Goblinworks Blog: Murder by Numbers


Pathfinder Online

1 to 50 of 360 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Paizo Employee Digital Products Assistant

Discussion thread for new blog entry Goblinworks Blog: Murder by Numbers

Goblin Squad Member

First, I love the idea of mimicking the d20 system in spirit while putting together a system that PLAYS better on a computer.

However, you say this: "Though the OGL technically doesn't have restrictions on media types, it's nevertheless generally incompatible with software development because it restricts a publisher's ability to require additional licensing terms for the end user. "

so my question is, how do DDO and NWN do it?

Second, please don't have "skills" that we spend XP on that only improve base stats such as saving throws. You say that you can "buy" more saving throw points. I really hope you mean that as you passively increase your base ability stats through spending skill points on related skills, you get additional saving throw points, or that you get the points directly from related skills. I don't want to have to spend XP to get JUST passive stats, (unless it is some obscure passive stat perhaps).

For example, I start leveling some rogue skills. I find a trainer and buy training and spend 250 XP to get "Open Locks 1". So if I come across basic lock in the game I now get a 20% chance to unlock it if I have thieves tools in my inventory. (I do, Being crafted me some nice master work ones that give me +20% to my try!) I have enough XP in my training "bag" that I immediately purchase (for another 250 XP) 'Open Locks 2" that bumps up my chance on basic locks to +30% AND gives me +1 to my reflex stat. (When I get to Open Advanced Locks 5, My Dex will go up by 1!)

See, I want all passive stats to improve as you level related skills.

Spending XP on improving passive stats feels like lazy design, to be honest.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

<homer>ooooh... nummmbers... we get pretty numbers to play with for combat!</homer>

The only troubling thing to me is that I see nothing in there really for a successful parry or block. Armor mitigation is good, as far as it goes, but if I parry your blade your blade isn't touching me. If I catch an arrow on my shield it does not pierce me.

Am I reading it wrong? When you shoot an arrow at me even if I can block it will it strike me?

Are misses impossible?

Goblinworks Executive Founder

2 people marked this as a favorite.

... Any plans for e.g. weapons with ~2x the damage rating but ~one third the damage factor?

A longsword with 40 rating and 1.5 factor against resistance 27 armor would do (40-27)*1.5=19.5 damage on a full hit, while a hammer with 80 rating and .5 factor would do (800-27)*.5=26.5 damage on a hit.

Against an lightly armored opponent, however, the longsword would do (40-9)*1.5=48 while the hammer would do (80-9)*.5=35.5.

That would create the emergent behavior of weapons which are good against armor types without writing them in directly.

Also, if the resistances are higher than the base damages, is the attack completely ineffective (barring a crit)?

CEO, Goblinworks

2 people marked this as a favorite.

@Aoldack Keldonson - neither DDO nor NWN is licensed with the OGL. They're licensed directly from Wizards of the Coast with a wholly separate set of terms.

Goblin Squad Member

I am absolutely in love with the 3d200 attack roll, with T1 using the lowest, T2 the middle, and T3 the highest of the three rolls.

Quote:
Damaging secondary effects (Bleeding, Burning, etc.) treat the target's appropriate resistance as additional defense that applies only against the secondary effect. For example, an attack with a Bleeding effect that missed by 9 against a target with 40 Physical resistance would have its base damage reduced by 15% and its Bleeding effect reduced by 35%.

Is this only if the attack misses?

For example, if my attack roll equals the defense roll, and the defender has a Physical Resistance of 16, will that result in a 20% reduction in my Bleed effect, even though I hit or full damage?

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

Very nice update! Some great straight-forward info on how weapons and armor will work.

Some questions on a few details in the blog:

Damage Types: Physical will be the main damage type for weapons, so will Slashing/Piercing/Bludgeoning only be a keyword without and mechanical difference between them other than the crit and final monster vulnerability stages of attack resolution? It seems like you could add some more realism to combat by keeping them as separate damage types, and giving different armor types more resistance to one than another. For example, Chainmail may offer good resistance vs Slashing and Piercing, but poor vs Bludgeoning.

Also, while not directly discussed in the blog, How will you plan on dealing with effects like spells, feats, or class abilities that add to AC in pnp? A Monk may have a higher AC than a knight in full plate, and Mage Armor grants equal protection to a Chain Shirt, but they wouldn't necessarily have a higher resistance to physical damage. Would those abilities grant a bonus to reflex or a bonus to resistance?

