Final Fantasy statuses revision

[Eficiente]

All the descriptions we have for spells with statuses miss how some of them stop working on their own after some time. This are valid weaknesses of the abilities themselves because that's how they work, it's not portrayed as if everything out there in FF had resistances to those ablities that only kick in at random.

As far as I know the only statuses that would need to have this added are Haste, Slow and Stop, but my knowledge on all the games is limited and I may be missing some, so help would be appreciated.

 

[Garchomp777]

The doom status should be fate manipulation

 

[Garchomp777]

And i agree

 

[TartaChocholate]

It should be noted, yeah. Not only Slow and Stop have them though, IIRC depending on the game other statues do last a limited time depending on the game, but that's something that can be checked out quickly in the FFwiki or a guide.

This can also be applied to Status Buffs, Haste, Protect, Shell and Regen also last a limited time.

 

[Eficiente]

The doom status should be fate manipulation

Makes sense, but maybe it should be noted that it could be any of them. I believe some games have it as some Death-like figure one-shotting you, so in those cases it may Soul Manip if the thing is intangible.

@TartaChocholate I believe the FFwiki doesn't always says so, it does it for FF6 but not FF7 as far as I can tell.

 

[Antvasima]

@Matthew_Schroeder @DarkDragonMedeus @CrimsonStarFallen

What do you think about this?

 

[HST_Master]

99% sure this falls under game mechanics. For example Status effects in 10 wear off after battle or a certain number of turns yet in X-2 they all stay until they're manually dealt with despite being in the exact same timeline.

 

[Eficiente]

It makes perfect sense for this type of abilities to be used on others and not last forever, even removing the crazy implications they would have. They can stay as they are in X as it's proven that they at one point had it as just game mechanics there, but other games like VI and VII are completely different from each other in what magic is and where does it come from, they should not inherit how magic realistically works in other titles via overanalyzing them and instead stick to what we know of it.

 

[HST_Master]

It makes perfect sense for this type of abilities to be used on others and not last forever, even removing the crazy implications they would have. They can stay as they are in X as it's proven that they at one point had it as just game mechanics there, but other games like VI and VII are completely different from each other in what magic is and where does it come from, they should not inherit how magic realistically works in other titles via overanalyzing them and instead stick to what we know of it.

But it's not overanalyzing it, the opposite actually, X and X-2 both having a different mechanics on status effects give credibility to it "wearing off" just being game mechanics that differ from game to game rather than being an in lore thing that the spells just last a short amount of time. Same reason we don't give bosses resistances to all abilities that don't work on them.

 

[HST_Master]

And to further prove my point, Crisis Core and VII and VII Remake all have separate takes on status effects despite all being VII, or XIV's which they all last literally only seconds in game because it's a MMORPG and that's simply the mechanics and not that it canonically lasts only 2 seconds.

 

[Eficiente]

It is overanalyzing to give them all the same mechanics in which they work based on how in some games of some universes it works in a better way than the rest and thus all others that don't should be using game mechanics. It doesn't give credibility to say that they work the same when it's proven in some universes that this isn't the case and their magic isn't the same, don't say "wearing off" and "an in lore thing that the spells just last a short amount of time" as if it was weird for this things people trigger in others to just not last forever.

 

[HST_Master]

It is overanalyzing to give them all the same mechanics in which they work based on how in some games of some universes it works in a better way than the rest and thus all others that don't should be using game mechanics.

Again it's not overanalyzing, it's going the simplest route, ironically your own argument that each game having different sources for magic is the reason despite there being games that despite taking place in the same world, do not mechanically work the exact same is in fact overanalyzing it. There's is no in universe reason why the spells work the way they do in gameplay. It's just game mechanics.

It doesn't give credibility to say that they work the same when it's proven in some universes that this isn't the case and their magic isn't the same, don't say "wearing off" and "an in lore thing that the spells just last a short amount of time" as if it was weird for this things people trigger in others to just not last forever.

Again considering that most of the examples I've listed come from games that share the same world, they do. And no, it's not proven considering that your entire argument doesn't stem from any lore statement or cutscene saying that "poison, confusion, etc. last x amount of time" but purely how the games differ in how they treat similar status effects, which is just textbook game mechanics.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

Pokémon is one of the only genuine examples where status effects are accurately portrayed. No one stops being paralyzed, burnt, poisoned, etc until said ailments are actually healed.

