Incenjucar
Legend
Dragons can have more and less pronounced differences. Deep dragons, shadow dragons, amber dragons, and cataclysmic dragons all mix things up.
D&D 5E How many dragons do we need?
Clint_L
Hero
I agree with OP - too many dragons and they become just another creature. I use them very sparingly, so when they appear, it's a big deal. I also don't bother with basically any of the D&D lore about metallic=good and coloured =bad, etc.. I treat each one as its own character with its own motivations and agenda (I don't use alignments anyway).
I also think dragons are kind of a generic monster unless you are very careful with how you deploy them. It's not like D&D invented dragons; almost every fantasy setting has dragons. Dragons are a dime a dozen. I am way more interested in creatures like the Beholder that were invented for the game. Dragons might be in the title, but that's just because they are a comfortable concept that doesn't need explaining. I'm so "meh" on Dragons that Fizban's is one of the only sourcebooks that I haven't even opened.
I also think dragons are kind of a generic monster unless you are very careful with how you deploy them. It's not like D&D invented dragons; almost every fantasy setting has dragons. Dragons are a dime a dozen. I am way more interested in creatures like the Beholder that were invented for the game. Dragons might be in the title, but that's just because they are a comfortable concept that doesn't need explaining. I'm so "meh" on Dragons that Fizban's is one of the only sourcebooks that I haven't even opened.
Incenjucar
Legend
I tend to use dragons as Big Deal elements.
In my last campaign, the PCs were on a planejammer pirate ship with a skeletal shadow dragon imbedded in it, who basically used a geas curse to control the crew until they served sufficiently. This dragon then had the crew find its granddaughter so it could turn her into a new heart, and later its daughter so it could be reborn with her body. Another dragon encountered became the living forge in which they merged two magical swords into one.
In my last campaign, the PCs were on a planejammer pirate ship with a skeletal shadow dragon imbedded in it, who basically used a geas curse to control the crew until they served sufficiently. This dragon then had the crew find its granddaughter so it could turn her into a new heart, and later its daughter so it could be reborn with her body. Another dragon encountered became the living forge in which they merged two magical swords into one.
Demetrios1453
Hero
Question: Why do dragons need to be "special"? In my opinion, they should be pretty common; maybe not quite as much as the other half of the game's title, but common enough that your typical campaign should encounter several of them. If not, you're basically providing false advertisement to your players by using the game's title. It's not "Dungeons & Maybe One Dragon If You're Lucky", after all...
EzekielRaiden
Follower of the Way
For my own work (unrelated to the game I'm currently running), I wanted to make metallic and chromatic dragons line up more cleanly. So I ended up with the following:
Gold: As standard in D&D, linked to fire.
Silver: As standard in D&D, linked to cold.
Copper: As standard in D&D, linked to acid.
Iron: Lightning damage.
Cobalt: Thunder damage.
Wolfram: Radiant damage.
Tyrium: Psychic damage.
The Chromatics would originally have been the Prismatic dragons, gemstones.
Ruby => Red
Diamond => White
Emerald => Green
Onyx => Black
Sapphire => Blue
Topaz => Yellow (essentially unknown to mankind)
Amethyst => Purple (essentially unknown to mankind)
This allows both an element-to-element matchup and a separate color-to-color matchup (Gold/Yellow, Silver/White, Wolfram/Green, etc.) for interesting thematic parallels. With seven colors, there's slightly more variety outside of the black/white distinction. As noted, Yellow and Purple dragons are essentially unknown in this framework, and there haven't been any Prismatic dragons for so long, most people don't know they ever existed. Tiamat (I use a different name in this setup) is the corrupted, fallen version of the original ruler of all dragonkind, chosen by Io (again, different name) as their intended successor; Tiamat only has five heads, matching the five kinds of generally-known Chromatic dragons. For complicated plot reasons, that successor fell, leaving Bahamut (again, different name) to rule alone. The fall of Tiamat partially damaged reality, and Bahamut can't fix it on their own.
Gold: As standard in D&D, linked to fire.
Silver: As standard in D&D, linked to cold.
Copper: As standard in D&D, linked to acid.
Iron: Lightning damage.
Cobalt: Thunder damage.
Wolfram: Radiant damage.
Tyrium: Psychic damage.
The Chromatics would originally have been the Prismatic dragons, gemstones.
Ruby => Red
Diamond => White
Emerald => Green
Onyx => Black
Sapphire => Blue
Topaz => Yellow (essentially unknown to mankind)
Amethyst => Purple (essentially unknown to mankind)
This allows both an element-to-element matchup and a separate color-to-color matchup (Gold/Yellow, Silver/White, Wolfram/Green, etc.) for interesting thematic parallels. With seven colors, there's slightly more variety outside of the black/white distinction. As noted, Yellow and Purple dragons are essentially unknown in this framework, and there haven't been any Prismatic dragons for so long, most people don't know they ever existed. Tiamat (I use a different name in this setup) is the corrupted, fallen version of the original ruler of all dragonkind, chosen by Io (again, different name) as their intended successor; Tiamat only has five heads, matching the five kinds of generally-known Chromatic dragons. For complicated plot reasons, that successor fell, leaving Bahamut (again, different name) to rule alone. The fall of Tiamat partially damaged reality, and Bahamut can't fix it on their own.
Last edited:
Sacrosanct
Legend
Oh, the #s weren't the dragon issue #. They were page #s. I had compiled all the OD&D/1e monsters from Strategic Review and Dragon all into a single book (466 of them).
Unfortunately, no I can't share this, so don't ask (in general, no just to you). This was a private thing I did for myself. And don't expect WoTC to do something like this either. Recently I spoke with Ray Winninger and he had some great insight. There was never great recordkeeping or licensing with TSR back in the day, so it's really all up in the air as to who actually own the content from Dragon back then. Apparently when WoTC released the digital Dragon compilation (1-250), several people got upset because they said they owned the rights to their contributions and WoTC didn't, and no one could find original contracts. So you'll never see anything like that again.
Mind of tempest
(he/him)advocate for 5e psionics
what is wolfram and tyrium?
pointofyou
Hero
They are archaic words for respectively tungsten and neodymium.
EDIT: I am wrong here about tyrium. Apologies.
Last edited:
Mind of tempest
(he/him)advocate for 5e psionics
thank you
