NPC Bosses

[Ultimo]

I don't want to tread too heavily on this one, because similar discussions seem to turn into flame wars... but I think I need to offer a suggestion.

 

I've commented before about how difficult it is to make enemies that are balanced well for the AE.  Minions and Lieutenants are fine, the issues arise from Bosses and EBs (and AVs, but that's a different problem).  In essence, it seems like there's a GAP between Bosses and Elite Bosses that should be filled.

 

In essence, the problem is this:  Suppose you're making an arc with a boss character in it.  EBs are sturdy, but they do WAY too much damage for most people to handle.  But, if you make the character a Boss, their damage is more manageable, but they're not way too squishy.  Perhaps what's needed is a rank for NPCs that falls between the two, having Boss level damage output, but Elite Boss level durability?  Not sure what I'd call it.

 

Even if it was just for the AE, it would make it a lot easier to make missions with enemies and allies that aren't so overpowered.

 

Create a new NPC rank with Boss damage and Elite Boss durability.

 

(As an aside, it might allow the Trick or Treat event to be more accessible, as most of the Elite Bosses that spawn today are so overpowered, most people have no choice but to run away, if they're even able to.)

[Rudra]

I would call it a boss with an armor set. Pick an armor set as one of your two power sets and give the boss all the non-crash powers from it.

[Ultimo]

16 minutes ago, Rudra said:

I would call it a boss with an armor set. Pick an armor set as one of your two power sets and give the boss all the non-crash powers from it.

I do give them armour sets (depending on the character, of course).

 

When making NPCs I try to make them follow the same rules as the players, so set choices are based on AT.  Usually.  It doesn't really help much with the Bosses survivability, and does nothing to reduce Elite Boss damage.  Yes, I can leave out most of the powers in the set, but that makes enemies that are boring to fight, and means they might be missing powers they really should have.  For example, suppose I'm making a character like the Hulk, who is known for smashing things.  Haymaker (Super Strength) is the power that looks best for that, but on an Elite Boss, it does so much damage it's nearly impossible for a Controller, Defender or other squishy to withstand it.  I could leave it out, but it's so characterful, it's a shame to do so.

 

Adding a rank between Boss and Elite Boss would allow greater flexibility.

 

[Rudra]

27 minutes ago, Ultimo said:

For example, suppose I'm making a character like the Hulk, who is known for smashing things.  Haymaker (Super Strength) is the power that looks best for that, but on an Elite Boss, it does so much damage it's nearly impossible for a Controller, Defender or other squishy to withstand it. 

The ranged characters should be staying out of the boss' or EB's reach anyway. (Edit: Do you really think Jean Grey is going to just stand within the Hulk's reach and try to tank his hits? [Edit again: And if she wants to stand that close anyway? She can call the rest of the X-Men to help. Teams are great for that.])

 

Edit yet again: That is also why AE arcs carry warnings for stories that have custom enemies, elite bosses, and AVs.

 

Edited Monday at 09:53 PM by Rudra

[macskull]

5 hours ago, Ultimo said:

EBs are sturdy, but they do WAY too much damage for most people to handle.

Did you know the increase in damage from a boss to an EB is only about 25% while the increase in damage from a lieutenant to a boss is well over 100%? On the other hand, an EB has more than twice the hit points of a boss. In short, EBs aren't tricky because they deal a lot of damage, they're tricky because they're basically a boss with a much larger HP pool. If a character can easily handle bosses, they can easily handle EBs.

 

5 hours ago, Ultimo said:

(As an aside, it might allow the Trick or Treat event to be more accessible, as most of the Elite Bosses that spawn today are so overpowered, most people have no choice but to run away, if they're even able to.)

Have you tried out the Halloween event this year? The versions of the event EBs at lower levels are significantly weaker than they used to be because people complained.

[Glacier Peak]

14 minutes ago, macskull said:

Have you tried out the Halloween event this year? The versions of the event EBs at lower levels are significantly weaker than they used to be because people complained.

Mac is being nice - I'd call it ruining other player's fun at the expense of those who aren't willing to take advantage of the tools available to them. 

[Ultimo]

Well, the point here isn't that the damage is excessive (that's a whole other thread), I'm just suggesting a step between the Boss and Elite Boss, so let's stick to that idea.  Also, remember this is not JUST for enemies, but also allies.

