Healing Pets

[medierra]

Ah, the age-old design debate between doing what might be cool and avoiding what might be frustrating.

I set up the occultist's summoned raven familiar with a healing spell that it is set to cast on allies whenever they are below 75% health. It generally feels pretty cool to have a pet that is healing you and have some reliance on it. It is especially awesome when you're getting hammered by enemies and your pet is there chain healing you, keeping you alive.

Unfortunately, as we all know, AI is not totally reliable. Of course, the case could be made that human allies aren't either but when they let you down, you tend to get mad them and not the game, which is okay with me. :p However, as cool as I find this dynamic to be when it works, I am worried that it has potentially to induce massive rage at the game. Imagine you're playing hardcore and you die because your raven randomly decides to wander off and attack something at the edge of the screen.

Of course, the counter-argument could be that no one playing hardcore should be silly enough to rely on AI healing to keep them alive but, I think we all know, people will anyway and then get upset when it fails.

This is one of those cases where I think I know what needs to be done but I thought I'd see how you guys felt.

[icedmetal57]

I personally like the idea, but like you said, shouldn't be too heavily relied on as AI in games can be unpredictable sometimes. Like you said, if I were to die because my pet didn't heal me in time, then I'd get mad at it, not the game, as I could have easily just used a potion or something.

[yerkyerk]

Hard to tell if all we go by is having a pet :)

From that info though, I'm against it. Fluctuating sources of damage are acceptable, but healing is something you don't want to take chances with when you're at low health. Since it's an unreliable source of healing, it cannot be depended upon. As you said, you shouldn't rely on it if you go hardcore - and even though I'm not sure if I'll play hardcore mode, I definitely want to go through the game dying as little as possible, just because of the challenge. Oh well, my 2 cents.

[Renevent]

I like the idea. I don't consider a healing pet something that is really supposed to keep you alive or depend on in an emergency anyways. Rather, I would say it's purpose would to keep the player healed enough to keep normal combat moving forward and not having to stop much to heal up. If you had other pets it would help keep those pets alive as well taking away some of that micromanagement from the player.

[eisprinzessin]

If you implement Support Stance and I set the Raven to support me, then I would expect my pet to heal me as first priority. Then again, who wants to rely on healing in the nick of time. Edit: Just re-read the OP. Forget the previous sentence. Thought healing is triggered once you lost 75% health ... being below 75% is certainly not in the nick of time. </edit> Maybe the Raven is dead by then or doesn't have sufficient energy to cast his healing spell.
I made a rule for myself [...], that if my health was below 70% I needed to drink a health potion because in Nightmare and Hell difficulty you can easily loose half or more health from a single hit in certain situations.
Otherwise I concur with Renevent.

[carnage665]

I like the idea, but could you make it an option to let you choose if you want your pet on attack stance or healing stance or a mix of both?

I only ask because i dont really care much about dying every now and then, but i will be worried if it will make the game 'too easy'. i dont just want to be playing and thinking at the same time 'oww nvm, my pet will heal me if i get into trouble'. i would still like some challenge.

Anyways, idea is good, it's just a difficult line to draw about how far you can acutally rely on your pet for healing you.

so i voted 'meh' ---> it's not a bad idea at all, but also the coolness might actually affect difficulty to much, so MEHHHHH for now, we'll see ^^. You're developping the game, go with the flow Med. ^^

[Roe]

Why not add a pet bar that allows you to switch the focus of the pet between aggressive, passive, support, etc.

Aggressive mode: Pet will attack all nearby creatures within it's range.

Passive mode: Pet will attack only after the player attacks.

Support mode: Pet will not attack and will only use support skills.

Etc.

[Roros]

Maybe it would help to make the heal more of a passive, slowly recovering between fights thing. Something that would save you a few potions rather than save your life.

Personally I have nothing against a bit of luck and dice rolls. I like playing with the notion that I have to be prepared for several outcomes.

[ASYLUM101]

I love the idea, I support it.

Like others have said, implement some sort of stance system or the old pet system from TQIT and just have it so in defense mode, it doesn't run off but merely stays by your side casting spells.

Another thing that could work is - removing the pets ability to auto attack, give it a tiny tiny leash, and have it merely use it's spells.

[Aeturnum]

I like the idea. No skill is going to be there 100% of the time, even when it's one of your skills. Maybe just give the raven a short leash and / or weight the tree to value staying close over chasing enemies.

