Okay, I'll admit it, I've never played a turn based game before. It's not that I think that a turn based system is bad, it's just that I get bored without some action. But, I am really looking forward to getting the Fallout trilogy pack because of all the things I've been reading about the originals. Honestly, they sound 100x better than Fallout 3, and any game that is better than Fallout 3 is an instant buy for me. But, the turn based combat is putting me off, because I don't know anything about it, or how it works. So, my main question is how long will it take for me to learn about the turn based system of the originals, and how easy would it be to get used to them? Any help is welcome.

Thanks in advance.

I'm not sure if Fallout 1 and 2's turn based system is the same as this, but have you ever played JRPGs or Pokemon? If so, usually turn based combat is like that. You attack, your opponent attacks, you attack again, your opponent attacks again, and it repeats until one of you die. It's very easy to get used to. Like I said, I don't know much about Fallout 1 and 2's turn based combat, but it can't be much different than that of JRPGs.

I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of Fallout fans collectively slapped their foreheads and were suddenly silenced.

As later on there will probably be dozens of people who are going to lecture you on this, I'm not gonna even bother.
But thanks for letting me start my day with a big fat grin on my face!

What, pray tell, makes Fallout 1's turn based combat system any different than Pokemon, except that you can't use Thunderbolt?

As I said, I know nothing about Fallout 1's combat, so please enlighten me on how radically different it is from the standard JRPG.

Pok?mon?

The traditional JRPG Turn-Based combat doesn't come close to the classic Fallouts, except for the fact that you get to do actions each turn. It stops there.


Depending on your stats, you have a number of action points you can spend on performing various actions during your turn. Movement, accessing your inventory, reloading, shooting, doing a targetted shot, opening doors/containers, attacking, etc. all take a number of action points to use it. It offers a very strategic combat, much more than Fallout 3.

"Okay so I have 7 action points, there are two enemies and I'm running low on health. I know that this raider is also low on health. I could shoot him and hope he dies on the first shot, which will allow me to open my inventory and use a stimpack to last this round. But if I miss, I only have 4 action points left though I could shoot again. Or I could try to take cover behind this wall to avoid being shot."

That's an example of what goes through your mind during combat. Unlike Fallout 3 where it's "Okay so there are 2 raiders in this room, I'm low on health. I could use these 5 stimpacks now, and use VATS to dismember both of them in a few seconds."

What I love about Turn-Based combat in Fallout is that even if it's slow, it can get you nervous. A lot. Because you never know when bad luck will get you and will make you drop your weapon, jam it, lose your ammo, lose your turn, hurt yourself or get killed by your companion in a misfire.

Know that your skills and stats DO matter in the game. You can miss often if you are not proficient in a weapon skill or get critical failures, which leads to the bad lucks listed above. But no worries, your enemies can also get critical failures. (I simply love it when a Super Mutant accidently decimates two of his friends with his mini-gun)

As for learning it, no worries. In Fallout 1 you get to practice against rats, to get the hang of it. In Fallout 2 you have other misc creatures as well.

Oh, well that sure is different. Now that I think about it, there's a mod or two for Fallout 3 that tries to make the combat turn based. http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=4446 is one if you wanted to try it out before playing Fallout 1 or 2, FALLOUTFTW.

I can see how it would take some getting used to, but it sounds like a better system then Fallout 3, where I can use 20 stimpacks any time I want. Though if it was in the vanilla Fallout 3, I doubt I would have liked it.

Anyway, thanks for the explanation Cliffworms.

Edit: Whenever somebody asks about turn-based JRPGs, I tell them that it's just like Pokemon, because Pokemon is universally known and makes understanding JRPG combat much easier. However, you're right, Fallout and Pokemon's combat are completely different, but I didn't know that until now.

No problem.

I also saw the mod. This combined with http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Wf_2V7wLkI&feature=related would be most awesome, since turn-based in a FPS/Third Person game doesn't work well.

Beth could have implemented turn-based combat along with real-time as optional settings....if they had done the game in a different view perspective that is.

Though it is a must to think you're actions through (at lower levels), the system is relatively easy and straight forward in how it works.
You only require the left and right mouse button to make it work and have plenty of time to think it trough.

The downside is that action is slow and, especially when you have leveled a bit, this can become grating with really simple enemies. Though in a tight situation this is a blessing
Don't know if FO1 had it but, there is an option to turn combat realtime in FO2 as I recall, could be time saver later on when travelling in area's with easily handled enemies.

