What about my dragonborn
- Thread starter Grimmjow
- Start date
Argyle King
Legend
I like that 4E split elves into elf and eladrin. I always felt as though the 3rd edition elf was trying too hard to cram too many elven stereotypes into one race. Then, beyond the 3rd Edition core, there came the conga line of elf sub-races. I prefer the 4E model of elves. I'd be ok with eladrin losing their teleport ability in favor of something else though. (It could still be an alternate racial feature in some settings.)
Likewise, I also prefer the 4E deva to the aasimar.
Dragonborn have grown on me, but I can understand if they are considered setting specific. I'm unsure if I prefer the 3rd Edition version or the one from 4th Edition.
In contrast, I strongly dislike the 4E tiefling.
I also dislike D&D gnomes, but they'll probably make it into core since they were a core part of older editions of the game.
If given the choice, I'd prefer a new small-folk race which replaces gnome and halfling -or at least is given a more prominent place beside them.
Likewise, I also prefer the 4E deva to the aasimar.
Dragonborn have grown on me, but I can understand if they are considered setting specific. I'm unsure if I prefer the 3rd Edition version or the one from 4th Edition.
In contrast, I strongly dislike the 4E tiefling.
I also dislike D&D gnomes, but they'll probably make it into core since they were a core part of older editions of the game.
If given the choice, I'd prefer a new small-folk race which replaces gnome and halfling -or at least is given a more prominent place beside them.
Hussar
Legend
I'm also in the boat for liking Eladrin. Thought they were very cool. Since I didn't even know the word "eladrin" was used in previous editions, I couldn't really care less that it was ported over to cover "Fairy Elves". It sounds cool, works for me.
Then again, I've never really understood why minor setting specific details from earlier editions need to be slavishly adhered to in a new edition that shares virtually nothing of the original setting elements.
But, I really, really hope that opinions like JRRNeikalots in the second post are the thing that gets tossed on the fire. I want my game to be as expansive as it can be, not shoehorned into someone's specific idea of what my game should look like.
Then again, I've never really understood why minor setting specific details from earlier editions need to be slavishly adhered to in a new edition that shares virtually nothing of the original setting elements.
But, I really, really hope that opinions like JRRNeikalots in the second post are the thing that gets tossed on the fire. I want my game to be as expansive as it can be, not shoehorned into someone's specific idea of what my game should look like.
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
There is a lot of hate in this thread. The Emperor is pleased.
"Is it my birthday already?! Thanks, ENWorld, for giving the gift of hate!"
Aside from everyone being jerks, I say that dragonborn deserve a place in 5e. I'm not the biggest fan of 'em, and I really dislike that name, but they have their fans, and they deserve their place in the pantheon of races, of which there are thousands.
What I would rather prefer, I think, is a half-dragon theme that gives you more advanced dragon powers as you gain levels. That'd be streets ahead.
But anyway, dragonborn should certainly exist as a playable PC race. So should every race hated on here.
In fact, I'ma put out a campaign setting with nothing but eladrin, dragonborn, warforged, and gnomes and an entire clan of horrible faux-Scottish dwarves who are painfully aware of their own stereotypes. It'll have ninjas and dinosaurs and guns and sharks and lasers and unicorns and 1-square diagonals. Everyone will hate it and I'll just be all
"They are horses with spears! They are warrior stallions!"
"Is it my birthday already?! Thanks, ENWorld, for giving the gift of hate!"
Aside from everyone being jerks, I say that dragonborn deserve a place in 5e. I'm not the biggest fan of 'em, and I really dislike that name, but they have their fans, and they deserve their place in the pantheon of races, of which there are thousands.
What I would rather prefer, I think, is a half-dragon theme that gives you more advanced dragon powers as you gain levels. That'd be streets ahead.
But anyway, dragonborn should certainly exist as a playable PC race. So should every race hated on here.
In fact, I'ma put out a campaign setting with nothing but eladrin, dragonborn, warforged, and gnomes and an entire clan of horrible faux-Scottish dwarves who are painfully aware of their own stereotypes. It'll have ninjas and dinosaurs and guns and sharks and lasers and unicorns and 1-square diagonals. Everyone will hate it and I'll just be all
"They are horses with spears! They are warrior stallions!"
S
Sunseeker
Guest
In 4e I think what, Favored Souls and Scions of Akrosha are the only ones to get perma-wings, but not till like, lvl17. Angelic-something or others get them at 30...woooo...
I really liked the "outsider bloodline" feats in the Faerun books, it was 2 feat cost to get wings for Aasimir and Tieflings, apply that to any race that could naturally have wings and I think that's a fair cost for a really good feature.
Similar Threads
