New kobolds


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion

51 to 100 of 213 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Well, I can't wait for non-risky PC kobolds, which I've already said before. This does show the benefits of having PC rules be different from NPC/monster rules.

...I just hope there won't be a flurry of whining about kobolds always being evil and always getting shot on sight, regardless of who's a PC.


I thought just giving the monster version lower ability scores was enough, as has been since the dawn of time. Lower rolls/point buy/spread/etc rather than natural suckage.

Though in this edition where monster ability scores don't necessarily correspond to attack bonus/damage, it may be a bit different.


Just to be clear, are we talking about the Kobold art from this blog post? Because I really hope that is just artistic license. It just looks wrong with plantigrade feet and no tail, kind of like a scaly human with a lizard head D&D Dragonborn.

As for garbage-difficulty enemies, there are always weak magical beasts to fight. It doesn't just have to be basic animals or intelligent races.

The Shifty Mongoose wrote:
...I just hope there won't be a flurry of whining about kobolds always being evil and always getting shot on sight, regardless of who's a PC.

There are probably just as many Lawful Neutral Kobolds as Lawful Evil!

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

The ones on the cover of the Second Edition Bestiary.


9 people marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
The ones on the cover of the Second Edition Bestiary.

Let's see... gotta find it here in the store...

OH MY GOD, THEY'RE SO CUTE! Yet also kind of awesome! Just like Kobolds!
That's fantastic! Finally something RIGHT about PF2!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

There is a PFS playtest scenario that dealt with kobold tribes in Absalom City. One of them was allied with (and asked for help from) the Pathfinder Society.


Bloodrealm wrote:
Rysky wrote:
The ones on the cover of the Second Edition Bestiary.

Let's see... gotta find it here in the store...

OH MY GOD, THEY'RE SO CUTE! Yet also kind of awesome! Just like Kobolds!
That's fantastic! Finally something RIGHT about PF2!

Haha, i find them a bit weird as villains. I mean look at them, they are like lizard dogs.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
oholoko wrote:
Bloodrealm wrote:
Rysky wrote:
The ones on the cover of the Second Edition Bestiary.

Let's see... gotta find it here in the store...

OH MY GOD, THEY'RE SO CUTE! Yet also kind of awesome! Just like Kobolds!
That's fantastic! Finally something RIGHT about PF2!
Haha, i find them a bit weird as villains. I mean look at them, they are like lizard dogs.

I think they've got just enough vicious and clever in their look that it manages to show through, and they're cute without looking goofy. The ones on the cover look ORGANIZED, too, which is exactly how Kobolds work and what makes them a threat. I feel like the 5 there could take down that troll provided decent preparation... if it weren't for the hydra rampaging behind it.


Losing the light-blindness makes Kobolds far more versatile without making them much more of a threat to low-level PCs.

If they must retain their penalties to Strength and Constitution, I would also like them given gliding wings to make them even more versatile and draconic. Unfortunately, they now would be almost equal to low level PCs.


12 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

OMG, agreeing with Bloodrealm here, those kobolds are adorable. Are there plans for plushies? I would totally buy a plushie.

Erm. *cough* I mean. Nice artwork. Very professional.

Silver Crusade

13 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
MaxAstro wrote:

OMG, agreeing with Bloodrealm here, those kobolds are adorable. Are there plans for plushies? I would totally buy a plushie.

Erm. *cough* I mean. Nice artwork. Very professional.

I shall enunciate clearly, I want a plushie.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Rysky wrote:
MaxAstro wrote:

OMG, agreeing with Bloodrealm here, those kobolds are adorable. Are there plans for plushies? I would totally buy a plushie.

Erm. *cough* I mean. Nice artwork. Very professional.

I shall enunciate clearly, I want a plushie.

And people wonder why some of us see a strong similarity to Goblins ;-P


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Kobolds > Goblins imo.

Tengu uber alles =>


10 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It's basically a slap in the face that I don't have a kobold plushie right now.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
WatersLethe wrote:
It's basically a slap in the face that I don't have a kobold plushie right now.

Honestly, do you know what's going to happen if I come home from GenCon and I don't have a Kobold Plushie for my daughter? I don't either, but I suspect it won't be pleasant.


