| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| Amaril09-14-06, 12:19 AM | OK, seriously. Is it too much to ask for Expanded Psionics compliant 3.5 Gem Dragons? How many opportunities has Wizards of the Coast had to update gem dragons and/or include content for Sardior? Let's count! An Expanded Psionics Handbook Web Enhancement Draconomicon Web Enhancement Races of the Dragon Races of the Dragon Web Enhancement Complete Psionic Complete Psionic Web Enhancement Dragons of Faerun (even though I don't care for Forgotten Realms and despite the inclusion of a single specific gem dragon) Dragons of Faerun Web Enhancement Dragon Magic (despite the mentioning of gem dragons and a gem dragon PrC) The Mind's Eye Monster Manual IV Did I forget anything? Seriously, I'm not one to randomly @#$% about something, but this is getting ridiculous. Come on, WotC. Throw us a bone here!:rant: [Edit: OK, to be fair, I took out Draconomicon since it was released before the Expanded Psionics Handbook, but that doesn't mean a second (later) Web Enhancement for the Draconomicon could not have included gem dragons.] |
| Tempest Stormwind09-14-06, 12:40 AM | There's an MM2 3.5 update doc that updates the majority of their text to 3.5. All that's left is the psionic elements. Strictly speaking, you missed The Mind's Eye as well, although Mark made it clear post-revision that he and Scott wouln't focus too much on updating old material. The stuff they DID update is among the best stuff they've done -- and more likely to be used in a game than a gem dragon, you have to admit. On a side note, this is exactly why UTP contains psionic dragons... We couldn't use the gem dragons or Sardior, so we invented our own and tied them to the mental side of psionics rather than the crystalline side. |
| Dr_Draco09-14-06, 02:22 AM | Yeah, that's always bugged me, too... But until something official is done, I'll continue to use RavinRay's 3.5 Gem Dragon Update (http://www.geocities.com/originalravinray/dnd/psionics/main.html). Check it out, it's well thought out and well done :). |
| RavinRay09-14-06, 07:01 AM | Thanks for the vote of confidence Doc; and Amaril and I are just dying for the Monster Gift Set to come out as the MM2, MM3, and FF will all be completely 3.5 compliant, and we hope that includes psionics! |
| Yak of Darkness09-14-06, 02:27 PM | Did I forget anything?Monster Manual IV. |
| highbulp09-14-06, 08:09 PM | There's an MM2 3.5 update doc that updates the majority of their text to 3.5. All that's left is the psionic elements. Do you have a link to this Stormwind? I don't think I saw it on the website. EDIT: NM, I found it. |
| Amaril09-14-06, 08:11 PM | Click on Game Rules on the left. Then go to 3.5 Update Booklets. |
| RavinRay10-15-06, 09:35 AM | Ok, now we got confirmation that the MM2 isn't updated as regards psionics, here's what I'm gonna do. I'll make a PDF of my update, then send it to either Mark, Bruce, or customer service. And while I'm at it, I'll gift Mark with the entire Legend of Sardior series in 3.5 format, plus a proposal of my own. |
| Ra-Tiel10-15-06, 01:08 PM | Ok, now we got confirmation that the MM2 isn't updated as regards psionics, here's what I'm gonna do. I'll make a PDF of my update, then send it to either Mark, Bruce, or customer service. And while I'm at it, I'll gift Mark with the entire Legend of Sardior series in 3.5 format, plus a proposal of my own. Now we have already come to the point where we not only pay WotC for their books, but also do the work for them? :rolleyes: |
| Nifft10-15-06, 01:13 PM | Now we have already come to the point where we not only pay WotC for their books, but also do the work for them? :rolleyes: Welcome to the age of Intellectual Feudalism! :D It's good to own the property. -- N |
| Vloorshad10-15-06, 01:42 PM | Now we have already come to the point where we not only pay WotC for their books, but also do the work for them? :rolleyes: It's probably the only way we'll get any Psionic updates. |
| Thanatos-Omega10-15-06, 02:26 PM | Not to mention Good edited material :D who's complaining though, it's obvious they won't/can't do it right so why not allow the Psi community to do it proper. UT/ My Forum is the case in point i believe. :P TO |
| yrogerg10-15-06, 03:05 PM | Monster Manual IV. And you know what's ironic? With all the rehashing of old monsters that have already been fully 3.5-updated and then filling the book of pages and pages of these monsters with class levels, Gem dragons would have been the one repeated monster that wouldn't have been a complete waste of space. |
| Lina_Inverse10-15-06, 06:13 PM | Sardior? Dont insult gem dragons like that. |
| Amaril10-15-06, 07:52 PM | Dont insult gem dragons like that. I'm not following your meaning. |
| Tralan10-16-06, 07:14 PM | I'd love one massive web enhancement of nothing but Gem Dragon meterial. It'd include 3.5 updates, some specific Gem Dragons, more Sardior stuff (you can never have too much Sardior), stuff like that. Heck, i'd even like a couple more psionic dragon varieties. Not just gem based, either. Mind's Eye had a download of some of their old stuff. The Sardior stuff was nice, as were the Obsidian Dragons. |
| RavinRay10-16-06, 08:42 PM | If Wizards approves this budding freelancer's admittedly ambitious project proposal, not only will the Legend of Sardior be finally updated to 3.5, but it will be updated to include three subpsionic gem dragons, three aquatic gem dragons, and one consort and one vassal for Sardior's court. |
