In this video I run through the basics of the combat system for the upcoming UnderQuest. greygnome.com/ / greygnomegames / greygnomegames / greygnomegames
Hi, I like very much the sound of your ideas on combat for UnderQuest that you describe from about 16:00, i.e., making combat last, making it harder, scarier. I really like too your emphasizing the narrative part of the game. This will make the game stand out, and be more grueling and realistic. Something I would like to see - whether in this game or another - is standalone scenarios that can be strung together to meet an over-arching 'campaign' objective. Some games have campaigns that follow a linear progression, but I was thinking more about letting the player(s) choose their next scenario, and ultimately their own path through the scenario-scape. For example, there could be a bulletin board that offers varied time-limited contracts of work, with some contracts easier and less financially rewarding and taking little time in the game, but others more dangerous and more financially rewarding. Perhaps some contracts would suit different styles of play, or would suit certain character types or anyone with specific skills. I'd like to see the character being able to retreat from the dungeon (because of too much damage, for example), but limp on to pick another (easier) contract the next time. For me this would add another dimension to decision making: it's not just about surviving the current contract, but thinking what's best to do for the long term to meet the campaign goal. There could be a financial penalty for non-fulfillment of the contract, and the campaign goal might have to be limited somehow, for example to be done within one year of game time. The story line would need a lot of work to make it believable in context and to make it engaging. This is probably more detail than expected, and maybe tangential to your combat-orientated video! I haven't played any of your games yet, although I'm waiting for Tim Helm and Banners to arrive, but I love your art. Good luck with UnderQuest. I'll be watching your progress with interest.
I did something similar with my game Iron Helm. The base game is the 1st adventure and then you can buy adventure packs that simply have levels, so you can keep your hero, if you survived, and move onto a 2nd, 3rd, and ultimately 4th adventure, before retiring. I will be doing something similar with UnderQuest. I am also designing it in such a way that fans can create their own adventures. Thanks for the comment!
Looks good so far. I like how the AI attack system mixes things up a bit and does it simply. The player attack system looks like it will offer a nice bit of strategic flexibility as well. For the curious, here's the probability spread for the dice system: 0 (miss) = 16.67% 1 = 27.78% 2 = 22.22% 3 = 16.66% 4 = 11.12% 5 = 5.56% PS. I love the art on the hero card.
I love Iron Helm but damn this looks like a much cooler combat system. Especially since both enemies and weapons are more unique and special. I'd think spending energy after rolling dice would be the better option though, it gives the player more of a tactical choice to make. It'd make it easier but if they had less health or energy it could balance out.
Maybe a combat system combining dice + cards can works. With cards of Fatigue like Frost card Game. And dicey dungeons of PC/Android now works so funny and with the element to upgrade the equip. Sustract ideas from: dicey dungeons, Slay the spire, Frost. The 3 are digitals. A Big hug, Jason. I LOVE your games
Always a treat watching your videos. I'm so glad you stuck with the same mechanics with Tin Helm. It really is simpler and more familiar. Hit locations on both the enemies and the players are a great way to distribute damage dealt. Bravo again, Jason! Best of luck with UnderQuest! Can't wait for the next episode.
This is very cool! I had almost this exact same combat system idea about a year ago with the hit locations, enemy behavior, and weapon uses. I think it’s really cool to see another designer, especially a very established one, come to similar conclusions as me. Definitely makes me feel like my design ideas maybe aren’t complete garbage, lol.
I've never been a fan of altering dice rolls up or down after the fact, but the way you described the reason behind it I loved and now I love the mechanic for this game and its execution. It made so much sense, also the factor of your agility or whatever stat it was determines how far you can alter it. Love it. I guess the only other time I experienced it really was in Silver Tower where a magical demonic Hero could alter the reaction roll of the enemies. That is really bland and disconnected for me, too abstract. Yours is basic and makes clear sense. I wish I had the money to invest in more of your games and others that have come up that you have shared.
I'm the exact opposite. I design/come up with EVERYTHING else in my games and right when I get to combat I get stuck cause I get so many different ways of doing it its hard to find the right one that fits. That being said, I like this system here you have decided upon. I like the back and forth because it'll make it feel like a fight and not a one tap. Great work so far!
