Most cliched enemies.

[winterraptor]

Mud Crabs.

 

[Crispy]

Rats aren't cliched, rats are rats. They're everywhere; they're vermin, will kill them, we get 1 xp each for them.

I think the most cliched FRPG monsters might be vampires. There's really not a whole lot you can do with them that hasn't already been done a thousand times, and it seems like every CRPG has some obligatory entry of these, well, boring, type of undead. Think about it - the last really interesting vampire was who? Count Strahd from Ravenloft?

VTMB excepted, of course.

 

[Stereotypical Villain]

A stereotypical villain done right.

 

[Syraxis]

Elemental anything.

 

[Felix]

Humans.

 

[Difera]

Your "cool and trusty" party member who turns on you near the end of the game... *yawn*

And in his dying breath you learn he was under mind control\had to do it to help his sick-dying-captive relative\because he loved you...

 

[Jasede]

probably undead

 

[Korgan]

Giant spiders. And robots. Man, there's zero satisfaction after killing a robot.

 

[Haba]

Orcs, goblins, trolls, kobolds...

 

[Dire Roach]

Demons. Always as bland and uninspired as dragons.

 

[DriacKin]

A stereotypical villain done right.

Why do so many of you fap over Irenicus? He's as stereotypical and cliché as any other main villian... And yet, so many of you consider him to be a 'memorable' villian. Why?
I never understood the love for this character. To me, he was never anything more than just another forgettable BioWare character.

 

[Emotional Vampire]

Agreed. And I'm the only person here who likes BG so my opinion is super important.

 

[Lesifoere]

Well, the voice acting done for him was pretty good?

 

[Lurkar]

Well, the voice acting done for him was pretty good?

That's about it.

I like BG2 a lot, but Irenicus isn't an awesome villain. He just has good VA.

 

[Norfleet]

Squishy Wizards. Why all wizards have to be frail old men?

This is basically game balance. If anything, this uniformity of nature is more prevalent in modern games than it is in older games. Just in the D&D example, in the original D&D and related games, one would roll stats essentially at random, perhaps with some rearrangement, but there was no mechanism to encourage characters to be "equal". Nowadays, all character stats are bought with points, so a character is essentially a clone soldier assembled from a fixed pool of parts, with absolutely nothing that makes them intrinsically interesting or unique, as every character is the same. This, in turn, leads to power creep as levelling up and acquiring aftermarket addons thus becomes the only way to distinguish your character.

But back to the wizards thing: Basically, if you made a wizard with all the physical attributes of a warrior, who wasn't feeble and easily killed with his wussy d4 hitpoints, there would be no point to having warriors as wizards would be superior to warriors in pretty much every meaningful way. It is interesting to note that in the original archetypes from which the "old man wizard" is based, this was, in fact, the case, and wizards were not in any way specifically physically gimped. Traditional wizardly figures like Merlin or Gandalf were not in any way physically incapable or easily killed, and were, in fact, the opposite, frequently supernaturally difficult to kill. Killing a wizard was not meant to be any small feat!

Of course, this is wholly unbalancing in a game, which means any game featuring wizards has to either make them squishy, make them unique characters that are part of the plot (villains, NPCs, or The PC), or make everyone a wizard: There simply isn't any other way to balance a system where a specific character simply has these magical bonus powers without any apparent drawback. Either wizards are plot-central characters that are supplied by the game itself without any specific balance (potential for use as a multiplayer system is thus nil), are strictly NPCs/villains (as before, only they were never playable), or everyone is a wizard (which gives us Jedi Knight).

Thus, wizards are squishy.

 

[Emotional Vampire]

I'm pretty sure that was a rhetorical question.

 

[Hory]

That's about it.

I like BG2 a lot, but Irenicus isn't an awesome villain. He just has good VA.

The voice acting is extraordinary, but I think it's also the fact that he's more involved in the story. He doesn't just appear at the end of the game for the boss fight. Also, the writing is above-average, he gives some philosophical justification for his actions. He's simply not as shallow as the foes from other RPGs.

