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
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
Profile
Locker
Play ListsTREASON89'S PROFILE
Treason89
360
Close
Magister in Chemistry boy who just likes RPG, programming and making his ideas to become real!
Three Treason Theories 
3xT explores RPG theories about battles being a short recipe of puzzles, challenge and a pinch of humor.
3xT explores RPG theories about battles being a short recipe of puzzles, challenge and a pinch of humor.
Search
Filter
All
Game Pages
User Statuses
Consistent Magic Systems
Well, that's why we give (or ask for) an opinion: many people may think in many different ways. I think things are simple if they are, somehow, systematic. If there is some kind of pattern, then it's more enjoyable as it's really possible to think about an strategy and not just... "Ok... I think this will work!".
I've never understood why there is a separation between water and ice. Sounds and effects are different, but the core is the same H2O. That's something I really like about Avatar series.
But putting that aside. I see two different interesting things here:
1)Meaning: making a meaningful system is important but then... well it may seem like a stupid question but here it goes: why do overpowered (or useless) elemental attributes exist? Are they like that because of the developer or because of personal preferences?
2)Simplicity: a very relative concept. What one may find simple, other one may find very complicated. If simplicity is just number of type of elements, then it may become a rock-scissors-paper rule, maybe leading to a meaningless system? Combo skills to create intermediate or new type of elements is a resource sometimes used to provide variety while maintaining the basics simple... but, isn't that complicating stuff? So what do you consider reasonably simple?
I've never understood why there is a separation between water and ice. Sounds and effects are different, but the core is the same H2O. That's something I really like about Avatar series.
But putting that aside. I see two different interesting things here:
1)Meaning: making a meaningful system is important but then... well it may seem like a stupid question but here it goes: why do overpowered (or useless) elemental attributes exist? Are they like that because of the developer or because of personal preferences?
2)Simplicity: a very relative concept. What one may find simple, other one may find very complicated. If simplicity is just number of type of elements, then it may become a rock-scissors-paper rule, maybe leading to a meaningless system? Combo skills to create intermediate or new type of elements is a resource sometimes used to provide variety while maintaining the basics simple... but, isn't that complicating stuff? So what do you consider reasonably simple?
This Looks Like This Could Be The End For Capcom
If BOF hadn't become a shame, I would be sad about this... and yeah, game industry is somehow finding herself again??? Maybe??? (I hope so...)
[Poll] Your favourite magic element!
Well, this comes as a complement of my thread about Congruent Magic Systems. If you want, let's talk a little about magic and let me know your opinion about magic systems and which element is your favourite.
If you think an element is missing, don't doubt to ask for it to be added (I will if I can, as I don't know if it can be done...)
EDIT: Nope, I think it can't be done... I hope I included everything. You can always comment it!
If you think an element is missing, don't doubt to ask for it to be added (I will if I can, as I don't know if it can be done...)
EDIT: Nope, I think it can't be done... I hope I included everything. You can always comment it!
Consistent Magic Systems
I don't know if this has been discussed before, probably yes. But may be it can be discussed again? Anyway...
What do you consider a Consistent Magic System? Many use: water, fire, wind, earth, dark, light. In pairs, or in a circular relationship of weak/strong.
Some may separate water form ice, use thunder as wind, dark as earth/gravity, fire as light/holy, etc.
Also Pokemon, as a particular case, don't use a predictable system.
So what do you consider a consistent magic system? What magic/element system would take its potential as far as possible (say, don't overpowering some element or making it useless)? Which characteristics you think a good magic system should have or what kind of characteristics you would like a magic system have?
What do you consider a Consistent Magic System? Many use: water, fire, wind, earth, dark, light. In pairs, or in a circular relationship of weak/strong.
Some may separate water form ice, use thunder as wind, dark as earth/gravity, fire as light/holy, etc.
Also Pokemon, as a particular case, don't use a predictable system.
So what do you consider a consistent magic system? What magic/element system would take its potential as far as possible (say, don't overpowering some element or making it useless)? Which characteristics you think a good magic system should have or what kind of characteristics you would like a magic system have?
Let's Draw a Pass-Off Comic! -Finished!-
Wo ho!! I'm done by now! I've just sent my page to Dudesoft.
I enjoyed doing this a lot, I hope all of you also enjoy it. And please RMN people, don't keep us at the edge! We want to see the complete story :)
Good luck for the next artist (Schwer-von-Begriff, probably), and see you around.
I enjoyed doing this a lot, I hope all of you also enjoy it. And please RMN people, don't keep us at the edge! We want to see the complete story :)
Good luck for the next artist (Schwer-von-Begriff, probably), and see you around.
questoin on classes and bosses
Hi Billiumw!
1) Feel the same here. This is the best forum ever.
2) Classes: I think unique classes build up who the character is. I like it better that way. FF IV (I think) had a class system using crystals. Anybody could be anything, nice! But Seiken Densetsu 3, each character had unique classes, some of them could be related to their choices in life or suggest their personality: AWESOME!
It may also depend on the setting you have for your game: If they are partners in the same army or so, then it may be reasonable to have all the options for all of them. If they are single adventurers from different backgrounds or so, then unique classes may be a better choice.
