General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
Ehh, I never have been much of a Dragon fan. At the most they serve the purpose of being the major predators of a setting. I like my Dragons as feral, hidden predators that lay in the deep swamps, forests, caves, etc. waiting for food. So lots of the stuff presented just aren't needed.
Plus, all the monsters, rituals, etc. I can get from the Compendium and then refluff as I wish.
Looking for an actual review from someone who has the book and plays 4e? Look no further.
Overall impressions - The book is for DMs. The old "sprinkle in some player bits into every book to increase sales" approach appears to be gone in 4e, and I'm all for it. Being in 3 games, only one of which is at my house, I appreciate not having to lug my entire library around on the off chance I'll need part of it that night. The art is nice in my opinion, and the book is a good mix of fluff and crunch, old and new (though really, did the world need a purple dragon?)
Section by section breakdown:
Chapter 1, Dragon Lore:
Good but not great - I never picked up the 3e Draconomicon, so a lot of it may be re-printed. I especially enjoyed the Chromatic Dragons In Detail section, which does a nice job of breaking down temperment, terrain preference, and favorite hoard objects in detail. Lots of little bits that I can see myself building out into adventures.
Chapter 2, DM's guide to Dragons:
Some very solid stuff here - lots of adventure ideas, campaign ideas, briefly sketched out Dragon NPCs, lots of hoards, some traps (I like the one that turns anyone who attempts to steal from the hoard into solid gold, making them part of the hoard), 4 artifacts, and some dragon rituals.
Chapter 3, Dragon Lairs:
3 heroic, 3 paragon, and 3 epic dragon lairs, each which is basically a mini-adventure (think dungeon delve with a bit more). Nice little bits which can be fit into just about any campaign. The last epic one is a nice shout-out to Red Hand of Doom for those who enjoyed that adventure.
Chapter 4, New Monsters:
First, let's start with the big deals, the three new dragons -
Brown Dragons: These are nasty, nasty boys. The blinding sand attacks, combined with the extra damage when the dragon has combat advantage, make for a vicious synergy. While I'm a little annoyed that they stole the desert from my favorite dragons (the Blues), they make good desert predators, and the gourmand fluff is interesting, though a little odd in the desert. Overall, good dragon, though I think I'll call them Sand Dragons instead of Brown Dragons to make them a bit more intimidating.
Gray Dragons: I really like the fluff for these guys - pure predators, they live for the thrill of hunt. Unlike most other chromatics, they don't spend as much time in their lairs, and are more nomadic hunters. The petrification attacks are quite nasty as well. Very nice dragon, will definitely see use in my campaigns.
Purple Dragons: Gag me with a spoon. I don't like these guys at all - the underdark theme, the psychic damage, and let's not forget, the fact that they're PURPLE . . . not everyone who does psychic damage needs to be the same color as mind-flayers, people. Total loss from my view, though they may be great fits for someone else. Loser Dragon.
Other monsters:
Wyrmlings - if you wanted baby dragons, you have them. Not much to say, though the art makes them very cute and adorable looking little engines of destruction (oversized head and feet, etc).
Planar dragons - some good, some bad. I'm not sure about the whole idea of non-solo dragons, and they're all slightly off-center away from the basic idead of dragon. Meh. The Shadow Dragon and Fairy Dragons make nice returns though (Shadow Dragon = scary).
The rest - a lot of familiar faces show up again - abishai, dragonspawn, etc. Decent spread of monsters from level 1-29. Nothing you could make a whole campaign out of, but you can probably find some stuff you like.
Dragon Hall of Fame: this section is pure win. Consider it your "epic tier opponents to smack the life out of your party with" section. Ashardalon, Cyan Bloodbane, and a few other famous dragons get write-ups, as well as several new dragons with some good backstory, and of course, 4th edition's first fully statted out deity, the unholy level 35 terror that is Tiamat. This is by far my favorite section of the book, and I'm already batting around several high level campaign ideas to make use of it.
Finally, there's some substitute powers to vary your dragons up a bit, along with a couple monster templates for your monsters (Draconic and Dragon Guard).
All in all, it's a good read, and if you're planning on running a campaign or adventure that makes heavy use of dragons, I'd definitely recommend it. You can definitely live without it, but I don't think you'll regret picking it up. The Gray Dragons and Tiamat are my favorite portions, though there's lots of good stuff to go around.