[medierra]

With regard to the stances, the issue is that AI just sometimes does wonky stuff despite the best efforts of developers and gamers. That may sound like sort of a lame cop-out but the reality is, teams with far more time and resources than us have consistently made games with AI that is not 100% reliable. I think we would be fooling ourselves not to expect that we will succeed beyond all those that have come before us. When AI meets in-game situations, there are just so many variables that there is always some potential for something weird to happen at some point. In this case, the more reliable the AI is, in some ways the more it sets players up to be surprised in that instance where it fails. Additionally, even if the AI is attempting to do what it is supposed to, it might end up out of range as a result of a pathing problem or some other non-AI related issue. Even more problematic, there are totally legimitate reason it might fail to heal the player, perhaps because the pet was stunned or died, that the player might not see at the time and therefore might assume the AI just let them down.

In game design you always have to consider that what players think is happening is more important than what actually is happening.

The other danger of this is that even when you, as a player, acknowledge that pet-healing is more of a bonus and shouldn't be relied upon, you get used to it happening and without even realizing you're doing it, you start to rely on it.

On the flip side, this dynamic definitely doesn't make the game too easy the way I have it set up atm. The occultist is fairly fragile and you really have to watch your health and occasionally disengage from enemies so the raven has a chance to heal you. It also feels very rewarding when you think you're screwed and then suddenly your pet rescues you.

With regards to a more passive healing, such as a regen aura, that would be more reliable - I think this would defeat some of the intention behind the pet healing dynamic, which is to make you feel more connected to a pet that is actively helping you. If the effect was passive, the pet wouldn't be actively doing anything to you and I think players would tend to just sort of forget it was there.

Pet healing goes against my personal design rule of avoiding mechanics where the game can cause players to fail or where it may not be clear that failure was the fault of the player. This can lead to players feeling cheated and becoming angry with the game. I've actually considered this very mechanic in the past and ruled it out for that reason. However, in my old age, I guess things don't seem quite as black and white. I remember a lot of games from my childhood that caused me to rage out for similar reasons but which I kept playing, loved, and remember fondly. That isn't to say that my rule isn't valid but I think perhaps special exceptions may be allowable if the potential gain offsets the potential cost. Just having a tough time deciding whether this is one of those cases or an instance where I'm going against my better judgement in order to preserve a "pet idea" that I like. (see what I did thar?! ooohh... puns FTL)

[Heffalumps]

I voted for it, but be it healing or some other buff, it really needs to be balanced to where it is VERY difficult to get it to the point where you can rely on it. As in, its always gonna help to some extent, but if this is a skill you're investing heavily in, everything else is gonna have to suffer to make the buff great.

The way I see it, is if it it's good enough to be something you're relying on, its because you seriously focused on it as a build, and when you're watching that health bubble fill back up you can smile to yourself and be like, "yeah, this is a great idea, I did that."

[ASYLUM101]

(see what I did thar?! ooohh... puns FTW)


I Fixed4U. :)

[medierra]

I think what I may do is leave it in for the alpha, see how people react, and then I can always turn it into player skill and make the raven responsible for one of the curses or buffs that is currently under player control.

I really wouldn't worry about it being overpowered, it is more like a constant stream of mini-heals that can occasionally be the difference between an enemy attack being fatal or not but it isn't going to keep you alive indefinitely while you camp out in the middle of an angry mob. I'd think of it more like a less reliable version of the massive amount of extra hit-points and armor a soldier has built into their class.

If you combined a soldier and occultist, you'd have some good tanking but the healing wouldn't seem as significant since each heal would only fill a much smaller portion of a soldier's much larger health bar. For a pure occultist it is often the difference between life or death because you don't have much health to begin with and a few too many enemy hits as you run through a crowd can take you down.

[eisprinzessin]

Did this interim poll result change your mind?

[medierra]

Yeah, the poll is so overwhelmingly in favor of keeping it so far that I think it justifies my belief that this may be a case where the coolness factor outweighs the potential negative.

[Scryer]

Yeah, I agree, leave it for alpha and see what people think.

My personal opinion though is this – if a player is investing heavily in any skill it should be reliable.

I can understand if for example a skill becomes more reliable as you increase the skill points into it. However, if it stays at the same level of reliability with 1 skill point versus 20 skill points, then the skill’s effect is diminished unless you can increase its power to compensate for the lack of reliability in which case that could cause imbalances.

I think the skill idea is cool; I’d have to test it out myself or see a video of it in action to suggest anything about it though...

