Breaking Bad: Silver Dragon edition

[Gaius Hermicus]

Hello GITP,

I'm working on a rather knotty worldbuilding problem right now and thought I would seek advice from more experienced GMs.

In the game I'm playing, the current questline is a heist to steal a new super-secret technology from a (steampunk-influenced) gnomish state. Said state is a military protectorate, highly authoritarian, and oppressive toward its kobold minorities. Essentially, it is a fascist state.

Living near/within this protectorate is a young silver dragon. The dragon is most definitely involved in the internal politics of the region and is on good terms with the government, making it by extension hostile to the players' plans - partially this is because I want the tone of the adventure to be more intrigue-heavy and having a dragon ally to just fly in and wreck **** would screw with this tone, and partially because I want to explore the possibility of having a "villain" that is good-aligned and has a lot of character depth.

Which leads me to my question: what could cause a silver dragon to break bad and start supporting an autocratic state that oppresses its citizens? And could it do so while still maintaining a Lawful Good alignment?

[Entessa]

Question number 1: why is it silver and not red? Only because you are set on making the "king" legal good?

[Sigreid]

The expression "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" exists exactly because people, and presumably dragons, can justify all manner of domination and out right cruelty in the name of "the greatest good for the greatest number'. Even if the government is bad, he doesn't have to be evil, but just have flawed judgement. He also may have come to the conclusion that it's a solid framework that over time he can bend to his idea of "good". he's a dragon. He can play a generations long long game.

[KorvinStarmast]

I want to explore the possibility of having a "villain" that is good-aligned and has a lot of character death. Do you mean character depth?

Which leads me to my question: what could cause a silver dragon to break bad and start supporting an autocratic state that oppresses its citizens? And could it do so while still maintaining a Lawful Good alignment? 1. Blackmail. The gnomes have leverage over the young silver dragon, such as one of its siblings, in their power and they use that to exact behaviors out of the dragon.

2. Financial interest in building a hoard since some adventurers had stolen their last one. Gnomes contribute to it when the dragon does some of their wet work.

3. It was orphaned as a wyrmling and was raised by a blue dragon. I like that one best.

4. Evil characters stole an egg from a silver dragon's nest, and when it hatched the evil characters raised the silver dragon. Nurture probably overcomes nature in this case. (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/76790/22566) Hey, look, you have some evil fascist gnomes already. Problem solved.

I suggest that you review the MM again. Although the 'on the label' alignment is LG, you can apply any alignment you like to a silver dragon. That's in the alignment section of the MM, page 7 - before any of the monster descriptions.

[Keltest]

Perhaps it inherited an oath to protect and support the regime from its parent, or made one itself depending on the timing, before it was overtly and visibly oppressive. It doesnt actually like the current actions of the government, but the oath is important to it because it is lawful, and it would prefer to exercise its influence to steer the course of the government back to a better path (or at least try to) than to break its oath and burn it all down, especially because its personal combat power is not enough to destroy a major kingdom.

[Gaius Hermicus]

Question number 1: why is it silver and not red? Only because you are set on making the "king" legal good?

It is silver instead of red because I want to challenge my players' perception of the character and have it be something they need to negotiate with or work around rather than something they expect to just attack head-on. Everyone knows chromatic dragons are evil and the dragon-slaying hero is such a common trope that I am afraid they would simply focus on just killing the dragon which solves nothing and isn't as interesting a storyline.


The expression "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" exists exactly because people, and presumably dragons, can justify all manner of domination and out right cruelty in the name of "the greatest good for the greatest number'. Even if the government is bad, he doesn't have to be evil, but just have flawed judgement. He also may have come to the conclusion that it's a solid framework that over time he can bend to his idea of "good". he's a dragon. He can play a generations long long game.

This is very true and has some interesting implications. I rather like the idea that, for instance, the dragon might view instability and anarchy in the region as more harmful to the long-term good than autocracy - maybe it takes a view that over time the government's influence will decline and become less oppressive.


Do you mean character depth?
1. Blackmail. The gnomes have leverage over the young silver dragon, such as one of its siblings, in their power and they use that to exact behaviors out of the dragon.

Blackmail is ok, though it makes the dragon more of a sidequest dispenser than an actual dedicated villain. I haven't planned out the entire arc yet so if there are plenty of other hostile figures I could use this one.


4. Evil characters stole an egg from a silver dragon's next, and when it hatched evil characters raised the silver dragon. Nurture probably overcomes nature in this case. (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/76790/22566) Hey, look, you have some evil fascist gnomes already.

Hmm, this one is actually also quite cool. There is another, older dragon nearby - maybe one of their eggs was stolen. If this is the case it also provides another level of justification for why the dragon supports such intense militarism - it's been brainwashed into thinking it's parent is going to try to kidnap it back.


I suggest that you review the MM again. Although the 'on the label' alignment is LG, you can apply any alignment you like to a silver dragon. That's in the alignment section of the MM, page 7 - before any of the monster descriptions.

Oh, I'm aware that it can have any alignment, but I just wanted to see if there was an effective way to make it turn villainous while maintaining a good alignment instead of LN or LE - just seems more interesting that way.

[KorvinStarmast]

Oh, I'm aware that it can have any alignment, but I just wanted to see if there was an effective way to make it turn villainous while maintaining a good alignment instead of LN or LE - just seems more interesting that way. Cool. Is that other dragon nearby a silver, or a different one? Looks like you've got some other good suggestions as well, hope it goes well and your players have fun. :smallsmile:

[Boci]

Oh, I'm aware that it can have any alignment, but I just wanted to see if there was an effective way to make it turn villainous while maintaining a good alignment instead of LN or LE - just seems more interesting that way.

How will the players know its maintained its good alignment? You say you want to challenge their perceptions of morality and not have them just charge at it, but if they see a silver dragon willing working for an obviously evil empire, it seems they could, entirely reasonable, conclude that this silver dragon is therefor an evil one.

[Gaius Hermicus]

Cool. Is that other dragon nearby a silver, or a different one? Looks like you've got some other good suggestions as well, hope it goes well and your players have fun. :smallsmile:

It's a bronze dragon, but I've been operating on an unorthodox draconic lore where any color of dragon can be born to any other, and their color is indicative of their personality/internal moral compass, rather than pure biology. Thank you so much for your suggestions!


How will the players know its maintained its good alignment? You say you want to challenge their perceptions of morality and not have them just charge at it, but if they see a silver dragon willing working for an obviously evil empire, it seems they could, entirely reasonable, conclude that this silver dragon is therefor an evil one.

That is a reasonable point - the alignment question is more for my own determination of its goals, ideals, and personality, which will then (hopefully) become apparent in the players' interactions with it.

[KorvinStarmast]

It's a bronze dragon, but I've been operating on an unorthodox draconic lore where any color of dragon can be born to any other, and their color is indicative of their personality/internal moral compass, rather than pure biology. You are the second DM that I have seen do this. (PhoenixPhyre does this as well). Just curious, but have you read any of the Pern novels? (Dragonriders of Pern (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragonriders_of_Pern) was a series of books by Ann McCaffreythat were published before D&D was released, but they were quite popular, and in that series dragons were born with varying colors from the same clutch of eggs.

That is a reasonable point - the alignment question is more for my own determination of its goals, ideals, and personality, which will then (hopefully) become apparent in the players' interactions with it. Role playing a dragon is part of the fun of being the DM, IME. I have an adult emerald dragon currently in play whom the party has just met and at the moment she is quite upset with them.

[Sigreid]

How will the players know its maintained its good alignment? You say you want to challenge their perceptions of morality and not have them just charge at it, but if they see a silver dragon willing working for an obviously evil empire, it seems they could, entirely reasonable, conclude that this silver dragon is therefor an evil one.

If they get the opportunity to talk to it where combat isn't a good option, it could explain how this is all for the greater good and maybe even try to win them over to the idea that long term it's plan leads to less suffering.

[Unoriginal]

Hello GITP,

I'm working on a rather knotty worldbuilding problem right now and thought I would seek advice from more experienced GMs.

In the game I'm playing, the current questline is a heist to steal a new super-secret technology from a (steampunk-influenced) gnomish state. Said state is a military protectorate, highly authoritarian, and oppressive toward its kobold minorities. Essentially, it is a fascist state.

Living near/within this protectorate is a young silver dragon. The dragon is most definitely involved in the internal politics of the region and is on good terms with the government, making it by extension hostile to the players' plans - partially this is because I want the tone of the adventure to be more intrigue-heavy and having a dragon ally to just fly in and wreck **** would screw with this tone, and partially because I want to explore the possibility of having a "villain" that is good-aligned and has a lot of character depth.

Which leads me to my question: what could cause a silver dragon to break bad and start supporting an autocratic state that oppresses its citizens?

Greed, lust for power, desire for scientific knowledge they don't think they can obtain ethicslly, hatred toward the oppressed due to X or Y, friendship with membersof the oppressive rulers that makes the dragon ignore the plight of the oppressed, etc.



And could it do so while still maintaining a Lawful Good alignment?

No.

There is no lawful good supporter-of-oppression.

The only way the dragon could be lawful good is if they're genuinely unaware of the oppression somehow, mind-controlled or mind-influenced by something that makes them act not like themselves (ex: the gnomes gave the dragon a magic crown, but the crown makes the owner irrationaly hate kobolds), or if the dragon is being coerced by other means (ex: the gnomes are keeping the dragon's kids hostage and they will die if the dragon doesn't help).

[CTurbo]

I like this debate.

Sometimes good people do bad things for good reasons.
Sometimes a good person could truly believe that they are doing the right thing.

My wife and I just finished the movie trilogy with our 11 and 12yr old daughters so this is fresh on my mind. I won't name it because I don't want to spoil it, but the moral of the story was, there is a virus killing off the population, and apparently some teens are immune, and the big giant "evil" corporation has all these kids kidnapped running tests on them trying to find a cure. The kids are tortured and some are killed. You can call this organization evil, and at face value, they are, BUT, they are legit just trying to do whatever is necessary to save humankind. Yes, they are going about it in not the best way of course, but their reasons are "good".
There are 3 main "villains" to this story. The man is clearly evil as he's willing to murder innocent people for unnecessary reasons. The woman is more ambiguous. She's clearly making hard decisions that lead to kids suffering, but she at least shows signs of remorse. She never hurts anybody for no reason. Is she evil? eh maybe? Probably not. She's willing to sacrifice a few to save many. I can see it go both ways. Then there is the young girl. She betrays her friends to continue to try to find a cure. Is she evil? No I don't think she's evil at all. This girl truly believes that she's doing the right thing for the right reasons. She shows obvious remorse for the suffering she witnesses. Even the young hero of the story understands why she's doing what she's doing.

Anyway, that series was merely "ok" to me, but I did like that the big bad evil corp was not your typical evil company out for world domination or world destruction.

Maybe the young silver dragon is ok with sacrificing a few to save many?


Another example is I saw a movie a long time ago that I'm not going to name, but this loving father went to extremes to save his kidnapped daughter. He didn't want to hurt anybody, but over the course of his campaign to save his daughter, many innocent people suffered from the collateral damage of his wrath. He clearly felt terrible about it. He wasn't evil. He was just willing to do anything to get his little girl back. Was he evil? Of course not.

[Nidgit]

Another angle: the dragon is ineffectively attempting to change the system from the inside. It's both loath to violence and unsure of its own power and as such has decided that the best move is to cooperate with you fascist gnomes in a fairly useless attempt to moderate them. Perhaps that draconic pride is keeping it from seeing its own mistakes and most persuasive attempts by the PCs just entrench it further in its position.

[strangebloke]

The easiest solution is honestly "Dizzyingly complex Geopolitical concerns." Something like "The gnomes are evil but they provide strategic access to agarthium, mithril, and other specialized resources to the kingdom of Ylisse next door, which is a key factor in allowing Ylisse and by extension the Alliance of Fordraft to withstand the aggression of the evil empire of Nozrathamus. Although Gnomehome is an evil and repressive state, we cannot allow it to fall because whatever gov't replaces the current despot has a good chance of being more favorable to Nozrathamus, which could lead to the fall of the Alliance of Fordraft!!"

This kind of overcomplicated Do-gooding that's a little lacking in empathy is very on brand for a silver dragon. IMO anyway.

