Upping Firepower

[Killer Cyborg]

Another thing I've thought for quite a while is that the breath weapons of Dragons are all pretty sorely lacking.
Solution?

Allow them to make bursts or sprays with their breath weapon.
Instead of using up extra ammo, it simply means that they can't breath fire again for a certain time.
Short Burst would do x2 damage, and the dragon couldn't use his breath for the next two attacks.
Long Burst does x5 damage and the breath can't be used for the next 6 attacks
"Full Clip" burst would do x7 damage and would render the breath weapon inoperable for either 1 full melee round or the dragon's next 9 attacks (whichever is LONGER).

[Kalinda]

When the books first came out, hatchling dragons breath weapons were OK. If they were a little weak, well it was only a baby.

When I saw the stats for adults in CB1 I couldn't believe that they did the same damage as hatchlings, so I made a house rule that adult dragons breath weapons did whatever damage they listed in the book times 10. (IE. An adult fire dragon does 6d6x10 with its breath weapon, rather then just 6d6.) this seems to work pretty well in my games, but I like your idea too KC. I think I'll try it out.

[Sentinel]

I have always taken the adult dragons' fire breath up by 2d6 per level. I like KCs' idea, but to be honest, I had just concentrated on the magic attacks and not thought much about the fire breath aside from my level advancement.
I'll have to give this a try and see how it works for me.

[Kalinda]

Dragons shouldn't depend on their breath damage for survival.

agreed, but they shouldn't get 'flame envy' when they see a guy with a C-29 either...

[SkyeFyre]

Dragons shouldn't depend on their breath damage for survival.

agreed, but they shouldn't get 'flame envy' when they see a guy with a C-29 either...

touche

[grandmaster z0b]

I think it really does depend on the dragon.

Part of the problem is that the breath weapon damages were set before weapon powercreep settled in to bring us our current standards in MD.

And besides... do you really want to give a Hydra the ability to use true burst fire with a deathwind breath attack?

It has little to do with power creep, by the original main book rules most weapons could do more damage with a burst than a hatchling's breath attack, the only advantage was that a dragon did not have to reload.

Anyway i think the real problem is that we all expected adult dragons breath attack to be much bigger than that. The only one that goes up is the great horned, up to 6d6 to equal a fire dragon.
I always ruled that a hatchling dragon could hit 2-6 targets at once with a breath attack, so maybe the bursting type rules could work.

[Nekira Sudacne]

Another thing I've thought for quite a while is that the breath weapons of Dragons are all pretty sorely lacking.
Solution?

Allow them to make bursts or sprays with their breath weapon.
Instead of using up extra ammo, it simply means that they can't breath fire again for a certain time.
Short Burst would do x2 damage, and the dragon couldn't use his breath for the next two attacks.
Long Burst does x5 damage and the breath can't be used for the next 6 attacks
"Full Clip" burst would do x7 damage and would render the breath weapon inoperable for either 1 full melee round or the dragon's next 9 attacks (whichever is LONGER).

this is. . .

Killer Cyborg, I agree Dragons need to be able to do more damage. but when I heard doing a "full clip" burst with a dragons flame, I felt a pain deep within my heart.

please find another way

[Killer Cyborg]

Another thing I've thought for quite a while is that the breath weapons of Dragons are all pretty sorely lacking.
Solution?

Allow them to make bursts or sprays with their breath weapon.
Instead of using up extra ammo, it simply means that they can't breath fire again for a certain time.
Short Burst would do x2 damage, and the dragon couldn't use his breath for the next two attacks.
Long Burst does x5 damage and the breath can't be used for the next 6 attacks
"Full Clip" burst would do x7 damage and would render the breath weapon inoperable for either 1 full melee round or the dragon's next 9 attacks (whichever is LONGER).

this is. . .

Killer Cyborg, I agree Dragons need to be able to do more damage. but when I heard doing a "full clip" burst with a dragons flame, I felt a pain deep within my heart.

please find another way

Sure... just allow short and long bursts if you don't like the Full-Clip (Full-lung?) burst... Or only allow that attack for Adults.

[Killer Cyborg]

Dragons shouldn't depend on their breath damage for survival.

And they don't.
They depend on their high MDC, their regeneration, and their teleportation powers for survival.
But there's no reason not to depend on their breath attack as a primary weapon for killing things.

[Rimmer]

Sorry, but after reading this tread i am getting mental pictures of MDC marshmallows

[grandmaster z0b]

Sorry, but after reading this tread i am getting mental pictures of MDC marshmallows

Well at the moment that's all you can really do with a dragons' breath attack.

[Dead Boy]

Another thing I've thought for quite a while is that the breath weapons of Dragons are all pretty sorely lacking.
Solution?

Allow them to make bursts or sprays with their breath weapon.
Instead of using up extra ammo, it simply means that they can't breath fire again for a certain time.
Short Burst would do x2 damage, and the dragon couldn't use his breath for the next two attacks.
Long Burst does x5 damage and the breath can't be used for the next 6 attacks
"Full Clip" burst would do x7 damage and would render the breath weapon inoperable for either 1 full melee round or the dragon's next 9 attacks (whichever is LONGER).

OK, at first I balked at this. The idea of allowing a breath weapon to fire a burst seemed a little stupid. But by the end of the string, I got it. Using the Burst Rules as a framework to enhance their effectiveness now seems to me as a great idea to give them that little boost they need to compete on the battelfield in Rifts circa 109 PA. Its a more dangerous world and unlike the tech in it, they haven't creeped.

Good thinking there, KC. :ok: