A Problem with Fey

[Wizards of the Coast]

Jon goes over the fey and how theyâ??re described (and depicted) in this weekâ??s Dragonâ??s-Eye View. Come join the discussion about feyâ??specifically dryads and nymphsâ??plus see some art!

Read A Problem with Fey on D&D Insider here!

 

[Siberys]

I posted this in the comments on the article, but I'd like to drop them here also.

In my view, for a D&D nymph or Dryad, and fey in general, you have the following;

Fey creatures are similar to outsiders in that they physically represent some ideal. A Nymph represents the stunning beauty of nature (nature in general); a dryad, on the other hand, represents the purity of an unspoiled forest.

So; a Nymph is beautiful - a physically perfect example of whatever the region's dominant humanoid is. At the same time, she's dangerous and fickle, just like nature.

A dryad is beautiful - as that is an aspect of the unspoiled forest we're covering - but their defining trait is their connection to the forest. They don't /just/ look like maybe burnished wood or have green hair; they look like they were carved from the finest wood of whatever their tree is, and they have leaves and vines for hair. and their outlook would be less fickle and more stolid defender. Not necessarily the "monstrous" dryad of 4e, but definitely nothing anyone would mix up with a nymph (by these definitions).

In other words, it looks to me like Jon is trying to create a problem where there isn't one. My internal image of these fey creatures are the pictures from the 3.5 Monster Manual, which pretty much use these descriptions, if memory serves. They are very clearly separate in my mind, anyways

 

[RACER_X?HAHAHA]

I like non-monstrous dryads. But, I think both nymphs and dryads should be able to be intimidating when the situation warrants. Fey should have a frightening side, they just should.

 

[Jack99]

I posted this in the comments on the article, but I'd like to drop them here also.



In other words, it looks to me like Jon is trying to create a problem where there isn't one. My internal image of these fey creatures are the pictures from the 3.5 Monster Manual, which pretty much use these descriptions, if memory serves. They are very clearly separate in my mind, anyways

Yes, but prior to 3.x, the difference between the two races was not that big. In 2e, it looked much more like the nymph.

 

[RACER_X?HAHAHA]

Yes, but prior to 3.x, the difference between the two races was not that big. In 2e, it looked much more like the nymph.

I really liked that Dryad.

 

[Ratinyourwalls]

...Come on WotC I know you don't want to acknowledge that either ever existed but both 4th and 3rd editions did adequate jobs of defining the two.

 

[Sunseeker]

Classically, there has been little differentiation between the two. They both represent various aspects of nature. The difference was found less in their physical appearance and more in their personalities. Nymphs were more playful, often playing tricks on mortals much in the way any fey does(when you live forever, life gets boring I guess). Dryads were less playful, they were the soldiers, the caretakers, the eyes and ears of the woods. A Nymph might lead you into the forest depths and leave you for lost, where a Dryad might arrive and kick your ass.

And yes, it really is that simple that when you get down to classical western mythology, from which D&D has traditionally placed it's roots, almost everything "nature" comes in some form of woman. But what exactly does "female" mean? Aside from having babies, it's represented a lot of different aspects of humanity throughout the ages. Remember that the destructive power of the "Eye of Ra" was generally represented with female gods.

I greatly dislike the end of the article where it seems to draw issue with the fact that most nature-creatures are female. That's classical western mythology, and I do not favor departing from it heavily. Being female doesn't necessitate being feminine. I swear we've been over this ground before.

The Fey, and everything about them, has typically relied on the trope of beautiful to behold, dangerous to encounter. As such I really don't see a problem with having literally everything with a fey descriptor follow that line.

If you want to talk about ugly looking fey creatures, lets talk spriggan!

 

[Stormonu]

I never want to see a monstrous dryad again. Not everything encountered in the D&D game needs to be a combat machine. If a nymph or dryad is dangerous, I see it generally because they are capricious or mischievous. I also would have nothing against one whose "gone bad", though as far as combat goes I'd envision her as an ambusher "scorned woman" - either like Batman's enemy Poison Ivy or the femme fatal Alex from Fatal Attraction.

I've always associated nymphs being more attuned to the entirety of a forest and dryads to individual trees (hmm...does that mean Jon can't see the forest for the trees? ). This might translate to nymphs being more defenders, caregivers and protectors while dryads are more just "inhabitants" with carefree natures and mischievous curiosity about interlopers.

<EDIT> I could almost see a scenario with treants being the father-like figures of the woods, and nymphs as a sort of "mother superior" over the impetuous "young" dryads. In this scenario, one of the dryads lures the party or individual into the deep woods for closer observation/play/whatever - only to face the wrath of a nymph (or attempt to dodge it) who believes the individual(s) to be up to no good or otherwise in a "forbidden" place - such as a treant's moot. I think it'd be quite an adventure with a climax of the entire forest seeming to uproot itself to drive out the characters...

 

[Li Shenron]

Whatever attached to a certain D&D version of these creatures I may be, I will always be in strong favor of WotC going back to their real-world mythology roots. At least this way, we can learn something while playing the game.

 

[RACER_X?HAHAHA]

There is a lot of talk elsewhere of there being variants on the nymph according to their habitat. Dryads, naiads, etc. I'm in favor of that.