There is a WIDE difference of reactions, between "This creature uses charm in the form of seduction-based mind control" "This goes against my faith" & "This creature is giving me license to act out fantasies at the table that aren't consented to by the rest of the players"
That's all I have to say.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM, player & homebrewer(Current homebrew project is an unofficial conversion of SBURB/SGRUB from Homestuck into DND 5e)
Once made Maxwell's Silver Hammer come down upon Strahd's head to make sure he was dead.
Always study & sharpen philosophical razors. They save a lot of trouble.
I am fine with them both as a player and a DM. The only time i had a problem with them is that time when the CR math did not remotely check out and 10 of them were thrown at us. But that was the DM's mistake, not the monster being problem.
They can certainly be annoying to deal with though.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
He/Him. Loooooooooong time Player. The Dark days of the THAC0 system are behind us.
"Hope is a fire that burns in us all If only an ember, awaiting your call To rise up in triumph should we all unite The spark for change is yours to ignite." Kalandra - The State of the World
it fits within the themes and tones boundaries established in sessions zero
doesn't cross any player lines
is handled in a way that is appropriate and considerate to everyone at the table
there are tools in place to handle how it's run, (lines and veils, X and O, traffic light etc)
Then sure, just like any mature theme or content
I've had a concubi (gender-neutral term I've seen used a lot more recently) in some of my games, including one where they worked as the HR manager for an adventuring guild, and another where they became best friends with the aroace warforged. I'm personally more interested in subverting the trope rather than leaning into it and its lasciviousness, but regardless as long as the legwork has been done to keep everyone informed, safe, and comfortable, it's all good.
Up to 2024 Incubi and succubi were gender-neutral in the sense that they're different forms of the same fiendish entity. They used to adopt a gendered form to appeal to their prey. I've seen concubi used (and personally do use it) to refer to both incubi and succubi rather than constantly saying "incubi and succubi"
However in 2024 lore they've shifted from masc/femme but both sexual in nature to succubi appealing to and feeding off desire whereas incubi feed off dreams and leave nightmares in their wake. Both can appear in whatever form they need to in order to subdue their prey. Concubi as a collective noun still works technically but under a more legacy application—concubine derives from the latin concumbere meaning "to lie together" which is fitting for a fiendish creature that lies with mortals be they sleeping or awake.
As a note, the 2024 versions are still the same entity. The split in abilities is likely just to give some variety, but they can change between the two on a long rest.
I have no problem using them, or encountering them in-game. I do, however, have a problem with one creature having two separate entries in the Monster Manual, separated by so many pages. They should have been given ONE entry since it is a single creature that can take two forms. It is similar to having seperate entries for Human Form - Werewolf, Hybrid Form - Werewolf, and Wolf Form - Werewolf; no-one would think that's a good idea, requiring DMs to flip thru so many pages whenever the creature changes form, or to have three different browser windows open just to get the stats for a single creature - so why did they do it with Succubi/Incubi?
I have no problem using them, or encountering them in-game. I do, however, have a problem with one creature having two separate entries in the Monster Manual, separated by so many pages. They should have been given ONE entry since it is a single creature that can take two forms. It is similar to having seperate entries for Human Form - Werewolf, Hybrid Form - Werewolf, and Wolf Form - Werewolf; no-one would think that's a good idea, requiring DMs to flip thru so many pages whenever the creature changes form, or to have three different browser windows open just to get the stats for a single creature - so why did they do it with Succubi/Incubi?
Likely because the use case of a succubi or incubi is specific enough that transformation won't be a common affair. A DM employing an incubi to feed on an NPCs dreams isn't likely to have them transforming into a succubi as a combat trick like a lycanthrope might, or vice versa. They're thematically connected rather than mechanically.
Sure they are fine. Remember, this isn't your kink table and sex fantasy time. It's D&D. Throw in the evil devils that they are and watch your players kill them.
Like others have said, it is all dependent on the group you're playing with and the boundaries you set up at the beginning of the campaign. My one group with more conservative religious individuals that has a longer list of "will not allow" topics in games I would probably just leave incubi and succubi out of the game, or if they were used it would be a lot more tame or subverting tropes like Dayvd said.
In another campaign where I would use the new Stellara books I got from their Kickstarter (NSFW), I would follow the same standards of adhering to the guidelines and limitations of session zero. But if we're using the Stellara book, it's going to be a much more open group of people to begin with.
So basically, always follow the guidelines you've set up with the group and make sure everyone is reminded of the safety tools you use at the table before a session with any subject matter than might be closer to toeing the line than your average Bugbear encounter.
LIke others have said, I have no issue with using them in the game per se, but when they are utilized, one needs to be careful and know their groups.
Speaking for myself, I am very careful when using them as a DM - I do a lot of work with matters like human trafficking and SA, so things that might be more horrific than the average person can imagine are things I regularly am interfacing with. As such, I am hyper-cognizant to my own high tolerance, and any time I come close to dealing with these themes (even if it is just deploying a Succubus as a toss away monster), I think through the specific group I am DMing for and adjust the encounter accordingly.
For example, with one of my groups, I would feel fairly comfortable leaning into the darker elements - that group is full of other individuals who either are indifferent to those darker themes or similarly have professional or personal experiences that allow them to better process those kinds of themes. With my other group, who has at least two people who feel squeamish about a wide range of topics, I tend to make it a bit more campy and clear the powers are a mere temporary effect, without trying to push anything absolute and crossing the line of player consent.
As with most topics in D&D, there are right ways and wrong ways to address them, and that answer is never going to be the exact same at different tables. The important things to do are checking your own privilege, biases, and perspectives, then considering those of others.
I'm okay with Succubus as long as it's handled with care as to not cross anyone's limit whatsoever and act in respect to the game code of conduct, like anything else.
Careful use of Dominate Person not issue any command that would be inapropriate.
Also Draining Kiss can always be renamed to reskin it as a diflferent contact if it's an issue for someone.
I've got no particular problem with them as a concept but as most of my games are run for teenagers and I'm a middle aged man I'm definitely not going to be using the sex demons against them
To summarize, to me anything in the game, be it PC, NPC or monsters with Dominate Person or any other mind control effect doesn't give them free card to do anything that is inapropriate in the game, the code of conduct apply to anyone anywhere at all time.
Sure they are fine. Remember, this isn't your kink table and sex fantasy time. It's D&D. Throw in the evil devils that they are and watch your players kill them.
There are rules for kink in some old supplemental material. And its not like you can’t bolt it on like people try to hamfist into 5e rules. Remember…. hang ups can kill a hobby, and only sith speak in absolutes. Table rule everything else.
That aside, they aren’t a problem unless you let them be. In the old monster manuals they explicitly state that you deal emotional damage to sucubi if you resist thier attempts to seduce. So I’ve made it a whole thing where I politely tell the pretty lady shes nice and all, but not looking for a relationship At a strip club he was refusing lap dances, but having conversations about his crafting hobbies, and encouraged a girl to get into fashion design. This was based on a true story of a guy I used to work with that locked out of the hotel on a business trip, and the strip club was the only place open that late He walked in, I only have $30, and thats gonna last me until morning. Legend says he spent 5 hours there, just talking and light drinking, giving the girls a crash course in savings and easy retirement investments; citing how setting aside $5 a night , and put it in a basic investment like CDs, can grow to thousands over the course of years. I use that as the basis for how I deal with the DM throwing seduction at my character, since one of the other characters is the suave type and party face; and I get dragged along to make plans work
One of the other players describe my character as a walking tisim. And I started embracing that because its funny, and it gets me out of having to RP personal drama…. which I dislike doing. And charm spell now states I’m only friendly or nonhostile if combat.
If you want to avoid subduction, just make the demon prey on a different vice or meta concept. There was a paranormal TV show way back when where the monster of the week was an intelligence vampire. It would approach high IQ men, cozy up, then get them reciting theroms and formulas like its foreplay, before brain draining them into a vegetable.
So for example. A greed sucubi could be a gold digger. Or a wrath sucubi could be starting bloodily feuds between dangerous people, feeding of the anger. Get creative.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Both players and DMs can answer this, that's why I posted it here. I personally am but I want to hear other peoples' opinions.
