It's something that I thought about and I realize as to why at least in the meta sense, as in what Tolkien was basing it off of...but as an actual in universe question...
Why the hell would Morgoth make his dragons with such a blatant design flaw?
That being, the soft underbelly.
I mean...really...did he purposely made it that way so they could get killed off easily?
Now granted, granted, killing a dragon even in Tolkien's universe is no small feat. I mean, I do agree with the Cinemasin's guy when he mentions how everyone mocking Bard for his ancestor Girion firing harpoon after harpoon to kill Smaug in The Desolation of Smaug that they did it in poor taste due to well...it's not easy to kill a dragon, even with a siege weapon designed for it.
Like it's not easy to be a master archer either.
But still, it just seems silly.
I mean, I think it's a poor design flaw that Morgoth would slap a bunch of wings to the "newer model" that the flying fire drakes became...and thought: "Meh, good enough."
Like I said, I get it why Tolkien added such things because he bases his literary elements from old legends and folklore. Dragons from Norse myths and such had a vulnerable spot that the hero could exploit.
But it just seems like a design flaw. Hell, I make things even more difficult and therefore something that a hero would be able to do by removing that vulnerable spot in the chest of the dragon and getting creative with making the dragon vulnerable.
Like with how Sam threatened Jonathan with a gun, while Jonathan was this...
How did he threaten a dragon the size of an airliner? And whose scales could deflect a gun's bullets?
Well, you aim the gun at one of his eyes.
Neltharion has a soft spot as well that can kinda be exploited, that being the inside of his mouth. Hell, Varian actually threatened to do just that when he was literally inside of Neltharion's mouth! Downside, it wouldn't kill him. But it can be pierced because he's not armored there. The other downside, Nel's blood splashing on you, crushing you and killing.
Kiryuu exploited King Ghidorah's minor weakness...
For Smaug in question, the one I try to develop, his vulnerable spot comes from much similar to what the movies did, a scale getting knocked loose. Which makes better sense. As much as people are critical of the movies, that one bit is a good idea.
Hell, my Smaug's reasoning to build an armored waistcoat of fine diamonds, heating his body in such a way that the diamonds themselves become permanently embedded within his chest, is for extra protection, and also...making that spot harder to see because of the glare of the diamonds when hit by sunlight or moonlight.
Though he tries to find a diamond that will cover that spot properly, which he did...and purposefully removes for a particular reason. It's not as well embedded as the others...until later.
I even like the idea in Battle of Five Armies that normal arrows, even iron ones that Bard shoots, though can strike the spot created by the missing scale, his hide, the skin under the scale, is so tough that the arrow can't pierce it.
Hell, a lot of my dragons in my stories, including Neltharion, have skin under their scales.
Neltharion can tear a scale off of his body and underneath is his epidermis, which is colored a medium dark-reddish brown with a soft glow lit by the veins because of his magmablood.
Jonathan's skin under his scales is actually a light orange, that has a slight glow to it due to his fiery blood.
And Smaug's skin under his scales is slight transparent, but colored an ashen black due to his blood being black. Like how people with light skin tend to be rosy because their blood is red. Smaug's skin tone is ashen, kinda blue-gray black mix.
Thinking about the contents of dragon blood, what makes a dragon's blood its color. The "hemoglobin" though they may not have hemoglobin...or at least the same as we do.
Why the hell would Morgoth make his dragons with such a blatant design flaw?
That being, the soft underbelly.
I mean...really...did he purposely made it that way so they could get killed off easily?
Now granted, granted, killing a dragon even in Tolkien's universe is no small feat. I mean, I do agree with the Cinemasin's guy when he mentions how everyone mocking Bard for his ancestor Girion firing harpoon after harpoon to kill Smaug in The Desolation of Smaug that they did it in poor taste due to well...it's not easy to kill a dragon, even with a siege weapon designed for it.
Like it's not easy to be a master archer either.
But still, it just seems silly.
I mean, I think it's a poor design flaw that Morgoth would slap a bunch of wings to the "newer model" that the flying fire drakes became...and thought: "Meh, good enough."
Like I said, I get it why Tolkien added such things because he bases his literary elements from old legends and folklore. Dragons from Norse myths and such had a vulnerable spot that the hero could exploit.
But it just seems like a design flaw. Hell, I make things even more difficult and therefore something that a hero would be able to do by removing that vulnerable spot in the chest of the dragon and getting creative with making the dragon vulnerable.
Like with how Sam threatened Jonathan with a gun, while Jonathan was this...
How did he threaten a dragon the size of an airliner? And whose scales could deflect a gun's bullets?
Well, you aim the gun at one of his eyes.
Kiryuu exploited King Ghidorah's minor weakness...
By shoving the Oxygen Destroyer inside of him before King Ghidorah's rapid healing abilities could close the wound.
For Smaug in question, the one I try to develop, his vulnerable spot comes from much similar to what the movies did, a scale getting knocked loose. Which makes better sense. As much as people are critical of the movies, that one bit is a good idea.
Hell, my Smaug's reasoning to build an armored waistcoat of fine diamonds, heating his body in such a way that the diamonds themselves become permanently embedded within his chest, is for extra protection, and also...making that spot harder to see because of the glare of the diamonds when hit by sunlight or moonlight.
Though he tries to find a diamond that will cover that spot properly, which he did...and purposefully removes for a particular reason. It's not as well embedded as the others...until later.
I even like the idea in Battle of Five Armies that normal arrows, even iron ones that Bard shoots, though can strike the spot created by the missing scale, his hide, the skin under the scale, is so tough that the arrow can't pierce it.
Hell, a lot of my dragons in my stories, including Neltharion, have skin under their scales.
Neltharion can tear a scale off of his body and underneath is his epidermis, which is colored a medium dark-reddish brown with a soft glow lit by the veins because of his magmablood.
Jonathan's skin under his scales is actually a light orange, that has a slight glow to it due to his fiery blood.
And Smaug's skin under his scales is slight transparent, but colored an ashen black due to his blood being black. Like how people with light skin tend to be rosy because their blood is red. Smaug's skin tone is ashen, kinda blue-gray black mix.
Thinking about the contents of dragon blood, what makes a dragon's blood its color. The "hemoglobin" though they may not have hemoglobin...or at least the same as we do.
