45 replies to this topic

[TruePurple]

The idea simply put, when any character (PC or NPC, with some exceptions) gets below 25% health they fall unconscious. This could be the same point low health scripts (where npc say things concerning injured comrades) kicks in, making for a much more dramatic effect.

Undead, trolls and a number of others would be immune to it. Raging units could be immunity to it (but lose the temp bonus to health they get)

The more ways to deal with a situation other then killing, the more roleplaying involved. If I can knock a npc out rather then killing it (or ignoring it as it attacks me which is really silly of course) then that gives me another tool to deal with a situation and mod story tellers another option at their disposal.

What would be really nifty if we could add add a "subdermal damage" system (d&d 3) as well but that might not be doable.

Edited by TruePurple, 28 June 2005 - 05:23 PM.

[T.G.Maestro]

The more ways to deal with a situation other then killing, the more roleplaying involved. If I can knock a npc out rather then killing it (or ignoring it as it attacks me which is really silly of course) then that gives me another tool to deal with a situation and mod story tellers another option at their disposal.

The Sword Angel kit component of Refinements already uses this "technique".
Sword Angel documentation.

[jastey]

I think that the possibilitiy of not killing your opponent is severely lacking in BG. There is a tutorial and a discussion about that topic here: Non-Lethal Combat.
Implemeting Vlasák's concept into BG as a "mod" would require changing all items, though, as far as I understood, making it rather a challenge.

[T.G.Maestro]

Implemeting Vlasák's concept into BG as a "mod" would require changing all items, though, as far as I understood, making it rather a challenge.

And pretty much impossible if you take into consideration the limits of the engine.

[T.G.Maestro]

I mean you'll have to re-edit all the dialogues, add many many new lines... truth to be told, the best solution for this problem is not the one we are discussing, this is only a poor and forced alternative. If there would be a sub-damage system like in ToEE, things would be perfect. But this is where the engine gets too limited.

[jastey]

Ah, you are right about dialogues, and many many triggers that have to be changed... (e.g. Dead(xy) wouldn't suffice any longer...) I only looked at the items. Oh well, it was a nice idea.

[TruePurple]

truth to be told, the best solution for this problem is not the one we are discussing, this is only a poor and forced alternative.

Please justify calling my suggestion "poor and forced". Also why would we need to add many new lines of dialog? This could be written into as much or as little story as we desire to. It wouldn't have to apply to every part of the game story! This isn't a all or nothing situation!

Please be respectful of me enough to talk about my suggestion and not Vlasák's. Clearly from what you guys are saying his idea isn't doable anyways. But mine is.

To append to my idea, items specifically geared to knock someone unconscious. Verses vlasák's, every weapon being usable for that purpose (then you wouldn't need to edit every weapon) along with knocking a person out at 25% health.

Please note, in my suggestion- I am not suggesting a player get experience for the knocked out foe! While a nice thought it clearly needlessly complicates things. Any quest that involves knocking a foe out verses killing or has that option of knocking out instead of killing can reward in experience accordingly.

Even if it wasn't used for enemy forces, your own forces being knocked out at 25% health, on its own would be a interesting addition to the game.

Edited by TruePurple, 29 June 2005 - 12:55 PM.

[Idobek]

The hostility here is hardly warranted, the thread had progressed naturally as far as I can see. A discussion as to what works has to include and then discard what doesn't work.

[TruePurple]

Noones discussed my idea, other then to call it "poor and forced", well I presume that was directed at me.

The rest of the "discussion" was directed at Vlasák' suggestion. If they wanted to discuss his idea they should do so in his thread, not mine.

[Rabain]

If a mod author needs to use unconciousness they can just apply it to the relevant creature via script. (opcode #39)

Changing all creatures (party included) to be affected by unconciousness at 25% HP's is identical (imo) to simply reducing their HP's by 25%. It is not roleplaying to have ten creatures attack me and 4 are knocked out during the battle, these creatures will still be hostile and I will still need to kill them, either that or leave and never return to that map, or leave Heal and return which just introduces cheese rather than more roleplay.

Even if it wasn't used for enemy forces, your own forces being knocked out at 25% health, on its own would be a interesting addition to the game.

Again you are simply reducing their staying power in combat by 25%, creatures aren't going to stop attacking just because you have become unconcious, they are not roleplaying. Once hostile they attack until death. There would be huge amount of scripting to be done to get around every scenario. Healing potions for one, you can see when you are reaching 25% and drink one, creatures would have to constantly check via script to simulate this.

