Final Fantasy V's Job System

 With only a single game between them, Final Fantasy V brings back the Job system introduced in III, but with some refinements and changes. I'm about four hours into the fifth entry in this franchise, which was also the only SNES-era game not to be released in the US initially (hence why IV and VI were released as II and III here).

Interestingly, this is the first of these games that uses Jobs/Classes that a player actually picks to give the characters actual distinct personalities, and in a delightful change, even though each class has it iconic looks (like a headband for Monks and a unicorn horn for Summoners) the looks of these characters are nevertheless unique.

Bartz, the game's primary protagonist, hasn't quite had a story like Cecil's unfold just yet, but there are hints of some greater story of his late parents and his connection to the various elemental crystals (I think II is the only one so far that has not had elemental crystals as a central part of the plot, though I think that element will largely depart from the series from VI onward, unless you count the various Mother Crystals in XVI, though these aren't quite as specifically linked to the four elements).

There are some new jobs, and I suspect that we're getting access to most of them far earlier than in III, to give us time to fully level them up. The early options are, if memory serves, Knight, Monk, Thief, White Mage, Black Mage, and Blue Mage.

The Blue Mage is an interesting addition - it's the first instance of a character that can learn enemy skills, though weirdly, you have to level up that job at least once before you get the "Learn" feature, so you don't actually have any Blue Magic to cast at first (however, they get to wield most weapons and armor).

Rather than just getting a job level for every five actions you take in combat, there's instead a kind of alternative XP that you get in each encounter that allows you to level you jobs.

Each job comes with a core skill that you'll have when you are using that job, but you'll start learning other skills as the job levels up. You have a second slot for a second ability, but you can equip the skills you've learned from any job, regardless of your currently-equipped one. Some of these primary skills can't be learned, like the Monk's kick, but most can. This will allow you, for example, to learn the Guard feature of the Knight and then swap to a Monk.

For spellcasting, they divide spell abilities by level, so while you'll want to largely stick with a type of caster to get those better spells, if you already have a high enough spellcasting ability, you can swap and have access to all those spells.

One real convenience is that once you learn a spell, all of your characters can use it if they've got the ability to cast that level of that kind of magic - for example, I just fought and earned the allegiance of Ifrit, so if I were to make all of my characters Summoners, they ought to all be able to summon him.

One class I've found fun is the Mystic Knight (your man loves a battlemage) who have a special "Spellblade" ability, which then lets you cast any of your black magic spells on your weapon, infusing it with that element of damage or even that magical effect for the rest of the fight - this can include Silence and Sleep!

In fairly quick succession, you get more Jobs. The next set includes the Red Mage, the Time Mage (which gets all those "Slow," "Haste," "Stop," etc. spells) the Summoner (all your summon spells - you can pick up some less powerful ones from a store,) the Berserker (which acts as if it always has the Berserk condition - basically if you want to not worry about micromanaging one of your characters,) an the Mystic Knight (as described earlier).

Next, you get the Beastmaster (which I have not really figure out,) the Geomancer (which, like in III, has some powerful and MP-free abilities that you just sadly don't get to pick,) and the Ninja.

I think there are others you can get, but I don't know if I need to do side quests, explore, or just wait until later in the game.

Anyway, I think that the system probably makes a bit more sense than the one in III. Assuming there's an exponential growth in both the points gained and needed to level the jobs, I hope it'll be easier to catch up on a new job than it was in III.

Monster Design in 2025

 We've talked about the new core rulebooks as the "2024 Core Rulebooks," but as we've learned from an announcement a few months ago, only the PHB and DMG will actually be releasing this year. The updated Monster Manual is due to come out a bit later.

The truth is, because this isn't strictly a new edition, it's probably fine. Not only do we have the 2014 MM to fall back on, but if there's one consistent addition to the game with nearly every book that comes out, it's new stat blocks. Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse doesn't have as extensive a bestiary as the Monster Manual, but its revisions of the additions from Volo's and the original Mordenkainen's provide both a bevy of creatures to choose from, but also a preview as to how we might see the originals change.

