2025 Monster Manual to Introduce Male Versions of Hags, Medusas, and Dryads

The upcoming Monster Manual will feature artwork depicting some creatures like hags and medusas in both genders, a first for Dungeons & Dragons. In the "Everything You Need to Know" video for the upcoming Monster Manual, designers Jeremy Crawford and Wesley Schneider revealed that the new book would feature artwork portraying both male and female versions of creatures like hags, dryads, satyrs, and medusas. While there was a male medusa named Marlos Urnrayle in Princes of the Apocalypse (who had a portrait in the book) and players could make satyr PCs of either gender, this marks the first time that D&D has explicitly shown off several of these creatures as being of both male and female within a rulebook. There is no mechanical difference between male creatures and female creatures, so this is solely a change in how some monsters are presented.

In other news that actually does impact D&D mechanics, goblins are now classified as fey creatures (similar to how hobgoblins were portrayed as fey creatures in Monsters of the Multiverse) and gnolls are now classified as fiends.

Additionally, monster statblocks include potential treasure and gear options, so that DMs can reward loot when a player character inevitably searches the dead body of a creature.

The new Monster Manual will be released on February 18th, 2025.

 

[Remathilis]

Mildly unpopular opinion: there are a few monsters that went from singular entities to species because D&D is meant to be played by multiple people and over multiple times.

Consider the tarrasque. It was stated in older lore that there was only one in existence. But that leads to some odd lore issues. If you have a group of players fight and kill it, no other group could. And if there is only one, where does it live? So it became "every D&D world has a tarrasque" which defeated the purpose of making it only one in existence. Pretty soon, things like "tarrasques wander the hinterlands of the Outlands, beyond the gate towns" or "there is a crystal sphere with Planet Tarrasque in it" was implied in the lore. Still, canonically, the idea that there was one tarrasque in all of creation became an unknown number across multiple worlds that has been killed an unknown amount of times.

And that is one iconic epic level baddie. Can you imagine that with Medusa, Goliath, Minotaur, Pegasus, Cerberus, the Kraken, etc?

 

[Echohawk]

And if there is only one, where does it live?

In Lord Soth's cupboard in Dargaard Keep, of course! I thought everyone knew that.

Pretty soon, things like "tarrasques wander the hinterlands of the Outlands, beyond the gate towns" or "there is a crystal sphere with Planet Tarrasque in it" was implied in the lore.

It wasn't just implied. The planet Falx, as detailed in SJR4: Practical Planetology, explicitly has several hundred tarrasques living on it!

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

Mildly unpopular opinion: there are a few monsters that went from singular entities to species because D&D is meant to be played by multiple people and over multiple times.

That's possibly a reasoning that could have been made to explain this shift. This is an interesting theory, especially in the early times where maybe more competitve play was the norm.

Though I have no problem considering each campaign to be independant and I don't think it blocked gamers. I mean, the same problem appeared as settings have uniques NPCs and always had (Ssasz Tam, the Lord of Blades, Vecna, Mordenkainen...)
Several groups probably defeated them in parallel. How many people took Drizzt's blades from his dead body?

 

[Remathilis]

That's possibly a reasoning that could have been made to explain this shift. This is an interesting theory, especially in the early times where maybe more competitve play was the norm.

Though I have no problem considering each campaign to be independant and I don't think it blocked gamers. I mean, the same problem appeared as settings have uniques NPCs and always had (Ssasz Tam, the Lord of Blades, Mordenkainen...)
Several groups probably defeated them in parallel. How many people took Drizzt's blades from his dead body?

Sure, from a DM perspective, it's easy to say, "there is only one Tarrasque, it lived on my homebrew world and was slain in a campaign I ran four years ago." And if the Tarrasque had been stated to be a unique monster found only on Oerth, it would have been a niche monster found in occasional Greyhawk-related supplements. But the Tarrasque was always part of the Monster Manual and implied to exist on every given world. So, in theory, a group of PCs could encounter the one-and-only tarrasque on Oerth, and then hop on a Spelljammer and fly to Faerun and meet the one-and-only tarasque on Faerun per D&D lore. And that doesn't make much sense.

And thus, the tarrasque went from "only one" to "very rare, about one per planet" in D&D lore.

So, in the same sense, a one-and-only Medusa would have ended up the same way. Unless she was treated as a unique NPC to one specific setting, she'd end up on every world which would facilitate there being multiple regardless.

Of course, WotC has also used the new "First World echos" answer to explain why certain powerful entities (like Tiamat or Orcus) keep getting "get out of jail free" cards. That's on-top of "the Dark Powers bring Strahd back to eternally torment him" and "Demon Lords can only die on their home planes" and "only gods can kill other gods permanently" rules used to explain why PCs keep killing Grazzt and Lolth and so on. Maybe Medusa would have had a similar "can't really die" card. Still, sounds like a lot of work for a relatively low-level, one note monster. Who knows?

 

[Voadam]

Mildly unpopular opinion: there are a few monsters that went from singular entities to species because D&D is meant to be played by multiple people and over multiple times.

Consider the tarrasque. It was stated in older lore that there was only one in existence. But that leads to some odd lore issues. If you have a group of players fight and kill it, no other group could. And if there is only one, where does it live? So it became "every D&D world has a tarrasque" which defeated the purpose of making it only one in existence. Pretty soon, things like "tarrasques wander the hinterlands of the Outlands, beyond the gate towns" or "there is a crystal sphere with Planet Tarrasque in it" was implied in the lore. Still, canonically, the idea that there was one tarrasque in all of creation became an unknown number across multiple worlds that has been killed an unknown amount of times.

And that is one iconic epic level baddie. Can you imagine that with Medusa, Goliath, Minotaur, Pegasus, Cerberus, the Kraken, etc?

D&D has plenty of unique individual monsters. From OD&D Supplement I Greyhawk there is the Platinum King of Lawful Dragons and the Chromatic Queen of Chaotic Dragons. Bahamut and Tiamat are still uniques through all editions.

I think Gygax just wanted to use medusas and minotaurs and pegasi as multiple creatures in his game instead of as uniques so he could use them in groups and over and over again as encounters.

 

[Remathilis]

D&D has plenty of unique individual monsters. From OD&D Supplement I Greyhawk there is the Platinum King of Lawful Dragons and the Chromatic Queen of Chaotic Dragons. Bahamut and Tiamat are still uniques through all editions.

I think Gygax just wanted to use medusas and minotaurs and pegasi as multiple creatures in his game instead of as uniques so he could use them in groups and over and over again as encounters.

OD&D was written before the concept of a multiverse formally existed in D&D. There was only one D&D world, and it was the one you DM was using.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

Is there in the 5e 2024 MM the indication that male Medusa have the Maedar lore, or are they just treated as Medusa, except male?

I am interested since having them in male and female sex means that medusas reproduce sexually and raise children. Which is OK with maedar being immunue to medusa gaze and potentially taking care of the youngsters (with the possibility that the petryfing gaze starts with puberty, so young medusas can cohabit with their male versions before leaving the lair when they start exhibiting a weak version of their gaze). Also, hunting tactics made sense because of the alternate power. But if they are just male Medusa, I wonder how they do that...

 

[Voadam]

Is there in the 5e 2024 MM the indication that male Medusa have the Maedar lore, or are they just treated as Medusa, except male?

I am interested since having them in male and female sex means that medusas reproduce sexually and raise children. Which is OK with maedar being immunue to medusa gaze and potentially taking care of the youngsters (with the possibility that the petryfing gaze starts with puberty, so young medusas can cohabit with their male versions before leaving the lair when they start exhibiting a weak version of their gaze). But if they are just male Medusa, I wonder how they do that...

I think it is just standard medusas. The picture has the male with snake hair unlike the Maedar or the 4e poison gaze no snake male medusa.

 

[Voadam]

OD&D was written before the concept of a multiverse formally existed in D&D. There was only one D&D world, and it was the one you DM was using.

The 1e MM and MM II and Fiend Folio each have unique demon lords and archdevils and unique things like the Elemental and Slaad Lords that have also remained uniques through editions.

 

[Faolyn]

goblin punch the guy who made the false hydra

Thanks!

<goes to check>

Ooh, lots of monsters to go through.