Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Whether they raise a protective shield around your party, or give them superhuman strength, buffs are present in almost every RPG. In most games, we see the Shell or Protect variants, which reduce incoming damage and are usually essential for (what seems like) every boss fight. You just have your healer (or whoever can cast the spells) plop them on at the start of the fight and recast them when they run out. No drawbacks, other than the short (usually) amount of time it takes to cast the buffs on everyone. Even better, the buffer often also has variants of the spells (protectga, shellga) that cast it on all allies to reduce the time even more.

 

The result of this is that the standard strategy for most players will involve maintaining the protective buffs, and as a developer, you have to keep that in mind; however, the developer would often just make enemies more powerful to counteract the lowered difficulty of using shell or protect. After this happens, you end up with a narrowed strategy that basically forces players to have to use the buffs in every single fight, which severely harms the game design in terms of flexibility and diversity. It could ruin the balance... it makes things bland.

 

Speaking of balance, this applies to offensive buffs as well. You have the usual Bravery and Faith buffs, which raise someone's attack or magic respectively. If they are overly effective, you'll also be using them every fight to finish them faster. It doubles your damage and lasts fifteen turns, right? Sweet, you'll chop them up real good.

Sometimes, If they aren't that effective, they become rather useless and neglected. Why burn your turn (that rhymes) casting Bravery, which only increases your attack by 1.3x and only lasts three turns, when you can just attack the enemy and finish them off next turn? Decision-making is a very important lesson in video games. Should I slip two attacks in, or wait to hit a stronger one later? 

Then comes more balance issues. You have multiple attack-boosting buffs that can be cast on the same character? They stack? So their original strength value starts to increase exponentially, and eventually they start hitting for 20 times more damage than they did without them.

 

Instead of making buffs as just a cheap way to tweak strategy by having them necessary for a character to perform well, which essentially ends up merging buffs with characters and assumptions (an issue caused by many MMOs where you just stack on the buffs and attack away), how do you guys spice up the way buffs are handled? Maybe they can result as a bonus of pulling off combos, or something. I'm just kind of tired of the standard buff at the start and strategy comes after "strategy" because, well, if every single strategy has to involve the buffs, why do you even need the buffs at all? Why can't more thoughtful strategy mechanics be implemented?

 

What do you guys think?

 

TL;DR: Traditional buffs are generally a false sense of "strategy". Let's hear some ideas as to how buffs can be made more strategic and less bland.

 

As a side note... how long do you guys like to make buffs last?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are several things: The easiest one is to make some enemies destroy Shell or Protect variants, perhaps with a percentage chance based on level of the magic spell, parameters of the enemy etc. Makes it so always having buffs is not always the best strategy.

 

Another is to make the buff elemental, so it'll only defend the character if you choose the right buff for the right enemy.

 

Yet another is downsides to using them, like how Reflect can also reflect healing magic/items you use on your allies. Team this up with powerful zombie enemies who you can't directly cast healing magic on, to give players who are smart enough to think of it a nice strategy to use. Raising one parameter at the cost of another works too (higher defense but lower speed, HP loss per turn for attack buffs, etc.)

 

You could also make the spells cost a ridiculous amount to cast, so you'll run out of MP if you use them every battle.

 

 

Personally I always make Haste and to a lesser degree Slow spells a priority, but I tend not to bother with Shell/Protect/Reflect variants. Healing in the menu after every few battles usually is enough.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your kinda right about the buffs and debuffs system, most of the games I play often uses the boring strategy where you cast buffs early then cast debuffs on enemies then fire away with attack and magical spells. (Yes I am looking at you Persona 3 and 4 buffs and debuffs)

 

But since I only used RPG Maker VX ace for only a few months I have little to no knowledge when making a rather "balanced" buff and debuffing system. Well I had a game (Which is a learning stage for me) that I am making that makes the buff and debuff skills fused with the your so normal damaging spells like for example:

Vital Shot = Deals damage and has a 8% chance to inflict AGI Down to a single target

Angelic Blessing = Heals a single ally and has a 30% chance to increase the targets DEF

Quadra Shot = Deals damage(4hits) and has a 2% chance to lower the targets DEF

 

I really like adding buffs and debuffs to skills so you could cast them whether you like it or not xD (And also same for the enemy skills)

 

And about the buffs duration, it depends on how much it helps the player like

If the buff increases the DEF by 50% it is rather wise to set a moderate duration like 5 to 8 turns

but if the buff only increases the DEF by let`s say 10% only, its good to make the duration longer.

In other words for me, the higher the amount or helpfulness of a certain buff the lower the duration

Edited by Kotori-chan
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest. I don't really like RMVXA default buffs system. I would like to use states. They allow me to remove by restriction, by damage, and even resistance. I'm free to edit how buffs are going. Let say, the buff is very strong. It raises 140% attack stat. But it will be removed once you get stunned. And the skill which give buff also had cooldown. How about stacking buff? Yes, I have stacking states script, so that is not problem.
 

The result of this is that the standard strategy for most players will involve maintaining the protective buffs, and as a developer, you have to keep that in mind; however, the developer would often just make enemies more powerful to counteract the lowered difficulty of using shell or protect. After this happens, you end up with a narrowed strategy that basically forces players to have to use the buffs in every single fight

I'm not. I treat buffs as bonuses. Yeah, really bonuses. I usually do balance the game by regular stats with no buff. Of course, I will make it so hard. But I need to make sure I could pass even I don't use any buffs. Beside, buffs itself can be canceled by many way as I mentioned before. I use states.

 

And yes, I'm with Shi-an. Defending only for certain element. Give them great resistance againts one type of element. But also give weakness to other element(s). This is why buffs/debuffs should be applied by states. Not the default buffs system.

 

Edit :
Ah, also don't forget to put an effort of using buff itself. In my game, everything is cost TP. And area buffs cost TP more. You need to charge your TP to use area buffs. The thing you need to consider is, if you wait to much, it's possible to enemy to kill you first. So, choose wisely

 

Edited by TheoAllen
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mhmmm, buffs and debuffs is very limited of creativity because they are given a fixed rate in the VXA version.

That's why I use states too, because you can make a lot of opportunities than what the regular buffs and debuffs can.

It's all about creativity though. what you make will make it fun or not.

 

I can understand the Shell and Protect being tedious because we all played games where we meet that kind of cliché.

But that doesn't mean you can't change it. You can add a bunch of new things in your project to add more variety when fighting.

Suppose if you had a "ribbon" on every party member, you think you are safe from status ailments right? 

By adding a skill that disables status immunity you can make it useless and the character would have to subject to using a remedy or Esuna (lol FF terms).

or add a vulnerability such as when you are stunned, you take 50% damage more. Or a weakness ailment, dulling your attack and magic att.

 

Those are what I think of but with these things, you can add something more than just a player "spamming" attacks.

 

Edit: One thing I like to do to people is to keep them guessing what's going to happen.  ^_^

Edited by LadyMinerva
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yeah, speaking of state chances... do you guys prefer consistency or luck?
For example...

 

Vital Shot = Deals damage and has a 8% chance to inflict AGI Down to a single target

Angelic Blessing = Heals a single ally and has a 30% chance to increase the targets DEF

Quadra Shot = Deals damage(4hits) and has a 2% chance to lower the targets DEF

 

These are good examples of those skills that have really low chances. So maybe it's a 8% chance to lower agility by 20 or something... but it would generally be the same effect as an 80% chance to lower agility by 2, right? Maybe with some balance tweaking to make it seem a little more effective. 

 

Edit: Also yeah, I actually forgot about VX ACE's Buffs system, I was indeed mostly referring to states.

Edited by Anderson88

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends on your game mechanic itself. If you're speaking about the default system, which consist too many luck involved (evade, miss, and critical), so it's also applied to buff and debuff. Why? If you're unlucky, you need to think another strategy. However, you shouldn't make your game really depends on luck. Just make it "there is a chance to fail".

 

It different matter if your game has no luck involved. Such as strategy, actor hit is depends on timed hit button, or similar.

Edited by TheoAllen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with Theo, I would prefer using states over the default buffs. Shi-an has some good ideas too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Luck's a funny thing (if you mean the term in stats). because it can even make a 100% chance of an ailment fail lol.

So for me its kind of in between but more of consistency, I just don't put luck into a heavy factor because of its ability to affect debuff and state rates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking about the buffs and debuffs, you might like to see what are your actors and enemies' potentials. Why? It'll be explained below.
 
