kerkerkruip
kerkerkruip copied to clipboard
i7
Physical combat states (prone/standing)
I'm already making an issue so that I won't forget, but I'll post a more detailed proposal (with questions) later. What I'd like to do is:
- Add some advanced combat actions, as already discussed on the forum.
- Make parrying and dodging more distinct, and make the choice between them more interesting.
- Think about whether we would like to add a "being prone" state, like Remko suggested, and think about how it would interact with combat.
- Think about how these combat actions and states could be used to differentiate melee and ranged weapons.
I'll work on a proposal and post it here later!
Once this is done, some of it should probably be changed in ATTACK itself.
As usual, let me provide a dissenting opinion!
In general I like the current basic actions of Kerkerkruip, and am not too keen on what has been suggested. I agree that there is too little distinction between parrying and dodging, but perhaps we could change that by increasing the difference that is already there. What if the initiative bonus for parrying was increased? What if there was a way to track initiative for longer than a single turn? Perhaps we could have a second initiative stat which parrying would increase, so that after attacking, instead of your initiative being set to 0, it would be set to the second stat? Then rather than just getting a bonus for a turn which you probably would already get, you can get a bonus for your next turn too. We should also make clearer what is happening when you parry or attack, because probably the sameness is more felt than is real.
A second idea I had would be to have a weapon or class of weapons which would allow you to attack while reacting, similar to lashing out. Perhaps this could be allowed when it is ranged vs ranged?
I have been thinking pretty hard on the range-proposals made by Erik en seconded by Remko. I've thought about Erik's original idea, and also about a simpler idea that just tracks whether two people are "locked in melee" or not. It seems to me that such a system could be tactically satisfying and would help us reach some of our design goals; in many ways, I like it.
But I cannot see how to make it work in Kerkerkruip.
The main problem is communication. How do we communicate to the player which people are locked in melee with which other people? In the room description? Using a special command? Upon examining? It all sucks. When thinking about how to communicate this stuff to the player, one keeps coming back to the idea "oh, we should use a graphical representation of the spatial situation for that!". But of course, that goes against the whole identity of Kerkerkruip. There are thousands of roguelikes out there that are good at spatial representation, one Kerkerkruip is the one roguelike that is not.
This makes me believe that we should not go this way.
A counterproposal will follow.
Let me suggest a 'prone' state. Being prone means the following (details to discuss):
- An standing attacker attacking a prone defender using a melee attack receives a +2 bonus on the attack and +1 on damage;
- a prone defender only receives half a dodge bonus against a standing attacker, since it is more difficult to dodge while being prone;
- a prone attacker receives a -2 penalty for attacking a standing defender;
- a prone defender may try to stand up; this takes a turn.
Furthermore, I think it should generally be easier to tackle a smaller opponent, perhaps modified by body (although the latter will depend on the nature of the attack).
I quite like my idea to allow attacking as a response in ranged vs ranged battles. What would you think about implementing this, even if the other stuff needs more discussion?
Yeah, that sounds good. I'll make it happen before the next release! Perhaps with some other ranged combat changes.
I'm going to delay proneness to Kerkerkruip 10 (unless someone vehemently disagrees). We've already made some very big changes to the combat system, and I'd like to see those settle down a bit first.