[KorvinStarmast]

This kind of overcomplicated Do-gooding that's a little lacking in empathy is very on brand for a silver dragon. IMO anyway. I like your thinking here. Stealing your idea. :smallsmile:

[GreyBlack]

Hello GITP,

I'm working on a rather knotty worldbuilding problem right now and thought I would seek advice from more experienced GMs.

In the game I'm playing, the current questline is a heist to steal a new super-secret technology from a (steampunk-influenced) gnomish state. Said state is a military protectorate, highly authoritarian, and oppressive toward its kobold minorities. Essentially, it is a fascist state.

Living near/within this protectorate is a young silver dragon. The dragon is most definitely involved in the internal politics of the region and is on good terms with the government, making it by extension hostile to the players' plans - partially this is because I want the tone of the adventure to be more intrigue-heavy and having a dragon ally to just fly in and wreck **** would screw with this tone, and partially because I want to explore the possibility of having a "villain" that is good-aligned and has a lot of character depth.

Which leads me to my question: what could cause a silver dragon to break bad and start supporting an autocratic state that oppresses its citizens? And could it do so while still maintaining a Lawful Good alignment?

So, here's a 62 gp question for you: Why isn't the Silver Dragon in charge of the fascist state?

Reading from my MM for a moment.


Dragons of Virtue. Silver dragons believe that living a moral life involves doing good deeds and ensuring that one's actions cause no undeserved harm to other sentient beings. They don't take it upon themselves to root out evil, as gold and bronze dragons do, but they will gladly oppose creatures that dare to commit evil acts or harm the innocents.


So, silver dragons are all about making sure that humanoids do good deeds and ensure that no undeserved harm comes to other beings. Well, why not just create a society that values that above all else, and try to be a paragon of the State, as it were? Sure you won't root out the evil yourself, but you might have inquisitors who do it for you. You're just trying to make sure that everyone in the city is trying to live their best life, after all.

Lawful Good is prime fodder for fascistic tendencies. You don't have to stretch too far to get a Silver Dragon to be one of the antagonists in your story.

[Unoriginal]

I like this debate.

Sometimes good people do bad things for good reasons.
Sometimes a good person could truly believe that they are doing the right thing.

My wife and I just finished the movie trilogy with our 11 and 12yr old daughters so this is fresh on my mind. I won't name it because I don't want to spoil it, but the moral of the story was, there is a virus killing off the population, and apparently some teens are immune, and the big giant "evil" corporation has all these kids kidnapped running tests on them trying to find a cure. The kids are tortured and some are killed. You can call this organization evil, and at face value, they are, BUT, they are legit just trying to do whatever is necessary to save humankind. Yes, they are going about it in not the best way of course, but their reasons are "good".
There are 3 main "villains" to this story. The man is clearly evil as he's willing to murder innocent people for unnecessary reasons. The woman is more ambiguous. She's clearly making hard decisions that lead to kids suffering, but she at least shows signs of remorse. She never hurts anybody for no reason. Is she evil? eh maybe? Probably not. She's willing to sacrifice a few to save many. I can see it go both ways. Then there is the young girl. She betrays her friends to continue to try to find a cure. Is she evil? No I don't think she's evil at all. This girl truly believes that she's doing the right thing for the right reasons. She shows obvious remorse for the suffering she witnesses. Even the young hero of the story understands why she's doing what she's doing.

Anyway, that series was merely "ok" to me, but I did like that the big bad evil corp was not your typical evil company out for world domination or world destruction.

Maybe the young silver dragon is ok with sacrificing a few to save many?


Another example is I saw a movie a long time ago that I'm not going to name, but this loving father went to extremes to save his kidnapped daughter. He didn't want to hurt anybody, but over the course of his campaign to save his daughter, many innocent people suffered from the collateral damage of his wrath. He clearly felt terrible about it. He wasn't evil. He was just willing to do anything to get his little girl back. Was he evil? Of course not.

D&D 5e alignments describe the character's typical behavior. If the character's typical behavior fits one of the alignment, they are that alignment, regardless of how we as an audience would judge the character. or how the characters would judge themselves. It's also not a measure of intensity.

For example, one of the NPCs in Waterdeep: Dragon Heist is neutral evil. He isn't a murderer, or a torturer, or anything of the sort, but his idea to get ahead in business is to spread rumors against his competitors, do false reports to the local authorities to get them to harass said competitors, and if it fails to hire a gang to ruin his rivals' place of business.

That makes him neutral evil, as he fits the PHB description. That allso means that his soul is more than likely going to end up on Gehenna if he dies, as he is both greedy and malevolent, and Gehenna attracts greedy, malevolent souls.

A neutral evil character who made a living trickimg old people into naming them their main inheritor, then murdering the old people would be neutral evil all the same, and end up in Gehenna all the same,despite the large difference in the scale of their actions.

Same way that an hobgoblin mook who's participating in the conquest and enslavement of the neighboring country is called lawful evil, like Asmodeus is.

Speaking of Asmodeus, if you ask him, he'll make an eloquent speech about how all his evil deeds are necessary and for the greater good of the Planes, and how he trully doesn't resent anyone unable to see this truth but he can't let their misguided good intention get in the way of his goals.

[Boci]

D&D 5e alignments describe the character's typical behavior. If the character's typical behavior fits one of the alignment, they are that alignment, regardless of how we as an audience would judge the character. or how the characters would judge themselves. It's also not a measure of intensity.

For example, one of the NPCs in Waterdeep: Dragon Heist is neutral evil. He isn't a murderer, or a torturer, or anything of the sort, but his idea to get ahead in business is to spread rumors against his competitors, do false reports to the local authorities to get them to harass said competitors, and if it fails to hire a gang to ruin his rivals' place of business.

That makes him neutral evil, as he fits the PHB description. That allso means that his soul is more than likely going to end up on Gehenna if he dies, as he is both greedy and malevolent, and Gehenna attracts greedy, malevolent souls.

The problem with this is its trying to insist that morality, a complex, multi faceted subject with many variance of opinion across, and within, culture, politics and time, has been solved by D&D.

Don't get me wrong, its understandable why D&D takes this approach, "Here's how it works, don't think about it too hard", works for a lot of games. But it doesn't work for them all, and if the GM is wanting to have a silver dragon be good whilst also playing a key role in an evil empire, that might be a time to realise this is where D&D's take on alignment will fall short and to stop insisting on what the rule books say, because morality is always going to be more complex than that.

[Unoriginal]

The problem with this is its trying to insist that morality, a complex, multi faceted subject with many variance of opinion across, and within, culture, politics and time, has been solved by D&D.

Don't get me wrong, its understandable why D&D takes this approach, "Here's how it works, don't think about it too hard", works for a lot of games. But it doesn't work for them all, and if the GM is wanting to have a silver dragon be good whilst also playing a key role in an evil empire, that might be a time to realise this is where D&D's take on alignment will fall short and to stop insisting on what the rule books say, because morality is always going to be more complex than that.

D&D does not pretend it has solved morality. People just have to acknowledge that D&D 5e alignment is an one-sentence descriptor for a typical behavior, not a moral judgement.


Also, you might find my edit to the quoted post interesting.

[Boci]

D&D does not pretend it has solved morality. People just have to acknowledge that D&D 5e alignment is an one-sentence descriptor for a typical behavior, not a moral judgement.

Declaring what behaviour is absolutely a moral judgement. At best, its a very easy judgement that the majority of people will agree with, but its still a moral judgement. And typical behaviour isn't exactly helpful, you still need to decide what constitutes "greedy" and what is just "smart business practices", and people are not going to agree on the distinction.

[Sigreid]

I kind of miss when alignments were a firm picking of sides in a cosmic war.

[Unoriginal]

Declaring what behaviour is absolutely a moral judgement. At best, its a very easy judgement that the majority of people will agree with, but its still a moral judgement. And typical behaviour isn't exactly helpful, you still need to decide what constitutes "greedy" and what is just "smart business practices", and people are not going to agree on the distinction.

What constitute "greedy" and what constitute "smart business practices" are two entirely different metrics, and none of them are moral judgment.

Someone can accurately be described as greedy if their behavior fits the description. Scrooge McDuck is greedy, because he desires wealth and material goods very strongly. That has nothing to do with any jugment toward if McDuck isgood or evil.

Something can accurately be described as a smart business practice if its fit the description, regardless of morality. Glasya tricking Mammon's markets into accepting worthless coins because they *technically* were legal currency at the time of the exchange is both smart (as using the technicality requires both enormous knowledge of infernal laws and outmanoeuvring some of the most money-conscious beings in the multiverse) and a business practice, so it fits the description, dspite also being unethical and suffering-causing.

[Boci]

What constitute "greedy" and what constitute "smart business practices" are two entirely different metrics, and none of them are moral judgment.

Yes they absolutely are. Declaring whether or not a type of behaviour is greedy is a moral judgement.

[Kol Korran]

A few thoughts:
# First of all, I suggest not to play the gnomish regime as "Evil" with the capital "E", or an overly simplified/ cartoonic way. If you wan't to challenge the players with a complex villain, with a complex personality, don't make the country feel too cliche. A LOT of countries treat their minorities bad. Even some of the more "enlightened/ advanced", nations in the real world, but due to forum rules I won't go any further than that.

They treat kobolds unfairly? Well so do many other countries. I think you are trying to portray the country as very orderly, technological, but also unforgiving, very "class based", with some people more on the top, some more at the bottom, with the corresponding levels of freedom, privilige, resources and what not.

While that may seem "evil" to many modern moral systems, it may not be from the view point if the gnomes. It may even seem actually good, benevolent, where everyone has their place, duties and role in society, to make things better as a whole. And yes, kobolds may be lower rank, but that can be from moral/ philosophical reasons, or even simply because the gnomes hate/ dislike/ don't trust them. This part CAN be sort of oppressive/ unfair/ evil, but a lot of other things the gnomes do can actually be good.

Or, may I suggest- simply neutral? Or lawful neutral? Those are amongst the most interesting alignments as antagonists in my opinion. The "antagonism" part comes from the conflict of interests and view points.

# Dragons...
Dragons are very, very, very long lived, and on the whole they perceived themselves superior, and set apart, from most of the bipedal humanoid shaped short lived races, who call themselves "the common races". This is true even to good dragons, and often lend to a... Particular approach, which may well fit your silver dragon.

You see, the silver dragon sees itself as a sort of parent/ mentor/ guide to the gnomish regime. An inside force to teach, nurture, guide and direct the "simpler, weaker, fragile race" to new greater heights!

Sure, it will take time... Decades, centuries, perhaps even a millenia. And sure- They will make mistakes, go through stages, a lot of "growing pains"... Similar to those of a child growing to a teen, to a young adult, until finally you can call him or her a fully grown person. Any child needs someone to believe in them, nurture them, guide them, accompany them, do they not?

The dragon sees itself in that role. He sees the potential of the gnomes, and may have a great fondness for them, as a whole, as a race, as a nation, and seeks to develop them to become... Something greater than they were, something magnificent, something it can be proud of! Yet the process is long, and the road is full of lessons, trials, and many times the "children" need to take their own path, and the parent waits and offer support, consultation and advice, when the time is right. All good things take time after all, no? You can't really hurry a good thing.

Yes, the kobolda may suffer now... That is regretable... (Sigh)... But under the gnomish regime, in time, their childrens' children will be made part of the greater enlightened gnomish growth! In time, they too will be made greater and better!

But, and for the group this is the essential part- The one thing a closely accompanying parent/ guide/ mentor WON'T allow, is any meaningful harm to their children, or their future! (As envisioned by the dragon). If the PCs mess with that too much? Well, they'll have an angry dragon to contend with!

How does that sound?

[KorvinStarmast]

I kind of miss when alignments were a firm picking of sides in a cosmic war. As do I. L/N/C was simpler to implement IME.

[KorvinStarmast]

They treat kobolds unfairly? Well so do many other countries. I think you are trying to portray the country as very orderly, technological, but also unforgiving, very "class based", with some people more on the top, some more at the bottom, with the corresponding levels of freedom, privilege, resources and what not.

While that may seem "evil" to many modern moral systems, it may not be from the view point if the gnomes. It may even seem actually good, benevolent, where everyone has their place, duties and role in society, to make things better as a whole.
Like most medieval era social frameworks, and I better stop there for the same reason you mentioned about the other stuff. (In one word: serfs). (We've been binge watching Downton Abbey lately and the class system is fresh in my mind since it is so well displayed and its slow decline also ... ).

Dragons are very, very, very long lived, and on the whole they perceived themselves superior, and set apart, from most of the bipedal humanoid shaped short lived races, who call themselves "the common races". This is true even to good dragons, and often lend to a... Particular approach, which may well fit your silver dragon. I've got an old Earthdawn appendix/draft that I don't think ever got printed that captures this beautifully.


Yes, the kobolds may suffer now... That is regrettable... (Sigh)... But under the gnomish regime, in time, their childrens' children will be made part of the greater enlightened gnomish growth! In time, they too will be made greater and better! I see that it's close to election season. :smallbiggrin: Is this silver dragon running for mayor, governor, chancellor ...

[Gaius Hermicus]

You are the second DM that I have seen do this. (PhoenixPhyre does this as well). Just curious, but have you read any of the Pern novels? (Dragonriders of Pern (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragonriders_of_Pern) was a series of books by Ann McCaffreythat were published before D&D was released, but they were quite popular, and in that series dragons were born with varying colors from the same clutch of eggs.
Role playing a dragon is part of the fun of being the DM, IME. I have an adult emerald dragon currently in play whom the party has just met and at the moment she is quite upset with them.

I haven't read those books but I think I might have stolen the idea from PhoenixPhyre myself.


Another angle: the dragon is ineffectively attempting to change the system from the inside. It's both loath to violence and unsure of its own power and as such has decided that the best move is to cooperate with you fascist gnomes in a fairly useless attempt to moderate them. Perhaps that draconic pride is keeping it from seeing its own mistakes and most persuasive attempts by the PCs just entrench it further in its position.

That does make a lot of sense in coordination with some of the other proposed ideas. Maybe it even tries to mitigate some of the worst aspects of the regime by quietly adopting kobolds as personal servants...


So, here's a 62 gp question for you: Why isn't the Silver Dragon in charge of the fascist state?

It's too young. I would imagine it plans on either usurping or inheriting the kingdom eventually, when it's more powerful - maybe it views the regime as a security to prevent it from falling apart until it can claim its "rightful position". That might be getting into LE territory though - depends on how it's played I suppose.


A few thoughts:
# First of all, I suggest not to play the gnomish regime as "Evil" with the capital "E", or an overly simplified/ cartoonic way. If you wan't to challenge the players with a complex villain, with a complex personality, don't make the country feel too cliche.

Excellent advice! I had been planning to do something along these lines, and aside from the bureaucracy, mandatory military service, and second-class status for kobolds the protectorate isn't meant to be all that bad. The party has a biased take on the protectorate's actual level of badness because of one player whose backstory describes a particularly difficult life as a kobold criminal in the kingdom - I hope to give a chance to both challenge these in-character perceptions during the arc as well as make a compelling villain out of the System.



The dragon sees itself in that role. He sees the potential of the gnomes, and may have a great fondness for them, as a whole, as a race, as a nation, and seeks to develop them to become... Something greater than they were, something magnificent, something it can be proud of! Yet the process is long, and the road is full of lessons, trials, and many times the "children" need to take their own path, and the parent waits and offer support, consultation and advice, when the time is right. All good things take time after all, no? You can't really hurry a good thing.

Yes, the kobolds may suffer now... That is regrettable... (Sigh)... But under the gnomish regime, in time, their children's children will be made part of the greater enlightened gnomish growth! In time, they too will be made greater and better!

But, and for the group this is the essential part- The one thing a closely accompanying parent/ guide/ mentor WON'T allow, is any meaningful harm to their children, or their future! (As envisioned by the dragon). If the PCs mess with that too much? Well, they'll have an angry dragon to contend with!

How does that sound?

I rather like this idea, especially in connection with a couple of the other proposals. The dragon, maybe, sees itself as reciprocating a favor already paid. The gnomes raised it, gave it a home, and mentored/protected it during its formative years. The dragon therefore sees it as its responsibility to do the same to the shorter-lived gnomes sometime in the future, when it takes its rightful place as leader of the kingdom. Filial piety is a very Lawful Good motivator, too.

[Angelalex242]

Ya know, this is a YOUNG Silver Dragon.

Skills Arcana +6, History +6, Perception +8, Stealth +4

Key skill not there: Insight. (Hilariously, even Ancient Silvers don't gain the Insight skill. This is...quite the oversight from the Monster Manual.)

It's is a totally Lawful Good Silver Dragon. He/she has just been lied to by some bards with expertise in deception.

(Note that Gold Dragons DO have insight, so they're less likely to be lied to. So do Bronze. Copper have Deception but not Insight. Brass have Persuasion but not Insight.)

It's a good thing to remind yourself which dragons are deceivable...and which are not.

[Unoriginal]

Ya know, this is a YOUNG Silver Dragon.

Skills Arcana +6, History +6, Perception +8, Stealth +4

Key skill not there: Insight. (Hilariously, even Ancient Silvers don't gain the Insight skill. This is...quite the oversight from the Monster Manual.)


I don't think it's an oversight. I don't think Silver Dragons have a reputation for being insightful or to be great at judging people. Mingling with people, sure, but reading their motives?

Meanwhile the Gold Dragon (who have proficiency in Insight, as you noted) are more the "king who see through the bull manure" type.

[strangebloke]

I like your thinking here. Stealing your idea. :smallsmile:

yeah its fun. I think that there are a lot of examples of this throughout history and fiction. To go for a fictional example (because those don't break the rules) Fallout: New Vegas asks you to choose one of several factions to support. At first glance, the NCR, the burgeoning democracy to the west that is seeking to expand its borders, seems almost inarguably the best option. But it isn't inarguable, because if you actually talk to people in the NCR, its clear that the expansion is occurring too quickly, and the the NCR is on the verge of overextending and collapsing (arguably, anyway.)

So some people argue its better to support a figure called House as the regional overlord. House is... a bad guy. But he's not that bad a guy, and he's willing to ally the NCR. The NCR gets access to the precious resources in the region, and gets an ally rather than a vassal. I'm not saying these fans are right (in fact the game ends before you ever see the consequences of your actions so its impossible for anyone to actually be right) but to my mind this is a genuinely good example of how to write a murky morally gray situation where the most obvious 'good' action might not have the best result.

Mind, there's no reason this silver dragon has to be correct. Proving to him that he's wrong could be a fun non-combat way of resolving him as an antagonist.

[GreyBlack]

It's too young. I would imagine it plans on either usurping or inheriting the kingdom eventually, when it's more powerful - maybe it views the regime as a security to prevent it from falling apart until it can claim its "rightful position". That might be getting into LE territory though - depends on how it's played I suppose.


How young is the fascist regime? A "Young" dragon could be as old as you'd like it to be; if the regime was only changed 10 years ago, that could be right in line with when the dragon chose to form an order of knights to work with to... "encourage" people to become better.

That said, I'm only using this as an idea. The point here is more that a silver dragon would totally be on board with a fascist regime if it thought it was the best way to show people the way to be moral. Take that as you will.

[Segev]

I think going back to "Why silver instead of red?" is an important thing to do, not as a challenge to the dragon being silver, but as a way to examine the role the dragon plays.

The most obvious starting point is that the gnomish state wouldn't want to work with a red dragon: red dragons are chaotic evil and respect only power, so unless the gnomes made themselves slaves to its whims, they would need to both maintain a powerful front and always watch for backstabbing.

So, they want a Lawful dragon. Silvers live in the same area. Perhaps the gnomes were in a long, drawn-out war with some kobolds, and developed their strict militaristic culture as a necessity of war-time. The silver dragon and they aligned with each other against a red dragon and his kobold minions.

The silver dragon may well have a more egalitarian lawfulness in his direct domain, but respects what the gnomes have accomplished and sees their strict ways as "their way." He provides an unintentional safety valve because enough of those who would rebel against the gnomish regime find their way to his protectorate, and because he doesn't think the gnomes are bad, and they were brought up in the culture thinking they might be in the wrong for their bad behavior, the gnomes don't complain to the dragon, but just accept that they're out here because they "couldn't cut it" back home.

The silver dragon has internalized enough of the gnomish way of thinking that he's willing to acquiesce to the "needs of order" on some things, even if he will frequently bend his will to find "unishments" to give for crimes he feels were done for the right reasons, when he can. He is close friends with the leaders of both his local group of gnomes and the gnomish hierarchy, and neither the LE gnomes nor the LG silver dragon see each other as evil/weak nor really recognize the alignment difference, just viewing disagreements as "harsh necessities" or "the benefits of being so strong." (That is, the gnomes will chide the dragon for assuming some of his "gentle" solutions could work for them; after all, unlike him, they're not nigh-invincible dragons. And he largely accepts this argument. Note: the gnomes believe it, too; they're not BSing him. They are wrong, but not lying, in this case.)

Which leads to a silver dragon propping up a tyranny while having a less-good-than-he'd-like group of gnomish minions who still are happier with him and his genuine attempts to be good than they were in the tyranny, and the tyranny of the LE gnomes remains intact because they can dispose of their worst malcontents in either typical tyrannical fashion or with exile to the dragon's "wild lands."

[Angelalex242]

I think going back to "Why silver instead of red?" is an important thing to do, not as a challenge to the dragon being silver, but as a way to examine the role the dragon plays.

The most obvious starting point is that the gnomish state wouldn't want to work with a red dragon: red dragons are chaotic evil and respect only power, so unless the gnomes made themselves slaves to its whims, they would need to both maintain a powerful front and always watch for backstabbing.

So, they want a Lawful dragon. Silvers live in the same area. Perhaps the gnomes were in a long, drawn-out war with some kobolds, and developed their strict militaristic culture as a necessity of war-time. The silver dragon and they aligned with each other against a red dragon and his kobold minions.

The silver dragon may well have a more egalitarian lawfulness in his direct domain, but respects what the gnomes have accomplished and sees their strict ways as "their way." He provides an unintentional safety valve because enough of those who would rebel against the gnomish regime find their way to his protectorate, and because he doesn't think the gnomes are bad, and they were brought up in the culture thinking they might be in the wrong for their bad behavior, the gnomes don't complain to the dragon, but just accept that they're out here because they "couldn't cut it" back home.

The silver dragon has internalized enough of the gnomish way of thinking that he's willing to acquiesce to the "needs of order" on some things, even if he will frequently bend his will to find "unishments" to give for crimes he feels were done for the right reasons, when he can. He is close friends with the leaders of both his local group of gnomes and the gnomish hierarchy, and neither the LE gnomes nor the LG silver dragon see each other as evil/weak nor really recognize the alignment difference, just viewing disagreements as "harsh necessities" or "the benefits of being so strong." (That is, the gnomes will chide the dragon for assuming some of his "gentle" solutions could work for them; after all, unlike him, they're not nigh-invincible dragons. And he largely accepts this argument. Note: the gnomes believe it, too; they're not BSing him. They are wrong, but not lying, in this case.)

Which leads to a silver dragon propping up a tyranny while having a less-good-than-he'd-like group of gnomish minions who still are happier with him and his genuine attempts to be good than they were in the tyranny, and the tyranny of the LE gnomes remains intact because they can dispose of their worst malcontents in either typical tyrannical fashion or with exile to the dragon's "wild lands."

On this plan, any kind hearted gnomes are sent off to the softer hearted dragon, which helps give the dragon a better view of the gnome around him...because they ones they send him frequently grow up to be Bahamut worshippers (Clerics) or Devotion/Ancients Paladins. (All the Paladins back home are Conquest...)

[Cheesegear]

Which leads me to my question: what could cause a silver dragon to break bad and start supporting an autocratic state that oppresses its citizens?

Nothing.


PHB, pg 124; Alignment
Lawful Good (LG) creatures can be counted on to do the right thing as expected by society.

Alignment in the Multiverse
Good without free will is slavery.

Do the citizens support their own oppression? If not, it's not the right thing to do.

People must choose to be Good, otherwise Good means nothing. State-enforced Goodness, is not Goodness.


MM, pg 115; Dragons of Virtue
Silver Dragons believe that living a moral life involves doing good deeds, and ensuring that one's actions cause no undeserved harm to other sentient beings. They don't take it upon themselves to root out evil, as gold and bronze dragons do, but they will gladly oppose creatures that dare to commit evil acts or harm the innocent.

Friends of the Small Races. [Silver Dragons like being around Humanoids.]

'A Silver Dragon does not like causing undeserved harm to sentient beings.'
...Well, what if the victim deserves it?

'They will oppose creatures that harm the innocent.'
...Who decides who is innocent?


And could it do so while still maintaining a Lawful Good alignment?

That's where it gets tricky, and essentially means that the Dragon has to be getting tricked in one way or another.

See above.
What if the Silver Dragon believes the harm to be deserved?

Now I know some people talk about 'Neccessary Evil'. No. Silver Dragons don't believe in that. They believe in Deserved Evil. Silver Dragons believe in Eye For an Eye. You are allowed to do Evil unto Evil creatures. Silver Dragons do not believe in 'This is for your own good.', because no-one should get to decide what is right - or good - for another creature (e.g; Oppression bad. Silver Dragons do not believe in Necessary Evils). The Silver Dragon has to have witnessed - or been first-party to - something horrific to determine that what a government is doing is morally correct.

Silver Dragons oppose creatures who harm the innocent.
That's where you get massive problems. If a Silver Dragon saw a small group of creatures commit an act...Only those creatures committed that act. Those creatures get punished. Sure. But to punish all creatures of the same type for the actions of a few? ...I don't believe a Silver Dragon could support that - at least, not a Young one. An Adult Dragon who has seen a continuous pattern of behavior from a certain group of Humanoids for over a century...Maybe. Maybe.

Young Silver Dragons aren't stupid (Int 14). They can find a better way to do things than oppression, especially 'cause their Ancestral Memory should probably kick in at some point and tell them the right thing to do (hint; It's not oppression). But that depends on whether or not you play that Dragons have Ancestral Memory (I do, hence Dragons' colour-coded alignment).

Ultimately, the way I would do it, is simple.

The Silver Dragon befriended the ruler at some point in their young life. When the pair first met, the soon-to-be-ruler was not a massive a*hole yet. They became friends and all was great.
Smash-cut to a decade later where the ruler has become an a*hole. Also, the Dragon is no longer a Wyrmling, but Young.

The Silver Dragon is currently being gaslit. Hard.

When told what their friend is doing, says 'Oh no, my friend wouldn't do that.' and denies that anything wrong is happening, perhaps not even hearing about them. Young Dragons can't Change Shape yet, so it's no like it can walk around incognito in the City and learn from the ground like Adults would ('The government is doing WHAT!? Polymorph into True Form in the middle of the market square and lay waste to the castle...Or better, Polymorph into True Form in the Throne Room and turn the ruler into an icicle on their chair...)

I forget the quote, but it goes something like:
'People tend to ignore atrocities committed by their own side. In fact, they have a remarkable capacity to not even hear about them.'

I wont go into real-world details on the quote. But if you're an adult I'm pretty sure you can work it out. That's how I would run a Silver Dragon that supports a Lawful Evil government. They either can't know, or must outright deny, that the government is Evil. The second that that changes, the Silver Dragon starts doing Dragon-like things to those it deems worthy of Silver Dragon-punishment.

[Unoriginal]

Alternatively, given the title of the thread... the silver dragon is sick, and the only way he can get the medicine to stay alive is by letting the gnomes oppress the kobolds.

Or at least, it's what the dragon says to themselves and others.

[Angelalex242]

Ya know, my plan A was: And the Gnomish Emissary to the dragon is an Eloquence Bard with Charisma 20 and Expertise in Deception.

Wouldn't be too hard to lie their rear ends off to this poor dragon.

[Keltest]

Ya know, my plan A was: And the Gnomish Emissary to the dragon is an Eloquence Bard with Charisma 20 and Expertise in Deception.

Wouldn't be too hard to lie their rear ends off to this poor dragon.

Unless the dragon only ever interacts with this one specific gnome, that doesnt really sound like a sustainable deceit. I can convince you to the very depths of your heart that the sky is green if you lived underground your whole life, but when you get up to the surface and see blue, no amount of skill in lying is going to make that sky any other color.

[ZRN]

In the game I'm playing, the current questline is a heist to steal a new super-secret technology from a (steampunk-influenced) gnomish state. Said state is a military protectorate, highly authoritarian, and oppressive toward its kobold minorities. Essentially, it is a fascist state.

...

Which leads me to my question: what could cause a silver dragon to break bad and start supporting an autocratic state that oppresses its citizens? And could it do so while still maintaining a Lawful Good alignment?

There were any number of highly intelligent and morality-focused people who ended up aligning themselves with the actual fascists in WW2 (the philosopher Martin Heidegger, for example). No matter how smart or well-intentioned you are, it's easy to get swept up in "patriotism" and/or concern for some alleged historical Greater Good.

Silver dragons love to hang out in humanoid form and get involved in humanoid affairs. Maybe this dragon is a socialite who hangs out with the elite of NaziGnomeTown. Maybe he reads lots of long, erudite magazine articles and philosophical treatises about how the NaziGnome Cultural Blooming will bring wonderful new technology and enlightenment to the whole world, and we just need to get past the current Difficult Historical Moment and take care of some Terrorist Elements.

[Angelalex242]

Unless the dragon only ever interacts with this one specific gnome, that doesnt really sound like a sustainable deceit. I can convince you to the very depths of your heart that the sky is green if you lived underground your whole life, but when you get up to the surface and see blue, no amount of skill in lying is going to make that sky any other color.

Well, let's say this Eloquence Bard also has Expertise in Persuasion.

With both Deception and Persuasion Expertise and maxed out Charisma, Mr. Eloquence Bard can come up with any number of propaganda to convince this poor dragon of just about anything.

Mr. Bard has the Glibness spell just in case you want to be extra sure.

[Keltest]

Well, let's say this Eloquence Bard also has Expertise in Persuasion.

With both Deception and Persuasion Expertise and maxed out Charisma, Mr. Eloquence Bard can come up with any number of propaganda to convince this poor dragon of just about anything.

Mr. Bard has the Glibness spell just in case you want to be extra sure.

Like I said, if I'm actively looking up at the sky, no amount of bonus will convince me that it is green and not blue. The check never gets made because it's impossible, like picking open a solid brick wall. If tye gnomes were tricking the Dragon like that, they would need to be controlling its perceptions, not just lying to it.

[Segev]

"What about those poor gnomes trudging miserably over there?" "Prisoners, confined for crimes such as aiding and abetting the kobold menace, being sent to work menial jobs in order to further the war effort."

[Boci]

Like I said, if I'm actively looking up at the sky, no amount of bonus will convince me that it is green and not blue. The check never gets made because it's impossible, like picking open a solid brick wall. If tye gnomes were tricking the Dragon like that, they would need to be controlling its perceptions, not just lying to it.

But this isn't "the sky is green" lie, this is "the kobolds aren't really being oppressed". And without getting too political, yes there are genuine disagreements in today's world about what exactly constitutes oppression.

[RSP]

These kobolds, if not kept in a strict, supervised, setting tasked with manual labor, will be susceptible to the whims of powerful artifact the Gnomes are secretly studying, located somewhere in/beneath their country. It’s happened before: the war of whenever that led to this situation. These kobolds are susceptible to it due to whatever magic curse holds power over them.

The leader gnomes, not evil, decided maintaining this situation is better than genocide of all the kobolds (which would ensure the country is safe), while they work to solve/destroy this ability of the artifact.

Only a select few are aware of this, as knowledge of the artifacts existence/location is an even greater threat to the country than the kobolds. Maybe super powerful Lich/dragon/entity/whatevers continue searching the world for its power, and won’t hesitate to raze the country to get it, if they knew it’s location.

This situation has led the gnome leaders to have to maintain the authoritarian society, which the Silver has agreed to assist: the dragon was persuaded by the leader gnome that this is the best path.

[thoroughlyS]

I am a little late to the discussion, but it could also be a matter of religious ignorance/bigotry. Kobolds traditionally worship Kurtulmak, who is an exarch of Tiamat. This dragon might believe that the oppression of these kobolds prevents them from causing destruction if left to their own devices.

[Amechra]

The silver dragon is almost entirely unaware of the kobolds' plight. Oh, sure, they've heard rumors, but all of the gnome leaders they've spoken to about it have denied it, and all of the kobolds that they've met have been well-off and spoke at length about how much they appreciate the fact that the gnomes are so gracious to them. Why, from what they've heard, the kobolds are all refugees from a neighboring state where they're hunted for sport, can you believe that? Why, once they've grown up, they're going to go give that place a piece of their mind!

Like other people have said, the dragon is a little naive and more than a little unwilling to disbelieve what their "friendly" neighbors are telling them. I'd also imagine that dragons would be very vulnerable to rhetoric about "lesser beings"... because they're, you know, dragons.

---

Maybe the gnomes are using the presence of the dragon as a way to control the kobold population, preying upon their natural adulation for dragons¹? If a kobold faithfully serves the regime, they get rewarded by getting to meet with the silver dragon! If the only kobolds the dragon gets to meet are quislings, they're probably going to get a very skewed view of the situation.

¹ In my version of D&D, "kobolds work for dragons" is something ingrained deeply into the kobold psyche, to the point where they're Charmed by a dragon's Frightful Presence instead of being Frightened. It's closer to how humans are susceptible to peer pressure than actual mind control, but it's a thing. On the dragon end of things, they view kobolds the way we view cats or dogs — kobolds are cute and full of clever tricks, and they love having them around.

[Catullus64]

I think the angle that I would take, given the premises you've offered, is that the Silver Dragon is aware of the abuses of the Gnome state, and disapproves of them sharply. However, as a Lawful creature, it abhors the idea of forcibly busting its way into a sovereign state and imposing its own vision of right and wrong on the business end of 12d8 cold damage. It has no more right to do that than any other creature living in that state. It believes that if the wrongs of this nation are to be righted, it would only truly take if done through institutions of political legitimacy.

It is playing an active part, and does have plans for the betterment of the state and all its peoples; but the plans of dragons are measured in centuries. No Gnome alive today will live to reap the benefits of the dragon's politicking, much less any Kobold. This means there can still be plenty of room for conflict with the players and their allies, who may not feel that they have the luxury of taking the dragon's long view of things.

To prevent your players from rushing to kill it, emphasize that this dragon is the defensive linchpin of this Gnome kingdom, and that if they kill it, the Gnomes will suddenly be exposed to invasion from whatever evil creatures are their nearest external enemy. And if the players don't care and get their dragonslaying on, follow through and have the place get invaded.

[Cheesegear]

This dragon might believe that the oppression of these kobolds prevents them from causing destruction if left to their own devices.

A Silver Dragon wouldn't believe that.
It's strongly arguable whether a Lawful Good creature could believe that at all;

'Freedom is the right of all sentient beings.' - The GOAT, Optimus Prime.

Evil or not - Icewind Dale says they can be any alignment, so Good Kobolds absolutely exist - Kobolds are, above all, sentient beings with self-determination.

[Angelalex242]

I think the angle that I would take, given the premises you've offered, is that the Silver Dragon is aware of the abuses of the Gnome state, and disapproves of them sharply. However, as a Lawful creature, it abhors the idea of forcibly busting its way into a sovereign state and imposing its own vision of right and wrong on the business end of 12d8 cold damage. It has no more right to do that than any other creature living in that state. It believes that if the wrongs of this nation are to be righted, it would only truly take if done through institutions of political legitimacy.

It is playing an active part, and does have plans for the betterment of the state and all its peoples; but the plans of dragons are measured in centuries. No Gnome alive today will live to reap the benefits of the dragon's politicking, much less any Kobold. This means there can still be plenty of room for conflict with the players and their allies, who may not feel that they have the luxury of taking the dragon's long view of things.

To prevent your players from rushing to kill it, emphasize that this dragon is the defensive linchpin of this Gnome kingdom, and that if they kill it, the Gnomes will suddenly be exposed to invasion from whatever evil creatures are their nearest external enemy. And if the players don't care and get their dragonslaying on, follow through and have the place get invaded.

Rushing to kill it? Maybe you've all played in different groups, but every group I've played in knows you never bear arms against a metallic dragon (or a celestial). Such is a failure of good all around.

[Cheesegear]

I was thinking about this, about how Dragons are tied to magic, and how their alignment is tied to their genetics. That is, their genetics are magic:

If, a Lawful Good Silver Dragon (no, those terms aren't redundant), has to be unknowingly supporting a Lawful Evil government; What if it started just getting sick for no reason?

Its acting - albeit unknowingly - against its nature, and its nature is inherently magical, and the magic pushes back. Instead of a majestic silver dragon that shines like a polished mirror in the sun...Its scales start fading to the colour of iron. Its Breath Weapon is harder to recharge. It feels sick.

Bahamut is disgusted; Silver Dragon do better. Be better.

[Yakk]

My D&D alisgnment axis are slightly different. But compatible.

L vs C axis is about loyalty. L is loyalty to systems, C is loyalty to individuals. A Lawful person may be loyal to the crown, not the one wearing it; a Chaotic person is loyal to the wearer, not the crown.

Both are consisten moral systems that fisagree with each other, and societies based on each are plauusible.

Good vs Evil is how much you value other people compared to yourself. Evil means you are more important by far, Good means others are more important by far. Evil here doesn't mean cruel, but cruelty does require evil. Selfish vs Selfless.

And good doesn't mean a saint. Someone who lives for their family, tithes more than the required amount, and would risk themselves to save a stranger at risk could qualify as good.

Neutral is a mix on both axis. Most people are Neutral.

So a LG dragon is loyal to systems not individuals, and values others more than themselves.

...

So, a young adult dragon can be up to 100 years old. The gnomish society with the underclass of Kobolds; maybe they arrived as refugees or prisoners of some foe, and the only way the Dragon could save them was slavery under the gnomes. Possibly that slavery includes an escape clause. That system might have been better than the alternatives. System over person; the Dragon owes a huge debt to the country of the gnomes, or even to the Kobolds (whose oppression was a deal to prevent destruction?) or both.

Long term. A few dozen generations of suck to get a better result.

Responsibility and promises. Stupid promises made a lifetime ago; she won't cause harm, but the oath prevebts her from stopping the harm. Or even supporting the system (without causing harm directly).

Using the products of evil for good. And working to reform evil within bounds of her oath.

[Sorinth]

For a Silver dragon I think it's best if they are excuse makers for the gnomes. So they believe the gnomes are inherently good, and with time/patience and a little dragon guidance the world will see it too. In the dragons mind the world only sees the bad side of the gnome empire and not all the good the gnomes have done. So they might disagree with the treatment of the kobolds, but suffer from a case of victim blaming to excuse the gnomes. Sure the crackdown that killed a bunch of kobolds protestors was wrong, but the kobolds shouldn't have torched that warehouse during their protest. The players might find a sympathetic ear with the dragon, and might get some minor help in trying to make things better, but the dragon will never turn on the gnomes because to recognize that the gnomes are evil would mean the dragon whose been helping the gnomes all this time has been supporting evil which just can't be true. So no matter what happens there's a mix of excuses, victim blaming, and just general refusal to accept facts. So the players initial impression might be they can convince the dragon to turn, but the more they push the more the dragon becomes suspicious towards to motives of the PCs eventually thinking the PCs are agitators trying to make things worse.

[Unoriginal]

I was thinking about this, about how Dragons are tied to magic, and how their alignment is tied to their genetics.

It isn't.

A dragon's alignment isn't actually determined by their subspecies.

It's just the education/nurture part of their mind is done before their eggs hatch, so even a Wyrmling born a few minutes ago already has developed moral capacities, slanted by their parents'.

[KorvinStarmast]

, and won’t hesitate to raise the country to get it, I think you meant raze, and I like your thought process there.

I am a little late to the discussion, but it could also be a matter of religious ignorance/bigotry. Kobolds traditionally worship Kurtulmak, who is an exarch of Tiamat. This dragon might believe that the oppression of these kobolds prevents them from causing destruction if left to their own devices. Yes. LG and heavy handed religion have tended to go together in D&D for a while.

¹ In my version of D&D, "kobolds work for dragons" is something ingrained deeply into the kobold psyche, to the point where they're Charmed by a dragon's Frightful Presence instead of being Frightened. It's closer to how humans are susceptible to peer pressure than actual mind control, but it's a thing. On the dragon end of things, they view kobolds the way we view cats or dogs — kobolds are cute and full of clever tricks, and they love having them around.
I may have to steal that. :smallcool:

My D&D alisgnment axis are slightly different. But compatible.

L vs C axis is about loyalty. L is loyalty to systems, C is loyalty to individuals. A Lawful person may be loyal to the crown, not the one wearing it; a Chaotic person is loyal to the wearer, not the crown.

Good vs Evil is how much you value other people compared to yourself. Evil means you are more important by far, Good means others are more important by far. Evil here doesn't mean cruel, but cruelty does require evil. Selfish vs Selfless.
So a LG dragon is loyal to systems not individuals, and values others more than themselves.
Nice dialable scale, not boxes. (Which is how the original points were plotted on the two axis grid in Basic and in the 'where various monsters/beings fit on the axis.' Again, there were not 9 boxes.

[Sorinth]

¹ In my version of D&D, "kobolds work for dragons" is something ingrained deeply into the kobold psyche, to the point where they're Charmed by a dragon's Frightful Presence instead of being Frightened. It's closer to how humans are susceptible to peer pressure than actual mind control, but it's a thing. On the dragon end of things, they view kobolds the way we view cats or dogs — kobolds are cute and full of clever tricks, and they love having them around.

Sounds cool, is that specific to Chromatic or also the case for Metallic dragons? Presumably this makes kobolds more varied in alignment since kobolds would probably follow the alignment of the dragons they serve.

In my world, kobold colouration varies based on parents and proximity to a dragon's lair. So with no dragons around their skin colour tends towards a brown (Taking several generations to transition), but then when a dragon setups a lair nearby (Actually not that nearby it's a large range) kobold babies are more likely to be born with skin colour of that dragon. Since like your world kobolds tend to serve dragons, a tribe of brown kobolds that suddenly starts having say Blue kobold babies will start sending out scouts to try and find the dragon and serve them. I hadn't thought of switching frightful presence to charm but now I'm stealing that, but they are also very good at recognizing the regional effects of a dragon.

Additionally dragons tend to gift kobolds their eggs to watch over. Dragons still in their egg are semi-aware of their surroundings and can stay in their eggs pretty much indefinitely, so they need to be coaxed into coming out of their shell. Kobolds do this by building the eggs first hoard and telling the egg how big and wonderful the hoard is until the dragon decides they want to see this hoard for themselves and hatches. So kobold tribes with a Dragon Egg tend to be hyper aggressive and do lots of raiding (Which is where the Kobolds are Evil view comes from)

[Angelalex242]

I was thinking about this, about how Dragons are tied to magic, and how their alignment is tied to their genetics. That is, their genetics are magic:

If, a Lawful Good Silver Dragon (no, those terms aren't redundant), has to be unknowingly supporting a Lawful Evil government; What if it started just getting sick for no reason?

Its acting - albeit unknowingly - against its nature, and its nature is inherently magical, and the magic pushes back. Instead of a majestic silver dragon that shines like a polished mirror in the sun...Its scales start fading to the colour of iron. Its Breath Weapon is harder to recharge. It feels sick.

Bahamut is disgusted; Silver Dragon do better. Be better.

I don't know that Bahamut would make this poor /young/ silver dragon sick. Instead, he'll probably send a Cleric with a 'hey, these gnomes are actually evil' message. Bahamut is an immortal Lawful Good deity. He'll use gentler means, at first. He isn't going to inflict sickness unless the silver dragon refuse to repent.

Indeed, perhaps this quest starts in the first place because an NPC cleric with just such a task wants to talk to him.

[Sorinth]

I don't know that Bahamut would make this poor /young/ silver dragon sick. Instead, he'll probably send a Cleric with a 'hey, these gnomes are actually evil' message. Bahamut is an immortal Lawful Good deity. He'll use gentler means, at first. He isn't going to inflict sickness unless the silver dragon refuse to repent.

Indeed, perhaps this quest starts in the first place because an NPC cleric with just such a task wants to talk to him.

I think it's less a Bahumut curse and more just what happens to dragons who don't act their nature. In which case perhaps the quest is initially to help the dragon figure out what this sickness is all about and discovering that it's because it's not acting LG.

[Keltest]

I think it's less a Bahumut curse and more just what happens to dragons who don't act their nature. In which case perhaps the quest is initially to help the dragon figure out what this sickness is all about and discovering that it's because it's not acting LG.

Dragons are mortal, and have as much free will as anyone else. Including, in this hypothetical, the freedom to be wrong.

[Sorinth]

Dragons are mortal, and have as much free will as anyone else. Including, in this hypothetical, the freedom to be wrong.

Depends very much on the DM's world.

[Amechra]

Sounds cool, is that specific to Chromatic or also the case for Metallic dragons? Presumably this makes kobolds more varied in alignment since kobolds would probably follow the alignment of the dragons they serve.

It's also the case for the metallics. And the alignment variance actually goes both ways — if you paired off a young red dragon with a strong and stable Lawful Good kobold town, you're probably going to end up with an uncharacteristically nice red dragon.

Key words there are "strong" and "stable".

[Bovine Colonel]

How old is the dragon, and how long has the nation been evil?

It could just be that the dragon feels a strong sense of loyalty to the country's founders, who were Good-aligned personal friends of the dragon, and believes in the country's ability to solve its own problems while the dragon defends it against external threats. If it's a young dragon, maybe the oppression only really got started in recent years with the accession of a new monarch? It doesn't need to have a human perspective of time; even if the oppression has been happening for a decade or two, maybe the dragon still thinks of that as only a brief hiccup in the history of an otherwise-Good nation.

As for directly opposing the PCs, who does the dragon think they work for? Could they pose a threat to the nation's survival? The dragon could be a voice of opposition to the state's current policies and still be hostile to the PCs if the dragon sees the PCs or their patrons as an existential threat.

[Angelalex242]

As a young dragon, it's less than a century old. Maybe as young as 30-50.

[Cheesegear]

If it's a young dragon, maybe the oppression only really got started in recent years with the accession of a new monarch? It doesn't need to have a human perspective of time; even if the oppression has been happening for a decade or two, maybe the dragon still thinks of that as only a brief hiccup in the history of an otherwise-Good nation.

I feel like several people in this thread either;
a) Don't understand Lawful Good, or
b) Don't understand Silver Dragons.
...Or both.

'Necessary Evil' and 'For Your Own Good' starts leaning strongly towards Lawful Evil, especially if you actively support it.
'It's bad now, but it gets us there in the end.' is Lawful Neutral depending on how far you actually want to go...See; Lawful Evil.

Then we just straight up have the idea that Evil (specifically, the oppression of sentient beings), is staring the Silver Dragon - a reactive Dragon-type (i.e; not proactive, like a Gold) - right in the face, and the Silver Dragon just lets it slide; Staring right at the fire and letting it burn itself out. Yeah, once all the fuel is gone, the fire will also be gone. So there's no problem.

'What about all the people that died and community and environmental destruction?'
...Yeah, but the problem was the fire, and that's gone. So situation restored.
'...Uhh...But you could have stopped the fire at the start so that none of this happened.'
No. The fire stopped itself. See? Look. No fire anymore. How do you not see this? I didn't have to do anything, and the fire stopped itself by burning all the fuel.

The ends do not justify the means; What Silver Dragons are you guys even reading? At least, definitely not in this case.
Monster Manual. Page 117. Dragons of Virtue:
- Don't cause harm to sentient beings.
- Don't cause harm to the innocent.
There are many versions of Lawful Good - I understand that. But that's the Silver Dragon's version of Lawful Good.

As many, many others have pointed out; The only way that the Silver Dragon can do this, is if it doesn't know what's actually going on. If it does know, and supports it, it is not Lawful Good and/or not a Silver Dragon.

If you want to play 'Well my Dragons are different.', the OP should specify that...But it doesn't.

[Bovine Colonel]

I feel like several people in this thread either;
a) Don't understand Lawful Good, or
b) Don't understand Silver Dragons.
...Or both.

'Necessary Evil' and 'For Your Own Good' starts leaning strongly towards Lawful Evil, especially if you actively support it.
'It's bad now, but it gets us there in the end.' is Lawful Neutral depending on how far you actually want to go...See; Lawful Evil.

Then we just straight up have the idea that Evil (specifically, the oppression of sentient beings), is staring the Silver Dragon - a reactive Dragon-type (i.e; not proactive, like a Gold) - right in the face, and the Silver Dragon just lets it slide; Staring right at the fire and letting it burn itself out. Yeah, once all the fuel is gone, the fire will also be gone. So there's no problem.

'What about all the people that died and community and environmental destruction?'
...Yeah, but the problem was the fire, and that's gone. So situation restored.
'...Uhh...But you could have stopped the fire at the start so that none of this happened.'
No. The fire stopped itself. See? Look. No fire anymore. How do you not see this? I didn't have to do anything, and the fire stopped itself by burning all the fuel.