Only recently found your channel, so I haven't seen previous iterations on combat, and I'm also a relative newcomer to Iron Helm. So take all this with a grain of salt, but I'm going to attempt to reflect a bit on my experience playing Iron Helm to offer some thoughts. When playing Iron Helm I often find myself wishing that information had been distributed differently on the cards. For example, when table space is at a premium I want to stack up item cards a bit (especially if there are some items that I'm just carrying in the hopes I can sell them off). But I also want to be able to quickly add up my encumbrance, and that requires me to have a good portion of the cards showing. I sometimes wish that item stats like their encumbrance had been put left-most, rather than their cost (since I'm more often looking up their encumbrance than their cost, shops being rare and all). Or, maybe all stats could have been arranged in a vertical row down the left side of the card, to make it easy to add them up by scanning visually left-to-right across a stack, even if very little of the card is showing. Looking at this new combat design, I find myself hoping similarly that information will be displayed in a way that helps me remember the rules for how to count up, subtract, and modify dice rolls to come up with final values for combat -- ideally maybe it will be possible to position the dice I've rolled to one side of the Hero character Sheet or Enemy card, then scan left-to-right across the card to see how to modify it, or something like that? There doesn't have to be a dedicated "place dice here" spot on the cards/sheets, but maybe a "Secret" way of positioning things that players will implicitly pick up on that can help with the math & remembering the rules. That's complicated, and maybe I haven't described it well. And the combat system doesn't seem so complicated that it would be tough to remember after a while. But any "Scaffolding" you can offer to the player using visual organization would be appreciated, I think. I'm really just echoing your own thought that you need to know how combat works before you design items, and saying "I am also interested to see how you will design the layout of item/character cards to support the experience of reading the cards to work through combat."
Interesting ideas. I definitely will play around with the cards quite a bit this time as far as layout is concerned. Maybe if the item stats were in a row across the bottom and the text above them? In that way you could stack cards and just have the bottom 1/4 of the card revealed? Thanks for the practical ideas!
@@jasonglover6615 Putting the stats across the bottom could work -- along any edge, really. And it's not that the original Card layout for Iron Helm was very problematic, just that (for me, anyway) I'm more often looking for the burden/weight stat on items than the cost stat, and so I find myself wishing those had been switched, even if they stay near the middle of the card the way they are now. It wouldn't require moving all the stats to an edge, just prioritizing which one goes near the edge, based on what's most common in gameplay. (Finding a shop and buying an item is relatively rare, but hauling around items you may not need is more common, in my experience; so, burden/weight should win as the most easy-to-see-stat and take a position at the edge of the card). That's my thinking, anyway For the case of the new Combat design, maybe specifics like that aren't so relevant: presumably players aren't going to hide their hero card or hero sheet! But I guess the similar thing I have in mind is: some way of arranging info so that if I have my hero sheet/card, and my gear is positioned next to it, then if I slide an enemy card nearby, somehow the information I need to calculate combat all lines up neatly. For example, I'm not "jumping" with my eyes from the bottom-left of the character sheet, to the center of each of my gear cards, then to the top-right of the enemy. It's hard to explain this sort of qualitative thing -- thanks for taking a look at my best attempt ;)
I tried that, and boy did I want it to work. I am a sucker for the simple. The issue is the distribution of results. I didn't like how I had to spread out the hit locations due to the bell-curve of results. It felt forced. I may revisit it, but I spent a good hour trying to figure out how to distribute the locations. Now I feel like I should try again... lol
@@jasonglover6615 Well, I think it can work. Rolling a 2, 3, 4 and 10, 11, 12 is relatively rare with 2d6. Basically this emulates that a soft spot is harder to hit, that seems logical and thematic. Rolling a 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 is more common and hitting an exposed body part is more likely. The only problem I see is that the damage spread (high die minus low die, beautiful mechanic btw) for the soft spot is always low. To counteract this you could give a + 1d6 damage or a free followup hit or something along the line if the soft spot is hit. Maybe I didn't catch it, but what happens when you roll doubles in your system?
Hi, I like very much the sound of your ideas on combat for UnderQuest that you describe from about 16:00, i.e., making combat last, making it harder, scarier. I really like too your emphasizing the narrative part of the game. This will make the game stand out, and be more grueling and realistic.
