PDA

View Full Version : [4ed] Metallic Dragons



Gorbash
2008-05-31, 03:40 PM
Am I missing something or there are no Metallic Dragons in 4th ed? In MM, only the Chromatic dragons are present, and Metallic are just mentioned... Wth?

Talya
2008-05-31, 03:43 PM
Am I missing something or there are no Metallic Dragons in 4th ed? In MM, only the Chromatic dragons are present, and Metallic are just mentioned... Wth?



No good dragons.
No good outsider types.

There's an obvious pattern at work there...obviously, the only things worth mentioning are the things you stick the pointy end of your sword into.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-05-31, 03:43 PM
Am I missing something or there are no Metallic Dragons in 4th ed? In MM, only the Chromatic dragons are present, and Metallic are just mentioned... Wth?

They're coming in a new Dragon Book, like the mythical Epic Martial Destinies. :smallannoyed:

Kurald Galain
2008-05-31, 03:43 PM
Am I missing something or there are no Metallic Dragons in 4th ed? In MM, only the Chromatic dragons are present, and Metallic are just mentioned... Wth?

I think this is for the same reason that the evil gods got cut out from the player's handbook.

Gorbash
2008-05-31, 03:44 PM
{Scrubbed}

I'm sooooo not playing this piece of crap...

LoopyZebra
2008-05-31, 03:53 PM
Is it really that big a deal that they're gone? You could always homebrew them, or improvise with their chromatic counterparts (just re-fluff 'em). The system has enough merits that it isn't completely useless due to the lack of a once in a campaign encounter.

Reel On, Love
2008-05-31, 03:56 PM
Why do you need the stats for metallic dragons, anyway? Planning on having some PCs kill them?

SamTheCleric
2008-05-31, 03:56 PM
The metallic dragons are unaligned now anyway... take the corresponding chromatic dragons... and say they have a metallic sheen.


Metallic dragons are in some ways the opposite of the
chromatic dragons. Many of them are devoted to Bahamut
and share his ideals of nobility and virtue. Many others fail
to live up to those lofty ideals and succumb to a selfishness
and aggression that seems common among all of dragonkind.

There are also new dragon types... Catastrophic, Planar and Scourge. They arent in this monster manual either, they get the same paragraph long description as the metallic.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-05-31, 03:58 PM
The metallic dragons are unaligned now anyway... take the corresponding chromatic dragons... and say they have a metallic sheen.

Gimme a Gold dragon, or a silver dragon. No correspondence there.

Gorbash
2008-05-31, 03:59 PM
Yes, actually, it is. It's the principal on which the whole of the edition is based (stick 'em with the pointy end), kicking out some of the classes, not to mention races, introducing Tieflings and not Aasimars (or other planetouched, for that matter), making the rules simpler for the Average Joe (out of the whole grapple system they made a Grab attack which is just attack vs. reflex, and if you hit, the target is pinned), 29 spell levels, no evil gods... This just what I managed to see after a skim read of all the three books, and I seriously disapprove of the whole edition, as should any serious 3.5 gamer.

I just want to know WHY? If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Why kick out gnomes? And Bronze Dragons? WHY?

SamTheCleric
2008-05-31, 03:59 PM
Gimme a Gold dragon, or a silver dragon. No correspondence there.

Red and White. Done.

Innis Cabal
2008-05-31, 04:00 PM
Yet another example of people looking at one thing and making an assumption on the whole rest of the game. So you cant kill good creatures, most people dont play evil anyway so whats the point?

Reel On, Love
2008-05-31, 04:01 PM
Yes, actually, it is. It's the principal on which the whole of the edition is based (stick 'em with the pointy end), kicking out some of the classes, not to mention races, introducing Tieflings and not Aasimars (or other planetouched, for that matter), making the rules simpler for the Average Joe (out of the whole grapple system they made a Grab attack which is just attack vs. reflex, and if you hit, the target is pinned), 29 spell levels, no evil gods... This just what I managed to see after a skim read of all the three books, and I seriously disapprove of the whole edition, as should any serious 3.5 gamer.

Evil gods exist, they just aren't detailed in the PHB.
They kicked out some classes and races and brought in some new ones. This happens EVERY edition.
Simplifying the horrible, awful Grapple rules can NOT be a bad thing.

4E has its problems. The things you describe aren't among them.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-05-31, 04:04 PM
Red and White. Done.

That is not a color inversion. Quoting you:


The metallic dragons are unaligned now anyway... take the corresponding chromatic dragons... and say they have a metallic sheen

Red never looked golden to me, and White dragons are the weakest of the lot, a far cry from the silver dragons, who can toe to toe it with reds.

I'm not saying your fix is bad, but you should phrase it better.

Gorbash: Gnomes are in the MM. They're not out.

Shhalahr Windrider
2008-05-31, 04:04 PM
What the crap?

No evil deities mentioned in the PH, either? So are they outlawing Evil PCs?

Hell, even if that, a list of evil deities would be nice so you could know the enemy.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-05-31, 04:05 PM
What the crap?

No evil deities mentioned in the PH, either? So are they outlawing Evil PCs?

Hell, even if that, a list of evil deities would be nice so you could know the enemy.

There is a list, they just aren't described in the thorough fashion that good and unaligned deities are. Want a list?

Cuddly
2008-05-31, 04:06 PM
What the crap?

No evil deities mentioned in the PH, either? So are they outlawing Evil PCs?

Hell, even if that, a list of evil deities would be nice so you could know the enemy.

No, you just have to buy that patch.
I mean expansion.
I mean splatbook.

SamTheCleric
2008-05-31, 04:07 PM
Yes the evil deities are in the PHB, they are just one line descriptions instead of the paragraph that the good/unaligned get. Hardly any difference, especially since there arent "domains" or anything mechanically related to your god, save for a single feat (channel divinity).

Cybren
2008-05-31, 04:09 PM
Really though i always thought metallic dragons were dumb.

Red and black. that's all we need

Illiterate Scribe
2008-05-31, 04:11 PM
But what does it matter, since we're all playing Sorrow McAngsticus, the Tiefling Warlock, who struggles daily with his inner darkness, yet really broodingly cool? Why bother even with the rule 'if it's a shiny dragon, don't kill it yet', when you can just slaughter anything that moves anyway? Even other humans/dragonborn/tieflings are on a lesser plane than you, inherently different with their inferior class templates.

Roll on 4e, I say.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-05-31, 04:12 PM
Really though i always thought metallic dragons were dumb.

Red and black. that's all we need

We agree to come to blows, then. Because metallics, and Green and Blue dragons are awesome.

Aquillion
2008-05-31, 04:12 PM
Yes the evil deities are in the PHB, they are just one line descriptions instead of the paragraph that the good/unaligned get. Hardly any difference, especially since there arent "domains" or anything mechanically related to your god, save for a single feat (channel divinity).There are no rules for evil clerics in the PHB, though (they all channel radient energy.) The book is very, very clear that you're not supposed to make evil characters, and provides no real support for you if you do. We all know the problems having one evil person in a good party can cause, so it's not that much of a surprise.

Oh, and regarding dragons, the manditory comic (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/1/13/).

LoopyZebra
2008-05-31, 04:13 PM
There's also the possibility of not using the standard deities, I know I don't plan to, and I assume that a large number of players plan to use 3.5 core's deities or the deities of another published setting like Eberron or Forgotten Realms. Ultimately, a large number of these details are fluff, because the mechanics can be used to make the evil deities or good dragons or whatever. And fluff is supposed to be made up.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-05-31, 04:14 PM
There are no rules for evil clerics in the PHB, though (they all channel radient energy.) The book is very, very clear that you're not supposed to make evil characters, and provides no real support for you if you do. We all know the problems having one evil person in a good party can cause, so it's not that much of a surprise.

Oh, and regarding dragons, the manditory comic (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/1/13/).

That IS true.

My guess? One of the first three books is going to be The Nature of Evil or something like that, and it's gonna have a load of evil options. It's the WotC way.

Gorbash
2008-05-31, 04:14 PM
Ok, Monks I understand. But Barbarians and Bards...? And why Gnomes? I love gnomes. Look at my signature, there's my all time favourite character, a gnome.


Gorbash: Gnomes are in the MM. They're not out.

As monsters. And as such, not playable as characters, since they introduced a whole separate set of monster advancment and classes.

Not to mention they kicked out Brass and Bronze, totally and replaced them with Adamantine and Iron.

Oh, and I like grapple rules as they are now.

