Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="dave2008" data-source="post: 9604840" data-attributes="member: 83242">Just want to echo my comment in my other response. I was just look at CR differences with this draft. It was not a redesign to follow the 2024 philosophy whole-hog. I have not decided how much I want to follow the 2024 design philosophy. There are things I like and things I don't.I disagree about the slam vs sweep, but agree there is a lot of overlap between the sweep and wing.  I generally like more explicit options than the 2024 designs and giving the dragons options it should have. However, I will definitely review to see if there is a way to streamline and still provide what I want.I think your idea has merrit, but I also don't think it matters if you use a DC 25 when it should have been 26 instead.  No need for a DM to remember, it doesn't matter as long as you are in the correct range. So this isn't a big deal to me one way or the other.  There reason I haven't adopted this idea (you have suggested it before) is that I like the DC to mean something. If the dragon is stronger (DC 26) than it is magical (DC 24) I think the DC should reflect. It is a world building item as well as a monster building item. It is my simulationist side fighting against my gamist side.I would leave that up to the DM. IMO, it would work the same as dragon flight. So if a dragon can fly in an anti-magic field, then its attacks do magical damage in an anti-magic field. This design predates (mostly) this new 2024 design philosophy.  However, I am not as of yet convinced of the new LA philosophy. I understand it is easier, but I like the design flexibility of having multiple use LA. I will consider it though when I do a thorough review / redesign of the dragon.The issue with not having random or limited breath weapons is then why wouldn't the dragon just breath fire all the time. It makes the encounter less interesting / less dramatic IMO. Here my gamist side is fighting against my simulationist side (in reverse order of the DC issue). Also, if the CR is built around the dragon breathing fire every round, then the breath weapon damage needs to come down (not up to the 200is range you want). The only reason the breath weapon damage is high is because the claw/claw/bite option does much less damage.I think you option here actively acts against a lot of what I am trying to do. I will consider it again, but I don't think this idea works for what I am trying to achieve.What anti-magic field are you talking about?Good points. The forcecage thing is something I will think about. I don't mind the dragon having it, but I get your point. It is not something you want PCs toface a lot.  However, this is an endgame level threat and I don't see the need to pull punches.  Though it probably makes sense to move it to 1/day</blockquote>

Verification