Elemental System

[Sylon]

I think that status ailments add much more to tactical gameplay than simple resists and absorbs.

I SO agree Tim, but the reason I never use them in professional games is because there are high chances that they MISS THE TARGET!!!  If there are status ailments, please program a higher hit rate that Squaresoft does in their games!    It would be much more useful.  Otherwise all that wonderful programming of status magic will be pointless cause no one will use those spells!!  (Not that I'm angry at you Tim  :D )

[Roots]

So what kind of hit rate are you talking about for status effects? 10%? 20%? I think that if it becomes *too* easy to create status effects, things will get messy, complicated, and unbalanced. Rather than having the creation of status effects on foes be a seperate attack/action, I think what we are moving towards here is having status effects in every attack. So if you hit someone with your sword in the head, maybe that will leave them temporarily blinded, rather than casting the spell "Dark" to try to blind your enemy. That way, status is still really useful as a strategic element in the battles, but it's not tedious/useless for the player to have to specifically select an action solely for the purpose of causing a status effect. Do you get me?

[Sylon]

Sounds like a very good idea!  Maybe I didn't read it if you said it somewhere else.  Hahaha!!!  I like it.

[Nimbrush]

Maybe impose some status attacks with a time limit?

Yeah, sure, it's been done before. Point is the duration is different. Say you hit the enemy with *sleep*. Basically you send the enemy for a short quick nap while you decimate their health. Now if you consider the time it takes to finish an average battle, -say a min- you could put the time limit for *sleep* as half of that. (Hmm, or if you hit 'em with a particularly hard, critical hit or a spell that does tons of damage--I never did like how when you use a spell the enemy still is asleep--the enemy wakes up and counters)

[Roots]

Maybe impose some status attacks with a time limit?

Yeah, sure, it's been done before. Point is the duration is different. Say you hit the enemy with *sleep*. Basically you send the enemy for a short quick nap while you decimate their health. Now if you consider the time it takes to finish an average battle, -say a min- you could put the time limit for *sleep* as half of that. (Hmm, or if you hit 'em with a particularly hard, critical hit or a spell that does tons of damage--I never did like how when you use a spell the enemy still is asleep--the enemy wakes up and counters)

I haven't given a thought about time limits with status effects, but it's something good to discuss. Before I get started allow me to retort your sleep argument. I think that if a foe gets attacked while sleeping it *should* wake up. The point to putting an enemy to slip is to not ream it of it's HP while it's in dream land (that would be too easy). The purpose of sleep is to get temporarily relief from an enemy's attacks so you can focus on vanquishing other enemies while he sleeps. That's just my opinion though.


Now onto status effect durations. Here's some initial thoughts I have:

Status effects disappear after the battle
Why, you ask? Because it's annoying when after each battle you always have to go to the main menu, select several potions/spells and heal your various characters of their various status. It's tedious and not fun. Especially since it seems the direction we're taking Allacrost that status effects will occur very frequently, more than your traditional Final Fantasy.

Most status effects last indefinetly throughout the battle, unless cured
Exceptions would be something like sleep, or other effects that disable the character/enemy completely

Don't have an item/spell/whatever for healing every status effect
This has become a problem IMO, especially in games like FFIX. There were just so many status effects and even though I've played the game through at least twice now, I still have trouble remembering what item heals what effect. And anyways, once you had enough $bling$ all you ever did was buy a bunch of remedies and use those anyway. Why don't we do something like classifying status effects into low-level, mid-level, and high-level based on the amount of disability they cause, and then have items/spells that heal effects for the level they correspond to, as well as any levels that may be below it?



That's all I have for now I think.

[Attactic]

I have an idea which I think to be quite interesting.

How about elemental attacks that cause the character to have special disadvantages and wounds? Being drowned is certainly different than being burned and in both instances they inflict different wounds. For example when a character is being drowned he wouldn't take immediate damage and if enough time elapses he would eventually die. As time progresses drowning becomes more painful, but the pain wouldn't effect the health of the character, instead it would effect his preformance in the battle. Another good example would be burning, if a character is buring he's in alot of pain depending on the intensity of the flames, and would be taking alot of damage. After the battle when the flames are put out, those horrific wounds would still be there and won't go away with just a potion, the party would need to find other ways to heal their friend.

