Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Bestiary 5 (OGL)

4.20/5 (based on 14 ratings)
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Bestiary 5 (OGL)
Show Description For:
Non-Mint

Add Hardcover $44.99 $22.49

Add PDF $9.99

Add Non-Mint $44.99 $33.74

Facebook Twitter Email

Beyond the veil!

Creatures strange beyond imagining and more terrifying than any nightmare lurk in the dark corners of the world and the weird realms beyond. Within this book, you'll find hundreds of monsters for use in the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game. Face off against devils and dragons, deep ones and brain moles, robots and gremlins, and myriad other menaces! Yet not every creature needs to be an enemy, as whimsical liminal sprites, helpful moon dogs, and regal seilenoi all stand ready to aid you on your quests—if you prove yourself worthy.

Pathfinder RPG Bestiary 5 is the fifth 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 a new era.

Pathfinder RPG Bestiary 5 includes:

  • More than 300 different monsters.
  • New player-friendly races like caligni dark folk, deep one hybrids, plant-bodied ghorans, and simian orang-pendaks.
  • Psychic creatures both benevolent and terrifying, from the enigmatic anunnaki and faceless astomoi to the howling caller in darkness and insidious, alien grays.
  • New familiars, animal companions, and other allies, such as clockwork familiars, red pandas, and many-legged wollipeds.
  • New templates to help you get more life out of classic monsters.
  • Appendices to help you find the right monster, including lists by Challenge Rating, monster type, and habitat.
  • Expanded universal monster rules to simplify combat.
  • Challenges for every adventure and every level of play.
  • ... and much, much more!

ISBN-13: 978-1-60125-792-5

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

Product Availability

Hardcover:

Available now

Ships from our warehouse in 1 to 5 business days.

PDF:

Fulfilled immediately.

Non-Mint:

Available now

Ships from our warehouse in 1 to 5 business days.

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.

PZO1133


See Also:

1 to 5 of 14 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Average product rating:

4.20/5 (based on 14 ratings)

Sign in to create or edit a product review.

My Favourite So Far

5/5

Don't have really anymore to add beyond that, love all the eldritch and occult flavor being pumped in ^w^


The weakest of the bunch

2/5

On the one hand, there are a good couple of gems and some very inspired entries throughout this book and, in truth, two stars is somewhat unfair, especially for the PDF. But, personally, I feel they're warranted, as this book seems to signal a shift in Pathfinder's direction, and one that I'm not happy about in the least.

First off, while Occult Adventures is readily available for consultation online in the SRD, I did not like to see a sizable number of monsters using rules from that book. It's one thing to have spells or feats from, say, Advanced Player's Guide or Mythic Adventures, as those are books that complement the game as a whole and present options for all classes, whereas Occult Adventures is a very specific niche that not all players will want to incorporate in their campaigns.

Secondly, I did not like the muddled product identity Paizo is showcasing here, with monsters such as the Android, Gray (Roswell), Reptoid (Reptilian) and Robot. Even the Annunaki seems more at home as the antagonist of, say, a Legion of Super-Heroes comic book. It's one thing to want to provide the tools for varied and diverse fantasy campaigns - in which constructs, space aberrations and even clockwork creatures can easily work without sticking out like sore thumbs - but quite another one to insert borderline hard-SF or contemporary conspiracy theorist creatures on a lark. Expedition to the Barrier Peaks this is not, and let's endeavor to keep it that way, please.

Thirdly, snake-bodied weasels with boar tusks? Serpentine bulls? Shark-headed sea serpents? Wolf-headed sea serpents? A chinchilla with a bat wing on the tip of its tail? An octopus with three shark heads? Really? Unless you have an absolutely amazing hook or a compelling campaign seed, why bother putting out this silly, uninspired dross? You can do much better than this, Paizo.


Monsters Galore

4/5

Read my full review on Of Dice and Pen.

I like Bestiary 5 a great deal. On an initial look-through before reading it more thoroughly, there were numerous monsters that drew my attention, that made me want to know more about them, and screamed to be included in one of my games sometime down the road. There's a wide variety of monsters present, with every type represented and the spread between them being fairly even. Ooze is a monster type that is often under-represented, but there are quite a few new oozes in this book. Along with that there are lots of magical beasts, constructs, undead, vermin, fey, and so on. In addition, there are several mythic monsters, and Bestiary 5 is the first hardcover book to contain monsters using the occult rules from Occult Adventures. The monsters cover a wide variety of challenge ratings as well, from 1/6 to 24. The bulk of the creatures are in the low- to mid-CR range, but there are also a sizeable number of high-CR monsters as well.


