• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E I don't like Dragonborn: Please stay away from D&D Next.

Do you like Dragonborn?

  • Yes

    Votes: 106 60.9%
  • No

    Votes: 68 39.1%

Status
Not open for further replies.

Doug McCrae

Legend
When you make things a part of the core then it changes the way players look at it. It almost becomes harder to tell a player that he can't be a Dragonborn when it's a core race.
Are your players (or some of them) argumentative? Do they frequently disagree with your rulings? What it help you to run D&D if the only options in the rules were the ones you personally wanted to use for your campaigns?
 

log in or register to remove this ad




S

Sunseeker

Guest
Uh, no. It's this sort of inference that leads to a lot of the heat during the edition wars. Criticism of an element of an edition, even a sharp criticism, isn't really a criticism of the people who like that.
This isn't criticism. Criticism is saying that you don't like a particular element. The OP is saying that he's going to take his toys and go home if he doesn't get his way. That's called a TANTRUM.

Isn't that what everyone critical of anything in these games and advocating for what shouldn't be in the next edition is saying?

Advocate A: No restrictions in Next!
Advocate B: But I find restrictions fun and challenging. Don't tell me how to have fun in D&D!

Advocate Y: No quadratic wizards!
Advocate Z: But I like really powerful wizards and magic. Don't tell me how to have fun in D&D!

The lesson here is to not assume that anything directed at or for the game is intended to be directed at anybody personally.
Except that almost every topic and every post by the OP derides and looks negativly at everything 4th edition. Understandably, 4th editioners are going to be upset. Again, this is not criticism. This is two-faced edition warring, this topic should be locked.

Completely misrepresenting several complex arguments on this forum does not aid your case.
 

ferratus

Adventurer
I'll say the same thing I've said before whenever an old-school player wants to remove dragonborn as a player option.

I've seen 8 dragonborn for every gnome I've seen played, and I was the one who played the gnome (I love gnomes). This despite the fact that gnomes have been around two editions longer.

Sorry, but Dragonborn or half-dragons (like Lanefan I consider them the same race) are here to stay. Despite how divisive they are, they are simply too popular.

I wouldn't bet any money on the shardmind showing up again though.
 

Tony Vargas

Legend
I like Dragonborn mainly as an alternative to the 3.x "Half-Dragon." If someone wants to play some scaly draconic thing, I can point them at a reasonably workable PC race, rather than some level-adjusted monstrosity.
 

ForeverSlayer

Banned
Banned
You can post on forums. Everyone has that right.

You DONT have the right to tell me my perceptions.

It's not about perceptions. You are trying to compare Dragonborn to Draconians and I'm afraid you aren't comparing like for like.

Draconians are a race that was created by dark rituals being done on the eggs of the good dragons. Also Draconians are evil. Even their appearance isn't the same.

Dragonborn are a goodly race of dragon like beings that had a civilization and are the progeny of Bahamut.
 


NN

First Post
The core rules should be yer basic quasi-medieval psuedo tolkeinesque cliche with the core races as human, elf, dwarf, and hobbit.

Ok, you can have half elves, gnomes, and half-orcs as well.


Anything else goes in a supplement.


Im not totally against angelbonkers and demonfiddlers and dragonshaggers etc.
no - actually half dragons are just a terrible, terrible idea - but they belong in their own weird setting. Not wandering into the prancing pony and ordering pints of ale.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top