The Gith Are Now Aberrations in Dungeons & Dragons

The githyanki and githzerai are officially reclassified as aberrations in Dungeons & Dragons. In a video released today about the 2025 Monster Manual, D&D designers Jeremy Crawford and F. Wesley Schneider confirmed that the two classic D&D species are now being classified as aberrations. The reasoning given - the two gith species have been so transformed by living in the Astral Plane and Limbo, they've moved beyond being humanoids. Schneider also pointed out that the illithid's role in manipulating the gith also contributed to their new classification.

The video notes that this isn't technically a new change - the Planescape book released in 2023 had several githzerai statblocks that had aberration classifications.

The gith join a growing number of previously playable species that have new classifications. The goblin, kobolds, and kenku have also had their creature classifications changed in the 2025 Monster Manual. While players can currently use the 2014 rules for making characters of those species, it will be interesting to see how these reclassifications affect the character-building rules regarding these species when they are eventually updated for 2024 rules.

 

[Chaosmancer]

The post I referred to brought up the eggs and said that was the reason. So argue with him.

I don't need to bother arguing with whoever that was. I'm presenting the fact that they were lying that that was the reason. You don't only counter misinformation by telling the person spreading it, you tell the people who repeat it as well.

That's even more problematic. That's incredibly problematic.

If you can't see how, well jesus wept dude.

Turns out, Mind Flayers are horrible things that can alter you on a genetic level, who could have guessed gazes out over the sea of monsters in the book created by mind flayers twisting life for their own devices

The only way this is a "jesus wept" moment is if you somehow believe that only Humanoids are valid people. Which is a really dumb idea not supported by anything in the game and in fact actively disproved by other creature types.

So... Yeah, turns out the evil Illithids are really really really evil and did some truly horrible things to their slave races. News at 11, the Ruler of the Nine Hells is also a bad dude.

 

[AlViking]

The post I referred to brought up the eggs and said that was the reason. So argue with him.

That's even more problematic. That's incredibly problematic.

If you can't see how, well jesus wept dude.

How is it problematic that they were altered by mind flayers? This is hardly a new concept in sci-fi or fantasy fiction, plenty of species have been altered and modified. Some with good intent and some malign. For that matter is it problematic that all of our domestic animals have had their genetics slowly modified over millennia? I'm not comparing creatures with human levels of intelligence and self awareness to animals of course I just don't know what the issue is.

 

[dave2008]

That's even more problematic. That's incredibly problematic.

If you can't see how, well jesus wept dude.

Is the plan to remove everything that is problematic. IDK, I don't think (IMO)) an entire sapient fantasy specifies having been psychology and/or biologically tortured, modified, or whatever is that high on the list of things that are problematic with RPGs or our culture in general.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

How is it problematic that they were altered by mind flayers?

Calling an obvious humanoid race with absolutely zero aberration characteristics an "aberration" in the game, and saying it's because another races did mean things to them is very obviously messed-up and reflects a whole bunch of dodgy racial tropes from the real world. It's not something WotC should be getting into.

Is the plan to remove everything that is problematic.

What on earth are you talking about? They just added this dude! This isn't some longstanding thing. This is a new weird and frankly kind of silly thing WotC have added in. If they'd always been seen as aberrations, then you could say "Well it's TRADITION!" < starts singing Fiddler On The Roof >. But that's absolutely not the case. This is just a wild and silly new thing.

IDK, I don't think (IMO)) an entire sapient fantasy specifies having been psychology and/or biologically tortured, modified, or whatever is that high on the list of things that are problematic with RPGs or our culture in general.

If you can't see how having that happen to them leading to them being labelled an "aberration" is uh, not cool, then I think you might not exactly be sensitive here.

You don't only counter misinformation

You don't counter personal opinion or personal theories, however dumb, by calling them "misinformation", so maybe get down off your high horse for a minute and look at what's actually happening?

So... Yeah, turns out the evil Illithids are really really really evil and did some truly horrible things to their slave races.

/rolleyes come on. That's just posturing. This is a bizarre and silly decision to label Gith as "aberrations", a very racially loaded term that should probably never be applied to a PC race, when it doesn't even make sense. By this logic, basically everyone with psionics is an "aberration", because that's the only change lore indicates the Illithids made.

 

[dave2008]

If you can't see how having that happen to them leading to them being labelled an "aberration" is uh, not cool, then I think you might not exactly be sensitive here.

I agree, I am not sensitive here.

Nor do I think anyone should be about a fantasy species with no RL connections. What exactly am I supposed to be sensitive about. As far as I know the Gith are not a stand-in for any RL ethnicity. If I am wrong about that I will blame my ignorance (I am not really familiar with the origins of the Gith except for them originally appearing in the Fiend Folio, IIRC, and from the cover I thought they were some type of undead at the time).

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I agree, I am not sensitive here.

