• The Infractions Forum is available for public view. Please note that if you have been suspended you will need to open a private/incognito browser window to view it.

Let's Read: Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Monster Manual II (1e)

Talisman

The Man of Talis
RPGnet Member
Validated User
Here is the Hydrodaemon/loth's current art.



They have also gained a new ability.



Despite appearances they are also very intelligent having 19 Int.
They're both better than 2e's take imo

I don't see how those flaps could glide.
I don't care for either of those, honestly. The 5e art isn't bad, but they both scream "generic toad-monster." It could be a hezrou demon, or a particularly bloated grippli (or grung, I suppose), or any of a dozen slaadi. I feel like there are more toad-monsters I'm forgetting as well.

Granted, the 1e art looks pretty toadish as well, but the wing-flaps are more pronounced, and it looks more . . . streamlined? Dynamic? That's a toad-monster that's about to leap into the air and come at me, or at least is capable of doing so. The art from later editions looks like something out of a fairy tale, that the Mouse Princess defeats by feeding him a magic button or something.
 

Envyus

Registered User
Validated User
Listen D&D loves toad / frog monsters, there are so many. Bullywugs, Froghemoths, Banderhobbs and the traditional giant toad. Even Kuo-Toa looked frog like in 3e.
 

Sleeper

Red-eyed dust bunny
Validated User
Listen D&D loves toad / frog monsters, there are so many. Bullywugs, Froghemoths, Banderhobbs and the traditional giant toad. Even Kuo-Toa looked frog like in 3e.
They've even got a toad Nazi.

(Wastri.)
 

VoidDrifter

Registered User
Validated User
Somebody post the 4e Hydroloth from the Demonomicon for Taslisman, please? I want to see what they think of it.
 

Envyus

Registered User
Validated User
Honestly thought the 4e version was the pathfinder version till I looked. Weirdly the text for the 4e Hydrodemon says they look like Toads but I can't see it at all. It's also a large creature where all other versions are medium from what I know.



Here is the pathfinder version, which is probably the most basic and plain of them all.



I noticed that both the 4e and Pathfinder versions lack the flaps, which is probably the most distinctive thing about the Hydrodaemon's appearance.
 
Last edited:

Talisman

The Man of Talis
RPGnet Member
Validated User
Okay, yeah, the 4e version is definitely the most daemonic. Too bad about the wing-flaps, but it's got much more flair and personality than Toad Monster #72, and I say this as someone who likes toads.
 

Envyus

Registered User
Validated User
The only issue I have with the 4e version is that I can't even see it as being the same thing as the 1e monster. It's a cool design, but it does not look (or even act) like the Hydrodaemon.
 

Felix

Member
RPGnet Member
Validated User
In the 4e version, what is that, um, protrusion coming out of its back?

And yeah, Pathfinder really went ultra-generic there. I wonder if someone said to an artist "Draw a dozen toad monsters and we'll decide where they go later."
 

VoidDrifter

Registered User
Validated User
It's a partially curled octopus tentacle; if you look closer at the bottom of the picture, you'll see there's at least one more growing off of the otherwise shark-like tail that it sports.
 

Envyus

Registered User
Validated User
It's a partially curled octopus tentacle; if you look closer at the bottom of the picture, you'll see there's at least one more growing off of the otherwise shark-like tail that it sports.
I see like 8 random octopus tentacles.
 
Top Bottom