Need Feedback on an Evented Battle System

[GoodSelf]

So, I had this idea for a "Story Battle System". The best way that I can describe it, is that each battle is akin to a choose your own adventure game.
For example, our hero enters a room that an enemy is in, and the battle begins. The player has multiple choices:
-Move behind a large rock
-Rush towards the enemy
-Pick up the torch from the wall
-Attempt to rush to the exit


Based on what choice they make. the enemy will take an action (sometimes damaging the opponent, or causing some hinderance for the player).
The player is then given another set of choices based on what action the enemy used, which would be predetermined by what they did earlier.

Here's another example:


-Player chooses to rush to the exit
-Snake shoots a poison gas cloud at the exit, player gets poisoned
-Player chooses to take cover behind a large rock
-Snake moves to the other side of the rock
-Player takes a 50% sneak attack chance
-Snake gets hit for damage, and retreats to a set position
-Player charges up a spell
-Snake moves behind obstacle
-Player casts spell, which does just enough AOE damage to kill the snake

In my mind, this seems like it would take a large amount of eventing to do properly, but I think it would bring a very unique battle system to the table.
What do you all think?

With a friendly bump, comes another choice I would like more feedback on. I'm currently trying to decide which style works better for the Story Choice Battle System (SCBS), and I would love your thoughts. The two styles are as follows:

1. Three choices to choose from each turn, giving the player more freedom, and making each battle more unique.
Downsides are less ability to add interactive mechanics with the environment, and a lot of eventing time.
Playtime of 4 rounds before cycling back to 0.
Possible combinations per round, starting with the first:   0, 3, 9, 27, 81(yikes)

2. Two choices to choose from each turn, allowing more interactivity with the environment, and less eventing time.
Downsides are less of a feeling for freedom for the player, and not much flair to the battles.


Playtime of 6 rounds before cycling back to 0.
Possible combinations per round, starting with the first:   0, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64(still yikes)

As you can see, I have a heck of a choice to make here. Any input would be great!

Here is a video of how the system will look, please excuse the terrible video quality!

 

[HexMozart88]

 I would love you forever if you did that. D&D styled... Ahhh, yes that'd be great. Please do it. And yes it completely would be a pain to event, but.... but from what I've seen from you, you are a pretty dang good eventer. Now, if you do it, I don't know what kind of person you are when it comes to storytelling methods, but you have three ways to go.


1. Completely text-based. Like Undertale. The benefit of this is that you get a nice classic feel to it. A couple drawbacks though. One is that there is a strong chance of it bearing too much resemblance to Undertale. The other is that it you make it too text-based, some people may not find it as fun because the lack of graphics to see what's going on may make more modern gamers lose interest because Ifind too much text makes a battle move significantly slower than seeing everything for yourself. 


2. Completely graphical.  This would be a pretty cool way of doing things because there's more engagement because you see everything and it moves faster, however, the drawback is that you'd probably have to make a heck ton of graphics for it.


3. In-between. A bit like Ace's battle system, and it's good because you get both a retro feel and the modern graphics. However, the drawback of this is you risk one of the two aspects becoming useless. If you make it too graphical, the text is useless because you can see what's going on. If you do too much text, it'll fill up the screen and there'll be no need for the graphics. Either that or you'll just get some weird narration effect of everything you're doing and trust me, that gets annoying.   

 

[GoodSelf]

 I was gonna have it so that when you select a choice, the player and enemy character move on the map with appropriate animations playing for the specific actions you take.


Its primarily a puzzle game with a handful of battles, so I wanted those battles to feel like a puzzle in and of itself.


Thanks for your support Hex, perhaps I'll try to make a proof of concept demo this week.

 

[LxCharon]

I love this idea, I really like battle systems that make you think instead of just button mash. And, like @HexMozart88 said I love the allusion to D&D. (I loooooove D&D)

 

[Wavelength]

I love this kind of system - it makes every decision feel important, and lends a true role-playing flavor to your design.  However, try your best to harbor no illusion about the amount of time this will take you to construct every single battle - considering all the different reasonable possibilities, implementing every little effect that can happen, and creating the kind of "memory" that would be required to make battles flow properly based on what happened a few turns ago.  Given that you mentioned there are only a handful of battles in your game, you probably do have the right idea - but expect each battle to take anywhere from 5 to 30 hours to construct.


