I just got the e-mail today announcing the Bestiary 3 and Advanced Race Guide. I gotta say, the description really has me hooked.
"Bestiary 3, which releases in November 2011, offers more than 300 new monsters for the Pathfinder RPG, with an emphasis on creatures from international myth and the best of Paizo’s Pathfinder Adventure Path series."
"Within this collection of creatures you’ll find grave knights and savage cyclopes, kappa and colossal kaiju, clockwork killers, mysterious sphinxes, imperial dragons, and so much more! Yet not all these monsters need to be foes, as fleet-footed sleipnirs, cunning vanaras, whimsical faerie dragons, and more companions from myth and modern fantasy join heroes on the path to legend."
At first, I thought, "Bestiary 3? Come on, man...another one?"
But...creatures from international myth? Sleipnir? Freaking KAIJU? I say HELL YES! Color me intrigued.Can't wait to pit my players against Godzilla and Jet Jaguar. : P
...Catch Phrase,
-Chris
EDIT: While I do feel kind of excited about the Advanced Race Guide, I feel much more "meh" about its teaser than the Bestiary 3.
Nah, not really. I'm kinda fed up with splatbooks and monster collections - I find race books that aren't tied to a campaign setting pretty gray and dull and generally just a bunch o' splat, and I find that there's simply too little new ideas to warrant a bestiary 3. I found most of the monsters in bestiary 2 pretty lackluster, and if I want something in particular, it's easy enough to convert from one of 3.5's five hundred monster books.
Personally, these aren't books I'm going to buy. I'd much rather see Paizo get back in action doing adventure paths and the like, since that's their strongest part and since we've already got a lot of splat (nothing compared to 3.5, thank god, but it's adding up and quality seems to be dropping from what I've seen of ultimate magic).
Paizo are great at fluff and decent at crunch, but I'm fed up with crunchies for a long time and want a lot of fluff to go with it.
Nah, not really. I'm kinda fed up with splatbooks and monster collections - I find race books that aren't tied to a campaign setting pretty gray and dull and generally just a bunch o' splat, and I find that there's simply too little new ideas to warrant a bestiary 3. I found most of the monsters in bestiary 2 pretty lackluster, and if I want something in particular, it's easy enough to convert from one of 3.5's five hundred monster books.
Personally, these aren't books I'm going to buy. I'd much rather see Paizo get back in action doing adventure paths and the like, since that's their strongest part and since we've already got a lot of splat (nothing compared to 3.5, thank god, but it's adding up and quality seems to be dropping from what I've seen of ultimate magic).
Paizo are great at fluff and decent at crunch, but I'm fed up with crunchies for a long time and want a lot of fluff to go with it.
Well too be fair it is not like they have stopped the APs...or even better yet the Golarion books to come out with these...so while you might not buy them...which I can respect that....it is not like these are hurting you either(as the APs and fluff books are still coming out every month).
Well too be fair it is not like they have stopped the APs...or even better yet the Golarion books to come out with these...so while you might not buy them...which I can respect that....it is not like these are hurting you either(as the APs and fluff books are still coming out every month).
Oh, I agree. It's just that I'd prefer double speed AP's and no more crunch ;)
But yes, this wasn't meant in any hateful way against Paizo. It just isn't my cup of tea, especially because of the seemingly dropping quality.
Paizo are great at fluff and decent at crunch, but I'm fed up with crunchies for a long time and want a lot of fluff to go with it.
I dunno... fluff is easy. I can do my own fluff. I often do. Crunch is hard. I'd rather spin out an idea than labor on number crunching my PCs will dismantle in 2-4 rounds. That includes doing conversions.
And frankly, I'm hoping they really take to the idea of going international with the monster selection. I really want to go to the Far East of Asia and collect some of their beasties through the Pathfinder ruleset lens, ... if only so I can see which ones I agree or disagree with in their interpretations. ;)
Besides, fluff is often more... Golarionish than I'm happy with, and I don't always like Golarion's... well... take on certain things. As hilariously awesome as goblins are, a couple of lines in their flavor text makes it hard for me to justify goblin wizards; and a similar line in the bestiary about hobgoblin cuts me off from making them arcanists in general. Neither of which I'm entirely fond of because I like magical goblin-types.
Also... I love monsters. Monsters. monsters, monsters. Monsters!
This isn't intended to be a "Fluff v Crunch thread, guys. Keep it on topic. I don't want this turning into another "Getting Use out of Ultimate Magic" thread (which I also started under another name).
EDIT: Sorry about OT.
I do think that if they should make another bestiary, there should be a lot of low-level encounters that aren't overly magical.
|
Bestiary 1 & 2, plus the monsters in the APs, 3rd party products, my 3e MMs and other supplements provide more monsters than I will ever use. So, I'm not too excited about another monster book, at this point. I'm sure it will be great, but I don't see me needing this one.
Now the Advanced Races, that my group and I can find a lot of use for.
Okay, I hadn't had a chance to take a look at said e-mail yet.
But kappa? Imperial dragons (I take it that's Eastern-style)? Sleipnirs? Vanaras?
Yeah, I'm sold. So far, at least. (As for monster oversaturation, I tend to cherry-pick anyway.)
Oh I am sold, Pazio has the best quality in there monsters(and other products) and definitly will be getting this one. I got rid of all of my 3.5 monster books except for the first one since it was the only one worth keeping.
I'm keen on Bestiary 3 and even the Advanced Race Guide - I'd much rather get those than psionics and epic levels (I guess I just ousted myself from a big group of forum goers).
I'm also keen on theoretical book "Ultimate Adventure" which unlike Combat and Magic would be dedicated to other/squishier player options that do not get as much time in the lime-light.
There are NEVER enough monsters. And I'll stand by that statement even if Pathfinder 1E lasts for 10 years, with a bestiary coming once per year in that time.
+1
Every monster has its niche, therefore you need lots of monsters if you have lots of niches :)
I'm not too excited about it; I find that there tends to be quite a bit of "filler" in monster books (e.g. yet another new race of outsiders that is only marginally different from the 29387 races of outsiders we already have). YMMV, of course.
Nope...not excited. I may scoop up the PDF if the monsters show up a lot in Pathfinder Society (and if it is $10), but I'll pass on the hard copy. Of course, I still don't have a hard copy of Bestiary 2 (waiting on the 2nd printing to seriously consider it).
It's a big monster book. Of course I'm excited! Can't get enough of 'em.
If I were creating a game system (and I have, actually) I would approach monsters in a completely different way.
Mostly I would focus on developing level appropriate abilities, skills, feats and attacks, and provide a means to mix and match those into a challenging concept for an encounter based on the type of encounter.
For example I'd have a section on melee attacks, skills and feats, a section on ranged attacks, skills and feats and a section on magical attacks, abilities, skills and feats.
Then if I wanted an appropriate encounter for a level six party that was optimized for melee, I might choose an encounter that is 75% melee and 25% ranged to play to their strengths. Then I'd pick the type of attacks, abilities, skills and feats that I wanted them to encounter.
Then I'd factor in the environment (dungeon, forest, desert, sea, etc.) and then "skin" those things into actual monsters.
That's really pretty much how I do it anyway. And since I end up frequently with "monsters" that don't exist in any of the splat books, I just make up my own, or modify an existing one.
Let's say, for example, that I decide I want to build that 75% melee, 25% ranged battle. I might satisfy that with a couple of ogres and a quartet of crossbow firing goblins. But that's pretty hackneyed. Also that might give the NPC party an action economy advantage over the party. So what happens if I combine the melee and ranged attacks into one "monster?" Perhaps they have encountered a couple of dire porcupines who have the ability to shoot quills at targets?
Hmm.... is there a dire porcupine in the bestiary? Well, there is now! At least in MY bestiary...
There are NEVER enough monsters. And I'll stand by that statement even if Pathfinder 1E lasts for 10 years, with a bestiary coming once per year in that time.
This. For a number of reasons, i'm not sure I will buy PC crunch anymore, but paizo did well B1 and B2, and I think I'm ok up to B10 too :D
I just with they gather, when is convenient for them, monsters in AP in bestiaries. I Buy the RP line only, but I'm sad to miss all those beautiful monsters :(
(I'm a GM in case you wonder)
|
I am excitedyet not that excited. I like monsters to the point that I also bought the Tome of Horrors complete. Yet beyond a fourth one I cannot see myself getting a fifth one after that. Eventiually you will get the same problem with the Monster Manuals from WOTC. The more MM they released the weaker the quality imo and the worst they became. Not saying it will happen to Paizo just that it might. After all you will run out of monsters at a certain point.
Well the monster book is understandable and appreciated, I assume many monsters already had ready made artwork from the APs they appeared in and just needed some updates and adjustments and the quality of those monsters is just very high in general. Mythological creatures are quite awesome, being more deeply rooted into my sense of acceptably fantastic creatures rather than a collection of new weird creatures.