[Frozen Burn]

I've seen this request before and I still do not see a need for it.  The thing with AE is, there is no "normal."  Because you can customize your bosses and EBs... they can be easy or they can be extremely difficult - whether it's the damage they deal or how long it takes to kill them.  And that EB my be difficult because it's actually supposed to be an "AV" as intended by the arc creator, but if your setting are for solo and EBs, it's an EB but a tough one.  And others don't want a difficult Boss as they just want the story to progress.  I've also seen the reverse with easy EBs and difficult Bosses.  

 

Trying to create something new to land in between a boss and EB is a waste, imo.  You'll still get varied difficulties even for that rank due the freedom of customization that AE provides.  

[biostem]

If 1 boss is too squishy and 1 EB is too tough, why not just tweak things to have a boss and another boss who is their right-hand person, or maybe incorporate some sort of self rez or maybe the boss gets' tp'd away and you have to fight them a 2nd time...

[Ultimo]

3 hours ago, Frozen Burn said:

I've seen this request before and I still do not see a need for it.  The thing with AE is, there is no "normal."  Because you can customize your bosses and EBs... they can be easy or they can be extremely difficult - whether it's the damage they deal or how long it takes to kill them.  And that EB my be difficult because it's actually supposed to be an "AV" as intended by the arc creator, but if your setting are for solo and EBs, it's an EB but a tough one.  And others don't want a difficult Boss as they just want the story to progress.  I've also seen the reverse with easy EBs and difficult Bosses.  

 

Trying to create something new to land in between a boss and EB is a waste, imo.  You'll still get varied difficulties even for that rank due the freedom of customization that AE provides.  

There are a few situations that arise that make this suggestion useful.

 

Suppose I'm making a mission with an allied superhero.  We'll use Iron Man as our example.  He's supposedly on the level of the player character, an ally to help you out.

If he's an Elite Boss, he completely trivializes everything in the mission (except the final boss, if there is one).  He'll blithely go around oneshotting all the minions and Lieutenants, and Bosses won't last much longer.  His damage output will be somewhere around 5-8 times what your player character can do.  Moreover, he's going to squish the ENEMY Boss with ease, because an enemy created as an Elite Boss will appear as a BOSS if the player's settings restrict EBs and AVs.  So, you need to make that character a lower rank.

So, you make him a Boss.  Now, his damage is still higher than yours, but not nearly so much, perhaps 2-3 times what you can do.  However, now he's incredibly squishy, even with armours in place.  This may not be an issue against lesser enemies, but when you come up on that Elite Boss or AV at the mission's end, he's going to be instantly squished.  Of course, many players will be instantly squished too... so maybe that's appropriate.

 

Now suppose, in the same situation, Iron Man is set to betray the character.  If your settings are set to make enemy Elite Bosses appear as Bosses, your ALLY will still appear as an Elite Boss.  When he betrays you, he will STILL be an Elite Boss, and thereby circumvent the restriction on EBs.

 

In essence, I'm trying to establish a rank of NPC that is the equivalent of the player characters.  Player characters are more powerful than Bosses (Bosses often do more damage, but aren't durable enough to match the players), but less powerful than Elite Bosses (who are more durable, but do even MORE damage).  So, to get an NPC that is equivalent to the player, we would need a rank in between.

 

Let me put it another way...  If Spider-Man is the player character, what rank would the Scorpion be?  Or Electro?  He doesn't beat them easily, so they're not Bosses, and he isn't defeated immediately, so they're not Elite Bosses.  It's just that there's nothing else in between those ranks.  It would be nice if there WAS.

[Rudra]

1 hour ago, Ultimo said:

Suppose I'm making a mission with an allied superhero.  We'll use Iron Man as our example.  He's supposedly on the level of the player character, an ally to help you out.

If he's an Elite Boss, he completely trivializes everything in the mission (except the final boss, if there is one). 

Then make him a boss or lieutenant instead.

 

1 hour ago, Ultimo said:

Moreover, he's going to squish the ENEMY Boss with ease, because an enemy created as an Elite Boss will appear as a BOSS if the player's settings restrict EBs and AVs. 

So will that EB ally. EBs turned off? Then there are no EBs unless something causes it to spawn after the mission has started. (That is why you can see Council lieutenant Archons turn into boss War Wolves when you have bosses turned off. After the mission has been set and started, what new spawns can spawn at normal strength.) I've been on several missions where my boss ally was only a lieutenant because bosses and EBs were turned off or my EB ally was only a boss because bosses and EBs were turned off.

(Edit: You want to make sure the players face off against an enemy EB in your AE mission? Make sure the EB doesn't spawn when the mission loads. Make it be triggered to spawn late in the mission, and it should still spawn as an EB even with the no bosses setting turned on.)

