I would see the 20 type per power level thing as more of a bare minimum than anything else. It really wouldn't make sense for chaotic or neutral groups. Imagine if there were only 20 types of demons in the infinite layers of the Abyss. That would be very lame. Might work for Inevitables or maybe Archons (though probably not.) I really wouldn't see that with devils, as they seem like they should have a lot of specialist types. Plus it would really make campaigns that revolve around, or make heavy use of, specific Outsider groups difficult, if you could only fairly battle one type before having to level up.
I hate to break your little wish Dragon78, but there is the Leukodaemon on CR 9 but also the Sangudaemon on CR 9, so that isn't working.
Yeah, and why would you want to have to choose between a vulture winged ghoul with a horse skull for a head and a giant mosquito made out of blood? Yes, they're too Daemons of the same power level, but how are either of those redundant?
Dragon78 wanted that every outsider group got its own 1 -> 20 list, but many groups of outsiders have doubles, that was an example :-p
I'm aware. I was merely expanding on your point.
I said I wish they did it that way, I already know it is too late.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Adam Daigle wanted original new monsters.
Well he gets them in the form of an awesome Colombian Critter called Abuhuku
This creature suits prefectly into the world of pathfinder it can fits right in with the other weirdo's.
Till now Paizo really didn't give much attention to the tree-stalkers of mythology.
I mean there are no, Asanbosam (not counting the very different Sabosan), Yara-Ma-Yha-Who, Drop Bear or Argopelters in pathfinder yet, so maybe this very obscure tree-stalker can be more lucky.
I can see this tree-Anteater/mosquito like creatures stalk primitive villages like mosquito-like humanoids, hanging themselves from the straw-like roofs down on their sleeping prey to suck their innards out through their skull, or stalk prey on walls of their very own houses, maybe using chameleon-like abilities and attacking them from behind with their mosquito-like mouth which pierces the skull easily, killing the weak humans in an instant without alerting the other villagers.
I have seen enough mosquito creatures, now make it more anteater-like and then I would be interested.
That one *is* new to me. Thanks!
Honestly you could just follow that blog and probably get way more new monsters than any of us could provide you, for future bestiary needs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Angel, Azrael: Angels of death who safeguard the River of Souls and fight against undead from spreading.
Angel, Ariel: Angels of stone and earth who fight against the corruption of worlds from vile sources.
Angel, Kherub: Powerful occult-like angels each comprised of four animal specific-aspects.
Angel, Tharsis: Aquatic angels who fight against despoilment of oceans.
Angel, Seraph: Angels of fire, war, and destruction who lead crusades against the fiends.
Agathion, Loxonal: Eclipsed in power only by the Draconals, the Loxonals defend agathion strongholds.
Archon, Blade: Archons whose heavenly pinwheels can tear scores of evil doers to shreds.
Archon, Monarch: Throne seated archons whose power goes beyond that of the star archons.
They have enough bestiary ideas from the B5 wish list to fill at least 6 hardcover books;)
They have enough bestiary ideas from the B5 wish list to fill at least 6 hardcover books. ;)
Also a ton of AP monsters they'll probably get around too. :D
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But some people will curse on Bestiary 6 anyway, say that it is milked out.
Just like many people hate the idea that a Monster Manual 2 (for D&D NExt) is made, I read that on many forums. Those short-minded creatures want only 1 monster manual because everything in Monster Manual 2 will suck anyway, the best monsters are in part 1. (criminal thoughts)
Only the die hard monster fans really want it to happen, people that don't care about monsters rather see Humans get more books.
I hope paizo ignores those people, and just goes on till Bestiary 20 and beyond.
Cosmetically speaking, I wish many Celestials and Fiends had less dull-ish features and more celestial/fiendish ones (though I know it's already too late for that).
I mean, what's the point of having Agathion of all species, when they look just like any other Humanoid or Monstrous Humanoid who's an animalesque Human (or simply an anthropomorphized beast)?
It's already ridiculous that there is going to be one kind of Agathion for every animal, rather than just those who are normally associated with power, spiritual nobility, wisdom and such. How long till a Puginal comes out? At the very least, give them things like shining auras, third eyes, wings of light, flaming halos, or other small but diffused celestial-ish details that give an otherworldy sense.
Same for fiends. Some look like just another beast or monstrous humanoid, and a couple of horns and pointy teeth doesn't make them more fiendish (of course, this matter doesn't include those who are shaped to be undercover-ish and others who, due to their theme, benefit from not having outstanding otherworldly features).
