I have often thought that Dragons have been used in fantasy RPG's in ways that dragons were not envisioned historically over the centuries. Why would the most magnificent of fantastical creatures allow him/herself to serve as a steed for a rider? I am reminded of Tolkein's Smaug and the movie Dragonslayer, where Dragon's didn't give people rides, they burned crops unless placated by sacrifices of virgins, nor did dragons masquarade in human/alternate forms and have Half-dragon spawn with basically anything registering a pulse. Does anyone else agree with me that the ferocious beast we all imagine and love have been made something altogether different than they historically thought to be? I for one can't see a dragon serving as a glorified taxi cab.
For me it's all in the personality. Yes, dragons by and large have heaps of pride and vanity, considering themselves the top of the Material Plane heap. But in worlds where "lesser races can by perseverance match and even exceed their capabilities, and where deities lord it over even the most powerful of wyrms, there are individuals who are realistic enough to share the world with others. An analogy is with Outer Plane outsiders. Celestials and fiends are very powerful, but many of the former don't find difficulties in mingling and even assisting with mortals, while the latter enjoy pretending to serve their alleged masters while covertly plotting their fall into the Lower Planes.
First, finding new and innovate uses for dragons in a campaign isn't something I view as necessarily bad, although it can be, depending on the exact circumstances.
That said, yes, I've thought the same things, too. When I first read Dragonlance and heard about the dragon riders, my initial thoughts were, "Other than carrying their magical lances, what benefit does a dragon get by having a knight strapped on his back? Seems more like a hinderance and liability to me."
Outside of a few instances like that, however, the only thing that gets me is their overuse. Sir Kaikillah (I hope I got your name right) just started a post earlier in which he mentioned dwarves calling gun powder "dragon powder." That's pretty good, actually. And having "dragon's breath ale" at a famous tavern isn't bad either. No, using their name to indicate power, royalty, destructive capability, and other things classically associated with dragons isn't a problem.
The problem for me comes from having every third villain be a half-dragon sorcerer with draconic heritage feats, and surrounded by dragon kin and kobold dragon shamans.
Eberron is a little dragon-heavy for my tastes, too. I'm not attacking the setting; I actually like a lot of what I've seen so far (which isn't much, admittedly). However, having dragon shards, dragon marks, dragon marked houses, the world, sky, and underdark all be referenced to as bodies of dragons, and a continent filled with a council of dragons comes off as a little too much. I like each of those ideas individually, but all mixed in at once is a little over potent. Even having them all in one setting isn't necessarily bad, it's just that they are stressed too much.
There was a thread like this just a few weeks ago, with a lot of the same sentiment you have expressed, Allen. Many people are tired of seeing dragons used too much, their sacred status removed by overuse, leaving them in the same camp as orcs and drow. I agree that it is a sad and troubling state of affairs for dragons.
"Why would the most magnificent of fantastical creatures allow him/herself to serve as a steed for a rider? "
I must agree. So I have multiple breeds of Dragons. The least powerful has the brain of a horse. It does not get Huge. It does not live hundreds of years. It does not have a breath weapon. You could say, they are just a horse with wings.
In my world, dragons live hidden in humanoid guise just to stop would be dragon slayers from harassing them, trying to make a name for themselves. I got the idea from the Greyhawk dragons of 1ed AD&D (they lived in cities and would interact with humans, never revealing their true natures.) I see dragons as cunning and manipulative, and hiding as a humanoid is one way for them to rule over human society without having the peasants show up with the torches and pitchforks. Dragons that breath fire and kill crops and demand virgins all end up dead! (Including both that you mentioned. and If I were a dragon and I got killed by the little wuss and the old wizard in Dragonslayer, I'd be ashamed of myself.)In FR dragons had a time when they ruled the world. That time came to an end. It becomes a situation of adapt or die. Given a dragons inteligence, compromise is not above them. Though I do agree that any shmuck shouldn't be riding a dragon, but it does make sense that a big bad ass like Manshoon or Samaster could bind a dragon into a riding mount. I just don't think that the dragon would do it willingly.
Tolkien's Smaug and Glaurung are kind of archetypal dragons drawn from Northern European mythology, but if you read Silmarillion the dragons are creations of Morgoth and ultimately serve his purposes, although they have pretty big egos of their own. In this way of thinking, dragons are large, destructive beasts, but also very clever, and only very heroic/lucky/well equipped adversaries can kill them, or those who resort to a stratagem, like strapping dozens of sharp knives to oneself and leaping down the dragon's gullet. Beowulf, Sigurd/Siegfried, Sir Tristan, Turin Turambar, Bard (with his magic black arrow that never fails him and the knowledge of Smaug's weak spot). Hedge knights and mercenaries get roasted and eaten by dragons.
Other fantasy literature has all kinds of different views of dragons--from virtually godlike to mere exotic steed. And Asian mythology takes a very different vision of dragons--they are powerful creatures that rule the elements (especially earth and water), and some have the ability to take humanoid form. In general, from what I've seen (maybe other people have read more broadly in fantasy lit than I), dragon-riders must have special training (the Dragon-riders of Pern) or special heritage (like the Targaryen family in Westeros). Sometimes dragons will consent to give someone a ride, but only when it's in the dragon's interest and even then it requires the would be passenger to make a serious diplomacy check (Terry Goodkind's first book, last book in Robin Hobb's Liveship series), and the dragon doesn't necessarily allow you to climb on it's back. In D&D terms, some powerful outsiders or powerful characters might get a dragon to serve as steed, but it should definitely be an exception. It's also not necessarily a tactical advantage to be mounted in this way--the dragon's strength is in strafing with breath weapon or landing in the middle of foes and shredding them with bite, claws, wings, and tail. A medium (or even large) character is going to have difficulty effectively employing a melee weapon from the back of a dragon, and even if he can, most of the damage is going to be dealt by the dragon. It makes sense for the leader of a large army to ride on a dragon, but less sense for an encounter between a villain and a party of PCs.
In the chinese classic "Journey to the West" there was a dragon that served as a mount to a simple monk. However, theat service was inflicted as a punishment by the dragons family and the monk didn't know he was riding a dragon.
I don't really see a big issue with "dragons" as mounts - you could sort of look at this "dragons" issue as taxonomic -
My personal classifications:
Primes - these would be along the lines of Midgard's Serpent
God Dragons - entities with draconic forms and godlike CRs
Planar Lords - enhanced with elemetal/planar abilities
Lord Dragons - beefed up MM dragons
Great Dragons - MM dragons with levels/bonuses
True Dragons - MM dragons
Dragons - MM dragons - no spell casting
Lesser Dragons - elephant sized strong firebreathing lizards
Drakes - rhino to deer sized firebreating reptiles
Dragonettes - large dog to small cat sized - intelligent magical?
Lesser Dragons and Drakes could be suitable as mounts.
All the dragon template nonsense - I would scrap - but if you like it the templates could be justified as "blessings" or "gifts" from Lord Dragons to ancestors (rather than as silly familial heritage backstories - I've been guilty)
Think about primates as an example Mountain Gorilla's down to marmosets - the morphology is strikingly similar - but the species, and thier sizes, radically different. Then addin close relatives - Lemures, for example and there is more diversity - using the analogy - Wyverns, certain types of sea monsters, etc.
IMO There is a place for dragons as mounts in fantasy games - but they should be rare and the mounts should not be overwhelmingly powerful when compared to the rider. A "True Dragon" might serve as a mount for a god - but a "Drake" of sufficient size might serve a wealthy enough knight. The issue it seems is that all dragons are lumped under the heading of dragon. The other thing to remember is the praticality of such mounts - can you use your weapon, can you stable it, feed it, clean it, how do you leave it outside a shop or restaurant when in town, how to you command an intelligent (presumably) creature to bear you into combat, what is its agenda (and family issues, hungers, lusts, time frames, risk threshholds, faith, etc.). Effectively running such a mount requires a lot of forethought and maturity if you don't want it to come off in the game as just silly.
My 2 cents.
You gentlemen have some interesting takes on dragons. I conceed that my viewpoint is what one of you described as a 'northern European' view of dragons, but that is what I see as the original view of dragons the game took back in the 70's when it began. I've never wished for diversity in dragons. I thoroughly loved how Tolkein's Glarung weaved a spell of sophistry over Turin when he wasn't incinerating villages and their inhabitants. Or when dragons rule over towns or localities through sheer terror and threat of brute force. If the dragon eventually gets killed as a result, so be it, but to "adapt" as a cosmopolitan city-dwelling elite is simply against a dragon's nature, regardless of the consequences. I think the idea of dragons masquarading as humans to mingle in society is bizarre and not supported in historical legends. Ultimately, this is a fantasy RPG, and if DM's and designers want to have dragons dance at a broadway musical, it's their cup of tea. I'm merely going to express my appreciation for the authors and game designers who come up with wily hardcore wyrms who intimidate the populace, devour virgins, and who don't chaffeur little folk around like a soccer mom on a Saturday afternoon.
I liked the dragon "Ellegon" from Joel Rosenberg's "Guardians of the Flame" series, where a bunch of gamers get plane shifted to a real fantasy world by their wizard game master, to engage in a quest to free said world from slavery.
The first slave they freed was the dragon, who had been chained into the sewers by a city government so he could incinerate their trash.
After freeing the dragon, he served as steed, mail service and ESP using 737 for the good guys for many decades.
I have a problem with all the spawn, half-dragon templates as well, but I don't have a problem with dragons doing whatever dragons want to do. It must get pretty boring just sitting around doing stereotypical dragon things, so I can see them potentially shifting into human form to interact with civilization.
but to "adapt" as a cosmopolitan city-dwelling elite is simply against a dragon's nature, regardless of the consequences. I think the idea of dragons masquarading as humans to mingle in society is bizarre and not supported in historical legends.
Actually there is a lot of support for that in folklore - especially Asian, but their are some European stories that get close to this idea. Certainly there is a lot more support for this idea than dragons as mounts.
Even in non humanoid form dragons that take up residence in wells in town spoiling the water.
In most European folklore dragons aren't really fleshed out characters they are analogues for plagues, calamaties, fires, droughts - not really stuff that supports the gamers interaction with intelligent dragons (Asian dragons support that better - though Tolkiens Smaug did have a lovely conversation with Bilbo).
The dragons of European lore were pretty light on conversation, the same can be said of Vampires - the vampire as a character - in modern storytelling is largely a function of bram Stoker (who took the bones of the vampire legend and created something really new for his time and Anne Rice (I know she wasn't the first modern vamp writer - just the best known), Vampires of lore were the corpses of the dead possessed by demons masquerading as the deceased - not the deceased empowered and cursed with dark energy.
Thats fine by me - I think there is a place for both memes - the character based creature works better sometimes in a heavy interaction setting, and in many ways are easier to stat up and use as game elements. Demons and Devils are other monsters severely altered for the game by passing through the lens of modern storytelling.
In regards to half-dragons they can work quite well when used sparingly, the movie the Golden Child having a good example of one.
There's a floor Monty, There's a floor.... There ain't no floor!
GGG
In regards to half-dragons they can work quite well when used sparingly, the movie the Golden Child having a good example of one.
GGG
Surprisingly, that movie had a lot of ideas and images that work well in a D&D campaign.
The dragonheart in the movie of the same name could produce a half-dragon as well - or dragon blooded progeny.
I'm merely going to express my appreciation for the authors and game designers who come up with wily hardcore wyrms who intimidate the populace, devour virgins, and who don't chaffeur little folk around like a soccer mom on a Saturday afternoon.
LOL.
