From Ultima Codex
Jump to: navigation, search


Should the Kilrathi race be included as other-worldly visitors?

In Ultima VII, A crashed Kilrathi ship is found in the fields east of Britian were a farmer tells the tale of his tussle (using his mighty "hoe-of-destruction") and resulting consumption of the dying alien. (a possible omage to Hiemlien's famous work?)

It is retroactively revealed that all the "tie-fighters" in the space-ace portion of Ultima I were actually piloted by none other than the Kilrathi! (The player had to kill 20 of the buggers to gain the title of Space Ace, required by the princesses for time travel info).

Carcerian 20:47, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I think the Kilrathi should if and only if it is not necessary for the beast to actually make an appearance. I might be wrong, but I don't think we actually see any Kilrathi. What I remember is just being told about them.
Where does this retroactive information come from? AngusM 03:10, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

From Ultima VII, They also appear in Ultima Underworld II, in a de-evolved state... Carcerian 07:56, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

Yes, they are covered under "Trilkhai", so it doesn't belong here (along with other stuff I had to clean up) --Tribun 10:00, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough, should "Trilkhai" be listed in the bestiary? (I agree the Kilrathi are debatable as the 20 aliens you must kill in Part I to become space ace (only Garriot can say for sure), but if the Underworld's "Trilkhai" are involved in RP, and can become hostile and thus a can be a fightable enemy)

Carcerian 04:54, October 20, 2009 (UTC)

Player Races[edit]

I can understand removing the early player races, perhaps there should be a separate section for them? (Bobbit, Furry, Dwarf, Elf races were in Ulitma I, II, III).

BTW, It should also be noted that Elves do exist as NPCs (in Ulitma Online, Mondains Legacy if i'm not mistaken), as do Dwarves (later called the Mountain Folk in Ultima Underworld).

Well I can't understand removing earlier player races. They were part of the game and always will be. What difference does it make if they were an aberration? AngusM 01:33, October 13, 2009 (UTC)
I'm assuming because the bestiary isn't for Player races, only enemies... Carcerian 05:02, October 20, 2009 (UTC)


Bears : first appear in Ultima I, not Serpent Isle only

Gargoyles first appear in Ultima III, not V

Ghouls first appear in Ultima III, not Pagan only

(Original ghouls obviously had no relation to the "Pagan Ghouls", should they be listed under Zombies, who appeared in Serpent Isle, or a separate entry?)

Goblins first appeared in Ultima III, and had a Castle in Ultima Underworld (II?) not Serpent Isle only

Golems first appeared in Ultima III, not V

Reapers, first appeared as Tanglers in Ultima I, not IV


The Bestiary was/is also missing the following creatures (from Ultima I, III, and Serpent Isle)

Brigands (U3) a form of rouge/thief, they could steal unequipped arms & armour

Clerics (U2) a human enemy

Cutpurses (U3) similar to brigand, can steal items not equiped

Demons (U3) (if devil is has a seperate entry, should not Demon, as well?)

Giants (U3)

Giant Beetles (U3) aka Brandles, Pinchers, Snatches

Giant Octopi (U1) appears in the Early Apple Versions Manual instead of Giant Squit

Griffins (U3)

Invisible Seekers (U1)

(if merged with invisible stalker, then the invisible stalker should not be listed as pagan only, however Stalkers were assumed to be humans using magic, while seekers are assumedly air elementals or some sort of spirit)

Manes (U3) (should be at least mentions as a subspecies of Daemon/Devil or Demon)

Mind Whippers (U1)

Rangers (U1) should be listed under human opponents

Roc (U1) picture appears in the Early Apple Versions Manual

Tanglers (U1) aka Reapers (or at least their ancestors)

Titans (U3)

Trents (U1) (easy to miss, as the look like hidden archers, never leaving forest)

Warlocks (U1) should be mentioned under humans/wizards

Wyverns (U3)

Zombies (U3, SI)

While early Ulitma manuals (like Exodus) grouped sets of 3 creatures together, like "Wyvern, Dragon, Griffin" and "Giant, Titan, Golem" as well as "Ork, Goblin, Troll", and "Gargoyle, Demon, Orcus" in the manuals, IMO this does not make all these creatures the same, as they can appear quite different from each other in the game, and may even have different abilities.

If Wizards group "necromancers, warlocks, illusionists" all together, should not the same be done for cutpurse,rogue, brigand, thief, hood, etc?)

Sources :

Manuals from Replacement Docs:

The Ultima RPG Shrines: (still missing the Trents, lol)

Playing the games Ulitma I, II, III (were i noticed the the missing Trents attacking me!!!)

Carcerian 20:41, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

Removal of pluralized monster names[edit]

Yeah, okay, this is REALLY anal, but listing the monster names in the plural ("Lizard men," "Fairies," Goblins," et al) is unecessary and leads to confusion over some monsters like the Cyclops (Websters says "cyclopes" - pronounced "cy-CLOE-peez"). Besides that, the original Ultima manuals listed them as singular, anyway.

Anyone wanna tackle the project of removing the "s" from all the monster names? Hell, we might even remove .5k of data in the process. ;)

I think they are pluralized for a reason, but I wasn't there for the original conversation. They may have been pluralized to avoid the previous confusion of having a mismatch of plurals and singular. Could anyone elighten me on what the original thought was? Dungy 23:16, September 9, 2010 (UTC)
When I created it, I actually put some thought behind it. My basic line was, that the signular would indicate, that it is a single entity, while the plural shows, that this enemy is encountered multiple times/often. So I went with the plural.--Tribun 00:16, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
Sounds good, just one of these days we're going to have to make a redirect for everyone of those from the singular to plural form so that regardless of what a person types in they go straight to it. I'm still fighting with my current giant to-do list, and it kills me to write more things on it. :P Dungy 00:54, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Like a Roc?[edit]

The Roc, as seen in the original-release Apple II manual.

Can ANYONE confirm for me that the Roc was, in fact, a monster included in the original release of Ultima I? It's pictured in the first-run Apple II manual, but definitely not in the later manuals or the actual re-written game.

Anyone? Anyone?

New Monster Parameter?[edit]

What does everyone think of adding a "Type" Parameter to the Creature Template? This would correspond to the appropriate part of the Bestiary.

For example, Skeletons would have type Undead.

Too much work? --Polygoncount 20:23, March 30, 2010 (UTC)

Yes, a lot of work, and first impression sounds a bit like Dnd 3e-3.5...

That said, given Ultima's versions of "Brommer's Guide", and Encyclopedia Britannica, seems to me there is no reason why certain Sosarian sages would not classify monsters in such a way...

Sounds like a great side project to me, to be sure :)

Carcerian 24:51, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

Flora and Fauna[edit]

As far as enemy categories go, perhaps plants could have a a separate "flora" section.

Examples: Swamp Plants, Tangle Vines, Trents, the U6 Hydra, etc...

Carcerian 24:28, September 9, 2010 (UTC)