Do We Really Need Half-Elves and Half-Orcs?

[Henry]

People ate Bigfoot? And now they are going after Yeti. I never knew culinary cryptozoology was a thing. No wonder they keep themselves well hidden!

I humbly submit:
https://www.connectsavannah.com/savannah/dont-eat-the-coelacanth/Content?oid=2136175

You KNOW if any cryptids were ever discovered as real, the first thing to happen is tons of bozos lining up to dine on one, no matter how sentient...

Yetis? Mothmen? Grafton Monsters? Bishopville Lizard Men? Nessie? Chupacabras? First question probably won't be, "What is the Genus of such a fabulous creature," but, "HOW MUCH PER POUND?!?!?!"

I've come upon an aphorism I keep finding true:
"If it exists, mankind has tried to eat it, shoot it, or screw it."

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

So, I know that there are lots of other 'skins' for Gnomes. That's great. I like them more as fae or brownies or whatever but I wouldn't call them gnomes for the purposes of all the ire they will draw. I like Sniverbling more as far as underground fairies go. I hate the name Sniverbling - yet another reason to re-skin them.

In any case...

To divert the thread slightly, someone mentioned making the half-races sub-races of human. How would you do it, exactly? I tried to track down the post but now I can't find it...

From what I read is, if a half-elf is a sub-race of human, they'd get +2 charisma and +1 to 2 random stats
half-orcs would get +2 Str and +1 to two random stats
Dwarves = +2 Con?

That feels powerful since most races get a +2 and then a single +1...so being a half-dwarf ends up being better than being a full dwarf...

How does variant human work? Can you still get a feat? or is that another sub-race of human?

To me, sub-races of human should be dependent on your campaign and have regional flavours depending on culture etc...
Like, for example the Phoenicians were renown sailors traders/merchants and get +1 Charisma and Persuasion as a skill proficiency.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Funny, in the last game I ran, one of the players played a gnome life cleric. He played it pretty strain—there was nothing silly or annying about the character.

Yeah, we have at least one gnome in each of the 4 campaigns we've got ongoing except 1, and none are silly, obnoxious, etc.

I do enjoy making gnomish steroetypes to annoy [MENTION=6799753]lowkey13[/MENTION] with, though.

But my current character in my friend's homebrew is a sailor from a northern mountainous land that was a Winter Fey kingdom ruled by a gnome-esque archfey queen until about 1500 years ago, and his family is descended from heroes from that age, who died protecting their children and neighbors when the mountain exploded and fiends poured out of it to plague the world.

He is on a quest to stop the necromancer-turned-lich who murdered his crew to make them thralls for a sorcerer's duel, and stop his cult from breaking the seals that keep the mountain from exploding again.

He isn't peppy, he doesn't talk a mile a minute, etc. He just speaks with an Irish accent because the region he is from is psuedo-Irish, and he likes befriending birds and other small critters, and using his minor magics to throw his voice or visualise his designs for ship tech or new weapons. Mostly, he's a swashbuckler and dabbler in magic, invention, and alchemy. He's very gnomish, because he views the world with a longer view than most humans, he's highly intelligent and literate, he doesn't think of critters as dumb beasts, etc.

People being bad at playing non-humans isn't a good reason to remove them from the game. I find I can just expect more from people, and they deliver.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

People being bad at playing non-humans isn't a good reason to remove them from the game. I find I can just expect more from people, and they deliver.

I never said I would remove them from the game if someone wanted to play one. It's just that no-one I know ever does and I, therefore, have no reason at all to add them to any setting I run. To me they add nothing to the setting except to, Sometimes, fill the nature fae role if I need one but usually only as a unique creature instead of a whole race. Obviously, if someone wants to invest time playing one, I'll add some lore (or use existing lore but am not a fan of the tinkerer stereotype so will avoid that unless the player insists on it).

