Bugbear Brigade

These look fun! I like your idea of having "focus creatures" in each set. Very cool.

I prefer lower level focus creatures as low level encounters tend to be played the most (even though my campaign right now is entering epic tier in 4e D&D).

I already like the kobolds, goblins, orcs, undead, and now bugbears that exist.

Lizard men please.

I'm liking the Bugbears. The Mystic is icing on the cake.

I'll second lizard men as another monster to get the featured treatment.

I just did a check and I realized that there are very few dark folk that have ever been done. Just the Dark Creeper from the old DDM Line. Now that there are so many different kinds, there is an opportunity for some varied minis.

Gillmen in a new set?

I'll third lizard men and second dark folk.

Halflings would be fun.

I know cultists have been done, but a new cult would be cool (could include some related monsters).

Pirates have been done, but adding more could work.

Along those lines, bandits or brigands would make a nice focus creature.

Cool idea and the suggestions so far are all good ones. I'll add Hobgoblins as something I'd like to see more of.

Hobgoblins are a natural choice. They are organized and militant, so you would expect(and need) a number of them. Good low level foe, plus one that can scale well with class level advancements, which fit their profile.

You would need at least four, and I would recommend five different models. I would recommend the following:

Hobgoblin Warrior (basic grunt type, common)
Hobgoblin Acher (bow or crossbow, armored, common preferably)
Hobgoblin Grenadier (alchemist with bomb, uncommon preferably)
Hobgoblin Spellcaster (armored, likely cleric, uncommon preferably)
Hobgoblin Warlord (well equipped leader type, rare)

This would provide a good starting cadre for a hobgoblin force. With all the figures that normally come in a set, you have an easy CR 1 encounter with a few warriors, to a CR 10+ encounter with a Warlord plus some casters, grenadiers and mook godyguards.

Drow are another excellent suggestion. From what I recall, they haven't been featured yet. So you could really do a lot here. This suits higher-level play. Some specific ideas:

Drow Scout (rogue, lighter armor, hand crossbow?, common)
Drow Soldier (fighter, heavier melee combatant, common preferably)
Drow Mage (Wizard, uncommon preferably)
Drow Priest (Cleric, uncommon preferably)
Drow Demonic Champion (antipaladin, could double as higher cleric or fighter, rare)

Then there are Duergar (gotta give the Darklands some love eventually). They provide a nice contrast to the dwarves featured so far, and provide interesting possibilities for different fights. A few ideas:

Duergar Sharpshooter (ranger type, crossbow, common)
Duergar Slaver (rogue type maybe? common preferably)
Duergar Anvil (monk type, uncommon)
Duergar Sergeant (fighter, heavy armor and weapons, uncommon)
Duergar High Priest (powerful cleric, rare)

Hope that helps some.

Absolutely love the idea of the focus creature. The Bugbears and ghouls in this set couldn't make me happier. I'd be interested to see these four alongside the two we already have, the Glutton and Mystic look to be a perfect match, the Tyrant and Lurker look a little of the skinnier side. However, that said, these look fantastic and the rarities are spot on for a great little bugbear horde. Love that Mystic and it is so refreshing to have the females for variety. I think the Glutton needs a little detailing on the hair covering his arms, shoulders and legs.

I'd go along with Feros on the dark folk. We have quite a few different types of them now but no modern miniatures of them.

Similarly Hobgoblins are a great idea, some of their artwork in the monster codex is incredible and would make some inspiring minis.

Duergar, like FF says,woudl be another great choice, although I'm a little biased here.

Finally let me throw in those little rascals the DERRO. Yeah we have two form shattered star, but with the codeces and occult bestiary there is a lot of really cool mini fodder out there. They may be small but we've see that Wizkids can manage the detail at that level. Plus Derro are extremely cool, scary, but very cool.

Last week you teased us with potential news form Wizkids. Any word on the future of the miniatures lines, note the plural there....

Dark Foll are a great idea, as are drow (particularly if it includes 1 or more male driders, which have a unique look in PF) and duergar. I'd also like to second the bandit notion: there are surprisingly few good basic bandit and thug minis available in the existing range of prepainted minis, and they're always in demand. And I don't think there are any dedicated female bandits at all. Particularly given how popular Kingmaker has been, I'd think such a grouping would be really popular, maybe led by a rare Stag Lord? (And if you do such a grouping, it would be great to have one of them be on the portly side, like Auchs; there aren't a lot of obese minis out there, and sometimes an adventure calls for such a character.)

