If you were to design a RPG, which elements would you respect/break

>>3771420
I'd definitely do it like this:

—Activity-based progression (level up skills through use)
—One big map with no battle screens, with hero being able to travel really fast via vehicles and transport
—Few if any cutscenes and NPC story dumps, all story is told through surroundings

The rest is up to discussion.

>>3771432
>No Combat
> No npc story

What's the point then?. Also, why do you want to travel is there is no danger in the middle?

Leveling by activity is an interesting feature which i appreciate, but it has never been implemented correctly (Ultima Online, FF2)

I would scale my game appropriately to avoid grinding.

FF8 scaled the enemy level in comparison of the players. It was a bad idea because if you grinded to much, the end boss become nearly unkillable.

I think you need a double XP system.
XP for the characters stat, if you grind to much in the same zone, you get nearly nothing.
XP for the job. If you grind too much, you job won't progress enough.

The first island would assume you should be between level 10 and 15 when the boss is killed.
And you job level shouldn't be above 3 out of 15.

When you reach the next zone, it should be able in 30 minutes or so to reach the max job of the previous zone.

Bravely Default was doing this fine in the begin. After 30 minutes you could have nearly full reconfigured your team with a new job.

File: 1428865536066.jpg (985KB, 1700x1164px) Image search: [Google]

985KB, 1700x1164px

What I really want is an SRPG like Fire Emblem or Shining Force. So I'd go with that.

However, I would really like to do something similar to what Skies of Arcadia did when it comes to magic/special attacks. Where it builds up gradually over time and can be built up faster if the user concentrates. I don't like magic users using up all of their MP and just being a waste of space for the rest of the battle.

>>3771440
>Leveling by activity is an interesting feature which i appreciate, but it has never been implemented correctly (Ultima Online, FF2)

Quest for Glory

File: romancing saga 2.jpg (1MB, 2100x1398px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2100x1398px

>>3771440

>>3771420
I would make one where you don't gain XP through fights, just money and items and leveling is done by gaining new equipment, but is very limited. Most benefits of new equipment are mostly buffs or skills. Combat would be tough and trying to fight every monster you come across would be unwise.

Most of the game would be based around exploring. The world is open from the start and uncovering the story wouldn't be just moving from town A to town B to dungeon C and so forth. It would be traveling back and forth across the world, talking to people to gain clues or information that leads you to unravel what's going on.

>>3771440
Not him, and FF2's system isn't perfect but I still really like it and prefer it to most traditional leveling in RPGs.

>>3771483
Not sure. Outside combat, the leveling was pointless.
> Climb tree a thoundand times until you succeed.

>>3771486
I haven't played this, so i can't speak for myself. How is it?

>>3771487
> just money and items and leveling is done by gaining new equipment, but is very limited

This is how most LoZ games work, and i think it does a good job. Low equipment count with different behaviors instead of Sword +30, +32, +35 ...

> It would be traveling back and forth across the world, talking to people to gain clues or information that leads you to unravel what's going on.
Sounds good. Again, i think the zelda saga did this and worked ok.

>>3771498
It's a direct descendant of FF2 but without the retarded issues inherent to that game.

>>3771440
>No Combat
Wait, where did you take this from? Of course there's combat.

As for NPC story, you kind of misunderstood me. Most of all I hate needless NPCs in games, which serve as idiotic fragments requiring you travel from point to point on foot endlessly just to get a fractured story.

You know, I once happened to read some famous author's tips on writing. He emphasized the importance of brief sentences and telling story through details. For example, you could make a lengthy sentence about how a hero went to a specific forest in the night and it was winter. But instead, you could just make this description: "thin black trees cast the cold shadow on the night snow". I kind of liked that idea.

What I ultimately would want to try would completely omit any backstory/intro. Your hero would literally wake up in a room and would be able to pierce his all identity from surroundings. A photo of the family on the table, books/PCs about some subject related to story, past accolades and awards, etc. You'd just get welcomed by wife/mother like it's just any ordinary day. No one tells you who you are, and yet you can put it all together if you want.

>>3771420
I'd keep random battles but I'd lift the mechanic from wild arms 2 that let you skip random battles with a button press
maybe if you skipped enough battles in a row you'd get some consumables as a reward idk

I'd probably also try to do something like Super Mario RPG/LoD with timed blocking/attacking

>>3771512
So the game rewards you for not playing it? That would sell like hotcakes in 2017.

>>3771514
skip too many battles and the boss will kick your ass

>>3771517
Then why reward the player for skipping them?

>>3771432
Sounds good anon.

>>3771538
Thank you

>>3771420
>start as an all powerful but old wizard on one last adventure
>each day and in many fights you lose some HP/MP permanently (old age) but you have to kill monsters to get food to stay alive long enough to complete your journey
>doing subquests for people along the way can get you helpful items or NPCs but due to time you can't do every quest or help every person in a given game.

>>3771483
>standing around picking your nose for days to level lockpicking

>>3771568
sounds replayable as fuck

>>3771585
That was the idea. Final battle is against another powerful old wizard but depending how quickly you get there it's either an all out spell flinging nuke fest or two half dead old dudes slapping each other hoping the other dies first.

>>3771440
>but it has never been implemented correctly
Go play SaGa games.
They're the best at it to this day.

No Lord of The Rings/Dungeons & Dragons/Star Wars/Dragon Ball influences in art.

File: image.jpg (131KB, 640x633px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 640x633px

For as shit as most of the characters are this game got combat so fucking right
> no random encounters
> heavy/medium/light attacks, landing a hit gives you a higher hit%
> versatile spell grid that let's you strategize however you want
> using the same element types in a row make your spells stronger
It's literally the best combat I've ever played in a JRPG and nobody has tried to copy it since it's a shame.

>>3771420
would use a combat system akin to Chrono Trigger, but with more emphasis on skills affecting specific areas (circle area, straight line, etc) and enemy/player positioning, and also some timing-based triggers to inflict extra damage or block attacks better etc. like Mario RPG or something. but more of a central mechanic to winning battles rather than a little bonus.

battles would be real real snappy. real quick. no stupid ass transitions, no football lineup, no combat screen. just bump into an enemy, move into placements, then start selecting commands and attacking. would require scripted enemies, but i think enemy placement is important to dungeon design.

dungeons would be large and contiguous... "metroidvania" esque, if you will. would like to borrow from games like Golden Sun and have a lot of environment-based puzzles that require spells/items to solve, but with tools that are a bit more intuitive and multi-purpose and not a simple round peg into a round hole. like stuff that lets you climb walls, stuff that lets you swim around, etc.

most enemy encounters could be avoided, and beating a boss at a lower-than-expected level would be rewarded with something cool.

character has just a few weapons that get upgraded with materials over time. like Secret of Mana or something, but maybe a bit more intricate with multiple upgrade paths. other pieces of equipment each give bonuses only to one specific stat.. like, torso = defense. feet/legs = agility. rings/headwear = charisma. gloves/arms = strength. something like that. i prefer simple equipment, rather than oodles of useless randomized gear.

>>3771903
yeah I agree, chrono cross does a lot right. i didn't like how spells were a consumable resource, and the +/- thing on abilities was weird. i think if that was all restructured to be a little more -- dare i say -- traditional, then it would be perfect.

but man, what a beautiful mess of a game.

