Tales of the Rampant Coyote
Adventures in Indie Gaming!


(  RSS Feed! | Games! | Forums! )

Monday, September 14, 2009
 
RPG Design: Seventeen Combat Encounters That Go Beyond Hack & Slash
Old-school pen-and-paper RPGing has kind of a reputation for being a hack-and-slash game... meaning pretty mindless dice-rolling and fighting. But the truth of the matter is that it the "classic" modules - at least the good ones - were a lot more like the late-era 3.5 and now 4th edition Dungeons & Dragons seemed to be trying to get back to: A lot of very interesting encounters / situations / tactical challenges that demanded players think their way through.

I spent a bit of time this weekend looking over some old (and not-so-old) modules for then pen-and-paper version of Dungeons & Dragons. Yeah, delving for ideas, I can admit it. Now granted, a lot of the homebrewed adventures out there really did fall into the stereotypical "kick open the door, kill the monster, take the treasure" hack-and-slash pattern that is all-too-familiar for computer RPG players.

But there really was a lot of effort to keep things fresh - ideas that were - and still are - too often forgotten by the computer RPG analogs. These might not be the pinnacles of role-playing, but they definitely turned combat into something far more interesting than straightforward hack-and-slash encounters. Players needed to use their brains, manage their resources carefully, think on their feet, and even (*gasp*) play their character roles.

Here's my list of the different kinds of combat encounters in old-school pen-and-paper modules.

1) Straightforward combat encounters - Nothing much to write about here. But often these involved a new monster type or a spellcaster or "boss-level" enemy which the players won't be familiar with. Or the tactics the enemies used might be a little unusual to mix things up.

2) Ambush attacks - monsters attacking from hiding to get an initial advantage (but quickly devolves into being a straightforward combat). Certain monsters were simply made for this kind of attack - like trappers and lurkers above.

3) Exposition Encounters - These might be encounters that resemble types 1 or 2, but actually provide clues as to the bigger picture. For example, orcs that are visibly nervous about guarding the entrance to the graveyard, and will not flee there under any circumstances.

4) Tactical Challenges - these battles involve a significant tactical wrinkle - like fighting on a bridge over a lake of fire, or something as simple as the enemy taking advantage of cover or the high ground. Anti-magic fields are also popular here. Tucker's Kobolds drove players insane with these kinds of battles.

5) Avoidable combats - battles which smart players can avoid completely by using their brains instead of their swords. There were often varieties of monsters coming and going in those old dungeons, which necessitated some loose agreements between them. The players could often exploit this situation. Using the correct password, or simply bribing the bored ogres might be enough.

6) Mixed battles with creatures of complimentary abilities. The classic example is to pair a powerful but easily killed magical enemy with a very tough "tank" to protect it.

7) Deceptive Battles - Like the ambush encounter, but there's something going on that makes the entire combat confusing and unclear. A canonical example is an illusion that disguises the true nature of the enemies, or adds additional illusionary attackers to the mix. Why is that cow breathing fire, again? Or a field of darkness within which the enemy can see, but the party cannot. Or maybe the party doesn't realize that the beautiful slumbering maiden they've just "rescued" is actually a vampire who is currently attacking with her charm power prior to unleashing her more direct and obvious attacks.

8) Programmed encounters - these are combat encounters that are directed or triggered by some sort of trap or puzzle. "Lady or the Tiger" situations or room-sized chessboard puzzles with golems as the enemy pieces might be examples of this kind of combat encounter.

9) Hostile Battlefields - This is a lot like Tactical Challenge battles (4), but there's an active environmental threat that makes time of the essence, or requires an active hand to avoid the threat as well as battle the enemies. An example might be a room with the walls closing in, or filling with water, or a battle taking place around an artifact that is hurling fireballs at random locations.

10) Booby Trap Battles - These encounters are semi-passive, happening only if the party digs around looking for treasure. Oozes, slimes, rot grubs, mimics, giant centipedes, and poisonous snakes worked well here.

11) Exceptional Enemies - These encounters involved an enemy more powerful than the players expect, due to nature, spells, or equipment. The Hobgoblin chieftain might fight as a bugbear, the zombies might be outfitted with chain mail and pole arms, the ogre might be wearing a ring of protection and drink a potion of haste before the battle, or the goblin might actually be a vampire. Third edition D&D really took this to the extreme, with plenty of options for advancing or otherwise beefing up "standard" enemies.

12) Waves of Opponents - Reinforcements are arriving. To avoid facing increasing odds, the party might have to expend a few more resources to eliminate the earlier waves quickly to avoid fighting an overwhelming force.

