The complexity of event-based combat

[manikus]

I understand. I just wouldn't be a good Sith Lord if I didn't point out the other options.

You could do all kinds of non-lethal things too. Throw a lasso to bind the opponent, or a net. Throw a flash grenade to temporarily blind them so you can sneak passed.

You could also simulate magical items, such as scrolls and other things that might have limited charges. Hmmm, more ideas having am I.

[Dinonykos]

Well, the question which interests me most at the moment (and with your special insight , you can probably help me with that): Is this event-based combat an alternative that is acceptable, or will the DC community demand the standard combat?

[Dinonykos]

I like both the net and the flash grenade idea... Or the classic with the little stones thrown somewhere behind a guard to distract is attention... I think I will add that feature somewhere in combination with NPC-walls.
Yesterday in the tramline, I thought that also the often-used element of ghosts hunting the party ignoring walls can quite easily be done in DC via quest stages. Same with filling a room/area with gas.

[manikus]

Will the DC community play a game using this method of combat? Absolutely.

Will the larger FRUA community play it? I think those that are willing to play DC games at all will.

One thing I've noticed about the community members (as opposed to casual gamers who are just surfing through) is that they will give most everything a shot, and if in the first little bit of time they are willing to suspend their preconceived notions, if they can be convinced it's a good game, they will continue to lplay. I think that most, if not all, of the designers value quality and story over everything else, and these folks are also the ones writing reviews and talking up games.
I can prety much guarantee all the forum members here, well the active ones, will enjoy your design, and I bet many of the people active on the FRUA forum will as well.

I also thought about the stone throwing trick, I just didn't include it, because I don't think you need to use this system to implement it. It could be done with a regular encounter. Of course, you could still track it with a quest, so that the party has to get by them on the way out of wherever it is that they've gone.

[ProphetSword]

I can't speak for the UA community as a whole, but we're definitely open to different ideas. And, I know I would try something like this.

In fact, I came up with something similar in UA to handle "ship-to-ship" combat for an unfinished Buck Rogers module I was working on. I never published it, but it used a system not unlike what you posted here (except that it used events available in UA without any kind of scripting).

Besides, there are plenty of modules with standard combat in UA. And while I certainly hope to see many with standard combat in DC in the future, I would certainly check out something a little different just to break the monotony.

[Dinonykos]

The ship-to-ship combat sounds interesting. I was already thinking of how a space battle could be handled in DC. Would be nice to see your solution...

[manikus]

In DC we can using the icon swapping technique to change from a player to a ship icon, if one so chooses.

But, I was just popping in to post my screenshot of a random/wandering monster chain for the Prohovost design.

Each encounter has an equal chance of occurring, and the chain starts with a utility event so that it can be turned on/off with a quest.

[Dinonykos]

Originally Posted by manikus In DC we can using the icon swapping technique to change from a player to a ship icon, if one so chooses.

I assumed that PS meant an event-based spaceship battle. However, to use the normal combat is certainly also an option for space battle. I know that there were several Buck Rogers in the style of UA, although I never played one. Did they have space battles in that normal combat style?
BTW, perhaps it is already discussed somewhere, but can the PC pics also be swapped?

Originally Posted by manikus Each encounter has an equal chance of occurring, and the chain starts with a utility event so that it can be turned on/off with a quest.

That means, the first has e.g a chance of 10%, the following of 11, 12, 13, 17, 20, 25% and so on up to 100% for the last encounter? Or how do you make the chance equal?
This is certainly a good approach to give a lot of variability to a level/zone concerning opponents. Anyway (without meaning to deningrate this approach!), I expected something more complex...
I thought with "wandering monster", you meant something like a monster that can indeed be seen (or "felt") wandering, for example via Quest values and changing NPC walls. For example, you could make a monster (visible as an NPC-wall) retreat when the player is strong/doesn't have an item/has not killed a similar monster and attempts to approach, and make it approach/attack when the player is weak or the monster is attracted by an item or wants to revenge a fellow monster.
It would certainly be a lot of effort do do something like that for every monster, but I want do do this for some important/big opponents/monster. (And I just have a kind of Deja Vu. Did I write something like this earlier? Probably... )

[manikus]

I do believe that ProphetSword did mean an events driven battle, I just wanted to point out that we could do it otherwise in DC.

I don't know if we can change the small pic...I suspect not, though. The wall trick and icon change trick were mentioned by CocoaSpud, but not explained. I do know that we can not change backdrops using the wall method. I assume that we can not change portraits using the icon method. But, as I know what 'assume' means, I will try it anyway/

The random encounters are often referred to as 'wandering monsters' in the GoldBox parlance. Sorry to get your hopes up. I guess the term comes from "...a monster wanders up to your party. What do you do?" The encounters in the GoldBox games often used sprites that would approach based upon decisions. I just don't have any sprites for the monsters I'm using.
The more complex notion of wnadering monsters is a great one, though. It's just not right for this design. Plus, this is the one that I'm trying to only use artwork that you (Dinonykos) and Uatu created.

I've actually come pretty close to succeeding on this bit with the art. All icons and walls are by you two. But, I think most of the backdrops are mine and about a third of the small pics/portraits come from Ziroc and goldBox sources which I've touched up.

Oh, I almost forgot, you are correct in the percentages I assigned. It's 1 divided by the total options left including that one.

Something my graphic doesn't show, is that you can have multiple chains run off of one utility or an utility and chain events.

[ProphetSword]

For the Buck Rogers modules, I definitely meant an "event-driven" style of combat. That's what SSI did with the original Buck Rogers modules too.

As for the UA Buck Rogers modules, none of them had space combat because I didn't finish working out the kinks. And since I'm the only person who wrote any Buck Rogers modules, I'm pretty sure I'm the definitive source of information on that.