Tactical RPG Grid Patterns

[Souly]

I assume most of you are looking at that like what the fuck...
I'm making a tactical web RPG.
Each player chooses their class and each has it's own movement/attack restrictions.
Since it's not really art I threw in some bad sketches for each class.

Think of chess on a more dynamic scale; Blue is Movement, Red is Attack, Purple is Move or Attack, Orange is Casting, 1 means low chance of critical hit 2 means high chance of critical hit.

Anyone have any suggestions or comments?

[Helm]

a more complicated version of chess?

Before you pixel anything, make some cardboard cutouts and try to play this with a friend. The possibilities or lack thereof will be apparent.

[Souly]

a more complicated version of chess?

Before you pixel anything, make some cardboard cutouts and try to play this with a friend. The possibilities or lack thereof will be apparent.

Yea, I actually just pulled out my chess set.
I've got to do first class stats and find some dice and I should be good to go.

[Souly]

I fixed up a few things.
Got rid of the confusing purple color and the 1s and 2s.

All of these attacks can be made based on where the character is.
The orange is for aura this is determined by your appearance.
Your custom avatar will effect this, each class has different aura types they can pick from.

[Batzy]

Hey nice thing you got there, but isn't it thief ? not theif 

[Souly]

Hey nice thing you got there, but isn't it thief ? not theif 

Yeah, I noticed the typo a while ago.
Wasn't concerned I'll be sure to fix it next update.



If anyone has any ideas for other classes I'd be happy to hear them. 

[Feron]

                 __---- Mage ---- Wizard
Magician  < __
                     ---- Warlock ---- Sorcerer


                  __---- Rifleman ---- Marksman
Musketeer < __
                      ---- Mortar ---- Demolitioner


             __---- Mounted Knight ---- Griffon rider
Trainer <__
                 ---- Wolf Rider ---- Elephant master


              __---- Longbow man ---- fire-arrow man ??
Fletcher <__
                 ---- Crossbowman ---- Balista operator

also try and work in classes like : hunter, paladin, rogue, elf (dark elf, blood elf, night elf), Priests, warrior, barbarian, shaman, axeman,

[Beoran]

Sorry to sound a bit harsh, but I think that all of this looks very difficult to remember for something that isn't a board game.
The only game that I know that uses a similar approach is the old Gameboy game "Castle Quest", and that's
a very obscure game.
http://www.gamefaqs.com/portable/gameboy/home/929600.html
You should s]emulate it[/s]get it somewhere to get an idea of what it's like.

Most tactical RPG's use a simple combination of "walking range" though "movement points", combined with an "attack range" which you could express in  "range points". A diagonal move usually costs 2 movement points, a straight one 1 movement point. The same goes for attack range points.

For the idea of a chance to a critical attack to be higher when the character hasn't moved very much,, you could make the critical attack rate proportional to the amount of movement points left. You could even range in the remaining "range points" for a ranged attack or a spell, as to make a spell or ranged attack more effective at point blank range. Say, say critical hit%  = 1% + movement point% + range point%.

Well, I hope that my suggestion is helpful to you. I really don't want to discourage you, I just think that for tactical RPG's there are some generally accepted conventions that most players will consider essential. While it is very creative to stray from these conventions, it is also risky and may make your game difficult for people to "get started", and thus, unpopular.

[ndchristie]

although this system seems interesting at the outset, it's not clear that the patterns satisfy one of the two necessary requirements for logical gameplay:

the movement/action patterns satisfy the basic needs of the game in a way that makes each of the pieces important
the movement/action patterns are implied by the type or role of the piece.

the classes you've got right now are more like extensions of each other, which make sense, but there isn't a discernible way that the progressions fullfill any need other than mobility - in fact, they seem to complicate the issue more than they help.

feron - those suggestions sound good at a glance too but they suffer from the same problem - no need, nothing added (yet).

how do we make things work then?

