Conquest of the Horde

Alrighty, I've been working on this for a couple of weeks now, and I think I've finally nailed down a pretty basic combat system.

If you read my previous post, you'd know that my main focus has been to try and balance the 'luck' aspect to combat next to a sense of skill and/or strategy.

The combat system I'll outline below addresses these, I hope. In test runs, the player that made good tactical choices - chose attack options that stacked up well against enemy defense options - routinely won. And when the strategic choices were about even, it was the luck factor that swung a battle.

I had luck be the impetus for comebacks, as well as the downfall of early leads. In short, luck has weight. As does strategy.

Obviously, my word is far from final, and this system is far from perfect. I offer it for consumption and testing and whatever you wish to do with it. That said, the system is ultimately limited in several ways.

1) It is strictly 1v1. While there are 'rounds', there are not 'turns' in the traditional sense. All actions happen mostly simultaneously. Turns only apply in who emotes first, and should be decided ahead of time. Two combatants. That's it. The mechanics, I do not think, work with more than two people.

2) It requires a moderator. As you will see below, there isn't really a way for two people to take care of it themselves.

The System

This system is based on the notion of Rock, Paper, Scissors. One's choice of attack is successful or not only when considering the others' defense. It works on a simple matrix, detailed below.

Attack Options: Finesse, Standard, Power
Defense Options: Finesse, Standard, Power

Finesse Attack deals 4 damage against Power Defense, 1 damage to Standard Defense, and 0 damage to Finesse Defense.
Power Attack deals 4 damage against Finesse Defense, 1 damage to Standard Defense, and 0 damage to Power Defense
Standard Attack deals 1 damage against Power and Finesse Defense, and 0 damage to Standard Defense

Round Start:
Opponent A and B whisper their Attack/Defense choices to the Mod.
Opponent A and B /roll 100. Higher roll deals 1 damage to lower, regardless of defenses.
Mod calculates damage on each side, lets opponents know.
A and B emote accordingly. In general that means A emotes attack, B emotes defense, counter attack.
When emoting is done, next round begins.

Notes:
- All attacks are considered simultaneous. That means that both can reach 0hp at the same time. Whomever dealt more damage that round wins. If damage is equal, roll off. Higher wins. That simple.
- In testing, 10hp worked out pretty well. Most fights lasted 3-4 rounds. And once people get the hang of it, rounds can go by QUICKLY. Longest part, I think, might be emoting. 15hp might be a good standard for a nice epic fight. 10 would work for tournies etc. where many fights need to finish. But I dunno. Mod should decided ahead of time.
- I believe it works for both melee and magical dueling. Have only tested magical, but I imagine the only difference is in the emotes.

That's all I have for now, please, post and tell me what you think. Find me IG if you wanna test it out- Marlowe, Daas, Thorin, or Mcgraw.


EXAMPLE:
For ease of showcasing, I'll use an example of the system in play. A is fighting B. Mod is Moderating.

Round 1
A whispers to Mod- Power Attack/Finesse Defense
B whispers to Mod- Standard Attack/Finesse Defense
A rolls 77, B rolls 34
Mod calculates the following- A chose Power to Finesse, 4 damage, B chose Standard to Finesse, 1 damage. A won the roll, 1 damage. Result: A takes 1 damage, B takes 5 damage.
A is at 9hp
B is at 5hp
A emotes attack
B emotes defense and counter
Round end.

Round 2
A whispers to Mod- Finesse/Finesse
B whispers to Mod- Power/Finesse
A rolls 56, B rolls 33
Mod calculates the following- A chose Finesse to Finess, 0 damage. B chose Finesse to Power, 4 damage. A won roll, 1 damage.
A is at 4hp
B is at 4hp
A emotes attack
Be emotes defense and counter
Round end.

And it goes on and on until someone dies. Make sense?

I have a question! Why would anybody choose standard attack, if it only deals 1 damage max, no matter what?
I understand that it's the only thing that affects Finesse & Power, but it still seems underpowered.

Delta Wrote:I have a question! Why would anybody choose standard attack, if it only deals 1 damage max, no matter what?
I understand that it's the only thing that affects Finesse & Power, but it still seems underpowered.

I actually tested this out and there's a strategy to it. I choose it because 1, no matter what I would do damage, and 2 because maybe my opponent wasn't anticipating it.

But my opponent was matching me technique for technique a good amount in the test lol.

To answer your question, I have Standard Attack and Defense the 'conservative' option. When I was running game theory in my head (and mind you I'm no great whiz at numbers), choosing Standard Attack and Standard Defense would almost always guarantee you dealt damage, and, all things being equal, you were relying on the 'luck' roll.

It is, in fact, a legitimate tactic to pick Finesse/Power attacks and consistently Standard Defense. That ensures that you are almost always only taking a single point of damage and, again, are relying on the luck roll to give you advantage.

Example:
Choice: Standard A/ Standard D
- 2/3 chance of taking 1 damage, 1/3 chance of taking 0 damage.
- 2/3 chance of dealing 1 damage, 1/3 chance of dealing 0 damage.
Result: Likely to take 1 damage, likely to deal 1 damage. Roll will determine if you or opponent takes an extra point of damage.

I am considering adding the rule that you cannot use Standard Defense more than once in a row- it has a clear advantage as a Defensive option since it has an effective ceiling on damage taken.

This is all, I think, fairly dry and uninteresting. But it is what I think about while at work...

I like this system. I find it's pretty complicated, of course, but it could work well if there is no other way to, uh... "settle a score".