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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mirrorrorrim" data-source="post: 9722639" data-attributes="member: 7040132">The below comments are not facts. They are only my rambling opinions, as a hardcore FR fan that embraced every edition and paradigm shift of the FR, and is NOT against exploring changes made during time-jumps.A martial "Warlord"/Military Leader has proven to be a popular character concept since 4E. Purple Dragon Knights are military knights. The leadership theme fits them, which is why I believe it was chosen back when SCAG was published. The problem with the SCAG design is that it failed to meet muster. It was mechanically weak and unimpressive. But with the new 2024 power-level paradigm, it can be fixed. I think they could go so far as to overtune it a little bit and I honestly think that would help a lot in meeting the fans' desires for another variant of a warlord-like fighter. Also, Banneret is a more generic title and can be selected to represent all kinds of military leaders, both good and evil. It's more useful to more tables and character concepts. I agree that this would be the best path for this particular book.As for a Dragon-Rider Knight, that is a popular character concept that is fine in fiction, like Dragonlance or Pern novels, because fiction does not have to be balanced against other character concepts for a collaborative RPG. Dragons in D&D are intelligent and are more powerful than any individual player character. Narratively, the power-fantasy of a dragon rider does not fit into the power/design paradigm of D&D classes, let alone a single D&D subclass. It is so powerful that the character shouldn't even become a real dragon-rider until much higher levels, and therefore fails the litmus test of qualifying as a dragon-rider for most of the class levels. Also, no dragon wyrmling should be let out of the nest to become the pet of a 3rd level knight, and a Young Dragon is too powerful a pet.Now as for how to make a the popular Dragon-rider Knight work in 5E in a future book? A generic Dragon Knight Paladin subclass that has a special subclass ability to use the Find Steed spell to summon a variant dragon statblock (and the paladin gets to pick the dragon type) is totally possible. It's not a real dragon and has built-in parameters and limitations. I'd be down for that. Some Purple Dragon Knight paladins might select such a subclass, but it wouldn't be ubiquitous in, or limited to, that organization.As for FR and monster lore, Amethyst dragons are not good guys. They do not fit the understood alignment, theme, or mission of Cormyr or the PDKs. Color isn't enough to pair those two design components up. I understand if it would be a convenient narrative link, but I'm sorry, it doesn't work. Trust me, I considered it myself. In fact, here is my own attempt at a lore update that might allow for it:[SPOILER="Amethyst Dragons and Cormyr pitch"]Let's just say that at some point since the lore of the 4E Spellplague-era, with the Abolethic Sovereignity and other otherworldly threats causing issues, Gem Dragons became more prevalent in FR. Let's say a family of Amethyst Dragons arrived and decided to claim some mountains in the Eastern Storm Horns because they were opposed to a rising threat of Phaerimm (or other aberrations) from Anauroch to the North. The matriarch and patriarch of this family were curious about this Realm of the Purple Dragon, this realm of people who were obsessed with the concept of Purple Dragons, let alone having never met one. Playing the part of noble, majestic dragon neighbors, they could have offered an alliance with the local mortal nation, as it would give each other access to military allies to help defend against or destroy aberrant threats from Anauroch and other regions. After some years of integration, there could be a dozen+ amethyst dragons, most of them young, who got paired up with purple dragon knights who've proven themselves worthy.I could see a passionate Cormyrean monarch and nation embracing such an alliance and shift if the dragons were just as dedicated to it (maybe hoping to influence the alignment of Corymr's leadership). But I also admit that this would be purely brand new lore invented primarily to hijack and re-define the concept of Purple Dragons of Cormyr. It also does not solve the issue that real dragon mounts do not fit the power-level limitations of subclass design. It's the kind of thing a DM offers for a personalized campaign that break the norms of a normal table.[/SPOILER]However, you know what? There are already multiple pieces of Cormyr/PDK art portraying Amethyst Dragon silhouettes (obvious floating amethyst crystal shards) on the heraldry. You can't ignore the change in a nation's heraldry. I think it's too late to change whatever lore they planned for this. We are going to see something change, and if the forums are any indication, not everyone is going to be happy.Me? I have an unfettered and open imagination and already have possible variants in mind. Maybe the writers can win me over with their ideas, too. But there are many others that hate any kind of change. We'll see what the writers come up with.</blockquote>

Verification