D&D 5E Wandering Monsters: Fiend Folio

[Plaguescarred]

Wandering Monsters
Fiend Folio
By James Wyatt

Firenewts and flumphs are the topic of this week’s Wandering Monsters. How did James treat these two creatures? Find out, and please do provide us with your feedback about them.

What do you think of these?

 

[MarkB]

The treatment of Fire Newts is pretty good, but leave their mounts as giant prehistoric birds - we already have plenty of dinosaurs.

Flumphs are a pathetic, ridiculous excuse for a creature, and this article does nothing to redeem them for me. Let them die.

 

[Kinak]

The firenewts are pretty cool, although the striders rub me the wrong way for some reason. If they're healed by fire, I feel like they should be more explicitly fiery and less organic.

Personally, I'd take away the fireball glands and fire healing, then make them immune to fire damage and faster for the round if they would take fire damage. It would make them great mounts in places like volcanos (with ongoing fire damage). If the need to hurl fire, I'd just give them a breath weapon. It's a little overdone, but the fireball glands are just weird.

That's not a terrible version of the flumph, which is saying something because most are terrible, although I prefer Pathfinder's.

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[Plaguescarred]

I found the firenewt and flumph's description pretty good.

I thought it was interesting to connect firenewt with cult of elemental evil fire.

I thought it was interesting to connect flumps with psionic activities detection as a way to gather intelligence.

 

[CAFRedblade]

The direction of Flumphs in the article reminds me of the Hanar from the Mass Effect games...
Now I want to use them in a game in the same manner...

And of course I'd have to introduce Blasto the Flumph...
http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Blasto

 

[steeldragons]

The firenewts are fine. The giant striders (which, it seems, should just be "striders" since we don't have "non-giant striders") are fine. If you want t ofluff them as dinosaurian critters. Knock yourself out. If you want to fluff them as just naturally occurring [fire-immune] "animal" critters then fine. Did they always have the ability to generate small fireballs?! That seems stupid. If they're just beasts of burden/mounts...why do they need to have a "fireball making gland next tot their eyes?" That through me.

Flumphs...flymphs, flumphs, flumphs. The psionic connection does help...a little. And thus associating them with the "aberration" species of mindflayers and aboleths lends some authenticity to them...a little....its just not enough, for me, to warrant these poor milky floating...things any more page space in a MM.

Let them fall into obscurity as a cute lil' [utterly useless] piece of D&D history/trivia.

You know poor Mr. Wyatt is scrapin' the bottom of his monster barrel when all he's got left to write about is flumphs. Hang in there JW.

 

[Zaukrie]

Flunph takes up space that could be used on a coffee spill mark, which would provide more value.

 

[Weather Report]

I want to play a Flumph Psion.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Did they always have the ability to generate small fireballs?!

In the 1E FF? Yes.

 

[JeffB]

You know poor Mr. Wyatt is scrapin' the bottom of his monster barrel when all he's got left to write about is flumphs. Hang in there JW.

Yep, time to start pitching ideas for a new column at this weeks team meeting, James.