Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
ACTION RESOLUTION SYSTEM - THOUGHTS
Posts
Fhizban
68
Fhizban
View playlists
CloseAfter having played so many RPGs, i get tired of the good old combat system and the game system in general. I would like to give something completely different a try: The Action Resolution System. Inspired by the days of the old pen-and-paper RPGs, this could be a new approach how to control conflicts in computer games:
My only question is: Would it be fun?
The Idea
First of all, imagine that there would be no battle system, there would also be no magic system. Oh yes, there will be skills, spells and weapons but all those things geared towards highly detailed realtime/turnbased combat would simply be cut out.
Instead, the game (wich would clearly be some kind of storytelling/adventure game) uses an action resolution system to handle all the things that happen to a player. Whenever a player fights, tries to pick a lock, sneaks past a guard, haggles with a merchant or tries to interrogate a witness - its always the action resolution that is used.
The system makes no difference between combat or non-combat, the framework is always the same. This waters down the game a lot, as it cuts out the enormous detail many games spend on combat and replaces it with a much simpler "general system" that focuses on the diversity of options.
How the System Works
Whenever the result of a situation is unclear, a ringmenu appears, showing the players choices. The number and type of choices are regulated by the situation itself. Each choice has a different success rate that depends on both: the players skills and the difficulty of the situation (or the skills of an enemy/NPC).
Different choices require different forms of energy like Healthpoints or Mana. Other choices require a certain item (like attacking, wich requires a weapon / or bribery wich requires money). All choices have a special result whenever you are successful or fail to accomplish the task.
The different choices are color coded to show you roughly the success rate: choices in grey are disabled and therefore not selectable (because of lacking skills or missing items), red is very hard to accomplish, then orange, then yellow, then dark green (very good chances of success) and finally bright green (piece of cake).
Examples
Situation: PC touches a motorbike
Choices: Ride (Driving skill required) or Cancel
Effect: PC rides the motorbike
Situation: PC convinces a doorman to let him in
Choices: Persuade (Fast talk skill required), Psi (Psi Ability required), Attack (Melee combat skill required)
Effect: Persuade - doorman lets PC in / or
Situation: PC tries to avoid a trap
Choices: Sneak past (Agility), Disarm (Technology), Psi
Effect: Trap succesfully avoided / or taking damage from it
Conclusion
I would like to see the system in action to finally make up my mind. But I would have to code it, as it seems no one has done something like this before. It reminds me a bit of Shenmue (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenmue). I just cannot predict if it would work - this is why i post it here. The game would be so much simpler, faster, and more shallow due to the fact that "heavy impact parts" like the Final Fantasy battle system would be completely missing. No 3000 weapons, No 2000 armor, No 1000 spells & skills and instead just a simple ringmenu that lets you interact with almost every object in the game? Hmmm......
My current tought is that it would be rather lame. To make this system interesting the degree of interaction has to be increased a lot. Making it possible to interact with almost every object/scenery/terrain/NPC/enemy in the game. And alltogether with different specifications, choices and outcomes. So, it could work in a way that we remove the ultimate focus from combat and shift it something like "equally focusing on all aspects of a gameworld on a simpler base".
And there would have to be many of those aspect to be fun (driving your bike, getting your train, avoiding a trap, defeating your enemy, bargaining, interrogation, subterfuge, stealth, perception, gambling, drinking, balancing on a pole, catching flies with your bare hands, running faster than gunfire, jumping over pitfalls, convincing people, driving a tank, operating machinery, hacking computers, casting shamanistic rituals, calling the rat god, arm wrestling, playing billiard, convincing the taxi driver to drive you for fee, getting information out of hostages, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.)
Just everything. Everything made simple. Everything equally simple. Combat just one feature among many.
Thats it. Feel free to discuss.
-Fhizban over and out
My only question is: Would it be fun?
The Idea
First of all, imagine that there would be no battle system, there would also be no magic system. Oh yes, there will be skills, spells and weapons but all those things geared towards highly detailed realtime/turnbased combat would simply be cut out.
Instead, the game (wich would clearly be some kind of storytelling/adventure game) uses an action resolution system to handle all the things that happen to a player. Whenever a player fights, tries to pick a lock, sneaks past a guard, haggles with a merchant or tries to interrogate a witness - its always the action resolution that is used.