Anyone got a link to the pic of these cute lil' buggers? Google search ain't coming up with anything.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Darigaaz the Igniter wrote:
Anyone got a link to the pic of these cute lil' buggers? Google search ain't coming up with anything.

On the left.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Looks like they are the Face-Bashed-In Snarl.

Either that, or they are junior Dragons-in-Training...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Those plushes better be high quality. The goblin ones you see on Paizo streams are decent but they're clearly not the highest quality or cutest design possible. Kobold ones need to be better!

Liberty's Edge

5 people marked this as a favorite.

I came here to say that I absolutely LOVE the new look for Kobolds, much less typically humanoid with an animalistic looking skull, even their hands look more natural ending in pointed claws now.

Having skimmed things I do think I noticed something that was said but nobody else seems to have picked up on so I'd like to ask:

Since the idea for the Bestiary Books is that it will apply almost entirely on Monsters, Hazards, and GM Material in general and NOT as a resource for new Player Races/Ancestries, what kind of Hardcover lines can we expect that WILL have new Player Rules for new Ancestries?

In the last decade the Bestiary line has been a BIG draw for not only GMs but Players as well in order to have access to new character options be it a Race or Feat but if the idea that "Player Material" will be phased out of this line...

Should we expect something like an "Ancestries in the Age of Lost Omens" book, that will fill the role of the Advanced Race Guild from PF1 or will the next few "Core line" books that included new Class Options also heavily feature the various Ancestries that players want to have such as the Aasimar, Kobold, Elemental Humanoids, and Ratfolk chattel?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Pawns, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Themetricsystem wrote:

I came here to say that I absolutely LOVE the new look for Kobolds, much less typically humanoid with an animalistic looking skull, even their hands look more natural ending in pointed claws now.

Having skimmed things I do think I noticed something that was said but nobody else seems to have picked up on so I'd like to ask:

Since the idea for the Bestiary Books is that it will apply almost entirely on Monsters, Hazards, and GM Material in general and NOT as a resource for new Player Races/Ancestries, what kind of Hardcover lines can we expect that WILL have new Player Rules for new Ancestries?

In the last decade the Bestiary line has been a BIG draw for not only GMs but Players as well in order to have access to new character options be it a Race or Feat but if the idea that "Player Material" will be phased out of this line...

Should we expect something like an "Ancestries in the Age of Lost Omens" book, that will fill the role of the Advanced Race Guild from PF1 or will the next few "Core line" books that included new Class Options also heavily feature the various Ancestries that players want to have such as the Aasimar, Kobold, Elemental Humanoids, and Ratfolk chattel?

It is stated HERE, under the Pathfinder Campaign Setting section that they are shifting it to the Pathfinder World Guide line which will include Player Options.

How long until certain options are available is unknown at this time.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I *think* the World Guide line is mostly the campaign setting line mashed up with the player companion line (with bigger books that have higher production values, they just come out less frequently). I imagine the Rulebook line (formerly the Pathfinder RPG line) will have, in addition to the CRB and Bestiaries, books along the lines of the Advanced [Foo] Guide, Ultimate [Bar], and [Baz] Adventures.

So I imagine we'll see new ancestries in both the world guide line and the rulebook line, since that's how it used to work.

Silver Crusade

The world guides would be a pretty good place to add a lot of player options like ancestries. E.g., think about this post from Mark:

Mark Seifter wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
MOAR LORE is so much more succinct than I was. :p

Big fan of MOAR LORE; Guide to Korvosa is one of my all-time favorites. If we consider a typical PF1 Player Companion (usually 100% rules with minor lore flavor text) and PF1 Campaign Setting (varies wildly, sometimes nearly no rules, up to sometimes a little under 50% rules, let's call it 25% on average), if you mashed those together into a 96-pager, you'd have 48 pages of rules, or half the book.

The coolest part about these World Guide books is that they are flexible and we're not tying ourselves to a static percentage of "required" rules; they'll have the right cool lore to tell the story they want to tell and all the right rules to support that story, and not just a random sidebar full of +1s like you were mentioning. We're pretty committed to doing what's right for each individual product. The first World Guide does have all the rules we've mentioned here, but ultimately it's much more lore-heavy than the hypothetical mash-up I described above.The second book is particularly rules-heavy, but it has some rules I think people are going to adore, and that's really all I can say, I can't give you any hints. There's one further in the future that's quite exciting and you in particular might like even more than the first one, and so on and so forth. The idea is to contain rules that do heavy lifting and increase the number of stories and RP opportunities you have tied into the setting, making the game and world richer, not rules just for the sake of having rules (the place for fancy rules innovations just for rules sake is in the other line). That's part of the reason for so many backgrounds in the first book, actually. They don't take much space, but they give you a rich connection to the setting in your backstory that can help shape your character as a person.

