D&D (2024) I have a Monster Manual. AMA!

Yeah, though sometimes they're elaborate historical hoaxes! And I imagine that many of them were from people finding skeletons of things they couldn't identify, such as the elephant-skull cyclops idea or, frankly, dinosaurs.
Or, it turns out, very often entirely real and well known animals. Just with the descriptions filtered through an international game of Telephone in an era without photographs or detailed zoological understanding.

The kirin was a giraffe. Unicorns were, duh, rhinoceroses. Behemoth was a hippopotamus and leviathan was a crocodile. Basilisks, a snake with a crown and venom so deadly it could kill with a glance, were cobras.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I really don't see what the problem is. If your PCs encounter a lizardfolk tribe in the jungle, they'll find that the majority of its inhabitants are humanoids susceptible to things like hold person, charm person, and the like. But the tribe's spiritual leader (geomancer) and civil leader (sovereign) have been magically reshaped by their environment (or by a deliberate ritual) and are not susceptible.
I don't have the book yet so I can't judge how it is presented, but broadly speaking I do not understand why there wouldn't be a couple stock lizardmen in the section.

I've heard all the explanations about the NPC statblock stuff, and it is all unconvincing -- at least as it has been explained in official videos and stuff that I have seen.

Eliminating the most basic unit of stabbable stock enemies seems like ridiculous, pointless and ultimately GM unfriendly change to me. But maybe the actual book will sell me on it.
 


I really don't see what the problem is. If your PCs encounter a lizardfolk tribe in the jungle, they'll find that the majority of its inhabitants are humanoids susceptible to things like hold person, charm person, and the like. But the tribe's spiritual leader (geomancer) and civil leader (sovereign) have been magically reshaped by their environment (or by a deliberate ritual) and are not susceptible.


If 5e kept with 4e's stocky, stony troglodytes, I could see them being elementals. But I'm fine with the 5e versions not being elementals.

I think the real problem here is that D&D has no "elemental (swamp)" or "elemental (jungle)" category. I suppose you could have Lizardfolk be Elemental (earth, water) instead, but that's kinda clunky.
Well, thw dMG brings back the Para-Elemental Planes, so the Swamp of Oblivion is one of the major regions of the Inner Planes now: Swamp of Oblivion
 

If Plant/Wood is an Element, then the Material Plane is its Elemental Plane, and it is a living blend of Earth, Air, Water, and Fire.
 


Well, thw dMG brings back the Para-Elemental Planes, so the Swamp of Oblivion is one of the major regions of the Inner Planes now: Swamp of Oblivion
Sure, but "swamp" is still not an element in and of itself.

As an aside, I know we've got some hybrid elementals in the form of the mephits, but 4e had others like the Firelasher (a fire and air elemental), the Rockfire Dreadnought (an earth and fire elemental), the Earthwind Ravager (an air and earth elemental), and the Thunderblast Cyclone (an air and water elemental). These were meant to represent the mixing of elements in the Elemental Chaos. Since the Elemental Chaos still exists in 5e's cosmology, I'd love to see more hybrid elementals like those make a comeback.
 


Sure, but "swamp" is still not an element in and of itself.

As an aside, I know we've got some hybrid elementals in the form of the mephits, but 4e had others like the Firelasher (a fire and air elemental), the Rockfire Dreadnought (an earth and fire elemental), the Earthwind Ravager (an air and earth elemental), and the Thunderblast Cyclone (an air and water elemental). These were meant to represent the mixing of elements in the Elemental Chaos. Since the Elemental Chaos still exists in 5e's cosmology, I'd love to see more hybrid elementals like those make a comeback.
I mean, it does feel like a major exploration of the Inner Planes and the denizens thereof would make sense...
 


Remove ads

Top