Skip to Content

Actions vs Energy Points, and Speed in a turn based combat system

17 replies [Last post]
devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014

What are some ways in which one can make it in a turn-based combat system to differentiate between fast and slow weapons and characters in the game? I did mention in one of my previous posts concerning my idea of having stats for Range, Reach, and Speed, but now I'm thinking perhaps there is a way to have speed work a little differently too perhaps by having multiple attacks per combat round besides just an accuracy bonus?

Also, when it comes to a player's turn, does anyone know of any good systems to utilize an Energy Points type of system rather than Actions?

What I mean is, in a lot of systems the player during their turn in combat is given an option like: "You have 2 actions you can do, a quick attack is 1 action, a strong attack is 2 actions etc" but what about systems that don't just use the set # of actions per turn but rather it depends on how you are equipped and what gear you are using. Look at the old Fallout PC games for instance. Or would that just be too complicated to do for a tabletop game? I know tabletop rpgs may do that, and though my game is inspired by rpgs with regard to the combat I don't want it to be overly complicated. Mainly, I'm just looking for ideas on how to handle combat speed and turns that may be possible other than simply a set # of Actions one can do each turn.

schattentanz
schattentanz's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/18/2014
Just an idea

you might want to scale down a turn into segments, let's say: 10 segments are 1 turn.
Each weapon has got a speed factor.
Turns begin in segment 0 and end in segment 9.
Each time the number of the current turn segment divided by the weapon's speed factor gets you an even result, the character may attack with that weapon.

Action points and energy points are - mechanics wise - the same thing, they've just gotten different names.
As Long as you keep the number of action points a character has got in a countable range (maybe 1-10), everything is fine :)

X3M
X3M's picture
Online
Joined: 10/28/2013
Devaloki, I asume this is the

Devaloki,

I asume this is the same game as the one where you are working with the range issue.

Out of some experience in the video game designs, I know that Speed and Range are 100% intertwened to start with. You have to think about it at the same time.

Then their influence on the game is depending on the ratio between the average damage compared to the average health, when no range and no speed would be applied.

Knowing this, keeping a balance might be hard (or very easy, depending on the game that you have in mind).

Especially hard when you are only using cards but no grid.
I myself have tried many ways to get a card version correct. And the number of cards was about 50 to 200. You only have about... 10 at tops, right?

All I know is that with only cards, you have to make choices in the mechanics first. Then determine how much a card would be worth. If you want a certain card to have a certain worth, you still can adjust the mechanics. But all other variations of cards are depending on that one card and your mechanics.

I think I remember you saying that you wanted ranged units to do multiple shots. Right? This is good, but having different speeds will be of influence on the combat. Thus they will be better against ranged units, but have to be worse against melee units.
The slow units will be better against melee units but worse against the ranged units.

I hope this was of some use.

***

It is good to gather hints and tips of other designers. Map them. Make a desirable combo. And work further on this.

If you want more advice on the combo, create an overview of every mechanic that you want to use for the combat. From there, little tweaks can be applied.

I know it worked for me.

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
Hey X3M yes it's the same

Hey X3M yes it's the same game.

"You only have about... 10 at tops, right?"
Card types in the game include:

- Character card (shows the Origin of your character) which you use to track your Hit Points, MP (if it's included, I'm probably going to use a non-mp magic system though), and other vital statistics. It also shows your starting attributes (stats), and also what your Specialization is.

- Various types of gear cards (weapons, spell catalysts, armor, rings, etc.)

- Skill cards. Which are divided into "common" and "alignment" pools, and there are different types of cards based upon specializations. Melee skills, spells, miracles, static buffs, noncombat skills, etc.

- Item cards

"I think I remember you saying that you wanted ranged units to do multiple shots. "
What I meant by that is that there is a Ranged combat prior to other units getting a chance to attack. Some Ranged weapons that have especially long range get two rather than one Ranged combat phase prior to other combat phases. Once melee occurs, Ranged can still attack but they have the lowest speed each round. There are two combat rows, you can only attack those in the back row if you have ranged attacks or if there are no enemies in the front row (this is kind of what I've settled upon after the discussion concerning ranged combat in my other thread from the past).

"It is good to gather hints and tips of other designers. Map them. Make a desirable combo. And work further on this."
Definitely. I've been studying what other people have done and chatting with many people on the subject.

"If you want more advice on the combo, create an overview of every mechanic that you want to use for the combat. From there, little tweaks can be applied."
I'm writing a simple ruleset for about 3 different systems in regard to the combat I have in mind for the game. I think what I'll do is write them down and make a few pieces of gear and enemy/characters cards and see how it plays out in practice and then choose one of those systems I think works best and develop it more from there.

"Out of some experience in the video game designs, I know that Speed and Range are 100% intertwened to start with. You have to think about it at the same time."

I've been noticing this too recently. That brings up another question that's been on my mind though concerning stats in the game:

Should whatever stat governs accuracy with weapons be separate from a stat that determines how agile/evasive one is? Or can they be grouped under one stat (i.e. like a Dexterity/Agility stat)? Or would that make that stat too powerful?

Stats I am considering having for players in the game:

1. Exploration 2. Strength 3. Agility 4. Willpower ..and possibly 2 other stats that I'm still contemplating on.

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
schattentanz wrote:you might

schattentanz wrote:
you might want to scale down a turn into segments, let's say: 10 segments are 1 turn.
Each weapon has got a speed factor.
Turns begin in segment 0 and end in segment 9.
Each time the number of the current turn segment divided by the weapon's speed factor gets you an even result, the character may attack with that weapon.

Action points and energy points are - mechanics wise - the same thing, they've just gotten different names.
As Long as you keep the number of action points a character has got in a countable range (maybe 1-10), everything is fine :)

How would you keep track of the segments for the round? Perhaps have a big counter like that looks like a clock that you use a marker on?

"Each time the number of the current turn segment divided by the weapon's speed factor gets you an even result, the character may attack with that weapon."

So, for example, like a very fast speed 5 weapon could attack at every 2 segment is what you mean?

"Action points and energy points are - mechanics wise - the same thing, they've just gotten different names."

They're pretty different in how they function I think though from other games I've seen.

schattentanz
schattentanz's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/18/2014
Answers

"How would you keep track of the segments for the round? Perhaps have a big counter like that looks like a clock that you use a marker on?"

By using a D10 for example.

"Each time the number of the current turn segment divided by the weapon's speed factor gets you an even result, the character may attack with that weapon."

Example: A Speed 3 weapon gets to attack on Segment 3 (3:3=1), on Segment 6 (6:3=2) and on Segment 9 (9:3=3); higher Speed numbers = less Speed. Might be a bit counter intuitive. If you explain it with "weight" instead of speed (e.g. a dagger weighs 2, a halberd 7) it might become clearer.

"[Action points] are pretty different in how they function I think though from other games I've seen."

Depends on what kinds of game you have seen.
Let's take the mmog Guild Wars for example.
A character has on average between 20 and 30 energy points.
Skills cost 5, 10, 15, 20 or 25 points.
With 25 energy points You could use 5 consecutive skills à 5 points or one 25 points skill. Afterwards you need to regenerate energy.
The system works the same with action points: On your turn you get soandsomany action points. Different actions have got different costs.
Example: Space Hulk. A marine has got 4 action points. Now there are different costs for different actions, such as:
1 Point: Moving forwards
1 Point: Turning 90°
2 Points: Moving backwards
and so on.
Basically those action points are the marine's energy, regenerating to full at the start of the marines' player.

Not sooo different in my eyes.

Jarec
Offline
Joined: 12/27/2013
Reaction systems

So I've been looking ways to incorporate reaction systems to my games, it can really shuffle the basic pack of I-go-u-go turn based gameplay and has good opportunities for differentiating many types of speeds of units.

One miniature game that had this system is Infinity (you can get quick start rules for free, the reaction system is explained in the first text page). It basically gives a free extra turn to the enemy, as you do things, to react what you are doing.
What I want to do for my project is to take this system and give it for my rogue-class as his "thing", for he is the speed-class and needs to do his things before the enemies or get wrecked.

X3M
X3M's picture
Online
Joined: 10/28/2013
To answer your question

To answer your question regarding the effects of Accuracy and Agility.

Accuracy not interfering with Agility, both are separate factors:
Accuracy * Average Damage = True Average Damage
Agility is often used as a dodge factor, thus;
Agility * Health = True Health

The above is what I currently use for my game.
Since the following didn't work out for me.
But maybe it does work for you.

