Pathfinder 1E What qualifies a creature as an extraplanar outsider, an extraplanar animal/humanoid/etc or an extraplanar native outsider?

[Tovec]

"PlH" is an abbreviation for the Planar Handbook, not the Player's Handbook or PHB. The revive outsider spell debuted in the Spell Compendium. The extraplanar outsiders in the PlH are given aging tables and repeatedly stated in their fluff descriptions to require food and other basic necessities, but this is not reflected anywhere in their racial traits that still consider them immortal outsiders who don't need to eat/sleep/reproduce.

PH may be an abbreviation for Planar Handbook or the Player's Handbook. It was not clear in the context of what you said. In either case, I believe I said that such a comment was irrelevent to typing issues. And doubly irrelevant since this thread is originally titled "Pathfinder" and not "early 3.5". Beyond this, the Outsider type as stated in the monster manual, can be revived - just not with resurrection, raise dead, or reincarnate. But it does list limited wish, wish, miracle, and true resurrection of being able to do so. So I fail to see why the lack of such a spell in the early days of 3.5 is an issue. So, I will once again say 'Irrelevant' and move on.

"The extraplanar outsiders in the PlH are given aging tables and repeatedly stated in their fluff descriptions to require food and other basic necessities, but this is not reflected anywhere in their racial traits that still consider them immortal outsiders who don't need to eat/sleep/reproduce."
Um.. the Outsiders you are talking about would be:
Briaurs, Neraphim, Shadowwyfts, and Wildren? I ask because you STILL didn't give me specifics to look up.

For example, a list such as this would have meant I didn't have to do your research for you:
Briaurs age.
Neraphim need to eat and age.
Shadowswyfts age.
Wildren are also sort of half-celestial, but ignoring that..they age. As do most half-celestials in my experience (not checking whether they should or not - irrelevant).

So, the only Outsider race that requires food is Neraphim who will apparently starve without it. Otherwise they are NOT stated repeatedly in their racial descriptions or traits to need food.

Outside of the entries (which obviously all say they age - so IS included), all of the entries say "outsider" and so it is assumed they have the outsider traits, unless individual descriptions differ. So, they do not require food for example - except the Neraphim. This is the same for all creatures of all types. Magical Beasts have darkvision 60.. except the magical beasts which don't. That is how it works. If you are wondering how to make a new Outsider then follow the type, unless you feel you need to make a change based on your own view of the race/monster.

Also, it doesn't say anywhere in the Outsider type that they cannot reproduce. IIRC (again, not willing to look for it) Eladrin make baby Eladrin that way. Also I'm assuming you mean sexually reproduce, right? Since most outsiders do create more of themselves, "reproduce" just in varying ways.

Beyond all of that, as I said last time, if these creatures are the exception then they are just that. Outsiders have certain traits, these creatures also have those traits. These creatures may have additional traits, like aging, that most outsiders do not possess but that doesn't invalidate the entire TYPE simply because certain creatures do age. You'll notice that the planar handbook doesn't suddenly start saying that Slaadi will die without food and sleep. It made entirely new creatures and called them Neraphim and gave those entirely new creatures special snowflake different rules.

And once again, I will say that it is probably poorly written why such things exist. There are many proponents of planar lore who would agree with me that the planar handbook isn't a well reasoned book of the planes, preferring books like Manual of the Planes, and alike, but that is really beside the point.

The celestial creature template in the SRD (not the PFSRD, which cuts out lots of explanatory rules for no apparent reason) states "Celestial creatures dwell on the upper planes, the realms of good, although they resemble beings found on the Material Plane. They are more regal and more beautiful than their earthly counterparts" and ""Celestial" is an inherited template." The template rules state "inherited templates, are part of a creature from the beginning of its existence. Creatures are born with these templates."

What are you even talking about? I can read the description as well as you. What is the point you are making?

Is it:
A. That magical beats exist on the planes?
If so, I agree. I don't say that you can't find non-outsiders on the planes.
B. That they are born with this tempate and that somehow makes the template NOT a template?
If so, I disagree. Just because they are "born" with the template doesn't mean they are a normal creature. I am specifically and emphatically going to ask you for a similar example WITHOUT the template. I ask this because the template alters the base creature. Also, because it is likely that such celestial creatures are former living creatures of the material plane that became celestial when they went to the planes at the time of their death. Just like a half-dragon is born a half-dragon but that doesn't make any comments about the state of the Dragon Type nor the Humanoid Type.

