Hey, folks. I'm just wondering if anyone has either created/attempted to create a non-random combat system, or ever encountered such a system in their IF wanderings.

By non-random I mean fore-going the use of the Rand function. 0 probabilities come into play. The comparison of statistics, however, is still present. This means that combat outcomes would always be the same for each static set of statistics. (Note that combat descriptions could still be randomized.) Combat such as this seems to be closer to what the IF community would deem acceptable to this story medium.

How could one go about making a non-random combat system complex enough without probability...?

This means that combat outcomes would always be the same for each static set of statistics.

Doesn't that rather take out the fun from the game - and void the whole point.

You'd have it basically doing the same thing, with perhaps a slight variation in text descriptions.

Do you mean a full system, or one which you would only use for certain rooms?
I'd suggest just writing it out as an event in the storyline in such a situation.

If you want a final outcome the same (ie one always wins) then you can have that as a flag in your normal (random) battle code. Meaning one is (basically) invinsible.

Not necessarily; it could be that "if the player has sword, and the opponent has been drugged, then the player will win; otherwise the opponent wins."

Doesn't that rather take out the fun from the game - and void the whole point.

You'd have it basically doing the same thing, with perhaps a slight variation in text descriptions.

This was my impulse reaction when first introduced to the idea. But then...

Not necessarily; it could be that "if the player has sword, and the opponent has been drugged, then the player will win; otherwise the opponent wins."

...this was the concluding line of thought. You could take what Freak mentioned and increase it - have many factors with many different outcomes. The player could win/lose/get wounded/draw/call truce, or win with a veritable matrix of repercussions.

The question: how to go about systematizing this, and making it complex enough to be a satisfying 'puzzle' for each new encounter.

That seems pretty boring, and isn't really a combat system as much as a checks and balances type system of, do you have this item, you can beat foe this, this different item, beat foe this other way, otherwise lose. Half the puzzle, 2 out of 3 pieces... draw, etc.

You could do a combat system based soley off of set(or progressing)statistics like strength, dexterity, offensive/defensive stature, character balance, alignment, weapon stats, or anything else you may want to factor in. But without the ocassional random dice roll factored in, things would either get very bland(mechanically that is) or become a loot fest constantly trying to find better items after you hit the eventual wall limiting skill or stat progression.

Yes, I agree with you, ITID. That is exactly what would happen in an RPG. But in a 'classical' IF game, I think that each instance of combat could and should be treated as a complex puzzle. Almost like combination locks that have more than one combination, and more than one result for each individual success or failure. Have you or anyone else who has played IF seen something like this before?

Honestly, the only scenarios off the top off my head I can think of that remind me specifically of this are old Sierra/Lucas Arts Adventure games like Monkey Island and such. The only problem I have with an idea personally on how to institute it in a game would be losing, because in combat typically losing equals death and restarting.

I suppose you could have combat in a sort of choose your own adventure style. Here's an idea of how it could play out from a players view.

"Haha, then raise your sword and face me!", the grizzled Norseman bellows in a thundering voice, as he swiftly raises his battle axe and begins advancing upon you. Draw your sword? Y/N

>Y
(alternatively you could leave out the choice, and loop some sort of, "what are you too cowardly to fight me? I said raise your sword!" indefinitely untill the player realizes to >draw sword)

As soon as you have your sword in grasp, the red-haired viking snarls, feinting left with weapon raised over his head. What do you want to do?

1. Dodge left.
2. Dodge right.
3. Swing your sword at his foot.
4. Lunge your sword at his belly.
5. Swing your sword at his axe.
6. Etc, etc.
(Alternatively here, using the clear command in ASL, you could reiterate the event with a counter ticking down 5,4,3,2,1... then executing a script for not reacting fast enough).

>1

You bravely duck and manuever to the left, narrowly avoiding the cleaving attack of the viking as his axe burrows into the ground at your side. What do you want to do?


