How to make dragons non-generic?
>>47852282
What's wrong with genericness?
>>47852329
Gets boring.
>>47852282
"Generically", they're massive, winged, fire breathing, often brutally cunning beasts. In this specific case, "generic" doesn't mean boring. Dragons are awesome just the way they are.
>>47852282
I fail to see how you can make dragons generic. Simply having a dragon show up in a dungeon is literally a hallmark of D&D; every dragon your party encounters should be a character all of their own.
>>47852282
By making them setting specific, what is your setting about? what role could dragons fill that works in line with those ideas? then design them around that.
In your standard fantasy campaign about killing monsters and getting treasure for instance dragons are powerful beings who build massive treasure hoards.
In an exploration based game they might take the role of wise old sages.
In Dark Souls, which are about people trying to break out the cycle of death and decay dragons are immortal creatures which other beings try to emulate.
Just make sure that the role dragons play ties into the main themes of your setting and they won't feel generic.
>>47852421
>emulate
If you mean "stab for their precious loot", yes.
Otherwise, stop talking out your ass and actually play the game (or watch some decent non-apeedruns of the game).
Don't fix what isn't broken.
I understand the problems with "they are humans but with X" races. But what the hell is wrong with dragons?
>>47852282
be original
How to make OP ask questions that are non-stupid?
Feathers, like feathered dragon
>>47852282
use eastern ones
>>47852282
Good writing and story telling.
>>47852698
What is the dragon covenant? What is Archdragon Peak?
Pay attention anon.
>>47852698
>If you mean "stab for their precious loot", yes.
Well, that ~is~ something dragons tend to do. If you want to emulate a dragon, killing things and taking their stuff is a good start.
>>47852282
Make them all metrosexuals and have them systemically criticize the party's fashion.
>>47854075
This. Good writing is as much about using standard tropes in interesting ways as coming up with original concepts.
>>47854664
Moreover, good/original world building might be what seperate a great from good, but it's not what separates good from bad.
Make them fuckable or vice versa
>>47852340
That's on you, not dragons.
this shit again
>HI ANONZ HOW DO I X ORIGINALLY
You don't. Nothing of value was achieved by tryharding. All really good original things were created because author had idea just spawned in his mind without concern of originality, it just happened to be original. "Forced" originality only spawns contrarian crap of zero value.
>>47854779
>>47852282
Trivially. Just change something about them that's never been changed before. Maybe your dragons have beaks instead of claws and eat through their feet, reserving their majestic heads for breathing and talking. Maybe your dragons subsist entirely on a diet of fruit flies, making them a sort of tropical whale that must constantly eat in order to sustain its tremendous bulk.
But, of course, if you want to make them non-generic and do so well, context is everything. Describe your campaign setting and its metaphysics, by which I mean the themes and symbols that govern its history and the stories you're going to use it to tell.
>>47852282
Might be fun to do away with genetics and normal dragon reproduction. Have each dragon be the result of a corruption from exposure to magic, defining each uniquely but sharing some characteristics with others.
>>47852282
Use some of the crazier designs like back in the old days.
>>47854741
>That's on you, not dragons.
Best post right here.
OP thinks dragons are boring because he doesn't know how to do them well.
Here's a question.
Why do you rarely, if ever see, dragons as the stuffy oppressive nobility of a nation?
Like, I mean this in terms of not just settings, but themes; dragons are proud, long-minded hoarders that play with lives and have delusions of grandeur. By rights these things should be the kings or emperors of their own nations, or living within a nation exploiting the system to their favor.
But you never get that, they're always stinky lizards hiding in a hole somewhere and occasionally burning down a village.I guess this is why I made my dragons all descended from a massive Not!HRE, where dragon dukes rule their lands as veritable sovereigns and those found outside of the lands are either second sons, exiles, or ambitious lords seeking quick cash for their war chest.
>>47857601
Shadowrun.
Gender bending dragons
>>47857601
I always assumed they were also lazy to some extent, kind of like how ruling the world would be a job no one would really want due to the responsibilities involved with actually running a planet. So instead of having the crown and having a bunch of nattering monkeys constantly intruding upon their leisure with their countless petty and insignificant problems, they just let the weaker races handle their own problems and remind them when they get big headed enough to, say, try and break an ages long deal with the dragon who is the top of the food chain.
