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.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Yeah but in AD&D person spells included things you expect to be persons. Humanoids were just nonhuman peoples not necessarily friendly to humans while demihumans were non human people generally friendly to humans.

3e started excluding a bunch of things from being persons based on their new type (planetouched humans with a planar ancestor at some point far back in their bloodline, monstrous humanoids, elan humans whose psionic rituals changed their type), similar to 2024 5e with kobolds, goblinoids, gith etc. not counting as persons based on their new type.

I agree. But that is not the point. The point was that the "person" in the spell generally told you, who you can target. Something that resembles humans (which varied by definition), but not "any sentient being" which was the thing I answered to. Dragons are sentient being and never were "persons" for those spells.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

They really are. And it seems like they change them every time a new set of corebooks comes out lately.

Lately in "in the last 25 years". As @Voadam correctly stated. 3e did it. 3.5 did it. And probably if we go back to the TSR area, we probably find examples where ADnD 1e or 2e did it.

For reference: The Giant class Table of 1st edition...

Table 66: Giant Class Creatures​

bugbear; kobold; cyclops; meazel; cyclopskinn; norker; dune stalker; ogre/merrow; ettin; ogre mage; giant (all); ogrillion; giant-kin; (all)orc/orog; gibberling; quaggoth; gnoll/flind; spriggan; goblin; tasloi; grimlock; troll/scrag (all)hobgoblin/kaolinth; xvart

You will notice that some of those creatures have not been giants for quite some time...

 

[Remathilis]

They really are. And it seems like they change them every time a new set of corebooks comes out lately.

Quick, what school of magic is Cure (x) Wounds been since AD&D?

A: depends on what PHB you're looking at.

 

[Voadam]

People as a term is being used in two different contexts here.

1) For what person spells affect mechanically or what are immune to them. Humanoid type now not including goblins and kobolds and gith and gnolls and such.

2) Morally for considerations of whether something is a dangerous monstrosity/automatic threat/enemy or should be treated as an individual person similar to how you would treat an individual human. Generally any sapient being should be considered a person here, intelligent wargs who speak, dragons, etc. Just changing a monster type classification or a body shape should not be a reason to remove moral considerations of how you treat somebody.

 

[Voadam]

Quick, what school of magic is Cure (x) Wounds been since AD&D?

A: depends on what PHB you're looking at.

AD&D 1e and 2e Necromancy (life manipulation)
3.0 and 3.5 Conjuration (summoning positive energy?)
5e Evocation (radiant energy?)

Basic and 4e, no school affiliation with spells.

 

[Remathilis]

AD&D 1e and 2e Necromancy (life manipulation)
3.0 and 3.5 Conjuration (summoning positive energy?)
5e Evocation (radiant energy?)

Basic and 4e, no school affiliation with spells.

5.24 Abjuration: (protective and restorative).

Four schools in 50 years. I hope 6e makes it Illusion next. [emoji16]

 

[Micah Sweet]

Quick, what school of magic is Cure (x) Wounds been since AD&D?

A: depends on what PHB you're looking at.

I always liked it in necromancy.

 

[Micah Sweet]

5.24 Abjuration: (protective and restorative).

Four schools in 50 years. I hope 6e makes it Illusion next. [emoji16]

Considering how hit points work, illusion might not be too far off the mark.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I always liked it in necromancy.

Agreed. I always loved the good side of necromancy. And it is not out of thin air. Anatomists used to undig corpses for studies when it was not considered pious.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Quick, what school of magic is Cure (x) Wounds been since AD&D?

A: depends on what PHB you're looking at.

it simply should not have one as it is not arcane magic