That being said, Monsters of the Multiverse came out two years ago, meaning that it will be around three years old by the time that MM25 is released, and as such, I can imagine that we'll see some design evolution from that point as well.

Let's start from the top:

Overall, the basic format of monsters and their stat blocks is, I think, unlikely to change. We might see some visual design changes - maybe a new font, maybe new colors - and it's possible that we'll see a change to where the Challenge Rating is found, possibly taking MCDM's approach and making it prominently visible at the top of the box (I'd actually love if they gave us monster roles as well, but I'm skeptical they will).

In general, I think we'll likely see formatting changes that have already happened carry through: rather than giving creatures lines in their basic traits section that provide things like bonus actions and spellcasting, this will instead be found in its Action or a separate Bonus Action section, respectively.

Likewise, we've seen a migration from the lore description outside the stat block to the stat block itself features like "Unusual Nature" that tell if a creature needs to drink or eat or the like.

Still, I imagine that all the information we currently get in a stat block will likely be represented similarly to how it is now.

But that's just formatting. What about changes to design?

Spellcasting:

Here, we saw an evolution of the design in MotM, where creatures with an extensive system of spell slots for casting instead got cantrip-like "spell attacks" that were the source of most of their damage, gaining utility or sometimes AoE spells as "X times per day" options.

I think this has made running these monsters far easier for DMs. The issue I have with it is how it neuters player-chosen spells like Counterspell.

Here, I favor the approach MCDM took in Flee, Mortals! Here, spellcasting enemies have multiattack options that allow them to cast genuine spells, and even though these are not cast using spell slots (meaning the DM only has to keep track of any "X/day" options) it still allows players to interact with these spells with their own options. By giving spellcasters multiattack, as well, you allow Counterspell to be a powerful option, but not one that will lock down a Lich (unless you have three characters all focusing on countering them every turn, which is unlikely even in a large party).

I'd also say that not all of the options need to be spell attacks - having effects that call for a saving throw feels more "caster-like" and will also not devalue effects like Aura of Protection, Bless, and the like.

Essentially, here are two entirely separate issues of why I don't like giving monsters a straight-up Spellcasting feature like player characters:

The first is just DM mental load - tracking spell slots is pretty easy for players, especially with a D&D Beyond sheet where you can just press "cast" and it will deduct the appropriate spell slot. But when you're running a Lich, his two Necromancer lieutenants, and twenty Ghasts or whatever, it's a lot.

The second reason is action economy: If your party has a Wizard or Sorcerer who can cast Counterspell, it's not an unreasonable plan to have them just spam Counterspells every time the big boss spellcaster casts a spell. And while this is certainly a good plan for players, for a DM it means that someone who is supposed to be really scary becomes pretty impotent.

Now, the redesign for Counterspell (while the Sorcerer in my Ravnica campaign is not a fan) in which it forces a Con save rather than automatically working on 3rd-and-lower spells, and can be up-cast to always work if you know the level of the spell you're countering, does help a lot with this - this can actually be a place where your bosses might burn through Legendary Resistances (I don't think I've ever used all of them on any boss) and where their high Con save bonus might make Counterspell a riskier move.

But in case the redesign doesn't go live, I wanted to propose something else: what if the multiattack options for casters allowed one regular spell (though in an "X per day" or even "At Will" format) along with a handful of the MotM-style spell attacks? That way, you can spam Counterspell to deal with the most powerful of their abilities, but they're still going to be dishing out the damage (possibly even have the "spell" thing more of a crowd-control element, meaning that even when their nasty spells are being countered, they're still putting out just as much damage as a boss ought to).

General Balance:

There's a tendency to talk about high-level D&D as an unbalanced mess, but in my experience running things now at tier 4 (admittedly without a Wizard in the party) it actually feels reasonable (my characters have high ACs, but the monsters hit hard enough that there's a sense of danger).

Still, I think that some of the older creature designs do suffer. Probably none do more than legendary monsters, where the action economy (even with their legendary actions) can really fail to deliver the kind of threat they're meant to.

