GURPS Dragons
 

Is this book 3rd or 4th edition?

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

A little of both. IIRC, it's largely 3e and was published before 4e came out, but since it was to come out shortly before 4e was published, it also contains some 4e stats.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

And it is awesome. That is all.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

They offer all the stats for the dragons in both 3e and 4e. Well worth it. Its a good book.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

It's damn expensive :) but I'm really interested.

Does anyone who has the book know if these dragons are stronger than the usual dragon from GURPS Fantasy 3rd ed? Fantasy dragons are weaker than an elephant, which to me is just plain stupid.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

Sorry, I don't have stats in mind now.

That remembers me another different question about GURPS Dragons I did want to ask:

Since all 4e sourcebooks are available in PDF format in e23, I wonder what happened with this book not having its PDF version.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

It depends. If you have GURPS Undead, GURPS Spirits, GURPS Faeries, or some such, you'll have an idea of what GURPS Dragons is like. The structure of the book is one of information. Part of the book is devoted to dragons in ancient lore as well as modern fantasy. There is a section on dragons' templates, of course, but it offers numerous options. There is also a section of the book devoted to a setting, which is rather unique. It's actually based in Edwardian times (circa 1905.)

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

The 3rd ed templates for "standard" dragons in there are based directly off the dragon stats in various 3rd ed sources - I think the Fantasy Bestiary was my primary reference, but the line was pretty consistent about such things by and large. I haven't cross-referenced any of the 4th ed numbers, but they were direct conversions of the 3rd ed versions.

However, the whole point of the book was to address and demonstrate the sheer range of possibilities for things called "dragons", from cute critters that sit on your shoulder up to gods of nature. There is absolutely nothing "stupid" about the idea of a dragon being weaker than an elephant; it depends entirely on your dragon (and for that matter, your elephant - a lot of the primary sources would have treated elephants as about as real as dragons, and with similar levels of real knowledge). A lot of mythical dragons were just big nasty snakes or lizards, perhaps with hyperactive poison glands, who could and did get stomped by oxen or horses. Anyway, once you've got a template, it's child's play to scale ST and hit points up or down to reflect your personal mythological prejudices.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

My personal mythological prejudices are really inconsistent with the idea of a "monstrous dragon" (Fantasy Bestiary p.84, size 14+) having ST "70+" and an elephant (Bestiary p.15, size 10+) having ST "250-300". Before anyone points out the dragon is much lighter in comparison with the elephant, let me express that that also makes little sense to me. Of course no one has ever seen a live dragon, but I was really pursuing a more fantastic dragon. No matter what, these books show an elephant must be much more frightening than an ancient dragon. :)

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know the ST values of dragons and elephants in 4e?

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

Elephants ST 45; Weight 12,000+ lbs
Monstrous Dragon ST 30; Weight 3,000+ lbs

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

That's much less difference, which is a sign of improvement. :)

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

Different GMs have different ideas as to what makes sense to them. The classic fire-breathing dragon of fantasy has never appealed to me, even in games such as D&D such an image is considered to be the norm. In most of my own games in which they appear, dragons are little more than large, semi-intelligent pterodactyloids possessed of the capability to spit paralytic venom and with an affinity for shiny objects.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

Not really, The elephants BL is more than twice that of the dragon. THe problem is 3ed was the linear strength system.
30 st is a basic lift of 180
45 st is a basic lift of 405.

The elephant is still massively stronger than the dragon. But if that bothers you change it. Of course you will splat any human in one hit.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

It's also pretty good for comparing 3rd ed. to 4th ed. in one book, especially if you are familiar with 3rd ed. already.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

Note that the Fantasy dragons that are weaker than an elephant are also TINIER than an elephant. They're about the size of a big horse.

But yes, Dragons does have templates for big dragons.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

Elephants ST 45; Weight 12,000+ lbs, SM +3 (10 Hexes).
Monstrous Dragon ST 30; Weight 3,000+ lbs, SM +5 (15+ Hexes). I assume some of this is wings, but still.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

It sounds like MOST of that is neck and tail. Ignore the hexes, it's only 3000 lbs. (which, on retrospect, is big even for a clydesdale, but not terribly big)

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

And IMHO it was successful. Let me give thanks to you for that excellent and much needed work!


