OT: Making a Game System (part 2)

[Omnirizon]

thanks for the tip on BaK. I actually recall playing that game now when it first came out, I never got too far into it though, but yes I remember it was quite innovative

so yes, i'm sold on vitality/health bifurication.

i'm more concerned with my system for handling and depleting vitality, where the defense roll is actually the generation of a fraction to multiply threat by; the 'roll' is to establish the denominator of that fraction.

this is combined with harmonic (or failing that, geometric) means for establishing threat and defense. 'threat' might typically be just the weapon damage and strength score, however since vitality is siphoned off without weapon contact, and weapons simply pose some abstract 'threat' in the hands of its user, a flat weapon damage makes no sense. weapons will have a base threat score, but that is averaged (harmonically!) with several other factors, including the array of mental skills I have (thus why I want so many of them). therefore, it is perfectly possible for a lean warrior weilding a dagger to present more threat against a massive warrior weilding a 2h-sword; it all depends on how skilled the two warriors are and how well the leaner warrior is at negating the range advantage of the larger sword. In fact, I was looking through the drawings of the old german school manuals on using 2h-swords, and warriors were often depicted using the sword more like a staff! in close combat the swords weight and leverage becomes a liability, and it had to be used differently. In actual combat, the dagger and the sword have a 'threat' separate from the amount of physical damage they could actually do.

for understanding the importance of the multiple factors and harmonic or geometric means, consider this (the following example is a geometric mean, since I don't know how to compute harmonic means or if it could be computed in this system [since I don't really understand it yet], but I know that harmonic means are sensitive to reverse salience the most, while geometric means are only a little.

1 + 1 + 1 + 2+ 10
arithmetic mean = 3
geometric mean = 1.71

this means a powerful weapon in the hands of a lousy user presents very little threat. so if the two-handed sword had a high base threat, but the user had no other stats or skills relevant to its use, it would do less threat than a stalk of grass in the hands of a person skilled in weilding stalks of grass. consider that even if the grass does no damage, it may still be used in a very threatening way that could reduce vitality. this is why 'psyche' and 'spirit' are part of vitality. they are those unspeakable but obvious items that we can feel but never understand. think about 'getting psyched out' or 'losing your spirit'. a person very good at using stalks of grass threateningly could do that to someone; while never inflicting physical damage, but forcing the person into a state of submission. for this reason, i'm even going to have 'charisma' be important for some martial arts (there are several that depend on feints and fakes to essentially psyche an opponent out).

ok, so the stalks of grass is completely absurd, but it makes the point of why i am so carefully parsing out the meaning of vitality and why I want all those stats which you may find unnecessary. also, there will be some systems in my game which need something like 'spirit'. some people may be completely dumb and naive, but have lots of spirit... I'm just trying to capture some of those less mechanical essences (in a mechanical way, no less, but that's the nature of the beast) and make them relevant for the game.

[cleveland]

Hey Omni,

Neat stuff. What are the expected ranges of each of these variables you've proposed? Things can get kinda dangerous with 1/x, it approaches infinity pretty quickly as x --> 0.

Also, in your threat*defense expression [(h1+r1)/(h2+r2)], what are the relative magnitudes of the h to r? If h>>r, (h1+r1)/(h2+r2) ~= h1/h2 (and vice versa).

[Endoperez]

Originally Posted by Omnirizon

In fact, I was looking through the drawings of the old german school manuals on using 2h-swords, and warriors were often depicted using the sword more like a staff! in close combat the swords weight and leverage becomes a liability, and it had to be used differently. In actual combat, the dagger and the sword have a 'threat' separate from the amount of physical damage they could actually do.

According to ARMA, the grip is changed because armor beats edge, but tip may be used to go through the gaps in armor and pommel strike to the head can give you time to do that. Half-swording uses the sword as a spear/polearm, and "morte-striking" uses it as a hammer and hits with the pommel/handguard:
http://www.thearma.org/essays/Talhoffer/HT-Web.htm
And here's a video in which two guys play it out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnqOMbFDEAI



I'm still not sure why you can't just say that stamina acts as a buffer before actual health goes down, but any way...