>>47858265
I wouldn't say its lazy so much as they have different values. The standard dragon doesn't really care so much about how much power they have so much as how much stuff they have.
Managing a big nation might mean that technically their "possessions" include everything in the country they rule, but they can't really pile it all up and sleep on it so its practically useless to them.
>>47858369
>include everything in the country they rule,
>can't really pile it all up and sleep on it
What, you mean your dragon-kings don't order ziggurats filled with treasure to serve as their thrones?
>>47858265
>>47858369
What if the dragons created a middle-man? The one that runs the place and brings a portion of the taxes to their lair?
You could call them Dragonborn.
>>47858265
honestly, even the dnd dragons all have different tastes in possessions, while all baseline want wealth, Blacks treasure suffering, Greens like possesing people, Whites consume things, Blues enjoy controlling cities/sources of wealth, and Reds want power above all.
Even metallics have different desires and wants.
>>47852282
I can answer your question, but first answer me this one; why do you need to make your dragons non-generic?
To be more specific, what is the objective you are attempting to accomplish with that?
No judgements, I just actually need to know this to give decent advice.
>They are the bioweapons of an ancient conclave of wizards that build them to protect the plane/planet against the Far Plane.
>They were bred over generations to be the perfect and immortal leaders of nations so that the greater good would always be upheld.
>They are the split essence of the supreme being, each time one is defeated it splits in to two beings, the most numerous of dragons has been defeated the most times and so has had its power split amongst the most 'offspring'.
>What we see as dragons is just a horrifically successful polymorph self spell cast in the most hallowed of grounds that gave it permanance. They are ancient and feeble.
>>47852282
The dragon's flesh and blood is only a convenience, created by the dragon's will.
The real dragon is in the Athanc or Core, a pearl-like structure situated in the chest between the dragon's seven hearts.
Even if you manage to defeat the dragon and capture the Athanc, you only hold a reflection of it in our three dimensional space. The real Athanc, the dragon's mind and personality, is on its home plane, indestructible and forever changing...
>>47858622
yo ya do good work so lets keep it goin
>They're small pieces of controlling hugeguts cosmic entities that gained free will and the ability to rebel, now freed of their constraints they build up nations with magical might to ward off their inevitable comeuppance
>They're creatures that live as little more than immortal relics of an ancient world who were once great sages but grew senile while some insane, the unfortunate fact that they've not lost their power alongside their minds makes the majority dangerous while the least of which are just tragically forgetful or suffering dementia
>The magical beasts called dragons seek gold because their magic imbues it with hypnotic magical singing that few mortals can hear, ones ensnared by the lust for this music steal and hoard refined treasures that grant grander more elaborate harmonies, and for these reasons the magically inclined say that a dragon's gold is cursed, as it may induce a similar madness
>Dragons were created by ancient magi as anti-mage countermeasures during the great wars and are the only beings in the setting absent the essential energies of magic and are thus unaffected by it, their too successful utility and intelligence leads to the unraveling of most major empires
>Dragons are ascended spirits who've attained physical form through cult/sacrificial means, and most usually take the forms the cult worshiped, the few relatable traits between them being wings, teeth, claws, and greed for souls, though of much variance in every other aspect
>They're usually tiny beings that embody physical aspects of the setting, and act as guardians of their aspect in wildly obtuse ways. these aspects are numerous and vary from 'the morning dew of all forests' to the gigantic embodiment's of 'soil,' 'starlight,' 'oceans,' 'rain,' and so forth. though improbable, killing such embodiment's may have dire consequences
>>47854779
Why do you belittle poor anon? He prolly just wanted some help to get his creative juices flowing. Brainstorming interesting concepts with peers is a good writing exercise, you know?
I don't have the screencap on me, but some dude on /k/ claimed to have met a dragon -- regardless of its truthness (the fancy for word for this escapes me), the dragon of his portrayal was pretty fuckin' gnarly (primarily in his specifying of the presence of ozone, before said space became plasmafied).
