D&D 5E MM Firesnake up on Christopher Burdett's Blog

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

here is the quotes that changed my minds...

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=16152989&postcount=13

I'm sure a storm giant toddler can level a village, but we'll never know because no one will ever publish combat stats for one. Because we all understand that no matter how potentially dangerous that 3-year-old storm giant could be, it's more than a little uncomfortable for a bunch of grown men and women to sit around a table and pretend to kill a child. The only difference between a baby giant and a hatchling dragon is the exact point you start to feel bad about it. Remember, there are also stats on baby gold dragons, so every argument about how dangerous they are and need to be fought to protect the town sort of goes out the window right there.

Basically, I've never argued that the baby dragons in RAW D&D are "harmwess widdle dwagons." I've argued that there should not be baby dragons in RAW D&D at all. There shouldn't be published newborn stats on anything that is sapient, period. It's creepy and weird and actually encourages exactly this sort of debate when I think we'd all be better off not spending our time debating under what circumstances it is or is not cool to murder alien babies.

At any rate, this isn't much of a fight worth having since even Wizards realized that it was sort of an uncomfortable idea. That's why in 4e they make a point of calling out that even the "young" dragons in the book are still mature specimens. And all they had to do was scale down the front-end difficulty so that they could start showing up around 5th level. It's a rare case of figuring out that they could sidestep the unfortunate implications without actually sacrificing any gameplay.

and http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=16153403&postcount=28

Here are the stats you actually need for a hatchling dragon:

Movement: Gets away if you let it.
Saving Throws: Miraculously survives all accidents.
Armor Class: You hit.
Hit Points: Congratulations, Baby-Killer.
Special Qualities: I hope you can live with yourself.

Coincidentally, these are the same exact stats for every other species of baby.

and http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=16153660&postcount=37

Dragons are made-up. We made them up. Every detail that you just wrote was made up by a writer working for TSR or Wizards. Saying, "It's OK to fight baby dragons because they're intelligent right out of the egg," is like saying, "It's OK to fight baby dragons because they made it OK to fight baby dragons." Maybe that's true but it doesn't really address whether or not they should have made it OK.

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

There was a time I had not thought of it myself. There was an discussion on GitPG last year that put it best. Once I saw it I couldn't unsee it. Why, why is it ok to kill a child, any child?

I'll try to do the giant Justice.

What makes a Dragon child different from a lion cub, or a bear cub? A full grown adult hunter taking down a lion cub isn't sport, but an Adventurer taking down a Dragon that just hatched?

Dragons are not real.

This is only a game.

Step away from the caffeine.


It's pretty sad when political correctness finds its way into gaming like this to this level. Next, every dungeon will have to have latrines. Then, men and women's latrine. Then, men, women, and monster latrines.


Ok, you do get how ludicrous the baby concept is, right?


Or do I have to take it a step further? Don't attack female monsters. That's domestic violence. A man should never ever ever strike a woman under any circumstance.


Let me go back to the concept "it's only a game".

ok, so first you need to understand that I will go toe to toe with any guy... I don't need some guy to tell me that "don't hit her she's only a woman" that is pure Political Correctness... maybe "Don't hit people because she's a person... and people shouldn't hit other people." should be the idea.

maybe there should be a latrine in dungeons where people live... but that is world building... right now I mean we shouldn't be fantasizing about killing babies

 

[77IM]

Do you remember the scene in The Fellowship of the Ring when the Uruk-Hai hatches out of the muck? Several scenes later, Aragorn's killing them left and right. But they could not have been more than a few weeks old.

Was that an act of baby-killing? What's the difference? Why would it matter?

(I am genuinely curious and not trying to bait/troll... My own kids will be old enough to role-play soon and I'm trying o figure out where to draw the line regarding various sorts of fantasy violence.)

 

[MarkB]

Do you remember the scene in The Fellowship of the Ring when the Uruk-Hai hatches out of the muck? Several scenes later, Aragorn's killing them left and right. But they could not have been more than a few weeks old.

Was that an act of baby-killing? What's the difference? Why would it matter?

(I am genuinely curious and not trying to bait/troll... My own kids will be old enough to role-play soon and I'm trying o figure out where to draw the line regarding various sorts of fantasy violence.)

There's a fair argument to be made that the Uruk-hai were never infants - unless Saruman had a really good educational programme, they were 'born' with all the strength, intelligence and knowledge of adults.

Then again, to use a similar fantastical example, I was always immensely uncomfortable with the morality of the second and third Star Wars prequel movies throwing millions of just-a-few-years-old force-grown clone troopers straight into a war.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

There's a fair argument to be made that the Uruk-hai were never infants - unless Saruman had a really good educational programme, they were 'born' with all the strength, intelligence and knowledge of adults.

