Does anyone actually like Dragonborn and Tieflings?

[Tervin]

Ew I don't know if this anonymous poll is reliable, but i am appalled at the thought that so many people on these boards may actually like dragonborn.

Tiefling, i could see (with a different look, fluff and name) but dragonborn?
Even if wotc hadn't gone out of their way to make them look so dorky, they'd still be akin to furry.

Maybe i'm just too old (34)

Back when I was 34 I might not have liked them. At 43 I feel that they are a breath (weapon) of fresh air. Of course it might be that I love the idea of fantasy races that don't feel like they could just as well be a human culture. The art of the dragonborn and the tiefling is only one (regrettably bad) image of what they can look like.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

I like them both. Dragonborn allowed me to have the fantasy equivalent of Zionists in my setting (OK, I could have used another race for that, but they just fit so well...). And tieflings fit in perfectly with all those Gothic tales about (a) bad seeds in a family, and (b) cautionary stories about not falling in love with "handsome but mysterious strangers"...

 

[ProfessorCirno]

I don't know what they were thinking; the only change they made between 3E and 4E was the addition of dragonborn and tieflings as core races. They put all their eggs in that basket, for sure.

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.

 

[Steely Dan]

Dig Tieflings, detest Dragonborn.

 

[Aus_Snow]

I don't like that either of them is a core race. I also don't like either of them anyway, but that's pretty much secondary. For instance, I like Tieflings of an earlier era. 'Dragonborn' however. . . well, a simple 'no' will suffice here.

Just two of so many things that I've found to be unappealing, when it comes to 4e.

 

[Trickstergod]

I like tieflings and detest dragonborn, but with a caveat:

I really, really hate the 4th edition approach to tieflings. They all have horns, they all have tails, they all look like a bunch of demonic dudes?

Umm, no, no sir. Don't like it. I liked it when they could very well fit in with humanity - when they had a range from "Holy crap, it's a demon!" to "There's something strange looking about that fellow."

Since the appearance is a very superficial, easy to change thing, it's not that big of a deal, but every time I see "tiefling" artwork, I groan a little.

Meanwhile, I just don't like dragonborn at all, at least as a core rulebook race. I like a good, solid humanocentric base - the more bizarre, alien races are better served as later additions, rather than staples to the game.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

I like them both, though my view of races in D&D may be somewhat different then most. I view races as a stepping off point for what races will be like in my world.

For example, in a couple of my to-be/current 4e settings Tieflings are either:

• Planescape style.
• Humans twisted in the womb by the effects of reality-deviations.
• When a mother is cursed with nightmares and dread during her pregnancy.
• A natural born race, very similar to the 4e one. But are rulers of the Roman Empire on a alternative Earth.

Dragonborn are:

• Simply another race formed during the chaos near the beginning ages of creation and simply another race you see walking amongst all the other odd races in Sigil.
• A race formed out of the distant and instinctual fears of Humans taken flesh, and even more crafted by the worries of armies and soldiers that people in such dark and violent times harbour, such violence simply falls hand-in-hand with Dragons, thus their form.
• A natural born race, similar to 4e one. But are the rulers of the Egyptian Empire on a alternative Earth.

The main races I almost never use and if I do, I alter to a extreme degree are Dwarves, Halflings, and pre-4e Elves (I adore Eladrin (Fey Folk for the win) and I am glad to see the schizophrenic Elf dissappear). As for extreme alteration, one example is when I change Halflings into Gremlins.

 

[Old Gumphrey]

You (admittedly, very few) folks who keep comparing dragonborn to "furries" are putting some pretty awkward sexual connotations toward those of us that do like dragonborn; whether it's toward our characters or us personally is irrelevant. Said connotations hardly seem appropriate to this board, much less a game that accepts players as young as 7 years old.

So maybe you could just knock that crap off?

 

[Steely Dan]

You (admittedly, very few) folks who keep comparing dragonborn to "furries"

I went to one of their conventions in Vegas, wild – dog-pile!

 

[Particle_Man]

We have a dragon-like core race? Where? All I see is some humanoid lizard that's really, really ugly, and doesn't invoke anything related to dragons in me. Just because WotC writes some background in doesn't make them look any closer to dragons.

Humanoids with scaly skins are not dragon-like. They'd need at least wings, a tail, and a much longer neck to be dragon-like.

They got a breath-weapon, unlike the other core races. I notice you forgot to mention that.

They also speak the language that dragons speak.

Flying got nerfed all around, so there won't be a flying core race. Ugly is subjective (I for instance think they look just fine), as does "invoking anything related to dragons".