30 réponses à ce sujet

[Tor_pedo]

manticores, most definetely. If a lion can mate with a bird, i don't see why it can't also mate with a scorpion and a bat. And big black cats like the ones Sten speaks of

[Upper_Krust]

Hey all!

Had a number of ideas about this, I agree there are a number of deficiencies in the following:

1. Monster Diversity (too many existing monsters are the same)
2. Monster Variety (not enough
3. Encounter Diversity (too many fights are with the exact same groups of monsters)

My own Dragon Age Monster Wishlist is about 1000+ monsters long.

Key: Normal Rank, Lieutenant Rank, Boss Rank, ELITE BOSS RANK

1. Darkspawn

Genlocks: Sneak, Grenadier, Trapper, Master Sneak, Bombardier, Wolfmaster, Emissary, Forgemaster, Forgeborn, PARAGON.

Hurlock: Warrior; Archer, Berserker, Commander, Beastmaster, Executioner, Emissary, General, Horror, DISCIPLE

Sharlock: Hunter, Alpha, Omega, ULTRA

Ogre: Brute, Hurler, Regenerator; Spider Symbiote, Emissary, Obliterator, BEHEMOTH

Children: Grub, Elder Larvae, Broodmother, BROODMOTHER STAGE II (Moth form).

2. Undead

Skeletons: Warrior, Archer, Shard Skeleton, Blazing Bones, Revenant, Arcane Horror, LICH KING

Corpses: Zombie, Foetid Zombie, Mummy, Sand Mummy, Draugr, Impaled Draugr, ANKOU

Ghouls: Ghoul, Vargouille, Kibagurui, KOSCHEI

Spirits: Ghost, Poltergeist, Bogeyman/Headless Horseman, Spectre, Wraith, Ash Wraith, SCEADUGENDA

3a. Animals (variable types)

Wolf: Wolf, Enfield, Orthrus, Bandersnatch, FENRIR

Lion: Lion, Glatisant, Griffon, Chimera, TERRIBLE MONSTER

Bear: Bear, Green Man, Wendigo, PELUDA

Lizard: Giant Crocodile, Basilisk, Afanc/Meiamalia, Aremag/Salamander, TARASQUE

Bronto: Bronto, Catoblepas, Gorgon, Bonnacon, BICORN

3b. Animals (size variables)

Spider: Small, Medium, Large, Huge "Spider Queen" and Gargantuan ANANSE

Deepstalker: Small, Medium, Large (used as steeds by Hurlocks) and Huge "Deep Tyrant" (T-Rex like) and Gargantuan GODSTALKER 

Dragon: Wyrmling, Drake, Dragon, HIGH DRAGON and BAHAMUT

Bird: Falcon, Eagle, Giant Eagle, Roc and ZU.

Chicken: cockatrice, Wyvern, Jabberwock, Basan and ARGUS

...actually, just realised a full list might take quite a while. I might add more later. Still got the Plants, Golems, Oozes, Demons and Angels to go. Then onto the more powerful enemies like Thedasian Immortals, Neverliving, Qunari Mirrormasters, Abominations, Tevinter Spellguards, Antivan Genies, Clockwork Keepers and Lunar Prisoners.

[CybAnt1]

Well, Upper, you put more thought into this than anyone else here. Frankly, I'm hoping for a handful of new monsters in the coming sequels, but you seem ready to add dozens.



Of course, it won't happen, and I know the reason why. Every new monster means designing a new model, new meshes, new animations, perhaps new special attacks/abilities. **It takes zots**. And as always, there's tradeoffs in where the zots go. People want lots of things (cloaks, combat logs, horsies, better facial expressions, swimming/jumping/etc.) and they can't do 'em all.



Again, the main reason I'm wanting variety is for two reasons.



1) I'm tired of fighting darkspawn. What are they really? Just this gameworld's version of orcs. That's really about it. And don't you get tired of fighting orcs in other games? So fine, I turn the corner, in 90% of the game, the only question I'm wondering is what the formation and composition of the darkspawn in the next room will be. Every once in a while they throw in some traps, barricades, etc. and something funky like a "forge master" or "necromancer" or an "assassin" that will actually sneak up on you, but mostly it's just grunts, archers, emissaries.



Oh and so when I'm not fighting darkspawn, it's bandits, cultists, & guardsmen. Boring! I want to kill stuff other than humans & humanoids. It's a fantasy world. There should be all kinds of strange, grotesque, and sinister beasts.



2) Like we discussed on the other thread, I want monsters that VARY in terms of their immunities, resistances, and vulnerabilities. Where you actually have to think about not just crowd control, target priority, and what abilities to use, but also plan what kinds of attacks to use against them. Like fire or holy water on mummies, because they're vulnerable. Or acid and fire on trolls, to prevent them from regenerating. Or switching to blunt weapons to fight skeletons because they take less damage from edged. Or avoiding ice/cold or mental attacks on undead. Etc., etc.



To me, it just seems like that tactical aspect is MISSING. Yes, I know, there are already creatures that are vulnerable or resistant to various things. You can't use blood magic on things that don't have blood. However, there's no way to know this information ingame, and precious little ways to discover it metagame. It could even be implemented better with the existing bestiary.



Because the game doesn't use very much of this existing mechanic, it makes the choice between, say, ice and fire arrows, or cold or flame weapon coatings, trivial. If there was stuff that was fire resistant - and you KNEW it - or cold vulnerable - and you KNEW it - it would make that choice meaningful.

[Upper_Krust]

CybAnt1 wrote...

Well, Upper, you put more thought into this than anyone else here. Frankly, I'm hoping for a handful of new monsters in the coming sequels, but you seem ready to add dozens.

Of course, it won't happen, and I know the reason why. Every new monster means designing a new model, new meshes, new animations, perhaps new special attacks/abilities. **It takes zots**. And as always, there's tradeoffs in where the zots go. People want lots of things (cloaks, combat logs, horsies, better facial expressions, swimming/jumping/etc.) and they can't do 'em all.

 
True, but as you say, I have put the thought into it. Which is why all my ideas have been designed around the idea of getting the maximum mileage from one single model. Even better, where new features are added to a variant, they are features that we borrow from other monsters.

So for instance.

Lets say we make a Lion model.

The upgrades for that are:

1. Glatisant - Adds Leopard spots pattern, Adds Dragon head (or snake head if we do a serpent)
2. Griffon - Adds Eagle head, Adds Eagle wings (we can use the wings model and animation for multiple creatures).
3. Chimera - Adds Goat Head (from Ice Demon), Adds either Dragon head or Serpent head.
4. Terrible Monster - Same as the Lion only upscaled (the idea would probably be to do this size first, then downscale for the lion), Add swords/weapons buried in its hide.

So think of it in terms of creating a monster construction kit. You design maybe half a dozen heads, half a dozen body shapes, half a dozen extar features (wings, tails etc.) and then when you mix and match it looks like you have created a hundred monsters.

Its exactly the same process used to create characters in Dragon Age. But instead of determining race, gender and facial features we are determining body shape, head shape, etc.

Again, the main reason I'm wanting variety is for two reasons.

1) I'm tired of fighting darkspawn. What are they really? Just this gameworld's version of orcs. That's really about it. And don't you get tired of fighting orcs in other games? So fine, I turn the corner, in 90% of the game, the only question I'm wondering is what the formation and composition of the darkspawn in the next room will be. Every once in a while they throw in some traps, barricades, etc. and something funky like a "forge master" or "necromancer" or an "assassin" that will actually sneak up on you, but mostly it's just grunts, archers, emissaries.

 
With a few small changes I could make Darkspawn so varied and exciting you would WANT to keep fighting them just to see what I have cooked up next.

I have been tinkering about revising the entire Dragon Age Origins game, but keeping it roughly the same size and only using as few new models as possible. In plotting out the dungeon encounters themselves I keep thinking we actually don't see enough of each monster. This keeps them fresh and exciting.

Oh and so when I'm not fighting darkspawn, it's bandits, cultists, & guardsmen. Boring! I want to kill stuff other than humans & humanoids. It's a fantasy world.

Even here. Normal Bandits, Cultists and Soldiers could really feel different with very tiny modifications.

1. Morale
2. Formations
3. Standard Bearers and Musicians (while raised, standard gives defensive bonus, while playing, drummer gives attack bonus etc.)
4. Leaders with an actual impact on encounters.

There should be all kinds of strange, grotesque, and sinister beasts.

I think where DAO, and western RPGs in general really struggle is in creating original monsters. I think this is partly because of the influence of D&D and Hollywood. People know what a vampire looks like - in fact they outright expect it to look a certain way.

I bought the Final Fantasy XIII Game Guide. There are 24 Undead...trust me when I say you probably won't recognise any of them in the Western mould. Two FF13 Vampire Fights at the start of this youtube clip will give you an idea what I mean...

http://www.youtube.c...178/jRh8tYyLstI

To be honest though I think the best approach is one of initial familiarity followed by subsequent originality. By that I mean, I would first introduce a familiar looking vampire, then at later stages have more varied and original 'vampire' variants.

So the best method is one that blends western familiarity with eastern originality. 

2) Like we discussed on the other thread, I want monsters that VARY in terms of their immunities, resistances, and vulnerabilities. Where you actually have to think about not just crowd control, target priority, and what abilities to use, but also plan what kinds of attacks to use against them. Like fire or holy water on mummies, because they're vulnerable. Or acid and fire on trolls, to prevent them from regenerating. Or switching to blunt weapons to fight skeletons because they take less damage from edged. Or avoiding ice/cold or mental attacks on undead. Etc., etc.

 
The more I think about this the more I believe the game has to switch from flat bonuses to percentages.

So if you are wielding a fire sword, instead of dealing +1 fire damage, it deals maybe +10%. But to enemies weak against fire it deals +50% (or better).

To me, it just seems like that tactical aspect is MISSING. Yes, I know, there are already creatures that are vulnerable or resistant to various things. You can't use blood magic on things that don't have blood. However, there's no way to know this information ingame, and precious little ways to discover it metagame. It could even be implemented better with the existing bestiary.

 
Creature Type and Element should have an impact on the game.

What I think you could do is base it upon the following three classifications, maybe: Body, Soul and Element.

A. Body

1. Organic
2. Solid
3. Liquid
4. Gaseous
5. None

B. Soul

1. Creation (ie. Living)
2. Entropy (ie. Undead)
3. Magic (ie. Construct)
4. Blood (ie. Demon)
5. None

C. Element

1. Air/Lightning
2. Earth
3. Fire
4. Water/Ice
5. None

Because the game doesn't use very much of this existing mechanic, it makes the choice between, say, ice and fire arrows, or cold or flame weapon coatings, trivial. If there was stuff that was fire resistant - and you KNEW it - or cold vulnerable - and you KNEW it - it would make that choice meaningful.

The statistical variables of the game need to start widening to allow that. I have examined a number of JRPGs and they use a more far reaching approach.

Very Vulnerable = 200%
Vulnerable = 150%
Normal = 100%
Resistant = 50%
Invulnerable = Immune
Synergy = Absorb

Lets say a (Boss Rank) Wild Sylvan takes (on average) 33 (normal) hits to fell.

Its Very Vulnerable to fire though, only needing 16.5 normal fire based attacks to fell.
But as a plant its resistant to Crushing and Piercing attacks 50%), Only slashing weapons do normal damage.

If you pick the right combination then you only need 16.5 normal attacks. If you pick the wrong combination you might need 66 attacks. Thats a 400% swing difference. Giving us a large variable to set the difficulty.

If the game is set up so that 33 normal hits will fell it, but its only 25% more vulnerable to fire attacks. Then the variable swing is only 25%. Meaning we only have a tiny variable to set the difficulty.

