What do you mean the dragon is wearing armor!?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 190 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Over and over and over again I see players and GMs alike talking about how monsters are often weaker than classed characters. Supposedly this is because their options are more limited, whereas a classed character can be optimized with a plethora of items and options.

Why?

What is keeping the dragon from wearing armor, or the ogre from using a potion of enlarge person? Why aren't monsters using the same tricks and tactics that classed characters often use?

They have treasure values; why aren't the intelligent monsters making use of it? Why aren't they every bit as selective and discerning in their tools and tactics as the adventurers they so often fight?

How is it that such an imaginative and outgoing community fell into the mental rut of "monsters couldn't/shouldn't/wouldn't do that."

Please. Answer me that.


Because people have fallen into the mental rut of "monsters couldn't/shouldn't/wouldn't do that"

Personally I love outfitting my monsters. Do you know how terrifyinf a Balor is when you actually use its gold intelligently? xD


My monsters make full use of whatever treasure they have. You can bet that the magical sword in the treasure is going to be in the hands of the orc chieftain, the masterwork armor on his second in command. The village shaman will make use of any scrolls they may have.

If the dragon feels it needs armor, then don't be surprised when you see a dragon in full plate.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Monsters in my games have always used magic items if they were smart enough to do so. It just made sense to me.

Not to mention, I've always enjoyed the outraged cry from players when the monster in question drinks a potion, uses a scroll or wand, and I hear across the table, "Hey, he's drinking our potion!" (or whatever).


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Cthulhu in power armor! Take that over-optimized PCs. ;)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:


What is keeping the dragon from wearing armor, or the ogre from using a potion of enlarge person?

Well, the dragon isn't wearing the armor because it's fitted for a humanoid, not a hexapedal lizard with wings. Roughly the same reason I wear boots, but my car sports snow tires instead.

And the ogre has an intelligence of 6 and no ranks in any relevant skill; there's an extremely good chance he literally doesn't know what the potion is or does, just that it's valuable. Similarly, he's not going to be using many wands.

The ghost isn't using the magic sword because she can't even lift it, and the ooze doesn't have fingers for the ring of invisibility.

Now, you're right that a dragon could commission a set of barding, assuming he was willing to humble himself enough to cooperate with a crafter in such fashion, and was willing to part with the fairly substantial amount of his hoard that it would cost. But why would he want to? He's already a terrifying engine of destruction, and armor is hot and uncomfortable.

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The big issue with this is balance - if your dragon is optimized, then when your party kills him, they have the loot of an optimized dragon. An optimized bad guy can screw up a party's wealth by level for two to three levels. If you look at paizo adventures from the past two years there are multiple dragons with items that they use magic items

shattered star and PFS spoiler:
I believe the blue dragon in shattered star has some magic jewelry and the beheir in destiny of the sands PFS series uses a crown of swords as a a bracelet.
as you can see they can use magic, but are limited by the wealth levels... consumables are a good thing for bad guys as they don't help the PCs.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:

Over and over and over again I see players and GMs alike talking about how monsters are often weaker than classed characters. Supposedly this is because their options are more limited, whereas a classed character can be optimized with a plethora of items and options.

Why?

What is keeping the dragon from wearing armor, or the ogre from using a potion of enlarge person? Why aren't monsters using the same tricks and tactics that classed characters often use?

They have treasure values; why aren't the intelligent monsters making use of it? Why aren't they every bit as selective and discerning in their tools and tactics as the adventurers they so often fight?

How is it that such an imaginative and outgoing community fell into the mental rut of "monsters couldn't/shouldn't/wouldn't do that."

Please. Answer me that.

Classed characters are generally created from scratch choosing every option as you build them. Their loot is often gear they use.

Monsters are generally in a monster book for ease of use. Grab their printed stat block and go. That is part of their value.

