Woot -- quality new race flavor!

Nice fluff imo.

I especially like the haflings gypsy'ish, river-barge wanderers thing.. Very nifty, and for some reason it just seems very fitting with how I think halfings should be. Dragonborn as a nomadic mercenary race sounds good too, I think they're a much better fit for that role than hobgoblins could have hoped to be.

I think I liked the thieflings better before though, I liked the whole 'baby born from normal parents suddenly grows horns, and a tail, and is left on the monastery's doorstep, to an uncertain fate' feel they had, but it's by no means bad.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Too many ancient empires.

And I'm still trying to think why people would trust tielflings in general and why dragonborn especially would want to travel with them. There's only so much role playing angst I can deal with at the table.
 

Mad Mac said:
Hmmm... wandering Mercenary Dragonborn...that's very nearly perfect, actually. It gives them a reason to show up nearly anywhere while still being arrogant bastards. That way, they're still outsiders of a sort, but intregrated enough into society to be playable without going all the way and making them a "Proud Warrior Culture of Innkeepers and blacksmiths".
That's my first 4e PC, right there.
 


I liked the whole 'baby born from normal parents suddenly grows horns, and a tail, and is left on the monastery's doorstep, to an uncertain fate' feel they had, but it's by no means bad.
See, in my mind, that old yarn's been completely played out. Boring to the max. (Tubular! Radical!) But I think I've read from R&C spoilers that tiefling+human=tiefling baby, so it could still work out for you if you wanted it.
 

Meh.

I still see dragonborn as an interloper race that is irrelevant. I'm guessing halfling background changes are related in part to eliminating size-based awkwardness (and the rest to giving them a firm niche). Human and dwarves are fine as described. The Elf/eladrin racial split seems silly ... why mechnically differentiate them. And I'm still not a fan of tieflings, though I approve of this background given the changes they've announced to demons/devils (devils = humanoid; demons = aberrations).

I'm wondering if the alignment changes will still feel like D&D. Does "unaligned" = neutral? Hmmm ... needs a new thread.
 


Olgar Shiverstone said:
I'm wondering if the alignment changes will still feel like D&D. Does "unaligned" = neutral? Hmmm ... needs a new thread.

With all due respect (and a healthy dose of wryness): Who cares? That's one sacred cow that's been answering to the name "Cheeseburger" for too long!

I'm glad to see the alignment system going the way of polio. Yeah, it'll still be out there, and when it crops up it'll be dangerous, but for most folks, it'll be completely irrelevant. :)

--G
 

cignus_pfaccari said:
The entire point of ancient empires is to create ruins for you to loot, and to have made magic items for you to find.

And ancient empires are a pretty common trope.

Brad
I just would prefer that they were not co-existing empires that both fell. If the Dragonborn Empire had fallen into disparate tribes of wandering mercenaries while the Tiefling Empire is now but an empire in name only and slowly crumbling into a withered state of decadence, I think that would be much more preferable and generative for a Points of Light campaign. And then one also to wonder if the giants too had an empire. And then the halflings with their "invisible empire," one must then further speculate that D&D flavor text developers lack the use of a thesaurus or failed to take history courses.
 

Kunimatyu said:
And Tieflings will probably exist in tribes in the Demon Wastes and as slaves of the Lords of Dust, I'm guessing.
Actually, Keith has talked about Tieflings being related to the Planes; a birth when a plane is manifesting/cotenimous with the Material results in a tiefling, and the Plane's nature reflects in the Tief's personality (a Shavarath tiefling being warlike and quick to violence, etc).
 

Remove ads

Top