Re-naming monster manual monsters. Monster.

[urkthegurk]

I propose we re-name some generically-flavoured D+D monsters, like dinosaurs and dire animals, to have D+D-style names. I don't know about you, but I use them as part of (fairly) normal ecologies all the time. Its very disruptive to be calling them Pteradons and Dire-weasels all over the place. For these two, I suggest 'Dactyl' for one and 'Bandersnatch' for the other.

This conversation started in this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=135564&page=2) thread, I thought it merited further discussion.

What do you think? What other monsters need names? Dire Elk?

[Latronis]

It's a good idea

and frankly I'm terrible at naming things, so I'll sneak around and yoink whatever strikes my fancy :smallbiggrin:

[hamishspence]

4E seemed to go with drakes and behemoths for most of the dinosaur-types.

"Dire X" does seem to be overused- and scientific names can sometimes seem a bit off, in a fantasy setting, like "megaloceros" for dire elk.

[Latronis]

another option is to see if you can find some native names for animals.

[hamishspence]

true- but a lot of these creatures went extinct before people were around to give them names.

Or, don't really have a real-world counterpart- for example, Dire Weasel: aside from maybe Giant Otters, there aren't much in the way of weasel-shaped, Medium mustelids, big enough for a Small creature to have ridden.

Similarly, the largest prehistoric mustelid (a bit like a wolverine) was the size of a black bear- Medium, rather than Large as the Dire Wolverine is.

[Latronis]

true- but a lot of these creatures went extinct before people were around to give them names.

Or, don't really have a real-world counterpart- for example, Dire Weasel: aside from maybe Giant Otters, there aren't much in the way of weasel-shaped, Medium mustelids, big enough for a Small creature to have ridden.

Similarly, the largest prehistoric mustelid (a bit like a wolverine) was the size of a black bear- Medium, rather than Large as the Dire Wolverine is.

So use the name from another culture for the dire variant :P just find one with a nice ring to it

[AceofDeath]

I really love this idea about re naming especially dinosaurs into something a bit more fantasy like. I reckon a good way would be to thing what you would name themif you saw one for the first time. T-rex Giant tooth or bite perhaps, refeering to it's enormous head compared to the rest of it's body. Deinonychus perhaps land eagle or claw stalker. I know these are a bit primitive names to use for them, but that way i guess they are pretty most what natives would call such creatures....

[Gamerlord]

Dire bats: Ironwings.
Dire Bear: Ironteeth.

[deuxhero]

Dire Croc:Prime Fiendjaw (I don't ever recall one without the fiendish template, so the name is based on the view of the fiendish template one being the default).

[Athaniar]

I don't see what's wrong with the current names, to be honest. I do think, though, that a good idea might be to give them different names according to the cultures in your setting.

[Latronis]

I don't see what's wrong with the current names, to be honest. I do think, though, that a good idea might be to give them different names according to the cultures in your setting.

Just quick example from the SRD:

You don't think.. Deinonychus.. Elasmosaurus is immersion breaking at all?

[Eldan]

Meh. Those are latin names. As are Tiger, Panther, Lion, and so on, just more or less corrupted. Of course, they are a little long, but if you make them a little shorter, they work fine.
Alternatively, didn't Eberron have an entire list of halfling names for different dinosaurs?

[Latronis]

Greek


There's a difference between calling A Lion a lion and calling it a panthera leo

and Deinonychus doesn't fit in within with the medieval fantasy theme. Where as something like terrible claw may

[Debihuman]

Just call the dire weasel a "Hyaenodon" and you'll be set.

Most prehistoric creatures have names, but in D&D there are dire creatures which fill a niche that prehistoric creatures do not. It depends on whether you want a "Medieval" flavor or not. Generally, D&D is set in a non-specific Medieval campaign hence the desire for "dire" creatures. They are just bigger and badder versions of normal animals. Unless you are playing in Dinotopia or Kong's Skull Island or a Lost World, dinosaurs don't often making a showing. That's not to say that they couldn't or shouldn't, because I believe that D&D should encompass everything, but it is a matter of flavor. If the dire weasel and hyaenodon have the same stats, it just becomes a matter of one name you like more. "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet."--William Shakespeare.

