# Answering Questions about Draconomicon: Metallic Dragons (was: Primal Power Preview)



## davethegame (Oct 19, 2009)

Rechan said:


> So, where can we ask questions about this, while avoiding the evil that is twitter?




Fire away! I'm about to head home for the night and when I come back I'll answer questions about the book.



CasvalRemDeikun said:


> Even though I loathe writing these types of posts, I want spoilers as well.
> 
> Who are all of the Hall of Fame Dragons?





Andraemos, a brass dragon, who rules a desert thanks to some bandits known as the Sand Knives.
Bahamut, the big bad platinum himself, both as The Old Man with the Canaries and the level 36 Dragon God form, with his aspect, and Kuyutha, his exarch. 
Jalaanvaloss, a steel dragon, who (according to her sidebar) originated in the city of Waterdeep in Forgotten Realms.
Niflung, a cobalt dragon, who hangs out in the frigid north with a barbaric tribe known as the Talons of Winter.
Silvara, a silver dragon, who is from Dragonlance (and the only one I previously recognized). 
Valamaradace, a gold dragon, the "Dragon Queen of Silverymoon" from FR. 

And in case anyone's interested, here are all the "new" metallics listed (new in quote since some of them are just new to the edition)


Brass
Bronze
Cobalt
Mercury
Mithral
Orium
Steel


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Oct 19, 2009)

So, are there any cool alternate powers?

Is there any flavor text about useing good dragons as allies, and mentors?

How much of the book is useable if you never want the party to fight a metallic dragon?


----------



## CasvalRemDeikun (Oct 19, 2009)

So how many of the "new" dragon types get full write-ups(i.e. different age categories)?

How many different types of Draconians are in the book?


----------



## davethegame (Oct 19, 2009)

GMforPowergamers said:


> So, are there any cool alternate powers?




Adding shapechanging is one easy one, but I also like the gold dragon's luck field (which is a cool callback), bronze dragons surrounding themselves with water (that gives vulnerable to lightning as well as forcing attackers to swim) and the mithral dragon's powers to go into extraplanar stasis to recover health.



> Is there any flavor text about useing good dragons as allies, and mentors?




Some, it varies by dragon but strongly emphasizes that they're not always good anymore. There's a section called "Dragons in the World" that talks about metallic dragon patrons, dragons as mysterious strangers, and occasional allies. My favorite though is a section on using Bahamut's "Old Man with Canaries" as a supporting ally for the party taking on a big threat.



> How much of the book is useable if you never want the party to fight a metallic dragon?




Hmm, depends if you still need the stats or not. There's 1 or 2 of the dragon lair mini-adventures that don't have you fight the dragons, and there's a few skill challenges for that too, as well as the stuff I mention above.



CasvalRemDeikun said:


> So how many of the "new" dragon types get full write-ups(i.e. different age categories)?




All of 'em, if I understand your question correctly.



> How many different types of Draconians are in the book?




8, for Adamantine, Gold, Brass, Bronze, Iron, Copper, Cobalt, and Silver with appropriately Draconian names.


----------



## Shroomy (Oct 19, 2009)

Most of the draconians death throes seem pretty easy to implement in 4e, but how does the baaz work?  Do they still turn to stone and trap your weapon when they die?


----------



## CasvalRemDeikun (Oct 19, 2009)

davethegame said:


> All of 'em, if I understand your question correctly.



 So there are seven new dragon types introduced in the way the three new chromatics were in Draconomicon 1?  Good gravy!  That is pretty awesome if that is true.




> 8, for Adamantine, Gold, Brass, Bronze, Iron, Copper, Cobalt, and Silver with appropriately Draconian names.



 Yeah... don't even get me started on the Adamaaz, Ferak, and Kobaaz.

Thanks for the answers, BTW!


----------



## davethegame (Oct 20, 2009)

Shroomy said:


> Most of the draconians death throes seem pretty easy to implement in 4e, but how does the baaz work?  Do they still turn to stone and trap your weapon when they die?




They still do indeed. There's a level 2 Soldier and a Level 8 Minion Soldier version, both make a reflex attack against the attacker in melee. If it hits, the weapon is stuck, needs a standard action to remove.



CasvalRemDeikun said:


> So there are seven new dragon types introduced in the way the three new chromatics were in Draconomicon 1?  Good gravy!  That is pretty awesome if that is true.




Yep, though it's definitely at the cost of other monsters. Not nearly the same variety of other dragon critters as was in Draconomicon 1. 



> Yeah... don't even get me started on the Adamaaz, Ferak, and Kobaaz.
> 
> Thanks for the answers, BTW!




Sure thing!


----------



## CasvalRemDeikun (Oct 20, 2009)

davethegame said:


> Yep, though it's definitely at the cost of other monsters. Not nearly the same variety of other dragon critters as was in Draconomicon 1.



 Umm, excuse me, but have you seen my jaw somewhere?  It seems to have clattered to the floor.  Perhaps we will see more Draconian types in Dragon mag (to fill out the rest of the types).


----------



## Shroomy (Oct 20, 2009)

davethegame said:


> They still do indeed. There's a level 2 Soldier and a Level 8 Minion Soldier version, both make a reflex attack against the attacker in melee. If it hits, the weapon is stuck, needs a standard action to remove.




Cool, I don't mind powers that target equipment or specific power sources, as long as its not a total "screw you!" to the players and can be reasonably overcome (totally crippling is totally lame).  BTW do any of the new draconians have death throes that affect implements?


----------



## Rechan (Oct 20, 2009)

1) Aside from the new dragons, and the Draconians... what other monsters are there?

2) What the heck is Orium?

3) OK. We see in the excerpt they mention about good and evil metallics. There's obviously material in there about Helpful dragons (Mentors, the Old Man assisting you, etc etc). What about Metallics as antagonists - are there any concrete plots offered, any advice in general beyond what we saw in the excerpt, or is it just "Well they can be evil, unaligned, or still antagonists... figure it out for yourself!"

4) Subdual encounteres - what the hell is that? We get the excerpt Friday, I just want an idea of what that is.

5) Any surprises we're not expecting? Or anything that surprised you, at least.


