Interesting low-level monsters to encounter?

[Fiery Diamond]

I'm looking for interesting low-level monsters for a group of adventurers to encounter as they travel. System is irrelevant; in fact, monsters from video games, fantasy literature, mythology, manga, or just created out of your own imagination are all welcome. Actually, I especially encourage that last one. They should have an interesting appearance and/or some sort of special ability. Bonus points if they're "like this animal, but with these crucial differences" or otherwise easy to describe while still remaining interesting.

Thanks in advance!

[redwizard007]

Low level is greatly dependent on the specific system.

[Fiery Diamond]

Low level is greatly dependent on the specific system.

That's a remarkably unhelpful point to make. If you must know, I'm actually planning to use this in a story, where the distinction of "level" is even more useless. Saying "low-level," on the other hand, while not specifying what to include, does a pretty good job of indicating to exclude certain types of monsters. If only a legendary hero can hope to defeat it, it's pretty clearly not "low-level," after all. I was deliberately trying to leave it open to interpretation.

But yes, I suppose that some people might interpret "low-level" to mean "lower X% of the level range for a given system" instead of "low power level." And those people might say what you did. However, that's a remarkably narrow way to interpret the term "low-level," and not a very useful one. Nothing meant to seriously challenge the PCs in, say, Exalted could reasonably be considered low-level by any definition but that one, for instance, while I'm sure some systems have the upper echelon of power still within normal human capabilities. One would think my going out of the way to clarify that system was irrelevant to what I was asking would make it clear that "lower X% of the level range for a given system" was a nonsensical interpretation of the term "low-level," but apparently not.

If you need any kind of more specific description of the kind of power level I'm looking for (and I don't see why you would - if your example was more powerful than what I had in mind I could probably use if later on when the characters were stronger): a group of people without superhuman capabilities or offensive magic should be able to take it out with medieval weaponry or clever tricks (though not necessarily without sacrifice). The weakest monster my characters have faced so far was basically a rabbit with a fox's tail and a unicorn horn on its forehead (a child defeated this monster). The strongest was a six-legged horned bear a little bigger than a polar bear with a damage-resistant hide (this monster killed one person and severely wounded others; it was defeated by later ganging up on it and using magic to take it down more quickly). I'm not the best at doing monster research or coming up with my own monsters, however, which is why I'm turning to the forums for help.

[Corneel]

Morrowind has a bunch of unusual creatures that might interest you.

Kwamas, which are eusocial insectoid animals.

Spoiler: Kwama images

Show

Spoiler: Forager

Show

Spoiler: Worker

Show

Spoiler: Warrior

Show

Spoiler: Queen

Show

Spoiler: Scrib (Larva)

Show

There are also a host of other beasts here.

If encountering (rather than fighting) is the idea the Netch are pretty neat since they are floating around.

Spoiler: Bull and Betty Netch

Show

di Terlizzi, the main artist for AD&D 2nd Edition's Planescape setting has, apart from that, a lot of inspiring artwork for all types of creatures amongst others from his work for the Spiderwick Chronicles. Just google his name for images.

Spoiler: Examples

Show

[falcon1]

Ningyos are Pathfinder monsters, which are basically monkey mermaids who come to life as zombies every night.

[Jay R]

Goblins in my world are half-instinctual. On their own, they will attack by running forward as an unorganized mob, but morale will break early if they aren't winning.

They are not standard D&D goblins, but are similar to D&D Orcs, but with slightly more stamina and slightly less long-term courage. They have a pasty white skin which is subject to sunburn. Their legs are slightly shorter than men’s, and the arms are slightly longer.

They are almost free-willed and sentient, being tribal creatures who will follow a strong leader - similar to the Great Apes in Tarzan books. They have no desire to be in an army – a raiding party is their preferred organization. Their morale is quite steady when they are winning, or when their leaders are behind them ready to kill stragglers.

Their claws are decent weapons, though not quite as good as swords. They prefer using weapons, to provide a little distance, but are quite willing to rend flesh with their claws if necessary, and will always feed with their bare hands.

They have no competent craftsmen, so their weapons are crude – clubs or very rough spears. If they have anything better made, they have been armed, or have stolen the weapons.

