Final Fantasy style combat [Archive] - Wizards Community

Final Fantasy style combat [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Romulus LoneWolf
10-22-06, 10:31 PM Ok, I mostly play online with friends over chat programs, making miniatures and tactical map-based combat useless to us. And I dislike depending on miniatures and maps to begin with.

To be honest, I much prefer a style of combat based on turn-based computer RPGs, where the Party is on one side of the screen, the monsters on the other, and they all basically throw attacks at each other..

Now, one modification I wanted to make to such a system would be ranges.. Basically, instead of large maps, you've got a simple range system: Melee, Short, Middle and Long. Everyone starts at Short or Middle range, and you can close in on enemies using a Move maneuver, or move away from an opponent with a similar maneuver..

...Well, it's just a basic idea so far. Any comments?
Darth Sephiroth
10-23-06, 02:39 AM Well it would work, you'd have to be careful with abilities and spells and other things with Area of Effect. Also use marching order and use all 3 ranges, just modify them by where the attack comes from.
Wayside
10-23-06, 09:32 AM A system like this can't really work out in D&D. To work D&D into a system like this would require a massive rules re-work. Any character who stands in the background is completely immune to melee enemies, and any enemy in the background is completely immune to melee characters. If you allow people to close on enemies who are at long range even though there are melee enemies in the way then you have to know their relation to eachother and it all just becomes way too difficult to deal with. Fun in the videogames, not so fun for D&D.
Millennium
10-23-06, 02:38 PM It's certainly possible to play D&D without using miniatures, or even without maps. It was fairly common in 2e games -in fact, IIRC it was standard at that point- to play without even an abstraction of space: everything happened in the players' minds.

However, 3e combat isn't well-suited to this as written: you'd be better off rewriting the combat system from scratch. The problem here is that too many of the actions and effects of 3e combat depend on a concrete notion of space, containing at least two dimensions (the map) and three is better (for flight). Your range system contains only one dimension, and this can cause problems.

This all said, your system is still in the early stages of development. We'd really need to see more of it before making much of a judgment on how it's working. Some questions:
How far can you move in one turn? You mention closing in on (or retreating from enemies): how many increments of your system can you do?
How do you handle flanking? If you plan on just removing flanking completely, then how does a rogue get sneak attack bonuses?
How do you plan to handle reach weapons?
What about the different spell areas of effect?
rydi123
10-23-06, 06:12 PM you could easily switch things around to an ff based system, but it wouldn't work out all that well imo, due to the rules of the game constantly referencing spacing and such. you could try something more like FF tactics instead (Heroscape terrain works wonders for this, as long as you like hexes). For something like that you would probably have to limit the movement actions/space moved though.
Thomar_of_Uointer
10-25-06, 11:49 AM Actually, this idea has some merit and doesn't need too much change.

What you do is change the two-dimensional grid to a one-dimensional line. Characters may move through the space of their opponents, but provoke three attacks of opportunity (typically one if the enemy doesn't have Combat Reflexes). Allied characters may occupy the same space. Flying characters only provoke AoO in the square they move out of, and you may choose to implement a two-dimensional grid to cover aerial combat. You could also have characters move "around" threatened spaces by moving at half speed, though this seems a bit redundant considering the way the Tumble skill works..

The only problem I see is that line effects will need a modification. As lightning bolt is the most typical effect of that range, you can change line effects to be more vertical, simply affecting all creatures in one square.

Makes sense?
Balthanon
10-26-06, 10:14 AM The only problem I see is that line effects will need a modification. As lightning bolt is the most typical effect of that range, you can change line effects to be more vertical, simply affecting all creatures in one square.

Makes sense?

Actually, it might be better to go with a choice of all creatures from one square/range or one creature from each square/range. That still gives a bit more of a tactical feel to the spell.

I think it would probably be possible to do something like this, however, you would end up making a lot of rulings as the game progressed and things were encountered that weren't accounted for in the initial attempt. Discuss them and keep track of the final decision and you should have a fairly stable system.
Thomar_of_Uointer
10-27-06, 07:40 PM I keep coming back to this idea. Maybe I'll write another 30-page document like my progressions.

I know this is getting a little complicated, but it does solve more problems than it creates.

You can move through spaces occupied by opponents, provoking attacks of opportunity as normal for leaving threatened spaces, but ending your movement in a space occupied by an opponent causes you to fall prone. You may choose to move around your opponents and not provoke attacks of opportunity, but doing so increases the feet of movement required to leave a threatened square by 5' per person threatening you. Tumbling works as normal. Thus, one man won't slow you down too much, but five will.

Two-dimensional combat refers to combat in the air, underwater, or where terrain is elevated enough. Spaces are simply designated as granting cover, and how much movement is needed to move through them is based on the nature of the cover. Dense brush requires two spaces to move through, a barricade with a chokepoint requires one space. A trench grants cover if you're occupying the same space as it, a low wall does not.

Ranged combat is fairly simple. If there's an opponent or cover closer to your target than you are, you suffer the cover penalties (soft for enemies, as cover for cover). In two-dimensional combat, This lets tougher back-row characters screen ranged attacks for mages and healers. It also gives me some cool ideas for feats...

Okay, let's go through spell ranges systematically, they function a little differently with these rules.

Personal, touch, close, medium, long, or specified: As normal.
Rays: Same as ranged weapon.
Spread: Pick a border between two spaces, effect emanates a distance equal to the spread radius in each direction. Cover counts as two spaces for spreads, total cover counts as three. For a two-dimensional grid including height, you select an intersection and determine the spread as normal.
Burst: As spread, but can't pass anything granting total cover.
Emanation: As burst, but continuous.
Cone: A cone can affect one character in each 5' space per 5' from the effect's origin. Thus, you can affect one character 5' away, two characters 10' away, three characters 15' away, and so on. If an ally is in a square, he counts as two characters for this purpose, and if only one more character could be affected he is not affected at all. In three-dimensional combat, use the normal cone effects but the same number of creatures can be affected for every 5' band from the caster. (More possible feat options?)
Cylinder: Specify a line as large as the effect's diameter, affects everything beneath that line.
Line: Affects one creature per square out to the end of its range. Any square containing two or more allies is crowded, and you accidentally hit one ally in such squares.
Sphere: Effect/range, meh.
Shapeable: Instead of 10' cubes, shapeable spells affect 5' spaces. If three-dimensional combat is used, affect 5' squares.

So, is anyone still interested in this?
kadeity
10-27-06, 08:22 PM i tried something similar.
we were literally running a final fantasy campaign though.

we did the 2d thing for a while but it got old...so we tried for a more "final fantasy tactics" feel. which btw was really fun with a dry erase board that was made from a laminated DND miniatures grid.

alot of spells lose their effectiveness in the facing each other combat, and so do alot of the feats...

keep in mind that dnd doesnt have pheonix down :D

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Romulus LoneWolf 10-22-06, 10:31 PM	Ok, I mostly play online with friends over chat programs, making miniatures and tactical map-based combat useless to us. And I dislike depending on miniatures and maps to begin with. To be honest, I much prefer a style of combat based on turn-based computer RPGs, where the Party is on one side of the screen, the monsters on the other, and they all basically throw attacks at each other.. Now, one modification I wanted to make to such a system would be ranges.. Basically, instead of large maps, you've got a simple range system: Melee, Short, Middle and Long. Everyone starts at Short or Middle range, and you can close in on enemies using a Move maneuver, or move away from an opponent with a similar maneuver.. ...Well, it's just a basic idea so far. Any comments?
Darth Sephiroth 10-23-06, 02:39 AM	Well it would work, you'd have to be careful with abilities and spells and other things with Area of Effect. Also use marching order and use all 3 ranges, just modify them by where the attack comes from.
Wayside 10-23-06, 09:32 AM	A system like this can't really work out in D&D. To work D&D into a system like this would require a massive rules re-work. Any character who stands in the background is completely immune to melee enemies, and any enemy in the background is completely immune to melee characters. If you allow people to close on enemies who are at long range even though there are melee enemies in the way then you have to know their relation to eachother and it all just becomes way too difficult to deal with. Fun in the videogames, not so fun for D&D.
Millennium 10-23-06, 02:38 PM	It's certainly possible to play D&D without using miniatures, or even without maps. It was fairly common in 2e games -in fact, IIRC it was standard at that point- to play without even an abstraction of space: everything happened in the players' minds. However, 3e combat isn't well-suited to this as written: you'd be better off rewriting the combat system from scratch. The problem here is that too many of the actions and effects of 3e combat depend on a concrete notion of space, containing at least two dimensions (the map) and three is better (for flight). Your range system contains only one dimension, and this can cause problems. This all said, your system is still in the early stages of development. We'd really need to see more of it before making much of a judgment on how it's working. Some questions: How far can you move in one turn? You mention closing in on (or retreating from enemies): how many increments of your system can you do? How do you handle flanking? If you plan on just removing flanking completely, then how does a rogue get sneak attack bonuses? How do you plan to handle reach weapons? What about the different spell areas of effect?
rydi123 10-23-06, 06:12 PM	you could easily switch things around to an ff based system, but it wouldn't work out all that well imo, due to the rules of the game constantly referencing spacing and such. you could try something more like FF tactics instead (Heroscape terrain works wonders for this, as long as you like hexes). For something like that you would probably have to limit the movement actions/space moved though.
Thomar_of_Uointer 10-25-06, 11:49 AM	Actually, this idea has some merit and doesn't need too much change. What you do is change the two-dimensional grid to a one-dimensional line. Characters may move through the space of their opponents, but provoke three attacks of opportunity (typically one if the enemy doesn't have Combat Reflexes). Allied characters may occupy the same space. Flying characters only provoke AoO in the square they move out of, and you may choose to implement a two-dimensional grid to cover aerial combat. You could also have characters move "around" threatened spaces by moving at half speed, though this seems a bit redundant considering the way the Tumble skill works.. The only problem I see is that line effects will need a modification. As lightning bolt is the most typical effect of that range, you can change line effects to be more vertical, simply affecting all creatures in one square. Makes sense?
Balthanon 10-26-06, 10:14 AM	The only problem I see is that line effects will need a modification. As lightning bolt is the most typical effect of that range, you can change line effects to be more vertical, simply affecting all creatures in one square. Makes sense? Actually, it might be better to go with a choice of all creatures from one square/range or one creature from each square/range. That still gives a bit more of a tactical feel to the spell. I think it would probably be possible to do something like this, however, you would end up making a lot of rulings as the game progressed and things were encountered that weren't accounted for in the initial attempt. Discuss them and keep track of the final decision and you should have a fairly stable system.
Thomar_of_Uointer 10-27-06, 07:40 PM	I keep coming back to this idea. Maybe I'll write another 30-page document like my progressions. I know this is getting a little complicated, but it does solve more problems than it creates. You can move through spaces occupied by opponents, provoking attacks of opportunity as normal for leaving threatened spaces, but ending your movement in a space occupied by an opponent causes you to fall prone. You may choose to move around your opponents and not provoke attacks of opportunity, but doing so increases the feet of movement required to leave a threatened square by 5' per person threatening you. Tumbling works as normal. Thus, one man won't slow you down too much, but five will. Two-dimensional combat refers to combat in the air, underwater, or where terrain is elevated enough. Spaces are simply designated as granting cover, and how much movement is needed to move through them is based on the nature of the cover. Dense brush requires two spaces to move through, a barricade with a chokepoint requires one space. A trench grants cover if you're occupying the same space as it, a low wall does not. Ranged combat is fairly simple. If there's an opponent or cover closer to your target than you are, you suffer the cover penalties (soft for enemies, as cover for cover). In two-dimensional combat, This lets tougher back-row characters screen ranged attacks for mages and healers. It also gives me some cool ideas for feats... Okay, let's go through spell ranges systematically, they function a little differently with these rules. Personal, touch, close, medium, long, or specified: As normal. Rays: Same as ranged weapon. Spread: Pick a border between two spaces, effect emanates a distance equal to the spread radius in each direction. Cover counts as two spaces for spreads, total cover counts as three. For a two-dimensional grid including height, you select an intersection and determine the spread as normal. Burst: As spread, but can't pass anything granting total cover. Emanation: As burst, but continuous. Cone: A cone can affect one character in each 5' space per 5' from the effect's origin. Thus, you can affect one character 5' away, two characters 10' away, three characters 15' away, and so on. If an ally is in a square, he counts as two characters for this purpose, and if only one more character could be affected he is not affected at all. In three-dimensional combat, use the normal cone effects but the same number of creatures can be affected for every 5' band from the caster. (More possible feat options?) Cylinder: Specify a line as large as the effect's diameter, affects everything beneath that line. Line: Affects one creature per square out to the end of its range. Any square containing two or more allies is crowded, and you accidentally hit one ally in such squares. Sphere: Effect/range, meh. Shapeable: Instead of 10' cubes, shapeable spells affect 5' spaces. If three-dimensional combat is used, affect 5' squares. So, is anyone still interested in this?
kadeity 10-27-06, 08:22 PM	i tried something similar. we were literally running a final fantasy campaign though. we did the 2d thing for a while but it got old...so we tried for a more "final fantasy tactics" feel. which btw was really fun with a dry erase board that was made from a laminated DND miniatures grid. alot of spells lose their effectiveness in the facing each other combat, and so do alot of the feats... keep in mind that dnd doesnt have pheonix down :D