Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Party-based Turn-based RPGs with mounted combat

Tavernking

Don't believe his lies
Developer
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
1,216
Location
Australia
Has this ever been done before?


And why do we never see this in our RPGs? Is this why nobody takes turn-based RPGs seriously?
 

Ysaye

Arbiter
Joined
May 27, 2018
Messages
771
Location
Australia
Has this ever been done before?


And why do we never see this in our RPGs? Is this why nobody takes turn-based RPGs seriously?

Jap SRPG's qualify for all that… if you consider them RPG's.

:grpg:

Fire Emblem 5 has mounting and dismounting too (You had to dismount inside) where each has it's advantages and disadvantages and a turn loss penalty for switching which made more sense compared to the other FEs and SRPGs. I always thought the mechanics used there could have translated very well into something that could work within the constructs of a turn based SSI style CRPG.

One problem was that (whether turn based or RTWP) there would likely have to be a lot of extra animation created (and hence budget implications), because unlike Fire Emblem where it is a core combat mechanic and only 3-4 classes can do that, if it were d&d you would have to have every class type both mounted and dismounted drawn (if you play strictly to the rules - perhaps you only give magic horses to paladins?).

There are also minor issues about game balance with other classes (particularly I would guess with ranged/mage classes in RTWP) and accountability issues (where does the horse disappear to?). But costs of animation would have been a big one I reckon.
 

JarlFrank

I like Thief THIS much
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
33,052
Location
KA.DINGIR.RA.KI
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
One problem was that (whether turn based or RTWP) there would likely have to be a lot of extra animation created (and hence budget implications), because unlike Fire Emblem where it is a core combat mechanic and only 3-4 classes can do that, if it were d&d you would have to have every class type both mounted and dismounted drawn (if you play strictly to the rules - perhaps you only give magic horses to paladins?).

With 3D models this is not an issue, you need only one animation for mounting.
 

AbounI

Colonist
Patron
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
1,050
That's one thing I felt missing in Age of Decadence - mounted enemies would have added a new dimension to combat. Would have been perfect for fights against the Urdu, getting charged by spear-wielding horsemen for massive damage, or having to deal with mounted archers
Not to mention some bigae in the Arena, that would have be so crazy !
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom