Dragon's Eye View: Reimagining Kobolds

I would actually really not mind seeing Dragonborn and Kobolds integrated into the same "family", like we have with the various types of Lizardfolk, or (with more dramatic differences) like we have with goblinoids (goblins, hobgoblins, bugbears).
Feedback Disclaimer
Yes, I am expressing my opinions (even complaints - le gasp!) about the current iteration of the play-test that we actually have in front of us. No, I'm not going to wait for you to tell me when it's okay to start expressing my concerns (unless you are WotC). (And no, my comments on this forum are not of the same tone or quality as my actual survey feedback.)
A Psion for Next (Playable Draft) A Barbarian for Next (Brainstorming Still)
I would actually really not mind seeing Dragonborn and Kobolds integrated into the same "family", like we have with the various types of Lizardfolk, or (with more dramatic differences) like we have with goblinoids (goblins, hobgoblins, bugbears).



Having some distant connection would be fine, but I wouldn't want to see them integrated into the same social structure.

Reality Refracted: Social Contracts

My blog of Random Stuff 

Dreaming the Impossible Dream
Imagine a world where the first-time D&D player rolls stats, picks a race, picks a class, picks an alignment, and buys gear to create a character. Imagine if an experienced player, maybe the person helping our theoretical player learn the ropes, could also make a character by rolling ability scores and picking a race, class, feat, skills, class features, spells or powers, and so on. Those two players used different paths to build characters, but the system design allows them to play at the same table. -Mearl

"It is a general popular error to suppose the loudest complainers for the publick to be the most anxious for its welfare." - Edmund Burke

Back to Product and General D&D Discussions -- because the mobile site is bad. (Fixed!)

I would actually really not mind seeing Dragonborn and Kobolds integrated into the same "family", like we have with the various types of Lizardfolk, or (with more dramatic differences) like we have with goblinoids (goblins, hobgoblins, bugbears).



I do so like monster families.  

"Ah, the age-old conundrum. Defenders of a game are too blind to see it's broken, and critics are too idiotic to see that it isn't." - Brian McCormick

I would actually really not mind seeing Dragonborn and Kobolds integrated into the same "family", like we have with the various types of Lizardfolk, or (with more dramatic differences) like we have with goblinoids (goblins, hobgoblins, bugbears).



While we're at it, let's make Halflings part of the human "family".

Lizardfolk are not the same thing as Dragonfolk
My two copper.
In many tales of kobolds found thru Wikipedia, kobolds have a rather black sense of humor and a prankster bent. This could mesh well with their D&D counterparts; kobolds in some editions have an animosity toward gnomes, humorous considering both species' popular penchant for mining, tinkering (mainly traps in kobolds' case), and supernatural household upkeep. They're like the gnomes' sinister cousin or natural enemy.

Making them another short human, as well as the halfling equivalent of a dragonborn/draconian, would be disappointingly redundant, don't you think?
I am a big fan of the idea that kobolds are related to dragons.  Basically, they should look like what dragons would look like if they were three feet tall, humanoid, and generally primitive.  Given their connection with dragons, having them be an 'early offshoot' that never developed the way dragons did is really compelling to me, and gives them a good reason to worship dragons as well.  Physical traits should reference dragons, but focused on their current state.  Scales the same colors, a tail that's useful for more than just balance, no ears.  They're unquestionably reptiloid, treat them as such.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition

"Creature design would be based upon the following:"


"Three-foot-tall humanoid (as in two arms, two legs, upright) form that has been infused with the draconic essence of a god.”  


I don’t like the “Infusion of draconic essence”; they are not lesser cousins of the dragonborn, but perhaps a reptilian race with delusions of grandeur.


I never cared for creatures under 4’ as they are nothing more than ankle-biters.  At 3’ the kobold is the equivalent of an “average size boy” of the whopping age of 2 and a half, I’d prefer to be attacked by kindergarteners or 1st graders instead (i.e. < 48 inches).


“Slight skeletal frame.”  


Disagree here they should have an “average” skeletal frame as they are a warlike race capable of attacking or defending themselves against beings of equal size (e.g. gnomes).  The Dragonshield would look awfully humorous (much like the Tiny Warrior from Ace Ventura: When Nature Calls).


