What About Dragons? (NOT the highest-level monster?)

[Mouseferatu]

I think Dragons made a strong resurgence in 3e, after losing some of the spotlight in late 1e and 2e (Dragonlance notwithstanding). So much so, in fact, that Dragons became the most thematic creatures in 3e (from "sorcerers as dragon scions" to "Draconic as a language" to "kobolds as sorcerers" to "Draconomicon" to "Dragon Magic" to "Tiamat as a full-blown goddess"). If I had to guess, I'd say Dragons will become a bit rarer in 4e and fiends will be a bit more common than they are now (starting with tieflings).

If this goes along with Tiamat and Bahamut being demoted back to "Unique and incredibly powerful dragons, but not true gods," I'm all for it.

 

[Wolfspider]

I suspect that dragons will lose most of their magical ability (as in actually being sorcerers and such) and become, like demons, mindless and primordial beasts.

I'm basing this theory on the fact that most of the fluff changes that have been made in D&D4e have totally been contrary to my own preferences, and the last thing I'd want to see is dragons as big, dumb lizards.

So bring on the fire-breathing iguanas... :\

 

[Mouseferatu]

I suspect that dragons will lose most of their magical ability (as in actually being sorcerers and such) and become, like demons, mindless and primordial beasts.

Except, of course, that nowhere in the article on demons did it say they're mindless. (And indeed, the author of the article chimed in on a messageboard to confirm that fact. Inherently destructive doesn't mean unintelligent.)

 

[Klaus]

I suspect that dragons will lose most of their magical ability (as in actually being sorcerers and such) and become, like demons, mindless and primordial beasts.

I'm basing this theory on the fact that most of the fluff changes that have been made in D&D4e have totally been contrary to my own preferences, and the last thing I'd want to see is dragons as big, dumb lizards.

So bring on the fire-breathing iguanas... :\

Me, I'd prefer if the dragons remained mostly the same, just lost all spellcasting ability. If I wanted a spellcasting dragon, I'd slap [3e]sorcerer[/3e] levels on it.

As for Tiamat and Bahamut, I *like* them as worshippable (is that a word?) entities. IMHO, they don't have to be full-blown gods for that, but I want them to be dragons so absurdly powerful that even Thor would think twice before facing either.

So, not quite gods, but they are to gods what dragons are to mortals.

 

[Mouseferatu]

As for Tiamat and Bahamut, I *like* them as worshippable (is that a word?) entities. IMHO, they don't have to be full-blown gods for that, but I want them to be dragons so absurdly powerful that even Thor would think twice before facing either.

So, not quite gods, but they are to gods what dragons are to mortals.

Blech.



Seriously, I like them as being more akin to demon lords: Something less than gods, something that a very high-level party could potentially challenge. It's what they were in 1E, and I'd like to go back. There are already draconic gods; no need to take the two greatest dragons out of the realm of actual playability and add them to the list.

(But then, I was against the promotion of Vecna to a true god, too. I don't see why really cool and powerful monsters/villains can't stay that way.)

 

[Reaper Steve]

I'm sure this won't happen, but I'd like to see dragons that are just of the western 'big rampaging beast' type. They don't need to plot, scheme, have magic, or even talk. They also don't need to follow the colors of the rainbow or types of metal.

I'm happy with the 'true dragon' concept from that age-old Dragon magazine. For variety, I'd like to see them build on the primordial/elemental concepts already fostered in the Demon/Devil article: give me a Fire Dragon, an Ice Dragon, a Rock Dragon, and a Swamp Dragon.

 

[CleverNickName]

Honestly, D&D dragons suck. They're a horrible hybrid of western "big rampaging animal" dragons with norse "ancient lizard that slumbers on a pile of gold" dragons and with eastern "ancient magical shapechanging spellcasting being which intervenes in the lot of mankind" dragons.

I totally agree...the blended flavor of dragons might make them more universally-fitting to campaigns everywhere, but it dulls them so much that they become bland.

I know that it is old-hat, and I know that it is entirely a matter of my own personal opinion (and bias) but I really like the Tolkien dragon...intelligent and quick-witted, and undeniably powerful, but not a spellcaster or a shapeshifter. Smaug will always be my ideal dragon.

If I ruled WOTC for a day, the first thing I'd do is separate out the dragon archetypes into different dragons. I'd be guided in dragon design by archetype, not by a box of crayons.

I can see the color of a dragon being something like a racial variant...like any other race. For example, black dragons get their own racial tree of abilities, that progress from being able to corrupt water at low levels, to being able to control reptiles at higher levels. Be that as it may, I would also like to see a "generic" dragon tree, for those DMs who do not want their dragons to be governed by the color of their hide.

Pretend they are elves. You have your standard elf, with its own standard tree of racial abilities...but you also have your black elves (drow), your gold elves (high elves), your green elves (wood elves), and so forth.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Where is the draconic love?

I am so bloody sick of this turn of phrase, by the way.

 

[RavinRay]

Seriously, I like them as being more akin to demon lords: Something less than gods, something that a very high-level party could potentially challenge. It's what they were in 1E, and I'd like to go back. There are already draconic gods; no need to take the two greatest dragons out of the realm of actual playability and add them to the list.

Which of Io's other children are you talking about? And Tiamat is the name of a goddess, so why strip her godhood? Oh wait, Dagon is the name of a Philistine god, but he's just an obyrith demon in the game. Orcus is the name of a Roman god, but he's just a tanar'ri demon in the game.

So if dragons lose their spellcasting levels, they're gonna be more like their planar and lung cousins, huh?

 

[CleverNickName]

I am so bloody sick of this turn of phrase, by the way.

Erm...sorry if I offended.