Skorpio {l Wrote}:I'm still against the implementation of factions, but I have an idea that could be similar to factions: Keeper archetypes. What I want are more roleplaying elements regarding the dungeon keeper. The player should be able to choose between keeper classes like necromancer, warlock, villain or warlord, who would all get access to the basic creatures and buildings, but have special magic skills and other abilities, and additonally some special creatures. For example only the necromancers should have a raise undead spell, and maybe the keeper class could also influence creatures in some way (more speed if you are a villain, more strength if you are warlord). The player should also be able to influence the immigration, if he wants to specialize in a creature class.
That would probably also be interesting in the campaign. You start out as a poor, unknown (classless) keeper and after some levels, when you are more infamous, have earned enough money and experience, you may choose a career path. In the beginning maybe between sorcerer and warrior, and later the paths could split up again, so that a sorcerer can become a warlock or a necromancer. Of course this can be varied in many ways.
TheAncientGoat {l Wrote}:.. Although I still have a soft spot for my alignment system...
charlie {l Wrote}:I think the keeper archetypes and alignment system are not necessarily incompatible.
svenskmand {l Wrote}:TheAncientGoat {l Wrote}:.. Although I still have a soft spot for my alignment system...
Care to explain?
TheAncientGoat {l Wrote}:charlie {l Wrote}:I think the keeper archetypes and alignment system are not necessarily incompatible.
I aggreesvenskmand {l Wrote}:TheAncientGoat {l Wrote}:.. Although I still have a soft spot for my alignment system...
Care to explain?
Basically, you have different measures of how you are playing Good/Evil Order/Chaos Magic/Mechanic, and depending where you stand on those axis, you attract different creatures to fight for you. Paladins like you if you're playing in a way that makes you lean towards Good, Demons like you if you're leaning towards evil, golems like it if you're leading towards order etc, so your playstyle basically determines what kind of creatures you can get.
The archetypes can make your character lean towards a direction, for example, making it easier to have the type of creatures you'd find in a "faction"
svenskmand {l Wrote}:TheAncientGoat {l Wrote}:charlie {l Wrote}:I think the keeper archetypes and alignment system are not necessarily incompatible.
I aggreesvenskmand {l Wrote}:TheAncientGoat {l Wrote}:.. Although I still have a soft spot for my alignment system...
Care to explain?
Basically, you have different measures of how you are playing Good/Evil Order/Chaos Magic/Mechanic, and depending where you stand on those axis, you attract different creatures to fight for you. Paladins like you if you're playing in a way that makes you lean towards Good, Demons like you if you're leaning towards evil, golems like it if you're leading towards order etc, so your playstyle basically determines what kind of creatures you can get.
The archetypes can make your character lean towards a direction, for example, making it easier to have the type of creatures you'd find in a "faction"
I think that is also a pretty good idea. But how about the backstory of the game then? What is the role of the players, and where does the creatures come from and why? I think the only problem is that this gives the same problem as DK1 and 2 had, namely no backstory at all. It could be nice to get a solid backstory for that alligment system, then I think it would actually be pretty nice
Skorpio {l Wrote}:I think this is a very important topic, which will influence the character and style of the finished game the most, so we should discuss it and come to a first decision soon, even if it's only temporary. That would help me and others a lot with the design of creatures, factions and other stuff, like spells, skills and buildings.
Skorpio {l Wrote}:First off I want to say that my idea of keeper archetypes could co-exist with the implementation of factions and alignments. I just think that five factions are a bit overambitious. Roleplaying elements and archetypes would be good instruments to keep the long time interest of the players, while factions could add different play styles. My biggest problem with five factions is the huge amount of creatures, textures, etc. that I would have to produce, and I would consider this a waste of time, if the factions were more or less the same, only with a different look. So I suggest we plan for three factions maximum, which should be significantly different in their play styles. Less factions should also be easier to balance.
What I have in mind are the Corpars, with similar gameplay as in the original DK games, the Undead, which could be a nomadic faction that uses fallen enemies to build at least a part of its troops and wanders from cemetery to cemetery, and the Constructs (I have no idea how they could be played yet). Balancing will be difficult, but the game would be more interesting. This is just a rough first suggestion that needs to be discussed some more. We also need to talk about the creature list/classes, maybe in another thread. And for our first playable version I think we should just focus on one faction: the Corpars.
