Skip to Content

Dodge vs Block mechanics for turn based combat system

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

This thread will build upon this previous one:
http://www.bgdf.com/node/15003

Ok, so the rough skeleton of the combat system for my games works like this in regard to making a melee attack works thus (scale of the game is individual characters fighting against other individuals, only a few at a time):

1. Declare target, spend an action point to initiate attack (possibly more than one AP depending if attack or weapon requires more than one spent...)
2. Roll to hit
3. Defender has option to block or dodge or do nothing (dodging and block rules is what this post will cover specifically as noted by thread title)
4. Determine level of success of hit. Sometimes will have special effects and/or critical damage multiplier (note, "determine" in this step doesn't involve rolling any dice, it would be determined by how well you did with your roll in step 2 versus step 3)
5. Determine amount of damage
6. Reduce damage by armour (Steps 5 & 6 are applicable for now, though I may change the way armour works , i'm testing different mechanics and ideas for now).

I know this is a rather vague explanation and doesn't explain any particulars of how the system works specifically, but bear with me...The system uses all d6s only at its core.

In step 3 the defender can choose to block or dodge...but what should the difference be between them is what I'm trying to figure out.
What I've contemplated so far is that dodge should be an all out type of defense, you try to avoid all damage or you end up taking all damage , maybe even giving the opponent a free critical if you fail to dodge. Dodge should require spending 1 AP and how good the dodge is should be based upon the unit's Agility stat (agility stat max usable would be determined by type of armour worn i.e. heavy armour = 1 dodge, medium=2, light=3, none=4). One idea I had for it is that you would have a saving throw that you'd try to roll equal to or higher on 2d6 in order to dodge...the number would be based upon the speed of the weapon being swung at you, as well as how agile you are.

Blocking on the other hand, I would imagine to be a sort of opposed dice roll, where the attacker rolls (however rolling ends up working mechanically...) at same time as defender and they compare their results. The shield could add to defenders roll in addition to the defenders stat. It would also require 1 AP (perhaps some shields would also allow you to spend extra AP to add to defense roll) to use beyond the first block (1st block would be free, you simply tap the shield card sideways to show it is used that round). So you have more likelihood of being hit than with dodging, but if you get hit you take less damage/have less chance of being criticaled.

Or maybe it'd be simpler just to have shields add to the armour value? Or even have two separate values: defense and armour...defense is how hard you are to hit, armour is how much you reduce damage by.

What I'm trying to aim for is:
1. The players should vary up their tactics depending upon the type of enemy they're facing. Agile quick enemies you'll want to use lighter weapons against, heavily armoured targets you'll want either piercing weapons or high damage heavy weapons. If you're the defender, you'll be faced with whether you should dodge or block.
and
2. For players to have to decide whether to use AP to attack hard or reserve it for defense. AP would regenerate back by 1 (or in full) after either everyone has went down to 0 or at the start of every other round.

Also, note in my game there are no skill cards. Weapons, shields, and other combat gear have maneuvers/bonuses printed on their cards; some require minimum stats for them to be unlocked. For example, a rapier could have a basic attack that comes with it, but also a second attack it can do that pierces armour easier but it's only usable if you have a certain amount of dexterity stat.

Any ideas or input is, as always, much appreciated.

chriswhite
Offline
Joined: 07/10/2011
Block idea

How about the block make the attack an automatic hit, but it hits with the lowest amount of damage (presumably 1) ?

Then keep the monsters fierceness differentiated by the particulars of their damage, so that the defenders have to choose which they are content to block, and which should risk dodging.

For example: (I'll use fantasy tropes here, but tweak as you see fit)
1. Goblin: 1D6 damage.
2. Asp: 1D6 damage, + 50% that the defender becomes 'poisoned' (some bad status effect)
3. Acid-Spitting Spider: 1D6 damage, + If this attack is Blocked, defender discards an armor card.
4. Giant: 3DG damage
5. Paladin: 1D6 damage, +3 damage
6. Crossbowman: 2D6 damage + this attack cannot be Blocked

So, for #1, blocking is the obvious choice, whereas 2 & 3 are situational, and you'd have to make a decision based on how your present situation would be affected by their other effects. 4 & 5 have high minimum damage levels, which makes dodging much more attractive. #6 is an example of the kind of design you could to to encourage certain specialized behaviors (i.e players that develop their character to specialize in dodging.

I haven't thought much about how this interacts with you Armor mechanic–– you'll have to figure that one out for yourself!

Hope that helps.

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
His Chris, thanks for the

His Chris, thanks for the post. Although your ideas don't interact well with the armor mechanic, it still gave me some food for thought nonetheless.

"How about the block make the attack an automatic hit, but it hits with the lowest amount of damage (presumably 1) ?"
The problem with this is that it wouldn't differentiate between different shields and also if something hits with lowest amount of damage it won't get past most armour (since armour most likely will be a damage reduction system in my game, i'm trying out other mechanics for armour though so that's not set in stone).

I do like your examples of the various enemies. For effects like the Asp's poison attack, i'd resolve that by having them roll a separate coloured d6 , 4+=poison condition.

for #6, ranged attacks will be affected differently by different types of shields. in general, the larger the shield, the more effective at blocking ranged attacks. As a penalty, shields (like armour) could have a weight to them that affects your dodge speed as well as perhaps some other type of penalty too.

" #6 is an example of the kind of design you could to to encourage certain specialized behaviors (i.e players that develop their character to specialize in dodging."
This, and the other examples and reasonings behind them that you gave, is a great example of the type of thing i'd be trying to convey with how players interact with different threats and enemies in the game.

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
Essentially, what I'm trying

Essentially, what I'm trying to figure out is:
If when you roll to hit the basics of the target number is based upon a comparison of accuracy vs evasion (if the opponent chooses no active defense; you only need one hit to succeed. one hit being a single 6 rolled on a single die out of your dice pool that you would roll) then how does dodge and block (done as an active defense) differentiate from doing nothing? Specifically in regard to the block option.

Dodge I figure would be that the opponent gets a dice pool based on their dodge rating (determined by agility stat, limited by armour) and then you compare results to attacker's. You either dodge all damage or you take all damage. Doing dodge requires spending one AP.

Block is what i'm trying to figure out though specifically, as said

schattentanz
schattentanz's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/18/2014
Too complicated

I think, you are overcomplicating the Situation:

In step 2, a character "rolls to hit". But what exactly does he roll against? Well, usually against the opponent's talent to negate a blow.
This basically is "dodging".
Either you hit (and deliver damage) or you don't (and do nothing instead).

If you roll to hit and hit, your opponent did not dodge.
I'd say, keep it as simple as that.

If you really want to have it more complicated, I'd like to suggest a mechanic I learned from playing "Angry Birds Epic":

"Dodging" means, if a character deals more damage than X, all of that damage is ignored.
(Note: To counter this, there are attacks with low initial damage but high damage over time following up, or attack having their damage potential split up on multiple swings. Both kinds of attacks go through, giving thos dodgers a hard time.)
"Blocking" means, if a character deals less damage than X, all of that damage is ignored.

This makes for some interesting setups, especially when you are fighting multiple waves of opponents featuring both dodgers and blockers.

Kind regards,
Kai

kos
Offline
Joined: 01/17/2011
Dodge with Agility and Block with Strength

What about:
Block rolls Strength to reduce damage.
Dodge rolls Agility to reduce damage.
If the defense roll is less than the attack roll, attacker adds Strength or Agility (for Block and Dodge, respectively) onto their damage.

Example, using the dice pool system you mentioned earlier:
Attacker rolls to attack and gets 3 successes.
Defender chooses to Dodge, rolling Agility to get 2 successes. He partially dodged the blow, but left himself exposed to a critical hit.
Attacker hits with -2 damage (for the Dodge result), but because the Defender failed the Dodge the Attacker adds his Agility onto his weapon damage.

This would create the situation where you may choose not to Dodge or Block if you think you are going to fail, and instead take the "safe" route of getting hit normally. Strong people are better at blocking, and Agile people are better at Dodging. Also, Blocking against strong opponents is more dangerous than against weak opponents, because if you fail the block you are going to get crushed.

Regards,
kos

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
"I think, you are

"I think, you are overcomplicating the Situation:

In step 2, a character "rolls to hit". But what exactly does he roll against? Well, usually against the opponent's talent to negate a blow.
This basically is "dodging".
Either you hit (and deliver damage) or you don't (and do nothing instead)."
Yeah you're right.
So I guess I should remove dodge as an active defense you spend AP and just simply have it as an always on type of thing the player rolls against.So the benefit of wearing less armour (and having a high agility stat as well combined with it) is that you are always harder to hit.

**Also**an important thing I wanted to point out:
There's another main mechanic I've been thinking about using besides the d6 pool where you count 5+s as successes. The other mechanic works like this:
You gather a pool of d6s according to how accurate your attack is and the defender/enemy gets a d6 pool as well according to their defense etc. Since you are attacking AIs in the game, you roll all the d6s at once (including the defenders) and you differentiate between them by using different colour dice. Out of the d6s rolled you simply look for the higher individual number. If tied, move on to the next. Once you found out who wins, count the degree of victory by comparing how many other dice the victor had over the opponent. The extra successes could add to the damage total/pool or be spent for special effects of weapons or for criticals...
I tested this one out a lot and it is a very fun one to use and it gives someone with lesser stats more of a chance of success than a d6 5+ success pool.

""Dodging" means, if a character deals more damage than X, all of that damage is ignored.
(Note: To counter this, there are attacks with low initial damage but high damage over time following up, or attack having their damage potential split up on multiple swings. Both kinds of attacks go through, giving thos dodgers a hard time.)"
Ehh, i don't like that mechanic at all so I won't use it, but thanks for sharing it.

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
Some interesting ideas KOS,

Some interesting ideas KOS, but you have to keep in mind Armour in my game reduces damage as well. I think what would be best idea (though I am contemplating other things too for it) for it is so that Shields/Blocking reduce damage further, either as a passive bonus, or when rolling to defend it allows you to reduce damage partially even if you fail (whereas Dodge should make it so it's all or nothing with regard to preventing damage).

" Also, Blocking against strong opponents is more dangerous than against weak opponents, because if you fail the block you are going to get crushed."
However blocking and dodging is done in the game, I'd like what you mentioned to be reflected in the rules somehow. Although perhaps tower shields could deal with big guys attacking you.

But yeah, I think I'll try to implement your idea of dodging being good for agile people and blocking for high strength characters.
I'd like , however it's done in the end, for blocking and dodging to feel like two separate things when you do them.
There could also be a differentiation between types of shields too. Smaller bucklers could make you harder to hit while tower shields reduce damage more.
But check my post I made above this one about the other dice mechanic for d6 pool I'm considering using.
Or shields could simply give you a saving throw (e.g. roll 10 on 2d6 to block attack )...

So to sum things up thus far:

Attacking consists of:
1. Declare target
2. Roll to hit if opponent is dodging (default state). If opponent is blocking, some other mechanic will be used for that. Dodging is a free reaction. Blocking requires tapping the shield or spending AP, perhaps some shields could be tapped more than once.
3. If hit roll damage (perhaps extra successes over opponent's defense roll increases damage or adds critical multiplier to damage), reduce damage by armour and take that as HP damage.

kos wrote:
What about:
Block rolls Strength to reduce damage.
Dodge rolls Agility to reduce damage.
If the defense roll is less than the attack roll, attacker adds Strength or Agility (for Block and Dodge, respectively) onto their damage.