Accuracy does interfere with agility:
Well, what you have here is a chance to apply a secondary RPS system in your game (I wished it would work for me).
Where high accuracy can hit high agility just as much as low agility. Let's say 100% on both (or more) agilities.
And low accuracy can hit low agility still with 100%, but the high agility can dodge.
The high accuracy and high agility have of course, high costs. Therefore, high accuracy will be ineffective against low agility. And low accuracy is still bad any way, especially against high agility, but is cheap, very cheap.

Getting a balance in the above is tricky. There are several ways. My favourite: Linear costs, exponential effects.

For agility and accuracy, the costs are 1,2,3 and 6
But the effects are 1,4,9 and 36
Further, if accuracy is higher then agility, it is a hit.
If it is overkill, it is still, just 1 hit.
If accuracy is lower then agility, then the dice are rolled.
Accuracy is out of Agility. Thus your chance is:
Accuracy effect/Agility effect

Thus having an accuracy of 2 and an agility of 3. We have the effects of 4 and 9.
4 out of 9 is a 16 out of 36 chance.
16/36
But what to roll?

For precision rolls, I apply the sum of 2 dice.
There are 36 combinations for all the chances out of 36.
Chances to roll a sum of:
2: 1
3: 2
4: 3
5: 4
6: 5
7: 6
8: 5
9: 4
10: 3
11: 2
12: 1

We need to calculate all possibilities though.
What you have to roll is a sum of 2 Dice.
Accuracy 1 versus Agility;
1 : 01/01, 36/36 : it is an hit
2 : 01/04, 09/36 : roll a 5 or 6
3 : 01/09, 04/36 : roll a 5
6 : 01/36, 01/36 : roll a 2

Accuracy 2 versus Agility;
1 : 04/01, XX/36 : it is an overkill = just 1 hit
2 : 04/04, 36/36 : it is an hit
3 : 04/09, 16/36 : roll a 6, 7 or 8
6 : 04/36, 04/36 : roll a 5

Accuracy 3 versus Agility;
1 : 09/01, XX/36 : it is an overkill = just 1 hit
2 : 09/04, XX/36 : it is an overkill = just 1 hit
3 : 09/09, 36/36 : it is an hit
6 : 09/36, 09/36 : roll a 5 or 6

Accuracy 6 is always an overkill = just 1 hit.

Personally, I didn't apply this since I also had chances like, out of 16, out of 25, out of 49 etc.
My game was going to be extended with many more types (into infinity)
And to top it off, I summed effects before the roll. If you reached overkill by just adding up. It was a hit, and no rolls where needed.
You cannot do that solely based on 6d. The 25 could with 20d, but I wanted a 6d game only.
And checking all those possibilities (for 3d and beyond) was painful.

Are you going to expand your game with extreme numbers?

You could however apply accuracy of 4 and 5. While agility of 4 and 5 is impossible without re-rolls.
It gives the illusion of a false balance, but those weapons have simply a small weakness on both sides instead of 1 big one on 1 side.
That worked, I tested that one 3 years ago :) .

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
Good call on the d10 to track

Good call on the d10 to track time in each combat round.

I do agree too about changing it to "weight" rather than "speed." Perhaps also too the user's Strength attribute determines how many Energy Points they use when attacking with that weapon. For example, if weight ranges from 1 to 6 and so does Strength attribute, then one could subtract Strength from Weight to see how much EP it costs to attack with the weapon, minimum of 1 EP required and there could be a limit as to how many times a weapon can attack each turn. Just some food for thought at this point.

Your example concerning Space Hulk is good (I'm quite familiar with that game) and I think I may do something similar. The question is, what determines how many actions/EPs a player gets each turn (i.e. is it set [wor does a stat/gear determine how many you get? what are the limits on how many times one can attack each round etc.).

"Not sooo different in my eyes."
Well, what I was referring to with the difference is how a set number of Actions each turn tends to make the game less dynamic battle wise than if you make it instead so what you can do each turn is variable. Most games that just use "Actions" as a mechanic in battle give everyone a fixed amount and it's "enemy takes a turn, you take a turn"

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
Jarec wrote:So I've been

Jarec wrote:
So I've been looking ways to incorporate reaction systems to my games, it can really shuffle the basic pack of I-go-u-go turn based gameplay and has good opportunities for differentiating many types of speeds of units.

One miniature game that had this system is Infinity (you can get quick start rules for free, the reaction system is explained in the first text page). It basically gives a free extra turn to the enemy, as you do things, to react what you are doing.
What I want to do for my project is to take this system and give it for my rogue-class as his "thing", for he is the speed-class and needs to do his things before the enemies or get wrecked.

