- Joined
- May 29, 2010
- Messages
- 36,692
I don't see how, considering combat is an abstraction of a fight. There's parrying, blocking and such.
Failing because the RNG says you did, especially if you were playing well, is bad.
-
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.
Codex Interview RPG Codex Interview: Seven Dragon Saga - A Return To Golden Boxes
- Thread starter Zed
- Start date
Stainless Veteran
Arcane
________
Oh well, I think I derailed this thread enough. As for Seven Dragon Saga right now I'm in "wait and see" mode. Not the biggest fan of pre-generated party plus 2 NPC, but if combat, setting, story and dialogues would be good then they'll outweigh my dislike. Does anyone know what those people mentioned in interview were doing in all that years since SSI demise? If kickstarter showed us something is that even talented devs could get really out of touch both with gaming industry and reality when they aren't consistently working on games.
They continued playing pen and paper and developed (and played with) their own pen and paper intellectual property - Seven Dragon Saga.
I've got a good vibe from TSI because they're using their own IP, and because they've developed it over many years, unlike some of these other kickstarters.
Last edited:
Stainless Veteran
Arcane
Err. Yeah, I've read the interview too. I meant what were they doing professionally, as a job. If playing tabletop games would have been the sole prerequisite for making a great RPG we would have drown in them by now.
I couldn't resist. 
But seriously, I'm pretty sure that they kept up with their respective professions (programming, game design, art, etc), that was the impression I was left with after watching the Matt Chat interview from a few weeks back.
I can't fault you if you're not liking what they've shared in this interview and/or so far, but as far as them being out of touch being a concern, I think it hardly matters. Making games is an iterative process, I don't think any dev could create a game from scratch and do a great job on their first attempt (PoE for example). I think the important thing is that they have some prior experience.
But seriously, I'm pretty sure that they kept up with their respective professions (programming, game design, art, etc), that was the impression I was left with after watching the Matt Chat interview from a few weeks back.
I can't fault you if you're not liking what they've shared in this interview and/or so far, but as far as them being out of touch being a concern, I think it hardly matters. Making games is an iterative process, I don't think any dev could create a game from scratch and do a great job on their first attempt (PoE for example). I think the important thing is that they have some prior experience.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2011
- Messages
- 99,592
They've been playing RPGs, that much is certain. Which is good. But working on them, not so much. According to Mobygames, David Shelley more-or-less dropped out of the industry after SSI. Ditto Paul Murray. Keith Brors, OTOH, moved on to Matrix Games, which makes sense for an SSI veteran.
bussinrounds
Augur
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2011
- Messages
- 483
Them's the rolls. What's the fucking problem here ?
- Joined
- May 29, 2010
- Messages
- 36,692
You can make a game with randomized results that isn't extremely swingy. JES is making one right now.
Oh my, don't get me started on analyzing why DnD is inherently broken. When I start with that, it never ends. Also had enough fights with blind fanboys claiming that the system is not broken, when it just objectively is. I don't mind people liking DnD despite knowing and accepting the flaws (we all have our guilty pleasures, right?).
For slightly less thread derailing, I'll just give you one example:
Vancian magic system, which I would find relatively stupid even if correctly implemented, is implemented pretty bad in D&D. It is supposed to cost mages time to prepare spells. So spells are really more rituals than anything else, prepared and then let loose at the correct point. But in D&D, it always takes exactly one full rest to prepare stuff. With sorcerers, blessed souls, warlocks, etc. (all the inherent spellcasters) I can understand that they are exhausted and need to rest. But mages? What do they do in the rest time? Do they get any sleep when preparing? Do mages not need to sleep? Or is preparing spells that easy? If it is that easy, why do they need to rest 8 hours and not just half an hour and could do it any time, using just 30 minutes of resting? Why can I not choose to take less time and prepare less spells? With a first level mage, why the heck does he need all that time to prepare a single colour spray? It really seems like 1st level is supposed to display children.
