This is a pretty gross exggeration, and either speaks to a profound level of ignorance which someone with your prominence on this forum simply shouldn't have, or a very obnoxious level of passive-aggressive edition hating.For me, it's nothing at all to do with the content. It's all to do with the writing style.
Play a dragonborn if:
- You want to be scaly.
This is a pretty gross exggeration, and either speaks to a profound level of ignorance .... or a very obnoxious level of passive-aggressive edition ... you either didn't bother to read the 4e PHB, or are passivly trying to start up an edition war.
Let's be clear.
You are welcome to disagree with me. You are welcome to debate my opinions. You are NOT welcome to make personal attacks against me or anyone else on these forums. There are no exceptions, no matter how right you feel. I hope that's crystal clear.
He does have a point though. Is "play a dragonborn if you want to be scaly" in the books?
It is not in the books; it's a little rhetoric hyperbole on the line "... if you want to look like a dragon".
I'm fine with people finding that a little too hyperbolic, and you're welcome to say so; that does not excuse personal insults, however.

(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.