CurvedSpace Forums: Discussion: GM Rules for monsters and bosses. - CurvedSpace Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • {lang:pm_locked} This topic is locked

Discussion: GM Rules for monsters and bosses.

#1 {lang:macro__useroffline}   Neraphym {lang:icon}

  • Do not want!
  • Icon
  • {lang:view_blog}
  • Group: Super Moderator
  • Posts: 10,332
  • Joined: 29-October 03

Posted 23 May 2007 - 11:51 PM

Let's discuss some basic rules for creating enemy monsters and bosses and how to effectively conduct battles. These are just going to be basic guidelines I think we should follow, but with enough discussion, I'd like to see Cspace put these guidelines into a rulebook. Right now, we have no real rules governing what kinds of monsters we create. This can lead to GMs giving players a hard time and treating them unfairly. With these rules, I hope to level the playing field and make the battle system fair.

Just like the class system, monsters need to be well thought-out and balanced fairly. A monster MUST have the following 6 stats: Health, Mind, Stamina, Affinity, Constitution, and their base physical DP. For roleplaying purposes, GM's may keep any of these stats and the monster's skills hidden from the player, but that GM must have them all written down somewhere before the battle stats.

The big issue I have is with enemy constitution. With the new class system comming out, many skills will involve status affects that can be defeated with high constitutions. These effects might be critical to a player's ability to fight, or simply a added bonus that the player uses when a good oportunity arises. Regardless, we as GM's need to appreciate this and allow our monsters and our bosses to be vulnerable to at least some of a player's status-inducing attacks. I suggest we make a rule that requires any monster's constitution to be low enough to allow at least 2 of a player's skills to inflict statuses. I believe this to be a fair allowance. It can allow GMs to have some resistance, but still allow players to use status-attacks to give them an edge.

Assessing damage is also important. I like to reward players who roleplay good attacks that exploit weaknesses in my monsters. For intance, I'll add damage to a fire-monster if the player uses an ice attack. This is more of a suggestion than a rule, but I urge others to follow suit and reward good roleplaying and strategy. Also, players can be sneaky and find a way to completely exploit a monster using the system. I say allow this cleverness!

I'm sure I'll think of more... so post your reactions and suggestions in the meantime!
Neraphym Archaeon
Posted Image
GWAMM
0

#2 {lang:macro__useroffline}   Darkness {lang:icon}

  • CHILDREN!
  • Icon
  • {lang:view_blog}
  • Group: Super Moderator
  • Posts: 11,225
  • Joined: 12-April 03
  • Location:In your pants!

Posted 24 May 2007 - 12:09 AM

Right now, I think this should be no more than a -guideline-. In some cases a monster/boss/whatever is -meant- to be uberly hard. Especially if it guards a hard reward. I think it should be required that stats be built out for each monster and boss and all, but I don't think any of those stats should be limited (like as you were saying with Constitution, for what if a creature is meant to be naturally resistant, or is meant to be defeated strictly by strategical damage based attacks?). Sure, making it so at least two status effects work could be a -guideline- is good, but GMs shouldn't technically be limited with their monsters bluetongue.gif

However, there is one other thing that I think would be a good guideline. Not necessarily a rule, since I'm against those when it comes to monsters and GMs, but a strong guideline, one that shouldn't be broken except on certain circumstances (the circumstance by which would be judged by the GM). Since, I believe, in the new system stats are still based on posts, it would be smart to make a limit on posts for the monsters. Like, perhaps, the monster's opponents' posts cumulatively multipled by two? Or 1.5? Multiply seems fairer, since methinks as a character grows their strength grows exponentially. Adding a certain amount (like 2000 to the opponents' posts) would be silly. Anyway, I think that would be wise, but the numbers I said are ridiculous and randomly pulled from the air. I hadn't given any thought into it bluetongue.gif

And I assume you mean to attempt to have this put in effect when the new system comes out, because your post doesn't make sense otherwise XD







“In the valley of hope, there is no winter.”

0

#3 {lang:macro__useroffline}   Neraphym {lang:icon}

  • Do not want!
  • Icon
  • {lang:view_blog}
  • Group: Super Moderator
  • Posts: 10,332
  • Joined: 29-October 03

Posted 24 May 2007 - 12:19 AM

I'm only for making rules when I think they are absolutely necessary. In the case of having the GM set all 6 stats beforehand, its just standard that all those be set prior to the battle, as all 3 are necessary for even having the fight. The reason I think GM's shouldn't be allowed to have ungodly constitutions is so people's characters won't be rendered totally useless, and so people aren't locked into using their strongest ability over and over again. High monster constitution limits a character's ability to have variety in the game, which the current system is severely lacking. Even if its something as lame as adding poison for 3 turns, it adds some much needed variety.

I have no problem with any of the other stats being broken at the GM's descretion, though.
Neraphym Archaeon
Posted Image
GWAMM
0

#4 {lang:macro__useroffline}   Neraphym {lang:icon}

  • Do not want!
  • Icon
  • {lang:view_blog}
  • Group: Super Moderator
  • Posts: 10,332
  • Joined: 29-October 03

Posted 24 May 2007 - 01:20 AM

Oh, and most importantly, GM's named Darkness cannot autokill minions... EVER.
Neraphym Archaeon
Posted Image
GWAMM
0

#5 {lang:macro__useroffline}   Snowy {lang:icon}

  • With this fire, we shall learn.
  • Icon
  • {lang:view_blog}
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3,367
  • Joined: 27-November 04
  • Location:In your pants!

Posted 25 April 2008 - 11:42 AM

QUOTE (Neraphym @ May 23 2007, 03:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Let's discuss some basic rules for creating enemy monsters and bosses and how to effectively conduct battles. These are just going to be basic guidelines I think we should follow, but with enough discussion, I'd like to see Cspace put these guidelines into a rulebook. Right now, we have no real rules governing what kinds of monsters we create. This can lead to GMs giving players a hard time and treating them unfairly. With these rules, I hope to level the playing field and make the battle system fair.

Just like the class system, monsters need to be well thought-out and balanced fairly. A monster MUST have the following 6 stats: Health, Mind, Stamina, Affinity, Constitution, and their base physical DP. For roleplaying purposes, GM's may keep any of these stats and the monster's skills hidden from the player, but that GM must have them all written down somewhere before the battle stats.

The big issue I have is with enemy constitution. With the new class system comming out, many skills will involve status affects that can be defeated with high constitutions. These effects might be critical to a player's ability to fight, or simply a added bonus that the player uses when a good oportunity arises. Regardless, we as GM's need to appreciate this and allow our monsters and our bosses to be vulnerable to at least some of a player's status-inducing attacks. I suggest we make a rule that requires any monster's constitution to be low enough to allow at least 2 of a player's skills to inflict statuses. I believe this to be a fair allowance. It can allow GMs to have some resistance, but still allow players to use status-attacks to give them an edge.

Assessing damage is also important. I like to reward players who roleplay good attacks that exploit weaknesses in my monsters. For intance, I'll add damage to a fire-monster if the player uses an ice attack. This is more of a suggestion than a rule, but I urge others to follow suit and reward good roleplaying and strategy. Also, players can be sneaky and find a way to completely exploit a monster using the system. I say allow this cleverness!

I'm sure I'll think of more... so post your reactions and suggestions in the meantime!

Yeah yeah. old topic, sue me. Just looking through some stuff, and what really intrigued me is when Neraphym said the stats had to be written down. Where the hell would they be written down? Integrity comes into play, and I think it would be a good idea for GM's to simply post their monsters stats and abilities in the Grotto before they initiate a fight bluetongue.gif
Proof That Darky is, in fact, evil:
Snowy: Lo'.
Darky: The ' usually goes before the lo =P But hi!
Snowy: It was for loser. Not for hello.
Darky: ...
Snowy: XD
Darky: Don't make me kill you.
Snowy: =O With what? =P
Darky: My bare hands.
Rhesal's Page
My Darky Theory/My Nuu Theory/My Nazy Theory
QUOTE (Neraphym @ Apr 16 2008, 11:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Omg, Snowy's back!!!!!!

QUOTE (JGJTan @ Apr 19 2008, 03:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
You're like full of awesome sayings, Snowy. We all wish we could be just like you. Please be our leader!

Snowy: I want your babies.
Snowy: In my womb.

Darky: Kinky.
Rhesal Blizzard (DS2) NOT FINISHED
Nick McDizzle says:
If we hung out, I would get you laid.

*red+u Matt says:
..
*red+u Matt says:
You should move here.
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • {lang:pm_locked} This topic is locked

2 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users