Urdefhans would also be welcome, since there are none at all presently available.

And want to make me *really* happy? Give us Small and Large spriggans!

Edit: oh, and a couple more trogs to go along with the Xulgath from way back might be nice!

Ahhh Cleanthes how right you are. Spriggans in large and small would be a long term goal fulfilled.

As for what we've got before, we could always benefit from fleshing out the ranks. One more boggard, two or three more sahuagin (sea devils, preferably all at the same scale - so keep them almost large like the basic one or reign them in like the four armed champion, not both) and at least three trogs to keep our lonely Xulgarth company. Hopefully things like these can still get woven through sets to flesh out the sets and creature we've got previously

The more I think about your post Cleanthes the more I think Urdefhans are a real go to miniature idea. They are a uniquely pathfinder creature, and the art is truly creepy. The hard part would be translating to plastic; transparent skin and all. Do you sculpt them with muscle and bone then add a gloss coat like the skum, or do you try something trickier to get the translucent skin?

Now I would like Drow based on the art in the codices but I also think there are a LOT of Drow in plastic out there already, especially now that the other company are making miniatures again. While pathfinder Drow are different from their other company brethren I think its really that male drider that is so out there it needs its own miniature.

I was also thinking we could use some Myconids. How many mushroom men do we have out there? Plus you could add a large one and some terrain to go along with them - BAM 6 minis, 2 small Myconid, 2 medium and a large one plus a terrain piece like a violet fungus or a mushroom patch.

Oh and since we're including organizations (and I do like the idea of a cohesive, city watch style range of bandits) I'd like to put forward another go at a Red Mantis group - 4 few different poses, 2 with masks on, 2 with mask off, 2 of each sex.

I've been staying away from drow so far because there are so GD many of them in the DDM sets that I have a difficult time believing any gamer anywhere needs any.

Maybe I'm wrong, and some of our dark elf images are certainly cool!

Oh the art is very cool. The differences from the spider motif-ed, all black drow of old do make yours stand out, I'm thinking of that very cool alchemist-like fleshwarper and the champion from the codices. They would translate to minis extremely well, but there are a lot of drow out there, plus another three more with the latest set from the other company. Still we are a hardy bunch or rarely complain about our miniatures...Perhaps if you threw in some drow themed creatures like the large male drider, the fleshwarped creatures, that sort of thing...

I've been staying away from drow so far because there are so GD many of them in the DDM sets that I have a difficult time believing any gamer anywhere needs any.

Maybe I'm wrong, and some of our dark elf images are certainly cool!

You are correct, Erik, that there are a lot of DDM drow minis out there. I've a few myself. But the PF art appeals to me. That, and I like where the Battles line is at the moment in terms of quality.

I second Spriggans and Dark Folk. Not the most common foes, but they mostly aren't represented in mini form, and add a different flair than most existing humanoidish foes. Trogs aren't a bad idea either- they work well with sewer encounters. And since we are talking about sewers, ratfolk are another possibility.

I know that these aren't 'monsters' per se, but I'd like to see a hinged door as one of the 'set dressing' pieces.

Having it hinged if possible would allow you to show if it is open or closed. Maybe even one with a bar piece?

Re: Drow, yes, there are a lot out there from the old DDM line, but I can tell you that my stock of them for sale has gotten pretty picked over, and in particular I have a very hard time keeping the cheaper ones in stock. (Any Drow Blademaster I list is generally gone within 24 hours.) The arrival of 5e brought a lot of new players into the market, and drow still have cachet. In any case, I'd bet you'd do well with a couple of cheap commons, maybe an uncommon drow female of some sort (something particularly alluring would be very welcome, I think, since most of the drow females on the market are pretty covered up -- with the exception of the Champion of Eilistraee who *still* goes for $25+...) and a male drider as a rare.

I wouldn't be surprised if the new DDM line goes into the drow sooner rather than later, though. If the Battles line does drow or their relations, I'd like it to be as Golarion-specific as possible.