The outsider type states "Some creatures start out as some other type and become outsiders when they attain a higher (or lower) state of spiritual existence." So material creatures can become outsiders through unexplained processes.

It is not an unexplained process. It is explained, "attained a higher state of spiritual existence." Usually through death. (Part of that dual-spirit thing that Outsiders lack.)
And beyond that, each of the Outsiders that you gave, those extraplanar ones from the planar handbook, did not start out humanoid and become Outsiders - so your argument seems to be unsubstantiated. They are just different races of Outsiders who are not exemplars and who happen to age.

An outsider is defined as any creature that contains the "essence" of a plane other than the material plane, and this implies an unstated rule that "all creatures from a plane other than the material are outsiders" that is broken in the SRD by the existence of planar versions of normal creatures. Planar creatures are explicitly not material creatures that emigrated to the outer planes: they "resemble" their "earthly counterparts" but are just as much born of their home plane as any outsider is.

Correct (to the underlined bit). It does say that Outsiders are creatures composed of an essence other than the material plane. But I disagree that there is an unwritten rule that all creatures from the planes are outsiders. That goes too far. Obviously there are exceptions. The planar handbook has some, but then again so does the Monster Manual. Ghosts are not outsiders, dragons living in the planes don't cease being typed dragon. Elementals (in 3.5 days - which we seem to be on now?) are not outsiders. You are simply wrong about this "unstated rule".

And since it is not a rule, it is not broken when you find "planar versions of normal creatures."

The outsider type, therefore, does not automatically apply to any creature that originates solely from an outer plane.

Yes it kind of does. That is the definition of Outsider. When you are solely created of the essence of the planes and not of anything else, then you are an Outsider. EDIT: Putting this in now that I got to the drider bit below: There may also be things that should be Outsiders that aren't but most things are typed 100% correctly.

EDIT: When you're playing a campaign set on the material plane, the creatures you run across range across the full gammut of types. When you're playing a campaign set on the outer planes, however, you run into an odd difference where virtually every living creature you encounter is an outsider despite having just as much physical and intellectual variety as creatures on the material plane do. Its lends a strange air of sameness to a setting that otherwise should seem wildly diverse. It would be exactly like saying that all creatures from the material plane automatically have the "insider type" and not aberration, animal, dragon, etc.

By in large, you aren't supposed to be playing a game on the planes. But if you do, then that is exactly what you should expect to meet. If you ran a game set completely under water, you would expect to see the 'water' and 'aquatic' subtypes a lot. If you set a game in the city of brass you would expect to see Outsider and Elemental types. If you set the game on an unimportant stretch of land in the material plane, you would expect to see Humanoid, Animal, MAYBE some magical beasts.

My point is that you are comparing a hip and happening material plane, the center of the multiverse, with a random plane and then criticizing the result? Poor form.

If all of this is to get me to support your new Types thread I saw yesterday (or the day before?) then I don't I'm sorry. But there is not very much wrong with the types as they are now. There are oddities certainly but it doesn't mean the Outsider type is broken.

EDIT: Apparently a lot of aberrations like beholders and mindflayers are from the Far Realm, which is technically another plane. Despite this, they're considered aberrations rather than outsiders and aren't even considered extraplanar on the material plane. On a related note, driders are considered aberrations while scorpionfolk (MMII) are considered monstrous humanoids despite both creatures being arachnid centaurs.

As best as I can tell, Mind Flayers do not come from the Far Realm. But it is a common mistake in planar lore. The bigger mistake that I'm not going to abide is saying "[the Far Realm] is technically another plane." It isn't by design, it is outside of the planes.

The PF bestiaries include several creatures that, if judged by the same criteria as planetouched, should be outsiders but are treated as extraplanar versions of other types (usually aberrations, since most of these examples are conversions from Call of Cthulhu). For example, the Spawn of Yog-Sothoth is an aberration (extraplanar) despite being the offspring of a mortal and a deity/outsider and therefore logically qualifying for the outsider (native) type. This sort of thing is fairly common as the types themselves are poorly defined and whether a monster qualifies for a particular type or not is made on a entirely arbitrary basis that contradicts decisions made for similar creatures (see my note about driders vs. scorpionfolk above).

Now, that does raise a good point. Aberration as a type is mostly wrong - as you correctly say. If most of those creatures should be Outsiders, then I would make them Outsiders (but then again I did in my system). But in so doing I imagine you would have a problem with even more creatures joining the amorphous blob that is the Outsider type, but you don't?

