Monster Core Speculation: Who's In, Who's Out?

[Xenocrat]

The extended family should be alright, but RIP aboleth, probably.

[Laclale♪]

Then there should be Tengu and Strix's Lilu alternate

Captain Morgan wrote:

Paizo has published some original fiends of their own too.

Ah yes, arson.

(Checks villains fandom)
Surtur was not in AoN, maybe we cau use that

[Kobold Catgirl]

This is a weird one, but I'm going to miss the grig. While WOTC didn't invent the association between that word and a cricket/little person, I have a feeling that it's unlikely to persist in its current form. It's a shame. I always liked those little gals.

[Jacob Jett]

QuidEst wrote:

Kevin Mack wrote:

I'd be suprised if Kobolds wouldent need a significant re-work (Someone please correct me if I'm wrong but them being lizrard/dragon like creatures are more the D&D twist on them with them traditonally being little dog men?

There was mention of kobolds going in PC2 so they'd be after the new dragons, so I'm guessing that the different and immediately distinguishing design of PF2's kobolds might be doing a lot of heavy lifting. I wouldn't be surprised for there to be some additional changes, but it at least doesn't sound like a dragon connection needs to be stripped entirely.

Maybe or maybe not worth noting that Kobolds were closer to little dog people in (A)D&D1 and 2. IMO PF2's Kobolds are already different enough that whatever tweaks to Dragons bubble over to them should be sufficient to differentiate them from what WotC is doing.

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

This is a weird one, but I'm going to miss the grig. While WOTC didn't invent the association between that word and a cricket/little person, I have a feeling that it's unlikely to persist in its current form. It's a shame. I always liked those little gals.

Well...the little fairy creature is derived right from the cricket/grasshopper (I forget which it is) in Pinocchio, which has been public domain since 1960. So, beyond a name change, I don't see that Paizo needs to change anything here. Since the source material is public domain, WotC (and let's face it, it's really their overlords, Hasbro) shouldn't have a legal leg to stand on in this instance.

[Kobold Catgirl]

The idea of a grig being a centaur-like fairy with a cricket's lower body and a person's upper body is pretty singularly D&D. So is the idea of kobolds being remotely connected to dragons. Kobolds in folklore were just helpful or mischievous mining spirits, like goblins or brownies.

Like, they might be fine, but just the fact that the word exists already doesn't protect it from being D&D's domain.

For the same reason, I'll be surprised if basilisks remain six-legged lizards.

[Wei Ji the Learner]

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

The idea of a grig being a centaur-like fairy with a cricket's lower body and a person's upper body is pretty singularly D&D. So is the idea of kobolds being remotely connected to dragons. Kobolds in folklore were just helpful or mischievous mining spirits, like goblins or brownies.

Like, they might be fine, but just the fact that the word exists already doesn't protect it from being D&D's domain.

For the same reason, I'll be surprised if basilisks remain six-legged lizards.

Sounds like they need more legs, because of a major MMORPG that has the 'lisk suffix added to a lot of critters.

[Veltharis]

MMCJawa wrote:

Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:

Will we be losing the claddic devils and denons?

That's going to be the big one I think. While the demon lords/archdevils are pretty safe, almost all the demons at least require a name change, if not more radical design.

At least Paizo already kind started that process of taking those things away from their DnD roots back when 2E started

Are the archdevils safe, though?

Sure, their names are (mostly?) public domain and a nine-layered model of Hell is straight out of Dante, but "Asmodeus as the supreme devil-god ruling from the realm of Nessus at the bottom of a nine-layered Hell" has been 100% D&D from back in the 1E days, and if drow and OGL demon lords like Orcus are being considered too close for comfort, I'm not so sure a list of archdevils and layers of Hell that map pretty close to D&D's Nine Hells of Baator is going to pass muster.

Pathfinder Layers of Hell and ruling archdevils
Avernus - Barbatos
Dis - Dispater
Erebus - Mammon
Phlegethon - Belial
Stygia - Geryon
Malebolge - Moloch
Cocytus - Baalzebul
Caina - Mephistopheles
Nessus - Asmodeus

1E D&D Layers of Hell and ruling archdevils
Avernus - Tiamat (later Bel and Zariel)
Dis - Dispater
Minauros - Mammon
Phlegethos - Belial (later Fierana/Fierna)
Stygia - Geryon (later Levistus)
Malbolge - Moloch (later the Hag Countess and Glasya)
Maladomini - Baalzebul
Cania (also spelled Caina) - Mephistopheles
Nessus - Asmodeus

I have every confidence there will continue to be a tyrannical Hell dimension populated by devils for Cheliax to be associated with...
I'm not so convinced it will still look all that much like Pathfinder's existing version of Hell.

