As an avid player of Dungeons & Dragons, one thing that I always admired was the rich variety of combat options. Sure, it all comes down to rolling dice in the end. Before dice hit the table, however, there is a wide range of weapon choices available. While many of these come down to the "fetch a bigger stick" variety, at any given tier there are a variety of choices that are equally valid. What makes these similar weapons each a useful choice is different Damage Types, which make certain weapons situationally better than others. That means that any weapon can be general purpose, but certain weapons give an advantage/disadvantage when used against the right/wrong enemy, a concept that I think could be useful in Minecraft.
Many people have asked for a broader range of melee options. Some have asked for more ranged. Adding different kinds of damage makes this idea make sense. Like in Dungeons & Dragons, weapons in Minecraft can be sorted into three broad types. The usefulness of this will be in giving mobs resistance or weakness to certain damage types. This "rock-paper-scissors" arrangement isn't just filler; it in fact fills several roles. First, as a new dynamic to SMP. Players with different weapons will achieve better results when working together than they can alone. Second, it creates more interesting combat dynamics. Do you carry multiple weapons or leave more free space for other items? Is it better to fight a given mob with a real weapon, or is there a tool that will work better for the situation? You just got the materials to upgrade one piece of equipment...but which one is best to improve? Lastly, it allows for more mob variety. Both in more types of mobs, not only with different combat types, but different resistances, and also with the introduction of prefix types which change the way in which mobs are fought; armoured skeletons, regenerating zombies, leathery creepers, and more.
In order to help players understand how the new system affects combat, a visual and/or audible indicator should be introduced. On hit a mob could flash, dimly for normal damage, brightly for a critical hit, and not at all for a resistance. Similarly, the hit sound could be made louder or otherwise more "serious" sounding for strong hits, and a quieter or less "painful" sound for weak hits.
Slashing
The existing Swords fit this category nicely. Additionally, Axes can be used as a substitute for a sword when the player hasn't got a sword handy.
Piercing
For piercing damage, we add the first new weapon, a Spear. As an improvised tool, a Pickaxe can be used.
Crushing
The second new weapon, the Warhammer, fits this category, as does the Shovel. The hammer would likely use the most materials of any weapon, and so would likely have slightly more mobs weak to their damage type in order to compensate.
Ranged
With a change in combat dynamics, ranged combat needs to change as well. This can be done either through the addition of new weapons, or new arrows. With the arrows, recipes for Broadhead (Slashing) and Blunthead (Crushing) arrows can be added. Not very difficult, but requires a system for switching between different kinds of ammunition.
Another possibility is the addition of two new weapons, both often requested;
The bow becomes a ranged Slashing weapon. Let's just pretend the arrows are broadhead.
Next, add in the crossbow. This, with narrow tipped bolts, becomes the Piercing option.
Finally, the musket, or flintlock. This is no rapid-fire weapon or instant killer. Its round ball projectiles merely make it a Crushing alternative to the bow, as slow as the others. In fact, neither it nor the Crossbow would deal any greater damage than the Bow, except on targets weak to their damage type.
With this solution, of course, the alternative weapons would have a higher material cost, both for ammunition and for the base weapon. To balance this out, each of them would also differ in durability, and in amount of ammunition created, proportionate to the difference in material amount/scarcity.
Enemies
So, now we have our damage types, and weapons for each. What changes with combat?
Each existing non-passive mob, and any new ones, will have weaknesses and resistances. Thus, they will take 50% more or less damage than normal from certain weapons and tools. For example...
Creepers, being implied by Notch to be plantlike, would be resistant to Crushing, and weak to Slashing.
Skeletons, being made of bones and empty space, are resistant to Piercing, but brittle and weak to Crushing.
Zombies aren't phased by much, and are resistant to both Slashing and Piercing (making up for their general weakness), but fit the undead stereotype with weakness to Crushing.
Spiders are just big bugs. Even the poisonous ones. Being unburned by sunlight, agile, small, gifted with X-ray vision, and able to scale walls, they hardly need an advantage. Thus, they take normal damage from all types.
Slimes have no real anatomy, and aren't all that tough. Both as compensation for their limitations, and to increase the chances of creating smaller Slimes, they gain a resistance to all types of damage.
Endermen are spooky, and I'm not sure how to represent that. However, there needs to be something weak to Piercing, so they get that status. So, to make up for it, they get resistance to Slashing and Crushing both. Let's say that it represents an ability to twist space that isn't effective against precise attacks.
The Ender Dragon is the big bad boss monster. It's not supposed to be easy. It's tough, and armoured, big, and mean. Naturally, it's resistant to all types.