Goblin Squad Member

Imbicatus wrote:
It seems like you could add some more realism to combat by keeping them as separate damage types, and giving different armor types more resistance to one than another.

It seems they have the infrastructure to support adding Keywords to Armor that result in a Damage Factor being applied if the Attack carries a specific Keyword. I think they can accomplish the end result you're wanting without having to treat them as separate damage types.

Imbicatus wrote:
How will you plan on dealing with effects like spells, feats, or class abilities that add to AC in pnp?

I'm interested in this too, as well as in how and whether something like Sanctuary might work.

Goblin Squad Member

Ryan Dancey wrote:

@Aoldack Keldonson - neither DDO nor NWN is licensed with the OGL. They're licensed directly from Wizards of the Coast with a wholly separate set of terms.

Ahh, thank you. Stay away from those WotC clowns...


Being wrote:

<homer>ooooh... nummmbers... we get pretty numbers to play with for combat!</homer>

The only troubling thing to me is that I see nothing in there really for a successful parry or block. Armor mitigation is good, as far as it goes, but if I parry your blade your blade isn't touching me. If I catch an arrow on my shield it does not pierce me.

Am I reading it wrong? When you shoot an arrow at me even if I can block it will it strike me?

Are misses impossible?

I second this question. I don't really like the idea of every single attack dealing damage. Sometimes--very frequently, in fact--you just miss.

Goblin Squad Member

Imbicatus wrote:
...A Monk may have a higher AC than a knight in full plate, and Mage Armor grants equal protection to a Chain Shirt, but they wouldn't necessarily have a higher resistance to physical damage. Would those abilities grant a bonus to reflex or a bonus to resistance?

If they have eliminated clean misses altogether I'm a little concerned about the Monk's ability to dodge.

Goblin Squad Member

Medium armor will be popular choice for the PvP, it seems. Great idea with the physical and energy resistances, imo. We'll see, how the problem of running archers will be solved.
Thank you, GW!

Goblin Squad Member

I love it. But I don't know what I love in that. It just... follow the same thinking from the last time combat was talked.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Being wrote:
If they have eliminated clean misses altogether I'm a little concerned about the Monk's ability to dodge.

If you think of Hit Points more as Survival Points, then it kind of makes sense that the Monk will spend these in order to Dodge - but at a rate significantly less than if he didn't Dodge.

I think it's absolutely necessary that low level characters be able to damage high level characters, and that making misses simply reduce damage is a really simple way to accomplish this.

I'm not sure how you could have "clean misses" that made sense and didn't also make it virtually impossible for a poorly geared low level to hit a well geared high level.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If an arrow misses its target it doesn't do damage to that target. I'm with you on wanting lowbies to have a meaningful chance in combat. But if I catch an arrow on my shield I don't buy that it still hits me.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
Being wrote:
If they have eliminated clean misses altogether I'm a little concerned about the Monk's ability to dodge.

If you think of Hit Points more as Survival Points, then it kind of makes sense that the Monk will spend these in order to Dodge - but at a rate significantly less than if he didn't Dodge.

I think it's absolutely necessary that low level characters be able to damage high level characters, and that making misses simply reduce damage is a really simple way to accomplish this.

I'm not sure how you could have "clean misses" that made sense and didn't also make it virtually impossible for a poorly geared low level to hit a well geared high level.

Initially I thought "dodge" must be outside the current blog's discussion, but then looked at: Saves/Defence > "Reflex" (which sounds like some form of dodge?) combined with:

Goblin Works Blog wrote:
By removing both "you miss and do no damage" and "you crit and do double damage" from the system, we keep damage within a predictable range.

I see where that's going. So, I assume "To Hit" and some form of "Dodge" are combined in the above in the form of the tug of war between Attack and Defence. But then is there a qualitative difference between "Reflex" and "Parry" and "Taking the hit"?? Does one apply to eg arrows as well as swords while the other applies to a wider range of melee weapons more effectively for hypothetical eg?

=

Also really nice to see these combat ideas discussed, and mathematics is always a good work-out for these skinny brain cells!

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Being wrote:
I'm with you on wanting lowbies to have a meaningful chance in combat. But if I catch an arrow on my shield I don't buy that it still hits me.

Can you see a way to accomplish the latter without abandoning the former? There's the rub.

For my part, it's easy for me to accept that Hit Points don't represent actual damage delivered to my body, but instead represent my overall ability to stay alive, and that I've expended some of that in order to catch that arrow on my shield. But then, I'm a "GW fanboi", so I'm generally predisposed to rationalize in order to make the proposed systems acceptable.

Goblin Squad Member

"We can do a lot more math. We can make systems that involve a lot more math than you would want to require people to do at the table. In the MMO, we can make much more complex and reactive models by making use of our ready ability to run numerous and complicated calculations.
We need the math to be more granular. We need to keep advancement meaningful over a long span of time, so we need a wider range of numbers to work with. If MMO players leveled up using the advancement system from the Pathfinder RPG, some players would go from 1st level to 20th in a matter of days; we need that to take years. Additionally, computer math using pure integers is faster and less prone to rounding sensitivity. That means we can work with really large integers—something the tabletop game tries to avoid in order to minimize human math errors."

WOW clone

there is nothing fun about "granular numbers" there is nothing better about "granular numbers" the only thing you do with "granular numbers" is two thing 1. make the whole system meaningless 2.be a WOW clone

some might see me as a jerk and if a derail i will move this idea but really this takes the cake

Goblinworks Executive Founder

A shield probably doesn't help your defense so much as it improves your physical resistance- but your arm can still be broken by a strong blow that you catch perfectly with a shield.

Arrows will probably be in the low-base, moderate multiplier, quickly repeating zone: Very effective against low resistance enemies, not so much against heavy armor.

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

I'm not really worried about the arrow issue, as I've fought in SCA battles with combat archery. Let me tell you, it is very hard to block an arrow from an archer with a shield unless you are only engaged with that one archer and they are using direct fire at you from close range. If you are fighting someone in melee and they aim from the side, or if they are using volley fire, you simply don't have time to Block the arrow with a shield.

That said, the only mention to shields in this post was that Unbreakable is an armor passive feat and will add a bonus to shield defenses. This tells me that a Shield may not be the simple bonus to AC that they are in PnP, but a separate block chance or modifier.

Goblinworks Game Designer

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Being wrote:
Am I reading it wrong? When you shoot an arrow at me even if I can block it will it strike me?

We don't presently have a concept for a complete miss/block for the same reason we don't have critical hits that double damage: it introduces an element that can make combat extremely unpredictable, and which are unfun for the person on the other side. Nobody wants to pull out an expensive attack only to see MISS and no effect. We don't want people to be in a position to have to decide whether they're actually outclassed, or whether the random number generator is throwing them a string of unlikely misses.

High-defense and block-type effects are getting incorporated as an across the board mechanism, but our actual balancing takes them into account the same way we would a miss/block chance. If we had a binary miss/hit system, the same defense that would give you a 10% chance to take 0 damage on any given attack (and full damage for all the others) will just let you take 10% less damage overall on every attack. It's less exciting for the guy that got the perfect block, but he's taking the same reduced average damage overall while keeping the other guy from having a very frustrating moment.

DeciusBrutus wrote:
Also, if the resistances are higher than the base damages, is the attack completely ineffective (barring a crit)?

It may still get its secondary effects through, but yes. In general, this won't happen except to new players using base-damage starter weapons against more powerful heavy armor wearers. And new players are going to have the lowest opportunity cost for, say, switching over to a different damage-type weapon when this happens. Heavy armor has sufficient physical resistance to ignore low-level weapon damage, but has the tradeoff of not supporting sufficient energy resistances. So if you're bound and determined to attack someone in heavy armor who's obviously way more powerful than you, try switching to a wand (and, vice versa, if your wizard is attacking a veteran cloth wearer with high energy resist enchants, try switching to a physical weapon).

Nihimon wrote:
For example, if my attack roll equals the defense roll, and the defender has a Physical Resistance of 16, will that result in a 20% reduction in my Bleed effect, even though I hit or full damage?

The effects can "miss" independently of the damage. A bleed that hits by 5 against a guy with 30 physical resistance would do full damage but 25% less bleed.