Hey, you are looking for a gygaxian Great Wyrm Red Dragon! ;-)

Thinking about this, Babylonic Tiamat definitely provided a strong inspiration for D&D dragons, and in line with that, 4e Fantasy provides a frigthening and awesome 350 ST example of Her (all hail Takhisis!), under Primordial Entities (p. 50).

Anyway, 3/4e Dragons is indeed a cool "GURPS Draconomicon ", being very useful and inspirational, too. I can't wait to combine part of it with Dungeon Fantasy inside a serious fantasy campaign.

A point to remark here is: really fantastic and awesome monsters, fall very well under the label of Primordial Entities.

Dungeons & Dragons rarely differenciated between regular dungeon crawling Fire Giants and Fire Giants of mythological scale being a menace to the gods and the cosmos. The same with cool dragons.

However, the last WoTC third edition Deities and Demigods shows "regular" Monster Manual's Nordic Giants tweaked for being a menace to the gods, and they are statted with some divine rank...

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

Yeah, and even a "Gygaxian" dragon in D&D isn't THAT much more powerful than a human, in the same scale as GURPS. 18 STR for a human, 30 STR for a dragon in D&D, that's pretty much not much different than a 20 ST human and a 35 ST dragon in GURPS. Even if you drop that to "averages" then your 10 STR or 10 ST still is on the same scale to the dragon in either game. Both games have a very similar stat averages and maximums.

EDIT: Also, if you compare D&D's writeup of Tiamat, the actual GODDESS of Dragons version, GURPS Fantasy's version would have the D&D version as an appetizer.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

These days, elephants should be designed with Lifting Strength.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

That would make them suseptable to being knocked over and such things that are basic strenght checks though.

They might be good canidates for reduced striking strength.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

Except that would nerf their Trample (B404). Reduced striking strength on their "arm" (trunk) comes in the form of it being weak.

Having done well over 200 3e -> 4e conversions I can say that the relationship between weight and ST is, most of the time, a good one. Certainly better than the 3e method (which is what I like to call "willy-nilly" when I'm feeling snarky). There are exceptions, like big worms or snakes that never lift more than 1/4 of their body and therefore only use 1/4 of their body for any kind of ST-related activities, but usually it works out pretty well. (An animal like that should be designed with low ST and high HP, since it neither attacks nor lifts with its whole body.)

As an aside, the only gap I've found (which may be because I'm dumb and can't find the answer) is that there is no simple way to reduce striking ST for non-bite attacks. To nerf a claw attack (for example) you'd have to start with low ST, then give Lifting ST and extra HP. There's no "Weak Arm" or "Reduced Striking ST" disad. (And if I'm wrong, PLEASE tell me!)

By the same token, Weak Bite should come in levels, not be a flat -2. I can easily imagine (and have had a dickens of a time trying to convert) a creature the size of a house with a very small beak. If it does thr 10d but has Weak Bite, that goes to 10d-20, which (yes, I know I'm fudging) is 6d or 7d. I can't make it anything lower than that unless I do the Lifting ST/extra HP trick.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

Weak Arms are listed under the Extra Arm advantage. There is a 1/2 ST and 1/4 ST version. You can also take ST with the No Fine Manipulators limitation for body/leg ST.

JeffM

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

10d-20 is more like 4d or 5d, not 6d or 7d. 10d averages 35 points, and 35-20 = 15, which is what you'd expect from 4d+1. Using the adds -> dice rule (B269), -20 is -5d and -2, for 5d-2 (which could also be considered 4d+2).

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

Actually, the average on 10d-20 is 16 2/3, not 15. No individual die can go below 0, so the average per die is 0+0+1+2+3+4=10, divided by 6 gives 1.667 per die, which gives 16 2/3 for 10 dice.

Sorry for the quibble; I know it's easier to just subtract 20 when rolling 10 dice together, but technically....it isn't right. :-)

This is more like 5d-1 (which averages 16.5). Still significantly less than the 6d or 7d of the previous poster, so your point stands.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

Incorrect! 10d-20 MEANS "roll ten dice, subtract 20 from the total minimum 1 if it's not crushing, minimum 0 if it is crushing"

Not "roll 10 dice, subtract 2 from each die, minimum 1 on each die".