You can customize them and rebuild them according to the rules, but generally monsters are assumed to have a pile of treasure that does not add to their combat stats with maybe a few items listed in their gear section and already figured into their stats. That is so their stats can be used off the page and that is where their CR is pegged. Swap around gp for combat items and you change their combat stats, best to then double check their stats to the CR charts afterwards as CR could easily go up if you add +8 to AC from armor, a toughness feat to boost hp instead of a skill focus feat, and a magic weapon that increases attack bonus and damage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
Now, you're right that a dragon could commission a set of barding, assuming he was willing to humble himself enough to cooperate with a crafter in such fashion, and was willing to part with the fairly substantial amount of his hoard that it would cost. But why would he want to? He's already a terrifying engine of destruction, and armor is hot and uncomfortable.

Older dragons can just Fabricate it, as they are all spellcasters anyway. Or they could just make it themselves. A set of masterwork tools is trivial, and they can take 10, so their craft check is 12+ Intelligence modifier. The highest DC is only 19 (for full plate), 20 if masterwork. So at least the lesser armors can be made with no real investment. A single rank in Craft gives another +4 for a total of 16 + Intelligence modifier, as Craft is a class skill for dragons.

And the dragon wears magic armor for the same reason anyone else does - you can enchant it with special effects. Throw some energy resistance on their if they are vulnerable to an energy type.

While the dragon doesn't need armor against lesser creatures, what if going up against another dragon? An adult red dragon has attack roll bonuses of +25 and +24, with an AC of 29. Against another adult red dragon, he gets hit on a roll of 4 or 5. Slap on a suit of full plate, the armored dragon boosts his AC to 38, and now gets hit on a roll of 13 or 14. That is a 45% less chance to get hit. With some magical enhancements, it gets even better.


Also a group of Vrocks all in plate mail is jarringly out of genre and aesthetically unappealing.


Ravingdork wrote:

Over and over and over again I see players and GMs alike talking about how monsters are often weaker than classed characters. Supposedly this is because their options are more limited, whereas a classed character can be optimized with a plethora of items and options.

Why?

What is keeping the dragon from wearing armor, or the ogre from using a potion of enlarge person? Why aren't monsters using the same tricks and tactics that classed characters often use?

They have treasure values; why aren't the intelligent monsters making use of it? Why aren't they every bit as selective and discerning in their tools and tactics as the adventurers they so often fight?

How is it that such an imaginative and outgoing community fell into the mental rut of "monsters couldn't/shouldn't/wouldn't do that."

Please. Answer me that.

It's boring.

Generally "monster using everything they can" translate to "monster runs around preventing all full attacks unless the spell caster can lock it down long enough to eat a full attack" OR "monster's AC is so high that you have no chance of hitting it unless the casters over-buff everyone"

Not every combat needs to be an impossible frustrating experience.


So... you let the monsters act dumb?

I guess I know why the caster/martial divide is so apparent in my games. My monsters don't let themselves get full attacked (if possible) unless they're mindless. Also any campaign relevant monsters have class levels and thus appropriate WBL.


I disagree about it being boring. Especially if you have most encounters just with the normal monster stats, throwing in an occasional monsters that has actually used his treasure wisely can be a memorable experience.

Players may forget about the fight with a group of vrocks, but may remember the fight against a vrock lord, who may actually be nothing more than a standard vrock decked out in full plate and a couple minor trinkets.

Sure, it can be a somewhat tougher fight (but I ignore the broken challenge rating system anyway). That is not always a bad thing.

For me, the boring part is having every encounter be with basically the same old monster, using the same old tactics. Some monsters are as smart as, or even smarter than, the PCs. It only makes sense they put that intellect to use, whether that be by using tactics or getting better equipment.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Jeraa wrote:
If the dragon feels it needs armor, then don't be surprised when you see a dragon in full plate.

Surely it can't fly if it's wearing anything over light? I should check that.

Scary thought, either way.

Orfamay Quest wrote:
And the ogre has an intelligence of 6 and no ranks in any relevant skill; there's an extremely good chance he literally doesn't know what the potion is or does, just that it's valuable.