----------



## davethegame (Oct 20, 2009)

Shroomy said:


> BTW do any of the new draconians have death throes that affect implements?




Nope, and most of them explode 



Rechan said:


> 1) Aside from the new dragons, and the Draconians... what other monsters are there?




Wyrmling versions of the metallics (including a piece of art that is super cute)

Hollow dragons, basically the metallic version of dracolichs without the undead flavor

Couatls

Drakes: Liondrake, Vulture Drakes

Drakkensteed, elongated dragons designed for riding and bred from metallic dragons.

More Kobolds, including more dragonkin.



> 2) What the heck is Orium?




"A crimson-hued metal used by ancient empires" that is supposed to enhance magic and may have originated in the Feywild, but is mostly long lost. It reminds me of Cinnabril (sp?) from Red Steel but without the cursing/mutations. It gets its own sidebar.



> 3) OK. We see in the excerpt they mention about good and evil metallics. There's obviously material in there about Helpful dragons (Mentors, the Old Man assisting you, etc etc). What about Metallics as antagonists - are there any concrete plots offered, any advice in general beyond what we saw in the excerpt, or is it just "Well they can be evil, unaligned, or still antagonists... figure it out for yourself!"




Yes, in fact, I'd say more about making them antagonists than allies. There's a lot about how proud and condescending they are. Most of the sample encounters involve fighting metallic dragons. There's some draconic campaigns and organizations that help with this as well.



> 4) Subdual encounteres - what the hell is that? We get the excerpt Friday, I just want an idea of what that is.




Good question! I don't remember anything like that in my read-throughs and it's not in the index, but I'll keep an eye out.


----------



## nightwyrm (Oct 20, 2009)

Maybe "Orium" (or at least the name) is inspired by Orichalcum?


----------



## Rechan (Oct 20, 2009)

Yay kobolds! Yay Drakes!  

Orichalcum is gold. Or well, super gold.

Hopefully there's good advice in there with regards to antagonists. Making, for instance, Good-aligned antagonists takes a litlte bit of skill. 

It seems I edited in #5 after you started, so I'll repeat: What surprised you? Or do you think will surprise us?

BTW, thanks Dave.


----------



## Nahat Anoj (Oct 20, 2009)

What are the personalities of the "new" metallics? (new to 4e, that is   )  Like how copper dragons tend to be miserly and silver dragons tend to be knights-errant.  

I'd like to know their breath weapons and monster roles too, if you would be so kind.   

Thank you very much!


----------



## davethegame (Oct 20, 2009)

Rechan said:


> Hopefully there's good advice in there with regards to antagonists. Making, for instance, Good-aligned antagonists takes a litlte bit of skill.




I think you'll like the advice about making them antagonists, but not necessarily about making them good AND antagonists.



> It seems I edited in #5 after you started, so I'll repeat: What surprised you? Or do you think will surprise us?




I was surprised that they decided to put in so many different dragon types, and not so many related monsters- I thought they would follow suit from Draconomicon 1 and include lots of related monsters. I tend to find the dragon-related monsters easier to use in games than a pile of new solos, but I do like a lot of the new dragon types. 

I was also surprised at how much it uses from DMG2, like the organizations and campaign styles. 



> BTW, thanks Dave.




Sure thing!


----------



## davethegame (Oct 20, 2009)

Jonathan Moyer said:


> What are the personalities of the "new" metallics? (new to 4e, that is   )  Like how copper dragons tend to be miserly and silver dragons tend to be knights-errant.
> 
> I'd like to know their breath weapons and monster roles too, if you would be so kind.




Brass (Artillery): Placid, curious, talkative, with a strong mercenary streak.
Bronze (Brute): Duty-bound and honorable, see the world in black and white.
Cobalt (Controller): Grim, sullen, have a "mine!" attitude
Mercury (Lurker): Erratic, craves variety
Mithral (Skirmisher): Aloof, stay in the Astral Sea, above the concerns of mortals
Orium (Soldier): Taciturn, history buffs
Steel (Controller): Loves humanoids and live in cities, hate authority


----------



## Nahat Anoj (Oct 20, 2009)

davethegame said:


> Brass (Artillery): Placid, curious, talkative, with a strong mercenary streak.
> Bronze (Brute): Duty-bound and honorable, see the world in black and white.
> Cobalt (Controller): Grim, sullen, have a "mine!" attitude
> Mercury (Lurker): Erratic, craves variety
> ...



Cool, thanks!  They all look like nice additions to the metallic dragon family. 

That is indeed a lot of dragons.  Not that I'm complaining, I like reading about them.  I just wonder how the chromatics will keep up!  For colors, we have yellow and orange left, but what else? Puce?? 

I know I'll get some flak for this, but to be honest I'd like to see gem stone dragons make a comeback!    They could actually have a personality this time ...


----------



## davethegame (Oct 20, 2009)

Jonathan Moyer said:


> I know I'll get some flak for this, but to be honest I'd like to see gem stone dragons make a comeback!    They could actually have a personality this time ...




No flak from me, I loved the gem dragons, played one in a Council of Wyrms game way back when. I think it might be cool to tie them into the 4e backstory of psionics and make them dragons who were created to beat the Far Realm.


----------



## Rechan (Oct 20, 2009)

Cobalts hang out in the cold areas, right? Do they have a particular schtick/neat tricks? 

Wow. Sincce Mithril dragons hang out in the Astral sea, I guess you won't see any young ones. 

Anyone remember the Amber Dragon, from one of the 2e compendium annuals? I think one of those would be neat.


----------



## Rechan (Oct 20, 2009)

> I just wonder how the chromatics will keep up!  For colors, we have yellow and orange left, but what else? Puce??



Fang dragon.


----------



## CasvalRemDeikun (Oct 20, 2009)

Rechan said:


> Fang dragon.



 Didn't the fang dragon become the new gray dragon in the same way the sand dragon became the brown dragon and the deep the purple?

So all we have is the yellow and orange left, perhaps indigo?  Perhaps a Mauve Dragon or Eggshell Dragon, Beige or Teal?  Perhaps the dreaded Rainbow (not Tiamat) Dragon?