The system makes no difference between combat or non-combat, the framework is always the same. This waters down the game a lot, as it cuts out the enormous detail many games spend on combat and replaces it with a much simpler "general system" that focuses on the diversity of options.
How the System Works
Whenever the result of a situation is unclear, a ringmenu appears, showing the players choices. The number and type of choices are regulated by the situation itself. Each choice has a different success rate that depends on both: the players skills and the difficulty of the situation (or the skills of an enemy/NPC).
Different choices require different forms of energy like Healthpoints or Mana. Other choices require a certain item (like attacking, wich requires a weapon / or bribery wich requires money). All choices have a special result whenever you are successful or fail to accomplish the task.
The different choices are color coded to show you roughly the success rate: choices in grey are disabled and therefore not selectable (because of lacking skills or missing items), red is very hard to accomplish, then orange, then yellow, then dark green (very good chances of success) and finally bright green (piece of cake).
Examples
Situation: PC touches a motorbike
Choices: Ride (Driving skill required) or Cancel
Effect: PC rides the motorbike
Situation: PC convinces a doorman to let him in
Choices: Persuade (Fast talk skill required), Psi (Psi Ability required), Attack (Melee combat skill required)
Effect: Persuade - doorman lets PC in / or
Situation: PC tries to avoid a trap
Choices: Sneak past (Agility), Disarm (Technology), Psi
Effect: Trap succesfully avoided / or taking damage from it
Conclusion
I would like to see the system in action to finally make up my mind. But I would have to code it, as it seems no one has done something like this before. It reminds me a bit of Shenmue (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenmue). I just cannot predict if it would work - this is why i post it here. The game would be so much simpler, faster, and more shallow due to the fact that "heavy impact parts" like the Final Fantasy battle system would be completely missing. No 3000 weapons, No 2000 armor, No 1000 spells & skills and instead just a simple ringmenu that lets you interact with almost every object in the game? Hmmm......
My current tought is that it would be rather lame. To make this system interesting the degree of interaction has to be increased a lot. Making it possible to interact with almost every object/scenery/terrain/NPC/enemy in the game. And alltogether with different specifications, choices and outcomes. So, it could work in a way that we remove the ultimate focus from combat and shift it something like "equally focusing on all aspects of a gameworld on a simpler base".
And there would have to be many of those aspect to be fun (driving your bike, getting your train, avoiding a trap, defeating your enemy, bargaining, interrogation, subterfuge, stealth, perception, gambling, drinking, balancing on a pole, catching flies with your bare hands, running faster than gunfire, jumping over pitfalls, convincing people, driving a tank, operating machinery, hacking computers, casting shamanistic rituals, calling the rat god, arm wrestling, playing billiard, convincing the taxi driver to drive you for fee, getting information out of hostages, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.)
Just everything. Everything made simple. Everything equally simple. Combat just one feature among many.
Thats it. Feel free to discuss.
-Fhizban over and out
I hate to say it, but...that sounds...pretty boring!
The extreme simplification of every conflict/challenge in a game being dumbed down to one menu and a pass/fail check? I'm sorry, but that sounds boring. Honestly I'd rather have the regular old RPG battle system than some of the stuff that people come up with (as I don't really get tired of the classic approach since I don't play only RPGs 24/7, which seems to be the leading cause of the 'I'm tired of this mechanic' malady). What you suggested sounds awesome for strictly non battle situations, but DON'T replace the battle system with it.
Because that sounds boring as hell.
The extreme simplification of every conflict/challenge in a game being dumbed down to one menu and a pass/fail check? I'm sorry, but that sounds boring. Honestly I'd rather have the regular old RPG battle system than some of the stuff that people come up with (as I don't really get tired of the classic approach since I don't play only RPGs 24/7, which seems to be the leading cause of the 'I'm tired of this mechanic' malady). What you suggested sounds awesome for strictly non battle situations, but DON'T replace the battle system with it.
Because that sounds boring as hell.
Shinan
4314
On the other hand if it's a more adventure game style game then I think that replacing an arbitary combat system with something like this is a great idea. I've toyed around with similar ideas myself but often find myself with UI issues. I mean if every time you touch something a menu pops up it sort of breaks the flow.
