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)
ELEMENTAL WEAKNESSES (AND BATTLES THAT MAKE YOU THINK)
Posts
Darken
3952
Darken
View playlists
CloseYet another discussion spawned from a different board (EW = Elemental Weakness due to the typing too many flapping letters).
Basic EWs are really boring in a commercial game as the people making it probably have the resources and skills to make it more complex. The only exception I can think of is the Persona series where elemental weaknesses can mean life or death instead of just *you do more damage.* I can accept EWs in an RM game for the simple fact that very little RM games even go beyond the complexity of EWs (or even have a good concrete focus on it when they do). It is just refreshing to see an RM game that forces you to use a variety of skills to win or even make the battles faster.
Scans that take up a turn is really stupid though, so if you're using rm2k3 I hope you are using glyphs in monster names or fake status.
So yeah idk, talk about stuff!!!!
Random chance in video games is poor design, as is elemental weakness. It's a foregone conclusion; is the enemy weak to fire? USE FIRE! That's what you do. It's not compelling gameplay or intelligent decision making. I wonder if developers keep including it because it makes people feel smart for having deduced to right element to use (scan) and then seeing LARGE NUMBERS come up when they use ice on the Burning Magmalords.
Basic EWs are really boring in a commercial game as the people making it probably have the resources and skills to make it more complex. The only exception I can think of is the Persona series where elemental weaknesses can mean life or death instead of just *you do more damage.* I can accept EWs in an RM game for the simple fact that very little RM games even go beyond the complexity of EWs (or even have a good concrete focus on it when they do). It is just refreshing to see an RM game that forces you to use a variety of skills to win or even make the battles faster.
Scans that take up a turn is really stupid though, so if you're using rm2k3 I hope you are using glyphs in monster names or fake status.
So yeah idk, talk about stuff!!!!
I don't mind scans that take up a turn. Fake statuses just don't work, because you can only have so many in a box.
sunshinesan
534
Weaknesses, resistances and immunities in pokemon shape the entire metagame and is number one priority whenever a team is created. Stats doesn't mean anything, for example when you give it to a pokemon like Aggron, a pokemon with terrible, terrible typing, whereas Pokes like Rotom thrive because of its immunities and exellent typing overall. Though I must agree that most games that have EW tend to oversimply it and make it just as dull as if there weren't any EW.
post=208854
a pokemon like Aggron, a pokemon with STAB HEAD SMASH off of 110 ATTACK
E: speaking of rotom and aggron, they synergize quite well! Rotom is immune to both of Aggron's major weaknesses...
Corfaisus
"It's frustrating because - as much as Corf is otherwise an irredeemable person - his 2k/3 mapping is on point." ~ psy_wombats
7874
How I see it, without EW there's little to no point in having magic in the first place. Why not just put in weapons with differentiating strengths and critical hit probabilities instead of bothering with the same but the other method actually costs you something per turn?
I mean, sure, "Bug is weak to fire. KILL IT WITH FIRE!" is a no-brainer, and unless you're clever (don't get your hopes up) there's going to be a very few games that can build beyond that, but why else would you have a MP bar? Perhaps people need to start working less with EW specifically and make the enemies more prone to status effects with a basis in the elements, such as a fire type would be more susceptible to a water-based status effect that lowers their agility (Watered down? Eh...heh). Then again, that would downplay the usefulness of the usual status effects, as you'd most likely have to adjust those to be less likely.
Or perhaps I'm just not thinking as clearly as I could.
I mean, sure, "Bug is weak to fire. KILL IT WITH FIRE!" is a no-brainer, and unless you're clever (don't get your hopes up) there's going to be a very few games that can build beyond that, but why else would you have a MP bar? Perhaps people need to start working less with EW specifically and make the enemies more prone to status effects with a basis in the elements, such as a fire type would be more susceptible to a water-based status effect that lowers their agility (Watered down? Eh...heh). Then again, that would downplay the usefulness of the usual status effects, as you'd most likely have to adjust those to be less likely.
Or perhaps I'm just not thinking as clearly as I could.
TheNecromancer
3160
post=208860
How I see it, without EW there's little to no point in having magic in the first place.
There is more to magic than attack spells. There's healing magic, enhancing magic, maybe teleporting magic, transformation magic, summon magic.... attack magic is just one type. Even without EW there's lots of other reasons to have magic.
Also, if the base damage of all attack spells is higher than weapon damage then that justifies the MP cost. Plus what else would a wizard do, you trying to make mage's lose their jobs??
EW doesn't always have to do x2 damage. It could do 1.3 damage, enough to make you want to think about what spell your using but not so much that it breaks the balance. Lots of games use weakness' on weapons too, weak to piercing for example. It all adds to the complexity of battle and is just plain realistic. Electronics in real life are weak to electric shocks and water, but its hard to stab through their metal casings with a pen.
