Mechanics that you want

[Momo]

You're going to have to quote the post in which you did this, because you never debunked anything as far as I'm concerned.

edit: lol are you talking about that extremely specific example you gave in chapter 17? that doesn't debunk anything.

Edited October 14, 2011 by Momo

[Othin]

That would entail wasting my time.

That said, no. I was talking about real-world priests and bishops and evidence that they were involved in and associated with fighting in wars. Specifically, the kind of fighting that involves swords.

Edited October 14, 2011 by Othin

[NinjaMonkey]

I feel the need to do what is necessary to improve the quality of a game. In this situation, more complexity helps with that; it often does.

Hopefully, IS disagrees with you...

[Momo]

That would entail wasting my time.

That said, no. I was talking about real-world priests and bishops and evidence that they were involved in and associated with fighting in wars. Specifically, the kind of fighting that involves swords.

Don't give me that "wasting time" bullshit, we're on an internet forum arguing about how anime girls kill things.

Also, wouldn't this mean class changing is more in character than not? I certainly doubt these priests taught the word of god as they were killing people.

[Othin]

Hopefully, IS disagrees with you...

Any particular reason?

Don't give me that "wasting time" bullshit, we're on an internet forum arguing about how anime girls kill things.

Also, wouldn't this mean class changing is more in character than not? I certainly doubt these priests taught the word of god as they were killing people.

You amused me before. You're starting to amuse me again.

Class changing in the sense of promotion is in character. Class changing in the sense of reclassing is not. In FE terms, I would say that these priests promoted to Paladin; the healer kind, that is. They may not have preached on the battlefield, but that is simple because it is a skill that is not particularly compatible with a battlefield no matter what "class" you are. Instead, we must consider other characteristics. In that time, the clergy were educated, unlike most of the population. A more suitable equivalent to a Priest reclassing to, say, Cavalier would be the clergy forgetting how to read. But they did not do so; they kept their skills and surely used them whenever there was an actual opportunity to use them.

Edited October 14, 2011 by Othin

[Momo]

They were not using their priest skills while doing the actual act of killing people though, which is exactly the same as if Lena became a Myrmidon for a chapter.

[dondon151]

You amused me before. You're starting to amuse me again.

I find it more amusing that you go through the trouble of pretending to be nonchalant about an argument that is very clearly falling apart for you.

Gameplay is not always about things making perfect sense. I never thought it was stupid that unpromoted units "forget" how to use weapons when reclassing because being locked to 1 weapon type with no base weapon EXP is a defining characteristic of an unpromoted unit. I think this limitation goes a long way in successfully balancing reclassing because it discourages the reclassing of unpromoted units. It guarantees that a guy who originally knew how to use axes (with a base C or D rank) will not be nearly as proficient in a sword, lance, bow, or tome using class. It's like how units in FFT and its successors are only able to use abilities from a limited number of jobs whereas it would make more sense for them to be able to use everything that they have ever learned.

At the same time, promoted classes sharing weapon proficiency in some weapon types is a decent mechanic that validates reclassing. Most of the benefit from successfully reclassing units comes from manipulating promoted classes.

[BwdYeti]

Then what about every Bishop who starts off promoted and still kills enemies, they're not allowed to kill people either? If it were in their creed to never kill they wouldn't have an offensive ability at all.

Lena eventually coming to terms with what war means and putting her magic aptitude to work protecting others and ending the fighting as soon as possible (and still spending most of her time healing anyway, since low magic rank) makes a lot more sense then 'welp I guess it's sword time as soon as I join'

Right, and in the same way, realistically, you'd never use a crap unit in the hope they they'll eventually get better, so they should just completely throw out growth units as well. Generals don't go into war and choose not to use their strongest units because they'll learn how to fight better. Yet FE isn't realistic.

It is impossible to see the potential for someone to grow, alright then

And if the unit doesn't grow, then they get benched

And if they don't grow and the player keeps using them, that means the general isn't good at their job, which is entirely realistic to happen :T

The rules of the game state that mages can't use swords. Nabarl can't just break the rules like that!

