*sniff* you left the greatest dragons off the cover.

A Blue putting a mouthy silver in his place, now -that- would be cover art!

Are there any specific Dragons that will be expanded upon? The powerful elder Dragons or a well known Draco-Lich or two?

Edit: What is the street date for this book? Amazon tells me it should have shipped today, but so far nothing.

sweet!

The book gives info on the 10 main dragon types that appear in the MM. It also talks about specific dragons of those types in Golarion, and gives a bio and stat block for one dragon of each type.

Quick review: WOW!

I just took a quick flip through the PDF and it is beautiful. This is going to be a hot product when it hits the shelves. There is no doubt.

Check out the actual cover art! Woot!

-Lisa

Hey, I have this ordered, but I think it's not going to be shipped until the end of the month. Is it possible to get it as a download in the next few days so I can have something to read on the plane back home?

Hey, I have this ordered, but I think it's not going to be shipped until the end of the month. Is it possible to get it as a download in the next few days so I can have something to read on the plane back home?

I skimmed over the pdf last night, and I'm seriously liking what I've seen so far in the blue, red, white, and silver subsections. I especially love the reimagined blue, and its artwork. The brief mention of Asuulek in the red section was very cool too, as well as the book's expansion on the idea of warring white and silver dragons in Elemental Air. Very cool. :D

Will be digging into this more in depth over the weekend.

Does it contain information on a certain blue dragon featured in the CotCT-AP?

There is a glitch in the cover in the PDF, just above the author's name.

There is a glitch in the cover in the PDF, just above the author's name.

The full art for the dragons are at Ben Wootten's DeviantArt site.

*Grrr*... my FLGS still hasn't received my copy! I thought it took them only a couple of weeks to receive it, but it's still "on its way". Maybe I need to subscribe?

Does it contain information on a certain blue dragon featured in the CotCT-AP?

So I take it no Gem dragons? I was thinking that maybe Pathfinder might do something completly differnt with the Gem Dragons even though they aren't OGL the names might still be used. Maybe make them a Lawful or Chaotic group instead of neutral. Or make them Asia type of dragons? Which I kinda think they should have been in the first place. Heck get rid of the psionics altogether just use the name. I doubt Wizards would have an issue with that its like coming out with a Knight class, the name is generic, as long as your not coping the game mechanics/fluff.

So I take it no Gem dragons? I was thinking that maybe Pathfinder might do something completly differnt with the Gem Dragons even though they aren't OGL the names might still be used. Maybe make them a Lawful or Chaotic group instead of neutral. Or make them Asia type of dragons? Which I kinda think they should have been in the first place. Heck get rid of the psionics altogether just use the name. I doubt Wizards would have an issue with that its like coming out with a Knight class, the name is generic, as long as your not coping the game mechanics/fluff.

1) No Gem Dragons. They are not classic Dragons.
2) The problem with Gem Dragons is that while Gems are public domain, and Dragons are public domain, very few sources outside of D&D have combined the two. As you put your finger on, adding psionics turns them directly from "Ruby Dragons" to "Lawsuit Dragons". But if you don't add psionics, what makes 'em unique enough to bother with?
3) Asian dragons (Lungs) are also not classic, in terms of D&D classical, although they are classics in terms of mythology. We almost certainly won't be seeing Asian Dragons until Pathfinder details the "East of Iran" parts of "Asia" for their setting, providing them an excuse for "generic" Asian stuff like Lungs.

So I take it no Gem dragons? I was thinking that maybe Pathfinder might do something completly differnt with the Gem Dragons even though they aren't OGL the names might still be used. Maybe make them a Lawful or Chaotic group instead of neutral. Or make them Asia type of dragons? Which I kinda think they should have been in the first place. Heck get rid of the psionics altogether just use the name. I doubt Wizards would have an issue with that its like coming out with a Knight class, the name is generic, as long as your not coping the game mechanics/fluff.

Gem dragons aren't open, so we're going to be avoiding that category, I suspect. The Tian Xia dragons we've already mentioned are not gem-related, and since there's a LOT of real-world myth to draw upon for the Asian-themed dragons, we'll be using that to build them when we get to them.

