Help! My players want to raise a dragon! (HotDQ)

[snowman87]

My players just finished episode 3 of Hoard of the Dragon Queen and walked out with their very own dragon egg. I could've railroaded them to leave the eggs behind or destroy them but it would have been very irrational in context and they worked very cleverly to get it.

I want to reward them, not punish them, since they have been very clever in most situations thus far. Instead of fighting the stragglers on the way to the Raider's Camp or killing them, for instance, one pretended to be a fellow cultist and chatted them up while the others framed the kobolds for stealing their weapons. It has been a real hoot.

In the Nursery, they fought all of the guards, killed Cyanwrath and spared Frulam Mondath (the cleric has a crush on her) right from the beginning. They checked out the the eggs and decided to carry one out. I did try to make it difficult for them by having Mondath and a couple more Berserkers waiting for them outside but they were clever again and used both Grease and Darkness to get away (the enemies failed their DEX saves miserably).

Now they have a dragon and it is going to hatch soon. I'm not against them having a baby dragon but how do you work that into the story? They are about to go undercover among the cultists on a 60 day trip to Waterdeep and I doubt they could hide a baby dragon that long. Not to mention all of the groups that would look down on having a dragon for a pet or just try to kill it or them on sight. Any advice on how to handle the situation?

[M Placeholder]

What kind of Dragon is, or rather, will it be? I would imagine that the response of the cultists would vary due to the colour of the thing.

You could just roll with the players trying to hide the Dragon, but its discovered and then stolen by another group in Waterdeep. I'm guessing there are a lot of people who would want a baby dragon for many different purposes.

[snowman87]

It will be a blue dragon. The book did not include the colors of the eggs in the description of the room so I had to choose. I chose blue because of the dragon in the first chapter, per a guide's advice about giving it a reason to ally itself with the cult, it's eggs. This could lead to something interesting down the road as I have read that the same dragon appears later.

[Regitnui]

A blue... Hmmm... If I recall correctly, there was an article in one of the print Dragons about raising baby dragons. I don't remember much of it, but something important was that a baby dragon is far more demanding than a humanoid baby; they eat meat from the time they hatch, and a lot of it; they'll be constantly testing the boundaries that their foster parents (the party) set; they're cunning enough to get in trouble constantly even if they're lawful good; and they will demand their own hoard, though it's proportionally smaller as their parents'.

Basically, your party are asking for a lightning-spitting, intelligent, cat-sized carnivore that will intentionally try and cause trouble, along with demanding their treasure and coins to sleep on. A dragon is not a pet.

[Nifft]

It's basically an evil child, but the spit-up is lightning, and it can shred any attempt at diapers.

The wyrmling's first word ought to be "mama!", and its second word ought to be "NO!"

Luckily it's a magical reptile so you don't need to worry about breastfeeding, but teething might be awful. (Chew-toys must be properly grounded.)

Blue dragons are a desert breed, so bath-time is going to be extra traumatic. On the other claw, I bet thunderstorms will be really exciting.

[Daishain]

When I ran HotDQ, my players ended up doing the exact same thing. They decided to pass the hatchling off as an exotic drake. In the interest of keeping things moving, I ruled that the average citizen wouldn't know the difference between a drake and a baby dragon, and in the D&D world, they're well aware of much weirder things out there. The cultists knew better of course, but they had their own concerns.

[Sigreid]

Watch The Omen for inspiration?

If you want to have real fun, allow them to teach it to be a good.person and have it slowly shift to a metallic color. For a bonus that will make cultists extra mad.

[Shining Wrath]

So you must choose sides on an ancient question: nature, or nurture?
If the dragon is innately evil because Tiamat made it, then nothing your characters can do will prevent it from growing up evil.
If the dragon is a product of its upbringing, the players can raise it to have the same alignment they demonstrate in your considered DM opinion, which may in fact be quite a bit different from what they note on their character sheets.
Dragons being "magical" creatures of legend and power, I'd suggest both - the dragon can be raised "good", but there's a "genetic" predisposition toward violence and greed.