Example, using the dice pool system you mentioned earlier:
Attacker rolls to attack and gets 3 successes.
Defender chooses to Dodge, rolling Agility to get 2 successes. He partially dodged the blow, but left himself exposed to a critical hit.
Attacker hits with -2 damage (for the Dodge result), but because the Defender failed the Dodge the Attacker adds his Agility onto his weapon damage.

This would create the situation where you may choose not to Dodge or Block if you think you are going to fail, and instead take the "safe" route of getting hit normally. Strong people are better at blocking, and Agile people are better at Dodging. Also, Blocking against strong opponents is more dangerous than against weak opponents, because if you fail the block you are going to get crushed.

Regards,
kos

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
One final thing I need to

One final thing I need to point out/make clear concerning d6 pool mechanic (regardless of either particular one):
The amount of dice would first be determined by your stats. Either
1. it would be d6s simply equal to the stat
or
2. 2 d6s base + an extra one per every 2 in a stat (so for example, at 5 in a stat you'd 4 d6s)
or
3. Compare the attacker and defenders stats. The one that is lowest only gets 2d6. The other gets +x , x depending upon how far the difference is. One higher=+1, two higher=+2, three higher=+3. If equal both players roll 2 d6s for their pool.

As to how shields/block works in this, that's what I'm still trying to figure out with this thread...

schattentanz
schattentanz's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/18/2014
Another thought: A

Another thought:

A comparision of strength versus agility equals your chance to hit as in "number of dice thrown".
(Also, Strength determines, what kind of armour you can wear; heavier armour, however, reduces your Agility.)
With each of those dice you have to roll equal to or lower than the weapon's strength (so each weapon uses a strength of 1-5, 6 always misses); the dieroll results in a number of successes.

Armour also has a certain strength.
Roll an amount of dice equal to your strength. Each die rolled equal to or below the armour's strength cancels out 1 of the attacker's successes.
Shields cancel out 1 success automatically.

Kind regards,
Kai

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
Strength should be about

Strength should be about damage output, how much you can carry, max HP, and Armour you can wear...it shouldn't affect how accurate you are.
For accuracy, there's a "Combat" (placeholder name) stat.

"With each of those dice you have to roll equal to or lower than the weapon's strength (so each weapon uses a strength of 1-5, 6 always misses); the dieroll results in a number of successes."
This was something I had been considering too. There's a RPG called Blade of the Iron Throne which has a similar mechanic. Basically, target numbers are set by the weapon itself you are using; your melee/combat d6 pool is based on your stats etc. I'll test it out and see what I think, but I am aiming more toward the idea (at least for the to hit roll) of the base mechanic being about rolling d6s and choosing highest and counting number of successes (which add to damage or crits etc).

"Armour also has a certain strength.
Roll an amount of dice equal to your strength. Each die rolled equal to or below the armour's strength cancels out 1 of the attacker's successes.
Shields cancel out 1 success automatically."

I like this idea of your's. Although I'm not sure if you're saying to have the armour step as part of the to hit roll or separate. Keep in mind, I want them to be two separate steps; armour should not make you harder to hit, it should reduce damage or have its own step where you have to penetrate the armour.

The amount of dice should be equal to the weapon damage though if I use that style. Or perhaps it could alternatively be an "armour penetration" step instead of a damage reduction style.

Either way, that would make it so armour works in a variable way since you are rolling to see how good it does, whilst shields give a small free bonus automatically.

I've seen a lot of similar games have it so that shields simply add to how hard you are to hit, but that makes it so that being agile and using a shield essentially are treated the same way mechanically (and as pointed out throughout this post, I'd like what they do to feel separate from one another).

schattentanz wrote:
Another thought:

A comparision of strength versus agility equals your chance to hit as in "number of dice thrown".
(Also, Strength determines, what kind of armour you can wear; heavier armour, however, reduces your Agility.)
With each of those dice you have to roll equal to or lower than the weapon's strength (so each weapon uses a strength of 1-5, 6 always misses); the dieroll results in a number of successes.

Armour also has a certain strength.
Roll an amount of dice equal to your strength. Each die rolled equal to or below the armour's strength cancels out 1 of the attacker's successes.
Shields cancel out 1 success automatically.

Kind regards,
Kai

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
One other idea that crossed

One other idea that crossed my mind, perhaps shields could be divided into 3 base categories: small, medium, and large.
They have different defense ratings versus ranged attacks based upon size.
But normally against melee attacks simply it'd work by: during the damage step, your armour reduces damage, the shield reduces damage too but you have to roll a d6 to see how much it reduces by, each shield would have its own stats. So for example, a medium shield could read like:

d6 roll/Damage reduction given= 1-3/0, 4-5/2, 6/3

And some shields would special abilities. So a buckler for example could read:

"d6 roll/damage reduction given=1-5/0, 6=2
Ability 1=If Agility is 4+ get +1 to your d6 roll for shield saving throw
Ability 2= If Agility is 3+, get +1d6 to Dodge roll pool (this represents buckler providing evasive ability to those skilled with it)"

But if shields are used that way, how does it interact with the first "to hit" step? I don't think it'd make sense to see a guy with a huge shield that's very evasive and has agility dodging everywhere...so I'm wondering how to stop that from happening? Perhaps have shields limit agility too?

Just some thoughts...
Any other ideas and suggestions would be appreciated

I could give a list of the Stats I am considering for characters in the game if needed too. The main combat ones would be Strength affecting damage bonus and what you can wield, Agility for how evasive you are when dodging (the base value that determines how hard you are to hit when not actively blocking), Dexterity/Combat for how accurate you are with weapons in general.

