|
Grant you, maybe I'm not one to talk, because I'm still mildly frustrated that Pathfinder Gnolls are based on hyena (and look like spotted hyena in the Classic Monsters book,) but are still patriarchal. Ah well.HA! That's an interesting point. Of course... the response is that while gnolls ARE based on and look like hyenas, they're not hyenas. The differences in their society and pack structure point to that.
And then, of course, in the end they're ruled by a female goddess, so maybe they're not as patriarchal as they think they are...
Yeah, I always thought you should have embraced the "female hyenas kick the crap out of male hyenas" thing with gnolls. I'm certainly going to instate that in my games, with female gnolls dominating their smaller, sniveling male counterparts. The physiological similarity between males and females, as well as the female dominance of males, was a source of myth for millennia. I was kind of grumpy when I read that gnolls were patriarchal in Classic Monsters Revisited. Not to belittle your work, or anything, I still love that book. Just one gripe I had.
Creative Director
|
Yeah, I always thought you should have embraced the "female hyenas kick the crap out of male hyenas" thing with gnolls. I'm certainly going to instate that in my games, with female gnolls dominating their smaller, sniveling male counterparts. The physiological similarity between males and females, as well as the female dominance of males, was a source of myth for millennia. I was kind of grumpy when I read that gnolls were patriarchal in Classic Monsters Revisited. Not to belittle your work, or anything, I still love that book. Just one gripe I had.
Mike McArtor's the one who wrote the gnoll entry, so he's the one to ask about why he didn't go that route. That said... just because a race is basically Human + Animal doesn't necessarily mean that the race has to follow the animal part of the deal so closely. Otherwise, minotaurs wouldn't live in mazes; they'd live in fields.
|
|
Yeah, I always thought you should have embraced the "female hyenas kick the crap out of male hyenas" thing with gnolls. I'm certainly going to instate that in my games, with female gnolls dominating their smaller, sniveling male counterparts. The physiological similarity between males and females, as well as the female dominance of males, was a source of myth for millennia. I was kind of grumpy when I read that gnolls were patriarchal in Classic Monsters Revisited. Not to belittle your work, or anything, I still love that book. Just one gripe I had.Mike McArtor's the one who wrote the gnoll entry, so he's the one to ask about why he didn't go that route. That said... just because a race is basically Human + Animal doesn't necessarily mean that the race has to follow the animal part of the deal so closely. Otherwise, minotaurs wouldn't live in mazes; they'd live in fields.
*shakes fist in indignation*
Curse you McArtor! I'll get you next time!
That said... just because a race is basically Human + Animal doesn't necessarily mean that the race has to follow the animal part of the deal so closely. Otherwise, minotaurs wouldn't live in mazes; they'd live in fields.
Not to mention the, you know, eating man-flesh thing.
Good point.
That said, the cool thing about D&D is the fact that even published setting canon isn't set in stone, as far as your game pertains. As a DM, you can turn the Gnoll King into the Gnoll Queen, and you're not going to be told not to do it.
Otherwise, minotaurs wouldn't live in mazes; they'd live in fields.
They could live in corn mazes
They could live in corn mazes
A Maize Maze, if you will.
* include as many ecology information stuff as possible. The Ecology articles of Dragon Magazine of old are some of the best articles around, when it comes to preparing a session. Whole campaigns started with a bit of information from an ecology article
Oh yes, definetly! I want critters to have an actual place in the world, and not just spawn in front of the party when they're ready for the next raid.
* Of course you can't include an information like 'in Fearûn' or 'in Eberron' but something like 'how to use' this monster in your campaign would be really nice.
Isn't this part of ecology? But certainly, this information should be in. And I think it will be. It might not get its own paragraph, but from what will be there you should get a pretty good idea about how to use that critter.
* I prefer the one monster per page layout. Which is very useful when you make a copy of a page when you prepare a session. Of course this may not be possible at all times.
Definetly seconded. And I'm quite sure it will happen. They might not get a double page, but one page all for themselves should definetly be in.
* Please offer a quick way to locate the monsters in the book according to criteria such as, CR, name, maybe even type (undead, constructs), or climate, etc.
I think this was confirmed. There will be charts and charts and charts. Can't remember what charts exactly, but there will be some.
* Of course: supercool inspiring artwork for each monster.
Goes without saying.
DONT'S
* I would NOT include information like 'as a character'. This belongs to the upcoming Pathfinder Savage Bestiaries book ;o)
While I disagree, I think it was confirmed that this information will indeed be in a separate book.
