All times are UTC





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Developing an RPG
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2013 3:07 am 
Offline
Power User

Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 4:25 am
Posts: 1778
Location: Earth
YouTD Score: 5
Yo,

So I've had dis here idea for some time now, like years, of making my own RPG. It's going to be an ARPG with a couple distinct changes from the traditional ARPG genre. The idea only concretely materialized recently (last year) when after playing Diablo 3 which most of us ARPG fans can agree was a flop - I realized that D3 actually had some very interesting positive takeaways despite failing epically. It wasn't so much D3 alone, but all the ARPGs that had been coming out around its time taken together - PoE, TL2, & D3. I'd also just gotten into playing Brother Laz's median XL d2 mod which I'd heard for years was an amazing mod of D2 (it's absolutely incredible, if there was a multiplayer where I could trade, duel, troll, party up, etc, I'd be playing it still). All these RPGs, especially D3, allowed me to analyze the genre in more detail than ever before and decide on what I believed needed to happen for the genre to prosper and go to a new level in the future.

So obviously I'm not actually making (programming blabla) an RPG. I'm designing it, and in precise detail. I plan on submitting drafts once most of the work's done to major companies, Blizzard for one. This is just kind of a side hobby I have (no I'm not an idealistic hobo, I make bank working 50+ hours a week at Bank of America so sit down son). Everything from story line, itemization, customization, every passive and active skill of every hero, level system, skill system, stat system, combat system and builds (every skill I design is created with the desired combat system in mind and with promoting some kind of build).

I dunno if anyone here gives a shit about all the above but what the heck I typed it, too late now. So I'll be sharing some ideas I have for my RPG, details as well, and would love feedback or just your own ideas. In particular I want to focus on what an ARPG should feel and play like. What traditions should be kept because they've tried and true and worked so well in the past and which ones can be improved on or completely removed because they've stagnated and become detrimental to the genre. This is why I say "ARPG" loosely. The pacing of the game will definitely be ARPG, but I don't want a spam-fest late game where you live or die by RNG. I don't seek to emulate an existing genre with my RPG. I am looking to take the best from the various genres while staying closest to ARPG because that is the genre I love the most. Frankly I don't give a shit for MMOs. They are gay as bananas. I do love bananas but I can't eat a WoW CD now can I?

So that being said, please share any and all of your ideas. I'm currently well into development, but I'm also many, many hours away from anything approaching a completed first draft. I'm a perfectionist by nature though, so any draft material I share is typically well thought out and finalized in terms of my thought process. I won't whimsically change the idea because I've put the time and rational into making it the way it is.

So, I'm kind of tired and lazy right now but I'll share some of the stuff I've got so far:


----


In no particular order, I'll list some very general stuff and why I think the way I do. Then I'll go very briefly into specifics which is actually my bread and butter. I love the specifics. I'm just gonna give you guys 1 skill as an example and how I envision the skill system to work at the bottom for now.

1. Some end game content should REQUIRE team play. Yeah, I don't think you should be able to solo the game. 95%+ of it, sure. But there should be a few areas that require teamplay because let's face it, coordinating with other players is harder than soloing. Don't get me wrong, a good team should make it easier, more fun, and more rewarded, but being a good team is more challenging than soloing everything. You have more to get right and more that can go wrong. If this is not the case, the RPG is badly designed. Not only should the hardest areas be the hardest, they should require the most challenging level of gameplay from the player's end.

2. Two difficulties (like a normal, nightmare, and hell in D2, but only 2). Normal and some other one, like Hell lol. Why? Aren't these difficulties an archaic element of the past? Why not just more content? Frankly, I wouldn't mind, but having 1 additional difficulty has its own benefits without getting too much into rote the way a 3rd difficulty does or god forbid, a 4th (D3). First, casual players can beat the entire game and know the full story without shitting their pants at the difficulty. Don't get me wrong, I want the game to be challenging from a very early level, but casuals and RPG noobs shouldn't be "banned" from beating the game. This is the compromise. There's also something to be said of redoing the game in a harder mode with new features. Yes, there would be new skills on some monsters and bosses and new monsters. New items of course. There'd be some endgame content as well but the casual player would be able to get through the storyline on the first difficulty and be at peace.

Also, this might sound wrong or demeaning, but I don't think ARPGs are about storyline and a long, drawn out game. I don't think mine should be either. If I want a good story, I'll read a bloody book. Only an illiterate imbecile or lazy asswagon will look for stories in video games. It doesn't even make sense. It takes 100x longer to finish an RPG and learn da story than to read a book. Christ Zeus man. That being said my story is gonna be kick ass. I ball hard. But why make the story the driving element? That's not cool. I want an RPG about gameplay, combat mechanics, itemization, customization, and ambiance/atmosphere. To me a good story is just an extension of ambiance. It makes you more attracted to the game and to your success in the game and more devastated if you fail. I want to feel attached to my character. And there's better ways to do that (itemization & customization, kickass mechanics) than a good story. But like I said my story's gonna be kickass. I ball hard. So 2 difficulties, that way I'm not so focused on creating a story all the time. The story's done and then I'm still creating all the other features for difficulty #2, not worrying about making the story continue, fit in, artificially dragging it out. I'm not gay like that. Lastly, frankly, what player really wants to spend weeks to learn the story? It's kinda frustrating at some point. Just wanna know what happens -.- But honestly I'm okay with just 1 difficulty as long as the storyline doesn't get in the way of gameplay and force compromises.