>>47857501
like this pic, he too described the dragon as 'lovecraftian'
>>47852282
Make them octopuses like in Poppy o' Possum.
>>47852282
Don't use them. Use something else. Make up your own terrifying monster. Steal the Dune Worms but make them bigger or something. Giants. The smoke monster from Lost was neat, cannibalize that.
Nobody wants almost-dragons. Just make dragons (wise ancient creatures or jerk lizards or virgin stealers or town botherers or whatever or all of it).
Innovating dragons is the traditional thing to do at this point.
>>47859475
>make the dune worms bigger
NO
They're the combination of all five classical elements meeting together in one place. The oldest dragon came about was a result of a volcanic eruption. The fire and earth of the lava met an incoming storm at the precise point a man has recently died, his spirit still haunting the place.
The melding of all the elements formed a being that embodied all of their physical and metaphysical aspects. The fury of the volcano, the raging of the hurricane, the anger of a vengeful spirit all came together to make a creature that brought storms in its wake and struck down its enemies with wings made of flame and roars of thunder.
>>47859430
The word you're looking for is veracity.
>>47852282
Dragons are the Fallen Angels. Which is why they tend to be dicks to mankind, and why God helps those brave enough to challenge them.
>>47859515
People aren't going to want your girly sandworms when they get a load of my girthy MANdworms.
>>47852282
Don't give in to the temptation to artificially engineer a scenario where low level pcs can fight a jeuvinille. Make em big. make em dangerous as fuck. keep them regional scale threats.
pick a goal for your dragon. characters that powerful and smart should have a goal.
Get rid of the "colored is evil, metallic is good" rule.
>>47859654
Blue whales are 33 meters long. Sandworms from dune can already grow to 450 meters. If anything they need to be made smaller.
>>47852282
>How to make dragons non-generic?
Why bother?
Unique doesn't mean better
Creative doesn't mean good
Stick with what works.
>>47852282
There is only one dragon.
It is slain heroically and the killer is crowned king.Original ideas don't exist, everything is generic.
>>47852282
If they're not generic, they're not dragons. Calling them dragons is like calling a pair of slippers sandals, when they're two distinctly different things.
>>47852282
>Having a dragon in your setting
>Not letting it be a big tyrannical asshole with a superiority complex that steals riches and bitches
Disgusting.
>>47859713
>meters long
Well that's your first mistake. Only girth matters, anon.
>>47859821
The diameter of a sandworms maw was estimated to be larger than a spice harvester factory. Spice harvester factories are 120 meters long.
>>47857601
In a way, dragons are a sort of symbol of ultimate freedom. They can fly all across the world, they can take what they want and destroy anything that gets in their way. They are diametrically opposed to a typical generic medieval society, which would see itself as a bastion of law and order against the chaotic forces of nature--and among all nature, there is none more chaotic than the dragon. Powerful enough to be above all law and not caring enough to form a hierarchy of power of their own.
>>47859247
>Dragons are the phyiscal embodiment of an emotion, as each person in a nearby area feels said emotion the temprament and morality of said dragon alters to meet the new emotion
>After a constant cycle of rebirth and death, the dragons are the last of the race that lived before, they are determined not to die and prevent the tech level of any nation advancing far enough to threaten the cosmic order and thus stay under their attention and live.
>The dragons are the gestalt conciousness of nations that conducted nation-wide spells to live on after an extinction-level event, nations became dragons, they are ruled internally by thousands of voices.
>>47852421
Came here to post exactly this. It's good advice and it goes a long way to making your campaign setting a little less bland. It also applies to more than just dragons. Where do they come from? What do they do? Why do they do it? What do different cultures think of them? What do they think of different cultures? How do they interact with mortals?
>>47860782
>The dragons are the final aspect of a Houses Patriarch/Matriarch in that they undergo a metamorphisis powered by the collective thought and magics of the rest of their House and vassals. The stronger and more powerful the house the stronger the Patriarch, or is it vice-verca?
>>47852421
pretty good post
you get some exp for that
>>47852282
Nothing at all, all you need to do is include one.
I swear the game should just be rebranded as "Forts & Liches."
>>47859998
This is actually an interesting opinion.