| Full_Moon_Draw10-17-06, 07:51 AM | Greetings Oh Hearald of Saridor, Just finished going over the Gem Dragon Project as part of my Council of the Wyrms (COW) conversion update - no doubt I'll post these few observations over at ENWORLD at some point. But as I'm passing through the Wizards boards & found this thread alive & fresh - I thought that I'd post them here 1st. Just three points I guess. [EDIT - Whoops slightly more than 3!] 1. I don't like the re-introduction of spell-like invisibility as psionic-invisibility (I know - it's my personal "bug a boo" & no one else cares! but I do have to keep on) - only in the D&D3.0 psionics handbook do the two abilities have the same capability! Other than that, psionic invisibility has always been "different" I know - this is a personal thing & no doubt we'll agree to disagree. But I think that the duergar update was a mistake that we shouldn't perpetuate! 2. The web update of MM2 seems to indicate that all Gem Dragons have Planar Travel (no where does it say how often they can use it) & that it's now a Psionic[Sp] ability. The Gem Dragon project doesn't seem to cover this. 3. Gem Dragons are given attack & defence modes for free. Though the rules don't indicate at what point these abilities are granted, I've always ruled that they are granted when the Dragon acquires a manifester level. The Gem Dragon project doesn't seem to cover this point either. 4. Just an observation really (please don't shoot me) but I kind of felt that virtual power point system seems a little over complicated (may be it's just me being a tad slow or some such?) I'd have gone with something along the lines of: If a Dragon has a psi-like ability & no power point reserve (i.e. no actual Psion level) then he may manifest that ability un-augmented a given number of times per day as indicated in the write up. However if the Dragon has a power point reserve (i.e. has levels of Psion) he may augment that ability as applicable within the limits of his power point reserve & manifester level. It is also worth noting that a Dragon's psi-like abilities are given a manifester level. If that Manifester level is higher than his actual level in the Psion class, he may ONLY use that higher level for the manifestation of psionic-like abilities NOT powers he gains through levels of Psion. No doubt I've missed the point in a couple of cases - may be you can put me straight? In any case, I did promise a comment or obseration or two & here they are. Cheers - FMD PS - Re: your comment over on ENWORLD about the new relative strangth of the Amythyst & the Topaz. You are of course spot on - they are a LOT closer in termsof real power! I've gone back as far as Dragon 36 where the Gem Dragons originally appeared & the Topaz has ALWAYS been significantly weaker than the Amythyst (who after all is supposed to be the Gold/Red of the Gem Dragon brand) - I can't imagine why this decision was taken in conversion! But for the purposes of my COW conversion - I'm going to have to address it! :confused: PPS - Obviously I don't apply my comments to the Obsidien or Ectoplasmic Dragon - they are outside the scope of any expertise that I might claim to possess! Incidentally though - whilse searching the Dragon archive - I came across the "original" obsidien Dragon, it wasn't a psionic or gem dragon at all!!;) |
| RavinRay10-17-06, 08:15 PM | I think that, for CoW, we can customize the gem dragons. After all, Margaret Weis did say in dragonlanceforums.com that Krynnish dragons are different from MM dragons, and even their physical appearance as shown in the DLCS art gallery are apparent. With that mind... 1. We can spell out the amethyst dragon's invisibility ability to allow it to retain the features of the older versions of invisibility. 2. Restore the amethyst dragon as the strongest gem dragon, in which case it should have the highest HD, CR, and size progressions. As far as real-world gems go, emeralds are highest, followed by sapphire, amethyst, topaz, and quartz (crystal). Amethyst was the 5th cardinal or precious gemstone after diamond, ruby, emerald, and sapphire, but declined in value after it was discovered in abundance in the 20th century. While we're at it, the topaz and crystal dragons should be Tiny as wyrmlings (like copper, brass, black, and white dragons); the crystal dragon breath weapon should increase by 1 die only per age category (like brass and white); and their psionic levels should start at juvenile age. 3. I deliberately did not add the updated attack/defense modes because I was unsure which ones to use and at what age category to add them (wyrmling?) and still retain their CR. Well, that's my take on it. |
| Full_Moon_Draw10-18-06, 09:29 AM | 1. We can spell out the amethyst dragon's invisibility ability to allow it to retain the features of the older versions of invisibility. Well - it's not that it's older is more that 3.0 invisibility was a hickup (IMHO that is!) I suspect that the BIG mistake in AD&D Psionics was to call the Psionic Discipline Invisibility in the 1st place - If they had called it something else - we'd not have a reason to debate this at all. Oh well, wishful thinking!! 2. Restore the amethyst dragon as the strongest gem dragon, in which case it should have the highest HD, CR, and size progressions. As far as real-world gems go, emeralds are highest, followed by sapphire, amethyst, topaz, and quartz (crystal). Amethyst was the 5th cardinal or precious gemstone after diamond, ruby, emerald, and sapphire, but declined in value after it was discovered in abundance in the 20th century. While we're at it, the topaz and crystal dragons should be Tiny as wyrmlings (like copper, brass, black, and white dragons); the crystal dragon breath weapon should increase by 1 die only per age category (like brass and white); and their psionic levels should start at juvenile age. Tempted as I am to get into the numbers & nerf things back to a more actrate tranlation - I fear that It would make things too difficult for people who just want to play the game! So I'll probably just mention the Topaz's enhancement under 3.5 & leave it at that! Mind you, a quick & dirty nerf easily comes to mind - that might restore the balance would be to change "Amythyst telekenisis" & "Explosive Gem" from 1/day to "at will!!" What do you think - would this work or badly unbalance the whole apple cart? I agree that the balance between the breeds has shifted all over the place within the Gem Dragons (I suspect that the same is true of the Chromatics & the Metallics - but I simply don't have the heart to go & check) Why a more faithful conversion wasn't carried out I don't know! The Gem Dragons weren't brocken - so why were they "fixed"? 3. I deliberately did not add the updated attack/defense modes because I was unsure which ones to use and at what age category to add them (wyrmling?) and still retain their CR. Hmm, I know what you mean - as "at will" they are probably unbalancing but at "1/day" may be the CRs can be left as they are?. I think I'd work with my "acquired at manifester level" if they were "at will" or go with "acquired at Wyrmling" if they were "1/day"? Well, that's my take on it. Just two more thoughts for your consideration: 1. What about Planar travel? - Or is that power an "abomination" that you'd rather leave well alone :) For the COW conversion it's not something that I'd use (it changes the nature of Gem Dragons too dramatically - but it might be colour that some COW DMs would like to add?) - but for a 3.5 rendition of the Gem Dragon, I can't simply ignore it. 2. Is my alternative to Virtual Power Points viable or did I misunderstand the original? Anyway - I appreciate you taking time to look at all this, It's good to talk these things over! I have rather been "flying solo" with my COW conversion & it's great to get some feed back even if it's just on this Gem Dragon Psionics issue! Cheers - FMD |
| Full_Moon_Draw10-23-06, 04:35 AM | No comment oh worthy hearald? Cheers - FMD |
| RavinRay10-26-06, 02:04 AM | I've been wandering the Planes and just got back to the Material Plane after discovering a diwįtang usā in the Spirit World. Amethyst telekinesis usable at will seems too strong for me, considering how heavy a load the dragon can lift/push, and no great wyrm ability for any dragon is usable more than 1/day. The explosive gem, though, is more acceptable. If I could house rule, I'd say the former defense modes would automatically come into use whenever the dragon is the target of a mind-affecting effect, whether magical or psionic. Can't say something about the former attack modes at this point though, my mind's hit a blank. So perhaps they can supernatural abilities that can be acquired at the dragon's age when it is a psion 1. I'll get back later. Just sneaking this in at work! |
| Full_Moon_Draw10-27-06, 11:52 AM | Greetings Oh Hearald, I have no doubt that our Gem Dragons would find good eating on one of those diwįtang usā ;) Though Mayhap the meal would not be worthy of the effort required to consume it? Anyway - I look forward to hearing your thoughts on these matters! I suspected that unlimited Amythyst Telekenisis would be "a bit much" but hey - it would certainly remind them thar upity Topaz types of their place :P Regards - Hear more from you when you have reaquinted yourself with the Prime!! I'm particularly interested in your opinion of my "simplfied" augmentation proposal!! Cheers - FMD |
| OzyBurrfoot11-07-06, 04:32 PM | Couldnt someone take the Psionic Handbook's Web Enhancement and the 3.5 Acessory Update Booklet and update these already? I am curious about the legality of posting it though. If its all OGL, then I'm going to suggest it to the online SRD sites. |
| Amaril11-07-06, 04:58 PM | Couldnt someone take the Psionic Handbook's Web Enhancement and the 3.5 Acessory Update Booklet and update these already? I am curious about the legality of posting it though. If its all OGL, then I'm going to suggest it to the online SRD sites. Its not OGL. That's the problem. |
| OzyBurrfoot11-07-06, 05:02 PM | :raincloud Well thats stupid. Its available for anyone to download both the old stats and the revisions. And I'm not even suggesting some does this to get money, just to appease some fans. Grrr... thats agitating. I guess I'll have to just do my own work and settle for that.:censored: |
| benstundze11-07-06, 05:10 PM | id be cool hehe |
| RavinRay11-07-06, 07:40 PM | Here's what I put in the disclaimer for my update. The gem dragons themselves are not OGC, even though the powers I used for their psi-like abilities are. I think it's reasonable to post a minimal set of stats, just to show what's changed, and nothing else. It's like the 3.5 revision booklet for MM2; it's pretty much useless unless you have the MM2 to begin with. Anyway, I've made it a PDF and sent it to someone at Wizards for them to look over. |
