D&D General What if every dragon was unique?

Yes!!! They really ruined Dragons when they made them "run of the mill" and easily defeated by a small party of heroes. Dragons should be a campaign ending foe, not a "monster of the week" feature.
They did not "ruin" dragons. D&D dragons have always been meant to be used at all levels of play -- which is convenient given the name of the game.

I love city buster, apocalyptic warms too, but that isn't what dragons are "supposed to be" any more than St George style angry crocodiles.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

This is one of the reasons I liked the 2e Van Richten’s Guides which applied the same idea to the horror themed monsters: unique vampires, mummies, ghosts, lycanthropes and the like.
 

How do you catch a unique dragon?

Unique up on him.

Drums Eye Roll GIF
 

Rather than the major chromatics being a species of dragons and collection of those that grow from egg to ancient wyrm, could D&D instead be a space where every dragon has different abilities, different temperaments and different looks?

They already are, as your example of Themberchaud shows.

The question I would have is what are you losing and gaining by such a change?

I don't honestly think you gain anything at all. While it's a really good thing if each DM pours creativity into each monster that they create and gives them personalities, temperaments, memorable appearance and different abilities, you already have that. If you don't utilize it, you can't blame the game for it.

What you lose by making everything wholly unique is any sense that the players might have that the world is predictable and sensible and knowable. For all your creativity you end up with Nitro Ferguson's "Kraag Wurld".

One thing that you should always avoid as a GM is the temptation to do something solely to impress, intimidate or terrify your players. A very little "Gotcha" goes a very long ways. Imagining how an encounter is going to play out for balance reasons is a good thing. Imagining the emotional reactions of your players to your creation is probably not a good thing.

Forcing yourself to make every single encounter that diverse and original is also probably not good for your sanity or prep time as a GM. Having a set of stat blocks to work from and inspire creativity or just grab because now you need a random encounter is a good thing.

When I set about making dragons have the lore that I wanted I created this thread: AD&D 1E - Revised and rebalanced dragons for 1e AD&D

There is a massive amount of diversity just in that. Five chromatic dragons in three sizes of two sexes of ten age categories some with wings and some without, some lithe and sinuous, some talking, some with spells, some especially poisonous, some with multiple heads. There are like 500 or 600 combinations even before I get into sea dragons, turtle dragons, shadow dragons, and metallics, undead dragons and half-dragons and all the diverse drakes that inhabit my campaign world.

Dragons appear in all sorts in my campaign world, from hatchlings looking for new territory to settle, to young adult marauders, to ancient things with vast wastes and desolations around them where civilization is rolled back and none dare tread.
 

You absolutely could, but the main advantage of having specific kinds of dragons have specific kinds of attacks and personalities is Branding. And I don't mean just IP Branding, but "Communicating a large amount of information with just a few words." When I say Black Dragon, you don't know everything about that dragon, but you suddenly have a lot of attacks, strengths, weaknesses, behaviors, and maybe even some ecological information pop into your head. Possibly even some stories about black dragons that appeared in novels!

This also lets us build a shared experience we can yammer about on the forums.

So, unique dragons are great for homebrew settings! But not so much for D&D. Though, it's fair to say most games benefit from having a mix of branded and cosmopolitan monsters. So dragons could transition from branded to cosmopolitan, but I don't think making everything cosmopolitan is a desirable goal.
 



This has been done.....

Back in 2E Ed Greenwood had a bunch of articles, Wyrms of the North, each one was a very unique dragon. And they were featured in some other FR books. Each had unique powers, abilities and other things.

5E went back to "dragons are monsters for you to kill"
 

I lose nothing by making monsters wholly unique. I gain the ability to suprise and frighten players by having monsters who's abilities are unknown. That means there is never a "oh whatever it's just a [insert monster] you only need to worry about it's X ability and it's vulnerable to Y" reaction. It means the world is not predictable, it's mysterious and fantastical. Plus, I'm making a game (and monsters) for MY players at MY table, not for people NOT at my table. Plus, this is often cited as advice in various games as a way to stop encounters from becoming "run of the mill" experiences. I also don't need to spend a ton of time creating a new monster from scratch. It's usually pretty simple to take a monster and add or tweak one or two abilities and away you go.
 

If he's different, he's unique. And if you really want to apply some sliding scale of uniqueness, then to be truly unique he must be the only dragon.
I guess I'm suggesting an approach to dragons similar to Ghostfire's Arora species rules, where no one is a mere human (elf, whatever), but a unique blend of abilities and personalities.
 

Remove ads

Top