__________________ Rick Reroll -- Deadly Rickster Utility 26 Daily
Choose one: you reroll one die roll you just made and keep the higher result; or the DM rerolls one die roll he just made and keeps the lower result.
My PCs just fought and then fought a fighting retreat from a Young Purple Dragon. It was impressive, the breath weapon and dominating ability made it a difficult foe. Add that the party had expended most of their daily effects by then, and the party soon decided to flee.
Looking for an actual review from someone who has the book and plays 4e? Look no further.
Great review-- and I think I'll like Purple Dragons a bit more than you, since I liked the 3.5 Deep Dragons. I can't wait for my copy to arrive, those famous dragons sound like amazing campaign capstones.
The rest - a lot of familiar faces show up again - abishai, dragonspawn, etc.
Did they make abishai dragons? Or did they (hopefully) keep them as actual fiends? Yes, Tiamat had a hand in creating them pre-4e along with the Lot9, but as actual baatezu I've always found it bizarre to try to keep linking them to dragons.
__________________ "I can just see the 4e adventure anthology "Tale from the Limited Staircase"." - Ken Marable
Books used last session Black Horse Parsantium campaign: 4e core rules, Player's Handbook 2 (invoker), Adventurer's Vault, Wrath of the River King. Dulwich Parsantium campaign: 4e core rules, Forgotten Realms Player's Guide (genasi, swordmage), Players' Handbook 2 (barbarian), Dragon (Playing Gnolls), Sellswords of Punjar (the adventure) Lands of Intrigue: 3.5 core rules, Arcana Evolved (unfettered), Ptolus, Spell Compendium, Complete Book of Eldritch Might, The Banewarrens (the adventure), Book of Nine Swords (Desert Wind), Monster Manual V (demons)
3.x's Draconomicon was one of my favorite books for 3.x and the same holds true for 4e's Draconomicon I. I love this book. I thought the artwork in the 3.x version was better, but it's not a dealbreaker for sure.
Though the book does focus on the chormatics, it has a bunch of general dragon info. Also, there's some info on the planar, scourge and catastrophic dragons as well (though no stats save for a handful of planars).
As has been said before, there is almost nothing in here for players, and I like it that way m'self.
On the three new dragons, I do dig all three of 'em. The grey dragon is the fang dragon, but with a story that has changed it from what it used to be to what it is now. The purple dragon is just the old deep dragon.
There are a lot of new critters in this book, including abashai, some new dragonspawn, a few new undead dragons (including a few new dracoliches, skeletal dragons, vampiric dragons and zombie dragons) and wyrmling dragons. Plus, a couple of new templates.
Oh, and we get some info on how deities are handled in 4e as well (to begin with, if you're under 20th level, you can't touch 'em).
I do have one beef with the book, and that's Tiamat being a Huge creature. No. Not Tiamat's avatar, Tiamat herself. This is easily remedied by pretending the line says "Gargantuan" and, in play, using my Colossal red and saying "pretend this is Tiamat."
Overall, I give it a 4.5 out of 5.
__________________ ______________
Prince Nightchilde
I'm always looking for new Friends on Xbox Live & the Playstation Network. My username is Nightchilde. Add me!
I never got the 3e version as I was kind of sick of dragons there for awhile, so cannot compare the two, but I bought the 4e book and like it a lot. It exemplifies what a 4e book should be, imo: a nice combination of fluff and crunch (I tend to find books like Martial Power kind of boring because of the lack of fluff). Good book, although I would only buy it if A) You like dragons, B) You like/play 4e and/or C) Don't have the 3e book. If, for example, you like dragons but don't play 4e and have the 3e book, don't buy it.
They are immortal humanoids. They still have draconic associations, as always, but they are definitely not dragons.
Though they're not quite devils either.
__________________ Veronica: Where's your brother?
Dick: I think he took Ghost World up to his room. They're probably up there making love. Or playing Dungeons and Dragons. Or both, at the same time. They're both, like, 12th-level dorks. I'm just sayin'
Someone posted a (small) table of contents some days ago.