Goblins have no sense of tactics or planning. The same, alas, cannot be said for those who are leading them. Whether you see him or not, if there are more than 20 or so goblins together, there’s a leader from some other race commanding them. The usual place for this leader is behind them, ready to kill any who break. As long as they are more afraid of the leader than the enemy, they will keep fighting.

They will occasionally be found riding wolves. Wolf-riders tend to ride in quickly, cut one victim out of the pack, and run away with it for feasting later. Note that this is a wolf tactic. They are being led, not by the goblin chief, but by the alpha wolf.

[Mastikator]

How about just straight up animals? Big spiders, snakes, wolves, bears, hawks, panthers, etc

Or weird combos like owlbears, chimeras and centaurs?

[redwizard007]

*rant*

Given the ability to disregard all threat clarifications, lots of possibilities open up.

Dragons, Sphinx, Hags, Cyclops, bridge trolls, etc. that would be lethal in a fight, may be more than willing to substitute a non-combat encounter. Riddles, games of luck or skill, even poetry recitals could function as a break in the pattern of your story. Additionally, they may have a mini-quest of their own.

Since you seem to be into original creations, any of the above could be replaced with a giant-floating-jellyfish that will allow passage over a bridge if the characters can bring it 3 goats to eat, hill sized earth elemental in a destructive rage because it's gemstone eyes have been stolen by miners (or kobolds,) a bear with the head of a lion that challenges the characters to a game of chess, or a pterodactyl that will eat a character unless someone can answer a riddle.

For combat encounters, a fire spirit could be quite easy if encountered near water or loose earth, so could some incarnation of stirges, sprites, mephits, or scarabs.

In original creations, a feral cat with face tentacles could be interesting, as could insectoid monkeys with a hive mind, jumping squid, migrating herds of winged pygmy hippopotamuses, or man eating plantlife.

[Ixidor92]

So, I understand that you're looking for stuff outside of D&D, but here's a couple of monsters from 5e (and previous editions) that I enjoyed using at low levels for various reasons.

-Darkmantles: These creatures are essentially black levitating squids that pretend to be stalactites before dropping down and strangling people. They're actually a decent threat to low-level adventurers if not spotted beforehand, and you can stick them into just about any cave-like environment.

-Ettercaps: Fun creatures that are basically humanoid spiders. They have the ability to spin web and also keep pet spiders, which they use to their advantage when constructing defenses of their territory. Imagine a creature that had the ability to make spider webs that were human-sized, and also had a basic intelligence that would let them construct traps with it. Stronger creatures and creatures that rely on fire don't have much to worry about since once the web-traps are removed they don't have much beyond a weak venomous bite.

-Gelatinous cube: On its own, this monster isn't very interesting or much of a threat honestly. The fun part comes in when more intelligent creatures take advantage of it. A gelatinous cube can't really be trained in the same way an attack dog can, but its behavior is simple enough that it can be effectively utilized. Kept in a pit for corpse disposal (or simply people disposal) or maybe a mindless guard dog in a labyrinth of passages.

-Adding magic to anything: This may be more of mechanical means of interest than a lore one, but taking any low power creature and giving it even a single level of cleric, sorcerer, or any other kind of main spellcaster class adds a layer to the combat. A group of kobolds behind traps become much deadlier if they have a cleric of Tiamat with them. You could even add latent magic powers to creatures that can't be trained, maybe a manticore has some latent spell-like abilities due to living in the service of a lich for decades, that sort of thing.

[Dao_Pun]

Boggles, i love boggles they are fey creatures that manifest in the presence of lowliness, and play pranks.
A boggle is a 3-foot tall, vaguely humanoid creature with skin color that varies from blackish-blue to dark gray. Boggles all have large, bulbous heads, but the rest of their body parts are disproportionate in size and length and vary from individual to individual. Their bodies are partially elastic, and they may stretch up to twice their length or contract to one-half their size. A boggle secretes a viscous black oily substance from its pores, and creatures treading on the oil can fall down on the slick surface it creates. A boggle can reach through a hole and appear magically through any complete frame (another hole, a door frame, grillwork, between someone’s legs), and can use this ability to run away, grab or strike at an opponent.

[Kaptin Keen]

Humans!

Or any race - especially taken out of their usual or expected context - make interesting encounters. Elven bandits, dwarven smugglers or thugs, orcish knights, whatever.

Or simply invent something. A colony of intelligent bugs, nature or hearth spirits, poisonous fungus that drives people berserk, encounters that can't be won in a straight-up fight (rolling barrels of acid or greek fire into the maw of a sarlacc, for instance).

[Wraith]

One of my favourite tales regarding D&D encounters, which could very easily be applied to just about any system, goes thus:

The party walks into a room, which then eats them because the ceiling is a Lurker Above, three of the walls are Stunjellies, the floor is a Trapper and the door is a Mimic. Roll initiative.

In fact, Mimics of any kind are always fun even at low level - no matter how puny and pathetic their stats are, they can always pose a risk just through the element of surprise giving them that first strike. A mimic posing as spoon is not itself that much of an enemy, but just the knowledge among your players that ANYTHING could be out to get them often causes more damage than the creatures themselves.

Especially if you're creative with what the mimic is actually pretending to be. Everyone has been bitten by a hungry treasure chest or tripped up by an angry doormat, but I'd bet far fewer are expecting to be attacked by a coin-purse found on a dead enemy, or a flagon full of ale in the tavern, or the saddle that eats your horse out from under you while you're trying to make your get-away....

[Lord Torath]

I was going to suggest a Rust Monster. Carrion Crawlers are also a nasty low-level-threat.

[The Jack]

a remarkably unhelpful point to make.

If you don't have the creativity to come up with your own conflict (or the ability to articulate queries effectively) maybe it's best off you don't write.


Oh, and a Bullsquid.

[Jay R]

In fact, Mimics of any kind are always fun even at low level - no matter how puny and pathetic their stats are, they can always pose a risk just through the element of surprise giving them that first strike.

One of the fun things to do with a mimic is have them face a mimic disguised as a chest once, very early on. The party will then view all treasure with suspicion.

[Fiery Diamond]

If you don't have the creativity to come up with your own conflict (or the ability to articulate queries effectively) maybe it's best off you don't write.

...Wow. Okay, so several issues here.

1) Having difficulty in one area does not mean someone is lacking in creativity in general.
2) Monsters =/= conflict in the sense that conflict is used when talking about stories.
3) Assuming different meanings of terms than someone else =/= inability to articulate. I was deliberately nonspecific to avoid unnecessarily narrowing the field of responses.
4) Telling someone they are lacking in a non-constructive sense and then telling them they shouldn't participate in a hobby as a result is uncalled for and highly insulting.
5) I'm reporting you for flaming as a result of #4.

To everyone else in this thread: these are some great ideas! Thank you, and keep 'em coming!

[War_lord]

When asking people for help on a forum, the best reaction to your query being unclear (you said level, this is a gaming forum, people will assume you mean in game levels) isn't to go on a rant and then act like a jerk when people call you out on it. A person misunderstood your highly vague post and you responded with nothing but condescending language. And yeah, if you aren't capable of grasping that your tone was rude and condescending and that people are naturally going to have a problem with that, that says a lot about your writing abilities.

And it's ironic that your location is "the imagination" when you apparently need help to even gather the imagination to borrow ideas from other fiction.

[Calthropstu]

Believe it or not, I would reccomend simple mundane animals, but with a twist.
People love animals, and it's certainly easier to describe and get the reader to empathize or despise.
So a wizards familiar whos master died but it kept the intelligence, a three legged wolf who developed psychic powers to survive, a magically or chemically mutated animal... all would be easily effective, strange and grab a readers attention.

Outside of that, pathfinder really does have exactly what you are looking for. From low level proteans and qlippoths to smaller monsters pulled from world mythology. I recommend browsing d20pfsrd.com or perusing the bestiaries.

[Fiery Diamond]

When asking people for help on a forum, the best reaction to your query being unclear (you said level, this is a gaming forum, people will assume you mean in game levels) isn't to go on a rant and then act like a jerk when people call you out on it. A person misunderstood your highly vague post and you responded with nothing but condescending language. And yeah, if you aren't capable of grasping that your tone was rude and condescending and that people are naturally going to have a problem with that, that says a lot about your writing abilities.

And it's ironic that your location is "the imagination" when you apparently need help to even gather the imagination to borrow ideas from other fiction.

