Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Callista 02-11-07, 12:49 AM	Was just IMing a friend of mine, who casually mentions that one of the fellow players in his game is playing a brass dragon...! His own character is level 15, so it's kind of a high level game. And the dragon is medium sized, don't know the age category. Apparently the halfling has been riding the dragon... why the dragon submits to such indignity, I have no idea. So here's my question: How in the world do you turn a dragon into a PC race? They've got to have absolutely huge LAs, with all those special abilities; and huge LAs equals underpowered... Not to mention the RP... how do you get a dragon to mesh with the usual motley group of adventurers? They've got to be rather inflexible creatures, anyhow, what with the absolute alignments and all. I can see half-dragons being adventurers. But... full-blooded dragons?
Salla 02-11-07, 12:51 AM	Dragon Magazines in the last couple of years have printed monster classes for playing pure dragons from levels 1 to 20, so he may well be doing that. As far as 'absolute alignments' go, that's iffy at best. Any intelligent creature can choose its own moral and ethical path, and even an 'always' alignment has its rare exceptions.
ShadowDragon8685 02-11-07, 12:51 AM	It's called the Draconomicon. Yes, it has rules for using Dragons as PCs.
kelvinaw273 02-11-07, 05:26 PM	Been there, done that! Had my ex-wife playing Bronze dragon in a campaign. A Brass dragon can work at around 5th level plus. What you need to do is sit down and work out an experience table a la Savage Species for the Dragon in question. The ECL for various ages is given as a yardstick, so it isn't too hard to add powers and stat increases in at non-HD levels. It takes a bit of time but is worth it. For my ex-wife I made the character 1/4 elf, so she could assume elf-form at will (saved on the non-humanoid form problems), and reduced the HD by 1 at each age level to compensate. For Dragons in a non-dragon party, I also ruled that once she reached her age level limit in hit dice she could not advance as a dragon until she reached the required age in years to go to the next age catagory, but could gain character levels instead. Once she reached that catagory she had to gain Dragon levels in priority to character levels again.
OneEye589 02-11-07, 08:01 PM	You can play a dragon as a PC race, for the first three or four age categories there is an LA. It's pricy along with the racial hit dice, I personally would never do it. Anyway, I wouldn't age the dragon at all (unless like 20 years passed), as that could boost the dragon's ECL up by 3 by just the age category. I'd just add class levels. It is totally possible, though.
Titan W 02-11-07, 08:13 PM	I've done it, and yeah, the racial HD are a pain, and since dragon age categories occur about as often as human ones it usually isn't a problem, the hardest part for me was calculating out the ability bonuses that would result for rolled stats, after that I just used class levels, there's a lot of ways to make it work and it usually varies from group to group how feasable it is, and what version of the methods you end up using.
Maekrix_Waere 02-11-07, 08:21 PM	I've done it, and yeah, the racial HD are a pain, and since dragon age categories occur about as often as human ones it usually isn't a problem, the hardest part for me was calculating out the ability bonuses that would result for rolled stats, after that I just used class levels, there's a lot of ways to make it work and it usually varies from group to group how feasable it is, and what version of the methods you end up using. On Racial Hit Dice-I personally think that the Dragon HD are actually nearly, if not, as good as class levels. 1d12, Good Saves, Good BAB, Good Skills. They are pretty good, and, frankly, if I could take class levels in Dragon HD, I would do so for all my frontline fighters, and maybe for some stealth based characters too. On Ability Adjustments-After subtracting for Ability Bonuses due to HD (use wyrmlings), subtract 10 from all even numbered abilities and subtract 11 from all odd numbered abilities. The remaining amounts are your ability adjustments.
goldjas 02-12-07, 01:43 AM	On Racial Hit Dice-I personally think that the Dragon HD are actually nearly, if not, as good as class levels. 1d12, Good Saves, Good BAB, Good Skills. They are pretty good, and, frankly, if I could take class levels in Dragon HD, I would do so for all my frontline fighters, and maybe for some stealth based characters too. On Ability Adjustments-After subtracting for Ability Bonuses due to HD (use wyrmlings), subtract 10 from all even numbered abilities and subtract 11 from all odd numbered abilities. The remaining amounts are your ability adjustments. Dragon HD as good as character levels? are you freaking crazy? Notice that a NPCs CR is equal to its HD in PC levels, but a dragons CR is almost double its HD, that right there says your wrong. I suppose someone could make a good argument for it being better then fighter, since all fighter basically gets you is feats, but besides that...no.
Titan W 02-12-07, 08:20 AM	They aren't bad HD, after you reach adult stage and start getting your spellcasting and a breath weapon that's on-par with a spell of your level, but before that they are just a hair short of class levels, however simply due to the better saves and HD they trump fighter every time.
Judging Eagle 02-12-07, 10:30 AM	I'd just Races of War it Callista. Any monster as a PC has a CR = Original monsters CR +1 Abilites and Stats need a bit more work, but it's really not that big of a deal. The straight classed characters are still good enough to hang with an appropriately CR'd dragon PC. They may in fact be a bit better, but who cares? As for the 'current' aka 'stupid' rules for using monster races as PC races: ECL, LA and all of the other 'ideals' associated with them needs to be dropped. Level Adjustment takes into account a monsters power(s); without taking into account their Hit Dice. Hit Dice takes into account a monsters power(s); without taking into account Level Adjustment. Which makes no sense since you're coming up with two numbers that don't take each other into account; then are added in arbitrary fashion. So, you have ... 'ecl' 16 Mindflayer PCs; and CR 8 Mindflayer NPCs. Since of course, a mindflayer geared as a PC is actually a challenge for 4 lvl 16 PCs? If it doesn't work both ways, then it never worked at all.
Sakaki22 02-12-07, 04:07 PM	I feel everyone else covered everything in your OP but one, so I'll touch on it. Apparently the halfling has been riding the dragon... why the dragon submits to such indignity, I have no idea. The one time I partied with a Dragon PC, I was a small character (Anthropomorphic Cat Wizard) and the Dragon decided to keep me on his head. I was typically out of damage range and had line of sight with everything, and he (as a PC and a character) thought it was cute. For "safe keeping" he eventually bought a straw hat, then eventually fortified it until I was in a sort of tank. All fun and games until an BBEG used Death By Thorns, trapping the Dragon in place (who made the save) and killing me. I believe after the fight the Dragon looked in his hat and the exact quote was something like "Ugh, aww..... *retch*" After resurrection I stayed mounted on the Dragon, but we ditched the hat.
Maekrix_Waere 02-12-07, 09:21 PM	Dragon HD as good as character levels? are you freaking crazy? Notice that a NPCs CR is equal to its HD in PC levels, but a dragons CR is almost double its HD, that right there says your wrong. I suppose someone could make a good argument for it being better then fighter, since all fighter basically gets you is feats, but besides that...no. I am guessing you meant-but a dragons HD is almost double its CR. I will not go into my discussion on the Dragon CR, as this is not the correct thread for it. However, I argued that the HD are good for things other than fighter mainly because of the HD size, the saves, and the BAB. I was arguing that I would be perfectly willing to spend a level or two for the mentioned benefits as any non-caster, and would do so for almost complete progression in frontline characters, only dipping out for a Barbarian rage or the first two levels of Fighter for bonus feats. I would NEVER make a character completely out of Dragon HD, because of the aforementioned bonuses I could gain by adding in a few levels of other classes..
Vaelan 02-12-07, 10:57 PM	So here's my question: How in the world do you turn a dragon into a PC race? They've got to have absolutely huge LAs, with all those special abilities; and huge LAs equals underpowered... That's easy: you ignore the rules. They simply do not work. I actually ran a game in which a silver dragon was a normal party member. The biggest problem was formulating the explanation of how dragons become more powerful that didn't make the entire premise ridiculous. Mechanically, the dragon gained a hitdie every time the other players went up a level. I split up what they would normally gain in their next age category into the hitdice they would gain in their next age category. This wasn't a big deal because dragons don't get their significant abilities in their first 20 hitdice. Sure, they get decent hitpoints, saves, and skill points, but their spellcasting is insignificant, they don't get all of their natural attacks until they get bigger, and their class skill list is certainly nothing to write home about. They also lack many of the equipment options of a normal PC, making their ability scores and natural AC fairly insignificant. The only meaningful abilities that a silver dragon gains are flight, breath weapons, and Alternate Form. While they can be problematic at times, they do not stop you from challenging a party.
kelvinaw273 02-12-07, 11:24 PM	In my experience of running an adventure with a dragon PC, the Leval Adjustment rules worked perfectly well. The Dragonended up with the same level of power as other characters. They ad reasonable hit points, reasonable AC, great movement and detection powers, and decent attacks.
Vaelan 02-13-07, 12:44 AM	The Dragonended up with the same level of power as other characters. Those other characters must have been exceedingly weak. Dragons, using the ECL rules, are about as good as core-only Bards in melee combat, which isn't that great. They don't have any other combat-related strengths. They ad reasonable hit points, reasonable AC, great movement and detection powers, and decent attacks. They have neither the hitpoints nor AC to stand up to an opponent of an appropriate CR, nor can they meaningfully harm such an opponent, having fewer attacks than a normal melee-oriented character of their level would and dealing much less damage with each attack. Even DR 5 of a variety that they can't overcome, which happens to be nearly every variety, shuts them down completely, unless you count their joke of a breath weapon. The only part of that statement that isn't ludicrous is the movement and detection powers, though calling them great is a bit of a stretch. Their maneuverability is terrible, making their flight practically worthless for anything but overland travel, which tends to be limited by your slowest party member anyway. Their land speed can range from slightly above average to twice human speed, but the ability to get into position won't do a whole lot when you're far too weak to do anything once you're there. Their detection powers are formidable, but they're nothing special at the minimum level required to play one according to the LA rules.