Then again, to use a similar fantastical example, I was always immensely uncomfortable with the morality of the second and third Star Wars prequel movies throwing millions of just-a-few-years-old force-grown clone troopers straight into a war.

Fire Snakes are smarter then Orcs (Not by much but they are) and turn into fully grown Salamanders in less then a year.

 

[Steely Dan]

They don't even stay like that for a year anyway. For all you know that snake is about to turn into a full grown Salamander.

Watching the original Alien film the other night, and it struck me again how quickly that thing grows from a vibrator-on-a-skateboard to this large humanoid (African guy in a suit).

 

[13garth13]

Alien has already been mentioned...

....and don't tell me that you wouldn't try to stomp that sweet little xenomorph baby as soon as it exploded from your mate's torso! Worse yet, you let that cute lil' thing live and pretty soon it is eating everything that moves.

But for wyrmlings....ah, cast your minds back to the early 80s and a wonderfully dark (metaphorically and literally....I don't think I saw blue, sunny sky in the entire movie, although it was over 30 years ago, so I could be mis-remembering) PG-rated "kids" move called Dragonslayer. Remember what happens to the princess and what the little baby dragons are doing to her when the hero finally arrives on the scene to rescue her?

Bottom line, I understand why the topic of monstrous infanticide is a touchy one, but it's hardly one that hasn't ever seen the light of day in film and fiction and I certainly don't see why it should automatically be off limits in a D&D game.

Some things are just rotten little terrors waiting to grow up into malevolent flesh-eaters that will destroy/devour everyone you care about. Better kill 'em while they're still easy to defeat
Cheers,
Colin

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

Do you remember the scene in The Fellowship of the Ring when the Uruk-Hai hatches out of the muck? Several scenes later, Aragorn's killing them left and right. But they could not have been more than a few weeks old.

Was that an act of baby-killing? What's the difference? Why would it matter?

(I am genuinely curious and not trying to bait/troll... My own kids will be old enough to role-play soon and I'm trying o figure out where to draw the line regarding various sorts of fantasy violence.)

The difference is how they are presented... Hatchlings are baby Dragons, Uruk-Hai are already fully grown bad assses...

same stats with a different description would work just fine, just leave off "hatchling" tag

 

[13garth13]

The difference is how they are presented... Hatchlings are baby Dragons, Uruk-Hai are already fully grown bad assses...

same stats with a different description would work just fine, just leave off "hatchling" tag

And, again, allow me to present, "Dragonslayer" (I just checked, it's from 1981, for what it's worth), where a princess is fed by mama dragon (Vermithrax Pejorative....thank you Wikipedia) to her hatchlings, and upon finding the lovely princess being devoured by the hatchlings (seriously, for a PG movie, I recall it being shockingly graphic, like with tearing meat sound effects and even the princess's foot being torn off and gulped down) the hero slays the two little critters.

And what exactly is wrong with this?

The hatchlings are just little baby animals being fed by their mom, no different really than a lioness feeding her cubs torn up pieces of zebra or wildebeast........but they are going to turn into fire-breathing monsters of enormous size and appetite. So, wherein lies the problem, from the perspective of a medieval warrior or wizard, of destroying the evil before it gets to the point where it will devour entire villages?

Cheers,
Colin

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

And, again, allow me to present, "Dragonslayer" (I just checked, it's from 1981, for what it's worth), where a princess is fed by mama dragon (Vermithrax Pejorative....thank you Wikipedia) to her hatchlings, and upon finding the lovely princess being devoured by the hatchlings (seriously, for a PG movie, I recall it being shockingly graphic, like with tearing meat sound effects and even the princess's foot being torn off and gulped down) the hero slays the two little critters.

And what exactly is wrong with this?

The hatchlings are just little baby animals being fed by their mom, no different really than a lioness feeding her cubs torn up pieces of zebra or wildebeast........but they are going to turn into fire-breathing monsters of enormous size and appetite. So, wherein lies the problem, from the perspective of a medieval warrior or wizard, of destroying the evil before it gets to the point where it will devour entire villages?

Cheers,
Colin

OK, lets take this apart bit by bit.

Inless I am wrong (please correct me I don't know the movie from before my time)we have the following scenario:

There is an evil Dragon (female) who kidnaped a princess. The Dragon is a mother (tee hee). There are 2 hatchling baby Dragons who need food. The Mother dragon feeds them the princess as if she were a cow.

now, my question is this, lets take the dragon out.

The evil Elven Necromancer has two elven children. She kidnaps a princess, and cuts her up and feeds her to her 4 year old daughter and 3 year old son.

wait, that may not be fair lets try again... lets use something else...um

The evil serial killer kidnaps a woman, and feeds her to there 2 preteen children...

so do we A) kill the kids, or B) adopt the kids and teach them right from wrong??