[medierra]

Forget the previous sentence. Thought healing is triggered once you lost 75% health ... being below 75% is certainly not in the nick of time. </edit>[/COLOR]

I have it set so high because it can take time for the AI to receive a status update indicating that one of its allies health is below healing level and then a little more time to cast the spell. At the longer end of the response-time spectrum, it may only be a second or two but for a class that doesn't have a lot of health to begin with, that can be life or death.

If the raven were previously healing the hellhound pet or another player ally in multiplayer, it could take a few seconds for it to finish the first heal and then turn and heal its master.

This early healing also helps in situations where the player is losing health faster than the raven can replenish it. In that case, starting early may allow the player to survive an extra couple seconds.

I've played healers in 3 MMOs, I figured I'd try to impart some good habits on the raven. ;)

[Kluga]

I like the idea. I don't consider a healing pet something that is really supposed to keep you alive or depend on in an emergency anyways. Rather, I would say it's purpose would to keep the player healed enough to keep normal combat moving forward and not having to stop much to heal up. If you had other pets it would help keep those pets alive as well taking away some of that micromanagement from the player.

This is why I voted for it, essentially. It may save your life from time to time but you shouldn't neglect drinking a potion in a dire situation because your raven is surely going to heal you. I think it'll be great fun :cool:

[medierra]

My personal opinion though is this – if a player is investing heavily in any skill it should be reliable.

You don't really have to invest much in this skill. It is currently an innate ability for the raven that levels up as the pet does, so it is sort of a freebie. The raven does more than healing, so it isn't the sole purpose of the pet either.

The power of it is offset by the overall gameplay dynamic and balance of the class.

I think people will ultimately have to experience it to judge it.

[eisprinzessin]

You noticed my edit? *hurray* But it's sensible to set the threshold early. Hardly ever used those things in TQ, which were triggered on low health.

[Shinrou]

I personally think one good alternative solution/addition as well would be the pet to use some sort of life leech skill that zaps enemy and it rebounds straight to player to heal the amount of damage dealt over the set period of time. The pet would use that skill if your HP drops under certain percentage.

Another strange experiment would be some sort of area life leech skill. The pet would cast area spell below closest enemy that would look something like that MP-drain area skill in TQ but red of course. It would drain HP of the enemies inside it and convert it into yours if you are also standing in the circle while they are being drained. It would need some balancing done, like it's healing capabilities should have a little penalty if there's many enemies inside the circle since you would get insane amounts of HP while in it.

I personally would like the pets to keep on fighting alongside and utilize heals in form of damaging spells. It could dedicate itself in dealing damage while ALSO healing. Of course it's damage dealing abilities of the skills that convert damage into health shouldn't be on par with real damaging abilities.

I don't really like the option of passive regen bonuses while having the pet summoned/near since it really doesn't give you that dynamic feeling of it actually doing anything.

But I'm certainly ok with regular heals as well, just throwing some ideas on the table here.

[Scryer]

In the case that the pet doesn’t just heal, and is thus not set to one mechanic (I.E. healing) I think that it’s okay then.

If the Raven’s only purpose were to heal then I think it should be reliable in doing that, but as you said it has a few other functions, in which case the player should realize that the pet’s reliability on healing is not guaranteed.

I actually like that a lot.

[Starkrun]

The bird needs to stay BUT the bird needs the ability to become passive so it'll stay by you and do its job... either use the bird passively so it'll only give you bonuses or when you tell it to attack like in TQ fir the Function commands to select pets....


keep it, keep the idea and the bird just allow us to set it passive, normal, aggressive... if you do that all issues you have are solved... then mister hardcore is at fault for not keeping the bird alive if its on passive... or not leveling the healing aspect of the bird more or giving it a better dodge ETC...

[Scryer]

I do like the idea of a branching skill that makes the pet sort of passive (untargetable by enemies).

I'm not sure if it'd be too OP with that, but it'd be kind of a cool bonus for those that want to spec into the pet more, it goes from being a temporary part of your arsenal in terms of length of time and death, to a more permanent part of your arsenal if you choose.

Maybe you could add a second branching augmentation whereby the raven is still targetable but gains even more awesome mechanics / gets even stronger?

Then you could make one skill lock out the other, not sure if you want to do anything like that though.

[Sile]

In Anarchy Online, the Meta-Physicist class uses pets to attack and heal. It's kinda cool to have a beast attacking for you and a smaller pet behind you just healing. The beauty of it was though, you could send the pet to heal your other attacking pet, or heal yourself, or heal another party member, or another member's pet etc etc.