It's only because of a different gameplay system that Navarre can't use swords in the first place

[Othin]

I find it more amusing that you go through the trouble of pretending to be nonchalant about an argument that is very clearly falling apart for you.

Gameplay is not always about things making perfect sense. I never thought it was stupid that unpromoted units "forget" how to use weapons when reclassing because being locked to 1 weapon type with no base weapon EXP is a defining characteristic of an unpromoted unit. I think this limitation goes a long way in successfully balancing reclassing because it discourages the reclassing of unpromoted units. It guarantees that a guy who originally knew how to use axes (with a base C or D rank) will not be nearly as proficient in a sword, lance, bow, or tome using class. It's like how units in FFT and its successors are only able to use abilities from a limited number of jobs whereas it would make more sense for them to be able to use everything that they have ever learned.

At the same time, promoted classes sharing weapon proficiency in some weapon types is a decent mechanic that validates reclassing. Most of the benefit from successfully reclassing units comes from manipulating promoted classes.

I'm so glad for you.

You may not care about when a game makes the characters make substantially less sense, but as I'm sure you're aware, not everyone thinks like you.

Being locked to one weapon type with no base WExp isn't a defining characteristic of all unpromoted units in any existing FE game with the necessary system, with the exception of FE10, where Tier 1 is virtually nonexistent.

You know what would balance reclassing even better? Not having reclassing.

[Aethereal]

The thing is, it does not matter. Gameplay canas is not the same as story Canas, just like everyone else. You don't seen to have a problem with things like Eliwood and Mist pulling horses out of their asses and somehow knowing how to ride them like experts.

Wait, how is that anything like what I said? A character eventually learning something new (All of once in the course of a game, which are all about a year long) over a period of time, and that being represented through a class change makes sense. Armies can also bring horses, and then people can dismount to fight. Not only that, but this is very different to reclassing. I'm not upset with Eliwood eventually picking up a lance, or learning to fight on a horse instead of on his feet. I'd be pretty confused, on the other hand, if he just stopped being able to use swords at all. You could make the argument that fighting on a horse is different, I guess, but in that case, wouldn't you be confused if Hector just stopped being able to use his axe when he promoted, but got swords? I would be very, VERY confused. Hector never really talks about the reasons he's an axe-wielder, or his axe in particular, and if he does it isn't very often. I'd still be confused.

I will also completely agree that assassins should have the ability to steal! Does it make sense that they can no longer do something they once did, because they gained experience in a completely unrelated area? Like, if I could ride a bike, but then suddenly learned how to do calculus, shouldn't I still be able to ride a bike? I like my bike, damnit. IS shouldn't have made assassins that way, but, that's like 2 (3? Does volke lose the ability to steal?) units over the course of 2/3 games. This is 90% of units over the course of 2 games.

Also, I'm not totally interested in other games' mechanics. I think there's a way to 'stretch' reality, particularly in a fantasy RPG, however I don't think that the idea "hey, this guy could train a lot and get stronger than he might really be able to" is nearly as unrealistic as "He likes swords now, so he forgot how to use bows". The fact that FF or whatever does that doesn't really change my stance on the subject, and if I followed FF, I'd say the same thing about their games. Unless there's some particular reason or something.

[dondon151]

You may not care about when a game makes the characters make substantially less sense, but as I'm sure you're aware, not everyone thinks like you.

No, actually, I think that as gamers, we all expect, to a certain degree, for games to not make sense. Some do that more than others. And we expect that the game will sacrifice sensibility for improved gameplay.

Being locked to one weapon type with no base WExp isn't a defining characteristic of all unpromoted units in any existing FE game with the necessary system, with the exception of FE10, where Tier 1 is virtually nonexistent.