1 - institute reasons for having each piece, and rather than create roles to fit players, create players to fit roles.  For intsance, you don't have a proper defensive unit, while your two sorts of melee combatants are essentially the same - heavy damage over a broad range.
In addition, there's no sort of attack or defense bonuses or anything, which means that all units are basically the same against units of similar rank, because they can just move to put the adversary in range and then attack.  This also means that feron's classes are unnecessary.

rather, we could set up something like this:

A - melee - Armsman - slowly moves (one square cardinal), attacks small range (one square cardinal)  This is a basic unit capable of applying some pressure and covering some ground.  His main weakness is being forced to move into the enemies' range before he gets the chance to attack.
AA - melee offense - Horseman - moves faster (two squares cardinal, one square diagonal), attacks small range (one square cardinal)  This unit closes ground faster allowing the player to attack first.
AAA - melee offense charger - Knight - good movement along the cardinal points and small range.  This unit closes ground very quickly and can break lines well before being struck, running over simple footmen (bonus against ABB).  However, his attack is very predictable which allows the enemy to set up a proper defense.
AAB - melee offense flanker - Hussar - good movement along the diagonal lines and small range.  This unit relies on his unpredictability to circumvent enemy preparations (bonus against ABA).  His ability to change direction also allows him some defensive flexibility when the odds are against you.
AB - melee defense - Sergeant - moves fine (one square any), attacks fine range (one square any).  Although this unit is slow moving, his spear makes him more than capable of intercepting his opponents.
ABA - melee defense blocker - Pikeman - moves fine, attacks good range.  Despite being slow, this unit can attack and pin charging units with it's long weapon.  A single unit can bristle with enough ferocity to deter even the bravest horse from attacking straight on (bonus against AAA).
ABB - melee defense intercepter - Halberdiers - moves faster, attacks fine range - this unit's attacking range is made up for by its ability to close with the enemy, particularly those that have overextended themselves (bonus against AAB).  His ability to cover ground offers limited offensive flexibility when the odds are against you.


see what i'm doing here?  already you have guys which fulfill specific tasks, each of which is necessary to use or avoid, and with three less melee classes to juggle.  Your two branches right now don't really offer logical bonuses and the attack ranges don't align themselves with the class type name.  Why should a spartan CHARGE?  What does brigadier (a rank of field officer never tied to a weapon) have to do with anything? (i've changed this to sergeant, as this was in medieval times used to designate a man worthy of carrying a spear into battle, but spearman may be the best name).  Why does your dragoon seem to have a melee range, instead of his customary carbine?  The player won't know what to do when he sees these pieces.

Many games institute simple bonus systems like the one i've suggested to help balance.  the most common are threes and fours, withe each defeating another.  I've suggested a simple two-pair system of speed and flexibility (fast rigid beats slow flex beats fast flex beats slow rigid beats fast rigid).  Many games prefer the sword beats spear beats lance beats sword and the rifle beats horse beats cannon beats rifle (which are both "rock paper scissors" relationships, not unlike the pokemon starting 3).

I won't go past the melee classes because I just don't understand how the others have been worked out, they seem pretty arbitrary.


Also - as I was told in my old thread - Hawkeye is too strange a name to see good use.

[Souly]

Thanks for the post ndchristie, I'll look over it again before I make any changes. :]
Okay, I've changed a lot...
I've decided to start thinking about stats.
And how they will effect your character.

Health - Vitality, Will
Energy - Wisdom, Will
Power – Attack, Dexterity
Spirit Dmg- Attack, Wisdom
Dodge - Agility
Defense - Will, Vitality
Hit rate - Dexterity, Attack
Cast/Reload speed - Wisdom, Agility

Movement is no longer based on your class, too confusing.
Your movement will be based off of your Agility and Dexterity.
For example)
5 Agility will allow you to move in all 4 directions by 1 square
10 Dexterity will allow you to move in the 4 Diagonal directions by 1 square
30 Agility would allow 4 directions by 2 squares
45 Dexterity would allow 4 directions diagonally by 2 squares
Depending on what the character builds they will be able create their own movement grid.



Characters now have splash damage/secondary attacks.
I've gotten rid of the aura system WAY too much...
Players will instead cast these on themselves or anyone at anytime.

The light red (orange) can have two different meanings to classes, some have both.
1. If a player is in the splash tile, and someone is hit in a main tile touching that splash tile.
There is a chance it could do damage to them too.
Players can attack the where the splash damage area is just like the attack tiles.
2. Secondary weapon/attack, some classes have secondary weapons/attacks.
Example) Swashbuckler uses a pistol and a falchion
The pistol areas do more damage because they are the main attack of the Swashbuckler.