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Oct 20, 2009)

CasvalRemDeikun said:


> Didn't the fang dragon become the new gray dragon in the same way the sand dragon became the brown dragon and the deep the purple?
> 
> So all we have is the yellow and orange left, perhaps indigo?  Perhaps a Mauve Dragon or Eggshell Dragon, Beige or Teal?  Perhaps the dreaded Rainbow (not Tiamat) Dragon?




prismatic and force from Epic book maybe...


----------



## CasvalRemDeikun (Oct 20, 2009)

GMforPowergamers said:


> prismatic and force from Epic book maybe...



Rainbow and Clear Dragons... 

As to why I keep bringing up Rainbow, it is because it just comes across as innocuous.  Like "oh, look at the pretty rainbow drago-OH MY GOD IT IS EATING ME!"


----------



## Rechan (Oct 20, 2009)

The Gray Dragon, among other things, has a breath weapon. It's also intelligent. 

IIRC, the fang dragon:

Had no breath weapon,
Was brown-yellow,
Relatively animal intellect. 

If we get a "Yellow dragon", I bet that would be the Fang.


----------



## davethegame (Oct 20, 2009)

Rechan said:


> Cobalts hang out in the cold areas, right? Do they have a particular schtick/neat tricks?




Their breath weapon restrains (there's a condition you don't see too often) but then they have a savage mauling attack that pushes back targets despite being restrained and knocks them over, and an aura that freezes the area around them. 



> Wow. Sincce Mithril dragons hang out in the Astral sea, I guess you won't see any young ones.




There is, but the youngest one is level 11.


----------



## Rechan (Oct 20, 2009)

Ooh! One last Q.

What is the level of the youngest cobalt? 

[sblock]My PCs are going into a cold North region. I have use for a dragon with the plot. Although, since the Youngest always have the least amount of powers, I may take the next level up or so and just de-level it, or add more powers period.

My one concern is that a restraining power is a rather harsh condition Locks down your party something awful. I'd hate for players to spend several rounds sitting on their hands.[/sblock]


----------



## davethegame (Oct 20, 2009)

Rechan said:


> Ooh! One last Q.
> 
> What is the level of the youngest cobalt?
> 
> ...




Level 5, and it has a fair amount of powers for a low level dragon, plus it still restrains (with an aftereffect slow), so that could be a problem, especially for primarily melee groups.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Oct 20, 2009)

Rechan said:


> The Gray Dragon, among other things, has a breath weapon. It's also intelligent.
> 
> IIRC, the fang dragon:
> 
> ...




The gray dragon is, indeed, the 4E incarnation of the fang dragon (which actually was gray, as pictured in 3E).


----------



## davethegame (Oct 20, 2009)

Mouseferatu said:


> The gray dragon is, indeed, the 4E incarnation of the fang dragon (which actually was gray, as pictured in 3E).




Hey, nice work on the book, Ari


----------



## yesnomu (Oct 20, 2009)

Does each new metallic have a full page portrait, like Drac I did? Not expecting them to, but I love big art! (although the grey's was disappointing)


----------



## Mouseferatu (Oct 20, 2009)

davethegame said:


> Hey, nice work on the book, Ari




Thanks. 

I will, for the moment, refrain from complaining about other people getting copies before the authors do, and will simply say I'm looking forward to seeing it myself.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Oct 20, 2009)

BTW, I see zero harm in saying that, at one point during design, what is now the "orium dragon" was indeed the "orichalcum dragon." I've no better idea than anyone else why it might've been changed.


----------



## Nahat Anoj (Oct 20, 2009)

Mouseferatu said:


> BTW, I see zero harm in saying that, at one point during design, what is now the "orium dragon" was indeed the "orichalcum dragon." I've no better idea than anyone else why it might've been changed.



Here are my theories...

1) Too many similarities between alchemical "gold" and real gold
2) They didn't want it too look like Exalted 
3) They thought "orichalcum" was too hard for the average person to pronounce
4) They wanted to find a way to tie in Red Steel


----------



## Rechan (Oct 20, 2009)

Jonathan Moyer said:


> 1) Too many similarities between alchemical "gold" and real gold
> 2) They didn't want it too look like Exalted



That ship sailed when they put in encounter (scene) long powers, used Primordials and Spirits as big important aspects of the setting, and set the Shadowfell as a dual reflection of the real world. 

Hell. The Abyssal Genasi article author admitted on his blog that he was inspired after reading some corrupted Dragon-Blooded fan creation.

But then, I think Exalted is the bees knees, so more similarities are cool with me.


----------



## Nahat Anoj (Oct 20, 2009)

Rechan said:


> That ship sailed when they put in encounter (scene) long powers, used Primordials and Spirits as big important aspects of the setting, and set the Shadowfell as a dual reflection of the real world.
> 
> Hell. The Abyssal Genasi article author admitted on his blog that he was inspired after reading some corrupted Dragon-Blooded fan creation.



Yeah, I remember when 4e setting info was released describing the ancient conflict between the gods and _primordials_, the cynic in me wondered if WotC was going to be sued!



> But then, I think Exalted is the bees knees, so more similarities are cool with me.



Same here.


----------



## AllisterH (Oct 20, 2009)

2 reasons why I can think of.

1. Orium as a word by itself, WOTC can claim total ownership. Orium is a suffix (crematorium, auditorium) that denotes a place where something (cremation and listening respectively) occurs.

2. Orichalcum gets misspelt a lot AND personally, I'm a little unclear as to how to actually pronounce it.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Oct 20, 2009)

Ok, I'm curious what kind of Kobolds are there in that book? since you mentioned them.

And do Mercury Dragons get radiant breath, and those blinding beams of light as their attacks?


----------



## MrMyth (Oct 20, 2009)

Rechan said:


> The Gray Dragon, among other things, has a breath weapon. It's also intelligent.
> 
> IIRC, the fang dragon:
> 
> ...




I think the fang dragon was often portrayed as gray from the start... and while more 'feral' than other dragons, I think it remained intelligent at heart. 