I think the book should have the information to turn critters into PCs. As long as you can get the info from the stat block itself, I'm fine with that.
* Please find a nice format for stats and combat information. To be frank I don't like the spell format in PRPG. To much lines for my tastes.
On that, on the other hand, you're probably out of luck. While I think they will tweak the format, it will look a lot like the Pathfinder bestiary/npc entries. But frankly, I like that format. It takes a while to get used to it, but then it's intuitive and very efficient.
|
Creative Director
|
* include as many ecology information stuff as possible. The Ecology articles of Dragon Magazine of old are some of the best articles around, when it comes to preparing a session. Whole campaigns started with a bit of information from an ecology article
We will indeed include as much flavor text/ecology/society type information as we can, but it won't be a lot in some cases. We want there to be a lot of monsters in the book, and doing something like we do in the Pathfinder Adventure Path bestiary, where we give each monster two pages, isn't really an option. Of course... the current backgrounds and ecology stuff we're doing will still work fine for the monsters.
* Of course you can't include an information like 'in Fearûn' or 'in Eberron' but something like 'how to use' this monster in your campaign would be really nice.
We won't be doing this specifically; advice about how a monster fits into a campaign world will be part of its flavor text now and then as we have room, but we won't specifically give details for specific campaign worlds.
* I prefer the one monster per page layout. Which is very useful when you make a copy of a page when you prepare a session. Of course this may not be possible at all times.
It will be one monster per page. In a very few cases we'll take two pages for particularly important or complex monsters, and in some cases there'll be two monsters per page (such as in the case of most animals, which will probaly have a stat block for the regular animal and the giant one on the same page).
* Please offer a quick way to locate the monsters in the book according to criteria such as, CR, name, maybe even type (undead, constructs), or climate, etc.
There will be a few indexes/lists at the front or at the back of the book, just as the Monster Manual list things by type, name, and CR.
* I enjoyed the killer combo articles in Dragon Magazin. Maybe information about the monster's associates might prove usefull.
As with point #2 above, this'll be in the flavor text now and then when there's room and when it's interesting, but we won't be trying to do this for every monster.
* Of course: supercool inspiring artwork for each monster.
It's looking like every monster will have its own illustration at this point, with the exception of some of the dual-stat pages. If we have a house cat and a leopard appearing on the same page under "Cat," we might only illustrate the leopard, for example. Some of the artwork will be "re-run" art we're taking from other Paizo products, but a lot of the art will be brand new.
* I would NOT include information like 'as a character'. This belongs to the upcoming Pathfinder Savage Bestiaries book ;o)
This information won't be appearing in the monster book. It's a monster resource book first, after all, not a player resource book. I'd rather spend that space talking about the monster and what it does and its role in the world and all that rather than setting them up to be PCs. As you say, that's a big job that's better handled in a dedicated book.
* Please find a nice format for stats and combat information. To be frank I don't like the spell format in PRPG. To much lines for my tastes.
We're tinkering with the stat block format. It's going to be relatively similar to the format we use in our modules and the Adventure Path, but a bit more streamlined. This format is the source of the format for magic items and spells in the Beta, of course, but I'm not sure that format will entirely be sticking around for the final PF RPG for spells and magic items. It doesn't work QUITE as well for short blocks of info like magic items or spells.
|
Creative Director
|
In the Dinosaurs section, will it be as limited as it is now? I'd really really like to see more variety, not only in predators but the herbivores as well.
Oh and youhave to find a way to include the new Predator X from the history channel!
It shouldn't be a surprise that I'm the one who's gonna be writing the dinosaurs... or that there'll be dinosaurs in the book anyway (there has to be, since they're on the druid animal companion charts and on the monster summoning lists, after all).
That said, some of the dinosaurs that DO appear in the book might be changing. For example... is there really a need for a deinonychus AND a megaraptor, when you can get a megaraptor by advancing a deinonychus? And for that matter... why doesn't that line of dinosaurs start at the velociraptor, a dinosaur that's far more well-known these days than the other two? And why are there three theropods (deinonychus, megaraptor, and T-rex) in the MM, and only one other dinosaur (the triceratops; the elasmosaurus isn't technically a dinosaur...). Where are the sauropods? What about flying ancient reptiles, if we're gonna have swimming ones?
At this point... it's looking like there'll be eight dinosaurs spread over four pages, in any event. I'm pretty pleased with the spread of types of dinosaurs in those four pages (and yes, two are not technically dinosaurs, but they're close enough for the game to not care!).
