I have been doing some reflecting on one of my projects, which I am still working out some of the kinks about.

In the street-fighting genre computer game (from hereforth refered to as SFG), the action is delibreatly created to be quick. In fact, the games at one point increasingly were all about getting the game to speed up so that it was reflexes and button mashing that won games. Although later games got rid of this, the feel still is one that denies the slower person.

Also, combos started to become popular. With a hit of a few buttons nowdays, you can layer up a number of impressive hits, far greater then the number of strokes on the controls would imply.

When converting this kind of feel to a RPG, there basicly comes down to a couple of considerations that you would want to have players think about

Postion: There are three basic ranges in Street Fighting Games. Long (Far enough away where leaps and punches will not catch you), Reach (Range where short ranged attacks can't hit, but leaping/streching ones can), and Close. In a RPG situation with multiple combatants, this can get complicated, but not much more so. There really is no problem on this level.

Evasion: In SFG, Evasion is a very important part of the game, and is partialy reactive, and partially programed part of the game. Blocking, sidestepping, Counter-Attack and teleportation are common evasion techniques. Even with these Evasion Techniques, however, when a Chain of Attacks is created by a player, these techniques can fail.

In RPG's when a player misses, they miss. There is no real explination why. To capture the feel of a SFG, players need to be able to define how a miss actually happens. There needs to be a mechanic that limits the kinds of responces that players have. It is perfectly acceptable, for instance, for a hero to block an attack with a gun, but a long attack typically can't be sidestepped in the SFG. Should there be hard rules on how players are allowed to defend automaticly, or should the players be allowed to choose, or, heaven forbid, the result of the defense be random?

Active Evasion is not a big issue, but the question is should there be some kind of advantage made to the player who uses evasion? Evasions tend to allow for hits and combos to happen in SFG's. Should something like that be available to players ofa table top game?

Combos: Combos are the heart of many SFG. The ability to do damage by setting up an opponent and using key combinations is what a lot of games are about. This does not translate so well over to RPG's. So how do you capture the feel?

One of my ideas is that you set it up as a staged powerup. A combatant must connect with an attack. Once they do that, on their next turn, they may use that for a Quick Combo, gaining a small boost in damage or special effect (Such as a knockdown), or they may wait further to get a Extended Combo, gaining a much larger boost in damage, or a greater special effect (Such as dizzying an opponent). One might consider limiting combos that one can have, by making people pay experince for different combo effects. This allows some charecters to have extensive combos, while other charecters, that rely on special effects, to specialize in their effects that are seperate from the fighting charecters. By no means, would this limit the other charecters from having combos, but it would force them to make an important choice in development.
----

Any thoughts people have would be appreciated. I might go the route of adopting one of my RPG systems in a slightly different way to accomplish the goals I need for a system. However, thinking about how to make combat as exciting as in some games I feel will lend to the success of what I envisioned.

Hiya Kensan,

Should there be...?

The ability to do damage by setting up an opponent and using key combinations is what a lot of games are about. This does not translate so well over to RPG's. So how do you capture the feel?

Well, I use the term should, as without a specific system in place, there can be no affirmative. Opinion is what is called for. A Definite of How or Would, or even Why is to specific. Should or Could are better matches. (Remind me to hit spell check buttons in the future)

Card Combat Route: MMm... too Complex if you allow for customization, and too much like SF:TRG, which failed miserably, and Brawl, which is just a brilliant game.  While I still love the idea of the Drama Card Mechanic they had in TORG, a card combat system might add yet another resolution mechanic, which would keep the game more complex. The more complex the game, the more rules you have to look up, the slower the combat becomes, the less speedy it is, the less like the button mashers we are like.

Perspective might be useful here. I play an occasional game (the Soulcaliber series currently being my favorite), and I don't get the chances to play them endlessly like other people. So the key things that I want to capture are the cool things from my experience.

So, in order, this is what is important.

1) Speed (Combat shouldn't bog down too much)
2) Thrill (Successful Special Effect Move)
3) Strategy (The kinds of attacks I do should matter.)
4) Cool Factor (The ability to describe the kind of move. For instance, in SF, Blanka has a stronger Cool Factor then Zeingif, even though Zeingif is the better character, overall.)
5) Simplicity (Doing things should not be hard. Combo's should be a natural part of a progression of attacks, not a combo of postions that one is forced to dance into) (Exalted has a little of this dance thing to a point, and I'm not particularly fond of the idea.)