SamTheCleric
2008-05-31, 04:16 PM
No. Monsters are a playable race, there are a list of like 10-11 playable monster races in the back of the MM, including stat adjustments, encounter powers, etc.

Gnomes are one of them.

LoopyZebra
2008-05-31, 04:17 PM
...As monsters. And as such, not playable as characters, since they introduced a whole separate set of monster advancement and classes.


There's rules for using them as PCs. Posted in another thread I believe, along with approximately 20 other monster manual critters for PC usage.

Edit: Ninja'd.

Daracaex
2008-05-31, 04:18 PM
Yet another example of people looking at one thing and making an assumption on the whole rest of the game. So you cant kill good creatures, most people dont play evil anyway so whats the point?

Seconded. Wizards put only things the players would likely use or encounter in the core books, assuming a generic group. Thus, they detailed only evil beings that the players will kill, good gods that the players will follow, etc. Everything else will surely be detailed later in other books.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-05-31, 04:18 PM
As monsters. And as such, not playable as characters, since they introduced a whole separate set of monster advancment and classes.

And? You just take their weakest power, look up their improved ability score, and make a race with that. Not that complicated.

SamTheCleric
2008-05-31, 04:21 PM
Gnomes get +2 Int and +2 cha... May make a hide check when they roll initiative if they start in cover or with concealment... and once per encounter turn invisible for 1 round after being damaged.

Reel On, Love
2008-05-31, 04:22 PM
Ok, Monks I understand. But Barbarians and Bards...? And why Gnomes? I love gnomes. Look at my signature, there's my all time favourite character, a gnome.
Barbarians got left out because *somebody* had to and there were already plenty of smashy classes.

You love gnomes. Everyone else hates gnomes. (Well, 3.5 gnomes; they made 4E gnomes kinda cool by making them more like Whisper Gnomes.)



As monsters. And as such, not playable as characters, since they introduced a whole separate set of monster advancment and classes.
No, there are rules for playing them as PCs. them and a number of other monster races, like doppelgangers, bugbears, minotaurs, etc etc.


Not to mention they kicked out Brass and Bronze, totally and replaced them with Adamantine and Iron.
Tell me the difference between Brass, Bronze, and Copper dragons, quick!

(Brass isn't even a metal, it's a copper-based alloy!)


Oh, and I like grapple rules as they are now.
Then something might be deeply wrong with you.
-They're horribly unlcear. Does the monk get extra grapple checks from flurry? It seems like he doesn't, but it's not obvious.
-They're dumb. A Fighter 20 can make 4 grapple checks to do damage a round, but a 10-HD aberration that's got 8 tentacle attacks can only make one?
-They don't scale well. PCs basically don't have a hope of consistently outgrappling their enemies. If they did, grappling would be ridiculously good. They don't, so it sucks.
-They're still dumb. A monster that has you in its mouth and is biting you, via a grapple, deals... bite damage? No, *unarmed strike* damage.

Kurald Galain
2008-05-31, 04:23 PM
And why Gnomes? I love gnomes. Look at my signature, there's my all time favourite character, a gnome.

Ah, because the designers couldn't find a good "niche" or unique ability for gnomes, such as them having some sort of innate invisibility. Oh, wait a minute... :smallbiggrin:

Charity
2008-05-31, 04:29 PM
And there I thought buying 4th ed books was going to be a good idea. Good thing I downloaded them...

I'm sooooo not playing this piece of crap...

Not smart making a public admission to a crime, even on the internet.

and seriously are we back to this?

Gorbash
2008-05-31, 04:29 PM
Yes, I know there's an entry on the back of the MM. But why aren't they there with the rest of the races? Why are they replaced with, as someone said, cool, but brooding Tieflings or some other cry-me-a-river race? It's the principle on which the 4th edition is based on. They totally departed from the coolness of D&D and succumbed to marketing ploys, and the whole system is trying to kick out the traditional values of coolness (gnomes, for example, by giving them quarter of a page entry on next to last pagein MM) and setting up a game for all those who think Drizzt is the coolest guy ever. They even put an entry in PHB, that says: Play a tiefling if you want to be a hero with a dark side to overcome. Please.

Chronos
2008-05-31, 04:30 PM
Evil gods exist, they just aren't detailed in the PHB.
They kicked out some classes and races and brought in some new ones. This happens EVERY edition.Name one race or class that was in second edition, but got kicked out in third. Heck, name one that was in first, and got kicked out in second: I don't think there are any of those, either.

Shhalahr Windrider
2008-05-31, 04:42 PM
Hardly any difference, especially since there arent "domains" or anything mechanically related to your god, save for a single feat (channel divinity).
Oh, that's just what I wanted. Clerics of my God of Chivalry looking just like my Clerics of my God of Crude Badassness.

Reel On, Love
2008-05-31, 04:51 PM
Yes, I know there's an entry on the back of the MM. But why aren't they there with the rest of the races? Why are they replaced with, as someone said, cool, but brooding Tieflings or some other cry-me-a-river race? It's the principle on which the 4th edition is based on. They totally departed from the coolness of D&D and succumbed to marketing ploys, and the whole system is trying to kick out the traditional values of coolness (gnomes, for example, by giving them quarter of a page entry on next to last pagein MM) and setting up a game for all those who think Drizzt is the coolest guy ever. They even put an entry in PHB, that says: Play a tiefling if you want to be a hero with a dark side to overcome. Please.
Oh, I get it. You like gnomes, therefore they're cool, regardless of how unpopular and nicheless they are. Meanwhile, people who like tieflings are all emo drizzt-lovers.

Geez, let go of your personal tastes for a moment. You like gnomes. You're in a very small group. How does it not make sense for them to put the more popular races in the core book?

Your favorite race isn't core, therefore the books suck, even though you can still play them and they're actually cooler now. Eyeroll.


Name one race or class that was in second edition, but got kicked out in third. Heck, name one that was in first, and got kicked out in second: I don't think there are any of those, either.
Funnily enough, first to second edition? Half-orcs and Monks.

LoopyZebra
2008-05-31, 04:53 PM
Oh, that's just what I wanted. Clerics of my God of Chivalry looking just like my Clerics of my God of Crude Badassness.

There's always the option to roleplay it, or to select a different paragon path, or select different powers to maker your cleric different than another. Heck, just use a different weapon, like a favored weapon or some such.

EDIT: I'm not trying to be obnoxious, it's just that there are small ways around these minor problems.

Reel On, Love
2008-05-31, 04:54 PM
Oh, that's just what I wanted. Clerics of my God of Chivalry looking just like my Clerics of my God of Crude Badassness.

Clerics of your God of Chivalry wear shiny armor and use swords and act knightly. They take the STR-based cleric powers and some of the CHA. Clerics of your God of Crude badassness.
Clerics of the God of Holy Light take CHA-based powers and become LAZER CLERICS.
Clerics of the God of Being Evil, Because Playing An Evil Priest In A Heroic Game Is Totally The Bomb, use the holy-light powers but replace "radiant" with "necrotic" and describe them as being all dark-looking. Edit: then they multiclass Warlock and take the Life-Stealer paragon path or something. Geez.

Illiterate Scribe
2008-05-31, 04:58 PM
Clerics of the God of Holy Light take CHA-based powers and become LAZER CLERICS.

You too have heard tohouguy's gospel of the LAZOR CLERIC?

Praises be!

Personally, I do quite like it, although I'm still mulling over whether to approach it from the warlock or cleric side.

Reel On, Love
2008-05-31, 05:02 PM
You too have heard tohouguy's gospel of the LAZOR CLERIC?

Praises be!

Personally, I do quite like it, although I'm still mulling over whether to approach it from the warlock or cleric side.

Cleric. Warlocks have their own thing to do.

What I like is the Paladin->Warlock multiclass.
You take Fey Pact. You get Fey powers. Then you take a paragon path and get Dire Radiance.

You Divine Challenge enemies. Then you hit them with Fey pact powers that make them attack each other. They take divine challenge damae when they do this. When you're out of those, you hit them with Dire Radiance. Then they take extra damage if they attack you... and extra damage if they attack someone else.

Rutee
2008-05-31, 05:07 PM
No, you just have to buy that patch.
I mean expansion.
I mean splatbook.

Are you new to DnD? That's been the case for years.

Illiterate Scribe
2008-05-31, 05:07 PM
Oh well. As a lazor cleric, I'm hoping on eventually nabbing Cloud Chariot, and sitting up out of reach all day lazoring.