I think for a healer pet to be fair in this sort of game, they have to be able to be targeted. You should fear AOE situations where your pet will take damage. In some cases, if a mob is going for your healer pet, you should employ a knockdown spell or a stun to shut that mob down. If you're going to have healing pets in the game, I believe you should need to care about losing them. Having them as a passive heal buff is not a good idea IMO. It just screams easy mode.

Having a heal pet that you're able to command is an idea I'd fully support. I'd like to be able to heal myself with it, or another player, or another pet etc.. like my example at the start of this post.

I don't think we need skill trees for the pet, but you could certainly have a skill for the player to summon better heal pets. Anarchy Online allowed you to buy better skills (spells) which meant you could summon better healing pets (and damage pets).

I use Anarchy Online as an example because I from my experiences, that did healing pets right and I just loved how they worked.

At this stage, I'll have to vote "meh". It would depend on more information about how they could work.

[Psyklone]

This idea is perfectly fine.
And I seriously doubt anyone would rely on this specifically to swoop in and save them.
To me its no different than having a regeneration aura.

So the regen aura is mobile, but more or less where you are... thats cool.
It also reinforces the idea that this class is stronger with their pets alive, and they're losing more than an extra dmg and some dps when they die.

[Gumshoe]

I think I would look at it like 'If the pet heal spell is an aura, why bother with the pet? Just have an aura.' Having the aura only work when in range of the pet could raise all sorts of problems with the pet getting stuck, running away etc. If the pet is only there to 'look cool' while otherwise the spells take care of themsleves, is it really necessary?

I personally would like to see a pet that is much more functional in defending the player rather than healing them. I think the raven would be cool if it swooped monsters to cause knockdown, had a screech attack to cause knockback/fear, or could 'round up' monsters and lead them away from/to the player.
This is useful especially for a ranged char and makes a purposeful pet, as to use knockdown/fear etc normally the monsters must be attacking the player already.

If the pet has heal effects, maybe it is done by roaming to find unsuspecting monsters, stealthily leeching life from them and returning to the player to deliver the health? If it's done out of battle, it's a cool(?) way of regenerating the player health without 'autorecovery'
If not a raven, a wolf or similar that actually charges the monsters, knocking them down, howls at them and rounds them up/chases them away, runs to your aid to attack monsters when you're attacked, especially archers, etc

I'd like for once for the pet to not feel like just a buff, aura or shield, but a companion that's working for me, like a good kelpie on a farm for instance :P

[i.n.s.a.n.e]

I like the idea and support it. It is everyone's option if the person wants to rely on pet's healing or will rather think about own health status by self. Especially on hc difficulty, the person would be pretty stupid to rely on anything but self in healing matters..

I am glad, Medierra, you played healer classes and that the inspiration gets projected to this great game. I am always playing healer/support in any game that supports it (heck, I even played spirit healer with some support spells in DA:Origins despite everyone claiming how boring it is...and I loved it!). I will love some sort of hybrid with healing in GD, can't wait! =)

[nicki_1911]

I do also like the idea. I think it's good if the pet does not always heal you so that you can't rely on it. It should just help to get through the game, but not make the game too easy because there is always someone instantly healing you from behind.

[End]

When talking about frustration, in many cases, and in the AI one, I think what we see a lot is players who go "it felt like there was nothing I could do", or "it felt like something was beyond my control". You've mentioned it yourself... you are okay with players getting mad at other players, because there is something that player could have done... they could have pressed the right button.

In this case, we're looking at it being impossible to "press the right button".

As you've mentioned, this causes frustration, and that's bad. There's also a secondary problem, as it gives no difference between "good" and "bad" players. Neither of them have a button to press, or a skill to use properly... a good player could die, or a bad player could live, merely because that's how the AI happened to work out.

So what I recommend is giving the player a button. In this case, the idea of a pet healing you is pretty neat... so how do we make that something the player controls?
The stupid obvious solution is that player presses button X, and raven casts a heal. This differs from "player casts a heal" only in graphics, and is thus boring. Not recommended. This also doesn't give you the functionality it seems you are looking for... a pet that keeps you alive WHILE you are doing other things. Now, we look at a way for the player to press a button, but still be available to do other things...

Thought 1 : Tie Raven-Heal to some other cooldown. Once you hit button X, the game checks to see if your raven is there, and then it starts healing you.

Thought 2 : Make Raven-Heal something like a 10s-spam-healfest, on a 30s-cooldown. Thus, the player is still responsible for hitting the button, but then they have the next 9+ seconds in which to make actions.