Fireclave 02-13-07, 01:38 AM	So here's my question: How in the world do you turn a dragon into a PC race? They've got to have absolutely huge LAs, with all those special abilities; and huge LAs equals underpowered... Not to mention the RP... how do you get a dragon to mesh with the usual motley group of adventurers? They've got to be rather inflexible creatures, anyhow, what with the absolute alignments and all. As it has already been said, it can be done and there are rules in the Draconomicon to do so. Personally, I'd rather not deal with the delicate dance of tracking and balancing racial HD, age categories, LA, special abilities, and the like. If I ever wanted to play a dragon, I'd just adapt something or invent my own dragon. That way, I can keep all of the abilities predictably static while still being able to play something draconic. For an example of how I would do it: Start with Human Dragonborn stats Change type to Dragon Give it the Heart trait, but limit the energy to one type Replace the human bonus feat with the Dragon Wings feat. Remove the dodge bonus vs dragons; Add +1 natural armor. Remove the human's bonus skill points; Give them natural claw attacks Increase the size to large or give them Powerful Build. Change the flavor to describe them as real dragons and not dragonborn Given them a new name (probably something like Lesser Drakes or something) Add two racial HD Make the LA+1 There. You have a playable dragon who shouldn't rock the boat too much. But that's just off the top of my head. YMMV.
Maekrix_Waere 02-13-07, 08:10 PM	They also lack many of the equipment options of a normal PC, making their ability scores and natural AC fairly insignificant. What equipment options do they lack? They can use every piece of magical equipment in the DMG except for (debatably) weapons, even though they may not be able to benefit from them (Such as Bracers of Archery or a Monk's Belt). There are also some magical items in the Draconomicon that they can use but Humanoids cannot (Such as the Amulet of Supremacy) that balance it out. For example, I once made a sample Wyrmling Silver Dragon PC (ECL 11 by Draconomicon rules) who had Belt of Strength +4 (Made Str 24), Amulet of Constitution +4 (Made Con 23 [24 after HD bonus], and +1 Barding Full Plate (Made AC 30). (Used Haggling variant of Diplomacy skill from Complete Adventurer to reduce prices by 10%.) I doubt you would call those "fairly insignificant." P.S.-About stats-Being a sample PC, I rolled them up and applied racial bonuses.
Vaelan 02-13-07, 11:10 PM	They can use every piece of magical equipment in the DMG except for (debatably) weapons, even though they may not be able to benefit from them (Such as Bracers of Archery or a Monk's Belt). The rules on body slots, which many people seem to ignore, say otherwise. To your earlier question of limitations: try playing a character that has to have the majority of their magical items custom made, incur body slot adjustments, and, optionally, maintain a hoard. The limitations will become quite clear. For example, I once made a sample Wyrmling Silver Dragon PC (ECL 11 by Draconomicon rules) who had Belt of Strength +4 (Made Str 24), Amulet of Constitution +4 (Made Con 23 [24 after HD bonus], and +1 Barding Full Plate (Made AC 30). (Used Haggling variant of Diplomacy skill from Complete Adventurer to reduce prices by 10%.) I doubt you would call those "fairly insignificant." I would probably go with "woefully inadequate", with a dash of "the rules don't allow that". First of all, your assumptions are questionable. Wyrmling Silver Dragons get +2 Strength, +2 Constitution, so I see you decided to start with an 18 and a 17. I don't particularly care if you play that way, but a lot of people don't, and it certainly isn't the standard. Second, a Wyrmling is Small and barding is only for Medium and Large mounts, according to the PHB. The rules for armor for unusual creatures would probably be significantly more relevant than barding, so they should be used. In that case, you need proficiency, since dragons are not proficient with any armor, according to the Monster Manual. Regardless, the heavy and medium armor and barding stop you from flying, which isn't a huge loss but is worth mentioning. Third, your melee capabilities are terrible. You have a worse attack bonus than a Fighter of the same level, your attacks deal no real amount of damage (1d6+7, 1d4+3, 1d4+3), and you end up with fewer attacks than the Fighter due to the applicability of Haste. The Fighter could actually use a shortsword and a heavy shield and still have you beat. I'm not counting the nonproficiency to attack rolls that you would most likely take for a legal set of armor, by the way. Lastly, you have 92 hitpoints. A level 11 Rogue with your base stats and equipment has 107. Even with your armor, which is not allowed, as per the rules, you shouldn't be taking hits.
Maekrix_Waere 02-14-07, 01:07 AM	The rules on body slots, which many people seem to ignore, say otherwise. To your earlier question of limitations: try playing a character that has to have the majority of their magical items custom made, incur body slot adjustments, and, optionally, maintain a hoard. The limitations will become quite clear. I would probably go with "woefully inadequate", with a dash of "the rules don't allow that". First of all, your assumptions are questionable. Wyrmling Silver Dragons get +2 Strength, +2 Constitution, so I see you decided to start with an 18 and a 17. I don't particularly care if you play that way, but a lot of people don't, and it certainly isn't the standard. Second, a Wyrmling is Small and barding is only for Medium and Large mounts, according to the PHB. The rules for armor for unusual creatures would probably be significantly more relevant than barding, so they should be used. In that case, you need proficiency, since dragons are not proficient with any armor, according to the Monster Manual. Regardless, the heavy and medium armor and barding stop you from flying, which isn't a huge loss but is worth mentioning. Third, your melee capabilities are terrible. You have a worse attack bonus than a Fighter of the same level, your attacks deal no real amount of damage (1d6+7, 1d4+3, 1d4+3), and you end up with fewer attacks than the Fighter due to the applicability of Haste. The Fighter could actually use a shortsword and a heavy shield and still have you beat. I'm not counting the nonproficiency to attack rolls that you would most likely take for a legal set of armor, by the way. Lastly, you have 92 hitpoints. A level 11 Rogue with your base stats and equipment has 107. Even with your armor, which is not allowed, as per the rules, you shouldn't be taking hits. RULES: DRAGONS AND MAGIC ITEMS Being both very smart and very wealthy, dragons often employ magic items. (Paraphrase-Spell like abilities do not equal spellcasting ability for wands/etc.) (Paraphrase-Dragons not proficient with weapons.) (Paraphrase-Dragons can use potions.) Because magic items that must be worn will fit users of any size, a dragon can use any magic item a humanoid character can. (*Explains how they wear the magic items*) Ability Scores-I made no assumptions, I rolled those stats and thusly included them in my post. Small Size+Barding-It never says that you cannot make barding for a small sized "mount." It merely only lists medium and large because of the available mounts listed in the PHB the smallest is medium. However, even if we did take that away, you can replace it with 2 Rings of Protection +2 and Bracers of Armour +5. I actually want to thank you for pointing that out. That would bring its AC up to 29, instead of 28 (14 Dex). Melee Capabilities-With those freed up feats from the armour proficiencies you can take Improved Natural Attack (Bite), Improved Natural Attack (Claws), and Flyby Attack (thanks for the regained fly speed). If you'd give me an additional 1 ECL (which you won't), I'd take a level of Fighter and you could replace that Improved Natural Attack (Bite) with Endure Blows, which I will qualify for via my Fighter Bonus Feat-Toughness. Also, aren't YOU making the assumption that that Fighter has access to haste? If we are comparing ability, then buffs defeat the purpose. Hit Points-Your forgetting, its a sample PC, I rolled the HD as well and came out with 107 hp. Awaiting your contradictions.:waits:
starfire311 02-14-07, 10:15 AM	Ability Scores-I made no assumptions, I rolled those stats and thusly included them in my post. you use insane stats, I can not remember the last time I played with a PC that had an 18 and a 17. Small Size+Barding-It never says that you cannot make barding for a small sized "mount." It merely only lists medium and large because of the available mounts listed in the PHB the smallest is medium. true, and I would allow it However, even if we did take that away, you can replace it with 2 Rings of Protection +2 and Bracers of Armour +5. I actually want to thank you for pointing that out. That would bring its AC up to 29, instead of 28 (14 Dex). Did you just replace a ~3000GP suit of armor with 2 rings that are worth 8000GP each, and bracers worth 50000GP, and the rings dont even stack Melee Capabilities-With those freed up feats from the armour proficiencies you can take Improved Natural Attack (Bite), Improved Natural Attack (Claws), and Flyby Attack (thanks for the regained fly speed). not the worst options available. Hit Points-Your forgetting, its a sample PC, I rolled the HD as well and came out with 107 hp. you can not use amazing luck to justify dragon being a good PC choice, I could just create a sample Warrior that rolled all 8s for HP and straight 18s for stats, and use that to justify warrior> poorly rolled fighter Awaiting your contradictions.:waits: please stop while your behind. as for the OP, yse you can play a dragon as a PC, I believe that a savage progression from level 1 does work, although the Dragon, may come out slightly weaker than a its peers, it is not overly weak IMO.
kelvinaw273 02-14-07, 01:59 PM	Those other characters must have been exceedingly weak. Dragons, using the ECL rules, are about as good as core-only Bards in melee combat, which isn't that great. They don't have any other combat-related strengths. They have neither the hitpoints nor AC to stand up to an opponent of an appropriate CR, nor can they meaningfully harm such an opponent, having fewer attacks than a normal melee-oriented character of their level would and dealing much less damage with each attack. Even DR 5 of a variety that they can't overcome, which happens to be nearly every variety, shuts them down completely, unless you count their joke of a breath weapon. The only part of that statement that isn't ludicrous is the movement and detection powers, though calling them great is a bit of a stretch. Their maneuverability is terrible, making their flight practically worthless for anything but overland travel, which tends to be limited by your slowest party member anyway. Their land speed can range from slightly above average to twice human speed, but the ability to get into position won't do a whole lot when you're far too weak to do anything once you're there. Their detection powers are formidable, but they're nothing special at the minimum level required to play one according to the LA rules. Actually some were very well optimised. If you consider 'strong' only in terms of "Der - me hit fings!" then you are correct. However for some games there are more factors than that in play. No, the dragon did not have the toe-to-toe combat power of the dwarf fighter in the front rank. Instead, they had superior darkvision, blindsense, massive advanatages on Listen and spot checks, the ability to fly, breath water, had a breath-weapon ... The Dragon PC took levels as a rogue and became a very effective flanker as well, but this is beside the point: It became impossible to sneak up on the party, they were an excelent back-up fighter especially against lesser minions (five attacks a round, even if none are individually that powerful, will do that), they had brilliant mobility. So you take the dargon up against the front-rank fighter, and they lose, right? Well wrong, actually. You szee dragons are intelligent. They don't stand there and duke it out with the fighter, they fly around strafing with their breath weapon where the fighter can't touch them. If need be they use the terrain to appear behind the fighter, swoop, breath and fly out of range before they can respond with their missile weapon. Not so useless now, is it?
