| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Common theme here is aberrations
Everquest is an MMO, thus it has no relevance.
Why does it being an MMO have anything to do with it? I am sure there have been novels where kobolds are mentioned as canine in appearance. I was just giving an example of a setting that had kobolds as canine-looking. And as TOZ pointed out, there is at least 1 tabletop RPG setting that has canine kobolds (Norrath/Everquest). I am sure there are others.
But, that's getting a bit off topic.
@Orthos: Linnorms actually appeared in 2nd edition AD&D. Sample of one of them And I believe they also show up in 3rd edition.
|
And how many people are actually playing it? 3?Everquest is an MMO, thus it has no relevance.You sure about that?
Likely at least as many people as play Pathfinder.
Add in WoW and I'm pretty goddamn sure that there are more of them than Pathfinder players.
But out of them all, it's gotta be the gelatinous cube. I don't know why, but I have a love of the oozes, and the cubes are just to funny looking not to love.
It was evolved to fit on graph paper! How could anyone dislike a G-Cube!
Owlbears are a close second though!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But out of them all, it's gotta be the gelatinous cube. I don't know why, but I have a love of the oozes, and the cubes are just to funny looking not to love.
It was evolved to fit on graph paper! How could anyone dislike a G-Cube!
Owlbears are a close second though!
We use hexes, so my gelatinous cubes are hexagonal in base :D
hexagonal prisms, or some sort of soccer-ball-esqe polyhedron?
I don't see why you cannot just assume kobolds are canine-like in your campaign. What a monster look like is just pure fluff and flavor text.
@Orthos: Linnorms actually appeared in 2nd edition AD&D. Sample of one of them And I believe they also show up in 3rd edition.
Like I said, I wasn't around for 2E. I don't recall seeing them in 3E, but I might have just not had the right books.
@Orthos: Linnorms actually appeared in 2nd edition AD&D. Sample of one of them And I believe they also show up in 3rd edition.Like I said, I wasn't around for 2E. I don't recall seeing them in 3E, but I might have just not had the right books.
For the curious (especially those like me who can't rest until they've found the answer), Linnorms appeared in Monster Manual II for 3E.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For the curious (especially those like me who can't rest until they've found the answer), Linnorms appeared in Monster Manual II for 3E.@Orthos: Linnorms actually appeared in 2nd edition AD&D. Sample of one of them And I believe they also show up in 3rd edition.Like I said, I wasn't around for 2E. I don't recall seeing them in 3E, but I might have just not had the right books.
Thanks! Note to self to check that out when I get home.
We use hexes, so my gelatinous cubes are hexagonal in base :DBut out of them all, it's gotta be the gelatinous cube. I don't know why, but I have a love of the oozes, and the cubes are just to funny looking not to love.
It was evolved to fit on graph paper! How could anyone dislike a G-Cube!
Owlbears are a close second though!
O_o
That is just too far, man! Too far!! Complete nonsense!
I mean no one uses hexes! Phffft!
/end joke
For the curious (especially those like me who can't rest until they've found the answer), Linnorms appeared in Monster Manual II for 3E.@Orthos: Linnorms actually appeared in 2nd edition AD&D. Sample of one of them And I believe they also show up in 3rd edition.Like I said, I wasn't around for 2E. I don't recall seeing them in 3E, but I might have just not had the right books.
Yep. pg 140. I don't think any of the other books I have has them. *checks his MM3* Nope, none in there.
And I was referring to your comment on Pathfinder introducing linnorms. I do like Pathfinder's linnorms, honestly. They have a lot more than 2nd or 3rd edition ever did.
|
I liked Perytons and Spriggans and Vegepygmies and even Dire Corbies. Nice to see they made the jump.
Also Water Weirds (the 1e version).
Cambions, Myconids, Wemics, Thri-Kreen. There's lots of neat stuff back in the old books.
And lots of stuff best left buried. :)
Of the stuff removed from the OGL, the Displacer Beast and maybe the Mind Flayer are the only ones that I'd really miss (assuming I didn't use them whenever I wanted anyway).
I would love to see the kercpa make a comeback. I plan to convert them myself and include them into my setting. Not sure if they should be magical beasts or fey creatures. Leaning towards magical beasts, personally.
Seen a "bone weird" in one of my old 2nd edition books. A hit would remove a few bones from the body, and force a save vs death or the victim would die of shock. Almost tempted to convert that as well.
I like looking through some of the old monster books and seeing some of the things they came up with. Some make me want to see them in Pathfinder. Others make me want to ask if they were on LSD when they came up with them.
I remembered another that I really like, and am so glad Pathfinder includes them: the Aurumvorax. Don't know what it is about these, but I absolutely love them. Even made a few variants of them for my own setting. It made me sad that they never had it for 3rd edition (but I think it was included in a dragon magazine? can't remember).
For the curious (especially those like me who can't rest until they've found the answer), Linnorms appeared in Monster Manual II for 3E.@Orthos: Linnorms actually appeared in 2nd edition AD&D. Sample of one of them And I believe they also show up in 3rd edition.Like I said, I wasn't around for 2E. I don't recall seeing them in 3E, but I might have just not had the right books.Yep. pg 140. I don't think any of the other books I have has them. *checks his MM3* Nope, none in there.
And I was referring to your comment on Pathfinder introducing linnorms. I do like Pathfinder's linnorms, honestly. They have a lot more than 2nd or 3rd edition ever did.
I wasn't aware of the others but thanks =) I'll amend that to "I prefer Paizo's take on Linnorms" then ;)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Norker (We need another Goblinoid!)
Kopru (It's a shame this mega-great monster never had an illustration worth anything.)
Rakasta (Will the real cat-folk please stand up? Please stand up.)
Xvart (Waaay to cool to be forgotten.)
And, of course,
Githyanki
Mind Flayer
Beholder
Yuan Ti
(But these aren't really gone; they still make regular appearances in my -- and every other PF gamer's -- games.)
I wasn't aware of the others but thanks =) I'll amend that to "I prefer Paizo's take on Linnorms" then ;)For the curious (especially those like me who can't rest until they've found the answer), Linnorms appeared in Monster Manual II for 3E.@Orthos: Linnorms actually appeared in 2nd edition AD&D. Sample of one of them And I believe they also show up in 3rd edition.Like I said, I wasn't around for 2E. I don't recall seeing them in 3E, but I might have just not had the right books.Yep. pg 140. I don't think any of the other books I have has them. *checks his MM3* Nope, none in there.
And I was referring to your comment on Pathfinder introducing linnorms. I do like Pathfinder's linnorms, honestly. They have a lot more than 2nd or 3rd edition ever did.
If you are able to get your hands on a copy, Dragon #356 (June 2007) has an Ecology of the Linnorm article.
Frankly, I'm shocked that no one has yet mentioned the explosion dog.
If you are able to get your hands on a copy, Dragon #356 (June 2007) has an Ecology of the Linnorm article.I wasn't aware of the others but thanks =) I'll amend that to "I prefer Paizo's take on Linnorms" then ;)For the curious (especially those like me who can't rest until they've found the answer), Linnorms appeared in Monster Manual II for 3E.@Orthos: Linnorms actually appeared in 2nd edition AD&D. Sample of one of them And I believe they also show up in 3rd edition.Like I said, I wasn't around for 2E. I don't recall seeing them in 3E, but I might have just not had the right books.Yep. pg 140. I don't think any of the other books I have has them. *checks his MM3* Nope, none in there.
And I was referring to your comment on Pathfinder introducing linnorms. I do like Pathfinder's linnorms, honestly. They have a lot more than 2nd or 3rd edition ever did.
And you can get your hands on a copy, they still have some in stock :)
Beholders, assweres, rot grubs, thri kreens, and manscorpions all wrapped up in a bed of sleeping.
If you are able to get your hands on a copy, Dragon #356 (June 2007) has an Ecology of the Linnorm article.I wasn't aware of the others but thanks =) I'll amend that to "I prefer Paizo's take on Linnorms" then ;)For the curious (especially those like me who can't rest until they've found the answer), Linnorms appeared in Monster Manual II for 3E.@Orthos: Linnorms actually appeared in 2nd edition AD&D. Sample of one of them And I believe they also show up in 3rd edition.Like I said, I wasn't around for 2E. I don't recall seeing them in 3E, but I might have just not had the right books.Yep. pg 140. I don't think any of the other books I have has them. *checks his MM3* Nope, none in there.