Adding unconciousness is unnecessary as it can be used currently, as is, if needed

[Idobek]

* Idobek sighs

Noones discussed my idea, other then to call it "poor and forced", well I presume that was directed at me.

Separate yourself from your ideas a bit. If you want them discussed then you are going to have to accept somepeople are not going to like them.

The rest of the "discussion" was directed at Vlasák' suggestion. If they wanted to discuss his idea they should do so in his thread, not mine.

Let's not start on the concept of thread ownership, eh? You have drawn "your" thread back to where you want it. Leave it at that. You might want to consider looking at Vlasák's idea though, see if it has anything that might be of benefit to yours.

[jastey]

Jesus, mate. Sorry if I mixed your idea with Vlasák's, but I truly thought you meant something similar as to what he suggested. I would be glad if you could explain your idea further, as I obviously didn't understand it. (I mean that serious, as I really think the non-lethal way of defeating an opponent would very much add to the game, and if you have a significantly different way of introducing this into the game please do tell me.)

I also didn't understand this sentence:

To append to my idea, items specifically geared to knock someone unconscious. Verses vlasák's, every weapon being usable for that purpose (then you wouldn't need to edit every weapon) along with knocking a person out at 25% health.

Which idea needs to change how much items?

As to your post: Please keep the aggressive tone for somewhere else. I linked to Vlasák's tutorial to show you that there are other people thinking about similar things. A plain "Vlasák's idea is nice but I had a different one, see here" would be sufficient, thank you. And it's funny that you complain about noone discussing your idea, but the "poor and forced" you take for yourself.

Sorry for my tone but I couldn't help feeling offended. <- smiley

Edited by jastey, 29 June 2005 - 02:10 PM.

[TruePurple]

Separate yourself from your ideas a bit. If you want them discussed then you are going to have to accept somepeople are not going to like them.

True words, if that was what the issue was. It wasn't that someone didn't like my idea but that noone actually talked about my idea other then that little nonspecific belittling bit. Well up to that point.

Likewise if you look at the posts up to that point they all seem directed at the Vlasák thread. Which is why I mentioned what you refer to as "thread ownership". It felt like Vlasák had hijacked my thread from the start and he hadn't even posted in it

As to your post: Please keep the aggressive tone for somewhere else. I linked to Vlasák's tutorial to show you that there are other people thinking about similar things. A plain "Vlasák's idea is nice but I had a different one, see here" would be sufficient, thank you

I'm sorry if my post took on a harsher tone then I meant for it. The exclamation marks were meant to get peoples attention and express my exasperation, not sound aggressive. Your approach would have been better though.

Anyways back to the issue (in a new post to seperate it out)

Edited by TruePurple, 29 June 2005 - 02:31 PM.

[TruePurple]

Changing all creatures (party included) to be affected by unconsciousness at 25% HP's is identical (imo) to simply reducing their HP's by 25%.

Similar, but not identical. If one of your party members gets knocked out, you can try to defend that person via means other then simply moving them to the back lines.(maybe even strong characters being able to pick them up, but bodies would weigh a bit of course and this wouldn't include equipment, also if your holding a body you shouldn't be able to attack) This adds more strategy as well as a small element of roleplaying. And more justifies the already currently existing low health script messages.

Likewise if you knock out half of the enemy unit in an attack, but they aren't dead yet and the enemy has means of healing and reviving those units, this adds a element of strategy. Do you attack the unconscious unit to prevent him from being revived? Or do you worry about the guys attacking you?

Also that adds a interesting dimension to raging, if it prevented you from going unconscious below the 25% mark (instead of temp bonus health) certain herbs and potions could also provide the same effect.

Concerning roleplaying,

If someone wanted they could script a specific enemy or a specific enemy type that does not become violent/aggressive when revived. Or enemies that flee if revived.

Yes you could just script a specific enemy to be knocked out at 25% health for a storyline. But if all enemies of the same race weren't also knocked out at the same point, it stretches credibility more.

Plus if thats how it worked for all npc (knocking them out at 25%) Those enemies that are specifically scripted to be handled by being knocked out (then possibly revived) blend in more, you might not know thats a option right away. A bit of a easter egg.

Edited by TruePurple, 29 June 2005 - 03:56 PM.

[TruePurple]

Implemeting Vlasák's concept into BG as a "mod" would require changing all items

His idea wouldn't require changing lots of items if the only specific items were able to knock a character out, instead of "all swords and weapons that can be used with the flat side" able to do so.

Edited by TruePurple, 29 June 2005 - 03:06 PM.

