Non-Healing Final Fantasy Style Battle System?

[Elizabeth17]

Sometimes I can be a bit too  much of a realist(ironically enough in my fantasy.) And when I try  to think of games or anything. I try and think of pushing it closer to this. Like I get why a healing position system is a stable to the above mentioned style of game. But I wonder if it could be abandoned. I mean, a real fighter on a campaign isn't gonna take damage and try and fix it after. They would conserve energy, be more careful and work harder to avoid damage in the first place.


I had an idea for how a game might utilize this idea and I wonder what you would think.


So, 1. No healing potions at least in the normal replinish HP sort of way.


2. Increased defense/heath bar. I say this because if you can't restore the bar, then it should deplete slower.


3. Other ways to recover the bar. Save spots being like campsites, or a casual health regain while on the world map. In the sense that out of battle the character is slowly catching their breath. Or a in battle, non move option that again lets you catch your breath and regain a small amount of health, which with multiple characters could be an interesting dynamic, a person resting mid fight while the other character takes on more of the work. All these(except camping save spots) would restore a very mild amount of health.


4. The battle system to reflect sort of a timing concept. I don't mean quick timing press of buttons. I mean for like enemies and you to have sort of a "on guard" bar, this bar changes based on their most recent action. Like Guard, or prepare to dodge obviously does no damage, but it puts  you on super high guard, increasing your defensive ability  by a huge amount. This applying to both you and the opponent. So if you stike him while he is on guard. Partically nothing or highly reduced damage.  Yet, even a small attack may do huge attack if his guard is low. Which would likely happen in response to him unleashing a higher attack. This idea at its core has more ideas to the balance, but this is the general idea. The point being that  the game wants you to learn how your attacks, based on their speed and strength leave you vunerable to attack. And to use your defensive/offensive moves at more correct timing to take less damage and deal more damage.


That is most of it. I like the idea of the game being like. "Sorry, you can't just level grind and buy 500x potions." This game is going to show you the style you need. Now there is a level system so you can level grind to help, and you have what I would envision as a skill tree so you can adjust your character to a style to make them yours. But  you have to bend the style to how the game plays.


Thoughts?


Also I find it a funny thought to imagine people trying to set personal records of how long they farm an area because with limited recovery options eventually they just have to go back and camp. lol.

 

[Eschaton]

Dragon Age Inquisition did something rather unique that I'd not seen in other games I've played:  instead of healing, your support mage applies a barrier (which is basically additional HP).


If you're using MV, you could do something similar with this Yanfly plugin.

 

[Elizabeth17]

@Eschaton


Ah, but the question is more, your opinion of the idea. Though thanks for  the input.


Like would it be rage inducing to be shown a game with no replinish HP through item/skill option. Having to relay on small situational regains or reaching a checkpoint and avloding taking a lot of damage.

 

[Milennin]

1. I like games that have none, or limited healing items.


2. How are monsters going to threaten your party if the characters' HP depletes slowly?


3. Campsites are basically inns, but in the wild? Health regeneration on the overworld will just make players sit around or walk in circles to restore their health if it's too much of a pain to get it back in other ways. In battle, it might work, but not if the health regeneration is smaller than the amount of damage monsters can deal in 1 turn. Otherwise, it's more efficient to spend the turn to deal damage to kill the monsters than it is spend a turn to heal, only to lose more HP than what was gained that turn.


What I'm seeing is that with limited health restoration, you're going to make it difficult for players to bounce back from an unfortunate situation, because once their characters' HP drop low, they're going to need to spend a lot of turns defending and slowly regaining health to get themselves in a better position again. Say every character in the party is at around 25% HP or less and the enemies aren't close to dying. How is the player going to deal with that without spending a bunch of turns slowly regaining their HP? That could get tedious very fast if it happens too frequently.


On the other hand, if enemies aren't allowed to deal much damage at a time, how are you going to make them feel threatening to the player?

 

[Elizabeth17]

@Milennin


Hi! I think I have answers to all your challenges.


2. Well there are multiple answers to this question but  the first and foremost is, attrition. Between save points you must survive and while small amounts of damage may seem worthless in the moment, that mystery distance creates a true sense of dire.


Well replying to one point at a time may not work because the core idea is how all the changes  relate to each other. Like the over world healing. I would only use that in the case of encounters being random. So there is then no way to abuse it. Just with such limited health items. Getting 2% of your health back over the course of a lucky walk streak sounds like it would be amazing in context. Same with  the regain in battle, neither of these are meant to be abused and I would take steps to prevent their abuse. An easy out to regain in battle would be probably to put a max cap per battle. Like you said too, staying in a prolonged fight for this purpose can be more risky than helpful.


