Arena talk:Monsters

Misc commentsEdit

Whoever put up the "moving" GIFs, well done, those are mighty sweet. Dr. Memory 16:01, 25 February 2008 (EST)

I assume the health of the troll is a typo; 75 - 10. I won't change it however, 'cos Bethesda do make mistakes, and I wouldn't know how to verify this information.

SkeletonEdit

I don't see the Skeleton in this list, but I've run into it in-game. Does it not count as a monster or what? QuakerTroy 22:57, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

If you've noticed something that is missing, please add it. –Rpeh^{•T•C•E•} 03:55, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

I scavenged up what little information I could find on them in the manual, but I'm lacking a GIF and statistics information on them. QuakerTroy 15:13, 8 September 2008 (EDT)

Homonculus/HomunculusEdit

Which is it? This page says "Homonculus", while the Bestiary says "Homunculus". The correct spelling (outside of the games) is "homunculus". --Gaebrial 02:57, 20 January 2009 (EST)

More than two years later, I had the same question. I've checked the Arena game manual, and confirmed that the manual uses 'Homonculus' both times that the creature's name appears. Can anyone who has the game confirm the name of the creature as it appears in-game? At the moment, I'm thinking that the Lore entries all need to be changed to use 'Homonculus'. --Nephele^Talk 02:19, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

For what it is worth, this spelling "homonculus" also appears in Advanced Dungeons and Dragons Monster Manual by Gary Gygax, copyright 1978 which predates Arena and seems to be a source of many of the official Arena Bestiary descriptions. The description offered in this case is pretty much the same: a flying creature created by a magic user. The definition of homunculus in the "real world" is a very small humanoid creature or a microscopic fully formed human from which it was formerly thought the human fetus developed. Kalevala 21:34, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Good find. AD&D did end up fixing their spelling -- my 2000 edition of the Monster Manual has "Homunculus" ("a diminutive servant created by a wizard"). Nevertheless, it seems likely that Arena took its spelling from the earlier AD&D manual, and therefore we probably should too. I'm going to update the Lore entries accordingly. --Nephele^Talk 02:46, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

TrollEdit

Section says, trolls can be killed with magic, but it keeps coming back. Anyone ever killed a troll? 89.13.7.150 08:06, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

There seems to be a bug. The troll can be killed by magic only in the first attack. If it is "killed" by normal weapons, it regenerates and further attacks even with magic will not kill it permanently. 89.13.187.135 09:49, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

My experience has been that if you leave before truly killing a Troll, you get zero experience points. I have updated the article to reflect this. I killed my first Troll using a spell I made called: Troll Spray = damage health 1 + 14 per level * 11 = 155 Kalevala 01:27, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Recent Changes to ArticleEdit

I have removed the comparisons to future TES games. Descriptions about Arena should be about just that - about Arena items, beasts, etc without reference to other games. The apparent "in game descriptions" are in fact long verbatim quotes from the Official Player's Guide for Arena, to which I have provided a citation link. There appears to be no Reflist template so I cobbled together the link. There is no Construction Set, so the experience points, health and damage for the creatures most likely came from the in game experience of the original author, likewise for the necessary weapon level required to hit the higher level beasts. If anyone knows of another documented source, please say so. I am playing through now and cannot gainsay the information presented, since what I have seen so far seems to fit nicely with what is presented here. Kalevala 16:52, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Ah, yes thank you for that. It seems to me that those notes were either a) added before our current policies were in place or b) added by people who had no knowledge of the policies. Even though I said the orc note should be put in lorespace, that is actually not correct. Really, those notes don't have a place on this site. So again, thank you for your help.--Kalis Agea^{Yes? Contrib E-mail} 17:16, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Conflicting In Game DataEdit

From mid level 8 to the end of level 11, I have maintained a spread sheet of 230 encounters with beasts and humans. My data so far shows that the average XP awarded is more than that given by the original author with the exception of Skeletons.

Experience Point Examples so far:

   Beasts       Article   Actual    Number 
   by Avg XP    Claim     Average   Killed
   ----------------------------------------
   Rat             25        58.8       4
   Lizard Man     100       203.8       8
   Orc            300       641.1      37
   Skeleton       880       856.5      23
   Minotaur       500      1229.3      42
   Spider        1000      1567.9      28
   Ghoul         1250      2194.1      17
   Zombie        2500      4668.8       4
   Troll         5000      5300.0       1 
   Ghost         2000      9095.0       1


 last updated 10/20/2011, covering levels 8-11.