[Disto]

Finally got around to reading the latest posts in this thread. WOW, I really like your idea Joe! What if we do something like this for our element system. Instead of having the plain old "fire sword" or "ice spear" that you buy in shops, what if each weapon comes with a number of "slots" (think materia) that you can add elemental stones to add bonuses to your weapon(s)? That way we have control over the base stats of weapons and armors (so it's more sane for us to balance) and the user can customize their own weapons to their liking? Yeah it's kinda like Diablo II I guess, but whatever. I think the players might really like this (players reading this, please confirm or deny my statement) customizability and it could add another strategic element to the game.


Question points might be: Are magical stones removable once they've been placed or are they stuck permanently? (I'm kinda torn between this one ) Where does the player obtain the stones from? (I'm thinking mostly scattered around the map, with only a few basic types sold in shops). Tell me what you guys think about that. And maybe we can include status stones, not just elemental stones? Hell, why don't we just mix elements and status together since Tim already proposed doing that with integration into the MAP system? The possibilities are limitless

I don't think we should actually put magic stones in it, you just find an artifact of power, could be anything and then you channel it's power into them, like high power of enchanting which of course you charecter cannot do without the aid of the artifact as it's magic is beyond him etc. I think the charecter should be fully customizable but that is another matter.

[Roots]

I don't think we should actually put magic stones in it, you just find an artifact of power, could be anything and then you channel it's power into them, like high power of enchanting which of course you charecter cannot do without the aid of the artifact as it's magic is beyond him etc. I think the charecter should be fully customizable but that is another matter.

So in other words, its like non-removable stones. Once you channel that power into your weapon, you can't get it back. 'Channeling power' sounds like a more unique concept than stones, so I like that part. But at the same time I don't like non-recoverable powers, because I never know if I should use it for my current weapon, or save it for a later weapon, etc. That's just me though. Maybe we could allow a limited number of "transfers" so you could move your powers between weapons at least one or two times?


And as for the "fully customizable" character debate, I just don't even think it's worth discussing. There are people on the left that are strongly against it, and people on the right that are strongly for it, and I think it's a pretty much even distribution so I want to strike somewhere in the middle. As for me personally, I hate games that require you to spend so much time customizing things. I'd rather play the damn game than customize it

[ian]

Just to the first post:

I think it should be kept simple.  :D

[Shadow]

Well almost ideas here makes sense something I would find really cool would be a kind of duel between magic users. Mostly the person with the strongest spell and who casts it first wins. How about that more complex and powerful spells need more time for preparation. The second spells could be counterd by another spell. One casts a fire spell and the other blocks it with an ice spell.
For every sucessfull counter the caster would regain some mana so he would get a small advantage.

[Roots]

Ok, this thread is starting to get rather . It was created with the intention of talking about the elemental system, and then status effects crept in, then we started talking about customizable weapons, and now I don't know what we're going on about.....



Anyway, based on what everyone has said before and the (very divided) poll results, I think right now we're headed in this direction:

- Small number of elements (8 or less)
- Non pair-wise elements
- No "healing" attacks when attacking an enemy of the same element as your spell/whatever (but effectiveness will be reduced)
- Tie in status ailments with elemental attacks (ie, fire attack causes blindness, ice attack causes slow, etc.)


That's elemental stuff we've discussed. I think status effects/customizable equipment discussions might be better suited in their own threads. Although I will say I of tieing in status ailments with attacks and doing away with specific ailment spells altogether. Mostly because I rarely use those ailment spells, because in a normal battle the enemy usually isn't alive long enough for it to be very useful, and in a boss better they NEVER FREAKING WORK!!!

[gorzuate]

Hmm, I thought pair-wise elements would be kinda cool, but whatever.