One really nifty touch that fits well with this type of game is to have things happen in the adventure (and/or subsequent battles) which depend on the actions you took in battles earlier in the game.  Perhaps if you talked a local villain down from the ledge during a fight instead of killing him, he reforms and opens a shop later on in the game where you can buy rare items.  Perhaps if you ran from that same villain, he got confidence (and a big head) from scaring you off, and takes over an entire village later in the game, turning it into a nightmarish wasteland.

 

[Kyoku]

That's really creative! It kinda reminds me of text based games, but that'll take a lot of eventing... But I think that would be worth it!

 

[GoodSelf]

I love this idea, I really like battle systems that make you think instead of just button mash. And, like @HexMozart88 said I love the allusion to D&D. (I loooooove D&D)

Thanks for the support!

I love this kind of system - it makes every decision feel important, and lends a true role-playing flavor to your design.  However, try your best to harbor no illusion about the amount of time this will take you to construct every single battle - considering all the different reasonable possibilities, implementing every little effect that can happen, and creating the kind of "memory" that would be required to make battles flow properly based on what happened a few turns ago.  Given that you mentioned there are only a handful of battles in your game, you probably do have the right idea - but expect each battle to take anywhere from 5 to 30 hours to construct.


One really nifty touch that fits well with this type of game is to have things happen in the adventure (and/or subsequent battles) which depend on the actions you took in battles earlier in the game.  Perhaps if you talked a local villain down from the ledge during a fight instead of killing him, he reforms and opens a shop later on in the game where you can buy rare items.  Perhaps if you ran from that same villain, he got confidence (and a big head) from scaring you off, and takes over an entire village later in the game, turning it into a nightmarish wasteland.

Some great information here - It will be a lot of work, but I feel like any other type of battle system will break immersion (i mean, this guys an archaeologist not a knight, he doesnt know how to swing a sword, but he can certainly flail a torch around). Thanks for your thoughts Wavelength.

 

[mogwai]

I played an NES title that had this kind of battle system, in fact the whole game was this adventure options style. It was called Princess Tomato in the Salad Kingdom. When I was a young boy it was very enjoyable. It also had a unique rock-paper-scissors-esque battle system for encounters with the main bad guys, the farmies. Good times.


Off topic: This was a vegetable people universe long before Vegitales. I wouldn't be surprised if I could find an article that mentioned Princess Tomato inspired the Vegitales if I read those kind of articles.

 

[GoodSelf]

I played an NES title that had this kind of battle system, in fact the whole game was this adventure options style. It was called Princess Tomato in the Salad Kingdom. When I was a young boy it was very enjoyable. It also had a unique rock-paper-scissors-esque battle system for encounters with the main bad guys, the farmies. Good times.


Off topic: This was a vegetable people universe long before Vegitales. I wouldn't be surprised if I could find an article that mentioned Princess Tomato inspired the Vegitales if I read those kind of articles.

@mogwai Hey you used the be the new mog.
I see you changed your name. Cool beans.
Thanks for the advice, I'll check out that game!

 

[Basileus]

When I think of D&D I think more of free-form and downright weird decisions, the kind of things you can only do when you convince a human DM to let you and can't really be programmed in. This seems a lot more like an old school text adventure game or a Visual Novel.


If you are going to have player and enemy units moving on the map to represent the player's choice and the actions of all units, then there are a few interesting things you can do with that. If you have each battle take place in a separate room then you can have a handful of relatively simple Events handling everything on the macro level. You can even let certain tasks and choices be handled by small events that react to units stepping on them.