The question is: why not have both dire weasels AND Hyaenodons?

Debby

[Latronis]

Bbut the question still remains.. why would the locals call prehistoric critters by modern scientific naming conventions?

[Athaniar]

Bbut the question still remains.. why would the locals call prehistoric critters by modern scientific naming conventions?

Why would the locals call them by modern English names? Oh, right, that's Common. Obviously, Common does not include modern scientific names. Because that would just be silly.

[hamishspence]

I figure "scientific names" could be one of the old D&D languages- maybe Draconic, favoured by wizards.

So a wizard with Knowledge-Nature could point at a creature and go "that's a scytheclaw drake, though the Draconic name for it is Deinonychus"

[Lappy9000]

There's a whole list of dinosaur names in the Eberron Campaign setting, Monster section, page 280. Bladetooths, Hammertails, Fastieths, Great Carvers, Spinebacks, you get the idea.

[hamishspence]

The question is: why not have both dire weasels AND Hyaenodons?




I think Pathfinder uses Hyaenodon for the Dire Hyena.

[Ashtagon]

There's an old game called Torg, in which, in a certain sub-setting, a certain type of giant snake is called an Abentallos. This was one of the easier-to-pronounce critters. It may well have been very much in-character and immersive to make all these funky names, but even on third reading, i was left feeling "yeah, but what is it?".

The important thing is that the names must mean something to the players. if it means something to the characters too, that's good, but that is by far of secondary importance.

[urkthegurk]

Just call the dire weasel a "Hyaenodon" and you'll be set.

Most prehistoric creatures have names, but in D&D there are dire creatures which fill a niche that prehistoric creatures do not. It depends on whether you want a "Medieval" flavor or not. Generally, D&D is set in a non-specific Medieval campaign hence the desire for "dire" creatures. They are just bigger and badder versions of normal animals. Unless you are playing in Dinotopia or Kong's Skull Island or a Lost World, dinosaurs don't often making a showing. That's not to say that they couldn't or shouldn't, because I believe that D&D should encompass everything, but it is a matter of flavor. If the dire weasel and hyaenodon have the same stats, it just becomes a matter of one name you like more. "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet."--William Shakespeare.

The question is: why not have both dire weasels AND Hyaenodons?

Debby

Problem is, we do. My game has dire hyenas up the ying yang, and they're called hyaenodons. Which is an excellent name. Which is why I call dire weasels and dire ferrets Bandersnatches, from the Jabberwocky.

By the way, I am very sad have been unable to find good stats for the jabberwocky. I imagine it would be related to the New Jersey Devil.

I love the idea of keeping dinosaurs scientific names as the draconic or arcane names for the species, but of course they still need common names.

[Debihuman]

Problem is, we do. My game has dire hyenas up the ying yang, and they're called hyaenodons. Which is an excellent name. Which is why I call dire weasels and dire ferrets Bandersnatches, from the Jabberwocky.

By the way, I am very sad have been unable to find good stats for the jabberwocky. I imagine it would be related to the New Jersey Devil.

I love the idea of keeping dinosaurs scientific names as the draconic or arcane names for the species, but of course they still need common names.

I honestly don't see why this is even a problem.

I'm sure you can find stats using Jabberwocky d20 or Jersey Devil d20 on google. There was an update to Dungeonland which had stats for the jabberwock (see below). You'll have to update it to 3.5, but that shouldn't be difficult.

The Jabberwocky (1): CR 8; Huge Aberration; HD 15d8+45; hp 112; Init +-1 (Dex); Spd 40 ft.; AC 17 (-2 size, -1 Dex, +10 natural); Atk Bite +19 melee (2d8+10), claw +14 melee (2d4+5,); Face 10 ft. by 20 ft.; Reach 20 ft.; SA Charge; SQ Damage Reduction 10/+3 or vorpal; SR 16; AL CN; SV Fort +12, Ref +4, Will +10; Str 30, Dex 9, Con 20, Int 12, Wis 12, Cha 15.
Skills and Feats— Intimidate +14, Listen +14, Spot +14, Wilderness Lore +13, Alertness, Great Fortitude, Power Attack.
SA— Charge (Ex): If a jabberwocky gains the initiative at the beginning of combat, it will charge. This doubles its speed, and allows it to make all three of its attacks at its full melee bonus (+19). This is a full attack which provokes an attack of opportunity, but increases the damage of each attack by +2.

