Talk:Enemies (Darkest Dungeon)

Dropping by to let you know that enemies can have multiple variations. The difference between those is that they have different stats, so any entry here should be threated with care, because it's fairly nondescript without any mention of what variation the enemy is. EDIT: It's always 3 variations, called A, B and C. I'll fit the monster box so that these could easily be added. --Dooomspeaker (talk) 19:23, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Interesting. I didn't know that. Thanks for the heads up --Z3ther (talk) 21:38, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the mention, I was aware of this but did not work on the original page. I feel the page should be renamed to "Monsters" also as that is what the game files refer to enemies as. --NecroSanct (talk) 02:40, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
 * To be fair, they are both referred to as monsters and enemies so we can either forward everything here to "Monsters" or just leave it as is and forward the Monsters page here. Also, as Dooomspeaker noted, most of the enemies have variations, so we'll need to take out all the HP, DODGE, SPD, resistances tables for each of the monsters on the list. But regardless, thanks for your efforts so far @NecroSanct, excellent work. --Z3ther (talk) 10:57, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
 * As I mentioned, Monster is the name that is used in every instance in the game files when referencing them. I am just a stickler for keeping to what Redhook decided to go with is all. As for the varied kinds per type, you can see that the Shared Monster table I added includes the 3 various kinds of each type in the form of the files NameHere_A_info.darkest, NameHere_B_info.darkest, NameHere_C_info.darkest located in the various folders inside the "monsters" folder. Note that I left out Dodge on the table as that is not in the files I pulled from. --NecroSanct (talk) 17:45, 7 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Please check the Bone Defender to see our reference page for an monster (you got a point about the naming here indeed!) entries. If you want all the enemy stats collected on one page, there's really nothing speaking against that either.


 * I understand that the table is lacking additional information. That is one of my issues against it. I didn't make that page to begin with, I just added to what already existed. If it were up to me I would have the main Monsters page with a brief text breakdown at the top and a master list of every monster "group" in the game and leaving the individual entries on their own pages along with the monsters found in each dungeon on the specific dungeon pages. I mainly just pull info from files and add it in where it is needed as I have time. That is why as I said above I am a stickler for naming conventions, such as Monsters and Heroes (not Characters) as I stare at the files and that is how I see things. You can only convey so much on a Talk page as opposed to some other actual form of "team" communication. --NecroSanct (talk) 18:42, 7 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I second that notion for the sake of simpler articles. The incorrect names do kinda annoy me, but as we are currently a budding wiki for a a brand new game these things take a bit of patience. I'll try to catch as many as these incorrect namings and fix them in the next few days so it will help people with naming of future pages. Meanwhile please keep up the good work and tell us if there's other problems. As for communication,what would you suggest? Something like ICR could work pretty well.



I'd like to remove the abilities section and instead insert "Effects inflicted". I think that information is much more useful and take up less space than the abilities column.

I'm attached a C&P from my excel file below. I'm willing to fill these in myself if everyone agrees to it but I need help inserting the symbols as I don't know how yet. Effects within "[...]" means veteran and champion versions have this effect.

List of Shared Monsters[edit | edit source] Enemy	Inflicts

Bone Rabble	-

Brigand Bloodletter	Bleed, Stress, Knockback 1

Brigand Cutthroat	Bleed, Debuff (Bleed), Knockback 1

Brigand Fusilier	Debuff (Dodge)

Cultist Acolyte	Stress,Pull 2, Knockback 2, Torch -10, [Mark]

Cultist Brawler	Bleed, Debuff (Stress), [Focus marked]

Ghoul	Bleed, Stress, Stun, Disease

Madman	Stress, Debuff (Stress)

Maggot	Disease, Stun, Stress

Spitter	Blight, Focus marked

Webber	Blight, Stun, Mark, Debuff (Blight), Focus marked

List of Ruins Monsters[edit | edit source]

Enemy	Inflicts

Bone Captain	Stun, Debuff (STUN)

Bone Courtier	Stress

Bone Spearman

Bone Soldier

Bone Arbalist

Bone Defender	Stun, Knockback 1, Debuff (STUN)

Gargoyle	Stun, Knockback 1/2

List Of Warrens Monsters[edit | edit source]

Enemy	Inflicts

Swine Chopper	Bleed, Debuff (Heals), Stun

Swine Slasher	Debuff (Bleed, Disease)

Swine Wretch	Stress, Disease

Swine Drummer	Mark, Debuff (Dodge), Stress

Carrion Eater	Blight, Disease, Focus Marked

Large Carrion Eater	Mark, Debuff (DMG, ACC), Focus marked

Swinetaur	Stun, Knockback 3

List Of Weald Monsters[edit | edit source]

Enemy	Inflicts

Ectoplasm	Summon, Stress

Large Ectoplasm	Summon, Stun

Rabid Gnasher	Disease, Bleed

Fungal Scratcher	Blight, Focus marked

Fungal Artillery	Blight, Mark, Debuff (DODGE), Disease

Crone	Stress, Blight, Debuff (ACC, DODGE), -Torch

Unclean Giant	Blight, Shuffle, Knockback

List of Cove Monsters[edit | edit source]

Enemy	Inflicts

Pelagic Grouper	Pull

Pelagic Shaman	 Heal, Buff (DMG,ACC, CRT), Stress

Pelagic Guardian	Bleed, Guard

Sea Maggot	Debuff, Disease

Deep Stinger	Stun, Bleed, Debuff (Bleed), Disease

Drowned Thrall	Stress, Kamikaze

Uca Crusher	Debuff (heal), Stun, Knockback 3

Mrbunnyban (talk) 13:15, 29 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I can see your point about taking up less space, but I personally disagree. Some players, such as myself, like to be able to see the full effect of an enemy's attack as to plan accordingly or just get some insight into how the game works. That said I don't think this is a bad idea and maybe one of the other moderaters have an opionion on this, but as it stands I am against removing the abilities. GentleIceZ (talk) 17:39, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I think we could easily compromise: I too dislike the idea of removing full information, especially since this is a general page and we have all the space we need. That said, I believe there is enough space for an additional column with "Common effects" or something like that, which would surely be more explicative than just listing the names of the attacks. We can also adopt a different alternative: put little icons next to each attack's name to hint on what the attack does; every status effect has an icon and the game itself uses them on the enemy screen since release patch. Tell me your opinion on this. --itaShadd (talk) 13:37, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Er, I'm talking about the general page, which doesn't have information about the full effect of an attack anyway. Just the names of the attacks, which I feel is rather useless info by itself. But I'm willing to compromise anyway and put the little icons next to the attack names on the general page... if I knew how. Someone teach me? Mrbunnyban (talk) 15:10, 30 January 2016 (UTC) ...I'm sure I'll figure it out, given time. Anyway, we all agree with putting the little icons of the effects next to the names of the abilities? Or use another column called "Effects"?Mrbunnyban (talk) 16:09, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * You can use the little icons; only, I'm not sure how to present information for attacks that gain extra effects at later difficulties. Anyway, you can write this aside the text: Poptext_bleed.png Rend for the old gods and it will show up like this: Poptext_bleed.png Rend for the old gods. You can look for additional options on the help wiki page for files, and you can find the filename for various icons copying them from the code of Status effects. Give a holler if you need anything else. --itaShadd (talk) 17:51, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, my bad, Mrbunnyban. I apologize for the misunderstanding. That said perhaps we only need to add the apprentice ones for now, since that's all the information on the general page right now anyway GentleIceZ (talk) 18:35, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Ranks on abilities
An anonymous editor added ranks to the abilities today, and while I like the idea I have two problems with this; 1) It seems unnecessary on this page 2) It's fairly clumsy and difficult to read at a glance As it is now I'm going to roll back this edit 24 hours from now. If anyone has any suggestions, ideas or concerns feel free to leave them here. GentleIceZ (talk) 16:53, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree: detailed info is available on each monster's page and including that info here would be redundant and make the page too crowded: the list should only include generic and immediately useful info, with the individual pages usable if one needs further details. --itaShadd (talk) 18:24, 11 February 2016 (UTC)