I guess it comes down to preferences. I certainly enjoy the old Smaug-type dragons, and tend to think of dragons as avaricious loners with an extremely large helping of ego, in most cases. However, other ways of using dragons can be fun too, if it's not overdone. I think Lashonna and Ilthane are excellent NPCs in AoW, along with Dragotha, a Dracolich who is bad-ass enough to scare dozens of other dragons into submission.
In my homebrew world, dragons are closely associated with divinity--the Rain God is also the lord of all good dragons, and in mythic times past, the Rain God (as gods are wont to do) spread his seed among humankind--his scions were rulers of a mighty, magically powerful kingdom, and a few scattered descendents of this royal family still survive, although the kingdom was destroyed and the ancient palace is occupied by an ancient blue wyrm of fearsome reputation. Occasionally, the draconic ancestry of the exiled descendents breeds true, yielding strange sorcerous powers. This may seem silly and trite because lots of other people use similar themes, but the campaign is a low magic campaign, so such dragonblood sorcerers are rare--you don't have half-dragons (or even sorcerers) popping up on every street-corner.
Even half-dragons work for certain things. Red Hand of Doom features a large number of them, but in a way that makes sense, so it doesn't seem trite to me.
I think we've gotten jaded due to a surfeit of certain stereotyped elements in the current FRPG scene, so that the minute you mention Drow, Half-Dragons, (and fill in the next dozen betes-noires on your list) people roll their eyes and start gagging. Drizzt do Urden has turned out to be too much of a good thing, and with MMIV and other recent products (taking inspiration from Dragonlance draconians, I suppose?), half-dragons are now all the rage. We'll all be sick of Kyuss's various spawn by the time we finish Age of Worms, and of dinosaurs and fiendish beast-creatures by the time we finish STAP. That doesn't mean that an individual DM is incapable of using these old friends effectively, though. (Yes, my homebrew features Drow in a central way--but they're closer to the original Ecdrava & co. (before the Drow began sprouting like mushrooms in every sewer and dungeon in the Flanaess) than to Drizzt do Urden. They aren't stupid enough to reveal themselves on the surface in great numbers, their existence has been nearly forgotten, and therefore they retain a certain element of mystery.)
I think what's really going on here, is that, much as we want to support our hobby (and the company that keeps it going) with our cash, we are getting saturated with the zillions of new ideas (Prestige Classes, monster templates, feats, spells, etc. etc. etc.) we get bombarded with by WotC's marketing department, and we long for the simpler, starker mystique offered by the "original" game. We recaptured this mystique when 3.0 came out, as we had a new game with all the familiar monsters tweaked for the new rules, and could enjoy the mystery of being 1st level and facing goblins and dire rats all over again. We're ready to recapture it again, though we don't necessarily want a new edition of D&D to help us.
Last night, I helped my DM destroy a party of ten PCs with a greater doppelganger (my parting gift to my comrades in Lansing--the look on their faces when each of them realized I had betrayed them and was going to eat their brains was priceless, and fortunately they were good sports about it). When the night was done, the DM announced that a new campaign would begin next week, and all PCs would be built using only the PH.
I think it's symptomatic of the way a lot of us feel--we want to bring back the mystery the game has at its simplest, to recapture how we felt when we first started playing, or when we came back to the game after several years away. We want to take joy in playing a human fighter or an elf wizard, in slaying orcs and trolls and vampires, in winning a treasure with four potions and a +1 longsword. Almost makes me want to find a set of 1e books on e-bay for my next campaign!
Sorry for the long post--and farewell to GGG and other MI lurkers--I'm packing the rental truck and heading for upstate NY tomorrow.
Oh yes, and a parting shot. Half-dragons don't necessarily have to be a result of breeding. (What, sully oneself by breeding with puny, insignificant humans?) They can be the result of experimentation (a mad wizard, infusions of dragon's blood, etc.--cf. Ilthane in AOW). They can be a template bestowed by some sort of divine blessing by deities associated with draconic themes.
They can also (most intriguingly) be the result of a mysterious transformation that some hero (or unwitting victim) undergoes after he sleeps in an ancient dragon's lair, or on a dead dragon's pile of treasure, or because he filches some favorite piece of treasure from a dragon's hoard, or because he bathes in the slain dragon's blood because it is said to make him invincible (think Sigurd and Fafnir).
Edit--we could even explain Sigurd's "invincibility" this way in D&D terms--he bathes in the blood and starts growing scales, giving him a very high AC and giving rise to the rumor that his hide cannot be pierced by sword or spear.
These situations could be very rare or even one-time effects, the subject of epic songs about ancient tribal leaders who had it happen to them, or a hideous curse that repays a PC for his cruelty and greed in slaying a dragon by making him fearsome to look upon and outcast by humanity. They would make great elements for a D&D campaign. And I should think the last set of ideas above might fit in nicely with the themes of greed, magic, and mystery surrounding the Tolkienian/northern European dragons that Mr. Stewart (and I, and many others) so love. And the beauty of 3.5e, optional rules saturation and all, is that you can adjudicate the whole thing using the rules for transformation in Savage Species.
Bwahahaha! *starts wheels turning inside head for future campaign ideas*
.LOL.
I guess it comes down to preferences. I certainly enjoy the old Smaug-type dragons, and tend to think of dragons as avaricious loners with an extremely large helping of ego, in most cases. However, other ways of using dragons can be fun too, if it's not overdone. I think Lashonna and Ilthane are excellent NPCs in AoW, along with Dragotha, a Dracolich who is bad-ass enough to scare dozens of other dragons into submission.
In my homebrew world, dragons are closely associated with divinity--the Rain God is also the lord of all good dragons, and in mythic times past, the Rain God (as gods are wont to do) spread his seed among humankind--his scions were rulers of a mighty, magically powerful kingdom, and a few scattered descendents of this royal family still survive, although the kingdom was destroyed and the ancient palace is occupied by an ancient blue wyrm of fearsome reputation. Occasionally, the draconic ancestry of the exiled descendents breeds true, yielding strange sorcerous powers. This may seem silly and trite because lots of other people use similar themes, but the campaign is a low magic campaign, so such dragonblood sorcerers are rare--you don't have half-dragons (or even sorcerers) popping up on every street-corner.
Even half-dragons work for certain things. Red Hand of Doom features a large number of them, but in a way that makes sense, so it doesn't seem trite to me.
I think we've gotten jaded due to a surfeit of certain stereotyped elements in the current FRPG scene, so that the minute you mention Drow, Half-Dragons, (and fill in the next dozen betes-noires on your list) people roll their eyes and start gagging. Drizzt do Urden has turned out to be too much of a good thing, and with MMIV and other...
I agree with you on the mass production of certain types of 'popular creatures & villains' by our ever-marketing friends at Hasbro/WoTC. One of the reasons for my post is my observation that most people & most campaigns I've seen use dragons that are heavily involved with the human & demi-human races of the campaign (usually disguised as humanity) or serving as transportation. I've only played with one fellow GM who uses old-fashioned 'hardcore wyrms' who simply anihiliate people and take their gold. For that matter, I haven't run across GM's who present low-magic, medieval-like campaign settings where hardcore wyrms would tend to be found. Probably why I like Greyhawk the most of the produced campaigns available.
Have a safe move and enjoy New York.
Hmm I have no problem with dragons becoming mounts in certain situations such as a lawful good paladin and a lawful good dragon teaming up to take on some vile enemy; it would be a sharing of talents and resources as the dragon would not want to be reduced to the slow movement of a biped and together they would share in skill and abilities and be stronger together than apart.
Also, if a dragon and say a biped like an elf; became lovers; I would think that flying together would be fine; I cant ever see a dragon ever being subserviant though like a horse and submit to general use.
I agree with you on the mass production of certain types of 'popular creatures & villains' by our ever-marketing friends at Hasbro/WoTC. One of the reasons for my post is my observation that...
Thanks for the good wishes. And here's to the (fairly) low magic setting!
Have a safe move and best of luck in your new digs, Peruhain....hopefully you'll still be seen around here after you get settled in.
I've only played with one fellow GM who uses old-fashioned 'hardcore wyrms' who simply anihiliate people and take their gold. For that matter, I haven't run across GM's who present low-magic, medieval-like campaign settings where hardcore wyrms would tend to be found
I have a pretty low-magic setting, and my dragons in particular are low magic. The dragons in my homebrew aren't even very intelligent. I think of them as being like Fafnir or the dragon from Beowulf - horrifically powerful and cunning serpentine monstrosities, with the intelligence of a predatory animal that is hundreds of years old. They can't talk, use magic, or anything else, and they collect treasure like magpies, to attract mates. The fact that they are huge and cunning and can't be communicated with makes them pretty scary for the PC's. You can't reason with a dragon on my world any more than with a shark, and if a dragon takes up residence somewhere everything else leaves or is eaten pretty quickly. I use the stats of a red dragon for my world, but with intelligence 4 and no languages, magic, or anything. Since it's a low magic setting, a red dragon without the brain is still pretty scary and very hard to beat...
Basically I want my dragons to be nightmare monsters, like the creature from Alien. They are giant reptiles; their brains are so different from a mammal's that I don't want there to be any way the two could share a common motivation. Perhaps a druid could use speak with animals to talk to a dragon, but he wouldn't get much out of the experience except:
"Meat, come closer..."
ha, "Meat", nice.
I tend to go with the Tolkien pantheon of dragonage- Cold Drakes, Fire Drakes, Winged Drakes, and Winged Fire Drakes. the first 2 types are just big mean brawlers, while the second 2 are your smaug-esque Wyrms. The Wagnerian enchanting dragon has a lot of resonance as well, but most of the time I run dragons with out thier spells (usually cuz I forget, or TPK with the other toys:) ). A good way to scare a party is to early on runthem up against a dragon they cannot handle. Have the dragon explain to them the only reason they are not dead is that it just ate, and it prefers its prey fresh. Then watch what they do next time they see one flying over head....
|
Eberron is a little dragon-heavy for my tastes, too. I'm not attacking the setting; I actually like a lot of what I've seen so far (which isn't much, admittedly). However, having dragon shards, dragon marks, dragon marked houses, the world, sky, and underdark all be referenced to as bodies of dragons, and a continent filled with a council of dragons comes off as a little too much. I like each of those ideas individually, but all mixed in at once is a little over potent. Even having them all in one setting isn't necessarily bad, it's just that they are stressed too much.
I have seen this comment a few times (maybe from you) and also the riposte: Eberron is actually pretty dragon-light. They get mentioned lots, as you state. But they don't show up in person very much at all. They are alien, aloof beings sequestered (for the most part) in Argonessen, an entire separate continent. Yes, dragons feature a lot in the creation myth (which, frankly, doesn't bother me at all, though it is all a matter of taste) and the draconic prophesy (of which the dragonmarks are a part) but you hardly see dragons at all. Not a single published Eberron module has a dragon in it, by WotC or Dungeon.
|
I have seen this comment a few times (maybe from you) and also the riposte: Eberron is actually pretty dragon-light. They get mentioned lots, as you state. But they don't show up in person very much at all. They are alien, aloof beings sequestered (for the most part) in Argonessen, an entire separate continent.
Kinda like the girl from Ipanema.
I have seen this comment a few times (maybe from you) and also the riposte: Eberron is actually pretty dragon-light. They get mentioned lots, as you state. But they don't show up in person very much at all. They are alien, aloof beings sequestered (for the most part) in Argonessen, an entire separate continent. Yes, dragons feature a lot in the creation myth (which, frankly, doesn't bother me at all, though it is all a matter of taste) and the draconic prophesy (of which the dragonmarks are a part) but you hardly see dragons at all. Not a single published Eberron module has a dragon in it, by WotC or Dungeon.Eberron is a little dragon-heavy for my tastes, too. I'm not attacking the setting; I actually like a lot of what I've seen so far (which isn't much, admittedly). However, having dragon shards, dragon marks, dragon marked houses, the world, sky, and underdark all be referenced to as bodies of dragons, and a continent filled with a council of dragons comes off as a little too much. I like each of those ideas individually, but all mixed in at once is a little over potent. Even having them all in one setting isn't necessarily bad, it's just that they are stressed too much.
