Ecology of the Dragonborn up
- Thread starter Rechan
- Start date
Wyrmshadows
Explorer
Nah, I think what would be more fair would be to give them great big humanoid schwantzes. Hey, it would give the female dragonborn something to look at. Heck, they aren't reptiles..they are monotremes and anything goes.
Wyrmshadows
Or perhaps some people think too less about some things.
'Tis in the very definition, is it not? "Fan" derives from "fanatic", after all. If the target demographic of D&D generally likes thinking about dragons and boobies in various permutations, who can blame the artists for giving them what they want? If the fantastical-biology nerds enjoy arguing endlessly on the merits of such a combination, and what that ultimately boils down to is more people talking about the product, why wouldn't they stir the controversy a little to keep things going?
Anyone for an "Improved Dragonborn Senses" feat that adds electroception?
Hussar
Legend
No, it's some people think too much about it.
Let's take the whole "brilliantly colored" bit for a second. What if I want to play a male (assuming males are to get the colors) rogue? Does having yellow and purple splotches affect my hide checks? Seems like it should. Trying to be sneaky while dressed like a Vegas showgirl would be tricky.
Upthread someone pointed to the whole dwarf female beard thing. This is pretty much identical. Same argument different set of glasses.
Wyrmshadows - you yourself admit that all of the creatures you point to are not reptiles. You said it yourself - they're reptilian as in look kinda like reptiles, but they aren't reptiles. So, pretty much any amateur biology crap is pointless. I would point out that non-bipedal creatures rarely have visible mammaries (although there are some exceptions). One doesn't have breasts on a horse for example. So, no breasts on dragons makes pretty decent sense if you want to go that way.
Now lizard folk? Why not? Why not give them breasts? Heck, SF does it all the time. In the end though, we don't because lizard folk don't feature in a whole lot of art or games. The question of gender simply doesn't come up.
mhacdebhandia
Explorer
My only problem with this is that it's utterly stupid to assume that the artwork has to be wrong.
It's a fantasy setting. (There are gelatinous cubes!) If it pleased Io to create dragonborn as humanoid creatures which hatch from eggs and have a superficial resemblance to dragons but otherwise human-like biology, including breasts on the women as either mammaries or simply as secondary sexual characteristics, then that's why it happened.
Dragons aren't reptiles. If you want to start in on realistic biology in D&D, let's start with dragons that can fly, think at a superhuman level, and speak. Ain't no reptile in the real world that could do that, because of fundamental facts of muscular and neural biology. That's a bigger "problem" than the terrible plague of breasted dragonborn women.
They seem to do fine in studded leather - you know, leather with hundreds of light catching shiney objects on it.
The dwarf female beard thing is a completely different argument.
We've already say why not. Because it's dumb, ugly, lazy, and insulting.
mhacdebhandia
Explorer
What kind of drooling moron would polish their studded leather's metal parts?
Hussar
Legend
Heh, yeah, it's not like you could, I dunno, USE PAINT?
I would also point out that studded leather in every edition has penalties to hide checks.
I know, male dragonborn have Razzle Dazzle patterns to make them harder to see.
I would also point out that studded leather in every edition has penalties to hide checks.
I know, male dragonborn have Razzle Dazzle patterns to make them harder to see.
Similar Threads