As far as scan goes, sometimes it's part of the fun not knowing what an enemy is weak against. Or maybe have visual clues, enemy color or in its name(like someone mentioned)
If there were no EW then it reduces the usefulness of having a large variety of elements in your spells, you would just want to use whatever deals the most base damage. Unless they had the possibility of different status effects attached to them. So it could work without EW but you would have to put something else in it's place to keep attack magic interesting.
Corfaisus
"It's frustrating because - as much as Corf is otherwise an irredeemable person - his 2k/3 mapping is on point." ~ psy_wombats
7874
post=208864post=208860There is more to magic than attack spells. There's healing magic, enhancing magic, maybe teleporting magic, transformation magic, summon magic.... attack magic is just one type. Even without EW there's lots of other reasons to have magic.
How I see it, without EW there's little to no point in having magic in the first place.
Also, if the base damage of all attack spells is higher than weapon damage then that justifies the MP cost. Plus what else would a wizard do, you trying to make mage's lose their jobs??
Mages could also sell potions. When the economy gets tough, you've got to make sacrifices.
Also, I guess I was a little too focused on black magic and forgot about healing spells for a moment. Then again, with items, mages are kind of out of luck, because your typical potions cost more to heal MP than HP.
I love Elemental weaknesses in a game, no matter how simple it may be, it helps making the game fun and that's all I care about... I'm not jaded enough (yet) to think that they are just "poor design" on the developer's part or anything like that.
Of course, spicing things up is always a nice thing, for example: let the weaknesses stack and fade away gradually, have monster that get stronger with one element as you weaken them with other ...or how about this? wanna hurt a monster really bad with fire? attack it with ice spells first so the sudden change in temperature gets them. I don't know, pretty much anything could work... I guess.
Oh, and what's wrong with scans that take up a turn? I love them too, "if you wanna know, take your time to find out", that's my motto.
Of course, spicing things up is always a nice thing, for example: let the weaknesses stack and fade away gradually, have monster that get stronger with one element as you weaken them with other ...or how about this? wanna hurt a monster really bad with fire? attack it with ice spells first so the sudden change in temperature gets them. I don't know, pretty much anything could work... I guess.
Oh, and what's wrong with scans that take up a turn? I love them too, "if you wanna know, take your time to find out", that's my motto.
Rowan
131
In my game, I just dropped Elemental Properties all together. In a game where canceling moves, debuffs, buffs, cooldowns, range, cast times, chance on use/hit effects, and many other stuff determines how the player plays, why have it? For me, it was just an uninteresting mechanic that only added further complexity to an already complex system.
Instead damaging moves deals either Physical Damage, Elemental Damage (in the most generic sense), or a combination of both. That's it.
As far as scanning goes I agree. The best scanning system (IMO) is the Grandia games. You just target an enemy and everything you will need to know will show up in a little box. Second best is the Persona games, mainly because they don't take up a turn, and once the member scans it, the information will forever be in their data-bank in case you come across the enemy again and forget.
Instead damaging moves deals either Physical Damage, Elemental Damage (in the most generic sense), or a combination of both. That's it.
As far as scanning goes I agree. The best scanning system (IMO) is the Grandia games. You just target an enemy and everything you will need to know will show up in a little box. Second best is the Persona games, mainly because they don't take up a turn, and once the member scans it, the information will forever be in their data-bank in case you come across the enemy again and forget.
post=208880That's Persona 3 - Persona 4 stores your trial-and-error discovery of enemy weakpoints and resistances. If you hit an Ice-weak foe with Ice damage, their analysis will show their Ice affinity whenever you consult it.
Second best is the Persona games, mainly because they don't take up a turn, and once the member scans it, the information will forever be in their data-bank in case you come across the enemy again and forget.
Pokemaniac
3559
I like situations where there are, say, 4 ice enemies and 4 fire enemies, and you have a hit-all fire spell. If you use the fire spell, you may kill the 4 ice guys, but heal the 4 fire guys or make them stronger. And gear that reduces damage of a certain element, but increases damage of another. Really, so long as you don't have FIRE DUNGEON | ICE DUNGEON | WATER DUNGEON type things, or so long as you still put the occasional Ice guy in the fire dungeon, elements work fine. And if you have limited attack slots and a lot of different enemies, like in Pokemon, it's pretty cool too!
EnderX
562
One thing I've played with on this topic - why does an elemental weakness have to be directly related to HP? Corfaisus gave one example above - having an element-based creature being susceptible to an opposing element status effect. Similar logic could be carried out otherwise. I've discovered that, for me at least, it helps to consider the elemental field as a space of planes, rather than a grid of lines.
My own take is, for lack of a better phrasing, elemental 'allergies' on characters and monsters. Independant of damage (or healing if absorbed), the attack element could trigger other effects. A simple example: Perhaps have a monster (or hero, if you so desire) who absorbs water attacks - but also gets put into one or more negative status effects by them, irrespective of whether the attack delivered a status or not? Or the converse - a creature that took extra damage, but also gained a positive status boost, from some element.
Another idea I've been playing with for this is field element - I've seen other games that do this as well. Even Pokemon has a few variants - harsh sunlight (Fire attacks double in power, grass-type solarbeam loses its charge time requirement, water power weakens) and rain (fire attacks weaken, water strengthens, Thunder hits perfect accuracy barring blocking moves) come to mind.
Unless you're actually using Jan, Ken, and Pon as your elements, though, it's generally a good idea to provide something to enhance the elemental rock-paper-scissors most games throw forward.
My own take is, for lack of a better phrasing, elemental 'allergies' on characters and monsters. Independant of damage (or healing if absorbed), the attack element could trigger other effects. A simple example: Perhaps have a monster (or hero, if you so desire) who absorbs water attacks - but also gets put into one or more negative status effects by them, irrespective of whether the attack delivered a status or not? Or the converse - a creature that took extra damage, but also gained a positive status boost, from some element.
Another idea I've been playing with for this is field element - I've seen other games that do this as well. Even Pokemon has a few variants - harsh sunlight (Fire attacks double in power, grass-type solarbeam loses its charge time requirement, water power weakens) and rain (fire attacks weaken, water strengthens, Thunder hits perfect accuracy barring blocking moves) come to mind.
Unless you're actually using Jan, Ken, and Pon as your elements, though, it's generally a good idea to provide something to enhance the elemental rock-paper-scissors most games throw forward.
Lennon
88
A good way to keep basic elemental weaknesses but not have it turn out to be horribly easy is to mix up the enemies and not throw in "elemental dungeons". Basically what Pokemaniac said, mix up the enemy parties, because it makes you actually think about what you're doing.
I think that weaknesses work really well when you're limited with your weakness, and it's not just elemental dungeons. Imagine a game where you only had elemental attack items to deal magic damage with, and they could only be bought in low quantities (you'd get most as monster drops). Suddenly, elements become something important to exploit, but you can't consistently exploit them. You need to know when it's good to kill the fuck out of that lightning-weak Behemoth.
Like previously mentioned, other effects are cool as well. For the purpose of Ciel's argument, however (how this thread started), they are really the same thing (hit the ice dude with fire for effect x!) under a different disguise.
Like previously mentioned, other effects are cool as well. For the purpose of Ciel's argument, however (how this thread started), they are really the same thing (hit the ice dude with fire for effect x!) under a different disguise.
post=209030
A good way to keep basic elemental weaknesses but not have it turn out to be horribly easy is to mix up the enemies and not throw in "elemental dungeons". Basically what Pokemaniac said, mix up the enemy parties, because it makes you actually think about what you're doing.
This is basically what I try to do. If there is an elemental dungeon, it can be fun to have a "support" enemy that bolsters the enemy party's resistance to that element. It then becomes a matter of which enemy to kill first: the hard-hitters or the guy who makes the battle last longer. Throwing a healer can lead to even better opportunity costs.
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
Elemental defenses and elemental attacks allow for customization of your characters. For obvious examples, see the Shin Megami Tensei games or Pokemon games. You have to get characters who use different elements, but you're limited in the number of skills you can equip on each character. You also have to manage your own elemental resistances and weaknesses. And if you have a skill system that allows the player to spend points to improve skills, they have to choose which elements to improve.
Once in battle, the amount of tactical complexity added by elements can vary depending on how well it's done. Final Fantasy style black mages add no tactical complexity to battles whatsoever. However that's certainly not the only way to handle elements. You don't need to always have equal to every element. In fact, you probably shouldn't ever have that - since that is what causes elements to become meaningless.
The key here is what I like to call TENSION. When the player makes a skill choice, it should be a real choice. Each option should have an upside and a downside, and whether the upside cancels out the downside or not should change from turn to turn and from battle to battle depending on the situation. Maybe you have an amazing skill that costs 60% of your max MP. Maybe you have a skill that hurts both you and the enemy.
Here's a simple example involving elements. Maybe you have a fire skill that costs does 50 damage to all enemies, and a non-elemental skill that does 65 damage to all enemies. If one of the enemies is weak against fire, the two are pretty close to being even damage, just distributed differently. To make things more complicated, maybe another enemy in the same battle needs to be resistant to fire (or absorb fire).
