How much do we know about the big beasties? From what I've gathered so far, they are the prime "battle creation" of each one of the big Angels, created sometime either during or Prior to the Age of Dragons (duh) to go forth and smash their foes.

But it's kind of vague...... SO here is a long, semi coherent rant of questions, coupled with some knowledge and speculation that I have about them.

How different are the dragons from each other? Are they some sort of manifestation of the Angel's personality, or is it a bit more practical, (I want a big nasty flying beast to kill things!)


Do they all fly? I know that some Angels have wings while others don't

Did one Angel come up with the original idea and the other 19 (I'm assuming that the Angel of Nature after Sucellus got switched to Life either never created or never revealed any dragon He might have made) made copies? If so, which one? (I'm guessing Mulcarn :p )


Who chose their color schemes, and is that even really significant? How big are they?

Have any of them died of "natural" causes, or been slain by powerful adventurers?

How come each Angel only made one? (Or did they make more?) Would they be able to create a "replacement" if something happened to the Dragon?

And who comes up with the thinking process of the lizards? Are they a receptacle of the Angel's thoughts, or do they have a mind of their own? Can a Dragon survive their God's death (We know that Acheron is still alive, albiet seemingly weakned, because of Bhall's fall, but could Drifa survive what happened to Mulcarn, assuming you didn't take a gang of assassin's to kill him/her. What, if any genders are dragons anyway?) How smart are they? It mentions in Cardith's bio that he was winning at chess, as usual. How good is he? (Which is actually where all this originally sprouted from. I've got roughly an 1800 USCF rating, and I want to know if I can play a game with the big gold dragon. Yes, I'm weird. :king:)

I might come up with a few more if I think of them, but that's all I can come up with for the nonce.

I have a few answers:

In a AoI entry it mentions the death of a Blue Dragon. I'd guess that this is Danalin's who probably sent it to defend his mer people when they were all dying. I also think Drifa is dead cause he's not rampaging around Erebus, unless upon Mulcarn's death he was sent somewhere else.

Dragons must be incredibly intelligent, though there is no direct link. I think they have differing levels depending on their gods. Sirona and Oghma would prefer very smart dragons while Camulos would probably just want big claws.

Arwan probably not have created dragons, as he is uninvolved in Erebus. During the Age of Dragons he was God of Life and Death, so both probably lack a dragon.

Are you referring to the line the Slaying of the Blue Dragon by Lucar's horde and the ensuing destruction of the Thraxian civilization in the AOI scenario civilopedia?


I vaguely recally a discussion where Kael said that the Aifons were the lost people of Danalin, not the Thraxians...

It was in this thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=264660). I thiink it was in Drifa's pedia but I'm not totally sure.

If I had to guess which was first, I'd probably say Eurabatres, since he is stated as being the strongest being ever created (except by The One). Since Amathaon is the Goddess/Angel of Creation (as in thinks coming to be or being born for the first time), it would make sense for him to be first.

Originally I assumed that all true Angels/demons were creations of The One, but Kael did say that Cernunnos is the weakest God because he was not created by the One, but by Sucellus. If all other angels are creations of the main angels, then that means that Eurabatres is greater than Cernunnos, Basium, Sabathiel, Brigit, etc.

An Angel probably has to use up a lot of his/her power to create such a creature, and so would be weakened by the process and would probably lose the ability to make another one. Assuming they were made after The One took away the power of creation, then this is almost certainly the case. Since they are weapons of war, and wars did not exist originally, they probably are later creations. They are described as fighting alongside their gods (instead of just for them, or in there name), which seems to imply their power was almost at the level of their makers. I believe that each god only made 1 dragon, but there were probably a myriad of lesser beasts in their service.


I don't know why, but I always assumed that the Dragons are of the opposite gender as his/her maker.


I believe has been stated that the reference to the Blue Dragon was supposed to refer to Drifa the White Dragon. Nikis-Knight also said that that particular reference was just made up for flavor, so the actual history of them hasn't been decided yet.


I'd probably say that a Dragon's intelligence is a lot like an archangel's, as described in Sabathiel's entry: "His mind appeared to work on an entirely different plane. While humans had to stumble through their choices, hoping the one they made was the best possible, the angel simply knew."


I'd probably say that dragons has personalities similar to their creators, but have minds of their own. Acheron is described as volatile and rebellious, as having bitten the hand of his maker.

During the Age of Dragons there were many dragons. Some gods had many of them and some didnt have any. From the gods perspective they are war machines, and exactly as Rex said they were as varied as their creators.

