I've reversed my stance on dragonborn and tieflings

[I'm A Banana]

So you're saying that 5E will make Summoner a core class?

I think in 5e, there will be a class whose entire repotoire of abilities relies on making monsters fight for him.

Which, IMO........AWESOME.

 

[Dormammu]

As has been noted in other, earlier threads, Tieflings and Dragonborn are closer to the sword-and-sorcery and horror fantasy that inspired Gygax (eg Howard, Lovecraft) than are Wagner or Tolkien-inspired treatments of the creatures of Nordic or Celtic myth - to which D&D Elves (though not Dwarves) in any event bare very little resemblance.

I think this point is somewhat odd given that the appearance of things like Tieflings and Dragonborn in those stories is always as monsters and never as heroes. In other words, them as a PC race is actually in diametric opposition to those stories.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

Dragonborn are replacing half-orcs, which are at least as vaguely-sinister but a lot less awesome. And hey, dragonborn are a true-breeding race all of their own, so they don't even have the half-orc's lame "caught between two worlds" angst. They're just a race of badasses, as good or evil as you want them in your campaign. (Note that in the default setting, they're worshippers of Bahamut, newly-assigned god of Paladins.) I don't see how you can really regard this swap as getting "darker and grittier."

The addition of tieflings as a core class is certainly "evil-curious," as one of the designers has it, or "a sop to people who'd really rather be playing Vampire," as others may have it. But honestly, it's a decent addition. If the angsty kinda-antihero is an overblown and overused archetype, so is the Noble Paladin, and that doesn't seem to bother anyone. (And honestly, the Selfless Paladin is at least as much of an annoyance to the typical dungeon-delving party as the Angsty Mercenary.)

 

[Incenjucar]

Tieflings are fine, and, if they weren't also tieflings, gargoyle people would be fine. I'd love to play a wingless Goliath.

Putting them together though is a bit awkward.

 

[pemerton]

I think this point is somewhat odd given that the appearance of things like Tieflings and Dragonborn in those stories is always as monsters and never as heroes. In other words, them as a PC race is actually in diametric opposition to those stories.

In Tolkien, Half-Orcs are all villains, as are Petty-Dwarves (from memory, the closest Tolkein gets to Gnomes). This hasn't stopped them being used as heroic races in D&D, and being described as generic/traditional in that role.

 

[Incenjucar]

It's more the whole xenophobia issue and the consequences of fantasy's habit of race wars.

The Dragonborn will not be an issue, as they're just a samurai culture with scales, but in a ...Xenobellic? world, devil people are problematic.

 

[Voss]

I don't know about that. Any 'reasonable' culture in the rough period that D&D supposedly represents would quickly attack an armed group of dragon people wandering through their lands. Or at least hire them and send them off to get killed by their enemies.

Let them into their towns? Unlikely.

 

[Derren]

I don't know about that. Any 'reasonable' culture in the rough period that D&D supposedly represents would quickly attack an armed group of dragon people wandering through their lands. Or at least hire them and send them off to get killed by their enemies.

Let them into their towns? Unlikely.

Why? Humans and dragonborn have known of each others since centuries. By now they would have realized that dragonborn are no monster (especially as they had a big empire, worshipped the god of paladins and are always described as being honorable).
Or does your "reasonable culture" also slaughter any other member not of their race which approaches one of their towns?
You assume (like most other dragonborn hater) that this race simply appears out of thin air. This is not the case.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

Why? Humans and dragonborn have known of each others since centuries. By now they would have realized that dragonborn are no monster (especially as they had a big empire, worshipped the god of paladins and are always described as being honorable).
Or does your "reasonable culture" also slaughter any other member not of their race which approaches one of their towns?
You assume (like most other dragonborn hater) that this race simply appears out of thin air. This is not the case.

The same logic applies for tieflings, of course. They've been around for centuries and it's well known that they're not inherently evil just because of their horns.

 

[rounser]

Or does your "reasonable culture" also slaughter any other member not of their race which approaches one of their towns?

A quick review of the monster manuals might actually recommend this course of action. I assume you can count the number of good, non-savage races on fingers and toes. The rest are potentially hostile, or actively hostile and unable to be reasoned with.

But you're right, D&D people act as if they're in a pseudomedieval world rather than a "D&D brought to it's logical conclusion" world, and seem largely oblivious to the sheer number of monsters wandering around the landscape. For their part, the monsters seem to have an unspoken agreement to leave human towns and farms alone until a plot point comes along.

It doesn't stand up to scrutiny, but the alternative to handwaving such stuff is probably far worse.