Also, why can one only prepare X 0 level, Y 1. level, Z 2. level, W 3. level spells, etc.? Why not a simple contingent of spell levels players can use freely? Why not always the same spell contigent (or only slightly growing), while levelling up unlocks to use more potent spells?
Questions, questions, questions, none of which can be answered really well, all of which proving that the whole implementation in DnD is just not believable at all. The sole reason this immersion breaking nonsense exists is balancing. Imagine a level 10 caster having a spell contingent and using it completely for fireballs. How many would that be? 15? More? And when knowing that fire resistant foes come up next day, just switch to 15 ice cones. There you go, doom machine, much earlier than mages normally become that strong. The sole reasons for all the arbitrary restrictions.
The whole magic system is so inherently flawed that it needs such artificial restrictions to be sustainable. When you have at least some experience in game design, you smell when something was done purely out of balancing reasons. And when something is done purely out of balancing reasons, the system in question has a severe design flaw, and should be redone.
In Shadowrun, each caster can theoretically learn & cast any spell in existence (not all of them, you still have to select some). And it works like a charm. Why? Because a lowly street shaman trying to cast something as powerful as a Power Word Kill would most likely never make the spell casting check and then die from not being able to stand the backlash from casting (no matter if successful or not). A powerful and experienced mage on the other hand might attempt to cast it as it is likely enough that he both succeeds in casting and survives the backlash.
Two very easy and intuitive dice rolls is all that is needed to make a working and believable magic system that is unlimited in what you can do with it (it is really easy to come up with new spells, should the need arise) and scales well for any power level of mages (you can also select how powerful your spell shall be, making the casting harder). Perfect, especially in comparison to the DnD nonsense.
4th edition DnD improved the casting a lot by introducing unlimited, per encounter and per day spells. Unfortunately, it used that system for every single class, so every class in 4th is basically a caster with different spell descriptions, making every class essentially the same. Way to ruin a good idea.
PM me if you want more of that, I won't continue another DnD discussion derailing this thread even more
Last edited:
That was more or less the answer I was hoping to hear!
Dorateen
Arcane
Some of the most memorable battles in the Gold Box series were desperate slogs, against overwhelming forces. With half the party down and incapacitated, then suddenly, the enemy's morale breaks and last few surviving foes turn tail and flee, or outright surrender. Haven't seen something like that in a long while.
Some of the most vivid memories of epic battles I have, are from playing Curse of the Azure Bonds on the C-64.
The party down and dead, only the ranger left alive, with 2 hp and some god that is trying to emerge from the
dead, in the form a giant slime, the next swing decides the game... the god-to-be missed, the ranger hit.
Otherwise I wouldn't have finished the game, because the last save...
Or the party down luck, bandaged, bleeding, wounded, only the mage left, pretty beaten up too,
suddenly two dozen enemies vanish, surrendering, I think I was looking at the screen in wonder,
wondering what happened and why I was still alive, for five minutes.
The party down and dead, only the ranger left alive, with 2 hp and some god that is trying to emerge from the
dead, in the form a giant slime, the next swing decides the game... the god-to-be missed, the ranger hit.
Otherwise I wouldn't have finished the game, because the last save...
Or the party down luck, bandaged, bleeding, wounded, only the mage left, pretty beaten up too,
suddenly two dozen enemies vanish, surrendering, I think I was looking at the screen in wonder,
wondering what happened and why I was still alive, for five minutes.
Starting at "mid-level" rather than as a ludicrously weak pussy who becomes a god forty-eight hours later is actually incline.
It's the GURPS way (and the BRP way), as opposed to the D&D way. D&D is the World of Warcraft of tabletop RPGs.
It's the GURPS way (and the BRP way), as opposed to the D&D way. D&D is the World of Warcraft of tabletop RPGs.
Rohan
Educated
It sounds great. I am curious as to how they will implement elevation into the system while going fully isometric. Can somebody point me to a game that has managed to do this? AFAIK none of the IE games made use of a character's position to determine damage or give bonuses in any way. I don't know if the maps even had 'elevation' in a sense that it was a variable that could have an effect on gameplay systems at all.
