While I am a little miffed about chromatic and metallic dragons no longer getting more love from Paizo, and I’ve even been somewhat jokingly saying “RIP Brass Bois” everywhere, I am admittedly excited for new dragon types
However, all we have been told so far is they they “look cool”. While I don’t doubt that, what I’m and I’m sure others are really interested in is how are the dragons gonna be like personality and characteristic wise?
The reason I love brass dragons so much is they are hilarious and fun. They are extremely chatty and very social, they are a little goofy, and they are very very energetic and hyper.
We need dragons that have personalities and characteristics that make then despicable and terrifying, something heroes can fight, but we also need dragons, like brass dragons or copper dragons, who are lovable and well liked, a dragon that would get along with heroes or at the very least cause hilarious chaos.
I can’t wait to see the “badass” dragons as Mark described the new dragons as being, but I also want a lovable dragon to fill the void that metallic dragons such as brass or copper dragons used to fill.
“Lovable” dragons led to iconic moments such as Barnaby the Brass Dragon in the D&D community, a dragon who just wanted friends to party with but was abandoned and forgotten by mean adventurers. I remember people told me a couple stories of their encounters with brass bois, forgot if it was D&D or Pathfinder, but one of them said a brass dragon dramatically landed in front of the party and then asked loudly “DO YOU WANT TO HAVE SOME SOUP?” And then proceeded to give free soup to the party. The other person mentioned they were making small talk with a brass dragon, and then one of the party members offered the dragon coffee. The dragon drank the coffee and all hell broke loose. Caffeine in the system of a hyper creature does not bode well. The dragon become extremely energized and hilarity ensued. Nothing more fun than a huge and very hyper dragon that just wants a fren to talk to
I’m hoping one of the new dragons can fill that lovable dragon role, so we can get similar moments like these.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
With chromatic dragons, the best way to mess with the PCs was to mix their colors up so their breath weapons didn't match their color. For me, dragons are too powerful and intelligent to be only defined by color. In most games with dragons, you're dealing with individual dragons. At that point, I feel they all should have their own unique personalities and abilities.
With chromatic dragons, the best way to mess with the PCs was to mix their colors up so their breath weapons didn't match their color. For me, dragons are too powerful and intelligent to be only defined by color. In most games with dragons, you're dealing with individual dragons. At that point, I feel they all should have their own unique personalities and abilities.
I was trying to come up with a good way to say this. Thank you!
I don't think that metallic and chromatic dragons will simply disappear or be merged. They probably will only loose their fixed alignment rules only no more making their metallic colors as main definition that they are good or bad
Probably just the terms Metallic and Chromatic that will be changed to prevent problems with WotC.
The issue I would currently have with this is how much of that OGL they've used with previously existing content; given that Age of Ashes (one of the first APs made in the PF2 system) has a large amount of history and storytelling reliant on this, it would be a serious retcon for both that, and any other stories that have such dragons as a central point in it. If the idea is "We can't use Chromatic and Metallic dragons because they're bound by OGL," it puts stories like Age of Ashes into serious question as to whether they can be reasonably played by the PF2 ruleset without relying on the OGL.
And unfortunately, I don't think it will be just a term change and mechanics substitution, similar to what they're doing with Alignment, because that doesn't seem like it will be enough.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Relevant quote from the Directorsaurus:
The existing dragons in 2nd edition aren't vanishing from the game. You can still use them in your games in the remastered rules. And we'll continue to have them play roles in Golarion in remastered adventures... but that's a "later and down the line" goal for us. We want to put some of our new dragons front and center in the Monster Core to build some of our own scaly friends and foes!
The issue I would currently have with this is how much of that OGL they've used with previously existing content; given that Age of Ashes (one of the first APs made in the PF2 system) has a large amount of history and storytelling reliant on this, it would be a serious retcon for both that, and any other stories that have such dragons as a central point in it. If the idea is "We can't use Chromatic and Metallic dragons because they're bound by OGL," it puts stories like Age of Ashes into serious question as to whether they can be reasonably played by the PF2 ruleset without relying on the OGL.
And unfortunately, I don't think it will be just a term change and mechanics substitution, similar to what they're doing with Alignment, because that doesn't seem like it will be enough.
But Dragons isn't an invention of D&D. Even the colorful ones. Paizo may want to change more characteristics than make then metallic or non-metallic that is a thing more d&deish but in order to proven't break the continuity of Golarion lore they probably will keep these dragons with different characteristics and names.
EDIT: Sounds like the dragons have been commented on already by Paizofolk! Still, I'll leave my post.
The stories you're describing don't sound like the brass dragons as they're described in Pathfinder already, at least to me? Pathfinder in general seems to treat dragons a bit more seriously than D&D, but that might loosen up with these changes.
That's mostly to say, I think some of this comes from the individual interpretation, which will still be applied much as it has been.
I can see some types of hypothetical dragons under the new system that could fit.
Firstly, occult dragons are a good candidate in general. They're already mentioned as... I think it was going in disguise more? But if we get an occult dragon that leans into it similar to how the Bard class does, that's a good fit. Collecting stories and songs from people to tease out collective impressions.
Secondly, in the divine category, when we get a dragon based on Elysium, that will be an excellent fit. Freedom, mirth, and good natured humor. I think we had one of these in PF1 already.
Thirdly, in the primal category, there's a slim chance of a dragon with more fey-like elements. I'd put that at a low chance because linnorms already have First World ties and are Not Nice.
Finally, for arcane... I don't have much, but I imagine that the iconic Summoner's dragon eidolon will remain arcane, and they seem pretty friendly. That might influence the corresponding dragon type.
That said, you will have copper dragons to about the same degree. Paizo wasn't likely to publish much for them adventure-wise, the stats are published under fully compatible OGL rules, the giant third-party book of playable dragons includes them already, and D&D will keep their versions popular and in the public consciousness enough that they can be used or requested in Pathfinder games. I would view this as a chance at maybe getting more dragons of your favorite type, rather than a loss.