Reel On, Love
2008-05-31, 05:10 PM
Oh well. As a lazor cleric, I'm hoping on eventually nabbing Cloud Chariot, and sitting up out of reach all day lazoring.

Enemies should be able to cope with flying by then.

Cloud Chariot is very stylish, but I don't know if I can justify taking it instead of, say, the "heal to full!" power. I'd probably pick it up using the Eternal Seeker destiny.

ShadowSiege
2008-05-31, 05:11 PM
Name one race or class that was in second edition, but got kicked out in third. Heck, name one that was in first, and got kicked out in second: I don't think there are any of those, either.

From Wiki (1e->2e): (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editions_of_Dungeons_%26_Dragons#Advanced_Dungeons _.26_Dragons_1st_Edition_to_2nd_Edition)


# Half-orcs were removed from the Player's Handbook, although they would be again made a playable race in supplements such as the Complete Book of Humanoids.
# Assassins and Monks (from Players Handbook) and Barbarians, Thief-Acrobats, and Cavaliers (from Unearthed Arcana), were removed from the game as character classes. Later supplements would introduce "kits" bearing the names of these classes and/or optional classes from sources such as Complete Book of Barbarians.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-05-31, 05:11 PM
Seeing this thread has been derailed, I believe it would be a good thing to refocus it on something.

So, a question: Which, do you think, are going to be the first three splats out?

My guess, in order:

1) Martial Power.

2) Something dealing with Evil.

3) PHBII or a book detailing new strikers/leaders.

Gorbash
2008-05-31, 05:11 PM
Meanwhile, people who like tieflings are all emo drizzt-lovers.

It's funny because it's true. I have never known a player who played a tiefling other than being a total arogant badass with a 'sup y'all I'm a devil' attitude.


Not smart making a public admission to a crime, even on the internet.

Oh please. {Scrubbed. It's a valid point. Regardless of the prevalence of the behavior, we don't allow discussion of illegal activities here.}

Reel On, Love
2008-05-31, 05:13 PM
It's funny because it's true. I have never known a player who played a tiefling other than being a total arogant badass with a 'sup y'all I'm a devil' attitude.
And I've never known a gnome player I'd describe in positive turns. I'm sure that says so much.

Seriously, you're whining about how other people have fun. "Why is Wizards letting lots of people have in a way I don't think is cool? That's terrible!"


Oh please. {Scrubbed}
I might tell you I've "never downloaded illegally". It's the typical thing to do.

Illiterate Scribe
2008-05-31, 05:14 PM
Enemies should be able to cope with flying by then.

Cloud Chariot is very stylish, but I don't know if I can justify taking it instead of, say, the "heal to full!" power. I'd probably pick it up using the Eternal Seeker destiny.

Yeah, there is the fact that they can fly, but how, on any level, mechanical or flavour, can you refuse a flying pimp car made of fog?

Rutee
2008-05-31, 05:15 PM
It's funny because it's true. I have never known a player who played a tiefling other than being a total arogant badass with a 'sup y'all I'm a devil' attitude.
Clearly, everyone who doesn't like Tieflings is an insecure dutch hater.

See? I can make up stupid crap too.


Oh please. {Scrubbed}

You fail at thievery if you admit it in public. Period.

Illiterate Scribe
2008-05-31, 05:19 PM
It's funny because it's true. I have never known a player who played a tiefling other than being a total arogant badass with a 'sup y'all I'm a devil' attitude.

Evidently you have not played sufficient Planescape, and a PbP in the City of Doors should be arranged for you.

Nonetheless, I am definitely concerned by the new Tieflings. Dragonborn I object to, as well.

Reel On, Love
2008-05-31, 05:19 PM
Yeah, there is the fact that they can fly, but how, on any level, mechanical or flavour, can you refuse a flying pimp car made of fog?

I'm holding out for the to-be-released epic-destiny variant, Cloud Chariot With a Minibar and Hookers.

ETA: It might also be part of the upcoming Lazer Disco Cleric paragon path.

Gorbash
2008-05-31, 05:22 PM
Clearly, everyone who doesn't like Tieflings is an insecure dutch hater.

I never said I don't like tieflings. I said I don't like the way the Wizards are enforcing them to be played or how most people see them... Why, my last character was a tiefling! But he sure as hell wasn't a hero with a dark side to overcome.


You fail at thievery if you admit it in public. Period.

Meh, it's common practice nowadays...

EDIT:


Evidently you have not played sufficient Planescape, and a PbP in the City of Doors should be arranged for you.

Nonetheless, I am definitely concerned by the new Tieflings. Dragonborn I object to, as well.

Planescape is my first and favourite setting, and what I'm saying about tieflings, I'm reffering to NEW tieflings. I'm sorry for the confusion.

Reel On, Love
2008-05-31, 05:27 PM
I never said I don't like tieflings. I said I don't like the way the Wizards are enforcing them to be played... Why, my last character was a tiefling! But he sure as hell wasn't a hero with a dark side to overcome.
Enforcing. Right.
Do you take penalties if you play a cheerful tiefling who doesn't care about any "dark side" nonsense? Or do WotC employees just kneecap you?

Seriously, guy-struggling-against-his-dark-side is one way of playing a tiefling. If you want to do that--and many, MANY people do--then the tiefling is good for that. That's why they said so. But you can also play a tiefling who gleefully uses his powers against devils, because the devils can't take them back an they hate knowing their power is being used for good and against them.

Illiterate Scribe
2008-05-31, 05:29 PM
I'm holding out for the to-be-released epic-destiny variant, Cloud Chariot With a Minibar and Hookers.

ETA: It might also be part of the upcoming Lazer Disco Cleric paragon path.

Well, Implement:Diamond Studded Cane would work. Possibly an artefact level staff a la that of Chuggo would, too.

Reel On, Love
2008-05-31, 05:32 PM
Well, Implement:Diamond Studded Cane would work. Possibly an artefact level staff a la that of Chuggo would, too.

...we need to stat this up. Lazer Disco Cleric paragon path, GO!

Shhalahr Windrider
2008-05-31, 05:32 PM
Enforcing. Right.
Do you take penalties if you play a cheerful tiefling who doesn't care about any "dark side" nonsense? Or do WotC employees just kneecap you?
"Encouraging" would be the more appropriate word, I think.

Like it or not, such encouragement does have an effect on the player population. And not just with the newbies.

Rutee
2008-05-31, 05:32 PM
I never said I don't like tieflings. I said I don't like the way the Wizards are enforcing them to be played or how most people see them... Why, my last character was a tiefling! But he sure as hell wasn't a hero with a dark side to overcome.
If you really think most DnD players (Or especially new ones) are thinking Drizzt..



Meh, it's common practice nowadays...
Oh, that most stunning of defenses of one's cunning plan. "It was so simple, everyone else was doing it."

Azerian Kelimon
2008-05-31, 05:34 PM
Oh, that most stunning of defenses of one's cunning plan. "It was so simple, everyone else was doing it."

Where is the Cunning Plan Mario pic when we need it? :smalltongue:

Gorbash
2008-05-31, 05:42 PM
Like it or not, such encouragement does have an effect on the player population. And not just with the newbies.

My point exactly.


Enforcing. Right.
Do you take penalties if you play a cheerful tiefling who doesn't care about any "dark side" nonsense? Or do WotC employees just kneecap you?


Yes, and I'm sure wotc gave them abilities such as Bloodhunt and Infernal Wrath, and made them look more like Devils than half-fiends of the 3.5 were, because they were encouraging players to play cheerful tieflings on the prowl for devils...


Oh, that most stunning of defenses of one's cunning plan.

Where did you get the idea that I'm even trying to defend myself?

Rutee
2008-05-31, 05:43 PM
Yes, and I'm sure wotc gave them abilities such as Bloodhunt and Infernal Wrath, and made them look more like Devils than half-fiends of the 3.5 were, because they were encouraging players to play cheerful tieflings on the prowl for devils...
They were encouraging Hell Boy.



Where did you get the idea that I'm even trying to defend myself?

Because you didn't simply say something along the lines of "I'm a bad thief then"?

Illiterate Scribe
2008-05-31, 05:44 PM
Being akin to some sort of memetic demigod, I deliver, AK:

http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/9783/1202228010192aa2.png

Azerian Kelimon
2008-05-31, 05:45 PM
Being akin to some sort of memetic demigod, I deliver, AK.

D'you want any sacrifice or ritual offerings?

Illiterate Scribe
2008-05-31, 05:48 PM
D'you want any sacrifice or ritual offerings?

