Creepiest D&D Content

[dascarletm]

Did someone say Harpy boobs? If they have then +1, if not Harpy boobs. Harpy boobs, harpy boobs.

damn those things to harpy hell.

harpy boobs.

If i wanted some past-they-prime bozongas that have no colour or whatnot I'd go to Miami.

CURSE YOU HARPY BOOOOOBS!

[Kelb_Panthera]

No, what have you done?!

Nothing to me. I don't have access to MM5. At least not yet.

I realize now that I'm grasping at straws with my "Planar Binding an Angel" example. But the spells in and of themselves are tailor-made for ethically dodgy acts.

Other creepy stuff in D&D:

Ravages from the Book of Exalted Deeds.

"It's just like poison, except it's not Evil because it only affects Evil creatures!"

How about the Slayer of Domiel? "It's just like assassination, except it's not Evil because they kill only Evil creatures!"

This implies that the forces of Good share more in common with Evil than they'd like to admit.

Also, the Book of Vile Darkness, with its emphasis on gross-out evil. Also, people who enjoy kinky S&M sex are somehow all of Evil alignment. Like to get tied up and spanked by dominatrices? Sorry, but you register as Evil and are destined to the Lower Planes.

We're being a little close-minded, are we, Monte Cook?

I've discussed each of those topics in some detail in other threads. I'm not going to say there isn't a certain creepy factor to at least the kinky sex stuff, (if it's not your kink it's creepy whether its S&M, feet, balloons, or whatever else), but the rest of it isn't that bad.

I'll cook up a couple of links.

Edit: The S&M thing I actually covered in this thread.

Poison & Ravages & that whole thread is about how assassination isn't necessarily evil.

On why [Good] and [Evil] are so simliar It's a long read, but the basic point is that good and evil are cosmic forces that have morality attached to them, not aspects of morality with cosmic forces attached.

[Venger]

wheep. why does it have nails in the eyes. they're not mentioned in the description. they're just there.

[willpell]

Did someone say Harpy boobs? If they have then +1, if not Harpy boobs. Harpy boobs, harpy boobs.

damn those things to harpy hell.

harpy boobs.

If i wanted some past-they-prime bozongas that have no colour or whatnot I'd go to Miami.

CURSE YOU HARPY BOOOOOBS!

What's especially funny is that in the original greek myths, harpies were hawt. They didn't start being ugly old women with dangling flab-sacs until the later depictions when someone got all hung up on them looking too much like sirens. This might have been an improvement in D&D terms, except that D&D's harpies have a siren song. So they shouldn't be called harpies at all, and they should be pretty (which would also coincidentally prohibit them from being bare-breasted, since Wizards is only worried that the soccer moms will picket them if they show attractive female nudity.)

[Zeful]

What's especially funny is that in the original greek myths, harpies were hawt. They didn't start being ugly old women with dangling flab-sacs until the later depictions when someone got all hung up on them looking too much like sirens. This might have been an improvement in D&D terms, except that D&D's harpies have a siren song. So they shouldn't be called harpies at all, and they should be pretty (which would also coincidentally prohibit them from being bare-breasted, since Wizards is only worried that the soccer moms will picket them if they show attractive female nudity.)

Succubus, Nymph; 3.5 monster manual.

[willpell]

Only people who "actively oppose the worship of the gods" get the Wall.

I am now picturing Bane and Tempus sitting down to a plate of linguini and discussing how youze has got to whack these here no-goodniks what is tryin' to cut into the gods' turf, see.

Succubus, Nymph; 3.5 monster manual.

Both of whom are covered up. The harpy is not.

[Sith_Happens]

Both of whom are covered up. The harpy is not.

Last I checked, the phrase "covered up" implies that the covering isn't completely transparent.

[Lyndworm]

I don't think that the succubus is covered at all, let alone with something as tantalizingly thin as the nymph's covering of choice.

[some guy]

Nothing to me. I don't have access to MM5. At least not yet.

Have some pictures from the art galery!

Spoiler

Show

At least, I think these are Mockery bugs, I'm not sure. They are called mockery drone and mockery monarch, so I guess so?

[willpell]

I don't think that the succubus is covered at all, let alone with something as tantalizingly thin as the nymph's covering of choice.

Ah, I misremembered. I think the succubus is doing the arms (or wings?) covering the chest thing, or maybe she was just painted with vague nipple-less breasts; it wasn't explicit, I'm 98% sure, but you're right that she is nude. I was thinking of the "Jozan smites a succubus" picture in the PHB, remembering 3.0 in which the monster manual didn't have a picture of every demon (or devil or "celestial", those having not been subdivided at all), and she was one of the ones left out.

Oh, and really, if we're talking creepy and mentioning the succubus, we really have to point out the fact that the picture of her has her being towered over by a much larger nalfeshnee who has exactly the same decolletage as the Harpy, except that in his case they're clearly intended to be moobs (the kind that go with a pot-belly, which he also has). Tell me that isn't worse.

[Lyndworm]

At least, I think these are Mockery bugs, I'm not sure. They are called mockery drone and mockery monarch, so I guess so?

Those are, indeed, they. Good job. *shudder*

Ah, I misremembered. I think the succubus is doing the arms (or wings?) covering the chest thing, or maybe she was just painted with vague nipple-less breasts; it wasn't explicit, I'm 98% sure, but you're right that she is nude.

Nah, the succubus is letting it all hang out, man; both nipples are clearly visible and her arms at her sides. She's even groping herself with her tail. It's more than a little off-putting. Wizards has the picture in their MM gallery, if you're AFB. I'd drop a link, but I seriously think it's considered NSFW.

Oh, and really, if we're talking creepy and mentioning the succubus, we really have to point out the fact that the picture of her has her being towered over by a much larger nalfeshnee who has exactly the same decolletage as the Harpy, except that in his case they're clearly intended to be moobs (the kind that go with a pot-belly, which he also has). Tell me that isn't worse.

The nalfeshnee isn't pleasant, but I wouldn't call it especially creepy either.

[Venger]

Have some pictures from the art galery!

Spoiler

Show

At least, I think these are Mockery bugs, I'm not sure. They are called mockery drone and mockery monarch, so I guess so?

those are indeed the mockery bugs. that's a picture of a drone.

the drones are born looking like a humanoid, and can do a (sort of) impression of the host, but due to int 3 can't do anything especially sophisticated. their aim is to lead you back to their queen.

the queen swallows you, and if you get below 0hp (not -10, but 0) in her gut, then you're converted into a mockery bug, and she spits you out her next turn.

you still look like yourself, but you're actually a hollow shell with a bug hiding behind your face. as shown in the picture, when the bug knows its cover is blown, it can jump out of the body (with its human face still on there) repeating its last lines at you.

it's like body snatchers, but actually scary.

[Zubrowka74]

CURSE YOU HARPY BOOOOOBS!

Isnt that the next "Pirate of the Carribean" title ? Curse of the Harpy Boobs ?

[Joe the Rat]

I'll see you your Harpy boobs and raise you a Night Hag cleavage.

I don't think that the succubus is covered at all, let alone with something as tantalizingly thin as the nymph's covering of choice.

It's wearing a sort of thin shred of white fabric, with a peek above, and hidden treasures below. I'd describe both as "wet t-shirt" translucent - though the succubus is marginally covered at that.

[Kelb_Panthera]

those are indeed the mockery bugs. that's a picture of a drone.

the drones are born looking like a humanoid, and can do a (sort of) impression of the host, but due to int 3 can't do anything especially sophisticated. their aim is to lead you back to their queen.

the queen swallows you, and if you get below 0hp (not -10, but 0) in her gut, then you're converted into a mockery bug, and she spits you out her next turn.

you still look like yourself, but you're actually a hollow shell with a bug hiding behind your face. as shown in the picture, when the bug knows its cover is blown, it can jump out of the body (with its human face still on there) repeating its last lines at you.

it's like body snatchers, but actually scary.

Okay. Now that I've got the full picture, mockery bugs are pretty squick. Tsochar are worse IMO, though.

[willpell]

I'll see you your Harpy boobs and raise you a Night Hag cleavage.

Perhaps I'm jaded, but that that isn't really enough to bug me; I've seen real women showing more unpleasantness than that. At least it's purple and thus fairly hard to see. Now, it's off the subject of boobs (which we all know is ALWAYS the subject, no matter what the thread says), but when it comes to female monsters and creepiness (not that the list is long since most of the nastier monsters don't have an identifiable gender), I think the prize-taker has GOT to be the Medusa. Her "assets" aren't really in view, but even if they were absent altogether, she'd still be one of the most unsettling sights in that entire book - basically skinless muscle, although mercifully less pink-hued, and that FACE...brrrr.

It's wearing a sort of thin shred of white fabric, with a peek above, and hidden treasures below. I'd describe both as "wet t-shirt" translucent - though the succubus is marginally covered at that.

Having given her a closer inspection than is at all conducive to proving myself mentally well-adjusted, the succubus is definitely wearing a flimsy white negligee which just barely covers her torso, hanging low on the boobs and riding high just under the waist...I think they intentionally set out to make the skimpiest item that you could still pass off as actual clothes, rather than as a set of miniature napkins connected by dental floss But there are unquestionably wrinkles of white cloth on top of the skin tone. So I do believe the harpy has the only completely naked female nipples in MM1, and having taken another look at them, I can indeed averr that they definitely do not "appeal to the prurient interest". Which of course means it's perfectly fine to publish them, according to the malicious doppelganger which has infiltrated the American collective consciousness in the stolen guise of logic.....

[Novawurmson]

Scylla from Pathfinder is pretty fun. Woman's upper body, then wolf heads, then tentacles.

Attic Whisperer freaked my party out a little when they were walking through the abandoned house of a dead serial killer. Another PF creature.

[Chainsaw Hobbit]

Scylla from Pathfinder is pretty fun. Woman's upper body, then wolf heads, then tentacles.

Attic Whisperer freaked my party out a little when they were walking through the abandoned house of a dead serial killer. Another PF creature.

The former is sort of silly in a fun way. The ladder is scary I guess, but a bit of an overdone concept.

[Mordokai]

Nah, the succubus is letting it all hang out, man; both nipples are clearly visible and her arms at her sides. She's even groping herself with her tail. It's more than a little off-putting. Wizards has the picture in their MM gallery, if you're AFB. I'd drop a link, but I seriously think it's considered NSFW.

Maybe I have weird fetishes. Scratch that, I know I do. But what exactly do you find so off-putting about succubus?

I mean, at least she has feet, not hooves.

[Arbane]

Scylla from Pathfinder is pretty fun. Woman's upper body, then wolf heads, then tentacles.

She's from Greek mythology.

[Lyndworm]

It's wearing a sort of thin shred of white fabric, with a peek above, and hidden treasures below. I'd describe both as "wet t-shirt" translucent - though the succubus is marginally covered at that.

Upon a close inspection than I could ever explain to someone else, I can see that you're right. The succubus appears to be wearing some sort of near-invisible negligee. Her nipples and even navel are plainly visible, though.

Maybe I have weird fetishes. Scratch that, I know I do. But what exactly do you find so off-putting about succubus?

Well, there's a difference between off-putting and creepy. Mostly it's just that there's a time and a place for sensual self-gropery, and inside the MM is simply not it. It totally works, given that it's a succubus and that's sort of the point, though.

I mean, at least she has feet, not hooves.

It may be a weird choice, but I'd take hooves over wings. The logistics of dealing with wings boggle my mind.

[Maquise]

For me, it would have to be behirs. While normally I'm fine with insects, chilopodes have always given me the creeps. So if I saw what was basically a giant lizard centipede coming after me, I'd probably curl up in a corner and cry.

[Mordokai]

Well, there's a difference between off-putting and creepy. Mostly it's just that there's a time and a place for sensual self-gropery, and inside the MM is simply not it. It totally works, given that it's a succubus and that's sort of the point, though.

Eh, it could be far worse and, as you have mentioned, it's totally in character for succubus. Fact is, it's totally working for me.

It may be a weird choice, but I'd take hooves over wings. The logistics of dealing with wings boggle my mind.

One needs to get creative And personally, hooves are one of the few things that kinda really bothers me. Compared to them, pair of wings is downright sexy.

[SgtCarnage92]

One needs to get creative And personally, hooves are one of the few things that kinda really bothers me. Compared to them, pair of wings is downright sexy.

Isn't there a reason that succubi can shape change? Removes the wing problem, assuming you find it as problem. I have friends who are into the hooves, can't say I join them.

As far as the topic itself goes, there's very little content itself that gets to me on the creep-o-meter. However the way it's used can be very effective. A kobold den can be very creepy if it's played correctly.

Overall I think the PF fluff on Daemons is delightfully twisted, as it should be. The horseman of famine being vomited by his horse as a dismount is just one of the many fine details that made me grin when I was reading through it. And on that note, Urdefan are wicked twisted when you have a GM who runs the "psychotic enemy who knows no fear" thing well.

[Hanuman]

Isn't there a reason that succubi can shape change? Removes the wing problem, assuming you find it as problem. I have friends who are into the hooves, can't say I join them.

As far as the topic itself goes, there's very little content itself that gets to me on the creep-o-meter. However the way it's used can be very effective. A kobold den can be very creepy if it's played correctly.

Overall I think the PF fluff on Daemons is delightfully twisted, as it should be. The horseman of famine being vomited by his horse as a dismount is just one of the many fine details that made me grin when I was reading through it. And on that note, Urdefan are wicked twisted when you have a GM who runs the "psychotic enemy who knows no fear" thing well.

On that note, haunts and illusions are probably the most terrifying thing, as the limitations on what you can do with them isn't very constricting.

Pathfinder did quite a good job with creating colorful content I have to agree.

@Behir
There's no shame in being afraid of a 4000lb animal no matter what it is. What astounds me about behirs is that they aren't at least 9,000lbs considering they are 40' long.

[willpell]

Eh, it could be far worse and, as you have mentioned, it's totally in character for succubus. Fact is, it's totally working for me.

Thanks for sharing.

@Behir
There's no shame in being afraid of a 4000lb animal no matter what it is. What astounds me about behirs is that they aren't at least 9,000lbs considering they are 40' long.

It must be their lightening breath. *rimshot*

[Sith_Happens]

It may be a weird choice, but I'd take hooves over wings. The logistics of dealing with wings boggle my mind.

Simple, she wraps them around you nice and tight.

[Mordokai]

Isn't there a reason that succubi can shape change? Removes the wing problem, assuming you find it as problem. I have friends who are into the hooves, can't say I join them.

Hey, the way succubus is portrayed in 3.5 MM, she needs shapechange nothing

Thanks for sharing.

Hey, I consider a day when I can't squick a single person a lost one

Simple, she wraps them around you nice and tight.

Some intimacy, eh? In the immortal words...

Spoiler

Show

[Lyndworm]

That shows you how well-behaved and well-moderated the Playground is, I guess; in a thread titled "Creepiest D&D Content" it took us most of five pages to turn it into a fetish thread.

[willpell]

Rule 34: Someone, somewhere, is now "into or curious about" Harpy Boobs. shudder

And in the spirit of oversharing, I see nothing wrong with hooves, but I would love a woman with wings (provided she wasn't a harpy). Bird, bat, butterfly, dragonfly, dragon, pterodactyl, segmented chrome, crystal, heatless magical fire...all are fine by me. There's a reason that images of angels, devils, faeries and such are iconic; mankind has always dreamed of flight. Getting a gorgeous babe along with his escape from the tyranny of gravity? Well, that's just gravy. Besides, who doesn't want to join the mile high club?*

* Okay, fine, I actually don't want to join the mile-high club, being afraid of heights and all. But wings are still sexy, if only for the aforementioned wrapping-around. Maybe not the metal and crystal ones so much.