Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on January 11, 2025, 09:27:49 AM

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 10, 2025, 08:31:48 PM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on January 10, 2025, 02:43:02 PMDryad: There are a few male tree spirits in European folklore, but they're generally an Old Man of the Woods, not hot young man of the woods. The closest I can find is the Scottish Ghillie Dhu, or "dark-haired lad".

The term I've found in research for non-OGL monsters for a male tree spirit is Drus... which actually fits well with Dryad so I decided to use it.

That's fakelore. There is no "drus" in any pre-internet sources. It seems to be something someone made up and shared online.

Perhaps. I don't mind it because it's just a slight variation on the Greek Drys (δρῦς) "tree."

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 11, 2025, 09:44:56 AM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on January 11, 2025, 09:27:49 AM

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 10, 2025, 08:31:48 PM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on January 10, 2025, 02:43:02 PMDryad: There are a few male tree spirits in European folklore, but they're generally an Old Man of the Woods, not hot young man of the woods. The closest I can find is the Scottish Ghillie Dhu, or "dark-haired lad".

The term I've found in research for non-OGL monsters for a male tree spirit is Drus... which actually fits well with Dryad so I decided to use it.

That's fakelore. There is no "drus" in any pre-internet sources. It seems to be something someone made up and shared online.

Perhaps. I don't mind it because it's just a slight variation on the Greek Drys (δρῦς) "tree."

It is the Greek word for tree.

Something I dislike about loanwords for myths is that the literal meaning is often lost in the loaning, so we get nonsensical folk etymologies leading to situations like thinking a "drus" is a male dryad when it is literally a tree. Likewise, the "taur" in centaur means bull and not centauroid, the hob in hobgoblin means home or hearth and not big, etc. (If it did mean big, then where are all the larger-sized hob-kobolds, hob-gnomes, hob-sprites, etc?)

The basic problem here is that English doesn't have a masculinizing affix. Words are generally assumed to be male or neuter depending on context, with a suffix like -ess indicating a female counterpart. There is the -er used in widower, but it's identical to the agent suffix used for driver, welder, etc.

You could coin "dryader" in this instance, I guess?

Anyway, the D&D dryad is derived from the Greek hamadryad, whose life was bound to her tree. (Dryad translates to "she of the tree/oak", while hamadryad translates to "she [who is] one with tree".) There really isn't any masculine version of the (hama)dryad in folklore. There are wild men of the woods, satyrs, etc., but the closest there is to the hamadryad is the Old Man of the Forest like Leshy or Oxylus, a singular god of his forest.

But the D&D 5e dryad doesn't fit any of the dryad lore at all. In this edition, they're fey who are imprisoned by being bound to trees, not the personification of their tree. It makes little sense to call them dryads now aside from ill-fitting tradition.

Quote from: HappyDaze on January 10, 2025, 08:51:06 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 10, 2025, 08:31:48 PM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on January 10, 2025, 02:43:02 PMDryad: There are a few male tree spirits in European folklore, but they're generally an Old Man of the Woods, not hot young man of the woods. The closest I can find is the Scottish Ghillie Dhu, or "dark-haired lad".

The term I've found in research for non-OGL monsters for a male tree spirit is Drus... which actually fits well with Dryad so I decided to use it.

I like the Age of Sigmar/Soulbound take on Sylvaneth when referring to the overall class of wood spirits. There are lithe female dryads and hulking male treemen (quite a bit of sexual dimorphism there) as well as the revenants (tree spirits shaped by the souls of deceased wood aelves) that appear in both genders. There are more beyond these too (e.g., the Kurnoth Hunters), and most of the Sylvaneth are not strictly bound by gender.

I was going to mention Warhammer's take on succubi in this context as well, where the Daemonettes are hideous androgenous monsters, but they're supposed to possess a supernatural beauty that can fascinate anyone regardless of their personal proclivities. A lust demon that can tempt you into desires you would normally find revolting is creepier to me than one that just plays on your existing desires.

I'm researching sylvaneth, lorwyn elves and glorantha elves. I like their different takes on woodland fairies.

The D&D lore on dryads isn't consistent across editions. The pre-4e stuff generally seems to hew more towards the Greek myths and to some Celtic fairy lore like abduction. Then in 4e it abruptly turns into a pastiche of Warhammer dryads, appearing as wood creatures that could glamor themselves as fey women. Then in 5e they're created by fairy lords who imprison other fairies by binding them to trees.

I'm thinking of revising the lore...

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on January 11, 2025, 10:36:05 AMBut the D&D 5e dryad doesn't fit any of the dryad lore at all. In this edition, they're fey who are imprisoned by being bound to trees, not the personification of their tree. It makes little sense to call them dryads now aside from ill-fitting tradition.

D&D doesn't have elves that fit the myths of elves or dwarves that fit the myths of dwarves. D&D has long (in modern terms) been forming own modern myths that have become the norms of pop culture. I don't worry too much if monsters that also appear in other myths have little in common with D&D creatures of the same name.

Quote from: HappyDaze on January 11, 2025, 12:45:44 PM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on January 11, 2025, 10:36:05 AMBut the D&D 5e dryad doesn't fit any of the dryad lore at all. In this edition, they're fey who are imprisoned by being bound to trees, not the personification of their tree. It makes little sense to call them dryads now aside from ill-fitting tradition.

D&D doesn't have elves that fit the myths of elves or dwarves that fit the myths of dwarves. D&D has long (in modern terms) been forming own modern myths that have become the norms of pop culture. I don't worry too much if monsters that also appear in other myths have little in common with D&D creatures of the same name.

It contradicts itself in this case and doesn't give any reason why

Quote from: Skullking on January 11, 2025, 05:09:09 AM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 10, 2025, 10:11:53 PMThere is still no combat wheelchair in 5e. Just a single picture (and only a picture) of a guy in a wheelchair (looks like an ordinary one). No rules about them. No text. None of that.

I'll translate this for folks:

"Stop complaining frog, and stay in the pot until it boils."

The OP from Pundit was also about trying to dispel a misunderstanding -

Quote from: RPGPundit on January 08, 2025, 10:36:28 AMNo, WotC did not put something about anti-colonialism in the D&D DMG. That's a misunderstanding caused by some people looking at a third party product by a bunch of nobodies and intentionally generating controversy by letting people think it's the DMG.

I would say it is fine to complain, but one should be truthful and accurate about what you're complaining about. In the case of the "anti-colonialism" or the "Romancing Monsters" clips, one should be clear that they're from Sly Flourish, not from WotC.

In the case of the wheelchair, there is a picture of an NPC in a wheelchair in the 2024 PHB - namely Alanik Ray from Ravenloft. Ravenloft has had wheelchairs since 1986 when Lord Weathermay (a wheelchair-using NPC fighter) appeared in I10 Ravenloft II. However, the "combat wheelchair" was a homebrew doc for a special magic item created by Sara Thompson in 2019. That magic item has never appeared in any WotC document.


As I understand it, Pundit is calling it "fake and dumb" to show a third-party or homebrew material, and then jump to complaining about WotC for it. If one is going to complain about WotC, use their actual material, not third-party stuff.

Well, I meant it in both senses: first, the misunderstanding that it was WotC was fake news and dumb. Second, "anti-colonialist D&D" play, whether official or not, is fake (performative propaganda) and dumb.

That said I should also note that I've said that undoubtedly every single person working at WotC today would wholeheartedly agree with that 3rd party product's views about "anti-colonialist play', and what's coming out about the new Monster Manual is evidence of that.

Quote from: ForgottenF on January 09, 2025, 11:45:44 PM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on January 09, 2025, 06:07:47 PM

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on January 09, 2025, 05:29:10 PM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on January 09, 2025, 03:34:31 PMDidn't the new blurbs about the MM just say something about dryads, medusas and hags now being genderfluid or something?

  Dryads, medusas, and hags are now both male and female. Succubae and incubi are able to flip between either sex. (This is arguably more theologically accurate, but D&D's 'demons' and 'devils' are so inaccurate in so many other ways that it doesn't help much. )

The dryads, medusas and hags now being male is nonsensical. Those words are female in English, insofar as English even has gendered nouns. (Don't get me started on the fact that Medusa is a proper noun and her species is gorgon.)

Why are succubi and incubi even separate things if they have no fixed gender? Should rename them collectively to malcubi.

Yeah, it's hard to imagine the Powers of Hell would create a demon that can be thwarted by being gay, so it makes sense to give them some genderbending powers. I've seen the word "hamadryad" used to talk about a male tree spirit, but, I don't know the origin of that term. Gorgons are specifically female, but they also have a specific origin story which probably doesn't apply to D&D.

  From the religious perspective, if the person is gay the powers of hell have their work already done.  No need for corrupting anyone.

Quote from: oggsmash on January 12, 2025, 02:44:17 PMFrom the religious perspective, if the person is gay the powers of hell have their work already done.  No need for corrupting anyone.

One or two religious perspectives, perhaps? There are sacred-text-compatible readings & Christian traditions that would completely disagree, not to speak some number of other religions historical or modern.

But that's another cool-ish thing that I want to see more of in my games, if I can figure out how to make it fun or interesting for the players - religions that have different interpretations of or focus on different subsets of the same things, albeit probably not as far as Glorantha goes. But think about Mediterranean syncretism - Hercules is identified with Melqart in some cities, and yet if we look at the myths I think we'd find them pretty incompatible, or the worship of Cybele in Rome dropping some of the core bits because they were too squicky for the Romans. The Arian heresy!

Like him or hate him, Varg put a spin on it with his latest game, ReconQuest:

Return to your ancestral homeland! Play as a Dwarf, Elf, Halfling, or Human, Male or Female, and take the long lost Thulê (Hyperborea) back from monstrous occupants, savages, and ancient horrors! Survive, thrive, and rebuild your ancestral homeland! Re-settle the lands your distant forebears once owned!
                 ---from the information on Amazon

I do wonder if burning down current religious buildings built over the originals (as in previous religion) is in the setting. I don't know about the guy, he has disavowed his neo-nazism, yet he is still pretty intense.

Quote from: bat on January 15, 2025, 01:28:36 PMLike him or hate him, Varg put a spin on it with his latest game, ReconQuest:

Return to your ancestral homeland! Play as a Dwarf, Elf, Halfling, or Human, Male or Female, and take the long lost Thulê (Hyperborea) back from monstrous occupants, savages, and ancient horrors! Survive, thrive, and rebuild your ancestral homeland! Re-settle the lands your distant forebears once owned!
                 ---from the information on Amazon

I do wonder if burning down current religious buildings built over the originals (as in previous religion) is in the setting. I don't know about the guy, he has disavowed his neo-nazism, yet he is still pretty intense.

His idiotic game is not built on authentic myth or legend, it's based on 19th century "Arianist" (including Nazi) pseudo-myth.

Quote from: RPGPundit on January 15, 2025, 04:32:53 PM

Quote from: bat on January 15, 2025, 01:28:36 PMLike him or hate him, Varg put a spin on it with his latest game, ReconQuest:

Return to your ancestral homeland! Play as a Dwarf, Elf, Halfling, or Human, Male or Female, and take the long lost Thulê (Hyperborea) back from monstrous occupants, savages, and ancient horrors! Survive, thrive, and rebuild your ancestral homeland! Re-settle the lands your distant forebears once owned!
                 ---from the information on Amazon

I do wonder if burning down current religious buildings built over the originals (as in previous religion) is in the setting. I don't know about the guy, he has disavowed his neo-nazism, yet he is still pretty intense.

His idiotic game is not built on authentic myth or legend, it's based on 19th century "Arianist" (including Nazi) pseudo-myth.

I am not arguing that fact, I am just saying he reversed the spin.

Quote from: RPGPundit on January 15, 2025, 04:32:53 PMHis idiotic game is not built on authentic myth or legend, it's based on 19th century "Arianist" (including Nazi) pseudo-myth.

   Aryanist. Arianism is something completely different.

I fought those idiots when they came down from their compound when I was a teenager and have the scar to prove it, I am not condoning his racism whatsoever, I am just pointing out that he put a clever spin on the approach, 'We are not the colonists, we are the ones taking our land back!'