Suppose it's labelled? I mean, I'd label my potions, so if an ogre killed me, it would then have labelled potions. If there's an ogre witch (which sounds plausible) they could have some understanding of why these things are handy.

The trick might be getting them to stop drinking the things and save them for actual serious fights.

...and now I'm imagining what happens when a whole bunch of ogres get their hands on potions of Fly.


A dragon could use his treasure hoard, I've done it in my games but remember to increase the CR for having more wealth.

A ancient red dragon could wear barding but they would suffer spell failure just as sorcerer would. They could use mitheral chain +5 I suppose and give it the feat Arcane Armor Training in place of staggering critical to give it +9 to it's AC. While your at it make the armor cold resistant 30 with greater energy resistance and heavy fortification. Give it +5 amulet of might fists. There is more than enough in treasure to accommodate that.

That CR 19 Dragon should be CR 20 then as that would exceed 123,000 GP in treasure at 270,000 not counting anything else you add.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
Surely it can't fly if it's wearing anything over light? I should check that.

You can fly in any armor in Pathfinder. The solar angel is specifically listed with +5 full plate and a fly speed. The fly spell even mentions flying in heavy armor, but as a magic spell that doesn't necessarily have to function the way mundane flight does.

In 3.X D&D, you couldn't fly with more than a light load. But Paizo didn't copy those rules, so they don't apply in Pathfinder.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:


What is keeping the dragon from wearing armor, or the ogre from using a potion of enlarge person?
Now, you're right that a dragon could commission a set of barding, assuming he was willing to humble himself enough to cooperate with a crafter in such fashion, and was willing to part with the fairly substantial amount of his hoard that it would cost. But why would he want to? He's already a terrifying engine of destruction, and armor is hot and uncomfortable.

You think the dragon is going to pay a humanoid to make his armor for him? The humanoid's payment is his life. Heck, what better reason for keeping a small army of kobolds around is there than that they are making you things?

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm not sure I'd give a dragon armor for the reason of them submitting to an armorsmith for fitting. Sure - technically they could make it themselves - but would they? And would they burn the skills on it? You might as well give them a greatsword to take advantage of their massive BAB and have their nat attacks sans claws as secondary swings.

I have and would give bigger dragons bracers of armor though.

Shadow Lodge

The fact that there is a lich monster doenst mean you have use "that lich" you can and should customize your monsters to suit your needs. Heck, many of the monsters in the aps are customized. What? Werewolf wizard witha staff of the magi, yes that exists


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Because I don't feel like statting and doing purchases for every single friggin' enemy. Building one good NPC takes long enough, I don't want to do that 15 more times for like two or three sessions of gameplay, and potentially have that all wasted or backfire.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
FanaticRat wrote:
Because I don't feel like statting and doing purchases for every single friggin' enemy. Building one good NPC takes long enough, I don't want to do that 15 more times for like two or three sessions of gameplay, and potentially have that all wasted or backfire.

It doesn't take that long. You already have the monsters stat. You already have to generate the treasure. It doesn't take that much longer to add a few extra plus into the monster stat block. You aren't rewriting the entire monster, just boosting a couple of things.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, an ogre who drinks his valuable potion every time some humans wander by now doesn't have a potion. Much like the adventurers themselves, who probably don't drink every potion they have and fire off every scroll at the ogre.

Since the ogre can't tell these are 8th level adventurers instead of 1st level warrior guards, it's probably round 3 and the ogre is down to his last 10 hp when he starts to realise perhaps he should have drunk the potion - but at that point it's a little late...

As to the dragon, why would he convert his beautiful horde into a few expensive magical items? Presumably he's gathering gold because dragons like hordes, not because he'd be better off paying a wizard to hide it in a custom demi-plane.


I don't think a boss with optimized equipment will necessarily mess up wealth-by level: you can always give him/her stuff that is good for him/her, but not for the PC's, because they can't use it... a bastard sword in a group without a bastard-sword-wielder... armor that is made for a dragon and not for a human, so refitting it is possible but takes alot of gold... a monks robe while your party has no monk... etc.


Reverse wrote:
As to the dragon, why would he convert his beautiful horde into a few expensive magical items? Presumably he's gathering gold because dragons like hordes, not because he'd be better off paying a wizard to hide it in a custom demi-plane.

He is only converting his hoard to item because that is what we've focused on. However, when the GM is generating the dragons horde, you always get magic items anyway. If those magic items are just sitting there in his hoard already, why shouldn't the dragon take advantage of them if he is capable of doing so?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:

Generally "monster using everything they can" translate to "monster runs around preventing all full attacks unless the spell caster can lock it down long enough to eat a full attack" OR "monster's AC is so high that you have no chance of hitting it unless the casters over-buff everyone"

Not every combat needs to be an impossible frustrating experience.

This is exactly what the players do to the monsters though. Battlefield control is code for action denial. Why is turn about suddenly not fair play?

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ravingdork, Orge's cannot use the spell Enlarge Person just like AAsamir can't use it as they do not fall into the person sub type AAsamir are Native outsiders and Orges are of the giant subtype.

Are you going to tell the ancient wyrm that he can't wear plate barding
if he wants too? I'm not. I will refer Jason Bhulman and hope Jason has his Devouring Insurance paid in full.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:
Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:

Generally "monster using everything they can" translate to "monster runs around preventing all full attacks unless the spell caster can lock it down long enough to eat a full attack" OR "monster's AC is so high that you have no chance of hitting it unless the casters over-buff everyone"

Not every combat needs to be an impossible frustrating experience.

This is exactly what the players do to the monsters though. Battlefield control is code for action denial. Why is turn about suddenly not fair play?

I didn't say that. It just gets boring when every monster decides to play that way.

"Oh look the boss teleported away again. Time to spend another 3 hours combing the dungeon."

"Oh look the dragon is either too far away or has too high of AC for anything to effect it. Well now we wait for the casters to dispel buffs and lock the thing down."

Just because martial/caster disparity is an issue, doesn't mean the GM needs to further reinforce it with encounter design. A lot of these "playing smart" monster tactics translates to "frustrate the players/make sure only the caster can do anything to the foe".

The occasional encounter is fine, but having that be the norm is not. That's what the monster stat blocks are for. Not every dragon should have plate-mail.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Lou Diamond wrote:
Ravingdork, Orge's cannot use the spell Enlarge Person (...) Orges are of the giant subtype.

And it prevents enlarge person from working how? I haven't noticed any rule saying that humanoid (giants) are somehow not viable targets for this spell.

Personally, I prefer my dragons to use mage armor and shield spells. Or improved variant of mage armor scaled for higher spell level with higher bonus.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Lou Diamond wrote:
Ravingdork, Orge's cannot use the spell Enlarge Person just like AAsamir can't use it as they do not fall into the person sub type AAsamir are Native outsiders and Orges are of the giant subtype.

There is no such thing as a "person" subtype. Enlarge person works on all creatures of the Humanoid type. Ogres are Humanoids, so they can indeed use Enlarge Person. Aasimar can't use it because they have the Outsider type, not the Humanoid type.

Silver Crusade

Sorry Jeraa I meant the Humanoid type. I used person because I was grasping for the word humanoid and could not think of it. I was wrong
giants can use enlarge person. I just hope they are outside.


I can well see a dragon wearing armour, but I doubt he'd be able to wear anything equating to full plate. A human in full plate is almost totally encased in steel. The dragon would have to leave his wings completely exposed or be unable to fly. Similarly his tail is a pig of a thing to armour effectively with anything more rigid than chain.

But generally, I kit my monsters out with kit they could use. Not the ideal stuff that they'd want (because they usually can't craft or go shopping), but stuff they could use (because they'll dump the useless stuff or swap it for something good). And obviously they'll occasionally have some utterly inappropriate junk.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:

Over and over and over again I see players and GMs alike talking about how monsters are often weaker than classed characters. Supposedly this is because their options are more limited, whereas a classed character can be optimized with a plethora of items and options.