Comments and suggestions are welcome, but please keep them constructive. Saying that you hate guns is your right, and you're entitled to your opinion, but it's irrelevant to the topic at large, and I've already provided an alternative. So please keep your responses as polite and relevant as you can.
Quote from Current Armor Proposal »
Base armour offers normal protection to all attacks. By combining the base armour with other materials (Amount varies by piece), the player may elect to specialize.
Armor + Wool produces a padded Plate armour that is strong against Crushing.
Armour + Leather produces flexible Brigandine, strong against Slashing.
Armour + Ingots produces chain-woven Mail, which is strong against Piercing. Due to the needed materials being more scarce, it uses less than the other two. Diamond Mail is made using Gold Ingots (which is only fair, since Gold Mail would pretty much be a joke).
None of these offer any decrease in protection, only specialization. By choosing to spend the materials to make one, you choose not to make the other two, and that is the trade-off. This combined with enchantments would allow a player a maximum defence against one damage type, good defence against two, or by mixing pieces and enchantments they slightly better defence across the board.
Note that Mobs will not have different damage types, making the choice to wear specialized armours a choice that is purely aesthetic outside of PVP. However, in PVP, it would drastically change the dynamic, allowing good or bad matchups to change the flow of battle. While high-end equipment would always be better, in certain circumstances a person in Iron could have an even shot against someone with Diamond gear.
For conservative people, a lite variation of this suggestion could entail just adding different attack properties without adding ten different weapons. That is, keep the sword as is (neutral property), and enable the other tools to do just as much as the sword, or more, if used against enemies weak to their attack properties. Or maybe give them an increased chance for critical hits instead of a straight-up damage increase.
Eh, Minecraft is turning more into and RPG now, I liked it the way it was. This would be better as a mod
While the idea takes its inspiration from tabletop roleplaying, I don't really see it as an "RPG idea". It's more a way to simulate the way that certain combat strategies are more or less effective against specific creatures. The reason that there are so many weapons in real life is because different ones work better in different situations. Rather than making Minecraft complex to the point that people must consider numerous factors of speed, reach, arc of swing, etc, setting a basic "this weapon is X kind and works better on Y mobs, it is no good against Z" formula makes combat a little less boring (a common complaint) and would satisfy people's desire for more weapons.
@Lumireaver: I can see the benefit in that, but really I'm not suggesting much be added. Four weapons tops, or two with options to use clay and iron-or-something as arrowheads in place of flint. Then add in the "use tools for different damage types" as you say. I thought about also adding in armours that excel against one type or other for PVP, but decided it would indeed be needlessly complicated at that point.
While the idea takes its inspiration from tabletop roleplaying, I don't really see it as an "RPG idea". It's more a way to simulate the way that certain combat strategies are more or less effective against specific creatures.
AKA, "RPG"
That is what basically what an RPG is; you, the player, have several techniques or weapons at hand. They, the enemies, have different "types" or "classes" or what-so-have-you. You, the player, uses the different techniques or weapons to deal more damage to a specific enemy.
Furthermore, any new weapons are merely old weapons, retextured, doing different damage values. For example, a crossbow as you suggested is a bow, using differently built arrows and retextured to look like a crossbow. A "warhammer" is simply a sword that has a larger end, and serves no purpose other than bonking mobs on the head instead of slicing them.
If anything, to buff up combat, new animations need to be added, that's pretty much all that is needed.
AKA, "RPG"
That is what basically what an RPG is; you, the player, have several techniques or weapons at hand. They, the enemies, have different "types" or "classes" or what-so-have-you. You, the player, uses the different techniques or weapons to deal more damage to a specific enemy.
Furthermore, any new weapons are merely old weapons, retextured, doing different damage values. For example, a crossbow as you suggested is a bow, using differently built arrows and retextured to look like a crossbow. A "warhammer" is simply a sword that has a larger end, and serves no purpose other than bonking mobs on the head instead of slicing them.
If anything, to buff up combat, new animations need to be added, that's pretty much all that is needed.
I hardly see how a simplification of real-world concepts automatically denotes a Role Playing Game. It's what defines a game in general. Hitting things with your tools and getting blocks? It's a simplification of digging, mining, or cutting lumber. In fact, to use your logic, why should he have a different tool for any of these things? A shovel or an axe is just a "retextured" pick that has different "damage" values to specific blocks over others. Clearly, we just need one item, the Tool, to collect all block types.
Different tools for different blocks. Different weapons for different mobs. It's the same thing.
AKA, "RPG"
That is what basically what an RPG is; you, the player, have several techniques or weapons at hand. They, the enemies, have different "types" or "classes" or what-so-have-you. You, the player, uses the different techniques or weapons to deal more damage to a specific enemy.
