Category talk:Monsters/Archive/00

New templates

I was wondering if I could possibly start makeing the new templet for the rest of the monsters. If it's a yes then could I please have the the thing to fill out for the page? Thanks. --Fibbler 06:15, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Do you mean you want to use this template? Go ahead. Anyone is allowed to. Just make sure you've read the usage provided on the template's page, and go here to understand the layout we're using for certain areas in the template. If you need any help, just ask. :) --Aramet 06:56, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok, thanks I started to attept it, but when I was doing it for the Cloaker, it came out in only test (http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh162/james6201/grrr.jpg)

Any idea what the problem is? I can't find any info on it on the templet page or Powder's page...Thanks.

Yea. You need to make a new page for each template. The page you want to make will be called Template:DataMonster and the exact name of the monster, including spaces (for example: Template:DataMonsterBlack Aardvark). Paste the coding on there and fill it out. Now, to get it to appear on the monster page, you use this coding: {{DataMonstername of monster|format=StyleMonster}} . --Aramet 03:53, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks but I'm not sure ho to do all that. To make the new page, do I put Template:DataMonsterCloaker, click the link (if one does) that it makes and fills out the template? Thanks. --Fibbler 04:50, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Yep. When you search Template:DataMonsterCloaker, there will be a red link that says "create this page." Click that, paste and fill out the template, and save. --Aramet 05:08, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Alright thanks I'll start working on the rest of the monsters today or tomorrow ^^ --Fibbler 00:46, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

One more question, I'm working on the Ghost Cloaker and it can't read the image when I try to put it there (I havent changed it yet, used preview). I have the templete made "Template:DataMonsterGhost Cloaker" so you can go over it but I would like to know how to get it to read the old image. Thanks.

This new template will automatically take the exact name of the monster and add .jpg at the end, so the image has to be named EXACTLY the same, capitalization and all. If an image has the file type .JPG or the name isn't spelled exactly the same but ends in .jpg / .JPG, you can request that a moderator moves it to the correct name via the image's talk page. If the monster's image ends in .png or .gif, you'll need to create this page: File:exact monster name.jpg and make the content #REDIRECT [[File:nameofimage.filetype]]. --Aramet 05:07, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Do I just make the page and then fill out the text there, and it automaticly appears when the new templete is filled out? --Fibbler 01:59, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

The best way to learn is to look at templates that have already been made and pages it's already been implemented on. But I'll try to explain here.

Let's say you're making a monster template for "Gray Wolf." You already know how to make a new page and copy and paste the template into the page and fill it out, right? After you're done filling out the template and create the page, go to the page the monster is classified under. In this case, the page is called "Wolf." Go to the Wolf page, edit it, and under the correct section, implement the template you've made by typing {{DataMonsterGray Wolf|format=StyleMonster}} and the template should appear on the page if you press Preview or Save.

Like I said, look at some examples on other pages and you should be able to figure it out if I didn't make any sense to you~ --Powder Rune 02:10, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Lvl on monsters?

So is there a lvl on monsters?Since monster that are higher lvl then u are boss should be way higher lvl and so are stronger and weak/awful=below your lvl and non on the monster indicate its around the same lvl as you or Mabinogi has some wierd way like it relate to your age/stat/skill???

Monster powers are calculated with a "Combat Power Points" system. It's not strictly level-based but based on your skills and stats. However, I'm not sure if this can be published. --Kakurady 20:50, 26 March 2008 (PDT)

Also, the relative level of monsters to you applies based on various things such as your stats, skill ranks, and especially skills such as combat mastery. The monster's relative level is indicated by weakest, weak, nothing, strong, awful, or boss. For example, a gray town rat could be weakest gray town rat, weak gray town rat, gray town rat, strong gray town rat, awful gray town rat, or boss gray town rat. Their relative level is only useful for figuring out how effective it is to train skills such as windmill, where killing different level monsters trains windmill at different speeds.

is it skills stats and current level, skills stats and total lever, or skils stats current level and total level?Sozen Cratos Focker 15:27, 8 July 2008 (PDT)

As I said, level has little to do with it. It's the current stats and skill ranks that counts.--Kakurady 11:31, 11 July 2008 (PDT)

Alphabetized list

Any reason why there isn't an alphabetized list of all the linked monsters under one page? In addition to the categories existing now. It'd be less hassle and less searching for monsters of questionable types.

If you could make one, that would be awesome. I've been wanting to stop relying on categories and sub-categories since most people won't like to keep clicking to find the monster they're looking for. However someone else started the category system and I don't feel like I have the right to change it.... but we can still have a list somewhere. --- Angevon 09:27, 21 May 2008 (PDT)

I second the master list idea, it sounds really really useful --Ladywinter 08:27, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Other monster stats

I've noticed that when running Rundal Basic and Rundal Siren that the two types of Knolls require a different amount of firebolts to take down. Generally, what I do for all monsters in Rundal Siren is I charge 4 firebolts and shoot. For Doberman Knolls they usually go down in 4-5 charges, but for Pug Knolls it's 5-7. The Knoll entry on the wiki states both with the exact same stats, so could this mean there are other stats not listed that factor into the monster? Kind of like how we're not simply determined by skill rank, level, defense, HP, MP, and Stamina, but with STR, INT, DEX, Will, and LUK as well. Could monster have stats similar to those? --GN54 18:48, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Advice section in chart

I'm confused as to why the Advice section is there since most advice is placed under Additional Information. Your thoughts? -- Ladywinter 08:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

At first I was confused by this, and it was actually an addition by a user who went on to have their account banned. However, when I was worknig to reorganise the template It dawned on me that this entry could have a legitimate purpose in displaying notes relevant only to defeating the monster, while the general info contains all sorts of things like fun easter eggs (the succubus losing her clothes) to notes about the drop rates. Above all else, I remember I first came to this site looking for advice on how to defeat the monsters I found hard to kill at first, and simply putting a link to fire-counter or windheal in the advice entry could help quite a few people. In fact I would go so far as to request that all monsters(except maybe...the foxes in Tir xP) have some combat advice in this column.

ah ok, I'll start leaving the links back to Battle Tactics in there. That page should be more cross-referenced anyways, imho. -- Ladywinter 23:53, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Monster Subcategory Overhaul

Heya! I saw on your to-do list about fixing the monster categories, I've been wanting to do the same, but didn't want to step on people's toes. It's kinda hard to use right now, to the point that I usually just run a search on the monster I want. I was thinking perhaps we could have just an alphabetized list of all the monsters, and if an AI pattern is the same, group the monsters together. Your thoughts? -- Ladywinter 23:09, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, this is still on my todo because I still haven't come up with the 100% perfect classification system I would like to have before I made any changes, but that's my fault for being a perfectionist xP. I was originally thinking of using something all-encompasing and scientific like the linnaean taxonomy. However, the more I thought about it the more I realised it's far more complicated that we need. More recently I'm wondering if subcategories are even needed at all. We are not in the business of categorising or classifying the fomors for scientific analysis or anything. And if there's anything I know for certain it's that the complex subcategory structure that exists at the moment makes it a lengthier and more complicated process to find the monster you are looking for via that method.

So, I now think that we should either remove all subcategories for the monster category, and place all pages related to monsters directly in this category. Or have a handful of very broad subcategories, such as "Humanoid" and "Invertibrate" and go down no further than this one subcategory. Taking World of Warcraft for example, all enemies in the game fall into a set group of categories, with no subcategories within. From memory, these are Humanoid, Beast, Undead, Giant, Elemental, Dragonkin and Unclassfied.

--Taru

hmmm, well if I was pushed, I would have as broad categories: Humanoid, Beast, Undead, and Other (with other being wisps, sprites, and flying swords). The tricky part of mabinogi is that there's things like stone bison and ice bison that makes one confused as to if that's a Beast or a Magical.

I would actually prefer it, as a user of mabi wiki, to have all the pages be on one single page. (even though as a contributor the amount of work that represents makes me cringe.)

You've seen my discovery of the List of Monsters, and I'm down to help with the DeadEiry format...however I'm deeply confused as to the coding for the DeadEiry, and would like to help if it could be explained to me. =) -- Ladywinter 23:41, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, regarding the DeadEiry, I've read up on everything and understand the concept, but the actual execution of it leaves me a bit befuddled. -- Ladywinter 23:46, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

With your permission, I'd like to copy our discussion to the Category:Monster talk page, and get eveyone's two cents worth. --Taru

lol, sure, I wouldn't mind moving all this over to the monster pages...I just don't know that anyone will see it because there's so many freaking monster pages and sub-pages XD. -- Ladywinter 23:49, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

ok, perusing the DeadEiry page, I think I get what the syntax is for the data side, and I *think* I may understand how to do the template side of it. So moving all the monster pages into DeadEiry format is doable...tho the amount of coding makes my brain break a little. Then again, since it separates the data from the formatting, it makes adding info much easier as there's less scolling thru 2 dozen monsters trying to look for the one you're concerned with. I guess the first step is to move all the monster data into their separate data pages? -- Ladywinter 01:02, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

OMG I has an idea! What if we made the initial monster category into a sortable table? like this. Have the columns be Name (ie. Wolf, Skeleton), AI Type, CP, Location, and Link to Details (which is the link to the in-depth info pages)...how's that? --Ladywinter 10:35, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Perfect. And works in with DeadEiry perfectly, since we can pull all that data out a centralised point. All that remains is designing an automated method of populating that list so that we don't have to maintain it every time a new monster is added to the system. It should be easy enough to get a list of all pages in the Category:Monster List, and then use that to populate the table, I'm just not sure if wiki script has the capability. It may be something that needs to be scripted in php and then imported.

=) awesome. All the monsters's already are present (WITH LINKS!) in a sortable table with cp and location here. I suggest we yoink the table and give a link on the cp page to the monster page, and a link on the monster page back to combat power (probably on the table, where it says cp) -- Ladywinter 21:18, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

argh, not with full links tho, just some. The data still needs to populate that table, also, the script needs to be cleaned up because as-is it's pretty but very ><; to a contributor. I don't think we need the tables to be in a very specific shade of pale grey, boxes like Jacobpaige's list is fine. -- Ladywinter 21:23, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

started in on the coding and cleanup here, thoughts? -- Ladywinter 21:34, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

skill ranks

I think I'm going to start adding specific ranks of some skills for some monsters. a lot of it can be figured out easily by comparing the skills damage to the monsters normal damage. Sozen Cratos Focker 04:20, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

It'll be hard to figure out ranks. Damage and rank dont really compare much. Skills such as windmill, where each rank only increase by 10%, can be confusing. --Kevin ^(•Talk•) 04:56, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

you can still figure it out if you pay enough attention. hard, but still doable. --Sozen Cratos Focker 05:00, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

doable, but screw that! my friend just told me he found a list of the skill ranks of each monster in the games files, so now it'l be easy to to find out things as hard to test for as litningbolt rank.--Sozen Cratos Focker 03:40, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Plants

I understand you want the minimum number of catagories used, from what is said above, but having the plant based monsters under Animal doesn't make sense (last place I'd look). I would seriously suggest placing them either under Magical or adding a Plant sub-category to the Monster category. --ZRoc (Talk) 11:05, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Balrog = ?

Where would it be? The thing "gaurding" that little pass between north and south zardine?--^♪♫_♪♫ѕταя♪^♫♪_♫^ταιқ♪♫_♪ 21:15, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

yup. -- Ladywinter 23:40, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Monster by Region

Think a monster by Region/Map listing would be useful? or to just have it under the notations for maps? -- Ladywinter 23:40, 20 October 2009 (UTC)