Converting First Edition Monsters

[Cleon]

Oh, I'm undecided on the Multiattack. An AD&D Constrictor Snake and Boalisk has it, but Constrictor Snakes in 5E have lost the ability and can only Bite or Constrict as their Action.

Multiattack. The boalisk makes two attacks: one bite attack and one constrict attack.

I am wondering about giving it a "Rotting Glare" attack that inflicts its rot attack as well as or instead of its Rotting Gaze trait, probably modelled after the Dreadful Glare of a Mummy.

The 2E AD&D version of this monster has "The boalisk can use its gaze on a single victim each round in addition to normal biting and constriction attacks" in its description, after all.

So maybe:

Multiattack. The boalisk makes two attacks: one constrict attack and one attack with its bite or glare.

Glare. The boalisk targets one creature it can see within ## feet of it. If the target can see the boalisk, it takes 3d6 necrotic damage and be cursed with rotting sickness from the boalisk's Rotting Gaze (see above). If the target succeeds on a DC ## Constitution saving throw they take half damage and do not contract rotting sicking.

Discussing the Rotting Gaze and/or Glare attack will have to wait.

 

[Casimir Liber]

Am incorporating all these - was tempted to change poison damage from bite to necrotic damage - so more akin to its rotting gaze. I think the glare as an attack rather than trait is okay. Will sleep on it....

 

[Cleon]

Am incorporating all these - was tempted to change poison damage from bite to necrotic damage - so more akin to its rotting gaze. I think the glare as an attack rather than trait is okay. Will sleep on it....

I'd keep it poison. The 5E basilisk doesn't have a petrifying bite after all!

 

[Casimir Liber]

I'd keep it poison. The 5E basilisk doesn't have a petrifying bite after all!

Yeah but constrictor snakes aren't poisonous - so we're starting from a null position with damage. To me, the rotting gaze suggests an entity which has an "energy-sucking" vibe/basis. However, on the basis of faith to the original I'd drop the extra bite damage entirely I think

 

[Cleon]

Yeah but constrictor snakes aren't poisonous - so we're starting from a null position with damage. To me, the rotting gaze suggests an entity which has an "energy-sucking" vibe/basis. However, on the basis of faith to the original I'd drop the extra bite damage entirely I think

Yes, but AD&D basilisks aren't venomous either but 5E added poison to their bite. I'm fine with a creature that's half-basilisk half-constrictor snake also have a venomous bite, just a less potent venom than a basilisk.

Incidentally, the boalisk's proposed 2d4 poison with a save for half is roughly half as lethal as the Basilisk's 2d6 poison damage, assuming a 50% chance of saving it averages 3¾ poison damage versus 7 for the basilisk.

As for the energy-sucking vibe, I think of the boalisk's gaze as being transmutational rather than based on negative energy, only instead of turning the target's living flesh into inanimate stone it turns living flesh into decomposition so the victim's body slowly rots away to dust.

The effect works "exactly" like a Mummy's rotting touch according to the original source, so presumably it's a curse that requires remove curse or other magic to neutralize.

 

[Cleon]

I'll update the Boalisk with some more red notes.

 

[Casimir Liber]

Okay, this is what I have as of now...using the 5e tools CR calculator it gives it a CR of 1 (????)

 

[Cleon]

Okay, this is what I have as of now...using the 5e tools CR calculator it gives it a CR of 1 (????)

I've updated the Boalisk but left some red text in to mark changes / questions, namely:

• I'd be OK with AC 14 rather than 13 so it's 1 worse than a Basilisk like the original.
• Are we giving it darkvision? I think not since the original AD&D monster makes no mention of the ability.
• Some of the wording of the Glare is slightly different to yours.

As for it coming out Challenge 1, did you make allowances that its Rotting Gaze affects EVERYONE within 30 feet who doesn't avert their eyes? If an opponent "averts their eyes" so they can't see the boalisk and be affected by its gaze, that makes the boalisk effectively invisible to them, so attack rolls against the boalisk have disadvantage, and the boalisk's attack rolls have advantage.

That should be enough to boost the CR considerably!

 

[Cleon]

There's some stuff in the rotting effect of your current draft's Rotting Gaze that's different from rotting effect of a 5E Mummy. For example, the curse lasts until removed by greater restoration rather than requiring "remove curse or other magic."

Since the original source describes the rotting as being identical to a mummy's special attack, I'd go for:

Rotting Gaze. If a creature starts its turn within 30 feet of the boalisk and the two of them can see each other, the boalisk can force the creature to make a DC 12 Constitution saving throw if the boailisk isn't incapacitated. On a failed save, the creature takes 10 (3d6) necrotic damage and contracts a magical rotting curse.
 The cursed target can't regain hit points, and its hit point maximum decreases by 10 (3d6) for every 24 hours that elapse. If the curse reduces the target's hit point maximum to 0, the target dies, and its body turns to dust. The curse lasts until removed by the remove curse spell or other magic.
 A creature that isn't surprised can avert its eyes to avoid the saving throw at the start of its turn. If it does so, it can't see the boalisk until the start of its next turn, when it can avert its eyes again. If it looks at the boalisk in the meantime, it must immediately make the save.
 If the boalisk sees its reflection within 30 feet of it in bright light, it mistakes itself for a rival and targets itself with its gaze.

 

[Cleon]

 If the boalisk sees its reflection within 30 feet of it in bright light, it mistakes itself for a rival and targets itself with its gaze.

Do we need this last paragraph? The original monster sometimes associates with constrictor snakes and other boalisks, suggesting it doesn't try to eye-kill its fellow serpents as soon as it sees them.

Plus there's no mention of the mirror trick working on boalisks in either the 1E Monster Manual or the 2E Monstrous Manual, while both those sources mention the trick in their basilisk entries.

So the rotting curse might not affect snakes and boalisks, perhaps because of the brille that permanently cover their eyes?

 

[Casimir Liber]

Went with AC 14, no darkvision, and BAM another plot hook for a magic item...the brille

 

[Cleon]

Went with AC 14, no darkvision,

Updating the Boalisk.

It should have "blindsight 10 ft." not "blindsight 10" in Senses.

The Glare's wording can be honed a bit:

Glare #2. The boalisk targets one creature it can see within 30 feet of it with its Rotting Gaze (see above). If the target can see the boalisk, it takes 10 (3d6) necrotic damage and contracts the rotting curse. If the target succeeds on a DC 12 Constitution saving throw it takes half damage and is not cursed.​

My idea was its Glare can affect creatures that "avert their eyes" from casual contact because the boalisk is trying to manoeuvre to meet their eyes, so I guess we should allow for that aspect too.

Still, averting their eyes should offer some benefit. How about advantage on the save?

Thus:

Glare #3. The boalisk targets one creature it can see within 30 feet of it with its Rotting Gaze (see above). If the target can see the boalisk, it takes 10 (3d6) necrotic damage and contracts the rotting curse. If the target succeeds on a DC 12 Constitution saving throw it takes half damage and is not cursed. Targets that averted their eyes from the Rotting Gaze gain advantage on the saving throw.​

I like Glare #3 the best of those tweaks.

BAM another plot hook for a magic item...the brille

So shall we modify Rotting Gaze so boalisks and constrictor snakes or all snakes are unaffected?

i.e.:

Rotting Gaze #2. If a creature other than a boalisk or snake starts its turn within 30 feet of the boalisk and the two of them can see each other, the boalisk can force the creature to make a DC 12 Constitution saving throw if the boailisk isn't incapacitated. On a failed save, the creature takes 10 (3d6) necrotic damage and contracts a magical rotting curse.​

OR

Rotting Gaze #3. If a creature other than a boalisk or constrictor snake starts its turn within 30 feet of the boalisk and the two of them can see each other, the boalisk can force the creature to make a DC 12 Constitution saving throw if the boailisk isn't incapacitated. On a failed save, the creature takes 10 (3d6) necrotic damage and contracts a magical rotting curse.​

Of those, I lean towards the all-snakes Rotting Gaze #2, but would go for #3 if you prefer it.

 

[Casimir Liber]

Ok - went with Glare #3 and Rotting Gaze #2

 

[Cleon]

Ok - went with Glare #3 and Rotting Gaze #2

I think that'll do for the mechanical elements, so we just need to polish the Description.

 

[Cleon]

I think that'll do for the mechanical elements

Upon reflection, we could add an immunity to certain gaze attacks due to its brille?

If the brille block line-of-sight by completely covering the eyes, a boalisk can't make direct eye contact and should be immune to the petrifying eyes of a basilisk or medusa.

Will think about the Description.

 

[Casimir Liber]

Funnily enough I was musing on this today (i.e. immunity to gaze attacks - or could be resistance to gaze attacks of other critters and immunity to boalisks) - anyway, yeah. I like the idea of hte brille being wider in its scope ....

 

[Cleon]

Funnily enough I was musing on this today (i.e. immunity to gaze attacks - or could be resistance to gaze attacks of other critters and immunity to boalisks) - anyway, yeah. I like the idea of hte brille being wider in its scope ....

How about:

Brille. A boalisk's eyes are covered by transparent scales that grant it immunity to attacks that require eye contact or direct line of sight, such as some gaze attacks (e.g. the petrifying gaze of a basilisk or medusa). The eye-covering scales also protect the boalisk's eyes from dust and other irritants. Brille are actually permanently fused clear eyelids, so a boalisk has its eyes closed but can still see.

It doesn't really need the Red Bit but it adds some flavour.

 

[Casimir Liber]

yeah red bit is good

 

[Cleon]

yeah red bit is good

Updating the Boalisk.

 

[Casimir Liber]

Right...the description as its stands is this....

The boalisk is a large serpentine horror with a gaze as hazardous as its near-namesake, the basilisk. Up to 25 feet long, it resembles a gigantic constrictor snake with sombre-colored scales of green, brown and grey, and striking luminous yellow eyes. Unknowing adventurers have sometimes mistaken this beast for a basilisk, leading to a not uncommonly held belief that basilisks are snakelike in appearance.

The boalisk's gaze afflicts victims with a rotting condition rather than petrification, which enables it to feed upon animals too large for it to kill in direct confrontation. After biting prey, the boalisk stalks them until they succumb to the rot, and eats their easily-digestible remains. Unlike basilisks, boalisks have a brille (clear membrane) over their eyes that prevents them being affected by their own gaze. This body part is valued by wizards and alchemists as it can be used to make eye cusps that prevent gaze attacks from affecting the wearer.

The boalisk inhabits dismal swamps and jungles, generally in warmer climates. Its origin is unknown, but thought to be from similar processes or dark magic that created the basilisk.

(Boalisks first appeared in 1st edition Monster Manual II in 1983)

(By the way, have been using the buffed troglodyte leaders on multiple encounters in my campagin - players were surprised by the range of the warchief's warstench)

PS: you left a stray closing bracket on the volcano pig....