Take Zelishkar: that's a good example of how a beastly outsider can look much more otherworldly than just another anthropomorphic beast.
Most Agathions and other scattered Celestials, on the other hand, are flat-out dull.
He can call them "creatures" if we get these people as a B6 entry...but what to call them.
While I don't agree about the stuff you said about agathions, I can see a lot of that stuff for angels. Also it would be nice to see more with 4 or more wings, no wings, different color wings, metallic skin/hair, elemental wings and/or halos, resembling non-human races, etc.
Same for fiends. Some look like just another beast or monstrous humanoid, and a couple of horns and pointy teeth doesn't make them more fiendish (of course, this matter doesn't include those who are shaped to be undercover-ish and others who, due to their theme, benefit from not having outstanding otherworldly features).
well to be honest, I don't see this as a problem with the fiends. The Qlippoth and Sakhil are pretty damn alien, and the Sakhil that was previewed I think is the only one that is rather "human-ish". Demons also have some pretty bizarre creatures. Devils are really the only outsiders with a mostly conservative morphology, which makes sense in the context of their boss and the fact they are sort of made in the image of good outsiders.
I, for one, would very much like a Puginal. Especially as a familiar.
Speaking of dogs, I'd LOVE to see variations on breeds for animals, though I'm not sure what form that'd take in a PF bestiary.
Not all good things are pretty and being too close to paragons should be bad for your health.
How is there not a Cupid yet? A CG celestial anti-succubus/incubus spreading love indiscriminately all over the place.
I'd like a Absolute Law "Elder Gods" subtype to counter-balance the Lovecraftian Great Old Ones. They should NOT be pleasant to encounter either.
More horrific monsters. Like the mosquito monster above (which I believe was featured in a Necronomicon-related film, two cops get sacrificed to them or somesuch, the baby stealing made it stick in my mind). Or monsters like the Lurker-in-Light and Shining Child that attack in broad daylight, when someone has every right to otherwise feel safe.
Occult Dragons if they don't already exist.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
well to be honest, I don't see this as a problem with the fiends. The Qlippoth and Sakhil are pretty damn alien, and the Sakhil that was previewed I think is the only one that is rather "human-ish". Demons also have some pretty bizarre creatures. Devils are really the only outsiders with a mostly conservative morphology, which makes sense in the context of their boss and the fact they are sort of made in the image of good outsiders.
I said some.
Among them: Ceustodaemon, Hydrodaemon, Schir, and Shira. No different than your average Monstrous Humanoid of beastly nature, or Lycanthrope. Not really otherworldly terrors, as far as looks are concerned.I, for one, would very much like a Puginal. Especially as a familiar.
Take a dog and add the Celestial template. No need to put inbred-puppy Celestials in the books, unless Pathfinder's staff is so out of ideas that they need to steer the game on the rail of blatant ridiculousness.
Speaking of dogs, I'd LOVE to see variations on breeds for animals, though I'm not sure what form that'd take in a PF bestiary.
Beside the fact that dogs aren't surely the most used creatures in the game, why would you need more stats for the same creature? There are Dog and Riding Dog already, and you can have more with templates like Young. What's the need for a differentiation between german shepherds and labradors? Having one point more in an ability score and one less in another? That's GM's job, if they really feel that level of detail is "needed" (which is not).
Not all good things are pretty and being too close to paragons should be bad for your health.
Who said they have to be pretty? I said they have to not be dull (or worse, just ridiculous).
I'm perfectly aware of the descriptions of Angels in the Bible, and more, and it's neither in favor nor in contrast with what I said.But if you want to put it under the "pretty" perspective, Agathions are not Angels, they're more or less anthropomorphic animals of celestial nature; as such, they could very well be expected to look like paragons, but what they really need, since they mostly lack it, is at least an appearence that sets them apart from all the "mundane" beastfolk.
Also, maybe because I'm not an OCD person, I don't really see the need to cover each and every combination of everything, thus producing an Agathion for every possible animal, an [insert any Outsider family] for every single CR, and so on.
I would love a cupid like creature that is CG and/or CN.
I would love a pigmy dragon swarm or baby rust monster swarm.
An incorporeal construct creature or incorporeal plant.
The esoteric dragons are the occult dragons.
More occult celestials! Like the Kerub. :D
Take a dog and add the Celestial template. No need to put inbred-puppy Celestials in the books, unless Pathfinder's staff is so out of ideas that they need to steer the game on the rail of blatant ridiculousness.
I'm sure the talent at Paizo is more than capable of creating a Puginal both interesting, unique, and just as blatantly ridiculous as anything else they produce. Just look at how Adam Daigle improved upon the Flumph!