Experimental Designs
Experimental Designs's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/20/2013
Should an attack miss

Should an attack miss wouldn't that count as a dodge anyway?

You swung, you missed therefore it was dodged. Or am I over-simplifying things?

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
This is how I see it:

This is how I see it:
A weapon has accuracy. The attacker takes this fact with it all the time when facing others.
An opponent has agility (ability to dodge). The defender takes this fact with it all the time when facing others.

The 2 effects might get stacked in a battle. But are to be treated separate for the entire game.

Experimental Designs
Experimental Designs's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/20/2013
I think if a character is

I think if a character is very agile on their feet or have a perk in acrobatics or has a combat proficiency bonus they'll be harder to hit because this shows how elusive they are as a target because they're dodging, ducking and whatnot.

So if your character is struck by a lucky hit this can determine a damage modifier. If you're doing D20s and the defense you need to beat is a 16 and you roll a total of 17 plus your character's sword skill then this attack is enough to wound if there is a damage die. If you roll a 20 or higher in total then maybe there can be a critical effect on the character where this counts as serious wound. It'll be like a slash across the arm versus a deep stab to the gut. A character with low armor will have a lower damage threshold versus someone tanking up on armor.

Perhaps a blocking mechanic will be something if you roll just high enough to hit that gives you character a chance to block akin to a saving throw of sorts.

It's what I like to call a threshold dynamic. I use something similar on my design.

For instance:

Character's Defense is a 16.

If you roll below a 16 the attack is a miss.

If you roll between 16 to 19 you hit but this character has a small chance to block.

If you roll a 19 or higher in total on the attack die this character cannot block and can potentially take a serious wound on a damage die.

If this overcomplicated things I'll just shut up.

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
Experimental Designs

Experimental Designs wrote:
Should an attack miss wouldn't that count as a dodge anyway?

You swung, you missed therefore it was dodged. Or am I over-simplifying things?

You're right, and others have pointed this out in the thread before. It is kind of redundant to have a dodge option in the game if there already is a to hit roll

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
X3M wrote:This is how I see

X3M wrote:
This is how I see it:
A weapon has accuracy. The attacker takes this fact with it all the time when facing others.
An opponent has agility (ability to dodge). The defender takes this fact with it all the time when facing others.

The 2 effects might get stacked in a battle. But are to be treated separate for the entire game.

What do you mean by them being stacked?
And I recall in one of my older threads on here where I was talking about weapons...wasn't it you in that thread that said weapons shouldn't have accuracy stats?

Also, concerning base mechanics for the to hit roll, I'm either going to go with:
1. d6 dice pool, you total number of d6s for yourself and the defender. Roll the pool, differentiate between attacker and defender by colour of the dice. Look for the single highest dice, if tied go down until someone has the highest single d6. The degree by which the winner won might add to critical damage perhaps.
or
2. d6 dice pool. count d6s as success based upon a target number. so if the target number is 3, then every 3 in your pool rolled counts as 1 success. do the same for defender and compare the total number of successes on each side to determine winner.

I'm leaning more towards the first mechanic, since I've been testing it I find it the most fun to use.

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
I'm not doing d20s, ONLY d6s,

I'm not doing d20s, ONLY d6s, but I found your comment pretty interesting and helpful regardless.

" If you're doing D20s and the defense you need to beat is a 16 and you roll a total of 17 plus your character's sword skill then this attack is enough to wound if there is a damage die. "
I don't intend to have +x to individual numbers, it'll be a dice pool system, at least for the to hit roll that is.
Also, armour in my game will reduce damage, not make it harder for you to be hit like how it is in d&d/thac0.
The to hit roll is an opposed test.

"It's what I like to call a threshold dynamic. I use something similar on my design.
If this overcomplicated things I'll just shut up."

Nah, it's fine, that's actually very cool idea.
If I use that idea for shields, I wonder how it could be integrated into a d6 pool system though?
Perhaps it could be that you roll to hit (and defender rolls their agility/evasion pool), you still hit if you roll highest number, but if you didn't succeed by a certain number of successes (indicated by the shield's stats that the defender is wielding) then the defender gets a saving throw that possibly negates all damage (so you would skip the damage step).

So for example:

You target a demon that is pretty agile.
Taking into account your's/and their's stat bonus+gear bonus you both gather a number of d6s for your attack and defense pools. Say you are rolling 4 d6s and they get 5 d6s.
You, the attacker, roll:
6, 6, 5, 1
They roll: 5, 3, 3, 2, 1
Since you rolled the single highest dice ("6"), you were successful in striking them. You won by +1 (since you have one other 6, your 5 and 1 don't count since it ties with what they have).
If they are wielding no shield then you would go to the damage step (perhaps the +1 adds to damage or something else), but if they are wielding a buckler that has threshold 1 (meaning, you have to have 2+ in order to bypass shield) they get a saving throw. if they roll 9+ on 2d6 they cancel your hit totally.

Just some brainstorming...

Experimental Designs wrote:
I think if a character is very agile on their feet or have a perk in acrobatics or has a combat proficiency bonus they'll be harder to hit because this shows how elusive they are as a target because they're dodging, ducking and whatnot.

So if your character is struck by a lucky hit this can determine a damage modifier. If you're doing D20s and the defense you need to beat is a 16 and you roll a total of 17 plus your character's sword skill then this attack is enough to wound if there is a damage die. If you roll a 20 or higher in total then maybe there can be a critical effect on the character where this counts as serious wound. It'll be like a slash across the arm versus a deep stab to the gut. A character with low armor will have a lower damage threshold versus someone tanking up on armor.