Fool! Your offerings are only keeping you down! Go forth, and create original content!

kamikasei
2008-05-31, 05:49 PM
Planescape is my first and favourite setting, and what I'm saying about tieflings, I'm reffering to NEW tieflings. I'm sorry for the confusion.

The confusion is pretty understandable when you say things like


I have never known a player who played a tiefling... [who didn't XXX]

since it's doubtful you've known any player who's played a tiefling from the edition not yet released, let alone anything like a sample from which a general trend might be seen.

Edea
2008-05-31, 05:49 PM
OK, now Cloud Chariot pisses me off. I'd houserule that you can't take any actions other than free ones while riding it (it would take your move action to move it, your minor to sustain it, and it would explicitly forbid standard actions).

SO multiclassing into Cleric from now on in 4e if a game gets to that level; I thought the whole point of nerfing fly powers was to completely put an end to the "rain of death from above" schtick, not give it to another class?

Gorbash
2008-05-31, 06:00 PM
since it's doubtful you've known any player who's played a tiefling from the edition not yet released, let alone anything like a sample from which a general trend might be seen.

Planescape setting, or a couple of video games (Torment, Baldur's Gate 2 (Haer'Dalis, Tiefling Bard (actor and poet)), for example) had a bunch of Tiefling npcs which were way more cooler than any PC Tiefling I've seen... I'm just refering to the common misconception that EVERY tiefling has an attitude of an angsty 16-year old, and Wizards are encouraging just that.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-05-31, 06:40 PM
Fool! Your offerings are only keeping you down! Go forth, and create original content!

Oh, I'm on it already. I'm making a slew of Precision weapons, and weapons with strange dice, and I'm trying to balance them against the PHB weapons. The idea is to make Superior weapons *Gasp* actually useful!

Scintillatus
2008-05-31, 06:50 PM
Eh, I'm taking the weapon prof feats just so I can have my sabre-swinging pirate and my deadly wrist-blade wielding assassin, anyway.

Chronos
2008-05-31, 06:55 PM
And it still doesn't make sense to include tieflings but not aasimar. You want angst? You can get just as much angst out of an aasimar. It's just a matter of not thinking you're good enough to live up to your celestial heritage.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-05-31, 06:56 PM
Eh, I'm taking the weapon prof feats just so I can have my sabre-swinging pirate and my deadly wrist-blade wielding assassin, anyway.

They better be Light Blades, because you don't get SA, else.

Charity
2008-05-31, 06:56 PM
I am waiting for the up coming huggy bear disco inferno cleric I've heard so much about.

Reel On, Love
2008-05-31, 06:57 PM
OK, now Cloud Chariot pisses me off. I'd houserule that you can't take any actions other than free ones while riding it (it would take your move action to move it, your minor to sustain it, and it would explicitly forbid standard actions).

SO multiclassing into Cleric from now on in 4e if a game gets to that level; I thought the whole point of nerfing fly powers was to completely put an end to the "rain of death from above" schtick, not give it to another class?

Er, at that level, enemies can fly, or are ranged. The Tarrasque is grounded, but hit has a power that drags flying things down and makes them stop flying.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-05-31, 07:04 PM
Er, at that level, enemies can fly, or are ranged. The Tarrasque is grounded, but hit has a power that drags flying things down and makes them stop flying.

Can they? I've yet to peruse my MM (Pretty much finished the PHB and DMG), so could you give me a few examples?

Though one thing has to be said: Most other classes do NOT have unlimited flight, even for a single encounter. Look at the items, for example. All of them specify you must land at the end of your turn, making your mobility sucky.

Edea
2008-05-31, 07:08 PM
Er, at that level, enemies can fly, or are ranged. The Tarrasque is grounded, but hit has a power that drags flying things down and makes them stop flying.

EXACTLY.

They are capable of those things, and unless you have Cloud Chariot or a magic carpet, you're not. You're stuck maintaining a fly spell at best, or more likely you're only going to be able to get up into the air for one or two rounds. On TOP of being able to laser-smite those poor bastards who still can't fly (and surely there are a fair number of those at that level, too; don't tell me ALL of the 22+ monsters fly :/). Keep in mind the chariot gives you cover (saying nothing about whether it blocks your line of sight), and it can't take damage or even be attacked. Pretty sweet ability.

I'm not saying flight is good or bad in and of itself, I'm saying it's pretty silly to nerf virtually all flight abilities, and then toss THIS thing in there.

Scintillatus
2008-05-31, 07:14 PM
They'll be Katars, which are superior weapons and light blades.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-05-31, 07:17 PM
They'll be Katars, which are superior weapons and light blades.

Hmm...I have to interrogate you about your loyalty, Citizen.

QUICK! Katars or Punching Daggers?

Collin152
2008-05-31, 07:22 PM
Everyone else hates gnomes.

You can start running now.
Else feel my fury right now.

Scintillatus
2008-05-31, 07:23 PM
Well, I'm really just using the Katar stats because they're the most logical. Really, they'd be clockwork-operated, forearm-mounted retractible blades.

Tough_Tonka
2008-05-31, 07:45 PM
Gimme a Gold dragon, or a silver dragon. No correspondence there.

Gold=Red

Silver=White with some bonus levels

Azerian Kelimon
2008-05-31, 07:47 PM
Gold=Red

Silver=White with some bonus levels

No longer a White then.

I already discussed this with Sam, in any case.

Skyserpent
2008-05-31, 07:54 PM
Planescape setting, or a couple of video games (Torment, Baldur's Gate 2 (Haer'Dalis, Tiefling Bard (actor and poet)), for example) had a bunch of Tiefling npcs which were way more cooler than any PC Tiefling I've seen... I'm just refering to the common misconception that EVERY tiefling has an attitude of an angsty 16-year old, and Wizards are encouraging just that.

I actually agree with this gripe: When I read that Tiefling "Naming practices" and one of the sample combinations could be "Poetry Tragedy" I did a rather uncharacteristic facepalm.

Nonetheless, I don't think that's actually going to discourage me from buying the new edition.

The lack of Metallic Dragons doesn't really bother me because they're coming in later, I'm okay with how it's all boiling down really, a downright GOOD combat system and some slightly uncomfortable (AND COMPLETELY CHANGEABLE) fluff.

I'm not going to FAULT D&D for pandering to the largest audience, but if you don't LIKE that kind of fluff, change it.

Frankly the Aasimar would have been a silly planetouched because Good is dumb. No one's going to WANT to play that namby pamby pampered alien celestial-dude. I mean, okay SOME people are but it's just not that interesting compared to, let's say, a Race of DRAGONS...

Also: They made a new distinction with Demons and Angels that not all Angels are Good, so having the inherently Good counterpart to Tieflings would have to come from somewhere else anyway...

StGlebidiah
2008-05-31, 08:01 PM
Oh my God! We may have to come up with something on our own! THE HORROR!

skywalker
2008-05-31, 08:06 PM
Gold=Red

Silver=White with some bonus levels

No. Gold>Red, and Silver owns White so hard it's not even funny. White dragons are dumb, ugly things, Silver dragons are intelligent and rather pretty, I think.

Back to the original discussion, heaven forbid there would be good monsters, because heaven forbid there's a time when the PCs have an ally... No, no, not when they're clearly the heroes, and everyone else is "covered in crap."

Jarlax
2008-05-31, 08:50 PM
No good dragons.
No good outsider types.

There's an obvious pattern at work there...obviously, the only things worth mentioning are the things you stick the pointy end of your sword into.

more like the only things worth stating out are the things your stick the pointy end of your sword into.

same goes for NPCs. their section in the DMG explains you might select a race, class and perhaps skills for most npcs and thats it. the only time that a full stat block should be generated in when there is a chance of combat.

so toddles the local merchant looks like

toddles level 1 rouge unaligned
skills: bluff diplomacy perception
stats: 12 14 12 10 10 15

as others have said, in a pinch you can convert a similar dragon by switching its alignment and some stats. we will be getting metallic dragons eventually. probably in draconomicon II or III, but in the first monster manual when we have a small range of monsters its a waste of space to stat out creatures who will rarely see combat.

Aquillion
2008-05-31, 10:31 PM
EXACTLY.

