We at LPJ Design are looking at doing a monster book. But with so many good ones out there, we wanted to know what you (the customer and Pathfinder fan) would want to see it one? What does a monster book have to do to be consider "GREAT" in your eyes? Feel free to comment in as much detail that you would need to explain your point. Thanks!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One monster per page format, and available as a PDF is my baseline, or I won't even look at it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Every entry would need to be illustrated. If I can't picture a creature or have something to show the players there would be little chance of me using it. Often the picture of the monster sparks some tactical ingenuity from the players in dealing with it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since we're talking GREAT, not good, here's what I'd love to see:
-Beautiful artworks and matching descriptions
-New, evocative signature abilities - preferably more than one, per creature.
-A concise Lore-section (Personally, I prefer ecology-style treatments/longer monster-entries)
-Unique concepts: Not yet another shadowy incorporeal undead, yet another green-skinned low CR goblinoid etc. please.
-Well-written prose. Beyond artworks and more than most realize, the actual background of creatures features in the decision to use or not use a creature. Case in point: What Paizo has done with goblins. No one would have considered goblins cool or interesting - it's about the fluff as well!
Just my 2 cents, of course!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Longer, more descriptive monster entries come to mind, at least for some monsters.
No "old school" monster graphics that look like the designer's six year old daughter drawn with pencil. And using pencil with wrong hardness...
Every entry would need to be illustrated. If I can't picture a creature or have something to show the players there would be little chance of me using it.
Does the artwork have to be in color? and would you pay more for color artwork?
Often the picture of the monster sparks some tactical ingenuity from the players in dealing with it.
Can you give a good example of this?
A concise Lore-section (Personally, I prefer ecology-style treatments/longer monster-entries)
Can you give a good example of this?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I think good b/w-artwork is better than bad color. Good color is the pinnacle - but depending on the creature b/w may well work better. What price increase for color would we be looking at?
Regarding Lore-section, you know, the skill list:
DC 18: This is creature xyz, and while it may look like a mundane mouse, it can actually...
DC 20: It's a traveler from the outer planes and not native in these parts.
DC 25: It has an array of magical abilities, which include bending the minds of foes or making them wail in agony. (NO references to concrete spell-like abilities/mechanics! - PCs should glean the effects from the text, not use meta-knowledge.)
DC 30: It has a dread weakness to cinnamon flavored cider and has a hard time resisting it, being known to ignore other targets in favor of getting drunk via the stuff.
All in all, a short list of things the PCs might know about the creature for the DM to paraphrase.
I would point you at the Book of Drakes, Book of Monster Templates, and the Midgard Bestiary.
All were received as outstanding collections of monsters, and their reviews explain it better than I will.
-Ben.
+1 on the good art. It can be b/w, but it needs to be really good and it needs to match the description of the monster it's paired with!
Also, avoid monsters that are just the same re-used concepts...like the fifth iteration of a monstrous crow, or yet another variant of the goblin.
Personally, I think good b/w-artwork is better than bad color. Good color is the pinnacle - but depending on the creature b/w may well work better. What price increase for color would we be looking at?
I agree very much with the good vs bad color issue. Cost wise we are looking at a 32 page full color PDF (and most likely full color POD) but the page could increase
an index is very useful. because sometimes i need to find a monster by CR, or by terrain type.
Since we have been looking at several monster books we have found that people really want monsters by type, terrain and CR. Is there anything else you would wan in an index?
to be great, your bestiary must have a good range of creatures, from low cr to high. there should be interaction between some types of monsters, similar to the goblins and their goblin dogs.
Thanks for the insight.
the monsters should also be fun. they should be something that takes advantage of the system to provide an entertaining battle. learning more about how they fit into the dungeon should be interesting.
Is this more about tactics and strategies of the monster OR the stat block of the monster?
for any template-monsters, it should be clear how to apply that template as needed. for humanoids, it helps to see clearly how to apply a different class than the default warrior 1.
