Whither the gnome?

[ComradeGnull]

We've seen character creation rules to date, but only for the core races. We know that gnomes (along with half-orcs and the rest) will be 'uncommon', which could mean they will be pushed into a second PHB, like they were in 4e.

Gnomes got a big re-think in the lore department between 3e and 4e, so my question is: what should be done with them for 4e? Go back to the 3e model of this-world scholars and tinkerer? The 4e model of fey mini-Eladrin? Go the Pathfinder route and make them fey-related but still permanent residents of the Prime Material? Throw back to Dragonlance and make them non-magical and play up the technological orientation?

Note that I've left off things like 'feed them to bugbears' or 'run them through a wood chipper'. I know not everyone likes gnomes, but they're bound to be in 5e one way or another.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Whither? Thither and yon.

Gnomes (yuck) will be small, slightly magical, favor illusion spells -- so bards or illusionists -- and gain a damage bump from hooked hammers. Gnomes are to halflings as elves are to dwarves.

 

[Ahnehnois]

The more grounded, the better. The less silly, the better. The less otherworldly, the better.

 

[CleverNickName]

I want BECM-style gnomes: pointy-nosed, gold-loving dwarf variants.

 

[tlantl]

I don't have a preference concerning the "official" lore concerning any race in D&D. I have my own take on all of the races and they are generally very different than any published versions of the races.

I say let them do as they please and I'll keep them the same as they have always been.

With that said, my version of the gnome is a very magically inclined engineer who has a gift for illusions.

My game setting has a strong steam punk influence minus the Victorian era baggage, mixed with a little six guns and sorcery.

 

[ferratus]

I think that both can be made into two subraces that both groups will appreciate. After all, we already have kender (lightfoot halflings) and hobbits (stout halflings) and there is much rejoicing.

I think dwelvish illusionists and/or bards with a fey origin and secret lore would work well for one subrace. We could call them forest gnomes, and these gnomes work for Greyhawk, Golarion, and Mystara.

The other subrace could be the tinker gnomes of Spelljammer, Dragonlance and Azeroth.

If you wanted to link the two gnomish subraces in the same setting, you could have the latter be an offshoot of the first. Except now the tinker gnomes have a mind of metal and wheels; and do not care for growing things, except as far as they serve them for the moment.

I think a lot of the reason that the gnomish flavour is so muddled is because they've tried to cram both archetypes into one race, and that is a mistake.

 

[Riley]

AD&D-style: illusion-loving, hole-living dwarf variant.

Not that I ever bothered to play one. Actually, I do remember playing a 2e gnome once, but I was bored with him before the first session ended.

 

[Dice4Hire]

Well, I am not a fan of gnomes at all, and have spent many an edition rarely encountering one, and never playing one.

That out of the way, I prefer the gnomes as surface dwarves, but with a magical bent that got them separated form dwarven society, that tends to not like magic at all.

Over a long time, gnomes got smaller and a bit more magically infused, but they are very much of this world.

I do not like fey gnomes.

 

[ferratus]

I guess there is an appetite for the traditional rock gnome as well, which surprises me. I figured that since dwarves can now be wizards and bards and what not (and racial restrictions will not come back in), that the "like dwarves but magical" would have pretty much been made redundant.

If you can already have a dwarf illusionist, what is purpose of dwarf-like gnomes?

 

[drothgery]

Eberron gnomes.