| Siberys11-07-06, 10:03 PM | If Wizards approves this budding freelancer's admittedly ambitious project proposal, not only will the Legend of Sardior be finally updated to 3.5, but it will be updated to include three subpsionic gem dragons, three aquatic gem dragons, and one consort and one vassal for Sardior's court. If this and the update of the core gem dragons actually came to be as a wizards article, I'd wet my pants. Seriously. Please, please, PLEASE do this!!! lotta work, though... :ton: cheers, Siberys |
| Amaril11-07-06, 10:05 PM | Anyway, I've made it a PDF and sent it to someone at Wizards for them to look over. Have they responded to it at all? Even if it's just, "Yeah, we got it. We'll look it over. Thanks." |
| yonman11-08-06, 01:58 PM | Thanks for the vote of confidence Doc; and Amaril and I are just dying for the Monster Gift Set to come out as the MM2, MM3, and FF will all be completely 3.5 compliant, and we hope that includes psionics! Monster Gift Set??? I haven't heard of this before, is WotC reprinting all of the monster manuals to v3.5? If so, when is it coming out? |
| RavinRay11-08-06, 07:26 PM | Yonman, the gift set is merely a re-packaging from Amazon.com and other retailers of MM2, MM3, and FF in a slip-case cover like the core rulebooks or Races sets. No updates whatsoever. Amaril, I'm just waiting... |
| RavinRay11-23-06, 05:54 AM | Here's what I found out from Dragons of Faerūn. Two gem dragons are statted, an adult crystal dragon and a very old topaz dracolich. The crystal dragon is statted as follows: Spell-Like (or Psi-Like, if using psionics) Ability (CL 5th [or ML 5th if using psionics]): 3/day—charm person (DC 14) (or psionic charm [DC 14] if using psionics) The topaz dracolich is statted as follows: Psi-Like Abilities (ML 13th): 2/day—feather fall Spell-Like Abilities (CL 13th): 2/day—control winds (DC 23), fog cloud As you can see, the default stats for the crystal dragon uses (Sp) abilities over (Ps), while the topaz dragon uses both. Until psionics are treated as core and gem dragons are finally officially updated (and hopefully added to the SRD in the future), this mix of state of affairs will persist. |
| lurking_archmage11-23-06, 09:48 AM | I also seem to notice that the Amethyst dragon seems to be a bit shafted as per its progeny... A red half-dragon is immune to fire, a blue half-dragon is immune to electricity... but an amethyst half-dragon doesn't seem to be immune to force effects... Are there THAT many force effects out there that the designers are afraid to grant that kind of ability?? I mean, geez. ( can't remember the exact reference, I think I saw this in Dragon Magic or Races of the Dragon ... probably the latter. But many dragon progeny of non-chromatic/non-metallic dragon types got the shaft, some don't even get a second ability... :( ) |
| RavinRay11-23-06, 06:53 PM | Well, the amethyst dragon has poison immunity, which I guess is due to the belief that amethysts protect one from drunkeness (alcohol is considered a poison in D&D). This is from the myth of Amethyst, a nymph pursued by the god Dionysus and transformed into a statue to protect her from his advances. In remorse, he wept tears of wine over her statue, staining it violet. The dragon does not have force immunity, instead it has a +4 bonus on saving throws versus force effects, but this is not passed on to a half-amethyst dragon, only poison immunity. |
| Siberys12-29-06, 02:39 AM | Any news on this? Shameless :bump: |
| Nitan12-29-06, 03:52 AM | I'm pretty sure Wizards has a "no look" policy on unsolicited materials to prevent legal issues. |
| RavinRay12-29-06, 08:48 PM | In which case, the best we can hope for is something like variant dragon abilities in Dragon Magic, where the abilities listed in MM2 are replaced by their XPH equivalents (where applicable). And as for that "no look" policy, the analogy's imperfect, but it is customer feedback, both solicited and unsolicited, that made Wizards put out version 3.5 in the first place. Can't it apply a similar reasoning here? |
| TheDarkLord12-29-06, 09:03 PM | I for one think there are way to many dragons anyway. I see no need for any updates on them. What next a rainbow dragon? Seriously, why do you need more than three types of True Dragon (Air, Earth, Water). |
| Lykos12-29-06, 09:28 PM | I for one think there are way to many dragons anyway. I see no need for any updates on them. What next a rainbow dragon? Seriously, why do you need more than three types of True Dragon (Air, Earth, Water). Because are cool... thats why. Also, in my homebrew world i have gem dragons that interact with my pcs and they are really want how to use their new 3.5 abilities! ;) |
| Lycanthromancer12-29-06, 09:29 PM | Um...fire? I mean, it's the archetypical dragon-type, after all. Then there's electricity and acid. Where's my sonic dragon? |
| Bacris12-29-06, 09:37 PM | Seriously, why do you need more than three types of True Dragon (Air, Earth, Water). Why do we need more than the fighter, rogue, cleric, and wizard? Variety is the spice of life, man! |
| ssvegeta55512-29-06, 11:48 PM | Seriously, why do you need more than three types of True Dragon (Air, Earth, Water). Gem dragons play a huge role in my CS. They are all ****** off at almost every person on the planet. Plus dragons rule! |
| TheDarkLord12-30-06, 12:19 AM | Yes yes, let's get out all the cheap shots. Let the Dragons have more than one breath type. Air dragons get Electricty and Sonic, Earth dragons get Fire and Acid, Water Dragons get Cold and Force. Their colors and alignments can vary depending on the climate the dragon is living in. And cool? Eh, a creature that probably shouldn't fly, looks like my mother-in-law on a good day, and for some reason can't rule the world even though they supposedly have legendary intellect and wisdom? That's cool? I'm not saying you can't have 5000 types of dragons in your world, but seriously, how many dragons can you have and hope for the rest of the worlds population to survive? One advanced great red wyrm with the right spells should be able to destroy entire nations and remain unseen. That goes for the Crystal dragons as well. |
| Lykos12-30-06, 05:32 AM | Yes yes, let's get out all the cheap shots. Let the Dragons have more than one breath type. Air dragons get Electricty and Sonic, Earth dragons get Fire and Acid, Water Dragons get Cold and Force. Their colors and alignments can vary depending on the climate the dragon is living in. And cool? Eh, a creature that probably shouldn't fly, looks like my mother-in-law on a good day, and for some reason can't rule the world even though they supposedly have legendary intellect and wisdom? That's cool? I'm not saying you can't have 5000 types of dragons in your world, but seriously, how many dragons can you have and hope for the rest of the worlds population to survive? One advanced great red wyrm with the right spells should be able to destroy entire nations and remain unseen. That goes for the Crystal dragons as well. Hehe... you forget that we play in a fantasy world. Dragons maybe have vast powers but they are not the only ones with such powers in my world. Again, in my homeworld, i have only 15 dragons (3 of each type) and they are pretty able have kingdoms of their own (some actually have). But, as someone said above, we need the many types dragons (even if we dont use these) becasue they add flavour and they are source of inspiration. And as i see i am not the only one that thought gem dragons are suitable for his "world". Hey, instead of the 65763th spawn of Tiamat, i would prefer our only 5 psionic gem dragons. |
| RavinRay12-31-06, 12:07 AM | If history is to be the arbiter, then gem dragons deserve to be updated because they and Sardior have been around longer than any other true dragon outside of the ten original chromatic and metallic dragons, and Bahamut and Tiamat of the classic Monster Manual. They first appeared in Dragon #37 (http://paizo.com/dragon/products/issues/1980/37) (May 1980). Lung dragons (save for the chiang lung and tun mi lung), then known as oriental dragons, appeared in the original Fiend Folio (1981). Monster Manual 2 (1983) showcased the two "nephic" dragons (cloud dragon and mist dragon), the shadow dragon, and the faerie dragon (then classified as, in 3e terminology, a true dragon). As we can see, the Dragon article precedes the other two. Mention of Sardior precedes that of all the other dragon deities aside from Bahamut and Tiamat, and he's been given full official deific stats, thanks to Mark and Scott. In the 2e Monstrous Manual, the gem dragons are listed in the main dragon entry along with the chromatic and metallic dragons, giving them de facto equal status in the game along with the "nephic" dragons, "aberrant" metallic and chromatic dragons (mercury, steel, brown, and yellow). Their psionic abilities were more clearly defined (while simultaneously retaining magical skills). And now gem dragons, while not as prominent, are present in Faerūn, and Volo's Wyrms of the North series mentioned one prominent individual from each of the five species. I'm not familiar with Eberron, but I'm hoping that gem dragons will somehow play a role in Sarlona. Metallic and chromatic dragons are reputed as master arcane spellcasters. Incarnum has an iconic eponymously-named dragon. While many hold illithid as the very symbol of psionics, why shouldn't gem dragons be regarded as the epitome and be updated as well? |
| (Psi)SeveredHead12-31-06, 02:14 PM | Gem Dragons are so easy to convert to 3.5 that we could do that, practically in our sleep. Only one dragon (I think it's the sapphire dragon) would create any significant difficulty. While many hold illithid as the very symbol of psionics, why shouldn't gem dragons be regarded as the epitome and be updated as well? Because psionic dragons are kind of a rip-off of a magical creature. Illithids are unique*. Psionic dragons are cool, but they're not unique. * There is a magical rip-off of mind flayers, but psionics isn't core rules, so they had to use a magical version in the MM. |
| starwed12-31-06, 04:32 PM | Lung dragons (save for the chiang lung and tun mi lung), then known as oriental dragons, appeared in the original Fiend Folio (1981). To be fair, everything in the FF had previously been published elsewhere, so they might in fact precede the gem dragon article in dragon. I think it lists the original source in the folio itself, though, so we can find out for sure if someone has a copy. (Mine is stowed at my folks house along w/ all my other old edition stuff.) |
| RavinRay12-31-06, 07:26 PM | Actually, you're right. After checking my source (Sulerin's monster index), the six original oriental dragons did appear in Dragon #24. Still, gem dragons are, for me, more prominent. Gem Dragons are so easy to convert to 3.5 that we could do that, practically in our sleep. There are people who are sticklers for official conversions, though. |
| Lykos01-04-07, 09:12 PM | .. |
| Vloorshad01-05-07, 12:20 AM | Actually, you're right. After checking my source (Sulerin's monster index), the six original oriental dragons did appear in Dragon #24. Still, gem dragons are, for me, more prominent. There are people who are sticklers for official conversions, though. And there are places that require official conversions. Oh well, maybe I'm just tired of the half-assed treatment. |
| Lykos01-12-07, 02:32 PM | And there are places that require official conversions. Oh well, maybe I'm just tired of the half-assed treatment. I have to agree with you! Although i am very pleased with the WotC materials, I have to say that Gem Dragons should be converted! |
| Lykos01-24-07, 05:54 PM | Now that we know that one of the future projects will be "Dragons of Eberon" do you think we will see a revamp of Gem Dragons? (i dont know Eberron setting except that has an amount psionic...) |
| RavinRay05-06-07, 11:10 PM | Ok, I've put my gem dragon psionics update into a PDF (http://boards1.wizards.com/leaving.php?destination=http://www.geocities.com/originalravinray/dnd/psionics/Gem_Dragon_psionics.pdf), but there is still one unresolved issue for me. If anyone wants to comment, join in. If you haven't done so yet, download the web enhancement (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/we/we20010330a) for the original Psionics Handbook, where the 3.0 stats of the gem dragons as written by Bruce Cordell are, so that you'll have a basis of comparison with their Monster Manual II stats. When Bruce converted the gem dragons from 2e to 3e, he did more than updated their stats. He also re-arranged the hierarchy, so that the amethyst dragon, once the most powerful of the gem dragons (as evidenced by its role in the classic Council of Wyrms), was relegated to second- or even third-fiddle (swapping places with the emerald dragon depending on whether you're using the Legend of Sardior or Dragon Magic), while the topaz dragon, arguable the second weakest, is now the most powerful. In doing so, he removed the amethyst dragon's wild shape-based polymorphing ability and gave it to the topaz dragon, which now has two shape-changing abilities, polymorph self and metamorphosis, but the web enhancement does not indicate at what age topaz dragons gained polymorph self, however. Thematically it makes sense for the topaz dragon to be able to shape-shift; the three most powerful metallic dragons, gold, silver and bronze, are able to polymorph from wyrmling or young age, so the most power gem dragon should have it as well (though neither red nor blue dragons have it, but I digress). However, looking at the MM II stats, Steve Winter's re-write gives the topaz dragon only the shapechange power, and only at great wyrm age. So topaz dragons have to wait until they are great wyrms before they can inherently shapechange. That didn't make sense to me. I don't know if either Bruce or Steve meant for the topaz dragon to wait that long, but it I think it needs to be fixed. Actually, the topaz and silver dragons have identical stats in numerous places and comparable in power. So why should one species be able to polymorph from birth while the other has to be really, really old to do so? Furthermore, it is a psi-like ability for the topaz dragon, not a supernatural as it is for every other dragon that has alternate form (gold, silver, bronze, mercury, steel, some planar dragons, deep, song, and hex and tome dragons). I wonder whether, as psionic dragons, topaz dragons should be distinguished from the others by being able to assume objects and creature types other than animal or humanoid, with a greater HD and size limit, as the trade-off for gaining this ability at great wyrm age. But if they are meant to change shape just like other dragons, then they should instead have alternate form as a supernatural ability at a wyrmling age, with the wording referring to metamorphosis. This is gonna be a somewhat drastic re-write for the topaz dragon, but witness the re-writes of the archfiends from BoVD to the two Fiendish Codexes. Oh, and a little sidebar. in Eberron, topaz dragons should have psionic control weather instead of control weather, because the latter is a power in the Eberron book Secrets of Sarlona. |
| CrimsonDeath05-07-07, 06:43 PM | I'd never heard of this web enhancement before. I was using the stats from the MM2, modified by its 3.5 update. Which source is more valid, the MM2 or the web enhancement? |
| RavinRay05-07-07, 08:42 PM | The MM II is newer than the web enhancement, so technically it is more valid; and the tables for the amethyst and topaz dragons are missing a few stats in the WE. The advantage of the WE however is that it was written specifically for the Psionics Handbook and thus left no room for a gem dragon that has sorcerous spellcasting instead of psionic manifesting levels, (except as a variant rule). Personally, I always run a gem dragon as fully psionic and not give it sorcerer levels. That's like making an arcane brain mole or crysmal IMO. |
| CrimsonDeath05-08-07, 04:12 AM | The gem dragons in the MM2 appear to have been written primarily for use with the Psionics Handbook as well. (They have attack and defense modes, they have preferred disciplines, and the Sapphire Dragon, who favors psychoportation, even has the Dexterity score to support it.) The only thing that even hints that they can be run without it is a sentence stating that many find their psionic abilities to be "indistinguishable from sorcery". For those people who dislike 3.0 psionics, it should be trivial to substitute the Expanded Psionics Handbook, since the writers didn't bother to provide a generic power selection and only vague suggestions for feats. |