[Wei Ji the Learner]

The Hells come from older source material and I don't think Dante (and others) is/are going to rise from the grave to press a suit.

I mean, I could be wrong, but if that happens we have Other Bigger Problems.

:>

[PossibleCabbage]

Yeah, the Archdevils are the ones you're going to have the easiest time justifying "we're adapting the same folklore that you are".

Like Asmodeus is in the Book of Tobit, the Testament of Solomon, and the Malleus Malifacarum. His specific presentation in both games is also influenced by "every representation of 'the Devil' in any medium ever."

It's just that the specific devils that you fight might need new names or descriptions, like how TSR changed the Balrog to the Balor after they got sued by the Tolkien estate.

[James Jacobs]

Tiamat as an arch devil is pretty mucht he only part of the D&D take on Hell that isn't something we can pick up inspiration from via mythology or Dante or the like. Hence no Tiamat in Pathfinder (although she did sneak in a few times early on when we were still figuring out how to do an OGL non-D&D game, and those early sneak-ins resulted in a few later sneak-ins that we've pretty much finally been able to put a stop to).

[Jacob Jett]

Indeed. Traditionally, IRL, Tiamat was a Mesopotamian goddess.

[MMCJawa]

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

The idea of a grig being a centaur-like fairy with a cricket's lower body and a person's upper body is pretty singularly D&D. So is the idea of kobolds being remotely connected to dragons. Kobolds in folklore were just helpful or mischievous mining spirits, like goblins or brownies.

Like, they might be fine, but just the fact that the word exists already doesn't protect it from being D&D's domain.

For the same reason, I'll be surprised if basilisks remain six-legged lizards.

There is medieval art if I recall with Basilisks with more than four legs, so that shouldn't be an issue.

Grig though....yeah. That might need to go away.

[Jacob Jett]

MMCJawa wrote:

Grig though....yeah. That might need to go away.

I'm really hoping it can get some kind of Jiminy Cricket exception.

[The Raven Black]

Jacob Jett wrote:

MMCJawa wrote:

Grig though....yeah. That might need to go away.

I'm really hoping it can get some kind of Jiminy Cricket exception.

I don't remember him being portrayed as a centaur though.

[Kobold Catgirl]

My guess is they'll be made more monstrous, more cricket-like. Which, y'know. That's fine.

[Perpdepog]

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

My guess is they'll be made more monstrous, more cricket-like. Which, y'know. That's fine.

Along with a possible name change, too. I tried looking up the Greek word for cricket, because IIRC a couple of heritages for sprites use that word as a prefix, followed by the suffix -xie, but I couldn't find a good match.

Xenocrat wrote:

The extended family should be alright, but RIP aboleth, probably.

Aboleth are another critter I think we should expect to see a name change, and possibly a bit of a physical design change to, but not be too worried about losing entirely. What is the lore for aboleth in D&D like? I know the Alghollthu, but not what the OG lore might have been.

[MMCJawa]

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

My guess is they'll be made more monstrous, more cricket-like. Which, y'know. That's fine.

Yeah if they are going to Jiminy Cricket route, ditching the centaur aspect and making them closer to "tiny bug person" would be obviously the simplest way forward.

[Kobold Catgirl]

"Grig" actually does mean "cricket", so they'd be fine on that front. The fey element and the centaur element are the problems, which is sad, since they're also the coolest things about grigs.

I could see them coming out with some "insectile" sprites, maybe. Like, I'd love it if grigs got replaced with some spider/ladybug/cicada-themed fairies.

[PossibleCabbage]

I never pictured grigs as centaurs, I just figured they were bipeds with cricket legs.

[Big Jig]

Since I am a current Grig character, I hope I get to keep my unique qualities.

[Jacob Jett]

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

"Grig" actually does mean "cricket", so they'd be fine on that front. The fey element and the centaur element are the problems, which is sad, since they're also the coolest things about grigs.

I could see them coming out with some "insectile" sprites, maybe. Like, I'd love it if grigs got replaced with some spider/ladybug/cicada-themed fairies.

IIRC we already have faerie dragon, bee (am I misremembering this one?), and bat-themed sprites (as well as the cricket themed grig). I think spider and beetle themed ones would also be cool. :)

Would also not be sad to see a flower/blossom themed sprite show up either. (Petals were an interesting fey creature.)

