I am starting to brainstorm the new/last robbery missions. I have divided into three categories:

- merchants: low money and no gems, but not risky

- nobles: high money and gems, but high security

- mercenaries/ex military: those are the toughest battles, a bit more money than merchants, but mostly for people who want XP



I am thinking if also to allow a game over in the mercenary events. For the other two, and even the catacombs, you can't have a game over (maybe in the final battle of catacombs).

But for example, I was planning to put some really bad stuff in this one, like a trap in which they fall on a pit with watch dogs or something, so even if they can turn invisible they would still have trouble to escape it, and so on.



I guess if I put a warning before starting the mission, it should be fine. Might still not do it, I want this one to be a more relaxed game ( I mean in Nightmare mode will still be hard to win, but no sudden game overs).

Is it one of those scenarios where certain decisions lead to a party's abrupt death or an end to their journey? I assume most players have a habit of saving often, it should be okay as long the game provides clues to avoid dangerous situations.

No only if you lose the battle is game over, never because of a "wrong choice". But you could be unprepared for the battle...

Since you would need a warning maybe before hand and losing the battles normally means you use up resources but have to do it again, I dont really see the difference between a game over and having to redo the battle, since redoing the battle may cost resources it seems like the more punishing option, rather than reloading a save to do it over?

Usually in the modern games you almost never save manually. I noticed that in many recent games, like Mad Max etc. The game automatically saves before a tough fight so even if you lose, it's never actually a "game over".

Also as you said I wanted to avoid "save scumming" (I think it's called like that) so people constantly reloading a save (like happened on SOTW) so having a game over probably seems the worst option.

Well I'll need to think about it more, maybe will enable it only in some plot-related battles but not during the robbery (which are semi-random scenes/battles).

Most of the modern games I play have both. It autosaves every time you go into a new area or before a fight, but if you need to quit the game suddenly for whatever reason, the save option is there for you to use.

Most of the modern games I play have both. It autosaves every time you go into a new area or before a fight, but if you need to quit the game suddenly for whatever reason, the save option is there for you to use.

Also handy if you want to replay a particular sequence later for fun or to see a cutscene again.

Yes I would need to modify Ren'Py a bit for this, since it displays the saves in "pages" (as you probably know already!). I mean I can do an autosave before each "checkpoint" but then would be hard to find it in the list. The save system would need a complete overhaul to be honest

You can use the existing system and just have the last six checkpoints. A number of games only have a finite number of auto-save slots (though it's usually closer to 30 or 60 or 100).

Yes but the problem is showing them. By default is saved in "slots and pages", so 1-1 = slot 1 page 1, 2-1 = page 2 slot 1 etc.

Doing that checkpoint, I should sort all saves based on the date. It's possible for sure but I never did it, and it sort of goes against the default Ren'Py behavior.

Probably easy to never have game overs at this point

You dont need autosave at all, I just don't find permanent death a really satisfying conclusion due to at that point you will reload anyway. So warn people, and they will save, and then probably reload, but if you dont warn them they may quit in frustration because replaying the last 2-6 hours because the rules changed is seen as not worth it and players will feel tricked or cheated.



But how about taking their stuff? Lose crystals/money or some other resource more than normal and you hurt players without making them feel they have to replay the game. If something needs to be punishing, making them fight out of a cave or taking their things is a good idea. Or lose the use of a character in the next battle as they are out for the count due to helping everyone escape.



I play a lot of DnD and shaking things up (in a way that makes sense) usually can make the game more fun or challenging, killing people doesn't do anything new, since they just replay but narrative punishments or new mechanics can be refreshing and feel rewarding when conquered.

Yes you're right - there's no point since people would just save before and reload.

It wasn't to make the game harder though: was because from narrative point of view was a bit weird. I mean they can use invisibility and run from the houses untouched/undetected, so I feel like there would be no "sense of danger" since they can actually never die.

On the other hand, probably it's how it should work since this game is much more "casual" since its inception, and not "hardcore" like how SOTW was*



* I had many non-hardcore players complain about the limited resources in SOTW, no autoheal after each battle etc. For me was fine: but I don't want to make another game with "those problems" just after this one. More variety is needed.

Its a flip in the air some people view resource management as a hassle even if they are hardcore, and others like more the tactical effort of it. Like in SotW I was just as annoyed at the lack of resources as having to deal with so many slots for equipment in Loren and SotW.



Sometimes a more laid back atmosphere means it needs more relaxed gameplay. How about this, if they lose its described how the dogs do chase them and it was too much of a fight, and then battling the mercenaries are too much for them and is no longer an option. Someone who wants the exp will feel like they lost something, and you imply the danger when the sisters outright say they can't do that again because they almost died and next time they wont be so lucky.



The Traders and Bandits are still an option but they lost an oppurtunity because they lost, since the option is for those wanting exp anyway, it feels like a fairly good way to show danger and make sense without outright killing them?

The problem is that there isn't just "a mercenary", but it's a category of houses/mansions/places to rob. They'll be pseudo-randomly generated on each game to add more variety.

Anyway, I haven't coded yet how the house will look (I'm just writing scenes for now) so it's better to wait and see how they play before deciding

I want really hilarious scenes where they totally goof up, get chased by guard dogs, lose their boots/pants to the dogs, drop the loot, limp home and blame each other for messing everything up. Something that's funny and worthwhile to read, even when you lose.



Not game overs.

Haha that wouldn't be a bad idea