“More about intelligence and agility than strength or brute force.”


Against larger creatures and their traditional enemies (e.g. small fey) they need to develop both, but again I think an average strength is sufficient.  The race is noted for having individuals of great intelligence (i.e. the alchemist).


“Furtive and cowardly alone, but ferocious and dangerous in a crowd.  This would drive all major design decisions.”


I would prefer stealthy and cunning when alone, a master of improvised traps and bushcraft (e.g. MacGyver or Dutch from Predator).  Again as a warlike race a group is always more dangerous than one.


“Hairless, scaly hides that range from dark brown to black.”


More specifically an earth tone scheme are muted and flat in an emulation of the natural colors found in dirt, moss, trees and rocks. Many earth tones originate from clay earth pigments, such as umber, ochre, and sienna.


“Large intelligent eyes that are suited to life underground.”


More like cat eyes (including shades too) suitable for night time raids (not darkvision, but low-light).


“A long tail (prehensile) that integrates with the rest of the body.”


Again like a cat, the tail is used for balance and agile movement.  But absolutely not prehensile, they are not monkeys or opossums!


“Hands that are quite deft and capable of intricate actions.  This would also indicate an ability to craft and make culturally appropriate clothing and accessories—perhaps draconic in theme? “


As an intelligent race they should have the ability to craft items suitable to their environs and culture.  1E had them using wicker shields, swords, axes, javelins and spears – so did many of the ancient Mediterranean and Middle Eastern cultures.


It should also be noted that they are capable of taming wild boars and giant weasels as guardians, which considering RW boars is no small feat.


“Affinity to, and reverence of, dragons.”


As stated earlier they have issues and claims of dragon-blood running through their veins makes them feel better.  A social order and worship based on admiration of draconic traits and service to infamous dragons would be a way of proving their claim of kinship.


The dragons don’t mind the cannon fodder and no sane enemy would think of them as cowards, especially if they have no clue if a dragon is around or not.


“Small white or beige horns.”


This is a whole different can of worms without more details


Age was not a factor listed by you, but the kobold’s lifespan of 135 years and their lairs having up to ~640 individuals and 300 eggs indicate a race of survivors.


Habitat was also not factored, while Mr. Wyatt claims when they cannot live near dragons, they live like rats in warrens.  I prefer the original idea where they live “in dank, dark places such as dismal overgrown forest or subterranean settings”, which considering their hatred of the fey creatures (e.g. brownies, pixies, sprites, and gnomes) gives the kobold a wider range of artistic possibilities.


Also will there be a definitive artistic difference between male and female kobolds?


IMHO kobolds should be a feared adversary and not the Jar Jar Binks of D&D!!

In reallife, “Kobold”, “Gnome”, “Leperchaun”, “Brownie”, and so on, are moreorless synonyms. They all refer to a “House Sprite”, albeit according to different cultures.

The D&D Kobold has little to do with the reallife meaning of the word, but making it explicitly Draconic surprisingly solves the dissonance.

Analogous to calling the creature a “Pygmy Dragon”, calling it a “Kobold Dragon” makes a lot of sense.

The Kobold Dragon is quite different from the typical Dragon. The name “Kobold” illustrates vividly these differences.
• Childlike size
• Domestic qualities, such as wearing clothes, using tools.
• Hiddeness, albeit by stealth rather than ethereality.
• Prankster, trickster qualities.
• Inhabiting mines.

And so on. The name “Kobold Dragon” is apt.


It seems to me, what makes the Kobold Dragon so popular is it is quintessentially a Geek. 
The "dragonblood" kobold from "Races of Dragons" can be a optional subrace. If you don´t like it you don´t add to your settin.


I imagine D&D kobolds like reptilian dog-like creatures, a mixture of velocirraptor and evil fays. They aren´t only canon fodder for low level PCs. 





Do you rebember the kobolds from AD&D capcom arcade?

I imagine my kobolds like from the videogame, but more reptilians, like a mixture of bulldog-like furry and velociraptors. 

Do you rembember Gremlins movies?



Munchies was a serie B horror movie from 80´s






 I mean I imagine D&D kobolds like creatures from horror subgenre of little monsters (gremlins, ghoulies, munchies, critters). 

