PDA

View Full Version : Why Don't Dragons Rule the World?



Laurellien
2017-03-25, 09:22 AM
It's a question that occasionally comes up in D&D. Here's my attempt at an answer.

What do you think? I know that my perspective may be controversial, and I want to give my players a good answer.

Furthermore, if you can think of any examples that might back up these points (from D&D sources, folklore, fantasy, or history), then please do let me know.


So, why don't dragons rule the world?

Dragons live for thousands of years, are far more intelligent, wise, and charismatic than humanoids, have supreme strength and constitution, and complement their physical prowess with a vast array of supernatural abilities and arcane spell casting. Why then, do they not rule the world? The same question too might be asked of any sufficiently long-lived and powerful creatures. Why don't gods, titans, giants, genies, outsiders, aberrations, or even sphinxes rule the world?

The first and most important thing to realise is that dragons and other long-lived beings gain their powers relatively slowly compared to humanoids, and humans in particular. A dragon may take centuries to even learn the basics of spell casting, but it can take mortals a matter of a couple of decades to be capable of using magic that will undo even the mightiest dragon. Thus, over the span of a dragon's life, hundreds, if not thousands, of humanoids will arise who are powerful enough to overthrow it. Moreover, dragons are few, but mortals are many. Conspiracies and armies of humanoids can also bring down a dragon, even if none of the humanoids even comes close to the dragon in power.

There is also a problem with empathy. To a being with a lifespan of 1,000 years+, a mortal life passes in the blink of an eye. For a dragon, a mortal's problems might be bad for the mortal now, but they will be over in a few decades, whereas a dragon has to be thinking centuries down the line. This leads to an inability to empathise with short-lived mortals, and to see their problems as meaningless and insignificant. A dragon would thus make a poor ruler, as it would make decisions too much in the long term for the benefit of mortals. A dragon king would happily see forty years of misery if it would lead to several centuries of bounteous prosperity. However, the mortals would not see things in the same way, and would rebel. This happened to Zyphaxes, a goodly bronze dragon who ruled in ancient times in Jinania. She thought that she ruled beneficently, with the long-term good of the realm ever at her heart. In enacting a plan that would have made Jinania more prosperous and pleasant than any kingdom that ever existed, she had to subject the realm to 5 years of hardship. Subjects who had seen family members die and suffer, and who lacked the vision to see what Zyphaxes would achieve, killed her in her sleep to end the suffering. It worked, and things got marginally better, but they all suffered worse in the end.

The empathy problem gets exacerbated when one realises that human intelligence is insignificant next to a dragon's. Dragons regard mortal problems and desires as stupid, and so evil dragon rulers will dismiss and ignore the concerns of their humanoid subjects, and see them much as humanoids view cattle. Even good dragons will consider humanoid concerns as mostly insignificant, and will patronise the humanoids. To a humanoid, these are equally bad.

The third problem is that of the stagnation and ossification of society. Living so long, dragons get used to certain ways of doing things. The natural suspicion of change and small-'c' conservatism that sees humans resent change is writ large in dragons. Two thousand years and more ago, it was considered reasonable to stone people to death for wearing clothing cut from two cloths, or to set bears on people who insulted travellers. A dragon brought up in those years would probably still be dropping boulders on fashion criminals and setting bears on rude children. Mortal society and culture changes in the blink of an eye to a dragon. This magnifies the empathy problem above, and gets worse over time. When the exiled titan Ophecles decided to carve out a kingdom in a weakened Antiochid Empire, and reintroduced the death penalty for talking back to one's parents or having certain haircuts, he was quickly overthrown.

Dragons are not entirely to blame in all of this. Mortals tend to be delusional and self-serving – even the good ones. To a mortal desiring advancement, dragons holding the levers of power is a very bad thing. A dragon king will likely keep the same people in office under him, for it is hardly worth the effort to fire and reorganise his privy council every couple of years for a few centuries. As a result, all of the ambitious courtiers and nobles who otherwise would seek office will be unable to with the dragon in power. As the slighted will greatly outnumber the honoured, this swiftly leads to the downfall of dragons.

Moreover, humans innovate. Dragons never needed swords because their claws were long and sharp enough as it was, but humans developed sharpened metal sticks with which to slay dragons and each other. Dragons never needed to study magic because it was innate within them, but humanoids created wizardry to get the same levels of power. This means that the numerically superior humans often end up ahead of dragons in the arms race, even if dragons are more powerful in every conceivable way.

Dragons also suffer by being monstrous. They have the natural ability to polymorph themselves into humanoids, but that doesn't change the fact that they are castle-sized reptilian beasts that breathe fire, lightning, and other such things. Even well-intentioned dragons are terrifying, and humanoids greatly esteem those who slay terrifying things.

Finally, there are different things that motivate mortals and dragons. Dragons, at the end of the day, are just magnificently powerful and intelligent magpies. Their goals mean that they don't normally need power, just a cave and a pile of coins. Humans, on the other hand, show far more variety in motivation than dragons. Some want gold, but others want power, family, or crave the love of their fellows. This adds to the empathy problem for dragon rulers, but also means that dragons tend not to want to rule the world.

Most of what is said above applies to other races to, even between mortals. Long-lived dwarves and elves tend to make poor rulers of humans for much the same reasons that dragons do. Differences in motivation also explains why other immortals don't rule the world. Why would a god limit themselves to temporal power over one plane of existence when they can rule entire planes and have trillions in thrall to them across the multiverse as worshippers? Titans, genies, and other outsiders tend to have more pressing concerns on their own plane, and view the material plane as either a side show or as a source of souls. Aberrations have alien minds that don't even make sense to other immortals, and so their motives are difficult to comprehend for mortals, and sphinxes and other intelligent monsters tend to just want to do particular things like set riddles and eat the occasional mortal that wanders into their labyrinth.

The only immortal monsters with a predilection for rule over other mortals, and the ability to do so successfully (at least for a short time) are those that were once mortal themselves. The chief examples of these are intelligent undead such as liches and vampires. However, even their rule will come undone eventually. They have the same problems as dragons in that they eventually lose their ability (or willingness) to empathise, come to view humans as cattle, find that their views swiftly become outdated, and that they are – at the end of the day – hideous, terrifying monsters.

Mystral
2017-03-25, 10:10 AM
They don't rule the world because they are too busy playing that stupid game of theirs.

BWR
2017-03-25, 10:23 AM
In the Dragonstar setting they do rule the world, and about a thousand others. Basically, they got together and said "we are ridiculously smart, powerful physically and magically, and live longer than the lesser races; why the hell do we sit in caves and let them kill us for our stuff?"
Then they banded together and took over a planet, spread to the stars and have an empire that's lasted 5000 years and going strong.