Thanks Jarec I'll check that out, I too enjoy miniatures games, and I wish you luck on your project

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
X3M,I do enjoy your posts

X3M,

I do enjoy your posts though they are very math heavy and hard to keep up with at times.

One thing I want to clarify too is that the game is going to either be 2d6 based at its core (with bonus dice thrown in sometimes to increase chances of success, bonus dice work by you get extra dice you roll with the 2d6 and choose the highest 2 out of the whole pool after you've rolled) or alternatively will be based on rolling the most 5+s on a number of dice for checks.

At its core, the way I would like combat to work is thus:

- Someone targets something
- Roll to hit
- Opponent can react with a focused evade/parry/or block if they wish to spend an Action/EP out of turn order (though this step may be cut)
- Roll to see how much damage is caused
- Opponent rolls for Armor value
- Resolve how much damage is done and deduct it from Hit Points

And a heads up before anyone suggests it: I'm not interested in doing a D&D Armor Class type of system where armor affects roll to hit.

"Well, what you have here is a chance to apply a secondary RPS system in your game (I wished it would work for me).
Where high accuracy can hit high agility just as much as low agility. Let's say 100% on both (or more) agilities.
And low accuracy can hit low agility still with 100%, but the high agility can dodge"

So are you saying that instead of having it so that you roll-to-hit the enemy you target instead always hit 100% of the time and what it is the opponent instead that rolls to evade/block/or parry?
Although later on in your post you mention simply about comparing ACC to AGI to determine whether it's an automatic hit or the dice have to be rolled...I'm not sure if I like that type of system honestly.

" Therefore, high accuracy will be ineffective against low agility. And low accuracy is still bad any way, especially against high agility, but is cheap, very cheap."

I have no idea what you mean there, can you clarify that?^

"Are you going to expand your game with extreme numbers?"

The system will be one of these two:

- System 1: roll a certain number of d6s opponent does the same, 5+s on each count as a success (or alternatively 4+ or 6+ if a comparison system is used), player/enemy that has highest pool counts as winning.
Opponent can react with focused evade/block/or parry.

or

- System 2 (one I'm leaning toward): For "to-hit" : compare your Agi to their Agi (or if "to-hit" accuracy is separate stat from AGI then it will be a "weapon skill" stat), that determines the target number (found by cross-referencing a chart). Roll 2d6 along with any bonus dice (from special skills, buffs, etc.), choose the two highest dice, add them together and if you get the target number it's a success. Any individual rolls of 6 on each dice count as a critical (5+s for certain weapons).
Enemy can react with a focused evade/block/or parry, though I'm unsure of how to implement that yet, whether it would be an action they do or if it increases difficulty of opponent to hit them in a static type of way.

I did like the charts you posted for your system but I feel it's too deterministic, I like things to have an element of luck to it with the dice.

Here's a picture illustrating what I mean with the 2d6 system:
http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n183/littlebilly_02/GA_Conversion_Gra...

X3M
X3M's picture
Online
Joined: 10/28/2013
Sorry about being heavy in

Sorry about being heavy in math.
And I know that I am sometimes bad in explaining things.

It is indeed to deterministic if you want a high luck in the game. That is why I removed the luck part from that from my game as well and turned into a solid thing (no dice specific). The real luck is now equal for all my units. But when an unit hits, there is differences in the damage in the same way as I tried to explain.

You could however, separate this with an extra roll of dice. Thus having the same accuracy on all weapons. But also an extra roll once there is a lower chance of hitting.

And that chart that you are showing is a good one. I would stick with that.

" Therefore, high accuracy will be ineffective against low agility. And low accuracy is still bad any way, especially against high agility, but is cheap, very cheap."

Errr, ok. There are more people that don't understand this. So it is me that explains bad.
I think I have to put the effects completely in numbers without dice. It is the conclusion that comes forth out of the math that counts. You give the players only the rules for playing. But the effects are noticed afterwards. The effects come from N.

***

For this example, I will show statistics that are worth equal (=a balanced game).
Each unit has a total of 216 AgH/body points to spend on Agility*Health.
Each unit has a total of 36 AcD/weapon points to spend on Accuracy*Damage.
For an RPS effect we don't use Ag and Ac. We use the squared numbers instead: AgX and AcX.
And it is those numbers that could be given in the game.

