View Full Version : Why not more weak bosses?

11-23-2014, 10:21 AM
I find the whole 'uber boss' trope unfortunate and overdone. Why not have a whimpy boss at the end? Heck, he or she has been hiding behind an army of minions until then, not some Alexander-type leading up front.

Note too that this is not implausible. A person may be a great political leader (or hereditary one) and lack strong combat/magic powers; time may have weakened an old general; some charismatic type turns out to be weaksauce; etc. Who didn't love it when Conan (in the first film) whacks the head off of the 'boss' and then frees the followers of the mass beguilement?

A boss could have his or her Vizier, like in Chess--but it could be optional. As in Chess, it's about the weak King and using strategy to get by opposing forces, no matter how or cost. The fortress or dungeon, with its long maze of battlements and troops in between you and the enemy leader, implies that he or she fears direct confrontation. The minions are the muscle, not the end one.

This would add to stealth/assassination quests which tend to be problematic due to the issue of having to DPS a hp bag after a clever hidden infiltration.

I 'get it' that raids should culminate in a tough end battle. But much (not all) non-raid questing in DDO is hitmanesque mercenary stuff. Some quests do this already sans uber boss, like Tor (excluding dragons), Rusted Blades, etc. and a lot of low-level quests.

Thoughts? This might be more interesting with the proposed Champion element. Am I overlooking that many quests already have weak bosses in their storyline?

11-23-2014, 12:59 PM
if dungeons were harder and longer and more confusing, i guess.