Combat & Classes... A little more flavor? - ID: 648
FORUM: Feature Requests
This topic was started by Mejilan on 10/05/2012, 00:53:08
I'd like to open by saying that I love this game as-is; and that I appreciate your desire to stay true to the Bard's Tale roots the game so joyously clings to. I understand that Silversword 2 is currently planned as a similar reimplementation of Wizardry game rules, and I wholeheartedly approve of those efforts as well (particularly as I've always preferred Wizardry to Bard's Tale!) I'm not looking for substantially reworked gameplay that would serve to change the core experience into something decidedly not Bard's Tale.
Having said all that, I still believe that there is room for minor evolutions to the core formula that don't compromise the game's experience or your intent. I'm mainly speaking of combat refinements that can simultaneously differentiate the various non-magical attackers and perhaps establish better scaling and parity with mages; who in the late-game become so overpowered that they essentially render the front lines of any party as little more than faceless walls of meat and metal that exist more to protect the rear elements rather than to satisfy any legitimate offensive purpose in battle.
Walls o' text, ahoy! :)
Warriors:
Almost grotesquely brutish tanks that will never finish off more than one enemy per round, regardless of how strong they become or how many attacks they can rain down on foes. Compare this to a mage that can cheaply strike every enemy in a battle for hundreds to a thousand points of damage... each. Compare this to THREE similarly tailored mages. The warrior's contributions to combat in the mid to late game are inconsequential. They have no range. They have no crowd control. They have no mass-kill potential.
Why not grant them a Sweep that is checked for each combat round like the hunter's passive critical hit ability? Only, instead of netting an insta-kill, it could, in the cases of severe 'overkills,' spread the number of available hits and resulting damage across a number of weaker targets within the same enemy group.
Scenario (all numbers illustrative):
1) Warrior strikes 1 of 20 renegades 8 times for 400 damage, dealing something to the effect of 350 points of damage beyond the 50 required to kill him.
2) Game checks Sweep percentage to determine if Sweep skill is fired. If so, then...
3) Game checks to determine if "overkill" damage points > 2x or 3x the enemy's total HP count. If so, then...
4) Game checks to determine if # of hits/damage required to kill enemy is less than 50% of the warrior's total number of successful hits / damage points rolled. If so, then...
5) Skill "sweeps" the overkill strikes & damage to the next enemy in the same group, if one is available.
6) At this point, the algorithm would roll back to step 2, revising the total number of remaining strikes and damage points downwards to account for the latest overkill; and checking to see if the conditions are right to continue the sweep.
Paladins:
They serve largely the same purpose as warriors, only with a greatly lessened damage output and equipped with a miniscule collection of largely useless (and expensive) prayers that are quickly eclipsed by much more powerful, and much cheaper mage equivalents. My Spidey sense is tingling with the potential for another 'critical hit'-like passive check during each combat round.
Turn Undead. Repel Evil. Whatever. Let's say the Paladin has holy symbols enscribed on his standard, shield, breast place, hilt, whatever. Let's say that the following passive skill check is performed each combat round testing for the following scenario:
1) Paladin targets an enemy group with a melee attack. Distance from paladin is irrelevant, making this skill potentially useful regardless of whether or not enemy is in striking distance.
2) Game checks to determine if Repel Evil skill is fired. If so, then...
3) Game checks to determine if enemy group is composed of evil (demonic) and/or undead creatures. If so, then...
4) Each individual enemy in target group has a 10% of paladin's skill percentage of being destroyed outright.
5) Surviving members of target group are repulsed backwards by 10'.
6) Game performs standard melee attack calculations to finish off paladin's round.
Hunters:
The versatile hunter already has the passive critical hit skill. But that doesn't mean that there's no room for improvement, right? Have you ever watched a cartoon or movie (say... Robin Hood?) where an archer rather unrealistically knocks multiple arrows and simultaneously shoots them off at various angles? Well now, that's an idea, no?
This would be an optional ability selectable much like the rogue's hide in shadows combat option. Dual-knock could become available at level 10 or 15, and allow a hunter to target and strike individuals in two separate enemy groups. Each strike would result in a separate critical hit check, potentially doubling the chances of at least one foe falling in a single hit. Limitations could include disabling the ability if only one group of enemy combatants exists (representing the angled spread nature of the attack), a slight THAC0 penalty over a traditional bow shot, and/or a critical hit percentage penalty on the second check if the first strike successfully crits.
Triple-knock could be learned at level 20 or 30 and become an option if facing off against three distinct enemy groups; and would feature up to three separate critical hit checks and even more stacked THAC0 / critical hit percentage penalties for successful repeat strikes. If only two groups are engaged, then only a dual-knock would be performed, of course, regardless of the hunter's experience level.
