Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Bestiary 2 (OGL)

4.30/5 (based on 18 ratings)
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Bestiary 2 (OGL)
Show Description For:
Non-Mint

Hardcover Unavailable

Add PDF $9.99

Non-Mint Unavailable

Facebook Twitter Email

Go beyond goblins with an army of fantasy's most fearsome foes! Bestiary 2 presents hundreds of different creatures for use in the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game. Within this collection of creatures you'll find undead dragons and mischievous gremlins, shrieking banshees and unstoppable titans, the infamous jabberwock, and so much more! Yet not all these monsters need to be foes, as new breeds of otherworldly guardians, living shadows, and vampires all might take up adventure's call. In addition, new rules for customizing and advancing monsters and an expanded glossary of creature abilities ensure that you'll be prepared to challenge your heroes wherever adventure takes them!

The Pathfinder RPG Bestiary 2 is the second indispensable volume of monsters for use with the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game and serves as a companion to the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook and Pathfinder RPG Bestiary. This imaginative tabletop game builds upon more than 10 years of system development and an Open Playtest featuring more than 50,000 gamers to create a cutting-edge RPG experience that brings the all-time best-selling set of fantasy rules into the new millennium.

The 320-page Pathfinder RPG Bestiary 2 includes:

  • More than 300 different monsters
  • Creatures both new and familiar, drawing upon the best-known beasts of legend, literature, and Pathfinder RPG adventures
  • Challenges for any adventure and every level of play
  • Hosts of new templates and variants, including simple templates for on-the-fly creature customization
  • Numerous lists of monsters to aid in navigation, including lists by Challenge Rating, monster type, and habitat
  • New rules for creating and running high-level menaces
  • Expanded universal monster rules to simplify special attacks, defenses, and qualities
  • New familiars, animal companions, and other allies
  • ... and much, much more!

ISBN-13: 978-1-60125-268-5

Errata
Last Updated - 7/16/2012

Other Resources: This product is also available on the following platforms:

Hero Lab Online
Fantasy Grounds Virtual Tabletop
Archives of Nethys

Note: This product is part of the Pathfinder Rulebook Subscription.

Product Availability

Hardcover:

Unavailable

PDF:

Fulfilled immediately.

Non-Mint:

Unavailable

This product is non-mint. Refunds are not available for non-mint products. The standard version of this product can be found here.

Are there errors or omissions in this product information? Got corrections? Let us know at store@paizo.com.

PZO1116


See Also:

1 to 5 of 19 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

Average product rating:

4.30/5 (based on 18 ratings)

Sign in to create or edit a product review.

Excellent Addition

5/5

As its name implies, Bestiary 2 is the second full-length collection of creatures for Pathfinder. It's a big (320 page) book, and introduces, according to the back cover, over 300 different monsters. The vast majority of creatures get one page each (art, stat block, description), though there are a few pages with two monsters and a few monsters that get double-page spreads. In format, it's very similar to the first bestiary collection. Obviously, I can't review all the monsters individually, but I would like to list some of the creatures or new creature types that jumped out at me:

* Aeons: Embodiments of neutrality striving to maintain universal balance, these cosmic entities are hard to conceptualise but interesting and important for planar travel. Several varieties are included here. I particularly liked "bythos", monitors of disruptions to time or space.

* Agathions: Beastlike outsiders native to the neutral good plane Nirvana. The theme works surprisingly well, with each type having a distinct role. I've never really used these, but should.

* Aranea: Super creepy pic!

* Athach: Dumb, bizarre arm monster with no background.

* Crypt Thing: Special teleport ability is pretty cool.

* Daemons: Outsiders with a special desire to consume mortal souls. Still too similar to "demons" and I don't really see what distinct niche they fill.

* Primal Dragons: Elemental-themed dragons plus a shadow plane-themed umbral dragon.

* Elementals: Four new ones here (mud, lightning, magma, and ice)

* Elemental (playable) races: Ifrits, undines, etc., are introduced here.

* Giants: Four new ones, including rune and taiga.

