Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dire Bare" data-source="post: 9606518" data-attributes="member: 18182">I have. Multiple times. Of course, we're closing in on 1000 posts in the thread, so there's been a lot of drift and a lot of cycling back. It is the way of things.Are demons gendered, or should demons be gendered, is a different question than, does the marilith need to be only be a six-armed hawt female wearing not much on top of a snaky bottom. Can a marilith be male? Can they be not hawt or wearing clothes? Can they be more bestial as depicted in the 2025 art?To me, allowing male and female mariliths doesn't make sense if demons cannot be gendered. Is the traditionally female marilith just a non-gendered demon shaped like a sexy lady with snaky parts? Which . . . is a fine interpretation I suppose, just not the one WotC seems to be leaning towards currently, if they are leaning at all on the issue.To cycle back to what is important here (to me anyways) is that WotC should very much move away from mono-gendered monsters like the marilith, medusa and hag. Having these monsters now enjoy the full breadth and diversity of gender that is out there is a positive move that opens up creativity and storytelling while moving away from toxic stereotypes in fantasy and myth. WotC certainly hasn't solved the toxic tropes problem in fantasy, but they are making a bit of progress here.Whether some of those monsters have sex or not and make babies . . . that's less important (to me anyways), but I get frustrated with some of the torturous arguments against the idea.If, in your campaign, demons are not truly gendered creatures but rather spiritual corruptions and mockeries of mortal frailties that might engage in stereotypical gendered behaviors and appearances . . . but not out of a physiological need but rather in mockery of the mortals they lust to destroy . . . that sounds cool and certainly works. But it does not match up with the D&D lore going back 50 years. Which is okay and no reason not to embrace it, but . . . why argue against the canonicity of what is rather than simply what you prefer for your own campaigns?Or, if in your campaign, demons are bizarre creations of evil that, while not mortal, still engage in all of the suffering and horror mortals are doomed to . . . including hunger, starvation, lust, love/hate, defecation, disease, malnutrition . . . and increase their numbers through spontaneous generation, corruption, and even sexual reproduction . . . that sounds cool too and also works. And is a lot closer to how demons have been depicted in D&D lore going back 50 years. Inconsistent and constantly changing lore, to be sure. It sounds almost . . . chaotic!</blockquote>

Verification