It is currently Sun Jun 07, 2020 6:57 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: TEST COMBAT.
PostPosted: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 1:07 am
Posts: 953
Location: Melbourne, Australia
DISCLAIMER: I know nothing about computers or programming ;)

That out of the way. Something came to my mind and if it is possible to do it would probably be the best solution for Play-by-Post TRoS combat.

We need a program where the GM can assign an NPC his Proficiecies and stats, aswell as his attiutde and favourite moves, then when a PC gets in a fight with him, the PC throws red or white and the NPC automatically throws red/white aswell, then the PC plays out combat against the NPC, the GM doesn't even need to be online.

Basically what the Combat Sim was trying to be, but it would be hosted on the site and all rolls recorded. That way one player online by him/herself can resolve an entire combat in one day by themselves (possibly even one post).

Thoughts? Is this possible? Probable?

Cheers!

_________________
"It was hard-fought, a desperate affair that could have gone badly; if God had not helped me, the outcome would have been quick and fatal" (115) ~ Beowulf after defeating Grendle's Mother.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: TEST COMBAT.
PostPosted: Thu Mar 19, 2009 5:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:43 pm
Posts: 2112
Location: Melbourne, Australia
It would be cool to have a tool that would let you conduct a TRoS combat against a computer opponent where the computer opponent used manoeuvres intelligently. However, for play-by-post that would onmly be useful in the specific situation of a PC duelling one NPC. Most scenario combats involve more than 1 PC and/or more than one NPC so from a gaming perspective, play-by-post or otherwise, I don't see it being that useful. So setting aside the technical difficulty, I'm not sure it helps us run better online games.

Regards,

_________________
Ian Plumb
Illustrations for Gamers
Lyonpaedia
Griffin Grove Gaming
Kraftworks for Kids School Holiday Program


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: TEST COMBAT.
PostPosted: Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:06 am
Posts: 1495
Location: Vienna, Austria, Europe
Ian.Plumb wrote:
It might be good to have this handled through bbcodes as well, where you have a bbcode that describes you attitude for the next period of combat. So instead of red/white for aggressive/defensive you have an array of possible attitudes -- cautious, blind fury, fearful, reckless, defensive, determined, panache, and so on. You select one of these and only you and the referee can see what you have chosen. When all choices are in the referee describes the combat based on the selected attitudes.

The attitudes could cover first exchange/second exchange CP splits, manouvre spreads, and so on. So Blind Fury might translate to 90%/10% CP split, red die, and the most difficult attacking manoeuvre available. It would also help the referee describe the action.

Just about exactly my own thoughts, apart from the bbcode...

Crow Caller wrote:
Basically what the Combat Sim was trying to be, but it would be hosted on the site and all rolls recorded. That way one player online by him/herself can resolve an entire combat in one day by themselves (possibly even one post).

I know about as much as you about programming, and while I think that something like that would be possible I have no idea just who should write such a program, and then I also have the same misgivings about its usefulness in anything but one-on-ones that Ian has...

_________________
My real name is Michael; use it, if you like.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: TEST COMBAT.
PostPosted: Thu Mar 19, 2009 9:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:43 pm
Posts: 2112
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Ian.Plumb wrote:
It might be good to have this handled through bbcodes as well, where you have a bbcode that describes you attitude for the next period of combat. So instead of red/white for aggressive/defensive you have an array of possible attitudes -- cautious, blind fury, fearful, reckless, defensive, determined, panache, and so on.


Grettir wrote:
Just about exactly my own thoughts, apart from the bbcode...


I should explain -- a BBCode is just one of the buttons above the editing screen when you are creating a new post. There's one for Bold, Italic, and so on -- these are standard. We also have one for Dice. They create the square-bracket entries that are then interpreted as commands -- make the text Bold or Italic or roll some dice: [dice]elhxjsunqk[/dice]

I am suggesting that we would have a button for describing mood which would have a set number of acceptable entries. These entries would only be visible to the player who created the post and the referee. Part of setting up a game will probably involve the site admin assigning all the players to a specific group and the referee to another group, so that their permissions can be set differently and thus they will see different things. As an example, when you use the Dice function what you see is different to what I see because I am the site admin.

Anyway Ben is the man for the job. I've given him access to the trosfans site and we're chatting about what is required. The first task is to modify dice so that 3d10 shows the three different rolls rather than the total of the three rolls.

