How to make a Stamina/HP system work

[Captain Shrek]

I think right now the stamina / HP divide is not only confusing but also kind of pointless. It conveys no real meaning, as you can "heal"  stamina but not HP. This makes little sense since stamina is also physical attribute. This simply acts to enforce a playstyle that is nothing but rest-spamming based on the HP of the tank. I would suggest an easy fix: Add healing magic back and to keep the component of tactics alive in the game use stamina is a conusmable resource instead. Make healing a bit difficult, like requiring resource cost to it, either XP or other non-economically-broken resource like emeralds or soemthing. This will allow it to meaningfully compete with resting and then players can rest easy knowing that the priest is not a healing battery after all.

 

What to do to make that happen:

 

Add stamina to HP as Total health.

 

HP is the component that is NOT touched when you fight, but stamina is drained if you use speicial abilities. When stamina is finished your stats drop and you take penalties. HP is ONLY damaged if Attack score > defense && Damage > Armour.

 

The advantage of this mechanics is that it is way more tactical, meaningful and useful all at the same time.

 

Comments?

[Doppelschwert]

Why would you add stamina to HP if they serve different functions at the end?

How is the priest not a healing battery in your scenario? How are classes not dependent on a healing class this way?

What is tactical about this?

Why would I want a system that makes healing way more costly (exp, seriously?), making it actually more restrictive?

 

Whatever you are getting at here, I haven't understood it the way you probably meant it to be, so I'd like to have a better explanation.

 

 

What is so difficult about forgetting the actual names of the HP system and treat it as what it is - stamina is HP per battle and health is overall HP?

Edited September 12, 2014 by Doppelschwert

[Captain Shrek]

Why would you add stamina to HP if they serve different functions at the end?

How is the priest not a healing battery in your scenario? How are classes not dependent on a healing class this way?

What is tactical about this?

Why would I want a system that makes healing way more costly (exp, seriously?), making it actually more restrictive?

 

Whatever you are getting at here, I haven't understood it the way you probably meant it to be, so I'd like to have a better explanation.

 

 

What is so difficult about forgetting the actual names of the HP system and treat it as what it is - stamina is HP per battle and health is overall HP?

 

1) Why add then: Makes physical sense. One you are seriously exausted it takes toll on your body.

 

2) Priest is not a healing battery because he can not heal non stop like in DnD. His casts are restricted by the game.

 

3) It is tactical because it manages resources in a sensible way. You can actually make choices in this scenario to sacrifice one thing to gain another. HP/Stamina coupling you have no choice. You take damage. Period.

 

4) "I haven't understood." Gee.

 

5)" What is wrong with the current system?" It makes no sense in game and is degenerate.

[Doppelschwert]

I'd still like you to explain your system properly.

 

So you add health and stamina and get total health, ok. If you get damaged, it only gets substracted from your health, ok.

 

Lets say I have 50 stamina and 100 health. Now I have 150 Total Health. I can spend 50 of these points for abilities because that's the stamina part? And then I get some penalty. Can I still use abilities to get into negativ stamina, reducing my health, or am I just punished for using up all my stamina?

 

Then you go on how health is not touched in combatn and in the next sentence health is touched if you get attacked - outside of combat, or how am I to take the sentence before?

 

What can be restored by resting / what can only be healed by spending ressources?

 

Seriously, I have no idea what you are suggesting here, and I don't mean it in an insulting way.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

vv

[Captain Shrek]

Alright. Fair enough. But I assume that you find the reacson why a consumable stamina is tactical satisfactory.

 

Right now the situation is that if you are "damaged" both HP and Stamina are reduced. Always.

 

I am suggesting that this is not a great idea for two reasons:

 

1) Stamina measures the ability to perform amazing feats in canonical sense. When you are pumping adrenaline the effect of wounds would not harm your stamina in short period of combat (order of mins to seconds). On the contrary if you exaust stamina and still try to perform such acts that would be hard.

