Accidentally the next Called Shots thread.

[Qzzrbl]

To avoid a complete and total derailment of the "it would be nice..." thread, I'm gonna move this discussion right here.

I know it's been done to death....

So shoot me, I think that "called shots", if implemented properly, would be a great idea.

I haven't really seen any good arguments against it other than as follows:

"It doesn't add to playability."

"It will be spammed and abused."

"Every single fight your character gets in to, he's wildly flailing his blades about and tackling and biting and you're just a tangle of person, armor, and sharpness."

Like with everything else in the game, there will be checks and balances to it.

One simply wouldn't be able to, "hit amos head; hit amos head; hit amos head; hit amos head; hit amos head;" and expect to win the fight, unless said fighter was just that badass.

How come my character is entirely incapable of concentrating an attack on a certain area of another character? If my warrior is hell-bent on whopping someone on the head, and only the head, disregarding every other opportunity of attack, why can't he? If no opening appears for the head, he'll just get his ass kicked as he waits for the moment to strike, how's that abuse?

How come I can't have my archer take a good bit of extra time to carefully and precisely aim his shot?

Called shots wouldn't be something just any 10 day character can go out and expect to do with any real degree of success.

I'm not advocating "critical strikes" or reworks of backstab or anything like that.

[Qzzrbl]

At some particular skill level, with some particular weapons, (melee 'and very much' ranged), a succesfull shot to the neck or head 'kills' or near kills the person instantly. And the time requirements to reach this particular levels is 'nothing' compared to such skills as backstab or sap. They arent 'easy' to improvel ,but ...well ... actually ... they are easy to improve, it just takes time. There is no huge delay, there is minor risks. No greater risks then you'd have usually really.

To have an ability to call shots, would take such concepts as backstab or sap and simply ... toss 'em out of the window. What's a point of them, if you can simply one shot kill a person while being 3 rooms away. Rangers already make 'passable' assassins, with this ability, they'll be 'the' assassins. And warriors ... why do you even need sap? Just do a call shot to the head/neck as a warrior, and any guild except other warriors, and (if 'very' lucky) ranger/assasins with parry will survive the first round. And even with those three it's iffy, since the attacker will initiate the called shot, and the victim will not right away. By the time they'll get out of reel lock (if they even do), the battle will be long lost.

Edit:Actually, parry wont matter as much even, since you need drawn weapons for that. so it's just pure defense versus full offense/skill levels/called shot. It's already a big deal, with the third one it'd be even worse.

I thought everyone was in agreement that warriors are, and always will be, the end-all, be-all of combat.... Like I was saying, it'd be a good while before a warrior would get near good enough to call a shot and have it worth his while, and generally, by that time, he'd likely be able to tear most people to ribbons with regular combat to begin with. So what if that badass warrior wanted to be nice and call a knockout shot to your head? He'd run the risk of tearing you to pieces and accidentally killing you otherwise. If anything, I've always seen sap and backstab as a way for lesser combat classes to kind of compensate for their level of fighty suck.

[brytta.leofa]

For my money, called shots should be implemented in such a way that they don't give any combat advantage: presumably "kill man" always means "do the best you can," and "shoot man" always means "take the best shot you've got."

The point is that you can do what you're trying to emote, rather than emoting what you're trying to do.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I've always supported called shots.

[Cerelum]

Even though I think it would just make killing my characters much easier, I totally support called-shots as well.

JaRoD

[Thunkkin]

How come my character is entirely incapable of concentrating an attack on a certain area of another character? If my warrior is hell-bent on whopping someone on the head, and only the head, disregarding every other opportunity of attack, why can't he? If no opening appears for the head, he'll just get his ass kicked as he waits for the moment to strike, how's that abuse?

Is this a compelling enough reason for the immense amount of coding required?  How often does this situation occur?  Does it warrant overhauling the entire combat code?

It's a nice idea, though, in theory.  I don't oppose it.

Do you think it's likely to happen?

[Lakota]

The idea of being able to "call your shot" is stupid, sorry.

Every time you shoot, a die is rolled against your proficiency in the skill. How about you just roleplay calling your shot and let the roll of the dice do its job?

[Dar]

Well. If it made the attacker 'not' make any hits at all, except to the targeted area, then sure. For example.


The fight begins. Fighter A calls a shot to the head. The round rolls.

Fighter A wins the roll high enough to hit somebody's body, but because of the called shot, he doesnt. He skips the round.
Fighter B nicks him on the body.