Maekrix_Waere 02-14-07, 06:43 PM	Did you just replace a ~3000GP suit of armor with 2 rings that are worth 8000GP each, and bracers worth 50000GP, and the rings dont even stack Yes, but I would like to say that my Str +4 and Con +4 Items were originally +6's. I took them down to +4 so that, in case problems such as the one I was presented with came up, I would have some extra cash to spend and replace it. Also, you'll forgive me about the rings stacking...my weak point happens to be remembering what bonuses stack and what bonuses don't...it has come up in the forums before...Either way, a 27 AC pre-buffs is respectable for ECL 11. P.S.-Are Bracers of Armour +5 50K in errata? Because I know that in the original DMG 3.5 they are worth FAR less. P.P.S-Actually an optimised Warrior CAN be better than a poorly rolled fighter. I was in a Campaign with a person who played an optimised Warrior for flavour...The Fighter was quite embarassed by the end of it since the warrior beat him in combat effectiveness throughout.:P P.P.P.S.-What's so insane about a 17 and an 18 both being rolled up for stats?:confused: Actually some were very well optimised. If you consider 'strong' only in terms of "Der - me hit fings!" then you are correct. However for some games there are more factors than that in play. No, the dragon did not have the toe-to-toe combat power of the dwarf fighter in the front rank. Instead, they had superior darkvision, blindsense, massive advantages on Listen and spot checks, the ability to fly, breath water, had a breath-weapon ... The Dragon PC took levels as a rogue and became a very effective flanker as well, but this is beside the point: It became impossible to sneak up on the party, they were an excelent back-up fighter especially against lesser minions (five attacks a round, even if none are individually that powerful, will do that), they had brilliant mobility. So you take the dragon up against the front-rank fighter, and they lose, right? Well wrong, actually. You see dragons are intelligent. They don't stand there and duke it out with the fighter, they fly around strafing with their breath weapon where the fighter can't touch them. If need be they use the terrain to appear behind the fighter, swoop, breath and fly out of range before they can respond with their missile weapon. Not so useless now, is it? Exactly. PC's are not justified merely by their ability in combat. I personally hate bards, for example, because I don't like the idea of my character being restricted to buffs/weakening skills in order to be very useful in combat, but many people like them for their usefullness in (nearly) everything not related to combat. However, if we do compare combat ability, not many fighters are willing to wade through a whole bunch of AoO's in order to attack an enemy spellcaster. A dragon could fly above the front line of enemies and kill the far squishier enemy spellcaster(s) who (generally) have a much lower AC and much lower hp than their underlings, making the dragon, who, as has been stated, is unable to do as much damage or hit as high of AC's as the frontliners, the perfect creature to neutralize the magical threat.
Callista 02-14-07, 06:50 PM	Dragon = more useful if the game isn't a simplistic kick-in-the-door thing, then? I've always liked versatile characters... rogues, magic-users, high-INT characters. I need to get the Draconomicon now.
Maekrix_Waere 02-14-07, 06:59 PM	Dragon = more useful if the game isn't a simplistic kick-in-the-door thing, then? Very much so.
Vaelan 02-15-07, 12:35 AM	Ability Scores-I made no assumptions, I rolled those stats and thusly included them in my post. The stats become an assumption as soon as you include them. I really don't care about ability scores though. The higher they are, the more they favor normal PCs, as dragons pay a price in ECL for their ability score boosts, which become worth less and less as base ability scores become higher. Small Size+Barding-It never says that you cannot make barding for a small sized "mount." It merely only lists medium and large because of the available mounts listed in the PHB the smallest is medium. The fact remains that the rules do not exist to cover that particular option. Discussions are confined to the rules to give common ground. However, even if we did take that away, you can replace it with 2 Rings of Protection +2 and Bracers of Armour +5. I actually want to thank you for pointing that out. That would bring its AC up to 29, instead of 28 (14 Dex). Rings of Protection don't stack, so make that 27. Need I even compare that to a Fighter with a shield? Melee Capabilities-With those freed up feats from the armour proficiencies you can take Improved Natural Attack (Bite), Improved Natural Attack (Claws), and Flyby Attack (thanks for the regained fly speed). And this manages to make him slightly worse than a Fighter with a shortsword and shield as opposed to significantly worse. Also, aren't YOU making the assumption that that Fighter has access to haste? If we are comparing ability, then buffs defeat the purpose. Yes, I am assuming that the character is created to take part in a typical party using the very basics of intelligent tactics. These assumptions happen to be the assumptions the entire system, including ECL, was written upon. Hit Points-Your forgetting, its a sample PC, I rolled the HD as well and came out with 107 hp. I compared averages. I could write up a nice little distribution and see exactly how many hitpoints a Rogue would have with the same rolls, but the fact that the Rogue's average, minimum, and maximum hitpoints are all higher gives you a fairly good idea about how that works out. If you consider 'strong' only in terms of "Der - me hit fings!" then you are correct. However for some games there are more factors than that in play. No, the dragon did not have the toe-to-toe combat power of the dwarf fighter in the front rank. Instead, they had superior darkvision, blindsense, massive advanatages on Listen and spot checks, the ability to fly, breath water, had a breath-weapon ... I am considering their ability to fulfill any one of the traditional roles in a four-man party. They have no appreciable spellcasting and their skill list is mediocre. The role they are best suited to is that of a Fighter and it cannot fulfill that role. The Dragon PC took levels as a rogue and became a very effective flanker as well, but this is beside the point: It became impossible to sneak up on the party, they were an excelent back-up fighter especially against lesser minions (five attacks a round, even if none are individually that powerful, will do that), they had brilliant mobility. First of all, please read the rules on dragons. Their natural weapons only come into play upon reaching a sufficient size category to use them. Second, it is still quite possible to sneak up on a dragon. "My DM couldn't think of a way to counter this" isn't a terribly strong argument. So you take the dargon up against the front-rank fighter, and they lose, right? Well wrong, actually. Believe it or not, that is their most effective strategy, aside from running away. They don't stand there and duke it out with the fighter, they fly around strafing with their breath weapon where the fighter can't touch them. If need be they use the terrain to appear behind the fighter, swoop, breath and fly out of range before they can respond with their missile weapon. Bows can fire an arrow further than a dragon can fly in a round, if they are using their breath weapon. The Fighter can simply ready an action, if nothing else. Even if the terrain were sufficient to gain total cover and the Fighter had no chance of seeing the dragon once it hid, a single shot (or Manyshot) from a decent archer is still about as good as the dragon's breath weapon. A dragon could fly above the front line of enemies and kill the far squishier enemy spellcaster(s) who (generally) have a much lower AC and much lower hp than their underlings, making the dragon, who, as has been stated, is unable to do as much damage or hit as high of AC's as the frontliners, the perfect creature to neutralize the magical threat. Perfect? Hardly. Dragons have ECLs above 10. Flying, the dragon's only real advantage, is nothing special at that level. At CL 10, a Phantom Steed has a movement rate of 200 feet. At CL 12, it can fly. Dragon = more useful if the game isn't a simplistic kick-in-the-door thing, then? Not really. Their ECL is too high to make their special abilities special, for lack of a better word. Their main feature, flight, is duplicated quite easily at the levels they are available. Their senses are a strong point, but it hardly makes up for something as useful as four levels of skill points or 11 levels of spellcasting. --- You guys seem to have trouble forming a cogent argument, so let me help you out here. I don't need a list of exactly what abilities a dragon has, especially since you tend to get them wrong anyway. I am aware of what a dragon can do. I am a conscientious DM and take all abilities into account, both in the context of the assumptions the rules were written according to and in the context of my campaign's log. What I do need, to be convinced of your point of view, is an explanation about who the dragon would replace in a typical four-man group (Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, Wizard) and how they would do so effectively enough to contribute to the party's effort to overcome challenges of an appropriate EL as much as someone of the appropriate class would. You are saying that the ECL is justified. The preceding is what is required for the ECL to be justified. I don't want to hear anymore about how your DM was too stupid to use Darkstalker or cover. I want to hear something relevant.
