Basic Fantasy Field Guide Volume 2

[chiisu81]

1. Correct
2. Art is still being accepted; be sure to check Jeff's thread/contributions so that y'all don't draw for the same monster(s)
3. Print, eventually. Solo is still working on the FG1 re-write, and until that's complete and he and I go through FG2 it's gonna be PDF only til then.

[teaman]

Thanks. Jeff is a drawing machine! I will keep it in mind should I do something other than fairy ladies. Still thinking about that volcano fairy.

[chiisu81]

Just saw this:

We have a "Boar, Polar" in the B's
but then later there is a "Sewer Boar" in the S's.

So far as I can tell, the Sewer Boar ought to be in the B's as well as "Boar, Sewer"

Very Minor thing, but I am a big fan of consistency... and I do like things to be grouped when it is appropriate. In similar fashion, I think the Bog Ogre ought to be in the guide as "Ogre, Bog", and embarrassingly that was one I put in (albeit from another source, so).

Agreed, I'll make sure they're moved (and updated in the Monster Index as well) for the next release. I still need the combined/fixed Bear entries before I work on the next release.

[Solomoriah]

All Field Guides will eventually be printed. Eventually.

[chiisu81]

I've put an updated r34 in the Projects folder for Solo. I've put in his combined quill-bear entry to replace the quill-bear and the longbear. I've re-sorted the entries noted by Smoot. I've put in quite a few images from Jeff and John, it's looking very nice. I did go ahead and remove the monster index, as I have it as a stand-alone item now, and it'll be much easier to keep updated.

[AlMan]

Just saw this:

We have a "Boar, Polar" in the B's
but then later there is a "Sewer Boar" in the S's.

So far as I can tell, the Sewer Boar ought to be in the B's as well as "Boar, Sewer"

Very Minor thing, but I am a big fan of consistency... and I do like things to be grouped when it is appropriate. In similar fashion, I think the Bog Ogre ought to be in the guide as "Ogre, Bog", and embarrassingly that was one I put in (albeit from another source, so).

Here are some other creatures that may need to be moved.

Bone Chimera could be under Chimera, Bone.
Bone Viper could be under Viper, Bone.
(may also try to see if it could go under Snake, Bone Viper).
Dancing Shadow could be under Shadow, Dancing.
Would a Duckbear need to go under bears?
Moon Goblin could be under Goblin, Moon.
Moonlight Butterfly could be under Butterfly, Moonlight.
Paper Tiger could be under Tiger, Paper.
Rabbit Snake could be under Snake, Rabbit.
Rock Bat could be under Bat, Rock (even though it is not a real bat-like creature).
Spitting Slug could be under Slug, Spitting.
Tree-Fox could be under Fox, Tree- (or some other way to preserve the hyphen in the name.)
Wind Wolf could be under Wolf, Wind.

I'll start going over FG2 r34 in depth, another pair of eyes always helps.

[chiisu81]

I agree with some of those being re-categorized, but not all. I'll wait for Solo, Smoot, and others to chime in first. And thanks for helping edit/proof-read!

[SmootRK]

I agree with Chi. Some of these are appropriate, IMO; others not so much. Just because name includes a creature, does not necessarily make it a member of the species. Otherwise, we would have Lion Fish included with Lions... and similar non-sense.

I am not very up to date with all these, so I will comment on the ones I feel like I have an opinion on:
Bone Viper: agree, and I would go the route of grouping with snake.
Moon Goblin: agree, Goblin, Moon
Paper Tiger: disagree. This is an origami construct, the "tiger" part just describes form... and is a funny/irony aspect.
Rock Bat: not a bat at all, so I disagree with grouping with bats. Just a name that helps describe a similarity.
The Tree-Fox (and Tree-Wolf variant sorta described within, one of my own creations), are actually meant as a new species (imo) that only has certain similarities to the namesakes. Neither true foxes, nor really members of squirrel family. That said, I am flexible to other opinions on what I made here; perhaps needs a specific name given, then the Tree-Fox gets a line in description like: "often referred to as 'tree-fox' by locals".

[ThorinSchmidt]

Actually, I would think "Lion Fish" would be under "Fish, Lion". unless it's actually the name of something that's not a fish, like Owlbear, for instance.

[SmootRK]

Actually, I would think "Lion Fish" would be under "Fish, Lion". unless it's actually the name of something that's not a fish, like Owlbear, for instance.

Not really meant as something accurate or even needed... maybe just a poor example to illustrate my point. Point being still valid though. Just because a particular term appears in the name, does not necessarily mean it is appropriate to include as a true member of a group.