One more thing: Monstrous humanoids eat, sleep, and breathe. The mergoyle needs to be fixed to reflect this. Since they have the Water subtype (as opposed to Aquatic) this means that they can usually breathe both air and water unless you state differently. The Aquatic subtype means that they only breathe water.


Debby

[hamishspence]

I can vaguely recall there being a 2nd ed Jabberwocky in Monstrous Compendium- maybe that could be used as a starting point?

Or, it could just be homebrewed up from scratch.

[urkthegurk]

I honestly don't see why this is even a problem.


Well, its a problem because its weird when you're advancing through the forest with the king's men, to retrieve fantastic ruby from the diabolic cabal of magicians, and one of the soldiers says to you 'watch out, over there in the bushes! It's an allosaurus! (or even piatnitzkysaurus!)

Perhaps to you it doesn't sound weird, but to me it sounds very weird. All these lizards are utah-this and saurus that, and T-Rex is a little artificial sounding a construction. But all mammals have names like 'bears' and 'sheep,' and those sound like words. And then you start to wonder why there's this division, and its uncomfortably obvious that there is no reason, it was just not thought out.

And that's why its distracting.

Obviously, not every monster has to have the same naming conventions, and probably most monsters have a couple of names. But these creatures are common monsters in my worlds, characters run into dire animals all the time, and this is a real problem. Its a problem in writing too. So we are trying to solve it.

EDIT: Thank you a whole large amount (this large [---------------------------------}}}}}-----].) for the stats on the jabberwocky. They will be most useful. :xykon:

[Solaris]

One more thing: Monstrous humanoids eat, sleep, and breathe. The mergoyle needs to be fixed to reflect this. Since they have the Water subtype (as opposed to Aquatic) this means that they can usually breathe both air and water unless you state differently. The Aquatic subtype means that they only breathe water.


Debby

This was addressed in the thread. It was deliberate on account of it being a gargoyle-thing.

By the same token of "Tyrannosaurus rex" being immersion-breaking, so too is "Sword-tooth titan". Tyrant basilisk strikes me as more appealing. I got it by stuffing 'Tyrant' and 'king' into a free translator. Naturally, tyrant came up tyrannos - I left it in the English form. King came up 'basilas' and 'rigas', and I said to myself "Basilas looks like basilisk... I got somethin' here." Bam. Sure, we know it's nothing like a basilisk - but zoology's chock full of odd species names. 'Sides, I'm betting T. rex could get a lot cooler if you gave it some kinda mean ol' gaze attack.

Deinonychus could do with a similar treatment. Drepan. Same translator, from 'drepani', means 'scythe'. You could also call it a raptor, as the name has entered into fairly common use (despite being derived from velociraptors). Just try not to have a heart attack at the table when you do. Utahraptor could be called a greater drepan/raptor, real velociraptors dwarf drepan/raptor.

Stegosaurus could just go with stego, steg, or something similar, but where's the fun in that? I got a free translator on my browser and I intend to use it. Plugging 'spike' in got me nothin', but 'thorn' comes up with a few things. I'm going with 'agkath'. I was tempted to go with 'agelada', cow.

Ankylosaurus, I'm going with 'Limer'. From limeri, means 'mountain fortress'.

By the way? I don't care if I'm getting the Greek wrong. I don't speak Greek, and neither do my players.

If you've built your world enough that you have a basic idea of what language groups go where (Dwarves in the kingdom of Manitol, for example, speak a language fairly similar to German), then you could do the same thing with the appropriate languages. To go with the previous example, the Manitorns have been known to domesticate mastodons... primarily because it's cool. (Obviously, there's more of a real-world explanation... but they're there because they're cool.) They call 'em tusked shafe, or tusked sheep.

[Latronis]

This was addressed in the thread. It was deliberate on account of it being a gargoyle-thing.

