Injuries

[Scilly_guy]

In Dragon Age (and probably other RPGs) when you "Die"/pass out you are inflicted with a random injury which gives some kind of debuff.

I see a lot of C&I posts that almost word for word go as follows:

"I'm not complaining, but this game is really hard. Can you make it easy so I can have more fun?"

I'm not about to say exactly that, I think permadeath is good, it makes you value your life, its not really permadeath though, you get some of your old LP and any thing from a claim stake (not to mention the Alt hordes). But perhaps if death was more of a punishment, ie you get NOTHING, except the stuff in your camp. Then as a flip side it could happen a little less, but instead you get an injury which requires specialist healing:
Broken Arm: Penalty to skills requires casting (clay and gauze)+time to heal
Broken Leg: No running or sprinting requires casting+time to heal
Cracked Skull: Penalty to learning ability requires time to heal
Vomiting: Penalty to fep gain requires potion that works similar to tea buff to heal

I'm not sure what the current chance of an animal killing you is, lets say its 70%, that could be lowered to 40% and 30% chance of giving you one or two injuries.
As for PvP combat, I doubt that the opportunity to break someones leg instead of killing them will appeal to many murderers, I don't understand how their minds work, but perhaps some kind of UAC related chance of inflicting an injury instead of murdering someone. So as UAC tends to infinity chance victim dies tends to 100%.

AND THEN I got thinking what about if weak characters had an increased chance of sustaining injuries instead of being murdered, but then I realised that was a silly idea, you'd be penalising better players. (The greater the gap in UAC/Delta the higher the chance that either one will get injuries.)

[MagicManICT]

Fail.

[Scilly_guy]

I'm glad you've learned to articulate your self so well.

[MagicManICT]

I'm glad you've learned to articulate your self so well.

If you would bother reading, you'd know that I do and that all I need is a one word post. Fail.

[Scilly_guy]

Yes I have seen that you do give in depth responses, I'm just curious as to what part of my suggestion you have issues with?
Injuries altogether?
Injuries instead of death?

Will you not comment on the actual content of the suggestion at all?

[Kriegwolf]

I'd more likely see people torn apart when they get high enough damage. Though injuries could be a better idea given not instead of death, but just for taking damage.

[Skorm]

Yes I have seen that you do give in depth responses, I'm just curious as to what part of my suggestion you have issues with?
Injuries altogether?
Injuries instead of death?

Will you not comment on the actual content of the suggestion at all?

Main features of H&H:

permadeath

Non-permadeath( alts)

this is not meant to be an easy game, you are not meant to enjoy it all the time, you are meant to survive and eventually die, Welcome to H&H.

Either alt every fucking thing or prepare to loose it all for either a boar, a Bear or a griefer.

[painhertz]

"In Dragon Age"

[MagicManICT]

Yes I have seen that you do give in depth responses, I'm just curious as to what part of my suggestion you have issues with?
Injuries altogether?
Injuries instead of death?

Since you asked, sure.

It's a permadeath game with some pretty involved mechanics already and skewed towards every possible way to kill off a character. Why do we need more penalties?

What's to stop a player from turning an injured character into a curio-fed alt for the two or three weeks it takes for them to "heal"?

Why bother leaving a character injured when you have the exact same penalty as killing the character (which, currently, can't even be enforced)?

Just because someone else did it, it doesn't mean it's a good idea for many games. Most games that have a limb-based damage system have developed combat and tactics based on this. HnH doesn't, so that would mean rewriting what is, in my opinion, one of the best combat concepts I have seen in an RPG in years.

I just don't think you really thought this through very well before posting. When you fail to consider all aspects of an idea, it's a Fail. I have thrown away dozens of posts because, after starting to write them and consider what the implications were, I found they were lacking and thus total Fail.

