log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 5E Fizban's Treasury Dragons Ranked By Challenge Rating

WotC has been sending out previews of Fizban's Treasury of Dragons, due out next month, to folks on Twitter. Amongst those are art pieces and other items.

fbtod.png


By Challenge Rating the dragons in the book are:
  • Ancient crystal (19)
  • Ancient topaz (20)
  • Ancient emerald (21)
  • Ancient moonstone (21)
  • Ancient sapphire (22)
  • Elder brain dragon (22)
  • Ancient amethyst (23)
  • Ancient dragon turtle (24)
  • Gem greatwyrm (26)
  • Chromatic greatwyrm (27)
  • Metallic greatwyrm (28)
  • Apects of Bahamut and Tiamat (30)
Interestingly, it appears that the great wyrm category is divided into three -- gem, chromatic, metallic -- rather than by each dragon type.

There's also an alphabetical list of all 20 dragon types in the book:
  • Amethyst
  • Black
  • Blue
  • Brass
  • Bronze
  • Copper
  • Crystal
  • Deep
  • Dragon turtle
  • Emerald
  • Faerie
  • Gold
  • Green
  • Moonstone
  • Red
  • Sapphire
  • Shadow
  • Silver
  • Topaz
  • White
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Russ Morrissey

Russ Morrissey


log in or register to remove this ad

Dausuul

Legend
It was designed to have a coherent and logical mythos, because that is what the creators wanted to try, rather than by paying attention to what users wanted from the game. There is a design principle that really summarizes everything about what happpend with 4E "You [the designer] are not the user."

With 5E, they did the work to find out what people by and large wanted, hence the return to the illogical and silly (hence fun for a game) Great Wheel and the Smorgasbord of the Forgotten Realms.
Yeah, that makes sense. "Kitchen sink" seems to be what most people want out of a setting. It's never appealed to me--I strongly prefer a curated setting with a well-developed theme and focus--but I recognize that my preferences are far from the norm.
 

Yeah, that makes sense. "Kitchen sink" seems to be what most people want out of a setting. It's never appealed to me--I strongly prefer a curated setting with a well-developed theme and focus--but I recognize that my preferences are far from the norm.
same but more material does make the options to build with better or at least more interesting when done well.
 

Liane the Wayfarer

Frumious Flumph
The 2e Waterdeep/Greyhawk Dragon ARE the same Dragon type as the 4e Steel Dragon, it's just that they altered the Breath Weapon, among other things, like retconning them into being Metallic Dragons. Like the Deep Dragons breath weapon was changed in 4e, it didn't make them a different kind of Dragon, it was just a retcon to a preexisting type of Dragon. Most of the Fluff matches.

It's simular to how 4e took Succubi and turned them into Devil's, instead of Demons, they were a seperate Succubi race, they retconned it, although Erin M. Evans fitted it for FR so it wasn't a retcon, more so a recent change of alliagence.
Hmmm... I've been inclined to be extremely specific in the list, so as to try to actually include every published dragon in D&D. Maybe I should rethink that. What does everybody think? My thinking has been to specify every dragon based on name and traits. Henadic Theologian makes a case that the criteria should be name and intent. Which is the better method?
 


Parmandur

Book-Friend
Yeah, that makes sense. "Kitchen sink" seems to be what most people want out of a setting. It's never appealed to me--I strongly prefer a curated setting with a well-developed theme and focus--but I recognize that my preferences are far from the norm.
I'm lucky that this does fit my taste, but leaving taste aside it is the calculated business move. The 4E Lore was putting creative choices ahead of business sense.
 

Hmm, just thought, are the critters in this (and Feywild/Ravenloft?) going to be brought forward to the new Monster book?
No. They stated that they created the monster stat blocks in current batch of products with the MPMotM format in mind. MPMotM appears to have been created to update the older stuff from VGtM and MToF to this new format.

In any case, why would they make FToD redundant only 3 months after releasing it, and announce that redundancy before it's even released?

And beyond that, MMotM is advertised at just over 250 monsters, which is basically what VGtM and MToF have combined, so I doubt we'll see more than a scattering of monsters from other sources...
 

Chaosmancer

Legend
I was trying to give them where to find the context. I mean just scroll up and down a few posts and @Micah Sweet can figure out what is going on if they want (which I assume they do since they asked)

The issue could be that the blocking software on this site makes posts invisible. So, if one of the two parties has blocked the other, then they can't read any of those posts.
 




Visit Our Sponsor

Latest threads

Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top