By the same token of "Tyrannosaurus rex" being immersion-breaking, so too is "Sword-tooth titan". Tyrant basilisk strikes me as more appealing. I got it by stuffing 'Tyrant' and 'king' into a free translator. Naturally, tyrant came up tyrannos - I left it in the English form. King came up 'basilas' and 'rigas', and I said to myself "Basilas looks like basilisk... I got somethin' here." Bam. Sure, we know it's nothing like a basilisk - but zoology's chock full of odd species names. 'Sides, I'm betting T. rex could get a lot cooler if you gave it some kinda mean ol' gaze attack.

Deinonychus could do with a similar treatment. Drepan. Same translator, from 'drepani', means 'scythe'. You could also call it a raptor, as the name has entered into fairly common use (despite being derived from velociraptors). Just try not to have a heart attack at the table when you do. Utahraptor could be called a greater drepan/raptor, real velociraptors dwarf drepan/raptor.

Stegosaurus could just go with stego, steg, or something similar, but where's the fun in that? I got a free translator on my browser and I intend to use it. Plugging 'spike' in got me nothin', but 'thorn' comes up with a few things. I'm going with 'agkath'. I was tempted to go with 'agelada', cow.

Ankylosaurus, I'm going with 'Limer'. From limeri, means 'mountain fortress'.

By the way? I don't care if I'm getting the Greek wrong. I don't speak Greek, and neither do my players.

If you've built your world enough that you have a basic idea of what language groups go where (Dwarves in the kingdom of Manitol, for example, speak a language fairly similar to German), then you could do the same thing with the appropriate languages. To go with the previous example, the Manitorns have been known to domesticate mastodons... primarily because it's cool. (Obviously, there's more of a real-world explanation... but they're there because they're cool.) They call 'em tusked shafe, or tusked sheep.

So is that where 'Ulikul' came from??

[hamishspence]

the names from The Land Before Time, while overly simplistic, do capture basic physical features:

Three-horn
Long-neck
Sharp-tooth
Spike-tail

etc.

[urkthegurk]

the names from The Land Before Time, while overly simplistic, do capture basic physical features:

Three-horn
Long-neck
Sharp-tooth
Spike-tail

etc.

Sort of feels like you're trapped in a cartoon, though. With my players, if that happened, would panic and go on a killing spree, and that would just be too much with all the cutesy-named dinosaurs, so that's a no-go.

[hiryuu]

I use dinosaurs a lot.

A lot.

The setting I use is primarily animistic/tribal in its religions (albeit with a 1930s level of technology), and these are some of the names I use:

Uchmoahaka: Also called a brumtumbler, this is a small hypsilophodont. The name means "one with human hands," since its forelimbs have rotating thumbs for climbing.

Uchanhaka: Also called deathwalker, these are any number of large tyrannosaurs; it means "one with no hands."

Uchngrunmaku: Also gariax, a large variety of deathwalker native to open plains. "One with swords for a face."

Uchgrunchuck: "Chucks," stegosaurs, native to scrublands. "One with planks/swords on his back."

Uchmoakuadeeha: "The big loud one," (also can be translated as "makes humans (loud, extreme) scream") also hornhead. Hadrosaurs. Specifically, Parasaurolophus.

Storks: This is a term used for pterosaurs, considering how they move around on land, they actually tended to look (http://www.flickr.com/photos/markwitton/sets/72057594082038974/), this isn't too far fetched. In the setting, they've also edged out actual storks and cranes for that niche, anyway. One example is uchkudjuju, "one with spots on his wings," which has large eyespots.

Uchmoawoku: Velociraptor, also hopper. "One who annoys people."

Uchakchuskaweechu: "One who cuts maize with his feet," neolithic dromaeosaurs. Maize-cutter, reaver, eagle-men, these guys have lots of names.

Uchgrunhaka: Therizinosaurs. "One with swords for arms." Also rootscraper.

Uchkuadaku: "Big stupid one," shield lizard, ceratopsians.

Uchrakijahak: "One with a big nose," a wild type of shield lizard that has a thick plate of bone over its upper jaw.

[Swordgleam]

When the party isn't with local NPCs, why use names? Just describe the creature - "A giant lizard-like thing with a huge head, tiny arms, and fangs advances toward you." Then the players can come up with their own name for it.

Even if one of them has some sort of monster-related knowledge feat, you can say stuff like, "This beast fears fire" and whatnot without giving them a name.

[hamishspence]

Descriptions could be more detailed depending on the result of the Spot check or Knowledge check.

from "big lizardlike thing" to "big lizardlike thing with long, strong hind legs built for running, massive jaws with broad, sturdy teeth, forward-pointing eyes, etc"

[Latronis]

Descriptions could be more detailed depending on the result of the Spot check or Knowledge check.

from "big lizardlike thing" to "big lizardlike thing with long, strong hind legs built for running, massive jaws with broad, sturdy teeth, forward-pointing eyes, etc"

10.3 ft long and weighes 370 lb, has a tail as long as its body, as well as about 60 frequently replaced serrated teeth that measure up 1 inch in length. Its saliva is frequently blood-tinged, because its teeth are almost completely covered by gingival tissue that is naturally lacerated during feeding. This creates an ideal culture for the virulent bacteria that live in its mouth. It also has a long, yellow, deeply forked tongue.

[AceofDeath]

I'll agree that if a party isen't together with a NPC, there's really no need for naming the dinosaur, just describe it as well as one can do and fits the amount of data the players needs and roleplay wise would have about it.
Names will of course be diffrent from whatever you hear them from the local tribe or travelling aristocrats. So I reckon there really is no need for just one name for the monster, but a lot of names could be better fitting the dinosaurs since this would make them a lot more into the feel of being fantasy monsters and not some kind of scientific names for long extinct animals of the family archosaurs.

[hamishspence]

10.3 ft long and weighes 370 lb, has a tail as long as its body, as well as about 60 frequently replaced serrated teeth that measure up 1 inch in length. Its saliva is frequently blood-tinged, because its teeth are almost completely covered by gingival tissue that is naturally lacerated during feeding. This creates an ideal culture for the virulent bacteria that live in its mouth. It also has a long, yellow, deeply forked tongue.

However- if the players have never met it before- resisting the description to the things that can be spotted with very careful looking would make sense. For example, until it bites, you wouldn't know it has big poison glands. The:

"really sharp eyes that spot all the little details" info might be different from:

"really detailed reading of a book description of the animal.

And 10.3 ft 370 pounds is one big Komodo dragon.

[Latronis]

However- if the players have never met it before- resisting the description to the things that can be spotted with very careful looking would make sense. For example, until it bites, you wouldn't know it has big poison glands. The:

"really sharp eyes that spot all the little details" info might be different from:

"really detailed reading of a book description of the animal.

And 10.3 ft 370 pounds is one big Komodo dragon.

meh i was just paraphrasing a section from wiki. It's not like it's unusual to large examples in fantasy games anyway. Danger it up a bit. Or creepy it out a bit.

It's just giving descriptions of various depths depending on how knowledgeable, keen sighted a character is can get tedious. Especially when the players know what many monsters\animals look like anyway.

[hamishspence]

True- a Giant Lizard advanced to the low end of Large, or the high end of Medium (depending on the writer) would be an ideal statblock for this.

Knowledge checks might be useful for the more exotic creature abilities- gives the party a reason to take ranks in the various skills.

[Latronis]

True- a Giant Lizard advanced to the low end of Large, or the high end of Medium (depending on the writer) would be an ideal statblock for this.

Knowledge checks might be useful for the more exotic creature abilities- gives the party a reason to take ranks in the various skills.

Then you just gotta be wary of the knowledgable druid surviving the encounter wanting to turn into one. Because a giant lizard with a disease bite can only be worse by adding spellcasting >_>

[hamishspence]

Thats druids for you.

There is precedent for giving creatures diseased bites (filth fever, usually) and the Paizo version of Compsognathus (Dragon 318) had it.

Maybe a revised version of the giant lizard would have a poison bite as well? What with the recent research showing several monitors have venom glands.

[Latronis]

Ah yeah poison could work too, bacteria kinda implies disease in my mind though and it's a little less common than poison attacks.

