OK what kind of monster are you MORE than tired of seeing?
Monsters that I think are a bit overused or which we have more than enough of already:
Demons and to a lesser extent Devils
Humanoid Undead
Traditional drakes/dragons
Incorporeal, wispy, shadowy undead. Blergh.
Humanoids with animal themes. (Wasp-people, Dog-people - you get the idea...)
WHat endzeitgeist said, and I'll add giant bugs.
+1 to incorporeal undead. If you're going to make a ghost-type creature, please make it more unusual than just another shadowy thing.
Yes, please no more bipedal, opposably thumbed animal-people.
*scribbles notes*
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Id rather see now themed monster manual's for a setting or for an area or a type of setting.
I am not sure if you are aware but this thread is research for our up coming kickstarter which we are goign to have over 20+ 3PP, freelance and Paizo staff writers to submit monsters to. So I am sure there will be several that are connected to 3PP campaign settings.
| 2 people 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.
You're describing one of my aunts quite well.
Monsters that I think are a bit overused or which we have more than enough of already:
Demons and to a lesser extent Devils
Humanoid Undead
Traditional drakes/dragons
Going to also add ape-like monstrous humanoid/magical beasts/etc. There are already a ton of different creatures with this theme, and most of them are hard to really distinguish from one another.
also another pet peeve: If you are going to take a creature's name from mythology/folklore, try to at least stat it up like the mythological version. It's really annoying to see a recognizable name of a critter applied to a monster that has nothing in common with the monster it is suppose to describe.
OK I think I have decided hat we are going to do 2 pages per monster (a la Privateer Press' Monsternomicon). Is there any reason you think this would be a bad idea?
also another pet peeve: If you are going to take a creature's name from mythology/folklore, try to at least stat it up like the mythological version. It's really annoying to see a recognizable name of a critter applied to a monster that has nothing in common with the monster it is suppose to describe.
True, though there are tons of monsters that were incorporated into D&D in this manner, mainly in the first AD&D Monster Manual and subsequent publications. Paizo is good about taking on these sorts of things in their "Revisited" line, and they've put a lot of mythological and legendary creatures into the Bestiaries.
That tends to leave a bit of a problem. The number of mythological creatures left to stat up for the game is lessening. I went on a search for one to do for RPG Superstar this year and the problem with a lot of "monsters" out there is...they're just not scary. Take the fachan, a monster of Scottish origin with one leg, one arm, and one eye. In a Pathfinder game, I'd quickly develop a routine of disarm, trip, and grapple, all of which it would be at a disadvantage against. Of course, the athach was derived from a variation of the fachan, and it worked out fairly well.
I'm not saying it can't be done. The challenge is finding something Paizo hasn't already done and do it as well as they've managed with other mythological/folkloric creatures.
I think with a degree of creativity you can do so however. And there is a difference between having to revamp a creatures abilities description for game reasons, and just making stuff out of scratch.
I was reminded of this when skimming through a recent bestiary, where the Domovoi is statted up as a CE small fey that lives on the edge of forests and ruins and likes hurting people. That to me at least doesn't really evoke the "helpful if mischievous house spirit" that the Domovoi is usually described as.
OK I think I have decided hat we are going to do 2 pages per monster (a la Privateer Press' Monsternomicon). Is there any reason you think this would be a bad idea?
Just make sure the printed version has them on the left and right pages as opposed to the right and left pages. That way the book can be opened to see the entire monster at once.
A word to the wise--publishing monster books is the most expensive kind of book (I know).
I know. That is why we really built this as a 3PP group event using kickstarter. The biggest issue being the artwork was one of the easiest parts to deal with. Once we got that part locked down, it was just getting the 3PP and freelancers on board. We really crunched the numbers on this to make sure doing this would be possible. I thinking having at the 3PP and freelancers on board is really what is making this possible.
So I am working on the design for our upcoming Pathfinder monster kickstarter and of course I have been working on the graphic design side of things, so I wanted to show you the chapter opener pages that I created and wanted to get everyones opinion on which color they thought would look better: Blue or Red? Please let me know!
Blue delivers a more pronounced contrast - for headers that one will work well. For statblocks, it might become jarring - for those I'd prefer red.
I assume statblocks will be in a normal type right? Having to read flavor/stats with weird fonts/colors can be hard on the eyes.
I assume statblocks will be in a normal type right? Having to read flavor/stats with weird fonts/colors can be hard on the eyes.
Yes you are correct. I personally make stat blocks as easy to read as possible. Making something clean and clear is always a good thing.
|
Without reading through a hundred-odd posts, I would expect a GREAT monster book to meet all of the following criteria:
- Full color illustrations by talented artists
- Index of monsters by CR
- One entry per page (or start a new page when dealing with multiple-page entries)
- A detailed Lore section that the GM can use to describe the monster's abilities, based on the Knowledge (dungeoneering) or Knowledge (nature) rolls made by the players
- Statblocks checked for statistical accuracy and compliance with game rules
That having been said, I am more likely to purchase a book that has unique critters or those based on a particular culture's myths and legends than just a generic book of more dragons, for example.
I'd love to see a book of non-Japanese Asian monsters (Người Rừng, Conrit, Zhàyǔ, Jiufeng, Pixiu, Kumiho, Bulgasari, etc.) or a book of Native American mythological beasts.