Destroy door mechanic and how to balance it

[heyguy]

Hey all! So I'm developing horror fantasy JRPG with some Resident Evil level structure. And I've decided to included a destroy door mechanic in the game. Kinda' inspired by Dungeons and Dragon and Fear and Hunger. A goal with my game is to have some open-ended Dungeons and Dragons-like design. So the basic mechanic is you can enter battle and attempt to destroy any door that's locked. There are 3, maybe 4 tiers of locked doors.

- Tier 1 doors are locked and can be opened with lockpicks. Lockpicks are found throughout the world. You can also enter battle, attack and destroy a Tier 1 door. Some chests are "Tier 1" chests and can be forced opened.
- Tier 2 doors are locked with named keys. The player can find the named key in the area or perhaps find an alternate route to bypass the door. The player can also enter battle, attack and expend significantly more resources (magic/mp, ,special items, explosive items, time) to destroy a Tier 2 door.
- Tier 3 doors are impossible to destroy - you'll need a key item to open.

That's the basic mechanic. I'm trying to balance the Tier 1 doors and the idea in general. It shouldn't be too easy to destroy a Tier 1 door. Or there should be some risk/reward when attempting to bash down a door, right? Here are some brainstormed ideas for balance and risk and reward.

- Destroying a door has a 50% chance of calling enemies over to investigate and causing a battle
- If you attempt to force open a chest, there's a 50% chance of destroying the item inside
- You need a high str stat for destroying doors.
- Weapons lose durability/effectiveness when used against doors
- You need a specific weapon to destroy a door. Doors have resistances to unarmed, staffs, claws, etc. Axes and Hammers would be the ideal weapons.
- DnD wackiness? You bash at the door with you axe, splinters of wood fly in your face, you take 1 damage. Your axe bounces of the door and back at you causing 3 damage.
- Destroying too many doors might summon some sort of tough stalker enemy (this seems time-consuming to implement for every location)

A combination of needing high str, weapon durabilty and 50% chance of alerting enemies if you choose to break down doors seem good. The perfect idea is something that can be easily reused throughout a game. Looking for other possible ideas if you got them! I'd appreciate any feedback, suggestions, ideas, thoughts y'all might have about the mechanic, too.

I guess it might help to give a quick breakdown of my game. It's still WIP but I'm aiming for a survival horror jrpg in grimdark fantasy country. It starts off fantasy but later in the story, the world gets turned upside down and survival horror enters the picture. The game would have on map encounters - not random encounters. XP will most likely be earned thru questing. And I'm still debating whether to include an inventory limit. Anyway, that's some of it. Thanks for reading my post! If anyone has some balance ideas or general thoughts about the mechanic, I'd love to hear them!

TL;DR If you're game had a destroy locked door option, how would you balance it?

 

[ATT_Turan]

You don't even need to do anything as silly as bouncing splinters, just the jarring impact of hitting a door might do minor damage. Or cause fatigue. Or, very saliently, reduce the durability of your weapon.

The attracting monsters on the map is also a sound idea.

Aside from that...why worry too hard about trying to "balance" this? What advantage is it giving to the player that you need to balance against? If you weren't willing to let the player have whatever is on the other side of the door, you wouldn't have put it there.

If they want to spend their game time standing there hacking at a door instead of doing something more interesting and immediately productive, god bless 'em.

 

[ZombieKidzRule]

This is almost exactly what I was previously experimenting with and why I created a random chest/door determining Common Event. I plan on having pretty much all the elements you listed. Sound attracts enemies, wearing down of whatever you are using, strength checks, possible damage to contents of chests, etc.

The system that I am working on for chests and doors is that almost every door and chest could be locked with a mechanical lock, a magical lock, or both. They could be trapped with a mechanical trap, a magical trap, or both. If locked and/or trapped, the player can always attempt to disarm or unlock manually or with magic. They can always try to force the lock open. They can always try to bash the lock, chest, or door open. They can always try to find a key. They can always just try to open the object without inspecting or anything, just to see what happens. Etc. And forcing or bashing would most likely set off any traps that aren't disarmed.

I want to incorporate every possibility that you would normally expect in that situation and let the player choose what is best. Or resort to a not so great choice if they absolutely want to open the object right at that very moment.

I also want to consider what the chest or door is made of. For instance, a wooden chest or door can generally be destroyed. But a solid stone chest or door? Maybe not so much. Depending on the object, you could make it very difficult to impossible to break through the object. And certain items would be essentially useless against certain materials. Swing a sword against a solid stone door? Sure, go ahead. Knock yourself out.

As far as balancing, I plan on going with what seems realistic. The HP/Health/Durability of the object is based entirely on the quality and material of the object. The same goes for the locks and traps. So some objects will be fairly easy to bash open while some could be nearly impossible or totally impossible.

