PDA

View Full Version : Why We Hit Dragons with Swords?



Mr. Mask
2013-08-07, 08:48 AM
"Dragons are best fought with ballista, and heavy crossbows," is a point that was made, and one I have trouble arguing with.

I had been discussing the type of hand weapons best used for harming a dragon. It was pointed out, however, that no hand weapon was going to be suitable. If it was larger than a bear, and had scaly armour, you don't hit it with a sword, if you're being sensible.

Now, I love logic... but I also love hitting dragons with swords.


Can anyone think of reasons or situations where you'd need to attack a dragon with hand weapons?

Lentrax
2013-08-07, 08:52 AM
You got swallowed and are attacking its insides?

Mr. Mask
2013-08-07, 08:59 AM
I think some rat-poison would be more effective, considering the state you'd likely be in. Or, even better, grog.


((If you were somehow conscious and able after being swallowed, it wouldn't be difficult to harm a creature. Snakes can face this problem and easily die, when they swallow crocodiles))

TheCountAlucard
2013-08-07, 09:01 AM
You're a Solar Exalt, a god-king with lethal monster-fighting techniques, and your daiklave is more akin to a sharpened bulldozer blade than a sword?

i.e., choice of game makes quite a bit of difference.

Joe the Rat
2013-08-07, 09:08 AM
There is a fantasy series (the name of which eludes me) that touches on this, particularly with the classic Knight hand weapon - the Lance.

Our protagonist has been sucked into a fantasy world and is turned into a dragon. At some point (the why eludes me as well), he is accosted by a knight, and decides to take his nigh-invulnerable self against a squishy little man in a suit of armor. With a long, pointy stick. On a heavy horse. So you have close to a half ton of beast and metal bearing down at you at 10+mph, focused into a hard point. (I'll leave the force calculations as an exercise for the reader).

It does not end well for our erstwhile dragon.

Piercing attacks are one of the most efficient ways to translate force into injury. If you are attacking a dragon with a sword, you should be thrusting for all you are worth. With a spear or lance, you have a better chance of getting to the vulnerable interior squishy bits. Adding a mount gives you more force and maneuverability. (and in 3.5, reach.)

Qwertystop
2013-08-07, 09:12 AM
Material-based defenses, where the material is unsuitable for projectiles, whether due to price or weight or how you can shape it?

Wind?

OverdrivePrime
2013-08-07, 09:14 AM
Can anyone think of reasons or situations where you'd need to attack a dragon with hand weapons?

Because I'm the hero.

Lord Torath
2013-08-07, 09:17 AM
There is a fantasy series (the name of which eludes me) that touches on this, particularly with the classic Knight hand weapon - the Lance.

Our protagonist has been sucked into a fantasy world and is turned into a dragon. At some point (the why eludes me as well), he is accosted by a knight, and decides to take his nigh-invulnerable self against a squishy little man in a suit of armor. With a long, pointy stick. On a heavy horse. So you have close to a half ton of beast and metal bearing down at you at 10+mph, focused into a hard point. (I'll leave the force calculations as an exercise for the reader).

It does not end well for our erstwhile dragon.

Piercing attacks are one of the most efficient ways to translate force into injury. If you are attacking a dragon with a sword, you should be thrusting for all you are worth. With a spear or lance, you have a better chance of getting to the vulnerable interior squishy bits. Adding a mount gives you more force and maneuverability. (and in 3.5, reach.)The Dragon and the George. All humans look alike, so the dragons call them all George after St. George, the dragon slayer. Or something like that...

At some point(age), don't dragons become immune to non-magical missiles?

Another problem with Ballistae is that they take a while to reload. They're also not very mobile, so they have a hard time avoiding return-fire. So if your first volley doesn't take the beast down, you probably won't get a second...

Slipperychicken
2013-08-07, 09:29 AM
The genre is called fantasy for a reason.

If heroes were sensible, they'd bring an army against the dragon, not just five guys who met in a bar.


EDIT: It is kind of covered by the rules: A normal person can't hurt a dragon with an ordinary sword (combination of natural armor, hit points, and DR), but a superhero with a magic sword can hurt it (since he possesses the attack bonus, damage, and DR penetration to do so).

But then, trying to hit it with a sword is pretty dumb in the first place unless you have it cornered, or if you're a faster flier. Otherwise, it can simply keep its distance and roast you with its breath weapon.

JustSomeGuy
2013-08-07, 09:35 AM
To the contrary, armies need to be equiped, trained and paid. Drunk bar guys will do just about anything given the correct titriation of bets, insults to their manliness and further provision of drinks.

Joe the Rat
2013-08-07, 09:35 AM
The Dragon and the George. All humans look alike, so the dragons call them all George after St. George, the dragon slayer. Or something like that...

At some point(age), don't dragons become immune to non-magical missiles?

Another problem with Ballistae is that they take a while to reload. They're also not very mobile, so they have a hard time avoiding return-fire. So if your first volley doesn't take the beast down, you probably won't get a second...Thank you! That has been bugging me for quite a while.

You'd probably be best off with staggered ranks of Ballistae to alternate fire and reload - but it would still be slow. This is probably the best argument for the "small arms" - faster reload.

Nerd-o-rama
2013-08-07, 09:38 AM
Attacking a dragon in melee is a legitimately bad idea unless you're Beowulf or someone sufficiently like him as makes no difference. This is true across pretty much all fantasy game settings I can think of.

Or for a D&D specific answer, to distract it and eat its attacks of opportunity so the mage can sneak in and hit it with Shivering Touch.

Also massed ballistae need to be arranged on an open field to have the range of fire needed to hit a flying dragon. That's a recipe for getting them cooked by breath weapon or the operators scattered and panicked unless you're dedicating a national army to take down one dragon. It's usually cheaper in terms of human resources to just hire adventurers to go stab it in its lair. Hell, they'll probably do it at no cost to you just for a crack at the dragon's hoard.

elliott20
2013-08-07, 10:20 AM
Because I'm the hero.

No other justification needed after that.

Berenger
2013-08-07, 10:27 AM
Because Ulfgar, the wizened old master bladesmith living atop the mystic mountain, doesn't spend years of his life to forge rare metal fallen from the stars and engrave elaborate ancient runes into an one-way crossbow bolt?

elliott20
2013-08-07, 10:44 AM
I just imagine though, that someone using a sword better be able to one-shot that dragon, because I just can't imagine any dragon with any amount of sense staying in melee for more than a round. (Especially one genre savvy enough to know what some adventurers are capable of.)

OverdrivePrime
2013-08-07, 10:49 AM
I just imagine though, that someone using a sword better be able to one-shot that dragon, because I just can't imagine any dragon with any amount of sense staying in melee for more than a round. (Especially one genre savvy enough to know what some adventurers are capable of.)

That's why heroes use fightan' magicks.

And jetpacks.

Slipperychicken
2013-08-07, 10:49 AM
Because Ulfgar, the wizened old master bladesmith living atop the mystic mountain, doesn't spend years of his life to forge rare metal fallen from the stars and engrave elaborate ancient runes into an one-way crossbow bolt?

If he's going to be such a prick about it, he could just give the bolt the Returning property make a Returning javelin or something.

Jay R
2013-08-07, 11:24 AM
Ordinary people shouldn't hit dragons with swords. They haven't the strength or the will.

But ordinary people shouldn't become player characters, either. These are great heroes, who do what most people could not.

But there is one reason that we hit dragons with swords, which swamps all other logic or reasoning.

The reason we hit dragons with swords is this:

Because Sigurd did.
Because Beowulf and Wiglaf did.
Because Turambar did.
Because Farmer Giles did.
Because Prince Phillip did.
...

elliott20
2013-08-07, 11:37 AM
That's why heroes use fightan' magicks.