There's obviously more to it than that, but that's the gist of it.

For all the other problems it had, the Dragonmage trilogy for Mystara did present a functioning dragon government and culture. They tend to keep to themselves and the ones you meet as monsters are the outliers and renegades. The dragons keep their true power and organization secret because for all their might, they are vastly outnumbered by the lesser races. Quantity has a quality all its own, and all that.

wumpus
2017-03-25, 10:43 AM
I'd have to assume that if you asked a dragon, they would ask you in what way *don't* they rule the world? Humans certainly think they rule the world, but it is quite possible that an alien observer would determine that ants are clearly the dominant life form (actually bacteria rules in terms of shear biomass and any other criteria, we are just more aware of the ants).

"That stupid game of theirs" presumably has very specific values for loot that aren't the same as other species (thus any dragon simply demanding treasure from mortals is losing badly enough to build a bed out of "off brand" gold).

Jay R
2017-03-25, 10:53 AM
I like C. S. Lewis's answer from The Voyage of the Dawn Treader:

And there is nothing a dragon likes so well as fresh dragon. That is why you so seldom find more than one dragon in the same county.

There is also J. K. Rowling's answer from Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince.

“The Prime Minister gazed hopelessly at the pair of them for a moment, then the words he had fought to suppress all evening burst from him at last.
“But for heaven’s sake — you’re wizards! You can do magic! Surely you can sort out — well — anything!”
Scrimgeour turned slowly on the spot and exchanged an incredulous look with Fudge, who really did manage a smile this time as he said kindly, “The trouble is, the other side can do magic too, Prime Minister.”

In short, you are making the false assumption that "Dragons" represent a single side. In fact, there are dragons of all nine alignments, and they don't all get along.

Evil dragons don't rule the world because good dragons don't want them to. Good dragons don't rule the world because the evil dragons can prevent it.

The biggest threat to dragons is other dragons.

And finally, it's possible that in their eyes, they do rule the world - or at least, as much of it as they care about. Humans are scattered around all over collected into town and villages where the dragons can harvest meat any time they choose. In the eyes of the local dragon, how is this different from a farm?

One envisions the cows in a pasture looking up at the farmhouse, wondering why the humans don't rule the world. "After all, they have guns and could kill us all, but they don't. We are left here in the pasture contentedly eating grass and growing fat."

Darth Ultron
2017-03-25, 11:59 AM
They don't want too, is the most basic answer. ''Ruling the world '' is after all a human idea. At the most basic dragons want a nice home with a big pile of treasure, and not all that much else. That does not ''sound'' like ''enough'' to a human, but then dragons are not human.

In a general sense, there are not all that many dragons to ''rule the world''. The worldwide dragon population is not all that big.

Also, dragons might rule the world...but just not show it. The rule the world in the crazy evil cartoon way does not really work in the long run. Like say dragons obliterated everything and enslaved everyone...ok, then they what? They have the slaves remake the world into just a park for the dragons....but ok, then what? Then just sit back and do nothing? It's a lot more possible that they just let things be and ''rule'' everything from behind.

And you do have the gods to stop the dragons.

Plus tons of other powerful people and creatures

Note the Forgotten Realms was once ruled by dragons, until the evles stopped them. They used epic magic to make the dragons go crazy. Worse it made the dragons near mindless brutes that would not use magic or tactics, and so could be defeated easily.

Yora
2017-03-25, 12:47 PM
Dragons could rule as god kings if they wanted to. But apparently they don't. Whatever being a powerful ruler gets you, the vast majority of dragons don't appear to care for it.

usorer
2017-03-25, 12:49 PM
I guess it was always that way. But there is no rule to against it. Especially for role playing games, game master has the flexibility to change or create worlds.

Coidzor
2017-03-25, 01:55 PM
Because they do in some settings, but it'd be boring if every setting ended up the exact same way.

Quiver
2017-03-25, 01:59 PM
There are so many varieties and takes on dragons that the answer could be "whatever reason the storyteller feels like giving".

Maybe Dragons are little more than feral beasts, as in A Song of Ice and Fire; they don't have sapience, and more like natural disasters, so obviously they can't rule the world.
Maybe they are smart enough to rule the world, but they are too combative with their own kind to truly organise a take over; basically, "dragons are orcs" argument.
Or maybe they DO rule the world in a labyrinthine conspiracy, and only appear not to. Every time a hero is despatched by their king to off a dragon, they might be serving the whims of a machiamvelian conspiracy whose understanding far exceeds human comprehension.

Strigon
2017-03-25, 02:29 PM
First off, I'd like to point out that, in most cosmologies, gods do rule the world. But they have no interest in the day-to-day, it seems like they don't.

Secondly, I believe the reason that dragons, titans, or other similarly powerful beasties don't rule the world is largely down to what I call the Qui-Gon principle; there's always a bigger fish. This is very true for Dungeons and Dragons worlds, where there are many powerful creatures, each with a very good reason not to let the others rule the world. So none of them can. Even if there were a single being powerful enough to overthrow all challengers, any intelligent creature can gain class levels, so they won't stay on top for long.

And third, ruling the world is a means to an end, not an end. You rule the world so you can have material possessions, love, revenge, to keep someone safe, et cetera. You don't rule the world to rule the world.
When you're as powerful as a Titan, what do you want with ruling the world? Nothing, that's what.

Jay R
2017-03-25, 02:44 PM
A king does not rule a kingdom alone. He's at the top of a large group that put him there, defends him, and administers his policy.

Unless dragons can work together in groups larger than a family, then "ruling a kingdom" is something they simply cannot, by their nature, do.

And unless all the most powerful dragons - gold, red, and every other kind - can all agree to get along, ruling the world is likewise impossible.

Yora
2017-03-25, 03:38 PM
I'd have to assume that if you asked a dragon, they would ask you in what way *don't* they rule the world?

I found this a very good explanation for why evil dragons don't completely wipe out any human population for several hundred miles around their lairs. Dragons would defend their territory against any competition. But as dragons are concerned, villages and even cities might not register as threats to their control of the region. As long as they can do what they want and don't have the resources they care for disrupted by other creatures, they are in full control.
If humans would start to kill all the large animals that a dragon wants to eat, that would change things. Then the dragon would have good reason to either start eating humans or if that turns out to be annoying for some reason to drive them out of the territory.

Stryyke
2017-03-25, 03:40 PM
They can't fit into the tiny houses.