Maekrix_Waere 02-15-07, 01:22 AM	Rings of Protection don't stack, so make that 27. Need I even compare that to a Fighter with a shield? You apparently didn't read the post where I apologized for that mistake. Yes, I am assuming that the character is created to take part in a typical party using the very basics of intelligent tactics. These assumptions happen to be the assumptions the entire system, including ECL, was written upon. Then if we are giving the Fighter a spellcaster to buff him up, then let us give both sides the same bonus. Also, the odds of your average Fighter in a four person party carrying around any potions except perhaps potions of healing is extremely low. "My DM couldn't think of a way to counter this" isn't a terribly strong argument. I have to agree on this point. Believe it or not, that is their most effective strategy, aside from running away. Bows can fire an arrow further than a dragon can fly in a round, if they are using their breath weapon. This one too. What I do need, to be convinced of your point of view, is an explanation about who the dragon would replace in a typical four-man group (Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, Wizard) and how they would do so effectively enough to contribute to the party's effort to overcome challenges of an appropriate EL as much as someone of the appropriate class would. Give me a point buy, make an ECL 20, and let's compare.
starfire311 02-15-07, 10:04 AM	Yes, but I would like to say that my Str +4 and Con +4 Items were originally +6's. sorry missed that.. and actually no they werent here is your OP on it For example, I once made a sample Wyrmling Silver Dragon PC (ECL 11 by Draconomicon rules) who had Belt of Strength +4 (Made Str 24), Amulet of Constitution +4 (Made Con 23 [24 after HD bonus], and +1 Barding Full Plate (Made AC 30). (Used Haggling variant of Diplomacy skill from Complete Adventurer to reduce prices by 10%.) I doubt you would call those "fairly insignificant." and here is your revised post However, even if we did take that away, you can replace it with 2 Rings of Protection +2 and Bracers of Armour +5. I actually want to thank you for pointing that out. That would bring its AC up to 29, instead of 28 (14 Dex). no mention of changing the stat boosting items that were already at +4, all you did was swap out the +1 full plate barding for Bracers of armor +5 and 2 +2 rings of protection. Either way, a 27 AC pre-buffs is respectable for ECL 11. my level 6 Dwarven Crusader/hellreaver has an AC 26 pre buffs at ECL 6, granted he is designed to be a tank, but he was built using a 25 PB, and has about 11k-12k GP worth of gear. P.S.-Are Bracers of Armour +5 50K in errata? Because I know that in the original DMG 3.5 they are worth FAR less. my mistake, for some reason I got it in my head that bracers were bonus squared times 2,000gp, it is only 1,000gp so they are 25K Gp. P.P.S-Actually an optimised Warrior CAN be better than a poorly rolled fighter. I was in a Campaign with a person who played an optimised Warrior for flavour...The Fighter was quite embarassed by the end of it since the warrior beat him in combat effectiveness throughout.:P there really is no way to optimize a warrior(you only get a handful of decisions to make), and yes a warrior with straight 18s will better than a fighter with a 14 and straight 10s P.P.P.S.-What's so insane about a 17 and an 18 both being rolled up for stats?:confused: you have about a 1 in 40 chance of getting an 18 and a 17 in the same set of rolled stats, this seems like a rather long shot, I am not sure if I have even had 40 character in my lifetime, and I have been playing for over 20 years. So, basically it would be a once in a lifetime event for someone like me.
starfire311 02-15-07, 10:14 AM	Give me a point buy, make an ECL 20, and let's compare. ECL 20 would not be a good level to make the comparison, perhaps levels 5, 10 and 15 would be better. But I really don't think that a dragon can compete with a regular PC filling the fighter role.
Maekrix_Waere 02-16-07, 12:57 AM	no mention of changing the stat boosting items that were already at +4, all you did was swap out the +1 full plate barding for Bracers of armor +5 and 2 +2 rings of protection. I shall rephrase that-They were written on the Character Sheet as +6's, I changed them to +4's when I posted as a contigency. my level 6 Dwarven Crusader/hellreaver has an AC 26 pre buffs at ECL 6, granted he is designed to be a tank, but he was built using a 25 PB, and has about 11k-12k GP worth of gear. What books are those from? Also, just curious, how is ECL 20 a bad level to make a comparison of two characters that were designed to fit the same role? Its the level where whatever you could possibly want to plan can be fully fleshed out, without going on to Epic Level.
starfire311 02-16-07, 08:54 AM	What books are those from? doesn't really affect the AC, except the crusader has a neat ability that lets me give an adjacent all my shield bonus to AC as a immediate action. Crusader is in Tome of Battle:book of nine swords Hellreaver is in Fiendiesh codex 2:Lords of Hell The AC comes from +1 Fullplate(DMG AC +9), +1 Heavy steel shield(DMG AC +3), Heavy Armor Optimization(RoS, +1 to AC of heavy armor), Shield Specialization(PHB2, +1 to AC from shield), Amulet of natural Armor +1(DMG, +1 natural armor) Dex 12(PBH, +1 AC). For a total of 10+9+3+1+1+1+1=26 Really any fighter can do this, it has nothing to do with my classes. Also, just curious, how is ECL 20 a bad level to make a comparison of two characters that were designed to fit the same role? Its the level where whatever you could possibly want to plan can be fully fleshed out, without going on to Epic Level. because that is not where the game is played. Who cares if 2 classes happen to be balanced at level 20, if they were unblanced at levels 1-19... that is why I ussually run a playtest of a new class at level 5 and level 10, and just extrapolate it for higher levels.
Maekrix_Waere 02-16-07, 09:26 PM	Heavy Armor Optimization(RoS, +1 to AC of heavy armor), Shield Specialization(PHB2, +1 to AC from shield That Races of Stone, correct? I have neither it nor the PHB2. because that is not where the game is played. Who cares if 2 classes happen to be balanced at level 20, if they were unblanced at levels 1-19... that is why I ussually run a playtest of a new class at level 5 and level 10, and just extrapolate it for higher levels. 20 is the threshold between Regular Level and Epic Level. IF you play a character from 1-20, then unless your DM has specifically planned to end it at level 20, you will probably be taking your character(s) into Epic. At least, thats how it has been from my experience.
Judging Eagle 02-16-07, 10:54 PM	I'd like to chime in that my Librarian (archivist) in the Eberron game that our group plays is level 7 and blows that dragon out of the water both in spellcasting (duh, full caster) and combat (no, really). With a 'low' AC of 30 when not in a peaceful area and 43 AC when in a combat zone plus up to 3 layers of Miss chance (50%, 80% and 20%; all attacks that hit have to roll past those 3 miss chances) and some Moderate DR (10/Magic) this charcter can afford to main tank with even a D6 hit dice (and, of course huge Con boosts from buffs that last hours). I won't go too in detail with damage; but I know that I've been outdamaging the THF warforged barbarian/fighter in our group since... level 1? (this will change when I get him to replace his sucky Core Barbarian with the Races of War one that makes actual sense). As for actually playing a Dragon? Seriously, my Barbarian in our group's Wolrd Largest Dungeoun game can outthink most Dragons of his CR; which he can solo, flying and breath weapons or not. Dragons have to be [b]radically[/i] changed if they are to be a viable PC race. Note: the reason for such... 'unreasonable' seeming AC is actually... not that unreasonable. At level 6 most brute monsters can hit ACs in the high 30's; look at a hill giant or some of the other CR 6 monsters. At level 11, everything that you face will almost invariabley hit you and probably kill you in one round. I learned my lesson twice over at level 6 and then got good and ****** and started layering defenses so I wouldn't get knocked down or killed again. Also craft contingent spell is rawksome. You can have.. any number of buff spells trigger when you shout a word or phrase. Makes prepping to take out a BBeG really fast. A party of dragon PCs could work however. It'd be like Pound Puppies, only they can spit acid or breathe Slow gas; and fly. Also: 20 is the threshold between Regular Level and Epic Level. IF you play a character from 1-20, then unless your DM has specifically planned to end it at level 20, you will probably be taking your character(s) into Epic. At least, thats how it has been from my experience. Is complete and utter BS. Almost no game can truly end at 20th lvl play unless everyone at the table agres to use 7th level tactics only, okay, maybe a few 10th lv ones as well. Most campaigns start at levels 1 to 10 and end around levels 7 to 17. Some are intended to end at level 16 to prevent too much craziness. So, unless a character was balanced at all levels, the build is one of two types: 1. Cash in now for big costs later; melee builds sometimes fall in here or 2. Starve for a lot of levels, then kick ass; a lot of caster builds are here. But, those two are bad for the game since almost no one actually plays from 1st to 20th level. Make a level 5, 10 and 15 Dragon. If they're equally effective to a lvl 5, 10 and 15 PC there may be a case for the dragon as part of the classic 4.
kelvinaw273 02-17-07, 07:43 AM	What I do need, to be convinced of your point of view, is an explanation about who the dragon would replace in a typical four-man group (Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, Wizard) and how they would do so effectively enough to contribute to the party's effort to overcome challenges of an appropriate EL as much as someone of the appropriate class would. You are saying that the ECL is justified. The preceding is what is required for the ECL to be justified. I don't want to hear anymore about how your DM was too stupid to use Darkstalker or cover. I want to hear something relevant. So in your logic the dragon is as useful as a monk, bard or ranger. None of these fit in the standard 4-man party either, yet they are pursued as valid character classes by many players, and some swear by them. Your logic only proves that round pegs don't fit in square holes, something that we already knew. You see some of us don't play 'standard 4-man parties'. We play five or six man parties instead, where some of the roles can be shared between characters rather than dumped on one. We like interesting as opposed to cookie-cutter optimised characters. Your six-man party might have three semi-fighters rather than one Tank (a monk, a ranger and a cleric, say). It might have two characters share the healing role (a bard and a paladin say) rather than a cleric. Then there are the three-or-less parties where roles have to be multi-tasked. Once again the less specialised character classes do better here, not because they are better than the specialists in their fields, but because they can do well enough to get by and do other things as well. Bards, monks and rangers are excelent 'fifth characters' in a four-man party, and the dragon-character fits neatly into this catagory.
Derren S. 02-17-07, 01:33 PM	Bards, monks and rangers are excelent 'fifth characters' in a four-man party, and the dragon-character fits neatly into this catagory. Except that it is weaker than any of those characters. A bard without spellcasting and bardic music.
Judging Eagle 02-17-07, 09:30 PM	Derren, you're being too kind and lumping in the pretty-much balanced Ranger in with the dogs that are the Bard or Monk (or Fighter, Barbarian or Paladin). Also, Kelvin, in between a monk, ranger and cleric; who of those three could you rely on to be a melee tank with honesty? Seriously, I could only see the cleric melee-tanking at all of those three. The ranger will do his job and shoot the hell out of every enemy within range (Bracers of the Shadowed Sky FTW!); and the monk will either toss out fire blasts or will drop sonic bursts via his slam attacks when he whirlwinds. The cleric will simply beat the bejeezus out of anything stupid enough to melee him and the party will be all right. Also, in a larger party, every character will have to pull their weight just as much as if there were less PCs; mostly b/c the party will face tougher encounters. Oh, snap, I was reffering to the good monk class. My bad; the core monk will try to.... not die before each fight starts. So... they'll be putting that high speed to good use!" :thinks: Since of course 'enhancement' bonuses to speed are so hard to find? When really every party member can have +30 feet to their speed at lvl 5-7. Hopefully the DM will take pity on him and give him his classes easter egg: Rules-Illegal artifacts like 'power gloves'. Core fighters of course getting Artifact swords, to make sure they can keep up with effective characters that can actually pull their own weight. Like the rogue or ranger. :weep:
kelvinaw273 02-19-07, 12:56 PM	Except that it is weaker than any of those characters. A bard without spellcasting and bardic music. Not in my experience, is all I can answer. That's like saying a monk is like a bard with no spells as well. The two classes do not compare on that field - monks are better at mobile fighting, bards at buffing A Dragon in a party is your detect-o-meter, better than any rogue save at Trapspringing. He's also a mobile reserve, able to get to where he is needed, much as your monk can. With five attacks he can make up for his lower BAB with the knowledge that he is likely to do at least some damage every round. He can deal energy damage as well - not a huge emount, but it can make a difference. Some barriers that hinder humanoids don't cause a problem for a dragon. And think of the intimidation factor ... Judging Eagle, core monks work just fine as monks, stop trying to play them as Tanks. The argument of 'If I stand face to face with it and we both slog away I always win therefore it is useless' is getting tired now. Neither your monk nor your dragon are going to just stand there. They will use tactics that play to their strengths instead, and employ teamwork within the party. I think some posters are missing the point that there are generalist roles and specialist roles. Specialists do what they do better than anyone. Generalists can't do it was well, but can do a lot more instead; just because they cannot beat the specialists on their own terms does not make them useless. For example: A Tank-fighter can, in a stand-up fight, beat a ranger or monk most times. If there is good terrain, the ranger can hide from the fighter and pepper him at range until he falls. The monk can sneak up and get surprise with a Stunning Fist and run away if it fails, or pile in the flurry of blows if not, or sunder a weapon or shield ... the 'grunt test' ignores the fact that the generalist can do more than the specialist; he has more options open to him. This applies alike with fighters, casters and skill-monkeys: the generalist can do things the specialist cannot, the specialist can do his thing better than anyone.
locksmyth 02-19-07, 03:04 PM	Was just IMing a friend of mine, who casually mentions that one of the fellow players in his game is playing a brass dragon...! His own character is level 15, so it's kind of a high level game. And the dragon is medium sized, don't know the age category. Apparently the halfling has been riding the dragon... why the dragon submits to such indignity, I have no idea. So here's my question: How in the world do you turn a dragon into a PC race? They've got to have absolutely huge LAs, with all those special abilities; and huge LAs equals underpowered... Not to mention the RP... how do you get a dragon to mesh with the usual motley group of adventurers? They've got to be rather inflexible creatures, anyhow, what with the absolute alignments and all. I can see half-dragons being adventurers. But... full-blooded dragons? As has been said, the dragon can be a playable character, alignment always only means 99.995 of the time and an always can not be applied to a PC, but they need a good BS. A medium side Brass Dragon has a LA+4 that's not too bad. Also as to why the dragon submits to the indignity of allowing a halfling to ride him. A dragon can be taken as a mount. It takes the Leadership feat and the dragon must have a friendly attitude towards you, it also helps if you raised it from the egg. However that's an NPC dragon, a PC dragon can allow an other PC to 'ride' him when ever he wants too simply because he likes him or considers him a good friend.
Derren S. 02-19-07, 03:26 PM	Or because the player(s) think its "cool". (A attitude which sadly is much too common among players).
kelvinaw273 02-20-07, 03:10 AM	Or because the player(s) think its "cool". (A attitude which sadly is much too common among players). Given a choice between an optimizing numbers-monkey who treats his character as a sheet of stats to get the most out of, or a player who plays sub-optimized characters because they think they are 'cool' but actually role-plays them, I myself will take the latter every time.
runestar 02-20-07, 03:24 AM	Given a choice between an optimizing numbers-monkey who treats his character as a sheet of stats to get the most out of, or a player who plays sub-optimized characters because they think they are 'cool' but actually role-plays them, I myself will take the latter every time. Of course, that is not to say that the 2nd option is not without headaches of its own. At least the 1st option's contribution to the party is more or less affirmed. The latter's usefulness is still more ...questionable...:P Anyways, I think the draconomicon does state that dragons are allowed to use most sorts of magic gear. And they typically adjust automatically to fit the wearer, so customization is not a problem as well. For armour, get the party wizard to supply you with castings of mage armour(extended if need be). Or invest in wands of mage armour? A monk's belt lets you add wis mod +1 to your AC if you opt to eschew barding. 2 lvs of swordsage lets you wear mithril barding and still get wis mod to AC. Wand of shield+UMD for +4 shield bonus. Until you get enough cash to buy rings of protection and amulets of NA, you could consider pooling funds together to buy wands of barkskin and prot from alignment, to simulate magic gear. A dragon will require a fair amount of twinking to be effective, but I think it is certainly playable. :)
UltimateReality 02-20-07, 09:55 AM	Hey, playing something "cool" and having fun is what the game is all about. I currently have a party that includes a half-ogre cleric and a centaur. Does it stretch believability for them to be travelling with an elf and a changeling in Zilargo? (Eberron's version of a gnomish Venice if you're not familiar with the setting.) Not with the backstories they've given me. The most important thing is that everyone has fun. Cool things are fun.
Derren S. 02-20-07, 12:09 PM	Lets just say that I prefer players whos definition of fun is not playing "cool" (crazy) races and doing anime stunts.
Callista 02-20-07, 12:15 PM	I think you can play a crazy race quite well, if you're sure not to have the character's entire schtick be that he's one of a crazy race. As for anime stunts... Eh, D&D characters do things which are alreay pretty superhuman. I don't see how that's much different from anime, really. Crazy races are really more of an RP challenge though, and not for newbies. But then, paladins aren't for newbies either!
Vintar 02-20-07, 10:46 PM	Curious - would anyone here allow their players to buy-off the dragon LA as they take them? For example - a copper dragon starts at +2 LA and doesn't get the third until at 8 hitdie. One could buy-off 1 LA at 6 hitdie - but when another LA is taken at 8 hitdie - when can another be bought off? Hasn't ever come up in my game - doubt it ever will - just a hypothetical.
runestar 02-20-07, 11:28 PM	I am all for having fun. I just don't want it to come at the expense of personal prowess. It might be cool being some weird-fangled race, but coolness alone isn't going to save you from being mauled by an ogre, or torched by a fireball, or perforated by arrows. You need stats for that. I don't mind a party made up of the weirdest composition you can think of, just that they had better be able to hold their own in combat, because I am certainly not going to pull any punches or be lenient with them just because they are playing with SS progressions. And of course, being able to justify this storywise, but the underlying assumption here is that they can. Bottom line - do what you want, just be prepared to bear the consequences.:)
DeathDragon 02-21-07, 06:33 PM	I have been doing what you guys have been talking about: Making a dragon as a workable PC. I know I should possibly make a new thread, but this fits basically... Sofar I have a few ways of doing it (on 1 and 2, I am working on ways to make it work): (Tell me how it is) 1) Do SavageSpecies to progress the dragon to full Wyrmling, maybe even cut out a few things which will be 'earned' later, such as Breath Weapon and reduce the Flying Ability (but add it later). Wyrmling Dragon In SavageSpecies Level HD BAB F / R / W Abilities 1 1D12 +1 2 / 1 / 1 Nat Armor +4, Size Tiny, Gains Claw + Bite, Cold Weak, Fire Imm. 2 2D12 +2 3 / 2 / 2 Con +3, Str +2, 2x Normal Vision, 30ft Dark-Vision, LowLight Vision (4x) 3 3D12 +3 4 / 3 / 3 (Flying Feat) Gain Flight = to 1x-2x Land Speed (Poor) 4 4D12 +4 5 / 4 / 4 Wis +2, Str +2, Flight = 2x-3x Land-Speed (Average), Dark-Vision 60ft 5 4D12 +4 5 / 4 / 4 Nothing... This is a Filler Level for Level Adjustment *Dark-Vision Increases to 90 and 120 ft at Levels 5 and 6, in addition to the class.* (((Progress as a class or whatever))) 2) Do SavageSpecies and every X levels, gain an Age Category (make it to where experience is a catalyst that enhances growth. After all, what would be stronger, a fighting type or a lazy type). Dragon In SavageSpecies Level HD BAB F / R / W Abilities 1 1D12 +1 2 / 1 / 1 Nat Armor +4, Size Tiny, Gains Claw + Bite, Cold Weak, Fire Imm. 2 2D12 +2 3 / 2 / 2 Con +3, Str +2, 2x Normal Vision, 30ft Dark-Vision, LowLight Vision (4x). 3 3D12 +3 4 / 3 / 3 (Flying Feat) Gain Flight = to 1x-2x Land Speed (Poor). 4 4D12 +4 5 / 4 / 4 Wis +2, Str +2, Flight = 2x-3x Land-Speed (Average). Dark-Vision 60ft. 5 4D12 +4 5 / 4 / 4 Nothing... This is a Filler Level for Level Adjustment ((Dark-Vision Increases to 90ft)) 6 5D12 +5 6 / 4 / 4 Size Small, +5 Nat Armor, Breath Weapon 2d10+2d4 Line, +1 Str. ((Dark-Vision Increases to 120 ft)) 7 6D12 +6 6 / 4 / 5 +6 Nat Armor, +1 Int, +1 Cha, +1 Str. 8 7D12 +7 6 / 5 / 5 +7 Nat Armor, +1 Wis, +1 Con, +1 Str. 9 7D12 +7 6 / 5 / 5 Nothing... This is a Filler Level for Level Adjustment 10 8D12 +8 7 / 6 / 6 +8 Nat Armor, Size Medium, +1 Str, +1 Con. 11 9D12 +9 8 / 6 / 6 +9 Nat Armor, Darkness (as Black Dragon), +1 Str, +1 Cha. 12 10D12 +10 9 / 7 / 7 +10 Nat Armor, +1 Str, +1 Int. 13 10D12 +10 9 / 7 / 7 Nothing... This is a Filler Level for Level Adjustment 14 11D12 +11 9 / 7 / 7 +11 Nat Armor, Breath Weapon Increases to 3d10+3d4, +1 Con, +1 Cha. 15 12D12 +12 10 / 7 / 7 +12 Nat Armor, Bless (as Gold Dragon), +1 Str, +1 Wis. 16 13D12 +13 10 / 8 / 8 +13 Nat Armor, +2 Str, +1 Int. 17 13D12 +13 10 / 8 / 8 Nothing... This is a Filler Level for Level Adjustment 18 14D12 +14 11 / 9 / 9 +14 Nat Armor, Size Large, Breath Weapon Increases to 4d10+4d4, +2 Con. 19 15D12 +15 12 / 9 / 10 +15 Nat Armor, +1 Cha, +1 Wis, +1 Str 20 16D12 +16 13 / 10 / 11 +16 Nat Armor, +1 Str, +1 Int. Age Stages are: Wyrmling @ 1 V. Young @ 6 Young @ 10 Juvenile @ 14 Y. Adult @ 18 Catchup Levels are: Level 5 Level 9 Level 13 Level 17 You earn nothing on these levels, they are to adjust the LA. Other things you can do instead of Null Levels; * Reduce the HD Type to 10 * Reduce Saves slightly Breath Weapon @6 Dragon gains a Breath Weapon of Fire or Acid (once picked a type cannot use other). It does 50% of the Gold and Black Dragon parents, of respective age. Line for Acid and Cone for Fire. Natural Armor As indicated on the chart, Natural Armor is equal to the HD of the Dragon. Darkness and Bless These are as the Dragon Parents, but based on age. I still need to fill in the table completely, but those are the stats I would have for it. Figuring off of 20d8 or 20d10 that is 160-200 health max, and 16d12 nets me 192 max. Also including CON later on, my health may rise higher, true, but also, other players health can rise too. It is a mix (somewhat) of Gold/Black Dragon. The short version of my characters backstory is this: Gold Dragon Mother and Black Dragon Father mated, Black Dragons clan came along and obliterated my parents. I, being a few days old, was hidden and left the cave after the incident. The Gold Dragons, nor any others, would not accept me in for being an 'abomination'. I wandered around and adventually found a small group of travellers, but I was so weak by then that I could only barely ask them to not attack me, as I passed out. From there, is where it begins with my guy.
