Jotari
-
Posts
19,204 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Jotari
-
-
I'm surprised more people aren't considering Izuka. Sure it'd make little sense in the story but...summon spam!
-
Personally I am fine with sword-wielding thieves even if knives are super cool.
But the mage part actually brings up a good question:
Physical classes can appreciate obtaining magic upon promotion because even if their MAG stat is much lower than their STR, magic is a reliable ranged attack, it hits the usually lower RES stat so it balances their lower MAG out, and in the Tellius games (if such a class existed), magic is even effective against certain Laguz without the aid of skills or specific weapons, which could then be used by a strictly physical class. And there's even the possibility of using siege tomes if those classes could ever reach the weapon rank necessary for it.
But magical classes... would they ever want a physical weapon? How are they actually improved by them (other than staffbots who can only attack with weapons, like Mist)? Has anyone ever given non-magical swords to Mage Fighters/Knights in FE4 (other than Azel for inheritance purposes)? Would people ever promote staffbots to Battle Monks/Clerics in FE13 when both Priests/Clerics and Troubadours have a mage-wielding alternative (legit question because I haven't played it)? Is there any way to make weapons useful for mages other than hitting enemy mages (which can be dealt with with a physical unit with good RES like a horsebird anyway)? I love the idea of Mage Fighters/Knights just because of the sheer coolness of it all, but can it actually matter in an efficient or even a casual playthrough?
It's a bit ironic because there are more examples of mages obtaining weapons than physical fighters obtaining magic.
If mages had somewhat decent strength it might make them more useful especially when it comes to dealing with other high res mages. In general I would like to see a closer divide between magic and strength growths as I mention in this thread I made a while back http://serenesforest...showtopic=31744
-
Yeah in a long three tier game that would get pretty overpowered near the end too.
-
I like the idea of automatically negating a counter. Would certainly give more useful opportunities for thieves to actually damage foes since as it is a untrained thief only has the option to attack a foe when the attack would kill them in fear of a strong counter attack.
-
So how do people feel about knives? Are the a waste of a weapon type or are they actually useful? Should they return as separate weapons in future games, and if so what classes should use them and what additional strengths or weaknesses should they have?
-
Maybe Ike just really hated that door.
-
Does the battle of Barhara credits scene like tribute mention all recruited characters who die during the first generation or only the ones who survive up until that point?
-
Let's just hope they give it a half decent marketing scheme so more people can expand their Fire Emblem knowledge beyond what can be seen in Smash Bros.
-
What would be the most talkative Fire Emblem game? Of the ones I've played I'd probably say Radiant Dawn since that's one long ass game with a lot of plot relevant characters in various locations with alterations on subsequent playthoughs. Still though it doesn't have any in depth support convos like the previous games.
-
I had the exact same idea. I think Pegasi Sword, Wyvern Spear and Griffon Axe would be the smartest way to develop it. Pegasi are the only fliers that have really used swords even if it wasn't their primary weapon and even if Wyvern's have been specializing more with axes in recent games they still use lances quite heavily and have been dual wielding both for a long time. To take away axes from Griffons, the one weapon currently associated with them would seem weirder than having Pegasi specialize in swords. I also thought of Griffon's getting Axe + Bows as a promotion item and have implemented it into my ever growing branching class tree that some of you might have seen. In fact I came here trying to get a few ideas for the Mastery Skill of an Axe Bow Griffon unit.
-
So does this game have a lot of text to translated or is it just a really low priority game when it comes to localization?
-
One thing I would advise is besides having this flowchart/branching thing is to have something simple like:
*Myrmidon (Sword)
**Swordmaster (Sword) <-> Assassin (Sword and Knife)
***Trueblade (Sword) <-> Ninja (Sword and Knife)
for your classes. Just something to think about.
Somehow I feel that would end up looking a lot more complicated.
-
Hmm so do you reckon in universe the units are aware of all those stats and statistics that means they'll be killed in one blow?
-
I feel it's important to distinguish between characters liked and characters felt to be well-developed. I like Crono from Chrono Trigger, but wouldn't dare argue he's well-developed; similarly, I don't particularly like Lucca, but would be glad to admit she receives substantially more fleshing-out than Crono does.
Oh I agree entirely I just don't want it to be taken that a character who isn't well developed is an inherently bad character.
