[BADD] A clinic for DMing Dragons- long

[Plecak]

Some thoughts on dragons

Hello,

While multiple-headed dragons are very popular in mythology, they are very rarely encountered in D&D campaigns. That's a pity, because multiple-headed dragons are going to be much harder to defeat than their single-headed counterparts, as each additional head can perform a partial action (breath weapon, cast a spell, bite) while dragon performs any standard action. For example a three-headed dragon could perform the following as a standard action:

move, bite (first head), breath (second head, partial action but without 5' step), cast a spell (third head, partial action but without 5' step).

When it comes to playing dragons to their fullest, I would give the following advices:

- utilize dragon's keen senses, for example: when a dragon intends to attack the PCs, it is going to do it in darkness or fog, casting (improved) invisibility beforehand (if available).

- do not use dragons with average stats - as these stats are well known to players, I always tend to change them a bit. As each dragon is unique, I would also suggest to change one or two of dragon's spell-like abilities.

- apply templates.

- utilize environment - for example: some areas of the floor in the lair of an old red dragon are melted into lava.

- use multiple-headed dragons to surpirise PCs.

- if you wanna be really scary, you can add some class levels to a dragon as described in "Dragon" No. 282.

- dragons tend to have servants, the more powerful the dragon, the more powerful his servants.

I would be grateful for your feedback.

 

[Gargoyle]

You bring up an important point.

Just wanted to question you guys on an assumption about dragons I've heard repeatedly:

That they are way arrogant.

It seems to me that dragons are typically pictured as arrogant when they are the ones in control of the situation.
No problem there.

It's when we go to assuming that dragons are arrogant ALL the time is what i question.

I agree that when you say "Dragons are arrogant" it's a generalization and does not apply to all dragons equally. Some are certainly more arrogant than others. I would think that the more experienced the dragon, the less often it lets its arrogance get the best of them. I would guess that there are very very few dragons that have problems with their self-image though.

They are NOT going to ASSUME that they are more powerful than this random group of adventurers that is storming their lair, probably using magics as well.

Why should an intellignet creature that has seen more than it's share of battles and tricks... spot the party a few nice licks (or in the case of the Greater Spell-Focused mage casting Polymorph other, the entire battle) by unreasonably assuming that the dragon is more powerful?

This assumes that the dragon has encountered adventurers before, and has seen lots of battles and tricks. I would guess that it depends largely on how close the dragon is to civilization, and how long the trail of bones is to its lair. A dragon in the remote wilderness might be more adept at fighting other dragons or various monsters and may never have seen an adventurer, even in its long life span.

Seems to me that the dragon would gauge the party's power as best he can.
If he's more powerful than they are, THEN he'd be arrogant and they might get a lucky shot in.

Hard to do that in less than a round. He's going to have to make some assumptions based on appearances and past experience with such types.

But when the dragon doesn't know how powerful they are, he'd come in with all guns blazin', intent on teaching these trespassers WHY noone F&%CKS with a dragon on his own turf!

I have to agree, if he finds the party mysterious, paranoia is likely to cause him to unload on them. It could be though that he's eaten hundreds of peasants trying to steal from his lair, and that he misjudges an experienced party for a bunch of commoners. If he's battled adventurers before though, he'd be likely to flex his muscles.

There's a big difference between arrogance and unreasonable recklessness.

I agree.

I think this is something that the DM should take into consideration when creating the dragon. It's not just a bunch of feat and spell choices. The dragon's past experience and history will often determine his reactions.

Will it be arrogant, paranoid, talkative, furious, curious, driven by hunger, playful (like a cat with a mouse)? The DM wil know if he develops its personality and tries to build a little backstory.

One important point: If the dragon isn't arrogant and is very experienced at dealing with adventurers, it should have a higher CR than one that is very arrogant and knows little about the tactics of fighting a party of humanoids. I suppose the baseline CR would be a dragon that is somewhat arrogant, but also has encountered at least one party of adventurers before and knows how dangerous they can be.

In my limited experience, dragon CRs seem to be appropriate, but I think the dragon's attitude and experience probably play a big part in how challenging they can be.

 

[Wolfspider]

Hard to do that in less than a round.

Well, dragons will almost always have more than a round of preparation when dealing with a party. Considering their acute senses and ability to detect invisible creatures and objects using Blindsight, they should at least have a handful of rounds to consider their options. (I just read about the Blindsight ability that dragons have; this would have factored in to another encounter that was described on a recent thread involving a dragon being polymorphed into a worm by an invisible flying wizard.)

 

[Gargoyle]

Re: Some thoughts on dragons

Hello,

While multiple-headed dragons are very popular in mythology, they are very rarely encountered in D&D campaigns. That's a pity, because multiple-headed dragons are going to be much harder to defeat than their single-headed counterparts, as each additional head can perform a partial action (breath weapon, cast a spell, bite) while dragon performs any standard action. For example a three-headed dragon could perform the following as a standard action:

move, bite (first head), breath (second head, partial action but without 5' step), cast a spell (third head, partial action but without 5' step).

Probably people think of hydras when you talk about multi-headed dragons.
How much would the CR increase on a multiple-headed dragon?
Would it be a different race altogether, or just a template? (A formally written template for this would be cool.)

Multiple dragons are something a party doesn't expect either. Imagine their fear when they are about to finish one off when its mate flys in.

 

[reapersaurus]

Just to throw a wrinkle in here:

What would you dragon-masters DO to protect a dragon against the insane kind of magics that PC's can wield in 3E?

