Large cast of playable characters? Opinions & Questions

[Gabu]

What are your thoughts on games that have a large cast of playable characters?
I actually have a LOT of questions that I'd like to ask regarding this topic. I'm not looking for any definitive answers, just opinions.



1. How many characters is too many?
2. How Often should a New Party Member be added? 
3a. Should all the party members should travel together in a large group and To change your active party members you just have to edit the formation? Or..
3b. Should the party members travel in a small group and to change your active party members you'd have to go to the World Map or a Save Point? (Like FFVII or FFVIII) Or..
3c. Should the party members travel in a small group and to change your active party members you'd have to go to your Airship / Base of Operations? (Like FFVI)
4a. Gameplay wise, How different should the characters be from one another? Should they all be able to learn the same Spells & Skills, should they have their own personal skills, Or should they have a mixture of both? 
4b. Similar to 4a, Should select characters have specific jobs? Like Should everyone be able to use healing spells or should a select few have healing spells?
4c. How should skills be taught? Should the characters learn them naturally by leveling up or should they learn them through AP?
5a. Should all characters be relevant to the story?
5b. Should There be Optional Characters?
5c. Should There be certain characters that are only obtainable during certain chapters of a game?
5d. Should There be a limit on how many total characters can join the group?

 

[Andar]

please search the forum, there have been several discussions in the past about the number of actors in the game, and each solution from 1 to 250 (yes, two hundred and fifty) actors in the database had its supporters and people crying against it.

 

[coyotecraft]

Recruitment systems are usually optional and most characters have a limited importance to the plot.  It flies in the face of most writing advice that passive characters are a bad thing. That's only true if your story is structured around Character, like most adventure or young-adult stories. However these games with a lot of characters are structured around an Event. Usually a war or time travel. 


Shining Force and the Suikoden games had a base where characters had their own rooms or roommates. In Radiata Stories, all the characters had their own life wandering around town, so you could recruit the baker who will be in the store while not in your active party.


Its common for characters to have shared skills and abilities, but 1-3 character unique skills. Naturally there are going to be characters who's abilities make them more desirable, such as a healer with Auto-Regen or a warrior with Counter Attack, but the recruitment conditions to get them are narrower and/or limited to a story point.


E.g. visit the house during this mission to obtain X; unobtainable after the house is burned down. 


In someways the character are like collectible trading cards. A lot of freemium games for smart devices are like this now, higher rarity makes them harder to get but better stats, and sometimes only available during a weekend/holiday event.


Think of the characters themselves being the rewards. 


I think class systems are only relevant if you have equipment types or elemental attributes. So there might be 3 yo-yo masters available, their equipment is interchangeable or they're identical except for their base element: fire, electricity, and  dark. 


And although some characters might be useless there's still might be some incentive to view their interactions once you have the right combination of characters. Suikoden had bath scenes.  In Shining Force, I think you could recruit a couple Zombie characters that got their own rooms because they're rotting, and as a gag there is a filthy type character who bunks with them and doesn't notice the smell.   

 

[Laetabilis]

My opinions:


1) When it starts to feel like there's no real reason for the characters to be with the party. If you can find a way to give 20 characters an engaging story and plot importance then that's great. But if characters are added just for the sake of more characters it's too much.


2) Not more than one per "chapter" or section of plot, and no later than 75% through the game.


4) I like it when characters have their own jobs and are limited to that archetype, at least to a certain extent. Having jack-of-all trades chars and more than one of the same type is fine, but they should all feel specialized. i.e. In Tales of the Abyss, Tear is a better AoE healer but Natalia is a better single target healer.


5) I think having optional/recruitable characters is a great way to give your game replay value. It's honestly part of what made Star Ocean 2 my favorite rpg of all time.

 

[LaFlibuste]

I'm more on the "less is more" side of the issue. Here are a few things to consider:

- More characters means less developed ones. It can be a good or a bad thing, but definitely is something to consider.


- More characters means the game has to be longer to introduce them all and give the player the chance to see a bit of each in action. Longer projects are harder to develop and finish, need more effort to keep engaging throughout, etc.


