D&D-- How Many Frog Races?

[Grod_The_Giant]

I'm trying to catalogue all the races of frog-people D&D has introduced over the years for a campaign that's not at all inspired by Hellboy/BPRD comics. Can you guys help out? So far I have:

• Anthropomorphic Toads (Savage Species rules)
• Bullywogs
• Froghemoth
• Grippli
• Grung
• Hezrou (demon frogs)
• Koa-Toa (are sometimes frogs)
• Neraphim ("totally not slaad you guys")
• Siv (racist frog assassins)
• Slaad (evil chaos frogs)

But I'm pretty sure these aren't the only ones. Can you guys help me find more frogs?

[Corvus]

There are a few, but it is still way less than elves. Those things are like cockroaches.

[Luccan]

I've been informed kua-toa are supposed to be Lovecraftian fish-folk (and definitely resemble fish more in 5e), but I also used to think they were frogs. This was based on the 3rd/3.5 art.

There's another frog race from Limbo: Neraphim. From the Planar Handbook and I think they might've been in an online article

Edit: Yup, here it is

[hamishspence]

Sivs are like Bullywugs, but more Lawful-leaning - they're in Monsters of Faerun in 3.0.

[Yanagi]

Neraphim are another planar frog from Limbo in 3.5

[Millstone85]

I do not know how it was before, but in 5e the froghemoth is an Int 2 unaligned creature that doesn't understand any language. So, I don't think it is people.

And like Luccan said, the kuo-toa are fishlike, not froglike.

[hamishspence]

I've been informed kua-toa are supposed to be Lovecraftian fish-folk (and definitely resemble fish more in 5e), but I also used to think they were frogs. This was based on the 3rd/3.5 art.

Lovecraft did describe his Deep Ones as both fishlike and froglike - "fish-frogs".

[Metastachydium]

Vodyanoi from Dragon no. 352?

[Lord Torath]

I want to say there was some attempted creation of 'frog people' in DA2 Temple of the Frog, but I don't recall for certain.

In 1E and 2E AD&D kuo-toans were definitely fish-like.

[Grod_The_Giant]

There are a few, but it is still way less than elves. Those things are like cockroaches.

At least elves come in different colors. I don't think I could tell you what makes a Grippli different from a Grung if my life depended on it.

I've been informed kua-toa are supposed to be Lovecraftian fish-folk (and definitely resemble fish more in 5e), but I also used to think they were frogs. This was based on the 3rd/3.5 art.

Same. The 3.5 Monster Manual's illustration is definitely a frog.

There's another frog race from Limbo: Neraphim. From the Planar Handbook and I think they might've been in an online article

Forgot about those guys.

Sivs are like Bullywugs, but more Lawful-leaning - they're in Monsters of Faerun in 3.0.

Yes! I knew I hadn't imagined stumbling across a species of racist frog assassins in an obscure 3e book.

[Luccan]

Same. The 3.5 Monster Manual's illustration is definitely a frog.




Forgot about those guys.

Yeah. It's also slightly better design, imo. The 5e ones look outright goofy and the MM picture is definitely giving a thumbs up for some reason.

What's funny is I had to double check an old thread where I was looking for specific races (races without stat bonuses) in order to confirm their name and you were one of the people that recommended neraphim to me.

[Grod_The_Giant]

What's funny is I had to double check an old thread where I was looking for specific races (races without stat bonuses) in order to confirm their name and you were one of the people that recommended neraphim to me.

Heh. It's been a while since I touched 3.5 stuff--I think most of my knowledge has been swapped out for Exalted and 5e.

(Alternate title: you know you've been on the same boards too long when...)

[hamishspence]

At least elves come in different colors. I don't think I could tell you what makes a Grippli different from a Grung if my life depended on it.

the fact that grungs come in very specific colours, denoting castes, is what separates them from grippli

https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Grung

Whereas grippli tend to be grey-green (though rainforest grippli are more variable) and, importantly, there's no "caste colour coding"

https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Grippli

[gloryblaze]

I think the Batrachi are supposed to be, like, the ur-frogfolk or the common ancestor of all frog people or something along those lines.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I think the Batrachi are supposed to be, like, the ur-frogfolk or the common ancestor of all frog people or something along those lines.

...and here I thought I was going to have to make up a primordial frog-sorcerer empire from scratch. :D

[Mechalich]

Vodyanoi from Dragon no. 352?

I believe those are intended to be salamander people, which is a small but significant distinction.


With regards to Kua-toa, it's worth noting that the difference between 'anthropomorphic fish' and 'anthropomorphic frog' is going to be fairly modest, and the design of the skull is not dispositive. The ventrally compressed and laterally extended skulls of frogs bear a considerable resemblance to a design found not only in many fish such as monkfish, and well, frogfish, but also many early tetrapodomorphs such as the famous Tiktaalik. Modern frogs are highly specialized animals, but the diagnostic features are mostly non-external. So whether or not Kua-toa are 'frog-people' or 'fish-people' involves some fantasy biology hairsplitting.

[Metastachydium]

I believe those are intended to be salamander people, which is a small but significant distinction.

Nope. They are explicitly described as resembling "fishy frogs" and look nothing like salamanders, if the art is anything to go by.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I believe those are intended to be salamander people, which is a small but significant distinction.

Vodyanoy are creatures from Eastern European folklore; their exact spot on the frog/human spectrum varies depending on where you are and who you ask.

[hamishspence]

The vodyanoi from the Perdido Street Station issue of Dragon Magazine (352) look a bit different from the vodyanoi from the Frostburn 3.5 splatbook.

The Frostburn one basically had hair, a beard, and a moustache, albeit green and a little tendril-like - very little of the overtly froggish about it.

[Quertus]

I should definitely not have been eating while reading this thread! (That I don't know if some of the comments were serious or intended as humorous makes it even funnier!)

My minimal contribution is… isn't there a frog-like demon Prince or something?

[hamishspence]

There's Tsathogga from the Cthulhu Mythos - very froglike, and in Pathfinder, he's a demon lord.

Wastri is the Greyhawk god of amphibians (and humanocentric bigotry, and self deception) - implied to be once human rather than once a demon.

[Grim Portent]

My minimal contribution is… isn't there a frog-like demon Prince or something?

There's the Troglodyte abyssal demi-god Laogzed, who's described as a monstrous toad/lizard hybrid.

[Millstone85]

There's the Troglodyte abyssal demi-god Laogzed, who's described as a monstrous toad/lizard hybrid.

The 5e illustration of the troglodyte also looks a bit toad-like, though the statblock suggests nothing of the sort..

[ahyangyi]

Frog, lizard, and weasel hengeyokai, as well as larger types like dolphin, panda, and tiger hengeyokai were spoken of in legends, but never confirmed to exist, at least by humans.

A... near hit, I think.

[KorvinStarmast]

I've been informed kua-toa are supposed to be Lovecraftian fish-folk

Yes

(and definitely resemble fish more in 5e), but I also used to think they were frogs.

Not originally. (They were featured in the second Underdark module that Gygax made for AD&D 1e).