Good Monster Ranking?

[Freesia.Cutepearl]

Most are classification, not ranking. Related terms but not the same. Though, classifications are actually more useful than rankings.

Imo, rankings are very arbitrary and useless. I don't really understand why these writers rank monsters and force their story/setting to fit this artificial system.
...
Applying ranking on the real world as a means to explain it just don't make sense. And building a (fantasy) world on such rankings makes no sense either.

Maybe these are taken from games? It is not like video games doesn't make for awful stories and movies.

I think it did start with RPGs both tabletop and video games.

But yeah, while I never really considered something like it for my own story(I am vehemently opposed to universal, global, adventurer's guilds too), when I actually think about it more deeply, it really doesn't make any sense. I had known I didn't want to go that route. But I didn't think much about why.

I just knew, it wasn't something people really used outside of games, like the military example I gave before.

It's not realistic. It's all about Information. Identify the threat/situation, Scout or Gather info via other means, Plan a solution, find and gather resources for the solution. At least that seems to be the basic cycle. Pretty sure you can apply that to almost anything.

Fun fact, I actually first heard about that sort of cycle from Cyber Security, there it's more like, Identify/Assess, Contain/Protect, Audit/Detect, Plan/Respond, Mitigate/Recover. Or w/e wording you want to use really, the ideas are similar.

 

[Typing...]

Most are classification, not ranking. Related terms but not the same. Though, classifications are actually more useful than rankings.

Imo, rankings are very arbitrary and useless. I don't really understand why these writers rank monsters and force their story/setting to fit this artificial system. Well, we rank competitors in a tournament or students in a class but those are artificial situations and the rankings have purpose for which these situations are created. Applying ranking on the real world as a means to explain it just don't make sense. And building a (fantasy) world on such rankings makes no sense either.

Maybe these are taken from games? It is not like video games doesn't make for awful stories and movies.

The hierarchy of power is used in the real world however. For example in the military there is a difference between a hundred soldiers compared to a thousand. Hence why one is called a company and the other a battalion. Another example is in wrestling where they are grouped by weight class. Or a more apt example for the times, the difference between an epidemic and a pandemic.

Humans by their nature like to apply arbitrary classifications to make sense of the world. Especially when threat response changes depending on the scale of the problem. Then they are ranked from least threatening to most.

Here is a real world example on rankings correlating to an individual's threat level.
White, Yellow, Orange, Green, Blue, Purple, Red, Brown, Black.

To some this is a horribly ordered rainbow. But to others this is the belt colors used in karate.

 

[Ankur_93]

Sounds interesting but I don´t know if I could do it like that in my case. And I´m reading at least 5 chapters of I reincarnated as in Immortal Caterpillar? it sounds like something I could like.

Of course. maybe you'd come up with your own method. Best of luck!
And thank you for reading! :)

 

[Ral]

The hierarchy of power is used in the real world however. For example in the military there is a difference between a hundred soldiers compared to a thousand. Hence why one is called a company and the other a battalion. Another example is in wrestling where they are grouped by weight class. Or a more apt example for the times, the difference between an epidemic and a pandemic.

Humans by their nature like to apply arbitrary classifications to make sense of the world. Especially when threat response changes depending on the scale of the problem. Then they are ranked from least threatening to most.

Here is a real world example on rankings correlating to an individual's threat level.
White, Yellow, Orange, Green, Blue, Purple, Red, Brown, Black.

To some this is a horribly ordered rainbow. But to others this is the belt colors used in karate.

Seriously, classification and hierarchy are different from rankings, and they certainly are different from units. You can't tell the difference between these various terms/words?

And, yes, the karate belt color is a ranking system, but, like my given examples, this is artificial and used on a system created specifically for it. You take a test, pass and you get the color. It is used to mark your progress of the art (and theoretically your ability).

 

[Kldran]

Ranking systems make the most sense in game-like worlds, where raw stat advantages can make weaker foes completely harmless due to how attack vs defense calculations work. It is from these systems that the ranking of monsters and adventurers comes from, and in these worlds, it's common for top rank beings to be absurdly powerful in terms of both what they can do, and how hard it is to defeat them in a fight.

 

[Typing...]

Seriously, classification and hierarchy are different from rankings, and they certainly are different from units. You can't tell the difference between these various terms/words?

And, yes, the karate belt color is a ranking system, but, like my given examples, this is an artificial used on a system created specifically for it. You take a test, pass and you get the color. It is used to mark your progress of the art (and theoretically your ability).

