Bestiary 7 Wishes List.


Product Discussion

451 to 500 of 841 << first < prev | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wannabe Demon Lord wrote:
So, if you may recall, between the two bestiaries which featured demigods, B4 and B6, we had B5, which did not include any demigods but had a full 300 monsters. Do you guys think that we should alternate, one non-demigod bestiary in between each demigod-prevalent bestiary, or just include Demigods every time with a smaller roster overall?

I think keeping a similar ratio to B4 is most appropriate. I don't know if we need another B6 style bestiary, what with all the archfiends, Horsemen, and for the most part Great Old Ones done.


Not B6 style please.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Dragon78 wrote:
Not B6 style please.

After five low-CR bestiaries, I think it's about time for the pendulum to swing the other way.


Only if every CR26-30 creature in the book is not of the outsider type(well maybe if it is CN, LN, or an elemental).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

A fungal spore faction like the formian (From bestiary 4)

Kinda taking the Myecloid (from bestiary 3) and expanding its fluff and and different CR of them. Like a Fungus spore maker, or Myecloid sappling.

A High CR (20+)
A few scaling mid terr CRs (5-15)
A low Cr would
be great.

(Also plant familiars for witches and wizards that what to do Herbalist stuff would be cool ----Leshys)


My players have been pretty vocal about wanting some gaps filled for animal shaman druids who want to use the higher level parts of their wild shape. Huge (not magical beast) wolf is the most in-demand, but any of the single-animal druids with gaps in the upper (and lower) size categories would be happy.

Awesome huge wolf? Adorable little tiny wolf?


Wannabe Demon Lord wrote:
So, if you may recall, between the two bestiaries which featured demigods, B4 and B6, we had B5, which did not include any demigods but had a full 300 monsters. Do you guys think that we should alternate, one non-demigod bestiary in between each demigod-prevalent bestiary, or just include Demigods every time with a smaller roster overall?

That is... a very good question. I'm tempted to say a smaller number each time save for the problem that if one gets into newer groups that don't have any, it's pretty useful to have a selection.

Mm, I'll go with a smaller roster each time, bestiaries come out slow enough it's more important to have some sooner.


LittleMissNaga wrote:

My players have been pretty vocal about wanting some gaps filled for animal shaman druids who want to use the higher level parts of their wild shape. Huge (not magical beast) wolf is the most in-demand, but any of the single-animal druids with gaps in the upper (and lower) size categories would be happy.

Awesome huge wolf? Adorable little tiny wolf?

The trouble with that is that most (but not all) animal-types in the game are based on real-world creatures, and variations of a lot of animals in upper and lower size categories simply don't exist. I believe the largest canid ever was Epicyon, which was about the size of a lion. That certainly doesn't mean it can't be done, but I'd personally rather see prehistoric creatures like Megistotherium or Sarkastodon used to fill the huge mammalian carnivore niche, though even those are something of a stretch in terms of size. But if Titanoboa can be size colossal...though I digress.

On the other hand, a tiny wolf-like animal can be included quite easily, considering how many small types of canids there are. I'd like to see dholes.


I'm not opposed to them coming up with more animals that are more purely fantastic. The gorthek is one of my favorite beasties.

I am totally up for dholes, though.


Wannabe Demon Lord wrote:
LittleMissNaga wrote:

My players have been pretty vocal about wanting some gaps filled for animal shaman druids who want to use the higher level parts of their wild shape. Huge (not magical beast) wolf is the most in-demand, but any of the single-animal druids with gaps in the upper (and lower) size categories would be happy.

Awesome huge wolf? Adorable little tiny wolf?

The trouble with that is that most (but not all) animal-types in the game are based on real-world creatures, and variations of a lot of animals in upper and lower size categories simply don't exist. I believe the largest canid ever was Epicyon, which was about the size of a lion. That certainly doesn't mean it can't be done, but I'd personally rather see prehistoric creatures like Megistotherium or Sarkastodon used to fill the huge mammalian carnivore niche, though even those are something of a stretch in terms of size. But if Titanoboa can be size colossal...though I digress.

On the other hand, a tiny wolf-like animal can be included quite easily, considering how many small types of canids there are. I'd like to see dholes.

Bats' sizes go from Fine to Large, so... :)


Well it is not like they haven't made up giant versions of existing animals though the odds of seeing a giant wolf of the animal type seems low...at least long after you actually need it;)


Colossal centipedes and other things have been made up (at least I really hope they were made up. Eugh...) without warranting a shift into magical beast territory.

Admittedly, most of the critters that get the tiny-through-colossal treatment are vermin, but there's no reason that B7 absolutely couldn't make the wolf druids (or lion druids, or boar druids, or whatever) happy.


Titanoboa is such a bad example of a colossal monster, considering a Giant Anaconda is 60ft. long and gargantuan and Elasmosaurus is 45ft. long and huge.


Updating my list ;)

- The Fire and Water equivalents of the Anemos and Glaistig
- A CR 20-23 Archon, similar to the Draconal, Solar and Veranallia
- Entothropes (scorpion, centipede and beetle)
- Manasaputras
- Demodands
- Diz
- Asuras
- Rakshasas
- Leshies
- Giant moths and butterflies... because those giant caterpillars need to transform at some point :P
- Silver, Chitin and Water Golem
- Clay, Ice and Clockwork Colossi
- Familiars (songbird, dog, mole, fish, kiwi, aye-aye)
- Troops (dwarven phalanx, elven archers, orc raiders, hobgoblin squadron)
- A 0HD race of dragons (Dragonborn)
- A 0HD race of giants (Half-giant)
- A 0HD race of Lawful outsider descendants


Earth, fire, water versions of the Anemos would be cool.

I agree, those giant caterpillars need to transform into something.

A CR20 Archon would be nice.

I would also like more entothropes(scorpion, beetle, and fly).


Maybe to add a few others:
- Giant songbird (nightingale, woodpecker, cardinal, etc)
- Giant hummingbird
- Giant waddling bird (ibis, crane, flamingo, heron, etc)
- New marsupials:
* Bandicoot
* Opossum
* Sarcophilus (that's the Tasmanian Devil... but Tasmania isn't in Golarion :P )
- New megafauna:
* Diprotodon (it's also a marsupial... extincted though :P)
* Giant teratorn
* Harpy eagle (it's the Haast's eagle, a giant eagle said to be an evolutionary species of another megafaune, the Moa (B6))
* Elasmotherium
- Giant termite
- Giant worms:
* Earthworm
* Velvet worm
- Giant cicada


Anyone remember that speculative documentary The Future is Wild from 2003, aired on either Discovery or Animal Planet, I don't remember which, but it was done in that Walking with Dinosaurs style where they basically speculated on what animals may evolve into over tens of millions of years in the absence of humans?

Basically just rip off everything from that that doesn't already have an equivalent.


I would love a Tasmanian Devil(Sarcophilus), regular and giant version.

Diprotodon would be interesting. Wasn't there a magafauna version of the kangaroo as well?

Would love giant earth worms and giant cicada(both young and adult versions).

Would love a giant humming bird.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

So I've mentioned this several times, but I figured I should open up why I'd rather not have next bestiary continue the tradition of "Five true dragons per book". Heck, I'd take five non true dragons which each would get two pages to them over more true dragons :P

The main reason for this is that for me best thing about bestiary entries isn't the statblocks, its the ecology description that tells about where monster lives, what their temperament is like, how they live, etc. Those texts usually give a lot of plot hooks and help explain how monster behave.

The thing with dragon statblocks is that at most each dragon has one paragraph of text to them since dragon article format is "article about them in general, basic statblock plus three age categories and if there is space, little about the ecology"

Ok, so I admit that in most of the bestiaries, Paizo has managed to make that one paragraph really flavorful, but thats not always the case. And even then, it would be better to have more than one paragraph of description to differentiate the dragons from each other.

Like, with Etheric Dragons in Bestiary 5 "Etheric dragons are pragmatic and survival-oriented beings who dwell in the farthest reaches of the Etherreal Plane." Ok, so they are neutral so not particularly friendly, they live in etherreal plane, but what is survival oriented supposed to mean? Like, if that is their defining personality trait along with pragmatism, does that mean they are really crazy prepared survivalists? Like all living things thrive to survive so that doesn't really say anything... Same with Dream Dragons, besides them hunting in Dimensions of Dream and considering themselves masters of the place, you don't get any good idea of them since pretty much all dragons have ego thing going on. To be fair, Astral, Occult and Nightmare are easier to get hang of them(their personality and modus operandi is stated clearly) if they are bit bare bones as well.

And Bestiary 6's outer dragons do have their paragraphs state their modus operandi clearly, but some of them, paradise dragons, say nothing about their personality. Like ok, they create sanctuaries of good, but thats all we know about paradise dragons, I have no clue how they differ personality wise from gold dragons.

I do like True Dragons though and think that Paizo can make more awesome dragons in future, but if they keep releasing true dragons every bestiary, I'd rather have them switch their format. Like have one less age category statted out so there would be more space for ecology description. Or am I only one who likes ecology texts? :(


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
CorvusMask wrote:
Or am I only one who likes ecology texts? :(

You are not, and your post essentially sums up why I don't think we ever need another "true dragon" again (we're going to keep getting them regardless, but...)

Without knowing what makes a monster tick, what it likes, where it likes to hang out... I can just use one of the already-existing beasties, maybe with a cosmetic reskin.

But "flying reptile with two wings, four legs, a breath weapon and a yen for treasure" is something that is completely covered (I don't particularly want more environment-themed giants for comparable reasons)


What they should do for true dragons is to add 2 additional pages containing the flavor text for each dragon right before the stat blocks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

They should also give all 0HD races two pages but that isn't going to happen.

I love getting 5 new true dragons each hardcover bestiary but it would nice if they gave us revisited/unleashed style books for these dragons.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Cutting the true dragons out of the bestiaries isn't really the best solution to this "iconic" problem regarding their flavor text.

I would rather release a campaign setting about them, just so we have a better idea of where should we use the many different true dragons.

Yet I have to agree that with each new true dragon category release this distasteful problem gets more and more uncomfortable...


My wishes for Bestiary 7 until now:

0HD Races:
- Half-dragons (like aasimars or the geniekin) with different traits
- Medium fairy (elf-like with insect wings)
- Small flower-like humanoid plant
- Insect humanoid race
- 0HD thriae
- 0HD formian
- 0HD satyr, dryad or pixie

Expanding Monsters into Categories/Groups:
I would like the following monster to get expanded; just like what was done with kytons,rakshasa or sphinxes:

- Garuda
- Couatl
- Jyoti
- Sceaduinar
- Homunculus
- Peri
- Nephilim
- Neh-thalggus (brain collectors race)

True Dragon Ideas:
- Half-Cobstruct true dragons (like the inevitables) (cyber, steampunk, alchemical, golem, carved)
- Nature dragons (wood, thorn, floral, venomous, )
- Truly Elemental dragons (with the elemental subtype) (flame, wind, wave, stone and ice for the fire, air, water, earth and cold subdomain respectively)
- Disaster dragons (quake, tsunami, hurricane, blizzard, eruption)
- Doom/Apocalipse dragons (plague, ruin, strife, decay, fallen)
- Emotion dragons (hate, passion, despair, joy, sorrow)

[spoiler=demigods]Demigods I would like to see:

- Elemental Lords
- Eldest
- Queens of the Night
- Archon Empyreal Lords (Olleon, Damerrich, Smiad)


I would like to see many of those 0HD races but at this point I doubt we will ever see them.


New thing for the wishlist; an aberration that can be taken as a familiar with the improved familiar feat.


It would be nice to get aberration type familiars along with ooze, humanoid, monstrous humanoid, and undead ones.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
The Gold Sovereign wrote:

Cutting the true dragons out of the bestiaries isn't really the best solution to this "iconic" problem regarding their flavor text.

I would rather release a campaign setting about them, just so we have a better idea of where should we use the many different true dragons.

Yet I have to agree that with each new true dragon category release this distasteful problem gets more and more uncomfortable...

Ye, considering that the problem gets worse with every book(I wasn't bothered by true dragons until occult dragons), I'm starting to worry whether devs are aware that it is a problem.

But yeah, again, I think they could just cut out one of dragon age category statblocks. Like the book assumes you will stat out other age categories anyway(and besides, younger they are, easier they are to stat out), and do we really need young dragon statblock for every dragon type?

Like I think most people don't use those because for certain dragons those are medium sized and everyone prefers high level large+ sized dragon fights in their mind .-. "Its human sized" dragon doesn't sound as epic to most people I think. I think having statblock for adult & ancient age categories as ready made should be enough


I would prefer they not cut out the stats to any of the age categories because it is much easier to make up a creature's motives, ideals, etc. then it is to stat them up.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
CorvusMask wrote:
The Gold Sovereign wrote:

Cutting the true dragons out of the bestiaries isn't really the best solution to this "iconic" problem regarding their flavor text.

I would rather release a campaign setting about them, just so we have a better idea of where should we use the many different true dragons.

Yet I have to agree that with each new true dragon category release this distasteful problem gets more and more uncomfortable...

Ye, considering that the problem gets worse with every book(I wasn't bothered by true dragons until occult dragons), I'm starting to worry whether devs are aware that it is a problem.

But yeah, again, I think they could just cut out one of dragon age category statblocks. Like the book assumes you will stat out other age categories anyway(and besides, younger they are, easier they are to stat out), and do we really need young dragon statblock for every dragon type?

Like I think most people don't use those because for certain dragons those are medium sized and everyone prefers high level large+ sized dragon fights in their mind .-. "Its human sized" dragon doesn't sound as epic to most people I think. I think having statblock for adult & ancient age categories as ready made should be enough

Oh they know about it...it's been a frequent point of discussion on the product pages for I think at least the last 2 bestiaries. I suspect that eventually we will get some product that sorts the existing dragons out.


A new monster subtype, mutant. Only fleshy creatures can be mutant, but creatures with magic powers cannot. A giant human with no elemental affinities would be a mutant. A unicorn, is not. Most dire animals are mutant.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Dragon78 wrote:

I would prefer they not cut out the stats to any of the age categories because it is much easier to make up a creature's motives, ideals, etc. then it is to stat them up.

But young dragons are much easier to stat than great wyrms, should they instead stat great wyrms then? :p

Also, even if its easier to make up creature's flavor, I don't care about using creatures that don't have flavor to inspire their use.


I would like to see some monsters inspired by Australian mythology. Some possibilities:

Mokoi. A small chaotic evil dark spirit that kidnaps and eats children. Despises and hunts down arcane spellcasters with possibly some form of spell immunity where each day it can choose three spells that it is immune to. This creature would often have levels in shadow dancer without having to meet the prerequisites. CR5+

Nargun. A large neutral part humanoid part stone creature that lives around the stony banks of fast flowing rivers. It has the unusual ability to reflect attacks back at the aggressor. CR7.

Rainbow Serpent. A colossal powerful lawful good water spirit (demi-god) that can teleport between waterholes leaving a rainbow pattern in the sky. This being is unique and has absolute mastery over water, can cast any water themed spell at CL30 and has a range of powerful supernatural powers like mass dehydration, mass instant rust, weather control and comet strike (like meteor swarm but cold and bludgeoning damage). CR30+ with 10 mythic tiers.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

I like the sound of the Mokoi and Nargun. But I thought the Julunggali(B4) was supposed to be the rainbow serpent?


That's an interesting one. Perhaps it is a combination of the rainbow serpent and Julunggul, a rainbow snake goddess of fertility.


