Pokemon RMN - Seeking Pixel Artists

I guess time will tell which one of us turns out to be right. This being said a community project is the equivalent of various people performing individual short tasks:

I used to think people could join up and finish a project out of fun alone and it does happen for little short projects.

I'd say a community project is more likely to succeed in that aspect. This being said, I'd be more than happy if it turns out I'm wrong. I certainly wish things were that way.

[RMMV] [paid] [$400] Hiring Developer for Ghibli Fan RPG

400$ to make a game is ridiculous. Sorry to break it to you.

Here's a breakdown of my own costs for my own project:

1. Title screen art: 115$
2. Music track x1 (that's just one track): 40$
3. Programming 400$ (for about 25% of systems in).

So I'm already at 565$ and that's just the foundations. You'll notice I have no art included (which is by far the most expensive) because I do it myself.

400$ on art alone could work for you though. This being said that's not even the biggest problem.

You don't own Ghibli's creation, those are copyrighted. This has been discussed before. You'd be investing 400$ which you couldn't sell. If you wanted to share it for free as a gift to humanity, you could still be shut down because you don't own the rights.

Pokemon RMN - Seeking Pixel Artists

I hope you take this advice seriously:

No one will complete such a task unless they're paid. I'm letting you know from personal experience, not pessimism. I've worked on probably 10 different games with many different people and every single person who just joined "for fun" left at various intervals. The most reliable stuck around for a while while most left a few days or a week in.

It's basic human psychology. You'll probably get some offers at first, that's common. Most will never turn out anything, some will complete a few sets then realize how much work you're asking and disappear. The mentality being: "I'm not getting paid so I don't owe that person anything." Whether or not that's reasonable is another story.

I used to think people could join up and finish a project out of fun alone and it does happen for little short projects. For anything longer, you're just wasting your time.


This looks interesting. I think I've only ever commented other games once or twice but this deserves it. I'm not interested in the plot or the anime style so I won't play it but the art is solid. I mean, effort was put into it and I appreciate that. Keep at it!

[Poll] Best Stamina User Interface

Hello again.

What do you think is the best way to handle a stamina meter?


Basic idea, stamina is constantly displayed at the bottom right.


Same idea, but the stamina meter only appears when it's partly depleted on top of the character. When full, it disappears. Note that in this case the stamina meter wouldn't appear at the bottom right like it to does here. I just forgot to remove it.


More simple design with the logo. The stamina meter only appears when it's partly depleted on top of the character.


The stamina meter only appears when it's partly depleted on top of the character.


The stamina meter only appears when it's partly depleted on top of the character.


The stamina meter only appears when it's partly depleted on top of the character.

Also, I'd like input on alternatives and other ideas. The game is turn-based by the way so that might factor into your decision.

[Design] The End of Hit Points

Ok so how about this:

Every time you attack a die is rolled to determine where you end up hitting 6: head 4-5: body 3: left arm 2: right arm 1: legs. This would be displayed as a special die.

Then you roll a number of dice represented by the combat ability of a character. In other words, a combat 3 means you roll 3 dice, a combat of 2 means you roll 2.
The highest roll is selected. So for example, with a combat 3, you’d roll 3 dice: 2, 4, 5; 5 being is highest roll. If you opponent has a combat of 2: 1,3: 3 would be the highest roll. This is pretty much the same as in the board game Risk for those who are familiar. This means that lower skilled character still stand a chance against tougher fighters.

Then you compare if you succeed or fail in your attack. If we keep the example above:

Player A: 5 vs Player B: 3. This means player A succeeds at +2.

Now let’s take another example:

Player A: 3 vs Player B: 5. The player misses at -2. (the enemy dodges the attack).

+2 or -2 is what I’d call the margin of success. The higher the margin of success, the more potential for injury. On the other hand, a lower margin of success means missing of even worse, a counter attack from your opponent. Not that this takes place in a typical turn-based combat: A takes his turn then B takes his turn etc…

How about this:
Different weapons are affected differently by the margin of success.
+1, +2: Graze
+3, +4: Light injury
+5: Serious injury
2-handed battle axe:
0: Graze
+1, +2: light injury
+3, +4, +5: Serious injury

This would keep different stats for different weapons relevant. Not that weapons would simply cause different damage but that’d be one difference from one weapon to another.

This leaves armor and how it affects gameplay. While I do want armor in the game, I don’t want it to further complicate things. I think the best approach would be to reduce the margin of success.

For example:
Being hit on the head while wearing a helmet thus decrease the +2 MoS (margin of success) to +1 and the type of wound you’re getting. I think that’s simple and straightforward enough.

Now the question is, how can I integrate the heart in all this? In the description I’ve provided so far, I’ve talked about how combat influences the potential for injury but not how health comes into play.

Any ideas?


Another option is to drop regular die and use special die instead:

Big Crown: Critical Success
Two small crowns: success
two small skulls: minor failure
One big skull: major failure

Maybe I could play around with that concept.

