D&D General Which Edition Had The Best Dragons?

[dave2008]

CR is so messed up that it was easier to drop it and make something fresh. I ported in 4E's monster & encounter design idea of one standard monster per PC. Fixed the math accordingly and tweaked it from there. Works far better for me than CR ever did.

Yes, that is fine for your own use - but I like to share. It become troublesome to explain why my statblocks are different from standard and that it was on purpose!

 

[dave2008]

CR is so messed up that it was easier to drop it and make something fresh. I ported in 4E's monster & encounter design idea of one standard monster per PC. Fixed the math accordingly and tweaked it from there. Works far better for me than CR ever did.

PS - care to share your work. I had a thread on these forums about doing that based on creating and "average" PC - but I never finished

 

[overgeeked]

Yes, that is fine for your own use - but I like to share. It become troublesome to explain why my statblocks are different from standard and that it was on purpose!

Why would you have to explain it?

PS - care to share your work. I had a thread on these forums about doing that based on creating and "average" PC - but I never finished

It's fluctuating, but here's the gist.

Standard monsters.

AC follows the DMG chart, except level 9 is fixed to 17. They either got their math wrong or intentionally changed it to verify if someone copied their chart.

HP is 8 at 1st level and +4 per level thereafter.

Modifier is +5 at 1st level and +1 every odd level, so +6 at 3rd, +7 at 5th, etc. Use this for all their checks...attacks, skills, abilities, etc.

Standard monsters get 1 attack each.

Average damage is 3 at 1st level and +2 every level thereafter. I roll 1d5 at 1st level, 1d5+1 at 2nd, then 2d6+X from 3rd. This gives your damage more consistency over time and so is less spiky except for crits. High modifier, low variability.

Save DCs are the attack bonus +7, so 12 at 1st and 2nd, 13 at 3rd and 4th, etc.

Clocks are 2. Clocks are like clocks and countdowns from BitD. Two successful checks to overcome that obstacle whether it's bribery, persuasion, intimidation, etc. This opens up encounters to more than just combat.

A medium encounter is 1 standard monster per PC. An easy encounter is 1 standard monster per 2 PCs. A hard encounter is 3 standard monsters per 2 PCs. A deadly encounter is 2 monsters per 1 PC.

You can also combine these to make a solo. Add together the HP, number of attacks, and clocks.

Use this like you would 4E monster math for encounter design. Only have 2 players show up or have a full table of 9 players tonight, do some quick math and you have an appropriate encounter. No more worrying about it.

Most of that comes from Blog of Holding's 5E MM on a business card. I started there and tweaked it to allow more flexibility, i.e. 4E monster design.

 

[dave2008]

Why would you have to explain it?

Because either people asked or said I was doing it wrong (because they didn't read my explanation). It got tiresome.

It's fluctuating, but here's the gist.

Standard monsters.

AC follows the DMG chart, except level 9 is fixed to 17. They either got their math wrong or intentionally changed it to verify if someone copied their chart.

HP is 8 at 1st level and +4 per level thereafter.

Modifier is +5 at 1st level and +1 every odd level, so +6 at 3rd, +7 at 5th, etc. Use this for all their checks...attacks, skills, abilities, etc.

Standard monsters get 1 attack each.

Average damage is 3 at 1st level and +2 every level thereafter. I roll 1d5 at 1st level, 1d5+1 at 2nd, then 2d6+X from 3rd. This gives your damage more consistency over time and so is less spiky except for crits. High modifier, low variability.

Save DCs are the attack bonus +7, so 12 at 1st and 2nd, 13 at 3rd and 4th, etc.

Clocks are 2. Clocks are like clocks and countdowns from BitD. Two successful checks to overcome that obstacle whether it's bribery, persuasion, intimidation, etc. This opens up encounters to more than just combat.

A medium encounter is 1 standard monster per PC. An easy encounter is 1 standard monster per 2 PCs. A hard encounter is 3 standard monsters per 2 PCs. A deadly encounter is 2 monsters per 1 PC.

You can also combine these to make a solo. Add together the HP, number of attacks, and clocks.

Use this like you would 4E monster math for encounter design. Only have 2 players show up or have a full table of 9 players tonight, do some quick math and you have an appropriate encounter. No more worrying about it.

Most of that comes from Blog of Holding's 5E MM on a business card. I started there and tweaked it to allow more flexibility, i.e. 4E monster design.

Ok, not sure how you came up with your numbers, but I am doing it a bit differently. First I am creating my numbers by averaging a representative PC from the Wizard, Cleric, Fighter, and Rogue classes, with assumptions for ASI, Feats, and Magic Items.

Then distribute those numbers to give an even spread across PC levels attack and defense. One standard monster will equal this "standard" PC. At least that was my plan, I only go through 3 classes.

I don't want to prescribe number of attacks and such. However, I will bring back elite and paragon (4e solo) monsters that are equal to 2x and 4x a standard monster at the same level.

 

[Tonguez]

Any particular reason? Especially as they, I'm pretty sure, are the hardest to use of any edition (except maybe 3.0)

I never played 4 so cant comment on that (though the concensus here seems to be it was excellent)

I didnt find the tables in the 3.5 iteration hard to use and liked that I could compare different ages at a glance - especially as I'd put them on a separate tactics card once I'd decided which one to use. I also liked that with templates, different spell selections, feats and things each dragon could be customized to be unique

 

[dave2008]

I also liked that with templates, different spell selections, feats and things each dragon could be customized to be unique

I mean, you can still do that in 5e.

 

[Tonguez]

I mean, you can still do that in 5e.

yes, yes you can, but I like the 3.5e ones better

 

[overgeeked]

Because either people asked or said I was doing it wrong (because they didn't read my explanation). It got tiresome.


Ok, not sure how you came up with your numbers, but I am doing it a bit differently. First I am creating my numbers by averaging a representative PC from the Wizard, Cleric, Fighter, and Rogue classes, with assumptions for ASI, Feats, and Magic Items.

Then distribute those numbers to give an even spread across PC levels attack and defense. One standard monster will equal this "standard" PC. At least that was my plan, I only go through 3 classes.

I don't want to prescribe number of attacks and such. However, I will bring back elite and paragon (4e solo) monsters that are equal to 2x and 4x a standard monster at the same level.

I got most of the numbers from Blog of Holding’s 5E MM on a Business Card.

For average damage, I tried all the fancy math you mention. Average this or that. Min vs max CON mod, race, feats, etc. It was a mess. So instead I went with what I call the wizard’s 1/2 rule. Take the average HP of the wizard of a given level and divide by 2. That’s the average damage of a hit. It scales perfectly and keeps everyone on their toes. No one shots without a crit. But still meaty enough to make the players pay attention.

I do number of attacks so the PCs don’t win just because of action economy. I either use 1 standard per PC with 1 attack each or a solo with attacks equal to the number of PCs.

 

[Corinnguard]

3.0/3.5 edition IMO had the best dragons, not just for the books that @RoughCoronet0 mentioned, but also for the number of dragons mentioned in Dragon Magazine. It had articles on some of the lesser known True Dragons- ferrous dragons, planar dragons, Hex Dragons, and Tome Dragons. It had two articles on Dragon Monster classes- one for Chromatic dragons and the other for Metallic dragons.

4e certainly had a number of interesting dragons. I liked the fact that they expanded the number of Chromatic and Metallic dragons beyond the Rule of 5. I wish 5e had brought them over, we need more kinds of Dragonborn to choose from.

There needs to be a TTRPG general thread for which RPG series has the best dragons.

 

[dave2008]

I do number of attacks so the PCs don’t win just because of action economy. I either use 1 standard per PC with 1 attack each or a solo with attacks equal to the number of PCs.

Those are all good ideas, but a bit to gamist for my personal taste.

To be clear, I don't think gamist is a bad thing and make conceits to it all the time (like hit points), but I don't like monsters have number of attacks based on the number of opponents they are facing. It just doesn't work for me, but happy it works for you!