When you guys check out the first few World Guides, please let me know how we did on that front. As the design lead on the first few of them (basically the rules guy from the design team who attends meetings and works with the development and edit leads to coordinate the process), I've been an advocate for this treatment of rules in the World Guide, and I want to know how we did!


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Add me to the list of those who want Kobold plushies. I fell in love with them thanks to Kingmaker and they are a common playable race in our home campaign setting. One day, I hope they'll overtake gnomes and halflings as *the* small race to play.

Boring old hobbitses.. who needses them?

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

World Guide book about Absalom might be a good place to introduce the Kobold ancestry :-)

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My future brethren need to be free to help fix the world since the softscales keep breaking it!


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Zi Mishkal wrote:

Add me to the list of those who want Kobold plushies. I fell in love with them thanks to Kingmaker and they are a common playable race in our home campaign setting. One day, I hope they'll overtake gnomes and halflings as *the* small race to play.

Boring old hobbitses.. who needses them?

My Kingmakers took quite a liking to the Sootscale tribe and helped them build their den into a full kobold city.

Which paid huge dividends in the mass combat section, as the kobolds' hit and run tactics held off a much larger army for long enough for the PCs to have time to deal with it.

Ever since then, civilized kobolds (with slightly better racial adjustments than standard kobolds) have been a PC race in my games.


MaxAstro wrote:

My Kingmakers took quite a liking to the Sootscale tribe and helped them build their den into a full kobold city.

Which paid huge dividends in the mass combat section, as the kobolds' hit and run tactics held off a much larger army for long enough for the PCs to have time to deal with it.

Ever since then, civilized kobolds (with slightly better racial adjustments than standard kobolds) have been a PC race in my games.

What slightly better racial adjustments?


12 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Because no one wants to play a -4 Str/-2 Con race.

Lore wise, the explanation was that living in cities with access to reliable food and water and clean living conditions resulted in heartier kobolds.


Derry L. Zimeye wrote:

I recall reading that Paizo wanted yo make more races recognizable as "Pathfinder Monster". We saw it with Goblins back when PF first released- a distinctive look that anyone can recognize as a Paizo original, which brought em a lot of brand recognition! They're now doing it with more monsters too. They've mentioned orcs, and we saw Hobgoblins (now much more like PF goblins, with long gangly limbs- terrifying!), and now Kobolds.

This is, from a design POV, a good move from Paizo. It's certainly convinced me to buy the Bestiary! Hell yeah I wanna see all the new designs! What's next? Who's next? Personally, I'd be pumped to see some other iconic monsters like Tieflings get a definitive "This is Paizo" look- pump up the variety between DnD monsters and PF ones! Get that sick brand recognition going!

I saw the new arts for kobolds on the cover of the Second Edition Bestiary, but where can I see the new arts for hobgoblins you mentioned? And did Paizo mention that orcs will have a whole new outlook?


MaxAstro wrote:
Lore wise, the explanation was that living in cities with access to reliable food and water and clean living conditions resulted in heartier kobolds.

I'm not sure that's really even necessary given that PCs are, by definition, exceptional. If you wanted to have a human character who grew up at or below the subsistence level in some wasteland, you wouldn't give them extra stat penalties, after all.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

It wasn't just to explain PCs, though - Sootscale kobolds effectively became their own race, culturally and to some extent physiologically distinct from other kobolds, so giving them their own stat spread was also a way to recognize "hey guys, I know you put a lot of work into this 'kobold' project, so here's some tangible results".

Also, despite my earlier comment, the one player who did end up playing a kobold in that campaign was before the whole civilization thing happened (he was in fact a driving force behind it) so he actually did get the bad stat adjustment. XD

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
ChibiNyan wrote:
Look for the Scenarios "Sewer Dragons of Absalom" and "True Dragons of Absalom" on this site!

If you're interested in scenarios featuring kobolds, there's also Fragments of Antiquity, though that takes place in the Hao Jin Tapestry and isn't as applicable to the specific kobold cultures on Golarion.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Aenigma wrote:
Derry L. Zimeye wrote:

I recall reading that Paizo wanted yo make more races recognizable as "Pathfinder Monster". We saw it with Goblins back when PF first released- a distinctive look that anyone can recognize as a Paizo original, which brought em a lot of brand recognition! They're now doing it with more monsters too. They've mentioned orcs, and we saw Hobgoblins (now much more like PF goblins, with long gangly limbs- terrifying!), and now Kobolds.

This is, from a design POV, a good move from Paizo. It's certainly convinced me to buy the Bestiary! Hell yeah I wanna see all the new designs! What's next? Who's next? Personally, I'd be pumped to see some other iconic monsters like Tieflings get a definitive "This is Paizo" look- pump up the variety between DnD monsters and PF ones! Get that sick brand recognition going!

I saw the new arts for kobolds on the cover of the Second Edition Bestiary, but where can I see the new arts for hobgoblins you mentioned? And did Paizo mention that orcs will have a whole new outlook?

There was a Game Informer article about the playtest about a year ago, it had this sketch of a hobgoblin, it also had some other concept art of the new look of PF2. The blog also had an article about monster stat blocks that had this sketch of a bugbear. As for orcs, there was another blog post that had this image of orcs, but I'm not sure if they'll use this in the end. There was some controversy in the thread about implications of that direction, and Paizo might just want to avoid that. I think the weapons shown are the orc knuckle-dagger (the three bladed punch dagger) and orc necksplitter (the cutlass looking thing) from the playtest.

The Playtest preview blogs (scroll down to the earlier ones), had several concept sketches in general showing the new look of PF2, particularly for PC races. I rather like this dwarf woman for example. This gnome and this one. seem to show a gnomish preference for conical hats, which seems appropriate. And I also like this spread of dwarven weapons. Being a weapon geek, I particularly like that dragon shaped warhammer, which is based on a historical piece in a Venice Museum.

Paizo certainly has put some effort into cementing a more unified look for PF2, and I suspect there's more Wayne Reynolds artwork that hasn't been revealed yet to define the look of PF2.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

14 people marked this as a favorite.

It's important to remember that concept art is art of concepts, not final art.

The sketches in the above link are concept art, and we didn't use all of them going forward. The hobgoblin and bugbear are close, but we went a different direction with orcs, for example.


22 people marked this as a favorite.
Cole Deschain wrote:
Darigaaz the Igniter wrote:
Anyone got a link to the pic of these cute lil' buggers? Google search ain't coming up with anything.
On the left.

I keep picturing the new kobolds doing the attention-seeking head-butting that cats do, except scores of them surrounding a very patient dragon.

I also want a PF2E kobold plushie.

And info for PF2E kobold PCs in the first available appropriate race/ancestry product slot.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:

It's important to remember that concept art is art of concepts, not final art.

The sketches in the above link are concept art, and we didn't use all of them going forward. The hobgoblin and bugbear are close, but we went a different direction with orcs, for example.

Makes sense. I had a feeling you'd go a different way with orcs. I'm curious about what it is. I am glad to hear the hobgoblins and bugbears are close to the concepts. I wasn't a fan of PF1 hobgoblins, they looked too much like grey orcs instead of their own thing. And this brings the goblinoid resemblance to the forefront. And the bugbear continues the trend (in PF1 they were pretty inconsistent from what I recall). As I said previously, goblins are like the big-headed evil toddlers of the gobliniods, hobgoblins the lanky teenagers and bugbears the muscle-headed dude-bros. It all fits.

I'm all for cementing a consistent, unique Pathfinder Look. There was a lot done in the early days to start it, but the job wasn't fully complete. PF2 is a great chance to finish what was started with the Burn Offerings goblins.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Those Kobolds better be FINAL art though. They are perfection.

Liberty's Edge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
ChibiNyan wrote:
Those Kobolds better be FINAL art though. They are perfection.

They kinda have to be, I think, given that they're from the Bestiary cover.

