Dragonborn boobs

[SuperPelmen2002]

Where are dragonborn boobies?
They canonically have ones, but instead larians decided to add tails which canonically are birth defects?

[m142]

it's wierd you'r questioning tails when thers option to add front 'tail' to woman and change title to fiat ita

[Ghost]

What canon might this be? What's the source?

Dragonborn are reptiles *draconic if we're being pedantic, not mammals. Having boobs would be weird. It would also require more dev work - all the clothes and armours would have to be rebuilt for them.

Tails are optional, and were a much requested feature.

They are not "canonically birth defects" - they are "considered by most" to be birth defects. It's semantic, but that's not the same thing.
---

Originally posted by m142:

it's wierd you'r questioning tails when thers option to add front 'tail' to woman and change title to fiat ita

Lose the phobia.

[Mike Garrison]

Originally posted by Ghost:

Dragonborn are reptiles, not mammals.

Canonically they are "draconic". Neither reptilian nor mammalian. Draconic creatures have warm (even hot) blood, unlike reptiles.

They hatch from eggs, but then again so do Githyanki.

The Forgotten Realms Wiki says they nurse their young.

[Ghost]

Originally posted by Mike Garrison:

Originally posted by Ghost:

Dragonborn are reptiles, not mammals.

Canonically they are "draconic". Neither reptilian nor mammalian. Draconic creatures have warm (even hot) blood, unlike reptiles.

They hatch from eggs, but then again so do Githyanki.

The Forgotten Realms Wiki says they nurse their young.

Yes, if we want to be pedantic, draconic not reptiles. Could potentially call them scaly monotremes. Point still stands that breasts don't make sense.

The source for that is from a magazine at the time of 4E. Per WotC's new rules, it's not canon. Egg-laying and nursing both make the other somewhat redundant.

[SuperPelmen2002]

Originally posted by Ghost:

What canon might this be? What's the source?

Dragonborn are reptiles, not mammals. Having boobs would be weird. It would also require more dev work - all the clothes and armours would have to be rebuilt for them.

Tails are optional, and were a much requested feature.

They are not "canonically birth defects" - they are "considered by most" to be birth defects. It's semantic, but that's not the same thing.
---

Originally posted by m142:

it's wierd you'r questioning tails when thers option to add front 'tail' to woman and change title to fiat ita

Lose the phobia.

>What canon might this be? What's the source? Dragonborn are reptiles, not mammals.
https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Dragonborn#:~:text=Like%20dragons%2C%20drag
onborn%20were%20often,feverish%20to%20the%20human%20touch.
*Like dragons, dragonborn were often mistaken for reptiles, but were in fact warm-blooded draconic creatures.*
>Having boobs would be weird. It would also require more dev work - all the clothes and armours would have to be rebuilt for them.
Like they did for all other races?
>lose the phobia
???????????????????????????????????????????????

[TyranntX]

Obvious ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ is obvious. So give me his clowns instead

[Ghost]

Originally posted by SuperPelmen2002:

>What canon might this be? What's the source? Dragonborn are reptiles, not mammals.
https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Dragonborn#:~:text=Like%20dragons%2C%20drag
onborn%20were%20often,feverish%20to%20the%20human%20touch.
*Like dragons, dragonborn were often mistaken for reptiles, but were in fact warm-blooded draconic creatures.*
>Having boobs would be weird. It would also require more dev work - all the clothes and armours would have to be rebuilt for them.
Like they did for all other races?

Your source is a wiki. Wiki's are convenient, but you need to check where they're sourcing the info and pics. Hell, there's even concept art of naked dragonborn on the page signed off on by WotC.
Also from the page itself under Disclaimer: "...nor does any lore presented necessarily adhere to established canon."

They share body types. Dragonborn are separate. They could have gone one way or the other, they went without. If they'd gone the optional route like the tails, that would've been twice the work.

Originally posted by SuperPelmen2002:

>lose the phobia
???????????????????????????????????????????????

Referring to m142's post - "change title to fiat ita"
It's a long existing pejorative 'joke' used to hurt and harm people.

[bayomaycry]

Originally posted by SuperPelmen2002:

Where are dragonborn boobies?
They canonically have ones, but instead larians decided to add tails which canonically are birth defects?

why do you care so much

[Mike Garrison]

Originally posted by Ghost:

Point still stands that breasts don't make sense.

In a world with tabaxi and half-elves and Elminster, I don't think you can declare anything as "not making sense".

Many birds are helpless after hatching and must be fed by their parents. It's not unreasonable to imagine mammals hatching from eggs and then being fed milk from their mothers.

I don't personally care whether dragonborn have breasts or not. I'm just saying that it is ridiculous to try to make an argument about it either way based on real-world animal classifications. Dragonborn don't exist at all in the real world.

[The Yeen Queen]

Originally posted by SuperPelmen2002:

Where are dragonborn boobies?

They're not mammals.

They canonically have ones

No they don't, who told you that lie?

[Ghost]

Originally posted by Mike Garrison:

Originally posted by Ghost:

Point still stands that breasts don't make sense.

In a world with tabaxi and half-elves and Elminster, I don't think you can declare anything as "not making sense".

Many birds are helpless after hatching and must be fed by their parents. It's not unreasonable to imagine mammals hatching from eggs and then being fed milk from their mothers.

I don't personally care whether dragonborn have breasts or not. I'm just saying that it is ridiculous to try to make an argument about it either way based on real-world animal classifications. Dragonborn don't exist at all in the real world.

I don't personally care if they do or not either, but about verisimilitude - being real to itself. If we're shown how things work in the world, that's how they work.

If we see a cow, we can expect it to behave the same as a cow. If we're shown a reptilian humanoid, something that is for all practical intents and purposes a sapient walking lizard, we can expect it to behave as such. Having warm blood instead of cold will change things, but not to that extent.

There are actually animals that lay eggs and produce milk - monotremes, amphibians, even spiders, but they are exceptions for reasons and none have or need breasts.

[Slats]

How bored are you guys to argue over this? :D

[Ghost]

Originally posted by Slats:

How bored are you guys to argue over this? :D

Very. Somehow tore my back this morning and can't really do anything except lie here and look at things.

[Jade Merrydown]

Takes 5 mins on Nexus to find a mod to fix this for you.

[alanc9]

It's academic anyway. The boobs came off with 5e. So yeah, dragonborn now canonically work like monotremes or some such.

Don't like it, then mod it.