1: Dragon Lore--pgs 4-42
2: DM's Guid to Dragons--pgs44-88
3: Dragon Lairs--pgs90-164
4: New Monsters--pgs166-254
1. Mostly the same than in the 3E Draconomicon. Dragon Physiology is nearly identical except for some changes to justify encounter powers. Dragon Psychology has a few nice bits in it and about 2 pages of information about each chromatic dragon type (again like in 3E except for changed fluff and the new chromatics)
2. A mishmash of treasure guidlines like in 3E with suggestion how to use piles of gold coins as special terrain (a option all sample hoards don't use as they don't have enough coins in them), adventure seeds and a few artifacts.
3. A discussion about how lairs are chosen and some sample lair mini adventures
4. Lots of new monsters, I think most things the 3E Draconomicon had. A lot of skeletal dragons variations if you ask me. Also some related monsters like Abiashi and special kobolds.
It also has a small list of famous dragons from various sample dragons (which butchers any fluff they had) and a few sample dragons (although I don't know if they are different from standard MM dragons).
That is all from memory so I might have missed or misplaced something, especially as I was not interested much in monsters and miniadventures.
Arg! My plan was to hold off on buying any more 4e products until the errata was incorporated into new printings of the core books, but this new Draconomicon is darn tempting.
There is not much talk about the Draconomicon on this board. I wonder what the reason is?
I think there is less interest because it is a DM's book, rather than a player book - which means less people reading and using it. Just like there was more discussion for the FRPG than the FRCG.
Quote:
I can't really say as I don't play 4E, but am just interested in the Fluff and Lore in this book. And for the most part its not as good as the 3E Draconomicon.
I have to disagree strongly here - but then, I'm really not sure how much use your review can actually be to 4E players, given your admitted bias against 4E.
In any case, I personally found this book incredibly interesting and flavorful. It is interesting - I never really cared much for the 3rd Edition Draconomicon, despite it being much more useful to me (as a player resource, which I tend to value over DM resources.) I found it somewhat bland - it did little to fire up my imagination. I used it, occasionally - if running dragons, it certainly was worth consulting. But in general, it was something of a disappointment.
I've only gotten through about half of the 4E Draconomicon thus far, and I'm loving it. Despite the fact that it will be a long while before I'll be running anything that can really use material from here, I'm finding it extremely inspirational, and thinking up a number of adventures based on the material in the book.
I actually loved the way they did the fluff for many of the famous figures - making them accessible, while still firmly grounding them in their backstory. Cyan Bloodbane is a good example - the default lore about him never mentions Dragonlance or any specific names, but is very clearly that story. A sidebar confirms this, detailing his place in the Dragonlance mythos - but I like that they have made him much more available to use in a personal campaign, without actually 'butchering' his background as you seem to be claiming.
I was very surprised by how much I liked it - possibly because of my feelings towards the 3rd Ed version, possibly because I was looking forward to Martial Power much, much more. But it is a great read, and well worth it - perhaps not for players, but definitely for DMs, and anyone who enjoys the use of Dragons.
Arg! My plan was to hold off on buying any more 4e products until the errata was incorporated into new printings of the core books, but this new Draconomicon is darn tempting.
It is. It's a solid product (specific minor gripes and 4e-isms notwithstanding). Go ahead, buy it. If you aren't buying Martial Power, they'll cancel each other out.
I have to disagree strongly here - but then, I'm really not sure how much use your review can actually be to 4E players, given your admitted bias against 4E.
Thats why I only comment on the edition independant fluff and not on the rules (which I can't judge accurately anyway). I think I clearly mentioned that in my report (never said that this was a review).
And I stay by my word. When you have the 3E Draconomicon then you don't need to read the first chapter of the 4E Draconomicon as they are the same with some small exceptions.
The only thing which the 4E book does better is how it describes lairs and the mindest of dragons. But that is countered by butchering the fluff of many famous dragons and by trying to explain why powers are encounter powers which is similar to linkink the ability to use the force with medichloreans.
Just compare Wyrms of the North: Daurgothoth, "The Creeping Doom" with his 4E Drac entry.
By the way, I remember that the book talks about true names and that they don't hold any power over dragons, but mentions a sidebar of optional true name rules. But I couldn't find such a true name (although I only searched a few pages for- and backward). Is that sidebar somewhere else in the book or even in the core rules?
