Wounds, Limbs and Gore

[walltar]

Internal bleeding in medieval setting is not needed ... you can't do anything with it. If it doesnt stop by itself you die. Or if there will be something thaumaturgic for internal bleeding then you have to use thaumaturgy to heal yoursel and someone who wants to play without it would be just prety much fu**ed.

I hoe there wont be loosing limbs for player ... maybe as finisher moove when enely cuts of your limb and then you die but in midle of combat that would only make you angry for no reason.

 

[Rob]

Internal bleeding in medieval setting is not needed ... you can't do anything with it.

"internal bleeding" doesn't have to mean serious/terminal wounds... it can be as simple as bruising, muscle damage, and would also be caused by broken bones, etc.

I see your point, but wouldn't generalised bleeding make an interestingly different mechanic for determining and accumulating damage?! Much better than the arbitrary methods that are employed by all other games. Much more realistic. I'd be quite happy for people to suggest more realistic damage models though!!!

 

[<3>Life]

If you just die eventually, I can't see the point. It might be fun to watch one or two times how the situation plays out, but after that I'm 100% sure that I'd instantly reload or start a new game instantly after being severed a limb. In addition to being highly frustrating, it'd be immersion breaking.

If you can survive losing a limb, you should be able to press on and just find out different ways to survive combat situations.

 

[Zodeak]

I think severing of limbs for players isn't a very good idea. Yeah, it may be realistic, but it would take so much from the gameplay that it could make the game unplayable to any reasonable degree. We already know the game is going to be "hard", so with combat hard as well, it seems unnecessary.

Internal bleeding sounds a bit useless to me too, unless as you stated Rob, it comes from broken bones etc etc. Bruises etc are pretty much only painful. They don't restrict movement in a combat situation. Who cares about a bruise when they a fighting for their life? If you're talking about major internal bleeding, like a burst artery, then what you have there is what we call in the trade, "unavoidable death in a medieval setting, without the help of magic"

 

[Rob]

Bruises etc are pretty much only painful. They don't restrict movement in a combat situation. Who cares about a bruise when they a fighting for their life? If you're talking about major internal bleeding, like a burst artery, then what you have there is what we call in the trade, "unavoidable death in a medieval setting, without the help of magic"

By giving the example of a bruise, I was just trying to exemplify that there are various levels of internal bleeding - bruises on one end of the scale, "unavoidable death" on the other end of the scale, and everything in between.

I certainly wasn't trying to suggest that the console message would be "you have a bruise", or anything like that . It doesn't have to acknowledge exactly what the damage is... just whether it's visible or not (for display purposes) and how severe the damage was.

My idea was all about using a real-life physical measure of damage as a mechanism for in-game damage. When the damage meter fills up, you die. That sort of thing. My thought was that bleeding could be one way to do that, since you can make parallels in all occasions, i.e. it maintains relevance for all types of damage that you might receive. I just thought it might be nice to die when you've lost X pints of blood, rather than when you've received 100 hit points worth of damage.

Alternatively, the damage model could be based on brain function, which is a further generalisation. Crushed head -> brain dead -> die. At the same time, lost too much blood -> no oxygen to brain -> die. That sort of thing.

If you have any other ideas for a physical damage model that's actually meaningful, I'd be interested to hear!!!

 

[Rob]

I think severing of limbs for players isn't a very good idea. Yeah, it may be realistic, but it would take so much from the gameplay that it could make the game unplayable to any reasonable degree. We already know the game is going to be "hard", so with combat hard as well, it seems unnecessary.

Whilst I take the opposite stance, I do definitely think that severing of limbs shouldn't be something that's too easy to do - I'm sure we can agree on that. At the very least, you should have to have an appropriate weapon, hit in an appropriate place, and with the necessary force. If it's done with physics, then it should work out reasonably balanced. Whether or not that causes frequent decapitations in practice will depend on how balanced Bare Mettle's implementation is. I suppose we'd just have to try it out in the alpha!

 

[the0thMonkey]

If it is relatively easy to implement and the devs don't spend time on it that they could be spending on stuff with a higher priority, I'm all for dismemberment. As long as it was not too easy to get dismembered it could be really good, both increasing immersion and heightening emotional attachment to your character. You really don't want dismemberment to become too cheap, "Oh, there goes another limb". Also, I think a realistic health model is essential.

Imagine the suspense.

You have just slain an immense and monstrous creature in its lair, but with its final blow, it punctured your lungs. You stagger back to the surface world, fighting death every step of the way. You manage to stow your weapons and mount your horse which was tied off outside the cave. As your horse trots back to a nearby town you start hearing noises in the dark. You urge your horse onward, trying to maintain your seat, wincing with every step it takes. As you arrive in the village, you fall off your horse and stumble to the local place of worship. The cough blood and bone shards as the head healer attempts to restores your former vigour...

Not very well written but I'm sure you can imagine it. Or if their was no local healer, you could try to bring the loot you collected back to your abode before you expired.