Perhaps a blocking mechanic will be something if you roll just high enough to hit that gives you character a chance to block akin to a saving throw of sorts.

It's what I like to call a threshold dynamic. I use something similar on my design.

For instance:

Character's Defense is a 16.

If you roll below a 16 the attack is a miss.

If you roll between 16 to 19 you hit but this character has a small chance to block.

If you roll a 19 or higher in total on the attack die this character cannot block and can potentially take a serious wound on a damage die.

If this overcomplicated things I'll just shut up.

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
Also, the reason why I'm

Also, the reason why I'm using a dice pool instead of d6+x type of system is because with d6+x systems in games (for example, Prophecy) it makes it so some battles are either hopeless or always assured of victory and I'm not a fan of that.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Devaloki wrote: What do you

Devaloki wrote:

What do you mean by them being stacked?
And I recall in one of my older threads on here where I was talking about weapons...wasn't it you in that thread that said weapons shouldn't have accuracy stats?

If so, than I am sorry that I explained that wrong. Because I only say something like that with a good reason.

It is completely depending on the duration of battle's. (army sizes and/or durability by health) And it also depends on some other mechanics like for example if a damaged soldier can take cover behind others or not. Or that soldiers can be targeted specifically etc.
Games where soldiers need like to be hit 10 times on average or more. The accuracy has no meaning in the long run. The same goes for agility as well.

When you have games where soldiers only need to be hit like 3 times. Then accuracy and agility are greatly of use. 1 miss is +33% more time needed. 1 critical hit could be -33% time. For 10 average hits you have +10% and -10%. The 10% difference is more deterministic than the 33% difference.

And with stacking I mean. Some games have soldiers that are agile (=more durable with the same amount of health) and some weapons are less accurate (=less hits with the same amount of damage). Putting the 2 together means that the weapon in question is a bad match for the targeted soldier.

I have good reasons for allowing agility together with accuracy in my game. If the "mismatch" is placed in the front lines. Then it is a matter of which player is using the best support units (less agility, more accuracy). Meat in the front means a better army in general.

What is your health average and damage average?

Devaloki wrote:

Also, the reason why I'm using a dice pool instead of d6+x type of system is because with d6+x systems in games (for example, Prophecy) it makes it so some battles are either hopeless or always assured of victory and I'm not a fan of that.

I completely agree on that one.
But it doesn't matter what kind of game you play, you always have those hopeless battles or assured victories at some point.
But in that case, if possible: Making the game in such a way that even 1 soldier has a chance in doing something (irreversible) against an army of 100.

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
I'll respond more in depth to

I'll respond more in depth to your post when I can X3M but for now I just wanted to respond to this part:
"What is your health average and damage average?"
First off, the scale of the game is that the players each control their own individual hero. They fight a few enemies at most in combat. It's not like armies or anything like that.
Heroes will have around 15-20 HP, enemies around 5-10 HP on average.
With average damage I'm still working that out, but it'll be based around the HP averages I mentioned.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Ok, that gives a clearer

Ok, that gives a clearer view.
Since you are only using a few hero's, randomness will be a bigger factor again in the long run.

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
I get what you are X3M about

I get what you are X3M about the math involved and how, if units in a game have low amount of life, then evasion is much more important.

"And with stacking I mean. Some games have soldiers that are agile (=more durable with the same amount of health) and some weapons are less accurate (=less hits with the same amount of damage). Putting the 2 together means that the weapon in question is a bad match for the targeted soldier."

I understand. Concerning the accuracy thing though, what are some ways weapon accuracy can be handled in relation to the skill of the user against the evasion/agility of the defender?
I explained earlier in the thread an overview of how I imagine combat working for melee.
Characters in the game have stats, one of which will be how skilled they are in melee combat. But even if you are very skilled in combat, I would imagine it'd be easier to dodge a slow greataxe compared to someone hitting at you with a quick falchion for example. That's why originally I wanted there to be an option to either dodge or block. But , as pointed out by others in the thread, there is no reason to have a dodge option if you have to roll to see if you hit the target to begin with (since that roll to hit implies the defender is dodging etc already).
So then if there is only a roll to hit, then how does weapon speed (as relates to ease of avoiding different weapons) factor in to the to hit roll?

In the example of combat I gave earlier in the thread, I stated that one would roll their accuracy+bonuses vs defender's agility+bonuses as d6 pool vs d6 pool. Perhaps some weapons then should give you a +x or -x (or alternatively, +x to defender's d6 pool) to your d6 pool depending on their speed stat? Or perhaps it should be that the amount of agility d6s added to defender's defense d6 pool be based upon a comparison of weapon speed # vs defender's agility stat?

Maybe I'm over thinking all of this though?

"But it doesn't matter what kind of game you play, you always have those hopeless battles or assured victories at some point.
But in that case, if possible: Making the game in such a way that even 1 soldier has a chance in doing something (irreversible) against an army of 100."

that's quite an extreme example though I get your point.

Jarec
Offline
Joined: 12/27/2013
devaloki wrote:So for

devaloki wrote:
So for example:

You target a demon that is pretty agile.
Taking into account your's/and their's stat bonus+gear bonus you both gather a number of d6s for your attack and defense pools. Say you are rolling 4 d6s and they get 5 d6s.
You, the attacker, roll:
6, 6, 5, 1
They roll: 5, 3, 3, 2, 1
...


If that's your base combat hit mechanic, how about simple re-rolls or forcing opponent to re-roll for dodge and block?

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

Jarec wrote:
devaloki wrote:
So for example:

You target a demon that is pretty agile.
Taking into account your's/and their's stat bonus+gear bonus you both gather a number of d6s for your attack and defense pools. Say you are rolling 4 d6s and they get 5 d6s.
You, the attacker, roll:
6, 6, 5, 1
They roll: 5, 3, 3, 2, 1
...


