Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Corsair

Leo_Negri's page

451 posts. 5 reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 451 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

crazy_cat wrote:
is there anywhere I can find a picture (with names) of all the current iconics - I've lost track of who/how many thee are?

When Occult Adventures is out and Ultimate Intrigue(?) there will be 38, I think (11 Core, 6 APC, 3 UC, 1 UM, 10 ACG, 6 Occult, and 1 UI)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
OldSkul wrote:
It would be fun in future sets to maybe get other races that are undead. I would love some dwarf wights and skeletons.

How about a Wight Dwarf, of does that step ON GW intellectual property?


So do them up as part of the Iconics line after the current crop of Iconic heroes are all said and done (a ways away, I know since we have only 15 at present out of 36[?]). I for one am always down for more variants of the Iconic characters, heck I want minis of the Valeros, Meri, Ezren and Seoni as goblins (Cover of Pathfinder Issue 1, Paizo.com exclusive variant) and I know that it's never going to happen.


Erik Mona wrote:
Leo_Negri wrote:
Any chance that we'll get a Non-adventuring variant of Ameiko Kaijitsu? After all the Rusty Dragon is HER Inn / Bar / Stomping Grounds.

This was originally on the list, but I had to drop it for a few reasons, not least of which being that we didn't have any decent art for it.

Understandable, so now there are two challenges: 1st get a good piece of non-combat art, 2nd find a home for the mini in another set :)

In any event, thank you for the prompt response.


Any chance that we'll get a Non-adventuring variant of Ameiko Kaijitsu? After all the Rusty Dragon is HER Inn / Bar / Stomping Grounds.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd like more male versions of the Succubus trope. Peronally I'd really like to see an Imp, Incuvan (you know, he's like an Incubus, only smaller ;) )


Myth Lord wrote:

I'd like to see a missing-mythology-monsters-only small bestiary next year, with world-over mythology monsters that don't appear in Bestiary 5 getting some love. 50 0f them would be lovely.

I'm not really a fan of inner sea bestiary, because of the unique creatures, the robots and the many too-much golems. There were only 10 creatures I used and liked in the last one.

I like the soft cover bestiaries, I really do. But what I really would like to see in the line for monsters is a couple more of the Revisited books taking 10 creatures related in some way and detailing them out to six pages each. We haven't had one for a couple of years now I'm starting to go through withdrawal. The last one was Demons Revisited, and that was well over a year ago. Even doing a Sequel to a prior one would be good. A Mythic Monsters Revisited 2, Mystery Monsters Revisited 2, or A Dragons Revisited 2 (particularly considering how scanty the information on the dragons is in Bestiaries 2 - 4 beyond the stat block) would be so nice. I know there are Dragons Unleashed and Undead Unleashed as well, but it's just not the same.

That said, I REALLY can't wait for both this and Bestiary 5, since I love monsters so much. [The six-year old in me is still very strong ;) ]


danielc wrote:
Swashbucklersdc wrote:
I actually like the bar idea; a whole tavern would be even better!
Please understand, the idea of a bar is not the issue. It is the idea of it replacing one of the many gargantuan monsters that could have been the case incentive that makes me less than excited. :-(

Agreed. I have no problem with the Bar as a miniature (and I am in fact a big fan of the dungeon dressing pieces and hope they do well), my issue is with it replacing a gargantuan monster, since as a case incentive is the ONLY way Wizkids has been producing the Huge and larger minis for a while now.

With the evolution sets not doing as well as they hoped and the Reign of Winter huge two-pack being a flop, the Case incentives have really become the only game in town for the biggest and baddest of critters.


Elrawien Lantherion wrote:
Eye rolling* really? a bar?

Agreed, waste of a mini. Especially in light of no firm information on how popular the dungeon dressing pieces will be. Oh well, Just saved myself 30 -50 $ :(.


Kevin Mack wrote:
Talking about rusty dragon then it's a bar

Bold assertion, where's the link with the spoiler to back it up? Not going to lie, it this is the case incentive, my interest has dropped about a 1,000%. I'm all for dungeon / setting dressing, but NOT as a case incentive. Waste of a figure.


Elrawien Lantherion wrote:
What will the chase figure for the new mini set be [green dragon?/gold?]

Since they've done a gargantuan Green, and the most recent Case incentive was a Red Dragon, I doubt that the next one will be a dragon at all or at least not one defined by a color. Maybe a linnorm? The Annihlator Robot (small hope)? A neothelid? Something else, that is a little odd? Or, if they do go Dragon, I'd suspect either Copper or Brass (the two metallics most likely to be antagonistic to the PCs).


