Talk:Dragon Rider (5e Class)
From D&D Wiki
Ah, here we go again! Maybe it'll be successful this time! :) So, what's the plan? How are you going to make this work where others have failed before? I genuinely want to see this concept succeed, so I'll lend a hand on the planning side of things. To be successful, you're going to have to answer these questions:
- How is a character a hero if their primary function is to call on someone/something else (in this case, a dragon) to resolve all their problems?
- How do you justify dragons being subservient to distinctly inferior beings, despite being magically intelligent?
- How do you deal with the incompatible lifespans of dragons and lesser mortals? It's pretty hard to befriend a dragon for its entire life if you're going to die of old age before it reaches adulthood. (Also, half of them are inherently evil, and even the "good" ones aren't necessarily nice.)
- How do you plan to balance this class, power-wise? You can't just give the PC a DMG dragon and say it's all good! The old version (before it got deleted) revolved around reviving your dead dragon, which finally happened at level 20. I've seen other people plan it out such that dragon riders get a unique dragon who arbitrarily levels with them, despite the established precedent that dragons primarily gain power from age.
- How do you plan to justify a dragon-sized mount in traditional dungeon crawls? Dragons can naturally polymorph, but that actually raises more questions, such as whether you're really a dragon rider if the dragon isn't a dragon at the moment.
- Please tell me you aren't using ranger-style animal companion rules. They're so terrible.
- What makes a dedicated Dragon Rider special, compared to any other person who happens to convince a dragon to consistently let them ride on its back?
There we go. I fixed the class. If there is something wrong with it, let me know on this page or add a stub and I will try to fix it. Thanks for the points, Kydo! Sé onr sverdar sitja hvass! (Yes, I am a HUGE inheritance fan!)
I've noticed the stubs about the balance issues. Here are my responses: I have to limit the Dragon to Young Adult because any younger and it would be too small, would you ride a dragon that was close to your own size? I will limit the telepathy and abilties that follow with it, maybe to half a mile? Boundless cry will not pierce planes, but carries every else with it, i may raise dc to 20. I will add some bad effects if your dragon or its rider dies. I understand about the martial weapons and spellcasting is a little strong, but you are bonded to a creature of magic and which is easier to use on dragonback, a sword or a lance? However, I will limit weapon proficiencies to simple weapons, long bows, longswords, and lances, is that good? Please note that i understand your concerns, but i don't want to destroy the original idea of it. I will fix it as soon as possible, however, my clunky phone has a character limit on edits and cuts off everything from Dragonfire down now that there is too many characters. I'm sorry if this class seems tOo OP. If you would like to see my inspiration for it, check out Christopher Paolini's series, The Inheritance Cycle.
- An adult black dragon has a challenge rating of 14. That means it is as strong as four level 14 player characters. With an ally like that, who needs a character at all? I think a good way to rebalance it would be to make access to the dragon itself variable based on the setting. So, give them a dragon NPC like you have, but make the connected features exploration and socialization related- not combat related. The dragon is already, in and of itself, an incredibly combat-capable benefit. It really doesn't need bonuses of any kind! Then their indepentent features would stand out, regardless of setting or situation- even if their dragon is killed. This would allow a PC of this class to function without their dragon, such as during a dungeon crawl, or in a campaign under a DM who hates dragons. At the DM's discretion, the dragon could be pushed aside as a story and background element, an information source, a travel method, etc; or they could be brought fully forward and given full combat use. The key here is that the class needs to make the character a hero in their own right. By making them dependent upon an NPC, you are putting the player's power and development fully at the mercy of the DM, because their features are directly connected to it. Take away the dragon and the character is basically not functional. That makes it extremely hard to write adventures involving such a character. You can't put them in a prison. You can't have them delve a subterranean labyrinth. Any interior fight turns such a character into a load to be carried by his party. The dragon can't be present for any important indoor scenes. This can be mitigated by having the dragon magically turn into something else, like a person, but that really blurs the concept of just what a dragon rider is when his dragon is something else. Basically, having combat features tied to or dependent upon an NPC deprotagonizes the character because it makes them only playable under extremely specific conditions, in very particular types of campaigns. It's actually more restraining for the entire table than anything else! The fact that it's outrageously OP compared to the intended game balance is just another reason for a DM to flatly say "no". --Kydo (talk) 16:50, 21 March 2016 (MDT)
- As for the proficiencies and spellcasting. I think I actually have a good resolution for that. Give them proficiency with ranged weapons, thrown weapons, and reach weapons. Nothing in the rules prevents us from giving weapon trait based proficiencies! For the spellcasting though, I have to ask, do they actually need to be able to cast spells? Like, it isn't even a unique casting mechanism. They're a sorcerer with a wizard's preparation requirement. It just doesn't seem to fit in with anything else in the character. Keep in mind that full spellcasting pretty much makes a full character development path on its own. Spellcasters usually only get a few metamagic features and stuff to style their magic, and make some spells a little stronger or cheaper to cast. By combining full spellcasting with enough features to make a full combat character, you've made a class that is nearly double the potential power. --Kydo (talk) 17:00, 21 March 2016 (MDT)
I see what you mean. I think I may have moved away from my original idea :) go me. My idea is that as a Dragon Rider you are effective alone, but no more than a typical fighter of you race. Your bond with your dragon sets you apart by "naturally" (would this count as natural? Probably not, but you understand, yes?) enhancing your character. These enchancements ( as per my idea) would be either magic or abilities that support you. Though now that i think about it, the Inheritance Cycle didn't give much to a bonded dragon that a normal one didn't have...maybe you are right about the dragon NPC thing. As for the spellcasting, I would have made it unique, except i really don't know what to do with the wiki spellcasting table-mabob. I could use some help with that part, and how to actually desribe the implementation of the dragon NPC. I think some of the abilities are fine (though they could change), I just need help working out how to make the spellcasting unique and balanced, but still keep that Dragon Riders are strong spellcasters, in addition to working out the chinks with the dragon. (Now to stop beating around, on, and through the dead horse) Will you help me? I also think as far as proficiencies, how about simple weapons and one martial weapons of the player's choice, that way they can pick how they want to fight (now I'm getting an entertaining image of a Dragon Rider using a whip).
- OK, so, I've been messing around, not saving anything, and I've found that the spellcasting table extension is extremely rigid. Editors are locked into the precedent framework set by the core material. I'm not sure how to change it to something unique. I may have to call in someone with a darker belt in wiki-fu. Here are ideas I had:
- We could use spell slots as an arbitrary currency for invoking effects/actions from your dragon. So, for example, we could start with, like, 1 spell slot of each level at first level, then grant the character access to a series of features as they gain levels, which can consume spell slots. The higher the level of the slot used, the more dramatic the effect. More powerful and influential features are made available as the character gains levels. That way it isn't magic, but it uses the mechanics of magic to generate mundane effects more flexibly than the core action currency used by most classes. It also introduces a tactical element, as the player only has one spell slot of each level. That means they can only use 9 features, tops, between rests, and they can only use a feature at a given power level once. They have to decide which spell slots are worth spending or saving each time they do something. Just an idea.
- Non-combat features could include things like the dragon granting advantages during overworld travel, such as scouting, preventing surprise attacks, preventing one from getting lost, finding otherwise hidden locations or trails, or possibly even giving rides to bypass certain distances. The dragon could be called upon as a contact for any number of downtime activities, granting advantage on their results, such as when doing research. (The obvious side-effect of this would be that you'd have to include the dragon's living expenses when doing this.)
- The dragon could provide access to unique downtime activities, such as helping the dragon amass its hoard, or participating in sporting events with your dragon.
- Don't forget, a dragon has needs. They are very big creatures, with a matching need for food and water. Dragons also have need of a den with surrounding domain. You could have advantages which only apply while travelling within its land. Certain features, like calling in your dragon for a ride, could have the expense of sustaining the dragon's dietary needs. You can't treat a companion as loot, or a feature, they need to come across as a real person who actually exists in the world.
- You could have features which, with limited use, call upon dragon effects in combat, without calling the dragon itself. For example, commanding your dragon to fly overhead and torch a group of enemies with dragon breath. These should be alternatives to actions you can make yourself, so the character has something to fall back on when there is no access to the sky. So, with the dragon breath example, make the attack a little smaller and weaker than normal dragon breath- the creature is moving while doing this, after all- and then grant a similar damage attack with no AOE. This gives you the option of calling the dragon for an area attack, or concentrating the damage on a single target by yourself.
I like your ideas, how about mine? I noticed your spell slot idea is similar to how spellcasting works in the Inheritance Cycle, and since the Inheritance Cycle can actually balance it (spells in the Inheritance Cycle draw their energy from the energy in the spellcaster's own body), here's my modifications:
- As you increase class level, the more abilities you get and the stronger abilities become. For example, at 1st level, a spell-like ability (for that IS what they are) might be able to light a torch easily, but at level 20, might be able to light a mansion on fire with little effort.
- Using higher spell slots have greater consequences, then a Dragon Rider might start with powerful abilities if they use their 9th level slot, but in doing so may suffer almost dire consequences (a level 1 using a 1st level slot may be a little woozy or something like that, using a 9th level slot would leave them unable to stand and very weak), but at higher levels, the consequences would be lowered as you are stronger (a level 20 might not have or notice the consequence from a 1st level slot and would only be staggered and weakened from the 9th level slot).