Why?

What is keeping the dragon from wearing armor, or the ogre from using a potion of enlarge person? Why aren't monsters using the same tricks and tactics that classed characters often use?

They have treasure values; why aren't the intelligent monsters making use of it? Why aren't they every bit as selective and discerning in their tools and tactics as the adventurers they so often fight?

How is it that such an imaginative and outgoing community fell into the mental rut of "monsters couldn't/shouldn't/wouldn't do that."

Please. Answer me that.

Because giving them armor takes them outside of their CR range. As an example throwing even a chain shirt on a monster give it +4 AC. A +1 cloak of resistance gives it a boost to all saves. Give it an amulet of might fist or a weapon, and its average attack and damage go up.

If you look at the monster creation chart even boosting AC, attacks, an saves by as small as +1 is enough to warrant a boost to another CR category.

I am not saying it makes someone a bad GM. I am just answering the question, and if a GM runs for an optimized group I actually recommend the monster using the treasure.

Now some monsters such as giants use this treasure to meet their CR ratings, but improving on it still bumps them up a CR.

Shadow Lodge

Mudfoot wrote:

I can well see a dragon wearing armour, but I doubt he'd be able to wear anything equating to full plate. A human in full plate is almost totally encased in steel. The dragon would have to leave his wings completely exposed or be unable to fly. Similarly his tail is a pig of a thing to armour effectively with anything more rigid than chain.

But generally, I kit my monsters out with kit they could use. Not the ideal stuff that they'd want (because they usually can't craft or go shopping), but stuff they could use (because they'll dump the useless stuff or swap it for something good). And obviously they'll occasionally have some utterly inappropriate junk.

IF this was true flying races in fullplate wouldnt be able to fly. Alas fullplate gives a horrible negative to the fly skill already.


Lou Diamond wrote:

Ravingdork, Orge's cannot use the spell Enlarge Person just like AAsamir can't use it as they do not fall into the person sub type AAsamir are Native outsiders and Orges are of the giant subtype.

Are you going to tell the ancient wyrm that he can't wear plate barding
if he wants too? I'm not. I will refer Jason Bhulman and hope Jason has his Devouring Insurance paid in full.

Actually Ogres are giants, and giants fall under the humanoid type in Pathfinder, unlike in 3.5 so an ogre could use the potion.

Quote:
Ogre Type Humanoid (giant)


Jeraa wrote:
You can fly in any armor in Pathfinder. The solar angel is specifically listed with +5 full plate and a fly speed. The fly spell even mentions flying in heavy armor, but as a magic spell that doesn't necessarily have to function the way mundane flight does.

I know what I'm thinking of. A flying mount can't fly with medium or heavy barding (and seem to need a specific level before they can fly while carrying a rider). I'm a little weirded out by the idea that a creature might have different rules if it's a mount than if it's just on its own.

Ravingdork wrote:
Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Not every combat needs to be an impossible frustrating experience.
This is exactly what the players do to the monsters though. Battlefield control is code for action denial. Why is turn about suddenly not fair play?

Because the game isn't about the monsters having fun?


Lucy_Valentine wrote:
Suppose it's labelled? I mean, I'd label my potions, so if an ogre killed me, it would then have labelled potions. If there's an ogre witch (which sounds plausible) they could have some understanding of why these things are handy.

Give the Ogre a Potion of Shocking Grasp that has been labeled "Power Thirst: Shocklate Flavor!"


Lucy_Valentine wrote:
Jeraa wrote:
You can fly in any armor in Pathfinder. The solar angel is specifically listed with +5 full plate and a fly speed. The fly spell even mentions flying in heavy armor, but as a magic spell that doesn't necessarily have to function the way mundane flight does.

I know what I'm thinking of. A flying mount can't fly with medium or heavy barding (and seem to need a specific level before they can fly while carrying a rider). I'm a little weirded out by the idea that a creature might have different rules if it's a mount than if it's just on its own.