Kor - Orc Scrollkeeper wrote:
Bill Redford wrote:

I'd like to see some more minion type creatures like:

4. Female orc Scout (monster codex pg. 169)

That would be great. Paizo has made some of the best looking PPM orcs, but no one has ever made a full-blooded female orc. It would be great to have a couple female orc minis. Not all female orcs are relegated to a breeder role :)

Ilka, on page 19 of Daughter's Fury would also be a great looking orc female mini.

Now that I think about it a bit, although Kor is right that not All orc females are relegated to a breeder role, a lot of them are. How about a couple of "non-combatant" (and I use the term very loosely here) female and juvenile humanoids defending the lair with what they have one hand. I don't know that there is any art for this sort of thing available, but it would be seriously cool.


Kalindlara wrote:

It bears mentioning that I come from D&D Minis, so I have the Gargantuan Blue and Black and Colossal Red from that line. (I skipped Icingdeath.) My "too many dragons" counts those, where others wouldn't.

I'm also biased in that I like Todd Lockwood's designs (for the 3e dragons) better than Paizo's for the most part. (The black dragon being the main exception.)

And of course, I'm still buying the Pathfinder Battles minis anyway - it's kind of a "not bad, could be better" thing.

Does that make sense? ^_^

It does make sense, and if you include the DDM Icons line, then yes, the Dragon percentages get skewed up towards the high end (out of 5 releases in the Icons series, 4 were dragons. I too liked Todd Lockwood's dragons (except for the green one, what was he thinking), But I also like Paizo's dragons. If anything though, I would like MORE Dragons as the case incentives, but more DIVERSITY of dragons. Pathfinder has Metallic Dragons, Primal Dragons, Imperial Dragons, Outer Dragons, Linnorms; None of which have they touched upon (And yes, I am aware of the 2 Gargantuan Metallics that have been produced for D&D Mini's Dragon Wing Game, but it's just not the same). I'd quite honestly like as a case incentive a Two Pack of Huge Elementals for a couple of sets. People have been agitating for Huge Elementals that match up with Paizo / Wizkids' Small, Medium, & Large versions, but so far, they seem to be a no-go. I'd also like an Annihilator Robot case incentive (although in that case I know I am in the distinct minority)

A Neothelid would be cool
A proper Purple Worm would be nice
A Bandersnatch (possibly frumious variant)
A Jabberwock

Or as slightly Over-sized Gargantuans:
Titans
Kaiju
Great Old Ones


Kalindlara wrote:

I'll have to think about this. But my big issue?

Less dragons.

I'd have to think about what I actually want (and maybe double check some size categories). :)

I have to ask, why? I thought the number of Dragon case incentives was a bit much at 1st, but it has been every other set which seems reasonable.

H & M - Black Dragon (huge)
RoTR - Rune Giant
Shattered Star - Gargantuan Blue (Significant NPC for the path as well)
Skull & Shackles - Brine bones (Undead Dragon, not a typical dragon)
Legends of Golarion - Gargantuan Green
Wrath of the Ritgeous - Demon Lord Deskarii
Reign of Winter - Gargantuan White
Lost Coast - Shemhazian Demon
Dungeons Deep - Gargantuan Red

Apart from dragons though, there just aren't that many Gargantuan monsters that would generate enough demand / would not be exceptionally divisive (The Annihilator Robot comes to mind).


Kalindlara wrote:


Merfolk. Never been done in prepainted 1".

Not quite true. Dungeon Crawler Fantasy Miniatures has done a 25 mm scale Mermaid (2 different paint jobs) but as far as I know, no one has done a Merman (or Triton, or Locathah, or Hai Nu, or Nigyo, or Pah'ri, or Irish Merrow, or pretty much any aquatic race but Sahuaghin, Kuo-toa, and Skum). Over all there is a decided lack of aquatic minis in pre-painted plastic.


Gnome-Mad!! Yes another gnome. And a female Dwarf!! This set is looking better and better (and it was already looking pretty darn good!)


Cat-thulhu wrote:
Leo_Negri wrote:
Cat-thulhu wrote:
Here looks to be a surprising lack of detailling on the goblin. Single tone to skin, black mouth ( teeth not picked out like on previous). I hope it matches the standard we've been getting, would hate the only archer to be the badly detailed figure. Odd, hopefully it's just a bad pic.

Took a look at the pic, the teeth seem to be picked out in white.

