Dragon stats for Krishnath!

[Filby]

Oh, wait... I just remembered: the steel dragon in Dragon #62 is a completely different creature from the one in the 2E Draconomicon. If I recall correctly, the steel dragon in that article (as well as the accompanying gray dragon) was supposed to be a unique monster. The Draco/MM steel dragon, on the other hand, is pretty much the same as the Greyhawk dragon.

 

[BOZ]

it's a debate that's gone on for some time, but i stick by my opinion.

 

[Krishnath]

I'll check it out, if I recall correctly, the Greyhawk Dragon has an enviroment entry of Urban, while the Draconomicon Steel has an enviroment entry of Temperate mountains, but I'll give it a look.

 

[Echohawk]

I'll check it out, if I recall correctly, the Greyhawk Dragon has an enviroment entry of Urban, while the Draconomicon Steel has an enviroment entry of Temperate mountains, but I'll give it a look.

Greyhawk dragon in Greyhawk Adventures: "Temperate cities; rarely, temperate hills, barrens or forested hills."
Greyhawk dragon in MC5: "Temperate/Cities (rarely Temperate/Hills, plains, and forests)"
Steel dragon in Draconomicon (FOR1): "Temperate/Cities; rarely, temperate/hills, barrens, or forested hills"
Stell dragon in Monstrous Manual: "Temperate cities (rarely temperate hills, plains, and forests"

 

[Krishnath]

I did say, if I recall correctly, I didn't.

But if I decide to convert the steel dragon (which I might, as it doesn't excist in any official 3E sources, and no, the Living Greyhawk Journal is not an official source, as it was produced by the RPGA, and I do not think of the RPGA as 'official' even though they are sponsored by WotC), but the breathweapon would be a killer. (litterally, in 2e it was save or die).

But I have still not decided.

 

[Echohawk]

the Living Greyhawk Journal is not an official source, as it was produced by the RPGA, and I do not think of the RPGA as 'official' even though they are sponsored by WotC)

This begs the question: what sources are 'official' sources of D&D monsters? Only WoTC/TSR products? Are the creatures on Wizards' web site official? What about licenced sources, like 3.x Ravenloft, Oriental Adventures/Rokugan, Kingdoms of Kalamar or Warcraft RPG? Does the Tome of Horrors count as official? What about 3.x conversions of older creatures on the 'official' web sites of the abandoned settings like Dark Sun and Spelljammer?

Personally, I'd consider the Living Greyhawk Journal as an official source, but that's just my opinion..

I've been trying to build a master-index of all the monsters I can find, and these are all vexing considerations <grin>.

 

[Gez]

Kingdoms of Kalamar and Dragonlance count as official sources since they have the D&D logo on it. Rokugan can count as official since it has the Oriental Adventures logo on it.

Tome of Horrors counts as official since we're on the Creature Catalog forums.

That stops here.

 

[Krishnath]

Echohawk: There is no need to get agressive, I said that I don't consider it an official source, if you disagree with me, I respect your opinion. But as I said, I have still not decided on which one to convert. And at this precise moment, that doesn't matter, as I won't start any conversions until this weekend at the earliest.

Gez: Well said.

 

[Echohawk]

Echohawk: There is no need to get agressive, I said that I don't consider it an official source, if you disagree with me, I respect your opinion. But as I said, I have still not decided on which one to convert. And at this precise moment, that doesn't matter, as I won't start any conversions until this weekend at the earliest.

Sorry Kirshnath -- I didn't mean to come across as agressive. I really am perplexed by the issue of what should be considered 'official' D&D monsters, and I value you your opinion on the status of Living Greyhawk Journal -- until now I'd just assumed it was official because it was made by the RPGA, but your post make me reconsider this. Now I'm more confused than ever

 

[Leopold]

so when are we getting started?