D&D 5E How Should Dragons Be Handled In 5e

[Jeff Carlsen]

The lower level dragons' stats have a use, so they should be in the Monster Manual. They're vaguely playable as PCs (In PF, at least, due to its highly generous monstrous character rules, less so in 3.x), shapechange forms, effigies, illusions, summons, or cohorts. But they shouldn't appear in published adventures or random encounter tables, due to the aforementioned "killing baby dragons" issue. Except maybe in a "dragon parent protecting its young from adventurers" capacity.

Perhaps, but I see younger dragons as something more befitting the Draconomicon.

 

[Kaodi]

I kind of don't want to bother with "wyrmling"-style age categories anymore, honestly, either. Killing baby dragons feels weird. I do not want to have to murder any more dragon-toddlers.

I had a feeling similar to this a few weeks back. I do not think the solution is so much to get rid of the " baby dragon " category as it is to make explicit that the youngest dragons should virtually never be encountered outside of their parents' lair. In 4E terms that would probably make them low level minions.

 

[Li Shenron]

In this regard, Pathfinder is obviously superior to 3e.

I don't think it's necessarily superior, more powerful perhaps but putting too much stuff on a monster does not equal superior design IMHO...

Personally the best for me would be if dragons were treated as a do-it-yourself monsters (but of course, with a good bunch of pre-generated ones too!). I don't mean totally DIY, but something for example where you have the basic crunch such as attacks, natural armor, movement abilities and breath weapons fixed (or fixed by HD) and then you pick a certain number of spells/SLA/Su/Ex abilities from a series of suggested pools (different pools for age categories for example).

I like each dragon to be at least somewhat unique.

I also like dragons to be spellcasters, but it would be best if this remains optional also because of the said higher complexity in running them in battles.

 

[keterys]

4E dragons (and many other creatures) are a lot more viable if you assume they have ritual casting and whatever rituals you want.

Anyhow, for a game called Dungeons and Dragons I don't think an edition of D&D yet has done dragons right.

 

[Incenjucar]

4E really needed a dragon-centric mega-adventure module that showcased how the system provides for incredible, magical dragons. 4E's style tends to leave a lot to subtext, which not everyone picks up on.

 

[CleverNickName]

Dragons should be, hands-down, the most powerful monsters in the game. The most powerful demon of the Abyss, the most radiant angel of Heaven, the darkest soul in Hell...they should all should be dragons, IMO. As others have said, the game is called "Dungeons & Dragons" for a reason.

I would also like to see the following:

1. Options for non-spellcasting dragons. Dragons that can cast spells like a sorcerer are nice, but so are dragons that can sneak like rogues, or rage like barbarians.

2. Options for spellcasting dragons. Why should all dragons use the same spell list? Sure, there is that bit of flavor text about sorcerers having dragon blood, but that's a pretty weak argument. Dragons with access to the bard, cleric, or druid spell lists would be awesome.

3. Color scheme. I know that the color of a dragon is a time-honored tradition ("It's a white dragon! Grab the burning oil!") but it is starting to get played out. That's why all of the dragons in my campaign have the chameleon-like ability to change their color to match their surroundings...the party doesn't know what "color" a dragon is until it uses its breath weapon.

4. Breath weapons. Dragons that breathe fire or acid are pretty cool. But so are dragons that "breathe" green slime, yellow mold, or blasts of sonic energy. My players still talk about the time I put them against a black dragon that didn't breathe acid...instead, it would vomit forth a rolling, twitching swarm of spiders.

 

[Incenjucar]

Dragons should be, hands-down, the most powerful monsters in the game. The most powerful demon of the Abyss, the most radiant angel of Heaven, the darkest soul in Hell...they should all should be dragons, IMO. As others have said, the game is called "Dungeons & Dragons" for a reason.

So the highest-level dragon solo's level is equal to the highest level non-dragon solo's level+1.

I would also like to see the following:

1. Options for non-spellcasting dragons. Dragons that can cast spells like a sorcerer are nice, but so are dragons that can sneak like rogues, or rage like barbarians.