2nd pic here? Blobby feet, paint bleed onto the bow, black mouth. Not talking about the previously shown pics which was a render. Is thee another pic of the actual model somewhere? I've only seen the one here in the second picture above.

I'm not too fussed, rest of the set looks fantastic

There is another close up from Toy Fair, I'll post the link if I can find it. And yes the bow and the feet are still pretty bad, but the teeth have been picked out, just not as nicely as in the digital render. They look single coat dry-brushed in the close up. I'm with you in hoping that the Archer holds up to at least the detail level of the other goblins produced so far.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cat-thulhu wrote:
Here looks to be a surprising lack of detailling on the goblin. Single tone to skin, black mouth ( teeth not picked out like on previous). I hope it matches the standard we've been getting, would hate the only archer to be the badly detailed figure. Odd, hopefully it's just a bad pic.

Took a look at the pic, the teeth seem to be picked out in white.


Kor - Orc Scrollkeeper, couple of corrections for your site.

The Dracolisk is a medium mini (It is also the one you have marked as Unknown, next to the Clockwork Golem)

and the Puckwudgie is a small mini.

I know you strive for accuracy.


Hobbun wrote:

I really like the idea of the dungeon dressings (the Sarcophagus is awesome), but does the chest really have a base?

I remember Erik had indicated some would have bases, some wouldn’t (on the dungeon dressings). I would think the chest would definitely be better without a base.

I respectfully disagree. If the chest is on a base, it doesn't look out of place next to the mimic.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Ooze licker wrote:

A dire boar, really? Another big red dragon... Come on guys, some of us have all the wizards minis and don't need reprints.

Yeah, yeah these are nicer models and better painted by frankly I don't need any of this stuff. You guys know what's been released before so why not stick to pathfinder monsters and stuff that wizards didn't make?
It has to be better for sales - if anyone wants a dire boar mini just google it and it's yours already.
I'm finding your policy of pretending the D&D stuff doesn't exist utterly infuriating, which is why having religiously purchased every wizards set (and in the case of some of the first few, multiple sets) I'm not subscribing to your mini's range- not to mention they're overpriced.

Remember Backward Compatibility and it's importance at Pathfinders birth? We already got this stuff. Who the hell needs a dire boar who hasn't already picked some up?
Crazy.

Backward compatiblility is not the issue here. Availability is. The Dire Boar from the DDM line, was released in the Harbinger Set, as a Rare and was hard to come by even 12 years ago and currently goes for between 13$ and 25$ (19$ here on Paizo's Store) on the secondary market (Assuming you want a wild one, The Thunder tusk boar from Desert of Desolation is more moderately priced (6$ here at Paizo), but has the drawback of having a saddle and armor.) A Dire Boar (or any Dire animal really), is something that most DM's are going to need multiples of, something which is not really feasible at 20$ a shot.

As for the Gargantuan Red, it is A) the last Chromatic Dragon to get a Gargantuan Sculpt (And as much as I love My Colossal red, I've only really had call to use it once, but my Gargantuan White and Blue DDM Dragons have seen much use, and my new Paizo ones are likely to see as much (Blue, White, Green, Brinebones, and now Red), B) it is one of the most frequently requested miniatures out there, and, C) as you mentioned, it fits design-wise with the Red evolutions set.

I also have most (not all, I have a few gaps) in my DDM prepaints, and in many cases multiples. Yet I still buy the Pathfinder battles minis (which given the quality are far from over priced, falling in line price wise with getting a similar number of UNPAINTED Reaper or Games Workshop minis, and without requiring me to assemble and paint them). You don't want to buy them that's your bag, but the Pathfinder battles line has only re-trod a small portion of the path laid by the DDM line (which itself did reprints of certain figures as well, Large Blue, Red, and Copper Dragons, Huge Red Dragons, Storm Giants, and Drow, endless freaking drow all come to mind), and is doing quite well apparently without your contribution.


Cleanthes wrote:
Leo_Negri wrote:
All told, there are, I believe 3 female giants (Storm, Stone, and now Frost) currently in the Pathfinder battles line, 2 female trolls (The Matron and an Ice Trollop), at least 1 female gnoll, 2 female goblins. All in all Paizo is doing a wonderful job of upping the gender diversity in PPM.
Isn't The Matron a sahuagin? And we can also include the Brinebrood Queen.

My Bad, the Matron IS a sahuagin (which add's another race to the gender equality list), and there is also a female winter wolf (human form, but in the same set as a winter wolf in wolf form).