I cannot tell if you dislike the notion of ranking systems because you find them arbitrary and artificial or some other reason. All I'm trying to express is that yes, there are lot of things that are arbitrary and artificial and that's normal. Many things in the world are without inherent meaning except for the meaning we give them. If this is your point all I can say is, yes I agree with you they are arbitrary. But why does that mean they shouldn't be used?

Perhaps what you are trying to express as arbitrary isn't the ranking system itself but how it's often used in storytelling as a crutch? I'm grasping at straws to understand your point of view.

Is there problems with the way rankings are used in stories? Sure, such as it's an easy shortcut to give a sense of progression. And that it's often used as a be all term to express why 'this young master' is superior. And does the ranking fall apart and lose it's meaning because the main character's power level is over 9000 despite the fact he's only 12 years old? At that point we cannot help but throw the ranking out the window at that point because it's not consistent.
Is this the point you are trying to express?

 

[Ral]

I cannot tell if you dislike the notion of ranking systems because you find them arbitrary and artificial or some other reason. All I'm trying to express is that yes, there are lot of things that are arbitrary and artificial and that's normal. Many things in the world are without inherent meaning except for the meaning we give them. If this is your point all I can say is, yes I agree with you they are arbitrary. But why does that mean they shouldn't be used?

Perhaps what you are trying to express as arbitrary isn't the ranking system itself but how it's often used in storytelling as a crutch? I'm grasping at straws to understand your point of view.

First, the arguments you use confuse ranking with other similar concepts like classification. When you say "The hierarchy of power is used in the real world however" you not showing hierarchy of power nor rankings. When you say "Humans by their nature like to apply arbitrary classifications to make sense of the world," you are not talking about rankings.

And when you do get into an actual ranking system you got it wrong. "Here is a real world example on rankings correlating to an individual's threat level." Obviously the Karate belt colors but… no, this ranking is not threat level, it is about progression of the art.

Is there problems with the way rankings are used in stories? Sure, such as it's an easy shortcut to give a sense of progression. And that it's often used as a be all term to express why 'this young master' is superior. And does the ranking fall apart and lose it's meaning because the main character's power level is over 9000 despite the fact he's only 12 years old? At that point we cannot help but throw the ranking out the window at that point because it's not consistent.
Is this the point you are trying to express?

Not exactly.

It is like this. As I said, rankings are kinda artificial and makes sense only in the narrow scope where it is used for.

My issue though is that the authors kinda took it out of its relatively narrow scope and put out of that context. Like building a world/setting where monsters are in ranks. It oversimplify things. Look! Your hero is rank A while the monster is rank B. Who would win? Obviously the hero. That doesn't makes for a great story, does it?

Well, you can pair the hero with a monster of higher rank but then… why did the hero still win? Get the problem here? Ranking become completely meaningless. So either you get a very boring story or you got a pointless ranking system.

Then keep the hero only meet monsters of the same rank? Then your story becomes incredibly contrived and, again, the ranking becomes pointless in your narrative.

Sure rankings makes it easy to give a sense of progression, you essentially just increment the level/ranking, but that doesn't mean that it makes the story better, especially when readers realize these ranking makes no sense whatsoever. Oh look! This monster has higher ranking/level than our hero!… Only idiots would fall for that again.

The very narrow and artificial nature of rankings makes it quite useless as means to build a world upon or to build your narrative upon. It gives your story a shallow, artificial and stilted edge.

Though, you could still use it, but in its narrow limited scope it was meant to be instead of this encompassing nature of your story.

 

[FDSIO]

My issue though is that the authors kinda took it out of its relatively narrow scope and put out of that context. Like building a world/setting where monsters are in ranks. It oversimplify things. Look! Your hero is rank A while the monster is rank B. Who would win? Obviously the hero. That doesn't makes for a great story, does it?

Well, you can pair the hero with a monster of higher rank but then… why did the hero still win? Get the problem here? Ranking become completely meaningless. So either you get a very boring story or you got a pointless ranking system.

That's true when raw power was the only criteria for which the rank was given for.

In my opinion, a dumb trigger-happy but strong as hell monster could be given the same danger rank as a weaker cunning and stealth-based monster.

 

[Ral]

That's true when raw power was the only criteria for which the rank was given for.

In my opinion, a dumb trigger-happy but strong as hell monster could be given the same danger rank as a weaker cunning and stealth-based monster.

This kinda breaks the simplicity of ranking system.

But the biggest issue here is that rankings hide the nature of the danger. Say the monster is ranked A, a high rank. In what way is it dangerous? You can't tell because it just say A rank. What people should you send? Well it only says A rank then… you still would actually not know. You could have send someone not suitable for the kind of threat they are going to face.