>>3771420

Holy shit, someone remembers this game! Can't wait to make a thread about it.

>>3771420
The first thing that comes to mind is not really something that I think I could do but more like what I'd like to see. Not grinding but using strategical methods to work around battles instead of relying on level's and everything else along those lines. It would be really fun but from any that I've seen it makes me believe that these kind of games can't truly execute this well without bullshitting your way through. Another cool idea would be to actually make an avatar for yourself.

>>3771441
I think setting a multiplier would be simple enough for the enemy level situation. Putting a .50 multiplier or something.

>>3771904
So Lunar with better dungeons?

File: cyclops.png (1KB, 110x128px) Image search: [Google]

1KB, 110x128px

>>3771420
Let's say hypothetically I'm making Homer's Odyssey the RPG for Sega CD. We're working with a non-linear narrative, flashbacks and so forth. We could cheap out and do sepia toned cutscenes, but he right thing to do is to save cutscenes for elements in the story that couldn't possibly be construed as conflict. Things that can't be wrangled into the main game loop that might be interesting as puzzles or mini-games deserve looking at. There's a lot of "tactical espionage action" in the Odyssey, so a few Metal Gear 2 rip-off sequences aren't out of the question. Sure, we could show an anime style still-frame of Odysseus jabbing Polyphemus' eye, but wouldn't it be way more compelling to sneak through his lair to avoid waking him from his drunken slumber. There are sequences where the protagonist is alone, and others where he commands a crew or fights alongside Athena (classic overpowered NPC.) I can see that going two ways: action combat that allows the issuing of general commands, or TBS. Since we already set the precedent of action based mini-games we'll go with something like Secret of Mana, with its NPC AI grid. Frankly I'm not a big fan of +1 swords. I'd rather all the customizable elements have to do with the way in which you fight (say a bow vs a sword) and your preference of special abilities. The closest example I can think of is the immense variety in firepower in Compile shoot 'em ups. Let the player decide what works, and don't punish them by making some equipment numerically superior. If they want a homing chakram, or spread-shot daggers, by all means. Levels and stats as abstractions are weird outside the simulationist environment of old tabletop RPGs. We're making a video game. What's important here? The player might want more health, or to more effectively use their chosen weapon, or to use their special abilities more often. The impact of the player's upgrades should be immediate and obvious. Comment is almost too long so I'll leave it at that.

>>3771441
>It was a bad idea because if you grinded to much, the end boss become nearly unkillable.
But bosses didn't scale, only random encounters. Grinding actually makes bosses easier, though it may be the least effecient way to do so.

>>3772302
Bosses do scale, but they all have level caps. Ultimecia caps out at 65 and even all four forms combined have a max of 616,100 HP, which can be ripped through by Irvine and Squall without either of them breaking a sweat.

>>3771903
I hated CC's combat. It doesn't matter how good your mechanics are when the game never bothers to challenge you. Even Miguel and Dario are both extremely easy if you aren't stupid.

>>3772459
>Would your game require countless hours of grinding?
Yes.

If it looks like an old school RPG then it should play like one as well. You can't have pixel art and chiptune but a super modernized 2017 gameplay. That's what indieshits are all about and it's disgusting.

Motherfuckers, either make a full modern game or a full retro game. Don't mix bullshit elements that doesn't go well together.

GODDAMN I'M SO PISSED

>>3771568
I always thought it'd be interesting to have an rpg similar to that.
The game would start off with the main villain showing up, saying he's going to fight you in X amount of time, and if you lose, he'll destroy the world or whatever.
Then you'd be free to explore, do sidequests to meet party members, and get stronger to prepare for the fight.
Maybe there could be different ways to defeat the final boss. i.e. if you completed one quest line, you'd have an item that would kill him. Or you could brute force it and grind the entire time to get strong enough, or maybe you could make decisions to convince him not to fight you.
Your idea just reminded me of my idea, but I like how your idea incorporates game mechanics into the plot.

>>3771440
>Leveling by activity is an interesting feature which i appreciate, but it has never been implemented correctly (Ultima Online, FF2)
The SaGa series continually enhances it. It is about challenging your characters in which the mechanics give you the best stat gains and chances to learn skills when you fight and defeat strong enemies. Weak enemies yield little to no benefit from fighting because you probably won't gain stat increases and won't spark skills. Along with that the battle rank can go up and you will find your party unable to fight against new enemies that are introduced and put you in an unwinnable game file.

This is just only regarding natural growth with taking actions that will influence your characters stats and skills. This isn't including different growth mechanics in the games that have races in them and how it can subvert hours of grind.

>>3771420
>Would your game require countless hours of grinding?
I'd make it so that you gain EXP from completing quests, beating bosses, and watching cutscenes; not from killing standard enemies. Didn't Chrono Cross do something like this?

>>3771420
if I were making an RPG, I'd implement the 'level zero' concept. set it up so that instead of exp/lvl, you gain power solely through weapons/armor/artifacts. that way, you could balance the difficulty exactly, and there would be no over/under leveling or grinding.

I'd remove slow linear progression of stats in favor of traits that give you a huge bump on your character performance

then:
>you gain a new level
>assign a point to endurance
>+4 hp
>meh

now
>you gain a new level
>assign a point to endurance
>level up more
>you have enough endurance to learn Hardened Skin +1 trait
>+100 hp
>woah

This would make designing interesting progression tree easier because instead of bunch of arithmetic formulas extreme autists can minmax you have basket of skills and stats upgrades to pick and choose from that are available to your character. Think Guild Wars.

>>3772594
Autists would still find the single most effective build, and only use that build.

I'd kill any sort of linear progression, and set it so that completing certain tasks would raise monster levels a little, and allow for more dangerous monsters to be encountered, with the explanation given that stronger monsters seek out strong opponents.

Would also like it to be set in an amalgamation world instead of it being bound to "medieval, sci-fi, or modern", kind of like Dragon Ball, where there's primitive human tribes, dinosaurs, modern cities, and futuristic sci-fi labs.

>>3771420
Levels? Never heard of them. Equipment? You didn't find a new spear, you found THE new spear for the next 10 hours. Items? No, but you can "cast from supplies". Gold drops? Fuck you, you don't get gold, you restock your supplies in town.

>Would your game require countless hours of grinding?
I would make a Wizardry style dungeon crawler with the strategic scale of games like Jagged Alliance or Xcom.
Set up patrols and training with new recruits, lead scouting parties to explore the dungeon and launch rescue parties when necessary. Eventually you construct camps and supply routes.
Having rival explorer companies and monster civilizations in the dungeon you can interact with could also spice things up.
In the really big picture you might be able to breed your own troops.

>>3772491
One game I can think of that has limited time is (non retro alert) Persona 3.
You always have 1 month before having to fight the boss (there are 12 standard bosses in the whole game) and during that time you can either grind your chars, boost your stats or hang out with friends to boost your Persona (and thus boosting your magic capabilities)

I only like western tactical, turn based strategy rpgs.

>>3772624
so basically chrono trigger with level scaling?

>>3771420
I mean, there's RPG and "RPG"

I'm constantly educating people about what RPG mechanics are. You can add story and hybrid mechanics from other genres, but take the RPG elements out and it's not an RPG anymore. Obviously.

So the main thing you HAVE TO HAVE is Character Progression.
>But Zelda --
ZELDA ISN"T A FUCKING RPG!!!
Action and Adventure mechanics are separate from RPG mechanics. Putting them in a RPG is fine, but that doesn't make them RPG mechanics.

I almost forgot one experiment I wanted to try to add to >>3771432 .

For every monster in a bestiary, you have a separate level, and you increase it by fighting a specific kind of monster. It increases your rate of critical hits and evasions for that enemy; at maximum level, they almost can't hit you, and you score criticals on them all the time.

Also, you get bonuses for completing bestiary. First, you get them by discovering all the drops a monster can give. Second, there are few families of monsters, like dragons, skeletons, etc. As you fill the bestiary, your acquaintance with a certain family raises, giving you an edge. Completing a family means you get a big advantage. But there are some very rare enemies which are hard to hunt down to encourage exploration.

>>3772815
>Action and Adventure mechanics are separate from RPG mechanics.

But rpg is not the mechanics:
> A role-playing game (RPG and sometimes roleplaying game[1][2]) is a game in which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting. Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative, either through literal acting or through a process of structured decision-making or character development.[3] Actions taken within many games succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and guidelines.

File: 1478731458498.jpg (51KB, 877x960px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 877x960px

>>3771568
>>3771591

Why does this sound so GOOD? I love this idea.

>>3772908
I've had a number of ideas of games for a while, just never have the time to actually make one.

It's just kind of a reversal of the standard RPG journey. It's always bugged me how JRPGs in particular are almost always hardest at the start and get progressively easier as you go. The number I've dropped around the final dungeon because it's become dull frustrates me. Though now I partially blame Etrian Odyssey for that.

The idea with this is replayability and a reversal curve of the standard RPG where it gets harder the further you progress.

>>3772892
Put your tits back in, the context is different when it comes to videogames and you know it.

>>3772941
But western RPGs are also hardest in the beginning.

>>3772953
Yeah, I've just played more jrpgs. Most of the western rpg type games I play are rougelikes which usually do have the difficulty curve I like. So I'm thinking about ways to bring that into a regular RPG without just plain making it a roguelike.

>>3772892
Yeah. Reread #3.

You're mixing up regular role-playing with role-playing game. Obviously we don't call every game that simply because we're playing as a character. That's the misnomer.
The point of RPGs is character progression- in which the outcomes are based on the character's abilities - not necessarily the player's choices. See, Zelda isn't an RPG because it uses action mechanics and damage is more or less fixed.
In a Tabletop RPG, successes depends on character stats and dice rolls.
Video Game RPGs calculate damage formulas based LVs. and differences between a character Atk. Defs. and other Attributes.
That's what Rpg mechanics are; you're playing by the character's abilities, not your own. You can point a gun point-blank, but it's the character's accuracy that matters.

Get it? So when games claim to have "rpg elements" but their not fully an Rpg, it means they have a point distribution to upgrade skills or something, but it's not a requirement and players could probably win on skill alone.

>>3773017
>You're mixing up regular role-playing with role-playing game.

I think it's confusing because he's using a definition for tabletop RPGs, and even though computer RPGs are an offshoot of them, they're quite different.

>In a Tabletop RPG, successes depends on character stats and dice rolls.
Partially yes, but in a well run campaign roleplaying is also a major part and preferably how players get past an obstacle. That's partly why computer RPGs are so different. They really are just stat based dungeon crawling games for the most part.

>>3773045
Maybe you're abstracting "role-playing" as "make believe"; and "game" as "fun activity"

Think "role-playing" as in perceiving a character capabilities; and "game" as in a set of rules that you have to plan by accordingly.

In anycase, RPG is a noun not an adjective. The name of a genre. Categorically different from Action-Adventure. I usually just tell people the genre name is a misnomer. That it has less to do with Role-Playing and more to do with the character sheet mechanics from Table-Top rpgs that it gets it's name from.

>>3772846
This sort of monster mastery is something I've been thinking about too. It seems pretty straightforward, and people generally enjoy having more bars to fill.

>>3773170
> I usually just tell people the genre name is a misnomer. That it has less to do with Role-Playing and more to do with the character sheet mechanics from Table-Top rpgs that it gets it's name from.

On this I agree with you. RPG is a poor name for the video game genre, but when you get down to it most genre names are.

But I think tabletop roleplaying games are about all the aspects you mentioned. There is perceiving your characters capabilities as a way to inform how you will roleplay them. But the game also intrinsically has an aspect of "make believe" as you play the role of whatever character you've made. And it is meant to be a fun activity.

I have always run campaigns that lean more heavily on roleplaying than dice rolls, but both are important to a good game in my opinion.

>>3773045
>but in a well run campaign roleplaying is also a major part and preferably how players get past an obstacle
That was before 3e D&D dumbed down everything so that every little thing had rules to it, which still causes brain damage that makes waves on tabletop players 15 years later.

File: Star_Wars_Role-Playing_Game_1987.jpg (24KB, 230x306px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 230x306px

>>3773189
Wasn't 3E the one that made combat very MMO like? I didn't mind that actually, it at least gave straight attack classes some interesting things to do in combat. I only played it a few times. My and my group haven't played actual D&D much since the 90's, it's mostly other systems these days. Also I've been playing with mostly the same group of people for ages now so I can't really comment on the general roleplaying scene as a whole.

>>3772743

Sure, but also minus the time travel, just put everything in the same time period.

File: IRyUfb8[1].gif (714KB, 400x240px) Image search: [Google]

714KB, 400x240px

>>3773017
>You're mixing up regular role-playing with role-playing game.

It must be a coincidence that both are called "ROLE-PLAYING game".

> Obviously we don't call every game that simply because we're playing as a character. That's the misnomer.

Obviously you are wrong, every single ROLE-PLAYING game is about playing as a character. What where you thinking when Dark Cecil was upset about bombing cities? "Damn, how many experience points is that!"

> The point of RPGs is character progression- in which the outcomes are based on the character's abilities - not necessarily the player's choices.

Yes, this is a feature that you see in ROLE-PLAYING games, both computers/consoles and tabletop games. In both realities you can usually find combat and RPGs are not defined because "there are swords", that's just your own personal definition anon.

> See, Zelda isn't an RPG because it uses action mechanics and damage is more or less fixed.

Zelda shares a lot of elements with ROLE-PLAYING games:
- Play as a character that can do more than attack and move.
- Explore a world, you are not limited by an scrolling window.
- Interact with the world and their citizens in many ways (Talk, Trade, questing, discover)
- There is a story going on. You can ignore it but you are not supposed to.

> In a Tabletop RPG, successes depends on character stats and dice rolls.
Video Game RPGs calculate damage formulas based LVs. and differences between a character Atk. Defs. and other Attributes.
That's what Rpg mechanics are;

Exactly, you said it: Mechanics belonging to RPGs, not the RPG genre itself, which consists in ROLE-PLAYING. That is, in playing as if the character was you.

> you're playing by the character's abilities, not your own. You can point a gun point-blank, but it's the character's accuracy that matters.

This happens in any ROLE-PLAYING session. You are not going to die because you got a fail in your dices.

