Interview Info about Torment's Tides and Combat at VG247

[Infinitron]

He could CS a mage before he would cast a spell if that's of any consequence.

But why? He had nothing to react to before the spell was cast.

Turn-based systems give you knowledge in advance of things and allow you to be more reactive, which can destroy the ability to create certain interesting tactical situations under such systems.

 

[tuluse]

Why not just use RTwP? What advantages does PB offer over RTwP in such a scenario?

2 things.

1) You can't react instantly to new information. This forces you to live with your plan.

2) There are no twitch skills required. This may or may not be an advantage depending on your opinions.

 

[Gozma]

PB is actually a cool way to make fighters and mages differentiated without having to give fighters de facto spells

Let fighters have rapid reaction to circumstance while mages need to commit to future actions

 

[Infinitron]

Turn-based systems give you knowledge in advance of things and allow you to be more reactive, which can destroy the ability to create certain tactical situations.

This is unsubstantiated bullshit.

What do you mean, unsubstantiated? I just gave you a perfectly good example.

What advantages does PB offer over RTwP in such a scenario?

It's slower paced and less twitchy, requires less reflexes, etc. Let me remind you that "twitchiness" is considered decline and popamole on the Codex.

 

[Infinitron]

PB is actually a cool way to make fighters and mages differentiated without having to give fighters de facto spells

Let fighters have rapid reaction to circumstance while mages need to commit to future actions

Frozen Synapse has a similar dichotomy, actually. Shotgun troops shoot fast but have short ranges, rocket launcher troops shoot slowly and have long ranges, and assault rifle troops are somewhere in the middle.

 

[l3loodAngel]

He could CS a mage before he would cast a spell if that's of any consequence.

But why? He had nothing to react to before the spell was cast.

Turn-based systems give you knowledge in advance of things and allow you to be more reactive, which can destroy the ability to create certain interesting tactical situations in such systems.

Just make spell casting take less than a round or be cast at the end of the PC/NPC round. Problem solved.

Why not just use RTwP? What advantages does PB offer over RTwP in such a scenario?

2 things.

1) You can't react instantly to new information. This forces you to live with your plan.

2) There are no twitch skills required. This may or may not be an advantage depending on your opinions.

1. That you can amend by reloading. I am still not sure this is bonus...

 

[Jaesun]

Not if you can't save during combat.

 

[tuluse]

It is a poor man's compromise for either well designed TB or RTwP.

Are you saying Frozen Synapse is a poor man's compromise

 

[Gozma]

RTwP is basically phasebased but the player gets to choose the frequency of the phases to make any fight trivial, and the AI gets to make tons of bad pathing decisions

 

[Infinitron]

Just make spell casting take less than a round or be cast at the end of the PC/NPC round. Problem solved.

"Problem solved" But what if you want to design a system where spells DO take more than one round to cast? Must all spellcasting systems work the same way?

And what if instead of a spell being cast it is something else? What if the mage cast an area effect spell in one round and party member B needs to retreat from the effect? In a turn-based system he gets the opportunity to retreat, in a phased-based system he might not have that opportunity.

You guys are just arguing for the sake of arguing. There's nothing incorrect about the advantages of phase-based combat over turn-based combat as I've presented them.

 

[tuluse]

But that's wrong. There is a whole subgenre of strategy games that focus on phase based simultaneous actions.

 

[l3loodAngel]

Just make spell casting take less than a round or be cast at the end of the PC/NPC round. Problem solved.

"Problem solved" But what if you want to design a system where spells DO take more than one round to cast?

Then it's still going to be interrupted because other players have their turns. What's your point?
This phase based scripted system creates more problems than it is worth imo...

 

[Infinitron]

Then it's still going to be interrupted because other players have their turns.

Not if you used your phase to send all of your other party members to chase down the enemy archers and they're all too far away from the mage now.

What is so hard to understand about this? Phase-based combat allows these interesting tactical situations to exist that are much harder to create in a reactive, turn-based system.

You might also want to read up about how the overly reactive nature of turn-based combat caused some serious problems in The Banner Saga, which they had to fix by implementing a special "Pillage Mode".

 

[tuluse]

But that's wrong. There is a whole subgenre of strategy games that focus on phase based simultaneous actions.

Why do I care?

I am talking about tactical RPGs here.

I like game mechanic X, I would like to see it in an RPG

I can't see the advantage of game mechanic X

Well it does A, B, and C and doesn't do E, D, and F. It's kind of neat and adds something new.

It's just a poor man's compromise of mechanic Y which does A, B, and E and mechanic Z which does C, D, and F.

No it's something different all together, here's some examples of games that use it to great effect.

Those games aren't RPGs, so they don't count

Edit: I don't know how to respond to this at all. Your argument is essentially, unless a game mechanic has been used before by an RPG before it can never be used well by an RPG.

 

[Cowboy Moment]

Rather they concentrate on one system instead of having two broken ones.

In phase based, all actions are determined at the beginning of the round. Phase based can also be called "round based". Same thing.

In turn based, all actions are determined within the turn of the character.

There is one difference FFS, the choice of action before the round rather than during the round... Is making toggle button that hard?