Isil-zha wrote:
Arikiel wrote:
Yes! Finally a female giant. They are so underrepresented. It is awesome that they're finally putting one out there.
there also was one in the previous set

All told, there are, I believe 3 female giants (Storm, Stone, and now Frost) currently in the Pathfinder battles line, 2 female trolls (The Matron and an Ice Trollop), at least 1 female gnoll, 2 female goblins. All in all Paizo is doing a wonderful job of upping the gender diversity in PPM.

As for there being multiple Gnolls in this set, Woot!!I have been requesting Lamashtu's favored practically since the line started, can't wait to get my hands on several of them.

Enjoy Maui Mr. Mona!


Frencois wrote:

No, wait... It's not dungeon dressing. It's a construct. Or a mimic... But it doesn't have base so I cannot attack it. Damned, Erik you got me :-) Worse: Vic is on the thread so now we will have Brasiers henchmen in the PACG. This is a nightmare...

Apocalypse will come next week with the large dungeon dressing being revealed as being a gazebo....
Just kidding. Superb preview. Was worth the wait.

The large would have to be a green Davenport. A Gazebo would be a Huge in a sperate pack :)


danielc wrote:
While I understand the reasons behind not wanting Drow models, I think of them in the same camp as Orcs, Goblins, Humans, Elves, etc. Just because old lines made tons does not mean new gamers have all the old models. They should make Drow as well as many other "commonly used" villain races. Now having said that, I do agree we don't need 20 different sculpts either. A few sculpts should do just fine.

The major difference between the Drow and Orcs, Goblins, Gnolls, Hobgoblins, Lizardfolk, Kobolds, etc. (I'm excluding Elves, Humans, Dwarfs, Gnomes, Halflings, and Half-Orcs, as these are the core PC races and we can always use more of them) is that the latter races are, A) useful over a much larger range of levels, B) Drow are typically found in groups of 8 or less while the others are frequently found in much greater numbers.

And as I said, I am not so much against more Drow models because they had so many in the older sets, as because they were saturated the older editions of the game so completely. I have the same objections to large numbers of Duergar, Derro, or Aboleth minis (or for that matter Svirfneblin), despite coming from a realm deep beneath the world's surface, they show up at every turn.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Timothy Ferdinand wrote:
Drow, lots of drow.....

Please, no. One or two to get the Pathfinder / Golarion feel would be cool, but I for one (and I know I am not alone on this) am Drow'd out. They have been over exposed ever since a certain novel series brought them into view. I realize that they have been around since 1st Ed AD&D and are a part of this wonderful hobby's past, but they seriously got over used during 2nd Ed and 3rd. / 3.5 Ed. D&D. I'm glad that they did get to make an appearance in Pathfinder, spotlighted as the Villains in the Second Darkness AP, but I am equally glad that they haven't come to dominate the setting as the Main Villains, as they have in certain other game worlds, to say nothing of them showing up as heroes at every organized play event.

When it comes to Drow (or any shadowy, secretive culture really [Aboleth, Duergar, Derro, or basically any elder evil hidden from the light of day, either underground or in deep space]), less really is more.


Ashram wrote:
Siouxsie and the Banshees reference, huh? Someone's digging deep.

It's Either that or a 20+ year old Batman reference. ;-)


Eric, you've revealed the first 18(!) figures from the Iconics Series.


MaxAstro wrote:

These are really cool, but...

Is that Hellknight wielding a double lance?!

My brain is trying to come up with what such a weapon could possibly be used for... and failing...

Nope, just a standard lance with a counter-weight to the back for ease of balancing, that and that bulbous point also looks as if it would help the Hellknight use the lance as a spear if unhorsed, allowing him to set it to receive a charge. Bear in mind this is all guesswork by me.


Sorry, I want a flumph, just to get it out of the way. They have a niche.


Get better Mr. Mona.


Finally, A Badger, now my Dwarf Sorcerer can have his familiar, Lazybones.


Dave Gross wrote:

I adore the unique figures like Pazuzu. As long as they're rare, they don't feel like they're taking a slot from a miniature I'd use more often. My players love it when the miniature for a boss looks exactly like that boss.

Granted, they haven't irritated me enough to set down Pazuzu lately.

Lamashtu, Baphomet, Deskarii? Just waiting for my players to Piss me off enough to bring one of them to bear.


Lorian wrote:
They plan to kickstarter a tarrasque next, but that's the first one. It should be available to buy after the kickstarter ones ship.

The Kraken have cleared US customs and should be shipping soon. Can't wait for mine!!