In Burning Wheel a round is made of 3 exchanges with every exchange having 1 move or more if you are fast enough. You write down three exchanges and then compare them to your opponents. The moves list is not overly large but certain moves counter others or get bonuses when used against each other.
Having few moves with set effects and interactions like Attack 1 is escaped with a side step would enable fast play.

Writing and revealing moves would be too slow and create more randomness then strategy.
Instead use a number of pre-made scripts that you can follow for benefits but you do not have to follow them These are your combos.
The main draw to this is the dynamic nature of working through your scripts allowing for changing strategies. The main difficulty that I see is being able to tell what your opponent is doing to counter to adjust your strategy like is the console game. Move/script aborts and escapes would need some well done mechanics as well though the basics look like they could be very simple.
Your combo/scripts can even be written in a shorthand like game buttons and have special effects not available in any other way.

How does that sound?

For some radical thoughts finding ways to use minimal dice seems like a point to look into.
Limited resources like speed is used to perform moves.
As long as the target is in the hit zone he gets hit/damaged but can roll dice to try and evade/block. This would require tracking of position and range but that can be very simplified to 3-6 steps of each and would not be too time consuming to handle, I think to handle.

I created an RPG called Thrash back in, like, 97, and I've been totally failing to put together a second edition of it for around 4-5 years now, so I've been grappling with a lot of the stuff you're talking about for a while, with the guys on the Thrash mailing list at turns keeping me honest and driving me insane.

Not to mention I keep hoping someone else would come up with a different take on the genre. Thrash started as a bastard child of Interlock and Street Fighter: The Storytelling Game, and while the new version is getting much better (in part because of the Cinematic Unisystem influence), I really would like to see something that comes at it from a completely different perspective. (I also want an intensely narrative fighting manga type game, but that's a whole other barrel of monkeys. Monkeys with kung fu).

(Although I have played Soul Calibur now and then, I'm more of a 2-D guy when it comes to fighting games too. When I decided to get back into the groove for working on Thrash I had to dig out my Sega Saturn and modded PSX for some crazy Japanese fighting game action).

Finding the right compromise between tactical sophistication and fast, simple combat is a pain. I wound up doing some crazy things with Action Points, and in the work-in-progress second edition of my game many of the things meant to capture the feel of fighting game combat are ultimately based on different ways of manipulating APs.

I started roleplaying with Palladium's Robotech RPG, so making characters actively defend themselves in combat was and still is very natural and intuitive to me. Palladium's thing was pretty simple: Parry doesn't use up an action, but it can only block certain kinds of things, while Dodge lets you evade most things, but it does use an action (unless you have a cheesy "Leap Dodge" ability). Thrash wound up being kind of similar, but with a fair number of special defense moves you could buy with points, and some stuff with Counterattacks relating to "posture" (standing, crouching, aerial).

One of the ideas that wound up being all but stillborn was using a Rock-Paper-Scissors type relationship between certain general classes of moves (something like Speed/Power/Finesse or Mind/Body/Soul), simply because no one could come up with a fair method of handling the selection of these at the gaming table without getting unduly convoluted. I thought about cards, someone on RPGnet suggested using different color dice, etc.

For combos that are improvised, I basically wound up throwing up my hands and saying that they're just what happens when you spend your AP on multiple attacks in a turn. I also have pre-set combos as character traits that let you use more than your maximum AP in one turn, but you have to commit them all at once.

There's a free RPG (which I really ought to give a spin some time...) called Final Stand, where you have piles of dice for Punch, Kick, and Throw that you roll at the start of a round, and combat is handled by assigning these in different ways to try to outdo your opponent (with stuff like special moves and Chi adding more variety).

My big, fun Thrash campaign with my friends (back around 2000 or so) had the combat go by pretty quickly, partly just because everyone was on the ball and keeping track of their characters' numbers on their own. Otherwise as GM I'd have wound up tracking Health, Super, Action Points, and Chi for four PCs, in addition to whatever NPCs happened to be around.

In any case, I'm definitely interested in whatever you might come up with. Also, if you'd like I have a couple of friends who are absolute fighting game fanatics who could weigh in on the subject.

