Sigilavox
He/Him- 401
- 210
Hello!
This is a CRT for the species of Monster Hunter to give shape to how monster intelligence is treated on this wiki.
TL;DR
1a. We should remove Dragon element weakness as our method for determining monster intelligence.
1b. Dragon Element should not be associated with "Mind Manipulation" and "Madness Manipulation" until we get a better source.
2. We should set all monsters to a default "Animalistic" due to being portrayed, by and large, as animals throughout the series.
3. We should set monsters with examples of (relatively) advanced strategy as "High Animalistic" on a case-by-case basis.
4. We should set elder dragons with proof of human-like (or above) intelligence at appropriate levels on a case-by-case basis, such as Safi'jiiva or Ibushi.
5. Monsties from the Stories games are "Below Average" like Pokémon, and we might be able to scale all monsters to that point.
The Non-Draconic Basis of Intelligence
First, let's talk about Dragon Element weakness, which is the metric that our wiki currently uses for monster intelligence (higher weakness = smarter).
See this example for Kirin:
The average hunter takes 100% of incoming Dragon-element damage. Kirin, as in the above example, takes 5% (or 1/20) Dragon damage across the board, making it resistant (though not immune) to Dragon element when compared with the average monster.
For comparison, the average monster takes an average of 10 to 15% incoming Dragon element damage, monsters who are notably weak to Dragon element (i.e., Rathalos) take ~20% to ~30% of incoming Dragon damage, and the most resistant ones (i.e., Stygian Zinogre) take 0% Dragon damage (i.e., they're immune to it). So even the weakest monster is far more resistant to Dragon element than the average person.
Furthermore, by looking at rosters one finds there are more exceptions to this rule than examples of it, given how Rajang, Odogaron, Gold Rathian, and Silver Rathalos, monsters who showcase precision and strategy in battle, are fully immune to Dragon (which would imply being tremendously stupid), while full-on elder dragons like Teostra or Valstrax are highly resistant to the stuff. Then there's the case where individuals of the same species can have wildly differing reactions to Dragon element; see World's Diablos (22 avg) and Black Diablos (full-on immune), where a Black Diablos is just a female Diablos that is in heat/pregnant. Source: any monster hitzone database.
And this brings us to the fundamental problem; as far as anyone on this wiki knows, there is no source for why higher weakness to Dragon Element implies higher intelligence, nor any primary source on how or even if Dragon Element directly attacks the mind. Unless we can get a source for this (please post down below if so), I propose not using Dragon weakness as evidence for or against intelligence (and removing Mind Manipulation/Madness Manipulation from Dragon Element monsters while we're at it).
What We Know
Now, let's talk about what we actually know about monster intelligence!
Throughout the series, monsters are by and large portrayed as and discussed as animals. There is a modest tendency for stronger monsters, such as the flagship Zinogre or elder dragons like Velkhana, to showcase something akin to a personality, but it never stretches so far as using or understanding language, holding visible emotions aside from what directly pertains to their survival or any other marks of human-like intelligence - with the exception of Monsties (but we'll get to that later).
As such, Animalistic to High Animalistic is our best bet for categorizing monsters as shown in all series entries excepting the Stories games.
Examples of monsters with higher intelligence can be seen in cases like Glavenus, who knows how to shift its weight to effectively use its enormous sharp tail edge as its primary weapon, or Rajang, who's basically just a gigantic primate. Monsters like Magnamalo can even rocket jump using their explosive attacks as self-propulsion. Such monsters would make sense to have High Animalistic, and should be individually determined, perhaps in this thread.
Rise's Ibushi and Narwa seem to be exceptions to this rule in that they are stated to have thoughts as interpreted through the wyverians Hinoa and Minoto via a psychic link, but even then, their thoughts were entirely driven by the base instinct of reproduction (single-mindedly yearning for the other) and wiping away threats to their young. Minoto mentions how repetitive Narwa's thoughts were (source in progress). Their monster intros, as narrated by Hinoa and Minoto, do seem to indicate an inner dialogue with such concepts as destruction or paradise, though, so it's up for discussion. I propose Below Average to be safe.
According to this translation of the Iceborne lore book (which currently has no official localization), Safi'jiiva is "far above human intelligence" and is referred to as "the Perfect Being". Since it was designed to be a rival to Fatalis, we might be able to scale Fatalis to this level, and potentially Alatreon as well given its connection with Safi'jiiva. Above Average, anyone?
PokéMonsters from Stories?
Our highest examples of intelligence in the series are from Monster Hunter Stories and Monster Hunter Stories 2: Wings of Ruin, in which certain monsters can be hatched and raised by Riders from birth to essentially become their Pokémon - capable of communicating with their Riders, responding to commands in battle, and strategizing to take down foes at the direction of a human. This would put them at Below Average. It's implied that Monsties respond more to a Rider's feelings and expressions than their language, but it's still something.
What else can a Monstie do, game mechanics aside?
Well, Guardian Ratha, from the 2nd game, is seemingly a standard (old) Rathalos, yet holds recognition and deference for a close friend of his old Rider, and apparently acts as the guardian of Mahana Village. Notable in the latter cutscene is how the hunters flatly consider monsters to be wild animals, while the people of Mahana Village, who are practitioners of Monstie riding, consider monsters to be intelligent and empathetic creatures.
So Monsties are Below Average, but how about regular monsters?
An argument against scaling wild monsters to Monstie levels of intelligence is the fact that Kinship Stones forged from special ore are essentially always required to "activate" a bond with monsters (by doing so just before the egg hatches) and are frequently used to express or reinforce the feelings between Riders and Monsties throughout the games, which might imply that kinship stones are the source of monsters being able to emotionally connect with humans.
An argument for scaling is that a monster doesn't have to be born a Monstie to be capable of being one. Frostfang is Avinia's Monstie even though it was first a wild monster before becoming a Monstie, meaning that a Monstie's expression is theoretically possible for any monster - one could say that the potential is always there.
Oh yeah, and like Narwa/Ibushi, Stories 2's Oltura has a "voice" - saying to Red and Zellard "the beginning". What it really was communicating, it turns out, is that "it was going to be born", but the latter took it as a sign that "it would wipe out the world as it was and create a new one"... and by the end of the game it's confirmed that the former is correct, and not the latter. So not necessarily human-like intelligence, but definitely something at least.
Discuss!
This is a CRT for the species of Monster Hunter to give shape to how monster intelligence is treated on this wiki.
TL;DR
1a. We should remove Dragon element weakness as our method for determining monster intelligence.
1b. Dragon Element should not be associated with "Mind Manipulation" and "Madness Manipulation" until we get a better source.
2. We should set all monsters to a default "Animalistic" due to being portrayed, by and large, as animals throughout the series.
3. We should set monsters with examples of (relatively) advanced strategy as "High Animalistic" on a case-by-case basis.
4. We should set elder dragons with proof of human-like (or above) intelligence at appropriate levels on a case-by-case basis, such as Safi'jiiva or Ibushi.
5. Monsties from the Stories games are "Below Average" like Pokémon, and we might be able to scale all monsters to that point.
The Non-Draconic Basis of Intelligence
First, let's talk about Dragon Element weakness, which is the metric that our wiki currently uses for monster intelligence (higher weakness = smarter).
See this example for Kirin:
Okay, first off: due to how hitzones in the Monster Hunter series work, it's inaccurate to say that "Kirin has -5% resistance, while the average hunter as 0% resistance."
The average hunter takes 100% of incoming Dragon-element damage. Kirin, as in the above example, takes 5% (or 1/20) Dragon damage across the board, making it resistant (though not immune) to Dragon element when compared with the average monster.
For comparison, the average monster takes an average of 10 to 15% incoming Dragon element damage, monsters who are notably weak to Dragon element (i.e., Rathalos) take ~20% to ~30% of incoming Dragon damage, and the most resistant ones (i.e., Stygian Zinogre) take 0% Dragon damage (i.e., they're immune to it). So even the weakest monster is far more resistant to Dragon element than the average person.
Furthermore, by looking at rosters one finds there are more exceptions to this rule than examples of it, given how Rajang, Odogaron, Gold Rathian, and Silver Rathalos, monsters who showcase precision and strategy in battle, are fully immune to Dragon (which would imply being tremendously stupid), while full-on elder dragons like Teostra or Valstrax are highly resistant to the stuff. Then there's the case where individuals of the same species can have wildly differing reactions to Dragon element; see World's Diablos (22 avg) and Black Diablos (full-on immune), where a Black Diablos is just a female Diablos that is in heat/pregnant. Source: any monster hitzone database.
And this brings us to the fundamental problem; as far as anyone on this wiki knows, there is no source for why higher weakness to Dragon Element implies higher intelligence, nor any primary source on how or even if Dragon Element directly attacks the mind. Unless we can get a source for this (please post down below if so), I propose not using Dragon weakness as evidence for or against intelligence (and removing Mind Manipulation/Madness Manipulation from Dragon Element monsters while we're at it).
What We Know
Now, let's talk about what we actually know about monster intelligence!
Throughout the series, monsters are by and large portrayed as and discussed as animals. There is a modest tendency for stronger monsters, such as the flagship Zinogre or elder dragons like Velkhana, to showcase something akin to a personality, but it never stretches so far as using or understanding language, holding visible emotions aside from what directly pertains to their survival or any other marks of human-like intelligence - with the exception of Monsties (but we'll get to that later).
As such, Animalistic to High Animalistic is our best bet for categorizing monsters as shown in all series entries excepting the Stories games.
Examples of monsters with higher intelligence can be seen in cases like Glavenus, who knows how to shift its weight to effectively use its enormous sharp tail edge as its primary weapon, or Rajang, who's basically just a gigantic primate. Monsters like Magnamalo can even rocket jump using their explosive attacks as self-propulsion. Such monsters would make sense to have High Animalistic, and should be individually determined, perhaps in this thread.
Rise's Ibushi and Narwa seem to be exceptions to this rule in that they are stated to have thoughts as interpreted through the wyverians Hinoa and Minoto via a psychic link, but even then, their thoughts were entirely driven by the base instinct of reproduction (single-mindedly yearning for the other) and wiping away threats to their young. Minoto mentions how repetitive Narwa's thoughts were (source in progress). Their monster intros, as narrated by Hinoa and Minoto, do seem to indicate an inner dialogue with such concepts as destruction or paradise, though, so it's up for discussion. I propose Below Average to be safe.
According to this translation of the Iceborne lore book (which currently has no official localization), Safi'jiiva is "far above human intelligence" and is referred to as "the Perfect Being". Since it was designed to be a rival to Fatalis, we might be able to scale Fatalis to this level, and potentially Alatreon as well given its connection with Safi'jiiva. Above Average, anyone?
PokéMonsters from Stories?
Our highest examples of intelligence in the series are from Monster Hunter Stories and Monster Hunter Stories 2: Wings of Ruin, in which certain monsters can be hatched and raised by Riders from birth to essentially become their Pokémon - capable of communicating with their Riders, responding to commands in battle, and strategizing to take down foes at the direction of a human. This would put them at Below Average. It's implied that Monsties respond more to a Rider's feelings and expressions than their language, but it's still something.
What else can a Monstie do, game mechanics aside?
Well, Guardian Ratha, from the 2nd game, is seemingly a standard (old) Rathalos, yet holds recognition and deference for a close friend of his old Rider, and apparently acts as the guardian of Mahana Village. Notable in the latter cutscene is how the hunters flatly consider monsters to be wild animals, while the people of Mahana Village, who are practitioners of Monstie riding, consider monsters to be intelligent and empathetic creatures.
So Monsties are Below Average, but how about regular monsters?
An argument against scaling wild monsters to Monstie levels of intelligence is the fact that Kinship Stones forged from special ore are essentially always required to "activate" a bond with monsters (by doing so just before the egg hatches) and are frequently used to express or reinforce the feelings between Riders and Monsties throughout the games, which might imply that kinship stones are the source of monsters being able to emotionally connect with humans.
An argument for scaling is that a monster doesn't have to be born a Monstie to be capable of being one. Frostfang is Avinia's Monstie even though it was first a wild monster before becoming a Monstie, meaning that a Monstie's expression is theoretically possible for any monster - one could say that the potential is always there.
Oh yeah, and like Narwa/Ibushi, Stories 2's Oltura has a "voice" - saying to Red and Zellard "the beginning". What it really was communicating, it turns out, is that "it was going to be born", but the latter took it as a sign that "it would wipe out the world as it was and create a new one"... and by the end of the game it's confirmed that the former is correct, and not the latter. So not necessarily human-like intelligence, but definitely something at least.
Discuss!
Last edited:
