Baldur's Gate had critical miss, even a line in the sound set.

By itself, a "critical miss" always seemed like a silly thing; intended more for the gamer's amusement than for anything constructive. What I wouldn't mind seeing is a "critical miss" that allows the opponent a favorable opening. If an enemy attacks me and flounders badly from my crafty block, then that should leave me a brief, favorable opening. Perhaps even give me an opportunity attack (or opportunity counter-attack, as it were).

 

Otherwise... shrug. I can live without a "critical miss".

[Tsuga C]

Thats whats disappointing to me, that all these mechanics are being "fixed" to cater to the .5% of the backers that complain about not being able to control themselves.

 

Yes, and also for those unable or unwilling to think or tolerate the idea that some things are, in fact, all or nothing. Maybe it was all of those pointless "self-esteem" trophies they received as children for "participating" in rather than winning sundry competitions...

Edited January 4, 2013 by Tsuga C

[maggotheart]

I see no reason why any element of fighting that could occur in real life should not be in the game.

 

Dodge/miss, parry, deflection, damage reduction, critical miss/hit and so on. Frankly I don't see any reason at all why the game should not include these. Don't fix that which is not broken (IE games lacked critical miss, I know, but Arcanum had that feature). The game is for fans of the old-school games, right?

 

If there is one thing I hate about Arcanum, it's critical misses. Shouldnt they be trying to improve on the old formulas, rather than try to copy them exactly, flaws and all?

[Malekith]

I see no reason why any element of fighting that could occur in real life should not be in the game.

 

Dodge/miss, parry, deflection, damage reduction, critical miss/hit and so on. Frankly I don't see any reason at all why the game should not include these. Don't fix that which is not broken (IE games lacked critical miss, I know, but Arcanum had that feature). The game is for fans of the old-school games, right?

 

If there is one thing I hate about Arcanum, it's critical misses. Shouldnt they be trying to improve on the old formulas, rather than try to copy them exactly, flaws and all?

Yes they should, but critical misses aren't a flaw

[Tigranes]

I love critical misses. They happen in real combat, they add drama, they can happen to you or them. You just need to get their frequency right.

[Ulquiorra]

I have few questions ... to Josh Sawyer. becouse of NON-ful-MISS mechanics

 

1. Mages and rouges are gonna to where fullplate to survive ? (just like fightes)

 

2: Is there are gonna be any block or demage reduction mechanics ?

 

3. If i do 4 demage to a oponent whearing heavy armor (and this armor absorbs 5 damage) than he will recive 0 demage or regardles of armor whearing i allways will do him 4 demage ?

 

4. How rouges will survive if they will always get hit regardless of their skills ?

 

5. Is NEVER-miss mechanics also include archers and firearms ?

 

6. Will the armor, shelds or spells will absorb demage (demage redustion) or what ?

Edited January 4, 2013 by Ulquiorra

[Kaz]

Critical misses didn't bother me in the old games. If we remove it from the bread and butter melee rolls perhaps we could bring it back in a few melee abilities, like a simple power attack where you trade extra damage for an increased chance of fumbling.

[Hertzila]

Personally I've never seen the point of critical misses. What are they supposed to simulate? Just what are they representing, with results like dropping my armor and having the dagger I was using somehow backstabbing me in the back.

Fumbling your defenses badly enough to allow the enemy an easier time to hit I can get, but not the extreme strangeness some games have for their crit misses.

[Rostere]

I see no reason why any element of fighting that could occur in real life should not be in the game.

 

Dodge/miss, parry, deflection, damage reduction, critical miss/hit and so on. Frankly I don't see any reason at all why the game should not include these. Don't fix that which is not broken (IE games lacked critical miss, I know, but Arcanum had that feature). The game is for fans of the old-school games, right?

 

If there is one thing I hate about Arcanum, it's critical misses. Shouldnt they be trying to improve on the old formulas, rather than try to copy them exactly, flaws and all?

 

Oh, come on. Critical misses were hilarious. Also, it gives depth and character to the game. I want my high-level mage who lacks combat skills to accidentally fall, drop his hat and maim himself if he charges into combat with a broadsword.

[rjshae]

1. Mages and rouges are gonna to where fullplate to survive ? (just like fightes)

...

4. How rouges will survive if they will always get hit regardless of their skills ?

Sigh, I hate to do this, but.... It's rogues, not rouges. Rogues are devious people; rouges are powders that eighteenth century french prostitutes used to put on their cheeks. Fighters wear full-plate; they know where to shove the pointy thing.

 

Also, can I suggest using a recent version of Firefox so you've at least got a spell checker available?

[Ulquiorra]

1. Mages and rouges are gonna to where fullplate to survive ? (just like fightes)

...

4. How rouges will survive if they will always get hit regardless of their skills ?

Sigh, I hate to do this, but.... It's rogues, not rouges. Rogues are devious people; rouges are powders that eighteenth century french prostitutes used to put on their cheeks. Fighters wear full-plate; they know where to shove the pointy thing.

 

Also, can I suggest using a recent version of Firefox so you've at least got a spell checker available?

 

esh .... sory ... but i think everybody understanded my sentence ....

[maggotheart]

I see no reason why any element of fighting that could occur in real life should not be in the game.

 

Dodge/miss, parry, deflection, damage reduction, critical miss/hit and so on. Frankly I don't see any reason at all why the game should not include these. Don't fix that which is not broken (IE games lacked critical miss, I know, but Arcanum had that feature). The game is for fans of the old-school games, right?

 

If there is one thing I hate about Arcanum, it's critical misses. Shouldnt they be trying to improve on the old formulas, rather than try to copy them exactly, flaws and all?

Yes they should, but critical misses aren't a flaw

 

What is and what is not a flaw in the old systems is debateable of course, I'm just saying that the idea of doing exactly what the old games did because it's meant for fans of the old games is wrong.

 

As for critical misses, I'm hearing a lot of suggestions for improvement on the idea in this and other threads (adjust the frequency, adding it to weapon types or melee abilities and so forth) so even if they get added to the game I don't think we would see them in the same form as those old games because they had a flawed implementation.

 

Edit @ Rostere: Funny the first couple of times, annoying after that.

Edited January 4, 2013 by maggotheart

[TRX850]

What if the outcome of a critical miss was a range of effects, rather than just damage?

• Self-knockdown
  
• Self-disarm
  
• Self-stun
  
• Self-wounding (i.e. damage over multiple rounds)
  

If you rolled a critical miss with a ranged weapon, maybe this represents the arrow/bolt "sticking" and shattering (with a hilarious "sproi-oi-oi-oing" sound effect) causing temporary blindness etc.

 

It makes more sense to introduce variety into a miss, instead of just impaling yourself every time.

 

EDIT:

 

Apologies if this has been suggested before. I do try to read through these forums, but on hot topics like this, it's sometimes difficult to be aware of previous suggestions.

Edited January 4, 2013 by TRX850

[Tamerlane]

Critical misses have their place, but I much prefer they stay in turn-based games.

1. Mages and rouges are gonna to where fullplate to survive ? (just like fightes)

...

4. How rouges will survive if they will always get hit regardless of their skills ?

Sigh, I hate to do this, but.... It's rogues, not rouges. Rogues are devious people; rouges are powders that eighteenth century french prostitutes used to put on their cheeks. Fighters wear full-plate; they know where to shove the pointy thing.

 

Also, can I suggest using a recent version of Firefox so you've at least got a spell checker available?

I get the feeling he's not a natural English speaker. Not too huge an issue so long as he's trying and you can more-or-less work it out. A spell checker won't help with things like "rouge" and "where" and the Firefox spell checker says that "mages" isn't a word, anyway.

I have few questions ... to Josh Sawyer. becouse of NON-ful-MISS mechanics

 

1. Mages and rouges are gonna to where fullplate to survive ? (just like fightes)

 

2: Is there are gonna be any block or demage reduction mechanics ?

 

3. If i do 4 demage to a oponent whearing heavy armor (and this armor absorbs 5 damage) than he will recive 0 demage or regardles of armor whearing i allways will do him 4 demage ?

 

4. How rouges will survive if they will always get hit regardless of their skills ?

 

5. Is NEVER-miss mechanics also include archers and firearms ?

 

6. Will the armor, shelds or spells will absorb demage (demage redustion) or what ?

I'm not Josh Sawyer, but I'll do my best to interpret and respond to these and not totally misrepresent what I have read and heard although I'll probably fail at some point.

 

1. All other things being equal, a heavily armoured character will always have greater survivability, though this can be minimized through crushing weapons. A lightly armoured character will be able to do things faster.

 

2. Unsure what they're doing as far as shields, blocking, and parrying. Armour does reduce damage, and presumably there will be spells that do this as well ("arcane veil" has been mentioned).

 

3. At present, there is a minimum damage, similar to Fallout: New Vegas.

 

4. Rogues will have some skills for survivability. Examples were given in update 36.

 

5. Unknown. They have also not talked about spells missing, to my knowledge.

 

6. Same as question 2, I think.

[Hormalakh]

lol at understanded. respect for speaking a language that isn't your first.

 

as for your questions, there will apparently be "misses" in the game. this conversation with Josh Sawyer wasn't set in stone - it's still a work in progress.

Edited January 4, 2013 by Hormalakh

[rjshae]

Critical misses have their place, but I much prefer they stay in turn-based games.

1. Mages and rouges are gonna to where fullplate to survive ? (just like fightes)

...

4. How rouges will survive if they will always get hit regardless of their skills ?

Sigh, I hate to do this, but.... It's rogues, not rouges. Rogues are devious people; rouges are powders that eighteenth century french prostitutes used to put on their cheeks. Fighters wear full-plate; they know where to shove the pointy thing.

 

Also, can I suggest using a recent version of Firefox so you've at least got a spell checker available?

I get the feeling he's not a natural English speaker. Not too huge an issue so long as he's trying and you can more-or-less work it out. A spell checker won't help with things like "rouge" and "where" and the Firefox spell checker says that "mages" isn't a word, anyway.

Well, my apologies then, but the use of "rouges" just keeps recurring up so I wanted to make a small point of it.

Edited January 4, 2013 by rjshae

[rjshae]

What if the outcome of a critical miss was a range of effects, rather than just damage?

• Self-knockdown
  
• Self-disarm
  
• Self-stun
  
• Self-wounding (i.e. damage over multiple rounds)
  

I'd hope that these will almost never happen to a competent warrior. Having a critical miss on one in twenty swings just seems way too high: the fighter's skill should play a big part in the outcome.