D&D (2024) D&D Marilith Is Far More Bestial In 2025

The new 2025 Monster Manual has all-new art, and one major change is the depiction of the marilith. Up until now, the marilith has been depicted as a six-armed humanish female from the waist up; while in the 2025 book, the picture is far more bestial in nature.

Not only is the imagery more demonic, it also features the creature in action, simultaneously beheading, stabbing, and entwining its foes with its six arms and snake-like tail.

Left 2025 Marilith / Right 2014 Marilith​

 

[Demetrios1453]

It is intentional, but adding male night hags, male medusas with snakes, and male dryads is nonsense. Unlike Incubi, those things do not exist in mythology. Same with removing the sex from Mariliths. They're tilting at windmills here.

If you're going to appeal to the original mythology/folklore, I assume you will, in turn, be tiilting at the windmill that gorgons shouldn't be bulls, and so on? Because D&D has put folklore and mythology through a meat grinder and what has come out often has been quite different from the actual original source material, from 1e onward. Male hags and the like are pretty minor changes compared to other folklore/mythology changes the game has made over the last 50 years.

 

[dave2008]

It is intentional, but adding male night hags, male medusas with snakes, and male dryads is nonsense. Unlike Incubi, those things do not exist in mythology. Same with removing the sex from Mariliths. They're tilting at windmills here.

I don't think it is nonsense, and if it is nonsense, then it is the type of nonsense I like! However, you believe it is intentional, then what is the intent for the changes in your opinion.

I also think your knowledge and understanding of mythology is a bit lacking in this subject if you believe your statement 100% correct. I will also admit that mine is as well.

Finally D&D =/= mythology.

 

[Clint_L]

If you're going to appeal to the original mythology/folklore, I assume you will, in turn, be tiilting at the windmill that gorgons shouldn't be bulls, and so on? Because D&D has put folklore and mythology through a meat grinder and what has come out often has been quite different from the actual original source material, from 1e onward. Male hags and the like are pretty minor changes compared to other folklore/mythology changes the game has made over the last 50 years.

Notably, gorgons are constructs in the new MM. Which actually makes a lot of sense, considering how they have been depicted for some time.

 

[Micah Sweet]

If you're going to appeal to the original mythology/folklore, I assume you will, in turn, be tiilting at the windmill that gorgons shouldn't be bulls, and so on? Because D&D has put folklore and mythology through a meat grinder and what has come out often has been quite different from the actual original source material, from 1e onward. Male hags and the like are pretty minor changes compared to other folklore/mythology changes the game has made over the last 50 years.

The bull thing is pretty ridiculous IMO.

 

[dave2008]

The bull thing is pretty ridiculous IMO.

Yet it has a folklore origin that predates D&D

 

[Scribe]

Its not a design choice. The game functions the same despite having male hags for some reasons.

 

[Demetrios1453]

Notably, gorgons are constructs in the new MM. Which actually makes a lot of sense, considering how they have been depicted for some time.

Which brings it closer to one of its origins in the Brazen Bull of Greek legend. So much so that the Brazen Bull is now a gorgon variant.

 

[Corinnguard]

It is intentional, but adding male night hags, male medusas with snakes, and male dryads is nonsense. Unlike Incubi, those things do not exist in mythology. Same with removing the sex from Mariliths. They're tilting at windmills here.

We're dealing with the D&D Multiverse here. There was bound to be several worlds in this multiverse where such beings existed.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yet it has a folklore origin that predates D&D

Oh, sure. I just think it may need a different name. But that's probably my grounding in Greek mythology talking.

 

[Charlaquin]

It is intentional, but adding male night hags, male medusas with snakes, and male dryads is nonsense. Unlike Incubi, those things do not exist in mythology.

Lots of D&D monsters never existed in mythology.

Same with removing the sex from Mariliths. They're tilting at windmills here.

I missed the part where Mariliths are sexless now. Where was that written? Just cause the new art doesn’t have human boobs doesn’t mean they’re a sexless species.