You need two different threat values, normal and armor. Using 2h-swords the usual way is generally better, but doesn't work against heavy armor. Half-swording makes it easier to thrust through gaps in armor, so it's better against armored opponents.

also, there will be some systems in my game which need something like 'spirit'. some people may be completely dumb and naive, but have lots of spirit... I'm just trying to capture some of those less mechanical essences (in a mechanical way, no less, but that's the nature of the beast) and make them relevant for the game.

So... spirit could affect things like the rate at which you lose your skills when you lose health? Morale, bravery, that kind of thing? There's the problem that players will want to control the character, and can guide a coward to attack a dragon. Would that do anything to the character?

1) Why do you need both Psyche and Spirit, how do they differ? If there's no important differences, combine them.

2) Will any of the main characters have poor spirit? If it doesn't ever come up, either add something that makes it important or remove the stat.

Originally Posted by JimMorrison

- Decreasing the number of available stats causes two problems, first it waters down the personality of your characters, I have seen numerous systems that go the STR/DEX/INT route, and the degree of variance among successful characters drops precipitously. Likewise, there is an inverse relationship between number of stats, and ease of min-maxing at the expense of character building. Using 9 statistics, even if they can be said to overlap in certain ways, adds a lot of nuance to a character, allowing you to give much more depth and personality as they develop - as well as making more progression paths viable.

This might be true. I'm still thinking mostly in Dominions terms, and you can't customize the units, so I don't know how badly unbalanced it would be if you could. We might see strength 3 titans who use AoE weapons and other such weirdnesses. I agree that having just three stats is often too little, but there's no need to have exactly 9. I could see getting rid of Memory and combining Psyche/Spirit, giving 7 base stats. 7 is a good number, and not that low.

[Illuminated One]

Originally Posted by JimMorrison

- The extreme complexity which would kill the game in PnP, becomes a great tool, when you decide to commit the system to only be used with a computer doing all the complex calculus.

On general terms I'd disagree with that.
In fact I tried to make a RPG myself with a system similar to a relatively complex PnP system. Once I had finished the UI I realized that I could have just gone with a third of the skills and attributes, as I could only create very few situations where it would have made a difference (*). Just having an attribute isn't enough, if it is only used in internal calculations and doesn't have a point where it shines it doesn't help to personalize the characters.
Plus it becomes a PITA when you're actually trying to implement a plot (or AI!) into the game cause every person/event/etc needs to have it's stats and checks set. Of course you could simplify that by making generic templates or something but that again beats the purpose of high complexity.

(*) (Needless to say I never finished that project )

@Omniziron

I'd drop the thing with the harmonic mean and instead us a linear or custom formula.
With the harmonic mean chance is that a character focusing on a certain weapon will do worse in combat than a character just leveling up all attributes evenly - even with the weapon that he's specialized in.
To make personalizing the character rewarding specialization has to pay off, I'd even say to the point that you get a big boost in the field where you are expert. The drawback would be that a specialized character has a hard time of dealing with situations outside of this field.

[Omnirizon]

Originally Posted by Illuminated One

@Omniziron

I'd drop the thing with the harmonic mean and instead us a linear or custom formula.
With the harmonic mean chance is that a character focusing on a certain weapon will do worse in combat than a character just leveling up all attributes evenly - even with the weapon that he's specialized in.
To make personalizing the character rewarding specialization has to pay off, I'd even say to the point that you get a big boost in the field where you are expert. The drawback would be that a specialized character has a hard time of dealing with situations outside of this field.

this isn't true. it simply means that this character can't dump all points into using THAT ONE WEAPON while allowing the character to remain dumb as a box of rocks, oblivious as an Alzheimer's patient, and clumsy as a cow on rollerskates and still expect to use that weapon with any efficiency. It really blunts min-maxing that simpler systems cannot stop. Also, and this isn't explicitly in the system yet, but it will allow for the reality that knowing how to use weapons other than that of your specialty will actually improve your skill with your specialized weapon due to a cognitive process called synthesis. I actually read a lot about this while I was tooling through martial arts boards (people talking about improving their kendo or some other skill by learning to use a naginata or something).

also, specialization's downside being lack of diversity is a crock of **** in any system that doesn't penalize lack of diversity:
"yes, I do +23 damage, have +12 attack, and get 9 attacks per round with my longswords. but that's ALL I can do, and just think of all the stuff I'm missing out on doing... like... like... singing opera... and cooking... and writing poetry... Don't you see how my character suffers due to its extreme specialization. It's pure torture. But the world needs me, so I trudge on."

[Omnirizon]

Originally Posted by Endoperez

According to ARMA, the grip is changed because armor beats edge, but tip may be used to go through the gaps in armor and pommel strike to the head can give you time to do that. Half-swording uses the sword as a spear/polearm, and "morte-striking" uses it as a hammer and hits with the pommel/handguard:
http://www.thearma.org/essays/Talhoffer/HT-Web.htm
And here's a video in which two guys play it out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnqOMbFDEAI



I'm still not sure why you can't just say that stamina acts as a buffer before actual health goes down, but any way...

You need two different threat values, normal and armor. Using 2h-swords the usual way is generally better, but doesn't work against heavy armor. Half-swording makes it easier to thrust through gaps in armor, so it's better against armored opponents.

This has occured to me, but rather than have all these threat values, I was going to allow for skill in the two handed sword, or whatever weapon, simply to increase the weapons contribution to threat (or 'attack', I may end up calling it for simplicity). This can abstract how the wielder knows _how_ to wield the sword in what situation to extract more effectiveness from the weapon; this at the slight expense that there are some situations in which some weapons should genuinely have a higher or lower attack, depending on the environment and the exact nature of the target. Also, since the target has an independent 'defense' roll and armor value, the quality of the armor is in principle accountable for without needing ad hoc or special formulas.

So... spirit could affect things like the rate at which you lose your skills when you lose health? Morale, bravery, that kind of thing? There's the problem that players will want to control the character, and can guide a coward to attack a dragon. Would that do anything to the character?

No. actually spirit is primarily intended for a part of the magic system, and it will be necessary in this respect. However it is useful for vitality too, since 'fear' and 'morale' from dominions are rolled up in this vitality score. at the moment, it influences the initial amount of vitality. Of course, I wouldn't force a player to run away, but there are penalties for having low vitality that might be thought of as Fear, and when a player is getting low on vitality, they are quite likely to want to run away.

most of the stats you are pointing out have their initial considerations in the magic system, which is why they are necessary even if they play only an ancillary role in combat. However, the primary combat stats will play an ancillary role in magic. I like it that way and it helps contribute to my ideal behind using harmonic means (everything works best when in 'harmony'.)

psyche and spirit, or even psyche and cognizance might not seem that separate, but I believe they are. Spirit was originally conceived to represent "spirituality", something that psyche does not. think not of the priest, but of the tribal shaman, or maybe the Buddhist monk. Psyche is that mental strength and brass; I was thinking of the D&D psionics here, which is usually associated with 'intelligence', but I thought that was too blunt. For more 'real life psionics' I might imagine browbeaters and car salesmen, that's not charisma, they arn't charming you, they are just beating you down mentally until you give in; there's a lot of weak minded people out there so this works well. That doesn't take intelligence, it doesn't take spirit, it doesn't take charisma, it just takes mental strength and persistence; that's psyche. cognizance then is your ability to think, abstract, and synthesize; what we most often associate with intelligence.

of course, each stat has a little overlap with others, but that's OK and even desirable. what's important is that they have a well defined center that is necessary and cannot be captured in another stat. Of course, I could go so far as having 'slow twitch strength' and 'fast twitch strength' and such parsings like that too, but I don't think those two things are separate enough from each other that they can't reasonably be represented with just 'strength'.

