Alternative token art for monsters

[SuperParkourio]

I've never been a GM for a PFS game, but when I GM other campaigns, I usually use joke images in place of a monster's given token art. For instance, I'd replace:
- a giant rat with Ratigan from The Great Mouse Detective.
- a giant spider with Aragog from Harry Potter.
- a web lurker with Zoidberg from Futurama.
- an blue dragon with Ord from Dragon Tales.
- A green dragon with Grim Matchstick from Cuphead.
- a kobold warrior with a Lizalfos from Breath of the Wild.
- a kobold trapmaster with a Lizalfos but with the hairdo of Fred from Scooby-Doo.
- a sewer ooze with a Like Like from Ocarina of Time.
- a cinder rat with Ratigan but on fire.

My primary reason for doing this is to prevent accidental metagaming. Some of my players are often GMs themselves, so they'd recognize the monsters instantly otherwise. My secondary reason for doing this is that my players and I find it funny. Nothing about the stat blocks changes. Just the artwork used for the tokens.

If I were to GM in PFS, would I be allowed to do this? Or am I required to use the official art presented for the tokens?

[Tomppa]

There's nothing saying that you must use official art, and indeed in meatspace games you might not even have tokens with appropriate art, but rather a random assortment of miniatures or just generic markers etc.

I'd avoid purposefully using misleading art, tho - for example, if the players are faced with lizardfolks, you wouldn't want to use zombies or skeletons.

Personally, I think the token art should be as representative as the description you're giving them, but not much else. If the players want to know whether that's a lizardfolk or a serpent folk or a nagaji (or just a very large kobold) (Or a werecrocodile), they get to roll a recall knowledge for it. This is especially true with undead, unless they are specifically described in a clearly identifiable way: if it's just a pile of bones animating, then sure, it's a skeleton (probably). But if you check the art for a skeleton champion and say, draugr, they look very similar and could easily be mistaken for one another. And if the skeleton has even a bit more armor or a closed helmet, it's no longer immediately recognizeable as a skeleton guard.

This ties a bit into a somewhat popular discussion about "if we're facing a skeleton / zombie, is it metagaming to know that bludgeoning / slashing works against each?" to which my answer is that you typically shouldn't know you're facing a skeleton/zombie without an RK check. You can definitely gamble that it's a skeleton/zombie, but it could just as well be draugr or a flesh golem, or possibly a Morhg, ghoul or a wight.

[Azothath]

In general blank art is better than misleading fictional art. What PCs can observe is valid and the art's job is to save a GM from describing critters. I wouldn't do 'jokey' as it goes in a direction you might not want. PFS GM agreement has you run stuff "as is".

PCs have to roll and succeed on knowledge checks in PF1 to get information but some creature types are obvious (animals not attacking 'unnatural creatures', etc). I also believe a successful know(nature) check would let you know something is or is not natural. PF1 Know(arcana) has this effect with robots where the questioner knows they're 'weird' golems.

Review PF2 mechanics for the same effect.

[SuperParkourio]

I don't want to mislead the players. I just don't want anyone already familiar with the image to be instantly spoiled about what they are fighting. I'll edit the images, too, to make the anatomy closer to the official art. For instance, when I replaced a xulgath warrior's image with a Hunter Alpha from Resident Evil, I made sure to give him a tail.

[Azothath]

I get that you are trying to mitigate metagaming and this is a particularly pervasive and thorny topic as many players objected to having to roll knowledge checks as they felt it ignored their PC's combat experience.
When players pipe up that it's a Gnarly Bogey-Bat without some check, you can remind players that it is a Game Mechanic and to invest a few skill points in said skills rather than 'spoiler' it for others. You try to 'grow' better players but sometimes people get excited and blurt stuff out, they also want to show that they know stuff.

With DR and such as a GM you can just say, "you did a bit less damage than you expected" or something similar. Don't put a specific number to it without cause.

There were a few PF1 boons with a list of common monsters that circulated so players could know one thing without having to roll.