But it is a defining characteristic for FE11 and FE12! And even so, your objection is actually entirely incorrect. Take a look at the FE6 class bases page, for instance - all unpromoted classes with the exception of cavaliers are locked to 1 weapon type, and they have a D in that weapon type. Their promoted versions get a +1 to the weapon rank in their primary weapon type. FE5 is an even better example - all unpromoted classes have an E rank in their primary weapon type (save dark and wind users, as the lowest usable weapon rank is C and D, respectively), and most of them can only use 1 weapon type.

You know what would balance reclassing even better? Not having reclassing.

I expected more from you than a childish retort. Even so, I would argue that you are incorrect on this point because with the lack of reclassing, most units in the game are completely denied access to good classes if their base classes are mediocre.

Edited October 14, 2011 by dondon151

[grandjackal]

Am I hallucinating, or am I seeing bi-polar disorder among the fans on FE thinking that FE is either too complicated or not complicated enough? Didn't people bitch about FE11 being too simple?

[Anouleth]

Details, details. Doesn't change the point. The class sets were merged so females wouldn't be at a disadvantage; it should've been kept that way.

I... don't understand. How are females at a disadvantage with unmerged class sets? Surely merging class sets hurts them, since they lack an option that males have. (not that's it's really a terrible thing, since females in FE12 are typically very competitive, and they only really lack Warrior and Berserker post-promotion, which aren't really great classes for them due to lack of Axe Rank.)

In other FE games, if a character can't equip a sword they're holding, it's because they aren't trained in using it. That's clearly not the case for Nabarl.

Nabarl can't equip a sword he's holding because he's a Mage.

The choices you might choose to make as a player are not the same as the "choices" the characters are forced to make. If the characters really can use other weapon types at a given time, they should have weapon levels in those weapon types.

It's like you haven't even played this game. Mages can't use Swords. Full stop. It's a rule that has been around from FE1, and it would make no sense to suddenly change it.

Most magic users aren't skilled sword fighters. Except for the ones in FE4/5/TRS/Berwick, who already will do that.

Well, the issue is more that Mages can't use Swords. You'd have to make a new class for that!

I prefer to play games that have at least some sense to their rules when feasible.

It makes perfect sense that Mages can't use Swords, if you have ever played a Fire Emblem game before and are familiar with the rules of the Fire Emblem universe. It might be arbitrary, but it's internally consistent. And in a way, class change fits into that. You might ask, what's the point of reclassing when you should just be able to pick up another weapon? The problem is that the rules of Fire Emblem prohibit using a weapon from a different class. Thus, the only way to use a different weapon would be to change class.

Finally, something we can agree on.

Sure, but unlike you who would probably want to strip out levelling systems because they don't make sense, like Reclassing, I recognise that the majority of players have some capacity for willing suspension of disbelief.

[eclipse]

Am I hallucinating, or am I seeing bi-polar disorder among the fans on FE thinking that FE is either too complicated or not complicated enough? Didn't people bitch about FE11 being too simple?

You're not hallucinating. I like FE11 because of its relative simplicity (no rescues, skills, or other nonsense like that), and flexibility (reclassing). Iswearit'snotbecauseofGeosphereabuse

[Othin]

No, actually, I think that as gamers, we all expect, to a certain degree, for games to not make sense. Some do that more than others. And we expect that the game will sacrifice sensibility for improved gameplay.

But it is a defining characteristic for FE11 and FE12! And even so, your objection is actually entirely incorrect. Take a look at the FE6 class bases page, for instance - all unpromoted classes with the exception of cavaliers are locked to 1 weapon type, and they have a D in that weapon type. Their promoted versions get a +1 to the weapon rank in their primary weapon type. FE5 is an even better example - all unpromoted classes have an E rank in their primary weapon type (save dark and wind users, as the lowest usable weapon rank is C and D, respectively), and most of them can only use 1 weapon type.

I expected more from you than a childish retort. Even so, I would argue that you are incorrect on this point because with the lack of reclassing, most units in the game are completely denied access to good classes if their base classes are mediocre.