Also, my above comment was the only one in response to your post. All the rest was in response to the OP. I'm not sure what put the butt in the hurt for all the rest of your responses to my comment, but that's ok. I forgive you.
Beside the fact that dogs aren't surely the most used creatures in the game, why would you need more stats for the same creature? There are Dog and Riding Dog already, and you can have more with templates like Young. What's the need for a differentiation between german shepherds and labradors? Having one point more in an ability score and one less in another? That's GM's job, if they really feel that level of detail is "needed" (which is not).
As a DM and designer myself I'm generally not one to crush others' creativity. A list of suggested bonuses (skill, ability, or other) was done well in Kobold Press' Campaign Setting with horses, monster re-skins in the back of the same book, the Familiar Folio and Animal Archive had wonderful options as well. I'd like to see future Bestiaries include some of those options as well.
Who said they have to be pretty? I said they have to not be dull (or worse, just ridiculous).
I'm perfectly aware of the descriptions of Angels in the Bible, and more, and it's neither in favor nor incontrast with what I said.
But if you want to put it under the "pretty" perspective, Agathions are not Angels, they're more or less anthropomorphic animals of celestial nature; as such, they could very well be expected to look like paragons, but what they really need, since they mostly lack it, is at least an appearence that sets them apart from all the "mundane" beastfolk.
Also, maybe because I'm not an OCD person, I don't really see the need to cover each and every combination of everything, thus producing an Agathion for every possible animal, an [insert any Outsider family] for every single CR, and so on.
Ridiculous has just as much use as all the other kinds of monsters. My Nose Goblins have both horrified and amused many a player at home and at conventions. I was agreeing with earlier comments that I'd like to see more less-than-attractive good guys and posted the article to highlight that even in the mythologies the creatures are normally based off of, they weren't so pretty as they're normally depicted and often just being around them was traumatic.
Agathions don't NEED appearances that set them apart. As NG outsiders, they're your buddies, looking non-"angelic" while being paragons aligning with specific themes is their thing. I'm sure there'd be plenty of people who wouldn't mind one for every CR either, not that that would ever happen of course, and that paragon status means that they are easy candidates for making new ones up to fit our worlds Large mythos of what various animals represent.
Am I the only one who finds that there are some celestials in Pathfinder already that qualify as not being "pretty" or "handsome"? I mean, take the new agathion we got at in the Bestiary 5. Hell, take a look at the new new archons as well (those two aren't so much handsome as they are intimidating)! Hmmm...maybe intimidating isn't the right word. Fearsome might be a better description. :D
So, yeah, maybe people calling for this kind of thing are already getting some of it (just not entirely in the way they wanted)? Don't get me wrong, I neither want nor expect a celestial with pus oozing out of it's orifices and with slimy tentacles sprouting from everywhere. However I am willing to make exceptions for celestials that are "regal" yet "fearsome" and "downright intimidating"!
It would be interesting to see how they would do a hebrew Kerub (aka an winged angel made up of four animal aspects whose members are eclipsed in power only by the seraphim). Maybe a large, four-winged, imposing humanoid, with eyes of fire and the ectoplasmic phantom-like forms of three large fearsome animals?
As long as we get some good female art this time I will be fine. Because if this the art direction that future bestiaries will be like then I am not sure if I will get anymore.
Mr. U, you forgot to mention that Cherubim are see (in Ezekiel's visions) as having the faces of a lion, ox, eagle, and man peering out from the center of an array of four wings. The multi-eyed version of the Cherubim is from Revelations (though I could be wrong) and thus it's more a part of Christianity. There is also the Ophanim (the Wheels you mentioned earlier), Erelim ("Brave Ones"), and Hashmal ("Glowing Ones" [possibly a lightning based angel]).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As long as we get some good female art this time I will be fine. Because if this the art direction that future bestiaries will be like then I am not sure if I will get anymore.
I...don't get that at all. I don't buy the bestiaries for sexy women. If I want sexy women, (fantasy-themed or not), a simple google image search can satisfy my needs.
Personally I think its cool that other groups are getting fanservice. i might think the Gancanagh looks cheesy as hell, but I am sure female/homosexual male folks look at the nymph art and think the same thing.
Angel, Azrael: Angels of death who safeguard the River of Souls and fight against undead from spreading.
Angel, Ariel: Angels of stone and earth who fight against the corruption of worlds from vile sources.
Angel, Kherub: Powerful occult-like angels each comprised of four animal specific-aspects.
Angel, Tharsis: Aquatic angels who fight against despoilment of oceans.