Life... is strength. That is not to be contested; it seems logical enough. You live; you affect your world. But is it what you want? You are... different inside. This woman lives and has strength of a sort. She lost her parents to plague, her husband to war, but she persevered. Her farm prospered, her children are well-fed, and her name respected throughout her land. She lived as she thought she should. And now she is dead. Her land will be divided, her children will move on, and she will be forgotten. She lived a good life, but she had no real power; she was a slave to death. I wonder if you are destined to be forgotten as she was. Will your life fade in the shadow of greater beings?

IMO, BG2 would be the fourth game in a RPG "holy quadrinity".

 

[Azael]

That's not really Irenicus though that appears in your dream, if we're going to be picky. I've always liked BG2 and Irenicus, but there are better villains out there even though they might not benefit from David Warner's excellent voice acting.

EDIT: As for most cliché enemy, I'd probably go with Suicidal Bandit. That a strong character is attacked with a suicidal beast is one thing, they might not be particular smart and not realize the difference between easy prey and Super Bad Dude Wielding the Sword of Doom, but a human or other sentient, somewhat intelligent, being certainly should. Walking around in Fallout 2 with power armor and wielding a pulse rifle and still being harassed by street punks is funny to me.

 

[DraQ]

Squishy Wizards. Why all wizards have to be frail old men? Seeing a big burly, warrior-looking guy suddently smack your best brawler's head on a tree with one hand while shooting lighting with the other would be a nice surprise.

I just remembered Białołęcka's "Tkacz Iluzji" and it's setting (the sequels are, sadly, shit).

Demons. Always as bland and uninspired as dragons.

Bland, uninspired authors -> bland uninspired creatures.

Technically demons, though not necessarily called that, but extradimensional beings overall can be fucking awesome as such - just look at lovecraftian cosmic horrors. The fact that they suck in computer implementations, being cheesy horned dudes with really deep voices and propensity for doing evil for lulz has the exact same cause as the fact dragons are usually big dumb lizards snoozing on large piles of treasure in those.

 

[Erebus]

I think the most cliched FRPG monsters might be vampires. There's really not a whole lot you can do with them that hasn't already been done a thousand times, and it seems like every CRPG has some obligatory entry of these, well, boring, type of undead.

I have grown to hate vampires in fantasy books because of how cliché, repetitive and annoying they usually are. However, I don't mind them in CRPGs : they can be interesting and challenging opponents. They certainly fare a lot better than many other undeads.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Squishy Wizards. Why all wizards have to be frail old men?

This is basically game balance[...]Thus, wizards are squishy.

I remember a guy that was asking why Gandalf used a sword if he was a wizard. Answer: "He has hands"

 

[VentilatorOfDoom]

IMO, BG2 would be the fourth game in a RPG "holy quadrinity".

Arcanum and PS:T are out, both being overrated. Bloodlines as best Troika game is in and so is BG2. That means Fallout, BG2, Bloodlines.

 

[Hory]

Nah, let Arcanum and PS:T stay and we'll have the holy pentinity. These are the best five (for "art fags", that is). Dungeon crawler fans, get your own pentinity!

 

[DraQ]

Squishy Wizards. Why all wizards have to be frail old men?

This is basically game balance[...]Thus, wizards are squishy.

I remember a guy that was asking why Gandalf used a sword if he was a wizard. Answer: "He has hands"

Sufficient proof that hard, DnDesque class disadvantages are fucking retarded.

@Białołęcka's "Tkacz Iluzji":
Magic talent was a rare innate thing of varying power and type in this universe. Very powerful talents could cause serious debilitations or deformities. The Circle (your standard monopolistic magely organization) was still pretty focused on knowledge (well, you get to learn a lot of stuff if you can directly perceive the structure of matter and manipulate it), but the mages themselves were fished out from various environments - one of the more important secondary characters, is basically a burly highlander with default facial tatooes and a big sword type who wasn't even literate before he got educated by the circle - he happens to be a master of illusion.

 

[mondblut]

Ghosts don't have fear effects, don't pass through walls or are immune to physical attacks.

In most proper games, ghosts are immune to non-magical weapons. Particularly powerful ones require like +3 to hit.

Skeletons rarely have a significant resistance to arrows, they don't lose members in fights, don't still come at you when cut in half or such.

Likewise, skeletal resistance to piercing damage is fairly common in RPGs where combat is serious business rather than something slapped together and thrown in between prolonged narrative sequences in last minute.