* Golems: Six new ones, with adamantine and clockwork the best.

* Gremlins: New creature type, a good and suitably annoying addition to the game.

* Inevitables: Lawful Neutral outsiders implacable in their goals. Each has a good nice.

* Lycanthropes: Three new ones, with wereboars and weretigers having good, scary art.

* Megafauna: Four new ones.

* Nightshade: Introduced as a creature type, with a really cool description.

* Proteans: Chaotic neutral outsider type. Not particularly interesting, and not obvious how to use well in a game.

* Qlippoths: Pre-demon residents of the Abyss, they hate demons and mortals whose sins form them. A cool concept.

Generally speaking, there are a lot of high-CR and a lot of gargantuan- and colossal- sized creatures. The book fills in a lot of the classics that weren't included in the first collection, and I also noticed a lot that appeared in Rise of the Runelords (including art reproduction). However, there are also a lot I've never heard of before despite gaming for a couple of decades. A good mix! Overall, an excellent, high-quality expansion to a GM's toolkit.


My favorite book from Paizo.

5/5

This book so far has been my favorite purchase of ALL of my RPG books.
I don't know if I can explain the fervor I have for this book but I will try.

So first of all there is the cover, the ever feared Jabberwock(y) of Lewis Carroll legend. Having a tough SOB (CR23) on the cover is the best way to start things off I think. Lets me know im in for a ride with this book.

While the first Bestiary was the standard array of Monsters we have all come to know and love through years of them being reprinted for games the Bestiary 2 is where Paizo took off on its own with a whole slew of new monster and just general new ideas for monsters. A handful of new extraplanar monsters of various alignments were added such as The Aeons, Qlippoths and Daemons all have decently written history and offer a lot of inspiration for using them in games.

The two things I love best about this book are as follows.
One: New dragons, and not just more "coloured or metal" dragons, but a new type of dragon altogether: Primal Dragons. These bad boys have probably the best art in the whole book (magma, im looking at you) and they make for a nice change from the everyday.

Two: The art, while the art in Bestiary 1 is GOOD, its not near as sharp, crisp, and detailed as this book. The colours, the textures, the everything, all done very well. You will not be disappointed when looking through this book.


Great buy!

5/5

I really enjoyed the artwork and the monsters presented in this book, especially the Qlippoth! Must have for your pathfinder library!


Back to the Golden Age

5/5

Looking through the PDF of Bestiary 2, I find myself remembering the days in the 1980s when I'd sit in the back of the mall bookstore and leaf through the various gaming tomes I couldn't possibly buy all of.

Crystal Dragons, Aeons, and several others in this book remind of that golden era, when DMs had such a wide variety of unusual (and often new-age-y) creatures at their disposals, they couldn't possibly ever use them all.

Sure, some of the creatures are a little odd, but on the other hand, the vast variety will lead to some adventurer groups with a far different list of encountered monsters than the norm.

I personally can't wait to spring the Dullahan (aka Headless Horseman) and Animate Dream on my party!


Something does not add up...

3/5

Not as extensive as the first, yet the same price...

I do not mind the creatures in this book, but it does get less use than my other bestiary. However it still has the same problem as the first also. The use of generic rules for a creature type. For an actual hardcover book to be useful in a game (for creatures) you MUST be able to have all rules for the creature on the one page. The use of rules based on a type of creature that you need to leave the creatures page to reference is irritating and a waste of in game time.

Please fix this problem. I understand that constructs all have similarities but I need the rules on each constructs page to reference. Not have to skip to the end of the book to see if they have something relevant when they need it.


1 to 5 of 19 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
151 to 200 of 1,311 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:


Yes. (although we're deliberately avoiding incorporating the Seelie and Unseelie into Pathfinder)

Out of curiosity, why so ?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Gorbacz wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:


Yes. (although we're deliberately avoiding incorporating the Seelie and Unseelie into Pathfinder)
Out of curiosity, why so ?

Because it's overdone and kind of cliched, and what we've done with the First World is gaining a lot of traction.