Book of races seems to have a great deal of crunch primarily and less focus on fluff, which indeed was wasted on me in previous race books in the 3.5 era, what I have seen from the expected content I am quite looking forward to it.
After APG and the 1st bestiary I pretty much consider everything optional, even if UM seems like it would have benefited in some areas by having the crunch value appraised it is still a very good book, the APG might have put expectations too high for books to come after it, but infact I have a hard time coming up with a book from 3.5 that held similar value compared to UM and APG.
I just got the e-mail today announcing the Bestiary 3 and Advanced Race Guide. I gotta say, the description really has me hooked.
"Bestiary 3, which releases in November 2011, offers more than 300 new monsters for the Pathfinder RPG, with an emphasis on creatures from international myth and the best of Paizo’s Pathfinder Adventure Path series."
"Within this collection of creatures you’ll find grave knights and savage cyclopes, kappa and colossal kaiju, clockwork killers, mysterious sphinxes, imperial dragons, and so much more! Yet not all these monsters need to be foes, as fleet-footed sleipnirs, cunning vanaras, whimsical faerie dragons, and more companions from myth and modern fantasy join heroes on the path to legend."
At first, I thought, "Bestiary 3? Come on, man...another one?"
But...creatures from international myth? Sleipnir? Freaking KAIJU? I say HELL YES! Color me intrigued.Can't wait to pit my players against Godzilla and Jet Jaguar. : P
...Catch Phrase,
-Chris
EDIT: While I do feel kind of excited about the Advanced Race Guide, I feel much more "meh" about its teaser than the Bestiary 3.
I wanted another bestiary also, but I want this to be the last one. I had my fill of 3.5 monster books after the 3rd one also. I am curious as to what will be in it though.
Not very.
Reason:
-Too many books, too many monsters. I like new products, but too many is too many.
What I would look up from upcoming bestiaries nevertheless:
-themed bestiaries (for example asian and epic level). It would be easy to determine if I have any use for such book from the beginning.
-reprinting monsters from scattered other product lines (AP:s, modules and Chronicles). I am running RotR and having B2 has been beneficial.
-producing some more monsters tied to Golarion. Neutral unlogical monsters dont appeal to me.
Out of curiosity, what is your definition of "neutral illogical monster?"
Not very.Reason:
-Too many books, too many monsters. I like new products, but too many is too many.What I would look up from upcoming bestiaries nevertheless:
-themed bestiaries (for example asian and epic level). It would be easy to determine if I have any use for such book from the beginning.
-reprinting monsters from scattered other product lines (AP:s, modules and Chronicles). I am running RotR and having B2 has been beneficial.
-producing some more monsters tied to Golarion. Neutral unlogical monsters dont appeal to me.
Your list of upcoming Bestiary wishes is kind of ... contradictory. You want reprinted monsters from other product lines, yet you also want more monsters tied to Golarion? Aren't those two things one and the same? Second, isn't the phrase "unlogical monsters" an oxymoron? I mean, this is a game where where one of the most iconic of all creatures is a giant, floating head with eight tentacles, each tentacle mounted with a single eye. If that is unlogicial, I don't know what is.
I think you'd be likely to see an Epic-Level Bestiary at some point if Mythic Adventures ever happened, but separating monsters based on theme is a poor business model because of exactly the reason you just said. If you cater an entire book to a small percentage of your fanbase, not only are you all but guaranteed to reduce your own sales but you also risk alienating your fans because there's not something everyone can get excited about in every book. Roughly four hardcover books come out each year, after all. While Pathfinder is popular in the world of Tabletop RPG Gaming, most people have never heard of it, so they need to make sure that every single hardcover book can attract as many consumers as possible.
You can say "Ah! That's an evil corporation! They don't care about their customers!" all you want, but the "cater to a small crowd" business model is how Nintendo alienated the hardcore gamers from the Wii and it's also how Wizards of the Coast managed to lose a lot of followers to Paizo in the first place. Paizo is smart and in touch with their consumers; you can bet that if you buy this book, there is going to be something in it that makes it worth the $40 cover price (in Bestiary 2, it was all of the Odyssey Monsters for me).
YES. Very excited!
In my opinion, the Bestaries have been excellent things. I find about 33% of the monsters fit my criteria for excellent monsters, and another 33% are almost as good.
The quick advancement rules are genius.
I can hardly wait for Bestiary 3!
-Moox
|
but the "cater to a small crowd" business model is how Nintendo alienated the hardcore gamers from the Wii
Sorry, but "hardcore" gamers abandoned Nintendo during the N64 and GCN eras, when they decided that they'd rather play mediocre FPS entirely colored in various shades of brown than any of the games that Nintendo put out.
Thanks for the feedback and well earned criticism.
I am happy to be on customer side, and buying the stuff I feel worth the investment. Somehow, my worst fear is that Pathfinder is going too fast. Coming to the stage, where a few good products are multiplied to many hurried products just for sake of the business. It is not only the situation with Bestiary line, but also other lines (for example I wish there was a full year between Ultimate Books). I am happy with my current books, but cant see the quality to stay the same.
I would be happy to skip Asian themed Bestiary and would buy epic book, but not sure if it is mix of everything. I have enjoyed Bestiry 2, but still lots of content (aprox. 80%) to be used for the first time.
But that is my feeling, and I hope Paizo can prove me wrong. Just answered to the topic of this thread.
Oh, I am a Finn. Thus easily satisfied and bit slow to adapt;)
Since the ultimates treat different classes, I guess that would have been unfair separate them too much in time.
|
|
I'm not particularly excited. The apparent focus on Eastern monsters leaves me cold. I just don't find Eastern creatures all that interesting, and they're hard to use As Is in very eurocentric games (which is what I tend to run).
The inclusion of a lot of "international monsters" doesn't do much for me either, since creatures culled from less well-known mythological sources tend to not elicit the same reaction from players that things like dragons, chimera and griffons do. A lot most of the good monsters from myth have already been raided for addition to the game as well, so what's left can be pretty funky and hard to use (heck, I still haven't figured out what swanmays are for).
Also, a lot of the time they're weirdly specific because they mostly exist as boogey-men to scare children into avoiding dangerous behavior, or from morality tales and fables meant to impart morals. Like the Kappa, which isn't so much a creature fought by heroes of Japanese legend as it is a convenient way of explaining to children why they shouldn't play down by the side of the lake (where they might drown).
A lot of these creatures just don't translate all that well into heroic gaming. A kappa becomes just another humanoid with 1 HD and the aquatic template. Unless they keep the head-bowl thing, in which case its a humanoid with 1 HD and the aquatic template that is ridiculously easy to defeat.
DM: "A kappa attacks you!"
Player: "I trip the Kappa."
DM: "Oh. Huh. It dies."
Player: "Kappas suck."
I don't really need stats for a Kappa. If my Kingmaker campaign somehow ends in in Tien (seems...unlikely), I have stats for a goblin, and I have the aquatic simple template. Pow. I have a Kappa.
I'll still pick it up, but I don't expect there to be more than a small handful of things in that excite me. Most of it will be pretty ho-hum. Like slepnir. It's an eight-legged horse. This does nothing for me. Between the pegasus, unicorn and hippogrif I'm pretty much cool on magical horses.
I'd be more excited if they were focusing more energy on expanding the Classic Monsters Revisited series, or if they Bestiary 3 was going to be focused on expy versions of monsters from classic horror films. Give me my xenomorphs, crawlers and graboids. Then I'll get excited.
A lot of these creatures just don't translate all that well into heroic gaming. A kappa becomes just another humanoid with 1 HD and the aquatic template. Unless they keep the head-bowl thing, in which case its a humanoid with 1 HD and the aquatic template that is ridiculously easy to defeat.
DM: "A kappa attacks you!"
Player: "I trip the Kappa."
DM: "Oh. Huh. It dies."
Player: "Kappas suck."I don't really need stats for a Kappa. If my Kingmaker campaign somehow ends in in Tien (seems...unlikely), I have stats for a goblin, and I have the aquatic simple template. Pow. I have a Kappa.
If they're done right, they won't attack unless they're close enough to the water that spilling their heads doesn't matter. They'd also have natural armor and possibly a bleed attack (they were sometimes described as vampiric).
And who's to say that they'd be 1 HD? In 3e OA, they were 4 HD (although still only a CR 2).
I'd be more excited if they were focusing more energy on expanding the Classic Monsters Revisited series, or if they Bestiary 3 was going to be focused on expy versions of monsters from classic horror films. Give me my xenomorphs, crawlers and graboids. Then I'll get excited.
I don't know about crawlers
But akatas (first appeared in Children of the Void; reprinted in B2) are (IIRC) meant to be xenomorph shout-outs. And as for graboids, there are purple worms and death worms, the latter of which was actually based off of the original inspiration for graboids. (If you need shriekers, ethereal marauders are OGL and might make it in.)
I like new monsters, sure, but I'm particularly interested in templates to change existing monsters into different things from different places. Templates with particular themes (rather than generic ones like "Advanced" or "Giant") tend to do very well in my games. Especially Half-outsiders and half-dragons, for example. I'd like more of those in the upcoming Bestiary.
I'm in.
Paizo does monsters best of all.
I look forward to learning about creatures of both myth and modern fiction that I know little about.
I only wish that there was some clear indicator of each monster's origin... if mythical, from what culture; if fictional, from whose writing; if original, what vacuum was it made to fill?
Even a single line would be wonderful. The long-form articles in the APs almost always include this material, and it pleases me immensely.
Perhaps it is because my father (a bit of a mythologist himself) would always roll his eyes at my game books because they robbed these stories of their context. With Pathfinder AP entries, I'm able to point to the sidebar and say: "There! Context! They are edifying readers, not merely pillaging the culture..."
So, yes. More context regarding origins is a good thing. Especially if this third volume of the Bestiary contains as much mythology as I imagine it does.
You promise me the rest of the monsters from the AP's and I'll get excited about it.
Note I said "rest of" not "best of".
I'd be more excited if they were focusing more energy on expanding the Classic Monsters Revisited series, or if they Bestiary 3 was going to be focused on expy versions of monsters from classic horror films. Give me my xenomorphs, crawlers and graboids. Then I'll get excited.
James Jacobs has said on the boards a few times that, even though they take their name from Wells, the Pathfinder morlocks are Crawler expies.
And speaking of monsters inspired by horror movies, my third party PDF company has a product coming out in the next couple of weeks that you may be interested in.
I'm excited but I would like to see them concentrate less on outsiders. I think I've seen enough demons and other stuff to last me for a while.
I agree with you. I love using outsiders, but they are a bit situational. I feel you can never have too many monster books - beacuse I don't like creating my own. But I found the Bestiary 2 to be outsider heavy. I find myself looking for reasons to use more of the monsters.
I am on the opposite side. For one reason or another, my settings are always outsiders heavy (either PCs go there, or they come here).
So I generally warmly welcome them. Nevertheless, I'd appreciate some high level fey.
As usual with things I'm not interested in, I'm nonetheless looking forward to seeing what Paizo produces.
I'm pretty much set with monsters - I'd FAR prefer they expand the 'XYZ revisited' line rather than providing me with new statblocks. Flavor-text is always going to be my preference ahead of more statblocks and/or mechanics. Having said that - it's the Paizo books I'm not really interested in which have really impressed me, so I'm glad they are pushing in lots of different directions as it forces me to try things I wouldnt choose on my own.
|
Bestiary are good but OK well after a couple i'm fed up with them.
I'm also the kind of guy who could modify and mix existing monsters. So really it's totally dull for me to have X bestiary.
Let's hope that they won't go to the polyhedral outsiders which were in AD&D... (don't remember their names).
God they were the worse monsters I had ever seen. I can't believe I paid for these.
Bestiary are good but OK well after a couple i'm fed up with them.
I'm also the kind of guy who could modify and mix existing monsters. So really it's totally dull for me to have X bestiary.
Let's hope that they won't go to the polyhedral outsiders which were in AD&D... (don't remember their names).
God they were the worse monsters I had ever seen. I can't believe I paid for these.
I spend so much time working on encounters, especially if they are NPC types, or monster with class levels, etc.
But I would really like to be able to just pull more monsters from the books without having to modfiy them. So more monster books is good in my opinion?
I thought the Modrons were a very good idea, just very poorly drawn. I understand the decision to go with geometric shapes, but I think they could have been illustrated better.
Let's hope that they won't go to the polyhedral outsiders which were in AD&D... (don't remember their names).
God they were the worse monsters I had ever seen. I can't believe I paid for these.
I loved the modrons when I was a kid; I thought they had a goofy kind of charm.
P.S. What is happening to the word "worst"? It seems to be disappearing from the English language...
|
Bestiary are good but OK well after a couple i'm fed up with them.
I'm also the kind of guy who could modify and mix existing monsters. So really it's totally dull for me to have X bestiary.
Let's hope that they won't go to the polyhedral outsiders which were in AD&D... (don't remember their names).
God they were the worse monsters I had ever seen. I can't believe I paid for these.
OTOH, I HATE modifying monsters, and I am not fond of templates ... same boring salad with a different dressing.
I MUCH prefer an all-new critter than a variation.