And jetpacks.
So, this guy?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b1/Rocket-knight-adventure.jpg

Asmodai
2013-08-07, 11:50 AM
Can anyone think of reasons or situations where you'd need to attack a dragon with hand weapons?

Because eventally you'll finnaly find the sword that goes snicker-snack!

Mewtarthio
2013-08-07, 12:06 PM
Because Sigurd did.

As I recall, Sigurd used a pit trap and a magical cuts-through-anything sword. The pit trap implies that Fafnir was not a flying kaiju-sized monstrosity.


Because Beowulf and Wiglaf did.
Because Turambar did.

And it worked out so well for them. :smallamused:


Because Prince Phillip did.

He didn't strictly speaking hit Maleificent with his sword: He had it enchanted with faerie magic to fly from his hand and pierce the beast's heart. It's more like shooting a dragon with a sword-shaped anti-materiel rifle.

[/pedantry]

OverdrivePrime
2013-08-07, 12:08 PM
Ordinary people shouldn't hit dragons with swords. They haven't the strength or the will.

But ordinary people shouldn't become player characters, either. These are great heroes, who do what most people could not.

But there is one reason that we hit dragons with swords, which swamps all other logic or reasoning.

The reason we hit dragons with swords is this:

Because Sigurd did.
Because Beowulf and Wiglaf did.
Because Turambar did.
Because Farmer Giles did.
Because Prince Phillip did.
...

http://i1205.photobucket.com/albums/bb426/Tree_Phiddy/Gifs/98659685.gif

Driderman
2013-08-07, 01:11 PM
"Why do we hit dragons with swords?"

Because we're too lazy to figure out an actual battleplan that would work against a flying, magical weapon of mass destruction that is most likely a lot smarter than us, so some people handwave it down to "It hit it with my sword for X damage".

Nerd-o-rama
2013-08-07, 02:14 PM
And it worked out so well for them. :smallamused:

To be fair, Beowulf was drastically undergeared.

elliott20
2013-08-07, 02:26 PM
"Why do we hit dragons with swords?"

Because we're too lazy to figure out an actual battleplan that would work against a flying, magical weapon of mass destruction that is most likely a lot smarter than us, so some people handwave it down to "It hit it with my sword for X damage".

well, when you're playing an ubercharger....

Calmar
2013-08-07, 03:35 PM
Nowadays everyone just thinks about getting something the easiest and fastest way. Of course you could try to poison a dragon, to bury it in its cave, or hire a magician to kill it. But that's not honourable. No one at your monarch's court, your jarl's drinking hall, or your chieftain's council will be impressed if you use cheap tricks to murder the powerful beast. At worst, they'll fear your malice and try to get rid of you in a equally cowardly way.

Besides, players often expect the foes play 'fair', so they should do the same to keep the game credible... :smallwink:

Hiro Protagonest
2013-08-07, 03:50 PM
Because in a world with MAGIC and AWESOME, you can kill a tank with an M16. But it has to be a MAGIC M16.

And apparently in fiction, when confronted with the idea of the supernatural, all soldiers think their M16s are magic.

Friv
2013-08-07, 03:55 PM
"Dragons are best fought with ballista, and heavy crossbows," is a point that was made, and one I have trouble arguing with.

I had been discussing the type of hand weapons best used for harming a dragon. It was pointed out, however, that no hand weapon was going to be suitable. If it was larger than a bear, and had scaly armour, you don't hit it with a sword, if you're being sensible.

Now, I love logic... but I also love hitting dragons with swords.


Can anyone think of reasons or situations where you'd need to attack a dragon with hand weapons?

There's a pretty good reason to avoid using artillery against a dragon: Artillery, especially medieval artillery, is pretty crummy against fast-moving targets. Good luck getting the dragon to stay still while you try to line up the shot.

As for other stuff, well... yeah, it's because the sword is what you've got on you. You didn't train as an archer, and the guy who did isn't around. An army of crossbowmen is likely to break and panic when the dragon explodes out of nowhere and flames half their line, and heroes use the weapons they know.

Slipperychicken
2013-08-07, 04:15 PM
No one at your monarch's court, your jarl's drinking hall, or your chieftain's council will be impressed if you use cheap tricks to murder the powerful beast.

If the only reason you have to destroy this magnificent noble beast is for fleeting personal glory, then you have better things to do.

You'll probably be better off making friends with it anyway, trading, instituting breeding programs (half-dragons are powerful warriors, especially if they're NPC minions for whom the LA is not an issue. You weren't expecting them to level up much anyway) and mutual defense agreements. A dragon can be a powerful ally.

Asheram
2013-08-07, 04:17 PM
Well. It all depends, I suppose.

Dragons are "traditionally" cave living beings which means that there are two ways of hunting them, either waiting them out or sending someone in. In older times you used to hunt bears and boar with spears, since it essentially was a big stick between you and certain death, but dragons are a tricky kind and I imagine that the dragon hunter needs more mobility since there are few spears long and sturdy enough to strike a dragon from afar.

Should one attempt to strike down a grounded dragon I suppose it is the lance which would be ideal for that, but lances break and if you don't kill the dragon in one shot then you're having a very pissed wounded dragon.

From afar it gets easier, I imagine that a ballista could take down a dragon, but that is only if you manage to hit it with a very cumbersome siege weapon and if you doesn't hit it the first time it means that it has a very good chance of taking the ballista out while you are busy reloading it.
Other than that, ranged weapons would work as well, I imagine a squadron of crossbowmen being quite fatal to a small dragon.
But that means you are prepared for a dragon assault.

In the end I believe you hunt dragons with swords just because it's a weapon that can be used in a multitude of situations. Lances are too circumstantial and you might get off one shot with a crossbow before the dragon is in your face and ready to eat you.

LibraryOgre
2013-08-07, 04:39 PM
Remember, too, that Beowulf fought the dragon NOT while it was in the air. He came upon it while it was sleeping. In his lair. So the dragon couldn't take off, and his sword-and-steel-board strategy was sound.

erikun
2013-08-07, 04:55 PM
Can anyone think of reasons or situations where you'd need to attack a dragon with hand weapons?
If I have a sword, with a blade magically enchanted to pierce through the hide of a dragon, then I can hit the dragon repeatedly with it until it is dead. When the dragon is dead, I may hand my sword down to later generations to use against future dragons.

If I have a ballista bolt, with a point magically enchanted to pierce through the hide of a dragon, then I have one shot with it. I'd better hope that it hits the first time, because we aren't likely to send out a troop of knights to go retrieve it if there's an angry dragon flying around. Also, it would likely be lost or broken afterwards. And I'm sure hoping that we don't have another dragon flying around.

In other words, if I'm a blacksmith making a dragon-slaying weapon or a king commissioning one, I am far more likely to be getting the reusable sword produced over the single use arrowhead.

Doomboy911
2013-08-07, 05:05 PM
The genre is called fantasy for a reason.

If heroes were sensible, they'd bring an army against the dragon, not just five guys who met in a bar.



Well you get a couple folks drunk with swords and you understand why they went off to fight a dragon.

Bar bets the beginning of all great adventurers.

"I'm tellin' ya man that lich hash like a billion hit points. There'sh no whay you can't take him." Hic

*GLUG* "You're on"

SiuiS
2013-08-07, 05:09 PM
"Dragons are best fought with ballista, and heavy crossbows," is a point that was made, and one I have trouble arguing with.

I had been discussing the type of hand weapons best used for harming a dragon. It was pointed out, however, that no hand weapon was going to be suitable. If it was larger than a bear, and had scaly armour, you don't hit it with a sword, if you're being sensible.