Furthermore, any new weapons are merely old weapons, retextured, doing different damage values. For example, a crossbow as you suggested is a bow, using differently built arrows and retextured to look like a crossbow. A "warhammer" is simply a sword that has a larger end, and serves no purpose other than bonking mobs on the head instead of slicing them.
If anything, to buff up combat, new animations need to be added, that's pretty much all that is needed.
Do you just flame every suggestion you see? I've never once seen you make a positive comment.
Great suggestion, I've always felt combat needs to be more interesting. Thanks for turning my basic ideas into a real suggestion.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
No, there has never, ever been a sandbox game with a story or ending... except Grand Theft Auto... and Saints Row... and Red Dead Redemption... and Crack Down... and Assassins Creed...
I agree with Neospector, this is just making Minecraft more like an RPG, we only need a bow and sword, I think monsters should be able to block:
A skeleton with a stone sword that follows the cursor, the sword blocks all attacks that hit it, you have to be fast(it's slow) and hit it before it moves its sword in the way. Zombie pigmen can also do this, they have gold swords, and are faster.
I agree with Neospector, this is just making Minecraft more like an RPG, we only need a bow and sword, I think monsters should be able to block:
A skeleton with a stone sword that follows the cursor, the sword blocks all attacks that hit it, you have to be fast(it's slow) and hit it before it moves its sword in the way. Zombie pigmen can also do this, they have gold swords, and are faster.
I hardly see how a simplification of real-world concepts automatically denotes a Role Playing Game. It's what defines a game in general. Hitting things with your tools and getting blocks? It's a simplification of digging, mining, or cutting lumber. In fact, to use your logic, why should he have a different tool for any of these things? A shovel or an axe is just a "retextured" pick that has different "damage" values to specific blocks over others. Clearly, we just need one item, the Tool, to collect all block types.
Different tools for different blocks. Different weapons for different mobs. It's the same thing.
Hahahah you have no idea how much that made me laugh. Nice one :wink.gif:
Personally, I'd like a method similar to taht used in Dwarf Fortress.
Weapons have a contact area, weight, and attack velocity of a given value, and armor has hardness, thickness, etc. Different materials have different values.
When they go against each other, a calculation takes place that determines whether the weapon pierces armor, glances off, or becomes a blunt attack.
If it pierces, it does the same amount of damage it would do if the player weren't wearing armor, and has a normal amount of knockback.
If it glances off, it does nothing.
If it becomes a blunt attack, the damage is based on the armors thickness and the weapons weight and velocity. It would also have higher knockback.
This would allow for a HUGE diversity of new weapons to be created, as well as enrich existing combat.
Different weapons of different materials could have different weights, contact areas, and swing velocities.
Stone swords could be heavier than, say, an iron sword, but have a smaller contact area, making them more of a blunt weapon good for beating up armor-users.
spears could be added that have a small contact area, low weight, and less velocity than a sword. Due to their tiny contact area, they have a higher chance to pierce armor, but are also more likely to glance off.
Axes could have a larger contact area than a sword, but be heavier and have higher velocity.
War hammers could have high velocity and a VERY high weight, but have a very large contact area, making it next to impossible to pierce something with a War hammer.
Instead of diamond being simply the best material, it could be made to be the lightweight weapon material with a very sharp edge.
Stone could be the heavier weapon material with a more blunt edge.
Iron could be a median between the two.
This would make diamond suck for warhammers, but be good for spears and swords. It would be good for axes too, but a bit of a waste due to how stats are calculated. Iron would be a great choice for Axes as weapons. Stone would be best for war hammers, since it would be the heaviest weapon material.
Not only would weapons be improved, but armor would have added depth.
Chainmail armor could be added as a useable item, which would have better defense against blunt attacks, but have next to no chance for attacks to glance off, causing almost all small-contact area attacks to pierce.
Leather armor would be similar to chain mail.
This is just a general idea, but I hope I get my point across.
EDIT:
two things I want to say:
1.) a weapon equip slot should be added to keep people from switching weapons easily in mid-combat to easily adapt.
@FireHawkDelta: An RPG defines itself by statistic based gameplay, a story-driven narrative, tiered enemies that become less difficult to battle after the player defeats an arbitrary number of lesser-tiered foes, unique and exceedingly powerful "boss" enemies at climactic story-relevant locations, and often a number of supporting characters with unique and varied abilities from the protagonist, typically also player controlled, who assist the protagonist on their journey. Could you please point out which, or even any, of these elements that I have proposed to add? By contrast, virtually any weapon with multiple weapons has differing properties that make one situationally better than another, depending on the opponent. For example, a space shooter where a player has Railgun, Laser, and Missiles might define that Railgun works best against armour, Laser against shields, and Missile does heavy damage against both, but is best used only against the small fast ships that are too quick to effectively target, but lack the jamming capabilities of bigger, slower ships. Or the traditional FPS trio, a rapidfire but weak midrange weapon, the too-innacurate-for-annything-but-close but powerful shotgun, or the long-range and high damage but too-slow-to-use-near-the-opponent sniper rifle. It's a basic concept in combat-oriented gameplay; The Right Tool For The Job.
