So, I may get slapped for this, but doesn't the Dragonlance seem a bit underpowered? I say that because even with max damage (1d12+3 piercing damage plus 3d6: 18 force damage = 39) this thing would only scratch an adult dragon. On average rolls, this item does only 19 damage. I know it allows another dragon within 30-feet to use its reaction to make a melee attack (an adult silver dragon's bite attack does max of 28 piercing damage), but it still seems lightweight.
Am I underestimating this weapon?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
C. Foster Payne
"If you get to thinkin' you're a person of some influence, try orderin' somebody else's dog around."
Being a +3 weapon (I'm not sure if you're just short-handing this, but remember that there is also the ability modifier that needs to be added to the damage), that automatically makes the Dragonlance a Very Rare magic item. Add on the additional 3d6 damage to dragons and I can see why they bumped it up to Legendary.
I see your point in that the 3d6 is kind of lacking given how niche it is (my experience of Dungeons & Dragons is that the eponymous creature is actually somewhat more absent than I'd have expected). However, when discussing how powerful an item should be, it's useful to compare them to other items of a similar rarity. I don't have access to the different items right now, but perhaps you could provide some examples of Very Rare and Legendary items that show that it is lacking?
Ideally, you'd show a Very Rare magic item that is more powerful than the Dragonlance which would show that there is a miscalculation somewhere. Alternatively, you could show that it is substantially less powerful than most Legendary magic items and so is more appropriate to the Very Rare list. If you know of such items, I'm genuinely interested what they are.
It should be noted that the Dragonlance, as a Legendary magic weapon, is designed to be used by a L17-20 Fighter or similar class, and so is hitting the enemy up to 4 times a round, every round. That 39 damage is going to translate into over 150*. An Adult Red dragon has 256HP - it could take less than two rounds of average damage with a Fighter armed with a Dragonlance, and that's in a solo fight, when it's mean to provide a medium challenge to an entire party of adventurers. I'd hesitate to say it's not potent.
* Edit: I misread the initial post and now I'm paying for not checking the maths out myself. The average damage with a L20 Fighter with 20 Str, is 1d12+3+5+3d6, which is 6.5+8+(3*3.5), 14.5+10.5=26 damage (we'll ignore critical) rather than 39. Still, that's 10 attacks, so 2 and a half rounds. However, Fighter gets Action Surge, so two lots of attacks per round. 8 attacks in round 1, and won't even need to do Action Surge on his second turn. On average, he'll have 224HP. Even if the Adult Red Dragon manages to win Initiative and is lucky on recharges, it can do:
Two breath attacks, totalling 126, plus one wing attack (since it'll be dead before the second will be triggered), which is 15 damage, doing 141 total. Obviously, this is without tactics and stuff, but numerically, a Fighter will, on average, get a nice strong win in a solo fight, if he has a Dragonlance. That fourth attack is crucial in the fight though, it prevents a third attack and second Legendary Action, which is pretty devastating, so a L19 Fighter would expect to lose the fight, assuming they lost the Initiative.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Compared to where Dragonlances were in previous editions they're considerably weaker, but the thing is most epic tier magic items are just a buttload weaker then they were in the past.
Like for reference, in earlier editions the dragonalnce would ignore draconian death effects, had slaying properties (As in save or die or doubling damage depending on the edition); bit of a step down.
In the books the dragonlances where legendary items.
Something to remember about the books: at the time they were written, dragons got immunity to damage from non-magical weapons as they aged, and Krynn was a low-magic setting so magical weapons were generally rare. Then the dragonlances were suddenly available and for the first time the good guys had a weapon that was not just capable of hurting their enemy but outright murderizing them, and they were getting this weapon delivered in bulk.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Dragonlance the setting is what TSR did to reduce the most epic, awesome enemy in the game to a mount.
Dragonlance the item is what TSR did to reduce that mount from a trusty warhorse to a mule.
I'm sure this seems like it's off-topic. But it's not. There's a vital point here. Dragons should not be mounts - not if you want them to be awesome. The two are mutually exclusive. You either wear a saddle and a bridle - or you're awesome. There's no way for both to be true. And likewise for the dragonlance, the weapon. Yes, it's weaker, but it's still too strong, because as LinkLite said, it reduces the dragon to something a well-built fighter can solo. Like a goblin, or a rat. It's no longer the be-all, end-all of monsters. It's just .. a random encounter in the cellar beneath the inn.