(Wishing for fishes)
I would personally love it if atomies, brownies, and kilmoulis were all folded in too. These all come from existing myths and fairy so Paizo could just do their own take on them. (Would also save me some house rule labor. Sprites, along with trolls, are important and common ancestries in my home setting.)

[scary harpy]

What about gremlins? Are they going to be reimagined?

Also, I think alignment affected fey. Without alignment, how will the fey change?

[James Jacobs]

scary harpy wrote:

What about gremlins? Are they going to be reimagined?

Also, I think alignment affected fey. Without alignment, how will the fey change?

Gremlins are pretty much a solid mix of real-world lore and our own creation. The only change you'll see there is us no longer calling mitflits "mites," as that's a name used in D&D for a creature that we've completely recast as a cowardly bug-friendly gremlin.

And the removal of alignment won't impact how creatures act. Fey will remain the same.

[scary harpy]

James Jacobs wrote:

scary harpy wrote:

What about gremlins? Are they going to be reimagined?

Also, I think alignment affected fey. Without alignment, how will the fey change?

Gremlins are pretty much a solid mix of real-world lore and our own creation. The only change you'll see there is us no longer calling mitflits "mites," as that's a name used in D&D for a creature that we've completely recast as a cowardly bug-friendly gremlin.

And the removal of alignment won't impact how creatures act. Fey will remain the same.

I am glad you mentioned mitflits. They are so pathetic that I feel sorry for them. Them and pugwampis.

I'm happy they are still in the game.

Thanks!

[Kobold Catgirl]

Honestly, I think it'll be a bit easier to reflect fey behavior without alignment. Some of the lore around, say, dryads feels less-than-Good from a mortal perspective, but pretty chill from a First World perspective. "What's the big deal? I just "persuaded' you to protect my grove, and I let you go afterwards and everything. It was very nice of you to help, though! Hm? Your rogue died defending my tree? Come on, that's ancient history, it happened an hour ago. I'll always remember her, of course. I planted a rosebush in her honor."

[arcady]

Have we covered Tarrasque yet in here?

There's a mention of one in the lore of Golaria as a major historical event. But I suspect this is a very D&D specific monster.

Is it? And if so, it opens speculation on how they will retcon that piece of lore. Thankfully it's just a name drop event to my knowledge, so you could sub in any other terrifying creature.

[Darth Game Master]

Tarrasques are from folklore. The D&D interpretation of them is pretty clearly Pathfinder's inspiration, but the specifics of them being Spawn of Rovagug and whatnot might be enough for them to get away with it?

[Kobold Catgirl]

Yeah, they'll have to change the design a lot, but I'm excited for that. The old tarrasque with its Knockoff Godzilla design and spiky caramel coating has gotten a bit stale, anyways. Pathfinder deserves its own Megamonster.

[PossibleCabbage]

arcady wrote:

Have we covered Tarrasque yet in here?

There's a mention of one in the lore of Golaria as a major historical event. But I suspect this is a very D&D specific monster.

Is it? And if so, it opens speculation on how they will retcon that piece of lore. Thankfully it's just a name drop event to my knowledge, so you could sub in any other terrifying creature.

There are 2e stats for it in the last volume of Age of Ashes, but the Golarion lore also involves the Tarrasque being sealed in a secret cavern under Avistan. If you're not allowed to use the monster anymore, you can just leave it at that.

Tables that want to tell the story of "the Tarrasque got out" have everything they'd need to tell that story.

Paizo can always just have a new Spawn of Rovagug crawl out of the Pit of Gormuz any time they want the PCs to have to fight a level 25 monster.

[James Jacobs]

Tarrasque as we all know it for Pathfinder is very D&D, but the Spawn of Rovagug are not. Going forward, we won't be telling Spawn of Rovagug stories involving Tarrasque, but we have plenty other Spawn of Rovagug to work with and can certainly make new ones as we go and need for new stories.

We also have King Mogaru to take the place of a big kaiju dinosaur.

[Perpdepog]

I hope that, at minimum, the Tarrasque's moniker gets applied to something new that might show up in the lore. "The Armageddon Engine" is an objectively cool name.

[James Jacobs]

Perpdepog wrote:

I hope that, at minimum, the Tarrasque's moniker gets applied to something new that might show up in the lore. "The Armageddon Engine" is an objectively cool name.

Nah. Since Tarrasque isn't going away from Golarion, I don't wan't to take away his moniker. It's just not gonna be in stories going forward. We came up with "The Armageddon Engine" so I'm confident that any new ones we come up with will have objectively cool names too. ;-)

One fun side note: Since our Spawn of Rovagug are known by proper names, we don't use "the" in front of Tarrasque in OGL books unless we screw up.