If that's your base combat hit mechanic, how about simple re-rolls or forcing opponent to re-roll for dodge and block?

I was thinking about that in the past. a dedicated dodge could force opponent to reroll all dice, while blocking allows defender to make them reroll specific ones (ether a certain # of them, or certain specific #s rolled, depending on the shield). Or perhaps remove dodge as an option (since the to hit roll implies dodging) and have block as only extra option you can do, one free block a round and you can get extra blocks by spending APs.
The only problem with that is the fact that the players are fighting against AIs, not each other. I'm sure I could figure out a way that would determine what the AI does, but it may be annoying to have to roll to hit...then if you hit, reroll again, then roll for damage, it may be too many rolls

Experimental Designs
Experimental Designs's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/20/2013
devaloki wrote:I'm not doing

devaloki wrote:
I'm not doing d20s, ONLY d6s, but I found your comment pretty interesting and helpful regardless.

" If you're doing D20s and the defense you need to beat is a 16 and you roll a total of 17 plus your character's sword skill then this attack is enough to wound if there is a damage die. "
I don't intend to have +x to individual numbers, it'll be a dice pool system, at least for the to hit roll that is.
Also, armour in my game will reduce damage, not make it harder for you to be hit like how it is in d&d/thac0.
The to hit roll is an opposed test.

"It's what I like to call a threshold dynamic. I use something similar on my design.
If this overcomplicated things I'll just shut up."

Nah, it's fine, that's actually very cool idea.
If I use that idea for shields, I wonder how it could be integrated into a d6 pool system though?
Perhaps it could be that you roll to hit (and defender rolls their agility/evasion pool), you still hit if you roll highest number, but if you didn't succeed by a certain number of successes (indicated by the shield's stats that the defender is wielding) then the defender gets a saving throw that possibly negates all damage (so you would skip the damage step).

So for example:

You target a demon that is pretty agile.
Taking into account your's/and their's stat bonus+gear bonus you both gather a number of d6s for your attack and defense pools. Say you are rolling 4 d6s and they get 5 d6s.
You, the attacker, roll:
6, 6, 5, 1
They roll: 5, 3, 3, 2, 1
Since you rolled the single highest dice ("6"), you were successful in striking them. You won by +1 (since you have one other 6, your 5 and 1 don't count since it ties with what they have).
If they are wielding no shield then you would go to the damage step (perhaps the +1 adds to damage or something else), but if they are wielding a buckler that has threshold 1 (meaning, you have to have 2+ in order to bypass shield) they get a saving throw. if they roll 9+ on 2d6 they cancel your hit totally.

Just some brainstorming...

Brainstorming is a good thing.

I'm sorry, I use D20 as an example since I can't seem to gear my brain back to a D6 dynamic.

A dice pool is interesting play with if done right. Warhammer fantasy burnt me out on rolling handful after handful of D6 to get the final result.

Using a dice pool would still give you the same range of flexibility as using D20s, D10s or what have you to represent the combat skill, agility and any other attribute you wish to factor into this mechanic.

Instead in having to roll a certain threshold with a D20 it is simply a matter of rolling an x-amount of successes to achieve the threshold and the number of sixes rolled. Another interesting thing about dice pools is doubles, triples or whatever combination you wish to insert.

Let's say a character's combat skill is a 4 therefore when you roll a dice pool only 4+ are counted as successes. If it has something like a swordsmanship of 5 then you roll five D6s.

Against a monster it has an agility of 3 meaning you need 3 successes to hit this monster to do damage. It's threshold can be if you roll two sixes then your character does a critical which it can be to stun it or do deal double damage or whatever you feel like.

There is so many ways you can go with this dice pool and with math meister X3M here you could be up to your eyeballs with concepts before the week is out.

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
Yeah, I had read into

Yeah, I had read into Warhammer fantasy's rules before, I'll try to avoid that issue in my game.

"Let's say a character's combat skill is a 4 therefore when you roll a dice pool only 4+ are counted as successes. If it has something like a swordsmanship of 5 then you roll five D6s."
I know about that type of mechanic, one skill level determines # needed on the dice and the other skill level determines # of actual dice rolled.

However...
"Against a monster it has an agility of 3 meaning you need 3 successes to hit this monster to do damage"
I don't want to have the system be based upon having to get a certain # of successes. Because, for example, what if you only get to roll 2 d6s but need 3 successes?I suppose one could get around that by adding in an "exploding dice" mechanic (i.e. 6s rolled allow to roll another dice), but maybe there's another way, if using a count the successes mechanic for d6s pool, to circumvent characters running into impossible situations?
That's why I'm leaning more toward using a system for d6s where they roll their pool and simply choose highest single dice and then compare the remaining ones.

And you are right about X3M for sure lol

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
http://www.troll.me/images/fu

http://www.troll.me/images/futurama-fry/not-sure-if-trolling-or-being-se...

Regarding agility and the roll of impossibilities. You could also simply give an character agility and the number of dice that an opponent has to roll to get that number.
Thus, the opponent has agility and the number of dice needed on its chart, for the attacker to roll.

Characters without movement, no dice needed at all.
Normal characters need 1D6, and you have the agility classes 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. Whereas what you need to roll is the minimum. So an agility of 5 requires a roll of 5 or 6 for a hit.
Special characters need 2D6, and you have the agility classes 3 to 12. Whereas 12 is definitely lower then 1D6>6. But still offers a chance.

The trick is that you decide for a character how agile it is. Then select the right number of dice and chance. Also taking into account that a very agile character will live very long with each HP. With 2D6 and needing a 12 or higher means that 1 HP actually can take on average 36 rolls.