See what I mean here? The ranking becomes pretty much pointless in actual decision making. It is too simple, and even when it is even uses complex criteria, the presentation is too simple as to obscure information.

This makes sense because ranking are meant to be used in very narrow context where things are simplified. Like, for example, students are often ranked based on their performance in school, usually tests and exams. In that very narrow (and artificial) scope, the ranking can make sense. The higher ranking student gets higher scores in their exams/test than others. But take the ranking out of that context, say, use this ranking to rank everyone not just the students… that makes no sense.

Still, the authors makes heavy use of this ranking systems and pretty much build the story around it. That is way out of scope the ranking system, any ranking system, is meant for. You will definitely have trouble with it.

 

[FDSIO]

This kinda breaks the simplicity of ranking system.

Who said you need to sacrifice logic for simplicity? That's just stupid.

But the biggest issue here is that rankings hide the nature of the danger. Say the monster is ranked A, a high rank. In what way is it dangerous?

I don't know... As the dude who's going to face it... hmm... maybe you could simply ask? No way, right? A person who climbed the ranks till rank A wouldn't do something so illogical, right?

What people should you send? Well it only says A rank then… you still would actually not know.

Of course the people who gave the rank based on said criteria wouldn't know who to send... At this point you do not make any sense anymore...

See what I mean here? The ranking becomes pretty much pointless in actual decision making

No, I don't see what you mean. I believe the rank were more like a guideline rather than an absolute rule. To stop beginners from going after dragons or the little rabbit looking monster that's equally dangerous... Maybe the common person wouldn't think of fighting a dragon but the harmless-looking rabbit? He does not know... If there was something to at least let him make an idea of how dangerous the thing was... Wouldn't that be wonderful?

He's rank E, he's not even gonna think of hunting B or A rank monsters... That's what I'm pointing at.

 

[Ral]

Who said you need to sacrifice logic for simplicity? That's just stupid.

Huh? This is not what I'm arguing about. It has nothing to do with logic.

Why do rank things? To present something (something scaling like power, intelligence or speed) in a simple manner. This one is more than the other and so on.

That problem of course is that it obliterates nuance. Why is one thing better than the other? You can't tell because the ranking only tells your that one thing is ranked higher than the other. That is it.

It is not lack of logic or anything but the very fact that ranking is very lacking.

I don't know... As the dude who's going to face it... hmm... maybe you could simply ask? No way, right? A person who climbed the ranks till rank A wouldn't do something so illogical, right?

Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Correct!

But here is the thing. Read the stories. Notice something? Yeah. They do something so illogical. In fact, the world is build around this ranking. Of course there are stories that defy this, but, a lot just use the ranking system as a crutch. Something like "oh no this is a S rank monster" and such and then we are supposed to feel suspenseful or something. Some at least give a run down of the monster and what is its capabilities, others pretty much just states the rank and that is it.

But, not a problem I guess. The author has complete control on the story after all. So what if the whole thing is illogical? They can make it work with the author powers.

Of course the people who gave the rank based on said criteria wouldn't know who to send... At this point you do not make any sense anymore...

First, my point is. Looking on just the ranking doesn't tell you anything. You actually has to know more than the ranking itself. Like, you are the one who rank this monster and have studied it, etc. Those aren't things that the rankings well tell you or you know by just knowing what the ranking of the monster is.

No, I don't see what you mean. I believe the rank were more like a guideline rather than an absolute rule. To stop beginners from going after dragons or the little rabbit looking monster that's equally dangerous... Maybe the common person wouldn't think of fighting a dragon but the harmless-looking rabbit? He does not know... If there was something to at least let him make an idea of how dangerous the thing was... Wouldn't that be wonderful?

He's rank E, he's not even gonna think of hunting B or A rank monsters... That's what I'm pointing at.

I know what you mean but see? Logical and Simple. So logical and simple that it can't be natural. Logical and simple is just not what nature is. I'm reminded of this quote: " As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality." Now imagine if you take this very simple and logical structure and build your story world on it. Not good.

And if they want to get idea of the dangers of the thing was… they should make proper research. Read books, ask other people, ask the witnesses, etc. You know, what we, in real world, actually do when we face dangers? Even something like mice and rats, people actually go and study about them intensively that we even have people who specialized on them and build specialized equipment to deal with them. That is how we deal with things, not look at the rankings and based everything on that.

