D&D 5E Bronze and Brass Dragons vs. Iron and Adamantine Dragons: Which do you prefer?

[dave2008]

And if I remember correctly, Paladine from Dragonlance was described as a dragon of platinum which....

Yes, Paladine = Bahamut, who is also referred to as the Platinum Dragon

 

[AlBear]

Dragonlance got me into D&D and that setting will always be my first D&D love. Bronze and brass dragons have a big place in that setting.

Adding new dragons is fine. If you want iron and adamantine in your world that's cool. But it shouldn't come at the expense of something else.
Add to the story of D&D... don't take away.

I came here to post my preference for the Iron and Adamantine of 4th Edition - both because I preferred their descriptions and for the "alloy" issue. But after seeing your post I realise the best option would be to simply roll those 4th Edition types in to my game and simply have more types of Dragon! The alloy thing isn't a huge deal to me, and I'm happy with how 5th has presented dragons thus far, so I wouldn't really want to replace anything - just add to the fun.

Which reminds me - 4th Edition had a "lot" of great ideas in its implied setting - I think partly because of their willingness to look past or even slay sacred cows. I think there was a page in Worlds & Monsters where they spoke to their decision to include Iron and Adamantine dragons instead.

So it's Iron & Adamantine for me but I'll happily play with alloy dragons if it's right for the table!

 

[jayoungr]

brass and bronze are alloys, not elements

True, but at least they exist in the real world. The fact that adamantine doesn't is a bigger mental hurdle for me than the fact that the others are alloys.

(EDIT: I recognize that the issue may not exist for others; I make no claim that it's anything but my own personal mental quirk.)

 

[dave2008]

True, but at least they exist in the real world. The fact that adamantine doesn't is a bigger mental hurdle for me than the fact that the others are alloys.

I thought that might have been the case; however, I find that an odd stance when we are talking about dragons which don't exist in the real world. It is so odd what our minds get hung up on.

 

[Ezequielramone]

The dragon races in d&d is nonsense for me. When I run a non core setting there is only "dragons". Each one is a unique individual with his own powers and personality. I use each "race" in the book to represent a specific dragon.

 

[pukunui]

If we're going to have adamantine dragons, then I think we should have mithril dragons as well. The more, the merrier!

And if we're going to expand on the metallics, then let's include some more chromatics too! How about purple (deep) dragons? Or brown (sand) dragons?

 

[Shasarak]

If I had to choose then it would be Bronze and Brass.

Luckily for me I dont have to choose; Dragons are like the gift that keeps on giving.

 

[Xeviat]

I was just saying today that I really appreciated 4E's metallic dragons. By making them Lawful, not Good, they could be antagonists, and you were more likely to get to use them in combat against your PCs. Like other flavor changes in 4E, I really appreciated it. There are so many monsters in 5E that I don't think I'll ever use.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dave2008]

I was just saying today that I really appreciated 4E's metallic dragons. By making them Lawful, not Good, they could be antagonists, and you were more likely to get to use them in combat against your PCs. Like other flavor changes in 4E, I really appreciated it. There are so many monsters in 5E that I don't think I'll ever use.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Were they lawful in 4e or, my personal favorite, unaligned? Regardless, I still find it interesting to use "good" metallic dragons as antagonist.

 

[jayoungr]

If we're going to have adamantine dragons, then I think we should have mithril dragons as well. The more, the merrier!

And if we're going to expand on the metallics, then let's include some more chromatics too! How about purple (deep) dragons? Or brown (sand) dragons?

Don't forget the gem dragons!

I thought that might have been the case; however, I find that an odd stance when we are talking about dragons which don't exist in the real world. It is so odd what our minds get hung up on.

It's mostly about consistency in naming. When I hear gold, silver, copper, iron, adamantine, I get a "one of these things is not like the others" disconnect. I guess the fact that the version with bronze and brass has two alloys makes it a group of three and a group of two in my mind, instead of a group of four and one outlier.