[hamishspence]

it has both.

That said, given that the poison is somewhat weak and slow-acting, the disease mechanic would make more sense, combining the effects of the slow poison and the real bacterial infections.

[Latronis]

Both poison and disease is kinda nasty for one bite, especially for something as an animal is a little more mundane. I may just have to do that. I think i just found a new critter for my tropical archipelago

[hamishspence]

Monitor lizards have a lot of style- fast, good swimmer, good climber, nasty claws, bite, etc.

[Latronis]

A quick flick through the books leaves me disappointed with the Monitor Lizard stats, for one it only covers up to 5' lizards. (though adding advancement upto large can work well enough) There is a distinct lack of any poison or disease. And it doesn't even have the climb speed of the smaller lizards.

And it should probably have scent too.

[alchemyprime]

The way my campaign works, I made some things group together. Like a Minosteed. What's a minosteed? A triceratops. Called so because the MINOTAURS RIDE THEM.

Minotaur on a freaking triceratops!

My campaigns have a rule: If it'd look awesome airbrushed on the side of a van, it'd look awesome in D&D. And a blunderbuss weilding minotaur on a triceratops is awesome.

T. Rex? Reptitan. Denonychus? Deathclaw(k). How do I get away with these names? Because dinosaurs lived on one island and a halfling and a gnome named them all. However... they later found that the "island" was actuallt a peninsula to the south pole, which is where a large Godtree resides, keeping it from frosting over...Still, it was fun.

And yes. Minotaurs import their minosteeds. From jungle minotaurs. ... It makes sense.

[AceofDeath]

The way my campaign works, I made some things group together. Like a Minosteed. What's a minosteed? A triceratops. Called so because the MINOTAURS RIDE THEM.

Minotaur on a freaking triceratops!

My campaigns have a rule: If it'd look awesome airbrushed on the side of a van, it'd look awesome in D&D. And a blunderbuss weilding minotaur on a triceratops is awesome.

T. Rex? Reptitan. Denonychus? Deathclaw(k). How do I get away with these names? Because dinosaurs lived on one island and a halfling and a gnome named them all. However... they later found that the "island" was actuallt a peninsula to the south pole, which is where a large Godtree resides, keeping it from frosting over...Still, it was fun.

And yes. Minotaurs import their minosteeds. From jungle minotaurs. ... It makes sense.

Hm minotaurs on triceratops, eh... your idea sounds apealing to me.

[Solaris]

So is that where 'Ulikul' came from??

No, that one came from me typing at random.


Minotaur on a freaking triceratops!

... This wins on so many levels.

[urkthegurk]

Hopefully I can brew up some really dragon-eque komodo dragon stats later on. Today? We shall see.

[hamishspence]

A quick flick through the books leaves me disappointed with the Monitor Lizard stats, for one it only covers up to 5' lizards. (though adding advancement upto large can work well enough) There is a distinct lack of any poison or disease. And it doesn't even have the climb speed of the smaller lizards.

And it should probably have scent too.

I figured that, in this case, it was up to 5 ft, not counting tail. Since going by MM, its length to base of tail that determines whether a creature is Medium or Large.

The fact that Medium crocodiles are listed as 11-12 ft long, does support this- if 8 ft from nose to tail tip was the minimum for Large, and the majority of creatures were measured that way, one would expect that it would have suggested this in the croc description.

That said, plenty of MM creatures could do with a little tweaking to expand their capabilities.

If Komodos are Medium, Megalania would be ideal for a Large lizard- big, heavy, but a long way short of the two-ton minimum for most Huge creatures.

[Latronis]

I figured that, in this case, it was up to 5 ft, not counting tail. Since going by MM, its length to base of tail that determines whether a creature is Medium or Large.

The fact that Medium crocodiles are listed as 11-12 ft long, does support this- if 8 ft from nose to tail tip was the minimum for Large, and the majority of creatures were measured that way, one would expect that it would have suggested this in the croc description.

That said, plenty of MM creatures could do with a little tweaking to expand their capabilities.