I have worked on alloting a number from a "Skill poll" this number transferd in to dice rolled. The faces of the dice represent move types, cut, thrust move grapple etc, the players use these to create their move combos, which they narrate. once each player has their combos they declare if they will be acting or re-acting this round, if one or both acts them something happens if both choose to react then nothing happens. My version is for weapons based comabt, being a fan of Soul Caliber, but also a teacher of historical weapons.

I forgot to mention that their is a game called Kung Fu Heros, it was developed by Pete Kautz, a martial artist and he has used it as a stand alone game but also as part of a RPG. its based on console games. Mainly the Virtua Fighter series I belive, though I could be wrong. VF is by far the best of the Unarmed fighting games, IMO.
The link is below.

http://alliancemartialarts.com/kfh.html

Jonathan

And another one called Kung Fusion over on the Warpspawn website.
Link below
http://www.angelfire.com/games2/warpspawn/KungFu.html

Jonathan

Kensan_Oni wrote:
Any thoughts people have would be appreciated. I might go the route of adopting one of my RPG systems in a slightly different way to accomplish the goals I need for a system. However, thinking about how to make combat as exciting as in some games I feel will lend to the success of what I envisioned.

I think the only way you're ever going to get the sort of speed and such that makes a video game have that hyper-kinetic feel is to use a computer. I don't think that standard TT RPGs can be made even remotely fast enough to where you'll get any benefit from the speed in terms of giving it this sort of feel.

So either chuck the goal, or consider incorporating a computer into your play model. The latter is a very serious suggestion. I see no reason why tools like a computer can't be used alongside normal tabletop RPG play.

Mike

I just wanted to say I *AM* listening, and thinking about things, it's just that I have been really busy with my day job, and am still fighting the impulse to change a system that I had made for a different purpose into this system, which I quite frankly don't think will fit well. You're ideas and suggestions are useful, although some of it seems a little much right now.

I just want to say Thank you to you all.

Kensan,

Sorry to add one more to the overload - Your going for the 'feel'? A basketball game has a 'feel' to it as well, but it is an entirely secondary byproduct to playing the rules to win. An enjoyable byproduct, but definately it comes second. Basketball players don't think 'how can we get that feel again?'. They just play and the feel comes as a byproduct. The hyper action and blur of activity of video games are not their intent - they are a byproduct of the game rules and conditions. Sure, the designers fiddle with that feel to make it more interesting. But it's like trying different types of music to go with a basketball match (ie, it's nice but secondary).

Do you want to put that 'feel' first, rather than it be a secondary?

As for the speed of play, notice that it's a very relative thing.

Some people playing arcade fighting game are overwhelmed by the pace, and hit buttons in a chaotic and/or instinctual way. Others are able to observe the screen like a match of chess was in progress, and at the same time keep attention to the details of the background and characters' graphics. I'm definitely not that far myself, but 30 seconds of playing arcade game certainly doesn't feel to me like 30 seconds of, say, writing a post. It feels like much more time was cramped in those 30 seconds.

Now, the games that give me most arcade-ish feel are old Street Fighter: The Storytelling Game and first edition Exalted. In both, combat takes much longer than on the computer - in SF: STG strategizing takes time, in Exalted describing stunts and tossing buckets of dice for attack and defense slows things greatly. But still, I rarely feel like an hour of combat in those games takes more than a fight in arcade games usually does. During RPG session it kind of works for me in reverse ;)

Very often I find opinions that action game must have very fast handling time, cause otherwise it fails to emulate the "feel" of action. I find such arguments untrue. It's not about how much real time handling the mechanics takes - it's about what players do in this time frame. So basically I think neither extreme speed nor extreme simplicity are really required in this kind of game.

And sure, neither SF nor Exalted is a perfect arcade fighting emulation game, they have some issues. I'd really like to play something that would work much better, as far as general game structure, special moves/combos balance and tactical options are concerned. Also, I'd really like to see a fighty game that's rather prep-less, and lets the players go straight to fun stuff instead of spending some hours on accounting first. In SF creating action cards and preparing opponents took ages, and in Exalted PC/NPC generation is not very fast, too (in Final Stand it was fast, but the game is a bit too simple for my taste, in turn).

Mike wrote:
I think the only way you're ever going to get the sort of speed and such that makes a video game have that hyper-kinetic feel is to use a computer. I don't think that standard TT RPGs can be made even remotely fast enough to where you'll get any benefit from the speed in terms of giving it this sort of feel.

