5E: Converting Monsters from White Dwarf Magazine for Fifth Edition

[Cleon]

No worries. He did.

Good, I'm glad my memory hadn't completely failed me. Most of the facts are there, including the fire-breathing oxen. It was a magical ointment Medea gave him, not a bridle.

I'm pretty sure there's a version where the Spartoi fight over a ball rather than being provoked into murdering each other by a thrown rock. Having literally just been born they had never seen anything pretty before and REALLY wanted it – you know how babies can be!

 

[ilgatto]

Good, I'm glad my memory hadn't completely failed me. Most of the facts are there, including the fire-breathing oxen. It was a magical ointment Medea gave him, not a bridle.

I'm pretty sure there's a version where the Spartoi fight over a ball rather than being provoked into murdering each other by a thrown rock. Having literally just been born they had never seen anything pretty before and REALLY wanted it – you know how babies can be!

lol.
IIRC the fight over the stone was because it landed in their midst and then all of them started accusing the others of having launched it as an attack - whence the fracas. Of course, history has taught us that throwing stones tends to lead to all kinds of confusion and altercations!

 

[ilgatto]

(...) or are we ready to proceed to the Description and separate entries?

I've been trying to come up with a 5E style "Description" for the dragon warriors - and failed, for I just can't get into the 5E flow of things description-wise.
Instead, I hereby attach my current 2E conversion, which could, perhaps, serve a source of inspiration.

 

[Cleon]

Instead, I hereby attach my current 2E conversion, which could, perhaps, serve a source of inspiration.

Hmm…

Rather than the "Any/Any land or underground (See below)" in CLIMATE/TERRAIN it could just be "Any" like a Skeleton or Golem, or "Any (see below)" if you want the referral.

Why has it got HIT DICE 5+5 instead of the original's 6 HD?

That's pretty much the same HP and uses the same attack table so the change seems a bit pointless.

Come to think of it, does the "fights as a 6th level fighter" include a fighter's 10-sided Hit Dice? That's 22% boost in survivability from a standard monster's 8-sided HD. That'd make it "HIT DICE 6 (6d10 hit points)"?

Having a Strength modifier isn't normally listed as a SPECIAL ATTACK, but is just mentioned in the Combat entry and sometimes its DAMAGE/ATTACK line. A Giant, for example, has "Hurling rocks for ### (#d##)" for its special attacks.

Speaking of which, I'd suggest including the broadsword in DAMAGE/ATTACK, so maybe make that "By weapon +2 from Str 18 (2d4+2 broadsword, 1d6+3 vs. Large)"?

The wording of the "fluff text" looks clunky to me, but I won't go into a detailed critique. Mostly because, knowing me I'd end up rewriting the whole thing to a "How Cleon Would Do It" version!

 

[ilgatto]

Hmm…

Rather than the "Any/Any land or underground (See below)" in CLIMATE/TERRAIN it could just be "Any" like a Skeleton or Golem, or "Any (see below)" if you want the referral.

Interesting notion. Never noticed that a skeleton only has "Any". Now I'll have to go check if this happens anywhere else in MC1.
As to the "(See below)": I always add that to CLIMATE/TERRAIN if there's some special circumstances that need to be met before a monster will appear anywhere. It's to warn the DM that something is afoot.

Why has it got HIT DICE 5+5 instead of the original's 6 HD?

Er... the original has 5+5 HD

That's pretty much the same HP and uses the same attack table so the change seems a bit pointless.

Come to think of it, does the "fights as a 6th level fighter" include a fighter's 10-sided Hit Dice? That's 22% boost in survivability from a standard monster's 8-sided HD. That'd make it "HIT DICE 6 (6d10 hit points)"?

I didn't interpret "fights as a 6th-level Fighter" as meaning that the DWs had a d10 for HD, especially since the original says "Hit Dice: 5D8+5".

Having a Strength modifier isn't normally listed as a SPECIAL ATTACK, but is just mentioned in the Combat entry and sometimes its DAMAGE/ATTACK line. A Giant, for example, has "Hurling rocks for ### (#d##)" for its special attacks.

Yup, I know. It's still in there because I used to add Strength scores to SPECIAL ATTACKS when I started converting/writing up monsters because..., well, frankly because I thought I knew better than the Monstrous Compendiums. Haven't really decided on whether I should remove it (and many similar) discrepancies for that is going to be A LOT of work.

Speaking of which, I'd suggest including the broadsword in DAMAGE/ATTACK, so maybe make that "By weapon +2 from Str 18 (2d4+2 broadsword, 1d6+3 vs. Large)"?

Ah yes. That's something I never do, for that would lead to a lot of problems in case of creatures that can use many weapons. Also, WD21 says "and normally use broad swords", which I took as there being a possibility that they also use other weapons ... for some unspecified reason.
Also, I don't think the various MCs ever mention "By weapon +x" as a result of exceptional Strength.

