# Loss of Innate Spellcasting (or 'How Dragons Build Lairs')



## takasi (Jan 9, 2008)

In the Worlds and Monsters thread, a few posters lamented the loss of a dragon's innate spellcasting ability.  It was suggested that a new thread pop up, so I'm starting one.

Doesn't it seem more appropriate to have TREASURE that makes makes things like alarms?  Or magical locations?  Or non-combat rituals?  Or minions?  It's definately more streamlined than wading through things that, honestly, will rarely be used.


----------



## Sitara (Jan 9, 2008)

Removing spellcasting/powers from dragons is the best thing ever. Finally! Dragons are cunning and canny brutes, not freaking scholars who pore over ancient tomes. they get unique powers for them only (hopefully different for ewach color) and their dragon breath. Oha nd hteir massive size, teeth and claws, wings, etc. 

Thats all they need. 

As for lairs, maybe they have a good sense of smell (high perception). They doin't need an alarm spell.

Oh and margeret weis is probably wrenching her hair out right now. lol


----------



## GreatLemur (Jan 9, 2008)

I have no idea why anyone would ever think that all dragons must have elaborate, custom-made lairs full of magical traps, or that they must create these things themselves through innate magical abilities.  It seems like a pretty silly demand, and it doesn't come anywhere near the way most people think of dragons.

If I want a dragon who lives in a palace full of traps, I can just give it some minions, or a few levels in a spellcasting class.  Why is it important that dragons don't have to do the work (or make the deals) that other beings would have to in order to get those things?


----------



## Cadfan (Jan 9, 2008)

Ever notice that, even though dragons have (had) nifty spellcasting abilities that can create lairs, they always live in crappy caves?  You never see a dragon living in a hall of polished marble, filled with pillows forty feet across, with all of their riches neatly organized by national currency and denomination.


----------



## Xyl (Jan 9, 2008)

GreatLemur said:
			
		

> If I want a dragon who lives in a palace full of traps, I can just give it some minions, or a few levels in a spellcasting class.  Why is it important that dragons don't have to do the work (or make the deals) that other beings would have to in order to get those things?




In fact, there's the kernel of an adventure here. "A dragon has kidnapped a master trapmaker to make defenses for its lair!"


----------



## infax (Jan 9, 2008)

For me it all hinges on how easy will monsters be to adapt for different uses (since we know it won't be simple to just slap a handful of PC class levels to them - it was doable but not easy on 3e, anyway).

It seems many players see dragons as brutes but I am much more familiar with dragons as creatures of very great age full of knowledge. While I can work with the former, I would very much like to have the latter.

I agree creatures don't need lots of non-combat abilities written up on their stat block, but I am staying confident that textual write-ups next to the stat blocks will be rich and flavorful.


----------



## TwinBahamut (Jan 9, 2008)

I just want dragons that can rampage across the countryside, leaving nothing but destruction and terror in their wake. If I want brilliant masterminds, mighty sorcerers, or complex mazes lined with deadly traps, I will turn to humans and humanoids. If I want a flying monster with terrifying breath weapons and incredible strength with claws and teeth, I will use a dragon.

The logical conclusion of the 3E dragons were Eberron's dragons of Argonessen, which I consider the big glaring flaw of the whole setting. They are so intellgient, powerful, and organized that they don't even serve as something the PCs can reasonably interact with. The only influence dragons have on the PCs would be through rogue dragons of the Chamber, which is pretty much a fringe group of younger dragons. Argonessen itself might as well be a mythical place, considering how often a PC will actually step foot on it.

I think dragons are best suited to playing to their mythical niche, and not trying to be the "ultimate do anything BBEG" monster.

Edit: As for lairs... I think it is fine if dragons just find large caves or abandoned (or not quite abandoned) structures to dwell in. If you ask me, it doesn't even make sense that every dragon has a lair. I certainly don't think that every dragon needs an elaborate lair filled with minions and magic traps.


----------



## Mentat55 (Jan 9, 2008)

It might be useful to consider what type of magical capabilities a dragon has in 3.5E, before we argue one way or the other what the loss of spellcasting will do.

An adult red dragon is CR 15 and can cast spells as a 7th level sorcerer; it can also cast spells from the cleric list, as well as spells from the Chaos, Evil, and Fire domains.  Functionally, this means that the dragon can cast spells up the 3rd level (not very high).  In addition, the red dragon only knows 5 1st lvl spells, 3 2nd lvl spells, and 2 3rd lvl spells.  A very cursory examination of the PHB spell lists brings up these spells, which could provide vital non-combat capabilities to a dragon serving as a major antagonist:

Lair building: magic mouth, stone shape
Traps/wards: alarm, arcane lock, explosive runes, glyph of warding, hold portal, misdirection, nondetection, Nystul's magic aura, obscure object, sepia snake sigil
Information gathering: augury, clairaudience/clairvoyance 
Allies/minions/slaves: charm person, status, suggestion

Note that other spells could be used to create magical device traps, but I have not listed these for the sake of brevity.

I think many of these capabilities could be accomplished with magic items or magical traps (crafted using a scroll of the appropriate spell), or perhaps a supernatural ability like "lair sense" or "hoard sense" that grants _alarm_ spell-like powers to the dragon when it is in its lair.

The loss of spellcasting becomes a much bigger deal when you start talking about CR 20+ dragons that have caster levels in the teens and above.


----------



## ZombieRoboNinja (Jan 9, 2008)

IMO dragons losing spells is a lot like wizards/clerics losing their overpowered melee buffing. In 3e, it actually made sense that a decent BBEG had to have tons of spells, because otherwise it'd have no chance against a high-level spellcaster who could rival it in melee AND have a bunch of spells up his sleeve.

Now that PC spellcasters aren't omnipotent, BBEGs don't have to be either.


----------



## cr0m (Jan 9, 2008)

My impression is that NPC creation isn't going to be as handcuffed to class levels as it was in 3e, where to get a dragon with the ability to say, hypnotize with its gaze, you had to take a few levels in wizard and suddenly--he's got other random spells for no apparent reason, keeps a spellbook (turns the pages with some kind of dialing wand, no doubt) etc.

I'm totally making this up based on comments about ditching the class system for monster/npc creation, but I think in 4e you'll be able to just pick and choose the kind of powers you want your BBEG to have--or at least you'll have more freedom to pick them.


----------



## WayneLigon (Jan 9, 2008)

I'm hoping that a lot of the 'magic solves every problem' attitude evaporates in 4E. Dragons don't need spells to carve out a lair; they need claws which simply widens an already existing cave complex or dungeon/ruin they've taken over. They don't need an _alarm _ spell, they sleep lightly and have extraordinary senses.


----------



## Sir Brennen (Jan 9, 2008)

Dragons using wizard spells is such a D&D'ism, and goes back to 1E where that particular ability was added to make them better combat monsters. They were horribly weak for such an iconic monster, not coming close to stacking up against demons and devils. The fact that there were one or two spells they could take that explained away the "how do they do that without hands" issues was completely incidental. I for one am glad they're making them more like their counterparts in myth and fiction, and not a big wizard-in-a-lizard.

But if you must... since monsters have levels now instead of Hit Dice, perhaps the new rules for "dipping" into classes can be used for them as well. A dragon could be given the "Wizard Training" feat if the DM wants it to have actual spell-casting abilities appropriate for its level (without bumping up it's "CR" 4E equivalant. Bonus!)


----------



## Stormtalon (Jan 9, 2008)

I wanted to reply to this post back when I first read it, but decided to wait for the separate thread that was requested for this particular discussion.  



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> Dragon: "MINIONS! Adventurers have intruded my lair. Now go away and hide while I fight the adventurers alone."
> Minions #1: "But dragon, I have arcane might with outmactches everything those adventurers have. You know that because I always have to cast scry spells for you as you are unable to do so. And Minion #2 who places all the wards around your lair so that you are not completely helpless against your enemies is a devout priest of the dark god. Together with our apprentices and Minion #3 who crafted all traps in your lair we could aid you in the combat.
> Dragon: "NO! I am a solo monster. You aiding me in combat would be an unbalanced encounter. Therefor you must leave."
> Minions #1: "Very well. (To other minions) Lets go and let this dragon be killed by those well prepared adventurers who all have protected themselves against his element. Its a good thing they don't know that we are the real boss encounter in this lair and not the dragon as together we are much stronger than him. That way we can surprise the adventurers. (To dragon). If you somehow manage to win the fight you are allowed to keep 30% of the loot. And if you die make sure that your corpse block the exit of the lair."
> ...




The point I wanted to make is that the entire premise of that conversation is such an absurdly contrived situation it makes my head hurt.  It's completely ignoring the concept of a dragon as a being of _innate_ magic and primal power.  Quite honestly, I've _never_ run a dragon where its spells made the difference in a fight with a party -- its innate abilities are more than enough to make even a small army of PCs sweat and wonder if they'll see the next sunrise.

I'd hazard that a far more likely conversation between a dragon and its minions would be as follows:

-----

Minion leader: "Great one, adventurers have--"
Dragon: "I know.  Deal with them."
Minion leader: "B-but, they seem more powerful than the last ones, Great one."
Dragon: "So?  You have set the traps as I ordered?"
Minion leader: "Yes.  The traps are set."
Dragon: "And the basilisks have been released?"
Minion leader: "I.... yes.  Unfortunately three handlers were caught unprepared by them and were--"
Dragon: "I fail to see the problem, then.  Deal with the adventurers, then.  Or have you grown more spineless since the last time?"
Minion leader: "As you wish, Great one."
Dragon: "If they do reach my chamber, it had better be that they had to step over the carcasses of all of you.  Don't even think of fleeing and hiding.  I _will_ know.  Oh and have those three unfortunate handlers brought to me.  They'll make fine additions to my collection, don't you think?"
Minion leader: "One of them was my sister, Great one."
Dragon: "Ahh, a new centerpiece for my collection then.  I know how proud you are of her, aren't you?"
Minion leader: "....."

-----

Minions are the expendable underlings and thralls that a dragon would use to keep uninteresting riff-raff from bothering it day and night; they're not beings it would even begin to consider as equals.  They're there to do menial labor and handle tasks that the dragon considers beneath itself, and in a way, they're resources to be expended to determine whether or not a foe is worthy of the dragon's personal attention.


----------



## jaer (Jan 9, 2008)

My biggest probelm with dragons having spell casting it is became obvious every dragon should take the same spells for the most part.  What dragon isn't going to make sure to invest in protection spells (after all, at such a low caster level, damage spells are going to be crap).  In order for dragons to have some flavor and not always be armed with the same spells, I ended up picking their spells known randomly by rolling.  Which often leads to them not having much useful anyway.

Taking away their spells only removes an added layer of complexity that was Dragon Creation.  I'm glad to see it gone and Out-of-the-box dragons now available.


----------



## Fallen Seraph (Jan 9, 2008)

I have to say I too am glad that the Dragons in 4e will be non-spellcasters "out of the box". Also I am glad most monsters will have alot of "out of the box" playable. Someone in the "Worlds and Monsters" thread said more-basic monsters slowed down game development, I personally disagree because by having more simply archetypes/templates it is easier to build upon then having to diminish or rework monsters for a plot.

Also, I think the "out of box" monsters, especially humanoids and Dragons will be easily adjustable into gaining more abilities/magic. Again it is easier to build-upon then tear down. Hell just look at the Red Dragon off the "Dungeon Master's Guide" if that doesn't scream scrying-Dragon I don't know what will.

I personally too, would very much like to see more basic dragons since it is fun to have dragons that simply enjoy torching villages, carrying away cows to the slaughter or making its den by a major-road to harass merchants.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Jan 9, 2008)

I don't miss dragon spellcasting at all.

If you want them to be wizards.

Have them take levels of Wizard.

This was a good place to streamline the monster, and it will cause me to run dragons more often.


----------



## Raduin711 (Jan 9, 2008)

I think it is possible that we may be jumping to conclusions.

They have spell-like abilities rather than spells ripped from the wizard list.

the oldest black dragon only has about five possible standard actions.

neither of these statements says that they have lost capability in making trapped lairs.

Also, don't forget that different dragons have different roles.  Whites are brutes, so probably don't have a lot of magic.  Other types may have lots of magical tricks.

Also, don't forget that a lot of things have become out-of-combat ritual types of abilities.  Spells that create traps would probably fall into that category.  Alarm for example, probably does not have a standard action casting time.


----------



## Jhaelen (Jan 9, 2008)

Stormtalon said:
			
		

> I wanted to reply to this post back when I first read it, but decided to wait for the separate thread that was requested for this particular discussion.
> 
> [snip]



I agree completely.


----------



## Lurks-no-More (Jan 9, 2008)

Q: How do dragons build lairs?

A: Using a combination of minions, thralls and slaves, and their own fearsome claws, iron-hard horns and terrible strength. Also, breath weapons and possibly long-term ritual magic which there is no point to quantify with game mechanics.

(I've always thought that even dragons without a listed burrow speed can, with time and some effort, dig through solid rock if they want. Hence, blocking a dragon in its lair by collapsing the entrance is a bad move; all you get is a very angry and very hungry dragon coming out a decade later.)


----------



## jaer (Jan 9, 2008)

Raduin711 said:
			
		

> I think it is possible that we may be jumping to conclusions.
> 
> They have spell-like abilities rather than spells ripped from the wizard list.
> 
> ...




True.  I think dragons should have magical abilites at their command, they just shouldn't be casting them like a sorcerer.  I like that each dragon will play out differently and some will have a variety of actions to bring to bear and others will rely on only one or two.

But moreover, I am glad to be done with flipping between three charts, 1 stat block, figuring out 8 feats, listing out 7 caster levels worth of spells, figuring out spell-like abilities, adding up the attack bonuses for all attacks (was that 3, 5, or 6 attacks for this dragon?), figuring out the damage (...so it's large, it's bite does how much?) the damage modifier (so it's full strength, 2xhalf-strength, 2xhalf-strength, and strength x1.5...), it's flying ability (it's a poor flier so...it takes...how many squares to turn around?) and then making a treasure hoard all for 1 creature.

Dragons really were rare and powerful in in my games only cause it wasn't worth trying to stat one out for a game unless it was the major end-all, be-all of the adventure for a few levels!


----------



## Conjurer (Jan 9, 2008)

Although my first reaction was of shock, now that I've thought it over a little more, I think this is a positive thing, as long as dragons can acquire class levels.

A little Wizard or Warlock and presto, spellcasting Dragon.


----------



## Scholar & Brutalman (Jan 9, 2008)

Lurks-no-More said:
			
		

> Q: How do dragons build lairs?




A. Dragons do not build lairs. They _take_ lairs.

When a lair gets too small for them, they go and take another.


----------



## kennew142 (Jan 9, 2008)

Scholar & Brutalman said:
			
		

> A. Dragons do not build lairs. They _take_ lairs.
> 
> When a lair gets too small for them, they go and take another.




That's what I always thought. Don't dragons specialize in driving dwarves out of their delvings?


----------



## AllisterH (Jan 9, 2008)

Sir Brennen said:
			
		

> Dragons using wizard spells is such a D&D'ism, and goes back to 1E where that particular ability was added to make them better combat monsters. They were horribly weak for such an iconic monster, not coming close to stacking up against demons and devils. The fact that there were one or two spells they could take that explained away the "how do they do that without hands" issues was completely incidental. I for one am glad they're making them more like their counterparts in myth and fiction, and not a big wizard-in-a-lizard.




This is the same reason why in 1E, the so-called martial BBEG villain, the Death Knight, had fireball as a spell. Melee quite frankly, sucked.

I think in 4E that melee is a viable alternative for a BBEG.


----------



## rkanodia (Jan 9, 2008)

Conjurer said:
			
		

> Although my first reaction was of shock, now that I've thought it over a little more, I think this is a positive thing, as long as dragons can acquire class levels.
> 
> A little Wizard or Warlock and presto, spellcasting Dragon.



Hopefully, the Wizard Training and Warlock Training feats will enable you to add a useful ability or two (and a lot of flavor) without having to pile on all the class-level-related baggage that goes with it.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol (Jan 9, 2008)

Scholar & Brutalman said:
			
		

> A. Dragons do not build lairs. They _take_ lairs.
> 
> When a lair gets too small for them, they go and take another.



So, dragons are essentially giant fire-breathing hermit crabs?


----------



## Scholar & Brutalman (Jan 9, 2008)

Dr. Awkward said:
			
		

> So, dragons are essentially giant fire-breathing hermit crabs?




I was actually thinking the same thing when I wrote it, but I decided not to put it in.

My iconic dragon is Smaug. He is intelligent, but he does not create - he steals; and he is too arrogant to learn magic that is not inherent to him. I've always found the Eberron or Shadowrun style dragons to be "just wrong" because of this; it's probably the same reaction that longtime planescape fans have when they find out that "Eladrin" means "High Elf" in 4e. To me, they're just not dragons.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Jan 10, 2008)

kennew142 said:
			
		

> That's what I always thought. Don't dragons specialize in driving dwarves out of their delvings?




W.W.S.D?

(What Would Smaug Do?)


----------



## FourthBear (Jan 10, 2008)

Conjurer said:
			
		

> Although my first reaction was of shock, now that I've thought it over a little more, I think this is a positive thing, as long as dragons can acquire class levels.
> 
> A little Wizard or Warlock and presto, spellcasting Dragon.




From what I'm guessing about 4e monster and NPC building, it will be considerably easier than even that.  Once you've picked the level for your monster, I think you'll have guidelines in the DMG for the kind of powers are appropriate for a monster of that level (e.g., Xd6 area effect attacks, ranges for attack rolls, when to consider allowing tactical teleportation).  Then you don't select a feat that allows you take wizard abilities.  You don't add wizard levels onto the monster (and have to recalculate all of its stats).  You just *add* the abilities you think are appropriate.  Want a troll able to breathe flame?  Look up its level and work out the numbers that are appropriate for that level.  And just add it.  There will no doubt be suggestions as to how when adding too much is just that.  But I think they're going to remove the whole "add a class" minigame from monster design.  And I suspect the same thing will happen with humanoids.  The latest Monster Manuals have a number of examples of monstrous humanoid write-ups for spellcasters.  And the spellcasters don't  have wizard or sorceror levels.  They just have a selection of magical abiltiies that would be useful in a typical encounter.


----------



## Conjurer (Jan 10, 2008)

rkanodia said:
			
		

> Hopefully, the Wizard Training and Warlock Training feats will enable you to add a useful ability or two (and a lot of flavor) without having to pile on all the class-level-related baggage that goes with it.




I hadn't thought of the class-training feats, and that's an even better idea. 



			
				fourthbear said:
			
		

> From what I'm guessing about 4e monster and NPC building, it will be considerably easier than even that. Once you've picked the level for your monster, I think you'll have guidelines in the DMG for the kind of powers are appropriate for a monster of that level (e.g., Xd6 area effect attacks, ranges for attack rolls, when to consider allowing tactical teleportation). Then you don't select a feat that allows you take wizard abilities. You don't add wizard levels onto the monster (and have to recalculate all of its stats). You just *add* the abilities you think are appropriate. Want a troll able to breathe flame? Look up its level and work out the numbers that are appropriate for that level. And just add it. There will no doubt be suggestions as to how when adding too much is just that. But I think they're going to remove the whole "add a class" minigame from monster design. And I suspect the same thing will happen with humanoids. The latest Monster Manuals have a number of examples of monstrous humanoid write-ups for spellcasters. And the spellcasters don't have wizard or sorceror levels. They just have a selection of magical abiltiies that would be useful in a typical encounter.




I actually liked the whole 'add a class' minigame as you call it, in as much as it gave me the tools to create more personalized encounters, and as long as there is a mechanism in place to add class abilities to the dragon (or any other monster, for that matter), then I'll be a happy DM.


----------



## infax (Jan 10, 2008)

Sir Brennen said:
			
		

> Dragons using wizard spells is such a D&D'ism, and goes back to 1E where that particular ability was added to make them better combat monsters. They were horribly weak for such an iconic monster, not coming close to stacking up against demons and devils. The fact that there were one or two spells they could take that explained away the "how do they do that without hands" issues was completely incidental. I for one am glad they're making them more like their counterparts in myth and fiction, and not a big wizard-in-a-lizard.
> 
> <snip>




Ok, that just got my hackles up.

I am very sorry you think that, but dragons as wizards is not a D&Dism. You have Earthdawn, Palladium FRP, Rolemaster and Shadowrun are all rpgs that represent dragons as wielders of great magical might and not only in the form of primal magic (allowing them to breath fire and fly) but also as knowledgeable of structured arcane magic as that used by humans and other intelligent creatures.

In literature, also, there is no lacking of dragons depicted as old and wise, versed in all forms of magic.

I can see that in old myth they were often depicted as brutes and when possessing magical power it was rarely structured, but then, the magic of old wizards of myth was rarely structured as well.


----------



## infax (Jan 10, 2008)

*"Add in a few levels of wizard"*

While I don't *need* my dragons to be spellcasters out-of-the-box, I wonder at the number of people defending it will be simple to give them levels of wizard.

Of the few things that have been said about monsters is that they will follow completely different rules than those of PCs. I can see how that can be useful for development (3E interlocking rules were a mess to deal with when creating or modifying creatures). I can also see how this will greatly help WotC sell more books (which isn't a bad thing). However, I can imagine how hard this may be to change monsters in any way that will leave you vaguely aware of what are the implications.

I'm sure some people remember how 2E was and adding levels of Magic User to a Minotaur was no easy task. Of course you could wave it and simply have your wise, elderly minotaur shaman casting a couple of spells in a scene or a wild orc shaman calling upon some nasty disruptive or damaging magic in the middle of a combat without bothering to know too much about any of their stats (and I did! I also did it in 3E, by the way).

"Giving it some levels of wizard" however, isn't, necessarily, something easy to do. Or even feasable at all. We got used to being able to add any kind of class to mostly any kind of creature in 3e and that is a characteristic that has most definetely not been assured to appear in 4e.


As an appart: it seems that adding levels of skirmisher, brute or artillery will be easy enough in 4e (or, at least, that has been the stated intention).


----------



## FourthBear (Jan 10, 2008)

infax said:
			
		

> "Giving it some levels of wizard" however, isn't, necessarily, something easy to do. Or even feasable at all. We got used to being able to add any kind of class to mostly any kind of creature in 3e and that is a characteristic that has most definetely not been assured to appear in 4e.




As I noted before I'm not worried about this aspect of monster customization at all.  Just give them the powers you think appropriate.  They've noted that monsters will have levels and ability scores, so you should be able to calculate any level and score dependent functions in the spells.  So just give them what spells you think appropriate and go.  If you really had to, I suppose you could pick a level of the wizard class and give the dragon the appropriate number of class related abilities for that level, if you want to.  I'm hard pressed to figure out how 4e *could* make it difficult to add magely powers to a dragon.  Are they going to base all spells in the PH on some number that only PC races will have?


----------



## Stoat (Jan 10, 2008)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't somebody from WotC said that adding class levels to a monster is still supposed to be a viable way of advancing them?


----------



## M.L. Martin (Jan 10, 2008)

Stoat said:
			
		

> Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't somebody from WotC said that adding class levels to a monster is still supposed to be a viable way of advancing them?




  Yes, Mearls said it on the WotC boards.


----------



## Sir Brennen (Jan 10, 2008)

infax said:
			
		

> Ok, that just got my hackles up.



Well, I thought your hackles looked like they were a little down...



> I am very sorry you think that, but dragons as wizards is not a D&Dism. You have Earthdawn, Palladium FRP, Rolemaster and Shadowrun are all rpgs that represent dragons as wielders of great magical might and not only in the form of primal magic (allowing them to breath fire and fly) but also as knowledgeable of structured arcane magic as that used by humans and other intelligent creatures.



Since all of these RPGs are post D&D 1E, one could argue that they all took their queue from the way dragons were depicted in the game that created the hobby.



> In literature, also, there is no lacking of dragons depicted as old and wise, versed in all forms of magic.
> 
> I can see that in old myth they were often depicted as brutes and when possessing magical power it was rarely structured, but then, the magic of old wizards of myth was rarely structured as well.



Well, you might be able to might come up with a few examples, and dragons as keepers of "ancient knowledge" is certainly a common trope, but dragons that actually cast magic spells? Not so much. Most magical abilities given to dragons in fantasy stories are more like the innate special abilities of other monsters we see in D&D, not book learin'. It sounds like, from the W&M preview info, that dragons will still have magical _abilities_, but won't be magic _users_.

And again, examples of "wizardly" dragons after the introduction of D&D might also be influenced by the presentation of them in the game.


----------



## Merlin the Tuna (Jan 10, 2008)

Conjurer said:
			
		

> I hadn't thought of the class-training feats, and that's an even better idea.



I'm not sure it'll work.  I remember one of the WotC guys remarking about how weird it was to move back to working on 3.5 material after doing so much 4E development, and one of the things he mentioned remarking was "Wait a minute, why do these monsters have feats?"


----------



## TwinBahamut (Jan 10, 2008)

infax said:
			
		

> Ok, that just got my hackles up.
> 
> I am very sorry you think that, but dragons as wizards is not a D&Dism. You have Earthdawn, Palladium FRP, Rolemaster and Shadowrun are all rpgs that represent dragons as wielders of great magical might and not only in the form of primal magic (allowing them to breath fire and fly) but also as knowledgeable of structured arcane magic as that used by humans and other intelligent creatures.
> 
> ...



I don't really accept this argument... Certainly, you are probably right that it is common among tabletop RPGs for dragons to have magical powers, outside of D&D it is very rare.

I never once saw wizardly dragons in any kind of literature. Unless you list a few real names, I don't really have a reason to believe you or agree with you. On the other hand, I have seen many classic fire-breathers with no distinct magic in all kinds of places. Most of the time, dragons are seen as either brutes with bestial intelligence who fight with breath weapons and brute power, or wise and intelligent sages who fight with breath weapons and brute power.

I am fine with dragons having the occasional special magical ability, or the rare dragon having wizardly powers, but, when it comes down to it, spellcasting is outside of the dragon's classic abilities. Dragons are the winged lizards who breathe fire. That is the single distinct and memorable niche dragons have ever occupied in myth and pop culture. Diluting that, rather than emphasizing it, would be a mistake.


----------



## M.L. Martin (Jan 10, 2008)

Merlin the Tuna said:
			
		

> I'm not sure it'll work.  I remember one of the WotC guys remarking about how weird it was to move back to working on 3.5 material after doing so much 4E development, and one of the things he mentioned remarking was "Wait a minute, why do these monsters have feats?"




  OTOH, the Mearls post I linked to above says that feats are one of the things you can add to monsters if you want to customize them.  I expect that it's going to be that if a given feat or feats suit a monster, it'll have them, instead of "all monsters must have *at least* 1 feat per 3 levels/Hit Dice, and any above and beyond this must be called out as bonus feats."


----------



## Wolfspider (Jan 10, 2008)

TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> I don't really accept this argument... Certainly, you are probably right that it is common among tabletop RPGs for dragons to have magical powers, outside of D&D it is very rare.
> 
> I never once saw wizardly dragons in any kind of literature. Unless you list a few real names, I don't really have a reason to believe you or agree with you.




Please define what you mean by "wizardly" dragons.


----------



## Wolfspider (Jan 10, 2008)

TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> Dragons are the winged lizards who breathe fire. That is the single distinct and memorable niche dragons have ever occupied in myth and pop culture. Diluting that, rather than emphasizing it, would be a mistake.




Heh.  Dungeons & Dragons has influenced pop culture quite a bit, I would say, and if its dragons are "wizardly," as you put it, I guess that they are more than just winged lizards who breathe fire.


----------



## Cryptos (Jan 10, 2008)

It doesn't seem like much of a problem for me.

I could see dragons passing down ancient knowledge in the form of rituals, if someone wanted that in a campaign, and simply giving them the rituals with no major effect on the degree of challenge they present in combat.

What I really can't see is an ancient race with powerful natural attributes that improve over time (to the point where they can strip magical protection you could get from any spell off a person) spending any amount of time learning how to cast magic missile when they can just turn their head and cough to make a village burn.  It sounds like their natural abilities outstrip the effectiveness of any single spell in combat.

Even if the Dragon can cast 8th level spells, the fact that they have studied arcane magic would imply that they had to spend a considerable amount of time learning the lower rungs of arcane spells... and that doesn't really feel right to me.  "So, dad, I've been practicing these magic missile spells since I was hatched.  Why don't I just grow old and breathe on things?"

What has been revealed doesn't seem to stop me from giving rituals to any NPC I feel should have them.  Or artifacts.  Or cults.   That is the stuff that would give them the power to be major players in the world, really.  They're basically defining ritual as a very extended spell that you need to prepare in order to do anything that affects the campaign world - teleportation, resurrection, etc.  They're the one type of magic that it seems you can still learn independent of level (you can learn as many rituals as you can discover, much as a 1-3e wizard could learn all spells for his level) so it would seem to me that if you felt it necessary, you could give them to just about any NPC you want to throw at the PCs.