Darth Ultron
2017-03-25, 04:27 PM
I found this a very good explanation for why evil dragons don't completely wipe out any human population for several hundred miles around their lairs. Dragons would defend their territory against any competition. But as dragons are concerned, villages and even cities might not register as threats to their control of the region. As long as they can do what they want and don't have the resources they care for disrupted by other creatures, they are in full control.

Dragons would see humanoids a lot the same way humans see animals in their backyard. When some ants make a tiny hill in your backyard far, far, far away from your house, do you care? The pond you have out back has fish in it, but they are of little concern. Even better some of them, like bees even make useful things for you. And oysters are the best...they make pearls.

King539
2017-03-25, 04:39 PM
Low reproduction rates.

Amphetryon
2017-03-25, 05:24 PM
It's cute how humanoids think Dragons don't rule the world.

thamolas
2017-03-25, 05:46 PM
It's cute how humanoids think Dragons don't rule the world.

In many settings, powerful dragons are able to assume humanoid (and other) forms. Who says that some of them don't assume humanoid identities and rule over humanoid empires, all without anyone knowing their true nature?

It's even possible that this (or something similar) is going on the real world -- how would anyone know?

AslanCross
2017-03-25, 06:39 PM
In Eberron, they sort of do.

The continent of Argonnessen is the homeland of the dragons, and over 50,000 of dragons of various ages live there. ALL the dragon races get along; no color-coding in Eberron. There are fortresses, vast repositories of magical lore and items, and wealth that would break any mortal economy. They have armies of non-dragon devotees, which include dragon-totem barbarians tribes and actual soldiers from various races. Their army, the Light of Siberys, if it takes wing, could conceivably lay waste to Khorvaire (the continent where most mortal races dwell) in short order, especially since the setting itself does not have many high-level NPCs wandering about (unlike the dozens of supreme archmages in FR). But the thing is, they have different concerns.

1. The Demon Overlords. There are thirty known Demon Overlords imprisoned all around Eberron, and these are more than just Demon Princes in the way that Demogorgon and Graz'zt are very powerful demons who command vast cults and armies. The Overlords are actual physical manifestations of evil concepts, and as such, can never be truly killed. One such Demon Overlord (Tiamat) is imprisoned in the middle of Argonnessen, and they devote great wealth and security to ensuring she never awakens. And that's just one. The other Overlords not only have vast amounts of power; they also have followers who constantly seek their release: the Rakshasa Lords of Dust.
This was actually the hook I used in my Eberron run of Red Hand of Doom; the Fane of Tiamat was actually part of a planet-wide seal that powered Tiamat's main prison. If the dragons sensed its disruption, they would respond with apocalyptic force...

2. ...Which they have done before. The dragons invented magic. They passed it on to the giants, who once had a continental empire on Xen'Drik. Long story short, the giants abused the gift of magic (breaking a moon and the planes in the process), which led to the dragons putting an end to the empire and the giant civilization forever. The dragons broke the continent in a cataclysm that reduced the giants to small, wandering tribes, and distorted time and space on that continent, preventing them from ever coming back together. So yes, in this setting, the dragons have militarized their might, but only in response to world-threatening catastrophes. Being very long-lived, I think they also have vastly different perspectives from mortals who are always trying to survive in a world that constantly victimizes them. Speaking of extinction-level events...

3. There's the Draconic Prophecy. It's a vast, fragmented, constantly evolving mass of prophecies on pretty much everything. The dragons devote their lives to its study; the elders to its preservation, the younger, more active ones, to its manipulation and manifestation. The dragons have agents who try to constantly cause, prevent, or otherwise manipulate the events of the Prophecy, while fighting against their enemies, the Lords of Dust, who are constantly doing the same, but to steer the Prophecy to meet the conditions of the Overlords' release. To this end, some dragons do hide among the mortal races as agents and spies.


That's setting-specific, but I think it does give some idea of the capabilities of dragons as a civilization, as well as why they don't do what um, humans would do, given that power.
I guess, coming from a more philosophical perspective, humans are constantly struggling for survival, and as such feel the need to wield such superiority against others to subjugate them.
Dragons, with their long lives and foresight, together with their great power---have a level of comfort that we could compare to how we feel toward ants.

Ants constantly dig and expand their warrens, and constantly forage for food. They spend their entire short lifespans--minuscule compared to ours---digging and feeding their queen. We could exterminate an anthill in short order and kill or spare ants at whim. Perhaps if they could think in the way we do, they would wonder why humans don't just exterminate them all, but instead spend their considerable lifespans sending electric signals to each other to debate about imaginary creatures.

The view is different from the top.

Jay R
2017-03-25, 08:07 PM
Dragons would see humanoids a lot the same way humans see animals in their backyard. When some ants make a tiny hill in your backyard far, far, far away from your house, do you care? The pond you have out back has fish in it, but they are of little concern. Even better some of them, like bees even make useful things for you. And oysters are the best...they make pearls.

They also see humans as humans see cows. They don't wipe out all the people in the village for the same reason no rancher wipes out his entire herd - that's a sustainable food source.

Xuc Xac
2017-03-26, 01:14 AM
Human kings don't inform field mice of the locations of the boundaries between their kingdoms. Dragons probably treat humans the same way.

Dalinale
2017-03-26, 02:20 AM
A couple of possibilities;

- Large groups of powerful dragons tends to attract opposition from other heavy hitters in the Monster Manual, up to and including the lower tiers of powerful unique outsiders with posses of 20 CR outsiders following them. A extended group of Chromatic Dragons banding together is the sort of thing that could convince a kingdom to start getting in touch with celestials.

- Extremely powerful dragons are best treated as upper-middle players in the great planer game. A Great Wyrm Red Dragon, instead of conquering puny mortals, might prefer to abscond to the Elemental Plane of Fire or attempt to gain greater glory elsewhere in the universe. In this case, dragons might be ruling a world, just not the world in question.

- Metallics and Chromatics hate each other, and even if alignments restrictions were removed, some would still lean towards Bahamut and others towards Tiamat, and in a traditional DnD setting cooperation between the two would be close to null. 'Dragons' can hardly be considered a united front in most cases when it comes to long-term goals; even a group of dragon-slayers could very well be directed by a dragon behind the scenes in order to eliminate problematic rivals, for example.

- They occasionally do, just not as a unified front; some major families of magic users, merchant guilds, nobility, and the occasional isolated tribe of conqueror types in a setting could all have ties to a hidden or open dragon overlord, either through politics, servitude, or blood. However, the machinations of dragons last as long as the dragon in question exists or sees fit to continue them, and as such there is no one single continuous period of dragon dominance.

