The first artwork.

Hello again friends. A friend of mine is doing the ardorous task of baby-sitting teenagers at a Christian High school. While doing so, she has sketched a few characters.

Here they are:

Her blog, and her other artwork, can be found here

Things done, and things to do.

Since I am not actively asking for feedback here, it is time to list things that I have done and things yet to be done.

Things Done
*Chance to Hit/Damage reduction
*Character Classes, Hit Points
*Attributes
*Attack Rating base
*Estimated Armor ratings
*Outline of all basic class abilities
*Outline of all hybrid class abilities
*Character "attachments" categorized into buffs, debuffs and further qualified as things like poison, disease, curses blessings, persistent effects etc.
*Damage types listed as Melee, Ranged, Acid, Shadow, Frost, Fire, Arcane, and Electrical
*Estimated value of individual armor pieces for warriors done.
*Combat action and resolution
*How magical resistance will work.

Things to Do
*Specifics of all abilities, including changes per "rank" of ability
*Vanilla weapons and Armor list
*initiative
*Armor value for individual pieces for all classes.
*Mana Bars
*characters "modes" which will cover shape changing forms, auras, etc
*Game interface
*and probably a lot more than I can list right now.

On mage and warlock abilities.

As I was brainstorming at Holly's coffee shop today, I had another thought for feedback.

Before I explain the thought, here's the background. I plan that each class (Mage, Rouge, Fighter, Ranger) will have about twelve to fifteen abilities. It is possible to divide these into three separate groups, and that has worked pretty well for Blizzard. Such a division could be superfluous, but for now imagine it.

The thought concerns how to divide up the abilities of mages and later the warlock/necromancer or otherwise "evil wizard" class.

Grouping for Mage class seem to fall into three, but maybe four? First group is "Enchantment/Charm" which is anything that affects the mental state of enemy of buffs non-living matter. Sleep and confusion obviously belong here. A buff to character INT belongs here. A second group might be "Invocation" which is where all the dramatic energy things like fireballs and lightening bolts come from. A third might be "manipulation" These spells, rather than summoning energy, alter present matter somehow. A spells that hardens skin (and thus buffs armor) or dramatically reduces the temperature of something belong here.

The only things that doesn't fit very well in this scheme are invisibility spells. Or a "mirror image" spell. Basically, spells that deal with light might not fit so squarely into manipulation category.

For the "evil mage" archetype, I think it is much easier. I can think of three categories. The first could be just generically called "Perdition" and that is any destructive spell. A second could be maleficium, which include curses and hexes. The third would be "demon magic" or something that draws power directly from evil spirits.

Either way, I'm happy to say that this game design slowly progresses toward the goal.

Why Damage types at all?

First, thanks to James and Alexander for commenting in the previous blog. Those kinds of things really keep me going. Don't feel like you have to tell other programmers about this blog, though the more input the better!

Since this blog is still on the subject of damage types and resistances. I have asked for the brainstorming, and I still fail to explain they "why" of the need for damage types. We need damage types because of the need to fulfill the RPG mantra: "Easy to Learn, Difficult to Master."

Please meditate on that while floating in the lotus position. oooohhhmmmmmm..

An example why might help. Let's say that I designed a game that was easy to learn, but not hard to master. In this game, players have hit points, an attack rating, and an armor rating. Higher numbers are better. Charter A has "10 Attack" "12 Armor" and 50 hp. Character B has exactly the same. There are no other imbalancing variables or hidden knowledge from the players in the game. This is going to be rather boring duel. I might as well flip a coin to see who wins.

The player who controls character A is getting an edge on this easy to learn, easy to master game. He increase his attack to 13. Now he wins most fights. This means he has just mastered the game. The only other thing another character can do is either increase his armor or his attack. This game is now mastered, and it is also boring. This is pretty much how Castle Age feels, if you have ever played that game.

How can this made a little bit more difficult to master? By adding imbalancing forces, specifically damage types and resistances. Lets say that Character A and Character B are fighting again. This time, however, Character A is using electrical damage. Character B is wearing metal armor. Electrical damage will do extra damage to metal armor, thus exploiting a weakness. Character B could go into fights with leather armor instead, but that would lower his overall armor rating. Players then would face a challenge of what armor they wanted to wear and what kind of attacks they wanted to use.

Notice, that emphasis here is not on a complete, rigid, realism. If realism was the focus, than all players would die in a single fireball. They would all be crippled by a single arrow, they would all most likely die after getting hit only two or three times. Could such a game make a great RPG in which players develop their characters over long periods of time? Where they fight battles that last several rounds? Not entirely.

Now, there is certainly room for realism. I am not sure how much though. Think about every RPG that you have played. What was the level of realism in it? Obviously, there is such a thing as being completely over-the-top, but do you generally find that RPG game mechanics are concentrating on how realistic the battles and damage mechanics are? This is an open question. I am an RPG veteran, but I have by no means been playing them over the last few years.

Why not add a few damage types now?

Please, you offer damage types!

One thing that is great about books like The Artist's Way is that it teaches you to shut off the left brain and let the right brain run free. That is what imaginative brainstorming is. It is only after you have done all the imaginative brainstorming that it makes sense to turn on the left brain that will judge the work you spit out on paper.

What needs to be imagined now is every type of damage in a fantasy role-playing setting. Sure, many of much I am about to list could be condensed, simplified, and cut down. However, that's what you do after you list all the brainstorming. In fact, if you have any more suggestions, go ahead and mention them. If you think anything on this list should be collapsed, eliminated, or simplified, you can mention that too.

