Random chance allows for emergent storytelling, if you were truly as “intellectual” as you sell your arguments to be then you’d at the very least try to understand why so many people find value on such randomness.
Taking chances is not devoid of strategy. And having to work to give yourself the best chances possible can also be part of a gameplay system. It’s why irons can still be used even though steels are also readily available usually after a certain point. Sure sometimes it can go a bit far like with FE6 but that’s still an a facet of the system being taken to an extreme that just so happened to not have worked in that environment.
If you’re not playing casual mode you are acknowledging that you can either be forced to reset or fail your Ironman because of the odds swinging out of your favor. That’s part of what makes such playthroughs so exciting for so many, it’s an interesting dichotomy of random chance and pure numbers.
Removing chance also just makes it REALLY REALLY boring. If you can plan your entire run from the word go then there’s no hype moments of 1% crits or units being blessed by the RNG gods and somehow surviving a lethal enemy phase, it’s taking the human interaction out of these games. There’s also the factor of getting screwed over by the RNG being absolutely hilarious in retrospect.
Assuming you’re not lying about your Ironman failing bc of a 99% miss and 1% crit… That’s fucking sick, that’s absolutely incredible I would laugh my ass off if I saw that with my own eyes! It’s such a waste to disregard how comedic these games can be!
I don’t think it matters if his ironman anecdote is true or not, it has no bearing on the argument.
Personally, I don’t like when there are too many RNG elements in place (Awakening skills lol), but you can’t remove RNG completely and still call it Fire Emblem. Hit/crit chance is an integral part of the FE formula. In my opinion, the randomness it brings makes the games even more immersive, because luck does play a part in real-life combat as well.
When you fight someone, you’re actively going to try to predict what your opponent is going to do; dodging or blocking as many hits as you can, and looking for an opening to try to deal as much damage as possible (a crit). While your physique and your skill will always matter most, you can’t deny that luck will always play a part. To me, it makes perfect sense that even the slowest unit will occasionally dodge, and the fastest will still sometimes miss.
Gameplay-wise, I think the FE series has been good at mitigating this randomness and the rules are usually made to benefit the player. I didn’t mind the 99% hit chance cap in FE5, but they obviously went back to 100% to appease the playerbase. Then they introduced true hit in the next game in an attempt to further reduce frustration.
There would be no point in watching the battle animations if the games had no RNG. Why watch the same animation I’ve seen a hundred times, if I already know what happens next? I watch them because I don’t know if I’ll miss, if the enemy will crit me, or if the enemy’s devil axe will backfire. If you’re familiar with soccer, think of penalty kicks. Their randomness have made them controversial, but they’re also a source of hype for viewers.
I also disagree with the argument that modern FE encourages grinding. I usually try to ignore the side content on my first playthrough, and I was pleasantly surprised when I played Engage, because it was clear that IS at least made sure that the chapters were beatable even with no paralogues. You don’t really need to grind or buy DLC to get through these games, as long as you git gud.
I can’t quite remember where but i saw someone make a hack that have aoe spells which is awesome but i can’t find it anymore. Some help would be appreciated
Alexa, what is “Hyperbole”? ChatGPT, explain “Hyperbole” so that anyone could understand it, even- No, I’m just kidding. I know you know the point I actually made.
Whether that hit chance my lord missed was in the high seventies or high nineties doesn’t really matter to the argument here. Maybe he would have hit his second attack and actually downed the boss, if he didn’t die, maybe he would have missed two high percent rolls in a row. It’s not mathematically impossible for statistically unlikely things to happen. You’ve seen unlikely things happen before. He missed when he logically shouldn’t have, and died to a low percent crit chance when he shouldn’t have. Luck influenced what should have been a safe option, and the result? An abruptly ended Iron Man run. The influence of luck on this strategy game was solely negative, and my only other option was to fear this would happen and play extremely safe instead of actually trying to take risks. Does this really seem fair to you? Fair enough that to criticize RNG in a strategy game really seems so unreasonable?
Also…
The childish insults aren’t helping you make your case. If you like RNG, good for you. I’m not taking that away from you by telling you why some people don’t like unreactable randomness influencing what’s supposed to be an intellectual challenge.
I would maybe agree with you on some points if not for the fact you as the player get more than enough tools to influence the RNG, moreso than the enemy, and even IF one of your units gets low% crit, the games are forgiving enough and give you enough units where as losing a few or maybe even half the cast is not a game over, and your lord and game over units tend to have atleast average if not good luck, and don’t really face low% crit chances in most games. Fire Emblem really is not that hard of a game series difficulty wise.
There are plenty of other tactical RPGs which don’t use RNG and i find pretty much all of them to be less interesting because of it.
Jason… I don’t think you know what I was even saying. You saw someone reach to your over the top writing style and went “grr childish grr” bc the exact thing I’m talking about is what’s being shown off here
“What’s supposed to be an intellectual challenge”? Come on man, what do you think Fire Emblem even is? Or for that matter what an “intellectual” challenge is?