Something I would like to see - whether in this game or another - is standalone scenarios that can be strung together to meet an over-arching 'campaign' objective. Some games have campaigns that follow a linear progression, but I was thinking more about letting the player(s) choose their next scenario, and ultimately their own path through the scenario-scape. For example, there could be a bulletin board that offers varied time-limited contracts of work, with some contracts easier and less financially rewarding and taking little time in the game, but others more dangerous and more financially rewarding. Perhaps some contracts would suit different styles of play, or would suit certain character types or anyone with specific skills. I'd like to see the character being able to retreat from the dungeon (because of too much damage, for example), but limp on to pick another (easier) contract the next time. For me this would add another dimension to decision making: it's not just about surviving the current contract, but thinking what's best to do for the long term to meet the campaign goal. There could be a financial penalty for non-fulfillment of the contract, and the campaign goal might have to be limited somehow, for example to be done within one year of game time. The story line would need a lot of work to make it believable in context and to make it engaging. This is probably more detail than expected, and maybe tangential to your combat-orientated video!
I haven't played any of your games yet, although I'm waiting for Tim Helm and Banners to arrive, but I love your art. Good luck with UnderQuest. I'll be watching your progress with interest.
I did something similar with my game Iron Helm. The base game is the 1st adventure and then you can buy adventure packs that simply have levels, so you can keep your hero, if you survived, and move onto a 2nd, 3rd, and ultimately 4th adventure, before retiring. I will be doing something similar with UnderQuest. I am also designing it in such a way that fans can create their own adventures. Thanks for the comment!
Looks good so far. I like how the AI attack system mixes things up a bit and does it simply. The player attack system looks like it will offer a nice bit of strategic flexibility as well.
For the curious, here's the probability spread for the dice system:
0 (miss) = 16.67%
1 = 27.78%
2 = 22.22%
3 = 16.66%
4 = 11.12%
5 = 5.56%
PS. I love the art on the hero card.
I love Iron Helm but damn this looks like a much cooler combat system. Especially since both enemies and weapons are more unique and special. I'd think spending energy after rolling dice would be the better option though, it gives the player more of a tactical choice to make. It'd make it easier but if they had less health or energy it could balance out.
Or it'll cost twice as much energy.
Maybe a combat system combining dice + cards can works.
With cards of Fatigue like Frost card Game.
And dicey dungeons of PC/Android now works so funny and with the element to upgrade the equip.
Sustract ideas from: dicey dungeons, Slay the spire, Frost. The 3 are digitals. A Big hug, Jason. I LOVE your games
Always a treat watching your videos. I'm so glad you stuck with the same mechanics with Tin Helm. It really is simpler and more familiar. Hit locations on both the enemies and the players are a great way to distribute damage dealt. Bravo again, Jason! Best of luck with UnderQuest! Can't wait for the next episode.
I enjoy this series, I also like when you review a game from a designer's perspective like you did in diary #2
This is very cool!
I had almost this exact same combat system idea about a year ago with the hit locations, enemy behavior, and weapon uses. I think it’s really cool to see another designer, especially a very established one, come to similar conclusions as me. Definitely makes me feel like my design ideas maybe aren’t complete garbage, lol.
Create your own character!!!!
I'm really excited for Under Quest.
Your game are incredible!
🖖🤓👍
I've never been a fan of altering dice rolls up or down after the fact, but the way you described the reason behind it I loved and now I love the mechanic for this game and its execution. It made so much sense, also the factor of your agility or whatever stat it was determines how far you can alter it. Love it.
I guess the only other time I experienced it really was in Silver Tower where a magical demonic Hero could alter the reaction roll of the enemies. That is really bland and disconnected for me, too abstract. Yours is basic and makes clear sense. I wish I had the money to invest in more of your games and others that have come up that you have shared.
This looks amazing!
I'm the exact opposite. I design/come up with EVERYTHING else in my games and right when I get to combat I get stuck cause I get so many different ways of doing it its hard to find the right one that fits. That being said, I like this system here you have decided upon. I like the back and forth because it'll make it feel like a fight and not a one tap. Great work so far!