Also, it takes a dragon years to go to the next largest age category, so your human PCs will probably never live to see it reach adult.

[kaoskonfety]

Oh good, you said "raise" not "train". There's a few other relativly recent threads in here with the same question/issue, but with more of a "fetch fido" initial mindset.

Blue Dragons are pre-disposed for Lawful Evil if I recall correctly?

It wishes to Rule with Power, but Respects Potent Authority and will Typically Honour Agreements (it cannot weasel out of...). It hatches in/near the average intelligence range for adult humans, can fly, kill smaller beasts with its talons with ease and, as a bonus, breathes lightning - limited spell casting optional.

If the PC's are strong, treat it well and fairly and set clear rules it has a good chance not to go *awful*. If they are thinking this will be a down time activity between murder hobo-ing they are probably wrong: raising a dragon will take the rest of their lives easily and is a campaign on its own. It actually feels like the sort of thing I'd do for a game where I know one PC will be absent for each session (like a back up game that only runs when someone isn't able to make it to the "regular" game) and have the missing PC have been "baby sitting" and get EXP based on the story they weave from the group regarding their mis-adventures in babysitting - could be fun and provided they always walk away singed and not dead I'm sure they will come up with WAY worse "testing the boundaries terrible 2's to teenage rebellion mischief" that needs fixing than I ever would. Say devote one session in 4 to 6 to "Raising a dragon fallout"... good times.

Regarding it "Being Evil" this will depend on the DM's/settings take on dragons. Can they nudge it to Lawful Neutral and make it, if not a productive member of society, at least not *EVIL!!!*, or the whole alignment consistency thing more an upbringing thing and Chaotic Good is a reasonable goal? or is it genetic/divine hard coded by Tiamat LE all the way to the core of its steely bones?

[Mr.Moron]

I think you first have to come to decision early about how Evil the dragon is by nature vs nature. If the dragon is inherently evil and has a fundamentally different form of consciousnesses than you and I such that it can only ever be engine of destruction that plays out very differently than if dragons are only evil by tradition or culture, which plays out differently than if their destructive urges are stronger than ours but they do actually have free will and choice in the matter.

[Atalas]

So you must choose sides on an ancient question: nature, or nurture?
If the dragon is innately evil because Tiamat made it, then nothing your characters can do will prevent it from growing up evil.
If the dragon is a product of its upbringing, the players can raise it to have the same alignment they demonstrate in your considered DM opinion, which may in fact be quite a bit different from what they note on their character sheets.
Dragons being "magical" creatures of legend and power, I'd suggest both - the dragon can be raised "good", but there's a "genetic" predisposition toward violence and greed.

Also, it takes a dragon years to go to the next largest age category, so your human PCs will probably never live to see it reach adult.

It takes six years for Wyrmlings to grow past that and become Young, and then another ninety-five years to become an Adult. Wyrmlings are, per the MM, considered Medium creatures. Young are Large. This has a LOT of interesting potential. The adventures in babysitting idea sounds fun, as is the idea of having one PC hanging back to babysit when their player can't make it. Overall, this can be a fun way to introduce new idea's to the campaign. Particularly whenever they run into a more intellectual citizen.

[Sigreid]

You sound in your original post like you want to reward them. So I would put nurture over nature, but as I posted above have it's magical nature change as they raise it right. It could be a lot of fun with them at first starting to think something is wrong as the color of the scales changes gradually like leaves in the fall. Their reward in the long run is a good and powerful (if young) friend whereas if they killed it their reward would be nice boots. :smallwink:

[Ionsniper]

Depending on the route you go with, nature or nurture, a good way to handle the situation is to treat the dragon much like a familiar with extra abilities if you have a caster in the group. In exchange for protection he might be a companion for a ranger or druid or a familiar for a caster in your group. Plenty of options to run with, but you must decide how the dragon is going to play out first. whether it will be inheritantly evil or be impressionable.

I'd say let them raise it and have fun with it. Nothing makes players enjoy a game more than giving them bonuses that aren't normally allowed by game rules. I've played games that went strictly by the books and while fun they lacked a certain enjoyment that can be found when you know your DM is willing to allow "rule of Awesome/Cool". So roll with it, have fun with it, have the baby dragon burp lightning and set one of the cultists wagons on fire, have it steal someone's small lockbox with gold in it while it practices flying around. The possibilities are endless!