For example, it is a fairly common tactic for mages to specialize in a school, and then acquire Spell Focus in said school, then Greater Spell Focus.
Add in stat-bumping spells that are TERRIBLE easy to get and use, and you've got a pretty darned high DC there for any of their insta-kill spells.
(this is all borne out in many threads, ,os noteably the black dragon wiped out with one Polymorph.)

So I guess the only way to stop insta-kills is to NOT have the mage cast?
That's kind of limiting (biols down to who can pull their gun out first and fire).

If there are mages who can bulk up their DC's to ridiculous heights, you'd hope there would be an alternate approach for dragons to decrease their vulnerabilities to said strategy.

 

[Gargoyle]

Well, dragons will almost always have more than a round of preparation when dealing with a party. Considering their acute senses and ability to detect invisible creatures and objects using Blindsight, they should at least have a handful of rounds to consider their options. (I just read about the Blindsight ability that dragons have; this would have factored in to another encounter that was described on a recent thread involving a dragon being polymorphed into a worm by an invisible flying wizard.)

This is another good point, though the example is one where the DM forgot a capability of the dragon, all too common.

Even when you don't make a mistake and the dragon's lair is well prepared, a smart group of PCs may be able to sneak in anyway and get the drop on him, especially at higher levels with planar travel, teleport, etc. Remember that there are usually six to eight devious players trying to defeat the scenario created by one very devious DM. If the players are patient and do everything they can to surprise the dragon in its lair, it's likely they'll succeed from time to time.

That's ok. The idea is to challenge them, and as long as they find such a situation challenging, then it's alright for the players to win. Even when they get to the dragon unexpectedly, they should still be in for a tough fight. And if they get lucky with a polymorph other spell or something like harm, then as the DM you can always up the ante by having one of the dragon's siblings start hunting the PCs.

I guess my point is that if the CR of the encounter is beatable at all, a dragon that is attacked in its lair is at a severe disadvantage, no matter his preparations. This is because the party chooses how much intelligence to gather about the dragon's defenses, when to attack, how to attack, and where to attack from. It's always easier to attack than to defend, so you have to increase the power and capabilities of the defender somewhat, and can't assume that the attacker won't be able to acheive some sort of tactical advantage.

If you turn the tables, it becomes much more dangerous for the PCs. Being attacked in their camp or in a village by a dragon is terrifying, especially if the party is split up for some reason.

 

[CRGreathouse]

CRGreathouse: "No dragons until high enoug level to see their true power"? I think that WotC put dragons at every CR level and added the bit about clutches of eggs because they felt that dragon-hunting campaigns should be workable. Granted, I'm only supposing, and even if I'm right, WotC's style of play isn't for everyone. However, to say that it isn't right for some is to devalue those people's opinions. After all, when discussing dragons, all we have to go on is opinion anyway.

I agree that WotC put in many CRs of dragons and the "clutches" theory so that adventureres could fight dragons from level 1 on. However, I strongly resent your statement to me, "However, to say that it isn't right for some is to devalue those people's opinions." Please note that I talked only of my own campaign; I made no value judgements on other campaigns. Also, note that I'm not a BADD member - I'm just pointing out a few facts and choices.

You don't like it when Reaper gets on your case, so I'd appreciate it if you didn't get on mine.

 

[James McMurray]

reapersaurus: That totally depends. If teh dragon has reason to know that wizards can greatly increase the potency of his spells (such as a focus feat of his own, experience, or knowledge arcana) then I would most efinitely think about getting him an item that provides a resistance bonus to saves. They are fairly cheap to make, so shouldn't be too hard to acquire.

If however, the dragon has no reason to know about these tings (i.e. he's young and inexperenced) I'd do nothing. He'll either barely make his save and learn his lesson, or he won't, and evolution will have been served.

Gargoyle: I've found that many monsters can be easy to forget the details of. In my game I use index cards for initiative. I put all the relevant stats of the PCs and creatures on the card, and then cycle through them after initiative is rolled. That way I'm less likely to forget important aspects of teh foes. Of course, it still happens, but nothing is perfect.

 

[CRGreathouse]

It seems to me that dragons are typically pictured as arrogant when they are the ones in control of the situation.
No problem there.

It's when we go to assuming that dragons are arrogant ALL the time is what i question.

They are NOT going to ASSUME that they are more powerful than this random group of adventurers that is storming their lair, probably using magics as well.

Why should an intellignet creature that has seen more than it's share of battles and tricks... spot the party a few nice licks (or in the case of the Greater Spell-Focused mage casting Polymorph other, the entire battle) by unreasonably assuming that the dragon is more powerful?

Seems to me that the dragon would gauge the party's power as best he can.
If he's more powerful than they are, THEN he'd be arrogant and they might get a lucky shot in.

I take a different viewpoint. Arrogance is arrogance is arrogance - either a dragon is or it isn't. My problem is that the younger dragons (<=young adult) are often portrayed as arrogant. Why? They're not yet the be-all and end-all monsters, they're just getting there. Once thyey're been on their own for a few decades, they'll get arrogant enough...

There's a big difference between arrogance and unreasonable recklessness.

I cetainly agree with you. Even the older, more confidant dragons shouldn't be reckless, as they are often portrayed. They are certain they will win, but they recognize that it's more than just their spells and physical prowess - they're also wise enough to know when to run and how to play off the party's arrogance.

 

[CRGreathouse]

What would you dragon-masters DO to protect a dragon against the insane kind of magics that PC's can wield in 3E?

* Items of resistance
* Illusion of dragon in lair (while dragon awaits the party nearby)
* Invisibility on self/kill mage
* Snatch (per feat) the mage and fly away