The wording of the "fluff text" looks clunky to me, but I won't go into a detailed critique. Mostly because, knowing me I'd end up rewriting the whole thing to a "How Cleon Would Do It" version!

Interesting.

Anyway. Mission failed.

 

[Cleon]

Er... the original has 5+5 HD

Dang it, you're right. Happily retracted.

Now why did I have it stuck in my head they had 6 HD? Was it just because of the "as 6th-level fighter" bit? Because the first 5E draft had six Hit Dice?

Oh never mind, I can't remember and it doesn't seem important.

Ah yes. That's something I never do, for that would lead to a lot of problems in case of creatures that can use many weapons. Also, WD21 says "and normally use broad swords", which I took as there being a possibility that they also use other weapons ... for some unspecified reason.
Also, I don't think the various MCs ever mention "By weapon +x" as a result of exceptional Strength.

They don't always quote a specific Strength score, but "by weapon +#" isn't that unusual in 2E. Heck, there are a few 1E monsters with it, like the Mezzodaemon has "DAMAGE/ATTACK: 7–12/7–12 or by weapon +6" in their 1E Vaults of the Drow and Fiend Folio appearances.

Mezzie actually lists a Strength of 18/00 to account for the +6 damage.

There seem to be as many that don't list an actual Strength, although by inference it's usually obvious what the STR stat is. A MC1 Fire Giant has "1-8, or by weapon (2-20 + 10)" but nowhere does it explain the +10 is from its Fire Giant Strength of 22, although at least that information is on page 14 of the Player's Handbook, where Table 1: STRENGTH has "Fire Giant" in the Notes for Ability Score 22.

I think the humble Ogre might be the oldest monster that had a +X damage, since it added +2 to its damage dice in Book 2 of the very first version of D&D back in 1974.

Giants did two damage dice in Monsters & Treasure, by the way, so they were inflicting 2d6 to the Ogre's 1d6+2.

 

[ilgatto]

Rather than the "Any/Any land or underground (See below)" in CLIMATE/TERRAIN it could just be "Any" like a Skeleton or Golem, or "Any (see below)" if you want the referral.

Having checked some MCs I am rather miffed to find that the "Any" and, for example "Subterranean" after CLIMATE/TERRAIN (instead of "Any/Any" and "Any/Subterranean") are actually more the rule than the exception. Amazed, too, for this has totally escaped me even though I've been at this write-up malarkey for quite a bit of time. Probably just ignored it in favor of my C/T approach.
Anyway. I'm still going to stick to the x/x thing, for I also mention "airborne" for "terrain" after C/T for flying creatures so just having "Any" for a skeleton or dragon warrior wouldn't fly (har, har). I have to admit, though, that I've never liked the "Any land or underground" phrasing.

The wording of the "fluff text" looks clunky to me, but I won't go into a detailed critique. Mostly because, knowing me I'd end up rewriting the whole thing to a "How Cleon Would Do It" version!

You do realize that I'm curious now, don't you?
It might even lead to the flavor text for the 5E DWs.

 

[Cleon]

You do realize that I'm curious now, don't you?

Bwah hah hah! My subtle lure has snared the laggard!

It might even lead to the flavor text for the 5E DWs.

Well I have been wondering about doing a 2nd Edition AD&D Monstrous Manual or Monstrous Compendium layout monster just to try out some MS Word styles and stop my editing skills from going too rusty.

It's been ages since the last time I did a full 2E AD&D monster writeup.

Still, I'll most likely work on finishing the 5E conversion's Description first.

 

[Cleon]

So for the Description, here's a start:

At first glance, a dragon warrior appears to be a human, orc or other sturdy humanoid completely coated in armor made of dragon scales; scale mail so exceptionally crafted it fits them like a second skin. A close inspection reveals the creature inside is no human fighter, but some sort of reptilian or draconic creature with finely scaled skin the same hue as their armor. Dragon warriors are armed with broad-bladed longswords crafted from the same material as their armor.
 Organic Armory. An intimate inspection reveals a dragon warrior's scale mail is, quite literally, a second skin; a partially shed hide whose living scales have thickened into a suit of armor. Its longsword is similarly formed from the dragon warrior's body: a single massive scale, or perhaps an enormous fang, that has assumed the shape of a blade.
 Children of the Dragon's Teeth. Legendary origins. Interfertility with humanoids? Alignment tendencies? Associated Magic Item (tooth of the dragon warrior? fang of wondrous power?).

