JeffB
Legend
Too bad I wasn't talking about the RC.
~ edited: civility please. Using a smiley doesn't give license to be rude to people - PS~
Last edited by a moderator:
-
Monstrous Menagerie II: Hordes & Heroes has a launch date! Mark your calendars for November 12th, 2024. 300+ more monsters for your D&D 2024, or Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition games, plus new horde rules and rules for heroic monsters who level up alongside you--whether they be allies, companions, or foes! Click here to follow on Kickstarter!
Tiefling, Dragonborn : have they gained traction ?
- Thread starter Aloïsius
- Start date
Too bad I wasn't talking about the RC.
~ edited: civility please. Using a smiley doesn't give license to be rude to people - PS~
Ktulu
First Post
I can't honestly say. In my current campaign, humans are the only race (though I used different Player races to reflect region). In the planescape game we were playing in, everyone played human (that was very weird, BTW).
Only two campaigns into 4e, we don't have much data to determine whether or not we like the new races. From a personal standpoint, I like the Dragonborn more than Tieflings, but that's just purely aesthetics.
Only two campaigns into 4e, we don't have much data to determine whether or not we like the new races. From a personal standpoint, I like the Dragonborn more than Tieflings, but that's just purely aesthetics.
Nivenus
First Post
I don't actively discourage or encourage any particular races, though, I do try and make it clear what the rules within my game are regarding racial cultural values and roleplaying guidelines - while stressing they can play against type (hey, want to play an axe-crazy deva? fine with me). However, if it starts to look like everyone's the same race I start to try and encourage variety. So far it's worked alright and only two people in the group are the same race.
Incidentally enough, they're both tieflings. So I think it's fair to say devil-childs have some traction. For that matter, they've had traction since 2e it's just that they've only become core recently. I can see why. There's something indisputably (okay, not indisputably) cool about the scions of demonic forces who struggle to overcome the devil within. After all, Merlin's whole backstory runs on this concept in most iterations of the character.
As for dragonborn - they seem to be accepted among my group. I don't have any players with the race but I don't have any halflings, half-orcs, half-elves, devas, shifters, or goliaths either. There is a major dragonborn NPC though and nobody throws a fit about him. Contrastly, they seem to think it's awesome when he uses his breath weapon.
Granted - most of my players are newbies (with one exception who last played D&D when it was 1e AD&D) so they're not as attached to the old races as alot of players are. But I think it's fair to say that dragonborn and tieflings were successful additions to core D&D - which seems to be what everybody else is saying anyway.
Incidentally enough, they're both tieflings. So I think it's fair to say devil-childs have some traction. For that matter, they've had traction since 2e it's just that they've only become core recently. I can see why. There's something indisputably (okay, not indisputably) cool about the scions of demonic forces who struggle to overcome the devil within. After all, Merlin's whole backstory runs on this concept in most iterations of the character.
As for dragonborn - they seem to be accepted among my group. I don't have any players with the race but I don't have any halflings, half-orcs, half-elves, devas, shifters, or goliaths either. There is a major dragonborn NPC though and nobody throws a fit about him. Contrastly, they seem to think it's awesome when he uses his breath weapon.
Granted - most of my players are newbies (with one exception who last played D&D when it was 1e AD&D) so they're not as attached to the old races as alot of players are. But I think it's fair to say that dragonborn and tieflings were successful additions to core D&D - which seems to be what everybody else is saying anyway.
alleynbard
First Post
Nice write-up. I have always been fascinated by Urbis. Good work there.
Hey guys I think Rounser dislikes 4e.
Oh hey, WE GET IT NOW.
Rounser, why don't you tell us about the previous editions and what you liked about the half-dragons or tieflings in those?
Personally I continue to use 2e's tieflings (Maybe even break out those random die charts - I love random die charts! Other players, maybe not as much. I love them more then enough to cover for them though!) As for the dragonborn, I don't dislike their fluff at all, but aesthetically I cannot freaking stand them. As I stated earlier, they become far more draconic looking. And no breasts.
I think dragonborn - or draconian - or half dragon - or vague dragon man - is a good race to have. I do agree, however, that if you have players who "want to be a dragon," then you should let them be a dragon. It's no more unfitting in most campaigns then dragon-people would be, and it's certainly fitting in with 4e's design philosophies, take that as you will.
Fallen Seraph
First Post
Leave the chart take away the randomness. While I get the reason, I dunno I didn't like how if I had a specific character concept how it could get messed up by the random rolls. Now if got a less concrete concept then yeah tis better.
I hope one day 4e could bring this back. Perhaps those Player's Handbook Races books could have it. Be a good place for it.
RefinedBean
First Post
I must spread some experience around, yadda yadda.
Oh, side note on dragonborn:
Several of my friends who do like 4e have almost all mentioned that they think dragonborn is just "too good" compared to the others. They have mountains of awesome racial feats while other classes get bland +number ones, and they're amazing at a very large array of classes, far more then other classes. Their main complaint is that they think WotC wanted dragonborn to be a big draw, so they focused a lot on them mechanically - to the detriment of other races.
Several of my friends who do like 4e have almost all mentioned that they think dragonborn is just "too good" compared to the others. They have mountains of awesome racial feats while other classes get bland +number ones, and they're amazing at a very large array of classes, far more then other classes. Their main complaint is that they think WotC wanted dragonborn to be a big draw, so they focused a lot on them mechanically - to the detriment of other races.
fanboy2000
Adventurer
Playing an actual dragon in 4e wouldn't be particularly difficult. Especially with the assumptions that the powers a race has in the MM isn't necessarily what all members of the race have. Choose two ability scores to give pluses to, think of a power to give the race, and finnish it off with a couple of misc. features.
outsider
First Post
Tieflings and Dragonborn seem to have plenty of traction. In the case of Tieflings at least, the reason isn't mechanics as they've generally been considered subpar.
While I don't really get Dragonborn, it's always been obvious to me that people will want to play them. Out of the 5 people in my first serious D&D group, 3 of them have latched onto the concept. One asked if he could play a dragon man when the group first formed, as he'd never played D&D before(this was in the early 2nd edition days). The other two started playing half dragons/dragon disciples in 3rd ed, and at least one of them is playing a Dragonborn now. I really don't get the appeal, but it's obviously there.
Tieflings I haven't seen quite as much of, though I personally like them alot. I suspect that their mechanics are holding them back, and they'd get alot more use if they were were as obviously powerful as the other races. The Drow steal their thunder to a degree, as they do the angsty role almost as well, with much stronger mechanics. I certainly see them more than halflings though.
While I don't really get Dragonborn, it's always been obvious to me that people will want to play them. Out of the 5 people in my first serious D&D group, 3 of them have latched onto the concept. One asked if he could play a dragon man when the group first formed, as he'd never played D&D before(this was in the early 2nd edition days). The other two started playing half dragons/dragon disciples in 3rd ed, and at least one of them is playing a Dragonborn now. I really don't get the appeal, but it's obviously there.
Tieflings I haven't seen quite as much of, though I personally like them alot. I suspect that their mechanics are holding them back, and they'd get alot more use if they were were as obviously powerful as the other races. The Drow steal their thunder to a degree, as they do the angsty role almost as well, with much stronger mechanics. I certainly see them more than halflings though.
Similar Threads