- Whatever battle system and ruleset you have for your game, there is only so many classes, specialties and niche roles a character can assume. Having many characters will likly result in one of two things:


1) You still have definite classes, but there is significant overlap and some characters end up being strictly better than others. Which IMHO is to be avoided since it defeats the purpose of having a large roster of characters.


2) Class are more and more blurry, most characters can learn most/all skills and spells, maybe with slight  more or less inconsequential specificities each. Characters can appear bland or interchangeable, less engaging, maybe also defeats the purpose of having many characters.


- You will likely have to think of some sort of system to diminish level difference between characters if you plan on forcing some characters for some arks, want to player to experiment with a lot of them or whatever. FFVI did it by diminishing the importance of stats and levels in favour of giving more importance to gear. Some games give residual experience to passive characters so they don't lag behind too much (but they still lag behind somewhat). FFX allowed you to rotate your characters so even though only 3 were active in battle at the same time, they could all keep up level-wise. Maybe passive characters have jobs in your city or fort or whatever which can bring bonuses to the party and earn them EXP, I don't know, passive roles could be a thing. There certainly are other options which I can't think off the top of my head.


So, in the end, depending on your game length and party-size, I personally wouldn't go higher than 6-8 playable characters. Do note however that I made the previous points with the idea of a constant roster in which you can switch characters around (like FFVI or Suikoden). Games with many playable characters but a party whose formation you never control (think FFIV) are an entirely different beast, in that most if not all of the previous points don't apply.

 

[coyotecraft]

You can also have special conditions for recruiting characters. Such as rival characters, you can recruit one but not the other. 


In Radiata Stories you had human and Fae characters. Some character wouldn't join if you sympathized with the other. At one point in the story you have to side with Human or Fae, and after that point you'll lose access to those character depending on who you side with. 


Arc the Lad: Twilight of the Spirits had 2 independent parties of 5 characters. Human and Deimos. Each character basically had a personal rival on the opposite team for story reason. Twin Bothers, Scientist hunting experiment, mirror revenge motives, parallel psychics defying their destiny.  You switch between teams every chapter with their paths beautifully weaving in and out until the climax when the 2 parties meet in entirety and the player has to pick a side to fight against.   


It's difficult to develop 10 character, but this game was able to do it by switching to 5 at a time. 


Agarest War has generational characters. Time basically stands still for the long-lived elf characters, while the humans are only relevant in their respective generation. The human character picks from 3 women, they become a sacrificial seal or something and their child will grow up and be playable in the next chapter/generation. You can retrieve the human characters and continue leveling them up as "magical doll replicas"


I have to point out a big issue with this game. 20+ characters with individual stat distribution is a terrible idea. It made a painfully long game even longer. 

 

[HexMozart88]

More characters is only useful if you know how to develop them evenly. I'd say no more than seven and even that's kind of pushing it. Start with the characters you know are going to be the most important to the story, and if necessary, add a few more. I think if you're going to have, like, ten characters in your party, they need to all be equally intriguing with balanced abilities, or some need to die off. Another alternative is having party swaps like Chrono Trigger. Depending on what characters you choose, there will be development scenes accordingly. That's a good way to compensate for a large party, and you can have the player choose which characters they want to work with. 

 

[Gabu]

@Andar


I'm sorry. I did do minor research on the forum but I couldn't really find exactly what I was looking for. And when I say Minor I mean searched about 2 times and when I couldn't find what I was looking for I thought I might as well make a post about it.
 

 

[Andar]

@Gabu no need to be sorry - that wasn't a moderator comment, those would have been blue.


It was a comment as a forum member because I remember that there have been pages of discussions about such topics, and you would get a lot more opinions by finding and reading them than you could get from a new topic about it. Especially since some of those discussions came from a different angle (which means they don't use the exact words/descriptions you used).


And no, I don't have the links either and a search would probably take a lot more than only minutes, especially if they are old enough to have been archived (archived topics are ignored by the search machine, they can only be found by manually checking the forum topic titles)

 

[XIIIthHarbinger]

Personally for me it's a question of how all the elements come together for that particular game, what works well for one, doesn't necessarily work for another. From a narrative sense, as well as a game mechanics sense as well. So I suppose I'll use my current project to answer your questions.

