What about my dragonborn

[Hussar]

One point I'm trying to highlight is you will be faced with a game that is "someone's specific idea of what [your] game should look like." At least for a while until the elements that make the game what you think it should look like come out.

Of course. Again, don't care in the slightest. It's always been thus. Why should 5e be different?

My point is, I'm not going to spend the next several years pissing and moaning because WOTC didn't serve me.

If something is in the game you don't like, there's a really simple solution to that. Don't use it. I know that's apparently some newfangled play thing that hasn't really been around all that long, but, I've been told that it apparently works. I forget the magic word the DM has to use though. Rhymes with snow or something like that. It's on the tip of my tongue...

 

[avin]

GNOMES and HALFLINGS are for slaying, not for playing.

Fixed

I hate halflings. I dislike gnomes. But I want them on core for people who like them be able to play since day 1.

Seems egoistic want to exclude other races from core just because it's not how you (*generic you*, not pointing here) like to play, forcing other people wait months while you are playing since day one.

About Eladrin, I like the concept but I would rename them to something like High Elves and move Eladrin back to what they used to be.

 

[Janaxstrus]

Seems egoistic want to exclude other races from core just because it's not how you (*generic you*, not pointing here) like to play, forcing other people wait months while you are playing since day one.

About Eladrin, I like the concept but I would rename them to something like High Elves and move Eladrin back to what they used to be.

I don't want the Dragonborn, "Eladrin", "Devas" and warforged in the core for a variety of reasons.

Warforged, Shifters, Changelings and Dragonborn to some extent, are setting specific. They make more sense to me in a campaign setting book.

Eladrin and Devas because they stole names from existing races/creatures that have been around for 20+ years.

I just dislike the flavor of devil born creatures, but I don't have a major problem with Tieflings.

Rename the "Devas" back to Aasimar and play them off the Tieflings, and I'll accept it.
Rename the Eladrin back to High Elves and there's no issue.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

I always felt that they never fleshed out the Dragonborn or Tieflings in the core books. With the other races, there was enough history in the game or other fantasy that you had an idea of what they were all about (elves live in forests, dwarves like mining, etc.). Sure, some of this is cliched, but it gives you a starting point. I never got a handle on Dragonborn culture - where did they live, what activites, items, social structures should you associate with them. Tieflings were worse because they were just humans who had made a bad deal in the past, so really.. they had no culture of their own.

 

[Mallus]

I agree there too. Especially since we have one guy in our group who plays half-orcs almost exclusively.

Heh... my 1st PC ever was an AD&D half-orc fighter assassin. I have a soft spot for them.

And I've seen my share of lizardman/saurial/half-ogre/mongrelman/part-monster PCs since then, usually in AD&D or AD&D 2e campaigns.

I don't see what the fuss is. If you don't like 'em, ban them in your campaign. But they and their monstrous kin have been around for ages.

 

[Minigiant]

One thing I hope is that what ever races, classes, and cultures the designers have as core, they give DMs and Players suggestions on how to not play stereotypes.

Sure it you want to play a drunken mountain-loving dwarf with an accent and beard or a eating stealing halfling sidekicks from the hills or an aloof vegetarian elf ranger or wizard, fine. But player/DMs shouldn't feel like they have to or that the game expects them to.

 

[Gorgoroth]

yes!

But why not have hardcoded alignments for dragonborn too. I think that would be neat-o. Like if you want to burn stuff as a red dragonman, it's a one-way ticket to evil-town for you. I didn't like how in 4e the colour of your skin didn't even determine your breath weapon damage type, let alone your alignment. Your dragon scale type was basically useless fluff, and in a game of dungeons and DRAGONS, is sacrilege IMO.

That way, metallic dragon skin tones would be the norm for PCs usually, and they might have less offensive stuff and more buffs or charisma or less-combat-min-maxy type bonuses. All of them, as they gain levels as PCs should have the option to spend feats to grow wings or thicker scales or magic resist or whatever. But not freebie giveaways. And some of the options for breathweapon could be similar to 4e, so long as the breath weapon builds are balanced and not either uber suck, or OP. It's another fail of 4e that they never errata'ed breath weapon to have built-in expertise or fixed the scaling issues. As it was, unless you were a sorcerer and it was an arcane power, there was no easy way to make you to-hit viable enough to be worth it to boost .

Do I take weapon focus for +1/+2/+3 to ALL my attacks? Or Empowered Dragon breath, for +2 damage on a single encounter power, that wasn't likely to hit anyway. //suckage

 

[CleverNickName]

Great, just another "only tolkien races are D&D" topic...

I don't think anybody is saying that. I don't speak for everyone here, but I do NOT think that dragonborn, warforged, tieflings, minotaurs, dark elves, half-races, and so forth should be removed from the game. I think 5E should have dozens, hundreds even, of playable races. I really do.

I just think that only 5 or 6 of the most popular ones should be in the Player's Handbook, and the rest of them should be put into other books. That's all. I don't think it is an unreasonable suggestion.

EDIT: Or better yet, I would love it if the PHB gave us rules for creating our own races and racial variants, and presented 5 or 6 of the most popular ones as examples. I think the rules should favor creativity, not standardization...who cares if Joe's version of drow is different from Sue's version?

An "everything but the kitchen sink" approach is fine for gamers who are seeking out-of-the-box variety in their games. But not everyone plays that way. A lot of gamers do their own world-building. It is a lot easier to add stuff later, than it is to remove it once it's in the core.

 

[avin]

I don't want the Dragonborn, "Eladrin", "Devas" and warforged in the core for a variety of reasons.

Warforged, Shifters, Changelings and Dragonborn to some extent, are setting specific. They make more sense to me in a campaign setting book.

Everything is setting specific. I've played in worlds where only humans existed. A friend of mine had a campaign with no Halflings. In my first homebrew there were only Orcs, Humans and Elves.

Unless DDN has a default world everything fits core.

Eladrin and Devas because they stole names from existing races/creatures that have been around for 20+ years.

Agreed completely.

They need to be renamed.

I just dislike the flavor of devil born creatures, but I don't have a major problem with Tieflings.

Rename the "Devas" back to Aasimar and play them off the Tieflings, and I'll accept it.
Rename the Eladrin back to High Elves and there's no issue.

Agreed.

 

[Shadeydm]

Rename the "Devas" back to Aasimar and play them off the Tieflings, and I'll accept it.
Rename the Eladrin back to High Elves and there's no issue.

Yes!