5E: Converting Monsters from White Dwarf Magazine for Fifth Edition

Cleon

Legend
That'll do for today.

I'd like to hear from Casimir before getting to much further with this conversion.

Also, it's getting a bit late over here…
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Casimir Liber

Adventurer
Been crazy busy and musing on this - first of all, if dragons are reptiles they don't have canines but undifferentiated teeth, so theoretically there are no limit to how many can come from one dragon. I agree with one statblock with resistance(s) according to parent dragon type. Pondering a challenge rating of around 2 (??) - will ponder how to stat this out...
 

ilgatto

How inconvenient
You'd think he'd mention bronze weapons or armour if it was supposed to be ancient Greek equipment though, so it is most likely meant to be a normal 1E Broadsword made of steel. A rhomphaia would likely have similar AD&D stats, but be shorter and more likely to bend.
As for the "broadsword" I guess that could be part of the Dragon Warrior's body too. Or we could just give it a Longsword or Greatsword as those are the commonest hefty sword in 5E.
I guess the Whateversword doesn't have to follow the standard Weapon table rules if it's a monstrous ability, no more than the Longsword and Whip of a Balor are normal versions of those weapons.

Agreed re standard 1E broadsword. I was merely thinking aloud as to how there apparently isn't a broadsword in 5E and what kind of special weapon could be used if you would decide to go the balor way.
 

ilgatto

How inconvenient
Been crazy busy and musing on this - first of all, if dragons are reptiles they don't have canines but undifferentiated teeth, so theoretically there are no limit to how many can come from one dragon.
I suppose that can be solved by making the teeth a magic item and stating that "typically, 1d4 will be found at any one time"?
 


ilgatto

How inconvenient
Okay, I've been digging through the 5E Monster Manual and noticed the "Multiattack" option. Do you think it would be worth considering that the original says "attacking as 6th level Fighters" and that that would technically have meant that 1E dragon warriors would have had as many attacks vs creatures with less than 1 HD as they had "Fighter levels" (PHB1, p. 25)?
Or would that be making 5E into 1E again?
 

Cleon

Legend
Been crazy busy and musing on this - first of all, if dragons are reptiles they don't have canines but undifferentiated teeth, so theoretically there are no limit to how many can come from one dragon.

Well, Dragons are mythic monsters rather than mundane reptiles so don't have to be limited by real-world biology. Considering I've read of dragons with hair, dragons that get pregnant after having "relations" with humans or gods and dragons with more than one head

Heck, the fact a standard D&D dragon has four legs and a pair of wings gives it six fully functional limbs, suggesting that they don't follow tetrapod structural biology.

So I'm not that bothered if they have teeth analogous to canines.

Besides, there are old European pictures of dragons with with canines or canine-like tusks, such as [i]Saint George and the Dragon[/i] by Svitozar Nenyuk or this Medieval Bestiary Dragon (which has some very unreptilian looking paws and and mane, plus a head on the end of its tail. Admittedly there are pictures of dragons with lizard style teeth like this Bestiary Dragon this Verona Miniature.

So maybe some D&D Dragons have "canines" and some don't? Guess it's up to the DM.

Or we could just not bother going into the such detail about what dragon teeth are usable for the manufacture of the magic item.
 

Cleon

Legend
So maybe dragonscale armor can leave the dragon warriors' armor non-magical?

It doesn't really matter whether the armour is natural or artificial except for how it affects the Dragon Warrior's stats.

Since the armour crumbles to dust when the Warrior is slain, it can't just be normal scale armour as that isn't noted for suffering existence failure when its wearer dies.
 

Cleon

Legend
Okay, I've been digging through the 5E Monster Manual and noticed the "Multiattack" option. Do you think it would be worth considering that the original says "attacking as 6th level Fighters" and that that would technically have meant that 1E dragon warriors would have had as many attacks vs creatures with less than 1 HD as they had "Fighter levels" (PHB1, p. 25)?
Or would that be making 5E into 1E again?

Multiple attacks against creatures with less than 1 HD hasn't been a feature of the D&D rules since 3rd edition.

I'd be inclined to give it regular Multiattack with its "broadsword", whatever we end up interpreting that weapon as.

In 5E a fighter gets an Extra Attack at 5th level, so it'd be quite appropriate to have a Dragon Warrior be able to do so. It might as well have the equivalent of some other abilities a 6th level fighter would have, like Fighting Style or Martial Archetype.
 

Casimir Liber

Adventurer
ok statblocking something now...made them a construct (precedent - flesh golems are organic constructs)...so construe them as made of tooth and scale armour. Just made broadswords do 2d4 (like 1e). Original description has them as non-intelligent, so mindless...so should be immune to psychic damage at least. Came out as CR 4 (??)

Incidentally, of Cadmus' crop of Sown Men, one of the five that survived was called Chthonius...
 

Attachments

  • dragonwarrior.jpg
    dragonwarrior.jpg
    86.6 KB · Views: 164
Last edited:

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top