Basilisk 5e Monster Manual
The aim of this subreddit is to serve as a platform for general DM questions, story advice, as well as all the myriad bits and pieces that go along with learning-to-DM. We are not only for new DMs, but the bulk of the posts will no doubt be submitted by newer DMs. Please refrain from downvoting legitimate questions. The Subreddit Rules.
Respect your fellow DMs. Assholes are banned for life. Debate, don't fight. Stay on topic. All Submissions must be in the form of a question that is related to DMing or an explanatory guide.
Art, terrain, session recaps, props and maps don't belong here. Do NOT shitpost. Advertising, and links to free or paid content is not allowed. No piracy (i.e do not post rulebook pdfs). Posts must have a useful and descriptive title.
Dungeons And Dragons 5e Basilisk
Commenting is encouraged by the community, and downvoting is discouraged. Please do not crosspost. Homebrew should be submitted toThe DM Help Network. DM Creative Archive. Worldbuilding, Storybuilding, DM Discussion. DM'ing 201. Random Tables for D&D.
Extensive and ready-to-roll. Collection of Podcasts, Vidcasts, and other D&D Multimedia for your consumption.
Catalog for user-created maps. Adventures for any edition of D&D. All homebrew. All the time. Combat areas for every conceivable encounter. Custom settings for your D&D world.
All monsters, all the time! Relatively new DM here. My party went basilisk hunting and defeated a basilisk in her lair. At the end of the fight, players asks 'Are there any eggs in the lair?' I think for two seconds and say 'sure.' They of course decide to take the egg and eventuslly raise it as their pet.
I of course had not considered this at all. My players sometimes read up on a monster after a fight (which I don't really care about, I know some DMs really don't like that), so likely saw the note about this in the monster manual.My first reaction was 'damnit. What did I just do to my game?' I considered making the raising of a basilisk prohibitively hard, making the egg break, etc but I think I want to roll with this instead. But it needs tweaking. RAW basilisk is way too powerful with its petrify ability. I also just don't want to deal with that mechanic for the rest of the campaign.Here are my thoughts:.I'm going to treat him as an allied npc rather than a pet tied to one character.
He takes his own actions on his own turn.He will go from hatchling to juvenile to adult. Different abilities at each level. Hatchling will be tiny, vulnerable, and only able to petrify tiny/small creatures. Essentially it is learning to hunt, which will be a downtime activity.Instead of time based leveling I will likely use party level. So next level up he goes from hatchling to juvenile, then another two party levels to get to adult.Petrify will be significantly changed. It will be a specific action that the basilisk takes. It will only target one creature, or maybe two within range as an adult.
It will require concentration to maintain, i.e. Only one/two targets at a time.
I will impose a size limit (no more than one size larger) and either an HP or CR limit (I don't want them to simple petrify the BBEG).If a target stays petrified for 2 rounds it is permanent unless appropriately healed. The basilisk can then choose another target.In terms of training.
I was thinking of a death saving throw system. Need three successful animal handling checks to tame, on three failures the basilisk leaves the party. This happens only when it becomes a juvenile, and it forces this round of checks. Each day they make one roll to make progress or failure.
They can be helped on this task, and bardic inspiration applies. But if I set a DC 10 the task becomes trivial with those modifications.Alternatively they could just succeed, no checks required.
Just let em have their basilisk, which I'm modifying anyway to be somewhat balanced.Thoughts? I certainly intend there to be numerous 'incidents' during the process.
The MM explicitly mentions that people raise and train basilisks from eggs, so presumably there are ways to control this.It actually makes me rethink my training process. Maybe a scale from 1 to 10. 1 is wild, super aggressive and not at all trained. 10 is essentially perma trained. At different levels it will have different risk level of randomly just petrifying stuff. Eating town livestock.
From 7 onwards it is fairly tame, but will not always do as told. A training attempt can be made which either increases or decreases this level. True re: lifespan. In reality our campaign will never last that long. So essentially I have to choose realism versus something that works for the game.
If I'm gonna make super burdensome, I might as well just make it impossible. But in reality I am leaning towards allowing it, bc it makes the game more fun for the players, and therefore I just want to make it a reasonably balanced extra bonus.But I may keep him a hatchling for longer though. Maybe for 2 levels, and juvenile for 3 levels. I would make the basilisk a liability to the party after a while. I would give them time to bond and enjoy the 'honeymoon'.
As a hatchling it may be nice and compliant, but as it grows older it's wild instincts take over. Nothing like a town mob or party of npcs out for basalisk blood after a few people turn out petrified. This may also give the party a moral conundrum. Do they protect the creature that they have formed a bond with who is only doing what comes naturally?Does any of the party members know how to train a basilisk?
