Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Bestiary 5 (OGL)

A quick search told me that the Pokemon Sableye is based on the Hopkinsville Goblins. That explains the resemblance to the Hobkins Gremlin, but it was very surprising to see what at first appeared to be a Pokemon in this Bestiary.

Again, you cannot see past your prejudices. No one, to the best of my knowledge, has said that they do not enjoy them or that they are somehow inferior.

What I, and others, have said is X is something that would make us happy to see in the books. You know, the way that you say "gimme lots and lots of mythological creatures!"

People are allowed, unless we've changed the rules, the express a preference. While you and some others may want a ton of creatures and believe that you can just make up fluff for things -- and you can, sure, but is it the right fluff? -- others believe the opposite, that you can slap numbers to just about anything but if the story isn't right, who cares?

Those are two of dozens of ideas and preferences that people have about the book. People are allowed to express them, and I sincerely hope that Paizo listens to all their fans and doesn't ignore anyone. I seriously doubt you'd enjoy having your ideas and preferences ignored, eh?

Sure

But I wasn't talking about this forum, fluff or anything like that.

I Was talking about different people around the internet and facebook who hate the thought that there are any more bestiaries created in the future as Bestiary 5 is already too much..

And if Paizo listen to those people TOZ, then there will never be a Bestiary 6. You like that? Ok, good for you.

People are allowed to express them

Yes, and I ain't human, so I can't have opinion of my own? This goes both ways.

There are people saying all sorts of things because everyone has their own opinion, and that's great! Personally, I'm pretty psyched about io9's take, given io9's relative reader base.

And if Paizo listen to those people TOZ, then there will never be a Bestiary 6.

You seem to be confusing 'listen to' with 'follow the orders of'.

But I wasn't talking about this forum, fluff or anything like that.

Well, given the discussion before, I also got the impression like you did. So thanks for the clarification.

The good thing about Paizo is that they listen to our suggestions and opinions. Often enough, they even care to explain why they don't follow those opinions. So I think there's no need to fight between us, just because we have different tastes.

And by the way, I don't give a damn if you're human or not. Even if you're a freakin' alien, your opinion is still as valuable as mine. ;)

Personally, I'm pretty psyched about io9's take, given io9's relative reader base.

I have to say there was a degree of joy coming from when I was first searching through the book and seeing the confusion on my brothers face when I asked "How do you feel about half shark, half octopus, half shark, half sharks?"

Sure

But I wasn't talking about this forum, fluff or anything like that.

I Was talking about different people around the internet and facebook who hate the thought that there are any more bestiaries created in the future as Bestiary 5 is already too much..

And if Paizo listen to those people TOZ, then there will never be a Bestiary 6. You like that? Ok, good for you.

People here often think that there are too many monsters, too many books, too many maps, too many feats, classes, archetypes and more. It isn't s new sentiment -- go look at all the threads here for information -- let alone adding in voices from the rest of the internet. They still get an opinion; just because we may not like it or agree doesn't mean that they have to shut up.

And yes, even if they say "Gosh, we have enough monsters, let's not have anymore."

People are allowed to express them

I do not believe I've said that. What I believe I said was "Stop trying to shut other people down and make sure only your opinion is heard." In the past, if someone says that they like robots/sci-fi/not-mythology beings you tend to rant and go on about how you hate it and hope that they are never ever allowed in the books, as an example.

It does go both ways. Just like you don't want to be shut down when you wax poetic about cool some creature that you like is, no one else wants to be shut down for voicing their love of robots, of fluff, of no more monsters.

I like the Astomoi in this book, but I feel like it differs too much from the hairy humanoids that still have eyes and noses... I may use it as a mutated/enlightened version of the original race, which would still have mouthless but lack most of psychic senses probably... Was there any particular inspiration on making them so spiritual and voidy?

I would like more hardcover campaign setting books and bestiaries(both hardcover and softcover). I would like more rule books though I am tired of feats and spells, mostly because the ones I would like to see just keep not happening.

I'm still grateful they've gotten 5 bestiaries deep and nary a Drow Ninja to be seen, so great job!

Maybe, if I use a different alias, they won't know it's really me

Edit: D'oh!

I'm still grateful they've gotten 5 bestiaries deep and nary a Drow Ninja to be seen, so great job!

It all depends, my dear not-Captain-Yesterday, on what one considers to be a Bestiary.

Hm, just a quick calculation: If Paizo made every other campaign setting book into an "revisited" tome, they could deliver 240 bestiary monsters in two years time. 3 Unleashed books for the big and rare/unique uglies and the bestiary would be nearly covered completely.

Someone saying anything about the difficulties to find a theme for all those books? Well, incoherent minds like mine don't need coherent books. Just call them "Yet another Monster Collection Again".

The problem - as some here will find very interesting - is that the Revisited line apparently don't sell very well.

yeah and I am inclined to think a hardcover revisited compilation would sell even less...

"Let's not bicker and argue about who killed who! This is a happy occasion!"

The publishing of Bestiary 5 is ABSOLUTELY a happy occasion--my favorite since 2!

I enjoyed this Bestiary; that said, I don't NEED another one. I'm not sure that I NEED the 5 we have. While an assortment of monsters are nice, I don't find myself using 1500 or so (if you figure 300 per book) monsters in the course of a campaign.

The selection is nice, and the fact that they give a wide assortment means that everyone, with any type of game, has something they can usually find that they will use in their games.

My concern, five books in, is that we are so focused on getting such a wide assortment that we're losing track of quality -- not to say that the monsters or format or art isn't quality. For me (and only me, perhaps) quality could be translated into depth, which is where fluff comes in.

While I can use just about anything as a set of stats to strip resources off players, it puts a bad taste in my mouth for it not to fit in with the world. I like whys and hows and the like instead of "A box of hit points and XPs runs up and does X damage. You killed it. Next!" Fluff is what helps make the creature live and breath.

The books are fine. Making more of them is fine. I do not believe that the format is going to change in the future. But it's sort of like buying a box of chocolate assortments and getting way too many orange creams and odd flavors like sardine caramel instead of the things I'd rather have. I keep buying it in the hope that the flavors I like will outnumber those I don't.

And that's where Paizo has a tightrope to walk, between the people who are considered boring, like me, and the people who want more exotic flavors and to ride the bleeding edge of new and cool. It's not an easy task, and one I'm thankful that they have to do instead of me.

Removed some posts and their responses. Do not make personal attacks against each other—it's completely unnecessary. Reread the Community Guidelines.

The problem - as some here will find very interesting - is that the Revisited line apparently don't sell very well.

Well I wouldn't know about that but I hope that I didn't came across as too serious with my calculation. In fact, I have no idea how well the revisited books sell/sold, and if this is the reason there aren't more floating around, well it's a shame but I wouldn't want Paizo to go bankrupt just for producing non-profitable stuff.

The thing is, I'm with Knightnday in that I want to know how a monster can fit into the world. If I take a look at the first monster in Bestiary 5, the Aatheriexa, I see something cool and creepy enough to want to use it, and the descriptive texts does give me a starting point from where to work. But It is me who has to do the work, and given the fact that I can't wait to look on the next page before creating the stuff, chances are that I'll never will use it. This is where official fluff would really come in handy.

Still love the bestiaries, though, it's just that you (in this case, I) can never get enough of the good stuff.

Removed some posts and their responses. Do not make personal attacks against each other—it's completely unnecessary. Reread the Community Guidelines.

So, telling someone to get a grip is wrong? Especially when that lack of grip resulted in many threads getting derailled, people getting angry and stopping having fun, and that before the silly modding that wouldn't be neccessary if the posters causing those messes were modded/suspended once in a while? OK.

The thing is, I'm with Knightnday in that I want to know how a monster can fit into the world. If I take a look at the first monster in Bestiary 5, the Aatheriexa, I see something cool and creepy enough to want to use it, and the descriptive texts does give me a starting point from where to work. But It is me who has to do the work, and given the fact that I can't wait to look on the next page before creating the stuff, chances are that I'll never will use it. This is where official fluff would really come in handy.

Sincerely curious, what sort of official fluff do you mean? Do you mean simply more of the same type of fluff that is currently present, or do you mean fluff that says how the monster works in relation to Golarion?

Also, it's my headcannon that Aatheriexa's homeworld was annihilated by Outer Dragons which is why they know draconic.

Liz Courts wrote:

Removed some posts and their responses. Do not make personal attacks against each other—it's completely unnecessary. Reread the Community Guidelines.

So, telling someone to get a grip is wrong? Especially when that lack of grip resulted in many threads getting derailled, people getting angry and stopping having fun, and that before the silly modding that wouldn't be neccessary if the posters causing those messes were modded/suspended once in a while? OK.

If you have an issue with a moderation decision, email the community team or take it to website feedback. Don't derail this thread with it.

Sincerely curious, what sort of official fluff do you mean? Do you mean simply more of the same type of fluff that is currently present, or do you mean fluff that says how the monster works in relation to Golarion?

Well, even when I was joking with the revisited idea, I really like the format of the revisited monster entries. Meaning the fluff should be presented ecology-style, be mostly generic enough to be easily used in your own campaign world, but can have some paragraphs about the monster's role in Golarion as added benefit.

Also, it's my headcannon that Aatheriexa's homeworld was annihilated by Outer Dragons which is why they know draconic.

See, and with this one sentence, you have inspired me how to use the Aatheriexa in my own campaign world. You probably even put them in a real central, setting defining role. So thanks, and consider this stolen ^^.

Well, even when I was joking with the revisited idea, I really like the format of the revisited monster entries. Meaning the fluff should be presented ecology-style, be mostly generic enough to be easily used in your own campaign world, but can have some paragraphs about the monster's role in Golarion as added benefit.

I mainly asked because of my personally worrying about Golarion in "setting neutral".

As for the more general, I find that many creatures don't really fit for ecology-style, the Aatheriexas, they have no home, their culture is disseminated, and they are a sentient race. Having the more generic style, just typing out what they think of helps since it means they don't have to try and think of information on certain subjects for every creature.

Any chance I could get any dev insight into the creation of the astomoi? Were they inspired by something? Do they have a mythological basis of some kind? Were they created to fill some sort of mechanical niche? They seem rather unique in many ways as a 0HD race and I would love to hear what sort of thought processes went into creating them.

Any chance I could get any dev insight into the creation of the astomoi? Were they inspired by something? Do they have a mythological basis of some kind? Were they created to fill some sort of mechanical niche? They seem rather unique in many ways as a 0HD race and I would love to hear what sort of thought processes went into creating them.

Try this!

Thank you!

I'm curious how they went from hairy mouthless people to faceless people looking like they're made of darkness. It's a cool idea, but it's a change. The psychic predisposition makes sense though, since they're supposed to be from near india (and overlap with Ghandharvas).

So, I was reading up on the Ahkhat (a fascinating critter) and I noticed something that doesn't make sense and isn't explained anywhere.

It's attack form is "Urn".

What is this?

Is it, like, a thrown object like throwing an urn? It's not mentioned in the monster description nor anywhere online that I can find.

Any ideas?

Well it's ranged, and it has throw anything as a feat.

Well it's ranged, and it has throw anything as a feat.

Agreed; that's why I think that's what it's supposed to be. But it IS kinda funny to see "Urn" rather than "thrown item within its reach".

What do others think of this interpretation?

'I don't need friends, I'VE GOT URNS'
*throws urn and misses*
'I'm...all out of urns.'
Party murder posse attack

captain yesterday wrote:

Well it's ranged, and it has throw anything as a feat.

Agreed; that's why I think that's what it's supposed to be. But it IS kinda funny to see "Urn" rather than "thrown item within its reach".

What do others think of this interpretation?

We could have just put "improvised weapon" in the ranged line, but then the damage die would be variable, so we decided to put more detail. Having urn there also contextualizes the monster, suggesting that they are found in ancient crypts or similar such places.

David Rust wrote:

captain yesterday wrote:

Well it's ranged, and it has throw anything as a feat.

Agreed; that's why I think that's what it's supposed to be. But it IS kinda funny to see "Urn" rather than "thrown item within its reach".

What do others think of this interpretation?

We could have just put "improvised weapon" in the ranged line, but then the damage die would be variable, so we decided to put more detail. Having urn there also contextualizes the monster, suggesting that they are found in ancient crypts or similar such places.

That's cool. I'm curious, though, was it due to space considerations (when it came time to print) that you folk didn't elaborate on that in the creature description?

Adam Daigle wrote:

David Rust wrote:

captain yesterday wrote:

Well it's ranged, and it has throw anything as a feat.

Agreed; that's why I think that's what it's supposed to be. But it IS kinda funny to see "Urn" rather than "thrown item within its reach".

What do others think of this interpretation?

We could have just put "improvised weapon" in the ranged line, but then the damage die would be variable, so we decided to put more detail. Having urn there also contextualizes the monster, suggesting that they are found in ancient crypts or similar such places.

That's cool. I'm curious, though, was it due to space considerations (when it came time to print) that you folk didn't elaborate on that in the creature description?

Space was indeed the main factor for how this monster appeared in this book. The ahkhat originally appeared in Pathfinder Adventure Path #79: The Half-Dead City where it got a full two pages and plenty more description.

Space was indeed the main factor for how this monster appeared in this book. The ahkhat originally appeared in Pathfinder Adventure Path #79: The Half-Dead City where it got a full two pages and plenty more description.

Y'know, I really appreciate your attention to fans of your games. It's contact like this, plain and simple talk, that makes lifelong gamers like myself loyal. :) I've been reffing tabletop RPGs since January 1st, 1980 and playing for a few months before then. It's always great to get into conversations with the creators.

Yours,
Sylvan (Dave)

Glad to do it! I was a fan before I got hired onto the staff, and this was one of the things that drew me to Paizo as well. Cheers!

Adam Daigle wrote:

Space was indeed the main factor for how this monster appeared in this book. The ahkhat originally appeared in Pathfinder Adventure Path #79: The Half-Dead City where it got a full two pages and plenty more description.

Y'know, I really appreciate your attention to fans of your games. It's contact like this, plain and simple talk, that makes lifelong gamers like myself loyal. :) I've been reffing tabletop RPGs since January 1st, 1980 and playing for a few months before then. It's always great to get into conversations with the creators.

Yours,
Sylvan (Dave)

I'll second those sentiments.

David Rust wrote:

Adam Daigle wrote:

Space was indeed the main factor for how this monster appeared in this book. The ahkhat originally appeared in Pathfinder Adventure Path #79: The Half-Dead City where it got a full two pages and plenty more description.

Y'know, I really appreciate your attention to fans of your games. It's contact like this, plain and simple talk, that makes lifelong gamers like myself loyal. :) I've been reffing tabletop RPGs since January 1st, 1980 and playing for a few months before then. It's always great to get into conversations with the creators.

Yours,
Sylvan (Dave)

I'll second those sentiments.

Third. ^_^

Four!

Ah ha ha ha ha ha ha!

I'm wondering, has the krampus(or something similar) appeared in a paizo book. I just wonder how a group of pathfinder adventures are supposed to deal with the dark vengeful spirit of christmas(or whatever they have in golorian that is an equivalent).

I got the book for Christmas, and as usual I'm the most critical of the artwork. This Bestiary has some of the best so far, except for the Moa. Whoever the artist was on that just recolored a bloody cassowary. Not very original. Booo.

We could use stats for santa before we get krampus. Unless you want santa and krampus to be the same creature whose form and alignment are based on if the child/children have been good or bad.