File: e5658025abb0e2e19eaeeacff1b918906b69f1907dc72cc3903b0680a1ffcfef[1].jpg (80KB, 405x720px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 405x720px

>>3773017
>>3773207

> Get it? So when games claim to have "rpg elements" but their not fully an Rpg, it means they have a point distribution to upgrade skills or something, but it's not a requirement and players could probably win on skill alone.

This is revisionist. You might want to define RPG as you like, but it is not how every sane person would define it.

See, this is what Garriot did with Akalabeth:
> Garriott is the sole author of the game, with the exception of title artwork by Keith Zabalaoui.[10] The game attempts to bring the gameplay of pen-and-paper role-playing games to the computer platform.[2] The player receives quests from Lord British (Garriott's alter-ego and nickname since high school) to kill a succession of ten increasingly difficult monsters.

You know why? Because he didn't give a shit about limitations. He tried to bring the RPG experience to computer.

Now, are you fucking telling me sport videogames are called like that JUST because in both you can see a referee? Really?!

>>3773214
And it's important to note that the RPG genre grew out of war gaming in the 70's. D&D has always been primarily about killing stuff and acquiring wealth first, and immersing yourself in a fictional world second.

>>3773413
>D&D has always been primarily about killing stuff and acquiring wealth first, and immersing yourself in a fictional world second.

Back in the day we called players who thought like this munchkins, and it was a very unfavorable term. D&D has always been heavily storytelling and roleplaying based. Gygax said so himself.

>>3773464
Gygax stole the game from Dave Arneson.

>>3771568
http://www.siliconera.com/2016/02/15/rpg-ash-level-not/

instead of random battles, you should just automatically get into a battle every time you take a step

>>3773724
> "over 4,000 hours of gameplay!"

>>3773207
>Zelda shares a lot of elements with ROLE-PLAYING games:
>- Play as a character that can do more than attack and move.
>- Explore a world, you are not limited by an scrolling window.
>- Interact with the world and their citizens in many ways (Talk, Trade, questing, discover)
>- There is a story going on. You can ignore it but you are not supposed to.

Those are all ADVENTURE elements. Do you even Vidja?

I've always hated magic in old games. Its always tied to some mana system or worse like in Ultima 4, but the game is setup in such a way that if you had regenerating MP or cooldowns like newer RPGs have, magic users would be OP.

>>3773841
There's mana regeneration in some games aside from Ultima. Bard's Tale comes to mind.

>>3773861
In Bard's Tale it would take several hours in real time for your MP to fully regenerate so realisticily you can refill it by paying the guy in the city.

>>3773678
He adapted it into something new and better. A roleplaying game.

>>3773704
>http://www.siliconera.com/2016/02/15/rpg-ash-level-not/

Well fuck me! I wonder if it's any good.

>>3773965
probably not, as far as I can tell it's just one guy doing everything

>>3771420
a bit "controversial" but I don't care anymore

-Overworld has more interactive bits than just talking to people/checking objects or entering other areas

-combat system isn't turn based and requires more skill than watching numbers

-story is told both through dialogue and visuals

-is not in a fantasy setting.

-no silent protagonist

>>3773991
>one guy doing everything

Cave story was done by one guy.

Make it heavily focused on actually role-playing. Bring it back to the roots of pretending you're another person in another world.

Lots of dialogue trees and choices. Lots of backstory, but you have to ask around and not just sit through exposition lectures from old wizards. Hell no to a silent protagonist. Stoic, maybe, but not totally silent.

Combat would be far more puzzle-oriented than grinding. No exp/lvl/spells.

Basically, what I'm hoping for is something like Ultima 7 or Planescape: Torment, with a totally overhauled combat system.

Instead of fighting waves of mooks, every enemy is essentially a boss, with their own weakness that you can exploit if you research them in the world. Knowledge is power. Transfer that over to games.

>>3772941
It wouldnt even be that hard to implement, really. Great idea though, Anon, I dig it. Hell, I'd even help make it if you needed some misc. programming done

Its a bit difficult to explain my idea. So basically you are the king of [insert GOOD country here] and you are on your last legs, as a nation. Your borders are buckling under the weight of 2 larger and more powerful nations. To solve this problem, you set out to find a new form of warfare, one that could save you from a war on 2 fronts against much more powerful foes.

Now the actual gameplay is the interesting bit. Searching for this "new style" of warfare would directly change the way random encounters and battles are fought. To begin with its just standard turn-based battles, but the king and his court magician then discover, that if you discount traditional battle honour and fight outside your own turn, you are much more effective at beating the enemy. This would be a story beat, and it would change the battle system to an ATB system on your side only, but its still not enough, it is too focused on small battles, and you would be outnumbered to an extreme level so the magicians keep researching.
Basically the battle system becomes more and more convoluted and just plain stupid, even going outside the genre the game.

>>3774301
I'd play that! It sounds very interesting and the sort of self awareness reminds me a bit of most nintendo RPGs

>>3773965
>Rpg maker
>good
pick one.

>>3774242
RPGs typically require way WAY more content to fill compared to a 4 hour Platform Shooter.

>>3774268
so you want a video game that's real life?

Basically you're talking about a pen and paper rpg, but you'd have to pay a full time salary to a DM for the level of depth you want/a game long enough to use all that depth.

a jrpg with skyrim style do whatever attitudes and a light fluffy story

>>3774402

That sounds pretty neat.

I wouldn't mind a game like Skyrim but without the grungy bleak art style.

>>3774408
We got it in the form of Xenoblade and Dragon's Dogma, but there's a lot of potential to be better.

>>3773991
The Exile/Avernum series is basically done by one guy.

>>3773965
Nah, that guy is using really basic functionalities of the engine without bothering making his own assets or even writing his own scripts, contrary to what people will tell you here RPGMAKER MV is a great little engine if you know how to write some decent script, but that shit is so basic he doesn't really deserve even five bucks, it's something you probably can do by yourself with just the basic trial in a week, probably even better than him, I don't think that shit will even get the Steam Greenlight, if it does then I'll stop drawing all of my assets and script and just publish a shit ton of half assed projects with it.

>>3771441
I like this idea, there's no reason to waste time on grinding. I've often felt that games should give you more experience the less you've fought a monster. Perhaps a monster starts with 1x EXP output, when you first fight it, the payout is 4x EXP, and then it scales down to 1x, and from there it goes down further to really low amounts (so that it becomes pointless to keep going).

I feel that this is better than allowing free grinding, which is not only tedious but game-breaking. Personally I think such things were only ever done to cover the designer's ass in case they accidentally balanced a boss poorly/thought players would do X but most ended up doing Y. A noble idea but if you used scaling like how I suggest then you could more or less always assume the players were at the right spot (because no one in their right mind would keep on grinding if the rewards were pitiful).

I also rather like what Undertale did with its enemies, where if you keep killing them eventually you empty the environment of enemies, and there are no more encounters there. I always liked that, but I would make it so that if you depopulated an area it stayed that way only for a while. Of course depending on how realistic you want to be that could take a long time (in-game years even?).

>>3771487
IIRC Romancing SaGa series is built around this idea. Personally I agree, leave the whole world open and put realistic restrictions on fighting all the time (make health points more than an arbitrary value, add real consequences to the strain of fighting literally all day). RPGs seem too intent on making the party into a team of human weed whackers.