-
(I happen to rather like Caellach, for the record, but he's not a great character by and large).
I'd have to disagree with you there. If you liked the character then I see him as a successful character. Characters don't have to have huge back stories, meaningful development or even a lot of depth. As long as they fit well in the story and are well received then they work as characters. Caellach is such a great character because he is so simple in everything he is about which is quite evidently what they were going for and in my opinion worked quite well. I liked him a lot too.
I'm also too lazy to double quote but to say Desmound isn't cruel seems kind of contradictory. I haven't played Fe7 (but I have played 6), but isn't Desmond's entire character based around how he abused and ''tried to kill'' his son for no real reason. I reckon trying to kill your own flesh and blood, and a child is inherently cruel.
-
I think you make a good point here, however I will note that all of your examples are of the "sympathetic villain" variety. They don't actually create moral dilemmas for the protagonists like FE10 does. While we might be somewhat sympathetic towards Zephiel, Nergal, or Lyon, there's little reason to actually agree with them from a moral point of view- making the decisions of the protagonists pretty easy.
That is true the main point I wanted to get across was that the villains have some kind of ideals in mind while the majority of people in the modern world would still disagree with. To a certain extent I would even disagree with you that Fe10 breaks the mold of having clearly defined sides. Miciah is heavily blackmailed into what she does, if she refuses then a lot more people that she feels closer to will die. Sure it is morally traumatic but there is no real choice there. To me the biggest moral ambiguity in Fe10 is whether Ike should have gotten himself involved in the war in the first place instead of trying to press a more peaceful resolution. I'm not forgetting about the killed messenger I'm just saying that starting a war when you know an evil god will wipe out existence if everybody starts fighting you shouldn't be so eager to start a war. But the conversation seems to have moved off our topic onto a somewhat more controversial debate of Fe7 V 9 so I'll leave it at that.
-
Lorenz is too high is my only real complaint.
Lorenz gets to go anywhere he wants because he has an eye patch.
-
I think this is the problem with Fire Emblem- it's very basic as to who are the "good guys" and who are the "bad guys" most of the time with only an exception or two in each game. The series is so set on following the original FE1 formula which leaves the villains either unexplained or just mustache-twirling evil.
I've heard people complain about that aspect of Fire Emblem before and I have to disagree. Since Fire Emblem 4 most of the villains in each game have been very redeemable in their evil. The only really irredeemable bad guy in FE4 is Manfroy, people actually do feel very sympathetic for the likes of Alvis and even Trabant despite him being a complete bastard. A good portion of the bosses in the second half of the game are children of people you killed earlier in the game looking for revenge after you murdered their entire family. Even Julius is possessed to be evil and was described as being very kind before that. It even tries to humanize the likes of Manfroy and the lopt sect at one point by showing a prayer on the wall written by a child raised in a lopt sect. The so called "good guys" of Fe4 where pretty brutal towards any survivors of the lopt empire with plenty of burnings and man hunts that its only a natural reaction for them to want to reclaim their lost empire.
Most of Fe6's cast are just devoted to Zelguis who in turn is just someone who is mad with grief after being unjustly abused and almost killed by his father. The only real monster in Fe6 is Narshen. Murdock, Galle and Brunya are just loyal followers of their king. Idoun is probably one of the most sympathetic antagonistic of the whole series being nothing but a slave without a soul to call her own. Yahn before her makes it very clear that he holds no hatred for humans and believes they are just on two different sides. And that's after the humans wiped out his entire race and blamed all of the worlds misfortune on them. He's even nice enough to tell Roy a story about it.
I haven't played Fe7 but I've heard that Nergal is depicted as a sympathetic villain. Something about his wife being sealed away or something.
Fe8 has Formortiis as the monstrous antagonist but the people he acct through and who are seen as the villains throughout most of the game are depicted as just people who are a victim of unfortunate circumstances, Lyon, Vigarde and to some extent Orson. Though admittedly that game does have quite a few people who are just evil for the fun of it like Valter, Caellach and Riev.
I haven't played Fe9 but from what I hear it has quite a few cases like Fe6 where a lot of villains are just people loyal to their king, though admittedly Ashnard is a much less sympathetic King.
Even going back to the times of NES era games where story was unheard of there's a few redeemable villains like Camus and Michalis.
