Loss of Innate Spellcasting (or 'How Dragons Build Lairs')

[Guacamole]

In this case it also doesn't matter if they give them their innate dragon magic. If you don't it, tweak them to suit your campaign.

It matters because it doesn't appear to be the way they are doing it. It doesn't make sense to bemoan a fact of life. If they did, and I didn't like it, I would tweak it. It wouldn't be a problem. I probably won't have time for 4e, but if I did, dragons in my homebrew would be different than the RAW.

fwiw
guaca.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

OMG this topic is still going? And it has spread to a new thread to boot. Well, I have nothing better to do at the moment.

First of all that is a LOT of assumption that you will get that many archers ready to shoot WITH magic arrows without a good bit of advance warning. Only an idiot of a dragon would ever give the city that kind of chance to get ready.

Here is what will actually happen
*snip*

In the fourth Pathfinder adventure,
[sblock]There is a dragon attack on a town in which the dragon's tactics are essentially "fly in, burn everything, laugh." The only thing that saves the town is that there are adventurers present, and the dragon is a young one without much experience but with an incredible ego. He doesn't systematically burn the place to the ground. Rather, he moves from place to place, burning a bit, eating a few people, and having fun. This means that by the time the PCs get to him, the town isn't just cinders.[/sblock]
Your analysis is a good baseline from which to design dragon attacks, spellcasting or no spellcasting.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

3) If a few GMs want all dragons to be powerful spellcasters, the rules have to make it so - even if that is not what most GMs would like

I'm of the opinion that when something is optional, it shouldn't be optional in the "you can rip it out and change it" sort of way, but optional in the "you can stick it in if you like" sort of way. This means that while I'm generally annoyed about a lot of the changes to the setting and fluff in 4E, I'm pleased with this particular development. When I want spellcasting dragons, I can make them. When I don't, I can use book dragons.

4) If a BBEG uses minions of any kind, he isn't really an BBEG

I guess that rules out Sauron.

In 28 years of GMing (and too many dragon scenarios to count), I have never used a dragon BBEG who relied on magic, eschewed minions or experienced the kind of bizarre problems I've seen trotted out in this thread.

I don't think I've ever used a dragon's spells. Such a waste of my effort, considering how much more useful it is for a dragon to do anything else besides cast spells with his precious actions.

 

[Stormtalon]

It matters because it doesn't appear to be the way they are doing it. It doesn't make sense to bemoan a fact of life. If they did, and I didn't like it, I would tweak it. It wouldn't be a problem. I probably won't have time for 4e, but if I did, dragons in my homebrew would be different than the RAW.

fwiw
guaca.

And that, right there, is the best counter to your arguments, Derren. Fait accompli. It's done, it's happening, learn to live with it. Many of us see it as an improvement and have plenty of ways to make dragons powerful, terrifying and meaningful opponents without them having to lean on the crutch of spellcasting. And yes, for dragons the thought of being reduced to "big scaly wizards" would be a serious blow to the ego.

Still, let's look at your 500 archer argument -- the most ludicrous and tenuous one you tossed out there. The logistical impossibility of it has already been addressed, so I won't rehash that here. There still remains the problem that as a matter of course, such an assemblage of ranged militiamen are Target #1 for the dragon. Take into account the Dragon's fear aura and they'll get off maybe one attack before the sheer terror of its presence sends them scattering and dropping their bows in panic -- after which they become fodder for its initial breath weapon attack. Presto, no more archers to harry him.

Additionally, most of the arrows shot at him would be non-magical anyway -- or at BEST temporarily enchanted -- and for those, there's something you're not considering. Think back to the sample fight Wizards posted that involved a dragon. He had this nasty emanation coming from him that caused damage of the same type as his breath weapon to anyone within 30' or so. I can't think of a DM out there who wouldn't rule that standard, non-masterwork, non-permanently enchanted arrows would even make it through something like that. They'll burn up, or corrode, or freeze so brittle that they shatter harmlessly against his scales -- even a blue dragon's electricity could deflect the steel arrowheads away from him. Even the iconic dragon Smaug wasn't brought down by just any arrow -- it took the Black Arrow, a relic handed down for generations, to fell him.

As far as a dragon is concerned, he's got little or nothing to fear from even a large militia. They can't hurt him. Hell, they're not supposed to be able to hurt him -- their concern is with things like bandits, roving bands of orcs & gnolls and other day-to-day threats. When something big like a dragon comes knocking, they have to hope and pray that there's some nearby heroes who can distract and maybe defeat it before too much of the town becomes a shattered ruin. That's one of the absolute base assumptions of the game -- that there are things out there that only a group of special and dedicated heroes chosen somehow by a shared destiny can defeat -- and it's not changing.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Ever notice that, even though dragons have (had) nifty spellcasting abilities that can create lairs, they always live in crappy caves? You never see a dragon living in a hall of polished marble, filled with pillows forty feet across, with all of their riches neatly organized by national currency and denomination.

Yeah, but that would be a lot of fun, discovering the dragon's accountant/coin polisher slave.

 

[Dausuul]

Ok, which of my answers is the rediculous one? That dragons are vulnerable to massive archer attacks when flying away which, considering his lack of healing, places him as a disadvantage as he now has to recover this damage first (attrition)?

Given that 95% of the archers flee in terror before the dragon's frightful presence... yeah, it's kind of ridiculous. Assuming the dragon is dumb enough to give you time to distribute your 500 magicked-up arrows, 25 of them will actually be fired--the rest will be carried off by the panicked archers running for their lives. Given the dragon's AC, one or two of those 25 will hit the target. Yup, that's gonna take down a dragon.

Or was it that a unmagical dragon does not necessarily have access to much magical knowledge a 10th level wizard might be interested in?

A dragon that's lived for 500 years probably has lots of knowledge the wizard would be interested in. Just because it doesn't know any spells doesn't mean it doesn't have several maxed-out Knowledge skills.

 

[kennew142]

1. Without magic dragons are a lot weaker as they lack options. After the players encountered 3 red dragons in the game they will knew what awaits them which makes the dragon weaker. Also if you play out the environment around the dragon a lack of magic also makes teh dragon weaker as it can't prepare itself against the PCs (or generally against the adventurers) anymore.

Dragons can prepare for adventurers in the same ways that non-dragons can. These ways have been listed numeruos times in this discussion already.

2. Its better for the rules to give a monster which requires spellcasting those spells instead of requiring every DM who wants more than a combat encounter to houserule it in.
Also theoretically you just need rules to build monsters and not actual monsters itself. That way every DM can have what he wants and you would save a whole book.
But that is not what people want, they want complete monsters.

It is your assertion that dragons require spellcasting in order to affective enemies. Most of us disagree with that assertion. Dragon spellcasting has always been so weak that it is inconsequential at any level appropriate for the dragon's CR.

3. If some DMs want to use monsters like they did use them in previous editions they should be able to do so.

New editions change things. In this case, I would argue they are changing for the better. If players of Basic D&D wanted to be able to play an elf as a character class should it have been included in the rules to 3e? They were able to do so before. Why not now?

4. The BBEG is not the BBEG when it is more or less helpless without his minions as he might still be able to fight well but has no way to influence the world on a level appropriate scale.

Dragons influence the world by talking to people, brining people, threating people, making deals with people, etc.... It isn't necessary for every dragon to be able to use magic in order to influence the world around them. Since lots of GMs have been using dragons in this fashion for decades, it would seem to be a lack of imagination that inhibits other GMs from doing so as well.

5. In 3E yes (High level, or with access to a lot of spellcasters). generally the BBEG must be able to match the ressources of the opposition (NPCs and PCs) and when they have magic he needs them too.

You are assuming that magic will trump everything in the same ways that it did in 3e. If the BBEG is a warlord or a rogue is he also useless without magic? Even in 3e, this is limited thinking.