I guess there are ways to work around these things. Depending on how many buttons you have I suppose you could have those context-sensitive things (so if you had A, B, X, Y, there'd pop up a short message telling what each of the buttons would do to a certain object)
Also would the skills be automatic successes or would there be a skill check? Basically are the skills traits that you pick ("level up. Pick a skill") or can they gain levels. There's different things to consider in both. (you'll want to show the chance of success if there's a skill roll. And then there's the consequences of failing) Automatic successes are simpler but require you to have loads of them (or have limited availability). Since once you have it you'll have it. And you'll probably want to shut some paths off depending on character builds.
Also don't listen to what Feldschlacht's saying. Getting rid of battle systems can only benefit an RPG)
I guess there are ways to work around these things. Depending on how many buttons you have I suppose you could have those context-sensitive things (so if you had A, B, X, Y, there'd pop up a short message telling what each of the buttons would do to a certain object)
Also would the skills be automatic successes or would there be a skill check? Basically are the skills traits that you pick ("level up. Pick a skill") or can they gain levels. There's different things to consider in both. (you'll want to show the chance of success if there's a skill roll. And then there's the consequences of failing) Automatic successes are simpler but require you to have loads of them (or have limited availability). Since once you have it you'll have it. And you'll probably want to shut some paths off depending on character builds.
Also don't listen to what Feldschlacht's saying. Getting rid of battle systems can only benefit an RPG)
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
It's possible to use the same mechanics as a battle uses, but make it be, say a dance contest. The "enemy" is simply the setting or event.
Each turn in battle you are given an option between several different dance moves you have learned, and depending on the setting and the music and the crowd you're performing for, you might get bonus effect from pirhouettes or from salsa moves, which are essentially elements. Doing a certain move might have a random chance to inflicted "wowed" status on the audience, if your flourish stat is high enough compared to their jadedness stat. Different clothing you can equip before you begin dancing could also influence how skilled you are, granting stats such as flexibility, moxie, rhythm, and memory, and some styles of equipment could be more appropriate for certain settings.
You could do the same thing with commands during a motorcycle riding sequence. The event acts by turning sharply or by sending a semi to cut you off, and your success is controlled by what action you take in response, as well as by your stats such as nerves, balance, reflexes, and engine volume.
This shouldn't ever mean there's just one correct action, but rather, it should play out roughly similar to an RPG battle - different commands you can choose have different levels of effectiveness and can improve with your stats. It should probably have equivalent ideas to elements, hit points, buffs, debuffs, etc, though the unique way that these ideas played out might make them almost impossible to recognize as standard RPG elements.
Regardless of whether you build a system like this or not, your goal should be to create a system that does not have battles, but is still interactive and strategic to the same level as an RPG. If you make a "game" that simply removes all the interactive parts, you should just make a movie instead. If your interactive parts don't really resemble the interactive parts of an RPG, then what you've created isn't an RPG; it's probably a sim game. Which isn't bad, but don't call it an RPG.
Each turn in battle you are given an option between several different dance moves you have learned, and depending on the setting and the music and the crowd you're performing for, you might get bonus effect from pirhouettes or from salsa moves, which are essentially elements. Doing a certain move might have a random chance to inflicted "wowed" status on the audience, if your flourish stat is high enough compared to their jadedness stat. Different clothing you can equip before you begin dancing could also influence how skilled you are, granting stats such as flexibility, moxie, rhythm, and memory, and some styles of equipment could be more appropriate for certain settings.
You could do the same thing with commands during a motorcycle riding sequence. The event acts by turning sharply or by sending a semi to cut you off, and your success is controlled by what action you take in response, as well as by your stats such as nerves, balance, reflexes, and engine volume.
This shouldn't ever mean there's just one correct action, but rather, it should play out roughly similar to an RPG battle - different commands you can choose have different levels of effectiveness and can improve with your stats. It should probably have equivalent ideas to elements, hit points, buffs, debuffs, etc, though the unique way that these ideas played out might make them almost impossible to recognize as standard RPG elements.
Regardless of whether you build a system like this or not, your goal should be to create a system that does not have battles, but is still interactive and strategic to the same level as an RPG. If you make a "game" that simply removes all the interactive parts, you should just make a movie instead. If your interactive parts don't really resemble the interactive parts of an RPG, then what you've created isn't an RPG; it's probably a sim game. Which isn't bad, but don't call it an RPG.
post=146213
Also don't listen to what Feldschlacht's saying. Getting rid of battle systems can only benefit an RPG
This is blasphemy.