1D6 agility factors:
2: 1,2
3: 1,5
4: 2
5: 3
6: 6

2D6 agility factors:
3: 1,02857
4: 1,09091
5: 1,2
6: 1,38462
7: 1,71429
8: 2,4
9: 3,6
10: 6
11: 12
12: 36

If you have healers, they of course are very effective on low health characters who have a very high agility.

If you have effects that lower agility, it is also most effective against a high agility character. Since it would have 2 or 3 times higher chance in being hit. While a lower agility class has only a bit of effect.

If you take a look at 1D6>2 and 2D6>5. Than you can see that they both have the same factor. If you now use an effect to lower agility by 1. The 1D6 will be effected much more than the 2D6. The factors are 1 and 1,09091. Which means that 1D6 reduction is about twice that of 2D6. For that agility. With 3D6 this effect is even lower of course.

So with this, you can always have a chance of hitting.
With this you can also choose how much "slow" has as effect, by selecting the number of dice.
And if needed, I can calculate the factors for you with 3D6 or higher.
If you are not happy about certain factors. You can always use groups of 2 x 1D6 (=2D6), where the effect is multiplied instead.
Thus any die must be higher then a certain agility number.

2D6 agility factors:
2: 1,44
3: 2,25
4: 4
5: 9
6: 36
For other factors, you would be needing 2 coloured dice. I don't think you want to do that, right?

*****

Something to add to all of this. If you want different effects of agility on the different types of attackers. How about making agility classes instead? If a character has 2D6, it can have 5 against swords, 6 against arrows, meaning it has more agility when dealing with an arrow.

I am not that kind of a meister you know. I love math, but even I must bow down to the simulators and one other person on this forum.

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
X3M I wasn't trolling you, it

X3M I wasn't trolling you, it was a compliment done in a slightly joking way, since you are more proficient in math than I and you really analyze things very in depth sometimes it boggles my mind lol.

"You could also simply give an character agility and the number of dice that an opponent has to roll to get that number.
Thus, the opponent has agility and the number of dice needed on its chart, for the attacker to roll."

Could you give me an example of what you mean by this?
When you say "has" do you mean that the opponent's card shows how many dice the attacker gets to roll? Or do you mean that they HAVE to roll a certain minimum number of dice [# of dice determined by attacker's stat(s)] otherwise they'll always automatically miss? I assume you mean the former instead of the latter, but just want to make sure.

"Normal characters need 1D6, and you have the agility classes 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. Whereas what you need to roll is the minimum. So an agility of 5 requires a roll of 5 or 6 for a hit.
Special characters need 2D6, and you have the agility classes 3 to 12. Whereas 12 is definitely lower then 1D6>6. But still offers a chance."

Why would I use BOTH of those instead of just one or the other in a game? If a character, for example, has agility 2 and some characters have accuracy 2d6, that means then that they will ALWAYS hit that target. If that's what you mean by it though...
And the 2d6 thing you are mentioning is different from a dice pool, I'd rather do a dice pool system than rolling 2 dice and adding them together and trying to reach a target number.
Maybe I don't understand what you mean by having some characters have 1d6 agility and others have 2d6 though.

When you say "factors" and post those 1d6/2d6 lists, are you displaying the chance to roll that exact number on the dice out of how many rolls? What's the "," in " 1,02857" for example supposed to mean?

"If you take a look at 1D6>2 and 2D6>5. Than you can see that they both have the same factor. If you now use an effect to lower agility by 1. The 1D6 will be effected much more than the 2D6. The factors are 1 and 1,09091. Which means that 1D6 reduction is about twice that of 2D6. For that agility. With 3D6 this effect is even lower of course."
I'm aware of that issue concerning how lower or raising a point with things like that is worth more if the system is 1d6 rather than 2d6 based. I do intend for there to be buff and debuff spells and effects in the game. The initial idea I have for my game with regard to the stats of characters is for it to range generally from 1 to 6, with some very rare circumstances boosting stats above 6. Perhaps I should change it to 1-12 though to open things up more? I guess that's something I'll have to contemplate more and test.

"So with this, you can always have a chance of hitting."
Yeah but all the stuff you are posting here is a different mechanic essentially than a d6 pool based system. You are saying to roll 1d6 or 2d6, total result, and try to meet or beat a target number and that the target number has a maximum it can be at, that way you always have a chance. I may use that type of mechanic (and indeed, if you look at my earlier threads, that's what I was going to use originally. It was going to be that you compare your accuracy to their agility score and that gives you a target number you have to meet), but I'd prefer to try to keep with a d6 pool system where you either roll a bunch of dice and count the dice that met (if it's an opposed roll, you compare the number of successes you achieved vs the # opponent succeeded with. Or it could be that you have to roll a certain number of successes based upon the target's defense...but that brings up the issue I brought up in my last post about how what if, for example, you need to get 3 successes but only roll 2 dice?), individually each, the target number OR you roll the pools and choose the single highest dice result and whoever has highest wins.

"For other factors, you would be needing 2 coloured dice. I don't think you want to do that, right?"
I'm not sure what you mean by this statement, but I'm not opposed to using different coloured dice in the game to differentiate between your opponent's dice vs your's, or to differentiate between dice used for various effects.

For characters in the game, they're going to have a base agility stat and that covers their general agility. Shields in the game will have different stats vs melee weapons or arrows, but I don't think it'd be good for characters to have such differentiation (i.e. the different agility classes you mentioned) in regard to their agility stat, because I plan on having many different types of weapons in the game. It'd be easier to have weapons have a "speed" stat of some sort that determines how hard they are to avoid.

Remember, the scale I'm going for in the game is similar to how it is with fights in the game "castle ravenloft" if you've ever played that one.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
devaloki wrote:X3M I wasn't

devaloki wrote:
X3M I wasn't ... my mind lol.