I am curious, will monsters follow the same feat progression as player characters do ?
I remember 3rd ed giving players more feats than monsters got by virtue of their HD
I remember 3rd ed giving players more feats than monsters got by virtue of their HD
That was already changed in 3.5.
Maybe its somethng to do with paizo, but I can almost see the pages already.
I'm a deeply fervent Wayne Reynolds fan, I almost always use monsters with an illustration by him, and his Monster Manual work is largely the inspiration for why I love the planes so much, and The Great Beyond of Golarion is my favourite of all.
My point here is, will he be doing any interior art, like some outsiders? which he does so well, specifically the balor, marilith, glabrezu and nalfeshnee. I know thats a ridiculous wish, and almost certainly not something you can answer. More of a superliminal suggestion I suppose.
Ahem, USE 'W.A.R.'!
|
My point here is, will he be doing any interior art, like some outsiders? which he does so well, specifically the balor, marilith, glabrezu and nalfeshnee. I know thats a ridiculous wish, and almost certainly not something you can answer. More of a superliminal suggestion I suppose.Ahem, USE 'W.A.R.'!
I would guess that the art order either have or will be going out shortly... so they might already have an idea of who is doing what
|
Creative Director
|
Maybe its somethng to do with paizo, but I can almost see the pages already.
I'm a deeply fervent Wayne Reynolds fan, I almost always use monsters with an illustration by him, and his Monster Manual work is largely the inspiration for why I love the planes so much, and The Great Beyond of Golarion is my favourite of all.
My point here is, will he be doing any interior art, like some outsiders? which he does so well, specifically the balor, marilith, glabrezu and nalfeshnee. I know thats a ridiculous wish, and almost certainly not something you can answer. More of a superliminal suggestion I suppose.
Ahem, USE 'W.A.R.'!
Wayne's mostly doing just covers these days. He'll be doing the cover to the Bestiary, but it's unlikely he'll be doing any of the interior pieces.
Cool, can't wait to see the cover. Hope it includes outsiders, either way its a new monster, envisioned by paizo, illustrated by W.A.R., so I win. Yay!
I want it, But I'll just have to wait until July.
Instead of pre-ordering I'm going to support my local game shop and buy it there.
Oh, and if Goblin snakes will be missing does that leave room for Green Dragons AND Ice Weasels?
I'm a deeply fervent Wayne Reynolds fan, I almost always use monsters with an illustration by him, and his Monster Manual work is largely the inspiration for why I love the planes so much, and The Great Beyond of Golarion is my favourite of all.
Beh, Wayne Reynolds is alright, as artists go. ;)
But when it comes to the Planes, he ain't a patch on Tony DiTerlizzi, says I, says I. But then, few are. A pity Tony's not available anymore, eh?
It shouldn't be a surprise that I'm the one who's gonna be writing the dinosaurs... or that there'll be dinosaurs in the book anyway (there has to be, since they're on the druid animal companion charts and on the monster summoning lists, after all).
James,
Since you love dinosaurs, I would suggest picking up the book "Dinosaurs: the most complete, up-to-date encyclopedia for dinosaur lovers of all ages" if you don't have it.It has some great artwork based on the latest scienice. The image of a Guanlong (a small tyrannosauroid - about 10 feet long) with protofeathers at the start of chapter 17 is really cool. It looks like some kind of reptilian bird hybrid right out of a wizard's lab.
The genus list at the back of the book with the estimates of weight and size are useful too. For example, Deinonychus was about 13 feet long (nose to tail) and weight about as much as a wolf. Definately Medium sized. Utahraptor was about 23 feet long anf weight about as much as a grizzly bear.
Megaraptor, by the way, might be some from of spinosauroid. It is definately not a "raptor" type though.
|
OK, I probably know the answer to this request but will ask anyway.
Is there any way you guys can do a new take on Undead? I have been doing some elementary level research on Vampires, Ghosts, etc for a little adventure I am writing for myself. And some of the interesting things I learned was that at various times many of our favorite undead were considered to be Demons animating corpses, or acting as spirits and such.
It would give the Undead a reason to be evil. If they are just animated by negative energy, or cursed or whatever it just never really felt EVIL! But, if a Skeleton was animated by a minor Demon, or a Zombie was really a Daemon using a corpse, or a Vampire was a Devil warping people, then we get EVIL! In fact, perhaps most undead are Daemons, acting out on the Material Plane. This way we get Daemons in the first PMM.