As others mentioned, the Gray Dragon is indeed the new Fang Dragon - but as I recall, the Draconomicon had specific explanations for the changes. Something along the lines of Tiamat purging the race of the ones that had devolved from standard dragonkind, I believe - though I don't have it on hand to confirm. On the one hand, the Fang Dragon was pretty cool and unique in its original form... on the other, it did always feel weird how different it was from other dragons, and with the removal of ability damage in 4E, I can see why they wanted to remake it as more akin to the rest.


----------



## catastrophic (Oct 20, 2009)

Yayyy Bronze dragons are back! 
Are they still semi-aquatic and fight pirates and stuff?



Rechan said:


> That ship sailed when they put in encounter (scene) long powers, used Primordials and Spirits as big important aspects of the setting, and set the Shadowfell as a dual reflection of the real world.
> 
> Hell. The Abyssal Genasi article author admitted on his blog that he was inspired after reading some corrupted Dragon-Blooded fan creation.
> 
> But then, I think Exalted is the bees knees, so more similarities are cool with me.



I think that ship sailed when Exalted 1st ed was released and the Solar castes were clearly inspired by Fighters, Clerics, Mages, and Rogues.


----------



## Logan_Bonner (Oct 20, 2009)

yesnomu said:


> Does each new metallic have a full page portrait, like Drac I did? Not expecting them to, but I love big art! (although the grey's was disappointing)




Each dragon has a half-page illo.



Mouseferatu said:


> BTW, I see zero harm in saying that, at one point during design, what is now the "orium dragon" was indeed the "orichalcum dragon." I've no better idea than anyone else why it might've been changed.




Basically, orichalcum was a real-world mythological term, which is cool. But it was too difficult to pronounce given the relatively small number of people who've heard of it. At one point, the plan was to change it to cinnabar! (I tried my best to make that not happen.  )


----------



## Danzauker (Oct 20, 2009)

WotC_Logan said:


> Each dragon has a half-page illo.
> 
> 
> 
> Basically, orichalcum was a real-world mythological term, which is cool. But it was too difficult to pronounce given the relatively small number of people who've heard of it. At one point, the plan was to change it to cinnabar! (I tried my best to make that not happen.  )




Bah!!

Why not call it electrum??!!?!!

If you wanna go old skool, go the whole way!! Don't be a wussy!!!


----------



## davethegame (Oct 20, 2009)

WotC_Logan said:


> At one point, the plan was to change it to cinnabar! (I tried my best to make that not happen.  )




Ha! I was right!

I guess it is a problem because it's RARE and CURSED....


----------



## avin (Oct 20, 2009)

davethegame said:


> Hollow dragons, basically the metallic version of dracolichs without the undead flavor




That bit make me interested on this book. Do they look like shells or more like dracoliches? What turn them into Hollow?

Anybody know when art gallery will be updated with this?


----------



## Jhaelen (Oct 20, 2009)

WotC_Logan said:


> Basically, orichalcum was a real-world mythological term, which is cool. But it was too difficult to pronounce given the relatively small number of people who've heard of it. At one point, the plan was to change it to cinnabar! (I tried my best to make that not happen.  )



Meh. I really would have preferred orichalcum. Is it really that obscure?

It features prominently in the Earthdawn rpg but I think the first time I read about it was in the 'Indiana Jones 4 - The Fate of Atlantis' computer game. And that's of course where it originates from: Plato's tale about Atlantis...

I even once had an idea for a new rpg system based on an atlantean style society using orichalcum as a basis for their magitech...


----------



## coyote6 (Oct 20, 2009)

Jhaelen said:


> Meh. I really would have preferred orichalcum. Is it really that obscure?
> 
> It features prominently in the Earthdawn rpg but I think the first time I read about it was in the 'Indiana Jones 4 - The Fate of Atlantis' computer game. And that's of course where it originates from: Plato's tale about Atlantis...
> 
> I even once had an idea for a new rpg system based on an atlantean style society using orichalcum as a basis for their magitech...




Orichalcum is also big in Shadowrun and Exalted, amongst other places. I think it's in one (or more) of the Final Fantasy games, too, isn't it?

I'm amused that something was too hard to pronounce for D&D. Chimera? Drow? Daemon? Sahuagin? Ixitxachitl? Melee?


----------



## Nahat Anoj (Oct 20, 2009)

coyote6 said:


> I'm amused that something was too hard to pronounce for D&D. Chimera? Drow? Daemon? Sahuagin? Ixitxachitl? Melee?



Blibdoolpoolp is one of my favorites.


----------



## Derren (Oct 20, 2009)

Are the new dragons also unaligned and does the book at least acknowledge that metallic dragons are generally good or are they just presented as another monster to be fought?


----------



## Squizzle (Oct 20, 2009)

Derren said:


> Are the new dragons also unaligned and does the book at least acknowledge that metallic dragons are generally good or are they just presented as another monster to be fought?



"Acknowledge"? There's no objective source for their statements to be compared against.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Oct 20, 2009)

WotC_Logan said:


> At one point, the plan was to change it to cinnabar! (I tried my best to make that not happen.  )




That would've been _hysterical_.


----------



## Rechan (Oct 21, 2009)

> At one point, the plan was to change it to cinnabar! (I tried my best to make that not happen.  )



A cinnabon dragon? YUM.


----------



## Garthanos (Oct 21, 2009)

WotC_Logan said:


> Basically, orichalcum was a real-world mythological term, which is cool.




But the red gold - atlantean magic metal described by plato would have been really cool.


----------



## FireLance (Oct 21, 2009)

Jhaelen said:


> Meh. I really would have preferred orichalcum. Is it really that obscure?





coyote6 said:


> Orichalcum is also big in Shadowrun and Exalted, amongst other places. I think it's in one (or more) of the Final Fantasy games, too, isn't it?



I think coyote6 might have touched on one of the unstaed, supporting reasons why WotC might have gone with the made-up name. Orichalcum features prominently in the Final Fantasy series and related games, and someone unfamiliar with the real-world roots of the term might think that WotC is just ripping off Square Enix.


----------



## Rechan (Oct 21, 2009)

Dangit. I just realized this comes out next month. I may need some of those stats a little sooner. c.c


----------



## Garthanos (Oct 21, 2009)

FireLance said:


> Orichalcum features prominently in the Final Fantasy series and related games, and someone unfamiliar with the real-world roots of the term might think that WotC is just ripping off Square Enix.




