Examples of roguelike with no-random, fully deterministic combats

[Absalom K.]

Hi, I am starting to write my first roguelike and will say more about it
in the days/weeks to come. Because of my scenario, I am currently
investigating ideas for managing combats with no random (no dice) at all.

I remember having encountered such games. If I remember well, there
are such systems in
* hydra slayer: you know perfectly what will happen when hitting, but
you have to make weapon-decisions when there is no perfect way of
hitting an opponent: inappropriate weapons may make the opponent
stronger, but sometimes you have to do it for later using a more
powerful weapon that can't handle weak opponents.
* z-day (a python roguelike): you have to kill zombies, and you have to
collect guns; one shot = one opponent killed; but you need to find more
and more guns because each one gets quickly empty.

There are probably many other examples; obviously the first one is more
challenging. You have only a few slots for weapons, you have to choose
your favorite and carefully balance their different "styles" in order to
be have something more or less useful for different kinds of opponents.

Do you have other examples of such games? Regards, a.

[Radomir Dopieralski]

On 2013-05-26, Absalom K. <abs...@emet.tnk> wrote:
> Hi, I am starting to write my first roguelike and will say more about it
> in the days/weeks to come. Because of my scenario, I am currently
> investigating ideas for managing combats with no random (no dice) at all.

[...]

> * z-day (a python roguelike): you have to kill zombies, and you have to
> collect guns; one shot = one opponent killed; but you need to find more
> and more guns because each one gets quickly empty.

That is wrong. In z-day, every weapon has a "lethality" score, which is
basically the probability that it hits the zombie's brains or spinal cord,
or otherwise damages it so much that it becomes harmless. It's expressed
in percents, and each time you shoot at a zombie, you have that much a
chance of destroying it. The nail gun has the smallest lethality, and the
chainsaw has lethality of 100%. So it *is* random. On the other hand, when
a zombie attacks you, it always wounds you, so the system is asymmetric.


[...]

> Do you have other examples of such games? Regards, a.

Try microgue, it's quite fun.

I also liked the combat system in Swift Swurd -- it's not random, but
quite different from what you usually see.


--
Radomir Dopieralski, sheep.art.pl

[Gerry Quinn]

In article <51a1d59a$0$2297$426a...@news.free.fr>, abs...@emet.tnk
says...

> Hi, I am starting to write my first roguelike and will say more about it
> in the days/weeks to come. Because of my scenario, I am currently
> investigating ideas for managing combats with no random (no dice) at all.

> Do you have other examples of such games? Regards, a.

A good one is Zaga 33. Hitting a monster is completely deterministic
(it does one point of damage). I think Chess Rogue is similar.

Games in the style of Desktop Dungeons (others are Dungeon Fray,
Dungelot) tend to be deterministic or nearly so.

A cross between this style and minesweeper is:
http://www.hojamaka.com/game/mamono_sweeper_h/en.html
..combat is fully deterministic though you occasionally have to guess
rather than deduce where a monster might be.

- Gerry Quinn

[Darren Grey]

On Sunday, 26 May 2013 10:27:54 UTC+1, Absalom K. wrote:

> Do you have other examples of such games? Regards, a.

Hmm, well, there's not many straight combat roguelikes that use deterministic
combat. Here's a few ones that tend to use more novel systems, usually with
1 HP or low HP for player and enemies:

* Ending by Aaron Steed
* MicRogue by Jason Pickering
* HyperRogue by Zeno
* Gruesome, Toby the Trapper and Unstoppable by me
* Zaga-33 and 86856527 by Michael Brough

Also ToME4 has mostly very deterministic combat - the dice rolls don't affect
too much. It would work better without them really, as the focus in the combat
is mostly around positioning and orders of attacks.

There's a lot more that can be done in this area, but I think low HP is the
beast area to work in. A good deterministic system is one in which you try
not to get hit at all.

--
Darren Grey

[Konstantin Stupnik]

Heya.

My last 3 7drl entries have deterministic combat:
Monster Slayer Show - here you have to estimate risk vs reward
Fragile Wrath - one hit tactical thing
Tetrogue - more complex combat system. it is deterministic, yet it's
takes some learning to properly calculate result of an attack.

[Darren Grey]

> On Sunday, 26 May 2013 10:27:54 UTC+1, Absalom K. wrote:
>
> > Do you have other examples of such games? Regards, a.

Oh, and I just remembered (how did I forget?) Rogue Rage, a game I'm still putting together that uses deterministic mechanics throughout. You can find some info and a current build here:

http://forums.te4.org/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=34564

It has stance-based combat, where what actions you take depend on what stance you're in. The chaos stance has entirely dice-centric mechanics actually, but the other 4 stances are entirely deterministic. Enemy abilities are all deterministic too, right down to the turn they use them in.

--
Darren Grey

[Filip Dreger]

On Sunday, May 26, 2013 11:27:54 AM UTC+2, Absalom K. wrote:
> Do you have other examples of such games?

A classic: "You Only Live Once" by Jeff Lait. Not only the combat was deterministic, but it was practically the only element of the gameplay (and to change weapons - you had to die)

Filip

[Jakob Virgil]

Stink Warrior is entirely deterministic/fatalistic.
http://roguebasin.roguelikedevelopment.org/index.php?title=Stink_Warrior

but I don't think it is what you are looking for.
I find this deterministic thing fascinating have you ever played the paper RPG nine princes in amber?

[David Damerell]

Quoting Jakob Virgil <a.kin...@gmail.com>:
>I find this deterministic thing fascinating have you ever played the paper RPG nine princes in amber?

Amber (for so it is called) is not really deterministic, because of the
potential for the players to engineer matters so that an attribute that
favours them is in play - there's examples in the rulebook about making a
wrestling contest not a pure test of Strength, or turning a test of
Warfare _into_ a test of Strength.

This may seem like pedantry, but I thnk it scratches a different itch to
deterministic combat in roguelikes, where the expectation is very simply
that you know the outcome before you start the fight.
--
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
And now, a seemingly inexplicable shot of a passing train.
Today is First Teleute, October.
Tomorrow will be First Oneiros, October.

[Jakob Virgil]

point well taken but just having
me.sword < you.sword ? me.dead() : you.dead();
to describe a fight would be pretty punk-rock in a rogue-style game.

[Martin Read]

Jakob Virgil <a.kin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>point well taken but just having
> me.sword > you.sword ? me.dead() : you.dead();
>to describe a fight would be pretty punk-rock in a rogue-style game.

Deterministic combat mechanics in a roguelike aren't all *that*
"punk-rock", really. Several of the rgrd regulars have spoken up in
favour of such things; the only *fundamental* reason the PRNG is
consulted for combat resolution in roguelikes is that people don't want
to go through the *design* hassle attendant on deterministic combat.
--
\_\/_/ turbulence is certainty turbulence is friction between you and me
\ / every time we try to impose order we create chaos
\/ -- Killing Joke, "Mathematics of Chaos"