Skip to content
Moderator: Ranger Team Alpha
Flamekebab wrote:I'd kinda prefer 4 PCs with as many recruits as I wanted. I like being able to do silly things like fielding a small army!
Brother None wrote:I included up to four player-created characters, as it came up in the general thread, but I think you gotta realize that such an option might be very hard to balance, and in my opinion this should be a party-based game primarily.
Temaperacl wrote:In my opinion, the game should be targeted to a squad of 4 (plus recruits), but you shouldn't be required to create that many if you don't want to. I don't think there should be any scaling or balancing done for smaller squads, though - if you have less than a full squad, the game should be harder, potentially drastically so. (Charging into the hideout? There will be the same number of opponents you face. Puzzle designed for 4 Rangers and you have 1? Either pick up some recruits (at least temporarily), avoid if (if you can), or get creative.)
Lexx wrote:Alternative of course should be to select (up to) 4 pre-defined characters from the available ranger pool, in case someone cannot bother with creating their own characters.
Not everyone plays RPG's where ANY of the PC's are necessarily "you". In Baldur's Gate, party members were not NPCs (unless they rebelled). In Pool of Radiance you had NPC's in the party if you wanted ~and could not control them in combat... because they were NPCs.rakenan wrote:Creating a bunch of custom PC's just makes them feel like anonymous stat sheets to me. This is an area where I think Jagged Alliance 2 and the Baldur's Gate series got it perfect - you have one character who is "you," but have very early access to additional recruits to help you out.
Gizmo wrote:How about no cap on recruits, and no minimum party size? (Well besides the one.)
rakenan wrote:Creating a bunch of custom PC's just makes them feel like anonymous stat sheets to me.
I have a mixed view on this. I like full control of party members ~but there is something to be said about powerful (or useful) NPCs that are not disciplined. IMO Party control should extend to military trained NPCs that know how to follow orders in a battle ~yet some NPC recruits might not follow orders very well or at all ~Like dogs and giant lizards, wanna-be commandos and... Consider Sean Bean's role in the film Ronin.Tanglebones wrote:Also, I think it's really important to have full control over all party members in combat. I like the tactical oportunities that presents, and bad party member AI, where they'll burst into a group of enemies while standing right behind you makes me rage.
Tanglebones wrote:The reason I like recruits so much is that they come with an option of having an interesting back story and interactions with my character (from finding out about Viconia's troubles adapting to the surface all the way to questioning Veronica about life in the Brotherhood).
Gizmo wrote:I like full control of party members ~but there is something to be said about powerful (or useful) NPCs that are not disciplined. IMO Party control should extend to military trained NPCs that know how to follow orders in a battle ~yet some NPC recruits might not follow orders very well or at all ~Like dogs and giant lizards, wanna-be commandos and... Consider Sean Bean's role in the film Ronin.
Quarex wrote:I mentioned to Urgrue in a thread about party composition that you can solve the "personalityless created PC" problem by having "variable NPC recruits" in the game--to explain, I mean that if there are 50 recruitable characters in the game, then 10 of them could have personalities that could double as potential PC personalities, and if you decided to give your characters one of their personality sets, then the NPC version would disappear from the game otherwise. Does that make sense? It seems entirely reasonable to me, but might sound crazy to others. And, of course, you do not HAVE to give your pre-made characters a personality at all; you can have four mute protagonists with no recruitable characters if you want to go that route.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests