|
I'm a little more then just disappointed. Every story I've heard about Phooka's describes them as large black goats(or mares) with red eyes that hunger for the flesh of humans, they have voracious appetites and mastery over illusions, often making themselves appear as harmless animals to lure in their victims. They're often describes as among the most powerful members of the Unseelie court. And, what do I get bunny girls, how disappointing. :(
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There seems to be a lot of overlap between Furry fans and Paizo fans, so it's good business sense to cater to catgirls and foxgirls and bunny-girls.
Oddly, searching 'phooka' in google images shows a lot of bunny people.
So it's not without precedence...I'm just not sure what that precedence is...
Well, wikipedia says
The creatures were said to be shape changers which could take the appearance of black horses, goats and rabbits.
So maybe that's it.
Yeah, I almost put the horse sort of them in Convergent Paths: Fey Archetypes. I think the rabbit version was popularized by the title character of the play Harvey by Mary Chase.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll gite it a pass. After seeing earth djinn get the Hebrew name for Satan, and efreet planetouched being named a transliteration of their name that is indistinguishable to native speakers of Arabic, I don't think it's so bad. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Phooka probably doesn't have a 'true shape', or at least, one that any mortal has seen. Its a natural shape-shifter - why would it even need a natural shape? it could look like just about anything.
My first D&D encounter with a Phooka was from Tall Tales of the Wee Folk (AD&D), and I believe the main one in that tome was a rabbit normally. In that source they are spelled 'Pooka'.
However, the illustration shows it looking like a dog (Greyhound), and the text states that they can probably take any form (many of the more usual ones are listed). It also says they are related to nightmares, and enjoy alcohol, smoking, and gambling.
Sounds like that one family member that everyone avoids at the reunion.
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Google did reveal multiple takes on the phooka, but I saw mostly goat people, and mares. Only one bunny, strange. Still I wish they (Paizo's) would have went with a well scarier monster rather then annoying fast talking rabbit girls. Maybe someone at Paizo's has a fetish.
There are plenty of scary monsters in the book already. One of the goals of ANY Bestiary is to give a range of creatures, in type, CR, appearance, and style. You can certainly change any of them how you want in your game... but our goal is a certain amount of variety. And that means, among other things, that some monsters will invariably not be things any one GM (Including me) won't be a fan of.
Personally, I like how the phooka turned out.
I like the idea of a bunny girl fey and the Pooka fits that idea well, but I do wish the art for it was better.
Shall I compare a Pathfinder 'gorgon' with the three Gorgons of Greek myth? Usually they make a good attempt at linking folklore with game stats, but sometimes they just steal a name that sounds right for the monster they already statted.
I think what you're describing sounds mighty similar to the kelpie from B2. Maybe they just didn't want to be accused of revisting the same monster.
The actual mythological gorgon is covered with the medusa, which in turn in the original mythology was the name of one specific gorgon.
Then there are a lot more monsters that aren't quite like their mythological inspiration, for example a greek chimera doesn't have wings, a stinger tail or a dragon head, but a snake head on its tail.
I used to have an issue with paizo using names for monsters that don't fit their namesake, but I got over it a while ago.
We have the gorgon and medusa situation, then there are demons and daemons, which originally are just british and american spellings for the same thing, we have alraune and mandragora, which are just the same thing in german and english, wyvern and vouivre which are english and french for the same thing and i think there was more.
There is a chance that the scary goat version of a phooka will come eventually as a púca, pooka, phouka or phooca.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are you sure that's confusion?
And none or very few of those name assignments actually have anything to do with Paizo.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Shall I compare a Pathfinder 'gorgon' with the three Gorgons of Greek myth? Usually they make a good attempt at linking folklore with game stats, but sometimes they just steal a name that sounds right for the monster they already statted.
...and sometimes they know their mythical critters better than we think.
then there are demons and daemons, which originally are just british and american spellings for the same thing.
Daemons were actually a Greek -and later, Roman- thing, sometimes referred to as a creative or inspiring spirit/thing.
Edit: same origin, yes, but the spellings are different for daemon and demon for a purpose: to avoid confusion with the judeochristian evil version. I believe the problem there is that the word was just borrowed during Greek translations. Anyway, point being, not just a random change to describe the same thing as two separate things.|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In a LOT of cases (such as the medusa/gorgon thing, or the demon/daemon thing), those are actually things we (gladly) inherited from Dungeons & Dragons.
Being able to use similar real-world mythological names like this to represent a HUGE range of monsters is a strength, because that allows for a wider range of monsters that have a built-in sense of tradition and weight to them that a completely made up monster lacks.
then there are demons and daemons, which originally are just british and american spellings for the same thing.Daemons were actually a Greek -and later, Roman- thing, sometimes referred to as a creative or inspiring spirit/thing.
Edit: same origin, yes, but the spellings are different for daemon and demon for a purpose: to avoid confusion with the judeochristian evil version. I believe the problem there is that the word was just borrowed during Greek translations. Anyway, point being, not just a random change to describe the same thing as two separate things.
Originally "daimon" for benevolent spirits, later thought of as neutral spirits, then when Christianity started to define all non-God-affiliated supernatural things as evil they appropriated the term (by then linguistically drifted to "demon").
I strongly suspect many people mispronounce daemon.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Phooka is a lot more accurate than Manitou
That's the thing though... they're ALL accurate as Pathfinder monsters.
Whether they're accurate representations of the original inspirational myths (who themselves are not always interested in being canonical with themselves) is an entirely different story. And since a Pathfinder Bestiary isn't intended to ever be an accurate and scholarly representation/report on real-world myths but instead a game resource INSPIRED by myths... it's unfair to say that they're inaccurate.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Considering that it's completely imaginary, whatever PF says is a Phooka is a Phooka in PF.
What I wanna know is if it's going to be completely different from the myth...why name it after an existing mythical creature?
Why not just name it something else?
I strongly suspect many people mispronounce daemon.For the purposes of Pathfinder, the mispronouncing you suspect is in fact legit.
That's paradoxically reassuring. :)
Does it rhyme with Simon or stamen?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Does it rhyme with Simon
Man, now I can't get the thought out of my head that Daemon is pronounced "Dee-moan".
Die-ah-mon.
I haven't had a chance to check this out yet. Is there a preview of the illustration in question somewhere?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Every time I see this thread pop up, I can't help but think the title should be the punchline to a joke.
Probably one told in meme form, with Ben Stiller saying the thread title, and the second part being a picture of Alan Rickman as Snape owning him.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I pronounce daemon as "day-mon," and demon ad "dee-mon." Not sure how close I am to the mark there...
Outside of Pathfinder and D&D contexts, daemon is also pronounced dee-mon. In Pathfinder, you're probably safe pronouncing it anything other than that. :)
Phooka is a lot more accurate than ManitouThat's the thing though... they're ALL accurate as Pathfinder monsters.
Whether they're accurate representations of the original inspirational myths (who themselves are not always interested in being canonical with themselves) is an entirely different story. And since a Pathfinder Bestiary isn't intended to ever be an accurate and scholarly representation/report on real-world myths but instead a game resource INSPIRED by myths... it's unfair to say that they're inaccurate.
That's very true, if it weren't that way a lot of cthulhu mythos creatures would have a statblock only consisting of the line "You go insane and die."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I pronounce daemon as "day-mon," and demon ad "dee-mon." Not sure how close I am to the mark there...
That is how I have always pronounced that word, to differentiate it from demon.
I pronounce daemon as "day-mon," and demon ad "dee-mon." Not sure how close I am to the mark there...That is how I have always pronounced that word, to differentiate it from demon.
Same. And yet my players still get confused...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It was even more confusing in 2e, when "daemon" was pronounced "yugoloth."
I guess they were Balkan fiends back then.
I pronounce daemon as "day-mon," and demon ad "dee-mon." Not sure how close I am to the mark there...That is how I have always pronounced that word, to differentiate it from demon.
In computing, daemon is (usually) pronounced as you do. In our industry, it's a program running invisibly behind the scenes, usually serving up data but sometimes performing other tasks.
The art of the phooka is one of the worst pieces I've seen in a Paizo product in a long time.
As for flesh eating phookas, those stories exist, but they're the minority. There are a lot of stories of phookas scaring the living crap out of people just for fun. There are also lots of stories about them being helpful.
What I wanna know is if it's going to be completely different from the myth...why name it after an existing mythical creature?
Why not just name it something else?
Why? It's just as imaginary either way. Lots of mythological creatures have different depictions in stories ... you're just creating another one.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Every time I see this thread pop up, I can't help but think the title should be the punchline to a joke.
"That's not a phooka ... now this? THIS is a phooka." -- Crocodile Dundee
That's very true, if it weren't that way a lot of cthulhu mythos creatures would have a statblock only consisting of the line "You go insane and die."Phooka is a lot more accurate than ManitouThat's the thing though... they're ALL accurate as Pathfinder monsters.
Whether they're accurate representations of the original inspirational myths (who themselves are not always interested in being canonical with themselves) is an entirely different story. And since a Pathfinder Bestiary isn't intended to ever be an accurate and scholarly representation/report on real-world myths but instead a game resource INSPIRED by myths... it's unfair to say that they're inaccurate.
You do know the statblocks for Cthulhu mythos entities in Call of Cthulhu (and Arkham Horror) aren't like that either, aside from a few exceptions?
At first I disliked this Pooka very much (I aways wanted the black horse version with beautiful silver manes and hairs, the moon steed version of the fey) but now I accept this creature and kinda like it.
BUT I DO HOPE pathfinder will release the Shadhavar sometime (bestiary 5 hint hint) to make up for the lack of evil black horse (unicorn in this case) creature.
I love some of the changed creatures as some mytho-creatures look very much the same as other creatures from other myths, I don't mind the Gorgon thing at all, Catoblepas is very different.
I do hate the Barghest and Salamander change from D&D, I'd rather see the Shadow Goblin be a Barghest-shape changer and the Barghest the Hound of ill Omen type of creature it is suppose to be, Shadow Mastiff could merge with the Shadow Goblin as its hound/wolf form.
THe Salamander should be called flamekeeper/flamebrother or whatever name, the real salamander from myth should have been used instead for Paizo Salamander. Same with Chimera.
I do love the Leshy, Rusalka and many others change.
And THANK GOD there are the Vouivre and Alraune in pathfinder, those are two of my all-time favorite monsters, while I don't like the Wyvern at all, Mandragora is another of my favorites so i'm happy we both have the Mandragora AND Alraune.
@Gancanagh, so is the nightmare not evil or black enough for you?
You do know the statblocks for Cthulhu mythos entities in Call of Cthulhu (and Arkham Horror) aren't like that either, aside from a few exceptions?That's very true, if it weren't that way a lot of cthulhu mythos creatures would have a statblock only consisting of the line "You go insane and die."Phooka is a lot more accurate than ManitouThat's the thing though... they're ALL accurate as Pathfinder monsters.
Whether they're accurate representations of the original inspirational myths (who themselves are not always interested in being canonical with themselves) is an entirely different story. And since a Pathfinder Bestiary isn't intended to ever be an accurate and scholarly representation/report on real-world myths but instead a game resource INSPIRED by myths... it's unfair to say that they're inaccurate.
Probably because the designers of that game also wanted to make them a little more interesting from the gameplay perspective.