See I wasn't even aware of its presence in some of those games... only aware of its legendary source.


----------



## Aegeri (Oct 21, 2009)

I would love to know more about Bahamut. I've heard that he's absolutely bananas (and that is the dragon form of course).


----------



## Wayside (Oct 21, 2009)

Danzauker said:


> Bah!!
> 
> Why not call it electrum??!!?!!



Because then we'd never hear the end of Carmen Electrum dragons.


----------



## lazerfish (Oct 21, 2009)

WotC_Logan said:


> At one point, the plan was to change it to cinnabar! (I tried my best to make that not happen.  )




A cinnabar dragon would *have* to use a fire breath weapon. It would also need to be able to shapechange into the form of a small red and white ball and only grow wings after reaching the adult stage.

It's hoard would include, among other things, Volcano Badges.


I would also like to hear more about Bahamut.


----------



## Nahat Anoj (Oct 21, 2009)

Hmm, would you be able to share the breath weapons of the "new" metallics, por favor?   I don't want actual stats, just a descriptions of the type of damage and maybe any rider effects.

I think with Draconomicon 2, I'll really be able to dive in to a faux Dragonlance setting I'd like to run.  It would have a similar campaign history and the like, but there would also be significant differences to the official setting.


----------



## Klaus (Oct 21, 2009)

Wayside said:


> Because then we'd never hear the end of Carmen Electrum dragons.



Dragonboobs?



Tell me more about the kobolds! Are they connected to the cobalt dragons (like the word "kobold" comes from "cobalt")?


----------



## AllisterH (Oct 21, 2009)

Heh..

I know of orichalcum from SLAYERS where it is this mystical uber metal.


----------



## Nahat Anoj (Oct 21, 2009)

Klaus said:


> Tell me more about the kobolds! Are they connected to the cobalt dragons (like the word "kobold" comes from "cobalt")?



That would be hilarious. 

I bet there are metallic kobolds, who are forthright, honorbound, noble little guys.  (yeah ... right...


----------



## Cam Banks (Oct 21, 2009)

FireLance said:


> I think coyote6 might have touched on one of the unstaed, supporting reasons why WotC might have gone with the made-up name. Orichalcum features prominently in the Final Fantasy series and related games, and someone unfamiliar with the real-world roots of the term might think that WotC is just ripping off Square Enix.




Given how much Square Enix is inspired by D&D to begin with (Bahamut, Tiamat, just to give two perfectly fine mythological yet iconic examples) I don't think a lawyer would have much to go on.

I'm also kind of floored by "but nobody would know how to pronounce it." This is D&D, people. It teaches people words they never would have used otherwise.

Cheers,
Cam


----------



## Logan_Bonner (Oct 21, 2009)

Rechan said:


> A cinnabon dragon? YUM.




And _that's_ exactly why I didn't like cinnabar.



Jonathan Moyer said:


> Hmm, would you be able to share the breath weapons of the "new" metallics, por favor?   I don't want actual stats, just a descriptions of the type of damage and maybe any rider effects.
> 
> I think with Draconomicon 2, I'll really be able to dive in to a faux Dragonlance setting I'd like to run.  It would have a similar campaign history and the like, but there would also be significant differences to the official setting.




You should keep an eye on the excerpts. I think you'll be interested in the orium dragon's breath weapon and the draconians. I'll give you a hint on the breath weapon: This one hangs out for a while. And walks around.


----------



## pawsplay (Oct 21, 2009)

Mouseferatu said:


> BTW, I see zero harm in saying that, at one point during design, what is now the "orium dragon" was indeed the "orichalcum dragon." I've no better idea than anyone else why it might've been changed.




Opium dragon?


----------



## yesnomu (Oct 21, 2009)

pawsplay said:


> Opium dragon?



No no no, you don't understand officer; I was eating a poppyseed dragon this morning!


----------



## Dragonhelm (Oct 21, 2009)

davethegame said:


> Jalaanvaloss, a steel dragon, who (according to her sidebar) originated in the city of Waterdeep in Forgotten Realms.






Interesting, considering that steel dragons used to be known as Greyhawk dragons.  



> [*]Silvara, a silver dragon, who is from Dragonlance (and the only one I previously recognized).




What do they say about her?  Anything past the War of the Lance?


----------



## Aegeri (Oct 22, 2009)

Still hoping for some news about what Bahamut is like.

Much like how I'm amazed nobody has yet spilled the beans on the new Orcus stats.

Sigh, it tis too cruel.


----------



## Jack99 (Oct 22, 2009)

Aegeri said:


> Still hoping for some news about what Bahamut is like.
> 
> Much like how I'm amazed nobody has yet spilled the beans on the new Orcus stats.
> 
> Sigh, it tis too cruel.




Not much to say. He is one level higher but has the same stats (except +1 initiative and perception). They changed his resists to 20 3/enc and gave him a close blast 4 melee attack so he can (at times) hit more than one enemy..

Just what I noticed at a glance the other day, might be other stuff, but no book atm.


----------



## Aegeri (Oct 22, 2009)

Jack99 said:


> Not much to say. He is one level higher but has the same stats (except +1 initiative and perception). They changed his resists to 20 3/enc and gave him a close blast 4 melee attack so he can (at times) hit more than one enemy..
> 
> Just what I noticed at a glance the other day, might be other stuff, but no book atm.




Is that Orcus? I am entirely confused.


----------



## Derren (Oct 22, 2009)

Its likely Bahamuts dragon stats as compared to his "I use great wyrms as magic items instead as real creatures" human form.


----------



## MrMyth (Oct 22, 2009)

Derren said:


> Its likely Bahamuts dragon stats as compared to his "I use great wyrms as magic items instead as real creatures" human form.




I don't know about that, from the context (and the description), it seems far more likely to apply to Orcus. Given that I imagine Bahamut's Dragon Form would involve a change in size, flight, breath weapon, and much more than a slight modifier to stats, resistance, and the addition of an attack that would compensate for a known weakness of Orcus.

Of course, I am certainly eager to see Bahamut's dragon form anyway! If it is nearly as awesome as his "Old Man" stats, I'll certainly be happy. (And I am more than glad to have thematically fitting but nonetheless easy ways for great wyrms to engage in such an epic fight, without simply throwing thousands of hp in allies into the fray, and letting slavish devotion to formula and simulationism doom the fight to boredom and grind!) The Old Man with the Canaries is a downright inspired piece of game design, and if the use of the great wyrms comes across as items rather than real creatures, I think the fault would fall with the DM rather than the rules.


----------



## Jack99 (Oct 22, 2009)

Aegeri said:


> Is that Orcus? I am entirely confused.




Sorry, was in a hurry. Yes those were the changed I noticed to Orcus.


----------



## Derren (Oct 22, 2009)

MrMyth said:


> The Old Man with the Canaries is a downright inspired piece of game design, and if the use of the great wyrms comes across as items rather than real creatures, I think the fault would fall with the DM rather than the rules.




No, not really. The one-use great wyrm items are so far away from the stats of real dragons that there is no way to hide the silliness of this mechanic.

Personally I can't see how anyone would not start laughing like crazy when seeing this in the game unless he is really really drunk.

His bodyguards should not simply be an encounter power of Bahamut himself, but separate creatures which can be encountered with him (then the players are in trouble) or alone. That way the players have to figure out how to separate Bahamut from his bodyguards. Tiamats consort is also not just another one use power in her statblock.
Would you make an army an encounter power for a BBEG so that the PCs don't have to think of a way to get the BBEG without his men supporting him?


----------



## The Little Raven (Oct 22, 2009)

Derren said:


> Personally I can't see how anyone would not start laughing like crazy when seeing this in the game unless he is really really drunk.




Nice dismissive attitude towards anyone who doesn't agree with you. If we don't agree, we must be drunk.

Stay classy, Derren.


----------



## pawsplay (Oct 22, 2009)

The Little Raven said:


> Nice dismissive attitude towards anyone who doesn't agree with you. If we don't agree, we must be drunk.
> 
> Stay classy, Derren.




Actually, Derren is just describing his inability to comprehend others' appreciation, not dismissing their right to an opinion. You, however, are being dismisive. Derren is entitled to think it's a ridiculous mechanic.


----------



## RefinedBean (Oct 22, 2009)

pawsplay said:


> Actually, Derren is just describing his inability to comprehend others' appreciation, not dismissing their right to an opinion. You, however, are being dismisive. Derren is entitled to think it's a ridiculous mechanic.




I don't know, he does seem to be dismissive...for instance, he's dismissing a DM's ability to take the mechanic and make it as epic and cinematic as they want.

Also, his "inability to comprehend others' appreciation" could be described in ways that don't involve a cheap shot about being.

Plus, it's Derren.  If there's a 4E thread involving dragons, he's going to make his presence known, and it's never going to be positive.  Couple that with the fact that his sig makes fun of 4E, it gets so very tiresome...


----------



## davethegame (Oct 22, 2009)

Put up my Preview: Critical Hits » Preview: “Draconomicon: Metallic Dragons”

What is it that people want to know about Bahamut? He has a lot of the same god mechanics we've seen with Tiamat, Vecna, etc.


----------



## LordArchaon (Oct 23, 2009)

Hey there! I was asking on the facebook page, but I'll duplicate the questions here just in case.

Here they are:

- What's the breath weapon and environment of the new Bronze?
 - Same things but about Brass?
- Is the Cobalt really so similar in body and general looks to the Blue as it appeared on preview artwork? (this is a critique more than a question, I would have preferred a slimmer look..!)...
 - What about Mercury dragons?
 - What makes Hollow Dragons what they are and how do they look like?

THANKS


----------



## Rechan (Oct 23, 2009)

I think folks want to know about Bahamut. We got his stats as the Old Man, but what does it SAY about him? Is anything detailed about him as far as being the God of honor and justice and whatnot? 

Also, it was asked what is there about the kobolds/dragonkin.


----------



## Garthanos (Oct 23, 2009)

pawsplay said:


> Derren is entitled to think it's a ridiculous mechanic.




I think implying others opinions must be based on drunkenness counts as thoroughly dismissive and you are playing word games to pretend otherwise.

And I don't think anyone said Derren thinking the mechanic was rediculous... was itself laughable like he must be drunk to think that.... 

Derren like a couple others carry an edition war banner and fly it high with every post. I consider that dismissive in an ongoing fashion.


----------



## Peraion Graufalke (Oct 23, 2009)

Garthanos said:


> Derren like a couple others carry an edition war banner and fly it high with every post. I consider that dismissive in an ongoing fashion.




Well, there's always the option to put him on the ignore list. 

On the other hand, maybe one the mods could have a word with him?


----------



## Jhaelen (Oct 23, 2009)

Peraion Graufalke said:


> Well, there's always the option to put him on the ignore list.



Well, he's on my ignore list since the 3E days (even back then, he was dismissing everyone's opinions about anything related to dragons).

So, everything would be fine - if people stopped quoting the guy all the time!


----------



## ferratus (Oct 23, 2009)

> His bodyguards should not simply be an encounter power of Bahamut himself, but separate creatures which can be encountered with him (then the players are in trouble) or alone.




You can't find stats for a Gold Dragon?   The whole point of the stat block is that represents a time when Bahamut is surrounded by his Gold Dragon Emissaries.  If you want to play a cat and mouse game in which you pick off the gold dragons one by one, just pick up the MM2 or use the Rules Compendium. 

You really don't get that 4e mechanics are supposed to be what happens in a scenario, not the complete mechanics of what characters/monsters are able to do at any given moment.  I don't understand why you can't understand this, as it has been explained countless times.


----------



## MrMyth (Oct 23, 2009)

Derren said:


> No, not really. The one-use great wyrm items are so far away from the stats of real dragons that there is no way to hide the silliness of this mechanic.




There is no way '_for you' _to hide the silliness of this mechanic. Clearly, many other DMs feel differently, and feel they are entirely capable of doing so, and you really aren't in a position to speak on their behalf. Or to imply that it only works if their players are drunk.

I mean, I genuinely am sorry that you don't feel you are a capable enough DM to pull this off. But one of the best parts of 4E has been given the DM the ability to weave together imagination, description and powers into a seamless whole. I admit some situations are more challenging than others, but it clearly is doable, and claiming otherwise is simply a dismissal of the accomplishments of a lot of skilled DMs out there. 



Derren said:


> His bodyguards should not simply be an encounter power of Bahamut himself, but separate creatures which can be encountered with him (then the players are in trouble) or alone. That way the players have to figure out how to separate Bahamut from his bodyguards. Tiamats consort is also not just another one use power in her statblock.
> Would you make an army an encounter power for a BBEG so that the PCs don't have to think of a way to get the BBEG without his men supporting him?




Yeah, uh... you are aware that you can, in fact, run the dragons precisely that way. Have the PCs fight them one at a time. But I'm guessing they feel that fighting a bunch of gold dragons in a row wouldn't be very good game design, and so didn't go that route. That doesn't mean you can't if you want to. But establishing that as the default - that Bahamut always has these allies, and that either the PCs fight them as a group (a terrible, terrible idea) or that they have to lure them away (removing them as a part of the encounter anyway)... yeah, that's just a bad idea, and bad design, no matter how you look at it.


----------



## FabioMilitoPagliara (Oct 23, 2009)

happy for seeing the canaries back in the game


----------



## Garthanos (Oct 23, 2009)

Pointless post removed.


----------



## Rechan (Oct 23, 2009)

Can we get back to the book and away from dragonhate?


----------



## Derren (Oct 23, 2009)

RefinedBean said:


> he's dismissing a DM's ability to take the mechanic and make it as epic and cinematic as they want.




No. "Epic" and "Cinematic" has nothing to do with something being silly or not (Not completely correct. "Cinematic" and "Silly" very often go hand in hand). DMs making a combat with a deity cinematic should be pretty normal. That still doesn't change that the one use canaries are silly when you assume that thos canaries are his bodyguards (which is heavily implied).



MrMyth said:


> I mean, I genuinely am sorry that you don't feel you are a capable enough DM to pull this off. But one of the best parts of 4E has been given the DM the ability to weave together imagination, description and powers into a seamless whole. I admit some situations are more challenging than others, but it clearly is doable, and claiming otherwise is simply a dismissal of the accomplishments of a lot of skilled DMs out there.




Only when the players don't look close enough. If they don't then 4e can of course be used to creating cinematic scenes, likely better than in previous editions. But when they start to look behind the cinematic effects they fill find silly mechanics. Some players care and some don't. I do care, not by choice, but because thats simply how I work. And thus I have a hard time understanding why someone would defend such a silly mechanic.







> Yeah, uh... you are aware that you can, in fact, run the dragons precisely that way. Have the PCs fight them one at a time. But I'm guessing they feel that fighting a bunch of gold dragons in a row wouldn't be very good game design, and so didn't go that route. That doesn't mean you can't if you want to. But establishing that as the default - that Bahamut always has these allies, and that either the PCs fight them as a group (a terrible, terrible idea) or that they have to lure them away (removing them as a part of the encounter anyway)... yeah, that's just a bad idea, and bad design, no matter how you look at it.




Except thats exactly what they did. Bahamut does always have this allies as default. Its just that their power varies considerably, depending on if they are encountered with Bahamut or alone.
In my eyes that is bad mechanic.

To make it make sense you either have to alter Bahamut or alter the fluff text of the bodyguards (the likely route to go). But as written by WotC its just silly.

And to try to get this thing semi on topic again. Subdual encounters look ok. Nice to see this implemented as more of a code of honour than a hard mechanic.


----------



## vagabundo (Oct 23, 2009)

Derren said:


> Only when the players don't look close enough. If they don't then 4e can of course be used to creating cinematic scenes, likely better than in previous editions. But when they start to look behind the cinematic effects they fill find silly mechanics. Some players care and some don't. I do care, not by choice, but because thats simply how I work. And thus I have a hard time understanding why someone would defend such a silly mechanic..




You're wrong; it is an awesome mechanic.  I don't have any problems with this mechanic, it is awesome to me and not in the slightest bit silly.


----------



## MrMyth (Oct 23, 2009)

Derren said:


> Only when the players don't look close enough. If they don't then 4e can of course be used to creating cinematic scenes, likely better than in previous editions. But when they start to look behind the cinematic effects they fill find silly mechanics. Some players care and some don't. I do care, not by choice, but because thats simply how I work. And thus I have a hard time understanding why someone would defend such a silly mechanic.




Here is the main problem with your viewpoint - it isn't that some players recognize silly mechanics and don't care. It is that some players (read: many players) _don't believe that those mechanics are silly_. You do. I disagree. Clearly others in this thread do so. Most of the players I know do so. I am perfectly fine with you feeling otherwise. I am less fine with you stating that the reason for my belief is that I am too blind to recognize the 'truth' of the mechanics... or that I'm drunk or otherwise deluded. That's offensive. 

And that's why you have a hard time understanding why someone would defend it. You are literally unwilling to even concede that the opposing viewpoint exists, let alone that there might any merit in it. And I guess there isn't much I can say to change your mind - not when people are coming forward, and saying they don't find this mechanic silly, and you genuinely feel they are lying about what they believe...


----------



## RefinedBean (Oct 23, 2009)

Rechan said:


> Can we get back to the book and away from dragonhate?




Oh Rechan.  You and your optimism.


----------



## FabioMilitoPagliara (Oct 26, 2009)

Maybe bahamut just like to use gold dragon as one use item... most of the times

I got that this is for when the character are hopelessly overpowered by Bahamut if the party is of 11 demigods then "maybe" it could be interesting to have a full scale battle between 

"Bahamut and his 8 gold dragon bodyguard" vs "The Demigods Eleven"


----------



## Derren (Oct 26, 2009)

New update
Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Excerpts: Draconomicon: Metallic Dragons: Draconic Organizations)

Did they just validate Die Vecna Die as canon? Ewwww.

What would be more interesting than simply example organizations with dragons in them (which at least in this example are pretty much interchangeable with most other creatures) is an paragraph which talks about how dragons tend to run organizations as compared to humans and how their (hopefully) very different psychology affects ranks, recruiting, etc.


