PDA

View Full Version : Ridiculous Monsters of D&D



Prince_Rohan
2008-02-03, 06:26 AM
I played D&D Basic and was thrilled to first play Advanced. So I get how awful some of the monsters were/are. But if there is anyone out there trying to enjoy OOTS and wondering WTF? I have a link that can help with references to the stupid types of stuff we few, we hapless few had to deal with to play D&D in the early days...

http://www.headinjurytheater.com/article73.htm

If anyone has their own suggestions for stupid monster ideas that never should have been put on paper, post them now or forever hold your peace...

Holammer
2008-02-03, 10:01 AM
hoho, that article was a good read. Whomever created The Flumph is clearly the first recorded prophet of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

I love reading David C. Lovelace's "Book of Beings (http://www.umop.com/beings/index.htm)", it contains his homebrew monster creations. Lots of silly monsters in the best D&D tradition but tons of awesome ones too.
Yes, Dave is the guy that does Retarded Animal Babies (http://www.newgrounds.com/collection/retardedanimalbabies.html).

Kurald Galain
2008-02-03, 10:04 AM
That was funny.

And, I finally found out what the creature on the right (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0055.html) is supposed to be!

NerfTW
2008-02-03, 10:10 AM
That article is awesome. I found it just a few months ago too. Definitely adds more explaination to the whole Flumps thing.

Bluelantern
2008-02-03, 10:44 AM
That was funny.

And, I finally found out what the creature on the right (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0055.html) is supposed to be!

Hooray! \o/

Also for some reason, I did like this one o.o

http://www.headinjurytheater.com/d&d%20owlephant.jpg

mockingbyrd7
2008-02-03, 11:28 AM
If I ever DM a game, there will be a swarm of monkeybees. There HAS to be.

InkEyes
2008-02-03, 12:03 PM
If the furry community ever chose a Gay Pride mascot, I swear, this would have to be it.
Hey! Don't diss the Senmurv! It's a Rainbow Wolf With wiiiiings!!! How much more original can you get?

Newtkeeper
2008-02-03, 01:21 PM
How much more original can you get?

Rainbow Wolves with Wings....


wait for it....


In Space!!!!!

Kurald Galain
2008-02-03, 01:23 PM
In Space!!!!!

Actually, I found Spelljammer to be a very enjoyable setting.

I am well aware that nearly all of it is patently ridiculous, but I think that was the whole point. They even have their own brand of absurd physics, with gravity planes and air bubbles :smallbiggrin:

InkEyes
2008-02-03, 02:52 PM
Rainbow Wolves with Wings....


wait for it....


In Space!!!!!

That should be a movie. I think it would be something like this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dgj_Hx8PJo).

Stormwolf
2008-02-03, 03:28 PM
I'm not saying that some of those monsters aren't clearly ridiculous concepts but there are some that exhibit parallels with creatures that have evolved (sorry Creationists) on Earth. There are real creatures that mimic others for the purposes of predation (and to avoid it). There are creatures with totally bizarre lifecycles and those that fill every bizarre ecological niche available.

Who's to say what creatures might evolve (or be created) in a world with a highly magical background radiation? One of the great things about D&D in general is it's an open playground for those with an imagination.

Fafnir13
2008-02-03, 03:50 PM
That vampire frog was pretty sweet if you ask me. Don't know what that guys problem was with it. Now if you wanted something patently rediculous, you should make giant vampire vampire bats. You know, they're vampire bats, but they're also vampiric creatures, undead and living forever. It would be awesome! :smallbiggrin:
Side note: am I the only one bother by when the article says that vampires are just vampire bat people? The bats were named after the mythic creature, not the other way around. Dracula would be very displeased. :smallfurious:

Kurald Galain
2008-02-03, 04:09 PM
Side note: am I the only one bother by when the article says that vampires are just vampire bat people?

Depends on your setting. In most settings were vampires are some kind of race, rather than a semi-unique cursed horror, they tend to be something like were-bats.

Of course, D&D has a tendency of turning unique mythological creatures into whole races :smallwink:

Ascension
2008-02-03, 05:01 PM
The name itself I'll admit is quite stupid, but this image (http://www.headinjurytheater.com/images/d&d%20beasts%20squark%20or%20sharg.jpg) is pretty badass in my estimation. If I ever DM, and the PCs travel through any water whatsoever, I'm homebrewing a 3.5 version of that thing...

...with a better name than "squark." Which won't be hard.

Akai
2008-02-03, 05:07 PM
I hurt myself from laughing so hard reading this.
I also sent an IM to a very good friend of mine telling him we're using these in our next Rp. I don't think I'll be waking up tomarrow.

The Asswere made me giggle, as did the Semvur.
Actually, the entire article just hurt my ribs.

chibibar
2008-02-03, 05:22 PM
Heh.... that was GREAT!.. ahh.. the good ol days. My friend and I made up some weird monsters and humanoid too.

This is why D&D is sooooo great!

Hallavast
2008-02-03, 06:00 PM
Monkey Bees! Monkey Bees!

FujinAkari
2008-02-03, 06:17 PM
Side note: am I the only one bother by when the article says that vampires are just vampire bat people? The bats were named after the mythic creature, not the other way around. Dracula would be very displeased. :smallfurious:

What was it Dracula turned into again? Oh yeah, thats right... BATS.

Thus, vampires are bat-people, the same way werewolves are wolf-people.

Jayngfet
2008-02-03, 06:32 PM
a duckbunny, what were they smoking and how much did they use?

Arkenputtyknife
2008-02-03, 06:59 PM
That vampire frog was pretty sweet if you ask me. Don't know what that guys problem was with it.
Well, for starters, he obviously didn't know that the Vampire Frog didn't originate in D&D. It actually started life as a joke in an old issue of OMNI magazine (I think — long time ago; it might have been Scientific American), which claimed that the beasts (actually a species of toad, you know) were being threatened by new golf courses in their native Florida.

The fun part is imagining a golfer's friends trying to kill the thing, when it's attached to the neck and the only weapons they're armed with are golf clubs. And the “Save the Toad!” campaign that it spawned.

“You killed a vampire frog? That's a protected species, boy!”

“But it was draining my blood!”

“Tell it to the judge.”

Chronos
2008-02-03, 07:29 PM
What was it Dracula turned into again? Oh yeah, thats right... BATS.

Thus, vampires are bat-people, the same way werewolves are wolf-people.Vampire bats are found exclusively in the New World. Before they were discovered, there was no connection whatsoever between vampires and bats in folklore. And even once the connection was established, they still weren't the defining feature of vampires: Dracula could turn into other animals, too.

tenguro
2008-02-03, 09:09 PM
hehe, that has got to be the most hilarious article I read on D&D ever. The duckbunny though takes the cake.

FujinAkari
2008-02-03, 09:24 PM
Vampire bats are found exclusively in the New World. Before they were discovered, there was no connection whatsoever between vampires and bats in folklore. And even once the connection was established, they still weren't the defining feature of vampires: Dracula could turn into other animals, too.

While true, this is largely irrelevant.

Vampires are humans that turn into bats as werewolves are humans that turn into wolves. Yes, while mythological vampires can turn into other creatures, D&D Vampires (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/vampire.htm) can only turn into bats or wolves, and it is blindly obvious that bats are the more iconic of the two :)

Corwin Weber
2008-02-04, 02:46 AM
While true, this is largely irrelevant.

Vampires are humans that turn into bats as werewolves are humans that turn into wolves. Yes, while mythological vampires can turn into other creatures, D&D Vampires (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/vampire.htm) can only turn into bats or wolves, and it is blindly obvious that bats are the more iconic of the two :)

...except that werewolves are supposed to be living beings.

Vampires specifically aren't. Dracula, (in the Stoker story, the 'legend' was virtually unknown outside of that) could turn into a bat, a wolf, or disappear into a cloud of fog. Essentially he could do.... well... pretty much anything he needed to.

Alex Warlorn
2008-02-04, 03:05 AM
Let's face facts, everything is stupid to someone, and everything is cool to someone.

Arkenputtyknife
2008-02-04, 03:14 AM
Let's face facts, everything is stupid to someone, and everything is cool to someone.
And your point is…?

Pronounceable
2008-02-04, 03:53 AM
All Hail The Mighty Duckbunny!


edit: Hey, shouting's been disabled?

monty
2008-02-04, 09:45 AM
Let's face facts, everything is stupid to someone, and everything is cool to someone.

Except the duckbunny. Seriously, that must have been designed by a five year old or something.

Crimson Avenger
2008-02-04, 10:42 AM
I object to the poo-poo-ing of evil squirrels. Haven't you seen the insurance commercial where the squirrels run the motorist of the road and then do a high five????

That PROVES that D&D style evil squirrels exist.

All hail our Evil Squirrel Overlord masters and the new era!

chibibar
2008-02-04, 10:46 AM
Originally (I remember somewhere on the original folklore) that Vampires did NOT originally change into bats. They could change into wolves and mist (ironically since their mortal enemies were werewolves) I think later on bats was added.

Prince_Rohan
2008-02-04, 10:47 AM
Let's face facts, everything is stupid to someone, and everything is cool to someone.

:confused: Rigghhhht. Good luck in the upcoming elections.

Any who...

Some of the these animals made me think of Austin Powers, and it recently hit as to why...?

Scott Evil: I was thinking I like animals. Maybe I'd be a vet.
Dr. Evil: An evil vet?
Scott Evil: No! Maybe like work in a petting zoo.
Dr. Evil: An evil petting zoo?
Scott Evil: You always do that!

Welcome to...


The Evil Petting Zoo
Scott Evil, Owner-Operator

Ladies and Gentlemen goodevening! You'll see that seeing is believing! Your ears and your eyes will be bleeding. We have clerics to see that your still breathing... Welcome to the show!

We have...


Oelephant Rides
(At the end of the ride they tell your kids how many licks to get to the tootsie-roll center of a tootsie-pop)
Giant Hamsters
(from Space!)
Evil Sqirrels
(But aren't they all, really?)
Duckbunnies!
(Also for sale - Pets or Meat)
...and much more

...and for the parents we have a heavy petting section next to the Mead Garden. Wednesday is Ladies Night! Ladies 1/2 cover. Succubae always free.

Plus, stop by the concession stand for our world and dimension famous Stench Cow burger. The only animal that smells better on the inside!

So grab the wife, mistress, and kids and come jump on a Flumph for a day of evil fun!

NOTE: The Putt-Putt course will be closed until the Giant Vampiric Frog colony migrates in the spring. We are eco-friendly.

:smallbiggrin:

FreiSchultz
2008-02-04, 11:45 AM
Funny, I think I have the Dragon Magazine issue with the Duckbunny and Armadellephant. I think it's somewhere in my room...

Yubari
2008-02-04, 11:47 AM
Cute. For those of you that didn't read the fine print at the bottom of the article, the author has this to say on the subject of duckbunnies:

The Duckbunny, which everyone seems to think is a total lie, was, if you don't mind me putting it into context, apparently the first animal any evil sorcery learns to make. You know, because a duck and a rabbit won't eat you if you get the magic spell wrong.

I can only assume he means "sorcerer", although given the context, a wizard would make more sense. I mean ... can you really picture Xykon or the like starting with duckbunnies?

Chronos
2008-02-04, 01:55 PM
Yeah, I love the notion of Duckbunnies as practice for making Owlbears and Squarks and Blast-Ended Skrewts.

Wait, what do you mean there aren't any Blast-Ended Skrewts in D&D yet?

BisectedBrioche
2008-02-04, 02:15 PM
Yeah, I love the notion of Duckbunnies as practice for making Owlbears and Squarks and Blast-Ended Skrewts.

Wait, what do you mean there aren't any Blast-Ended Skrewts in D&D yet?

I think someone did a Harry Potter d20 on the homebrew forums....

Yubari
2008-02-04, 02:24 PM
Hah, that would be pretty sweet. :smallamused:

chibibar
2008-02-04, 02:51 PM
Cute. For those of you that didn't read the fine print at the bottom of the article, the author has this to say on the subject of duckbunnies:

The Duckbunny, which everyone seems to think is a total lie, was, if you don't mind me putting it into context, apparently the first animal any evil sorcery learns to make. You know, because a duck and a rabbit won't eat you if you get the magic spell wrong.

I can only assume he means "sorcerer", although given the context, a wizard would make more sense. I mean ... can you really picture Xykon or the like starting with duckbunnies?

Sorcerer didn't exist until 2nd Ed I think (I know it wasn't around in basic or expert)

using magic = sorcery, so "technically" it is right ;) but yea... magic users.

Vectner
2008-02-04, 03:01 PM
My son and I took out the old 1st ed. Feind folio yesterday and looked through it. That book is full of stupid creatures. The flail snail and the kilmilouse, man those were dumb and of course taht is where the famous Flumpth originated and yes they are Lawful good.

chibibar
2008-02-04, 03:03 PM
My son and I took out the old 1st ed. Feind folio yesterday and looked through it. That book is full of stupid creatures. The flail snail and the kilmilouse, man those were dumb and of course taht is where the famous Flumpth originated and yes they are Lawful good.

Yea... but those earlier books also inspire many DM to create their own creatures :)

that is how with our gaming groups and our school.

Shademan
2008-02-04, 03:15 PM
My son and I took out the old 1st ed. Feind folio yesterday and looked through it. That book is full of stupid creatures. The flail snail and the kilmilouse, man those were dumb and of course taht is where the famous Flumpth originated and yes they are Lawful good.

can yeh scan some pics of them monsters?

Shademan
2008-02-04, 03:20 PM
My son and I took out the old 1st ed. Feind folio yesterday and looked through it. That book is full of stupid creatures. The flail snail and the kilmilouse, man those were dumb and of course taht is where the famous Flumpth originated and yes they are Lawful good.

can yeh scan some pics of them monsters?

Yubari
2008-02-04, 03:35 PM
Sorcerer didn't exist until 2nd Ed

Hmm, interesting. So ... does that mean wizards were the original spellcasters? My knowledge of D&D is limited, but this comic and the forums have certainly motivated me to learn more.

chibibar
2008-02-04, 03:54 PM
Hmm, interesting. So ... does that mean wizards were the original spellcasters? My knowledge of D&D is limited, but this comic and the forums have certainly motivated me to learn more.

depends ;)

in D&D basic

Elf, Cleric and Magic-users were the first spell casters. Yes Elf was a class (so was dwarves and halfling) I remember when the 1st edition came out (AD&D) there were expansion books that expand spellcasters class.
Wu-jin, Witch, Warmage (yes we can use shortsword and some longsword) Sorcerer (more or less) and sundry of other type of caster and of course Elf became a race and no longer a class.

Chronos
2008-02-04, 05:41 PM
Actually, I don't think sorcerers existed in 2nd edition, either. At the very least, they weren't in the core books, though there might have been a spontaneous-casting kit for the wizard in some splatbook or another.

chibibar
2008-02-04, 07:47 PM
Actually, I don't think sorcerers existed in 2nd edition, either. At the very least, they weren't in the core books, though there might have been a spontaneous-casting kit for the wizard in some splatbook or another.

no.. they were not core book, they were in the expansion books.. I can't remember for the life of me right now :(

but I play my first Wu-jin/Wildmage and Chronomancer from them :)

Swordlol
2008-02-04, 07:58 PM
I am no expert.

I do not claim to be an expert.

I was under the impression that vampires were undead, maybe not in D&D but I thought they were considered undead in mythology.

Again, no expert.

RTGoodman
2008-02-04, 08:06 PM
In case anyone is interested, most (if not all) of those critters have been updated to 3.5 in Necromancer Games' Tome of Horrors book. It's available for legit download on various websites (rpgnow.com is where I got mine), and is really worth whatever they charge for it.

(Of course, I got mine for free back during their Thanksgiving Giveaway thing in November, so that makes it even better.)

Furin_Mirado
2008-02-04, 09:16 PM
I've been guilty of doing something similar to the Room of Death. There was one level of a dungeon which was actually the wizard's home, so it was well-furnished and looked more or less like a house. The trick was that about half of the furniture (or wall hangings) were animated objects, hehe. Oh man, I instilled so much paranoia in my players, it was truly wonderful.

Dwarkanath
2008-02-04, 09:50 PM
I object to the poo-poo-ing of evil squirrels.Hear, hear!

I've always want to have flying carnivorous squirrels in my game: "normal" ones for flavor, giant and dire varieties as low level encounters.

Ooooh! And I'd probably have an adventure or two where the part had to find/talk to the hermit "Ruukeh" who just happened to be an 10th level druid / awakened giant flying squirrel (with the obligatory moose animal companion....)

-- Dave

hewhosaysfish
2008-02-05, 06:12 AM
Hear, hear!

I've always want to have flying carnivorous squirrels in my game: "normal" ones for flavor, giant and dire varieties as low level encounters.

Ooooh! And I'd probably have an adventure or two where the part had to find/talk to the hermit "Ruukeh" who just happened to be an 10th level druid / awakened giant flying squirrel (with the obligatory moose animal companion....)

-- Dave

My group was harassed (buy which I mean nearly killed) by ninja-assassin squirrel-things for a while. I'm not sure if they were meant to be sqirrelmen, dirre squirrels, were-squirrels or whatever. But they gave as a run for our money and some of them are still out there...

Prince_Rohan
2008-02-05, 11:32 AM
Hear, hear!

I've always want to have flying carnivorous squirrels in my game: "normal" ones for flavor, giant and dire varieties as low level encounters.

Ooooh! And I'd probably have an adventure or two where the part had to find/talk to the hermit "Ruukeh" who just happened to be an 10th level druid / awakened giant flying squirrel (with the obligatory moose animal companion....)

-- Dave

I've got a 9th LVL Dwarf Fighter named Boris along with his 10th LVL Sorceress companion Natasha who can make big trouble and take then down!

Kurald Galain
2008-02-05, 11:35 AM
Hmm, interesting. So ... does that mean wizards were the original spellcasters?

Essentially, yes. The original arcane spellcasters were "magic users", which were later renamed because let's face it, the term "magic user" sounds remarkably lame. The 1E MU strongly resembles the 3E wizard.

Elves, as printed in 1E, were a kind of fighter/wizard hybrid. Clerics were the original divine spellcasters, but couldn't use spells until level 2, back then. An early addition was the illusionist, which had a different spell list; the other seven specialties were introduced later.

Wu Jen and Witch (and about a dozen others) were "kits" for 2E wizards, which essentially means "alternate class features". Most of these kits were more about flavor than about special rules or mechanical bonuses.

I am unaware of any "sorcerer" class (or kit) being used in any second edition book. Certainly not in the Tome of Magic, or Complete Wizard. Of course, I haven't read every single 2E book. The sorcerer as it stands now was designed for 3E to not require every caster to memorize spells every day (2E used psionics for that).

chibibar
2008-02-05, 11:42 AM
I remember playing a Sorcerer before 3E came out. Its been so long :) hehe

I know that we haven't play 3E or 3.5E as a group (or 4.0) we been playing 2E forever.

Clovis
2008-02-05, 12:30 PM
I've never got over the image of an 'undead poodle' from a supplement... Some deranged necromancer missed his pet. Ooh, Xycon or 'Pet sematary', anyone? Which reminds me, has anyone seen d20 stats for King's 'IT'?

Weiser_Cain
2008-02-05, 01:54 PM
I've never got over the image of an 'undead poodle' from a supplement... Some deranged necromancer missed his pet. Ooh, Xycon or 'Pet sematary', anyone? Which reminds me, has anyone seen d20 stats for King's 'IT'?

Nope, post it!

Furin_Mirado
2008-02-05, 02:04 PM
Nope, post it!

That thing must be nasty. It could go in that new Elder Evils book.

Underfoot
2008-02-05, 02:28 PM
I always thought the bulette was stupid. Primarily because Gygax insists it's pronounced "bew-LAY" - "like the French." *ahem* An -ette is always pronounced, in French, like ET... as in Smurfette. If he wanted it "bew-LAY" and wanted a French transcription, it would be spelled "boulet."

Kurald Galain
2008-02-05, 05:36 PM
I always thought the bulette was stupid. Primarily because Gygax insists it's pronounced "bew-LAY" - "like the French." *ahem*

Wait until you're in Paris and you hear those bloody Americans asking where the ChemsuhLIEsys is...

Demented
2008-02-05, 07:27 PM
I always thought the bulette was stupid. Primarily because Gygax insists it's pronounced "bew-LAY" - "like the French." *ahem* An -ette is always pronounced, in French, like ET... as in Smurfette. If he wanted it "bew-LAY" and wanted a French transcription, it would be spelled "boulet."

...Except that you'd never, ever, EVER be able to take seriously a monster named "boulet".

Weiser_Cain
2008-02-05, 07:53 PM
I always thought the bulette was stupid. Primarily because Gygax insists it's pronounced "bew-LAY" - "like the French." *ahem* An -ette is always pronounced, in French, like ET... as in Smurfette. If he wanted it "bew-LAY" and wanted a French transcription, it would be spelled "boulet."

I have so many more problem with the dnd guys than than the occasional stupid monster I don't use, that said, french? Come on!

Alex Warlorn
2008-09-22, 04:27 PM
Except the duckbunny. Seriously, that must have been designed by a five year old or something.

Actually going to use those in my campaign, they're so cute!


And what's wrong with Five year olds?

Linkavitch
2008-09-22, 04:33 PM
Those are all completely ridiculous!:biggrin:

Impikmin
2008-09-22, 09:28 PM
That was funny.

And, I finally found out what the creature on the right (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0055.html) is supposed to be!

Lmao that was soo funny. And yes, I agree, I finally know!

Jenx
2008-09-23, 03:30 AM
Aside from the article having a bit too much of a trollish flavor then I think it should, it was a great read. I guess it's just part of D&D to have absurdly stupid monsters attack your players.

What's wrong with goblins and orks I ask!? What?