Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ruleslawyer" data-source="post: 3009122" data-attributes="member: 1757">Here are my thoughts:1) Fight Club is not the place to look for "icons." The stated function of that column is to do weird and wacky things by tacking on templates and classes to monsters; expecting a particularly "dragonish" dragon from it is likely to bring disappointment.2) As far back as in early 1e, people have been looking for ways to beef up dragons; the general consensus seems to have been that as players began exploring levels past 10th, dragons lost their place as interesting, deadly foes. It has been common practice for a long time to beef up D&D dragons by boosting spellcasting ability; as far back as Dragon 98, there were various suggestions for making dragons mightier spellcasting adversaries, including ignoring the percentage chance of speaking and spell use, making certain spells more powerful when cast by dragons, etc. 3) Even in 2e/3e, the spellcasting ability of dragons has always lagged behind their HD and CR (or the 2e equivalent; namely, the expected level at which PCs encountered x dragon). Nonetheless, it is clear that dragons have been positioned in D&D as powerful spellcasters for some time. The 2e Draconomicon talked about how dragons have so many centuries to perfect their spellcasting that they should be more powerful spellcasters than suggested by the rules, and so on. I think there are two obvious reasons for this: 1) Spellcasting is D&D's big stick. One of the things that's always bothered me about D&D is that spellcasting ability really does make you the king pimp. It adds damage-dealing capability, versatility, social ability and skill replacement, [summoned or charmed] allies, and all manner of difficult- or impossible-to-counter tactics (time stop, prismatic wall, teleportation, etc.). Hitting things really just doesn't go as far. Until 3e, spellcasting was generally more powerful than monstrous spell-like abilities; only the solar had anything like the power and options available to a powerful wizard or cleric.2) Spellcasting is practically de rigeur for "boss" type monsters, and the general consensus has put dragons consistently in that position. Again, spellcasting offers both power and versatility, and the latter is really a requirement for any leader-type monster. In order to prepare the kind of contingencies sufficient to thwart an enterprising group of adventurer-types (who, as noted earlier, are far more diversely capable than a typical knight-errant), the dragon needs to be able to summon elementals, create phase doors, teleport around, etc.3) Legacy. Dragons have been spellcasters (as opposed to spell-like ability users) since 1e. This almost certainly has influenced the decision to keep them as sorcerers in 3e.Now, that said, it's certainly a possibility to re-engineer dragons to emphasize their physical abilities; however, it will lower their threat level substantially. Yes, I know it seems weird to have every high-end dragon start combat invisible, levitating, dimension dooring, and surrounded by a horde of summoned allies and magical effects. OTOH, it does add to the survivability factor, which is a good thing for a CR 20+ monster. In order to keep dragons at the CR 20+ level while toning down their spellcasting ability, you have to boost other abilities. One idea is to give dragons massively increased SR, more substantial DR, build "buffed" stats into the book stats, give them immunity to several insta-kill effects, and grant them some kind of ranged attack capability, as well as give them some IH-style social feat abilities and appropriate summoned minions. Just giving them increased physical abilities will turn them into glorified giants; easy kills for well-prepared PCs who don't even need to get close to take them out.</blockquote>

Verification