(Edit again: I even went into AE to verify that it works in AE the way it works everywhere else. Turned off bosses on my character, grabbed a test map, threw a EB Goliath War Walker as an ally on the mission, went in, and wow, it was a boss. Because difficulty settings are not enemy only settings.)

 

1 hour ago, Ultimo said:

Now suppose, in the same situation, Iron Man is set to betray the character.  If your settings are set to make enemy Elite Bosses appear as Bosses, your ALLY will still appear as an Elite Boss.  When he betrays you, he will STILL be an Elite Boss, and thereby circumvent the restriction on EBs.

Nope. I have yet to see a mission where I had bosses turned off and anything that wasn't an AV spawned as an EB. Not even an ally mob. So that EB will start the mission as a boss and will stay a boss when (s)he/they/it betrays you.

 

1 hour ago, Ultimo said:

In essence, I'm trying to establish a rank of NPC that is the equivalent of the player characters.

This is typically held to be lieutenant or boss strength. Unless you're using IO sets to really crank your character up.

 

1 hour ago, Ultimo said:

Player characters are more powerful than Bosses (Bosses often do more damage, but aren't durable enough to match the players), but less powerful than Elite Bosses (who are more durable, but do even MORE damage). 

Not unless you build them to be. Such as using IO sets and a good build plan.

 

Edited Tuesday at 08:24 AM by Rudra

[Frozen Burn]

6 hours ago, Ultimo said:

There are a few situations that arise that make this suggestion useful.

 

Suppose I'm making a mission with an allied superhero.  We'll use Iron Man as our example.  He's supposedly on the level of the player character, an ally to help you out.

If he's an Elite Boss, he completely trivializes everything in the mission (except the final boss, if there is one).  He'll blithely go around oneshotting all the minions and Lieutenants, and Bosses won't last much longer.  His damage output will be somewhere around 5-8 times what your player character can do.  Moreover, he's going to squish the ENEMY Boss with ease, because an enemy created as an Elite Boss will appear as a BOSS if the player's settings restrict EBs and AVs.  So, you need to make that character a lower rank.

So, you make him a Boss.  Now, his damage is still higher than yours, but not nearly so much, perhaps 2-3 times what you can do.  However, now he's incredibly squishy, even with armours in place.  This may not be an issue against lesser enemies, but when you come up on that Elite Boss or AV at the mission's end, he's going to be instantly squished.  Of course, many players will be instantly squished too... so maybe that's appropriate.

 

Now suppose, in the same situation, Iron Man is set to betray the character.  If your settings are set to make enemy Elite Bosses appear as Bosses, your ALLY will still appear as an Elite Boss.  When he betrays you, he will STILL be an Elite Boss, and thereby circumvent the restriction on EBs.

 

In essence, I'm trying to establish a rank of NPC that is the equivalent of the player characters.  Player characters are more powerful than Bosses (Bosses often do more damage, but aren't durable enough to match the players), but less powerful than Elite Bosses (who are more durable, but do even MORE damage).  So, to get an NPC that is equivalent to the player, we would need a rank in between.

 

Let me put it another way...  If Spider-Man is the player character, what rank would the Scorpion be?  Or Electro?  He doesn't beat them easily, so they're not Bosses, and he isn't defeated immediately, so they're not Elite Bosses.  It's just that there's nothing else in between those ranks.  It would be nice if there WAS.

 

I have done this scenario with my arcs and played them on others' as well.  Again, it's all up to how the characters are created in the arc, and player settings to an extent.  If the ally is an EB, and they are set to aggressive, yes, they will lay waste to everything.  If they are set to follow defensively, I find they hardly ever attack at all - they only do when they get hit - not the character getting hit.  

 

And yes, ally betrayals can be tricky, but it's up to the arc creator to either make it easy for the player or give the player a challenge.  

 

I understand your request.  I just don't see the need to create a whole new rank and change the game structure to do this.  Instead, perhaps increase Boss HPs and lover EB damage output slightly each.   But still, even with a new rank, you're still going to get arc creators that overpower or underpower their characters.  And even if the arc creator finds a happy middle ground, the player's settings can screw it all up.  

[srmalloy]

12 hours ago, macskull said:

In short, EBs aren't tricky because they deal a lot of damage, they're tricky because they're basically a boss with a much larger HP pool.

This is a common feature of MMOs; it's hard to make NPC combat logic more 'intelligent', but it's easy just to give a mob a bigger sack of hit points to make them harder to take down. More HP, more resistant to controls, a moderately bumped damage, and you've got a harder fight without having to come up with better combat logic.