3) Bosses: How climatic you think it is your character to be frozen continously until death? Maybe the issue is to balance the status. I agree with you: bosses vulnerable to anything being killed by poison or paralysis can be boring. Bosses (like in BoF IV) that can (and will) uncast just every buff, are just hack-n-slash-survive-enough-to-kill-me... But think about Pokemon: it's statuses are so balanced that even in Elite4 you wont feel bad if you burn/freeze somebody, because it's strategy.
Don't know if I could explain myself here but I hope you may find my opinion useful to build up your own.
1) Feel the same here. This is the best forum ever.
2) Classes: I think unique classes build up who the character is. I like it better that way. FF IV (I think) had a class system using crystals. Anybody could be anything, nice! But Seiken Densetsu 3, each character had unique classes, some of them could be related to their choices in life or suggest their personality: AWESOME!
It may also depend on the setting you have for your game: If they are partners in the same army or so, then it may be reasonable to have all the options for all of them. If they are single adventurers from different backgrounds or so, then unique classes may be a better choice.
3) Bosses: How climatic you think it is your character to be frozen continously until death? Maybe the issue is to balance the status. I agree with you: bosses vulnerable to anything being killed by poison or paralysis can be boring. Bosses (like in BoF IV) that can (and will) uncast just every buff, are just hack-n-slash-survive-enough-to-kill-me... But think about Pokemon: it's statuses are so balanced that even in Elite4 you wont feel bad if you burn/freeze somebody, because it's strategy.
Don't know if I could explain myself here but I hope you may find my opinion useful to build up your own.
Ballin': An examination of money in games.
author=Sviel
For the most part, that's not a huge issue, so no one bothers 'solving' it.
In such case why to put money to start with?
author=RyaReisender
Not really what you talked about but when we talk about gold, I want to add: I DO LIKE it when monsters drop gold directly at the cost of realism. I really hate it when they drop "Etc." items and then you have to figure out yourself which ones you can actually sell to the NPC and which you might need later.
I just have the opposite view. It can be a good way to create real atmosphere, if as Shoobinator says, the player is informed. At the end, this may be a question of taste.
It would work specially if there is a trade system. I think that a good idea (I'll also use it in the game I'm actually developing) is to have enough money, from battles or found lying somewhere, to cover basic and raw needs. Like maybe little healing or small supplies. Besides of that, some kind of system (actual buying/selling system with prices variable to the region) to get the big amounts of money to buy large supplies, full heals and unique items (may be even surrogates for storyline missed items?). So you can go through the game with little pennies, or learn how to make fortune and ease your way.
I think Tales of the Abyss made some sort of variable price changing as the events unfolded.
Monster encounters that make sense.
Liberty, you may be right... but then if monsters are "afraid", or keep away of humans, just as a deer or whatever then they would not swarm you while you are walking on the fields close to towns or so.
I also find true what you say about villages, but then if there is something like you described, it isn't a defenseless village anymore.
This lead me to other question about making more sense in encounters. Why are enemy encounters fixed to game pace. I've never seen weaker enemies after the start point, or strong enemies roaming early. It may not defeat the realism as you may find, for example, find 1 or 2 strong enemy among 30 weak enemies (think abour Africa, lions and zebras). Strong enemies could even be a auto-pace factor for the player to say "come back later" without using a stubborn NPC or a flat weak bush.
I also find true what you say about villages, but then if there is something like you described, it isn't a defenseless village anymore.
This lead me to other question about making more sense in encounters. Why are enemy encounters fixed to game pace. I've never seen weaker enemies after the start point, or strong enemies roaming early. It may not defeat the realism as you may find, for example, find 1 or 2 strong enemy among 30 weak enemies (think abour Africa, lions and zebras). Strong enemies could even be a auto-pace factor for the player to say "come back later" without using a stubborn NPC or a flat weak bush.
Monster encounters that make sense.
I don't know if this fits on this discussion but here I go!
Another important thing to have in mind when designing encounters is the monster location. In Legend of Legaia the world was filled with monster because of the mist (or whatever name it had) but after you progressed through the game, the mist was cleaned and monsters (Seru) didn't appeared anymore in that area. That makes sense.
In the other hand, some RPG games put enemy encounters just outside the countryside of even a little defenseless town. The monsters are SO intelligent, bold and nice not to swarm against the town (even if you see them cooperating in enemy encounters), but once you put just a step outside the "WELCOME" sign they rush for your meat... That's nonsense and unrealistic for me. Why should the monsters cooperate with townsfolk but go against you? Well of course it could be justified if it is the Necromancer/Witch town mentioned before by Kaliesto.
Edit: Whoa! CashmereCat, I like that point of view. I would surely work nice if it properly fits in the game.
Another important thing to have in mind when designing encounters is the monster location. In Legend of Legaia the world was filled with monster because of the mist (or whatever name it had) but after you progressed through the game, the mist was cleaned and monsters (Seru) didn't appeared anymore in that area. That makes sense.
In the other hand, some RPG games put enemy encounters just outside the countryside of even a little defenseless town. The monsters are SO intelligent, bold and nice not to swarm against the town (even if you see them cooperating in enemy encounters), but once you put just a step outside the "WELCOME" sign they rush for your meat... That's nonsense and unrealistic for me. Why should the monsters cooperate with townsfolk but go against you? Well of course it could be justified if it is the Necromancer/Witch town mentioned before by Kaliesto.
Edit: Whoa! CashmereCat, I like that point of view. I would surely work nice if it properly fits in the game.
Games - Tester
Games - Other
