Hi, everyone. I've been working on making an RPG with rules that have elements of various RPG video games I've played before such as Final Fantasy games and Diablo, just to name a few, but I'm changing things that I don't like about how those games worked and adding new things and whatnot. The problem I'm having is that since I've never played any RPGs that aren't video games except for the board game Hero Quest, I'm having to try to kinda figure out how basic rules, mostly combat rules, are done in these different games, as well as coming up with some of my own system ideas if I feel something should be changed or added.

Okay, now I seem to pretty much have most of the basics worked out, but what I'm really struggling with now is that I can't figure out how it is that the whole thing of determining if an attack is a hit or a miss works. I've noticed that basically every game I can think of uses a system of percentages rather than just "game points" to determine accuracy and evasion values, but I still don't understand how this would work in a combat system. For example, if someone has a total accuracy rating of, say, eighty percent and attacks something that has an evasion rating of...sixty percent, ¿does that mean that you would minus that sixty from the original eighty which would mean that the attacker now has only a twenty-percent chance of making a hit? That doesn't sound right. Or the other thing I was thinking is that maybe it would be that the attacker would have an eighty-percent chance of making what would be a valid hit but then the defender has its sixty-percent chance to evade but the two percentages never directly compete with each other in the way that an attack-power value would compete directly with defense power, but then if that's the case, then that means that it all would come down to how high the defender's evasion is, because if that's how it works, then that means that the attacker could have, if such were possible, a ten-thousand-percent chance of making a hit, but then if the defender has a ninety-five-percent chance of evading, let's say, then regardless of how high the attacker's accuracy is, this would almost always result in a miss anyway, so I don't think that system can be right.

I just can't seem to figure out how to make this work. I would actually rather have a system to where the attacker's accuracy directly competes with the defender's evasion, just like the attacker's attack power directly competes with the defender's defense power. A good reason for this also would be so that there isn't any limit to how high someone's accuracy or evasion can really be, because if there's a limit on these stats of one hundred like is the case with some games, then there's nothing that can be done if, say, someone already has an accuracy of ninety-five but is also wearing a ring or something that increases their accuracy by ten, or if they're using a weapon that that character is particularly good with which gives them an extra ten to accuracy when using that type of weapon or something like that. ...But like I said, I don't really know anything about this, so I don't know exactly what kind of system would be best.

If anyone knows of a good, accurate system to use for making this work, then please let me know, and let me know what kind of dice the system uses too, of course. If there's a system that's just as good that can be done with regular six-sided dice, that's great, but if a better system exists that uses a different type of dice, I'll use that too.

Anyway, I'm sorry this ended up being so long. ...And thank you very, very much in advance if anyone helps me with this.

...Take care, everyone.

Hello,

That you are more familiar with video games can make RPGs seem very illogical. I find that RPGs don't have very good combat systems. There is a presumption that the numbers used to gauge difficulties in RPGs are based on some real-world statistics. They aren't and reflect only how players feel how good a character's combat skills should be in certain situations. It is a compromise and nothing more.

Percentages to hit something are not very accurate unless it is a stationary target or one with predictable movement. That would allow you to truly measure the character's chances of hitting something. Most percentages cannot be added and subtracted unless both statistics use the same base. 90% to hit vs. 10% to evade equates to 90% to hit times 90% to be hit. So, that's 81% to hit that target. However, percentages only work when the circumstances are exactly the same every time--and that's not very likely. It's easy and popular among RPGs.

Video games are more about selecting the correct combination of moves with emphasis on timing. As long as you make the right combat maneuvers during the correct moment, you will win or at least improve your position. That's very difficult to simulate in an RPG.

RPGs use a lot of bonuses and penalties to give the game a sense of realism. A player can increase his chances by selecting certain armor, changing position or using skills that provide an advantage to the base chance success of an attack. I find it monotonous and time consuming.

Of all the systems I've encountered, none are as seamless and quick as those in a video game. The video games can have hundreds of factors that are analyzed by the software. That's almost instantaneous and the action is smooth and realistic. Don't expect that with an RPG. Plus, the GM doesn't represent the mindless enemies found in video games. The GM provides challenges and antagonists that engage the players without instantly killing them.

I like Alternity because it gives the players levels of success instead of just hit/miss. The game is out of print but still has a large following.

I imagine you will have a great task ahead of you. Players have been trying to create the perfect game for decades that combine realism and speed of play in a simple set of rules.

Good luck,

Troy

Welcome to the Forge, Paladin Knight! Is there a real name we can call you by?

I'm going to disagree outright with Troy because the opposed statements "RPGs do this" and "video games do that" are false: neither does either with any consistency, and the games you state your design is basing itself upon definitely do not require "the correct combination of buttons at the appropriate times" and are thus easily emulatable with dice and paper.

Now, there are a number of ways you could go about solving your problem of how to make combat work, including trying an entirely different system, depending on what your goals for the feel of play are. Since you've stated this is an attempt to emulate FF and similar games, I'll go with that for now and ask if you have you checked into others' attempts to create similar systems from the same sort of base?

Here is the Returner's FFRPG, and here is another called Zodiac. Both rule sets are available for free on the web. Though I have never played either system, I am not certain how they handle the answer to your question about percentages, but I suspect the answer you seek about how such a system actually works can be found within either.

If you are interested in other systems that handle combat differently than this, there are a variety of games you could check out (for example, "The Riddle of Steel" details highly realistic, deadly combat but does not use interacting percentage scores; "Dungeons & Dragons" uses a simplistic "roll against a target number from 1-20" system; etc) and I am sure we could point you to various RPGs you might want to try out based on what you decide you wish to accomplish.

Oops. I gave bad URLs in the post above; sorry about that. Here are the working links: Returner's FFRPG, and Zodiac.

Hi Palidinknight,

If you are using computer games as inspiration you might want to consider resolution in the same way. Since computers have a huge mathematical advantage over humans, resolution of an action is typically a multi-step process from what I understand. For instance, take the game Dark Age of Camelot. For my big fighter type to hit someone it works something like this. (It's actually more involved, but this works fine for my point.)

• Check for hit. Big fighter type has 97% chance to hit.
• If Hit, check for magic protective bubble. If target has bubble then remove bubble and damage equals zero.
• If no bubble, check for block.If target blocks then damage equals zero.
• If no block, check for parry. If target parries then damage equals zero.
• If no parry, check for evasion. If target evades then damage equals zero.
• If no damage is mitigated then determine damage.
• Modify damage up or down by checking weapon type to armor type.
• Modify damage down by checking for percentage of resistance versus weapon type if any.
• Finally deliver damage to player and play damage animation or if no damage play damage escape animation.

This would be a long process in a tabletop RPG, and likely make for very slow combat resolution, but I'm fairly sure there are people out there who would enjoy a system with so many things to tweak. *shrugs* There are quite a few who like to examine DAOC's system to determine maximum effectiveness. I just read what those guys say and follow their advice myself.

You might make a simpler process. For instance Palladium's Robotech game used a system where you would roll to hit, and if you hit the other player could try to parry or block the blow. Failing that they could use up one of their actions to dodge. After that was resolved they could try to roll with the blow to take half damage.

First edition D+D used a chart to determine bonuses or minuses to the ability to hit someone based on their weapon versus various armor types. I don't know anyone who actually used it except me once, and I did a lot of prep work so we wouldn't have to look at a big chart everytime we rolled. Again, I'm certain there were folks who enjoyed this system.

So you might want to consider a multi-step process versus a computational all in one step process.

Heya, welcome to the forge!

I'm going to suggest two things:

1: folks take a breather while Paladin Knight has a chance to read through and respond so far. 

2: Paladin, the single best thing you can do to understand how different tabletop RPG's work is to play them.  Go to your friendly local game store, and see if they have an announcement board, or weekly game nights.  Go to Findplay and see if there's anyone in your area.  Ask your online gaming friends (if they're in your area) if they game or know folks who do.

hope that helps,

James

Hi again, everyone. Thank you all very much for your responses. Sorry it took me so long to get back on here to read them. I've just been busy with things and had a party thing over the weekend.

I do see and understand what some of you are saying about how it would be way too complicated and slow to try to fully emulate everything that goes on within an RPG video game. I figured this before, and so I kind of gave up on the idea of trying to *totally* emulate their combat systems and was instead trying to find something that would work just as accurate but be much quicker and easier to do and get the final results of. I definitely do not want the combat to be "a drag". I want it to be fun and exciting instead of having the players dread every time they run into a random encounter because the combat is so lagging, but at the same time, I want it to be an accurate system that really works and is fair and whatnot. What I'm saying is that I don't want to compromise having a good system that works for just having a system that is all about speedy resolution but isn't accurate or totally fair, but that also doesn't mean that I'm trying to find a system that perfectly emulates reality either. I was going for that in the beginning, but then I had to remind myself that this is after all a *game*, so it's not so horrible if it functions as a game instead of a reality simulator. For example, I gave up on the idea of worrying about where a given hit actually lands on the target and also how hard each particular hit is. I know that in video games, such as Final Fantasy games, just to name one, every hit is different and does a different amount of damage, even if the attacker and defender's stats haven't changed since the last hit and the same weapons and armor are used and all. I was originally trying to emulate how the damages varies like that in the video games, but then I gave up on that because I felt it to be too unnecessarily time-consuming and went with a much easier and simpler system of just taking the attacker's total attack power, which is their strength value plus the attack power of the weapon they're currently using, and minusing from that the total defense power from all the armors that the defender is wearing, and whatever is left over is the total amount of damage that the defender would take, and at that point you would double the damage if the defender were weak against that weapon's type of attack it uses or half the damage if they're resistant to it or whatever. This system means that the total damage taken would be the exact same every time a particular character attacks the same target and there's no change in the attacker's strength-point value or weapon used or armor worn by the defender if any, but that's okay because you don't really *need* it to be a different damage value every time. I mean, yeah, it's more realistic for it to be different every time because in reality, every hit would strike a little different, but it still works just as well with this simpler way. Besides, this works just fine in other games. The one that comes to mind first is The Legend Of Zelda. Now, I know a lot of people don't consider this to be an RPG, but it is one in a lot of ways, and in those games -- I'll use Zelda 3: A Link To The Past for an example. In that game, if you use the original white sword, which is the first sword you get, and you attack one of those Hyrule knights with the purple armor, they will always take three hits with that sword, and that never changes, so I figure if it's good enough for games like this, it's good enough for me.

But anyway, that's basically what I'm going for is a system that is accurate and takes into account how good the attacker is at hitting targets and how good the defender is at dodging hits and makes it work in a fair and accurate way, but I don't need it to simulate reality to a T.

I guess I should describe the system I had in mind but couldn't figure out how to make work. Like I said, I have played the board game Hero Quest before, so taking something from that, I was thinking of how in that game they use the combat dice with the three skulls, two white shields and one black shield. Well, to make the necessary parts for the game more accessible, I decided to instead use just regular dotted dice to simulate what the combat dice in Hero Quest do, since both are six-sided dice anyway. I don't know if any of you have played Hero Quest, but in that game, when one of the hero characters attacks, for example, they roll however many attack dice they have, let's say three for an example, and the defending monster rolls however many defend dice they have, say two, and for each skull rolled by the attacking hero, that's one "hit", and for each black shield rolled by the defending monster, that's one blocked attack point, so if the hero rolled two skulls out of a possible three and the monster rolled one black shield out of a possible two, then that would mean that the monster took one point of damage. The Hero Quest system also says that if the attacker rolls no skulls, then the attack is a failed attack. The thing I don't like about this system is that it means that the stronger the attack power of the attacker is, the more attack dice they use and therefore the more of a chance they have to make a hit, so what this means is that the attack power and the chance to hit have been combined into the same thing to where a greater attack power also means a greater chance to hit, and I want to the two things to be separate values. I also want it to be a totally fair and even playing field, meaning I don't want to do what Hero Quest does and give any combat advantages to the "heroes" just because they're the good guys. I forgot to mention that in Hero Quest, a hero defends against attacks using the two white shields on the combat dice, compared to the one black shield that the monsters use, which means the heroes automatically have an advantage in defending in combat, which is unrealistic and unfair, so I don't like that. I know that it's necessary for the players to generally be stronger than the enemies they encounter, except for bosses, but this advantage will be done by giving the enemies lower stats and/or lower levels and therefore lower stats, but I want the combat system to work exactly the same for everything in the game.

The system I was thinking of using is one where you would use the same kind of system of dice used in Hero Quest but *only* to determine whether an attack is a hit or miss and it would have nothing to do with how powerful the attack is since that's already determined by the attacker's total attack power based on their strength points plus the weapon they're currently using if any. The problem I was running into is that this system I was thinking of using would require rolling an insane amount of dice because if the attacker had, say, sixty-two accuracy points -- I should also mention that these accuracy and evasion points are not percentages -- and the defender had....let's say forty-eight evasion points, then that would require rolling sixty-two six-sided dice for the attacker and forty-eight six-sided dice for the defender, and then I was gonna say that each one, two or three rolled equals nothing and each four, five or six rolled equals a value of one, and this is the same for both the attacker and defender, so if the attacker rolled enough fours, fives and sixes to gain a total value of fifty-seven, just for an example, out of his or her possible sixty-two and the defender rolled enough fours, fives and sixes to get a total value of, say, twenty-nine out of its possible forty-eight, then that would mean that in this particular case here, it would be a hit because fifty-seven is a higher number than twenty-nine, but then if the same attacker attacked the same defender again later and this time the result of the two rolls gave the defender enough fours, fives and sixes to give the defender a higher number than the attacker got with its fours, fives and sixes this time, which we can also call "points" for both the attacker and defender, then it would be a miss, and if they tied with the total number of "points", then it would be a hit since in this case the attacker has a higher accuracy value than the defender's evasion value, but if a defender's evasion value is higher than the attacker's accuracy value, then that would mean that a tie in "points" after a roll, which would be very rare anyway, would result in a miss, and in a case where an attacker has an accuracy value exactly equal to that of the defender's evasion value, then a tie in "points" after a roll would be resolved by rolling one single six-sided die, and a one, two or three would favor the defender and make the attack a miss and a four, five or six would favor the attacker and make the attack a hit, but this would be an extremely rare occurrence. Anyway, that's the system I had in mind. This system would be perfect and exactly what I want if only there were an easier way to get the same result without having to roll all these tons of dice, because that obviously is not going to be a good way to try to play the game. I don't even want to think of the hassle and lag time...

But if there were just some way to do this without having to roll all those dice, that would be exactly what I'm looking for. ...Sorry that took so much text to explain, but I hope that me explaining that gives a good idea of what kind of system I'm trying to find.

I would also like to play more tabletop RPG games like James suggested, but it's hard for me to find the time to do a whole lot right now and travel around and stuff. That's why I like designing and creating game stuff is because that's something I can do at home and on a computer and whatnot. Hopefully, though, I will have more free time at some point.

Anyway, thank you all again so very much for responding to me. ...I'm gonna go ahead and check out those links that Greyorm gave me. Take care, everyone. ...Bye.  :-)