Imbicatus wrote:
Damage Types: Physical will be the main damage type for weapons, so will Slashing/Piercing/Bludgeoning only be a keyword without and mechanical difference between them other than the crit and final monster vulnerability stages of attack resolution? It seems like you could add some more realism to combat by keeping them as separate damage types, and giving different armor types more resistance to one than another. For example, Chainmail may offer good resistance vs Slashing and Piercing, but poor vs Bludgeoning.

We're holding this as an option in reserve. Right now, bludgeoning vs. slashing vs. piercing is both keywords and different types of attack effects. The keyword lets you deal with specifically vulnerable creatures (slashing vs. zombies, bludgeoning vs. skeletons, etc.). The different effects are things like slashing has more bleed effects, bludgeoning gets more knockdowns and knockbacks, and piercing gets more penetrating attacks. The damage types also governs what types of injuries you take when the weapon crits.

We may split it into three types of damage later, if those options don't create enough variation, but right now it's more straightforward to keep it as one type.

Quote:
Also, while not directly discussed in the blog, How will you plan on dealing with effects like spells, feats, or class abilities that add to AC in pnp? A Monk may have a higher AC than a knight in full plate, and Mage Armor grants equal protection to a Chain Shirt, but they wouldn't necessarily have a higher resistance to physical damage. Would those abilities grant a bonus to reflex or a bonus to resistance?

It mostly depends on what kind of defense it is in the fiction. Dodging-based AC mods will generally be reflected in more Reflex, while things like Mage Armor that grant force fields are more likely to be resistances.

But we reserve the right to fiddle with that once we have a whole picture of how the role is supposed to function and realize something else would work better. If the monk winds up with too much Reflex and not enough resistance, some of the "Monk AC" may get rolled into a "Diamond Body" rather than a Reflex bonus.

Goblin Squad Member

Thanks Decius: I had not considered looking at it in that possible way.

@Kyras: I appreciate GW explaining the differences between PnP and Online: That particular paragraph really highlights what computers are good at: Computation on computation ? Perhaps the blog seems like spreadsheet combat as presented in these bare bones form? Where's the human element is perhaps what you are asking? Eg I manually target and hit or miss??

Goblin Squad Member

I too on wondering on the survivability of my nimble rogue should he be forced to fight for his life.

I'm assuming there must be some extra benefits from wearing light armour other than extra magic resistance. Building on what Nihimon discussed about 'the ability to stay alive' i can see the ability to dodge/parry/block going a couple of ways.

1. Flat increase in AC - no increase to damage resistance

Say that a fully specced combat rogue/monk has the same AC as a heavy armoured fighter. This would mean he has the same chance as 'evading' a blow as the fighter does having it bounce of the armour. But when the rogue/monk DOES get hit, it hits him a lot harder as he has a much lower resistance to physical damage due to the lack of armour he wears.

2. Misses hurt less

"If the result of the roll plus the attack bonus was less than the target's defense, the difference translates into a percentage reduction in the total damage dealt. This reduction is equal to the square root of the miss amount times 5%. Thus, a near miss will do at least 5% less damage, but the attack would have to miss by 400 or more (not possible except in the most extreme cases) to do 100% less damage. This percentage is applied later, with the damage factor."

These abilities could add a flat percentage reduction to the amount of damage that is taken upon the character being missed, to show that the character 'evaded' the attack more than it bounced off his armour.

Goblin Squad Member

@Avena: when the math is brought to this point it because meaningless to the player if i give you a +1 to you str on the PnP you know exactly how that effects you but if we go on wow right now and i give you a +12 to spirit to you max lvl toon it dose not mean any thing other then being a higher number. there is no way the play can work that math with out a spreed sheet which is ridiculous. I should not need a math degree to understand the game I am playing players are just going to walk around grinding for the next larger number, then to top it off in a few mounts some one will make a site like www.askmrrobot.com just so they can have some grasp of what is worth grinding out the next few hours for. Just because that player will not be doing looking for random drops in a raid he instead be farming mats which dose not make this a better game.

Goblin Squad Member

Interesting. Will take a bit to digest. The only thing I don't like so far is that it seems that secondary effects will ALWAYS apply, even if just reduced in duration. I'm not sure that's such a good idea, especialy with things like ROOTS and STUNS and DISRUPTS. The idea that you can always without fail disrupt another characters activity at a critical moment just by pressing the button us a really, really powefull thing.

