Final Fantasy Zero: Design Diary continued
- Thread starter Mark Causey
- Start date
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
It largely works under it's own system, which is d20-derived (and still comprable). The specific feats mentioned are originally in the "Character Concepts" document (you'll find it in my .sig), but they have already changed from that early format.
Most of the references make the most sense in relation to each other, they're just easier to understand with a d20 background.
AND, I will be trying to pick up Final Fantasy 12 tomorrow after my midnight work shift. Wish me luck!
Most of the references make the most sense in relation to each other, they're just easier to understand with a d20 background.
AND, I will be trying to pick up Final Fantasy 12 tomorrow after my midnight work shift. Wish me luck!
Ok, new questions.
First, a general one about the class formats; while the stat columns, I am assuming, are meant to reflect that stats' current rating, like in standard D20. Is this also true for the "Bonus" column, or are those enhancements meant to be cumulative? For example, does a Whm get a total bonus to WIS of +6 (at 48th level), or +18 (the cumulative enhancement)? I ask because the Crusader table has some of its higher level bonuses actually going down, then up higher again (such as its "armor" bonus). Or, is it dependant upon the type of score the bonus applies to? (IE, attribute enhancements are linear (WIS +6), but other stats are cumulative (Armor +18 ).
Second, is it you're intent that spells cast by high level casters are unavoidable even by other high level (even higher level) characters? For example, assuming even pathetically average ability scores, a spell cast by a 50th level Blm (or Whm) cannot be avoided even with a Resistance roll of 20 (assuming we are ignoring the "automatic" success of a "natural 20") by any of the classes published so far. Crusaders seem to be the only ones capable of avoiding their own magic on a 50% margin; everyone else is doomed to failure.
For instance, a 50th Hume Blm with a 10 (now 16) Int has a Magic score of 30, making for a Magic Class of 43 (10+MAG+INT Mod). However, his evil twin genome only has a RES score of 16, meaning his resistance roll will be made at a D20 +16. At the best of times, he can only muster a RES result of 36, still significantly below his opponenet's 43 MC.
Only the theif has a higher RES than MAG, but even still, its RES is not enough to effectively resist a true spellcaster.
Is this imbalance intentional? Or, do you intend to "fix" it by making more defensive, RES boosting, magic gear available than ofensive, MAGIC boosting, gear?
First, a general one about the class formats; while the stat columns, I am assuming, are meant to reflect that stats' current rating, like in standard D20. Is this also true for the "Bonus" column, or are those enhancements meant to be cumulative? For example, does a Whm get a total bonus to WIS of +6 (at 48th level), or +18 (the cumulative enhancement)? I ask because the Crusader table has some of its higher level bonuses actually going down, then up higher again (such as its "armor" bonus). Or, is it dependant upon the type of score the bonus applies to? (IE, attribute enhancements are linear (WIS +6), but other stats are cumulative (Armor +18 ).
Second, is it you're intent that spells cast by high level casters are unavoidable even by other high level (even higher level) characters? For example, assuming even pathetically average ability scores, a spell cast by a 50th level Blm (or Whm) cannot be avoided even with a Resistance roll of 20 (assuming we are ignoring the "automatic" success of a "natural 20") by any of the classes published so far. Crusaders seem to be the only ones capable of avoiding their own magic on a 50% margin; everyone else is doomed to failure.
For instance, a 50th Hume Blm with a 10 (now 16) Int has a Magic score of 30, making for a Magic Class of 43 (10+MAG+INT Mod). However, his evil twin genome only has a RES score of 16, meaning his resistance roll will be made at a D20 +16. At the best of times, he can only muster a RES result of 36, still significantly below his opponenet's 43 MC.
Only the theif has a higher RES than MAG, but even still, its RES is not enough to effectively resist a true spellcaster.
Is this imbalance intentional? Or, do you intend to "fix" it by making more defensive, RES boosting, magic gear available than ofensive, MAGIC boosting, gear?
Last edited:
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
The "bonus" colum lists the current rating, still. And I must have made a mistake with the Crusader table, because all the classes use the same basic formula of increasing stats/scores.
That "10 + Magic + Attribute Modifier" should probably just read "Magic + Attribute Modifier."
Ok.
