Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="adembroski" data-source="post: 3944691" data-attributes="member: 18869">I'm well aware of market economics, but I wonder if they're misreading their audience.Oh I'm well aware of who I'm addressing in this forum... it's the point of my posting here. I want to hear a prospective outside my own that might be able to counter my bias. I'm actually rather happy with a lot of responses I've had, they've helped ease my mind about it... at least enough to keep my ears perked when more info comes down the pike.Honestly the biggest issue I have is this. I've seen the tiefling grow in popularity over the past 10 years or so. There is hardly a video game made without some form of it creeping into the PC's party, so I can accept it, however it bothers me (I run 3 campaign worlds, two published, one home brewed... the tiefling only exists in one of them [FR]). It's the Dragonborn that don't make sense. I cannot help but think it's thrown in there for the cool factor, roughly equivalent to the overabundance of spikes in the previous edition.The problem with Tieflings and Dragonborn is that they are, essencially, mythological creatures even within a mythological setting (Mythological is definately the wrong choice of words here, but I can't think of a better one). They're dependent that a given world have certain preconditions. All races do, but with other races, nothing beyond the existance of that race need be assumed. With Tieflings and Dragonborn, you must assume not only that THOSE races exist, but also the presence of Dragons, the presence of Fiends, and their ability to breed with mortals... it just invades the DMs territory too much for the core rulebooks in my opinion.I would be willing to accept the Drow because they depend on no other condition to exist.</blockquote>

Verification