-The Pathfinder male drider (although the female from the Rival Guide will do, I suppose)
-Many of the characters from Second Darkness
-The blademaster from Into the Nightmare Rift

I actually have two Champions of Eilistraee, and it's one of my favorite D&D miniatures of all time. If you want to go alluring, I support this plan. ^_^

Kalindlara, you're prescient! The new official D&D set (Rage of Demons) is just in the process of getting released, and there's a bunch of drow in it. So that would be another reason for not going heavy into drow.
On the other hand, I get the sense that often new D&D players don't know much about or care to look at Pathfinder minis, and vice versa. Once I talk them into taking a look, both groups come around, but people are funny that way, and put a lot of stock in the names themselves. So there are probably some Pathfinder players out there who want to use official Pathfinder minis and Pathfinder minis only, dadgummit! And you'd be helping them out.

It doesn't take that much prescience. ^_^

The new DDM line seems to be mining the "big" D&D stuff really hard. Tiamat, dragons, illithids, demons - there was no way they'd wait on drow, especially since they cling to Drizzt like a life preserver.

(I will give them credit for putting out an actual angel mini or two. I could really use more of those, and the Battles line seems to be in no hurry.)

I agree, they're playing things pretty safe. But I don't think that's a bad strategy for them, at least short term; Paizo ate their lunch in a big way over the last several years, and they've needed to get back to basics. By sticking to the core stuff, they re-assert, hey folks, remember where the "real D&D" is. (Not that I think that's true.) I also think, though, that it's a bit of a trap for them to stick with their old campaign worlds. A lot of what made Paizo and Golarion exciting was that the world was genuinely new, and no one knew what the answers to the big questions were. (I even wonder if the devs knew, at the beginning.) It's exciting to be part of that first group of discoverers, and people who have been tromping around Toril for the last 30 years just can't get that experience anymore -- not in the same way, anyhow.

On top of that, they lost a lot of old-schoolers with stuff like the Spellplague debacle. Another reason for them to hammer home the D&D Classic theme.

Something something New Coke.

(That being said, I will always hold one little piece of 4e Faerun close to my heart - it has a reference to Pandorym and the events of Darkvision.)

WotC is back to games with VR's and incomplete sets even when you buy I case. Plus, their rarity scheme is anywhere but where a gamer really needs it to be. I'm so tired of their games about this, that even though I'm not using the Pathfinder rules (still stuck in old D&D 3.5 rules) I so look forward to Pathfinder release over D&D ones. Thank you Erik and Paizo, for making a product we really can use. You just seem more in tune with the actual role playing aspect of miniatures and have continued to put out a superior product. Take the focused creature concept, for instance. It is wonderful, and really enhances my collection of humanoid races with rich storyline possibilities, since everything is not a safe Generic version. Also, thank you for the wonderful communication with us about upcoming and future sets. I realize that it is hard to react to the pulse of the community when you have to plan sets a year or more in advance, but each new set continues to add new pieces that push the envelope and that I really want.

I like the new bugbears minis. But I struggle a little with the lack of an overall goblinoid look in Pathfinder - goblins > hobgoblins > bugbears. I know that hobgoblins aren't just "bigger goblins," but I feel like there should be some family resemblance. There's something there with the new bugbears, which is why I like them. But it's taken a while and there has been an evolution in what bugbears look like. Even more when you look at the furry-faced bugbears from D&D. Anyway, I like the new look, I'd like to see it settle here for a while and not continue evolving, and when we get to hobgobs, I hope there's a family resemblance.

Send more serpent folk!
And Lizardmen!

Maybe a mwangi themed set. We could use apes and dinos and tribesmen and many many evil reptillians.

Erik is right: No more drow. I am drowning in drow: DROWNING!

I actually like the idea of bandits, brigands, scruffy men, outlaws, as there seems to be a general lack of roguish miniatures that aren't halflings or wielding two swords at the same time.

Send more serpent folk!

And Lizardmen!

Maybe a mwangi themed set. We could use apes and dinos and tribesmen and many many evil reptillians.

A Serpent's Skull set? That would be cool.

I'd want

We need Thriae, Morlock's, Derro's, Lzardfolk, ratfolk, Tengu, Fairies, Pixies,...