Grim Reapers, Deep Ones, and Greys Oh My!

5/5

I have always loved Bestiaries and Paizo has yet to disappoint in department. Now with a 5th hardcover bestiary they continue with quality and variety. I will list the good and the bad of this fine product.
The Good
-Dragons, 5 great new true dragons, along with a variety of "lesser" dragons such as jungle drake, rope dragon, vishap, and awesome shen.
-Fey, a variety of ranging from low to high CR such as the house spirits and the glaistag.
-Giants, we finally get the Firbolg, been waiting to see this one for a long time.
-New 0HD races like the Astomi, Caligni, and Reptoid.
-Aliens such as greys and the Anunnaki.
-Elementals such as aether, the wysps and the awesome anemos.
-Interesting oozes such as animate hair, apallie, and living mirage.
-New clestials and aeons.
-Robots!
-Creatures from mythology.
-Old school monster such as moon dogs, muckdwellers, brain moles, and thought eaters.
-Some interesting undead like bone ship and death coach.

The Bad
-Some minor design issues.
-Some art issues.
-The Sahkil, another evil outsider group, could have used this space for Oni, Azura, or Rakshasa.
-Continued use of the mythic rules that to me should be a completely optional rule.


3 STARS?????

5/5

I can't agree with the below rating of 3 stars. (Read Below) This is on-par with any other bestiary piazo has produced. Although i cant speak of quality due to just buying a pdf, this bestiary has the best range of monster selection in my opinion. It adds some technology driven ideas, unique story driven monsters and my favorite: A BoneShip, literally the pcs can fight an undead ship!!!! The complaint of no new monster over CR25 is a lazy lie, using templates the Esoteric Dragons can be over CR25 with other CR20+ monsters utilizing templates provided can increase above CR25. This book contains ideas for familiars, companions, and constructs for many classes and pairs amazingly well with content from the Occult Adventures. I Love this book, and pathfinder in general due to the wealth of information it has for both a PC and a DM. Cant wait for more!!!


1 to 5 of 14 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
1,801 to 1,850 of 2,175 << first < prev | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

Fourshadow wrote:
Odraude wrote:
Anyone else think the Moon Dog looks like Christopher Lee as Dog Saruman?
Please tell me it doesn't look like a poodle...please? I loved the D&D Moon Dogs!

Nothing like a poodle.

Defiantly an afghan hound, that is pure silver white and wears jewelry


Mystic_Snowfang wrote:
Fourshadow wrote:
Odraude wrote:
Anyone else think the Moon Dog looks like Christopher Lee as Dog Saruman?
Please tell me it doesn't look like a poodle...please? I loved the D&D Moon Dogs!

Nothing like a poodle.

Defiantly an afghan hound, that is pure silver white and wears jewelry

And they have hands. Unsure if they are humanoid or not, but the art work is really cool.

Silver Crusade

Fourshadow wrote:
Moon Dogs not poodle-like? Good and thank you for your input, all of you. More like Afghan Hounds? That is definitely acceptable. Poodle? Not in my Pathfinder!

Are we talking lion clip poodle? (something that was created for working dogs and found in several retrieving breeds, not just poodles?)

Or just poodles?

Who are the second most intellegent dog, and were originally water dogs. (srsly, their name comes from the German "to splash)


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I bought this from Paizo directly and it will be here soon. I have high hopes for it but I know it will be good.


Mystic_Snowfang wrote:
Fourshadow wrote:
Moon Dogs not poodle-like? Good and thank you for your input, all of you. More like Afghan Hounds? That is definitely acceptable. Poodle? Not in my Pathfinder!

Are we talking lion clip poodle? (something that was created for working dogs and found in several retrieving breeds, not just poodles?)

Or just poodles?

Who are the second most intellegent dog, and were originally water dogs. (srsly, their name comes from the German "to splash)

To be fair, modern poodles look pretty silly, so I can understand the apprehension.

I loved the robots in this, though I am sad they were reprints, but the terraforming robot looks awesome. The occult and psychic monsters are probably my favorite though.


This book is so awesome that I'm having a hard time figuring out where to begin when it comes to praising it. Let's start with the Cherufe. That thing is badass. Almost exactly how I pictured the creature. Looks really quite kaiju-ish to me.

Silver Crusade

Odraude wrote:
Mystic_Snowfang wrote:
Fourshadow wrote:
Moon Dogs not poodle-like? Good and thank you for your input, all of you. More like Afghan Hounds? That is definitely acceptable. Poodle? Not in my Pathfinder!