You’re taking such a defensive stance whenever anyone responds to you stomping your foot and saying “im right why does no one get how intellectual this is supposed to be”
This is a public forum, you’re supposed to be responded to. The phrase “I’m not taking that away from you” distinctly reads like you don’t want people to actually engage with your arguments. It is no insult when I talk of your writing, it is a response to what I feel is a reply not being candid with me as a reader.
Do you want to engage in honest and open discussion that is intellectual or do you want to pick out the most ‘personal’ of the many replies sent to you about your idea and only respond to that aspect of it?
There needs to be more accessory/equipment items, such as the Knight Ward, Knight Ring, and the shields from Echoes and 3H. Personally, I prefer when these items need to be equiped rather than just held in your inventory. And also, I think it would be a lot more interesting if these types of items had durability. Strangely, 3H shields didn’t have durability, despite weapons having durability.
Most games and hacks nowadays just have the standard anti-crit item (Iron Rune/Hoplon Guard) and the anti-flyer effectiveness item (Delphi/Fili Shield). I’m not against these items, of course. But I think it would be more neat if they were a part of this bigger system of equipment items.
Worth mentioning is that the Full Guard in Path of Radiance needs to be equipped, unlike the Delphi/Fili/Iote’s Shield in other games, which only needs to be held.
“if you were truly as “intellectual” as you sell your arguments to be then you’d at the very least try to understand why so many people find value on such randomness.”
This kind of talk… Maybe you didn’t intend for this to be a childish insult. But this is a personal attack. Do you really think I’ve never tried to understand why some people like RNG? Do you think that’s the only reason why somebody wouldn’t already agree with you? You don’t need to try and make this personal with any “If you were truly as “intellectual”” talk. I’m not insulting you for communicating this way, I want you to see where the breakdown in communication is happening.
In Dungeons and Dragons, RNG can create emergent storytelling. Like that time the party’s rogue rolled a 1 and failed a pickpocket attempt, creating a bar brawl where the party’s useless bard rolled a 20 and did something uncharacteristically amazing. In Fire Emblem, RNG is an obstacle in the way of truly perfect prediction and planning. I think RNG should be optional, or removed entirely, because I think the game would benefit from that added layer of intellectual certainty. Attacking me for not seeing things your way isn’t the same as making respectful arguments for the positive things RNG can do for a game, and even if RNG can do some good things for your game, like letting weak units hit for bigger number sometimes and avoid death, I don’t think it’s worth the times an undesired crit makes a foe die before you were done milking him for support points and WEXP and EXP or the times your unit kills an enemy with an unwanted crit, making room for more enemies to approach and kill your unit, or the time a unit gets bizarrely stat screwed or stat blessed, or the time an entire run ends anticlimactically because your Lord missed a high hit chance and died to a low crit chance. Yes, players who aren’t doing an iron man challenge can keep playing the same map until RNG smiles on them when they need it the most, but I don’t think that’s worth all the times RNG can ruin the experience in unpredictable, sometimes even unreactable ways.
In Fire Emblem, losing your most important unit might not matter. It might end the run. It might end whatever potentially interesting strategy you were going for as you fall back on the META - Most Effective Tactic Available. Did that unit I was training just die to a low% crit, putting an end to the interesting thing I was going to do with that unit’s build? Lose enough interesting units and it might be time to fall back on the boring reliable strategies like slow juggernauting, nostanking, max damage vantage crit builds, and so on. I don’t think that’s worth the rare instances of RNG making one of your units better than normal. Or far worse than normal. Because I have put in the effort to understand the arguments for and against RNG I feel confident saying “Fire Emblem is better off without it”.
And if there are people who personally like randomness, fair enough, it should be optional so those people can enjoy the game how they want to play it. Personally, I don’t feel the downsides created by luck-based inconsistency are worth any upsides created by it.
I think it appropriate to point out that depending on game these strategies are just as susceptible to RNG, and when they aren’t also require preplanning, [possibly the whole game] to get working, or it’s awakening, which, on some level was meant to be like that.
E.g.
Vantage requires you to hit and not miss
some games, like conquest, and every player phase focused game actively prevent jugganaughting, and is only something you’d do if you don’t want to use ore than one unit,
No RNG doesn’t even solve this as all you do is go slower and take on fewer enemies on enemy phase
Nostanking only works like that in awakening, in fates it requires so much more work, and in GBA it’s so heavy, you’re likely to get doubbled by the strong enemies you want to use it on and it only has 20 uses with no armsthrift and limited harmerne, the strat is unviable
And beyond that you lose all of FE’s unique brand of SRPG gameplay, It was always intended for unlucky, situations to happen afterall these games have always been considered simulation games by the devs and in japan, as the FE theme goes “Fire emblem, Epic warfare SIMULATION” these games have never been pure strategy games they have always been part simulation, RNG simulates the random elements of warfare, sometimes you get a lucky shot, sometimes death is unexpected, etc…
Even ignoring that they are RPGs. In every RPG randomness is used and expected.