Now, I'll grant, elements are not a great way to introduce tension in a battle with single-target attacks. Pokemon handles it well by making you waste a turn to bring out the party member that has access to the right element. You will have to come up with your own way to do so - that's why you're a game designer.
Once in battle, the amount of tactical complexity added by elements can vary depending on how well it's done. Final Fantasy style black mages add no tactical complexity to battles whatsoever. However that's certainly not the only way to handle elements. You don't need to always have equal to every element. In fact, you probably shouldn't ever have that - since that is what causes elements to become meaningless.
The key here is what I like to call TENSION. When the player makes a skill choice, it should be a real choice. Each option should have an upside and a downside, and whether the upside cancels out the downside or not should change from turn to turn and from battle to battle depending on the situation. Maybe you have an amazing skill that costs 60% of your max MP. Maybe you have a skill that hurts both you and the enemy.
Here's a simple example involving elements. Maybe you have a fire skill that costs does 50 damage to all enemies, and a non-elemental skill that does 65 damage to all enemies. If one of the enemies is weak against fire, the two are pretty close to being even damage, just distributed differently. To make things more complicated, maybe another enemy in the same battle needs to be resistant to fire (or absorb fire).
Now, I'll grant, elements are not a great way to introduce tension in a battle with single-target attacks. Pokemon handles it well by making you waste a turn to bring out the party member that has access to the right element. You will have to come up with your own way to do so - that's why you're a game designer.
So here's a question, although it pretty just comes down to a case-by-case basis:
What kind of multiplier do you use for EW? Do you use a x3 so that the person will always use that skill once he knows he should? Or do you use a x1.5 so you do bonus damage but it's not always guaranteed that the spell is completely necessary?
Even further questions - what if there are differences in the spells being cast beside the element? FF7 had Fire/Ice/Lightning that were the same spell unless it took advantage of a weakness. In my current project, I also tacked on an effect to each spell type - Fire spells have a chance to set fire to enemies (damage over time), Water spells slow enemies (halve AGI) and Earth spells cause other debuffs (halve Atk/Def/Mag).
Up until now I had spells using EW doing triple damage, which means that there really is no substitute for that spell - it will almost always be the best choice. After reading this topic though, I think I should reduce it to x1.5 or x2. That way, an enemy that happens to be weak to fire might still be hit with water attacks sometimes (just to reapply the Slow debuff) and would allow for some cycling (thus making the battle more interesting) instead of just always using Fire.
What kind of multiplier do you use for EW? Do you use a x3 so that the person will always use that skill once he knows he should? Or do you use a x1.5 so you do bonus damage but it's not always guaranteed that the spell is completely necessary?
Even further questions - what if there are differences in the spells being cast beside the element? FF7 had Fire/Ice/Lightning that were the same spell unless it took advantage of a weakness. In my current project, I also tacked on an effect to each spell type - Fire spells have a chance to set fire to enemies (damage over time), Water spells slow enemies (halve AGI) and Earth spells cause other debuffs (halve Atk/Def/Mag).
Up until now I had spells using EW doing triple damage, which means that there really is no substitute for that spell - it will almost always be the best choice. After reading this topic though, I think I should reduce it to x1.5 or x2. That way, an enemy that happens to be weak to fire might still be hit with water attacks sometimes (just to reapply the Slow debuff) and would allow for some cycling (thus making the battle more interesting) instead of just always using Fire.
LightningLord2
230
When enemies have resistance/immunity/etc. to an element which the others are weak to, and the weakness is, let's say a x1.5 Factor, i'd go the mass attack that hits all enemies for at least neutral damage. Also, not all enemies have to have the same Weakness Factor to an element. My idea is that the guys with many different elements have low damage output in general, forcing them to hit the enemy's weakness to do decent damage. Likewise, members with high damage output could have few or just one element so that they're strong against those who don't resist it and are very weak against those who are immune/resistant.
Here are some pros and cons about high and low weakness/resistance modifier:
High
+ The element of an ability is more important
+ You have to watch out for your party's weaknesses
- Stats are less important
- Makes other abilites useless when a weakness can be exploited
Low
+ Stats can mean a lot more than just the element
+ Eases up the stress on your party member's weaknesses
- Elemental coverage becomes very secondary/redundant
- Players can't use resistance to combat a powerful ability
Here are some pros and cons about high and low weakness/resistance modifier:
High
+ The element of an ability is more important
+ You have to watch out for your party's weaknesses
- Stats are less important
- Makes other abilites useless when a weakness can be exploited
Low
+ Stats can mean a lot more than just the element
+ Eases up the stress on your party member's weaknesses
- Elemental coverage becomes very secondary/redundant
- Players can't use resistance to combat a powerful ability