I have never ever ever seen that second meaning used in an RPG.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

I have, but not when it's worded the way Weak Bite is: "Calculate biting damage normally, then apply an extra -2 per die". If it said "to each die" it would be a different matter.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

Look, a lot of people point out that the elephant is heavier, more massive than a monstrous dragon. In GURPS books, the elephant is actually heavier than the monstrous dragon. But the darn monstrous thing is supposed to be the largest one conceived on GURPS books, that's why I may upgrade a monstrous dragon ST, but I don't think I should have to. It's a great wyrm, it's supposed to be very very frightening and powerful. It shouldn't even measure only 14 yards in size, should be more like Godzilla.

Think less in D&D terms, but imagine the big dragon from movie Reign of fire. Not intelligent, not spellcaster, not speaking, all muscles, size and fire. Now picture an elephant biting harder, bashing harder, lifting more weight, actually, dragging the dragon itself down if it had the chance of pulling a rope tied to it.

So, even not if not Gygaxian, even if just a pterodactyl that spits fire, a dragon is supposed to be stronger than an elephant and not otherwise, lest the elephant has a chance of beating the monstrous dragon's ass good on a fist fight.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

Let me fix that for you:

There's no one right answer. Dragons don't really exist. Want one the size of Godzilla, give it Godzilla stats. But it seems pointless to complain that there are other concepts of dragons that wouldn't have such exaggerated stats.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

I based the largest dragons I typically would use in a campaign off a T-Rex, myself. About 40 feet total length, about 10,000 pounds, about ST 40. And those are the big, ancient dragons. It's easy enough to modify the size/strength/mass of the templates in Dragons. (And actually, I should note that my prefered size for dragons actually ranges from roughly the size of a human or wolf, up through a large horse)

It's only when you start dealing with D&D-style enemies with frequency that some winged, fire-breathing, armor-plated beast that is "only" the size of a full-grown T-Rex seems small. In any other context, it's a terrifying monster that you don't want to be anywhere near.

And even that "weak" default monstrous dragon would shred an elephant without issue. The elephant would have to get lucky to even do much to the dragon, and it would seem near miraculous for it to win.

GURPS dragons generally seemed more interested in dragons that were closer to historical legends and realistic designs, rather than the more modern ones which are often treated with far too much hollywood-realism (Reign of Fire is actually a good example of this. Those things were absurdly strong and tough for their size, and even with what they showed in the movie, the idea of them taking out humanity was quite a stretch).

The problem with dragons, of course, is that everyone has different images of them. D&D just happens to be one of the more common reference points. However, considering the large number of varieties and interpretations, I think GURPS Dragons did the most sensible thing by keeping with GURPS tradition; go with a realistic base, and let the players add or subtract what they need for their exact tastes.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

Yeah, I can see where that might be confusing. To reverse your example, Karate skill adds +1 or +2 per die. So if your strength gives you 1d damage, that's +2 total, if your strength gives you 4d, then that's +8 damage. SO, I can see where confusion could occur that the "per die" thing might be thought to be a universal thing when it's not.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

And really, I think even for a "gygaxian" dragon, ST 40 is more than sufficient. As I said before, D&D STR and GURPS ST are close enough that you can make pretty much direct comparisons. I mean in D&D the human maximum (before level increases) is 18, in GURPS it's 20. Close enough. So, your gygaxian dragons pretty much can convert right over, and show me D&D stats (any edition!) for even a GOD(DESS) dragon with STR more than about 75-100. IIRC Tiamat is the strongest dragon in D&D, and she's only like 60-70 (IDHMBWM).

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

Ehh, if we're dealing with some huge dragon, I'd definately give them more ST, just because it needs to keep in scale with other critters. Fortunately, it seems with normally proportioned dragons (Okay, that's subjective, normally-proportioned as I imagine and draw them), "natural" dragons would have about ST1 per foot of length (Measured from the tip of the tail to tip of the snout). Dependant on bulk, of course.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

That is the point. I think I agree with you.