@Sting_Auer: You're right. That would add a great deal more depth to the system and make for a very interesting dynamic. I even considered something of the sort. So, you might wonder why I would present this idea instead? Well, as I said, this is a super-simplified system. Minecraft itself follows a formula of complexity from the most simple of components. So, essentially, it comes down to two main considerations.
First, and as I said before, a "rock-paper-scissors" dynamic makes things easy to remember. Rather than having to account for variances in three different statistics and compare them to two or three stats for each enemy, the player only has to remember whether the weapon is an A, B, or C type, and which it would make more sense to work on the enemy they're facing. This makes the system more intuitive, rather than requiring a lot of stat-math DPS calculation. Secondly, it's a matter of unobtrusiveness. A system that factors in construction materials weight, shape, ability to hold an edge, and such like, will as you said result in certain weapons being better at what are typically seen as lower tiers. This has an effect of hindering balance, making certain early-game options superior to late game alternatives. Additionally, it forces players to re-learn how to play to a greater degree. Rather than simply having to know which tool to use, they will have to know which tool made of what to use. It would no longer be a simple matter of knowing that the next material is always better than the last. This would be frustrating to long-time players, especially those that suddenly find that a portion (perhaps a great portion) of their equipment is no longer as good as they have come to expect it will be, and make the game harder to understand for new players.
@FireHawkDelta: An RPG defines itself by statistic based gameplay, a story-driven narrative, tiered enemies that become less difficult to battle after the player defeats an arbitrary number of lesser-tiered foes, unique and exceedingly powerful "boss" enemies at climactic story-relevant locations, and often a number of supporting characters with unique and varied abilities from the protagonist, typically also player controlled, who assist the protagonist on their journey. Could you please point out which, or even any, of these elements that I have proposed to add? By contrast, virtually any weapon with multiple weapons has differing properties that make one situationally better than another, depending on the opponent. For example, a space shooter where a player has Railgun, Laser, and Missiles might define that Railgun works best against armour, Laser against shields, and Missile does heavy damage against both, but is best used only against the small fast ships that are too quick to effectively target, but lack the jamming capabilities of bigger, slower ships. Or the traditional FPS trio, a rapidfire but weak midrange weapon, the too-innacurate-for-annything-but-close but powerful shotgun, or the long-range and high damage but too-slow-to-use-near-the-opponent sniper rifle. It's a basic concept in combat-oriented gameplay; The Right Tool For The Job.
@Sting_Auer: You're right. That would add a great deal more depth to the system and make for a very interesting dynamic. I even considered something of the sort. So, you might wonder why I would present this idea instead? Well, as I said, this is a super-simplified system. Minecraft itself follows a formula of complexity from the most simple of components. So, essentially, it comes down to two main considerations.
First, and as I said before, a "rock-paper-scissors" dynamic makes things easy to remember. Rather than having to account for variances in three different statistics and compare them to two or three stats for each enemy, the player only has to remember whether the weapon is an A, B, or C type, and which it would make more sense to work on the enemy they're facing. This makes the system more intuitive, rather than requiring a lot of stat-math DPS calculation. Secondly, it's a matter of unobtrusiveness. A system that factors in construction materials weight, shape, ability to hold an edge, and such like, will as you said result in certain weapons being better at what are typically seen as lower tiers. This has an effect of hindering balance, making certain early-game options superior to late game alternatives. Additionally, it forces players to re-learn how to play to a greater degree. Rather than simply having to know which tool to use, they will have to know which tool made of what to use. It would no longer be a simple matter of knowing that the next material is always better than the last. This would be frustrating to long-time players, especially those that suddenly find that a portion (perhaps a great portion) of their equipment is no longer as good as they have come to expect it will be, and make the game harder to understand for new players.
Just because Minecraft has no storyline makes your idea no less RPG. Combat mechanics in sandbox-esc games have a very basic system:
You have a few weapons, be these swords and bows in Minecraft or something else in another game. These weapons have different strength levels or have different tiers to make them more or less powerful. The more powerful a weapon, the more rare or difficult it is to get. It is highly unlikely for a sandbox game to have a rock-paper-scissors mechanic due to the fact that the sole point of a sandbox is to move at your own pace; you are in no way obligated to build any specific kind of weapon over another, you can just as easily defend your house with a bow as you can with an iron sword.
