Eladrins, Tieflings, Dragonborn Too Far Outside Standard Fantasy?

[Hussar]

I guess I don't see the elves of Tolkien as being Eladrin - they're elves. And I guess I don't see general asian fiction and poor video games to be a staple of the fantasy genre. Dragonlance had the draconians as a race of minions specific to that world - and that's fine for a world-specific supplement but to put them into the PHB as a core race implies they're supposed to be in the assumed default fantasy world. And I just don't buy that.

As to what I consider classic fantasy, I would probably point to Tolkien, Jack Vance, Robert E. Howard, Fritz Leiber, etc.

Maybe it's just a generational thing.

So, we should force new gamers to look to books that were out of print several decades before they were born for inspiration for their game?

Since you include Leiber in there, how about Moorcock? Eladrin are pretty close to Melniboneans IMO. Tieflings, in one flavour or another, have been a staple of fantasy for a very long time, whether in comic book characters or novels.

Now, I do agree that Dragonborn seem to be purely a D&D creation. It didn't work for gnomes, so we'll see how it works out for these guys.

I think the question really should be are races such as Eladrins, Tieflings, and Dragonboobs too far beyond the scope of core DnD. I think they are, however, I'm sure there are plenty who think otherwise. I can hardly wait to see the write up for Gibbering Mouther PCs in the PHB3 I wonder how many boobs they will have...

I remember the complaints leading up to 3e that read, almost word for word, like this one. The fact that you could play half dragons and other beasties sent all sorts of ripples through the internet. Beyond the scope of core D&D? Core 3e allows me to play a fiendish half dragon giant should I want to.

 

[Ginnel]

Conversely, the DM may consider examining his own unwillingness to allow such a race into the game.

Yupyup

though I'd assume a DM would have done that when designing his gameworld note by design I can mean think about what you want and don't.

I feel the reason you don't want tieflings or dragonborn because you want players to be able to instantly go its a bad guy lets kill it is a reasonably justifiable reason, though would that mean not having human/dwarf/elf bad guys as well?

The reason of just because I don't like it and they weren't in previous editions, in my opinion needs the DM to examine that a bit more.

 

[SilverAgent]

For the record, assuming you aren't just going 'old fantasy' but 'good, modern fantasy':

Eladrin: Brust's Dragaerans. Erikson's Tiste. Neither of them are 'woodsy' but they're both highly magical elves with highly formal civilizations. There's lots of others I can think of of less quality, but those are the ones that I personally adore.

Tieflings: Moorcock. How can someone not see a Moorcock reference? Other than Moorcock, off the top of my head I again think of Erikson and various horribly-mutated people. These just have a common 'magical mutation' due to pacts with devils.

Dragonborn: Erikson again with the Assail. I like him a lot though, so of course he's first on my mind. Also, like, Conan? There's lizardmen all over with Conan.

My 2c.

 

[Ingolf]

Now, I do agree that Dragonborn seem to be purely a D&D creation. It didn't work for gnomes, so we'll see how it works out for these guys.

I'd wager that gnomes were inspired by the "Hugi" character from Poul Anderson's "Three Hearts and Three Lions." He described as a "hill dwarf" in the book but his behavior is much more like a 1st/2nd edition gnome.

Dragonborn - yes. Pure D&D though not without some literary analogs. I am also interested to see how they make out. I am sort of ambivalent about them, though not cool enough on them for a ban. And I have at least one player that I expect will want to play one, he has a penchant for selecting the least-human race available.

 

[Dausuul]

Honestly, my preference would be for no nonhuman races at all, but I'm weird that way.

I think my real problem with dragonborn and tieflings is that they clash horribly with elves and dwarves. Dragonborn and tieflings are "modern fantasy" races, the sort of things that get invented out of whole cloth by fantasy writers, with no connection to traditional mythology. Elves and dwarves are "traditional fantasy" races, based on mythological archetypes that go back centuries.

I can see the PHB going either way, but having the "default world" built on the assumption that you have both types of creatures jammed together rubs me the wrong way. (Previous editions also rubbed me the wrong way when you had gelatinous cubes and githyanki in the Monster Manual alongside centaurs and griffins, but it was easier to ignore when it wasn't front and center--it's a lot less of a pain to house-rule gelatinous cubes out of your game than it is to house-rule dragonborn out.)

Also, I wish they'd come up with better names for the new races.

 

[xjermx]

Talislanta, anyone?

 

[Ulthwithian]

I'm actually surprised that some people have issues with half-elves. Consider the following:

Eladrin - Galadriel. As a Noldor and the niece (or was it grand-niece?) of Feanor, she definitely would be an eladrin in D&D terms, not an Elf.

Elf - Legolas... sort of. Legolas, while a Prince among the Elves of Mirkwood, is not Avari or Wood Elven. He is actually Sindarin, just as his father Thranduil is. However, mechanically, he is much closer to Elf than Eladrin in 4E.

Half-Elf - Elrond and any of his children. Heck, one of the subplots of LotR is the reenactment of sorts of the romance of Beren and Luthien in Aragorn and Arwen.

As far as non-Tolkien races go, Shannara definitely has Half-Elves in the foreground. Speaking of very recent fantasy, the Elves in Eragon (more in Eldest) rather blend elements of Elves and Eladrin in 4E.

 

[drothgery]

So are we going to get both Shifters and Warforged in the Eberron book? That's starting to look like a must-buy for me, even though I'm not planning to run Eberron.

I suspect that full race write-ups for some of the Eberron races will be in PH2, not the Eberron Player's Guide. Kalashtar are the only ones I'm figuring are certain for the Eberron book, as they're just a bit too tied to Eberron to drop in a general work.

I mean, by the time the Eberron Player's Guide hits print, we obviously need full PC treatments for all the 3.5 PH races and all the ECS races. Humans, elves, dwarves, halflings, and half-elves are in PH1. So that leaves changelings/dopplegangers*, Kalashtar, gnomes*, half-orcs**, shifters*, and warforged*.

* In MM1 as a playable race.
** It's probably workable to use orcs as a temporary stopgap.

 

[BWS]

Dragonborn and tieflings are "modern fantasy" races ....

Characters with significant demonic heritage are considerably older than modern fantasy. See, for example, Arthurian legend. And it's been pointed out repeatedly in the thread that D&D itself offers many precedents for reptilian races.

 

[Zander]

I'd wager that gnomes were inspired by the "Hugi" character from Poul Anderson's "Three Hearts and Three Lions."

I thought so too (and still do) so I asked Gary about that once. He said it was possible but so long ago that he couldn't recall with certainty.