Has anyone ever explored the idea of “scalable” monsters for DW?
Has anyone ever explored the idea of “scalable” monsters for DW?
Has anyone ever explored the idea of “scalable” monsters for DW?
Has anyone ever explored the idea of “scalable” monsters for DW?
Has anyone ever explored the idea of “scalable” monsters for DW?
Comments are closed.
Yes using the codexs, provided for us by dungeon world. I typically take note of several monsters to cover my basic monsters. If 2-3 go down extremely easy, I then start using one of my reserved placed above with enhanced stats, and continue to raise the bar to keep things exciting.
…Or do you mean scalable as in climbable, Shadow of the Colossus style?
The answer to that one is yes, too. Searching Google+ is a pain on mobile, but quite a while back someone linked a blog post about ‘fighting really big monsters’ in DW. If you search for that, it should yield some good results.
What exactly do you mean? You could make a simple goblin challenging for the whole party simply by changing his moves or environment. Maybe he moves faster than the eye can see? Or uses a really useful weapon? Maybe there are caverns to small for the PCs that he can use forty hit n run? The mechanics aren’t what makes a monster strong in dw
The ‘end boss’ in Shadows of Umberto is a really big demon (about the size of a royal palace). That was a really fun campaign ender!
As far as scaling difficulty level, there was a thread waaaay back on Story Games (I think) about it. Ill try and dig it out this afternoon; the gist was, the harder the enemy the more they can do to override and mess with the players moves.
This is a really good read of scaling difficulty of monsters
http://blog.trilemma.com/2014/10/non-mechanical-difficulty-levels-for.html?m=1
.
Joe Banner I looked but did not see that article you mentioned. Any luck? I LOVE the idea and had something to expand on with it.
This wasn’t what I was thinking of, but it’s worth a read: http://www.story-games.com/forums/discussion/17462/dungeon-world-too-many-hit-points (specifically Sage’s comments.)