As a huge Fire Emblem fan, I've always wondered this myself. Bump for curiosity.

4th Edition plays like an expanded Fire Emblem.

Swords - Spears - Axes.

Are ther any mroe rules that matter?

Honestly? DnD 3.5, with the casters nerfed to hell and back. It would be almost perfect.

>>10628521
flyers

>>10628525
NO.

>>10628520

Yeah, I was playing with my group today, and though this would really work, maybe with a few modifications though.

FIRE EMBLEM!

Hell yeah, i'd totally play that. Recruit is the best class.

>>10628521
Yeah, you have the magic triangle

Dark - Anima - Light - Dark

Bows, crossbows and ballistae maim flyers

Light kills monsters.

>>10628525
Not really. I'm thinking each player has like 10-15 characters with individual stats and classes, abilities and equipment, and fights against another opponent with the same.

I don't really think any existing edition of D&D would make for a true Fire Emblem game. I'm not talking Dungeons and Emblems here, I'm talking a FIRE EMBLEM game.

It basically already IS a tabletop game. Seriously, just pay attention to the game; the math isn't that complicated and can be easily deduced from the gameplay. All you have to do is write it down for reference (or find someone who already has online; I'm sure it's already been done). Then make some models or whatever and have at it.

I just wish Fire Emblem had more class freedom. I'd make a whole army of heros and sages.

>>10628666

DnD 4th edition does KINDA work.

It has a focus on miniatures and a similar weakness/damage type system to fire emblem. Undead are weak against Radiant damage and all that.

I could seriously see a FE type DND 4e game where PC's control a group of miniatures (3-4 mostly) instead of just individual parties.

>>10628711
Actually, you're right about that. I'm just wondering how you would do stats and such. Prearranged characters wouldn't work on the table like they do in the game, so I'm kind of at a loss with that.

So, how would you work out starting stats, growth rates, weapon levels, HP level, and classes.

>>10628751
The main thing that would be the same about that two is that even if an enemy has a 1% chance to critical hit someone you don't need to be critical hit? It'll happen. Always.

>>10628784

... what?

>>10628784
Pretty much.

14% chance to hit and kill main character.
It hits. Every damn time, it hits.

>>10628817
He's saying that critical hits will happen when you really don't want them too.

>>10628835

Ah yes.

Well at least in 4e critical hit just means max damage instead of multiplied by 2 or 3.

you can just go to rolling pure d % and use the whole calculator thing. also the differences between versions of fire emblem exist wold you take mastery skills for 9 and 10?

C'mon guys. I'd actually like to make a full write up of this and play it with a few friends, but I need help with the point system.

>>10628824
>>10628835
Yeah, what these two guys said. I screwed up my sentence and must be tired.

>>10628877
>Help me make shit up so I can have fun, oh yeah you can do the work too!

No.

>>10628896
I suck at number crunching. If I did it, it'd end up as an unbalanced mess.

feto.feplanet.com

I think they have an explanation somewhere on there of how FE's mechanics work.

>>10628932
Are those..
>Sees the image name
Haha, I thought so. That's pretty creative.

>>10628475
Already exists. I literally just googled it.

First result.

Don't be a lazy faggot.

http://fed20.wikidot.com/system:list-all-pages

>>10628877
>>10628930

I might be wrong about this, but I think the stats are actually determined randomly. Each character has a "growth rate" specific to each stat (30%, 40%, etc), and when they gain a level each stat is rolled to see if they gained a point in that stat.

This would be easy enough to do with a d10. Each character can have a growth rate for each stat, numbered from 1-10; when you level up, roll 1d10 for each stat. Rolling under the score yields a point.

You don't need identical mechanics to the FE series.

4E has approximations that work better for it.

just play 4th ed with only solo monsters on a team against you, tada

>>10628994
That's a pretty good idea actually.

That other FE tabletop uses d20. I feel the need to ask, WHY? The person who made that should have clearly seen that d% would have been so very much better.

>>10629069
Probably just because of how ubiquitous d20 is among the mainstream.

>>10629096
Unfortunately too.

The more I've seen it, the more I feel it's limiting.

>>10629069
Well, because the mechanical difference between say, a 93% success rate and a 95% success rate isn't really very large at all, so there's not much reason to have that granularity.

In making a new edition of one game, I went from "percentile rolls that are all over the damn place" to "percentile rolls that only exist in steps of 5" - (d20s in disguise!) just because if there's a difference between two stats, it should actually be measurably, statistically significant, and feel different to the players.

>>10629125
But I just think that would leave some people feeling as if they've been cheated, after all, that 4% could have made a difference.

I don't know, D20 seems to be simpler, D% sticks to the source material more, and might allow one to use the actual game mechanics (http://www.gamefaqs.com/gba/921183-fire-emblem-the-sacred-stones/faqs/37253) in the game.

Can't quite decide which is better, really.

>>10628994
it's exactly like that. a 'good' growth rate is 40-ish, anything higher is awesome, anything in 30's in low. anything 20's is piss poor.
always loved FE, and to be honest, with how simple everything is, it's be pretty easy to run it in boardgame form. there's hardly ever more than 4 stats total involved in any given combat action, i could totally see a recreation of the games in boardwargame form.

;levelling/stat growth would have to be determined weirdly however, as they wouldn't really fit a 'static stats' wargame like 40K.

hardcore FE guy here, played all from 4 on up. god thse are great game (barring 8. sometimes 10)

I don't think it would be all that fulfilling as-is, unless you get to control a squad (just like the games!). If you want to have people each control one character, you'd need to come up with a lot of new stuff for characters to do.

>Yeah, you have the magic triangle
Magic triangle in practice is pointless because magic users have so much RES and spellbooks have such low Might that fights take forever. Nice if you want some reliable experience, though. It's a bit sad though.

>>10629197
Probably. Feel free to go for it.

(I just moved from d100 to d20 just because I noticed people going "I'll have a LITTLE BIT of evasion" and due to the way the - completely irrelevant to this conversation - system was constructed, that didn't actually accomplish anything at all. So I set out to make the smallest amount of effort towards anything statistically significant.)

>>10629205
Somebody already suggested that you roll 1d10 and then if you get a lower number than your growth rate, you gain a point in that stat.

But now, how to determine growth rates. Roll d% and then round up?

>>10628946
I like the idea- but some of the things that they kept over from the games just does not work very well in a table top game.

For instance, having to calculate experienced gain, and keep track of weapon durability for EVERY ATTACK is just obscene.

Instead, I'd probably use a "group XP" with possibly some kill bonuses thrown in for certain foes, and then roll a % breakage on any attack roll of 1 (on a d20).

>>10629267
growth rates - point value of unit or whatever determines how many 5%'s you get to put into a stat grpwth. every character has equal points to distribute (UNLIKE THE GAMES) no stat cna have more than a 55 or 60 growth rate

>>10629315
Consider bonus XP for completing special objectives and beating up guys fast. Also reloading for stats.

The idea I had for base stats is [2d10+12], then divide the total between the 6 stats.

Not sure about HP, growth rate is open to debate.

>>10629315
Weapon durability isn't really that hard to keep track of to be honest, although xp could be a problem.

Need a simpler way of working out XP.