 

2) As HP is always drained when you are attacked and hit, and there is no way to heal it, it enforces only ONE solution. Rest. Which somehow magically cures everything from diseases and broken bones in 8 hours. Which is faintly ridiculous and enforced.

 

Replacing this with stamina as a resource would make the entire process much more intuitive and make healing viable but not over powered, which I am guessing was the original reason why the HP/Stamina divide was put into place.

[Arsene Lupin]

Huh. I actually just posted a simple solution in the "tedious combat" thread. To restate it more succinctly here:

 

1. Health should represent health and Stamina should represent stamina (currently Health represents stamina and Stamina represents health).

2. Only Health should be "damaged" by enemy attacks. Stamina should be an independent variable.

3. Stamina should decay at a constant rate: while in normal gameplay, it should decay slowly; while in combat, it should decay faster.

4. When Stamina hits 0, the character should become "exhausted" and receive a number of negative status effects that remain until resting/camping.

 

....

 

There is no reason to have two different abstractions for "HP." That just makes the system needlessly complicated and unintuitive.

Edited September 12, 2014 by Arsene Lupin

[Doppelschwert]

Ok, but is your system any different from traditional RPGs?

The way I understand it, you want just have normal HP and stamina used for abilities, or is stamina also temporary hitpoints?

Either way, how are you not reintroducing the problems the system now is meant to get rid of, e.g. that a healer prolongs your adventuring day and is more or less a must have?

 

I understand the gripes people have with this system from a semantic point of view, but I always ask myself what would be different if they just renamed everything by saying stamina is HP and health is some kind of obscure fatigue making you need to rest.

[Captain Shrek]

Ok, but is your system any different from traditional RPGs?

The way I understand it, you want just have normal HP and stamina used for abilities, or is stamina also temporary hitpoints?

Either way, how are you not reintroducing the problems the system now is meant to get rid of, e.g. that a healer prolongs your adventuring day and is more or less a must have?

 

I understand the gripes people have with this system from a semantic point of view, but I always ask myself what would be different if they just renamed everything by saying stamina is HP and health is some kind of obscure fatigue making you need to rest.

 

 

1) Is it different from traditional RPGs.:  I am not sure. I am also of the opinion that different for the sake of different is not a great idea if that brings no benefits.

 

2) Stamina is not temporary HPs. They are not drained on attacks.

 

3) In a way this does prolong the day, but yeah, it is going to leave you with a choice: Shall I use up important resources like e.g. emeralds or XP to prolong it? Or today I have had enough and it is time to rest? That is the difference. You will have a tactical choice. And healers are a must have enen right now, except that they "heal" stamina. Which makes little sense as I pointed out.

 

4) It is not only semantics, although I would say that in a story heavy game semantics are important. It is also what the mechanics do to make the system rigid and repetative that bothers me.

[Captain Shrek]

Huh. I actually just posted a simple solution in the "tedious combat" thread. To restate it more succinctly here:

 

1. Health should represent health and Stamina should represent stamina (currently Health represents stamina and Stamina represents health).

2. Only Health should be "damaged" by enemy attacks. Stamina should be an independent variable.

3. Stamina should decay at a constant rate: while in normal gameplay, it should decay slowly; while in combat, it should decay faster.

4. When Stamina hits 0, the character should become "exhausted" and receive a number of negative status effects that remain until resting/camping.

 

....

 

There is no reason to have two different abstractions for "HP." That just makes the system needlessly complicated and unintuitive.

I like this except the idea that stamina decrease automatically. That puts an artificial limit on the combat encounter. Rather I would spend stamina until it is exausted.

[Arsene Lupin]

Ok, but is your system any different from traditional RPGs?

The way I understand it, you want just have normal HP and stamina used for abilities, or is stamina also temporary hitpoints?

Either way, how are you not reintroducing the problems the system now is meant to get rid of, e.g. that a healer prolongs your adventuring day and is more or less a must have?

 

I understand the gripes people have with this system from a semantic point of view, but I always ask myself what would be different if they just renamed everything by saying stamina is HP and health is some kind of obscure fatigue making you need to rest.