>>3771512
Isn't that just a guaranteed run button?

>>3771568
Read an idea like this once but for a platformer, still sounds great.

call me crazy, but I saw this movie the other day about a bunch of vampire hunters traveling around mexico hunting down a super vampire of sorts, and I think a cool idea for a game would involve total mystery death. Like, you'll be playing, and your party will stop to make camp for the night, and you'll all go to sleep, and then instead of seeing the next day start you'll just go to the title screen and your save will be deleted. And then if you go back to the same spot again (with your new party) you can find the remains of your old party members/their stuff and figure out what happened to them. For example, the lesson from this group could have been 'leave someone up on night watch to make sure you aren't ambushed in the night'.

I suppose that in order to work you would need a 'game' that started as an instance world which lasted until the end (a time-lapse thing in which you either win or lose at the end) and you basically roll and wipe parties all the time. Like a rogue-like experience but instead of random-genning the world every time, you're rolling parties inside of the same persistent world (so more like a tabletop) and the persistent world is regenerated whenever a 'new game' is started.

I've been wanting to design a " 'Tales of' game done right." Ever since I was a young teen playing Tales of Phantasia for the first time on emulator, I was blown away by its innovative real time combat in an RPG. It's just so cool how you run toward an enemy, attack them, defend, and use special attacks.

The problem that I have with all of the "Tales of" games though is that they're all flawed and screwy in one way or another. There is truly no good Tales of game. ToP is ruined by spell/summon spamming. Subsequent games are ruined by the emphasis on combos, you just spam the same combos over and over, there is no strategy. Also, all of the stories of the Tales of games that I've played fucking suck. They're all games that should be 30 hours long, but then get convoluted and lose focus entirely, they always make me question "why are they still motivated to work with each other?" The goons who made these games have drug them through the dirt.

I'd make a game with Tales of Phantasia's battle system with an emphasis on strategy on having to buff allies and having to defend and parry attacks, you can't just spam special attacks or else you'll die. Basically taking the fundamentals of a Dragon Quest game's combat and applying it to Tales of Phantasia. It would be beautiful.

>>3774332
Like shenmue?

>>3774838
not everyone can afford to spend that much time and money on a project

>>3774323
>reminds me a bit of most nintendo RPGs
Yeah I guess I can see that. They were always pretty good at switching stuff up. The only problem really is that I have no artistic or literary talent whatsoever and that this game is mostly just an excuse to make a bunch of different mini games. If SOMEONE *wink wink* would do all the art and music stuff then I would totally be down.

>>3774807
>IIRC Romancing SaGa series is built around this idea
Not quite, while SaGa games from the Romancing series onwards are 99% open and fully explorable since the beginning there's still a few things that are not quite as that anon you're quoting wants.
It's true SaGa in general rewards you much more for looting items or buying/creating better equipment, but it's also a system that is based around getting the upper hand through a smart use of certain commands, knowledge of implicit rules and mostly controlling your characters' growth by managing their behaviour in battle and constantly fighting tough enemies, money is also largely a non issue in most games, it might as well not exist since economy is focused on other things.
It is a series that relies a lot on preparation and to a large degree, metaknowledge, in order to be played truly efficiently, many games in the system also have fixed stats, meaning levelling up proficiencies by making your characters act like you need them to act is crucial and getting good equipment fast is even more important, and that's just one layer of management since there's also Battle Rank, meaning the more you fight the tougher enemies get, then there's sparking, spark tables, character recruitment conditions, routes, economy, ecology and so on, none of this is explained in depth(or at all) in the games either.

In short, while SaGa does give you a large amount of freedom for exploration and in depth party building it's also true that the restrictions it gives you are not always realistic and require more than just thought to be managed, at its core SaGa is still deeply rooted in stuff like dice rolls and some degree of apparent randomness, which usually turns off many people who prefer having less hidden variables or factors to control.

>>3773197
>Wasn't 3E the one that made combat very MMO like?
4E was the one that got a reputation for being MMO or "World of Warcraft" like, though in my opinion I feel like people who have that impression must not be very familiar either 4E or World of Warcraft.

3E was definitely one of the editions that was very heavy on having super specific sub-systems and rulings for every single thing though you can claim that already started happening in the previous edition.

>>3771420
Keep:
Turn-based
Random battles
SaGa style non-linearity
Ability to grind - to be honest, I don't know why people obsess too much about removing it - ideally, good players should be able to beat the game without grinding while poor ones can spend time in order to get themselves a numeric boost.

Change:
Random battles dropped in frequency by a lot, while being increased in difficulty - the current rate of being overbearing while being really easy is pretty terrible.
Higher emphasis on consumable management - really make players appreciate every potion, attack item like scrolls and bombs and buff items they pick up.
Better dungeon and puzzle design - most JRPGs and modern games seem to completely fail in this department.

>>3775112
So Wizardry with an open world?
Might and Magic 1 would fit if not for the overpowered skill potions you can buy.

>>3771420
I've been considdering making an rpg where stats and abilities are based on equipment

So here's the idea, you could equip the theif gloves, which would increase your speed and luck and also give you the steal command. But because you have that equipped, you can't use the kniht gloves, which would allow you to dual weild and give you more str and def.

So what I would do is give you more equipment slots than the average rpg, and let the player do whatever builds they wanted. With tons of items equipment and weapons to customize yiur team with.
You cloud do stat heavy builds, at the cost of skills, or skill heavy builds with lower stats and anything in between. All changable at any time.

I always liked games that focus on customization instead of static upgrades. So this would be amazing to me. Not sure is anyone else would play it though.

The battle system is the idea i'm working on right now.

>>3771420
It would be Final Fantasy 9 with Phantasy Star 4's battle system. turn-based with combos and limited use abilities unique to each character.

>>3775101
As a player of both I can confirm that 3e is the one that's a tabletop MMORPG, and that 4e is tabletop Shining Force on steroids

Pathfinder is the private server run by people who were fannyrashed over the game being made far better and less of a clusterfuck.

>>3775152
I like this idea a great deal in a single player game. Something like a version of the relics from ff6 and the item-ability system from 9 and FFTA.

I plan on doing something similar for my GURPS style game.

>>3771420
Something like legend of mana is the perfect blueprint. Xenoblade X is a modern example, too bad it wasn't made in an era where technology pushing rpgs were the norm

>>3774301
sounds alot like ZHP or Undertale

>>3775112
>Random battles dropped in frequency by a lot, while being increased in difficulty - the current rate of being overbearing while being really easy is pretty terrible.
>Higher emphasis on consumable management - really make players appreciate every potion, attack item like scrolls and bombs and buff items they pick up.
Paper Mario does a lot of these, and Paper Mario is probably one of the only rpgs where I actually used attack items. Never in another rpg did I feel like I should use an item other than mega potion or megalixir or something similar cause my characters could it for a much less cost, and it didn't require me searching for it in my long list of inventory items. With its limited movesets and limited inventory space, it forced you to use items and to organize by which would be the most helpful.

>>3774810
Dwarf fortress has a mechanic where you can take an adventurer to explore the ruins of your old, fallen forts

>>3775293
Yeah I know. I've had this idea for years though

>>3771440
>Ultima Online leveling
>bad

>>3775112
>>3775121
Yeah, the first two M&Ms are basically what this guy is describing

>>3775112
>Keep: Turn-based

Dropped.

