Revamping combat

[LostTemplar]

Easyest way will be to implement stats like in Unangband. So, you get some stats points every level, which can be invested in stats with diminishing returns and stat potions work like restore + temporary boost to a given stat.

Another good idea IMHO is to get rid of initial stats points, just make a given class/race have a given stats. It is allmost like this anyway. Everybody uses some proven best stat distribution.

[Magnate]

Hmmm. I think it's dangerous design to make stat choices made at birth affect the whole game. I'd prefer there to be ways in which people could correct or change their build without having to start over. Mind you, I guess you can always say that if I want to wield a MoD, I shouldn't choose a hobbit ... which is back to the point I made yesterday about how much we want in the way of race-specific rules.

[bio_hazard]

Sorry, I didn't mean to put you off - that's a perfectly good explanation, and I agree with you that V chars end up far too similar post-stat-gain. I misunderstood your original point is all.

No offense taken. I'm just having an off day, and let a bit of snark into my previous post.

Estie- I think that's a start. What if you earned a point of stat-gain capacity every level (or two). There could be some sort of hard cap so not all 50 get spent on CON. This would make gain 1 lose ones more valuable, and would somewhat diminish the temptation to sit at stat-gain depth without working to level up.

I kind of like the idea that beyond str/dex, some players might just have more aptitude with certain weapons in addition to the early game optimiziation issue.

[Estie]

Random thoughts:

Who would use light weapons: imo the guy with 10 str 18 dex. 18 dex enables a few blows/round, but str 10 restricts that to light weapons. If he uses heavy weapons he gets fewer blows -> less damage, much like it is now for everyone. The guy with 18 str 10 dex can never get many blows/round (restricted by the 10 dex), so he wants a heavy weapon.

I think it is bad that the lategame takes place close to the global statcap for everyone. It would be better if the relation of the starting stats were preserved; maybe allow a certain fixed number of gain potions to take effect, the same amount for every stat. Even a halftroll who starts with maximum allowable str, drinks all of his alloted str potions and wears many items granting str should not reach the global str cap - i.e., if he finds another str item, he happily equips it because it gives more damage.

Yes, that means that the best type of endgame weapon depends on starting str/dex. A hobbit will never be able to make effective use of a MoD; but wether his most prefered type is a longsword or executioners sword depends on how many points he put into str at character creation. This doesnt bother me; if someone really wants to avoid it though, there are ways around, like making the stat gain maximum a bit random, or, heck, even not giving the player any points to distribute - so every hobbit rogue would start with the same stats.

[Magnate]

I don't know that they would necessarily need to be hard restrictions, but if we are already talking about racial/class specific modifiers to other melee "skills", I don't see this as that far of a leap.

Maybe it's just that I'm fairly dis-satisfied with the way stat-gain works in Vanilla, since it serves to make characters so similar by the time they are half-way through the game. I think I'll just keep my mouth shut and explore more variants.

Sorry, I didn't mean to put you off - that's a perfectly good explanation, and I agree with you that V chars end up far too similar post-stat-gain. I misunderstood your original point is all.

[bio_hazard]

While I'm ambivalent about the whole 2h/dual wield thing (I see it as nice flavour but far from important), I think it's worth noting that the racial distinctions in Angband are largely for flavour and have very little impact on the game beyond starting stats. I know there are some plans to introduce more racial abilities in v4, but it seems to me (at least initially) that going down the route of race-specific rules for equipment is more complexity than it's worth. Do you really want to find that your hobbits have totally different equipment restrictions than your half-trolls? I'm not sure that many would welcome that.

I don't know that they would necessarily need to be hard restrictions, but if we are already talking about racial/class specific modifiers to other melee "skills", I don't see this as that far of a leap.

Maybe it's just that I'm fairly dis-satisfied with the way stat-gain works in Vanilla, since it serves to make characters so similar by the time they are half-way through the game. I think I'll just keep my mouth shut and explore more variants.

[Magnate]

I while ago I suggested giving races bonuses to using weapons with their race attributes and penalties for other weapons. It would be grouped, so that hobbits, gnomes, kobolds could all use each other's weapons without penalty. Humans would get no benefits from any weapons but no penalties for using another. For penalties and benefits, I was thinking something like +5 to-hit for using an appropriate weapon and -2 to hit for using an inappropriate one.

This is much more for flavor than for gameplay, so it can certainly wait while we get combat sorted out.

Yeah that's a slightly different thing - small bonuses/penalties are ok, it's "cannot wield" or "can wield a two-hander in one hand" that I was worried about.

[fizzix]

I know there are some plans to introduce more racial abilities in v4, but it seems to me (at least initially) that going down the route of race-specific rules for equipment is more complexity than it's worth. Do you really want to find that your hobbits have totally different equipment restrictions than your half-trolls? I'm not sure that many would welcome that.

I while ago I suggested giving races bonuses to using weapons with their race attributes and penalties for other weapons. It would be grouped, so that hobbits, gnomes, kobolds could all use each other's weapons without penalty. Humans would get no benefits from any weapons but no penalties for using another. For penalties and benefits, I was thinking something like +5 to-hit for using an appropriate weapon and -2 to hit for using an inappropriate one.

This is much more for flavor than for gameplay, so it can certainly wait while we get combat sorted out.

[Magnate]

While I'm ambivalent about the whole 2h/dual wield thing (I see it as nice flavour but far from important), I think it's worth noting that the racial distinctions in Angband are largely for flavour and have very little impact on the game beyond starting stats. I know there are some plans to introduce more racial abilities in v4, but it seems to me (at least initially) that going down the route of race-specific rules for equipment is more complexity than it's worth. Do you really want to find that your hobbits have totally different equipment restrictions than your half-trolls? I'm not sure that many would welcome that.