"Say me what you're showing off for, and I'll say you what you lack!" (Spanish saying)

 

Book 13 Anaclet 23 Confucius said: "The Superior Man is in harmony but does not follow the crowd. The inferior man follows the crowd, but is not in harmony"

 

"In a country well governed, poverty is something to be ashamed of. In a country badly governed, wealth is something to be ashamed of." - Confucius 

One important element that needs to be kept in mind that he doesn't mention is that Kobolds are moderately humorous monsters. They not joke monsters or entirely ignorable, but they are not a serious threat to any but the least experienced adventurers. Trying to make Kobolds too serious looking is likely to get in the way of their character. It would also be bad to overplay the connection to dragons, D&D doesn't need two dragon-kin races.

Other then that, I'm fine with reworking kobold's apperance. Other then being small and having somewhat lizard like appearance, they have not really had a consistent look across editions.
D&D doesn't need two dragon-kin races.


Why?
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
D&D doesn't need two dragon-kin races.


Why?



I agree. Why?

We can have 340935230459 human-kin races, but 2 dragon-kin races is a problem in Dungeons and Dragons? 
D&D doesn't need two dragon-kin races.


Why?



I agree. Why?

We can have 340935230459 human-kin races, but 2 dragon-kin races is a problem in Dungeons and Dragons? 


Particularly if those two races are nothing at all alike, except for being related to dragons.  Different aspects of draconicness are emphasized, they're quite distinct.  I can't possibly imagine thinking "Nah, there's no point to having kobolds because there's a Dragonborn in the party."  They're two completely different worlds.  It'd be like saying there's no point to having demons and devils if we also have Tieflings.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
D&D doesn't need two dragon-kin races.


Why?



I agree. Why?

We can have 340935230459 human-kin races, but 2 dragon-kin races is a problem in Dungeons and Dragons? 


Particularly if those two races are nothing at all alike, except for being related to dragons.  Different aspects of draconicness are emphasized, they're quite distinct.  I can't possibly imagine thinking "Nah, there's no point to having kobolds because there's a Dragonborn in the party."  They're two completely different worlds.  It'd be like saying there's no point to having demons and devils if we also have Tieflings.



Plus, it would be fun to have the Kobold secretly worship or maybe resent the Dragonborn for being more "dragon-like".

We know that's wrong though. Kobolds rule.  
New, higher level kobolds would be awesome.  We have a few different versions of goblins.  So why not a few different versions of kobolds?

Leave the old kobolds to be the weak ones.  With crude cloths and crude traps.  And the smaller early edition sizes.

Then make new ones who are more crafty, and have prehensile tales, and like magical traps as well.  They would be commonly mistaken for kobolds, but are slightly larger (4e's size).  These can be a PC version.

And a third version, closer to dragons.  They have wings and elemental bites, if not breath.  Some run around on all 4's though they can still wield weapons.  They still make traps, but rely on them less.  Their pride tend to be more solo, only grouping under a strong leader, like a real dragon.

And there can be half-breeds between them as well.



Red beady eyes are fine.  Large eyes are for low light vision.  You need something different for darkvision.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

Kobolds rule.  


As long as they have guns.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
Kobolds rule.  


As long as they have guns.



If only...
I would actually really not mind seeing Dragonborn and Kobolds integrated into the same "family", like we have with the various types of Lizardfolk, or (with more dramatic differences) like we have with goblinoids (goblins, hobgoblins, bugbears).

I do so like monster families.  

While I'm not a fan of how kobolds do not resemble historical lore (they are germanic house sprites, not scaly underground dogs), I'd be happy with a similar family grouping for Lizardfolk and Dragonfolk. If dwarves can have their "gully" version, then I guess kobolds could be the "gully dragon" of D&D.

Magic Dual Color Test
I am White/Green
I am White/Green
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I am both orderly and instinctive. I value community and group identity, defining myself by the social group I am a part of. At best, I'm selfless and strong-willed; at worst, I'm unoriginal and sheepish.
It should be made clear that those of us in favor of a stronger kobold-dragon connection and a family of Dragonfolk that Lizardfolk and Dragonfolk are not the same thing.

We are in agreement, yes?