>>10629395
hp growth should be in the 30's at absolutely lowest, average is 50's, high is 60's.

basically - do ti the way the games do it - all growth rates are in percentages of 5. you can check the actual stats if you want,
http://www.serenesforest.net/

look at growth rates for units in the game, preferably for the good units that are actually worth anything (not jeigan's, etc) like, the trends for the stat spreads for growth among all 3 cavaliers in FE7 or whatever.

base whatever you're going to do off of that.

>>10629419

xp - assuming equal levels - 10 xp per combat, 30 per kill.plus or minus 1 and 5 respectively per level of difference.

>>10629487
So how about D%-30 with a lower floor of 15, then round up to the nearest 5?

>>10629497
Sounds good.

>>10629557
hp shouldnt have the -30, otherwise, youre good.

>>10629557
nonono way too low
a growth in the 30's is always a weak stat for a character
remember lyn? she has a str growth of 35.

remember her being level 15 and having 6 str?
or other such RNG rape?

also - using name just because of avoiding confusion

>>10629609
So what, -20? -15?

>>10629618
why is there a minus there at all? just range growths from 30 to 60. 45-55 for a units primary stats, 30-40 for secondary. 20 for shit stats like res on a fighter.

hp should be 30ish for fragile mages 50ish for any melee fighter, 60-70's for axe fighters and knights.

>>10629662
best and simplest way to handle these stats is to directly do what the games do. anything else is over complicating a simple and already functional system

>>10629690
>I'm retarded

No, no, no, no, NO!

YOU DO NOT MAKE EVERYTHING RANDOM IN A TABLETOP GAME!

>>10629690
Yes but you need a way of working them out.

Perhaps have negatives/positives applied to certain stats, such as -25 defense on a mage, or +10 str on a fighter?

>>10629719
oh? the pure random works pretty damned well, and simply in the games themselves. randomized stats on level, except the growth rates will usually keep you correctly where you should be.

rng love and rape do happen, but they happen in anything. why so vehemently not liking it?

>>10629747
what are you talking about? the stat growth percentages give you your inclination for stats. why have a direct modifier on top of that?

>>10629719
This is stat generation. And it's fire emblem. Half the game is up to the random number gods, and it should stay that way, because that way it is most fun.

>>10629792
>because that way it is most fun.

So it's totally okay for one guy's PC to be entirely useless because he's unlucky?

Fuck you, leave tabletop gaming forever.

Honestly, I don't see the need to completely emulate the game.

Just get some simplifications going.

>>10629784
Nono, we're working out the stat growth. If we're going to have all the characters as full units and not just mooks like the in-game enemies, they need to have differing growth rates. Not all the cavaliers you obtained in the game had the same growth rates.

>>10629823
uhhh every tabletop ever does that. what, you never rolled like 6's 8's for a stat in dnd? and your dm always makes you keep it? thats harsh.

>>10629823
>Has never played a Fire Emblem game.

That argument applies to fire emblem.

>>10629865
>I don't know about pointbuy

>>10629843
hence every pc has points to distribute to create the stat growths for their guys. everyone has equal growth totals, just diff allocation. then roll for stats.

>>10629497
>>10629419
Guys, my problem isn't how difficult it is to do something, it's how often its done. In a FE game your faction will be about ~10 characters. Having to adjust character experience points a hundred times in a single encounter is just plain annoying.

>>10629869
Fire Emblem has prepromotes in the games that don't have impossible-to-RNG-rape characters. Players are neither.

>>10629881
Pointbuy in fire emblem. I considered it, but randomly generated stats work better in this specific game.

Anyone got a picture of an ArmorKnight?

I've been wanting to make my next character one, but google only gives me things like pic related, who doesn't look as armored as he should be.

>FE's Durability rules in 4e

FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF

>>10629923
pointbuy the stat growth rates. then roll. sounds good enough to me. gives you control and randomizing.

>>10629935
I don't see the point in randomizing, but then again, I don't see the point in trying to emulate the game as closely as possible.

I'd rather just have the Feel instead of the crunch.

>>10629881
>>10629894
>>10629923

Point-buy for character creation. When you level up, it is random advancement. That is how it works in the game. The developers essentially use point buy to give the characters the stats they have when they join your group.

>>10629894
Hmm... Should the distributable total be random, or not?

>>10629923
They really don't.

Emulating the game's mechanics is stupid because they're not set up to work as an RPG. Your breadth of actions is infinitely more broad than they can account for.

What about flanking? Should that be included as a mechanic?

>>10629976

If you really want some random variation in the growth stats, allow them to set them as they like but then introduce a d3 to it for each stat. If they roll a 1, they lose 5% for that stat; if they roll a 2, it remains unchanged, and if they roll a 3 they gain 5%.

That way they still get to set their general stat growth, but you get the randomness you seem to desire in a way that won't totally fuck them over if it goes wrong and won't make them a deity if it goes in their favor.

Okay, so, we need to verify this stuff.

Determing base stats - 1d10+22, then distribute it into stats of your choice.

Determining Growth rates - Undecided (Kinda)

Working out HP - ???

>>10629985
Agreed. Make shit simple for us humans.

>>10629985

As an outsider, the way I see this working is that FE-style play is used for mass combat, but each player has a "central" character that they control out of the mass combat that would be run in a different system.

Sort of like how out-of-flight, the Planes and Mercs dudes were statted up in GURPs, but the Planes and Mercs system was in-use while they were flying.

At least, that's how I'd run it.

>>10630105

HP is a base stat as well. works the same way; has a growth rate, randomly increases. though i think it goes up in increments of 2 rather than 1.

>>10629932

Yeah, as far as I'm concerned we just "forget" about the durability rules.

That shit was annoying as fuck in the games, I don't want to deal with it in a tabletop.

>>10630041
Okay, fair enough.

Actually, in retrospect I have been rather stupid about the whole thing. You're right. 5% on growth rates is fine.

What should the distribution total be, in that case?

>>10630173
Ah yeah, each point in HP counts as 2.

well, the thing is, the games systems for stats are pretty simple, and for the tabletop wargame bit, thats all you need it to be.

for base stat totals - assuming level 1? not that hard to to do at all, but I'd go a little more than 1d10 + 22.

you got

hp
str
skill
spd
def
res
luck
and con. for whatever you're doing with that one.

even getting 33 points to distribute is going to be pitifully low in almost every stat

>>10630192
for growth rate totals, look at some of this
that should give you a good idea of what a character of a given class should be "like"

http://www.serenesforest.net/fe7/char_growth.htm

>>10630191
>durability
Yeah, I never liked that. The only reason it was even there in the first place is so you don't use your most powerful weapon all the time.

And 50 uses is waaay more then you'll ever keep track off in a tabletop game.

>>10630241
HP and Con wouldn't be included I assume. So that's 33 max for 6 stats.

possibly ignore weapon durability, but have a cash limit on what to equip everyone with?
giving that myrmidon a silver sword would strictly limit options for other units, etc.

costs would need to be a balanced, but that's durr obvious.

>>10630298
for 6 stats, that would give you an average of 5.5 per stat, if you roll in max. i'm just saying it should be a wee bit higher.

>>10630241
True, although looking at Serenes Forest, the base stats ARE pitifully low, but not as low as I've got it set as.

Lets try... 45+2d10? I'm basing this off of Lyn's base stat total, which is 62.