Now, I love logic... but I also love hitting dragons with swords.


Can anyone think of reasons or situations where you'd need to attack a dragon with hand weapons?

Because a Dragon is an embodiment of Wickedness, whereas dragons layers are usually Knights, and their sword is symbolic of their status and piety. You're not hitting a dragon with a sword, you're cleaving manifest sin with Valor and Chivalry. The narrative feel is important. Line dragon slayers go after dragons instead of armies because the lone dragon slayer has the attributes necessary to be carries through on faith or baddassitude.

Endarire
2013-08-07, 07:03 PM
Because we can.

Alternatively, it's because the sword is bigger (and better) than the polearm you were using to Dragoon (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19872838/Little_Red_Raiding_Hood:_A_Tale_of_38;_Guide_to_th e_3.5_Dragoon) it.

Lord Vukodlak
2013-08-07, 07:27 PM
There is a fantasy series (the name of which eludes me) that touches on this, particularly with the classic Knight hand weapon - the Lance.

The rights of which were purchased and very loosely adapted into the animated movie The Flight of Dragons.

nedz
2013-08-07, 07:29 PM
Ordinary people shouldn't hit dragons with swords. They haven't the strength or the will.

But ordinary people shouldn't become player characters, either. These are great heroes, who do what most people could not.

But there is one reason that we hit dragons with swords, which swamps all other logic or reasoning.

The reason we hit dragons with swords is this:

Because Sigurd did.
Because Beowulf and Wiglaf did.
Because Turambar did.
Because Farmer Giles did.
Because Prince Phillip did.
...

George used a lance — which may be why he is more famous ?

Nerd-o-rama
2013-08-07, 08:00 PM
George used a lance — which may be why he is more famous ?

Have you ever looked at the actual painting of St. George and the Dragon? That poor thing was a Juvenile at most, barely the size of George's horse.

On the other hand, a Juvie Green Dragon is still CR 8, and George was soloing it...yeah, ubercharging was involved somehow.

Alabenson
2013-08-07, 08:33 PM
Why do I hit dragons with a sword?

Because I'm playing an ubercharger, and my sword deals more damage than a cruise missile :smalltongue:.

Incanur
2013-08-08, 09:42 AM
Much of the appeal of attacking a dragon with a sword comes from the fact that it's generally not a wise move. Relentless optimizing stands antithetic to the chivalric ethos and leads to few if any great feats of arms. The iconic knight wants to prove their superiority, not win in the easiest way possible. In Orlando furioso, for example, one of the characters ends up discarding a magic shield that blinds opponents because it prevents him from demonstrating his prowess and valor. This wasn't just an ideal. Countless historical warriors opted for the more dangerous course in order to prove their worth and win renown. (This often got them killed, especially as guns improved.) The medieval military elite had a different mindset from the pragmatic technological militaries of today.

Driderman
2013-08-08, 11:06 AM
The problem with hitting dragons with swords is also that, barring having actually grounded the beast with no means of escape, it's a purely mechanical thing because many systems simply doesn't differentiate between hit locations (to any major extent at least, and with good reason because it could become insanely trivial).
So due to the mechanical nature of the game you can do any action that basically makes no sense whatsoever and still (un)reasonably expect it to work despite the fact that it makes as much sense as battling an elephant with a pocketknife, from a fluff-standpoint.

Personally I don't really play D&D any more (where it is my experience that situations like these can often occur) and you'd better believe that if I ran a fantasy game where my players expected to go toe-to-toe with a dragon without wielding the "Magical Plot Macguffin Of This Specific Dragon Slaying" they'd most likely be reduced to dragonchow very quickly.

Dusk Eclipse
2013-08-08, 11:13 AM
Have you ever looked at the actual painting of St. George and the Dragon? That poor thing was a Juvenile at most, barely the size of George's horse.

On the other hand, a Juvie Green Dragon is still CR 8, and George was soloing it...yeah, ubercharging was involved somehow.

I wish this wasn't too long for a sig-quote

Nerd-o-rama
2013-08-08, 11:23 AM
I wish this wasn't too long for a sig-quote

I suck at brevity.

Jay R
2013-08-08, 01:14 PM
As I recall, Sigurd used a pit trap and a magical cuts-through-anything sword. The pit trap implies that Fafnir was not a flying kaiju-sized monstrosity.



And it worked out so well for them. :smallamused:

...

He didn't strictly speaking hit Maleificent with his sword: He had it enchanted with faerie magic to fly from his hand and pierce the beast's heart. It's more like shooting a dragon with a sword-shaped anti-materiel rifle.

[/pedantry]

Did you miss the point? Our fantasy heroes try to hit dragons with swords because fantasy heroes of old tried to hit dragons with swords.

One of only 13 magic swords listed in the original D&D is a +1 sword, +3 vs. Dragons. Clearly, we are intended to hit dragons with it.

And by the way, it did work out well for Beowulf and Wiglaf. They slew the dragon they were out to slay. They also died, but all heroes do, eventually. These got a heroic death, saving their people, and a poem to keep them known forever.

Gettles
2013-08-08, 01:28 PM
Because you are blatantly superhuman and know for a fact that you can use your ordinary piece of metal to absolutly ruin the dragon's day.

Premier
2013-08-08, 01:38 PM
Ballista or other siege weapons - They're neither meant to nor capable of aiming at and hitting a fast, mobile, small flying target. Note that for a siege weapon any moving target other than "Look, there's an entire army, just hit some of them, I don't care which guys, specifically" counts as small.
Not to mention that if the dragon is inside its lair, you can't even get your ballista in there.


Bows, cross- or otherwise - Assuming they CAN penetrate the dragon's natural armour, they're very terrain-dependent. Other than mythological and fairy tale-style hits to the single weak spot, two or three archers are not going to do anything: you need an entire company of them or more firing in a volley. Which in turn requires that A, they be trained in firing volleys at high-speed aerial targets, which sounds rather preposterous, and B, they need to be outside on open ground, because you can't exactly sneak an entire army into the dragon's lair while it sleeps.

What else is there? Polearms - these could actually be useful, assuming the dragon does engage in close combat: good reach, penetrating capability, the dragon will impale itself thanks to its own momentum, and a small group of polearm wielders is also able to defend itself effectively, so you can bring them indoors (as long as the dragon's lair is like a typical fantasy dungeon rather than a realistic cave, where even a single spear is going to be a major hindrance to movement).

And then you have the non-polearm close combat weapons, which win out by elimination. And of those, bashing weapons might be useless because the dragon's thick skin and hide soften the impact, leaving axes and swords. And, like polearms, axes are less suitable in enclosed environments.

Avilan the Grey
2013-08-08, 02:06 PM
There is a fantasy series (the name of which eludes me) that touches on this, particularly with the classic Knight hand weapon - the Lance.

Our protagonist has been sucked into a fantasy world and is turned into a dragon. At some point (the why eludes me as well), he is accosted by a knight, and decides to take his nigh-invulnerable self against a squishy little man in a suit of armor. With a long, pointy stick. On a heavy horse. So you have close to a half ton of beast and metal bearing down at you at 10+mph, focused into a hard point. (I'll leave the force calculations as an exercise for the reader).


I remember this book, it was quite good and brought this point home even better.

There was another, called Dragonslayer or something like that... The large dragon's name was Morkeleb, if that helps anyone.

The main character was the only living person who had killed a dragon, and everybody expects him to kill Morkeleb with his sword etc. Instead he shows up with about 6 poisoned strongly poisoned long harpoons, which shocks the people expecting the knight on a white horse. He BARELY manages to kill the dragon regardless; in fact, both are dying from eachother's poison and a truce have to be made to be able to save the man.

nedz
2013-08-08, 02:10 PM
I wish this wasn't too long for a sig-quote

The Dragon George slew
Juvenile, his horse larger
Ubercharging icon

Ed:
actually it's a very common orthodox icon (http://uk.images.search.yahoo.com/search/images?_adv_prop=image&fr=altavista&va=george+dragon+icon).

