Walking dead and spectral dead intellect

An oddity I noticed in the distribution of undead intelligence scores is that the incorporeal undead are almost always of average intelligence. Of those in the MM, only the shadow has INT lower than 10.

I don’t understand why this would be the case. In general I would have expected the specter, will-o’-wisp, and wraith to have lower intelligence. I would’ve expected at least some spectral dead with comparable intelligence to zombies and skeletons.

Or perhaps, more likely, the writers didn’t give much thought to what effect intelligence had on the fluff. 

In real life, the voodoo religion tells of “astral zombies” as the spectral counterparts of regular zombies. These spirits are enslaved by bokors and used to perform various tasks.

In a future post, I plan on dedicating thought to a more thoughtful ecology of the spectral dead. With influence from The Lord of the Rings too.

We don’t need so many reptilian races

One of many oddities of D&D is that it has a bazillion reptilian races. As with goblinoids and orcs, I think it makes the most sense to treat all these chike/gatorfolk, kobolds, lizardfolk, serpentfolk/naga/ophiduan/inphidian, lernaeati/dorvae/manalishi, troglodytes/xulgath, dinosaurfolk, etc as members of the same monster family. For example, the reptilian races could be distinguished by categories like subrace, caste, size, tribe, degree of anthropomorphism, etc a la Warhammer Fantasy lizardmen.

Way back I briefly recapped the saurian race from Slavelords of Cydonia, which had several castes representing different reptile varieties like gators, chameleons, and turtles. I said back then that it made sense too, but this moment I wanted to add something else.

The reptilian races should be explicitly linked with dragons, dragonborn/dragonkin/dragonspawn, and so forth. In D&D-inspired media, this is already seen to a degree like the “dragonewt” race.

Furthermore, I think this family should (vaguely) include what amphibian races exist. A herptilefolk family? I alluded to this a while back when I discussed the Ogdoad of Ancient Egypt, a paired set of primordial deities in the forms of snakes and frogs. (Which are the parents of basilisks. Patterns are fun!)

In a future post I intend to explain about how I would define dragons based on comparative mythology rather than the idiosyncratic D&D norms.

A brief list of aboleth variants

Many different aboleth variants have been published in third part products. Here is a listing of some of them. (Servitor races are not listed here.)

These are simple additions to the aboleth family:

• The behemoth, engulfer, manipulator, livyathan, protoaboleth, and larval aboleth swarm appear in Monster Menagerie: Horrors of the Aboleth.
• The nihilith appears in Tome of Beasts.
• The veiled master appears in Pirate Campaign Compendium.

These additions presume that the core aboleth is a member of a family called the [lethid] (invented by Grim Tales). Many lethid are parasitic.

• The mohldaleth, nihileth, rgleth, shibboleth, and true aboleth appear in Slavelords of Cydonia.
• The possessor appears in Possessors: Children of the Outer Gods and reprinted in Forgotten Foes. Not originally a member of the aboleth family, but the lethid are based on its rules.

These additions presume that the core aboleth is a member of a family called the [alghollthu] (invented by Pathfinder).

• The omnipath and veiled master appear in Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Bestiary 6.
• The uldraaghu appears in Pathfinder Adventure Path #121: The Lost Outpost.
• The enisysian appears in Pathfinder Adventure Path #124: City in the Deep.
• The plizeazoth appears in Pathfinder Adventure Path #125: Tower of the Drowned Dead.

As I mentioned in prior posts on aboleth, I decided to use all of these together. I love variety in monster families.

Larry Fessenden's deer-headed wendigo... was not actually deer-headed!

As Emily Zarka, Ph.D., helpfully informed us, the image of the windigo as a hideous satyr originates from the 2001 film Wendigo directed by Larry Fessenden. Fessenden also curated the book Sudden Storm: A Wendigo Reader, now sadly out-of-print.

(Technically, it was Matt Fox who seemingly invented the satyr motif in the 50s with an illustration of one for a printing of Blackwood’s story in a magazine. However, Fessenden seems to be responsible for popularizing the satyr motif outside the pages of that magazine.)

Although Fessenden popularized the satyr motif that now dominates Euro-American popular culture, his movie describes the windigo in an ironic manner. Take a gander:

Man: “A Wendigo is a mighty, powerful spirit. (...) It can take on many forms. Part wind, part tree, part man, part beast. Shapeshifting between them. (...) It can fly at you like a sudden storm, without warning, from nowhere and devour you – consume you with its ferocious appetite. (...) The Wendigo is hungry – always hungry. And its hunger is never satisfied. The more it eats, the bigger it gets. And the bigger it gets, the hungrier it gets. And we are hopeless in the face of it. We are devoured.”
Miles: “Is the Wendigo bad?”
Man: “Nothing between the earth and sky is bad. But there are spirits that should be feared, (...) that are angry. (...) Do you believe me? ”
Miles: “I guess.”
Man: “Go ahead and take it. Nobody believes in spirits anymore. Doesn’t mean they’re not there. He who hears the cry of the Wendigo is never the same again.”

The script is unambiguous. The windigo depicted therein was a shapeshifter. When it appeared as a satyr, that merely one of the countless forms it could assume. (It probably assumed that particular form since the cast was hunting a deer at the time.) It was never a satyr in truth, insofar as truth applies to trickster demons, but assuming the shape of one!

According to the back-of-the-book advertising blurb for Sudden Storm:

Between Algonquin mythology and field-noted cryptozoological points of view, the Wendigo is portrayed as a ferocious yeti-like monster, a half man-half stag creature, a troll, or even just the wind itself.

See that? Fessenden himself acknowledges that the windigo isn't really a satyr, but that stories depict however the storytellers please. Considering all the online chuckleheads who claim the satyr is the only "correct" depiction, it is the height of comedic irony that the guy who invented the satyr motif actually wrote the windigo as a shapeshifter.

Inspiration for the abyssal larvae

In an older post, I wrote a bit on the origins and appearances of the monster called "abyssal larva." I briefly alluded to their mythological inspiration in the larvae or ghosts from Greek mythology. However, I suspect that the abyssal larva may draw from Biblical imagery as well.

In Mark 9:44-48, Jesus says that "their [sinners'] worm does not die," referring to the Greek larvae. In Christian philosophy, pangs of conscience or envy are metaphorically described as a "gnawing worm" on the soul. Sinners and sin itself are often conceptualized as worms.

As I mentioned in my prior post, some depictions of the fantasy larvae may add that it matures into a locust demon. Such locust demons are described in the Book of Revelations, with disturbing features like human faces and scorpion stingers whose venom causes agony but never death.

Eschatology never ceases to amaze.

Was Argus Panoptes a cyclops?

While reading about Greek mythology, I noticed something interesting. One of the elder cyclopes was named Arges. Another hundred-eyed giant was named Argus. Both of these names seemingly derive from an Ancient Greek root ἀργός meaning "bright, quick."

This leads me to suspect that these two may be multiplications of the same figure. Mythology, owing to its nature as orally-passed storytelling, grows and changes over time like kudzu. Multiplications of the same character or monster are just one example of the divergences that accumulate.

Previously I wrote posts speculating about the relationship between the cyclopean giants with variable numbers of eyes drawn from Greek mythology: monoclopes, biclopes, triclopes, megaclopes. (Of course, the naming scheme is nonsensical since cyclops itself is a combination of cycle and ops.) I find it highly amusing and ironic that mythology might have gotten the same idea millennia before me.

Research links

• https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ἀργός#Ancient_Greek
• https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Κύκλωψ#Ancient_Greek
• https://www.theoi.com/Gigante/GiganteArgosPanoptes.html
• https://www.theoi.com/Titan/Kyklopes.html

The many names of the sea-dog

While researching heraldry and monsters, I was surprised to learn that creatures like the alphyn, enfield, and sea-dog (or water-dog) were actually variations on the same thing.

The onchú (literally "water-dog," probably from on "water" + cú "hound") appears to be either an otter or a mythologized version thereof. Through assimilation with the heraldic sea-dog and phonetic mutation into the alphyn and enfield, it acquired features like a fishy mane and avian talons.

• The sea-dog is a canine beast with fishy features including scales and fins.
• The alphyn is a vaguely lupine beast with avian talons and a long knotted tail.
• The enfield is a vulpine beast with avian talons.

Research links:

• https://abookofcreatures.com/2017/04/03/onchu/
• http://mistholme.com/dictionary/alphyn/
• http://mistholme.com/dictionary/enfield/
• http://mistholme.com/dictionary/sea-monsters/
• https://www.sacred-texts.com/lcr/fsca/fsca73.htm
• https://www.sarahsawyer.com/2012/03/mythic-creature-the-alphyn/