Goblins, the final PHB3 race?

I'm doubtful, since there's no unreleased race mentioned in the Ardent article. And they mention all (?) known races that have a bonus to Charisma. But they might have gotten more careful with such tidbits...
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Dak'kon is the one who sold Githzerai as a PC race. Not to mention Planescape which did a lot of work to sell both the Githzerai and Tieflings as PC's.

Githyanki don't have anyone selling them on why they should be a full PC race. Even the 2e Guide to the Astral Plane which has a PC writeup on Githyanki, discouraged people from playing Githyanki unless they had really good reasons.

As for Goblins, well for everyone who likes to make all those accusations about WOW's influence, the new World of Warcraft expansion has Goblins as a race.
 

Dak'kon was Githzerai, though. IIRC the only Githyanki were antagonistic.

Dak'kon is the one who sold Githzerai as a PC race.
Dak'kon sold both types of gith to me, since his racial creation myth / back-story encompassed both races.

However, if you only associate Dak'kon with Githzerai, then my sales pitch for Githyanki would be: "like that Dak'kon guy, but with an awesome sword, and they ride dragons".

Also, Swordmage just screams out GISH to me. (Though "Gish" could be a racial paragon path.)

Cheers, -- N
 


Actually, reading that, I realize I'm the exact same way. Which is probably why I don't react well to the various Gith classes, either. Hunh.
I'm in a similar boat.

But also I came in at the tail end of 2e/beginning of 3e, so Planescape never registered on my radar. No planescape, no giving a damn about the Planes.
 


I'm in a similar boat.

But also I came in at the tail end of 2e/beginning of 3e, so Planescape never registered on my radar. No planescape, no giving a damn about the Planes.

Yeah, same here. Except I came in at the start of 2e. Only played a few games of Planescape, and never really "got" it. I do vaguely remember playing a tiefling rogue who got caught up in an arms heist. But still don't care much for planar games.
 

Yeah, same here. Except I came in at the start of 2e. Only played a few games of Planescape, and never really "got" it. I do vaguely remember playing a tiefling rogue who got caught up in an arms heist. But still don't care much for planar games.

I enjoyed Planescape a lot, and wound up accumulating a fair share of it even though I never actually used that much of it. Tieflings were immediately grafted into my game (We'd already been using homebrew rules for demon-blooded anyway... why yes, I'm one of those people who has not a whit of a problem with 4e's "tieflings are core" approach.) So were aasimar. But I've never run a plane-hopping game as described. The Great Wheel is an interesting philosophical construct, but I've never actually found it attractive enough to actually use it. Give me an Overworld, an Underworld, and some way to visit the City of Brass and I'm happy enough.

It was certainly a neat setting, though, and its notable characters ranked up there with the notables of any other. My wife still makes "Friendly Fiend" references when the opportunity arises.
 

The thing is, if they're going to bring in Goblins or Gnolls, why the rant about no Githyanki as a playable race? That just irks me, since Githyanki seem to fit a good niche (mechanically and flavor-wise), and seem to be rather popular.

So: if they won't give me Githyanki, then I'm against all the other monster races. Purely for reasons of spite.

Cheers, -- N

Yeah, the whole "cut down on evil race thing" is hard to take seriously when all of the races players seem to want are generally of the 'evil' ilk.
 


Remove ads

Top