Just checking.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
The key word for kobolds is cunningly. They are weak and they know it, but they make up for it with slyness. They are the evil McGyver of D&D. 

 

I have found this image:


 
I like that ape snout.

I don´t like those ridiculous lizard heads like from children cartoons. Kobolds aren´t evil cousins of Wally Wator (Hanna-Barbera´s character). I imagine D&D kobolds like reptilians baboons, closer to AD&D look, like a mixture of gremlims (80´s movie) and kobolds from capcom AD&D arcades (tower of doom and shadow over mystara).

www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhAWfVmnV38

"Say me what you're showing off for, and I'll say you what you lack!" (Spanish saying)

 

Book 13 Anaclet 23 Confucius said: "The Superior Man is in harmony but does not follow the crowd. The inferior man follows the crowd, but is not in harmony"

 

"In a country well governed, poverty is something to be ashamed of. In a country badly governed, wealth is something to be ashamed of." - Confucius 

It should be made clear that those of us in favor of a stronger kobold-dragon connection and a family of Dragonfolk that Lizardfolk and Dragonfolk are not the same thing.

We are in agreement, yes?

Just checking.

*shrug*

I could see them in the tree somewhere.  Something like...

Dragon -> missing link -> dragonborn -> missing link -> kobolds -> missing link -> lizardfolk.


Thus lizard folk are very far removed from dragons, but not too far from kobolds.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

See, I don't like the "missing link" connection between kobolds and lizardfolk, because it implies a more direct evolution.  I would rather it be more branching, like how we humans are actually fairly closely related to lemurs, but the common ancestor is still a good ways back.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
I would actually really not mind seeing Dragonborn and Kobolds integrated into the same "family", like we have with the various types of Lizardfolk, or (with more dramatic differences) like we have with goblinoids (goblins, hobgoblins, bugbears).

I do so like monster families.  

While I'm not a fan of how kobolds do not resemble historical lore (they are germanic house sprites, not scaly underground dogs), I'd be happy with a similar family grouping for Lizardfolk and Dragonfolk. If dwarves can have their "gully" version, then I guess kobolds could be the "gully dragon" of D&D.



Agreed. Lizardfolk, kobolds, and dragonborn should be one (albeit dysfunctional) family. I would love it if all 3 were options for characters.
dragonborn would be the noble and intelligent ones.
lizardfolk would be the dumb powerful brutes.
kobolds would be the small, cunning, sneaky ones.
of course a character could break the mold and escape the stereotype with any of them.

i like it when races are type cast to certain classes but the rules are built so characters can escape stereotypes (dwarf wizards, halfling fighters, Orc bards, etc.)
 
I would actually really not mind seeing Dragonborn and Kobolds integrated into the same "family", like we have with the various types of Lizardfolk, or (with more dramatic differences) like we have with goblinoids (goblins, hobgoblins, bugbears).

I do so like monster families.  

While I'm not a fan of how kobolds do not resemble historical lore (they are germanic house sprites, not scaly underground dogs), I'd be happy with a similar family grouping for Lizardfolk and Dragonfolk. If dwarves can have their "gully" version, then I guess kobolds could be the "gully dragon" of D&D.

Agreed. Lizardfolk, kobolds, and dragonborn should be one (albeit dysfunctional) family. I would love it if all 3 were options for characters.
dragonborn would be the noble and intelligent ones.
lizardfolk would be the dumb powerful brutes.
kobolds would be the small, cunning, sneaky ones.
of course a character could break the mold and escape the stereotype with any of them.

i like it when races are type cast to certain classes but the rules are built so characters can escape stereotypes (dwarf wizards, halfling fighters, Orc bards, etc.)

I wouldn't lump lizardfolk in with dragons, because they are distinctly different, IMO. My suggestion was to have a separate "lizardfolk" family, AND a "dragonfolk" family, with kobolds and dragonborn being related, following a similar pattern as the goblins. I liked how the Draconomicon (I think that was 2e) described dragons as more akin to felines than lizards. Hmm, maybe the catfolk should have its own family as well...