Pit of the Fire Lord. Other than that, you're right, and I stand corrected. Again, my exposure has been limited, and from my personal experience, they have been stressed a lot. However, in hindsight, the stressing of all that actually came from other critics of the setting, talking about how much dragon stuff there was, so my post may have been erroneous from the get-go. In any event, no, I haven't voiced such sentiment before on these boards to my knowledge.
When I use dragons in my own campaign, they're often equipped with a number of nasty surprises. I don't waste my time with what I think of as 'useless' feats like Persuasive or Combat Casting, Toughness, or Negotiator as they like to give dragons in the MM. Instead, I equip my dragons with metabreath feats from the Draconomicon, or the strafing breath feat from the Dragonlance setting.
I firmly believe dragons should be deadly, chocked full of surprises, and each encounter with one should be something the party remembers whether they fight it or not.
That said, I don't have a problem with all the draconic feats, dragon prestige classes, or people using dragons as mounts. Usually in the latter case, we're not talking about true servitude, but a partnership of sorts. You get an experienced warrior who serves the dragon by watching its back as they soar through the skies, and provides defense against would be-attackers. In return, the dragonrider gains a powerful 'mount' partnered with him in battle. It's a good situation for both of them, really.
My props to Kahoolin, you probably run a wonderful campaign, and I regret I can't participate in it.
Valegrim, I'm afraid I can't comprehend your point of view. Do dragons have no desire to breed within their own species??? Do reptiles frequently breed with warm-blooded creatures??? Are there a lack of dragons available for reproducing with each other? Does every eligible male dragon feel compelled to go chasing every elf maiden in sight simply for the novelty? Do female dragons prefer to hump smelly 7 INT hill giants or vomit scented trolls instead of male dragons? Let's keep it simple and have creatures breed within their own species, shall we.
I firmly believe dragons should be deadly.
When I run full powered dragons, I set up their skills with great planning. Most characters really can not stand against a well planned monster. They have skills and feats. Plan them out well, and then fight like the dragon is smart and wants to live through it.
Valegrim, I'm afraid I can't comprehend your point of view. Do dragons have no desire to breed within their own species??? Do reptiles frequently breed with warm-blooded creatures??? Are there a lack of dragons available for reproducing with each other? Does every eligible male dragon feel compelled to go chasing every elf maiden in sight simply for the novelty? Do female dragons prefer to hump smelly 7 INT hill giants or vomit scented trolls instead of male dragons? Let's keep it simple and have creatures breed within their own species, shall we.
Certainly not every dragon breeds with lesser species, but it seems to me entirely reasonable that dragons that take humanoid form might have love affairs of one sort or another.
Also, a mature dragon may view itself as a godlike being, and wish to spread its seed, just like Zeus and co. in Greek myths. These offspring then can become favorite tools of the dragon as it builds its power.
Sure, this can be overused, but it's not entirely unreasonable that a mighty red dragon might want to spawn various half-breeds--its motive is not enjoyment, but power.
|
|
Pit of the Fire Lord.
Did that have a dragon in it? I too stand corrected. And I think maybe Fake Healer - the great critic of Ebberoonn (sic) - might have said something like that, now you mention it.
On the more general point raised in this thread, I think all of the ideas and criticisms are interesting and point towards great campaigns. It is a question of taste, and also being creative with the settings (homebrew or otherwise).
Personally, I like my dragons to scheme evilly in the background as the big villains of the piece. Maybe some do rampage around, although they become the targets of adventurers - but those are the "dumb" or immature ones: I envisage a sort of Darwinian/political process where the dafter dragons get weeded out while the smarter ones gather their power and become much tougher cookies to crack (you don't live to over 1000 years old by being a violent schmuck).
Though I never actually (yet) played it, I did give a lot of thought to a campaign where a dragon (a blue in a desert setting) was actually the acknowledged ruler of a kingdom (actually, a satrap in a decadent and failing empire, where the emperor had been replaced by a council of the satraps). Though evil, it would be lawful enough to run a province effectively (harsh but fair - well, sort of). There was more to it (the dragon actually was a dracolich and worshipper of the Night Dragon, and was trying to resurrect its god) but it sort of got done in AoW. However, as my players haven't done AoW (and probably won't) maybe I'll use it after the current campaign.
And I agree with the dragons "doing it" with anything with a pulse seems a little odd - I've never fancied it with a horse, for example - but there can be decent reasons. Half-dragons should be expected to be much more common from golds and silvers, which can easily take humanoid form and have love affairs. In Zenith Trajectory, the black in that is just a rampant perv. And, as stated above, a half-dragon can be a useful cohort for a power-hungry dragon - smarter than the average of its type, but not so powerful as to be a threat. So an evil dragon could "think of England" and create half-dragon spawn with a view to conquest or security. And finally, there is the old excuse - in a recent Dungeon module by Andy Collins featuring the red Flame, it got very drunk, that crocodile started to look kinda sexy, and the rest is history.
Also, a mature dragon may view itself as a godlike being, and wish to spread its seed, just like Zeus and co. in Greek myths. These offspring then can become favorite tools of the dragon as it builds its power.Sure, this can be overused, but it's not entirely unreasonable that a mighty red dragon might want to spawn various half-breeds--its motive is not enjoyment, but power.
AS other posters (and I) have stated in other posts. Half breeds, dragon blooded, dragon marked, dragon gifted, beings need not be thte result of sexual unions either. Indeed in any given campaign world that may be the LEAST likely way to gain draconic characterists, dragons given a gift of their essence, bathing in dragon blood, eating dragon flesh, slaying a dragon, being exposed to certain kinds of draconic (or other magical) energy. Dragons actually "mating" with other species and those pairing resulting in offspring requires a certain type of dragon, as well as suspension of certain rules of biology (good thing magic is ot there to smooth it all over).
Further any number of "half dragonsesque" stuff is better explained by mutation (magic as opposed to radiation as the mutagen), a seperate race called half dragon because of their characteristics rather than any specific ancestry (though their own legends and beliefs may say otherwise), demons/devils/angels with draconic characteristics in the bloodline, magical experimentation, worship of a dragon, or dragonesque being, etc. etc. etc.
Even in the game there can be a separation of what the NPCs say, what they believe, and what is true. For example, the may say they are decended from dragons, beleive they are decended from a reptilian demon, and actually be the victim of a curse/blessing on a mere human ancestor generations ago.
In the end I think what is important is that you have thte level of cheese in your personal campaign world to suit your tastes and imagination. If your into draconic lotharios fine, if you like dragons to be aloof fine - doesn't mean their can't be individuals with draconic characterists - doesn't even take that much imagination.
My personal taste - I use dragon in the names of things - but actually am pretty light on dragons (or dragon blooded) things myself - I like dragons to be rare and removed from the events of humanoids.
WAAAAY back in the 1e Player's Handbook (I think - mine is in storage and I can't check it), there was the picture of the paladin who subdued a black dragon and there were rules (probably in the DMG or MM) for subduing a dragon.
Those filled my head with a lot of ideas as a player.
And then my DM hit us with a REAL dragon, and those thoughts pretty much fled. Two PCs died in the first round!
Anyway, be that as it may, the idea of subduing a dragon, especially a young one could justify a rider on the back of a dragon, or dragons could be bred for such uses as in Dragonlance.
Then again, I am in agreement with the last poster: Keep dragons rare and terrifying things, and all this half-dragon whatzits is a bit over-done.
I my games, the mere thought that a dragon circled the party's camp as they slept and only one of the PCs saw it, or the rumor of a dragon in the area is enough to make the players' and their PCs' blood run cold.
Dragons -- the ultimate power!
I my games, the mere thought that a dragon circled the party's camp as they slept and only one of the PCs saw it, or the rumor of a dragon in the area is enough to make the players' and their PCs' blood run cold.
And THAT, in my personal opinion, is how it should be.
I hated the thought of half dragons when 3rd edition came out, and I hate them now. They have been overused to the extent they have been used at all..
I too favour the smaug type Dragon, remembering though that Smaug was one of the oldest and most powerful left in the 3rd age. Most dragons would pale to his magnificence.
But they should be relatively scarce. My biggest beef with the Kings of The Rift adventure in age of worms was that you are throwing squadrons of these things at the players..ho humm..just killed another dragon..sigh..only 6 more to go..
sorry, but that is ridiculous..
I'm personally rather fond of the Darklands interpretation of Dragons. I can't really do it justice without directly quoting it, so...
"The dragon is not a natural or living creature. Instead, the dragon is an embodiment of evil, waiting for the final battle of Armageddon (as predicted in Revelations). Then it will fight with the forces of the Antichrist. Dragons do not eat normally; the more they eat, the hungrier they become, until they eat the entire world. A dragon cannot be satisfied. The more treasure it has, the more it desires until it has the entire treasure of the world and goes mad with the desire for more. The very existence of a living dragon, with its unnatural hungers, causes all types of sickness in the land, spreading pestilence and evil."
|
I have to agree with several of the other posters here. The less you see dragons the better. Then when one kills half the party, it is a memorable and hard fought battle. I remember my first sustained campaign: my elven fighter/mage got fragged by a black dragon - melted down by acid - and at least one other party member ended up with missing limbs. From that point on, with that DM, anytime the word dragon came up there was a collective "Aw crap!" from the group.
I hated the thought of half dragons when 3rd edition came out, and I hate them now. They have been overused to the extent they have been used at all..
I too favour the smaug type Dragon, remembering though that Smaug was one of the oldest and most powerful left in the 3rd age. Most dragons would pale to his magnificence.
But they should be relatively scarce. My biggest beef with the Kings of The Rift adventure in age of worms was that you are throwing squadrons of these things at the players..ho humm..just killed another dragon..sigh..only 6 more to go..
sorry, but that is ridiculous..
Actually, if done right, Kings of the Rift's background of dragons can be used to inspire awe. If Ilthane and her brood were handled well and inpired much fear and inflicted great wounds upon the party earlier in the campaign, then the sight of so many dragons should be a mind-blowing experience, letting the party get a sense of the utter and raw power of evil they are up against.
Then again, it has a high potential to be misused and give the impression of fighter squadrons of dragons, which was not the intent.
This is probably easiest to avoid when you have a group that's been together for quite a while, is very mature, and has never seen anything like that before, EVER, so they really get the impact of the scene before them.
I my games, the mere thought that a dragon circled the party's camp as they slept and only one of the PCs saw it, or the rumor of a dragon in the area is enough to make the players' and their PCs' blood run cold.
And THAT, in my personal opinion, is how it should be.
I agree :)
I've been playing for over 25 years, and I've seen a dragon encountered in an adventure less than a dozen times during that period. They are (in our campaigns) terrifying and rare.
