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

[Cleon]

Okay, let's get this show on the road!

I've transferred over the obvious traits like Monocular Illusion Resistance.

The Amiraspian Cyclops Chief needs a bit of a power boost from the standard version. Upthread I proposed a reach weapon like a Glaive plus Javelins for ranged attacks, so I put that in the working draft.

The Chief also needs some improvements to ability scores, particularly Strength (as they have a high strength in White Dwarf #21) but maybe others.

Not sure whether the Young Amiraspian Cyclops would have Aggressive like the adults, so left it in red. Being smaller, weaker and lacking a Hypno-Eye I suspect they would be more cautious about charging into the fray.

Just gave them claws, fangs and rocks as attack options, although I'm considering adding "baby's first bludgeoning instrument" (i.e. Greatclub) to the options.

 

[ilgatto]

Okay, let's get this show on the road!

I've transferred over the obvious traits like Monocular Illusion Resistance.

The Amiraspian Cyclops Chief needs a bit of a power boost from the standard version. Upthread I proposed a reach weapon like a Glaive plus Javelins for ranged attacks, so I put that in the working draft.

The Chief also needs some improvements to ability scores, particularly Strength (as they have a high strength in White Dwarf #21) but maybe others.

Off the cuff, I'd say STR 19, INT 11 or maybe 12 of you'd need the +1, and CHA 15 for the chief?

Then there's the original having 7 HD for the chief. So is that going to be 10d10 in the 5E version?

Glaive is fine coz it falls in the disadvantage for poor depth perception category, which I like.

Not sure whether the Young Amiraspian Cyclops would have Aggressive like the adults, so left it in red. Being smaller, weaker and lacking a Hypno-Eye I suspect they would be more cautious about charging into the fray.

Just gave them claws, fangs and rocks as attack options, although I'm considering adding "baby's first bludgeoning instrument" (i.e. Greatclub) to the options.

Well, I'm not in charge of Aggressiveness so I'll leave that you and @Casimir Liber. I tend to agree with the above, though - no aggression for the young.

As to baby's first little instrument: I suppose the young are smaller than the adults, so only clubs instead of greatclubs?

 

[Cleon]

Off the cuff, I'd say STR 19, INT 11 or maybe 12 of you'd need the +1, and CHA 15 for the chief?

I'd rather the Strength be 20 or more so it has a higher bonus than a standard Cyclops's +4. Same issue with CHA 15, in that it's the same +2 as the standard model's CHA 14.

Not that bothered about whether we give it a higher INT or not. They seem to rule by viciousness more than cunning.

Let's see, with STR 20 or 21 that'd be 2d6+5/1d6+5/1d6+5 with its bite/claw/claw and a Large Glaive would be 2d10+5/2d10+5.

That's 29 DPR with its natural attacks, 32 DPR with its glaive.

If it had STR (+6) it'd be 32 with tooth & claw, 34 with glaive.

I'd be OK with either of those.

Then there's the original having 7 HD for the chief. So is that going to be 10d10 in the 5E version?

Probably a bit more.

7 is 40% more than 5, so if we literally want it to have roughly 40% more HD/hp than the 76 (9d10 + 27) of our Amiraspian Cyclops it'd need to be somewhere near 106.4 hp and 12.6 HD, so maybe one of the following:

Hit Points Chief A 102 (12d10 + 36) with CON (+3)​

Hit Points Chief B 104 (11d10 + 44) with CON (+4)​

Hit Points Chief C 110 (13d10 + 39) with CON (+3)​

Hit Points Chief D 114 (12d10 + 48) with CON (+4)​

However, that'd put it close to or slightly above the hit points of a Hill Giant, which doesn't seem right.

Maybe knock off a HD?

Hit Points Chief E 93 (11d10 + 33) with CON (+3)​

Hit Points Chief F 95 (10d10 + 40) with CON (+4)​

Hmm, of the above, options A, B and F tickles my fancy the most. What about you?

Glaive is fine coz it falls in the disadvantage for poor depth perception category, which I like.

That reminds me. The idea was the Cyclops would have disadvantage when it uses its glaive when reaching (i.e. at a distance of 5 to 10 feet) but attack normally at it's normal melee range (0 to 5 ft.).

However, we've made Poor Depth Perception "The cyclops has disadvantage on its attack roll if the target is more than 10 feet away" so that'd never apply.

It needs to be "more than 5 feet away" for Reach to work the way we proposed.

Will update all the Cyclopes with that…

…and the Amiraspian Cyclops, Cyclops Chief and Young Cyclops now all have 5 foot Depth Perception.

Well, I'm not in charge of Aggressiveness so I'll leave that you and @Casimir Liber. I tend to agree with the above, though - no aggression for the young.

I'll cut it out and see if Casimir will argue for its reinstatement.

As to baby's first little instrument: I suppose the young are smaller than the adults, so only clubs instead of greatclubs?

Well the Young Cyclop's is Medium size so its Greatclub is going to be smaller than an adult-sized Greatclub, assuming we give it one.

