5E D&D Gem Dragons Are Officially Back

So if you're (not) like me and you don't have the time or patience to watch Spoilers & Swag, you may have missed this awesome reveal... Gem Dragons are back! And I don't just mean back in a third-party book like Matt Colville's Strongholds and Followers (great book, check it out), I mean back officially for D&D 5e.

In case you don't know, Gem Dragons are the third-wheel of dragonkind... they are not Good (Metallic) or Evil (Chromatic), they are Neutral. This makes them easily overlooked in the struggle of good vs. evil, but they've popped up here and there in previous editions.

But it looks like Gem Dragons have returned, first to promote the sale of a very expensive sapphire dice set. This little paper fold-out is included (screenshots below), complete with lore for gem dragons and a statblock for the Adult Sapphire Dragon specifically.

Of course, if you don't want to buy a pricey set of dice for a statblock... you're in luck, as Nathan Stewart reveals that everybody else will get access to it "early in 2020, where we [WotC] will have some fun ways to get that out there." So it looks like some product will be released including the Neutral Dragons, a new adventure or maybe a new monster book!

Feel free to speculate, here's the images;

1573671774880.png


1573671794207.png
 

Comments

Leatherhead

Possibly a Idiot.
You ever feel like Chromatic dragons got the short end of the stick because they don't have a solid secondary unifying theme like "Metallic" or "Gem"?

I mean I suppose there is a demand for "normal" dragons to fight, but the good and neutral ones just have much better aesthetics and are immediately identifiable as a D&D thing.
 

Urriak Uruk

Debate fuels my Fire
You ever feel like Chromatic dragons got the short end of the stick because they don't have a solid secondary unifying theme like "Metallic" or "Gem"?

I mean I suppose there is a demand for "normal" dragons to fight, but the good and neutral ones just have much better aesthetics and are immediately identifiable as a D&D thing.
I've always felt the reverse, that Chromatic dragons get all the attention because they are more similar to popular conception of what a dragon is. Sure they might not be as unique to D&D, but that's what Tiamat herself is for.
 

Leatherhead

Possibly a Idiot.
I've always felt the reverse, that Chromatic dragons get all the attention because they are more similar to popular conception of what a dragon is.
I always attributed that to players getting to fight them more often.

It's kind of hard to justify a fight with a Gold Dragon, but that would be an amazing fight to imagine. How it twists and turns in the sky, wrapping around the party to come at them from the front with it's head and the back with it's tail.
 

Dausuul

Legend
You ever feel like Chromatic dragons got the short end of the stick because they don't have a solid secondary unifying theme like "Metallic" or "Gem"?

I mean I suppose there is a demand for "normal" dragons to fight, but the good and neutral ones just have much better aesthetics and are immediately identifiable as a D&D thing.
I feel like the unifying theme is a problem for both metallic and gem dragons. It makes them blur into each other. Each chromatic dragon has a very definitive individual theme. With a couple of exceptions*, you can look at a chromatic dragon and guess just by the color of its scales where it lives and what its breath weapon is. How many people can remember where, say, a copper dragon lairs or what it breathes? I sure can't.

*The exceptions, at least for me, are black dragon breath and blue dragon lairs. I would have expected blue dragons to lair near or in the ocean, and I would not have guessed acid damage for black dragon breath.
 

Yaarel

Adventurer
Cool. It follows the Monster Manual format, to mention if the spells of ‘innate spellcasting’ are psionic.

But really, other magical features should also be able to be psionic.

For example, even a breath weapon can be psionic in source.
 

Salthorae

Imperial Mountain Dew Taster
Cool. It follows the Monster Manual format, to mention if the spells of ‘innate spellcasting’ are psionic.

But really, other magical features should also be able to be psionic.
I mean... ish?

1/day it can use scrying, telekinesis, and teleportaion circle as psionic innate spells. Not very Psionic to me.

It's legendary actions do include telekinetic fling, and teleport though.

OTOH, it has as many, if not many more, "spells" than most 5e dragons get in default rules now, so I guess that is something
 
Last edited:

Celebrim

Legend
I've never used any of the true dragons except the Chromatics. And at this point, I know I've had white, black, green, and blue, but I'm not sure that I've ever used the iconic red dragon in a combat. (I've fought one as a PC, but that's a different matter.)

I suspect that all the monsters I've ever actually used in a session in 30+ years of gaming would fit in at most a single monster manual, and all the monsters I've ever placed (but didn't use because the party went "left" instead of "right") would fill at most a second one. And a good portion of both books would be homebrew.

I say all of that as a preface to my question, "Am I really wierd?" I mean, do lots of DMs out there really feel the need for gem dragons? Do gem dragons show up a bunch in your games, and if so what are they doing? And do most DMs go through far more many different monsters than I do?
 

In Our Store!

Advertisement

Advertisement

Top