Ye Olde Inn

Are we still in an alternate Old World?
Then, the "people" would be called Beastmen. Beastmen are, as such, spawned from Chaos, so that's in the word Beastmen.
The species would be the Gor (with the Bestigor and Ungor variants) and the Minotaur and others lesee well known thingies.

So the keyword could be Beastmen which would have to be explained somewhere to include all repercussions of the keyword Chaos or just Chaos, depending on what you actually wanna do with these keywords.

I see the classification keywords as informal. The use of "undead" in the Summon Undead Chaos spell is the only example that comes to mind. I'd just as well omit the use of a keyword the bottom of the Monster Card. Saving 13 characters with a keyword instead of writing Beastman and Minotaur isn't worth the break in continuity with the established style, in my opinion. Is there some other benefit I'm overlooking?

Assuming keywords were to be adopted, another Beast People variant keyword could be "Wild." The term Wild also applies to an optional spell set that is worked up for a Beastman spellcaster.

Informally, GW's tag "greenskins" has been applied to HQ Orcs and Goblins. I prefer the WoW name "horde", since it doesn't dictate a painting color choice. One or the other is fine. "Chaos" could work for gray minis and Chaos Dwarves, as they mostly share chaos in their name. I've suggested "Reptilians" cover the partnering of Kobolds and Fimir in our current story arcs. That assumes we favor the more lizardy Kobold of the later D&D editions.

For sure I could just take it away. In the original quests they refer to white and green figures, also to undead and to orcs, and in some places there is a list following the reference.

I always felt that those references were missing, that it was nearly a bug that they were not there. This is why I add them in the first place, so that we can use them in a cleaner way.

Your mention of a "reptilian" Kobold, however, is completely stranger to me. so at least here it gets clear for me that we would have to go through an entire discussion as to which tag belongs to which monster. That would be a large and long discussion for a small benefit.

I guess it is easier to just not put the tag on the card. I will make according versions during the week.

The type of kobold will also affect the monster card. That would need a concise answer. I have no kobold minis so interested to see which way it goes.

About the look of the Kobold, I had entered a wrong link for the reptile in this post. We may need a poll, but if someone comes up with a good-looking Monster Card that could solve the issue.

Personally, I was hoping for a paper-mini option for the HQ-25 expansion. Then we could use 2-D mini art that would be chosen to fit the HQ Monster Card art well enough. However, I'm not certain if the original paper-mini artists would be willing to share art in this way. I'd hope so, as their works' inclusion in our project should generate extra downloads for them. There are even some viable free options at RPG Now with suggested $1 donations.

Daedalus wrote:About the look of the Kobold, I had entered a wrong link for the reptile in this post. We may need a poll, but if someone comes up with a good-looking Monster Card that could solve the issue.

The minis most readily available conform to the dog- or lizard-like varaints used by D&D, but I think the majority of you guys wants that jester-like do-no-gooder, magic-dillettante type.
Now, if Anderas comes up with a monster card using that horned evilly smirking goblin-type, here's another mini option: modding of an HQ goblin with long horns, a staff, a robe, whatever floats your boat and caters to your modding skill...

That said, the spell-casting kobold type, to me, is based on background on the word kobold, which is really just a very very widely used term for any small humanoid creature that likes to hurt people in any which way. f that monster casts spells, it's safer to use it by its lonesome, not in larger groups.. When we came up with the kobold as a monster type for the pack, however, it was meant as a low-dice grunt that can flood the heroes by numbers.

I think the spellcaster based on BigBene's ideas should be a Goblin character - or quest-based variant of Goblin - and there should still be a grunt-like monster type to serve as low-dice bladefodder called kobolds, which there is a rich miniature market for. Whoever doesn't want to buy minis, well, goblins are the perfect proxies...

EDIT: I changed my vote again to untie it.

Perhaps snotlings could be used for the small monster flood and then kobolds could be a spellcasting trickster type resembling the HQ pictured creature.

To be clear, that horned goblin-type was intended for the Kobold Trickster only. I have the dog-like Kobolds myself but wouldn't have a problem if reptile art was used for grunts, either.

In the best of worlds someone will step up and create the Kobold art, but most likely it will end up a photoshopped derivative of doggie or lizard Kobolds.

Ok here we go.
I corrected the EU layout to be like the other EU playcards.
All around (both EU and US) I have 3mm extra, for professional printers. If you cut it out yourself, just cut it to the format you like.

I was shocked when I took out my old EU style german cards. They have the statline listed as text. I took my freedom to make at least that part better.

Worst is, the vanilla yellow on the EU playcard looks grey on my laptop. Only on my "real" screen it looks vanilla yellow. That's strange that.

Maybe we should make a central monster thread instead of having each monster presented somewhere in it's niche.

Besides, that counter attack ability of the Beastman was costing some BP yesterday during my test games for Fire and Night.

I'd change "If" to "When" and start a new line after that comma.
Also, in general I would not centralize the special rules text, but rather have each line start to the left in order to introduce counter-weight to the icon which sticks to the right.
That might be just a minor layout pet peeve of mine, though. Depends on more opinions.

What's the verdict on neutralizing all monsters from "he" to "it" even when the monster's name is "...man" or something supposedly quite intelligent or culturally sophisticated?