Meanwhile, an RPG has a very complex system of combat mechanics:
An RPG has a lot of different types of weapons existing solely for the purpose of being differently looking than a sword or other weapon. These weapons also have different strength levels or tiers. An RPG usually includes a rock-paper-scissors mechanic somewhere in the game (there are a few exceptions). Meanwhile the tiers of mobs goes up, making them stronger as you go along. In an RPG-esc game, you are obligated to switch weapons to better suit your attacking mobs, and it's harder to defend your home with one weapon than it is with another.
Now, your suggestion is a rock-paper-scissors mechanic (Slashing, piercing, ect.), adding a lot of different weapons solely for the purpose of them looking different than a sword or bow (as I said before, a crossbow as you suggested is a bow, using differently built arrows and retextured to look like a crossbow). You suggestion also includes tiers of mobs (as you so put it, prefixes). Prefixes alone are not a bad idea. However, bundled with a rock-paper-scissors mechanic and a lot of new weapons only there for the sake of being there makes it a bad one.
Ergo, your suggestion is more RPG than it is sandbox.
Nothing you just said was accurate or resembled sense.
EDIT I really should leave it at that, but as I am always berating others for not supporting their statements, I will elaborate.
R-P-S elements exist in any system with varying weapon types. They are hardly an RPG-exclusive phenomena. I have already explained this once. I do not care to go into detail on it twice within the span of minutes.
The suggestion is hardly "weapons for the sake of weapons". People have been wanting more weapons for a long time, and people have stated that combat is overly dull for a long time. My suggestion is there to meet an apparent need. It makes combat more varied, and allows an alternative to just using the Sword and Bow.
Prefix mobs are not tiered. They would simply change the tactics required to fight them. It's not even my idea. Notch first proposed adding titled mobs, and we have Cave Spiders to show for it. If you were, for example, to have a "Speedy Zombie", it would still be a zombie. It would just be a zombie that was better to fight at range. Having different tactical elements doesn't translate in any way to "only beatable if you have killed X weaker ones first".
Nothing you just said was accurate or resembled sense.
I have checked my post thoroughly. It made complete sense.
In short terms; your suggestion uses weapons that are there just because they are supposed to look different. Your mechanic makes it harder to defend your home, and requires the player to build the pointless weapons just so they have a chance at defending their home, which in turn ruins the very point of a sandbox game; moving at your own pace and not having to use one thing over another.
I have checked my post thoroughly. It made complete sense.
In short terms; your suggestion uses weapons that are there just because they are supposed to look different. Your mechanic makes it harder to defend your home, and requires the player to build the pointless weapons just so they have a chance at defending their home, which in turn ruins the very point of a sandbox game; moving at your own pace and not having to use one thing over another.
On the contrary, it in no way prevents a player from moving at their own pace. Instead, it in fact allows them more freedom to do so. All weapons will deal damage. Mobs will take slightly more, slightly less, or the same damage depending on what they are struck with. Thus, a player can choose to make a weapon that makes combat easier against the mob that they consider to be the biggest threat, but will still be effective in most situations, only making certain fights take slightly longer. For casual players, combat won't change much, other than letting players focus more on their problem areas. However, for those who want to put in the effort, they will be able to make all combat easier, by always choosing the tool or weapon best suited to the situation, or even create an added challenge for themselves by deliberately using less effective strategies, thus making combat more interesting for those growing weary of "just smack it with the smacking tool".
To be honest, I regret even bringing up D&D. The suggestion has very little to do with it, and I think that some people have a bad habit of just skimming topics and picking out phrases to make a fuss over. So, and this is directed at everyone, let's just keep this confined to the relative merits and pitfalls of a system with different weapons that have more or less effect on specific mobs, not where the idea comes from, shall we?
I really like the idea of a war hammer that is more effective against the undead, more weapons and specific mob weaknesses in general would be cool, but I don't know if that would be desirable for vanilla, as it would disrupt the balance between the roguelike element of minecraft and the sandbox/survival elements. Once the mod api comes out this would make for an awesome mod.
Many people have asked for a broader range of melee options. Some have asked for more ranged. Adding different kinds of damage makes this idea make sense. Like in Dungeons & Dragons, weapons in Minecraft can be sorted into three broad types. The usefulness of this will be in giving mobs resistance or weakness to certain damage types. This "rock-paper-scissors" arrangement isn't just filler; it in fact fills several roles. First, as a new dynamic to SMP. Players with different weapons will achieve better results when working together than they can alone. Second, it creates more interesting combat dynamics. Do you carry multiple weapons or leave more free space for other items? Is it better to fight a given mob with a real weapon, or is there a tool that will work better for the situation? You just got the materials to upgrade one piece of equipment...but which one is best to improve? Lastly, it allows for more mob variety. Both in more types of mobs, not only with different combat types, but different resistances, and also with the introduction of prefix types which change the way in which mobs are fought; armoured skeletons, regenerating zombies, leathery creepers, and more.
