Community

 
Jump Menu:
Post Reply
Page 1 of 4  •  1 2 3 4 Next
Switch to Forum Live View James Wyatt: Regarding kobolds and dragons...
8 months ago  ::  Oct 10, 2012 - 4:06PM #1
Angrygodofmilk
Date Joined: Mar 30, 2007
Posts: 290
You recently posted the following poll results for kobolds in your latest Wandering Monsters article. Here is it again for the edification of all.

Kobolds: Dragon blood?
1 -- No dragon blood. 221 17.6%
2 -- I like the wishy-washy answer. 731 58.1%
3 -- Definitely dragon blood! 306 24.3%
Total 1258 100.0%

I'd like to take a crack at interpreting these results.

82.4% of those polled like the 'possibility' that kobolds are descended from dragons, if not definitively linked to dragons with no question in their mind what-so-ever.

You made it clear that you want to de-couple kobolds from their dragon lineage, but I think this poll disagrees with your sentiment.

You also made it seem like (in the previous Wandering Monsters article) there are no D&D precedents for kobolds being descended from dragons, writing:

"The most contentious part of the description seems to have been the kobold claim to dragon descent. That's one of those things that has worked its way into my mind (and not just mine) without ever really being explicitly stated in the core rules, at least not that I could find."

Let's start with a quote from the Dungeons & Dragons Basic Set.

"They have scaly, rust-brown skin and no hair."


Fair enough, scaly-skin does not a dragon make. So let's follow this quote up with two more from Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, Monstrous Compendium, Volume 1.

"Barely clearing three feet in height, kobolds have scaly hides that range from very dark rusty brown to a rusty black."


...and...

"In a lair there will be 5-20 (5d4) bodyguards, females equal to 50% of the males, young equal to 10% of the males and 30-300 (3d10x10) eggs."


Eggs. A picture of kobolds as reptiles is beginning to form, which is eventually firmed up in Dungeons & Dragons, 3rd Edition, Monster Manual.

"Kobolds are short, reptilian humanoids with cowardly and sadistic tendencies."


...and...

"A kobold's scaly skin ranges from a dark rusty brown to a rusty black color."


Fast forward and couple of years and guess what? The secret is out. Let there be no doubt!

Here is a picture of a 'dragonwrought kobold' figurine, made by Wizards of the Coast and hosted by the Wizards of the Coast web site.



Here is the book, published by Wizards of the Coast, in which kobolds were featured and described as having strong game-mechanical ties to dragons.



Here's some beautiful interior art of a 'winged' dragonwrought kobold from Races of the Dragon (no doubt responsible for inspiring the above-posted figurine).



Which leads me to ask...how hard did you look for connections between kobolds and dragons in D&D lore?

Also, based on these easily discovered examples of winged kobolds, I think you may be premature in leaving the 'urd' aside for now. The urd kobolds seem to be alive and well (in some form or another).

You asked what D&D players think. Well, D&D players have spoken. Please listen to them.

Quick Reply
Cancel
8 months ago  ::  Oct 10, 2012 - 4:35PM #2
mrpopstar
  • Dragon Slayer
Date Joined: May 22, 2003
Posts: 2,693
Specifically, 1,258 of the 80,000+ D&D players taking part in the playtest have spoken.

Just a matter of perspective.
Quick Reply
Cancel
8 months ago  ::  Oct 10, 2012 - 4:40PM #3
MindWandererB
  • Core Coliseum Elder
Date Joined: Apr 23, 2005
Posts: 2,705
I think when they say "D&D Lore" they mean editions 2 and earlier.  Clearly the dragon-kobold thing in 3e is pretty solid. In earlier editions, they're reptitian but not draconic.
"Edison didn't succeed the first time he invented Benjamin Franklin, either." Albert the Alligator, Walt Kelly's Pogo Sunday Book

The Core Coliseum: test out your 4e builds and fight to the death.
Quick Reply
Cancel
8 months ago  ::  Oct 10, 2012 - 4:49PM #4
Hebitsuikaza
Date Joined: Apr 23, 2005
Posts: 936
In edition 1 and 2, they were small lizardmen. However, strangely enough they were also considered to be goblins. This was never particularly well explained-- except that "goblinoid" just seemed to sort of mean basic, mundane badguy demi-humans.

