Category talk:Monsters

From Townstons

Rather than name each monster here - what about an entry for each type? and then the names and pictures of each?

ie. Whisker Brood

Divine Whisker
Flame Brood
Vergrim's Brood

etc

other main types

Whisker Blademaster, Whisker spitter, Whisker shaman
LichLord, Hatchling, Soldier
Hulk, Pincher, Puker

An entry for each Boss? and also non-random (unique) champions (ie. Rattletooth friends, Singe, the Cremator etc.)

--Blue.octopus 12:03, 30 September 2007 (CEST)

I meant really one entry per Graphic Model, and then a list of the mob names that use this Graphic model. Then the mobs could be grouped in to categories also: Whiskers, Mutants, Fade, Boss's, Champions, Heroes, Oroks --Blue.octopus 11:05, 1 October 2007 (CEST)

Monster setup

If you mean having multiple sub-category's where all monsters are sorted out by type/race, then yes it could work. Just like the quest category, subcategory's for the areas they appear and next to that just all monsters listed. Main information for Monsters is hard to achieve, but we can list;

1. Race

2. Where to appear

3. Class (ranged/melee/mage)

4. Related to any quests

5. unusual notices

6. picture

Needs quite some work, though.

--LegendRunner 13:58, 30 September 2007 (CEST)

re: Monster setup

Seems good to me, only thing is that champions and hero's arent monsters of the same "Skin" ;) It could work, easier to do and also makes same sense then list all monsters. Only thing to do is that we need to edit the dungeons, all of them. So that we can link the monsters that appear. And by the way, dont forget that its easier to click on the + next to the edit tab to talk in a discussion page ;) --LegendRunner 16:26, 1 October 2007 (CEST)

ah - I didn't know about the + tab :) --Blue.octopus 17:19, 1 October 2007 (CEST)

Race Reclasification

Gah what a hash! Need some input. Proposed reclassification below --Spetsdod 03:30, 2 March 2008 (CET)

See User_talk:Spetsdod/Monster_List for the list... it was gettin in the way --Spetsdod 03:45, 10 March 2008 (CET)

Yep, a hash it is. Good start on reclassifying! The little four leg guys are Pincers, I think. And Sprites are basically Spawn. What about Hatchlings? Are they Dissectoids? Orok Mystics. The Raythes are like Generals in appearance, but don't lead Skeletons. And what about Manglers, the Juggernauts of the Haunt bunch?? And there are Whisker shaman, too. And don't forget spitters.

Linneaus, where are you now that we need you?? --Catwalksbyhimself 03:56, 2 March 2008 (CET)

And -- Hey, there's always Miscellaneous!--Catwalksbyhimself 03:58, 2 March 2008 (CET)

I got that reference, and yes I'll make up a misc if you don't know where they go... Like spawn/sprites. --Spetsdod 04:07, 2 March 2008 (CET)

Consider that things that appear together might need to stay together. Manglers need to be with Haunts and Raythes in the same group, don't they? Seems to make sense. Habitat rather than shape??--Catwalksbyhimself 07:08, 2 March 2008 (CET)

Nope, if we do habitat we'll get a hash... for instance we have Ice Orok Scouts with Poison Pukers in Frump's stick with what's in monsters for now... I'll take a late evening and revamp it again if need be.... I noticed that fades is starting to get full now, so we might have to go with further classification --Spetsdod 14:39, 2 March 2008 (CET)

Dear Lord! The monster page had exploded in proportion since I last visited it. I was going to take up the job of monster taxonomist, but was too lazy to do it... it seems like things are getting very chaotic. --Necrophilius

Actually is not so bad... the bulk of the monsters are simply redirect pages so that there is a just a listing of monster in the appropriate places. Its bit as if there is an actual page for every entry. --Spetsdod 03:40, 10 March 2008 (CET)

The "Official" guide just uses four subcategories. So I combined Demons, Revenants, and Demi-Humans into one sub-category of Demonspawn. Otherwise no significant change.--Catwalksbyhimself 19:49, 16 April 2008 (CEST)