[CybAnt1]

Interesting idea. Yeah, the "synergy" creatures might actually heal from it. So if you use fire attacks on a fire elemental, it might actually heal & gain HP.



Anyway, then the other aspect of this I'd like to see are creatures that use special attacks, and then various methods you need to counter them. Maybe a Healer class (and not just one line of a mage school) that focuses on protecting or curing these special attacks, like I keep hinting.



Creatures that poison you, and you need antidotes or cure poison spells.

Creatures that disease you, and likewise (medicine or cure disease)

Creatures that do bleeding DoT, and you must bandage to stop the bleeding

Creatures that do injuries that drain stats (even before making you lifeless/unconscious) so you might actually use some of those injury kits.

Creatures that drain your stamina or mana on hit.

Mental attacks that might confuse you, make you go 'beserk' (indiscriminate), or take control of you; or silence/feeblemind your spellcasting (and perhaps certain helms might help you resist or make you immune)

Negative energy that does level drain (but yes there should be counter/remedies)



I don't think these kinds of things belong only in MMOs or JRPGs; they were a part of the Infinity Engine games, and I don't think have to be confined to the D & D ruleset, either.



And I don't believe they lead to "golf bag" gaming, I think they just lead to you thinking more about what to take with you to face various encounters, whether it's to respond to vulnerabilities or counter special attacks, and that's not bad.

[Upper_Krust]

CybAnt1 wrote...

Interesting idea. Yeah, the "synergy" creatures might actually heal from it. So if you use fire attacks on a fire elemental, it might actually heal & gain HP.

Many games use this approach. Then lets say we set the game up so that as well as the four elements we have four other attack types (most of which is already built into the game):

1. Creation/Holy/Healing...can heal living creatures
2. Entropy/Shadow/Draining...can heal undead
3. Spirit/Magic/Force...can repair constructs
4. Blood/Anti-Magic/Chaos...can heal demons

I do hate DAO's Spirit 'element' makes no sense to me whatsoever. It looks 'evil', so should it work against undead and demons?

Anyway, then the other aspect of this I'd like to see are creatures that use special attacks, and then various methods you need to counter them. Maybe a Healer class (and not just one line of a mage school) that focuses on protecting or curing these special attacks, like I keep hinting.

 
You rarely if ever have to counter anything in DAO. 

Creatures that poison you, and you need antidotes or cure poison spells.
Creatures that disease you, and likewise (medicine or cure disease)
Creatures that do bleeding DoT, and you must bandage to stop the bleeding
Creatures that do injuries that drain stats (even before making you lifeless/unconscious) so you might actually use some of those injury kits.
Creatures that drain your stamina or mana on hit.
Mental attacks that might confuse you, make you go 'beserk' (indiscriminate), or take control of you; or silence/feeblemind your spellcasting (and perhaps certain helms might help you resist or make you immune)
Negative energy that does level drain (but yes there should be counter/remedies)

I don't think these kinds of things belong only in MMOs or JRPGs; they were a part of the Infinity Engine games, and I don't think have to be confined to the D & D ruleset, either.

And I don't believe they lead to "golf bag" gaming, I think they just lead to you thinking more about what to take with you to face various encounters, whether it's to respond to vulnerabilities or counter special attacks, and that's not bad.

I think I have isolated the key seven negative and positive status changes which I linked to seven (sins) demons and virtues (angels).

Pride ~ Fear = Strength/Damage 50%
Sloth ~ Slow = Speed 50%
Gluttony ~ Disease = Health capped at 50%, half effect from healing
Greed ~ Curse = Half chances of success at Attacking
Envy ~ Vulnerable = Defense Chance Halved
Wrath ~ Poison = Degenerating Health
Lust ~ Death = Chance of Death

Humility ~ Heroism = Strength/Damage 200%
Diligence ~ Haste = Speed 200%
Temperence ~ Vitality = Health Doubled
Charity ~ Luck = Double chances of success at Attacking
Integrity ~ Protect = Defense Chance Doubled
Mercy ~ Regen/Heal = Regenerating health
Chastity ~ Revive/Life = Return from Death