Scarab Sages

James Jacobs wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:


Yes. (although we're deliberately avoiding incorporating the Seelie and Unseelie into Pathfinder)
Out of curiosity, why so ?
Because it's overdone and kind of cliched, and what we've done with the First World is gaining a lot of traction.

Personally, that's good to here. I like what I've seen of the First World so far. It seems very Arthurian to me somehow. I can't wait to see what else you guys come up with.

Sovereign Court

James Jacobs wrote:
Yes. (although we're deliberately avoiding incorporating the Seelie and Unseelie into Pathfinder)

Sometime the things you.. you say are..are..just so..perfect..((sob)don't look at me(sob))<:{

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber
David Fryer wrote:
I was actually thinking more along the lines of redcaps and the Unseelie Court rather than Angsty the Emo Fey.

Redcaps were in Pathfinder #4, and updated to PF in Pathfinder #29, so I don't know if that would make them more likely or less to show up in Bestiary 2.

Sovereign Court

Over in the classic fairies revisited request thread , I

Andrew Phillips wrote:

Would a Pathfinder Chronicles about the First World be a better way to get info about fairies? I'm just shooting for two books in one I do love the Revisited's'es...

Series.

Take control of the Frist World Keep the seelie/unseelie sillyness completely out, watch those free lances early on until you get there head on right.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Kvantum wrote:
David Fryer wrote:
I was actually thinking more along the lines of redcaps and the Unseelie Court rather than Angsty the Emo Fey.
Redcaps were in Pathfinder #4, and updated to PF in Pathfinder #29, so I don't know if that would make them more likely or less to show up in Bestiary 2.

Whenever you see us do an illustration of a monster we're updating from old 3.5 products, chances are VERY VERY good that we've an ulterior motive in updating that creature by getting its update and (more importantly) it's artwork done for an upcoming Bestiary.


Which monsters in PF BESTIARY 2 have the play as a PC details? Also, will the gillmen be in PF BESTIARY 2?

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
Kvantum wrote:
David Fryer wrote:
I was actually thinking more along the lines of redcaps and the Unseelie Court rather than Angsty the Emo Fey.
Redcaps were in Pathfinder #4, and updated to PF in Pathfinder #29, so I don't know if that would make them more likely or less to show up in Bestiary 2.
Whenever you see us do an illustration of a monster we're updating from old 3.5 products, chances are VERY VERY good that we've an ulterior motive in updating that creature by getting its update and (more importantly) it's artwork done for an upcoming Bestiary.

I figured the update and the new art made it more likely, but its being included in just last month's Pathfinder kinda threw me off.

Then again, the achaierai were just updated in Infernal Syndrome (Pathfinder #28) and they're going to be in Bestiary 2, so... *shrugs*

Madness Follows wrote:
Which monsters in PF BESTIARY 2 have the play as a PC details? Also, will the gillmen be in PF BESTIARY 2?

Gillmen are supposed to be in the updated World Guide: Inner Sea, the Pathfinder revision and expansion of the Campaign Setting. The reasoning behind it is that they're more iconic to Golarion than just general RPG monsters.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Madness Follows wrote:
Which monsters in PF BESTIARY 2 have the play as a PC details? Also, will the gillmen be in PF BESTIARY 2?

Very few. There's only 6 0-HD monsters in Bestiary 2, I believe.

Gillmen are not one of them; they'll be showing up in the revised Pathfinder Chronicles Campaign Setting.

Sovereign Court

Aberzombie wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:


Yes. (although we're deliberately avoiding incorporating the Seelie and Unseelie into Pathfinder)
Out of curiosity, why so ?
Because it's overdone and kind of cliched, and what we've done with the First World is gaining a lot of traction.
Personally, that's good to here. I like what I've seen of the First World so far. It seems very Arthurian to me somehow. I can't wait to see what else you guys come up with.

Makes me think of some of the stories in the Mabinogion.

Which is a good thing.

