D&D (2024) D&D Marilith Is Far More Bestial In 2025

Dire Bare · Tuesday at 5:00 PM

Azzy said:
What is the goal of the current line of discussion? Is it just to vent? Because nobody is moving from their entrenched views, and the image still exists and it's not going away.

Pelor, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.

Dire Bare · Tuesday at 5:02 PM

Kobold Avenger said:
3e shows that certain Demon Lords can influence what their minions and followers look like, so that can also apply to Mariliths being different from the default MM entry. I imagine that ubilex's Mariliths would all be slimy and look like their melting.

Ew. Nope, marliths are quite clearly sexy ladies with snaky bottoms. Gross, drippy, melty ladies with snaky bottoms? I'm sorry, canon is important. /kidding

Voadam · Tuesday at 7:08 PM

Dire Bare said:
Ew. Nope, marliths are quite clearly sexy ladies with snaky bottoms. Gross, drippy, melty ladies with snaky bottoms? I'm sorry, canon is important. /kidding

Yeah but 3e also gives us this exemplar of "an attractive female human" from the waist up.

AnotherGuy · Tuesday at 7:34 PM

Yeah I'm no fan of the new Marilith art, looks more gargoyle-like than fiend to me.

Some 2 decades ago my friend ran a campaign where we were all slave gladiators in a Yuan-ti nation. We came to discover, before the campaign's untimely end, that the ruler of this land was but a Marilith. The sexy female fiend concept worked for that setting.

Older Beholder · Tuesday at 9:01 PM

AnotherGuy said:
Yeah I'm no fan of the new Marilith art, looks more gargoyle-like than fiend to me.

Gargoyles are generally depicted to look like demons, though.

pemerton · Tuesday at 9:02 PM

The AD&D MM says that "Demons of this type [ie Type V] are likely to desire the sacrifice of strong warriors to them".

In conjunction with the picture, this reinforces the pulp-y vibe of these creatures, as originally conceived. It's not really clear how their ability to polymorph self at will is meant to interact with their monstrous yet alluring true form.

But it is clear that the original conception of Type V demons is very gendered (via a particular trope-y lens).

Dire Bare · Tuesday at 11:45 PM

Voadam said:
Yeah but 3e also gives us this exemplar of "an attractive female human" from the waist up.

View attachment 399279
I think she'd be a bit more of an attractive human if she had a human nose or forehead or hair.

Given this baseline, melty ladies seems like it could have been within their concept of sexy ladies.

Dude, she's monster-girl hot! Er, or so my friend tells me . . .

Hussar · Tuesday at 11:53 PM

Kobold Avenger said:
3e shows that certain Demon Lords can influence what their minions and followers look like, so that can also apply to Mariliths being different from the default MM entry. I imagine that Jubilex's Mariliths would all be slimy and look like their melting.

Avernus has a gnoll marilith - ((Fanart rendition))

Maxperson · Wednesday at 12:32 AM

dave2008 said:
To be clear, the book says they "appear" as "half humanoid" and then describes that upper half as female. I think both of those words are doing some work:

From the 2e Monstrous Compendium:
"Mariliths appear as half snake, half humanoid. From the waist down, these creatures have the bodies of giant snakes, with huge, green, scaly coils. Above the waist they are beautiful, comely females. Besides the obvious snake body, the feature that identifies a marilith is its six arms."

That suggests to me that the bottom half and the top half are neither snake nor female, but simply "appear" like they are. Which is how I always understood it myself. I am not trying to win any arguments, I just thought it was interesting the 2e MC spelled out my thoughts pretty well. Though I had some of the MC binders back in the day, I didn't really use it and have no idea if I even looked at the marilith (I do remember the horrible drawing of the balor though).

I think you're reading too much into "appears." "Appear" doesn't indicate that it's really not the thing. It just means that you aren't sure. A wall an appear solid. Maybe it's solid. Maybe it's hollow. The marilith appears female, but that doesn't mean that it's not female. Only that you don't know for sure. The same with the snake portion. The overwhelming majority of humans can't tell a snake's gender just by looking, so it's just going to appear like it has the lower half of a snake, even if it's a female lower half.

You can certainly decide that it's just an appearance and not a gender, but the 2e language used doesn't show that for certain.

Maxperson · Wednesday at 12:48 AM

Voadam said:
Yeah but 3e also gives us this exemplar of "an attractive female human" from the waist up.

View attachment 399279
I think she'd be a bit more of an attractive human if she had a human nose or forehead or hair.

Given this baseline, melty ladies seems like it could have been within their concept of sexy ladies.

I've seen humans with noses like that.

She also has hair. Some of which is covering her forehead and some streaked back and down almost to her shoulders. That lady needs a shower, though. That hair is really matted and dirty.

D&D (2024) D&D Marilith Is Far More Bestial In 2025

Dire Bare

Legend

Dire Bare

Legend

Voadam

Legend

AnotherGuy

Hero

Older Beholder

Hero

pemerton

Legend

Dire Bare

Legend

Hussar

Legend

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus

Similar Threads

Trending content

Related Articles

Trending content