I'm ok with (though I never liked) the "race to the bottom" hit point thing....that is part of the flavor of the PnP system. I do think you may want to allow for some of the more powerfull secondary effects to just fail completely though. That way you can't always count on being able to disrupt your opponent when you want to just by pressing the button faster then they. There are some effects that definately make sense in being of the nature of partial duration or partial effect....and other types that really do make sense in more of a pass/fail mode. For those things I imagine that you could put in a threshold by which the attack must exceed or fail in order to have the effect fire off in the first place. YMMV.

Goblinworks Game Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
GrumpyMel wrote:
Interesting. Will take a bit to digest. The only thing I don't like so far is that it seems that secondary effects will ALWAYS apply, even if just reduced in duration. I'm not sure that's such a good idea, especialy with things like ROOTS and STUNS and DISRUPTS. The idea that you can always without fail disrupt another characters activity at a critical moment just by pressing the button us a really, really powefull thing.

We're currently thinking that most controls downgrade to a lesser control if they miss by a sufficient margin. Stuns become Immobilizes, for example.

Which is to say that we're as worried as you are about this possibility and will be scrutinizing it heavily as we prototype and test :) .

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
Being wrote:
I'm with you on wanting lowbies to have a meaningful chance in combat. But if I catch an arrow on my shield I don't buy that it still hits me.

Can you see a way to accomplish the latter without abandoning the former? There's the rub.

For my part, it's easy for me to accept that Hit Points don't represent actual damage delivered to my body, but instead represent my overall ability to stay alive, and that I've expended some of that in order to catch that arrow on my shield.

I think this is probably how they are thinking of HP. I think it would be good if perhaps there was a chance for a total_miss, say about as much as possible crit. But, if it means doing away with the design vision, then I don't think it is really all that necessary.

Goblin Squad Member

@GrumpyMel, keep in mind that the Root, Stun, or Disrupt will also apply counters that make the target less susceptible to them later. So, it's not just that you're disrupting them now, it's that you're disrupting them now for a diminished effect yet still making them less susceptible to disruption later. If the devs are just a little wicked and don't reduce the application of these counters on partial effects, then it's going to be a really bad idea to give your target full effect resistance to future disrupts to get a less-than-full disrupt now.

Goblin Squad Member

One thing the blog didnt cover was how AoO and movement in combat was gonna work, is there any news on these fronts?

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
The Wiseman of the Wilds wrote:
One thing the blog didnt cover was how AoO and movement in combat was gonna work...

I'd really love to see an entire blog about Combat Maneuvers.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
Being wrote:
If they have eliminated clean misses altogether I'm a little concerned about the Monk's ability to dodge.

If you think of Hit Points more as Survival Points, then it kind of makes sense that the Monk will spend these in order to Dodge - but at a rate significantly less than if he didn't Dodge.

I think it's absolutely necessary that low level characters be able to damage high level characters, and that making misses simply reduce damage is a really simple way to accomplish this.

I'm not sure how you could have "clean misses" that made sense and didn't also make it virtually impossible for a poorly geared low level to hit a well geared high level.

That's pretty easy to accomplish. You just make the RNG have a greater deviation then the variance between the lowest geared newbie and the highest geared veteran. It wouldn't accomplish thier other goal of making a system that was less "luck dependant" but it would accomplish the specific goal you are talking about.

I even had a homebrew system that I used to run for freinds that did that. You had both attack and defence rolls. They were both d100 rolls that "open ended" on the top and bottom 5 percent. That is if you rolled 01-05, you rolled d100 again and SUBTRACTED that roll from the origional result and if you rolled 96-100 you rolled d100 again and added that roll to the origional result.

End result was that anyone had the potential to hit anyone some of the time and the potential to miss anyone some of the time...but most of the time you got a result within an expected range.

Pathfinder PnP essentialy does the same with the automatic success on a "20" and fail on a "1".

That particular goal is easly enough done with clean "misses", it's just that doesn't work well with some of thier other goals (e.g. greater perdictability in each attack)

Goblin Squad Member

Stephen Cheney wrote:
GrumpyMel wrote:
Interesting. Will take a bit to digest. The only thing I don't like so far is that it seems that secondary effects will ALWAYS apply, even if just reduced in duration. I'm not sure that's such a good idea, especialy with things like ROOTS and STUNS and DISRUPTS. The idea that you can always without fail disrupt another characters activity at a critical moment just by pressing the button us a really, really powefull thing.