The "natural abilities" of dragons are what scream "dragon" for me.  Spellcasting isn't the first, second, or fifth thing I think of.


----------



## Merlin the Tuna (Jan 10, 2008)

Matthew L. Martin said:
			
		

> OTOH, the Mearls post I linked to above says that feats are one of the things you can add to monsters if you want to customize them.  I expect that it's going to be that if a given feat or feats suit a monster, it'll have them, instead of "all monsters must have *at least* 1 feat per 3 levels/Hit Dice, and any above and beyond this must be called out as bonus feats."



Alternatively, feats may be granted only by class levels and not by monstrous hit dice.


----------



## Incenjucar (Jan 10, 2008)

Basically, with monsters, instead of "The dragon has Weapon Focus (Bite) they'll just have the +1 calculated in rather than bothering to note WHY it's in, etc., or so it appears.

There's no real reason to give a reason.


----------



## Sir Brennen (Jan 10, 2008)

Merlin the Tuna said:
			
		

> Alternatively, feats may be granted only by class levels and not by monstrous hit dice.



Well, since monsters don't *have* hit dice, but are defined as simply being a level X monster, what's the real difference? Especially since feats will be even less class specific. You could simply think of "monster" as being an NPC class.

Based on the info from Mearls in the link above, Tuna, I think your's is an unlikely speculation (that is, adding feats to monsters requires class levels).

Here it is for reference (emphasis mine):



> In 4e you can make up monster NPCs with class levels, feats, modified skills, magic items, and *everything you can do in 3e to your heart's content*. We wouldn't dream of taking that away from you - it's too much fun.
> 
> PCs are a slightly different story. We'd rather create a specific PC write up for a monster that reins in any potential issues at the table or for game balance.


----------



## KrazyHades (Jan 10, 2008)

Conjurer said:
			
		

> as long as there is a mechanism in place to add class abilities to the dragon (or any other monster, for that matter)





They have a name for that. It's called GURPS.


----------



## TwinBahamut (Jan 10, 2008)

Wolfspider said:
			
		

> Please define what you mean by "wizardly" dragons.



I mean ability of dragons to use magical spells, especially the exact same magical spells that humans use. In other words, a wizardly dragon is a dragon who has the same abilities as a human wizard.



> Heh. Dungeons & Dragons has influenced pop culture quite a bit, I would say, and if its dragons are "wizardly," as you put it, I guess that they are more than just winged lizards who breathe fire.



Err, I have trouble understanding what you exactly mean here. Are you saying that, since D&D has had an influence on pop culture, then the specific trait of "wizardly" dragons must exist in pop culture as a whole, and thus is now considered to be an important part of dragons by most people?

This is not the case at all. If you want to argue that spellcasting dragons are common, you need to provide evidence from outside D&D. A (non-tabletop RPG based) videogame, an anime, or something else specific that has spellcasting dragons would suffice.

Anyways, one of my favorite depictions of dragons is in the videogame Odin Sphere. In that game, the dragons are all essentially winged lizards who breathe fire (except that not all have wings and not all breathe fire). Every battle against them is a massive fight against a giant reptilian monster who stomps (or flies) around the battlefield. One Wagner, breathes fire down upon you that conjures up fire spirits, and creates tornadoes when he beats his massive wings. Another, Belial, fights only by biting, trying to inhale you, and spitting out the armor of the soldiers he has digested. The last one, Levanthan, is a colossal serpent than breathes down giant energy beams that ruin the landscape and is surrounded by crackling lightning. But beyond being powerful beasts, Wagner and Belial are wise and philosophical, offering help and advice as much as they seek battle and destruction, aiding their friends and devouring their enemies. Another dragon, Hindel, is a powerful prophet.

I don't think any of those dragons needs magic spells, especially silly things like Alarm spells and Illusions, in order to be interesting. The power that comes from their physical power, the elemental might of their breath weapons, and the wisdom of their long age is more than enough.


----------



## Derren (Jan 10, 2008)

TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> I don't think any of those dragons needs magic spells, especially silly things like Alarm spells and Illusions, in order to be interesting. The power that comes from their physical power, the elemental might of their breath weapons, and the wisdom of their long age is more than enough.




Dragons also have to sleep from time to time and then an alarm spell is quite handy.

It seems to me that many people do not understand my point. Dragons don't need spells to be strong combatants (except for "Escape from overpowered ability" spells). They needs spells to be anything else than a combatant.
Their lifestyle and physical characteristics makes it impossible for dragons to actually create anything without magic. Especially when you want them to be BBEG they must be able to do BBEG stuff like scrying, spying etc. and they need a appropriate lair defense. And they can only achieve that either through minions or magic. When minions do it then those guys are the real BBEG. Destroy them and the dragon is helpless.

Some people do want dragons to be dumb beast which do nothing, but that are not the D&D dragons. Dragons in D&D are (for the most part) intelligent and have high ambitions. And for that they need some way to affect the world in a different way than simply razing poorly defended villages and demand some few copper coins as tribute.

You can say that the DM can simply make this up and this is correct, but why should I pay for a book which tells me to make things up? I don't need D&D for that. There is a good post from kamikaze midget which explains why it is better for monsters to have out of combat abilities in the rules (thats what magic would be for dragons) instead of simply saying that the DM should give them whatever he wants them to have.
http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=3983551&postcount=149

In the end, dragons having spellcasting is more of a "Should monsters have out of combat abilities which explain how they function in the world in the rules?" question.  And the answer is yes.


----------



## The Little Raven (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> In the end, dragons having spellcasting is more of a "Should monsters have out of combat abilities which explain how they function in the world in the rules?" question.  And the answer is yes.




The answer is no. I don't need to know that a dragon can carve out his lair, specifically using his Create Lair spell-like ability, nor do I need to know he has 20 ranks in Profession (Cook). All I need to know is what he can do as an encounter, then some fluff to tell me what they're like aside from combat. I'm not sacrificing space in the MM so that tons of stuff that hardly gets used can displace other monsters.


----------



## Derren (Jan 10, 2008)

Mourn said:
			
		

> I'm not sacrificing space in the MM so that tons of stuff that hardly gets used can displace other monsters.




Most monsters in the MM won't be used too.
I rather have additional rules for sensible monsters than three additional Ethereal Filcher.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Dragons also have to sleep from time to time and then an alarm spell is quite handy.



Fighters need to sleep, too. Commoners need to sleep. Bears need to sleep. None of the casts the Alarm spell.

Fighters and Commoners help themselves with watch dogs or having people stand guard. Bears don't even have that, but they probably just sleep lightly and have little enemies to fear.

In all cases, someone dedicated still can kill you in your sleep. Why does it need to be different for the Dragon? Why does he need to rely on magical protection, if not some "socializing" with trapmakers and cultists can do the trick.

4E even presents a good reason why Dragons don't need spells. The gods/primordal created the Dragonborn for them, humanoid/reptiloids servants.


----------



## Derren (Jan 10, 2008)

Fighters and commoners are normally not on the hit list of many of assassins (aka. adventurers). And when they are you can bet that they either invest heavily in traps and alarm spells or die quickly. A pity that dragons are no social creatures and don't have the ability to simply ask the local guards and trapmakers to get some traps. They have to rely on their own power. 
Or on Minions. But when they need minions for everything then the minions are the real encounter.

And killing a bear in its sleep is easy for every experienced rogue, especially when he uses magic. But which rogue would kill a bear in its sleep? A dragon on the other hand is a quite worthwhile target.


----------



## Aeric (Jan 10, 2008)

Sitara said:
			
		

> Removing spellcasting/powers from dragons is the best thing ever. Finally! Dragons are cunning and canny brutes, not freaking scholars who pore over ancient tomes. they get unique powers for them only (hopefully different for ewach color) and their dragon breath. Oha nd hteir massive size, teeth and claws, wings, etc.
> 
> Thats all they need.
> 
> As for lairs, maybe they have a good sense of smell (high perception). They doin't need an alarm spell.




QFT.

This is the best news about 4E I've heard since the gnome thing.


----------



## Steely Dan (Jan 10, 2008)

I always thought that dragons made their abode in naturally occurring spaces, and maybe punched a few holes (big) in a wall or ceiling (escape route) here or there.


----------



## vagabundo (Jan 10, 2008)

I'm glad dragons will lose the spellcasting out of the box and that they should be playable from the MM. Great news as I would like to include them more.

If they were to introduce dragon magic I would prefer that it was different than the magic that PC's use. No hand waving or material components needed. For combat dragons should have spoken dragonic power words, for no combat stuff for lairs they could do some rituals.

For old powerful smart dragons I could see them collecting this type of knowledge. I would prefer not to given them PC class levels if I wanted them to have some magic.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Fighters and commoners are normally not on the hit list of many of assassins (aka. adventurers). And when they are you can bet that they either invest heavily in traps and alarm spells or die quickly. A pity that dragons are no social creatures and don't have the ability to simply ask the local guards and trapmakers to get some traps. They have to rely on their own power.
> Or on Minions. But when they need minions for everything then the minions are the real encounter.
> 
> And killing a bear in its sleep is easy for every experienced rogue, especially when he uses magic. But which rogue would kill a bear in its sleep? A dragon on the other hand is a quite worthwhile target.



Maybe this explains why a sapient, spellcasting flying dinosaur race didn't totally dominate the world.

Dragons might not be social creatures in the sense of "hanging out in groups, building families, clans and nations", but they are still capable of interacting with other people. If they wouldn't, nobody would bother slaying them, in fact. The only Dragon worth an assassination is a Dragon that has made contact with other sapientcreatures - to get his treasure, to create plots of world domination/betterment or to just gather a ton of useful information. 

If you're not willing to allow Dragons to do this, then your point is no more important/valid/critical then the ones of people that don't want their Dragons to study casting magic missile or Endure Elements and prefer them being brutal beasts that oppress villages by fear and physical might.


----------



## StarFyre (Jan 10, 2008)

*Once again....*

Derren has a point.

I also think dragons should have spellcasting, but I realize I think I use this a bit differently.  

First; having dragons living in caves is boring. I liked having some dragons living in clouds, etc (silver dragons).  TO do this, they need specific abilities and probably spells.  I created custom spells for them, that are natural magical abilities. In my cosmology, magic is teh essence of the universe. Think of it, like the 'great serpent' hinted at in 2E now and then, and sometimes compared to asmodeus, lady of paint, elder breathren...all that jazzz. i just took my own spin on that stuff.

Anyways, books like draconomicon 2e, 3e and cult of the dragon 2e, have tons of dragon only spells.  I think dragon should have, as derren pointed out, funtioality spells that help them accomplish their own goals, but it makes more sense after that, to have spells that they would create that make sense for them.  Death Matrix is my favourite one and I can gaurantee, any high level party engaging a great wyrm in my campaign better be ready for something like this..via research, looking for signs of 'somethign amiss', etc.    Ain't revenge great? 

Back in 2E, they explained more of ecology and personality, etc.  As the style of the game has gone more towards hack 'n slash (really, that is where you need most of the rules anyways to be fair), there was less need for this; and thus now, at the tail end of it; they get rid of any semblence of "a grand holistic" view on specific creatures and instead just make them cannon fodder.

Also, Derren - we've alwasy been buying D&D books that don't have all the rules we want, and many players make house rules for it.  It's how it is; nothing we can really do about that.  They can't make a game that appeals to everyone 100%. I think 50 to 60% is good enuff 

Sanjay


----------



## Sitara (Jan 10, 2008)

Another thing to keep in mind is the ton of ree actions and conditional actions (auto attack when flanked!) dragons have. They have more of these than any other monster!! go and read the 4e party vs dragon encounter play by play thats on the wizards site. (I forget the link )

Also, do not underestimate the power of their breath weapon. A red dragon can kill a freaking fire elemental with its (fire) breath weapon! seriously, you think they need spells to help them in combat? They need..._traps?_ when they can roast a party of adventurers in an instant?

Seriously, spells , summoning and the ability to shapechange were three of the most annoying things about 3E dragons and I for one am glad they are gone! 

The unique powers they will now have I hope are in keeping with their statuses as canny brutes (say maybe a power that lets them cause dragonfear or something, or increases their speed in flight, etc)


----------



## Steely Dan (Jan 10, 2008)

I say dragons should have spell-casting like any standard race – if they choose to study it, I don't think a dragon should know how to cast _Bigby's throbbing member _ or what have as a natural ability simply because it is a dragon.


----------



## Derren (Jan 10, 2008)

StarFyre said:
			
		

> Also, Derren - we've alwasy been buying D&D books that don't have all the rules we want, and many players make house rules for it.  It's how it is; nothing we can really do about that.  They can't make a game that appeals to everyone 100%. I think 50 to 60% is good enuff
> 
> Sanjay




Yes but the difference is that those books always had rules in it and said "If you don't like those rules, change them".
Now the book basically says "We do not provide any rules so you have to make them up yourself".

I buy books because the rules might be the ones I am looking for (=gambling for this 50-60% you mentioned). But now the chance that I like the rules is 0% as those rules aren't there.



			
				Sitara said:
			
		

> Another thing to keep in mind is the ton of ree actions and conditional actions (auto attack when flanked!) dragons have. They have more of these than any other monster!! go and read the 4e party vs dragon encounter play by play thats on the wizards site. (I forget the link )
> 
> Also, do not underestimate the power of their breath weapon. A red dragon can kill a freaking fire elemental with its (fire) breath weapon! seriously, you think they need spells to help them in combat? They need..._traps?_ when they can roast a party of adventurers in an instant?
> 
> ...




That completely misses the point. Dragons don't need spells for combat, they need spells for everything else besides combat. What good is a breath weapon when the dragon can't prevent the adventurers from suprising it while it sleeps?


----------



## Firevalkyrie (Jan 10, 2008)

I'm thinking of the Onyxia fight in World of Warcraft as an iconic dragon battle. Onyxia doesn't have any magic spells as a human wizard might cast - she also doesn't need them. Her natural weapons can eliminate an entire raiding party of forty max-level adventurers all by themselves.


----------



## FourthBear (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> It seems to me that many people do not understand my point. Dragons don't need spells to be strong combatants (except for "Escape from overpowered ability" spells). They needs spells to be anything else than a combatant.




Again, as in the previous thread, you seem to be strongly implying that only spellcasters can have important roles outside of combat.  The previous claim was that without the ability to create magical wards, a dragon would be utterly helpless against magical opponents and crippled without spellcasting minions.  As I said before, I really hope that the 4e ruleset works very hard to eliminate the magical powers that make this situation (or perception) common.  If at high levels non-spellwielders are only good for brute work or have no use to be anything other than a combatant, than the vast majority of monsters, PCs and NPCs should be altered such that *all* such are spellwielders.  Why can't the dragon's intelligence and charisma make it a formidable threat without giving it arcane spells?  I don't like the idea that for every problem that a creature can be presented with, they have to be given spells to take care of it.  It seems like the laziest, least interesting solution.  Dragons have to guard their lairs while they sleep?  They've got to have an alarm spells.  Dragons need traps in their lairs?  They need traps spells.  Dragons don't have the dexterity to manipulate small objects?  They need telekinesis spells, too.  Where does it end? 

If specific high level arcane magic makes it necessary for others to have specific arcane defenses, doesn't that indicate that the first set of magic is too powerful?  Just as the rule was that if every player took a certain power or spell, that indicated that it was too powerful, if particular arcane powers result in everyone taking particular arcane defenses against them that indicates the same, IMO.


----------



## Steely Dan (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> What good is a breath weapon when the dragon can't prevent the adventurers from suprising it while it sleeps?




What good is a fireball when the wizard can't prevent the dragon from surprising him while he sleeps…?


----------



## Sitara (Jan 10, 2008)

Who says Dragons will be able to be surprised when they sleep? 
They get a ton of free actions; perhapos they have a built in super version of the new 4e Alertness feat that disallows anyone to get combat advantage on them...even when they sleep.

Lastly, so what if the dragon is surprised when it sleeps? i mean...just read the hobbit.


----------



## Derren (Jan 10, 2008)

FourthBear said:
			
		

> If specific high level arcane magic makes it necessary for others to have specific arcane defenses, doesn't that indicate that the first set of magic is too powerful?  Just as the rule was that if every player took a certain power or spell, that indicated that it was too powerful, if particular arcane powers result in everyone taking particular arcane defenses against them that indicates the same, IMO.




It is. Thats why I always say when someone complains about 3E "wizards with scales" that not dragons having spells is the problem, but magic being so powerful.
And it is not that it is strictly necessary to have magic to be "someone" (although in a high magic world like D&D not having magic as powerful and influental individual would be the exception). But dragons are handicapped in an additional way because they don't live in any coherent society and can't even craft things for themselves (no opposable thumbs)
Where others can buy things or otherwise exploit the society they live in, the dragon can only use magic or minions.
And to be a "good BBEG" the minions must be quite powerful, especially when they also should pose a threat to adventurers. In the end the minions will be the real BBEG because without them the dragon is helpless. 



> What good is a fireball when the wizard can't prevent the dragon from surprising him while he sleeps…?




Sure, but the wizard can prevent that with simple things like Rope Trick. The dragon can't.



			
				Sitara said:
			
		

> Lastly, so what if the dragon is surprised when it sleeps? i mean...just read the hobbit.




Unlike Bilbo, adventurers are normally equipped with quite damaging weapons and know how to use the CdG rule.


----------



## Steely Dan (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Sure, but the wizard can prevent that with simple things like Rope Trick. The dragon can't.




But not all wizards learn spells such as _rope trick_ or _alarm_ etc.


----------



## Derren (Jan 10, 2008)

Steely Dan said:
			
		

> But not all wizards learn spells such as _rope trick_ or _alarm_ etc.




That are the wizards who are likely to be assassinated in their sleep when they make powerful enemies.


----------



## Steely Dan (Jan 10, 2008)

Sorry, double-posting madness!


----------



## FourthBear (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Sure, but the wizard can prevent that with simple things like Rope Trick. The dragon can't.



Wow, now the dragon needs Rope Trick, too?  So far, the dragon should have Silent Image, Alarm, Mage Hand, Rope Trick, warding spells against scrying, warding spells against teleportation, unnamed spells to create its lair, unnamed spells to create the traps in its lair.  

Do you have an example from 1e or 2e of a good example of a published dragon with these powers noted, such that you would consider it an adequately prepared dragon?  I can't recall any that would seem to satisfy these requirements, unless the spells known were left utterly undescribed and therefore simply assumed to satisfy all requirements.  I know that in the Giants/Drow series the only dragons found were strictly combatants.  And from Dragon magazine, even Flame and Vesicant would not seem to satisfy this (both of those dragons used minions and pre-existing lairs for the most part).


----------



## Steely Dan (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> That are the wizards who are likely to be assassinated in their sleep when they make powerful enemies.




Okay, then the same goes for the dragon that chose not to learn _rope trick _ or _alarm_ etc.

Are you suggesting that all dragons should have an innate alarm/warning type spell-like ability?


----------



## Derren (Jan 10, 2008)

Steely Dan said:
			
		

> Okay, then the same goes for the dragon that chose not to learn _rope trick _ or _alarm_ etc.
> 
> Are you suggesting that all dragons should have an innate alarm/warning type spell-like ability?




And how does the dragon learn those? Taking levels in wizard?
Imo dragons should have the innate ability to learn/cast some spell because it simply makes sense for them as otherwise they are extremely handicapped outside of the combat.
Dragons having rituals is probably the best idea. That way dragons can cast utility spells when needed but their combat ability is not affected by spells so the people who want the dragon to just be another encounter don't need to bother with them.


----------



## Steely Dan (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> And how does the dragon learn those? Taking levels in wizard?




Yep.

Why should all dragons have spells that other races have to learn and scribe in a book as natural abilities?


----------



## Derren (Jan 10, 2008)

Steely Dan said:
			
		

> Yep.
> 
> Why should all dragons have spells that other races have to learn and scribe in a book as natural abilities?




Because thats how D&D dragons are? Why do dragons have breath weapons and trolls have regeneration? Why can Rust Monsters corrode metal?
But as dragons are unable to really do something big in the world without the help of magic I don't see a reason to not give it to them, especially as dragons always had magic in previous editions.

I much rather have some predefined slots for spells which I can fill or not than to make every dragon a wizard just so that he can do something else than sitting in its cave and wait to be slain.


----------



## Steely Dan (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Because thats how D&D dragons are?




While I don't agree with the "Because" or "Legacy" arguments, I'm at work so I can't check (all me lovely books are at home), but how much magic did 1st Ed dragons have?


----------



## Steely Dan (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> I much rather have some predefined slots for spells which I can fill or not than to make every dragon a wizard just so that he can do something else than sitting in its cave and wait to be slain.





I'd say that's a pretty limited view of monsters without spell-casting.


----------



## Derren (Jan 10, 2008)

Steely Dan said:
			
		

> While I don't agree with the "Because" or "Legacy" arguments, I'm at work so I can't check (all me lovely books are at home), but how much magic did 1st Ed dragons have?




I think it was a %chance for them to have spells or not. (Or some types of dragons had spells and some didn't)
And its not just a "Because" argument. Most D&D dragons from the beginning were simply more than brutes sitting in  a cave. They were masterminds. The BBEG of an entire campaign. And to fulfill this role they need magic (unless magic is nerfed big time, but then there is still the question of how they should do those BBEG things).



> I'd say that's a pretty limited view of monsters without spell-casting.




But imo a correct one. Without magic the dragon is limited to sitting in his cave (most D&D adventures use that one) or demand tribute from a nearby poor village (cities are too heavily defended).
For everything else the dragon would need magic if it is supposed to work.


----------



## AllisterH (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> The BBEG of an entire campaign. And to fulfill this role they need magic (unless magic is nerfed big time, but then there is still the question of how they should do those BBEG things).
> 
> .




It should be noted that WOTC _IS_ taking a nerf bat to magic especially the high level and the campaign altering ones (scrying, teleportation being made into rituals and not spells, wizards not having as wide a selection of spells as before etc...)

As long as the dragons have polymorph self as an innate ability, then they can easily function in society.


----------



## Steely Dan (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> But imo a correct one. Without magic the dragon is limited to sitting in his cave (most D&D adventures use that one) or demand tribute from a nearby poor village (cities are too heavily defended).
> For everything else the dragon would need magic if it is supposed to work.




It seems like you're saying that any monster without magic is limited to hanging out in a cave or whatever and waiting for adventurers to kill them…?

In my current _Planescape_ campaign my Vile Drow Chaos Monks (no magic) certainly don't do this…


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Yes but the difference is that those books always had rules in it and said "If you don't like those rules, change them".
> Now the book basically says "We do not provide any rules so you have to make them up yourself".



Excuse me, what are you trying to say here? "Same Difference"? What's the difference between "changing" and "making up" in this context?


----------



## D.Shaffer (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> They were masterminds. The BBEG of an entire campaign. And to fulfill this role they need magic (unless magic is nerfed big time, but then there is still the question of how they should do those BBEG things).



So...anyone who's a BBEG of the entire campaign and a mastermind needs to have built in innate spell casting to be effective?  Because that's what you seem to be implying here.


----------



## Derren (Jan 10, 2008)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:
			
		

> Excuse me, what are you trying to say here? "Same Difference"? What's the difference between "changing" and "making up" in this context?




Changing: I pay for rules which I might not like so I change them. Or maybe I am happy with them.
Make up: I pay for a book which says me to make things up.



> So...anyone who's a BBEG of the entire campaign and a mastermind needs to have built in innate spell casting to be effective? Because that's what you seem to be implying here.




Not every BBEG (but in a high magic world, having magic is nearly a necessity). But dragons have the disadvantage that unlike human BBEGs they do not live in a society which they can use to get what he wants. Without magic, dragons would need minions for everything except simple destruction work, and that is not really BBEG material.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Because thats how D&D dragons are? Why do dragons have breath weapons and trolls have regeneration? Why can Rust Monsters corrode metal?



In D&D 4, not anymore! Except of course in campaigns that use house-ruled or variant Dragons from 3rd party publishers. (Which, by the way, means that 3rd party publishers can do even more interesting things for D&D then they used to do - 3E feel, 4E rules, so to say)



> But as dragons are unable to really do something big in the world without the help of magic I don't see a reason to not give it to them, especially as dragons always had magic in previous editions.
> 
> I much rather have some predefined slots for spells which I can fill or not than to make every dragon a wizard just so that he can do something else than sitting in its cave and wait to be slain.



Okay, I guess this will be the last time I repeat myself, before I wait until I have something new to add: 

It is plain wrong that Dragons need magic to do something big in the world. 
If a mortal man can create nations and topple kings, a Dragon can do it too. A Dragon is capable of speaking with humanoids, and he certainly has a few tricks up his sleeve to make them do what he want. If he can't do a thing on his own, he can find someone who can. 

Even more important, the fact that Dragons need to rely on others make it more likely that PCs have to interact with them at all. If the Dragon is the ruler of a region, you can ask him for aid. If he is oppressing a region so he can get the slaves he needs to make his lair comfortable and safe for him, this gives incentive for the PCs to attack him in the first place. 
If the Dragon is using people, some people will benefit from it (maybe the PCs want the same), and some people won't like him (the PCs have to stop it). 

If he is sitting in his lair casting spells for most tasks, there is little reason to interact with him - until the point where the kings archmage decides that the Dragon constantly scrying on the king might be a bad idea, casts Nondetection or Mindblank and sends a group of heroes to slay the Dragon. Would have been nice to have some agents and spies around to watch out for this kind off stuff, or even delay, possibly stop the heroes before they wreck the Dragons lair or kill him, but well, an Alarm spell will probably do... not.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Changing: I pay for rules which I might not like so I change them. Or maybe I am happy with them.
> Make up: I pay for a book which says me to make things up.



Still don't get it. 
Are you saying there is a difference between:
"Hmm, Sorcerors cast spells. Dragons do it the same way. But my Dragons should study magic, so they shall cast spells like Wizards!"
to: 
"Hmm, Wizards can use Rituals to cast certain spells. Dragons can't use them normally, because they're not Wizards. Let's ignore that, my Dragons get access to the same Rituals as Wizard do."

It's not like there are no spellcasting rules in D&D 4. You don't have to make up entirely new rules just for Dragons to cast spells!


----------



## Derren (Jan 10, 2008)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:
			
		

> Would have been nice to have some agents and spies around to watch out for this kind off stuff, or even delay, possibly stop the heroes before they wreck the Dragons lair or kill him, but well, an Alarm spell will probably do... not.




And how does the dragon keep contact with those agents and spies? With carrier pigeons? Or having them constantly go to and from his secret lair and hope that no one will wonder what they are doing there?
No. Sending and Message spells are the answer.



			
				Mustrum_Ridcully said:
			
		

> Still don't get it.
> Are you saying there is a difference between:
> "Hmm, Sorcerors cast spells. Dragons do it the same way. But my Dragons should study magic, so they shall cast spells like Wizards!"
> to:
> ...




In this context it is like:
Change: "Dragons can learn 5 rituals of this level...."
Now the player can fill this slots with whatever the dragon needs, ignore it as he doesn't need rituals or change the number of rituals the dragon has.

Make up:" Dragons fight like this.... "
No information about how dragons fit in the world. You have to make that up from the ground.

Overall it looks like.
Change: "This monster might fit into the world this or that way". You might use it or not.
Make Up: No information about ecology, monsters are pure combat stat block. if you want this monster to be something more than a encounter you have to make it up.

When rules for out of combat abilities of monsters exist there is a chance that you won't have to spend that time to make this stuff up or change it. You can pull out a monster from the book and assign it a role in your world. You might also be inspired by those abilities. "hey this monster has 10 ranks in Y. I can use it for..."
Without those rules most players will have no idea how this monster would fit in the world. Is it a monster which likes to corrupt other people? Or does it simply dominate them?. Sure you can make it up, but it will require time and I buy D&D books so that I don't have to spend that time.
And all this for 3-4 more monsters which I probably won't use anyway?


----------



## D.Shaffer (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> And how does the dragon keep contact with those agents and spies? With carrier pigeons? Or having them constantly go to and from his secret lair and hope that no one will wonder what they are doing there?
> No. Sending and Message spells are the answer.



How are NON-Dragon BBEG's doing it?  I think this is why so many people are having a disconnect with your views here.  If other Big Bads can do it without being super-uber built in magic spellcasting creatures, why do dragons HAVE to have this in order to be a proper threat?


----------



## FourthBear (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> And how does the dragon keep contact with those agents and spies? With carrier pigeons? Or having them constantly go to and from his secret lair and hope that no one will wonder what they are doing there?
> No. Sending and Message spells are the answer.




OK, now the dragon (and apparently all master villains) needs Silent Image, Alarm, Mage Hand, Rope Trick, warding spells against scrying, warding spells against teleportation, unnamed spells to create its lair, unnamed spells to create the traps in its lair and now Sending and Message spells to communicate with allies.  My goodness, this list of necessary spells just grows and grows.  How pathetic villains without spells to serve their every need look!


----------



## Jedi_Solo (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> And how does the dragon keep contact with those agents and spies? With carrier pigeons? Or having them constantly go to and from his secret lair and hope that no one will wonder what they are doing there?
> No. Sending and Message spells are the answer.




All dragons have secret lairs?

I always thought that the ones that were arrogent didn't care (the dragon would eat anyone they didn't like anyway) and the (nonmagical) ones that did have secret lairs would have a randevouz location (either at sceduled times or the dragon would swing by that location while it went out to hunt for its mid-afternoon snack to see if a lacky was waiting for it).

Quite often dragon lair locations are known.  The reason that the dragon isn't dead is because... well... it's a big nasty dragon that feeds off the corpses of everyone that has tried to kill it.


----------



## jaer (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren - I understand your point, but have a couple questions for you:

If the MM had the line "Most dragons have the mental prowess and arcane ability to learn and use any rituals they can find," will that be counted as satisfacory for you?

Also, you mention the Alarm spell often.  I am curious what other spells you feel dragons need to be safe and secure in a lair and how often dragons of such age make an appearance.  As was noted, the CR 15 adult red dragon is a 7th lvl caster, which doesn't even give teleknesis for fine maniuplation or scrying for info.  All this dragon really has is charm and suggestions for minions and alarm for lair protection, and a few other spells.  Can they even ward against teleportation into their lair at this level?  And any spell they cast was pretty easily dispelled by the party (14th lvl wizard vs a 7th lvl caster?  That's a 4 or higher on 1d20 to dispel their protective magics).

If anything, it seems 3e dragons were lacking what you would think was necessary wizardly power as it was.  I would say that they didn't even have the magical capabilities to properly carve our and protect a lair or control minions with their natural abilities.

IMO, I'd rather have a section detailing what the creature is like out of combat (the old ecology and society entries from 2nd edition) and have only combat abilities statted out.  If it states in the book that red dragons are known for making powerful magical items and black dragons are fond of designing traps and planning out ambushes, I can come up with ways for them to do so on my own without a stat-block telling me spefically what they can manage outside of combat.  This would further allow for each dragon to be different and have various implementations, rather than them all having the same basic powers as listed.

Further, that information should allow DMs to have the inspiration they need for crafting an adventure around the creature.  In fact, I find that more inspiring then looking at a skill, feat, or ability list and trying to figure out how to work those in to something meaningful.


----------



## Derren (Jan 10, 2008)

D.Shaffer said:
			
		

> How are NON-Dragon BBEG's doing it?  I think this is why so many people are having a disconnect with your views here.  If other Big Bads can do it without being super-uber built in magic spellcasting creatures, why do dragons HAVE to have this in order to be a proper threat?




Which non dragon BBEG? A human? As carrier pigeons do not instantly flee from his presence and his hands are dexterous enough to tie a massage to their claws without splattering it all over the place he indeed might use them. Or he might simply walk into the city and meet his agents somewhere.
A dragon can't do those things.



> OK, now the dragon (and apparently all master villains) needs Silent Image, Alarm, Mage Hand, Rope Trick, warding spells against scrying, warding spells against teleportation, unnamed spells to create its lair, unnamed spells to create the traps in its lair and now Sending and Message spells to communicate with allies. My goodness, this list of necessary spells just grows and grows. How pathetic villains without spells to serve their every need look!




I would appreciate it if you started to think about this issue instead of making this silly list without offering any alternatives or other constructive comments.
Tell me, how would a dragon stay in contact with its agents without compromising them?



			
				jaer said:
			
		

> Derren - I understand your point, but have a couple questions for you:
> 
> If the MM had the line "Most dragons have the mental prowess and arcane ability to learn and use any rituals they can find," will that be counted as satisfacory for you?




Its not optimal but it would do. Saying "Dragons of age X can cast rituals of level Y" would be very good.







> Also, you mention the Alarm spell often.  I am curious what other spells you feel dragons need to be safe and secure in a lair and how often dragons of such age make an appearance.




The Alarm spell is the only one which I think is a must. 
Silent image can make nice pit traps (especially when the bottom of the pit is either very far down or filled with acid. Acid breathing dragons have also an advantage with digging).
Phantom trap can also be used rather cleverly, but is luxus rather than required. Explosive runes make nice traps which don't need preparations and Arcane Lock is also very useful.
For fine manipulation mage hand or a summon monster 1 must do.
The other spells, like scrying and sending would be too high for the dragon (but Clairaudience/Clairvoyance is a good substitution)
The best, and also very hard to get spell is Forbiddance.

Before the nerf, polymorph was also important as it allowed the dragon to get into towns unnoticed and do business there (maybe getting magic items for spells he can't cast?)


> If anything, it seems 3e dragons were lacking what you would think was necessary wizardly power as it was.  I would say that they didn't even have the magical capabilities to properly carve our and protect a lair or control minions with their natural abilities.




The spellcasting itself was not that impressive, that is correct. but it allowed teh dragon to take item creation feats which were much more valuable in combination with lair wards (Draconomicon)


----------



## Guild Goodknife (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> And it is not that it is strictly necessary to have magic to be "someone" (although in a high magic world like D&D not having magic as powerful and influental individual would be the exception).



So in your campaign world every king, crime lord, or otherwise leader is a spellcaster? And i really hope that all youre kings climp up their rope tricks when it's time for them to got to sleep...



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> But dragons are handicapped in an additional way because they don't live in any coherent society and can't even craft things for themselves (no opposable thumbs)
> Where others can buy things or otherwise exploit the society they live in, the dragon can only use magic or minions.



But they *can* get the things they need, either through intimidation (think dragon demands stuff from a village or town it holfs hostage) or trade (if they're smart and wealthy enough). Some dragons are incredible intelligent, they can bully their minions or corrupt them with promises of treasure and power. Just like every other crimelord. 



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> And to be a "good BBEG" the minions must be quite powerful, especially when they also should pose a threat to adventurers. In the end the minions will be the real BBEG because without them the dragon is helpless.



No, not every minion must be a powerful combatant. The sneaky kobold spies don't need to be great fighters, the craftfull trapmakers the dragon kidnapped don't need to known any swordsmanship, the dwarvish miners that build his lair are weak slaves, etc.
Maybe the dragon is allied with a powerful mage whom he promised knowledge and secrets only the old dragons knows anymore...
And don't forget, dragons *are* powerful combatants since their solo monster. They *will *be able to challenge a whole party of powerful adventurers on their own, so his wizard ally should think twice before he tries to double cross his partner in crime.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> And how does the dragon keep contact with those agents and spies? With carrier pigeons? Or having them constantly go to and from his secret lair and hope that no one will wonder what they are doing there?
> No. Sending and Message spells are the answer.



Why not carrier pigeons, envoys and messengers, like people did in our past before the advent of  Sending and Message spells telephones, internet and cell phones?
Information in a "pseudomedieval" society doesn't travel fast, but it doesn't need to. 
if it's really urgent, the Dragon can fly to a nearby rendezvous points. I mean, he is probably one of the fastest flier in the world!




> In this context it is like:
> Change: "Dragons can learn 5 rituals of this level...."
> Now the player can fill this slots with whatever the dragon needs, ignore it as he doesn't need rituals or change the number of rituals the dragon has.
> 
> ...



Okay, I think I get it now. But note that the current rules don't tell us anything about these things, either. There is nothing in the Dragon stat block telling us he learns Sending and Message or Guards and Wards instead of Mage Armor and Disintegrate. You just have "Casts spells like Sorceror X at Age Category Y".

These kind of information is part of the "flavor text" of a monster entry. Maybe the D&D 4 team made a horrible mistake and they just noticed that they don't have any of it in their MM, but after the discussions on implied settings, "Golden Wyvern Adepts" and reading the R&C books, I doubt that.


----------



## Steely Dan (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Or he might simply walk into the city and meet his agents somewhere.
> A dragon can't do those things.




Why does he have to meet his minions in a city, couldn't the dragon meet them at a designated L.Z. or what have you?


----------



## FourthBear (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> I would appreciate it if you started to think about this issue instead of making this silly list without offering any alternatives or other constructive comments.
> Tell me, how would a dragon stay in contact with its agents without compromising them?




They could do so as master villains throughout fantasy literature and D&D itself have done through the ages.  They can have networks of highly mobile agents that spread their wishes.  They can have magical items that allow for such communication.  They can breed creatures that allow for rapid message delivery.  They can have slow and inefficient communication, allowing for the PCs to be able to take advantage of.  I see no reason for a master villain to be formidable that they need to have supernatural solutions for all difficulties.  I see no reason that every time some difficulty for such a character arises, they need to have arbitrary spells or spell-like abilities to solve it.


----------



## Derren (Jan 10, 2008)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:
			
		

> Why not carrier pigeons, envoys and messengers, like people did in our past before the advent of  Sending and Message spells telephones, internet and cell phones?
> Information in a "pseudomedieval" society doesn't travel fast, but it doesn't need to.
> if it's really urgent, the Dragon can fly to a nearby rendezvous points. I mean, he is probably one of the fastest flier in the world!






			
				Steely Dan said:
			
		

> Why does he have to meet his minions in a city, couldn't the dragon meet them at a designated L.Z. or what have you?




And how would the agent know where and when to meet the dragon? It works for planned meetings, but when something important happens, communication is impossible.
And please tell me how the dragon writes a message and ties it to a pigeon (which probably dies of a hart attack anyway being so close to a dragon). The solution is again minions or magic.



			
				FourthBear said:
			
		

> They could do so as master villains throughout fantasy literature and D&D itself have done through the ages.  They can have networks of highly mobile agents that spread their wishes.  They can have magical items that allow for such communication.  They can breed creatures that allow for rapid message delivery.  They can have slow and inefficient communication, allowing for the PCs to be able to take advantage of.  I see no reason for a master villain to be formidable that they need to have supernatural solutions for all difficulties.  I see no reason that every time some difficulty for such a character arises, they need to have arbitrary spells or spell-like abilities to solve it.




How does the dragon contact the agents? Where do the magical items come from? How does a dragon breed other creatures as messengers?
Also the "good guys" likely does include spellcasters, so a BBEG who has to rely on slow, inefficient nonmagical methods is at a disadvantage.

@jaer
See the edit of my last post.


----------



## Lackhand (Jan 10, 2008)

Dragonfear prevents carrier pigeons and many envoys, unless it can be suppressed (I don't remember).

But the level of machiavellian spymaster that the dragon seems to need is something which I'm glad isn't core anymore. Maybe some dragons are great shadows-behind-the-throne, movers and shakers. Maybe those dragons can change shape (and are no longer Good only. woohoo!)

As for the others? It's a fecking huge scaly lizard whose talons are swords and whose breaths are deaths. Don't try too hard to make them be, out of the box, more than that: they're fantastic as that, and don't need to be more. They lair in swamps and volcanoes, surrounding themselves with hazards both natural and artificial.

How did those artificial hazards get there? The dragon made someone else do it, and then ate them. The dragon bought them from dwarves. The dragon stole them. There are as many ways for the hazards to get there as there are dragons.

Where do dragon hoards come from? That much coinage is... hard to accumulate. Let alone carry, since the dragon, as you say, doesn't have thumbs. It's also fantastically heavy; transporting it there in secret is difficult at best. And Yet, the hoard is there.

A dragon that is a puppetmaster has its dragon statistics coincidental, it seems to me, to how you're using it.


----------



## Sitara (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren, honestly speaking your argumetns are getting ridiculous. Seriously; if you want them to have those silly spells which, quite frankly don't really make sense for a dragon to have, then go ahead and give them to it in your games. Give them a level of wizard or whatever. 

I mean honestly, a dragon should have _rope trick_ now? *rolls eyes*


----------



## Derren (Jan 10, 2008)

Sitara said:
			
		

> I mean honestly, a dragon should have _rope trick_ now? *rolls eyes*




Dragons "needing" Rope Trick was actually FourthBears idea. I never said or intended that.
And the spells being silly? I guess in your gaming worlds dragons are extinct because every rogue worth his salt can swallow an silence and invisibility potion and kill the unprotected dragon in its sleep and grap the hoard (which no one can explain where it got it from).
The few remaining dragons are used as guard dogs by influental individuals who can use magic or their connections to shape the world around them, either politically or magically.


----------



## jaer (Jan 10, 2008)

Thanks for the reply.  I more fully understadn now.

It seems that what it all really comes down to is the _intent_ the DM has for the dragon.

It is difficult for a dragon to be the Puppetmaster/crimeboss type, but it is not impossible.  A dragon has wealth and power, both of which readily attract people.  It is not difficult to picture a dragon, for nothing more than fun, attacking a caravan.  He's intelligent enough to realize that he is not attacking merchants, but rather some brigands who raided the caravan earlier that day.  In exchange for sparing their lives and giving them some of their loot back, the dragon now has minions.  Weak ones, but minions none-the-less.

Barring magic, how does he communicate with them?  They must know where his lair is.  Perhaps a few of them actually stay in the lair to attend to the dragon's needs: writing, trap buidling, message-carrying.  The brandits know that they are no match for this creature, so they can't fathom using the information of the lair to their advantage.  They can't steal from the dragon, it would know (perhaps some tried and were eaten already).  It seems to see all, and knows exaclty every coin in the lair.

However, working with the dragon offers them some protection as well.  The dragon is a good schemer and when the wealth is worth it, it personally comes and helps the raids.  It is mutually beneficial, and continues to be so as the bandits gain wealth and power.  At the dragon's behest, they start bribing and infultrating the local power structure.  Soon, the bandits are allied with the local thieves guild and have eliminated the local assassin's guild with the help of the dragon's planning and wealth.  Soon the dragon has corrupt politians in its pockets, and it is the mob-lord of the entire area.  There are enough locals in power to deter and prevent adventures from taking on the dragon, and it has spies enough to know when someone it making an attempt to find the lair.  It has a thieves guild and a bandit camp to help defend it, and surely it has a few new traps in its lair from the thieves guild.

Sure there are plenty of people who could betray the dragon and if they all worked together, they might be able to bring it down, but individually they are weak, greedy, and intimidatable, and they don't all know about each other or trust anyone else.  As such, the dragon rules all with fear and wealth without needing to leave it's lair.  It's done more easily with magic, yes, but this example has the dragon as the puppet master, it has minions that do not out-shine it, and is plausible why the dragon has a custom, defendible lair.

I think that WotC's intent, however, is to have more Smaug-like dragons: big, power creautres of such destructive force that they don't worry about their presence being known because there is nothing out there they fear (though that does not mean there is nothing out there which cannot kill them; they just arrogantly refuse to believe in the possibility).  Most don't need a lair full of traps, they just need a place to sleep and store their gold.  They don't spend a lot of time at home, building their home; they spend it outside, flying to high for eyes to see or scouring the land for food, new wealth, or another lair that has more room to fit its growing treasure.

Dragons can be used as masterminds and cunnying campaign opponents, but the intension is for them to be mass destruction given scaley form.


----------



## Steely Dan (Jan 10, 2008)

jaer said:
			
		

> It seems that what it all really comes down to is the _intent_ the DM has for the dragon.





Exactly, some DMs might want dragons as nomadic, big flying lizards of prey (no treasure or lairs etc) of below average Int.

Some DMs want dragons to be Sauron-type masterminds.

There's more than one way to skin a dragon.


----------



## Derren (Jan 10, 2008)

jaer said:
			
		

> Dragons can be used as masterminds and cunnying campaign opponents, but the intension is for them to be mass destruction given scaley form.




I don't see it that way when you consider how dragons were used previously.
Look at the Wyrms of the North. Some might be cunning beasts, but many of them engage on smaller or larger intrigues, perform magical studies or otherwise interact closely with humans that it requires magic.

Those DMs who do want dragons as pure combat machines can ignore the rituals, or use them to give their dragons a small twist so that the party will be surprised. Without that dragons become very predictable.
Even if it is metagaming, the players will know sooner or later what abilities a dragon has.


----------



## Professor Phobos (Jan 10, 2008)

While it is clear that the game will certainly support modding your dragon to your heart's content- so as far as I am concerned, that argument is done, I'd like to take issue with the idea that it needs spellcasting levels to be a mastermind.

Those help...but it's still a giant, scary friggin' lizard that can eat villages, right? So why couldn't a dragon with an eye for some assistance take over a mortal kingdom?

It could go the "fear, terror" route and have a bunch of terrified people serving it to keep it from burninating the countryside. Until, of course, some stalwart band of heroes comes to liberate them (the PCs). But since the countryside has no faith in stalwart bands of heroes (as their crucified remains line the roads leading in) the PCs have to face the dragon's mortal agents motivated out of fear, self-interest (ruling in Hell, etc) or stockholm syndrome. 

It could go the "Hey, I'll help you out, you help me out" route. The dragon lends its might to the defense of the region in exchange for a percentage of crops, worship, money, a nice hat, whatever. A rival kingdom hires the PCs to assassinate the dragon- but first they must get through all the people who like the darn thing or rely on it to supplement their armies. Or genuinely believe it to be divine. Or are its friends.

Obviously that can all be true (even moreso, actually) for a spell-casting dragon, but spells aren't a requisite for the thing to be an intelligent, long-term opponent. Particularly in a campaign where magic is rarer and so the dragon doesn't have to worry about it being particularly likely a passing super-wizard will scrag it effortlessly.


----------



## Derren (Jan 10, 2008)

Professor Phobos said:
			
		

> Those help...but it's still a giant, scary friggin' lizard that can eat villages, right? So why couldn't a dragon with an eye for some assistance take over a mortal kingdom?




I don't know how it will be in 4E, but in 3E every kingdom had quite a lot more firepower than the dragon.
Taking over villages is fine, taking over cities, especially the ones which cast wizards which can craft items for you is quite hard even for old dragons.


----------



## jaer (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> I don't know how it will be in 4E, but in 3E every kingdom had quite a lot more firepower than the dragon.
> Taking over villages is fine, taking over cities, especially the ones which cast wizards which can craft items for you is quite hard even for old dragons.




I thought part of the PoL concept was that there were no sprawling kingdoms anymore.  Villages, yes, and towns, and cities, and even city-states, but that the idea of a unified group of people spreading over many towns and villages was pretty much done.  There are many dangerous things lying in between the areas for there to be a unifying force.

An army might be able to defend itself from another army, but what level are the troops generally?  The real question comes down to, what level is the most powerful NPC in an area?  In Faerun, it was pretty darn high.  In the generic setting, it looks like they are aiming lower.  A spell-less dragon could concievably take over a city by sieging the place every few days for long enough.  Sure the general might be a 15th level warlord, and the chief advisor a 13th lvl wizard, but when the regular army is 5th lvl fighters, a CR 15 brute dragon shouldn't have too much of a problem, especially if it burns the fields and homes of the neighboring country-side, reducing supplies and buchering the outlying populace.

I never considered it too difficult for a dragon to take over a town or hold a kingdom hostage with fear and strength...I just never ran a dragon that would want to do so.

It seems that the mastermind and conquering motif are still viable, they just aren't meant to be the norm.  I don't know the Wyrmms of the North (was that the Faerun guide that talked about specific dragons?), but if they are mentioned by name, then most likely, these dragons are note-worthy for NOT being the normal versions of their species.  Going above and beyond the typical dragon's actions is what makes great sages take note of their particular behavior.

I agree that costumization is important to be able to keep dragons fresh and interesting challenges for players, but I don't see that the loss of sorcerer spell-levels in any way reduces that if they gain unique special abilities (especially if at some point suppliments come out at give alternative abilities).  I like that they will have things other than just attack, breath, wizard spells, something more unique to the creature.  To me, that is much more interesting than simply picking over-used spells from an over-used list.


----------



## Derren (Jan 10, 2008)

jaer said:
			
		

> I thought part of the PoL concept was that there were no sprawling kingdoms anymore.  Villages, yes, and towns, and cities, and even city-states, but that the idea of a unified group of people spreading over many towns and villages was pretty much done.  There are many dangerous things lying in between the areas for there to be a unifying force.




We don't really know. While this is the premise of PoL there still can be big cities which are left from fallen empires (and there apparently were quite a lot of them in PoL). And in established campaign settings like FR you can't simply say that suddenly everyone is much weaker.

A spell-less dragon could concievably take over a city by sieging the place every few days for long enough.  Sure the general might be a 15th level warlord, and the chief advisor a 13th lvl wizard, but when the regular army is 5th lvl fighters, a CR 15 brute dragon shouldn't have too much of a problem, especially if it burns the fields and homes of the neighboring country-side, reducing supplies and buchering the outlying populace.[/quote]

Spell-less dragons are very vulnerable to attrition. It can't flee from the attackers very well and it has to heal naturally while the defenders clerics can simply heal the warlord. Sooner or later the dragon would be weakened enough so that it has to break off the siege and then it is hunted.







> I don't know the Wyrmms of the North (was that the Faerun guide that talked about specific dragons?), but if they are mentioned by name, then most likely, these dragons are note-worthy for NOT being the normal versions of their species.




Wyrms of the North is indeed a collection of dragons in FR (Sword Coast to be specific). And while some dragons are special many of them are just average members of their species.
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/wn/20041201a



> I agree that costumization is important to be able to keep dragons fresh and interesting challenges for players, but I don't see that the loss of sorcerer spell-levels in any way reduces that if they gain unique special abilities (especially if at some point suppliments come out at give alternative abilities).  I like that they will have things other than just attack, breath, wizard spells, something more unique to the creature.  To me, that is much more interesting than simply picking over-used spells from an over-used list.




I would rather customize dragons right from the beginning and get more options from every splatbook than having to wait for a 4E Draconomicon.
Also if you like it or not, there will be a power creep in 4E and there will be overpowered abilities. With spells, the dragons can have a counter to them if needed. Without them the DM has to "cheat" that the dragon survives that attack.


----------



## Wolfspider (Jan 10, 2008)

I have no problems with dragons not innately having levels in wizard or the ability to cast traditional spells.  I do think, though, that they should be innately very magical creatures, not just lizards that fly and have breath weapons.  They should have senses without peer and armored hides that can turn aside even magical weapons.  They should be able to beguile with their voices and curse those that are foolish enough to listen.  They should be as intelligent as their age indicates, and very clever as well.

If dragons can't do these things, they they truly have been diminished in my view.


----------



## Merlin the Tuna (Jan 10, 2008)

The only "spell" I'd care to see on dragons is Alternate Form for transforming into a single player-race, or similar.  Paranoid-Wizard-Combo 2A, I've got no interest in seeing in the statblock.


----------



## jaer (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> We don't really know. While this is the premise of PoL there still can be big cities which are left from fallen empires (and there apparently were quite a lot of them in PoL). And in established campaign settings like FR you can't simply say that suddenly everyone is much weaker.




Yeah, but they are supposedly making a lot of changes to it.  Further, in a place such as Faerun, with so many power NPCs and with wizards tending to be the be-all, end-all of power, dragons would need magical power in order to survive at all.  It seems that WotC is tuning down the power-level of wizards in general, which in turn, reduced the need for creatures like dragons to need magic in order to be powerful.

I suppose that is sort of an underlying point as to why I like the lack of natural spell-casting: wizard magic seems less powerful, so in turn, it seems less necessary for a creature to have magic in order to actually be powerful.  In 3E, it is very difficult to have a potent BBEG without having some magic himself or magical alliances, unless he had a lot of magical immunity.  I'm hoping to see the end of that.  A 18th lvl wizard or cleric can challenge a 17th lvl party if given a few rounds to prep.  I have never seen 18th lvl fighter, barbarian, or any other meeler do the same. 



> Spell-less dragons are very vulnerable to attrition. It can't flee from the attackers very well and it has to heal naturally while the defenders clerics can simply heal the warlord. Sooner or later the dragon would be weakened enough so that it has to break off the siege and then it is hunted.




Agreed.  I am assuming, here, a certain amount of healing capability on the behalf of the dragon.  After all, as a solo creature, it seems likely to have some way to heal.  Even the buellete in the example healed a bit when it burrowed.  If the dragon strikes out, at random, every few days to burn the town, terrorize the populace, lay waste to the guards, and battern the city walls, and it returns to various tatical resting place, it can still keep up enough destruction and damage to force some sort of take over.  Or, at the very least, cull the army down enough to take out the few pesky high level NPCs and then go away to rest for a few days after such an encounter.

I would imagine there are several techniques a dragon could use under such condition to raze or over-take most small cities.



> I would rather customize dragons right from the beginning and get more options from every splatbook than having to wait for a 4E Draconomicon.
> Also if you like it or not, there will be a power creep in 4E and there will be overpowered abilities. With spells, the dragons can have a counter to them if needed. Without them the DM has to "cheat" that the dragon survives that attack.




Also agreed, but we don't know that there won't be some customization.  The dragon section in the MM1 3E had a very large section detailing common attacks and extra feats and the like and giving info about feat selection and skills.  I would not be surprised if the 4e MM did not have something similar along the lines of "if you are looking for additional powers for your dragon, you can consider swapping these in for the ones that are listed" and having a few extras there according to dragon level.

I also would not be surprised to see similar things in the DMG, such as an entire chapter on special abilities listed by appropriate creature level so that DMs have a guildline on what level of challenge some powers are.  This would make it very easy to take the out-of-the-box lvl 12 black dragon, remove one of his powers, and add in a 12th lvl power from the list.  Automatically customized, still the same number of combat options, and I didn't have to look but spells per day, spells known, and sift through pages of spells to find something approprite (or worse, always pick the same ones!). 

Of course, I am an optomist!


----------



## StarFyre (Jan 10, 2008)

*Instead of regular wizard spellcasting*

I think I will continue my 'unique spell listing' project I started, and now make a list of spells that make sense for dragons.

I did this for all Chronomancy spells I could find from all editions and put them into one unified list for our chronomancers (since chronomancy plays large parts in my cosmologies/universes/games)....also started that for wild mage as my friends char is a house ruled wildmage.

Ithink I'll do the same for all spells from the draconomicons and cult of the dragon and other sources that "make sense" to be spells for a dragon but won't be that useful for PCs.

If anyone would like this list, so that they can customize their 4E dragons a bit more with 'magic' but spells that make sense for dragons, but doesn't have access to those books, message me, and I can send the list over when I finish it....

Sanjay


----------



## Propheous_D (Jan 10, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Dragons "needing" Rope Trick was actually FourthBears idea. I never said or intended that.
> And the spells being silly? I guess in your gaming worlds dragons are extinct because every rogue worth his salt can swallow an silence and invisibility potion and kill the unprotected dragon in its sleep and grap the hoard (which no one can explain where it got it from).
> The few remaining dragons are used as guard dogs by influental individuals who can use magic or their connections to shape the world around them, either politically or magically.




Correct me if I am wrong but didn't dragons have rediculous blindsight abilities, scent, and similar detection abilities. So the rogue would not be able to sneak up on the dragon even with flight as the dragon could detect him by scent. Even if the Rogue could sneak up on the dragon he can't kill him in one round unless the dragon is really really weak.

The one thing in FR that I thought they should have kept on 3rd was that dragons in 2E only took 1/4 damage from physical attacks. This was stated to emphasize the fact that dragons in FR were a little more daunting.

Most of the stuff I read here is very dissapointing to say the least. Even with out shapeshift/polymorph a dragon would easily be able to acquire minions. Power seeks Power, and weakness seeks shelter in the presence of power. Dragons make powerful allies to anyone of power. In good kingdoms with good Dragons there would be those smart enough to seek the dragons councel if the dragon was interested, or even worship the dragon itself. In evil kingdoms dragons would rule, work with, or be dominated through strength by other powers. This is the nature of things.

As for getting messages to and from operatives that is so incredibly easy for all the reasons stated here. A good dragon who befriends the native dryads of the forest he resides in offering wisdom, and protection would have some of the best spies. An evil dragon who inhabits the swamp and is woshipped by the local Troll tribe as a totemic figure would make for more then an interesting set of lackies.

I find the need for people to use magic as an excuse for something to be "powerful" or to "survive" really is not that knowledgeable in the game, the literature, and needs to open their mind to how the world both fantastically and realistically works. 

Dragons would use the concepts of social engineering and manipulation if evil, or simply use the benificial aspects of being a nice dragon and recognized for what one was in other cases. 

The honest truth is that a known dragon is all ways a dead dragon. Dragons do not publicize thier lairs, and do not leave them ungaurded or in places were people can easily go. Thier minions may know the location but a smart evil dragon would not even let anyone but his most trusted minions whom would never see beyond the walls of his lair into it.

Lets not forget that simple is often best. A dragon who resides in the broken ruins of a volcanoe doesn't need a permanent entrance as he can make one and destroy one at his leisure using nothig more then brute force and claws. Let alone a breath weapon.

Please let us get over this argument of what things should and should not have. This is DnD if *YOU* believe its flavourful then add it, but I think there is more then enough arguements against why dragons don't need magic and I have not seen a ANY ONE SINGLE point that makes me think dragons even need a single level of Mage/Cleric.

I know though in my games Dragons will all ways have the ability to polymorph but this is my choice and how I like to see dragons.


----------



## Lord Zardoz (Jan 10, 2008)

I think that Derren's primary concern (or at least those he voiced that inspired the creation of this separate thread) seems to be based on one specific problem.  The potential problem is that removing spell casting classes from monsters that are often used as the primary villains in adventures will reduce the durability and usefulness of those monsters in that role.  The secondary concern is "Without general purpose spellcasting, how are 4th edition dragons able to do all of the 'dragon-y' things they normally do outside of combat, such as scry, or trap and create their lairs.

For the first aspect of this problem, I am sure that dragons are being combat tested quite thoroughly.  I would not worry much about spells like Protection from Element spells making dragons ineffective.  One of the examples cited in the Monsters and Worlds thread specifically mentioned the more powerful dragons being able to strip away such protections.  On top of that, I suspect that entering melee will be much more viable for these monsters, given the ability to sustain hundreds of points of damage and move PC's about as was demonstrated in the "Party vs Massive Red Dragon" example released a few months ago.

In any event, I am sure that the designers are making sure that when a dragon is rated as being a suitable challenge for adventurers of Level X in combat, that the claim can be taken at face value, at least until the game is released and it can be proven wrong in play.  I suspect that the "Scry and Fry" tactics that make high level games difficult for Dm's are being addressed globally, so I do not think that knowing your going up against a Red Dragon is going to be that much easier simply because you know you should have Protection from Fire handy.  I do not think we have been told anything that should have us too worried about the ability of a Dragon to protect its lair / kill intruders.

I do think that the question of out of combat capabilities is a reasonable one though, particularly for things like Scrying and Social encounters.  Having some means to track your foes down and seek revenge may not be necessary for Dragons, but it is necessary for Villains.  It would suck if the ability to use a Dragon as a primary villain in an adventure or campaign were removed simply because there was no way to add such capabilities to a monster that was more balanced than slapping PC levels on top of a monster and trying to work out the CR / XP value.  If I want to let my Dragon use some advanced divination, I would like to do so without throwing 13 or so levels of a spell casting class onto it.

END COMMUNICATION


----------



## takasi (Jan 10, 2008)

As I implied in my first post, and everyone seems to ignore...

Dragons have treasure.

Magic items are treasure.

Magic items can do things casters can do.

Why do dragons need to be casters?


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jan 10, 2008)

> Spell-less dragons are very vulnerable to attrition. It can't flee from the attackers very well and it has to heal naturally while the defenders clerics can simply heal the warlord. Sooner or later the dragon would be weakened enough so that it has to break off the siege and then it is hunted.




The important thing is to remember that inspiring fear doesn't require killing the Warlord and his loyal guardians. If a Dragon wants to terrorize a village or city, he attacks the weak. He burns the fields, attacks caravans and lays waste to the cities market place. If the Warlord appears, the Dragon just breathes once at him, shouts a threat and flies away. The Warlord will at least need to make a compromise with the Dragon. Or he has to find someone that can hunt the Dragon down for him.


----------



## jaer (Jan 10, 2008)

takasi said:
			
		

> As I implied in my first post, and everyone seems to ignore...
> 
> Dragons have treasure.
> 
> ...




In 3e, to use caster items, such as staves, wands, and scrolls, one needs either to be a spell caster or to have UMD.  Dragons were caster already, and so could use them.

In 4e, we know wands and staves aren't working the same way as they did in 3e.  They might be spell holders, true, but they have something else going on.  We don't know that there are magic items that duplicate the spells wizards and clerics cast.  There might not be.

In that regard, we have no way of knowing if a dragon can a) use magic items at all or b) use magic items to duplicate the spell effects it no longer has because it isn't a caster.  Simply saying a dragon has magic items as treasure in it's possession no longer implies it has access to magical good that can "do things casters can do."

Honestly, we don't even know what casters can do!  There could be no Alarm spell anymore or things of the Move Earth, Stone Shape, or Fire Trap or other such things with which a dragon might have previously used to craft and protect it's lair.

We've spent all this time discussing how a spell-less dragon could communicate with minions, manipulate things around him, and create and defend his lair with traps and wards and such...and we never even discussed the possibility that a full-spellcapable dragon might not be able to do these things either!


----------



## FourthBear (Jan 10, 2008)

Lord Zardoz said:
			
		

> I do think that the question of out of combat capabilities is a reasonable one though, particularly for things like Scrying and Social encounters.  Having some means to track your foes down and seek revenge may not be necessary for Dragons, but it is necessary for Villains.
> END COMMUNICATION



My primary concern here is the conflation of out-of-combat abilities and spellcasting.  That mundane methods of creating traps, communicating with allies and otherwise working as a villain are being roundly rejected as impotent and ineffective if they don't involve the villain having direct spellcasting power.  Is spellcasting power necessary for villains?  If so, why do we even detail villains *without* spellcasting power?  We should just give it to all villains.  For that matter, we should give spellcasting power to all PCs, if they have any ambitions to running an organization and having a base.

As to the second point of worries about having difficulties in adding magical abilities to dragons, I don't see *how* 4e (or any edition) could make it difficult to add magical power to an enemy.  If you want a dragon who can scry out opponents, just write that in its description when you create the enemy.  What's to prevent you?  If you want to give  it the spellcasting power of a 10th level wizard, go ahead.  Poof, it's done!  And if you're worried about unbalancing the opponent, shouldn't you already have taken this into account before you decided to add the ability?


----------



## Campbell (Jan 10, 2008)

Lord Zardoz said:
			
		

> If I want to let my Dragon use some advanced divination, I would like to do so without throwing 13 or so levels of a spell casting class onto it.




Why would you need to add levels of a spell casting class onto the dragon if you want to be able to use advanced divination ? If the divination is thematically appropriate for a given dragon why not just give it the abilities it needs rather than tacking on a bunch of levels of spell casting with all the superfluous junk that goes along with it?


----------



## Stogoe (Jan 10, 2008)

The off-screen 'what does a dragon do out of combat' stuff doesn't need to be in the combat stat block.  To me, rules for how a dragon digs out a hole and threatens a village and gathers his hoard are of the least importance.


----------



## Sitara (Jan 11, 2008)

IMo they are taking Dragons back to where they belong, the dungeons. That is, Dragons were always the uber ultimate BBEg of dungeons who you encounter in the final room after 20 levels of hacking. Then you kill it and take its loot, able to finally retire after that.

later editions for some reason made dragons into these ridiculous masterminds, which makes no sense since dragons only hoard treasure for its own sake (i.e. like a raven takes shiny things). Dragons should have little to no interest in mortal affairs.

Thus 4E seems to be bringing dragons back to their roots (i.e. putting the dungeon back in the dragon, and the dragon back in the dungoen  ) Dragons will not be critters to kill in your games and thier loot will be yours to take. For epic campaing with evil masterminds...well thats when you turn to class-leveled humanoid opponents, Yuan-Ti, Vampires, Death-Knights, Liches, Demons etc etc.


----------



## Derren (Jan 11, 2008)

Professor Phobos said:
			
		

> Those help...but it's still a giant, scary friggin' lizard that can eat villages, right?




I want to add something about this sort of argument. Yes, dragons can destroy villages. If they can also destroy cities is unknown but probably not as cities are very well defended including several adventurers.

And according to WotC new Tier System, saving villages is "heroic" meaning suitable for heroes from level 1-10. So if dragons are only usable to threaten villages then they are de facto low level monsters as paragon PCs are supposed to go against greater threats.



			
				jaer said:
			
		

> Also agreed, but we don't know that there won't be some customization.  The dragon section in the MM1 3E had a very large section detailing common attacks and extra feats and the like and giving info about feat selection and skills.  I would not be surprised if the 4e MM did not have something similar along the lines of "if you are looking for additional powers for your dragon, you can consider swapping these in for the ones that are listed" and having a few extras there according to dragon level.





I am not sure but I heard that, for the first time in D&D history, dragons will have a fixed statblock. But that could be a unfounded rumor.



			
				Propheous_D said:
			
		

> Correct me if I am wrong but didn't dragons have rediculous blindsight abilities, scent, and similar detection abilities. So the rogue would not be able to sneak up on the dragon even with flight as the dragon could detect him by scent. Even if the Rogue could sneak up on the dragon he can't kill him in one round unless the dragon is really really weak.




Dragons do not have scent and blindsense goes only 60 ft. far. And even if the DM rules that the blindsense will wake a dragon when someone enters the radius the adventurers can still set up themselves around the dragon and prepare so that the dragon does not have a chance anyway.







> Dragons would use the concepts of social engineering and manipulation if evil, or simply use the benificial aspects of being a nice dragon and recognized for what one was in other cases.
> 
> The honest truth is that a known dragon is all ways a dead dragon. Dragons do not publicize thier lairs, and do not leave them ungaurded or in places were people can easily go. Thier minions may know the location but a smart evil dragon would not even let anyone but his most trusted minions whom would never see beyond the walls of his lair into it.




And how would the dragon use this "social engineering"? How would it manipulate others? Without magic to send messages or alter its form it can't talk with persons of power without revealing its nature. Even when it uses minions this can be quite hard (Try to manipulate someonw by sending a kobold as messanger.
So to affect the world the dragon has to reveal itself if it has no magic. And as you said a known dragon is a dead dragon. Also minions would be a huge achilles heel in this case. They are either weak to be easily defeated and interrogated or strong and a threat for the dragon (running the show).



			
				Lord Zardoz said:
			
		

> I think that Derren's primary concern (or at least those he voiced that inspired the creation of this separate thread) seems to be based on one specific problem.  The potential problem is that removing spell casting classes from monsters that are often used as the primary villains in adventures will reduce the durability and usefulness of those monsters in that role.  The secondary concern is "Without general purpose spellcasting, how are 4th edition dragons able to do all of the 'dragon-y' things they normally do outside of combat, such as scry, or trap and create their lairs.




I have no problem with what you call "primary concern" If the dragon is strong enough it would not need spells (especially as 4E spells will be weaker than in 3E). I am only a bit concerned that after some time a splatbook comes out which has a overpowered ability in it which the dragon is defensless against without magic (Think forcecage or shivering touch)
The "Secondary Concern" is really my primary one. Without magic dragons have no real way to interact with the world on a large scale (to be a paragon or epic adversary). Sure the DM could simply give dragons all what they need but imo those out of combat abilities should be statted in teh MM (in a separate entry/statblock) because it gives monsters a better defined place in the world and might inspire the DM. You can still rule 0 it if you don't like those ooC abilities.



			
				takasi said:
			
		

> As I implied in my first post, and everyone seems to ignore...
> 
> Dragons have treasure.
> 
> ...




The dragons magic items have the tendicy to become the PCs magic items. So when you give dragons lots of magical items you later have the problem that the PCs have too much magical gear.



			
				jaer said:
			
		

> In that regard, we have no way of knowing if a dragon can a) use magic items at all or b) use magic items to duplicate the spell effects it no longer has because it isn't a caster.  Simply saying a dragon has magic items as treasure in it's possession no longer implies it has access to magical good that can "do things casters can do."



Thats also a good point







> Honestly, we don't even know what casters can do!  There could be no Alarm spell anymore or things of the Move Earth, Stone Shape, or Fire Trap or other such things with which a dragon might have previously used to craft and protect it's lair.




That would be the worst case scenario and imo a very big disadvantage for 4E. I don't want three books full of combat rules. i also want utility abilities which makes sense so that I can run adventures which don't revolve around hack and slash.



			
				FourthBear said:
			
		

> My primary concern here is the conflation of out-of-combat abilities and spellcasting.  That mundane methods of creating traps, communicating with allies and otherwise working as a villain are being roundly rejected as impotent and ineffective if they don't involve the villain having direct spellcasting power.  Is spellcasting power necessary for villains?  If so, why do we even detail villains *without* spellcasting power?  We should just give it to all villains.  For that matter, we should give spellcasting power to all PCs, if they have any ambitions to running an organization and having a base.




Villians need some way to interact with its world except pure combat (except you want things like teh Tarrasque or an Elder Evil). Magic is just one way to do that so it isn't strictly necessary (although in 3E magic was so powerfull that at higher level you were nothing without magic).
The problem is that because of the lifestyle, society and physical characteristics of dragons they can't use the other ways to influence the world at all. Personally doing things in a city is nearly impossible for them as is crafting things itself.
They only can do it through minions amd magic where magic is the prefered method because Minions will soon take over the whole show (considering what minions need to do for dragons there must be some quite powerful minions among them. And then why do you need the dragon?)
Also having a lot of minions needs a lot of logistic. Where do those minions get their equipment and food from? Where do they live? what do they do in their free time? I don't simply throw some kobolds into a dragon lair and be done with it, I want this question to be answered in my adventures. Thats why I can't simply add some minions with an off thought.







> As to the second point of worries about having difficulties in adding magical abilities to dragons, I don't see *how* 4e (or any edition) could make it difficult to add magical power to an enemy.  If you want a dragon who can scry out opponents, just write that in its description when you create the enemy.  What's to prevent you?  If you want to give  it the spellcasting power of a 10th level wizard, go ahead.  Poof, it's done!  And if you're worried about unbalancing the opponent, shouldn't you already have taken this into account before you decided to add the ability?




So I have always balance the off combat abilities of a dragon with its power level? No thanks. I rather have in build spellcasting for dragons which I can use anyway I want. Or at least give the dragon rituals (out of combat spells only).
And I want to have a coherent world. Giving monsters arbitrary powers without explanation doesn't fit my style of DMing. I rather take a different monster than planned which has the abilities required by my adventure than rule0 the monster to have that ability.
Also when I see the out of combat abilities from a monster I might be inspired or at least knew how this monster fits into the world. Imo the sentence "This dragon can cast spell from teh trickster domain" is much more useful to me than having no informations at all. And if I don't like the trickster domain or spellcasting dragons in general I can still change it. As you see, spelling out out of combat in the MM does in no way restrict the DMs. Actually it makes teh DMs job easier there is always the change that teh DM likes those abilities and does not have to change them. When those information is lacking the DM must always make something up.


----------



## Green Knight (Jan 11, 2008)

> And how does the dragon keep contact with those agents and spies? With carrier pigeons? Or having them constantly go to and from his secret lair and hope that no one will wonder what they are doing there?




Dragons don't lair in populated areas, so unless the FBI's got the dragon under surveillance, no one's going to notice a couple of minions running about. Nevermind that there're numerous ways to avoid getting noticed. Secret passages, for instance. If you're going to go to the trouble of having a secret lair, then a secret lair with an exit far away from the lair is to be expected. 



> No. Sending and Message spells are the answer.




Having minions handy is a better answer. And if you're so hellbent on using Sending or Message spells, then hey, have a minion who can cast those spells. 

As for minions, Kobolds are a prime choice. They practically worship dragons. They're small and stealthy, and they're also very skilled at building traps. Because of their size, they can squeeze into secret tunnels that're to small for most PC races, and their Darkvision allows them to see just fine in unlit tunnels. And to top it off, they make for talented Sorcerers. And there you have it. A perfect minion race. You can throw in Dragonborn, too, with 4E. 



> And according to WotC new Tier System, saving villages is "heroic" meaning suitable for heroes from level 1-10. So if dragons are only usable to threaten villages then they are de facto low level monsters as paragon PCs are supposed to go against greater threats.




Dragons as "low level monsters"? You really think that's going to be the case?


----------



## Derren (Jan 11, 2008)

Green Knight said:
			
		

> Dragons don't lair in populated areas, so unless the FBI's got the dragon under surveillance, no one's going to notice a couple of minions running about. Nevermind that there're numerous ways to avoid getting noticed. Secret passages, for instance. If you're going to go to the trouble of having a secret lair, then a secret lair with an exit far away from the lair is to be expected.




What are those mysterious messengers who are in contact with those important people doing in such a wild area which apparently doesn't contain anything. That just begs for a closer look (not only into the area but also what messages are cerried and who is receiving them).


> Having minions handy is a better answer. And if you're so hellbent on using Sending or Message spells, then hey, have a minion who can cast those spells.
> 
> As for minions, Kobolds are a prime choice. They practically worship dragons. They're small and stealthy, and they're also very skilled at building traps. Because of their size, they can squeeze into secret tunnels that're to small for most PC races, and their Darkvision allows them to see just fine in unlit tunnels. And to top it off, they make for talented Sorcerers. And there you have it. A perfect minion race. You can throw in Dragonborn, too, with 4E.




When the minions must do everything then they are the BBEG, not the dragon. Do you really want a kobold cleric to be in charge of a horde of kobolds with a dragon as guard dog?
Also kobolds make very bad messengers as they can't move freely in most societies.
Dragonborn are a bit better because they are more accepted. But you still have to answer where those minions live, what they eat, where they get their resources and equipment from, etc.







> Dragons as "low level monsters"? You really think that's going to be the case?




They must be if they are only good for attacking small villages. Saving villages are adventure for heroic 1-10 level adventurers. higher level adventurers have something better to do than to save a small village from a dragon. They save big cities or even kingdoms and maybe even wander the planes.
(See http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=216163)

When dragons are supposed to be encounters worthy for paragon or maybe even epic adventurers, they must be able to do some paragon or ewic stuff. Threatening a small village is not enough.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jan 11, 2008)

> And according to WotC new Tier System, saving villages is "heroic" meaning suitable for heroes from level 1-10. So if dragons are only usable to threaten villages then they are de facto low level monsters as paragon PCs are supposed to go against greater threats.



At the heroic tier, you fight the young dragon that still has to establish himself. He has just started attacking a few villages and pressing them into his serve. The PCs intervene and take him out.

Unfortunately, there are older Dragons around, and the adventurers in their region failed to stop them.
These are the Dragons you encounter in the paragon tier. You might stumble "accidently" on them while you're investigating a dragon-loving cult that threatens the safety of your local kingdom. Or you know there is a Dragon in charge of the invading armies that want to conquer the PCs favourite kingdom.

There are some Dragons that where successful in their conquest, succesful enough to become worshipped as gods. This Dragon's lair is no longer on the Material Plane, but instead the Dragon has taken an abandoned Astral Dominion of a forgotten god and made it his new home. Due to his quasi-god status, many lesser Dragons worship him or at least allied him.
Some Dragons weren't that succesful, and they needed more help, turning to the Devils. Well, they got their deal, and they felt pretty good about it, but somehow, they still ended up in Hell. But at least not as a simple minion, but instead of a powerful ally of an Archfiend. (And which Archfiend wouldn't want a fearsome Dragon at his side? Or was it the other way around?)


----------



## FourthBear (Jan 11, 2008)

Actually, it sounds as though the vast majority of your complaints would be solved not by giving all dragons spellcasting power, but giving all dragons Alternate Form into a humanoid form.  If you feel that humanoid mastermind villains don't need to have spellcasting powers, just allow all dragons to become humanoid.  It's a much more elegant solution that giving all dragons sorceror levels or such, IMO.

As to issues with minions, again, if spellcasting makes a character so potent that they are now to be considered the BBEG, even if they're working for a dragon, then spellcasting is far, far too potent.  All BBEGs should be spellcasters, if that's the case.  The game should be explicitly designed that way.  I hope 4e works to eliminate this, frankly.



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> <Snip>
> So I have always balance the off combat abilities of a dragon with its power level? No thanks. I rather have in build spellcasting for dragons which I can use anyway I want. Or at least give the dragon rituals (out of combat spells only).




No, actually my point is the exact opposite.  You *don't* need to balance off combat abilities in a monster or NPC.  You can just add these abilities to them as your world building sees fit.  Because they don't influence their immediate power during a combat confrontation, there's no need for them to be detailed in the stat block or detailed the same way the combat relevant power need to be.  This is why I don't feel they need to be made standard for all dragons in the Monster Manual.  If they are there to justify plot points and world-building  issues, then they should be left up to the DM.  If you declare that all dragons are spellcasters, then you've just bloated up the stat blocks for every dragon generated in your campaign for your entire future work.  The reason I am concerned by the number of magical abilities that are named that are "necessary" for dragons to be masterminds is power and stat bloat.   Further, as noted by others in this thread, there are a fair number of people whose world building *doesn't* include having dragons as spellcasters.


----------



## Jedi_Solo (Jan 11, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> What are those mysterious messengers who are in contact with those important people doing in such a wild area which apparently doesn't contain anything. That just begs for a closer look (not only into the area but also what messages are cerried and who is receiving them).




Two things...  First, this is of course assuming that the PCs spot the messangers first (as opposed to discovering the messages themselves on a newly dead guys desk and also are not aware that there is even a dragon in the area. What are the PCs doing in the area with "nothing" to be able to discover the messengers in the first place?

Second, the party may very well want to follow the messengers to learn more about who/what the minions are working for.  This will just build up the dragon as a BerBerEerD (Bigger Badder Eviler Dragon) since the PCs will have been working on the case longer and there will be a more complex story since they know about the messangers, conspirators and the Evil Plot.  I see this as a very good thing.



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> When the minions must do everything then they are the BBEG, not the dragon. Do you really want a kobold cleric to be in charge of a horde of kobolds with a dragon as guard dog?




Wait... What?

Isn't that what a minion is?  A lacky who does something so the BBEG doesn't have to?  If a draogn is trying to keep itself safe and not risk exposure of any kind (as I get the impression you want it to - I could be wrong) then of course it will have minions do everything.  That's what minions are for - to do things and to die horribly so the main villain can be lazy and safe.  If the BBEG needs to do everything then what's the point of having minions?



> Also kobolds make very bad messengers as they can't move freely in most societies.
> Dragonborn are a bit better because they are more accepted. But you still have to answer where those minions live, what they eat, where they get their resources and equipment from, etc.




Depends entirely on the society in question.  If it's a swamp based city -> kobold.  If they have to go through sewers -> kobold.  If they have to walk through city steets unnoticed -> not kobold.  A sufficently powerful Evil Guy could easily have access to both types.



> They must be if they are only good for attacking small villages. Saving villages are adventure for heroic 1-10 level adventurers. higher level adventurers have something better to do than to save a small village from a dragon. They save big cities or even kingdoms and maybe even wander the planes.




So higher level PCs aren't allowed to save small villages?  There are plenty of reasons why a higher level dragon would be attacking a smaller village:  from it being a small piece of a plot hatched by a higher mastermind (so the 15th level critter is it itself a minion) to the fact that the small village isn't all it seems (sitting on top of a gold mine or a mostly forgotten tomb of a powerful wizard that the dragon has learned about) to the comedic value of the fact that it's a very lazy dragon and doesn't want to get shot at by the city's catapults.


----------



## Derren (Jan 11, 2008)

Instead of talking back and forth without conclusion why do you not simply prove me wrong?
I opened a thread where you can post a sample intrigue under the assumption that the dragon has no magic.
If several people can come up with working, nonmagical intrigues (see rules in this thread) I will admit defeat.

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?p=3987718#post3987718


----------



## jaer (Jan 11, 2008)

You talk about dragons being able to socialize...it depends what society you are refering to and also how the dragon attempting these socialization efforts.  A city of dragonborn might have no problem with a dragon showing up in the local Tuesday Market to attempt to trade and sell some goods!  The younger, smaller dragons would have no problem doing so.

Then there is the minion speak - again, looking at 3e for examples, a CR 15 red dragon was a 7th lvl caster.  If it had a 10th lvl wizard and cleric minion, both of these had better casting and more spell choices than the dragon, but even if they joined forces, they did not have the power to take over the dragon's lair and they, as an encounter for the PCs, still didn't over shadow the BBEG dragon.  Basically, in this case, the magical power necessary to ward and protect the dragon are so low scale, having minions do it does automatically mean they are powerful minions.

Moving forward to 4e.  BBEG dragon can once more have minions powerful enough to do magic for him, but still be considerably weeker than the dragon powerwise.

And as for how the dragon get's it's business done:

Dragon had kobold minions.  They worship him as a god and for generations have carved out a home near his lair, building traps and secret passages.  The are low on the dragon's notice, but they amuse him, and again, for generations, their presence has eased his needs and brough him some wealth.  Only a few have ever actually been to the dragon's lair - the tribal chief, the shaman, and the mystic are the only ones to whom the knowledge of the secret road is given.  They go their monthly to pay homage to the dragon, but there is also a way the dragon can summon them, should it require them sooner (drum, gong, bellow, breath fire down a certain chamber so that smoke rises from the sacred tunnel).

The dragon, also, has challenged and dominated several orc tribes in the area.  Being that the chief is the strongest and best, and being chief requires defeating the old chief in combat, the dragon had no problem doing so.  It is now chief of a few orc tribes.  It uses the kobolds to communicate with the orcs - it does not want the orcs knowing where it lairs, and the kobolds use all manner of long and secret tunnels, too narrow for orcs, when entering and leaving the lair.  Even if the orcs tracked the kobolds back to one of these entrances, it's too small for the orcs to use and well trapped, and the passage will only take it to the kobold's lair.  From there, the orcs would still need to transverse the numerous caverns inside to find the dragon, and all of them have been well trapped over the years.

The dragon then took over the hobgoblins that were setting up defenses in the ruined castle near by.  This was, in fact, very easy.  The dragon organized the orcs to lay siege to the place, and "negotiated" with the leader.  Once again, the kobolds are the direct go-between, and there is no way the hobgoblins could muster an assault against the dragon just as the orcs could not.  Besides, if the either force tried, the dragon would have the other wipe them out.

The dragon now has orc minions, hogoblin minions, and the trusted kobold minions.  It's lair is gaurded by the kobolds and the traps they have set (and a few magic ones to boot, being there are a few low level casters amongst them).  Between the casters of these races, it would be easy enough to have a few talisments created so that the dragon could magically communicate with the warlords of the orcs and hogoblins when direct and immediate command was needed, but mostly, it relies on kobold messengers.

Should the dragon wish to infultrate more civilized society, there are ways to go about it.  Sure, the kobolds, hobgoblins, and orcs might not be able to move about freely in the city, but the wererats in the sewers can, and there are ways to garner their support.  From there, humans can easily be swayed into service.

None of these minions out-shine the dragon as the BBEG and they provide all the services and protection the dragon needs.  It can have them make a couple magic items it cannot, but it does not require these for use.

I think most dragons will be set up to not be these types of over-lords; I think they are being taken back to the power-house gold-hoarders that do not seek socialization and that do not want minions, and try not to influence the world around them except to collect treasure and feed (and that alone makes them dangerous and threats to the surrounding areas).  But should a DM wish to make them The Threat, I don't see that magic is necessary to do so, and I don't think that if a dragon needs some minions for magically supported defenses, that that in any way implies the minions are anywhere close to the dragon's power.  Yes, they can do things the dragon cannot, but that does make them inherently more powerful or more dangerous to the PCs.


----------



## jaer (Jan 11, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Instead of talking back and forth without conclusion why do you not simply prove me wrong?
> I opened a thread where you can post a sample intrigue under the assumption that the dragon has no magic.
> If several people can come up with working, nonmagical intrigues (see rules in this thread) I will admit defeat.
> 
> http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?p=3987718#post3987718





Posted while I was constructing my last remabling post.  Sounds like fun.


----------



## Derren (Jan 11, 2008)

This is a nice writeup. You might want to post it in my "challenge" thread by expanding the part about the wererats. But don't forget that sending is a 4th level spell requiring a 7th level cleric or 9th level wizard (10 for sorcerers). And that you need materials to craft magical items.

But in the end its all speculation as we don't know what magic will be capable of in 4E. Maybe WotC will completely neglect the non combat part and there will be no spells which I think are necessary for overlord dragons (Its not that unthinkable). if that is the case I will be seriously disappointed.


----------



## Professor Phobos (Jan 11, 2008)

Do the 3e demographics really establish that any city is going to be powerful enough to scrag a dragon with no problem?

Because that is lame.


----------



## Derren (Jan 11, 2008)

Professor Phobos said:
			
		

> Do the 3e demographics really establish that any city is going to be powerful enough to scrag a dragon with no problem?
> 
> Because that is lame.




It depends on the age of the dragon but generally cities are strong enough to repel or pose a serious thread to most dragons., With the "20 always hits" rule, 500 level1 archers each firing a +1 arrow /greater magic weapon) will score enough hits on any dragon to kill it. And that doesn't even take the level 14+ characters into account which live in a typical D&D city.


----------



## Raduin711 (Jan 11, 2008)

KrazyHades said:
			
		

> They have a name for that. It's called GURPS.




That is strikingly unhelpful.


----------



## Intrope (Jan 11, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> It depends on the age of the dragon but generally cities are strong enough to repel or pose a serious thread to most dragons., With the "20 always hits" rule, 500 level1 archers each firing a +1 arrow /greater magic weapon) will score enough hits on any dragon to kill it. And that doesn't even take the level 14+ characters into account which live in a typical D&D city.



 I can see larger cities having the ability to cast 10 GMW spells to dole out 500 temporary +1 arrows--but that would be a pretty tricky operation logistically (you'd have to find the casters/scroll guys, marshall the archers, dole out the arrows, and position them where they can all get their one shot in). Not only that, it's inadequate for CR8 and above Chromatics (avg damage -> 112.5 won't kill at CR8+). 

For small cities and towns, I'm not seeing this as being a viable strategy. It's clever, though. The two biggest issues here are: can the town get enough warning to enact the plan in time, and can they do it repeatedly in case of head fakes by the dragon?


----------



## Merlin the Tuna (Jan 11, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> They must be if they are only good for attacking small villages. Saving villages are adventure for heroic 1-10 level adventurers.



Derren, this is getting more ridiculous with each post.  We've _already seen _ a snapshot of an encounter with a dragon.  It's got over 1000 hp.  It's not vulnerable to cold despite being fire-based.  It can loose a breath weapon and make three attacks, all as free actions.  Said breath weapon can also apparently dispel or ignore elemental resistances to it.  It's got an AC of 49 -- even not knowing attack bonuses, I have a hard time seeing mobs of people getting +30 to their attack rolls... and even that only gives them a 10% chance to hit.  We have absolutely no reason to believe that they'll only be threats to small villages.

You seem to be taking a bizarre assessment of the situation -- that is, that dragons are exactly the same as they are in 3e except that they have no spells, that magic is exactly the same as it is in 3e, and that cities are exactly the same as they are in 3e.  Yes, if you take a 3.5 dragon and just strip away his spellcasting, his CR drops.  Whoopty-friggin'-do.  We've already seen that different abilities have been stepped up in the place of that.  WotC would have to be idiots to just delete the spells and say "Okay, done with design!"  They aren't, and we've _seen_ more changes than that.

Similarly, you can't just assume that because a 17th level Wizard has certain tools at his disposal in 3.5 that a dragon will need defenses against them in 4E.  We know magic is changing.  We have no idea how impressive disguise, movement, or buff spells/skills will be -- at this point, there's pretty much no justification to say "He doesn't have Alarm!  He's doomed!"  Will _anyone_ have Alarm?  Maybe not.  Invisibility?  Might be a fairly exclusive ability.  Greater Magic Weapon?  I'd even peg that at unlikely.  Scry'n'Fry?  We already know that flying is significantly more difficult -- presumably these two are, as well.

And then there's cities.  3E had a lot of rules for who went where, and it often resulted in having a lot of fairly-high-leveled characters in PC classes.  And then there's FR, which seems to ignore even those conventions and add in fistfulls of epic mages on top.  Given that having gobs of off-duty megaheroes is pretty counterintuitive to the "points of light" scheme and that we already know that FR's mage herd is getting thinned, it isn't hard to imagine that city-building is going to yield pretty different results.

So no.  Given what we've seen already, I see absolutely no need for magic in a dragon, and the pseudo-context you've created where you pull the problems with 3.5 together with rampant (and ocassionaly incorrect) speculation of 4E doesn't even begin to change that.


----------



## Propheous_D (Jan 11, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Dragons do not have scent and blindsense goes only 60 ft. far. And even if the DM rules that the blindsense will wake a dragon when someone enters the radius the adventurers can still set up themselves around the dragon and prepare so that the dragon does not have a chance anyway.
> 
> And how would the dragon use this "social engineering"? How would it manipulate others? Without magic to send messages or alter its form it can't talk with persons of power without revealing its nature. Even when it uses minions this can be quite hard (Try to manipulate someonw by sending a kobold as messanger.
> So to affect the world the dragon has to reveal itself if it has no magic. And as you said a known dragon is a dead dragon. Also minions would be a huge achilles heel in this case. They are either weak to be easily defeated and interrogated or strong and a threat for the dragon (running the show).




*sighs in a grand way giving the impression of a teacher who is tried by the stubborness of a student who just is not opening his mind*

Blindsight 60 ft = 120ft radius chamber for sleeping. No possible way to sneak up on dragon with out his attention being generated. All entrances to chambers are plugged thus requiring some strength and noise to remove, less they are disintegrated. To further allow for situations were plugs are disintigrated there is a heavy object on the top of the plug that would fall when the plug failed thus making a loud noise, temor, or displacement of material alerting the dragon.

Simple non-magical and VERY effective at keeping the dragon alive and alert to intruders. Can it be penetrated of course, but then again any defence can be penetrated.

The next part communication.

Why do people require dragons to take human form to communicate to thier operatives? Once a dragon interests one individual he can EASILY with his treasure gather an entire army and network with very little effort. As for getting in touch with his cohorts that is again easily done through messengers, and SIGNS. When the fire is raised on the hill north at dusk you know I shall be calling upon you. Similarily when the green smoke rises from the chimney of your home I know you have something to report to me. We meet at the prearranged clearing where I simply fly to.


One more thing we are talking about spells that make a wizard about 5-10th level or so. WHY can't a dragon simply make a deal or befriend such a wizard. They are small weak and snackable to a dragon, while the dragon can offer them access to power, wealth, protection, components, amd most importantly KNOWLEDGE.

Example:
Wizard and his 2 body guards are traveling form one town to the other. The dragon swoops in eats said weak bodygaurds and snatches young wizard to take to a rocky ledge were he starts his deal making. If the wizard seems uninterested well he is boney but atleast he might be tasty.
Example 2:
Good dragon lands before a local hedge wizard who has been frequenting his woods. He simply talks with said wizard and they rendevous now and again to discuss the weather and offer each other assitance and mutual benefit.

Nothing anyone has said here makes me think that anything is lost by a dragon not having some crappy levels in spell casting.

Oh yeah which person said a dragon can not escape a combat... THEY CAN FLY!!!!!!!!! while alot of adventures can as well something tells me that the dragon stands a good chance of winning a chase either by cunningly seperating the foes or lining them up for a nice beath weapon or two.


----------



## Tzarevitch (Jan 11, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> It depends on the age of the dragon but generally cities are strong enough to repel or pose a serious thread to most dragons., With the "20 always hits" rule, 500 level1 archers each firing a +1 arrow /greater magic weapon) will score enough hits on any dragon to kill it. And that doesn't even take the level 14+ characters into account which live in a typical D&D city.




OMG this topic  is still going? And it has spread to a new thread to boot. Well, I have nothing better to do at the moment.  

First of all that is a LOT of assumption that you will get that many archers ready to shoot WITH magic arrows without a good bit of advance warning. Only an idiot of a dragon would ever give the city that kind of chance to get ready.

Here is what will actually happen
1. Dragon gets pissed off at the city for some reason. Maybe they didn't pay their tribute on time or something. 

2. Dragon takes off and flies to attack the city at night when the mortals can't see well (and giving it a miss chance). Not wanting to give the pathetic mortals time to flee or any chance to spot it,  it comes in low and away from the main transport links (rivers, roads etc.). Without potent magic at their disposal (some sort of divinatory magic alerting them that the dragon will attack today) and with darkness and typical guard alertness, (playing cards, drinking, daydreaming or just looking the wrong way because guard duty is boring) the dragon isn't spotted until extremely  close into the city.

3. Fear and indecision sets in among the spotting guards. OMG the dragon is out. Where is it going? Is it going to attack? (Minutes pass to confirm that it IS approaching to attack, as the guards do not want to sound a false alarm). 

4. The guards sound the alarm (speaking tubes or bells or something). Assuming a special signal for "the dragon is attacking, this is no joke," and if the troops are very well drilled and have had some recent practice to keep them sharp, a decent portion of its defenders start rousing themselves from whatever they were doing, suit up, get their weapons and leave their homes/barracks and attempt to marshall at a location. Hopefully enough archers are actually in the city and not deployed to guard positions outside. 

Unfortunately for the nearest wall guards, they don't live to see it as flames engulf them. Being 4th or so level maybe, they can't hope to survive even if they save. The dragon takes care to set fire to everything flamable for maximum terror and destruction and maximum concealment from smoke. The city then does what non-modern cities historically did when confronted with fire . . . they burn . . . a lot . . and very quickly. 

5. The population realizes that the attack is real and the dragon is upon them and they do what they do best - PANIC!. People flee everywhere they think is safe. The weight of panicking crowds severly hampers the defense. Fear being contageous, some of the defenders even rout and flee themselves. Others are knocked down or pushed aside or succomb to smoke or fire or collapsing buildings. 

6. Meanwhile the dragon roars in delight and burns everything and everyone it can. Smoke and fire are everywhere. Smoke stings the eyes, and clogs the lungs. The dragon burns any group that looks like it is forming to attack. Then when it is satisfied it flies off while the city burns. 

In conclusion, your supposition about the 500 archers isn't going to happen. The city's best chance actually is that a group of adventurers or other high level individuals who are practiced in this sort of thing survived the surprise attack and went into action quickly. The city army's strength is in numbers and no dragon will give enough warning to build up the numbers to defeat it. Even then they wouldn't face good odds unless more powerful than the dragon because they'd have no prep time. Casters would be down spells, armor-users wouldn't have gear on (or necessarily even nearby) etc. They'd be better off waiting and pursuing the dragon to its lair. 

Watch _Reign of Fire_ or _Dragonslayer_ or simply _Tora, Tora, Tora _ (for a typical response to a surprise attack) sometime and you will see how hard it is to fight a dragon that you didn't see coming or to rally any defense in the face of a surprise attack. Speed, surprise and general terror are powerful weapons and a dragon doesn't need magic to employ them. 

And the dragon in this example has NO minions to fight or simply spready discord or sabotage the defense.

Tzarevitch


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 11, 2008)

So just to be clear, Dragons lose innate spell casting, and spell casting is not the same as using rituals.  We do not have confirmation that Dragons do not perform rituals, nor confirmation of what exactly a ritual can achieve.  Is that all correct?


----------



## Tzarevitch (Jan 11, 2008)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> So just to be clear, Dragons lose innate spell casting, and spell casting is not the same as using rituals.  We do not have confirmation that Dragons do not perform rituals, nor confirmation of what exactly a ritual can achieve.  Is that all correct?




That is correct. It is also likely that dragons can pick up caster levels if they want to, they just don't come with them by default.

Tzarevitch


----------



## Green Knight (Jan 11, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> What are those mysterious messengers who are in contact with those important people doing in such a wild area which apparently doesn't contain anything. That just begs for a closer look (not only into the area but also what messages are cerried and who is receiving them).




1) Why would the Dragon need to be in contact with anyone? 

2) Who would notice this? Say the Dragon did feel a need to keep in contact with a local town guard for some inexplicable reason, and he sends a Dragonborn to talk to his sources. 

A) Who would raise an eyebrow at some random Dragonborn chatting up a militiaman? 

B) How in the world would anyone know that this same Dragonborn's wandering around in the middle of the wilderness 10 miles away? 

You're making some pretty unrealistic assumptions, here. 



> When the minions must do everything then they are the BBEG, not the dragon. Do you really want a kobold cleric to be in charge of a horde of kobolds with a dragon as guard dog?




So when Megatron sent the Decepticons to do a job, they were the BBEG, and not Megatron? When Cobra Commander sent Cobra agents on a job, they were the BBEG, and not Cobra Commander? As someone else said, the whole point of the minion IS to do most of the work, so that the BBEG doesn't have to do it. What's the point of having minions if you're doing all the work they could be doing? 



> Also kobolds make very bad messengers as they can't move freely in most societies.




Sewers. They can travel all throughout any city through the sewer system. And even if there is no sewer system to move through, they can still move about fairly freely at night. They're stealthier than most, and being only 2 feet tall, they can sneak around quite easily. 



> Dragonborn are a bit better because they are more accepted. But you still have to answer where those minions live, what they eat, where they get their resources and equipment from, etc.




They live with the dragon. There's plenty of room in the mountains that Dragons lair in for Kobold servants to tunnel out homes for themselves. Or hell, the Dragon may have taken over a Dwarf Clanhold, and it's already got rooms and corridors tunneled into it. As for where they get their food and resources from, they get it in the same way that Dwarf Clanholds got them. In their case, it's much easier and less noticeable, as we're talking a couple dozen minions, and not thousands upon thousands of Dwarves. 



> They must be if they are only good for attacking small villages. Saving villages are adventure for heroic 1-10 level adventurers. higher level adventurers have something better to do than to save a small village from a dragon. They save big cities or even kingdoms and maybe even wander the planes.
> (See http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=216163)
> 
> When dragons are supposed to be encounters worthy for paragon or maybe even epic adventurers, they must be able to do some paragon or ewic stuff. Threatening a small village is not enough.




You're making an illogical conclusion, here. There is nothing at all to support that dragons will be reduced to low-level villains, and given what we've seen of 4E Dragons so far, the exact opposite is true. Just look HERE. The dragon in that fight had over 1,000 hit points and AC 49. Hardly a minor threat.


----------



## jaer (Jan 11, 2008)

Tzarevitch said:
			
		

> OMG this topic  is still going? And it has spread to a new thread to boot. Well, I have nothing better to do at the moment.
> 
> First of all that is a LOT of assumption that you will get that many archers ready to shoot WITH magic arrows without a good bit of advance warning. Only an idiot of a dragon would ever give the city that kind of chance to get ready.
> 
> ...




Awesome.  Pure awesome.

This what I envision when I think of a dragon attack.  I just don't have it in me to think most towns have adventure-grade citizens dwelling within, and certainly not enough to muster a counter to repel a dragon attack as it is happening.  The best thing one can do is hunker down somewhere where you won't burn and nothing too large can crash on you and pray until it over.

That was always my biggest mental block to FR setting, too many high level NPCs hanging around for my taste.


----------



## Cmarco (Jan 11, 2008)

Dragons don't necessarily need to make their lairs themselves... they could just steal, move into, or kill for their own lairs. I often use this approach, rather than having the dragon spell-shape stone or something else. My players actually just fought a black dragon who'd killed an old hermit (actually a fairly powerful druid), and taken over his home.


----------



## Derren (Jan 14, 2008)

Propheous_D said:
			
		

> Blindsight 60 ft = 120ft radius chamber for sleeping. No possible way to sneak up on dragon with out his attention being generated. All entrances to chambers are plugged thus requiring some strength and noise to remove, less they are disintegrated. To further allow for situations were plugs are disintigrated there is a heavy object on the top of the plug that would fall when the plug failed thus making a loud noise, temor, or displacement of material alerting the dragon.
> 
> Simple non-magical and VERY effective at keeping the dragon alive and alert to intruders. Can it be penetrated of course, but then again any defence can be penetrated.




You are aware that the dragon needs to be able to go in and out there, too? Also dragons need to breath......







> The next part communication.
> 
> Why do people require dragons to take human form to communicate to thier operatives? Once a dragon interests one individual he can EASILY with his treasure gather an entire army and network with very little effort. As for getting in touch with his cohorts that is again easily done through messengers, and SIGNS. When the fire is raised on the hill north at dusk you know I shall be calling upon you. Similarily when the green smoke rises from the chimney of your home I know you have something to report to me. We meet at the prearranged clearing where I simply fly to.




So the dragon has to sit the entire day on top of a hill (very exposed) and look for smoke. (I though the dragon has to bury itself into a 120 ft cave?). And what does the dragon do if he wants to speak with his operatives? Set a forest on fire? Messengers are a possibility, but they are unreliable and slow. Much too slow when a teleporting adventuring party arrives.







> One more thing we are talking about spells that make a wizard about 5-10th level or so. WHY can't a dragon simply make a deal or befriend such a wizard. They are small weak and snackable to a dragon, while the dragon can offer them access to power, wealth, protection, components, amd most importantly KNOWLEDGE.




As dragons can't cast spells, what knowledge can they offer? Also 10th level wizards are not the ones which are easily intimidated as they can easily make sure that the dragon can never harm them (living in a big city is most of the time enough).







> Example:
> Wizard and his 2 body guards are traveling form one town to the other. The dragon swoops in eats said weak bodygaurds and snatches young wizard to take to a rocky ledge were he starts his deal making. If the wizard seems uninterested well he is boney but atleast he might be tasty.



A 10th level wizard would not walk. He flies or teleports.







> Oh yeah which person said a dragon can not escape a combat... THEY CAN FLY!!!!!!!!! while alot of adventures can as well something tells me that the dragon stands a good chance of winning a chase either by cunningly seperating the foes or lining them up for a nice beath weapon or two.




And by flying away they are exposed to being shot with arrows. And because a 20 always hits, the distance doesn't matter when you have enough archers.


----------



## Propheous_D (Jan 14, 2008)

Derren we have surpassed the superflous here and have reached a point were we shed our childhood and tak about adulthood. 

1. You assume the chamber the dragon is in is not ventilated use smaller air holes. You also assume that one of the entrances that is "plugged" is not large enough for the dragon. 

You are completely stretching trying to hold onto a thin whisper of your arguement for arguement sakes.

2. 10th level wizards do not teleport around. At 10th level teleport is risky to imposible for most 10th level wizards in earlier versions and in 4E it has all ready been stated to be expensive and harder to do via ritual. Please come up with better more intellegent arguements. EVEN in the Realms wizards did not teleport all over the place. Alot of them travelled and with an entourage a dragon would snack on in one round.

3. This is getting utterly rediculous. You are now trolling. Your arguments are becoming a bit old and I would appreciate you either accept that your opinion is yours and frankly the minority of this cross section of players, or come up with something that actually makes sense and doesn't every single poster after you squashing. I wish you the best playing other editions or games.

conclusion

There is no evidence to support a drastic weakening in the dragons presence or power with a dm worth anything more then a cut and paste campaign.

Good gaming all


----------



## Derren (Jan 14, 2008)

Propheous_D said:
			
		

> Derren we have surpassed the superflous here and have reached a point were we shed our childhood and tak about adulthood.
> 
> 1. You assume the chamber the dragon is in is not ventilated use smaller air holes. You also assume that one of the entrances that is "plugged" is not large enough for the dragon.
> 
> You are completely stretching trying to hold onto a thin whisper of your arguement for arguement sakes.




If you think so. But I suppose that me asking why the adventurers instead of attacking the dragon wouldn't simply plug the air holes (or blow a cloudkill into it) is trolling too.
And I guess its normal that the dragon has to plug and unplug the exit to his lair whenever it tries to leave and comes back, which also includes placing the heavy object on top of it so it falls down when a hole is disintegrated into the plug.
Lets not talk about what happens if the adventurers manage to only drill a small hole into a plug and use it to fire spells/arrow through it.







> 2. 10th level wizards do not teleport around. At 10th level teleport is risky to imposible for most 10th level wizards in earlier versions and in 4E it has all ready been stated to be expensive and harder to do via ritual. Please come up with better more intellegent arguements. EVEN in the Realms wizards did not teleport all over the place. Alot of them travelled and with an entourage a dragon would snack on in one round.




So, why? A 10th level wizard has many options other than mundane travel (and that includes overland flight). And escaping from a dragon is not that hard for him either. Invisibility + Dimension door. The Blindsense only goes so far. I suggest you stop thinking in novel terms "The wizard travels because the plot says he does" and start thinking in game terms.







> 3. This is getting utterly rediculous. You are now trolling. Your arguments are becoming a bit old and I would appreciate you either accept that your opinion is yours and frankly the minority of this cross section of players, or come up with something that actually makes sense and doesn't every single poster after you squashing. I wish you the best playing other editions or games.



Ok, which of my answers is the rediculous one? That dragons are vulnerable to massive archer attacks when flying away which, considering his lack of healing, places him as a disadvantage as he now has to recover this damage first (attrition)?
Was it the one that when using smoke to convey the intention for a meeting that the dragon has to spend most of his time outside of his lair watching for the smoke? (Also the dragon would be unable to have agents farther away as it can so, not to mention that colored smoke is suspicious)?
Or was it that a unmagical dragon does not necessarily have access to much magical knowledge a 10th level wizard might be interested in?


----------



## JahellTheBard (Jan 14, 2008)

Dragons are the elite of all mosters ... they should have the greatest magical powers ... i see them as pure magic in tangible form ... like in EarthSea by Le Guin .. They shoud be more, much more than just mindless brutes ...


----------



## Wormwood (Jan 14, 2008)

JahellTheBard said:
			
		

> They shoud be more, much more than just mindless brutes ...



There's a large divide between "not being a 10th-level sorcerer" and being "a mindless brute".


----------



## kennew142 (Jan 14, 2008)

Wormwood said:
			
		

> There's a large divide between "not being a 10th-level sorcerer" and being "a mindless brute".




Ain't this the truth?

Some things I've learned in this thread:

1) If all dragons aren't archmages, they are inconsequential creatures at best

2) It is better for the rules to make every dragon a powerful spellcaster than to allow such an option for those GMs who want it (i.e. giving dragons caster levels or wizard training)

3) If a few GMs want all dragons to be powerful spellcasters, the rules have to make it so - even if that is not what most GMs would like

4) If a BBEG uses minions of any kind, he isn't really an BBEG

5) Only spellcasters can be major villains - everyone else is too weak

6) It is too much trouble to construct a good story - every creature should be given enough magic to make good plotlines unnecessary

7) No matter how many viable scenarios are given to disprove a point, even more ridiculous (and tenuous) arguments can be constructed to argue ever more minor details in order to hold onto the original point

In 28 years of GMing (and too many dragon scenarios to count), I have never used a dragon BBEG who relied on magic, eschewed minions or experienced the kind of bizarre problems I've seen trotted out in this thread.

If some GMs want their dragon BBEG to be powerful spellcasters, rules exist to make it so. No one is telling you not to. As for the rest of us, we don't need them. Dragon spellcasting has always been so weak that they are insignificant to the overall power of the dragon.


----------



## Guacamole (Jan 14, 2008)

The point is simply this.  The rules are a framework to build a game on.  Rules cannot be a comprehensive document that wil cover every circumstance.  It is logical that the rules be subject to the narrative, not vice versa, because the narrative is the motive force behind the game--the rules are the body, the narrative is the soul.  

If your narrative requires that your dragon be able to cast spells to be a suitable BBEG, then so be it.  He does.  He has wiz/sor/cleric/warlock levels.  If that means that the heroes don't fight the dragon until level 20 rather than level 18, so be it.  If that means that the dragon has access to special "dragon magic" beyond the ken of the heroes--a plot device, if you will-- so  be it.  The dragon can send magical messages, magically shape his lair, errect wards and protections, etc.  This isn't cheating as long as the players are aware (through research, rumor, notes found on assassinated NPC kobold clerics) that the dragon has magical wards they may not be able to circumvent (or there needs to be a allowance for this).  

It's either that or continuing to play 3.5.

Cheers,
guacamole


----------



## Mirtek (Jan 14, 2008)

Dragons and magic used to be synonynous in D&D. I even say that dragons and dragon magic are much more "D&D'ness" than the typical metalic/chromativ colors. I guess scraping their "D&D color code" would be only half as worse as scraping their innate magic.

I dearly hope that FR and other settings will quickly reintroduce their own, spellcasting, version of the dragons.


----------



## Derren (Jan 14, 2008)

kennew142 said:
			
		

> Ain't this the truth?
> 
> Some things I've learned in this thread:
> 
> ...




1. Without magic dragons are a lot weaker as they lack options. After the players encountered 3 red dragons in the game they will knew what awaits them which makes the dragon weaker.  Also if you play out the environment around the dragon a lack of magic also makes teh dragon weaker as it can't prepare itself against the PCs (or generally against the adventurers) anymore.

2.  Its better for the rules to give a monster which requires spellcasting those spells instead of requiring every DM who wants more than a combat encounter to houserule it in.
Also theoretically you just need rules to build monsters and not actual monsters itself. That way every DM can have what he wants and you would save a whole book. 
But that is not what people want, they want complete monsters.

3. If some DMs want to use monsters like they did use them in previous editions they should be able to do so. 

4. The BBEG is not the BBEG when it is more or less helpless without his minions as he might still be able to fight well but has no way to influence the world on a level appropriate scale.

5. In 3E yes (High level, or with access to a lot of spellcasters). generally the BBEG must be able to match the ressources of the opposition (NPCs and PCs) and when they have magic he needs them too.

6. A good plotline requires the BBEG to have fixed abilities and not get ruled 0 whenever he needs something.

7. So far I haven't seen a viable theory, only some dodged counters which don't really address the point. If you know a counter example post it in my "Challenge" Thread.
http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=216248

The problem with all counters is that they do not address the big picture. See the smoke idea. Yes, smoke can be a way to convey messages, but the poster didn't think of how this method of communication would mean for the day to day life of the dragon, the possible operating distance of the dragon or for the security of the operation (suspicious, easily forgeable,). This "seeing the big picture" (don't know a better word for it) is what all those counters are lacking imo.

In your 28 years of GMing, did you ever think about the backstory and how the dragons achieved what they did by the rules or simply said "thats a interesting plotline so that happened"?.


----------



## Guacamole (Jan 14, 2008)

Mirtek said:
			
		

> Dragons and magic used to be synonynous in D&D. I even say that dragons and dragon magic are much more "D&D'ness" than the typical metalic/chromativ colors. I guess scraping their "D&D color code" would be only half as worse as scraping their innate magic.
> 
> I dearly hope that FR and other settings will quickly reintroduce their own, spellcasting, version of the dragons.




Why does it matter?  If you don't like dragons the way they are, tweak them to suit your campaign.


----------



## Mirtek (Jan 14, 2008)

Guacamole said:
			
		

> Why does it matter?  If you don't like dragons the way they are, tweak them to suit your campaign.



In this case it also doesn't matter if they give them their innate dragon magic. If you don't it, tweak them to suit your campaign.

Isn't it the tantrism of the pro-4e crowd that it's always easier to ignore than to build yourself? Ah, I forgot that's only the case when the added thing is something that they like. Woe if it's just merely suggested that there could come something they don't like (like a map of the PoL setting), because then it makes a 180° turnaround and it's suddenly easier to build yourself than to just ignore what's written (See the Map-Thread, there it's suddenly claimed that the mere existance of the map is something that impedes ones imagination while all you have to do is to just ignore it).


----------



## Guacamole (Jan 14, 2008)

Mirtek said:
			
		

> In this case it also doesn't matter if they give them their innate dragon magic. If you don't it, tweak them to suit your campaign.




It matters because it doesn't appear to be the way they are doing it.  It doesn't make sense to bemoan a fact of life.  If they did, and I didn't like it, I would tweak it.  It wouldn't be a problem.  I probably won't have time for 4e, but if I did, dragons in my homebrew would be different than the RAW. 

fwiw
guaca.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol (Jan 14, 2008)

Tzarevitch said:
			
		

> OMG this topic  is still going? And it has spread to a new thread to boot. Well, I have nothing better to do at the moment.
> 
> First of all that is a LOT of assumption that you will get that many archers ready to shoot WITH magic arrows without a good bit of advance warning. Only an idiot of a dragon would ever give the city that kind of chance to get ready.
> 
> ...



In the fourth Pathfinder adventure,
[sblock]There is a dragon attack on a town in which the dragon's tactics are essentially "fly in, burn everything, laugh."  The only thing that saves the town is that there are adventurers present, and the dragon is a young one without much experience but with an incredible ego.  He doesn't systematically burn the place to the ground.  Rather, he moves from place to place, burning a bit, eating a few people, and having fun.  This means that by the time the PCs get to him, the town isn't just cinders.[/sblock]
Your analysis is a good baseline from which to design dragon attacks, spellcasting or no spellcasting.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol (Jan 14, 2008)

kennew142 said:
			
		

> 3) If a few GMs want all dragons to be powerful spellcasters, the rules have to make it so - even if that is not what most GMs would like



I'm of the opinion that when something is optional, it shouldn't be optional in the "you can rip it out and change it" sort of way, but optional in the "you can stick it in if you like" sort of way.  This means that while I'm generally annoyed about a lot of the changes to the setting and fluff in 4E, I'm pleased with this particular development.  When I want spellcasting dragons, I can make them.  When I don't, I can use book dragons.


> 4) If a BBEG uses minions of any kind, he isn't really an BBEG



I guess that rules out Sauron.



> In 28 years of GMing (and too many dragon scenarios to count), I have never used a dragon BBEG who relied on magic, eschewed minions or experienced the kind of bizarre problems I've seen trotted out in this thread.



I don't think I've ever used a dragon's spells.  Such a waste of my effort, considering how much more useful it is for a dragon to do anything else besides cast spells with his precious actions.


----------



## Stormtalon (Jan 14, 2008)

Guacamole said:
			
		

> It matters because it doesn't appear to be the way they are doing it.  It doesn't make sense to bemoan a fact of life.  If they did, and I didn't like it, I would tweak it.  It wouldn't be a problem.  I probably won't have time for 4e, but if I did, dragons in my homebrew would be different than the RAW.
> 
> fwiw
> guaca.




And that, right there, is the best counter to your arguments, Derren.  _Fait accompli_.  It's done, it's happening, learn to live with it.  Many of us see it as an improvement and have plenty of ways to make dragons powerful, terrifying and meaningful opponents without them having to lean on the crutch of spellcasting.  And yes, for dragons the thought of being reduced to "big scaly wizards" would be a serious blow to the ego.

Still, let's look at your 500 archer argument -- the most ludicrous and tenuous one you tossed out there.  The logistical impossibility of it has already been addressed, so I won't rehash that here.  There still remains the problem that as a matter of course, such an assemblage of ranged militiamen are Target #1 for the dragon.  Take into account the Dragon's fear aura and they'll get off _maybe_ one attack before the sheer terror of its presence sends them scattering and dropping their bows in panic -- after which they become fodder for its initial breath weapon attack.  Presto, no more archers to harry him.

Additionally, most of the arrows shot at him would be non-magical anyway -- or at BEST temporarily enchanted -- and for those, there's something you're not considering.  Think back to the sample fight Wizards posted that involved a dragon.  He had this nasty emanation coming from him that caused damage of the same type as his breath weapon to anyone within 30' or so.  I can't think of a DM out there who wouldn't rule that standard, non-masterwork, non-permanently enchanted arrows would even make it through something like that.  They'll burn up, or corrode, or freeze so brittle that they shatter harmlessly against his scales -- even a blue dragon's electricity could deflect the steel arrowheads away from him.  Even the iconic dragon Smaug wasn't brought down by just any arrow -- it took the Black Arrow, a relic handed down for generations, to fell him.

As far as a dragon is concerned, he's got little or nothing to fear from even a large militia.  They can't hurt him.  Hell, they're not supposed to be able to hurt him -- their concern is with things like bandits, roving bands of orcs & gnolls and other day-to-day threats.  When something big like a dragon comes knocking, they have to hope and pray that there's some nearby heroes who can distract and maybe defeat it before too much of the town becomes a shattered ruin.  That's one of the absolute base assumptions of the game -- that there are things out there that only a group of special and dedicated heroes chosen somehow by a shared destiny can defeat  -- and it's not changing.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jan 14, 2008)

Cadfan said:
			
		

> Ever notice that, even though dragons have (had) nifty spellcasting abilities that can create lairs, they always live in crappy caves?  You never see a dragon living in a hall of polished marble, filled with pillows forty feet across, with all of their riches neatly organized by national currency and denomination.



Yeah, but that would be a lot of fun, discovering the dragon's accountant/coin polisher slave.


----------



## Dausuul (Jan 14, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Ok, which of my answers is the rediculous one? That dragons are vulnerable to massive archer attacks when flying away which, considering his lack of healing, places him as a disadvantage as he now has to recover this damage first (attrition)?




Given that 95% of the archers flee in terror before the dragon's frightful presence... yeah, it's kind of ridiculous.  Assuming the dragon is dumb enough to give you time to distribute your 500 magicked-up arrows, 25 of them will actually be fired--the rest will be carried off by the panicked archers running for their lives.  Given the dragon's AC, one or two of those 25 will hit the target.  Yup, that's gonna take down a dragon.



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> Or was it that a unmagical dragon does not necessarily have access to much magical knowledge a 10th level wizard might be interested in?




A dragon that's lived for 500 years probably has lots of knowledge the wizard would be interested in.  Just because it doesn't know any spells doesn't mean it doesn't have several maxed-out Knowledge skills.


----------



## kennew142 (Jan 14, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> 1. Without magic dragons are a lot weaker as they lack options. After the players encountered 3 red dragons in the game they will knew what awaits them which makes the dragon weaker.  Also if you play out the environment around the dragon a lack of magic also makes teh dragon weaker as it can't prepare itself against the PCs (or generally against the adventurers) anymore.




Dragons can prepare for adventurers in the same ways that non-dragons can. These ways have been listed numeruos times in this discussion already.



> 2.  Its better for the rules to give a monster which requires spellcasting those spells instead of requiring every DM who wants more than a combat encounter to houserule it in.
> Also theoretically you just need rules to build monsters and not actual monsters itself. That way every DM can have what he wants and you would save a whole book.
> But that is not what people want, they want complete monsters.




It is your assertion that dragons require spellcasting in order to affective enemies. Most of us disagree with that assertion. Dragon spellcasting has always been so weak that it is inconsequential at any level appropriate for the dragon's CR.



> 3. If some DMs want to use monsters like they did use them in previous editions they should be able to do so.




New editions change things. In this case, I would argue they are changing for the better. If players of Basic D&D wanted to be able to play an elf as a character class should it have been included in the rules to 3e? They were able to do so before. Why not now?



> 4. The BBEG is not the BBEG when it is more or less helpless without his minions as he might still be able to fight well but has no way to influence the world on a level appropriate scale.




Dragons influence the world by talking to people, brining people, threating people, making deals with people, etc.... It isn't necessary for every dragon to be able to use magic in order to influence the world around them. Since lots of GMs have been using dragons in this fashion for decades, it would seem to be a lack of imagination that inhibits other GMs from doing so as well.



> 5. In 3E yes (High level, or with access to a lot of spellcasters). generally the BBEG must be able to match the ressources of the opposition (NPCs and PCs) and when they have magic he needs them too.




You are assuming that magic will trump everything in the same ways that it did in 3e. If the BBEG is a warlord or a rogue is he also useless without magic? Even in 3e, this is limited thinking.



> 6. A good plotline requires the BBEG to have fixed abilities and not get ruled 0 whenever he needs something.




Good plotlines have to remain flexible enough to maintain themselves. No plotline that is written in stone can survive first contact with a clever party. In novel or screenplay writing, the author has control over all of the characters. In a good rpg campaign, the GM must be able to adapt the storyline so as to maintain interest and cohesion.



> 7. So far I haven't seen a viable theory, only some dodged counters which don't really address the point. If you know a counter example post it in my "Challenge" Thread.
> http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=216248




There have been several viable theories presented in this thread. You have just found some reason to dismiss them.



> The problem with all counters is that they do not address the big picture. See the smoke idea. Yes, smoke can be a way to convey messages, but the poster didn't think of how this method of communication would mean for the day to day life of the dragon, the possible operating distance of the dragon or for the security of the operation (suspicious, easily forgeable,). This "seeing the big picture" (don't know a better word for it) is what all those counters are lacking imo.




It means exactly the same thing it would mean for every other BBEG who used smoke, mirrors, messengers, etc... to communicate.



> In your 28 years of GMing, did you ever think about the backstory and how the dragons achieved what they did by the rules or simply said "thats a interesting plotline so that happened"?.




This is an extremely ignorant question. Of course I have. Every single thing that occurs in any of the many campaigns I've run has had a logical backstory. How nice of you to assume that everyone who disagrees with you is a mindless hack-and-slasher, or a mental defective who wouldn't know a backstory if it bit him in the backside.


----------



## Derren (Jan 15, 2008)

Dausuul said:
			
		

> Given that 95% of the archers flee in terror before the dragon's frightful presence... yeah, it's kind of ridiculous.  Assuming the dragon is dumb enough to give you time to distribute your 500 magicked-up arrows, 25 of them will actually be fired--the rest will be carried off by the panicked archers running for their lives.  Given the dragon's AC, one or two of those 25 will hit the target.  Yup, that's gonna take down a dragon.




Somehow I fail to see how you are able to stuff that many soldiers in such a small space so that everyone is affected by frightful presence. So, not 95% of all soldiers would flee, 5% would maybe. The rest will fire one or two salvos at the dragon and wound it soo much that the high level NPCs of the city can finish it off if the dragon doesn't flee.







> A dragon that's lived for 500 years probably has lots of knowledge the wizard would be interested in.  Just because it doesn't know any spells doesn't mean it doesn't have several maxed-out Knowledge skills.




Historical knowledge doesn't automatically mean magical knowledge. Don't forget that this knowledge has to be so interesting for a wizard that he is willing to deal with a dragon.







> kennew142 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jan 15, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Somehow I fail to see how you are able to stuff that many soldiers in such a small space so that everyone is affected by frightful presence. So, not 95% of all soldiers would flee, 5% would maybe. The rest will fire one or two salvos at the dragon and wound it soo much that the high level NPCs of the city can finish it off if the dragon doesn't flee.



Well, if you have trouble stuffing enough enemy soldiers in one place, how do you at all ensure that they all have a chance to attack the Dragon? I mean, it's not as if the Dragon couldn't just fly in the middle of the city and hide behind some buildings. 



> Historical knowledge doesn't automatically mean magical knowledge. Don't forget that this knowledge has to be so interesting for a wizard that he is willing to deal with a dragon.



Historical knowledge can be very useful in most settings to find magical knowledge.
"Oh, yeah, their used to be Kingdom of Arcanus back when I was still in my youth. They even had flying air ships, and used Golems for manual labor. Pretty advanced stuff, but they got this power all due to some schemes with some devils. That didn't turn out so well in the long run, and that kingdom crumbled. Well, it wasn't the first, and it wasn't the last to do that. Anyway, I know that a few of their Ruins lie south of here, but beware. They are heavily trapped. You know, I have explored them myself a little bit. If you want, I can give you some pointers that help to avoid the worst, but I might need a little bit in exchange for that.



> .
> See, thats what I mean with "dodging". You just say that they can do it, without explanation. Do you know what it means to use this method of communication? That it is slow and unreliable (especially in a monster filled world). Having huge centralized organisations (the one dragons tend to have) would be close to impossible. And the reaction time would be much too slow to do something against fast moving adventurers or NPCs who use magic for communication.



Slow and unreliable information is common in D&D settings. A Dragon would probably _not_ want to create an obviously centralized organisation where everybody can find the center (him) by just asking one of the random messengers across town. He will rely on a lot of "cells" operating without a lot of knowledge and using other groups to recieve the order. The slow speed works in both directions, and the dragon has the advantage of some redundancy. Sure, the party intercepted a messenger of a cell that knows a little bit more, but another cell might become aware of this and inform the Dragon (not neccessarily knowing that the cell was actually related to the Dragon, but knowing that something notable happened (like a guild house was attacked), and not neccessarily knowing that they informed the dragon).

It's not like someone just pops into existence and says: "There is Dragon behind this all, quickly, that messenger over there knows where his lair is, interrogate him and kill the beast!" Wandering adventurers will slowly connect dots between different activities and figure out that there is someone manpiulating the events, and they will eventually figure out where to look (and maybe they even learn what they have to expect). But their activities won't go unnoticed.


----------



## Dausuul (Jan 15, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Somehow I fail to see how you are able to stuff that many soldiers in such a small space so that everyone is affected by frightful presence.




That "small space" is a radius of 30 feet per age category.  For a mature adult red, that's 210 feet.  Not so small... so let's talk about visibility.

The dragon will obviously be attacking at night.  We'll be generous and say shadowy illumination, although an overcast, moonless night in a pre-industrial setting is a lot closer to total darkness.  Hence, the dragon has concealment as it comes in, enabling it to Hide.  It will of course cruise in at a leisurely 150 feet per round so as not to take any penalties due to movement.

At a range of 210 feet, the archers have a -21 to their Spot checks.  A mature adult red with no ranks in Hide has a -8 Hide modifier due to size penalties.  So the net result is that if most of the archers have +2 Spot (typical for a 1st-level warrior who put some cross-class ranks in), they have to roll 11 points higher than the dragon.  A bit of number-crunching reveals that 11.25% of the archers will spot it at that range.

But wait!  It gets better.  Only the archers who are exactly 210 feet away will have an 11.25% chance to spot.  The chance drops rapidly as they get further off.  At 220 feet, it's 9%.  At 230 feet, it's 7%.  At 300 feet, they can't see it at all.

End result: Dragon glides in toward the city.  We'll be insanely generous and suppose that all 500 of your magic-arrow-armed archers manage to get in the perfect "sweet spot" at 211 feet.  On average, 56 of them will spot it and shoot.  Of those, three will hit.  3d8+3 damage, woo.  The dragon notices the arrows coming at it and angles in that direction, raking your archers with its frightful presence.  Half the archers flee in terror, and the dragon is now beyond sight range for the other half; the only archers who can see it are those who already spotted it in the previous round (since it hasn't done anything to break line of sight).

Another volley from the guys who saw it, scoring maybe another two hits for 2d8+2.  The dragon comes back.  More terror.  Then the dragon belches fire, killing a couple archers who made their saving throws, and setting a couple of buildings aflame.  One round of arrows from the 25 archers who made their saves scores one last hit for 1d8+1.  After that, the smoke will provide total concealment for the dragon as it burns and ravages... no more archery.

So, let's review.  You have been given the following ridiculous advantages:

--Knowledge ahead of time that the dragon is coming
--Arrows pre-buffed and distributed to 500 archers
--Archers perfectly positioned to shoot at the dragon from 211 feet

With all these breaks--which you would hardly be likely to get in a real dragon-versus-city scenario--you managed to inflict 6d8+6 damage, averaging 33 damage, to a mature adult red dragon.  Instead of 312 hit points, it now has 279.  Oh noes.  That's going to cripple it soooo badly when the PCs come to engage it.



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> Historical knowledge doesn't automatically mean magical knowledge.




Knowledge (Arcana) bloody well does.  And historical knowledge is often very useful to a wizard.



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> Don't forget that this knowledge has to be so interesting for a wizard that he is willing to deal with a dragon.




You say that like it's a bad thing.



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> If you mean "combat encounter" with "enemy" then you are correct, dragons do not require spells for combat. They require spells outside of the combat to be effective masterminds.  Dragons can't really be subtile without using hordes of minions or magic and to influence whole kingdoms subtility is required because unless dragons are made much stronger than in 3E they can't take on an entire kingdom.




No, they don't.  A dragon is perfectly capable of being a mastermind without spells.  It just has to, y'know, mastermind stuff.  And as long as it's got a few human or human-looking agents to deliver its orders and carry out business transactions, it has all the subtlety it requires.



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> From the answers in this thread so far it looks to me that most DMs sacrifice cohesion for plotwriting.




No, we simply give a creature with genius-level intelligence credit for not being a total moron.  Contrary to your repeated assertions, it is perfectly possible to be a powerful mastermind without being a spellslinger.  Lots of people have demonstrated this in detail.  Your counter-arguments have done no more than nibble at the edges of a few of the less well-constructed examples.



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> And the reaction time would be much too slow to do something against fast moving adventurers or NPCs who use magic for communication.




It's not hard to find a couple of minions who can _teleport_.  Heck, if you can get a mid-level evil outsider working for you, a lot of them can do it at will.  Of course, _teleportation_ will be much less common in 4E... but that applies to the adventurers/NPCs too.


----------



## Steely Dan (Jan 15, 2008)

To maybe allay some of Derren's concerns, it has been confirmed that some monsters will have Rituals:


"A new article on Dragon shows a site of exploration and possible encounter action in the new forgotten realms, Some cool info on crunch from this article:

-Trolls still regenerate (big surprise there, but hey)
-Naga's will have rituals and spells. Apparently they will be the same one's players get, not custom made for the Naga's only. So I guess there are monsters who don't have all unique abilities. 
-Rituals and spells can be 'taught' to others.
-There is some kind of a friendly relationship between Naga's and Dwarves in FR, at least in the Amn region.


Quote:
The Wailing Dwarf
Realmslore
by Bruce R. Cordell
Art by Drew Baker01/14/2008Dragon Features Archive 


An enormous vertical slab of rock 4,000 feet high in the western portion of the Troll Mountains in Amn is carved to resemble a dwarf. Named after the sound of the wind blowing through its hollow eyes and mouth, it marks the site of an abandoned dwarven city. 

At least, that's the common wisdom. The foregoing is all most know about the Wailing Dwarf, if they've heard of it at all. Many assume the site is an abandoned dwarven city, probably haunted by opportunistic monsters and lonely dwarven ghosts. A few have even taken the time to describe away the noise made by the image: Some learned sages in Amn have it that the wailing winds result from temperature differences between air inside the caverns hidden behind the open eyes and mouth, and the air outside. When it's colder inside, air rushes in, and when it's colder outside, air rushes out, wailing and whining through the narrowed apertures of the carved dwarf's face.

The truth is a little stranger. 

General Description 
Consider the vast size of the vertical slab on which the dwarven image is carved -- the relief sculpture is nearly a mile tall! Dry words on a page do little to convey the surprising awe one feels upon first encountering the Wailing Dwarf in person. The great stone helm of the carven image surmounts the image like a king's crown, thick with forgotten dwarven script and pitted where ancient gemstones may once have glittered.

The empty eyes and mouth are black shadows, but the braided beard reaches a full thousand feet, where its stone tips are tucked into the image's belt. The graven image grips a fantastically large double-bladed axe in both hands, as if ready to break from the mountain, shake the residual rubble from its shoulders and beard, and give battle to another being as titanic as itself.

Next, there is the haunting sound that issues from the relief sculpture's empty lips and vacant orbs. Sometimes as quiet as a lover's whisper at midnight, other times as brash and grating as a shrieking cyclone uprooting a farm house, the wail of the dwarf is nothing if not extraordinary. Upon hearing the dwarf's exhalation, one comes away with the sense that it is hardly likely the noise could have anything other than an unexpected explanation. 

Previous Exploration
Noted explorer Bryam Lancameth of Amn financed an expedition to determine the truth behind the unnatural sound of the Wailing Dwarf, though it's likely he also wished to liberate any remaining dwarven treasure yet potentially lingering in the abandoned city inside. Many know or have heard the lay Lancameth's Last Expedition, though few realize that it was within the dark byways behind the Wailing Dwarf's black eyes that Captain Lancameth and his companions, all celebrities in their own right, met their ends. Certainly Last Expedition takes many liberties with the reality of that final adventure; however, the lay does accurately sum up the expedition with the refrain:

. . . lost, past all hope of the return,
they perished, tombless and alone.

What is known for certain is that Lancameth's last expedition numbered five principles.

First was Captain Bryam Lancameth himself, famous for his many long years of notable service in Amn's merchant marine fleet. Lancameth, a human youthful for all his forty years, wielded the storied Clockwork Blade of Venom.

Next was Lady Starthorn, an elf ranger out of the Aglarond's Yuirwood. Lady Starthorn was famous both for her silvery voice and her night-black Bow of Death's Rain.

Nhair Ebendar, a halfling scoundrel from the streets of Athkatla, was never far from Lancameth, cracking wise with quips and stories. Ebendar somehow acquired the Punching Dagger of Quar-Shan, a relic whose mere possession put Ebendar in constant danger of assassins from Calimshan.

No historical account records Dog Wizard's true name. Dog Wizard is the only name he answered to, in any event, when he answered at all. Dog Wizard's greatest claim to fame was his magic implement, the Jagged Staff of Hellgate. Dog Wizard always hid his features in a hood, but some say he was a tiefling.

Though Lancameth led all their expeditions, the touchstone of the group was Matron Iremar, a priestess of Oghma. Knowledgeable in almost every circumstance and ready with healing magic when things turned rough, Matron Iremar was also a doughty warrior, and she wielded the Astral Mace of Blasting, supposedly a gift given by one of Oghma's angels directly into Iremar's pious hands.

For all their bravery, cunning, experience, and luck, all five famous heroes fell within the bleak, wind-washed caverns behind the Wailing Dwarf. Regardless of whether Lancameth's hope concerning dwarven treasures was true or merely optimism, it is certain at the very least that the dangerous ruins behind the graven image contain the powerful magic relics each expeditioneer carried with them to their ends.

Behind the Face
The presumption that opportunistic monsters lair within the cavities behind the sculpted slab are accurate. Lightless shafts shelter spiders, fungi, oozing slimes, and even the spirits of mourning dwarves.

However, in more recent times, an unusually clever tribe of trolls partly colonized the hollow mountain. They did so only in part because they found the access into the heart of the ruined city beyond the First Antechamber contested by immortal guardians set there to keep secret the Wailing Dwarf's windy heart.

After a running conflict that lasted decades, the trolls were mostly wiped out, though pockets still persist in hidden corners of the ruined city past the First Antechamber. Also, the immortal guardians captured a few alive and set them up in the First Antechamber as a warning to the future.

Created expressly by secret makers, the immortal guardians in the Wailing Dwarf take the form of guardian nagas. All nagas are fascinated by knowledge, and most eventually assemble a formidable understanding of rituals and arcane spells, as well as collect powerful magic items. The guardians in the Wailing Dwarf (whose total number is not known) are obsessed with the continued acquisition of magical knowledge and the final resting place (or current wielders) of storied magic items, legacy items, and relics. 

Though the guardian nagas in the Wailing Dwarf devote themselves fiercely to their appointed task, they also thirst for new knowledge and are not quick to attack intruders. In fact, they may offer to spare intruders' lives if the intruders can teach them a new ritual or spell, or if they give up a magic item. A naga is compelled by its very nature to guard its appointed secret or object with its life, and thus it never negotiates away access to the windy heart of the abandoned dwarven city. Still, one might be willing to allow intruders to turn back with their lives -- especially if they can offer something worthwhile for its mercy.

Gaining Entry
At first glance, those seeking entry are faced with a vertical climb up the flatiron slab upon which the Wailing Dwarf is carved. However, investigation higher up the mountainous shoulder behind the east-looking side of the dwarf reveals rough but navigable terrain, including a natural rock shelf 5 feet in width that curls around across the slab's front, through the stony braids of the Wailing Dwarf's beard, to the open cavity of its vacuous mouth.

Here explorers face their first potential danger. Sometimes, an erratic howling wind bursts from the mouth (and both eyes) of the stony façade. When this happens, all objects and creatures not staked into the stone are either sucked in or blown out. Those sucked in tumble roughly into the First Antechamber, where they fall prone and are dazed. Those blown out are flung off the carved slab face into open air, where they face a fall of nearly 4,000 feet to the rocky gorge floor below.

Those lucky enough to avoid a wind surge or who take precautions against the howling winds find a wide circular tunnel beyond that leads, after a hundred feet or so, to the First Antechamber.

First Antechamber
Behind the façade of the Wailing Dwarf and past the long throat is the wide and high First Antechamber. Here the shackled bodies of four regenerating trolls are strapped across walls and ceilings. Completely insane from their years-long captivity, they now serve both as a warning to would-be interlopers, as well as self-renewing hors d'oeuvres for the guardian naga that has taken up her position here. 

The guardian naga in the First Antechamber deals newcomers who enter the chamber, whether troll, adventurer, or dwarf claiming to be a long-lost heir of the city that lies beyond, as described above under Behind the Face.

Abandoned Dwarven City
Beyond the First Antechamber is another tunnel, which opens onto a great rift at the mountain's heart, from which the winds emerge or sometimes plunge. The ruined dwarven city is carved into the stone of both sides of a great rift, cliff-dwelling style. Countless bridges, suspended roads, and other stone paths provide access back and forth between the two sides, though most of these stone spans are untrustworthy at best in their neglected antiquity. 

Thousands of empty chambers lie within the abandoned city, whose name is one more secret hoarded by the guardian nagas who patrol the city's upper edges. Mournful dwarven ghosts, lurking trolls, patrolling guardian nagas, the powerful items once wielded by Lancameth and his fallen band, and other secrets are here kept, not least of which is the reason for the near constant inhalation and outrush of air from somewhere deeper. . . .

About the Author

Bruce Cordell is a D&D designer, but during his twelve years in the game industry, he has dabbled in miniatures, board games, collectible card games, d20 games, and more. Bruce has over a sixty listed credits to his name, including the Expanded Psionics Handbook, Libris Mortis, and Expedition to Castle Ravenloft. His body of work also includes three published Forgotten Realms novels (Lady of Poison, Darkvision, and Stardeep), with more on the way."


----------



## Propheous_D (Jan 15, 2008)

Darren I am going to spell this out quickly:

Communication with others - All ready pointed out that its a moot point because of the plethora of ways all ready detailed here on how to contact and deal with people with out magic. Not to mention that the Dragon could have a mildly magically ally who does the communication.

Alarm spell - 1st level spell that shows up with detect magic and can be dispelled or avoided. Only lasts 2 hours per level and requires the dragon to be able to recast it EVERY DAY. Dragons don't have permanancy ieing around.

Silent Image - All ready defeated requires concentration and LINE OF SIGHT.

Invaisibility/Thief - Has blindsight 60ft thief can't get close enough to use it. As for poison last I checked Dragons have rediculous fort saves.

Lets get to the meat about wizards travelling:

Wizards have other options but they do not tend to use them. In 3.5 Invisibility doesn't last that long, Fly lasts just as long. So those what 20 minutes of invisible flight are realy quite usefull.

archers vs a dragon - An archer has to have LoS which easily defeated even  in the air. The PC's once again can only fly for 20 minutes tops. The dragon flies at a minimum of 100ft per round while a PC does 60. A dragon moving double will be out of the range of a standard bow in 2 rounds atleast. Not including cover. Again your archer would have to deal incredible amounts of damage in a VERY short period. While possible it is very unlikely that the dragon will sustain enough to die. Dragons have hundreds of hp and rediculous AC. While it may be possible for someone to sufficiently damage them in the time aloted it is most unlikely.

Bottomline your counter arguements are not proving that Dragons are any more susceptable to death by tactics then they are in 3E or 3.5E. In fact I would go so far to say that its easier to take out dragons in 3E or 3.5E using these tactics because of the PC rules in those versions.

Give us an arguement that proves beyond a shodow of a doubt that the lack of spells in 4th for dragons out of the box makes them lose anything beyond having to use a iittle elbow grease and persusion.

P.S. I am sure a dragon is more then capable of putting a plug in a door and resting a rock on top before he goes to sleep at night. I personally like to make sure my doors are locked and my phones are charging and my lights are off before I go to bed. I even brush my teeth and wash. I bet it takes me longer to do that.

To be honest Darren I am not trying to be antagonistic with you but your resolute mannerism about how dragons lose all credibility because they lose magic is just silly. The idea also that a BBEG needs magic or levels o caster classes is also silly. That would be a HUGE problem with the game (meaning 4E as 3E had a magic to balance magic approach). The problem here that everyone seems to be having with your ideology is that you are applying a 3E mindset to something that is VERY far removed from 3E by all accounts. The core of 4E the soul and heart of it remains roughly the same but the application of it seems to have taken a change. I for one am very ready for it.


----------



## Derren (Jan 15, 2008)

And I will answer really quick

- Communication. All forms of communications presented here are not good enough when adventurers who can fly or teleport show up and also limit the size of the dragons operation to the area around its lair. They work, but not very well.

- Alarm spell
2 hours per level is most of the time enough for the night. Recasting it every day is easy for the dragon when it has spellcasting

- Silent Image. Yes. Thats where alarm spells are handy to know when and where to place this spell.

- Thief
Buffing and setting up traps etc. 61 ft. away from teh dragon is enough to ensure victory

- Wizard
Overland Fly, Phantom Steed or when it gets rough Dimension Door to escape from danger

- Archers
Having a Line of Sight to a flying target is not that hard to get. The damage comes from the masses of archers (20 automatically hits, so AC is not an issue). Even when not killed, the dragon which is unable to heal itself now has to fear to be hunted down and killed in its weakened state (unlike the high level NPCs which can simply heal up within a day unless killed)

- Plug
I did not assume that the dragon lair has doors made specifically made for it. If not then the dragon has to make sure that there is no hole in those plugs. if there is the dragon has now given the adventurers free cover from its melee attacks while they can attack him with arrows and spells while he can only fight back with its fire breat (which the heroes are likely protected against).

And imo dragons without magic much of their credibly *as movers and shakers of the world* when they do not have access to magic because the organizations they are competing against do have it and magic is a big advantage. it starts from security (its very hard to stop a magical party with nonmagical means) to communications and transporting (the contact with its agents is confined to a small area around the lair, slow and unreliable while adventurers and NPCs can use magic and travel spells) and spying (The enemies can simply scry the dragon which it likely is not able to block. The dragon on the other hand can't do it).

In 4E this might change but we already know that there will be rituals for many of those things. When the dragon can't cast those rituals we have the same situation as teh one I described above with 3.5Ed terms.

Sure, it can be solved by magic using minions, but to me a real minion is someone who has no real ability of his own and is only really useful when directed by a mastermind. But in this case those minions are the only thing which keep the whole operation alive. Remove the dragon and it wouldn't make a difference assuming a higher level minion takes his place.


----------



## Lackhand (Jan 15, 2008)

I'm a little confused what exactly the goal here is. Is it to:
1) Present a reasonable way for a Dragon to commit intrigue and otherwise manipulate the destinies of humanoid kingdoms or
2) Be undefeatable by adventurers?

