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

[ilgatto]

passive Perception is simply 10 plus the creature's Perception, so 9 if it only has the –1 modifier of its Wisdom.

It's what you roll against in 5E when trying to sneak past someone (or something) that isn't using an Action to look/see/hear/etc around itself but is just paying casual attention to its surroundings.

I really had to read that four times before I could make sense of it. I guess my mind simply doesn't want to accept it, but it'll probably become second nature once I would have played some 5E. Still, I guess knowing that pP depends on WIS, I'm now even more in favor of WIS 9 (because of one eye and of what I remember from Odysseus and the cyclops).

Well personally I'd only give it a Bite and two Claw attacks for melee weapons, like the original.

Well, that's not entirely true, [checking] hmm..., I could have sworn that this:

The cyclops' eye handicaps it in combat so that it strikes at -1. It similarly hurls missiles at -2 but it gains +2 on saves vs illusory magic.

... read "at -1 with a melee weapon".
But it doesn't.
Therefore, as a purist, I'd favor the claw/claw/bite routine although I rather like the idea of the club/greatclub so I wouldn't mind it.

I'd be quite happy to give the "Chieftain" an artificial melee weapon to reflect its greater cunning and as a sign of its status?

If the regular Hypno-clops has such a melee weapon, it doesn't make much difference to me whether it's a Morningstar or a Greatclub, although like you I prefer Greatclub as it's what Ogres and Hill Giants use.

Yup. Club and therefore greatclub because cyclops.

Although I'm thinking it ought to have a ranged weapon. What's the point of its Poor Depth Perception trait if it never chucks something deadly at an opponent? Either a Javelin like an Ogre uses for ranged attacks in later editions of D&D, or the sophisticated implement called "A Big Rock" preferred by a Hill Giant.

I'd certainly prefer the big rocks!

Oh, I'm starting to wonder if Poor Depth Perception should have a shorter range than 30 feet.

If it threw javelins, for example, those have range 30/120 so the cyclops would get disadvantage on its attack rolls beyond 30 feet anyway, since that's the limit of a javelin's accurate range.

If we made the limit 10 feet, then basically all its ranged attacks would likely have disadvantage and if it's target was only within melee range of a weapon with the reach property like a halberd, glaive, pike.

Agreed. 10 feet.

Hmm, maybe we could give the Chieftain a reach weapon like one of the above?

Excellent thinking if that would mean its disadvantage for Poor Depth Perception comes into play! It would honor the original -1 penalty in melee.

I prefer Glare over Stare as that's the word a Mummy fear-inflicting glower uses.

OK.

For the "If the target's saving throw is successful, the target can thereafter no longer be hypnotized by the same hypnoclops", I would recommend using the standard 5E solution for such attacks: have a target that saves become immune to that creature's attack for 24 hours.

As in "A target that successfully saves is immune to this cyclops’s glare for the next 24 hours."

OK.

I think it'd work better if cyclopes could glare and melee attack in the same round. There's no rule that they must Hypnotic Glare at the same target as their melee attacks.

Vicious! Fine by me. So I guess I'll have to go figure out what the wording's going to be now that it's no longer an "Action" as such.

The original text said it affects one target just like the spell hypnotic pattern, which can affect any creature able to see it, so I wouldn't restrict it to humanoids.

OK.

Still think we need to make its name "Something Cyclops" but we just need to agree on that something!

I think we've had Amiraspi, Amiraspian, Cave, Hypnotic and Eldritch proposed so far, but none of them won everyone's favour.

Yeah, there's that. Hypnotic and Eldritch don't really do it for me. "Cave" has been rejected by Casimir, and you gents are not in favor of Amiraspian, which is understandable. So, of all these, I probably wouldn't really mind Hypnotic, although it still feels awkward, but that can be my interpretation of the word.

 

[Cleon]

OK. For reasons mentioned upthread, I vote for the following stats for the regular xcyclops:

STR 18
DEX 12
CON 17 (and hence 9d10+27 HD)
INT 10
WIS 9
CHA 14

Those are fine by me. What about you, @Casimir Liber?

Come a-flaming-gain?! Is an odd-and-even ratio for scores a rule in 5E? Whatever for?

It's not a rule, more a tendency for 5E monsters to have three odd stats and three even ones.

If you scan through the Monster Manual you'd notice most of the beasties are like that, although there are some that break the trend (four odd/two even, vice versa, or whatever).