>>10630298
HP is still included, but each point counts as 2.

for imstance, lyn, sain's, and kent's starting stats at levle one.

HP S/M Skl Spd Lck Def Res Con
Lyn
16
4
7
9
5
2
0
5
5
Sain
Cavalier
19
8
4
6
4
6
0
9
7
Kent
Cavalier
20
6
6
7
2
5
1
9
7


if you need a god roll to make these character at lvl one, it should be a bit higher.

>>10630340
Wait, how the fuck did I get that?

>>10630318
Not the guy who's trying to make it, but the average stats for a level one player unit in FE7 is about 4.66-4.75

Redid the calculations (How the fuck did I get 62?) and got 35. I think 25+d10 would be fine, really.

HP: 19
Str: 9
Skl: 5
Def: 7
MDf: 0
Spd: 7
Con: 9
Luc: 4
Rsc: 16

These are Sain's from the OP's initial stats according to GameFAQs. Assuming everything starts at 1, you've got these points into each category:

HP: 9
Str: 8
Skl: 4
Def: 6
Mdf: -1?
Spd: 6
Con: 8
Luc: 3
Rsc: 15

which is 58 total points. If I'm doing this right.

>>10630409
Rsc and Con do not count, I believe.

>>10630241
Keep in mind that the classes in the games always have their own base values (this is more apparent in FEDS than the others because of reclassing, but in the others it's still factored in). Same thing with growths. Add those in and it'll look much less sparse across the board.

>>10630340
lol at myself posting the stats uselessly.
i mean, it doesn't seem all that hard to me to pointbuy starting stats, pointbuy stat growths, and then roll whenever you level.

combat is also pretty.
to hit is based off of skill, luck, and accuracy of weapon, to dodge is based on speed and luck.
if anyone wants, i can look up the actual maths to show you what every stat is worth, it's pretty simple.

Skirmish game that follows the weapon triangle, with a bit of attention to the magic rules.
The statistics (except for biorythms, if they were in this game) could almost be transferred as is in terms of what they are and what they do, and attacks use a d%.
Question is, do you keep in growth, and roll for stats on level up?

>>10630435

In that case it'd be about 35 points, but then how do you get stats for Con and Rsc?

If I recall correctly Con is really only used for picking up and carrying other characters, but Resistance is a very important stat. How did the game decide that? Was it just a per-class thing?

>>10630409
Rsc is just Con with some modifiers depending on if the unit is mounted, so it don't count towards the total.
Depending on how it's being made, Con may not count either.

ok, yeah, derr i did forget that. each class has it's own spread of +1's and +2's after you roll. derp.

>>10630446
I think that's only enemy mooks. If we're talking true characters like the player's army in the game, then I think the stats are individualized.

>>10630448
I have the game mechanics right here in front of me, so no need. It's mainly just a problem with working out base stats, but since I'm now basing it off of Lyn's base stat total (35), that is pretty much sorted.

That said, vote time. Who thinks 25+1d10 is a good number for a base stat total?

>>10630502
i think it's fine, if you make sure what exactly stats are bought with that.
hp 2 per point, will con be class based + points?

>>10630502
also - my adding for lyn gives me 32 points, counting con as 1 point each and completely ignoring hp.

Yeah, guys DO NOT include CON and RSC (or MOVE) for that matter, as those are separate stats that do not change throughout the game, except with items or promotion. I also think HP should be done separately as well, simply because it's always the largest stat with the largest growth.

>>10630446
http://www.serenesforest.net/fe7/class_base.htm
http://www.serenesforest.net/fe7/class_growth.html

>>10630448
-Strength is added to physical attacks, magic to magical; defense subtracts from physical damage, resistance from magical
-2x Speed is added to evade, if speed is greater than the enemy's by 4 the character doubles (and vice versa)
-2x skill is added to hit chance, 1/2 skill (or full skill before FE6) is added to crit chance
-1x Luck is added to hit and evade, and subtracted from enemy crit chance
-If the weapon weight is greater than the character's con (or strength in some games), the difference is subtracted from speed before evade and doubling chance is calculated

That's pretty much it, besides situational stuff like terrain, leadership, supports, bonds, etc. The rest (such as the base hit/damage/crit chance) is based on the weapon.

>>10630553
Yes.

The stats bought with that will be; HP, STR/MAG, SKL, SPD, DEF, LCK and RES

>>10630502
They are individualized, but they're individualized based around the class stat chassis.

>>10630592
yep. math is pretty dirt easy. although i could've swore that skill was 4 to hit per point.

but the class base stats thing is only for enemies. because every enemy in the game is base statted exactly the same then randomly rolled when you start the level.

party characters bases are created individually.

>>10630603
yeah, but even with hp worth 2, I'd go base stats
1d10 plus 30. to give you points for hp. maybe even plus 35

anyone whio is a frontliner at all has around 20 at lvl 1. hell, mages have 16-17 at lvl 1, and they're fragile as hell.

>>10630604
True I suppose, but the question is, will we be adhering to that, or leaving capped stats, weapon levels and growth rates as the defining features.

Personally, I think we should not stick to the class base stat blocks, and just allow distribution by choice.

>>10630690
i also agree.

>>10630690
Either way. In that case, the initial points bought will probably want to be bumped up slightly to reflect that.

>>10630686
Okay, 1d10+30 it is.

What if you made the system classless? Each capability of the characters can be considered a "feat" (sword use, light use, horse riding, etc). Most base classes have 1 feat. A few have 2 (pretty much anything that rides an animal), and cavaliers have 3 (swords, lances, and horse riding). Most advanced classes simply add one feat (use of an additional weapon). So you could give your character any mix of abilities that you liked.

Feats:

Sword Use
Lance Use
Axe Use
Bow Use

Light Use
Anima Use
Dark Use
Staff Use

Horse Riding
Pegasus Riding
Wyvern Riding

+15% Critical
Silencer
Pick
Steal
Sure Shot
Slayer
Summon
Pierce
Great Shield

Now, this certainly doesn't needed to be limited here. The discrepancies in "feats" between some of the classes are compensated by character stats (for example, I know that characters with mounts have lower stat caps than their unmounted counterparts). With a little digging, these could be quantified and included as extra skills a character can take (examples could be Heavy Armor, High Evasion, etc).

k. lets go with rolling a 5.
go with cavalier.
35 points, spend ten on hp to have 20.

6 str
5 skl
6spd
6 def
0 res
2 luck.

apply plus 1's and 2's per class? a la promotion bonuses? (fe8 did have promotion bonuses for base lasses for trainees) or just leave as is?

>>10630796

I know what most of those are, and I can guess most of the ones I'm not sure of, but what are Silencer, Slayer, and Summon?

>>10630796
not bad, except that some classes have way more "feats" than others. and a lot of promotions that gain abilities also gain a weapon, so maybe 2-3 per promotion.

kick it up to every class having 2, some 3, with 2 per promotion.

>>10630796
I think feats should be left out of it, it would make army creation an absolute nightmare.

>>10630802
What are the 1s and 2s to add? Do you have a list of them somewhere?

Also, what was the total distributable stat growth rate % again? I need to write it down.

>>10630821

Silencer is the Assassin's ability (i think its a 10% chance to one shot an enemy regardless of other stats).

Slayer is the Bishop's ability, making his magic more effective against monsters.

Summon is the Summoner's ability (derp), which allows him to summon 1 weak undead to fight with him.

>>10630858
total stat growths are different for every character in the game, it's part of the whole "some charcters are awesome, some are shittacular)

http://www.serenesforest.net/fe7/char_growth.htm

promotion gains list from FE8 for every class.

http://www.serenesforest.net/fe8/promotion.htm

>>10630858

well armies will use cut-and-paste classes, obviously, with the GM making special foes as needed. This is no different than any other RPG.

silencer - passive 50
% of crit chance to instagib anything.

slayer - holy magic tomes have X3 attack before character stats against monsters.

summon -worthless.

entire game needs to be jeigan characters

>>10630843
>>10630796

It seems to me that if you're using feats like those, classes are fairly useless.

I would assume that if I made a Mage he would automatically come with Anima. If you base it purely on feats, you might make a Mage with Swords and base his stats like a Hero.

Either have the classes add these feats and maybe give them 1/2 choices on promotion, or leave classes out entirely and let characters choose whatever feats they like.

>>10630821
Silencer is an instakill, slayer does 3x damage to monster enemies when using light magic, summon summons a phantom on your side

>>10630796
While I'm tentative about point-buying everything like that, this does bring up one issue I had forgotten, that of how ridiculously good Cavaliers are in the GBA games because they have two weapon types available in their base class. Maybe we should tone it back to the Path of Radiance/Radiant Dawn standard of splitting them into sword/lance/axe knights?

also - goddamn Hector was such a boss.

"hECTOR CRUSH PUNY MORTALS!"
is something i always end up thinking whenever he gets promoted.

Dat axe.

>>10630796
Also, if you're going to throw skills into the mix, bring in the non-GBA ones to keep things interesting.

>>10630913

Never mind. I'm a damned idiot, I misread your post.

Sorry about that.

>>10630882
Alright, thanks. Yes, we'll add these to the stats.

>>10630886
I see what you mean now, and yeah, that will work.

In retrospect, I think a feat system has the potential to be good if done properly. Any ideas?

>>10630924

weapon triangle is what makes them awesome!
and yeah, i kinda don't like the whole feats thing. cool for custom making classes, but honestly, games have pretty much everything you could do covered. unless you really wanna do something odd like lance/ bow.

>>10630973
Good move and mostly no gimp growths is what made them staples. Two weapons is what made them dominant.

>>10630843

2 Feat classes:
Swordmaster (which has better than average speed, "High Evasion")
Assassin (which has better than average speed, "High Evasion")
Warrior
Hero
Sniper

3 Feat Classes:
Rogue
Berserker (Has "Water Walking")
Ranger
Paladin
Falcoknight
Wyvern Knight
Wyvern Lord
Valkyrie
Mage Knight
Sage
Bishop
Druid
Summoner

4 Feat classes:
Great Knight (Which has lower than average speed, "Heavy Armor" negative feat?)
General (Which has lower than average speed, "Heavy Armor" negative feat?)

They are roughly balanced. Surely we can work out the kinks.

>>10630994
fair enough. but then what class would have early game 2 weapon? there should be one.

>>10631025
To be honest, I think it's unnecessary. Just use the classes as they are, no need to call them feats and such.

>>10631025
some of those don't make any sense.
all a sword master gets is critical bonus. no second.
actually, almost all those 2 feats one only get 1 more thing on promote.
crit
bows
axes
crit and 'snipe' which is always completely worthless. always. whoo 100% to hit. and a half crit chance of sleep! so shitty. . .

>>10631048
Why should there be? It gives that class a lot of versatility that no other has.

>>10631092
scrath that. most of those are like, one or two less than what they actually gain. what am i missing?

>>10631068

Options man, options. Obviously one could keep to the established class system; I'm just trying to quantify their abilities in case someone wants to make their own stuff.

>>10630913
If you want to discourage magic/weapon mixing, you could make "Weapon Use" and "Magic Use" their own feats, which in themselves do nothing but are prerequisites for using weapons or magic. Then give the players an extra feat. Players that stick to one branch won't suffer any loss, players who mix will have to weigh the advantages of using magic and weapons against losing a feat to strengthen themselves.

>>10631118
i suppose you're right. just goes against the grain. lol. I didn't really like it when FE9 did that to be honest. I always felt that the versatility of the 2 weapon cavs was made up for by the fact that most of the time they don't have any outstanding stats.
barring sain's redonkulous str. and maybe alan from FE6.

>>10631092

I was counting total; Swordmasters have "Swords" and "Criticals"; Warriors have "Axes" and "Bows", etc. And like I said, Swordmasters have above average speed stats, which could easily be attributed to a third "feat", giving that stat boost.

Getting a name, however late it is now.

Okay, so how are we handling the stat growths?

Is there going to be some base total which you divide between all your stats, or a randomly generated growth total, or what?

That d3 system is good to use. 1 = -5% growth, 2 = nothing, 3 = +5% growth.

>>10631146
magic use and wapons at the same time would be bad
that would make you have to have seperate str and magic stats.
which is kinda terribad, and i can't think of any FE that had a melee and magic class, like ever.

shadow dragon for DS doesn't even count, get that shit outta here.

>>10631201
Both of the gamecube ones, probably a couple of the non-translated.

>>10631201
If somebody wants to be a magic and melee class, go right ahead. They're going to have crap for stats, so yeah.

>>10631201

Its unprecedented, sure. But the option is out there.

And there were weapons that enabled the wielder to use magic, which would be a natural fit for a specialized character.

>>10631200
stat growths - players have a given number of points at chargen. 1 point equals 5 percent growth rate.

just look at the growth rates list already posted, and decide how many points they should have. you kinda have to just go with whatever feels right on this, because total growth rates are different for every character. it's part of what defines good char from bad.

>>10631222
FE9 and ten had both stats, but you only ever used both if you were a fighter with a magic weapon.

>>10631276
That's my point, should the total be different for every class, or (within reason) randomly generated?

>>10631306
i think the total should be fixed for everyone. that way everyone stands equally well with the RNG god.

just a question of figuring out the total. probably go with a main character's total, or raven's.
someone who is high tier.

>>10631161
In my experience, most of the classes/characters that did have certain outstanding stats (myrmidons, fighters, generals, etc.) had serious deficiencies in other areas. Being the all-arounder already pays off, the various mercenaries in all 3 GBA games can attest to that. The high move and 2 weapons (and later 3) are just icing on the cake. It's probably for the best they didn't get real Canto either in the GBA games.

I never got Alan to be good, he never grows skill or speed for me, which is a death warrant on Hard. Lance always turns out like a goddamn boss though.

>>10631336
Righto, so an absolute total for everyone, and then a d3 to determine bonuses.

So that's stat growth and base stats done, we just need to do some class work and I think I'll have most everything I need to start.

You could import the combat rules from any fantasy system - the important thing is having a relationship system for PCs and NPCs. Like Bliss Stage, but with less loli and murder.

>>10631336
because the growth rate totals don't really have anything to do with class. look at knoll compared to ewan.

or ross compared to is dad, guy, karla, and whashisname. all Fe7 myrmies, all dfferent totals.

get what i mean?

>>10631201
>magic use and wapons at the same time would be bad

Play FE4 and FE5 (seriously go do that, they're awesome), then get back to me on that one. Split magic/str works fine, as does using both magic and physical weapons.

