Too bad the "Test Play" button simply throws an error if you're using a TBS of any kind.
Rofl, I feel ya on that (the struggles of an LTBS user). That's why I have a test map solely for battle testing purposes.
4. Skills each are potent and fill a purpose. I do not have elemental spells whose only difference is in the element they use. I do not have Fire 1, Fire 2, Fire 3, Fire 4 either. No skill is useful in every situation. Buffs are powerful, but not always useful. Skills fill their particular niche and every character has a "tool kit" they use with every skill emphasizing usage of that tool kit to provide synergy. Skills are also VERY RARELY "multi-target". Almost every skill in the game is single-target. Well, unless an enemy has it. Their "ultimate skills" often hit the whole party.
I totally agree w/ this. I hate when an RPG has
Fire,
Fira,
Firaga, etc... Or even just different elemental spells in which the only difference is the elemental damage as you mentioned. That's why not only do I avoid using tiered spells like the
Fire,
Fira,
Firaga example, but I also design spells w/ synergy as the main goal/focus. Basically, spamming a single skill over and over will yield very mediocre results. The player must combine the various skills/spells they have available, not only w/ themselves but also with their party members and the environment. For example, casting an Ice spell on a puddle of water or a unit w/ the Damp state will Freeze them immediately, whereas simply casting Ice Blast over and over requires 4 turns to fully freeze the target (Chilled->Frosty->Frigid->Frozen). Basically, there are "mini-rotations" and combos the player could (and should) do. I try to make every spell interact w/ as much stuff as possible.
Like your project, Buffs (or States rather) are powerful in my game as well. I noticed in many RPGs, skills that increase stats are almost never used by the player. Usually, it's because the buff's effect isn't large enough or the player simply doesn't want to spend that turn on a skill that doesn't deal damage. I addressed this by making various skills, including buff spells, a "Bonus Action". Bonus Actions don't consume your turn, but do cost resources to cast, whether it's MP or TP or w/e. Other examples of Bonus Actions include "Stances" and various Movement-type skills (e.g. Leap). Buffs also make use of utility scaling, as does pretty much every skill/spell. This removes the need for tiered spells like
Fire,
Fira, &
Firaga.
7. There is no Dedicated Healer. Magic Healing is too cost effective and renders almost every RPG "too easy". The only games that are difficult with Dedicated Healers are ones in which the healing had to be nerfed or severely restricted in the first place. Which, should tell you everything you need to know about how easy any RPG is as long as healing is quick, easy, and cheap. So, no Dedicated Healers. Buy your consumables, spend a turn to use them. Avoid damage through smart gameplay, or use consumables and turns to fix mistakes.
I'm curious to see how that'll work out for you. I have the opposite opinion regarding healing. In fact, it is a critical aspect of combat in my game. Many enemies will have healing as well (not every enemy, but usually at least 1 unit in the troop can heal). The "healing is OP" issue you mentioned isn't an issue since Mana is extremely limited in general. For the 1st few levels, a player character would only have enough MP to cast 2-3 spells. If they want to be a more efficient caster/healer, they'll have to build for it. That means equipping a Staff or other caster-type weapon and putting points into Hematurgy (mana management & caster utility skills/passives), Hieromancy (Holy-themed skills/passives), and/or Hydromancy (Water-themed skills/passives).
There is literally only 1 direct healing spell available to players (found in the Hieromancy tree). This is intentional since I've designed healing to be more than just simple direct healing. For example, Hieromancy is all about damage prevention, mostly via Absorption Shields, but also through other means like Spirit Link (shares/equalizes HP pool w/ an ally) or a dmg reduction buff. Many of the passives in that tree affect/improve the
Shield spell (this is the skill that grants an Absorption Shield). This can range from granting the Absorption Shields a dmg reflect component to making overhealing (from using the direct Heal spell) grant an Absorption Shield for the value overhealed. This tree also has the only Revive spell available (at the bottom of the tree though).
Hydromancy, on the other hand, is all about HoTs (healing over time). This tree also contains the only AoE heal available to players (Healing Rain). However, even that is a HoT spell. Many of the spells in this tree can also be used offensively, not just for healing. For example, the spell Drench has 2 components: 1st it attempts to remove Burn, Disease, or Poison on the target, then it also inflicts the Damp state, which increases both Healing received (from Water-themed heals) as well as Frost damage received by 30%. I've also mentioned that Damp makes the affected target susceptible to Freezing. So it's like a double-edged sword, but in most situations, it's not a problem.
In short, I've tuned the encounters to be pretty difficult if the player doesn't have access to some form of healing (including Absorption Shields & HoTs as mentioned above). They'll have to be smart w/ their MP management. There are many ways of regenerating MP (not just via the +4% MP regen from Staffs). Most of the methods of gaining MP involve a combo w/ certain spells or a certain setup/rotation.
In addition, I went the opposite route in terms of item usage. I discourage the use of items as much as possible. I want players to use their skills/spells instead of relying on consumables. Hence, HP/MP Potions are in the form of HoTs as well, which also simulates "metabolism".
Edit: Btw, what's your definition of a "dedicated healer"? Is it a character that can ONLY heal? Or does a caster-type character that has healing spells in addition to non-healing spells count? If it's the former, then I agree with you regarding the exclusion of a "dedicated healer". If it's the latter, well I've already typed enough on that matter...
Anyway, there's no right and wrong way of doing things. The various mechanics simply have to culminate into a cohesive and balanced battle system. So it's hard to say whether a certain specific mechanic is balanced or a good/bad idea. It's all about the context.