3. Acts? Yeah sure acts or no acts. I don't think it's archaic but I also don't think it's particularly value-adding. Waypoints are cool though. Obviously value-adding, they keep up the ARPG pacing I love so much. They might detract from the "big world" image, but if you do the job building the world correctly, the terrain, areas, that image will exist. The waypoints just keep it fresh instead of forcing you to haul ass everytime.

4. First time boss kills drop better loot. This coming from D3 that I liked. I think D2 had it too. I know for Baal, act 5 boss, this was the case on first time solo kills. It's great for casuals, although quite frankly I don't really care about casuals and it's not why I like this idea. First, it adds excitement. It allows the game to be slightly harder in the first few acts or areas or what have you so that it's somewhat challenging even for experienced players because the added quality of items provides a crutch for players which can be balanced by slightly harder difficulty level. Finally it encourages progressing over farming. I'm all for farming as a core ARPG concept, but I say reward the bold player, especially on hardcore, who wants to race ahead.

5. No quest experience. Same thing. No artificial benefits to farmers. I hate artificial fixes in general. If your system is flawed, don't try to artificially create benefits. I think it slows down the natural flow of ARPGs. In D3 a buttrizzle of people just farmed NM Azmo to 60 on hardcore when they realized hell was hard wawawawawawawa. Seriously? Quest exp? That means your regular exp system sucks and you needed to patch it with quest exp bahahaha noob.

6. No permanent bonuses from side quests. SAME THING AS ABOVE. No artificial fixes. Maximum flexibility should be promoted. Very few quests are required to progress. If you're bold and competitive, go ahead, get the initial loot boost from your boss kill, learn the story line faster, and just progress faster in all facets (experience, rewards, etc). However, to encourage side questing, both challenge and reward should be high for them. They should be interesting and add depth to the story. Side quests should add substance, not clutter. Players who want to farm for items or exp before moving on should find side quests are a better option than main quests and fun & challenging.

7. No durability on gear. Durability is meaningless. In general, avoid meaningless additions that overcomplicate the game. Everything should serve a purpose and be justifiable. There are WAY better ideas for currency sinks than durability lol. Currency sinks should be fun, like gambling, crafting, enchanting gear, customizing, etc.

8. Long skill CDs should be avoided but spammable defensive skills should also be avoided. Most CDs should be kept below 20 seconds. In general, cast times should be nonexistent or under 1 second to avoid slowing down combat. Some CDs like a powerful minion can have a slightly longer CD like 30 seconds to avoid noob tactics like spam resummoning, but ultimately anything longer than 20 is just slowing down combat. If the skill is too strong to merit a lower CD, it wasn't thought out with the correct mechanics in mind.

I got a bunch of other stuff but that's all for now. Just a taste ya hurd dawg? Below is just one example of a skill, a very brief intro of the skill system I envision, and a very brief intro to the classes (heroes) I'll have.


---


Heroes & Skills:

Heroes: I intentionally have only gone with just 4 heroes. I might add 1 but that's all I plan on. Why? I like flexibility. Let's take a foray: Path of Exile, for those of you who don't know, has no real classes. All the classes can do identical builds on the skill tree and use identical skills. The only difference between classes is where they start on the passive skill tree, which becomes nonexistent late game. That's what I call retarded. That's customization gone wrong. Also the passive skill tree is huge and extremely unfriendly to noobs. PoE is a very stellar and ground-breaking ARPG, don't get me wrong. It just fails epically at user-friendliness. You can't use your intuitition to make builds; you have to painstakingly analyze the game. That ruins it for a huge portion of players, myself include it even though I consider myself an analytical person!

Back to my decision for 4 heroes. Flexibility. But not PoE-like. So my classes all have unique skills and start slightly different in their stats (yes I have stats too, won't go into these into detail for now). My classes are basically like d2 or d3 classes. Completely unique. Except they have a lot more skills than the 24 in D3 (forget runes, those were a joke) and 25-30 that D2 had for each hero...

Skills: I will have separate points for passives and actives, first and foremost, because investing into a passive only on leveling is retarded and boring. That's one thing D3 got right. A separate passive skill tree (even though D3 doesn't even have builds lol!). Yes, I will have builds duh. 1 active point per level. 1 passive point every other level. Currently looking at 90 levels, 1-40 in first difficulty, 41-75 in 2nd, so you're looking at about level 75 by the end of 2nd difficulty. End game content levels 75-85. Levels 81-90 are really slow like levels 91-99 in D2, especially levels 85-90 when you out-level end the hardest endgame stuff.

That makes 45 passives and 90 active skill points (remember, no permanent bonuses from quests). That's considerably more than D2, so that gives more options for players in terms of skill customization, especially because of how I've set up my skill system. To accommodate for this greater pool of skill points, I've kept heroes to 4 and added a lot of skills to them so players actually have a great variety of builds they can play for 1 hero, and a great variety of experimental builds. Builds that may or may not work, probably will depending on gear. I want a skill tree that is intuitive but crazy. I want a player to have constant aha! moments when looking at it to realize they can do X Y Z and make a build. So for each hero I will have 35-40 of just ACTIVE skills and another 30-40 passives. Currently I'm set on new skills every 5 levels: 1, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25. So all skills will be available to use at level 25. I want players to focus playing and experimenting with a variety of skills early on, not grinding to a high level just to try a skill and realize they don't like. Boring.