Skorpio {l Wrote}:I thought the Undead could move around and harvest mana, bones or souls from the tiles. If they stay too long at one place they use up all of their resources and have to move on. But such a nomadic behaviour would probably require big maps and I'm not sure how they could be forced to build an interesting dungeon. I'm also not sure if that play style would be amusing for the players. It's just a very basic idea.
TheAncientGoat {l Wrote}:Thats pretty exactly much the system I was talking/thinking about
TheAncientGoat {l Wrote}:@svenksmand
No, I don't think the creatures themselves should change (at least, not all of them). Mainly it will attract different creatures, instead of affecting all the creatures you own.
The creatures would be, well, any kind of creature we can think of, really. We just need to think what "alignment" they would fall under. The current list of creatures would work fine, we'd just need to make them more unique instead of just equivalent copies of eachother.TheAncientGoat {l Wrote}:Then what is the story behind the game; why is there keepers?, who do they serve if any? where does the creatures come from? why do they do the keepers bidding? why are the keepers fighting? what is the keepers goal?, ...
@xahodo
I do think a light/dark subset would work (instead of good/evil), thematically more than philosophically though. Also, magic instead of spirit might be a clearer definition, as spirit could be mistaken for life/light
What will attract the public? This is a topic for a different thread (OD already has waaay to much information lost in these thread subtopics). But to slightly answer your question, its an open-source remake of a beloved game, and that always garners interest
TheAncientGoat {l Wrote}:In my eyes, the faction system would be more artwork intensive, and balance intensive if you want to make the factions be anything more than just the same units with different skins. An alignment system would mean that you have 1 pool of creatures, smaller than the combined amount of 4 different factions of creatures. Each creature can be as individual as you want, without regard for "is this balanced compared to the other 3 factions' creatures". Adding creatures to this pool is way easier too, because in a faction system, if you want to add 1 creature to a faction, you have to give each faction an equivalent bonus. This gives the artists more freedom, and thus makes it a more attractive projects for artists to contribute for, and makes it easier for us to grab creatures from other free art resources.
Currently, we don't have enough models to support a faction system
Also, it is easy to switch from an alignment system to a faction system once you have enough creatures. You could even implement a faction-like system by using the Avatar/Keeper system that has been suggested (you choose a character to play as that biases your alignment). The play-style code that is needed to support an alignment system would also really benefit a faction system (creature happiness and the like)
I also think the current backstory would be usable in an alignment system, just like backstories fit in in any openworld-sandbox-rpg type game.
All a faction system does is duplicate work, and pidgeonhole you into a limited set of play styles for that faction.
TheAncientGoat {l Wrote}:In my eyes, the faction system would be more artwork intensive, and balance intensive if you want to make the factions be anything more than just the same units with different skins. An alignment system would mean that you have 1 pool of creatures, smaller than the combined amount of 4 different factions of creatures. Each creature can be as individual as you want, without regard for "is this balanced compared to the other 3 factions' creatures". Adding creatures to this pool is way easier too, because in a faction system, if you want to add 1 creature to a faction, you have to give each faction an equivalent bonus.
TheAncientGoat {l Wrote}:This gives the artists more freedom, and thus makes it a more attractive projects for artists to contribute for, and makes it easier for us to grab creatures from other free art resources.
TheAncientGoat {l Wrote}:Currently, we don't have enough models to support a faction system
TheAncientGoat {l Wrote}:Also, it is easy to switch from an alignment system to a faction system once you have enough creatures. You could even implement a faction-like system by using the Avatar/Keeper system that has been suggested (you choose a character to play as that biases your alignment). The play-style code that is needed to support an alignment system would also really benefit a faction system (creature happiness and the like)
TheAncientGoat {l Wrote}:I also think the current backstory would be usable in an alignment system, just like backstories fit in in any openworld-sandbox-rpg type game.
TheAncientGoat {l Wrote}:All a faction system does is duplicate work, and pidgeonhole you into a limited set of play styles for that faction.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest