Jump to content


RAWR ! Monster unit smash puny units !

monster unit concept

  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 Conquérant_Rouge



  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts
  • LocationQuébec, Canada

Posted 16 February 2015 - 12:57 AM

Recently wondered on how the monsters would be implemented.

The only thing Playdek currently mentions is that they will be a specialize type of class and there will be a tamer class.
I've been wondering, what sort of specialty should they have ?
A concept I though of: large, neutral monsters to act like a sort of makeshift siege weapons or vehicles under the Tamer units' control.
Those large beast would take five tiles (like Disgeae's fused monsters or Banner Saga's Varls).
Because of neutrality, you have options such as rush your tamer for the beast's control or simply kill the enemy tamer and ignore the monster.
For example: on a castle siege mission, you can control a behemoth and have it smash a backdoor gate or cracked wall so you can flank the enemy.

So what do you think ?
Have any unique ideas for monster units ?

  • Palossact, Vitezdido, Ronaldsr and 16 others like this

#2 Gesser


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 91 posts

Posted 17 February 2015 - 09:46 AM

I definitely favor monsters which take up more than a single tile.


Shoot, even creatures so large and tall that you can get underneath them & stab up into their belly :P. May sound a little silly, but...


I think TRPG's could stand to utilize vertical space in more ways.


A Cyclops who's weakness is (shocker) his one eye but he's so tall, you need to reach the eye's hitbox in front & up high. So long-range attackers with LoS would get a bonus for aiming directly at the eyeball.


Not only that, TRPG’s could stand to utilize the surfaces of tiles in more ways.


Perhaps a blast of steam shooting up from the ground beneath you, launching you to a higher level or at a steep vertical angle. All kinds of possibilities… back to monsters now.


Many TRPG's could also stand to implement large monsters with weak-points.


E.g. a steampunk warmech who's arm-cannons you could chop off or legs you could take out from underneath it.


Or hacking at the leg of a tall creature to trip or immobilize it... it could then require effort to stand again or permanently hobble/be immobilized.


I think Beastmaster/Tamer types could become far more interesting through elevating the genre further with deeper combination-attack mechanics.


For instance, a Tamer could have a different type of special available for each creature-type which would only be usable when both are in range to strike (and possibly have the action-point budget remaining or haven't exhausted their turn(s)). Tight, equitable balance is imperative however (explained below). If well-balanced, it's more of a 'have your pick' scenario which' good for the game. Allow for different play-styles or flavors-of-play but don't have one dominate the rest.


None of this "when these two characters combine, they have access to the absolute, strongest action in the game!!!".


All that does is dissuade players from having both those characters in their end-game party... virtually no one likes the feeling of being forced into a party-comp... especially when the 'ultimate fighter' just happens to be the one whom irritates you the most among the cast of recruits.


As a standalone-mechanic, the genre's combination-attacks & skill-chains need to be elevated in general.


Anyway, went a little off-topic...



I'll chip in one specific monster unit suggestion:


A giant, three-headed Chimera.


Multiple heads, each head reaching out occupying a different individual tile before the Chimera.


The Chimera's abilities would be tied to the heads, each possessing different ability-options.


A certain head dies, the Chimera loses access to that pool of abilities.


The Chimera would get an Enrage Stack for each head lost however (bonus effects/prowess for the remaining head(s)).


Heads would also have their own HP, separate from the body & one another.


When a head dies, 33.33% of both the body's current & max health goes down.


The heads would actually have <33.33% of the body's max HP, making it quicker but more dangerous (enrage) to focus down the heads.


Consider however, body's obviously a lot larger so it'd be easier to hit from more of your army.


So there would be many potential strategies to taking the beast down.


If you go for a body-only kill, you won't fear the Enrage bonuses but it'll take you longer overall.


You could also go for a 1-head/body kill or 2-head/body kill or 3-head-only kill...


Another component of the strategy would be which heads to kill also...


Anyway, I could go on & on & on about it... you get the basic idea now.

#3 Conquérant_Rouge



  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts
  • LocationQuébec, Canada

Posted 24 February 2015 - 03:03 AM

The weak point system is interesting, especially if you it's applied onto you. Makes you think twice about your monster unit's position.

Reminds of Valkyria Chronicles' tanks, heavily armed and armor invincible to all weapons but anti-tank shells and explosion.

Up front, they can take quite a beating, but behind them lies the radiator (the weak-point) which turns that "9 shells to kill" tank into a "3 shells to kill".

Heck, if shot at the weak point, even normal bullets can destroy a tank (takes LOTS of bullets, but possible)

The leader character is in a tank with all perks, but that weak point prevents you from charging and crub stomping the enemy.

  • Gesser likes this

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users