What are all the “animal-like” monsters?

[stewstew5]

So to establish, worgs are wolf-like, but blink dogs are not dog-like and displacer beasts are not panther-like.
What are all the monsters in 5e that closely resemble animals without having (or having limited/subdued) magical/supernatural abilities?

[NaughtyTiger]

So to establish, worgs are wolf-like, but blink dogs are not dog-like and displacer beasts are not panther-like.
What are all the monsters in 5e that closely resemble animals without having (or having limited/subdued) magical/supernatural abilities?

but blink dogs ARE dog-like
displacer beasts ARE panther-like
dwarves are rock-like

[stewstew5]

but blink dogs ARE dog-like
displacer beasts ARE panther-like
dwarves are rock-like

For the sake of this question

[KorvinStarmast]

Giant spiders are like spiders, but giant.

[Corpsecandle717]

Roc jumps to mind...does an owlbear count for this exercise?

[hamishspence]

Rocs are probably one of the better examples - very much "gigantic eagle" - distinct lack of supernatural powers.

[NaughtyTiger]

For the sake of this question

I was serious, I didn't see the difference.

I guess you can include Roctopus?

[Jophiel]

I was serious, I didn't see the difference.
Worgs are big savage semi intelligent wolves but not overtly supernatural. Blink dogs are overtly supernatural with magical powers.

[stewstew5]

does an owlbear count for this exercise?

I suppose owl bears are beast like, especially if you consider them to just resemble a bear with an owl head instead of a hybrid of the two

[nickl_2000]

Giant spiders are like spiders, but giant.

Sword Spiders are like spiders, but with swords
Phase Spiders are like spider, but with phasers (I may be wrong about this one though).



Real Answer:
Yeth Hound
Ice Toad
Carrion Crawler
Shadow Mastiff
Winter Wolf
Fire Snake
Flail Snail
Unicorn
Hell Hound
Kelpie
Nightmare

[hamishspence]

Real Answer:
Yeth Hound
Ice Toad
Carrion Crawler
Shadow Mastiff
Winter Wolf
Fire Snake
Flail Snail
Unicorn
Hell Hound
Kelpie
Nightmare

I get the impression that most of these are too heavy on "special powers" for the OP's taste.

Griffins and hippogriffs, on the other hand, might fit better as "mix and match animal, but still pretty animalistic".

[Tetrasodium]

They are in eberron...
halflings in the blade desert ride:
- fasteeth
- knifeteeth
- spiketail
-glidewing(?)
- more
eberron in general has
- daggerhawk
- dragonhawk
- treehawk
- starhawk
- Horrid beasts (any animal altered with gatekeeper magic)
- Magebred animals (imagine arcane genetic engineering)
- dream serpent
- more I'm forgetting

[MagneticKitty]

Striders (which got moved from beast to monstrocity) are basically giant spiders...

On the opposite side, crag cats are beasts, but have magic resistance

[Trustypeaches]

Then there's my favorite monster (visually), the Su-Monster

https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/forgottenrealms/images/7/79/Su-monster_-_Tomb_of_Annihilation.png/revision/latest?cb=20170909232903

[stewstew5]

I get the impression that most of these are too heavy on "special powers" for the OP's taste.

Griffins and hippogriffs, on the other hand, might fit better as "mix and match animal, but still pretty animalistic".

Griffins and hippogrifs are fairly supernatural seeming


I’m thinking; if this got discovered, on earth, tomorrow, (and presuming that pop culture depictions don’t exist) would I think “yea that’s real”?

So: a teleporting dog? No.

Bigger wolf? Yea

Bear that resembles an owl from the front? I guess so

A lion with lion & eagle legs AND wings that resembles an eagle from the front? No


But I guess they are still beast like. The grey line

[Crgaston]

So to establish, worgs are wolf-like, but blink dogs are not dog-like and displacer beasts are not panther-like.
What are all the monsters in 5e that closely resemble animals without having (or having limited/subdued) magical/supernatural abilities?

I think you are referring to Beasts, which is a game term for a type of monster. Monster types are listed in their description. Other monster types include Aberrations and Monstrosities, which are often similar to Beasts, but usually have some characteristic which would make them unbelievable as a real-world creature.

Worgs and Displacer Beasts are classified as a Monstrosities, and Blink Dogs are Fey. A Dire Wolf is still only a Beast


Does this help answer your original question?

[stewstew5]

I think you are referring to Beasts, which is a game term for a type of monster. Monster types are listed in their description. Other monster types include Aberrations and Monstrosities, which are often similar to Beasts, but usually have some characteristic which would make them unbelievable as a real-world creature.

Worgs and Displacer Beasts are classified as a Monstrosities, and Blink Dogs are Fey. A Dire Wolf is still only a Beast


Does this help answer your original question?

Yes, I do mean beasts, I know what they are.
My original question, rephrased to use creature types, is what creatures that aren’t beasts would fit well into the beast type or have it as a sub-type?

[Crgaston]

Yes, I do mean beasts, I know what they are.
My original question, rephrased to use creature types, is what creatures that aren’t beasts would fit well into the beast type or have it as a sub-type?


Ahhh... I gotcha. My misunderstanding!

[stewstew5]

Ahhh... I gotcha. My misunderstanding!

No prob ;)

[No brains]

How do Flying Snake and Giant Ape strike you?

Also a weird note on griffons: Supposedly they are based on fossils of protoceratops. Their shield frills got bused up and looked like wing bones in profile. In theory, people really thought they existed. Modern biology makes us think hexapods more difficult to find as vertebrates, but people say those skeletons and thought, "Yeah, that exists."

Also does Aurochs from Volo's count? They are named after and take traits of something that was real, but were exaggerated. Then again, D&D technically does that for everything.

[Xeko]

A lion with lion & eagle legs AND wings that resembles an eagle from the front? No



Platypuses are mammals that lay eggs, have duck bills, and beaver tails, do not have nipples and instead excrete milk from pores in their arm pits, and have poisonous barbs similar to a scorpion on the ankles of their back feet, but NOT on the claws. And they are absolutely real.

Less impressive real world creatures include Pangolins, which are a mammal that have massive scales and look a lot like a lizard that can curl up like an armadillo, and Echidnas, which are a cross between an anteater and a hedgehog, with four headed genitalia.

Just saying, maybe keep an open mind about what may or may not be discovered as "real".

[No brains]

Similarly, Volo's mentions that dimetrodon is 'lizard-like', but modern paleontology believes dimetrodon probably had fur and looked more mammalian. Does that mean dimetrodon isn't barely real enough?

[stewstew5]

Platypuses are mammals that lay eggs, have duck bills, and beaver tails, do not have nipples and instead excrete milk from pores in their arm pits, and have poisonous barbs similar to a scorpion on the ankles of their back feet, but NOT on the claws. And they are absolutely real.

Less impressive real world creatures include Pangolins, which are a mammal that have massive scales and look a lot like a lizard that can curl up like an armadillo, and Echidnas, which are a cross between an anteater and a hedgehog, with four headed genitalia.

Just saying, maybe keep an open mind about what may or may not be discovered as "real".

A six-limbed chordate.

The platypus is... a mess, but it doesn’t have extra limbs

Pangolins aren’t as wild as people like to act like. Yes they are what they are, but it’s not as wild as you think all things considered

As for echidnas, all marsupials are like that, except instead of four headed penises and seven pronged vaginas the rest (including kangaroos, opossums and the late thylacine) have two heads, three prongs, and for a very interesting reason I advise reading up on it’s super neat

But that is just flesh. Growing extra limbs that are big enough to support a large mammal in flight is nowhere as reasonable as the rest.

But once again all things considered I did call them ‘the grey line’, and I do think it wouldn’t be absurd to give them beast as a sub-type


ow do Flying Snake and Giant Ape strike you?

Also a weird note on griffons: Supposedly they are based on fossils of protoceratops. Their shield frills got bused up and looked like wing bones in profile. In theory, people really thought they existed. Modern biology makes us think hexapods more difficult to find as vertebrates, but people say those skeletons and thought, "Yeah, that exists."

Also does Aurochs from Volo's count? They are named after and take traits of something that was real, but were exaggerated. Then again, D&D technically does that for everything.


the giant ape is a beast (I know I said animal like but earlier in the thread I clarified more creatures that deserved the beast tag).

Similarly with the flying snake, it is also a beast, and so with it the gryphon and hippogriff become much stronger contenders.

as for the dimetrodon it was an ancestor to both mammals and reptiles, so it will of course resemble both. my concern with gryphons was the six limbs