I also like the idea of Fiends and Celestials being spirits of Evil and Good. They have no material bodies unless summoned to the Material Plane, and then only for the duration of their summoning. In their natural forms on the Material Plane they are disembodied spirits, like a ghost, but not in the Etheral plane. Does that make sense?
Elementals are beings of their elements, even Djinn and Efreet and Azer (need more elemental types like the Azer- and the need to elementals, not just Outsiders).
I fully expect the answers to be no, too late already pretty much done and doesn't fit with the old stuff anyway. But thought I would toss it oout anyway.
|
Creative Director
|
This isn't really a new take on undead, though. The concept of demons and devils and other fiends creating undead's already in the game. Most devils have animate dead as a spell-like ability, for example, and the nabasu demon's pretty strong at making undead.
That said... the game's also not a new game. It's basically a new edition of D&D, and I'm pretty comfortable with the way the core undead work in there.
That certainly doesn't mean that going forward in new products beyond the initial Pathfinder Monster Manual we won't be looking at doing other things with undead... we already are, in fact, in Pathfinder now and then.
|
Creative Director
|
For example, Deinonychus was about 13 feet long (nose to tail) and weight about as much as a wolf. Definately Medium sized.It's not going to fit inot a 5' square, though, so how can it be Medium size just because it's light? Although I guess we could just ignore the fact that it has a tail.
The space for monsters isn't quite an exact science. Look at the 100-foot-long purple worm; its space is only 20 feet. On the other side, look at a horse; its space is 10 feet, but in every direction.
Space in the game is an approximation. In the case of a deinonychus, even though it might be longer than five feet, if a lot of that is tail then its space is fine at five feet. The part that overlaps into other squares is effectively modeled by its reach.
|
Does it mean that the "D12 HD but no bonus to HP" idea is finally gone ?
I think recently in KQ Skip Williams admitted that it was somewhat unwise to balance all those undead kinks by giving them crap HP amount - yeah, you might be immune to poison/crits/mind-affecting but in the end of the day, a 50 point full attack is a 50 pts. full attack, and SRD undead tend to go in pieces far too quickly. IIRC in "Libris Mortis" this was "fixed" by giving most of the new undead either CHA bonus to HP or the Improved Toughness feat - I hope Paizo found some way to fix the problem :)
|
Creative Director
|
Undead in the PFG are probably going to have d8 HD and adjust that total with their Charisma scores instead of their constitution scores. The end result should be undead with more reasonable hit points, and less undead that try to cheat for more hit points by having insanely high HD that makes them impossible to turn or affect with certain saving throw attacks.
|
Does it mean that the "D12 HD but no bonus to HP" idea is finally gone ?
I think recently in KQ Skip Williams admitted that it was somewhat unwise to balance all those undead kinks by giving them crap HP amount - yeah, you might be immune to poison/crits/mind-affecting but in the end of the day, a 50 point full attack is a 50 pts. full attack, and SRD undead tend to go in pieces far too quickly. IIRC in "Libris Mortis" this was "fixed" by giving most of the new undead either CHA bonus to HP or the Improved Toughness feat - I hope Paizo found some way to fix the problem :)
CHA bonus to HPs sounds fine, and having run the PCs against different types of undead in my Pathfinder Beta playtest campaign, I'm getting fed up with all those immunities and DR and Incorporeality -- maybe I should just give them the 'Golf Bag of Weapons', and add 'Ghost Touch' as a bonus to all of them?
4E *does* have a more elegant system for Undead and immunities, in a way, and I dare to suggest that maybe PF RPG should "tweak" Incorporeality to 'DR Half/-' (i.e. they'd take only half damage from every attack). And, as someone has already suggested, perhaps DR should not protect from all damage, but rather it'd protect 5 points for every plus or ability your weapon should have, i.e. if you strike a monster which has 'DR Magic and Adamantine' (or, say, 10/+2, should Pathfinder return to 3.0 DR) with +1 Keen Long Sword, DR would protect against 5 points of damage (because you don't have an adamantine weapon).
Or, maybe it should also work as 'DR Half/X', such as 'DR/Magic and Adamantine'? For example, your +2 Cold Iron Longsword would only inflict half damage, but a +1 Adamantine Dagger would inflict full damage.
In either case I see the impact of Damage Reduction being less of a problem, especially at higher levels, and this might eliminate the need for the annoying 'Golf Bag of Weapons' altogether?
