Dragon Breath

[PolterGhost]

I dunno if this is in the correct forum, but I digress.

I've always liked the concept behind the old Gygaxian dragons- Big, vicious beasts with a 3/day breath weapon dealing as much damage as they have in hit dice.

In 3.5, I'd like to have this same frightening breath weapon. From what I've tested, it doesn't completely throw the game off balance- There's more than enough defences against a breath weapon, it's just getting yourself ready to defend against one that's the issue! A (un)lucky hit could completely smoke your party's magic-user in one fell swoop, or even a Fighter with the worst luck!

Would changing the breath weapon in this way change the average CR of the dragon? I imagine it wouldn't (The dragon gives up being able to use it without limit to turning it into a tactical weapon), especially given that a typical breath weapon would deal 1/2-3/4 the amount of damage, plus the fact that you can still save versus the attack for half damage as normal.



On another note, how do you do your breath weapons? As we know, all the chromatic dragons have vastly different weapons, including
Acid spray
Chlorine mist
Fire blast
Rapid freeze
Lightning stream

So how do you do yours? I can imagine most adventurers would walk into battle with a dragon with a Tower Shield strapped to them so they can claim total cover against the breath weapon, but how effective would it be?
If an adventurer has acid shot at them, does the shield melt? Do you damage their equipment? Do you damage their equipment in the case of the chlorine gas as well, and do you even let them take total cover against that? Does the lightning act like a Lightning Bolt and shatter the tower shield with its might?

 

[nonsi256]

.
Your suggestion will basically make dragons go from [high-damage battlefield control] to SUPERNOVA (One-Shot-One-Kill), which could easily turn out to be TPK, unless they're prepared (and then "big ole' frightening dragon" loses its main asset).

Routine supernova encounters are bad for the same reason one shouldn't put the climax of a story in the beginning of the book.


With all the supplement books there (Dragon Magic, Draconomicon, Races of the Dragon etc), there are already plenty of metabreath feats and other means to make breath weapon in particular and dragons in general truly terrifying, even without pumping up the base damage.


If you're trying to catch that "vicious primordial beasts" spirit, what you could do is to replace spellcasting with something more innate, such as invocations (not including Eldritch Blast) and/or incarnum and/or maneuvers.
With the right cocktail, you could obtain the theme you're looking for without changing the overall CR too much.


And it would also be more appropriate ecology-wise, because 3e dragons (supreme Int + overwhelming spellcasting) should've reigned supreme rather than stand by and "let those puny humanoids spawn everywhere and infest & despoil the world".

 

[radmod]

Remember, though the game has always been called D&Dragons, dragons were never very scary except at low levels. IIRC, the original MM only gave them a bite attack. In fact, once we learned to play the game, we would scoff at dragons (until clever DMs would add stuff gained from the Dragon mag).
With 3.5, dragon's are where they should be: higher hps, special abilities, multiple types of attacks, feats, etc. - scary.

EDIT: Oops, I meant claws/bite, not just bite.

 

[PolterGhost]

Original MM does indeed give them a three times a day breath weapon with damage equal to their hit dice, though there was that percentile chance that they'd rather bite you to death instead.

I can't even seem to find these metabreath feats you speak of, even in the three books mentioned (There are some for Dragonblooded out of the RotD, but most of them are N/A or are just too, um, weird to think about using (entangling breath weapons, really?))

As it is, I view a combat with a dragon to be something that's meant to be cinematic, not where the DM goes "Hey guys, watch how badly I can abuse the feat system." It doesn't take a genius to figure out that you can perform continuous flyby attacks turn after turn, but does that really sound like an epic battle?

As it stands, a 3/day breath weapon alone is the least of the adventurer's worries. If they know anything, they'll learn to ready actions to dive out of the way or put up a barrier between themselves and the dragon so that they won't get obliterated. It's not like a simple thing as dragon breath is going to become the be-all end-all of the battle, just something that the adventurers are going to learn to dodge as opposed to shrugging off the damage, sitting back, and healing up.

 

[radmod]

I just happened to have my original MM next to the computer. Hopefully I can translate the data into 3.5

An ancient red dragon was supposed to be the big scary encounter in 1e.
However, it has 88 hps, (AC -1 = ) AC 21, and does claw/claw/bite of d8, d8, 3d10 at something like +8 to +11. If rolled, it has a 75% chance of being able to speak, ~30% chance of casting spells, and, if it can cast spells, only up to 4th level. However, it does move fast: 90' ground, 250' fly.

Except for the flying, we discovered they were cake walks comparatively. Nowadays, I fear a proper dragon.

 

[radmod]

I can't even seem to find these metabreath feats you speak of, even in the three books mentioned (There are some for Dragonblooded out of the RotD, but most of them are N/A or are just too, um, weird to think about using (entangling breath weapons, really?))

Draconomicon (p. 68) provides 12 metabreath feats which are similar to metamagic feats. For example there is a maximize breath and a Quicken Breath. Instead of adding to a spell level (like metamagic) they increase the amount of time until a dragon can breathe again.