And I was referring to your comment on Pathfinder introducing linnorms. I do like Pathfinder's linnorms, honestly. They have a lot more than 2nd or 3rd edition ever did.
And you can get your hands on a copy, they still have some in stock :)
Sweet. It also comes with a Sea Linnorm and the end of the "Ecology of the..." article. Thinking of converting it over to Pathfinder.
Why not bring back old faves like the beholder and the illithid under slightly different names...the eye beast and the mind slayer?
Kind of like the miniatures of the 1980s...companies that do not have a license with TSR made monster minis under slightly different names...
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why not bring back old faves like the beholder and the illithid under slightly different names...the eye beast and the mind slayer?
Some 3PP have already done so.
As for why Paizo does not, possibly some combination of;
1) Illegal.
2) Rude to the people who so progressively put hundreds of other elements of their IP up for grabs with the Open Gaming License.
3) An admission that one's own creations are somehow 'not good enough' to stand beside old classics.
4) Tacky.
Why not bring back old faves like the beholder and the illithid under slightly different names...the eye beast and the mind slayer?
Kind of like the miniatures of the 1980s...companies that do not have a license with TSR made monster minis under slightly different names...
Try the isitoq, Argus, Hyakume, Gibbering Mouther, Shoggoth and Azgenzak, all awesome eye-based monsters.
Mind Flayer, well we have the Intellect Devourer, Caulborn and Brain Ooze.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
for the mind flayer. you have DSP's Phrenic Scourge.
Hook Horrors and Cranium Rats.
Oh man, completely forgot about cranium rats. Yes please.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why not bring back old faves like the beholder and the illithid under slightly different names...the eye beast and the mind slayer?Some 3PP have already done so.
As for why Paizo does not, possibly some combination of;
1) Illegal.
2) Rude to the people who so progressively put hundreds of other elements of their IP up for grabs with the Open Gaming License.
3) An admission that one's own creations are somehow 'not good enough' to stand beside old classics.
4) Tacky.
That tackiness is what makes old school D&D so much fun.
Yeah on the tack. My players yearn for some of the terri-bad old monsters. Their groans motivate them! Then they report they had a lot of fun, and that it was good to face the best from years ago.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And why the hell were they barking at people in FR novels and games...
Because of this:
"and their language (which sounds like small dogs yapping),"3) An admission that one's own creations are somehow 'not good enough' to stand beside old classics.
Even if it might be true. (And is absolutely true, AFAIC.)
But then, I still play 3.5, so I still have all these monsters (and every one listed on this thread so far) in 3.5 format.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Gas Spores.
Executioner's Hood.
Heck, with some work, you could change the darkmantle into lurkers above, trappers, and executioner's hoods.
Cloaker.
And I will always, always have a place in my heart for the tirapheg.
Mind Flayer, well we have the Intellect Devourer, Caulborn and Brain Ooze.
It's important to recognize that the original intellect devourer didn't do skinwalking. Paizo really improved on the monster, in my opinion.
Gas Spores.
Executioner's Hood.Heck, with some work, you could change the darkmantle into lurkers above, trappers, and executioner's hoods.
Cloaker.
And I will always, always have a place in my heart for the tirapheg.
I believe those in your third sentence are in Bestiary 4.
4) Tacky.
That tackiness is what makes old school D&D so much fun.
Not tacky because the monsters were tacky, tacky because *stealing* is tacky.
Puh-leaze, the whole game itself "steals" from myths and Tolkien (balrog / Type VI demon / balor anyone?).
My favorite old monster thing wasn't so much separate monsters as it was the concepts and monster customizations coming out of the 2e Van Richten's Guides. Particularly the ones out of Van Richten's Guide to the Created (love intelligent golems as a product of obsession)
4) Tacky.
That tackiness is what makes old school D&D so much fun.
Not tacky because the monsters were tacky, tacky because *stealing* is tacky.
Stealing is to creativity as butter is to toast.
Seugathi are also a good stand in for Mind flayers.
The Death Sheep, of course.