Anyway, when you've decided to make some buffs and debuffs,

  • Use state instead of buffs feature from the tools you use. In this case, and AFAIK, VX Ace has Buffs feature with fixed amount and irremovable. In VX, there is no Buffs feature thus it's clean from this point. And, as far as I use RPG Maker as my tools of the trade to build a game mechanic, fixed buffs are nasty and game-breaking; Buffs and debuffs are temporary, and can be annihilated by certain means (knocked down, stunned, expired, or finished battle)
    Also, IMO the buffs that permanent are called Perk. I've noted it in my mind :lol:
  • Some buffs/debuffs are effective against SOME of the targets. Keep in mind that there are some buffs and debuffs that only works to certain targets (why bother to give an actor who wields ranged weapon a melee damage booster or debuff an enemy who is resist against most of debuffs?). That way, players will concern more to another way of engaging a battle that has different battle pattern than the usual he/she uses in most of encounters.
  • Make them unique, and apply some rules on them. In Warcraft III (yes, that good ol' strategy game), there are some buffs and debuffs that doesn's stack with other, and sometimes one overrides the others. Also in some games (that I forgot their titles), some buffs or debuffs will react each other, creating new effect even will annihilate BOTH of them. Why? It's for balance's sake.
    What will it be if you command an actor to cast Protect buff to ally who has been Protect-ed? Apply the rules and make it balance so the buff mechanics will be more interesting.
  • Make them more worthy than just a bread-and-butter attack/spell. Buffs and debuffs are exist to make life easier, right? So if you decided to make buffs/debuffs, make them worthy either in short-term or long-term.
    Also, would it be a blast if there are some enemies that can be finished only by applying certain debuff in first place, and certain situation that needs some buffs to be applied on allies to prevent imminent death? That's what I meant, make them worthy enough to be used, buffs/debuffs that worth a turn to be spend and gives an easier battle to your party.

 

Aside of that, I have some rules to be applied for each buffs/debuffs that synergixed with points above, i.e.:

  • Even in the slightest boost or smallest amount of debuff, make it worthy enough to be cast either by making it has low MP cost, low spell cooldown or treated as Instant-Cast (that means you can do another action after casting that spell)
  • If the buff/debuff has low degree of effect, make it stackable. That way the player can gain more advantage by giving the same buff/debuff over and over. This applied in passive-type buff/debuff in system I developed, and this is the rule.
  • Greater effect has its greater effects (and drawbacks as well). Like Mana Barrier which capable to diminish up to half of damage taken but consume MP in the process, Metabolic Boost which boosts allies' attack damage but only in brief time, or perhaps weak Poison effect that stackable.
  • Make certain buffs/debuffs alter the performance of the inflicted ones, such as the attack damage type changed when applied with Flame Blessing buff, or make a chance to paralyze enemy when attacking by applying Shock buff, or change the effect of spells when the caster has certain Fortify Spell buff.

 

After all, by maximising the potent of buffs and debuffs and treat it not as a simple boost, you'll find the mechanism of buffs and debuffs are... fascinating.

 

My 50 cents. :lol:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, for the whole "static rate" for De/Buffs, I was going to say that you can edit the multiplier in the script like the following:

 

 

 

def param_buff_rate(param_id)
    level = @buffs[param_id]
    return 2.00 if level == 4
    return 1.75 if level == 3
    return 1.50 if level == 2
    return 1.25 if level == 1
    return 1.00 if level == 0
    return 0.875 if level == -1
    return 0.75 if level == -2
    return 0.675 if level == -3
    return 0.50 if level == -4
  end 

 

 

 

I was considering making De/Buffs an actual thing in my battle system (but at an uncommon rate, ie. 25% Chance from "May Buff" Skills, or "Charge" State required for some enemies), but seeing that the Player can't react to an already applied Buff (on the enemy), then they're kind of forced to lame it out (if they've been taking a lot of damage beforehand). However, I would honestly argue that the "Charge" State should be sufficient enough to be fair, and the fact that a "Stun" state taking away a Buff stacked 4 times is rather unfair - for both sides.

 

But as with everything in Theory and Development, it varies with each project and how they use the mechanics. For example. in my Project, the De/Buffs are an uncommon (but not rare) thing. For the Player, they're gained (or inflicted) through certain skills that explicitly say "May Buff" and/or "May Debuff", it's never guaranteed. The Damage Formula in my game immediately scales one way or another, depending on if the User's Offense is higher than the Target's Defense. For example, I'm dealing 100 Damage with 100 User Offense and 100 Target Defense; Then I get a Buff that gives +25% Offense, then the damage should increase to 150, but instead it's actually 181.25. It may not seem like much, but the scaling grows fast when you stack: +2 is 283.33 Damage, +3 is 406.25 Damage, and +4 is 550 Damage.