Granted, I think this is most prevalent in spellcasting enemies - as long as a legendary monster is still bound to a single reaction and a single spell on their turn, they'll struggle to be the kind of terror that they ought to be.

Now, obviously, monsters shouldn't be invincible - as much as I've dreamed of setting Sul Khatesh on a party and letting them puzzle out how the hell they're able to do anything to her (though my party does have an artifact weapon, so they'd be able to do a little damage) - there does need to be a gap in their armor.

That being said, I think that the game isn't totally ideal for "boss fights" because, given how long it takes to run combat, every encounter should be at least a little dramatic and challenging. In a video game  you can blaze through like fifty encounters before you take on a boss, which gives you the opportunity to make some real contrast. In D&D, I try not to have more than four or five encounters per day, so the boss can't be that much crazier than the other fights.

Legendary Reactions:

One curious aspect of recent monster design (first seen, I think, in the Spelljammer Monstrous Compendium) is that legendary actions seem to be getting replaced with Legendary Reactions, in other words, giving boss monsters multiple reactions per round that can be used for things similar to legendary actions.

There is some tech this actually takes away, which is allowing the expenditure of multiple legendary... things for more powerful effects. For instance, the Lich can spend a single legendary action to cast a cantrip, but can spend more for effects like its Paralyzing Touch or Frightening Gaze, and all three to do Disrupt Life, a reasonably powerful AoE damage burst.

The Vecna the Archmage stat block from the Vecna Dossier just has two extra reactions - they're powerful, including what is essentially a 4th level Counterspell that deals damage and also, because it's not a spell, can't itself be countered, and a quick escape reaction if someone hits him in melee.

These are both really good, mind you (in fact, given that Vecna can cast Scrying at will and the range on his counterspell is just "anyone he can see casting a spell" you could really cause a lot of pain before the party even gets to him).

Having not used a ton of this style of legendary monster, I can't really tell you what I think of it. I think this Vecna stat block is deadlier than the Monster Manual Lich, but it's also several CRs higher, so that's to be expected.

One thing that this does do is that the legendary reactions compete with normal ones, like opportunity attacks. Given that this version of Vecna has a pretty powerful melee weapon attack, you might actually be tempted to make use of that if it's provoked, but if a 2014 Lich has three legendary actions and a reaction, our new style loses one of these four off-turn capabilities.

Evil Humanoids:

Naturally, the notion that some peoples are inherently evil is abhorrent, and at the risk of breaking us out of this fun little fantasy bubble, the real world suffers the most when groups of people convince themselves that other groups of people are inhuman and worthy of wholesale slaughter.

Still, it can get murky in the land of fantasy. For example, well before Tolkien, the earliest versions of Orcs were actually malevolent underworld spirits (if I recall correctly, they originate in Greek myth,) not too dissimilar to demons and devils and the like. Over time, though, in fantasy fiction, Orcs have evolved into something that is more human-like, really a people with their own culture but who are essentially not that distinct from humans. Clearly at this point, Orcs in particular have been an opportunity to examine the way that dehumanization can obscure a culture that has its own richness and merits, even if history has put us in conflict with them.

I find it interesting, then, that most of these classic "evil humanoids" like Drow, Orcs, and Goblins have undergone something of a rehabilitation in D&D, with Ed Greenwood (creator of the Forgotten Realms) introducing lore about Drow who are not aligned with Lolth's murderous and evil ways. But not all of them have: Gnolls, for example, have been relabeled as Monstrosities, and are solidified as unnatural and purely evil. While the descriptions of Gnolls in lore sourcebooks suggests a truly monstrous nature, spawning from the evil of Yeenoghu, I'll confess I don't see why these hyena-people are so inherently bad while, for example, Minotaurs (who were similarly linked to another demon lord in the form of Baphomet) have been given a more neutral/all-alignments treatment, and there's even a new alternative origin story, connecting them instead to Sigil and the Lady of Pain's mazes rather than Baphomet's Abyssal labyrinth.

What, though, does this mean for stat blocks?