Yet take the 4 point in my original thing. A stat chart that sways based on guard/vunerable. Regaining health is way more of a guarded activity. So the character doing it would as a result be taking way less damage. And in the situation. You might not need both attacks. Like the enemy is gonna die in one hit. One takes a knee and breathes replinishing health. The other ends the battle. The small add on to health again would make a huge difference in a long level. Especially since it could be done more times. And it can back fire if you failed to kill the enemy and took more damage, that would suck. But I would want the player to be wondering this risk reward.


Okay so you mentioned the situation of like, all the game characters have like 25% or less health and the enemy isn't close to dead yet. Two replies to that. The first, is no you shouldn't be able too stall/health regain. So that shoulnd't be an options. WHich means, you probably are gonna get a game over. I know that may sound harsh, but yeah. Ya got to weak, either you messed up a lot in tht fight, or you messed up lot over the course of many fights. But to reach a hard boss and not have sufficent health to win means game over I think. lol. This also applies to even a random enemy.


Its like. I want to give the realism of survival into the RPG mechanic.


Okay point 2. This goes back to how you asking how enemies are dangerous also. Which is the swaying stat chart applies to the villain too. So, in theory, even with 20 percent health. If you read his style correctly. Hitting him when he is vunerable, and guarding at  the right moments to reduce damage you recieve while increasing the damage being done? You could in theory win. Be hard obviously. But that is  part of why I like this idea. I want the players heart to be poundin, while they consider very carefully each click. As one mistep is game over, yet can still win. Though obviously under a bit more optimum conditions, a player wouldn't be near death by the time the boss figh starts giving more wiggle room to the actual fight.


But can you imagine how epic it would be if you did win, purely based on all your good descisions against a boss you originally thought you had no chance against?


Did I answer all your questions?

 

[Milennin]

@Elizabeth17, I could see battles lacking excitement, as the overall threat from them comes from longterm exhaustion, rather than the monsters having high impact actions themselves. This would also mean that it doesn't matter how well you play, because you're always going to end up exhausted at some point. Bad players get to do a lot of backtracking to campsites, while good players would just feel relieved to get through an area by making it to the next campsite.

But can you imagine how epic it would be if you did win, purely based on all your good descisions against a boss you originally thought you had no chance against?

But really, this is the part that confuses me the most, because I don't see how this is related to the topic at hand. Are you implying that it's not possible to make an exciting combat system if it included easy ways to regain health?

 

[Elizabeth17]

@Milennin


LOL I meant no implication. Of course healing isn't bad. Of course the battle can be exciting. Heck obviously that system has had some exciting moments for me. Usually the most excited wins for me is one that  are uncertain. When the enemy does his ultimate attack sooner than you anticipated and you are like. "please live please live!" and you do. That is amazing. lol.


And actually wrong in one respect. Backtracking to a campsite would do no good. I mean, if the stretch between two places was long(which of course would be reserved for later in game, no reason to  start out on insane difficulty lol.) backtracking would actually take longer. You would have wild encounters most likely, and once you back track your in no better a position than just restarting the game. Which, sounds mean to bad players, but it is a style I much prefer. In the sense that you can't just tank  your way through it.


Reminds me of Megaman, because after I beat megaman, not only did I still have all the game skill I needed to beat megaman. I was more ready for every other megaman. I had the skill, not my in game character. Obviously, you gain skill with any game. But you could erase the data of megaman and when I restart I am still gonna be good, right at the start. While do that with a RPG, and your most often stuck waiting for your character to catch up. Which I am not saying is bad gaming either. Just, I like the idea of bringing that player skill factor into it. Where you learn the mechanics of the battle system and as a result if you restart you are just so much more prepared.


One part confuses me. Not sure how that lacks excitment. I mean, any enemy can still kill you. And with a mystery timer on how long you need to survive, suddenly any damage is quite a serious threat. If anything this seems more excting then before. In Final Fantasy, if I backtrack to a area I have already been, I have zero fear. I know no enemy is gonna kill me in a hit or two. And  I have likely a  decent stock of  healing, whether it is through the white mage or potions. And even then I can't stay there unlimitedly. Unless I am taking no damage. The difference I see here is. In Final Fantasy, you can stay so long it would become boring while there is no threat. While this situation, backtracking, even for a level grind or fetching a lost item or just scanning the area for lost items is quite threatening. How long can ya last? Which way to go? Once ya find an item, do you backtrack or advance t reach the nearest campsite? Is that small mistake gonna cost you enough to make  ya restart? What if two friends just tried to vs each other by "outlasting" each other in the same area.