Rule #1 for discussions: If you don't have something to contribute, don't post. Posting something that isn't a contribution but is only a nonconstructive criticism is, in fact, a jerk move. I'm not talking about your post; I'm talking about the initial response that I replied to. If they had said, "What I would consider low-level varies depending on system; can you clarify what you're looking for?" I would have been 100% okay with that. But that's not what they said, and it's not how it came across. You can scroll up for exactly what they said, but this is how it came across to me: "Your request is bad and self-contradictory; you say system is irrelevant but it obviously is relevant!" That's not a request for clarification, that's an attack on my post.

As I've stated, the opening post was intentionally slightly vague so that I would get a wider variety of responses. Complaining that it was vague is ... well, let's just say it's missing the point. Like I said, a simple request for more details would have been fine, and I would have happily obliged.

Saying: "You're being unhelpful and using an overly narrow interpretation of broad terminology, which is nonsensical given the context" isn't condescending, it's being honest. And that's all I said besides going ahead and giving additional details (which I noted I thought was unnecessary for reasons I provided, but still did anyway). Also, familiarity with how people are going to take something I say doesn't have anything to do with writing abilities, it has to do with social skills (which I will admit I have always had trouble with).

Lastly, and I can't stress this enough, not all creativity is the same. You wouldn't expect a painter to be an expert musical composer, even if they were one of the best painters in the world. "Writing a story" is not a single skill set, it has a lot of parts. Most writers use other works as inspiration, and writers asking others for help with aspects they have difficulty with isn't a flaw, it's a given. One of the areas with which I struggle is coming up with creative monsters to include in my fantasy stories. I was already doing independent research when I came to the forums for additional help because I felt the time spent to useful things gotten ratio was too high.

Well, I actually have one more point, so I guess the previous one wasn't really "lastly." The other post I got upset about? It was a direct personal attack. Saying, "If you are so terrible at your hobby, maybe you shouldn't have it as a hobby" is a direct personal attack that's tantamount to bullying, and if you can't see that, then... well. That would be a flaw of your own.

[mephnick]

Rule #1 for discussions: If you don't have something to contribute, don't post.

I'm so confused. It says you've been here since 2007, so you're at least 12 years old. I just don't see it.

[Fiery Diamond]

I'm so confused. It says you've been here since 2007, so you're at least 12 years old. I just don't see it.

The sentiment also applies to face-to-face discussions, actually, though I wouldn't use the word "post" when talking about those. It's part of the unspoken social contract. What exactly are you confused about?

[JNAProductions]

FD, your first post was fine. It was a general question.

Your second post made you seem like an enormous tool. Yes, the responses you got weren't exactly the best either, but you should look to yourself for why it's gotten coarse.

[War_lord]

FD, your first post was fine. It was a general question.

Your second post made you seem like an enormous tool. Yes, the responses you got weren't exactly the best either, but you should look to yourself for why it's gotten coarse.

Bingo, your first post was fine FD, and then you responded to a brief, simple query that was entirely expected given the (apparently intentional) vagueness of your post by flying off the handle and going on a rant based on what you projected onto that simple question. And now you're surprised anyone is taking issues with your attitude?

I have issues with social interaction, I don't blame other people when I roll a critical fail on managing my issues with social interaction.

[Fiery Diamond]

Bingo, your first post was fine FD, and then you responded to a brief, simple query that was entirely expected given the (apparently intentional) vagueness of your post by flying off the handle and going on a rant based on what you projected onto that simple question. And now you're surprised anyone is taking issues with your attitude?

I have issues with social interaction, I don't blame other people when I roll a critical fail on managing my issues with social interaction.

There is not a single question mark in the initial reply to the opening post. It isn't a question, it's a statement. As such, I interpreted it as a statement. Like I said, I would have been fine with an actual question, which it was not.

[JNAProductions]

There is not a single question mark in the initial reply to the opening post. It isn't a question, it's a statement. As such, I interpreted it as a statement. Like I said, I would have been fine with an actual question, which it was not.

So the lack of a question means it's worth dismissing?

No, it was a perfectly reasonable response. Your reply to it was not.