 

What would be different is that A) the systemizations would make logical sense and B) removing unnecessary/redundant systemizations. What would be different is that the core mechanics would be simpler and more intuitive--and that is a thing to strive for.

 

So long as being "tired" is undesirable and healers are unable to heal that fatigure, the presence or absence of a dedicated healer in the party will never be a factor outside of combat.

 

 

 

Huh. I actually just posted a simple solution in the "tedious combat" thread. To restate it more succinctly here:

 

1. Health should represent health and Stamina should represent stamina (currently Health represents stamina and Stamina represents health).

2. Only Health should be "damaged" by enemy attacks. Stamina should be an independent variable.

3. Stamina should decay at a constant rate: while in normal gameplay, it should decay slowly; while in combat, it should decay faster.

4. When Stamina hits 0, the character should become "exhausted" and receive a number of negative status effects that remain until resting/camping.

 

....

 

There is no reason to have two different abstractions for "HP." That just makes the system needlessly complicated and unintuitive.

I like this except the idea that stamina decrease automatically. That puts an artificial limit on the combat encounter. Rather I would spend stamina until it is exausted.

 

 

Easily enough solved. For example:

 

Stamina: reduces at a rate of -1/round when out of combat.

Stamina: reduces at a rate of -5/round when in combat.

Stamina: reduces at a rate of -10/round for 5 rounds after using ability/spell X.

Stamina: reduces at a rate of -50/round for 10 rounds after using ability/spell Y.

 

Very simple and intuitive: low-stress of walking around and talking consumes little energy; high stress of combat consumes more energy; increased stress of certain special abilities and/or spells temporarily increases much greater quantities of energy.

Edited September 12, 2014 by Arsene Lupin

[Silent Winter]

why give up XP when you can rest for free?

Why use emeralds when camping supplies would be cheaper?

A better system would be as already proposed by devs - change the stamina/health ratios for classes and make damage 1:1 - longer adventuring day, easier to understand.

[Captain Shrek]

Indeed. Why take damage at all. Even better, why combat?

[Silent Winter]

 

 

 

Easily enough solved. For example:

 

Stamina: reduces at a rate of -1/round when out of combat.

Stamina: reduces at a rate of -5/round when in combat.

Stamina: reduces at a rate of -10/round for 5 rounds after using ability/spell X.

Stamina: reduces at a rate of -50/round for 10 rounds after using ability/spell Y.

 

Very simple and intuitive: low-stress of walking around and talking consumes little energy; high stress of combat consumes more energy; increased stress of certain special abilities and/or spells temporarily increases much greater quantities of energy.

 

sounds kind of convoluted - the stamina as stamina and health as health is fine - but there'd be too many different abilites reflecting different stamina drains for the other part.  Plus it'd suck royally to be told you don't have enough stamina for ability-x when that ability is the choice you need to win and end the fight.

For a more simulationist game, sure.  Just not for this type of rpg.

Edited September 12, 2014 by Silent Winter

[Silent Winter]

Indeed. Why take damage at all. Even better, why combat?

Because that's a fun game - seriously though, why would someone give up something as limited as XP for something unlimited like resting?

[Captain Shrek]

 

Indeed. Why take damage at all. Even better, why combat?

Because that's a fun game - seriously though, why would someone give up something as limited as XP for something unlimited like resting?

 

 

 

That is what I am asking. Why take damage? Just allow us to spam them fireballs while in god mod. As some might say, HA! Great fun!

[Silent Winter]

 

 

Indeed. Why take damage at all. Even better, why combat?

Because that's a fun game - seriously though, why would someone give up something as limited as XP for something unlimited like resting?

 

 

 

That is what I am asking. Why take damage? Just allow us to spam them fireballs while in god mod. As some might say, HA! Great fun!

 

There's a huge difference  between a fun, challenging game and a convoluted, challenging game with no-brainer choices.

You suggested using emeralds and XP to heal health - I'm questioning whether 90% of players would consider that  a real choice.

Do you have an answer?

[Captain Shrek]

 

 

 

Indeed. Why take damage at all. Even better, why combat?

