D&D General The abandoned core monsters of D&D

[Mind of tempest]

Finishing up Basic D&D with its epic finale... the Rules Cyclopedia.

There are a whopping 89 monsters on the list that were core here, and never again:

• Versions of archons, undead beholders, mountain and sea giants, gremlins, phoenixes, and poltergeists unique to Basic D&D
• The gemstone dragons: amber, crystal, jade, onyx, ruby, sapphire (not to be confused with the AD&D lineage's gem dragons)
• The Dragon Rulers: Diamond, Opal, Pearl, and the Great One
• Actaeon
• Adaptor
• Blackball
• Snow ape
• Caecilia
• Elemental ruler
• Greater efreet
• Faerie
• Grab grass
• Black hag
• Headsman
• Helion
• Horde
• Hsiao
• Hydrax
• Kryst
• Malfera
• Manscorpion
• Mystic
• Mek
• Metamorph
• Mujina
• Nuckalavee
• Lava ooze
• Planar spider
• Plasm
• Revener
• Rhagodessa
• Frost salamander
• Sasquatch
• Spectral hound
• Sporacle
• Rock/cave toad
• Water termite
• Undine
• Giant bass, giant rockfish, giant sturgeon, great whale, giant snail
• Herd animals: caribou, moose, zebra
• Generic dinosaurs: aquatic, land carnivore, land herbivore, large pterosaur, small pterosaur
• Golems: amber, bone (a.k.a. skeletal), bronze, mud, obsidian, wood, drolem
• Hydrae: flying, sea
• Lycanthropes: wereseal, wereshark, devil swine
• Drakes: colddrake, mandrake, wooddrake, and elemental drake (air/earth/fire/water)
• Gargantua: carrion crawler, gargoyle, and troll
• Phantoms: apparition, shade, vision
• Spirits: druj, odic, revenant

Why were these included? No deep reason this time - the Rules Cyclopedia was a compilation of all four rulesets for Basic D&D (Basic, Expert, Companion, and Master) and these monsters were in those sets. A better question - which I don't have an answer to - is why Basic D&D invested so much energy in a completely different line of monsters for its game, rather than just cribbing from the AD&D monster books.

The other question is, why has the main D&D line (AD&D onward) been so reluctant to include these Basic monsters in later core lineups? 3e tried, with the athach and nightshades, but that's pretty much been it. It's even rare to find these monsters updated in non-core books for later editions (excepting the Mystara MC in 2e, which pretty much had "update Basic D&D monsters" as its remit).

Worth noting, BTW - although not Wizards-official, the Original Adventures Reincarnated line did update a number of these monsters for 5e. (Shame those products will probably never see a PDF release.)

wait why do we not have bigfoot as a monster option?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

wait why do we not have bigfoot as a monster option?

Just use yeti.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Double post deleted.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Blackballs are way better than spheres of annihilation and much more gameable. You don't have to jump through hoops with a fake-out magic item that only has one real use and thus doesn't belong on the magic item table at all. (Just put it in the dungeon with the sphere as part of the dungeon design.)

 

[Demetrios1453]

Is the Rules Cyclopedia manscorpion different from the D&D tlincalli, which has manscorpion as an alternative name?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The other question is, why has the main D&D line (AD&D onward) been so reluctant to include these Basic monsters in later core lineups

I would imagine mostly because they are very similar to things that are in. Pretty sure the main adversary in Desert of Desolation was a Greater Efreet, noble genies are mentioned in 5e without having stats, AD&D had elementals with three different strengths without giving them separate names, and so on.

Then there are some things like the Sasquatch which don’t really do anything apart from hide in the woods, and some that stray a little too close to IP violations.

 

[ilgatto]

I'm curious. Could it be argued that the BX/BECMI/RC91 Spitting Cobra (1 HD, 3' long) is not the same as the African Spitting Cobra that is mentioned in MCC1 Snake - Spitting (4+2 HD, 8' long)? Admittedly, MCC1 is a bit of a mess, but shouldn't the latter actually be Giant African Spitting Cobra, as MM1 Snake, Giant - Spitting ("Giant spitting cobras") (4+2 HD) seems to suggest? If so, is there a core Spitting Cobra in AD&D? MM2 doesn't have one, MC1 doesn't mention one under Snake - Spitting (4+2 HD).

 

[ilgatto]

(...) A better question - which I don't have an answer to - is why Basic D&D invested so much energy in a completely different line of monsters for its game, rather than just cribbing from the AD&D monster books.(...)

I suppose a major reason could have been settings, with AD&D being Greyhawk (sort of, anyway), Forgotten Realms, and Heroic Fantasy, and BD&D being The Known World, some Blackmoor, Pellucidar, and Pulp Fantasy/Swords & Sorcery?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I suppose a major reason could have been settings, with AD&D being Greyhawk (sort of, anyway), Forgotten Realms, and Heroic Fantasy, and BD&D being The Known World, some Blackmoor, Pellucidar, and Pulp Fantasy/Swords & Sorcery?

I think it's probably more cynical than that: They created different sets of monsters to insulate themselves from paying Arneson for AD&D, which had a different set of monsters and thus is clearly a different game than AD&D.

 

[J.Quondam]

Also, I suppose you're looking for monsters with actual write-ups (however summary) rather than just being hinted at/left for DMs to flesh out? If not, then there's always this rather fascinating collection of monsters in D&D-GH.

Whoa! The "Ogre Jelly" just reminded me of something I hadn't thought about in a long time. It was listed in Mentzer Basic as a "Special" on the random Room Contents table. These were called "Trick Monsters":

That whole section of "Special" room contents was probably my very first genuine D&D epiphany, that there really is no limit! It's truly a formative warm fuzzy of mine. Possibly even a giant albino four-armed warm fuzzy.

/nostalgia