Because these are very different goals. *Everything* that has been mentioned so far stymies the vast armies of humankind and provides a fair measure of protection. It takes some fairly focused attention from human(oid) champions to root out the serpent that's behind all of it, let alone throw off the phenomenal bluff, intimidate, and diplomacy checks the wyrm can make.

Sure, adventurers can become aware of a dragon that communicates in a mundane fashion. They can then approach the dragon who, if they are anything other than Adventurers, bully them, intimidate them, squash them flat, or fry them crispy.

On a similar note, consider trying this game from the other side, *Derren*. Come up with the spell list of an Adult Red dragon (200 years old, casts as a 7th level sorceror, I believe?) that doesn't fall into the exact same problems.

These are plot hooks, not flaws, and the dragon manages what it does far better than an equivalent human (non wizard) mastermind.

Or are we just arguing that wizards are broken? 
Edit: I guess it just feels to me that the ground rules for this argument are that the Dragon, to be a mover and shaker, must be:
Invincible, Omnicognizant, Extraordinarily subtle, Able to hold (solo!) its own against the amassed forces of several kingdoms and fairly large numbers of humanoid champions, and Unable to positively interact with anyone useful.
These exact same strictures kill a dragon with spellcasting dead, so I must be missing something.


----------



## Steely Dan (Jan 15, 2008)

Lackhand said:
			
		

> Or are we just arguing that wizards are broken?




I'm wondering at this point too – I think this thread has drifted into the arena of the unwell, making an enemy of its own future.


----------



## Dausuul (Jan 15, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> In 4E this might change but we already know that there will be rituals for many of those things. When the dragon can't cast those rituals we have the same situation as teh one I described above with 3.5Ed terms.
> 
> Sure, it can be solved by magic using minions, but to me a real minion is someone who has no real ability of his own and is only really useful when directed by a mastermind.




This is beyond absurd.  Are you claiming Darth Vader had no real ability of his own?  Or the Witch-King?  How about Lucius Malfoy or Wormtongue?

A minion who has no real ability of his own isn't a minion, he's an Imperial Stormtrooper.  Minions _always_ have abilities of their own.  That's what makes them useful to the mastermind.  Some of them are combat brutes (Darth Vader).  Others are spellcasters (the Witch-King).  Still others are smooth-tongued liars (Wormtongue).



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> But in this case those minions are the only thing which keep the whole operation alive. Remove the dragon and it wouldn't make a difference assuming a higher level minion takes his place.




Not even remotely true.  The dragon is the genius behind the organization, the brains of the outfit.  Remove the dragon and there is no one fit to replace it.  Sure, one of the minions will step up and try his best (actually they'll all probably try to step up, leading to a free-for-all as the pretenders to the throne murder one another), but he lacks the dragon's experience, its vast intelligence, and its equally vast array of Knowledges and social skills.  He won't be able to run the show the way the dragon could.


----------



## Propheous_D (Jan 16, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> And I will answer really quick
> 
> - Communication. All forms of communications presented here are not good enough when adventurers who can fly or teleport show up and also limit the size of the dragons operation to the area around its lair. They work, but not very well.




Actually you assume that adventurers know were the dragon is right away and do not do anything to ti the dragon off. This is typically FAR from the truth. Adventurers even in 3e CAN NOT teleport into a dragons lair. They need to know were it is and have a good working knowledge of the area they are teleporting into. Any form of transport into a dragons lair is going to require atleast 1 days travel. In which a dragon can easily receive warning from his spies and followers. Again your points are making MANY assumptions and completely inaccurate use of abilities alloted to PCs. 



> - Alarm spell
> 2 hours per level is most of the time enough for the night. Recasting it every day is easy for the dragon when it has spellcasting
> 
> - Silent Image. Yes. Thats where alarm spells are handy to know when and where to place this spell.




These two spells really are not practical. Were does the dragon waste his alarm spell? were does the dragon hide while being in line of sight and concentrating on a silent image? This is completely impractical in all ways. Not to mention a complete waste of time for a dragon who has much better options with out worrying about these pathetic parlor tricks. 

Example 1 cavern the PC's have to pass through which he simple collapses on them using his strength or breath weapon is a hundred times more effective then the sillent image. Again non-magical defeats magical in this instance in every way.



> - Thief
> Buffing and setting up traps etc. 61 ft. away from teh dragon is enough to ensure victory



Again even buffed how is a thief a match for a dragon in melee? Are you assuming 3E buffs and assuming they work in 4E. Again your arguements are widely speculative and full of wholes. There is no place to stop and buff in a 120' diameter cavern. The dragon can even sleep in a much smaller chamber.



> - Wizard
> Overland Fly, Phantom Steed or when it gets rough Dimension Door to escape from danger




I don't see an invisible undectable 10th level wizard here I see lunch for a dragon. Dimensional door only gets one so far and a dragon fiies rediculously fast. Not to mention the dragon just needs to ambush the wizard along his path. Not to hard for anyone to do really. The wizard is much better off just using normal means and blending in with the common folk. 



> - Archers
> Having a Line of Sight to a flying target is not that hard to get. The damage comes from the masses of archers (20 automatically hits, so AC is not an issue). Even when not killed, the dragon which is unable to heal itself now has to fear to be hunted down and killed in its weakened state (unlike the high level NPCs which can simply heal up within a day unless killed)




200 archers firing with a required 20 to hit will only hit 10 times for 1d8 per hit even with magic and buffed to the nines lets say that does 20 damage per hit (which it won't) its only 200 damage and a dragon has 500-1000 hit points. It takes only one breath weapon too take down a rediculous amount of archers not to mention once close enough which takes 1 round they can be effected by fear which may reduce the enitre 200 archers into nothing thus defeating the entire plan in one round.



> - Plug
> I did not assume that the dragon lair has doors made specifically made for it. If not then the dragon has to make sure that there is no hole in those plugs. if there is the dragon has now given the adventurers free cover from its melee attacks while they can attack him with arrows and spells while he can only fight back with its fire breat (which the heroes are likely protected against).




since when are air holes murder holes? All a dragon has to do is have his air holes angled which is not that difficult and bam done. not to mention all he has to do is have something 1 ft in front of his air holes and no pc can see or fire anything into the room. If you are going to assume things try playing devil advocate with yourself and realize that when you post things that are obvious it doesn't help our discussion progress but keeps us on this silly circular arguement.



> And imo dragons without magic much of their credibly *as movers and shakers of the world* when they do not have access to magic because the organizations they are competing against do have it and magic is a big advantage. it starts from security (its very hard to stop a magical party with nonmagical means) to communications and transporting (the contact with its agents is confined to a small area around the lair, slow and unreliable while adventurers and NPCs can use magic and travel spells) and spying (The enemies can simply scry the dragon which it likely is not able to block. The dragon on the other hand can't do it).




Organizations do not all ways seek to destroy dragons, but in actually would seek to use them for thier benefit. this can be beneficial to the dragons themselves as they gain powerful allies. This again goes back to the understanding that Dragons are a force to be reckoned with. A CR20 dragon stands an incredibly good chance of slaughtering any single combatant 20th level or lower, and as those level lower the amount of combatants it can slaughter increases exponentially. You are stuck thinking of magic as a means to an end. If magic was the only means to an end then armies would be useless.



> In 4E this might change but we already know that there will be rituals for many of those things. When the dragon can't cast those rituals we have the same situation as teh one I described above with 3.5Ed terms.




No one has said dragons can not use rituals. No one has said dragons can not cast spells. All that was stated is that base dragons no longer include casting levels.



> Sure, it can be solved by magic using minions, but to me a real minion is someone who has no real ability of his own and is only really useful when directed by a mastermind. But in this case those minions are the only thing which keep the whole operation alive. Remove the dragon and it wouldn't make a difference assuming a higher level minion takes his place.





This is not true at all. A smart Mastermind compartmentalizes. The trick to staying in power is to keep your underlings in the dark. Give your underlings the abiity to do everything and they will betray you. This is easily avoided, and the setup for it is not that hard at all. This is were you are having difficulty. Your lack of understanding on how social structure and intrigue work is were your arguements fail to prove to have merit.

All powerful minions are kept at arms length and scrutinized. Its good to have a dozen or so equally powerful minions this allows you to keep them seperate and at each others throats. The trick is keeping those minions power in balance. If one starts to out strip the others he/she must be replaced or taken out of that level and moved somewere that removes his powerbase and isolates him/her to remove the ability to take over.


----------



## WayneLigon (Jan 16, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Somehow I fail to see how you are able to stuff that many soldiers in such a small space so that everyone is affected by frightful presence. So, not 95% of all soldiers would flee, 5% would maybe. The rest will fire one or two salvos at the dragon and wound it soo much that the high level NPCs of the city can finish it off if the dragon doesn't flee.




No, sorry, doesn't work that way. Your little 1-3rd level guys who are the vast bulk of the city guards have _no possibility of making the save _ against it's frightful presence if we are talking an Old Red dragon. They have to roll a natural 20 to save, and that's only because D&D has that little rules quirk. 1 out of 20 = 5%, so 5% of any of the militia forces will stay and fight. 95% will flee. That's not a number someone is pulling out of their pants in casual conversation. 

Small space? An Old dragon's frightful presence is radius of 240'. That is a globe 480' across. Do you have any idea how big an area that is? That's quite a bit bigger than a football field is long. Archers can be scattered all over the city and when it flies over in that initial pass using it's overland flight hustle speed of 60 mph, it's going to Frightful Presense _all of them _ in one looping pass over the city. Given that he's also going to throw the vast majority of the city into a blind panic as well (including all those animals), you're going to see a major riot start.

Sorry, I still don't buy that you're going to hand +1 arrows to every Tom, Dick and Harry in the militia or have someone casting _Magic Weapon, Greater _ at the drop of a hat. The latter would work if you had a few hours worth of warning that the dragon was going to attack, but when's the last time that ever happened?


----------



## Incenjucar (Jan 16, 2008)

It's easier to add than to take away, generally.

I also don't see why a dragon would waste a spell when it can do this:

"On the dragon’s turn, the first thing it does is burst out in an inferno of flame, searing every PC within 25 feet—a free action. Then, with a standard action, it slashes out at the fighter and the cleric with its two front claws (even though they’re both 20 feet away). As another free action, it uses its tail to slap the rogue, who was trying to sneak up behind it, and pushes her back 10 feet. It’s getting angry at the wizard, so it uses a special ability to take another standard action: it spits a ball of fire at the wizard, setting him on fire. It has a move action left, which it uses to fly into a better position for its breath weapon. That ends the dragon’s turn."

But no, give the dragon access to Fireball spell instead.


----------



## Sir Brennen (Jan 16, 2008)

Incenjucar said:
			
		

> But no, give the dragon access to Fireball spell instead.



And _alarm_. Don't forget _alarm_.


----------



## Incenjucar (Jan 16, 2008)

Sir Brennen said:
			
		

> And _alarm_. Don't forget _alarm_.




A dragon that can't Unseen Servant or Sleep may as well just kill itself.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jan 16, 2008)

Incenjucar said:
			
		

> A dragon that can't Unseen Servant or Sleep may as well just kill itself.



Is that even possible without magic?


----------



## Derren (Jan 16, 2008)

Ok, I give up. It seems that the majority of people here are satisfied with dragons as combat monsters or don't really care much about internal cohesion of their world.
Otherwise I can't explain the tendency of some people to not think through thinks but instead just throw around "solutions" which have glaring holes when you apply something else than slash&hack tactics or otherwise completely misunderstand what I am posting.

What was the 10x10 room with an orc and a treasure chest in previous editions is now the 100x100 room with a pile of gold and a dragon.


----------



## Lurks-no-More (Jan 16, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Ok, I give up. It seems that the majority of people here are satisfied with dragons as combat monsters or don't really care much about internal cohesion of their world.




No, it's just that the majority of people here don't think dragons need to be able to cast spells to be more than just combat monsters. And as it has been pointed to you time and time again, you could add spellcaster class levels to dragons, or just give them rituals for non-combat-affecting things like lair-building, long-range communication or whatever.



> Otherwise I can't explain the tendency of some people to not think through thinks but instead just throw around "solutions" which have glaring holes when you apply something else than slash&hack tactics or otherwise completely misunderstand what I am posting.



The solutions offered have, to me at least, seemed mostly perfectly reasonable.

Just because you are hell-bent on believing that 4e is going to cripple dragons, doesn't mean you're right. Enjoy your misery, if that's what you want.


----------



## Steely Dan (Jan 16, 2008)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:
			
		

> Is that even possible without magic?




Like it centurion, like it.


----------



## Dausuul (Jan 16, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Ok, I give up. It seems that the majority of people here are satisfied with dragons as combat monsters or don't really care much about internal cohesion of their world.
> Otherwise I can't explain the tendency of some people to not think through thinks but instead just throw around "solutions" which have glaring holes when you apply something else than slash&hack tactics or otherwise completely misunderstand what I am posting.
> 
> What was the 10x10 room with an orc and a treasure chest in previous editions is now the 100x100 room with a pile of gold and a dragon.




*shrug* If that's what you want to believe, go ahead... but in the unlikely event that you ever play in any game I run, you will quickly learn just how dangerous a non-casting dragon can be.


----------



## Stogoe (Jan 16, 2008)

The biggest mistake here is assuming that people are clueless or "doin it wrong" because they disagree with you.  Sometimes, tastes just differ.


----------



## shilsen (Jan 16, 2008)

Stogoe said:
			
		

> The biggest mistake here is assuming that people are clueless or "doin it wrong" because they disagree with you.  Sometimes, tastes just differ.



 What he said. A lot of the nitpicking by Derren here could be applied to any theoretical discussion of any BBEG from previous fantasy and fiction. When you describe Sauron's rise to power as depicted by Tolkien, you can find dozens of places to say "But if X had done Y then Sauron would have been thwarted...." The point is that if a functional BBEG needs a reasonably plausible explanation. And we've had a lot of them in this thread, IMNSHO.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jan 16, 2008)

shilsen said:
			
		

> What he said. A lot of the nitpicking by Derren here could be applied to any theoretical discussion of any BBEG from previous fantasy and fiction. When you describe Sauron's rise to power as depicted by Tolkien, you can find dozens of places to say "But if X had done Y then Sauron would have been thwarted...." The point is that if a functional BBEG needs a reasonably plausible explanation. And we've had a lot of them in this thread, IMNSHO.



I guess there are a lot of "wannabe" BBEG where those flaws actually manifested. Not all Dragons become master minds behind a city or kingdom. Some just die an ugly death when some wandering adventurers stumble upon one of their weaknesses. 

At 5th level, the heroes stop a Dragon that is working together with a kobold tribe to gain power in a region.
At 10th level, the heroes stop a Dragon that is trying to get a few noble houses working for him.
At 15th level, the heroes find out that a Dragon has manipulating them to kill the first two Dragons so his secret rulership of the region remains unchallenged.
At 20th level, the heroes find a cabal of Dragons for which the previous Dragon was a member, who together manipulated a majority of the continent to fill their hoards.
Eventually, the heroes might have to stop one of the cabals founding members from achieving godhood...


----------



## vagabundo (Jan 16, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Ok, I give up. It seems that the majority of people here are satisfied with dragons as combat monsters or don't really care much about internal cohesion of their world.
> Otherwise I can't explain the tendency of some people to not think through thinks but instead just throw around "solutions" which have glaring holes when you apply something else than slash&hack tactics or otherwise completely misunderstand what I am posting.
> 
> What was the 10x10 room with an orc and a treasure chest in previous editions is now the 100x100 room with a pile of gold and a dragon.




The amount of cohesion that you seem to require would need a very complete write-up, more time that I can give (still I will see what I can put together over the next few days), but is easily done. Although enough examples have been given in both threads that a little imagination could flesh out the rest. 

All that is required for a Dragon to influence human society and even rule a human kingdom is its intellect and long life. Through patience and its innate powers it could easily dominate small town or merchant guild and work up from there.

Most of your issues seem to hinge on a rejection of the dragon by humans, the fact that they would all wish for its destruction. I think you underestimate how people would react to the situation and how easily a dragon could manipulate the fears, greed and flaws of people to construct a huge network in quite a short time. And then maintain that network for generations. 

Very few in the network may know that it is ruled by a dragon, its influence (through bribery and assassination) could spread much further than its membership would know.

Some dragons will have no interest in such a power, they might desire the freedom of flight and the hunt. Certainly there would be many different types of dragon personalities and some would, as you indicated above, be throw away encounters. But only if you as a DM want that to happen. 

For those dragons that are inclined, their intellect and diplomacy are their main weapons ,not the combat powers and certainly not the handful of spells that dragons in 3.5e know. 

Having the power over several towns or a kingdom and their armies, legions of spies, multiple lairs that it moves randomly too. Access and the money to have custom magic items created for it by the best mages money can buy. 

With this behind it, and without insider help, there is no way that Adventures would get with bow shot of the dragon before they were assassinated or imprisoned.


----------



## Derren (Jan 16, 2008)

vagabundo said:
			
		

> The amount of cohesion that you seem to require would need a very complete write-up, more time that I can give (still I will see what I can put together over the next few days), but is easily done. Although enough examples have been given in both threads that a little imagination could flesh out the rest.
> .




There are actually only some key issues which are important to me.

- Efficient communication
Having a large spy network requires a good communication and without magic this is not possible as it would be very slow and unreliable. Especially when you consider how fast adventurers can move or other nobles can communicate with their agents through magic having to rely on mundane communication is a big disadvantage.

- Defense
Dragons are always a prime target for adventurers which nearly always employ magic. Without having magic yourself it is very hard or even impossible to defend yourself against them. That doesn't mean the actual combat (the dragon is still quite good at that) but  how to prevent the adventurers from intruding your lair.
Another thing is how to keep adventurers or rivaling organizations/nobles from disrupting your spy network or other organization. Disrupting mundane communication is easy and as the dragon can't visit his agents personally it would cripple the entire network.

- Secrecy 
Without magic there is no defense against diviniations (even with magic that is quite hard) as soon as the influence of the dragon gets too big some people, maybe rivaling nobles will start to gather informations about the agents of the dragon (or whoever the dragon uses to exert his influence) and from there it is easy to follow the trail (especially when you use mundane communication) back to the dragon.

- Contacts
Face it, most humans will not trust a dragon. Some might do it on a personal level, but on a political scale no one will follow a dragon unless they must do it (at least on large scale politics).
So teh dragon needs minions to represent him. But where does he get this minions? They have to be loyal and must be able to walk freely among humans (or whatever race you want to infiltrate). And as soon as his connection to the dragon gets found out he is useless.


----------



## Lackhand (Jan 16, 2008)

Why do we care how fast adventurers can cope with dragons? If adventurers are a dime a dozen, then there should be sufficient villain NPCs that some can be perverted to the dragon's ends, thus countering the OMG BROKEN player wizards. If not a dime-a-dozen, then they're rare enough that the dragon takes a few obvious precautions and call it quits; that the players can find and challenge the dragon is fine, as it allows the drake to enter the campaign.

The magic dragons have is wholly unsuitable for defending themselves from players' spells; if they must prevent the specific scry/buff/teleport trifecta (which, I remind you, most other NPCs do *not*), surely it's better to just grant the entire race immunity to scrying?

Disrupting mundane communication is not as easy as you seem to think that it is. Or rather, it's exactly as easy as Dragons are disempowered by replacing their spellcasting abilities with more thematic, specific powers. 

Secrecy: Live in a volcano. Seriously. Or in an area of natural mineral charged from the bowels of the earth, or in a cloud fortress made of storms, or at the spine of the world. These things block scrying. Or just make the damn race immune to scrying since, again, none of their spells really help with this.

Contacts: Aaaah, double standard. Let's just say that people disagree with your assertion that the universal result of human/dragon contact is pitchforks and torches. The whole point of a _mastermind_ is that they manipulate people on whatever scale they like to get the end result: as soon as the dragon has followers on the personal scale, it can spin them into followers on the political scale.

"puppet ruler".

As soon as the connection is found out, depending on context, the agent turns around and says "No, it is not so! It is *you* who are the slave to the dragon, and nobody trusts you anyway, in-league-with-devils wizard. Yeah, that's right, I went there. You think nobody noticed you opening gates to hell, trading with the dark infernals for powers beyond our ken? Burn the witch, she got into congress with the help of the devil!"

See, even with proof or magical divination, a plausible bluff check or large swell of public sympathy can do a hell of a lot.

I think that's about all I can say usefully on this subject. Good gaming!



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> There are actually only some key issues which are important to me.
> 
> - Efficient communication
> 
> ...


----------



## WayneLigon (Jan 16, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Having a large spy network requires a good communication and without magic this is not possible as it would be very slow and unreliable.




Spy networks existed in our non-magic world long before fast, efficient communications was invented. It's slow, but that's not a bad thing because everyone else is just as slow as you are. Reliability, in any network, depends on the people you choose. What distinquishes a great spymaster from a wannabe is his ability to choose loyal underlings, people who will either die for him personally or for the cause they espouse.



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> Without magic there is no defense against diviniations (even with magic that is quite hard)




With magic, it's quite easy to proof oneself against any sort of scrying. Even mundane people get a chance to notice the scrying 'object'. Divinations are chancy at best since they are always couched in obscure language and it's never more than 90% accurate; usually less so. You never get 'Baron DeMoney is plotting treason against the King'. You get 'The King should fear green (DeMoney, as well as three or four other nobles, favors wearing green)'.


----------



## Snowy (Jan 16, 2008)

I'm recognising that there seems to be a disconnect between perceptions in this thread. On this basis I'd suggest we start thinking about our assumptions for the opponents of the dragon.

Things that make it a problem.

Access to the dragons lair: Flight, teleport.

Fixes: can't fly for more than 10 minutes, manouverability clumsy.
Teleport: Takes ages, arrive unconcious, sounds like a jet plane, etc etc

Divinations: etc etc

The issue I see is assuming adventurers will still be flying, tac-nukes, with omnipotent power, I'm assuming that there will be other changes.

etc drat will try and continue when not so busy at work.


----------



## Steely Dan (Jan 16, 2008)

I can't decide if this thread is like the Terminator or the Energiser Bunny…


----------



## green slime (Jan 16, 2008)

Snowy said:
			
		

> I'm recognising that there seems to be a disconnect between perceptions in this thread. On this basis I'd suggest we start thinking about our assumptions for the opponents of the dragon.
> 
> Things that make it a problem.
> 
> ...




I agree, and I still can't see the big problem. Somehow, Derren assumes PC's have access to all sorts of magical goodies, that were found strewn by the wayside, waiting for them to be plucked by the near-impervious adventurer-heroes, while the dragon which has lived for more than a millenia, has not managed to gain a single item of any use whatsoever. Not a crystal ball (sold by the heroes IMC), ioun stone, or anything, with which to bribe, beg, or recruit aide. There is nothing, nothing preventing the spies of the dragon having access to near-immediate communication devices of various sources. From the humble _message_ spell, through to _bracelet of friends_ 

Imagine the wealth I could accumulate if I could play the stock market for 1000 years.... Towards the end, I'd probably *be* the stock market....


----------



## shilsen (Jan 16, 2008)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:
			
		

> I guess there are a lot of "wannabe" BBEG where those flaws actually manifested. Not all Dragons become master minds behind a city or kingdom. Some just die an ugly death when some wandering adventurers stumble upon one of their weaknesses.
> 
> At 5th level, the heroes stop a Dragon that is working together with a kobold tribe to gain power in a region.
> At 10th level, the heroes stop a Dragon that is trying to get a few noble houses working for him.
> ...




Dude - you've got to stop posting things I agree with so much!

More seriously, that's a very nice way of considering it, and also tying things together in the game.


----------



## Derren (Jan 16, 2008)

WayneLigon said:
			
		

> Spy networks existed in our non-magic world long before fast, efficient communications was invented. It's slow, but that's not a bad thing because everyone else is just as slow as you are.




And thats how it is not in D&D. While the dragon still has his runners who have to dodge all the wilderness monsters the other organizations send their important message magically to its destination or at least teleport the messenger (or let him fly).


----------



## FourthBear (Jan 16, 2008)

Sorry to sound like a broken record, but if dragons need all this magic to be effective mastermind villain, than all mastermind villains need this magic.  In which case we should assemble the list of necessary spells for all mastermind villains and create a template to give to all of them.

It has been claimed that villains need to have their non-combat abilities spelled out explicitly for world-building issues.  Since Derren has presumably been running mastermind villains before and since all mastermind villains must have these spells (for dragons, sorcerer spells in 3e), he should have an example list of spells that will be necessary.  Otherwise, he could never have been running mastermind villains.  We could then collate them and create the mastermind template for DMs who think it needed.  Or present it to the 4e team to suggest to them what will be needed for all such villains in their monster and NPC design.


----------



## CleverNickName (Jan 16, 2008)

Awesome.  I think this is the best development regarding dragons that I have heard about so far.  Don't get me wrong, there is definitely a place in the game for spellcasting dragons...but they should be the exception, not the rule.

It was a nightmare in 3.x, playing a dragon.  Until the Draconomicon came along, putting a dragon in an adventure required more paperwork than filing my income taxes...and then to have to assign spells on top of that?  No thanks.

Your stock is rising, 4E.


----------



## Propheous_D (Jan 16, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Ok, I give up. It seems that the majority of people here are satisfied with dragons as combat monsters or don't really care much about internal cohesion of their world.
> Otherwise I can't explain the tendency of some people to not think through thinks but instead just throw around "solutions" which have glaring holes when you apply something else than slash&hack tactics or otherwise completely misunderstand what I am posting.
> 
> What was the 10x10 room with an orc and a treasure chest in previous editions is now the 100x100 room with a pile of gold and a dragon.




How to respond to this with out being condesending and caustic let me try to count the ways. As was stated in a previous response if you really think that then my friend you are truly missing everything that was stated here. My impression of your ability to DM and make world cohesion is about as interesting as the encounter you put above.

You make the massive mistake of assuming everything and have such a high opinion of your grasp of the way worlds work that everyone else is wrong. While revolution people can be like that, you are not presenting a revolutionary ideology, and so you don't qualify for it. I would suggest a stop drop and roll or a total ignoring of this thread. Understand that people have different ways of doing things.

I hope you have fun in your games but as stated if you come to one of our games you will realize just how naive you come accross to the rest of us as you try to poke holes and find nothing but more brick and mortar. Are we perfect, no never but the majority of people here are decent skilled gamers and I am going to side with the majority on this, not because I like doing that but because I think they are right.


----------



## Hussar (Jan 16, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> And thats how it is not in D&D. While the dragon still has his runners who have to dodge all the wilderness monsters the other organizations send their important message magically to its destination or at least teleport the messenger (or let him fly).




Again, as I mentioned in your challenge thread, PLEASE reread your DMG and the demographics section.  You are mistaken as far as RAW is concerned as to how a D&D world should look.  D&D worlds are not what you seem to think they are.  You wouldn't find a 9th level wizard in anything smaller than a large city, and then, you'd only find ONE of her.  Teleport networks for instant messaging is a nice idea, but is completely unsupported by RAW.

There's a reason people talk about Eberron being so heavily magictech.  It's a departure from RAW, not a representation.


----------



## WayneLigon (Jan 16, 2008)

Hussar said:
			
		

> You wouldn't find a 9th level wizard in anything smaller than a large city, and then, you'd only find ONE of her.  Teleport networks for instant messaging is a nice idea, but is completely unsupported by RAW.
> 
> There's a reason people talk about Eberron being so heavily magictech.  It's a departure from RAW, not a representation.




And even in Eberron, there isn't the level of extreme 'everyone uses fly and teleport' Derren seems to assume the norm for a standard D&D world. It's rare in Eberron for _any _ NPC to be over 6th level, so almost no-one has access to those spells at all. For example in Sharn, the 'New York City' of the setting, there are _two guys _ that can bring dead people back to life. And it would take a lot to get them to do it.


----------



## WayneLigon (Jan 16, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> And thats how it is not in D&D. While the dragon still has his runners who have to dodge all the wilderness monsters the other organizations send their important message magically to its destination or at least teleport the messenger (or let him fly).




You do know that Fly has a fairly short duration and that it's not Overland Flight? Fly last for _a few minutes_ and you're kinda gliding through the air at a trotting speed. Overland Flight only works on the caster, so you're having 10th level wizards carrying messages around like pigeons?


----------



## Derren (Jan 16, 2008)

WayneLigon said:
			
		

> And even in Eberron, there isn't the level of extreme 'everyone uses fly and teleport' Derren seems to assume the norm for a standard D&D world. It's rare in Eberron for _any _ NPC to be over 6th level, so almost no-one has access to those spells at all. For example in Sharn, the 'New York City' of the setting, there are _two guys _ that can bring dead people back to life. And it would take a lot to get them to do it.