Avilan the Grey
2013-08-08, 02:16 PM
There's a pretty good reason to avoid using artillery against a dragon: Artillery, especially medieval artillery, is pretty crummy against fast-moving targets. Good luck getting the dragon to stay still while you try to line up the shot.

You hunt it like a badger: You corner it the lair. Preferably by shooting INTO the lair, so you don't get caught in it as well.

Jay R
2013-08-08, 03:39 PM
The problem with hitting dragons with swords is also that, barring having actually grounded the beast with no means of escape, it's a purely mechanical thing because many systems simply doesn't differentiate between hit locations (to any major extent at least, and with good reason because it could become insanely trivial).

They don't differentiate within the mechanics. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist; it merely means that the mechanics of the game deal with it implicitly.

It's just as easy to hit somebody in plate as to hit somebody who is unarmored. The rules say it's harder because many hits on plate do no damage. So a miss on somebody in plate, with a roll that would have hit somebody unarmored, merely means the sword actually hit, but the plate prevented any damage.

Similarly, dragons are really, really easy to hit. They're big. So any "miss" represents the sword hitting someplace where the dragon scales prevented damage, and a "hit" represents hitting the unprotected belly, or sliding in under a scale, or some such.


So due to the mechanical nature of the game you can do any action that basically makes no sense whatsoever and still (un)reasonably expect it to work despite the fact that it makes as much sense as battling an elephant with a pocketknife, from a fluff-standpoint.

The action makes perfect sense; you just weren't given the details. The attack mechanism shows how easy it is to find an unprotected spot on a dragon in that universe.


Personally I don't really play D&D any more (where it is my experience that situations like these can often occur) and you'd better believe that if I ran a fantasy game where my players expected to go toe-to-toe with a dragon without wielding the "Magical Plot Macguffin Of This Specific Dragon Slaying" they'd most likely be reduced to dragonchow very quickly.

This does not mean that your game will be more accurate, but merely that dragons in your world are better armored than dragons in the D&D-verse.

Consider two facts:
1. Dragons can fly, which means that they have to lift all that armor into the sky.
2. Throughout history, in many cultures, while dragons are portrayed as being able to defeat ordinary people, they are virtually always defeated by great heroes.

Go look at any period portrayal of St. George and the dragon, and you will realize that the current image of a dragon is simply much larger than dragons were considered to be in the period.

Beleriphon
2013-08-08, 03:46 PM
To be fair, Beowulf was drastically undergeared.

And he was venerable age according to the D&D age categories.

Toofey
2013-08-08, 03:48 PM
Because you're the toughest guy available and you're better with a sword than any other weapon?

Nerd-o-rama
2013-08-08, 04:22 PM
The Dragon George slew
Juvenile, his horse larger
Ubercharging icon

Ed:
actually it's a very common orthodox icon (http://uk.images.search.yahoo.com/search/images?_adv_prop=image&fr=altavista&va=george+dragon+icon).

Wow, those are even tinier dragons than in the painting I saw. Now I really feel sorry for the poor thing.

Lord Ruby34
2013-08-08, 04:54 PM
You hunt it like a badger: You corner it the lair. Preferably by shooting INTO the lair, so you don't get caught in it as well.

To be fair most badgers don't breathe fire. Or acid. Or lightning. Or... Well, you get the point. I doubt the actual ballista would last long. And if the dragon is suitably tough the ballista bolt might literally bounce off its hide.

Knaight
2013-08-08, 06:36 PM
Go look at any period portrayal of St. George and the dragon, and you will realize that the current image of a dragon is simply much larger than dragons were considered to be in the period.

More than that, relatively few mythical beings in general would be any larger than D&D Huge (though that applies a lot less when it comes to sea monsters), and the ones that were were big deals that are generally way beyond human capacity to deal with - or, they were something like the Cyclops which involved a large battering ram applied to it while it was asleep.

Beleriphon
2013-08-08, 06:59 PM
More than that, relatively few mythical beings in general would be any larger than D&D Huge (though that applies a lot less when it comes to sea monsters), and the ones that were were big deals that are generally way beyond human capacity to deal with - or, they were something like the Cyclops which involved a large battering ram applied to it while it was asleep.

Or you were Heracles. He did fight and kill a three headed giant named Geryon (or three torso'd, or three bodied, depending).

Slipperychicken
2013-08-08, 07:03 PM
Or you were Heracles. He did fight and kill a three headed giant named Geryon (or three torso'd, or three bodied, depending).

Who dnd claims would be roughly 10th level in 3rd edition.

Knaight
2013-08-08, 07:50 PM
Or you were Heracles. He did fight and kill a three headed giant named Geryon (or three torso'd, or three bodied, depending).

True, but he was also a demi-god himself.

nedz
2013-08-08, 07:58 PM
Wow, those are even tinier dragons than in the painting I saw. Now I really feel sorry for the poor thing.

About crocodile sized :smallsmile:

Medieval pictures are notorious about not representing scale realistically, though these are all religious icons so the image is highly stylistic. George could be being shown larger to represent his status, but then the Dragon has a high status also ?

I note also that they come in a variety of colours.

CowardlyPaladin
2013-08-08, 08:04 PM
Dragon Scales are extremely tough and hardy, resisting any siege machinery attacks. Its the space between the scales where you can do damage, where a normal sword can slip through but nothing else could

Avilan the Grey
2013-08-09, 02:42 AM
The book I was refering to is "Dragonsbane" by Barbara Hambly.

The first in the Winterland series but I never actually read any more books. The first one stands well on it's own, at least, and can be recommended strongly. Morkeleb is my favorite dragon of all time.

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/176268.Dragonsbane

(Large image)
http://www.dana-mad.ru/gal/images/Michael%20Whelan/Fantasy/michael%20whelan_fantasy_barbara%20hambly_dragonsb ane.jpg

The book makes a point that the titular dragonsbane has to cross the valley from their camp where his wife has prepared the magical poison (she's a weak mage) and reach the entrance of the lair before the dragon has time to take flight, or he will perish without causing any harm to the dragon whatsoever. He makes it, barely, and the end result of the fight is that both man and beast lies dying, he from poison and fire, and Morkeleb from the poison and harpoons in his chest. (Not really spoilers, happens in the beginning of the book).

Regarding size, you can see that the dragon is not that big. Bigger than in the St. George illustrations, but about the size of 1½ workhorse, and probably lighter since he has to be able to fly.

Cerlis
2013-08-09, 05:23 AM
well its being called "fantasy" for the wrong reason.

Holy knights with righteous fury and the blessings of God(s) destroyed great beasts with enchanted weapons as well as natural cunning.

So yea, its Fantasy because of all the magic. If you had a +5 Dragonbane sword , a ring of fire resist, and a girdle of "cant touch dis" then you might fight a dragon with a sword too.

as for actual in game reasons (which is actually on topic, as i think "Why do people fight dragons with swords" was a precedent, not the question) The main thing would, again, either be an enchanted sword or a cunning dragonslayer who knew how to stab them in the right places.

This is of course AFTER all the siege weaponry goes caput. Note that in Dragonheart that he uses siege weaponry to "slay" dragons when he could and only resorted to cloak and dagger when overwhelmed (which he never TRIED to do)

Eldan
2013-08-09, 05:44 AM
Dragons were rarely if ever shown to be larger than dogs, maybe horses. They also most often aren't majestic or intelligent, but lowly, wicked, ugly creatures.

