D&D 5E (2024) Opinions on the Topaz Dragon Reverse Wings?

[Tonguez]

How...would they get their wings beneath their body? The joints attach above their shoulders...

the dragon has elbows and very flexible wrist joints, I'm also assuming the wing socket allows it to rotate - if the dragon was in a upright bipedal posture (like when flying maybe) it would just be a normal 'extra' set of arms with claws rotated so they orientate inwards.

 

[kigmatzomat]

These topaz dragons cannot control their flight if they are flying forward, unless the wings are 100% irrelevant to their flight. In general, dragon flight is understood to be magically enhanced, but still actually making use of the wing itself.

I like the idea that they don't aerodynamically fly so much as claw their way through the sky. Its less a wing and more a hand. The glassy "membrane" in the earlier art is space- time flexing about their body.

I mean, it can't be a psionic effect, as there's no blue bit between their body and spines. So...space-time.

 

[Laurefindel]

I don’t see anything controversial. I just find it incredibly goofy.

I’m not a fan of « because magic » or « because dragon » as a universal hand-wave pass for anything or everything….

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I don’t see anything controversial. I just find it incredibly goofy.

I’m not a fan of « because magic » or « because dragon » as a universal hand-wave pass for anything or everything….

I'll admit, for me, "because dragon" can get you pretty damn far.

But it doesn't get this far. Which sucks, because I'd love to be like "wow I really like this design!" It's not like the artist who made it is unskillful. I just think it's...a bad choice.

It's like having an orange-mint flavored chocolate bar from Godiva chocolates. I love Godiva! I think they make great chocolates. But that specific combination? That's just a bad choice. Silk purses and sows' ears.

 

[I'm A Banana]

This isn't a new design. I don't think any of them are -- these are all 5e designs that date from Fizban's. It's just new artwork with the same design. Pushing into the controversy to tackle the wings and try and make sense of them might be the best solution here for Palmer.

Here's the topaz dragon from Fizban's:

The description in Fizban's states: "their wings are shaped to propel them through both air and water." Which....I dunno, Palmer's wings seem sturdy enough to do that. The ones above seem more diaphanous and decorative, hahaha. Wings in nature aren't built for both mediums as far as I know (penguins don't fly, and most birds that dive fold their wings in when they plunge).

I like RJ Palmer's artwork better than this. The above ain't bad by any stretch, but RJ's feels so substantial and powerful. The dude above is more sleek and ethereal.

For comparison to other works, here's 2e's Topaz Dragon:

And 3e's design:

I think I like 5e's design the best out of the bunch. 3e's is OK, and fits with the other "made of gem" designs in 3e, but it looks a little...melted...and very chaotic (which is apt, I suppose!). 2e's looks pretty "dinosaur"-y. Intimidating, but it looks like it'd be a bit lumbering and awkward.

I'd say RJ Palmer's is the best illo of a topaz dragon yet! I'm sure he was working within the design constraints the team gave him, which includes the backwards wing design.

I imagine these wings "flap" like a hand grabs. The topaz dragon is grabbing fistfuls of air or water and hurling them back and beneath to push off.

.....yeah, still a strange deisgn.

It's weird, and I like that they got weird with it. Not super successful, I guess, but I appreciate the experimental attempt.

 

[TiQuinn]

Thank you for sharing! The only one I really "like" is the crystal dragon. Of course, i don't really care much about the gem dragons so the fact they are my least favorite doesn't have much impact. It is more of a shrug then move on.

This. I’ve been reading a few threads now about gem dragons and I can count on one hand the number of times I’ve used them in a game. They’re not exactly what I consider a high priority.

 

[Distracted DM]

My favorite gem dragon designs are MCDM's. I can respect someone thinking this is a good idea, but I do not personally care for it because it seems weird in a lazy way. Uninspired. I don't know a nice way of putting it

 

[IkeClanton]

I will say, the diaphanous wings in Fizban's and in the early concept version of this illustration both make this backwards wing situation less unpalatable.

 

[dave2008]

But it doesn't get this far. Which sucks, because I'd love to be like "wow I really like this design!" It's not like the artist who made it is unskillful. I just think it's...a bad choice.

Just wanted to be clear it wasn't this artist's choice. The design (backward wings) comes from FToD and RJ didn't do that art.

 

[Charlaquin]

Just wanted to be clear it wasn't this artist's choice. The design (backward wings) comes from FToD and RJ didn't do that art.

Are we certain that the FToD design is supposed to have backwards wings? Cause it looks to me like they are normal wings that are, in that specific piece, twisted into a weird position.