1. How many characters is too many?
2. How Often should a New Party Member be added? 
 

For my current project I am using a very small cast of character with all of them being acquired within the first hour of game play. Each is essentially recruited for the overall mission, for different reasons, largely stemming from the circumstances of their background. Namely each of the characters are considered talented but expendable for various reasons; namely they're heretics, criminals, disgraced people, inconvenient bloodlines, etcetera.


The reason for this is because I want the player to learn about the world the story takes place in, by learning about the characters that comprise their party. By deepening their understanding of the experiences that have shaped the characters into who they are, they deepen their knowledge of the game world. To do this well I think you need more than grand expositional moments; but also minor interactions with NPCs & interactions between party members. The original Dragon Age did this very well I think with the various side bar conversations that happen in towns between party members that give us an understanding of who these characters are.

3a. Should all the party members should travel together in a large group and To change your active party members you just have to edit the formation? Or..
3b. Should the party members travel in a small group and to change your active party members you'd have to go to the World Map or a Save Point? (Like FFVII or FFVIII) Or..
3c. Should the party members travel in a small group and to change your active party members you'd have to go to your Airship / Base of Operations? (Like FFVI)
 

With the exception of missions where the party splits into smaller strike forces, to assault multiple objectives simultaneously I intend to keep the party together. So with the exception of those particular events, party selection is simply managed from the menu. Partly this is for narrative purposes like I was mentioning before. Also it makes a kind of sense, because they will all be working together on various missions.

4a. Gameplay wise, How different should the characters be from one another? Should they all be able to learn the same Spells & Skills, should they have their own personal skills, Or should they have a mixture of both? 
4b. Similar to 4a, Should select characters have specific jobs? Like Should everyone be able to use healing spells or should a select few have healing spells?
4c. How should skills be taught? Should the characters learn them naturally by leveling up or should they learn them through AP?
 

I am having my characters start out as one of the three, from the RPG holy trinity. However, after that the player determines the development of the character. Each of the characters will have multiple classes to chose from over the course of the game which will effect equipment capabilities & potential skill selections, with more than fifty different classes in total. Additionally each of the characters gains a point each time they level up, which will in turn can be used to unlock a skill like a spell or technique; or it can be used to unlock a passive ability which alters things like parameters or resistances. 


Simply put, if the player wants a collection of Min/Max archetypes & to just switch the party members around according to the enemies that they are facing they can do that. If instead they want a collection of multifaceted hybrid classes for maximum versatility they can do that to. That way two different people can approach the game in entirely different ways, & they aren't just playing with (insert character name), they are playing with THEIR (insert character name).


However, I don't think the way I am setting up my current game, would work with a large character cast. I think it works well specifically because the cast is so small, & the players get to develope their party members "from the ground up" as it were.

5b. Should There be Optional Characters?
5c. Should There be certain characters that are only obtainable during certain chapters of a game?
5d. Should There be a limit on how many total characters can join the group?

Aside from putting in certain temporary characters as part of a story component, I am not intending to use them. However, again that is largely because of how the game mechanics & narrative. 


When it comes to the things you are asking about I would suggest you look at it as being rather like cooking. There are no good ingredients or bad ingredients, only ingredients that do or do not bring out the intended flavor of the meal. What works very well in one game, is very detrimental to another. So the question is not should or shouldn't X, Y, or Z be used in a game; but rather should or shouldn't X, Y, or Z be used in a specific game.

 

[Arithmetician]

Well, just from playing a lot of JRPGs, 6-8 seems to be a pretty common number, and this works pretty well because each character can occupy a distinct and meaningful niche in battle, and permits plenty of variety in party composition without becoming narratively overwhelming, especially if they are introduced gradually, say starting with 2-3 characters. 


Larger casts can work, such as Final Fantasy VI's ensemble, but again, the key is to be able to give each of them something different to contribute from a gameplay standpoint, as well as a reason to care about them as characters.  Likewise, a game with a particularly developed plot like Final Fantasy Tactics can introduce a large cast over time and plausibly accommodate generics as well  (though obviously generics work better in tactical games than traditional RPGs).


Now, if characters can all or mostly draw upon the same large pool of skills, and the point is to customize them, a small, fixed party established early on of about 3-4 is probably ideal.  Other sorts of games, such as Golden Sun, will also dictate small parties for plot reasons (1 adept for each of the elements, at least at first)