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​

 

[dave2008]

Probably not. It does make me take a really serious and introspective look into my own values in trying to decide what makes a "Kali-adjacent thing" into a Kali-adjacent thing. Like, WHAT specific elements of Kali really invoke Kali and should be put into the monster.

Naturally, "It shouldn't have anything to do with Kali" is a perfectly valid answer. But it's not my answer, since being a Kali-adjacent thing is such a huge cornerstone of why I like the monster.

What is important to you about a marilith being kali-adjacent? I mean other than having multiple arms they don't share any significant similarities in form or lore.

 

[Demetrios1453]

What is important to you about a marilith being kali-adjacent? I mean other than having multiple arms they don't share any significant similarities in form or lore.

And in fact, it would be pretty insulting to Hindu religious beliefs if they were...

 

[Micah Sweet]

I agreed several posts ago that there can be settings where Mariliths aren't female. Deviations like that, though, are typically in the setting books/boxed sets. Not the MM where the defaults dwell. By placing it in the MM, they've made the neutered version the default for all settings.

This is exactly what I was talking about. WotC does something, and it gets taken practically as gospel.

 

[Maxperson]

I want to make sure we are clear: do you think Mariliths are "traditionally" female or simply that their have had a torso that looks like a 6-armed human or elf female (most expression have pointy ears IIRC)?

I have never thought they were female, just that their torso looked similar to a female elf.

I've always thought that they were female. The 1e MM says it straight out and nothing has deviated from that until now.

 

[Maxperson]

But, again, there’s no indication that they’ve deviated from Mariliths being female in the monster manual.

Yes there is. The art is an indication.

 

[Demetrios1453]

The main goal of the MM art isn't to set "default" lore, it's about DM inspiration. It's obviously subjective but when the art speaks to you, you want to include that monster in your games and it inspires creativity. Personally I find the Marilith art pretty meh, but as an example the male Hag art does get me thinking and provides inspiration for including a male Green Hag in my campaign, namely a coven with two female and a subserviant but underappreciated male which opens up a way for the PCs to sow discord in the coven. It's something I maybe wouldn't have ever come up with if it wasn't for the male artwork being included.

Someone upthread a bit facetiously referred to male hags basically being Gargamel, which, on further reflection, is actually a pretty reasonable proto-example. I mean, he lives in his semi-ruined castle in the forest with his cat familiar and terrorizes the local fey, right? It's not a far leap to make him a bit less human, and he basically becomes a male hag. Granted, his rival Hogatha is definitely a more classic portrayal of a hag...

 

[dave2008]

This is exactly what I was talking about. WotC does something, and it gets taken practically as gospel.

That seems to less of worry now days though. It feels like fewer and fewer people have that stance IMO. Not that anyone should, but it seems to be getting better to me

 

[dave2008]

Yes there is. The art is an indication.

The art is not an indication really. It could easily still be female, just not a human female torso. I actually think the head still looks feminine, but I have a type .

This image could still represent a female of any non mammalian creature, which of course a demon is.

 

[Micah Sweet]

And in fact, it would be pretty insulting to Hindu religious beliefs if they were...

I still think concern about that is a real possibility for why the art was changed.

 

[Scribe]

This is exactly what I was talking about. WotC does something, and it gets taken practically as gospel.

I dont think this is true anymore. You can find 'D&D' elsewhere, and I would argue better versions of it.

The more Wizards makes a joke of themselves and their game, especially as their 'new playerbase' gets older and starts to open their eyes to the sheer variety on tap with very little effort involved?

People will continue to branch out.

Its not 5.0 release anymore. Wizards is not remotely top dog, in anything but market saturation, and a HUGE part of that is the name and budget for marketing.