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​

 

[Maxperson]

Will you answer my question: why do seem to insist female = human/elf/humanoid female?

Because we are human and that's how we can tell the difference without things becoming x rated.. If you remove the human standards for what looks female from the artwork, and then also deliberately remove female from the lore, that's a rather huge indicator that they removed female.

It's not 100% proof, but it's fairly strong.

 

[Iry]

Interesting, as it is fully scaled just like this one is. To me, the notable differences seem to be the color (tan and brown instead of blue), the frame (sleek and slender instead of muscular and with significant asiposity), and the presence of mammalian breasts.

I don’t want to mischaracterize you, so correct me if I’m wrong, but this really seems to come down to the 2024 design not hewing as closely to a particular feminine beauty standard.

I had to pull up my physical book to get a higher quality look at the 3E Marilith, and it really doesn't look fully scaled to me except whatever is happening with its hair, which is some curious combination of scale and tendril.

As for mischaracterizing me, I think it comes down to not being able to recognize what monster I am seeing at a glance. I really didn't recognize it. I had to stop and check the title of the thread to be sure I wasn't mistaken, then visually confirm that there were indeed 6 arms on this.

I searched my emotions to see if I would care about a female vs male marilith and didn't find much reaction (I'm ace). I did get a reaction from scaled vs smooth. I think it's just a Branding issue. It didn't have the hallmark branding of a Marilith, so I couldn't identify it as a Marilith at a glance. I probably wouldn't feel this way if the Marilith had looked like this for its entire publication history.

 

[Charlaquin]

And eastern. And southern. And northern. Let's not be coy about it, they removed human standards of female from the picture.

Apart from the scales, color, and number of arms, nothing about this design couldn’t be found on a human female. The number of arms has been a part of the design from the get-go, and these complaints didn’t manifest with the 3e art, which was scaled. What this is about is boobs, and fat. Beauty standards.

Western has nothing to do with it.

Beauty standards vary between cultures. Though, it’s certainly true that many cultures the world over do directly equate large breasts and low body fat with feminine beauty.

 

[dave2008]

The marilith never looked like a genius tactician. It did frequently look regal and elegant.

Let's see how that plays out in the MM (see post #8):

1e: possibly, the art is not the best quality, but has a refined air (but I think it is debatable) 1 point for team Regal & Elegant (R&E)
2e: it is wearing a crown, but actively in a combat stance, 1 point for team Savage (S)
2e Planescape: (not MM). This one fits the bill +1 for R&E.
3e: One of the more monstrous mariliths +1 for S
3e HotA: (also not MM, but lets run with it). Yep, a little barbaric in is attire, but this hits the vibe IMO. +1 for R&E.
4e: Though the scales on the face look a bit like make-up, but non elegant combat pose. +1 for team S.
5e14: Clearly a combat pose, but the armor lends it a degree of sophistication. I lean to team S, but I'm going to give it a tie.
5e24: Brutal. +1 team S.

Final MM tally: 1 for Team R&E and 5 for Team Savage. Clearly the default image leans to the more savage side.

Final tally all references: 3 team Regal & Elegant and 4 team savage.

What are your rankings?

 

[dave2008]

At best they resemble Darkness from Legend, the whiny devil baby. They do have some noble features, but not a regal air because they're too busy catching flies.

Open mouth and inward-curled body position suggests a very clumsy hacky combat style that reminds me of a toddler hitting their toys.

They also have a neck as thick as their waist, though at least it doesn't bulge like the rest of their body.

I don't know what your talking about, but I do like the Darkness call out!

 

[Incenjucar]

Let's see how that plays out in the MM (see post #8):

1e: possibly, the art is not the best quality, but has a refined air (but I think it is debatable) 1 point for team Regal & Elegant (R&E)
2e: it is wearing a crown, but actively in a combat stance, 1 point for team Savage (S)
2e Planescape: (not MM). This one fits the bill +1 for R&E.
3e: One of the more monstrous mariliths +1 for S
3e HotA: (also not MM, but lets run with it). Yep, a little barbaric in is attire, but this hits the vibe IMO. +1 for R&E.
4e: Though the scales on the face look a bit like make-up, but non elegant combat pose. +1 for team S.
5e14: Clearly a combat pose, but the armor lends it a degree of sophistication. I lean to team S, but I'm going to give it a tie.
5e24: Brutal. +1 team S.

Final MM tally: 1 for Team R&E and 5 for Team Savage. Clearly the default image leans to the more savage side.

Final tally all references: 3 team Regal & Elegant and 4 team savage.

What are your rankings?

2e is perfectly regal. Royals can do war. The crown, the jewelry, the cheek bones, the bored look. As a bonus they look like they're at least in their 50s.
3e: As I noted above, looks like an emo kid. It's when they started to really diverge from the classic design. WotC's been dragging them away from their classic design since, though notably they bounced back toward classic, despite taking away their royal elements

 

[dave2008]

Because we are human and that's how we can tell the difference without things becoming x rated.. If you remove the human standards for what looks female from the artwork, and then also deliberately remove female from the lore, that's a rather huge indicator that they removed female.

It's not 100% proof, but it's fairly strong.

Then what do we make of lizard folk, tortles, half-dragons, etc. that give no hint of male or female? Couldn't be that the marilith was moved to be more monstrous and less male or female like other creatures are (and how demons should be IMO).

To be clear, my preference is to remove sex from demons as they shouldn't have a sex IMO. However, I am fine with having demons that look like they have a sex, I prefer the older marilith designs myself (the HotA one is probably my favorite non-fan art); however, in my mind that design is not female - part of it just looks like an elf female.

 

[dave2008]

2e is perfectly regal. Royals can do war. The crown, the jewelry, the cheek bones, the bored look. As a bonus they look like they're at least in their 50s.
3e: As I noted above, looks like an emo kid. It's when they started to really diverge from the classic design. WotC's been dragging them away from their classic design since, though notably they bounced back toward classic, despite taking away their royal elements

So we disagree on 2e MM, but that still puts more in the "savage" category for MM art.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

No. Tactical genius = lawful. Mariliths being demons aren't lawful. The one there could be an intuitive genius on the battlefield, though.

Don't even slightly agree here. Tactics are not lawful or chaotic, organization is Lawful. Demons respect of the simple hierarchy of obeying those stronger than them. The Marilith who commands lesser Demons would and should have them use simple tactics, even if they don't organize their subordinates

 

[Incenjucar]

So we disagree on 2e MM, but that still puts more in the "savage" category for MM art.

Okay. And? This isn't a frequency of depiction contest. WotC has owned the game for a long time.