Fighter A wins the roll high enough to his somebody's wrist, but because of the called shot, he doesnt. He skips the round.
Fighter B hits you on the foot.

Fighter A wins the roll high enough to his somebody's head. Since the called shot was for the head, he swings and hits it with no particular bonus or negative he'd have otherwise if he hit the head without the called shot.
Fighter B hits you on the body.

And so on.

Then, yeah. Okey. Sounds like a good idea. Would do wonders on sparring rings, or when a fighter wants to show up and do a 'clean' kill. Or when fighting people who cant have their pretty faces battered into a bloodied pulp, making the fencing teacher focus on the pretty aide's buttocks instead.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Conversely, why not just add it? Sorry, but your opposition holds no water.

[Qzzrbl]

Well. If it made the attacker 'not' make any hits at all, except to the targeted area, then sure. For example.


The fight begins. Fighter A calls a shot to the head. The round rolls.

Fighter A wins the roll high enough to hit somebody's body, but because of the called shot, he doesnt. He skips the round.
Fighter B nicks him on the body.

Fighter A wins the roll high enough to his somebody's wrist, but because of the called shot, he doesnt. He skips the round.
Fighter B hits you on the foot.

Fighter A wins the roll high enough to his somebody's head. Since the called shot was for the head, he swings and hits it with no particular bonus or negative he'd have otherwise if he hit the head without the called shot.
Fighter B hits you on the body.

And so on.

Then, yeah. Okey. Sounds like a good idea. Would do wonders on sparring rings, or when a fighter wants to show up and do a 'clean' kill. Or when fighting people who cant have their pretty faces battered into a bloodied pulp, making the fencing teacher focus on the pretty aide's buttocks instead.

Pretty much exactly what I had in mind.

::Edited to add:: And maybe add a slightly higher chance to hit the targeted area.

For instance, in regular combat, let's just say I have a 20% chance of hitting in any one area of the body.

But since I'm capitalizing on the feet, and specifically looking for openings to exploit near the feet, the chance could be raised to something like 30%, but I'll still ignore other opportunities.

And your opponent could still parry/dodge/block your attempt.

[Dar]

If there is a bonus, I disagree. The unfortunate problem is that a hit to the head/neck, can 'end' combat. Which means that if the person doesnt have shield/weapon wielded (for example, while inside the city), then it's just dodging. Maybe make it so called shots activate only after 3rd round or something.

[Qzzrbl]

If there is a bonus, I disagree. The unfortunate problem is that a hit to the head/neck, can 'end' combat. Which means that if the person doesnt have shield/weapon wielded (for example, while inside the city), then it's just dodging. Maybe make it so called shots activate only after 3rd round or something.

So ignoring every single other attack opportunity in exchange for a slight increase of the chance of hitting a targeted area is bad?

You would likely be able to end someone by capitalizing on those missed chances.

[BlackMagic0]

The idea of being able to "call your shot" is stupid, sorry.

Have you even seen what a marksman can do with a rifle, pistol, or even bow 'n' arrow? Cause I do not call that "stupid" at all.
I'll admit that a pistol/rifle holds no sway over this conversation, but the marksmen that can do quite stunning tricks with a bow does.

I believe if we are going to add 'call shot', it should be only for archery/throw. And it should be a branched skill perhaps off of archery/throw, as only a very-very skilled marksman could pull off most shots: instead of general just aiming for the guys body. I am all for called shots as a branched skill, or some other way to regulate it for only skilled 'ranged' things. I am a bit ifie on 'called shots' for melee though.

I would also believe the branched skill of 'call shot' would have three different, or more outcomes. "Critical Miss' 'Minor Miss' 'Hit!' and so forth. A roll each time you use the skill, based off your archery/throw and the 'call shot' skill that you branched from said things. This could at least help balance it a wee-bit.
A 'critical miss' would be completely missing the person as a whole, and just being terrible.
A 'minor miss' would be a possible hit of another location, but a weak shot.
A 'Hit!' would obviously be that you hit the person.

ALSO: Weather/Distance would have to be added into the equation also, for you shouldn't be able to shot at all in a sandstorm or in darkness unless you got super-cat-night-vision.
ALSO ALSO: Same as Ozz said, the size of the target area and the target itself would be taken into account as well.

EDITED: To add one more thought.
EDITED AGAIN: One more thought.