They are capable of those things, and unless you have Cloud Chariot or a magic carpet, you're not. You're stuck maintaining a fly spell at best, or more likely you're only going to be able to get up into the air for one or two rounds. On TOP of being able to laser-smite those poor bastards who still can't fly (and surely there are a fair number of those at that level, too; don't tell me ALL of the 22+ monsters fly :/). Keep in mind the chariot gives you cover (saying nothing about whether it blocks your line of sight), and it can't take damage or even be attacked. Pretty sweet ability.Don't forget that as a conjuration it actually blocks its 2x2 space. You can use it as a mobile wall in the dungeon. And also, while you're riding it, you don't have to take move actions, freeing them up to use any abilities you have that can be used as a move action.

There are very, very few powers that grant you any advantage that lasts more than a few rounds or a single encounter at most. That makes that one pretty powerful.

Ryuuk
2008-05-31, 10:44 PM
Lasts until an extended rest, damn, its pretty strong. It goes on to describe how it can hold up to 6 creatures though, so at least it's something that the entire party can benefeit from.

SamTheCleric
2008-05-31, 11:01 PM
Someone was asking about the first splat books?



Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide - Aug 19
Forgotten Realms Player's Guide - Sep 16
Adventurer's Vault: A guide to weapons, equipment and treasure - Sep 16
Martial Power - Oct 21
Draconomicon I: Chromatic Dragons - Nov 18
Manual of the Planes - Dec 16

Scintillatus
2008-05-31, 11:04 PM
...There's going to be more than one Draconomicon? Are they kidding me?

SamTheCleric
2008-05-31, 11:05 PM
Like I said earlier... there's now 5 types of dragons. Chromatic, Metallic, Catastrophic, Scourge and Planar.

I kinda wish it'd just be one Draconomicon... but maybe we'll get different variations of each dragon... sample lairs... etc.

Renegade Paladin
2008-05-31, 11:10 PM
And I've never known a gnome player I'd describe in positive turns. I'm sure that says so much.
Ahem. (http://www.libriumarcana.com/RPG/public_profiler/view.php?id=13)

Seriously, I don't get it. Gnomes don't have some sort of stereotyped niche, so they're bad? Nor do humans. I suppose we should remove them from the game next. :smallannoyed: Seriously, gnomes are bad because they're not easily pigeonholed. That's got to be the lamest line of reasoning I've read all week.

Where is the Cunning Plan Mario pic when we need it? :smalltongue:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v350/RenegadePaladin/cunning.jpg

:smallamused:

Trog
2008-05-31, 11:39 PM
Personally I'm not all that bothered by the lack of chromatic dragons in the upcoming edition. I've been playing DnD for 20 years now and can count the number of chromatics I have used against players on one finger of one hand.

Catastrophic, Scourge & Planar? :smallconfused:

Hmm.. Well they simplified the planes quite a bit from what I've read in the preview books. So probably shadow dragons and maybe some form of undead dragon for the Shadowfell, Fairie dragons and perhaps the once neutral now probably unaligned gem dragons for the Feywild. Elemental demon type dragons for the Elemental Chaos and pretty much any kind they want for the Astral sea. Maybe the oriental dragons there.

Catastrophic? Aren't they all? :smallconfused:

Scourge... no clue what these could be.

Chronos
2008-06-01, 12:06 AM
so toddles the local merchant looks like

toddles level 1 rouge unaligned
skills: bluff diplomacy perception
stats: 12 14 12 10 10 15That seems like a lot of work for a merchant. In 3rd edition, I'd stat him out as

Toddles the Merchant

In fact, that's how I'd stat him out in 2nd edition, too. And I've never played 1st, but I'll bet the same statblock would work there, too. I thought that fourth edition was supposed to be streamlining NPC generation?

ghost_warlock
2008-06-01, 12:20 AM
Seriously, I don't get it. Gnomes don't have some sort of stereotyped niche, so they're bad? Nor do humans. I suppose we should remove them from the game next. :smallannoyed: Seriously, gnomes are bad because they're not easily pigeonholed. That's got to be the lamest line of reasoning I've read all week.

Win.


...So probably shadow dragons...

Wait...they're keeping the Plane of Shadow? I haven't heard much about the planes in 4e. Since they pretty much removed illusions and necromancy from the PHB I'd have figured they'd also remove the Plane of Shadow. :smallconfused:

Keeping the Plane of Shadow would be the first *good* thing I've heard about 4e since people got the books, so I hope your prediction is accurate. Oh please, oh please, oh please... :smallfrown:

Helgraf
2008-06-01, 01:09 AM
Name one race or class that was in second edition, but got kicked out in third. Heck, name one that was in first, and got kicked out in second: I don't think there are any of those, either.

1st, not 2nd:
Assassin.
Theif-Acrobat
Berserker
Barbarian (reintroduced as a kit, not a class, therefore qualifies)

Ya know, that was easy.

SamTheCleric
2008-06-01, 06:41 AM
Catastrophic dragons are mighty embodiments of primordial
forces. They are destructive, but not devoted to evil.
The ground warps and explodes violently in their presence.
Earthquake and typhoon dragons are two types of catastrophic
dragons.


Planar dragons are dragons infused with the nature of
other planes of existence. Shadow dragons, Abyssal dragons,
and fey dragons are all planar dragons.


Scourge dragons, sometimes called linnorms, embody
the afflictions that plague living creatures, much as catastrophic
dragons embody natural disasters. They are almost
universally evil, even more so than the chromatics, and they
revel in the raw physicality of melee combat. Because they
lack wings and rear legs, some scholars insist that they’re not
true dragons, but more closely related to drakes.

So yes... Shadow Dragons are in. I'm interested in said Earthquake Dragon.

Burrito
2008-06-01, 07:48 AM
I know this is a tangent within a thread already de-railed by other tangents, but why not.

This is how I always saw the Metalllic - Chromatic dragon match ups

Gold -Red Both of them at the top of their respective food chains.

Silver - Black Very powerful, and sort of mirror opposites, both in apperance and style

Bronze - Blue About equal in power, and seem to have a lot of interactions with humans, just for different ends.

Brass - Green

Copper - White ( I won't color this one)

I never delt with Brass and Copper dragons much, so this is something of a "why not-it seems to fit" pairing. I have had tons of encounters with white and green dragons though, and if played right by the DM, a Green can give a party just as much trouble as a Red.

Gorbash
2008-06-01, 08:05 AM
IMHO, there should be 5 chromatic, 5 metallic, and maybe one for each plane (even Draconomicon introduced too many), but come on, Earthquake Dragon? What's next - Afternoon Rain Dragon?

Oh, and I don't know why they changed the way the greens look like. Sure, it wasn't the best (nothing that much distinguishable as others), but this is a step down, by my thinking.

Rutee
2008-06-01, 08:16 AM
Ahem. (http://www.libriumarcana.com/RPG/public_profiler/view.php?id=13)

Seriously, I don't get it. Gnomes don't have some sort of stereotyped niche, so they're bad? Nor do humans. I suppose we should remove them from the game next. :smallannoyed: Seriously, gnomes are bad because they're not easily pigeonholed. That's got to be the lamest line of reasoning I've read all week.

Not having a schtick is not the same thing as not being pidgeon-holable. I wouldn't want them to be kender, but I'll grant that Gnomes don't have anything particularly unique about them either, in DnD. And, I love gnomes. Doesn't mean they're popular.


Wait...they're keeping the Plane of Shadow? I haven't heard much about the planes in 4e. Since they pretty much removed illusions and necromancy from the PHB I'd have figured they'd also remove the Plane of Shadow.
They removed them from the PHB. They're confirmed as a power source, so one can surmise that there'll be Illusions and Necromancy. Just later.


IMHO, there should be 5 chromatic, 5 metallic, and maybe one for each plane (even Draconomicon introduced too many), but come on, Earthquake Dragon? What's next - Afternoon Rain Dragon?
I still don't see a point behind seperate stats for Chromatic and MEtallic. As near as I can recall, they're pretty much the same things, by element, just with G instead of E. Further, it's not like, say, evil humans and good humans have different stats.

LoopyZebra
2008-06-01, 08:29 AM
Wait...they're keeping the Plane of Shadow? I haven't heard much about the planes in 4e. Since they pretty much removed illusions and necromancy from the PHB I'd have figured they'd also remove the Plane of Shadow. :smallconfused:

Keeping the Plane of Shadow would be the first *good* thing I've heard about 4e since people got the books, so I hope your prediction is accurate. Oh please, oh please, oh please... :smallfrown:

Actually, it's called the Shadowfell now, you can read about it (and the other planes) here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drdd/20070926a&authentic=true).

Part of article about Shadowfell:
The Shadowfell

Just as the Feywild is an echo of the natural world, so is the Shadowfell. However, the Shadowfell mimics the mortal world in a different manner. The Shadowfell is the land of the dead, where the spirits of the deceased linger for a time in a dark reflection of their previous lives before silently fading beyond all ken. Some undead creatures are born in the Shadowfell, and other undead are bound to it, but some living beings dwell in this benighted realm.

Like the Feywild, the Shadowfell also reflects the mortal world imperfectly. Towns, castles, roads, and other objects built by mortal kind exist in the Shadowfell about where they should be, but they are twisted, ruined caricatures. The shadowy echo of a thriving seaport in the mortal world might be a dilapidated, desolate port whose harbor is cluttered with the rotting hulks of shipwrecks and whose busy wharves are empty except for a few silent and furtive passersby. In the Shadowfell, heroes might venture into:

* A necromancer’s tower;
* The sinister castle of a shadar-kai lord, surrounded by a forest of black thorns;
* A ruined city swept by long-ago plague and madness; or
* The mist-shrouded winter realm of Letherna, where the fearsome Raven Queen rules over a kingdom of ghosts.

Full article:

Secret worlds and invisible domains surround the world of the Dungeons & Dragons game. Godly dominions, elemental chaos, shadow kingdoms, and faerie realms are all part of the world. Most mortals know little of these things, but heroes are a different matter. Heroes often find that adventure calls them to distant and strange dimensions indeed.
The Feywild

The closest of these alternate worlds is the Feywild, or the realm of faerie. It is an “echo” of the mortal world, a parallel dimension in which the natural features of the lands and seas are arranged in much the same configuration. If a mountain stands in a given place in the mortal world, a similar mountain stands in a corresponding place in the Feywild. However, the Feywild is not an exact reproduction. Built structures and terrains are not copied in the faerie realm, so a valley dotted with farm fields and towns in the mortal world would simply exist as untouched, unsettled woodland in the Feywild.

The Feywild’s many vistas can catch your breath with beauty, but the Feywild is far from safe. Heroes visiting to Feywild might encounter:

* A mossy forest glade where evil druids spill the blood of hapless travelers over the roots of the thirsting trees;
* The tower of an eladrin enchanter;
* A fomorian king’s castle in the dim, splendid caverns of the faerie Underdark; or
* A maze of thorns in which dryad briarwitches guard an evil relic.

The Shadowfell

Just as the Feywild is an echo of the natural world, so is the Shadowfell. However, the Shadowfell mimics the mortal world in a different manner. The Shadowfell is the land of the dead, where the spirits of the deceased linger for a time in a dark reflection of their previous lives before silently fading beyond all ken. Some undead creatures are born in the Shadowfell, and other undead are bound to it, but some living beings dwell in this benighted realm.

Like the Feywild, the Shadowfell also reflects the mortal world imperfectly. Towns, castles, roads, and other objects built by mortal kind exist in the Shadowfell about where they should be, but they are twisted, ruined caricatures. The shadowy echo of a thriving seaport in the mortal world might be a dilapidated, desolate port whose harbor is cluttered with the rotting hulks of shipwrecks and whose busy wharves are empty except for a few silent and furtive passersby. In the Shadowfell, heroes might venture into:

* A necromancer’s tower;
* The sinister castle of a shadar-kai lord, surrounded by a forest of black thorns;
* A ruined city swept by long-ago plague and madness; or
* The mist-shrouded winter realm of Letherna, where the fearsome Raven Queen rules over a kingdom of ghosts.

The Elemental Chaos

All of the cosmos is not tied to the mortal world as closely as the Feywild or Shadowfell. The natural world was created from the infinite expanse of the Elemental Chaos (or Tempest, or Maelstrom), a place where all fundamental matter and energy seethes. Floating continents of earth, rivers of fire, ice-choked oceans, and vast cyclones of churning clouds and lightning collide in the elemental plane.

Powerful beings tame vast portions of the chaos and shape it to their own desires. Here the efreeti City of Brass stands amid a desert of burning sand illuminated by searing rivers of fire falling through the sky. In other places in the Elemental Chaos, mighty mortal wizards or would-be demigods have erected secret refuges or tamed the living elements to build their domains.

Elemental creatures of all kinds live and move through the Elemental Chaos: ice archons, magma hurlers, thunderbirds, and salamanders. The most dangerous inhabitants are the demons. In the nadir of this realm lies the foul Abyss, the font of evil and corruption from which demonkind springs. The Abyss is unthinkably vast—thousands of miles in extent—and in its maw swirl hundreds of demonic domains, elemental islands, or continents sculpted to suit the tastes of one demon lord or another. Within the Elemental Chaos, heroes might explore:

* The crystalline tower of a long-dead archmage;
* A grim fortress monastery of githzerai adepts;
* The diseased Abyssal continent where Demogorgon rules amid ruined temples and bloodthirsty jungle beasts; or
* A vast polar sea lit only by the cold glitter of icebergs and flickering auroras, in which the frozen stronghold of a frost giant warlock lies hidden.

The Astral Sea

One final extradimensional realm touches on the mortal world: the Astral Sea. If the Elemental Chaos is the manifestation of physicality, the Astral Sea is a domain of the soul and mind. The divine realms, the dominions of the gods, drift within Astral Sea’s unlimited silver deeps. Some of these are realms of glory and splendor—the golden peak of Mount Celestia, the verdant forests of Arvandor…. Others belong to dark powers, such as the Nine Hells where Asmodeus governs his infernal kingdom. A few astral dominions lie abandoned, the ruined heavens and hells of gods and powers that have fallen.

Only the mightiest of heroes dare venture into the dominions of the gods themselves. In the Astral Sea, heroes may find:

* The iron city of Dis, where the devil Dispater rules over a domain of misery and punishment in the second of the Nine Hells;
* An artifact guarded by race of cursed warriors whose castle of adamantine overlooks the war-torn plains of Acheron;
* The black tower of Vecna, hidden in the depths of Pandemonium; or
* A dragon-guarded githyanki fortress, drifting through the silver sea.

No one is knows how many astral dominions there are. Some dominions, such as the Nine Hells, are the size of worlds. Others are no larger than cities, rising like shining islets from the Astral Sea. Several dominions have been ruined or abandoned, usually because the gods who made them were destroyed or forgotten. What sorts of treasures—or perils—might slumber in such places, only learned sages could say.

It's an old article, but I think that's pretty much all unchanged.

Jarlax
2008-06-01, 08:47 AM
...There's going to be more than one Draconomicon? Are they kidding me?

nope and i am expecting it to be for the best. certainly the fiendish codex line is a great example of carefully balanced fluff-to-crunch. if the draconomicons come out looking like the fiendish codexes then it will be for the better.

the design for the fiendish codexes seemed to be get specific to add more detail, so fiendish codex II: Devils did this by focusing on just devils. dedicating 4-5 pages for each layer and an additional two pages to flesh out each lord of hell, their motivations, enemies and allies. all of it pure fluff. the rest of the book was character options, new monsters and even a section dedicated to letting players sell their souls. as a DM it read more like a fiction book than a rulebook. and most of it remains valid in 4e because of this.

3.5s dracinomicon on the other had gave about 1.5 pages of fluff to each dragon color stretched across 3 pages by inserting half page diagrams. dedicating about 50pages out of about 275 to fluff about dragon culture and touching on each colors specific mannerisms. feindish codex II on the other hand dedicates about 70 out of about 150 the change in design between their releases shows.

Gorbash
2008-06-01, 08:47 AM
I still don't see a point behind seperate stats for Chromatic and MEtallic. As near as I can recall, they're pretty much the same things, by element, just with G instead of E. Further, it's not like, say, evil humans and good humans have different stats.

It's more like, Chromatic are Asians, and Metallic are Europeans. Yes, we're all human, whereas the asians are evil and bent on destruction (joke), europeans are peaceful and kind. Just slight alternation of skin/scale color, general view on life etc, so yes, the separation on Chromatic and Metallic isn't needed, but that's just in name, since they're all, first and foremost, dragons. As are we all human, but we classify ourselves as Europeans, Americans, Asian etc etc, so it's no wonder it applies to Dragons, too. So I really don't think we need Catastrophic, Scourge and whatsnot. That's just too much.

AslanCross
2008-06-01, 08:53 AM
Really though i always thought metallic dragons were dumb.

Red and black. that's all we need

Blue and Green rock just as much, if not more.



I know this is a tangent within a thread already de-railed by other tangents, but why not.

This is how I always saw the Metalllic - Chromatic dragon match ups

Gold -Red Both of them at the top of their respective food chains.

