Page 3 of 4

Re: The problem with using a formula rather than RNG

Posted: October 3rd, 2018, 2:12 am
by ZiN
Well, they don't really need more than 4 skills anyway. In fact they could go with 1: 6 "grand conjurers" with arcane barrage will destroy pretty much everything: "1click,1click,1click,1click,1click,1click,1click,1click,1click,1click,1click,1click..." and everything is nuked to oblivion. It's more "evolved", than AAADDDD though, because it needs a mouse, and has animations and cool effects!

Re: The problem with using a formula rather than RNG

Posted: October 5th, 2018, 9:01 am
by rmcoen
I learned Calculus 30 years ago. Learned it, could use it, knew what it was for. Haven't used it pretty much since. Daughter needs tutoring in Calculus in high school. Had to hire a tutor. Skill was learned, "slotted out" as unneeded for my day-to-day progression; eventually forgotten.

Re: The problem with using a formula rather than RNG

Posted: October 5th, 2018, 10:54 am
by Gizmo
It's different for a character who aspires to be a professional mathematician—or a Practitioner/Bard/Warrior. ;)

'Slotted out' in this game, implies that it can be slotted in again; on demand, on the spot, and with a professional's keen edge still intact. Unfortunately (as I understand it—second hand), it also means that they subjectively forget what they have learned, when it is not 'slotted' in.

*This mechanic would have been better suited to a Cyberpunk-style futuristic game; where it becomes plausible that they actually do slot & un-slot skill chips; and actually would forget an unslotted skill.

Re: The problem with using a formula rather than RNG

Posted: October 5th, 2018, 12:01 pm
by Jamey
The last half of this thread seems to be concerned about the realism aspects of how fantasy characters choose which spells they can use.

Not only is that amusing on its face, but the discussion should be centered around fun, not realism. I play games because I enjoy them, not because they are realistic simulations.

Re: The problem with using a formula rather than RNG

Posted: October 5th, 2018, 1:45 pm
by CaptainPatch
Part of the fun IS realism. BT, like every other Fantasy game, builds on "a real world where Magic works. Mechanically, we still have the Laws of Physics in effect. We stick to the ground because of gravity. Missiles fly in straight lines rather than meandering all over the landscape. Our view of the world is what is directly in front of us rather than looking around corners without being AT the corner. Though quite variable, we don't have infinite carry capacity. Etc. In the absence of a magical explanation, we expect the game world to function more or less like the Real World... with the proviso that in the game world, Magic works.

Re: The problem with using a formula rather than RNG

Posted: October 5th, 2018, 1:55 pm
by Jalis
CaptainPatch wrote:
October 5th, 2018, 1:45 pm
Part of the fun IS realism. BT, like every other Fantasy game, builds on "a real world where Magic works. Mechanically, we still have the Laws of Physics in effect. We stick to the ground because of gravity. Missiles fly in straight lines rather than meandering all over the landscape. Our view of the world is what is directly in front of us rather than looking around corners without being AT the corner.
Tell that to Planescape: Torment ;)

Re: The problem with using a formula rather than RNG

Posted: October 5th, 2018, 3:05 pm
by Gizmo
Consider the physical laws in Planescape though; everything must be plausible within context—or it all turns to mush.

Re: The problem with using a formula rather than RNG

Posted: October 5th, 2018, 3:10 pm
by ZiN
Planescape: Torment pretty much obeys 2nd edition AD&D rules, as far as combat and spellcasting goes, with a few cool additions. While the spells have different names, they work mostly like the ones in the source material, the exact opposite of Barrows Deep, where they name dropped everything, but completely changed the effects and rules.

Re: The problem with using a formula rather than RNG

Posted: October 5th, 2018, 3:13 pm
by Drool
I remember when I was taking Karate as a kid.

I learned how to kick. I learned how to punch. I learned how to block. They tried to teach me how to do a leg sweep, but I couldn't learn any more, so I decided I'd forget how to walk so I could learn it.

Good thing I wasn't thirsty at the time.

Re: The problem with using a formula rather than RNG

Posted: October 7th, 2018, 3:44 am
by Spectralshade
Drool wrote:
October 5th, 2018, 3:13 pm
I remember when I was taking Karate as a kid.

I learned how to kick. I learned how to punch. I learned how to block. They tried to teach me how to do a leg sweep, but I couldn't learn any more, so I decided I'd forget how to walk so I could learn it.

Good thing I wasn't thirsty at the time.
I stopped at karate when they wanted me to learn to go into a split. I prefered remembering how to pee. :lol: :mrgreen:

Re: The problem with using a formula rather than RNG

Posted: October 9th, 2018, 9:02 am
by thebruce
Drool wrote:
October 5th, 2018, 3:13 pm
I remember when I was taking Karate as a kid.