 

[hawkeyefan]

Here I thought we were having a discussion instead of an argument. I am not trying to "prove" my viewpoint to you so the strength of my "argument" is totally irrelevant. Arguing matters of taste is pointless.
----------
There are thousands of preservers, free slaves, and outlaws, etc. There is only one gnome, so once discovered it going to stand out as an anomaly. Every session of the game is going to have to take this into account. It may not be the major story for that session. Other character arcs will exist, but this one is always going to cast its shadow on them. Well you could have a party of the "lasts" -- the last gnome, the last orc, the last etc.

IMHO, it would be better to just leave out the gnome and reskin the race or rework the setting instead of introducing such a disruptive element into it. A genetic mutation of a halfing or some such would be a better choice (as you suggested). A magical curse placed upon the character would still create a special arc for the character but not threaten to derail the setting. But the last actual gnome? Incongruent. Jarring. Unnecessary.

The premise of the thread has morphed a bit, but I want to reiterate again that the races chosen for a setting are part of its tone and what sets it apart from other settings. Dark Sun has a number of elements that set it apart from the rest of the D&D settings. If any ole' race is allowed it takes away from the uniqueness of that setting. Sigil, Forgotten Realms, and Spelljammer are all settings where everything is allowed including the kitchen sink. That doesn't and shouldn't have to be the norm for every setting.

Sticking a race into a setting where it was excluded is just as jarring as putting in technology into a setting that had excluded it. It changes the tone, feel, and story arcs. The Marvel Universe version of WWII is dramatically different in tone, feel, and story arcs compared to the actual event. It interjects items into it (including races) that were not part of the event. Does it create different, unique, and entertaining stories? Yes. Does it remain true to the setting? No. Same thing with putting races into settings they were purposely excluded from.

So when it comes to the gnome in Dark Sun, Ithink we’ve established that it can be done in one way or another. Whether mutation or by some kind of stasis or planar traveler or simply a halfling variant....different solutions for different degrees. Of course we could also just say that there are gnomes on Athas, that they were never wiped out. Give them a bit of a grim tweak....maybe they roam the Silt Sea as pirates on silt skiffs, scavenging and raiding, and there you go.

But maybe another example would help; what about Dragonborn? I mean, to me, Dark Sun is really the 2E stuff. The original boxed set and its associated products. I didn’t hang around 4E long enough to make it to their take on Dark Sun. But I know they included the Dragonborn in the form of Dray.

So here’s the perfect example of a race that was not a part of the setting as originally presented which was then added later on.

Now, I would personally not really want Dragonborn in Dark Sun because of the whole dragon transformation aspect for defilers and the Sorcerer Kings being in various stages, with Borys as the only actual Dragon. Having a bunch of dragonmen running around seems to weaken that element of the setting. I’d lean toward not having them in the setting. I’d simply leave them out.

But ifa player said he wanted to play one, then I’d really think it over. How would it be best toincorporate the idea of a Dragonborn to Athas? Should I go with how the official material handled it? Or some other way?

How do you feel about the Dray? How did they impact the setting in your opinion?

 

[cbwjm]

So when it comes to the gnome in Dark Sun, Ithink we’ve established that it can be done in one way or another. Whether mutation or by some kind of stasis or planar traveler or simply a halfling variant....different solutions for different degrees. Of course we could also just say that there are gnomes on Athas, that they were never wiped out. Give them a bit of a grim tweak....maybe they roam the Silt Sea as pirates on silt skiffs, scavenging and raiding, and there you go.

But maybe another example would help; what about Dragonborn? I mean, to me, Dark Sun is really the 2E stuff. The original boxed set and its associated products. I didn’t hang around 4E long enough to make it to their take on Dark Sun. But I know they included the Dragonborn in the form of Dray.

So here’s the perfect example of a race that was not a part of the setting as originally presented which was then added later on.

Now, I would personally not really want Dragonborn in Dark Sun because of the whole dragon transformation aspect for defilers and the Sorcerer Kings being in various stages, with Borys as the only actual Dragon. Having a bunch of dragonmen running around seems to weaken that element of the setting. I’d lean toward not having them in the setting. I’d simply leave them out.

But ifa player said he wanted to play one, then I’d really think it over. How would it be best toincorporate the idea of a Dragonborn to Athas? Should I go with how the official material handled it? Or some other way?

How do you feel about the Dray? How did they impact the setting in your opinion?

Well, since the dray were around in the original setting (or at least were added sometime during the original setting), subbing in dragonborn for them is fine to me. The same with using goliaths as half giants.

I think if my group was going to play in dark sun and everyone had read the race limitations and someone turned around and said they wanted to play a gnome or a halforc, I'd just say no. They know the races available, they should have chosen one of them and it isn't like there's no choice, still plenty of races to pick from.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Well, since the dray were around in the original setting (or at least were added sometime during the original setting), subbing in dragonborn for them is fine to me. The same with using goliaths as half giants.

I think if my group was going to play in dark sun and everyone had read the race limitations and someone turned around and said they wanted to play a gnome or a halforc, I'd just say no. They know the races available, they should have chosen one of them and it isn't like there's no choice, still plenty of races to pick from.

Right....they were added later in the 2E days as villains. I wasn’t clear....they became officially playable when 4E came out.

 

[cbwjm]

Right....they were added later in the 2E days as villains. I wasn’t clear....they became officially playable when 4E came out.

Whether villains or not, they were still part of the setting. Allowing them to be playable by using dragonborn to represent them is fine by me.

 

[Dessert Nomad]

So when it comes to the gnome in Dark Sun, Ithink we’ve established that it can be done in one way or another. Whether mutation or by some kind of stasis or planar traveler or simply a halfling variant....different solutions for different degrees. Of course we could also just say that there are gnomes on Athas, that they were never wiped out. Give them a bit of a grim tweak....maybe they roam the Silt Sea as pirates on silt skiffs, scavenging and raiding, and there you go.

Just because it 'can be done' doesn't mean it should be done; I certainly don't think someone attempting to run a WW2-era Call of Cthulhu game should allow dragonborn PCs, for example. There seems to be an assumption by a number of people here that the desire of one player to play a race that doesn't fit the background is the only desire for the campaign that matters, which is weird. Why does the DM's desire to run an actual Dark Sun game automatically lose to gnomeophile, instead of the other way around? And if we put it to a vote, why wouldn't the vote of five players and a DM who want an actual Dark Sun game not win over gnomeophile's desire to play in a variant Dark Sun world? If gnomeophile really only wants to run a gnome, it's not like there's a shortage of games with gnomes allowed.

I find this line of argument to be extremely selfish and unfriendly, and the gnomeophile comes off pretty bad; "I know all of you want to do X, but I want to do Y and so I'll guilt trip you until you give up X and do Y."

 

[hawkeyefan]

Just because it 'can be done' doesn't mean it should be done; I certainly don't think someone attempting to run a WW2-era Call of Cthulhu game should allow dragonborn PCs, for example. There seems to be an assumption by a number of people here that the desire of one player to play a race that doesn't fit the background is the only desire for the campaign that matters, which is weird. Why does the DM's desire to run an actual Dark Sun game automatically lose to gnomeophile, instead of the other way around? And if we put it to a vote, why wouldn't the vote of five players and a DM who want an actual Dark Sun game not win over gnomeophile's desire to play in a variant Dark Sun world? If gnomeophile really only wants to run a gnome, it's not like there's a shortage of games with gnomes allowed.

I find this line of argument to be extremely selfish and unfriendly, and the gnomeophile comes off pretty bad; "I know all of you want to do X, but I want to do Y and so I'll guilt trip you until you give up X and do Y."

I don’t think that’s really what I’m putting forth. At all.

If we assume the worst motives about either side, then yes....it’s a case of someone who’s being a jerk, either the player or the DM.