Page 1 of 1

Battle mechanics like "trip", "disarm", "grapple", etc.

PostPosted: Sat May 05, 2018 11:59 pm
by Atoch
Glad to hear that the gamedevelopment is progressing well.

One of the reason I imagine that pure fighters with a lot of feats (especially strength-fighter) are the Kings of 1v1 battles (that's not the focus of the game, so there shouldn't be a balancing issue), are the really cool (or rather "really, really, really cool") battle mechanics like "trip", "disarm", "grapple", etc..
Were you already able to play around with it and test it?
How useful are they in group-fights? How often did you use them in a fight or, asked in a different way, how useful should they be? (and can the AI already use them?)

Re: Battle mechanics like "trip", "disarm", "grapple", etc.

PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2018 4:47 am
by BlueSalamander
Hello Atoch, thank you for your post. I did test each combat manoeuvre after implementing them, but I have not yet had the chance to see how effective they will be in group battles. I expect that Trip, Bull Rush and Grapple will be very useful.

So far, for my work on the AI, I've been focusing on Fighter versus Wizard and Wizard versus Wizard. In a 1v1 combat against a Wizard, it's very unlikely that the Fighter will win. Because the Wizard can just cast Acid Fog on the Fighter, making the Fighter a sitting duck for the next few rounds without a saving throw. Now, if the Fighter wins initiative and manages to start a grapple with the Wizard, and the Wizard cannot cast Stilled spells, then the Fighter will win.

Yes, the AI can use combat manoeuvres, and it will. Grapple, Disarm, Sunder, Trip and Feint are pretty straightforward for the AI. Whirlwind attack is more involved as it requires a comparison with the expected outcome of a Full Attack. Bull Rush / Slide / Pull / Swap (all part of 'Bull Rush') are a bit complicated because you have to look for dangerous squares and make sure that the change in positions will be beneficial. The AI can do it already but it needs a bit more testing and improvement. Spellcasters also have access to a form of Bull Rush through Gust of Wind spells; these will require specific AI.

Concerning extra feats for some classes, here is what I'm considering:

Champion: bonus feats at levels 2,6,10,14,18
Storm Warrior: bonus feats at levels 2,6,10,14,18
Ranger: bonus feats at levels 5,11,15,17,20
Paladin: bonus feats at levels 7,10,13,17
Bishop: bonus feats at levels 3,7,12,17
Rogue: bonus feats at levels 12,16,20
Mage Knight: bonus feat at level 1
Bard: bonus feat at level 1

I'm not completely sure whether it's a good idea to add those bonus feats, so if anyone has any comments on that, I will be very interested. Thank you!

Re: Battle mechanics like "trip", "disarm", "grapple", etc.

PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 10:59 pm
by Atoch
I guess, the hybrid classes are quite strong and effective against monster-type adversaries, but are lacking against specialists, not least because of feats like "trip", "disarm", "grapple", etc.. Therefore the defensive properties of these feats seem to be a life-saving necessity for those (melee-)hybrid- classes - so the additional feats are very welcomed and needed.
I, personally, would still prefer specialists for my "ideal" 4-person-party. But with the additional feats, hybrid classes get a lot more attractive - especially as additions for larger party-sizes.

The Ranger-class is a special case. I (probably) wouldn't choose battle-mechanic-feats for him even if he got those additional feats. So there would be a need for another reasoning to justify them - but I still incline to concede some additional feats to the Ranger.

Alternatively: Armour- or weapon-enchantments could provide (the defensive properties of) those feats quite cheaply - but I prefer just getting additional feats.

Re: Battle mechanics like "trip", "disarm", "grapple", etc.

PostPosted: Wed Jul 11, 2018 3:38 am
by BlueSalamander
Thank you! Sounds good to me, so I'm going to add those extra feats to the game. More choices at level-up for those classes will make the game better, I think.