13) Weakened Enemies - The party may face a creature typically more powerful than they'd usually be able to take on, but has some advantage which - if they exploit - can grant them victory. A Hydra might be bound on a chain to an area, the ogre camp may be sleeping off a night of drunken revelry, or the dragon may be injured from another battle.

14) Non-Lethal Attacks - The enemy launches a quick raid set the party back (and gain treasure) rather than to kill them. It may be a quick robbery to deprive the party of equipment (or the functional equivalent via a Disenchanter or Rust Monster), or an attempt to lure / force the party into a trap, or simply to get them to waste spells, potions, and charges on magical items for an all-out battle that doesn't happen until later. Another example is an entirely illusionary encounter, which again may cost the party resources.

15) The Rule Changers - The wildly bizarre, constrained encounter that the Game Master might have a tough time rationalizing, but really turn combat on the ear. The most common of these would be combats where the party is stripped of all their gear, and must fight unarmed or with improvised weaponry. More extreme rules might be a conflict that must follow the rules of Rugby or something like that. While weird, they can be enormously amusing.

16) The No-Win Scenarios - Like #5, but this is a battle which - if pursued to the ultimate conclusion - is for all practical purposes unwinnable. The only way to win is - not to play. Or rather, to find the alternative means of defeating the enemy. Players (and Captain James T. Kirk) hate these, but usually only because they don't realize its danger until too late. Presented carefully, I believe it is still a valid and enjoyable encounter.

17) Combos - Two or more of the above mixed together

The reason I'm presenting these here is that I'd like to see more of these kinds of encounters in computer RPGs. There's no reason combat encounters need to be plain ol' hack-and-slash grinds. And these ideas are hardly outside of the processing capability of modern systems - and some games are doing this already on a limited scale.

So - game-makers - how about it?

And gamers: What kinds of interesting variations on combat encounters did I miss in this list?

Labels: ,



Did you enjoy this post? Feel free to share it: del.icio.us | Digg it | Furl | reddit | Yahoo MyWeb

Comments:
Related to (16) is the scenario you are expected to loose, where even though the battle is lost the game goes on. As happened at the beginning of one of the final fantasies, or the melee fight with the hunter in zeno clash, or even in HL2 where you get knocked out. However, these are done best when the game can still continue if you win, or if the player is clearly signaled that they weren't expected to do more.

A few of these might work well when reversed: for (2) the PCs set up an ambush for enemies, or with (12) where they receive reinforcments or a mysterious stranger arrives partway into a hard battle.
 
I think the list was fairly comprehensive with some that I'm not sure were really its own category like 17. Regarding 16, planescape: torment had extra content when you lost in certain areas. Most players hate being railroaded into a failure path (maybe just me though) which seems to happen to me a lot in jRPGs. I think this blog may have covered the Wing Commander and this previously.

Anyway, I was think of mounted/vehicle combat and aerial/aquatic combat as being unique though probably can be put in to the weird or hostel environment bucket. Fairly memorable when done right in pnp but doesn't translate as well to computers.
 
But .. but ... it doesn't have to be always hack'n'slash! It could also be bolts'n'lasers!

Either way, good list!
 
Hey, I can hack 'n slash with my vibroblade and powered assault armor! ;)

Yeah, there are a few other options with the "No Win Scenario" besides what I listed here. I really don't like the forced-failure railroading personally (though I acknowledge it's not necessarily a game-ruiner) - but the point is that brute force alone can't prevail. Direct confrontation requires a quick escape before it is too late.
 
I really envy how PnP can set up these encounters and just throw them out there. The idea of the PCs being in over their heads and having to improvise or realizing it's a no win situation seems to me to be by comparison a lot easier to set up when there is a GM and no such thing as reload. But in a computer game imagine what many gamers will do when faced with that rust monster, ambush or vampire maiden. Unless surprise is somehow embedded as a game mechanic (ala "Caught flatfooted" in 2nd Edition I think) they'll just optimize/powermax rather than think on their feet. We've become so spoiled by the idea that if we lose something we just redo until perfect (as you mentioned in the branching WC blog) that I can imagine designers saying, "Aw forget it... just throw a bunch of monsters on the level and let 'em path to the player. Lock 'em in a boss chamber if it has to be really difficult."

Good list though.
 
Very interesting list; should be mandatory reading for all RPG developers out there. One thing I don't see mentioned is the kind of battles where you have to either defend or (preferably) fight alongside AI/DM-controlled allies (who, in the latter case, may or may not have to survive the encounter).

Also, I can't resist adding that "Knights of the Chalice" includes the following types of encounters:

* Seemingly endless amounts of 2s (usually very difficult ones).