On The Spawn of Yog-Sothoth, I would suspect he would be a pure Outsider, not (native) - since he is extraplanar it would be unlikely he would be native to the material plane. Although, after reading the description - I'm fairly certain it SHOULD be defined as an aberration, as it is a thing not of the multiverse - and not actually an Outsider. Also, you are still wrong because Yog-Sothoth is not typed, but given the three Great Old Ones in that book are all defined as NOT Outsider type it is unlikely that Yog-Sothoth would be typed that - and more unlikely that its children would suddenly gain the Outsider type (especially the Native Outsider type).

But you have me on the Drider thing...

Now as far s the 'extraplanar' tag you stuck on there - I still don't get why? What does them being extraplanar factor in for you in this argument? In the spawn's case it is extrplanar because it is does NOT belong to the material plane where it is. It would additionally have the extraplanar subtype on all of the multiverse. Mind you that claim is not so strange since a modron has the extraplanar subtype on every plane except one. In fact all creatures, except those from the Far Realm (not even all Aberrations) would have the extraplanar subtype on all but one plane. I'm just saying, it seems like an odd thing to repeatedly mention as important without saying why it is important.

 

[VelvetViolet]

I have no idea what you're saying at this point because you've completely misinterpreted my meaning. So I'm going to wipe out my previous statements and restate my basic argument and hope I understand your next reply.

The outsider type is an amorphous blob containing any sort of random creature from the planes. Plenty of creatures created from the essence of the planes or other universes, such as celestial/fiendish creatures, devourers, and lovecraftian monsters, are not outsiders but aberrations/magical beasts/fey/undead/whatever. So the problem I run into is that, when designing a creature from the planes, on what criteria should I decide to make it an outsider as opposed to any other type?

 

[Shemeska]

In my surveying of various 3.5 and PF books, I've noticed that extraplanar creatures can generally be divided into three categories: extraplanar outsiders, extraplanar creatures of any other type, and native outsiders that are native to an outer plane or similar.

Exactly what criteria qualifies a creature to be placed in one of the three categories above?

Take the tenebrous worm, for example. It is an outsider native to the Plane of Shadow. However, it could just as easily qualify as an extraplanar magical beast. The only important difference between the two is that an outsider is subject to planar binding and cannot be raised, etc. But otherwise all outsiders just seem to be garden variety aberrations, humanoids and magical beasts from another plane that get extra skill points and stuff regardless of whether it makes sense. If one wished for it to be subject to planar binding or more difficult to resurrect, then merely give it an outsider ancestry/blood trait, a quasi-soulless trait, a planetouched subtype, etc.

As I see it, coming from a 2e/3e/PF perspective, it boils down to the state of the creatures soul and body.

Outsider: immortal, completely lacks body/soul duality.
Native Outsider: retains body/soul duality, but with a certain spark of an outsider be it by descent, curse, transcendence, etc that links them to something greater (or lesser depending on their nature)
Extraplanar creatures of any other type: normal critters that just happen to be on another plane besides the material plane, and which lack the innate connection to an alignment or other metaphysical concept as other outsiders possess.

 

[VelvetViolet]

As I see it, coming from a 2e/3e/PF perspective, it boils down to the state of the creatures soul and body.

Outsider: immortal, completely lacks body/soul duality.
Native Outsider: retains body/soul duality, but with a certain spark of an outsider be it by descent, curse, transcendence, etc that links them to something greater (or lesser depending on their nature)
Extraplanar creatures of any other type: normal critters that just happen to be on another plane besides the material plane, and which lack the innate connection to an alignment or other metaphysical concept as other outsiders possess.

Don't forget that outsiders all use the same hit dice and skills despite having just as much variety as all the other types combined.

But what determines whether a creature created on/from another plane has soul duality or not? Celestial/fiendish/etc creatures are just as much creations of their planes as celestials and fiends are, yet they have soul duality. Devourers can be created from fiends (when they weren't evil mortal spellcasters), which turns them into undead, and casting a resurrection or true resurrection spell on them turns them back into the fiends they were before (since fiends are living creatures healed by positive energy). At several points it is even stated that the "homeworld of the fey" is another plane of existence, yet fey are their own type instead of outsiders (and have the same problem of being an amorphous blob that all other types can be fit into with no effort).