[JackPhoenix]

In MM, blue dragons are mentioned as extremely vain, even by dragon standards, and very fond of servants who appeal to their sense of superiority. Presumably, that would still be true even if you could manage to raise him to be not evil. But all things considered, blue dragons sounds the most "reasonable" from all chromatic breeds

[Regitnui]

But all things considered, blue dragons sounds the most "reasonable" from all chromatic breeds

Since we're raising the dragon, it might be worth going to Eberron, where the colour of a dragon is about as indicative of it's alignment as the colour of a human. The racial descriptions given in the MM hold, but are more tendencies than definitive. Your blue dragon baby will always be vain, but by raising it right, you can take that from a driving motivation (MM) to a tendency to pose dramatically after fighting the current threat.

[NNescio]

If Parthuunax can be good, then so can a DnD chromatic dragon.

What is better? To be born good, or to overcome your evil nature through great effort?

[MrConsideration]

I would make the Dragon's motivations different, but its still possible to be Good(ish). It would need to be explained to the Dragon why, specifically, small children are not simply easy prey and why it doesn't have a right to take any shiny bauble it sees to add to its hoard. It would still show nascent Dragon behaviours and want or even need a hoard. It might be arrogant and vain - it is a superior creature to almost all life and instinctively seeks utter dominion over others. I imagine in my own headcanon that even 'good' dragons have the same impulses as Smaug.

Perhaps it might have some kind of weird, raised-by-wolves moment and think of itself as human(oid).

Is it going to be an active participant in adventures? It will demand a portion of treasure and come with numerous complications. Make sure it isn't just an asset, and gets the players in trouble as well - stealing the king's crown eating people's pigs - perhaps not as dark as Daenerys Targaryen's parenting troubles but derived from those experiences.

They'll likely be dead before it reaches adulthood, though - but maybe in a future campaign there could be a benevolent blue dragon....

[Nifft]

What is better? To crush my enemies!

To see them driven before me!

To hear the lam--


To be born good, or to overcome your evil nature through great effort?

-- oh.

Uh, the second one.

Yeah.

[Mr.Moron]

If Parthuunax can be good, then so can a DnD chromatic dragon.

What is better? To be born good, or to overcome your evil nature through great effort?

Well, if that's if you're predisposed to evil rather than be fundamentally and irrevocable evil. Though it's not stated explicitly D&D has always seems to lean to the latter option with evil dragons. You may as well hope you can "Teach" a person to stop being aware of their body, feeling emotions or having biases towards their own kin groups. It just wouldn't be possible.

Obviously it's OPs game and he can do what he wants. However just because in one work of fiction the dragon is creature that has the same form of free will as us and can overcome being "Evil" doesn't mean that can or should expected to apply universally.

[Susano-wo]

I agree that you have to decide how much is inherent vs learned, and how much control it can be taught to have over its impulses.

Also, though, even if it must be, or turns out to become evil,. that does not mean that it cannot have a bond with those that raised it. That might cause it to adjust its behavior, even if it doesn't think its the best thing to do, and has no problem with doing things its own way, if given the chance

[Shining Wrath]

Well, if that's if you're predisposed to evil rather than be fundamentally and irrevocable evil. Though it's not stated explicitly D&D has always seems to lean to the latter option with evil dragons. You may as well hope you can "Teach" a person to stop being aware of their body, feeling emotions or having biases towards their own kin groups. It just wouldn't be possible.

Obviously it's OPs game and he can do what he wants. However just because in one work of fiction the dragon is creature that has the same form of free will as us and can overcome being "Evil" doesn't mean that can or should expected to apply universally.

My world has fallible gods - which means that even if Tiamat wanted all blue dragons to be LE, a few will wind up CG anyway ... and those few tend to find each other and build a culture that reinforces their innate CG tendencies. Same for all other alignments of all other creatures except what used to be called Outsiders - angels and demons and that lot. As noted in the MM, if those guys don't have the correct alignment they cease to be what they were made to be.