Thought 3 : Make the raven spawn, and immediately start healing, the second the player hits (arbitrary number... we'll go with the example 75%) health. This removes all other potential functionality from the raven, but if you really want a passive raven that the player never has to work with, then this will remove any potential AI frustration.

Thought 4 : You could also have a trigger-button come available once the player hits 75% health, and once the player hits that button, the Raven spawns and heals. That's maybe the most in-depth solution, and is pretty twitchy in a game genre where health goes up and down very drastically very quickly, but reactive abilities have been fun in games in the past.


Bottom line... if you want to remove frustration from the game engine, find a way to make the player responsible for what happens to them. Since the vast majority of what a player does is press buttons... give 'em a button to push. Then the scenario where the heal fails is 99% of the time the fault of the player for not pushing the button, and they're much more forgiving of the 1% of the time when the raven got caught behind a stalagmite.

[i.n.s.a.n.e]

When talking about frustration, in many cases, and in the AI one, I think what we see a lot is players who go "it felt like there was nothing I could do", or "it felt like something was beyond my control". You've mentioned it yourself... you are okay with players getting mad at other players, because there is something that player could have done... they could have pressed the right button.

In this case, we're looking at it being impossible to "press the right button".

As you've mentioned, this causes frustration, and that's bad. There's also a secondary problem, as it gives no difference between "good" and "bad" players. Neither of them have a button to press, or a skill to use properly... a good player could die, or a bad player could live, merely because that's how the AI happened to work out.

So what I recommend is giving the player a button. In this case, the idea of a pet healing you is pretty neat... so how do we make that something the player controls?
The stupid obvious solution is that player presses button X, and raven casts a heal. This differs from "player casts a heal" only in graphics, and is thus boring. Not recommended. This also doesn't give you the functionality it seems you are looking for... a pet that keeps you alive WHILE you are doing other things. Now, we look at a way for the player to press a button, but still be available to do other things...

Thought 1 : Tie Raven-Heal to some other cooldown. Once you hit button X, the game checks to see if your raven is there, and then it starts healing you.

Thought 2 : Make Raven-Heal something like a 10s-spam-healfest, on a 30s-cooldown. Thus, the player is still responsible for hitting the button, but then they have the next 9+ seconds in which to make actions.

Thought 3 : Make the raven spawn, and immediately start healing, the second the player hits (arbitrary number... we'll go with the example 75%) health. This removes all other potential functionality from the raven, but if you really want a passive raven that the player never has to work with, then this will remove any potential AI frustration.

Thought 4 : You could also have a trigger-button come available once the player hits 75% health, and once the player hits that button, the Raven spawns and heals. That's maybe the most in-depth solution, and is pretty twitchy in a game genre where health goes up and down very drastically very quickly, but reactive abilities have been fun in games in the past.


Bottom line... if you want to remove frustration from the game engine, find a way to make the player responsible for what happens to them. Since the vast majority of what a player does is press buttons... give 'em a button to push. Then the scenario where the heal fails is 99% of the time the fault of the player for not pushing the button, and they're much more forgiving of the 1% of the time when the raven got caught behind a stalagmite.


Or:

1. You could just wait for alpha/beta to see how it works. =)

2. The easiest solution (as someone already suggested in this thread a page back) could be to bond the Raven to its master and give it a life leech to transfer. Something like Blood Golem in D2 or a pet in the great mod of Asylum's did. =) It would heal you or any other companion under conditions I am too lazy to think about now, heh. But you get the image.

[irk]

Monster Hunter has cats that you bring with you that heal you whenever they feel like it (if you give them that skill). You can go entire quests without them healing, or get so many heals you never use a pot. Its really convenient at times and I never rely on them because its so random.

Pretty much one pot sized heal at random is actually quite nice to have.

[xxaosicxx]

Just a thought..

...it might be good to have the pet cast a healing buff on the player that will automatically give a boost at 25% health, because of some sort of connection between pet and master...a buff which disappears if the pet dies.

That way your pet is still important to you...it could save your life...but you're not relying on AI at all as the buff would be cast on summon.

Alternatively, have you considered the idea that the pet gives you HIS health (you sort of leech it from him) but that the pet might have a very quick health regen. This way you could trigger the health boost yourself, your pet is technically healing you, but if you over-do it you'll lose your pet (because you killed it)....

Just my 2p worth :)

[i.n.s.a.n.e]

Alternatively, have you considered the idea that the pet gives you HIS health (you sort of leech it from him) but that the pet might have a very quick health regen. This way you could trigger the health boost yourself, your pet is technically healing you, but if you over-do it you'll lose your pet (because you killed it)....