Erik Mona wrote:
Cat-thulhu wrote:


Now a quick question arising from Gen Con. I saw some photos on another site of a goblin pyro promo from gencon. I thought we were looking at a goblin rider or hell wisp? What changed? Also when do promos usually hit this site for us in the far away places?

I have a sizable pile of different promo repaints, some of which we haven't ever told anyone about. They'll be a surprise, when they show up.

So far this convention season has gone like this:

ORIGINS: Hellfire Wisp (Will-o-Wisp Repaint)
PAIZO CON: Bloodbriar Goblin Raider (Goblin on Goblin Dog repaint, slightly different from Emerald Spire version)
GEN CON: Goblin Raider (repaint of Goblin Pyro)
GEN CON PFS SPECIAL: Horned Demon (red-skinned repaint of purple WotR demon)

ALL of these figures exist in huge quantities in the Paizo warehouse (I think we gave away fewer than 500 copies of the Origins figure). They will all, eventually, appear on the Paizo.com store, probably after the convention season in a few weeks.

As soon as these are up I'll be grabbing them (like Pokemon, I gotta catch them all). Anything we'll have to purchaser to get one (like the Goblins Comic and Rita's Bridesmaid) and any restrictions on number purchased (I'm specifically thinking of the goblin raider and Bloodbriar Goblin on this.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
jimibones83 wrote:
Ahrien wrote:
jimibones83 wrote:
First off, your maths wrong. 3 is 60% of 5, meaning it's only a 40% increase, not a 66%. Also, 4 iconics for $13 is actually $3.25 apiece. Lets just use that figure so we don't have to debate whether or not a large should count as 2 mediums. $3.25 to $5 is only a 35% increase. A significant increase, but far from 66%.

Actually my maths are pretty solid. A medium figure costs $3, but for these you will have to pay $2 more. $2 in addition to $3 is a 66% increase.

But I am not here to argue about maths, I am just asking the increased price gives us better quality minis from Wizkids.

Ah yes, i see what your saying. Where are you getting medium iconics for $3 though?

Harsk $9
Seoni $11
Lirianne $10
Seltyiel $10

And so on and so on...

Now I understand that your basing your price off if these, but again, that would be $3.25 apiece, not $3, nor do they represent the entirety of the iconics.

I agree, the $3.25 price point was great. I really wish we could get them for hat price, but I suppose I'll still pay $5. More than that though and I'll probably he getting the blunt end from my fiance.

Ah but the problem is, that you can't get the Iconics (with the exception of Harsk) for that price, they are all unavailable on Paizo and they go for a hell of a lot more through another retailer, assuming you can find one that has them in stock.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I have to ask, could we possibly get The Iconic heroes as Goblins as one of the post "we've done all 31 Iconic heroes, now what sets?"

a la The Paizo.com Exclusive Pathfinder Issue #1 cover

It would give us four more of those wonderful goblins ;-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Big Jay wrote:
Already there ;) Got massive metal, resin, plastic and ppm collection. I conplain for all of those. What im scared is if people do like me and cherry pick it will kill the line like it did DDM.

It wasn't just people cherry-picking pieces that killed the DDM line, it was also the rapid downward spiral in quality, and increase in price point that really hammered home the last few nails in the coffin.


Squeely Nord!! And Alhazra, nice. They more than make up for the additional daisy-eating elf in the set. Though as pointy ears go, our resident alchemist isn't as bad as most. Set keeps looking better and better.


So now we have - Cult leader Etainia, cult alchemist Thelsikar, A goblin mutant, Lamashtan Cultists, 2 different bully boys for the cult, and Lamashtu herself. Please tell me that there will be one or two of her favored children in this set. Tell me we are going to get some Gnolls.


CanisDirus wrote:
Just had an odd thought, Drogon - didn't White Wolf have minis for their Werewolf: The Apocalypse once upon a time? A Crinos (Warform) Werewolf might work for a Kitsune fighter/barbarian, perhaps?

The Crinos form Werewolf Minis are way to big to serves as a Kitsune (even a fighter or barbarian) unless they are also under the influence of an Enlarge spell. In scale they are roughly 12' at the eyes, putting them in line with your typical Ogre.


Pigraven wrote:
J. Chris Harris wrote:
Okay, I love the stone giant and the hill giant. The fire giant, however, looks like he should be wearing roller skates. I'm sorry.
As long as he's not trying to roller skate in a buffalo herd, he should be okay.

But he could be happy if he had a mind too.


Erik Mona wrote:

I'd love to do a trollhound mini.