Well, clearly we need to preserve some of them for the backwards compatibility that is one of the new books' major selling points. If I pull out Lost Mines of Phandelver (or the Shattered Obelisk) I'm going to need those "Goblin" stat blocks for the first encounters.

But we're almost certainly going to see an "any alignment" label on these stat blocks rather than the current "chaotic evil" ones.

Indeed, it seems likely that we'll be sticking with "typically" as a qualifier on alignments - even in cases where it would seem that beings are defined by their alignments, like Devils being lawful evil and Demons chaotic evil. I actually have no problem with that - if we can have any sort of fallen angel that is of an evil alignment, it stands to reason that you could have a noble fiend who has turned their back on evil, despite being physiologically the same as they were.

Another thing I'm curious to see is Hags. Hags are... here's the thing: they make for awesome monsters and villainous (not necessarily antagonistic) NPCs, but they are, of course, even inherently in their names, built on misogyny.

And yet, I think that we're seeing a way to play with that - in Turn of Fortune's Wheel, the adventure that's part of the Planescape box set, we encounter a male hag. He uses "uncle" as his title, much as hags often go by "Auntie" or "Granny." And you know what? I think this kind of solves the problem. Hags are the embodiment of cruelty, conniving, manipulation, and nastiness, and women of course don't have a monopoly on those things.

More Unique Mechanics:

One of the issues you get with the release of any new monsters is that, well, there's just not a huge difference between monsters. When you look at an Ogre as compared to a Hill Giant, there's a difference in CR and thus damage and hit points, but overall, there's not much that really makes these monsters too distinct - it's super easy to re-skin a hill giant as a more powerful ogre, or to use ogres as lesser hill giants.

I'm hoping that we get a good hook for each monster family. Yes, being able to reskin monsters easily can be helpful in and of itself, but monsters should also be exciting to face. Anything that's just a big bag of hit points feels like it should get at least one unique thing that it can do and no other monsters can.

But that's less of a prediction than a wish.

Anyway, this is the book we're going to have to wait longest for. Luckily, we have tons of resources to tide us over. I never even got Tome of Beasts III, and I still have plenty of Flee, Mortals monsters I've never used. I haven't even checked out the Grim Hollow and Drakkenheim books.

The Rogue, the PHB, and Whether the 2014 Subclasses are Too Sacred to Cut

 One of the surprising elements of the recent interview about this year's new Player's Handbook is the inclusion of the Soulknife Rogue. While I like that subclass, I also felt that, on a flavor level, the established picks for the Rogue's four subclasses were kind of perfect:

In the last Rogue playtest, the subclasses listed were the Thief, the Assassin, the Arcane Trickster, and the Swashbuckler.

Again, in terms of flavor, these seemed like the perfect options for the class. To my mind, the PHB should represent the most classic examples of character archetypes that fit into the broader archetypes of the classes. And in that case, I think that the death-dealing assassin, the deft thief, and the brazen swashbuckler are all really solid, core facets of the Rogue fantasy. The Arcane Trickster is admittedly a little less traditional, but the notion that Rogues might utilize a bit of magic when they live in a world with as much magic as you find in D&D feels right, and on top of that it's a very popular subclass.

The presence of the Soulknife, though, seems to indicate that one of these four is getting the cut.

Now, granted, maybe they've decided to give every class five subclasses, but I doubt that.

It seems to me the most likely that the Swashbuckler would get cut, as it's the only one not in the 2014 PHB. That being said, I hope it's not.

Instead, I think there's an argument to be made for both the Thief and the Assassin.

The Thief is a solid subclass, but you could make the argument that it's so close to the core of the class fantasy that you could argue that every Rogue could be a Thief of sorts.

The same might be said for the Assassin (though I think you could play a Rogue who really tries to avoid killing). And I think the Assassin also has the downside of having always been, mechanically, a little underwhelming. The 2014 version, for instance, has two of its four subclass features as things that could be handled with simple RP and that I think any character would be able to do at my table. The UA update to the Assassin was certainly better, adding new Cunning Strikes options, for example, but still had a bit of this jankiness.

I think the Arcane Trickster is the only subclass I think is safe from getting cut, and the Swashbuckler is still most likely to be the one dropped.