I firmly agree with HST, there should be no reason why these ailments running out isn’t game mechanics.

 

[Strife304]

I'm in agreement with Milly and HST. The way Final Fantasy applies time limits on these sort of buffs are strictly for game balancing and have never implied in lore or in any guidebook that they do have a time limit as presented in gameplay. If the following status effects have a limited duration in the lore of the aforementioned verses, proof should be given.

Though, even if this were the case, it's a redundant detail to add because, nothing would stop the user from just recasting it anyway.

 

[TartaChocholate]

Hmm... HST and Milly do have a good point. Took a look around at how the status ailments and buffs worked in the FFwiki and a couple of guides and mostly they last the entirety of the battle, having a limited time is not as widespread as one would think.

What HST mentions also relevant in one aspect, some games have the same setting behind yet the magic gameplay wise works differently because the battle system has different needs. For example, in the original FFVII Haste and Slow last the entire battle, but in the action RPG Remake they were given limited durations despite being the same setting (later chapters revelations notwithstanding).

Positive buffs are the ones that in later entries the developers started to give time limitations in later entries, which is pretty likely for balancing reasons. But as Strife mentions, simply casting it agains is a viable option as magic is shown in cutscenes and story scenes most of the time to simply need a hand gesture at most to use.

Though I can see why there could be confusions on any side, the "gameplay mechanics" line can get pretty blurry sometimes.

 

[Psychomaster35]

I agree with this

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I think HST Master is explaining it just fine; it's agreed that enemies resisting statuses is game mechanics and that characters are fine via equipment to have resistances. But "Attacks that simply have a changed to causes statuses" seems like game mechanics; they're legit powers otherwise.

 

[Antvasima]

So what should we do here?

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

It seems rejected, in all honesty.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. So should I close this thread then?

 

[Eficiente]

I think HST Master is explaining it just fine; it's agreed that enemies resisting statuses is game mechanics and that characters are fine via equipment to have resistances. But "Attacks that simply have a changed to causes statuses" seems like game mechanics; they're legit powers otherwise.

I have no idea what you're talking about, you undertood the strawman but not the only topic here.

Again it's not overanalyzing, it's going the simplest route

You're wrong, the simplest route is to say it works how it does in the games, not to grab the game that has it the best way from other universe and w/ other history of magic and claim it's the same as that.

ironically your own argument that each game having different sources for magic is the reason despite there being games that despite taking place in the same world, do not mechanically work the exact same is in fact overanalyzing it.

Analyze things from the same universe and magic is good, grab from others isn't. Simple as that.

There's is no in universe reason why the spells work the way they do in gameplay. It's just game mechanics.

It doesn't need to when it makes perfect sense that they do and it's what's shown.

but purely how the games differ in how they treat similar status effects, which is just textbook game mechanics.

You ignore how the same powers can legitimately work differently from universe to universe, having other ways in which they're shown and descriptions. This is not an "it turns out" thing, but something basic.

Though, even if this were the case, it's a redundant detail to add because, nothing would stop the user from just recasting it anyway.

Since I'm actually paying attention to this bit I may as well be the only staff who points out how atrociously wrong this is. The effects not working would give as much of an advantage to the foes as the things affecting them, you don't know if the FF character would feel like casting it again, or if the foes would not now have a mean do dodge, defend against it or make it so that the FF characters won't cast it again. Not all can cast magic forever anyway, and particularly Stop would make anyone believe the FF character can just cast it and be done with the fight, when it's literally used to keep hitting foes safer.

I take all of the above as incredibly basic.

 

[Strife304]

Since I'm actually paying attention to this bit I may as well be the only staff who points out how atrociously wrong this is. The effects not working would give as much of an advantage to the foes as the things affecting them, you don't know if the FF character would feel like casting it again, or if the foes would not now have a mean do dodge, defend against it or make it so that the FF characters won't cast it again. Not all can cast magic forever anyway, and particularly Stop would make anyone believe the FF character can just cast it and be done with the fight, when it's literally used to keep hitting foes safer.

I take all of the above as incredibly basic.