But then again, most these stories build itself around these rankings (maybe they copied the video games) so, in story at least, they make sense. Of course it would, because they build their story around it. It does come with a consequence as I will talk more about.

One issue that I have with this is that the authors use these rankings as a crutch. This monster is rank B or A because… it just says so ( and therefore adventurers of rank A or higher is required, yada yada). No details whatsoever and the fight often are just vague and generic. And when the protagonist fight monsters we are just supposed to feel suspense or tension because they are fighting monsters of higher ranking than out protagonist even though the authors provide very vague or no details.

And they even actually elevate rankings to the point of making the whole world and culture around it. All these adventurers with all their rankings. The monster are all uniform with every species somehow fitting in a single ranking (while humans don't).

They could still use rankings, I do said that, but it should have limited purpose and usefulness as rankings really are.

This is what I'm pointing at. This simplicity doesn't really make for great stories, especially make for your setting to build upon. The stories I've read that use rankings sooner or later soon abandons it or deliberately breaks it. Of course they would because it is very limiting that the story demands that you do this. How long before you realized that they only mention the ranking almost only once, usually in the introduction, and never bother with it again or it has pretty much no effect on the story? How many times have you read of stories where the protagonist beats this young master that is supposedly many levels higher? This might be also a reason why many of these stories kind of stories degenerate into slice-of-life something like that because the system is so limited that slice-of-life offers more writing material.

 

[FDSIO]

But here is the thing. Read the stories. Notice something? Yeah. They do something so illogical. In fact, the world is build around this ranking.

Just so you know, I wasn't defending that kind of story... I don't like when that's happening either. I was just giving a more plausible and logical ranking system that could work ALONGSIDE the story not based on it. And it doesn't need to be perfect either as most things in life aren't. But if you were to use a ranking system, it NEEDS to make some sense at least.

One issue that I have with this is that the authors use these rankings as a crutch. This monster is rank B or A because… it just says so ( and therefore adventurers of rank A or higher is required, yada yada). No details whatsoever and the fight often are just vague and generic.

And that's what my original point was. The monster was rank B or A because despise being weaker, it has that and that. Or lives in that dangerous environment. Or does that thing that's bad and if not stopped... I don't know... very bad things were to happen. And takes priorities compared with a D rank for example.

My point was that the ranking system could be so much MORE. It wasn't to prove you wrong or anything, but seeing you dismissing it so vehemently I had to point that by giving some thought and attention it could work. Not as the base of the story but as part of it.

 

[Ral]

Just so you know, I wasn't defending that kind of story... I don't like when that's happening either. I was just giving a more plausible and logical ranking system that could work ALONGSIDE the story not based on it. And it doesn't need to be perfect either as most things in life aren't. But if you were to use a ranking system, it NEEDS to make some sense at least.

Oh. We are looking at it at different viewpoints.

And yes, ranking always does make some sense but in the very limited area they meant for, not something that your story should build from.

And that's what my original point was. The monster was rank B or A because despise being weaker, it has that and that. Or lives in that dangerous environment. Or does that thing that's bad and if not stopped... I don't know... very bad things were to happen. And takes priorities compared with a D rank for example.

Hmmm… a goblin attacking nearby town takes priority over that dragon miles away doing nothing (but those pose danger)… but because goblins are lowest ranked, they take lowest priority and we should deal with the dragon first. Is that what you mean?

On the other, you can't really say that the goblins are higher ranked than the dragon because they have higher priority.

And rankings often are just by itself. This monster is higher than this monster whether this monster is posing a danger or not. Heck, even if the monster went extinct, the ranking would stick. I mean, dragons doesn't become the lowest rank monster just because they are all dead now, does it?

With just this you can see how rankings can don't work taken away from its limited context. This is probably more of an example of how limited rankings are rather that how wide its application is.

My point was that the ranking system could be so much MORE. It wasn't to prove you wrong or anything, but seeing you dismissing it so vehemently I had to point that by giving some thought and attention it could work. Not as the base of the story but as part of it.

I don't say they won't work. They work, in a very limited way. But that is not how authors implemented them in stories. Most of the time, rankings are given so much weight to the point that the story or world revolves around it. I mean, I give typical Xianxia story as example where almost everything is about your levels and such, but then the protagonist can easily beat those genius young masters that are of supposedly higher level than them.

Yes, giving some thought and attention it could work, and I do give it thought and attention and here is what I think would make it work: give it a very limited scope and context. Making something work doesn't mean it can do more. Sometimes it means it does one small thing well. A light bulb for example only does one thing and that is to create light. All it needs to work is to do this single, very limited task well.