Also:

@Rob
Have you played Day-Z? The more stuff I read on this forum, the more this game is starting to sound like it. They use the system of bleeding out and players have to maintain a certain blood level using morphine, food, and bandages to counteract bleeding.

@walltar
If it was a pure medieval setting, I would totally agree with you. But let's not forget about thaumaturgy. I think healing would come under the "Body" magic category, and could be used to treat internal bleeding.

 

[Rob]

@Rob
Have you played Day-Z? The more stuff I read on this forum, the more this game is starting to sound like it. They use the system of bleeding out and players have to maintain a certain blood level using morphine, food, and bandages to counteract bleeding.

No, never played it. I don't go for shooters, nor MMOs... but thanks for the reference - interesting!

It looks like they've got some quite nice elements in there - blood bags to recoup blood, zombies draining blood, etc. I would be especially nice if blood loss is modeled with some thought to realism, rather than something like "got shot with x gun" -> "lose 20 blood", although I couldn't find such info quickly on the wiki.

I think Sui Generis has the potential to do this well, since the size of wounds is determined by real physics, and that would directly affect blood loss, if modeled well. This means that skill and luck really would determine the outcome of battles, rather than how many times you get hit.

 

[the0thMonkey]

I agree, the fact that the physics in this game is a lot more complex and realistic than a lot of other games that are similar in other ways, really expands the options in terms of good damage models.

 

[<3>Life]

Just realised that I made an assumption that death is permanent which it apparently is not. So what happens when the player dies? If there are severed limbs, will they be restored upon resurrection?

I also realise that this intersects heavily with the "death penalty" thread, but I think it's relevant here, too.

This doesn't change what I said earlier, though. I think that it still applies that if severed limbs result to inevitable death, it should be instant. If death was avoidable, it would make an interesting struggle for your player characters life, the level of interest depending of the penalty upon death, of course. If there are significant setbacks it could be meaningful to fight for survival - which sounds great to me!

 

[The Hedge Knight]

It is an adventuring game, losing a limb should just be a death. They don't plan on adding any non combat skills, so not being able to not be in combat is basically end game.

Not to mention, losing an artery = massive blood loss. Losing a limb is just losing massive amounts of blood, even if you cover it up you are still going to bleed straight through the bandage. It is death, unless you are some god mage medic.

 

[the0thMonkey]

It is an adventuring game, losing a limb should just be a death. They don't plan on adding any non combat skills, so not being able to not be in combat is basically end game.

But what if you could get that limb restored somehow? Also, what about grievous injuries as opposed to actual dismemberment?

 

[The Hedge Knight]

But what if you could get that limb restored somehow? Also, what about grievous injuries as opposed to actual dismemberment?

If it comes to the point where the enemy can chop off your arm, there is no way you are getting out alive without cheating. There is no reason they should let you live.

However, regular grievous cuts and everything can be more excusable, as long as your torso is not in two pieces or whatever.

 

[the0thMonkey]

If it comes to the point where the enemy can chop off your arm, there is no way you are getting out alive without cheating. There is no reason they should let you live.

However, regular grievous cuts and everything can be more excusable, as long as your torso is not in two pieces or whatever.

"Porky swings his giant spiked flail towards your head. At the last second, you dodge to the side and land a blow on an unarmoured area of his leg. As he falls and spasms in death you feel a sharp pain in your left shoulder. Looking down you see your own severed arm lying on the ground..."

Bam. Porky dead, you still alive (barely). Time for some intense therapy!

 

[The Hedge Knight]

I don't think he's going to chop it off at the last second. And if you are in some sort of boss lair you are certainly not getting to some one who might fix your stump in time.

 

[Rob]

It is an adventuring game, losing a limb should just be a death.
[...]
losing an artery = massive blood loss. Losing a limb is just losing massive amounts of blood, even if you cover it up you are still going to bleed straight through the bandage. It is death, unless you are some god mage medic.

I agree... but I would rather see it inherent in a proper mechanic, not some boolean choice. Losing a limb shouldn't mean you die. Losing a limb should mean that you lose a lot of blood, which would mean you would die. Subtle difference, but it is important.

 

[the0thMonkey]

What if you just had all the bones in your arm broken and it was horribly mangled? Could that be healed or is the only option amputation? Because dismemberment might also be used medicinally.

 

[The Hedge Knight]

Stuff like broken bones should not be added, it gets to a point where it is just not fun. If a thaumancer or whatever they are called force throws me into a wall, I do not want to just be useless and have a death sentence.

 

[Rob]

Stuff like broken bones should not be added, it gets to a point where it is just not fun. If a thaumancer or whatever they are called force throws me into a wall, I do not want to just be useless and have a death sentence.

Life is tough... trials and tribulations...

 

[The Hedge Knight]

Life is tough... trials and tribulations...

They already refuse to add sleep and food, I highly doubt they are going to make a medical system realistic to the key.