[tidge]

8 minutes ago, srmalloy said:

This is a common feature of MMOs; it's hard to make NPC combat logic more 'intelligent', but it's easy just to give a mob a bigger sack of hit points to make them harder to take down. More HP, more resistant to controls, a moderately bumped damage, and you've got a harder fight without having to come up with better combat logic.

 

This explains 90% of the Giant Monster balance pass(es). My own opinion is that if the initial pass simply increased the base ToHit of the Giant Monsters, we'd have gotten almost all of the way to making them as difficult to handle as a majority of folks thought they should be. Eventually we got to this point, but now we are also stuck with all the other stuff that came along the way.

 

This isn't me complaining about the new attacks that the Giant Monsters got, this is me complaining about how "buff HP and resistances" was probably the least interesting approach to "making them harder".

[macskull]

2 hours ago, srmalloy said:

This is a common feature of MMOs; it's hard to make NPC combat logic more 'intelligent', but it's easy just to give a mob a bigger sack of hit points to make them harder to take down. More HP, more resistant to controls, a moderately bumped damage, and you've got a harder fight without having to come up with better combat logic.

The problem with “difficulty through tedium” is it ends up with very binary results. If a character or team is able to easily handle an enemy critter adding more hit points just increases the amount of time that fight takes without meaningfully increasing the risk. If a character or group is already struggling with a critter, adding more hit points just means they are less likely to defeat that critter anyways.

[JKCarrier]

17 hours ago, macskull said:

If a character can easily handle bosses, they can easily handle EBs.

That hasn't been my experience.

[srmalloy]

2 hours ago, macskull said:

The problem with “difficulty through tedium” is it ends up with very binary results.

I didn't say it was a good solution to the problem, just that it was a common one. It's often an indication that the development team is running out of ideas, or has to produce something quickly using existing resources because the art team isn't available to create new visuals.

[MTeague]

I don't think the idea of a rank between Boss and Elite Boss is necessary. 

But I'm not opposed to the idea either.  I don't think it would be harmful, in any way. 

I just would prefer programming time went to other concerns.

Edited Tuesday at 08:46 PM by MTeague

[Ultimo]

14 hours ago, Rudra said:

Then make him a boss or lieutenant instead.

 

So will that EB ally. EBs turned off? Then there are no EBs unless something causes it to spawn after the mission has started. (That is why you can see Council lieutenant Archons turn into boss War Wolves when you have bosses turned off. After the mission has been set and started, what new spawns can spawn at normal strength.) I've been on several missions where my boss ally was only a lieutenant because bosses and EBs were turned off or my EB ally was only a boss because bosses and EBs were turned off.

(Edit: You want to make sure the players face off against an enemy EB in your AE mission? Make sure the EB doesn't spawn when the mission loads. Make it be triggered to spawn late in the mission, and it should still spawn as an EB even with the no bosses setting turned on.)

(Edit again: I even went into AE to verify that it works in AE the way it works everywhere else. Turned off bosses on my character, grabbed a test map, threw a EB Goliath War Walker as an ally on the mission, went in, and wow, it was a boss. Because difficulty settings are not enemy only settings.)

 

Nope. I have yet to see a mission where I had bosses turned off and anything that wasn't an AV spawned as an EB. Not even an ally mob. So that EB will start the mission as a boss and will stay a boss when (s)he/they/it betrays you.

 

This is typically held to be lieutenant or boss strength. Unless you're using IO sets to really crank your character up.

 

Not unless you build them to be. Such as using IO sets and a good build plan.

 

I already pointed out that making the character a Boss makes them too squishy.

 

Allies appear in the missions at the rank they're created at.  Only enemy Elite Bosses scale down.  That means an Ally created as an Elite Boss will appear as an Elite Boss, and not scale down.  Again, MAKING him as a Boss means he's too squishy to be comparable to the player.  That's for CUSTOM characters.  Characters already part of the game (like the Archon/War Wolves) scale properly, as far as I know.  Either way, having the character appear as a Boss means he's too squishy to be a fun fight.

 

Player characters are all substantially more powerful than Lieutenants or Bosses.  Bosses can often be more damaging, but they're not sturdy enough to compare to the player characters.  One on one, a fight between a player character and a Boss NPC will go to the player the great majority of the time.  This is reversed for Elite Bosses.  The damage they can take makes them more fun to fight, because you aren't going to beat them in a couple of seconds, but the damage they do is so high that they can easily beat the player, even in one attack.  Elite Bosses are clearly more powerful than player characters.  This is why I'm suggesting a step between them, with the damage of the Boss and the durability of the Elite Boss.  It offers people making AE missions (and potentially the devs making regular content) a bit more flexibility.

