D&D (2024) Interested in new dragon designs for 5e (5.5e or 6e)?

[Yaarel]

I created an image of a Norse Dragon, called a ‘Drekar’.

For Norse names, I lean toward using the Norse plural form, and then treating it in English as if both singular and plural. So for example: one Drekar, many Drekar, one Æsir, many Æsir, one Vanir, many Vanir. And so on. (Heh. I think it unreasonable for English speakers to need to understand Norse grammar rules. Heh, and looking at a Norse -R being dropped, or an English -S being added, is just painful.)

The image is still a work in progress but it is a proof of concept. The Norse Dragon is specifically an adder snake. The color patterns tend to be black and silver-gold. It has a V-shaped ‘horns’ pattern on the back of its head. For the Dragon these horns are actual horns. And there is a black lightning bolt pattern across the spine. The shade of colors can vary significantly, from almost entirely black, to almost entirely silver, to almost entirely gold. And the females tend to be a slightly orangish-and-brownish shade of bronze.

Wyrmling Drekar have no limbs. But Young Drekar emerge with arms after shedding their skin. The hands of the arms are prehensile eaglelike talons, that can manipulate objects like human hands can. Adult and Ancient Drekar might or might not also have eaglelike wings.

Oh, and the eyes of the serpent are super cool. Even in reallife, the eyes look like various patterns of volcanic lava, with catlike slit pupils.



DREKAR

 

[Son of the Serpent]

D'awwww

Its a cutey

 

[dave2008]

I added a new white dragon inspiration image

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

My opinion is the next edition will be like World of Darkness 20 anniversary, more a compendium than an update.

We will see a 5.5 Ed, but no, I mean it will not D&D mark but other name, maybe d20 Modern 2.0, Universal d20 or d20 Modular, created to play and crossovers with differents genres as sci-fi. Some sacred cows could be changed, for example Courage and Acuity (perception + astuteness to discover little details as clues, or to give an fast answer) added as new abilities scores.

But before this we could see as previous step some settings with littles things from d20 M as Spelljammer and Ravenloft. Maybe even Red Steel/Savage Coast, a Mystara spin-off of fantasy swashbuckling.

 

[Yaarel]

I added a new white dragon inspiration image

For the White Dragon, and the buff lion look. Say which aspects of which image you like best? For example, one White Dragon has long fur, is the a feature you prefer for your ideal white dragon? Which head is your favorite? Which wings? And so on.

 

[dave2008]

For the White Dragon, and the buff lion look. Say which aspects of which image you like best? For example, one White Dragon has long fur, is the a feature you prefer for your ideal white dragon? Which head is your favorite? Which wings? And so on.

Because of the environment I see the it as being a compact, bulky brute of dragon. Probably shorter neck and tail than most. I think I would like some combination of the first 2 images + some iconic white dragon features. In the 2nd image i like the idea of the shard-like growths at the joints, but tufts or fur / proto-feathers instead

 

[Laurefindel]

I do want to clarify that I’m not saying there can’t be mechanical changes to the dragons. I’m just saying that’s not what I wanted to discuss in this thread. I would assume any redesign would also include mechanical revisions to accommodate those re-designs. But that is another discussion.

I redesigned dragons for two different settings. Each had a very different approach, but in each case the first question I asked myself was whether I wanted a more biologically-consistent design, or whether I didn't care about that.

In the first world dragons were different species of the same genus, meaning that they mostly shared the same physical characteristics with environmental/specialised variations (i.e. lion vs tiger). They had physical differences, but those were designed after the new abilities I gave them rather than the other way around. (I wanted to vary the options of Actions for dragons without making stat blocks too heavy, so one or two different ability for each colour was more manageable).

Spoiler: Off-topic dragon characteristics

Dragons They were all reptiles, all had scales, all had the same number of limbs, all had roughly the same skeleton etc. The chromatic categorisation was the base for each specie but even the colour differences were toned down. Most were green or brown with specific colour variations (reds had a distinctive red underbelly, blues had a blue-ish ridge and spines on the back, blacks had distinctively dark scales on its back, greens had stripes and paterns, whites were actually brown in colour but with a recessive albino gene mutation, etc).

Dragons had only three types of "breath": fire, caustic bile (spitters), and venomous bite (which greens developed the ability to "breathe out" by exhaling violently. They were resistant to their own energy type but not immune to it; young red dragons would use their fire breath in territorial/mating disputes for example.