Kalevala 20:19, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

I have looked through the files with a file reader in the Arena folder. I have not found any files that specify the nature of damage, hit points or experience for bestiary entries. The actual executable is compressed by PKLite which is a DOS compression utility that is self extracting on binary executables. Thus, for example, you cannot search for "Minotaur" in the game file itself, nor find any region within the program that might give a clue as to the actual numbers. There is no "Construction Kit." So we are left with reports of in-game experience. The problem is: At what point does person X's reported experience out weigh that of person Y? Might the originally reported numbers be fine base numbers, but then are somehow modified using the player's current level or location in a dungeon? Also the original author's numbers are so "perfect" it would seem that they have some source other than game experience. I am in a quandary. Kalevala 04:27, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

It is possible with specialized hardware or memory capture programs to make a snap shot of machine code running in memory. I don't have either, but this type of thing is not unknown to hackers - even in foreign countries. So in searching around the web, I've found an additional statistic called: Experience Points per Hit Point (XPpHP) and I am coming to suspect that the actual XP awards follow a formula somewhat like:

Award = Monster_Base_Experience + Monster_Hit_Points_Random(Low,High) * maximum(XPpHP, Player_Level)

Kalevala 19:15, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello, people. I decided to pull a feat and go through the whole TES series, starting from Arena. I came here trying to find info on how to whack a vampire for good, and even if I found it in other place, this monster/xp thing picked my interest. Here's link to a page on one of many russian tes sites. Don't worry, all that you need is in english, only monster descriptions are in my native. They claim to have this info from digging deep and combing through every bit of arena files. What you think? Could we put this info in the article proper? http://www.elderscrolls.net/arena/monsters.php VagabonD SerpenT 16:45, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

If you have reason to believe the data is correct, I don't see why we shouldn't use it. Better than trying to discern the statistics through averages. --Legoless 17:17, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

The Codex Scientia table is mostly bogus, so I will fill in the actual game data. KShrimp (talk) 10:33, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Mundane WeaponsEdit

I would like to know exactly what is a "mundane weapon". Nowhere is it explained on this site or the official manual. I assume it is a generic term to refer to a weapon below a certain unspecified material modifier. Some inconsistencies however: 1) The Ice Golem is immune to weapons below elven, but he doesn't have "immunity to mundane weapons" in the description. 2) Same for the Stone Golem: immune to weapons below dwarven, no "immunity to mundane weapons" Shall I add it for these 2 monsters? 24.37.139.69 20:54, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Mundane weapons usually refers to weapons without enchantments. If the immunity isn't listed on the page, the enemy probably doesn't have it. --Legoless 22:54, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Oh I see, thanks for the quick reply. Just to be sure (because you can't really enchant a weapon in Arena), an enchantment is an attribute boost, ie "of Agility", or a magical resistance or spell, ie "of Frost Resistance" or "of Life Steal", added to the weapon like those listed under the "Effect" column in Arena:Katanas right? 24.37.139.69 19:17, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

@Legoless, I have completed The Elder Scrolls: Arena, I killed many monsters that were "Immune to Mundane Weapons" and not once did I have an enchanted sword. I thought I would point this fact out. 74.195.157.8 22:02, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Human enemies?Edit

Shouldn't we also include the various human/Mer enemies featured in the game? You know, like Wizards, Nightblades, Rogues, Knights, etc.? Bauglir100 (talk) 23:36, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

This article is just for the monsters, a separate page for human enemies could be added but they all have different equipment and stats. RIM (talk) 15:55, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

But the article has Jagar Tharn and the Vampires listed. Couldn't you just rename the article "Arena:Bestiary" so that they could fit? Bauglir100 (talk) 02:46, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

I'd be okay with that. Not even sure a rename is needed. —Legoless (talk) 13:13, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Okay with what, exactly? Putting them all on this page, or somewhere else? Bauglir100 (talk) 16:16, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Like I said, here seems fine. —Legoless (talk) 17:47, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Human Enemies' Official DescriptionEdit

Human Enemies (or "People" as in the manual) does also have a description in the manual's bestiary, should we add it to that section in the article?

As it follows: It is a sad commentary to include those of our own race in this list of creatures and foes, but there are those traveling the land of Arena who would see profit through your pain. These people come in as much variety as you or I, some following the paths of the arcane, others familiar with the sword and shield. Do not underestimate any who would approach you. Their skills can be as deadly as your own...

—Punheda (talk) 00:39, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Jagar Tharn XPEdit

In regards to the edit I just did, apart from a single typo, all the numbers on the page before my edit were precisely correct and reflected what's used in Arena itself...until I got to Jagar Tharn's XP. It was previously listed as 100,000, but at least as of 1.06, it's only 75,000 in the game file. I don't see any way it would be anything else, so I didn't put a VN on it, but I thought I should note it here, in case there's a version discrepancy or something else along those lines. (I should note that I've never played Arena to the end, so I'm not even sure if it would make a difference if, for example, the game ends as soon as you kill him.) – Robin Hood ^(talk) 06:19, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Monster Loot Chance and no corpseEdit