[Nifft]

I'd suggest going full Eberron and just making it explicit that color determines power, not personality.

That's what I did for my setting (long before Eberron), and it worked great. When the PCs saw a big red dragon, they only knew that it was a big red dragon, and that they ought to approach it with caution.

IMHO that uncertainty about motivation helps make dragons into important NPCs rather than just big monsters.

[NNescio]

Well, if that's if you're predisposed to evil rather than be fundamentally and irrevocable evil. Though it's not stated explicitly D&D has always seems to lean to the latter option with evil dragons. You may as well hope you can "Teach" a person to stop being aware of their body, feeling emotions or having biases towards their own kin groups. It just wouldn't be possible.

Obviously it's OPs game and he can do what he wants. However just because in one work of fiction the dragon is creature that has the same form of free will as us and can overcome being "Evil" doesn't mean that can or should expected to apply universally.

Okay, Eludecia the Succubus Paladin then. She's explicitly made out of evil and chaos (to the point of still being affected by magical effects which target evil and chaotic alignments. By 3.x's mechanics she has the Evil and Chaos subtypes), but can still be (lawful) Good.

And Fall-from-Grace from Planescape:Torment. Lawful Neutral Cleric. Going against her nature causes her great torment (even moreso than the rest of the party, which is really saying something), but she still sticks to her beliefs and morals.

2e AD&D also has an entire 'celestial' host composed of redeemed devils, led by a barbed devil called K'rand Vahlix.

In general, there are many precedents for fundamentally evil creatures ("always Lawful/Neutral/Chaotic evil" alignment under 3.x's creature statistics) becoming good.

Redeemed devils, demons, vampires (even if they are portrayed as made from evil or as demons/devils wearing human skin) are also common tropes in other works of fiction.

If beings such as fiends that are fundamentally composed of evil can be redeemed, I don't think that all dragons are irrevocably evil either.

Of course, as you mentioned, this is the OP's game, as he gets to decide.

[Regitnui]

O2e AD&D also has an entire 'celestial' host composed of redeemed devils, led by a barbed devil called K'rand Vahlix.


You see, the problem there is that devils are fundamentally Evil. If they were redeemed, they wouldn't be devils anymore. They might look superficially like their old shapes, but they wouldn't have the fiend type anymore. They'd essentially cease to exist. That's a little more impossible than raising a blue dragon.

[Coidzor]

They'd essentially cease to exist.

Nope. That succubus Paladin definitely didn't cease to exist.

[Regitnui]

Nope. That succubus Paladin definitely didn't cease to exist.

This is 5e. Suc/Incubi aren't devils or demons, just fiends. And they're allowed to be Lawful, so there's nothing stopping a devil, succubus or non-chaotic fiend from swearing a paladin oath without changing their base, subconscious alignment.

[Hawkstar]

Blue dragons are a desert breed, so bath-time is going to be extra traumatic.
Make a sandblaster to clean your baby blue dragon.

But it sounds like a cat with lightning.


Nope. That succubus Paladin definitely didn't cease to exist.

If she's not Evil, she's not a fiend. If she's not Good, she doesn't exist because when the Evil that makes her left her, there's no Good to replace it - essentially trying to transform from something without something to transform into. Fiends are made of Evil. A fiend that converts from evil is essentially throwing itself into a chipper-shredder.

[Daishain]

Make a sandblaster to clean your baby blue dragon.

But it sounds like a cat with lightning.

D&D dragons are often described as feline like when it comes to their movements, actions, and motives.

As a result, I imagine raising a baby dragon would be a lot like raising a kitten, into absolutely everything, easily distracted, prone to rushing off and playing with random things, careless with their claws and teeth, prone to playfighting (which in this case could easily lead to evisceration). And if they decide to be affectionate, you really don't have a choice in the matter.

[Shining Wrath]

Make a sandblaster to clean your baby blue dragon.

But it sounds like a cat with lightning.



