Survivor Monster Types- DRAGON WINS!

[Maxperson]

Yeah, such a shame when the monster the entire game is actually named after wins.

They're overused at this point. Not that undead was much better, but at least there are undead creatures that aren't vampires and zombies to use.

 

[Grognerd]

They're overused at this point. Not that undead was much better, but at least there are undead creatures that aren't vampires and zombies to use.

Uh, again: LITERALLY the name of the game. That's kind of like complaining that Ars Magica had too many magi and Pendragon has too many knights...

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[77IM]

I'm surprised there's so much love for giants. To me they are the most boring monster possible: "Yeah it's just a regular dude, but bigger."

 

[Gradine]

I'm surprised there's so much love for giants. To me they are the most boring monster possible: "Yeah it's just a regular dude, but bigger."

This. There are few things more iconic to D&D than Dragons vs Giants, but there are also few things more cliche in D&D. They're both big proponents of palette swaps (though at least giants have been getting somewhat more interesting in the meantime) (well not hill giants I guess); their use is mostly limited to NPCs since they can only be properly fought by parties of fairly high level, which through my very scientific anecdotal research approximately <checks notes> zero percent of D&D parties reach; every iteration of D&D has made aerial combat a giant pain in the ass (pun very much intended), so it's hard to run dragons "properly" without making PCs feel like useless sitting ducks; giants are mostly variant themed buckets of HP.

Both monster types harken back to the old old days of D&D and its older influences, which means most people are generally going to fall into two camps:

(1) People for whom dragons and giants play to certain kind of nostalgia for gamers who miss those old old days
(2) People who realize that the fantasy genre has evolved way beyond those days and has made room for far more interesting stories

There's a value statement in that, and I'm willing to admit that they reflect my values; I'm not trying to crap on anyone preferences. I'm just saying that there's plenty more reasons to downvote dragons than the typical Survivor Thread contrariness.


PS: Re the "name" thing; to me at least that's incidental. I'd be playing the game whether it was called "Dungeons & Dragons", "Mazes & Monsters", "Swords & Serpents", or "Griffins & Gargoyles".



PPS: Okay, maybe not "Mazes & Monsters", I saw what that game almost did to Tom Hanks!

 

[Lanefan]

Both monster types harken back to the old old days of D&D and its older influences, which means most people are generally going to fall into two camps:

(1) People for whom dragons and giants play to certain kind of nostalgia for gamers who miss those old old days
(2) People who realize that the fantasy genre has evolved way beyond those days and has made room for far more interesting stories

There's a value statement in that, and I'm willing to admit that they reflect my values; I'm not trying to crap on anyone preferences. I'm just saying that there's plenty more reasons to downvote dragons than the typical Survivor Thread contrariness.

One of which reasons was, in my case, to upvote Giants.

And one person's "fantasy game has evolved" is another's "fantasy game has gone to hell in a handcart"...just sayin'

Still, second place for Giants in a Survivor in which the only real race all along was for who would be the last non-Dragon standing - I'll take that.

 

[Gradine]

And one person's "fantasy game has evolved" is another's "fantasy game has gone to hell in a handcart"...just sayin'

I would not discount that at all. Disagree, yes, but never discount

 

[StormbringerAUS]

It's Halloween and the Undead DO have a way of rising again. Keep a watch on this thread … just in case.

Dragon 11
Necromancer 0

So

Dragon 11 -2 = 9
Undead Giant 0 + 1 = 1

 

[Maxperson]

Dragon 11 -2 -2 = 7
Undead Giant 0 + 1 +1 = 2

 

[TiwazTyrsfist]

This. There are few things more iconic to D&D than Dragons vs Giants, but there are also few things more cliche in D&D. They're both big proponents of palette swaps (though at least giants have been getting somewhat more interesting in the meantime) (well not hill giants I guess); their use is mostly limited to NPCs since they can only be properly fought by parties of fairly high level, which through my very scientific anecdotal research approximately <checks notes> zero percent of D&D parties reach; every iteration of D&D has made aerial combat a giant pain in the ass (pun very much intended), so it's hard to run dragons "properly" without making PCs feel like useless sitting ducks; giants are mostly variant themed buckets of HP.

Both monster types harken back to the old old days of D&D and its older influences, which means most people are generally going to fall into two camps:

(1) People for whom dragons and giants play to certain kind of nostalgia for gamers who miss those old old days
(2) People who realize that the fantasy genre has evolved way beyond those days and has made room for far more interesting stories

There's a value statement in that, and I'm willing to admit that they reflect my values; I'm not trying to crap on anyone preferences. I'm just saying that there's plenty more reasons to downvote dragons than the typical Survivor Thread contrariness.


PS: Re the "name" thing; to me at least that's incidental. I'd be playing the game whether it was called "Dungeons & Dragons", "Mazes & Monsters", "Swords & Serpents", or "Griffins & Gargoyles".



PPS: Okay, maybe not "Mazes & Monsters", I saw what that game almost did to Tom Hanks!

What about Bunnies & Burrows?