To distinguish them between alignment and type?
I'm just wondering, I've always liked the idea of running into a gold dragon and not knowing if it would try to kill our group outright or not.
|
I'm hoping for aloof dragons. I don't mind the alignment typecasting via scale color, but the very thing I loved so much when I was 13 reading the Dragonlance novels, I now can't stand and don't allow in any of my games: dragonriders. I am particularly fond of the Eberron approach to dragons. At any rate, I would love to see dragons that
• aren't easily outwitted by wily, cunning adventurers (ala Drizzt & Cadderly)
• aloof, antisocial, speciesists who rarely, if ever, deign to associate with the “lower forms”
• won’t fight each other, no matter what scales they wear; kind of a dragon mafia
• observers-at-a-distance, and more Rakshasan in their demeanor; definitely conspiracists
Then why have colors at all? Make them all green firebreathers like the iconic images of them are and be done with it.
I like the metallic vs. chromatic / good vs. evil element to dragon society. It lends a sort of primal history to the species. Even if only the most ancient of ancient dragons are involved in the celestial power struggle of good vs. evil, the varying color of the scales of even the small, non-speaking, animalistic versions of the dragons reflects their epic destinies.
Then why have colors at all? Make them all green firebreathers like the iconic images of them are and be done with it.
I like the metallic vs. chromatic / good vs. evil element to dragon society. It lends a sort of primal history to the species. Even if only the most ancient of ancient dragons are involved in the celestial power struggle of good vs. evil, the varying color of the scales of even the small, non-speaking, animalistic versions of the dragons reflects their epic destinies.
Agreed.
Also, I like Andrew Turner's point re: dragonriders. Actually, even when I first read and loved DL (also when I was around 13), I didn't even really like them all that much then. It never made any sense to me. I remember trying to puzzle out what possible benefit the dragon got from a human slapped on his back. Obviously the human got a benefit, and it would make sense if the dragons were of bestial intelligence, but they aren't. They're just as smart as humans; in fact, much more so. Then why on earth does having dragonriders make any sense at all?
I do not use, have never used, and will never use a dragonrider in any of my games, nor will I allow players to take on such roles unless it makes an amazing amount of sense (which I highly doubt it ever will).
|
|
I still think the alignment colors are great, but I mean that they (dragons) aren't out there necessarily living up to alignment/scale tint expectations; and that the good vs. evil bent is more subversive, more centuries-spanning detailed machinations, struggles for power between the dragons that have been on-going since the beginning. I particularly like the use of the 'lesser forms' (by dragons) to meet their ends and advance their ploys--I'm looking at this from a Cold War perspective. Anyway, this style would be different, somewhat unexpected, but not too alien to be unbelievable and, dare I say, cool...
Oh, this is in reply to Fletch.
Creative Director
|
The ten dragons in the SRD (black, blue, green, red, white, brass, bronze, copper, gold, and silver) are going to be the same in Pathfinder. These ten dragons have been iconic since the start, and changing them around isn't something I'm interested in doing. They're beloved parts of the game, and more to the point, they're traditional parts of the game across pretty much every campaign setting.
We'll certainly be adding new dragons to our setting as time goes on, and the physical look of our dragons will differ (in the same way our goblins and kobolds look a little different from the MM versions), but their game stats are not changing.
That pretty much goes for all of the SRD monsters.
For monsters we pick up from OGL sources and D20 products beyond the SRD, that won't always be the case; we'll probably adjust some of them here and there to fit our world better.
But as a general rule, the SRD monsters are pretty institutionalized in the game, and drastic changes to their game stats and basic niche in the world is self-defeating and disrespectful.
To distinguish them between alignment and type?
I'm just wondering, I've always liked the idea of running into a gold dragon and not knowing if it would try to kill our group outright or not.
Well, 'twould seem that the 'iconic 10' dragons are in for sure. It will be interesting indeed to see if they provide for a different world-look on critters in the new campaign world. Especially different alignments ...
Of course, I personally hope for dragons to be much, much rarer in the new game world. Dragons are critters to be rightly feared, rather than " oh look ... we've levelled up ... so, which dragon are we looking at again ? "
To distinguish them between alignment and type?
I'm just wondering, I've always liked the idea of running into a gold dragon and not knowing if it would try to kill our group outright or not.
Well, 'twould seem that the 'iconic 10' dragons are in for sure. It will be interesting indeed to see if they provide for a different world-look on critters in the new campaign world. Especially different alignments ...
Of course, I personally hope for dragons to be much, much rarer in the new game world. Dragons are critters to be rightly feared, rather than " oh look ... we've levelled up ... so, which dragon are we looking at again ? "
I concur with Jacobs and Turin. In fact, I'd do without some of the ten listed. Give me Reds, who needs the rest.
I'm kinda glad, as I pretty much intend to adapt these things to Eberron and the less I need to change stuff around, the better.