 

2 hours ago, JKCarrier said:

That hasn't been my experience.

Nor mine.

 

9 hours ago, Frozen Burn said:

 

I have done this scenario with my arcs and played them on others' as well.  Again, it's all up to how the characters are created in the arc, and player settings to an extent.  If the ally is an EB, and they are set to aggressive, yes, they will lay waste to everything.  If they are set to follow defensively, I find they hardly ever attack at all - they only do when they get hit - not the character getting hit.  

 

And yes, ally betrayals can be tricky, but it's up to the arc creator to either make it easy for the player or give the player a challenge.  

 

I understand your request.  I just don't see the need to create a whole new rank and change the game structure to do this.  Instead, perhaps increase Boss HPs and lover EB damage output slightly each.   But still, even with a new rank, you're still going to get arc creators that overpower or underpower their characters.  And even if the arc creator finds a happy middle ground, the player's settings can screw it all up.  

In the past, I suggested lowering EB (and AV) damage somewhat, and was flamed half to death for even suggesting it.  That's why I'm suggesting a separate rank.  It doesn't take away or change anything that's already there, it just adds something to provide another option.  As mentioned, I see no harm in it, and the benefit of greater flexibility in storytelling.

[Rudra]

Why does the ally boss/EB need to be a "fun fight"? Scale your EB down to a boss and let the player, who is supposed to be the main character of the story, be the main character of the story rather than the custom character's sidekick. (Edit: Especially if the ally is supposed to betray the character at any point.)

 

Scaling up difficulty via the difficulty settings is an option for players that find foes too easy to fight. Making sure your boss meets the "Hard" or "Extreme" difficulty settings of custom characters also makes sure it is more of a threat.

 

Bosses are not easy fights for every character. It depends greatly on the character and the boss. For instance, I have a Brute that doesn't care what bosses I am fighting even at +4/x8 until a psionic boss shows up. Then I'm panicking and struggling to survive. And several times, a Fortunata Mistress buried me and I had to hurry back to the fight before she could heal enough to do it again or I had to make sure I had the inspirations to survive her. (Edit again: Hells, a few times, a single Fortunata Mistress or the Tarantula equivalent obliterated my Brute multiple times before I finally won. Even after I had already cleared out her supporting mobs. So yes, bosses can still be threats to players.) And my squishy characters? Couldn't care less about how sturdy a boss is, just whether or not that boss can hit my character and floor me.

 

EBs are supposed to be a big threat to players. That is why they were added in the first place. Because some players were complaining that bosses were too easy. So making them weaker, even if only their damage, takes away the threat they pose and defeats the purpose of their addition.

 

What would the new enemy tier scale down to when bosses are turned off? Bosses scale down to lieutenants and elite bosses scale down to bosses. Are we also going to create elite lieutenants or whatever for the new tier to scale down to?

 

Edited Tuesday at 11:24 PM by Rudra

[Ultimo]

An Ally CAN be set to turn on the player.  Either way, the point is to create a step between Bosses and Elite Bosses.  Refer back to me example of Spider-Man vs Scorpion or Electro.  They're clearly more of a challenge than a Boss would be, but not as overwhelming as an Elite Boss would be.

 

Again I say, what's the reason for the resistance?  If you prefer to use EBs in your missions, adding a level of enemy between Boss and EB isn't going to stop you.  You're objecting to increased flexibility for reasons I cannot understand.

[Rudra]

58 minutes ago, Ultimo said:

An Ally CAN be set to turn on the player. 

And that was contested by who where?

 

58 minutes ago, Ultimo said:

Again I say, what's the reason for the resistance?  If you prefer to use EBs in your missions, adding a level of enemy between Boss and EB isn't going to stop you.  You're objecting to increased flexibility for reasons I cannot understand.

I'm objecting to something I don't see adding any benefit to the game for the stated purpose of more accurately making a mob the equal of a player when any given boss can already be no threat to a player or a near insurmountable threat to a player depending on the player's character. You cannot make a mob that regardless of the character a player makes, will be the absolute equal to. Not unless that mob was built to match that specific character. You keep saying Electro and Scorpion versus Spider-man for example. Okay. Let's take Electro and pit him against Storm. Suddenly, he isn't even a speed bump character. Let's take Scorpion and pit him against Wolverine. Suddenly, we're trying to identify who Scorpion used to be from the scattered bits of flesh and bone Wolverine left him in without even trying.

