2025 Monster Manual to Introduce Male Versions of Hags, Medusas, and Dryads

The upcoming Monster Manual will feature artwork depicting some creatures like hags and medusas in both genders, a first for Dungeons & Dragons. In the "Everything You Need to Know" video for the upcoming Monster Manual, designers Jeremy Crawford and Wesley Schneider revealed that the new book would feature artwork portraying both male and female versions of creatures like hags, dryads, satyrs, and medusas. While there was a male medusa named Marlos Urnrayle in Princes of the Apocalypse (who had a portrait in the book) and players could make satyr PCs of either gender, this marks the first time that D&D has explicitly shown off several of these creatures as being of both male and female within a rulebook. There is no mechanical difference between male creatures and female creatures, so this is solely a change in how some monsters are presented.

In other news that actually does impact D&D mechanics, goblins are now classified as fey creatures (similar to how hobgoblins were portrayed as fey creatures in Monsters of the Multiverse) and gnolls are now classified as fiends.

Additionally, monster statblocks include potential treasure and gear options, so that DMs can reward loot when a player character inevitably searches the dead body of a creature.

The new Monster Manual will be released on February 18th, 2025.

 

[Chaltab]

The problem with that, though, is that in the base mythology of the game, there aren't anything like "true fey," although there definitely should be, IMO.

There are though? Tiandra and Oberon, the Queen of Air and Darkness, the Prince of Frost, just to name the four highest Archfey.

 

[Misanthrope Prime]

A male hag makes no sense; the whole reason why hags are repulsive and evil is because they're based on patriarchial folklore that sees women beyond childbearing age as abject monstrosities. Introducing egalitarianism and feminism gets rid of the point.

A "male hag" is just a naughty word senator in the literal Latin translation of the term. Old men have respect in our societies.

 

[Twiggly the Gnome]

The problem with that, though, is that in the base mythology of the game, there aren't anything like "true fey," although there definitely should be, IMO.

This is really what the Eladrin should be. Send them lock, stock, and barrel to the Feywild. Replace them as CG exemplars with a group including Asuras and Lillends.

 

[Clint_L]

A male hag makes no sense; the whole reason why hags are repulsive and evil is because they're based on patriarchial folklore that sees women beyond childbearing age as abject monstrosities. Introducing egalitarianism and feminism gets rid of the point.

A "male hag" is just a naughty word senator in the literal Latin translation of the term. Old men have respect in our societies.

Good thing Dungeons and Dragons is a fantasy setting, then.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

There are though? Tiandra and Oberon, the Queen of Air and Darkness, the Prince of Frost, just to name the four highest Archfey.

I know fey sleep around, but I find it hard to imagine those four procreating with mortals so much that we get elves as a result.

I was thinking of true fey as a Feywild counterpart to demons and devils. We mostly have the equivalent of low level miscellaneous stuff at the moment, with cobbled-together Seelie and Unseelie courts where the top level fey have to be handwaved and skimmed over, other than the exceptional individuals at the very top.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

What do you mean by the base mythology of the game?

gestures at the core books

The implied setting of the game, with dragons, ranks of fiends and celestials, a force that returns some dead to a hostile unlife, etc.

We have lip service to a robust world of fey in the Feywild, but we don't actually have their ranks meaningfully spelled out in 5E. (I skipped 4E, but I seem to recall that line got cancelled before the Feywild got its due there as well.)

 

[Dire Bare]

What do you mean by the base mythology of the game?

All of the lore in the core books over the years creates an implied setting for D&D that draws upon literature and mythology, but is it's own thing. And that's before you get to the more developed settings like the Realms or Dragonlance.

 

[Dire Bare]

Good thing Dungeons and Dragons is a fantasy setting, then.

A fantasy setting that draws directly upon this problematic trope from European folklore . . . and in the case of the hag, almost directly translates it into the game.

Tweaking the hag to include male hags doesn't really fix the trope, IMO.

 

[dave2008]

gestures at the core books

The implied setting of the game, with dragons, ranks of fiends and celestials, a force that returns some dead to a hostile unlife, etc.

I don't know what this means in the context of your previous statement. Anything from the Feywild is fae in the base mythology of the game.

We have lip service to a robust world of fey in the Feywild, but we don't actually have their ranks meaningfully spelled out in 5E. (I skipped 4E, but I seem to recall that line got cancelled before the Feywild got its due there as well.)

Both 4e and 5e have provided some info about the Feywild. More in 5e than 4e, but again I am not sure what the point of this comments is? The feywild was expanded on beyond the core books in Wild Beyond Witchlight and the free supplement associated with that (sorry I can't remember the name) at a minimum. If I remember there was aditionnal info in Volo's or the Original Mordekainen book.

 

[dave2008]

All of the lore in the core books over the years creates an implied setting for D&D that draws upon literature and mythology, but is it's own thing. And that's before you get to the more developed settings like the Realms or Dragonlance.

A core tenet of mythology, IMO, is that different people have a different perspective on it (in particular those who are living it). Therefore, it is natural IMO that anything in any rulebook (core or otherwise) should be taken as a possible lore, not necessarily the true lore. Most mythology has multiple versions of the same tale. The books are just on version of tale of D&D.