DND_Reborn
The High Aldwin
Oi! Here we go... LOLI kinda want to play an owlbear warlock now
Patron of the Monsters?
Oi! Here we go... LOLI kinda want to play an owlbear warlock now
For owlbears, I definitely think it's a case where the narrative around them in the popular imagination is changing faster than the books are.Perhaps when the next revision/version comes around, they will examine each creature along a more rigid system, and define the lore more clearer in cases like owlbears. Like I wrote above, maybe once owlbears were created by magic, but then were able to breed and continue their species without magic? If that was the established lore, fine.
Very well could be, given this was never even brought up on the forum (to my knowledge) until the movie trailer came out...For owlbears, I definitely think it's a case where the narrative around them in the popular imagination is changing faster than the books are.
Wellllll I mean I would prefer to go with the Shadowcat patron from the Compendium of Forgotten Secrets so my owlbear can stalk dreams and shadows, but we could work out something with a Patron of MonstersOi! Here we go... LOL
Patron of the Monsters?
To me, owlbears are beasts because no wizard is creating more owlbears.I suppose if WotC retooled the ideas to be along these lines, but for me an easy way to judge it is if the creatures reproduce or not? To they have to all be created by magic or do they carry on their own species?
I could easily see owlbears and pegasi carrying on their own, but chimera I would have to imagine are somehow "born" of magic. The others might have been once upon a time but turned out that they could mate and reproduce, no longer needing magic to continue the line.
Anyway, bottom line for me is they aren't beasts, so normally druids can't wild shape into them. Although I think a Circle of Monsters might be cool, to me it would have to be carefully balanced versus Moon Druids, otherwise Moon Druids would likely no longer be used by players.
But hey, that is the trend with new things according to WotC, they don't seem to care if it makes prior things obsolete.![]()
Ok, so I brought up Hippogriffs before. What is your thought on them?Owlbears is "a wizard did it" but it's so different from the fey or divine origins of the other monstrosities. And it lacks the magic of the other arcanely created monstrosity.
Hippogriffs are related to griffons.Ok, so I brought up Hippogriffs before. What is your thought on them?
By those statements, I would imagine you would consider Hippogriffs beasts as well?
So, Hippogriffs then are beasts:2 or more animals jammed together with no magical powers, no divine/dragon/giant/fey/psionic origin, and beast intelligence is a beast to me.
Hippogiff's origin is unknown.So, Hippogriffs then are beasts:
2 or more animals? Check! Eagle + Horse
No magical powers? Check!
No divine/dragon/giant/fey/psionic origin? Check!
Beast intelligence? Check! (INT 2)
(FWIW, the are not related to griffons.)
View attachment 254927
It's magical. It might be lost to history, but it is magical. Not divine/dragon/giant/fey/psionic. So, check!Hippogiff's origin is unknown.
As was discussed upthread, this is just one possible origin. The other being it is from the Feywild, which would violate your origin condition since fey is part of that list...This is unlike the owlbear which has a "wizard did it" origin.
I'd definitely consider hippogriffs beasts. Heck, couldn't rangers get them as animal companions in 2e?So, Hippogriffs then are beasts:
2 or more animals? Check! Eagle + Horse
No magical powers? Check!
No divine/dragon/giant/fey/psionic origin? Check!
Beast intelligence? Check! (INT 2)
(FWIW, the are not related to griffons.)
View attachment 254927
But if they are from the fey wild, then owlbears would be fey, right?possible origin. The other being it is from the Feywild, which would violate your origin condition since fey is part of that list...
Which was why I suggested if they are not monstrosities, they should be fey, while others suggested beasts.But if they are from the fey wild, then owlbears would be fey, right?
I don't know about animal companions, but followers certainly (along with several others):I'd definitely consider hippogriffs beasts. Heck, couldn't rangers get them as animal companions in 2e?
Pepperidge Farms remembers.Remember wen 3x make dinosaurs Beasts just to hose druids?