What if the Main Character could turn into any monster class in the game?

[AnonymousSpeed]

Transforming classes have been around since the very first Fire Emblem game.

Monster classes were a thing in FE2 and FE8, and while the 3DS marked something of a comeback for them, the ones which weren't Gaiden-carryovers where pretty generic and forgettable. They were also a thing in Three Houses, I heard, but I didn't play so I can't say if they were cool or not.

Back to FE8 for a second though, randomizers of that game have popularized the idea of being able to use units from the monster classes, but transforming units are the closest we've ever gotten.

***

In a discussion about future avatars wearing masks, there came up this idea of the avatar being able to transform into a monster.
Now, that's not entirely new, as Corrin could use dragonstones, but what if that concept was taken even further? Instead of being a neutered Manakete, what if the lord turned into, you know...actual monsters? Gargoyles and Gorgons and Hellhounds and Cyclops and all other manner of nasty beasts. This would give us a transforming class totally different than what we've seen before, not just in what they turn into but also how they might play on the battlefield.
You might start with a small few forms, but unlock more over the course of the game. Maybe you wouldn't get all the possible forms in any individual playthrough, depending on how many monster classes there are to turn into (sixteen forms on one unit might be a bit much). Each form would adjust the stats of the transforming unit greatly, of course.

As far as equipment is concerned, this monster character could have one unremovable weapon in their inventory which transforms to match the monster they turn into. For example, turning into a Mogall would give them a "tome" called "Evil Eye" or something. Some monster classes, like the Tarvos, would also be able to use regular weapons in their inventory.

Narratively, it could be the result of the avatar wearing some sort of cursed mask or swapping masks to those of the corresponding monster, as in Majora's Mask.

Alternately, this power could come from magical helmet which not only gives you a special power, but also is able to talk and advise the character, sort of like Ezlo in Minish Cap.

***

So what do you think?

Would this be cool or lame?

How would it work in gameplay?

How would it work in the story?

Share and discuss.

[lenticular]

Playable character and enemy designs should be separate. It's fine if there's some degree of overlap, but starting off with a rule that every enemy class in the game also has to be playable limits design space way too much. Interesting enemy designs can have gimmicks or power levels that just wouldn't work as a playable character. Enemies can also be much simpler: if a type of enemy only appears on one level then you only have to give them stats and mechanics that work for that one level rather than a full set of growths and progressions.

The whole "transforming into monsters" thing isn't really my aesthetic -- I tend to go for "glorious, shining and heroic" much more than "dark, brooding and gothic" -- but if they wanted to do it at all then I'd much rather see them keep the number of forms small, maybe three or four at an absolute maximum. The fewer forms there were, the more care and attention they could give to each one to make them feel unique and interesting, rather than just reskins with slightly redistributed stats.

[Jotari]

Should have been what Corrin was really. Only substitute Monster for Dragon. Not sure why they even decided to make Corrin a manakete when it has basically no relevance to the game at all and even in terms of gameplay it's really  underwhelming.

[Darros]

Honestly I don't like the idea of straight up monsters the way its worded. The monsters have never been shown to have any shred of humanity to them and it doesn't feel right to suddenly have them on your side. Plus, there's some merit in having a certain subset of classes be enemy only. If you recruit monsters, how do we know that the ones we're fighting are supposedly the bad guys? I just don't see the narrative working this out. It seems more or less random in a fire emblem game which generally presents itself super seriously.

 

Another thing is that the way you bring it up, I don't know how that would work statwise. Sure, the different stones boost stats in different ways in their current implementations, but having so many drastically different forms just doesn't sound like there'd be consistency to the unit's state, rather it would be primarily based on the boosts/reductions of whatever form it's taking on.

[vanguard333]

I don't see this for monsters, as those kinds of things should remain enemy-only. 

However, I am all for the character being able to transform into other creatures that display intelligence, culture, and potential for good and evil. 

The only way that I could see it work for a full-on monster, would be if the bad guy forcibly turned the main character into a monster, and the cure made them able to transform at will. That's the only way I could see it work. 

[Mukmuk]

(I mean, you can already do this in randomized FE8lol)

Well, it's kind of like Corrin in Fates, when he flew into a temper tandrum and "unlocked" the beast inside of him. But any kind of monster? That's interesting. If that was the case, and there was some kind of mechanic which the MC could turn into some kind of nasty skeleton or something, hopefully they wouldn't go Green Unit or Beserk on me... 