Silver - Black Very powerful, and sort of mirror opposites, both in apperance and style

Bronze - Blue About equal in power, and seem to have a lot of interactions with humans, just for different ends.

Brass - Green

Copper - White ( I won't color this one)

I never delt with Brass and Copper dragons much, so this is something of a "why not-it seems to fit" pairing. I have had tons of encounters with white and green dragons though, and if played right by the DM, a Green can give a party just as much trouble as a Red.

I always tiered them according to their breath weapon damage dice (and their average HP). Their HP works out too, though metallics are slightly tougher.

That comes out to: (Stats at Great Wyrm)
Red 660 HP, 24d10 == Gold 707 HP, 24d10
Blue 565 HP, 24d8 == Silver 660 HP, 24d8
Green 551 HP, 24d6 == Bronze 565 HP, 24d6
Black 536 HP, 24d4 == Copper 551 HP, 24d4
White 522 HP, 12d6 == Brass 536 HP, 12d6


It's more like, Chromatic are Asians, and Metallic are Europeans. Yes, we're all human, whereas the asians are evil and bent on destruction (joke), europeans are peaceful and kind.

Just remarking on the general irony of this joke, since in Asian myth, dragons are generally benevolent and in European myth, dragons are always malevolent.

Gorbash
2008-06-01, 09:11 AM
Bleh, it doesn't really make any difference, I was just remarking on how Asians have a different skin colour than Europeans, and how they have different views on life, I wasn't comparing good/evil in those two cultures.

JaxGaret
2008-06-01, 09:44 AM
Humans have different phenotypes because of geographical isolation.

Perhaps Dragons also have isolated themselves to certain preferred terrains, and thus have self-selected their own phenotypes.

bosssmiley
2008-06-01, 10:24 AM
Personally I'm not all that bothered by the lack of chromatic dragons in the upcoming edition. I've been playing DnD for 20 years now and can count the number of chromatics I have used against players on one finger of one hand.

Catastrophic, Scourge & Planar? :smallconfused:

I think you meant metallic rather than chromatic there mate. :smallwink:

IIRC

Catastrophic: things like earthquake, volcano/pyroclastic and typhoon dragons. Not evil, just incredibly powerful and heedless of the little squishy humans

Scourge Dragons: Linnorms re-hashed as avatars of plague, famine and other forms of mortal suffering.

Planar: sound like a rehash of the planar dragons from the Dragon magazine anniversary articles. Draconic Outsiders.

It's all good for me. I already liked the Eberron idea of dragons pursuing their own interests in a real politick way above and beyond alignments.

Smiley_
2008-06-01, 10:39 AM
All the junk about corresponding dragon types.

The way I see it, there are generally two lesser dragons, an intermediate dragon or two and a greater dragon or two in each set of dragons.

Leser dragons include:
white
brass
copper
black

Intermediate dragons include:
green
blue
bronze

and greater dragons:
silver
red
gold

As for the correspondance, you cannot go by elemental type. A siver wil smash a white to little bits while a blue will do the same to a copper.
So, I came with the correspondance list
Gold/Red
Silver/Blue
Bronze/Green
Brass/White
Copper/Black

Azerian Kelimon
2008-06-01, 10:46 AM
...Only that now, we have Adamantine and Iron dragons. Where do they fit?

Trog
2008-06-01, 11:44 AM
I think you meant metallic rather than chromatic there mate. :smallwink:
Er... yes. Quite right.

And: OOoooooo!! Volcano Dragons! Tornado Dragons! Blizzard Dragons... um... what else... um... Earthquake, right, right... and um... Drought Dragons? Flood Dragons? Typhoon, yes... Hmm... Mudslide Dragons? (they mix drinks for you) and lets see... Forest Fire Dragons? (only you can prevent them). Hurricane? Waterspout? El Niño Dragon? Global Warming Dragon? Ozone Depletion Dragon? Smog Dragon... ... nah. Nobody would name a dragon Smog. :smalltongue:

Starbuck_II
2008-06-01, 12:20 PM
Enforcing. Right.
Do you take penalties if you play a cheerful tiefling who doesn't care about any "dark side" nonsense? Or do WotC employees just kneecap you?

Seriously, guy-struggling-against-his-dark-side is one way of playing a tiefling. If you want to do that--and many, MANY people do--then the tiefling is good for that. That's why they said so. But you can also play a tiefling who gleefully uses his powers against devils, because the devils can't take them back an they hate knowing their power is being used for good and against them.

Agreed. I read it as tongue-in-cheek designer joke. Remember spell components how you made a TV for Scry in 3.5? Same idea.
Yes, designers make lame jokes sometimes, but come on: they are geeks too. They deserve a joke here and there.

And for Aasimars? What did the forces of light give people powers but forever cursing them with angelic features for this ancient pact?
You know how lame that sounds.
I don't see how Aasimars would work as a major race. Unless you want the humans are whores angle , but I think 4th is moving away from that.

skywalker
2008-06-01, 12:29 PM
Er... yes. Quite right.

And: OOoooooo!! Volcano Dragons! Tornado Dragons! Blizzard Dragons... um... what else... um... Earthquake, right, right... and um... Drought Dragons? Flood Dragons? Typhoon, yes... Hmm... Mudslide Dragons? (they mix drinks for you) and lets see... Forest Fire Dragons? (only you can prevent them). Hurricane? Waterspout? El Niño Dragon? Global Warming Dragon? Ozone Depletion Dragon? Smog Dragon... ... nah. Nobody would name a dragon Smog. :smalltongue:

I LOL'ed IRL!!1!

No, but seriously, I want an El Niño Dragon.

Only you can prevent forest fire dragons... hilarious :smallbiggrin:

Smiley_
2008-06-01, 12:55 PM
...Only that now, we have Adamantine and Iron dragons. Where do they fit?

Well, now that ruins everything!

Azerian Kelimon
2008-06-01, 01:02 PM
Well, now that ruins everything!

And two of either brass, copper, or bronze are out.

ghost_warlock
2008-06-01, 01:13 PM
Er... yes. Quite right.

And: OOoooooo!! Volcano Dragons! Tornado Dragons! Blizzard Dragons... um... what else... um... Earthquake, right, right... and um... Drought Dragons? Flood Dragons? Typhoon, yes... Hmm... Mudslide Dragons? (they mix drinks for you) and lets see... Forest Fire Dragons? (only you can prevent them). Hurricane? Waterspout? El Niño Dragon? Global Warming Dragon? Ozone Depletion Dragon? Smog Dragon... ... nah. Nobody would name a dragon Smog. :smalltongue:

Hey, don't leave out the Bermuda Triangle Dragon and the Acne Dragon!

Aquillion
2008-06-01, 01:46 PM
Hey, don't leave out the Bermuda Triangle Dragon and the Acne Dragon!Or the dreaded 4th Edition Dragon, with his Magic-Diminishing Breath.

hamishspence
2008-06-01, 02:08 PM
At the time of Worlds and Monsters, Bronze and Brass were out till later, the others were in. Now metallics are out, I hope it will be done as follows:

MM2: Metallics, including iron and adamantine
Drac2: Bronze, brass, a third. Many candidates for third one. As of last ed, options included: Electrum, mercury, steel. Even more options exist in Dragon mag (Tungsten, Nickel, Chromium, Cobalt) Iron was also in that article.

Gorbash
2008-06-01, 02:14 PM
Perhaps in Draconomicon will see some entirely new metallic dragons, such as Trash, Death, Heavy, Gothic. Dibs on Heavy Metal Dragons!!!

kamikasei
2008-06-01, 02:16 PM
Perhaps in Draconomicon will see some entirely new metallic dragons, such as Trash, Death, Heavy, Gothic. Dibs on Heavy Metal Dragons!!!

I suspect you intend to imply this is a bad idea but I'm sorry to say you have failed.

Trog
2008-06-01, 02:26 PM
Yeah electrum is a mix of metals. But then again steel doesn't really exist in natur too yet they have a steel dragon. Along those lines having a bronze dragon would make sense I guess. Brass dragon? No thanks. It somehow just reminds me of bad decorating taste.

Now they have had a mercury dragon before. So that could perhaps be added.

Other silly suggestions: Lead! (Get 'im offa me!) Tin! (Ooooil cannn [/muffled and rusty]) and of course the recyclable dragon, Aluminum. (You can shine like silver all you want... *crushes against forehead*)

Though I put my vote in for a Mithril dragon. :smallbiggrin: If mithril even exists in the new edition. :smallconfused:

AslanCross
2008-06-01, 04:00 PM
I suspect you intend to imply this is a bad idea but I'm sorry to say you have failed.