If you are interested, I have a tutorial for my experiments with the random determination of chests (with doors being very similar) that incorporates a bunch of these factors and stores them in an array for that specific chest. Of course, you don't need to do the random determination thing, it is just the concept of establishing, storing, and accessing the factors related to the chest or door that might be interesting.

I am still experimenting with my system for engaging with the chests/doors. I sort of got sidetracked by messing around with making a Sudoku puzzle.

So, generally, I 100% support this mechanic and I am definitely implementing something similar.

Good luck and happy game developing!

 

[heyguy]

@ZombieKidzRule Thanks for sharing what you've got cooking! I can't believe I forgot about magical locks and traps. Those are definitely must haves. How are you handling the disarming of magical traps and locks? DnD style? Player "roll"+ stats beat a number?

I also want to consider what the chest or door is made of. For instance, a wooden chest or door can generally be destroyed. But a solid stone chest or door? Maybe not so much. Depending on the object, you could make it very difficult to impossible to break through the object. And certain items would be essentially useless against certain materials. Swing a sword against a solid stone door? Sure, go ahead. Knock yourself out.

I've got a question on how one might make this happen. Is it possible to give enemies "Weapon Types" weaknesses and resistances? I did some research already and it looks like one way is to add a "Sword" Element and add that element to any swords. Just curious about the other ways to accomplish this.

Yeah, I'd definitely like to see your tutorial. Right now, I'm copying and pasting a pretty simple event and I'm still learning RPG maker so everything helps. Thanks!

 

[ZombieKidzRule]

@heyguy I am taking the approach of D&D style skill checks (rolls) where success is influenced by skill level, attribute bonuses, lock/trap level, etc. I am still trying to decide if I want to make the rolls visible or not.

I am also experimenting with doing everything "custom" and outside the normal MZ structure of menus and such. I want weapons/armor/items to have durability and to have repair options. So I am experimenting with tracking everything outside of the default database by using arrays.

I am still working on the shell of my chest/door engagement system, but my plan is to confirm which party member is acting and what what weapon they have equipped (if they are trying to bash the object). Then I will get the current information about that weapon to use during the attempt and update the information on the weapon based on the results.

Another option would be to identify which party member is acting and then present the player with the options they have for items to use based on their inventory and what they are carrying. But that seems like it would get quite complex.

I already know that I am going to have to predetermine what can be used for what purpose and have conditional branches check to see if the chosen actor has that item, skill, spell, etc.

All of my tutorials are available in the link below.

Anyway, please keep us informed of your progress because what you are planning sounds very cool. At least to me!

Thanks!

 

[Tai_MT]

As a game player, here's what I immediately wonder with your mechanics:

1. Is stealth beneficial? If not, then the choke point of the door would be more beneficial. Funneling all the enemies into "one on one" fights is more valuable than stealth. Especially if your tank can block the door and your rangers can sit off to the sides and turn a 4v4 fight into a 4v1 fight. This is an ACTUAL tactic I've used in D&D and one I've seen other players use. Why unlock the door and sneak around the room when you can bash it down, step to the side of the door to lure an enemy to the entrance, and then mob them there and still get the "surprise attack" without having to spend a ton of turns waiting for the stealth based characters to maybe fail and be punished for being spotted. One of these is safer for the whole party.

2. Why can't I crowbar the door off the hinges? Why can't I use the "Bardic Knock" spell? That is, why can't I just knock on the door to see if enemies would answer the door (something that would pretty much always work, since the universal response to a door being knocked on is to open it, especially if it's locked, and it's deep within the stronghold... which means someone would need to unlock the door for staff who don't have the key). Why don't lockpicks work on Tier 3 doors? Are the keys enchanted? Why can't I break the flimsier wall it's attached to, instead? Why don't explosives work on the higher tier doors? Do I really need to get into that room? What happens if I just find the key and DESTROY the key, so that the lock becomes an obstacle to the enemies as well? As in, they can no longer unlock the door either. If the key can be reproduced should I destroy it, how come I can't make my own key?

3. Why would whacking the door do damage to me? Surely my characters are smart enough to ONLY target the door KNOB... which is the thing that holds the door shut. Why are my characters idiots who are hacking away at the material of the door itself? Just break the metal bit holding it in place. Door Knobs are generally LESS STURDY than the thing they are placed into.
---
Those are just my immediate questions.

As for balancing it... It really depends on what your gameplay loop actually looks like. Is alerting all the enemies an actual "punishment"? If so, how? You sure that can't be exploited?

Is it more beneficial for players (or more fun) to destroy the door instead of looking for the key? If so, why? How tedious is it to find the keys?

I mean, in Deus Ex I always took things like "lockpicking" and "hacking" so I didn't have to spend time looking for keycards. Both methods were generally less tedious and allowed me to "get back to the fun" more quickly. Being able to immediately get through the locked door is far preferable as a player than having to backtrack or continue exploring to "find the way to open the door". Unless you're designing something like a Metroidvania where to unlock the path, you need a specific ability.