Not saying my idea is better. Just different, and I posted to see the general feedback the gamers would give. So thank you for the feedback.

 

[Oddball]

What about making healing items only usable outside battle and giving the "healer" a damage reduction + HP regeneration skill plus making gaurd also restore a little bit of hp?

 

[Milennin]

@Milennin


LOL I meant no implication. Of course healing isn't bad. Of course the battle can be exciting. Heck obviously that system has had some exciting moments for me. Usually the most excited wins for me is one that  are uncertain. When the enemy does his ultimate attack sooner than you anticipated and you are like. "please live please live!" and you do. That is amazing. lol.

I didn't mean just excitement. Skill as well. Knowing when to use a heal, and when to save it for later. This is why I don't understand why you seem to draw the correlation between having no easy health regeneration and skilful RPG combat with this topic. I mean, I get your point about wanting a combat system that requires skill to play properly. I just don't see why you would necessarily need a lack of easy health regeneration to achieve this.

Reminds me of Megaman, because after I beat megaman, not only did I still have all the game skill I needed to beat megaman. I was more ready for every other megaman. I had the skill, not my in game character. Obviously, you gain skill with any game. But you could erase the data of megaman and when I restart I am still gonna be good, right at the start. While do that with a RPG, and your most often stuck waiting for your character to catch up. Which I am not saying is bad gaming either. Just, I like the idea of bringing that player skill factor into it. Where you learn the mechanics of the battle system and as a result if you restart you are just so much more prepared.

That is because they're both different types of games, so, of course, the experience between an action platformer and the average RPG is going to be vastly different. But I see what you mean, and I agree with what you're trying to say here, I just don't see how it's related to the topic of having no easy health regeneration.

One part confuses me. Not sure how that lacks excitment. I mean, any enemy can still kill you. And with a mystery timer on how long you need to survive, suddenly any damage is quite a serious threat. If anything this seems more excting then before. In Final Fantasy, if I backtrack to a area I have already been, I have zero fear. I know no enemy is gonna kill me in a hit or two. And  I have likely a  decent stock of  healing, whether it is through the white mage or potions. And even then I can't stay there unlimitedly. Unless I am taking no damage. The difference I see here is. In Final Fantasy, you can stay so long it would become boring while there is no threat. While this situation, backtracking, even for a level grind or fetching a lost item or just scanning the area for lost items is quite threatening. How long can ya last? Which way to go? Once ya find an item, do you backtrack or advance t reach the nearest campsite? Is that small mistake gonna cost you enough to make  ya restart? What if two friends just tried to vs each other by "outlasting" each other in the same area.

What I'm saying is that your idea seems to build around the concept of having the individual monsters not being dangerous to the party. They are not designed to kill the party by themselves. They are only there to wear down the party over the course of many encounters in between periods the player can access healing points. This means that a regular encounter isn't exciting by itself; that the excitement is supposed to come from not knowing whether or not you're going to be able to survive between healing points. But, before heading into an area, you don't know how far you need to go. So, you can make the mistake of going too far and then not be able to make it back. But, how was that your fault, then? Even if you played well, you still got worn down over time and were forced to restart the game because you didn't get a chance to recover. In my opinion, that would suck.

 

[Basileus]

From a design perspective, I foresee a metric ton of problems with this system. 


One of the biggest is that you are essentially forcing a "20 or 1" system on the player. Either the player attacks when the enemy's guard is low and deals a ton of damage in one hit (like rolling a naturally 20 in any D20 system, or a Critical Hit in most games) or they deal next to nothing (like rolling a natural 1). There really would be no in-between. It's even worse if the player doesn't have total control over the enemy's guard states since it removes player agency and forces them to just turtle up behind their shield and wait for an opening to do anything useful. This makes battles artificially long since many turns will be spent just waiting for a low guard state.


The other big issue I see is that this design is a "Lose More" system. Without any kind of comeback mechanic, taking a lot of damage because of one misplay means that the player will almost certainly lose since there are no emergency options and even guarding won't bring back their health quickly but they will still be taking damage while waiting for a regen effect. In most games this type of situation means that the party member hit by this is effectively out of the fight since they have to guard every turn or die. The only way to avoid player outrage and frustration on this point is to offer some kind of comeback mechanic so that a single hit when your guard is low (because you were forced to go full offensive because the enemy's guard was finally low) doesn't completely screw the player.