- Since some abilities would be more powerful than others, each ability would have their own list as to what they can do depending on the rider's level and the slot used. They would also have their own consequences based on the rider's level and the slot used (a spell that lights fires would have weaker consequences compared to, say, the equivalent of a wish spell (just an example, not sure on what the abilities would be)).
- The consequences can be things that happen throughout Dungeons and Dragons already (Exhaustion, temporary decrease in stats, effects that can be described, such as 'You find yourself gasping for breath even at a light jog' or 'You are weakened o the point your vision flickers and you are unable to stand without some form of support')
All this makes a Dragon Rider stronger than a normal spellcaster, but with more risks and dangers involved Now the dragon. I understand about them being their own person and a dragon as an ally is a little overpowered, but this is a Dragon RIDER...But I have somethings that may help. I want to do away with the bonds and just keep the Family Bond (just the raising the egg yourself part), so that the dragon should mean more to the rider. Because of how the bond works, they do love each other (like siblings or a parent and child) and (normally) would do things against their ideals, traits, even alignment if their partner was in danger (for example, a dragon might (a very big and unlikely might, but still a might) let a hunter bind them if their Rider was threatened and, of course, there was no other way for their rider to escape with at least their life, or a Rider dedicated to good might do evil if something similar happen to their dragon). A rider and dragon would help each other (so yes, I like your ideas for what the rider can do involving their dragon, like help building hoards, expand/manage territory, etc.), but there would be ways to limit a dragon's involvement. You would have to build a personality for your dragon, and that includes dislikes that may keep them from helping (a dislike of humanoids other than their rider, a dislike of tombs, etc.). Of course, when they are with you, you have to include their living expenses (an innkeeper needs some way to persuade them to tolerate the dragon nearby) as well as the difficulties of them being a dragon (people don't like dragons, dragons attract dragonslayers, etc.). There are also other dragons that would need things worked out with (bargaining or performing favors to allow you dragon to travel through their territory). Your dragon would also want a fair portion of the treasure for themselves. And no, just because they are bonded doesn't make it easier to get them to part with treasure (and, being bonded to them just makes it all the more apparent to the rider!). Plus, some of the abilities a dragon could do might tax the dragon's own strength, meaning it can only do so much (this could be represented with some form of point system, similar to ki and sorcery points, or is that not a good idea?). As for what the rider can do aside from the magical abilities and the dragon's physical abilities, I thought the abilities would be more passive (like Timeless Body), so that they aren't overpowered and leaves the player with figuring out things like, "Can I risk using a powerful ability and weakening myself?" and "Should I ask my dragon to come, or is it too expensive/risky/dangerous?" (a dragon could easy provoke a fight just with its presence). I do like your ideas for out of combat advantages and downtime options. I also am questioning if the archetypes should be changed. Let me know about your ideas and I will add my own, when I get on a computer, as this page has now exceeded my clunky phone's character limit.
OK, what about using a point currency to "buy" spell levels. So, for example, let's say you wanted to cast a level 1 spell; that would cost you like 1 point, but to cast it as a 2nd level spell would cost, like, 2 points. Or something. They aren't a spellcaster, so they shouldn't use the core spellcasting mechanism really. Instead, we could grant them access to specific thematic spells as they gain levels. Kind of like what the Roebling race does, but as a class feature. These would then essentially be cast-at-will spells, like what monsters do, but with a limited currency resource. --Kydo (talk) 15:38, 30 March 2016 (MDT)
Why not? The abilities can cost so many points minimum, but you can then spend more to strengthen it. This can go very well with the other ideas. I thought of a similar system to limit exactly what your dragon can do.
