Gnomes! (HUH) What are they good for? Absolutely nothing!

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

So gnomes are the hills and woods that are not cultivated.

So, just like elves? Not hills, but hills aren't usually very prominent.

Because gnomes weren't in LotR, they have to work harder to establish a niche, and they generally haven't.

Mind you, Eberron and afterward, after several decades, gnomes have finally been given an identity. Being denizens of the untamed woods just tells us they're feyborn.

 

[the Jester]

After some thought:

You know who I blame for the gnomes' generally low standing in D&D? Douglas Niles.

Why? Because he's the designer who couldn't be bothered to figure out enough about gnomish culture and traits to give them the 2e Complete Book they deserved. Instead, he shoved halflings and gnomes together into one book- and a crappy one at that. That 2e "brown book" line spawned a great deal of the current lore on the major D&D races. Niles' intellectual and creative laziness, inability to understand the gnomish point of view, unwillingness to take the time to seriously differentiate them from halflings, lack of ambition or whatever it was that made him decide to put the square and round pegs together in the same square hole did a tremendous disservice to gnomes and gnome-fans, one that seemingly reverberates to this day.

 

[technoextreme]

Is there some fantasy literature tradition they are supposed to reference? If there is I'm not familiar with it. When someone says 'gnome', I think of this guy:

From a literature perspective the original incarnation of them has more to do with the history of science and toxicology than it does with fantasy literature. They are basically earth elementals.

 

[steeldragons]

So, just like elves? Not hills, but hills aren't usually very prominent.

Because gnomes weren't in LotR, they have to work harder to establish a niche, and they generally haven't.

Mind you, Eberron and afterward, after several decades, gnomes have finally been given an identity. Being denizens of the untamed woods just tells us they're feyborn.

Well, exactly. They are not a LotR race. But they are prominent throughout many cultures' folklore and, as others have mentioned, "gnome" was often used interchangeably with "elf, dwarf, fairy." I think this real world association works more in their favor than "not in LotR" works against them.

In 1e and BECM/B-X, when gnomes came on the scene, there was no such thing as "feyborn." That has nothing to do with their indentity. And, even if you want to subscribe to the concept that they are creatures from/of Faerie, they were never only that.

Just as a point of personal contention, before Eberron, Dragonlance made gnomes into the mad tinkerers that has given way to Eberron's artificers or today's presumption that, as a race, they are mechanically/builder/tinker inclined. In the age when any gnome you encountered could be assumed to be an illusionist/thief, Dragonlance/Krynn said "Nope, they're not about magic at all, that wanna build these steam-powered/mechincal monstrosities." So, no. I reject the assertion that Eberron gave them a separate identity. It simply built off of what was introduced in Dragonlance.

 

[Dungeoneer]

After some thought:

You know who I blame for the gnomes' generally low standing in D&D? Douglas Niles.

Why? Because he's the designer who couldn't be bothered to figure out enough about gnomish culture and traits to give them the 2e Complete Book they deserved. Instead, he shoved halflings and gnomes together into one book- and a crappy one at that. That 2e "brown book" line spawned a great deal of the current lore on the major D&D races. Niles' intellectual and creative laziness, inability to understand the gnomish point of view, unwillingness to take the time to seriously differentiate them from halflings, lack of ambition or whatever it was that made him decide to put the square and round pegs together in the same square hole did a tremendous disservice to gnomes and gnome-fans, one that seemingly reverberates to this day.

Hmm. Would you say that Niles relegated them to a gnome man's land?

I am enjoying how many people are saying "Well obviously, gnomes are X" and then giving a different answer for X. Apparently there's no clear consensus on what gnomes are all about even among people who like gnomes.

Jester, you may be right about Niles and the gnomes. But every designer has elements of the lore they are less enthusiastic about. The thing is, that just leaves the door open for some other designer to jump in and reinvent the gnome. But apparently no one ever has, at least not in a way that has resonated with the general population.

 

[DMZ2112]

See also, Azer.

Azer just make my point. They're elemental dwarves, and where are they? Not the plane of Earth.

 

[Tovec]

Azer just make my point. They're elemental dwarves, and where are they? Not the plane of Earth.

I thought gargoyles also held a place as "elemental dwarves" and are certainly stone/earth and not fire. Plus after doing some research I can tell you that gnomes have been associated with fire in many distinct writings (my favourite being Narnia). I'm not saying your analogy is wrong, just merely limited or incomplete - not everyone agrees with you on this. It isn't terrible either, just doesn't entirely work for myself and others. Mind you, I do have my own (specific) versions for both haflings and gnomes and nothing said in this thread has shifted them in any way.

 

[DMZ2112]

I thought gargoyles also held a place as "elemental dwarves" and are certainly stone/earth and not fire.

That's... new to me.

Plus after doing some research I can tell you that gnomes have been associated with fire in many distinct writings (my favourite being Narnia). I'm not saying your analogy is wrong, just merely limited or incomplete - not everyone agrees with you on this. It isn't terrible either, just doesn't entirely work for myself and others. Mind you, I do have my own (specific) versions for both haflings and gnomes and nothing said in this thread has shifted them in any way.

My point is only that gnomes don't have to be interchangeable with dwarves. How that is achieved is obviously up to the individual dungeon master. If I was defending my personal idea, it's only because the arguments against it were [REDACTED] and I'm a sucker for people being wrong on the internet.

My homebrew D&D4 setting actually lumped gnomes in with /elves/ in the same way that halflings were lumped in with humans. Dwarves were lumped in with goliaths. Totally unrelated. There's any one of a thousand ways to make gnomes unique.

Saying gnomes are redundant is just silly. Elves and humans have a lot of common traits, too, and the anti-elf lobby is a small one.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Well, exactly. They are not a LotR race. But they are prominent throughout many cultures' folklore and, as others have mentioned, "gnome" was often used interchangeably with "elf, dwarf, fairy." I think this real world association works more in their favor than "not in LotR" works against them.

Being used interchangeable with elf, dwarf, etc, does not help make them distinct.

Real world association doesn't do them much good. Plenty of D&D creatures are based on real-world tales and yet haven't drawn much "traction" in the game. Those in more familiar sources (LotR being one of those, but not the only one) have more traction and show up more.

When was the last time I saw a hieracosphinx in the game? Or an androsphinx? That's just taking up space in the Monster Manual.

Just as a point of personal contention, before Eberron, Dragonlance made gnomes into the mad tinkerers that has given way to Eberron's artificers or today's presumption that, as a race, they are mechanically/builder/tinker inclined. In the age when any gnome you encountered could be assumed to be an illusionist/thief, Dragonlance/Krynn said "Nope, they're not about magic at all, that wanna build these steam-powered/mechincal monstrosities." So, no. I reject the assertion that Eberron gave them a separate identity. It simply built off of what was introduced in Dragonlance.

Eberron gnomes aren't tinkers at all and have nothing to do with Dragonlance gnomes. See here: https://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ebds/20041129a

They're not tinkers, which are unpopular and (unintentionally?) comedic. They're not tricksters or pranksters. They're more like the KGB. Whoever laughs at them? Maybe the KGB might have pulled a "prank" on someone such as switching all your furniture for pink-colored replacements, but that's more of a "I can get in your house and do whatever I want; stop doing X or next time we'll do it while you sleep" message. So not really a funny, unserious prank at all.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

From a literature perspective the original incarnation of them has more to do with the history of science and toxicology than it does with fantasy literature. They are basically earth elementals.

And, in fact, that is strongly implied by their literary origins. From the Wikipdia entry on "Gnomes":

The word comes from Renaissance Latin gnomus, which first appears in the works of 16th century Swiss alchemist Paracelsus. He is perhaps deriving the term from Latin gēnomos (itself representing a Greek γη-νομος, literally "earth-dweller"). In this case, the omission of the ē is, as the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) calls it, a blunder. Alternatively, the term may be an original invention of Paracelsus.
Paracelsus uses Gnomi as a synonym of Pygmæi,[3] and classifies them as earth elementals. He describes them as two spans high, very reluctant to interact with humans, and able to move through solid earth as easily as humans move through air.[4][5]
The chthonic, or earth-dwelling, spirit has precedents in numerous ancient and medieval mythologies, often guarding mines and precious underground treasures, notably in the Germanic dwarves and the Greek Chalybes, Telchines or Dactyls.[2]