Some of the spells from the NES version of Megami Tensei I do not match up exactly with their seemingly equivalent spells in Megami Tensei II/Kyuuyaku Megami Tensei. For example, the Clink spell in Megami Tensei I cures Poison, Paralyze, AND Stone, but its functions were split between Posumudi, Paraladi, and Petradi respectively (hence why the Clink box is merged across the rows for Posumudi, Paraladi, and Petradi. Additionally, MP costs are different between versions.
Do we need to split this article into Skill Lists for Megami Tensei I and Megami Tensei II/Kyuuyaku Megami Tensei?
126.96.36.199 00:24, July 24, 2016 (UTC)
- Seeing as we aren't noting MP costs on the page and have the Clink thing noted, I don't really see why. We'd note the difference in MP on the relevant pages for the skill holding demons. (I also am pretty sure this isn't the only time MP cost has changed between versions of the same game.) Seeing how linked MT, MTII and KMT are in terms of spell lists, I don't really see the point of splitting.--Otherarrow (talk) 00:45, July 24, 2016 (UTC)
- ...Well, if we don't need to do that, then is there a possibility that we can expand this list or create one for Extra Skills? Y'know, since the Skill lists for the other mainline games have them...188.8.131.52 13:49, July 25, 2016 (UTC)
So... When I asked if this page needed to be split into Skill lists for Megami Tensei I (MT) and Megami Tensei II/Kyuuyaku Megami Tensei (MT2/KMT), I mentioned things like MP cost and effect differences, but looking back I probably wasn't specific enough as to what exactly those were. I'm not sure if it'll count for anything, but I suppose I should explain what differences I found based on what I saw when I played MT:
First, the offensive elemental (Fire, Ice, Elec, Force, Expel) spells in MT always hit a fixed, maximum number of enemies (provided that at least that number are present), while in MT2/KMT they can hit random enemies a random number of times within a range of hits (unless they target all enemies). For example, the Boattna spell in MT will always hit the maximum of 3 enemies if at least that number is present, but its 'equivalent' in MT2/KMT, Agion/Agilaon, consists of either 2 or 3 attacks that hit random enemies. Another example is that the Gaboatt spell in MT can only hit 4 enemies maximum, while its 'equivalent', the Agidyne/Maragidyne spell in MT2/KMT hits all enemies present.
Second, the Ailment spells seem to have different effects between games. In fact, even their elemental properties are different (since MT doesn't have an elemental resistance system, all of the Ailment spells are pigeonholed into a single Ailment element, but in MT2/KMT, Ailment spells can fall under Nerve, Mind, or Bind). With regards to different effects, Dormin (Dorminar?), Nopp (Shibaboo?), Pulinpa, and Marin Karin all inflict the Close ailment in MT (Dormin hits 1, Nopp and Pulinpa hit 2, and Marin Karin hits 4), but their MT2/KMT 'equivalents' are not only divided into different elements, but inflict different ailments.
Third and last, Extra Skills are not only different in number, but are treated completely differently between MT and MT2/KMT. Extra Skills in MT are completely enemy-only, are fewer in number than in MT2/KMT, and have different targets. Let's look at the Ailment afflicting Extra Skills from MT to MT2/KMT: Venom Breath in MT simply afflicted one enemy with Poison, but came in 4 varieties, targeted all enemies, and dealt damage in MT2/KMT; Paralyze in MT simply afficted one enemy with Paralyze, but dealt damage in MT2/KMT as well and was split into Stun Bite (Gun-type) and Paral Eyes (Special-type); Stone Breath in MT simply afflicted one enemy with Stone, but in MT2/KMT dealt damage and was split into Stone Bite (Gun-type) and Petra Eyes (Special-type). Also worth mentioning are Blaze and Roar, which originally damaged a single enemy in MT, but were split into different varieties and targeted all enemies in MT2/KMT.
Whew! Perhaps this may be enough to consider splitting this into Skill lists for MT and MT2/KMT, but if you guys still find it not to be worth the effort, at least it'll have provided some food for thought. At any rate, I have to thank you for hearing me out!184.108.40.206 03:13, July 28, 2016 (UTC)