Something like:


Main battle event presents Player with 3 options -> Player selects Choice A -> the enemy Event moves to a specific Map X/Y -> "Choice A" Event at Map X/Y activates when enemy's Map X/Y is the same (be careful not to path the enemy over it accidentally on other choice paths) -> Actions take place and stuff happens to Player and/or enemy unit -> "Choice A" Event finishes by presenting the next set of options -> Player selects Choice 2 which moves the Player character to a specific Map X/Y that triggers another Event -> repeat until battle is over


If you make it kind of like a sliding ice block puzzle - where the player's current options are based on where exactly they are standing on the map currently and taking any action moves you to a different spot where all new options are available - then each battle can be a similar puzzle where the player needs to figure out the best/correct way to traverse the room. This also would enable actions to be repeated simply by selecting options that take the Player or enemy back to a previous spot on the map. The player could then build a "mental map" of where on the battlefield they want to go and plot out how to get there. This would be a lot easier if certain terrain features always enable certain actions to provide some tactical consistency that the player can use to make decisions. 


Something like:


Bomb Flowers explode when lit on fire, killing all adjacent enemies.


Torches lit your arrows on fire when they pass through them mid-flight.


The player enters a "battle room" and sees one enemy, one Bomb Flower, and one torch.


One possible solution to this battle would then be to take actions that move the enemy unit next to the Bomb Flower while positioning the Player in a spot where they can fire an arrow through the torch to hit the Bomb Flower.


I can see this being like if someone broke a more action-oriented game like The Legend of Zelda down into "scenes" where difference scenes only play if the player selects the right string of actions. Making poor choices would lead to the player character taking damage and eventually dying, while making good decisions sets the player character up to deal damage to enemies while avoiding damage in return. The major challenge with this would be to make enough variance between battles to keep them consistently interesting, and making sure the player has enough information to actually make their decisions with. I'm thinking repetition would actually be advantageous with a system like this, probably while also starting simple and building in complexity once the player has proven they have mastered the basics and have a good sense of things. But I can definitely see this being a lot of fun - I look forward to any demos or proof of concepts that you make!

 

[GoodSelf]

@Basileus I'm already implementing some of your ideas! As of right now, I simply have events you can run up to, and interact with. The main character is not a warrior/mage/archer, he is a simple archaeologist who knows nothing of combat. Because of this, I plan to use the environments in almost every battle.

Also, I'm gonna have to "reset" the position of the player every 4 choices, or else the combinations get ridiculous (3, 9,  27, 81, 243).
Because of this, I have to plan my characters positioning very carefully, which will limit what I can do within the battle itself.
 


But most of those puzzle elements will be present in the game, just not so much in the actual battles.

Thanks for your thoughts! 

 

[Basileus]

@GoodSelf


The video looks good. The battle didn't seem slow to watch, and the player and enemy move around the room a fair amount for such a short exchange, so I see a lot of interesting possibilities. It actually feels quite a bit like a Roguelike where the player takes a "turn" when they move which then causes everything else to take a "turn" in response...except with this system each movement or action can be more than just moving a single square in one direction. I'd like to see some more of how you plan to let the player interact with the environment to deal and avoid damage. Also I'd like to see a long battle when you get the chance to get a feel for the pacing of a more extended fight.


But I like the sample you put up. It looks like fun, possibly a bit too menu/text-based for some people though. If it's possible I'd try to see if you can "Show Not Tell" for some of the actions - if there is enough clarity in the animations/movements then you can avoid using text boxes to describe some parts to keep a nice flow to the action. I still like it though and would definitely play a game with battle mechanics like the ones in the video

 

[Wavelength]

I could barely read anything in the video (partially because of the video quality @ 240p; partially because of the low contrast between the orange map background, yellow window color, and white text).  But I understand the gist of the mechanic in the video, and I think it looks cool - flows very well.

 

[HexMozart88]

I like it! Reminds me a bit of a TBS but with different choices each time. Although yeah. You may want to take a screen video instead of using a camera if at all possible on your computer.  

 

[LxCharon]

The test video plays out really well, and @Basileus is right (on all points made) Though I personally don't mind how menu heavy the combat/puzzle is, but I am a lover of heavy text adventures, so I may not be the majority here.


