Creative Director
|
I'm actually cool with a "suggested retail alignment." It's the possibility of something different that means everything.
That's actually pretty much how it works already in the game, really... even a creature with an "Always" alignment has the possiblity of being a different alignment (although this is super rare).
I really enjoy metallic and chromatic dragons, not because of the good/evil thing so much (I believe firmly that no dragon is ever safe to be around--good dragons gotta' eat too, y'know) but for the gobs of personality and flavor that drip from the various descriptions. I love them. Would I like more kinds of dragons? Oh boy yeah! Every time Dragon had an issue that covered new kinds of dragons I bought it. I would go for a multiplicity of dragons, all of them with their own cultures and individual personalities besides.
I don't see the color thing as racism, not in the slightest--since a well concieved individual dragon, regardless of color, will have a distinct personality within it's greater racial bounds. It's like saying there shouldn't be gnomes or elves, because then you see an elf and go "ho-hum he eats daisies and thinks he's better than me..." or you see a gnome and think "oh here we go again, he's going to talk my ear off about some invention..." While these are stereotypes, they serve as cultural jumping off points to make hundreds of neat characters within their spectrum, or perhaps a nice contrast for individuals that step outside their usual box and challenge the preconceptions--rattling the cage a bit.
I'd like to see dragons in Pathfinder, classic dragons as they were meant to be--ancient and magical and neigh invulnerable. Much like goblins (who I'm convinced now that only Pathfinder have ever really done justice) I would like to see the re-imagining of dragons be a purification and crystalization of the things that have made them great rather than see what whacked out new things can be done with flying lizards (Easy-Cheese breath weapon!)
Though as to the larger issue of this thread--monster submissions for Pathfinder--I have to say, I've got a ton of ideas I'm itching to submit. I really am gunning to get my foot in the door to leave a mark on the Pathfinder setting. Granted until things like the Player's Guide come out I'm going to be a bit of an outsider (not ever using adventures...
I grew up with dragons this way and I do not need them to be wacked out with death ray eyes or anything too far out there. I would to see them as they are supposed to be, this powerful elder race that could eat if it mood struck. I never used a dragon and not have my pcs quickly deciding to run or fight cause they give them pause. As far as reweaving the idea and fit pathfinder like the Goblins I am excited about that. Heck I do not think I ever really got excited about goblins before.
New monsters. I got allot and would love to submit them.
On Hobgoblins:
I have a personal affection for these guys. They've featured highly in many of the adventures on my homebrewed world of Havok. They are a combination of Monguls (Or Hykranians for you Conan readers out there) and Klingons. In the past one of their gods (of which they have their own pantheon) stole Odin's Horse Sheplnir (yeah I misspelled it) and bred it with normal horses before letting it go to be found by the angry Norse God. Thus Hobgoblin horses are born with six legs. (called Vostger by the Hobgoblins) I also adapted the Tyrg (though they're called the Vulkur) from the old 1st edition Mordenkainen's Amazing Adventure module to them so you have these nasty attach beasts with the six-legged horses and the Hobgoblins have become this frightening figure in my world. I would love to see Hobgoblins (in whatever form) used in the pages of Pathfinder.
On Dragons:
I am always interested in new takes on these classic D&D creatures. I have a tendency to give Chromatic dragons Shapeshifting in some form because it makes them all the more versitile. I had one Blue Dragon that got tired of the 'Lair in the wilds' and she took a human form, moving her hoard into a large town and started investing it. In a few decades she was the most powerful merchant in the town owning most of it. She constantly hired adventurers to deal with threats to 'her town'. It wasn't until PC Group's wizard cast True Sight to try to find a doppleganger spy that they found out the truth. New dragons and fresh takes on existing dragons are another thing I look forward to see in the pages of Pathfinder.
On Monsters in General:
I am a sucker for new monsters and I have an altogether too obsessive attraction to Templates. With Pathfinder being OGL it opens up MANY new Template options (Advance Beastary (Green Ronin) Deluxe Book of Templates (Silverthorne games) just to name a few sources). Nothing like making an entirely new monster with a few unexpected templates. Another personal favorite monster are the Hags. With slight modifications and adjustments they become movers and shakers behind adventures. Needless to say I'd love to see more and better use of Hags within Pathfinder.