Outsiders just seem to have a particularly stronger connection to their plane than other creatures also born of it, but the name/description is still confusing since it implies all creatures not of the material plane are outsiders even though this isn't true. Maybe if the outsider type was replaced with, I don't know, the "exemplar" type, representing beings that are avatars of their plane in the same way that deities have avatars, as opposed to any random creature born of/from that plane? Celestials, Fiends, Elementals, Genies, Axioms (axiomites, inevitables), Anarchs (proteans, chaosiic), and Equilibrants (aeons, etc) would qualify as exemplars, while stench kows (evil cattle of the lower planes) and Stygian leviathans (giant whales that swim the River Styx) would be magical beasts and planetouched would be humanoids with the planetouched subtype.

 

[Tovec]

I have no idea what you're saying at this point because you've completely misinterpreted my meaning. So I'm going to wipe out my previous statements and restate my basic argument and hope I understand your next reply.

The outsider type is an amorphous blob containing any sort of random creature from the planes. Plenty of creatures created from the essence of the planes or other universes, such as celestial/fiendish creatures, devourers, and lovecraftian monsters, are not outsiders but aberrations/magical beasts/fey/undead/whatever. So the problem I run into is that, when designing a creature from the planes, on what criteria should I decide to make it an outsider as opposed to any other type?

The problem you seem to be running into is that you want outsiders to be both (a) a type that means a creature is not from the material plane, and (b) split up into various different types. You have a problem with both Outsiders being monolithic and yet when they are NOT monolithic. Which makes me wonder what you actually want.

Also, if this had been your purpose from the start then there is no reason you should have begun with the native and extraplanar outsiders stuff.

Further, lovecraftian monsters should NOT be outsiders (they don't come from the outer planes - they come from beyond the multiverse entirely), nor should most fey, magical beasts, and so on. The celestial template perhaps should turn the creature into an Outsider, but the rationalization of why it does not is similarly clear. It is not created of the essence of the outer planes, it is not an outsider by that definition. I looked at devourers too, they're ethereal natives and therefore not really outsiders. Though I suppose of one was on Hades or something and started devouring an outsider I could see how you could think it applies. But in that case I think the Undead type applies much more greatly.

Don't forget that outsiders all use the same hit dice and skills despite having just as much variety as all the other types combined.

Is this your issue? Seems like a fine one to have (I don't mean fine as in good, I mean as in precise). In such a case I think it is a matter of the designers not wanting to make more work than it is worth. You'll also notice that Humanoids have d8s despite fighters having d10s, barbarians d12s and wizards having d4s. But basic humanoids with levels in nothing but humanoids have d8s regardless if they are strong, fast, smart or anything else. It comes down to what level of granularity the designers want, and I do not fault them for making outsiders have a d10. Also, as I explained further back, that is the default not the automatic. So, while outsiders may have darkvision 60, some may not have that and others may have darkvision 200 - it is all a matter of degrees of variation from the norm, and that norm seems to make sense.

So, if you are truly wondering "So the problem I run into is that, when designing a creature from the planes, on what criteria should I decide to make it an outsider as opposed to any other type?" as you say last quote.. then use the default as it is and vary it as you need to - something I've been saying since the start. Is the creature a pure outsider made of outer planes essence? Then it is an outsider. Is it undead? Then its undead. Is is a creature that is made of the material plane but now living on the outer planes? Then consult the material plane aspect. If this confuses you (which I honestly doubt it does) then I am amazed how you function when creating a monster for the material plane.

In fact I'll ask again, what is the problem? That you don't know what type to make things when making something for the outer planes? Or that you WANT to be confused when doing so?

But what determines whether a creature created on/from another plane has soul duality or not? Celestial/fiendish/etc creatures are just as much creations of their planes as celestials and fiends are, yet they have soul duality.

If by "celestial/fiendish/etc" you mean the template? Then no. You are wrong, still. Bring up good examples for this argument please.

Devourers can be created from fiends (when they weren't evil mortal spellcasters), which turns them into undead, and casting a resurrection or true resurrection spell on them turns them back into the fiends they were before (since fiends are living creatures healed by positive energy).

All manner of undead can be made of fiends (or outsiders in general). I can only presume your problem is that undead on the other plane are still typed Undead instead of Outsider? That is because while they are undead they are .. Undead. It has nothing to do with a dual soul. It has to do with the state of the soul. Outsiders do have souls, it just happens that their bodies are their soul, whereas humanoids have a soul that is separate from their body and can be removed without affecting the body (when dead)

At several points it is even stated that the "homeworld of the fey" is another plane of existence, yet fey are their own type instead of outsiders (and have the same problem of being an amorphous blob that all other types can be fit into with no effort).