6. A good plotline requires the BBEG to have fixed abilities and not get ruled 0 whenever he needs something.

Good plotlines have to remain flexible enough to maintain themselves. No plotline that is written in stone can survive first contact with a clever party. In novel or screenplay writing, the author has control over all of the characters. In a good rpg campaign, the GM must be able to adapt the storyline so as to maintain interest and cohesion.

7. So far I haven't seen a viable theory, only some dodged counters which don't really address the point. If you know a counter example post it in my "Challenge" Thread.
http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=216248

There have been several viable theories presented in this thread. You have just found some reason to dismiss them.

The problem with all counters is that they do not address the big picture. See the smoke idea. Yes, smoke can be a way to convey messages, but the poster didn't think of how this method of communication would mean for the day to day life of the dragon, the possible operating distance of the dragon or for the security of the operation (suspicious, easily forgeable,). This "seeing the big picture" (don't know a better word for it) is what all those counters are lacking imo.

It means exactly the same thing it would mean for every other BBEG who used smoke, mirrors, messengers, etc... to communicate.

In your 28 years of GMing, did you ever think about the backstory and how the dragons achieved what they did by the rules or simply said "thats a interesting plotline so that happened"?.

This is an extremely ignorant question. Of course I have. Every single thing that occurs in any of the many campaigns I've run has had a logical backstory. How nice of you to assume that everyone who disagrees with you is a mindless hack-and-slasher, or a mental defective who wouldn't know a backstory if it bit him in the backside.

 

[Derren]

Given that 95% of the archers flee in terror before the dragon's frightful presence... yeah, it's kind of ridiculous. Assuming the dragon is dumb enough to give you time to distribute your 500 magicked-up arrows, 25 of them will actually be fired--the rest will be carried off by the panicked archers running for their lives. Given the dragon's AC, one or two of those 25 will hit the target. Yup, that's gonna take down a dragon.

Somehow I fail to see how you are able to stuff that many soldiers in such a small space so that everyone is affected by frightful presence. So, not 95% of all soldiers would flee, 5% would maybe. The rest will fire one or two salvos at the dragon and wound it soo much that the high level NPCs of the city can finish it off if the dragon doesn't flee.

A dragon that's lived for 500 years probably has lots of knowledge the wizard would be interested in. Just because it doesn't know any spells doesn't mean it doesn't have several maxed-out Knowledge skills.

Historical knowledge doesn't automatically mean magical knowledge. Don't forget that this knowledge has to be so interesting for a wizard that he is willing to deal with a dragon.

It is your assertion that dragons require spellcasting in order to affective enemies. Most of us disagree with that assertion. Dragon spellcasting has always been so weak that it is inconsequential at any level appropriate for the dragon's CR.

If you mean "combat encounter" with "enemy" then you are correct, dragons do not require spells for combat. They require spells outside of the combat to be effective masterminds.
Dragons can't really be subtile without using hordes of minions or magic and to influence whole kingdoms subtility is required because unless dragons are made much stronger than in 3E they can't take on an entire kingdom.

Dragons influence the world by talking to people, brining people, threating people, making deals with people, etc.... It isn't necessary for every dragon to be able to use magic in order to influence the world around them. Since lots of GMs have been using dragons in this fashion for decades, it would seem to be a lack of imagination that inhibits other GMs from doing so as well.

From the answers in this thread so far it looks to me that most DMs sacrifice cohesion for plotwriting. Not that it is wrong, it allows you to easily write good plots withotu having to worry too much if that is even possible. Hollywood does it all the time.
But that is not what I am looking for.
And if I am wrong, then please do not use one word sentences but explain how your answer does fit into the world (See smoke example).

You are assuming that magic will trump everything in the same ways that it did in 3e. If the BBEG is a warlord or a rogue is he also useless without magic? Even in 3e, this is limited thinking.

Unless utility magic is completely removed in 4E most PCs and big NPC organizations will have access to it. And when a dragon does not have it it is at a disadvantage. Add that to all the other disadvantages dragons have (being not humanoid which makes it hard to deal with powerful humanoids) and them being masterminds becomes a hard thing to explain.