There is a rule in 3E (called Ability Score Arrays in Improving Monsters section), but that's (a) hardly relevant for 5E, (b) often observed in the breech (there are plenty of monsters that would have the non-elite or elite arrays that don't have ability scores that match them). That's perfectly rules-legal though, since randomly generated / assigned ability scores are still OK in 3E.

Yeah, there's that. Hypnotic and Eldritch don't really do it for me. "Cave" has been rejected by Casimir, and you gents are not in favor of Amiraspian, which is understandable. So, of all these, I probably wouldn't really mind Hypnotic, although it still feels awkward, but that can be my interpretation of the word.

I'd be OK with Amiraspian or Amiraspi, although I should mention that there's already a homebrew conversion of this White Dwarf monster called the Amiraspian Cyclops, so our take on it might get confused with that.

That appears on a website whose servers disappeared from the 'net more than a decade ago, although you can still read it on the internet archive (see The Frilond Campaign).

Shall we go for Amiraspi then?

Alternatively, can we come up with a synonym of "Hypnotic" we all like?

The only one I could think of was "Mesmeric" but I think that was rejected as well.

Something like "Entrancing" while technically correct give the wrong impression of a creature that's incredibly beautiful.

 

[Cleon]

ok I've made it 9d10+27 wih 16 CON - I have no strong preference so have changed to yours

changed morningstar to greatclub

rock is more what I imagine than a javelin.

STR 18
DEX 12
CON 17 (and hence 9d10+27 HD)
INT 10
WIS 9
CHA 14

I'll combine the above and update my version of the Cyclops.

Here's the previous draft, for posterity:

Cyclops
Large fey, chaotic evil
Armor Class 13 (natural armor)
Hit Points 76 (9d10 + 27) OR (8d10 + 32)
Speed 30 ft.

STR​	DEX​	CON​	INT​	WIS​	CHA​
18 (+4)​	11 (+0) 12 (+1) 13 (+1)​	16 (+3) 17 (+3) 18 (+4)​	9 (–1) 11 (+0)​	9 (–1) 11 (+0)​	14 (+2) 15 (+2)​

Saving Throws WIS +1?
Skills Perception +1 or +2?
Senses darkvision 60 ft. [Like an Ogre or Troll. They are cave dwellers, after all], passive Perception 9 or 11 or 12
Languages Giant, Gnoll, Goblin
Challenge 3 (700 XP) Proficiency Bonus +2

Monocular. The cyclops has advantage on saving throws against spells and other magical effects that are delivered by sight, such as visual illusions or gaze attacks.

Poor Depth Perception. The cyclops has disadvantage on its attack roll if the target is more than 10 feet away.

Aggressive. As a bonus action, the cyclops can move up to its speed towards a hostile creature that it can see. (wouldn't bother with this trait myself, but am happy to leave it in if Casimir & Ilgatto like it)

Actions

Multiattack. The cyclops makes three attacks: one with its bite and two with its claws.
OR
The cyclops makes three attacks: one with its bite and two with its claws; or it makes two attacks with its greatclub.
OR
The cyclops makes three attacks: one with its bite and two with its claws; or it makes two attacks with its greatclub or a javelin/rock.

Bite. Melee Weapon Attack: +6 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 11 (2d6 + 4) piercing damage.

Claw. Melee Weapon Attack: +6 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 7 (1d6 + 4) piercing damage.

Greatclub. Melee Weapon Attack: +6 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 13 (2d8 + 4) bludgeoning damage.

Javelin. Melee or Ranged Weapon Attack: +6 to hit, reach 5 ft., or range 30/120 ft., one target. Hit: 11 (2d6 + 4) piercing damage.
OR
Rock. Ranged Weapon Attack: +6 to hit, range 20/60 ft., one target. Hit: 11 (2d6 + 4) bludgeoning damage.

Hypnotic Glare (6/day). The cyclops's eye becomes a twisting vortex of colors and it stares at a creature within 60 feet. If the target can see the cyclops it must make a DC 12 Wisdom saving throw. On a failed save, the creature becomes charmed for 1 minute. While charmed by the glare, the creature is incapacitated and has a speed of 0. The effect ends if an affected creature takes any damage, or if someone else uses an action to shake the creature out of its stupor.
 A target that successfully saves is immune to this cyclops's glare for the next 24 hours.

 

[ilgatto]

That appears on a website whose servers disappeared from the 'net more than a decade ago, although you can still read it on the internet archive (see The Frilond Campaign).