I personally think the "dragons are lazy rulers who lord over territory because they can" mixes cause with effect.
It's not that dragons set out to divide up the world into their own pieces. It's that the world intentionally divided itself up for the dragons. Here you have a race of extremely long-lived, intelligent, and very powerful beings. Beings which would just as soon eat you as you'd step on an ant. You'd do whatever you can to appease such a creature.
A dragon's territory becomes it's kingdom by default. The people who live in the kingdom don't want to get eaten by the dragon, so they voluntarily submit to serfdom and tithe to the dragon a percentage of what they make (in whatever form the particular dragon cares about), as protection.
>>47859433
Poppy dragons are freaky as fuck.
>>47852282
First random ass idea to pop into my head:
Reverse the roles humans and dragons traditionally play. Dragons are the most populous species around, but aside from that are no different that usual. But humans are mythical monsters of legend, whose cunning and ingenuity have been the downfall of thousands, but low reproduction rte and general squishy-ness keep them from overrunning and destroying the world.
Now someone who is a better writer than I do something with this.
Well in the game I'm running I have it so they're just rare, but smart animals, can't talk and what not. There on the top of the food chain in most areas. So taking one on is like hunting the most dangerous game.
>>47859821
It is possible to put too much in.
Dragons are the only truly immortal being in existence where flesh is of little/no consequence to them and can possess naturally and artifical objects of sufficent size to serve as their bodies when desired.
However, as a result they are mostly beastial in nature and are only lucid when they are freed from their physical constraints but don't take kindly to be destroyed as they will reincarnate back into the physical world.
This process is also chaotic as it can happen slowly over thousands of years or in a matter of seconds. One instance of such is when a Dragon materialized from an old steam ship and become a metallic monstrosity that breathed super heated steam and boiled half a city before it was finally destroyed.
Further, the bodies of dragons and the areas they devestate or reside in are forever changed and affected by their presence and the material s that was part of their body often have very powerful magical properties often being turned into weapons or powerful regents.
>>47852421
>>47852282
The Dark Souls path of the dragon concept intrigues me, and might be relevant for OPs question.
Prehaps all 'dragons' are the grotesque remains of those who sought to change themselves to achieve immortality. They vary between mad and bestial and those who retain some of their intelligence. Many have strange defects or mutations, malformed and crippled by the transformation. In some corners of the world you can find entire ancient buildings filled with half-transformed monstrocities, either lying dead or crawling in the dark.
>>47852282
Make it Chinese
>>47852282
Take away their intelligence and give them all different body types from each other.
>>47854725
Fuck them makeable?
>>47868489
So Dark Sun's dragons kings basically
The scaly monstrosity isn't actually the dragon, just a physical puppet form. The real dragon is a living concept formed by its hoard. Even if the puppet is killed and the hoard taken by humans, the treasure remains infectious. The adventurers develop dragon sickness.
At first, just greed and an obsessive desire to add even more treasure to their hoard. Eventually further symptoms* begin to manifest. The adventurers will then proceed to either:
• Kill each other off through greed-fueled infighting until their last survivor's metamorphosis completes itself.
• Be driven mad with paranoia that their treasure might be stolen. They then use forbidden magic and/or magitech to create a suitable guardian beast with predictable results once their monster is finished.
* less D&D dragonborn, more a hypothetical interpretation of dragonborn as designed by David Cronenberg
>>47868489
Except you forgot where there were actual dragons at one point and humans went full genocide on a dying race because their was shit else to do at the moment.
>>47859676
Hell, don't color-code at all.
I'm a Space Fantasy kind of person, so I like my Dragons to be cosmic creatures as old as the universe, with vast magical power.
>>47852282
Pull a possy o'possum and make them eldrich abomination of ancient and terrible magic
>>47869575
See that isn't making dragon's non-generic. That's just having a good idea.
@OP don't try to make dragon's non-generic, try to have a good character first.
>>47870651
You know what else is a good idea?
Dead dragons.
>>47852698
Sounds like someone hasn't been reading the lore at all, huh? What are you, a casual?
>>47852282
you don't, now take your vanilla-flavored ad&d dragons and go
they're a trope because they're fucking great