And they are, indeed, adorable.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

One thing I've noticed is that trolls and troll hounds didn't have the look species. Often they kind of look like the do on the PF2 bestiary, sort of just an ugly humanoid, but they also often wind up with much longer snouts and a more bestial look on some of the figures and art. This is true even within the same species of troll. I wonder if their look will get retconned to be more consistent, or if different troll looks within the same species will be like different breeds of dog.

I kind of prefer the long snout look so I hope it isn't completely gone.


I like the new hobgoblin art very well. But it means those numerous hobgoblin arts in Ironfang Invasion are obsolete now and thus cannot be used anymore. If Paizo ever publish Ironfang Invasion for Second Edition, I hope it would include whole new arts for every hobgoblin characters in that adventure path. I also wish we would see whole new arts for Vault Builders and Vault Keepers as well.

P.S. Huh, that art was for the Second Edition orcs? At first I thought that art does not depict orcs because their posture looks like that of a gorilla, instead of an orc.


12 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
I keep picturing the new kobolds doing the attention-seeking head-butting that cats do, except scores of them surrounding a very patient dragon.

OMG are you trying to kill me from cute overload? XD You are right, though, their head shape totally puts me in mind of that. :D

EDIT: It has now become headcanon for me that kobolds greet close friends with forehead-nuzzles. You can't convince me otherwise. :P


Captain Morgan wrote:

One thing I've noticed is that trolls and troll hounds didn't have the look species. Often they kind of look like the do on the PF2 bestiary, sort of just an ugly humanoid, but they also often wind up with much longer snouts and a more bestial look on some of the figures and art. This is true even within the same species of troll. I wonder if their look will get retconned to be more consistent, or if different troll looks within the same species will be like different breeds of dog.

I kind of prefer the long snout look so I hope it isn't completely gone.

But what happens when you boop a troll snoot?

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I do prefer trolls with boar like face since that is really unusual look for them


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Aenigma wrote:


P.S. Huh, that art was for the Second Edition orcs? At first I thought that art does not depict orcs because their posture looks like that of a gorilla, instead of an orc.

They were trying to make unmistakable Pathfinder Orcs like they have done with lots of the other races. People called racism so that concept specifically had to be gone.


19 people marked this as a favorite.

Right? People are so sensitive nowadays. It's not like orcs have a long history of being based on racist depictions of people of color, all the way back to their origins. That'd make a redesign that specifically emulated an animal commonly used in racist depictions of another group of PoC really awkward.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Malk_Content wrote:
Aenigma wrote:


P.S. Huh, that art was for the Second Edition orcs? At first I thought that art does not depict orcs because their posture looks like that of a gorilla, instead of an orc.

They were trying to make unmistakable Pathfinder Orcs like they have done with lots of the other races. People called racism so that concept specifically had to be gone.

Really? People disliked the concept art for orcs because it reminded them of racism? I honestly cannot understand. If we depict other human races as gorillas, that would be a problem. But how can one relate the concept art with racism? Do they think orcs as victims of racism?

Liberty's Edge

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Be it on the nose or not, it's close enough to real life hand-wringing that continuing down that path that could (Or has) raise questions is not a good or worthwhile idea.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Aenigma wrote:
Malk_Content wrote:
Aenigma wrote:


P.S. Huh, that art was for the Second Edition orcs? At first I thought that art does not depict orcs because their posture looks like that of a gorilla, instead of an orc.

They were trying to make unmistakable Pathfinder Orcs like they have done with lots of the other races. People called racism so that concept specifically had to be gone.
Really? People disliked the concept art for orcs because it reminded them of racism? I honestly cannot understand. If we depict other human races as gorillas, that would be a problem. But how can one relate the concept art with racism? Do they think orcs as victims of racism?

Check Honeybee's comment right above yours.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Saedar wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:

One thing I've noticed is that trolls and troll hounds didn't have the look species. Often they kind of look like the do on the PF2 bestiary, sort of just an ugly humanoid, but they also often wind up with much longer snouts and a more bestial look on some of the figures and art. This is true even within the same species of troll. I wonder if their look will get retconned to be more consistent, or if different troll looks within the same species will be like different breeds of dog.

I kind of prefer the long snout look so I hope it isn't completely gone.

But what happens when you boop a troll snoot?

You probably lose a limb. So I wouldn't recommend it, unless you're also a troll and can regrow it.

51 to 100 of 213 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / New kobolds All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.