Eladrins, Tieflings, Dragonborn Too Far Outside Standard Fantasy?

[Blackeagle]

Let me ask: how common are what races among those authors' works? Tolkien has dwarves, elves, and hobbits as common major characters, and they have large-scale societies in his world. For the others, do nonhuman characters occur often, rarely, or never in major or minor roles in the stories? Do they have large societies(500+ population) or small societies(50-500 population), or are they one of a very few(less than 50 in the whole world)?

I haven't read much Vance or Leiber, but I've got a fair amount of experience with Howard, mostly his Conan stories. In his books non-humans are fairly rare, and when they appear they're virtually always presented as "monsters" rather than PC races. No elves, dwarves or hobbits. The closest thing I recall to a "classic" fantasy race are giants (frost giants, in fact). Most of his non-humans tend to be nasty ape-like brutes, with the occasional Cthulian horror thrown in (Howard was a friend of H.P. Lovecraft).

 

[theNater]

Can we really call 4e "Sword and Sorcery" if there's no Sorcerer in core?

Good call. Of course, there's no Swordsman in core either. Guess we have to call it "Fighting and Wizardry".

 

[That One Guy]

To the OP... nope, not bothered at all. A lot of people have said the reasons for my thoughts/feelings.
Now for the OT...

That is sooo true. Halflings/hobbits are in Tolkien and (some DnD) books. Gnomes, as in DnD trickster illusionists? Never even heard of one outside of DnD.
I want more, interesting different races. The only thinkg that annoys me about races in the PHB is there are not enough! So I have to wait a year or so for more ...

I'm pretty sure there are small write-ups for how to make PCs out of 10+ races in the MM. I'm hoping there'll be at least a paragraph or two about those race's cultures... but I doubt it. (Among this group are gnomes, orcs, and warforged)

Before this goes any further, what do you consider stock fantasy?

Robert Aspirin, who just passed away recently, has some fantastic Tiefling style characters in his Myth series. While Aazh(sp) is strictly a demon in description, he'd work pretty well as a tiefling.

Aspirin's death makes me sad. But, he shifted my views on fantasy settings a lot. I'd like to think in a good way.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

Can we really call 4e "Sword and Sorcery" if there's no Sorcerer in core?

Hmm... Can we call any D&D besides 3e/3.5 Sword and Sorcery then too, as well

Fighting & Wizardry as theNater suggested seems to be the only option

 

[Ander00]

I felt the same way initially, and was disappointed with the choice of these three races. Heck, I was afraid the mystery race was going to be dragonborn. I have come to terms with it and find I have no problem with D&D doing its own thing (though as it's been said, the previous race selection couldn't really be called the standard fantasy races anyway).

And I'm now really enjoying playing my dragonborn warlord .


cheers

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Side note, and minor joke that will immidiately be mis-read and used to attack me;

Can we really call 4e "Sword and Sorcery" if there's no Sorcerer in core?

Wait, isn't the game called "Dungeons & Dragons", not "Sword & Sorcery"?

First compound words, now conjunctions. Can't we make up something original?!

I say we call D&D 4E style of fantasy Ka'kal'ubsen from now on! That's an original name!

Spoiler

Really, it is! I made it up as a little child, many cycles ago. Off course, it didn't have the apostrophes then.
Ah, the good old days, when I was still making my own song, "Loggi Loggi Peng Peng", I played with Legoes (which often meant that I and my neighbor would build awesome stuff and he or I had to go home before we could play with it, to repeat this every day)! And I was playing Fall Guy and Knight Reader with Matchbox and SIKU cars and funny voices and sound effects!" [/childhood memories]

 

[FireLance]

Fighting & Wizardry as theNater suggested seems to be the only option

Go back far enough and you'll have to call it Fighting and Magic-Using.

 

[CleverNickName]

I agree with the OP, to a certain extent. I fear that, should I ever start a 4E game of my own, I will be spending too much time trying to explain why tieflings and dragonborn "aren't allowed" in my game because they are in the PHB. And houserule or no, the implication among most players is "if it is in the PHB, it is allowed." Putting them in the PHB makes them "cannon" to some people...especially the people who are fond of saying things like "if you don't allow the PHB as-written, then you aren't playing D&D."

I don't know if the OP intended to open up that old "what is/is not real fantasy" can of worms, though. That is an argument that will go nowhere in a hurry. I'm not saying that there is no place for eladrin, tieflings, dragonborn, gelatinous cubes, or any other thing in D&D...and I don't think the OP was saying that, either. If the choice were mine, I would have put them in separate books. That's all.

 

[Ferrous]

I agree that the races the OP identified are rather naff. They will not be making an appearance in my campaign unless heavily modified. Still one man's meat is another man's poison and all that.

I think that the problem for me and perhaps the original poster was that the strength of D&D was it was a kind of linqua franca of fantasy RPG and it gave stock archetypes that could be then modified for your own game world. However by moving away from the stock (or cliched if you will) you have a style that is less easily modifiable. D&D 4th edition feels in flavour much like Earthdawn which was great in terms of colour. But Earthdawn did not get as much play (at least in our group) because it was less easy to make the setting your own.

I do not like the higher fantasy of feel of the new D&D myself, though I do like the mechanical changes for a more balanced and playable game. For me when everything is magical it cheapens the feel and sense of wonder. Magical is simply the new mundane. When my Paladin draws back the cowl of the hooded stranger to see the slitted eyes and forked tongue of someone who has been touched by diabolical forces, I want to be able to cry aloud in shock and disgust and reach for my sword without another PC going "Relax it's just Dave who works in the bar. Racist!"

As this is an enclave of people who are largely excited about the new edition any concerns and criticisms tend to be attacked. After reading through a few such posts, I want to say "Yes, I like 4th edition but that does not mean I have no sense of critical discernment" .

 

[Bluenose]

It may be generational. I'm not old enough to have read those authors(except a little Tolkien), but I am old enough to be embarrassed that I haven't.

Let me ask: how common are what races among those authors' works? Tolkien has dwarves, elves, and hobbits as common major characters, and they have large-scale societies in his world. For the others, do nonhuman characters occur often, rarely, or never in major or minor roles in the stories? Do they have large societies(500+ population) or small societies(50-500 population), or are they one of a very few(less than 50 in the whole world)?

Jack Vance has a fair variety of "faerie" creatures in Lyonesse, though all the protagonists are human apart from one changeling. In his dying Earth novels the protagonists are again human, but there's a variety of creatures that have been created by wizards - mostly though as one-offs rather than races.

Fritz Leiber has a larger range of non-humans. The two main protagonists are Fafrhd and the Grey Mouser, both human. A lot of the people they encounter are also human. But then you have the rat civilisation living under Lankhmar; the ghouls, intelligent and civilised with transparent flesh; and various others that are more or less human.