I have mostly cleaned the page, leaving United We Stand as I would still like an ability like that. All that needed is to start entering the ideas. (once they have been decided on!)--Agrith (talk) 10:19, 15 April 2016 (MDT)
OK, so, sorry about my absence of involvement. I'm going to test-play this class tomorrow using my go-to trial: try to one-man the Tyranny of Dragons expeditions. I am going to attempt to optimize the build for survivability. --Kydo (talk) 14:03, 8 June 2016 (MDT)
- Here's the results: At least in the first tier of play, this class is unstable, and that instability hinges on the circumstantial restriction regarding dragon involvement. I found every time my dragon was available, (whenever I was outdoors) this class performed better than is expected, but that effectiveness was short-lived. Every time I was separated from dragon involvement, I was pretty much thoroughly screwed without a great deal of luck. Whether I succeeded or not basically boiled down to a coin flip, because I was basically just a guy off the street, statistically- I had nothing else to fall back on. If I had been a jerk DM to myself, restricting the dragon at any opportunity, I would have struggled to achieve anything- even survive any combat encounter at all. I even had to start one adventure over again from the start, because three consecutive bad rolls had me killed in a single round against one creature. This whole class relies on the player and DM engaging in an unspoken agreement- that the DM will intentionally act to enable the player in the challenges they are proposing against the player. Thus, this class is highly demanding of the DM, but not particularly demanding of the person playing it. This highlights the conflict of interest for the DM in play, bringing that social tension into game play. This can be a very bad thing if there is not an incredibly high degree of trust present in that relationship. Even if the DM is being fair, a low trust relationship will predispose the player to interpret any failure or challenge as a personal slight. It's hard not to feel that way either- I was DMing myself and frequently thought to myself, "Man, this was a pretty harsh consequence, am I really being fair here?" and I can see other DMs struggling to discern whether their own decisions regarding this class are fair. In practice, if the player truly trusts the DM, and the DM is fairly experienced, I can see it working incredibly well. If either of these factors is not present- a stranger or jerk DM, or an inexperienced DM- then this class will likely result in arguments at the table. At this point, I'd recommend a disclaimer to point out the demand this class places on the DM. --Kydo (talk) 17:13, 9 June 2016 (MDT)
Have you reconsidered building a template for a Dragon Riders specific Dragon? I am also an avid Inheritance Cycle fan
and have been looking for a similar build and thought that if you may have made a Dragon template tailored towards not being overpowered by relying involved the MM ones that it may work out better. If you left it Player controlled but had it also level up similar to a characters (I'm personally using the Dragon Knight homebrew which is considered imbalanced for games but it has a great Dragon compnion setup imo) it would be an awesome class. ALso maybe give the character the extra attack sooner like level 5 like most classes if your more worried about the Shur'tugal surviving alone. -trtl2000
Hello! I couldn't help but notice someone changed the dragon's starting age from Adult to Ancient and I wanted to say that if you have any ideas for possible additions or changes, could you put them here so I can go over them? Thanks!
Alright, now the age is Adult because of both backstory and play-ability. This class is nigh unstoppable at level 20 (the character and their dragon can hold their own if not defeat a small party of level 20s) and can be often relied upon by their allies. At level 1, however, they are just average people with a little weapon practice and a dragon. They are heavily reliant on their allies as their dragon isn't overly powerful either, just enough to tip the scales ;). An ancient dragon would upset this. In addition, YOU raised the dragon. I would have made the dragon younger because of that, but it would make the class too weak. But to give you an idea, would you want to wait thousands of years to be a level one Dragon Rider or raise a dragon that become almost entirely self-sufficient around Adult age. An ancient dragon wouldn't make sense! Of course, the DM might decide it is more fitting for the dragon to be younger or older, but aside from that, it is fitting as an Adult.
I have changed my mind about the above. After thinking about it, it would perhaps be better if it started as Young. Not too powerful, and not old either.
The Series this is based of of is one of my favorite of all time , and I think you should add stuff about the energy storing in gems , riders blade , and eldunaris .
The Rider's Swords and Eldunari would make interesting equipment, but technically anyone can wield a Rider's Sword and dragons in D&D sadly do not have Eldunari. However, Eldunari could be a creature that is somehow connected to dragons. Finally, the gem system would be a great idea, but it would unnecessarily make the Energy system even more complex. But the ability to carry around a small store of Energy is appealing. I will think about it, but leave it how it is for now.Agrith (talk) 22:31, 22 November 2016 (MST)
Whoever changes the Hit Dice to d10. Thank you. The old d6 Hit Dice made Dragon Riders too squishy, they tend to do a lot of melee combat (or ranged, player's choice). A Dragon Rider that burns Energy will quickly be no more help in a fight. So again, thank you. Though next time, please let me know that you want to make a change so I can approve (or decline) it. Agrith (talk) 07:18, 17 January 2017 (MST)
Trtl2000, thanks for the points. I'll try to give my explainations the best I can. The dragon is how it is because I didn't want a dragon that magically changed size and age every so often, it didn't feel right for what I had in mind, but I understand your reasoning. Draconic Prowess also adds to your walking speed, thus its level. The dragon rider is supposed to be weak early on, but not too weak. Also, I am not picky about where you post, but my phone is clunky and can't edit pages or sections that are too big, or they reach its limits and it cuts off some of the bottom of the section/page. Agrith (talk) 05:11, 14 February 2017 (MST)
Very understandable. This was my first time posting a comment so I'm glad I actually got the message through haha. I was relating the Dragon scaling with you as level as similar to the Eragon book where as the egg hatched Saphira was but basically a psuedodragon. And
as time went on she grew in size and ability, but not very fast in
skill and couldn't even breath fire for around I think 6 months. So that's why I could see a Dragon Template serving very well both based on the series and in play.. Plus I feel it would bring a
new level of connection as your Dragon and your play r gain in power together. I would recommend checking out the Dragon Knight Dragon Template, it's very neat.
I have seen them. I would use that, if I was using the Eragon movie (no offense, but that's what it remided me of and I never liked the movie, too much difference from the book). I just feel a more natural growth fits (plus D&D dragon are very different from Alagaesia's dragons). Agrith (talk) 10:31, 14 February 2017 (MST)
So an IP user wanted an additional attack per turn as part of draconic strength. Fighters get that at level 5 and monks have to use a bonus action but can only use specific weapons. So it's a little too powerful for level 3. Agrith (talk) 05:17, 18 February 2017 (MST)
Right. Even though this is in vain, in the odd chance that the IP users look at the talk page, I will explain Draconic Prowess' mechanic. It grants an extra attack when you take the attack action and an additional 10 ft to your walking speed. The downside is you don't get the extra attack if your weapon is heavy or oversized and you don't get the extra movement if your armor is heavy. Dragon Riders are not proficient with Heavy Armor and unless you find a simple weapon with the heavy or oversized property, your choice of martial weapon is the only problem with this. So, please, look at the talk pages before you make an edit to a page. Agrith (talk) 14:43, 19 February 2017 (MST)
- Hi there I was looking over this class and loved the Inheritance cycle series and would have to agree upon a dragon template. If not so much as having the dragon change so much as to just understand what you have in mind for your dragon being capable of. The dragon knight class one is a good example but is flawed in of itself. If anything since you are raising this dragon from an egg for battle purses I'd say to look at the dragon tamer class and start out at Wyrmling that can fly. Seeing as how the dragon rider should be similar to the ranger class (but not too like it because that class sucks in its regards) being aware of the attacks your dragon can make would greatly help with play. Also granting the trait system may also be beneficial as a kind of learning capability that could give this class a growth aspect. Your dragon is a living creature and can learn from others of its kind. If you encountered a dragon that could burrow or swim it would make your dragon seem uneducated. The dragon knight traits would be a good example suggestion to see and gain as a kind of learning growth. Energon97 (talk) 2:26, 13 March 2017 (EST)
- True enough, but I'll just point out that most dragons don't exactly get along with each other. Plus dragons are proud creatures, a gold might not scoff at a bronze dragon's skill at swimming, but they would definitely be uninterested in learning it for themselves (well, they might enjoy the knowledge of it, but wouldn't be interested in using it very much). See what I mean. Also someone recently got rid of a section that I put in to point out the dragon's individuality. Apparently they didn't like the dragon having free will ;) I'll fix that. As for the trait system, I'm a little conflicted on whether I should go for that or keep it how it is. I absolutely love the Inheritance Cycle and can't help but point out that through out the series, Saphira didn't change much, aside from growing larger, gaining the ability to breathe fire, and learning from Glaedr. Those did change much of what she could do, though. If I were to use a trait system, what would you say I should use? Personally, I'd like to keep the dragon's growth system (you know, growing from size to size depending on how long they've lived) the same as it normally is. Agrith (talk) 12:38, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
I can agree with that. My suggestion would be that doing the trait system and maybe combining what is seen in the dragon knight and the arcane tinkerer for inspiration along with dragons as a whole. My belief for not seeing Saphira grow much is due to her not being able to with the situation she was placed in. Glaedr taught her what he could in the short time they had and we still don't completely know what that was. By you instilling a trait and age/size system you'll eliminate other people trying to edit the class seeing as how you account for everything already. Starting with a young adult dragon at level 1 and after a campaign say you have a few years of downtime she becomes an adult it could be seen as frustrating. Since d&d has different dragons to the Inheritance cycle you'd have to find a middle ground of what you think Saphira and Thorn would be able to do if they were transported to here. Energon97 (talk) 2:52, 13 March 2017 (EST)
You misunderstand (I think). I want to keep D and D's age system, not make an entirely new one. As for the trait system, if it has a lot of variations to it with limitation as to when certain traits are available, it would allow for choice and a feeling of progression when the dragon becomes capable of such and such trait that was out of reach.. Plus I could modify the dragon's Energy system to fit with this. Before you ask, the dragon's Energy system was to balance having creatures with CRs of 6-10 as loyal allies at level 1. Agrith (talk) 01:51, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
I have to ask that you change the flight and movement buff in the abilities part at the start because if you look at the actual dragons in the monster manual they have double their walking speed for fly speed, so it would just make more sense that you would get 10 fly speed and 5 walking speed every upgrade. As it stands you would need 10 levels just to match a wyrmling.--Lord Survival (talk) 16:38, 12 February 2018 (MST)
True, except that I don't want them to be too strong early on. At those improvements, one could have a dragon with a fly speed of 60 at level 3. This just feels a bit too strong (though I will nerf the walking speed. It does need to be 10) Agrith (talk) 22:31, 12 February 2018 (MST)
- All the instances of "per long rest" need correcting (see Class Do's and Don'ts (5e Guideline)).