Hobgoblins.
The hobgoblin army that will be nocking on my PC's door is a combination of Spartan, Egyptian and Samurai cultures.
As children they are raised as the spartans (for those who have seen The 300 or read The Laws Of Lycurgus) but those who are not deemed worthy or fail their test but make it back aren't killed. They are the foot soldiers as you would think of a typical hoplite. Tower shield, spear, and shortsword. Those that do make it through the tests are allowed to swear their fealty to the tenets of power (A code that establishes actions and respect through strength of arms) and become Similars (Samurai class) and what you would consider a Spartan then becoming dual sword wielding terrors of the battlefield, with many becoming Warmasters (Kensai). In fact the final encounter should be glorious battle against the Warlord Kings personally lead band of Sam8/Ken5, he is obviously much higher(Lvl 21).
Because I put them as marching out of the sea of dust I went and bought Sandstorm and gave them a visual culture similar to the Egyptians but very simplified to coincide with the Spartan/Feudal Japan war societies. Oh and when I read about the Ashworms and Ashworm riders you bet I made a whole legion of them.
The party keeps running into these wierd brown armored dual sword wielding Hobgoblins. Little do they know where it is taking them. But that's how I picture hobgoblins. Legions, and legions of them ordered and structured built around a war society. Really what else do they have to do?
New dragons unique to Pathfinder's world (and you can bet there will be plenty) are open season on alignment, though.
Well, can I vote for more of these new dragons and less of the others?
And to repeat my thoughts from earlier, please, please, please, tret them as NPCs and not as "monsters" and DEFINENTLY not as "wandering encounters"
And to repeat my thoughts from earlier, please, please, please, tret them as NPCs and not as "monsters" and DEFINENTLY not as "wandering encounters"
If the silver dragon from the Age of Worms AP is any indication, they will do exactly what you want. :)
If the silver dragon from the Age of Worms AP is any indication, they will do exactly what you want. :)
And to repeat my thoughts from earlier, please, please, please, tret them as NPCs and not as "monsters" and DEFINENTLY not as "wandering encounters"
While Lashona is a good example of a dragon NPC...
Kings of the Rift is a good example of what Mevers is unhappy with. There's a ton of dragons that are treated as just mooks. It's a cool adventure, but some people don't want their dragons to be that common or easy to kill.
|
Creative Director
|
Dragons are weird. Everyone seems to have REALLY strong opinions on how they're used. If there's anything I've learned from Dungeon, it's that. Personally, I think that the super detailed age categories in the current rules for dragons are a big part of the problem; it makes dragons TOO common and TOO easy to use in any situation. But then, just as many people want there to be an opportunity for a low level party to fight a dragon. It's frustrating.
In any case, you can probably expect to see dragons treated as boss monsters or major NPCs in Pathfinder FAR more often than as mooks. You'll hopefully never see "1d4 green dragons" on a wandering monster table there. And truth be told, the fact that we've got a LOT more room for adventures means that we won't have to take shortcuts like we did with "Kings of the Rift," and we'll be able to do personalized stats and histories or whatever for all of our dragons.
Of course, then when we go and do a campaign like Savage Tide, where there's NOT a lot of dragons and those few that DO show up are key players and unique... we see an upcry of "why aren't there more dragons in this adventure path?"
Sigh.
personaly, I could care less whether there are any dragons in a given adventure path or not ::shrug::
That's actually pretty much how it works already in the game, really... even a creature with an "Always" alignment has the possiblity of being a different alignment (although this is super rare).I'm actually cool with a "suggested retail alignment." It's the possibility of something different that means everything.
That's how I use it, but I'd always gotten the impression that it was considered even more rigid. Then Eberron came and opened up the alignments for the dragons (which I'll admit I enjoy). Glad to hear I was apparently misinterpreting it all this time. :)
Any thoughts on giants in Pathfinder?
I'm hoping we can get some truly gigantic giants for a change, none of these Large sissies.