[War_lord]

There is not a single question mark in the initial reply to the opening post. It isn't a question, it's a statement. As such, I interpreted it as a statement. Like I said, I would have been fine with an actual question, which it was not.

You know, you just admitted that you're not good at social skills. So maybe you'd like to consider that you are in the wrong with your massive overreaction to a simple question in response to an (apparently intentionally) vague post?

[Kaptin Keen]

Rule #1 for discussions: If you don't have something to contribute, don't post.

I wasn't going to post anything else here, but ... really.

I kinda agree with your Rule #1 there - but it needs a Rule #2, namely: If someone does post something unhelpful, your best response is to ignore it, or respond humorously, if possible.

Your thread is no longer about low level monsters, it's about this. That's all you've achieved. And you could simply have let it slide, and then the thread would still be about low level monsters. And I say this, not to rant against you, but because I've had to learn Rule #2 myself.

[Fiery Diamond]

You know, you just admitted that you're not good at social skills. So maybe you'd like to consider that you are in the wrong with your massive overreaction to a simple question in response to an (apparently intentionally) vague post?

Okay. I will admit that I did not correctly perceive how my response would be seen, and that it was seen much more negatively than intended. But I still stand by my statement that it was not framed as a question, making that poster just as faulty in not correctly perceiving how it would be seen, because I did not see it as a question. And if it wasn't a question, how else was I supposed to interpret it? As I said, if it had been framed as a question, I wouldn't have gotten upset. At all. It wasn't "a simple question," it was a statement. It didn't even cross my mind that it was supposed to be a question.

Kaptin Keen is right, though. Rather than getting upset and responding, I should have just ignored it. That is 100% my fault. My thanks to Kaptin Keen for saying this to me.

[Knaight]

There's always the good old fashioned animal hybrids, including animal-human hybrids. On the human side lizardpeople and birdpeople are particularly common, but there's no reason amphibians, crustaceans, and other less common ones couldn't be used. These also let you vary from the barely merged humans with beast heads and vice versa to more thorough hybrids, along with shapeshifters.

On the animal side there's suddenly tons of room to go wild. Mixes of bird and land animal are particularly common, along with land animals and fish, and snakes with basically anything else. Again though there's room for all sorts of mixing - lizard like creatures with chitin instead of conventional scales, antennae, and water breathing capacity come to mind as one specific example.

I'm also quite fond of animal automatons. Sticking to comparatively minor threats, small wood or stone statues found on shrines could easily be creatures, and the combination of the strengths provided by being made of something stronger than flesh and the weird movement could be fun.

That's a remarkably unhelpful point to make. If you must know, I'm actually planning to use this in a story, where the distinction of "level" is even more useless. Saying "low-level," on the other hand, while not specifying what to include, does a pretty good job of indicating to exclude certain types of monsters. If only a legendary hero can hope to defeat it, it's pretty clearly not "low-level," after all. I was deliberately trying to leave it open to interpretation.

"Level" is also a jargon term with minimal uses outside of the various areas it's jargon for - and as we're talking about monsters and not buildings, surfaces, etc. and you posted in a roleplaying games subforum it's entirely reasonable to read this in a way referring to specific games that use monsters with levels (particularly given the extent to which unlabeled threads usually refer to D&D).

This issue was pointed out, such that you could clarify what you actually meant. All this got in return was a bunch of hostility. I believe there's a policy about that:

Rule #1 for discussions: If you don't have something to contribute, don't post. Posting something that isn't a contribution but is only a nonconstructive criticism is, in fact, a jerk move.

Yep, that was it.

[redwizard007]

Low level is greatly dependent on the specific system.

Low level can have extensive variation depending in the setting or system used. If you could provide additional parameters to help guide us to the type of threats you are looking for that would aid us in answering your request.


Would that have been more satisfactory? It still doesn't have a question mark, which seems to be s sore point.

Originally, I just ignored the dismissive portions of OPs response and added some appropriately mild creatures and scenarios in my second post (because it's the internet and I'm an adult.) Since the "unhelpful first response" actually prompted a clarification of what OP was really looking for, it had exactly the result I hoped for, and resulted in some neat responses.

Now that we are getting hung up on OPs inability to communicate with other human beings I must ask, how was your response to me any different from the post above that you threatened to report for flaming?