More sensibility can improve the atmosphere of the game, which is just as important as gameplay. Furthermore, as I've noted before, reclassing does not improve gameplay, as it simply adds less meaning to character choices, while the FE games should be focusing on making character choices even more distinct and meaningful. I'm sure I don't need to tell you which games have mastered that.

Any game in which Cavaliers or Mages have multiple weapon types is a game for which my objection is factually correct. I didn't say games where it's true for most classes, but for all classes. I furthermore was not talking about classes, but characters, and within those games, many unpromoted characters start with more than a base weapon rank.

What you call a childish retort is simply a statement of fact. If some classes are overpowered, and characters don't have a way to make up for lacking those classes, then that needs to be fixed; it's not overly difficult. And if still, the game isn't perfectly balanced, good. Perfect balance is not constructive to the creation of a game where distinctions matter.

I... don't understand. How are females at a disadvantage with unmerged class sets? Surely merging class sets hurts them, since they lack an option that males have. (not that's it's really a terrible thing, since females in FE12 are typically very competitive, and they only really lack Warrior and Berserker post-promotion, which aren't really great classes for them due to lack of Axe Rank.)

Nabarl can't equip a sword he's holding because he's a Mage.

It's like you haven't even played this game. Mages can't use Swords. Full stop. It's a rule that has been around from FE1, and it would make no sense to suddenly change it.

Well, the issue is more that Mages can't use Swords. You'd have to make a new class for that!

It makes perfect sense that Mages can't use Swords, if you have ever played a Fire Emblem game before and are familiar with the rules of the Fire Emblem universe. It might be arbitrary, but it's internally consistent. And in a way, class change fits into that. You might ask, what's the point of reclassing when you should just be able to pick up another weapon? The problem is that the rules of Fire Emblem prohibit using a weapon from a different class. Thus, the only way to use a different weapon would be to change class.

Sure, but unlike you who would probably want to strip out levelling systems because they don't make sense, like Reclassing, I recognise that the majority of players have some capacity for willing suspension of disbelief.

The class split, I mean. They're at a disadvantage with merged sets.

And no, it's not fucking arbitrary. Mages can't use swords in other FE games because they don't know how. When a character capable of using swords becomes a mage, or vice versa, in other games, they become a hybrid class, such as Mage Knight, keeping both options.

I play games where characters are constrained by rules of their own abilities and by logical fantasy conditions of the world where they live, not by arbitrary nonsense rules that make the game simply a bunch of numbers rather than the involving, atmospheric world superior games are. If the rules of the game state that mages can't use swords, than Nabarl shouldn't be able to become a mage in the first place, because he is Nabarl; he can use swords. The laws of characterization state that he can use swords whenever he damn well pleases.

Leveling systems are a defining characteristic of RPGs. They're used because they're the most feasible way for a video game to emulate character growth, and they improve gameplay more than enough to be worth it. Reclassing does no such thing; it damages atmosphere only to ruin gameplay.

Edited October 14, 2011 by Othin

[Rewjeo]

More sensibility can improve the atmosphere of the game, which is just as important as gameplay. Furthermore, as I've noted before, reclassing does not improve gameplay, as it simply adds less meaning to character choices, while the FE games should be focusing on making character choices even more distinct and meaningful. I'm sure I don't need to tell you which games have mastered that.

Right, because as you so clearly showed before every potential mage in FE11 is identical. Maybe you missed this part, but people have different levels, bases, growths, and join times. Reclass allows me to play with a team drastically different from any I've used before- and I can do it starting from Chapter 4 (FE11) or Chapter 1 (FE12) instead of having to wait three quarters of the game for a unique set of units to show up.

And no, it's not fucking arbitrary. Mages can't use swords in other FE games because they don't know how. When a character capable of using swords becomes a mage, or vice versa, in other games, they become a hybrid class, such as Mage Knight, keeping both options.

Funny thing is, if cavalier Navarre gets attacked by a zerker with A axes and you had him equipped with a lance and he has a sword in his inventory, he'll use the lance. But that's illogical. That's getting rid of like 35 HIT or something.