Undead in the PFG are probably going to have d8 HD and adjust that total with their Charisma scores instead of their constitution scores. The end result should be undead with more reasonable hit points, and less undead that try to cheat for more hit points by having insanely high HD that makes them impossible to turn or affect with certain saving throw attacks.
Will they always have d8 all the way, or will class HD be class HD?
With Charisma giving them all bonus HP, undead wizards and the like will no longer need to be upgraded to d12 in order to have a chance to survive more than one attack by a commoner.
|
Creative Director
|
Undead in the PFG are probably going to have d8 HD and adjust that total with their Charisma scores instead of their constitution scores. The end result should be undead with more reasonable hit points, and less undead that try to cheat for more hit points by having insanely high HD that makes them impossible to turn or affect with certain saving throw attacks.Will they always have d8 all the way, or will class HD be class HD?
With Charisma giving them all bonus HP, undead wizards and the like will no longer need to be upgraded to d12 in order to have a chance to survive more than one attack by a commoner.
Class HD will remain class HD.
For example, Deinonychus was about 13 feet long (nose to tail) and weight about as much as a wolf. Definately Medium sized.It's not going to fit inot a 5' square, though, so how can it be Medium size just because it's light? Although I guess we could just ignore the fact that it has a tail.
3.5 figured size for quadrupeds from nose to base of tail. The length of a Deinonchus is nose to tip of tail. admittingly the Deinonychus is not a quadruped, but its stance is close enough in my book.
Class HD will remain class HD.
Good to hear. One of those things to confuse people - newbloods and otherwise.
I saw that undead will have d8s rather than d12s and a few thoughts sprang to mind: 1) this will be a bit of a backwards compatibility problem; 2) will undead therefore get an average BAB or is the BAB HD link only for character classes; and 3) will dragons keep their d12 HD?
1) A bit, but not much. After all, other classes also get different HDs, and if you figure in favoured class rules, there will be some recalculation, anyway. And the cha bonus for undead already changes this.
It basically comes down to a quick recalculation. Just look at their charisma scores, and at their hit dice. New HP will be (4.5+Cha mod)*HD. Only undead with class levels will be different.
2) I'd say the link is only for classes. Otherwise outsiders would get d10, too, and they already get enough.
3) Dragons will keep their d12 I think. They're dragons. They're supposed to be top of the food chain (until someone invents a dungeon category of monsters - they'll get the d20 of course)
CHA bonus to HPs sounds fine, and having run the PCs against different types of undead in my Pathfinder Beta playtest campaign, I'm getting fed up with all those immunities and DR and Incorporeality -- maybe I should just give them the 'Golf Bag of Weapons', and add 'Ghost Touch' as a bonus to all of them?4E *does* have a more elegant system for Undead and immunities, in a way, and I dare to suggest that maybe PF RPG should "tweak" Incorporeality to 'DR Half/-' (i.e. they'd take only half damage from every attack).
Personally this is something that breaks virsimilitude for me. Theoretically, by this method, a bunch of farmers could stab a shadow or ghost to death with pitchforks and daggers instead of sending for one of them thar hero things to perform an exorsism (turning) or use one of their magic swords.
As for DR and the Golf Bag of Weapons syndrome, I'm of the opinion the PCs shouldn't always have the right weapon for the job. A werewolf scenario is more tense if the heroes can't all reach into their... ahem... backpacks and pull out silver blades.
Re: d8's with Chr bonus and backward compatibility - A lot of SRD undead have Chr scores of 14 or 15. These monsters' average HP will not be changing.
|
Creative Director
|
I saw that undead will have d8s rather than d12s and a few thoughts sprang to mind: 1) this will be a bit of a backwards compatibility problem; 2) will undead therefore get an average BAB or is the BAB HD link only for character classes; and 3) will dragons keep their d12 HD?
1) I don't see how it'll be a backwards compatibility problem at all. Both versions of the game will have undead with hit points and hit dice; the SIZE of the hit dice doesn't make it hard to play if you only know one rules set. Undead will likely have the same or close to the same HD in either game, but since they now get bonus HP from their Charisma, we can massage the Charisma score so that the total hit points remain appropriate for their CR. I don't envision any way a HD change would cause compatibility problems.
2) I suspect undead will indeed get the middle attack roll value.
3) Dragons are bad-ass. They'll be keeping their d12 hit dice, I believe.