Ravingdork wrote:
Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Not every combat needs to be an impossible frustrating experience.
This is exactly what the players do to the monsters though. Battlefield control is code for action denial. Why is turn about suddenly not fair play?
Because the game isn't about the monsters having fun?

But it is about roleplaying.

After all, if the monsters that don't fight intelligently, what is the difference between a TTRPG and a RPG video games? "Oh look, the dragon is engaging the Two-Hand barbarian in melee, because the Barbarian didn't bring a bow..."


Kazaan wrote:
Lucy_Valentine wrote:
Suppose it's labelled? I mean, I'd label my potions, so if an ogre killed me, it would then have labelled potions. If there's an ogre witch (which sounds plausible) they could have some understanding of why these things are handy.
Give the Ogre a Potion of Shocking Grasp that has been labeled "Power Thirst: Shocklate Flavor!"

Your plan is predicated on the ogres ability to read. :)


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Anzyr wrote:
After all, if the monsters that don't fight intelligently, what is the difference between a TTRPG and a RPG video games? "Oh look, the dragon is engaging the Two-Hand barbarian in melee, because the Barbarian didn't bring a bow..."

character: "Oh no, they're going to eat us alive!!!"

monster A: "What? Human Flesh? RAW!?"

monster B: "What does he think we are? Monsters?"


Charon's Little Helper wrote:

I'm not sure I'd give a dragon armor for the reason of them submitting to an armorsmith for fitting. Sure - technically they could make it themselves - but would they? And would they burn the skills on it? You might as well give them a greatsword to take advantage of their massive BAB and have their nat attacks sans claws as secondary swings.

I have and would give bigger dragons bracers of armor though.

Well, I would imagine that there are dragons with various hobbies just like every other intelligent creature (particularly ones that live hundreds of years).

You just need 1 dragon armorer in a region with decent enough relations and neutrality to set up every dragon with armor (in return for a bit of their horde, of course). Since a lot of dragons can act like spell casters, they can maintain their own darn armor, so it could be a piece that is 100 years old (which means each dragon only has to decide once to buy into a fad)

Similar things could happen with less intelligent (although still barely sentient) races such as ogres if they simply decide 'Man, those last squishies were tough. And their big knives hurt... maybe I should wear some of those shinies like they did?' and have them grab a blacksmith as hostage (and heck, this sound like a whole quest in itself- "Save the master blacksmith before he is forced to arm all the ogres in the Snaggletooth mountains")

Also, I somewhat question whether a dragon's equipment should count towards the wealth that players get from it. It is both too large, and designed for a body that is nothing like the players. Heck, I would say that it would not even fit animal companions right. So to the players, that dragon armor looks like just a big hunk of scrap that made the fight hard.

Anyway, for how prevalent optimized equipment would be somewhat depends on their lifestyle. Joe-Smoe-Smog that only goes out to occasionally raze a small farm and eat the livestock will not wear armor, since he doesn't expect resistance. He is basically the guy that goes to the store in sweat pants. Now, LORD GARGOYLE, RULER OF THE BLACK DRAGONS, who has waged war against the neighboring red dragon clans while maintaining his position with an iron fist (claw?) might just be inclined to wear armor since he often fights against creatures that are serious martial threats to himself.

Just ask yourself- is this creature's the position the same as a commoner's in his society? Most commoners do not go out in armor unless they are suddenly drafted for some big war. Is this the village idiot of dragons? Or is this a noble with means, power, and a need for some insurance.


Ravingdork wrote:

Over and over and over again I see players and GMs alike talking about how monsters are often weaker than classed characters. Supposedly this is because their options are more limited, whereas a classed character can be optimized with a plethora of items and options.

Why?

What is keeping the dragon from wearing armor, or the ogre from using a potion of enlarge person? Why aren't monsters using the same tricks and tactics that classed characters often use?

They have treasure values; why aren't the intelligent monsters making use of it? Why aren't they every bit as selective and discerning in their tools and tactics as the adventurers they so often fight?

How is it that such an imaginative and outgoing community fell into the mental rut of "monsters couldn't/shouldn't/wouldn't do that."

Please. Answer me that.

Treasure management is a pain in the ... Lots of DMs just roll on the random treasure table. After all, most dragons don't go shopping, so they can't customize their treasure.

Certainly plenty of intelligent monsters, such as dragons, will use that treasure, but it's nowhere near as optimized as what a classed NPC would have, much less a PC.

It doesn't help that a lot of creatures can't use many items, as they're the wrong shape, size, intelligence level, and/or aren't spellcasters. (True spellcasters. Just because you can use spell-like abilities doesn't mean you can use scrolls or wands. Unless you've got Use Magic Device, of course.)

Ever played Dragon Mountain? It's a spoiler, but it's an old adventure, so here goes... the eponymous dragon feeds a kobold a couple of potions (invulnerability and polymorph - specifically into a dragon) and watches the PCs waste resources killing a kobold.

(Also, most dragons don't have Armor Proficiency feats. Where is the dragon getting barding from? Maybe if it has minions, but plenty of dragons are solitary. Can a dragon use a wand that's made for a human-sized creature? I think that's a yes, but I don't actually know.)

Ogres aren't that bright. (Does Enlarge Person even work on an ogre? Even if armor magically resizes to fit an ogre, will the ogre even know this? If the ogres are being organized by more intelligent creatures, wouldn't those creatures use the treasure instead?)

*Edit: Apparently they can use the potions. Given their low intelligence, how would the ogres identify the potions? Well, their "shamans" could, but unless there's a resource with a bunch of ogre shamans and barbarians in it, somehow I doubt DMs are going to use such opponents.

On a similar note, when DMs give a creature class levels, they usually just take the base creature and then give it the class levels in order to avoid work. Often this means the monster has a bunch of useless feats that could have been traded out for feats that suit their class.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

a Dragon doesn't wear armor because dragon's don't wear clothes. the concept and experience are probably not enjoyable for them. Armor Chaffes yo.

also, for whatever reason Barding DOES specify that you cannot fly with medium or heavy barding. but barding only applies to mounts, so whatever that means.

Also, dragons would definitely use magic items they have lying around.


Anzyr wrote:

But it is about roleplaying.

After all, if the monsters that don't fight intelligently, what is the difference between a TTRPG and a RPG video games? "Oh look, the dragon is engaging the Two-Hand barbarian in melee, because the Barbarian didn't bring a bow..."

Sure, and the barbarian should have brought a bow and not been such an idiot. But this isn't a binary choice here: frustrating versus pointlessly easy. The level appropriate for a specific group is probably somewhere quite distant from MMO-land but still not at the "monster has perfect gear and perfect tactics and therefore beats you in seconds" that exists at the other end of the spectrum.

And this notion of believability? This is a group-specific thing. If the group finds that believability is more important than them having a chance, then good for them. Personally I do... but weirdly, not actually in Pathfinder. In other systems.


Molten Dragon wrote:
Cthulhu in power armor! Take that over-optimized PCs. ;)

Ctulhu plus a sounds fun suit from Dragonmech


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Most dragons are left alone by humanoids, by and large, especially the older ones. The adventurers who show up represent a small portion of human(oid)ity. They probably only show up every couple decades to bother the dragon, and most probably die when they do. I don't think a dragon would take to wearing armor on the regular because of this, in addition to the annoyance that comes with having it made...dependence on lesser creatures, etc.

I would only have a dragon wearing armor if the party has already killed at least one dragon and the potentially armor-wearing dragon heard of the event. Then it makes a lot more sense to have the dragon either commission their minions to make, or go through casting fabricate, or whatever other work is required to get a set of armor.

Armor would then be one of the ways the dragon prepares for this potential threat.


I remember an adventure pack I bought years ago that had an Intelligent Fish that was the Priest of a River God and the Fish had a custom suit of( Light weight) armor crafted by land dwelling Worshippers of the River God.
So a Dragon decide it wishes to rule an area or is appointed ruler of an area. And as tribute the local humaniods make it a suit of armor. Or maybe a ring of protection.


I can say that many monsters are actually terrifying when you play them intelligently...

For instance, Aboleths. I used to think they were kinda weak... until I sent 3 of them vs a party of slightly over geared level 10s... and nearly caused a TPK (it would have been a TPK if I didn't intentionally do some stupid stuff to allow the party to kill them since it was the very beginning of the game).

details:
Well essentially the party was trapped in a sorcerer's dungeon when they managed to break free and tried to escape. They found the sorcerer's treasure trove and got a lot of nice items (it was a hihg power game so it was ok). Well they go into one room that had a pool 200 ft across and looked fairly deep (the dungeon was underground for those who are wondering about how you have a deep pool) and dark. Well the party wizard (for whatever reason) had water walk prepared and cast it to allow the party to get to the other side (this room was kinda optional since the otehr end of the pool simply had a nice staff and a pretty bow). Half way across, the party oracle finally passes the perception check (I got their modifiers before hand and rolled their perception checks secretly to prevent metagaming) but only barely.

So she notices a dark shadow in the water and warns the party. They suddenly start looking around when the party witch gets hit with a dominate and rolls a 1. After I looked at his spell list I had to start playing easy because other wise I would have murdered the party... (the witch was an optimized SoS witch... so between her Cackle+Evil Eye+Misfortune and the aboleth's dominates... oh and the witch player specifically said it was not outside his character's personality to attack the rest of the party since the party did not know each other really yet and only worked together for convience sake).


Because the monster is now one or more CR above what it should be.

Which means it gets more treasure, commensurate with it's difficulty.

Which means, possibly, the PCs get more treasure than they should at that level.

Alternatively, if the items used by the monster are part of its treasure, that potentially reduces the amount of treasure PCs get for a challenge of that level.

And worse, if the monster uses monster specific items , such as Dragon shaped armour, the PCs then have a magic item that they can't use anyway. This is very much like taunting your players. Showing them magic items that they then can't use. Sort of like giving them barbarian specific armour in a party with no barbarians.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Maybe the armor was passed down from the old days, back when dragons rules the world and humans, elves, and dwarves had yet to master fire. Humans have legendary items and magical artifacts, why not dragons?

Modern dragons, in an attempt to rekindle the old days, commission great suits of armor for themselves. (Of course, they aren't as good as the ancient suits of armor. Apparently, nothing in the modern fantasy world is as good as it was in the old days.)

In most settings (or at least a lot of settings), there was a time when dragons ruled the world. The only threat to a dragon then was another dragon, and armor would be as helpful there as it is to a human facing other humans.

Dragons don't make armor to protect themselves from humans. They do it to protect themselves from other dragons.

Quote:
And worse, if the monster uses monster specific items , such as Dragon shaped armour, the PCs then have a magic item that they can't use anyway. This is very much like taunting your players. Showing them magic items that they then can't use. Sort of like giving them barbarian specific armour in a party with no barbarians.

Its far more realistic if there are items the party can't use. Why must everything be focused around humans and human-sized/shaped creatures. There are many, many different creature types. Many of them are a different size and/or shape than humans. Why wouldn't they make their own magical gear?

I guess it comes down to one thing. Do you build the world around your specific players, ignoring everything else? Or do you make a more realistic fantasy world, which means there will be things the party can not use and there may be fights the party can not win?


A Dragon with armor is just... really, really, corny. It looks stupid. Hey, play the way you want- but it sounds, and looks stupid.

Now a Dragon throwing up Mage Armor (the best version of it if you are using other sources) and wearing a Ring of Protection... and maybe another buff if you want to go wild, sure, go for it.

1 to 50 of 190 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / What do you mean the dragon is wearing armor!? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.