Not sure what being "staff" has to do withwthis discussion, but sure? The last part of my response is more of an aside.

You still need to properly address what Milly and HST said with empirical evidence.

 

[HST_Master]

I have no idea what you're talking about, you undertood the strawman but not the only topic here.

Except it's not a strawman? It's quite literally your argument.

You're wrong, the simplest route is to say it works how it does in the games, not to grab the game that has it the best way from other universe and w/ other history of magic and claim it's the same as that.

Analyze things from the same universe and magic is good, grab from others isn't. Simple as that.

Well no, one your only examples is VII and VI having different mechanics on how they do status effects even though I've listed not only several games but several connected games that also have different mechanics on status effects. It's being overtly critical of a difference in design between games.

It doesn't need to when it makes perfect sense that they do and it's what's shown.

This isn't nearly enough. Bring some proof to the table.

You ignore how the same powers can legitimately work differently from universe to universe, having other ways in which they're shown and descriptions. This is not an "it turns out" thing, but something basic.

Just saying "they're from different universes" is no where near enough, not to mention the descriptions don't mention anything of what your claiming at all?

Since I'm actually paying attention to this bit I may as well be the only staff who points out how atrociously wrong this is. The effects not working would give as much of an advantage to the foes as the things affecting them, you don't know if the FF character would feel like casting it again, or if the foes would not now have a mean do dodge, defend against it or make it so that the FF characters won't cast it again. Not all can cast magic forever anyway, and particularly Stop would make anyone believe the FF character can just cast it and be done with the fight, when it's literally used to keep hitting foes safer.

I take all of the above as incredibly basic.

Defend against what with no resistance? Especially when the large majority are on target?

Please give some legit proof outside of eyeballing mechanics because otherwise I'm heavily against this. It's being overctitical and not knowing the line between game mechanics and genuine weakness.

 

[Eficiente]

Except it's not a strawman? It's quite literally your argument.

The part that's not "my argument" is the strawman, which you pointed out at random, the "Attacks that simply have a changed to causes statuses" is not what I'm talking about.

Well no, one your only examples is VII and VI having different mechanics on how they do status effects even though I've listed not only several games but several connected games that also have different mechanics on status effects. It's being overtly critical of a difference in design between games.

Not just mechanics, in VI magic came from 3 gods that gave that to humans, they nearly destroyed the world and then pretty much those gods died and all magic and magic beings stopped existing forever, in VII it has nothing to do with that at all, magic comes from the planet and Sephiroth says that we shouldn't even call it magic. Idk about other games but unless they have it the same way and are in the same universe they shouldn't have everything the same simply because they're not the same. Those other games with that can have it that way, their different uses in mechanics proves how things work in their universe, not others.

This isn't nearly enough. Bring some proof to the table.

Your proof of using other games isn't usable because they don't matter.

not to mention the descriptions don't mention anything of what your claiming at all?

I meant from powers in general.

Defend against what with no resistance? Especially when the large majority are on target?

This just doesn't matter to the thread but they can defead against it without a resistance or make it so that they have one after being affected by the powers once. Fiction doing all kinds of things like this isn't something new.

Please give some legit proof outside of eyeballing mechanics because otherwise I'm heavily against this. It's being overctitical and not knowing the line between game mechanics and genuine weakness.

Your point sits on using other game as proof, as it would otherwise be a genuine weakness, claiming that to be something we shouldn't do and not knowing game mechanics has a major difference.

 

[HST_Master]

The part that's not "my argument" is the strawman, which you pointed out at random, the "Attacks that simply have a changed to causes statuses" is not what I'm talking about.

Again it's not a strawman it's answering your point.

Not just mechanics, in VI magic came from 3 gods that gave that to humans, they nearly destroyed the world and then pretty much those gods died and all magic and magic beings stopped existing forever, in VII it has nothing to do with that at all, magic comes from the planet and Sephiroth says that we shouldn't even call it magic.

I'm aware. This still gives zero evidence that it's not game mechanics.

Idk about other games but unless they have it the same way and are in the same universe they shouldn't have everything the same simply because they're not the same. Those other games with that can have it that way, their different uses in mechanics proves how things work in their universe, not others.

Dude what? I hope you're not legitimately trying to argue to differenting mechanics in how games with multiple side games is canon. The reason the mechanics of status effects differs isn't because something changed about them in-verse, it's because the gameplay is different. It's literally just game mechanics.

Your proof of using other games isn't usable because they don't matter.

I meant from powers in general.

This just doesn't matter to the thread but they can defead against it without a resistance or make it so that they have one after being affected by the powers once. Fiction doing all kinds of things like this isn't something new.

Your point sits on using other game as proof, as it would otherwise be a genuine weakness, claiming that to be something we shouldn't do and not knowing game mechanics has a major difference.

Just saying they don't matter isn't an argument.

My points sit on using consistency between each games showings and drawing a conclusion, even one of the games that you are attempting to use (VII) to prove your logic, does not follow it, unless you can give a in-verse reason why status effects suddenly work differently between Crisis Core and VII which take place at best a couple months from each other and VII Remake which is just an alternative retelling/sequel to VII, your logic doesn't make sense.

Again provide proof for your argument because currently you have none and simply repeating that they have different sources for magic is nowhere close to it.

 

[Eficiente]

Dude what? I hope you're not legitimately trying to argue to differenting mechanics in how games with multiple side games is canon. The reason the mechanics of status effects differs isn't because something changed about them in-verse, it's because the gameplay is different. It's literally just game mechanics.

You know it's not true as I already said that X can have it as X-2 has it. It's you the one putting it as "something changed about them in-verse".

My points sit on using consistency between each games showings and drawing a conclusion, even one of the games that you are attempting to use (VII) to prove your logic, does not follow it, unless you can give a in-verse reason why status effects suddenly work differently between Crisis Core and VII which take place at best a couple months from each other and VII Remake which is just an alternative retelling/sequel to VII, your logic doesn't make sense.

Your proposed example isn't applicable as things do work differently between those games as they're in the same universe and canon. You can't say that the logic doesn't make sense because of that.

And imagine from your point of view I'm actually correct and some games don't have it that way like in the X ones; they have no way of proving this at all, they already had things work as they created it in the game, some descriptions also informed the same and then out of nowhere other people made other game in other setting with other canon to recontextualize things in other games from other settings made by other people just because the title has FF in it. The jurisdiction is simply none.

 

[Antvasima]

@DarkDragonMedeus

What do you think that we should do here?

 

[HST_Master]

You know it's not true as I already said that X can have it as X-2 has it. It's you the one putting it as "something changed about them in-verse".

Because that's the point. Despite nothing changing in verse about how magic works the mechanics of said magic, in gameplay are slightly different, because it's simply the game mechanics.

Your proposed example isn't applicable as things do work differently between those games as they're in the same universe and canon. You can't say that the logic doesn't make sense because of that.

Dude how many times do I have to say it, just saying they're different universes isn't an argument. Give proof.

And imagine from your point of view I'm actually correct and some games don't have it that way like in the X ones; they have no way of proving this at all, they already had things work as they created it in the game, some descriptions also informed the same and then out of nowhere other people made other game in other setting with other canon to recontextualize things in other games from other settings made by other people just because the title has FF in it. The jurisdiction is simply none.

This is just argument from incredulity. I've given several games from X, VII, Ivalice, and XIV and more than likely more if I dig enough to prove my case meanwhile you've repeatedly have not given any evidence to support your claim when asked.

 

[Antvasima]

I have a hard time keeping track. Can somebody write a summary of the issues and arguments here please?

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I'm also having a hard time keeping track and abrasive comments back and forth don't really help much. But I overall do think HST Master is making more sense.

 

[Eficiente]

You just have to read the beginning and ignore the parts where I'm misunderstood or unrelated matters are touched.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I actually did read through the posts step by step; statuses that wear off after a while seems like game mechanics. For example, the Poison status effect wears off after a few turns in game play but there are random times where if the fight ends, it persists after battle until someone uses an antidote; and it could also wear off naturally during the next battle. Other status wear off after battle automatically, but there are still notable game mechanics. However, I still lean towards agreeing more with what HST is saying.

 

[Antvasima]

I trust Medeus' sense of judgement. My apologies Eficiente.

 

[Eficiente]

I wouldn't pack them all as game mechanics for those that may be so, but with the disagreement there isn't much that can be done here, so I'll lock it.