Bestiary Design Changes

[Dragon78]

While I love the set up for PF1E bestiaries I do feel this new edition needs some changes.

-Player/playable races need to be in found in other books. They should be in player focused hardcover books and/or get their own softcover book like "Races of Golarion"/"Pathfinder Ancestors" vol 1, vol 2, etc.

-Normal animals should be in player focused hardcovers and/or get their own books as well or at least any creature that can be an animal companion or familiar. That would be an interesting line or "sub-line" for softcover books.

-More monsters per book, I would like to catch up with(and surpass) the PF1E bestiaries in less time and number of bestiaries.

[Rysky]

Dragon78 wrote:

-Player/playable races need to be in found in other books. They should be in player focused hardcover books and/or get their own softcover book like "Races of Golarion"/"Pathfinder Ancestors" vol 1, vol 2, etc.

... They were and did and will probably continue to do so.

[W E Ray]

I agree with the OP....

PC Races should NOT be in the Monster books.

Familiars and animals we don't fight should NOT be in the Monster books.

MORE monsters should be in each book.

. . . .

And I'll add mine,
MORE ecology/habitat, personality, Fluff information

[edduardco]

As long as monsters/NPCs use the same rules than PCs everything else is fine.

[Patrick Newcarry]

agreed with all of above posts. this is very important

[MMCJawa]

W E Ray wrote:

I agree with the OP....

PC Races should NOT be in the Monster books.

Familiars and animals we don't fight should NOT be in the Monster books.

MORE monsters should be in each book.

. . . .

And I'll add mine,
MORE ecology/habitat, personality, Fluff information

I concur with this, although I definitely want animals that could end up as things to fight in the regular bestiary

And if I have any flavor request, please, for the love of all that is good and holy, please provide us with more dragon info. You can insert this request for any non-animal that gets a whopping 2 or three sentences per entry. I really don't mind if that means bestiary entries need a third page.

Also, if we are going to be forced to endure a update cycle, please consider a super-sized entry for the first bestiary, cramming in as many monsters as possible from the first three bestiaries at least, into a single book. If I have to wait 3 or 4 years to get to the next bestiary volume that isn't simply a rehash of an early book, I will not be a happy camper

[Silver Scarab]

I would love it if the list of monsters by CR was in front of the book instead of the back and a pocket edition would be wonderful.

[ChibiNyan]

Remember they said PF2 could be Golarion-infused on the core books. This means the bestiaries can now have lore. This is why the core Bestiaries 1-5 feel so bland in first edition compared to the lore bestiaries such as those in APs or some Campaign Setting books.

[ChaiGuy]

It would be great if the process of creating and modifying monsters was retooled to be quicker. I know that many want monsters and PCs to use the same rules, but I'd rather not spend an equal amount of time creating a monster as a PC, they are not going to see equal play time to say the least.

[Starsunder]

ChibiNyan wrote:

Remember they said PF2 could be Golarion-infused on the core books. This means the bestiaries can now have lore. This is why the core Bestiaries 1-5 feel so bland in first edition compared to the lore bestiaries such as those in APs or some Campaign Setting books.

I don’t necessarily agree with this. I think the bestiaries felt a little bland because of room, ie. stat blocks and big color pictures vs. lore that people may or may not use. Look at the AD&D Monstrous Manual; that’s my gold standard for lore/ecology/history of monsters, and it was setting neutral, with really only the Planes getting a mention now and then, or specific monsters getting shout-outs in the description (like Lord Soth for the death knight).

It’s entirely possible to have a deep, ecology rich bestiary and not have specific settings forced on us. I don’t play in golarion, for instance, so golarion specific lore wouldn’t be all that useful for me, although I could adapt some of it to what I use. I know Paizo wants to push golarion, and I get it. But I did want to point this out.

[Dragon78]

Bestiaries 1-5 are not bland, well maybe B1 because they had to bring in the cliche...I mean "classic" monsters in first.