This is a nice short article on it. (http://www.bogleech.com/dragons.html)

Avilan the Grey
2013-08-09, 06:16 AM
In the western world I think Tolkien was responsible for both the bigger size and the bigger brain of dragons.

In Swedish folklore (at least after 1066) dragons barely appear, and if they do they are indeed somewhere between dog+longer, meatier tail, or big horse sized. The shape is also far more snakelike, but then again the old word for dragon in Swedish was the same as in English, aka the word for snake. Orm Worm, Wyrm etc.

Zombimode
2013-08-09, 06:41 AM
Dragons were rarely if ever shown to be larger than dogs, maybe horses. They also most often aren't majestic or intelligent, but lowly, wicked, ugly creatures.

This is a nice short article on it.

Well the thing is, all those abhorrent creatures are still in the monster manual - they are simply not called "dragon" anymore.


Terminology for mythological being also was never so clearly defined and diverse as it is today. "Ork", "Dragon", "Basilisk", "Wyrm" or just "Beast" can pretty much be used interchangeable for a specific role in the stories of old.
But since then, the fantasy genre has made at least to big evolutionary steps. The first was moving from allegoric stories to pure entertainment and the second becoming the basement for a entirely new form of games.
Especially due to D&D's wargaming roots the need for clear definition of "unit" ehrm, I mean "monsters" arose and Dragons were codified as beasts of might and awe unsurprisingly following the trend set by Tolkien*. And why not? This type of dragon is apparently hugely popular to this day.
The other and more classical interpretations of Dragons are still there running under the name of Naga, Basilisk, Hydra, Aboleth and so on.

* Also, the discovering of giant ferociously looking reptiles that apparently walked the earth of past in the late 19th century may had something to do with it.

Eldan
2013-08-09, 07:18 AM
Perhaps less the Basilisk, that one is old, or the Aboleth, that one is new. But the Wyvern, certainly. And Wyrms and Drakes, both in the Draconomicon.

And I agree that they are what dragons used to be. I was mainly commenting on the people who said that the dragons in those pictures probably weren't grown up.

Spiryt
2013-08-09, 07:26 AM
Dragons were rarely if ever shown to be larger than dogs, maybe horses. They also most often aren't majestic or intelligent, but lowly, wicked, ugly creatures.

This is a nice short article on it. (http://www.bogleech.com/dragons.html)

Eh, maybe this article has some point, but I couldn't bear to read it honestly. I may be to sensitive, but amount of bias and purely ideological bashing doesn't make it too credible...


Anyway, dragons were eating sheeps/maiden/whatever by dozens, drinking whole rivers dry and so on. Plenty of power and terrifying physicality, by default.

nedz
2013-08-09, 08:06 AM
Dragons were rarely if ever shown to be larger than dogs, maybe horses. They also most often aren't majestic or intelligent, but lowly, wicked, ugly creatures.

This is a nice short article on it. (http://www.bogleech.com/dragons.html)

Well these are medieval European dragons. There are dragons of other traditions. Chinese ones were more spiritual, as were the Anglo-Saxon ones perhaps ? Just how big was Beowulf's bane ?

There are several features in the British landscape which are referred to as Dragons, these are often the size of a hill.

Nerd-o-rama
2013-08-09, 08:26 AM
About crocodile sized :smallsmile:

Medieval pictures are notorious about not representing scale realistically, though these are all religious icons so the image is highly stylistic. George could be being shown larger to represent his status, but then the Dragon has a high status also ?

I note also that they come in a variety of colours.

Actually, I think that the depiction of the dragon was meant to be extremely large......for a legged, winged snake.

As people have mentioned, lowly, ugly creatures. European-style dragons as majestic city-destroying monstrosities instead of "snakes, but a lot worse" are relatively new.

Also I think given how many cues Tolkien took from Der Ring des Nibelungen when writing about dragons and treasure we can trace huge-ass dragons back a little further than the 1930's. I do think Fafnir got bigger in every adaptation of the original myth, though, a bit like a fish.

DementedFellow
2013-08-09, 08:57 AM
Why We Hit Dragons with Swords?

For fun and profit.

Frozen_Feet
2013-08-09, 05:51 PM
Dragons were rarely if ever shown to be larger than dogs, maybe horses. They also most often aren't majestic or intelligent, but lowly, wicked, ugly creatures.


In short, they were more like real dragons. (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Komodo_dragon‎) Which are pretty damn bizarre creatures in their own right.

Also, to answer the original question, you use a sword if you broke your lance against the dragon and the damn thing is still alive. Sure, it's like fighting a bear with a knife, but it's better than your bare hands. You might pierce its eyes or heart, or you could slash the tendons in its wings so it can't fly.

But the most effective tactics against a dragon are more like anti-air tactics by modern armies. Namely,


If you're infantry, walk in loose formation so it can't scorch too many people in one go.
Have a spotter on the lookout, and if a dragon is sighted, you duck for cover and pray it goes away.
If it doesn't go away, you shoot and throw everything you have at it, from crossbows to rocks. Even if they can't hurt it, they might at least scare it away.
If you seriously want to keep dragons out of your turf, you develop anti-air artillery. Like cannons that shoot shrapnel or nets, or firecrackers/rockets, or kites with bombs.
If you want to kill a dragon, you catch it on the ground when its sleeping or eating.
Or, you grow yourself a faster and stronger dragon.

Wardog
2013-08-11, 10:00 AM
Medieval pictures are notorious about not representing scale realistically, though these are all religious icons so the image is highly stylistic. George could be being shown larger to represent his status, but then the Dragon has a high status also ?


Yes - I won't go into much detail (because that would potentially be discussing religion and hence against the board rules), but a lot of the medieval images of dragon-slaying were essentially allegories about the triumph of Good over Evil. So it made sense to show the representative of Good as bigger and more powerful than Evil. (Also, the dragon slayer was usually the most important thing in the painting, so if you made that take up most of the image, there wasn't room for a big dragon).

If you want humongous dragons, you generally have to go back to older myths and legends. (Which IMO tend to get into "Chuck Norris Facts" levels of escalation, not to mention treating size consistency with as much reverence as Transformers G1 did). (I can't remember the name of the story, but I once read an old Scottish and/or Norse tale about someone who battled and eventually killed a sea serpent. As it thrashed around as it died, it managed to carve out the various gulfs around the North Sea; some of its teeth fell out, forming the Orkney, Shetland, and Faroe isles; and when it eventually died its body formed Iceland).

Frozen_Feet
2013-08-11, 10:22 AM
If you want a really big serpent of myth, I must mention Jormungand, the world-serpent that circled all the seven worlds and bit its tail, but was still slain by dude with a hammer. :smallwink:

Lord Raziere
2013-08-11, 10:23 AM
from a dragon:
because you are foolish mortals who look to make themselves appetizing. After all, why hunt when the prey will come right up to you and provide you with a toothpick after you have eaten?

Eric Tolle
2013-08-11, 01:15 PM
Because I'm Hasted, Shape Changed into a Titan, have Giant Growth cast on my sword, have Resistance to Energy, Flight, and a half-dozen other magics that will ensure the dragon has a really bad day.

As for ballistas and armies, bear in mind that once the dragon has its Fearsome Presence ability, large masses of low-level people are basically just a buffet table.

Angel Bob
2013-08-11, 04:20 PM
from a dragon:
because you are foolish mortals who look to make themselves appetizing. After all, why hunt when the prey will come right up to you and provide you with a toothpick after you have eaten?

+1 Internet

In all seriousness, I don't think I have anything much to contribute to this discussion. I'll just add my vote to the "because highly influential, genre-setting fantasy tales featured knights hitting dragons with swords" camp.

Driderman
2013-08-11, 05:27 PM
If you want a really big serpent of myth, I must mention Jormungand, the world-serpent that circled all the seven worlds and bit its tail, but was still slain by dude with a hammer. :smallwink:

To be fair, a rather magical hammer wielded by a god, and he had trouble with it all the same. Also, he doesn't in fact kill it the first time he tries, so it becomes a recurring villain and he only manages to kill it at the end of campaign boss fight known as Ragnarok where he dies from the poison afterwards. So perhaps not the best example :smallamused:

AmberVael
2013-08-11, 05:40 PM
As I recall, Sigurd used a pit trap and a magical cuts-through-anything sword. The pit trap implies that Fafnir was not a flying kaiju-sized monstrosity.

This isn't really correct. Sigurd dug a series of small trenches or channels rather than a trap, and he used them to hide himself rather than catch Fafnir. As Fafnir walked over them, he used it to come up under Fafnir and catch him off guard and stab him in the gut- and drain off dragon blood, because if he didn't have enough channels, he would have been drowned by the sheer amount of it.

So it wasn't a pit trap, and to let out that much blood Fafnir would have had to be massive.

Also, this is a pretty decent strategy for killing a dragon with a sword, if not exactly a heroic one.

Eric Tolle
2013-08-11, 05:52 PM
You know, I would rather use a spear, but D&D massively understatted spears compared to swords. So I'll go with the item that has the best game stats. And make that a 2-hand sword, because D&D also massively underrated the usefulness of shields as well.

SassyQuatch
2013-08-11, 07:46 PM
Because in the end we will hit anything with a sword, whether advisable or not.

Especially when it is not.

kidnicky
2013-08-11, 08:33 PM
Eh, maybe this article has some point, but I couldn't bear to read it honestly. I may be to sensitive, but amount of bias and purely ideological bashing doesn't make it too credible...


Anyway, dragons were eating sheeps/maiden/whatever by dozens, drinking whole rivers dry and so on. Plenty of power and terrifying physicality, by default.

How could he be biased or lack credibility? He shows a picture where the dragon looks small,and says it looks small.

Angel Bob
2013-08-11, 09:00 PM
By "bias", I think Spiryt refers to the author's stance on modern dragons. However, reading the conclusion of the article reveals that the author doesn't really mind having modernized, awe-inspiring dragons; he just wants to see the old, hideous dragons given some appreciation.

kidnicky
2013-08-11, 09:03 PM
[QUOTE=Wardog;15800122]Yes - I won't go into much detail (because that would potentially be discussing religion and hence against the board rules), but a lot of the medieval images of dragon-slaying were essentially allegories about the triumph of Good over Evil. So it made sense to show the representative of Good as bigger and more powerful than Evil. (Also, the dragon slayer was usually the most important thing in the painting, so if you made that take up most of the image, there wasn't room for a big dragon).

[\QUOTE]

That's the first thing I thought. I'm not knocking the art style of those days,in fact it looked cool. But aside from the fact that they're going to make the God fearing guy look better than the satanic monster,I also just think things like realism and scale weren't these guys' number one priority. In the first pic,the horse's head is smaller than the guy's hands,and the horse is straddling the dragon in a way that,while technically possible,stretches common sense. Even the way the apparently still living dragon is bending his neck seems wrong.

Look at some of the other pictures,the horses look like monsters too,and the artists had horses to look at for reference. I think these pictures are like the Marvel comics of their day. I'm sure Jim Lee knows most guys don't have a 24-pack stomach and most girls aren't 18 heads tall,but that's what makes an appealing picture.

Avilan the Grey
2013-08-12, 02:50 AM
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, because you are crunchy and good with ketchup.

Erock
2013-08-12, 06:45 AM
Because... I am a sexy, shoeless GOD OF WAR!!! :belkar:

viking vince
2013-08-12, 09:49 AM
You hit dragons with swords because there are no balliste of Dragon Slaying.

Raimun
2013-08-12, 11:31 AM
Why?

Because I can. That's why.

At least in RPGs.

Jayabalard
2013-08-12, 11:43 AM
There is a fantasy series (the name of which eludes me) that touches on this, particularly with the classic Knight hand weapon - the Lance.

Our protagonist has been sucked into a fantasy world and is turned into a dragon. At some point (the why eludes me as well), he is accosted by a knight, and decides to take his nigh-invulnerable self against a squishy little man in a suit of armor. With a long, pointy stick. On a heavy horse. So you have close to a half ton of beast and metal bearing down at you at 10+mph, focused into a hard point. (I'll leave the force calculations as an exercise for the reader).

It does not end well for our erstwhile dragon.

Piercing attacks are one of the most efficient ways to translate force into injury. If you are attacking a dragon with a sword, you should be thrusting for all you are worth. With a spear or lance, you have a better chance of getting to the vulnerable interior squishy bits. Adding a mount gives you more force and maneuverability. (and in 3.5, reach.)the dragon and the george (by Gordon D i c k s o n)

Jay R
2013-08-12, 01:40 PM
To KILL them.

Wardog
2013-08-12, 04:10 PM
Look at some of the other pictures,the horses look like monsters too,and the artists had horses to look at for reference. I think these pictures are like the Marvel comics of their day.

So... they've been done by the medieval equivilent of Rob Liefeld?

Reltzik
2013-08-12, 04:22 PM
Well, there's something to be said for attacking wyrmlings with swords. Or coup-de-grace against restrained or unconscious dragons. And if it's a +5 sword of dragonsbane that you've got a crapload of combat feats with, that helps too.

But under normal conditions, just charging a dragon with a normal melee weapon?

That's dumb (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pqdHkgdXr0).

EDIT: Which doesn't rule out a fighter or barbarian doing it.

((We'll ignore the presence of the words "normal conditions" and "dragon" in the same sentence, here.))

kidnicky
2013-08-12, 07:21 PM
So... they've been done by the medieval equivilent of Rob Liefeld?

EXACTLY. Look at the feet on some of those guys. Small doggish dragons were the pouch bandoliers of those days.

Eldan
2013-08-12, 07:35 PM
Fair point. Though I notice that while they had some problems with horses, some of them drew some very impressive old corpses.

kidnicky
2013-08-12, 08:03 PM
Same thing with a lot of comics, really. The streetlamp or trashcan in the background is often really sketchily drawn, whereas the gore or t&a or machineguns are lovingly detailed.

Gavinfoxx
2013-08-13, 07:04 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CfyU1mOZ1E

You should really really watch this!

Jay R
2013-08-13, 09:47 AM
But under normal conditions, just charging a dragon with a normal melee weapon?

That's dumb (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pqdHkgdXr0).

Just charging anything from in front is dumb, if you can control the encounter. Make plans, set an ambush, use spells and missile weapons, attack from behind, etc.

But even so, you have to include the possibility that you will eventually need your melee weapon, and it will probably be a sword.

Turn the question around. No matter what plan you have, and how many ways you have to kill it before it gets into melee range, are you ever going to be stupid enough to attack a dragon without a sword?

I mean, I've tried hitting them with a dish rag, a ball of string, a water balloon, a pink chemise, a bunny, and a serving of chicken tetrazinni lightly seasoned with thyme and nutmeg, but the sword is still the one that did the most damage.

Dead_Jester
2013-08-13, 12:04 PM
Turn the question around. No matter what plan you have, and how many ways you have to kill it before it gets into melee range, are you ever going to be stupid enough to attack a dragon without a sword?

Honestly, I'd take a nice warpick/warhammer hybrid over a sword any day if I where dragon hunting; if it didn't care about the crossbow bolts, the lance points and the halberds/glaives/bills, than a sword won't help at all; a pick into the eyeball might do something, and a good warhammer hit might break a few teeths at least, making it think twice before going for an easy snack.

