Tales and Chronicles
Jewel of the North, formerly know as vincegetorix
ahhh yes, that's spot on the aesthetic I was looking for.
D&D General what is the worst race in dnd?
- Thread starter Bernese
- Start date
Redwizard007
Adventurer
Bupu throws you a dirty look.
EzekielRaiden
Legend
Keep in mind, 5e thinks dragonborn and half-orcs and friggin' gnomes are "the true exotics." So yeah. The term is damn-near meaningless.
Literally every part of this analysis makes me sad, because I couldn't possibly disagree more.
They do look like dragons to me, and indeed I'm quite fond of their look. Whether they have tails or not is pretty irrelevant to me. Wings are a special bonus some dragonborn might develop, but most don't. And the special thing about them is the friggin' Arkhosian Empire and its wonderful, tragic history, and all the physiological and sociological information we get about them.
I just think dragons are great. You can check out Overly Sarcastic Productions' "Trope Talk: Dragons" video if you want to know why. TL;DR though is: dragons are awesome in nearly every culture in human history the world over. There's SOMETHING draconic in essentially every culture ever, and it always means a connection to power. Sometimes benevolent, sometimes malevolent. Sometimes elegant, sometimes savage. Sometimes divine, sometimes monstrous. Being a dragon-person means getting the foot in the door on that. Dragonborn society is still built on the need to realize that potential--to forge a name, a legacy for yourself--but there's such enormous, tantalizing potential there simply by being dragonborn.
There are two types of people in the world: those who cannot extrapolate from incomplete data
I mean...that's literally just a silver dragonborn with a reptiloid centaur body. (Tails have already become a "some have it, some don't" trait in the fanbase. Consider (spoilered for size):
Clint_L
Hero
Can't speak for your table, but at mine natural 1s produce more entertainment than any other dice roll.
Twiggly the Gnome
Legend
I mean...that's literally just a silver dragonborn with a reptiloid centaur body. (Tails have already become a "some have it, some don't" trait in the fanbase. Consider (spoilered for size):
That head and face look essentially identical to the art you linked, so the only real difference is two legs vs four (and tail, if that's a difference you consider significant.)
Keep in mind that I was talking about a product that included yet another type of elf. I don't think another dragonborn adjacent option is a big ask.
Vaalingrade
Legend
'Entertainment'. That's why Luck for everyone. If it's positive entertainment, they won't use the luck to fix it. IF it's just going to make your character look like a goober as they die, they can slay the dice.
I must be the only person on the planet who liked Aggressive. It was great for my War Cleric to get close enough to actually use Cure Wounds on allies!
Vaalingrade
Legend
It's more like the barely contained contempt with which the races and their abilities were presented with.
Also the idea that an entire people are naturally aggressive. That's going into Gully Dwarf and Vistani BS.
Also the idea that an entire people are naturally aggressive. That's going into Gully Dwarf and Vistani BS.
Well granted, but I mean, they'd already told us that all Halflings are Brave, all Gnomes are Cunning, and all Half-Orcs are Menacing, Relentless, and Savage, and nobody seemed to mind that at the time.
Heck, even now, all Kender are Fearless.
Vaalingrade
Legend
Kender are actually magically fearless though, so they get a pass.
Halfling brave is a crock though, and no gnome has ever shown cunning.
Redwizard007
Adventurer
Oh, I don't know. Every Gnome that I've never played has been cunning enough to avoid a brutal death.
jasper
Rotten DM
Death snail racing the two hundred laps in Waterdeep. Still going on. Ricky Beholder is in the lead,
humble minion
Legend
I honestly can't remember what they were like in Volo's, but i do remember being unimpressed. Orcs are pretty good in MMoM though.
Mad_Jack
Hero
I liked both the wilden and shardminds in 4E, but they really didn't seem to be all that popular - probably because, although they were definitely cool from a flavor perspective, they weren't exactly impressive mechanically.
jmartkdr2
Hero
Given the number of homebrewed plant-people I had to sift through to find a good one, it's definitely not the concept that's the problem.
Corinnguard
Adventurer
I will have to go with the 3.5 Dragonborn and the Raptoran as the worst two races in D&D. Does anyone here remember when WoTC introduced everyone to Level Adjustments (LAs) and Effective Character Levels (ECLs) in their Savage Species book? This book had rules on how to play powerful beings such as Minotaurs and Giants as player characters. It did this by looking at every trait in a monster's stat box and assigning each of them a LA, which could then be totaled up to determine that being's ECL. As a result, beings such as Minotaurs had an ECL of 8, which meant that they could only be played when everyone else in the party was 8th level as well. You couldn't play one as is at 1st level because they were simply too powerful. You could, however, play one if you took up a Minotaur class and then later multiclassed into the character class you wanted them to have.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I found the whole LA/ECL to be pretty discouraging. Which apparently was WoTC's intent all along.
I can't remember which 4e book spilled the beans on WoTC's intent to discourage the players from playing Giants, Hags, etc. But I do remember reading that WoTC was worried about the fans 'desire' to play something powerful would render the standard races obsolete. There was also that nagging balance issue.
Anyway, the very rules that were meant to discourage players from playing something powerful also proved to be something of a hindrance to any attempt on WoTC's part to create new player character races. How else to explain the staggered approach they used for each of the paths a 3.5 Dragonborn could take for their breath weapon, their senses and their ability to fly? Ditto for the staggered approach in the Raptorans' ability to fly.
I am glad that the 5e Dragonborn are slightly better than their 3.5 counterparts. I say slightly because they're still being 'confused' for Half-Dragons. Not really.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I found the whole LA/ECL to be pretty discouraging. Which apparently was WoTC's intent all along.
I can't remember which 4e book spilled the beans on WoTC's intent to discourage the players from playing Giants, Hags, etc. But I do remember reading that WoTC was worried about the fans 'desire' to play something powerful would render the standard races obsolete. There was also that nagging balance issue.Anyway, the very rules that were meant to discourage players from playing something powerful also proved to be something of a hindrance to any attempt on WoTC's part to create new player character races.
How else to explain the staggered approach they used for each of the paths a 3.5 Dragonborn could take for their breath weapon, their senses and their ability to fly? Ditto for the staggered approach in the Raptorans' ability to fly. I am glad that the 5e Dragonborn are slightly better than their 3.5 counterparts. I say slightly because they're still being 'confused' for Half-Dragons.
Not really.
The funny thing is, I always wanted to play a Half-Dragon, but never found a DM who would let me. And then when I saw Dragonborn, I was like "nah, hard pass".
Corinnguard
Adventurer
I wish I could have played a Half-Dragon back then. The 5e Dragonborn will do. What about a Half-Dragon Dragonborn?
One way to look at a Dragonborn is that they are Half-Dragon and Half-Humanoid.
Similar Threads
- Locked
