In most of the lore I've heard, incubi and succubi are the same creature, but called something different depending on their current sex. (Like, chickens and roosters are the same, but called different things depending on sex)
So, is there a special reason they're listed separately in the monster list?
I'm not sure what you're looking at but "that's how WotC designed them" isn't exactly correct. In the Monster Manual they share an entry Succubus/Incubus and share a stat block, and explain the sort of fluid sex presentation of the fiend that you're talking about reflective of D&D monster lore. So they aren't really separately in the design of the book. Rather, I think this is utility of splitting up the slash into two separate entities landing on the same text with the search term leading in. Most folks when looking things up will likely type in one or the other "succubus" or "incubus" not a combined slash search of "incubus/succubus". If you read the entries, they're the exact same texts.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
What I mean is that there are two different monsters that share the same stat block with different names; a creature is either a succubus or an incubus. It's stat block is functionally identical in either form, which is why the monster manual lists it as Succubus/Incubus rather than either
Splitting it out into two stat blocks that only differ by name, wasting page space, or
Having a stat block with a single name
D&D Beyond does not have to worry about page space so can reflect how WotC designed them by having two separate stat blocks; succubus and incubus. This reflects how WotC designed them; as two different creatures (different in name only) rather than one single creature.
You can verify this yourself by looking at the entry in the monster manual; it refers to succubus or incubus (or succubi and incubi), rather than referring to them as succubus/incubus. e.g.
The kiss of a succubus or incubus is an echo of the emptiness that is the fiend’s longing for a corrupted soul.
In most of the lore I've heard, incubi and succubi are the same creature, but called something different depending on their current sex. (Like, chickens and roosters are the same, but called different things depending on sex)
So, is there a special reason they're listed separately in the monster list?
Because that's how Wizards of the Coast have designed them
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Fair enough.
I'm not sure what you're looking at but "that's how WotC designed them" isn't exactly correct. In the Monster Manual they share an entry Succubus/Incubus and share a stat block, and explain the sort of fluid sex presentation of the fiend that you're talking about reflective of D&D monster lore. So they aren't really separately in the design of the book. Rather, I think this is utility of splitting up the slash into two separate entities landing on the same text with the search term leading in. Most folks when looking things up will likely type in one or the other "succubus" or "incubus" not a combined slash search of "incubus/succubus". If you read the entries, they're the exact same texts.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
What I mean is that there are two different monsters that share the same stat block with different names; a creature is either a succubus or an incubus. It's stat block is functionally identical in either form, which is why the monster manual lists it as Succubus/Incubus rather than either
D&D Beyond does not have to worry about page space so can reflect how WotC designed them by having two separate stat blocks; succubus and incubus. This reflects how WotC designed them; as two different creatures (different in name only) rather than one single creature.
You can verify this yourself by looking at the entry in the monster manual; it refers to succubus or incubus (or succubi and incubi), rather than referring to them as succubus/incubus. e.g.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here