Amazing.
Currently working on a revision of The Halls of Tizun Thane for next Friday and using the text of a 3.5E version I found on the interwebs a long time ago as a basis coz I don't have a good scan of the original. Couldn't for the life of me remember where I got that text from and who wrote it, though. And now there he is!
Thanks for that.

 

[ilgatto]

I'd be OK with Amiraspian or Amiraspi, although I should mention that there's already a homebrew conversion of this White Dwarf monster called the Amiraspian Cyclops, so our take on it might get confused with that.

That appears on a website whose servers disappeared from the 'net more than a decade ago, although you can still read it on the internet archive (see The Frilond Campaign).

Shall we go for Amiraspi then?

Alternatively, can we come up with a synonym of "Hypnotic" we all like?

The only one I could think of was "Mesmeric" but I think that was rejected as well.

Something like "Entrancing" while technically correct give the wrong impression of a creature that's incredibly beautiful.

I'd fancy "Amiraspian Cyclops" over "Amiraspi", for I'd like to have "Cyclops" in he name and, imo, "Amiraspi" alone would actually apply more to the "Amiraspians/Cyclopean Humans", the one-eyed 'human' offspring of our xcyclops.

Agreed on "Entrancing" not being an option.

Although I dislike both "Cyclopskin" and "Hypnotic Cyclops", that may well be because of my understanding of English.

To me, something like "The cyclopskin says..." sounds weird because of the use of the word "cyclopskin" for a single specimen of the kind. This may well be perfect English, though, I just can't tell.
I would also prefer not to call it "Cyclopskin" because of the 2E monster of the same name.

As to "Hypnotic Cyclops": I feel that connecting "Hypnotic" to a noun - or, indeed, a ceature that isn't "hypnotic" in and of itself - is weird. As above, this may well be perfect English and I've tried to figure out if it was but haven't succeeded.

So, if "Hypnotic Cyclops" is a perfectly acceptable way of saying things in English, I think "Hypnotic Cyclops" for our "Something Cyclops" is the best of the non-Amiraspian options.

 

[Cleon]

Would accept either Amiraspian Cyclops or Hypnotic Cyclops.

I prefer "Amiraspi Cyclops" over "Amiraspain Cyclops" though as it more clearly distinguishes them from the half-human/half-cyclops "Amiraspian" should we ever decide to write one up.

Guess we just wait to hear if @Casimir Liber will accept one of those.

Oh, I like "Cyclopean Human" as alternative names for the Amiraspians. Could call them Cyclops Folk instead, as they might not all be half-human. Would there be half-orc/half-cyclops and the like?

Although I'd probably draw the line well about "Amiraspian Folk" as that's got no charm to it.

Oh, if we were to stat up an Amiraspian Warrior of some kind, we'd obviously have to stat up an elite Amiraspian Griffon-Rider as well!

 

[ilgatto]

Cyclops
Large fey, chaotic evil
Armor Class 13 (natural armor)
Hit Points 76 (9d10 + 27)
Speed 30 ft.

STR​	DEX​	CON​	INT​	WIS​	CHA​
18 (+4)​	12 (+1)​	17 (+3)​	10 (+0)​	9 (–1)​	14 (+2)​

Saving Throws WIS +1?
Skills Perception +1?
Senses darkvision 60 ft. [Like an Ogre or Troll. They are cave dwellers, after all], passive Perception 9 or 11
Languages Giant, Gnoll, Goblin
Challenge 3 (700 XP) Proficiency Bonus +2

Monocular. The cyclops has advantage on saving throws against spells and other magical effects that are delivered by sight, such as visual illusions or gaze attacks.

However, I don't think this works. First there's the phrasing, for visual illusions are not necessarily "delivered by sight".
As to "gaze attack immunity": hmm..., I can see what your thinking, by why add it? Isn't adding to its immunity to visual illusions actually opening a lot of questions, especially in light of your or @Casimir Liber's suggestion upthread that this resistance may be hard to explain because it only has one eye?
Sticking with resistance to visual Illusions only would have my vote.

Poor Depth Perception. The cyclops has disadvantage on its attack roll if the target is more than 10 feet away.

Love "10 ft".

Aggressive. As a bonus action, the cyclops can move up to its speed towards a hostile creature that it can see. (wouldn't bother with this trait myself, but am happy to leave it in if Casimir & Ilgatto like it)

Actions

Multiattack. The cyclops makes three attacks: one with its bite and two with its claws; or it makes two attacks with its greatclub or rocks.

Bite. Melee Weapon Attack: +6 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 11 (2d6 + 4) piercing damage.

Claw. Melee Weapon Attack: +6 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 7 (1d6 + 4) piercing damage.

Greatclub. Melee Weapon Attack: +6 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 13 (2d8 + 4) bludgeoning damage.

Rock. Ranged Weapon Attack: +6 to hit, range 20/60 ft., one target. Hit: 11 (2d6 + 4) bludgeoning damage

Hypnotic Glare (6/day). The cyclops's eye becomes a twisting vortex of colors and it stares at a creature within 60 feet. If the target can see the cyclops it must make a DC 12 Wisdom saving throw. On a failed save, the creature becomes charmed for 1 minute. While charmed by the glare, the creature is incapacitated and has a speed of 0. The effect ends if an affected creature takes any damage, or if someone else uses an action to shake the creature out of its stupor.
 A target that successfully saves is immune to this cyclops's glare for the next 24 hours.

All OK. Blue in "Rock" coz doubtful so far for some reason?

Description

???.
 ???.
 Subsection. ???.
 ???.

 Subsection. ???.
 ???.

(Originally created by Albie Fiore; appeared in White Dwarf Magazine #21 (Oct/Nov 1980) as part of the Fiend Factory mini-module "One-Eye Canyon", edited by Albie Fiore.)

 

[ilgatto]

Would accept either Amiraspian Cyclops or Hypnotic Cyclops.

I prefer "Amiraspi Cyclops" over "Amiraspain Cyclops" though as it more clearly distinguishes them from the half-human/half-cyclops "Amiraspian" should we ever decide to write one up.

Guess we just wait to hear if @Casimir Liber will accept one of those.

Oh, I like "Cyclopean Human" as alternative names for the Amiraspians. Could call them Cyclops Folk instead, as they might not all be half-human. Would there be half-orc/half-cyclops and the like?

Cyclopean Human would be my choice as well. I wouldn't bother with half-orcs et al., for the original says "humans" and, also, orcs didn't exist in Ancient Greece, on which our cyclops is obviously based. Wouldn't go into too much detail regarding the "humans only" though, to avoid... erm..., problems.

Although I'd probably draw the line well about "Amiraspian Folk" as that's got no charm to it.

Agreed 100%.

Oh, if we were to stat up an Amiraspian Warrior of some kind, we'd obviously have to stat up an elite Amiraspian Griffon-Rider as well!

Hehehe. Obviously!

 

[Cleon]

However, I don't think this works. First there's the phrasing, for visual illusions are not necessarily "delivered by sight".
As to "gaze attack immunity": hmm..., I can see what your thinking, by why add it? Isn't adding to its immunity to visual illusions actually opening a lot of questions, especially in light of your or @Casimir Liber's suggestion upthread that this resistance may be hard to explain because it only has one eye?
Sticking with resistance to visual Illusions only would have my vote.

It's not immune to gaze attacks or illusions, it just gets advantage on saves or Perception checks against them.

If we didn't mention it has to be a visual illusion, then the Cyclops would be resistant to illusions that are entirely delivered by another sense or senses, such as smell or hearing.

How would a Cyclops's eye be able to tell a ghostly wail is an illusory sound if there's no ghostly image for it to see?

I suspected you'd be against its monocularity also helping it against other sight-based attacks, but thought it worth throwing the idea at the wall to see if it stuck.

 

[ilgatto]

It's not immune to gaze attacks or illusions, it just gets advantage on saves or Perception checks against them.

If we didn't mention it has to be a visual illusion, then the Cyclops would be resistant to illusions that are entirely delivered by another sense or senses, such as smell or hearing.

How would a Cyclops's eye be able to tell a ghostly wail is an illusory sound if there's no ghostly image for it to see?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not at all against saying that it's visual illusions only - in fact I'm all for it (see my earlier write up).

What I meant to say with "First there's the phrasing, for visual illusions are not necessarily "delivered by sight"., was that visual illusions aren't delivered by sight.

Hence, imo, the phrasing would have to be something like:

Monocular. The cyclops has advantage on saving throws against visual illusions and against spells and other magical effects that are delivered by sight, such as gaze attacks.

I suspected you'd be against its monocularity also helping it against other sight-based attacks, but thought it worth throwing the idea at the wall to see if it stuck.

. Can of worms.