Even other SRPGs like Shining force have RNG, although less pronounced, you can miss, you can crit, you can doubble, all on random chance, they even have random levels [though it works slightly differently], it’s not unusual for the genre as a whole at all.
Randomness also allows everyone to have a unique playthrough, beyond just the units they use or who dies, etc.
Manipulating RNG is also a strategic element and is almost always in the player’s control, outside bosses enemies usually have one maybe 2 weapons and usually they aren’t braves or silvers, even in the late game, as such you always have the advantage in terms of usable tools.
Now I do think it’d be nice to have a “NO RNG” mode for play but I’m going to be honest, beyond what I’ve already said so many systems and game design elements go out the window if you remove RNG.
Iron, Steel, Silver weapons become strict upgrades as such there is never reason to use them late game, aside saving money on juggernauts.
unless we do the fates thing of being player phase only [even then] braves become overcentalizing as the best generic weapons in the game, especially with no durability systems like fates or engage.
Weapons like short bows or wo dao lose most all use as they are side grades that rely on different crit/hit chance existing.
Skill/Dex, Luck, and half of speed, become redundant.
Status Staffs become even more of a restore staff check as they will always hit, also makes them better in player hands, but usually it’s the enemy that has good access to these tools.
Traditional Devil weapons are impossible to implement
Some Support bonuses are removed
Chance skills like Sol, Luna, World Tree, etc… wouldn’t be in the game for the same reason as devil weapons, dependent on strategy they can and will screw you over.
Skills that influence chance like Panette’s Blood Fury can not exist.
Certain strategies and unit design become impossible, You can’t implement a high damage unit that has shaky hitrates like FE6 Gonzales, you cant’s add assassin as silencer is chance based, you can’t add dodge tanks, tense Strategies like having units dodge balista bolts become untenable, Berserkers in mountains no longer get insane dodge, unless killer edges auto crit they don’t exist, as such swordmasters are just bad heros, and all crit strats are worthless.
The entire level up system is screwed, removing randomness, doesn’t even hurt strong units as they mostly rely on bases, class, and high W.Ranks, it only hurts off meta, weak units who rely on lucky growth and investment, fixed growths means these units suffer, Nino with Afa’s drops may be less luck reliant but she is less unique, less viable, less fun, and the game is worse for it.
The only way to implement some of these like traditional devils, Chance Skills, and status staff misses is to have partial randomness which is a hack job system, and, as a sane person, not something I’m willing to entertain.
I’m going to be frank, this statement can only be made if you haven’t thought through your points, haven’t played many SRPGS, and know little of game design.
Removing RNG would make FE a completely different game, It would play differently, it would need different mechanics to function. It would not be Fire Emblem.
Even Shining Force with it’s much less impactful RNG and lack of perma-death is played very differently.
There is no reasonable way to conclude “Fire Emblem is better off without RNG” unless you dislike FE’s gameplay so much you believe the series should be something entirely different to it’s core Mechanical Identity and most every SRPG, RPG, and simulation game.
I think a middle point is a good compromise. Enemies having 30 on late game units in gba suckkkks. Low crit suuuucks but rng is an integral point in fe. I think fates is a pretty good balance, aside from the super complicated stat manipulation on weapons and seals.
I do think having too much variables is bad although enemies with killer weapons are fine they are meant to be a treat but one that’s not super scary [compared to braves or status], especially by late game where you have many tools either units, weapons, or the iron rune that can take them out, however too many units having killer is bad as it introduces too many random crit chances.
I realize I never mentioned the Iron rune, this makes late game crit in fe7/8 a non issue.
Reading through this entire thread, I think there’s an important element that hasn’t been addressed yet regarding the importance of RNG in a strategy game.
In my view, RNG is the differentiator between a strategy game and a puzzle game.
The reality of strategy is that sometimes, things do not work out as planned; the player is thus tested on the ability to mitigate risk and the ability to adapt to unforeseen circumstances, on top of general planning and management.
Remove the risk and the unforeseen circumstances, and what you’re left with is a puzzle to be solved. There’s value to a good puzzle, but we’re suddenly dealing with a very different beast.
If you think people relying on “META” with RNG present is boring, then you won’t be too fond of what players will be doing with your game when they “solve” it.
threatening monks? if there wasn’t the game that kickstarted my villain arc then I wouldn’t believe you
but yeah - RNG is integral to how Fire Emblem works, and part of how Fire Emblem works is trying to make such unfavorable events less likely than they could be
getting crit by 1% crits is the trade-off for sometimes getting crits yourself at low odds - but there is truth that enemy crits against you hold more value - and threat - than your own crits (as the amount of enemies are way larger, and Fire Emblem culture heavily leans towards safekeeping all your units) - which is often designed towards (enemies with no luck vs. units with luck)