Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="(Psi)SeveredHead" data-source="post: 6064127" data-attributes="member: 1165">I think they do.I got disenchanted, fast, with many of those races in AD&D. They might behave differently, but orcs were virtually statistically identical to gnolls, hobgoblins, etc. Fortunately, this only impacted them on a mechanical level. A battle with orcs should "feel" different from one with hobgoblins in AD&D, even though in each case you're attacking opponents with about 5 hit points, who deal 1d8 damage, and have an AC of about 5.In 3.x, when large numbers of such humanoids could take class levels, they began to diverge. (Orcs tended to be disorganized barbarians, hobgoblins tended to be disciplined fighters, gnolls were presumably chaotic evil rangers and barbarians...)In 4e, each race could have its own ecosystem. (There are gnoll brutes, soldiers, skirmishers, controllers, leaders, lurkers...) In addition, most of these races had features that "spoke" to their identity. (Orcs were so ferocious and tough they could try to attack you even after death. That orc running in The Two Towers - the movie - made perfect sense. It might have run out of hit points after being shot by an arrow, but it could still sprint to the base of the wall and let its bomb blow up.)While some of these races are available for play, none but half-orcs (which wouldn't be found in large numbers except in Eberron) were in the Player's Handbook. If the DM decided they couldn't make hobgoblins a cool race, there wouldn't be any hobgoblin PCs.I think in D&DN they're going back a bit on the mechanical distinction. Each raider race gets one feature, often a minor one. (Gnolls, for instance, get a free attack if someone drops near them.) These features generally back up a core part of the race's identity (gnolls get an extra attack because they're bloodthirsty demon worshippers, orcs used to get rage because of Warcraft's influence, hobgoblins are steadfast and disciplined so they get traits reflecting that). Their leaders generally power-up those features. (Gnoll leaders give a significant attack and damage bonus to these extra attacks, for instance.) Still, each race has a mechanical distinction.I guess the point I'm trying to make is:1) The savage races didn't need a whole lot of flavor, and often didn't get them. Being disciplined and steadfast is probably not enough of a niche to make a playable races. Dwarves tend to be disciplined and steadfast (just like hobgoblins), but there's a lot more to dwarves. Gnomes, unfortunately, only seem to get as much flavor as these savage races (just in a different direction), and if they seem to have more, it's only because they're stealing from other playable races.2) Since AD&D, each of these "savage" races has been allowed to diverge, culminating in racial abilities in 4e and Next that back up their flavor. However, they're based on "limited" flavor.3) If gnomes could be given a niche unique from the other playable races, they might become popular. I've seen no signs of that from WotC since the Gnomes of Zilarge article was published.</blockquote>

Verification