Angel, Seraph: Angels of fire, war, and destruction who lead crusades against the fiends.
Agathion, Loxonal: Eclipsed in power only by the Draconals, the Loxonals defend agathion strongholds.
Archon, Blade: Archons whose heavenly pinwheels can tear scores of evil doers to shreds.
Archon, Monarch: Throne seated archons whose power goes beyond that of the star archons.
I second all of these
Yes, but I don't want to have see nothing but sexy guys in my bestiary ether.
Asmodeus, After Dark, coming soon!
Gorbacz, name some pathfinder art that you consider "softcore porn"?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And please, be as specific as possible.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Gorbsers didn't actually say Pathfinder art—he said fantasy art. And while that figure may be correct, even more staggering is the percentage of women in fantasy art who are sexualized to boost sales. I wouldn't be surprised if it was pushing 95%.
You're implying that what bothers you is all the scantily-clad guys, but your first post on the matter (that I see) didn't express a wish for less objectification—you said you were dissatisfied with the current trend of Pathfinder bestiary art depicting women. Are you asking for less female sexualization as well?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How about a celestial ooze?
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
People... if you want pretty ladies maybe the playboy bestiary is a better wish... And pathfinder already has like 20 pretty female monsters, hell make that 40. Ok if you like them, but if you cant stand ugly ladies and pretty male art there is something wrong. And no, im gay and I dont mind pretty ladies. But every female monster being some worldmodel is boring...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
People... if you want pretty ladies maybe the playboy bestiary is a better wish... And pathfinder already has like 20 pretty female monsters, hell make that 40. Ok if you like them, but if you cant stand ugly ladies and pretty male art there is something wrong. And no, im gay and I dont mind pretty ladies. But every female monster being some worldmodel is boring...
This isn't a monster idea, but as long as Paizo's taking suggestions could we please get a way to favorite posts more than once?
More Half Outsider templates: Neutral (Good/Evil), Chaotic/Entropic, Neutral (Law/Chaos), Lawful/Axiomatic, more specific subtypes (Psychopomp, Axiomite, etc), and if possible, avoid putting "Smite [alignment]" in them.
I agree with the "We need more Outsiders that don't look like Human in costumes"I also wouldn't mind a new good outsider group focused on the "Good is not pretty trope" Some wierd ancient eldritch entities that are good, but completely inexplicable would be sort of awesome.This. This exactly. Evil is still okay, but it has to be unique, way more neutrals needed, and some good groups that don't look beautiful.
Yeah, I don't see a being of one of the celestial upper planes being ugly and repulsive dude. Fearsome and intimidating is perfectly fine. If you want a pus spewing, vomit inducing angel though, your probably out of luck. Not only does that go against established core material for Pathfinder it also doesn't make much sense.
I second all of theseAngel, Azrael: Angels of death who safeguard the River of Souls and fight against undead from spreading.
Angel, Ariel: Angels of stone and earth who fight against the corruption of worlds from vile sources.
Angel, Kherub: Powerful occult-like angels each comprised of four animal specific-aspects.
Angel, Tharsis: Aquatic angels who fight against despoilment of oceans.
Angel, Seraph: Angels of fire, war, and destruction who lead crusades against the fiends.
Agathion, Loxonal: Eclipsed in power only by the Draconals, the Loxonals defend agathion strongholds.
Archon, Blade: Archons whose heavenly pinwheels can tear scores of evil doers to shreds.
Archon, Monarch: Throne seated archons whose power goes beyond that of the star archons.
Thankies. :D
There's so much focus on evil outsiders that good outsiders are few are far in between ya knows? I'm glad we got quite a few of them in the Bestiary 5 though. :D
'Angels' as described in the Bible (and other such Holy Texts)? Those are far from the Winged Humanoid cliché/trope... and they aren't pus spewing, vomit inducing either.
I didn't say they couldn't be fearsome or not humanoid.
Pathfinder currently has angels that are flying disks, archons that are models of solar systems, and agathions that are covered in tentacles and fins.
Yes but they aren't repulsive looking dude. The Bishop Agathion is merely a squid-like humanoid outsider. As for the disk and solar system models, I actually think those are rather regal.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pathfinder has a weirdly human-centric cosmology—the celestials seem largely designed with them in mind, and there's not a single major nonhuman-looking god aside from the Rough Beast itself. It'd be nice to get some more really weird celestials, not just to show how alien they are, but to show the celestials handle more than one "consumerbase". Maybe something closer to Azathoth or Cthulhu in appearance. Wrinkle in Time-esque.