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

[Umbran]

I am reminded of the Monty Python bookshop sketch:

C: I saw it over there: 'Olsen's Standard Book of British Birds'.... The expurgated version....

P: (pause; politely) I'm sorry, I didn't quite catch that...?

C: The expurgated version.

P: (exploding) The EXPURGATED version of 'Olsen's Standard Book of British Birds'?!?!?!?!?

C: (desperately) The one without the gannet!

P: The one without the gannet-!!! They've ALL got the gannet!! It's a Standard British Bird, the gannet, it's in all the books!!!

C: (insistent) Well, I don't like them...they wet their nests.

P: (furious) All right! I'll remove it!! (rrrip!) Any other birds you don't like?!

Which is to say - if we get too picky about what we want, and are willing to accept, we make it impossible to please us, and can drive those trying to give us products a conniption fit.

I suggest we not sweat the small stuff (like one race here or there). Sweat the big stuff - like whether the game engine as a whole does what you want it to do. Small stuff we can adjust easily enough on our own. Big stuff is harder to house-rule.

 

[Sunseeker]

I don't like you. Please stay away from DDN.

I mean, that's basically what you're saying. That you should get to determine what other people get to find fun in D&D.

I don't like Dwarves, I don't like people who play Dwarves. I don't like Hobbits/Halflings/w.e you want to call them.

But a lot of folks find those things fun. Who am I to say that DDN should not allow them to have their fun? Noone that's who, and neither are you so great that your opinion should matter any more than mine.

 

[mudbunny]

I wonder how the results of the poll would change if the question actually reflected the topic.

"Do you like Dragonborn?" will get a different response than "Do you mind if Dragonborn are a playable race in D&D Next?"

 

[ForeverSlayer]

I'm sure I'm not going to get what I want and I know I can just ignore them in my games if they are in the game but I don't even want the book to waste space on them.

Now I loved the Noldor from Middle Earth but I didn't like them as a playable race. 4th editions Elves, to me, were just out of place and a bit goofy. I mean you had dragonborn, tieflings, humans, genasi, then Elves. I didn't really like their version of the Halfing but it was more tolerable than the Elf. The Aasimar was the most normal I wanted to see a playable race in D&D.

I just wish they would leave that race alone.

And yet your avatar is an elf.

 

[mlund]

Well, there's a tangent line of reasoning I can sympathize with in excluding Dragonborn and Tieflings as they appeared in 4E from the Core of 5E. While I love 4E I absolutely despised dropping a cataclysm on Forgotten Realms to shoe-horn these races into the picture. I'd hate to see what kinds of hoops people would jump through for Greyhawk, Krynn, or Darksun.

The Core races and classes need to be non-antagonistic towards the established settings. In general the settings should be adding to the Core rather than redacting it - bar extremely critical unique features like Divine Magic in Darksun and the Age of Despair for Krynn.

Stuff like PC Drow, Dragonborn, and Tieflings - Arishoka and Bael-Turath - these things would be best migrated from Core of the PHB and put into the modular section of said PHB. Heck, I'd prefer to see "Acid Arrow" to "Melf's Acid Arrow" with something in the flavor text describing how in Greyhawk the spell is named after Melf, just so Core can nod at the history without the standard lexicon of the PHB being setting-specific.

- Marty Lund

 

[CleverNickName]

I wonder how many people see the word "dragonborn," mentally substitute "4th Edition," and then vote accordingly?

Me? I don't like monstrous races...so I voted "No." I would vote the same way for half-orcs, minotaurs, tieflings, warforged, vampires, werewolves, drow, thri-kreen, etc.

 

[BobTheNob]

Ever since reading Dragonlance the Draconian(or the "Dragonman") has stood as fantasy staple in my mind. That it was introduced in 4e was an utter delight to me.

LOVE dragonborn and I consider them a fantasy staple. Would hate to see them gone.

 

[CleverNickName]

And yet your avatar is an elf.

And mine's a Moogle. (shrug)

 

[Remathilis]

And yet your avatar is an elf.

Glad to see that's all you got out of that...

 

[Sunseeker]

I wonder how many people see the word "dragonborn," mentally substitute "4th Edition," and then vote accordingly?

Me? I don't like monstrous races...so I voted "No." I would vote the same way for half-orcs, minotaurs, tieflings, warforged, vampires, werewolves, drow, thri-kreen, etc.

Aside from the fact that Drow are cruel and generally evil(and almost every edition will remind everyone that "players are the exception"), and they are almost always the antagonists in a variety of stories, I don't quite see how they classify as "monstrous".

They are literally "dark elves", not much far off from "wood elves" or "high elves" or "sun elves". They just live in caves full of murder, debauchery and treachery instead of in trees with happiness, cookies and elitsit attitudes..oh wait they have that too.

Anyway, I'm not arguing for their inclusion in core(though I would like to see them playable at some point, I do enjoy an evil campaign or two), just how they are considered monstrous alongside orcs, vampires, minotaurs, werewolves and that lot?