Rules consequences of dragonborn not being a template?

[rrwoods]

I'm DMing a game where a player is playing a dragonborn ("of Bahamut"). I've seen it mentioned a few times that dragonborn isn't technically a template. What consequences does this have by RAW, silly or otherwise? Not that I'm going to necessarily adhere to all of said consequences, I just want to know what they are.

[Starbuck_II]

I'm DMing a game where a player is playing a dragonborn ("of Bahamut"). I've seen it mentioned a few times that dragonborn isn't technically a template. What consequences does this have by RAW, silly or otherwise? Not that I'm going to necessarily adhere to all of said consequences, I just want to know what they are.

They are wrong as there is a template mentioned in Races of the Dragon.

[Inevitability]

They are wrong as there is a template mentioned in Races of the Dragon.

Actually, I don't see the word 'template' anywhere in the description of dragonborn, nor in the rite sidebar.

The similar spellscale transformation is even explicitly designated 'not-a-template'.

[Cerefel]

Spellscale keeps very little from the base character though, while dragonborn keeps quite a bit (size, ability scores, movement)

[Nifft]

I don't think there are any consequences to Dragonborn either being or not being a template.

The sidebar spells out specifically how the transformation works.

[Red Fel]

I'm DMing a game where a player is playing a dragonborn ("of Bahamut"). I've seen it mentioned a few times that dragonborn isn't technically a template. What consequences does this have by RAW, silly or otherwise? Not that I'm going to necessarily adhere to all of said consequences, I just want to know what they are.

Short version? If it's not a template, then it... Well, it doesn't exactly fit. At least, as I understand it. Here's why.

A template is a block applied to a creature (the "base creature") that modifies its stats, abilities, etc., but isn't a class. For example, taking a level of Fighter gives you BAB, saves, and a feat, but that's a class level; by contrast, taking the Phrenic Creature template (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/monsters/phrenicCreature.htm) gives you a subtype, PLAs, and other modifications (for +2 LA). The latter is a template.

If Dragonborn isn't a template, then... What exactly is it? I mean, the Rite of Rebirth, as expressed in the online article (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/iw/20060105b), calls Dragonborn a "race," and says that "A dragonborn loses many of her original racial traits and gains the racial traits of the dragonborn race[,]" which causes Dragonborn to fit into this nebulous half-zone - the creature is part one race, and part another. And that's not something 3.5 does - you can be one race, with templates; you can be one race, and count as another race; you can be one race, and then change into another race; but you can't be two races at once.

That's the confusing part. Dragonborn, if read in its entirely (whether in the article or in RotD) seems like it was clearly written to be a race. But it's a race with traits of another, prior race, which isn't something D&D does. It's just weird. Picture the converse - see Dragonborn as a baseline race, onto which the player must choose certain stats of another race - chosen by the player - to add. So, your Dragonborn has Elf features, or Dwarf features, or Warforged features. It's just... Strange. It doesn't work right.

They seem to have gotten it right with the Hellbred. That one is pretty explicitly a new race. Whatever it was in its past life is wiped away, gone. Easy. But Dragonborn, by dragging traces of the base creature into the mix, muddies the water. Is it new? Is it modified old?

Does it really, ultimately, make a difference, whether you call it template or race? I'm not convinced that it does, no. But if it's a template, what it does makes perfect sense - it modifies the base creature. If it's not, then it's... An odd, weirdly-customizable race. An incomplete race. It's just odd, because that's not something D&D does particularly well.

[Flickerdart]

That's the confusing part. Dragonborn, if read in its entirely (whether in the article or in RotD) seems like it was clearly written to be a race. But it's a race with traits of another, prior race, which isn't something D&D does.

Deep Dwarf Traits (Ex)
These traits are in addition to the hill dwarf traits, except where noted.

Drow Traits (Ex)
These traits are in addition to the high elf traits, except where noted.

Aquatic dwarves have the general aquatic racial traits described above and all the dwarf racial traits, as well as those noted below.

Air goblins have the general traits of air races described above and all goblin racial traits, with additions and exceptions as noted below.

[DarkSoul]

I look at it as a subrace you don't have to choose at character creation.

[Red Fel]

Deep Dwarf Traits (Ex)
These traits are in addition to the hill dwarf traits, except where noted.

Drow Traits (Ex)
These traits are in addition to the high elf traits, except where noted.

Aquatic dwarves have the general aquatic racial traits described above and all the dwarf racial traits, as well as those noted below.

Air goblins have the general traits of air races described above and all goblin racial traits, with additions and exceptions as noted below.

Fair comparison. But those are established as basically racial variants - same race, with some minor tweaks. This is a distinctly different creature, with a massive pile of changes.

Moreover, variant races are a fixed type. A Drow is a modified High Elf, pretty much without exception. A Deep Dwarf is a modified Hill Dwarf. A Dragonborn... Is a Dragonborn, flavored by the race of your choice. There is a standard Drow, a standard Deep Dwarf, a standard Strongheart Halfling and Whisper Gnome. There is no standard Dragonborn, because a Dragonborn can be made from anything.

It's just always struck me as easier to visualize as an acquired template, is my point.

[Darrin]

The implications of Dragonborn that might be clarified if it were treated as a template (or at least described a little better):

It's not clear if Dragonborn can be applied to any living creature, or just humanoids. I believe the current consensus, based on some custserv rulings, is that Dragonborn can be applied to any living creature. So Dragonborn warforged or gelatinous cubes are possible. It's also not clear if a creature wasn't already a humanoid, do they also gain the humanoid type? Every template description includes a section on what happens to the creature's type, so hopefully this would be addressed more directly than what we have now.

It's not clear what happens to natural weapons. Are these physical features like wings/fins, or are they racial abilities?

[animewatcha]

IIRC, doesn't it also say that if a dragonborn of bahamut is too naughty or something, Bahamut can take the transformation away leave the person the former race?

[Inevitability]

IIRC, doesn't it also say that if a dragonborn of bahamut is too naughty or something, Bahamut can take the transformation away leave the person the former race?

Yes. First people get a warning or two, if they keep being 'naughty' their skin melts off and they lose the not-template.

[rrwoods]

Funny that Hellbred is mentioned as an example of doing it right -- the character in question is a dragonborn hellbred. (The flavor works, or rather we made it work. Super interesting character backstory.)

It sounds like the easiest route is to just say "it's a template" and move on (or, possibly, "it's a sub race").

[MaxiDuRaritry]

...but you can't be two races at once.The fusion power does this, and certain other options (mostly spells, such as alter self and magic jar), doppelgangers (especially the more powerful variants, such as ethereal doppelgangers), hagunemnons, and (to an extent) illithid savants also do this. You keep some racial traits and gain others, occasionally (but not always) losing some in the process.