It was only when WotC took over that they became dragonoids. If dragonborn aren't thrown out though, they might serve the purpose of being the dragonborn's small people race-- such as halflings with humans, goblins with hobgoblins and gnomes for dwarf/elfs.

Quick Reply
Cancel
8 months ago  ::  Oct 10, 2012 - 4:57PM #5
Coyoteoldman
Date Joined: Jan 22, 2006
Posts: 57
I love this thread.
Quick Reply
Cancel
8 months ago  ::  Oct 10, 2012 - 4:58PM #6
DragonGuardian
Date Joined: Jul 2, 2008
Posts: 355
They like to believe they are dragons, and the nobelest of their kin are dragon decended, but dragons are known to get around. Kobalds are just one of the more willing races to have draconic blood introduced, but that does not mean they all are dragon decended.
Quick Reply
Cancel
8 months ago  ::  Oct 10, 2012 - 5:18PM #7
Kalex_the_Omen
Date Joined: Apr 1, 2001
Posts: 2,909
3rd Edition is indeed where this idea first started.  The earilest reference I can find is in The Sunless Citadel.  The kobold chieftain Yusdrayl says when asked why the kobolds are here...

"As all know kobolds are heir to dragons.  As the mightiest among my people, I have led a brave few to this holy site, where dragons were revered long ago."




I believe Deekin Scalesinger the kobold bard from the Bioware's Neverwinter Nights video game also made frequent references to kobolds' draconic heritage.

Kalex the Omen
Dungeonmaster Extraordinaire



Concerning Player Rules Bias Show

Mar 7, 2012 -- 5:19AM, Kalex_the_Omen wrote:

Gaining victory through rules bias is a hollow victory and they know it.


Concerning "Default" Rules Show

Oct 11, 2012 -- 2:23AM, Kalex_the_Omen wrote:

The argument goes, that some idiot at the table might claim that because there is a "default" that is the only true way to play D&D.  An idiotic misconception that should be quite easy to disprove just by reading the rules, coming to these forums, or sending a quick note off to Customer Support and sharing the inevitable response with the group.  BTW, I'm not just talking about Next when I say this.  Of course, D&D has always been this way since at least the late 70's when I began playing.


My First D&D - 1979 D&D Basic Set (6th Printing) Show

Quick Reply
Cancel
8 months ago  ::  Oct 10, 2012 - 6:04PM #8
trebor_rjf
Date Joined: Sep 30, 2006
Posts: 1,083
the way i see it, why not just let them have it? it makes them more interesting than just being another wimpy race of level 1 fodder.
Quick Reply
Cancel
8 months ago  ::  Oct 10, 2012 - 6:11PM #9
LupusRegalis
Date Joined: Dec 15, 2009
Posts: 362
The way I see it, leave the answer as a mystery, all wishy-washy.  Maybe they are dragon-blooded, maybe they're not.  If it's something that becomes important in a game, the DM can decide for himself based on his preferences/setting.  If it's not important to the game, it's just one of life's unanswered questions and adds flavor to the game.
Quick Reply
Cancel
8 months ago  ::  Oct 10, 2012 - 7:43PM #10
Quasadu
Date Joined: May 24, 2012
Posts: 373

Oct 10, 2012 -- 4:06PM, Angrygodofmilk wrote:

82.4% of those polled like the 'possibility' that kobolds are descended from dragons, if not definitively linked to dragons with no question in their mind what-so-ever.




And at the same time, 75.7% of those polled like the 'possibility' that kobolds are not descended from dragons, if not definitively unrelated to dragons with no question in their mind what-so-ever.

Speculative interpretation of vague data is fun.

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 4  •  1 2 3 4 Next
Jump Menu:
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing