Questions about Dire and Legendary Animals

Hello,

The MM lists Dire animals, some of which are a size category higher than their normal counterparts.

The Masters of the Wild lists legendary animals some of which are listed as being one size smaller than their dire versions, some are the same size, and some are one size larger.

The Epic Level Handbook lists only 2 legendary animals and they didn't help clear anything up.

(I'm at work and can't get exact details at the moment.)
This is a problem since enough of the critters are messed up I can't figure out which ones are wrong and which ones are correct.
Is it safe to assume that all animals follow this progression:
Animal = Size X
Dire Animal = Size X+1
Legendary Animal = Size X+2


My Druid player and I would like to make a way for him to be able to use his divine powers to transform his existing pets into dire and eventually legendary animals. He'd prefer one pet forever as opposed to ditching his pets as soon as he's outgrown them.

I am not requesting houserules, I'll post that in the appropriate forums; what I would like to know is there anything written from 1e or 2e that describes how a normal animal becomes dire or legendary?

My houserules question is here: http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=20744

Thanks for the help,
Telor

Normal animals don't become dire or legendary. They are basically seperate races.

Here is a Dire Template:

http://www.enworld.org/cc/converted/template/dire_creature.htm

This response isn't going to give you exactly what you want to hear.

The "dire" qualifier is entirely new to 3rd edition, so no AD&D sources will be able to help you, I don't believe. The "dire" qualifier collected a lot of animals that were previously using "giant" or actual prehistoric nomenclature.

My understanding from reading the "legendary" stuff in MOTW is that many of the creatures were explicitly made smaller so as to be easy to take into dungeon settings. I doubt there's any "true" sequencing which makes them larger, size-wise, than dire animals.

I don't yet have the ELH, but according to MOTW:

Legendary animals represent another step in the animal power curve. Although the same size as their normal counterparts ...

Click to expand...

Of the animals listed, only the ape seems to have lost a size category compared to the normal MM entries, and none are larger. (Snakes and sharks come in several sizes in the MM, and the Huge legendary shark seems to correspond to the Huge shark. I don't know what the legendary snake is supposed to be-the description says it is 'a strong constrictor with a potent venomous bite,' which doesn't exist in the MM. Anyway, it fits in the size range for constrictors, which vary from Medium to Huge.)

dcollins said:

My understanding from reading the "legendary" stuff in MOTW is that many of the creatures were explicitly made smaller so as to be easy to take into dungeon settings.

Click to expand...

Yep. "Legendary" animals ain't. The only reason they exist is so that the druid doesn't have to part with his pets when dungeoncrawling.

Personally, I much prefer the spirit template in GR's Shaman's Handbook. That at least has a legendary feel to it, unlike the homogenised, processed-food stuff that appears in MotW.

Christian said:

I don't know what the legendary snake is supposed to be-the description says it is 'a strong constrictor with a potent venomous bite,' ...

Click to expand...

I'd never read through the descriptions carefully before I posted this message. And the more I ponder the legendary snake, the more it bugs me. Is it a constrictor or a viper? Or is it the Ronco All-in-one Multiserpent?

"It kills with its deadly poisonous fangs! Or by squeezing its victim with its powerful coils! Look at that tomato!"

I think the legendary snake is indeed an all-instrument-octopus!