Large Awakened (5e Creature)

Large Awakened

Large plant, unaligned


Armor Class 13 (natural armor)
Hit Points 26 (4d10 + 4)
Speed 35 feet


STR DEX CON INT WIS CHA
17 (+3) 10 (+0) 12 (+1) 4 (-3) 10 (+0) 4 (-3)

Damage Vulnerabilities fire
Damage Immunities psychic
Condition Immunities blinded, charmed, defened, frightened
Senses blindsight 40 feet (blind beyond this radius), passive Perception 10
Languages understands languages of its creator but cannot speak
Challenge 1 (200 XP)


Shield. (2/rest) When an attack hits the awakened or it is targeted by the magic missile spell, it can use its reaction to add +5 to its AC and prevent all damage from magic missile until the start of its next turn.

ACTIONS

Slam. Melee Weapon Attack: +3 to hit, reach 10 ft., one target. Hit: 12 (2d8 + 3) bludgeoning damage.


A plant-based creature about 12 feet in height, its shape is only roughly that of a humanoid. Loose approximations of arms and legs made of leaves, branches, and roots, the awakened does not have a head or eyes to see with. The branches it uses as arms are thick and strong, and won't break even when the awakened throws it full weight into its punches. Though it lacks any ability to see its surroundings, it can vaguely detect slightly distant objects and can hear the sounds of other creatures just fine, despite its lack of auditory sensors. It does not think for itself, and is a product of an awakener using their Animative Botany feature on a collection of saplings, a young tree, a great many bushes, or similar flora.


Hyperlinks to other sizes: Tiny Awakened, Small Awakened, Medium Awakened, Huge Awakened, Gargantuan Awakened


Back to Main Page β†’ 5e Homebrew β†’ 5e Creatures

gollark: And I could procedurally generate a moral system in a bunch of different ways.
gollark: Ignoring the whole fundamental values differences issue, saying something is objective(ly) right because it's generated by evolutionary processes and not humans is… odd. I mean, the bible has tons of contradictory competitors.
gollark: And I don't think you can have objective morality at all, is-ought problem and such.
gollark: No, negative utilitarianism bad.
gollark: β„š you, utterly.
This article is issued from Dandwiki. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.