[Rain]

And as for the "fully customizable" character debate, I just don't even think it's worth discussing. There are people on the left that are strongly against it, and people on the right that are strongly for it, and I think it's a pretty much even distribution so I want to strike somewhere in the middle. As for me personally, I hate games that require you to spend so much time customizing things. I'd rather play the damn game than customize it

Roots, who is on the left?  A game that is more customizable creates more opportunities for longevity and provides more depth to the overall experience.  I think making things customizable is a necessary factor in making the game more engaging because it allows the player to have more control over whats going on.  It doesn't mess with the gameplay, simply gives it more substance.

Maybe this idea is for another thread?  

[Roots]

Hmm, I thought pair-wise elements would be kinda cool, but whatever.

That's because you're like the only one here who's never played a real RPG. :P You can't speak when you got your ass pwn3d by the first boss in FFVI (Welck).

Characters in game: "Don't attack it when it goes inside it's shell!"
Phil: "Drrrrrrrr magic missle YARRRRRRGH!!!!!"

I will make fun of you for that for the rest of your days

Roots, who is on the left?  A game that is more customizable creates more opportunities for longevity and provides more depth to the overall experience.  I think making things customizable is a necessary factor in making the game more engaging because it allows the player to have more control over whats going on.  It doesn't mess with the gameplay, simply gives it more substance.

Maybe this idea is for another thread?  

Yeah, probably an idea/topic of discussion for another thread. Go ahead and create it if you want to discuss it. I'm too lazy to make topics today :P Anyway, I see your point, but still I don't care for customizations. I don't want to control the game world. I want the game world to control me. Ya know what I mean? It's just something that's not important to me. I can't remember a single SNES RPG where you were allowed to customize things, and those RPGs are what I remain most found of to this day (for that and for several other reasons too). I'm not completely against customization, I just don't want it to be a dominant factor of the game (a la Diablo).

[gorzuate]

Hmm, I thought pair-wise elements would be kinda cool, but whatever.

That's because you're like the only one here who's never played a real RPG. :P You can't speak when you got your ass pwn3d by the first boss in FFVI (Welck).

Characters in game: "Don't attack it when it goes inside it's shell!"
Phil: "Drrrrrrrr magic missle YARRRRRRGH!!!!!"

I will make fun of you for that for the rest of your days

Your definition of "real RPG" seems to be limited to the FF series. I may have not played those, but I've played others.

Roots, who is on the left?  A game that is more customizable creates more opportunities for longevity and provides more depth to the overall experience.  I think making things customizable is a necessary factor in making the game more engaging because it allows the player to have more control over whats going on.  It doesn't mess with the gameplay, simply gives it more substance.

Maybe this idea is for another thread?  

Yeah, probably an idea/topic of discussion for another thread. Go ahead and create it if you want to discuss it. I'm too lazy to make topics today :P Anyway, I see your point, but still I don't care for customizations. I don't want to control the game world. I want the game world to control me. Ya know what I mean? It's just something that's not important to me. I can't remember a single SNES RPG where you were allowed to customize things, and those RPGs are what I remain most found of to this day (for that and for several other reasons too). I'm not completely against customization, I just don't want it to be a dominant factor of the game (a la Diablo).

Not to mention customizability could create a nightmare for the programmers.

Ok, I'm off to beat Welck (maybe )

[Rain]

Hmm, I thought pair-wise elements would be kinda cool, but whatever.

That's because you're like the only one here who's never played a real RPG. :P You can't speak when you got your ass pwn3d by the first boss in FFVI (Welck).

Characters in game: "Don't attack it when it goes inside it's shell!"
Phil: "Drrrrrrrr magic missle YARRRRRRGH!!!!!"

I will make fun of you for that for the rest of your days

Roots, who is on the left?  A game that is more customizable creates more opportunities for longevity and provides more depth to the overall experience.  I think making things customizable is a necessary factor in making the game more engaging because it allows the player to have more control over whats going on.  It doesn't mess with the gameplay, simply gives it more substance.

Maybe this idea is for another thread?  

Yeah, probably an idea/topic of discussion for another thread. Go ahead and create it if you want to discuss it. I'm too lazy to make topics today :P Anyway, I see your point, but still I don't care for customizations. I don't want to control the game world. I want the game world to control me. Ya know what I mean? It's just something that's not important to me. I can't remember a single SNES RPG where you were allowed to customize things, and those RPGs are what I remain most found of to this day (for that and for several other reasons too). I'm not completely against customization, I just don't want it to be a dominant factor of the game (a la Diablo).

No way it should be taken as far as Diablo.  I am sure we will find a balance.

[Loodwig]

pairs are overdone.  I would rather see trichotomies or more advanced pairing, as complexity in an rpg makes for an interesting game.  On customization, I say set a balance.  We want characters to have their own uniqueness, which cannot be defined in mass customization.

[Rain]

On customization, I say set a balance.  We want characters to have their own uniqueness, which cannot be defined in mass customization.

Good point.   If this were a strategy game things might be different.

[Alexander]

Hello, I am new to this forum and having read most (so forgive me if i am repeating anything) of the Elements thread, and being a Black Mage at heart, I have a fairly humble idea that would be simple yet provide a bit of variation to the game.

Suppose that we are using an 8 element system that is either paired or not.  In an elemental system of this kind, monsters usually have a type(s) of element(s) that they are strong or weak against.  My thought is that environment could have something to do with damage as well.  For example...

-No matter what type of monster you are fighting, a fire spell or ability used in a desert is enhanced (damage-wise) by the natural heat of the desert (and if you are having day and night, deserts get really cold at night, so that bonus would go away at night and possibly be reversed).

-Additionally, a wind spell would be more effective in an open field or a desert than it would in a forest or a dungeon.

-Earth would be more effective on a mountain but less effective in the desert where the ground is not solid.

-Blizzard would do better in snow or freezing conditions, but less in the desert.

-Thunder/Lightning would be more effective if fighting a monster in water (remember that it would be more realistic if thunder affected any party members standing in the same water).

-Etc. Etc. Etc.

These modifiers would probably be simple to implement if attached to the battle maps, though I am not a programmer, so maybe not.

Con - This would call for a variety of locations and a great supply of battle maps.

Pro - More strategy for mages

I figure these modifiers would be somewhere in the area of plus-or-minus 5-20% depending on the environment's potency and would stack with the monster's strengths and weaknesses.

So that's one idea, and i just had another one come to me so...

My other thought is that if you are having input commands that can occur on an If/Then basis, allowing a mage to hold a spell to counter an enemies spell (either same spell, i.e. fire to cancel fire; or opposites, ice or water to cancel fire depending on pairing) would add some strategy to the mage jobs.  This is similar to the Dungeons and Dragons method of cancelling spells, but you would have to know what spells the enemy can cast rather than identifying it when it is cast.  This will help keep battle real time.

Thank you for listening to (or reading, as the case may be) my ideas.  Sorry about the length.

Any questions? Comments?

[Roots]

Yeah I think we've touched on the "environmental bonuses" thing before. It wouldn't be too hard to implement in the code, but my primary concern with this is the player knowing what enviornmental changes are in effect. I hate making the player play the game of "guess what the developer is thinking". I would want some way to communicate that there is a fire bonus, an earth impedement, etc. Maybe we can pop up little icons on the corner of the map when a change takes place, and keep the environmental status icons stored in the main menu.



I really like your idea about spell canceling! That seems really cool (and I think the enemies should be able to do the same to the characters as well). I wouldn't really cancel out fire with fire though, but rathe weaken the spell with the opposite type. Notice I said weaken, not cancel. So if an enemy casts a fire spell that is calculated to cause 580 damage and a character casts an ice spell that will cause 625 damage, the enemy will receive 45 damage or something. That way you don't always have to cancel out a "fire 1" spell with an "ice 1" spell, but rather could use any ice-based attacks to weaken or even overcome the other spell. This could make for a really cool offensive/defensive strategy! I think it would be a little too easy if the player knew what spells the enemy was about to cast though. Typically I don't think enemies will have too wide of a range of skills/spells, so I think we should leave a little chance up to the player so they won't know 100% for sure what spell they are attempting to block. (On the other hand, if an enemy only casts one type of spell, they would be 100% sure)


Anyway, great idea! The more I think about this, the more I'm liking it. What do the rest of you guys think? I think it would really fit in well with the battle system.