Also, making it a club would mean that option does pathetic damage.

A club only does 1d4 in 5E, so if it does 1d3+X/1d3+X/1d6+X with claw/claw/bite that's 6.5+3X damage, two club attacks would be 2d4+2X or 5+2X damage, and two greatclubs would be 2d8+2X or 9+2X.

That means the two club attack is by far the worst option.

It it had, say, X=1 (i.e. a +1 bonus from its STR) that's 9.5 for claw/claw/bite, 7 for dual clubs and 11 for two greatclubs.

However, I'd prefer STR (+2) for 12.5 claw/claw/bite and 13 for greatclub/greatclub, while club/club lags behind at 9.

 

[Cleon]

That reminds me. The idea was the Cyclops would have disadvantage when it uses its glaive when reaching (i.e. at a distance of 5 to 10 feet) but attack normally at it's normal melee range (0 to 5 ft.).

However, we've made Poor Depth Perception "The cyclops has disadvantage on its attack roll if the target is more than 10 feet away" so that'd never apply.

It needs to be "more than 5 feet away" for Reach to work the way we proposed.

Will update all the Cyclopes with that…

…and the Amiraspian Cyclops, Cyclops Chief and Young Cyclops now all have 5 foot Depth Perception.

I did briefly consider keeping the Depth Perception cutoff at 10 feet and giving the Chief reach 10 ft. with its base attacks and 15 ft. with its reach weapon, but it's probably need to be Huge to justify that, which opens a whole new can of worms as we'd have to change a lot of the other stats.

I prefer them only be slightly bigger than an average Amiraspian Cyclops, not twice as tall!

 

[ilgatto]

I'd rather the Strength be 20 or more so it has a higher bonus than a standard Cyclops's +4. Same issue with CHA 15, in that it's the same +2 as the standard model's CHA 14.

Ah, yes, the 5E two steps for a bonus increase.

Not that bothered about whether we give it a higher INT or not. They seem to rule by viciousness more than cunning.

Let's see, with STR 20 or 21 that'd be 2d6+5/1d6+5/1d6+5 with its bite/claw/claw and a Large Glaive would be 2d10+5/2d10+5.

That's 29 DPR with its natural attacks, 32 DPR with its glaive.

If it had STR (+6) it'd be 32 with tooth & claw, 34 with glaive.

I'd be OK with either of those.

STR 20 would be my choice for that puts it one point below the hill giant even though that doesn't really matter coz the bonus is the same. CHA 16 is fine too, and [I checked], since 5E CHA "measures force of personality", that would mean that INT can remain the same. No need for the chief to possess any form of reasoning or memory. "Wuddaya mean we been at this farm before? We jus' kill 'em again! Mwu-ha-ha-haaa!"

Probably a bit more.

7 is 40% more than 5, so if we literally want it to have roughly 40% more HD/hp than the 76 (9d10 + 27) of our Amiraspian Cyclops it'd need to be somewhere near 106.4 hp and 12.6 HD, so maybe one of the following:

Hit Points Chief A 102 (12d10 + 36) with CON (+3)​

Hit Points Chief B 104 (11d10 + 44) with CON (+4)​

Hit Points Chief C 110 (13d10 + 39) with CON (+3)​

Hit Points Chief D 114 (12d10 + 48) with CON (+4)​

However, that'd put it close to or slightly above the hit points of a Hill Giant, which doesn't seem right.

Maybe knock off a HD?

Hit Points Chief E 93 (11d10 + 33) with CON (+3)​

Hit Points Chief F 95 (10d10 + 40) with CON (+4)​

Hmm, of the above, options A, B and F tickles my fancy the most. What about you?

Hmm... [checking again and typing out loud]. CON measures endurance so if the chief rules by force him having a higher CON than his underlings probably isn't a problem. So I presume he has either CON 16 or 17 (+3) or CON 18 or 19 (+4) in your examples.
Hill giants have CON 19 and HD 10d12+40, the standard cyclops has 76 hp and HD 9d10 + 27.
So, more CON than underlings, plus increased bonus = CON 18 (+4). Then I'd say I'd not be in favor of giving him many more hp than his underlings, though, so... CON 18 (+4) and 95 hp and 10d10+40 it is, for option F.

That reminds me. The idea was the Cyclops would have disadvantage when it uses its glaive when reaching (i.e. at a distance of 5 to 10 feet) but attack normally at it's normal melee range (0 to 5 ft.).

However, we've made Poor Depth Perception "The cyclops has disadvantage on its attack roll if the target is more than 10 feet away" so that'd never apply.

It needs to be "more than 5 feet away" for Reach to work the way we proposed.

Will update all the Cyclopes with that…

…and the Amiraspian Cyclops, Cyclops Chief and Young Cyclops now all have 5 foot Depth Perception.

Return of the Very Happy Camper!

I'll cut it out and see if Casimir will argue for its reinstatement.



