Eyes on Final Fantasy Forums > Final Fantasy: Nerds in Paradise > Final Fantasy I > My party setup

[Realm25]

So in my current run through I'm using two Knights, a Ninja, and a Red Wizard. I'm thinking I didn't even need the Thief/Ninja at all, and should have gone with three Warriors/Knights.

What do you guys think about the Thief/Ninja compared to the Warrior/Knight, besides the use of low level white/black magic?

Further more, I never hear of a lot of people using the Red Mage/Wizard, and I'm wondering why? it saves room for an extra hard hitter like the Warrior. I mean sure, they cant cast higher level spells, but they get a little of both types, plus a fairly decent ability to attack with a sword.

For me I HAVE to have two Warriors, and a Red Mage, no question. The third character is what's always optional for me.

PS - GBA version.

[gothic_fantasy]

My personal favorite setup is a warrior/fighter, a red mage, blackbelt and a black or white mage, depending on my mood. I generally choose the black mage. I never use thief, because he sucks until class change and I'd rather have the black mage who doesn't MISS all the time (the thief's hit % is terrible). But I usually play the NES version so I'm not sure how different these classes are in the remakes.

[ValiantKnight]

1 fighter
1 black belt
1 white mage
1 red mage/black mage.


Is the usual party. But I've did a bunch of different combinations.
As for Thief...

Thief in the original had increased run chances, and wasn't too bad.
In the Playstation remake he doesn't improve and loses his extra running ability.
In the DoS remake, he along with the mages get a huge hit percentage boost. Effectively where the thief would be hitting 1 time for X damage... now he hits 3 times for XX damage.


Playstation remake(easy) - Black belt gets a huge benefit of 49 more levels of growth. Mages get infinite spell charges(more or less)

DoS - Improved hit rate for mages and thief. MP system may help spell costs a little bit, but could also be viewed as a bad thing. Black belt gets a moderate nerf to his critical rate, damage growth, and armor growth.

[Crossblades]

I always like to use a Warrrior, Monk, Black Mage, White Mage setup. It's balanced and you barely have to spend anything on a Monk

[ReloadPsi]

Right now: Knight, Master, Red Wizard, White Wizard (Done class change, yay!)

Normally I prefer two Fighters and two Red Mages. Easiest party to use if you overlook how expensive they are; they can all equip decent weapons and the Red Mages have a better armour selection than their more specialised counterparts, plus they don't stand in the back row hitting for slightly-above-zero damage while you conserve the spells for more dire situations.

I never, ever take a Black Mage except for "novelty" value (and by "novelty" I mean "extreme frustration", or maybe I mean "novelty" in sense of "joke" rather than "fun") and it's extremely rare that I play without a Red Mage (or Fighter for that matter) as it's my favourite class... but my "usual" setup indicates them as being my constant :P

Thieves are incredibly broken in DoS; they get 2 hits per attack right off the bat for me and once they gain the ability to cast FAST/Haste and Temper on themselves after the class change you might as well consider the game beaten. Red Mages can, of course, cast Haste and Temper on themselves as well.

[Denmark]

Right now, I'm using a Fi/RM/BM/BM party. Lotsa magic. Lots of offense which is how I like it.

[theundeadhero]

My favorite is Fighter, Black Belt, Red Mage, White Mage.

You never need more than two fighters, so it's not really worth it setting a third character as one. I never use the theif because their completely useless and I rarely use a black mage because they are pretty crappy too. I always take a white mage, if anything so I can cast exit after I get the Masamune in the last dungeon and go save it. Also because I never buy heal potions. I just use the cure spells.

[ReloadPsi]

Depends which version you're playing though: There's this thing called the "Fighter Difficulty Quotient" in the NES version that I totally didn't lift from Uncyclopedia but is totally true to life that dictates how hard the game will be depending on how many Fighters are in the party.

Originally Posted by totally not Uncyclopedia, honest

The Fighter Class
The Fighter's job is to make the game easy. Although the game is rumored to be diabolically hard, there is a little known difficulty-selection system. To make the game easier, simply add more Fighters to your party. The difficulty levels are as follows:

Zero Fighters: "Forget it"
One Fighter: "Pretty tough"
Two Fighters: "Now that's better"
Three Fighters: "This is the easiest game ever"
Four Fighters: "The game just beat itself for me"
Fighters can never be killed, and the strategy for employing them in battle is very simple: hit bad guys with swords until dead. After they are promoted, they get to use healing magic, as if they need it.

Fighters upgrade to Knights. Some people think that that reduces the FDQ (Fighter Difficulty Quotient) because your party no longer consists of "Fighters" in the literal sense. But all it does is make them even stronger and able to heal themselves, as previously mentioned. Weren't you paying attention? Needless to say, that only raises the FDQ by 1.5 per Knight (as opposed to 1 per Fighter), which can lead to a FDQ of 4.5 or even 6. This is why, at this point, people simply stop playing, most often. It's because they've already won three times over (even if one of those times consists only of White Mages).

What's ironic is that Uncyclopedia is supposed to contain incorrect, inaccurate information, yet they've totally got it right with the Fighter.

The best thing about these guys is that once you spend most of your 400 Gil on their Rapiers and Chain Mail vests, you barely need to buy any more equipment for them as you find upgrades all over the place. It's nice to save up 16,000 for four Silver swords in Elfland and that's about it.