100%
why couldn't a trained fighter hit its target?:O

btw are you making a game? why do you want us to make it for you? just make it and we will score it

imho this is how to make a bad game throu surveys ...

100% accuracy with minimal damage.

Missing just feels so bad as a player. I'm sure some people can brush it off with RPing or something.
Hitting every time but for even 1 damage at least feels like you're doing something.

Baldur's Gate also came to my mind as an example to avoid.

Level 1 characters are comically inept and spend 5 minutes in combat against rats, missing practically every attack.

Mages may as well not show up at all once they have expended their single magic missile.

I have a lot of complex systems in mind and not really focused on it at he moment, so it'll be messy, but...
I still say that a melee attacker using a weapon they're not unskilled in using should always hit, or almost always. Starting value and impact of skill may differ depending on weapon complexity if you want to go more complex with the mechanics, but with a starting weapon I'd go for if (skill > 0) { hit_chance = 95 + (skill / 10) }, so starts at 95% and 100% at 50%. For particularly difficult / exotic weapons it may go down to 75 + (skill / 2), but that's not something a starting character would worry with.
On the other hand, the defender should have a chance to evade, so first check attacker's hit chance, if not 100% in itself, then check defender's evasion, and if you want to go more complex then if evasion check is successful further check whether attacker can compensate for evasion, getting a reduced damage strike, and then possibly even further check whether defender can compensate for that compensation, still getting full evasion.
Between the two, damage would depend more on skill than hit chance, have a min and max damage and it's more random at low skill levels, maximum may increase relatively little with skill but minimum will increase a lot, at minimum training may have smth like minimum to 75% of maximum base weapon damage, at 100% may have fixed max damage, or max to 120% of max if skill may also add bonuses in itself.
With ranged weapons it'd be different though, there the miss chance will be significant and very much tied to skill.

But in the situation you ask about, level 1, basic gear, expect 95% base melee hit chance by player, average of 2-3 strikes for kill, but something like 20-25% of one-hit kill and a similar chance of 5-6 strikes needed, having relatively low skill. Low evasion normally, always by low-level enemies and most player characters, rogues and the like should have some modest chance of evasion even at low levels. And a low level enemy would probably get 75-80% base hit chance and on average do about half damage, percentage wise, to the player compared to what the player does to it, weighing it in the player's favor at such levels. So a player would have a decent chance of killing such an enemy in single combat without a scratch, since they'll probably strike first, get 20-25% chance of one-hit kill, if that fails get 20-25% chance of not getting hit in return, then a higher chance of killing with second strike, and some small chance of still not getting damage even if the fight continues a bit more.

I dislike games wherein weapon types don't determine damage. Like games were a guy with a knife is doing 50 times the damage as a guy with a gun. Or the same guy with a gun can equip his starter weapon and do 5 damage, then equip his end game gun (similar in every aspect except "Stats") and do 3000 damage per hit. What makes such a difference between weapon a and weapon b? A knife or sword doing disproportionate damage to other similar weapons depending on where/when you found them is just terrible. It's one of the reasons I like the D&D style. Damage will be more with some weapons, but generally weapon damage is mostly based on your character.

yes, and I would give it 1/10 points :)
but if you are not making a game why these questions?

Footing, enemy dodging, weapons being brandished at the player...
It makes a lot more sense in tabletop D&D, where hits depend on many different factors like the ones listed above, and where HP is an abstract simulation of how close the player is to slipping up and receiving a death blow.
HP in D&D was never supposed to be a measure of your actual physical "Health", but rather an abstract combination of all the factors keeping you alive.
So in D&D, a hit might not actually be connecting and slicing the enemy; it could be a swing that the player has to expend strength to duck under and dodge, and now they are that much more vulnerable to an actual killing blow.

In videogames, especially modern ones, it doesn't make as much sense to have blows miss since that isn't as fun for the player since there is less feedback in the game. In Morrowind there isn't much explanation for missing hits. It's easy to imagine in a turn based game with little to no graphics like Wizardry that the battle is going on and when you miss you may have been parried, ect.
But if the graphics are going for 1:1 realism, then you need unique animations for dodging and blocking to explain misses, or else it just takes the player out of the situation.
I imagine that is one of the reasons why we've drifted away from that in games like TES series. Of course, it begins to depend on your definition of an RPG, since Skyrim and Wizardry are almost impossible to compare. I think it is reasonable to not consider Skyrim to be an RPG, at least not in the traditional sense, so it may not be the best game to talk about in this particular circumstance.