Alright then if the outsiders are going up in HD size to match their BAB will constructs also be getting a good BAB and keeping the d10 and are there going to be other changes to other creature types to harmonize the rules on this?
|
Creative Director
|
Alright then if the outsiders are going up in HD size to match their BAB will constructs also be getting a good BAB and keeping the d10 and are there going to be other changes to other creature types to harmonize the rules on this?
Perhaps.
It's worth noting that we're still relatively early in the monster building process, and all this is subject to change, of course; nothing you see me prattle on about here is writ in stone.
|
Apologies if this has been asked before. New to Pathfinder, and haven't had any D&D stuff for probably over 15 years, maybe more. I think we still have the red-boxed, possibly original, versions stored somewhere lol. But Pathfinder has piqued my interest.
Having downloaded the freebie pdfs, I've noticed that in the adventure modules D0 and D1.5 there are encounters/animals/monsters but no stats to play them - and you are referred to the D&D Monster Manual to get such stats (eg for worgs, MM 246). Will this new Pathfinder bestiary mean you won't need to buy a non-Pathfinder book at all, ie. the D&D Monster Manuals, to get the necessary rpg stats to play ALL the encounters? Or will I still need to get the Monster Manuals to have the complete stats for any encounter in your Pathfinder books?
I am looking at going the pdf route for most of the Pathfinder material, saves the bookshelves any more strain, plus I print only what I need - so I may end up just buying the paper versions of the rpg book, maybe this bestiary (love that you use that word btw, my BA dissertation was on medieval bestiaries), and the campaign guide.
Been looking for a good rpg world to get into, Pathfinder (great name) may well have grabbed me - get some novels and maybe a comic series, and you may see me here till the end.
|
|
I believe that 95% of monsters from MM used in Paizo adventures will be in the first PF Bestiary. Unless it's a Tojanida.
Also - almost entire content of MM is available online as part of the SRD, except a few monsters that are property of WotC and they are not used in Paizo material anyway. By the same rule, you don't have to worry about other monster books (MM2-5, FF etc.)
|
Apologies if this has been asked before. New to Pathfinder, and haven't had any D&D stuff for probably over 15 years, maybe more. I think we still have the red-boxed, possibly original, versions stored somewhere lol. But Pathfinder has piqued my interest.
Having downloaded the freebie pdfs, I've noticed that in the adventure modules D0 and D1.5 there are encounters/animals/monsters but no stats to play them - and you are referred to the D&D Monster Manual to get such stats (eg for worgs, MM 246). Will this new Pathfinder bestiary mean you won't need to buy a non-Pathfinder book at all, ie. the D&D Monster Manuals, to get the necessary rpg stats to play ALL the encounters? Or will I still need to get the Monster Manuals to have the complete stats for any encounter in your Pathfinder books?
I am looking at going the pdf route for most of the Pathfinder material, saves the bookshelves any more strain, plus I print only what I need - so I may end up just buying the paper versions of the rpg book, maybe this bestiary (love that you use that word btw, my BA dissertation was on medieval bestiaries), and the campaign guide.
Been looking for a good rpg world to get into, Pathfinder (great name) may well have grabbed me - get some novels and maybe a comic series, and you may see me here till the end.
At the moment, Pathfinder modules still uses the existing SRD and OGL material, so it makes reference to the Monster Manual. Once the Bestiary and Pathfinder game come out, so August, they'll be switching to using those as references. I would suspect the old references would be completely invalid as far as page numbers go, but you could still refer to the same monsters from the Bestiary.
As an aside, welcome to the boards. Lilith will probably be along with welcome cookies soon.
Having downloaded the freebie pdfs, I've noticed that in the adventure modules D0 and D1.5 there are encounters/animals/monsters but no stats to play them - and you are referred to the D&D Monster Manual to get such stats (eg for worgs, MM 246). Will this new Pathfinder bestiary mean you won't need to buy a non-Pathfinder book at all, ie. the D&D Monster Manuals, to get the necessary rpg stats to play ALL the encounters? Or will I still need to get the Monster Manuals to have the complete stats for any encounter in your Pathfinder books?
The bestiary is supposed to replace the Monster Manual. It will not quite contain everything out of the MM, but the missing stuff will definetly be the more popular stuff.
In the meantime, go tohttp://www.d20srd.org/ And look up the stats there. Its free and perfectly legal.
Been looking for a good rpg world to get into, Pathfinder (great name) may well have grabbed me - get some novels and maybe a comic series, and you may see me here till the end.
Novels are already planned, and the Pathfinder Adventure Paths have some novellas in them. It's just a couple of pages each time, but it's not bad.