I agree with Black Dougal that the imagery in Kings of the Rift was a bit too much for me. I understand what Saern is saying about the intent but I believe the intent is lost when the chances of *that* many dragons together in one place is inconceivable. I know, some will probably argue that the whole point is of a scene that has never before been witnessed and never shall again. I argue that it never should be. It is one thing to have some really iconic baddies massed together for a unique encounter and I don't even mind a few immature dragons along for the fortune & glory but just dozens of full-grown dragons all in one place is ridiculous. Rather than being ultimately terrifying, it reduces them to big flying lizards that we can chop down one by one. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the Kings of the Rift adventure (our group is a ways away from this one) but my immediate thought (and still my intention) is to pare down the dragons significantly. The first thing I did in fact, after finishing my read, was start calculating how many dragons of each type (good & evil) I was assuming existed in the entire world at this point and what age each would be. If dragons live for hundreds of years there certainly is no need to be reproducing all the time (don't get me started on the whole half-dragon crap). Also, it should not be forgotten that dragons are way at the top of the food chain and pretty close on the power chain as well. Just as a rakasha can't be around every corner, or yuan-ti, or other seriously overpowered creatures; neither can dragons be too common or all other civilizations would fail and the environment simply wouldn't support them. Besides, I myself would rather see a handful of dragons taking on an entire complex cliff-hanging city of giants (and certainly endangering my intrepid adventurers as they try desperately to make their way through) than squadrons of them just providing both the giants and my party with carnival-style moving targets.
I've seen an adaptation of Dragons (by Bill Willingham's comic book the Elementals) where dragons are natural shapeshifters. Young dragons hide in humanoid form because older dragons have a tendency to eat their young. Something like this helps add and explain the dragon classes and still add to the mystique.
Personally, I agree with most of you that dragons are best rare and terrifying. When run properly run players should wet themselves when confronted with one. Especially intelligent ones. I think the classes are fine as long as they fit in your world. Just make sure the dragons are played right, and consider whether or not a true dragon would like, respect or even tolerate some half breed. That might weed some characters from considering them.
I realize this is a D&D thread, but just for humourus comparison I refer you all to FASA's shadowrun game (set in earth 2050 after the return of magic), where some Dragons are still large lizards just sleeping on mountains of gold, but other are more savvy and modern, who take active interest in the affairs of mankind. They own businesses, are silent partners in ventures and agencies, are major shareholders in lots of corporations, and even rule entire megacorporation boards as CEOs (by proxy of course). Their hoards consist of stocks and bonds. I think that's hilarious (but logical in THAT setting at least given that they are supposed to be VERY intelligent).
Be safe all.
I don't get why people hate on dragons breeding outside of the species so much. Noone here(to my knowledge) can change their shape naturally or magically, so the idea of actually BEING something else is foriegn(unless you happen to be a VERY skilled actor, and/or in need of copious amounts of therapy). I take a page from the WONDERFUL Erevis Cale trilogy(read it, even if you aren't a fan of the realms) on this one- to monsters with damage reduction due to tough hides, humanoid forms(human, elf, gnome, even dwarf) are amazingly suited for hedonistic pursuits. Food tastes better(well, maybe not to a dragon's sophisticated palate) and intimate moments are far more sensuous. Who knows? Maybe this unconcious joie de vive is why the PC races are so greatly outnumber monsters(and don't get me started on the whole "Why don't monsters rule the world" debate).
Nor do I understand the powerful = rare equation. These are dragons we're talking about- it takes a pitched battle or truly powerful magic to even harm one, much less kill it. Being so powerful, and breeding as they do(both within and without their species), they and their kin stand a MUCH better chance of living out their life cycle and dying of old age than the adventurers who get it in their fool heads to attempt to wrassle 'em. While they certainly shouldn't appear in EVERY adventure or be behind EVERY plot(they do need to sleep, eat and socialize amongst themselves), they wouldn't feel the need to keep their numbers down due to their might.
The hatred for half-dragons really has me scratching my head though. I've loved them ever since second ed's Council of Wyrms, and they have always been a great inspiration to me. While they have the potential to be abused(perhaps even moreso than whole dragons due to the fact that they could be used as a race), I don't think that alone elicits the copious cups of haterade that are emptied in their name. They CAN be played with dignity- I think GLF President Lilith had a good experience with that on another topic somewheres. Heck, I'm banking on it- dragons and their kin play a very important role in my homebrew.
::hugging my copies of Dragonomicon, Council of Wyrms, and the dozens and dozens of Dragonlance books on my shelf::
P.S.- I voted for that dragon in Shadowrun! Too bad he was assassinated shortly into his term...
That just put a funny scene in my head:
Two dragons, in whatever passes as a dragon's bedroom.
"No, stop, we shouldn't be doing this..."
"Why not?"
"What if I get pregnant?"
"It's okay- I'm ready to have wyrmlings."
"No, it's not that; it would put the world over its quota of our kind and could interfere in some major plotlines."
"Oh, right."
|
|
That just put a funny scene in my head:
Two dragons, in whatever passes as a dragon's bedroom.
"No, stop, we shouldn't be doing this..."
"Why not?"
"What if I get pregnant?"
"It's okay- I'm ready to have wyrmlings."
"No, it's not that; it would put the world over its quota of our kind and could interfere in some major plotlines."
"Oh, right."
That sounds like something straight out of OotS. Funny! Although it does conjure some very disturbing pictures in my head.
Well here goes my first post.
I have played for about 30 years mostly DMing and i believe i have only used 5 fully fledged dragons in that time ( not counting running the much loved Dragonlance scenarios ) Each and everyone of them has been a dramatic encounter where the players around the table felt theor number was up.
I have no problems with Dragons visiting cities in humanoid forms for research purposes or for purposes of intrigue if that is their way but meet the same dragon in protection of its hoard and prepare for a mighty battle.
Dragons should be one of the ultimate enemies feared by all ( after all why call it Dungeons and Dragons? ) and that is how i like them portrayed.
Allow me if i may to recount a single encounter in a part of my campaign.
The scene was in a swamp land trekking through to a sunken temple. The first part of this encounter was a jet of acid hitting a tree almost melting the wood itself ( ooo strong acid ) Instantly the players assumed a black dragon but seeing the covered swamp area assumed it to be small. They ducked and dived getting closer as they feared their lives ( hmm and yes 1 of them fearing the loss of his prized armour ) the mage throwing a ball of fire into the area for good measure.
Imajone their surprise as they closed with some light to gaze at the Dracolisk ( yes the armour worrier did fail his save and began sinking as a statue into the swamp )
I guess what i am trying to show above is
a) the fear and respect dragons deserve comes from the use of them and
b) dragon hybrids can fit into the game.