In order to help players understand how the new system affects combat, a visual and/or audible indicator should be introduced. On hit a mob could flash, dimly for normal damage, brightly for a critical hit, and not at all for a resistance. Similarly, the hit sound could be made louder or otherwise more "serious" sounding for strong hits, and a quieter or less "painful" sound for weak hits.
Slashing
The existing Swords fit this category nicely. Additionally, Axes can be used as a substitute for a sword when the player hasn't got a sword handy.
Piercing
For piercing damage, we add the first new weapon, a Spear. As an improvised tool, a Pickaxe can be used.
Crushing
The second new weapon, the Warhammer, fits this category, as does the Shovel. The hammer would likely use the most materials of any weapon, and so would likely have slightly more mobs weak to their damage type in order to compensate.
Ranged
With a change in combat dynamics, ranged combat needs to change as well. This can be done either through the addition of new weapons, or new arrows. With the arrows, recipes for Broadhead (Slashing) and Blunthead (Crushing) arrows can be added. Not very difficult, but requires a system for switching between different kinds of ammunition.
Another possibility is the addition of two new weapons, both often requested;
The bow becomes a ranged Slashing weapon. Let's just pretend the arrows are broadhead.
Next, add in the crossbow. This, with narrow tipped bolts, becomes the Piercing option.
Finally, the musket, or flintlock. This is no rapid-fire weapon or instant killer. Its round ball projectiles merely make it a Crushing alternative to the bow, as slow as the others. In fact, neither it nor the Crossbow would deal any greater damage than the Bow, except on targets weak to their damage type.
With this solution, of course, the alternative weapons would have a higher material cost, both for ammunition and for the base weapon. To balance this out, each of them would also differ in durability, and in amount of ammunition created, proportionate to the difference in material amount/scarcity.
Enemies
So, now we have our damage types, and weapons for each. What changes with combat?
Each existing non-passive mob, and any new ones, will have weaknesses and resistances. Thus, they will take 50% more or less damage than normal from certain weapons and tools. For example...
Creepers, being implied by Notch to be plantlike, would be resistant to Crushing, and weak to Slashing.
Skeletons, being made of bones and empty space, are resistant to Piercing, but brittle and weak to Crushing.
Zombies aren't phased by much, and are resistant to both Slashing and Piercing (making up for their general weakness), but fit the undead stereotype with weakness to Crushing.
Spiders are just big bugs. Even the poisonous ones. Being unburned by sunlight, agile, small, gifted with X-ray vision, and able to scale walls, they hardly need an advantage. Thus, they take normal damage from all types.
Slimes have no real anatomy, and aren't all that tough. Both as compensation for their limitations, and to increase the chances of creating smaller Slimes, they gain a resistance to all types of damage.
Endermen are spooky, and I'm not sure how to represent that. However, there needs to be something weak to Piercing, so they get that status. So, to make up for it, they get resistance to Slashing and Crushing both. Let's say that it represents an ability to twist space that isn't effective against precise attacks.
The Ender Dragon is the big bad boss monster. It's not supposed to be easy. It's tough, and armoured, big, and mean. Naturally, it's resistant to all types.
Comments and suggestions are welcome, but please keep them constructive. Saying that you hate guns is your right, and you're entitled to your opinion, but it's irrelevant to the topic at large, and I've already provided an alternative. So please keep your responses as polite and relevant as you can.
Note that Mobs will not have different damage types, making the choice to wear specialized armours a choice that is purely aesthetic outside of PVP. However, in PVP, it would drastically change the dynamic, allowing good or bad matchups to change the flow of battle. While high-end equipment would always be better, in certain circumstances a person in Iron could have an even shot against someone with Diamond gear.
Enter that and you'll score one hundred thousand rupees for us both, along with a spiffy card!
While the idea takes its inspiration from tabletop roleplaying, I don't really see it as an "RPG idea". It's more a way to simulate the way that certain combat strategies are more or less effective against specific creatures. The reason that there are so many weapons in real life is because different ones work better in different situations. Rather than making Minecraft complex to the point that people must consider numerous factors of speed, reach, arc of swing, etc, setting a basic "this weapon is X kind and works better on Y mobs, it is no good against Z" formula makes combat a little less boring (a common complaint) and would satisfy people's desire for more weapons.