ALL HAIL TIAMAT
I have 15 game systems and 60+ video games.
I also may or may not still be playing Skyrim for XBOX 360 (and PC) in 2026
Also, please visit My WordPress Blog
There is a WIDE difference of reactions, between "This creature uses charm in the form of seduction-based mind control" "This goes against my faith" & "This creature is giving me license to act out fantasies at the table that aren't consented to by the rest of the players"
That's all I have to say.
DM, player & homebrewer(Current homebrew project is an unofficial conversion of SBURB/SGRUB from Homestuck into DND 5e)
Once made Maxwell's Silver Hammer come down upon Strahd's head to make sure he was dead.
Always study & sharpen philosophical razors. They save a lot of trouble.
The first one is what I think.
ALL HAIL TIAMAT
I have 15 game systems and 60+ video games.
I also may or may not still be playing Skyrim for XBOX 360 (and PC) in 2026
Also, please visit My WordPress Blog
I am fine with them both as a player and a DM.
The only time i had a problem with them is that time when the CR math did not remotely check out and 10 of them were thrown at us. But that was the DM's mistake, not the monster being problem.
They can certainly be annoying to deal with though.
He/Him. Loooooooooong time Player.
The Dark days of the THAC0 system are behind us.
"Hope is a fire that burns in us all If only an ember, awaiting your call
To rise up in triumph should we all unite
The spark for change is yours to ignite."
Kalandra - The State of the World
As long as it isn't being used for OOC purposes, it's fine IMO. How descriptive visions inflicted by charms can be should be dependent on the group.
As long as
Then sure, just like any mature theme or content
I've had a concubi (gender-neutral term I've seen used a lot more recently) in some of my games, including one where they worked as the HR manager for an adventuring guild, and another where they became best friends with the aroace warforged. I'm personally more interested in subverting the trope rather than leaning into it and its lasciviousness, but regardless as long as the legwork has been done to keep everyone informed, safe, and comfortable, it's all good.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
I believe both succubus and incubus are meant to be gender-neutral with the 2024 edition.
Personally, I'm not a fan of them, but not to the extent that it's going to ruin the game for me or anything.
Up to 2024 Incubi and succubi were gender-neutral in the sense that they're different forms of the same fiendish entity. They used to adopt a gendered form to appeal to their prey. I've seen concubi used (and personally do use it) to refer to both incubi and succubi rather than constantly saying "incubi and succubi"
However in 2024 lore they've shifted from masc/femme but both sexual in nature to succubi appealing to and feeding off desire whereas incubi feed off dreams and leave nightmares in their wake. Both can appear in whatever form they need to in order to subdue their prey. Concubi as a collective noun still works technically but under a more legacy application—concubine derives from the latin concumbere meaning "to lie together" which is fitting for a fiendish creature that lies with mortals be they sleeping or awake.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
As a note, the 2024 versions are still the same entity. The split in abilities is likely just to give some variety, but they can change between the two on a long rest.
A succubus for every Paladin!
I have no problem using them, or encountering them in-game. I do, however, have a problem with one creature having two separate entries in the Monster Manual, separated by so many pages. They should have been given ONE entry since it is a single creature that can take two forms. It is similar to having seperate entries for Human Form - Werewolf, Hybrid Form - Werewolf, and Wolf Form - Werewolf; no-one would think that's a good idea, requiring DMs to flip thru so many pages whenever the creature changes form, or to have three different browser windows open just to get the stats for a single creature - so why did they do it with Succubi/Incubi?
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (original Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
Likely because the use case of a succubi or incubi is specific enough that transformation won't be a common affair. A DM employing an incubi to feed on an NPCs dreams isn't likely to have them transforming into a succubi as a combat trick like a lycanthrope might, or vice versa. They're thematically connected rather than mechanically.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Sure they are fine. Remember, this isn't your kink table and sex fantasy time. It's D&D. Throw in the evil devils that they are and watch your players kill them.
Like others have said, it is all dependent on the group you're playing with and the boundaries you set up at the beginning of the campaign. My one group with more conservative religious individuals that has a longer list of "will not allow" topics in games I would probably just leave incubi and succubi out of the game, or if they were used it would be a lot more tame or subverting tropes like Dayvd said.
In another campaign where I would use the new Stellara books I got from their Kickstarter (NSFW), I would follow the same standards of adhering to the guidelines and limitations of session zero. But if we're using the Stellara book, it's going to be a much more open group of people to begin with.
So basically, always follow the guidelines you've set up with the group and make sure everyone is reminded of the safety tools you use at the table before a session with any subject matter than might be closer to toeing the line than your average Bugbear encounter.
That would probably fall under setting expectations, boundaries, and safety tools in session 0
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
LIke others have said, I have no issue with using them in the game per se, but when they are utilized, one needs to be careful and know their groups.
Speaking for myself, I am very careful when using them as a DM - I do a lot of work with matters like human trafficking and SA, so things that might be more horrific than the average person can imagine are things I regularly am interfacing with. As such, I am hyper-cognizant to my own high tolerance, and any time I come close to dealing with these themes (even if it is just deploying a Succubus as a toss away monster), I think through the specific group I am DMing for and adjust the encounter accordingly.
For example, with one of my groups, I would feel fairly comfortable leaning into the darker elements - that group is full of other individuals who either are indifferent to those darker themes or similarly have professional or personal experiences that allow them to better process those kinds of themes. With my other group, who has at least two people who feel squeamish about a wide range of topics, I tend to make it a bit more campy and clear the powers are a mere temporary effect, without trying to push anything absolute and crossing the line of player consent.
As with most topics in D&D, there are right ways and wrong ways to address them, and that answer is never going to be the exact same at different tables. The important things to do are checking your own privilege, biases, and perspectives, then considering those of others.
I'm okay with Succubus as long as it's handled with care as to not cross anyone's limit whatsoever and act in respect to the game code of conduct, like anything else.
Careful use of Dominate Person not issue any command that would be inapropriate.
Also Draining Kiss can always be renamed to reskin it as a diflferent contact if it's an issue for someone.
I've got no particular problem with them as a concept but as most of my games are run for teenagers and I'm a middle aged man I'm definitely not going to be using the sex demons against them
To summarize, to me anything in the game, be it PC, NPC or monsters with Dominate Person or any other mind control effect doesn't give them free card to do anything that is inapropriate in the game, the code of conduct apply to anyone anywhere at all time.
There are rules for kink in some old supplemental material. And its not like you can’t bolt it on like people try to hamfist into 5e rules. Remember…. hang ups can kill a hobby, and only sith speak in absolutes. Table rule everything else.
That aside, they aren’t a problem unless you let them be. In the old monster manuals they explicitly state that you deal emotional damage to sucubi if you resist thier attempts to seduce. So I’ve made it a whole thing where I politely tell the pretty lady shes nice and all, but not looking for a relationship At a strip club he was refusing lap dances, but having conversations about his crafting hobbies, and encouraged a girl to get into fashion design. This was based on a true story of a guy I used to work with that locked out of the hotel on a business trip, and the strip club was the only place open that late He walked in, I only have $30, and thats gonna last me until morning. Legend says he spent 5 hours there, just talking and light drinking, giving the girls a crash course in savings and easy retirement investments; citing how setting aside $5 a night , and put it in a basic investment like CDs, can grow to thousands over the course of years. I use that as the basis for how I deal with the DM throwing seduction at my character, since one of the other characters is the suave type and party face; and I get dragged along to make plans work
One of the other players describe my character as a walking tisim. And I started embracing that because its funny, and it gets me out of having to RP personal drama…. which I dislike doing. And charm spell now states I’m only friendly or nonhostile if combat.
If you want to avoid subduction, just make the demon prey on a different vice or meta concept. There was a paranormal TV show way back when where the monster of the week was an intelligence vampire. It would approach high IQ men, cozy up, then get them reciting theroms and formulas like its foreplay, before brain draining them into a vegetable.
So for example. A greed sucubi could be a gold digger. Or a wrath sucubi could be starting bloodily feuds between dangerous people, feeding of the anger. Get creative.