But if they were willing to cut any PHB subclasses, I wonder what we might see.

Barbarians:

I actually think both the Totem Warrior and Berserker are likely to stay, especially given the fixes made to the Berserker that genuinely make it a pretty good subclass.

Bards:

Here, I think I could imagine seeing the College of Valor cut and replaced with a revised version of the College of Swords. Swords largely felt like an update to the Valor Bard, and one that had more interesting and unique mechanics.

Clerics:

Well, we already know that there are a bunch of cuts, as this is one of the two classes that had more than four subclasses in the 2014 PHB. As of the last UA, the included subclasses were Trickery, Light, Life, and War. I don't think I've actually seen anyone playing a Light Cleric, though I think it's actually a pretty good subclass. So I don't have any obvious cuts here.

Druids:

Again, with Land Druids getting fixed up, I don't see either of the '14 subclasses getting cut.

Fighters:

The Psi Warrior is somewhat of an unexpected choice here. None of the Xanathar's subclasses were likely to make the cut (and the Echo Knight is in that weird psedo-3rd-party space and also maybe too good). But even while the Rune Knight is popular, I really can't see cutting any of the 2014 options - the Battlemaster is beloved, and the changes to the Eldritch Knight are fantastic (though please let us use our weapons as a spellcasting focus!) and the Champion is boring, but they need a simple option.

Monks:

Previously I might have said I'd expect the Four Elements Monk to get the cut, but with the last playtest, they actually put that subclass in a great place, and with the further improvements to the Monk itself, I think we're unlikely to see any unexpected changes here.

Paladins:

The only head-scratcher choice to me in the playtest was the Oath of Glory, which I could imagine seeing booted in favor of something like Conquest or Redemption (I like Oath of the Watchers myself, but I don't know how popular it is). But the three 2014 options are probably safe.

Rangers:

Again, with only two 2014 options, and with the Tasha's era fix to Beast Masters, I think we're probably going to see both of these. I'll be curious to see how the updated Gloomstalker turns out. I still find the Fey Wanderer a surprising choice, but it does work kind of well if we think of the Gloomstalker as the Shadowfell Ranger and the Fey Wanderer as the Feywild one.

Rogues:

Well, we talked about this already.

Sorcerer:

Yeah, the existing ones are staying.

Warlock:

Again, I think that the three 2014 options, especially with the revisions we saw in the UAs to the Archfey and Great Old One, feel great.

Wizard:

Once again this was a class with more subclasses than any other in the PHB, so they had to get some cut down, but I found the inclusion of Illusionists to be a bit surprising - but then, they did mention that they had new rules guidance on illusions, so I doubt it will be cut.

We're still months away from the release of the new PHB, but with everything finalized, WotC seems willing to share some sneak peeks, so I'm curious to see what else they're willing to reveal.

IV Down, II To Go

 Perhaps it's because it was my first console, but I have a strong nostalgic connection to the SNES. I actually got an N64 only a year after the Super Nintendo, so for me those eras kind of overlapped (it was a less internet-saturated time, so I wasn't feeling FOMO as much over all the newest games, and the old ones I was discovering were new to me).

Final Fantasy IV, released in the U.S. as II originally, is a huge leap forward for the franchise in many ways I've already detailed on this blog. I do wonder a bit to what extent this is due to technical breakthroughs (surely somewhat) and to what extent it's a reflection of the folks at SquareSoft just getting better at making this kind of game.

IV has a broad cast of characters who each have at least a little personality - this, of course, is something that games have gotten better and better at over the years. I believe it wouldn't be until VI that you got to keep a large stable of characters and swap them out between fights. Here, we have a few characters who show up temporarily, and honestly it's a little surprising to see that some of them don't actually come back as playable characters (Edward, the Bard, seems due for a return, but he simply remains a friendly NPC).

Naturally, the center point of the story is Cecil, the clear main character of the game, and the only one we have from start to finish. Cecil's arc is simple, but cool - he begins as a Dark Knight guilty of brutal acts of conquest, but begins on the journey to redemption when he acts as guardian to the young Rydia after inadvertently killing her mother and destroying her hometown.

