[Dragon] Dragons need armor and weapons?

[Ferret]

Paranoid dragons? He he he.

 

[Mark Plemmons]

I dunno. Dragons wearing lots of armor and wielding weapons just doesn't feel very "dragony" to me.

I think the only time you'd see a dragon outfitted with anything would be on those extremely rare times when they decide to help out humans. So it might have some sort of saddle fitted to it just to keep the the human from falling off.

If people want weapon-wielding, armor-wearing dragons in their home campaigns, that's cool with me. I'd hate to see it become the standard, though.

===
Mark Plemmons
Kenzer and Company
www.kenzerco.com
===

 

[rijeagle]

I too was shocked to see that article in Dragon, and the first thing that popped into my head was: WHY?!?!?

Dragons have way too much pride in their own abilities to use petty equipment like armor and weapons. They know they are already a walking(flying) arsonal, and somehow I just can't see a dragon belittling itself with such things. Magical items such as rings, amulets, rods, etc. Sure, they would enhance the already formidable dragon abilities, but armor and weapons?? Why? Dragons claws and bite do more damage then any weapon, and the armor would create restrictions the dragon would other wise ignore due to its fabulous scale armor. How much would that armor weigh to cover something that big? 2-3000 pounds? how could it fly?

The article is, simply put, useless really.

 

[DWARF]

Maybe the dragon got over his vanity by reading Nietzsche and wants to become the Overdragon? He does not need the armor, but will use it to his advantage.

 

[shilsen]

I've never used a dragon which utilized armor or weapons, but I don't see a problem with it. Considering dragons don't exist (hard to believe, considering the confidence with which many previous posters have stated exactly what dragons are ), there's no reason why dragons in your campaign can't be equipment-users. And even if one doesn't like that flavour, presumably all dragons in a campaign aren't carbon copies of each other, so having one which uses armor and/or weapons is a nice way to make things interesting for your players/PCs.

 

[Daedrova]

::chuckles:: Nietzsche huh?
I am thinking a dragon would have such mental ability and years of experience and pondering to think through such philosophy without "help" from the works of a philosopher who failed utterly at his life's goal therein... (despite his many intelligent, if fallible, arguments)
Aside from that, our understanding of philosophical truths/arguments doesn’t necessarily direct our actions or desires (even though it probably should).

 

[Felon]

Dragons have way too much pride in their own abilities to use petty equipment like armor and weapons.

Feh, says who? Dragons do whatever they want, including stuff that other dragons don't do.

They know they are already a walking(flying) arsonal, and somehow I just can't see a dragon belittling itself with such things.

Simply put: results speak for themselves. What, dragons are too proud to be pragmatic? It's tough to argue that things that make you more effective actually lessen you.

Magical items such as rings, amulets, rods, etc. Sure,

Sure? Why "sure" that and "no way" other stuff?

they would enhance the already formidable dragon abilities, but armor and weapons?? Why?

Because they also enhance the dragon. Natural armor bonuses stack with regular armor bonues, and the weapons allow the dragon to dish out even more carnage.

armor would create restrictions the dragon would other wise ignore due to its fabulous scale armor.

Yet they'd still be more maneuverable than most of their puny foes. And if they're opting to go toe-to-toe, then maneuverability comes second to defense.

How much would that armor weigh to cover something that big? 2-3000 pounds? how could it fly?

LOL, how do they fly without the armor?

The article is, simply put, useless really.

It lacks cookie-cutter compatability, if that's what you mean.

I may or may not have use for anything in that article--I saw the tail-sword and immediately thought "heh, I bet he's overcompensating for something"--but I sure don't see the point of slamming it just because the authors aren't too hidebound by preconceptions to breathe some new life into a classic monster.

 

[Nifft]

Dragons are IMC both the paragons of physical might AND the paragons of mystical puissance. They do use tools -- especially magical tools -- but they don't count armor among their tools.

Armor and weapons are for beings which are NOT paragons of physical might -- like, say, humans.

-- Nifft

 

[Saeviomagy]

I'd see some form of bow for a dragon as a great investment. It would seriously upgrade a dragons offensive capability by allowing him to attack from a distance while in flight. I doubt that it would be a conventional bow however. Some form of crossbow seems far more likely.

The arguments about dragons being vain to ludicrous extremes is a standard one. Apparently having an intelligence of 18, a wisdom of 19 and a charisma of 18, and living for a few hundred years means that you have some critical personality flaw which would seriously jeapordize your attempts to remain living, not to mention seriously piss off everyone you meet.

Dragons, as written in the D&D rules, are not like that. They may be vain, but they're not vain to the excesses of stupidity. They may look down on humans, but they're not going to totally discredit them as a threat.

 

[Numion]

Dragons have way too much pride in their own abilities to use petty equipment like armor and weapons.

What about against other dragons.. say, a red dragon and a gold dragon of equal power live near each other. Now would each other just be content having pride in their abilities, or would either one forget the pride, use the tools to kill the other and take its loot? I'm having hard time imagining that a red dragon would value pride that much more than a great hoard of other dragons loot!

Why? Dragons claws and bite do more damage then any weapon

Because dragon weapons do more damage than dragon claws and bite?