Most of the dragons died during that age. The ones that didnt withdrew to their creators vaults or into the shadowy connection between that vault and creation. Some dragons were roused from slumber during the age of magic and went rampaging or were killed. Even more likely these dragons were moved by the archmages to become their sleeping guardians. All your traditional dragonesque mythology.

The reason we only have a handful of named dragons in FfH isnt because that was all their were, but because from a game flavor perspective I think it ruins their awe factor if they are running around everywhere. But thats not to say they are common either. By the time of the Age of Rebirth there are only a few still alive.

Is the "Dragon Bones" tile supposed to be one Dragon skeleton, or some sort of graveyard of them? And how does it make money? Are you selling the bones or something? (Even weirder, in the old version anyway, was that it gave ivory to train Elephants.........)

And how does it make money? Are you selling the bones or something? (Even weirder, in the old version anyway, was that it gave ivory to train Elephants.........)

Tourist attraction maybe?

Its not mony its commerce: that includes money, research, culture.
Considering how powerfull a dragon was its very likly that some power remains in its bones. This power could be used for various magic items -> research and money (reagents are expensive). And a dead dragon in your backyard is likly to attract attention or create all kinds of rituals-> culture.

Aye, anything which gives Commerce is a fluid concept that is up to the owner to decide how it is used, gold/science/culture. Kinda nice that way, because it makes perfect sense with Cottage --> Towns & Traderoutes (as well as most of the other sources)

(Which is actually where all this originally sprouted from. I've got roughly an 1800 USCF rating, and I want to know if I can play a game with the big gold dragon.

I imagine that playing against Cardith Lorda is like playing against Magnus Carlsen. Only worse. More like a kid with a brain like Deep Thought and Gary Kasparov rolled into one. But the feeling would be the same. You're sitting across from this young fellah, thinking, "How the h*** did he do that?"

I always imagined the Gold dragon to be very calculating and incredibly intelligent.

Intelligent does not necessarily equal chess skill. Fischer was neither knowledgeable or even good at mastering any skill other than chess. I don't believe too many of the 50's and 60's world champions (Botvinnik, Smyslov, Petrosian, Spassky) could do too much else other than play the game. Meanwhile, people like Einstein and Napoleon were actually rather weak players.

And if you look at the games from the late medieval period, even the "masters" of the time, like Ruy Lopez, were pretty pathetic by modern standards. If you don't have someone teaching Eurabatres opening theory (and seriously, I doubt an Angel's war machine is going to be devoting much time to chess theory) he's probably not going to get it on his own. Still, that "only" makes him say, a McDonald or a Philidor

However, I was drawing from the Cardith Lorda civelopedia entry that wehn he's playing against the dignitary "As usual, he was winning." I imagine a Carlsen strength player in a medieval setting would win every single game, without too much trouble, hence me thinking I might have a chance :p


(And in conclusion, I really am pathetically nerdy :king:)

The important part being about him being calculating, like a computer. As I understand it, a key part of chess is pattern recognition and an ability to calculate several possible outcomes well in advance. I would imagine Eurabatres excels at that.

I imagine that playing chess with a Dragon is much like playing dejarik (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Holographic_game_table) with a Wookie: Namely, you're never going to get the chance to do so in real life.

Well maybe with Eurabatres being the creation of a god he is more capable of remembering things than average people, so he can remember all his previous games so he knows the best outcomes and moves to do by looking at what happened in previous games, hence the better his opponent and the more games he plays, the better he becomes..... Maybe?

My money would still go on the Luchuirp Deep Blue golem...

Nakamura could take them both on at once, in bullet games, while holding a conversation and checking his stocks online.

If there were two dragons I could play chess with at the same time I'd probably beat one and lose to one or be tied with both (won't tell you how, as you probably guessed it already :p)

What if they both insist that you play the same color?

or if you play with a quick time control?

What if they both insist that you play the same color?
They would be Eurabatres and Abashi most likely, and I think Eurabatres would let me play what I want (he would win anyway) and Abashi would prefer black.
or if you play with a quick time control?
What does that affect?

I'm assuming you're going to try the old trick of.......

Playing one game as white and a second as black. Then you play your two opponents moves against each other, to the real effect that you're coordinating a game between the two of them, and not thinking of your own moves. But you still have to see one's move, go over to the other board, play it, and then wait for a response. Consequentially, you're going to be moving slower than your two opponents. If you're playing with say, a two minute time control, your flag is going to fall before both of your opponents, and then you lose both games.

And there is always the possibility you just annoy them and they argue over how to split you as a mid-game snack.

They would be Eurabatres and Abashi most likely, and I think Eurabatres would let me play what I want (he would win anyway) and Abashi would prefer black.

Yes, but Abashi is the dragon of Ceridwen, not to mention the hero of the Sheiam. I imagine she's pretty smart, as far as cunning plans go. She's probably already thought of this, and she wouldn't insist on black because she'd know that's exactly what you'd expect.

And then there's the problem of what you do after you pull this off. Eurabatres is the strongest of the dragons, and I imagine he'd win. Thus, Abashi is humiliated by her loss to a mere mortal, researches your power (remember, she's the ultimate weapon of Ceridwen, the Dimensional Angel), discovers your duplicity, and either eats you immediately or has her Sheiam buddies banish you to Hell.

If Eurabatres loses, it's not so bad. He seems like a nice guy, and he'd be too worried about the fact that Abashi is running around out there to concern himself with you. If you spread news of your victory in an attempt to humiliate the Gold Dragon, then you'd be torn to shreds by the Cultists, of course.

I imagine that playing against Cardith Lorda is like playing against Magnus Carlsen. Only worse. More like a kid with a brain like Deep Thought and Gary Kasparov rolled into one. But the feeling would be the same. You're sitting across from this young fellah, thinking, "How the h*** did he do that?"

I always imagined the Gold dragon to be very calculating and incredibly intelligent.

I'm viewing that it is like playing Greco -- brilliant player, but without all of the chess books, opening knowledge, endgame knowledge, etc. So, he wouldn't be able to beat someone like Kasparov who played hours/day for years and years, but sorry Ur_Vile_Wedge, I don't think 1800 would take him (but you can take me)!

Best wishes,

Breunor

Since Eurabatres has been around since the Age of Dragons, isn't it possible that he's gone through all the opening/endgame theory through sheer brute force?

Okay, he spent the Ages of Magic and Ice floating around disembodied, but still, you can't overlook the immortality factor.

But it says in Cardith's entry (or was it Eurabatre's) that the dragon was plotting a way to get back into Creation and continue the war. Somehow I doubt that chess skill would help that...... And can a dragon focus long enough on something like that? I love chess, but if I were to suddenly become immortal and have a vastly upgraded processing and memory functions, I would go nuts imediately studying chess for the next thousand or so years.

But it says in Cardith's entry (or was it Eurabatre's) that the dragon was plotting a way to get back into Creation and continue the war. Somehow I doubt that chess skill would help that......

True, but Cardith's entry also shows that Eurabatres plays chess semi-regularly--he knows the rules, and he's really good. He might have played the game as a pastime in the Age of Dragons when he wasn't fighting, or he may have simply picked it up during the Age of Rebirth. Even the latter gives him well over a human lifetime to learn the game, and we can assume he's got a pretty good memory, being the most powerful non-angelic creature in creation. That can all add up eventually.

Okay, we can only settle this with the official Word Of God. Kael, if you're reading this, what's Eurabatres's USCF rating?

And while I'm asking, what's Tebryn Arbandi's favorite ice cream flavor?

True, but Cardith's entry also shows that Eurabatres plays chess semi-regularly--he knows the rules, and he's really good. He might have played the game as a pastime in the Age of Dragons when he wasn't fighting, or he may have simply picked it up during the Age of Rebirth. Even the latter gives him well over a human lifetime to learn the game, and we can assume he's got a pretty good memory, being the most powerful non-angelic creature in creation. That can all add up eventually.

Okay, we can only settle this with the official Word Of God. Kael, if you're reading this, what's Eurabatres's USCF rating?

And while I'm asking, what's Tebryn Arbandi's favorite ice cream flavor?

I'm just assuming that in this world, they don't have publishers putting out books, don't have modern printing presses, don't have people running around studying these things, don't have world tournaments and people recording the games, and don't have that many people publishing games on openings and endgames and even middle game technique.

So, even great players who devoted tremendous time to playing chess in Medieval or Renaissance periods just couldn't keep up with any modern players in terms of the developments of chess.

That's why I'm using Greco as a model. My suspicion is that as a pure talent, he's as good as Fischer or Kasparov, but he clearly just didn't have all of the tools available. Even if Greco lived for 200 years though, he just wouldn't have that kind of knowledge.

Best wishes,

Breunor

Eutrabartes could simply appreciate all this, and insist on Fischerandom.

Eutrabartes could simply appreciate all this, and insist on Fischerandom.

And if Eurabates wants to make up his own set of rules, who will argue with him? :-)

Best wishes,

Breunor