Then don't make the battle system suck. While there are undoubtedly aspects of our favorite games we don't like, we shouldn't establish nor encourage a throwaway attitude towards those aspects in our own games. Instead of going "WELL THE BATTLE SYSTEM SUCKS ANYWAY", make the battle system...not suck.
And of course this applies towards any and all other aspects of gaming and development as well.
And of course this applies towards any and all other aspects of gaming and development as well.
Fhizban
68
Thanks for the comments so far!
@Feldschlacht IV
There are many games on RMN wich feature only a few to almost no combats at all. Are all those games considered boring? No offense but - I try to keep this discussion as open minded as possible.
@Shinan / all
Good post thank you! Yes, there would also be a skill check - so every situation can have different results. When dealing with a situation, you gain experience - later on you can use the XP to increase your skill values (still very cloudy, but thats the current idea). I dont bother with UI issue of popping up menus - there will be only one action key and if you press it the menu appears. Some situations let the menu appear automatically and sometimes there are "hidden skill checks" where you do not have a choice.
@LockeZ
Very good! That is exactly the point: Basically you can use the systems and the complexity we already have and use it to represent other situations then just combat. But i really like to limit myself to the ringmenu thing, a simple system to suit any situation of a adventure game.
@all
The original game behind this idea was: You are a outlaw in a cyberpunk city, trying to make money by doing minor quests. there are also major quests wich advance the story. the game would take place only in the city and besides questing you have a lot of choices what to do. i want the player to be able to do whatever he wants: gambling, going to pubs, arm wrestling, buying fresh equipment, bump into NPCs on the streets once in a while and do the occiasonal quest.
And there would be combat, ringemenu based combat: Shootouts are quick and deadly, one shot from my predator and most enemies are a bubbling pile of gore on the floor. No need to make a detailled CBS where each shot takes 2d100+10 Hitpoints.
I would rather focus on the NPC/world interaction. Imagine you enter a store and before the shop menu appears, there is a ringmenu with choices: Buy, Leave, Haggle, Threaten, Use Psi
If you choose Haggle, Threaten or Use Psi succesfully this would result in better prices. If you fail to haggle the normal prices appear, If you fail magic the prices might even be higher than before. And failing to threaten the shopkeeper might result in police/guards appearing.
This is just one sample situation, now fill the game up with action resolution system based situations like this - and let there be hundreds of them. Still no fun?
I dont say anything against combat heavy games - its just, that there could be some room for new ideas. Like story-driven games with lots of decivise freedom, branching PC actions and focusing on all aspects of a "adventurers life" instead just on dealing with level ups and combat situations.
@Feldschlacht IV
There are many games on RMN wich feature only a few to almost no combats at all. Are all those games considered boring? No offense but - I try to keep this discussion as open minded as possible.
@Shinan / all
Good post thank you! Yes, there would also be a skill check - so every situation can have different results. When dealing with a situation, you gain experience - later on you can use the XP to increase your skill values (still very cloudy, but thats the current idea). I dont bother with UI issue of popping up menus - there will be only one action key and if you press it the menu appears. Some situations let the menu appear automatically and sometimes there are "hidden skill checks" where you do not have a choice.
@LockeZ
Very good! That is exactly the point: Basically you can use the systems and the complexity we already have and use it to represent other situations then just combat. But i really like to limit myself to the ringmenu thing, a simple system to suit any situation of a adventure game.
@all
The original game behind this idea was: You are a outlaw in a cyberpunk city, trying to make money by doing minor quests. there are also major quests wich advance the story. the game would take place only in the city and besides questing you have a lot of choices what to do. i want the player to be able to do whatever he wants: gambling, going to pubs, arm wrestling, buying fresh equipment, bump into NPCs on the streets once in a while and do the occiasonal quest.
And there would be combat, ringemenu based combat: Shootouts are quick and deadly, one shot from my predator and most enemies are a bubbling pile of gore on the floor. No need to make a detailled CBS where each shot takes 2d100+10 Hitpoints.
I would rather focus on the NPC/world interaction. Imagine you enter a store and before the shop menu appears, there is a ringmenu with choices: Buy, Leave, Haggle, Threaten, Use Psi
If you choose Haggle, Threaten or Use Psi succesfully this would result in better prices. If you fail to haggle the normal prices appear, If you fail magic the prices might even be higher than before. And failing to threaten the shopkeeper might result in police/guards appearing.
