After looking up what the B3 catfolk looked like, I have to say that I found it jarring. I can't say anything about the face, because I didn't look too close. The strongest observation I got out of it was that the pose looked more reptilian than feline.
I like both depictions, but agree with others that their is a large enough variation present that I think they would be better off as different races. Lumping them both as catfolk is kind of like treating a Yeti as a race of humans.
If you like "anime" catfolk, then just run your game with anime catfolk.
If you don't like anime catfolk, don't use them.
Remember, art is just one artists interpretation of how a race looks. You as a GM or player have an infinite amount of room to work with that art.
Maybe you're a player who's GM likes the non-anime catfolk... who says you can't be like 1/4th human, causing you to look a little more like a cat girl than a catfolk.
Maybe you're a player who's GM likes the more anime catfolk. Why can't you just play an evolutionary throw back? Like a catfolk with their equivalent of a genetic disorder that makes you look a lot more catlike than others of your kind.
How you and I picture an elf in our head is probably very different. To some of us, elves are taller than humans, to others they're shorter. To some of us they're desert dwelling nomads, to others they're analogous to the feudal Japanese.
Compare a traditional D&D dwarf to a Dragon Age dwarf. They share similarities but also massive differences in both appearance and attitude.
Don't let art dictate how YOU see your character.
If you like "anime" catfolk, then just run your game with anime catfolk.
If you don't like anime catfolk, don't use them.
Remember, art is just one artists interpretation of how a race looks. You as a GM or player have an infinite amount of room to work with that art.
Maybe you're a player who's GM likes the non-anime catfolk... who says you can't be like 1/4th human, causing you to look a little more like a cat girl than a catfolk.
Maybe you're a player who's GM likes the more anime catfolk. Why can't you just play an evolutionary throw back? Like a catfolk with their equivalent of a genetic disorder that makes you look a lot more catlike than others of your kind.
How you and I picture an elf in our head is probably very different. To some of us, elves are taller than humans, to others they're shorter. To some of us they're desert dwelling nomads, to others they're analogous to the feudal Japanese.
Compare a traditional D&D dwarf to a Dragon Age dwarf. They share similarities but also massive differences in both appearance and attitude.
Don't let art dictate how YOU see your character.
But if you go by arts, these catfolks should have different abilities and stuff.
It has already been said but just go with whichever version of Catfolk you want. I personally like the Khaji- I mean the ARG Catfolk look over "Anime Catfolk" look.
I just searched the book myself and cant seem to locate it, it may have not been put in or is in a different book.Forgive my ignorance, but am I missing where they put the rouge talents convincing fakes and dodge trap?
I have the same problem here too. From the sounds of the two talents though I would guess "Convincing Fake" has to do with item forgery and "Dodge Trap" might add a bonus to reflex saves to avoid traps. I'd like Paizo to fix this error soon, I'd like to know what those Rouge Talents do.
But if you go by arts, these catfolks should have different abilities and stuff.If you like "anime" catfolk, then just run your game with anime catfolk.
If you don't like anime catfolk, don't use them.
Remember, art is just one artists interpretation of how a race looks. You as a GM or player have an infinite amount of room to work with that art.
Maybe you're a player who's GM likes the non-anime catfolk... who says you can't be like 1/4th human, causing you to look a little more like a cat girl than a catfolk.
Maybe you're a player who's GM likes the more anime catfolk. Why can't you just play an evolutionary throw back? Like a catfolk with their equivalent of a genetic disorder that makes you look a lot more catlike than others of your kind.
How you and I picture an elf in our head is probably very different. To some of us, elves are taller than humans, to others they're shorter. To some of us they're desert dwelling nomads, to others they're analogous to the feudal Japanese.
Compare a traditional D&D dwarf to a Dragon Age dwarf. They share similarities but also massive differences in both appearance and attitude.
Don't let art dictate how YOU see your character.
Never let logic or rules get in the way of a cool picture in your head.
Epic/awesome characters are better then getting caught up on stat variations for different catfolk looks.
Do you remember the stats of your favourite character? I sure as hell don't. I remember his race, his class, and how I pictured him, but I couldn't tell you is Int score if you paid me, and he was a Wizard.
But if you go by arts, these catfolks should have different abilities and stuff.If you like "anime" catfolk, then just run your game with anime catfolk.
If you don't like anime catfolk, don't use them.
Remember, art is just one artists interpretation of how a race looks. You as a GM or player have an infinite amount of room to work with that art.
Maybe you're a player who's GM likes the non-anime catfolk... who says you can't be like 1/4th human, causing you to look a little more like a cat girl than a catfolk.
Maybe you're a player who's GM likes the more anime catfolk. Why can't you just play an evolutionary throw back? Like a catfolk with their equivalent of a genetic disorder that makes you look a lot more catlike than others of your kind.
How you and I picture an elf in our head is probably very different. To some of us, elves are taller than humans, to others they're shorter. To some of us they're desert dwelling nomads, to others they're analogous to the feudal Japanese.
Compare a traditional D&D dwarf to a Dragon Age dwarf. They share similarities but also massive differences in both appearance and attitude.
Don't let art dictate how YOU see your character.
not necessarily, use instead of subraces the word ethnicity, and you can also compare them to real humanity, just because there are asians africans and europeans they are all humans with same abilities, catfolk can also look very differently but still be the same species, although in such different representation subraces are more used usually
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Khajiit does not know what you are talking about. Khajiit likes the way Khajiit looks.
M'aiq wishes you well.
The ARG style is a bit overdone in western rpgs. The B3 version was far more original. Thin =/= anime style. They looked more like catfolk in B3 opposed to Tigerfolk in ARG
This.
Remember, art is just one artists interpretation of how a race looks.
Art published in an official capacity as a race description is just a weeeeee bit more than "one artist's interpretation" of how the race looks.
It's the officially-sanctioned interpretation of the publisher/game.
Obviously, nothing at all precludes one from reinterpreting it, but at the core of this discussion is a very similar concept to RAW/RAI - we all come to this game of various mindsets, and the official supplements provide a common ground for us all.
Am I the only one who is sick of all this comic/computer-game like artwork since 3.0?
Am I the only one who remembers the awesome pictures from AD&D?
The ARG style is a bit overdone in western rpgs. The B3 version was far more original. Thin =/= anime style. They looked more like catfolk in B3 opposed to Tigerfolk in ARGThis.
Tigers are no less cats than house cats are.
Catfolk could as equally mean panthers as it could mean a cornish rex, or any other species in the Felidae family.
Am I the only one who is sick of all this comic/computer-game like artwork since 3.0?
Am I the only one who remembers the awesome pictures from AD&D?
I loved the change of art. Give me 3.0 Elmister verses 2.0 Gandalf in Red Elminster. Don't get me wrong there was great art back then. I don't think it is mutually exclusive.
|
Am I the only one who is sick of all this comic/computer-game like artwork since 3.0?
Am I the only one who remembers the awesome pictures from AD&D?
It is not a change towards comic or game art. It is a change in art preferences in general. Compare video game box art of the 80s and 90s to ADnD. You will find they are very similar.
Would hairless and long-haired catfolk be character traits or alternate racial abilities?I think that would just be fluff. Or in the case of a hairless, the lack of fluff.
Sphynx (EX): you gain +2 on all charisma rolls in Osirion, but but are considered "unnatural" throughout the rest of Golarion.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sphynx (EX): you gain +2 on all charisma rolls in Osirion, but but are frequently mistaken for a tall Goblin throughout the rest of Golarion.Would hairless and long-haired catfolk be character traits or alternate racial abilities?I think that would just be fluff. Or in the case of a hairless, the lack of fluff.
Fixed.
I would have to agree with the statement that the ARG appearance is more like a monstrous humanoid vs. a humanoid (like the B3).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is not a change towards comic or game art. It is a change in art preferences in general. Compare video game box art of the 80s and 90s to ADnD. You will find they are very similar.Am I the only one who is sick of all this comic/computer-game like artwork since 3.0?
Am I the only one who remembers the awesome pictures from AD&D?
Without a doubt, there was some good art back in AD&D. There was also some terrible stuff going around, and a lot more of it was black and white and/or sexist. I love 3.x's stuff, especially WAR's work along with the stuff by the likes of Steve Prescott, but I'll gladly take some Tony DiTerlizzi as well (and am sad that I don't get much of his work anymore. His Catlord and Tiefling from Planescape still remain in my mind).
That said, I'd also like to see some more "anime-inspired" stuff in my game books. Aside from it being a highly popular art form and something that I like the aesthetics of, it's also a style that I do and I'd actually like to believe that I had a chance to contribute art to my favorite hobby (art major here, wanting to do illustration). Unfortunately, the highly vocal "get yer animes out of mah D&D!" lobby pretty much precludes me ever getting published in a game book (aside from the one time with a small-house publisher).
Give me my anime alongside my WAR alongside my DiTerlizzi alongside Brohm, if you want. It can all be highly evocative. White Wolf's Kindred of the East supplements were full of Melissa's very anime-styled work alongside some of their more standard artists, and they all worked wonderfully.
I'm okay with either catfolk style. I'm not actually a big fan of the B3 one, but I don't entirely love the one in the ARG, either. I do find it funny that everyone who's for the ARG style is willing to call the B3 style "anime" but doesn't feel the need to acknowledge that the ARG style is straight-up "furry," though. ;)
I do find it funny that everyone who's for the ARG style is willing to call the B3 style "anime" but doesn't feel the need to acknowledge that the ARG style is straight-up "furry," though. ;)
Perhaps that's because it isn't?
I don't care about sexual fetishes regarding catgirls and furries. I just think the ARG version looks better. At least the male one. The female one is odd looking. I've always preferred my catfolk to look like Ajani from Magic the Gathering. I think he (and the Nacatl) look awesome and cool.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do find it funny that everyone who's for the ARG style is willing to call the B3 style "anime" but doesn't feel the need to acknowledge that the ARG style is straight-up "furry," though. ;)Perhaps that's because it isn't?
It's a type of furry style. It's not the only furry style, but there's no denying that the ARG style is a furry one.
(Source: Roommate is a furry)
I skimmed through the thread and didn't see this thought, but I might have missed it.
Hasn't anyone realized yet that the B3 catfolk is the standard eastern variant, while the ARG catfolk is the standard western variant? It's basically the difference between a European Lion and an African Lion. Both are the same species, but they have different proportions, sizes, etc.
Remember, B3 was written more to the eastern mythos, not the western mythos, so the artwork reflects that.
There are more than enough anthropomorphic manimals in the game. I like the Catfolk design from the Bestiary 3 book over the ARG interpretation.
|
|
It's the officially-sanctioned interpretation of the publisher/game.
Not necessarily. I can't remember who said it (Jacobs, maybe?), but, when facing a TON of flack after promising no armor plated and spiked dire animals, and publishing exactly those type of pics in B1, the official line was "we really didn't like the art work, but we were pushing against a deadline and didn't have time to have it redone". So, the "official" interpretation is no spikes and armor, even though the art work depicted such.
It's the officially-sanctioned interpretation of the publisher/game.Not necessarily. I can't remember who said it (Jacobs, maybe?), but, when facing a TON of flack after promising no armor plated and spiked dire animals, and publishing exactly those type of pics in B1, the official line was "we really didn't like the art work, but we were pushing against a deadline and didn't have time to have it redone". So, the "official" interpretation is no spikes and armor, even though the art work depicted such.
So in other words, we are free to go with Catfolk that look like the B3 version, and with ones that look like the ARG version? Or heck, even go for the heresy of putting cat ears and a cat tail on a human and call it a catfolk*?! That should put this whole "you are doing it wrong" debate to a close.
* = Though I'd say that character is a catfolk-human hybrid if anything.
|
|
Bottom line. RPG artwork is the artist's imagining, sometimes with guidance from a creative director or an editor or something. RPGs are about using your own imagination to interpret things. Don't let some piece of art used to illustrate a book dictate how you imagine things. Your table, your group, your game. No one is going to kick in your door and take your books if you want sexy catfolk, brutal cat folk, anime cat folk, cosplay catfolk, or, in my case, no cat folk at all.
Do you, screw everyone else's opinion.
I hate catfolk with actual cat heads.
D&D catfolk were the best in my book. they were small leith humanoids with light fur and sharp catlike features to an otherwise humanoid face.
not just skinny people with cat heads.
I don't care about sexual fetishes regarding catgirls and furries. I just think the ARG version looks better. At least the male one. The female one is odd looking. I've always preferred my catfolk to look like Ajani from Magic the Gathering. I think he (and the Nacatl) look awesome and cool.
I don't think "sexual fetishes" is an issue for me. I am a rather straight individual, as my wife can contest, and was rather looking forward to see male versions of the B3 catfolk. Instead I got these monstrous humanoids passing as humanoids.
We want some monstrous humanoid-cat race that is perfectly fine by me, but the art (while I do the consider ARG art nice and mostly well done) does not match the race description. So with my original statement could we please have future catfolk appear in the art more like B3?
|
I love 3.x's stuff, especially WAR's work along with the stuff by the likes of Steve Prescott, but I'll gladly take some Tony DiTerlizzi as well (and am sad that I don't get much of his work anymore. His Catlord and Tiefling from Planescape still remain in my mind).
Give me my anime alongside my WAR alongside my DiTerlizzi alongside Brohm, if you want. It can all be highly evocative. White Wolf's Kindred of the East supplements were full of Melissa's very anime-styled work alongside some of their more standard artists, and they all worked wonderfully.
YES
On the matter of catfolk, I prefer the B3 Thundercatsy look as well, though maybe with digitigrade legs to further set them apart.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's the officially-sanctioned interpretation of the publisher/game.Not necessarily. I can't remember who said it (Jacobs, maybe?), but, when facing a TON of flack after promising no armor plated and spiked dire animals, and publishing exactly those type of pics in B1, the official line was "we really didn't like the art work, but we were pushing against a deadline and didn't have time to have it redone". So, the "official" interpretation is no spikes and armor, even though the art work depicted such.So in other words, we are free to go with Catfolk that look like the B3 version, and with ones that look like the ARG version? Or heck, even go for the heresy of putting cat ears and a cat tail on a human and call it a catfolk*?! That should put this whole "you are doing it wrong" debate to a close.
* = Though I'd say that character is a catfolk-human hybrid if anything.
I pick the "heresy" one then :)