D&D 4E Manticores will have beards again in 4E

[lukelightning]

If the elves and dwarves want monsters that have elfish and dwarfish bits, then they should come up with their own myths and legends. Seriously, these things have human traits because they are part of human culture.

I don't understand your argument. Are you saying that humans in D&Dland (i.e. any given D&D setting) invented manticores, et. al? That their myths and legends created them? Why don't the elves in D&Dland have similar creatures? Yeah, elves and humans and dwarves look close, but what about orcs and goblins?

Of course hybrid creatures have human traits in our real-world mythology. But in a D&D world in which humans are not the center of everything there is no reason that all these hybrid creatures should have explicity human body parts. I think it's more interesting to reimagine them. Give manticores a "humanoid" head, like in 3rd edition, and medusas weird reptilian bodies. I even prefer my centaurs to be more bestial and not look like perfect humans with horse bodies.

There could, of course, be some in-game explanation. Perhaps humans are, in fact, some special thing. Perhaps these hybrid creatures were created out of humans, and that this process only works on humans for some reason.

 

[Daniel D. Fox]

Personally, I don't know why people get their panties in a twist over the appearance of a monster (such as the beardless Manticores and the hornless/horned green dragon). It's the DM's job to describe what you're facing, regardless of what is considered to be "core" from the images in the Monster Manual.

Some folks seem to forget this is a game of imagination.

 

[helium3]

I had the privilege of seeing the upcoming mini's set last night, which apparently previews the new 4E art direction. I can happily report that the new manticore actually looks pretty cool. The image posted on that web article really doesn't do it justice, since it's a side profile that doesn't capture the bestial nature of the creature's face.

I'm just glad that the new manticore doesn't look like this . . .

 

[zen_hydra]

I don't understand your argument. Are you saying that humans in D&Dland (i.e. any given D&D setting) invented manticores, et. al? That their myths and legends created them? Why don't the elves in D&Dland have similar creatures? Yeah, elves and humans and dwarves look close, but what about orcs and goblins?

Of course hybrid creatures have human traits in our real-world mythology. But in a D&D world in which humans are not the center of everything there is no reason that all these hybrid creatures should have explicity human body parts. I think it's more interesting to reimagine them. Give manticores a "humanoid" head, like in 3rd edition, and medusas weird reptilian bodies. I even prefer my centaurs to be more bestial and not look like perfect humans with horse bodies.

There could, of course, be some in-game explanation. Perhaps humans are, in fact, some special thing. Perhaps these hybrid creatures were created out of humans, and that this process only works on humans for some reason.

I think a way to get past the issue of monsters having "human" traits is to reevaluate the paradigm.

It all makes a lot more sense if humans were made in the image of the gods.

If that is the case, then these monsters have god-like attributes, not human-like ones.

Problem solved.

 

[Mouseferatu]

In a world of elves and dwarves and gnomes and halflings and orcs and goblins and bugbears and troglodytes, why do we have to have all these monsters that are "part animal, part human? Humans are only a fraction of the intelligent races.

Open your 3.5 MM to page 32.

That centaur is described as "part humanoid," not "part human." And those ears are definitely more elven than human.

 

[Klaus]

I hope they don't go back to the old bull-headed man look. Myself, I prefer the more bestial look in the MM- something that is still humanoid, but feral and with horns. I tire of the "let's just slap an animal head on a human body" artwork for all of those creatures. Not very imaginative.

While I don't usually like a perfectly human body with an animal head, I prefer animal-people whose facial features are closer to the animal than to a human. That gives the race an "alienness", because it becomes harder to read a facial expression. A side effect of that is that the animal-person doesn't automatically become a "furry".

 

[frankthedm]

BTW Klaus, I love your take on the owlbear!

 

[RPG_Tweaker]

A side effect of that is that the animal-person doesn't automatically become a "furry".

Furries... *shudder* the only thing in the whole universe more evil than clowns.

 

[Klaus]

BTW Klaus, I love your take on the owlbear!

Thanks!

There's even an owlbear skeleton in Counter Collection: Undead.