This is just one sample situation, now fill the game up with action resolution system based situations like this - and let there be hundreds of them. Still no fun?
I dont say anything against combat heavy games - its just, that there could be some room for new ideas. Like story-driven games with lots of decivise freedom, branching PC actions and focusing on all aspects of a "adventurers life" instead just on dealing with level ups and combat situations.
There are many games on RMN wich feature only a few to almost no combats at all. Are all those games considered boring? No offense but - I try to keep this discussion as open minded as possible.
I'm not saying games with no combat are boring. I'm just skeptical about your idea in particular.
Darken
3952
post=146242
@Feldschlacht IV
There are many games on RMN wich feature only a few to almost no combats at all. Are all those games considered boring? No offense but - I try to keep this discussion as open minded as possible.
Hmmm too bad your 'open mindedness' is being close minded to assumingly close minded posts. Like F-G said, you need variety. Even normal RPGs with combat have different methods of how you do things, dungeon crawling, puzzles, mini games. Setting everything to a single ring menu doesn't feel very immersive or flexible in ways of keeping the player interested. If jumping out of an exploding building requires the same input process as buying stuff from a shop then I find it hard to believe anything will be exciting over a long period of time.
Of course I can appreciate consistency, it's just that you should preserve different aspects of the game to their own designed mechanics suited for them.
Fhizban
68
@Fallen-Griever @Darken
Understood and I am already feeling like "head against the wall". In fact I think a combination of both: the typical rpg system with combat and an action resolution system to spice up dialogs and map events could work. This is by the way the first think Feldschlacht suggested.
Im still thrilled by the "Use a ringmenu to make choices during non-combat". Maybe I launch the Maker and give it a try.
Understood and I am already feeling like "head against the wall". In fact I think a combination of both: the typical rpg system with combat and an action resolution system to spice up dialogs and map events could work. This is by the way the first think Feldschlacht suggested.
Im still thrilled by the "Use a ringmenu to make choices during non-combat". Maybe I launch the Maker and give it a try.
Shinan
4314
post=146249
As a further example, I'd use the game VtM: Bloodlines; there are a lot of dialogue choices and the like in that game that are purely %-based (as your game sounds like it will be), but they are backed up by a fairly amazing combat system, solid exploration-based puzzles and a good storyline.
Actually VtM Bloodlines is a perfect example of a game with a treshold mechanic where certain things are unavailable until you reach a certain level (instead of rolling randomly depending on skill). Basically if you have Lockpicking 5 then you can automatically lockpick all locks with 5 or less but not harder locks. Whereas a %-chance based system would be you have lockpicking 5 and the difficulty of the lock is 5 you have a 50% chance of picking the lock. (a challenge roll where both are equals)
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
Overall your idea sounds like a great way to add interactivity and RPG-like gameplay to situations that would normally just be cut scenes or simple dialogue choices. Though not strong enough to base an entire game around (unless it were an extremely short game), it's a great idea for an added aspect of gameplay, when presented in addition to some other more complex type of interactive scenario like battles.
WolfCoder
3554
Yeah, I've got some fun ideas for the WeaponBirth system such as the perception mechanic combined with the kind of skills you mentioned, but the battle system just has to be there otherwise I would get bored eventually.
What you described is pretty much heavy rain with skill checks. Booooring
What you described is pretty much heavy rain with skill checks. Booooring
Shinan
4314
I have to admit I don't quite get all this "must have something else or else it'll be crap". This is essentially an adventure game mechanic. "Use X on Y" "Push Y" "Talk Y". Sure adventure games MIGHT be a bit boring occasionally (and for certain people they certainly are) but dismissing a game just because it doesn't have... uh... action?
The way I see this is that a system like this turns a game into a strategy game of sorts. You look at your spreadsheet and decide what action to take. It turns the game choices around a bit "WIll I kill this man?" rather than "Can I kill this man?"
Example: In your average RPG you meet a guy. You get some dialogue choices which essentially boil down to "talk and be happy" "talk and be neutral" "attack". In the first two you tend to get some result but in the third you're usually forced to go through some kind of different game mechanic. (usually a pssht sound and drawing of weapons (see Fallout, Mass Effect))
I'm thinking a system like this would work very well with a game not so focused on fighting. And where if you killed every kill would matter (if a person is dead he's dead and ain't coming back). I mean nine times out of ten the diplomatic dialogue choice options in RPGs are way more fun than the combat ones anyway.