File: curoius crow.jpg (63KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 500x500px

>>3771420
>>3771487

Actually id likely go the survival horror route where your character has alot of stuff to boot and the advancement, while you'd have to place the points, doesnt make you all that much more badass than you start with.

But it lets you do some things better, get away with shit without doing a bunch of retries/grinding, and would be the principal way that you boost Accuracy and Damage.

I felt this would have been a better way for upgrades in RE4, and it would apply skill with each weapon not just across the board since being able to properly aim a gun to do critical damage without having time to contemplate the shot - thats gonna be different between each gun.

> Damage Systems

They wouldnt be outrageous like alot of JRPGs are, that stuff is so unrealistic its humorous, but I also dont think its all that suspenseful either.

I prefer setups similar to western games and even less expansive than d20. Mine would be similar to Fallout 1or2 in terms of HP/damage.

(ive played games where by Level 24 im beating the game and my character only has about 120 HP - 4 times what they started with)

Except that as you level up your defense skills get better, and your Armor items will block and reduce damage more.

I kinda like the way it was done in C:SOTN actually, anything pestulent and immemerable always just did 1 damage to you. Serious fights is when things started doing alot more.

Thats suspense, where you're not used to taking damage at all, and someone crits twice in a row and now you're 25 pts down. And the bosses, and shit you should get hit with, hurt you measurably every time.

> Impassable Bush Trope
There would be rock slides and other obstacles that actually look dangerous or impassable. For asshole guards that wont let you pass, it would be obvious they've got a fuckton of much higher level backup.

I would do this for any game. In an FPS id kill characters for walking too far (sinkhole opens up, anti tank landmines, orbital laser, etc).

File: hey georgie want a balloon.png (774KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

774KB, 1024x576px

>>3775742
* shit you shouldnt get hit with, ie being a dumbass and getting hit by a catapult or something, that should hurt you alot - just as you would expect

also cont'd...

I dont mind random encounters as long as they're Meaty and much less common than usual.

This is what killed FF7 for me, watching someone else play it and they encounter one thing after another on the worldmap, even maybe standing in one place doing nothing. I didnt give a shit about the story at that point
> especially given the rather low number of healing items given in FF games, and then they slaughter you out in the countryside with non-plot monsters.


For example I liked the random encounter distribution in Fallout 1 pretty well, it was rare enough that you could go from one place to another and not even run into anything.

While going through some areas, you might run into critters native to that area, those mutant patrols for example or the really nasty mutant creatures. Serious Encounters in places where they should be serious - using the random encounter mechanic as a message to tell you that you really shouldn't be there.

Other encounters were generally easy enough, and those easy ones where you had to whack some radscorpions or dogs - they weren't exactly around every corner either.

It cut the monotany just enough to make the game fun, yet not make the game monotonous due to random encounters.

> Fallout 2 had too many random encounters in my opinion, and because the JHP ammo variant did extra damage in the game due to them correcting the code after FO1 they were more lethal than the encounters in Fallout 1.

> in FO1 average pistols only did about 5-10 points per shot if you observe the console messages. But in FO2 almost everything did at least 10-15 points, and armor piercing rounds is when the game was going SOFT on you. While in FO1 the AP rounds were the nasty shit.

>>3775556
I like turn based but I think there should be "interrupt" reactions too. (eg, FOT's turn based)

File: kek deus vult.jpg (77KB, 500x667px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 500x667px

>>3775742
>>3775768

This way also I can do the impassable bush trope the way Dark Souls does it.

"why are these fucking creatures tearing me apart"

because you're not supposed to be over there yet, if you paid attention to the ramblings in town they said things were "horrible" and "grim" up on that plateau - but YOU didnt listen.

And no they arent giving you a bunch of XP so that you can just go risk-grind your way to powerleveling.

After you do some quests later on those random encounters will dramatically reduce and you'll have good enough armor/protection necklace and defense skill by then (and probably more of the damage type they're vulnerable to) that they'll be toast.

This is also another argument against the kinda exponential XP system that alot of monsters give based on level. Its trash.

This is what makes powerleveling possible and it sucks.

Instead of accelerating XP values you should have them generally ALL give you about the same XP regardless of the monster type or its level. Maybe variances of up to 5x or 10x depending on how much of a douche that monster is.

But what you do to prevent easy grinding (ooh sounds so sexual) is:
- Based on Level of monster less than yours you divide the XP provided by a certain amount

Or if its literally "1 point per monster" rather than dividing you tally it up and then do a random roll to see if you even get 1 Point for having slain X set of monsters (maybe awarded as a 5 point package).

That way somebody is wagering that an entire series of grinding, maybe a couple encounters worth, is even going to provide experience.

> Keeps the players focused on the story rather than being autistic XP pervs.

Mid to Late game lower end critters, anything more than a couple levels lower than themselves, should be an annoyance and even an encouragement not to stay in an area since all it will do is deplete their resources while not giving much back.

Yet if you powerlevel, you only get standard XP for the deadlier risk

>>3771420
- countless grinding
- buggy to the point of not being able to finish it without at least six patches
- homoerotic story about angst
- strictly scripted AI
- require pen and paper to draw the maps because there is no ingame map

>>3771903
Are you trolling?

>>3775976
As someone who is not suffering from crippling autism to where he gets a check from the government every month, I interpreted it as "Advancing the plot and viewing optional/hidden scenes".

>>3775976
>responds to the known falseflagger
>/tv/ level image

Pottery.

>Main character is legitimately in love with the female lead, and she is in love with him. And it shows.

>>3771420
Open world, and I'd work on the setting and plot first.

Make an interesting world, a lot of settlements, dungeons, etc. (many of which would be completely optional), make different parts of the world feel distinct from each other, give each region a unifying backstory, cultural elements, and "themes", get a good idea of the political layout of the world.

Encounters would be random on the world map, but visible otherwise. They'd be random encounters, too, not necessarily battles. Like, you might run into merchants on the road and be able to buy/sell things. Or you might encounter random "scenes" (some plot related, or character related, some might give some insight into the setting, or give you a hint as to the location/existence of some hidden area/thing, some might just be amusing, and some might gain/lose you something (depending on some choice made either in the scene or at some previous point in the game)). Encounters would be based on region/tile/story progression, with no level-scaling.

An XP system where you gain skills by doing things (i.e. use a sword a lot, gain points in Sword), and instead of levels, you gain stat increases by gaining enough points with a relevant skill. You could pay trainers to raise your skills, with it being more expensive the higher the skill is. You would also learn techniques from these trainers, but a lot of these would require a certain level in the relevant skill (i.e. you can't learn <flashy sword tech> unless your Sword skill is at least <number>). You'd also be able to gain techniques through quests/story events. There'd be both combat and non-combat skills.

Also, there'd be RS-style permadeath. Characters would have a certain amount of LP, losing one each time they die. Dying at zero LP = dying permanently. HP would be limited and hard to fully restore. Combat would be draining but often avoidable. You'd be encouraged to look for ways to avoid unnecessary fights (i.e. traveling with a caravan on the roads).

>>3776012
Oh, also, in each region (and in certain settlements), certain items would sell for more/less. You would be able to do pretty well and possibly even beat the game by buying low and selling high, traveling with caravans over the world map roads for safety, paying trainers to increase your skills, avoiding most combat, and hiring mercenaries to handle the battles that you can't avoid.

>>3775998
This anon gets it.

For example, let's say you have a mage character who's very shy and hides her face under a hood a lot. In the late game, she tells the sad story about how she was kicked out of her home for being herself. And she was made to feel like the whole world is against her. It takes courage to be honest about who she is, so she gains strength from the experience (3000 XP and +500 max HP). Any party members present also gain wisdom from hearing her tale (+2 wis), and it strengthens the bonds of their friendship (any dual-tech involving the mage and her friends is now 25% more effective).

Oh also, character development is reflected in changes to the sprite. In the case of our exemplary mage, she will no longer keep her hood up all the damn time (+1 to charisma since she exudes more confidence). And as it turns out, she's not really that pretty, but she's okay with that. Anyone hating on her can suck a fireball.

>>3776029
There's a Famicom RPG called Niji no Silk Road (Rainbow Silk Road) where you play as a middle eastern prince in exile. Battling doesn't earn you money, and you don't get stronger from experience. Instead you need to buy equipment and to afford it you need to buy low, sell high between various settlements across Asia. You hire guards and pack mules to travel with you, and you have to watch your water intake whole travelling. Battles aren't completely pointless, though, as they earn "license points", and having more license points allows you to obtain licenses to purchase and trade more valuable commodities in that region.

>>3775076
Ah, I was only really referring to the Battle Rank idea, which as I remembered it had something to do with making battles more difficult and thus not making it possible to really 'grind forever'. I appreciate that further explanation though, very informative. Had no idea just how much there was to the games.

>>3775298
I noticed this with Mother 3 too. I think the designers behind those games realize that when you end up getting dozens or hundreds of items, it becomes overwhelming and just turns into noise. Mother 3 I liked how it basically gave you stuff all the time so that you could justify using items when you felt it necessary. Plus you sometimes had to actually prioritize items over others, which was nice compared to pretending your chars are big endless sacks of holding.

>>3775832
nah man, nothing wrong with drawing a map.

>>3776007
weren't the two leads in xenogears getting it on often?

>>3776514
sounds cool

>>3776093
Sounds weird, but cool. I say weird because I'm one of those autist types who doesn't understand the purpose of a story in a video game, even if there are a small number of games for which I did enjoy the story. Just someone else better write it, I won't ever pretend to be a storywriter.

>>3776647
>Ah, I was only really referring to the Battle Rank idea, which as I remembered it had something to do with making battles more difficult
Well, Battle Rank is actually a bit trickier than that in most titles.

Long story short, Battle Rank works on enemy batches, depending on various factors that change with each game, the game basically shift the enemy batches to another set of different, often stronger enemies.
Now, the interesting thing behind BR is that by itself it doesn't really mean much, after all it's only natural that the game tries to give you an appropriate challenge the stronger your characters get.
The key is how the game gauges how strong you are, and we go back to the point of arbitrary, non realistic limitations and ruleset.
For instance, in Romancing SaGa 2, BR works on the number of battles TRIGGERED, not won, simply triggered, so even if you get into a lot of battles and run away, the BR goes up while you don't get stronger, running away doesn't give you any proficiency, and it's a game with fixed stats on top of that, moreover, BR tends to go up real fast and most batches of enemies are a steep change in terms of difficulty.
Romancing SaGa 3 instead makes BR work on a basis of how many enemies of a certain family you killed, so if you kill many goblins expect to see ogres soon, but other monster families such as birds or insects aren't affected by BR since each family as its own gauge of sorts.
Then there's other games which use you HP as BR gauge, which means that if your main character gets a lot of HP but less stats(i.e. you don't input any significant command on that character) they're still weaker than they should be in the next BR.
Then there's games with ER tied to BR, meaning that the game locks you out of quests if you don't complete them while you're in the appropriate BR.
>>>

>>3776689
> and thus not making it possible to really 'grind forever'
For clarity's sake I'm going to debate this point too.
BR is indeed one of the anti grind measures in SaGa games, together with ER, Greed Counters and other small mechanics like story boss forms in Romancing SaGa 2.

However, it wouldn't be completely true to say SaGa games don't have grind, you can totally grind, but it requires more finesse and planning than other games.
While other RPGs often give you EXP/AP pinatas, SaGa doesn't, or more accurately, it stopped working on EXP counters with Romancing SaGa 2, and even so the only EXP pinata in Romancing SaGa 2 was a particular boss tier monster you'd get only if you completed a certain route in a certain event.

Now, the level up systems in modern SaGa, so Romancing SaGa 3 onwards, work by roll checks, with the exception of Unlimited's magic learning. Basically, each input or event in a battle involves a dice roll for a level up or learning chance, said rolls are rigged in a way that the tougher the enemy you fight the more chances you have to make a successful dice roll, conversely the weaker the enemy the less chances you have.
This forces you to constantly fight stronger enemies because the BR still keeps going up, while some bosses are at their own BR, some others might change depending on your BR too, and that's not all, some areas might also have a fixed threshold in BR, either starting or end BR, which makes exploration more challenging, and rewarding.
Zones with high BR often have better loot in them, and of course, make you grow faster and give you better chances to learn stronger techs, if you know what you need to survive and where to look for things, after all, better equipment doesn't influence BR, which is why you'd want to explore and loot, or forge items, better equipment gives you a large chance of surviving better in tougher fights, meaning you can get strong faster while also completing harder quests on top of controlling BR
>>

>>3776691
However, all of this needs another piece of the puzzle to work.
After all, many other RPGs had some kind of anti grind measures, for instance, getting less EXP on level ups, however in many games you simply couldn't fight an enemy that was mch stronger than you on simple virtue of stat difference, try go fight a behemoth at level 5 in your average FF, it doesn't work, occasionally, those game might give you access to gimmicks like LV5 Death or something, but you still need to grind beforehand to even get access to those if you want to grind a mystic pinata with a level that works on multiples on 5 base, if that even exists.

SaGa gives you a more concrete advantage in the sparking system, as any other kind of level up you can learn new attacks or in some games, specific evasion abilities on a roll check chance that also works more in your favour if you're fighting a stronger enemy and/or if you're in a tight spot like having low HP.
By virtue of said system, your character might learn a strong attack on the spot or even learn how to completely evade a certain attack seemingly by chance and let you win a tough fight, this is the other way to grind, knowing how to learn abilities in the first place and betting on tough odds, which is again, a countercheck to the BR based on rewarding you for fighting your way through danger consistently and knowing how to do so and when it's the right time for you to do so, because stats still do matter, you can gameshark any ability on a character but you still will get your ass kicked if you don't have the fuel or stats to use them well, which come naturally by fighting.

tl;dr: You can grind in SaGa, but it's not mindless grind and requires a lot of knowledge of the system and game in general.

To put a BR like mechanic in a game is a laudable effort, but you should know that BR alone must work with a ton of other little things to be an anti grind measure and not actually cause more grind.

Grinding is failure in pacing, shouldn't be a necessity.
One level to the entire party, no mismatched levels and having to grind a character who's lagging behind.
HP shown as percentage, not as "423" or "88/126". "91%" is better.

File: rajang-from-monster-hunter-o.gif (1MB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 320x180px

>>3776782
>1. I always fantasized about an action-rpg where combat is like in an oldschool fighting game, i.e. street fighter. So, for complex moves or spells, one would have to learn insane controller combos, instead of clicking thorugh a menu and simply selecting it.

That's pretty much what Capcom was going for with Monster Hunter and Dragon's Dogma.

>>3776782
1.
The Mega Drive port of Madô Monogatari does that.

>>3775101
>>3775169
Interesting thanks. Like I say I only ever played a handful of sessions with 3E and in some ways I liked it better than 2nd Ed. But also I was never a huge fan of that either, better that original or first ed AD&D, but still really flawed in my eyes. Like most roleplayers I got my start with D&D, but over the years it's only been 5%, maybe 10% of the gaming I've done.

I've never played any World of Warcraft, or really other MMOs. I just heard that comparison a lot.

>>3776782
that's like:
Downtown Nekketsu Monogatari
or Little Ninja Brothers

>>3776782
There's an action RPG where combat is a bit like Tekken but on steroids, it's based on juggles and assists/supers. See Namco x Capcom, Super Robot Wars OG Saga: Endless Frontier, and so on.

File: top2331.png (25KB, 240x160px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 240x160px

>>3776782
Tales games are a little like that, but none are deep enough to stay interesting in my opinion.

someone should port the tabletop game Dungeons the Dragoning 40k to rpg maker, that game has dope lore

>>3776514
Yeah, that's sort of what I was thinking in terms of gameplay. A combination of Rainbow Silkroad, Romancing SaGa, and maybe one of the early Fallout games, with a training mechanic (possibly) and a massive world with extra deep lore.

Now that I think of it though it'd probably be better without the training mechanic (or at least, without being able to raise your skills at trainers; needing trainers to learn techs would probably still be fine).

>>3776870
Which Tales? There must be millions of different games with the word 'Tales' on 'em.

>>3771420
I would design it to need grinding, but give alternatives- like a place to gamble for more money, or a gladiator pit to earn money and XP at your leisure.

>>3776967
"Tales of" games, you fucking mongoloid

I have a question. Do you guys think that if you have multiple PCs in an rpg, you should either be able to use them all in battle or if you can't, like say for FF7 which only allows 3 people at a time, the game should have mostly just been a 3 PC game, sort of like FF X-2.

open world nethack, with platforming elements

File: le vomit gnome.gif (1MB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 500x281px

>>3777047
>platforming elements
>in a roguelike

>>3776985
Your question is ill conceived.

You compare a game that is designed around many characters but lets you use a select few at a time to a game that is designed around a fixed party, moreover, in this regard you mention a game with a class system compared to a game with freeform customization.

You can't compare a car to a motorbike and ask which is fundamentally better at being a vehicle, they're different things.

To answer your question however, it all depends on how you design your game, if you give me a party of six characters but let me use only three of them at a time you must design the game around that in a way to justify this decision, same thing with a game with just three characters in a party of three characters. FFVII works in such a way because it's supposed to make you swap characters based on whatever tool you need at the moment, in practice it doesn't work like that because the game design is trash, FFX-2 works on a job basis, so like FFV or FIII it's pointless to give you many party members because job change is the fulcrum of the gameplay, in a way you are swapping party members, but in this case party members are a set of sub-templates applied to a main one, which let you have a slightly nuanced interpretation of each class depending on the character using said class.

FYI, there's also many turn based games with a single PC that are very interesting in terms of designing a system, Solid Runner for SNES for instance or if you want a more recent example, Last Ranker.
There's also a few others that work on a one to two party member basis like Frontier Gate, again, as long as you can design a system around it you can use as many PCs as you need, Last Remant lets you use up to 35 characters in a single battle against other 35 actors.

Maybe it's been done before, but here's my 2 cents.

Every time you beat the boss in some dungeon, you level it up and it respawns. It gives better items and drop, but the enemies and the boss also grow much stronger.

Some doors only open on certain dungeon level, revealing new sections. On max level, they open the hidden treasure, unique for each dungeon.

>>3777203
Phantasy Star Online. Next.

>>3777083
Ever play Rogue Legacy? It pulls it off well

You can either do a dungeon the old fashioned way, or run a gauntlet. Running a gauntlet pits you against consecutive battles where you rush through an area all at once and is far faster than just going through it normally. If you retreat however, you have to start over from where you began.

A non-linear game with a huge amount of paths and endings. However, several of these paths are statistically impossible (or highly unreasonable) to do because of your poor stats.

Every NG+ though (which you'll be doing at a fast rate), you get a stacking bonus to your experience gains based on how many routes you have done and endings you've seen. Everything is open to you, but is gated behind a combination of your level and personal skill. As the difficulty goes up, so does the scope and total consequences of the routes.

>>3771420
I would break everything that was related to a technical limitation, including combat systems.

I would replace every control scheme that involved unnecessary clicks and buttons.

I would generally speed shit up.

I would leave out all unnecessary time sinks. This includes everything from lore dumps to grinding.

I would probably also drop a shit ton of modern features too. No minimaps, no questmarker bullshit, hell maybe not even a quest log beyond one you can write into yourself.

I would adopt Thief's level design and Dark Souls level progression.
The combat would be like Dark Messiah of Might and Magic or a game that puts an equivalent focus on combat.
I would give it very little but very impactful choices & consequences.


Also no crafting.
Fuck crafting.

>>3771420
Limited enemies and items like in the HOMM series. That would encourage players to optimize their characters and put more thought in strategy.

>>3771441
>if you grinded to much, the end boss become nearly unkillable
I accidentally grinded all the way through 60... it came to a point where ultimecia would leave my party with 1hp, squall and zell would limit break, and quistis would use max elixir. It wasn't really hard, since it could be done without max elixir if i had enough curaga and acess to cerberus(which is a joke to get).
>>3772302
>But bosses didn't scale
they did, but some only up to a certain level... ultimecia, for example, only got up to 65

>>3777375
That's not even an rpg anymore.

I'd have it so there's Zelda 2 style battles where the game drops you into an action sequence where you can kill the enemies or run away. I would also make the combat maps smaller in comparison to the Zelda ones.
Additionally, I'd like the story to be explained with as little dialogue or words as possible.
Furthermore, environmental puzzles sound like a fun idea, so I would do those too.

I would improve ff6

>>3779971
gameplay or story wise? there's a difference

>>3771420

I would never want to design a straight RPG, but I don't mind adding in RPG elements. Like Stalker Shadow of Chernobyl.

Apparently you need rpg mechanics for something to be a rpg. Who knew?

>>3782726
We have decaf coffee and 0% milk. You won't stop us from taking RPG out of RPG

>>3783109
What would the point be though?

>>3783126
To market it to people who believe in "experience is bad" meme

>>3783187
So you didn't really have a point?

>>3783126
'Cause I'm tired of shaming people for bringing up Simulators and Action-Adventure games in RPG topics. Or just confusing it for Role-Playing in general. Let them be right for a change.

>>3783581
Man, I love role playing games. Zelda is muh favorite

Seriously though, it triggers the hell out of me that Nintendo Power called Zelda an RPG.