D&D (2024) Check Out The New Monster Manual’s Ancient Gold Dragon

Wizards of the Coast has previewed (part of) the stat block for one of its iconic monsters on social media. Take a look!

 

[Zaukrie]

I'd really like more damage from the breath weapon. But this is a controller, so we'll see when we see the rest of the block.

 

[abirdcall]

So it's very interesting to see that the AC and HP of the Gold Dragon haven't changed. I think 500+ should be pretty normal for a CR20+ monster that is supposed to be able to take on an entire adventuring party.

So if we expect the ancient gold to be able to make 3 rend attacks as a Legendary Action too, we might see a max average DPR of 187. That's about a 32% increase in DPR. Not bad. I wouldn't have minded something between 50-100% increase, but dragons have always been able to deal decent damage.

There is an implied "take on an entire adventuring party alone."

I think that is where a lot of people are coming up short with these legendary creatures. They have lived a long time and are smarter and wiser than most creatures.

They will have have a lot of ways to gain warning of potential threats as well as having allies to protect them in various ways.

Calculating whether a party can take on a solo creature in a white room is missing almost all of the game.

(Sorry to single out your post it just spurned me on to write this.)

 

[Sulicius]

There is an implied "take on an entire adventuring party alone."

I think that is where a lot of people are coming up short with these legendary creatures. They have lived a long time and are smarter and wiser than most creatures.

They will have have a lot of ways to gain warning of potential threats as well as having allies to protect them in various ways.

Calculating whether a party can take on a solo creature in a white room is missing almost all of the game.

(Sorry to single out your post it just spurned me on to write this.)

Oh I don't mind, I'm not about white room encounters at all. I was just comparing the monsters with little information.

Using the new encounter building rules, you could make a high challenge encounter with this ancient gold dragon and 2 CR15 or 5 CR9. Should be an interesting fight!

Already the art makes me think of a party wanting to go through a door and a gold dragon guarding it. "Your quest led you here, but it is foolish. I swore to Bahamut never to let the seal on this door break. I see you are set on your ways..." The dragon then summons 5 fiery dragon knights (fire giants) or 2 former protectors of the seal (Death Giant Shrouded Ones).

I just realized there are VERY few CR15 monsters. Odd.

 

[Pax Drowana]

If that's the stat block for the Gold dragon, why is the dragon in the picture black and blue?

 

[Horwath]

still gets soloed by sorcerer/bard(wizard/druid) multiclass in one round...

 

[Shadowdweller00]

I'd really like more damage from the breath weapon. But this is a controller, so we'll see when we see the rest of the block.

I'm a little worried that they may have nerfed dragon breath damage across the board. I note that the Summon Dragon spell from the PHB2024 has a truly anemic breath weapon (2d6 for like a 5th level spell slot); that is theoretically balanced by being interchangeable with a melee attack during a multiattack sequence. It appears this dragon listing can do the same.

 

[dave2008]

I'm a little worried that they may have nerfed dragon breath damage across the board. I note that the Summon Dragon spell from the PHB2024 has a truly anemic breath weapon (2d6 for like a 5th level spell slot); that is theoretically balanced by being interchangeable with a melee attack during a multiattack sequence. It appears this dragon listing can do the same.

That has been happing since shortly after the MM. The great wyrm dragons (CR 27 & 28) in Fizban's do less damage than the CR 24 ancient red and gold in the 2014 MM. I was hopeful they were not going to continue this trend in the 2024 MM as the ancient green dragon preview a few months ago had the same breath weapon damage it had in 2014. However, we now know that was not the final design, so it looks like things are point to nerfed breath weapon damage. A real shame IMO.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Again, I am not talking about the DPR / CR calculation and the fact that you add 9 fire to it doesn't make up for the fact, IMO, that a multi-ton dragon should hit for more than 2d8 + 10 damage. The dragon is immense, it should do more damage than a Large sword.

I think you are making a mistake here.

Is a bulltet not very light, but has a lot more kill potential than a basket ball?

Speed and precision is also what is doing damage to people.
If we were trying to be realistic, big monsters like dragons should have the siege monster trait, dealing double damage against structures or at least ignoring damage tresholds.

Just because something is big does not mean it is automatically doing a lot of damage. Maybe if they grapple you and decide to sit on you. So maybe they should have a grapple and squeeze/crush abiltiy that deals massive damage. Not their rend.

 

[dave2008]

I think you are naking a mistake here.

Is a bulltet not very light, but has a lot more kill potential than a basket ball?

Speed and precision is also what is doing damage to people.
If we were trying to be realistic, big monsters like dragons should have the siege monster trait, dealing double damage against structures or at least ignoring damage tresholds.

Just because something is big does not mean it is automatically doing a lot of damage. Maybe if they grapple you and decide to sit on you. So maybe they should have a grapple and squeeze/crush abiltiy that deals massive damage. Not their rend.

I know what I like and what I want, so it is most definitely not a mistake for me. I also know high damage attacks scare my players more then multiple low damage attacks. So for me and my group I am absolutely correct. That is really all I can base my judgement on (well not all, but that is the most important). So it may not be what others want, but it is what we want.

Interestingly, the Empyrean does 52 damage on an attack compared the this gold's 28. Which seems more threaten to you?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I know what I like and what I want, so it is most definitely not a mistake for me. I also high damage attacks scare my players more then multiple low damage attacks. So for me and my group I am absolutely correct. That is really all I can base my judgement on (well not all, but that is the most important). So it may not be what others want, but it is what we want.

Ok. Bad phrasing from me.
I think it is a mistake to cite physics (mass) to have higher damage for big creatures as this is only only a part of it.

If you said: "I want more damage because I like it that way", I hadn't said anything.

Interestingly, the Empyrean does 52 damage on an attack compared the this gold's 28. Which seems more threaten to you?

I don't go into an argument woth you here. I have never seen an Empyrean nor a dragon. Maybe Empyreans can use their weapon more precise or can move their mass much faster than the dragon can move their hand. How should I know. I have never seen either one.

But it is easy to explain the difference with physics. Momentum = mass * velocity. Energy = 1/2 * mass * velocity^2
Force is the d/dt(momentum).
Pressure is force/area

So however you look at it, without knowing how fast and precise and sharp their weapon is, we can't say anything about relative damage numbers.

Edit: another question.

What is more damaging? Falling on thousand needles or a single one?

Even if you know, what do you think will the majority of people answer?