I learned how to kick. I learned how to punch. I learned how to block. They tried to teach me how to do a leg sweep, but I couldn't learn any more, so I decided I'd forget how to walk so I could learn it.

Good thing I wasn't thirsty at the time.
OH! OH! And sometimes a punch or kick wouldn't be as effective. Sometimes my opponent's block happened to end up in the right place at the right time to thwart my technique. Sometimes my angle for a kick might be slightly off and miss the target leading to less 'damage', or spot on with all the relevant angles of myself and my opponent in prime orientation to hit a tendon and become 'critical' for a boosted effect (for eg; I've never truly criticially kicked a partner, lol, unless maybe you consider that a point in point sparring).

Random variations in combat absolutely are a realistic factor, regardless of skill level. Of course if I train my kicks to be super powerful, the range of effect will be much higher than had I lesser skill or strength, but specific effectiveness will still vary by random factors.

(disclaimer: I do currently train in martial arts)

Re: The problem with using a formula rather than RNG

Posted: October 9th, 2018, 11:30 am
by ZiN
Playing Barrows Deep combat is a bit similar to playing chess:

Image

Re: The problem with using a formula rather than RNG

Posted: October 9th, 2018, 12:01 pm
by thebruce
Or, in the context of strategy, Jurassic World Alive (also static ability statistics where your win/loss depends on pure ability and statistical knowledge, without random variations in results to take into consideration.

Re: The problem with using a formula rather than RNG

Posted: October 9th, 2018, 12:28 pm
by Jalis
Sometimes my double leg takedowns hit just the right angle behind just enough leg sprawl to get my opponent down somewhat gently, and sometimes I blast through, having set it up with a good jab to take away any potential defensive sprawl, where my opponent and I travel 3-4 feet and they land roughly on their back! Sometimes that jab is just a softening up blow, opening up for something else, and sometimes I land it out of nowhere and behind the full weight where that jab in and of itself can be a knockout blow.

IMO, ranges work better in combat to afford some realism as well as variety; otherwise, I'm just doing math on a spreadsheet to cancel out numbers.

Re: The problem with using a formula rather than RNG

Posted: October 9th, 2018, 1:18 pm
by thebruce
Exactly, those are all examples of being able to pull out different techniques you've learned (arguably the same general skillset) as part of the combat strategy. I was more referring to ranges though in light of proficiency within a skill (like, stronger legs mean harder hit/more damage - but the technique itself can still be altered by 'random' factors)

Or perhaps the scale of random adjustment effect should be reduced with higher skill levels. Say, the difference between
1) throwing a wild kick which could effectively hit its mark or miss entirely, and
2) a very controlled and planned kick that's also made more effective by increased skill in reading the opponent and environment so as to very quickly adjust and retain that precision effective strike.

Lower skill = low base range + high random factor.
Higher skill = high base range + low random factor.
...or, in basic tabletop terms, # dice rolls :P (4d10 -> range 4-40, vs 25d2 -> 25-50) the system used by BT1-3 item effectiveness.

{base effect} D {precision}

Re: The problem with using a formula rather than RNG

Posted: October 9th, 2018, 2:25 pm
by eisberg
ZiN wrote:
October 9th, 2018, 11:30 am
Playing Barrows Deep combat is a bit similar to playing chess:

Image
Which is a deep, complex game, that takes a whole lot of thought and strategy to play... something that can't be said with RNG games like the originals.

Re: The problem with using a formula rather than RNG

Posted: October 9th, 2018, 3:02 pm
by thebruce
eisberg wrote:
October 9th, 2018, 2:25 pm
Which is a deep, complex game, that takes a whole lot of thought and strategy to play... something that can't be said with RNG games like the originals.
Arguable, because that entirely depends on the quality of combat design decisions. And arguable, because many would quite disagree with you that combat in the originals was not deep, not complex, and didn't take a whole lot of thought or strategy.
Boiling all combat down to AAADDD has already been debunked.

Re: The problem with using a formula rather than RNG

Posted: October 9th, 2018, 3:04 pm
by Drool
eisberg wrote:
October 9th, 2018, 2:25 pm
Which is a deep, complex game, that takes a whole lot of thought and strategy to play... something that can't be said with RNG games like the originals.
Might want to take a closer look at that picture...

Re: The problem with using a formula rather than RNG

Posted: October 9th, 2018, 3:50 pm
by Dork Mage
Thanks Drool... missed it on first view.

Re: The problem with using a formula rather than RNG

Posted: October 9th, 2018, 5:44 pm
by _noblesse_oblige_
ZiN wrote:
October 9th, 2018, 11:30 am
Playing Barrows Deep combat is a bit similar to playing chess:

Image
Brilliant, Zin.