| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Brimstone |
Posted - 09 Nov 2009 : 13:42:47
Jalanvaloss
Pretty good article. Free PDF, from the Upcoming Draconomicon. Yes it does say you could use her in Eberron. The Dragon Queen of Silverymoon will also be in this book. So I know I will be picking this up. |
| 14 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Quale |
Posted - 19 Nov 2009 : 18:46:05
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Both prophecies and dragons can be fun, if handled correctly. I've heard too many tales of DMs not using dragons correctly, though. And I think prophecies are better if they don't actually involve the PCs.
Though one of my Hooks did feature what may or may not have been a prophecy... Part of the Hook was that the mysterious message could have been a prophecy or a hoax. I wrote that Hook at least 3 years ago, and I still haven't figured out a good meaning for it! 
Sure, everything if handled correctly is fun. Forgot about the dungeons, imo they're even more annoying than dragons. There are a bunch of books about the dragons, who are supposed to be mythical (and drow) with every new edition, and never a necronomicon, a planar folio, or a ''fey grimoire''. |
| Cleric Generic |
Posted - 19 Nov 2009 : 18:15:50
In my experience, and NPC being a useful 'good guy' with info is rarely an impediment to killing it and taking it's stuff :)
I rather like a fair few bits from Draconomicon 2, personally. Reading up on the Mercury Dragon inslired a scene in my head where one is trying to assassinate a monarch is a grand throne room that I WILL shoehorn into my game somehow...
As for the billion odd breeds of dragon, I've never opperated under the belief that they can all be used or even slotted into a single coherent campaign world, so I cherry pick from the heap of contradictory and overlapping material for the most appropriate examples.
Out of interest, what do people consider to be the 'proper' use of dragons? Presumably this means not using them as mindless monsters, but as 3d characters interacted with over time?
Also, +1 vote for Song Dragons!
EDIT: Mercury, not Mithril (though they're kinda nifty as well) |
| Brimstone |
Posted - 19 Nov 2009 : 13:42:05
The Guys I usually game with, when we meet a dragon they start rolling spot checks.  
They want to know what loot it has, or they start looking up what spells they may need to use on it.
Yet its a Gold Dragon NPC that has info for us, for CRYING OUT LOUD PEOPLE... |
| The Sage |
Posted - 19 Nov 2009 : 13:33:23
Here's a vote for more on song/were-dragons.  |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 19 Nov 2009 : 13:21:33
quote:
Originally posted by Gray Richardson
Well, after all, the game is called "Dungeons & Dragons" so for me, the more the merrier. I am even hoping they do a 3rd dragonomicon devoted to the gem dragons.
I don't have a problem with gem dragons. My issue is that with all the existing metallic, chromatic, and gemstone dragons, they feel compelled to keep adding more and more flavors. I thought it got ridiculous back in 2E -- and the flow of new dragon types that pop up and disappear in one article or sourcebook has continued for 20 years.
Seriously -- how often have you seen cobalt, pearl, energy, arack, or orange dragons? All of those have been in Dragon. By my count, we've had more than 100 new dragons introduced just in Dragon, and some of them, like the yellow, have appeared more than once.
quote:
Originally posted by Gray Richardson
In my campaign, I have used dragons quite often to great effect. From a juvenile, somewhat incompetent dragon that waylaid the party and tried to extort money from them to keep him from killing them, to Theriantherax, the mother of the wizard's familiar who pursued the party relentlessly for kidnapping her egg. Each of whom fled the scene when their hit points got too low, which had my players crying out in rage for their blood and pledging revenge. It was amusing to me that the players were so frustrated that the monsters had the gall to up and leave before my players could slay them. It had a strange galvanizing effect on the party each time, nursing a mutual hatred for the one that got away...
My players have met Deszeldaryndun Silverwing (though he was in disguise as Alustriel, and the party didn't know it at the time) and Valamaradace in her floating lair. There was a cave dragon in the Underdark intent on eating them that my players actually used diplomacy on to win him over and befriend him, a surprising result given their usual bloodthirst.
They once purchased passage from a pyroclastic dragon in the Plane of Fire to ride his back across a sea of lava. And there was a memorable encounter with a dragon-turtle that sank their sailing ship, initiating a detour from their mission that saw them explore the ocean depths, travel to the City of Glass, and cross the Paraelemental plane of Ice for many sessions before finally returning to Faerūn.
I honestly love using dragons as villains, NPC's and allies. I try to work them in as often as appropriate, as fits the adventure.
See, all of that is fine. I don't have an objection to using dragons -- it's just that too many DMs turn dragons into big piles of hit points that exist to be slain.
I like dragons. I just don't like that in D&D there are as many types of dragon as there are breeds of dog in the real-world, and that a lot of DMs don't know how to properly run them. |
| Gray Richardson |
Posted - 19 Nov 2009 : 07:38:45
Well, after all, the game is called "Dungeons & Dragons" so for me, the more the merrier. I am even hoping they do a 3rd dragonomicon devoted to the gem dragons.
