|
Too busy to read Message Boards. Here are my ideas
1) 5-10
2) T-Rex (naturally), Raptor, Pteradon, Stegasaurus, Aquatic, One of those spitting dinosaurs from 'Jurassic Park'.
3) This is your book. Put what you want in it.
4) As was mentioned earlier, Velocerapors are small, so how about treating the dinosaur entry like ghoul/ghast or elemental entries and have a family spiecies of dinosaurs with 2-4 different size catagories where qualified.
5) No, provided it is something that "could" happen in nature. The spitting dinosaur is one such example (it was made up for the movie). Who knows what they could actually do. I see no problem with a small dinosaur possessing a paralitic poison, or a spiny one that could shoot its spines at an enemy (some could even be barbed or poisonous). I could even see 30 tiny creatures being able to take down a medium size creature.
6) Nothing comes to mind, but if you want to go crazy and change things, go right ahead.
|
Kobolds are trail snacks for Utahraptor.
"UTAHRAPTORS? They doesnt exist." The Goblin looked around at the rest of the Kobolds...thye were all loking down at their feet like they had been sold a sack full of beans for a herd of cows.
"Are you going to believe silly stories about UTAHRAPTORS?"The Goblin looked back at the Human storyteller.
"We all know Kobolds evolved from snapdragons during the Age of Carnage."
Something else to look at for foundations for "futuristic yet realistic dinos" is a book called The New Dinosaurs. It's a fascinating look at an alternate evolution for dinos, as well as giving them some odd abilities that are real world.
|
You may need to adjust the size of the current dire animals to better fit the size of the prehistoric megafauna.
Edit:
For megafauna I see these possibilities:
Dire Wolf = Dire Wolf
Dire Tiger = Smilodon
Dire Boar = Daeodon (formerly Dinohyus)
Dire Bear = Arctodus (who I think is bigger than a cave bear)
Dire Lion = American Lion (or Cave Lion)
Also Megalania should be the "dire" version of the monitor lizard.
The Dire Rhino could be the Elasmotherium.
As long as we're talking about prehistoric mammals, I'd like to put in requests for the Andrewsarchus(possibly the largest land-dwelling carnivorous mammal known), the Doedicurus (a Glyptodon similar to the Ankylosaurus) and the Entelodont (7-ft. tall killer pigs!).
And just because I loved them as a kid, the Chalicotherium and the Brontotherium.
|
Something else to look at for foundations for "futuristic yet realistic dinos" is a book called The New Dinosaurs. It's a fascinating look at an alternate evolution for dinos, as well as giving them some odd abilities that are real world.
I used to check this out of the library all the time when I was a kid. I would love to see some of these ideas used if it's possible.
|
|
Something else to look at for foundations for "futuristic yet realistic dinos" is a book called The New Dinosaurs. It's a fascinating look at an alternate evolution for dinos, as well as giving them some odd abilities that are real world.
I love Dougal Dixon's stuff, but he's got a real thing for convergent evolution. Just because a hadrosaur evolves to fill the same niche as a giraffe doesn't mean it's going to look like a duck-billed giraffe, down to the identifiable as specifically Kenyan giraffe markings. I like the Speculative Dinosaur Project for a slightly more rigorous look at Earth without a C-T Event.
I'll hammer the point again, but the Babbler and the Bonecruncher in the Tome of Horrors are both great for either "modern dinosaurs" or dinosaurs with abilities not recorded in the fossil record. Linnorms are great dino-dragons. Lizardmen and Troglodytes are to dinosaurs what humans are to Australopithecines and Pithecanthropus. D&D is filled with these things if you sift through the monster manuals with a taxonomist's eye.
The Dire Rhino could be the Elasmotherium.
As long as we're talking about prehistoric mammals, I'd like to put in requests for the Andrewsarchus(possibly the largest land-dwelling carnivorous mammal known), the Doedicurus (a Glyptodon similar to the Ankylosaurus) and the Entelodont (7-ft. tall killer pigs!).
And just because I loved them as a kid, the Chalicotherium and the Brontotherium.
