Mechanics/ Systems or character/ story elements you'd like to see in future Fire Emblems?

[Mizerous]

50 minutes ago, Imuabicus der Fertige said:

Clearly Manaketes need to shed skin when in dragonform, otherwise the itch just drives them to insane bouts of destruction.

Class Skill [Wait: When waiting (dex% + lck%) chance to gain a smithing material.]

Why not play that up? A group of fanatics who hate dragons spead rumors about "dragon disease" kinda like how mutants get treated in X-Men.

[Imuabicus der Fertige]

14 hours ago, Mizerous said:

Why not play that up? A group of fanatics who hate dragons spead rumors about "dragon disease" kinda like how mutants get treated in X-Men.

Manakooties. to be clear I ain´t mocking here

 

ngl, I´d prefer to see the formation of the legendary golden ages we never get to see, with dragons alongside humans or vice versa, instead of digging around in ruins

hell, dragons get domesticated by humans via 1x livestock/week and bam, magical golden retriever dragons 

[Samz707]

On 10/5/2023 at 4:42 PM, Mizerous said:

Why not play that up? A group of fanatics who hate dragons spead rumors about "dragon disease" kinda like how mutants get treated in X-Men.

Honestly TBH I've just headcanon'd that "Dragon Degredation" is just a neurological disease but because it's medieval times, people assume it's a dragon thing. (Since Dragons naturally live longer than humans.)

Also my head canon as partly why Nergal is crazy with how long he lived. 

 

[Maronmario]

There’s one I’ve personally would like to see happen is a desert map where the objective is to protect a certain part of the map.

So in this case your party has reached a sacred temple or an Arcadia equivalent, but it’s locked and will take time to open. But bandits and brigands attack you and your goal is to defend the temple from the incoming onslaught. 

Now to disincentivize turtling there’s four things you can do: having there be some villages out of the way you should save, but can’t just throw a flier because of the sheer number of enemies.
Make the location you’re guarding be too big to just have your units surround and weather the storm. 
Killing the boss just ends the map early.
And finally four, is to have several good rewards be lost if the temple takes too much damage. Like at the minimum success gets you the plot important item, but you lose out on a large amount of Gold, strong and rare weapons and equipment like Killer/Silver weapons, Delphi shield and rings. 
 

I’d also wish the games would branch out more on the whole Blue player, Red enemy, Green Ai system. Like imagine if Sacred stones and Echoes had monsters be Purple and are hostile towards everyone. Same with Fates and Anankos’ faction and everything to do with those who Slither in the Dark.
Would significantly enhance the gameplay and story integration, showing players how much of a danger these third party enemies are to everyone instead of just saying they’re dangerous but are just another enemy in a crowd.

Edited October 9, 2023 by Maronmario

[X-Naut]

GBA had a purple faction for 4-player multiplayer. It'd be neat to have a "chaotic neutral" faction and I've thought of how an enemy commander could be characterized as honorable if they dispatched some units to go after the opportunistic bandit intruders mid-battle.

Now for my own point. One thought about Seize maps I've had is to add a "zone of control" where your faction must outnumber the enemy faction within that zone to successfully seize. It doesn't have to be the same size every map; in some cases it can be a box around the point, where in others it's limited to the point. Something to make certain maps more resilient to skip tactics.

I think a similar concept could also make Escape maps more palatable, where the zone is a "safehouse" and all units within that space will auto-escape alongside your lord. Might require culling or routing the enemy in that zone. Lightens the logistics of transporting your entire army from Point A to Point B slightly.

[Jotari]

32 minutes ago, X-Naut said:

Now for my own point. One thought about Seize maps I've had is to add a "zone of control" where your faction must outnumber the enemy faction within that zone to successfully seize. It doesn't have to be the same size every map; in some cases it can be a box around the point, where in others it's limited to the point. Something to make certain maps more resilient to skip tactics.

I think a similar concept could also make Escape maps more palatable, where the zone is a "safehouse" and all units within that space will auto-escape alongside your lord. Might require culling or routing the enemy in that zone. Lightens the logistics of transporting your entire army from Point A to Point B slightly.