- Bits of missing definition here and there, for example, Magic Blade: "your weapon does one extra die of damage", what is the extra die? (c.f. the wording for critical hits PHB p. 196)
- "Whenever a creature would be resistant to your magic" - there isn't a "magic resistance". Resistances apply do damage types. What is meant here?
- "You also gain complete freedom with your magic. With DM's approval (they must determine Energy cost), you may use your magic to do anything you can describe (the more powerful the spell is, the higher the Energy cost will be). " - extremely vague, provides no guidelines at all for what the effects might be or what the costs might be, could be used to replicate any spell in the game without it explicitly being a spell.
- More wording. "for one minutes time." -> "for a duration of 1 minute."
- Here's another one "You perform any time related ability permitted by the DM, who determines effects, costs, etc. " - vagueness is weak design.
- Wait, there everywhere, "You may perform any earth related ability"...?! Marasmusine (talk) 14:54, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
A suggestion for the dragons. I have worked a system based off of the dragon knight class, with some modifications. It does mean the dragon is weak in the beginning, but does gain power over time. It could probably use some more work, but I fell like it could be a start. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1WOYbvNuETgKXspF-HPeeOxt95NrLhemgUxu5DhYfMYM/edit?usp=sharing
I'm terribly conflicted. On one hand, I want the dragon to age naturally, but on the other, it make the dragon's progression slow and could lead to the player playing who know how many adventures with little change to their dragon. But while the progression and trait system for the Dragon Knight class is quickly and actually feels like something, the way the dragon ages just seems too unnatural to me. I suppose an asnwer would be to allow the dragon to age naturally, but gain new abilities as the player gained levels. Actually, that would also go with the dragon being raised by its rider thing and could be an answer to Marasmusine's Young-Dragons -are-too-powerful-for-level-1 problem (no offense, Marasmusine). Agrith (talk) 17:57, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
Okay, here's my idea. I am not sure about the dragon's starting age, but they do still age naturally. In addition, as they gain levels, the rider will have a list of abilities that they can choose from for their dragon. Since a random farmer who just so happens to get a dragon egg would have no idea what abilities a dragon has, "natural abilities" would be one of the abilities a player could select (for example, an adult gold dragon would have the option to select frightful presence as one of the natural abilities). This is just a basis at the moment, let me know if you think I should go another route or what-have-you. Thanks! Agrith (talk) 17:19, 21 June 2017 (MDT)
Alright. Hope that made it a little more balanced. Let me know if you see anything else, yes? Also, had to do those last couple of edit on my (still clunky) phone, so I am currently unable to remove the needsbalance stub and the -- > and < !-- from around the design disclaimer. If someone could do that, thanks! If not, I get to it when is can get on a computer. Extra thanks to Marasmusine for pointing that out. I don't have a MM (but I do have th PHB and DMG) so I have to use the web to find that stuff out (roll20 is my personal favorite). Agrith (talk) 15:03, 5 July 2017 (MDT)
Turn to Energy was basically a one shot kill to EVERYTHING within range. This was kill allies, enemies, you as well? I know EXACTLY what this is based on (Galbatorix's suicide from the Inheritance Cycle). But in any case, that kind of power is too much... and a little deadly for everyone. --Agrith (talk) 22:02, 7 July 2017 (MDT)
Hello, Mr. IP! That you are your changes, but d10s are used for fighters. Versatile characters, like monks, use d8s. I did forget about saving throws and skill proficiency, but instead of four, I decreased it to two and made skills a trait to select. Shortbows are simple weapons, and finally, the dragon did need less hit points, thank you. Agrith (talk) 12:50, 26 September 2017 (MDT)
Hey, Piplus. I just wanted to explain my choices so it didn't seem like I undid your changes for no reason. First, bolt cases and quivers can hold twenty bolts/arrows. Second, I limited it to one martial weapon and no shields to prevent it from being too powerful. Having a shield and any martial weapon you want, with a dragon, is quite strong. Finally, the shortbow or javelins is so that, regardless of what martial weapon you pick, you can have a ranged and melee weapon, if you want. I hopes thismakes more sense, and thank you. Agrith (talk) 05:16, 12 March 2018 (MDT)
Ideas, Comments Desired!