Good plotlines have to remain flexible enough to maintain themselves. No plotline that is written in stone can survive first contact with a clever party. In novel or screenplay writing, the author has control over all of the characters. In a good rpg campaign, the GM must be able to adapt the storyline so as to maintain interest and cohesion.

But that doesn't require that that the DM gives arbitrary powers to the BBEG. Imo it is more interesting when the BBEG has fixed powers so that the PC can outwith him. When they do the BBEG reacts accordingly but the PCs did score a victory.
Much better than arbitrary saying "the BBEG anticipated it and has ability X as counter" (and you just gave him ability X a few seconds ago).

There have been several viable theories presented in this thread. You have just found some reason to dismiss them.

I assure you I am not trolling. To me those reasons are logical.

It means exactly the same thing it would mean for every other BBEG who used smoke, mirrors, messengers, etc... to communicate.

See, thats what I mean with "dodging". You just say that they can do it, without explanation. Do you know what it means to use this method of communication? That it is slow and unreliable (especially in a monster filled world). Having huge centralized organisations (the one dragons tend to have) would be close to impossible. And the reaction time would be much too slow to do something against fast moving adventurers or NPCs who use magic for communication.

This is an extremely ignorant question. Of course I have. Every single thing that occurs in any of the many campaigns I've run has had a logical backstory. How nice of you to assume that everyone who disagrees with you is a mindless hack-and-slasher, or a mental defective who wouldn't know a backstory if it bit him in the backside.

See above.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Somehow I fail to see how you are able to stuff that many soldiers in such a small space so that everyone is affected by frightful presence. So, not 95% of all soldiers would flee, 5% would maybe. The rest will fire one or two salvos at the dragon and wound it soo much that the high level NPCs of the city can finish it off if the dragon doesn't flee.

Well, if you have trouble stuffing enough enemy soldiers in one place, how do you at all ensure that they all have a chance to attack the Dragon? I mean, it's not as if the Dragon couldn't just fly in the middle of the city and hide behind some buildings.

Historical knowledge doesn't automatically mean magical knowledge. Don't forget that this knowledge has to be so interesting for a wizard that he is willing to deal with a dragon.

Historical knowledge can be very useful in most settings to find magical knowledge.
"Oh, yeah, their used to be Kingdom of Arcanus back when I was still in my youth. They even had flying air ships, and used Golems for manual labor. Pretty advanced stuff, but they got this power all due to some schemes with some devils. That didn't turn out so well in the long run, and that kingdom crumbled. Well, it wasn't the first, and it wasn't the last to do that. Anyway, I know that a few of their Ruins lie south of here, but beware. They are heavily trapped. You know, I have explored them myself a little bit. If you want, I can give you some pointers that help to avoid the worst, but I might need a little bit in exchange for that.

.
See, thats what I mean with "dodging". You just say that they can do it, without explanation. Do you know what it means to use this method of communication? That it is slow and unreliable (especially in a monster filled world). Having huge centralized organisations (the one dragons tend to have) would be close to impossible. And the reaction time would be much too slow to do something against fast moving adventurers or NPCs who use magic for communication.

Slow and unreliable information is common in D&D settings. A Dragon would probably _not_ want to create an obviously centralized organisation where everybody can find the center (him) by just asking one of the random messengers across town. He will rely on a lot of "cells" operating without a lot of knowledge and using other groups to recieve the order. The slow speed works in both directions, and the dragon has the advantage of some redundancy. Sure, the party intercepted a messenger of a cell that knows a little bit more, but another cell might become aware of this and inform the Dragon (not neccessarily knowing that the cell was actually related to the Dragon, but knowing that something notable happened (like a guild house was attacked), and not neccessarily knowing that they informed the dragon).

It's not like someone just pops into existence and says: "There is Dragon behind this all, quickly, that messenger over there knows where his lair is, interrogate him and kill the beast!" Wandering adventurers will slowly connect dots between different activities and figure out that there is someone manpiulating the events, and they will eventually figure out where to look (and maybe they even learn what they have to expect). But their activities won't go unnoticed.

 

[Dausuul]

Somehow I fail to see how you are able to stuff that many soldiers in such a small space so that everyone is affected by frightful presence.