In the game code there are four bytes for each monster. The order and type seem to match well with what's currently listed. (gold, magic item or potion, base weapon or armor, magic weapon or armor) All except gold have simply had their hex values converted to decimal and listed as a percentage. The hex values for gold are in the same range, but they are recorded as peaking at 25% and then original values that are higher, the percentage listed begins dropping back down at the same rate. (0..25..0) I don't know how or why the chance for gold loot is calculated this way, but it seems to be true in normal gameplay. If anyone knows the answer, I'd appreciate hearing about it. The other thing I wanted to note was specifically for creatures like the Homonculus. The loot chance was originally left blank, but they have code for dropping loot. Of course, when they die, they don't leave a corpse, so it can't be looted. But there is a note in the Codex Scientia under Ghost: "Note: ghosts, like a couple of other monsters (wraith, homunculus, firedaemon, vampire, lich), vaporize after being killed. A nice spell to have available for such combats is a combination freeze/damage spell to cast when they are almost dead. With luck, the spell will kill and paralyze it simultaneously so it freezes before being completely vaporized and can thus be picked for treasure." Now, in the code, the only 2 with a chance to drop loot are the Vampire and Homonculus. It sounds plausible, but I've never seen this. --Satribe (talk) 15:50, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Edited to correct some of my incorrect information. --Satribe (talk) 16:25, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

2.55 or 2.56 Divisor?Edit

Looking at the monster stats, it's clear that the majority of entries use a 2.55 divisor. If I have 255 possibilities (FF = decimal 255), then divided by 100 equals 2.55. However, in my testing I kept coming up with internal values that were being stored using a 2.56 divisor. The problem is that, although the highest byte value of FF is 255, the lowest is not "1", but "0". That's 256 possibilities. Although most of the monster stats were hand entered using a 2.55 calculation, internally they are still evaluated using a 2.56 divisor. This actually eliminates the discrepancy in the the Agility entries because when using 2.56, they all round to the correct values. If you're adept with hex editing and want a simple way to test the divisor value, try the following. Edit the initial stat die value from 20 to 1 (must be at least 1) and then edit the character stats using the hex values you wish to test. Begin a new character and when you get to the stat screen, subtract the 1 added by the stat die. You can evaluate 6 values at a time, but be sure to test E6 and E7 for decimal 90, because this is the main one that rounds differently between the two divisor possibilities. The offset locations can be found here. --Satribe (talk) 07:08, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Killing Trolls and VampiresEdit

Killing Trolls and Vampires requires magic attacks; this we know. What my testing has shown (that I have not found recorded elsewhere) is that damaging them with a physical weapon will then make it require "more" magic. -- Saving before a fight, I tested various weapons and magical attacks. If I used only magic, my experience was that they were killed and were not "subdued". I used a ring of shock, bracers of wizard's fire, longsword of lifesteal and a bow of lightning. Although I had the best results with the ring of shock, I have not tested enough to know if it was the type of magic or simply a more powerful enchantment. Each magic item required an average number of attacks to kill the creatures. Hitting the creature, even once, with a physical weapon would increase the average number of attacks required to kill for 1 or more or all of the magic types. If I first subdued the creature with physical attacks, it often increased the required average. -- I don't know how the information of magic -vs- physical weapon is stored or used, so the following is theory only: It seems to me that the game is storing magical damage as an additional counter separate from physical damage. My guess is that these creatures have two thresholds: physical damage, leading to being subdued; and magic damage, leading to death. Only damage caused by magic is added to both counters. The second part of this theory is that "only" the amount of damage required to reach being subdued is added, even if a more powerful attack was used. Say the counters are such that it will require 10 magic damage to kill, but only 2 damage to reach "submission". A spell of 20 damage is used, but because it only needed 2 for subduing, only 2 damage is recorded to both physical and magic and the creature is subdued. The creature revives, and it now requires only 8 magic to kill, but still only 2 physical, and "death" requires much more magic than it should. This could make it appear to some that a creature couldn't be killed if you mixed the two types. It's also possible that the creatures spawn with different values for the magic and physical thresholds, and/or that some spells have a secondary "physical" damage that is not counted as magic. Either of these would account for comments of a creature going into a subdued state with magic only. I currently do not have data available to determine how regeneration actually works. Are they actually having health restored over time during a battle, or only when subdued? It's possible that it is the subduing that activates the regenerating effect and both the magic and subdue counters are boosted as it revives. --Satribe (talk) 11:19, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

RatsEdit

"Rats are one of the most" I think this sentence was never finished and cant seem to find how to edit it.

Spider still lacking attribute tableEdit

not sure what else to say, it has been missing for some time. TheSeldomConsitentEditor (talk) 01:13, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Is Tharn immune to weapons?Edit

I cannot seem to damage Tharn even with ebony weapons, can anyone try it if he can be damaged without magic? TheSeldomConsitentEditor (talk) 01:20, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Some monsters have no dedicated window showing their statsEdit

Liches for example have nothing, just their gif. 80.60.179.34 19:38, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Silver weaponryEdit

Codex Scientia says that all undead take 2x damage from silver. This page has always said that about vampires only.
I don't trust a word Codex says, but I also don't trust Arena info that's been on UESP for that long. Has anyone ever tested the supposed special effects of silver, or found something in the files to confirm/deconfirm? Boustrophedon (talk) 22:09, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Sound filesEdit

I think it could be beneficial to add the sound file names and sound clips to the windows of the monsters, same for the pages for individual monsters. There are some mistakes in the file names, however.TheSeldomConsitentEditor (talk) 20:46, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

UESPWiki β