 

It's one thing to make VX Ace's Buffs intuitive, and then it's another to make it useful. But I think we all already know this stuff, just know how worthy the bonus is in comparison to the turn used up for it (Nobody's going to care for a Buff that gives +5% Attack for 5 turns). You can try implementing De/Buffs into your Damage Formula with Skills that increase in damage based on the User's/Target's De/Buffs, or changing the User's Debuffs into Buffs (and Vice Versa).

 

I would say to make this more proactive for strategy, is instead of upping the enemies' parameters, just give certain enemies skills that bypass effects like Wall/Barrier/Shell/Reflect. Have the Enemies barrage the Player, attacking their status rather than their health (which is another thing I'm nitpicky about). Going to digress here:

 

But the only reason I'll use stuff like Wall/Barrier/Shell is because of the lack of manual dexterity allowed from Player Input. I would love to allow the Player to gain a guaranteed dodge, an absolute block, and/or a successful parry by entering correct inputs at the right time. Assuming this is an animated battle that has enemies on the left and actors on the right, let's say an Enemy does an attack that has an animation that implies an Overhead attack, the Player can press the Right Arrow Key (Back direction) at the right time to perform an absolute block. This should simply override the damage and reduce it to 0, there should never be a penalty for doing it incorrectly, if you do the wrong input, the game simply continues. You take damage (reduced if you're already guarding) or dodge (or Enemy misses) the attack as the game initially intended. Another is let's say a Boss does a sweeping attack that hits everyone, the Player can press the Up Arrow Key to make the entire Party jump at the right time to avoid this attack, but if the Player presses the Down Arrow Key instead, then the Party crouches, but still takes damage. Finally, if the Player is feeling ballsy, they can press the Left Arrow Key (Forward direction) at a very specific time of the Enemy's attack to Parry it (think 3rd Strike Parry and not Dark Souls parry). I would love to implement this into my system, but I still need to do more work myself. For some reason I have to give the entire input commands, but I would also use the Down+Right Arrow Key for a mix of Crouch and Block that is a Crouch-Block, that can Guard just like the Right Arrow Key, but are able to Guard against "Sweep" attacks, but not "Overhead" attacks. Fight sticks yo

 

Tl;dr - I believe the concept of Buffs, Debuffs, and States being used for strategical purposes is because of the lack of manual dexterity in turn based battles. Think Galv's Pirate Rush skill link button inputs - but for defensive use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is a great read as someone new to RPG Maker. I had figured out that the buffs were of a predetermined value, but I hadn't gotten to the point where I was designing a caster yet, so knowing to design buffs as states ahead of time will be very useful.

 

A lot of what I wanted to say has been said, but the balance struggles mentioned in the OP are easily solved by what the replies have said. I think a very underrated form of balancing is mana costs. The characters tend to gain mana every level, but that doesn't mean that their spells have to become more efficient. The stronger the spell, the more it costs (this is common) but I wouldn't be worried about making a powerful spell be less efficient than a less powerful version. Just as an example - if the first healing spell available to the players in game heals for 100 health, for 50 mana, the efficiency that has been set is 2 health per mana (this is also for simple math to make my point). You have your base there, and from there you can balance. If it is a self-targeting heal, make it more powerful, but alter the efficiency to your liking. If it is from a true "healing" class, the efficiency would change there, too. Healing your entire party would probably be significantly less mana efficient (for the healer) in exchange for keeping the rest of the party alive. That way, not only did they spend x amount of time to use a party heal, but they also have to spend another turn to regain some mana from a potion or other source. You can also do this with any spells that give mana. Make the spell grant a target mana, but have the mana cost be more than what it grants so that it doesn't go infinite on the caster themselves.

 

As I mentioned earlier, most of the other points I would have made have been made already, so I won't reiterate them. But I would like to mention something else that I didn't see anyone else mention. The OP mentions boss fights as a common time when the buff>damage (however many times) strategy gets repeated over and over, and while this is true, it also depends on the boss, and you can design bosses in a way where this isn't very strong (as has been mentioned). However, there is another instance where this becomes useful - and in my opinion, it's a reason enough to keep them present in the game - and that is when the player's party is underleveled. This is most common in games that use a random-encounters type of combat system, where the player can sort of "grind" his way up in exp. If I want to wander the forest and fight imps for an hour, I wouldn't necessarily have to use buffs, because I'm out leveling the monsters in the region. Conversely, what if I completely missed an entire sidequest, or chain of sidequests, and therefore my party is substantially behind in level/strength than it was at the time the developer was playtesting? I might need those powerful buffs to help makeup for a mistake, and then it might hit me as the player "oh, that battle was a lot tougher than the rest, maybe I overlooked something". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've clearly established that buffs are a low-cost way of empowering the party.

That being said, there is a case to be made for buffs to be balanced in an interesting way.

*For the record, I refer to buffs not solely as buffs in the RMVXA sense, but in skills or states that boost potency in battle in general.

 

We can see that buffs are not only convenient, but very much spammable.

What usually happens is that these buffs come at the cost of one turn, a turn that can otherwise be used to attack. Somehow, as mentioned, buffs must pay off for the entire duration they are active. They may not be necessary, but they can be spammed at will.

 

Now, in order to counteract the overuse of buffs, we consider the following solutions:

1. Enemies using Buffs too

This ends up in a vicious circle of both parties buffing themselves to absurd levels of attributes. While it certainly can be done after a set number of turns, it's a redundant and pointless strategy, especially considering that both parties will aim to balance offense and buffs ad infinitum.

 

2. Debuffs

Again, falling back on the buff/debuff equalization, this can also go on ad infinitum. It certainly can be done, but at some point we have to consider if the debuff is worth the one turn casting it. Which in turn leads to someone buffing or debuffing themselves again.

 

3. Having a side effect.

This presents a more interesting element to the gameplay - making buffs situational rather than necessary under all circumstances.

A Rage buff, for instance, increases your attack at the expense of defence. In some cases, this may be a good idea - the additional attack power is well worth taking an additional 20% damage from slimes.

What if, however, we present a slightly less obvious scenario - a direct buff with no side-effects whatsoever - say, a Buffer state that increases DEF by 40%? Sounds good, but now we consider that some enemies have armor piercing skills that, depending on your definition of the game, either negate DEF or deal more damage the higher the player's DEF. This forces players to rethink their strategy of mindless buffing just for the sake of higher statistics.

 

Sumnus brought up a very valid point regarding MP, although this isn't necessarily limited to MP. Truth is, there are many variables to play around with regards to buffs, and many strategies designed to counter them - using LUK, AGI, HP, etc. Anything goes; and it's up to you to establish a decent equilibrium between buffs and regular attack/skill combos.

 

I won't lie. Buffs are an integral part of my gameplay - some of my characters' playstyles revolve around passive buffs or stacking buffs to deal a monstrous amount of damage, but after a significant delay. It all falls back on the concept of opportunity cost - is it worth stacking the buffs, or using the buffs in the first place? At the end of the day, the onus is on the game developer to find a nice balance, and to justify that the buffs aren't useless at any point in the game.

 

P.S. for the matter, please stop with the "enemy bosses are immune to debuffs" thing. You can have them affected by debuffs, and if you want to retain a certain degree of challenge, either:

  1. Don't make the debuffs broken to normal monsters in the first place, as a cheap way of clearing them off; or
  2. Have the debuffs deal reduced or modified effects to bosses.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We've clearly established that buffs are a low-cost way of empowering the party.

That being said, there is a case to be made for buffs to be balanced in an interesting way.

*For the record, I refer to buffs not solely as buffs in the RMVXA sense, but in skills or states that boost potency in battle in general.

 

We can see that buffs are not only convenient, but very much spammable.

What usually happens is that these buffs come at the cost of one turn, a turn that can otherwise be used to attack. Somehow, as mentioned, buffs must pay off for the entire duration they are active. They may not be necessary, but they can be spammed at will.

 

Now, in order to counteract the overuse of buffs, we consider the following solutions:

1. Enemies using Buffs too

This ends up in a vicious circle of both parties buffing themselves to absurd levels of attributes. While it certainly can be done after a set number of turns, it's a redundant and pointless strategy, especially considering that both parties will aim to balance offense and buffs ad infinitum.

 

2. Debuffs

Again, falling back on the buff/debuff equalization, this can also go on ad infinitum. It certainly can be done, but at some point we have to consider if the debuff is worth the one turn casting it. Which in turn leads to someone buffing or debuffing themselves again.

 

3. Having a side effect.

This presents a more interesting element to the gameplay - making buffs situational rather than necessary under all circumstances.

A Rage buff, for instance, increases your attack at the expense of defence. In some cases, this may be a good idea - the additional attack power is well worth taking an additional 20% damage from slimes.

What if, however, we present a slightly less obvious scenario - a direct buff with no side-effects whatsoever - say, a Buffer state that increases DEF by 40%? Sounds good, but now we consider that some enemies have armor piercing skills that, depending on your definition of the game, either negate DEF or deal more damage the higher the player's DEF. This forces players to rethink their strategy of mindless buffing just for the sake of higher statistics.

 

Sumnus brought up a very valid point regarding MP, although this isn't necessarily limited to MP. Truth is, there are many variables to play around with regards to buffs, and many strategies designed to counter them - using LUK, AGI, HP, etc. Anything goes; and it's up to you to establish a decent equilibrium between buffs and regular attack/skill combos.

 

I won't lie. Buffs are an integral part of my gameplay - some of my characters' playstyles revolve around passive buffs or stacking buffs to deal a monstrous amount of damage, but after a significant delay. It all falls back on the concept of opportunity cost - is it worth stacking the buffs, or using the buffs in the first place? At the end of the day, the onus is on the game developer to find a nice balance, and to justify that the buffs aren't useless at any point in the game.

 

P.S. for the matter, please stop with the "enemy bosses are immune to debuffs" thing. You can have them affected by debuffs, and if you want to retain a certain degree of challenge, either:

  1. Don't make the debuffs broken to normal monsters in the first place, as a cheap way of clearing them off; or
  2. Have the debuffs deal reduced or modified effects to bosses.

 

 

Can't disagree with Spectre :lol:

 

Also with  "enemy bosses are immune to debuffs" thing, this is a crucial and notable thing developer shall concern. More over, the balance of game will be broken if developer considers the buffs/debuffs are just a 'cheese over a cheesecake' and it'll be a pain in the arse when bosses are immune even by the simplest debuff the party has.

I mean, c'mon, the Overlord also can be affected by a simple Weakness to Fire 10% debuff :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Richter_h, its not bad to have bosses that are immune to debuffs but make at least one debuff effective against them. Yeah, I make my bosses immune to instant death and doom states or whatsoever. But I think it would be fun to make a boss that is immune to all status changes and damage except for a instant death skill, that way players will really think why the boss cant be damaged? Should they use one particular skill, buff, debuff?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my game, I'm having statistics effect the damage of certain skills. So say a ninja would have an assassinate skill that 's damage is increased by evasion. Changing to an alternate class would increase evasion but at the cost of say defence, offence, ect, so a buff in this case will raise the damage out put with out drawing back defence, but at the cost of the buff lasting a shorter duration then say a job change. Also, why not have it so certain buffs will de buff other stats just to balance things out and keep things strategically interesting? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Richter_h, its not bad to have bosses that are immune to debuffs but make at least one debuff effective against them. Yeah, I make my bosses immune to instant death and doom states or whatsoever. But I think it would be fun to make a boss that is immune to all status changes and damage except for a instant death skill, that way players will really think why the boss cant be damaged? Should they use one particular skill, buff, debuff?

I would actually avoid using such a gimmicky playstyle in my RPG. It doesn't have strategic value so much as it is trial and error, and you pretty much guarantee they die in one turn if people read game guides. Not that worth it - nor hinging on a single debuff as the only way to damage a boss.

 

 

In my game, I'm having statistics effect the damage of certain skills. So say a ninja would have an assassinate skill that 's damage is increased by evasion. Changing to an alternate class would increase evasion but at the cost of say defence, offence, ect, so a buff in this case will raise the damage out put with out drawing back defence, but at the cost of the buff lasting a shorter duration then say a job change. Also, why not have it so certain buffs will de buff other stats just to balance things out and keep things strategically interesting? 

It's always worth considering, but in some cases absolutely unnecessary.

For instance, consider the following:

A Berserker class has a skill that reflects all damage taken to it, and one that deals more damage the lower its health gets.

Now, its Rage buff boosts ATK at the expense of DEF, which has excellent synergy with the other two.

 

Consider a Marksman class, with already pathetic levels of defence. Using the same Rage buff makes no sense strategically or in game design, as it forces you to compensate for the lost DEF or face dying way more easily.

You can, of course, create equippable items or optional skills to do this, but at the end of the day, it should be the player's jurisdiction rather than inbuilt into the characters' skillsets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm actually ok with simple buff systems as long as the effects are not overpowered

 

For example I consider mighty guard in ff to be overpowered because for the low entry requirements you gain access to several buffs.

 

Buffs should have a noticeable effect to be worth using but balanced in terms of maintenance cost and bonuses granted

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
Top ArrowTop Arrow Highlighted