First all the AgH; from the least agile to the most agile;
Ag=1 H=216 AgX=1
Ag=2 H=108 AgX=4
Ag=3 H=72 AgX=9
Ag=6 H=36 AgX=36

Now for the AcD; from the least accurate to the most accurate;
Ac=1 D=36 AcX=1
Ac=2 D=18 AcX=4
Ac=3 D=12 AcX=9
Ac=6 D=6 AcX=36

We compare AgX with AcX.
When AcX is the same or higher. The chance (C) = 1.
When AcX is lower then AgX. The chance on hitting is C = AcX/AgX.
The average damage is then D*C = Ad
The number of shots needed before some one is defeated is H / Ad = N

---

How many shots (N) do I need when I pit any weapon against the unit that has Ag=1?

Ag=1 means that AgX=1 and H = 216

Ac=1 D=36 AcX=1 gives us That AcX = AgX,
thus C = 1
D * C = 36 * 1 = 36
N = H / Ad = 216 / 36 = 6

Ac=2 D=18 AcX=4 gives us That AcX > AgX,
thus C = 1
D * C = 18 * 1 = 18
N = H / Ad = 216 / 18 = 12

Ac=3 D=12 AcX=9 gives us That AcX > AgX,
thus C = 1
D * C = 12 * 1 = 12
N = H / Ad = 216 / 12 = 18

Ac=6 D=6 AcX=36 gives us That AcX > AgX,
thus C = 1
D * C = 6 * 1 = 6
N = H / Ad = 216 / 6 = 36

---

How many shots (N) do I need when I pit any weapon against the unit that has Ag=2?

Ag=2 means that AgX=4 and H = 108

Ac=1 D=36 AcX=1 gives us That AcX < AgX,
thus C = AcX / AgX = 1 / 4 = 0,25
D * C = 36 * 0,25 = 9
N = H / Ad = 108 / 9 = 12

Ac=2 D=18 AcX=4 gives us That AcX = AgX,
thus C = 1
D * C = 18 * 1 = 18
N = H / Ad = 108 / 18 = 6

Ac=3 D=12 AcX=9 gives us That AcX > AgX,
thus C = 1
D * C = 12 * 1 = 12
N = H / Ad = 108 / 12 = 9

Ac=6 D=6 AcX=36 gives us That AcX > AgX,
thus C = 1
D * C = 6 * 1 = 6
N = H / Ad = 108 / 6 = 18

---

How many shots (N) do I need when I pit any weapon against the unit that has Ag=3?

Ag=3 means that AgX=9 and H = 72

Ac=1 D=36 AcX=1 gives us That AcX < AgX,
thus C = AcX / AgX = 1 / 9 = 0,111
D * C = 36 * 0,111 = 4
N = H / Ad = 72 / 4 = 18

Ac=2 D=18 AcX=4 gives us That AcX < AgX,
thus C = AcX / AgX = 4 / 9 = 0,444
D * C = 18 * 0,444 = 8
N = H / Ad = 72 / 8 = 9

Ac=3 D=12 AcX=9 gives us That AcX = AgX,
thus C = 1
D * C = 12 * 1 = 12
N = H / Ad = 72 / 12 = 6

Ac=6 D=6 AcX=36 gives us That AcX > AgX,
thus C = 1
D * C = 6 * 1 = 6
N = H / Ad = 72 / 6 = 12

---

How many shots (N) do I need when I pit any weapon against the unit that has Ag=6?

Ag=3 means that AgX=36 and H = 36

Ac=1 D=36 AcX=1 gives us That AcX < AgX,
thus C = AcX / AgX = 1 / 36
D * C = 36 * (1 / 36) = 1
N = H / Ad = 36 / 1 = 36

Ac=2 D=18 AcX=4 gives us That AcX < AgX,
thus C = AcX / AgX = 4 / 36 = 0,111
D * C = 18 * 0,111 = 2
N = H / Ad = 36 / 2 = 18

Ac=3 D=12 AcX=9 gives us That AcX < AgX,
thus C = AcX / AgX = 9 / 36 = 0,25
D * C = 12 * 0,25 = 3
N = H / Ad = 36 / 3 = 12

Ac=6 D=6 AcX=36 gives us That AcX = AgX,
thus C = 1
D * C = 6 * 1 = 6
N = H / Ad = 36 / 6 = 6

---

And that is how we get a list of N.
The lower N, the better the choice of weapon.
The higher N, the better the choice of body.
Putting these N in a table, we get:

Against a weapon with AcX from low to high (highest N is best)
Ag=1 H=216 AgX=1; 6/12/18/36
Ag=2 H=108 AgX=4; 12/6/9/18
Ag=3 H=72 AgX=9; 18/9/6/12
Ag=6 H=36 AgX=36; 36/18/12/6

Against a body with AgX from low to high (lowest N is best)
Ac=1 D=36 AcX=1; 6/12/18/36
Ac=2 D=18 AcX=4; 12/6/9/18
Ac=3 D=12 AcX=9; 18/9/6/12
Ac=6 D=6 AcX=36; 36/18/12/6

The 2 N-matrixes show the same, thus we can conclude that the game is 100% balanced with equal bodies versus equal weapons. And there are different effects with different choices.

With 4 options for the body and 4 options for the weapon. We can have 16 combinations of units in this example. Solely on Agility and Accuracy differences.

So, if any one wants to keep a game balanced, each unit needs to be added.

---

I have to admit that when you think about these numbers. It shows that when luck strikes, some inaccurate soldiers will be having very devastating effects. In small armies, luck is a big factor. In big armies, you get statistic events smeared over the army. And thus luck is a very small factor.

To see the effects more clearly, you could pit the combinations:
Bert;
Ag=2 H=108 AgX=4; 12/6/9/18
Ac=2 D=18 AcX=4; 12/6/9/18
against
Ernie;
Ag=6 H=36 AgX=36; 36/18/12/6
Ac=1 D=36 AcX=1; 6/12/18/36

A relatively slow soldier with a relatively low accuracy.
against
A very agile soldier with a very very low accuracy.

Statistically speaking Bert needs 18 shots for defeating Ernie.
And Ernie needs only 12 shots for defeating Bert.
An army of Ernies would win in the long run.

However...
When they are having luck on their hands. And every shot is a hit.
Bert only needs 3 shots on Ernie.
And Ernie needs 3 shots on Bert.
So while Ernie misses 3 times, Bert could already have finished him.

An Bert against Bert;
statistically they need 6 shots.
and 6 shots is needed at 100% luck. Well, a Bert against Bert is always 100%.

An Ernie against Ernie;
statistically they need an anoying high amount of 36 shots,
only 1 shot is needed though at 100% luck.

***

I hope this was better to understand.

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
"You could however, separate

"You could however, separate this with an extra roll of dice. Thus having the same accuracy on all weapons. But also an extra roll once there is a lower chance of hitting."

What do you mean separate it with an extra roll of dice? Like, what I was referring to with having weapons hit automatically but players/enemies get a chance to evade/block/or parry with a dice roll for that?

The rest of your post is good but, as said, it's not the way I look into and understand games. Your post reminds me of the extremely mathematically detailed analyses found on the Dominion Strategy website.

Those type of analyses may be useful and interesting to certain types of gamers, such as analyses talking about the exact mathematical certainties of winning via the Big Gold strategy, but for other players (such as myself) it's not something interesting or needed. I'd rather simply know which strategy (or design mechanic) is better to go for, not the exact mathematical reasons underlying it.

"So, if any one wants to keep a game balanced, each unit needs to be added."
Could you clarify what you mean by that^ ? So are you saying that if a game has characters that have attributes/stats, then it is important to separate the stat that governs weapon accuracy from the one that governs evasion/chance to be hit?
Of course, various gear in game would affect or limit the character's stats that determines those things.

With stats for characters in my game currently it is looking like this:

Each stat ranges from 1 (horrible) to 6 (best).
Stats may provide a bonus or penalty to rolls based upon the stat (though I'm unsure of this mechanic).

The stats and what they govern are:

1. Exploration. Determines how well you are at exploring locations on board, how dangerous things are that you encounter, and allows you to sift through more loot when obtaining loot.
2. Strength. Affects physical weapon damage, affects equip limit, affects endurance (endurance points can be used during combat to do extra actions but aren't restored until the character rests outside of battle).
3. Agility. Affects weapon accuracy, affects ranged weapon damage, affects evasion/dodge.
4. Resolve. Affects # of overworld actions available each turn, as well as other things possibly.
5. Willpower. Affects # of castings per sorcery you get (sorceries have a number of castings each, no mp. there are other forms of magic/spells in the game), affects other things unsure of yet...
6. Intelligence. Affects # of skill cards you can sift through/add to the store, power of spells perhaps, amongst other things...

Though there possibly may be other stats or different ones. the idea is that each stat affects multiple things in combat and/or outside of battle.

What I am wondering of is whether or not it would be overpowered for Agility to affect both weapon accuracy and evasion as said.

X3M
X3M's picture
Online
Joined: 10/28/2013
"You could however, separate

"You could however, separate this with an extra roll of dice. Thus having the same accuracy on all weapons. But also an extra roll once there is a lower chance of hitting."

With this I meant that you always have the same chance of hitting your opponent in a "clean" game.
With clean, I mean, no agility, no accuracy, no parry, no blocking etc.
When you add agility and accuracy, there is another roll added to the "clean" roll.

Dominion Strategy website.
I guess, I check that out.
My math is only used in designing. When players play, they only get the statistics to play with. No need for them to know where the statistics come from.
For designers however, it might be important to create a balanced game. This applies to war games the most.
If a statistic is a little wrong, and you get that players wont use certain soldiers. And that would be a waist of time you put in creating that soldier.

"So, if any one wants to keep a game balanced, each unit needs to be added."
As above, when a certain unit is refrained from adding. Another unit might become over powered. And then some units will be weaker, thus not used.
Of course you could do with less. But that to is a math story.

Think of it like this:
'would a player use this unit?'
and when you adjust the unit;
'will a player now still use the other units?'

"What I am wondering of is whether or not it would be overpowered for Agility to affect both weapon accuracy and evasion as said."
In my opinion, each statistic of a unit should have a strong and a weak point. However, designs are possible with only strong points. And to top it of, you have agility affect 2 stats. No problem, just keep in mind that when you balance your game. Agility simply is a bigger factor to all events.

let-off studios
let-off studios's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/07/2011
Visual Cues

Just a thought on how to visually represent the number of attacks a character is permitted in a turn.

Imagine a "number line" ranging from 0 to 9, as in your segment explanation. Each character (and additional combatants) has a number of tokens for their weapon equivalent to their speed. For example, if a character has a weapon with Speed 3, they'll have 3 tokens for that weapon.

Weapon tokens are placed on the number line wherever they correspond. In the previous example, a character with a Speed 3 weapon places tokens on 3, 6, and 9. Same goes for all other combatants in the encounter.

Individual initiative can be calculated through Speed and/or other character factors, and this is indicated by placing the weapon tokens from top to bottom, with the first character to act at the top of the list.

If spells or abilities affect the number or timing of character attacks, then the adjustments can be made on the fly by simply moving tokens from one slot on the number line to another, or adding tokens, or removing tokens.

For me, this kind of tool would be useful since I spend only the beginning of a turn wondering when I'll be able to attack. Even in the case(s) where the number or order of attacks are adjusted, there's still minor changes made with a persistent visual cue.

This entire mechanic sounds very interesting. I hope my explanation has been useful. If it seems worthwhile but you need clarification, let me know and I can come up with a visual tool to explain it.

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
let-off, Thanks for the tips,

let-off,

Thanks for the tips, I really like your ideas on it! That would make sense to use a system like that too in my game, because I plan on having a "Round A" and "Round B" that alternate after initial ranged phase. The reason for that mainly for determining enemy AI patterns. For instance, one enemy on Round A might charge a strong attack and then initiate it on Round B.

"Weapon tokens are placed on the number line wherever they correspond. In the previous example, a character with a Speed 3 weapon places tokens on 3, 6, and 9. Same goes for all other combatants in the encounter."

I like this idea a lot as said, I'd have to work on it more to balance it better.
For example, what if a player wants to do a nonattack action that would take less or more time than using their weapon?

I do really like the idea of a "time line" being used for rounds though, more so than the d10 suggestion earlier in the thread..

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
Well, thinking of it now, if

Well, thinking of it now, if i use a timeline system I could have it work by initiative/reach determining when you can act initially, but each action has an associated amount of time units with it. So after you an action you shift your time marker along the timeline based upon how long the action's time unit consumption/recovery it has.
Ranged weapons get a "first strike" type of round but after they fire they have to use an action to reload.
Alternatively, if i forego the use of a timeline system I could just have it so some actions are designated as "long action" and have it take two combat turns to do
Thoughts on this?

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
The boardgame Red November

The boardgame Red November uses a time system similar to what I was trying to say with my last post

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut