Josh Sawyer on Miss and Hit

[Lephys]

The opposite of an instant kill would either be an instant self-kill or fully healing the enemy, not doing nothing.

 

Well, within the context of an RPG damage system, a miss reduces any damage value to 0, and it is "random" on the negative-effect end of the spectrum. Since a critical hit is the exact same thing, but on the opposite postive-effect end of the spectrum, I used the example of a critical hit dealing, essentially, the opposite of zero damage... infinite damage, if you will. Which, within the context of the combat, would mean a death, no matter what, because no foe would ever have infinite hitpoints.

 

My point was merely that the difference between nothing and something is similar to the difference between all things and something. Dealing zero damage instead of 2 damage is not simply twice as bad as dealing only 1 damage instead of 2 damage.

[Osvir]

Parry, Block, Dodge should really be in game.

 

Who says it couldn't? What if it could be represented in the combat log as mere text? Glancing hits equal "Block, Parry, General Fighting/Brawling" whilst "Miss" could rely on "Dodge" in both parties (PvE).

 

Is this glancing and hitting business some sort of "General Brawling" in pacing of combat?

 

What is the vision for the combat animations and can the Player interfere in the midst of it?

 

If the enemy swings his blade, but I do "Escape" in it, does that pile up on a big pile of invisible "turns" where the enemy finishes his attack first, and then "Escape" is utilized, or could I escape in the midst of an attack and still take a hit from what visually would be a distance? I think this plays its part too in missing and hitting.

 

Maybe a lingering question that no one dares ask hangs in the air "What does it look like?".

 

EDIT: Also got to read up on the pages~

Edited January 4, 2013 by Osvir

[Lord of Lost Socks]

I didn't claim it was. But you appealed to 4E adopting it as evidence that players preferred it, but given the generally negative reaction to much of 4E, we know that 4E's use of a feature is not evidence that players like that feature.

 

You're assuming that he's talking about D&D tabletop players. That's a fraction of their target audience.

 

Personally, I think D&D 4th ed. introduced a ton of good features, without killing what D&D is. However, one of the most common complaint for 4th Ed. is that it's too much like a video game. So, the fact that a video game would seem similar to 4th Ed. by default should not be surprising.

 

I don't really care either way. If they think it will provide good combat, then I trust them. They are gamers themselves, so I hope they can be self-critical enough to change if they notice they've gone down a wrong path and stay the course when they're on the right one.

Edited January 4, 2013 by Lord of Lost Socks

[Falkon Swiftblade]

I'm still reading through this thread so sorry if my reply is out of context, but two things I hope dev's can get right since they're starting fresh. First of all like several have mentioned, fix the game mechanic that basically makes the game a tennis match of just spamming attack button over and over while health fiddles down. Even before the hit and miss functionality, I don't want to just spam my button for 3 minutes until the baddies die.

 

Secondly, something I have been really wanting to play for ages is a character that is unarmed and can actually fight without being gimped because I'm not carrying a 9 foot knife, or a plethora of magic missiles Maybe they need to do a fresh take on combat, and use counter attacks in there to make up for hit/miss situations. I know I use Reckoning a lot in my examples, but as an RPG one of the things that made combat so much fun was the ability to block just as you were attacked and that stunned the enemy for just a second, and knocked them back. With minor skill point investments you could gain tactical combat perks like special attacks from dodging or parrying, and attacking from a block. I know that was a slightly different type of game, but the combat was just so much better than standard RPG button mashing of the attack button. I hope that PE can use those types of mechanics when it comes to these types of discussions, because there should be way more tactical use of game play rather than just having damage for damage sake.

[Karkarov]

Real-time + stamina shield make glancing kinda an overkill. Making new X-Com an example was kinda dumb because in TB you do see effect of every miss. In RTwP I rarely ever payed lot of attention to misses, I mostly watched flow of combat in general.

XCom EU is a great argument in favor of the system Saywer says they are making. I suffered the loss of units more than once in XCom when sending them to make shots that were insanely easy and they miss and next round are shot dead by the person they missed. When I say insanely easy understand I don't mean like 70-75%, I probably missed over 10-15 times with odds of 95% + before the game was over, at least 3 times on 99% odds, and once I actually missed on a 100%. No, not joking.

 

RNG is the enemy of good planning and solid tactics because it makes the best plan that should work with no problem at all blow up in your face for no other reason than dumb luck and a bad random number roll.

[Ieo]

I'm still reading through this thread so sorry if my reply is out of context, but two things I hope dev's can get right since they're starting fresh. First of all like several have mentioned, fix the game mechanic that basically makes the game a tennis match of just spamming attack button over and over while health fiddles down. Even before the hit and miss functionality, I don't want to just spam my button for 3 minutes until the baddies die.

 

Uh, none of the I.E. games had button spamming. It was impossible. Physical combat (auto-attack) was maintained by either AI script trigger or manual initiation and ended when the baddies died--one click of the attack button at most. Casters couldn't spam, period (Vancian magic). Well, unless you count 5 magic missile spells as spamming.

 

Secondly, something I have been really wanting to play for ages is a character that is unarmed and can actually fight without being gimped because I'm not carrying a 9 foot knife, or a plethora of magic missiles

 

I don't think Obs has released any detailed information about the Monk class just yet, so you'll have to wait on that. But the monk class is there, and we're all assuming it's primarily unarmed...

 

RNG is the enemy of good planning and solid tactics because it makes the best plan that should work with no problem at all blow up in your face for no other reason than dumb luck and a bad random number roll.

 

Hear, hear.

[Sacred_Path]

About DT: as long as a fighter in plate armor can't die from a thousand papercuts, I'm fine.

 

One other thing Josh, in your example you mentioned the classic longsword doing 6-12 damage. This allows for quite some randomness already, where 6 dmg might represent the slicing of a forearm, while 12 might be a serious hit to the abdomen. I think that's a bit at odds with the further reduced damage of a glancing miss. Instead, why not make glancing misses more common, but damage on a full hit less trivial (say 10-14, 1/3 damage on a glance) ?

[Adhin]

There is a good chance bonuses from stuff will be direct points instead of heavy % which should keep the same general 6 dmg difference in his example. For instance 6-12 maybe a dex based rogue but a fighter with +10 from str would have 16-22, same difference in range but the difference between a low and a high is less in general comparison.

[Sabotin]

Why not simply have all those glancing blows converted fully to stamina damage? Effort of dodging and parrying and all that. A swarm of enemies will still eventually wear down even the most heavily armored fighters, and the lightly armored will still have some leeway for hit and run tactics etc.

Then you can add a bunch of feats that manipulate this, so you can have some swashbuckler types around that last more than a minute.

And maybe make shields reduce the stamina damage a bit, too, so that tank types will be interested in them more.

Also when you have a fight with the pirate boss, he's a boss 'cause he's better at fighting than you, not because he has triple health to account for glancing blows killing him too fast.

[Kaldurenik]

So holdon... if i get this correctly there is no "miss" only "glancing blows"? I just wokeup so i hope i read it wrong.

 

The entire point and reason i why i backed this project was because i want a game with a deep (lol its kinda sad that one have to consider "miss" as a deep system now days) game play system. I dont want a action or rts game where you can never miss. Just point and whack! Heck even hack and slash games have hit chance...

 

No im very disapointed and honestly if i could after reading some of the comments as of late i would remove my pledge if i could. It seems that more and more things are done for the "wider audience" people that cant bother to read or understand systems.

 

Also im not a huge fan on how hard it is to find comments made by Sawyer. Why are you posting these things over at other forums instead of sharing it with the people that backed the game...?

 

*sigh*

[SunBroSolaire]

He talked about this on his formspring account. As he said there and here, the system is still being worked on.

[Sacred_Path]

There is a good chance bonuses from stuff will be direct points instead of heavy % which should keep the same general 6 dmg difference in his example. For instance 6-12 maybe a dex based rogue but a fighter with +10 from str would have 16-22, same difference in range but the difference between a low and a high is less in general comparison.

 

I hope that stats will figure in less heavily compared to weapon damage, but that's just my preference.

 

My point was I could imagine the following: complete misses, yes. Glancing misses, yes (should happen most of the time). Full hits, yes (should inflict non-trivial damage, replaces crit hits).

[Osvir]

Glancing+Hitting could just be general brawling visually.

 

Critical hit+Critical miss being something excluded and/or "Specialized".

 

A Rogue could cause the enemy to Critically Miss a lot, so sending your Fighter or Paladin against that Rogue could equal a lot of missing?

 

Class Balance, basically. How do you deal with it? Which Class is good against what Class? What's the general set up? Support-Class, Tank-Class, Magic-Class, Rogue/Scout-Class, Ranged/Bow-Class?

 

Melee

General brawling, glancing+hitting Stamina. Will it overlap? Will you eventually grow in strength enough to damage more Health than Stamina? Or will it be a consistent flow? If "General Brawling", animations could be stunning. Animations frames could be piled up on several invisible "turns". Basically you chop at the enemy, they react, then they attack you. There could be forced "animation frame" end, so if you use an ability in the midst of combat, the enemy would attack before the ability is utilized (If the enemy's animation frames were "activated" before you activated your ability).

 

Ranged

Odd thought, but could you pause the game and do a skill shot with a bow? Get a "Rainbow" thing (like a grenade in most modern games) that you can adjust in "Pause" mode to launch an arrow at someone. Why? Because then you could shoot over your own character. The Ranger class is very strong in the IE games. What would this "Skill Shot" arrow do?

 

A, It could negate some kiting.

B, More importantly, you'd be able to physically block arrows with your Fighter in Defender mode. He could stand and block arrows incoming from a Ranger, so that the Wizard doesn't take any damage.

 

Friendly fire? -> Morale? -> Party banter?

 

Not all shots should perhaps be skill shots (with an arrow) but targeting an enemy directly shots an arrow in a straight fast path (Fast Shot?) which can be blocked. Perhaps you could choose a "fixed" curve, though that'd make enemies react after 2-3 shots (AI) seeing how you play~

 

Magic

Magic is magic, in many games you can still hit with magic even if you are blinded. This baffles me, like "Silence", "Blindness" should make "Single Target" spells be unusable. Why? You don't see the enemy, but AoE spells should still be able to be thrown.

 

Blindness

How will "Blindness" work? This is how I see how it could work: Your Wizard gets blind, selecting the Wizard (as a single selection) makes the entire game screen/board (not UI) go all Fog of War up close and personal on the Wizard. Selecting 2 characters (Maybe your Fighter who isn't blinded, and the Wizard) could perhaps allow the Wizard to throw some of his AoE spells, it could be seen as "Fighter is helping the Wizard". Like those "funny" comedy scenes from movies where one guy yells "Aim left! No no no! Right, more to the right!!!!" etc. etc.

 

Animation+Combat

Could it follow psuedo-turns? Magic: The Gathering styled~ for counters?

 

Turn 1: I attack the enemy

Turn 2: Enemy attacks me (in the midst of it I choose an ability)

Turn 3: The ability is piled up after the enemy attack and is utilized now.

 

Should there be counter-abilities vs attack-abilities? Specifically for different uses?

Edited January 4, 2013 by Osvir

[Helm]

RNG is the enemy of good planning and solid tactics because it makes the best plan that should work with no problem at all blow up in your face for no other reason than dumb luck and a bad random number roll.

That is almost like saying that an FPS sucks because you can miss even if your tactics are flawless. If you can't cope with missing then your strategic and tactical choices were not good enough, that is all.

If I personally know that it is possible to miss, then I change my tactical and strategical planning accordingly because that is what you are supposed to do.

 

The IE-games also used RNG (dice rolls), so why are you even here if you hated that anyway?

 

EDIT (first line): can't => can (of course ^^)

Edited January 4, 2013 by Helm

[SunBroSolaire]

From Something Awful:

The most compelling statement I've read against the subject is some flavor of, "I want to make a really dodgy character." I think supporting character types/concepts is important and feel is part of that. I think if we added an outer boundary beyond "graze" that was a "true" miss, but one that was a fixed mathematical distance away from chance to hit, that would probably be fine/good.

 

E.g. using D&D terms, a character needs to roll an 11 or higher to score a "real" hit. The 5 points below (6-10) are considered a graze (i.e. what our current miss effect is, half min damage). If the player rolls 6 points below (1-5), it's a full miss. If the player's hit odds improve to scoring a hit on an 8 or higher, 3-7 become grazes and 1, 2 are misses. If the player needs a 3 or higher, well congrats, the worst you can do is graze on a 1 (effectively the "you can always do badly" result).

 

This can also work the other way, where the critical hit range is some fixed distance away from to-hit score. Maybe it's 8 points (for example). So if you score a hit on 13 or higher, you can't crit. Tough. If you score a hit on a 5 or higher, you'll crit on a 13 or higher. The worst case, as with grazes on 1, would be a hit on 20.

 

If accuracy (i.e. "to-hit") and defenses (i.e. "AC" and "saves") improve with level advancement, it does mean that noobs vs. pros will get destroyed very handily even if everyone is using the exact same gear. Low-level characters will drift away from crits and into grazes and hits. High-level characters will drift away from misses and into hits and crits. Two characters of the same level would, all other things being equal, likely have a solid chance to hit or graze, with a small chance to miss or crit. Most encounters are not toe-to-toe contests of equals. I.e. the PCs usually have the advantage because they are often fighting a series of battles that are wearing them down, and often more enemies than party members. As a result, the math would skew toward the higher level PCs hitting more often, missing less often, grazing being common. The monsters would miss more often and possibly graze more often than hit.

 

Certain character builds might alter the "bands" either offensively or defensively. E.g. a rogue might have an ability that pushes their "miss" boundary for certain defenses two steps up, meaning some attacks against them that would normally be grazes are converted to misses. A fighter might have an ability that makes their melee graze range extend two steps lower, turning more misses into grazes.

So congratulations you pushy bastards though obviously it's not finished yet, it looks like Sawyer might have been swayed...

 

I was fine with the other system, but I admit that this sounds great / possibly better than either of the previous implementations. I like the idea that some character builds could be naturally better at dodging, instead of just ALL characters being better at dodging as they stacked on heavier armor. That always struck me as odd... It would be cool if he went one further and tied %miss to equip load, but that might just be the Dark Souls talking...

 

Still want to hear about ranged attacks, but this gives me more confidence that projectile misses will be possible.

[Helm]

How about a long clear wall of text explaining the advantages and disadvantages with detalied mathematical examples of this new system ? Instead of getting more paranoid whenever Mr. Josh replies a post

The really brief version is to imagine a normal attack in AD&D, but if you miss, you inflict half minimum damage. Math and values can get shoved all over the place, but that's the fundamental mechanic. Whether you like the concept is separate from how well it works in practice (which really comes down to math/value specifics).

 

Well, something like this is what I would like to see in PE (with armor, shield and stat bonuses/maluses and what not of course):

 

Attack roll:

you hit enemy = full damage

you strafe enemy = half damage

you miss = no damage is inflicted

 

Defense roll:

character does not block or parry = damage (from atttack roll) is inflicted

character blocks = less damage (from atttack roll) is inflicted

character parrys = no damage (from atttack roll) is inflicted

[Hormalakh]

From Something Awful:

...

So congratulations you pushy bastards though obviously it's not finished yet, it looks like Sawyer might have been swayed...

I think the above proposed solution is actually quite great. The beginnings of a good hit/miss system. Edited January 4, 2013 by Hormalakh

[Undecaf]

RNG is the enemy of good planning and solid tactics

 

Of course it is (though it isn't nullifying, assuming your character knows what he is doing (via his/her skills)). But it also presents the natural flaw of the character fairly well. Nobody is ever perfect. Even the best do mistakes from time to time, and even the worst may succeed sometimes against all the odds (a fluke). I would say probabilities add a lot of flavor in combat situations precisely because of the unpredictability (relative to the characters' aptitude of course).

[Osvir]

That's what happens when you put thoughts together and mash it up in a mosh pit of hungry nerds.

 

EDIT: @SunBro, wow. Like 5 posts at the same time

 

EDIT EDIT: SunBro (loving the sn btw) quoted Something Awful.

 

How about a long clear wall of text explaining the advantages and disadvantages with detalied mathematical examples of this new system ? Instead of getting more paranoid whenever Mr. Josh replies a post

The really brief version is to imagine a normal attack in AD&D, but if you miss, you inflict half minimum damage. Math and values can get shoved all over the place, but that's the fundamental mechanic. Whether you like the concept is separate from how well it works in practice (which really comes down to math/value specifics).

 

Well, something like this is what I would like to see in PE (with armor, shield and stat bonuses/maluses and what not of course):

 

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 strafe 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 =

 

I like it. I added my own thoughts to it. Just conceptual numbers. Does the player pay stamina for attacking/defending/casting? is an important question in my opinion. Guns shooting shouldn't cost stamina, reloading should. apart from taking a lot of time to reload (shooting maybe once or twice in combat?). How do you balance that? With 6 party members, one guy could sit outside of battle and just keep on reloading/shooting. How much time does it take to reload and are you easier "To Hit" when you are reloading? (Easier to score a "Critical Hit" on someone reloading? Would that be beneficial in creating an "AI Hook"?).

 

Does a Wizard block with a Grimoire? Can the Grimoire take damage for this? Or is it better to just bring up a magical veil/barrier? How powerful should "blocking" be? Do I use a Fly Squatter against Bugs (Half-Minute Hero <3) or can the enemy have similar benefits? Equal ground somewhat. Ofc, that's more "harder difficulty" talk.

Edited January 4, 2013 by Osvir

[rjshae]

I still think there are appropriate instances for misses. Josh hasn't yet addressed ranged attacks that I know of, but he specifically stated that they were still working out the system, and they were currently on getting melee combat situated, so... no biggie.

 

Ranged defense could be treated as a "Concealment" effect (with suitable adjustments for player skill). That would provide a "hit or miss" binary. Once you score a success, you can then check the result against the Concealment success range to see what type of hit you got.

Edited January 4, 2013 by rjshae

[BobbinThreadbare]

I really like the change to have full misses and glancing blows.

 

This actually adds more nuance to the DnD system. The kind that is easy to grasp but would be annoying to keep track of with dice.

[Osvir]

Additionally:

You know this might be a mistake on my part. Looking at the DoTA/LoL games, those games really are dependent on gear (very little character customization)

 

Masteries, Rune Pages, Build Order (Which skill should you invest in first? Which Gear should you focus on buying etc. etc in what order?). All of this different for which champion you like. You've barely scratched the surface Hormalakh if you just started playing. Takes time to get to level 30.

 

DotA is pretty much only Build Order. DotA 2 offers some "level up" awards that are slightly beneficial but that is gear as well.

 

I also realized that I was missing the "frustration" of early level combat but at the same time, there was a more linear approach that I should be taking towards combat. If my variances fall within a certain range, my character can only approach a smaller subset of combat situations at any time. I know the average damages that I can produce at any time and the combat situations I put myself in must fall within the appropriate risk/reward scenarios. As these variance ranges of probability decrease, my options of "viable" combat scenarios decrease. Dodging enemies allows you to sometimes risk fighting enemies at a higher-level than you, even though the the risks are high. Yet the rewards for such a fight are also high

Yes, that is a consequence of normalizing ranges, so again this comes back to asking players the question, "How much chaos do you like?" In many cases, this is a personal preference. I have, for instance, seen people request elements like the fabled Ars Magica/Rolemaster botches and crits of old, which were wild and crazy.

 

Could a chaotic character pathway/roleplay lead to more chaotic mechanics?

Edited January 4, 2013 by Osvir

[Brasidas]

I see I'm late to the party, but I wanted to add that I support the minimum damage mechanic 100%. I know exactly what Josh is talking about with the new X-COM (employing the ideal tactic and having it completely backfire) and I like the strategic focus the minimum damage mechanic brings.

 

For example, in old BIS game there were many fights that were winnable at lower levels due to the RNG. (I'm thinking of the Raiders in FO2, Decker in FO1, and Firkraag in BG2, to name a few.) Don't get me wrong- these fights usually still required oodles and oodles of tactics, and I have fond memories of reloading over and over again to test out new strategies. However, once my tactics were refined, I still lost these fights to the RNG repeatedly (even at higher levels!), and was forced to save and reload tediously until i could get that perfect set of rolls.

 

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.

[Hormalakh]

Additionally:

You know this might be a mistake on my part. Looking at the DoTA/LoL games, those games really are dependent on gear (very little character customization)

 

Masteries, Rune Pages, Build Order (Which skill should you invest in first? Which Gear should you focus on buying etc. etc in what order?). All of this different for which champion you like. You've barely scratched the surface Hormalakh if you just started playing. Takes time to get to level 30.

 

No I know about Masteries, runes, BO, etc. for each champion. The point was that the actual amount of champion customization that you get in these games is obviously nowhere near as much as you get in a cRPG. Your damage output and armor etc are also quickly calculated for you using fairly simple systems. There is no "weapon specialization" for example. The masteries and runes that you get give you attack advantages to all aspects. It's a broad game, but a fairly shallow one.

 

Yet the point is that these advantages you get can apply to any champion that you have. Your choices are not towards improving your characters as much as it is towards getting the right runes, gear, etc. These are external to the champion. Which is fine for these MOBAs; that is the way they were created because ultimately they are derivations of a limited system (Starcraft and Warcraft) which didn't really allow that much character customization.

Edited January 4, 2013 by Hormalakh

[Gfted1]

If we design a system that rewards resting every 5', the gamer isn't at fault for using it. We put it in there! If we design a system that rewards savescumming, we (the designers) are the ones to blame. If we design an inventory system that rewards traveling back and forth to haul load after to load of loot out like precious grains of sand, again, we're the ones that built the system.

 

Toggleable?