So, like 4E? Because 4E does that.

2. Options for spellcasting dragons. Why should all dragons use the same spell list? Sure, there is that bit of flavor text about sorcerers having dragon blood, but that's a pretty weak argument. Dragons with access to the bard, cleric, or druid spell lists would be awesome.

Why should dragons resort to silly mortal structures like spells when they can use more primordial forces? Why not develop a few monster powers and abilities that dragons have more or less exclusive access to, with default dragons of a type having a certain roster of those? Making a dragon into an oversized wizard lizard seems like an insult.

3. Color scheme. I know that the color of a dragon is a time-honored tradition ("It's a white dragon! Grab the burning oil!") but it is starting to get played out. That's why all of the dragons in my campaign have the chameleon-like ability to change their color to match their surroundings...the party doesn't know what "color" a dragon is until it uses its breath weapon.

Rather than making every dragon a rainbow, I'd rather see them adopt more complex color schemes with stripes and spots and whatever else, rather than just a glob of paint.

4. Breath weapons. Dragons that breathe fire or acid are pretty cool. But so are dragons that "breathe" green slime, yellow mold, or blasts of sonic energy. My players still talk about the time I put them against a black dragon that didn't breathe acid...instead, it would vomit forth a rolling, twitching swarm of spiders.

Sounds like templates to me.

 

[CleverNickName]

So, like 4E? Because 4E does that.

I honestly wouldn't know. I've been told that I'm allergic to 4E.

Why should dragons resort to silly mortal structures like spells when they can use more primordial forces? Why not develop a few monster powers and abilities that dragons have more or less exclusive access to, with default dragons of a type having a certain roster of those? Making a dragon into an oversized wizard lizard seems like an insult.

One man's "silly" is another man's "versatility." But I think you and I are saying the same thing here. Dragon spellcasters always seemed a bit odd to me. Sure, they are magical creatures, and yes, wizard magic has to come from SOMEwhere, but still. Does Puff the Magic Dragon have to be a scaly Merlin?

Rather than making every dragon a rainbow, I'd rather see them adopt more complex color schemes with stripes and spots and whatever else, rather than just a glob of paint.

Or they could just make them all stone-colored, and drop the paint altogether. I think that would be my favorite option, truth be told. But colorful dragons are as iconic as +1 swords and halflings...I would be very surprised if the game designers broke tradition in this department.

Sounds like templates to me.

Yep. That spider-dragon was the result of applying a Half-Dragon template to an advanced Monstrous Spider, and a rare stroke of creative genius. I hope 5E has templates. I also hope that they are easier to use than the 3.x ones.

 

[Sunseeker]

While all dragons are usually intelligent and powerful enough to be spell-casters, I don't feel that necessitates that all dragons should be.

All dragons should as a default, have the characteristic physical abilities, bite, claw, tail, breath, ect..
All dragons should have a set of powerful, but flavorful supernatural powers related to their color, this set of powers should grow with age, but not significantly.
Only older dragons should gain spellcasting, and they should gain this based on their relative intelligence. More beastial dragons should not gain spellcasting as quickly or to the same extent as more intelligent, "learned" dragons might.
Dragon spellcasting should tie their flavor into psuedo-classes. IE: platinum dragons would be more paladiny, red dragons would be more wizard/sorcerery, green dragons would be more druidy, ect...

 

[Doug McCrae]

Dragons shouldn't be that big a deal, imo. They shouldn't be intelligent, or particularly powerful, they're just another monster. In the old medieval European legends they were beasts that guarded a horde of gold, they weren't the ultimate evil of the universe.

They're big reptiles, they can fly, they breathe fire, they hoard gold and have a taste for maidens. They represent greed, if you want to get fancy. They're tough, too tough for a level 1 party, but they're not epic level tough. By the time you're planehopping you've outgrown them, they're a terrestrial foe.

But I've never particularly liked dragons (especially the colour-coding), so my view shouldn't count for much. A lot of people really love em, I know.