@Lumireaver: I can see the benefit in that, but really I'm not suggesting much be added. Four weapons tops, or two with options to use clay and iron-or-something as arrowheads in place of flint. Then add in the "use tools for different damage types" as you say. I thought about also adding in armours that excel against one type or other for PVP, but decided it would indeed be needlessly complicated at that point.
AKA, "RPG"
That is what basically what an RPG is; you, the player, have several techniques or weapons at hand. They, the enemies, have different "types" or "classes" or what-so-have-you. You, the player, uses the different techniques or weapons to deal more damage to a specific enemy.
Furthermore, any new weapons are merely old weapons, retextured, doing different damage values. For example, a crossbow as you suggested is a bow, using differently built arrows and retextured to look like a crossbow. A "warhammer" is simply a sword that has a larger end, and serves no purpose other than bonking mobs on the head instead of slicing them.
If anything, to buff up combat, new animations need to be added, that's pretty much all that is needed.
[quote=Badgerz]You have to keep in mind that people are stupid.
[quote=Catelite]Just because you don't understand how something works, doesn't make it broken or pointless. >_<
I hardly see how a simplification of real-world concepts automatically denotes a Role Playing Game. It's what defines a game in general. Hitting things with your tools and getting blocks? It's a simplification of digging, mining, or cutting lumber. In fact, to use your logic, why should he have a different tool for any of these things? A shovel or an axe is just a "retextured" pick that has different "damage" values to specific blocks over others. Clearly, we just need one item, the Tool, to collect all block types.
Different tools for different blocks. Different weapons for different mobs. It's the same thing.
Do you just flame every suggestion you see? I've never once seen you make a positive comment.
Great suggestion, I've always felt combat needs to be more interesting. Thanks for turning my basic ideas into a real suggestion.
A skeleton with a stone sword that follows the cursor, the sword blocks all attacks that hit it, you have to be fast(it's slow) and hit it before it moves its sword in the way. Zombie pigmen can also do this, they have gold swords, and are faster.
I was the guy that said that >_>
Hahahah you have no idea how much that made me laugh. Nice one :wink.gif:
Personally, I'd like a method similar to taht used in Dwarf Fortress.
Weapons have a contact area, weight, and attack velocity of a given value, and armor has hardness, thickness, etc. Different materials have different values.
When they go against each other, a calculation takes place that determines whether the weapon pierces armor, glances off, or becomes a blunt attack.
If it pierces, it does the same amount of damage it would do if the player weren't wearing armor, and has a normal amount of knockback.
If it glances off, it does nothing.
If it becomes a blunt attack, the damage is based on the armors thickness and the weapons weight and velocity. It would also have higher knockback.
This would allow for a HUGE diversity of new weapons to be created, as well as enrich existing combat.
Different weapons of different materials could have different weights, contact areas, and swing velocities.
Stone swords could be heavier than, say, an iron sword, but have a smaller contact area, making them more of a blunt weapon good for beating up armor-users.
spears could be added that have a small contact area, low weight, and less velocity than a sword. Due to their tiny contact area, they have a higher chance to pierce armor, but are also more likely to glance off.
Axes could have a larger contact area than a sword, but be heavier and have higher velocity.
War hammers could have high velocity and a VERY high weight, but have a very large contact area, making it next to impossible to pierce something with a War hammer.
Instead of diamond being simply the best material, it could be made to be the lightweight weapon material with a very sharp edge.
Stone could be the heavier weapon material with a more blunt edge.
Iron could be a median between the two.
This would make diamond suck for warhammers, but be good for spears and swords. It would be good for axes too, but a bit of a waste due to how stats are calculated. Iron would be a great choice for Axes as weapons. Stone would be best for war hammers, since it would be the heaviest weapon material.
Not only would weapons be improved, but armor would have added depth.
Chainmail armor could be added as a useable item, which would have better defense against blunt attacks, but have next to no chance for attacks to glance off, causing almost all small-contact area attacks to pierce.
Leather armor would be similar to chain mail.
This is just a general idea, but I hope I get my point across.
EDIT:
two things I want to say:
1.) a weapon equip slot should be added to keep people from switching weapons easily in mid-combat to easily adapt.
2.) Holy crap I typed a lot right there o_o
@Sting_Auer: You're right. That would add a great deal more depth to the system and make for a very interesting dynamic. I even considered something of the sort. So, you might wonder why I would present this idea instead? Well, as I said, this is a super-simplified system. Minecraft itself follows a formula of complexity from the most simple of components. So, essentially, it comes down to two main considerations.