I also have to wonder what the point of the "locked doors" is. To hide loot? Main story progression? If I see "named key", then I know it's probably story related. If I see, "easy lock, you can break the door", I'm going to assume the content is "optional". Which means, unless I'm looking for a fight or your loot is "absolutely amazing" every time I open a chest or one of these doors... I'm not going to bother opening them. You run into the problem Zelda Breath of the Wild and Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom run into with their chests. Put simply... the loot is pretty much always garbage, so there's not a lot of reasons to "open the chests". The equipment you get is worthless or useless or under what you're already using in terms of "power". Or, it's some random material in such a tiny quantity that it's not really worth opening the chest for since you can get a ton in town or just through random gathering.

Your loot would need to be "always useful to every player" to warrent even opening those doors to begin with.

 

[ZombieKidzRule]

@Tai_MT I think you might be forgetting to consider one thing…some players like opening stuff. It actually bothers some players to leave places unexplored.

Just like some players hate grinding and other players don’t. Or how some players would prefer all chests and doors to just open instead of having to deal with locks and traps.

But I appreciate some of your other points raised and I have added them to my list of things to consider when I go back to working on my own door/chest system experiments.

 

[Tai_MT]

@Tai_MT I think you might be forgetting to consider one thing…some players like opening stuff. It actually bothers some players to leave places unexplored.

I'm not forgetting that. I'm one of those players. However, the problem after a bit of time becomes "is the juice worth the squeeze?".

I want to get everything in the game, but if I have to play Jump Rope and make it to 100 jumps without fail... No. I'm done. Too tedious. Too boring. Not fun.

I want to open every single chest in the game. I want to see every single room.

But, if I get 30 chests deep and only 1 in 30 was "useful", then I'm generally going to start seeing every chest missed as "an acceptable loss". If only 1 in every 50 rooms was "interesting to be in", then any I miss is an "acceptable loss". As in, generally not important to even me, the player, except to "sate curiosity".

But, when the reward for "sated curiosity" is "basically nothing", then there's nothing to be curious about. If every chest contains 3 Potions, or the monetary equivalent of 3 Potions, then where is my curiosity? I know what's in the chest already. 3 Potions or their equivalent. I don't even need to "open" the chest anymore. Unless I have OCD and am COMPELLED to do so... at which point you've got lots bigger problems in game design if it's meant to attract THAT crowd, as you can now no longer have ANYTHING be "missable", or they will throw a fit. It's the same concept with the doors. If I've opened a bunch of doors and the usual reward for doing so is "5 enemies to fight, maybe 1 interactable object, and 1 or 2 chests, which contain 3 Potions ore the monetary equivalent of 3 Potions", then I have no need to open the door. I already know what's in it. I know what's back there without having seen it.

The Open World Zelda games have that problem currently. There are dozens of shrines that I didn't even LOOK for the "secret chest" in them (or Optional Chest), because of this issue. I don't even open Chests from Like-Likes in Tears of the Kingdom since the first 5 that I killed showed me that "every single Like-Like chest is just a shield under 20 power".

What's behind the doors needs to be incredibly valuable to warrant the fact that they are "locked" to begin with. Because, let's face it, the act of "unlocking the door" isn't typically that much fun in a game. It's an arbitrary obstacle that typically leads to "busywork". In many cases, "having to find the key" is just a form of "completing a puzzle", except that puzzle is "figure out where the key is", which may as well be "navigate this maze before the door", for what the actual gameplay boils down to.

Just like some players hate grinding and other players don’t. Or how some players would prefer all chests and doors to just open instead of having to deal with locks and traps.

I think it's less that "no player wants to deal with locks and traps", and more "the effort isn't worth the reward".

If you trap a chest that contains 25 Gold Pieces... yeah, good luck making a player LOVE that. But, if you trap a chest that contains a full set of Dark Knight armor... Well now... defusing the trap could be worth the loot.

If what is behind the lock is 10 treasure chests and they contain two sets of armor, 1 weapon, a few consumables, some free money, and an item that grants a skillpoint to spend on a character. Well then, let me go find the key!

Devs need to take into account what a locked or trapped ANYTHING represents to a player. Namely, a time investment. If I have to travel half the dungeon to get the key for this lock, then this lock doesn't represent "a lock". It represents, "this is how much time you need to spend as a player for this to unlock". If I need a 57 in Trap Disarming to disarm this trap... That level of Trap Disarming represents a SIGNIFICANT amount of time and effort into the build of that character to be able to open this thing without eating a penalty.

So, the questions need to be asked:
1. Why do I want the player to invest this amount of time to open this?
2. Is what is in this room or chest worth the time investment I'm asking from my player?