So level 25 is the last time you get a new active skill unlocked. Passives are a bit slower at every 6 levels, 1, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and you can only level a passive once every 2 levels. To control how fast you can level some skills to avoid really powerful builds early on, I've created requirements for some skills, for the most part very logical stat requirements, gear requirements, or synergy skill requirements. Nothing artificial like a level requirement before leveling a skill beyond a certain point. Passives can only be leveled every 2 levels because you only gain a new passive every 2 levels.

Why 1 passive every other point? This gets right into the meat of my skill system. Each skill can only be leveled to 10, not 20 like D2 or 15 like Torchlight 2. For passives, you get to 10 (I'm toying with some higher level passives going up to 15), and you're done. That's it. You don't have any other customization you can do with the passive except to level it because god damn it's just a passive. Don't worry my passives ball hard as they are.

But for actives, I've taken the best of both worlds from D3 elements and traditional D2 elements. I loved how you could try every skill for free in D3. I think that would be fantastic with builds because the real commitment isn't putting a point into a skill and then realizing shit I don't want it, the real commitment is putting points into multiple skills and creating a build that works. Realizing halfway through you messed up because you didn't think it through is perfectly fine with me. Stupidity should be punished.

But curiosity? No way. I should be able to try any skill and not be punished if I don't like it. The D2 system is archaic and horrible for ARPGs in this respect. The D3 system of no builds is even more horrendous because it just destroys customization lmfao. So we need compromise. Also, synergies are cool and all in D2 but can inadvertently limit builds by forcing players into synergistic builds.

After much pontificating, I've come to the conclusion that synergies are a type of artificial fix. They're a fix for real depth of customization in the skill tree. How do I accomplish this depth? (So far I've used only a handful of synergies in over 50 skills I already have developed.) My skill system works similar to how D3 would work if you actually had to invest in skills. Think of each D3 rune of a skill as a skill path. You can invest points into the skill path and that will modify/improve the base skill. The base skill is free and automatically unlocked at the required level, 1, 5, 10, or whatever it is. This allows the testing I love in D3 and keeps customization by forcing point investment in skill paths if you want the skill to viable as you level. It's much better customization than D2 because it allows for multiple iterations of active skills. To prevent abuse of using all the free skills simultaneously, you can only use 1 "base skill" without an invested point into a skill path on your end or +skill path from an item. The base skill is there mostly for testing new skills, not for abusing, which is why you can only use 1 such skill at a time. Every other skill you use requires you to invest at least one hard point into one of its skill paths to use or have an item equipped that gives the bonus. Yes, items will give skill bonuses. No idea why ARPGs didn't take this from D2. It's one of the cooler customization features, directly connecting skills with items.

I also added an extra layer which I think is the jewel in my skill system. I set the max level of any skill path of a skill to 10, so you can max 2x faster than D2 which I always thought was a bit boring, BUT... I allow you to invest in MULTIPLE skill paths for the same skill. A few skills I've created even have 5 skill paths. Can you investment 50 points into a skill? Wouldn't that be boring and overpowered and just imba/impossible to balance?

No you can't investment 50 points into the skills I've made with 5 skill paths and yes it would be OP, imba, hard to balance, and just stupid. I've decided the maximum you can investment into a skill is 30 points, so 3 skill paths, and this only for a few skills. The vast majority of skills will allow you to invest in up to 2 skill paths, and many will be viable in some shape or form, likely as a support skill, if you invest 10 or less points into just 1 skill path.

How do I prevent you from investing into all skill paths? Some skill paths are simply mutually exclusive. Pick one and you can't pick the other. It changes the skill. Others would just be idiotic to invest in even though you can. It's an inefficient point allocation and if you're stupid enough to do it, go ahead invest more than 30 points. I promote learning not limiting for retards. Otherwise they'll never unretard themselves.

So all this being said, if you're confused, lol, I'll share some visuals in later posts to show a skill map of how it works precisely. How are 2 skill paths different than just 20 points in one D2 skill? You choose which 2 are most important to you. You choose to tweak your skill just the way you want it. I often wondered playing an RPG, what if the skill I was using was like this or that, i.e., slightly different. What if I could do X with it? Well skills paths promote that like D3 runes do, but they're actually meaningful (D3 runes were mostly crap, it's like a child was randomly creating effects for skills). All my skill paths are highly build-oriented and NATURALLY synergistic with a certain build without having the retarded hard synergies D2 had (artificial connections to create artificial builds). Makes sense? So, an example of a skill. First, quick intro to the 4 heroes and their stats:

Heroes: Shade, Bard, Golem, Seer.

The stats in this game are:

Wisdom- increased spirit pool, spirit regeneration, and spell critical damage
Finesse- increased hit chance and critical hit chance
Strength- increased physical resistance and critical damage
Endurance- increased elemental resistances and life regeneration

Not gonna go into detail now but spirit is basically mana just sounds cooler and I ball hard. No +life stat because it ruins any build as has been proven in very ARPG that's done it and I'm not gonna spend hours needlessly trying to make it work when so many others have failed. I really use the stats as core drivers however. Your stat build may well be skill-build oriented when you realize your skill are giving you a lack of X, let's say elemental resistance, so you put points into Endurance, or your skill builds require more Strength, so you put into Strength.

For each hero, I create a percentage system for the stats. It's a very loose way for categorizing strengths and weaknesses as a starting reference for beginners. 100% means they have very high specialty in the stat, 0% means none. So a hero with 0% Wisdom will have shit spells. Here's the breakdown. Notice that every hero totals to 300% one way or another.

Shade: 80% wisdom, 100% finesse, 60% strength, 60% endurance
Bard: 75% each stat
Golem: 80% wisdom, 20% finesse, 100% strength, 100% endurance
Seer: 100% wisdom, 80% finesse, 40% strength, 80% endurance

If I do create a 5th hero it will be a retarded hero who has low wisdom :P. Call him Nubz.

Each hero has 3 "skill trees" which categorize skills by type. I put them there more for ambiance and aesthetics than for any real purpose as you don't need to invest into a skill path to get the skill path of a high level skill (it's not a strict tree/chain). Again, this would lower build flexibility and force players down some builds because of feasibility of how nearby skills are on a tree system. So I use the phrase skill "tree" very loosely. It's just an organizational structure to help me think of what type of skills/builds/concepts each hero has.

Well, without further ado here's an active skill from the Shade, who is my most fleshed out hero so far. Shade's trees are shadow masteries, shadow magic, and dark arts. Here's a Shadow Mastery skill, Lethal Lunge, available at level 1:

Lethal Lunge: lunges forward to target, increased damage by 10%.
Skill paths:
1.Poisonous Strike- Requires a dagger or claw. Increases range at which the Shade can lunge per level and converts a % of damage dealt on hit to poison damage. +% damage converted to poison damage per level, adds a flat damage bonus per level.

2. Dual Strike- Requires you to dual wield. Increases lunging range per level and attacks with both weapons at once, adding their damage together. The attack speed of the slower weapon is used, +% to physical damage per level.

3. Reverse Lunge- Requires a ranged weapon. Moves backwards on hit, cursing the ground you lunge over for 3 seconds, treating it as cursed ground. All traps and minions that hit attack enemies on cursed ground will slow them. Increases lunging range per level. duration of cursed ground, and the effectiveness of the slow.

4. Evasive Maneuvers- gain a % of your movement speed evasion while attacking or standing still for 3 seconds after lunging. Also, gain a small static evasion bonus for 3 seconds. Increases the percentage of movement speed evasion gained and the static evasion bonus per level.


Those are the 4 paths. 1 and 2 are mutually exclusive. Putting points into either one will exclude you from investing in the other. Just to go over my thought process: Lethal Strike in general is a good maneuverability skill as it allows you to quickly cover ground. It's like an offensive teleport. Helps you close in fast and get to the monster you want to hit.

Poisonous strike is geared towards poison builds because of the damage conversion. You can play a melee character and stack +poison damage passives, gear, etc with the skill. Maybe you only put 1 point into poisonous strike for the poison effect, which does damage overtime. It's negligible late game but some skills of the Shade gain big bonuses when you have multiple poison durations stacking on a creep. Neat huhuhuhuh?

Dual Strike is self-explanatory. I make the dmg bonus only physical damage because it's already a very powerful skill as it hits with 2 weapons simultaneously. It is however single target, which is a big minus in ARPGs. AoE's important. You can simply use dual strike as a 1 pointer to close with enemies if you're a dual wielder.

Reverse Lunge is also self-explanatory and very flexible. Obviously a great survival skill for ranged builds, it also provides a natural synergy with trap and summoning builds (the Shade has traps and summons yes).

Evasive Manuevers is for people who decide to use this skill as their main attack and want that extra pop so they put 20 points into the skill, 10 into their attack dual strike or poisonous strike, and 10 into evasive. Also, although the duration of the bonuses is only 3 seconds, this would probably be worth putting just 1 point into if you're using the skill as a 1 pointer for maneuverability. FYI, I've decided that your hero will have a +5% evasion chance while moving, so if Evasive Manuevers increases your evasion chance while attacking/standing by 50% of your movement speed evasion bonus, that's 2.5% (as an example). This base bonus can be improved by some skills, items, passives, blabla.

---

That's just 1 skill and at level 1! I don't think it's complicating, which I also try to avoid. It just gives you a variety of choice that supports multiple builds. Obviously every skill won't be supporting every build in some way that would be ludicrous. But I try to represent at least 2 distinctly different pathways you can take with a skill through its skill paths. Thus, they are called skill paths. That's all for now you queers. I'll post sometime this month with more probably. If you're interested, please comment, blabla.

_________________
<Nubz> i wanna have my own farm
<Nubz> where i can grow all my own foods
<Nubz> and have my own animals
<@mOck_> you just want that stuff to lure little children over with a petting zoo
<@mOck_> i know your tactic


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Developing an RPG
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2013 8:31 am 
Offline
YouTD Admin
YouTD Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 10:51 pm
Posts: 1675
Location: Texas/New Jersey(Azeroth)
YouTD Score: 168
I noticed you took my ideas and branded them as your own...AGAIN.

But in a surprise turn of events I read it all and
NubzTheGay wrote:
Only an illiterate imbecile or lazy asswagon will look for stories in video games.

fuck you.



Also any imbecilic ideas I can think of will be promptly given to you.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Developing an RPG
PostPosted: Fri Aug 09, 2013 1:33 am 
Offline
Power User

Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 4:25 am
Posts: 1778
Location: Earth
YouTD Score: 5
MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. I HAVE MY OWN SUBFORUM NOW AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


AHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA

*bans everyone*

So anyway I have a lot of stuff already done but I want to post it preferably in a neat and orderly fashion which my stuff isn't in currently lol. I might wait until I'm fully done with one heroes skills before posting in a nice big easy to read chart.

