The Journey of “Leomorn Sword”

A Developer’s Reflections on Creation, Challenges, and Legacy

As the developer of “Leomorn Sword,” what initially inspired you to start this project?

“Leomorn Sword” traces its roots back to my childhood fascination with games like “Zelda” and “Final Fantasy Adventure”—known as “Mystic Quest” in Europe—on the Game Boy.

As a teenager, my interest in game development blossomed, sparked by early experiments with RPG Maker. It became a shared hobby among a few neighbours who would gather at my place, drawn by the allure of my more powerful computer. One particular friend, a constant companion in those days, joined me in this creative pursuit. Together, we immersed ourselves in crafting an elaborate fantasy world, which incorporated people from our real lives into the game.

In retrospect, perhaps my earliest project, “Just the Three of Us,” served as more than just a mere introduction. It was our refuge from the challenges of being marginalised and bullied during those formative years. Through game development, we were seeking means to reclaim control over the narratives of our lives, transforming our shared experiences into fantastical adventures.

Fantasy novels, particularly Terry Brooks’s “The Sword of Shannara,” which I delved into at age 11, also kindled my passion for storytelling. In my early creative endeavours, particularly “Just the Three of Us,” there were quite a few nods to my own fantasy stories.

Between “Just the Three of Us” and “Leomorn Sword,” circa 2005, I embarked on a game development journey with a project titled “Lheon Sword,” named after my brother’s gaming alias, “Lheon.” It actually diverged significantly from what would later become “Leomorn Sword,” and so I later referred to it simply as “Jaisen’s Adventure.” Unlike its predecessor, “Lheon Sword” took on a more serious tone, shedding its comical nature. It featured an entirely original combat system where players had strategically to manoeuvre statues to defeat monsters while evading their line of sight. Although some characters from “Just the Three of Us” made appearances, the project marked a departure into new territory, laying the groundwork for what would eventually evolve into “Leomorn Sword.”

“Lheon Sword” in RPG2000 featured an entirely original combat system where players had strategically to manoeuvre statues to defeat monsters while evading their line of sight.

A few years later I encountered a significant source of inspiration: Avadan’s indie game “The Cartographer,” developed using RPGVX, and released around May 2009. It’s a 4~5-hour game experience, unburdening, straightforward, with minimal complexity, and yet engaging enough for me as a player. In my eyes, “The Cartographer” had everything: it was the sort of game I would’ve wanted to release. Spurred on by that captivating experience, I turned back to “Lheon Sword” that same year, 2009, transitioning it from RPG2000 to RPGVX. Shortly after, the game was renamed to “Leomorn Sword,” which is the title the RPG Maker community would recognise today.

Essentially, from the start, “Leomorn Sword” bore the imprint of my evolving narrative aspirations influenced by both literature, gaming, and real-life experiences. As a game developer, I definitely see many elements of continuity in this progression.

Can you elaborate on any specific difficulties you faced while working on “Leomorn Sword”?

One significant challenge I encountered during “Leomorn Sword’s” development was technical limitations, particularly lag issues that rendered the game unplayable for some. Balancing engine limitations with my own lack of expertise while striving to create a standout project within the RPG Maker community proved to be daunting. The game’s preference for small maps is no coincidence: it was a callout to “Final Fantasy Adventure” and “Zelda,” of course, but also a way to mitigate the sheer amount of parallel events, most of which were meant as “eye candy.”

The lack of a consistent plot—until about version 1.3—further hindered progress. Not having a disciplined approach to game design was a major flaw since the beginning. I ended up wasting lots of time and efforts retracing my steps rather than moving forward.

Despite numerous revisions, the whole narrative arc surrounding Belgeon’s clandestine activities lacks narrative cohesion.

Consider the unfolding events at Lochbrook Edge.

• The game commences eight years after Leomorn’s disappearance, with his titular sword uncovered buried beneath the debris.
• For Belgeon, this find signals Leomorn’s certain survival, driving him to reclaim the sword in hopes of summoning Leomorn—to prove his theories about the “Underworld.”
• After threatening Shalamin, another of Leomorn’s mentors, Belgeon discovers the sword’s location: hidden within Virannum’s prisons, where a statue of Leomorn oddly stands.
• So, despite knowing the sword is no longer in Lochbrook Edge, Belgeon still decides to return before the Council seals the ruins with magic.
• His intention seems to be to get arrested by the guards—almost like a Monopoly’s go-to-prison card—banking on Lauron and Panril’s rescue.
• Surprisingly, however, he conceals this plan from his companions.

Evidently, despite numerous revisions up to version 1.7, the whole narrative arc surrounding Belgeon’s clandestine activities is convoluted and lacks narrative cohesion, serving primarily as a plot device rather than meaningful story progression.

Reflecting on the project now, what do you believe were some contributing factors to its eventual abandonment?