I wouldn't say "even in Eberron". Low level NPCs are a trademark of that setting. In other settings like FR this looks very different.
As for the nonmagical rulers of FR, many of them exist simply "because it fits", not because its logical. When you have Cormyr, a kingdom mostly inspired by Arthurian England a wizard as king wouldn't fit. But all those rulers always have several high level mages close to them which provide them with spellcasting. (Dragons don't have a good access to loyal high level wizards. They depend on wizards who seek them out).

Maybe I was wrong concerning the demographics of traditional D&D worlds, I'll check in the DMG.. Thats also because I prefer worlds where magic is integrated into society and not "tacked on".


----------



## Dausuul (Jan 16, 2008)

Not sure why I'm bothering at this point, but...



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> - Contacts
> Face it, most humans will not trust a dragon. Some might do it on a personal level, but on a political scale no one will follow a dragon unless they must do it (at least on large scale politics).
> 
> So teh dragon needs minions to represent him. But where does he get this minions? They have to be loyal and must be able to walk freely among humans (or whatever race you want to infiltrate). And as soon as his connection to the dragon gets found out he is useless.




This seems to be the core of your complaint.  Without this, the dragon can have low- to mid-level spellcasters and other minions to cover deficiencies in all other areas.

However, your assumption here seems wildly off base to me.  The dragon has piles of money, a brilliant mind, centuries of knowledge, extraordinary social skills, and formidable combat prowess.  All of these make it a very attractive patron.  And against that you're setting--what?  That the dragon isn't human?  So what?  Lots of people aren't human in D&D.  Are you claiming that not one mid-level wizard would be tempted by such an offer?

"Hey, wizard.  I want you to be my personal caster.  You'll attend to the arcane defenses of my lair, and you'll send messages and teleport places when I need you to.  In exchange, I'll provide you with lots of gold to buy books and lab equipment.  I'll give you a place to carry on your experiments into forbidden magic, and if those pesky paladins keep bothering you, I'll eat them.  I'll teach you what I've learned about magic in my five-hundred-year lifespan, and I'll show you how to be a little more charming so that cute sorceress will pay attention to you.  And I'll even give you a good game of chess."

(As for how it delivers the offer, it kidnaps a peasant family.  It gives one of the peasants fifty gold pieces and explains that he's to deliver a message to the local spellslinger.  If the peasant delivers the message and returns promptly with a written reply, the dragon will give him another fifty gold pieces and send him home unharmed.  If the peasant fails to deliver the message, the dragon will eat the other family members.  Given the dragon's Intimidate and Bluff scores, it should not be hard to cow the fellow into delivering the message and coming back... of course, the dragon may eat the peasants anyway.)

Moreover, the dragon is not limited to human servants by any stretch of the imagination.  My own example included several erinyes that the dragon obtained by making a deal with a pit fiend.  The erinyes can _greater teleport_ at will, which solves communications issues at a stroke.  Of course, easy teleportation is probably--I hope!--gone in 4E.


----------



## TwoSix (Jan 16, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> There are actually only some key issues which are important to me.
> 
> - Efficient communication
> Having a large spy network requires a good communication and without magic this is not possible as it would be very slow and unreliable. Especially when you consider how fast adventurers can move or other nobles can communicate with their agents through magic having to rely on mundane communication is a big disadvantage.




We don't know how fast adventurers can move.  You're still conflating 3e magic with 4e dragon.  You can't do that.



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> - Defense
> Dragons are always a prime target for adventurers which nearly always employ magic. Without having magic yourself it is very hard or even impossible to defend yourself against them.




Again, 3e thinking.



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> That doesn't mean the actual combat (the dragon is still quite good at that) but  how to prevent the adventurers from intruding your lair.




Being good at combat is a good way to keep people out of your lair.  You can eat them.



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> Another thing is how to keep adventurers or rivaling organizations/nobles from disrupting your spy network or other organization. Disrupting mundane communication is easy and as the dragon can't visit his agents personally it would cripple the entire network.




You disrupt their network?  Blackmail/ally/eat the people leading it?  What magic was the dragon using before, _Protection against spies_?



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> - Secrecy
> Without magic there is no defense against diviniations (even with magic that is quite hard) as soon as the influence of the dragon gets too big some people, maybe rivaling nobles will start to gather informations about the agents of the dragon (or whoever the dragon uses to exert his influence) and from there it is easy to follow the trail (especially when you use mundane communication) back to the dragon.




Yes, because nobles are keen to go up against a dragon.



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> - Contacts
> Face it, most humans will not trust a dragon.




Yes, but plenty will.  How many did you need?



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> Some might do it on a personal level, but on a political scale no one will follow a dragon unless they must do it (at least on large scale politics).




Why do you have this obsession with dragons as political figures?  Is this a common theme in your campaign?



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> So teh dragon needs minions to represent him. But where does he get this minions? They have to be loyal and must be able to walk freely among humans (or whatever race you want to infiltrate). And as soon as his connection to the dragon gets found out he is useless.




SO don't let people find out!  That's what a spy network is for.

You seem to have a flaw I've seen in several world builders, where you believe the world has to be in perfect equilibrium before it can make sense.  You point out all the flaws the dragon has in its plans...but what plan doesn't have flaws?  It doesn't mean the dragon won't try, and it doesn't mean the dragon can't succeed for a while.  It just means the dragon can be brought be down, because it has these flaws.  I mean, think how many flaws exist in a human monarchial kingdom in a D&D world, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.


----------



## Sitara (Jan 16, 2008)

I don't understand why this thread is alive. Dragons are brutes, not genius plotters plotting the end of the world. 

Why do they need extensive spy networks??
Why do they need rope trick?
Why oh why do they need henchmen now?


----------



## Steely Dan (Jan 16, 2008)

Sitara said:
			
		

> Dragons are brutes, not genius plotters plotting the end of the world.




…They can be both or either.


----------



## lukelightning (Jan 16, 2008)

TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> I just want dragons that can rampage across the countryside, leaving nothing but destruction and terror in their wake. If I want brilliant masterminds, mighty sorcerers, or complex mazes lined with deadly traps, I will turn to humans and humanoids. If I want a flying monster with terrifying breath weapons and incredible strength with claws and teeth, I will use a dragon.




Hear hear!  I am so tired of super smart uber mastermind dragons. Heck, I'd rather have unintelligent dragons... maybe cunning, but a bestial cunning, not evil genius cunning.

It seems that just about _every_ monster in D&D gets the "evil genius upgrade." Even Kobolds, once a minor threat, have become a race of super genius trap builders with a huge credit rating (to purchase all their alchemist fire and poison and engineering goods).


----------



## Guacamole (Jan 16, 2008)

Oddly enough, it seems some people find the tradition of smart dragons a compelling narrative and want to find a way to make it work in their games.  Crazy, huh?


----------



## lukelightning (Jan 16, 2008)

Guacamole said:
			
		

> Oddly enough, it seems some people find the tradition of smart dragons a compelling narrative and want to find a way to make it work in their games.  Crazy, huh?




And oddly enough, some people find the mythic tradition of solitary, asocial dragons a compelling narrative.

It's easier to stat up dragons as non spellcasters and add spellcasting in if needed rather than the other way around.


----------



## Guacamole (Jan 16, 2008)

lukelightning said:
			
		

> And oddly enough, some people find the mythic tradition of solitary, asocial dragons a compelling narrative.
> 
> It's easier to stat up dragons as non spellcasters and add spellcasting in if needed rather than the other way around.




Hence, if people have different styles of play, it seems somewhat pointless to jump into a thread not about your style of play and go "OMG. DRAGONS SHOULD BE BIG BAD AND STOOPID!!!!!!!!"  Perhaps a thread about dragons being big bad and stupid would be more appropriate than a thread jack, no?


----------



## Dausuul (Jan 16, 2008)

I think the reason dragons are so often made out to be masterminds is that they are the iconic foe in D&D, which means people want an option to make a dragon into the Big Bad.  However, Big Bads are not merely the nastiest villains around; they're also the engines that drive the plot.  A plot consisting of "Hike up to the dragon's lair and kill it" does not make for an exciting story.

Therefore, if dragons are to function in a Big Bad role, it's very handy for them to have mastermind capabilities.  It is possible to have Big Bad dragons that don't run networks of intrigue (see Smaug), but they don't really cut it as dumb brutes.


----------



## Lackhand (Jan 16, 2008)

Which, I remind everyone, is _not_ what the loss of minor sorcerous spellcasting means.


----------



## TwinBahamut (Jan 16, 2008)

Dausuul said:
			
		

> A plot consisting of "Hike up to the dragon's lair and kill it" does not make for an exciting story.



Well, I think both Beowulf and Tolkien's _The Hobbit_ will disagree with you, but that is a different point... Edit: Looking at your post again, even you seem to recognize this with your Smaug reference, so I wonder why you made this point at all.

The Mastermind is not the only archetype for the BBEG. In fact, the archetype many people are referring to in this thread, the hidden figure who controls the world from behind the scenes, is just a subset of the idea of a Mastermind. Dragons shouldn't be built with the assumption of that one subset of a single archetype.

Regardless, I prefer dragons to be The Dragon, rather than the villain itself, and they _certainly_ don't need magic for that role. They might not even need a lair for that role.


----------



## Stormtalon (Jan 16, 2008)

TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> Well, I think both Beowulf and Tolkien's _The Hobbit_ will disagree with you, but that is a different point... Edit: Looking at your post again, even you seem to recognize this with your Smaug reference, so I wonder why you made this point at all.




I think the point he's trying to make is that, regardless of role -- be it mastermind, despot, or rampaging beast -- the last thing that _any_ dragon would be is a simple "big, dumb brute."  Smaug was the epitome of the rampaging beast, but he was also intelligent, arrogant and somewhat (in an odd way) cultured.  In D&D, only the White Dragons --and now, apparently, the Iron Dragons-- will fit neatly into the dumb brute role, and even they have at least human-level intelligence.


----------



## Dausuul (Jan 16, 2008)

TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> Well, I think both Beowulf and Tolkien's _The Hobbit_ will disagree with you, but that is a different point... Edit: Looking at your post again, even you seem to recognize this with your Smaug reference, so I wonder why you made this point at all.




Yeah, my ideas were sort of changing as I wrote the post.  What it really comes down to is that while a BBEG need not be a Mastermind, animalistic brutes don't make for very satisfying BBEGs in a long campaign.  Dragons who fill the BBEG role should be clever creatures, if not necessarily brilliant.

Beowulf's fight with the Fire-Drake was spectacular, but when you get right down to it, it was just one battle.  In a D&D game, it wouldn't have taken more than a single session to complete.  That's what I mean by "hike up to the dragon's lair and kill it."

The Hobbit is a much better case; it's a long story that's very much in the classic D&D "quest mold."  It's not just hiking up to the dragon's lair and killing it.  It's hiking through the hills, getting caught by trolls, tricking the trolls into being petrified, visiting Rivendell, crossing the Misty Mountains, getting caught by goblins, escaping the goblins, finding a magic ring, meeting Gollum, having a riddle-game, escaping from Gollum, escaping the goblins again... et cetera, et cetera.

And no, Smaug isn't a Mastermind.  But he _is_ quite intelligent.  He has to be intelligent so you can hate him; otherwise there's not enough motivation to carry players through a big campaign, and the final confrontation is just another fight.  After you've been through the sort of stuff Bilbo had to go through, the confrontation with the Big Bad has to be suitably epic.



			
				TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> The Mastermind is not the only archetype for the BBEG. In fact, the archetype many people are referring to in this thread, the hidden figure who controls the world from behind the scenes, is just a subset of the idea of a Mastermind. Dragons shouldn't be built with the assumption of that one subset of a single archetype.
> 
> Regardless, I prefer dragons to be The Dragon, rather than the villain itself, and they _certainly_ don't need magic for that role. They might not even need a lair for that role.




Dragons certainly make excellent Dragons.  Still, I dislike always having them in a subordinate role.


----------



## The Little Raven (Jan 16, 2008)

Steely Dan said:
			
		

> I can't decide if this thread is like the Terminator or the Energiser Bunny…




"It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead. "

This thread is very much the Terminator.


----------



## FourthBear (Jan 16, 2008)

Dausuul said:
			
		

> Dragons certainly make excellent Dragons.  Still, I dislike always having them in a subordinate role.




There has definitely been a beefing up of dragons going from 1e to 2e, then 2e to 3e.  Many people felt that dragons in the first edition of AD&D were underpowered.  In that editions, dragons were often subordinate to the mastermind villains.  Heck, there were specific rules in 1e for subduing dragons and for capturing dragon eggs and training the hatchlings.  In both 2e and 3e, dragons got a very substantial power and intelligence boost.  Unfortunately, it does seem to have come with dragon stats that would make a tax lawyer blanch.


----------



## Fallen Seraph (Jan 16, 2008)

I am just gonna put in a quick thought, but hopefully those with more fluent writing skills can build upon.

I think one major disconnect here is the idea of Race/Class (spellcasters). If we take into consideration that as has been stated by WotC numerous times that sentient-monsters can take classes then the major difference between PCs/NPCs and Monsters is the race itself.

So we have to view it through a racial viewpoint.

Putting aside magic/magical items, dragons have the benefit of:

-Hundreds if not Thousands of years of knowledge. 

-Most likely just as old connections with long-lived organizations/creatures.

-Can travel much faster then any human on a horse. (The only PC race I could see being able to travel as fast as a Dragon with natural abilities would be the Eladrin Feywild-travelling (and that could be extremely hard to, or only local). 

-Have numerous powerful natural abilities. 

-Can spend decades building its home. It is more then slightly hard to reach a Dragon unnoticed if it is perched on a large rock overlooking a underground lake you have to cross to reach it.

-Other Dragons, Dragons while yes solitary most of the time can and do work together. Especially if the Dragon is working with its own young. 

-If Dragons can still transform into humans (as a natural ability) then that enables them to do anything a humanoid would be able to.

Humanoids have:

-Large numbers, both in civilian populations and armies.

-Dozens of heroes at the call.

-Fortresses and Keeps secured and built-up over decades.

-Fast breeding.

-Easier to establish contacts with other humanoids. 

From this view it seems like Dragons have a very broad and powerful advantage over humanoids. Now, if magic is in the world, and magic items. Then the ability for Dragons to hoard magic items and take spellcasters levels just like Humanoids can simply cancels eachother out.


----------



## Propheous_D (Jan 16, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> I wouldn't say "even in Eberron". Low level NPCs are a trademark of that setting. In other settings like FR this looks very different.
> As for the nonmagical rulers of FR, many of them exist simply "because it fits", not because its logical. When you have Cormyr, a kingdom mostly inspired by Arthurian England a wizard as king wouldn't fit. But all those rulers always have several high level mages close to them which provide them with spellcasting. (Dragons don't have a good access to loyal high level wizards. They depend on wizards who seek them out).
> 
> Maybe I was wrong concerning the demographics of traditional D&D worlds, I'll check in the DMG.. Thats also because I prefer worlds where magic is integrated into society and not "tacked on".




I think the major mistake you are making is that you are trying to fit a basic dragon into a high fantasy world. WotC I think realized they made a mistake in making dragons have spell casting right off the bat. This made them have to be balanced under the rules based on thier abilities to cast spells and thus made them weaker then they should have been because of this. Instead they have altered thier philosphy so the dragon is easy to pick up and throw against a group of PC's and if you want him to be a BBEg you can do that with a small addition of the proper abilities and adjusting his CR based on the added abilities.

I think most of us prefer having a base monster that we can easily use in a campaign but with a system that allows us to play with them when we need something a little bit more.


----------



## Tzarevitch (Jan 16, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> There are actually only some key issues which are important to me.
> 
> - Efficient communication
> Having a large spy network requires a good communication and without magic this is not possible as it would be very slow and unreliable. Especially when you consider how fast adventurers can move or other nobles can communicate with their agents through magic having to rely on mundane communication is a big disadvantage.




I have news for you. Spy networks existed BEFORE the dawn of satellite communications. They date back to ancient days. Unless we are talking about trully vast distances, your intel does not have to be real time. 

If the dragon wants magical communications, it can find a few of those ubiquitous kobold sorcerers that the kobold lairs seem to have so many of.




			
				Derren said:
			
		

> - Defense
> Dragons are always a prime target for adventurers which nearly always employ magic. Without having magic yourself it is very hard or even impossible to defend yourself against them. That doesn't mean the actual combat (the dragon is still quite good at that) but  how to prevent the adventurers from intruding your lair.
> Another thing is how to keep adventurers or rivaling organizations/nobles from disrupting your spy network or other organization. Disrupting mundane communication is easy and as the dragon can't visit his agents personally it would cripple the entire network.




1. The spells that most dragons had were nowhere near enough to protect them against anything powerful enough to think it could challengethem.
2.  Since disabling mundane communcation networks is so easy I assume you will be submitting your plan to disable the communication networks of Al-Qaeda, Hamas, the Taliban, North Korea, Syria, Iran and China ASAP so the CIA can get right on it. I am sure they would be delighted to hear what they have been doing wrong all these years. 
3. And yes, the CIA director personally spends time in sunny Iran every summer so he can hear the report of every deep-cover operative. . . personally. Because without that the entire CIA spy network will collapse.   




			
				Derren said:
			
		

> - Secrecy
> Without magic there is no defense against diviniations (even with magic that is quite hard) as soon as the influence of the dragon gets too big some people, maybe rivaling nobles will start to gather informations about the agents of the dragon (or whoever the dragon uses to exert his influence) and from there it is easy to follow the trail (especially when you use mundane communication) back to the dragon.




First of all, magic itself if not much of a defense against magic divinations. Most of those blocked scrying results are DM or author fiat. Darkness, inhospitable location and good lair construction are the best defenses.

What sane noble is going to track down a dragon or agents known to work for a dragon? Are you familar with Shadowrun? Google search for "Lofwyr" and tell me that any sane noble or corp exec would harass one of his agents. Note this has nothing to do with his magic, it is beneath him to bother to use magic on you. His organization will simply have someone make you wish you were dead. Exactly like mafia dons and corporate bosses do in the real world . . . without magic. 




			
				Derren said:
			
		

> - Contacts
> Face it, most humans will not trust a dragon. Some might do it on a personal level, but on a political scale no one will follow a dragon unless they must do it (at least on large scale politics).
> So teh dragon needs minions to represent him. But where does he get this minions? They have to be loyal and must be able to walk freely among humans (or whatever race you want to infiltrate). And as soon as his connection to the dragon gets found out he is useless.





I am not sure why you think humans would trust a dragon less than anything else in a fantasy setting. In Shadowrun one was elected president and many of those are much nastier than D&D dragons. 

If a dragon landed in front of you on the way home with $10,000 deposit and offered you a job paying $10,000 per month more simply to act as it investment consultant and spokesman you are saying you wouldn't take it? Even when all it is asking you to do is the same thing ordinary humans pay other humans to do legally?

Tzarevitch


----------



## pemerton (Jan 18, 2008)

Lord Zardoz said:
			
		

> I do think that the question of out of combat capabilities is a reasonable one though, particularly for things like Scrying and Social encounters.  Having some means to track your foes down and seek revenge may not be necessary for Dragons, but it is necessary for Villains.  It would suck if the ability to use a Dragon as a primary villain in an adventure or campaign were removed simply because there was no way to add such capabilities to a monster that was more balanced than slapping PC levels on top of a monster and trying to work out the CR / XP value.  If I want to let my Dragon use some advanced divination, I would like to do so without throwing 13 or so levels of a spell casting class onto it.





			
				Cryptos said:
			
		

> It doesn't seem like much of a problem for me.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> What has been revealed doesn't seem to stop me from giving rituals to any NPC I feel should have them.  Or artifacts.  Or cults.   That is the stuff that would give them the power to be major players in the world, really.  They're basically defining ritual as a very extended spell that you need to prepare in order to do anything that affects the campaign world - teleportation, resurrection, etc.  They're the one type of magic that it seems you can still learn independent of level (you can learn as many rituals as you can discover, much as a 1-3e wizard could learn all spells for his level) so it would seem to me that if you felt it necessary, you could give them to just about any NPC you want to throw at the PCs.



Excellent point. What is relevant to the creature's power (from the point of view of encounter balancing) is not _the way in which it got a certain buff, or added a certain trap to its lair, but simply the final numbers for the encounter (including the extra difficulty that traps or other hazards add).

So if I think a balanced combat encounter with the dragon requires buffs X&Y and trap Z I can simply add these to the encounter, plus add as flavour text: the dragon did those things using its Rituals.

What would make a difference would be that those extra Ritual abilities would potentially constitute extra rewards ("treasure") to be gained by resolving the dragon encounter as a social challenge. This might be a reason to be a little cautious about adding too many such Ritual abilities to the dragon (or to any other NPC).



			
				Derren said:
			
		


			So I have always balance the off combat abilities of a dragon with its power level? No thanks. I rather have in build spellcasting for dragons which I can use anyway I want. Or at least give the dragon rituals (out of combat spells only).
And I want to have a coherent world. Giving monsters arbitrary powers without explanation doesn't fit my style of DMing.
		
Click to expand...




			
				Derren said:
			
		


			Saying "Dragons of age X can cast rituals of level Y" would be very good.
		
Click to expand...


I don't see why the absence of a statement like "Dragons of age X can cast rituals of level Y" would make the gameworld incoherent. If you think a given Dragon would benefit from Rituals X, Y and Z then presumably you have a reason for this, and also a view about how Dragons learn this magic. Why wouldn't these together yield sufficient coherence?



			
				Derren said:
			
		


			But that doesn't require that that the DM gives arbitrary powers to the BBEG. Imo it is more interesting when the BBEG has fixed powers so that the PC can outwith him. When they do the BBEG reacts accordingly but the PCs did score a victory.
Much better than arbitrary saying "the BBEG anticipated it and has ability X as counter" (and you just gave him ability X a few seconds ago).
		
Click to expand...


I don't see what is arbitrary about giving the Dragon the stats/traps etc required and jotting down a note that these derived from Rituals. This has nothing to do with GM "cheating" by changing the combat stats mid-encounter._


----------



## Derren (Jan 18, 2008)

pemerton said:
			
		

> I don't see why the absence of a statement like "Dragons of age X can cast rituals of level Y" would make the gameworld incoherent. If you think a given Dragon would benefit from Rituals X, Y and Z then presumably you have a reason for this, and also a view about how Dragons learn this magic. Why wouldn't these together yield sufficient coherence?




When you read my other posts you will see that I think that every dragon, in order to behave like they did in previous (including this) edition need magic as it lacks other resources. And to me it is incoherent when a creature lacks a ability which is necessary for its role. Otherwise it leads to very silly things unless houseruled (for example see 3E Mind Flayers. By lore they dominate other creatures to make them their slaves. But they lack any ability to dominate. For me that is incoherent. Same with dragons. They are very often masterminds or at least have trapped lairs and magical wards. But without magic there is no way that they could have placed this wards. So either every dragon has magic or every dragon has minions. In 4E this would both be houserules as dragons are non spellcasting solo encounters.

Another thing. Those who say that dragons casting spells are rare in real life mythology should consider that dragons having minions is even more rare.







> I don't see what is arbitrary about giving the Dragon the stats/traps etc required and jotting down a note that these derived from Rituals. This has nothing to do with GM "cheating" by changing the combat stats mid-encounter.




It is arbitrary when the DM does not have any limits on what the dragon has. Say he does set up trapped lairs, spy networks etc. and explains everything with "the dragon has rituals for that". Now the PCs find a loophole. Can the dragon now counteract the loophole with the rituals it has? No matter how the DMs decides it is arbitrary.


----------



## The Little Raven (Jan 18, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> It is arbitrary when the DM does not have any limits on what the dragon has. Say he does set up trapped lairs, spy networks etc. and explains everything with "the dragon has rituals for that". Now the PCs find a loophole. Can the dragon now counteract the loophole with the rituals it has? No matter how the DMs decides it is arbitrary.




This goes beyond "dragons need spellcaster stats to have lairs/minions" into "should clever players get away with clever things you don't plan for, even if it severely reduces the challenge of an encounter?"

And the answer is yes.


----------



## Derren (Jan 18, 2008)

Mourn said:
			
		

> This goes beyond "dragons need spellcaster stats to have lairs/minions" into "should clever players get away with clever things you don't plan for, even if it severely reduces the challenge of an encounter?"




Not really. When a dragon has clear rules which "utility" think it can and can't do this question doesn't really come up. When the DM gives the dragon arbitrary powers there is always the question of "wouldn't such a intelligent dragon not also have an ability for this?"


----------



## The Little Raven (Jan 18, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Not really. When a dragon has clear rules which "utility" think it can and can't do this question doesn't really come up. When the DM gives the dragon arbitrary powers there is always the question of "wouldn't such a intelligent dragon not also have an ability for this?"




You're not talking about just explaining away the existing traps, lairs, and minions that you've made as part of your encounter as previously-used rituals, you're talking about a DM changing things about the encounter on the fly because their previous plans aren't working out.


----------



## Derren (Jan 18, 2008)

Mourn said:
			
		

> You're not talking about just explaining away the existing traps, lairs, and minions that you've made as part of your encounter as previously-used rituals, you're talking about a DM changing things about the encounter on the fly because their previous plans aren't working out.




Its not only the DM changing games in mid game which is problematic. Not changing things also is.
With statted out abilities the Dm can look over this abilities and decide if some of those abilities would be useful in this new situation.

When there are no such printed out abilities the DM can either "cheat" or devalue the opponents without knowing if it is appropriate.
No matter what the DM does it is arbitrary and imo problematic.


----------



## Lackhand (Jan 18, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Its not only the DM changing games in mid game which is problematic. Not changing things also is.
> With statted out abilities the Dm can look over this abilities and decide if some of those abilities would be useful in this new situation.
> 
> When there are no such printed out abilities the DM can either "cheat" or devalue the opponents without knowing if it is appropriate.
> No matter what the DM does it is arbitrary and imo problematic.



That advice falls strictly under the purview of the "designing an adventure" heading. It has surprisingly little to do with dragons.


----------



## Dausuul (Jan 18, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> Its not only the DM changing games in mid game which is problematic. Not changing things also is.
> With statted out abilities the Dm can look over this abilities and decide if some of those abilities would be useful in this new situation.
> 
> When there are no such printed out abilities the DM can either "cheat" or devalue the opponents without knowing if it is appropriate.
> No matter what the DM does it is arbitrary and imo problematic.




Or, the DM can stat out the dragon's "nonstandard" abilities before the game and then stick to those abilities.  Like giving the dragon class levels, only with less number-crunching.  Every good DM I've ever played with has house-ruled and homebrewed things.  I would never, ever want to play under a DM who thought the published rulebooks were the immutable Word of God.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jan 18, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> It is arbitrary when the DM does not have any limits on what the dragon has. Say he does set up trapped lairs, spy networks etc. and explains everything with "the dragon has rituals for that". Now the PCs find a loophole. Can the dragon now counteract the loophole with the rituals it has? No matter how the DMs decides it is arbitrary.



The DM has the responsibility to decide which rituals the Dragon has access to before the adventure begins. It is the same type of responsibility as picking the Sorceror spells a 3.5 Dragon knows. 

Then, sometimes DMs screw up and miss something important. It's the DMs responsibility to decide whether the Dragon wasn't smarter then him and retroactively gives him access to the right spell or ritual, or whether he decides that it's better for the game if the players get to outsmart the Dragon.

Over the course of the campaign, is possible that the Dragons picks up new Rituals, if the PCs use a loophole (without killing him) and he takes note of it. Which seems a fair lot easier then learning a new spell for Dragons in 3.5. And also adds yet another plot hook (stop the Dragon from performing/gaining access to the ritual that brings his plans back on track)


----------



## pemerton (Jan 18, 2008)

Derren said:
			
		

> They are very often masterminds or at least have trapped lairs and magical wards. But without magic there is no way that they could have placed this wards. So either every dragon has magic or every dragon has minions. In 4E this would both be houserules as dragons are non spellcasting solo encounters.



Two responses:

1) It doesn't follow from the fact that a 4e monster is not a spellcaster that it does not have use of magic. I doubt, for example, that demons will typically be spellcasters but I'm sure that they will have the use of magic.

2) The fact that a monster is (in the metagame sense) a solo monster does not remotely imply that (ingame) it has no minions. All it means is that the game plays best when the PCs do not have to fight the minions and the boss in the same combat. For the typical dragon, and the typical minion-set that has been suggested in this thread and the companion challenge thread, that should be very easy for the GM to arrange (eg first one clears the warrens of kobolds, then one goes and fights the dragon mastermind).



			
				Derren said:
			
		

> It is arbitrary when the DM does not have any limits on what the dragon has. Say he does set up trapped lairs, spy networks etc. and explains everything with "the dragon has rituals for that". Now the PCs find a loophole. Can the dragon now counteract the loophole with the rituals it has? No matter how the DMs decides it is arbitrary.



Others have dealt with this comment to my satisfaction!


----------