I think two things are really key to remember going forward: 1) Making sure that the monsters encountered are the right balance of readable puzzle, and slightly random battle. Is the bat always going to attack and then run away from the player? because that is a puzzle that can be figured out. Or does it just attack and move in patterns irrelevant of what the player does? and 2) Balancing choice and death. Because of the not fully translatable nature of text to action the player can't fully be punished for making a decision that they can't fully know the outcome of, otherwise the battle becomes more of a gambling game than a puzzle, but also they can't be invincible, otherwise there is no risk or pressure. If you understand what I'm saying. (Though I also don't know why I'm telling you how to make a puzzle you are obviously a master of puzzles! haha)


Also as a side note I love the style of your game, did you make those tilesets and sprites? They look amazing!


Also also, try https://www.bandicam.com/ or http://camstudio.org/ for screen recording from your computer.

 

[GoodSelf]

@LxCharon I'm using the Time Fantasy and Time Fantaay Monsters resource packs. They are available on the store page here on these forums, and I highly recommend it. I've been wanting to pick up this pack for a while and I'm glad that this is the game  that I get to use those graphics in.


 Once again you bring up some great points.  The best way I can explain how I want the system to function with in the puzzle game itself is to explain how your choices matter in the battle represented in the video. 


 You can pick up the torches and strike the bat with it. The torches do significantly more damage than just your fists alone. However, there is a locked door after that battle that requires two torches to open. So if you used one or both torches during the battle, you now have to complete to mini puzzles to reach a torch on either side of that hallway. 


Another idea that just came to me could be a battle where you have to reach a certain point and flip a lever.  You can choose to make distractions for the enemy, or choose to just rush ahead, of course there will be consequences for either option .


i'm very open to ideas from everyone here on these forums, so if anyone has any great ideas for combat mechanics, please let me know. Keep in mind that these battles are going to take a very long time to event, so I probably will not be able to implement some battle mechanics that are too advanced, as they might lag down the combat, which would ruin the experience. I'm already running into issues using simple animations, and working around those has been slightly troublesome.

 

[GoodSelf]

With a friendly bump, comes another choice I would like more feedback on. I'm currently trying to decide which style works better for the Story Choice Battle System (SCBS), and I would love your thoughts. The two styles are as follows:

1. Three choices to choose from each turn, giving the player more freedom, and making each battle more unique.
Downsides are less ability to add interactive mechanics with the environment, and a lot of eventing time.
Playtime of 4 rounds before cycling back to 0.
Possible combinations per round, starting with the first:   0, 3, 9, 27, 81(yikes)

2. Two choices to choose from each turn, allowing more interactivity with the environment, and less eventing time.
Downsides are less of a feeling for freedom for the player, and not much flair to the battles.


Playtime of 6 rounds before cycling back to 0.
Possible combinations per round, starting with the first:   0, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64(still yikes)

As you can see, I have a heck of a choice to make here. Any input would be great!

 

[LxCharon]

@GoodSelf I think it maybe better to design these SCBS (love that you named it) encounters backward. For each encounter write out a list of 10 or so different outcomes (on varying good to bad ratios) and then decide possible ways to get there. And multiple paths can lead to the same outcome (preventing 64 combinations from happening) I mean the outcome of "Bat is murdered with a torch" could be reached 3 different ways with overlapping choices, greatly reducing your need to make unique instances or combinations. If you understand what I'm saying. 

 

[GoodSelf]

@GoodSelf I think it maybe better to design these SCBS (love that you named it) encounters backward. For each encounter write out a list of 10 or so different outcomes (on varying good to bad ratios) and then decide possible ways to get there. And multiple paths can lead to the same outcome (preventing 64 combinations from happening) I mean the outcome of "Bat is murdered with a torch" could be reached 3 different ways with overlapping choices, greatly reducing your need to make unique instances or combinations. If you understand what I'm saying. 

@LxCharon Yeah that makes sense. I'm currently mapping out the temple,  but yeah I  understand what you mean. 


 I need to figure out how many "health potions" The player is going to pick up after the battle so The different outcomes will have varying health totals, different amounts of resources used, etc. This definitely might work out. It sounds confusing thinking about working backwards, but I think building a good map w so the very and I'll come schedule substantially be different health totals, different amounts of resources used, etc. This definitely might work out. It sounds confusing thinking about working backwards, but I think building a good map of the battle sequences will help a lot, thanks!of the battle sequences will help a lot, thanks!