Zardnaar
Legend
Yeah I lean towards 6-12 major races so sligyly more.
Most 3-4 are fleshed out in any real depth. The rest are at best Gnomes here, Elves there sorta thing.
D&D 5E The Human Problem Pt 1
Yeah I lean towards 6-12 major races so sligyly more.
Most 3-4 are fleshed out in any real depth. The rest are at best Gnomes here, Elves there sorta thing.
cbwjm
Seb-wejem
Sounds like a case of great minds thinking alike, or maybe I read it ages ago, forgot about it, but the idea stuck in my head. Might be the former since I've definitely created dragonborn empires before. I had one based kind of on that old d20 Scifi books where each type of dragon would rule for a millenia, though in my case, each of the great clans of dragons would rule for one king's reign before passing onto another clan. Or maybe it's both.
Zardnaar
Legend
Sounds like Dragonstar never played it but Dragon had a write up back in the day.
jmartkdr2
Hero
I always place the Dragon Empire across the ocean, and assume the technology to cross is new-ish: about ten years ago or so.
This is short enough that dragonborn aren't common yet, haven't had a chance to really establish themselves enough to really fight, and the tech (ie new ship designs) are still expensive. But it's just long enough that people have heard of dragonborn and are aware they aren't coming to eat your babies, so even in a small rural village the main response would be guarded curiosity. They don't think a small dragon is attacking, but you are a stranger.
This does give dragonborn the Far Traveler background for free, but most other background features wouldn't apply. (ie even if you're an acolyte your church has no presence so they can't really support you.)
Mechanically all races are equivalent, and will be even more in 2024.
So any race can be the leading race in a setting, that will rely more on geography and optimal conditions for that race.
I see the custom lineage become the standard, and the actual racial features become racial feats or variant.
So any race can be the leading race in a setting, that will rely more on geography and optimal conditions for that race.
I see the custom lineage become the standard, and the actual racial features become racial feats or variant.
Zardnaar
Legend
Boring game I don't see them doing that.
cbwjm
Seb-wejem
That's the one. I never played either, but the setting sounded cool.
Horwath
Legend
I don't see that races will be same, but racial abilities might get more broad and usable by more types of characters.
I.E. wood elves ability to hide in dim light might not be greatly appreciated by some heavy armor user, but 5ft speed is usefull for ALL characters.
perception is useful for all characters, but stealth or sleight of hands is not.
High elves bonus cantrip can be broaden to give any cantrip and that ability is highest of int, wis or cha. Then it works for ALL character concepts.
Mt dwarf medium armor proficiency might not work for many classes(that is why it was changed in Tasha's), but what if it says:
you get one level higher armor proficiency for your 1st level class or an extra class skill? That way, all character can have bonus from that racial.
Having racial bonus weapons, tools, languages interchangeable fixed a lot of "waste" racial features.
EzekielRaiden
Follower of the Way
Well, not exactly. More like if you WANT a race that is supposed to be "the most common" that isn't humans, dragonborn are probably your best bet, because they actually have some measurable advantages against us.
I mentioned nutrition above. Nutrition was the other incredibly serious issue for most humans across most of our history, and those issues are going to be much bigger for dragonborn, because they need more protein than we do. Protein is, unfortunately, harder to get than carbs or fat, and meat is by far the best source of protein in a pre-industrial society. Ironically, having a very high-protein diet could actually protect them from many of the problems that were induced by humans transitioning to settled existence (namely, dental issues) but likely would introduce other issues unless, as stated, the fact that they're physiologically different from mammals would protect them from animal-derived pathogens.
Setting up new food sources, particularly if they're travelling a long distance from somewhere else, will always be a tricky thing, depending on exactly how high-protein their diet needs to be. E.g. humans generally shouldn't eat more than about 35% of their daily calories as protein; the implication from the Ecology of the Dragonborn Dragon Mag article is that their diet would be closer to a minimum of 25% protein and a maximum of, say, 50%. If that's the case, their expansion will be limited either to places that already suit whatever agricultural methods they use (e.g. herding for inland populations, fishing and other aquaculture for people living near water), which is less a "secret weakness" and more an obvious logistics issue. Likewise, they'd need to develop preservation techniques for keeping enough meat on hand to feat their militaries, so while they have the manpower to wage war, they may struggle with maintaining logistics and supplies for war.
Locations with natural caves and thriving fish/shellfish sources would be prime targets for settlement, as caves would form naturally-defensible nesting/incubation sites, and fish provide a ready source of high-protein food. Mountains and deserts would present major difficulties for expansion, so human groups wanting to prevent dragonborn from spreading in and (potentially) taking over would want to button up any valleys or passes SUPER hard, and might even want to thin the numbers of any livestock-adjacent animals in their territory to deny possible food sources. More or less, prevention would be the watchword, rather than trying to take them on directly once they've gotten a solid foothold.
TL;DR: Because raising (or fishing up) lots of meat is hard, dragonborn will be more vulnerable than humans right at the initial founding of a settlement, when their logistics aren't well-established and they're the most at risk of Stuff Going Wrong. Kind of "in for a penny, in for a pound." Once built up, they'll be a nightmare to remove; likewise, if they're not trying to build up, their individual strengths give them an edge. But when they're invested but haven't yet gotten the infrastructure in place, they're extra vulnerable: no incubation sites, livestock not yet well-protected, poor road networks for receiving support from the homeland, etc. Terrain features would be better defenses than fortifications or armies.
With respect to humans being ‘locked in’ on a specific geographic boundary by other species, races, powers that be, monsters…you could absolutely use the ‘points of light’ idea; human settlements are few and far between. One of the few safe places for humans and half-humans in a world that is dangerous, bleak, and determined to remain a threat. No massive human cities, no universities, few trained wizards, if any.
You could use a Ravenloft-style of ‘dark powers’ that seek to keep humanity from expanding too far and wide. Perhaps the powers sense that humanity has the potential to unlock incredible mysteries for the benefit, or ruin of all. Or, you could go Dark Sun style and just have a world environment that is so hostile to life, that fragile humans have a very difficult time of emerging as a race and growing in scale. Perhaps there’s a prophecy that a human child, born in a certain age…etc.
You could use a Ravenloft-style of ‘dark powers’ that seek to keep humanity from expanding too far and wide. Perhaps the powers sense that humanity has the potential to unlock incredible mysteries for the benefit, or ruin of all. Or, you could go Dark Sun style and just have a world environment that is so hostile to life, that fragile humans have a very difficult time of emerging as a race and growing in scale. Perhaps there’s a prophecy that a human child, born in a certain age…etc.
Similar Threads
