A more "realistic approach" to taking damage and dealing damage in a video game, + Internal Damage? Read more. Options

[ValkyrieDeath]

Recently, I've been thinking of a more "realistic approach" to take damage in an RPG Maker game, or any role-playing game, whilst we're at it.

In an RPG game, when an enemy attacks you and your HP goes down and that's it. Over time, your HP depletes, and becomes more minimal. But still, nothing happens. Battle still goes on. However, if in real life, you took a fatal blow (hit, stabbed or maybe shot) depending on where you've been hit, there will be consequences. For example, say you got shot multiple times in the leg, you will be limping on one leg, and your movement speed would slow down severely. If you took a blow to the arm, you won't be able to use that arm so well as the other, and the power you can deal to an enemy may not be as great. And over time, as you take more damage, your overall strength and movement speed becomes much lower.

Now, if something like this was added into an RPG game, I think it would add to the difficulty factor a bit more, as well as gameplay and a pinch of tactics. Enemies can target a certain part of your body, and depending on how much damage was taken to that part of the body, affects the overall gameplay of the character (this also works the same way with you dealing damage to the enemy). As well as choosing which part of the body to attack, you can choose which hand/leg or whatever to attack with, and depending on the weapon equipped the damage varies.

Now onto internal damage. I think for those who have heard of 'Blood Damage' in Final Fantasy XIII-2 this is pretty much the same idea. Every so often, you can do a bit of 'internal damage', which decreases the maximum HP of your party/enemies have for the rest of the battle, and party members can only be healed up to the current amount of maximum HP.

So these are my thoughts, I've tried explaining them the best I've can. If you're confused of my thoughts, I will try to elaborate on them a bit more. And sorry that the structure of it all is all over the place.

So what are your thoughts on this? Discuss. c:

[Essenceblade]

While the realistic approach to damage is interesting, you have to remember the fact that not every player wants to be hit in the leg and then have their movement speed decreased. I'm not saying this is a bad thing, but If I was playing persay, and then I'm hit in the leg in the middle of a forest where the monsters are stronger than me, my movement speed will be slowed down, and it'll take longer to get through and out overall, and the same if I take any more damage to be honest--not to mention that if I'm hit in the arm, my overall damage will be lower, making it even harder to get through. The idea seems pretty good, but in a casual rpg, this may not be the best idea. If the RPG GENRE, perhaps was something like that of a horror, or thriller or something along those lines, this idea would fit perfectly, as those genres focus more-so on gruel and guts.

I've not always been a fan of the "Shoot in the head, 1 shot" idea, but that's just me, It is realistic but I've always believed in the "Slash, and XX damage" idea. Though, I've made and seen in games where weapons like Guns, when they critical they do around half your hp or bring you to HP critical (or even a chance it does anywhere from 40 - 80% of your max hp).

I think it'll just add a bit over the lines of what a player has to worry about, which is both a good and bad thing, but if the game focuses heavily on battle tactics already, such as Sages or Mages using magic and healing, or overdrives or a 'stagger' system, for example, it's just too much to worry about. Unless the status can actually be healed with just a spell (which kind of strips the word 'realistically' from the whole idea, anyway.) but again, that's just my opinion.

I think if you used this idea along with the internal damage system, in a tactical battle system, much like Fire Emblem, this'd be a cool idea actually. As the battle isn't constantly focused on one character and their turn bar isn't "charging up" continuously.

Edit: By the way, the internal damage system works both ways or nay? I like the idea, but I would hate if only the player could do the internal damage, as much as I like advantage, I also want challenge. I was kinda hitched about FF13's stagger system. While I loved it, and the battle system at that, if a monster could stagger you, it would make the game more interesting, needless to say.

This post has been edited by Essenceblade: Jan 24 2012, 02:13 PM

[Shaddow]

I actually really like this idea, it was used in fallout3 and later games, when you went to heal you had to decide, was it more important to heal your health or did you want to keep your arms and legs stable? It provides a lot of tactics, but it has to be used in moderation or a lot of healing needs to be available in standard rpgs as this can majorly make the game annoying.

I also really like the idea of internal damage and lowering maximum hp, as long as it's only for the fight. Or if it's not only for the fight then it should only lower a small amount, major jumps like that with no way to undo it would be crazy.

another thought on the internal damage system is that it heals slowly over time. That way it doesn't have to be low nor does it need to be able to be healed quickly.

anyways these are just my thoughts, a rather good idea.

[Oceans Dream]

In this case, you have to consider how the mechanics of the battle system and the map layout/healing/and all will work. I don't think it's a bad idea depending on how it's used (I guess a lot of ideas depend more on how they're implemented rather than just the idea itself), but it has to be done with some care.

For example, it could likely more annoy the character or set them back than have it be a legit challenge. Like, if a Dragon Quest turn based battle system were used, it could probably just be random what target the enemy hits, and say, 2 head shots from enemies could possibly kill you without anything you could do about it. It'd have to have some more complex mechanics than ATTACK, SPELL, ITEM, RUN.

It could also be simply like status effects, and I have seen this done in other RM games as well. Bleeding condition, having skills that lower speed or lower mind until you apply the right item to it (Bandage for bleeding, Leg Brace for restoring speed, Head Gauze for restoring mind). In this case, it'd really be just status effects/debuffs redefined. Being able to target your healing item to a specific point would then be more useful.

For the actual deadly few hits and any enemy (including yourself) is down, perhaps a more player skill/reaction based system would work. Doesn't have to be a first person shooter for that really, there's other options. But yeah, you'd have to be able to select where to hit the enemy (It's possible to have different weapons just do damage to different parts so one can do 3 damage total and 1 damage to arms, while another can do 5 damage to legs only). Also, then you'd have players going really for the most efficient way to kill them. Yes you can disable them from attacking if you hit their arms, but wouldn't 2 headshots easily just get rid of them and save your ammo? (If ammo is a factor)

Then there's the effect on the player character. The enemies usually outnumber you by a lot, so while an individual enemy might not be able to attack you for a bit if you hit their arms, if there's 4 more of them then the player doesn't reaaally see as much of a benefit to them as it would if the reverse happens. The enemies could easily take advantage of the lone player if they're handicapped because of their attacks. It doesn't have to be a lone player, but again a lot of factors can go into something like this. Plus, you'd have to think of how to make encounters more difficult (add more enemies? enemies have body armor? a robot?) and everything.

If you did something like permanently removing an arm if you get hit too much. Well... either you'd have a very unforgiving game, or you'd have to be able to have lots of other characters on standby to replace them since you wouldn't be able to get much use of them then! Or perhaps some roguelike type of thing.

I dunno I think I was going somewhere with this but I just typed up a bunch of incoherent thoughts. Oh well.

This post has been edited by Oceans Dream: Jan 24 2012, 05:24 PM

[Turkwise]

One game that completely does away with HP is Dwarf Fortress, which models every creature in the game, down to the nervous system and blood. Of course, this is easier to achieve in a game environment rendered in ASCII or simple tilesets. Any injury can occur, from minor bruising and scratches, to dismemberment and internal bleeding. Creatures (including humans, elves, dwarves, etc) can succumb to pain and collapse, bleed to death, or simply take an arrow to the...head and die.

This is a model of combat that is more suited to the rogue-like genre, where death, or losing a limb, is permanent. For a story-focused game like most RPGs are, compromises must be made...something between HP you can heal and bleeding to death internally, and that can easily result in a health model that is more annoying than engaging.

[Shaddow]

I'd suggest removing the head shot option all together, or if you like it then have it do a guaranteed critical hit but not instant death, but have a much smaller chance to actually hit, like only 35% or some such.

A good game to look at this for an example is Front Mission. Body, R Arm, L Arm, and legs. targeting each has it's own benefit.

[bulmabriefs144]

How about a compromise?

Wound Arm/Leg as a status for some attacks.

Also, for more realism, make it so all attacks are defined by call event (connect it to a switch), and have a random variable for damage. You can do this for all attacks. Then have an event where if the single damage is greater than 30%, add bleeding status (it's like poison). Then if that one attack does 60% damage, you can instant die or at least have a chance to.

This post has been edited by bulmabriefs144: Jan 24 2012, 07:39 PM

[Vexus]

Vargant story was the most in depth with this type of damaging into body parts.

After hitting someone for x times in the legs he lost 50% movement speed, when it happened to the left arm reduces accuracy and right arm damage not sure on the body and head as I never managed to test it 100%.

Apart of that each body part had different % of evasion to compensate the system.

[Kaust]

Others have touched on the healing issue already, but if you want to have a more realistic damage system you've gotta have more realistic consequences from the damage. You can't just slap on a bandage (or as Essenceblade said earlier, a spell) and have the problem done away with, its just too easy and defeats the point entirely.
I'd recommend a sort of slow self-healing system with certain healing items to facilitate it, much like real life, but this adds even greater difficulty to a system that others have shown to already be more difficult than your standard battle system. That's fine in itself, but again like Essenceblade asked, is it really suited genre?
RPG's are known for their length and if you take the above into consideration the game is just going to get harder and harder as your character gets weaker and weaker, and in this weakened state has to fight stronger enemies than the ones that originally wounded them.

But negativity aside, I do think it'll be a good idea if you can find the balance between reality and the very element escaping it that is a game.

[Essenceblade]

Thinking on the matter, I guess this would re add the efficiency of defend. I've hardly ever used it or really seen it as a main priority in battles, unless classes like paladin, for say could make good use of it. I guess defend would be seen as a constant optional choice. I think allowing the player to block while this system is in tact could really add some variance.

