log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 5E Do you like or dislike Song & Steeal Dragons being demoted to Folklore?

Do you like or dislike Song & Steeal Dragons being demoted to Folklore?

  • I hate or Dislike the removal of Steel and Song Dragons as type of Dragon

    Votes: 14 19.4%
  • I like or love the removal of Steel and Song Dragons as a type of Dragon

    Votes: 9 12.5%
  • Neutral as a Gem Dragon

    Votes: 49 68.1%

  • Total voters
    72

log in or register to remove this ad

Steampunkette

Shaper of Worlds
Ah. Less that there's too many dragons, and more that they are the Wrong Dragon? That I can understand.

When I next run a thing that needs dragons, I'm apt to specifically discard the idea that the various types of dragons are species that breed true.
Yeah. The Wrong Dragon is a way to put it.

And, like, you can scrape off the Mayo, but some of that flavor stays on the bred no matter how hard you scrape. And it's really hard to describe the swamp-dwelling Wight Dragon (Which often look like bloated frog-like beasties) when everyone hears White and immediately jumps to "Shouldn't they be in a colder climate?" before you can get to describing their bulbous shape.

'Cause the Mayo just gets -everywhere-...
 


pukunui

Legend
I just happen to prefer monstrous dragons rather than all dragons being hyper-intelligent immortal companions and the like and Wizards practically never wants to do those, anymore...
Me too! That's one of the things I like about the Dragon Age setting.

Yet another reason to consider switching to the Dragon Age RPG ... (I've got the original three box sets from Green Ronin but have never had a chance to use them.)

If it doesn't have stats, how do we invade its home and mug it?
You don't!
 

Uni-the-Unicorn!

Adventurer
Yeah. The Wrong Dragon is a way to put it.

And, like, you can scrape off the Mayo, but some of that flavor stays on the bred no matter how hard you scrape. And it's really hard to describe the swamp-dwelling Wight Dragon (Which often look like bloated frog-like beasties) when everyone hears White and immediately jumps to "Shouldn't they be in a colder climate?" before you can get to describing their bulbous shape.

'Cause the Mayo just gets -everywhere-...
Um, that is a language issue, not a lore issue.

You could easily run any dragon in the MM as a beast and no one would no. There is no Mayo there really.
 


Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
You could easily run any dragon in the MM as a beast and no one would no. There is no Mayo there really.

Let us not pretend that old-hand players have no expectations and do not leap to conclusions - they totally do. We, as GMs, often have to do some work to be original and avoid or subvert those expectations.
 

Urriak Uruk

Debate fuels my Fire
That's like saying, "This deli has too many kinds of sandwiches."

If you can find the sandwich/dragon that you need quickly enough, the mere existence of others on the menu should not have much of an impact, should it?

Now I need to stat up a sandwich dragon.

Ah, but no chef can make 100 perfect sandwiches right? What if this deli does have a huge menu, but only 5 of the sandwiches are actually good while the rest are just kind of slapped together?

I do agree that more dragons with excellent, different stats would be great. But considering the size of 5E books, there can only be so much content in it without pushing the books beyond their "acceptable size" for WotC publishing. So more dragons competes with the remaining dragons getting more lore or lairs or PC options, etc.

Adding two more dragons in this huge book, doesn't bother me. But WotC has to draw the line somewhere, otherwise we would be seeing pink, brown, yellow, catastrophic, adamantium, orium, mithral, obsidian, electrum, pearl, gray, orange... the list goes on and on and on. So some of these got to be removed, and the more you add, the more they compete for other content. So is a book of just statblocks of dragons better than a book mixed with statblocks and other material?

So you know, not as simple as "more choice is always better."
 

Urriak Uruk

Debate fuels my Fire
Don't really care much to be honest. The text leaves it open to them being separate or not, depending on your interpretation.

Would it be nice to have it? Sure, why not. But I like the stuff they've chosen to put in the book more than either of these, so I'm totally cool this is where they drew the line.

Like, if I got Steel/Song dragons but didn't get draconians, I'd be more bummed.
 



el-remmen

Moderator Emeritus
When I next run a thing that needs dragons, I'm apt to specifically discard the idea that the various types of dragons are species that breed true.

I did that in my old homebrew Aquerra - each dragon was unique and had a unique heritage and powers. The whole categorization of dragons by color thing was something sages had invented based on incomplete information and human beings' tendency towards apophenia - and passed down as established lore.
 



doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
I would rather have seen them statted up in the book than gem dragons, which I've never seen the appeal of, or the aberrant dragons which are fine but like...meh.

Steel dragons especially I feel like have a decent history in the game. Song dragons I'd never heard of and am not especially impressed by what I've now read about them.

I'm also a bit sad that the book doesn't have calamities and bestial dragon variants.
 

Tonguez

A suffusion of yellow
IMC The Grand Hierophant of the Celestial Hierarchy in Al-Qahira is a Song Dragon attended by Song dragons in human form. There are also Rainbow (Prismatic) Dragons in the Mountains of the Moon, home of the Rain Queen.

Personally I hate the color coding of the Dragons and tended to use Song and Celestial Dragons much more often than the lesser Metalics. I also merged Silvers/Golds with Radiant/Celestial dragons and gave them the form of Oriental dragons. Equally Gem dragons imc are unique creatures not 'races'
 

Steampunkette

Shaper of Worlds
Um, that is a language issue, not a lore issue.

You could easily run any dragon in the MM as a beast and no one would no. There is no Mayo there really.
Well, I mean...
Let us not pretend that old-hand players have no expectations and do not leap to conclusions - they totally do. We, as GMs, often have to do some work to be original and avoid or subvert those expectations.
^That.

You can scrape off the Mayo and pretend it's a Bloated Toad-Like dragon, but if it uses the same breath weapon, frightful presence, legendary resistances, and stuff it's gonna -taste- the same.
Yeah. Well, they have decades of precedent that you know they have to work with. Suddenly breaking from that wasn't going to happen.
Oh, sure. Make more Gem Dragons and maybe hint at Song and Steel Dragons... but what's stopping them from making some "Lesser" dragons. "Degenerate" dragons.

Or go the old Warcraft route and have Dragons be an evolved form of a more primitive "Proto Dragon" that can be brought out for use.

No reason not to say "Mayo Only" when butter exists.
 




Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top