[bio_hazard]

You make a good point about gameplay, Derakon, so it could be the large number of blows/round is necessary. However, I agree with EpicMan that it feels off. I would be in favor of player attacks getting more powerful with better kits and/or skill/CL/ whatever. By powerful, I mean more and more damaging crits. Maybe much higher chance to stun or even make a knock-back attack (with blunt or heavy weapons, potentially), or more cuts (sharp or piercing weapons). Another possibility, make crit attacks operate kind of like the ToME 2 "Curse" (I think that was it), where you have a chance to reduce enemy melee damage, to hit, or AC with good attacks.

Also, I'm kind of on the fence about the changes to 2-handed weapons/two handed wielding that are being discussed. On the one hand, if this let half-trolls carry weapons that were traditionally 2-handed in one hand, that would be pretty cool. On the other hand, if every hobbit mage that buffs up to 18/a billion strength is striding around with a mace of disruption in one hand and a large shield in the other, that just seems wrong. I'm not sure that the strength bonus for 2-handing a one-handed weapon really adds much. If it is adopted, it might make sense to add some changes that make shields more useful- possibly increasing saving throws, a better AC bonus, chance to negate one monster attack, or maybe a shield bash when str/dex are high enough.

[Derakon]

What's the reason for limiting the player to four blows? Just symmetry? The player's going to need to dish out a certain amount of damage in a given amount of time; all that limiting blows does is make the amount of damage on any give round more variable (because it has to happen in fewer blows, and blows can miss).

Keep in mind that monsters are horrifically more powerful than the player in a pure-stats sense. The player's main advantage is being able to use his/her equipment intelligently. In a straight-up damage race between the player and a like-leveled unique monster, the player will generally lose.

[EpicMan]

I do not think that dual wielding feels right for Angband, but I Do think that 2 handed wielding does.
My idea, again, must come from D&D - I Believe that you were treated as if you're strength were 1.5 times as high (or something to that effect, maybe 1.2 would be better) when you wielded two handed. (hmm, 1.5 modifier means 18/20 would then be 18/120, and 18/90 would be 18/***.)

well, I don't know what numbers would be best, but that's my two cents - this would also mean that the "Bonus" disappears when your character becomes exceedingly strong.

that would presents another question - if 2h fighting were introduced, should it be stopgap until you can reach top strength and get a shield, or should 2h be a viable strategy till endgame, meaning that it should give a significant bonus regardless of your stats (or perhaps beyond your normal stat maximums?)

In DND (at least 3.5) stat bonuses were linear, in Angband they are more or less exponential. So I think to get the same effect as in DND you would need to multiply the effects of strength on melee (bonus damage, bonus to-hit, etc) by 1.5. Of course the exact multiplier needed for balance is probably different but that's a good place to start. You should also get more STR for purposes of blows when two-handing a weapon but I don't have a clue how that should work.

Despite not having a clue I do have an opinion: Since this is about combat revamp, I think there are too many blows allowed. Monsters only get up to four, I think the player should be similarly limited:
Warrior-4 (or 3)
Paladin-3 or 4, maybe 3.5? (or 2/2.5 or3)
Ranger/Rogue-3 (or 2)
Mage/Priest-2 (or just 1)

[sethos]

I do not think that dual wielding feels right for Angband, but I Do think that 2 handed wielding does.
My idea, again, must come from D&D - I Believe that you were treated as if you're strength were 1.5 times as high (or something to that effect, maybe 1.2 would be better) when you wielded two handed. (hmm, 1.5 modifier means 18/20 would then be 18/120, and 18/90 would be 18/***.)

well, I don't know what numbers would be best, but that's my two cents - this would also mean that the "Bonus" disappears when your character becomes exceedingly strong.

that would presents another question - if 2h fighting were introduced, should it be stopgap until you can reach top strength and get a shield, or should 2h be a viable strategy till endgame, meaning that it should give a significant bonus regardless of your stats (or perhaps beyond your normal stat maximums?)

[Magnate]

We will have to redesign how stat bonuses, resistances, and other attributes are distributed among the various equipment slots before implementing a balanced 2H/dual-wielding mechanic. Right now, it's pretty hard to forgo the benefits of an artifact shield, for example.

I don't think my experience agrees with that. If we ignore the obvious imbalance of Thorin being too findable and overpowered for most of the last twenty years, I think there are plenty of randart winners with wholly underwhelming shields, and plenty of weapons with lots of stats or resists.

I'm not saying we wouldn't have to make any balance adjustments at all, but I don't think it would necessarily involve wholesale redesign of how item bonuses are distributed among the other slots ... and as tg122 says, we can (if we want) still allow the non-AC bonuses of a shield worn on the back, a la Sangband.

[*] I think it's worth taking a look at Steamband's combat mechanics as well, as a source for ideas. They can't be imported directly, without lots of other changes like a skill tree, but the force mechanic seems potentially useful as another means of differentiating weapons beyond weight, without resorting to edged/blunt/etc. classifications.

I don't really understand Steam's force mechanic yet, so I can't agree or disagree with it - but I don't see why "resorting" to distinguishing damage types would be a bad thing in any case.

Steam also has another feature that I omitted in my list of fundamental considerations: the distinction between fatigue (hit points) and injury ("wound points"). The case for this distinction is IMO not quite as clear as that for evasion/absorption - and it would mean an additional array of healing mechanics - but it's something to think about.

[LostTemplar]

I am currently trying to add some difference between weapon classes in FAangband. It is nice idea overall.