Probably ain't none of y'all bitches gonna read but fuck it if someone does read that would be legit pit ya hurd?

So if you have any ideas at all, any suggestions/opinions about how you think an RPG should run, please share. Sharing is caring.

Going forward I'll be posting different content in different topics so it will be a lot better organized than my shitty ass first post lol.

And thanks Vajidan for the subforum. Majidan's real name is Vajidan guys. Cuz he's always suckin dat vaj.

_________________
<Nubz> i wanna have my own farm
<Nubz> where i can grow all my own foods
<Nubz> and have my own animals
<@mOck_> you just want that stuff to lure little children over with a petting zoo
<@mOck_> i know your tactic


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Developing an RPG
PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2017 2:55 pm 
Offline
New User

Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2017 2:53 pm
Posts: 1
Nubz wrote:
Yo,

So I've had dis here idea for some time now, like years, of making my own RPG. It's going to be an ARPG with a couple distinct changes from the traditional ARPG genre. The idea only concretely materialized recently (last year) when after playing Diablo 3 which most of us ARPG fans can agree was a flop - I realized that D3 actually had some very interesting positive takeaways despite failing epically. It wasn't so much D3 alone, but all the ARPGs that had been coming out around its time taken together - PoE, TL2, & D3. I'd also just gotten into playing Brother Laz's median XL d2 mod which I'd heard for years was an amazing mod of D2 (it's absolutely incredible, if there was a multiplayer where I could trade, duel, troll, party up, etc, I'd be playing it still). All these RPGs, especially D3, allowed me to analyze the genre in more detail than ever before and decide on what I believed needed to happen for the genre to prosper and go to a new level in the future.

So obviously I'm not actually making (programming blabla) an RPG. I'm designing it, and in precise detail. I plan on submitting drafts once most of the work's done to major companies, Blizzard for one. This is just kind of a side hobby I have (no I'm not an idealistic hobo, I make bank working 50+ hours a week at Bank of America so sit down son). Everything from story line, itemization, customization, every passive and active skill of every hero, level system, skill system, stat system, combat system and builds (every skill I design is created with the desired combat system in mind and with promoting some kind of build).

I dunno if anyone here gives a shit about all the above but what the heck I typed it, too late now. So I'll be sharing some ideas I have for my RPG, details as well, and would love feedback or just your own ideas. In particular I want to focus on what an ARPG should feel and play like. What traditions should be kept because they've tried and true and worked so well in the past and which ones can be improved on or completely removed because they've stagnated and become detrimental to the genre. This is why I say "ARPG" loosely. The pacing of the game will definitely be ARPG, but I don't want a spam-fest late game where you live or die by RNG. I don't seek to emulate an existing genre with my RPG. I am looking to take the best from the various genres while staying closest to ARPG because that is the genre I love the most. Frankly I don't give a shit for MMOs. They are gay as bananas. I do love bananas but I can't eat a WoW CD now can I?

So that being said, please share any and all of your ideas. I'm currently well into development, but I'm also many, many hours away from anything approaching a completed first draft. I'm a perfectionist by nature though, so any draft material I share is typically well thought out and finalized in terms of my thought process. I won't whimsically change the idea because I've put the time and rational into making it the way it is.

So, I'm kind of tired and lazy right now but I'll share some of the stuff I've got so far:


----


In no particular order, I'll list some very general stuff and why I think the way I do. Then I'll go very briefly into specifics which is actually my bread and butter. I love the specifics. I'm just gonna give you guys 1 skill as an example and how I envision the skill system to work at the bottom for now.

1. Some end game content should REQUIRE team play. Yeah, I don't think you should be able to solo the game. 95%+ of it, sure. But there should be a few areas that require teamplay because let's face it, coordinating with other players is harder than soloing. Don't get me wrong, a good team should make it easier, more fun, and more rewarded, but being a good team is more challenging than soloing everything. You have more to get right and more that can go wrong. If this is not the case, the RPG is badly designed. Not only should the hardest areas be the hardest, they should require the most challenging level of gameplay from the player's end.

2. Two difficulties (like a normal, nightmare, and hell in D2, but only 2). Normal and some other one, like Hell lol. Why? Aren't these difficulties an archaic element of the past? Why not just more content? Frankly, I wouldn't mind, but having 1 additional difficulty has its own benefits without getting too much into rote the way a 3rd difficulty does or god forbid, a 4th (D3). First, casual players can beat the entire game and know the full story without shitting their pants at the difficulty. Don't get me wrong, I want the game to be challenging from a very early level, but casuals and RPG noobs shouldn't be "banned" from beating the game. This is the compromise. There's also something to be said of redoing the game in a harder mode with new features. Yes, there would be new skills on some monsters and bosses and new monsters. New items of course. There'd be some endgame content as well but the casual player would be able to get through the storyline on the first difficulty and be at peace.

