Talk:System Monsters: Difference between revisions
m Monster links removed. |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
--- I think you're right about that, unless the suggestion for monster graphics is implemented. Removed for now. --[[User:3d0xp0xy|3d0xp0xy]] 11:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC) | --- I think you're right about that, unless the suggestion for monster graphics is implemented. Removed for now. --[[User:3d0xp0xy|3d0xp0xy]] 11:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
- Even still we could just add another column to the table and put the images there. --[[User:Spectre|Spectre]] 11:59, 20 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
---- | ---- | ||
Revision as of 11:59, 20 April 2009
I think separate pages for each special attack shouldn't be necessary, so I suggest we remove those links to make things look a little better. 3d0xp0xy 07:41, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
- I agree with 3d0xp0xy, unless there is any actual reason to have a new page such as for an explanation to a reference, but this is mostly unnecessary. The easiest solution would be to have a trivia section at the bottom of the page or something (something I was going to try and do for the original bestiary, but never did). --Spectre 07:56, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Oh, and references could be explained on the monster pages themselves I suppose. --YoungHickory 08:53, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
-- We need individual monster pages? Having individual pages for the monsters would essentially be repeating information on this page. =p --Spectre 09:06, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
--- I think you're right about that, unless the suggestion for monster graphics is implemented. Removed for now. --3d0xp0xy 11:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
- Even still we could just add another column to the table and put the images there. --Spectre 11:59, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
I went ahead and removed the links, plus that I split the Attack column in Name and Element, and added a border to the table. Good? Bad? --3d0xp0xy 08:13, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
If a monster has multiple attacks (Do they have spirit attacks the way they used to have legendaries? Or multiple spells? Will they?) the table will need rejiggered, but I guess this works for now. --YoungHickory 08:44, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Legendary monsters could be added to a separate table, either here or in a new article. --3d0xp0xy 09:03, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
- I would add Horizontal lines in the talk page to separate different subjects. @3d0xp0xy: I would put Resistance and Weakness next to the monsters name, then follow it with the attack and attack element, it would probably flow better. @YoungHickory: We can fiddle with the table later to cover that. A new article is probably not needed, a new table is debatable, but we'll figure that out when comes the time. --Spectre 09:06, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
-- Columns reordered. I also changed "Ice" to "Cold" for consistency. --3d0xp0xy 11:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
