Sans soul-eater
- Eao
- Posts: 129
- Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 4:33 pm
- Location: a chair in new jersey
- Contact:
Sans soul-eater
I know its pointless, but has anyone here ever completed Suikoden 1, without using the souleater at all (it uses itself story wise) I did, on my second or third go. It makes the game pretty intersting. if not harder.
(i was planing on doing this with somthing else, but its not the place to discuss)
(i was planing on doing this with somthing else, but its not the place to discuss)
the best thing about the internet is that they can't see you pick your nose
-
- Global Admin
- Posts: 6205
- Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 3:29 pm
- patapi
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 2526
- Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 3:55 pm
Soul Eater losing to half of a true rune? Never. Bright Shield was immersely useful, but only as a support rune at best. While Soul Eater is overall a great rune, some of the BS spell felt unneeded that I usually had to fine a complementing second (or third) rune to Hero 2 in order take advantage of his naturally high MP.
The third spell of Soul Eater was no doubt a nightmare for non-bosses. Training low level units could have never been much easier, for example. If it's a boss, there's always the spectacular final spell to give you the ultimate win.
[spoiler]Even in the capable hands of Ted many years ago (technically), it was still arguably the best magical rune in that game despite the change in its array of spells.[/spoiler]
Anyway, back to the original topic, it's entirely possible to avoid using the rune if you discount story-driven events. I've gone through the first Suikoden without the use of any attack spells, and it's still pretty much the same game.
EDIT: I just realise that this thread is two months old, ack.
The third spell of Soul Eater was no doubt a nightmare for non-bosses. Training low level units could have never been much easier, for example. If it's a boss, there's always the spectacular final spell to give you the ultimate win.
[spoiler]Even in the capable hands of Ted many years ago (technically), it was still arguably the best magical rune in that game despite the change in its array of spells.[/spoiler]
Anyway, back to the original topic, it's entirely possible to avoid using the rune if you discount story-driven events. I've gone through the first Suikoden without the use of any attack spells, and it's still pretty much the same game.
EDIT: I just realise that this thread is two months old, ack.
- Nemesis
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 3:14 pm
- Location: York Village
- Toon Maha Vailo
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 11:21 am
- Location: England, UK
I used the third level spell for quick and easy levelling as well. Personally I feel like it would be fun to go back to this game again and not use it for the challenge. Secondly, I preferred the Bright Shield Rune. Battle Oath was a nasty, nasty spell if it made Shiro or Victor berserk. That's what I use it for.
-
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 6:05 am
- Toon Maha Vailo
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 11:21 am
- Location: England, UK
- son_michael
- Posts: 2235
- Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 12:24 am
- Location: New York
[/quote]Truewindrune wrote:Huh??that's weird.... i'm using BSR Lvl 4 to beast rune but it just do a little damage (only about 300 or so), so i'm just use that spell for recovery only.
But when i'm using Soul Eater the damage was awesome! about 2000+!
same with me
the only reason I ever used bright shield rune on the beast rune was to recover otherwise soul eaters the only thing that does the job
-
- Global Admin
- Posts: 6205
- Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 3:29 pm
er well the explanation behind your "300" dmg in that game vs Beast Rune is because it heals your party for up to ~2000 hit points, and leftover damages enemy. heal your party before using it to make it completely be offensive. if you still don't understand this spell, please make a topic in the Suikoden 2 forums.
but anyway... i rarely used the "instant death" spells because i thought it wasn't 100% successful on regular enemies (is it??).
but anyway... i rarely used the "instant death" spells because i thought it wasn't 100% successful on regular enemies (is it??).