Magic Dual Color Test
I am White/Green
I am White/Green
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I am both orderly and instinctive. I value community and group identity, defining myself by the social group I am a part of. At best, I'm selfless and strong-willed; at worst, I'm unoriginal and sheepish.
I wouldn't lump lizardfolk in with dragons, because they are distinctly different, IMO. My suggestion was to have a separate "lizardfolk" family, AND a "dragonfolk" family, with kobolds and dragonborn being related, following a similar pattern as the goblins. I liked how the Draconomicon (I think that was 2e) described dragons as more akin to felines than lizards. Hmm, maybe the catfolk should have its own family as well...



Draconomicon was 3e.
One of my favorite books in the set, actually.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
I would actually really not mind seeing Dragonborn and Kobolds integrated into the same "family", like we have with the various types of Lizardfolk, or (with more dramatic differences) like we have with goblinoids (goblins, hobgoblins, bugbears).

I do so like monster families.  

While I'm not a fan of how kobolds do not resemble historical lore (they are germanic house sprites, not scaly underground dogs), I'd be happy with a similar family grouping for Lizardfolk and Dragonfolk. If dwarves can have their "gully" version, then I guess kobolds could be the "gully dragon" of D&D.

Agreed. Lizardfolk, kobolds, and dragonborn should be one (albeit dysfunctional) family. I would love it if all 3 were options for characters.
dragonborn would be the noble and intelligent ones.
lizardfolk would be the dumb powerful brutes.
kobolds would be the small, cunning, sneaky ones.
of course a character could break the mold and escape the stereotype with any of them.

i like it when races are type cast to certain classes but the rules are built so characters can escape stereotypes (dwarf wizards, halfling fighters, Orc bards, etc.)

I wouldn't lump lizardfolk in with dragons, because they are distinctly different, IMO. My suggestion was to have a separate "lizardfolk" family, AND a "dragonfolk" family, with kobolds and dragonborn being related, following a similar pattern as the goblins. I liked how the Draconomicon (I think that was 2e) described dragons as more akin to felines than lizards. Hmm, maybe the catfolk should have its own family as well...



I like the elegance of larger more inclusive groupings. 

I would like the following character options:
human: + halfling and dwarf
Elven: drow, high, wood
Dragonic: lizardfolk, kobold, dragonborn
Goblinoid: goblin, Orc
+ system for making hybrids (half elves, half orcs, mongrelfolk)

 
Humans like to catagorize things.

Now how to make that fairer?   hmmmmm

I am in the Dragons are not lizards camp.

"The Apollo moon landing is off topic for this thread and this forum. Let's get back on topic." Crazy Monkey

Option A: Kobolds linked with dragonblood family: dracoborn, dracotaurs, dracokins, draconians.......(and spellcalles?). Maybe goblinoid ancestors who got dragonblood traits like the spellcales from "Races of dragons".


Option B: Kobolds linked with reptiliand humanoids: lizardfolk, troglodytes, urds, khaasta...





 Option C: two subraces, one would be A and the other B. (and both hate each other).

The kobolds´ jaw and snout should be like a reptilian badoon. Those too big nasal holes are too ridiculous. Is there any real world reptile with a snout like it? I would rather the AD&D reptilian ape. 
 
 

* Some humanoid monsters should be designed to be nemesis or achenemy of some PC races. Goblins, kobolds and springans should be favorite antagonist of little PC races (halflings and gnomes).

 * Some DMs could say kobolds from their setting were a goblinoid comunity who were transformed by dragons (to use them like slaves) or some deity...or kobolds ancestors used magic to transform themself to survive, a softer version of prestige class disciple of dragon.

"Say me what you're showing off for, and I'll say you what you lack!" (Spanish saying)

 

Book 13 Anaclet 23 Confucius said: "The Superior Man is in harmony but does not follow the crowd. The inferior man follows the crowd, but is not in harmony"

 

"In a country well governed, poverty is something to be ashamed of. In a country badly governed, wealth is something to be ashamed of." - Confucius 

Option A: Kobolds linked with dragonblood family: dracoborn, dracotaurs, dracokins, draconians.......(and spellcalles?). Maybe goblinoid ancestors who got dragonblood traits like the spellcales from "Races of dragons".


Option B: Kobolds linked with reptiliand humanoids: lizardfolk, troglodytes, urds, khaasta...