 

Edit: And you still haven't said what the new proposed boss tier would scale down to.

 

Edited Wednesday at 12:30 AM by Rudra

[Ultimo]

2 hours ago, Rudra said:

And that was contested by who where?

 

I'm objecting to something I don't see adding any benefit to the game for the stated purpose of more accurately making a mob the equal of a player when any given boss can already be no threat to a player or a near insurmountable threat to a player depending on the player's character. You cannot make a mob that regardless of the character a player makes, will be the absolute equal to. Not unless that mob was built to match that specific character. You keep saying Electro and Scorpion versus Spider-man for example. Okay. Let's take Electro and pit him against Storm. Suddenly, he isn't even a speed bump character. Let's take Scorpion and pit him against Wolverine. Suddenly, we're trying to identify who Scorpion used to be from the scattered bits of flesh and bone Wolverine left him in without even trying.

 

Edit: And you still haven't said what the new proposed boss tier would scale down to.

 

You asked, "Why does the ally boss/EB need to be a 'fun fight'?" so I explained that you might end up fighting an ally.

 

Your objection seems to be predicated on your assertion that Boss level enemies are equal to player characters.  I don't agree, and I think you'd find many don't.  There are doubtless many who would suggest Elite Bosses are equivalent to player characters.  I don't agree with that, either.  In any case, having a step between the two allows for more sensitivity when creating enemies (or allies) for AE arcs.

 

You're right, I haven't said what this middle tier would scale down to.  As it is, if Bosses are turned off, a Boss would appear as a Lieutenant.  Since this new rank would be more powerful than a Boss, it probably should be more powerful than a Lieutenant, so I guess it should scale down to the Boss rank... same as an Elite Boss.

Edited Wednesday at 01:43 AM by Ultimo

[Rudra]

10 minutes ago, Ultimo said:

You asked, "Why does the ally boss/EB need to be a 'fun fight'?" so I explained that you might end up fighting an ally.

You responded well after I had edited my comment. And my comment was:

2 hours ago, Rudra said:

Why does the ally boss/EB need to be a "fun fight"? Scale your EB down to a boss and let the player, who is supposed to be the main character of the story, be the main character of the story rather than the custom character's sidekick. (Edit: Especially if the ally is supposed to betray the character at any point.)

 

If you are providing an ally to the player, that ally does not need to be a fun fight. If you are providing an ally that will betray the player, that fight does not need to be a difficult fight.

 

12 minutes ago, Ultimo said:

As it is, if Bosses are turned off, a Boss would appear as a Lieutenant.  Since this new rank would be more powerful than a Boss, it probably should be more powerful than a Lieutenant, so I guess it should scale down to the Boss rank... same as an Elite Boss.

And that makes no sense to me to do whatsoever.

 

13 minutes ago, Ultimo said:

In any case, having a step between the two allows for more sensitivity when creating enemies (or allies) for AE arcs.

It would not at all. Because depending on the boss' build and the player character's build, that new middle step boss would still be either a joke to the player, an elite boss aggravating match to the player, or a brawl to the character. Just like bosses can be. We can't make incarnate enemies in AE, but there are arcs in AE that challenge even incarnate characters. It is all about how you build the mob and how the player builds the character.

[Ultimo]

EVERY fight should be a fun fight.  It's baffling to me that you would suggest otherwise.

 

Scaling the intermediate Boss rank down is something that would need to be figured out.  He'd have to go down to either Boss or Lieutenant level, and I think Lieutenant would be TOO weak, so I suggested Boss.  The alternative would be ANOTHER intermediate step between Lieutenant and Boss, and I don't think that's needed.  Boss level is reasonable.  You're free to disagree.

 

Having a step between Boss and Elite Boss would absolutely allow for more sensitivity when creating characters, because there would be an intermediate step between the extremes.  Like the Three Bears, one is too weak, one is too strong... we only need the one that's Juuuust Right.

 

There are times when I'd make a character a Boss.  There are times when I'd make an Elite Boss, or even an Arch-Villain.  I'd continue to do so when I felt it appropriate, and so would others.  There are MANY times when I wish I could make a character that is in between the Boss and Elite Boss.

 

I believe you understand the suggestion and the reasons for it.  You don't agree that it's useful or needed, and that's fine.  I'm not going to keep arguing for no reason.

Edited Wednesday at 03:13 AM by Ultimo
spelling