If she's not Evil, she's not a fiend. If she's not Good, she doesn't exist because when the Evil that makes her left her, there's no Good to replace it - essentially trying to transform from something without something to transform into. Fiends are made of Evil. A fiend that converts from evil is essentially throwing itself into a chipper-shredder.

Or the body still exists, but is composed of a different essence which has different characteristics. All those resistances? Gone. It's a magic world, magical transformations happen, including alchemical transformation from Fiend Essence to not-Fiend essence.

[Tenmujiin]

If she's not Evil, she's not a fiend. If she's not Good, she doesn't exist because when the Evil that makes her left her, there's no Good to replace it - essentially trying to transform from something without something to transform into. Fiends are made of Evil. A fiend that converts from evil is essentially throwing itself into a chipper-shredder.

Personally I'd have any celestials/fiends that "go netural" become fey. Fey are affected by the same spells as fiends/celestials and thus can be inferred to be what other editions called outsiders but don't have an alignment requirement (though they are generally chaotic).

The PHB says under "alignment in the multiverse" that "a devil that somehow ceases to be evil ceases to be a devil", nowhere is it said they cease to exist, in fact i'm fairly sure it is stated in one of the 5e books that "if an evil celestial is rare, a good fiend is almost impossible" or something along those lines.

As to dragons, they are creatures of the material plane and so have no enforced alignment but rather a leaning towards lawful evil (which manifests in part as vanity) which would probably be a little stronger than that for say elves towards CG but by no means are they forced to be lawful evil, they just have genetic personality traits that push them towards it along with some seriously bad parenting.

[comk59]

D&D dragons are often described as feline like when it comes to their movements, actions, and motives.

As a result, I imagine raising a baby dragon would be a lot like raising a kitten, into absolutely everything, easily distracted, prone to rushing off and playing with random things, careless with their claws and teeth, prone to playfighting (which in this case could easily lead to evisceration). And if they decide to be affectionate, you really don't have a choice in the matter.

Also, it can talk and will insist that it gets to sleep on shinies. Maybe you can give it an allowance of shiny things to get it to behave...

[Nifft]

Also, it can talk and will insist that it gets to sleep on shinies. Maybe you can give it an allowance of shiny things to get it to behave... Ah, yes, an allowance.

Just don't be surprised if the little fellow decides to allow himself all the shiny things you leave unattended.

Plus all the shiny buttons on clothes you're not currently wearing.

Plus anything in your pockets while you're asleep.

Plus things in other people's pockets.

Plus stuff in store windows.

"And the skulls of my foes!"
"Those were just ravens."
"They were after my hoard!"

[Regitnui]

"And the skulls of my foes!"
"Those were just ravens."
"They were after my hoard!"

Now I've got this image of a brass wyrmling sitting proudly amongst a pile of shredded feathers, expecting praise for valiantly defending the house against those filthy, thieving magpies.

[Mr.Moron]

Okay, Eludecia the Succubus Paladin then. She's explicitly made out of evil and chaos (to the point of still being affected by magical effects which target evil and chaotic alignments. By 3.x's mechanics she has the Evil and Chaos subtypes), but can still be (lawful) Good.

And Fall-from-Grace from Planescape:Torment. Lawful Neutral Cleric. Going against her nature causes her great torment (even moreso than the rest of the party, which is really saying something), but she still sticks to her beliefs and morals.

2e AD&D also has an entire 'celestial' host composed of redeemed devils, led by a barbed devil called K'rand Vahlix.

In general, there are many precedents for fundamentally evil creatures ("always Lawful/Neutral/Chaotic evil" alignment under 3.x's creature statistics) becoming good.

Redeemed devils, demons, vampires (even if they are portrayed as made from evil or as demons/devils wearing human skin) are also common tropes in other works of fiction.

If beings such as fiends that are fundamentally composed of evil can be redeemed, I don't think that all dragons are irrevocably evil either.

Of course, as you mentioned, this is the OP's game, as he gets to decide.

OK...and? My point was clearly that such examples don't exist "Evil Thing actually turns good" is a pretty common trope. It was just that we shouldn't presuppose that's the case or say it's inherently any better or worse than other option.