In any case, this book was intended to be about the 10 classic dragons; it doesn't have the name "classic" in the title, but it's very much in the same tradition as "Classic Monsters Revisited," "Dungeon Denizins Revisited," and "Classic Horrors Revisited."

My wife loves the dragons. Where can she get more? I'm trying to avoid having to get the 4E Draconomicons...

That's fine with me. We have shaitans now for all our gem-lovin' needs.

How Golorion specific is this? I loved classic monster revisited, and changed my home versions of those monster to the way they are portrayed in the book (go goblins). Does Dragons have the same flexibility, or is it very world specific?

How Golorion specific is this? I loved classic monster revisited, and changed my home versions of those monster to the way they are portrayed in the book (go goblins). Does Dragons have the same flexibility, or is it very world specific?

Each dragon has approximately one column of information specifically about that color on Golarian, and the statted up dragon is Golarian specific. Otherwise the information is general enough to plunk into any campaign world :)

Whew! This is a very information dense post! As an informed citizen, allow me to share what information we civilians have until a Fully-Licensed Paizo Professional can come along.

1) No Gem Dragons. They are not classic Dragons.
2) The problem with Gem Dragons is that while Gems are public domain, and Dragons are public domain, very few sources outside of D&D have combined the two. As you put your finger on, adding psionics turns them directly from "Ruby Dragons" to "Lawsuit Dragons". But if you don't add psionics, what makes 'em unique enough to bother with?
3) Asian dragons (Lungs) are also not classic, in terms of D&D classical, although they are classics in terms of mythology. We almost certainly won't be seeing Asian Dragons until Pathfinder details the "East of Iran" parts of "Asia" for their setting, providing them an excuse for "generic" Asian stuff like Lungs.

Honestly I get why they don't want to touch the Gems, Even though I alwasy thought that while Good and Evil was repersented, and neturals I suppose, I alwasy felt that Law and Choas were missing proper respect. Asia dragons also lacked something, and I always wanted to redo them to fill the law and choas nich, espically since I alwasy saw Asian myth more focused with those concepts then with Western Good and Evil. Gems might fill the Law side and maybe Elemental Dragons filling the choas one. I know about he heavy metal dragons, but I never liked the fluff for them. Paizo could do something like this, I mean other 3pp have redone Tiamt (yeah I know its part of mythology but its also very "DnD") heck even Paizo mentioned the old hag in RotRL.

In either case I do love all things dragons and this book is on my gotta get it list, I was just hoping.

TTFN DRE

PS You know maybe Paizo could get the rights for a Godzilla RPG, I can just see it now, play an atomic monster destroy Japan, gain XP and then...........ummm.........go take out New York, yeah yeah that'd be cool.

Gem dragons aren't open, so we're going to be avoiding that category, I suspect.

DRE

PS You know maybe Paizo could get the rights for a Godzilla RPG, I can just see it now, play an atomic monster destroy Japan

You do have Dragon #289, right? Formerly available here in the Paizo Store, but now only available via piracy and used book stores thanks to Wizards.

Dragon and Dungeon products are still available for sale under a different license with WOTC.

And yes, that's a great article on Kaiju in it (which *seriously* needs to be added to the issue description!)

Great "re-alignment" of the classic dragons on new lines. Sadly not as good as the goblinoid races revisited sourcebook, though. The way goblins were rethought is simply hilarious, if somewhat morbid.

Dragon 289, available Right Here for sale on Paizo.com.

Dragon and Dungeon products are still available for sale under a different license with WOTC.

And yes, that's a great article on Kaiju in it (which *seriously* needs to be added to the issue description!)

Gem dragons aren't open, so we're going to be avoiding that category, I suspect. The Tian Xia dragons we've already mentioned are not gem-related, and since there's a LOT of real-world myth to draw upon for the Asian-themed dragons, we'll be using that to build them when we get to them.

But when (not if!) you do psionics, and you're going to consider draconic paragons of psionics, you can create psionic dragons, just not named after gems.

Rechan wrote:

I really hope this does offer a new spin on some dragon types. Something a little more intriguing than "Whites = Dum + Cold", or at least some different ways to spice ye olde dragon color up.

Well, actually, white dragons haven't been "dumb" for a while now. They aren't nearly as smart as other dragon types, but at their adult state, they are as intelligent as an average human.