His transition to become a Paladin happens a little earlier than I expected (though there's still a fair amount of content before that point).

Still, this game still has a foot in the series' roots, with a focus on elemental crystals at the center of it (though if I recall correctly, there are no such crystals in II). While VI and especially VII moved the series away from traditional medieval fantasy, it's clear that there are some of those genre-bending ideas here (and in previous games, even the first). The third airship you get, the Lunar Whale, is more of a piece of futuristic sci-fi tech, as is the Tower of Babel, which you visit a number of times as climactic dungeons.

This game's progression system actually works pretty much the way that I had assumed most RPGs did, having gotten my start with Super Mario RPG. Characters simply learn spells and abilities as they level (though Rydia gets some of her summons from optional side quests, and at least one from an item drop,) which means that, on one hand, you can't really tailor them to what you particularly want (and given that you have no control over which characters are in your party, you'd better learnt to like what you have) but on the other, they're going to be able to do their job and do it right.

I also think they did a pretty good job in making spellcasters feel like they have enough MP to actually cast spells, while still forcing you to manage the resource, especially in long-haul dungeons. The addition of save points where you can use Tents and Cottages is a fantastic change here - the final dungeon has, if I recall correctly, two save points. While you can't resupply (I did use Teleport a couple times to go back and get more items, being better able to get down there with higher levels and fewer side-paths needed to take) it's a great opportunity to take a break.

I'll also hand it to the game in that it has a big twist that actually makes sense because it echoes a previous twist.

So, now I'm looking forward to checking out the new and improved Jobs system in V, and getting excited to fully delve into VI.

Nearing FFIV's Conclusion

 I realize I've been blowing through these games. In part I think that's because, as someone who has lived through the evolution of the genre, I've got a better handle on how games like these work - like that it's good to dump a bunch of gil on potions to heal up between fights, for example. I've also been pretty good at recognizing how certain enemies work - a number of "Grenade" enemies, I discovered, would detonate after taking any lightning damage and destroy not just themselves but also all the other monsters you're fighting, making fights with them trivial (as long as you could survive long enough for someone to get their spell off). Similarly, I figured out fairly early on in one of the last dungeons that some enemies would essentially get the "Confuse" effect if you hit them with lightning, so I could make those encounters a lot easier.

As I said with my first post about the game, IV seems like the first Final Fantasy game that really feels like what I've come to expect from the genre. There were gestures toward something approaching a plot in II and III, but here we've got characters that have arcs, a decent amount of levity (though also some darkness - darkness that the game, in its final act, seems to kind of take back).

The Active Time Battle system certainly takes getting used to - I definitely spent some of the early game gawking at the screen when I had characters ready to go.

I also think that, much as I had wished in the previous entries, there are fewer random encounters, but they feel more impactful. This does mean that my healer (primarily Rosa by the end) is getting a real workout. That said, it also feels like the spellcasters have a deep enough MP pool that you can generally cast a spell on each turn, and it only starts to feel limiting in big marathon areas (though with save points where you can pop a Tent or a Cottage in most dungeons, even this isn't such a bad thing).

Essentially, of this run of the entire series, IV is clearly the best game so far, but naturally one has to recognize that they needed the first three to get to this one.

I do suspect technical capabilities played a role in making a more sophisticated game as well - I don't know what the data capacity of an SNES cartridge is like compared to that of an NES one, but I suspect there was more room for dialogue, which naturally helps flesh out the characters.

Indeed, I've marveled at the amount of music in FF7 Rebirth, and I think that's in large part due to the fact that we've gotten to a point where it's not a terrible burden to have a 100GB game. Audio, comparatively speaking, is minuscule, so the challenge is not fitting it in, but producing it in the first place.

Anyway, I'm at a point where I'm pretty sure I can go to the game's final dungeon, but I have a number of side quests to take care of. One might be moot - looking it up online (sue me) it seems the point of going to one of them is to discover that a character you thought was dead is alive, but I've already seen the guy. The other is largely to enhanced Rydia's summoning capabilities - getting extra summons like Leviathan and eventually Bahamut (I went through a later dungeon where I had to fight through three Behemoths - easily some of the hardest enemies I've fought in the game - only to discover that I hadn't done the necessary prerequisite quest).

After this, I know that V re-introduces the Job System as seen in III, but I'm told implements it better (Here's what I'd love to see: make it less of a pain to level up a new job, don't give us jobs at the end of the game that make all the previous ones irrelevant, and maybe limit what jobs certain characters can choose - I'd love to see, say, a character who only gets to pick offensive spellcasting Jobs or one who's all tanky, melee-focused ones, to retain something of a personality).

Of course, this is all building to VI, which seems to be in contention with VII as the best of the series. That one I have played a bit of, and I'm excited to see how it feels.

And, if I feel up to it, I might get whatever latest remaster of the original VII is available. Naturally, I've got a bit of a sense of that one having played through the two existing thirds of the Remake trilogy, but it would be cool to see the original "text."

FFVIIR Through the Lens of the Early Games

 I'd guess I'm about half to two thirds of the way through Final Fantasy IV, which feels like it's really zipping right along (it seems to be relatively linear, for one thing). The inspiration for getting all these Pixel Remasters was, of course, the release of Final Fantasy VII Rebirth, the second part of the FFVII trilogy.

I've been massively impressed with the Remake trilogy. There's exceptional polish and really compelling gameplay in what was clearly a labor of love for those who made it. In fact, it's so good that last year's Final Fantasy XVI feels all the more underwhelming in comparison (I know that there are some who are very happy with the game, but returning to bang out a few more sidequests before the game's conclusion after finishing Rebirth, the game's glaring flaws were thrown into sharp relief).

In fact, perhaps it would be best to kind of triangulate between these three categories. Ever since XII (I'm setting aside the two MMOs just because I think a game like that naturally can't work the same way a single-player game does) there has not been a single new main-line Final Fantasy game to use the traditional JRPG combat set-up, where you have a battle screen and your party of characters lined up on one side and the monsters on the other.

And... I'm honestly finding myself a little more sympathetic with that decision, even if I really didn't like the implementation that XII used.

As I mentioned in a previous post, I believe X is actually the only Final Fantasy game in the entire series to use what I'd consider a traditional turn-based system. Games I through III are closer to that, but you actually queue up each of the characters' actions for the round ahead of time, and it's somewhat randomized as to what order in which they act (this actually screwed me a bit on the final boss of III, because I forgot that I'd want to hit my healer with an Elixir when they had the MP to cast Curaja twice rather than once, and wound up missing a turn of healing and thus not being able to both revive and heal up one of my two martial characters before the boss' giant AoE blast that they do every round hit).

IV introduces the Active Time Battle system, which is something that I've never been entirely comfortable with. In the first three games, there's arguably no reason you ever need to pause the game, as none of your inputs are time-sensitive. But in IV, instead, you have these meters that fill up and once they do, you get that character's menu. The action does not pause unless you've selected one of the options, like Attack or Black Magic, etc. Thus, if you hesitate (or even just lose focus and don't realize you can do something) you can find yourself taking more damage and making the fight harder.

This system would persist through I believe IX, which created a bit more pressure and honestly introduces a greater risk of sloppiness, forcing you to think quickly as to what you want to do. In fact, the ATB system would also be the basis for Chrono Trigger's combat system, which added the clever wrinkle of combo-attacks that require you to wait until both (or all three) characters are active and ready to go.

Flashing forward to 2020, and the launch of Final Fantasy VII Remake, you have something that calls itself the Active Time Battle system, even though it's transparently a very different system. And yet... it's also kind of similar.

The obvious distinction is that the 7R (there, that's probably the quickest abbreviation) games use action-style gameplay that requires you to consider positioning and gives you a number of commands, dodges, blocks, and such, along with enemies that will send out attacks in discrete locations, allowing you to move out of the way and such. There's a somewhat undercooked pure-action game right there (and here my criticism of XVI is showing) but while you can do a significant portion of your damage in this real-time action gameplay, its primary purpose is to build up ATB charges, which you then use to perform the kind of actions you would in the old Final Fantasy games (except "Attack," though every character has several non-spellcasting ability options, similar to a Dragoon's Jump or a Monk's Kick).

