D&D 5E (2024) Opinions on the Topaz Dragon Reverse Wings?

[Charlaquin]

 

[RoughCoronet0]

I love it, and I'm really happy to see the weirdness of the gem dragons being kept and even leaned into more in the art.

 

[kigmatzomat]

Think I preferred the "crystal film" wings. It was more surreal. For a dragon that lives in a necrotic environment, that glassy "immune to cosmic decay" look makes sense.

 

[pukunui]

Didn't like it in Fizban's, and I don't like it here either.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I have always disliked this design concept. I dislike it even more than the other 5e designs. And I really, REALLY hate the new Gold dragon.

It looks stupid beyond belief.

This.

Where others might see this as "oh, it's so obviously fantastical because it wouldn't work IRL!", I just...see how it wouldn't work.

Like...it's like showing me one of those pictures where you have three mutually-interlocking gears.

No, seeing something like this is not going to make me think "Wow! What crazy power must be in play to make this ridiculous, impossible thing actually work!?"

It's just going to make me think various negative thoughts--and remind me of just how much I'm already suspending disbelief.

Edit: I've just realized what specific thing this is, that makes it different from something like Escher's impossible staircase.

This is banal impossibility. It doesn't spark wonder, it leaves me disappointed.

 

[Demetrios1453]

Given that gem dragons now have floating gems as part of their bodies, having other impossible body features seems fine to me.

This. Gem dragons are supposed to be a bit weird.

Also, I like how the art has both yellow and blue topaz components.

The book is due out in little over a week, and I can't wait to look through it. All the art we've seen from it looks spectacular.

 

[Corinnguard]

The only version of the 2024 Gem Dragons that I like so far is the Amethyst Dragon. The Topaz Dragon's body is okay; I can go with it. But the reverse wings give me the impression that it can only do the backstroke when it flies. Luckily that feature can be ignored by any DM for a pair of regular wings.

 

[cbwjm]

I hate it.

 

[Tonguez]

Enantiornithes are extinct bird-like avialans distinctive for having 'backward wings', so maybe the Topaz dragon followed that similar 'opposite' wing articulation, not quite what the image depicts, but not impossible given that dragons are significantly larger than the enantiornithes fossil we know

 

[Corinnguard]

Enantiornithes are instinct bird-like avialans distinctive for having 'backward wings', so maybe the Topaz dragon followed that similar 'opposite' wing articulation, not quite what the image depicts, but not impossible given that dragons are significantly larger than the enantiornithes fossil we know

Interesting that the designers of the Topaz Dragon decided to use the wing anatomy of Enantiornithes (Ancient Greek for "opposite birds") for them. I looked them up on Wikipedia. The 'backward wings' are the result of a convex scapula and a concave coracoid. Modern birds have a concave scapula and a convex coracoid.