Tweet
Since we're posting our ideas for how to rework combat, I guess I may as well give this its own thread. 
I brought up this idea first in this thread. The idea is to replace to-hit with "weapon finesse", and to-dam with "weapon power". The former represents the character's ability to quickly send a weapon exactly where it needs to be; the latter represents the character's ability to put a lot of force behind each blow.
A character with high finesse (as given by their racial and class skill bonuses, their DEX score, any on- or off-weapon bonuses, and to an extent their level) is more likely to hit his opponents. A character with a high power score (ditto, except STR instead of DEX) is more likely to score critical hits. These two effects are global and don't depend on what weapon you're using.
However, each individual weapon also has two values: a finesse multiplier and a power multiplier. These determine how many blows you get with the weapon, and how much damage for each blow is multiplied by, respectively. For every 100 converted finesse points, you get 1 extra blow; for every 100 converted power points, your damage gets an extra multiplier. Of course, fractions are allowed.
Examples
A 1d4 dagger might have a finesse multiplier of .8 and a power multiplier of .2. If your finesse before multiplying is 200 (that is, your race, class, level, DEX, and equipment modifiers sum to 200), then you would get 200 * .8 / 100 = 1.6 bonus blows per round. Everyone gets at least 1 blow per round so your actual blows per round would be 2.6. If your power was 400, then each blow would deal 400 * .2 / 100 = .8x bonus damage, so 1.8 times normal.
Alternatively, a 2d5 longsword could have a balanced set of multipliers: .5 finesse and .5 power. Given those same skill levels from before, we get 2 blows per round at 3x normal damage.
Finally, a 4d4 maul would be massively overdirected towards power in its multipliers: .1 finesse, .9 power. Again, with those same stats, we end up with 1.2 blows per round at 4.6x normal damage.
Breaking things up by class
Now, we can bias different classes towards different weapon types by changing their skill growths. Rogues would presumably get very high finesse scores, which would bias them towards weapons which benefit strongly from finesse, which would tend to be lightweight weapons. Paladins could have good power but poor finesse, directing them to the heavy maces and axes; warriors would be good all-rounders.
Relative balance of finesse and power
Because both blows and the damage multiplier effectively do the same thing in terms of total damage dealt, we may need to re-think how many dice weapons get. Of course, finesse-biased characters will tend to hit more often, while power-biased characters will tend to get more and better criticals. The net result is that power characters will have more unreliable damage, which I tend to think means they should get better base damage, though perhaps not to the current extent (where a heavy weapon can do 3-5x more damage than a light weapon just from dice alone). Power characters will also be worse at fighting weak groups, because they have to spend most of a round pancaking each enemy; a finesse character might need two blows to precisely kill each foe, but that still leaves plenty of un-used energy to deal with his buddy.
Implications for item design
Right now all we care about for items is the base damage, the weight, and whether or not the item is pointy -- and that last bit only if we're priests! There's a lot of functionally identical weapons out there. By giving each one different relative weightings towards finesse and balance, we can inject some variety. For example, longswords would be balanced weapons, while pikes would be power-oriented and scimitars skill-oriented.
We can also make weapons that are intentionally awkward, or intentionally easy, to use. The infamous whip, for example could get a .6x finesse multiplier and a .2x power multiplier -- summing to less than 1! But take a standard weapon, and apply the "masterwork" affix: now its finesse gets an additional bonus. This would be the new "extra blows" affix, in other words. Or the "lead-filled" affix could reduce finesse by .1 while raising power by .3.
What about missile weapons?
There's no reason they couldn't be handled by the same framework. High-finesse bows can be fired faster, high-power ones get a better multiplier. This actually matches reality better than our current system, where it doesn't matter how strong you are, you can still use that Longbow of Extra Might x5 which probably has a draw weight of over 100 pounds.
What about slays?
Apply a 1.x damage multiplier to each shot/blow. Done.