In the second world, dragons was a catch-all word for reptile/avian-ish monsters that had a breath weapon of some sort à la How to Train Your Dragon or the Dragon Hunter movie. Not all had the ability to fly, some had scales, feathers, fur, or a mix of the three. There the stat blocks were mostly left intact, sometimes with an ability/action copied from another monster tacked on. The general approach was far more whimsical and and magical where physical variations (even within the same colour entry in the MM) were mostly cosmetic, . For that world, the goal was to vary dragon encounters (which were central to the setting) to avoid the "yet another young blue dragon" syndrome. One could be a colossal boss fight against one of the "sons of the thunder storms", the other a skirmish against a dozen over-excited lizards discharging static electricity shocks at random, etc.

TL;DR: How far are you willing to take aesthetic variations, and do you care about biology?

 

[dave2008]

I redesigned dragons for two different settings. Each had a very different approach, but in each case the first question I asked myself was whether I wanted a more biologically-consistent design, or whether I didn't care about that.

In the first world dragons were different species of the same genus, meaning that they mostly shared the same physical characteristics with environmental/specialised variations (i.e. lion vs tiger). They had physical differences, but those were designed after the new abilities I gave them rather than the other way around. (I wanted to vary the options of Actions for dragons without making stat blocks too heavy, so one or two different ability for each colour was more manageable).

Spoiler: Off-topic dragon characteristics

Dragons They were all reptiles, all had scales, all had the same number of limbs, all had roughly the same skeleton etc. The chromatic categorisation was the base for each specie but even the colour differences were toned down. Most were green or brown with specific colour variations (reds had a distinctive red underbelly, blues had a blue-ish ridge and spines on the back, blacks had distinctively dark scales on its back, greens had stripes and paterns, whites were actually brown in colour but with a recessive albino gene mutation, etc).

Dragons had only three types of "breath": fire, caustic bile (spitters), and venomous bite (which greens developed the ability to "breathe out" by exhaling violently. They were resistant to their own energy type but not immune to it; young red dragons would use their fire breath in territorial/mating disputes for example.

In the second world, dragons was a catch-all word for reptile/avian-ish monsters that had a breath weapon of some sort à la How to Train Your Dragon or the Dragon Hunter movie. Not all had the ability to fly, some had scales, feathers, fur, or a mix of the three. There the stat blocks were mostly left intact, sometimes with an ability/action copied from another monster tacked on. The general approach was far more whimsical and and magical where physical variations (even within the same colour entry in the MM) were mostly cosmetic, . For that world, the goal was to vary dragon encounters (which were central to the setting) to avoid the "yet another young blue dragon" syndrome. One could be a colossal boss fight against one of the "sons of the thunder storms", the other a skirmish against a dozen over-excited lizards discharging static electricity shocks at random, etc.

I like both of those approaches. For the basic thought process in this thread it would be more similar to the first concept for the chromatics, but I am fine with the dragon 'type' being shared with a wide variety of creatures similar to HtTYD

TL;DR: How far are you willing to take aesthetic variations, and do you care about biology?

Are you asking about between species (differences between white dragons and blues) or within the same species (one white dragon to another)? I generally thing the 5 chromatics should have similar morphology (head, neck, body, 4 limbs + 2 wings, a tail). However, I am not opposed to changing this up (I was thinking of given the black 4 wings), and I think there can be a lot of variation within those general parameters.

I care about biology, but I understand biology and physics well enough to know dragon biology is generally impossible (a creature that big just can't fly). I also know just because a dragon looks like it could fly (big wings) doesn't mean it actually could (there not big enough!). However, I to adhere to some type of fantasy biology. The dragon looks reasonable at least. However, I am also willing to let their inherent magical nature overcome their biological limitations. One of the things I have been think about doing away with is the super large and muscled wings. The dragon has magic - it doesn't need muscles!

 

[Son of the Serpent]

My opinion is the next edition will be like World of Darkness 20 anniversary, more a compendium than an update.

We will see a 5.5 Ed, but no, I mean it will not D&D mark but other name, maybe d20 Modern 2.0, Universal d20 or d20 Modular, created to play and crossovers with differents genres as sci-fi. Some sacred cows could be changed, for example Courage and Acuity (perception + astuteness to discover little details as clues, or to give an fast answer) added as new abilities scores.

But before this we could see as previous step some settings with littles things from d20 M as Spelljammer and Ravenloft. Maybe even Red Steel/Savage Coast, a Mystara spin-off of fantasy swashbuckling.

I think you meant to post this in a different thread

 

[dave2008]

Here are some pictures of a baby dragon I caught about 12 years ago. You should see him now!
I thought @Yaarel might like this (FYI, no photo manipulation involved)