Does anyone actually like Dragonborn and Tieflings?

[williamhm]

I personally don’t have an issue with dragonborn, as I’ve always wanted to play klingons in d&d, but I think the art dept went a little overboard with the tieflings.

yeah I like the unified backstory for tieflings, I think it makes them more of a race than an occasional accident, Im even okay with the horns and eyes, its just the big huge tails that I do not like. As for dragonborn, yeah I wish they had wings, but I love their backstory and fluff.

Unlike in previous edditions I can see myself playing every race in the 4e line up.

Does anyone else also like the retooled halfling better?

 

[The Little Raven]

However, I can't see how....

I can't see any rhyme or reason...

I don't see how...

I don't see how a beast of a dragon's size can fly or breathe fire, but they can. That's the beauty of fantasy: the impossible is perfectly possible.

Yes, yes, the platypus and echidna - the extremely small and isolate exceptions to the genera rule about mammals - small, bird-looking critters.

And that has what to do with the incorrect claim you made about mammals?

Frankly, I'd think Dragonborn would have a lot more in common with, say, Dragons than the platypus but that's just me.

They do have more in common with dragons. They hatch from eggs, have scales, and can breathe some kind of breath weapon. Just like dragons, they are not reptiles.

Frankly, a lot of my impulses towards Dragonborn probably come from being introduced to the concept of Draconic Humanoids through Lizardmen, Yuan-Ti, and Draconians - all of which were described as "reptilian."

Reptilian =/= Reptile.

Without both of those things in place Dragonborn seem too stretched from being Draconic on the one hand or Mammalian for me to be comfortable with their appearance and name.

Draconic =/= Reptile.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

Seems that most people do actually like them, or at least one of them.

 

[Fifth Element]

I don't recall saying that was the only change, nor have I found me saying that here. If you find it, let me know, eh?

What I DO remember saying was a comment on how odd I found it that people thought that, amongst other things (And I remember saying THAT bit almost word for word) that the dragonborn and new tieflings would drive new sales.

All right, here's what you said: "Equally, I'm surprised people think adding those in will in of themselves be a draw for more people to start playing the game" (emphasis added)

I'm sure the designers feel that the changes made to 4E as a whole (including the addition of these races) will bring in new players. They don't necessarily think the new races will do it in of themselves, as you said.

Yes, yes, the platypus and echidna - the extremely small and isolate exceptions to the genera rule about mammals - small, bird-looking critters.

Just admit you were wrong about mammals.

And remember, 4E is all about exceptions. Why would you be surprised they used an exception here as well?

 

[Wormwood]

Seems that most people do actually like them, or at least one of them.

Of course.

We just post less.

 

[Old Gumphrey]

Hey, WE weren't the ones that decided to give them .

All races have those. Your comment is pants on head retarded.

 

[mlund]

Just admit you were wrong about mammals.

Sure thing. Mammals are: "any vertebrate of the class Mammalia, having the body more or less covered with hair, nourishing the young with milk from the mammary glands, and, with the exception of the egg-laying monotremes, giving birth to live young."

If you want to argue that a Dragonborn ought to be a monotreme, however, I'd disagree with that opinion. Further, unless Dragons nurse their young, I see no reason why the Dragonborn ought to do so.

I'll also note that Ruin Explorer has made a much better, compelling as a matter of fact, argument as to why breasts on female Dragonborn are just crudely designed to superimpose a human-like gender on the creature, not to meet any actually anatomical purpose.

And remember, 4E is all about exceptions. Why would you be surprised they used an exception here as well?

I'm not really surprised, just disappointed. There is really nothing more than a visual "cheat," in the art direction that makes me like their work on the 4th Edition Dragonborn less.

- Marty Lund

 

[Korgoth]

Seems that most people do actually like them, or at least one of them.

According to the poll, about 45% of respondents like them both, 8% don't care about them and the remaining 47% dislike one or both.

So, overall each one of the two has over a 50% "approval rating", but it's also true that almost 50% of people dislike at least one of them. I would guess that the latter is what gave the OP the impression that they are widely disliked.

 

[drothgery]

According to the poll, about 45% of respondents like them both, 8% don't care about them and the remaining 47% dislike one or both.

So, overall each one of the two has over a 50% "approval rating", but it's also true that almost 50% of people dislike at least one of them. I would guess that the latter is what gave the OP the impression that they are widely disliked.

Err... the like/love one options also included people who were indifferent about the other (like, say, me; I like dragonborn and am indifferent to tieflings).

 

[Mark]

I'll try again...

http://barkingalien.deviantart.com/art/The-Dragling-90208155

The image linking function of the site doesn't seem to work well for me.

AD

That works. Thanks! Send an email my way directly instead of through the boards and let's see if we can thwart the spam filters or whatever is keeping me from reaching you in return.