Yes, it would fit the theme well, right? I like it. Sacrifice! =)

[Gumshoe]

Just a thought..

...it might be good to have the pet cast a healing buff on the player that will automatically give a boost at 25% health, because of some sort of connection between pet and master...a buff which disappears if the pet dies.

That way your pet is still important to you...it could save your life...but you're not relying on AI at all as the buff would be cast on summon.

Alternatively, have you considered the idea that the pet gives you HIS health (you sort of leech it from him) but that the pet might have a very quick health regen. This way you could trigger the health boost yourself, your pet is technically healing you, but if you over-do it you'll lose your pet (because you killed it)....

Just my 2p worth :)

I don't think the 'health while pet is alive' would work well, because if the pet dies while you're not watching in battle, you die too and that sucks.

Your other ideas of pet sacrifice and sharing/donating health is great and could be very effective :)

[xxaosicxx]

Fanks :D

Yeah....I really like the idea that you life-leech from your own pet. The onus is on you then not to over-do it (unless you deem it absolutely necessary) and there are no AI complications.

A fast health regen for the pet would be a must, but not so fast that you can do it endlessly...

I'd see a problem with the pet pulling massive aggro because of this, so it might have to be slightly ethereal....harder to hit perhaps?....something like (for those who remember it, the arcane "blur" spell from D&D...used quite effectively in Baldur's Gate 2, to reduce the chance of being hit)

[jodyj]

i liked the health steal idea or the sarifice your pet for health idea, or how cool would it be if your pets life gets higher and higher the more life it steals and if you are low on health it can be sacrificed to give all its health to you.

Or the other alternative instead of the pet healing you rather let it do something to prevent damage, like every monster it hits has a chance to be weakened (does less damage)/ blinded / converted???

[Josho]

Kamikaze pet (was it a raven?).

When health reaches a particular level the pet will sacrifice itself to replenish the life of its master. Don't make it need to come back and heal, just let it trigger automatically. Lose a pet, gain some health, decide whether tis better to stay alone, or to run away...

Keep the pet summon on a slow cooldown to not devalue the use of potions. Or maybe it is a skill that costs both health and mana to cast. Makes me me think using that option could open the way for a overheal styled buff for tough fights. I don't know.

[NZSpy]

I like the idea. As it has been stated numerous times, it is not something you should depend on but something to help sustain your health in some situations. I can't recall any game that has implemented things like this 100% perfectly. Besides, it's up to us players to play it smart, not the devs. :)

[matthewfarmery]

certainly an interesting idea, would be interesting to see this in GD at some point

[Roe]

Here's an idea:

Why not make it so that when the pet is active (summoned and alive), it automatically adds a buff to the owner which is a constant HoT, so that regardless of what the pet is doing, the caster will still receive the heals. This could even be an effect of switching the pet to 'support' stance.

Rather than relying on the pet to actually do the healing, I think a buff on the player would be much more effective.

[xxaosicxx]

I'm pretty sure I suggested that myself on the previous page, as the first of my two ideas...

[Azrael]

I don't see a problem with this pet-healing feature. I mean you said in the first post that the Raven tries to heal you as soon as you're below 75% HP. That is high enough that if the Raven is far away and doesn't heal you, you should have enough advance warning that you can try to get away or something..

[Sile]

I'd like for once for the pet to not feel like just a buff, aura or shield, but a companion that's working for me, like a good kelpie on a farm for instance :P

lol.. I'm tipping that 99% of the people on this forum wouldn't know what you meant there. ;) But I agree.

[i.n.s.a.n.e]

Any chance, Medierra, to see a video of the pet healing in action once you get the pathing done or something (although I do not think it is necessary for a quick get-harmed-go-out-of-combat-let-the-pet-heal-you video)? =))

[matthewfarmery]

Any chance, Medierra, to see a video of the pet healing in action once you get the pathing done or something (although I do not think it is necessary for a quick get-harmed-go-out-of-combat-let-the-pet-heal-you video)? =))

certainly would like to see that in action, so seconded!

[jeckhyl]

In an old MMORPG, Anarchy Online, one of the coolest class is the Metapsysicist, a guy with an healing pet, an attack pet, and later, after some years, a mezz pet, and beside these pets, a nuke like primary attack and some mob debuffs (and later, he was given a bow).

A very complete, and very pleasant, character.

[DOOMER]

ive played pvp with pets, and it is always awful.