Because that's a fun game - seriously though, why would someone give up something as limited as XP for something unlimited like resting?

 

 

 

That is what I am asking. Why take damage? Just allow us to spam them fireballs while in god mod. As some might say, HA! Great fun!

 

There's a huge difference  between a fun, challenging game and a convoluted, challenging game with no-brainer choices.

You suggested using emeralds and XP to heal health - I'm questioning whether 90% of players would consider that  a real choice.

Do you have an answer?

 

Sure. The answer is yes.

[Arsene Lupin]

 

 

 

 

Easily enough solved. For example:

 

Stamina: reduces at a rate of -1/round when out of combat.

Stamina: reduces at a rate of -5/round when in combat.

Stamina: reduces at a rate of -10/round for 5 rounds after using ability/spell X.

Stamina: reduces at a rate of -50/round for 10 rounds after using ability/spell Y.

 

Very simple and intuitive: low-stress of walking around and talking consumes little energy; high stress of combat consumes more energy; increased stress of certain special abilities and/or spells temporarily increases much greater quantities of energy.

 

sounds kind of convoluted - the stamina as stamina and health as health is fine - but there'd be too many different abilites reflecting different stamina drains for the other part.  Plus it'd suck royally to be told you don't have enough stamina for ability-x when that ability is the choice you need to win and end the fight.

For a more simulationist game, sure.  Just not for this type of rpg.

 

 

Less convoluted than the current damage system, IMHO.

 

Anyway, you're misunderstanding something: in my proposed solution, stamina is NOT a consumable resource. Using a (certain) spell/ability would not consume stamina, but rather change the rate and which stamina decays. Once stamina hits zero, the character would receive the requisite negative status effects--but nothing would prevent that character from still using abilities/spells that increase stamina decay.  Just do the math: if you have 0 stamina and are losing 5 stamina per round and perform a spell that temporarily increases that rate to -10 stamina per round, how much stamina will you have 20 rounds later? The same amount of stamina as if you had not used that spell: zero.

 

EDIT: the idea is simply to "tighten" the already-existing systems so that the systemization abstractions are less abstract. Which should be the goal of any game designer.

 

EDIT: and I am also not thinking that every, or even most spells or abilities would effect stamina at all--just the really powerful ones. IE if you go "berserk" and do a hugely powerful attack, there should be a stamina cost for that. It would only be applied to certain high-level abilities.

Edited September 12, 2014 by Arsene Lupin

[Doppelschwert]

I was not asking whether its different from traditional stuff with the intent that it should be, just for making sure I actually understood him correctly.

 

As for the rest, I agree with silent winter.

[Silent Winter]

 

There's a huge difference  between a fun, challenging game and a convoluted, challenging game with no-brainer choices.

You suggested using emeralds and XP to heal health - I'm questioning whether 90% of players would consider that  a real choice.

Do you have an answer?

Sure. The answer is yes.

 

 

Maybe if I put it simply - the idea doesn't work well because it's neither a tactical nor strategic advantage to expend XP or emeralds.

In IE games, you could rest outside or rest at an inn - resting outside was free but came with the danger of random attacks (AFAIK, PoE won't have those so resting isn't a risk).  Inns cost money but the amount is so small as to make it a no-brainer to use an inn when in a city.  Deciding to rest or not in the field carries risk v. reward.

PoE will have more costly inns and more costly camping supplies.  To make your choice an actual choice, you'd need to give an advantage to each choice.  Inns grant bonuses, camping supplies heal ... and losing XP heals...or emeralds ... both of which are more valuable than the camping supplies -> no brainer.

Edited September 12, 2014 by Silent Winter

[Silent Winter]

 

Less convoluted than the current damage system, IMHO.

 

Anyway, you're misunderstanding something: in my proposed solution, stamina is NOT a consumable resource. Using a (certain) spell/ability would not consume stamina, but rather change the rate and which stamina decays. Once stamina hits zero, the character would receive the requisite negative status effects--but nothing would prevent that character from still using abilities/spells that increase stamina decay.  Just do the math: if you have 0 stamina and are losing 5 stamina per round and perform a spell that temporarily increases that rate to -10 stamina per round, how much stamina will you have 20 rounds later? The same amount of stamina as if you had not used that spell: zero.