Right, I have decided how to deal with the trait system. I am going to have them start with a Young Dragon with weaker abilities than normal. For example, a far weaker breath weapon than is normal. The reason: a dragon would have little opportunity to use its breath weapon if doing so might attract unwanted attention that could result in it and its rider being forced to flee (or die). Most races do not like dragons, after all. The option to make such abilities stronger would an available trait. Plus, some traits would be available to certain ages and class levels. Agrith (talk) 08:36, 30 June 2017 (MDT)
Right. New idea. What do you all have to say about another Rider's Bond. (Go ahead and rant and rave about how there would be 4 archtypes and that isn't normal... Done? Then read on!) What I want to do is rename the Dragon Knight to Dragon Warrior and have the new Dragon Knight be more focus on mounted combat. Basically most/all of its abilities would require being mounted and may specifically require your dragon. My main problem with this is, unlike the other Bonds, the Dragon Knight features would likely be almost useless without a mount. That is a very significant problem, as this class, even the Dragon Friend, can adventure without its dragon if needed. Comments? Agrith (talk) 19:27, 12 July 2017 (MDT)
hey, i had a thought could you change the energy limit, aka how much you can use with out gain exaustion, as you level up as you remeber in th books as he got stronger he was no longer exusted by the same things like in the first book bresinger nocked him out but come a book later, or even by the end of the first, he has no trouble using bresinger to throw flames around. To the point he can sommion the true from of his sword, the weird ghost copy of his sword, with out it tiring him to bad where as aria said it would kill him or nearly kill him to sommion a simple silver ring in the first book.--Lord Survival (talk) 11:36, 14 June 2018 (MDT)
Hmm, you have a point. But, you must remember, the dragon rider's magic in this class functions like a limited wish spell. As it is, you can cast spells that cost up to 3 energy with no effect on yourself (4 for a dragon mage). Really powerful spells (at least, the examples I give) can cost 7 or even 10 or more. The more powerful a spell you go for, the more dangerous the cosequences... but I'll think on it. Thanks for bringing it up! Agrith (talk) 16:00, 14 June 2018 (MDT)
you could make it to where you could only just cast the level 9 spells by level 20 but still be exuasted by it so like your limit at max,for those other than a mage, could increase as you level up to the max being like 8,for the mage, or around there. Maybe you get 1 point to the limit every 2 time you get more points to use where as the mage could get 1 point each time he/she gets more points so he would havethe max of 8 buth the others would be 5. this way you keep the balance but open up the doors to moe power ful magic, almost creating a full vs half caster situation with in a class.--Lord Survival (talk) 16:27, 14 June 2018 (MDT)
- There. I made it so that the limit is raised to 5 at level 10, and 6 at level 18. That should help. Agrith (talk) 09:26, 15 June 2018 (MDT)
Wow. Now that I think about it, this class has vastly changed from how it was. Originally, it was just an attempt at a class by a just registered user (me) that was all but abandoned because of school. Now look at it. A working class with images and people making variants and using its rather unique mechanic. But enough patting myself on the back. The images I used are good, but I worry since I just up and used them. You know, copyright and all that. So I have a plea.
If anyone wants to make an image for this page, feel free. I am only using four images, however (Dragon Rider, Dragon Knight, Dragon Mage, and Dragon Friend). If you are making an image, I have a few requests:
- A no-brainer, but the image should include the dragon and rider.
- No reins please. These are not horses, but thinking creatures with their own wills (yes, I am aware that the dragon knight image has reins, but I didn't know that when I put it on).
- The Dragon Knight images should show their physical capabilities, but no muscly men, please.
- The Dragon Mage should show off their skill in magic (the current one looks like magic, but I think it's just sunlight.
- The Dragon Friend should preferrably not include battle and destruction. Leave the fire and brimstone to the other images. This one should note the relationship between dragon and rider and should feel more peaceful.
In any case, just show me the image on either my or this talk page if you make one (no one if forcing you, do it because you want to!). Thank you all! (My phone sucks, so it couldn't do the following line:) Sé onr sverdar sitja hvass! Agrith (talk) 09:04, 4 August 2017 (MDT)
Wow. I'm terrible. One of the images is under copyright. Not sure how I forgot about that, basically everything is under copyright, but I removed it. Thanks to Marasmusine for pointing that out! And now that I am very uncertain about the images, I have removed them all... Agrith (talk) 12:24, 4 August 2017 (MDT)
I understand that this is taken from another fictional source, however as a class for D&D this needs work. The DM should never have to play a role in a players class other than small things worked out in the beginning of a campaign. Additionally, a young dragon at level 1 is extremely OP, and giving the player the ability to give additional abilities to an already overly powerful all seems extremely unfair. On top of having a dragon ally, the player can use magic, making this more like a multiclassing experience than an actual class.