If they will not effect pvp, go nuts. Assuming this game will have any.

[Sile]

In an old MMORPG, Anarchy Online, one of the coolest class is the Metapsysicist, a guy with an healing pet, an attack pet, and later, after some years, a mezz pet, and beside these pets, a nuke like primary attack and some mob debuffs (and later, he was given a bow).

A very complete, and very pleasant, character.

Glad someone is able to back my post up and likes the way MP Pets play from Anarchy Online!

[CBR1000Rider]

Having a pet heal you is pretty awesome, I would not rely on it however as long as I had a potion hot keyed.

[Chameleon]

Or you could give the pet a "potion belt" and you can put various(or is there only one kind?) potions onto it. To set when the potion is used you could have a slider so it heals you with a potion when your Hp reaches a certain level.

[Palladin0718]

I like the idea of a healing pet. I also like the idea of being able to have some kind of pet "control."

[Bead]

What about being able to have a list of priorities for the AI?

Example:
A - Attack
H - Heal
D - Defend
U - Stand around and be useless

So then for the pets AI priority list it could be
1. H
2. D
3. A
4. U

Also, what about having some roaming options for the pet?
1. Stay close, I'm scared
2. Don't go to far now
3. This town ain't big enough for the both of us

[i.n.s.a.n.e]

What about being able to have a list of priorities for the AI?

Example:
A - Attack
H - Heal
D - Defend
U - Stand around and be useless

So then for the pets AI priority list it could be
1. H
2. D
3. A
4. U

Also, what about having some roaming options for the pet?
1. Stay close, I'm scared
2. Don't go to far now
3. This town ain't big enough for the both of us


I think that's how the AI works already (or very similar to it).. The problem is, it is still AI..if it gets stuck at one priority and you need the other at the same time..you are fuc-ed. You just can't rely on it.

[ekopalm]

What if each of the modes just loads a seperate sprite, maybe it changes the color and becomes a healer only or attacker only. It may play to the theme of dark/light a little. In devil mode it might be an attacker, provoker, instigator, etc,... and in light mode or whatever it is a buffer/healer in ways. Maybe you can go as far as to only be able to pick one in the tree and you lock out the other. I know that's intricant but it kinda gives that "no going back now" feel when dev'ing a characters tree as well as makes it easier for the AI if you have one very simple series of commands for one type of Raven and another for the other type of Raven as opposed to balancing one major piece of AI tech.

Very quick edit:

I kind of like not being able to control pets to be honest. I like when I can trust my pet to do one simple thing (i.e. Attack things or Heal me). Pets are more of a bonus...a "plus" to me, they serve the purpose of accomplishing something on their own while I accomplish something on my own. I am sure none of this helpful but I rarely contribute.

[eisprinzessin]

I am sure none of this helpful but I rarely contribute.
if someone just wants to give an opinion without any argument behind it, that is perfectly valid. It is helpful for us to know how fans generally feel about an issue.
Nevertheless - I like to have more control over my pets, I'd like to be able to activate all their skills, and I think such theme-modes are out of question, as they were required for any pet, which would require some new tech. ;)

[ekopalm]

Nevertheless - I like to have more control over my pets, I'd like to be able to activate all their skills, and I think such theme-modes are out of question, as they were required for any pet, which would require some new tech. ;)


Thanks for the support.

I understand your arguement. If I am choosing a pure summoning path then I would definitely understand having more micromanaging options available. If i'm choosing an independent path and I have a summon for support then I want it to be simple while I worry about what my character has to do to win. But again, I completely understand your arguement.

[yerkyerk]

I'm not very fond of micro managing pets. I just want to stay in the back and control the battle, throwing out debuffs to weaken the enemy force, taking care of my army and use my minions to take the heat. I think spells that target a specific enemy for your pets to focus (perhaps throw a scent on him or something) would be good though. But that's not really micro managing pets, as you don't directly control their actions, but rather direct the battle. I like to see more of these kinds of spells (the Soothsayer in TQ:IT definitely had such spells, but only had few pets). I liked this tactics aspect the best in the D2 necromancer. Having direct control of pets kinda ruins the pet part for me. Than they're just another caster class.

[pts]

I'd like it if pets had an ability that the player could activate with a single click, perhaps though a button placed next to it's health/energy (and/or a series of keybindings).

The ability could be a buff, area spell (aoe) or taunt for instance.

I think spells that target a specific enemy for your pets to focus (perhaps throw a scent on him or something) would be good though.
+1
As long it's MY ability and not a pet's :p

[Fingrapyro]

In dungeon siege 2 I really loved making one of my team members to autocast healing.

