Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
CAN YOU HAVE TOO MANY CHARACTERS IN A GAME?
Posts
Red_Nova
Sir Redd of Novus: He who made Prayer of the Faithless that one time, and that was pretty dang rad! :D
9192
Red_Nova
View playlists
CloseRocket, how important are these characters to the main plot? If they are all central figures that literally cannot be removed from the story without major plot holes, then... holy crap. That's nuts. And if these characters all interact with each other, you've got a lot of writing to do.
Fire Emblem games have a large cast, but only a handful are actually important to the plot (because anyone who isn't a main character is capable of dying). However, the personalities of the supporting cast can be explored and fleshed out through optional Support conversations. That might be a way to develop the large cast, otherwise, I'd imagine players would drown in all the dialogue you'd have to make them read and not enjoy the GAME part of your game.
Fire Emblem games have a large cast, but only a handful are actually important to the plot (because anyone who isn't a main character is capable of dying). However, the personalities of the supporting cast can be explored and fleshed out through optional Support conversations. That might be a way to develop the large cast, otherwise, I'd imagine players would drown in all the dialogue you'd have to make them read and not enjoy the GAME part of your game.
that always bothered me about older fire emblems. if they talked more, i'd care more about them dying. otherwise i only care about them as stats. =/
the newer games still have the issue when THAT ONE BADASS CHICK joins your group... and she only has support options with the player and cannot talk to anybody else. ehgiaosglkn i just want to learn more about you, flavia
the newer games still have the issue when THAT ONE BADASS CHICK joins your group... and she only has support options with the player and cannot talk to anybody else. ehgiaosglkn i just want to learn more about you, flavia
RyaReisender
200
In normal RPGs I actually like it when there are only so many playable characters as can participate in battle. I don't like having to put characters "out of battle" even though there are in the party.
There can still be more playable characters at different times. FFIV for example solved that really nice. You never had more than 5 characters in your party, but there are actually around 15 playable ones.
For strategy RPGs I like larger parties but prefer if they are without permadeath and the ability to grind. With those two features it's nice being able to swap out parties to keep the battles interesting.
There can still be more playable characters at different times. FFIV for example solved that really nice. You never had more than 5 characters in your party, but there are actually around 15 playable ones.
For strategy RPGs I like larger parties but prefer if they are without permadeath and the ability to grind. With those two features it's nice being able to swap out parties to keep the battles interesting.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
author=Craze
you can never have too many. i add more and more playable characters to every game i make. literally never enough. karsuman and i's current game has 40+.
if you're talking about your narrative, then you'll have to design the narrative around your group size.
if you're talking about mechanics, you'll have to design your mechanics around your group size.
Mmm, if you want this much variety/choice in your gameplay, but a more focused narrative, the other option is to use 40 classes instead of 40 characters.
If you want this much variety/choice in your narrative, but more focused gameplay, the other option is to make 38 of the 40 characters NPCs even after they "join" your hero's group.
(There are also other weirder options, like what FF8 did with the time travel segments, where Laguna/Kiros/Ward would actually inherit all of the stats, equipment and abilities of the main party so that the designers didn't have to figure out how to make the gameplay work in those scenes. Don't do that. Come up with a better solution. That was really nonsensical.)
DoctorRocket
409
author=Liberty
108 characters per game. XD
That's a much bigger difference then. Just creating 100 characters seems like too many. I wonder how they do it and enable them to interact so much. I'll have to look into it...
DoctorRocket
409
author=Red_Nova
Rocket, how important are these characters to the main plot? If they are all central figures that literally cannot be removed from the story without major plot holes, then... holy crap. That's nuts. And if these characters all interact with each other, you've got a lot of writing to do.
The original Bamford Tenement didn't exactly have a linear story: it was centered around the 16 or so quest arcs and once all them were finished then a final quest would be available where all the characters make an appearance. Characters only briefly mentioned each other when spoken to before the final quest, but then in the final quest they have scripted interactions.
In this future game, the Player is the Landlord of the Tenement which means they get to choose who ends up staying at the tenement. And there are less rooms than the cast of potential tenants.
So yeah, it may be a bit of writing, but after seeing what Toby Fox did with Undertale's character interactions, I think it's possible. At least on a simple scale.
So in the final quest of this game, certain characters fill the rolls that other characters wouldn't. It sounds complicated now, but I can make it happen with a little bit of planning.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
Undertale only had a small handful of main characters, and you aren't Toby Fox.
More likely result:
More likely result:
Jaden
28
author=LockeZ
Uh, wow. Someone who thinks Pacman was overly complex because it had too many characters? That's a new one.
Lol. Pacman has no story in the game itself, it's arcade, so it can get away with having more than 3 characters in it.
It's all balance, and pacman came during a time when that balance was more of a compromise situation (couldn't have story, so gameplay had to be worth the time to play it. Couldn't have better graphics, so more to design, etc.)
DoctorRocket
409
author=LockeZ
Undertale only had a small handful of main characters, and you aren't Toby Fox.
I know, I was only using that as an example. The undertale characters are so interconnected plot-wise that it's really hard to believe. but if I could add just a 4th of that into putting together my characters' interactions, I could really do something special.
And I believe I've seen that before actually. But yeah, I get your point. But I don't write sitcoms.
And spoiler alert: I am Toby Fox.
Or at least one of them.
That's right.
There are actually 30 different Toby Foxes spread throughout the world. And they all look the same.
Hate to go on about the one game, but it helps to balance your battles around the party amount. Again, Suikoden had a LOT of characters, each and everyone on of them different in battle, but they knew that people didn't have the time or inclination to grind up a new character when they came along so they used a scaled system for levelling up - the lower level you were against the enemies you were fighting, the more experience you got until you reached around the recommended level of the monsters.
So if you decided you wanted to take a level 4 character into your party to get them up, and your currently party was as 30, if you went and fought monsters in the current dungeon they'd be almost at level 30 within 3-5 battles.
Another way they went about giving characters customisability was having them all have hidden competencies. So one character might have an affinity with water magics and do better with a water rune, and another might be better with fire - but they'd also have their own battle abilities outside of the shared runes.
Also, DocRoc, please don't double post. Just bundle all the quotes in one post and reply to them all in one (or edit them in). It's a site rule. Thanks! ^.^
So if you decided you wanted to take a level 4 character into your party to get them up, and your currently party was as 30, if you went and fought monsters in the current dungeon they'd be almost at level 30 within 3-5 battles.
Another way they went about giving characters customisability was having them all have hidden competencies. So one character might have an affinity with water magics and do better with a water rune, and another might be better with fire - but they'd also have their own battle abilities outside of the shared runes.
Also, DocRoc, please don't double post. Just bundle all the quotes in one post and reply to them all in one (or edit them in). It's a site rule. Thanks! ^.^
DoctorRocket
409
author=Liberty
Also, DocRoc, please don't double post. Just bundle all the quotes in one post and reply to them all in one (or edit them in). It's a site rule. Thanks! ^.^
Alright, so when you say "don't double post" you mean don't post twice, one after the other, right? I can still post multiple times on my forum, right?
