D&D 5E Todd Kendrick Interviews Jeremy Crawford: Fizban Dragon Subclasses and Dragonborn races

[Weiley31]

At least I can still do a Half-Dragon by refluffing the Dragonborn.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

No! Not just Sorcerers! Monks and Rangers, too! You know, everyone's favorite classes! The best mechanically balanced ones, too!
/s

I mean, they are very popular and beloved classes.

And I’ve seen plenty of people wanting draconic Rangers.

The only class I’m sad didn’t get a subclass is the Warlock. Especially with the new Great Wyrm lore, it’s just very obviously primed for a warlock patron.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I mean, they are very popular and beloved classes.

Maybe to some people, but some of the "more/most" popular classes in the game? Nah. Absolutely not.

And I’ve seen plenty of people wanting draconic Rangers.

Really? Because I've literally never seen anyone ask for that.

The only class I’m sad didn’t get a subclass is the Warlock. Especially with the new Great Wyrm lore, it’s just very obviously primed for a warlock patron.

I'm sad about that, too. That's the main one that I wish we'd gotten. However, there are a few others that I would have wanted.

 

[Bolares]

Maybe to some people, but some of the "more/most" popular classes in the game? Nah. Absolutely not.

Well, they said "they are very popular and beloved classes". Even if they are not the most popular classes that doesn't invalidate @doctorbadwolf 's argument.

Really? Because I've literally never seen anyone ask for that.

I wanted a draconic ranger...

I would like if more classes had draconic subclasses, I just don't get why we need to undermine other people's preferences... Ask for what you want, but don't say what other people want is wrong.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Maybe to some people, but some of the "more/most" popular classes in the game? Nah. Absolutely not.

Unless you're calling Crawford a liar and an idiot, yes, they are very popular and beloved, as I said. Also, in general, if you're going to use quotes while replying to someone, you should be sure that the text in the quotes is actually something the other person said.

Really? Because I've literally never seen anyone ask for that.

Okay.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

I'm very surprised that there is no draconic sorcerer reprint this book. With optional origin spells too in order to bring it into line with post Tasha's sorcerers.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I'm very surprised that there is no draconic sorcerer reprint this book. With optional origin spells too in order to bring it into line with post Tasha's sorcerers.

Or an option for Gem Draconic Sorcerers. That's super disappointing.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Well, they said "they are very popular and beloved classes". Even if they are not the most popular classes that doesn't invalidate @doctorbadwolf 's argument.

Okay. I might have misread/misinterpreted that, then. I apologize for that, @doctorbadwolf.

My point was that there are more popular classes that people had asked to get a Draconic Subclass for, like the Cleric, Paladin, or Barbarian.

I wanted a draconic ranger...

Good to hear. I have to admit that that's a first, but I'm glad to hear that you're getting what you wanted (if the subclass is designed in a way that you wanted, that is).

I would like if more classes had draconic subclasses, I just don't get why we need to undermine other people's preferences... Ask for what you want, but don't say what other people want is wrong.

Sorry. I wasn't meaning to do that. I just meant that it would probably be fitting to give Draconic subclasses to the more popular classes/more asked for subclasses, instead of the Monk or Ranger (as I had heard people ask for a Dragon Rider Fighter, Dragon Domain Cleric, Great Wyrm Warlock, Dragonrage Barbarian, etc, but not a Draconic Ranger or Monk). That does rely on the premise that WotC strictly only wanted to put 2 subclasses in this book, and that the Monk and Ranger were taking "subclass slots" that other classes' draconic subclasses could have filled.

I can see how that would be taken as me saying that it's bad or wrong to want a Draconic Monk or Ranger. I just would have preferred other subclasses, and wish that these subclasses didn't take the place of the subclasses that I would have preferred (that is, if the reason they weren't included is because of WotC not wanting to add more than 2 subclasses in this book).

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Unless you're calling Crawford a liar and an idiot, yes, they are very popular and beloved, as I said. Also, in general, if you're going to use quotes while replying to someone, you should be sure that the text in the quotes is actually something the other person said.

No, I didn't mean that. I meant that there were other options for Draconic Subclasses that would probably have been more popular/asked for than a Draconic Monk or Ranger.

I'm sure that Monks and Rangers are overall popular classes. Every class in the game is pretty popular, and some unpublished ones (Mystic, Swordmage, Warlord, etc) are also pretty popular. I just meant in comparison to other classes.

(Also, I don't believe that I changed anything in the section of my post that was quoting you. What are you referring to?)

 

[Minigiant]

As much as I woulda like a Dragon fighter where you set your weapon on fire and do leaping attacks, I think the Ranger and Monk are some of the few classes that got no setting subclasses.

WhatI really woulda want is brown dragons and draconic lizardfolk and kobolds.