They likely don't want to do include it because they don't want to deal with dumbfucks like you turning on TB mode and complaining that balanced-for-PB combat encounters are too easy.

 

[Infinitron]

Edit: I don't know how to respond to this at all. Your argument is essentially, unless a game mechanic has been used before by an RPG before it can never be used well by an RPG.

The funny thing is that it HAS been used by RPGs, and not even just blobbers.

 

[Excidium]

You don't need action points for that.

Thanks for helping me out there. Action points just do everything better.

More like they make everything needlessly granulated.

He could CS a mage before he would cast a spell if that's of any consequence.

But why? He had nothing to react to before the spell was cast.

Turn-based systems give you knowledge in advance of things and allow you to be more reactive, which can destroy the ability to create certain interesting tactical situations in such systems.

Well keep in mind that this varies from system to system.

Like for example in VtM and derivates, actions are described in reverse order of initiative so the faster a character is, the more of a general idea of what will happen in a given combat round he has, you still don't know exactly what happened because rolls haven't been made but you know what are the slower characters' intention. You can also opt to delay your turn for the opportunity to act at any point during the combat round AFTER your initiative to interrupt other people's actions for example.

 

[Excidium]

Because the half/full turn action system that some pnp systems use does the job well enough.

 

[tuluse]

What is wrong with this argument? You will next tell me that we should also have FPS elements because why the heck not o_O.

Well...

 

[Excidium]

Yes, but how fine do you want to get?

 

[l3loodAngel]

Rather they concentrate on one system instead of having two broken ones.

In phase based, all actions are determined at the beginning of the round. Phase based can also be called "round based". Same thing.

In turn based, all actions are determined within the turn of the character.

There is one difference FFS, the choice of action before the round rather than during the round... Is making toggle button that hard?

They likely don't want to do include it because they don't want to deal with dumbfucks like you turning on TB mode and complaining that balanced-for-PB combat encounters are too easy.

Advertise it as PB for idiots like you to vote for it, than balance it around for TB... Sounds good?

Then it's still going to be interrupted because other players have their turns.

1. Not if you used your phase to send all of your other party members to chase down the enemy archers and they're all too far away from the mage now.

What is so hard to understand about this? 2. Phase-based combat allows these interesting tactical situations to exist that are much harder to create in a reactive, turn-based system.

1. So just put a freaking mage further than one can reach in a single round. Wow, that was that hard. Why would anyone chase down enemy archers first if there is a mage standing idle.
2. They are neither interesting, nor had to create. I still don't see a single reason why PB is superior.

 

[Harg Harfardarssen]

Turn-based systems give you knowledge in advance of things and allow you to be more reactive, which can destroy the ability to create certain tactical situations.

This is unsubstantiated bullshit.

What do you mean, unsubstantiated? I just gave you a perfectly good example.

What advantages does PB offer over RTwP in such a scenario?

It's slower paced and less twitchy, requires less reflexes, etc. Let me remind you that "twitchiness" is considered decline and popamole on the Codex.

Also, RTwP is still fairly reactive. The major tactical difference between phase based and TB/RTwP is that b/c you make all of your decisions without knowing what situation will be when they are executed, in PB you are always trying to predict what will happen when they are executed.

To me the differences are most apparent in healing. For example, imagine a battle against 3 enemies, where each enemy capable of hitting for 1/4 your chars HP and heal spell (assuming real resource constraints) will restore 1/2HP.

When your fighter and cleric are both at 3/4 HP in a TB or RTwP game, you can just wait for a hit to land on the fighter or cleric to heal him with relative safety. If you are a bit late, its not a huge deal.

In a phase based game you have to make a decision - do you wait until the next round to see if either character will gain the full benefit? Do you heal the fighter knowing that although you will waste some healing potential, there is a small, but not insignificant chance all hits will land on him and kill him? Do you heal the cleric b/c although there is an even smaller chance he will die, his death will rob you of your main source of healing/resurrection?

 

[Globbi]

You don't need action points for that.

Thanks for helping me out there. Action points just do everything better.

More like they make everything needlessly granulated.

But in real-time or time frames everything is even more granulated, it's just that instead of action points are milliseconds or screen frames. There are always some kind of action points, whether hidden or not. Having such points as measure of every action makes system easier to balance and more clear to users. If we're going for standard turn-based system, I would like it to have fallout-like action points.

 

[Hobz]

What is wrong with this argument? You will next tell me that we should also have FPS elements because why the heck not o_O.

Total strawman

I'd personaly like a PB combat, if only to have an alternative to PE's RTwP and W2's TB. I liked Frozen Synaspe and have to admit it felt more rewarding to properly anticipate ennemy's action than "simply" reacting to it.

I'd like to try a game where I don't CS when I feel it's necessary, but rather use a silence on a spellcaster because I "bet" it's gonna be necessary/opportune to do.

 

[Wizfall]

Obviously some people don't understand what PB is or just don't realize the tactical implication.
By the way thanks Infinitron i just checked a Knights of Legend video, that was what i was looking for (would have liked to brofist but i'm no more able to do it, don't know why).
I think that Colin want to go PB to make combat more complex (and no reflex based) than RTwP and quicker than action point TB.
But a no "blobber" PB combat is more complex than action point TB and no faster (or very barely).