Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="doctorhook" data-source="post: 5207185" data-attributes="member: 58401">Awesome pic, and thanks for pointing out the article. That's exactly the kind of thing I'm looking for.Fair enough. Personally, I really like the new statblock format. As far as descriptions go though, I'm sorta of the opinion that a picture is worth a thousand words... and I'm certain there's lots of people who disagree with me.Haha I knew someone was gonna point that one out. Yes, I've seen that picture. It seems to be the only thing close to a clear picture of a mithral dragon in Draconomicon 2, and I don't think it's very clear -- the dragon is practically hidden in the shadows of that picture. We don't get a great view of its face and head, nor is it clear what shade its scales are supposed to be.I think the worst part about that picture is that it doesn't seem (to me, at least) to match that book's physical description of mithral dragons. The book says that mithral dragons grow to have silver-coloured scales with white streaks -- this is ambivalent from the picture. The book says, "(a) ring of spikes crowns a mithral's head, and small spikes extend down its neck," a description which I don't think really fits the dragon in the picture. Most noticeably though, the book says, "The dragon's wings consist of radiant energy instead of flesh," which definitely doesn't match with the picture in the book.After reading the ecology article linked above, I'm inclined to believe that the description in the book is wrong, or at least incomplete; the article talks about the radiance and shows a picture of it, but also shows several pictures of mithral dragons with fleshy wings. Suffice to say, I think this confusion could've been avoided with more pictures of this monster in Draconomicon 1... or at least a more carefully selected one, alongside a better description.[/tangent]Oh, this guy. I remember him now. I don't like his art very much... it's just too plain for my tastes, I think. And I never liked that sunken-eyed goblin picture of his that seemed to be everywhere.</blockquote>

Verification