Steampunkette
2017-03-26, 03:42 PM
In 5e?

Bounded Accuracy.

In basically any other game system?

CRITS.

You can breathe fire and kill a few dozen rampaging villagers, sure, but get enough villagers together and there'll be plenty enough 20s rolled to kill even the most powerful dragon.

Humans: Dangerous because each one of us gets to roll at least -1- d20 in a given fight.

Cazero
2017-03-26, 04:29 PM
What, and be held responsible? And being expected to solve issues of commoners?
Have you ever seen a cat?

Madbox
2017-03-26, 09:44 PM
They have better things to do. Why get wrapped up in the petty day to day nature of ruling a nation, when easily manipulated humans can do all that work? Just nudge things in the right direction if you don't like where it's going, and focus on trying to find the Plane of Raw Steaks and Endless Gold.

Mando Knight
2017-03-26, 10:11 PM
In the Forgotten Realms, the Time of Dragons was broken by the elven Dracorage mythal, a world-encompassing spell that plunged the dragons into a bloodlust, forcing them to destroy and devour their own machinations (and anything else in their way). The mythal was also set to repeat the dracorage when the stars aligned, so while dragons would occasionally carve out kingdoms (or usurp them) on an individual basis, as a whole the dragons were disrupted enough that the humanoid races could keep them from re-establishing global dominance.

And then the lich Sammaster subverted Dracorage for his own purposes in 1373 DR, leading to its unraveling at the hands of a band of adventurers. And then 4e caused the Spellplague to hit in 1385 and mess up magic everywhere, and 5e led Ao to put everything back mostly the way it was in 1482, so there hasn't really been time to coordinate a post-Dracorage resurgence of dragonkind as masters of Faerûn.

oudeis
2017-03-26, 10:14 PM
they have better things to do. Why get wrapped up in the petty day to day nature of ruling a nation, when easily manipulated humans can do all that work? Just nudge things in the right direction if you don't like where it's going, and focus on trying to find the plane of raw steaks and endless gold. This is easily one of the best things I've ever read on this forum.:biggrin:

Cosi
2017-03-26, 10:16 PM
There's not really any terribly compelling reason for a long lived, magically powerful creature like a dragon to rule a human kingdom. Between fabricate and planar binding they have the tools to create anything they might want without ever bothering to interact with mortals at all. The only reason to bother with humans (or elves, or dwarves) is to subjugate them for their own amusement. Between the fact that dragons already have kobolds for that, and might be reasonably expected to be possessed of an impressive degree of racial arrogance (by virtue of, you know, being smarter, stronger, and longer lived than other races), it's not at all unexpected that they might simply ignore most species.

Max_Killjoy
2017-03-26, 10:43 PM
Rulership implies social structure. Dragons don't appear to be very social.

Mechalich
2017-03-27, 12:24 AM
In D&D, the ability to reign as a tyrannical god-king is all about magic. The one who has the biggest, baddest magical repertoire wins, full stop. That isn't dragons. As a result dragons can only rule in a situation where they seize power early and limit the magical development of those races with the capability to churn out even one single 20th level wizard. In the Forgotten Realms and in Dragonlance they did that happened, and dragons did indeed rule - for draconic values of rule - for quite some time but ultimately the pesky elves got their hands on the secrets of mighty spells and the stranglehold of the dragons was broken.

Psikerlord
2017-03-27, 06:28 AM
It's a question that occasionally comes up in D&D. Here's my attempt at an answer.

What do you think? I know that my perspective may be controversial, and I want to give my players a good answer.

Furthermore, if you can think of any examples that might back up these points (from D&D sources, folklore, fantasy, or history), then please do let me know.


So, why don't dragons rule the world?

Dragons live for thousands of years, are far more intelligent, wise, and charismatic than humanoids, have supreme strength and constitution, and complement their physical prowess with a vast array of supernatural abilities and arcane spell casting. Why then, do they not rule the world? The same question too might be asked of any sufficiently long-lived and powerful creatures. Why don't gods, titans, giants, genies, outsiders, aberrations, or even sphinxes rule the world?

The first and most important thing to realise is that dragons and other long-lived beings gain their powers relatively slowly compared to humanoids, and humans in particular. A dragon may take centuries to even learn the basics of spell casting, but it can take mortals a matter of a couple of decades to be capable of using magic that will undo even the mightiest dragon. Thus, over the span of a dragon's life, hundreds, if not thousands, of humanoids will arise who are powerful enough to overthrow it. Moreover, dragons are few, but mortals are many. Conspiracies and armies of humanoids can also bring down a dragon, even if none of the humanoids even comes close to the dragon in power.

There is also a problem with empathy. To a being with a lifespan of 1,000 years+, a mortal life passes in the blink of an eye. For a dragon, a mortal's problems might be bad for the mortal now, but they will be over in a few decades, whereas a dragon has to be thinking centuries down the line. This leads to an inability to empathise with short-lived mortals, and to see their problems as meaningless and insignificant. A dragon would thus make a poor ruler, as it would make decisions too much in the long term for the benefit of mortals. A dragon king would happily see forty years of misery if it would lead to several centuries of bounteous prosperity. However, the mortals would not see things in the same way, and would rebel. This happened to Zyphaxes, a goodly bronze dragon who ruled in ancient times in Jinania. She thought that she ruled beneficently, with the long-term good of the realm ever at her heart. In enacting a plan that would have made Jinania more prosperous and pleasant than any kingdom that ever existed, she had to subject the realm to 5 years of hardship. Subjects who had seen family members die and suffer, and who lacked the vision to see what Zyphaxes would achieve, killed her in her sleep to end the suffering. It worked, and things got marginally better, but they all suffered worse in the end.

The empathy problem gets exacerbated when one realises that human intelligence is insignificant next to a dragon's. Dragons regard mortal problems and desires as stupid, and so evil dragon rulers will dismiss and ignore the concerns of their humanoid subjects, and see them much as humanoids view cattle. Even good dragons will consider humanoid concerns as mostly insignificant, and will patronise the humanoids. To a humanoid, these are equally bad.

The third problem is that of the stagnation and ossification of society. Living so long, dragons get used to certain ways of doing things. The natural suspicion of change and small-'c' conservatism that sees humans resent change is writ large in dragons. Two thousand years and more ago, it was considered reasonable to stone people to death for wearing clothing cut from two cloths, or to set bears on people who insulted travellers. A dragon brought up in those years would probably still be dropping boulders on fashion criminals and setting bears on rude children. Mortal society and culture changes in the blink of an eye to a dragon. This magnifies the empathy problem above, and gets worse over time. When the exiled titan Ophecles decided to carve out a kingdom in a weakened Antiochid Empire, and reintroduced the death penalty for talking back to one's parents or having certain haircuts, he was quickly overthrown.

