D&D 5E I don't like Dragonborn: Please stay away from D&D Next.

[billd91]

But, if we're going down this route - the new gamer who is coming to D&D fresh couldn't give a toss about any of what came before. None of that has any resonance at all with the new gamer. So, everything is now on an even footing - no legacy issues.

That will probably depend more on how they're recruited rather than on whether or not they're new. Brought in by other players? Picking up the material in a game store because it catches their eye? Watching episodes of Community? Drifting into the hobby because of links to another hobby or fanboy subculture they already participate in?

 

[underfoot007ct]

Idk I'm going to need harder evidence pointing to the popularity of Dragonborn with new gamers.

I don't see a pronounced fetish for dragon people elsewhere in popular geek/gamer culture.

There's Dragonborn in Skyrim, but they don't look like Dragons. They're people who are especially good at hunting Dragons and steal their souls after they kill them.

(I'd love it if D&D Dragonborn were more like Skyrim Dragonborn).

How about evidence that enworld likes Dragonborn. The poll is currently 58% pro DB. I think that any race or class that more than 40% of gamer want, needs to be included in 5eNext. Seems to be a clear no brainer.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

At this point, I really don't care if they have stats on the PHB, but respect the implied D&D setting, please. You know, if dragonborns are not in Forgotten Realms, DM can put them there at any time, I did that with some psionic races of my choice. On the other hand, if they simply blow up a part of the map of Faerun and say: "no, we don't have updated Mulhorand, because now we have this awesome kingdom of dragonthings in its place", I'll be very upset.

This is my appeal: if you want to have stats for pink unicorns as a playable race in the PHB, I'm pretty sure it will make it look sillier, but do that. Just don't tell me that they have been wandering around the City of Greyhawk since forever, doing business with tieflings and dragonborns. Also, don't tell me that they were not there before, but the Kingdom of Iuz was hit by a meteor sent by Pelor and a race of anthropomorphic pink unicorns was born there as a side effect.

The settings built in the past 40 years are an important part as much as hit points and saving throws. Don't mess with them.

Cheers,

 

[Incenjucar]

Idk I'm going to need harder evidence pointing to the popularity of Dragonborn with new gamers.

I don't see a pronounced fetish for dragon people elsewhere in popular geek/gamer culture.

I could prove this, but you would never, ever, EVER forgive me.

Just please trust me that humanoid dragons are extremely popular in geek circles of various sorts. DO NOT SEARCH.

 

[nnms]

How about evidence that enworld likes Dragonborn. The poll is currently 58% pro DB. I think that any race or class that more than 40% of gamer want, needs to be included in 5eNext. Seems to be a clear no brainer.

Yep.

Even though I'm generally in favor of PC races that are less human than demi-humans being not PCs, I definitely see that other people really like them, so they should probably be there.

 

[Ratinyourwalls]

I could prove this, but you would never, ever, EVER forgive me.

Just please trust me that humanoid dragons are extremely popular in geek circles of various sorts. DO NOT SEARCH.

WHY DIDN'T I LISTEN TO YOU??

What I have seen I cannot unsee. Where is a beholder so I can sacrifice my eyes to it?

 

[Incenjucar]

WHY DIDN'T I LISTEN TO YOU??

What I have seen I cannot unsee. Where is a beholder so I can sacrifice my eyes to it?

Nooooooooo! I am so sorry.

 

[grimslade]

Ack! Rule 34 is Rule 34. Now I know whence the dragonbreasts came. I can not purge it from my mind. May Bieber have mercy on my soul.

The 4E conversion of FR was horrid. It was a bizarre decision to destroy parts of the world to update to the new edition, and many existing players, even those who did not like FR, were turned off by the intrusion. Dragonborn have a stigmata of being a monstrous race, new in 4E, and destroying the Realms. Tough PR to overcome.

So that is old edition news, past is prologue, and we now are building a more inclusive D&D Next. So how do we include races from the latest edition to a rule book meant for all D&D styles?

The race chapter should start with the core four races with large full page write ups. Heck include a few vanilla subraces, like High elf and wood elf, lightfoot and stout halflings, mountain and gully dwarves. Knock yerselves out. After the core four, have a section for Advanced or Rare PC races. 1/2 page to full page write ups of the rest of the lovable rogues with a section explaining how a DM may flesh his world out with a wider variety of playable races. Stranger subraces might creep in here, aquatic elves, deep gnomes, kender. All in all the rule book contains a bunch of rules that appeal to a wide variety of groups while setting the baseline of any D&D table at at least the core four.

This race section will need a corresponding section in the DMG section of the rules explaining the ramifications of a more diverse campaign and what happens when you switch out even some of the core four.

The other way is to release a single 'basic' set of rules with all the options stripped off and an Advance guide(s) containing everything left out of the base rules. This might be make a Core Four of books as well. D&D Core Rules, Advanced Players Options, Advanced Dungeon Masters Guide and the Monster Manual.

 

[Derren]

Give each race some generic racial features, elves are good in forests, dwarves are good in mountains, halflings in grasslands, a few basic racial traits(honorable, hearty, good-natured, cruel, etc..). Then let the setting books fill in the very fluffy details.

And thats why Dragonborn should be in the core book and, if you ask me, elves and dwarves should not.

Because Dragonborn do not have such a stereotype attached to them, forcing the player to invest time to think about his character. Elves and dwarves most of the time end up as shallow stereotype (hippy elf and scottish dwarf).

For the "I hate dragonborn" crowd: In how many editions does a race need to appear to become iconic and thus worthy of inclusion? I assume everything Tolkien wrote is automatically in?

How about that: No races in the PHB. Just rules how to adapt races from the Monster Manual for play with different categories for how easy it is. Then humans, elves and dragonborn are all in the MM.

 

[vagabundo]

Dragonborn: I love them.

Dwarves are still my favourite race, but Dragonborn have jumped to 2nd place since 4e. I like the story. I like their look. I like their Klingon like attitude. I like dragonboobs - they make perfect sense, mang - I like their badassery.

I'm less impressed with half-orcs and half-elves, and would be happy to see them dissapear. However I feel the PHB should support a broad range of campaigns out of the box.

You don't like Dragonborn, fine, but don't campaign to get them removed from our PHB because of your prejudices.