As for butchering Cyans fluff, he did far more than what is described in the book. Everything after the chronicles is left out, even the part where he tricked a whole elven nation into destroying itself with a magical shield and nearly succeeded if not a chosen revealed his identity.
Also his picture is ugly. Since when is Cyan related to Mind Flayers or Gold Dragons?
__________________ Everything about RPGs is subjective, so everything I say about them is I my opinion and not hard facts
Having a backstory is good. Using this backstory in game is better. And for that you need background skills.
4E, the game where you play HSMFOS
Heroic
Only good, or at least unaligned adventurers are supported and no monster you can fight is good aligned.
Super-
The PCs become masters in any skill automatically and it is impossible for them to be bad at a mundane task
Mutants
Compared to NPCs of the same strength, PCs poses a ungodly amount of HP and can withstand huge mountains of punishment. That or they can spontaneously regenerate wounds.
From Outer Space
Yet despite no matter how powerful the PCs become, they can never do anything special what the "natives" (=NPCs) can do like animating a skeleton.
Last edited by Derren; 23rd November 2008 at 08:52 PM..
Thats why I only comment on the edition independant fluff and not on the rules (which I can't judge accurately anyway). I think I clearly mentioned that in my report (never said that this was a review).
Oh, sure - but I think there is a level of difficulty in judging something which has a significant portion of material you already are set against. But fair enough on not claiming it was a review, and I certainly don't want to say you aren't entitled to declaring your own opinion on the book!
Well, sure - but if they posted that detailed an entry for every one of the 'famous dragons' mentioned in the book, it would take up another 100-200 pages!
Even comparing it to the detailed entries in the Dragon Hall of Fame, the Daurgothoth article is nearly triple their length. Including that much detail would mean going from 8 such entries to only 2-3. Personally, I'd prefer it as it is, where each entry gets a write-up with more than enough information to be of use, but no so much that other material has to be cut out for it.
Now, if they were to do a similar write-up as an article in an issue of Dragon, I'd find that perfectly fine - and I see that as the logical place for such in-depth entries, in all honesty.
Quote:
By the way, I remember that the book talks about true names and that they don't hold any power over dragons, but mentions a sidebar of optional true name rules. But I couldn't find such a true name (although I only searched a few pages for- and backward). Is that sidebar somewhere else in the book or even in the core rules?
Not sure, don't recall seeing it in there - I think one of the rituals in the book has something to do with this, but I don't recall it involving detailed rules for true names.
Quote:
As for butchering Cyans fluff, he did far more than what is described in the book. Everything after the chronicles is left out, even the part where he tricked a whole elven nation into destroying itself with a magical shield and nearly succeeded if not a chosen revealed his identity.
Also his picture is ugly. Since when is Cyan related to Mind Flayers or Gold Dragons?
Is it really needed to get into that much detail? Sure, yes, it is part of the dragon's story. But we aren't dealing with a novel - we are presenting a product for use in the game. How much does that extra information add?
Does it really help to have the following:
DC 25 Lore: Cyan nearly destroyed an elven nation through trickery and deceit, manipulating its king into using a powerful magic item to protect his nation, and instead the elven nation was nearly destroyed until some champions of the gods stopped Cyan's plans.
DC 30: Cyan later nearly destroyed the same elven nation through trickery and deceit, manipulating its king into using power magic to protect his nation, and instead the elven nation was nearly destroyed until some champions of the gods stopped Cyan's plans.
And let's be really honest - even if you would prefer that information be added, is it really butchering his fluff by not including it? Is the dragon's character somehow completely lost because they only included the core fluff of his background?
Heck, didn't the story you are referring to end in his death? Maybe they didn't include it because they wanted to present Cyan Bloodbane in all his original glory, rather than having him show back up as a dracolich or the like? I certainly don't see how that hurts the game in any way.
As for the picture, I think its awesome. I'm sorry you dislike a dragon looking remotely distinctive, but I think the Fu Manchu tentacle look is absolutely perfect for his personality.
Why? the 3e book was all just fluff, and since I have a tendency to change things to suit my homebrews, fluff is really just a starting point that gets ignored.
Meanwhile, the 4e book is stuff I can use in a pinch. It has something like nine adventures in it, each about 2-3 hours playing time (and most with notes on how you can expand it). It gives you two complete campaign arcs, from heroic to epic, that really piqued my interest (I was tempted to change my current campaign, still in heroic, to the second of the two arcs). It gives us some nice monsters to play with (Abishai!), and the information on creating draconic hoards is, in my mind, very useful for a 4e game - much more useful in context than the same information for the 3e book.
As for the fluff, it's useful, but of course I'll change it as needed.
I was really excited by the power replacements at the end of the book, so you can create your own unique dragons (I know the 3e book did something like this, too, and I loved it there as well). The two new templates were useful, and was a nice way to give the DMs access to monsters like the Dragonne and Dracotaurs without having to write up yet another "half-dragon/half-x" monster description.
What I really love in this book, though, is the artwork by a Mr. Tsai. His painting for the start of chapter 2 really caught my eye - the characters are just wearing armour, and not a dozen small WAR packs and belts. It's very classical, but at the same time modern. Love it. The Brown dragon painting on page 169 is also awesome and hearkens back to old 2e years of D&D art (my favourite era of D&D art) - it actually reminds me of the 2e PHB in many ways.
Seriously, the art in this book made me realize how bored I had become with W.A.R.
There were things in the book I wasn't a fan of (the famous dragons in particular skipped some of my favourites, such as Ashardalon and Flame; Using draconic organs as treasure), but no book can please everyone.
I bought this book instead of Martial Power, because I couldn't buy 'em both lest I anger the s/o. It was really a Sophie's Choice, but I'm glad I bought this one in the end.
__________________ Current Campaign:The Shattered Isles Homebrew - Hammer (Minotaur Fighter 8), Kirra (Drow Rogue 8), Shedin (Dragonborn Paladin 8), Zahar (Half-Eladrin/Half Drow Bard 8), and Seahorse (Halfling Rogue 8). Currently the group is in the Feywild, trying to discover who is poisoning the drow.
The pre-statted dragons of every age category and color were one of the more useful parts of the book for me. I also enjoyed a few of the Prestige Classes and the rules for playing dragons.
I mean, there was a lot of fluff in the 3e book, but there was a PILE of crunch, too. In my mind, the Draconomicon was one of the strongest 3e books (in part because of the AMAZING art...which 4e's isn't really up to par with, but it's okay).
Well, sure - but if they posted that detailed an entry for every one of the 'famous dragons' mentioned in the book, it would take up another 100-200 pages!
Even comparing it to the detailed entries in the Dragon Hall of Fame, the Daurgothoth article is nearly triple their length. Including that much detail would mean going from 8 such entries to only 2-3. Personally, I'd prefer it as it is, where each entry gets a write-up with more than enough information to be of use, but no so much that other material has to be cut out for it.
Now, if they were to do a similar write-up as an article in an issue of Dragon, I'd find that perfectly fine - and I see that as the logical place for such in-depth entries, in all honesty.
They don't have to write all this. They could have summarized it like "Daurgothoth is an ancient Dracolich who experiements with combining the strengths of several dragon species into one mate for him so he, after he found a way to become alive again, can sire the perfect dragon race.
There. Its short and still much truer to his fluff than "He has minions stealing stuff for his hoard".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamikaze Midget
.....?
The pre-statted dragons of every age category and color were one of the more useful parts of the book for me. I also enjoyed a few of the Prestige Classes and the rules for playing dragons.
I mean, there was a lot of fluff in the 3e book, but there was a PILE of crunch, too. In my mind, the Draconomicon was one of the strongest 3e books (in part because of the AMAZING art...which 4e's isn't really up to par with, but it's okay).
Not to forget all the monsters in it.
__________________ Everything about RPGs is subjective, so everything I say about them is I my opinion and not hard facts
Having a backstory is good. Using this backstory in game is better. And for that you need background skills.
4E, the game where you play HSMFOS
Heroic
Only good, or at least unaligned adventurers are supported and no monster you can fight is good aligned.
Super-
The PCs become masters in any skill automatically and it is impossible for them to be bad at a mundane task
Mutants
Compared to NPCs of the same strength, PCs poses a ungodly amount of HP and can withstand huge mountains of punishment. That or they can spontaneously regenerate wounds.
From Outer Space
Yet despite no matter how powerful the PCs become, they can never do anything special what the "natives" (=NPCs) can do like animating a skeleton.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