I've actually done that for one chapter in my fan game. It's a bridge chapter much like that one that crops up in both Tellius games, and the chapter goal is to have more player units than enemies on the opposite side of the bridge.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

I love repositional movement skills. They just expand your toolset on player phase without being quite as good as a Dance. But I'm tired of them needing to be grinded out and/or taking the slot of something else. It's a brilliant idea that's never been executed well.

I would give every unit exactly one of: Shove/Repo/Swap. It's not taking up a skill slot or anything. Have it be their "Personal Move Action" listed next to their personal skill in the menu, or tie it to their affinity. I'd warn against tying it to their class, since this is an opportunity to differentiate two units that are in the same class. 

[Jotari]

7 hours ago, X-Naut said:

GBA had a purple faction for 4-player multiplayer. It'd be neat to have a "chaotic neutral" faction and I've thought of how an enemy commander could be characterized as honorable if they dispatched some units to go after the opportunistic bandit intruders mid-battle.

Now for my own point. One thought about Seize maps I've had is to add a "zone of control" where your faction must outnumber the enemy faction within that zone to successfully seize. It doesn't have to be the same size every map; in some cases it can be a box around the point, where in others it's limited to the point. Something to make certain maps more resilient to skip tactics.

I think a similar concept could also make Escape maps more palatable, where the zone is a "safehouse" and all units within that space will auto-escape alongside your lord. Might require culling or routing the enemy in that zone. Lightens the logistics of transporting your entire army from Point A to Point B slightly.

Relating to this, I'd like to see seize worked in as a more diverse mechanic in general. As right now it's essentially just a boss kill objective with one extra step. I can think of only two bosses in the series that actively guard a throne, but are willing to step off it. Rummel in Mystery of the Emblem, who who is a Wyvern in a forested area of the game befor eyou have warp staves. It's possibly to get around him and seize, but his range is so big and the terrain so unfriendly you'll stand a high chance of losing someone if you don't kill him. The other is Tashoria from Radiant Dawn, who protects a seize point down a long corridor and charges you form the corridor. These are cool ways of shaking things up. It'd be great is a boss with canto could leave the throne to attack, but only if they have enough canto squares left to return to it. Or a pair of bosses that might take turns guarding the throne if one can deal more damage and the other can reach the throne. It feels less like enemies are guarding this point and more like an excuse to make bosses sitting ducks. Which sure, a stationary boss is fine sometimes, but fought something like five hundred Fire Emblem bosses, some more variety wouldn't hurt.

Edited October 10, 2023 by Jotari

[The Seraph of Tomorrow]

Build an Archetype System:

(Turning Classes into Archetypes)

 

Everything a class offers to a game, archetypes can accomplish without the need for restrictions. FE has been around so long that nearly every class combination that can exist, has existed in a game. So there isn't a reason to deny the player from building their own combinations.

 

1. What is an Archetype

Archetypes identify a theme that a character can fall into and is more flexible than a class. As an archetype is often a title or label applied to a character.

 

A class is a preset that is easily identifiable and unchanging role that a character fills.

 

2. Archetypes System:

Instead of unlocking a class, the archetype system would have characters unlocking titles that grant unique skills to the character depending on the title.

 

Example:

Character A has equipped a Pegasus Mount, Dark Tome (Rank C), and Light Armor. Unlocking the Dark Flyer Archetype title to equip, granting the skill Tempest.

 

Character B has equipped a Pegasus Mount, Bow, and Light Armor. This is not an archetype, so no special skills are granted.

 

As seen in the example, archetypes allow players to build their own units. Though reward building toward an Archetype allowing for tactical freedom in unit creation. (Inspired by 3H's skill growth system.)

 

3. Equipment:

Instead of having classes with preset armor, weapons, mounts, and magic limitations the game would need weapon, armor, and mount slots. Somewhat like 3H's skill rank system where equipping almost any weapon was possible and would come with their normal benefits / penalties if you met the rank requirement.

(Weapon Triangle, Heavy Armor = Magic Weakness, Flier = Bow Weakness, Etc.)

This can be done by restricting the inventory to carrying 2  Weapons, 1 Armor, 1 Mount, and 1 Archetype; then 3 consumable / item slots.

 

Example:

Character A has equipped No Mount, Dark Tome (Rank C), and Light Armor. Unlocking the Dark Bishop Archetype title to equip. Granting the Miasma and Dark Magic Mastery skills.