The only reason heroes use swords over other, more practical melee weapons in particular, is that swords are a fashionable weapon in both history and fantasy. Knights didn't fight each other with swords if they could avoid it, because a sword is a bad weapon for dealing with armored targets, but a sword is a symbol, so you want you Hero of Good to destroy Evil with your difficult to use, expensive, aristocratic, cross shaped weapon, rather than some peasant ranged weapon or pollarm.

In the context of RPG's, this means that swords get the good enchants, even though a practical blacksmith would have made a warpick instead, to maximize it's killing potential on tough targets. Which is why you have dwarves in fantasy settings, who, being the practical minded individuals they are, put the good enchants on weapons made to kill tough targets, rather than on weapons mostly made to kill mooks (like swords). Which is why you find a lot of magical, beast slaying swords in dungeons, most notably dragon hoards, (where their previous owners might have died because they did not bring the right weapons), but not a lot of the more practical dragon slaying weapons, whose owners might have survived to bring back the weapons home, thereby allowing the next bunch of heroes to ambush the dragon in his sleep without needing to go on a fetch quest beforehand. The fact that the dwarves won't give their good stuff away to just anybody (who would have probably lost the uber warpick of dragonslaying after getting killed by orks), and the average adventurer either has to make due with finding a dragon slaying sword or needs to petition the people with the good stuff to borrow it to them, both of which make for good stories, but only the former of which focuses mostly on the Hero, which is what you want in a classical fantasy story.

Name_Here
2013-08-13, 12:17 PM
Well let's put ourselves in the shoes of the adventurer.

I have a sword the Dragon is there the math is pretty much unavoidable at this point. Sure the best option would be to retreat and come back with an army but I'm an adventurer I didn't get into the business to live a long comfortable life.

Slipperychicken
2013-08-13, 12:46 PM
I mean, I've tried hitting them with a dish rag, a ball of string, a water balloon, a pink chemise, a bunny, and a serving of chicken tetrazinni lightly seasoned with thyme and nutmeg, but the sword is still the one that did the most damage.

There's your problem right there. You need some fresh blood on the meat so the dragon can smell it. If you hit his mouth so he tastes it, he'll usually waste some time trying to eat the chicken, which can give you the opening you need to stab him.

You'll get better results using a sword in the main hand, chicken in the off-hand. I've heard of some people putting the chicken on the sword (or spear) so the dragon thinks you're trying to feed him a shishkebab; it's risky, but it lets you stab him in the mouth a few times before he realizes it's a trap. It's also a good way to deliver poisons, especially if you pump the chicken full of Black Lotus Extract (usually Drow Knockout poison if you're trying to save money) or something beforehand.

Jay R
2013-08-13, 05:03 PM
The only reason heroes use swords over other, more practical melee weapons in particular, is that swords are a fashionable weapon in both history and fantasy.

Of course, it's fashionable because it works well.


Knights didn't fight each other with swords if they could avoid it, because a sword is a bad weapon for dealing with armored targets, but a sword is a symbol, so you want you Hero of Good to destroy Evil with your difficult to use, expensive, aristocratic, cross shaped weapon, rather than some peasant ranged weapon or pollarm.

Knights attack each other with lances when riding, and with swords when standing.

A sword can work well against armor, as long as you don't use it the same way that you do against an unarmored opponent. Fiore di Liberi and other medieval authors show the techniques for slipping in under the armor's layers - the same technique I'd use with a dragon.

Mewtarthio
2013-08-13, 05:08 PM
There's your problem right there. You need some fresh blood on the meat so the dragon can smell it. If you hit his mouth so he tastes it, he'll usually waste some time trying to eat the chicken, which can give you the opening you need to stab him.

The real problem is probably the choice of seasoning. Dragons are notorious gourmands, so if you probably don't have the skills to season the chicken to their standards (sure, they'll eat it anyway, but they won't savor it). I mean, you're an adventurer, so you probably dumped the Craft (Foodstuffs) skill, right?

A much simpler trick is to go for shock value. Screw that "lightly seasoned" crap and just put an insane amount of seasoning on it. Really overpower the flavor of the meal itself. Your average dragon will be so horrified, he'll be unable to properly fight back.

Slipperychicken
2013-08-13, 07:46 PM
The real problem is probably the choice of seasoning. Dragons are notorious gourmands, so if you probably don't have the skills to season the chicken to their standards (sure, they'll eat it anyway, but they won't savor it). I mean, you're an adventurer, so you probably dumped the Craft (Foodstuffs) skill, right?


Nothing that a casting of Psychic Reformation (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/psychicReformation.htm) can't fix. One should be able to buy a casting, or a psionic scroll (or whatever the psionic version of scrolls is called) without too much trouble.

Or you could hire a master chef to properly season the chicken shout at you while teaching you to season the chicken. Then try to contain your laughter as your DM does his best Gordon Ramsay impression.

"THIS CHICKEN IS SO RAW, IT HAS BARD LEVELS"

Raimun
2013-08-14, 06:28 PM
Oh, and I once punched a dragon.

It was a solid plan since I had Fly-by Attack and better maneuverability than the dragon.

Jay R
2013-08-14, 11:42 PM
JI mean, I've tried hitting them with a dish rag, a ball of string, a water balloon, a pink chemise, a bunny, and a serving of chicken tetrazinni lightly seasoned with thyme and nutmeg, but the sword is still the one that did the most damage.

There's your problem right there. You need some fresh blood on the meat so the dragon can smell it. If you hit his mouth so he tastes it, he'll usually waste some time trying to eat the chicken, which can give you the opening you need to stab him.

Maybe I could change it to parsley? Is parsley scarier than nutmeg? (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0103.html)

Doxkid
2013-08-15, 04:18 AM
One being's suicidal attack on a nigh invulnerable super-beast is another being's foreplay, I suppose.

Sorcerers have to come from somewhere, right?

Dead_Jester
2013-08-15, 10:44 PM
Of course, it's fashionable because it works well.

It's fashionable because it's relatively inconspicuous when sheathed in a scabbard, making it acceptable social wear, unlike a poleaxe. :smallbiggrin:


Knights attack each other with lances when riding, and with swords when standing.

A sword can work well against armor, as long as you don't use it the same way that you do against an unarmored opponent. Fiore di Liberi and other medieval authors show the techniques for slipping in under the armor's layers - the same technique I'd use with a dragon.

Swords can be used against other knights, but they are, by far, not the best weapons. if you want to avoid armor, a tuck (or estoc) or a dagger (something like a misericorde works well here) is much better and what was usually used. To even do noticeable damage to plate armor, you more or less have to half-sword or mordschlag the other individual, at which point you aren't using the sword as a sword anymore, and you would have been better with another weapon. This explains the popularity of poleaxes and other similar weapons like the bec-de-corbin and Lucerne Hammer in the 15th and 16th century, which where more or less the premier knight weapon for dismounted combat in the era of cap-a-pied.

Lord Raziere
2013-08-15, 11:32 PM
One being's suicidal attack on a nigh invulnerable super-beast is another being's foreplay, I suppose.

Sorcerers have to come from somewhere, right?

…I think this is a relevant response, sir:


http://i655.photobucket.com/albums/uu279/lizzard-zx/DragonLayer.jpg (http://s655.photobucket.com/user/lizzard-zx/media/DragonLayer.jpg.html)

Slipperychicken
2013-08-16, 01:16 AM
Oh, and I once punched a dragon.

It was a solid plan since I had Fly-by Attack and better maneuverability than the dragon.

What about the breath weapon?