Needless to say, this would potentially double or triple ammo consumption.
Rogue:
A skilled rogue with solid hide in shadows and critical hit percentages still lags far behind all other classes as respects combat. Save for the bard, of course. I think a single tweak could make this a much more viable class, especially in the late game. For every successful critical hit performed from the shadows, the rogue should have a 67% of hide in shadows skill chance of REMAINING hidden (and at the same distance). In such fashion, a skilled rogue would not have to sacrifice a bare minimum of HALF of her potential combat rounds (in the best case scenario) just for a shot at crit'ing a foe. Well more than half of her combat rounts for particularly distant foes and/or such cases that the rogue is not wielding a throwing weapon capable of critical hits.
Such a simple tweak would make her a more viable class offensively, but ESPECIALLY defensively, as in the front line she stands a better chance of remaining unassailable while still protecting the mages in back!
Bard:
A bard isn't really meant to contribute much to active combat, and I wouldn't change that aspect of her character in the least. However, I do see room for a Charm condition to slightly improve her defensive capabilities, as follows:
1) Bard targetted by an enemy. Before enemy's to hit and damage rolls are performed...
2) Enemy is checked for intelligence. If sentient, proceed to 3). Else, proceed to 5).
3) Game checks to determine if bard is playing a song. Any song. If so, then...
4) Attacking enemy must perform a saving throw against 15% of bard's Instruments skill percentage. If the roll fails, the enemy is rendered bemused by the bard's performance and loses that combat turn.
5) Otherwise, the enemy's attack proceeds as planned.
That's about it, I guess. These mostly passive abilities would do much, I think, to add a bit of flavor to combat and differentiate the non-magical, primarily front-line classes from their more purely magical colleagues; without, I think, diminishing or diluting those ingredients that make for a classic Bard's Tale experience. To spice up the changes, you could even save them for the upcoming expansion (or possibly, a later expansion) and incorporate class-specific side quests that must be undertaken in order to unlock these bonus class abilities!
For example, warriors could seek out the aid of near-legendary military genius living in a self-imposed exile after failing to defend Castle Cranbough from the doom that befell it. Of course, finding this hermit would only be the beginning!
Paladins could brave the trials and tribulations of an evil cult's necropolis headquarters in order to win back a holy symbol said to have been passed down the line of Lord Cranbourgh.
Hunters could be invited to take up the mantle of the Nature Goddess Mielkari, long since thought to have abandoned humanity out of despair of their ever living harmoniously with the flora and fauna of the lands she presides over. Your hunter(s) could be the first in centuries to ever live up to her ideals and earn her favor; and would do so by taking up small, seemingly incidental tasks that provide succor to the weak and defenseless creatures of Mielkari's domain.
Finally, rogues of the more gallant persuasion could attempt to invade the lair of a powerful robber-baron that has long since eschewed the timeless and honorable trade of carefully targeted 'wealth redistribution,' having succumbed to basest greed and consequently begun extorting from even the poorest of serfs.
I realize that this leaves mages out in the cold, but consider that they're already insanely overpowered; featuring combat abilities, hit points, spell points, and statistics that dramatically dwarf every other class. However, I'm thinking that completing the class-specific side stories could result in substantial experience rewards (and perhaps even some unique, powerful equipment) that would normally only be available to the class that the side quests pertain to. Perhaps mages could share at least in the experience rewards, if nothing else. Non-mage classes not pertaining to those quests would get none of the experience rewards for completing said quests (though of course including them in the questing party would make things quite a bit easier...)
I forgot the monk, didn't I?
Well, they are fairly forgettable, no?
The lack of HP in the late game can be a deal-breaker, especially when it comes to damage tiles and magical attacks.
AC can only go so far, I guess.
I don't really like the monk class, so I don't have too many ideas.
How about some table-turning defensive abilities? How a out a multi-faceted Counter ability?
When successfully dodging a melee attack, the monk could have a passive skill check that counter attacks the would-be transgressors for half of the monk's usual strikes/damage? Staff-wielding and hand-to-hand monks only. Non-magical ranged attacks would be proof to these counters, of course.
Similarly, they could have a lessened chance to reflect magical spells back to casters that target them. Say, 33% of the monk's Counter skill?
For a class quest... I don't know, a shady, underground martial arts tournament complete with a sub-plot involving corrupt officials, banned poisons, tampered with arenas and equipment... Completion would net the monk class access to the Counter skill and a special pair of martial arts gloves that have a solid chance of inflicting the poison condition and/or a lesser chance of inflicting paralysis.