Also, this might sound wrong or demeaning, but I don't think ARPGs are about storyline and a long, drawn out game. I don't think mine should be either. If I want a good story, I'll read a bloody book. Only an illiterate imbecile or lazy asswagon will look for stories in video games. It doesn't even make sense. It takes 100x longer to finish an RPG and learn da story than to read a book. Christ Zeus man. That being said my story is gonna be kick ass. I ball hard. But why make the story the driving element? That's not cool. I want an RPG about gameplay, combat mechanics, itemization, customization, and ambiance/atmosphere. To me a good story is just an extension of ambiance. It makes you more attracted to the game and to your success in the game and more devastated if you fail. I want to feel attached to my character. And there's better ways to do that (itemization & customization, kickass mechanics) than a good story. But like I said my story's gonna be kickass. I ball hard. So 2 difficulties, that way I'm not so focused on creating a story all the time. The story's done and then I'm still creating all the other features for difficulty #2, not worrying about making the story continue, fit in, artificially dragging it out. I'm not gay like that. Lastly, frankly, what player really wants to spend weeks to learn the story? It's kinda frustrating at some point. Just wanna know what happens -.- But honestly I'm okay with just 1 difficulty as long as the storyline doesn't get in the way of gameplay and force compromises.

3. Acts? Yeah sure acts or no acts. I don't think it's archaic but I also don't think it's particularly value-adding. Waypoints are cool though. Obviously value-adding, they keep up the ARPG pacing I love so much. They might detract from the "big world" image, but if you do the job building the world correctly, the terrain, areas, that image will exist. The waypoints just keep it fresh instead of forcing you to haul ass everytime.

4. First time boss kills drop better loot. This coming from D3 that I liked. I think D2 had it too. I know for Baal, act 5 boss, this was the case on first time solo kills. It's great for casuals, although quite frankly I don't really care about casuals and it's not why I like this idea. First, it adds excitement. It allows the game to be slightly harder in the first few acts or areas or what have you so that it's somewhat challenging even for experienced players because the added quality of items provides a crutch for players which can be balanced by slightly harder difficulty level. Finally it encourages progressing over farming. I'm all for farming as a core ARPG concept, but I say reward the bold player, especially on hardcore, who wants to race ahead.

5. No quest experience. Same thing. No artificial benefits to farmers. I hate artificial fixes in general. If your system is flawed, don't try to artificially create benefits. I think it slows down the natural flow of ARPGs. In D3 a buttrizzle of people just farmed NM Azmo to 60 on hardcore when they realized hell was hard wawawawawawawa. Seriously? Quest exp? That means your regular exp system sucks and you needed to patch it with quest exp bahahaha noob.

6. No permanent bonuses from side quests. SAME THING AS ABOVE. No artificial fixes. Maximum flexibility should be promoted. Very few quests are required to progress. If you're bold and competitive, go ahead, get the initial loot boost from your boss kill, learn the story line faster, and just progress faster in all facets (experience, rewards, etc). However, to encourage side questing, both challenge and reward should be high for them. They should be interesting and add depth to the story. Side quests should add substance, not clutter. Players who want to farm for items or exp before moving on should find side quests are a better option than main quests and fun & challenging.

7. No durability on gear. Durability is meaningless. In general, avoid meaningless additions that overcomplicate the game. Everything should serve a purpose and be justifiable. There are WAY better ideas for currency sinks than durability lol. Currency sinks should be fun, like gambling, crafting, enchanting gear, customizing, etc.

8. Long skill CDs should be avoided but spammable defensive skills should also be avoided. Most CDs should be kept below 20 seconds. In general, cast times should be nonexistent or under 1 second to avoid slowing down combat. Some CDs like a powerful minion can have a slightly longer CD like 30 seconds to avoid noob tactics like spam resummoning, but ultimately anything longer than 20 is just slowing down combat. If the skill is too strong to merit a lower CD, it wasn't thought out with the correct mechanics in mind.

I got a bunch of other stuff but that's all for now. Just a taste ya hurd dawg? Below is just one example of a skill, a very brief intro of the skill system I envision, and a very brief intro to the classes (heroes) I'll have.


---


Heroes & Skills:

Heroes: I intentionally have only gone with just 4 heroes. I might add 1 but that's all I plan on. Why? I like flexibility. Let's take a foray: Path of Exile, for those of you who don't know, has no real classes. All the classes can do identical builds on the skill tree and use identical skills. The only difference between classes is where they start on the passive skill tree, which becomes nonexistent late game. That's what I call retarded. That's customization gone wrong. Also the passive skill tree is huge and extremely unfriendly to noobs. PoE is a very stellar and ground-breaking ARPG, don't get me wrong. It just fails epically at user-friendliness. You can't use your intuitition to make builds; you have to painstakingly analyze the game. That ruins it for a huge portion of players, myself include it even though I consider myself an analytical person!

Back to my decision for 4 heroes. Flexibility. But not PoE-like. So my classes all have unique skills and start slightly different in their stats (yes I have stats too, won't go into these into detail for now). My classes are basically like d2 or d3 classes. Completely unique. Except they have a lot more skills than the 24 in D3 (forget runes, those were a joke) and 25-30 that D2 had for each hero...

Skills: I will have separate points for passives and actives, first and foremost, because investing into a passive only on leveling is retarded and boring. That's one thing D3 got right. A separate passive skill tree (even though D3 doesn't even have builds lol!). Yes, I will have builds duh. 1 active point per level. 1 passive point every other level. Currently looking at 90 levels, 1-40 in first difficulty, 41-75 in 2nd, so you're looking at about level 75 by the end of 2nd difficulty. End game content levels 75-85. Levels 81-90 are really slow like levels 91-99 in D2, especially levels 85-90 when you out-level end the hardest endgame stuff.

That makes 45 passives and 90 active skill points (remember, no permanent bonuses from quests). That's considerably more than D2, so that gives more options for players in terms of skill customization, especially because of how I've set up my skill system. To accommodate for this greater pool of skill points, I've kept heroes to 4 and added a lot of skills to them so players actually have a great variety of builds they can play for 1 hero, and a great variety of experimental builds. Builds that may or may not work, probably will depending on gear. I want a skill tree that is intuitive but crazy. I want a player to have constant aha! moments when looking at it to realize they can do X Y Z and make a build. So for each hero I will have 35-40 of just ACTIVE skills and another 30-40 passives. Currently I'm set on new skills every 5 levels: 1, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25. So all skills will be available to use at level 25. I want players to focus playing and experimenting with a variety of skills early on, not grinding to a high level just to try a skill and realize they don't like. Boring.

So level 25 is the last time you get a new active skill unlocked. Passives are a bit slower at every 6 levels, 1, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and you can only level a passive once every 2 levels. To control how fast you can level some skills to avoid really powerful builds early on, I've created requirements for some skills, for the most part very logical stat requirements, gear requirements, or synergy skill requirements. Nothing artificial like a level requirement before leveling a skill beyond a certain point. Passives can only be leveled every 2 levels because you only gain a new passive every 2 levels.

Why 1 passive every other point? This gets right into the meat of my skill system. Each skill can only be leveled to 10, not 20 like D2 or 15 like Torchlight 2. For passives, you get to 10 (I'm toying with some higher level passives going up to 15), and you're done. That's it. You don't have any other customization you can do with the passive except to level it because god damn it's just a passive. Don't worry my passives ball hard as they are.

But for actives, I've taken the best of both worlds from D3 elements and traditional D2 elements. I loved how you could try every skill for free in D3. I think that would be fantastic with builds because the real commitment isn't putting a point into a skill and then realizing shit I don't want it, the real commitment is putting points into multiple skills and creating a build that works. Realizing halfway through you messed up because you didn't think it through is perfectly fine with me. Stupidity should be punished.

But curiosity? No way. I should be able to try any skill and not be punished if I don't like it. The D2 system is archaic and horrible for ARPGs in this respect. The D3 system of no builds is even more horrendous because it just destroys customization lmfao. So we need compromise. Also, synergies are cool and all in D2 but can inadvertently limit builds by forcing players into synergistic builds.

After much pontificating, I've come to the conclusion that synergies are a type of artificial fix. They're a fix for real depth of customization in the skill tree. How do I accomplish this depth? (So far I've used only a handful of synergies in over 50 skills I already have developed.) My skill system works similar to how D3 would work if you actually had to invest in skills. Think of each D3 rune of a skill as a skill path. You can invest points into the skill path and that will modify/improve the base skill. The base skill is free and automatically unlocked at the required level, 1, 5, 10, or whatever it is. This allows the testing I love in D3 and keeps customization by forcing point investment in skill paths if you want the skill to viable as you level. It's much better customization than D2 because it allows for multiple iterations of active skills. To prevent abuse of using all the free skills simultaneously, you can only use 1 "base skill" without an invested point into a skill path on your end or +skill path from an item. The base skill is there mostly for testing new skills, not for abusing, which is why you can only use 1 such skill at a time. Every other skill you use requires you to invest at least one hard point into one of its skill paths to use or have an item equipped that gives the bonus. Yes, items will give skill bonuses. No idea why ARPGs didn't take this from D2. It's one of the cooler customization features, directly connecting skills with items.

I also added an extra layer which I think is the jewel in my skill system. I set the max level of any skill path of a skill to 10, so you can max 2x faster than D2 which I always thought was a bit boring, BUT... I allow you to invest in MULTIPLE skill paths for the same skill. A few skills I've created even have 5 skill paths. Can you investment 50 points into a skill? Wouldn't that be boring and overpowered and just imba/impossible to balance?

No you can't investment 50 points into the skills I've made with 5 skill paths and yes it would be OP, imba, hard to balance, and just stupid. I've decided the maximum you can investment into a skill is 30 points, so 3 skill paths, and this only for a few skills. The vast majority of skills will allow you to invest in up to 2 skill paths, and many will be viable in some shape or form, likely as a support skill, if you invest 10 or less points into just 1 skill path.

How do I prevent you from investing into all skill paths? Some skill paths are simply mutually exclusive. Pick one and you can't pick the other. It changes the skill. Others would just be idiotic to invest in even though you can. It's an inefficient point allocation and if you're stupid enough to do it, go ahead invest more than 30 points. I promote learning not limiting for retards. Otherwise they'll never unretard themselves.

So all this being said, if you're confused, lol, I'll share some visuals in later posts to show a skill map of how it works precisely. How are 2 skill paths different than just 20 points in one D2 skill? You choose which 2 are most important to you. You choose to tweak your skill just the way you want it. I often wondered playing an RPG, what if the skill I was using was like this or that, i.e., slightly different. What if I could do X with it? Well skills paths promote that like D3 runes do, but they're actually meaningful (D3 runes were mostly crap, it's like a child was randomly creating effects for skills). All my skill paths are highly build-oriented and NATURALLY synergistic with a certain build without having the retarded hard synergies D2 had (artificial connections to create artificial builds). Makes sense? So, an example of a skill. First, quick intro to the 4 heroes and their stats:

Heroes: Shade, Bard, Golem, Seer.