Regards,

_________________
Ian Plumb
Illustrations for Gamers
Lyonpaedia
Griffin Grove Gaming
Kraftworks for Kids School Holiday Program


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: TEST COMBAT.
PostPosted: Thu Mar 19, 2009 11:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:06 am
Posts: 1495
Location: Vienna, Austria, Europe
Ian.Plumb wrote:
I should explain -- a BBCode is just one of the buttons above the editing screen when you are creating a new post. There's one for Bold, Italic, and so on -- these are standard. We also have one for Dice. They create the square-bracket entries that are then interpreted as commands -- make the text Bold or Italic or roll some dice: [dice=quote]elhxjsunqk[/dice]

I am suggesting that we would have a button for describing mood which would have a set number of acceptable entries. These entries would only be visible to the player who created the post and the referee. Part of setting up a game will probably involve the site admin assigning all the players to a specific group and the referee to another group, so that their permissions can be set differently and thus they will see different things. As an example, when you use the Dice function what you see is different to what I see because I am the site admin.

I understand what BBCode is. I'm just not sure if it is necessary to further modify the site. I was thinking about me composing a list of various levels of aggressiveness, where every entry corresponds, among other things, to a certain percentual CP allocation to offensive and defensive. This list would be publicized for everybody to refer to. If PCs fight each other, they could PM me their levels of aggressiveness. But if adding further BBCodes is easy, I'm by no means against it.

_________________
My real name is Michael; use it, if you like.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: TEST COMBAT.
PostPosted: Tue Jun 16, 2009 5:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:26 pm
Posts: 228
If you're interested in converting the site to have more stuff like BBcodes and assigned GMs, I know of another forum that has stuff like that. Don't know too much about it in detail, but they have a system of setting up groups and assigning GMs and Co-GMs, who can see things the players can't. For example, they added in a language-tag feature, where only GMs and characters who knew that language could read the text (that'd solve the red and white dice issue, just set the language to fhwdgads).

Here's the link, if you want to check it out: http://www.myth-weavers.com/


I've also been having trouble with running combat properly in my game. What I've been doing with NPCs is to keep track of what dice colour they are going to pick before I see the player's dice colour--but some times it happens that I reveal their colour before the player has declared theirs. After the player has declared their colour, the NPC and player declare manoeuvres, and I roll the dice. There hasn't been so much feinting yet, so I'm not sure how to see to that issue. I guess I'll require my players (when they're fighting NPCs, that is) that they're ready to feint if the situation warrants.

So the way I do it, it varies in length...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: TEST COMBAT.
PostPosted: Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 12:59 pm
Posts: 51
Hey everyone. I’m a player in Conners’ game, and I thought I’d add my two cents to the conversation. Bare in mind, I’m very new with the system (I’ve only used the combat simulator and read the book, I’ve yet to actually fight a fight), so this work up is probably flawed in some way or another, but might be a good start.

My idea involves using the system as presented in the core manual, with the players making as many decisions at a time as possible. The various steps are kept in separate spoiler boxes, so that each decision is revealed by the referee only when they should be. This keeps things fair on the player’s part, and should be for the referee as well, so long as they don’t peak ahead. Also, this lets a whole exchange’s worth of rolls and decisions be made on a single post, although working out the various possible outcomes does take quite a bit more writing time per post then doing the fight post by post. For a bit more work per post, this should decrease the real world time for a combat significantly.

From what I’ve read, I believe 3 spoiler boxes are needed per exchange, except one with a stance, which will require 4. There may be maneuvers available which I am unaware of which makes more spoiler boxes necessary. If so, let me know. This is what I have so far.

-State stance
(can be revealed by the referee once stance is chosen)

-State attacking or defending, based on opponent’s choice. Also state any special action on offence or defensive choice, including terrain roll, if needed.
(can be revealed by the referee once initiative is chosen)

- State offensive maneuver with dice, if attacking,
State defensive maneuver with dice, if defending
(can be revealed by the referee when the attack order is known)

-State any attacking or defending qualifiers
(can be revealed by the referee once attack or defense maneuvers have been decided, but before rolling the dice)

Once these steps had been done, the referee would need to work out the NPC’s reaction based on each spoiler’s content, in turn, and to make the appropriate rolls. Damage and such would be calculated after, and then aggressor declared leading off to the next exchange.

Here are two examples, made purposely complicated. In both cases, they cover calling stance, initiative, attacks/defenses, and faints.

Example 1: A sword and shield PC (CP 15) faces an NPC mace wielder

Spoiler one (my stance)
Spoiler: show
I want to see what my opponent does, so I’ll be defensive


Spoiler two (my action)
Spoiler: show
If my opponent is aggressive, I’ll throw white; otherwise, I’ll throw red

If I’m attacking, I want to attack first. I’ll try and buy initiative at the base cost (the mace wielder’s PER), if he’s attacking too and has better reflex.