I haven't seen a Linnworm mini yet, and some more "were" creatures would be great!

"X-th"-ing Spriggans in large and small (are we at fourth or fifth?)
I used the "way too small" troll as a stand in for Kingmaker - not a pretty sight really.

plus more fey in general

I really like the completion of a bugbear tribe!
Got four warriors, four snipers and one hero already, plus space for 5 more in the stowage box.

Morlocks are a great idea. I'm running through the last chapters of Serpent's Skull right now, and morlock minis have been a problem.

Gripplis

-Drow from the Second Darkness Art, not the ones from pages 34 and 35 with the Justin Biber hair.
-Urdefhans - really cool looking in both Serpents Skull part 5 as in the Inner Sea Monster Codex.
-All 10 Feshwarped from Bestiary 4.
-Red Mantis Assassins

Ratfolk, celestials, fey (dryads, pixies, nymphs etc).
Actually would like to see some drow from Second Darkness too ;)

I've been staying away from drow so far because there are so GD many of them in the DDM sets that I have a difficult time believing any gamer anywhere needs any.

Maybe I'm wrong, and some of our dark elf images are certainly cool!

The Drow in PF are very different from the ones in D&D and the PF minis are a lot more detailed so i would love some even if i got 4 scouts, 3 captains, 2 archmages and 3 Driders in my Rage of Demons Case.

I can't see the Rusty Dragon Inn set in the november solicidations section of the schedule and have read that the Bar incentive is being overworked.
So is the intended release date still november 18th or has this changed to early december.

Thank you for your insights Eric!

Halflings, hobgoblins, gnolls, kobolds, gnomes...there are a lot of PC races that are underrepresented. Also the 4 elemental-kin: undines, ifrits, sylphs & oreads - maybe a suli-jann?

From my smart-aleck side: how about swordsmen that are right-handed; male druids; male sorcerors; more choices for two-weapon fighters;

Charau-Ka. Ratfolk. Tengu. Kitsune. Catfolk. And Umpteenthing for the Spriggans, Darkfolk, and Duergar (though like the spriggans, I'd like both a medium AND a large version, preferably in both genders).

Also, I get it. Golarion Drow are different than D&D Drow. Fact is that Eberron Drow were different that Forgotten Realms Drow. Neither of these facts changes that Drow were done to death in the 21 sets of DDM. I'm with Yolande and Erik on this one, no Drow (even Golarion-specific), at least for the time being, especially since it looks like WotC's new mini line is heading in that direction.

A unique drow would be awesome! Drow are a big draw and including one or two in a set would without question garner some interest! I have every drow ever made, but making a few rare drow minis would be a good selling point in my opinion.

I'm always looking for more of the common type creatures such as lizardfolk! That would be awesome. My choice for needed minis would be more svirfneblin and derro. I would love to get some leader type rares of these races, but I know Paizo doesn't like to make small minis rare. I'm fine with it as long as it's great!

Do drow run into the OGL problem of needing an alternate, in-game name?

Do drow run into the OGL problem of needing an alternate, in-game name?

Not if it is a unique drow with a name from an adventure path...

I haven't checked, but I think "drow" isn't protected IP. If memory serves, the name originates in folklore.

I haven't checked, but I think "drow" isn't protected IP. If memory serves, the name originates in folklore.

Yeah, they did, but I thought it was like demogorgon - ie the name is the only thing from legend/myth but the specifics were IP.

Halfings!

Cleanthes wrote:

I haven't checked, but I think "drow" isn't protected IP. If memory serves, the name originates in folklore.

Yeah, they did, but I thought it was like demogorgon - ie the name is the only thing from legend/myth but the specifics were IP.

Anything in the SRD* is open content.

* The link is not to the original System Reference Document, but rather to a hypertexted derivative.

I really wish we could get an 'actual size' comparison between these three bugbears, the Bugbear Tyrant and the Bugbear Warrior from Legends of Golarian, bwcause it looks like the scale is just all over the place and that's a HUGE turn off for me and one of the reasons I started losing interest in the old D&D miniatures.