Maybe have a block chance system if you choose to have this in-depth damaging system. By that, I mean when a monster attacks and the game screen slows down momentarily to give the player a chance to input a command which blocks an otherwise attack that could cripple you. The chance to block would be a random key of selection and timing, you can't just hit say, W, the moment you see or hear the screen slow down. In this case you'd have to wait for your opponent to get his claws or whatever near you, then hit the key. Which then activates another key you need to input to actually block the attack. Which adds focus and attention to the system.


Of course. The speeds and reactions of the system are both random, different-keyed, and vary from speeds to the monster in question. Weaker enemies usually are quicker, but a successful block usually results in taking just a normal attacks worth of damage. As for monsters with a bit more power, and something for the party to actually fear, have this system process slower but make the point of impact a bit more precise. The damage from a successful block results in the damage worth of critical damage being taken.

You'd expect to be seeing and hearing things like wind slowing down, pings and those "special message tones", words like "Chance!" "Block!" "Failure..." "Miss!" "Good" "Perfect" "Counter!" ect.

And by counter, I mean, especially damage dealing classes (or an ability as a trait or off an item if you're not going for the class system approach) have the chance to take the risk of countering, instead of blocking. Now the system would go faster than the block system and results in you getting in another attack instead of just blocking a hit. As variance, this would result in a faster combination of keys needing to be pressed. For example:

Enemy attacks Herald!

*Screen slows down and initiates the block system along with the words "Block Chance" above Herald's head*

A circle appears around Herald, and the player waits for the creature to get at least the part of the body it is attacking with inside the circle.

Once it is in range, the player has less than 1.5 seconds to hit the button which displays on screen. Depending on the reaction time and timing, the damage is adjusted accordingly.

Branch:
If Herald fails to block the attack:

The message "Failure..." comes up on the screen with a slightly fail kind of sound, (those that you see on game shows when a player guesses incorrectly.)

Herald takes full damage and is crippled.
--------------------------------------------

If Herald blocks the attack successfully:

The message, depending on your timing can vary from "Bad!" to "Perfect!" along with a positive sound (Like a high tone that you get when you exit a lift, or when you pass a checkpoint in the classic sonic games.)

Herald takes damage according to the ranking they got on Great to Perfect.

Perfect would be minimal damage, and a 0% chance of the enemy criticaling during that attack.
Excellent would be low damage, and a 25% chance of the enemy criticaling during that attack.
Great would be medium damage, and a 40% chance of the enemy criticaling during that attack.
Bad would be full damage, and a 60-70% chance of the enemy criticaling during that attack, along with the chance to cripple the target.

Of course, this whole system in all is just a RANDOM percent chance to occur, and it may not even occur during a whole battle, it is just based on if the attack has a chance of crippling.

Now that idea seems kinda overkill, and may even be a bit complicated, but that's the only way I could think of which makes both the detailed damage system both good, balanced and intensifying, while restraining it from being annoying, and too common.

[Jens of Zanicuud]

In the RPG I'm working on I'm using a different damage system, which is slightly more realistic...
First of all, I've abolished SP. Techniques are free use and have different effects.

Damage is subdivided in Blood damage and Pain damage.
Ordinary attacks can cause both Pain and Blood damage, while skills can deal either one of them.

Blood damage, however, is not such easy to deal.
Only if Pain is too high (i.e.target almost motionless) then Blood damage can occurr.
A critical hit is possible only if Pain damage is too high and can result in a Haemorrhage.

Defend is a precious rook in the battle chessboard:
it halves Pain damage and prevent Blood damage

Evasion is rather high, but decreases linearly with Pain damage.

Items are replaced by painkillers, extremely efficient in healing Pain but with time-limited effect.
Blood can only be restored by transfusion...

I think it can be an idea...

Jens

[bulmabriefs144]

In the RPG I'm working on I'm using a different damage system, which is slightly more realistic...
First of all, I've abolished SP. Techniques are free use and have different effects.

Damage is subdivided in Blood damage and Pain damage.
Ordinary attacks can cause both Pain and Blood damage, while skills can deal either one of them.

Blood damage, however, is not such easy to deal.
Only if Pain is too high (i.e.target almost motionless) then Blood damage can occurr.
A critical hit is possible only if Pain damage is too high and can result in a Haemorrhage.

Defend is a precious rook in the battle chessboard:
it halves Pain damage and prevent Blood damage

Evasion is rather high, but decreases linearly with Pain damage.

Items are replaced by painkillers, extremely efficient in healing Pain but with time-limited effect.
Blood can only be restored by transfusion...

I think it can be an idea...

Jens

You could do Blood, Pain, and Exhaustion. Skills and attacks don't use anything, but each turn you do any skill, add one to Exhaustion. When Exhaustion is equal to your level (I assume you still have those), you can't use skills, and gain Exhaustion (exhaustion number reverts to zero at this point to decrease problems later). You have to rest or use some sort of item to reduce exhaustion.

I think your idea, and my idea would be good combined (though I don't fully understand your system), since realistically if someone shoots a massive hole in your arm, it doesn't matter if this isn't a vital point you die/pass out from the sudden shock.