I prefer my Fey CN: whimsy, aloofness, reckless independence - these are all PC traits that they're not used to encountering in others and can make for great encounters,

Evil Fey are so common now in PF (I can think of a dozen off the top of my head, and only one or two neutral/friendly) that they have become the dominant trope.

If I'm playing a Paizo adventure and some fey turn up my instinct will be to cut them up: they're turning into an evil species with magic and odd personalities and I don't need Fey for that, i've got Derro and Drow and Rakshasa, and...

Dark Archive

Will the Jabberwock maintain connections to the Tane, the Twisted, and the First World (as mentioned on page 48 of Skinsaw Murders)? Will there be some sort of sidebar detailing other Tane like the short ones with the Empyreal Lords and Archfiends?

Also- I support Mr. Stewart getting to write about more Axiomite types. I certainly like the Inevitables and am quite glad they will be appearing in this, but I also think that more Axiomites would be an interesting addition to Axis.

Scarab Sages

Something I just thought of: How about the Wolfwere and Jackalwere? Any chance of seeing those, or are they not open content?


James Jacobs wrote:


As of right now... I'm thinking there'll be 4 more "dinosaurs": compsognathus, tylosaurus, allosaurus, and some sort of hadrosaur.

Anyone have any other nominations?

There're just so many, & quite a few are just 'bigger' or 'smaller' versions of a specific one. I'd start with "dinosaurs" that fill out a particular niche or morph, and fairly standard, if not iconic, versions at that (that's why there are advanced and simple templates, after all). Then move on to other versions that do something a little different to the already-statted-up dino (a pachyrhinosaurus is unlikely to do piercing damage like a triceratops, eventhough they're both large ceratopsians...).

So I'd second the therizinosaur request, and add one for a pachycephalosaur. For something with a twist, how about a psittacosaurus (I'm referring to the more recent views that at least some species of this dinosaur sported "plumes" or "quills" along the top of their tails...)? Or how about a heterodontosaurus (small, speedy herbivore with viscious tusks & ability to burrow - like an aardvark and not like a mole or earthworm, that is)? And for the more aquatic adventure (and to represent the "other dinosaurs"), how about some sort of ichthyosaur or a nothosaur?

Then there's:

Spoiler:
More ceratopsids (pachyrhinosaurus, styracosaurus, torosaurus, etc.), an iguanodont (iguanodon, ouranosaurus, tenontosaurus, etc.), a spinosaur (baryonyx, spinosaurus, irritator, etc.), a titanosaur (antarctosaurus, saltasaurus, augustinia, etc.) or diplodocid (diplodocus, apatosaurus, amargasaurus, etc.), a polacanthid (gastonia, polacanthus, etc.) or nodosaur (sauropelta, edmontonia, etc.), a hypsilophodont-type, a prosauropod (plateosaurus, massospondylus, etc.), a dicynodont (placerias, kannemeyeria, lystrosaurus, etc.), a pelycosaur (dimetrodon, ophiacodon, etc.), a gorgonopsian (lycaenops, gorgonops, etc.), a cynognathid (euchambersia, cynognathus, diademodon, etc.), a dinocephalian (estemmosuchus [sp?], anteosaurus, moschops, etc.), a - ok, I'll stop now ;-p

Sorry, just my palaeo-geekness coming out... :-D

It's interesting to see that there'll be a hadrosaur in the upcoming Bestiary II ... You do know that the lambeosaurines aren't particularly THAT obviously duck-billed, right? And that there's a family of sauropods that would give the rest of the hadrosaurs some stiff competition for the description of being "duck-billed"...? (Granted, they don't actually have beaks, but their jaws...) ;-D

Sovereign Court

Aberzombie wrote:
Something I just thought of: How about the Wolfwere and Jackalwere? Any chance of seeing those, or are they not open content?

The Bardi, a sort of Turkish banshee, is a jackal bi-tch that can turn into a human woman. So "jackalweres" are Folkloric, and thus Open. They'll just be a little different than D&D's Jackalweres.