Okay, back to the grindstone…

Description​

​

At first glance, a dragon warrior appears to be a human, orc or other sturdy humanoid completely coated in dragon scale armor so exceptionally crafted it fits them like a second skin. A close inspection reveals the creature inside is no normal humanoid, but some sort of reptilian or draconic creature whose finely scaled skin is the hue of its armor. The warrior is normally armed with a broad-bladed longsword made from the same material as its armor.​

 Organic Armory. An intimate inspection reveals a dragon warrior's scale mail is, quite literally, a second skin; a partially shed hide whose living scales have thickened into a suit of armor. Its longsword is similarly formed from the dragon warrior's body: a single massive scale, or perhaps an enormous fang, that has assumed the shape of a blade.​

 Draconic Scions. Dragon warriors come in ten varieties matching the five chromatic dragons (black, blue, green, red, white) and the five metallic dragons (brass, bronze, copper, gold, silver). A dragon warrior's scales match the corresponding dragon in color and texture and it often has minor features reminiscent of it, such as vestigial horns or crests. While metallic dragons are renowned for their benevolence and chromatic dragons are notoriously malign, dragon warriors rarely follow the true dragon's morality. While there may be a faint tendency towards their corresponding dragon's alignment (a red dragon warrior is slightly more likely to be evil or chaotic than a bronze one, for example), most dragon warriors are strictly neutral. The dragon warriors do have some other draconic traits though, such as being immune to the damage type of their dragon's breath weapon.​

​

 Children of the Dragon's Teeth. The common dragon warrior encountered by adventurers is an artificial being produced by a dragon tooth, an item that becomes a dragon warrior to serve the tooth's user; the transformed tooth is a temporary creatures that exist only briefly before crumbling into dust.​

 These dragon teeth imitate ancient myth, which says the first dragon warriors were born by planting the teeth of a slain legendary dragon in ploughed earth. Called Spartoi (literally "the Sown"), these warriors sprouted from these strange seeds armed for battle, growing to adulthood in moments. Some myths say the handful of Spartoi who survived their initial battlefield went on to found lineages of true dragon warriors. The legendary Spartoi and their dragon warrior descendants are living creatures, rumored to have incredibly long lifespans like a true dragon. True dragon warriors are fantastically rare creatures, and how they reproduce is unknown (or even if they can reproduce). The tales say dragon warriors, or at least the original Spartoi, would marry into human tribes, but the union of a Spartolos and Human normally resulted in humanoid offspring, not dragon warriors. A few modern sages claim dragon warriors can mate with dragons or reptilian humanoids as well as each other to produce newborn dragon warriors or eggs, but that is pure speculation.​

I think that'll do, so it's just the dragon tooth item to do.

 

[Cleon]

 These dragon teeth imitate ancient myth, which says the first dragon warriors were born by planting the teeth of a slain legendary dragon in ploughed earth. Called Spartoi (literally "the Sown"), these warriors sprouted from these strange seeds armed for battle, growing to adulthood in moments. Some myths say the handful of Spartoi who survived their initial battlefield went on to found lineages of true dragon warriors. The legendary Spartoi and their dragon warrior descendants are living creatures, rumored to have incredibly long lifespans like a true dragon. True dragon warriors are fantastically rare creatures, and how they reproduce is unknown (or even if they can reproduce). The tales say dragon warriors, or at least the original Spartoi, would marry into human tribes, but the union of a Spartolos and Human normally resulted in humanoid offspring, not dragon warriors. A few modern sages claim dragon warriors can mate with dragons or reptilian humanoids as well as each other to produce newborn dragon warriors or eggs, but that is pure speculation.

Incidentally (a) Enworld's spellcheck refuses to recognize the UK spelling of ploughed but is happy with the alternative of plowed. Might use that just to save headaches.

Also, I'm not 100% sure that Spartolos is the proper singular of Spartoi. All the sources I could find online that used it appear to be derived from a Pathfinder Monster of that name, said Spartolos (plural Spartoi) being an undead warrior that sprouts from magic spartoi seeds that resemble teeth, obviously inspired by the myth.

Should I decide that the provenance of Spartolos is uncertain and will use the more US-approved plowed spelling, I'd change the quoted paragraph to:

 These dragon teeth imitate ancient myth, which says the first dragon warriors were born by planting the teeth of a slain legendary dragon in plowed earth. Called Spartoi (literally "the Sown"), these warriors sprouted from these strange seeds armed for battle, growing to adulthood in moments. Some myths say the handful of Spartoi who survived their initial battlefield went on to found lineages of true dragon warriors. The legendary Spartoi and their dragon warrior descendants are living creatures, rumored to have incredibly long lifespans like a true dragon. True dragon warriors are fantastically rare creatures, and how they reproduce is unknown (or even if they can reproduce). The tales say dragon warriors, or at least the original Spartoi, would marry into human tribes, but the resulting offspring were humanoid, not dragon warriors. A few modern sages claim dragon warriors can mate with dragons or reptilian humanoids as well as each other to produce newborn dragon warriors or eggs, but that is pure speculation.​

I'm leaning towards keeping Spartolos and just changing ploughed to plowed though.