A high Charisma does not necessarily mean you are liked. It might improve the chances that you are liked, but things such as appearance and simply what you are have a much greater impact on how someone else perceives you.
Charisma is force of personality, variant. It doesn't matter if they like you or dislike you if they respect and obey you (hate/love is more complex, of course). That's what Charisma gets you - people's attention, their instinctive respect, not pathetic little "likes".
Traditionally, Tieflings had a bonus to Charisma because of their great force of personality. This makes complete sense when you consider that all the creatures likely to be in the heritage of a Tiefling are beings with very high Charismas, known for their silver tongues. We say "silver-tongued devil" for a reason. They were not particularly likely to be Evil.
Then 3.XE took them a completely different way. They put a CHA penalty, gave them an LA, and CHANGED them so that they were "very strongly likely to be Evil", basically turning them into cheap "nasty devil people", right down to the cheesy art.
4E took them back in the right direction, returning the CHA bonus, removing the "usually Evil" drivel, and the LA. It changed their backstory in a way that simplified them and made them more accessible, but wasn't terribly exciting and could impact campaign-setting-design. The big downside to the 4E changes was that it made them more boring appearance-wise, but that is probably the easiest possible thing to fix, and much better than the godawful combo of CHA penalty, "usually Evil" and LA in 3.XE.
If 5E takes them to the 3.XE CHA penalty nonsense, or makes them "usually Evil", I will flip a table for real. They are not goddamn Drow, nor have they ever been. I do hope that it goes with a backstory that allows more diverse appearances than.
So anyway, please don't make me go through all the differences between 2E and 3.XE Tieflings AGAIN. I already did that in another thread. There is no such thing as "2E/3E" Tieflings. There are 2E Tieflings, 3E Tieflings, and 4E Tieflings.
Am I huge 2E Tiefling fan? Yes!
I also did not like 4e dragonborn at all. Petty as well, but maybe it was the artwork. Unless 5th edition makes a substantial change it's a race I won't allow in my campaign. I also have not had players who give a poo about playing one either, so a moot point I guess.
I'm kind of "Meh" on Dragonborn myself. I loathed their "MAGICALELELELE DRAGON PEOPLES!!!!!!"-style stuff from 3E which basically seemed to be Fan-Fiction or even Slash-Fiction bait to me. Their 4E deal was a massive improvement, but they were still pretty boring by "Dragon People" standards.
However, my players liked them, and I've seen a number of Dragonborn PCs (including ones where they are clearly not the "optimized" race or even close, suggesting that the player just loves the concept), so I definitely want them in 5E, because I prefer happy players above other things.
Judging by talk about 4E, it seems like they were broadly popular (much to my surprise - you can still find my chatter about them being "uninspired" and "insipid" on various forums from around 4E's release!), so I'm really unsurprised to see them in the PHB. I notice we've not seen art of a 5E DB yet, so I wonder if they've changed appearance (at least the default). I'd go with a "4E-style" subrace as well as a "Basically a Draconian without the death effect" subrace, myself.