Hrmmm.... I'm starting to see a little bit of a problem here.

With our standardization of stat and growth distribution throughout ALL classes, some seem to have become obsolete.

I mean, who would ever want to play as a knight over a cavalier, even if we limit cavalier's to just one weapon? Now that characters can have any stats and growths in any class, what advantage does a knight have? None.

lyn, and hector's total growth rates are 335
eliwood is 325.

call it 330 or 235? seem like a good way to have a powerful character with weakness still.

or an average piece of shit like eliwood.

>>10631371
I'm using Lyn for total stat growth rates

>>10631385
It just means an extra stat to divide stats into. Sure, it could be versatile and powerful if used properly, or it could end up being complete suck.

I kind of like the idea, but it should only apply to certain classes which will be created when the groundwork is down.

>>10631414
differences are in each classes base promotion gains.
hp, str, skl, spd, def, res, con
Recruit Cavalier (F) +1 +0 +2 +2 +0 +2 +3

Recruit Knight (F) +2 +1 +1 +1 +2 +0 +4

give cavs 1 weapon, makes it fairer.

>>10631414
This is why I'd recommend bases for at least Con for classes. You might also consider changing the point total distributable based on the class.

>>10631455
I wouldn't suggest it for this, it seems that we're building this around the GBA games. All I'm saying is that it works fine.

>>10631385
you're right, i haven't played Fe4 in years, my bad.
>>10631455
sounds solid.

Even though it's probably best never to speak of the DS game, why not just use the class bonuses from the class change thing? Assuming we're using classes and not the feat thing, I just skimmed through the thread.

>>10631498
you make much sense.

>>10631498
Con is going to be kept for classes, yes.

Cavaliers are going to be split into sword, axe, lance and bow again.

>>10631505
Why aren't we speaking of the DS game, anyway? The gameplay's fine in it, for the most part, there are just a few strange decisions they made in the process.

>>10631505
That is what we're doing.

Also, stat caps, weapon levels, skills and such are another reason for smart class selection.

>>10631544
because it brings back awful memories?
making everyone die to get any gaiden levels.
class changing was cool, but everything else i hated.
feelsbadman.jpg.

Does each player control one character, and that's that? Seems like most player armies in Fire Emblem start with two or three guys, then expand to like 10 guys, chosen from a pool of even more guys.

also - a reason to run knight over Cav.

paladin promotion gains are almost all ones.

generals is all 2's and 3's.

>>10631585
Yeah, that didn't sit well.

The rest was pretty standard, though.

>>10631604
It's like being an archer. You're fairly shit until you promote to sniper, then all of a sudden HUEG GAINS

>>10631601
No, each player controls like 10 units, maybe more.

Okay, we're leaving classes roughly unchanged. I think promotional gains, weapon levels and stat caps are fine to make each class distinct from another.

All in favour?

>>10631601
that would be a question of scale. i really like the idea of every player controlling 3-5 characters, co-op campaign style.

or for player v player, each person gets 6-8.

>>10631643
With the exception of the cavalier change, in favor.

>>10631643
yarr!
ten works, for each person being their own team. for co-op, 3-5 people each controlling 3-5 seems fuckyeah.

>>10631658
That would work just fine as well, to be honest. I mean, as long as the minimum one player is controlling is 4 or so, in a 3 player + DM game, or 5-6 in a free for all battle, then yeah.

I like this system idea because it works for both DM+player typical campaigns, and PvP wargames as well.

>>10631601
What I'd do is have every player make a lord at the start, then any new characters get added to a collective pool that all the players share.

>>10631670
also - agree to cav change. makes them not necessarily the BESTBEST class.

although, their low caps on pally kinda do offset that, but thats gonna take a long while to be relevant.

>>10631710
That is, assuming it's a co-op game, not PvP

Would XP work the same way? That'd be a lotta paperwork.

Okay, changing cavalier, but the rest remains.

How do you guys feel about:

2) The players Lord having a 365% growth total instead of the 335%?

To signify them being a lord and all.

2) Capping growth rate on any stat out at 85%?

>>10631726
That is the brilliant thing; It can be either.

>>10631707
I know, i really do think this could be made to work with both really well, non-combat stuff would have to be shoehorned in somewhere, for the "traditional" tabletop RPG. or something.

this is reminding me sorta of a fantasy heavygear, but simpler. i dig simple, so will my playgroup

>>10631757
Yeah, not so much. I'd recommend something similar to FE4's formula (10+level difference for attack, 30+level difference for kill). Any ideas past that?

>>10631722
I assume paladins get a second weapon upon promotion (instead of having axes, lances, AND swords), and thus I assume it would be their choice as what to pick.

So Paladins having large movement and the choice for both of their two weapons definitely makes up for, if not outweighs, the lower stat caps.

>>10631784
Sounds good.

>>10631765
ehhh, 335 is already pretty good. just look at how hector ends up every single playthrough.

I'd just say have no caps. if you dump all your points into one thing, prepare to be worthless elsewhere.
see example of a myrmidon with too much speed skill luck, not enough hp str or def.

marisa from FE8. almost worthless, aside from her personality. she gets made an assassin a lot, because she'll crit really high, for like 12 damage. assassin instagib with killer edge and supports, gogogo.
although joshua and ross both compete for gerik's delicious lightning affinity.

>>10631784
exactly- anything else and it just bogs down like a motherfucker. maybe a +10 - 15 bonus for killing promoted, auto-level for killing promoted in you're not.

>>10631765
Seems good. Maybe give the Lord a slightly better base stat pool too.

I'd put a growth cap at even 70%, if we're assuming 40 = good.

>>10631782
>non-combat stuff would have to be shoehorned in somewhere

No real need for it. This is a tabletop wargame, pretty much anything noncombat comes down to fluff.

>>10631826
Good point. If anybody puts more than 85% in, they're probably a bad player.

Each player controlling up to 10 guys, complicated combat tables just like the vidya games, people gaining XP almost every turn and levelling up in the middle of fights - this is gonna be really slow to play. Things will go a lot slower when there's no computer to keep track of all the math, and fights are slow *already* in the originals, to the point where people generally turn off the combat animations.

Is there no way we can simplify things a bit?

>>10631895
well, to simplify some thing, you could say that all levelling takes place after combat.
i kinda like that idea a lot actually. that way, all you have to do is jot down xp, keep tally until end.

>>10631876
well, someone said somethign about this working for a dm / player kinda thing, so i thought he meant a dnd style thing. that wouldn't really work.

tabletop wargame sounds pretty fuckin pimp however.

>>10631920
True. I vote for that.

I archived this, because I actually think this would be cool as hell to see done.

so
next issue - weapons. how to handle them.
obv they cost cash, but i have no idea what would be balanced cost wise, it depends entirely if we want to have them have durability or not.

I'm leaning towards no, just to keep bookkeeping cleaner, your guys's opinions?

>>10631945
Are we using a square grid, a hex grid or an inches system like Warhammer?

Yeah!!

Pretty sure we can get all the calculations prewritten for each character and then all you'd need to do is simple subtraction and rolling.

>>10632036
Since we're trying to keep it close to the games, might as well go with a square grid.

>>10631920
Also, the advantage of this being tabletop is that you can do things like rolling the attack and counter at the same time. Animations get turned off more because they take up so much time - turns go much faster without them.

