1
\$\begingroup\$

Looking at the monster manual (p. 70) I am confused as to how the dragon's attack is calculated.

Example: young black dragon.

It has a BAB of +10 and a STR score of 15 meaning a +2 to its attack. It is medium so there is no size adjustment.

Thus one would think that the Primary natural weapon attack of the dragon (BAB+STR mod) would be +12 yet it is listed as +9... what am I missing here?

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Are you sure that you're not reading the wrong line? The Very Young dragon has an Attack of +9 and the Young dragon has a Fort Save of +9. Each of these entries bracket the +12 of the Young dragon's Attack entry. \$\endgroup\$ – Chemus Jul 11 '17 at 15:56
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ It appears my edition of the monster manual has an error.. I'll go with the +12 :) \$\endgroup\$ – Critical Crafting Jul 11 '17 at 16:18
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Chemus, the DandDwiki has this error on their site, so I'm going to assume for now that this questioner is reading properly from an unusual source. Possibly a 3.0 book? \$\endgroup\$ – godskook Jul 11 '17 at 16:19
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @godskook Not in my copy of the 3.0 MM (2000); there it's on page 68, has a bonus of +12 (which is not shown as being +10, but only the calculated bonue of +12). D&D Wiki looks to be the culprit, as neither d20 SRD or DND SRD have the error. \$\endgroup\$ – Chemus Jul 11 '17 at 17:13
3
\$\begingroup\$

The chart Black Dragons by Age in my Monster Manual (2003) and premium edition Monster Manual (2012) (both on page 70) show the young black dragon's Base Attack Bonus as +10 and its Attack as +12. It's possible to misread the chart: the very young black dragon (directly above the young black dragon) does have an Attack of +9, and the young black dragon itself has a Fort Save of +9 (which is immediately beside its Attack entry).

\$\endgroup\$
2
\$\begingroup\$

This appears to be an error with whatever source you're using. My copy of the Monster Manual and this site both have the value at +12(This site is my personal trusted go-to site for getting SRD information, as it incorporates errata).

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ @KRyan Monster Manual checked, and Errata checked. OP's problem seems to not exist in any of my sources. \$\endgroup\$ – godskook Jul 11 '17 at 16:08
0
\$\begingroup\$

It appears to be a typo but there isn't anything like that mentioned in an errata. Also there were two erratas for the monster manual the only entry related to the black dragon is as follows below:

p. 63 Black dragon advancement should read:

Advancement: Wyrmling 5-6 HD (Small); very young 8-9 HD (Small); young 11-12 HD (Medium-size); juvenile 14-15 HD (Medium-size); young adult 17-18 HD (Large); adult 20-21 HD (Large); mature adult 23-24 HD (Huge); old 26-27 HD (Huge); very old 29-30 HD (Huge); ancient 32-33 HD (Huge); wyrm 35-36 HD (Gargantuan); great wyrm 38+ HD (Gargantuan)

Therefore there aren't any official changes about this subject, although as my personal suggestion you should use the entry on www.d20srd.org, it is as close to official as you can get and it incorporates all erratas and updates to the core system.

\$\endgroup\$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.