[Illuminated One]

Originally Posted by Omniziron

this isn't true. it simply means that this character can't dump all points into using THAT ONE WEAPON while allowing the character to remain dumb as a box of rocks, oblivious as an Alzheimer's patient, and clumsy as a cow on rollerskates and still expect to use that weapon with any efficiency.
It really blunts min-maxing that simpler systems cannot stop. Also, and this isn't explicitly in the system yet, but it will allow for the reality that knowing how to use weapons other than that of your specialty will actually improve your skill with your specialized weapon due to a cognitive process called synthesis. I actually read a lot about this while I was tooling through martial arts boards (people talking about improving their kendo or some other skill by learning to use a naginata or something).

Hmmm...
I don't know the details of the system you have in mind but lets just make one example.
Computer programming and talking have synergy effects like one who's good a memorizing vocabulary is good at memorizing commands. Likewise someone who's able to express exactly what he wants to say should also find it easier to program a computer. But a computer programmer needs mathematics, too, and computer knowledge.
So lets make the formula for programming skill with the harmonic mean and add the talking synergy.
programming=1/(1/talk+1/math+1/computer knowledge)

Average person:
talk=5
math=5
computer knowledge=5
The average persons programming skill is (1/5+1/5+1/5)¯¹*3 = 5
Single-minded computer genius:
talk=2
math=9
computer knowledge=10
His programming skill is (1/2+1/11+1/10)¯¹*3 = 4.2 - lesser than that of the average person allthough he has burned more points.
Balanced person:
talk=7
math=7
computer knowledge=7
programming skill: 7/3 = 7 - this is the min-maxed value you can't go higher with 21 points.

So every good programmer is also an above average speaker. This is in no way realistic. There's countless examples of people being good at one thing while lacking in other areas despite synergy effects - this is what makes individuality possible. It can't be encompassed with an harmonic mean as long as you want to have synergistic effects. With a harmonic mean whatever gives a bonus will also become a limiting factor.
You can certainly tweak that a bit but I'm quite sure you'll end up with that the balanced person is best at everything or so close to it that there is no point of building up strengths and weaknesses.

better formula (1/(talk*2)+1/math+1/computers)¯¹*3

average: 6
specialized: 6.3
balanced: 8.4

also, specialization's downside being lack of diversity is a crock of **** in any system that doesn't penalize lack of diversity:
"yes, I do +23 damage, have +12 attack, and get 9 attacks per round with my longswords. but that's ALL I can do, and just think of all the stuff I'm missing out on doing... like... like... singing opera... and cooking... and writing poetry... Don't you see how my character suffers due to its extreme specialization. It's pure torture. But the world needs me, so I trudge on."

Then just penalize it. Get the +23 damage guy into a situation where his longsword is useless - for example grappling, a fight against a ghost, a karaoke contest.

[JimMorrison]

Obviously, there is a point where creativity is required to tune the math to the appropriate point.

I'm going to assume here, that what you want Omni, when you think of "harmony", is a balance between diversity and specialization. So I think a good way to achieve this, is to look at how a character might develop, such as Illuminated One's calculations - and parse out typical scores based on 'single stat min-maxing' or 'across the board flat scores with purely harmonic means'. Then in comparing the numbers, alter the math so that the "peak" of a character's ability, falls somewhat in between these scenarios - a mathematical paradigm that rewards well thought out specialization AND diversity.

It would seem you want to do more to avoid having pure specializers than hindering a jack-of-all trades, but by adding bonuses in the appropriate points, you can reward someone for making a couple stats shine, while allowing them to not be utterly crippled if they are deficient in some area. The point being that a player can neglect some things as a matter of choice, because otherwise there is simply enforcement of pure diversity, and no direct reward for ever trying to excel in any one thing.

People are multifaceted, some facets are dull, some are sparkly, but no one facet makes you a god.