I play games where characters are constrained by rules of their own abilities and by logical fantasy conditions of the world where they live, not by arbitrary nonsense rules that make the game simply a bunch of numbers rather than the involving, atmospheric world superior games are. If the rules of the game state that mages can't use swords, than Nabarl shouldn't be able to become a mage in the first place, because he is Nabarl; he can use swords. The laws of characterization state that he can use swords whenever he damn well pleases.

Oh, so some mages only using magic is not a fantasy condition, it's just arbitrary? But other mages using magic IS a fantasy condition, not arbitrary?

Leveling systems are a defining characteristic of RPGs. They're used because they're the most feasible way for a video game to emulate character growth, and they improve gameplay more than enough to be worth it. Reclassing does no such thing; it damages atmosphere only to ruin gameplay.

Not really. M&B uses it to some extent, but not entirely, and a lot of people want it scrapped altogether in M&B2. They just want the character to constantly grow as they use whatever abilities, like how the weapon skill system works now.

Totally, giving me options just RUINS games. That's why FF is my favorite series- nothing like monotony!

[Thor Odinson]

(not that's it's really a terrible thing, since females in FE12 are typically very competitive, and they only really lack Warrior and Berserker post-promotion, which aren't really great classes for them due to lack of Axe Rank.)

Minerva says hi.

Anyway, I agree with Yeti in that Reclass should be a secondplaythrough+ thing. Sure, storylinewise it may not make the most of sense, but fuck, it's a fun mechanic that many of us enjoy. I don't think I'd replay the FEDSes if it didn't have reclass, tbh. That way, it allows the integrity of the storyline (then again, FE11, what story) to be preserved on the first playthrough, but allows us to go all out with mechanics on subsequent plays. Oh, and let the chicks have set B too. Stupid lazy IS, if they lack designers for female set B they can call me up or something, I need a job. :P

[CrashGordon94]

If we have Reclass, it should be available on the first playthrough, adding significant gameplay things on the 2nd playtrhough onwards really, REALLY sucks.

[BrightBow]

Looking back at this now I wonder why all those unique mechanics from Thracia got lost after the game.

I mean all units in Thracia 776 also had: Skills, PCCs, Personal Weapons, Supports, Movement Stars, Leadership stars, Special Classes.

This is all stuff that's completely independent from a units class. (Except special Classes obviously)

A lot of units where pretty much defined by these factors. Tina, Fin, Olwen, anyone?

But then we got the handheld games and characters became nothing but classes and supports which require you to cuff people together for half the game before it has any notable effect and became a self-serving task anyway thanks to the support conversations. And when the console games brought some of those elements temporarily back, they screwed them mostly up.

And with the Reclass system even classes became finally obsolete along with loosing their color pallets. So all they have now for themselves is a hair color. Unless you Reclass to Paladin or Dragonknight who look excactly the same. And of course it just so happens that high-move units are rarely considered low tier. So half your army will probably look like FE7 Marcus of all people. I recently played the Final Fantasy III DS-remake where you can switch classes at will and at least they bothered to give everyone an unique design for each class on top of having them still looking like themselves.

Anyway, that's definitely not the direction I want the series to develop. If they add any more "Gameplay" like this on the cost of story, characters and atmosphere and I think we might just as well stick with chess.

Edited October 14, 2011 by BrightBow

[dondon151]

More sensibility can improve the atmosphere of the game, which is just as important as gameplay. Furthermore, as I've noted before, reclassing does not improve gameplay, as it simply adds less meaning to character choices, while the FE games should be focusing on making character choices even more distinct and meaningful. I'm sure I don't need to tell you which games have mastered that.

There is no way that reclassing does not improve gameplay. Reclassing gives the player more usable options. More usable options equates to better gameplay.

Any game in which Cavaliers or Mages have multiple weapon types is a game for which my objection is factually correct. I didn't say games where it's true for most classes, but for all classes. I furthermore was not talking about classes, but characters, and within those games, many unpromoted characters start with more than a base weapon rank.