The stats in this game are:

Wisdom- increased spirit pool, spirit regeneration, and spell critical damage
Finesse- increased hit chance and critical hit chance
Strength- increased physical resistance and critical damage
Endurance- increased elemental resistances and life regeneration

Not gonna go into detail now but spirit is basically mana just sounds cooler and I ball hard. No +life stat because it ruins any build as has been proven in very ARPG that's done it and I'm not gonna spend hours needlessly trying to make it work when so many others have failed. I really use the stats as core drivers however. Your stat build may well be skill-build oriented when you realize your skill are giving you a lack of X, let's say elemental resistance, so you put points into Endurance, or your skill builds require more Strength, so you put into Strength.

For each hero, I create a percentage system for the stats. It's a very loose way for categorizing strengths and weaknesses as a starting reference for beginners. 100% means they have very high specialty in the stat, 0% means none. So a hero with 0% Wisdom will have shit spells. Here's the breakdown. Notice that every hero totals to 300% one way or another.

Shade: 80% wisdom, 100% finesse, 60% strength, 60% endurance
Bard: 75% each stat
Golem: 80% wisdom, 20% finesse, 100% strength, 100% endurance
Seer: 100% wisdom, 80% finesse, 40% strength, 80% endurance

If I do create a 5th hero it will be a retarded hero who has low wisdom :P. Call him Nubz.

Each hero has 3 "skill trees" which categorize skills by type. I put them there more for ambiance and aesthetics than for any real purpose as you don't need to invest into a skill path to get the skill path of a high level skill (it's not a strict tree/chain). Again, this would lower build flexibility and force players down some builds because of feasibility of how nearby skills are on a tree system. So I use the phrase skill "tree" very loosely. It's just an organizational structure to help me think of what type of skills/builds/concepts each hero has.

Well, without further ado here's an active skill from the Shade, who is my most fleshed out hero so far. Shade's trees are shadow masteries, shadow magic, and dark arts. Here's a Shadow Mastery skill, Lethal Lunge, available at level 1:

Lethal Lunge: lunges forward to target, increased damage by 10%.
Skill paths:
1.Poisonous Strike- Requires a dagger or claw. Increases range at which the Shade can lunge per level and converts a % of damage dealt on hit to poison damage. +% damage converted to poison damage per level, adds a flat damage bonus per level.

2. Dual Strike- Requires you to dual wield. Increases lunging range per level and attacks with both weapons at once, adding their damage together. The attack speed of the slower weapon is used, +% to physical damage per level.

3. Reverse Lunge- Requires a ranged weapon. Moves backwards on hit, cursing the ground you lunge over for 3 seconds, treating it as cursed ground. All traps and minions that hit attack enemies on cursed ground will slow them. Increases lunging range per level. duration of cursed ground, and the effectiveness of the slow.

4. Evasive Maneuvers- gain a % of your movement speed evasion while attacking or standing still for 3 seconds after lunging. Also, gain a small static evasion bonus for 3 seconds. Increases the percentage of movement speed evasion gained and the static evasion bonus per level.


Those are the 4 paths. 1 and 2 are mutually exclusive. Putting points into either one will exclude you from investing in the other. Just to go over my thought process: Lethal Strike in general is a good maneuverability skill as it allows you to quickly cover ground. It's like an offensive teleport. Helps you close in fast and get to the monster you want to hit.

Poisonous strike is geared towards poison builds because of the damage conversion. You can play a melee character and stack +poison damage passives, gear, etc with the skill. Maybe you only put 1 point into poisonous strike for the poison effect, which does damage overtime. It's negligible late game but some skills of the Shade gain big bonuses when you have multiple poison durations stacking on a creep. Neat huhuhuhuh?

Dual Strike is self-explanatory. I make the dmg bonus only physical damage because it's already a very powerful skill as it hits with 2 weapons simultaneously. It is however single target, which is a big minus in ARPGs. AoE's important. You can simply use dual strike as a 1 pointer to close with enemies if you're a dual wielder.

Reverse Lunge is also self-explanatory and very flexible. Obviously a great survival skill for ranged builds, it also provides a natural synergy paris taxi Airport with trap and summoning builds (the Shade has traps and summons yes).

Evasive Manuevers is for people who decide to use this skill as their main attack and want that extra pop so they put 20 points into the skill, 10 into their attack dual strike or poisonous strike, and 10 into evasive. Also, although the duration of the bonuses is only 3 seconds, this would probably be worth putting just 1 point into if you're using the skill as a 1 pointer for maneuverability. FYI, I've decided that your hero will have a +5% evasion chance while moving, so if Evasive Manuevers increases your evasion chance while attacking/standing by 50% of your movement speed evasion bonus, that's 2.5% (as an example). This base bonus can be improved by some skills, items, passives, blabla.

---

That's just 1 skill and at level 1! I don't think it's complicating, which I also try to avoid. It just gives you a variety of choice that supports multiple builds. Obviously every skill won't be supporting every build in some way that would be ludicrous. But I try to represent at least 2 distinctly different pathways you can take with a skill through its skill paths. Thus, they are called skill paths. That's all for now you queers. I'll post sometime this month with more probably. If you're interested, please comment, blabla.

Hi, it seems complicated


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group