The ends do not justify the means; What Silver Dragons are you guys even reading? At least, definitely not in this case.
Monster Manual. Page 117. Dragons of Virtue:
- Don't cause harm to sentient beings.
- Don't cause harm to the innocent.
There are many versions of Lawful Good - I understand that. But that's the Silver Dragon's version of Lawful Good.

As many, many others have pointed out; The only way that the Silver Dragon can do this, is if it doesn't know what's actually going on. If it does know, and supports it, it is not Lawful Good and/or not a Silver Dragon.

If you want to play 'Well my Dragons are different.', the OP should specify that...But it doesn't.

Yeah, that's fair. If we want to stick closer to the MM silver dragon characterization (and inch a little away from the thread's premise, unfortunately), maybe it's possible to have the dragon opposing the state's policies with whatever means it has available, while also having good or at least plausible reasons to oppose the PCs or their patrons specifically? Heck, navigating whatever bad blood exists between the dragon and the PCs' backers might even pose enough of a challenge to justify a dragon ally flying in and wrecking things as a narrative reward.

[Angelalex242]

I'd like to again point out my plan A of a gnomish eloquence bard lying his rear end off to the dragon.

Silver Dragons do not have the insight skill.

[Cheesegear]

Heck, navigating whatever bad blood exists between the dragon and the PCs' backers might even pose enough of a challenge to justify a dragon ally flying in and wrecking things as a narrative reward.

The way I would run this (and I just might):

Phase 1.
Players find out about Kobold slavery, and confront the Gnomes over it. This works better if the Kobolds are good-aligned - Icewind Dale says they can be. But it's still pretty bad, even if they're Evil. You'd probably need a Kobold liaison (Dragonshield-in-chains?) to the party to convince them to actually do something about it. A Kobold is an adult by 6 years, and usually dies by 20. 'Decades' of oppression is several generations for them.

The Gnomes, in response to being called out, summon their Silver Dragon to defend them via...Whatever. Sending Stones? Doesn't matter.

Holy crap!? A Silver Dragon!? But the players immediately get confused because the Gnomes are Evil? They might try and convince the Dragon. But you can't perform an impossible task. The Dragon has been friends with the Gnomes for decades. Surely, if they were Evil, it would know. When the Dragon is reduced to a suitable number of HPs, it flies away.

Phase 2.
D- ...Was that a Dragon!? The Kobolds freak out. They have to escape and meet up with the Dragon. They have to. It's in their DNA. The Resistance begins in earnest, as now the Kobolds have a real goal...Dragon! The goal isn't just 'escape.' ...Because what are you supposed to do after you do? No. The Dragon will look after the Kobolds. Dragons always do. A Silver Dragon, being Silver, would take them in - it doesn't matter if the Kobolds are Evil.

The players also find out the classic gaslighting plan; Treat the Dragon amazingly, treat everyone else like ****. That way the Dragon will always be in their corner, even when they're in the wrong. As long as the Dragon doesn't find out, then it's all good? Right? Have the Gnomish ruler be an incredibly good liar. As others have pointed out, Silvers do not have Insight. Silvers also don't poke their nose where it doesn't belong.
(Silver Dragons also 'do not seek out Evil like a Gold'; Which basically means that if a Silver doesn't know about it...It's not a problem. Hence why the Silver can't know.)

Phase 3.
The players find the Dragon, and convince it that the Gnomes are bad. This time they even have proof. Look, here's a Kobold that can tell you the whole story...

The players - with Dragon in tow - and a not-small amount of Kobolds, attack the City and remove the real bad guys of the story. Bonus points if a player gets to ride the Dragon - you know they'll want to.

Conclusion:
The players freed the Kobolds and make friends with the Silver Dragon (gaining the trinket the Gnomes had?), and ousted a bunch of corrupt individuals.

The Silver Dragon takes an active hand in guiding them. Potentially turning the Kobold Colony 'Good', and making Silver Urds and Scale Sorcerers. Potentially turning a group of Kobolds towards Bahamut - the Good one that doesn't see Kobolds as vermin to be abused. The Kobolds have been enslaved for generations. This Silver Dragon might not be one of Tiamat's...But...It's better than literally any living Kobold in the colony knows.

EDIT: ...Actually, 'in captivity', Kobolds can live up to 120. Maybe 'Old Kobold Kenkins' remembers serving a Green Dragon...It was basically like living under the Gnomes. Living under this Silver Dragon who doesn't hate us is amazing.

[Bohandas]

Which leads me to my question: what could cause a silver dragon to break bad and start supporting an autocratic state that oppresses its citizens? And could it do so while still maintaining a Lawful Good alignment?

They could have filled its head with a bunch of BS propaganda

[KorvinStarmast]

Silver Dragons do not have the insight skill.
One need not be proficient with Insight to use it. This is D&D 5e. Using insight is not gated behind having the skill proficiency chosen or not. One simply doesn't get a proficiency bonus to the roll. Straight Wisdom (Insight) roll. If one is lied to often enough one may begin to smell a rat, or not.

[arnin77]

What about using Superman from Injustice as a template. “The Boy Scout goes bad”? Maybe the silver dragon has been betrayed or something has happened “for the last time” and he’s tired of being passive and now has decided to take drastic measures to stop it from happening again? I don’t think it would be LG anymore, but it would be a way for a silver dragon to start LG and go evil?

[RSP]

What about using Superman from Injustice as a template. “The Boy Scout goes bad”? Maybe the silver dragon has been betrayed or something has happened “for the last time” and he’s tired of being passive and now has decided to take drastic measures to stop it from happening again? I don’t think it would be LG anymore, but it would be a way for a silver dragon to start LG and go evil?

Perhaps the kobolds were previously in the employ of a rival dragon, and while that was the case, they repeatedly attacked the silver (or their siblings/parent - maybe resulting in their death). Though the rival dragon is now gone, the kobolds must still pay for their role in the attacks.

[Cheesegear]

Though the rival dragon is now gone, the kobolds must still pay for their role in the attacks.

Generational, collective punishment!? That's exactly what Silver Dragon would do!

[Angelalex242]

One need not be proficient with Insight to use it. This is D&D 5e. Using insight is not gated behind having the skill proficiency chosen or not. One simply doesn't get a proficiency bonus to the roll. Straight Wisdom (Insight) roll. If one is lied to often enough one may begin to smell a rat, or not.

True as that is, Eloquence Bard vs. No Insight Dragon is surely going to keep this dragon in the dark semi indefinitely.

[KorvinStarmast]

True as that is, Eloquence Bard vs. No Insight Dragon is surely going to keep this dragon in the dark semi indefinitely. The d20 is swingy. But, as a DM, if the bard has been successful time after time, it makes a certain amount of sense for some deception checks to be made with advantage (or the insight check to be made with disadvantage) given the habit of 'buying it' that has been established.

That still doesn't make it an auto success.

[Cheesegear]

The d20 is swingy. But, as a DM, if the bard has been successful time after time
[...]
That still doesn't make it an auto success.

Use mechanics to inspire the fluff.

Your base Noble, at CR 1/8, has Persuasion and Deception at +5, each. Or, +25%.
At CR 1/8.
That's before you start adding in magical effects and class abilities.

Now, you can roll dice for what amounts to 20 years every time the Gnome lies to the Dragon.
Or, it's backstory, and it doesn't actually matter, and you can just say that the Gnome lies successfully. If we start demanding dice rolls for peoples' backstories...90% of all my players' characters over the last ten years almost definitely couldn't have existed.

'But the Dragon could roll Insight, and pass?'
...Well it didn't.
'How do you know?'
Because it's backstory and dice are irrelevant. The point is that Nobles are good at lying, and Young - impressionable - Dragons, are not good at detecting lies. So the backstory works and is justified.

[Angelalex242]

Also, it's a sad fact of real life, where we don't have d20s, that people have been successfully lied to for decades, sometimes right up to and through their death, and they never do learn the truth of what someone else was doing to them. They go to their graves entirely clueless.

[Segev]

The LG Silver Dragon won't stand for obvious needless oppression. But consider that what is necessary in war is awful, even domestically. And the dragon need not be privy to everything going on.

To him, the kobolds may be dangerous agents of the enemy. He might feel that it is unfortunate that they must be constrained, but when they aren't, he may believe they engage in criminal or warlike behavior for the sake of overthrowing the gnomes.

Consider how propaganda has been used. I will give no real-world examples, but I am pretty sure people have read 1984 and seen Babylon 5's Earth rebellion plot. The propaganda is used to provide a narrative that those who want to believe the leaders are justified can buy into. The silver dragon obviously isn't buying it out of fear that the gnomes will punish him for not doing so, but he might buy it out of idealistic trust that the gnomes are good people who wouldn't do wicked things if they didn't have to.

[Cheesegear]

But consider that what is necessary in war is awful...

I love when creatures that are Lawful Good go around oppressing, enslaving and murdering people for generations. It's definitely a thing that Lawful Good creatures act on and condone all the time.


To him, the kobolds may be dangerous agents of the enemy.

No. To the Dragon, they must be dangerous agents of the enemy, and they must be proving that they are dangerous agents all of the time. Otherwise why isn't the punishment over? Furthermore, the enslavement of the Kobolds must have a point that benefits them. Otherwise, you're better off executing them for the crimes that they've definitely committed. If they're constantly proving that they're dangerous threats, that means that they are irredeemable, and the Silver Dragon can do what it does best.

If the Dragon knows about the enslavement, all's it has to do is talk to a single Kobold in any number of decades and the lie falls apart. They are not dangerous enemies, and they've arguably done nothing wrong...Or, if they have done something wrong, to them, it was generations ago and no Kobold in the camp is responsible for what happened many generations ago (which could only very well be 20 years...The Gnomes might remember, Hell, the Dragon might remember...The Kobolds however, do not. To the Kobolds this is how life has always been and no-one knows why.). Unless, of course, you are having open insurrections every other month that result in several casualties and the Dragon witnesses said insurrections all the time.

Otherwise, the Dragon can't know about the Kobolds. Full stop.

If it does...It's a Lawful Good Silver Dragon, and it would immediately do what a Lawful Good creature that is also a Silver Dragon would do...Ask more questions, decide who the evil-doers really are, and turn them all to ice.

[Segev]

I love when creatures that are Lawful Good go around oppressing, enslaving and murdering people for generations. It's definitely a thing that Lawful Good creatures act on and condone all the time.



No. To the Dragon, they must be dangerous agents of the enemy, and they must be proving that they are dangerous agents all of the time. Otherwise why isn't the punishment over? Furthermore, the enslavement of the Kobolds must have a point that benefits them. Otherwise, you're better off executing them for the crimes that they've definitely committed. If they're constantly proving that they're dangerous threats, that means that they are irredeemable, and the Silver Dragon can do what it does best.

If the Dragon knows about the enslavement, all's it has to do is talk to a single Kobold in any number of decades and the lie falls apart. They are not dangerous enemies, and they've arguably done nothing wrong...Or, if they have done something wrong, to them, it was generations ago and no Kobold in the camp is responsible for what happened many generations ago (which could only very well be 20 years...The Gnomes might remember, Hell, the Dragon might remember...The Kobolds however, do not. To the Kobolds this is how life has always been and no-one knows why.)

The Dragon can't know about the Kobolds. Full stop.

If it does...It's a Lawful Good Silver Dragon, and it would immediately do what a Lawful Good creature that is also a Silver Dragon would do...Ask more questions, decide who the evil-doers really are, and turn them all to ice.

It depends heavily on what the kobolds' treatment is and what the dragon thinks it is.

Does he know they are universally being "punished?" Or does he believe there is simply more security in place regarding them?

The OP asked how the dragon could be cooperating in this. Mostly, it amounts to what the dragon believes about the situation.

[Keltest]

I love when creatures that are Lawful Good go around oppressing, enslaving and murdering people for generations. It's definitely a thing that Lawful Good creatures act on and condone all the time.



No. To the Dragon, they must be dangerous agents of the enemy, and they must be proving that they are dangerous agents all of the time. Otherwise why isn't the punishment over? Furthermore, the enslavement of the Kobolds must have a point that benefits them. Otherwise, you're better off executing them for the crimes that they've definitely committed. If they're constantly proving that they're dangerous threats, that means that they are irredeemable, and the Silver Dragon can do what it does best.