You are nitpicking to the extent that you are now completely missing my point; I have a strong feeling that you are doing so just so you can justify yourself being correct. Furthermore, virtually every unpromoted character (except for like, Cord) in the DS FE games has a base weapon rank in their initial class. That gives the player a strong incentive to keep that character in his base class.

What you call a childish retort is simply a statement of fact. If some classes are overpowered, and characters don't have a way to make up for lacking those classes, then that needs to be fixed; it's not overly difficult. And if still, the game isn't perfectly balanced, good. Perfect balance is not constructive to the creation of a game where distinctions matter.

But distinctions still matter, even with reclassing. Athena is not going to be nearly as good of a pegasus knight as Caeda. Gordin is not nearly as good of a cavalier as Abel. Draug is not nearly as good of a fighter as Barst. And so on. The player definitely has the capability to manipulate these characters, but that already exists in every other FE game.

I play games where characters are constrained by rules of their own abilities and by logical fantasy conditions of the world where they live, not by arbitrary nonsense rules that make the game simply a bunch of numbers rather than the involving, atmospheric world superior games are. If the rules of the game state that mages can't use swords, than Nabarl shouldn't be able to become a mage in the first place, because he is Nabarl; he can use swords. The laws of characterization state that he can use swords whenever he damn well pleases.

Well, isn't that a damn shame.

[BrightBow]

Well, isn't that a damn shame.

I would say yes. And these distinctions are nothing but a 1-2 points difference these days anyway. To me this takes a lot from what the series means to me if everything is exchangeable and meaningless.

Edited October 14, 2011 by BrightBow

[dondon151]

I would say yes. And these distinctions are nothing but a 1-2 points difference these days anyway. To me this takes a lot from what the series means to me if everything is exchangeable and meaningless.

1-2 points difference in most stats comprises the difference between xHKOing, doubling, getting xHKO'd, etc.

Differences in base weapon rank amount to a lot as well, as they can range from as little as a 3 atk difference (which is pretty big) to guaranteed OHKOs.

[Thor Odinson]

If we have Reclass, it should be available on the first playthrough, adding significant gameplay things on the 2nd playtrhough onwards really, REALLY sucks.

No it doesn't. Hand your cart to someone to play the first run if you're that annoyed about it. It gives incentive for a game to be replayed. And it's a nice midground between "reclass is awesome yay!" and "no we hate reclass >|". I don't see the problem with unlocking gameplay. Hell, if playing FE7 10 times will unlock capture, I'd do it in a heartbeat. But as it stands, it doesn't. So I'm not gonna play FE7 10 times.

Though, reclass is completely optional. I don't get why there is a shitstorm about it, really. A game is supposed to be fun, and if you don't find the fun in reclassing, don't use it. It's not like the game forces you to. I don't think I even used reclass on my first run of FE11 anyway, and it wasn't until my second run that I started using them. But since the game gave reclass to us, I personally don't find a reason for myself not to use it, but I can see why some people may not like it. Now, if IS made reclass not an option (like, IDK, you must have a certain setup of classes for this map, which would be totally stupid), I'd oppose it, but it's just a fun gameplay mechanic that people enjoy having. Why must there be a shitstorm over it?

[Anouleth]

There is no way that reclassing does not improve gameplay. Reclassing gives the player more usable options. More usable options equates to better gameplay.

I don't think that's necessarily true. For instance, I wouldn't say that adding Warp staves really improves FE11 because it completely trivialises the game. Difficulty, challenge, and strategy are rendered moot by Warp staves.

And making games more complex doesn't necessarily make them better, either. Fire Emblem is already an extremely complex game, and I don't think that more options are really needed in it.

[Parrhesia]

oh my christ people

If you don't like reclass, don't use it. It's not as if, in a story sense, classes even EXIST.

I'm sticking to my 'actually related classes' theory. But seriously, this argument is getting ridiculous when there's a very simple solution.

I mean, fuck, it isn't as if Myrmidon Lena will actually ACCOMPLISH anything, ever.