Are we talking lion clip poodle? (something that was created for working dogs and found in several retrieving breeds, not just poodles?)

Or just poodles?

Who are the second most intellegent dog, and were originally water dogs. (srsly, their name comes from the German "to splash)

To be fair, modern poodles look pretty silly, so I can understand the apprehension.

I loved the robots in this, though I am sad they were reprints, but the terraforming robot looks awesome. The occult and psychic monsters are probably my favorite though.

well depending on the clip

*shurgs*


Hmm, the Astomoi has an ability that could be used to explain Living Incorporeal creature, the "how do they feed?" part.


My contributor copies arrived yesterday, yay!

-Ben.

RPG Superstar 2011 Top 8

Nightterror wrote:
John Benbo wrote:
I've seen a couple people mention the bone ship so I'm glad people are digging it. Along with the death coach, can't go wrong with some vehicular undead.

Those two + the Wraithwyrm and Polong are probably my favorite undead in the book, i'm glad you kept away from the more humanoid undead!

Cool and thanks- those are all ones I designed!


I think today's poodles look like topiary! They are ridiculous. It doesn't help that some of the poodles I knew best were cowardly bullies (yes, those two words do go together) when I worked at a pet shop decades ago.


Odraude wrote:
Mystic_Snowfang wrote:
Fourshadow wrote:
Odraude wrote:
Anyone else think the Moon Dog looks like Christopher Lee as Dog Saruman?
Please tell me it doesn't look like a poodle...please? I loved the D&D Moon Dogs!

Nothing like a poodle.

Defiantly an afghan hound, that is pure silver white and wears jewelry
And they have hands. Unsure if they are humanoid or not, but the art work is really cool.

Good, they kept that aspect from D&D...the hands, that is.


ErisAcolyte-Chaos jester wrote:
JiCi wrote:

Got my copy! Here's my review ^_^

** spoiler omitted **

I'd give it 4.5/5 if I would review it normally, but it's too fanboyish so I'll keep myself to this post :P Overall, great work to everyone ^_^

Thraie constructors are mindless, because they are a total subservient hive mind. They only build and maintain according to the queens will, and will generally only attack in self defence. In comparison to the rest of the soldiers, queens, and dancers(which are all require a greater level of sentience and independent thinking outside of the hive mind), constructors are simply the workers. Now sometimes 1 or 2 might develop the sentience to think outside of the hive mind for itself, but in a similar manner to a bee colony, if a constructor falls out of line and starts to compromise the hive structure, they face the risk of a swift and brutal death from the queens troops to set an example. Not quite lawful evil levels, but still quite jarring to the average civilised race.

Ok, here's my reasoning behind it:

The thriaes seem to have a rigid hierarchy, WITHOUT any sign of rebellous activity. Real bees don't revolt against their queen, so why would thriaes do that? Even if a constructors would be sentient, it technically would be utterly loyal to the hive, just other thriaes, not to mention that being "smart" would make sense of a working creature. If the hive mind, or whatever authority the queen has, is THAT powerful, shouldn't it be strong enough to restraint a being as big as a constructor?

I just don't see a constructor as something that would turn against the hive because it's bigger and stronger if it was smarter.


What's the difference between the deep ones in this book and the previous conceit that the skum were the "deep ones" of Golarian. How do the two fit together in the same campaign setting?


Bought the pdf today.

Im really pleased with the dragons and fey in this one. I wasn't sold initally on a high powered glaistig but I really like how Paizo handled it. The gremlins were also very nice as was the baginnek. Really loving the little dragonfly-looking dragons who literraly have hearts of fire too.

Outsider wise, all the celestials were amazing. Really digging the Empyrean Angel, Gate Archon, and Reptial Agathion. The Sahkil are freaking amazing and are defitenly competing with daemons for my favorite fiend race now.

Not a big fan of the manasuptras though. They weren't all that interesting to me. The elemental creatures were pretty cool too. The wisps in particular were very whimiscal:)

All in all a solid bestiary.

Well done Paizo. Well done.


This Bestiary is pretty awesome. A lot of great creatures. Almost every creature is cool and interesting in one way or another. I love all the different aliens and cryptids that made it in, all of the oozes, all of the new vermin, and all of the new animals are fantastic. The taxidermied template is my new favorite. And even though Megaprimatus could've been beefier, I love the art and its mangling ability.

