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​

 

[Alzrius]

Will Pathfinder even use Mariliths anymore? I thought their 2E Revised nixed SRD monsters that aren't found in folklore.

I'm pretty sure it's not found in the Remastered version, though it is in the original PF2.

 

[dave2008]

I still don't understand why you would attempt to apply a new standard to D&D without changing the edition? Make a clean break from what's gone before if you want things to be different.

I don't agree with that. You should, IMO, change when change is needed, warranted, or desired. Waiting for sales to go down and require an edition change makes no sense to me.

 

[dave2008]

There's no indication that it actually is a replacement and not a variation, either. There's no indication either way. While it might be claimed that as since it's the art in the MM, that indicates it's a replacement, we've seen art of other creatures that vary quite differently from their MM standards in quite a few products over time...

There is no indication that the behirilith is a variation rather than a replacement. If there was information that this wasn't a design retcon, and was merely an expansion, the topic would be mostly "well even if they can still be the classic look they should still use that in the book art so new players can see it" etc.

I mean look at the difference of marilith art in 2e and 3e. Neither of which was stated to be anything like a replacement or a variation. We just accept that they were variations. I don't know why we should assume anything different now.

2e:

3.5:

 

[dave2008]

Yeah, and I can't respect such a sweeping decision regarding a creative product not made for creative reasons unless that decision is absolutely necessary, and it isn't. It just isn't.

Why do you assume it is not for creative reasons, and what do believe are acceptable creative reasons? Also, by this statement, they shouldn't remove something offensive either, which seems like an odd stance to take.

I stated my reasons in an earlier post for why I think they changed the marilith, some of which were creative reasons. So if I am correct, then the change is OK with you?

 

[dave2008]

Seeing these two pics side by side, I don’t get what the fuss is about.

Not a fuss, they are just different. Now, I would put that difference down to mostly artistic style, but there design differences as well.

The only fuss was that art in the MM is pretty ugly (IMO).

 

[Corinnguard]

It’s a corpo-creative endeavor to capitalize on the intellectual property’s 50th anniversary in the hopes that nostalgia will create an emotional response to give them money.

They weren't using Bardic Inspiration?

 

[Demetrios1453]

As for the 2024 wyvern, to my eyes both images depict the same creature, just in different art styles. They aren't different enough for me to consider them two separate creatures designs, which isn't the case with the marilith.

The MM one has a mouth that ends well behind the eyes, the PHB one has a mouth that ends well in front of the eyes (it's not some subtle difference, but one that's measured in feet). The MM one has a beak, while the PHB one does not. The MM one has horns and a frill, the PHB one does not. The MM one has virtual scythes at the end of its wing fingers, the PHB one has a little nub. The tail spike is completely different between the two. If those were shown to a biologist, they would definitely not put them in the same species, and even being in the same genus would be up for debate.

 

[Voadam]

The two wyverns compared:

2025 MM:
View attachment 398248

2024 PHB:
View attachment 398249

If the same creature in the same set of core rule books can look so markedly different, then there's no reason that any, or all, of the other monsters can't as well.

Thanks for posting the two wavering pieces.

They look very similar to me, red wing skin and back sails, similar scales, color schemes, etc. Differences are small subtle things like snout coming to hooked point in the MM, the PH one having no sail skin and just spikes on the side of the face, MM tail segmentation and how integrated or segmented the stinger ball is with the tail.

The big stand out difference for me is the artistic style of portrayal, not the creature design details.

 

[TiQuinn]

Not a fuss, they are just different. Now, I would put that difference down to mostly artistic style, but there design differences as well.

The only fuss was that art in the MM is pretty ugly (IMO).

Yeah, I just see the same wyvern but the artist’s style is just different from the others. I actually quite like it.

 

[Corinnguard]

I like the PHB version better.