We're currently thinking that most controls downgrade to a lesser control if they miss by a sufficient margin. Stuns become Immobilizes, for example.

Which is to say that we're as worried as you are about this possibility and will be scrutinizing it heavily as we prototype and test :) .

Thanks Stephen, that actualy sounds like a viable solution...

So something like Stun -> Immobilize -> Slow ?

Goblin Squad Member

Police ftw!

Thank you for the blog. This is nothing new at this point, but it is really cool to see the degree to which GW is involving us in the development process. This is another example of seriously pulling back the curtain.

I'm not a numbers person, so I'll leaving the crunching to others, but I do like the attention detail and the apparent richness of the system. I'm thinking that the whole Pit Fights idea will be crucial in ironing out the issues.


Honestly, I don't see a huge similarity between removing crits and removing clean misses. A crit ends a fight early. A clean miss makes the fight take longer. Clean misses should not be reliant on comparative levels (or should be pretty unlikely), but they should exist.

Liberty's Edge Goblin Squad Member

I find the use of granular math to be highly intriguing, as I have only encountered their use in such things as quantum mechanics and weather forecasting, so from a purely academic viewpoint I am looking forward to seeing how they play out in a system designed to last years. It also seems the most adventitious way to go for said system, given the time consideration that must be applied to any system in PfO. Yes it will be hard to grasp for most people, even me, as I am better with theory than the math (don't laugh but I am an amateur quantum theory nut <EG>, curse you Drs Koku, Tyson and Wolfe!) However, I really don't need to know the numbers in order to use the system, as it all happens behind the scenes on the server. Really all I need to know is did I hit (it appears it will be yes most of the time) and if so, how much damage did I do?

Of course now I wonder what the systems will be like once PfO is migrated to a quantum computer (curse you Ryan and Stephen... j/k)

All-in-all, I think this will work well, but I am a geek :D

Goblin Squad Member

Kyras Ausks wrote:
@Avena: when the math is brought to this point it because meaningless to the player if i give you a +1 to you str on the PnP you know exactly how that effects you but if we go on wow right now and i give you a +12 to spirit to you max lvl toon it dose not mean any thing other then being a higher number. there is no way the play can work that math with out a spreed sheet which is ridiculous. I should not need a math degree to understand the game I am playing players are just going to walk around grinding for the next larger number, then to top it off in a few mounts some one will make a site like www.askmrrobot.com just so they can have some grasp of what is worth grinding out the next few hours for. Just because that player will not be doing looking for random drops in a raid he instead be farming mats which dose not make this a better game.

Ah, I see comparing those "tables" (I'm used to Warhammer's system) which are human-friendly to what these mmorpgs are doing. I think it just comes down to scale, as said in the blog, every single moment needs feedback for thousands of players across 'millions' of scenarios going on for years and years? Even a small mmo I played on mobile, had a fairly intense spreadsheet for working out "builds" for each level ie chains of (xy)+(za)+. Though that site you mention, is knowingly tongue-in-cheek about the whole "cheesing" process... . I think like anything, you find a small area that works for you and find hopefully finer and finer margins with experience that give you a sense of mastery? I'm happy if the combat speed of moving players is not too crazy so I can appreciate nuances in the animation combined with the time to make decisions? Maybe see how that ends up looking?

Goblin Squad Member

I hope jumping and excessive movement takes alot of fatigue too. Otherwise you'll have people running and jumping in cirlces around opponents hoping to get a pixel or two on your backside for precision damage.

Goblin Squad Member

3 people marked this as a favorite.

It's probably best to think of hit points not as blood loss, broken bones, or other traumatic injuries necessarily, but as one's ability to keep fighting. An attack will miss, but the effort to dodge/block/parry the attack will still take something out of you.

Stamina will be an interesting factor, as it will be the "currency" of combat. I wonder what will be better, a pool that stays fixed for all players, or a pool that can be improved through effort?

Goblin Squad Member

Good info here. I'm always interested in the interactions of game mechanics and this brought a few things into focus for me.

Goblin Squad Member

I like the math, but I am not 100% sure I like the "I can't miss" idea. It is nice to be able to do damage no matter the target and all, but I am just not sure. Maybe once I see it in action I might like it better but right now i'm not sure.

Goblin Squad Member

Kryzbyn wrote:
I hope jumping and excessive movement takes alot of fatigue too. Otherwise you'll have people running and jumping in cirlces around opponents hoping to get a pixel or two on your backside for precision damage.

Don't forget about movement provoking attacks of opportunity.

From Goblinworks Blog: A Three-Headed Hydra:

Lee Hammock wrote:
* One of the core mechanics we are working on for the fighter is a version of attacks of opportunity. The idea is that certain actions, such as running, casting spells, ranged attacks, etc put a debuff on the target called Opportunity. This debuff has no effect other than when certain attacks (particularly fighter attacks, and to a lesser extent Rogue) are used against a target suffering from Opportunity they do a lot more damage and can stun/slow/etc the target.

Goblin Squad Member

Is there any reason to be concerned that the system is TOO predictable? Once player A figures out a rotation that beats Player B won't he alwyays beat him?

Or once I know Pauls weak vs. Fire won't I always beat him until he earns xp or re-gears?

Maybe just a concern vs. NPCs who can't change tactics.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I really like the proposed system, especially the relative predictability. I tend to get frustrated with systems where the randomness heavily outweighs the fixed numbers (like the D20 system at low levels), they just feel entirely too RNG-based which minimizes any meaningful player contribution (IMO).

@Ryan, although it's obvious how this system ties in with armor & weaponry, and how it could emphasize the threading of your high-tier armor & weaponry over other items for combat-focused characters, could you go on a bit of a tangent and elaborate a bit on what the effects of other gear (hats, boots, rings, etc) might be?

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Stephen Cheney wrote:
Nihimon wrote:

For example, if my attack roll equals the defense roll, and the defender has a Physical Resistance of 16, will that result in a 20% reduction in my Bleed effect, even though I hit or full damage?

The effects can "miss" independently of the damage. A bleed that hits by 5 against a guy with 30 physical resistance would do full damage but 25% less bleed.

If I'm reading this right, resistances count as added defense versus effects, but don't otherwise reduce the damage done by those effects? If that bleed hit by 30, it would do the same maximum damage as if the target had no physical resistance at all (the physical portion of the attack would do more in that scenario, I'm asking about the effect damage exclusive of other factors.)

Goblin Squad Member

I would suggest you not separate physical Freedom and mental Freedom. Doing this allows for 2 consecutive full strength control effects.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rafkin wrote:

Is there any reason to be concerned that the system is TOO predictable? Once player A figures out a rotation that beats Player B won't he alwyays beat him?

Or once I know Pauls weak vs. Fire won't I always beat him until he earns xp or re-gears?

Maybe just a concern vs. NPCs who can't change tactics.

Well, yeah. If you know your enemy's weakness and can exploit it, you win. Top-tier PvP will be about preparation, research, misdirection (looking like your weaknesses are something other than they are), and numbers.

NPC's can typically only be killed once each (and can change tactics), so I don't see your concern there. In theme park MMOs, one challenge is figuring out what defeats each static encounter and iterating it. Figuring out what type of strategy adapts to each type of encounter is a slightly different skill.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I wish I had the "I can't miss" rolls when I was in the military, although I'm glad the Iraqis didn't have the "I can't miss " button as well.

But to build the system of combat around the concept of predictability is a bit strange. The one thing anyone who has been in combat knows is that nothing is predictable. In a game, having the long shot is of great value in my opinion.

Without true critical hits or the very, very, very rare instant kill.... You take the unpredictability of combat out of combat, and that takes you off the edge of your seat and firmly places you on the seat.

I would rather be on the edge of my seat in every combat situation, never feeling truly safe.

Goblin Squad Member

But we will know your biggest weakness based on the armor type we see you wearing. I suppose thats true of most games but then most games aren't this predictable. Ah well, system sounds good to me.

Just consider changing Freedom or everyone will spec for one physical control and one mental control and its Stun Wars all over again.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Bluddwolf wrote:
I would rather be on the edge of my seat in every combat situation, never feeling truly safe.

Isn't that still possible with the proposed system? There are still wide ranging variables, and the if the pacing of combat is fast, then I can still see it being exciting.

1 to 50 of 360 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / Goblinworks Blog: Murder by Numbers All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.