Hey, don't dis the entangling. One of my players is using it!
Ah, nevermind, I find it weird too.

 

[Celebrim]

Remember, though the game has always been called D&Dragons, dragons were never very scary except at low levels.

???

Seriously???

A 1st edition AD&D red dragon of the largest size has a breath weapon that does 88 points of damage. It may use that weapon 3 times in a row before resorting to claw/claw/bite.

A 10th level fighter, which in 1st edition must be considered 'high level', has probably no more than 75 or so hit points (assuming a reasonably fortunate constitution). Hense, everyone in the party is facing save or die on the first breath and without special protection from fire will probably die on the second round regardless of how they save.

Even at 20th level, a 1st edition fighter probably has no more than 100 hit points. A mated pair of dragons therefore still threatens a party wipe.

A 1st edition AD&D dragon is something of a glass cannon, but at no point were they 'not scary'.

Later editions of dragon made them more well rounded, and eventually reduced the breath weapon in damage and frequency to something which was not the sole overriding concern of the fight (and hense, made combat with dragons less a matter of pure luck), but at no point were they scarier than they were in 1st edition.

 

[Celebrim]

An ancient red dragon was supposed to be the big scary encounter in 1e.

However, it has 88 hps, (AC -1 = ) AC 21, and does claw/claw/bite of d8, d8, 3d10 at something like +8 to +11. If rolled, it has a 75% chance of being able to speak, ~30% chance of casting spells, and, if it can cast spells, only up to 4th level. However, it does move fast: 90' ground, 250' fly.

However? Only?

Seriously, what non-unique monster in the MM do you see with more than 88 hit points? To get 88 hit points on average required like 19 HD. How many 19 HD monsters do you see in the manual. Nor are there a whole lot of monsters with more than 'AC 21'. And keep in mind that while its HD is 'only' 11, the tables only go up to 16th HD, and it gains saving throws on the basis of it's hit points (one effective HD per 4 hit points, IIRC, so 22nd level for the purpose of saves).

Seriously, you are dealing with a situation where a 15th level M-U probably has 30 hp. It's claw/claw/bite reutine does on average like 25 hp of damage. It's breath weapon does 44 damage even on a save. How long do you think a party can take that sort of damage? High HD dragons had to die almost immediately or they would wipe the whole party.

You can't directly compare the numbers in 3rd edition to the numbers in 1st edition, because unless you had a totally twinked out munchin game, the numbers associated with PC's were so so much smaller than in the modern game. Tenth level was 'high level'. Having 50 hit points was 'a lot of hit points' for a PC, especially pre Unearthed Arcana when the first round of power creep hit.

 

[radmod]

I'm just saying two things:
1) From my experience a smart 1e/2e party could easily handle a dragon, though not with everyone necessarily surviving. I'm talking more TPK. Remember, an ancient red is the extreme example. AND it is a 'rare' creature. Compare similar ones, such as a Balor, Balrog, Lich, or even Remoraz*. I would rather face a dragon than those.
Where did you get the 16 HD limitation (or are you talking the save chart)? A Roc has 18 and many creatures have more than the dragon. Comparing a maximized red dragon to a non-maximized version of them is like comparing apples to oranges.

2) Compared to a 3.5 dragon (with his multiple attacks, higher spells, higher BW, multiple feats, etc.), the earlier ones are wimp. I'm talking relative to a 3.5 party of the same level. Yes, a 1e 9th was considered high, and a 3.5 9th may not, but that's exactly my point. A 9th level 1e party isn't likely to get wiped out by the ancient red but a similar 9th level 3.5 party could by an Old. Even the juvey version (CR10) provides problems. Now look at your standard high level 3.5 party: they fear a similarly high HD dragon.

No, I stand by my statement. We were never that greatly concerned if we faced a dragon. Nowadays, parties fear dragons - as they should.

* Big time argument: the 1e remorhaz did an instant kill on a "score of 20". I seem to remember arguing over whether that meant a natural 20, or an adjusted 20.

 

[Celebrim]

I'm just saying two things:
1) From my experience a smart 1e/2e party could easily handle a dragon, though not with everyone necessarily surviving. I'm talking more TPK. Remember, an ancient red is the extreme example. AND it is a 'rare' creature. Compare similar ones, such as a Balor, Balrog

Balor is like a 8+8 HD creature with an average of 44 hit points. They have an AC of -2, or 22 in today's terms. And there are only six of them, so its an even more extreme example than an ancient red dragon.

As for comparing 3rd edition to 1st edition, that's truly apples to oranges. Yes, it is true that 3rd edition creatures are vastly more powerful than the 1st edition counter parts, but so are the characters both in terms of expectations about level and absolute power at a given level. On the other hand, 1st edition assumes that a character of a given level has much greater power relative to the world than 3rd edition does.

* Big time argument: the 1e remorhaz did an instant kill on a "score of 20". I seem to remember arguing over whether that meant a natural 20, or an adjusted 20.

Exactly what adjustments would it have?