That "small space" is a radius of 30 feet per age category. For a mature adult red, that's 210 feet. Not so small... so let's talk about visibility.

The dragon will obviously be attacking at night. We'll be generous and say shadowy illumination, although an overcast, moonless night in a pre-industrial setting is a lot closer to total darkness. Hence, the dragon has concealment as it comes in, enabling it to Hide. It will of course cruise in at a leisurely 150 feet per round so as not to take any penalties due to movement.

At a range of 210 feet, the archers have a -21 to their Spot checks. A mature adult red with no ranks in Hide has a -8 Hide modifier due to size penalties. So the net result is that if most of the archers have +2 Spot (typical for a 1st-level warrior who put some cross-class ranks in), they have to roll 11 points higher than the dragon. A bit of number-crunching reveals that 11.25% of the archers will spot it at that range.

But wait! It gets better. Only the archers who are exactly 210 feet away will have an 11.25% chance to spot. The chance drops rapidly as they get further off. At 220 feet, it's 9%. At 230 feet, it's 7%. At 300 feet, they can't see it at all.

End result: Dragon glides in toward the city. We'll be insanely generous and suppose that all 500 of your magic-arrow-armed archers manage to get in the perfect "sweet spot" at 211 feet. On average, 56 of them will spot it and shoot. Of those, three will hit. 3d8+3 damage, woo. The dragon notices the arrows coming at it and angles in that direction, raking your archers with its frightful presence. Half the archers flee in terror, and the dragon is now beyond sight range for the other half; the only archers who can see it are those who already spotted it in the previous round (since it hasn't done anything to break line of sight).

Another volley from the guys who saw it, scoring maybe another two hits for 2d8+2. The dragon comes back. More terror. Then the dragon belches fire, killing a couple archers who made their saving throws, and setting a couple of buildings aflame. One round of arrows from the 25 archers who made their saves scores one last hit for 1d8+1. After that, the smoke will provide total concealment for the dragon as it burns and ravages... no more archery.

So, let's review. You have been given the following ridiculous advantages:

--Knowledge ahead of time that the dragon is coming
--Arrows pre-buffed and distributed to 500 archers
--Archers perfectly positioned to shoot at the dragon from 211 feet

With all these breaks--which you would hardly be likely to get in a real dragon-versus-city scenario--you managed to inflict 6d8+6 damage, averaging 33 damage, to a mature adult red dragon. Instead of 312 hit points, it now has 279. Oh noes. That's going to cripple it soooo badly when the PCs come to engage it.

Historical knowledge doesn't automatically mean magical knowledge.

Knowledge (Arcana) bloody well does. And historical knowledge is often very useful to a wizard.

Don't forget that this knowledge has to be so interesting for a wizard that he is willing to deal with a dragon.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

If you mean "combat encounter" with "enemy" then you are correct, dragons do not require spells for combat. They require spells outside of the combat to be effective masterminds. Dragons can't really be subtile without using hordes of minions or magic and to influence whole kingdoms subtility is required because unless dragons are made much stronger than in 3E they can't take on an entire kingdom.

No, they don't. A dragon is perfectly capable of being a mastermind without spells. It just has to, y'know, mastermind stuff. And as long as it's got a few human or human-looking agents to deliver its orders and carry out business transactions, it has all the subtlety it requires.

From the answers in this thread so far it looks to me that most DMs sacrifice cohesion for plotwriting.

No, we simply give a creature with genius-level intelligence credit for not being a total moron. Contrary to your repeated assertions, it is perfectly possible to be a powerful mastermind without being a spellslinger. Lots of people have demonstrated this in detail. Your counter-arguments have done no more than nibble at the edges of a few of the less well-constructed examples.

And the reaction time would be much too slow to do something against fast moving adventurers or NPCs who use magic for communication.

It's not hard to find a couple of minions who can teleport. Heck, if you can get a mid-level evil outsider working for you, a lot of them can do it at will. Of course, teleportation will be much less common in 4E... but that applies to the adventurers/NPCs too.