In my campaign, I have used dragons quite often to great effect. From a juvenile, somewhat incompetent dragon that waylaid the party and tried to extort money from them to keep him from killing them, to Theriantherax, the mother of the wizard's familiar who pursued the party relentlessly for kidnapping her egg. Each of whom fled the scene when their hit points got too low, which had my players crying out in rage for their blood and pledging revenge. It was amusing to me that the players were so frustrated that the monsters had the gall to up and leave before my players could slay them. It had a strange galvanizing effect on the party each time, nursing a mutual hatred for the one that got away...
My players have met Deszeldaryndun Silverwing (though he was in disguise as Alustriel, and the party didn't know it at the time) and Valamaradace in her floating lair. There was a cave dragon in the Underdark intent on eating them that my players actually used diplomacy on to win him over and befriend him, a surprising result given their usual bloodthirst.
They once purchased passage from a pyroclastic dragon in the Plane of Fire to ride his back across a sea of lava. And there was a memorable encounter with a dragon-turtle that sank their sailing ship, initiating a detour from their mission that saw them explore the ocean depths, travel to the City of Glass, and cross the Paraelemental plane of Ice for many sessions before finally returning to Faerūn.
I honestly love using dragons as villains, NPC's and allies. I try to work them in as often as appropriate, as fits the adventure.
|
| The Sage |
Posted - 18 Nov 2009 : 16:38:36
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Quale
Personally the most annoying cliche after prophecies are dragons. I only enjoy using more unique ones, like the astral.
Both prophecies and dragons can be fun, if handled correctly.
I'm inclined to agree.
Prophecies can be a lot of fun in a campaign. It's important to note that even attempting to provide specific information about any of the prophecies you present should be exceedingly difficult, for the most part. After all, and as an example, it's not unheard of for Alaundo's/Augathra's prophecies to have a number of different ways they're interpreted/seen. And, thus, such ambiguity can help send the party into all kinds of adventure and strife. Good stuff! 
As for dragons...
In my Realms, I've only ever used dragons, as a major adventure encounter, twice. And each time, I spent months building up the story to that final confrontation with the draconic overlord. But, I've learned an important lesson when utilising dragons in a campaign... it's not so much about the end result -- the party versus the dragon. Rather, it's the long and arduous journey to reach that point. Then, each PC can truly feel that sense of awesome accomplishment when they finally bring the wyrm down. They'll each come away from the campaign with a deep sense of satisfaction and respect for these wondrous creatures. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 18 Nov 2009 : 16:11:18
quote:
Originally posted by Quale
Personally the most annoying cliche after prophecies are dragons. I only enjoy using more unique ones, like the astral.
Both prophecies and dragons can be fun, if handled correctly. I've heard too many tales of DMs not using dragons correctly, though. And I think prophecies are better if they don't actually involve the PCs.
Though one of my Hooks did feature what may or may not have been a prophecy... Part of the Hook was that the mysterious message could have been a prophecy or a hoax. I wrote that Hook at least 3 years ago, and I still haven't figured out a good meaning for it! |
| Quale |
Posted - 18 Nov 2009 : 15:56:55
Personally the most annoying cliche after prophecies are dragons. I only enjoy using more unique ones, like the astral. |
| Mr_Miscellany |
Posted - 10 Nov 2009 : 00:00:39
Hehe I used Jalanvaloss in my Third Edition Realms game. While the new entry for her in Draconomicon is hardly enlightening, I can still use it to advance her forward in time for my Fourth Edition Realms game. Love the artwork depicting her as well. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 09 Nov 2009 : 23:38:46
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Don't get me wrong, I like some of these other ones, but there's a lot of them that seem to be created not to fill a purpose, but just to have yet another flavor of dragon.
Indeed. There's already more than enough dragon types without any actual purposes previously featured in D&D lore. Enough, at least, to warrant finding places for them first, before generating new types.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 09 Nov 2009 : 22:29:11
quote:
Originally posted by Asharak
It's... disappointing, and don't give me desire to see more...
Yeah, that was my thought, too. However, I'm not certain how I would have regarded this article in the absence of prior lore. If I didn't know a thing about Jalanvaloss, I might have enjoyed this article more. |
| Asharak |
Posted - 09 Nov 2009 : 18:30:26
It's... disappointing, and don't give me desire to see more... |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 09 Nov 2009 : 16:38:52
Looking further down that page, I see a new dragon type called "Orium dragon". And it disappoints me. Even in 2E, I thought it was ridiculous that they kept introducing new dragon types as oft as they could... Don't get me wrong, I like some of these other ones, but there's a lot of them that seem to be created not to fill a purpose, but just to have yet another flavor of dragon.
If you looked at all the new monsters that have been intro'ed over the years, you'll see that the two types we see the most often are dragons and undead. I'd prefer to see something else other than yet another variation on a theme that was quite well explored 20 years ago. |
|
|