Bring on some Gargantuan and Colossal giants to smash the puny humans. :)
|
Creative Director
|
Any thoughts on giants in Pathfinder?
I'm hoping we can get some truly gigantic giants for a change, none of these Large sissies.
Bring on some Gargantuan and Colossal giants to smash the puny humans. :)
Rise of the Runelords has very strong giant themes to it. There will indeed be Gargantuan and Colossal giants before all is said and done.
Any thoughts on giants in Pathfinder?
I'm hoping we can get some truly gigantic giants for a change, none of these Large sissies.
Bring on some Gargantuan and Colossal giants to smash the puny humans. :)
I like big stompy giants. Big stompy giants don't like dwarves, though. I propose a feat:
Stuntie Stomper [General, Fighter]
You know the tricks of your enemies, and can overcome their training against giants.
Prerequisites: Giant, Favored Enemy(Humanoids[dwarf]) or Favored Enemy(Humanoid[Gnome])
Benefits: Dwarves and Gnomes you attack cannot claim any dodge bonuses to AC against your attacks. Note: This includes dodge bonus that do not specifically affect Giants, such as from the Dodge feat or a Svirfneblin's AC bonus.
Normal: Dwarves and Gnomes normally gain a +4 dodge bonus against Giants.
My experience has been that, shortly after one meets Gargantuan and Colossal giants, all is said and done.
*shivers with terrified excitement*
I’m tired of D&D dragons. I think Pathfinder should jettison most of the existing rubric. Pathfinder dragons should defy player knowledge. Their alignments, personalities, and abilities should have little to do with the climates they choose and nothing to do with their colors. Dragon scales should come in all kinds of colors, . . . usually patterned or otherwise mixed together. . . . Moreover, dragons should have a wide range of unexpected abilities and weaknesses. And while breeds exist, each dragon should be unique in some fashion.
I wouldn't expect Pathfinder's dragons to end up differing much at all from the classic ten chromatic and metallic dragons. They've remained pretty much the same for 3 decades, and that's not by accident. . . . It's foolish to make sweeping changes to something that's that well-loved.
*SLAM!! Stagger, stagger, collapse*
I guess this is why I don't run a publishing house. Fools rush in, and all that. But here's my vote for more creative and unique dragons than run-of-the-mill, know-them-by-their-color-and-size mimeographs. May they grace Pathfinder with their idiosyncrasies and distinctiveness!
If the silver dragon from the Age of Worms AP is any indication, they will do exactly what you want. :)
And to repeat my thoughts from earlier, please, please, please, tret them as NPCs and not as "monsters" and DEFINENTLY not as "wandering encounters"
While Lashona is a good example of a dragon NPC...
Kings of the Rift is a good example of what Mevers is unhappy with. There's a ton of dragons that are treated as just mooks. It's a cool adventure, but some people don't want their dragons to be that common or easy to kill.
Actually, I didn't mind King of the Rift so much. Yes, there were a lot of dragons, that were basically treated as mooks, but they were DRAGOTHA'S mooks. But if they were anymore "mookish" then they would suck.
And I LOVED Lashona, I wish all (well, at least most) dragons were like this (or Dragotha really).
What I really didn't like was the Dragons in the SCAP, that seem to show up, simply so the PCs can say "We Killed A Dragon!!"
That is what I don't want to see. But if there are more of the Lashona style Dragons, then I can handle a few of the Kings of the Rifts style.
|
If the silver dragon from the Age of Worms AP is any indication, they will do exactly what you want. :)
And to repeat my thoughts from earlier, please, please, please, tret them as NPCs and not as "monsters" and DEFINENTLY not as "wandering encounters"
While Lashona is a good example of a dragon NPC...
Kings of the Rift is a good example of what Mevers is unhappy with. There's a ton of dragons that are treated as just mooks. It's a cool adventure, but some people don't want their dragons to be that common or easy to kill.
Actually, I didn't mind King of the Rift so much. Yes, there were a lot of dragons, that were basically treated as mooks, but they were DRAGOTHA'S mooks. But if they were anymore "mookish" then they would suck.