Implications for code work
We would need to rework the areas where the following things are calculated:
* Weapon definition (loading from object.txt) and in-memory storage
* Number of blows per round
* Damage per blow
* Chance of hitting
* All critical hit logic
* How slays apply
* Race and class growth information (growth in finesse and power skills)
* Display of finesse and power bonuses (rename to-hit / to-dam)
* Item 'I'nspect display (to show impact of finesse and power)
* (Possibly) rework the energy scale to allow finer gradations (e.g. 1.15 blows/round vs. 1.25 blows/round). Just multiplying everything in the current system by 10 should do.
Implications for non-code changes
Big. Every weapon, race, and class will need new stats. All of this will take significant balancing work.
Ultimately, what does this buy us?
* More sensible weapon decisions -- trading between fast light weak weapons, and slow heavy powerful ones. The logic for the decision is the same at level 1 as it is at level 50, though the factors on the decision will change. Characters at level 1 won't always opt for the biggest weapon they can max blows with.
* More distinguishable (and thus interesting) weapon types. Daggers, whips, main gauches, and rapiers will all have more to differentiate them than a single die side. Longswords and broadswords will differ by more than just 2 pounds. Angband is ultimately largely about finding new and better equipment; creating finer gradations here will make that part of the game more detailed, ergo more interesting.
* Unifying melee and ranged combat.
* Smoother power curves without the sharp breakpoints we get currently (especially with regards to the "Extra Blows" and "Extra Shots" affixes).
* The impact of STR and DEX is more intuitive. STR directly affects power, which directly affects your multiplier. DEX directly affects finesse, which directly affects your blows/round. They don't combine in some weird interdependent fashion where gaining 5 STR is like gaining 2 STR and 3 DEX is like gaining 7 DEX.
Why not just O combat?
OAngband-style combat has a similar approach: to-dam is replaced by a "deadliness" damage multiplier which applies to the base dice, multiplying damage by up to 255% (if I recall correctly). My main beefs with it:
* There's diminishing returns on deadliness, so it's not necessarily clear exactly how equipment decisions affect your damage.
* Your number of blows is still calculated based on your STR and DEX and the weapon weight, which I'd like to get away from as being overly opaque.
I brought up this idea first in this thread. The idea is to replace to-hit with "weapon finesse", and to-dam with "weapon power". The former represents the character's ability to quickly send a weapon exactly where it needs to be; the latter represents the character's ability to put a lot of force behind each blow.
A character with high finesse (as given by their racial and class skill bonuses, their DEX score, any on- or off-weapon bonuses, and to an extent their level) is more likely to hit his opponents. A character with a high power score (ditto, except STR instead of DEX) is more likely to score critical hits. These two effects are global and don't depend on what weapon you're using.
However, each individual weapon also has two values: a finesse multiplier and a power multiplier. These determine how many blows you get with the weapon, and how much damage for each blow is multiplied by, respectively. For every 100 converted finesse points, you get 1 extra blow; for every 100 converted power points, your damage gets an extra multiplier. Of course, fractions are allowed.
Examples
A 1d4 dagger might have a finesse multiplier of .8 and a power multiplier of .2. If your finesse before multiplying is 200 (that is, your race, class, level, DEX, and equipment modifiers sum to 200), then you would get 200 * .8 / 100 = 1.6 bonus blows per round. Everyone gets at least 1 blow per round so your actual blows per round would be 2.6. If your power was 400, then each blow would deal 400 * .2 / 100 = .8x bonus damage, so 1.8 times normal.
Alternatively, a 2d5 longsword could have a balanced set of multipliers: .5 finesse and .5 power. Given those same skill levels from before, we get 2 blows per round at 3x normal damage.
Finally, a 4d4 maul would be massively overdirected towards power in its multipliers: .1 finesse, .9 power. Again, with those same stats, we end up with 1.2 blows per round at 4.6x normal damage.
Breaking things up by class
Now, we can bias different classes towards different weapon types by changing their skill growths. Rogues would presumably get very high finesse scores, which would bias them towards weapons which benefit strongly from finesse, which would tend to be lightweight weapons. Paladins could have good power but poor finesse, directing them to the heavy maces and axes; warriors would be good all-rounders.