The picture in itself is a trolling picture ;). I did get the joke.

devaloki wrote:

"You could also simply give an character agility and the number of dice that an opponent has to roll to get that number.
Thus, the opponent has agility and the number of dice needed on its chart, for the attacker to roll."

Could you give me an example of what you mean by this?


Ok, let's say the swordsman is the attacker and an archer is the defender.
The archer has an agility of 3, while using 1D6. Thus on the card of the archer, we have 1D6; 3 as agility.
The swordsman has to roll with 1D6, a 3 or higher for an hit.

devaloki wrote:

When you say ... to make sure.

The defenders card shows the number of dice and the defenders card shows how much the attacker has to roll for an hit.

devaloki wrote:

"Normal characters need ... offers a chance."

Why would I use BOTH of those instead of just one or the other in a game? If a character, for example, has agility 2 and some characters have accuracy 2d6, that means then that they will ALWAYS hit that target. If that's what you mean by it though...


That is why I said, agility classes 3 to 12. Not 2 to 12.
For always an hit, there are no dice needed at all. Thus this would not even be displayed on the card in the form XD6, we rather have agility = 0.

devaloki wrote:

And the 2d6 ... have 2d6 though.

Could you please tell me what your definition of a dice pool is?

devaloki wrote:

When you say "factors" and post those 1d6/2d6 lists, are you displaying the chance to roll that exact number on the dice out of how many rolls? What's the "," in " 1,02857" for example supposed to mean?

Ok, perhaps I do need to explain this.
In games you have chances for hitting. Let's take for example a 50% chance. This means that 50% of the time, we miss as well. Since 50% is half of the time. The health is relatively worth more. When a creature has 10 health, but you only hit 50% of the time, that same creature has a relative health of 20. And we do have a factor 2 in this.

Now another creature has only 5 health, but you also have a hit ratio of 1/6th. This means that 5 out of 6 times, we miss. Or in other words, the relative health is 6 times higher. Thus the relative health is in this case 30. Even though the actual health is only half than the first example. The relative health is 50% higher. And the second creature is much more durable in normal combat.

And the "," is a decimal sign in my country. Perhaps you need the dot. In your case we have "1.02857".

devaloki wrote:

"If you take ... lower of course."
I'm aware of that issue concerning how lower or raising a point with things like that is worth more if the system is 1d6 rather than 2d6 based. I do intend for there to be buff and debuff spells and effects in the game. The initial idea I have for my game with regard to the stats of characters is for it to range generally from 1 to 6, with some very rare circumstances boosting stats above 6. Perhaps I should change it to 1-12 though to open things up more? I guess that's something I'll have to contemplate more and test.

If you want 1-6, we help to try to design 1-6.

Personally, I am not really fan of any other dice type either. Only D6, everything with D6.
And my game that I am designing also has all the stats of 1-6. The only difference is that you are going above 6. Perhaps it is better to have 6 as a maximum? And give the creature something extra instead? Like a secondary chance of hitting twice for example?
(My soldiers with 6 bullets, shoot 7 after an upgrade. But my soldiers with just 1 bullet, shoot 2 after an upgrade. The second bullet however has a chance of 1/6th. Thus both type of soldiers have the same relative upgrade.)

devaloki wrote:

"So with this, you can always have a chance of hitting."
Yeah but all ... has highest wins.

Somehow, you should not demand a number of successes if you can't keep track of it. Maybe you could simply use counters if there where successes. For example, 2 successes while you need 3, you place 2 counters on the targeted creature for a next round. But then we fall back into the tracking of health.

Another approach is having more successes than your opponent. And simply making sure any one can roll 0 successes. Thus 1D6 can beat 6D6, even though the chance is very slim.
For this, simply consider each die roll 0-5, not 1-6.

devaloki wrote:

"For other factors, ... do that, right?"
I'm not sure ... for various effects.

Well, I was talking only about combat dice. But if you are going to use coloured dice for other functions, you better not follow my example. It is best to do, one or the other. Not both.
And with that statement I meant that a combat resolving is done with 2 groups of dice, not one group of dice. Both groups needed to reach a certain number for a success. For example, having a chance of 20 out of 36. We need to roll one 4 or higher, and one 5 or higher. To differentiate here, red is the 4 or higher roll and blue is the 5 or higher roll. If you do this with 2 dice of the same colour, your chance is actually different than 20/36.

devaloki wrote:

For characters in the game, they're going to have a base agility stat and that covers their general agility. Shields in the game will have different stats vs melee weapons or arrows, but I don't think it'd be good for characters to have such differentiation (i.e. the different agility classes you mentioned) in regard to their agility stat, because I plan on having many different types of weapons in the game. It'd be easier to have weapons have a "speed" stat of some sort that determines how hard they are to avoid.

Remember, the scale I'm going for in the game is similar to how it is with fights in the game "castle ravenloft" if you've ever played that one.


Nope, never played that one. But I will take a look. :)
I will also think a bit more about the system you want.

devaloki
devaloki's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2014
I'll respond more in depth

I'll respond more in depth when I get a chance but I just wanted to ask real quick about one thing first:
"Ok, let's say the swordsman is the attacker and an archer is the defender.
The archer has an agility of 3, while using 1D6. Thus on the card of the archer, we have 1D6; 3 as agility.
The swordsman has to roll with 1D6, a 3 or higher for an hit.

The defenders card shows the number of dice and the defenders card shows how much the attacker has to roll for an hit."

If the units in the game show how many dice you roll and what you have to roll to hit, then how would that factor in the skill of the attacker at all? If a defender's card says "hit on a 3+, you get 1d6" then someone who is unskilled in melee would hit them at the same rate as someone who has is very skilled in melee...

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut