Why no Hound Archon


Rules Discussion


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Why is there no a Hound Archon in the Bestiary? This is one of my all time favorites


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Why no (insert any of the hundreds of PF1 monsters that aren't in PF2)?

Paizo couldn't exactly replicate 10 years of monsters for the initial PF2 release, so there had to be cuts somewhere. They're likely to show up before too long, though.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

A lot of extraplanar creatures are sort of over represented in the PF1 Bestiary, so there are fewer of them and more creatures that catually live on Golarion. That being the case, some types of extraplanar stuff had to have less types portrayed in the core.

They still exist in-universe, and I'm sure will be high on the list for additional Archons to show up in the Bestiary 2.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
A lot of extraplanar creatures are sort of over represented in the PF1 Bestiary, so there are fewer of them and more creatures that catually live on Golarion.

Depends on the campaign, and most private games are apparently home-brewed worlds.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I didn't even notice he wasn't in, Hound is one of the most commonly used Archons so they are usually among the first to come out! Been running Hell's Vengeance and you see these dogs all the time.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Paizo is taking a hardline anti-furry stance. That is why cat folk aren’t a base race.


Colonel Kurtz wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
A lot of extraplanar creatures are sort of over represented in the PF1 Bestiary, so there are fewer of them and more creatures that catually live on Golarion.
Depends on the campaign, and most private games are apparently home-brewed worlds.

I doubt any rpg maker has access to those sorts of stats, even surveys would only hit a small part of the playerbase.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

7 people marked this as a favorite.

We went with the horned archon instead of the hound archon because the horned archon fits the world better AND because it's our own creation rather than one created for D&D. There are still hound archons out there, and we'll get to statting them up eventually. But not for Bestiary 1.


The Gleeful Grognard wrote:
Colonel Kurtz wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
A lot of extraplanar creatures are sort of over represented in the PF1 Bestiary, so there are fewer of them and more creatures that catually live on Golarion.
Depends on the campaign, and most private games are apparently home-brewed worlds.
I doubt any rpg maker has access to those sorts of stats, even surveys would only hit a small part of the playerbase.

WotC did a few, and found just that. I think it's a mistake to tie PF so closely to a specific campaign setting.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

On a related note, I would have liked all major outsiders to have their old CR 2 and CR 20 variants in the first Bestiary. The ship has sailed though... (and Proteans never had the 20th variant at all)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lucas Yew wrote:
On a related note, I would have liked all major outsiders to have their old CR 2 and CR 20 variants in the first Bestiary. The ship has sailed though... (and Proteans never had the 20th variant at all)

Yeah they did. Izfiitars.

I do agree with your statement though. It seems odd that Lawful Neutral, Neutral Evil, Chaotic Neutral, True Neutral and all the Good aligned outsiders are missing their Level 20 counterparts, but we still have Balors, Pit Fiends, and Pleromas.

Plus, where are the Agathions at all? Are Angels replacing them as Neutral Good?

I just kinda want to have a game which heavily revolves around a level 20 lord of all 9 alignments are involved. I feel like that'd be fun.


Vali Nepjarson wrote:
Lucas Yew wrote:
On a related note, I would have liked all major outsiders to have their old CR 2 and CR 20 variants in the first Bestiary. The ship has sailed though... (and Proteans never had the 20th variant at all)

Yeah they did. Izfiitars.

I do agree with your statement though. It seems odd that Lawful Neutral, Neutral Evil, Chaotic Neutral, True Neutral and all the Good aligned outsiders are missing their Level 20 counterparts, but we still have Balors, Pit Fiends, and Pleromas.

Plus, where are the Agathions at all? Are Angels replacing them as Neutral Good?

I just kinda want to have a game which heavily revolves around a level 20 lord of all 9 alignments are involved. I feel like that'd be fun.

I was wondering that about the agathions as well. I suspect that they were trying to keep 1 outsider type per alignment, and angels took over the "main NG" spot from the agathions, but that doesn't mean they can't show up later. I think if they were going to have angels absorb agathions (like aeons did to inevitables), there would have been an example in the Bestiary.


Curating the first bestiary is not easy. Especially if your looking to prioritize what you consider your brand identity rather than meeting expectations that have developed over 40+ years of gaming. Anything not mentioned in the bestiary has definitely got a high potential to appear in a future bestiary.


Vali Nepjarson wrote:
Lucas Yew wrote:
On a related note, I would have liked all major outsiders to have their old CR 2 and CR 20 variants in the first Bestiary. The ship has sailed though... (and Proteans never had the 20th variant at all)

Yeah they did. Izfiitars.

I do agree with your statement though. It seems odd that Lawful Neutral, Neutral Evil, Chaotic Neutral, True Neutral and all the Good aligned outsiders are missing their Level 20 counterparts, but we still have Balors, Pit Fiends, and Pleromas.

Plus, where are the Agathions at all? Are Angels replacing them as Neutral Good?

I just kinda want to have a game which heavily revolves around a level 20 lord of all 9 alignments are involved. I feel like that'd be fun.

I think it was just a mix of (1) needing to favor evil creatures for PCs to fight, (2) needing to support the Aeon/Inevitable merger, (3) limited space given the desire to include many new creatures and not focus too hard on outsiders who are iconic but not useful to most campaigns, (4) author/developer interest, and (5) knowing another Bestiary is coming less than 12 months later.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Rules Discussion / Why no Hound Archon All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.