Rolls = players WP


Spoiler three (attack or defense)
Spoiler: show
If attacking first (either due to the other combatant choosing defense, or winning an initiative roll), I’ll spend 4 of my remaining dice (either 13, or 13 - initiative roll cost) on a cut to the lower legs

If defending, I’ll spend dice equal to my [opponent’s attack +1] dice (of my 17 CP) on a shield block, unless over 7, in which case I’ll use partial evasion with [opponent’s attack +2] dice, to a maximum of 14 so I can buy initiative and follow up with an attack

14 rolls (count as necessary)


Spoiler four (attack or defense qualifier)
Spoiler: show
I could faint here, but I won’t be doing so. This spoiler is only here so you don’t know if I have fainted or not.


Example 2: A sword and shield PC (CP 15) faces an NPC spear wielder

Spoiler one (my stance)
Spoiler: show
I want to end this fight now. I’ll be aggressive


Spoiler two (my action)
Spoiler: show
I’m going to kill this guy. I’ll throw red

If he’s attacking too, I’ll try and buy initiative if necessary and I’ll raise his TN by one (so cost is spear wielder’s PER + 1)

Rolls = players WP


Spoiler three (attack or defense)
Spoiler: show
If attacking first (either due to the other combatant choosing defense, or winning an initiative roll). I’ll spend 6 of my dice (either 17, or 17 - initiative roll cost) on a cut to the upper arms if I didn’t need to buy the initiative, otherwise I’ll spend 4, accepting the -1 die penalty for being outranged in both cases.

6 rolls (ignore final two if unnecessary)


Spoiler four (attack or defense qualifier)
Spoiler: show
I’m fainting to a cut to the head, using all my remaining dice except 2

8 rolls (max based on given situation. Count as necessary)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: TEST COMBAT.
PostPosted: Wed Jun 17, 2009 6:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:26 pm
Posts: 228
Well, you're right that's it's relatively complex, but I think it's really quite brilliant. Sure, you won't be able to make pin-point decisions based on the circumstances, but as long as your GM can do it for you well enough I don't see it as mattering.

Perhaps we should bring that up in the OOC thread of our game? If it seems a bit much for some, then they don't need to worry about it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: TEST COMBAT.
PostPosted: Wed Jun 17, 2009 11:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 12:59 pm
Posts: 51
Well, I'd be game for following this system (although Manis is still going to avoid combat like the plague).

Some points though: for this system to work the players will need a very good idea of how many combat points they have to work with from the beginning of the fight, after terrain, range, and other assorted penalties, so that sort of thing (and any checks required to prevent the penalties) will need to be posted by the GM as the fight begins.

Secondly, from what I've seen, I'm not sure if the guys we're playing with understand how the combat system works yet (particularly Damian Jade), and so probably wouldn't be able to do something like this without reading the core book a little more thoroughly. Still, I'd be up for trying it. Perhaps we should find a way to show it in game for the others, and see what they have to say.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: TEST COMBAT.
PostPosted: Wed Jun 17, 2009 10:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:43 pm
Posts: 2112
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Regin wrote:
Still, I'd be up for trying it. Perhaps we should find a way to show it in game for the others, and see what they have to say.


My advice would be to sdet up a sample combat thread in your game's forum and you and Conners run through an entire combat the way you would like it played in your game. That way the other players and new players can be referred to that thread if they need help with combat.

If you look at how combat is handled in the What Price Freedom game you'll see that it is quite different. A level of abstraction is used to avoid much of the rolling -- and the commensurate slowing of the pace -- while retaining the feel of TRoS combat. I mention this simply as an alternative view of combat for forum-based play, a view that might better suit players new to TRoS.

Regards,

_________________
Ian Plumb
Illustrations for Gamers
Lyonpaedia
Griffin Grove Gaming
Kraftworks for Kids School Holiday Program


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: TEST COMBAT.
PostPosted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 1:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 12:59 pm
Posts: 51
Good idea Ian, having the potential combat system in a separate thread to begin with. That way Conners, if people don't like it, we can just ignore it (or just use it ourselves). Also, as you mentioned, it will make for quick reference.

As for abstracting the combat system, I'd rather have the rules spelled out clearly, regardless of what they might be. Conners, if you would prefer streamlining the combats, that's ok with me as well, so long as we figure out exactly how it will work. I think I'd prefer something close to the official rules, but that might be unfeasible given the format.

Shall we move this discussion to the Anur section then?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: TEST COMBAT.
PostPosted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:26 pm
Posts: 228
I plan on sticking to the original combat rules as much as can be managed. The TRoS games I'm going to be running are more-or-less test for a large-scale free-roaming game I want to do with this system, after all, and I don't see abstract combat working for that.

You can start the thread in the Anur section for the combat... I need to take a nap... not feeling so great.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group              Designed by QuakeZone