Looking back, I believe one of the main contributing factors was the lack of clear direction and planning from the outset. While I had a vision for the game, I struggled to translate that vision into a concrete development roadmap. This resulted in a disjointed development process and ultimately led to a loss of momentum.

1. “Lheon Sword” – February 7, 2010 (rmrk.net)
2. “Leomorn Sword” 1.1 – March 5, 2010 (1 month)
3. “Leomorn Sword” 1.2 – July 21, 2010 (4 months)
4. “Leomorn Sword” 1.3 – November 6, 2011 (1 year and 4 months)
5. “Leomorn Sword” 1.4 – April 15, 2012 (5 months)
6. “Leomorn Sword” 1.5 – June 30, 2013 (1 year and 2½ months)
7. “Leomorn Sword” 1.6 – April 9, 2014 (9 months)
8. “Leomorn Sword” 1.7 – April 5, 2015 (1 year)

As “Leomorn Sword” reached its seventh iteration in 2015, roughly 5 years and 2 months into its development, despite some hiatuses, it had become burdened by its own complexity and ambition. Some features were must-have’s for players at the time, but ended up encumbering them with excessive information and felt as burdensome as homework. The game’s complexity made it harder for players to immerse in the plot and characters, which should’ve remained at the core of their game experience.

It was only a matter of time, and the game’s structure crumbled under its own weight.

Combat mechanics come to mind. All later versions of the game have a notable emphasis on healing, featuring three healer classes out of the eight playable. This focus on healing is a rarity in many games outside of titles like “World of Warcraft,” bringing each class a repertoire of five healing abilities, single and multiple-target, with varied potency and effects, complemented by additional features such as beneficial status effects, dispelling abilities, and damage-dealing techniques. Now, as the game progresses and parties consist of four characters instead of three, the need for two healers becomes evident, particularly due to the absence of instant abilities—which is quite a limitation within turn-based combat mechanics.

Overall, “Leomorn Sword” version 1.7 features over 400 abilities in its database. This sort of intricacy stands in contrast to both the game’s scale and the constraints imposed by its engine.

Additionally, the community’s interest started to shift towards RPGVX Ace. Despite considering porting the project to a newer engine, compatibility issues and the daunting prospect of starting over proved discouraging.

Over time, my own interest waned, as other projects and life events took precedence, leaving “Leomorn Sword” to stagnate. Time went by, and in 2015 I finally made the decision to abandon “Leomorn Sword’s” development.

Can you discuss how your experiences with “Leomorn Sword” have influenced you as an amateur game developer?

Like I said earlier, there’s a thread of continuity in all of my projects. Even a more recent project of mine, titled “The Last Warden,” unfolds within the same universe as “Leomorn Sword,” and pitting players against the same villain, although millennia before the events of “Leomorn Sword.” It could be called a spin-off title.

Drawing from the lessons of “Leomorn Sword,” I’ve also honed my approach, for instance prioritising flexibility and balance in class and combat design, so that changes can be made more easily. I am more aware of my strengths and weaknesses as both player and developer, and I try to use those to my advantage. While “The Last Warden” is smaller in scale compared to its archetype, its narrative clarity reflects a radically different development process.

Another example is how I’m eschewing artificial time-extending mechanics. This includes eliminating the need for players to interact with class trainers, spending hours on stat distribution systems, or navigating through dispersive maps, which force players to travel long distances just to hand in quests. Instead, I’m focusing on keeping dynamic features, such as ability ranks. All in all, I find myself incorporating many features and “quality-of-life improvements” that I had initially experimented with in “Leomorn Sword.”

Finally, working within RPGMV or RPGMZ allows for much greater creative freedom, enabling the realisation of ideas previously unattainable in RPGVX.

How do you feel about “Leomorn Sword’s” legacy, despite its challenges, its flaws, and eventual abandonment?

“Leomorn Sword” has served as my experimental project, allowed to evolve almost autonomously—“a testament to my vision, creativity, and—in many respects—my own hubris,” as I mentioned in a previous post. I always remember fondly the anecdote of how Leonardo Da Vinci famously carried the Mona Lisa with him, continually refining it over the years. Da Vinci’s approach, viewing the portrait as perpetually unfinished, also resonates with Stoic philosophy, particularly Seneca’s emphasis on the intrinsic joy of the creative process.

Of course I don’t claim to equate “Leomorn Sword” or any of my projects—past, present, and future—with art: what I’m saying is that there’s a beauty in all unfinished works. Our fascination with them stems from curiosity, engagement, and appreciation for growth.

Also, in today’s world of instant gratification, witnessing a project’s evolution over time is still deeply satisfying. We invest emotionally in its progress, celebrating milestones and anticipating its completion. The journey may conclude at a destination, while in the case of “Leomorn Sword,” the release of a complete game remained elusive; but I don’t see the game’s legacy to be that of “yet another abandoned project.” Instead, for me at least it stands as a testament to resilience and my own creative process. Its unfinished state symbolises the continuous journey of exploration and growth inherent in any creative endeavour.