----------



## AllisterH (Oct 26, 2009)

Derren said:


> New update
> Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Excerpts: Draconomicon: Metallic Dragons: Draconic Organizations)
> 
> Did they just validate Die Vecna Die as canon? Ewwww.




Um, wasn't Die Vecna Die the *OFFICIAL* explanation for the switchover from 2e to 3e?


----------



## Stoat (Oct 26, 2009)

AllisterH said:


> Um, wasn't Die Vecna Die the *OFFICIAL* explanation for the switchover from 2e to 3e?




IIRC, it was just a "campaign ending mega-adventure" like Apocalypse Stone, not  *OFFICIAL* the way that, say, the FR Avatar Trilogy was.

I may be the only person alive who liked Die Vecna Die.  It was just so gonzo, how can you not love it?


----------



## Moon_Goddess (Oct 26, 2009)

Die Vecna Die may have not been "official" but it is part of venca's backstory and since he's now a core god then his backstory is canon.


----------



## Derren (Oct 30, 2009)

Another update
Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Excerpts: Draconomicon: Metallic Dragons: Draconic Organizations)

Just a small dragon lair/dungeon crawl.
Kill the dragon and go on....

I don't really see how this lair is any different than a chromatic dragon lair. The dragon certainly isn't (your only option is to fight).

And you get a first(?) look at the Orium dragon. It can throw stones and its breath weapon summons a minion (in addition to doing damage). The breath weapon recharges when the minion dies. So it might be better to simply ignore the minion.


----------



## DragonFan (Nov 1, 2009)

I hope the Bronze Dragon is redesigned closer to the Dragonlance setting.  There they are the most ferocious and physically strongest metallic, going all the way back to the first Bronze, Burll.  We already know the Bronze is going to be a Brute, so hopefully he will be written as lumbering behemoth able to deal serious damage.


----------



## RavinRay (Nov 1, 2009)

Danzauker said:


> Bah!!
> 
> Why not call it electrum??!!?!!
> 
> If you wanna go old skool, go the whole way!! Don't be a wussy!!!



Why not consider the real-world gold-copper allow tumbaga for the mythological orichalcum? Then we can get the gold-silver alloy electrum and the silver-copper alloy billon.


----------



## Phaezen (Nov 1, 2009)

Derren said:


> Another update
> Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Excerpts: Draconomicon: Metallic Dragons: Draconic Organizations)
> 
> Just a small dragon lair/dungeon crawl.
> ...




Awesome lair though some really nice ideas to swipe for an encounter.

Fighting on a rickety scaffold staircase should make for a memorable encounter.


----------



## doctorhook (Nov 4, 2009)

Garthanos said:


> Derren like a couple others carry an edition war banner and fly it high with every post. I consider that dismissive in an ongoing fashion.



Even his sig is baiting.


----------



## Derren (Nov 5, 2009)

doctorhook said:


> Even his sig is baiting.




If you consider stating ones opinion that 4E is not the best game ever and actually has flaws baiting then yes, it is.


----------



## FireLance (Nov 5, 2009)

Derren said:


> If you consider stating ones opinion that 4E is not the best game ever and actually has flaws baiting then yes, it is.



That's not what's in your sig, though. 

If you had actually said something along the lines of, "In my opinion, 4E actually has flaws and is not the best game ever." I doubt that anyone would have a problem with it.


----------



## Derren (Nov 5, 2009)

FireLance said:


> That's not what's in your sig, though.
> 
> If you had actually said something along the lines of, "In my opinion, 4E actually has flaws and is not the best game ever." I doubt that anyone would have a problem with it.




I expect people to know that what I say is my opinion, especially concerning such subjective topics like RPG games.
But considering how often people seem to not know this, I guess I should add it to my sig.....


In my sig I highlight the flaws I think 4E has, not more, not less.


----------



## FireLance (Nov 5, 2009)

Derren said:


> I expect people to know that what I say is my opinion, especially concerning such subjective topics like RPG games.
> But considering how often people seem to not know this, I guess I should add it to my sig.....
> 
> In my sig I highlight the flaws I think 4E has, not more, not less.



I'm not a moderator, so just consider this to be unsolicited advice:

Even though what you are expressing is an opinion, the way that you choose to express it, for example, by using derisive language or words with negative connotations, can give others the impression that you want to offend those who do not share your opinion. If you truly do not want to give offense, perhaps you should consider re-expressing your views more neutrally.


----------



## Amphimir Míriel (Nov 7, 2009)

Stop feeding the trolls!

Lets get back to the discussion!

Can someone tells us more about the subdual mechanics? I vaguely remember them being in the old Forgotten Realms grey box, where it stated that some dragons could be persuaded to have a "duel" to a certain percentage of its total hp


----------



## Derren (Nov 7, 2009)

Amphimir Míriel said:


> Stop feeding the trolls!
> 
> Lets get back to the discussion!
> 
> Can someone tells us more about the subdual mechanics? I vaguely remember them being in the old Forgotten Realms grey box, where it stated that some dragons could be persuaded to have a "duel" to a certain percentage of its total hp




Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Excerpts: Draconomicon: Metallic Dragons: Draconic Encounters)
It's not a mechanic but a agreement between the PCs and the dragon to stop fighting when bloodied. And the dragon is not forced to accept it.


----------



## Amphimir Míriel (Nov 7, 2009)

Derren said:


> Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Excerpts: Draconomicon: Metallic Dragons: Draconic Encounters)
> It's not a mechanic but a agreement between the PCs and the dragon to stop fighting when bloodied. And the dragon is not forced to accept it.




Ok, pretty much like in Forgotten Realms 1st edition, then


----------



## Ripzerai (Nov 17, 2009)

WotC_Logan said:


> Basically, orichalcum was a real-world mythological term, which is cool. But it was too difficult to pronounce given the relatively small number of people who've heard of it. )




Heh, wow. You guys really don't think much of your readers, do you?

And the minds of thousands of bright ten-year-olds with access to Wikipedia suddenly cried out from being condescended to. 

I remember being in elementary school, discovering obscure D&D terms had myths in real-world history and legend. It was a neat feeling.


----------