- I moves this here because it is easier to respond to, but at a glance, you are right. But let me explain. And this may seem out of order, but it helps.
- The dragon is actually far weaker than the Monster Manual young dragons. The trait system allows it to grow and still be useful when you are level 20 and fighting a tarrasque (saying this, I did just nerf it more by reducing the hit dice it has). While it may seem powerful, it really isn't much better than you save for the immunity, its flight, and its high health (which I suppose I could reduce to 3 hit dice and allow it to gain one each time you gain a level). It is supposed to be more powerful than you, but not extremely so. If absolutely necessary, the DM can find reasons to remove the dragon temporarily. Finally, if you or your dragon dies, it can give a permanent madness.
- The magic system is very malleable, but for more reatrictive than it seems. The energy system is equivalent to spell slots, but what makes Dragon Rider magic more dangerous is that you can kill yourself or leave yourself vunerable because of exhaustion, basically limiting you to spells that cost 3 Energy or less unless you need a bigger spell and are willong to deal with the exhaustion. The DM can further restrict or loosen it by deciding just how expensive the spell is and could change it based on location.
- As you pointed out, this class has very pwerful element that may need further restriction than the class alone provides, hence the DM involvement.
Thank you for responding to me! This helps a bit, but u still have concerns about the trait system and the DMs role. Some things still do not seem fair to me. For example, a Red dragon cannot physically burrow. It's not built to biologically, and yet because it was raised in a different environment it suddenly can burrow with astounding speed? If a cat were raised by moles it couldn't dig nearly as fast or as well as they could, even if it were digging all it's life. I understand stuff like health and speed, but stuff like burrow, blindsight, gas breath, and change shape make no sense to be able to do for any dragon not biologically or physically able to in the first place.
Also, yes, I understand a great way to ballance something in a campaign is to let the DM decide what's best to do, but this should only be in specific cases where one person's character stands out from any other character using the same class or where the DAM disagrees with something that is usually accepted. I like the creative options given with letting the PC do whatever their creativity desires, but i still believe the DM shouldn't be playing such a big role in how the class works. I think a good solution for this would be to let the PC choose from a variety of spells, perhaps even spells you make yourself, instead of making the DM figure out all the rules needed to have fair magic abilities. The exhaustion rule can still work here if you make the exhaustion less for certain level spells, or it might be easier to move it to spell slots, either way that works. With the way you have it now, the DM is doing much more Tha. They should, and even though it's open for creativity for the PC it also allows for the player to create loopholes and play a lot more overpowered than this class may intend. I'm sorry I didn't use the talk page before, it would've been easier. Now I know! 18.104.22.168 13:34, 3 September 2017 (MDT)
This explanation is going to be short, since my internet connection is terrible (it already stopped my from posting a very nice explanation) and I not in a good mood (I have been playing a game on an emulator and got myself in a situation were the Random generator makes continuing impossible without giving up). Right... gas breath is only on metallic dragons, most, if not all dragons have blindsight (don't have Monster Manuel and already explained about internet), I think ancient dragons have change shape (again, internet and lack of MM), plus a cat cannot be as good as a mole, but I can be extraordinarily good at digging for a cat. Plus dragons are smarter than cats. I could limit the number of selections players can make on those trait, but I does limit the sort of freedom of "building" the dragon however you like. As for the spell thing, loopholes are going to happen in games that allow creativity (such as D&D), but D&D has other players (such as DMs) to "police" that. Plus I would create or choose spells, but I would much prefer a malleable spell system that allows players to create their own spells for the situation. The consequences (as I found out from play testing) can be far worse than you think if you aren't careful (I decided to be a little careless on two runs (just to test) and, even with my dragon, I got utterly obliterated at level 20. Yeah...). I hope that helped, but with my... restriction, I probably did a terrible job at it. Agrith (talk) 22:58, 3 September 2017 (MDT)
- Hmm, good question. I'm not sure, as its magic is essentially just a limited wish spell. But due to the limited Energy and the exhaustion penalty, I'm going to say that it sits around third caster. Energy a Dragon Rider has at a certain level is variable. It has a minimum of 5 and will likely sit at about 20-30 for a level 18 character (a guess, I'm not sure). While it depends on the spell, that's about 2 to 3 spells that could be level 9 potential, plus the possible regeneration of energy from Boundless Energy granting the repeated use of spealls similar to cantrip/level one spells. If you think otherwise, please tell me. Agrith (talk) 20:15, 3 July 2018 (MDT)