Japanese folklore has Foxes and Badgers that turn into humans. Native American folklore has Coyote and Raven as simultaneously a coyote and a raven, but also as anthropomorphic spirits. The concept of animals that turn into men is broadly folkloric, so I'm sure we'll see something along those lines eventually.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Not to mention the whole truckload of real world myth which was cleverly used by White Wolf to describe werebears, wereravens, werehyenas, weredingos, werebats, werecats, weresnakes, werecoytoes, weredinosaurs, werefoxes, werespiders, weresharks and wereducks.

OK, maybe not the last ones.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Lord Gadigan wrote:
Will the Jabberwock maintain connections to the Tane, the Twisted, and the First World (as mentioned on page 48 of Skinsaw Murders)? Will there be some sort of sidebar detailing other Tane like the short ones with the Empyreal Lords and Archfiends?

Absolutely; that was sort of the goal all along, in fact. The Tane are less powerful than archfiends; they're a category of monsters that live around CR 18–22 I suspect. And they're not unique monsters; they're a collection of monsters. There's probably more than one jabberwock, for example, in the world.

Lord Gadigan wrote:
Also- I support Mr. Stewart getting to write about more Axiomite types. I certainly like the Inevitables and am quite glad they will be appearing in this, but I also think that more Axiomites would be an interesting addition to Axis.

At this point, we have no plans to turn the axiomites into a whole category of planar race; I actually like the fact that they're a single stat block race, since that allows us to continue developing the inevitables as the multiple stat block lawful neutral outsider race.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Aberzombie wrote:
Something I just thought of: How about the Wolfwere and Jackalwere? Any chance of seeing those, or are they not open content?

They're open content. They're in the Tome of Horrors. We used a jackalwere in an AP already, in fact. They're most likely not gonna be in Bestiary 2, in any event. Maybe later.


Did you run out of room in this one already? :)

Paizo Employee Creative Director

blope wrote:
Did you run out of room in this one already? :)

We've had all the monsters picked out for Bestiary 2 since late last year, actually. So yeah; we've technically been "out of room" for more monsters in Bestiary 2 for close to half a year.


James Jacobs wrote:
blope wrote:
Did you run out of room in this one already? :)
We've had all the monsters picked out for Bestiary 2 since late last year, actually. So yeah; we've technically been "out of room" for more monsters in Bestiary 2 for close to half a year.

Have you started making a list for number 3?


James Jacobs wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:


Yes. (although we're deliberately avoiding incorporating the Seelie and Unseelie into Pathfinder)
Out of curiosity, why so ?
Because it's overdone and kind of cliched

End yet we got "Dwarves of Golarion" :P

Paizo Employee Creative Director

seekerofshadowlight wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
blope wrote:
Did you run out of room in this one already? :)
We've had all the monsters picked out for Bestiary 2 since late last year, actually. So yeah; we've technically been "out of room" for more monsters in Bestiary 2 for close to half a year.
Have you started making a list for number 3?

Yes.

Scarab Sages

James Jacobs wrote:
seekerofshadowlight wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
blope wrote:
Did you run out of room in this one already? :)
We've had all the monsters picked out for Bestiary 2 since late last year, actually. So yeah; we've technically been "out of room" for more monsters in Bestiary 2 for close to half a year.
Have you started making a list for number 3?
Yes.

Sweet! So, when can we get more hints as to what's in #2? Eh? Hmmm? What's it got in its pocketses?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Aberzombie wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
seekerofshadowlight wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
blope wrote:
Did you run out of room in this one already? :)
We've had all the monsters picked out for Bestiary 2 since late last year, actually. So yeah; we've technically been "out of room" for more monsters in Bestiary 2 for close to half a year.
Have you started making a list for number 3?
Yes.
Sweet! So, when can we get more hints as to what's in #2? Eh? Hmmm? What's it got in its pocketses?

We'll be dropping more hints here and there in the months to come, so keep an eye out on these boards, at the Tuesday night chat, and at paizo.com.

But I guess I can say that this one will have a lot of planar stuff in it... since one of its goals is to fill out the other outer planar races with entries for inevitables, agathions, proteans, qlippoth, daemons, and so on...


Ah yes, hints indeed...
Any likelihood we'll get to see a sample creature from Bestiary II prior to publication? Also, any plans for more free pdfs of non-OGL creatures? I really liked seeing the caryatid columns statted out for PF, but I am SO jonesing for updates on the genasi! Or at least a viable PF substitute for them.

Also, you mentioned an updated campaign setting book coming out. Any idea when? I wouldn't mind scoping out the Golarion world setting, but I just can't afford to buy up all those chronicles and adventures and whatnot to do so, and the only copies of the world setting around here are from before the core book came out. I'm currently still running Forgotten Realms games, but sometimes those books give me a headache (a serious lack of decent random encounter tables, for one thing, and maps that lack detail for another). Besides, one of my players has really been pushing for me to run a Golarion campaign (and knowing him, that kind of worries me a bit LOL).

Oh, and one last request (for now): MORE TROLLS!!!
So tired of players always knowing that fire hurts trolls. There's only so much control over metagaming; it would be SO nice to throw those rules marshalls for a loop once in a while ;-)


James Jacobs wrote:
But I guess I can say that this one will have a lot of planar stuff in it... since one of its goals is to fill out the other outer planar races with entries for inevitables, agathions, proteans, qlippoth, daemons, and so on...

SWEET!!!

I, for one, LOVED the Planescape setting, and was more than a little disappointed that it never made it into 3.5. I also loved Ravenloft, but good luck getting my current group to play THAT; something about too many undead (as if there is such a thing ;-P). Granted, I still won't see Planescape (not OGL :-(), but at least I can do SOMETHING with the outer planes soon!

Paizo Employee Creative Director

drakkonflye wrote:
Any likelihood we'll get to see a sample creature from Bestiary II prior to publication? Also, any plans for more free pdfs of non-OGL creatures? I really liked seeing the caryatid columns statted out for PF, but I am SO jonesing for updates on the genasi! Or at least a viable PF substitute for them.

Unlikely; we aren't going to do a bonus bestiary for this one. We MIGHT do a preview on the blog here and there though as we get closer to the end of the year.

drakkonflye wrote:
Also, you mentioned an updated campaign setting book coming out. Any idea when?

The updated PCCS will be out, hopefully, in September. It's got its own page here.

drakkonflye wrote:

Oh, and one last request (for now): MORE TROLLS!!!

So tired of players always knowing that fire hurts trolls. There's only so much control over metagaming; it would be SO nice to throw those rules marshalls for a loop once in a while ;-)

We'll have a couple more trolls... but part of what being a troll IS is that they're hurt bad by fire. Changing that changes what being a troll is.

Fortunately, changing the word "fire" in its regeneration line to, say, "cold" or "sonic" is a SUPER easy house rule change.


James Jacobs wrote:

We'll have a couple more trolls... but part of what being a troll IS is that they're hurt bad by fire. Changing that changes what being a troll is.

Fortunately, changing the word "fire" in its regeneration line to, say, "cold" or "sonic" is a SUPER easy house rule change.

I would love to see a stone troll.

Not a troll turned to stone, as per Tolkien, but a big stone guy, like the trolls of Midgard, in Dark Age of Camelot.
Not vulnerable to fire, and not necessary evil or stupid.

I converted them a long time ago for my campaign setting (as well as other DAoC creatures), but it would be nice to see how Pathfinder would stat something similar.


James Jacobs wrote:
Fortunately, changing the word "fire" in its regeneration line to, say, "cold" or "sonic" is a SUPER easy house rule change.

Oh, yes, I've done that :-D

I am, after all, an evil DM. Nothing shakes things up more than taking what they expect and making it something different. I've also played around with templates (yes, I hear the groans), but due to the overabundance of templates in previous MMs and such, Pathfinder seems to be steering well away from them. I've actually been hoping to see some decent elemental templates, though, as opposed to the seriously lame ones I've seen before, preferably something that gives decent DR, SR, SA, or SQ instead of gaining SLAs dependant upon HD.