Nor do I think anyone should be about a fantasy species with no RL connections. What exactly am I supposed to be sensitive about. As far as I know the Gith are not a stand-in for any RL ethnicity. If I am wrong about that I will blame my ignorance (I am not really familiar with the origins of the Gith except for them originally appearing in the Fiend Folio, IIRC, and from the cover I thought they were some type of undead at the time).

Given they have often have and still do have connections to Asian culture, not least via monks, martial arts, etc., and fit with some crude Asian stereotypes, even down to their appearance... That's the sort of thing that can be ignored when they're being handled otherwise well, maybe, but when you're doing stuff like classing them as "aberrations".

Also, I seem to remember you arguing a great deal that it wasn't racist that Orcs were described in Volo's in terms which closely echoed racist propaganda against Black and Asian people, and that no-one should be concerned about that, and... I think we can now see that was a silly position. Certainly WotC has disowned that position.

WotC just keep walking into this stuff though. It's the field of rakes. They can't escape.

 

[Chaltab]

Given they have often have and still do have connections to Asian culture, not least via monks, martial arts, etc., and fit with some crude Asian stereotypes, even down to their appearance...

I... can't say that's something I've ever perceived from the Githyanki or the Githzerai before.

 

[dave2008]

Given they have often have and still do have connections to Asian culture, not least via monks, martial arts, etc., and fit with some crude Asian stereotypes, even down to their appearance... That's the sort of thing that can be ignored when they're being handled otherwise well, maybe, but when you're doing stuff like classing them as "aberrations".

I've never heard or seen such connotations and I don't see them just from your description. However, I am not trying to suggest that they are not there. I am just stating that I was ignorant of such a connection and at first glance I don't see it.

Also, I seem to remember you arguing a great deal that it wasn't racist that Orcs were described in Volo's in terms which closely echoed racist propaganda against Black and Asian people, and that no-one should be concerned about that, and... I think we can now see that was a silly position. Certainly WotC has disowned that position.

I find that unlikely, but I do say stupid things sometimes and since my daughter died 13 months ago today I have been pretty messed up the past year and sometimes I have found myself saying stuff just to piss people off because I am pissed off myself. I have been trying to work on that.

However, if I had to guess, I bet I was saying that for me, in my game, I have no issues with brutish orcs are evil monsters because I can separate fantasy from reality. I do understand the issue with a mass produced publication though.

And, thinking a little deeper, you memory is more suspect as I have repeatedly said, in these forums, that may view of orcs comes mostly from my understanding of the "goblins" in the Hobbit (book and animated movie). They were, IMO, treated as a thinking and nuanced people in that book that were dangerous, but could be negotiated with and talked to, not simply killed. At least that was how my young self understood them.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I've never heard or seen such connotations and I don't see them just from your description. However, I am not trying to suggest that they are not there. I am just stating that I was ignorant of such a connection and at first glance I don't see it.

If you look at very early depictions in the Fiend Folio, it's there - yellow skin, slanted eyes, militarism (Fiend Folio was written by people old enough to remember WWII) and Zen. But in the intervening decades, the D&D depiction has drifted a long way from that.

As for aberration, I don't see that as a problem, because the meaning of that has also changed, and has come to simply mean "touched by the Far Realm". And clearly, "humanoid" does not mean two arms, two legs, one head, etc. It's D&D sense is now more "mundane/of the Prime Material".

 

[AlViking]

Calling an obvious humanoid race with absolutely zero aberration characteristics an "aberration" in the game, and saying it's because another races did mean things to them is very obviously messed-up and reflects a whole bunch of dodgy racial tropes from the real world. It's not something WotC should be getting into.


What on earth are you talking about? They just added this dude! This isn't some longstanding thing. This is a new weird and frankly kind of silly thing WotC have added in. If they'd always been seen as aberrations, then you could say "Well it's TRADITION!" < starts singing Fiddler On The Roof >. But that's absolutely not the case. This is just a wild and silly new thing.


If you can't see how having that happen to them leading to them being labelled an "aberration" is uh, not cool, then I think you might not exactly be sensitive here.


You don't counter personal opinion or personal theories, however dumb, by calling them "misinformation", so maybe get down off your high horse for a minute and look at what's actually happening?


/rolleyes come on. That's just posturing. This is a bizarre and silly decision to label Gith as "aberrations", a very racially loaded term that should probably never be applied to a PC race, when it doesn't even make sense. By this logic, basically everyone with psionics is an "aberration", because that's the only change lore indicates the Illithids made.

Traditionally gith have never been presented as normal humanoids in lore or description. By cultural description, psionic abilities, the art that represents them they are obviously abnormal for some reason. About the only way they are not aberrations is that they lack tentacles. They have backed off of some of the lore from older editions but perhaps they plan on bringing some of it back. You keep insisting that if people don't agree with you that it's somehow our problem. I've always thought of them as otherworldly and not fitting in so perhaps you should be the one looking at what's actually happening.