Ecology of the Dragonborn up

I just have to say...Who cares?

In 3e the first game I ran used sunless citadel as the opening adventure, but the PCs were a bit on the high power side (3 out of 5 PCs played monsters out of MM, and one rolled his character at the table and had 4 18s, and 2 16 before Race) so I made some modfications.
I went into the MM and took the kobold sorceress and added the 1/2 Dragon template to her as 1 mod. When the PCs meet the Kobold and I said it was a woman, they asked how they could tell it was a female lizard...thinking quick I said with her 19 cha she must of had at least C cups, and a nice butt. (we always used cha as looks in 2e...and give me a break it was 8 years ago I was a dumb kid).
about a year later when that game ended our PC Sorcerer (Asimar) was married to that kobold and they had 3 kids

No one cared then...noone should care now. In real life if a woman was completly flat chested and had no curves she could be mistaken for a guy...So you know what lets keep the Core races of D&D as human like as possible...

and now I am off to go through all my 3.5 books to stat out the offspring of a Asimar who had elven harratige, and a 1/2 Green Dragon Kobold...I forgot how messed up that game was.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I don't understand why dragonborn have to be monotremes, or reptiles, or any other real-world classification of animals. I don't understand why real-world physical characteristics of animals have to apply to D&D. I don't know of any real-world humanoid creature that has pointed ears, yet they're all over the place in D&D.

Where's hong when you need him?
 

I certainly do not see any reason why an actual dragon adventuring in such a world would be anymore jarring or strange or theme altering than an entire repitilian race plopped into a setting.
Core D&D has always been about humanoid creatures. PC races are humanoid. If you put in actual dragons, you change the dynamic significantly. It could certainly be done, but the reasons why they chose not to do so are quite obvious to me, and have nothing to do with "cheapness".
 

Core D&D has always been about humanoid creatures. PC races are humanoid. If you put in actual dragons, you change the dynamic significantly. It could certainly be done, but the reasons why they chose not to do so are quite obvious to me, and have nothing to do with "cheapness".

Basically: if you want to have magical equipment, you need humanoids. Dragons don't wield Swords or wear Clothes. And while for mythical dragons it might be "interesting" to hoard treasure, it won't be for a human playing a dragon. If the treasure has no purpose other to be hoarded, it won't be satisfactory most of the time.

And, of course, people will have a far harder time to identify with "real" dragons then with dragonmen.
 

Also, it's not that hard to play dragonmen. Wizardry has them, Final Fantasy Tactics Advanced has them, other japanese RPGs also feature dragonmen, the infamous Dragonlance series has them.

I still dislike the boobs on the dragonborn females, however. Artistically, I dislike the race. Thematically, they're okay.
 

Good lord. It this Dragonboob nonsense still going on? I thought we got this out of our systems before the game even came out.

*sigh* For the record, evolution don't enter into it. In most D&D worlds the races look the way they look because thats how it amused the gods to create them.

Besides, the real question is: Do dragonborn males have two penises like real world reptiles?
 

Meh, I still think dragonboobs are stupid ;p

Constructive as always, eh Cirno?

Yeah, there's nothing quite as sad as poorly cobbled rationalizations to try and justify what is nothing more than anthropomorphism and shoddy art work.

As noted, monotremes don't come with teats, and creatures whose young can walk within hours and thus don't need to be carried about for years at a time by nursing mothers don't have their mammary glands 4+ feet off the ground.

But furries with cow-udders on their stomachs don't sell as well as furries with human-style "boobs." They'd be even far less marketable-looking with the application of the very biology they try to use to excuse "putting jugs on them," than if they just gave up on trying to stick breasts on every female in the PHB. Would it have been so hard to just pay extra attention to the faces, eyes, and maybe attach some differentiating "plumage" type effects? I mean, they gave them a hair-substitute already.

- Marty Lund

I see your scientifical impossibility and raise you with Bellisario's Maxim, the Rule of Cool, and the recommendation that you should just relax and enjoy.

(I am using links from TV Tropes because I believe roleplaying games are all about the narrative experience, much more than about the simulationist consistency)
 

My only problem is the arrogance of WotC's designers to admit that they made a mistake. They should have just said "Yeah... that artwork is wrong. They don't have boobs." and be done with it. Instead, they just have to appear to know what they're doing and write some contrived bullcrap to justify their nonsensical decision in the first place.

The whole thing stinks of "That's not a bug, that's a feature" syndrome, wherein you never want to look like you didn't think things through and fouled up, but look as though you intended it from the start, usually with some lame explanation to go along with it.
 


Constructive as always, eh Cirno?
If you have a problem with a poster, you can put them on ignore, report the post, or (preferably) discuss the issue. What you can't do is make snide and insulting comments to them. We expect folks to behave like adults, and that means not picking a fight just because you don't like someone's posting style. There are better solutions.

Please drop me an email if there are any questions about this.
 

Remove ads

Top