I kinda like option B, where they are genetically related to lizards, but have racial delusions of grandeur and want to be related to dragons.

Magic Dual Color Test
I am White/Green
I am White/Green
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I am both orderly and instinctive. I value community and group identity, defining myself by the social group I am a part of. At best, I'm selfless and strong-willed; at worst, I'm unoriginal and sheepish.
D&D doesn't need two dragon-kin races.


Why?

Because the range of dragon related creatures is over crowded in D&D and the total range of dragon/lizard/serpent related is even worse.

Plus, what makes Kobolds useful isn't dragon related. They are useful because they are wimpy, the race that even a 1st level character can take on when out numbered. When you make them dragon-kin, people start expecting them have dragon-like powers, and that gets in the way of their in game utility.
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" class="mceContentBody " contenteditable="true" />
I'll add my voice to what a few others are saying, I really like the idea of kobolds being in the same "family" as Dragonborn. Further, I would like halflings to be included in the same family as humans. I don't think this would make much mechanical difference, but we have had the idea of monster families (gob, hobgob, bugbear) for a while now, and it always seemed to make a fair bit of sense.
D&D doesn't need two dragon-kin races.


Why?

Because the range of dragon related creatures is over crowded in D&D


...huh?

We've got dragons, and....dragonborn.  And not kobolds, apparently.

What are all the others?

When you make them dragon-kin, people start expecting them have dragon-like powers


...huh?

Since when do all dragonkin have dragon-like powers?  Why are people expecting that, particularly when it's very clearly explained that while they're related, they don't have nearly any of that awesomeness to them?  That that's the point?
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
It should be made clear that those of us in favor of a stronger kobold-dragon connection and a family of Dragonfolk that Lizardfolk and Dragonfolk are not the same thing.

That I agree with, if only because people who like Dragonfold and those that like Lizardfold tend to dislike them being associated with each other. There is enough space for both a lizard-folk and dragon-folk PC race, and both sides are happier if the two are no more related then lizards and dragons. Which is to say, very distantly but both legend and observation suggests that there is some connection somewhere even if it isn't clear which came first or how they are related.

See, I don't like the "missing link" connection between kobolds and lizardfolk, because it implies a more direct evolution.  I would rather it be more branching, like how we humans are actually fairly closely related to lemurs, but the common ancestor is still a good ways back.

Well i can't do a good tree with just text.  But yea, i think there should be some sort of connection both ways.


What if kobolds where the offspring of lizardfolk and dragonborn?

Thus more like...

Dragons -> missing link -> Dragonborn -> kobolds <- lizardfolk <- missing link <- newt. 


I actually wouldn't mind if every creature (except far realm) was releated in some super tree.  Though not really a tree, since there would be more then 1 start point.  And lot's of inter-species mating and magic tinkering...

owl -> owlbear <- bear.
trent -> Gazeebo <- mimic <- ooze.  

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

D&D doesn't need two dragon-kin races.


Why?

Because the range of dragon related creatures is over crowded in D&D and the total range of dragon/lizard/serpent related is even worse.




Psst.

Just because it's printed doesn't mean you have to use them, and even if you use them, you can re-skin them and change the lore any way you want.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
change the lore any way you want.


Which would make any discussion of what lore in the books should be pretty worthless, in your opinion, along with this entire article series.

What's the point of your contribution here, beyond implying that none of what we're discussing is worth discussing?
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
To me the relationship is not important in the D&D game.  The game could just leave it as vague and let each campaign flesh out the relationship.

The mechanics is the important thing that the gamemakers need to be worried about.

As someone who has played PC kobolds, dragonborn, and lizardfolk, I want all three as playable PC races.  Leave their history out.  I don't care how they are linked if it is going to bother some people.

I like reptilian races.  I would rather have 3 reptiles than gnomes.

Cool races:
Drow, lizardfolk, minotaur, undead

Uncool races:
Half-elves, gnomes, half-orcs

If we must have hybrids, can we just have a mechanic for creating hybrids instead of making them a separate race?


I prefer the older scaly dogish ratlike tailed Kobold of AD&D. I fear Jon's description will look too much a 3 feet tall lizardfolk.

Id like something like this: (perhaps with a little more fur)


Sign In to post comments