[NinjaMonkey]

Where's the "No, definitely not!" option in the second question?

[Alastor15243]

Tiki could kinda do this in FE3. There weren't monsters so much as a bunch of different types of dragons, and Tiki, if you accessed a secret shop, could turn into any of them because she can use all of the dragonstones in the game. unfortunately, since none of the dragon types are capable of doubling... the variety wasn't exactly that interesting beyond novelty.

[AnonymousSpeed]

The poll is kind of split. Interesting.

19 hours ago, lenticular said:

Playable character and enemy designs should be separate. It's fine if there's some degree of overlap, but starting off with a rule that every enemy class in the game also has to be playable limits design space way too much. Interesting enemy designs can have gimmicks or power levels that just wouldn't work as a playable character. Enemies can also be much simpler: if a type of enemy only appears on one level then you only have to give them stats and mechanics that work for that one level rather than a full set of growths and progressions.

9 hours ago, Darros said:

Plus, there's some merit in having a certain subset of classes be enemy only.

6 hours ago, vanguard333 said:

I don't see this for monsters, as those kinds of things should remain enemy-only.

Yeah, probably wouldn't be a good to have access to every class, that's very fair. Even aside from ones with abilities that don't easily work in the player's hands, there are classes like revenants which you probably wouldn't want to have anyway.

 

On 11/17/2019 at 12:43 PM, Darros said:

Another thing is that the way you bring it up, I don't know how that would work statwise. Sure, the different stones boost stats in different ways in their current implementations, but having so many drastically different forms just doesn't sound like there'd be consistency to the unit's state, rather it would be primarily based on the boosts/reductions of whatever form it's taking on.

I figure that there wouldn't be a lot of consistency between states. The unit would be either very weak when not transformed and get large bonuses, or get both significant bonuses and penalties in each form, though HP would probably stat the same regardless.

 

9 hours ago, Darros said:

If you recruit monsters, how do we know that the ones we're fighting are supposedly the bad guys?

To be fair, you butcher a lot of human enemies in these games too.

 

6 hours ago, vanguard333 said:

I don't see this for monsters, as those kinds of things should remain enemy-only. 

However, I am all for the character being able to transform into other creatures that display intelligence, culture, and potential for good and evil.

The only way that I could see it work for a full-on monster, would be if the bad guy forcibly turned the main character into a monster, and the cure made them able to transform at will. That's the only way I could see it work. 

So, if not weaponizing a curse Legend of Zelda style, then recruiting from groups of civilized Mogalls who drink tea and speak with British accents behind their very large monocles? I would be in favor of something like that.

 

2 hours ago, NinjaMonkey said:

Where's the "No, definitely not!" option in the second question?

The second question is specifically for the best way to implement it, assuming already that it's being implemented.

[Alastor15243]

13 minutes ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

The second question is specifically for the best way to implement it, assuming already that it's being implemented.

But people who said no to question 1 still have to say something for question 2 or their vote doesn't count. If you make people who don't really care about any of the options arbitrarily pick one, it muddies the results, no?

Edited November 19, 2019 by Alastor15243

[vanguard333]

19 minutes ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

So, if not weaponizing a curse Legend of Zelda style, then recruiting from groups of civilized Mogalls who drink tea and speak with British accents behind their very large monocles? I would be in favor of something like that.

I was more thinking civilized Gargoyles that live in a mountainous society with grand castles that touch the clouds. But Mogalls with monocles sounds like too good an idea to pass up, especially if they live in a Castle in a Swamp that took four attempts to build.

[Mylady]

Shapeshifter classess based on animals or mythic creatures is nice and I would like to see it returning. But  bestial monsters don't appeal to me, I'd rather to see it only as enemies. 

[Hawkwing]

An idea I've had for the Chameleon class returning is that instead of simply copying the other units class, it transforms into a creature that fulfills the same niche but brings something unique as well. Something like copying a knight would turn the character into a floating suit of armor or a golem, copying a cavalier would turn them into a cheetah or gazelle like monster. Copying a fighter might turn them into a six armed boar/bear creature, becoming a thief might turn them into living mist or small creature that can create illusions, and turning into a mage might make them a D&D creature. Each of these would bring something new to the class, whether it be a different skill, movement type, or other ability. If they do go through with this idea, I want them to get creative with it.

As for potential snags, the production costs of modeling and animating these unique creatures, balancing the new classes, and making sure they're not too out of place in the setting are the biggest ones I can think of.