starfire311 02-21-07, 06:44 PM	Curious - would anyone here allow their players to buy-off the dragon LA as they take them? For example - a copper dragon starts at +2 LA and doesn't get the third until at 8 hitdie. One could buy-off 1 LA at 6 hitdie - but when another LA is taken at 8 hitdie - when can another be bought off? Hasn't ever come up in my game - doubt it ever will - just a hypothetical. Are you refering, to the UA variant for Buying off LA? If so, you cannot buy off LA untill you have achieved 3 times the LA in class levels, this does not include racial HD... so if you have LA +2 to can not buy it off untill you have 6 class levels, not racial HD.
kelvinaw273 02-21-07, 09:49 PM	Lets just say that I prefer players whos definition of fun is not playing "cool" (crazy) races and doing anime stunts. Who said anything about 'crazy' or anime?
CaoSlayer 02-22-07, 08:05 AM	yes, you can play a dragon with a succeful perform (Dragon) check.
Judging Eagle 02-22-07, 09:41 AM	Judging Eagle, core monks work just fine as monks, stop trying to play them as Tanks. The argument of 'If I stand face to face with it and we both slog away I always win therefore it is useless' is getting tired now. Neither your monk nor your dragon are going to just stand there. They will use tactics that play to their strengths instead, and employ teamwork within the party. Seriously. Are you even trying to be funny here? Pit a level 10 monk against a CR 10 encounter. Say a Stone Golem. Even with spring attack nonsense, the monk will need about 27 to 30 successful hits to kill the Golem. The golem on the other hand will kill the monk in 3 hits. Also, it can ready an action to wait until the monk approaches, then attack. So, yeah, at level 10 the monk class changes nothing about how effective or ineffective it is. It's a great character, but a horribly written class. Now, the dragon could probably beat that same golem, mostly b/c it can fly. However flying is really powerful in D&D since most enemies are melee brutes.
Templario 02-22-07, 10:15 AM	Two days ago I started a campaign based in a world took off almost entirely by undead - but their generals have fallen, and the undead stayed without overminds until now (a great evil arose). Now we're playing with Good dudes, but look at our group: - A Sacred Watcher (BoED) cleric of Focus (our Pelor version, with additional Domains to choose. In fact the world has only 3 deities who make the Triad; a neutral good - Focus, lawful neutral - don't know the name, it's the dwarven one and a fiery one); - A Ghoul Fighter; - A Skeleton Aasimar with Saint Template Paladin(he was the Focus' mortal champion, who commandered the human + dwarven + elven + draconic armies against the undead generals. Now he woke to save the world once again); - A Wyrmling Copper Dragon. (Me. The Aasimar dude saved my grandpapa many years ago with his life, and for gratitude my family made a mausoleum in our lair to watch for his body not being found by necromancers). We're all ECL 7, and using Savage Species/Libris Mortis/Wizards Site progressions for the undead guys. I'm using a mix between Draconomicon advancment table and Dragon magazine #320, which has a 1-20 dragon class advancment levels. My role in the part? Having nice stats (except DEX and WIS), I'm being the aerial scout. I'm gonna be a kind of bazooka over the Paladin shoulders, breathing over the puny undead :cool: Of course, to this campaign get well, Focus is smart enough to work a bit over our Cleric's turn undead and Cure Spells; they don't damage the skeleton, himself and the ghoul, and the turn undead don't turn/destroys them alike. God bless House Rules :evillaugh In the future I'm looking to Battle Sorcerer/Abjurant Champion (getting them between age advancments, and as we use Spell Points, spell slots isn't a pain anymore). I'll be the arcane from our group (already maximized concentration and know (arcana), too bad spellcraft is a cross-class skill for dragons HD until they get their first sorcerer innate level). Actually only me don't have class levels; the other 2 has 5 levels in their classes and 2 monster ones. They'll need to get them all (sacred watcher 5 levels, ghoul 8 'cause he's going to turn in a ghast, and the skeleton is complete, but has +3 ECL, so 4 levels of paladin). Weird group, lots of fun :D yes, you can play a dragon with a succeful perform (Dragon) check. :D Too bad some of them are spiky!
Vintar 02-22-07, 10:45 AM	The stone golem would also pwn the rogue, that doesn't make it suck. Frankly - I doubt most wizards would have the correct spells to solo one at any given time. Besides - any monk worth his salt by 11th level (the stone golem's actual CR) would have a +1(min) adamantine weapon - dealing 4.5 damage a pop without strength - ballpark at a Str 16 - or 7.5 damage. This would kill the golem in naught but 15 strikes. Besides which - in an open field the stone golem would never touch the monk. All he would have to do is get at a 70ft distance and start slinging adamanine bullets at it for 5.5 damage a pop. (taking 20 hits assuming no magic) The stone golem does a double move (40ft) and is still well beyond range of its slams and slow ability. The monk then backs off with super speed single move and does it again. As was said earlier - monks and the like require tactics to use them effectively. This is not to say the monk is especially powerful - just playable. In my opinion the monk, bard, or possibly the battle sorceror (the only kind in my campaign - more with the flavor) are the best fifth characters in a group assuming the 4 base roles have been filled. The dragon sounds like it fits in well with this group. Edit: Forgot that the new FAQ allows gauntlets to be treated as unarmed for monks. Assuming you use this ruling a monk with Improved Natural attack would be doing 2d8+6 (assuming +3 adamantine gauntlets) each hit or 15 damage. This would kill the golem in only 8 shots (7 if you get lucky on damage at all)- the monk gets 4 a round - 3 of which are at max to hit.
obrysii 02-22-07, 10:55 AM	At level 12, a dragon PC (at least a gold dragon) should easily have: AC 33 (10 base + 7 natural + 8 armor + 4 shield +2 dex + 2 deflection) ... assuming only a Ring of Protection +2, an innate Dex 14, and a Wand/Scroll of Shield. This is minimal, as I don't have time to look up the amount of gold a level 12 ought to have.
ZiggZagg 02-22-07, 11:21 AM	I have played a Dragon in a campaign before, and it turned out very well. Most of the arguments about the dragon not standing up in melee are somewhat true, but the character made an excellent back up to the frontline and was also good for aerial drop attacks and neautralizing spellcasters. We had an instance where the party rogue got separated from the group via a prismatic wall effect to take on a kobold sorcerer alone. The Rogue got blinded and things were looking grim...until I Melded into the stone via a magic item I found earlier and snuck up on said Kobold...he got punt kicked "through" his own prismatic wall :D Bottom line, dragons make very rewarding characters to play if you like to play intersting characters that are good for RP instead of just making up a sheet of numbers and giving it a face.
Judging Eagle 02-22-07, 03:34 PM	The stone golem would also pwn the rogue, that doesn't make it suck. Frankly - I doubt most wizards would have the correct spells to solo one at any given time. Wizards get Scribe Scroll. At level 5 they have more spells in their belt than they`ll ever need in any one encounter they should be facing. And they can buy a Candle of Invocation at level 8-10. They don`t have think about what spells to prepare each day. They have all the spells they can cast (i.e. every spell on the wiz-sorc list) in quinticate in scroll form at that point. I`m sure that 5 scrolls of every wizard or sorcerer spell would cover most encounters. Unless you heavily house rule and remove any and all magical items worth 8,000 gp or more. Yes, the Candle of Invocation is pretty broken, but who really cares? It means that the fighters have a better shot of getting lots of low-value magical gear in addition to their base gold gear. Also, Vintar, you`re not solving the problem of the golem readying an action to attack when the monk gets close in. That`s still 3-4 hits on the golems part for it to win; one third of what it takes the monk. You`re also assuming an open field in your sling example; which is improbable, since you almost never see a golem in other than a cramped space.
ZiggZagg 02-22-07, 03:49 PM	Yes, the Candle of Invocation is pretty broken, but who really cares? Power gamers irk me:nonono:
Vintar 02-22-07, 03:52 PM	Where did you get that the golem could kill the monk in 3-4 hits anyway? The golem does 2d10 + 9 - average of 20. With a Con of 14 at level 11 a monk with average rolls should have 75 HP - a solid 4 hits - if he never uses wholeness of body for another 22. This would make it a solid 5 attacks - rarely less and sometimes more should the golem roll poorly. As well, most groups I know of use a method for rolling HP that lowers the average - such as only in the top 50% or the Iron Heroes method(what my group uses). This would raise the monk's HP considerably. Even with all this the monk can take fewer hits - but he also swings 4 times a round - 3 of which are at max to hit vs. a mere 2 a round. Again - not an easy fight - but far from suicide. And where the crap does your wizard store all of his 200 scrolls that are all within easy reach anyway? Perhaps half a dozen at most.(excluding special magic items perhaps) Besides which - using a scroll always provokes an attack of op - and can't escape with a 5 ft step as the golem has reach.
kelvinaw273 02-22-07, 04:38 PM	Seriously. Are you even trying to be funny here? Pit a level 10 monk against a CR 10 encounter. Say a Stone Golem. Even with spring attack nonsense, the monk will need about 27 to 30 successful hits to kill the Golem. The golem on the other hand will kill the monk in 3 hits. Also, it can ready an action to wait until the monk approaches, then attack. So, yeah, at level 10 the monk class changes nothing about how effective or ineffective it is. It's a great character, but a horribly written class. Now, the dragon could probably beat that same golem, mostly b/c it can fly. However flying is really powerful in D&D since most enemies are melee brutes. So the fact that a rogue would likewise get totalled by the Stone Golem is beside the point? After all, a rogue isn't a tank either. Again, you assume that things bashing each other to bits is the point. It isn't. The Monk, like the rogue, can use their skills to bypass the encounter, or use their wits to engineer a situation where they can triumph - say by luring the stone golem into a trap. What's wrong with the monk taking his slingshot ot crossbow and picking at the stone golem from a distance? After all, one thing the stone golem cannot do is catch the monk. It's a bit like saying the fighter is useless against the stone golem too. After all, if he has no special weapon hurting the golem, even at level ten, is going to be very hard. If he doesn't have a weapon at all, he's toast.
Judging Eagle 02-22-07, 06:25 PM	Power gamers irk me:nonono: People with no imagination irk me too. Too bad they tend to be people who try to `roleplay` poorly thought out characters with no flair for anything, not their modes of speach, the actions that they perform or even their mindset. Oh snap, I shouldn`t have said that aloud. You`re just a black a pot as I`m a kettle. Plus, you don`t even realize that the candle of invocation actually helps non-powergamers. :P It gives them the chance to get a slew of low-grade magical gear* and inherent bonuses to all of their stats that puts them on parity with a powergamer. If you let infinite gold in your players hands break the game, you`re the worst DM ever. You can`t break the game so long as you put a 15,000 gp cap on anything magical that can be bought or wished for. Which makes sense since the Wish spell can normally create such items anyway. Of course, PCs and other people can always craft better things, or sacrifice XP to Wish for more powers on their existing items, but that`s different and no longer `free`. Parity is the name of the game my friend, not division. The .... people who call themselves roleplayers should be on parity with those who can spend hours coming up with a logically created powerful character. Unless, you actually want different play styles to be completely unfair to each other in completely opposite methods.
Judging Eagle 02-22-07, 09:07 PM	Where did you get that the golem could kill the monk in 3-4 hits anyway? The golem does 2d10 + 9 - average of 20. With a Con of 14 at level 11 a monk with average rolls should have 75 HP - a solid 4 hits - if he never uses wholeness of body for another 22. This would make it a solid 5 attacks - rarely less and sometimes more should the golem roll poorly. As well, most groups I know of use a method for rolling HP that lowers the average - such as only in the top 50% or the Iron Heroes method(what my group uses). This would raise the monk's HP considerably. Even with all this the monk can take fewer hits - but he also swings 4 times a round - 3 of which are at max to hit vs. a mere 2 a round. Again - not an easy fight - but far from suicide. And where the crap does your wizard store all of his 200 scrolls that are all within easy reach anyway? Perhaps half a dozen at most.(excluding special magic items perhaps) Besides which - using a scroll always provokes an attack of op - and can't escape with a 5 ft step as the golem has reach. Well, you didn`t put the golem toe to toe with the monk at first, so I assumed I could do the same with the wizard and his.... Heward`s Handy Haversack full of scrolls? or any number of duplicated thrice over Magic Storing Belts? With 12+ pouches that hold a cubic foot of space each. Seeing as a scroll is a single sheet, I`m sure you could carry a good 500 scrolls in a belt and a haversack; with about say.... 20 on your person on a pair of bandoleers. Whip out a Swift Fly; then cast Fly, then pull out some Shrunk Item iron ingots and drop them on the Golem`s head for massive weight-based damage on other classes: Fyi, a druid could do most of this too, but they`d summon some animals or elementals, then wildshape into something powerful and murder the golem with their friends; the cleric would just command the party to defeat this triviality while he saves himself for the undead lich or a fiend; who am I kidding? The cleric will just crush the golem with his bare hands and eat the rocks with fangs and melt those eaten rocks with acidic saliva; then he`ll go and kill the Golem`s wife and kids. He will then claim his Diety or... Ideal told him to. Seriously, the way the core rules are written; I could create a Cleric who believes in the concept of ``Kicking Ass`` and claim any domain that helps me achieve that goal. Since, of course, large parts of the Core books weren`t written be a monkey on crack? :rolleyes: Heck, for ***** and giggles the same wizard can simply throw a ball of wadded up Explosive Runes written onto blank pages of a spell book then use a wand of Dispel Magic to detonate them. That actually costs him less than anything else; heck it could cost him nothing since he could ask an Efreeti to use it`s Wish ability for sheets of paper in small neat stacks worth 25,000 gp or get the gp and buy the stuff himself. Or just move backwards and activate boots of levitation to just get out of reach and then drop stuff on the golem, or just use unseen servant to drag my levitating self away (yeah, that`s what newbie wizards do at lvl 3; they combo lev and US to sort of fly). As you can see, I don`t really need to come up with `tricks`for the wizard, do I? The class has tons and tons built in for a creative person to make use of. Every single level provides him with at least 3 more tricks a day and every odd level provides him with a new tier of tricks that let him do level appropriate things. As for the rogue; it has a good chance of both spotting and avoiding the golem; then sneak attacking with golem strike and a crossbow; or UMDing a wand with one of the Orb line of spells from further away. I don`t need to defend the rogue, it can always take care of itself if it uses it`s strengths. Seriously, aside from running away, what can the monk do? If the monk goes toe-to-toe ... Even with all this the monk can take fewer hits - but he also swings 4 times a round - 3 of which are at max to hit vs. a mere 2 a round. So, you`re going to give the golem a chance to slow you every 2 rounds? Also, he`ll be hitting 28 AC half the time and can hit up to 38 AC. So your monk is either going to have one of a few things to level out this field: 1. Wierd and bizarre tricks that only he has and are hard to counter. These can be called fighting styles; with a monk being able to choose and create a new one every other level or something. You could have wierd stuff, like being ethreal at really high levels, or being able to poke someone and do 1 point of con damage at low levels or be able to move faster, or get a boost to AC from your style. Something distinctive and effective. 2. Able to deal massive damage with or without weapons (aka, monk damage instead of increasing your unarmed damage, instead increases the damage of any weapon as if you, and the weapon, were larger than you really are; every 4 or 5 levels you count as being one size larger). 3. Just not get hit, ever. Think Drunken Fighter Jackie Chan; I don`t know how this could work; gain your level in AC, wis, dex, int and cha to AC or dex and one of wis or int or cha. You could also replace the accepted and normal mechanic and allow the monk to sub out dex for a mental stat and that`s their new AC stat (as well as their reflex save stat). Damage would be worse, but this monk is nearly impossible to strike. In any case, let`s play this out and see how close this really is. Let`s 1st assume the elite array buy on the monk S 12 (12 + 5 + 2 = 21) D 13 (13 + 5 + 2 = 20) C 14 (14 + 5 + 1 + 2 = 22) I 10 (10 + 5 = 15) W 15 (15 + 5 + 1 + 2 = 22) Ch 8 (8 + 5 = 13) You already assumed a 14 con; so I put the 14 from the elite array there there. The other high stats in wis, dex, str, int and cha in descending order. Lets also assume +2 str, dex, con and wis items, they`re for free at lvl 11 since they`re under the 15,000 gp threshold on Wish. Int and Cha aren`t part of this exercise. +1 to wis at lvl 4, +1 Con at lvl 8 +5 to all stats since you`ve hit lvl 11 and not died; an unlikely prospect, but this is all hypothetical, so what the hey I can be generous in a completely fictional experiment that costs no discernible value] So, you`re sitting at 11d8 + 66(58 + 55: 124 HP) A Base AC of: 10 Base +5 Dex +6 Wis +3 T-shirt of `Vintar is awesomeness`(armour) (bracers of armour are passe, having a cool t-shirt is where it`s at) +3 Monk AC (lvl 16 Monk AC via Monks Belt) +2 Ring of protection AC of 29 You`re also forgetting the... 8-10 point to-hit difference (+18 Stone Golem, +8-11 Monk; assuming a +2 str item and an ammy of might fists +1; and a +1 construct bane adamantine Kama (very affordable via a Wish economy), Yes the construct bane adamantine Kama is very generous, but melee characters need items like these in order to stay competitive in the magic land that is post lvl 10 gameplay). The Monk will hit the Golem`s 26 AC on a 13+ that`s not average odds, but they`re achievable and he`ll deal 1d4+2d6+5 damage [average damage: 11 per attack, up to 33 per round, but this is deceptive since more attacks means more chances to miss] with a +1 Construct Bane Adamantine Kama or .... 