That's like talking about the Merisiel or the Calistria or the Ripnugget. ;P

[Brinebeast]

Arcanatons - Okay, they are not an SRD monster but they are a Paizo original. Arcanatons are somewhat like Arcane spirits or living spells. I have been hoping to see Arcanatons expanded on and fleshed out into a full group. Maybe nows the time!

[Perpdepog]

Brinebeast wrote:

Arcanatons - Okay, they are not an SRD monster but they are a Paizo original. Arcanatons are somewhat like Arcane spirits or living spells. I have been hoping to see Arcanatons expanded on and fleshed out into a full group. Maybe nows the time!

If you are looking for a living spell-type monster in the meantime, might I interest you in the roiling incant? I've always thought they were really cool.

Though I suppose they'll need to be reworked to fit with the remaster, assuming they make it in at all, since they are tied to both traditions and schools. Perhaps they can be tied to a tradition and spell trait, instead?

[Rysky]

James Jacobs wrote:

That's like talking about the Merisiel

Careful, you’ll skyrocket her ego :3

[RiverMesa]

The reveal of the athamaru as one of the Howl of the Wild ancestries has me wondering - they are described as living in Xidao in Tian Xia, which has historically been the domain of locathah, who seem to be an OGL inclusion and thus likely slated for a re-design/rename/removal.

Granted, locathah were originally in Bestiary 3 and thus probably not super likely to show up in Monster Core either way, and Grefu's concept art is dated 2022 like all the other HotW ancestries unless there were some more recent changes involved.

[ckobbe]

Veltharis wrote:

MMCJawa wrote:

Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:

Will we be losing the claddic devils and denons?

That's going to be the big one I think. While the demon lords/archdevils are pretty safe, almost all the demons at least require a name change, if not more radical design.

At least Paizo already kind started that process of taking those things away from their DnD roots back when 2E started

Are the archdevils safe, though?

Sure, their names are (mostly?) public domain and a nine-layered model of Hell is straight out of Dante, but "Asmodeus as the supreme devil-god ruling from the realm of Nessus at the bottom of a nine-layered Hell" has been 100% D&D from back in the 1E days, and if drow and OGL demon lords like Orcus are being considered too close for comfort, I'm not so sure a list of archdevils and layers of Hell that map pretty close to D&D's Nine Hells of Baator is going to pass muster.
I have every confidence there will continue to be a tyrannical Hell dimension populated by devils for Cheliax to be associated with...
I'm not so convinced it will still look all that much like Pathfinder's existing version of Hell.

I don't know, suddenly having all those infernal contracts in Cheliax be null and void because Asmodeus didn't survive the remaster would be pretty darn funny. First you lose Aroden, then Asmodeus. Who's next on down the alphabet !?!?

[Jacob Jett]

Isn't Asmodeus originally from pre-D&D sources? IIRC, this is true of a bunch of demon lords and princes of hell. Like Dispater is actually an Etruscan god of the underworld. Etc. Etc.

[Sibelius Eos Owm]

Jacob Jett wrote:

Isn't Asmodeus originally from pre-D&D sources? IIRC, this is true of a bunch of demon lords and princes of hell. Like Dispater is actually an Etruscan god of the underworld. Etc. Etc.

Asmodeus comes from Redwall. Of this I am 110% certain. This is why the Prince of Lies is associated with snakes.

This statement should not be taken at face value

[Jacob Jett]

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

Jacob Jett wrote:

Isn't Asmodeus originally from pre-D&D sources? IIRC, this is true of a bunch of demon lords and princes of hell. Like Dispater is actually an Etruscan god of the underworld. Etc. Etc.

Asmodeus comes from Redwall. Of this I am 110% certain. This is why the Prince of Lies is associated with snakes.

This statement should not be taken at face value

No. It's important to do the homework.

As I mentioned. This is the case for many of D&D's big bads.

Edit: Wait, wait, wait. I hate how hard text in other colors is to read on phones. I'm with you. Apologies if the terseness is too blunt. Offense is not intended. Can't recall the strike through markup right now but am leaving the link in case others take it as literally as I did at first.

[Merisiel Sillvari]

Rysky wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

That's like talking about the Merisiel

Careful, you’ll skyrocket her ego :3

Mmmmmm... ego...

[Kobold Catgirl]

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

Jacob Jett wrote:

Isn't Asmodeus originally from pre-D&D sources? IIRC, this is true of a bunch of demon lords and princes of hell. Like Dispater is actually an Etruscan god of the underworld. Etc. Etc.

Asmodeus comes from Redwall. Of this I am 110% certain. This is why the Prince of Lies is associated with snakes.

This statement should not be taken at face value

The really wild thing is how snakes also come from Redwall. It's crazy how influential that show was.

[Sibelius Eos Owm]

Jacob Jett wrote:

.

Edit: Wait, wait, wait. I hate how hard text in other colors is to read on phones. I'm with you. Apologies if the terseness is too blunt. Offense is not intended. Can't recall the strike through markup right now but am leaving the link in case others take it as literally as I did at first.

I have often enough been the one checking others' homework, so no harm done--my own fault for reducing font size as well.

[Perpdepog]

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

Jacob Jett wrote:

Isn't Asmodeus originally from pre-D&D sources? IIRC, this is true of a bunch of demon lords and princes of hell. Like Dispater is actually an Etruscan god of the underworld. Etc. Etc.

Asmodeus comes from Redwall. Of this I am 110% certain. This is why the Prince of Lies is associated with snakes.

This statement should not be taken at face value

The really wild thing is how snakes also come from Redwall. It's crazy how influential that show was.

It was a show? Oh, dang; I only ever knew it as a book series. I should track that show down.

[Cori Marie]

Merisiel Sillvari wrote:

Rysky wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

That's like talking about the Merisiel

Careful, you’ll skyrocket her ego :3

Mmmmmm... ego...

I've missed you Meri!

[Quen Pah]

Veltharis wrote:

MMCJawa wrote:

Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:

Will we be losing the claddic devils and denons?

That's going to be the big one I think. While the demon lords/archdevils are pretty safe, almost all the demons at least require a name change, if not more radical design.

At least Paizo already kind started that process of taking those things away from their DnD roots back when 2E started

Are the archdevils safe, though?

Sure, their names are (mostly?) public domain and a nine-layered model of Hell is straight out of Dante, but "Asmodeus as the supreme devil-god ruling from the realm of Nessus at the bottom of a nine-layered Hell" has been 100% D&D from back in the 1E days, and if drow and OGL demon lords like Orcus are being considered too close for comfort, I'm not so sure a list of archdevils and layers of Hell that map pretty close to D&D's Nine Hells of Baator is going to pass muster.

Pathfinder Layers of Hell and ruling archdevils
Avernus - Barbatos
Dis - Dispater
Erebus - Mammon
Phlegethon - Belial
Stygia - Geryon
Malebolge - Moloch
Cocytus - Baalzebul
Caina - Mephistopheles
Nessus - Asmodeus

1E D&D Layers of Hell and ruling archdevils
Avernus - Tiamat (later Bel and Zariel)
Dis - Dispater
Minauros - Mammon
Phlegethos - Belial (later Fierana/Fierna)
Stygia - Geryon (later Levistus)
Malbolge - Moloch (later the Hag Countess and Glasya)
Maladomini - Baalzebul
Cania (also spelled Caina) - Mephistopheles
Nessus - Asmodeus

I have every confidence there will continue to be a tyrannical Hell dimension populated by devils for Cheliax to be associated with...
I'm not so convinced it will still look all that much like Pathfinder's existing version of Hell.

Aren't most of those names taken out of literature and mythology/demonology?

[Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti]

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

Jacob Jett wrote:

Isn't Asmodeus originally from pre-D&D sources? IIRC, this is true of a bunch of demon lords and princes of hell. Like Dispater is actually an Etruscan god of the underworld. Etc. Etc.

Asmodeus comes from Redwall. Of this I am 110% certain. This is why the Prince of Lies is associated with snakes.

This statement should not be taken at face value

The name Asmodeus comes out of the Book of Tobit, part of the dueterocanonicals in the LXX version of the Hebrew Scriptures.

[scary harpy]

QuidEst wrote:

...

The reworked categories of monsters have all hit the spot for me. Hag rework leans more into fairy tale stuff, and I like that we're going to have a hag with Gingerbread Witch vibes. That just has more pizazz than "sea hag" or "blood hag". Hopefully it'll have some fun spillover to Changeling.

...

Absolutely thrilled to have kholo move out from the shadow of litigation that gnolls had hanging over them.

...

This is exciting!

I look forward to the new hags!

The new hyena-people may have potential.

[Laclale♪]

Even SoT has ant kholo(yes, it's after rename) as student

[Xyxox]

I've gotten to the point where as long as the core stat block doesn't change, I'm fine with whatever they do because I am not planning on a completely new campaign world that I only use he Player's Core rule book and the Game Mastery Core Rule book. Everything else will come from my brain.