[Qzzrbl]

Well for archery, I was thinking of having aim time increased significantly to account for taking your time to get yourself steady, adjust for wind/distance, etc.,etc.,etc, for unskilled archers. The better you get at archery, the shorter your aim time becomes. And even after taking your time to aim and all that still won't guarantee a hit, it could still miss. But if you -do- hit, it'll be where you were taking so long to aim at.

::Edit:: And of course the size of the target would be taken into account too. You'd have a better chance at aiming an arrow and hitting someone in the body, as opposed to the oh-so-vital head and neck.

[Dar]

Well for archery, I was thinking of having aim time increased significantly to account for taking your time to get yourself steady, adjust for wind/distance, etc.,etc.,etc, for unskilled archers. The better you get at archery, the shorter your aim time becomes. And even after taking your time to aim and all that still won't guarantee a hit, it could still miss. But if you -do- hit, it'll be where you were taking so long to aim at.

::Edit:: And of course the size of the target would be taken into account too. You'd have a better chance at aiming an arrow and hitting someone in the body, as opposed to the oh-so-vital head and neck.

And ... what exactly do you lose if you miss? You can easilly move and hide and try again later. Little loss, plenty of gain. If you backstab somebody, you have atleast endure a hurrendously long delay, during which you can be easilly be cut down by guards, or the person whom you've failed to insta kill. The risk of failure are significant. And what are the risks of failing to shoot an arrow from 3 rooms away? Meh. The whole concept simply is not worth it.

[BlackMagic0]

Stuff!

And ... what exactly do you lose if you miss? You can easilly move and hide and try again later. Little loss, plenty of gain. If you backstab somebody, you have atleast endure a hurrendously long delay, during which you can be easilly be cut down by guards, or the person whom you've failed to insta kill. The risk of failure are significant. And what are the risks of failing to shoot an arrow from 3 rooms away? Meh. The whole concept simply is not worth it.

If we did it the way I was say, if we did it is the big thing, is three rooms away called shot would be basically impossible.

A you gotta add a delay to the shot, make it quite a bit longer then a normal archery/throw shot. Maybe a short delay after.. But I still say 1-2 room max, maybe even 1.

[musashi]

I would think that making a called shot should give someone a penalty to hit, rather than a bonus. To use the theory Qzzrbl brought up, if all someone's doing is focusing on the enemy's feet, then to me it seems like they're intentionally limiting themselves in the hopes of getting a specific outcome.

To me it always felt like that's what a called shot was: I take a penalty to my entire chance to hit in the first place because I'm making the strike more difficult than it has to be ... ... and in exchange, if I'm cool enough to pull it off anyway, I get the damage bonus that striking said area carries.

The idea of saying that I should get a bonus to hit someone in the head because I'm making a called shot there, and then I should get the natural bonus of a headshot for damage on top of that ... sounds broken at its core. To me anyway.

[Lakota]

Conversely, why not just add it? Sorry, but your opposition holds no water.

Why not just add it? Because the notion is utterly silly.

Have you even seen what a marksman can do with a rifle, pistol, or even bow 'n' arrow? Cause I do not call that "stupid" at all.

Yeah, I have seen what a real life marksman can do. I'm an avid shooter/hunter myself. Guess what: Zalanthan archers have neither the technology nor the inclination to compete with real life pistol marksmen. You need to take into account that archers are shooting bows made of chitin often times. Their arrows are also not the straightest.

There's a big difference between an individual shooting a dime out of the air with a pistol as opposed to a Zalanthan archery attempting to shoot the hand of an opponent with inadequate technology.

[BlackMagic0]

Lakota, you really do not pay attention? I was talking about marksmen using bows, not pistols. I've seen amazing things with a bow/arrow, and not some special fancy comp-bow. Also you do not take into account that the Zalanthan archers have been using these things since day one, they've adapted to the use. And a very skilled archer/thrower could defiantly shot your arm or leg or chest or possibly head. Which is why I said I am for it being a BRANCHED skill off archery/throw, which would show that 'skill'.

[Lakota]

Lakota, you really do not pay attention? I was talking about marksmen using bows, not pistols.

Have you even seen what a marksman can do with a rifle, pistol, or even bow 'n' arrow? Cause I do not call that "stupid" at all.

I guess not.

I've seen amazing things with a bow/arrow, and not some special fancy comp-bow.

