Monsters. Bread-and-butter for a CRPG, right?

 

We've got elves and dwarves as playable races, an arguably necessary sop to the genre. But what vanilla monsters are we going to have, if any, and will the developers be indulging our tastes for the classic / bizarre / unmentionable? And, yes, a sub-set of people on this forum have got a big Lich thing going on.

 

So this thread is about everything monster, creature, beast, abomination, chimera, shambling undead, ooze, jelly, construct, giant or whatever other critter you would like to bury an axe into.

 

My personal favourites from AD&D:

 

THE MANTICORE

 

 

THE STIRGE

 

 

THE BARROW WIGHT

 

as long as we have plenty of variety that isn't just palette swaps I'm happy, I'm pretty confident I will be.

 

there will not be owlbears this was mentioned during the countdown drinking session.

 

they also said no to were-sharks but I could see them as an Easter egg.

Was always partial to the more mythologically inspired beasties, somehow. Manticore, yes, but also griffons, chimeras, basilisks, gorgons (the hawt-bodied lady with a face full of butt-ugly, not the D&D bull-like one), hydras (am personally hoping for hydras in this game).

 

And not a single one of these things should be included as a playable race or a pet of any kind.

 

And certainly not as a romance option.

 

 

Not even the hydra.

Kobolds, dragons, giant spiders, trolls, ogres, beholders, imps, liches, skeletons, zombies, bats, wyrms, wyverns, krakens, sea serpents, orcs, demons, wisps, wights, hydras, giants, mammoths, and most importantly:

The Esquilax

Something mindflayer-like and of course, lizardmen (also possible as a playable race)

Yes, I am very fond of mind-flayers. I find them very creepy.

 

I also like Ogre Magi and Hobgoblins. AD&D Hobgoblins are like Nazis, sort of lawful-evil militaristic so-and-so's who like marching around in pseudo Samurai armour.

Not only I'd like to see varieties, but also I'd like them to have places in the world and rich lore*. While this should enrich the world by itself, even for game-play, if the characters are well-informed, they may be able to deal with them in various ways. Typically, bard chanters, rangers (and druids?) are good at these things but, depending on the nature of knowledge, wizards and priests may turn out to be useful (The class-free skill system may make things flexible, though).

 

*Personally, I like systems which call them creatures. The word "monsters" are more for in-world usages.

Me I'd like it if they throw just enough changes into the mix that they defeat our expectations. I.e. stock D&D monsters are okay, but it'd be better if we didn't quite know how they will behave or what their combat capabilities are.

Hopefully monsters are rare.

 

As said in another monster topic, I think I appreciate them a lot more in fantasy games when there's only a few of them out there hidden in the depths of the world, that are whispered about by NPCs a lot and mentioned in lore books, but very rare to actually encounter. There should be a sense of wonder and discovery when running into one.

 

If they're used all the time as bosses, they lose their appeal for me. I would much rather face tough human enemies as "bosses" most of the time, rather than monsters.

 

-

 

As for types of monsters... nothing too alien, but nothing too overused either, like dragons.

There was a disgusting monster in second edition that I can't remember the name of for the life of me, it was basically a nightmare given flesh by residual strong magic fields, and resembled a pus covered sack of sentient entrails. Always liked using those.

 

Always liked gibberlings as well, but without the swords, I always made them into a veritable roiling carpet of stinking black fur replete with too many teeth, talons and unwinking red eyes. Ocassionally i'd introduce a champion or shaman, to lead and guide the will of the swarm, but mostly I like the thought of a mammalian locust swarm. Unreasoning and unrepentant.

Always liked gibberlings as well, but without the swords, I always made them into a veritable roiling carpet of stinking black fur replete with too many teeth, talons and unwinking red eyes. Ocassionally i'd introduce a champion or shaman, to lead and guide the will of the swarm, but mostly I like the thought of a mammalian locust swarm. Unreasoning and unrepentant.

 

So, basically, romance fans.

"Out of what crypt they crawl, I cannot tell,

But every night I see the rubbery things,

Black, horned, and slender, with membranous wings,

They come in legions on the north wind's swell

With obscene clutch that titillates and stings,

Snatching me off on monstrous voyagings

To grey worlds hidden deep in nightmare's well.

 

Over the jagged peaks of Thok they sweep,

Heedless of all the cries I try to make,

And down the nether pits to that foul lake

Where the puffed shoggoths splash in doubtful sleep.

But ho! If only they would make some sound,

Or wear a face where faces should be found!"

- Night-Gaunts, H.P. Lovecraft

Dopplegangers, Intellect Devourers (Those are always good for a couple second pause of WTF?), Golems (Especially the sneaky kind like Carytid Columns). Revenants are cool, as are well done Undead.

 

Water Weirds, Elementals, and Mimics could be cool. Lurker Above and Lurker Below, Ropers, Molds. Pixies and Brownies if actullay represented as mischievous critters could be really fun.

Hopefully monsters are rare.

 

As said in another monster topic, I think I appreciate them a lot more in fantasy games when there's only a few of them out there hidden in the depths of the world, that are whispered about by NPCs a lot and mentioned in lore books, but very rare to actually encounter. There should be a sense of wonder and discovery when running into one.

 

If they're used all the time as bosses, they lose their appeal for me. I would much rather face tough human enemies as "bosses" most of the time, rather than monsters.

 

-

 

As for types of monsters... nothing too alien, but nothing too overused either, like dragons.

 

Human enemies are often so much more fun to fight against because they bring the full range of tactical options coded for your own party, whereas monsters are often one-diimensional. I like the idea of less is more, a smaller bestiary but with each creature type presenting unique tactical challenges or dimensions in some way.

 

Otherwise, surely at least one type of enemy must exploit the stamina/health mechanic, e.g. slow heavy-hitters that drain health exclusively.

In addition to those mentioned, I think the slime/pudding/ooze is a sort of staple monster in most RPGs. I recall playing an old, homebrew oozemancer in table top, which was fun. Of course, there would be some copyright issues...

Hopefully monsters are rare.

 

As said in another monster topic, I think I appreciate them a lot more in fantasy games when there's only a few of them out there hidden in the depths of the world, that are whispered about by NPCs a lot and mentioned in lore books, but very rare to actually encounter. There should be a sense of wonder and discovery when running into one.

 

If they're used all the time as bosses, they lose their appeal for me. I would much rather face tough human enemies as "bosses" most of the time, rather than monsters.

 

-

 

As for types of monsters... nothing too alien, but nothing too overused either, like dragons.

 

Human enemies are often so much more fun to fight against because they bring the full range of tactical options coded for your own party, whereas monsters are often one-diimensional. I like the idea of less is more, a smaller bestiary but with each creature type presenting unique tactical challenges or dimensions in some way.

 

Otherwise, surely at least one type of enemy must exploit the stamina/health mechanic, e.g. slow heavy-hitters that drain health exclusively.

 

I'm a reverse of this, to be fair. I'm not saying you can't have creatures without sophistication, I'm merely applying that having a poor sad "amount" of creatures in the game as a price to this... Is not in my books, a favorable exchange...

 

Simply put, to me... Less is less in the monsters department... I guess however given that the games budget hit an extra one hundred and sixty thousand on top of the four million probably means we have little to be concerned. Lets hope they're staffed for both.

Edited October 20, 201213 yr by Erollisi Marr

As long as there are no Rust Monsters. Godamit those things angered me in my P&P days...

I like flora and fauna to make some degree of sense. I think "monsters" should be warped version of animals that we know, either subtly or blatantly. I mean, these creatures presumably have to make sense for their habitat (no polar bears in the middle of a desert, for example) and, as the environment will likely be based on real world environments, so will the creatures that live in them. This doesn't mean that every creature has to be a wolf or something similar (I was actually thinking of something a little more exotic, like a velociraptor), it's just that they should feel like they're animals.

 

As for the humanoid enemies (which are sometimes classed as monsters) there should be two types. The first are the semi-sapient, like the gibberlings or maybe kobolds or maybe just really mischevious monkeys. These fill a nice early niche, being more complicated and organised than animals, but not quite on par with regular humanoids. As for humanoid enemies, I'd hope that it'd avoid the trap of making a fully sapient race a generic monster race. Let the semi-sapient fill that role and let all humanoid enemies be humanoid first and enemy second.

How 'bout Verbeeg?

 

And lest we forget

 

 

Ummmm ... scary huh?

Aboleth anyone?

 

So "Mindflayer" is copywritten, just call them by their original name - "Star-Spawn".

I'm pretty sure nobody owns Wereshark.

Unicorn, obviously.

I like plenty of monster (variety).

 

Nothing stupider than being a monster-hunting called "witcher" and pretty much only humans need killing (Witcher II, I look at you). W2's line-up was pathetic compared to W1, which did a lot better.

So the more scary beasties the better... leaving only the really rare and strong, well, "rare"...

 

And not all of them bosses in highly likely places to be found. What says more 'Oh crap' than finding a rare legendary potent beast just while exploring about...