How do you design original monsters?

Don't set out to be "original", set out to be interesting.

>>53423827
DW cheatsheet has a nice little guide.
As >>53423853 : the only good monster is an interesting one.
"Originality" is a hand of paint.

>>53423853
>>53423935

>Original isn't Interesting

Yeah, but they can often go hand in hand. Using the same monsters everyone knows the weaknesses of takes away the fear of the unknown and the experience of learning.

>>53423995
>>Original isn't Interesting
neven said that.
the point was: red skinned goblins are technically original but not interesting.
gms have limited time. need to set priorities straight.

>>53423995
Sure, but here's the thing. If originality is your design goal, you can easily find yourself building something around a gimmick. You come up with something that sets them apart, and the design is trying to justify that hook. It frequently comes across as forced, two-dimensional, or simply uninteresting. If you reverse that design philosophy, it doesn't matter how original it is; you've made something interesting.

The other pitfall of an originality-first philosophy is that inevitably what you've thought of will have been done before in some capacity. The result is that what might seem new and original to you might not be to your audience, so all that effort on originality is wasted if you've failed to produce something with substance beyond that.

File: alexandre-chaudret-gca-creature-barghest-04.jpg (496KB, 1920x798px) Image search: [Google]

496KB, 1920x798px

>>53423827
Try seeking artwork, reading fantasy books, looking for weird chinese toys or whatever for inspiration.

And when brainstorm your monsters from your inspiration sources.

>>53423827
Look around and monster use the first thing coming to mind.
Wall air freshener:
Digestor polyp - a polyp growing on cave walls. St of time it just filters air and produces oxygen (something something symbiotic aglae), making specific cavern's air fresher and more pleasant to breathe. But sometimes it releases it's paralyzing/digesting spores, and that's the end for most of organics in the cavern.

>>53423827
Many methods.
I sometimes decide on the following things in order;

If it kills things
How it kills things
What it eats
How it eats
Body type (humanoid, amorphous, bipedal, quadreped, winged, etc)
Finer appearance details
Predators
Capable of comunication (lingual or otherwise)
Capable of using tools
Reaction to other local races/species (fear, hostility, passivity, indifference)
Origin (could simply be "wizards have no sense in right and wrong")

>>53423995
Trying too hard to be original is more harmful than good. You can still use normal monster elements and normal monster weaknesses, but presentation, depth, and execution can turn those into a unique and cool experience, even if you're doing something like "shadow monster with a weakness to light", which sounds dull and tired as fuck on the surface.

>>53423827
I like taking inspiration out of realistically described Pokemons.

>>53423995
Nobody said that, dingus. If your only goal in design is being original, then you'll just drive yourself crazy and churn out crap.

>>53423827
Why would you want to design an original monster? The entire point of using monsters is that they're iconic and instantly recognizable.

>>53425418
You really think people want to see the same generic orc for the millionth time?
>Why write new stories? We already have good ones!

>>53423853
This is the kind of thing you tell someone who is frustrated at discovering somebody did his stuff before him and stifled by this, discarding good material because of similarities.

Sadly it has become the first thing people say, because it sounds like a smart truism. When put before everything else the message shifts and just discourages people from innovating.

Why has the assumption proliferated that when originality enters, suddenly all demand for quality is dropped?
Yes new things can be shit but that is no reason to be so risk adverse.

>>53425439
Because people want to slay the dragon not your original bingo bongo beast, that's why.

>>53425468
I think the overarching point was that even if you design something entirely alien, there will always be that one guy who says "hey! This reminds me of-". The trick is to just not worry so much about that.

>>53425515
Yes, I just feel the reassurance is becoming lost and it is turning to a conservative sentiment in popular perception.

There is a noticeable faction on /tg/ that seems to prefer the same settings made over and over again.

>>53425587
The point is that originality winds up being something of a pipe dream, especially in extensively explored genres like fantasy. I would advise not stressing so much over the broad strokes and inject originality into the details, if you can.

File: Doom-imp-video-game-h2.jpg (28KB, 725x226px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 725x226px

>>53423827
I don't, I just adapt monsters from video games.

>>53425587
Fantasy is about re-living and reinforcing the timeless legends, of Warrior Slaying the Beast and so on. Never wondered why it's always about dungeons and dragons and not dungeons and social progress? It's a fantasy about the good old days, an inherently conservative ideal.

>>53427182

That flies in the face of every author trying to do new stuff with Fantasy.

Just don't read Tolkien-based Fantasy and read some other type of Fantasy, New Weird Fiction for instance.

>>53425482
that's where you are wrong kiddo.
you cant talk for players you dont know

>>53423827
Random tables.

>>53423827
by subverting popular tropes in existing concepts.
then searching the internet if the idea already exists. if yes, discard the idea.

next step should be trying to make it actually interresting and fun for the players

>>53425418
>The entire point of using monsters is that they're iconic and instantly recognizable

Pretty sure the point of using monsters is to have a weird or horrible imaginary creature.

>>53425468
>>53423853 here,
I think what I should have said/what I meant to say was,
>[The best way to do that is] Don't set out to be "original", set out to be interesting.

Because I'm with you, a fundamental lack of originality is bad too and a fatalistic "don't even bother" mentality is ultimately detrimental. The two aren't mutually exclusive, either. But I think prioritizing originality over... interestingality... often results in cheap tricks and lame gimmicks. All flash and no substance, if you will. But if you prioritize substance first, then even if you've failed to make something original you've still at least made something *good.* You feel me?

Game of Thrones as an example, there's not much about it that you could say is truly original, right? But it does manage to be interesting, enough so that it's become a cultural juggernaut.

>>53427376
Fantasy is about returning to the status quo, putting the rightful king back in his place by overthrowing the evil usurper, slaying the dragon so peasants can go on their lives. That's what players look for in a game too, and that's why you need recognizable nostalgia inducing monsters. You want to players go 'a-ha, I know how to handle this!' in their head so they can relive the familiar story themselves.

File: wasteland_gripfang.png (243KB, 1407x813px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 1407x813px

Generally if it has a weird look to it, that suffices. Or have a kinda-cool ability like the magnetism monster in 3.5 that makes weapons fly and stick to it, or those creatures whose AC goes up by one every time you damage them. Or just take an existing monster and make them extra horrifying or creepy, like the mind flayers of Thoon.

>>53427706
there are so many things to do with the potential of the fantasy setting (hence the word "fantasy") yet you go for an escapist "fantasy" that follows such a standartized formula?

even though there are so many things to do, in so many different ways? with your highly generalising statement dragging down the genre, i feel nothing but despise for you

>>53423827
Define "original"

Taking existing monsters and mixing them or adding unusual twists is standard fare for making monsters your own. Coming up with something completely unlike anything anyone has ever seen is virtually impossible since new ideas are really just novel mutations of old ideas.

>>53427836
>Coming up with something completely unlike anything anyone has ever seen
Since when is that the threshold of original? Redefining original to some narrow definition so we can then discredit it serves nobody. Lets keep it as a useful word.

>>53427938
Good thing I requested clarification on what he meant before giving a practical answer and an impractical, extreme answer then.

>>53427836
I am convinced that "originality" doesn't exist. True originality would mean taking an element from outside of the universe that doesn't exist and is incompatible with our reality anyway so we would have no choice but to judge it within our own terms. I mean I guess you can create a new idea, but it's going to be a mix of old ideas somehow. Even D&D wasn't really that original, it was an extension of something children have been doing for millenia I am sure, just not with codified rules.

>>53428214
You have chosen a frame of reference for your "true originality" that would render the term meaningless beyond philosophical use.

But why should we tangle up ourselves in outlandishly pedantic interpretations?
Where lies the benefit aside from removing the word original from conversations about new things?

>>53427816
>even though there are so many things to do,
False, there is only few things to do, to replay Jungian myths basically. Otherwise it's not fantasy.

>>53428524
Maybe an additional genre term is in order then.

File: paraceratherium_by_yty2000.jpg (43KB, 878x528px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 878x528px

>>53423827
It's impossible.Most good ideas were taken or are mineralized bones.

Don't focus on making them original,instead focus on making them believable.Ex: Herbivore creature that lives in herds and stampedes when stupid adventures scare them.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (55KB, 1472x828px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 1472x828px

>>53423827
Nature is the best inspiration. Look up rare or unusual animals, extinct north american megafauna like >>53429495 or strange deep sea critters.

Pic related is a carnivorous caterpillar. It fits itself to a leaf and swings its body down to snatch flies which land too close to it. Make it 10ft long and boom, you have a jungle semi-unique death monster.

>>53423827
When looking at making "new" monsters, consider that all the common fauna in fantasy are drawn from mythology--so it pays to rewind and see where they came from. What's old is new, and all that.

From an OSR point of view, a useful facet in monster design is the element of mystery. Monsters that are too "familiar" won't excite or frighten the player (i.e. the meta curse of the Troll). Fear of the unknown is a powerful thing.

Sometimes, even a "remixed" monster that carries no OUTWARD similarities to a similar creature can give pause.

>>53423827
To design something interesting you need interesting ideas.

>>53425468
I get what you're saying, but I don't think it's risk aversion. It's reminding the designer to focus his attention on what matters. "Originality" may seem like a holy grail in design, but it's the kind of grail that causes you to shrivel into a dust skeleton when you drink from it.

Thing is, if you set out to design something interesting, then originality will often flow seamlessly from that.

>>53425418
Agree and disagree. Classic monsters do have their place (and the classics are usually classics for a good reason), but there's something to be said for surprising players - esp if you have an older, somewhat jaded group.

The right choice depends on what you're trying to accomplish with the encounter.

File: img012.jpg (1MB, 1784x2127px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1784x2127px

>>53423827
I just combine two random creatures into one with a pleasing shape.

>>53423827
You have to answer the question of "What does it DO?". If you can't, you're just going to suck, forever.

>>53423827
Well, I'm going to agree with this guy here. >>53431775

What do you want the monster to do? What role is it supposed to fill? What does it represent? Then design around that, instead of just throwing random details together until you've got something that looks cool, but has no unique behavior or abilities.

File: 11269754.jpg (383KB, 1200x960px) Image search: [Google]

383KB, 1200x960px

>humanoid
when in doubt
add tits

>non-human
take the unintelligible crayon drawings of your little bro/yourself when younger
overdesign them

>>53423827

Look at something really weird like abstract art, and picture how that can be made into a functional organism.

>>53423827

So in short, have elements that lead to interesting results when combined.

Like, have a system that creates results from elements already in play.

Example: in my setting, powers are everywhere, but each has a super broad theme. They don't have the energy to do every power they can, so the tailor a power from the theme to the user.

so, lets take depression the character and give him a power that has a nullification theme. He gets a power that just suppresses the effects of things in his area. Like, fires and radiation doesn't spread, Your sight only extends to a few feet, moving itself becomes hard, etc. You eventually start suffocating because your lungs start to become less efficient. Also, it affects his allies because he views himself as a burden.

His power is tied to his mental state, and since he keeps ruining shit he feels awful, leading to an endless cycle. Note, his power will do its best to stop suicide attempts (blow your brains out? lol, gun doesn't fire. Jump off a building? Good luck, enjoy your slow drift to the ground and soft landing.)

I know it sucks, but thats like 5 seconds of though, point is have a system

think about what role you want the monster to fit into your setting/encounter/story

Nobody gives a shit that there is a pack hunting aquatic lizard with mating periods that occur every spring and involve pulling food to attract mates until the river they live in is turned completely red with blood. They'll give a shit when it's springtime and they need to cross that river.

If you were writing a story, my answer would be the same way you make anything "original". Take existing stuff and combine or otherwise modify it.

However this is a gaming board, so I'm going to assume this is for a table top game.
The way I see it, there are 2 ways to go:
"Bottom Up": Start with the stats that the monster will use in the game (or at least a first draft of those stats), then make a monster that fits those stats.

"Top Down"- think of the monster, and then stat it appropriately.

>>53423827
You realize that every idea that you could possibly come up with has already been done before by someone else in some form, and just make things that appeal to you instead of focusing on trying to be original.

Look deep into the fears of men & give it shape.

This is literally where all monsters come from

>>53425482

Iunno man, it's all in the contextualization.

Like, in the video game Pikmin, the enemy called "the waterwraith" is really original for a video game, but it's one of the most satisfying fights I can remember from a game because it was so out there.

The creature was this mysterious ominous aquatic humanoid, who with ruthless efficiency blazes through your army and crushes it with its concrete murdercycle. The thing is translucent and hard to see, and lives in an untouchable dimension only disruptable by intense vibrations (and because of the dungeon's design, you don't have the tools to create any until the final floor), so all you can do is run, for floor after floor, until the climactic showdown at the end.

After like 5 floors of running for your life, finally being able to fuck with this guy is so, so satisfying.

What I'm getting at is it's not originality that's the problem, it's being a lazy fuck and leaving out the part that justifies why you should give a shit about fucking up "anon's monster" instead of dragons, etc.

>> 1) Take a page out of MM
>> 2) Change name and minor cosmetics
>> 3) ???
>> 4) PROFIT?

>>53423827
Take Pokemon and turn them into something out of Grimm's fairy tales.

Remember: Pokemon is a post-apocalyptic setting where the trainers are actually being trained to fight the next war.