2d6+5 - 10 if he just punches. So, the Kama, since we`re trying to kill the freaking golem here. The golem will hit the Monk`s AC of... [read the assumptions I made above] 29 on a roll of 11 or better. Dealing 2d10+9 damage [19 average damage, up to 38 damage if both attacks hit]on an attack. Well, throwing enough magic at the monk does even out the damage a lot more. The Golem has a bit of an advantage damage wise, since he`ll hit more often and his damage output is higher. Absorbing Damage is the next thing to look at: The Golem has 107 hp and the monk has 124 + 22 hp for this fight. It`s a close fight, but the monk should squeeze by and survive with maybe 20-ish HP left assuming they use their entire wholeness of body ability party way through. The problem is that the golem could slow the monk and the monk has to either A) spring attack to reduce it`s taken and given attacks to 1 for 1 and hope the golem misses and that the monk hits or B) just slug it out and fight defensively where the monk`s ranks in tumble will help. A more intelligent opponent like a Hamatula would be a bit more of a problem since they`re better at grappeling than the lvl 11 monk is since has both full BaB and more str, (+22 total on the Hama, about +13 to +17 if the monk took imp grapple over stunning fist). In any case, Vintar, the monk `can` take on a stone golem at lvl 11, but unless you`re willing to accept the fact that level 11 means that everyone has access to the Wish-based economy, the monk won`t actually have a chance. ----------------- Also, people don`t play a monk to fire a crossbow or use a sling. They play a monk to beat kill stuff with their hands. Any tom dick or harry can wear boots of levitation and plink at a golem with some adamantine bolts. A Monk does it with any part of his body. That`s cool, but it has to be viable, if not DMs will have to hand out Power Fists when the Monk can`t cut the mustard when fighting Hamatulas, Bebiliths, Hezrous, Retrievers, Juvenile Red Dragons, 10-Headed Cryo or Pyro Hydras, Dread Wraiths, Cauchemar Nightmares. And that`s just the Core MM. Monster Manuals 2, 3 and 4 are worse, as are campaign specific monsters and Fiend Folio. As it stands the core monk can`t do what it needs to do to help fight these. What`s worse is that he can`t to anything level appropriate to help his party out, since you won`t have just a CR X (your parties level) encounter; it will be a bunch of monsters. So, the whole 5th man argument falls short unless your 5th man can do something that makes everyone else better or can perform as well as any other crucial party member. Then again, the 3 cleric, 1 rogue and the 3 Druid, 1 rogue parties don`t fall short that often at almost every level of play. Of course, in all of this everyone gets defensive and tries to defend their class as being good; which is touching, but it`s misplaced defensiveness. I`m never attacking the class, or the concept or anything else here. I`m attacking the fact that Wizards of the Coast designers love arcane casters and druids and clerics and they made them obviously powerful and as they ramp up everything, those classes still stay where they were. I want the melee classes to be able to face down an enemy lich and take him down. If this was a free-form level-less system where you could buy powers with points you earn while leveling up; that would be cool since everyone could specialize in what they want and still have effective abilities. But it`s not. It`s a class and level centered system and either the classes need changing or we`re all going to have to accept the fact that a Monk can`t karate chop someone to break a bone or rupture veins or poke someone`s eyes or pressure points to cause blindness or extreme pain. Which frankly is stupid, you can punch someone with or without killing power, but you can`t chop them or poke them?
kelvinaw273 02-23-07, 12:49 AM	As for the rogue; it has a good chance of both spotting and avoiding the golem; then sneak attacking with golem strike and a crossbow; or UMDing a wand with one of the Orb line of spells from further away. I don`t need to defend the rogue, it can always take care of itself if it uses it`s strengths. Excuse me, but the monk has the exactly the same strengths of being able to avoid the stone golem as the rogue. He doesn't get as many skill points, but your average Monk is usually pretty sharp and stealthy and can do a lot more than run away, thank you. As has been pointed out the monk can whittle down the golem with ranged weapons, or sneak past it. Why do people assume that all the monk can do is try (and fail) to go toe-to-toe with an opponant? Clearly you stopped and thought about the abilities of wizards, rogues and CoDzillas, but you don't seem able to apply that to monks, you just assumed it would grunt away: Also, people don`t play a monk to fire a crossbow or use a sling. They play a monk to beat kill stuff with their hands. Any tom dick or harry can wear boots of levitation and plink at a golem with some adamantine bolts. Actually, I play a monk to be an ascetic warrior-philosopher who is not dependent on material possessions (and I don't mean VoP, I don't even have that supplement). A monk beats their foes using their wisdom. The strength of the spirit defeats that of the body every time (rhetorically speaking), to me that means using you head and adapting your combat style to the foe you face. In the case of the stone golem, you lure it over the cliff or else p[ick at it at range. The only time you charge and hit it is if it's back is turned! Anyway, we are off topic - the subject was DRAGONS! The dragon can beat the golem with flight and breath weapons .. or just flight and ignore the golem.
Judging Eagle 02-23-07, 02:22 PM	Excuse me, but the monk has the exactly the same strengths of being able to avoid the stone golem as the rogue. He doesn't get as many skill points, but your average Monk is usually pretty sharp and stealthy and can do a lot more than run away, thank you. As has been pointed out the monk can whittle down the golem with ranged weapons, or sneak past it. Why do people assume that all the monk can do is try (and fail) to go toe-to-toe with an opponant? Excuse me? Excuse me? Wha did you say? Did you say that I suggested that the monk slug it out toe-to-toe with the Golem? No, Vintar did. I simply tested that idea out. It should also be noted that I made sure that he had a bit more parity with a balanced character by throwing cash and items his way. If he didn't have most of that kit; and +5 to all of his stats; he'd have half of his HP. and everyone knows that monks that can't melee makes people who want to play a monk cry. If I wanted I could use the same Boots of Levitation trick that a wizard could use. Plus a +1 Repeating ConstructBane Crossbow plus a pile of +2 Adamantine Crossbow bolts. The problem is that most people don't play monks that way. Which is fine, they shouldn't need to since most people's limited vision of the class isn't about an accomplished warrior-sage or mendicant-scholar who can also whup a gang of maurading bandits who try to raid a village that she's passing through. Some people want to play a scruffy Gnoll who punches and bites his opponents; or a Celestial unicorn-ascestery Aasimar that knows when someone will do something bfore they'll do it and can jump over a mob of enemies to make a getaway. Clearly you stopped and thought about the abilities of wizards, rogues and CoDzillas, but you don't seem able to apply that to monks, you just assumed it would grunt away: Actually, I play a monk to be an ascetic warrior-philosopher who is not dependent on material possessions (and I don't mean VoP, I don't even have that supplement). A monk beats their foes using their wisdom. The strength of the spirit defeats that of the body every time (rhetorically speaking), to me that means using you head and adapting your combat style to the foe you face. In the case of the stone golem, you lure it over the cliff or else p[ick at it at range. The only time you charge and hit it is if it's back is turned! Anyway, we are off topic - the subject was DRAGONS! The dragon can beat the golem with flight and breath weapons .. or just flight and ignore the golem. Yeah, one problem, your vision of a monk pretty much reflects what I'm getting at (the monk that shuns the use of weapons and triumphs via their innate awesomness, not something as petty as a blade or axe or the Infinite Dragon Throne forbid a ranged weapon, and denies completely the tactics that you want to use (stand back and use ranged attacks with adamantine tipped missiles that you, as an ascetic would probably never purchase). In any case, unless that monk has some way to fly or get out of reach of the golem, your whole 'plink at it till it dies' tactic will do one of two things: 1. Not work, since you're an ascetic and not a master of all martial weapons with powerful items that help you acheive your dojo's goals (at lvl 10, seriously, your combat style is something that people will go out and learn; unless you play in some ridiculous unbelieveable setting like FR). As a result you don't pack appropriate gear for various encounter types in a bag of holding or a Heward's Handy Haversack. or 2. Get your party killed since you couldn't melee the bastiche golem and someone else had to. Seriously, the more GP one throws at PCs at lvl 10, the closer the fighter can keep up with the wizard. Just keep the purchase cap at 15,000 GP on any magic item that is purchased with gold (gems, trapped souls, etc. are actually worth stuff to buy more powerful items) and you won't have anyone at any level running around with a +4 stat item, +4 armour or +3 weapon. For that kind of gear, xp has to be paid. Giving the melees free gofbags of whatever they feel is necessary is actually perfectly okay at level 10+. As for the Dragon, yes, it's vastly superior to the Monk, but it's something that rests at the Cleric or Wizard's feet or hovers overhead and uses it's breath weapon. In any case, the core of my argument is that any class, played by any player should have an equal chance to kick as much ass at the table as any other player playing any other character class. So, Fighter 10 = Monk 10 = Wizard 10 = Druid 10 = Cleric 10 = Swashbuckler 10 = Bard 10. I want that for everyclass right off the hop. Being able to do broad sweeping gestures, like give everyone cheap magic gear and stat boosts at lvl 11-15, helps acheive some degree of parity, but more should be done. Kelvin, you ever look at Frank and Kieth's Dungeonomicon? The monk there is very staright forward, I was able to show it to a player that who, while he loves monks, doesn't play very powerful or effective characters and was getting sick of the class after his... damn I think 8th monk and had played a vampiress sorcerer and a human buffer wizard. The class plays power-wise the same way the old 2e monk did. As good as almost any other character.