Having said that, these are my least favorite monsters (in no particular order):

1. Aeons: Meh. Three-fingered, multi-limbed dudes from another dimension just aren't interesting to me. Sorry. Although one of them looks like a doughnut, so that's kinda fun I guess.
2. Astomoi: Faceless, mouthless, shadow people? *fart noise*
3. Azata, Gancanagh: Probably my least favorite creature. Just a foppish elf who can't handle his smoke. It's probably from some myth or tall tale or something, but I don't care.
4. Caligni: I feel like shadow people have potential to be cool...yet, none of them are.
5. Esoteric Dragons: Sometimes, ya just want more out of your dragons, aesthetically-speaking.
6. Drakes: ^^^
7. Duppy: Just a ghost that summons ghost dogs.
8. Egregore: Despite being a monster composed of a buncha brains and a giant eye, the egregore still manages to be generally uncool.
9. Aether Elementals: *yawn*
10. Etiainen: Sad-looking mist monster is sad.
11. Ghoran: I usually love plant creatures, but ghorans are just not vegetable enough for me.
12. Moon Dog: Despite being a Christopher Lee dog, I really hate its design.
13. Scitalis: You would think a neon snake would be cool. You'd be wrong.
14. Seilenos: Just a fat satyr.
15. Shadow Collector: UGH.
16. Syricta: Snake with abs. Not as cool or sexy as one might expect.
17. Tulpa: "A gray-skinned humanoid with oddly unremarkable features floats ponderously in the air." Unremarkable indeed.
18. Turul: A giant magic bird with killer magic feathers only sounds cool in writing.
19. Wysps: Next.
20. Zygomind: Cool idea. I like it. The art just doesn't really grab me.


Katowice wrote:
What's the difference between the deep ones in this book and the previous conceit that the skum were the "deep ones" of Golarian. How do the two fit together in the same campaign setting?

I wondered about this myself. Then again, now we have reptoids and the Serpent People, though nothing says any group has to use one or the other (or either) in their home games.

Paizo Employee Developer

Eric Hinkle wrote:
Katowice wrote:
What's the difference between the deep ones in this book and the previous conceit that the skum were the "deep ones" of Golarian. How do the two fit together in the same campaign setting?
I wondered about this myself. Then again, now we have reptoids and the Serpent People, though nothing says any group has to use one or the other (or either) in their home games.

Skum are more associated with aboleth (and in turn the Darklands), and since they're associated with the aboleth, they are not religious.

Deep ones are more associated with mythos stuff and are more connected to salt water. Also, they are highly religious creatures.


Eric Hinkle wrote:
Katowice wrote:
What's the difference between the deep ones in this book and the previous conceit that the skum were the "deep ones" of Golarian. How do the two fit together in the same campaign setting?
I wondered about this myself. Then again, now we have reptoids and the Serpent People, though nothing says any group has to use one or the other (or either) in their home games.

Admittedly I get more of an alien vibe from the reptoids, but that's due to modern interpretations of them ruling the contemporary world.


Odraude wrote:
Eric Hinkle wrote:
Katowice wrote:
What's the difference between the deep ones in this book and the previous conceit that the skum were the "deep ones" of Golarian. How do the two fit together in the same campaign setting?
I wondered about this myself. Then again, now we have reptoids and the Serpent People, though nothing says any group has to use one or the other (or either) in their home games.
Admittedly I get more of an alien vibe from the reptoids, but that's due to modern interpretations of them ruling the contemporary world.

Yeah...The reptoids kind of, pop culture wise, evolved from the Serpentfolk. It's just over time the alien/conspiracy stuff kind of evolved to be more prevalent with the reptoids


J-Spee Lovecraft wrote:


17. Tulpa: "A gray-skinned humanoid with oddly unremarkable features floats ponderously in the air." Unremarkable indeed.

It's a literal imaginary creature.... if you think the sustained by thought and mental form abilities are unremarkable I am sincerely amazed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
J-Spee Lovecraft wrote:

This Bestiary is pretty awesome. A lot of great creatures. Almost every creature is cool and interesting in one way or another. I love all the different aliens and cryptids that made it in, all of the oozes, all of the new vermin, and all of the new animals are fantastic. The taxidermied template is my new favorite. And even though Megaprimatus could've been beefier, I love the art and its mangling ability.

Having said that, these are my least favorite monsters (in no particular order):

1. Aeons: Meh. Three-fingered, multi-limbed dudes from another dimension just aren't interesting to me. Sorry. Although one of them looks like a doughnut, so that's kinda fun I guess.
2. Astomoi: Faceless, mouthless, shadow people? *fart noise*
3. Azata, Gancanagh: Probably my least favorite creature. Just a foppish elf who can't handle his smoke. It's probably from some myth or tall tale or something, but I don't care.
4. Caligni: I feel like shadow people have potential to be cool...yet, none of them are.
5. Esoteric Dragons: Sometimes, ya just want more out of your dragons, aesthetically-speaking.
6. Drakes: ^^^
7. Duppy: Just a ghost that summons ghost dogs.
8. Egregore: Despite being a monster composed of a buncha brains and a giant eye, the egregore still manages to be generally uncool.
9. Aether Elementals: *yawn*
10. Etiainen: Sad-looking mist monster is sad.
11. Ghoran: I usually love plant creatures, but ghorans are just not vegetable enough for me.
12. Moon Dog: Despite being a Christopher Lee dog, I really hate its design.
13. Scitalis: You would think a neon snake would be cool. You'd be wrong.
14. Seilenos: Just a fat satyr.
15. Shadow Collector: UGH.
16. Syricta: Snake with abs. Not as cool or sexy as one might expect.
17. Tulpa: "A gray-skinned humanoid with oddly unremarkable features floats ponderously in the air." Unremarkable indeed.
18. Turul: A giant magic bird with killer magic feathers only sounds cool...

Admit it! You hate Gancanagh because he's my namesake! :-p

Anyway, I kinda agree, the best parts of the Gancanagh is that it has addictive sweat, women (and men) that touch the Gancanagh become addicted to it (like one would be addicted to drugs) and if it leave them with a broken heart they end up in suicide.

The women that it makes addicted will always fight for him and rip each other into shreds as they become extremely protective and jealous.

I think its because its a boring good creature that this isn't possible anymore, because good creatures are always about butterflies, little ponies, pretty people and boringness, with few exceptions.

I agree with the rest of your list, but Scitalis is one of my favorites, I really love the artwork. Duppy and the Aeons are cool too.

I'm disappointed with the Shadow Collector, it looks like that famous Gnome/Halfling from Paizo, with the Snow Leopard but with red hair instead of green, very boring, would have liked them a little more evil and shady, not this friendly. I think its a bad-art case though, the actual idea of the creature is probably better, hope to see this fixed in a Pawn. I recognize this creature from Castlevania, at least the idea is also in a boss from one of that parts, with a vain looking man with a giant wolf shadow.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I look forward to some alien stuff. I have been thinking of playing up what the history channel has offered on aliens for fantasy games.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

So, for psychic monsters, did they scrap the power point system that made Occult Bestiary so unappealing to me.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
captain yesterday wrote:
So, for psychic monsters, did they scrap the power point system that made Occult Bestiary so unappealing to me.

Noooope. There's a few PE-using monsters, although it's not ubiquitous.

Spoiler:
I count 29 monster entries with the psychic magic ability.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

That sucks :-(


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I actually like the power point system for monsters though I would like to see it for a psychic based martial class.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

I hate power points, have since 1st edition, I won't get any book that uses it.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
captain yesterday wrote:
That sucks :-(

If it's any comfort, that's out of 300+ monsters. It's nowhere near as prevalent as it was in Occult Bestiary. ^_^


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

I'd rather not encourage it's continued use. :-)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah the use of the points confuses me, especially since the devs have gone on record saying that they don't like spell points and don't like psychic magic being so completely different from arcane and divine. I may change it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I am more annoyed by mythic rule use in my bestiaries since it is supposed to be a optional system.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
captain yesterday wrote:
I hate power points, have since 1st edition, I won't get any book that uses it.

You realize that excludes MOST of the Pathfinder books, right?

Ki, Grit, Panache, Arcane pool, rage, bardic performance, lay on hands, mercies, channel energy, 'spells per day', stat point buy system, et cetera. All just 'power points' by other names.


Milo v3 wrote:
J-Spee Lovecraft wrote:


17. Tulpa: "A gray-skinned humanoid with oddly unremarkable features floats ponderously in the air." Unremarkable indeed.
It's a literal imaginary creature.... if you think the sustained by thought and mental form abilities are unremarkable I am sincerely amazed.

For an imaginary creature it has a very unimaginative design.


Lol, I can't even remember seeing the page of the Tulpa? :-p


captain yesterday wrote:
I'd rather not encourage it's continued use. :-)

I don't really understand why you would begrudge the use on a monster, which will mostly only get a couple of rounds to use its points before it is completely destroyed. PC...sure I get that, since some people don't like the bookkeeping involved. but there is not a whole lot of book-keeping involved in a monster usually.

And yeah in implementation, it's not really different than giving a Ki Pool to a monster.


Dragon78 wrote:
I am more annoyed by mythic rule use in my bestiaries since it is supposed to be a optional system.

Not often does this happen, but I agree: not a fan of "Mythic". PCs are powerful enough, IMO. Why make them Super Heroes or Avatars?


It is not that I don't like mythic, it is just that I want to choose what monsters I want it used for.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm the opposite. I hate seeing rules systems that are introduced, then not supported in the future. I'm glad they are still giving us mythic content, as well as Asian, technology, and occult stuff.


Mythic content is one thing, mythic monsters that are in a world neutral bestiary is another. It is like giving a whole bunch of creatures a template without being aloud to have the base creatures stats without that template.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

But the monsters are mythic content. When running a mythic campaign, you need mythic foes to throw at your players, especially high level foes. There are always going to be monsters in a bestiary that people won't use. How many are going to use cryptids, or the Japanese monsters, or the occult monsters, or the aliens? The goal though is to have a wide variety of options available to the different types of gamers and games that people run. I'm sure there are people out there that hate all the non-European monsters in the Bestiaries, but at least it means we all have options.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Dragon78 wrote:
Mythic content is one thing, mythic monsters that are in a world neutral bestiary is another. It is like giving a whole bunch of creatures a template without being aloud to have the base creatures stats without that template.

So don't use any of the special abilities you think are too much.

Paizo Employee Designer

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Personally, while I haven't run a game for mythic PCs yet, I use mythic monsters and such a good amount as adversaries. While there are definitely some wonky things in the mythic rules, when I grab mythic enemies, it's easy to avoid them, and some of the things in there are great for a tense, epic boss fight.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Finally, we got the red panda familiar. With an acrobatic bonus! That's enough for me to want to snag a copy.


It's not just the high level monsters in bestiaries that get mythic ranks it's also low level ones and creatures that are not unique. I am fine with unique CR26+ creatures having mythic ranks but not most of the rest. I was very disappointed that the Annunaki had mythic ranks(and CR18). I could have used something more like Prometheus' engineers wich I would have had around CR8-12 for the standard ones.


Considering mythic abilities on mythic monsters are not really any different to the non-mythic abilities on non-mythic monsters except for the fact they count as mythic, I don't really see how there is a difference to the PC's in a non-mythic game. To be honest, the only reasons to not use mythic monsters is "This specific monster doesn't fit the situation" (which applies to Every monster) or "I'm stubborn, and wont use mythic monsters despite the fact there is no actual difference in gameplay when the PC's are non-mythic".


Odraude wrote:
But the monsters are mythic content. When running a mythic campaign, you need mythic foes to throw at your players, especially high level foes. There are always going to be monsters in a bestiary that people won't use. How many are going to use cryptids, or the Japanese monsters, or the occult monsters, or the aliens? The goal though is to have a wide variety of options available to the different types of gamers and games that people run. I'm sure there are people out there that hate all the non-European monsters in the Bestiaries, but at least it means we all have options.

I'm absolutely going to use cryptids and aliens and all that stuff because I like games where the same old crap doesn't get recycled over and over.


Same old crap? You mean Robots, Smilodon, T.Rex, Pixies, D&D Dragons, Minotaur and all other overused stuff you see in every story, movie, book, cartoon ect ect??

I don't think most of Bestiaries 2,3,4 and 5 mythology and cryptid monsters are same old crap.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

As the guy who was complaining about the the lack of Good Outsiders dedicated to seduction and male-looking paragons of love and beauty, i must sand huge THANK YOU for whomever was responsible for the Gancanagh. They are exactly what I was looking for. Much appreciated.

And the Manasaputras... Whoa. Too much awesome for words. And the implications... Is the material from the Bestiaries canon for the Pathfinder Campaign Setting? Because we might be looking at creatures that are actually older than Pharasma here. I mean... It just huge. Sometimes, the ultimate fate of the Multiverse seems much too bleak and hopeless, and these guys are evidence of, possibly, a birghter future.

Besides...

They've just introduced Galactus in Golarion. A whole race of them. Non-planet eating, sure, but... An antire race of Galactus.

I'm fanboying hard here.

1,801 to 1,850 of 2,175 << first < prev | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Product Discussion / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Bestiary 5 (OGL) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.