Here goes:

Damage from weapons can be divided into piercing, slashing, and bludgeoning.

Damage can also be divided up by four elements, such as Earth, Fire, Wind, and Water.

Magical Damage can be divided up into Arcane, Shadow, Necromantic, Electric, and Frost

Other types of damage could be Biological, Acidic, Poison, or the broad Nature

Finally, there is always Holy damage.

Now, I already think that many of these can be collapsed. Some can be gotten rid of. However, every conceivable type of damage should be covered and then people can turn on the left brains and cut things out.

Please, tell me what you think of the list and add, remove, adjust etc as you see fit because that is an important step before listing off abilities of characters.

Not feeling so well and not abandoning the game.

There is nothing more lame than a blogger who whines about not posting, but nonetheless I feel I should explain why I have not updated this blog.

The first and foremost reason was NaNoWriMo. I knew that this project was going to take a back seat, but I did not mention it here. Which I really wish I would have.

Secondly, was been my move and settling into a job and new country. This has not been an easy task.

Finally, there has been all the work I've been doing offline for this project. There has been no shortage of brainstorming going on in my spare time, nor mapping out of all the things I will eventually put together for the game BCP.

The answer to many questions is no, I have not and I will not abandon or forget about this project. Even if I decide to abandon this blog, there is no doubt that I will get the BCP going. Simply put, the creation of a facebook game is still something that I get very excited about. It is very encouraging to remember that the earliest video games began with guys in college who had full time schedules. I have a part time work schedule. Therefore, there is really no way that this can't get done.

I still look forward to reaping the financial benefits of this game in the distant future. I have found an English bookstore in the area that will allow me order books -like things on interface design- soon.

Until then, I am at the point in which I am designing character abilities.

Keep you all posted.

It has been to long: Chance to hit formulas

I realize that I have not been keeping up with updating this blog. A big part of that is that I am doing NaNoWriMo this months and the pages upon pages of writing have been going into that. Also, I have realized that what I really need to do is less public brainstorming and more privately designed and complete document so that I can put together some instructions for a BCP.

I have however created chance to hit formulas. This chance to hit formula will calculate both the chance to hit and the amount of damage "absorbed" by armor in one roll.

Some back ground first. Characters will have two relevant attributes when it comes to hitting and dealing damage. One attribute will be the damage multiplier and the other will be the attribute that affects the attack rating. The attack rating itself will be mathematically derived number that affects the chance to hit. What affects each of these will depend on the weapon used or the type of spell:

Projectile Spell = INT(attack rating); WIL(damage multiplier)
Mellee Weapon = DEX(attack rating); STR(Damage multiplier)
Ranged Weapon = DEX (attack rating): PRC(Damage Multiplier)

As mentioned in another blog the amount of damage is simply the base damage of weapon/spell (1-4 points) multiplied by the attribute. So if a character is striking with "rusty dagger" (1-2 base points) and has a STR of 9, then the range of damage is 9-18.

Now, the attack rating is also depended on an attribute. I don't know how that will be derived yet. I do think the average attack rating for a level one character should be about 10 and should double every ten levels, just like armor. Note, that I'm tied to the number 10, it can be 100 at level one, just as long as it doubles about every 10 levels. Additionally, the attack rating should be approximently equal to the average "heavy leather" armor rating. This is the second highest armor rating, with metal armor, on average, exceeding attack ratings.

If anyone has any ideas, please let me know.

The actual formula works like this. In order for a character to hit, there must be calculated a "full hit minimum" (FHM) number. The number will be within the range of 0-100, although it can exceed 100 in certain circumstances. It will be calculated according to this formula:

FHM == {[0.8a + (a-d) + (l_a-l_d)]/a} * 100
a = attack rating
d = defender's armor
l = level of attacker and defender

If the defender and attacker have equivalent levels, and the attack rating and armor rating are the same, than the FHM == 80. Compare that to a random number 1-100. If the random number >= 80, than calculate full damage (base damage * damage multiplier.

Note, this is a pretty high bar. An attacker fighting an evenly matched defender, the attacker will deal full damage only 1 out of every 5 strikes. However, this is Full hit minimum. If the attacker is below the mininum he will not deal no damage, but will deal less damage:

If RND(1-100) is less than FHM by .1-10.0 then calculated damage * 80% ("partial hit")
If RND(1-100) is less than FHM by 10.1-20.0 then calculated damage * 60% ("weak hit")
If RND(1-100) is less than FHM by 20.1-30.0 then calculated damage * 40% ("glancing blow")
If RND(1-100) is less than FHM by 30.1-40.0 then calculate damage * 20% ("near miss")
If RND(1-100) is less than FHM by 40.1 or or more then calculate no damage ("complete miss")

So in combat between evenly matched characters, damage will be dealt to the defender about 60 percent of time (excluding calculations for evasion/blocking), and most of those hits will not be full 100% damage. In this way, the comparison between the armor rating and attack rating will cover both chance to hit and damage absorbed by armor. There will be no need have a separate formula for damage absorption.

An important question at this point is will players like hiting only 60% of the time, or will this generate more frustration than challenge? How often should players expect to hit an evenly matched opponent?

I plan to soon make a flow chart that will include evasion, block, critical hit, and so forth. Assuming that programmers like flow charts. :-)