Eric Tolle
2013-08-16, 02:32 AM
Because my sword is 20 meters long, and I'm piloting something like THIS:

http://machineageproductions.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/ApotheosisDriveX01rough.jpg


I can't wait until Princess Drive X comes out...

HKR
2013-08-16, 05:41 AM
The question should be HOW do we hit dragons with swords? How do dragons get hundreds or even thousands of years old? By not getting into melee combat. Dragons are really intelligent in most settings. If you could fly and breathe fire at your enemies, would you ever land and fight them with your claws or bite?

Jay R
2013-08-16, 10:29 AM
The question should be HOW do we hit dragons with swords? How do dragons get hundreds or even thousands of years old? By not getting into melee combat. Dragons are really intelligent in most settings. If you could fly and breathe fire at your enemies, would you ever land and fight them with your claws or bite?

Every time they crept into my lair while I was asleep.

nedz
2013-08-16, 01:16 PM
Of course, it's fashionable because it works well.

This is circular reasoning. Swords work well because the rules give them an advantage. They do this because Swords are fashionable in a Swords and Sorcery setting.

Slipperychicken
2013-08-16, 02:22 PM
Every time they crept into my lair while I was asleep.

If that happened many times, you probably wouldn't have lived to see your 1000th birhday...

Of course, True Rez is pretty cheap affordable for an older dragon, so they might actually have died once or twice over that time.

Figgin of Chaos
2013-08-16, 02:28 PM
Because if your heart is strong as a mountain and your voice is as loud as thunder, the dragon would be a coward not to land and fight you with tooth and claw. And a dragon is no coward.

Dead_Jester
2013-08-16, 02:49 PM
Every time they crept into my lair while I was asleep.

The question, rather, is why is your lair easily accessible by non-flying mortals? It's not like finding a spot where the easiest access point requires more than a few hours of continuous climbing or sailing through stormy seas is all that difficult. At that point, your only concern are the damned magic users, and well, if they have d&d levels of power, your world has more pressing issues than dragons (like the complete collapse of any non-magocratic social structure).

Slipperychicken
2013-08-16, 03:10 PM
The question, rather, is why is your lair easily accessible by non-flying mortals? It's not like finding a spot where the easiest access point requires more than a few hours of continuous climbing or sailing through stormy seas is all that difficult.

Don't forget being breath weapon'd by an angry dragon (plus any minions or allies he's managed to enlist, probably in exchange for protection) while you're trying to climb or sail.


Also, with dragons being so impossibly smart, wise, and wealthy, why wouldn't they simply have dragon-sized armor, weapons, clothes, and backpacks crafted for them? Why are they running around stark naked?

Nerd-o-rama
2013-08-16, 03:25 PM
Don't forget being breath weapon'd by an angry dragon (plus any minions or allies he's managed to enlist, probably in exchange for protection) while you're trying to climb or sail.


Also, with dragons being so impossibly smart, wise, and wealthy, why wouldn't they simply have dragon-sized armor, weapons, clothes, and backpacks crafted for them? Why are they running around stark naked?

That **** costs money. Money spent on Colossal +5 Death Ward Barding is money the dragon doesn't get to swim around in Scrooge McDuck-style.

That said, it's kind of down to the preferences of the dragon.

Keneth
2013-08-16, 03:33 PM
How else does one kill a jabberwock? :smallconfused:

Slipperychicken
2013-08-16, 03:50 PM
That said, it's kind of down to the preferences of the dragon.

Okay, I know what it is. They aren't normally proficient with armor or weapons, unless they take a feat for it, or dip into a class like Warblade.

Nerd-o-rama
2013-08-16, 04:25 PM
Okay, I know what it is. They aren't normally proficient with armor or weapons, unless they take a feat for it, or dip into a class like Warblade.

And since Dragons are Tier 1 Casters without taking any levels at all, they usually just don't bother.

This segment of the conversation kind of delved specifically into 3.5 D&D didn't it.

Slipperychicken
2013-08-16, 04:28 PM
This segment of the conversation kind of delved specifically into 3.5 D&D didn't it.

There's so much crossover between the two forums, I sometimes forget which one I'm posting in.

Qwertystop
2013-08-16, 04:39 PM
Don't forget - outside of species that need it for environmental protection issues, the only thins that make clothing anything but cultural are pockets (plus other means of using it to carry things) and magic.

Dragons keep all their stuff in a big centralized area, and most of the things they need to do outside of it they can do themselves, especially if they have magic besides breathing fire and flying - don't need to cook, don't really need shelter, too big for most crafting stuff, they can use their claws as cutting implements, etc. Pockets are unnecessary.

Magic items are expensive.

Jay R
2013-08-16, 05:44 PM
The question, rather, is why is your lair easily accessible by non-flying mortals?

Counting all the flight spells, pegasus riders, Winged Boots, and other annoying toys, there are actually way too many flying mortals around these days.

I prefer a lair with a sharp turn not far inside, followed by a long straight entrance tunnel just barely dragon-width, with just enough room to turn around at the end, so that the entire corridor can be filled with breath weapon.

nedz
2013-08-16, 06:46 PM
Counting all the flight spells, pegasus riders, Winged Boots, and other annoying toys, there are actually way too many flying mortals around these days.

I prefer a lair with a sharp turn not far inside, followed by a long straight entrance tunnel just barely dragon-width, with just enough room to turn around at the end, so that the entire corridor can be filled with breath weapon.

But all of the best lairs were taken centuries ago. Well sometimes one becomes vacant, but moving a vast hoard is difficult and risky; also you have to ask — if this vacant lair were so good, how come it's now empty ?

Dead_Jester
2013-08-16, 10:50 PM
Counting all the flight spells, pegasus riders, Winged Boots, and other annoying toys, there are actually way too many flying mortals around these days.

Like I said before, if you have so much magic, you probably have bigger issues than dragons. But yes, when the world is filled with heroes/demigods ala Greek myths, it's a bad day to be a monster terrorizing the countryside. No matter how many of Zeus' bastards Hera kills, there are always more to take their place and kill your divine spawn drunk author's monster of the week. Which leads to the question of why don't dragons (assuming intelligent dragons ala modern fantasy, rather than large angry lizard), as both physically powerful and intelligent creatures, don't subjugate the mortal races and use them as slaves servants to protect them, provide food for them and wage war on the other nations? Surely the megalomaniac in every gold hungry fire-breathing lizard would rejoice at the idea.

Nerd-o-rama
2013-08-16, 10:55 PM
Like I said before, if you have so much magic, you probably have bigger issues than dragons. But yes, when the world is filled with heroes/demigods ala Greek myths, it's a bad day to be a monster terrorizing the countryside. No matter how many of Zeus' bastards Hera kills, there are always more to take their place and kill your divine spawn drunk author's monster of the week. Which leads to the question of why don't dragons (assuming intelligent dragons ala modern fantasy, rather than large angry lizard), as both physically powerful and intelligent creatures, don't subjugate the mortal races and use them as slaves servants to protect them, provide food for them and wage war on the other nations? Surely the megalomaniac in every gold hungry fire-breathing lizard would rejoice at the idea.

Some campaign settings do that. I think the reason they usually don't is that while the natural unit of most mortal races is the tribe, the natural unit of dragons is the dragon. They are solitary, selfish creatures, even the bestest metallic and/or Chinese dragons preferring solitude or aloof superiority. Dragons are so monomaniacal and paranoid that they have trouble working together and, thus, can't really compete with smaller races' numbers and organization, at least not without being whacked by another, jealous dragon.

That said, dragons often have tribes of humanoids in thrall as mooks, and a truly visionary Great Wyrm might be able to manage to carve out a real empire, if he made it his life's work. Or gathered the Dragon Balls Orbs of Dragonkind to subjugate his rivals...