[Scilly_guy]

I probably should play the devil's advocate to actually present an opposing side to the curiosity system:

"The main problem I see with the curiosity system is its ease to make alts and one of the source of devaluation the usefulness of mains which itself devalues the impact of a permadeath system as you no longer put your eggs in one basket so each death is more like breaking a branch of a tree than cutting its trunk which somewhat defeats the purpose of the survival aspect. The lost of value of main itself presents a problem in its own right as it makes consequences of ones own action less severe. It is arguable if this raises the aggression of different factions but even if such conflict breaks out, wars will be fruitless as warriors can be manufactored easily and even if there are more conflicts appear on Congress, it will simply be trading casualties back and forth endlessly.

This. Project Overhaul includes a change that should... change this.

this is not meant to be an easy game, you are not meant to enjoy it all the time, you are meant to survive and eventually die, Welcome to H&H.

Either alt every fucking thing or prepare to loose it all for either a boar, a Bear or a griefer.

Thank you for your welcome, I have been playing since march, I learned the basics before the end of world 4, just got my first scythe the night before the world ended. I was part of small village in W5 but when the LS and Chief went AWOL, and I had more to do IRL I stopped playing. I started a new character after the summer and quickly set up my own little village and had just mined enough iron to think about a brickwall when the world ended. I've only died once, and I blame lag for that, it was a school boy error though, plucking an auroch hair with a main, even if it was a lone auroch beside my boat. I haven't been in a situation to properly learn the PvP system, only fighting animals. The way I see it is that you are meant to survive so I avoid getting in a PvP fight I know I'll lose, I do have several alts though, but only 2 that I play, farmer and miner.

"In Dragon Age"

Its not an original idea, and I wasn't suggesting it be exactly like Dragon Age, I was just giving an example of an existing injury system.

It's a permadeath game with some pretty involved mechanics already and skewed towards every possible way to kill off a character. Why do we need more penalties?

Firstly, thank you for taking the time for a thorough reply.
Personally I feel that getting KO'd by animals and cave-ins is a little under whelming, I see being injured as a help, it makes me more hungry.

What's to stop a player from turning an injured character into a curio-fed alt for the two or three weeks it takes for them to "heal"?

THAT is the first valid critique and I refer you to Jorbs statement above from the LP Concerns thread. My understanding is that we won't be having armies of alts any more.

Why bother leaving a character injured when you have the exact same penalty as killing the character (which, currently, can't even be enforced)?

My thinking is that if your character isn't very good at murder... ie you have a low UAC and are probably incapable of killing someone anyway, then when you "think" you have killed them, they are actually just knocked out cold, and appear to be dead. You deserve to leave a murder scent for wanting and trying to kill them.

Just because someone else did it, it doesn't mean it's a good idea for many games. Most games that have a limb-based damage system have developed combat and tactics based on this. HnH doesn't, so that would mean rewriting what is, in my opinion, one of the best combat concepts I have seen in an RPG in years.

I'm not saying lets change the game and make it like Dragon Age, I'm just giving an example of injuries in a game and admitting its not an original idea. My suggested injuries where just to spark ideas, I'm not suggesting changing the combat system, just the out comes of combat. Is it not plausible that after a fight a character might have a broken arm or leg?

I just don't think you really thought this through very well before posting. When you fail to consider all aspects of an idea, it's a Fail. I have thrown away dozens of posts because, after starting to write them and consider what the implications were, I found they were lacking and thus total Fail.

I haven't put as much thought into it as I would like to, and I was tired when I was writing it, also I think I rushed the end as I really needed to pee and wanted to finish it before getting ready for bed.

Maybe my view of where Jorb and Loftar are going is wrong, I thought dying was supposed to be harsh to make you value your life, I was trying to add injuries to make you value you health. I guess if is just that the game is built around dying being harsh, and valuing your life is a side effect then where I was aiming is wrong. This is J&Ls game, and I have no illusions that it belongs to the players, I salute them for that and I look forward to seeing where they take it. When I suggest ideas, whether its this, Wind Powered Water lifts, Shell fishing, Pasta, I'd hope that they can be taken seriously, they aren't designed to make the game easier, but maybe this one does a little too much, however it were to be implemented. But then, thats what this discussion is about.