>>10631859
Yeah, I'm assuming add 20 for promoted (because a Paladin 1 is like a Cav 21, etc). The only reason FE4 didn't factor that was because it didn't reset the level.

>>10631945
Have the DM be the enemy side and such, and run through a campaign. Shit, that'd be awesome. Hard to balance, though.

I'd say no durability. Would get majorly confusing after a while. Just scale up the costs in relation.

The weapon stats allow for a lot of custom items to be created, and a forging system similar to the GC games might not be amiss.

I say we grab a list of existing weapons, and then create some new ones if need be.

>>10632032
PS. Archive link? I'd like to save it too, for reference material.

>>10632116
http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/10628475/

>>10632088
Of course people turn off the animations to make it go faster. That's what I'm saying.

Playtest this and you'll probably see that it takes a really long time to run.

>>10632088
>>10632091
I like both of you guys are saying, although rolling attacks and counters at same time might be messy. e.g. - you crit kill them before they do anything. you rolled for nothing.

>>10632088
That reminds me, would we have early promotion with hero crests and stuff, or require players to reach 20?

>>10632091
http://www.serenesforest.net/fe7/sword.htm
http://www.serenesforest.net/fe7/lance.htm
http://www.serenesforest.net/fe7/axe.html
http://www.serenesforest.net/fe7/bow.html
http://www.serenesforest.net/fe7/staff.html
http://www.serenesforest.net/fe7/anima.html
http://www.serenesforest.net/fe7/dark.html
http://www.serenesforest.net/fe7/light.html

For starters.
I recommend everyone who wants to work on this bookmark serenesforest. It's got so much stuff that would be useful for this project.

>>10632162
Sure, early promotions, throw them in.

Of course, players who use them end up with craptacular characters, but having the option is cool I suppose.

>>10632032
I'm probably the only person who doesn't mind durability, but at the same time it's just more bookkeeping. For that reason I'd say to nix it.

For prices we should just pick the normal ones from one of the games. Steel might be 2x the price and silver 3x to account for no durability, something like that.

Durability can always be an optional rule.

True.

Without durability, costs will need to be suitably scaled up, though.

That said, I don't think players will exactly be drowning in money.

>>10632215
sounds decent, we could probably get away with using the standard prices for weapon modding in FE 9 and 10.

and yeah, serenesforest is the best place for referencing everything.

I think I'll actually try to run this, this has me more excited to play something than anything since AdEVa.

>>10632256
Seems reasonable. It's probably also a good idea to use if you're planning to put stuff like legendary weapons in the game.

>>10632032

My vote is to get rid of durability in its game form. There's just too much bookkeeping; I don't want to have to keep track of my iron sword which I used...was it 10 times now, or 11?

If you want, you can add a "weapon break" chance for each weapon, increasing as the power gets higher. Like, maybe you need to roll 2 d20 and get 3 or less on both for an Iron Sword to break, but for a Silver Sword you'd only need 2 6's or less.

That way you keep the general idea of each weapon gets a certain number of uses without actually having to keep track of those uses.

Or just get rid of it altogether. I'm actually pulling for that.

>>10632284
Agreed. I have the next two months to work on this anyway, so I'm going to be sure to put some effort into making it nice, playable and polished.

>>10632279
yeah, that all comes down to "point value"

however much cash each player agrees to start with, what levels, etc. like every other tabletop wargame. you know what I mean?

only issue coming to mind then would be pvp games at like level 15 or so. be a bit of a lot rolling to level up before the game. unless you want to go honor system and all that.

I'm not sure how many of you would be playing this, but I would likely run this as a campaign type of game, with some actual role playing involved. Not just a simple skirmish game with no context.

Because of that, I'd handle XP a bit differently than how the games do it. Keeping tallies attack by attack for dozens of characters is just too much work. Instead, I'd just calculate the value of the skirmish that they faced, and distribute the XP to everyone equally (then modified by their current level).

BUT, I would also award bonus XP for cool shit happening, that the games couldn't really take into account.

-You just defeated that big boss in single combat? Awesome, +40 XP.
-You miraculously dodged those 5 attacks in a row, when you were 1 hit from death? Sweet, +15 XP.
-You put your own life at risk to rescue the wounded NPC? Nice, +20 XP.

On the flip side of things...
-You hid in the corner this entire battle and did nothing? Uhh, -50 XP


This way characters are still leveling up at different paces depending on how awesome they do stuff, and you don't have to do as much bookkeeping during the session. But if someone tries to game the system (ie put a low level character in the mission, but never put them in harms way), simply doc XP so they get none or at least not as much as the others.

>>10632324
would you like to maybe trade emails or something, for writing/editing back and forth? I can make a throwaway gmail for that.

>>10632316
What if we did this weapon break chance at the end of each battle?

Roll d%, if you get too low, then your weapon is no longer usable, full stop.

>>10632347
If I were starting at that high I'd just say to go for the averages based on the growths.

>>10632397
the only real issue with that would be non-combat stuff. not sure if we want to bother with that at all, at least as far as statting and stuff.

freeforming roleplaying that stuff in combat would be awesome, I could see that being a totally viable way to play

I want to play Fire Emblem again. Which GBA (emulator) game is most fun? Don't care about story, since I obviously won't understand it in japanese.

>>10632402
Yeah, I would. I'll go make a trash email now.

>>10632450
Fe7. so amazingly awesome.
FE 6 is also good, and english patch is pretty good and easy to get as well.

then 8, mostly because it's too easy, and very short. a lot of fun anyways, especially with the things like branching promotions and whatnot.

>>10632412
Hmm. Maybe if you roll under the number of times you fought with that weapon in that battle, it breaks?

>>10632450
2 of the 3 GBA games are translated, so that's a moot point. Most people seem to be a fan of Blazing Sword (the one just titled Fire Emblem, or Fire Emblem 7) more than the others. I like FE6 better, but that's just me.

>>10632412

If you're going to include durability that'd probably be the best way to handle it. If it's per battle, though, the numbers would have to be quite higher. Say, 5 or less for an Iron weapon, 10 or less for a Steel weapon, 15 or less for a Silver weapon, and 20/25 or less for legendary weapons.

>>10632450

Uh, well only one of the three GBA fire emblems wasn't released in the US, so either Fire Emblem or Fire Emblem: Sacred Stones.

Fire Emblem has a better story and characters, but Sacred Stones frees up the game a lot with a world map, areas you can fight in over and over to grind weak soldiers up in, more options for class changes, etc. Overall it's the superior game, the plot just isn't quite as good as the other one.

>>10632532
Yeah, those are the sort of rates I was thinking of.

>>10632521

>Hmm. Maybe if you roll under the number of times you fought with that weapon in that battle, it breaks?

That's just as bad for bookkeeping as is giving each weapon a certain number of uses.

>>10632521
Times used * material modifier?

1 for Iron, 2 for steel, etc.

>>10632532
i dunno, that makes legendary weapons really really fragile. i'd go with an after battle of iron - 5 steel - 10 silver 15, and legendaries are either 15, or unbreakable. unbreakable should be very expensive to 'build', or be dm fiat thing.

Already done. But maybe you can get ideas from it.

http://fed20.wikidot.com/start

Have a sandwich.