So either chuck the goal, or consider incorporating a computer into your play model. The latter is a very serious suggestion. I see no reason why tools like a computer can't be used alongside normal tabletop RPG play.

It's funny, but recently I was touting the rule from Space Hulk where the marine player has to move all his characters before a timer runs out, because it makes for extra challenge, and it further delivers the feeling that the marines are pressed for time.

What Thor said...don't go for the same feeling, but for something that is possible to deliver better than video games with TT RPG.

Mike

I suggest this:

Each player has a hand of cards. They have to be put down one at a time, but they can be put down as fast as you like. When you put one down, you may optionally refresh your hand. That is, taking a breath to strategize (refresh your hand with new options) gives your opponent time to slap down more cards if they're not doing the same. I'm not sure if there's a problem with someone being allowed to take as many cards as they like, so long as they only draw one at a time.

Cards are attacks, feints, blocks, dodges, throws, what-have-you. There are rules about what will work and what won't, and scoring is done when the deck is depleted. Maybe you get a certain number of each kind of card for different styles of fighting.

There are three active piles for each player: Head, Torso, Legs.

Some example rules:

Feint is placed on a particular pile; until the defender covers it with a Block, the defender can't Block or Dodge. So, for instance, I place a Feint on your Head. You can still strike at all heights, but you can't Block at all until you've Blocked your head.

Range cards: Long, Reach, and Close allow you to change ranges. Implicit in this is that different attacks work at different ranges.

Kick: Costs 2 points at Reach range, 1 at Long range.

Sweep: Can only be played on Legs. Target discards hand. If blocked completely (see below), attacker discards hand.

Block: if played before an attack, completely negates the attack. If played immediately after an attack, reduces the attack by 1. If played twice in a row, costs the defender 1 point.

Punch: Costs 2 points at Reach range, 1 at Close.

Throw: Both players shuffle current hands into their Draw decks. Target loses 1 point.

... and so on.

Whoever's lost the fewest points at the end, wins! When fighting against mooks, you probably want to run them out of cards, not actually tally points, except your own. I think you can probably tap out any time.

Now, if you're using this as an RPG mechanic, you probably want to have some sort of stuff on the line here, and work this tightly into a CR system. So, for instance, you might have narrative rights altered by the degree of success, or the type of success, or other factors. Maybe there are cards that have to do with your story arc that you shuffle in.

I think something like this could offer both the adrenaline speed and tactical relevance of an RPG. What I'd most like is to be able to play a game like Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon with this: lots of plot points and motivation, really fast and graceful fighting.

I also think that cards are the way to go, as they offer a simple way to ristrict what the fighters can do. They also offer a way of keeping your avaialbe moves secret from the opponent, which is harder to do with dice driven systems I worked with.
The problem I've run up against is the vast number of options that are avaiable. Where systems like Swashbucklers matix comes in.
My current system works with cards for Movement. Action and reaction. Using a number of drawn cards based upon skill the players can create their actions etc. Here movement improves the chances of an action or reaction working, and also goes toward cancelling out the opponents movement.
Movement I define as the fighter trying to control distance and position in the fight as well as a way to generate power in action. my plan is that the cards can be used on their own, but can also be sued to make specifc tactical options, such as those in TROS and BW as the palyers get more familiar with the system, or for those who have experience in WMA etc. They are also used as a way to help create the narrative for the combat.
The addition of a matrix defining specific actions etc to drive this and allow for waht types of thing can be strung toegther.

As has been mentioned what will drive the excitement of the system is not alwasy to do with speed but a balance of speed with the effects of the players decisions, and the possible results of getting things wrong. As has been mentioned else where, a coin toss is a simple system, which is not very exciting, but if you suddenly start betting £100 per toss, the excitement builds!

Best

Jonathan

I forgot to mention that my system also includes, a roll for Timing/Awarness. This represents the players ability to "read" what the opponent is doing and get inside their action. What this means is that though one or both fighters may declare an attack, the one with better A/T will probably get inside their action before that properly attack. What this menas in games terms is the winner of the A/T, gets to see more of the other players cards before they decide to changes cards in their hand, so they are better able to counter/act.
I am also toying with Attitudes. Thsi would be like stance in TROS. Aggressive, neutral and Defensive. This could be keyed into the charecters fighting style, or could a racial thinsg or something that fighters choose before each exchange.

JW