Monsters! One or several species?

[Bluelantern]

The question is:

Do you link it better when there is one species of monsters/Creature or when there is several?

For example would rather to see only one kind of Unicorn? or several kinds like "Desert Unicorn", "Tundra Unicorn"?

I ask that because today the Color-coded-for-our-convinience-Dragons are well accepted, but to me there is the problem that there is to many of them to look acurate, dragons being so powerfull should not being that common, so how many dragons from a simple species can actually exist?

[factotum]

You don't need that many creatures to form a viable breeding pool, even BEFORE you take magical effects into account; if there were maybe 300 Red Dragons in the entire world that would be biologically enough to keep the species going, and it would still make them super-rare as far as the chances of actually bumping into one are concerned.

[Khanderas]

Isn't there a rule called 50/500 ?
States that you need 50 individuals for short term survival and 500 for long term survival.

[Ronsian]

I think the 50/500 rule might not work for nigh-immortal dragons. Probably wimpy humans, with a tiny life span. I would like to see lots of different dragon species, simply to get veriety. "Look! Another Black Dragon of Doom!" "Sir, didn't they kill it in the Hobbit?" "No, that was a different one."

[Tom_Violence]

I always just figured it was a cheap way of making 'different' monsters in games by simply recolouring the old ones. :smalltongue:

[Bluelantern]

I think the 50/500 rule might not work for nigh-immortal dragons. Probably wimpy humans, with a tiny life span. I would like to see lots of different dragon species, simply to get veriety. "Look! Another Black Dragon of Doom!" "Sir, didn't they kill it in the Hobbit?" "No, that was a different one."

This reminds me of a article that I readed years ago, about how much fun a DM could have by just renaming the monster and watch the players be confused, I mean, what a peasant knows about dragons? to them any big lizard could be a dragon! So the players may prepare themselves against a might dragon and end up with a Dinosaur or Basilisk xP

[Khanderas]

This reminds me of a article that I readed years ago, about how much fun a DM could have by just renaming the monster and watch the players be confused, I mean, what a peasant knows about dragons? to them any big lizard could be a dragon! So the players may prepare themselves against a might dragon and end up with a Dinosaur or Basilisk xP
I so support this. Nebwies see not "a juvinile green dragon" they see a 10 feet long green lizard sleeping. Or a "greed dragon" that actually is a non-intelligent giant lizard.

Anyhow. Since Dragons can mate with humanoids (halfdragons) species is a farily pointless angle. If they can mate with humans, they can mate a black dragon with a golden. The result ? Heck if I know. Perhaps alignment and habitat makes a dragon grow up to a certain type.
A black dragon growing up in a forest, gradually becomes a green dragon due to what he eats (counting evil black as equal to evil green dragon type), white dragons become white dragons (with immunties and vulnerabilities) because they like to live in a frozen wasteland.

Or an evil silver dragon would become a black dragon over time. Physical changes can happen with a race so intimatly tied to magic, alignment and immense lifespan.

That way they would still be color coded, but be the same species.

[Bluelantern]

Another thing that ocurred to me, at least for dragons and high-level creatures there is a solution for the population thing worldS, why limitself to only a plane of existence when there is so many out there waiting to be crused under your claws?

[TheEmerged]

I for one have never liked the "color coded for your protection" thing :)

I'm not sure I like the announced change for D&D 4th Edition that...

...they're trying to move away from having "elemental" versions of stuff because they feel it creates redundancy. I for one LIKE my 12-elemental cosmology :P

On the bit about naming stuff differently to throw players off, you can have a LOT of fun with this. A menu is as good as a myth, and all that :smallbiggrin:

[Bluelantern]

Another problem is to choose the diferents miths to base the creatures on, for example the basilisc who appears as a serpent or a lizard, sometimes with several legs. Do you think it is better to use all the opitions, or this loose part of the essence? and also, how about creating new creatures on the base of old ones, like a "Unicorn Lion" or a Batbear (based on the Owlbear).

[Xuincherguixe]

Another problem is to choose the diferents miths to base the creatures on, for example the basilisc who appears as a serpent or a lizard, sometimes with several legs. Do you think it is better to use all the opitions, or this loose part of the essence? and also, how about creating new creatures on the base of old ones, like a "Unicorn Lion" or a Batbear (based on the Owlbear).

Don't forget the Saber Tooth Moose Lion.

[Bluelantern]

Don't forget the Saber Tooth Moose Lion.

Lol

a example of what I am saying

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a5/th_ar_al/12%20Guildas/HipogrifosRaas.jpg

Also, just for show:

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a5/th_ar_al/12%20Guildas/Ursomorcego.jpg