[Vlasák]

truth to be told, the best solution for this problem is not the one we are discussing, this is only a poor and forced alternative.

Please justify calling my suggestion "poor and forced". Also why would we need to add many new lines of dialog? This could be written into as much or as little story as we desire to. It wouldn't have to apply to every part of the game story! This isn't a all or nothing situation!

Please be respectful of me enough to talk about my suggestion and not Vlasák's. Clearly from what you guys are saying his idea isn't doable anyways. But mine is.

To append to my idea, items specifically geared to knock someone unconscious. Verses vlasák's, every weapon being usable for that purpose (then you wouldn't need to edit every weapon) along with knocking a person out at 25% health.

Please note, in my suggestion- I am not suggesting a player get experience for the knocked out foe! While a nice thought it clearly needlessly complicates things. Any quest that involves knocking a foe out verses killing or has that option of knocking out instead of killing can reward in experience accordingly.

Even if it wasn't used for enemy forces, your own forces being knocked out at 25% health, on its own would be a interesting addition to the game.

Uhm, well... I don't want to hijack anything

Your idea is different from mine, that's without any debate. In Non-Lethal Combat (NLC), you have the possibility to choose whether you want to kill your enemy or just knock it out. Appropriate weapons for this type of combat have the second, non-lethal mode of attack.
While your idea is about the fact that before death the creature falls unconscious, if I understand you correctly. It is just the different angle of view to the huge possibilities of unconsciousness in the game - and the products of that different views are different too.

However, there is one significant note - we have developed this idea for purposes of the TC where we can do everything from the beggining and only with our limits.
To be honest, I can't imagine the implementation of NLC to the original BG2 content - to be usable, it would required a lot of work (scripts, items, dialogs) and maybe the main reason - feeling of SoA/ToB is maybe not 'compatible' with such method that improves the role-play. SoA/ToB with NLC would be completely different game - the new dialogs would occur, new quests, etc. Does we really want to see SoA/ToB different?

Our TC is based on less 'heroic' or 'epic' concepts - rather interaction and unique characters than combats and anonymous enemies; before you kill anybody, you must count the consequences of the killing of that person/creature.
NLC is fully compatible with this concept and even improves it. I've already coded many quests and events to the game and for the time being it seems that it has its place in the game and it is doable.

I haven't put my tutorial on the web with the motivation to say "do the mods with it" - it was rather the offering of the possibilities of the engine. We can share our ideas and methods and anybody can improve them, give feedback to them and use them or just use their parts.

You don't have to feel that your idea was attacked by mine. There is no reason why it should be - there was just the mention about that "someone did something similar for something different - you can see different view on unconsciousness in the game and you can see the technincs that can be used for it."

It is not roleplaying to have ten creatures attack me and 4 are knocked out during the battle, these creatures will still be hostile and I will still need to kill them, either that or leave and never return to that map, or leave Heal and return which just introduces cheese rather than more roleplay.

The knocked enemy can just flee away when they awake, can get respect to you and not attack you again and many other possibilites. The role-play factor in this is in the fact that the killing is not just the only way how to solve a "problem". Check BG2 combats - you'll find many and many occurences where the killing of the enemy was not the best solution of the quest or interaction.

Edited by Vlasák, 29 June 2005 - 03:35 PM.

[TruePurple]

@Vlasák
Please scroll up, I had posted some information that should help clarify some of the uses of my idea.

we have developed this idea for purposes of the TC

Who's "we" (you and me?, you and some other people?) TC= tactical combat?

where we can do everything from the beginning and only with our limits.

Whats "everything"? Limits? NLC provides options, not limits.

To be honest, I can't imagine the implementation of NLC to the original BG2 content - to be usable, it would required a lot of work (scripts, items, dialogs)

Your suggestion would require that much work, mine wouldn't. Mine wouldn't require any change of items.(unless items were made to prevent unconsciousness) Yours would require minimal change of items if it only applied to specific items (including fists) and not tons of currently existing items. Less script work too if experience isn't gainable from knocking out.

As far as script and dialog. My suggestion wouldn't necessarily require any change of "original BG2 content" With no storyline change my suggestion of NLC would still have plenty of application. (please see the post I made while you were writing this)

Plus it would be a tool for any mod makers to use. Don't get me wrong, some original content could be changed to incorporate NLC, but none of it needs to be changed for NLC to have its place in game.

I mean your goals are so lofty and complicated, simplifying and aiming lower, then building up over time seems a much more practical approach.

Edited by TruePurple, 29 June 2005 - 04:00 PM.

[Pex657]

TC stands for Total Conversion