>>10632521

oh I thought there were more than three. already played the two english ones; guess that makes the choice easy.

>>10632577
Yeah, we checked that, and it isn't too great.

email - srwaddict@gmail.com

I'll probably start writing up a basic thing covering character generation tomorrow, we can work out everything as we go.

>>10632577

That actually keep track of the number of uses for durability.

FUUUUUUUUUUUUCK that shit.

>>10632584
replay FE7. hector hard mode.

so amazingly frustrating for the first 10 levels. so fucking awesome. not many other strategy games are anywhere near as challenging/awesome as some of the FE's can get on hard.

Email:
Wat_tg@live.co.uk

Add me on Msn or something and I'll give you the real address.

>>10632575

Legendary weapons ARE really fragile. Most of them only get around 10 uses or so.

>>10632412
I find end of battle stuff to be goofy. If I used my silver sword once in battle, does it have the same probability of breaking as if it had been used a dozen times?

If you are going to have durability, I think it's best to have a change for breakage every time you roll a crit failure on an attack role. Then roll again to confirm for breakage, with iron being the most resilient against breaking.

or get FE6.
has awesome characters, roy is a motherfucking pimp. I think he has the most 'couple' support endings of almost any FE character.

FE4 doesn't count for that. lol.

>>10632662
eh? most of the ones I've seen are at least 20 uses or so. if not 30. where you getting 10 from?>>10632673
I like that.

rolling a 0-5% generates break chance, chance roll is determined by weapon type.

>>10632677
>I think he has the most 'couple' support endings of almost any FE character.

Wait a fucking sec-

>FE4 doesn't count for that. lol.

Never mind, continue on.

But yeah, Roy has 5 potential "couple" endings. I just like the jankiness of 6's characters more, it reminds me more of the older games.

>>10632727
yeah. not everyone is a powerhouse, but goddamn you will love that 3 stage A support with alan and lance on hard.

and that first chapter with the arena, you will learn to fear dragon riders like nothing in any other FE, assuming you've only played 7 and up. they are so much more powerful than in any moder FE.

>>10632713

I checked again, and you're right there. 20 uses is about the norm, with 15 for the reaver weapons like Swordreaver.

Except for the ultimate magics which each have only 5 uses. I never used them anyway, though.

Okay, so are we going with the critical failure weapon breakage rule, or the one roll per battle breakage rule?

Votes, gentlemen?

>>10632789
I like crit failure break chance. seems not terribad, and gives you a reason to carry a backup weapon whenever you can.

>>10632764
Also, the loldiers on hard mode. <5 every other stat, 12-15 strength. Awesome. And the fact that it's challenging even on normal.

>>10632789
Crit failure.

>>10632813
Okay, that sounds good.

Hey Binary, do you want in as well? Just send me a message on that throwaway account if you do.

>>10632835
Yeah, sure, just give me a sec to remember the password to one of my throwaways.

hey, not all loldiers are bad.

Nephenee is one of my favorite characters ever. with the soldier's growth booster, she's amazingly high statted, almost as good as Ike.

wrath + resolve map clearing ftw.

>>10632900
Sure, but that's because FE9/10 actually made them real units instead of trash.

>>10632900
Nephanee is a god anyway.

So, guys, I'm still a bit confused on how the class system is going down.

Are we even using classes, or are we using that classless system with feats someone posted earlier?

And in either case, what about promotions? Is it a "get whatever promotion item you want" for promotions, or is there going to be a stat requirement / stat growth requirement to get into classes?

>>10632914
true.

anyways, further discussion!

so, we have an idea about weapons, character stats / generation. fine details can be hammered out later for those.

should we go with the 4 item inventory, or the easy 4 weapon 4 item inventory?

item use pretty much the same? use / buying of unique items discouraged? (hoplon guard, etc.)

assuming one shot games, what should be done about all that kind of stuff?

>>10632962
We're using the class system. We figured that stat caps, weapon levels, promotional gains and abilities were enough to make them all distinct.

>>10632982
5-item is fine if we don't have to worry about durability.

With regards to unique item use in skirmishes and shit, I figure they'll be bought like any other, but given a high price.

>>10632982
Give the players a certain amount of money at the start to buy stuff I guess. Prices wont need to be altered, really.

Actually, that brings me on to another point - Will staves be subject to the breakage rule as well? I'd say we just reduce the number of uses they get and leave them at that.

>>10632962
I'm thinking classes, with the options for custom classes using the feat thingy. maybe just call it abilities/features.
e.g. myrmidon gets sword use, cav gets 1 weapon + horse. in exchange, myrm gets better base bonus (the promotion into base class bonus jacked from FE8)

use all the classes from FE, except maybe summoner,(too much bookwork/weak), have options for all other.

>>10632962
I'm thinking classes, with the options for custom classes using the feat thingy. maybe just call it abilities/features.
e.g. myrmidon gets sword use, cav gets 1 weapon + horse. in exchange, myrm gets better base bonus (the promotion into base class bonus jacked from FE8)

use all the classes from FE, except maybe summoner,(too much bookwork/weak), have options for all other

>>10633035

Well, they need to have some chance of breaking. Otherwise a Cleric just buys 1 and goes off on her merry way the whole damn game never buying anything else.

And I don't think we should add in a different durability rule for the item. That just adds needless complexity.

How about for staves you roll for breakage if you overheal the target?

>>10633085
err. weird, but whatever

anyways, yeah.we've got some seemingly solid ides, now it's just a case of doing number crunching and making tables and costs and stuff.
I think.

anyone think of anything else that would be an issue?

>>10633105
Or just make a break roll every time you heal, possibly?

I can't think of much else that needs working out. The game is surprisingly easy to manage, since a lot of the vidya formula translates fairly easily.

dunno about overhealing causing break chance, it's almost always a good idea to top off hp whenever possible to give healers much needed xp.

>>10633169
Depends on how XP is going to work, if we do blow-by-blow XP gain or use the more campaign-style battle end, GM-powered version somewhere above.

>>10633164

No, a break roll every time you heal just means more needless dice. Plus, if you do that, why not have weapons roll every time you strike?

How about just testing durability when a certain condition is met? For weapons, I think everyone decided it was on a critical failure. Do you roll to hit with staves? I can't remember. If you do, just roll on a critical failure again. Otherwise, overhealing is a possible condition. I'm sure someone else can think of a different condition that would make sense.

fair enough.
I think we're rolling with after battle xp, but based on what you do. then again, that kind of xp gain is worthless to a skirmish wargame thing, but necessary for campaigns, obv.

>>10633216
No, you don't roll to hit with any staves except offensive ones (Status conditions and such), which is why we have this problem.

How should we determine staves breakability?

And holy fuck it's 6:10 AM. Have I really been doing this for 4 hours?

>>10633216
you only roll to hit for offensive status staves.

I really can't think of what to do other than overheal as a break condition, but overhealing as a potential negative just seems off to me.

Why not change it a bit to make healing variable? Somehow stick a roll into the amount you heal and base breakage off that.

>>10633281
except nothing in the entire game does a damage roll. it's all fixed based on stats.

maybe adding it in for healing only, I can see that, but then it asks why not for all damage.