Another issue I have is that you seem to be doing an attrition-based system wrong. If the purpose of battles is to slowly deplete resources across multiple battles - such as you having large health bars but low damage and no real source of healing - then it is pretty much mandatory that combat encounters are fast. As in a couple rounds at most. The fodder gets a few hits in, get killed in 2-3 turns, then the player moves on with their HP bars chipped down a little more. If combat is drawn-out - such as your system of managing guard meters and dealing low damage most of the time - then the focus should be on tactical decisions in battle and resources should be less constricted.


Final Fantasy XIII had a grueling battle system where common enemies could have well over 1 million HP and the player did piddly damage until they managed to fill the Stagger Meter to put them in a weakened state where they took tons of damage. It could take a while to Stagger some enemies and one of the challenges was struggling to survive while trying to keep the Stagger Meter up (since it went back down if you did not keep up the hits) but finishing fights very quickly once they were Staggered. The game had the courtesy to offer a full heal at the end of battle on top of having no MP to limit skill use and plentiful healing spells and it was still pretty easy for the party to wipe in some parts. 


Dark Souls has healing from a limited number of uses of the "Estus Flask" or a limited number of spell charges that only replenish on resting at a bonfire...which also respawns all the enemies you killed. The healing is pretty limited compared to most RPGs but combat is fast-paced and the player is unlikely to take much damage since the focus is on dodging damage completely because each hit will chunk your health severely and will usually stagger you leading to immediate death. Healing can afford to be limited since battles are fast and healing is only necessary when you take a hit and get brought to half health so the next enemy that surprises you doesn't instantly kill you - but it is still limited to force the player to rest at bonfires and respawn the enemies. 


"Realistic" combat is just not very fun. If you are going to limit or mostly remove healing, then you need to seriously consider the player experience and what will keep your game fun and enjoyable. Combat speed, other resources gating abilities, the tactical options available within combat, and even the design of your maps and how combat is initiated all need to be heavily considered before you implement a system like this. If you are doing just for the sake of making combat "more realistic" then I strongly urge you not to.

 

[Elizabeth17]

@Basileus


Good points! I am certainly no expert. Which is why I opened the thread. 


Its not just the I want realism. It is more, that is how my mind naturally thinks. Moments of healing magic takes me out of the expierence.  Instant reversal of damage invalidates it.


Which can explain that in my own writing(I like writing) healing magic is very rare to non-existent.


So, I began wondering, how could I stay true to that idea while making a fun game. 


I can't really counter your issues. But hey that is what makes your issues fun! Though, I think one aspect in your analysis is wrong from my idea. Which is, 1 or 20 aspect.


The twenty sided die is a great example though. I think the guarded stat would have more niches. So like, used a heavy attack or a light attack. This giving you middle grounds to the guarded state. Thus, I see battles being more like. Mid damage, or light damage, to mid damage to being like! He is open! FINISH HIM. And not just click click wait wait finish him.


And like any game I see a learning curve. Like the game having a beginning where this could be ignored to some effect, but as the game progresses, it becomes more and more important. 


But yeah the control of pacing that is one issue I thought up myself because obviously I don't want the gamemr to be waiting on the random moment the guy is unguarded. Attacks need to be meaningful before then. And the pllayer should be able to push him into unguarded, either by combo attacks or special skills. OH I like that. D: lol. Thanks for the idea.


The more I think about it. The more I think I am thinking int he sense of Legend of Zelda or what people have told me it is like. Never played it myself actually. But like, finding items, learning their purpose, waiting for that moment to use everything effectively. Trial and error making you, more than the character stronger. I like all those ideas. 


I would hate it if a "stagger" move became like the staple everyone was waiting for because it altered the guard status. The way I see it. Every possible move should have a time and a place and the gamer is learning and applying those to verrying levels of effectiveness. Creating something that is both enjoyable to them, as well as effective.


Sorry, feel like I am rambling now.


@Milennin


You make a good point on the legnth of exposure. Obviously I wouldn't want to punish players with that. So that would need some way of showing a player before hand how difficult a journey might be so they can proceed with the accurate level of cation. lol

 

[Adam1013]

I like having healing be a very sparse thing. I just recently started playing Fallout 4 Survival Mode lol...It changes the way the entire game is played by enforcing limitations on the player. You get hungry, thirsty, tired and other ailments through not taking care of yourself while trying to survive, find your kid and rebuild the commonwealth.
It's a super cool take on a game and it shows that by placing limitations on a player will certainly generate creativity and new play styles. 


In this case I think having your camp site is a really cool idea...Imagine after a long trek and you fall upon a campsite...REJOICE!! lol The relief of completion and staying alive. I think your stats and enemy stats would have to be very carefully crafted and resources carefully placed so that you ensure a more natural experience to give that effect.