I have a bit of trouble with the situation sketched by DTGreen, maybe someone can help me out here

if we talk dice and both the attacker and defender have a similar dice set to appeal too how the heck should i be able to provide a percentage since that is super random number right?

If the attackers throw is heigher then the defenders throw by x then it will hit and hit for x ???
if the defenders throw is higher then the attackers throw attacks are dodged blocked and in some super rare cases provide a strike of opportunity

Not sure about the whole thing without going into much detail but.... for the sake of something i belief the percentage would be around 40% for hitting and about 20% for a decent hit

I hate dnd system, where armor gives miss chance, and as hp as an abstract simulation, I don't get then why it wouldn't be full after a fight and why is there healing and such, makes little sense to me if it is an abstract thing

yeah best thing if the game has dodge and parry animations , like in neverwinter nights

That reminds me of one of the big herosystem weapons/rules, which is HTH. Weapons made with HTH (knives, staffs, whatever) are just a type of reduced strength, so you get say a 1 1/2d6 knife/dagger (5d6 nonlethal) then you can only add your strength up to double that ability. For every 5 points of stength you could add 1d6 non-lethal to the effect, so 5d6+5d6 would be the max you could do with a knife (10d6 nonlethal or 3d6+1 lethal). It's mixed between character stats as well as ability and you can't go higher.

Though maybe you can do 12d6 with your laser eyes...

Anyways, both sets of rules after a bit follow a set of more or less mostly-realistic set of rules.

One thing that Morrowind could have done: Whenever the attack roll is a miss, the target should show a blocking animation. This provides the player with feedback that they're positioned correctly to hit the target, but are just getting unlucky. Fighting Fantasy on the Nintendo DS does this, for example.

That would be way too frustrating, to be honest.

I prefer this sort of mechanic to not exist, except perhaps as a special ability that is only found on certain entities, and which the player won't necessarily want to have (or be able to get) on every party member.

Or if the game displays the word "Miss!" over the target when the attack rolls a miss. (Common in turn-based JRPGs, but then I see it in Secret of Evermore, where it starts to feel silly.)

(Note that anyone translating the game needs to be careful to use the right translation; having the equivalent of "young lady" come up when an attack misses would not be correct.)

Just don't do what Morrowind did in the early stages of combat where you would be fighting a slow mudcrab and yet you would swing and miss, swing and miss, swing and miss, swing and miss, swing and miss swing and ....hit.

That was annoying.

Well, perhaps a robot with the proper piece of headgear could have laser eyes. Of course, for the sort of game I might write, there are questions to ask:
* What stat should affect the damage (and accuracy, if that is a factor)?
* What stat(s) should such attachment provide when equipped on a robot? (Made more complicated by the fact that, if I follow SaGa, the stats a robot gets from equipment are *all* the stats the robot gets, except for some very low starting stats (like 5 when 99 is attainable).)

Personally, I think realism is over-rated, and what matters is what makes the game more fun. For example, it might be realistic for armor to lower your evasion, but in Final Fantasy 2 the penalty is so severe that it actually makes you more vulnerable, plus you also don't get to act before the enemy does, making things frustrating rather than fun. (On the other hand, shields making you act sooner in the round isn't particularly realistic, but that's how FF2 works.)

Also, I think having exotic growth systems that are neither realistic nor XP-based can be fun, particularly for more exotic character types.

Morrowind isn't the only game to do this.

Dungeons and Dragons did this, and many WRPGs, from Wizardry up to at least as recently Baldur's Gate (and I believe even Baldur's Gate 3), copied this feature. It is really something that should have died a long time ago, and something that JRPGs (except the first two Final Fantasy games, with FF2 being worse than FF1 at the start) did better.

well yea, first level life should be frustrating.. at least in my book it does..... that stupid wolf you might encounter in your first steps in baldurs gate, if your so smart to go back to the ambush spot to see if you can find some extra loot or just decide to roam the wild and miss your first party increase choice for example



and strikes of opportunity should be common ground, i'm not here to play some japanese invention