I guess when taking something like DA:O as an example, the maps definitely had elevated areas...so comparing the height difference between units and calculating any kind of bonus/penalty based on that would be trivial. But is their engine going to be fully 3D? Got a lot of questions on what their approach will be like, I guess it will be revealed soon enough.
I guess when taking something like DA:O as an example, the maps definitely had elevated areas...so comparing the height difference between units and calculating any kind of bonus/penalty based on that would be trivial. But is their engine going to be fully 3D? Got a lot of questions on what their approach will be like, I guess it will be revealed soon enough.
Jagged Alliance 2?
Final Fantasy Tactics?
Rohan
Educated
Yes of course final fantasy tactics, but they've specifically stated in this interview that they didn't want a breaking of view between exploration and combat, so they have decided to go fully isometric.
Would you consider FFT style maps suitable for exploration? I guess it could work, but it might be a little odd.
One of the best things about the first person exploration in the Gold Box games was the tension, there's no seeing into the distance, you do not know what is around the corner. It's really tense, and I loved that. You feel scared of the dungeons. It's pretty integral to their appeal imo.
To me, isometric + exploration = infinity engine or perhaps Ultima or Diablo, but in the end it's the same question; none of these games had elevation factored into combat AFAIK.
Would you consider FFT style maps suitable for exploration? I guess it could work, but it might be a little odd.
One of the best things about the first person exploration in the Gold Box games was the tension, there's no seeing into the distance, you do not know what is around the corner. It's really tense, and I loved that. You feel scared of the dungeons. It's pretty integral to their appeal imo.
To me, isometric + exploration = infinity engine or perhaps Ultima or Diablo, but in the end it's the same question; none of these games had elevation factored into combat AFAIK.
KickAss
Augur
Good interview, and they say exactly what i want to hear..
Did they give details about the system they invented?
Did they give details about the system they invented?
Good interview. Since they are going crowd-funding after all, it is probably time to dust off my credit card. I wonder how high a funding goal they will set, and how much is it realistic for them to get. Gold Box nostalgia is not as prevalent as that of Fallout / IE games.
tuluse
Arcane
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2008
- Messages
- 11,400
Rohan
Educated
Hmm ok I guess I wasn't clear enough in my question so let me change it.
Can anyone tell me of a game that provided the following
* free roaming exploration
* no change of view mode / camera angle between exploration and combat
* combat which made use of height variations for advantages/penalties
To illustrate my point further: FFT did not have free roaming exploration, it lacked this mode and only had an overworld map plus combat.
XCOM and JA also didn't have free roaming exploration, they're mainly about tactical combat.
TSI have stated that they're going to go fully isometric so as to have no drastic change of camera between exploration and combat. So I'm just curious as to how they will achieve this and what their maps would look like. As I said, I'm still not aware of a game that provided the above three points. Hmm well, I'm aware of one actually, but it is not party based.
Can anyone tell me of a game that provided the following
* free roaming exploration
* no change of view mode / camera angle between exploration and combat
* combat which made use of height variations for advantages/penalties
To illustrate my point further: FFT did not have free roaming exploration, it lacked this mode and only had an overworld map plus combat.
XCOM and JA also didn't have free roaming exploration, they're mainly about tactical combat.
TSI have stated that they're going to go fully isometric so as to have no drastic change of camera between exploration and combat. So I'm just curious as to how they will achieve this and what their maps would look like. As I said, I'm still not aware of a game that provided the above three points. Hmm well, I'm aware of one actually, but it is not party based.
Dude, you want to know what it will look like to have exploration and combat on the same map. Several of the games mentioned combine both elements. If you want to see a game that looks exactly like Seven Dragon Saga in every way, you'll have to wait for the game. JA2 already shows you what it can look like to walk around a map out of combat and then go into combat on the same map when there is combat. Imagine that JA2 was just one big sector. That's what it might look like.
As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.