Being a series of games where you casually slaughter hordes of human enemies there are quite a few random evil for the sake of it bosses but on a whole most Fire Emblem games tend to have their primary and important villains have some form of reasoning behind their actions. The only real "unexplained or just mustache-twirling evil" characters in the series who aren't random chapter bosses tend to sealed evil in a can characters who are rarely explained in any media that uses that trope.
-
I think it could work for your tree if you scrap one of the tiers and instead give most(or even all)classes the possibility to promote into 3 different classes.
Most of the classes do have 3 final promotion options either way so it wouldn't be such a big deal to leave out one class in the promotion tree.
The only classes that this change would affect more drastically are those who don't have a total of 3 possibilities,like the myrmidon who has only 2,or the knight who has 4.
For those that have less than 3 options I would suggest:
-the myrmidon could be able to promote to the ranger class
-the bandit could promote to pirate,Berserker and warrior
-dragon rider could get a new class,I mean pegasi also have 3 class options,so why not dragon riders?Maybe giving them a magic using class too(overlord could easily be changed to a dragon riding class)
-gryphon riders could also get a new class(maybe gryphon scouts or something like this,with bows)
-well the soldier has 3 promotion options,but like already said I think the magic knight could be scrapped.Instead the soldier could get general as a promotion option or you could make sentinel a different class from halberdier,giving them light magic or something.
I do like the idea of giving Griffon Riders bows (and an aerial bow class in general). I also did consider linking the soldier and general class since they do promote that way in Gaiden, but really the actual class tree diagram made it far to awkward.
-
Are you saying the promotion at that weapon level would be optional or automatic?
I'm thinking of Pokemon, where if your Eevee gets enough Happiness, it can evolve into an Espeon or an Umbreon, but if you really want it to be another evolution, say a Vaporeon, you can keep it from evolving into one of those two even after attaining enough Happiness and just use a Water Stone on it whenever you want.
That, I think, would be much more accepted.
Yes the idea was that once you reach level 21 if you have a high weapon rank in something the unit will promote into a different class. Before that though you can use other items or a master crow to promote to one of the other options. It's not just that once you reach an S rank in anima magic he'll promote on the spot.
-
Anyway, my issue is simply that you could get screwed out of a class you want by raising the "wrong" weapon rank, there's simply no way to get past that problem, even (or ESPECIALLY) if that's your intention.
The way it is laid out however makes it so in order to get the class you want with weapon rank you really have to know what your doing and want that particular class. The only one where you might make a mistake would be the mage class, which I am considering changing since people don't seem to be fond of the specializing feature for them.
-
I'm surprised Tiki is so low, she always ends up awesome with little trouble for me.
-
I must say I'm not terribly keen on the "weapon ranks for promotion" (for lack of a better term) thing personally, it's definitely inventive but it just sounds really awkward and I really don't aprreciate consequences for raising certain weapon ranks.
Well I imagine there would be some form of in game tree that would display most of the classes available (keeping some hidden for the fun of it) and in the so far weapon rank promotions that we have here the only one that could be problematic is the sage one. The Black Knight as I said above is made to be impractical to get and will only be obtained by deliberately working towards it. Likewise the Baron to Master Knight promotion will only occur with a high anima magic rank, something the Baron only acquires upon promotion to it meaning if you want to go Baron -> Master Knight you really have to dedicate your to magic right from the promotion. Which leaves only the mage as the likely class where players might level up evenly. I would treat the mage as an example class and make the knowledge of its promotion quite known using supports, base conversations, manuals and in game tutorials to convey the point of branched promotions and how the mage in particular promotes.
-
Looks like my next thread should be How do people feel about Trabant. Or alternatively I could declare this topic to now be named How do people feel about Alvis and Trabant.
Fe10 Balancing attempt! [Subject #3 - Bastian]
in Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn
Posted
I'd love to see Pelleas join in 3-13. Just reached that part and spared him for the first time and I have to say I'm a little disappointed. I was expecting a more uplifting speech about the importance and life and all but instead we get to spare him just because Micaiah say's no and miss some awesome artwork of Ashnard. The logical thing to do with the information they have had hand anyway is to get him to join the battle anyways. I'm sure any Laguz could count as a third party if Pelleas. Plus it would make a whole lot more sense in the eyes of the country if their king died defending their nation rather than getting stabbed by his loyal general for no explained reason (who later takes the throne).