I guess my point being, with limitations in place you can create a unique and exciting experience  

 

[Fernyfer775]

If you can manage to balance it right, I can see it being a very fun game mechanic, but this sort of gameplay can become extremely frustrating for the player if you don't do it right.

 

[Oddball]

out of curiosity, what kind of game are you making? whats the setting, plot, mechanics and stuff?


this might help people better help you. after all, the homesick mechanic from earthbound looks annoying on paper, but is very flavorfull and adds to the experince


maybe this can be the same way

 

[Elizabeth17]

@Oddball


I don't have a good answer for you. Because I suck at this stuff, I just love thinking. lol.


But if I were to give you an answer. I see it being a game where you sort of start at this base, and your training. You can explore the surrounding area to a extent to train, and you  have missions to help you level up. Once a number of missions have been completed you can end the chapter advancing the plot but increasing the difficulty. So that the player can personally judge if he is ready to advance. Because you can't backtrack chapters! but you technically could grind in the expanding(based on chapter) environment surrounding your base.


Does that answer your question?

 

[Oddball]

Not really. It says nothing about the world and just sounds like a generic rpg

 

[Engr. Adiktuzmiko]

So, 1. No healing potions at least in the normal replinish HP sort of way.


2. Increased defense/heath bar. I say this because if you can't restore the bar, then it should deplete slower.

Then you basically canceled out the effect automatically... The very essence of games that don't provide normal healing is that they make you think about how to manage your characters to lose the least HP possible, so now if the system is actually adjusted so that you don't take much damage then it just kinda makes the sense of not having normal HP regen not that prominent.


Instead of increasing def/health, what you should do is to provide ways/possibilities for the player to minimize getting damaged. The key here is that it should be the player that is the one doing things to minimize damage and not the system itself.

 

[Elizabeth17]

@Oddball


Not quite sure what your question is then.


@Engr. Adiktuzmiko


Well, I am no expert but that was the goal. I figured that if you can't replenish the health bar in  a normal way, then you would need an increase  in base health. Because it is still a game, it shouldn't be about 0 damage or death.


Like when I think final fantasy. And I imagine an attack against one of my characters that is both strong enough to do something yet, weak enough to not worry about. I imagine something like 5-10% life bar. I can take at the very least 5 of these before I am worried about healing. But if you remove healing. Even 5% from one shot is just brutal, because you are likely gonna take more  thn one shot per enemy and multiple enemies per area.


But I did also have an idea about what your talking about. Which I referred to like the "guard guage" against to use numbers(not that these numbers matter beyond an example.) I see a common enemy normal atttack against a normal guard being like 2%. While the guarded damage being like 1-.0.5% and unguarded being as high as 5%.


I would want a player to be like. "okay, damn I lost. But I took quite a bit of unneeded damage. I need to play a bit more seriously at this stage of the game."

 

[Reapergurl]

Survival games are in a word, massively unpopular, because most modern gamers don't care for such painstaking gameplay.


As for me, I like that kind of thing, but I really enjoyed it on the older generation consoles.


One example of a survival game that is not an RPG is Contra (oh yeah, I'm sure we all know this one). The enemies spawned from every which way, and you would die quickly. Not only that, you had five lives only.


Or Ghosts and Ghouls, as an even greater example. Suit of Armor to Naked to Dead. Game Over.


With LoZ, as mentioned, there is a great deal of survival roles in the game, but it's more of a puzzle (okay, now where t.f. do I go?)


Personally, the only RPG I've played with some parts of these mechanics in it was Dissidia: Final Fantasy (healing was limited to either on-map screen skills or regeneration while in EX Mode). But that was an Action Style RPG, where you were participating in battles much like Street Fighter instead of entering commands (though there IS a command style option).

 

[LaFlibuste]

Honestly the system you describe in point 4 sounds to me like nobody in your game actually knows how to fight properly. Not opening up your guard when you are attacking is one of the basic thing fighters have to learn when they start out because if they don't well... they die. Quickly.


Also, the general system you describe actually doesn't sound like a system  that's built around attrition. Like others have said, if you have tons of encounters, especially tedious one, the player is bound to make a few mistakes (or just be unlucky). If he has no way of recovering from it, they are effectively game over. To be honest it doesn't sound like a fun game. Replaying a level over and over is not fun for most people, especially in an RPG, imo. Your system sounds like it would work better in a game where there is in fact almost no attrition, no random encounters in dungeons and almost only boss fights.


But hey, maybe that's just me. Good luck with it