Relative balance of finesse and power
Because both blows and the damage multiplier effectively do the same thing in terms of total damage dealt, we may need to re-think how many dice weapons get. Of course, finesse-biased characters will tend to hit more often, while power-biased characters will tend to get more and better criticals. The net result is that power characters will have more unreliable damage, which I tend to think means they should get better base damage, though perhaps not to the current extent (where a heavy weapon can do 3-5x more damage than a light weapon just from dice alone). Power characters will also be worse at fighting weak groups, because they have to spend most of a round pancaking each enemy; a finesse character might need two blows to precisely kill each foe, but that still leaves plenty of un-used energy to deal with his buddy.
Implications for item design
Right now all we care about for items is the base damage, the weight, and whether or not the item is pointy -- and that last bit only if we're priests! There's a lot of functionally identical weapons out there. By giving each one different relative weightings towards finesse and balance, we can inject some variety. For example, longswords would be balanced weapons, while pikes would be power-oriented and scimitars skill-oriented.
We can also make weapons that are intentionally awkward, or intentionally easy, to use. The infamous whip, for example could get a .6x finesse multiplier and a .2x power multiplier -- summing to less than 1! But take a standard weapon, and apply the "masterwork" affix: now its finesse gets an additional bonus. This would be the new "extra blows" affix, in other words. Or the "lead-filled" affix could reduce finesse by .1 while raising power by .3.
What about missile weapons?
There's no reason they couldn't be handled by the same framework. High-finesse bows can be fired faster, high-power ones get a better multiplier. This actually matches reality better than our current system, where it doesn't matter how strong you are, you can still use that Longbow of Extra Might x5 which probably has a draw weight of over 100 pounds.
What about slays?
Apply a 1.x damage multiplier to each shot/blow. Done.
Implications for code work
We would need to rework the areas where the following things are calculated:
* Weapon definition (loading from object.txt) and in-memory storage
* Number of blows per round
* Damage per blow
* Chance of hitting
* All critical hit logic
* How slays apply
* Race and class growth information (growth in finesse and power skills)
* Display of finesse and power bonuses (rename to-hit / to-dam)
* Item 'I'nspect display (to show impact of finesse and power)
* (Possibly) rework the energy scale to allow finer gradations (e.g. 1.15 blows/round vs. 1.25 blows/round). Just multiplying everything in the current system by 10 should do.
Implications for non-code changes
Big. Every weapon, race, and class will need new stats. All of this will take significant balancing work.
Ultimately, what does this buy us?
* More sensible weapon decisions -- trading between fast light weak weapons, and slow heavy powerful ones. The logic for the decision is the same at level 1 as it is at level 50, though the factors on the decision will change. Characters at level 1 won't always opt for the biggest weapon they can max blows with.
* More distinguishable (and thus interesting) weapon types. Daggers, whips, main gauches, and rapiers will all have more to differentiate them than a single die side. Longswords and broadswords will differ by more than just 2 pounds. Angband is ultimately largely about finding new and better equipment; creating finer gradations here will make that part of the game more detailed, ergo more interesting.
* Unifying melee and ranged combat.
* Smoother power curves without the sharp breakpoints we get currently (especially with regards to the "Extra Blows" and "Extra Shots" affixes).
* The impact of STR and DEX is more intuitive. STR directly affects power, which directly affects your multiplier. DEX directly affects finesse, which directly affects your blows/round. They don't combine in some weird interdependent fashion where gaining 5 STR is like gaining 2 STR and 3 DEX is like gaining 7 DEX.
Why not just O combat?
OAngband-style combat has a similar approach: to-dam is replaced by a "deadliness" damage multiplier which applies to the base dice, multiplying damage by up to 255% (if I recall correctly). My main beefs with it:
* There's diminishing returns on deadliness, so it's not necessarily clear exactly how equipment decisions affect your damage.
* Your number of blows is still calculated based on your STR and DEX and the weapon weight, which I'd like to get away from as being overly opaque.
Comment