D&D General Dinosaurs in your campaigns

[Frozen_Heart]

Do we know if all Dino's had feathers? Or just some types?

All dinosaurs (and pterosaurs) shared a common ancestor which was covered in fuzz. However many groups lost their feathered covering over time and switched to scales. Which groups have feathers and which have scales seems to be a bit all over the place. Every time a scaled animal is found, a close relative is found with feathers. And every time we think a group is feathered, another relative is found with scales.

Larger species such as hadrosaurs, ankylosaurs, sauropods, ceratopsians, and many theropods all seemed to have had scales though. Smaller species seemed to be more likely to have fuzz of some sort. The environment would also play a factor, with species in colder climates probably being more likely to have coverings of some sort.

Complex branching feathers which we think of on modern birds are unique to more derived theropods though. Raptors, birds, and maybe ornithomimids.

Animals can lose or gain a fluffy covering in a relatively short time period. Elephants and mammoths are extremely closely related, yet one have tough and thick bare skin, while the other has long and dense fur.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

So whilst I like to think stuff like that I don't think most people care. Most D&D world are totally just "wizard did it" and there probably is creationism instead of evolution. And even if we assume more natural processes, the D&D worlds still have all sort of monsters that would take the ecological niches of dinosaurs and would prevent or at least affect the evolution of other animals. Like if presence of dinosaurs would prevent evolution of mammals, then surely the presence of dragons would do the same?

I've never thought about dragons in that way, but you raise a good point. If a bunch of funni hairless monkeys can completely change their worlds biosphere and remove practically all megafauna, then surely a bunch of massive flying magical superintelligent reptiles would have an even larger effect?

Honestly the best thing to do on most dnd settings is close your eyes and pretend the entire thing wouldn't collapse instantly.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I've never thought about dragons in that way, but you raise a good point. If a bunch of funni hairless monkeys can completely change their worlds biosphere and remove practically all megafauna, then surely a bunch of massive flying magical superintelligent reptiles would have an even larger effect?

Honestly the best thing to do on most dnd settings is close your eyes and pretend the entire thing wouldn't collapse instantly.

With Artra I've aimed for some sort of a veneer of plausibility, like thinking what creatures are related to each others and trying to make their features more consistent (so no sudden centaurs or six-limbed dragons etc) as well as thinking their ecological roles a bit, but in reality it is just skin deep and wouldn't withstand closer scrutiny.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

With Artra I've aimed for some sort of a veneer of plausibility, like thinking what creatures are related to each others and trying to make their features more consistent (so no sudden centaurs or six-limbed dragons etc) as well as thinking their ecological roles a bit, but in reality it is just skin deep and wouldn't withstand closer scrutiny.

I'm probably going to treat dragons a bit like celestials or demons to explain their 6 limbs. Treat them as creatures of magic which didn't evolve naturally.

All the natural species are getting more strict evolutionary origins to them.

 

[Shades of Eternity]

Yeah. I made owlbears "beasts" in my world. But It is sad how low CR most beasts are. Artra is a primal world and I would like to use sabre-tooth tigers and other such prehistoric beasts, but the characters grow past them so quickly. Whilst having "dire" version of everything might seem a bit silly, it is unfortunate that they did away with "dire animals." It was useful to have more powerful version of animals readily available. All sort of giant animals are super common in fantasy.

What I did to compensate is make most megafauna magically resistant and it really jacks up the danger.

like the Hyaenodon has become one of the iconic monsters of the Hodgepocalypse because it's big, sneaky and when you drop a fireball on it, it has a tendency to laugh at your actions before biting you.

 

[Mind of tempest]

I am not a dm but an idea for a cold pine forest would be to put therizinosaurs as unlike our ice-aged megafauna it could live off the pines with no problem and an over 10-foot tall goose with scythe claws and an attitude problem is at least memorable for you next cold weather campaign.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

I am not a dm but an idea for a cold pine forest would be to put therizinosaurs as unlike our ice-aged megafauna it could live off the pines with no problem and an over 10-foot tall goose with scythe claws and an attitude problem is at least memorable for you next cold weather campaign.

They're not well known in pop culture, but irl dinosaurs did live at the poles. Both the north and south.

It didn't get even close to modern polar temperatures, but snow and below freezing weather would have been a possibility, along with months on end of pure darkness due to the sun not rising in the polar winter.

 

[Nebulous]

The only time I have ever used dinosaurs in D&D is Tomb of Annihilation. The jungle was teeming with them, both mundane and dangerous. I never had a desire to use them any other place though, and frankly thought too much monster manual space was given to them.

 

[Mind of tempest]

They're not well known in pop culture, but irl dinosaurs did live at the poles. Both the north and south.

It didn't get even close to modern polar temperatures, but snow and below freezing weather would have been a possibility, along with months on end of pure darkness due to the sun not rising in the polar winter.

true but it is not that hard to go full polar as polar bears are fairly young as far as life goes.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Eh. That is just some setting specific backstory that may or may no be true. (On Artra, definitely not.) Besides, even if it was true, I don't see how it would stop them from being beasts. It is like if scientists used generic engineering to crossbreed two animals that are not closely related to naturally crossbreed. It doesn't seem to me that this should affect the classification this way. Beside, if the platypi are naturally occurring, so can be the owlbears!

Platypi are aberrations, and therefore unavailable for wildshape!

/s