4e Dragonborn to Gargoyles?

[Irving the Meek]

One of the hangups of doing a 4e version of Ravenloft is the Dragonborn. It's hard to see how they can fit in.

Jester, over on the D&D boards, suggested an interesting change - giving them wings, taking away the dragon breath, and calling them gargoyles.

How much would that change their fundamental role? I believe that dragon breath is useful for the class of choice for dragonborn, the paladin - it lets them mark a target much more readily. Perhaps the fly speed could be a feat, and the dragon breath can become a wing buffet or thunderous war cry.

As for the natural +2 Charisma and the potential Outsider Rating... consider this potential. Gargoyles are intimately tied to the Church of Ezra (and, as time went on, other churches). They're widely known as protectors of the faith and defenders of the Church. Gargoyles ooze gravitas, and their voices decidedly lean to the basso-profundo side. People don't run screaming... but they do stare, and behave very nicely, when a walking boulder of faith shows up.

Thoughts?

[Jester of the FoS]

It was an old idea.

Right around the pre-4e days (April, May) I was watching alot of Disney's Gargoyles cartoon (bought the 1st half of season 2). I was kicking around the idea of a Goliath-esque characters in D&D and thought it might work in 4e with a dragonborn (at this time the books weren't out and many of the preview pics still had wings).
So I was disappointed when no racial feats or alternate powers gave wings. But the idea stuck with me and I brainstormed flight as an encounter power comparable to the eladrin teleport (and was rewarded with genasi having encounter flight).

Somewhere when working on my 4e Ravenloft pamphlet I considered a new race to replace dragonborn like caliban replaced half-orcs in 3e; something that would fill the role and muscle and martial. A caliban to dragonborn didn't work due to dragonborn's charisma boost and my desire to make caliban stand on their own.
So I returned to the old idea of making the dragons gargoyles, albeit more D&D and rocky than Disney.

Dragonborn make excellent warlords and paladins. The dragonbreath is useful for both because its a touch of range. However, racial powers are less tied to class, the stat boosts should more than make up for any changes in the power. The extra mobility of flying would be useful in both cases: moving to where you're needed for support or to defend an ally.

The big reason I didn't do this in my rules (other than forgetting when doing the races) as that I didn't think they filled the same player niche. Dragonborn are very much the role for playing dragons. They're for people who want to be big, scary, fire-breathing lizards. There are other beefy classes, including the Monster Manual races, so I didn't feel not including dragonborn/gargoyles would break the game.

[Igor the Henchman]

You know, for a while now I've been very doubtful about the so-called "incompatibility" of dragonborn in Ravenloft. I've seen quite a lot of lenghy discussions on how they could be remade to "fit" Ravenloft, and how you're better off just exculding them, etc... and I don't quite bite.

My current 4e game (a bit irregular, but still going strong) is set in Ravenloft and there's a dragonborn PC - regular stuff, straight up from the PHB. And quite a funny thing: we've yet to run into one of those menacing "problems" that are so much discussed upon around here.

One short but very fun episode in the second session was when they got to a human town. The PC played the character as a sort of proud-ish and head-strong warlord type - "you humans are all as weak and tender as that pink hide of yours", that kind of guy - and somewhat preoccupied with personal appearance too. So when - I don't remember how exactly - his clothes got completely ruined in the first few encounters, first thing he wanted to find was a tailors' shop to order a new suit. And it was very fun moment, with the blanching tailor finding a big scaled humanoid with a huge sword bursting into the shop, and very civilly inquiring about a new suit for himself. I think the player enjoyed the scene quite a bit - as well as the next session, when he found himself temporarily filling in for the town sheriff (before he got kicked out of office by the sheriff's second in command, that is, but that's besides the point).

Also, Merry Christmas

[Isabella]

I wrote a great big article on them for QtR... I think it got lost in the October fray. But yes, I also felt they could be played as gargoyles. They could even keep the breath weapon; many gargoyles were waterspouts, it's not that far-fetched to imagine one gurgling something else.

[Jester of the FoS]

You know, for a while now I've been very doubtful about the so-called "incompatibility" of dragonborn in Ravenloft. I've seen quite a lot of lenghy discussions on how they could be remade to "fit" Ravenloft, and how you're better off just exculding them, etc... and I don't quite bite.

There's just nothing really gothic about a big giant lizard-man. They're not very folklorish and very, very fantastic. Picture the reaction if a lizard-man walked through a small town in 1100ad rural Germany or England.

But, that said, I never wanted to say "no dragonborn!". I ignored them in my pamphlet to let people make their own mind, and instead focused on all the other races. I neither encouraged nor discouraged. Another reason I avoided the gargoyle retcon, I didn't want to say something didn't exist.

[Gnarfflinger]

I agree that the Dragonborn doesn't fit the idea of Ravenloft. But then again, if a player wants a one bad enough, the mists could scoop one up just as easily as any other character. But remind the player that villagers will think he's some kind of monster and will run from him and bar the doors and windows.

I don't feel they should be native to Ravenloft, but I don't rule out creating a Dragonborn domain in the future as an Island or part of a cluster. I'm fine with not having them as NPC's in the game, but I won't rule them out either.

[Archedius]

If you're a dragonborn and you're in one of Darkon's cities- you may be safe. If you're in a Darkonian villiage- you may still be safe. If you're dragonborn and you're not in Darkon= you are not safe.

Remember, if people are afraid of something, how do they react? With great violence. Why do many 'monsters' in Ravenloft keep a low profile? They will be killed by the very people they consider to be prey.

How does this figure into a dragonborn in Ravenloft? Sure they could walk into a villiage and some people may run...but realisticly it's towards their homes to fetch a sword they keep in the thatch of their roof or a closet.

I've allowed players to play the occasional gnoll, orc, lizardfolk, kobold, goblin or caliban- but it was with the background knowledge that they were at risk of being lynched in most realms.

This obstacle can be gotten 'round by minor illusions (not sure how accessable these are in 4th ed), disguises (not very useful IMO) or by staying out in the wilderness while the human members procured what was needed in town.

I personally feel that dragonborn, while aesthetically similar to lizardfolk, are just THAT much over the line towards the overtly fantastic. A good DM could salvage them I suppose.

On a separate note- it is hard to make non-humans includable in the gothic atmosphere of Ravenloft. From experience, it is helpful to get a good idea from non-human players the basic outlook and thought processes of their characters. A goblin is going to view things differently than a human and an elf- keep this in mind (only if your players RP well ).

Use this knowledge to try and hit home. But if your players don't RP well, just ignore that they're not human

[Igor the Henchman]

I agree that the Dragonborn doesn't fit the idea of Ravenloft.

I am opening a biiiiiiiig can of worms, here, but...

Praytell, what is the "idea of Ravenloft"?

(I am getting too off-topic, here?)

[Irving the Meek]

In my opinion...

Gothic Horror, generally low-fantasy, Germanic in flavor if in the Core.

[Dion of the Fraternity]

If a tiefling can be a darklord (re Sunderheart), then who's to say that dragonborn don't fit into the Domains of Dread?

Let's all remember that whatever manifestation of Ravenloft is in 4e doesn't lump into Gothic horror anymore: it's fantasy horror. Though Gothic horror is its crown, the Domains have always been about fantasy horror (check out the spine and back cover of "Vampire of the Mists"), and it will remain so in 4e. The sheer accessibility of the Shadowfell will see to that.

I won't be surprised if in the future the Domains would finally welcome the Shadar-kai (or perhaps they've been there all along).

[cure]

If a tiefling can be a darklord (re Sunderheart), then who's to say that dragonborn don't fit into the Domains of Dread?

Let's all remember that whatever manifestation of Ravenloft is in 4e doesn't lump into Gothic horror anymore: it's fantasy horror. Though Gothic horror is its crown, the Domains have always been about fantasy horror (check out the spine and back cover of "Vampire of the Mists"), and it will remain so in 4e. The sheer accessibility of the Shadowfell will see to that.

I won't be surprised if in the future the Domains would finally welcome the Shadar-kai (or perhaps they've been there all along).

You can fit one of just about anything into Ravenloft. Heck, Mangrum floated a dragonborn (or some such) via the dragon world backstory of Sithicus. But that was a one off, not the introduction of an entire race. Nothing is to exclude 'a' dragonborn, but the general although not complete exclusion of dragons, the humancentric although not exclusively human focus, and the pitchforking of those sufficiently outside the norm, makes Ravenloft a place very unfriendly to such an individual. For example, moving about the western core is actually extremely difficult for a demihuman. Avoiding Falkovnia is very inconvenient but absolutely necessary for such beings and characters. Certainly one can stick whatever one wants as a race off in an island (talking animals, brain eaters, etc.), but from the perspective of the core, those places are nigh mythical.

Equally, there is the matter of evil and darklordship in relation to dragonborn. To quote: "Each of Van Richten's foes presented a different thematic/moral threat -- a different take on evil. Werebeasts represented our darkest natures unleashed; Created was about the hubristic need to control our surroundings. Shadow Fey morality was skewed by their lack of mortality. Fiends were ultimate evil, interested in nothing more and nothing less than spiritual destruction for its own sake." So what is the thematic/moral threat of dragonborn? What is their special evil? That they are cold blooded lizards that see us as meat? Well we already have the dud of a darklord in the person of King Croc who 'evilly' wants to eat man like every other croc in existence. Or similarly there is the 'evil' of the God Brain who wishes to eat our brains like every mind flayer does. To address the latter, it has been proposed that the creature was initially human. A different and preditorial nature is not sufficiently evil to merit the embrace of the Dark Powers. So what would dragonborn bring to the table that earn them a domain and a chapter in the study of evil? For to have a domain there must be an evil.

[Jester of the FoS]

I agree that the Dragonborn doesn't fit the idea of Ravenloft.

I am opening a biiiiiiiig can of worms, here, but...

Praytell, what is the "idea of Ravenloft"?

(I am getting too off-topic, here?)

D&D done in the style of Folk Tales, gothic horror, and the darker but more realistic of Grimm's Fairy Tales.
A world of less fantasy and magic with greater parallels to Earth.
With a dash of classic movie monsters and famous creatures.

[Igor the Henchman]

In my opinion...

Gothic Horror, generally low-fantasy, Germanic in flavor if in the Core.

D&D done in the style of Folk Tales, gothic horror, and the darker but more realistic of Grimm's Fairy Tales.
A world of less fantasy and magic with greater parallels to Earth.
With a dash of classic movie monsters and famous creatures.

Cool. I've been very curious about what opinions existed on the question around here.

My own definition, only slightly different from Jester's is this: Ravenloft is D&D with Gothic Horror atmosphere added in, as exemplified by the I6 and I10 modules by Tracy and Laura Hickman.

This means that Ravenloft has monster-filled dungeons, fantasy races, adventurers, treasure and evil forces periodically threatening villages, realms and occasionally the entire world. Just as in any D&D world. But Ravenloft has, on top of that, the Mists, Darklords, intelligent, insidious monsters that walk among men and bucket-loads of horror atmosphere and poetic justice tropes. Ravenloft tries to encourage adventures where using one's head and keeping one's eyes open for unexpected clues yields better results than immediately charging in. It is a world where things are not always what they seem, where villains have complex motivations and human character flaws, and NPCs tend to be well rounded-up and believable in their conduct. Add an occasional element of tragedy here and there, and you get Ravenloft.

Ravenloft is for all kinds of players. Hack and Slash types will find dangerous creatures to fight and dungeons to explore. Story and actor types will find plenty of opportunity to explore their characters' personality in strange and complex situations. Players craving a fantasy of control will get their satisfaction from finally kicking evil in the head during the adventure climax. It all depends on the DM flexibility and the chosen campaign style. Ravenloft has something for everyone.

To tie this back into the original topic: an element doesn't need to literally ooze Gothic to fit well into Ravenloft. It does help, but its not a requirement. You might "adapt" dragonborn by making them gargoyles, or caliban, or spawn of a scientific experiment or mysterious reptile-people from the Souragnian swamp. But you can also introduce them as is, and trust your players and DMing skills to accomodate them without too much fuss. I tried it, and it works.

[Jester of the FoS]

That view works well with the later 2e products when they tried to push more to Fantasy Horror and less gothic folklore.
And alot of my adventures or campaigns have had that feel. You give the players a little of what they want and play the game they want.

In my writing I've always pushed to expand my view and play down the fantasy and show how to make the game and products support the folklore view, mostly because there were already products out there to support fantasy play: its easier to make an official/ generic product fit a horror game than a low-fantasy game.
Like my 4e pamphlet: add options, don't take things away.

Lately I've been more pushed to the folklore/gothic/low-fantasy because there are better options for a dark horror high-fantasy game. Like Midnight. Also a fairly fun setting. But hey, to each their own.

[Archedius]

mmmm Midnight- that's a quality setting; definately not for the beginner DM or non-rp characters I've actually taken a lot of what applies to Midnight, and instead applied it to Ravenloft- makes everything very low magic.

I'll be honest though- I found most of the posts in this forum agreeable before 4th edition came out. Afterwards...I can't say I agree with the majority of what I read. *shrugs* I don't care for 4th ed Ravenloft, whether it's from here or Wizards. I wish I could but I'm very specific with my tastes.