Dragons are not entirely to blame in all of this. Mortals tend to be delusional and self-serving – even the good ones. To a mortal desiring advancement, dragons holding the levers of power is a very bad thing. A dragon king will likely keep the same people in office under him, for it is hardly worth the effort to fire and reorganise his privy council every couple of years for a few centuries. As a result, all of the ambitious courtiers and nobles who otherwise would seek office will be unable to with the dragon in power. As the slighted will greatly outnumber the honoured, this swiftly leads to the downfall of dragons.

Moreover, humans innovate. Dragons never needed swords because their claws were long and sharp enough as it was, but humans developed sharpened metal sticks with which to slay dragons and each other. Dragons never needed to study magic because it was innate within them, but humanoids created wizardry to get the same levels of power. This means that the numerically superior humans often end up ahead of dragons in the arms race, even if dragons are more powerful in every conceivable way.

Dragons also suffer by being monstrous. They have the natural ability to polymorph themselves into humanoids, but that doesn't change the fact that they are castle-sized reptilian beasts that breathe fire, lightning, and other such things. Even well-intentioned dragons are terrifying, and humanoids greatly esteem those who slay terrifying things.

Finally, there are different things that motivate mortals and dragons. Dragons, at the end of the day, are just magnificently powerful and intelligent magpies. Their goals mean that they don't normally need power, just a cave and a pile of coins. Humans, on the other hand, show far more variety in motivation than dragons. Some want gold, but others want power, family, or crave the love of their fellows. This adds to the empathy problem for dragon rulers, but also means that dragons tend not to want to rule the world.

Most of what is said above applies to other races to, even between mortals. Long-lived dwarves and elves tend to make poor rulers of humans for much the same reasons that dragons do. Differences in motivation also explains why other immortals don't rule the world. Why would a god limit themselves to temporal power over one plane of existence when they can rule entire planes and have trillions in thrall to them across the multiverse as worshippers? Titans, genies, and other outsiders tend to have more pressing concerns on their own plane, and view the material plane as either a side show or as a source of souls. Aberrations have alien minds that don't even make sense to other immortals, and so their motives are difficult to comprehend for mortals, and sphinxes and other intelligent monsters tend to just want to do particular things like set riddles and eat the occasional mortal that wanders into their labyrinth.

The only immortal monsters with a predilection for rule over other mortals, and the ability to do so successfully (at least for a short time) are those that were once mortal themselves. The chief examples of these are intelligent undead such as liches and vampires. However, even their rule will come undone eventually. They have the same problems as dragons in that they eventually lose their ability (or willingness) to empathise, come to view humans as cattle, find that their views swiftly become outdated, and that they are – at the end of the day – hideous, terrifying monsters.

Good question... and this is why I prefer low magic worlds, with reptile like dragons, not demigod like behemoths every mountain range.

iceman10058
2017-03-27, 06:38 AM
As far as they are concerned, they do. If a dragon decends to a town or city and demands some sort of tribute, he will get it. If he feels like eating some lone travelers, he will, who is gonna stop him. They dont rule over kingdoms cause they have other "hobbys" they would rather persue and thwart and steal teritory from other dragons.

The small party that is capable of slaying any adult or older dragon is not a common thing and therfore, not something to worry about.

Professor Chimp
2017-03-27, 07:19 AM
It might just be a numbers game. Yes, a Great Wyrm is vastly more powerful than the lesser races. But there's not many of them and there are vast amounts of the lesser races. Let's say, a million for every Great Wyrm. Even if 99,999% of those are no match for the Dragon at all, that still leaves 10 credible threats. Maybe not facing off 1,2 or 3 on 1, but all 10 at the same time? Those odds don't favor the Dragon.

If the lesser races were given enough reason to unite, they could go on an extermination campaign, overwhelming Dragonkind with sheer weight of numbers. And the Dragons know it. The old ones are too smart not to know it. So they make sure they don't give the lesser races any reason.

Max_Killjoy
2017-03-27, 08:24 AM
As far as they are concerned, they do. If a dragon decends to a town or city and demands some sort of tribute, he will get it. If he feels like eating some lone travelers, he will, who is gonna stop him.


That's not rulership, that's raiding.

halfeye
2017-03-27, 09:18 AM
That's not rulership, that's raiding.
There is the phrase "robber baron".

Draconi Redfir
2017-03-27, 09:36 AM
My reasoning for it is simple. Dragon's don't DO anything.

When have you ever seen a city of Dragons? A town of Dragons? A village of Dragons? Show me a hamelt that was built by and inhabited by dragons.

Dragons may be super smart and powerful, but they practically hate eachother they're so isolated. None of them every gather together to actually make use of that power and actually take over a kingdom or build a settlement. they're all too content living in primitive caves and relying on their natural prowess rather then forging new tools and weapons that can help them advance further.

on the matter of Tools, they don't even have thumbs! Sure they could use magic to use tools probably, but thumbs are still important dangit!

gkathellar
2017-03-27, 09:44 AM
Why bother? Humans desire social power for a wide variety of reasons - personal safety, the ability to seize and control property, easy fulfillment of their desires, and the emotional gratification that comes of all these things and more - that are simply inapplicable for a dragon. Even a wyrmling can defend itself effectively, and it has the expectation that as it grows the world will fall into its lap. What a dragon wants, it can often take; if it can't, why, it need only wait for time to favor it in a way it does few other beings of the Prime, granting the dragon strength even as lesser creatures wither and die. Even a metallic dragon, fettered by morality, will find no shortage of lesser creatures willing to cooperate with it for its promises or its protection, and no shortage of the wicked to strike down should it desire land, gold, or action.

Compare the ruler, who alleges land is his, but must field an army in its defense and tax its people to remind them of his authority, with the dragon, who simply flies to the land, lays claim, drives off any challenger, and goes undisturbed for the fear its power inspires. Why should the latter want to lower itself to the status of the former?

Beleriphon
2017-03-27, 09:50 AM
There is the phrase "robber baron".

I don't think that means what you think it means. Robber Baron (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robber_baron_(industrialist)) definition.

As for dragons, are we raiding when we go out an hunt for deer, or boar, or moose to feed ourselves? A dragon is doing the same thing, they are apex predators and they are hunting. The fact that humans and other species in D&D Land are sapient really doesn't matter to an apex predator that is also sapient and generally smarter than the things it hunts. An average ancient red dragon is smarter than most of the smartest humans in the world.

Max_Killjoy
2017-03-27, 10:03 AM
I don't think that means what you think it means. Robber Baron (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robber_baron_(industrialist)) definition.

As for dragons, are we raiding when we go out an hunt for deer, or boar, or moose to feed ourselves? A dragon is doing the same thing, they are apex predators and they are hunting. The fact that humans and other species in D&D Land are sapient really doesn't matter to an apex predator that is also sapient and generally smarter than the things it hunts. An average ancient red dragon is smarter than most of the smartest humans in the world.

It's sapient/sentient creatures attacking other sapient/sentient creatures to take stuff from them, IMO it falls under "raiding".

But, raiding or hunting, the exact word used isn't as important as the fact that freely stealing from one's neighbors doesn't make one their leader/ruler.

Draconi Redfir
2017-03-27, 10:19 AM
Compare the ruler, who alleges land is his, but must field an army in its defense and tax its people to remind them of his authority, with the dragon, who simply flies to the land, lays claim, drives off any challenger, and goes undisturbed for the fear its power inspires. Why should the latter want to lower itself to the status of the former?

With the former i see a leader who has thousands doing as he wills in his name and extensive land that he can defend in it's entirety without leaving the comfort of his throne.

with the later i see a lone wolf who must hunt and kill his own food just to survive. it's a very powerful and effective wolf yes, but alone all the less. And it can't be in two places at once. If a seccond wolf tries to take it's territory from the north, and a third from the south, it's going to loose something reguardless of what it does. all the while it's treasured horde is unguarded for those wiley enough to take the risk.

Berenger
2017-03-27, 10:21 AM
I don't think that means what you think it means. Robber Baron (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robber_baron_(industrialist)) definition.

I don't think halfeye means what you think he means. You linked to robber baron (industrialist) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robber_baron_(industrialist)), not actual robber barons (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robber_baron).

gkathellar
2017-03-27, 04:07 PM
With the former i see a leader who has thousands doing as he wills in his name and extensive land that he can defend in it's entirety without leaving the comfort of his throne.

with the later i see a lone wolf who must hunt and kill his own food just to survive. it's a very powerful and effective wolf yes, but alone all the less. And it can't be in two places at once. If a seccond wolf tries to take it's territory from the north, and a third from the south, it's going to loose something reguardless of what it does. all the while it's treasured horde is unguarded for those wiley enough to take the risk.

Sure, absolutely. On the other hand, political authority is an excellent way to end up assassinated or usurped, so it's a matter of perspective. Heavy is the head that wears the crown, sword of Damocles etc.

The critical thing is that a dragon simply isn't motivated by many of the things a humanoid is, because of its power and its tremendous lifespan. Rule would have its benefits, and no doubt some dragons experiment with those, but that's a lark, because for their species life really isn't nasty, brutish, and short and that makes the whole social contract a lot less interesting.

Draconi Redfir
2017-03-27, 05:00 PM
Rule would have its benefits, and no doubt some dragons experiment with those, but that's a lark, because for their species life really isn't nasty, brutish, and short and that makes the whole social contract a lot less interesting.

Which is exactly why Dragons don't rule the world. they don't DO anything to try too.

halfeye
2017-03-27, 07:22 PM
I don't think halfeye means what you think he means. You linked to robber baron (industrialist) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robber_baron_(industrialist)), not actual robber barons (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robber_baron).

Yeah, toward the bottom of the second link is:


England

The reign of King Stephen of England (1096–1154) was a long period of civil unrest commonly known as "The Anarchy". In the absence of strong central kingship, the nobility of England were a law unto themselves, as characterised in this excerpt from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle:

When the traitors saw that Stephen was a mild good humoured man who inflicted no punishment, then ... They were all forsworn and their oaths broken. For every great man built him castles and held them against the king; they sorely burdened the unhappy people of the country with forced labour on the castles; ... they seized those they believed to have any wealth ... they ... tortured them ... Many thousands they starved to death.


<edit>

I didn't know about that period, but from Wikipedia it looks ideal for a historical setting, wars all over and betrayals by the bucket load:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen,_King_of_England

The guy ruled up to 1/4 of France and at times maybe 2/3 of England, but kept losing bits and gaining bits, and (oversimplifying ridiculously) couldn't make up his mind whether it was England or part of France he wanted most.

Beleriphon
2017-03-28, 09:56 AM
It's sapient/sentient creatures attacking other sapient/sentient creatures to take stuff from them, IMO it falls under "raiding".

But, raiding or hunting, the exact word used isn't as important as the fact that freely stealing from one's neighbors doesn't make one their leader/ruler.

Eh, do you worry about what squirrel think about their status in the tree in your backyard? One squirrel might deem that tree their's but you still think of the tree as yours and the squirrel as an amusing creature for you to watch. If they get annoying you evict them with extreme prejudice.

Max_Killjoy
2017-03-28, 10:04 AM
Eh, do you worry about what squirrel think about their status in the tree in your backyard? One squirrel might deem that tree their's but you still think of the tree as yours and the squirrel as an amusing creature for you to watch. If they get annoying you evict them with extreme prejudice.

A squirrel is not sapient/sentient.

Humans are.

D&D dragons are.

Stealth Marmot
2017-03-28, 11:36 AM
They don't want to.

Beleriphon
2017-03-28, 12:09 PM
A squirrel is not sapient/sentient.

Humans are.

D&D dragons are.

Squirrels are sentient creatures (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentience) given they can tell the difference between themselves and the rest of the world, sapience is a different issue (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdom#Sapience). Either way an evil dragon (the kind likely to just up and go kill some merchants for being there) is still probably going to view humans in much the same light we view squirrels: vermin. Ohhhhh, the vermin can talk how adorable!

If ants could talk would really care about exterminating a nest of them if they wont just go away or give you something in return for being in your yard? Dragons are going to view humanoids in much the same light, they're at the top of the heap and a human village needs to either be beneath their notice, provide something they want, or wipe out the source of the thing annoying them.

Having a human/elven/dwarven/humanoidish kingdom inside of a region a dragon considers its territory (which it rules) doesn't matter much to 2000 year old flying, fire breathing, freight train.

Max_Killjoy
2017-03-28, 12:12 PM
Squirrels are sentient creatures given they can tell the difference between themselves and other creatures, sapience is a different issue. Either way an evil dragon (the kind likely to just up and go kill some merchants for being there) is still probably going to view humans in much the same light we view squirrels: vermin. Ohhhhh, the vermin can talk how adorable!