 

EDIT: the idea is simply to "tighten" the already-existing systems so that the systemization abstractions are less abstract. Which should be the goal of any game designer.

 

Ah, ok - I was mixing the 2 suggestions above.  In that case I agree, yours is actually a good idea.

[zimcub]

I know this isn't a solution but i at least think this is a better idea than it is now:

After your stamina reaches 0 your character doesn't fall to the ground, but instead just takes double health damage until he gets stamina back? (or whatever number is appropriate)

After your character is exhausted they lost most of the power to defend themselves properly.

EDIT: And reverse the portrait damage and the green health bar with each other.

Edited September 12, 2014 by zimcub

[Captain Shrek]

 

Maybe if I put it simply - the idea doesn't work well because it's neither a tactical nor strategic advantage to expend XP or emeralds.

In IE games, you could rest outside or rest at an inn - resting outside was free but came with the danger of random attacks (AFAIK, PoE won't have those so resting isn't a risk).  Inns cost money but the amount is so small as to make it a no-brainer to use an inn when in a city.  Deciding to rest or not in the field carries risk v. reward.

PoE will have more costly inns and more costly camping supplies.  To make your choice an actual choice, you'd need to give an advantage to each choice.  Inns grant bonuses, camping supplies heal ... and losing XP heals...or emeralds ... both of which are more valuable than the camping supplies -> no brainer.

 

 

 

Then our understading of what is Tactical differs. As I see it is a clear tactical choice (not advantage) to heal by magic or rest. Rest takes time/resting supplies and  heal saves time/resting supplies but uses emeralds. Sounds like tactics to me.

 

Infinite resting was what was wrong in the first place in IE games.

 

Funny you should mention resting equipment. That was actually my idea way before it was introduced. Not saying that they got an inspiration from there, but rather that this new idea is in the same spirit. Resource allocation.

Edited September 12, 2014 by Captain Shrek

[Silent Winter]

 

 

Maybe if I put it simply - the idea doesn't work well because it's neither a tactical nor strategic advantage to expend XP or emeralds.

In IE games, you could rest outside or rest at an inn - resting outside was free but came with the danger of random attacks (AFAIK, PoE won't have those so resting isn't a risk).  Inns cost money but the amount is so small as to make it a no-brainer to use an inn when in a city.  Deciding to rest or not in the field carries risk v. reward.

PoE will have more costly inns and more costly camping supplies.  To make your choice an actual choice, you'd need to give an advantage to each choice.  Inns grant bonuses, camping supplies heal ... and losing XP heals...or emeralds ... both of which are more valuable than the camping supplies -> no brainer.

 

 

 

Then our understading of what is Tactical differs. As I see it is a clear tactical choice (not advantage) to heal by magic or rest. Rest takes time/resting supplies and  heal saves time/resting supplies but uses emeralds. Sounds like tactics to me.

 

Infinite resting was what was wrong in the first place in IE games.

 

Funny you should mention resting equipment. That was actually my idea way before it was introduced. Not saying that they got an inspiration from there, but rather that this new idea is in the same spirit. Resource allocation.

 

Yes, but 'saving time' isn't an issue when there are no timed quests.  It's not a viable tactical choice to expend-xp/emeralds when there is no advantage but a clear disadvantage.  (Hence my suggestion it's a 'false choice' - a choice in name only)

It's also a 'tactical choice' to remove your armour and weapons and run into melee - just not overly viable (though at least with the armour gone there's a speed advantage).

 

Making a tactical choice involves weighing advantages and disadvantages - camping supplies are cheaper than emeralds - if camping supplies weren't available in shops, it'd be a tactical choice, but they are (AFAIK).  Xp is limited (quest-only xp so can't be farmed from those battles that make you need rest in the first place, otherwise I'd agree)