Talk:5e Creatures

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

The list should go up to CR 30 since the Terrasque is that high.

Anyone know how to make the system organize by type and size? If so please tell me how if you can. Azernath (talk) 12:15, 8 April 2015 (MDT)

I've added CRs up to 30, and a "by type" list. If we start getting a lot of monsters, I may need to move this to another page. Marasmusine (talk) 15:12, 8 April 2015 (MDT)

How did you learned to make templates for this website? Azernath (talk) 18:54, 8 April 2015 (MDT)

Why are aberrations listed as "aberrant" in the Monsters section? SirSprinkles (talk) 16:40, 2 July 2016 (MDT)

NPCs and Miscellaneous Creatures[edit]

I've divided this into Monsters, NPCs and Miscellaneous Creatures - per the Monster Manual appendices. Tag creature pages with Category:NPC and Category:Miscellaneous Creature as appropriate. Marasmusine (talk) 06:09, 4 October 2015 (MDT)

Would it make sense to merge the Monsters and Misc creatures sections? It strikes me that the distinction can be kind of arbitrary. Lemiel14n3 (talk) 08:26, 19 October 2015 (MDT)
That's the distinction in the Monster Manual. I've found it quite helpful in encounter design actually. 08:35, 19 October 2015 (MDT)

Useful Links to Monster Manuals[edit]

Reason: This guy put all the monsters into one place! You cant deny that is awesome. It works great since with a little conversion, you could add all these to any edition you desire. I saved every page for offline use thus far. Not sure how many has been added since I last 'saved' everything. The site does have occasional issues of inaccessibility, or rather it used to, for whatever reason. Still, I haven't found a site as good as this one yet.

I'm sorry, I had to remove the link. That website reproduces text of the 2nd Edition AD&D books, which are still under copyright. Also, this is the talk page for 5th edition creatures.Marasmusine (talk) 09:55, 29 April 2016 (MDT)

THAT I did not know...I had speculation, however even that was vague and controversial so it was hard to get actual facts from a legal stand point. G of TierArea (talk) 12:46, 29 April 2016 (MDT)
I admit to using that website myself when converting things from AD&D to 4th and 5th edition! Although I do own the 2nd edition AD&D core books. Marasmusine (talk) 12:51, 29 April 2016 (MDT)


Perhaps we could include links from the creature pages to their 5e SRD equivalents? AngelicBahamut (talk) 01:01, 7 February 2017 (MST)

What do you mean? (Give example) Marasmusine (talk) 01:29, 7 February 2017 (MST)
You know, 5e Monsters to 5e SRD:Monsters, 5e NPCs to 5e SRD:NPCs, 5e Miscellaneous Creatures to 5e SRD:Miscellaneous Creatures, and 5e Creatures to 5e SRD:Creatures. AngelicBahamut (talk) 14:41, 7 February 2017 (MST)
Like what you did to 5e Monsters? SirSprinkles (talk) 15:07, 9 February 2017 (MST)
Precisely! AngelicBahamut (talk) 15:13, 9 February 2017 (MST)
Can I do that to the other creature pages (5e Miscellaneous Creatures and 5e NPCs)? AngelicBahamut (talk) 18:59, 9 February 2017 (MST)
Can that now be done to 5e Creatures by an admin? AngelicBahamut (talk) 00:05, 12 February 2017 (MST)


All creatures that are shapechangers have this fact listed in their race, but that creates issues like at the imp where the creature isn't listed in the appropriate tag (Category:Devil Tag in this case). Perhaps, instead of being a race, there should be a tag that you could enter "yes" or "no" to make a creature a shapechanger (and then list it in brackets after creature type, after any other applicable races). AngelicBahamut (talk) 22:57, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

I have brought up this issue on Template talk:5e Creature#Improving the template. Good eye that you spotted this! --Green Dragon (talk) 10:05, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Monsters by Type[edit]

Perhaps this page should include the various 5e Monsters by type (such as 5e Aberration Monsters) that the 5e Monsters page has? SirSprinkles (talk) 02:33, 23 June 2019 (MDT)

Oh, I agree. In my opinion it would also make sense to make each of these lists (including the ones proposed and already here) as subpages, like 5e Races so that this loads quicker. Don't you agree? --Green Dragon (talk) 08:49, 24 June 2019 (MDT)

Swarm of Insects[edit]

Below, I have compiled a list of creatures that I believe could be compiled onto a single page of swarms of insects in a similar manner as 5e SRD:Swarm of Insects. They all fit the description, though with negligible ability score differences.

I don't want to rush into this, so let me know what you all think of this idea. -Ref3rence (talk) 15:06, 28 April 2020 (MDT)

You could put them on 5e Monsters Reimagined. SirSprinkles (talk) 20:12, 28 April 2020 (MDT)


I just created Incomplete 5e Creatures to match how 5e Races has Incomplete 5e Races. Could an admin add that page to this page? Thanks. --PJammaz (talk) 10:49, 11 May 2020 (MDT)

Done and done!Natsumi super fan (talk) 12:31, 11 May 2020 (MDT)
Cool! --PJammaz (talk) 13:02, 11 May 2020 (MDT)

Monsters For Shadow-Based Campaign[edit]

I'm looking for monsters that would be good for a campaign with the big bad guy being an overpowered shadow. I need some creatures for minions, some for allies to the players, and a big baddie for the last one. Any ideas? Flamestarter (talk) 19:44, 19 July 2020 (MDT)


Given the recent massive overhaul of 5e Classes, I think this page is long overdue for an equal treatment. The main issues I believe should be resolved are as follows:

  • The ability to sort by CR or size without going to 5e Monsters. Shouldn't be too hard, just moving the top portion of the page to the right side of this page. Nobody wants to have to load the list of every monster just to load another page. Would undertake this myself, but access to this page is restricted.
  • Modern/futuristic creatures exist here-and-there, but don't have their own space or rules. Non-traditional equipment exists in somewhat of a void at the moment, and special rules for creating creatures that are usable alongside it would be greatly appreciated. Just off the top of my head, modern creatures should probably prioritize damage output over survivability since that's how firearms work, futuristic creatures should probably fit half-way between traditional and modern creatures. Would undertake myself, but as my previous statement probably revealed, I don't even know where to start on this beyond adding links to the relevant pages to the right side of this page.
  • NPCs should probably be reformatted to match other creature pages. I am willing, able, and ready to make this change, but others may have objections.

I'm interested to hear what other users think of this, and any other major changes you believe need to be made. --Ref3rence (talk) 11:20, 26 November 2020 (MST)

I have gone ahead and added links to various list pages on 5e Monsters to here. As for Modern/Futuristic creatures, it would make sense to have list pages for them as they wouldn't really fit into a normal campaign. Besides that though, you don't really need to use any special or variant rules when creating them and really they should use the normal rules for creating creatures. You can just as easily make a creature that has an attack use a club or a futuristic weapon and do the same with with armor, ect. Besides that though, Modern/Futuristic creatures should probably be tankier than usual, having a high to hit bonus and dealing lower damage than an average creature at that CR as pcs in those settings should have similar hit points, same or higher AC, and deal much more damage with weapons.
Finally, I have also gone ahead and also reformatted 5e NPCs to match the formatting of other creature pages as that makes sense.--Blobby383b (talk) 22:42, 28 November 2020 (MST)
Big thanks on the edits! The main issue with that is that anachronistic creatures still have CR built around the standard 5e rules, while PCs with anachronistic items will tear through most creatures with proper CR, while higher CR creatures often have features, additional effects, and skill/save bonuses the players aren't prepared to deal with until they react the proper level. Even just modified CR calculations would probably be enough to remedy the issue. We had a little bit of a conversation on it here that led to some major changes. --Ref3rence (talk) 23:00, 28 November 2020 (MST)
Ah then, the question is whether anachronistic creatures should be designed to account for the fact that pcs are stronger and facing higher CR creatures or whether some other approach is needed. Thinking about it, given the fact that pcs are more powerful, another approach is probably needed because the regular way of building creatures simply does not fit an anachronistic setting balance wise no matter how much finagling you do.
I believe that the easiest approach to making regular creatures in 5e fit an anachronistic setting is to make a template for them so they can receive buffs that increase their hit points and to hit bonuses. Besides that, I believe that you are correct in that a modified CR calculation would help remedy the issue, as done correctly, it would make for creatures that are balanced in the setting they are used in.--Blobby383b (talk) 23:39, 28 November 2020 (MST)
Home of user-generated,
homebrew pages!