Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="grimslade" data-source="post: 8426740" data-attributes="member: 6061">I guess I am neutral about them being relegated to folklore in D&D. It doesn't preclude me from having them in my home games if I so desire. I guess I don't understand why WotC felt the need to dismiss them in a sidebar at all. They may want to revisit steel and song dragons in a future project, and now they have lightly bound themselves to this folklore nonsense. I mean, if they wanted to not have Steel and Song dragons in 5E, why mention them at all? I think the sidebar is to acknowledge these dragons without having to stat them up. Fizban's is supposed to be a definitive guide to all things dragon, written by an Avatar of Paladine himself, so not mentioning them at all would have been more of a controversial statement. As for monstrous/degenerate dragons, DRAGON is a loaded term for D&D. There are almost 50 years of ossification of the beast into Skittles Smaug. If you want to have monstrous dragon-like beasts of myth and legend, you will have to use proto-drake, drake, Great wyrm, or some-such to get the point across to jaded D&D players.</blockquote>