Ok, but then won't that imbalance things unduly at the lower-level end of things, with just about every spell being avoided by even lower than average D20 rolls? For example, our struggling 10th level Blm (yeah, I know, not that low level, but bear with me) now has a MAGIC of 6, granting an MC of 6 (remember, he's none too bright for a Blm
), which is resisted by his evil twin Genome Blm-10 who has a RES of 3, meaning he only has to get a 3 on the D20 roll to resist our Hume's spells (DC 6 vs. D20+3). I think that the "10+" formula works best; it just seems that the RES scores for characters don't keep up with their MAG scores, which, depending on the job, is more or less ok, so long as there is even a point of picking up the die. Which classes have the best RES to magic will have to rely upon your game theory and interpretation of the source material, but if there is the chance to resist, mechanically, then there needs to be the possibility for success, especially in those Jobs that you deem to be capable of successfully being able to resist magic. For example, it may be decided that Jobs with low magic use are just incapable of resisting any but the most elementary spells, so some might possess this gradual degeneration of resistance, and have to suffice with other means of survival, like lots of HP or HP recovery methods. This certainly seems to be present in some of the FF incarnations, wherein you just have to have a ready supply of X-Potions available for use. Powerful magic just might not be capable of real resistance; but I think, for the D20 system, such might be better relfected in the results of successful resistance (ie Save for 1/2 rather than the Save to avoid or "negates" of less "powerful" spells), rather than the eventual impossibility of even a partial success, as this seems to be how the (d20) system is "balanced". But, thats just my half-mill on it.
Another aspect for D20 that is different than FFZ is that the spell save is based on the level of the spell, rather than "Caster Level", which given that spells capp at "9th" level, that means the save DCs are much lower than FFZ's potential, which has the corresponding difference in effect of the (essentially) same mechanical ability to resist, as reflected by class/job based save/RES modifiers. A +12 Save bonus means a lot more in D20 than a +12 RES stat because of the lower basis of spell/effect DCs for D20 spells than FFZ. [OTOH, I often find the spell dcs in D&D to be too low for the challenge ratings they should represent]
I guess the solution will have to rely upon your vision as to how able you want characters to be able to resist magic. I like how you've got things set up (caster-level based DCs, single saves, ect), and think the present system you've created will work, just need some minor tweaking to the "hard numbers" for some fine tuning (which is what testing and drafts are for, Neh?)
BTW, so far, FF12 is Kewl.....
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
Upon further (and not drunk) analysis, Cynlas, you've a good point. The RES scores are not quite working as they should.
I think it has to do with how they were derived. I wanted the RES scores to reflect the continuum from high to low saves in d20. Part of the problem is that RES is your ONLY saving throw, though, effectively making all of a black mage's saves fairly low, for instance.
Expect the jobs to get a universal RES bump. It's easy enough to do, but it's definately something I wouldn't have noticed without some help.
Still, you'll find the Thief saving against spells about 1/2 the time, Crusaders (and White Mages) maybe more like 3/4ths....Black mages maybe closer to 1/4....
The RES checks are not entirely off. A lot of the jobs released so far have had pretty low RES scores rather intentionally. Still, most are going to need a better chance than they have.
I think it has to do with how they were derived. I wanted the RES scores to reflect the continuum from high to low saves in d20. Part of the problem is that RES is your ONLY saving throw, though, effectively making all of a black mage's saves fairly low, for instance.
Expect the jobs to get a universal RES bump. It's easy enough to do, but it's definately something I wouldn't have noticed without some help.
Still, you'll find the Thief saving against spells about 1/2 the time, Crusaders (and White Mages) maybe more like 3/4ths....Black mages maybe closer to 1/4....
The RES checks are not entirely off. A lot of the jobs released so far have had pretty low RES scores rather intentionally. Still, most are going to need a better chance than they have.
Glad I could help.
Which is entirely appropriate. Each class should have some level of variance in how it can resist magical effects. Remember though, as I am sure you will, that the WIS based casters (like Whms) will have an inherently higher RES than the job tables will overtly indicate thanks to job-based stat increases. Too bad about those poor black mages though...
Keep up the good work, and we'll even make allowances for the extra time your um, "research" will take in reveiwing the new FF12 material.
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
I'm also economically pinched since my move, so I've been putting in extra hours at the job. Real Life Attacks!
Still, there is steady progress being made. I'm too stubborn to let this project go.
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
Yeah, that's accounted for. What I didn't really account for was the problem of most jobs having effectively "no good saves" or "all poor saves". Thankfully, it's easy enough to mend, and shall appear in Version 1.