According to the Wikipedia entry Julunggul and the rainbow serpent are one and the same.

Scarab Sages

Paraelemental/Quasielemental Elementals and Planetouched!!!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Nerf Bat- dreaded monster with the ability to make class abilities useless;)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

More creatures from ABC:
Beisht Kione Dhoo
Utelif
Serra
Fei
Qinyuan
Roperite (Pretty sure this one's been mentioned before, but here's more info.)
Ambisiangulo (The embellished version from a lot of books and web sources might make a better monster.)
Rolling Calf
Falajitax
Apshait
Yohualtepoztli
Bulgu (This one's awesome. Might be good as another CR 20 Monstrous Humanoid.)
Ix-hunpedzkin (I've mentioned this one before but couldn't find a good source for it, but here it is.)
Lebraude
Kama-kiri
Animalito
Bakunawa
Onchu
Poreskoro
Huayramama


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I like the bakunawa, bulgu, huayramama, onchu, and serra.


Dragon78 wrote:
Nerf Bat- dreaded monster with the ability to make class abilities useless;)

Sounds more like a curse-bestowing magic item :P


JiCi wrote:
Dragon78 wrote:
Nerf Bat- dreaded monster with the ability to make class abilities useless;)
Sounds more like a curse-bestowing magic item :P

And inteligent/sentient magic item?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

No more Giants. We have too many.

No more demigods/things like demigods. It takes a lot of 'whoa, he's part god' out of them when people go "Oh, look, Chthulu can be killed this way and he's got no defense against it."

No more new Outsider factions. We're close to as many as the unneeded giant types.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Correction, no more evil outsider factions, could still use more CN, LN, and N.

Love more giants but they need to be based on non-human based humanoids like goblinoids, catfolk, gnomes, lizardfolk, various alien based races, etc..

Some tiny and smaller size monstrous humanoids.

Some tiny and smaller size humanoids.

Still need a lot more creatures from the positive energy plane, dimension of time, dimension of dreams, axis, maelstrom, astral, and ethereal plane. Also not just outsiders but other creature types especially humanoids, magical beasts, monstrous humanoids, plants, and oozes with a fey dragons, fey, and giants.


"The Horned King" was mentioned in the write up for the Wild Hunt in B6. I would LOVE to know more about The Horned King!!!


Dragon78, I think some of those planes would be great for non-outsiders. the Maelstrom, Astral, and Ethereal Planes have dozens of potential creatures, and if there are cousins to Thought Eaters and Horlas from the Ethereal Plane, I'd love to see more of them. as per fey, I'd like to see their lords finally receive statistics.
as per the Positive energy plane, I would love to see some creatures entirely made up of positive energy that are so narcissistic that they see all other life as a waste of space.
Axis could use some Disorders (caused when an Axiomite mates with a Protean)
Time is a dangerous thing to play with, and would merit some high level monsters. you know, things that are only docile when in the dimension of Time, but cause cataclysmic universal collapse when brought outside, or beings made up of pure, materialized time.
Dreams could definitely be spiced up a whole lot more.

and I agree on the diversifying of humanoids completely. There is definitely a tapirfolk shaped hole in the humanoid section ;)

will be coming back next week with maybe a few better suggestions than my previous ones, this time from mythology.

Taotao Mona is a worthwhile creature to look at. it's basically the evil version of an ancestral spirit, which takes the form of a dog, a monkey, or a coconut crab.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

i want Smurfs


I would also like to have smurfs along with snorks, xenomorphs, predator, Gummi Bears, Audrey 2, house elves(Harry Potter), movie gremlins, trolls(2016 animated movie), Freddy Krueger, Godzilla, and many others but those pesky copyright laws;)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

We have a Godzilla creature. It's awesome.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

How about a fey variant for the Dullahan and Yuki-Onna?

451 to 500 of 841 << first < prev | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Paizo Products / Product Discussion / Bestiary 7 Wishes List. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.