If the Dragon knows about the enslavement, all's it has to do is talk to a single Kobold in any number of decades and the lie falls apart. They are not dangerous enemies, and they've arguably done nothing wrong...Or, if they have done something wrong, to them, it was generations ago and no Kobold in the camp is responsible for what happened many generations ago (which could only very well be 20 years...The Gnomes might remember, Hell, the Dragon might remember...The Kobolds however, do not. To the Kobolds this is how life has always been and no-one knows why.)

The Dragon can't know about the Kobolds. Full stop.

If it does...It's a Lawful Good Silver Dragon, and it would immediately do what a Lawful Good creature that is also a Silver Dragon would do...Ask more questions, decide who the evil-doers really are, and turn them all to ice.

Well said. The dragon either needs to not know, which would be a pretty difficult sell for a creature that is still young after generations of this society have gone by, or there needs to be some compelling reason to get it to refrain from violence as a solution to the problem. Any variation of "it doesnt care" drifts the dragon into evil territory, which from my understanding misses the point of the OP's scenario. If its just an evil dragon, even though its scales are silver, then the party wont give it a second thought before murdering it to death.

[Cheesegear]

It depends heavily on what the kobolds' treatment is and what the dragon thinks it is.

I mean...

Maybe you could have it so the Dragon, every now and then wants to talk to the Kobolds. But, since a Young Dragon can't Shape Change yet, it can only talk to Kobolds in open areas and wide spaces. That is, the Kobolds' visits and meetings with the Dragon are 'heavily supervised', because the Dragon can't just go where it wants because it would get in the way and wreck up the place.

Dragon: Hey there little Kobold. How're things? I knew your Dad.
3rd-gen Kobold: *Sees himself surrounded by Gnomes, many of whom have wands.* ...Uhh...G-Great. The Gnomes are... *looks off to the side*
Gnome: *Looks Kobold in the eye, frowning. The Gnome shakes his head, glaring.*
Kobold: ...Uhh...Where was I? *Checks the script on his hand* ...Uhh...Gnomes are great. We love it here. Everything's amazing. We're about to make our 4th generation under the Gnomes'...Hospitality.
Dragon: Hooray! More eggs! Can I see them? Maybe I can make some Urds? Is that a thing Metallics can do? ...I've heard Chromatics can do it.
Kobold: ...Ummm... Wh-
Gnome: No, Dragon. That's enough. The Kobold is tired from hard work. It's time for him to go.
Dragon: Oh, say hi to all the Koblds for me. Bye little Kobold.
Gnome: Let's go, Kobold. Back to your family and dinnertime. Everything is very great, isn't it?
Kobold: Yes very great. Nice meeting you Dragon. Everything is fine. Nothing to worry about. Everything is fine...Did I say everything is fine yet?
Dragon: He sure said everything was fine a lot. You Gnomes must be doing a great job.
Gnome: We sure are.

Three hours later the Kobold is dead in a pig trough. He served his purpose and now he's feeding the pigs.

[Gaius Hermicus]

I should mention that the kobolds aren’t being enslaved or violently suppressed. They are put on lists keeping track of their names and professions, subjected to profiling and excluded from holding most major political positions (to the point where most are left with little choice but to become beggars or criminals) but they aren’t slaves.

[Catullus64]

I feel, Gaius Hermicus, that how you characterize this dragon should have a lot to do with your players' motives; both what their starting motives are for attempting this heist in the first place, and what role you want this antagonistic dragon to play in driving or changing those motivations. It makes quite a bit of difference whether your players are patriotic agents of a rival power, amoral mercenaries in service to a rival power, citizens of this Empire striking a desperate blow against tyranny, thieves who want to steal the tech for their own gain, or any mixture of these motives.

Also, as a point of curiosity, is the Silver Dragon aware of or actively involved in the development of this secret military tech that your players are out to steal? Because if not, I think you should make that the case. Having an antagonist's goals directly clash with those of the PCs will beat out abstract ideological conflicts every time.

[Cheesegear]

They are put on lists keeping track of their names and professions, subjected to profiling and excluded from holding most major political positions (to the point where most are left with little choice but to become beggars or criminals) but they aren’t slaves.

If you can't hold a political position, your only other choice is beggar or criminal? I hope I read that wrong.

Anyway...None of that is anything. That reads as 'If you haven't done anything wrong (or you don't get caught), there's no problem.' Which is Lawful Neutral at worst. I can't really see where a Silver Dragon would actively oppose to any of it, nor can I see where the players would strongly object - unless IRL they are hard-line libertarians. So I don't know why the players or the Silver Dragon would even come into conflict.

I kind of thought that was the point of the thread:

Q. How to make Silver Dragons and players come into conflict?
- The Dragon must be Silver.
- The Dragon must maintain it's LG alignment.

A. Easy. You have to make the 'middle man' (the gnomes) much worse than you've made them; You have to make them Lawful Evil, not Lawful Neutral.

[Angelalex242]

Yes. I believe the idea we're having is that the Kobolds are being used as slave labor.

Ya know. Killed on a whim, cruelly beaten for gnomish giggles, tortured in cruel gnomish experiments (They are gnomes after all, have to test their nifty new weapons out on something...), hard labor every day with no pay while gnomes sit on their butts with their drink of choice.

[Sorinth]

If you can't hold a political position, your only other choice is beggar or criminal? I hope I read that wrong.

Anyway...None of that is anything. That reads as 'If you haven't done anything wrong (or you don't get caught), there's no problem.' Which is Lawful Neutral at worst. I can't really see where a Silver Dragon would actively oppose to any of it, nor can I see where the players would strongly object - unless IRL they are hard-line libertarians. So I don't know why the players or the Silver Dragon would even come into conflict.

I kind of thought that was the point of the thread:

Q. How to make Silver Dragons and players come into conflict?
- The Dragon must be Silver.
- The Dragon must maintain it's LG alignment.

A. Easy. You have to make the 'middle man' (the gnomes) much worse than you've made them; You have to make them Lawful Evil, not Lawful Neutral.

Not to get into real world stuff, but my impression is that the gnomes are running an apartheid state. So it's not outright slavery, but it's still pretty much an evil institution based on racism that prevents the kobolds from getting too successful at anything. For the OP the question is does the Silver Dragon know it's supporting that apartheid state (And justifying it in some way), or is it being fooled/tricked in some way and doesn't really know. In one case the dragon might not like the situation but supports it for whatever reasons and therefore can't be turned, in the other case it doesn't understand/know about the situation (Possibly intentionally) but could potentially be turned if it's "eyes are opened to the real situation."

[Cheesegear]

Not to get into real world stuff, but my impression is that the gnomes are running an apartheid state. So it's not outright slavery, but it's still pretty much an evil institution based on speceism that prevents the kobolds from getting too successful at anything.

Fixed. Gnomes and Kobolds are not the same species.

If the Kobolds are presented as Lawful Evil - even while under the state - then they are subject to punishment. Gaius came back to the thread; The Kobolds have a modicum of free will...And they use that free will to become criminals. Therefore, they are Evil, and deserve it, thus, a Silver Dragon supports their punishment.

The problem is that I don't see how players wouldn't also see it that way, and so how would the Silver and the PCs come into conflict if they actually both agree that the Kobolds deserve it? Because the Kobolds are criminals and bad.


For the OP the question is does the Silver Dragon know it's supporting that apartheid state (And justifying it in some way)

It can only be justified - in the Dragon's moral sense - if the Kobolds are actively causing trouble, even while being surveilled. Once again, if the Kobolds are causing trouble constantly, I don't know where the conflict is if all parties agree that the Kobolds are a pain in the arse.


In one case the dragon might not like the situation but supports it for whatever reasons and therefore can't be turned...

The problem is short-term vs. long-term. As I've brought up repeatedly, a Kobold's lifespan is about as long as your average housecat; 6-20 years. The Dragon is a Young Dragon - up to 100 years old. It's entirely possible that the Kobolds have been living under the Gnomes for several entire generations. I can't find the post where the OP explains the whole situation - or maybe they didn't?

1. Can a Lawful Good creature kill an innocent creature possessed by a Demon, and still maintain Lawful Good? ...Probably. Do you know the creature is Possessed? Is this your last resort? ...Just this once, right? You have no other choice...You'll regret it...

2. Can a Lawful Good creature kill any number of innocent creatures, whenever they want, based on the fact that they could be possessed, and still maintain Lawful Good?
...Are you serious!? What kind of question is that!? :smallyuk:

This is something similar:
Kobolds and Gnomes have a bit of a fight. The Gnomes win, and take PoWs. The Silver Dragon says 'Fair enough.'
Months go by.
Years.
Decades, maybe? Remember, Kobolds basically have the lifespan and reproductive cycle of cats. Decade(s) is a long time in Kobold-years.

At some point the Dragon will have some questions. When does this end? The war was a while ago. Why do we still have these camps...This doesn't make sense. At some point you have to escort the Kobolds to an unpopulated mountain and leave them to their own devices. Whatever happened, happened...And no Kobold alive even has a first-hand memory of what even happened. The Kobolds are not responsible for actions they didn't do...Unless they are causing problems currently, and showing the Gnomes that they are going to cause problems in the here-and-now if they were free.

If you tell the Dragon a reason that makes sense for why the Kobolds are like this, and it both believes the reason, and agrees with it. You're gonna have to tell the players that same reason. I have a hard time believing that any DM worth their salt would make a Silver Dragon agree to doing the wrong thing (this thread makes me believe that there are some DMs not worth their salt...But we'll let that go). So it must be the right thing, right? And if a Silver Dragon believes it to be the right reason...Why would the players disagree unless they are Evil?

There's no problem if the Kobolds present themselves as a*holes that justify their treatment. There's no conflict.

[Angelalex242]

Well...Kobolds are in theory Lawful Evil, so they are probably...less than ideal slaves. Obeying the letter of every law, while making things as miserable as they can for the gnomes. I'd expect to see kobold slaves poisoning gnome babies, sabatoging gnomish machines, and otherwise being Tucker's Kobolds if they somehow got enslaved.

[Gaius Hermicus]

I can't find the post where the OP explains the whole situation - or maybe they didn't?

Fair enough; I don't think I did.

As per default 5e lore, kobolds and gnomes are ancient rivals, which is reflected in their mythologies which paint Kurtulmak and Glittergold as constantly attempting to one-up each other in terms of pranks. (Glittergold usually wins in the stories the players have heard because gnomish culture is dominant in the area that they come from).

This gnomish protectorate is one of a handful of kingdoms splintering off of a vestigial empire, which once controlled essentially all the gnome-held lands in this part of the world. Said empire was forged in battle centuries ago and in its early days it destroyed most of the local kobold population and cultural influence. Over the years, it became overstretched and corrupt, and eventually various principalities split off of the empire, including the protectorate where this adventure takes place.

The kobolds that live there are by no means enslaved, but they are cut off from any part of the world where kobold-dominant societies are alive and well. Not all are criminals, but the gnomish government which keeps close surveillance on known kobolds actively uses potential kobold uprisings as a propaganda bogeyman to justify their militarism, and popular propaganda flyers usually depict kobolds as stupid, vicious, and universally criminal. As a result of both intentional propaganda and of cultural memory of the ancient rivalry, large portions of the gnomish population do not trust kobolds trying to run legitimate businesses or work legitimate jobs, and they are legally barred from serving in the military or holding bureaucratic office (both of which are massive employment sectors due to the totalitarian state). Many do, in fact, enter the criminal marketplace; some because they have few alternative sources of income, and some to stick it to the system that rejects them. Kobolds also are rarely given fair trials if accused of a crime and are sometimes subjected to extrajudicial punishment if somehow acquitted. That said, they are free citizens, not slaves.

The protectorate is probably 50-60 years old, and the dragon 40 or so. It would have lived most or all of its life within the gnomish territory and has free rein to travel within the kingdom as it pleases.

[Sorinth]

Fixed. Gnomes and Kobolds are not the same species.

If the Kobolds are presented as Lawful Evil - even while under the state - then they are subject to punishment. Gaius came back to the thread; The Kobolds have a modicum of free will...And they use that free will to become criminals. Therefore, they are Evil, and deserve it, thus, a Silver Dragon supports their punishment.

Being a criminal doesn't make someone Evil though. There's a place today where holding a sign that reads "No more war" makes you a criminal I doubt you think doing so makes that person Evil.


The problem is that I don't see how players wouldn't also see it that way, and so how would the Silver and the PCs come into conflict if they actually both agree that the Kobolds deserve it? Because the Kobolds are criminals and bad.