I am a fan of Andrewsarchus and Chalicotherium too. By the way, the Daeodon is an Entelodont, though their nickname name of terminator pig might work too.
I can't believe I didn't see this before! Dinos!
So, let us assume that there will be dinosaurs in the Pathfinder Bestiary.
1) How many dinosaurs is the right amount to do a good show of it?
2) What four dinosaurs would you hope to see in the book more than any other?
3) How important is it to maintain all five dinosaurs from the MM?
4) If #3 above is true, would it better to replace the deinonychus with the velociraptor?
5) Dinosaurs don't have to be boring... Would it be too strange to give some dinosaurs a bit more flavor by giving them attacks that aren't necessarily supported by the fossil record?
6) Is there anything in particular with how dinosaurs have been stattud up in the game before that rubs you the wrong way that you'd like to see changed?
1) How many? Fewer than the 1st edition Monster Manual (much as I love it). I want to say 5 or 6, but if there is any company and any time to go big on the dino's, it'd be here. 8.
2) a) Pteranodon - a nice *big* flyer - second only to the Roc (and they can come in packs). Not just Pterodactyl.
b) Brachiosaurus - trample is a fun mechanic (36 HD!)
c) Dimetrodon - the sail would have to give it blindsense or sight at least. [Not really a dinosaur technically though.]
d) Allosaurus - deadly, and more likely to see use than T Rex. By the time a T Rex is an appropriate challenge the party will blast it from far range.
e) Need a good sea one, something like Elasmosaurus. Illustration vital.
3) It's not that important to maintain all 5, though megaraptor is one of the most used ones I think. (It might just be used as an example more). Of course, T Rex and Triceratops are musts (sneaking in extra to question 2).
4) Yes, put in the velociraptor (though you'll scare Randall Munroe).
5) Dinosaurs could be spoofed up a bit - but they need to stay animals, not magical beasts. Something for a bit of inspiriation (from wikipedia) "Like most sauropods, Apatosaurus had only a single large claw on each forelimb, with the first three toes on the hind limb possessing claws."
I'd almost be tempted to infect a little Golarion on the Pathfinder Bestiary and call dire rats "donkey rats."
Do it! Just put it in "Rats, Donkey" with an a.k.a. in the text.
5) Dinosaurs could be spoofed up a bit - but they need to stay animals, not magical beasts.
Okay.. so.. what about giving Dinos the Dragon type, and all the advantages that come with that?
Takes a hit at druids and animal companions I suppose (though the summon nature's allies don't have to be animals), but... well just a thought.
Creative Director
|
5) Dinosaurs could be spoofed up a bit - but they need to stay animals, not magical beasts.Okay.. so.. what about giving Dinos the Dragon type, and all the advantages that come with that?
Takes a hit at druids and animal companions I suppose (though the summon nature's allies don't have to be animals), but... well just a thought.
Dinosaurs are real animals. Dragons are not. Doesn't make sense to make dinosaurs dragons, any more than it makes sense to make bears humanoids, in my book. :-P
|
Creative Director
|
But Ankhegs still aren't vermin, dammit!Dinosaurs are real animals. Dragons are not. Doesn't make sense to make dinosaurs dragons, any more than it makes sense to make bears humanoids, in my book. :-P
Okay.. so.. what about giving Dinos the Dragon type, and all the advantages that come with that?
In the case of an ankheg, making it a vermin would require redefining their stats, and would hurt backwards compatibility because vermin are mindless and therefore can't be trained or have feats or skills. And if we make ankhegs vermin, where do we stop? Does that mean we should make the frost worm, the remorhaz, and the purple worm vermin too?
It may seem arbitrary, but it's not. Vermin has a specific set of expectations, and the driving one for me is that a creature has to be a real-world creature before it gets to be a vermin. Giant versions of real-world creatures count. Monsters that are made up and have fantastic abilities (be they as outlandish as the remorhaz's heat or as borderline as the purple worm's super-fast burrowing speed or the ankheg's super-fast acid) are better suited as magical beasts.
We'll be making SOME changes to stats. Ropers will probably become aberrations, for example, and derro humanoids, but I really REALLY want to keep those changes at a minimum. For the ankheg, changing its type is needless tinkering.
|
Creative Director
|
can wehave a Megalodon? for sea campaigns? :D
pretty please... nothing says terror in the seas like either a Kraken and a Megalodon (i know its no dinosaur... but its prehistoric)
The SRD's dire shark already pretty much does the job of the megalodon. And when we do up a dire shark in the PF RPG, I'm pretty sure we'll call it a megalodon.
can wehave a Megalodon? for sea campaigns? :D
pretty please... nothing says terror in the seas like either a Kraken and a Megalodon (i know its no dinosaur... but its prehistoric)
We have Dire Sharks and Huge sharks.
|
The SRD's dire shark already pretty much does the job of the megalodon. And when we do up a dire shark in the PF RPG, I'm pretty sure we'll call it a megalodon.can wehave a Megalodon? for sea campaigns? :D
pretty please... nothing says terror in the seas like either a Kraken and a Megalodon (i know its no dinosaur... but its prehistoric)
je ok ok... i was just reminded of one of my first Monster Manual Add ons... the one of Forgotten Realms that hadall about dinosaurs and oriental dragons,i do remember there was another name for a huge shark there and rember using it in one of my 1st adventures... my player's couldn't kill it...but they did made it go away... that was the whole idea.
sight ok so Dire Shark it will be :P
I vote no on dire rats being renamed to donkey rats. I always assumed capybara were termed donkey rats in Pathfinder because they bray like donkeys and sort of have a similarly shaped head. Dire rats are just big sewer rats.
|
Creative Director
|
I vote no on dire rats being renamed to donkey rats. I always assumed capybara were termed donkey rats in Pathfinder because they bray like donkeys and sort of have a similarly shaped head. Dire rats are just big sewer rats.
Nope; the donkey rats in Pathfinder are basically just dire rats but with a different name to give them some local color. They're called donkey rats because they're rats that happen to be the size of donkeys.
|
|
We'll be making SOME changes to stats. Ropers will probably become aberrations, for example, and derro humanoids, but I really REALLY want to keep those changes at a minimum. For the ankheg, changing its type is needless tinkering.
Can you lose the bizarre random bone spurs and plates on dire critters?
They may have a better natural armor modifier, but it seems a really silly way to implement it, particularly with the association of them being prehistoric or primitive. It is like the whole monster section went out and watched an post-apocalyptic movie with neo-primitives and decided to start a lame fashion fad.|
|
We'll be making SOME changes to stats. Ropers will probably become aberrations, for example, and derro humanoids, but I really REALLY want to keep those changes at a minimum. For the ankheg, changing its type is needless tinkering.Can you lose the bizarre random bone spurs and plates on dire critters?
They may have a better natural armor modifier, but it seems a really silly way to implement it, particularly with the association of them being prehistoric or primitive. It is like the whole monster section went out and watched an post-apocalyptic movie with neo-primitives and decided to start a lame fashion fad.
I couldn't agree more. The whole osteogenesis imperfecta riff murders it for me. I houserule it as nonexistant.
So, let us assume that there will be dinosaurs in the Pathfinder Bestiary. A relatively safe assumption, since every edition of the game's core monster book has had them since 1st edition, yes?
So, working on that assumption, I would love to hear folks answer the following questions:
1) How many dinosaurs is the right amount to do a good show of it?
1) Deinonychus
2) Tyranosaurus3) Petrosaur
4) Triceratops
5) Anklyosaurus
6) Elasmosaurus
2) What four dinosaurs would you hope to see in the book more than any other?
1) Deinonychus
2) Petrosaur3) Triceratops
4) Elasmosaurus
3) How important is it to maintain all five dinosaurs from the MM? Can we get away with just one dromaeosaurid (probably the deinonychus), with the assumption that one can make a megaraptor by simply advancing the deinonychus?
Sounds good to me.
4) If #3 above is true, would it better to replace the deinonychus with the velociraptor? Velociraptor is more well-known these days, and it's easy enough to say that a velociraptor advanced up one size category is a deinonychus.
This also sounds good to me.
5) Dinosaurs don't have to be boring. They don't have to simply be hit points and a bite attack. Currently living animals have a wide range of biodiversity, with special attacks like poison, constriction, electricity generation, stunning attacks, ranged attacks (like tarantulas flicking poison hairs, archerfish spitting balls of water, or cobras spitting poison), and the like. Would it be too strange to give some dinosaurs a bit more flavor by giving them attacks that aren't necessarily supported by the fossil record?
I am quite amenable to this. We don't know everything about dinosaurs - it's possible that some of them may have had attacks like this. It's also not unreasonable to assume that these apex predators would have probably undergone additional evolution in order to compete with Magical Beasts.
Perhaps you can give each Dinosaur a number of extra traits to choose from like extra armor, faster movement, acid spit, and blindsense? It would be similar to the way that Astral Constructs work.
6) Is there anything in particular with how dinosaurs have been stattud up in the game before that rubs you the wrong way that you'd like to see changed?
The baseline stats of these dinosaurs should probably be flexible to scale them up and down without too many problems, but I don't have any issues with the current stats right now.
In the case of an ankheg, making it a vermin would require redefining their stats, and would hurt backwards compatibility because vermin are mindless and therefore can't be trained or have feats or skills. And if we make ankhegs vermin, where do we stop? Does that mean we should make the frost worm, the remorhaz, and the purple worm vermin too?
I realize that this is somewhat off-topic, but I'd actually like to see the Vermin Type abolished and have giant insects folded into the Animal Type. Vermin are little more then organic constructs right now; I'd like to see them given an INT score of 1 or 2 instead of classifying them as completely mindless. This would better reflect the fact that insects are in fact animals - albeit animals with a limited or alien kind of intelligence. It would also allow players to more easily have a giant insect as an Animal Companion or train one for use as a mount, a guard, or a hunting companion. And if you tweaked the special abilities of a few of the insects to better reflect some of their natural abilities (I'm looking at you, Scorpion) - or better yet, give them additional abilities like you are considering giving to Dinosaurs - I think they'd be just about perfect!
Ok. I'm done going off-topic. *steps off of soapbox*
|
|
I realize that this is somewhat off-topic, but I'd actually like to see the Vermin Type abolished and have giant insects folded into the Animal Type.
Total agreement. If 'vermin' can be trained, both in the real world, and, far more relevantly, in the game, then they don't fit the 'Int 0 / mindless' concept at all. It ends up being one of those rules that gets abandoned the second somebody like Monte Cook wants to have his bad-guys riding Spider-Eaters in RttToE, or anybody ever wants to use the Drow and their trained spider mounts in a game. Giving insects and arachnids an Int score of 1 would just solve all this nonsense, including the various feats or whatever that end up being kludged into the game to explain why some druids can communicate with vermin and some bards can affect vermin with their music and some animal handlers can train vermin and blah-blah-blah. If the rule needs that many sub-rules just to counter it, it should die in a fire.
Given the existence of paper wasps and termites and spiders and complicated direction/distance/quantity communication 'bee dances,' it's just bizarre that they don't have an Intelligence score, and would be mechanically incapable of spinning webs (a 'craft skill') or communicating information to each other in this fashion.
[Even more tangentally, it's fun to see those YouTube videos about spiders spinning webs on various drugs...]
Vermin are little more then organic constructs right now; I'd like to see them given an INT score of 1 or 2 instead of classifying them as completely mindless. This would better reflect the fact that insects are in fact animals - albeit animals with a limited or alien kind of intelligence.
Insects have extraordinarily simple minds. They can be simulated very accurately by machines with only a very simple set of behaviors, or neural networks with a handful of nodes. Th cockroach is infamous for being able to survive for weeks with no head (and forever if its brain is removed but its mouth left intact.)
Insects have extraordinarily simple minds. They can be simulated very accurately by machines with only a very simple set of behaviors, or neural networks with a handful of nodes. The cockroach is infamous for being able to survive for weeks with no head (and forever if its brain is removed but its mouth left intact.)
Simple mind != non-existent mind. I believe that just about every monster (and specifically Constructs and Undead) should have an INT score of at least 1 point to illustrate the fact that they are capable of carrying out rudimentary reasoning - even if it's just enough reasoning to follow orders and identify things that need to be killed, eaten, or avoided altogether.
The more dinosaurs the better.
However, if we're limiting dinos, I think some consideration should be given to axing either Tyrannos or Velociraptors; they are both biped carnivores and there's tons of dinos in the size range between the two (including smaller dinos such as campi's and bigger than Tyrannos).
If we limit to four, I'd like to go with one biped carnivore (Carnotaur), one saurapod (Brontosaurus), one flier (Pteradon) and one general herbivore (Triceratops).
While I'd like to see some variety in abilities, I'd rather they stay fairly close to a warrior-version of a dragon to the cleric-version of the dragon the chromatics and metallics are. Dinosaurs should be brutes with melee-based attacks that surprise, not gimmicky powers like poison spit and the like.
We'll be making SOME changes to stats.
Please tell me you are making the Remorhaz immune to fire. The thing can melt steel to slag with a touch, but it has no ability to resist heat? What the?!
(and forever if its brain is removed but its mouth left intact.)
I'm an engineer, but some of the things science learns are just ... wrong. I wonder if the science for this is the basis for the resident evil movies.
T-rex, triceratops, stegasaurus, ptyeradactyl, velociraptor, brontosaurus, and a big ole dino fish (where would we be with out a lochness monster??)
|
|
For Asmodeus' sake, please publish Dinosaurus Revisited, and be done with it. There's no way that you'll be able to put just a few dinos in Bestiary and not get persecuted for leaving all the others out.I second this motion. A small 36 page book for dinosaurs would be great.
36 page?
Not a chance.Go FGU's Saurians and just wallow in it.
We know it will be hard to release the initial bestiary with none, but wait a few months and just release the Bestiary II - Archaic Animals, and be done with it.
I hate expansion books, and I approve this message!
|
|
I am a fan of Andrewsarchus and Chalicotherium too. By the way, the Daeodon is an Entelodont, though their nickname name of terminator pig might work too.
Yeah, I got the terms mixed up, it's been a while since I looked at the old prehistoric animal books I own. Speaking of which, i looked at them and forgot to mention the Thylacosmilus and the Hyaenodon. Both cool as well!
This makes me wonder when the Realm of the Mammoth Lords is going to be covered in more detail, I assume some prehistoric mammals will emerge then.
This makes me wonder when the Realm of the Mammoth Lords is going to be covered in more detail, I assume some prehistoric mammals will emerge then.
I hope so. I would love to see a scimatar cat as a "dire" or advanced version of the cheetah (it was about the size of a lion, but had many of the cheetah's adaptation. They hunted mammoths, so they would fit the region.
|
|
You may need to adjust the size of the current dire animals to better fit the size of the prehistoric megafauna.
Edit:
For megafauna I see these possibilities:
Dire Wolf = Dire Wolf
Dire Tiger = Smilodon
Dire Boar = Daeodon (formerly Dinohyus)
Dire Bear = Arctodus (who I think is bigger than a cave bear)
Dire Lion = American Lion (or Cave Lion)
Also Megalania should be the "dire" version of the monitor lizard.The Dire Rhino could be the Elasmotherium.
As long as we're talking about prehistoric mammals, I'd like to put in requests for the Andrewsarchus(possibly the largest land-dwelling carnivorous mammal known), the Doedicurus (a Glyptodon similar to the Ankylosaurus) and the Entelodont (7-ft. tall killer pigs!).
And just because I loved them as a kid, the Chalicotherium and the Brontotherium.
Add my vote for Andrewzarchus (and delete the possibly from that description-it was the largest mammalian land carnivore ever) Hyaenodon, Elasmotherium, Doedicurus and Indricotherium (one term for brontotherium)would all be good as well. WRT the elasmotherium, smilodon, hyaenodon and maybe or two others there are already 3.5 OGL stats for these guys in Necromancer Games Tome of Horrors line-these could potentially be useful. Dire tiger = smilodon would work.
|
|
So, let us assume that there will be dinosaurs in the Pathfinder Bestiary. A relatively safe assumption, since every edition of the game's core monster book has had them since 1st edition, yes?
So, working on that assumption, I would love to hear folks answer the following questions:
1) How many dinosaurs is the right amount to do a good show of it?
1) Deinonychus
2) Tyranosaurus
3) Petrosaur
4) Triceratops
5) Anklyosaurus
6) Elasmosaurus2) What four dinosaurs would you hope to see in the book more than any other?1) Deinonychus
2) Petrosaur
3) Triceratops
4) Elasmosaurus
Petrosaurs? Are those the ones that own the big drilling companies and go to various seemingly inhospitable regions finding the liquid remains of long dead life? Yeah I know you meant pterosaurs but still figured I'd try to get a joke out of it.
We'll be making SOME changes to stats. Ropers will probably become aberrations, for example, and derro humanoids, but I really REALLY want to keep those changes at a minimum. For the ankheg, changing its type is needless tinkering.Can you lose the bizarre random bone spurs and plates on dire critters?
They may have a better natural armor modifier, but it seems a really silly way to implement it, particularly with the association of them being prehistoric or primitive. It is like the whole monster section went out and watched an post-apocalyptic movie with neo-primitives and decided to start a lame fashion fad.
Agreed on this although if the minis are any guide, dire lion and dire tiger, at least, would not be a problem.
For Asmodeus' sake, please publish Dinosaurus Revisited, and be done with it. There's no way that you'll be able to put just a few dinos in Bestiary and not get persecuted for leaving all the others out.Dude, Jacobs works for Paizo. I'm sure there are plans for a full blown dino book!
Seconded! Prehistoric mammals being in there would work as well.
|
|
Petrosaurs? Are those the ones that own the big drilling companies and go to various seemingly inhospitable regions finding the liquid remains of long dead life?
That would be a freaky ooze. Murky black oil that has been imbued with necromantic magics to pull forth the hungering animalistic essence of the many aeons-dead creatures it once once. Slavering jaws and slashing limbs and flailing legs jut forth and sink back into the tarry slime as it lurches forward, it's undying prehistoric hunger awakened again into unholy life...
When the ghost is a dinosaur, the 'ectoplasm' is petroleum.
|
|
Seconded! Prehistoric mammals being in there would work as well.For Asmodeus' sake, please publish Dinosaurus Revisited, and be done with it. There's no way that you'll be able to put just a few dinos in Bestiary and not get persecuted for leaving all the others out.Dude, Jacobs works for Paizo. I'm sure there are plans for a full blown dino book!
I second the prehistoric mammals inclusion! And stats for Raquel Welch and Barbara Bach while we're at it!
|
|
THE AGE OF CARNAGE™
Welcome to the Age of Carnage where the boundary between the now and the past has collapsed and all manor of Dinosaur run Rampant.
DINOSAUR TEMPLATE
BASIC: NATURAL ARMOR+5, SPEED+10, +8 Listen & Spot, SQ: SCENT (ex), Natural Attacks, HD TYPE: d10, Animal Intelligence(2)
PLANT EATER: +14 CON, -1 DEX, -1 INT, +2 SA (ex), +1 BONUS SQ(ex)
RAPTOR: +7 STR, +2 DEX, +8 WILDERNESS LORE, JUMP & HIDE, +20 SPEED, Prefered Natural Attack: RAKE
SUPERPREDATOR: +14 STR, +1 DEX, +2 SA (ex),Prefered Natural Attack: BITE
NEW Bonus SQ:
ARMORED (EX): +3 Natural Armor/-10 Speed (Armoured Plates)
Now you can dinosaur up your Kobold and your Dragon.
|
|
For Asmodeus' sake, please publish Dinosaurus Revisited, and be done with it. There's no way that you'll be able to put just a few dinos in Bestiary and not get persecuted for leaving all the others out.I second this motion. A small 36 page book for dinosaurs would be great.36 page?
Not a chance.
Go FGU's Saurians and just wallow in it.
We know it will be hard to release the initial bestiary with none, but wait a few months and just release the Bestiary II - Archaic Animals, and be done with it.I hate expansion books, and I approve this message!
So you condone ripping of Games Workshops Saurians? No respect of IP.