MERLANDESE'S PROFILE

Thanks a lot, Liberty! Ed's three-sentence blurb really made my day.

Excellent game! So much fun!

I have nothing but good thoughts about Halloween Flop, so playing this addition to the universe was a no-brainer. I wasn't at all disappointed, even though I typically don't like prequels.

I'm not going to gush about it just yet. I don't want to lose steam. Hopefully I'll be able to pop up a review with all of my <3's and lulz.

Great work, everyone!

author=Treason89
What if WE do? I've seen sparks of collaborative projects here, and I think that the most valuable product we could produce, as a group of people disscusing about RPGology stuff, is an actual game with our ideas working for good.

That'd be a lot of work, and would require more than just the interests of the people in this battle design thing.

Although it might be a good exercise to take existing games and try to craft better battle systems for them. Using the example of FFIX again, Trance was a part of the story, but it was awful in gameplay. I'm certain there's a better way to make an engaging battle system that also utilized Trance better.

But for the sake of an RM community, we could find certain RM projects that had a lot of great wold-building, plot, and assets, but a lackluster battle system. Then we could ask permission to try out new ideas. This would get to the heart of battle design much better, if you ask me. We could incorporate all of the ideas that we've discussed as needed while also considering the world of the game before making decisions.

This is all some interesting stuff!

I think it's a weird deviation (a good one) that instead of determining how to design a battle system in which we have all of the elements we've discussed beforehand, we're instead designing a system in which we can all design a battle. XD I think the problem with this setup is that we, as designers, have fun designing, and now we're gearing towards developing a Battle Engine game rather than a Battle System. Although I really like the looks of these ideas.

When Never Silent first brought up rule altering, I was thinking of games like Small World (board game) or Smash Bros.

In Small World, a kind of boring game, the rules of your turn are based on one set of rules every time. But you have an Adjective-Noun pair you represent, like Hill Giant or Hill Triton or Angry Dragonrider. Each Adjective and each Noun has a property that defies the main ruleset of the game. So everyone plays the same set of actions, except their pair allows them to cheat.

In the Smash Bros. example, it's a little more basic. Every character is based off of Mario with a few slight deviations. It's almost like Mario is the rule, and when you learn to play as him, you can then play as anyone. Except other people take the rules of Mario and break them a bit.

None of that has any bearing on what you're doing right now, though. XD

@Hasvers: I played the Chimera Battle System a few days ago! I really couldn't see what was happening, but I kind of liked the ideas in it. I got to a point where Yellow and Red crystal were at a stalemate, I think.



One thing I think we're overlooking is an aspect of RPG battles that I've only brought up to Hasvers in the dark recesses of the PM Universe. To make these battles actually for RPGs, we have to consider the role-playing. That is, part of a good RPG Battle is themeing, and how it fits into the rest of the game. This entire contest ignored that.

If we were making board games, this would be fine, because we could make a great system and then cover it with the best theme. But RPGs typically rely on the confrontation system to enhance the narrative and the world. It's a big piece that isn't being considered. Without it, I don't really see this as RPGology so much as Confrontation System-ology. It might seem like a minor point to some people, but the difference between an awesome RPG battle and an awesome confrontation system is the difference between FFIX's battle system and FFIX's Tetra Masters. Both are good, but only one is a roleplay-enhancing system while the other is just a cool system that happens to be in an RPG. (EX: The fight between Zidane and Kuja is a narrative necessity, made more dramatic by the player's involvement in the battle system, and wouldn't be very good if they played Tetra Masters instead.)

This is just another point to consider. It's cool to make rule ideas where you can have fire arrows and healing swords, but this confrontation system wouldn't work in Mass Effect or Wild Arms as well. And if we leave the objects and names open to be changed once it's plugged into a world, then we create a sort of MacGuffin-based battle, rather than one that organically pulls from the RPG.

Your mind has officially been blown to pieces. You are welcome.