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

[Cleon]

I notice it has only two attacks, having both 1E claw attacks combined into one, something @Cleon also touched upon upthread IIRC. Is that common practice in 5E? Is there a reason for that if so?

Claws are often combined into one attack in 5e

What he said, although in this case I would be game to give them the old claw/claw/bite routine.

They seem rather trollish in their approach to melee, and the 5E Troll still makes two claw attacks rather than a single claws attack.

 

[Cleon]

Well I've finished deblueing the Dragon Warriors and realized they're not quite done yet.

I forgot to write up the dragon tooth magic item!

Oh well, I'll get around to it eventually.

 

[ilgatto]

Not sure I follow you. An Ogre is pretty giantish too, and they're slightly bigger than this Cyclops.

In my mind, the WD21 cyclops has a strong connection to giants because of its name, the ref to Amiraspians, and therefore to the 1E DDG Greek cyclopes and the lesser cyclopes in particular, which makes them "giants" rather than "ogres" to me and therefore stronger than ogres as per 1E/2E. Since the giants got a bump in 2E MC1, I've always assumed that this would then also become true for the WD21 cyclops (and its 2E Strength) if it were ever converted to 2E - as by me.
So, even if we're sticking to the 1E size for the 5E conversion, I still find it difficult to let go of the notion that the hypnoclops should be surprisingly strong. However, as noted, I admit that there may be a problem with giving them 5E STR 20 because there's also the Hypnoclops Leader, which is supposedly a lot stronger than the regular version (coz 1E to hit/damage +2/+3).
STR 19 for the regular hypnoclops and STR 20 for the leader, then?

I'm not sure how a lack of depth perception would help you notice the flaws in a visual illusion. I tend to imagine it's cause its galumphing great eye can see details more precisely so it notices flaws more easily, or perhaps it's just 'cause its a supernatural creature and can see things normal mortals can't.

Yeah, as a matter of fact, neither was I when I actually thought about it when writing it. So I'd be OK with some "magical" quality that explains their illusion resistant, especially since their eye can create an illusions (Hypnotic Pattern).

 

[ilgatto]

Lots of stories about fey creatures interbreeding with humans in folklore (and dnd) so no problem at all. Druidic fey-ancestried arimaspians with animal handling skills. Coherent in my mind.

Fair enough.

Just looked up cyclopskin in 1e MM2. Very vanilla. Also ecology of cyclopskin in Dragon 254. A bit more interesting. Has them as sometimes following beholders (can imagine egotistical beholders enjoying this). Not much else in there though.

re beholders: yeah, there is that eye thing, of course...

 

[ilgatto]

It needs a /COLOR to close the BB Code not /COLOR=hue

Understood.
Still a lot of work, though.

 

[ilgatto]

I like the idea that to create an illusion, a spellcaster creates something that will confuse himself or someone that sees the spectrum like him. And his skill at creating a believable illusion decreases for any opponent that senses things differently - so a cyclops lacks depth perception but has a single honking big eye that maybe 'sees' things differently from lack of depth preception and also has a higher acuity than (say) human eyes, so the spellcasters illusion is less effective. I'd also make all insectoids Resistant to illusions for similar reasons (seeing in UV light, which spellcaster might forget about emulating) - I recall this being a thing in one edition of one RPG but can't recall which.

OK so looks like we'll make its resistance to illusions some "magical" effect linked to its eye and ability to generate an illusion.

Yeah, as a matter of fact, neither was I when I actually thought about it when writing it. So I'd be OK with some "magical" quality that explains their illusion resistant, especially since their eye can create an illusions (Hypnotic Pattern).

But I'd still not link that to Keen Sight because of the original imposing penalties for lack of depth perception (which hardly constitutes "keen sight").

 

[ilgatto]

Yeah, I like them as Fey too.

The 95 hp is a bit too much high. That's not much less than a 5E Hill Giant.

Seconded.

Yes. To be honest I'm having a bit of trouble figuring out the "Challenge Value" of its hypnogaze. It's one of those effects like a Ghoul's paralysis that could easily go very nasty for a party if they roll a lot of poor saving throws.

I was thinking of making the Hypnotic Stare part of its Multiattack, like the Dreadful Glare of a Mummy, as in "Multiattack. The cyclops can use its Hypnotic Stare and make X attacks, one with its bite and Y with its claws."

Although a Bonus Action works just as well.

Er..,, is there a difference? Maybe for CR? Wouldn't a Bonus Action rather indicate a "choice" than an "attack that happens each round because it is part of its Multiattack"?

Anyhow, at least we seem to have agreed on the languages!

I'll update the Cyclops with that and the ability scores from Casimirs version, except for the CON which I think is too high. Plus Ilgatto and I had more-or-less settled on a +3 CON bonus and 9 Hit Dice.

Still going for CON (+3).

EDIT: STR 19 fine for reasons upthread if Leader has to be STR 20.
P.S.: How in blazes do you link to a post without quoting it?

That would make it hard for them to find their way around the caves they live in though.

Not really. Think shallow cave with a fire burning in it (Odysseus). They do their raiding outside and I've always seen the "found in almost any terrain, including underground complexes" as being "optional" rather than the rule.

 

[ilgatto]

What he said, although in this case I would be game to give them the old claw/claw/bite routine.

They seem rather trollish in their approach to melee, and the 5E Troll still makes two claw attacks rather than a single claws attack.

Me game, too.

 

[ilgatto]

Well I've finished deblueing the Dragon Warriors and realized they're not quite done yet.

I forgot to write up the dragon tooth magic item!

Oh well, I'll get around to it eventually.

Leave you to it, then.

(Although I might alos try and have a go to get into the 5E way of doing things if I can find the time)

 

[Cleon]

So, even if we're sticking to the 1E size for the 5E conversion, I still find it difficult to let go of the notion that the hypnoclops should be surprisingly strong. However, as noted, I admit that there may be a problem with giving them 5E STR 20 because there's also the Hypnoclops Leader, which is supposedly a lot stronger than the regular version (coz 1E to hit/damage +2/+3).
STR 19 for the regular hypnoclops and STR 20 for the leader, then?

Isn't, a +2 to hit and +3 damage only Strength 18/51-76 in AD&&D terms?

That's considerably less than the 18/00 of an AD&D troll, let alone the Strength 19 of a Hill Giant.

The Fifth Edition Troll has Strength 18, so we're already giving it a better Strength with STR 19.