If ants could talk would really care about exterminating a nest of them if they wont just go away or give you something in return for being in your yard? Dragons are going to view humanoids in much the same light, they're at the top of the heap and a human village needs to either be beneath their notice, provide something they want, or wipe out the source of the thing annoying them.

Having a human/elven/dwarven/humanoidish kingdom inside of a region a dragon considers its territory (which it rules) doesn't matter much to 2000 year old flying, fire breathing, freight train.


If ants were somehow smart enough to hold an actual conversation with, then we'd need to take a different approach than we do now.

I keep using "sentient/sapient" because of the incredibly sloppy and contradictory overall usage of both words.

(And again, "rulership" is more than just "I can kill anyone here any time I like".)

Ruslan
2017-03-28, 12:16 PM
Good Dragons don't rule the world because they don't want to.
Evil Dragons don't rule the world because they can't work together.

LibraryOgre
2017-03-28, 01:31 PM
The Forgotten Realms answer is pretty close to "God created all men, but Sam Colt made them equal".

In short, once upon a time the dragons DID rule the entire world, though not necessarily as a single hegemony. But, then, technology advanced and the non-draconic races started to develop magic and, suddenly, dragons can be overthrown. It became more work than the dragons wanted to do, so the dragon kingdoms waned and disappeared where they were not violently overthrown.

Stealth Marmot
2017-03-28, 01:47 PM
To clarify on my earlier statement: The same reason that humans don't endeavor to become kings of spider monkeys or earthworms.

The first thing you need to understand about dragons is that they are arrogant. Like, REALLY damn arrogant. Yes, even the shiny good ones. They consider ELVES to be the silly little mortals, much less any of the other sentient races.

Human and other racial affairs have pretty much no interest to them other than who is minting coins and growing their snackfood (or as we call it "livestock")

Sure sometimes you might get the Jane Goodall of dragons spending time to learn and understand the races and they might make friends with one or two of them (especially as younger dragons) but most dragons only get interested in peoples affairs if it benefits them somehow. How would running a country benefit a dragon? They could demand coins for their hoard, but in reality hoarding money is not efficient for running a country. They may expect tribute from some places that they shake down, but thats about the limit of their interactions.

Almost every dragon thinks that people are beneath them. Chromatics will bully or destroy people, while metallics will ignore or patronize at best. "You silly little children!"

Dragons are *****, and ruling the world means you have to actually do stuff concerning the people you rule over, and most every dragon around couldn't be bothered to find a crap to give. The few that do aren't enough of a powerhouse to rule the world, at least openly, and they aren't about to stand united (since the only thing dragons will disdain more than mortals is generally other dragons).

Velaryon
2017-03-28, 03:04 PM
Here's my question about dragons:

What did they hoard before humanoids started making coins, statues, and art objects?

Strigon
2017-03-28, 09:19 PM
Here's my question about dragons:

What did they hoard before humanoids started making coins, statues, and art objects?

Dragon-made coins, statues, and art objects.
Or, if you prefer, shiny rocks.

FabulousFizban
2017-03-29, 05:46 PM
longevity provides a unique perspective. additionally dragons aren't even humanoid, so their thought process is largely alien and inscrutable. LIZARD BRAIN!

They probably just don't care. they would see whole kindgoms of shorter lived races - even elves - come and go with (to them) absurd frequency. Dragons probably think they DO rule the world. Think about it, dragon slayers are exceptionally rare, the only thing that really threatens a dragon is another dragon.

FabulousFizban
2017-03-29, 05:48 PM
Here's my question about dragons:

What did they hoard before humanoids started making coins, statues, and art objects?

arrogance. it is why they have so much of it.

Koo Rehtorb
2017-03-29, 05:57 PM
Because they know they'll get Familicided if they act up. Bam.

Esprit15
2017-03-29, 06:09 PM
Because the lesser races have this weird habit of forming little groups of outcasts that travel the world, normally four or five of them, and these groups (let's call them adventurers) have a habit of overthrowing oppressive leaders.

2D8HP
2017-03-29, 07:21 PM
Why don't the Dragons rule?

Because they slumber.

When they awaken...

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT7JmB3pnv639retguz_HFD7gNFiDl5r hCIC5VRDT1BAvBHXeqT


https://timeentertainment.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/apocalypse_movies_12.jpg?w=720&h=480&crop=1

Psyren
2017-03-29, 09:20 PM
Because they do in some settings, but it'd be boring if every setting ended up the exact same way.


They don't rule the world because they are too busy playing that stupid game of theirs.

These. Also, gods exist.

Next question.

Pugwampy
2017-03-30, 03:57 AM
Every species think they are king of the world . Are there more humans than Dragons ? Yes . Are there more roaches than humans ? Yes .

For every human a dragon hunts and kills there are ten more hiding . close by . These disgusting things can breed and populate in under 10 months . Its all they do eat and copulate .
Sure you could hire a dragon thats an expert in smoking out those hairless monkeys but they will be back within a year .

Max_Killjoy
2017-03-30, 08:27 AM
Every species think they are king of the world . Are there more humans than Dragons ? Yes . Are there more roaches than humans ? Yes .


Roaches don't think they're kings of the world. Roaches don't think. At all.

Strigon
2017-03-30, 08:29 AM
Every species think they are king of the world . Are there more humans than Dragons ? Yes . Are there more roaches than humans ? Yes .

For every human a dragon hunts and kills there are ten more hiding . close by . These disgusting things can breed and populate in under 10 months . Its all they do eat and copulate .
Sure you could hire a dragon thats an expert in smoking out those hairless monkeys but they will be back within a year .

Sure, maybe, but when was the last time a cockroach got uppity and actually killed a human in combat?

Stealth Marmot
2017-03-30, 10:00 AM
Sure, maybe, but when was the last time a cockroach got uppity and actually killed a human in combat?

http://www.theroachkillerguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Ugly-Roach.jpg

Cosi
2017-03-30, 12:23 PM
Roaches don't think they're kings of the world. Roaches don't think. At all.

Cockroaches definitely think. Not a whole lot, or anything particularly sophisticated, but they do think.

Max_Killjoy
2017-03-30, 12:39 PM
Cockroaches definitely think. Not a whole lot, or anything particularly sophisticated, but they do think.

So cockroaches think... they make plans, they anticipate what they're going to do later, contemplate the past, wonder what other roaches are thinking, etc?