[Design] The End of Hit Points

I'm not against attacking different body parts as I already have an equipment system which includes head, arms, body and legs:

I could actually draw a die for his location, that'd be cool.

The issue I see with your suggestion is that every weapon would cause the same amount of damage which is problematic (unless I misunderstood what you meant).

I sketched a couple of icons for injuries:

From left to right: broken bone, minor bleeding, major bleeding, stunned, panic, blinded.

[Design] The End of Hit Points

There are differences of course, but I don't know what exactly this system is supposed to accomplish. I don't think it's realistic either.

I think it's realistic that the more wounded you are the less efficient you end up in battle. That's not really what I'm going for however as an end result. I'd agree that just getting weaker the more injured you become is not a thrilling alternative to a basic hit point system.

Anyway, as for the hearts system, it seems to me that it would make more sense if tougher creatures got a lower wound category rather than surviving more wounds of the same category. A punch that causes a serious, but not life threatening wound, to a five years old child would be unlikely to cause a serious wound to an well trained adult, rather, it would cause what you call a light or medium wound. Heck, try the same punch on an elephant and I doubt anyone would say the elephant got wounded.

Oh, I like that. That's a good idea. There's ground to work from this.

As for innovating, it does require more work and trial for sure. I'm hoping it won't be too time consuming as I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel after all.

If you're using dice, I'd say each Graze could be used to inflict a -1 penalty on the next roll. As a rough example, if you're using a D20: 15-20 is a miss. 9-14 is a graze, 3-8 is a light wound, 1-2 is a serious wound. I would avoid instant critical wounds, but of course those can be 1 if you jog the numbers around. That means that if you've been grazed twice, 15-20 is still a miss and 9-14 and 11-14 is a graze, but now 3-10 is a light wound. This means you could get to a point where is it impossible to be further grazed (as now 3-14 is a light wound), but you're still dodging around because you're rolling 16+.

I'm using D6 for the game, do you think it could still be applied then:

This being said, I like the idea that grazes increase the chances of getting a more serious wound further down the road.

How about this:

Instead of representing health reserves, hearts represents your resistance to injuries. Every time you are wounded, your hearts will determine what type of injury you will end up with (from a pool of possible injuries). Some injuries will reduce your heart meter which in turn will make you more prone to more serious injuries further down the line.

Healing would involve picking which injury you want to heal (and removing the associated debuff).

What do you think?

[Design] The End of Hit Points

I think it's a question of how much you're expecting your players to keep track of in combat. There isn't necessarily anything wrong with simply using HP to represent player health; it's just a simple way to do it and will probably resonate well with most players because it's familiar and easy to remember.

I certainly can see the appeal of hit points and why they are consistently used in games. I do want to provide an alternative however, the idea of using hit points in my own game feels wrong, stagnant. I think it's stale.

You COULD take things to Dwarf Fortress levels of detail but remember that you could end up limiting your audience if you do so.

It would also clash with the simplicity of the board games I'm trying to recreate.

Though in the end it's just tracking a couple of different kinds of hitpoints. It makes for a fun but also kinda fiddly system.

At least it's an attempt for innovation. Having three different sets of hit points would be too complex for one I'm going for however (which makes me realize what I've previously suggested is also too complex).

One thing I want to convey is a more realistic health system. Wounds should therefore have consequences. You shouldn't function 100% if you're wounded and should be further impaired the more wounded you become.

In the end graze, light wounds and serious wounds are just different names for hitpoints. It's like having different coin types in your game. 100 copper makes 10 silver makes 1 gold. In this case it's 100 grazes make 10 light wounds make 1 serious wound. Tiered but in practice there's not much difference.

The difference is this though:
Grazes have no consequences besides stacking. They also are recovered after battle.
Light Wounds, Serious Wounds have consequences (stat reducing).

Sure enough it's not a complete and absolute change from hit points but it's more realistic I think for lack of a better word.

This was random injury ramblings.

Cool, keep 'em coming! They're helpful for sure, force me to question my ideas. I realized the system I suggested in my first message is too complicated, back to the drawing board.

***July 17th update***

Characters in-game are defined by stats which represents their strengths and weaknesses. I've decided to use a heart to represents health:

Again, I want to keep units low, I'm aiming at something 10 and lower. In D&D (the older versions anyway) they used to range from 3 to 18.

So each heart unit represents stronger health or constitution if you will. One heart would be weak whereas 10 would be legendary.

The challenge is to determine how each heart translate in-game. In Zelda being hit reduces your heart meter until you have nothing left and die (which is pretty much hit points in heart graphical form).

What I could is to have hearts empty by a quarter if it's a graze then fill back up provided it wasn't entirely empty.

Every time a heart is lost, a light wound occurs. This means that a lost heart wouldn't regenerate after battle and therefore be healed in some other way. A random debuff is also triggered (a minor one).

Basically, a light wound is a loss of one heart, which comes with a minor debuff.

I like this idea but I don't know how well it can be implemented as weaker characters, like a wizard, would potentially die after three light wound which seem a bit much.

Another option is to have a scale damage like so:
Graze: 1/4 heart
Light wound: 1/2 heart
Medium wound: 1 heart (+minor debuff)
Serious wound: 2 hearts (+major debuff)
Critical wound: 3 hearts (+life threatening debuff)

Hearts which haven't been emptied automatically regenerate at the end of battle, sort of like in Far Cry.

What do you think?

[Design] The End of Hit Points

Alright so I want to do away with "hit points". It's a fossil in the rpg genre (my opinion) and too seldom questioned or pioneered upon. The reason is likely because they’re easy to handle in the rpg genre in general. More powerful monsters have higher hit points to compensate for stronger players.

I frankly don’t like it (which is problematic since it’s pretty much the only alternative out there). There’s a good reason for that; they’re difficult to replace. It’s easy to say you don’t like something, anyone can do that, the hard part is finding an alternative.

Now I’m using lower numbers in my game, probably going as high as 10 as a number but hopefully no higher. This includes health of course. If 10 is the highest, the most legendary of scores, weaker characters would need to be able to survive in-game without risking of dying in a single hit. That’s essentially the challenge of the whole thing.

I find a certain charm in lower numbers, it’s simpler and more accessible than having 9999 dropping all over the place. Darkest Dungeon is a good example of lower numbers being attractive. Paper Mario did that as well if I remember correctly.

The challenge is keeping battle realistic without being too lethal. It doesn’t make sense to me how someone could survive more than a couple of sword strikes for one thing.

One option is making it more difficult to hit in the first place and making the consequences of being hit more important. The problem with that missing too often means combat really isn’t progressing and that can drag on and become boring.

Having lower numbers also has the challenge of having a diverse set of weapons with their own pros/cons. You can’t just rely on damage to differentiate a dagger from a sword for one thing. Besides, damage output to differentiate weapons is also sort of a let-down, it’s creatively lazy I think.

Darkest Dungeon death’s door is what inspired me to do away with hit points entirely, that and the injury system of Shadowrun pen and paper. They both have game mechanics which are clever, especially Shadowrun. Shadowrun keeps track of your injuries. It becomes harder to fight the more injured you are. I think that’s not only smart but also realistic and consequentially something I wanted to have in my own game.

So I’m thinking of using injuries as opposed to abstract “points”. I liked the idea of having random injuries selected every time a character is hurt. I couldn’t just have all the various injuries as one big pool, I needed various “levels” of injuries; from light ones to potentially fatal ones. I also needed to tie this in with the health characteristic of player characters and implement a way for opponents where it wouldn’t end up being too complex.
So, basically, that’s where I’m at now and what I’d like to discuss. My objective in creating this thread is to read suggestions from other people and also to point out where the HP alternative I’m putting forward comes short so that I can fix it before it’s hard coded in.

Everything written in this original post is brainstorming, nothing set I stone. I’m trying to organize and tidy up my set of ideas to make them practicable,
unique and fun.

For example:

Suppose a wizard has a health of 2. He therefore needs to be fragile without being a glass canon.

My starting point would be too each unit of health represent being able to sustain a certain amount of injuries. A first reaction might be to say: “Well, what’s the difference with hit points then?”. For one thing, every type on injury would have different impact.

Suppose a health unit means you can sustain a certain amount of injuries before being in a critical state (think Darkest Dungeon Death’s Door here) where every single hit might mean your death, regardless of the gravity of the wound sustained.

So basically, how about something like this:

Graze: has no immediate effect on a character but they’re being kept track of. Once you reach a certain amount of grazes, character are inflicted a single light wound. Grazes are dismissed post-combat. They’re too light to really amount to anything outside of combat that is. It’s sort of a safe “injury”. Three grazes could lead to a single light wound.

Light wound: light wounds have consequences. It can be something like an injured arm which lowers combat effectiveness for example. Light injuries carry over after battles so they’re to be taken more seriously so to speak. You can’t die from light injuries however. Since they do stack, getting healed before the next encounter becomes important (whereas grazes do not carry over). As you stack more light wounds, the next injury leads to a serious wound. I’m thinking of 3 light wounds to keep with the grazes vs light wound concept.

Serious wound: Serious wounds are well… serious. They have much more serious consequences than light wounds. Serious wounds can lead to critical wound which in turn can lead to death. Serious wounds are also harder to heal. Stacking up 3 serious wounds leads to critical wounds.

Critical Wounds: These do not have consequences per se but each critical wound increases the likeliness of dying for each consequences wound.
This doesn’t mean that the only way to die is to gradually stack wounds from level to level. All sorts of injuries can be sustained in battle.
So that’s about it right now and this message is long enough on its own. Let me know what you think!