D&D 5E Race Class combo, together, defines a character ‘type’

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Sunseeker]

The Dragonborn race, in it's first incarnation, was archetypically noble and honor-bound, the scions of an ancient, militaristic, deeply religious empire that revered Bahamut, and had near-ideal stats for a Paladin to 'support' that in the system mastery sense.
The Paladin lost it's humans-only-club aspect in 3.0 at the latest.

I disagree. The Paladin "club" wasn't opened up to Dragonborn. Dragonborn were written to pass the "human test" to get into the club. The Paladin still carries very strong humanocentric tones, and always has, tones that don't just resonate in game, but tones that resonate with our real world history. The in-game Paladin is basically what the classical Judeo-Christian Knights always wished they could be and what we dreamed they were. (The Cleric too, but we're talking about Paladins right now.)

By writing Dragonbown as a ancient, deeply religious empire, the Dragonborn were essentially designed to fit into the peg-hole already made for human paladins. There are a wide variety of variant classes (in older editions) for elf paladins, dwarf paladins where they explicitly laid out that these races version of a paladin is somewhat different from the traditional human paladin. Dragonborn do not have that.

Dragonborn were designed to the Paladins. Paladins were designed to be Human. So Dragonborn are designed to be Human Paladins.

 

[Mephista]

Yeah ... no. You can't both say that "there's more going on here than just that," and, "{you} think {I'm} reading too much into this."

Sure I can, because I'm talking about two different things. Hells. I even put it in a different post! Trying to suggest that these two points are equatable when they're addressing vastly different things and taken wildly out of context is just being misleading. People can be missing information on one thing, and overthinking other things. That's why we're humans.

But whatever, I'm done. If you're going to slaughter what I said to this extent, there's no need to talk. Good bye.

 

[Mephista]

Dragonborn were designed to the Paladins. Paladins were designed to be Human. So Dragonborn are designed to be Human Paladins.

Closer to the truth than you realize. The original dragonborn weren't a race, but a template put over a worshiper of Bahamut to transform them from their old race into a new one. Primarily, yes, drawn from human stock.

That said, just as the paladin recently shed its LG requirements, its also shedding its human-centricity. I think its especially notable now that, in 5e, we have a Nature-centric paladin that has nothing to do with humans. The Vengence paladin, the paladin of Tyranny... these are all departing from the traditional human-based paladin. Even the nominal anti-undead, sun god worshiping Devoted Paladin is moving away from it. We have stories and characters about paladins devoted to the pursuit of knowledge.

Times change. Things change.

 

[Sunseeker]

Closer to the truth than you realize. The original dragonborn weren't a race, but a template put over a worshiper of Bahamut to transform them from their old race into a new one. Primarily, yes, drawn from human stock.

That said, just as the paladin recently shed its LG requirements, its also shedding its human-centricity. I think its especially notable now that, in 5e, we have a Nature-centric paladin that has nothing to do with humans. The Vengence paladin, the paladin of Tyranny... these are all departing from the traditional human-based paladin. Even the nominal anti-undead, sun god worshiping Devoted Paladin is moving away from it. We have stories and characters about paladins devoted to the pursuit of knowledge.

Times change. Things change.

Ah yes I remember the "Dragonborn of Bahamut" (which to this day, instead of ba-ha-mut I still read as "baha-mutt"). I had quite a few players attempt to power-game into that. I don't blame them, it was pretty good for what it cost.

Yes, I certainly agree that 5E has the most "open" paladin. Though sadly it lacks some of the flavor from previous editions racially-themed paladins. I quite liked 4E's take on elven paladins, it was so different!

 

[Yaarel]

Sadly, I have to agree with the Charisma drow reasoning, since the whole stripperific drow was published in books, alongside that +2 charisma, starting around 3e era. It still irks me that the drow book spent time to talk about drow women walking around mostly naked. Despite that, the Charisma actually works for them now, though. Charisma and Dexterity became the main stats for the drow in 4e, because they were to make good warlocks and rogues. They even made a drow specific Dark Pact Warlock for Lolth powers to make the whole drow-warlock thing click. Meanwhile, Rogue keyed off both Dexterity and Charisma, making drow a natural fit. So, while the Charisma started off as the result of sexual fantasies, it kind of evolved into something more over time. Rather, its the direction drow have evolved to - rogues, assassins and warlocks. Drow are renowned for their poisons, for hunting from the shadows before making an appearance or causing chaos while disguised and lying their asses off (both disguise and bluff are Charisma). Their innate spells naturally lend themselves to rogue tactics as well. Warlocks, I mentioned above.

So, the drow did undergo a bit of an evolution here, but its mostly cemented now. Drow suffer from Light Sensitivty now, so occupations that keep them in the shadows tend to be favored - rogue, and a darkness/devil's sight warlock are especially notable. The rogue also benefits from a high charisma for social skills, and warlock's main stat is charisma.

still make excellent rogues thanks to social skills and dexterity, plus stealthy innate magic.

Wait. Are you saying, where the 1e origins had Wisdom Drow Cleric as a female type, the 5e incarnation of this tradition now has a Charisma Drow Warlock as a female type? I dont see this view as true upto now, but may well be the direction that this tradition is evolving.

3e switched Drow to a high Charisma (plus Dexterity plus Intelligence).

It seems to me, 4e tried to cohere this tradition by making the Drow high Dexterity-plus-Charisma/Wisdom. Thus regarding females who happened to have high Dexterity and Wisdom, the Drow culture groomed them to excel as great Clerics. Those males who happen to have high Dexterity and Charisma to excel as great Warlocks. In this way, the Warlocks were flavored as a male Drow type. Nevertheless, these types seemed to gain less traction and played out in a messy way, with Drow Rogue and Drow Sorcerer mixing things up, not to mention Dexterity-Wisdom Drow Avenger often serving as the female priestess, and so on.

So far in 5e, the Drow is only Dexterity and Charisma, for both female and male. Maybe the female ‘priestess’ type is now defacto a Drow Warlock with a Spider pact, plus an Acolyte background? Meanwhile the rest of the Drow, including both females and males, tend to excel in the ‘military academies’ as a Rogue, and to some degree Dexterity Fighter? Drow magic institutions promote ‘Drow blood’ Sorcerer?

Or maybe Drow culture makes magic mainly warlockry? Where the female priestess is more an infernal pact, while the male is more a fey pact? Plus Rogues dominating the nonmagical sector?

 

[Mephista]

Wait. Are you saying, where the 1e origins had Wisdom Drow Cleric as a female type, the 5e incarnation of this tradition now has a Charisma Drow Warlock as a female type? I dont see this view as true upto now, but may well be the direction
that this tradition is evolving.

Nah. The shift actually started in 3e Eberron. You had the main drow in that campaign setting who served as part of a Lolth-like cult as normal. Then, as more books came out, different drow civilizations appeared. Some were criminal enterprises, some were shadow warlocks and psy-blades, all unconnected to the stereotypical FR drow city type.

Then, when 4e came out, drow were presented as a playable race, but they drew on the Eberron lore and translated it over a bit. Drow in criminal enterprises settled themselves in the surface and ran things from the shadows, while those drow who broke away from Lolth and the standard society (basically rebels) tended to do so with the help of the Dark Pact Warlocks. These were the drow that left Lolth behind. You can see this trend as well in the few drow-specific backgrounds, such as in the neverwinter book. That said, errata came out later where you could swap Cha for Wis, but that no more carried over to 5e than any of the other alterate stats from the errata for other races.

Thus, we come to 5e. We carry over the "anti-hero" rogues and warlocks that started off in 3e Eberron and lasted through 4e, and establish them as the normal PC option for drow, with race features that favor that same style. It has no bearing on the lore or hierarchy of drow cities, but instead a focus on PC types that are less, well, brainwashed.

You'll notice that most of the MM drow still favor cleric, wizard, and the other historical drow classes. However, PCs are the rebels and deviants, so they're a bit stronger willed and driven in different directions than the historical types, and the drow subrace reflects that.

 

[Yaarel]

The Dragonborn Paladin is an ironic type. This the perspective I am speaking from.

The knight-versus-dragon archetype is thousands of years old, deriving from concepts about the storm spirit trampling on the sea spirit. It shows up variously in many cultures: Norse Thorr versus Midgardr Serpent, Canaanite Hadad versus the 7-headed sea, Hindu Vishnu sleeping on the many headed serpent, Christianity walking on water, and the angel Michael defeating the serpent that rises out of the sea, and the medieval romance novels of the knight defeating a more animal-like dragon.

D&D 3e created the Dragonborn that subverts this ancient archetype by conflating both the knight and the dragon into a single person. Perhaps 4e subverted the archetype further by making this Dragon-Knight blend a heroic good guy: the Dragonborn Paladin. Archetypally, the cosmic seaserpent qua dragon is the villain, but by the process of dreamlike conflation becomes − ironically − the noble knight hero who saves the people from the dragon.

To some degree, the Dragonborn Paladin type resonates a deep and ancient archetype, and to some degree this subversion is successful, whence some traction in popularity.

 

[Yaarel]

My impression is. Players who like less the D&D tradition of how a race favors a class, tend to be character optimizers who eye specific race mechanics and disregard official narrative flavor.

 

[Mephista]

Also, while I'm on it, I'm going to rant for a tic about Ellistrae. I like the idea of a non-evil drow goddess. The problem? Bah! She's trying to turn them all into elven rangers! She's the goddess of Drizz't clones! Gahhhh! *runs around screaming*