Cosi
2017-03-30, 12:55 PM
So cockroaches think... they make plans, they anticipate what they're going to do later, contemplate the past, wonder what other roaches are thinking, etc?

I guess it depends on your definition of thought? Cockroaches probably aren't conscious, but they definitely respond to stimuli and process information. Apparently, they're able to learn. (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-cockroaches-learning-memory-idUSHKG14533220070613)

oudeis
2017-03-30, 02:41 PM
Q: Why don't dragons rule the world?
A: Because they prefer their meat free-range.


Thank you, ladies and gentleman! I'll be here all week!

Mechalich
2017-03-31, 01:12 AM
Cockroaches are a bad example of ruling the world. Cockroaches aren't a species, they're an Order, Blattodea of 4,400 species (and if you want to get your cladistics on, one that also contains another 3,000 species of termites). There are very few, if any, members of the order Blattodea with a global distribution, and most are confined to fairly specific environments and compete heavily with other species of cockroaches for territory.

This, of course, applies to dragons as well. There's not one species of dragon, there's many. Depending on edition, setting, and how inclusive you want to be, there can be close to one hundred species of true dragon available and they mostly compete with other dragons (in Dragonlance, they do so rather spectacularly, in other settings its a bit more restrained). So while the draconic clade may have dominance over the humanoid clade in some settings at certain times, those clades aren't united, and since we're talking about sapient beings here different portions of the two groups can ally together against other portions (once again, rather spectacularly in the case of Dragonlance) which makes talking about them as uniform entities rather pointless. Even in Council of Wyrms, which was explicitly dominated by the draconic clade, the humanoids allied principally with different dragon clans from different breeds.

There are cases where we can talk about a single unified group ruling a setting: aboleth and illithids are both rocking that particular claim in their histories, somewhat more obscurely so are Clockwork Horrors and it is strongly implied that there are other races - like Neogi - out there with whole worlds of their own, but 'dragons' as a collective entity are operating on different criteria.

darkrose50
2017-04-01, 02:48 PM
There is a dragon paradise, The Flying Isle, a moving island held in the air via an anti gravitational field. This island is steered along a route that follows various animal migration patterns of sustainable foods (schools of fish, pods of whale, and herds of various kinds). Hunting for meat is easy on the island. Earning a place on the island requires vast amounts of gold. The dragons living on the island are uncovering the secrets of creation and could theoretically each become a god of creation in their own creation/universe/dimension (not just another god).

The dragons acquired and are acquiring a plethora of knowledge and understanding of the universe collected from many other races. They also study magic independently of preexisting ideas. Though studying the magics of the other races they found that gold could be the key. Leprechaun magic is an intrinsic source of magical power in this scheme. The dragons of The Flying Isle require vast quantities of gold. Trough a seemingly mystical loophole they have discovered a method of creating a sustained supply of magical energies believed to be required in ascending to the higher levels of godhood.

Leprechaun magic can turn gold into a reusable source of magical energy. A piece of gold may be used to generate magical energy every year-and-a-day via leprechaun magic. If one were to get enough of these little bits of gold, then the gold pieces can be alternated every 366.24 days in order to create a consistent steady flow of magical energy. Thus could, theoretically, solve the problem of supplying the right amount of magical energy in order to create the precise temperature of divine fire long enough to forge a creation.

Dragons need all the gold they can acquire. The dragons who contribute the most gold and/or magical advancement will be granted godhood of creation over their own universe. Once the forge is operational this creation may sustain damage and even destruction. Those that contribute the most to the cause earn an earlier place in line towards ultimate godhood. Those too low in the pecking order will likely parish among the lessor races.

Bohandas
2017-04-01, 11:42 PM
Some of the campaign settings have covered this to an extent

In Eberron they sort of do rule the world, but outside of Argonesson it is only in a hands off behind the scenes illuminati sort of way, thay mostly leave the dragonmarked races undisturbed because they believe in a form of divination (supposedly more far reaching than divinatory spells) based on observation of these races' actions

In Dragonlance IIRC there was a massive war between the good and evil dragons that devestated both sides.


Roaches don't think they're kings of the world. Roaches don't think. At all.

The same could be said of almost half of humanity. At least where I live; I don't know about demographics in other countries.

Eladrinblade
2017-04-02, 06:37 PM
Dragons don't have to work together to survive, and being so physically gifted and possessing magic, they don't see the need to develop technology. Do dragons even die of old age? The only thing "ruling the world" would get them is security, but they're very proud and arrogant due to their gifts and don't really see themselves as being under threat. They may know that some dragons get killed by dragon slayers, but those dragons are evidently weak. The only threat they truly recognize is other dragons, which is where most of their concern lies, and also why they don't band together (though dragons of like mind and kind may). They probably see their kind as "ruling" already, given they can basically do what they want (as long as they don't anger another dragon of equal or greater power). Other than security, what more would they gain that they don't already have? Lot of stress ruling a bunch of constantly busy ants.

Misereor
2017-04-03, 07:50 AM
There is also a problem with empathy. To a being with a lifespan of 1,000 years+, a mortal life passes in the blink of an eye. For a dragon, a mortal's problems might be bad for the mortal now, but they will be over in a few decades, whereas a dragon has to be thinking centuries down the line. This leads to an inability to empathise with short-lived mortals, and to see their problems as meaningless and insignificant. A dragon would thus make a poor ruler, as it would make decisions too much in the long term for the benefit of mortals. A dragon king would happily see forty years of misery if it would lead to several centuries of bounteous prosperity. However, the mortals would not see things in the same way, and would rebel.

Nice post.
I agree that the matter of incompatible perspectives should definetely come into play.

Someone with a sufficiently different lifespan would either be unable to rule effectively, or would have to use intermediaries.
Several different types of intermediaries could be used, each with it's attendant problems. Institutions devolving into cult/religion as they started losing touch. Hybrid administrator races getting out of control. Dragons creating split personalities for themselves and becoming their own unwitting avatars. (***evil GM wheels turning***)

Zale
2017-04-06, 11:10 AM
on the matter of Tools, they don't even have thumbs! Sure they could use magic to use tools probably, but thumbs are still important dangit!

Thumbs are a compelling reason for Dragons not to kill all humanoids.

After all, if it were not for humanoids, dragons would have to dig up ore, refine it into metal, and then craft that metal into shiny trinkets!

Whereas if you just teach the humans to do that, then leave them alone, they'll do it all by themselves! They'll even be nice enough to collect it into large quantities for you to take!

No dragon wants to work for their hoard when they can just wake up every fifty years and shake down some kingdoms for cash. They can spend more time admiring their own magnificence if they let humans do the work.