If Komodos are Medium, Megalania would be ideal for a Large lizard- big, heavy, but a long way short of the two-ton minimum for most Huge creatures.

Well a 5ft komodo would be a total length of 10' so I suppose that fits with the top end wiki measurements too. Although a medium a creature that takes up 2 squares is at a bit of a disadvantage.

Also they like crocs tend to be apex predators where they live too so 3 hitdice seems a little low. I'd go with 4-5HD(medium) 6-8(Large) and 9+(Huge)

And Monitor 4-5HD(medium) 6-8(Large) drop the lowlight vision, add scent. Give it a climb speed.

If we go with filth fever for the disease (I'd be inclined to include the claws with the bite) according the to wiki the monitor poison is paralytic and painful and doesn't seem overly lethal. So I'd make the bite contain the monitor poison which should be uh Injury DC12(at 4hd) initial and secondary damage dexterity. Which gives it a nice kind of synergy with the disease.

[hamishspence]

I figure it takes up one square, with a bit of its head projecting out of it (giving it 5 ft reach forward) and a bigger bit of its tail projecting backward (giving it a 5 ft tail slap)

This generally works quite well for most "long" medium creatures.

Most WOTC miniatures of such creatures seem to work a bit like that- the whole creature doesn't need to be inside the base area, as long as the tail or head don't project beyond the normal reach.

http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/mg/20051103a

Though the monitor lizard in this gallery is a bit on the large side, it's a shade smaller than most Large creatures, and it is on a Medium base.

Or, the creature is shown "coiled up" so to speak- filling the base tightly, and if it stretched out it would be much longer than it.

[Latronis]

I figure it takes up one square, with a bit of its head projecting out of it (giving it 5 ft reach forward) and a bigger bit of its tail projecting backward (giving it a 5 ft tail slap)

This generally works quite well for most "long" medium creatures.

Most WOTC miniatures of such creatures seem to work a bit like that- the whole creature doesn't need to be inside the base area, as long as the tail or head don't project beyond the normal reach.

http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/mg/20051103a

Though the monitor lizard in this gallery is a bit on the large side, it's a shade smaller than most Large creatures, and it is on a Medium base.

Or, the creature is shown "coiled up" so to speak- filling the base tightly, and if it stretched out it would be much longer than it.

I suppose I can buy it as a balancing factor so it has no disadvantages over other medium creatures. Still it is a bit odd to think that a 10' croc or lizard whose natural stance would seem to be 'stretched out' can only have it's torso square threatened. I mean I don't think they are like skinks and can detach and regrow a tail. 5' of tail would afterall mean there's an extra 5' of length to be targetted. Still it does mean they don't threaten the square behind the 'tail square' either so I guess it works out well enough to overlook.

Opinion on the venom as Dex poison?

[hamishspence]

Makes sense- Dex as reducing mobility and defenses, rather than the strength of blows delivered, is as good or better than Str as a "low lethality" poison.

Going by the sample lizard-type models, it would probably, in battle, be lashing its tail back and forth, in the same way that a fighter would be lunging back and forth with his sword and arm.

[urkthegurk]

Okay, Dire Bear. These things are awesome, any epic druid needs one as an animal companion, and they eat whole mammoths. What do we call them? Certainly there has never been a prehistoric bear this big. What about in mythology?

[hamishspence]

Dire bears are Large, not Huge. As are Brown bears.

There was a prehistoric bear bigger, faster and more predatory than modern brown bears- Arctodus, the Short-Faced Running Bear.

Also, there was an early subspecies of polar bear, that was closer, genetically, to brown bears than modern polar bears are- and that was also quite a bit bigger than modern brown bears.

So, prehistoric polar bears, and Arctodus, both make passable candidates for Dire Bears- though they are probably lighter than the figure the MM gives.

[Prime32]

Both poison and disease is kinda nasty for one bite, especially for something as an animal is a little more mundane. I may just have to do that. I think i just found a new critter for my tropical archipelagoWhere are the dire platypus stats? Or dire vampire squid (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3PvvT_Ktx8&fmt=18)? :smalltongue:

Oh right, the second one is here (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=1498.msg139066#msg139066). Those two are the factotums of the animal world.