So if you could get three version of the sample templates (Fighter, Wizard and Rogue)who would be very happy?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seriously, I would rather have a book about fewer, but better thought-through monsters with additional stuff like feats, magic items and spells related to the creature, than one with a lackluster monster on every page.
good artwork...bad/silly looking monsters will sink just about any concept or good stat block you can produce, since the picture is what I will initially judge the critter by. Doesn't have to be color either...as mentioned bad color can be worse than no color at all.
Monsters that draw from folklore/fiction/movies/art/etc are great. Generally it's far far more difficult to invent an iconic monster than it is to take some inspiration from what is already out there
If you are inventing monsters whole cloth, please no "It's a snake, but made of magma" or "it's an evil undead made by evil people" Those get repetitive way way fast.
Good flavor: again why would I want to use this creature when I could use humanoid x or spider y? What is cool and awesome about it, and how does it tie into the setting, even if only in a generic sense.
Finally...does the bestiary fill a niche? Specialized books might be less useful to some people, but it's nice if you can look for holes in the coverage of other publishers. There are a lot of creature types still not well fleshed out, or specific environments and planes that could use some love. Dark Roads and Golden Hells for instant had a great bestiary that manage to plug some of the holes in the existing game, in relation to planar denizens.
Organization of the stats and abilities that make sense. I hate having to look all over to find skills or feats or stats.
White background pages without artwork, I want to be able to easily read everything. The border art that bleeds over the text, and nonwhite background can make it difficult to read the text.
As a request for monster types. High CR (12+) non intelligent monsters.
How realistic would be chances for getting images that would be specifically made to look good both in color and black-and-white - color for PDF and black-and-white for eventual printing to reduce price?
I disagree with Vod there - Paizo's bestiaries have border art and they read just fine - white backgrounds look painfully jarring when paired with full color artworks. B/w-artwork + white background? No problem.
Jsut my 2 cents, as always and to each his/her own. ^^
Monsters as PCs: Wanted or NOT wanted?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Monsters as PCs: Wanted or NOT wanted?
Really depends upon particular monster but I do admit that I am fan of 0 HD monsters that are suitable for (N)PC races.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with much of the above input, so I'll just add these two small things:
- Please resist the temptation to do more new humanoid races along the lines of "humanoid body with the head of a/an X" (insert bird, turtle, snake, badger, monkey etc.) We really don't need more humanoid races ;-)
- Please include a section on using body parts from the monster: as material components in spells / to draw poison from / as components for a magical item / as parts for armor or weapon creation / to sell for gold. My players always like to see dead monsters as a potential source of riches :-)
Good themes for sets of monsters that would make sense together in a campaign. An exciting, new theme would make for a good reason to buy a whole book.
Oh, that would be a selling point. Monster A is often allied with monster B, which they train and use as mounts in their battles against C and D.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Monsters as PCs? No. We already have Fehr's Ethnology and X races from all over the 3pps and a slew of horribly broken ARG races. Personally, I'm not too keen on them. Monster books should be for the DM. Monstrous PC races are a different book.
I prefer two pages per monster, with a level of detail found in AP bestiaries rather than the core bestiary line.
I actually prefer broadening existing monsters rather than inventing new ones.
I like those sidebars that explain the origin of a monster.
I like before combat, after combat, and morale entries.
I would want monsters that inspire good encounter, adventure, or campaign ideas in me. The linked monsters are one way to do that --- but don't link all 16-32 monsters together!
I remember one of the WotC 3.5 monster manuals (MMV, maybe?) had this undead critter that inspired an entire mini-campaign in my head: local adventurers have to enter a ruined tower to stop the revival of a necromancer that had been defeated by other adventurers decades ago. I didn't particularly care for the monster itself, and wouldn't use it, but the write-up counts as good precisely because it gave me that idea.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If a monster would be appropriate for a familiar, animal companion, mount, cohort or could be summoned by a summon monster X or planar ally/binding spell, I'd want information (such as bonus granted if a familiar, companion statistics, or what level of summon X it would appear on, or what it wants if planar allied) right there in the monster write up.
Variations. In the frozen lands of Blah, a white-furred version of this beastie exists that instead burrows through snow and ice, ignores difficult arctic terrain and has cold resistance 5 instead of fire resistance 5. A larger version is rumored to exist in the great lake of Blah, use the advancement by size chart on Bestiary 296 to increase it to Huge and add 8 HD.
Agreeing with what Sissyl said above. I'd rather see four pages providing a mini-ecology of a well-fleshed out creature that can be adapted and fit into multiple roles and environments and encounter types, than 32 one page fire-and-forget collections of numbers. There are literally thousands of monsters out there. I'd rather see eight more *good* ones, any one of whom I could build a campaign around, than thirty-two more mediochre ones that will, at best, be a single forgettable encounter.
I really happened to like Privateer Press's Monsternomicon for their Iron Kingdoms RPG when it still used the d20 system. Every monster entry had a full page dedicated to lore, possible hooks for using the creature and even some examples of interesting treasure to be found once the creature is defeated. In my opinion that is incredibly valuable information in a monster manual.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I prefer two pages per monster, with a level of detail found in AP bestiaries rather than the core bestiary line.
The real issue when you do that is you automatically double the size of the product automatically So my 32 page book is now 64 pages with the price increasing. Plus you will need more content to expend that over 2 pages, which also increases the cost of the product.
I would want monsters that inspire good encounter, adventure, or campaign ideas in me. The linked monsters are one way to do that --- but don't link all 16-32 monsters together!
While some of the monsters will be relaxed I assure you they will all not be linked to each other.
If a monster would be appropriate for a familiar, animal companion, mount, cohort or could be summoned by a summon monster X or planar ally/binding spell, I'd want information (such as bonus granted if a familiar, companion statistics, or what level of summon X it would appear on, or what it wants if planar allied) right there in the monster write up.
Great idea! I will see what we can do about adding this in.
I really happened to like Privateer Press's Monsternomicon for their Iron Kingdoms RPG when it still used the d20 system. Every monster entry had a full page dedicated to lore, possible hooks for using the creature and even some examples of interesting treasure to be found once the creature is defeated. In my opinion that is incredibly valuable information in a monster manual.
As I said before, would love to do this but might not be possible. But maybe we can incorporate some of the ideas into a stat block some how. I will have to see.
OK since we are talking about creating monsters, which writers create the coolest monsters? Who should we hire to work on this project? Who would you say, "Shut up and take my money" to?
I actually like when there are a few O HD races, or things that can be summoned/work as familiars. Makes a book of monsters a bit more diverse.
I think a neat compromise for distribution of info on monsters might be to "replace" the generic monster description text after the stat block with a DC knowledge table that confers the same information. So basic description would be at 5 or 10 plus CR, then additional descriptors at each +5 increment. That way you could satisfy those wanting the knowledge check info without taking up (much) extra space.
I am also of the opinion that every monster should have one or two signature abilities, and be designed tightly around that principle. I hate when monsters have 3 (or more) seemingly unrelated abilities glommed on (plus a scorpion tail!) just for the sake of it. Monsters only last a few rounds at best, most don't need a dozen different powers.
As for authors, Eric Morton and Adam Daigle have plenty of monster chops, and I'd dive in for either of them.
I prefer two pages per monster, with a level of detail found in AP bestiaries rather than the core bestiary line.The real issue when you do that is you automatically double the size of the product automatically So my 32 page book is now 64 pages with the price increasing. Plus you will need more content to expend that over 2 pages, which also increases the cost of the product.
Of course, so? Just having lists of statblocks without any description or art would be cheapest, but I don't think anyone wants just that.
The reason I think two pages are necessary is that it provides a context for using the monster in an interesting way. Without that description, the burden shifts to the DM (which, for me, I would rather just come up with something custom, as stat-blocks aren't hard, than try to reverse engineer the intent or flavor intended in an encounter with the creature).
Good artwork, and creatures from folklore and mythology should look like their descriptions and better reflect their legendary abilities rather than having them changed to suit a designer's generic game mechanic.
OK One last question, for a full color 128 page monster book what would you be expecting to pay?
Pdf or print?
Pdf or print?
Both.
The PF Bestiary is $9.99 PDF/$39.99 Print for 328 pages. Bestiaries 2 and 3 are the same price with slightly less pages.
I'd say ~$15/20, maybe $25 maximum print, if I ever bought print. Since I don't, for PDF price $10 would be my maximum, preferably lower.
I'd say $25 print, $10 PDF. I'd go as high as $30 for the bundle if the book looked REALLY good...
I am a fan of Eden Studios' Liber Bestarius. It had good information and connections within it.
I am a fan of Eden Studios' Liber Bestarius. It had good information and connections within it.
Search reveals that's an early-3.0 product and thus unfortunately not available in the Paizo store. Know anywhere that sells it in PDF?
what should a great monster have? easy, every page should have something on it that my players could find a legitimate reason to slay. Whether the sinister bad factor (ex:Demons), the goody two shoes factor (ex:Angels), the because awesome factor (ex:Dragons), the freaky deaky factor (ex:shining child), or so annoying it needs to die factor (ex:leprechauns, flumphs). Putting stats to something means someone, at some point, will try to dismember it. You capture the essence of that, you're golden.
A good picture is probably the first thing that draws me to a monster and bad picture will probably make me skip it. B&W works. Second, monsters should have unique special abilities. Interesting crunch makes better encounters. Don't overdo it, though one or two unique abilities are enough for a creature, IMO (unless a CR 15+ outsider). I also vote for two pages, and more fluff. It can give you a feel of the monster. It's especially true for fey and outsiders, those two, IMO, should have some motivation beyond "I kill you!" I also like information how to incorporate it into a setting (like in MM3, you had "Monster in Faerun" and "Monster in Ebberon" column).
What I don't want to see: more undead and vermin. Giant bugs and spiders are so boring. Undead just lost their appeal for me. New undead that is. I tend to use oldies but goldies. The same is true for constructs, but somehow I still like new constructs, while undead are just thin on new ideas. Don't want PC races. Or templates, unless they have a really good fluff.
And if I see another CR 2 tiny outsider "oh-so-suitable-for-a-familiar" something is going to burn!! (that is the most irritating thing I saw in PF Bestiaries 2&3).
I always like seeing new magical beasts, giants and variant dragons (drakes, landwyrms and stuff, true dragons with 5 pages of statistics for every f-ing size, I just skip).
I'd like to see unique monsters, and not just CR19+ outsiders. But that's mostly fluff.
CR in all over, but mostly 4-10.
The only really good bestiary I saw for PF is the Midgard one. Alluria's creepy creatures had some gems, but many more low points for me. Adamant's fell beasts were mostly misses for me. And don't go Tome of Horrors route, we want quality not quantity!
As for writters Epic Meepo (Eric Morton, I think), and whoever did the Midgard one.
I'd pay 25-30$ for a hard copy of a good bestiary (as I will for Midgard one). But I'd have to see some preview (beasts by type/CR and two or three beasties). I hate paying PDF's and getting dissapointed.
Bestiarie are my favorite RPG Books, I buy most of them, make this one awesome! Fluff for monsters!
For creatures that it would make sense to have as a PC, stats to allow you to do so. Or even a ARG breakout of points used to make them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A bestiary that fleshes out gaps in the existing Pathfinder coverage also would be useful.
Like more kytons, Qlippoth, etc, or creatures appropriate for Native American or African based settings.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Working backwards: Proof reading-somehow this seems to slip by and erratas become too vital.
Durable book-I have several 3.0'folders' that were once books.
If the entry is 2 pages, include a way or four to alter the critter. A local 'dm' runs hard to the text encounters because 'that's how its written'. No imagination.
Tactics and even a strategy for use. EG: I have a G. spider that lays webs in rough terrain, even creating pit traps and trip wires. They avoid actual melee as much as they can, but swarm a 'helpless foe. They are only about a CR 4 encounter as a nest, but the players now dodge any and all webbed areas.
No art or mood illustration behind a bit of the mechanical text.
If the book is to have a theme, have a theme! No "we're just adding this one cuz' Larry likes Elves". A friend even suggested a gritty entry on each monster to toughen up the game (more deadly).
If its based on a real monster, some background would be nice, particularly if it bears on how to run the monster.
Have CRs for the monsters that allow them to be used at multiple level, say weak/avg/strong so groups can be a bit different.