(In his inventory he has 3 tomes, 2 dark and one fire)

 

Character B has equipped No Mount, Dark Tome (Rank E), and Light Armor. Unlocking the Dark Mage Archetype title to equip. Granting the Dark Mages Wisdom skill.

(In his inventory he has 1 dark tome and 1 sword.)

 

Character C has equipped No Mount, Dark Tome (Rank C), and Heavy Armor. This is not an archetype, so no special skills are granted. Weakness to armor slayer is gained, but the high def / res will make the mage knight a tanky mage.

(In his inventory he has 1 dark tome, and 1 axe)

 

4. Balancing

Naturally freedom allows for versatility and versatility can be powerful in a tactics game.

(3H's failed in this regard when it came to balancing as it made the mistake of allowing characters to carry a weapon for every situation. This made the game easy since one rider could have a slayer weapon for every enemy type.)

So:

- Characters can only carry 2 weapons, or 3 weapons if they are of the same type (Tomes, Axes, Etc.)

- Characters wearing medium armor on a mount reduces Mov by 1, and heavy armor reduces Mov by 2.

- Characters can not equip Archetype exclusive skills unless they have the Archetype equipped.

- Buying items such as mounts, armors, and weapons would have to be unlocked just like in the normal weapon progression system. Though some characters when recruited can start with items that can be unlocked later on, so there are some rare items teased early on that can be transferred to other units.

 

5. Special Archetypes?

You are probably thinking about Hero, Dancer, Shapeshifter units. This is also solvable, in that there can be Archetypes that are character / race exclusive.

 

Characters with x = Name or y = tag only able to select exclusive archetypes.

 

Example:

Kitsune Character A has equipped No Mount, No Weapon, and Light Armor. Unlocking the Kitsune archetype, and gains a skill that allows them to transform in their beast form during combat (no beast stone needed).

 

Kitsune Character B has equipped No Mount, Axe (Rank C), and Medium Armor. Unlocking the Fighter archetype and gains the prowess skills, but does not transform in their beast form during combat.

 

6. Summary

What does Archetypes offer to the game? In short, freedom to build the characters you want. So you don't have to worry if the class you like is in the next FE game, since you can just build it even if the Archetype for it isn't in the game.

 

7. Thoughts

Feel free to voice your own thoughts on this, but I can assure you, (as I know it will come up),this idea will not disrupt the normal FE game balance. As it is modeled after improving the flaws of 3H while expanding the player freedom.

 

I have never like the way class systems impose arbitrary restrictions on the player. I believe games should be expanding possibilities, not restricting them.

Edited October 17, 2023 by The Seraph of Tomorrow

[The Seraph of Tomorrow]

On 9/9/2023 at 3:59 PM, DefyingFates said:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Classes are removed altogether. Instead everyone can equip any weapon type again and there's a new "equipment" slot that can be either a mount or armor. Weapon Ranks work just like in Three Houses, but now there's also a Rank for each type of equipment - increasing this rank is the equivalent of promotions (e.g. a high Rank in Riding increases Mov). 3H made a distinction for magic wielders and I'm not sure how that would transfer over here. Perhaps canon mages would start with a high enough Magic Proficiency to use spells by default but others would need to earn it by building up that proficiency by equipping a "tome" item?

You could balance this by exaggerating the impact of bonus/ negative proficiencies from how they were in Three Houses. For example, if a character has a fear of heights, their Flying Rank would be locked at F (or even "X" to show it's impossible to improve).

  Reveal hidden contents

I actually talked about this idea here too.

The only change I'd make to Engage's system* would be to allow characters to use whatever equipment they're proficient in in any other class, e.g. someone good with swords keeping them as a Berserker. To balance this, the rank of that weapon would be capped at C. This lets each character have a custom version of every class in the game AND lets you "roleplay" better (e.g. you can still keep your Lord's sword on them even if they're in some other class, though you miss out on the good swords).

Also, instead of getting weapon bonuses from Emblems, they could be tied to weapon ranks again, so in addition to the choice Engage already gives you about whether you want a higher Rank in a single weapon or medium Ranks in two, now you'd also be trading high power skills (e.g. Sword Avo +5, Sword Power +5) for a few mid-range ones (e.g. Sword Avo +3, Lance Avo +3).