What experience do they have with wild beasts?Oh and if there's an egg to be had then the party is likely to keep one! Happens quite a lot.
This is something of a fork from the 5e Toolkit thread. Inspired by comments by both @ and @ CMG and wandering musing, as I am want to do, by yours truly.Let's make a Manual of Monsters Starter Kit. Assume you have never played the game before.
Basilisk 5e Monster Manual Pdf
What monsters are essential to get a rounded feel/flavor for a fantasy gaming world?In a very basic starting set for a fantasy RPG game a la D&D, what 'monsters' (this includes mundane animals) would you think worthy to make the cut for providing a solid and varied introduction to the creatures of the game/genre.Also, who would you give access of their stats to, the players via entries in the Players manual or the DM via a monster's section in the DM's manual?I recall, in the Basic and Expert sets, the monster section was about half of the DM's book. Mark made the suggestion that players might have access to animals/mundane creatures which makes sense to me, as these would be creatures the PCs would/could have had regular contact with, domesticated animals, common predators (like wolves), etc. Makes sense the PCs would know about these kinds of creatures and the 'magical'/otherworldly type things be the purview of the DM.I also recall, from the Basic (Red) book in particular, that a great deal of 'Monster' entires were normal animals (and/or their 'giant' types. That's what we called 'em in yon days of yore, before anyone ever heard of a 'Dire' anything.I think 'Dire Wolves' came about first, but I can't remember where they appeared.well, ANYwho.)So, let's say, 20 'normal' animals (varieties may be included as a single entry.
'Cat' could include domestic, puma, tiger, etc. And giant/dire versions of each. So it would only count as 1.).and, let's start with 20 'monsters'/magical/not-real-world creatures. Again, variants of types (different dragons, for example) could all be included as a single entry.Threadmaker's note: If you want to think in terms of a '5e set', fine, but edition is not really the point here. So let's not make it one.
Please and thank you.Look forward to all thoughts. Have fun and happy menagerie-ing.-Steel Dragons. First of all, no good comes from scattering monster stats between the player and dm books; they should absolutely 100% be dm material. The pcs learn about them through. 'Normal' creatures for Players and DMs:1. Alligator: normal, crocodile, giant versions of each2.
Ant: giant, giant fire3. Bear: black, cave, grizzly, polar4. Birds of Prey: eagle, falcon, hawk, owl, raven, vulture, (normal and giant versions of each,% chance to be intelligent/speaking.)5. Cat: domestic, lion, lynx, puma, sabertooth, tiger, (normal and giant versions of each)6. Deer: stag, elk, moose (normal and giant versions of each.)7.
Dog: domestic, hunting/hound, guard/mastiff, wild8. Dolphin: normal, telepathic9. Elephant: normal, mammoth10. Frog: giant, poisonous, toad/giant and poisonous11.
Furry Woodland Creature: Badger, Beaver, Ferret/Weasel, Fox, Otter, Rabbit/Hare, Squirrel (normal and giant versions of each,% chance to be intelligent/speaking.)12. Herd Animal: antelope, bison, camel, cow, sheep, wildebeest, yak, zebra13. Horse: draft, riding/light, war/heavy, wild14. Rat: normal, giant, swarm15. Scorpion: normal, giant16.
Shark: normal, giant17. Snake: poisonous, constrictor, two-headed (normal and giant versions of each.)18. Spider: poisonous, bola, tarantulas, wolf, large and giant versions for each19. Turtle: giant, giant snapping20. Wolf: normal, giant, winterPHEW! That was tough!
Getting/cutting them down to 20.And has anyone else noticed that all of the truly dangerous 'Real World' creatures begin with a 'S'? Why is that?Anywho.what do we think?-Steel Dragons. Interesting topic, I'll toss my small list of ideas out here as well. This would be my list of monsters.
Note: I tried to keep some monsters in a generic form in order to allow room for various other types of monsters to be included. I think this list is fairly comprehensive.1. Animal (Bat, Bear, Boar, Dog, Donkey, Elephant, Hawk, Horse, Hyena, Lion, Mule, Rat, Raven, Snake, Tiger, Wolf)3.
Displacer Beast10. Eagle, Giant14. Mind Flayer41.
Priest (cleric)53. Rust Monster54. Umber Hulk63. Vermin (Ant, Beetle, Spider, Wasp)66. Zombie-JMEdit: 73. Normal critters - mostly stuff that might be hunted as game or thought of as encroaching on human territory, as well as pets/domestc animals- Bear- Lion/Tiger- Ape/Gorilla/Baboon- Boar- Wolf/War dog- Horse- Bat/Mobat- Giant Spider- SharkApes, boars and BATS!
I can not believe I forgot BATS of all things. Ugh.But the apes and boars as well.right at the front of practically every monster list I've ever seen. Ok, before taking another look to see if at least BATS are workable into my list.or re-negging and admitting we need more than 20 mundane creatures.lemme see what I can come up with for the 'Monsters.' I'm going to presume to agree with most of the posters thus far that ALL creatures for a monster starter section should be the purview of the DM only.While MarkCMG's suggestion makes sense to me, that a PC would have knowledge of 'normal' creatures in their day-to-day lives, I suppose that is up to the DM to decide and share with the players as necessary. For example, no reason a game taking place in a desert/arabian-flavored setting should have access to things like sharks or beavers. But camels, elephants.things like scorpions, makes sense.So, yeah, DM gets all of the info and DM's call as to what PC's would know as common knowledge.Now.heh, heh, heh.'
Monsters'(How'my gonna do this in 20? I think I painted myself in the proverbial corner of the dungeon with that.)1. Carrion Crawler3.
Dragon: Start with a list of 8 (so as not to overwhelm). 1 good and 1 evil for each of the 4 elements, maybe? Soooo, something like: Gold/Red (fire), Silver/Blue (air), Bronze/Black (water), Copper/Green (earth)5. Dwarf: Hill, Mountain, Deep6. Elemental: air, earth, fire, water (normal and giant versions and 1 'humanoid' creature for each: sylph, gnome, salamander, undine)7.
Elf: Dark, Grey, High, Wood8. Faerie: Brownie, Pixie, Sprite9. Giant: fire, frost, hill, stone, storm, wood(treants10. Goblinoid: Goblin, Hobgoblin, Bugbear11. Human: Bandit, Barbarian/Berserker, Nomad/Tribesman14. Ogre: normal, two-headed (ettin?)16.
Ooze: Gelatinous Cube, Green, Grey, Yellow17. Undead: Ghoul, Ghost, Skeleton, Spectre, Vampire, Wraith, ZombieOk, that was not so hard as the animals, oddly enough.
Sam smith writings on the wall mp3 download. Aug 10, 2018 - “Writing's On the Wall,” co-written by Sam Smith and Jimmy Napes, is the first. DOWNLOAD MP3: Sam Smith – “Writing On The Wall” Song. Nov 28, 2018 - Theme Song of Spectre - Writing's On The Wall (by Sam Smith) Free MP3 MP4 HD MV Download. Get the best freeware to free download Writing's On The Wall MP3 audio file, and MP4 music video in SD, 720p/1080p HD at one go! 'Writing's on the Wall' by Sam Smith (4 Grammy Awards winner.
Though there are several that I'd rather see separated out, like 'Ghost' and 'Vampire' since they are so different from the 'mindless' undead and 'Grey' and 'Dark' elves might better be saved for the next 'set'/installment.assuming there is one. But hey, they're there.And many of the humanoid races would, as Jester mentions, have varying stats for groups and individual specialists, 'captains' or 'Chiefs' etc.I am missing a few classics and favorites, like Stirges (always a good low-level threat) and Chimera and Medusa.
But my brain is a bit on overload (as Stormonu mentioned) rifling through the various incarnations of MMs.and, then, of course, there is the fact I have work to do!Great suggestions/lists thus far.Check back in a bit.-Steel Dragons. I semi-replied via my reply to Lanefan on the spawing topic. Basically, I'd rather have 'Stuff that Everyone Needs' book, 'Stuff that only the DM Needs' book, and then a third book for the stuff in the middle. Unlike, the Jester, I'm perfectly willing to split monsters across multiple books to make that happen.So with that said, I agree that any common animals should be in, and maybe some of the dire variants. And good call on familiars. I'd considered mounts, but not those or animal companions in general.Then I'd also include some of the most common variants of the most common creatues.
Include the basic goblin (and a picture of same), but not the leaders, shamans, etc. Also include a fair amount of lore on each creature type by category. That is, you get the stat block for a single basic goblin, along with the rest of the page on common lore. You can even include a few 'rumors' that may or may not be true. (Only the DM knows for sure.)On things like horses, the lore section is more about different types, how sturdy they are, etc. And you might have stat blocks for a nag, common mount, and warhorse.When you get to monsters that are more prototypical D&D, but not common, you still get a page of lore, but it is definitely sketchy and leans heavily on rumors.
The dragon page is like this. While it has no statblock whatsoever, it does have a picture.For things like undead, you might have more than one page on 'undead', with a sample skeleton and zombie stat block. Or you might have a page on 'animated undead' with a skeleton stat block and references to zombies, and another page on 'undead' that was more like the dragon section.Then in the DMG or full-blown Monster Manual(s), you have more of the stat blocks for all these types, including the uncommon stuff.I'm not wedded to those particular examples. There is room for editor discretion around the basic concept.