First, and as I said before, a "rock-paper-scissors" dynamic makes things easy to remember. Rather than having to account for variances in three different statistics and compare them to two or three stats for each enemy, the player only has to remember whether the weapon is an A, B, or C type, and which it would make more sense to work on the enemy they're facing. This makes the system more intuitive, rather than requiring a lot of stat-math DPS calculation. Secondly, it's a matter of unobtrusiveness. A system that factors in construction materials weight, shape, ability to hold an edge, and such like, will as you said result in certain weapons being better at what are typically seen as lower tiers. This has an effect of hindering balance, making certain early-game options superior to late game alternatives. Additionally, it forces players to re-learn how to play to a greater degree. Rather than simply having to know which tool to use, they will have to know which tool made of what to use. It would no longer be a simple matter of knowing that the next material is always better than the last. This would be frustrating to long-time players, especially those that suddenly find that a portion (perhaps a great portion) of their equipment is no longer as good as they have come to expect it will be, and make the game harder to understand for new players.
Just because Minecraft has no storyline makes your idea no less RPG. Combat mechanics in sandbox-esc games have a very basic system:
You have a few weapons, be these swords and bows in Minecraft or something else in another game. These weapons have different strength levels or have different tiers to make them more or less powerful. The more powerful a weapon, the more rare or difficult it is to get. It is highly unlikely for a sandbox game to have a rock-paper-scissors mechanic due to the fact that the sole point of a sandbox is to move at your own pace; you are in no way obligated to build any specific kind of weapon over another, you can just as easily defend your house with a bow as you can with an iron sword.
Meanwhile, an RPG has a very complex system of combat mechanics:
An RPG has a lot of different types of weapons existing solely for the purpose of being differently looking than a sword or other weapon. These weapons also have different strength levels or tiers. An RPG usually includes a rock-paper-scissors mechanic somewhere in the game (there are a few exceptions). Meanwhile the tiers of mobs goes up, making them stronger as you go along. In an RPG-esc game, you are obligated to switch weapons to better suit your attacking mobs, and it's harder to defend your home with one weapon than it is with another.
Now, your suggestion is a rock-paper-scissors mechanic (Slashing, piercing, ect.), adding a lot of different weapons solely for the purpose of them looking different than a sword or bow (as I said before, a crossbow as you suggested is a bow, using differently built arrows and retextured to look like a crossbow). You suggestion also includes tiers of mobs (as you so put it, prefixes). Prefixes alone are not a bad idea. However, bundled with a rock-paper-scissors mechanic and a lot of new weapons only there for the sake of being there makes it a bad one.
Ergo, your suggestion is more RPG than it is sandbox.
[quote=Badgerz]You have to keep in mind that people are stupid.
[quote=Catelite]Just because you don't understand how something works, doesn't make it broken or pointless. >_<
Nothing you just said was accurate or resembled sense.
EDIT I really should leave it at that, but as I am always berating others for not supporting their statements, I will elaborate.
R-P-S elements exist in any system with varying weapon types. They are hardly an RPG-exclusive phenomena. I have already explained this once. I do not care to go into detail on it twice within the span of minutes.
The suggestion is hardly "weapons for the sake of weapons". People have been wanting more weapons for a long time, and people have stated that combat is overly dull for a long time. My suggestion is there to meet an apparent need. It makes combat more varied, and allows an alternative to just using the Sword and Bow.
Prefix mobs are not tiered. They would simply change the tactics required to fight them. It's not even my idea. Notch first proposed adding titled mobs, and we have Cave Spiders to show for it. If you were, for example, to have a "Speedy Zombie", it would still be a zombie. It would just be a zombie that was better to fight at range. Having different tactical elements doesn't translate in any way to "only beatable if you have killed X weaker ones first".
I have checked my post thoroughly. It made complete sense.
In short terms; your suggestion uses weapons that are there just because they are supposed to look different. Your mechanic makes it harder to defend your home, and requires the player to build the pointless weapons just so they have a chance at defending their home, which in turn ruins the very point of a sandbox game; moving at your own pace and not having to use one thing over another.
[quote=Badgerz]You have to keep in mind that people are stupid.
[quote=Catelite]Just because you don't understand how something works, doesn't make it broken or pointless. >_<
On the contrary, it in no way prevents a player from moving at their own pace. Instead, it in fact allows them more freedom to do so. All weapons will deal damage. Mobs will take slightly more, slightly less, or the same damage depending on what they are struck with. Thus, a player can choose to make a weapon that makes combat easier against the mob that they consider to be the biggest threat, but will still be effective in most situations, only making certain fights take slightly longer. For casual players, combat won't change much, other than letting players focus more on their problem areas. However, for those who want to put in the effort, they will be able to make all combat easier, by always choosing the tool or weapon best suited to the situation, or even create an added challenge for themselves by deliberately using less effective strategies, thus making combat more interesting for those growing weary of "just smack it with the smacking tool".