Agreed. Don't forget the Power Metal Dragon.

They breathe guitar solos. Sonic damage, baby. Resist that.

Tough_Tonka
2008-06-01, 05:10 PM
No. Gold>Red, and Silver owns White so hard it's not even funny. White dragons are dumb, ugly things, Silver dragons are intelligent and rather pretty, I think.

Back to the original discussion, heaven forbid there would be good monsters, because heaven forbid there's a time when the PCs have an ally... No, no, not when they're clearly the heroes, and everyone else is "covered in crap."

Alright then:

Gold=Red+bonus levels

Silver=White+bonus levels and bonus int

of coarse add an extra breath weapon for each and describe the color of the scales as gold and silver

the monster building and editing system is really user friendly. I had a hard time making simple changes to monsters in 3.5 without worrying about balance. I haven't had the 4e books for a week and I've already managed to modify and pump up 2 monsters from the MM and make my own giant wasp from scratch with little problems.

Ralfarius
2008-06-01, 05:36 PM
steel dragon
Gimme Blood
Gimme Blood
Gimme Blood
Gimme Blood Pollution!

Burrito
2008-06-01, 09:40 PM
Okay, here is a question. Why don't White Dragons have fire as a Breath Weapon.

White Dragons live in arctic type regions, and most critters there have some sort of resistance to cold damage, so why would one of the top critters in that region inflice cold damage as a main weapon? You would think they would evolve (or whatever it is dragons do to become dragons) to deal out damage that would be the most efficient for the environment?

Just a minor useless pet peeve in a world where strange combinations of magical creatures exist next mountains of gold and fancy prancy elves.

EvilElitest
2008-06-01, 10:04 PM
Why do you need the stats for metallic dragons, anyway? Planning on having some PCs kill them?

Remember kids, shallow hack and slash is the best and true way the play a True RPG. Really, it is possible he might use a metallic dragons for something than combat fodder
from
EE

Reel On, Love
2008-06-01, 10:08 PM
Remember kids, shallow hack and slash is the best and true way the play a True RPG. Really, it is possible he might use a metallic dragons for something than combat fodder
from
EE

Quit putting words in my mouth. My point was that you'd be using them for things that *aren't* combat... and therefore, you don't need their stats.

Edea
2008-06-01, 10:14 PM
Mmh, I dunno about that. I know plenty of players that would much rather piss the gold/silver/holier-than-thou dragon off just for the hell of it (LEEEEEROOOOOY...), -or- they might ask it to fight with them if the situation is dire enough (far more likely and relevant; are all good dragons pacifist? Bahamut says, "Uh, no o_o."). I think they should still be statted out. Perhaps they need an entirely separate section of the MM: "Appendix A: Potential Allies?"

Also, the alignments of monsters are no longer hard-coded. It's perfectly possible and, I think, RAI to have a Silver Dragon who is a total bastard, or a Gold Dragon who reminds you of Xykon (read: also a total bastard). So why not include their stats?

EvilElitest
2008-06-01, 10:14 PM
Quit putting words in my mouth. My point was that you'd be using them for things that *aren't* combat... and therefore, you don't need their stats.

except that isn't true, and it is extremly limiting to think of it as such

1) Anyone heard about allies? Anyone? you know, people, other than the PC who try to fight the enemies? Them?
2) Weather they will be fighting the PCs or not, their stats will effect hte world around them. just because WOTC works under the narrow minded assumption that all PCs are good and thus won't be fighting solars, doesn't mean that Solar's stats aren't important. With its magic, spell like abilities, and powers, the way the Solar effects the world around it and fights evil is important to note. How much could it do, what can it pull off, and how can it affect a society, an evil orginization, the world ect.
3) Also, even in good interactions, stats are niffty
4) they can be evil now (which i think is a good thing) so they actually can fight the PC

Also is 4E out offically? Why haven't my copies arrived
from
EE

ghost_warlock
2008-06-02, 02:07 AM
Yeah electrum is a mix of metals. But then again steel doesn't really exist in natur too yet they have a steel dragon. Along those lines having a bronze dragon would make sense I guess. Brass dragon? No thanks. It somehow just reminds me of bad decorating taste.

Now they have had a mercury dragon before. So that could perhaps be added.

Other silly suggestions: Lead! (Get 'im offa me!) Tin! (Ooooil cannn [/muffled and rusty]) and of course the recyclable dragon, Aluminum. (You can shine like silver all you want... *crushes against forehead*)

Though I put my vote in for a Mithril dragon. :smallbiggrin: If mithril even exists in the new edition. :smallconfused:

And don't forget the dreaded Plutonium Dragon from Munchkin that gets smaller the older it gets!


Why do you need the stats for metallic dragons, anyway? Planning on having some PCs kill them?

Because I enjoy mounted combat with style rather on the back of some hair-covered, hay-eating quadruped that likely has incontinence as its most powerful attack. Go Bronze! *ZAP*

Xefas
2008-06-02, 02:25 AM
Umm...if all dragons can be all alignments now, then why do you think they left out Metallics because they're "Good"? They aren't Good anymore, so that isn't really a valid complaint.

Maybe it's just because we already have 20 dragon entries in the MM and they didn't want us to have 40 when you can easily substitute a Chromatic as your ally.

ghost_warlock
2008-06-02, 02:37 AM
Umm...if all dragons can be all alignments now, then why do you think they left out Metallics because they're "Good"? They aren't Good anymore, so that isn't really a valid complaint.

Maybe it's just because we already have 20 dragon entries in the MM and they didn't want us to have 40 when you can easily substitute a Chromatic as your ally.

Then why include the chromatics rather than an array of different kinds of dragons; a couple chromatics, a couple metallic, a couple planar, etc.?

Xefas
2008-06-02, 02:47 AM
Then why include the chromatics rather than an array of different kinds of dragons; a couple chromatics, a couple metallic, a couple planar, etc.?

Really, the fanbase can't be pleased either way.

If they just include 5 Chromatics, they're dumbing it down and not including enough variety. If they include 1 of each kind, then they're getting rid of iconic monsters and forcing their weird, new, communist crap on you that must be for -4 year olds who play TCGs over the chat logs on MMOs while watching DBZ and inventing obtuse acronyms.

Five Chromatics are uniform, iconic, and will serve all your purposes now that they're unaligned.

ghost_warlock
2008-06-02, 05:35 AM
getting rid of iconic monsters and forcing their weird, new, communist crap on you that must be for -4 year olds who play TCGs over the chat logs on MMOs while watching DBZ and inventing obtuse acronyms.

What? :smallconfused:

I think the fanbase would have been sufficiently happy with 3 chromatic (red, blue, and black) and 2 metallic (gold and silver). At least that's the impression I get from actually reading this thread. This would have maintained the iconic-ness and still given the players an example of how the metallics will work in 4e (traditionally, the metallics have more than one type of breath weapon and we're interested in seeing if that will remain the same). Instead, WotC simply completed their set (gotta collect them all) of chromatics, scrubbed the alignments, and have essentially said 'homebrew' the rest. Furthermore, the next draconic supplement, unless I'm mistaken, is scheduled to further detail the chromatics. Great, an expanded copy+paste supplement.

As for as 'weird, new, communist crap,' the 2e Monstrous Manual had more than 20 dragons: 5 chromatic, 5 metallic, 5 gem, and a bunch of odd ones that didn't fit into those categories for some reason or another: song, cloud, deep, shadow, yellow, etc. There were also faerie dragons, dragon turtles, dragonnes, pseudodragons, were-dragons (published in a compendium later) and so on. Virtually every dragon in 3e can be traced back to 2e. Hardly any of the dragons in 3e were new, but the most recent version of a long line of draconic tradition.

I get that WotC is trying to spread monsters around so that characters of any level should find a variety of appropriate threats, but the game is called Dungeons & Dragons, after all, and it wouldn't be inappropriate for the core Monster Manual to contain a bit more than a selected handful of them.

Xefas
2008-06-02, 05:59 AM
As for as 'weird, new, communist crap,' <stuff>

I'm talking about the new Catastrophic and Scourge type dragons. Planar existed slightly in 2nd edition (Shadow) and a good bit in 3rd, but the other two kinds are new, and that means that including them would have people complaining because they're new (though they would justify it some other way).

Anyway, I'm betting that no one needs more than 5 colors of dragons statted in their adventures before the MM2 comes out.