D&D (2024) What do people think of the new dragon designs?

[Frozen_Heart]

So the titular monsters of Dungeons and Dragons are getting a full visual redesign! The dragons have had a consistent design since 3rd edition, so I was pretty shocked when I heard that they were being redone. However when I saw them I instantly loved them. More than ever before they feel like real flesh and blood monsters, and the design both resembles their previous iteration, while being a lot more distinctive than before.

I'm still hoping that their statblocks get redone to be worthy of both the namesake of DnD, and one of the most commonly used BBEGs in peoples campaigns. 'Big blob of health which occasionally does fire damage' isn't exactly a memorable encounter.

What do people think of the new designs?

Edit: Attached the gold dragon design.

 

[Reynard]

A little gaudy, but fine. I like my dragons city buster size, though, so...

 

[Yaarel]

I like em.

For me, the most important part of a "dragon" is the fact that it is a serpent. It is literally a species of snake.

The tails look sufficiently serpentine to me. Even the body area is undular.

 

[Shardstone]

They freaking rock. The MM14 dragons for the most part don't look that great. These dragons are a lot better.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

I like em.

For me, the most important part of a "dragon" is the fact that it is a serpent. It is literally a species of snake.

The tails look sufficiently serpentine to me. Even the body area is undular.

I've always been torn on what dragons should be most based off. I've seen arguments for snakes, lizards, dinosaurs, birds, cats, and even dogs.

But I feel that monitor lizards come closest to the 'traditional western' dragon depiction. Though they're not technically snakes, they're grouped pretty closely together, and have many snake-like traits.

 

[DarkCrisis]

If Dino's can be giant chickens then so can dragons I guess

 

[Frozen_Heart]

A little gaudy, but fine. I like my dragons city buster size, though, so...

That's the great part about dragons going from wrymling all the way to greatwyrm. A dragon for every occasion!

(Even if I have to homebrew the greatwyrms as the official ones are just sad.)

 

[Ringtail]

My favorite thing about the old designs was that each type of dragon had a consistent look. All red dragons had the same horn shape, etc. etc.

So as long as they keep that (which they appear to be doing, why else would you need a ref sheet for a dragon?) I'm cool with it.

Also these designs look good. Sufficiently dragon-like. Pretty beefy. No complaints.

 

[Yaarel]

I've always been torn on what dragons should be most based off. I've seen arguments for snakes, lizards, dinosaurs, birds, cats, and even dogs.

But I feel that monitor lizards come closest to the 'traditional western' dragon depiction. Though they're not technically snakes, they're grouped pretty closely together, and have many snake-like traits.

When you look at reallife medieval bestiaries − the dragon is precisely a kind of snake. The concept evolved from ignorance about the Greek descriptions about the african rock python. The artists didnt know exactly what to depict.

The Norse version of the dragon, the dreki, is unambiguously a snake, as can be seen in the runic rock carvings. These are born as normal european adders, soon sprout horns, then as adolescents shed their skin and form forearms. There are rare examples of ancient dragons sprouting wings.

It is a snake.

The classic dragon (and the Norse one) is a blend of snake, with lion and eagle features.

But the British dragon looks more like a blend of snake, with wolf and bat features.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

My 'ideal' dragons are the four limbed variants, as they conform to irl tetropod bodyplan. Dragons like those in GoT and Skyrim.

I wouldn't want those in DnD though, as the 6 limbed design is just so iconic and established in DnD.