...and it goes without saying that brawling/ gauntlets would go back to the 3H formula of being pure Str weapons. While this may look silly in practice, I think it'd be cool if horses/ pegasi kicking at an enemy counted as a brawling attack if you were on a mounted class too.

* I'd also like it if the heavy weapons were useful for more than just Engage Attacks too. Maybe give them a defensive perk or enemy-phase brave attacks like Ephraim's Sunlight Bangle from FEH?

Permadeath likely wouldn't work here unless we start getting generic soldiers to fill in the gaps, but I'd like to see something like this at least once. Even Fell Xenologue did this, with Alear and the dragon twins being the only ones who could actually die. If balancing is a concern, maybe anyone who's defeated in battle has a debuff in the next so you're still incentivized to keep everyone alive as much as possible.

 

Your classless idea sounds like the Archetype system I thought of after playing 3H. Nice to see I am not the only one that feels this way, feel free to let me know your thoughts on my version.

--/--

That aside, I liked how in Fates you could recruit (capture) and name generic units for your army. Though there is another solution, a Necromancer hidden class for the MC.

 

Check out my comment on the first page of this post.

In summary, it's a hidden MC only class / archetype that would be unlocked under the condition of losing most of your units. It's a mix of Perma-Death and Non-Perma mechanics. 

 

Alternatively, a simple non-perma penalty like injuries (If used in next battle they get a 25% stat penalty.) could be used.

--/--

As it pertains to a FE plot that allows freedom with a smaller cast of characters. You could have it so the MC (Avatar) leads the story, and when a split happen you basically choose a side... or... for a MC taking a side role:

--/--

Let me pitch an idea to make my point, and you tell me if it sounds better or worse than the FE (self-inserts).

Here is what I think would make for a better Main Character concept and story outline for a self-insert character.

- Instead of being an amnesiac, you as the MC get summoned from another world.

(Overused? Sure, but better than amnesia. It would justify the MCs initial state of disbelief / confusion)

- The MC would be summoned as a result of a prophesy that foretells of a hero with the power to alter the tide of a war that has lasted 2 generations without end.

(The trope would justify why some characters in the setting would (have faith or doubt) you.)

- However, the other kingdom hears about this prophesy and their best warrior unit takes a risk to fight their way into the citadel where the summoning happens. In order to try and stop the ritual, and once they find it is completed to convince you to leave with them instead.

(The MC would not have enough information at the time to know what each side is fighting for yet, so the player gets to decide without bias who to trust.)

- Before you decide your heroic, divine, or dark power reveals itself chaotically which causes the citadel to start crumbling. With the faction you pick being the ones who reaches you first / saves you and escapes.

(Justifying future character conflicts without either side knowing the choice you were going to make since the cutscene would show a character of that faction reaching you first in the chaos.)

- This would begin your story in the war, with you learning about and fighting with the side you initially chose. The other sides characters would be conflicted by the idea you have been brainwashed by lies. Which presents an option half way through to switch sides at a critical choice, or join a third faction in the war that reveals itself once both sides are weakened.

(Allowing you to bring over some faction exclusive characters you bonded with to the side you switch too.)

This offers:

- Player Freedom
- Faction Choice
- Nuanced Plot / Intrigue
- Conflicted Characters

All that would need to happen is to create the reason for the war before the player arrived, the themes of each faction, and the character designs.

[Metal Flash]

8 hours ago, The Seraph of Tomorrow said:

Feel free to voice your own thoughts on this, but I can assure you, (as I know it will come up),this idea will not disrupt the normal FE game balance. As it is modeled after improving the flaws of 3H while expanding the player freedom.

While it sounds like a cool concept, I worry how it would effect unit identity/individuality. I agree FE restricts classes arbitrarily, which is stupid. Letting players really build whatever units they want is a great way to let players craft their own experience. This would also increase replayability of the game. The different types of armor, mount and weapon combinations could also lead to some fun challenge run ideas.

On the flipside, if anyone can be anything, it will make each unit feel less distinct (a problem I had with Three Houses and late game Echoes). Balancing would also be tricky, since the developers can`t know exactly what units players will bring to later chapters.

8 hours ago, The Seraph of Tomorrow said:

Let me pitch an idea to make my point, and you tell me if it sounds better or worse than the FE (self-inserts).