| RavinRay05-08-07, 07:32 AM | Reading through the psionics (sp) paragraph on page 15 of the MM II, I'm of the opinion that the Psionics Handbook is only referenced as an option for those people that have it and wish make the gem dragons (as well as the braxat and thri-keen) fully comply with the then-existing psionics system. The psionic attack/defense modes and discipline lines were included to eliminate any guesswork for those people interested. In the interview (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ps/20010309a) for the Psionics Handbook, Bruce said that the book ran out of room for the gem dragons, hence the web enhancement. I speculate that had they appeared there, they might not have needed to appear in the MM II. Or maybe they would still have, anyway. Maybe the decision to include the gem dragons in the MM II was to make them more accessible to more people since the Wizo's figure that more folks would buy that book than the PsiBook 3.0. Of course, the trade-off is that they needed to be statted in such a way that the PsiBook is not necessary to run them; it's helpful, but not strictly necessary. And hence the situation regarding gem dragon psionics as they are now. I can say that it is not an entirely trivial task to update gem dragon psionics to the 3.5 psionics system, if you read the comments in my project for which there is a link in my sig. Edit: In case my sig doesn't show up, the updates with my comments are here (http://www.geocities.com/originalravinray/dnd/psionics/main.html). |
| RavinRay07-03-07, 09:56 PM | Ok, I just thought of a way to resolve the metamorphosis/alternate form conundrum for the topaz dragon. As posted earlier, I want it to have Alternate Form (Su) at wyrmling age, to match the silver dragon, but worded a bit differently. Alternate Form (Su): A topaz dragon can assume any animal or humanoid form of Medium size or smaller as a standard action three times per day. This ability functions as a metamorphosis power manifested at its manifester level, except that the dragon does not regain hit points for changing form and can only assume the form of an animal or humanoid. The dragon can remain in its animal or humanoid form until it chooses to assume a new form or return to its natural form. It's identical to the silver dragon's entry except for the reference to metamorphosis instead of polymorph. What about greater metamorphosis at great wyrm age? I folded it into alternate form, such that at that age the dragon can assume the forms of objects and other monster types with higher HD cap, but with the duration limitation. It would be written like: At great wyrm age, a topaz dragon can assume the form of any nonunique object or creature, subject to the duration and HD limitation of the greater metamorphosis power. In other words, a great topaz wyrm can choose to go beyond the traditional limitations of alternate form, but at the cost of a shorter duration, which counts against its use of alternate form. |
| RavinRay07-19-07, 08:00 PM | Gem Dragons as PCs Dragon article proposal! Ok, so this is slightly-OT, but Dragon Associate Editor Mike McArtor, who did the chromatic and metallic dragon PC articles for Dragon, just submitted a proposal for gem dragon PCs, as confirmed in this Metallic Dragons as PCs? (http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/dragon/generalDiscussion/metallicDragonsAsPCs) thread at Paizo: P.S. When do we get (3.5 psionic) Gem Dragons as PCs? Just as soon as Jason or Erik ask me for them. :) Which is probably just this side of never. :\ Pardon for reviving this thread, but with WotC reassuming publication, maybe now's a good time to do it Mike? Table 3-22 on page 144 of Draconomicon shows which chromatic or metallic dragon each gem dragon is comparable to, so I think it's a matter of modifying that dragon's PC table to match a gem dragon's abilities. Matter of fact, I'm experimenting on the topaz, emerald and sapphire by editing the tables of their counterparts. Pardon for reviving this thread, but with WotC reassuming publication, maybe now's a good time to do it Mike? Table 3-22 on page 144 of Draconomicon shows which chromatic or metallic dragon each gem dragon is comparable to, so I think it's a matter of modifying that dragon's PC table to match a gem dragon's abilities. Matter of fact, I'm experimenting on the topaz, emerald and sapphire by editing the tables of their counterparts. Oh... I'm sure a certain author of certain articles has sent a proposal to a certain company that is accepting queries... ;) Hmmm, is the Diplomacy check for me to convince you to tell me Who When Where too high, or is your Will save against my mind probe or read thoughts too good? ;) Hmmm, is the Diplomacy check for me to convince you to tell me Who When Where too high, or is your Will save against my mind probe or read thoughts too good? ;) Well I could play it a little less coy and say directly that, yes, I sent Chris Thomasson queries related to this. :) By Sardior, let's hope Chris accepts this! |
| Water_To_Fire07-20-07, 11:39 AM | This would make me very happy. It's too bad they've only got one issue left to put it in (unless they plan on putting it in the new online version). |