I've seen recurve bows make fine shots as well. However, they were made with today's technology, not with the meager, piss-poor technology Zalanthans possess.

And a very skilled archer/thrower could defiantly shot your arm or leg or chest or possibly head.

I think we're missing a rather important point here...A very skill archery/thrower can definitely shoot your arm or leg or chest, provided they pass the necessary roll of the dice. Having the ability to call your shots is already possible, don't you see? No code required. Problem solved.

Zalanthan archers =/= real life marksman, be them pistoleers, riflemen, or archers. They just simply aren't as good.

[BlackMagic0]

I'll admit that a pistol/rifle holds no sway over this conversation, but the marksmen that can do quite stunning tricks with a bow does.

Why don't you read the next line in my post, if your going be a smart ass? Also, you say that Zalanthans are to primitive and stupid to make any straight arrows or even good bows out of the materials they have. Be that wood, chitin, bone, or other wise. Though Native Americans made straight arrows, and damn sturdy/powerful bows out of -very- primitive tools and simply wood.

So you are saying Zalanthan people have even more primitive tools then Native Americans did, and are quite retarded? Perhaps you should also read the description on arrows before you say they are not straight.

Almost all people that do archery today do it as a hobby, these people on Zalanthas do it for their life, survival, they make sure they are damn good at it if they are needing it to survive. So your point about modern day people being oh-so amazingly better is rather dulled in comparison, as you got no proof but your own high-and-mighty thoughts.

Either way, Lets not derail this thread any farther with _anymore_ petty bickering and let others have their thoughts in on the matter. You had yours, and me mine.

[Lakota]

I'll admit that a pistol/rifle holds no sway over this conversation, but the marksmen that can do quite stunning tricks with a bow does.

I did read your next line. If it holds no sway, why fucking bring it up? To prove a point at your own expense?

Also, you say that Zalanthans are to primitive and stupid to make any straight arrows or even good bows out of the materials they have.

Not once have I called Zalanthan people stupid or primitive.

Be that wood, chitin, bone, or other wise. Though Native Americans made straight arrows, and damn sturdy/powerful bows out of -very- primitive tools and simply wood.

Native Americans also had a little something 99.99% of all Zalanthans lack: METAL. Albeit, they could not mold nor harvest it in as great of quantities as today, though they certainly had more at their disposal than your average Zalanthian.

So you are saying Zalanthan people have even more primitive tools then Native Americans did, and are quite retarded?

...? I never called Zalanthan people retarded, nor did I say their tools were more primitive. As a whole, their tools are quite in line with what Native Americans had at their disposal. Again, that little thing called metal was something a few tribes in particular made use of.

Perhaps you should also read the description on arrows before you say they are not straight.

Some arrows say "straight as possible." The shaft of an arrow before one crafts it with a feather and arrowhead also says something similar. This does not mean the shafts are perfectly straight. I seriously doubt they are, given the crafters are having to use knife-bladed picks of bone.

So your point about modern day people being oh-so amazingly better is rather dulled in comparison, as you got no proof but your own high-and-mighty thoughts.

Either way, Lets not derail this thread any farther with petty bickering[...]

lol k?

[Dar]

Lakota, Blackmagick. Reread your posts, and ask yourself ... are you going to get this thread locked? Take a chill pill pretty please with Nyr's severed head on top.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

The idea of 'called shot' is not ridiculous. The randomization of the combat code as it stands now is, really, pretty ridiculous. If I want to hit somebody from the waist up, hitting their foot shouldn't be an option. I see called shot as something meant to alleviate this. If I want to hit Brian in the head, why in the world should I hit him in the waist? Furthermore, while I'm trying to hit him on the head, why should I not have a bonus to defense, or, to hit him in the head? I'm not doing a damned thing else but waiting for that chance.

Of course, what would make this grand is if locations had penalties. Feet and legs made you move slower if running off, hands and arms made your attacks weaker or gave more of a chance to disarm you, head and body shots could kill swiftly with one or two strikes but were far easier to defend against. Tactics could then enter into play using the ability to select portions of the body to strike.

Calling it a stupid idea instead of considering ways to make the system work first seems off to me. I'd examine the idea first, myself, and evaluate ways to make it a wyn idea, instead of flipping out because it's a fale idea.

[musashi]

Lakota, Blackmagick. Reread your posts, and ask yourself ... are you going to get this thread locked? Take a chill pill pretty please with Nyr's severed head on top.

It's just the internet guys