The easiest way is very harsh punishments for crimes, along with overall repressive laws that aren't applied equally. It's doubtful that people would jump to Kobolds are Evil criminals if one of those criminals is a kobold stealing bread to feed some orphans who gets caught and has their hands cut off as punishment. Similarly if there is little to no punishment for a Gnome assaulting a Kobold but a death sentence for a Kobold assaulting (Or even defending themselves) against a Gnome I don't think the players will side with the Gnomes.

The difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter is often just your POV. So the OP will want to the Dragon to look at things through a specific POV, and then present the players with the opposing POV.

[Bovine Colonel]

I feel, Gaius Hermicus, that how you characterize this dragon should have a lot to do with your players' motives; both what their starting motives are for attempting this heist in the first place, and what role you want this antagonistic dragon to play in driving or changing those motivations. It makes quite a bit of difference whether your players are patriotic agents of a rival power, amoral mercenaries in service to a rival power, citizens of this Empire striking a desperate blow against tyranny, thieves who want to steal the tech for their own gain, or any mixture of these motives.

Also, as a point of curiosity, is the Silver Dragon aware of or actively involved in the development of this secret military tech that your players are out to steal? Because if not, I think you should make that the case. Having an antagonist's goals directly clash with those of the PCs will beat out abstract ideological conflicts every time.

I would reiterate this - how are the PCs involved? What is their motivation for stealing from the gnomes? Are they agents of a rival state, mercenaries, outlaws, revolutionaries? If you're presenting the gnomish state as "kinda bad, but not bad enough to provoke a silver dragon into breaking things" do the PCs disagree with the silver dragon or do they have other reasons for the theft? Likewise, if the silver dragon knew who the PCs were and who they were working for, would any of that knowledge constitute a reason to trust the PCs?

[Gaius Hermicus]

I would reiterate this - how are the PCs involved? What is their motivation for stealing from the gnomes? Are they agents of a rival state, mercenaries, outlaws, revolutionaries? If you're presenting the gnomish state as "kinda bad, but not bad enough to provoke a silver dragon into breaking things" do the PCs disagree with the silver dragon or do they have other reasons for the theft? Likewise, if the silver dragon knew who the PCs were and who they were working for, would any of that knowledge constitute a reason to trust the PCs?

One of the players is playing a kobold from this country who used to work as a thief. His fence called him back to let him know about a heist he's putting together to steal some kind of secret new technology the gnomes have developed.

They are aware of the dragon's existence but have never met it; the dragon, by contrast, has never heard of them.

[Cheesegear]

The kobolds that live there are by no means enslaved, but they are cut off from any part of the world where kobold-dominant societies are alive and well.

If the Kobolds are not enslaved...Why do they stay if they're so badly treated?


Not all are criminals, but the gnomish government which keeps close surveillance on known kobolds actively uses potential kobold uprisings as a propaganda bogeyman to justify their militarism, and popular propaganda flyers usually depict kobolds as stupid, vicious, and universally criminal.

But that's not what propaganda is.
Your average Kobold is stupid Int 8 (-1) and potentially vicious - Lawful Evil.
As mentioned, Kobolds are Lawful Evil. Now, a criminal, is by definition, Chaotic. But it's not hard to stretch Evil = Criminal, too.

'Kobolds are stupid and vicious and that's why we need to keep an eye on them.' isn't propaganda. It's an unflattering fact that is impolite to point out.


large portions of the gnomish population do not trust kobolds trying to run legitimate businesses or work legitimate jobs

If you are running Kobolds-as-default...Neither would I.

This is where I have some confusion. See, I've spent the majority of the thread under the impression that...


Which leads me to my question: what could cause a silver dragon to break bad and start supporting an autocratic state that oppresses its citizens?

...It doesn't sound like Kobolds are citizens.

It sounds more like from what you've said that the Kobolds are more like indentured servants, that are likely to turn on their masters as soon as is convenient. As you also said, you're running with the default premise that Kobolds hate Gnomes, and vice versa.


Many do, in fact, enter the criminal marketplace; some because they have few alternative sources of income, and some to stick it to the system that rejects them.

Then they are unfortunately fulfilling the narrative:

Gnomes: Kobolds are criminals!
Kobold: No we aren't.
Gnomes: Yes you are.
Kobold: Alright. I'll become a Criminal.
Gnome: See!? Kobolds are Criminals.

Unfortunately, once you become what they say you are; There's really no going back; Something, something real world.

Considering below, you say the city/state has been going for half a century. The Kobolds are now baked into their behavior.


That said, they are free citizens, not slaves.

You said they were being oppressed?
...Now you're saying they're free, albeit they experience bigotry...Turns out, some of which is actually justified.

The Kobolds can leave any time they want.
They choose to stay; They choose to be punished under a state that hates them.

Alright the Kobolds really are stupid. I see no propaganda.

Here I thought the Kobolds couldn't leave the situation that they're in.
Nope. Turns out they're using their free will to do something stupid...And the Gnomes are letting them.

Sentient beings should have a right to self-determination...And they determine themselves to live in [poop]. Okay. Sure. That's something you can do.


The protectorate is probably 50-60 years old...

That's close to ten generations' worth of Kobolds.
They could've left at any time.

In any case; The Silver Dragon watches over the city and waits for the Kobolds to do something stupid, which they will. Because they're Int 8 and Lawful Evil. The Silver Dragon absolutely supports the state because the Kobolds are going to harm the Gnomes sooner or later, and constantly. They are vicious and stupid, not necessarily criminal...But definitely vicious and stupid. There is no problem. Everything is fine.

As I said, I don't really see why a group of PCs would disagree with anything the Gnomes are doing. Unless the Gnomes turn their attention to the PCs and do the same thing to them, as well. I can't really see the Kobolds being sympathetic when they've stayed so long under a system that hates them when they could've left at any time. They are not enslaved. They're not even really oppressed - just marginalised and monitored.

[Unoriginal]

If the Kobolds are not enslaved...Why do they stay if they're so badly treated?

Moving is dangerous and expensive, especially if you have no guarantee of a safe place to stay at your destination.

Also culturally speaking Kobolds are generally characterized as preferring toiling under tyrants than taking individual risks.

[KorvinStarmast]

I can't really see the Kobolds being sympathetic when they've stayed so long under a system that hates them when they could've left at any time. They are not enslaved. They're not even really oppressed - just marginalised and monitored. Maybe they lack a leader with vision, and the PC kobold may (by choice or by accident) fulfill that role.
(I am thinking a little bit about The Expanse and the various potential leaders ~ Anderson Dawes, Camina Drummer, Fred Lucius Johnson, Marco Inaros ~ who could or could not rally the Belters to their own cause).

[Cheesegear]

Moving is dangerous and expensive, especially if you have no guarantee of a safe place to stay at your destination.

Yeah. I get that. I've played Oregon Trail.

But the thing is...50-60 years in the same place? Twenty, thirty, fifty Kobolds, at some point, should set out on their own if they're allowed to (and it sounds like they are), and then send a runner back to the city about Kobolton, where there are no Gnomes. Six decades is a long time for humans. For Kobolds? That's ten generations of being hamstrung.

My assumption of the thread was apparently evidently flawed:

Gnomes are doing things to the Kobolds which are unjustified.
The PCs, in the majority of cases, will see the injustice and want to do something about it.
Attacking the state, means confronting a Silver Dragon, and that's bad. The Silver Dragon, in turn, doesn't know about the injustice, and that's how the fight can happen in the first place. The PCs then commit an Evil act by slaying a Good Dragon, or, they convince the Dragon that the state is bad, and continue the adventure with a powerful ally and installing a new government...Perhaps even the Dragon itself.

Turns out:
Kobolds are stupid and dumb, and the Silver Dragon watches over them to make sure they don't do anything too stupid or Evil, whilst living in the Gnomes' city.
The adventure is exactly what you think it is. The PCs are actually against the State, and by extension, the Silver Dragon, at the start of the adventure, and the Kobolds are just window dressing; Maybe serving an 'Enemy of my enemy is my friend,' role?

The Kobolds' living conditions isn't actually important. When the OP was talking about state-level 'oppression', they really meant more 'general bigotry, some of which is as the state-level', which is sort of...Nothing the PCs can actually fix or get involved in, because to fix that it's more of a bottom-up approach, not top-down. So the Kobolds really are just world-building. Okay. You could replace the Kobolds with 'disenfranchised gnomes' and you'd have the same adventure, really.


Also culturally speaking Kobolds are generally characterized as preferring toiling under tyrants than taking individual risks.

So again, situation normal. If this is what the Kobolds want. There's nothing to want to change. I guess.

For some reason I was operating under 'Oppression is - or is very close to - exploitation, and slavery at worst. That's Bad. Even when you do it to (nominally) Evil creatures.' and it's something that the DM would imply to the players that they need to fix; But if Kobolds are Evil (or even not Evil at all ), is that okay if the government is Lawful? Uhh... What's [I]really weird is that a Silver Dragon - almost synonymous with Good - is involved. That doesn't make any sense. What a puzzle for the DM players.
Don't know where I got that idea. :smallsigh:

[Segev]

Taking the notion that kobolds are generally happy toiling under evil chromatic dragon overlords, in the sense that that's their comfort zone and they live in awe of their draconic master at least as much as in fear, that could put an interesting twist on it:

What if the Silver Dragon is knowingly acting as the "dragon tyrant" to the kobolds, because he's trying to be sensitive to their needs while keeping them from becoming a problem? He is actively wearing the trappings of a wicked tyrant-king because he was young when he started and didn't know better how to do it, and now is in the habit and hasn't figured out a better way because he's spent so much time play-acting the role. He still isn't exactly comfortable with it, and is playing a game similar to Ainz Ool Goawn in Overlord where he's convinced he has to convince his kobold charges that his motives are evil. Unlike Ainz, however, he doesn't willingly engage in evil to "maintain the charade," and instead finds 'evil excuses' for his Good-motivated directives.

However, the kobolds still are under the impression that this silver dragon is tyrannical and prone to whimsical violence... and just think they (and maybe the gnomes who are clearly "above" them in the hierarchy) are very good at propitiating his wrath. Which could flare up any moment if the kobolds step out of line!

So you have this cartoonishly evil presentation of the silver dragon, and maybe some gnomes aiding it who actually are as bad as they act (having "become the mask," or having been the kind of wicked person who would seek that kind of power) but whom the dragon thinks are just pretending. The party sees this, and only when they manage to find the dragon alone do they see him take off the skull-decorated military jacket and the fake toothbrush mustache and sigh with relief that the kobold he had to consider executing could be given a "terrible" unishment (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Unishment) instead.

[Cheesegear]

When the OP was talking about state-level 'oppression', they really meant more 'general bigotry, some of which is as the state-level', which is sort of...Nothing the PCs can actually fix or get involved in, because to fix that it's more of a bottom-up approach, not top-down.

I figured out the phrase I was looking for; It's a caste system. There are some significant flaws in a caste system. But it can work - especially if you have a Silver Dragon with unimpeachable morals as a consultant looking over your shoulder to make sure you do it right.

The main sticking point seems to be that all of the people in the lower caste(s) are of a singular species.
However, that species has Int, Wis, Cha, 8, 7 and 8 respectively on average, and Lawful Evil, and may - on some level - prefer the caste that they're in, due to how Kobolds and tyrannies tend to interact anyway.

[Bohandas]

Yeah. I get that. I've played Oregon Trail.

But the thing is...50-60 years in the same place? Twenty, thirty, fifty Kobolds, at some point, should set out on their own if they're allowed to (and it sounds like they are), and then send a runner back to the city about Kobolton, where there are no Gnomes. Six decades is a long time for humans. For Kobolds? That's ten generations of being hamstrung.

Wait. Did they change kobolds in 5e? In 3.5e they lived 120 years.

[Keltest]

Wait. Did they change kobolds in 5e? In 3.5e they lived 120 years.

My understanding of the current 5e lore is that while they theoretically have the capacity to live that long, kobolds suffer a lot of attrition and have short generations. Chromatic dragons are not kind to their minions, and even without that living underground is dangerous.

[Gaius Hermicus]

My understanding of the current 5e lore is that while they theoretically have the capacity to live that long, kobolds suffer a lot of attrition and have short generations. Chromatic dragons are not kind to their minions, and even without that living underground is dangerous.

This is the lore I've been operating on in my game.