EDIT:
@Cliffworms: Personally a hybrid system would be the preferred option for me, where changing gear, using items, taking aimed shots cost you action points and were normal shooting and walking would stop the AP's to regenerate. Off course aimed/VATS shots should hold quite an advantage to normal shooting.

There is no option to turn combat real time in FO2. Only in Fallout Tactics.

Maybe that mod I used added it in.

I don't think there is a mod that does that.

Fallout's TB combat is not best in class, but it is good. (Tactics TB mechanics are a notch better than FO's IMO).

The first thing to do is distance yourself from the idea that its about "I shoot you then you shoot me, then I shoot you again, ad infinitum".

Combat may literally be carved into rounds and turns, but its assumed to be taking place realtime ~sort of .

You can consider turns for each as the perception of the same few seconds for each combatant from their perspective. AP's directly equate to time, and what a given combatant can do in a few seconds. More AP's means that they can do more in the same amount of time. Dedicated movement AP's (non-existent in FO3) mean that they can move pretty fast in those few seconds, and really get around. Turn based action divides the the time into discrete chunks and lets you examine the potentials of any choice you have very closely (and the possible choices that come of them). Combat in the game will eventually develop a kind of tension somewhat akin to "The Sword of Damocles", where the player perceives the weighted risks of taking one action instead of another. (To eat or not to eat ~should I shoot him or go heal Dogmeat ).

Fallout's original SPECIAL system has a far greater impact on your freedoms in this game. Points are finite and difficult to change permanently once you set them. A strength under 7 means you can't use heavy weapons properly, but shaving a few points from Agility to increase your strength lowers your AP's and some skills, so you can't do as much using a heavy weapon; Take it from Perception instead, and you can lift more, and do more, but are not as accurate with the weapon at range. Boost all three, and your diplomatic stats suffer, and Fallout may restrict what you can say to nods and grunts, or have merchants rob you blind with their prices.
Every interaction in FO1 is based on virtual dice ~an impartial chance tempered by your PC's skill at doing whatever you have him attempt; The Luck stat affects all of it. High luck weights the dice slightly in your favor, low luck can do the opposite. (A curious quirk is to get the Jinxed trait, and have also the highest luck ~it makes you have average luck, but everyone else is miserable around you, with gun jams, misses and lost turns ~Don't try this one first).

Fallout's TB has double edged rules, where the enemies can run out of ammo too, and are limited to their AP's in terms of how and where they can move, and/ or use their weapons ~this is something you can figure out, and use against them. Unfortunately Fallout doesn't have a developed concept of "cover", but you can step behind a wall or close a door to avoid being targeted, (and burn enemy AP's by forcing them to open the door instead of attacking). Fallout lets you do anything in real time for free outside of combat, but mundane tasks like opening door and looting bodies costs AP's when in a fight (it relates back to the whole AP's = Time concept); It is possible to rifle your opponent's pockets when he's knocked out, and is even worth it to unload his gun while you're at it... as he won't know it when he wakes up, and it won't fire when he tries to use it (and if you stole his ammo, he can't reload it ).

Another thing is that AP's need not be spent entirely (or at all!); You can choose to do nothing ~this means that your AP's are effectively stored potential, and tells Fallout that you are on the defensive (it means that your Armor Class goes up slightly... +1 for each unspent AP. Against low level threats (IE. early in the game) this can actually help avoid injury, but its not so effective against the more powerful opponents you find later. It is the case that you might realize that your opponent has trouble hitting you with just a few more AC points ~so choosing to attack cheaply, and leaving the rest [of your AP's] unspent, might allow you to attack him every round with very little risk. Extra AC always helps.

*In FO2, with the HtH evade perk, your armor class goes up +2 per unspent AP provided you end the round unarmed (power fists don't count ) ~that can add up to a lot when in Power Armor to begin with. Most of my PC's were melee specialists for that very reason).

FO's TB combat is not perfect, and my description can't be completely accurate at all times during a fight; If taken too literally, you run into things like, "If its all happening at once, why are my NPC in front of me when I've been firing a minigun this round". Its not perfect, and won't be improved .

*This is (at least for me), why I'm disappointed with FO3... Instead of improving it, they chose a different system entirely ~realtime, but without the foundation of the series, and it's untapped potential on modern hardware.

