Hi guys, /vg/ here.
I was introduced to RPG by AD&D and the D&D cartoon, and really wants to build a game around the old AD&D modules, but not restricting myself to the AD&D ruleset. This poses as a problem.
What ruleset should I use? 2e? 4e? 5e?
And most importantly, How deviate can I go from the ruleset?
I was one of the bashers of Swordcoast Legends because it doesn't use the 5e ruleset but "adapted" it to a computer, action =, Diablo-like RPG.
But when testing the attack mechanics on a CRPG, a "Miss" is more like a nuisance, irritating and boring event than when it plays on the tabletop, since you're playing alone and the interaction with your fellow mates lessen this perception.
Some game developers says that anything less than 95% hit chance makes a boring combat full of misses - or worse, when a miss comes at the "wrong" time (Darkest Dungeons come to mind, but then in DD the "rogue"-like and grim darkness, Lovecraftian-lore makes use of the miss as another psychological factor to both characters and the player).
But should I then keep to the default D&D formula? Roughly 75% hit chance, even if the combat is full of misses? Or should I adapt the damage to allow higher hit % but keeping the same number of combat turns?
Who's to say they miss? Why not have glancing blows off of armor, damaging it? If the player passes the AC of an enemy, assume they got past the armor somehow, and, assume that unless they roll low, or the enemy is incredible nimble, generally they hit armor, denting and scratching but not actually dealing damage.
>>47059777
The old Infinity Engine games run on a slightly modified version of 2e,so you could check those out for how that plays.
>>47059843
CRPGs can afford to have more fiddlybits in the hit resolution since the players don't have to track it. So what I'd do is perhaps give a base 75% hit rate, add another 10% of "scrape" or "shallow hit" for fractionally reduced damage, and then another 10% of "glancing blow" which deals 1 damage.
Or you could even remove outright "miss" entirely in favor of there being only hit for full, hit for half, and hit for 1 damage It may then be useful to buff baseline hp as a result too - and longer lasting combats in terms of swing count are also another CRPGs can afford since they can resolve an attack a second easily.
>>47059862
I've played the old Infinity engines, especially Baldur's Gate, but it was Real-Time with Pause (RTw/P), so the misses were more thrilling. But when dealing with turn-based, a miss turns to be not so cool anymore, just creating a "wasted turn" on the player thinking.
>>47059843
Aesthetically effects can work only so much, unfortunately. But well thought.
>>47059938
This is were the problem starts. If I try to adapt the ruleset, I may anger the most faithful ones that want a CRPG experience of a TTRPG ruleset, the same way I was angered by how Swordcoast Legends dealt with it.
>>47059938
Which, essentially makes it a 95% hit chance for most attacks, which is odd. In DnD/Pathfinder, you do have to meet/exceed the AC in order to deal damage.
Which, if you were to roll a d20 to hit, means no matter what you will be dealing damage unless you roll a natural 1. It should be dependent on the player's ability in combat, proficiencies, etc.
Something like this could work:
1 = critical miss
2-10 = miss
11-12 = glancing blow
13-15= scraping attack
15-19= full damage
20 = critical success
>>47059938
>So what I'd do is perhaps give a base 75% hit rate, add another 10% of "scrape" or "shallow hit" for fractionally reduced damage, and then another 10% of "glancing blow" which deals 1 damage.
I was about to suggest this.
It's a good idea.
Couple of ideas:
-buff hit chances and buff hp correspondingly. HP is probably easiest to sell as a small deviation from the tabletop rules to make fights not be ROUND ONE, GANK, GAME OVER.
-prominently display the die roll on a miss, misses are probably more understandable when a big d20 showing "4!" flashes at you
-outright lie to the player, hide monster hp, say "you hit" a lot, have internal misses.
>>47060329
Final Fantasy did this a lot. Popping up that you hit, but dealt 0 damage.
Bumping this with a missed (oh, the irony!) question on the OP:
Which ruleset to aim for? 2e, 4e or 5e?
It feels like most games based on D&D are liked for reasons other than how the rules are applied. Nethack is an exception, but it's also a bad example.
I think the biggest problem with D&D is the damage spread. Being very likely to miss, and then dealing anywhere from 14 to 5 damage with your d10 sword (before damage reduction if the enemy has any) makes combat feel very unreliable. Tighter damage spreads with higher minimum were the first thing Japanese RPGs did after it turned out that Wizardry and its early copies didn't work quite as everyone would've liked.
>>47062519
NetHack is amazing in it's own right.
>>47059938
This is the pillars of eternity solution - each attack can result in miss, 'graze', hit or crit and the chance of each scales with attack and defence stats. So the frustration of an outright miss is rare, but its still important to maximise your accuracy.
In a faithful turn-based adaptation of AD&D I think misses are likely to be less of an issue because experienced fighters attack several times a round. Of course low levels will be as painful as ever.
>>47062636
But then how to hold the player's motivation until the higher levels?
Bumpity bump.
>>47059777
4e ruleset would be very fitting for a CRPG, its rules practically beg for a vidya adaptation.
Off topic, has anyone here played the early access for Torment: Tides of Numenera? I want to know if it is worth buying and /v/ is being useless.
>>47059777
Please don't use mash tabletop rpg systems into videogames. Tabletop rpgs are made with humans at the helm behind the rules, and there's a reason why people with extremely powerful autism don't make good GMs.
>>47066016
But Baldur's Gate...
>>47065823
Yes, but if not for a grid, tactical approach, still the best option?
>>47066637
Baldur's Gate stood up on being a well made game, not on its adherence to D&D rules, there's a big difference. The designers knew how to make the most out of what they had to work with and made a good game out of it, but since Baldur's Gate puts so much effort into being comparable with a tabletop session, then let me tell you Baldur's Gate is NOTHING compared to a well run tabletop session.
>>47067644
I forgot to mention. That being said, wargames are a great resource to look to if you specifically want tabletop game mechanics in your videogame. Wargame rules are not up to interpretation, which works much better with computers.