And I LOVED Lashona, I wish all (well, at least most) dragons were like this (or Dragotha really).
What I really didn't like was the Dragons in the SCAP, that seem to show up, simply so the PCs can say "We Killed A Dragon!!"
That is what I don't want to see. But if there are more of the Lashona style Dragons, then I can handle a few of the Kings of the Rifts style.
To be fair, Gottrod, Hookface, Vittriss Bale, and, to a lesser extent, Dhorlot all have legitimate reasons to be in SCAP, though I'd be inclined to reverse the colors of the last two. For the most part, they're as well integrated into the setting as can be expected, and in many cases, are better developed than some of the Cagewrights. The only ones that feel tacked on are the wandering black on Occipitus and Moltenwing. Although Moltenwing and his lair make a cool combat, and to the credit of the editors, they include him as a possible roleplaying encounter in a combat-heavy dungeon, I might have used another well-done, time-limited puzzle like the Starry Mirror instead.
I'd also like to see a few good dragons as cohorts or cobelligerents, though it can be hard to keep them from stealing the show.
Rise of the Runelords has very strong giant themes to it. There will indeed be Gargantuan and Colossal giants before all is said and done.
Sweeeeeeeeet. :)
I don't want my players to ever go 'Meh XXXX' ever again. I expect the new goblins to get their interest again. I want my players to go 'Oooh and Aaaah when a phoenix shows up, and I want them to be utterly terrified or despairing when some of these other things show.
I completely support this. Monsters are only as cool as their fluff. The fluff is responsible for "marketing" the monster, making players "ooh" and "aah", or run in fear, or pee their pants. The stat block only delivers on that message. If there is no message in the first place, who cares about the delivery?
I love monster books more than just about any other book. I get into monster books not so that I can peruse stat block after stat block, but so that I can let my imagination run wild with fantastic stories and scenarios based on the creatures within.
This thread suddenly got my attention.
Please continue to talk about what you like and dislike of dragons as they exist in D&D today.
:)
Fine. :)
I like dragons best when they tie in to mythology and folklore. This means that dragons from fairy tales are cool. Dragons from Norse legend are cool. Dragons from Tolkien, even, are cool. Dragons as a rainbow brigade are kind of, meh.
The chromatic dragons from the MM would be a whole lot cooler if they had different names and weren't so obviously tailored for an even division of terrain and energy types among dragon-kin.
Edit:
I concur with others who said that age categories are good. I really like the concept and execution behind these.
I wouldn't expect Pathfinder's dragons to end up differing much at all from the classic ten chromatic and metallic dragons. They've remained pretty much the same for 3 decades, and that's not by accident. . . . It's foolish to make sweeping changes to something that's that well-loved.*SLAM!! Stagger, stagger, collapse*
I guess this is why I don't run a publishing house. Fools rush in, and all that. But here's my vote for more creative and unique dragons than run-of-the-mill, know-them-by-their-color-and-size mimeographs. May they grace Pathfinder with their idiosyncrasies and distinctiveness!
Y'know, now that I actually read that quote out of context ... "dragon ... 3 decades ... foolish to make sweeping changes to something that's well-loved" ...
I think -- THINK mind you, don't know -- that JJ may have actually been talking about something ELSE here.
-The Gneech
Contributor
|
Moreover, dragons should have a wide range of unexpected abilities and weaknesses. And while breeds exist, each dragon should be unique in some fashion.
But here's my vote for more creative and unique dragons than run-of-the-mill, know-them-by-their-color-and-size mimeographs. May they grace Pathfinder with their idiosyncrasies and distinctiveness!
Keep in mind that while we might not fundamentally alter how the ten OGL dragons act and look and behave, there's more than one way to make a dragon unique. :)
Keep in mind that while we might not fundamentally alter how the ten OGL dragons act and look and behave, there's more than one way to make a dragon unique. :)
A hat? ;)
Speaking of dragons, I'd like to officially request that Tiamat keep her spawning to a minimum in your world. ;)
|
I like dragons best when they tie in to mythology and folklore. This means that dragons from fairy tales are cool. Dragons from Norse legend are cool. Dragons from Tolkien, even, are cool. Dragons as a rainbow brigade are kind of, meh.