This premise, while far from rare in modern stories, does offer some interesting opportunities. Letting the player switch factions midway through could offer some intense confrontations later in the game. 

I could see a potential problem if the factions were not created equal (like what happened with Fates), but that is just a possibility. 

As for it being better or worse than what FE currently has, that depends on execution. A simple premise executed well tends to be better received than a unique premise handled horribly.

[Jotari]

1 hour ago, Metal Flash said:

While it sounds like a cool concept, I worry how it would effect unit identity/individuality. I agree FE restricts classes arbitrarily, which is stupid. Letting players really build whatever units they want is a great way to let players craft their own experience. This would also increase replayability of the game. The different types of armor, mount and weapon combinations could also lead to some fun challenge run ideas.

On the flipside, if anyone can be anything, it will make each unit feel less distinct (a problem I had with Three Houses and late game Echoes). Balancing would also be tricky, since the developers can`t know exactly what units players will bring to later chapters.

Could be a good mechanic for an avatar character. Despite them being ostensibly being a player created character, they've all been kind of packaged when it comes to class and stats. Kris was probably the best implementation with a lot of control over states and complete choice of class. Unfortunately the idea has degraded since then. Robin and Corridor got assets and flaws, while Robin could be any class via class change while Corrin gets just one side class to choose. And Byleth manages to have less customization than the other units in their game!

Anyway, yeah, if you had complete control of the class, mount etc of an avatar it'd be pretty cool and fit the idea quite a bit better than most of the avatars they've done, which have basically degraded into "bog standard Fire Emblem Lord with a female option."

[Metal Flash]

1 hour ago, Jotari said:

Could be a good mechanic for an avatar character. Despite them being ostensibly being a player created character, they've all been kind of packaged when it comes to class and stats. Kris was probably the best implementation with a lot of control over states and complete choice of class. Unfortunately the idea has degraded since then. Robin and Corridor got assets and flaws, while Robin could be any class via class change while Corrin gets just one side class to choose. And Byleth manages to have less customization than the other units in their game!

Anyway, yeah, if you had complete control of the class, mount etc of an avatar it'd be pretty cool and fit the idea quite a bit better than most of the avatars they've done, which have basically degraded into "bog standard Fire Emblem Lord with a female option."

I didn`t think of that, but that is a good point. If the avatar is meant to be "my unit", then I should be able to decide what kind of unit they are.

[Imuabicus der Fertige]

13 hours ago, The Seraph of Tomorrow said:

FE has been around so long that nearly every class combination that can exist, has existed in a game.

I don´t think so? Like, not even remotely? I swear @Jotari had a topic about class combos we´ve not had yet, but I couldn´t find it on the swift.

SF won´t let me quote but this still from you:

Quote

So there isn't a reason to deny the player from building their own combinations.

Yes, yes there is. When you make a build for a character you first look at what they be good at, what they be bad at and then you decide what you wanna do with it. Fates is an excellent to mediocre example with it´s class dualism in the joining units and the choices of alternate classes afforded to the player.

Sure you could make Nyx a Swordmaster. It´s just not gonna work all that well, unless you throw ressources at her like crazy and even at the best of times you´d have an extremely flimsy levinsword user with some serious accuraccy issues who explodes whenever a ninja looks at her, but yeah SM Nyx is possible with a cost.

13 hours ago, The Seraph of Tomorrow said:

Naturally freedom allows for versatility and versatility can be powerful in a tactics game.

(3H's failed in this regard when it came to balancing as it made the mistake of allowing characters to carry a weapon for every situation. This made the game easy since one rider could have a slayer weapon for every enemy type.)

Weapons have nothing to do with TH class and unit balance, it´s that WLs/Pegs stand far and wide above the rest of the classes in stats and move and on place two we get everything that gets the chance to double attack.

Add that the game has like 3 unique students/house (including the damn lord), the rest are either copy pasted across all 3 houses or only between 2 houses + monastery recruitables are either "I´m you in the future but worse" or Jeritza.

 

Anyway, to be not a total downer, mid map objective changes and more dynamic maps in general, both in total map objective as well as map features. I´m thinking about a Vestaria Saga chapter whose number eludes me rn, but the objective turns from "seize/kill" boss methinks to "fuck off" when enemies catch up and then we throw in Dragon Veins and other shenangians - I think VS chapter 15 has a dragon attack semi randomly because you make noise in it´s territority?