Personally I've also found that automatic skill checks are so much more fun than those damn minigames (see Bioshock, Mass Effect for lockpicking (and similar) minigames that are fun the first 38 times but the last 900 times are really fucking boring)
The way I see this is that a system like this turns a game into a strategy game of sorts. You look at your spreadsheet and decide what action to take. It turns the game choices around a bit "WIll I kill this man?" rather than "Can I kill this man?"
Example: In your average RPG you meet a guy. You get some dialogue choices which essentially boil down to "talk and be happy" "talk and be neutral" "attack". In the first two you tend to get some result but in the third you're usually forced to go through some kind of different game mechanic. (usually a pssht sound and drawing of weapons (see Fallout, Mass Effect))
I'm thinking a system like this would work very well with a game not so focused on fighting. And where if you killed every kill would matter (if a person is dead he's dead and ain't coming back). I mean nine times out of ten the diplomatic dialogue choice options in RPGs are way more fun than the combat ones anyway.
Personally I've also found that automatic skill checks are so much more fun than those damn minigames (see Bioshock, Mass Effect for lockpicking (and similar) minigames that are fun the first 38 times but the last 900 times are really fucking boring)
Neophyte
155
It's really not that different than most RM battle systems. You're still opening a menu to decide tactics, and the attributes of a turn-based RPG are still there. Most RPGs here consist of 5000 menus where you use a cursor to select things. This is just without the flashy battle transition to another backdrop. I have no idea though, it's impossible to tell if something will be good or bad based on something so simple.
I mean if Final Fantasy/Dragon Quest never existed and some guy made the concept "well you press up and down on a menu and select skills and watch the animation play", it would probably sound boring too. Obviously there is more to it than that, but you get the idea. Regardless, mechanics almost always radically change from their first concepts, so a lot of testing and changes to this system are probably going to happen.
I mean if Final Fantasy/Dragon Quest never existed and some guy made the concept "well you press up and down on a menu and select skills and watch the animation play", it would probably sound boring too. Obviously there is more to it than that, but you get the idea. Regardless, mechanics almost always radically change from their first concepts, so a lot of testing and changes to this system are probably going to happen.
Pokemaniac
3559
I think what's missing from this system is the player's intuition. I think the player should have to discover the ways of doing things before they are added to the menu. Failing that, some sort of logic behind getting new things. Ever played Miles Edgeworth? Basically, there's a mode where you collect observations, and then string them together into conclusions. So something like, "I have a key" and "This door is locked" could unlock the option to put key in door.
Or you could have it flow more naturally. With the bouncer option above, you could have the process of unlocking the persuade option be navigating through a dialogue web, before it is added to the ring menu for easy access. Pressing the attack option would give the option of beating him down and walking past, using the "psi" button unlocks that, using money on him unlocks the bribe option, and presenting your VIP card unlocks that.
Or you could have it flow more naturally. With the bouncer option above, you could have the process of unlocking the persuade option be navigating through a dialogue web, before it is added to the ring menu for easy access. Pressing the attack option would give the option of beating him down and walking past, using the "psi" button unlocks that, using money on him unlocks the bribe option, and presenting your VIP card unlocks that.
I dislike traditional battle systems as well.
I don't think it's a bad idea, and it would account for a simpler gameplay style (like adventure games), but definitely not a substitute for traditional systems in RPGs.
It's actually VERY easy to implement. And it would get better with some more complexity and changes (like clearer numerical factors).
As I was reading this, it reminded me of Sore Losers: Riot Grrrl. There's some interesting gameplay ideas there, and alternatives for traditional RPG resolutions (although it still uses the DBS). You should check it out.
I don't think it's a bad idea, and it would account for a simpler gameplay style (like adventure games), but definitely not a substitute for traditional systems in RPGs.
It's actually VERY easy to implement. And it would get better with some more complexity and changes (like clearer numerical factors).
As I was reading this, it reminded me of Sore Losers: Riot Grrrl. There's some interesting gameplay ideas there, and alternatives for traditional RPG resolutions (although it still uses the DBS). You should check it out.
