SO YOU SAY YOUR GAME HAS STRATEGY

author=Max McGee
People say they want this but in practice they COMPLETELY. FUCKING. HATE. IT.

Trust me on this one, bro. The best thing you can do if you want your game to be moderately popular is to make your game simple and easy, at least at the beginning. Otherwise, your game will make people feel stupid and they'll hate it. Be careful, though. If everyone hates you anyway, you can even get in trouble for your game being too easy!

Why would we just trust you? There's a low quantity of hard RPGs that aren't a grindfeast, so I don't know where you would get that from.

Why not manipulate the exp curve and exp output of the enemies? So that you can reach the required level by defeated all the enemies you'd normally find on the way, and have it nigh impossible to level up using the current enemies you found after reaching the optimal level for that segment. You know, like Ys and Suikoden. Bosses would be likely faced at similar levels for mostly everyone. Button mashers would be discouraged and smart players wouldn't need to do more than they need to.

As far as I'm concerned, if a player grind and then complain about the lack of challenge, it's his/her own fault. I put a large part of the exp in boss battles so that problems like getting lost and therefore fighting twice as much battles as you're expected to in a dungeon has a low impact, but other than that, I don't see it as my job to prevent a player from grinding.

author=PsychoFreaX
Which is why in my game smart people have to level grind as well. Just to filter out every.single.button.masher. level grinders or not. Which raises the amount button mashers have to grind to insane amounts.. They'll all lose their patience after level grinding for five hours and still unable to mindlessly beat a boss. Clever players don't even need to grind nearly as much though. Yep, my game I'm planning rewards the wise and the patient.

First, I might ask for you to clarify what you consider "grinding" in case we have differing opinions on it. For the most part, my definition is shared with just about everyone who has replied. But some people call, for example, the minimum amount of non-boss battles on the way to the boss as the grind.

Second, my grinding philosophy as I have indicated in all such topics: a boss should be killable, on the first attempt, by a party that has completed the MINIMUM number of encounters to reach said boss. That doesn't mean it has to be easy, but the smartest players should be able to prevail.

Third, let me go ahead and group people who grind like hell to level up and beat bosses with button mashers. That is, a group of people whose "strategy" just consists of taking the easiest route, including button-mash grinding, even if it takes a lot longer than being smart. I believe this should always be an available option to people. Again, my philosophy, is that a certain demographic should never be actively DISCOURAGED from playing your game the way they want. The more people who like and play your game, the better. It's their choice if they want to blow a lot of time being lazy, and it's perfectly acceptable to suggest they are making it harder on themselves, but it should still be an option.

Fourth, it's always wise to reward the wise, but expecting people to be patient is very dangerous. If patience means giving someone the choice between getting a powerful weapon later instead of a less-powerful weapon now, that's fine. They are active in their choice, and most importantly, it's THEIR choice. If patience means some degree of mandatory grinding, or even an arbitrary amount of grinding, then you're asking a lot; particularly from your smarter players. They choose to play smart specifically for the purpose of NOT being patient.

I wouldn't agree with LightningLord about difficulty levels being redundant. I would just let people play the way they want to play. They can be challenged and win with wits, or they can play safe and grind.

@slashphoenix, the best approach I've seen to your conundrum remains in FFXIII (even if I'm not crazy about the game). Enemies leading up to a boss are introduced in an escalating fashion; for they'll introduce one new enemy, then put two of them in a battle or two, then three, then they'll introduce another new enemy, combine that enemy with one or more of the first ones, etc. The purpose of this is that you are given the opportunity to learn what strategies work best for specific enemies, how the strategy changes when there's more than one of them (and that strategy DOES change), then when they mix enemy groups, you have to decide which strategies to implement immediately and what order to kill them in, which does have make-or-break consequences. And it's fascinating that once you learn that approach, you start paying attention more to enemy weaknesses, and the appropriate buffs and counters to enemy attacks.

That brings up another good point I wanted to make earlier. If you are going to use a central philosophy to your central battle and boss designs, let the player know what it is. Give them a freebie or two, go over the appropriate problem-solving process early on so that they can follow it in future fights. I don't think this makes your fights easier, it actually establishes the boundaries for how much thought players should put into their strategies. It will get them thinking beyond just what abilities they should try first.

P.S. Craze, if you tl;dr reply this, I will destroy you.

Mages already have the cool gimmick of having an entire library of spells they can launch at the enemy. It's the Warrior who can only Attack, Defend and Use Items.

author=Versalia
Shin has a recognizable pattern. Shin will use AoE status effects over and over again - specifically Curse (your dealt damage splashes back on you) and Confusion (yeah).

That's already poorly designed. One of the very important rules of game-making to bear in mind is that the player wants to play the game. Hitting the entire party with status changes like confusion, berserk, sleep, stop, etc. basically takes away the player's ability to make any decisions. Above all else, always give the player the ability to play the game.