Hey! No need to talk smack about gay dragons.... Oh, skip it. ;)
The chromatic dragons from the MM would be a whole lot cooler if they had different names and weren't so obviously tailored for an even division of terrain and energy types among dragon-kin.
I tend to agree that the dragons in D&D, while cool in that nostalgic sort of way, just don't feel right in the context of an organic setting. They're just too... I dunno, color-coded for simplicity? Like the planes of the Great Wheel, they're based on artificial traits within the game's mechanics, and thus prone to disrupt a settings ability to maintain the players' suspension of disbelief.
In order to keep that SoD and the chromatic/metallic dragons, one would have to develop a mythology behind them that ties directly into the setting and doesn't come across forced. It can be done, but it's going to take a lot more than what Tiamat and Bahamut have got. :/
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
Dragons... yatta... yatta... yatta... Okay, let's try to get back to the reason this thread was started.
I'D LIKE TO SEE: More monsters from classic literature. I want stats for a furmious bandersnatch or a Jabberwock.
OR monsters inspired from television, movies, and comics. I want Shrieking Eels.
I want the isz. Deadly, fast, cunning buggers that are vicious and can appear as whatever they're disguised as. ISZ ROCK!! What I REALLY love about the new take on goblins is that if you ditch the ears and the eyes you've got an ISZ!!
I want to protect the Jungle Queen across the wild Outback!!! HELL YEAH!!!
I tend to agree that the dragons in D&D, while cool in that nostalgic sort of way, just don't feel right in the context of an organic setting. They're just too... I dunno, color-coded for simplicity? Like the planes of the Great Wheel, they're based on artificial traits within the game's mechanics, and thus prone to disrupt a settings ability to maintain the players' suspension of disbelief.
I find things like this easier to accept if you think about it in this manner: Within the game world, physics are dependant on the game mechanics. Alignment might not be that realistic in our universe, but it applies absolutely in that one. Similarly for energy types. So things fit into distinct niches because the game physics determine those niches.
In regards to monsters that will be published in the Pathfiner series: will all new monsters published therein be OGL.
I would very much like for the answer to be "yes". WotC hurt the game when they restricted usage of the so-called iconic monsters.
Rise of the Runelords has very strong giant themes to it. There will indeed be Gargantuan and Colossal giants before all is said and done.
I read this and could not stop giggling with joy. Not only of the battle against these giant but also I was thinking what cities they would build. made me think of lovecrafts at the mountain of madness.
That fire-breathing dragon depicted in the blog does not look like a standard red or gold dragon. Two alar thumbs like a silver dragon, but four wing fingers (for a total of six). Is it, dare I speculate, a new species? Like something similar to my homebrew pyrite dragon, an evil artificial cross-breed of red and gold dragons that is the mirror image of the gold? Or just an atypical (mutated?) red or gold?
Zombie sharks.
The spawn of Tiamat are WotC-owned, so we couldn't use them anyway.
woohoo!
Yes; all of the new monsters in Pathfinder will be OGL.
woohoo!
Are there guidelines available for submitting monsters to Pathfinder? Should I just use the current Dungeon submisson guidelines? Do you actually want a lot of monsters submitted right now?
|
|
We'll be using an evolution of the current stat block. It'll be familiar enough to readers of Dungeon that it'll be easy to navigate, but will have some more refinements to it (Including several we're putting in because of feedback from our readers).
As for what kinds of monsters we're looking for... Owen's advice above is pretty spot on. We want a wide variety to choose from, and saying that we're looking for certain types or CR bands will only narrow that down. Keep in mind also that the process for submitting them and all that is still being worked out. Keep an eye on paizo.com/pathfinder for the latest news, in other words...
Actually... I can say this. I, personally, am interested in new monsters that are based on real-world legend and myth that haven't yet been statted up. This certainly includes monsters of a cryptozoological nature, like chupacabras or Bigfoot (although you'll have to get pretty obscure there to find one that hasn't already been statted up elsewhere).
Have you read any of the Dresden Files? I started watching the show and now I'm going back to read the novels. Odd order I know but hey...
Anyways the second book in the series takes a very suprising and interesting twist on Were-creatures. In particular Werewolves but it's VERY interesting and different.
There is a Dresden File's RPG on the way. What sort of things would I need to watch out for if I were to do stats for these creatures? I mean I think I could change them enough so that there wouldn't be any trouble. One of them would even be a class rather than a racial sort of thing.
You're just glad that no one can pitch dire corbies or thouls at you anymore James. ;-)
Can the often neglected/forgotten monsters of the SRD get some loving? I have probably seen athacks (why are they abberations?), digesters, phasms, and tojanidas about once or twice in the pages of DUNGEON and I'm pretty sure it comes down to the goofiness of their illustrations. I'm sure if Wayne Reynolds or one of the other good DUNGEON artists illustrated them they would suddenly become cool.
So James - when can I see digesters and tojanidas next? ;-)
O'h, I already have about 12 or more monsters to hit your staff over the head with when the submissions process comes out. Get ready for the deluge!!!
What are the restrictions on monsters? What is an easy way to figure out which ones are copyrighted by WOTC? Presumably they will never show up in Pathfinder?
What about say..
beholder?
fire giant?
gorgon?
mind flayer?
gnoll?
bullette?
marilith?
What are the restrictions on monsters? What is an easy way to figure out which ones are copyrighted by WOTC? Presumably they will never show up in Pathfinder?
What about say..
beholder?
fire giant?
gorgon?
mind flayer?
gnoll?
bullette?
marilith?
sure there is an easy way, go through the SRD and if the monster isn't there, but appears in a WotC book then you can't use it. (The exception would be common monsters from mythology or a real prehistoric animal or such, which you can use, but you would have to make up your own statistics for it, not based upon the ones WotC has created).
of the list you present only the beholder and the mindflayer are off limits.
This thread suddenly got my attention.
Please continue to talk about what you like and dislike of dragons as they exist in D&D today.
:)
Well, setting aside my kinda jealousness that D&D Western-style dragons have kinda stolen the thunder of being the wise, sagely, elemental mystics away from the Eastern dragons (I'm pretty fond of them):
I think someone put an article on the D&D webpage http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dd/20061013a, that said it best when he said, "They’re eighty gallons of fun in a forty-gallon barrel." I think that once upon a time, dragons were more manageable (and I've been around since AD&D 1st edition at least,) but they were recognized as being so popular, that designers started piling more cool stuff on them just to make them "more awesomer!" Now, they're usually the biggest and the best fighters, the wisest sages, the best spellcasters, the original intelligent race on the world, they're synergised with another greatly popular critter: the D&D Kobold, they're the origin of the language of magic (or magic in general,) and the origin of most sorcerers, (in fact, other likely magical lineages, like outsider or fey backgrounds are seriously underplayed.)
I believe that too much awesome can be a bad thing.
<crotchety> I remember back when all you had to do was be a big, ancient, freaking dragon, and that was enough. Right, Smaug? </crotchety>
I guess all I'm trying to say is, "Please don't try and make them be everything. Or the top of everything in Path-land."
And the easiest place to check the SRD, at least that I've found, is at d20srd.org.
Awesome site Mike Old Bean:)
Hear hear! Fantastic site, Mr. McArtor. Do you know of any more gems like that would be particularly useful to us?
|
Contributor
|
Hear hear! Fantastic site, Mr. McArtor. Do you know of any more gems like that would be particularly useful to us?
Well, I'm also partial to GiveMikeMcArtorMoney.com and BuyMikeMcArtorAlcohol.org and BakeMikeMcArtorCookies.net, but that's just me. :)
Otherwise, the vast majority of websites I use for work purposes are aimed directly at D&D and Wizards of the Coast IP, so those are far less useful for Pathfinder work.
|
|
...Otherwise, the vast majority of websites I use for work purposes are aimed directly at D&D and Wizards of the Coast IP, so those are far less useful for Pathfinder work.
What a job! Here's to hoping Paizo doesn't decide to associate the website with 'games,' lest they be blocked from my office network like WotC's site was/is...