1. Dodge left.
2. Dodge right.
3. Swing your sword at his foot.
4. Lunge your sword at his belly.
5. Swing your sword at his axe.
6. Etc, etc.
(Here I was going to have a bunch of different choices for this aspect of the scenario, but as mentioned before it's author choice to perhaps have the player need to figure out the proper verbage and such, but I also left the same choices to show that you could perhaps have the same manuevers possible each step of the scenario and require the player to figure out the right order. Next I'll illustrate both an example of first the right choice ending the scenario and a wrong choice which could loop back to the beginning, or decrease a score or amount of chances to solve the scenario, or whatever you want.)

==============
POSITIVE SCENARIO
==============

>5

You heave your sword at the vikings massive axe as he toils to remove it from it's place firmly embedded in the soil and land a successful hit breaking the weapon in two. Now a useless handle occupies the embarassed Norseman's hands and the deadly axe head is left useless stuck in the ground.

"Please take mercy upon me, clearly a warrior of your caliber would spare the life of a foolish old sailor." The viking begs of you. "Please take this *OMG-LEWT* and continue upon your journey."

You got the *OMG-LEWT*!11oneleven.

==============
NEGATIVE SCENARIO
==============

>3

You swing your sword at the vikings foot as he toils to lift his stuck axe, and just before your blade strikes, he dislodges his weapon and parries your blow leaving you off balanced. Spotting your weakness, the rotund northerner slams into with his massive belly knocking you to the ground.

You quickly scramble to your feet but realize you shouldn't allow yourself to make that mistake again.

(You could then loop back into the viking attacking the same way from the beginning, letting the player fight again make the right choices up untill this point and then try a better option when the blade gets stuck, or you could continue along a scripted fight, deduct a point from the player, and judge his overall winning of the fight based on some factor of that.)


I hope that is a good example of what I was saying and all of that all of my jabbering wasn't too hard to understand. I don't know if that's exactly what you meant, but as I said you don't have to give choices, just leave it to the player to figure out the verbage, or prompt for an action every step of the way even having a counter to institute a feeling of urgency. Maybe if I have some time tonight I'll make a demo or three of how a fight like this could go down and try to post on it. Either way, I hope the example promotes more discussion of the topic.

I like that idea ITID..

I'm going to invest some time into that and see how easy it would be.
I'd personally prefer that occasionally than a true combat system.

That's a pretty cool idea, ITID.

One note is that the 'depth' of the right choice path creates an exponential amount of descriptions. That's not a bad thing if you like writing. (If you don't like writing, I guess you shouldn't be making text games.) For instance, if the initial choices number five, and each choice generates five new child choices, to a depth of 5, the number of descriptions is 5 * 5 * 5 * 5 * 5, or 5^5. That's 3125 descriptions. Obviously not going to happen.

This is like a combination lock (00000-55555).

...like combination locks that have more than one combination

To remedy, and you may already have had this in mind, we could make the 'true' choice paths or combinations have unique descriptions, while the false ones have the same/similar descriptions.

	     1	2	3	4	5
	
Desc.	F	F	T	F	F
Desc.	T	T	F	F	F
Desc.	F	T	F	F	T
Desc.	F	F	F	F	T
Desc.	F	F	T	F	F 

The player would have to navigate through the T's, avoiding the F's. Too many errors and the player dies. This leaves us with a few combinations that work: 31253, 31553, 32253, and 32553. Each of those correct combinations could result in a different win, with different repercussions.

Yeah.. One general description for a failure (which may change slightly.. So say if you "swing the sword at his head" or "swing for his foot" - then a reply would be "you swing for his foot but..." or "you swing the sword for his head but...").. Which will either loop around - or kill you off.

Or a failure may come up with random failure messages:
"You try it, but get thrown back by your training master. 'AGAIN!' he cries."
"Your training master hits you to the ground. 'Pittiful!'"
"Your training master picks you up and shakes you, finally letting you go. 'NO!"
And a random selection can be made from those...

And a successfull text which would be set because it is a set-progression of the combat.
You can, of course, vary the test if you wish - as above, random text can also be selected:
> attack master
1.
2.
3.
> 2
You dive at the master and...
(various can be chosen)
"Chop his arm off.. 'Good!' he says, as his arm re-grows."
"Chop his leg off... 'OW!' he falls to the floor with only one leg.. But he soon re-grows another and stands."
"Slice his side open. 'Very nice' He congratulates you before guzzling down some more healing potion to heal his wound."