The turn handling sounds a bit like One Way Heroics, which was a pretty decent game. Do you support diagonal movement?

Good that the enemies sound a bit more than just stat dumps but hopefully there's more on offer than what you said so far; a couple more easy ones would be teleporting enemies, or 'fast' enemies that move multiple squares per turn.

Fairies seem to be becoming a bit more vogue in gaming lately so hopefully you can ride that wave for some extra support  

One Way Heroics uses it yes, it is basically a roguelike it's self after all, if a slightly gimmicky one what with the whole one way thing and all. And yeah, I do have diagonal movement, it's basically a must for this kind of thing if you ask me.

Yeah there are a few more enemy types. Fast enemies are already in. Bats are a fast enemy, though their gimmicky in that though they get two moves to every one you make, they can only attack with one and the other is in a random direction. It mostly makes it so you have to be careful. There is also a hornet enemy I made that right out moves and attacks twice. The jumping spiders basically do very short range teleports and I think ghosts also had a fast escape move at one point that made them teleport away but I probobly need to redo it. I was wondering if I could make an enemy that moved like a knight in chess using jumps. I could do other things too, since all the enemy moves are handled by events following move routes, so just about any possible pattern if I wanted. Also there will be more things then just movement of course. What skills they use and the range they use them at is something worth thinking about too.

I can possibly lend an idea on how the Knight movement can work...

Remembering the rule that such movement has two different patterns, and the sub-pattern is directly determined by the pattern.

So, if one forces a x coordinate movement pattern of one, the y coordinate sub-pattern must be two, and vice-versa.

Or, the same terminus pattern can be inverted to y coordinate then x coordinate...

If one can figure out how to index that in Ruby then...

Well there are only a number of valid places one can land from any given spot with a knight move, I just need a nested array of where they all are I guess. I already have a method that returns an array for each neighboring location for any given x and y like this:

  def neighboring_xy(x, y)
    [[x + 1, y], [x - 1, y], [x, y + 1], [x, y - 1],
     [x + 1, y + 1], [x - 1, y - 1], [x + 1, y - 1], [x - 1, y + 1]]
  end

So given what you said, maybe this will work?

  def knight_moves_xy(x, y)
    [[x + 1, y + 2], [x - 1, y + 2], [x + 1, y - 2], [x - 1, y - 2],
     [x + 2, y + 1], [x - 2, y + 1], [x + 2, y - 1], [x - 2, y - 1]]
  end

Hmmm...

  def knight_moves_xy(x, y)
    [[x + 1, y + 2], [x - 1, y + 2], [x + 1, y - 2], [x - 1, y - 2],
     [x + 2, y + 1], [x - 2, y + 1], [x + 2, y - 1], [x - 2, y - 1],
     [y + 1, x + 2], [y - 1, x + 2], [y + 1, x - 2], [y - 1, x - 2],
     [y + 2, x + 1], [y - 2, x + 1], [y + 2, x - 1], [y - 2, x - 1]]
  end

(Don't know if using the xy/yx inversion will matter...)

Swapping x and y just mixes up which is which. Think of it this way: Instead of a list of one type of thing, I am wanting a list of a pair of different things, an x and a y. To tell which is which, I simply make sure the x is first.

I could also have made a flat array that alternates so the array goes x,y,x,y,x,y:

  def knight_moves_xy(x, y)
    [x + 1, y + 2, x - 1, y + 2, x + 1, y - 2, x - 1, y - 2,
     x + 2, y + 1, x - 2, y + 1, x + 2, y - 1, x - 2, y - 1]
  end

But this is slightly more tricky to use with loops/blocks.

So, one would do it more like this to have the y coordinate be considered first:

  def knight_moves_xy(x, y)
    [[x + 1, y + 2], [x - 1, y + 2], [x + 1, y - 2], [x - 1, y - 2],
     [x + 2, y + 1], [x - 2, y + 1], [x + 2, y - 1], [x - 2, y - 1]]
  end
  def knight_moves_yx_invert(y, x)    
    [[y + 1, x + 2], [y - 1, x + 2], [y + 1, x - 2], [y - 1, x - 2],
     [y + 2, x + 1], [y - 2, x + 1], [y + 2, x - 1], [y - 2, x - 1]]
  end
end

By having either x or y coordinates being considered, one can make the movement look more natural, in theory.

I mean, B1 to C3 is going to be the same, but one can visually move to B3 first (x + 2), or to C1 first (y + 1). That's the main point behind the swapped x and y coordinates. Of course, whether having this is necessary or not, I do not know...

Cool to hear that you continued work on your dungeon system. I've been toying with an idea using your older released demo (kind of a mix between Pokemon Mystery Dungeon, and raising Chao from Sonic), and look forward to seeing how you've expanded on it over time.

20 hours ago, PhoenixSoul said:

So, one would do it more like this to have the y coordinate be considered first:

  Hide contents

  def knight_moves_xy(x, y)
    [[x + 1, y + 2], [x - 1, y + 2], [x + 1, y - 2], [x - 1, y - 2],
     [x + 2, y + 1], [x - 2, y + 1], [x + 2, y - 1], [x - 2, y - 1]]
  end
  def knight_moves_yx_invert(y, x)    
    [[y + 1, x + 2], [y - 1, x + 2], [y + 1, x - 2], [y - 1, x - 2],
     [y + 2, x + 1], [y - 2, x + 1], [y + 2, x - 1], [y - 2, x - 1]]
  end
end

 

By having either x or y coordinates being considered, one can make the movement look more natural, in theory.

 

I mean, B1 to C3 is going to be the same, but one can visually move to B3 first (x + 2), or to C1 first (y + 1). That's the main point behind the swapped x and y coordinates. Of course, whether having this is necessary or not, I do not know...

Well, I wasn't making a list of moves, but a list of places to move to.  Deciding how to get there is another matter all together. It don't matter what order the x and y are in, as long as they are all in the same order so I can tell them apart. Look at it this way. Say you have a hat or something right? You stack blocks with numbers on them into a hat. The numbers are not labeled at all, they are just numbers. So if you want to have a bunch of numbers for different things you need later and all you have is this hat and the blocks, how will you possibly be able to tell what number is what? The simple way is to put the stack of blocks in an order, and then you just have to remember the order the numbers are in to tell what they mean. So in this case I say to myself, 'okay self, the number that comes first is x, the next one is y' so later the program can be all like 'hey there is a hat here with two numbers in it. The first must be x and the next y' and stuff. Maybe I could use a hash too, but that seems like a waste.

Also, you forgot an important thing about knights! They don't really walk. They jump! If I make a monster like this, it won't move one way then the other, it will jump and land on the new square. :3 But the question is... how would this monster attack? Hmmm...

woa. roguelikes seem difficult in that making a valid story behind procedural dungeons is complex. but if you don't think story matters, it's a win win

On 1/15/2018 at 9:37 PM, Asharonapaul said:

woa. roguelikes seem difficult in that making a valid story behind procedural dungeons is complex. but if you don't think story matters, it's a win win

I am definitely more interested in good gameplay then I am story in general. That said, I am not sure if there is a big difference between procedural dungeons and normal premade dungeons when it comes to story structure. Because let's face it, in most RPGs, or at least older JRPGs of the style RPG Maker was designed to emulate, dungeons are often the parts of the game where the story takes a back seat anyway. I mean think about it. Most RPGs I have played do the same kind of structure. You go to a town, deal with a bit of story, then you go to a dungeon and the story just stops while you take time to explore or overcome challenges, then picks the story up for a big boss fight. Doesn't seem to make that much of a difference what form the dungeon takes to me. Puzzles and on the other hand can be much more tricky.