D&D 5E Fizban's Treasury Dragons Ranked By Challenge Rating

WotC has been sending out previews of Fizban's Treasury of Dragons, due out next month, to folks on Twitter. Amongst those are art pieces and other items. By Challenge Rating the dragons in the book are: Ancient crystal (19) Ancient topaz (20) Ancient emerald (21) Ancient moonstone (21) Ancient sapphire (22) Elder brain dragon (22) Ancient amethyst (23) Ancient dragon turtle (24) Gem...

WotC has been sending out previews of Fizban's Treasury of Dragons, due out next month, to folks on Twitter. Amongst those are art pieces and other items.

fbtod.png


By Challenge Rating the dragons in the book are:
  • Ancient crystal (19)
  • Ancient topaz (20)
  • Ancient emerald (21)
  • Ancient moonstone (21)
  • Ancient sapphire (22)
  • Elder brain dragon (22)
  • Ancient amethyst (23)
  • Ancient dragon turtle (24)
  • Gem greatwyrm (26)
  • Chromatic greatwyrm (27)
  • Metallic greatwyrm (28)
  • Apects of Bahamut and Tiamat (30)
Interestingly, it appears that the great wyrm category is divided into three -- gem, chromatic, metallic -- rather than by each dragon type.

There's also an alphabetical list of all 20 dragon types in the book:
  • Amethyst
  • Black
  • Blue
  • Brass
  • Bronze
  • Copper
  • Crystal
  • Deep
  • Dragon turtle
  • Emerald
  • Faerie
  • Gold
  • Green
  • Moonstone
  • Red
  • Sapphire
  • Shadow
  • Silver
  • Topaz
  • White
 

log in or register to remove this ad

It's a possibility!

I'm looking forward to seeing if Deep Dragons are Utility less combat focused Dragons or Templates like Shadow Dragons. Both approaches of their advantages. The former allows the Deep Dragons to a very different experience from the other Dragon types, but the latter allows for alot more diversity in Deep Dragons, I mean you could have Psionics using Deep Gem Dragons, shape shifting Silver Deep Dragons, Swimming White Deep Dragons, etc...

Also it occurred to me that the fact that Deep Dragons have huge weaknesses, like dying in sunlight, maybe radiant vulnerability, possibly other weaknesses has suppressed their CR compared to their other abilities.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Levistus's_Leviathan

5e Freelancer
ancient Faerie Dragon
I don't mean to specifically call you out, but I'm not sure that this is going to be a thing. In fact, I'm fairly certain that it's not going to be a thing, for one major reason:

The PHB Faerie Dragon already gets more powerful as it ages. It doesn't get bigger, but it does change colors and get access to more at will spells each day.

Since there's already rules for the Faerie Dragon getting more and more powerful as it ages, I'm 90% sure that Fizban's Treasury of Dragons will not have stats for different age groups of Faerie Dragons.

(I would be on board with combining Faerie Dragons with Prismatic Dragons, as they have that whole "dragon with rainbow powers" in common, but it's pretty unlikely for FToD to do this.)
 

I don't mean to specifically call you out, but I'm not sure that this is going to be a thing. In fact, I'm fairly certain that it's not going to be a thing, for one major reason:

The PHB Faerie Dragon already gets more powerful as it ages. It doesn't get bigger, but it does change colors and get access to more at will spells each day.

Since there's already rules for the Faerie Dragon getting more and more powerful as it ages, I'm 90% sure that Fizban's Treasury of Dragons will not have stats for different age groups of Faerie Dragons.

(I would be on board with combining Faerie Dragons with Prismatic Dragons, as they have that whole "dragon with rainbow powers" in common, but it's pretty unlikely for FToD to do this.)

Those preexisting rules cap out at 51 years of age, so they could do Faerie Dragons of older ages too.

Heck maybe instead of getting bigger the Ancient Faerie Dragon just gets better and better magic spells and more of them.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
I don't mean to specifically call you out, but I'm not sure that this is going to be a thing. In fact, I'm fairly certain that it's not going to be a thing, for one major reason:

The PHB Faerie Dragon already gets more powerful as it ages. It doesn't get bigger, but it does change colors and get access to more at will spells each day.

Since there's already rules for the Faerie Dragon getting more and more powerful as it ages, I'm 90% sure that Fizban's Treasury of Dragons will not have stats for different age groups of Faerie Dragons.

(I would be on board with combining Faerie Dragons with Prismatic Dragons, as they have that whole "dragon with rainbow powers" in common, but it's pretty unlikely for FToD to do this.)
Yeah. I was responding to @Parmandur and I saw that as well. I didn't bring it up, because they could give something like echoes and such to increase the faerie dragon power if they wanted to, or completely re-write it like they have with some other things.
 

see

Pedantic Grognard
Counterpoint: The Demiplane of Shadow and the Plane of Faerie are way older than them, though.
No, the "Plane of Shadow" is way older, but the "Plane of Faerie" isn't.

The Plane of Shadow (whatever the nonce name; it changed a lot but was always identifiable) has been a part of the standard cosmology since 1980 (1e Deities & Demigods, p.114). Which explains why it was mentioned in the monster entries for shadow dragons in 1st edition (pp.58-59 of the Monster Manual II mentions "planes of dimness such as the Shadowland"), 2nd edition (p.85 of the Monstrous Manual), 3rd edition (p.44 of Monsters of Faerun), and 3.5 (p.191 of the Draconomicon).

The Plane of Faerie, on the other hand, shows up in D&D hardbacks for the first time as an optional plane in the 3rd edition Manual of the Planes in 2001, with any version only becoming a standard part of D&D cosmology with the 4th edition Feywild. Which explains why such a plane isn't mentioned at all in the faerie dragon entries on p.57 of the 1st edition Monster Manual II, or on p.89 of the Monstrous Manual, or even pp.158-159 of the 3.5 Draconomicon.
 

No, the "Plane of Shadow" is way older, but the "Plane of Faerie" isn't.

The Plane of Shadow (whatever the nonce name; it changed a lot but was always identifiable) has been a part of the standard cosmology since 1980 (1e Deities & Demigods, p.114). Which explains why it was mentioned in the monster entries for shadow dragons in 1st edition (pp.58-59 of the Monster Manual II mentions "planes of dimness such as the Shadowland"), 2nd edition (p.85 of the Monstrous Manual), 3rd edition (p.44 of Monsters of Faerun), and 3.5 (p.191 of the Draconomicon).

The Plane of Faerie, on the other hand, shows up in D&D hardbacks for the first time as an optional plane in the 3rd edition Manual of the Planes in 2001, with any version only becoming a standard part of D&D cosmology with the 4th edition Feywild. Which explains why such a plane isn't mentioned at all in the faerie dragon entries on p.57 of the 1st edition Monster Manual II, or on p.89 of the Monstrous Manual, or even pp.158-159 of the 3.5 Draconomicon.
The identifiable predecessor of the Plane of Faerie, the Seelie Court, appeared earlier than that, as early as the Planescape product Planes of Chaos. Even at that point, it wasn't part of the traditional Outer Planes, but was accessed from various planes like Ysgard, Arborea, and the Beastlands. Already at that early stage, it was something outside and different.
 

Daraniya

Explorer
man, I hope all those 'legendary' tail attacks and beating wings will be worth the $40... oh, and don't forget perception checks... I quake in fear... sarcasm

seriously, they need to fix that crap... breath weapons could/should be legendary... they make each dragon unique... or maybe additional magic abilities or summoning creatures to aid them... hell, maybe a berserker form or something that channels primal energy to regenerate their body
 


see

Pedantic Grognard
The identifiable predecessor of the Plane of Faerie, the Seelie Court, appeared earlier than that, as early as the Planescape product Planes of Chaos. Even at that point, it wasn't part of the traditional Outer Planes, but was accessed from various planes like Ysgard, Arborea, and the Beastlands. Already at that early stage, it was something outside and different.
A key difference between the Seelie Court and the Plane of Faerie is that there is nothing making it an overlapping companion of the material world. The 2e Seelie Court isn't particularly distinguishable from, say, the 1e Manual of the Planes's realm of Olympus, a divine domain nominally on the Plane of Olympus/Arvandor which sits at the top of a conduit that connects to Hades and to every material world that worships the Greek pantheon. The idea that there's a fairyland plane with a special next-door relationship to the material world isn't introduced until the 3rd edition Manual of the Planes details a Plane of Faerie coexistent with the Material Plane, "and a location on the Material Planes matches with a Faerie duplicate" (p.210).

It's that coexistence which is the key conceptual step in moving from something like the Seelie Court, a slightly exotic realm in the Outer Planes, to the Feywild, a bright parallel of Shadow. Because from the very beginning in 1980, we read, "The Plane of Shadow co-exists with the Prime Material Plane, and is the result of the interaction of that plane and the Positive and Negative Material Planes".

Until there's a fey plane cosmologically equivalent to the Plane of Shadow, a fey equivalent of the shadow dragon doesn't have any particular logical force. I mean, sure, you might have a dragon native to any given Outer Plane or realm thereof, but only if you have a particular idea for one. And until Faerie gets promoted from an optional plane mentioned near the back of the Manual of the Planes to something canonically equivalent to the Plane of Shadow, it's unlikely to get published in any case.

So, in 1983, the faerie dragon and the shadow dragon are published on opposite sides of the same book leaf, and have nothing in particular in common, because there's no reason for them to. It'll be eighteen years before there's a plane with the necessary attributes to be a fey equivalent of Shadow in the game, and another seven before it's part of D&D's standard cosmology.
 

dave2008

Legend
I'm fine with annoying monsters. I just think making Fairy Dragons be magical winged cats is a huge mistake. (And, yes, I will stick by my "should". If the Shadow Dragon is a template that is added onto True Dragons, so should Faerie Dragons, because the Feywild and Shadowfell are opposites.)
I don't think fairy dragons are the equivalent of shadow dragons. Wouldn't that be the moonstone dragons?
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top