Things I hope are NOT in the Bestiary 5


Product Discussion

101 to 150 of 400 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

If you all like the You Hun Ye Gui so much, why don't you wish for it in the wish topic just to piss me off? I'm wishing you luck with getting it into the bestiary 5 (or any bestiary anywhere at all for that matter)

:-p


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Gotta love the assumption that any contradiction is because we want to piss you off or because we absolutely adore something and not just because your criteria are ridiculous and people are calling you on it.


This thread isn't about what we want to see in the next bestiary, it's about those things that we don't!


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Sometimes, it seems like everyone on this site is pissed off.


Yeah, pretty much.


How can my opinion about a few names be ridiculous criteria? Its my personal opinion about which names I don't want to see in bestiaries because I find them silly/ugly/ whatever you like to call it.


Because you're the one making a stink over multiple pages about it.


Because you attack my personal opinion. DUH.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't really find it very ridiculous—you don't like the aesthetic of certain names. I don't really understand why it's an issue... can we move on? Please?


If there are no further attacks on my opinions about WHAT I don't like to see in bestiary 5 i'm fine. (I maybe was wrong to attack others in the wish topic, but this topic is exactly what I needed to attack creatures I don't want in it, legally)

But I have a feeling this will all be cleaned away anyway.


I haven't picked up the Bestiary 4 yet, so I'm not sure if Paizo has published more of 'em, but I'd really like game designers to stop making so many cross-animals. I mean, the akhlut is probably the worst monster ever—a half killer whale/half wolf, really? I like griffons—eagle and lion works—but not every combination of animals is a winner.


Also, anything with a human face on something else, like the azruverda. I'll never use that thing... ever.


Dude, the You Hun Ye Gui is just a ghost. We already have ghosts.

To be on topic, I'm not really interested in more terrain giants. I always tend to skip those when reading my Bestiaries.

That being said, I'm sure Bestiary 5 will have giants in it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Not to diss your opinion of course, but the Akhlut isn't made up by Paizo, its a Inuit monster from Inuit mythology :-p

I'm actually pretty much in love with the Akhlut, and I learned about the myth/creature because of Paizo's bestiary 3.

Its even because of the Akhlut that I wanted to learn more about rare and strange myth/folklore creatures from all over the world, before that I only cared for the more known creaturs such as Medusa and Hydra's.


Gancanagh wrote:
...But I have a feeling this will all be cleaned away anyway.

Then stop making more work for the devs! XD

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Gancanagh, for someone who likes to dish so much, you have a surprising inability to take.


I had no idea the akhlut was inspired from real world mythology. Doesn't change the way I feel about it, though.


Zhangar wrote:
Dude, the You Hun Ye Gui is just a ghost. We already have ghosts.

That's a pretty good observation. Is there anything to distinguish them from ghosts? Otherwise, why do we need both? I'm also in favor of reducing the number of duplicate monsters. If a monster doesn't have enough "oomph" to distinguish it from other, similar monsters, then it doesn't really deserve a place in a bestiary, if you ask me.


Zhangar wrote:

Dude, the You Hun Ye Gui is just a ghost. We already have ghosts.

To be on topic, I'm not really interested in more terrain giants. I always tend to skip those when reading my Bestiaries.

That being said, I'm sure Bestiary 5 will have giants in it.

I know, but it was/is the perfect example of a name I don't really like.

And no Detect Magic, there is nothing special about the You Hun Ye Gui, so they are better left untouched forever.

And I really hope they continue with Giants but more like mythical giants like Antaeus and Jack-in-irons and not with Vulcanic Giants, Grassland Giants and Water Giants.


Now, something I'd like to see (and I know, not on topic, but still) would be a bestiary full of monsters we already got, just with class levels. You know, the sort of things we typically build ourselves, but in line with the NPC Codex—to cut down on preparation time. Orc barbarians, goblin rogues, kobold sorcerers, etc.


Oh, that is something I never like to see in Paizo Bestiaries, creatures with other weapons and armor and professions.

Like in the Monster Manuals of 4th edition there are Orcs with swords, orc berserkers, orc with crossbows and orc shamans.

I just like one Orc thank you. :-D

They would be nice for a MPC Manual tho.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Orthos wrote:
Gotta love the assumption that any contradiction is because we want to piss you off or because we absolutely adore something and not just because your criteria are ridiculous and people are calling you on it.

Everything has gotta be about him, remember? He 'suffers' from narcissism. ;)


Don't all fey?


Detect Magic wrote:

Sometimes people aren't lazy, they just forget how to pronounce words that aren't regularly used. Integrating words into your vocabulary from languages drastically different from your own takes time. You gotta feel 'em out first and sometimes that process can take a while. Most of us aren't linguists, after all.

Hell, I've been mispronouncing "otyugh" for years.

I'm not talking about the people that forget words. That happens to everyone. Hell, it recently happened to me with an Aztec word (tepoztopilli). But, at the very least, you look up the word later on right?

I'm not against Paizo having pronunciation guides. I think that's helpful for on-the-fly reading of words you aren't familiar with. But I am against Paizo changing the names of foreign monsters because people don't wanna spend the five grueling seconds to google it themselves.

Detect Magic wrote:
Now, something I'd like to see (and I know, not on topic, but still) would be a bestiary full of monsters we already got, just with class levels. You know, the sort of things we typically build ourselves, but in line with the NPC Codex—to cut down on preparation time. Orc barbarians, goblin rogues, kobold sorcerers, etc.

I'd like to see that as a separate, NPC Codex, rather than a Bestiary.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well seeing that the point of this thread is to be negative...

Things I don't want in the Bestiary:

Anything that Gancanagh likes ;)

I kid.


Odraude wrote:

Well seeing that the point of this thread is to be negative...

Things I don't want in the Bestiary:

Anything that Gancanagh likes ;)

Then you are in for a bummer, JJ said he liked the Gancanagh and Wesley liked the Karkadann and Batibat and even said he already has the Karkadann on the list, same with Namazu and some others + JJ and Wes are very much into mythological/cryptid/folklore creatures.

Bummer for you, happy happy for me :-D


The batibat sounds like a fat green hag.


The batibat is a fat ugly fey dryad-creature which I adore because I love everything ugly, makes me feel pretty myself. J/K ;-)

And she's more like a bogeyman(women) and dreamworld creature and less hag.


Hides in trees and drains people of their vitality—sounds like a green hag to me. Then again, she shares some similarity with traditional vampires, and even succubi, what with the sitting on peoples' chests and what not.


I don't know if she makes the same sound as the Green Hag ;-), but the Green Hag is thin, as far as I know there aren't any fat women monsters in pathfinder yet, and this is the perfect candidate for it cuz she's from mythology.

And just like Mika once sung, Big Girls you are beautiful!

She would also make the perfect evil dryad creature.


I don't want more made-up monsters unless they are Bestial Races... Though I would love to have more Mythological Monsters from the Real World.

Also what I was suggesting on naming and such is simply that you can alter the names to fit in with the local region and such. Sort of how a single type of creature might carry fifteen different names via various cultures. Such as the Cancanagh might be an Incubus or Faun/Satyr in disguise.


Well in pathfinder that would be a strange idea cuz the Gancanagh has an aura/scent that makes females (and maybe even males) addicted to him so they will do anything for him and turn on others to protect the Gancanagh.
The pathfinder Incubus is more into physical attacks and less about charming and Satyr's are ugly and aren't as powerful as the Gancanagh should be and they work more with music and less with their appearance/scent/aura.

Both Satyr and Fossegrim are CR4, so the Gancanagh should be around Succubus level as its pretty much the male version of that creature more than the Incubus is (in pathfinder at least)


Also in the next bestiary I like to see more unique dinosaurs and less weaker versions of already done ones.

Like Velociraptor and Styracosaurus are fine and all, but they just remind me of weaker versions of the Triceratops and Deinonychus so I rather see some more unique dinosaurs first. (Gallimimus or any other such fast-dinosaur and Therizinosaurus for example as they don't have matches with other dinosaurs that much, also pre-dinosaurs of course they are all unique if I remember correctly.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd like a "Monster Codex" with statted up versions of different common enemy foes. Like orc raiders, Hobgoblin generals, Ogre barbarians, etc.

But I would hate to see some of that info included within a Bestiary. Although I would be fine with a Monster Codex taking up a bestiary slot in the rulebook line up.

I would be actually pretty shocked if we didn't get a Yara-ma-yha-who eventually, although I imagine (like Alp Luachra), it would be in the bestiary as Yaramayhawho.

To be fair...I actually like a lot of the mythological monsters that Sincubus suggests. Perhaps not his interpretations however.

The Batibat actually has some pretty distinctive abilities compared to green hags. Some of the stories I have heard tell is that it inhabits a tree, and if the tree isn't properly respected during it's harvest and turned into a home, it will ooze out and haunt the place. I am tempted to actually classify it as a really weird ooze that can take humanoid form, rather than a fey or monstrous humanoid.


I love the story and the looks of the Yara-Ma-Yha-Who and it's behavior kinda reminds me of the Drop Bear (which also drops from trees onto its victims) they are from the same continent so the Yara would make a perfect replacement for the Drop Bear.

Yara-Ma-Yha-Who and Wolf-in-Sheep's-Clothing are the only creatures with multiple -'s in their name I actually like.
I wouldn't mind Yaramawhawho tho, cuz I also like the name Alpluachra more than the Alp-Luachra one.


I would like to see the giants from greek mythology, the ones born to destroy a particular god each. They would probably be something like greater titans in pathfinder. They should all be in the mid 20 CR range.


Detect Magic wrote:

Sometimes people aren't lazy, they just forget how to pronounce words that aren't regularly used. Integrating words into your vocabulary from languages drastically different from your own takes time. You gotta feel 'em out first and sometimes that process can take a while. Most of us aren't linguists, after all.

Hell, I've been mispronouncing "otyugh" for years.

There's a correct pronunciation for otyugh?

Shadow Lodge

Oh-tea-ugh is how I pronounce it.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Vowels. I am so sick of seeing vowels in every bestiary, and that includes that poser "Y". Just once I'd like to see a bestiary filled with monsters whose names are made up entirely of consonants.


Velcro Zipper wrote:
Vowels. I am so sick of seeing vowels in every bestiary, and that includes that poser "Y". Just once I'd like to see a bestiary filled with monsters whose names are made up entirely of consonants.

I found one. Sort of.

Wait, here we go, or this.


Velcro Zipper wrote:
Vowels. I am so sick of seeing vowels in every bestiary, and that includes that poser "Y". Just once I'd like to see a bestiary filled with monsters whose names are made up entirely of consonants.

Pftt. Consonants are overrated. I want to see monsters with names made up only of diacriticals.


I'm personally hoping the paizo staff and forum members aren't in the next bestiary :P

I can do without running for my life from an epic level cosmo :P


christos gurd wrote:
I would like to see the giants from greek mythology, the ones born to destroy a particular god each. They would probably be something like greater titans in pathfinder. They should all be in the mid 20 CR range.

i just realized i put this in the wrong thread.


I hope the Kitsune will be the last real-world-mythology creature that is taken by the 0HD race.

I like some races, but not taken from real mythology, Kitsune, Oread, Sylph and Undine for example should have been more than just playable races.


personally, i'd like to see something inspired by the Tera online Elins as a 0 HD race

but i think we need more playable humanoid fey. so a half-nymph and a pixie/halfling hybrid would be pretty cool

at the same time

we need more high level challenging fey

i suggest we include skinwalkers, maybe some other native american south american feylike monsters

we need more cute fey and less evil outsiders, less regional giants, less new true dragons, less undead


Funny :-p I for one would like more ugly and scary fey like Nuckelavee, Tunche and such non-humanoid, non-tiny, non-pretty fey creatures.

I do agree 100% with the Higher CR fey comment tho, gladly the Tunche was in the bestiary 4, which is both high CR, non-humanoid and monstrous. I like more of those creeps!

I believe we have enough fairy critters... I mean: Nixie, Sprite, Pixie, Atomie, Grig, Lurker in Light, Lyrakien (which looks like just another fairy), Tooth Fairy is more than enough for me personally.


Gancanagh wrote:

Funny :-p I for one would like more ugly and scary fey like Nuckelavee, Tunche and such non-humanoid, non-tiny, non-pretty fey creatures.

I do agree 100% with the Higher CR fey comment tho, gladly the Tunche was in the bestiary 4, which is both high CR, non-humanoid and monstrous. I like more of those creeps!

I believe we have enough fairy critters... I mean: Nixie, Sprite, Pixie, Atomie, Grig, Lurker in Light, Lyrakien (which looks like just another fairy), Tooth Fairy is more than enough for me personally.

i'd like some of those too

but the small pretty humanoid fey i want, are PC options

i'd like some of the ugly, scary and creepy fey too

i always wanted to play a pixie, nymph or Elin, but they aren't options due to being heavily statused as monsters for decades


Umbriere Moonwhisper wrote:
...we need more high level challenging fey.

I created a thread to address that problem, but it never really kicked off.

Umbriere Moonwhisper wrote:
...i'd like some of the ugly, scary and creepy fey too.

The Pale Man!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Detect Magic wrote:
Umbriere Moonwhisper wrote:
...we need more high level challenging fey.
I created a thread to address that problem, but it never really kicked off.

I really like that Pan creature you created there Detecty, but too bad that topic was so long ago so I can't respond to it anymore (people would find me a topic-digger) :-p

Maybe you should post that same Pan (with stats) in the Bestiary 5 wish topic? So people can react to it? And its pretty much a wish from you anyway! :-)

101 to 150 of 400 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Paizo Products / Product Discussion / Things I hope are NOT in the Bestiary 5 All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.