This hybrid of action and menu-navigation-based gameplay really feels to me like the perfect update to the Final Fantasy formula. Because while I've felt nostalgic for the old turn-based (even if, contrary to my assumptions, none but X have had actual truly turn-based combat systems) combat, the truth is that it does get a little repetitive and... maybe boring? Granted, you're reading the words of a person who is playing through the fourth title from this series in a row, so I've been steeping in random encounters for many hours in close succession.

Still, I think it's all worth bearing in mind that in Square Enix's now 23-year quest to find some new core gameplay system, I think the 7R system has the legs to give them many titles in the future (I don't know if it's a rights thing or something, but boy would a Chrono-series sequel using this system work fantastically).

Anticipating and Imagining Tweaks to the Soulknife

 The Soulknife is my favorite Rogue subclass, and so I'm fairly excited to see the subclass getting a revision in this year's Player's Handbook (I'll be sad if this means the Swashbuckler gets cut - honestly, I wouldn't shed a tear if the Assassin got cut instead, though I think the Assassin really deserves a good rework to be an actually good subclass).

The Soulknife is super cool, but there are some rules hiccups and balancing issues caused by the way that the rules are written.

Let's talk about the big one first:

Soulknives are built around Psychic Blades, which are effectively hybrid melee/ranged conjured weapons that deal a damage type that very few things resist (Psychic) and from which the Soulknife cannot be disarmed. It also doesn't leave visible wounds, allowing for some great plausible deniability if the Rogue needs to go take down an NPC without leaving any evidence. With a flat 60-foot range, you no longer suffer disadvantage that you might from throwing a dagger at a similar distance, as well, and the main-hand one does a d6.

The weapons are conjured when you take the Attack action - and this is where the first big problems come up. The weapons vanish after they hit or miss, which means that after you've made your attack, your hand is once again empty. Because it takes the Attack action to conjure the blades, this means that you won't be able to have those Psychic Blades in hand for any reaction-based attack - most obviously an Opportunity Attack, but also in situations such as if you have a Battle Master with Commander's Strike.

The fix here is easy, though: simply have the blades appear whenever you make a melee attack and are not carrying a weapon (or, probably better to say you "can" have the blades appear, as you might have some reason to want to make an Unarmed Strike). Another option would be to say that the blades persist indefinitely, and can be dismissed at no action cost.

The next issue is one that I think could be solved with special magic items:

We've already seen Monks receive an item, the Wraps of Unarmed Prowess, which correct the lack of +X weapons for their unarmed strikes. But as far as I know, there aren't equivalents for subclass-derived weapon attacks, such as the Natural Weapons (which aren't technically unarmed strikes) for the Beast Barbarian or the Psychic Blades for the Soulknife.

I'll contend that this is less of an issue for Soulknives, given that at least in terms of damage, they're relying less on their modifiers to the damage roll than other classes. But in terms of their accuracy, it would be good to let them keep pace with other Rogues (and not have to rely on Homing Strikes to make up for this deficit).

These two changes I think are all that are needed to fix the clear problems with the subclass.

But let's dream a little bigger:

Cunning Strikes is a new Rogue feature that allow you to sacrifice dice from your Sneak Attack hits to fuel additional effects. A few of the subclasses for the Rogue introduced after this addition also gain new Cunning Strike options. In my mind, this feels like a great way to give every subclass a way to interact with this very cool feature.

High-level Soulknives can potentially stun a target with their Psychic Blade sneak attacks, but I could also see this transforming into a Cunning Strikes option (though perhaps that would be too powerful without a resource limiter). But I could see doing things like Dazing targets, maybe inflicting a confusion-like effect, or other mind-altering hinderances.

And there we have it - I'm really looking forward to the new core books, and I hope we'll get some hints at what kind of tweaks are coming in the next few days.