* Many 1s (often spiced up with spellcasters/new monster types).

* Frequent and mostly challenging 6s.

* A couple of amusing 10s.

* Some scripted 5s (and a potentially unlimited number of random 5s).

As is evident from this list, there's not a huge or even particularly original variety of encounters in the game, but the mere fact that the majority of KotC's battles are NOT (or at least don't begin as) straightforward type 1 battles seems like a step in the right direction compared to most CRPGs...
 
Yes, in a computer game, the player will just reload the game if caught by surprise. Besides, I do hate when a game is unfair. A player should always have the opportunity to make smart decisions, decisions that will actually MATTER.

As droid said, let's turn this around and let it work from the character's side. I enjoy games where you can send one character ahead to lure an enemy into a preset ambush. And I'd much prefer that a smart player have a chance to avoid the worst surprises (so that frequent game reloads aren't necessary). Scouting, searching, and/or extra caution could spot ambushes. Spiderwebs should give away the presence of spiders, and appropriate countermeasures (light torches and burn the webs?) should make the battle easier. Enemies shouldn't just pop out of thin air, but should make sense AND provide some clues to their presence and their nature.

Most of all, games really need to use NPCs to make the situation realistic. If there's a vampire around, the townspeople are going to know about it. Or at least have the evidence a player needs to make the right determination. A vampire isn't just going to sit quietly, doing nothing until PCs arrive. And if you know that a vampire is around, and you encounter a beautiful young maiden at night, you're certainly going to be cautious enough to make a few tests, don't you think?

As I said, I want NPCs to be a better resource. If there are monsters or even just dangerous animals nearby, the local peasants will certainly be aware of them. And they'll know what particular dangers they represent. If I talk to a peasant, I want to hear that the spiders to the east are dangerous, because they'll trap you in a web and then poison you. Or that the bandits like to set an ambush on the road, attacking with crossbows from cover (and that they've dug pit traps to keep their victims away from melee range). Or that there's something in the cave that can't be harmed by ordinary weapons. Or that a powerful, confident mage died there (giving you a clue that the creature might be magic resistant).

All too often, in D&D games, the player is just expected to know what a monster is and how to fight it (apparently from memorizing the Monster Manual). Or else you're expected to find out the hard way,... and then reload the game. That's not for me. I want to find out ahead of time by being smart - especially by taking the time to question the locals (of course, if I steal from them or bully them, they won't be so eager to help), but also by examining animal signs, by checking out previous victims, by careful scouting, etc.

And I love games like The Witcher that keep notes for me on what I discover about potential foes. Then, if I encounter an enemy - or just suggestive signs of one - I can browse my notes and remind myself what to expect (something which wouldn't be necessary, no doubt, if my life really were on the line - but since it's just a computer game, and it might be days since I last played it...).
 
There's no declaration here that the ambush has to be forced and successful. Players learned paranoia and "door drills" in dungeons so they could better spot and counter those kinds of ambushes. That was half the fun.
 
Good list.

One additional thing: I would like to see more realistic applications of morale and damage during combat encounters. I've played way too many games (FPS and RPGs both) where the designer (or GM) has ignored the effects of fear, pain, blood loss, potentially debilitating damage, etc.

Examples of poor design include Crysis and Farcry 2. In both of these games NPCs tend to ignore damage that would realistically be crippling, e.g. someone shot in the leg should not be able (or willing) to sprint after me. Or, for someone chopped in the arm with a machete, it should be rather difficult to hold a weapon and attack accurately.

An example of better design is Fallout 3; it's not perfect, but it works well enough: Cripple an NPC's head and he has a more difficult time aiming or detecting you. Cripple their weapon arm, they usually drop their weapon. Cripple a leg, and the NPC can't run or jump. Destroy their weapon, and they have to take time to pull out another. And there's always the chance they'll become demoralized and run away, especially if they've lost their weapon.

This is actually one of the reasons I enjoy Fallout 3 so much. It allows a variety of tactics well beyond what a simple hit point system can provide.

For example, a Deathclaw has a potentially lethal leap-and-rip-your-face-off attack, so I know that in order to survive I need to cripple a leg ASAP so it can no longer jump. (Frag mines FTW!)

Another example: Fighting against an NPC with a rocket launcher can end in a quick death, so it's a good idea to cripple his head so he can no longer see or aim well.

At any rate, I really like having other options available during encounters, particularly in combat. I think it's rather dull when the player is forced to just shoot (or chop) the hell out of everything in order to proceed.
 
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

Powered by Blogger