Dragons lay eggs. By the time the young hatch they can eat on their own.
Drakonid are ascended mortals. Not a natural species. Granted, the drakonid of the Dragon Isles are uplifted tarasek, but they have historically originated from a variety of humanoid species, be they reptilian or mammalian.
1 Like
But yeah, point being, they can inherit traits of the original species. Like breasts. As seen in official art.
1 Like
Hence:
3 Likes
Drakonids in a vacuum are fine, but they shouldnât take away any potential classes from the Dracthyr. If thereâs room enough for Dwarf Warriors and Gnome Warriors side-by-side, then thereâs room for Drakonid and Dracthyr Warriors side-by-side as well.
Plus, thereâs no reason they couldnât expand Dracthyr BTs to have bulkier options, which Drakonids might endanger.
Iâd support Drakonids as long as Dracthyr get equivalent development and options afforded to them.
If we get Drakonid for the non-Evoker classes, there is no reason for anything other than Dracthyr Evokers.
Thatâs like saying âwe have Dwarven warriors, why bother with Gnome warriorsâ. We know that not all Dracthyr are Evokers. So it makes no sense to lock them to a singular class when we know they pursue different paths.
I donât think youâre making a good case, here. Gnomes are defined by a lack of strength. Lacking Warriors would make a lot of sense for them in establishing the raceâs fantasy. Especially when Dwarf Warriors exist to fulfill the âshort warriorâ fantasy without compromising their raceâs integrity.
1 Like
For Dragonkind.
2 Likes
Except notice how Gnomish fantasy isnât diluted by the presence of Warriors; they are rare yes, but those that are present are as committed to the cause as any other raceâs Warriors. When you think Gnome, you donât think âhulking berserkerâ, you probably think âeccentric technobabbling mageâ. Which means the âfantasyâ remains intact, and those embracing Warrior as their class are standouts among their people, maybe thought of as aberrations, maybe thought of as outcasts, maybe even thought of as failures.
Thatâs what youâre not seeming to grok; the presence of standouts from the stereotype does not harm the âracial fantasyâ in the least. Instead, it reinforces it.
2 Likes
Allowing a Gnome to be a Tinker reinforces the racial fantasy. Allowing them to be a Warrior does not. It is easiest to define a culture by defining what it is not. Disallowing Warriors would send a clear message that this is not a race that is all about martial strength.
I can see that you do understand this, though. Admitting that these âaberrationsâ detract from the racial fantasy isnât something Iâd ever thought to hear from you. Although, I donât think you understand how youâve just undermined your entire manifesto by laying it out like that.
1 Like
When did I say it detracted from the fantasy? A Gnome Warrior reinforces the fantasy.
Right there. 
Granted, you went on to try to contort the point into saying that hulking Gnome berserkers everywhere somehow reinforces that they should be Mages (???), but you did need to first admit that class selection can be used to reinforce cultural identity. Bravo!
1 Like
It took you nearly a month to think of that comeback? Do better, my guy,
Yes. It reinforces the culture to have a Gnome Warrior because theyâre so at-odds with their home people. Just like a Human Warlock reinforces Humanityâs dedication and piousness to the Light by completely rejecting it themselves. Culture is meant to have influence on, but not total control, over the outcome of those originating from it. Some will embrace their culture and become what their people are best known for (Gnome Mages, Human Paladins) other individuals will utterly reject the norms their culture has set before them and go their own path, knowing they isolate themselves from their âhomeâ (Gnome Warriors, Human Warlocks).
Youâre not looking for âcultural identityâ, youâre looking to be spoonfed what to think. To have every member of a race be a xerox copy of one another, capable of being completely summed up, backstory and all, with a mere glance.
I take breaks from the forum. No reason to get snide.
And thereâs a difference between having an individual lore character represent a contrast to the cultural norm and having potentially hundreds of thousands of player characters representing that contradiction - very possibly outnumbering the player characters that actually represent that cultural norm.
Lightforged Draenei Warlocks are now a cultural norm. Magâhar Warlocks are a cultural norm. Blood Elf Warriors are a cultural norm. Orc Holy Priests? A cultural norm.
That doesnât sit right with me in a fantasy universe. In reality? Iâm all for DEI. But it doesnât make sense to apply our cultural initiatives to paint fantasy races with a broad, homogenizing brush.
1 Like
Thatâs the risk of introducing multiplayer and character customization into narrative-heavy settings; youâre going to run into situations where supposedly ârareâ individuals become commonplace.
Are all Tauren Engineers just because mine is? Are all Pandaren Mages because mine is? Are all Draenei Warlocks just because a few PCs are? Whereâs an âacceptableâ limit of âoutcastsâ?
Hell, Druids are supposed to be phenomenally rare and difficult to find, yet throw a stone and youâll almost certainly hit a Tauren or Night Elf PC that runs Bear Form on raid night. Does that mean every Tauren or Night Elf is a Druid? Weird, whenâs Baine or Tyrande gonna shapeshift?
Cultural norms are meant to be backgrounds, not restrictions. No one should have their concept invalidated just because someone else couldnât come up with a justification for it; if it checks out in the playerâs head, then thatâs really the only person they have to ask.
EDIT: Hell, what about Druid Engineers? Kinda flies in the face of the entire practice, doesnât it?
Youâre quite right - it would make much more sense for professions to be restricted based on race.
All that being said⌠you do realize that youâve âwon,â right? Theyâve stated their intent to make all classes available on all races eventually. No need to continue this particular crusade. You chose a hill to die on and survived the battle nevertheless.
Our particular debate is entirely academic. And is entirely based upon differing philosophies. I wonât say that nothing you say can change my mind, because thereâs always a chance, but given the talking points that are continually retread upon, itâs not enough to make me budge on this particular opinion.
Itâs not a matter of you opening my eyes to reality - I understand your stance completely and still disagree with it. Vehemently. 
1 Like
I would definitely play Dracthyr if this was the model.
The point is to have both. One for the fire-breathing, high-flying, spell-casting fantasy, and the other for the physically-imposing hulking monsters. Both represent a different facet of the dragon fantasy.
Put them together, you have a full dragon.
1 Like
For sure, but If the current model was involved I still wouldnât play it. The current model is to feminine for me.