Then, to quote a famous starship captain, "Make it so." Use your super Publisher Powers and put it in a set.


Asgetrion wrote:
Hmmm... a hillbilly giant, really? I don't own that particular AP, so I haven't even heard of this guy, but I have to say I don't like the idea of a giant or ogre that seems to come from Louisiana or Georgia and wears overalls patched with modern t-shirts.

Funny that the very thing about the figure that appeals to me is precisely what you dislike about it. To each his own, but it really in a good likeness of Munguk (Rivers Run Red, pg. 30), if only it had his medallions and buttons (particularly, the smiley face, it just seems so appropriate to Munguk's personality).


Not a bad one in the bunch.

Conna the Wise - I like her. Slighter build than the other Stone giants to date, and looks to be a good match for the portrait. I think she looks female, albeit a very lean female. She'll be a nice addition to my mini's alongside my other RotRL minis.

Fire Giant King (or fire giant Noble given his rarity per Mr. Mona) - I like him too, He's a nice replacement for my King Snurre from the DDM line as a leader for my tribe of fire giants.

The Hill Giant Chief - This is the crown jewel of the reveals though. Finally, a hill giant that doesn't look like a stereotypical 'cave man' type giant, and further differentiating Hill Giants from Ogres. This one has the added benefit of being a "twofer," in that it will also double nicely as an Appalachian giant in the Deadlands game I run off and on.

These three more than make up for no Dwarves in this set. Dwarf-squooshers are just as useful.


catron1601 wrote:
Could you try to include a badger in a set? All the other animal companions for the Iconics are included except for poor Biter (who isn't even mentioned in Hasrk's bio and therefore gets no love). I would love to be able to add him to my collection alongside Daji, Droogami, and Donahan.

Bet they'd make him if his name started with "D" :)


Erik Mona wrote:
Leo_Negri wrote:
Erik Mona wrote:
Depends. Are you an orc?
No, just a person with a real hate for those smug daisy-eaters. Question is, Where are the Dwarves, and Gnomes; the two least represented races in the Pathfinder battles line (in fact gnomes are the least represented in PPM over all).

Well, we've already previewed a gnome in this set. There was also one in Heroes & Monsters, and of course Lini is a gnome, and we did a mini of her. There's another gnome in the set after this, too.

I'm pretty sure there are no dwarves in this set. There are several in the next set, though!

Yes!! A fourth Gnome! and Dwarves in the next Set. Thank you Mr. Mona, you just made my day.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Isil-zha wrote:
Leo_Negri wrote:
Where are the Dwarves, and Gnomes; the two least represented races in the Pathfinder battles line

Non-human core races are being treated fairly equally in PFB, equally bad, but at least equally. (numbers include already previewed miniature sculpts for LC)

Dwarves: 3
Elves: 5 (6 if we count Ardathanatus)
Gnomes: 3
Halflings: 3
Half-elves: 4
Half-orcs: 4

For medium sized races there are another 6 or so sculpts with helmets or masks that have no discernible race.

Elves / Half-elves are fairly interchangeable for one another and they cross the gamut of class types (save for specialized classes like monk, Samurai, and Ninja) and with a fairly even gender split(perhaps a slight favoring of females to males).

Dwarves - have a generic, an Iconic, and a villain. (All male and all of a martial nature, not one that could pass for a rogue, priest or wizard)
Halflings - An Iconic and two pirates. (2 males, 1 female but all skill monkey's - 2 that are or could be bards)
Gnome - Generic fighter, Iconic, and one yet to be released. (2 male, 1 female
Half-Orc - Tsadok, Irabeth, and Imrijka, and the Half-Orc barbarian from H & M. (2 male and 2 [badly needed] females, but once again all martial character types).

I really like the Pathfinder battles line, but it is continuing to promote the massive race / class disparity that is found in PPM. It is remarkably easy to find an acceptable elf or half-elf miniature for either gender in virtually any class, a male dwarf of most classes, a halfling skill-based character of either gender, and only a smattering of Gnomes and Half-Orcs, predominantly male and primarily of martial types.


Erik Mona wrote:
Depends. Are you an orc?

No, just a person with a real hate for those smug daisy-eaters. Question is, Where are the Dwarves, and Gnomes; the two least represented races in the Pathfinder battles line (in fact gnomes are the least represented in PPM over all).


Finally, a bard to play Thunderstruck by AC/DC on the bagpipes, cello, or whatever. Skald, the Metal Bard!! Only class I want to play more at the moment is the Warpriest.

1 to 50 of 451 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.