Yeah, I know..."house rule it".

Scarab Sages

drakkonflye wrote:

......something about too many undead (as if there is such a thing ;-P).

You, sir, are a wonderful person! I wish there were more living folks who appreciated we, the heart beat challenged.


James Jacobs wrote:
At this point, we have no plans to turn the axiomites into a whole category of planar race; I actually like the fact that they're a single stat block race, since that allows us to continue developing the inevitables as the multiple stat block lawful neutral outsider race.

Could we get a low-CR inevitable? Perhaps something suitable as a Bestiary-style pseudo player race? It would be nice to offer the a level of support for players who want something similar* to warforged, only not a player race, and all Pathfinder-y and awesome.

*not too similar, BTW. (as if I had to remind you)

Dark Archive

James Jacobs wrote:
seekerofshadowlight wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
blope wrote:
Did you run out of room in this one already? :)
We've had all the monsters picked out for Bestiary 2 since late last year, actually. So yeah; we've technically been "out of room" for more monsters in Bestiary 2 for close to half a year.
Have you started making a list for number 3?
Yes.

good I suggest catfolk (or somethink similair since there not open content I dont think.)


drakkonflye wrote:


Oh, and one last request (for now): MORE TROLLS!!!
So tired of players always knowing that fire hurts trolls. There's only so much control over metagaming; it would be SO nice to throw those rules marshalls for a loop once in a while ;-)

I don't call that meta-gaming. The information that you need fire to kill trolls is probably universal folk wisdom in a Pathfinder world. There are cautionary tales about it and everything.

Just like in today's world (at least in many parts of it), children are taught that you don't cross the street unless the lights are green, that you don't follow a stranger into his van just because he tells you about candy and cute little bunny rabbits (and countless other bits of potential life-savers, often dependant on where you live), children on Golarion are told about trolls.

There's the tale about Johnny Adventurer who "killed" 3 trolls and then went to sleep beside their "corpses", only to wake up tied up beside their camp fire where the trolls - miraculously returned to life! - are preparing a spit for him. Luckily for him, the trolls can't tie a decent knot, so he can free himself and, having no other weapon available, takes a swing at the trolls with a burning log - and they die, this time for real.

Dark Archive

No self respecting adventurer would ever sleep by a troll's corpse. They smell too bad.


More linnorms?

Anything in here that we've never seen anywhere else?


Gurubabaramalamaswami wrote:


Anything in here that we've never seen anywhere else?

Drop elephants (The drop bears' larger cousins)


KaeYoss wrote:


Drop elephants (The drop bears' larger cousins)

Those pale in comparison to the power of the Drop Whale.

Scarab Sages

Just noticed this today... Hmmm... While I *am* looking forward to the book, I find the cover I see today to be too violent. I don't know what kind of dragon that is, but it is chains, screaming and being torn in shreds with bone and blood everywhere. Not my choice of art. Even a good artist can produce something "over the top". If I had a say: no explicit gore please, I prefer some things left to the imagination.

[edit] Funny thing, if it was green blood it wouldn't bother me. I guess red blood and bone is too realistic/human-like. Now I recall seeing this art before, didn't like then either. Seeing something chained up and in its death-throes actually is a turn-off.

Sorry.


Don't worry, Winterthorn: that's a mock-up.

Scarab Sages

Mairkurion {tm} wrote:
Don't worry, Winterthorn: that's a mock-up.

That's what I'm hoping for. Thanks for the reminder. :-)

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Correct; the current cover's a mock-up cover.

And just for full disclosure, the dragon illustrated is far from being in its death throes. It's gory and violent, yes, but that's because it's from an illustration of a very powerful undead dragon minion of Zon-Kuthon being returned to animation.

In any case, the final cover will depict something else entirely.

Scarab Sages

James Jacobs wrote:
... In any case, the final cover will depict something else entirely.

Sweet!


KaeYoss wrote:
drakkonflye wrote:


Oh, and one last request (for now): MORE TROLLS!!!
So tired of players always knowing that fire hurts trolls. There's only so much control over metagaming; it would be SO nice to throw those rules marshalls for a loop once in a while ;-)

I don't call that meta-gaming. The information that you need fire to kill trolls is probably universal folk wisdom in a Pathfinder world. There are cautionary tales about it and everything.

Just like in today's world (at least in many parts of it), children are taught that you don't cross the street unless the lights are green, that you don't follow a stranger into his van just because he tells you about candy and cute little bunny rabbits (and countless other bits of potential life-savers, often dependant on where you live), children on Golarion are told about trolls.

There's the tale about Johnny Adventurer who "killed" 3 trolls and then went to sleep beside their "corpses", only to wake up tied up beside their camp fire where the trolls - miraculously returned to life! - are preparing a spit for him. Luckily for him, the trolls can't tie a decent knot, so he can free himself and, having no other weapon available, takes a swing at the trolls with a burning log - and they die, this time for real.

Well and good, and quite eloquently written, but two things:

1) I don't run my games in Golarion, as I don't have all the support material yet (waiting for the World Guides, and then we'll see).

2) This was just an example: this particular player is a long-term gamer, so knows about just about every creature in every MM and support material out there, including Golarion (HE has the chronicles sub), so trying to surpise him is difficult.

It wouldn't be so bad if he'd keep his mouth shut, but while I got him to stop naming the creatures as soon as he hears the description (even when I change it up a bit, he knows), he still has his "ah", "oh no", "damn", "I knew it", and so on comments, which can be pretty distracting to the other players. I've had to resort to making them make those Knowledge checks to see if they actuallt DO know what they think they do, but sometimes that leads to arguments with the other players. Enh...it happens. It just encourages me to drop in more of my own creations, that's all :-D


Winterthorn wrote:

Just noticed this today... Hmmm... While I *am* looking forward to the book, I find the cover I see today to be too violent. I don't know what kind of dragon that is, but it is chains, screaming and being torn in shreds with bone and blood everywhere. Not my choice of art. Even a good artist can produce something "over the top". If I had a say: no explicit gore please, I prefer some things left to the imagination.

[edit] Funny thing, if it was green blood it wouldn't bother me. I guess red blood and bone is too realistic/human-like. Now I recall seeing this art before, didn't like then either. Seeing something chained up and in its death-throes actually is a turn-off.

Sorry.

THAT'S gory?

Someone hasn't played the God of War series it seems. I have to say most D&D battles go that route, especially with barbarians involved.


Any chance we might see some creatures that are similar to some specific WOTC licensed setting monsters/races (i.e. shifters, warforged, etc)?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

barnabyjones wrote:
Any chance we might see some creatures that are similar to some specific WOTC licensed setting monsters/races (i.e. shifters, warforged, etc)?

Not really. Even discounting the fact that the two races mentioned above are perhaps two of my least favorite races to come out of late 3rd edition... we're not interested in providing generic versions of monsters that are obviously key to WotC products. We'd rather support Golarion, draw from mythology/cryptozoology/public domain/folklore monsters (aka "the real world's monster pool"), or make entirely new monsters.


James Jacobs wrote:
or make entirely new monsters.

I'd suggest the Bearbear. It's the ultimate deadline monster.

Dark Archive

Shinmizu wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
or make entirely new monsters.
I'd suggest the Bearbear. It's the ultimate deadline monster.

Or the vorpal bunny.


James Jacobs wrote:
Not really. Even discounting the fact that the two races mentioned above are perhaps two of my least favorite races to come out of late 3rd edition... we're not interested in providing generic versions of monsters that are obviously key to WotC products. We'd rather support Golarion, draw from mythology/cryptozoology/public domain/folklore monsters (aka "the real world's monster pool"), or make entirely new monsters.

And thank you for that. Not a fan of those either and I'd rather see what you come up with.

151 to 200 of 1,311 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Product Discussion / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Bestiary 2 (OGL) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.