this post was submitted on 05 May 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

rpg

3062 readers
6 users here now

This community is for meaningful discussions of tabletop/pen & paper RPGs

Rules (wip):

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 3 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

Most boring take on dragons I've ever seen. Dragons have pretty much never been exclusively creatures of fire, with water and acidic bile being common themes across different cultural incarnations. Dragons should be pretty rare, what with their power allowing them to make hundreds of square miles their territory, but otherwise this article is just saying to make dragons the most basic gold hoarding lizards.
I will continue to have cool interesting dragons that hoard things other than gold and have motivations beyond power through fear thank you very much.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

This article is dumb. It claims that diversity among dragonkind is reductionist? No, what's reductionist is claiming all dragons should be Smaug.

What are the essential parts of a dragon? There are literally none. The terrasque of myth had a lion's head, turtle's shell, scorpion's tail and no wings, but it was still called a dragon. Eastern dragons are commonly wise sages and protectors. Artwork of Saint George has the dragon barely bigger than his horse.

Saying "all dragons have to be this specific thing" is terrible worldbuilding advice.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

If I make a story about how a stegosaurus did amazing feats to the point they became blessed gaining feathered wings and flight, becoming the first dragon, then that's still a dragon.