As far as I know there is no canon world of the fey. They are of the material plane. Even if there was a faerie realm (like from the manual of the planes) that still would not make them Outsiders, as that plane is NOT an outer realm. Swing and a miss.

Outsiders just seem to have a particularly stronger connection to their plane than other creatures also born of it, but the name/description is still confusing since it implies all creatures not of the material plane are outsiders even though this isn't true.

YOU have that implication. It is not implied beyond what you repeat that it should be implied. It says that Outsiders are from the Outer Planes, it does not say that they are the only ones, nor anything of the sort. It is not an unwritten rule of any kind. If you find it confusing I am sorry, but the term itself is not all that much more confusing than Humanoid, Magical Beast, Monstrous Humanoid, or Aberration - those are equally 'confusing' and there are likely others that could be added to this list. My point, perhaps, is that your own personal confusion is not enough of a reason to say something is wrong. If I don't follow the mechanics of psionics, it doesn't mean they are wrong, just that I somehow fail to understand what others can see clearly.

Maybe if the outsider type was replaced with, I don't know, the "exemplar" type, representing beings that are avatars of their plane in the same way that deities have avatars, as opposed to any random creature born of/from that plane? Celestials, Fiends, Elementals, Genies, Axioms (axiomites, inevitables), Anarchs (proteans, chaosiic), and Equilibrants (aeons, etc) would qualify as exemplars, while stench kows (evil cattle of the lower planes) and Stygian leviathans (giant whales that swim the River Styx) would be magical beasts and planetouched would be humanoids with the planetouched subtype.

Why replace the name with exemplar? If your objection is that outsiders should be both broader to encompass all things on the planes, and yet not nearly as broad since there are exceptions - then the rename does nothing.

Beyond that, exemplar already has a meaning, but granted that is a fairly minor point. But you raise a good point, deities have avatars.. but in that case the exemplars you name AREN'T exemplars.. since only the true 'exemplar races' would be. And it still rules out all the others that you don't name here that aren't exemplars. AND all you are trying to do is make more magical beasts? Heck, elementals already have their own type!

I guess my point here is that it doesn't solve your problem with a rename, if you think "stench kows" should be magical beasts then there is nothing stopping you - but does an evil outsider bane weapon no longer work on them - even though they are creatures entirely made of outer planes essence, unlike say a chimera? Do the stench kows now need food? Will they die without air to breathe?

Also, where would the couatl belong in your typing system? I assume the planetouched subtype would replace 'native' but what about things that aren't humanoid? I don't doubt that a perfect system could account for such things, I do doubt the point and effort that is required to get there. How fine (again precision) do you go with this? To what end?

If you are going down this road, I'll recommend (I think I already did in another thread) looking at the 4e MMs. They do a retype involving the body shape - but I don't see what real value it adds. If you can see the creature you can tell if it is humanoid or not. Does it add a meaningful change? Can you make a humanoid bane weapon that works on them? Why or why not?

 

[VelvetViolet]

Fiendish/celestial creatures are not material creatures that emigrated to the outer planes. They were created from the essence of their planes just like celestials and fiends are. Therefore, according to the description of the outsider type itself, they should be outsiders. But they're not.

Stench kows and Stygian leviathans are already magical beasts and stated to have been created from the essence of the lower planes, which should make them outsiders but they're not.

The fey are not material creatures. It is stated quite explicitly at certain points that they were created from the essence of another plane known the fey homeworld. They should be outsiders but aren't.

I don't want to add creatures to the outsider type. What I'm saying is that dozens of creatures that should be outsiders, since they are created from the essence of other planes (which is the definition of the outsider type), are not outsiders but some other type. The outsider type is inconsistently applied. So if I'm designing creatures created from the essence of an outer plane, I run into a problem of whether to make them outsiders or some other type because the types are inconsistently applied.

I use the term "exemplar" because it was the term used in Planescape to refer to the major planar races like fiends and celestials and whatever. It doesn't matter to me if the word is already used for some monster or prestige class from an obscure book.

I'm already well aware that 4e overhauled the type system and have made several threads discussing replacing the Pathfinder types with a variant of that system because it isn't arbitrary and often ill-defined.