Well the Young Cyclop's is Medium size so its Greatclub is going to be smaller than an adult-sized Greatclub, assuming we give it one.

Also, making it a club would mean that option does pathetic damage.

A club only does 1d4 in 5E, so if it does 1d3+X/1d3+X/1d6+X with claw/claw/bite that's 6.5+3X damage, two club attacks would be 2d4+2X or 5+2X damage, and two greatclubs would be 2d8+2X or 9+2X.

That means the two club attack is by far the worst option.

It it had, say, X=1 (i.e. a +1 bonus from its STR) that's 9.5 for claw/claw/bite, 7 for dual clubs and 11 for two greatclubs.

However, I'd prefer STR (+2) for 12.5 claw/claw/bite and 13 for greatclub/greatclub, while club/club lags behind at 9.

I see, didn't realize that there's small greatclubs.

Greatclubs it is!

 

[ilgatto]

I prefer them only be slightly bigger than an average Amiraspian Cyclops, not twice as tall!

Absolutely!

 

[Casimir Liber]

My idea was to adapt the cyclops battleweaver from 4e to be a chief

Also cyclops published here

 

[Cleon]

STR 20 would be my choice for that puts it one point below the hill giant even though that doesn't really matter coz the bonus is the same. CHA 16 is fine too, and [I checked], since 5E CHA "measures force of personality", that would mean that INT can remain the same. No need for the chief to possess any form of reasoning or memory. "Wuddaya mean we been at this farm before? We jus' kill 'em again! Mwu-ha-ha-haaa!"

Hmm... [checking again and typing out loud]. CON measures endurance so if the chief rules by force him having a higher CON than his underlings probably isn't a problem. So I presume he has either CON 16 or 17 (+3) or CON 18 or 19 (+4) in your examples.
Hill giants have CON 19 and HD 10d12+40, the standard cyclops has 76 hp and HD 9d10 + 27.
So, more CON than underlings, plus increased bonus = CON 18 (+4). Then I'd say I'd not be in favor of giving him many more hp than his underlings, though, so... CON 18 (+4) and 95 hp and 10d10+40 it is, for option F.

I'll fill out the statblocks with some appropriate-seeming numbers and see what needs tweaking afterwards.

These are fairly simple modifications of the base Cyclops so we don't need to spend that much time on them.

I see, didn't realize that there's small greatclubs.

Greatclubs it is!

We haven't settled on whether the Young will have weapons or not, but if they did they'll be regular sized ones like a typical Medium humanoid would have.

Those are smaller than those used by a full-grown adult Cyclops, but that's because those are Large so use bigger than normal weapons.

As to whether little greatclubs are possible in 5E, I guess so. A Sprite has a Longsword and Shortbow that do way less than the normal damage of such weapons.

 

[Cleon]

Also cyclops published here

It's missing its Skills Perception +1 and we've changed Poor Depth Perception to 5 ft. so it covers the further half of the range of a Reach weapon.

Would look a bit better with a linespace ahead of the "Originally created by" credit and the Description's paragraph formatting is a bit prettier in the Enworld Amiraspian Cyclops, but I now how uncooperative D&D Beyond can be with that.

How far have you got sending the Dragon Warriors to the Beyond.

EDIT: The Bite, Claws and Greatclub of the D&D Beyond version should have reach 5 ft. not 10 ft.

It's Huge creatures that come with 10 ft. reach as standard in 5E, not Large ones, see Troll and Ogre for examples. /:ENDEDIT

EDIT2: The "amiraspian cyclops" in Monocular Illusion Resistance, Poor Depth Perception and Aggressive should all be "cyclops". /:ENDEDIT2

 

[Cleon]

Okay, I've removed the color tags from the Amiraspian Cyclops as it's done and updated the Cyclops Chief and Young Cyclops with some proposed stats.

EDIT:
Dang it, just noticed the Young One-Eye's got piercing damage on its claws that should be slashing damage.

Just fixed it.

Incidentally, I had the claws do 1d4 damage because 5E doesn't appear to favour the d3. At least, none of the Monster Manual monsters use it.

To keep the 1dX/1dX/1d2X style of the original's 1-3/1-3/1-6 attack routine I made the Bite 1d8 instead of 1d6 of the original, but I am tempted to keep the d6 of the original and make the bite damage 5 (1d6 + 2) piercing.

Alternatively, we could switch from 2 claw attacks to 1 claws attack like a Black Bear, e.g.:

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

Bite. Melee Weapon Attack: +3 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 6 (1d8 + 2) piercing damage.

Claw. Melee Weapon Attack: +4 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 7 (2d4 + 2) slashing damage.​

Both would keep it at Challenge 1.

With AC 12 and 37 hp the CR Calculator says anything from DPR 9 to 20 falls into CR 1, so d8+2/2d4+2 (DPR 12½) puts it closer to the lower end than d4+2/d4+2/d6+2 (DPR 14½) or d4+2/d4+2/d8+2 (DPR 15½).
:ENDEDIT