While I'd prefer Fallout [always] as TB, it is conceivable that FO1's combat could have been remade without turns (though not quite accurately). It could have been done with VATS-like slowed gameplay, where each combatant moved and attacked at different speeds (based on their SPECIAL stats, and perks) ~very like a "global bullet time" for all involved. (consider how Max Payne would dive to the floor, but swing his guns in five different directions to take out a group before hitting the floor). I can't vouch for if it would get boring long term, but that at least would simulate what Fallout simulated with turns.

And remember there's nothing complex about Fallout's TB system. It's pretty straightforward actually, which in turn can actually mean fun. I know it was for me.

Now if it where JA2 we're talking about, I can understand if one where to be frustrated, that really is a complex (and cool) turn based system. Unfortunately I failed at it far too many times.

But it has been redone without turns - in FOT's real-time mode.

Yeah... but I meant using TES style play as a base...
(and in first person)

I think you could recreate FOT's combat system in first person too.

.... Dude.

Youtube.
Search for fallout 2 gameplay.
(Or 1 or tactics)

I think you could at that. I think it might have been neat too, but it seems to me that it would have been somewhat like Myst3 with combat.

With good photorealistic images (edited photos for best results) that would be awesome! (with TB combat of course)
(not to mention fairly simple and cheap to do... someone do that!!)


EDIT: whoops... I didn't read that through carefully... I didn't notice the #3 after Myst...
No, I want Riven with combat! B)

Personally I thought Tatics' became just a turkey shooter when in TB mode because of the poor adaptability of the AI,which was fine-tuned for RT. TB combat in FO1 &2 was much better IMO.

I mentioned Myst 3 due to the ability to rotate the FPP view 360^o. Of the three, Riven is my favorite, and I played it through again just a few months ago; But I lost interest a few hours into Myst 3 (starting from the beginning of the game ~it was only that I'd just played Riven, that let me tolerate the few hours ... I really wanted to like that one too.)


Yeah...
~ but its the rules that I find improved; It was too bad IMO... They greatly improved the system and turned it off by default

I love TB combat when you control multiple units (XCOM, or TB wargames) but I've never been a big fan when you control a single character. While Fallout does have a nice range of options I usually found that my APs were best spent attacking which left little or nothing for anything else - thus diminishing the usefulness of most of these options and the tactical advantages of TB versus RT. Despite this, and some other quibbles, when I tried Fallout again before FO3's release it didn't take me long to get used to the system. Granted, I had played it a little before, and I've played a number of other TB games, but it was still a fairly fresh experience.

I don't think you'll have much trouble with the combat basics - attacking, movies, and what not. The inventory system is a bit clunky and spending AP to access your inventory during combat is going to be a very different, but even here you'll get used to it after a while. I'd suggest starting with a throw-away character that has a very high Agility so you can experiment with a hefty AP pool. I'd also suggest avoiding the Fast Shot trait - it may seem tempting since it saves you AP but it also simplifies combat (no aimed shots) and that defeats the purpose of the more tactical TB combat.

Whether you keep the character or re-start you probably don't want to play a low-AP character until you're quite comfortable with the system, otherwise you'll just find it aggravating and there's no sense needlessly putting yourself off the game

I always considered the ones you could find (NPC's) as "loose cannons", untrained and not really "command-able" in a combat situation (the way troops would be, and the way it was done later in Tactics). I had hoped that in FO3 (this years ago) would have some that took orders well, and others that maybe didn't :shrug:. ~The difference between wasteland rabble and [for instance a squad of Brotherhood knights].

*But the more I think about it, the more I considered the Vault dweller as your one implement it their world, where nothing else was under direct control, but not everyone was an enemy. I liked it that way.

Fallout is not a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_Box game... but the gameplay and combat (at a base level) is not so different. In Pool of Radiance (for instance), you had your party of adventurers, but you could also hire mercs to fill your ranks. Merc would fight your enemies, but would not take orders from you; They were basically non-hostile, disinterested tag-alongs that would fight and/or carry things for you (and that's basically what you get in Fallout, but with a base party of one).

In those games it was very common to have most of your men down, bleeding, and unconscious with only your most powerful fighter still standing ~fighting alone, to save himself (and the rest that lay helpless). Coming from that, Fallout combat was close to familiar the first time I played.

I think it's not so much the AI as the missions were designed mainly for RT.



In Van Buren, you would have been able to issue orders to followers, the extent of which was limited by your Charisma.

That would have fit the bill nicely, and seems a perfect evolution of the game, in keeping with the SPECIAL system.