Sure i dont use dragon borne , half dragons etc on every street corner or infact at all up to now but it dosnt mean i wouldnt.
Now in comparison the game a actually get to play in is very dragon heavy with a abyssal drake being the overall evil master in the area and using tiamat priests and many dragon kin as our enemies in a secluded area of the world. This game is equally enjoyable because thats how it is set the players know it and the dm knows it ( obviously ) so all are happy.
Are there a lot of dragon based suppliments/ articles coming out now and recently? ---YES
Is this a bad thing? --- Not if you want them.
Anyways sorry for such a long first post but i kinda got into it
Befarr
That just put a funny scene in my head:
Two dragons, in whatever passes as a dragon's bedroom.
"No, stop, we shouldn't be doing this..."
"Why not?"
"What if I get pregnant?"
"It's okay- I'm ready to have wyrmlings."
"No, it's not that; it would put the world over its quota of our kind and could interfere in some major plotlines."
"Oh, right."
Saern, you madcap. You crack me up. Thanks for illustrating my point so perfectly. Oh, and welcome to NY, Peruhain! While you're several hours away from me in all probability, I hope to run into you at my local game store.
I don't get why people hate on dragons breeding outside of the species so much. Noone here(to my knowledge) can change their shape naturally or magically, so the idea of actually BEING something else is foriegn(unless you happen to be a VERY skilled actor, and/or in need of copious amounts of therapy). I take a page from the WONDERFUL Erevis Cale trilogy(read it, even if you aren't a fan of the realms) on this one- to monsters with damage reduction due to tough hides, humanoid forms(human, elf, gnome, even dwarf) are amazingly suited for hedonistic pursuits. Food tastes better(well, maybe not to a dragon's sophisticated palate) and intimate moments are far more sensuous. Who knows? Maybe this unconcious joie de vive is why the PC races are so greatly outnumber monsters(and don't get me started on the whole "Why don't monsters rule the world" debate).
Nor do I understand the powerful = rare equation. These are dragons we're talking about- it takes a pitched battle or truly powerful magic to even harm one, much less kill it. Being so powerful, and breeding as they do(both within and without their species), they and their kin stand a MUCH better chance of living out their life cycle and dying of old age than the adventurers who get it in their fool heads to attempt to wrassle 'em. While they certainly shouldn't appear in EVERY adventure or be behind EVERY plot(they do need to sleep, eat and socialize amongst themselves), they wouldn't feel the need to keep their numbers down due to their might.
The hatred for half-dragons really has me scratching my head though. I've loved them ever since second ed's Council of Wyrms, and they have always been a great inspiration to me. While they have the potential to be abused(perhaps even moreso than whole dragons due to the fact that they could be used as a race), I don't think that alone elicits the copious cups of haterade that are emptied in their name. They CAN be played with dignity- I think GLF President Lilith had a good experience with that on another...
The dislike for half dragons might have something to do with people's basic understanding that we as human beings are INCAPABLE of cross-breeding with any other species on earth. As far as I know, if you were theoretically combine sperm to egg of say human & dog, human & giraffe, human & horse, human and komodo dragon, etc., NO conception occurs. When was the last time you saw a half-human/half-tiger walking around the nearby shopping mall? Cross-species reproduction simply is not ever seen in nature. Period.
So I ask the obvious question, why have some of you beeen convinced by some sexually disturbed game designer that Dragons are some sort of Walking-Maternity-Machines that are cranking out half-Anything's with Anybody? Just as you never see a half-hippo/half-rhino roaming around Africa, or a half-cat/half-dog running around anyone's house, I would contend that logic would hold that Dragons, fictitious creatures that they are, simply aren't capable of breeding with another species.
Actually, the inability to cross breed is one of the defining characteristics of a species. If you have, say, two forms of similar animals and they can interbreed, it is my understanding they are the same species. If they can't, they are distinct species.
That said, I have two words that fix everything: "Fantasy" and "Magic."
Obviously, there are steps taken by the game to make it more believable and "realistic," but in the end, there are certain premises that have to be overriden to make it a fantasy game. No one complains about half-orcs and half-elves when they complain about half-dragons.
I think a lot of people realize this, and the theoretical capability of the animals to interbreed with other organisms isn't the issue at all- it's the over use of an admittedly bizarre situation, and the cheesy nature in which many people perpetrate such overuse that galls so many DMs, me thinks.
The dislike for half dragons might have something to do with people's basic understanding that we as human beings are INCAPABLE of cross-breeding with any other species on earth. As far as I know, if you were theoretically combine sperm to egg of say human & dog, human & giraffe, human & horse, human and komodo dragon, etc., NO conception occurs. When was the last time you saw a half-human/half-tiger walking around the nearby shopping mall? Cross-species reproduction simply is not ever seen in nature. Period.
So I ask the obvious question, why have some of you beeen convinced by some sexually disturbed game designer that Dragons are some sort of Walking-Maternity-Machines that are cranking out half-Anything's with Anybody? Just as you never see a half-hippo/half-rhino roaming around Africa, or a half-cat/half-dog running around anyone's house, I would contend that logic would hold that Dragons, fictitious creatures that they are, simply aren't capable of breeding with another species.
That gives me an idea actually. Maybe there could be a reason why dragons can interbreed with everything. You could play up the shapeshifter angle so that dragons were the first and mightiest of shapeshifters. Perhaps they are an alien cross-planar species who mastered matter millenia ago, but something happened to strip them of their innate plane-hopping abilities. Perhaps their minds can shape their bodies, and the "dragon" form could be the one most similar to their original form so it is the one they revert to as a default. But really they are no more a giant winged lizard than they are anything, and physical forms are totally mutable to them. Instead of being the primogenitors of kobolds, perhaps dopplegangers are their descendants. And they are capable of successfully mating (or not) with whatever material being they choose. I don't know, it could be cool.