Avoid doing that to your game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So, I may get slapped for this, but doesn't the Dragonlance seem a bit underpowered? I say that because even with max damage (1d12+3 piercing damage plus 3d6: 18 force damage = 39) this thing would only scratch an adult dragon. On average rolls, this item does only 19 damage. I know it allows another dragon within 30-feet to use its reaction to make a melee attack (an adult silver dragon's bite attack does max of 28 piercing damage), but it still seems lightweight.
Am I underestimating this weapon?
C. Foster Payne
"If you get to thinkin' you're a person of some influence, try orderin' somebody else's dog around."
Being a +3 weapon (I'm not sure if you're just short-handing this, but remember that there is also the ability modifier that needs to be added to the damage), that automatically makes the Dragonlance a Very Rare magic item. Add on the additional 3d6 damage to dragons and I can see why they bumped it up to Legendary.
I see your point in that the 3d6 is kind of lacking given how niche it is (my experience of Dungeons & Dragons is that the eponymous creature is actually somewhat more absent than I'd have expected). However, when discussing how powerful an item should be, it's useful to compare them to other items of a similar rarity. I don't have access to the different items right now, but perhaps you could provide some examples of Very Rare and Legendary items that show that it is lacking?
Ideally, you'd show a Very Rare magic item that is more powerful than the Dragonlance which would show that there is a miscalculation somewhere. Alternatively, you could show that it is substantially less powerful than most Legendary magic items and so is more appropriate to the Very Rare list. If you know of such items, I'm genuinely interested what they are.
It should be noted that the Dragonlance, as a Legendary magic weapon, is designed to be used by a L17-20 Fighter or similar class, and so is hitting the enemy up to 4 times a round, every round.
That 39 damage is going to translate into over 150*. An Adult Red dragon has 256HP - it could take less than two rounds of average damage with a Fighter armed with a Dragonlance, and that's in a solo fight, when it's mean to provide a medium challenge to an entire party of adventurers. I'd hesitate to say it's not potent.* Edit: I misread the initial post and now I'm paying for not checking the maths out myself. The average damage with a L20 Fighter with 20 Str, is 1d12+3+5+3d6, which is 6.5+8+(3*3.5), 14.5+10.5=26 damage (we'll ignore critical) rather than 39. Still, that's 10 attacks, so 2 and a half rounds. However, Fighter gets Action Surge, so two lots of attacks per round. 8 attacks in round 1, and won't even need to do Action Surge on his second turn. On average, he'll have 224HP. Even if the Adult Red Dragon manages to win Initiative and is lucky on recharges, it can do:
Two breath attacks, totalling 126, plus one wing attack (since it'll be dead before the second will be triggered), which is 15 damage, doing 141 total. Obviously, this is without tactics and stuff, but numerically, a Fighter will, on average, get a nice strong win in a solo fight, if he has a Dragonlance. That fourth attack is crucial in the fight though, it prevents a third attack and second Legendary Action, which is pretty devastating, so a L19 Fighter would expect to lose the fight, assuming they lost the Initiative.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Compared to where Dragonlances were in previous editions they're considerably weaker, but the thing is most epic tier magic items are just a buttload weaker then they were in the past.
Like for reference, in earlier editions the dragonalnce would ignore draconian death effects, had slaying properties (As in save or die or doubling damage depending on the edition); bit of a step down.
In the books the dragonlances were legendary items.
Something to remember about the books: at the time they were written, dragons got immunity to damage from non-magical weapons as they aged, and Krynn was a low-magic setting so magical weapons were generally rare. Then the dragonlances were suddenly available and for the first time the good guys had a weapon that was not just capable of hurting their enemy but outright murderizing them, and they were getting this weapon delivered in bulk.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Dragonlance the setting is what TSR did to reduce the most epic, awesome enemy in the game to a mount.
Dragonlance the item is what TSR did to reduce that mount from a trusty warhorse to a mule.
I'm sure this seems like it's off-topic. But it's not. There's a vital point here. Dragons should not be mounts - not if you want them to be awesome. The two are mutually exclusive. You either wear a saddle and a bridle - or you're awesome. There's no way for both to be true. And likewise for the dragonlance, the weapon. Yes, it's weaker, but it's still too strong, because as LinkLite said, it reduces the dragon to something a well-built fighter can solo. Like a goblin, or a rat. It's no longer the be-all, end-all of monsters. It's just .. a random encounter in the cellar beneath the inn.
Avoid doing that to your game.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.