I mean, I get that there will be height and build differences among all member of a species, but come on! The Bugbear Warrior was very nearly a large, whereas that Bugbear Flesh Glutton looks to be about the size of a dwarf (or smaller, going by the gallery images) - something I could almost accept for the Bugbear Mystic, a runt who had to turn to magic because he'd never cut it as a brute force fighter, but I expect warrior classes to be more...beefy.

That issue aside, I'm really liking these creature groupings, and if this is a sign of things to come, I can't wait for the next set that's, hopefully, sans townsfolk. A set with clusters of lizardmen, serpentfolk, drow and maybe even a revisiting of the Sea Devils (preferably as some commons this time!) might prompt my first pre-order ever.

the gluton looks like a dwarf because the base is large but the scale of the pictures doesn't match.
Base to figure comparison, I think it will be a bit bigger than H&M troll.

WotC is back to games with VR's and incomplete sets even when you buy I case. Plus, their rarity scheme is anywhere but where a gamer really needs it to be. I'm so tired of their games about this, that even though I'm not using the Pathfinder rules (still stuck in old D&D 3.5 rules) I so look forward to Pathfinder release over D&D ones. Thank you Erik and Paizo, for making a product we really can use. You just seem more in tune with the actual role playing aspect of miniatures and have continued to put out a superior product. Take the focused creature concept, for instance. It is wonderful, and really enhances my collection of humanoid races with rich storyline possibilities, since everything is not a safe Generic version. Also, thank you for the wonderful communication with us about upcoming and future sets. I realize that it is hard to react to the pulse of the community when you have to plan sets a year or more in advance, but each new set continues to add new pieces that push the envelope and that I really want.

Berk you are absolutely right about the case politics of the D&D minis.

That never happened with the Pathfinder cases, there i got mostly all, sometimes 1 large rare was missing.

I can understand the Drow concerns but i don't think they are justified.
Most old minis are years old and not available anymore.
The 3 new ones from the Rage of Demons are a Scout (2 daggers in hands) which is common (i got 4), a female captain which is uncommon (longsword and handcrossbow - i got 3) and an uncommon Archmage (staff in one hand of which i got 2).

That leaves lots of room for other dark elf minis considering that most people won't buy a case of both Pathfinder and D&D.

Also i noticed there are a lot of TENGU in the Adventure Paths but only 1 mini - #26 Jakaw Razorbeak from Skull and Shackles. This is probably the most needed focus race followed by Devils.

Daemons could certainly use some love. Poor fellows.

Steve Geddes wrote:

Cleanthes wrote:

I haven't checked, but I think "drow" isn't protected IP. If memory serves, the name originates in folklore.

Yeah, they did, but I thought it was like demogorgon - ie the name is the only thing from legend/myth but the specifics were IP.

Anything in the SRD* is open content.

* The link is not to the original System Reference Document, but rather to a hypertexted derivative.

My query was about the use of the name - there's this weird thing where you might have to put the OGL on each box (or even each mini! Nobody's really sure). It means that if the specifics of the creature are IP (even if open content) you have to be careful. So Pathfinder troglodytes have to be labelled xulgaths, for example.

I wondered if the same was true of drow - or if they are more in the orc/goblin category.

The only drow mini I have is the Drizzt from Icons of the Realms. I never bought minis before Pathfinder Battles.

I much prefer the purplish-skinned drow from Second Darkness to the ebony drow of WotC. I don't like the pale blue ones from ... is it the ARG? They look more like Snowcaster elves to me.

I like the new bugbears minis. But I struggle a little with the lack of an overall goblinoid look in Pathfinder - goblins > hobgoblins > bugbears. I know that hobgoblins aren't just "bigger goblins," but I feel like there should be some family resemblance. There's something there with the new bugbears, which is why I like them. But it's taken a while and there has been an evolution in what bugbears look like. Even more when you look at the furry-faced bugbears from D&D. Anyway, I like the new look, I'd like to see it settle here for a while and not continue evolving, and when we get to hobgobs, I hope there's a family resemblance.

Thanks. We're trying.

Bugbear look is completely settled. What you see in the Monster Codex is what you get, and isn't likely to change in the future.

Hobgoblins are pretty well baked in, though their take in the Monster Codex is a little dark for my tastes. It's slightly evolving, I guess, and if you look closely you can see the "family resemblance" with goblins.

One day I will show you this in miniature form. :)