What I would find important is that the pet should have low mana/energy and it would change the least as the pet gets more skill points.

This way he will still make a difference, but in long battles he won't be enough to protect you from death.

[wyldmage]

Pet heals should be over-time skills in the first place, not burst healing.
Not only does this lower their ability to be relied on, it also decreases the chance for the pet to not be healing you at any given time.

If the Raven's #1 priority is casting his heal-over-time on anyone under 70% hp, unless he did so in the last X seconds (X = 2/3 duration of the spell), then the AI shouldn't bug up too hard.

[Stormcaller]

I dont usually post, but when I d---

why our heal pet heals when our hp is below %75 ?
ok hear this, have an action key("E" will fit best) and when,
we press E, that monster heals us.
also, it will heal when our hp below %75.
so if monster decides to act dumb, we can press "E"

[Ragnar]

Maybe it would be better a pet to have a aura, that heels all the time, somthing like paladin in d2.

[james1976]

I think having a pet that can heal is a pretty good idea. It's more like extra healing or something to fall back on but not a primary source. It's an extra resource to pull from if you need it.

[Zenuf]

Generally i don't use perma pets because i don't even like to rely on them for damage and i wouldn't like they idea of rely on them for heals either. If you're looking for a way to make them more reliable as a healer. Why not rather then use a nuke heal, could give them the heal in the form of a shot healing over time buff.

A player in tense combat who has lost track of his pets actions can see a HoT on his UI to see if he is being healed. Also a HoT won't exactly snap you back from the brink of death when your being heavily attacked so you wouldn't really be blaming the pet for not healing you. It'd be more a "i took too much damage too fast" situation.

[Daemeous]

Pet healing shouldn't be able to keep a character up on his own against equal level content, that would make the game unchallenging. If anything it should be a something to take the edge off incoming damage.

One proposal could literally be one that takes the edge off. It has a total, let's say at a certain rank it has...400 health and a 50% for ease.

Every time the player takes damage the percentage (50% in this case) of that damage is healed.

So a 200 damage hit would afterwards heal for 100 leaving 300 left in the pool for subsequent hits. Naturally you'd want to put in a check to make sure the hit hadn't killed the player before applying the healing, or if health is a signed integer, you could see if the heal brought them back above 0.

Another option for the same effect could be a share damage link, where the pet can self heal and takes a percentage of the damage it's master does, this gives you a choice between breaking the link and killing the pet should it take too much damage.

One final idea would be, for a pet class, a pet orientated around healing other pets. It'd give the player the feeling that they're bringing a full group of tanks, healers and DPS on their own, granted not comparable to actual players performing the same role (should you include direct healers).

Just my 2 pence.

[NZSpy]

Torchlight has this. You can equip your pet with a healing spell, which the pet will cast on you. It was balanced pretty well. It never saved you from certain death but enough to keep you in the fight in a pinch. If you relied on it, you would most definitely die.

[Tarnsman]

I am kinda late on this but thought I would add my 2 cents. I personally think this is a cool idea as long as it doesn't create a reliance on the pet. I don't ever use pets regardless of how uber they are because I don't like to babysit pets, but I wouldn't want to deprive someone else of the option if it is in the game. I say go for it as long as they aren't required to succeed.

Of course if this a permanent pet that doesn't die that would change my outlook since I wouldn't have to keep it alive...

[DeAdOne]

Why not add a pet bar that allows you to switch the focus of the pet between aggressive, passive, support, etc.

Aggressive mode: Pet will attack all nearby creatures within it's range.

Passive mode: Pet will attack only after the player attacks.

Support mode: Pet will not attack and will only use support skills.

Etc.


Like others have said if you do make pets able to heal you should have control over their basic AI functions.

Extact AI functions will of course have to be determined.Something like this though i think would be a good starting point.

[Ryland]

I personally would think it was weird if a pet didnt get distracted sometimes (ie a crow see's a "shiny" off to the side and goes to check it out). Pets should never be relied on to do anything required and maybe the animal's intelligence should work into the equation (ie a smarter animal may be less likely to go chasing squirrel's...)

[Malpheas]

I think the healing pet is a good idea. I think it should work differently. I honestly have not read the entire rest of this thread, but I think that it should be an aura that effects all allies and a nominal to so-so healing should be that. I think that healing aura should be a pulse of healing at intervals rather than a boost to hp recovery / second.

How popular will it be? Very, at low levels, not so much at high levels.