| Warforged Goblin07-20-07, 01:12 PM | Gem Dragons as PCs Dragon article proposal! Ok, so this is slightly-OT, but Dragon Associate Editor Mike McArtor, who did the chromatic and metallic dragon PC articles for Dragon, just submitted a proposal for gem dragon PCs, as confirmed in this Metallic Dragons as PCs? (http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/dragon/generalDiscussion/metallicDragonsAsPCs) thread at Paizo: By Sardior, let's hope Chris accepts this! With only a scant few issues left, do we have any hope on this? |
| Amaril07-20-07, 02:26 PM | With only a scant few issues left, do we have any hope on this? They are accepting submissions (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/news/20070711a) for the upcoming online versions. |
| RavinRay07-25-07, 08:49 AM | I just submitted an article proposal to Dragon for the psionics update, and got an auto-reply in seconds. Now, let's hope that, by Sardior, it gets accepted. |
| Bacris07-25-07, 09:52 AM | cool - hope it gets accepted, RavinRay :) And dang, 20% higher pay for the WotC submissions... I may have to start writing up some articles on Product Identity stuff (Ardent, Lurk, Kreen, etc...) |
| Nifft07-25-07, 07:43 PM | They are accepting submissions (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/news/20070711a) for the upcoming online versions. OOoooooo! Thank you, this is relevant to my interests (and habits). :) Cheers, -- N |
| Amaril07-25-07, 08:00 PM | You're welcome. :) |
| Water_To_Fire07-25-07, 08:27 PM | Anyone got ideas for an article I could write? |
| Amaril07-25-07, 08:34 PM | Anyone got ideas for an article I could write? If it hasn't been done already, Psionic Mantles associated with Sardior and the rest of the Draconic pantheon. |
| Water_To_Fire07-25-07, 08:38 PM | Those being the dragons gods found in Draconimicon/RotD? That could work. |
| Amaril07-25-07, 08:43 PM | Those being the dragons gods found in Draconimicon/RotD? That could work. Yep. I've been brewing an idea for a draconic campaign setting using Draconomicon, Races of the Dragon, and Dragon Magic. I'd like for the ExPsiHB and CPsi to fit into that setting, too. The entire campaign uses only the draconic pantheon including Sardior. |
| Water_To_Fire07-25-07, 09:28 PM | Is Sardior in one of those books? I don't seem to remember him. |
| Amaril07-25-07, 09:45 PM | Sardior is from the Mind's Eye articles. Here are the results (http://www.google.com/search?q=sardior+site%3Awww.wizards.com) from a Google site search for Sardior. You should start with the Legend of Sardior (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20030124a) and then continue with the following: Chosen of Sardior (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20030926a) Sardior's Knowledge (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20030926b) Aleithian Dwarves (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psb/20030926a) The Church of Sardior (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20040227a) Followers in the Church of Sardior (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20040327a) Ruby Disciple (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20030124c) |
| RavinRay07-25-07, 10:34 PM | Although it's unlikely, it would be nice if there's a mega gem dragon issue of Dragon. But hey, Paizo did a Dark Sun-themed Dragon, so can't we dream? After all, Sardior and the gem dragons did debut in Dragon #37. Putting in the Legend of Sardior series would need Mark and Scott's participation. (I've done the 3.5 updates on that, all it needs is for them to edit it.) Beyond that, this is what I want to see: Races of the draconic realm using the five gem dragons and five of the humanoid races in the XPsiHB: dromite, duergar, half-giant, maenad, xeph. Initiate of Sardior feat. "Dweomered" gem dragon scales. Dragonpacts for gem dragons and psions. My homebrew subpsionic gem dragons (jade, opal, turquoise) as the "missing gem dragons" counterparts to the "missing chromatic dragons" (orange, purple, yellow). I even have a backstory to fit them into a Legend of Sardior game. |
| Amaril07-25-07, 10:38 PM | Races of the draconic realm using the five gem dragons and five of the humanoid races in the XPsiHB: dromite, duergar, half-giant, maenad, xeph. I'm curious about this one. Can you elaborate on this? |
| RavinRay07-25-07, 10:54 PM | Remember Chapter 1 in Dragon Magic where several humanoid races swapped inherited some draconic abilities from a particular dragon species in exchange for some of their own inherent abilities (sort of inspired from the draconic bloodlines in Unearthed Arcana)? For instance, a silverbrow human can use feather fall (Sp) but has no bonus skill points. I'm thinking of doing the same thing for the gem dragons and the psionic humanoid races. Maenads live in coastal areas, and topaz dragons live in watery environments, so maybe maenads can have water breathing (Ex) in exchange for their outburst (Ex) ability. I'm trying to match each race with each dragon, this is what I've come up tentatively: amethyst dragon: xeph, both live underground or in deep valleys crystal dragon: dromite, as a cold caste of dromites might live alongside the crystals emerald dragon: half-giant, as the emeralds might dwell in dormant volcanoes near the semi-desert homes of half-giants sapphire dragon: duergar, since both are Underdark dwellers topaz dragon: maenad |
| Amaril07-25-07, 10:59 PM | :lightbulb :cool: :clap: |
| Andramadus07-26-07, 08:15 AM | http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20040327a Best for a 1 level dip and you get a Gem Dragon.... Sweet! |