MUNINN'S PROFILE

This may have had something to do with that.

Yep, that fixed the issues I was having.

Scarlet Skies has a download now. Should it be re-added to the count of games needing reviews?

I don't actually mind the two boss fights back-to-back (And as you said, it wouldn't really make sense another way), it was just that there was a bit of a shock in the transition from "Yay! I finally beat the Mercenary" to "Another boss? I'm out of MP".

Something you might want to consider if you ever make edits to this game (or if the situation comes up in a subsequent game) is actually making the second boss less powerful than the first to account for the player being low on resources. (Or, if healing items are prevalent, raise the boss's stats after a few rounds in order to give the player a bit of breathing room to recover)


Does the Fire spirit's level account for that fact that two out of your three party members can it it with an element that its weak against? That's something that really sped up the battle for me: The Fire spirit only lasted a few rounds after I hit it with the single-target all-stats-down debuff, but that was because I had two party members hammering it with strong water spells. With the Mercenary, the fight lasted much longer even though I was 10 levels higher when finally beat it.

Many things to respond to:

author=Trihan
Which means I can't really take the traditional approach to NPC dialogue, because people you randomly meet in the street are pretty unlikely to blurt out that the magical macguffin of +1 awesomeness is located in that cave to the northeast that you should never ever go to.

What they are more likely to do is ask you why you're bothering them and then ignore your requests for information on the black-caped man.

Partly agreed here, but I think you're really selling people short here: If somebody walked up to me in the street and asked if I'd seen a person of a certain description (even if it weren't such a unique appearance), I'd take at least a few seconds to give them an answer as best as I could.

Now, I think it's unreasonable to assume that every NPC in the village would know this piece of information, and since most RPGs cut out the part where you ask them for the information, it comes across as everybody in town talking about one thing which shouldn't be that insignificant to them.

author=Trihan
My first idea was to allow the player to choose what they say to NPCs; this would require each NPC, however minor, to have some kind of "relationship" counter with the party which would determine how they react to you based on how you've been treating them. Which is awesome on paper but results in a shitload of mostly inconsequential variables for very little reward, as players generally don't give a shit what NPCs say in games.

This would be a good idea only if there's also something more meaningful to a good relationship with an NPC: For example, the .hack games allow you to trade items with pretty much every NPC in each town (sort of... it's a single player RPG that simulates an MMO, so these are supposed to represent other players). If you do something where most NPCs have an inventory of items they'd be willing to trade with you, they might also be willing to sell for less to someone with whom they've had extensive dealings. (I'd personally only implement this halfway: Some NPCs (including all shopkeepers) would be "Important" NPCs, with their own inventories, wealth levels, etc: These would be the ones you could build a relationship with. Most of the people would just be simpler NPCs who are less developed)

author=Trihan
My next idea was kind of an offshoot of this: the party (such as it is) will start out pretty much unknown (save for people who already know them; some NPCs will react differently to party members if they're, say, from the same town. I've never understood why NPCs have stock phrases when you're talking to them with someone who you recruited in the same town as them and presumably are either acquaintances or friends). Through the actions you take, the quests you do and whatnot, the party will gradually grow (in)famous, and the NPCs you help/hinder will tell tales of your exploits to other people, which will affect how they view you and subsequently the way they speak to you. This is an improvement upon the first idea, but still contains the same basic flaws.

I think this fits into a broader concept of having NPC dialogue that changes based on circumstances: You're talking about altering it based on party composition, but you could also change reactions based on world-changing storyline events, equipment (Talking about you, Cloud), or probably some other factors that I'll remember after hitting "submit".

author=Trihan
I've come up with some pretty crazy ideas that just wouldn't work in execution, actually--probably one of my most ambitious was to plan out a "storyline" for EVERY NPC IN THE GAME. So whenever you go to a town or whatever, everyone there is progressing through their own narratives and you'll see as much or as little of their individual adventures as you care to witness. This could be something as mundane as taking care of the kids to an NPC who's on a completely different quest to you and gathers their own groups of adventurers to go and accomplish it. You could see them in various places doing their thing and even choose to help them if you meet them at key points in their journey.

This reminds me of some (potentially apocryphal) stories about film director Akira Kurosawa. The guy paid attention to detail in some of the strangest places (in Tora Tora Tora, he once tried to get an entire aircraft carrier set repainted because the shade of white paint used on the set was slightly off from the one used on actual WWII carriers), with possibly the most relevant story being from the filming of Seven Samurai. Rather than casting "Extras" to play the villagers that the samurai are trying to protect, Kurosawa wrote little bios for each member of the village, assigned them to the "extra" actors, and informed them that whenever they were on the set, even if the camera wasn't pointed at them at the moment, they were to remember that they each had their own character who they needed to stay in-character for.

Naturally, more work would be required for implementing this in a game, since you'd need to write a full script rather than a bunch of suggestions.

author=Trihan
This could apply to other aspects of the game as well. It's not "logical" to carry the kind of item list that most traditional RPGs have, but it's restrictive and potentially damaging to limit the player's inventory to something more realistic to what the group could actually carry. Do you value suspension of disbelief higher and have a portable shared inventory with no limit? (well, beyond the usual 99) or do you think that realistic simulations of what could actually be carried could have a place in a jRPG style game?

I'd support limiting the inventory, both because of the realism factor and because it adds another dimension of gameplay:
- Want to bring an alternate weapon in case you encounter an enemy resistant to your main one? Are you willing to carry fewer healing potions in exchange for this extra level of security? (Although in-battle weapon switching is something that few RPGs do anyway).
- You found a new set of armour better than your old one? Want to sell the other? Are you willing to accept encumbrance penalties during the encounters on your way back in exchange for lugging that thing around? (In actuality, I'd support giving each character a "battle inventory" of what they're carrying on their person, with an additional "pack inventory" of things that are carried on mounts (or in packs that are assumed to be dropped at the first sign of battle), but is only accessible out of battle)

Remember, it's only restrictive and damaging to limit your players inventory if the rest of the game is designed with the assumption that they can carry as much as they want.

author=Trihan
Same sort of thing with treasures. Unless there's a given reason for it (and there have been RM games that explained the treasure chests and stuff really well--see Master of the Wind for an excellent example that's blended seamlessly with the plot along with the saving mechanic) there's no justification for just having random chests full of money and items dotted around the world. They'd have been picked clean long ago by people who explored those places before you. And if you're the first to explore said place, who put the chests there?

At the same time, I find myself worrying that if I -don't- put random chests everywhere, people will think there isn't enough reward for exploring maps.

Include many "off-the-beaten-path" mini-dungeons where stored treasures would be more likely: Guard posts, bandit dens, Dragon lairs, smugglers coves. Not too many (You want to reward exploration, not tell the player that whenever they need something, they can walk five yards in any direction and find a treasure trove)
Alternatively, claim that your world is home to many avid geocachers.