We constantly find old shit in the forests anyway, be it some ancient coins, mass graves, or WW2 bombs some of which could be integrated into FE.  

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

On 10/9/2023 at 10:28 PM, Zapp Branniglenn said:

I love repositional movement skills. They just expand your toolset on player phase without being quite as good as a Dance. But I'm tired of them needing to be grinded out and/or taking the slot of something else. It's a brilliant idea that's never been executed well.

I would give every unit exactly one of: Shove/Repo/Swap. It's not taking up a skill slot or anything. Have it be their "Personal Move Action" listed next to their personal skill in the menu, or tie it to their affinity. I'd warn against tying it to their class, since this is an opportunity to differentiate two units that are in the same class. 

Interesting! I really enjoy the repositionals as well. I'd say, throw in Draw Back as well. Maybe Smite, too, as a niche that one or two "bad" units could have.

2 hours ago, Imuabicus der Fertige said:

WW2 bombs

Reminds me - it's a shame that the Mine was a "one and done" item. It'd be cool to see them brought back, with new effects. Say, an "Ice-Mine", that freezes the target in place. Or a "Magma Mine", that turns the floor into lava when triggered. Make it something the enemies can use too - although, be sure to show them placing the mines. That would reward observant players, without necessarily turning into a rehash of the Tellius bridge maps.

[Jotari]

2 hours ago, Imuabicus der Fertige said:

I don´t think so? Like, not even remotely? I swear @Jotari had a topic about class combos we´ve not had yet, but I couldn´t find it on the swift.

I made two threads on the topic!

And I'll probably make another after the next mainline game is released.

The verdict is that, yeah, there are quite a few classes missing. Out of the 84 possible classes by combining two weapons from the pool of swords, axe, lance, bow, magic, staff and knives, with the four movement types, infantry, armoured, flying and cavalry, they haven't used 38. They've used just over half of all combinations. The most noticable absence, and probably the one people most want, is pairing magic and armour. Course, we don't really need to fill every item. I wouldn't like it if the next game just tossed in a bunch of class combinations in because they haven't been used before. I'd rather they be inspired and be designed for a specific reason other than that it hasn't been done before.

 

 

[Imuabicus der Fertige]

3 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Interesting! I really enjoy the repositionals as well. I'd say, throw in Draw Back as well. Maybe Smite, too, as a niche that one or two "bad" units could have

throw em all in a positional-command menu to differentiate from refresh and rally, make em available for everyone and dependant on body/con-stat

3 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Reminds me - it's a shame that the Mine was a "one and done" item. It'd be cool to see them brought back, with new effects. Say, an "Ice-Mine", that freezes the target in place. Or a "Magma Mine", that turns the floor into lava when triggered. Make it something the enemies can use too - although, be sure to show them placing the mines. That would reward observant players, without necessarily turning into a rehash of the Tellius bridge maps.

I´m more partial to the Fates crate.

Light rune in Blazing Blade - PoR?

[DefyingFates]

23 hours ago, The Seraph of Tomorrow said:

2. Archetypes System:

Instead of unlocking a class, the archetype system would have characters unlocking titles that grant unique skills to the character depending on the title.

 

Example:

Character A has equipped a Pegasus Mount, Dark Tome (Rank C), and Light Armor. Unlocking the Dark Flyer Archetype title to equip, granting the skill Tempest.

 

Character B has equipped a Pegasus Mount, Bow, and Light Armor. This is not an archetype, so no special skills are granted.

 

As seen in the example, archetypes allow players to build their own units. Though reward building toward an Archetype allowing for tactical freedom in unit creation. (Inspired by 3H's skill growth system.)

Ooh, I like this! It offers flexibility but also rewards people who want to stick to defined classes like in "the good old days"!

[Jotari]

4 hours ago, Imuabicus der Fertige said:

throw em all in a positional-command menu to differentiate from refresh and rally, make em available for everyone and dependant on body/con-stat

I´m more partial to the Fates crate.

Light rune in Blazing Blade - PoR?

Obstruct staff from Engage is the same concept, and, imo, is one of the most useful, best designed items in the entire series. The power to just eliminate a square for a turn is so damn useful in so many scenarios without being broken.