Excited for this one . Can't wait what story line goes along with it
Excited to see/buy the final result 🎉
Only recently found your channel, so I haven't seen previous iterations on combat, and I'm also a relative newcomer to Iron Helm. So take all this with a grain of salt, but I'm going to attempt to reflect a bit on my experience playing Iron Helm to offer some thoughts.
When playing Iron Helm I often find myself wishing that information had been distributed differently on the cards. For example, when table space is at a premium I want to stack up item cards a bit (especially if there are some items that I'm just carrying in the hopes I can sell them off). But I also want to be able to quickly add up my encumbrance, and that requires me to have a good portion of the cards showing. I sometimes wish that item stats like their encumbrance had been put left-most, rather than their cost (since I'm more often looking up their encumbrance than their cost, shops being rare and all). Or, maybe all stats could have been arranged in a vertical row down the left side of the card, to make it easy to add them up by scanning visually left-to-right across a stack, even if very little of the card is showing.
Looking at this new combat design, I find myself hoping similarly that information will be displayed in a way that helps me remember the rules for how to count up, subtract, and modify dice rolls to come up with final values for combat -- ideally maybe it will be possible to position the dice I've rolled to one side of the Hero character Sheet or Enemy card, then scan left-to-right across the card to see how to modify it, or something like that? There doesn't have to be a dedicated "place dice here" spot on the cards/sheets, but maybe a "Secret" way of positioning things that players will implicitly pick up on that can help with the math & remembering the rules.
That's complicated, and maybe I haven't described it well. And the combat system doesn't seem so complicated that it would be tough to remember after a while. But any "Scaffolding" you can offer to the player using visual organization would be appreciated, I think. I'm really just echoing your own thought that you need to know how combat works before you design items, and saying "I am also interested to see how you will design the layout of item/character cards to support the experience of reading the cards to work through combat."
Interesting ideas. I definitely will play around with the cards quite a bit this time as far as layout is concerned. Maybe if the item stats were in a row across the bottom and the text above them? In that way you could stack cards and just have the bottom 1/4 of the card revealed? Thanks for the practical ideas!
@@jasonglover6615 Putting the stats across the bottom could work -- along any edge, really. And it's not that the original Card layout for Iron Helm was very problematic, just that (for me, anyway) I'm more often looking for the burden/weight stat on items than the cost stat, and so I find myself wishing those had been switched, even if they stay near the middle of the card the way they are now. It wouldn't require moving all the stats to an edge, just prioritizing which one goes near the edge, based on what's most common in gameplay. (Finding a shop and buying an item is relatively rare, but hauling around items you may not need is more common, in my experience; so, burden/weight should win as the most easy-to-see-stat and take a position at the edge of the card). That's my thinking, anyway
For the case of the new Combat design, maybe specifics like that aren't so relevant: presumably players aren't going to hide their hero card or hero sheet! But I guess the similar thing I have in mind is: some way of arranging info so that if I have my hero sheet/card, and my gear is positioned next to it, then if I slide an enemy card nearby, somehow the information I need to calculate combat all lines up neatly. For example, I'm not "jumping" with my eyes from the bottom-left of the character sheet, to the center of each of my gear cards, then to the top-right of the enemy.
It's hard to explain this sort of qualitative thing -- thanks for taking a look at my best attempt ;)
i'm just so very hyped for this D:
Inspiring video. First thing that came to mind is why use a D12 for hit location when you can use the sum of the 2d6?
I tried that, and boy did I want it to work. I am a sucker for the simple. The issue is the distribution of results. I didn't like how I had to spread out the hit locations due to the bell-curve of results. It felt forced. I may revisit it, but I spent a good hour trying to figure out how to distribute the locations. Now I feel like I should try again... lol
@@jasonglover6615 Well, I think it can work. Rolling a 2, 3, 4 and 10, 11, 12 is relatively rare with 2d6. Basically this emulates that a soft spot is harder to hit, that seems logical and thematic. Rolling a 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 is more common and hitting an exposed body part is more likely.
The only problem I see is that the damage spread (high die minus low die, beautiful mechanic btw) for the soft spot is always low. To counteract this you could give a + 1d6 damage or a free followup hit or something along the line if the soft spot is hit.
Maybe I didn't catch it, but what happens when you roll doubles in your system?