I'll probably start writing up a few pages on walking through the character generating + levelling stuff tomorrow,

1d10 + 35, wasn't it?
each point in hp gives you 2 hp, 1 each for str, skl, spd, def, res,lck.

con will based on class, with the option to spend more points on it. will only gain from promotion. seems silly to have stat booster in this as anything other than a dm thing to throw out in a campaign.

players get 335% (67 units of 5 probably) for stat growths, a lord gets maybe 355.

promotions / class bonus/caps should all be taken from probably FE 7 and 8.

anything else?

>>10633267
>>10633244

Well, how about overhealing by a certain AMOUNT, then? Say, the low-level staff (what is it...Heal? I can't remember) can overheal by up to 5 without causing a break chance, and Mend can overheal by up to 10 without causing a break chance. The numbers, of course, are up for discussion; those are just examples.

That way there's only a small chance of having to roll for breakage with staves per overheal.

Because then we would be rolling to hit with a stave, and we don't really want that.

I'd just go with making a breakage roll whenever it is used.

>>10633315
Why not have staves and tomes have a certain amount of magic charges, as it were? Weapons can break when you use them, that makes sense, but are you going to read a book so hard it just snaps?

>>10633267
You could just make a "hit roll" against nothing to see whether a crit failure pops up. No real need to make this crazy complicated or bring in a secondary system.

>>10633325
Mechanically, I can dig that. actual numbers can be hashed out as we go.
and rolling per use just seems bad. nothing else does that thus far.

possibly a set number of whole battles before a staff gets replaces? regular heal 2-3, mend 1-2? i dunno. This seems to be the one thing that mechanically seems hard to fit in.

>>10633315
The notes I've taken so far:

Resources:

http://www.gamefaqs.com/gba/921183-fire-emblem-the-sacred-stones/faqs/37253
http://fed20.wikidot.com
http://fireemblem.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Game_Mechanics
http://www.serenesforest.net/

Determining Growth rates – Take the total of 335% and then split it into each respective stat. It must be a multiple of 5%. Your lord gets 365% to divide.

Determining base stat totals - Roll 1d10 and add the result to 30, then divide that number between your respective stats, before adding the numbers found here: http://www.serenesforest.net/fe8/promotion.htm
Each point in HP counts as 2.
Constitution is class-based, and unaffected by stat distribution and growth rate.

XP gain is:
For attacking (10+level difference)
For killing (30+level difference)
Being attacked without countering (1 xp)
Killing or attacking a promoted unit gets an extra +10
ALL LEVELLING IS DONE *AFTER* COMBAT.

With a critical failure attack roll (different depending on weapon type), the weapon may break. If you get a critical failure, you then need to confirm the breakage. If breakage is confirmed, the weapon is no longer usable. Ever.

I think I'll write out the basic combat rules, but I'll do it tommorow as well. Right now, sleep. There is only sleep.

So the rumours are true. We DO get shit done.

Anyway, bye.

>>10633446
Sleep is good.
only issue I have is that i think Con should be class based, and be able to spend points on it, but only at chargen. no growths for it, only chargen and promotion bonuses.
it is something that varies a lot between people in the same classes, and it matters for utility / worth.

>>10633479
Not to mention, it doesn't have a growth in the games (except in FE5).

>>10633315
>players get 335% (67 units of 5 probably) for stat growths, a lord gets maybe 355.

Lords already get ~335, others get ~305. Unless you want to rework all of the stat caps for different classes, we should probably keep this fairly similar to the game.

>>10633510
well, a lot of the 'good' characters already have just as high stat growth totals as the lords. we were just looking for a way to make the lords actually stick out more/ make them matter more in a tabletop version.

maybe an area effect leadership thing like in SRW? lol.

>>10633566
>maybe an area effect leadership thing like in SRW?

There's already precedent for that in quite a few of the games.

>>10633479
Okay, shove that in.

I'm REALLY leaving now. Honestly. I swear.

>>10633479
I like the STR-based weapon weight system in FE9/10.

>>10633593
I know.
AND I REMEMBER WHAT WE'VE FORGOTTEN SO FAR!
supports! that'll be interesting. for a skirmish type mode - a given number of supports based on the point value of the game.

in a campaign type game, DM gives out one per or every other or something, player chooses with which of his/her characters. I dunno.

>>10633646
yeah, but then that makes Con worthless. I like Con mattering.
Then there was the whole books having a str weight for mages. that shit was annoying.

Fairly certain we're leaning more towards the GBA games, with maybe some elements from others, but likely not. biorhythm would be terrible, skills from older/ newer games are a maybe, haven't really been discussed yet.

>>10633646
The main problem I have with it is that for anyone who's actually in combat, it becomes completely irrelevant halfway through the game because you'll need to grow str to be effective in combat anyway. Basing it off Con means it's something you'll actually have to think about for the entire time.

>>10633713
Are we just using the FE7 support list for the mechanics of it, or what?

And yeah, I'd say for campaigns it'd probably be a matter of establishing relationships between the characters first (fast vs. slow supports, etc). For skirmishes it'd be easy enough to just give each side a few and forget about it.

>>10633713

If you include supports, wouldn't we have to include affinities?

That wouldn't be so much of a problem, except that it adds a new bit of bookkeeping, doesn't it? Not only do you have to keep track of what type of bonuses you get for the support based on the affinities, but you also have to keep track of how many turns the two units are together.

Unless you want to choose a different condition for triggering the bonuses. Maybe instead of turns spent beside one another it can be once both units reach a certain HP deficit, or something.

>>10633792
>how many turns the two units are together
Yeah, not a fucking chance.

Use the Path of Radiance system for supports, it's much more sane for both tabletop and in game.

yeah, i figure supports will be a DM fiat thing, as in, after a battle in a campaign he gives each player with their team/squad 1 support level to be given out wherever the player wants it to go, it's on the player to describe their character's supports/relationships.

elemental affinities can/probably should be dicerolled at chargen.
not too much effort to keep track of the bonuses, plusses to some stats when they're near each other. sorting out who will have them and what bonuses they give will be done before battle / at squad setup.

>>10633754
Honestly, it was more annoying when a Pegasus Knight wielding a Javelin or even an Iron Lance was guaranteed to be gimped.

>>10633868
So buy some more Con for the character. Easy enough.

>>10633881
yeah, not having to worry about speed loss from anything other than slim lances is part of the cost of being a fast flyer. we can possibly adjust stat bonuses from base classes if some things like that don't work well enough to balance, but for the most part, the initial stat bonuses and caps work well enough

we also have a few holes in our initial class stat boosts, the ones not selectable by the trainees aren't listed, (archers, thief, flyers, i think there's a couple others)

but we can work all that out by applying logic and common sense.

>>10633949
Still not sure why you're assuming the recruit promo gains rather than just the class bases.

thread has apparently died out.

thank you all for awesome discussion, I'll be writing stuff up tomorrow after some job hunting, hope to catch some of you all laters.

ah. i thought that it was to make it fit with the current system of 1d10 + 30 for base stats as a way to make every class have different bonuses at level one?
because the base stats for classes are for npc's? and using those would make us go with like 1d10 plus 10 or something at chargen to have roughly equal starting stats to actual characters?

>>10634089
Maybe so, but it doesn't leave every class except those 6 high and dry. I dunno, either way it's worth continuing it tomorrow or whatever.

>>10634120
thats why i was saying we should think of those bonuses later. lol.

gnight, it's been really awesome in /tg/ tonight.