Honestly, how often have you used gnomes?

[Arkhandus]

I agree with WotC's choice to remove the gnome, largely because it didn't have any place in the fantasy world.

They felt, to a lot of people, like clumsy halflings that had useless spellike abilities.

Those two points are only really due to
1) Tolkien's Middle-Earth didn't have gnomes, even though many folks whine all the time that D&D should be less slavishly based on Tolkien's work
2) WotC messed with the gnome in 3E and made it less distinct, moreso in 3.5, removing some of their old qualities that made them more interesting or different; and they just plain chose stupid racial traits for them (given how gimped illusion magic is in 3E, they should've at least given gnomes more than just the lowliest of cantrips).

Gnomes have their place in folklore and fantasy fiction. D&D just doesn't represent that so much these days. And really, WotC should've probably put Forest Gnomes in the PHB instead of Rock Gnomes if they were so uncertain about how to differentiate them from Dwarves or Halflings.

Gnomes are the tricksters and magic-users, the ones who aren't stuck up and fragile like elves nor irksome and overly serious like dwarves. They're the kind of folks that are actually fun to have around regardless of your own race, who always seem to have a trick up their sleeve, despite being kind of annoying once in a while with their mischief.

They're the clever race, but 3E took that away from them. For whatever reason, WotC didn't keep the gnomish Int bonus and Wis penalty, because they didn't want to bother making it work fine in-game without unbalancing the race as wizards. Go figure. The existing rules already massively favor certain races.

 

[Mad Mac]

As nonsensical as it sounds, I've played a ton of gnomes, and I'm also glad they aren't making the initial cut for the PHB. Gnomes have just never had much thought given to them since 1st edition, and it was starting to catch up. I look forward to seeing a more focused revamp.

I like gnomes, I just want them to get the level of design consideration they've never gotten, instead of getting a half-arsed version squeezed into the phb at the last minute to appease a few fans. again.

 

[Abstraction]

You know, strangely enough, gnomes do make the best barbarians just from a mechanical standpoint. A small weapon does on average 1 point less damage than a comparable medium one. With the gnome +1 size bonus to hit, he can afford to power attack for one more point than a medium sized character (and he doesn't have a STR penalty) with a two-handed weapon for 2 more points of damage. Add to that the size AC bonus and Con for extra hit points and one more round of rage and the gnome is the premier class for Barbarian. Possibly better than half-orc.

 

[Ifurita'sFan]

Two things.

First this statement

I agree with WotC's choice to remove the gnome, largely because it didn't have any place in the fantasy world.

Is the single most spurious statements about fantasy I think I've ever read

Gnomes have no place in a fantasy world? Are you high, or just utterly out of touch with reality

You are aware that Gnomes have held a place in folklore and fairy takes in the west that spans centuries right? If not I'd suggest you look into it. Start with the Brothers Grimm fairy tales.

Now, that said.

Gnomes under 1st and second edition filled outstanding roles. Mainly they flesh out thief, illusionist, and cleric roles. They were well suited for the game and their abilities as illusionists (until they were seriously nerfed in 3rd edition) were outstanding.

That third edition screwed up is simply an indication that 3rd edition is not perfect, and should be ignored and fixed by the GM where appropriate.

If the game rules would have been properly done illusionist spells would have not had their effectiveness damaged and the gnomes would have continued to be a respected and well used character race.

That WotC screwed up 3rd edition on that score should not be held against the gnomes

Have I used them? Yep... more than once. Particularly a couple Gnome thief characters in a Greyhawk campaign starting in and near the Kron hills.

The thing is... if they kill gnomes off completely... what happens to Greyhawk?

The Kron Hills (Flann-aerich in the old Flan tongue) are a range of mineral-rich hills spilling from the eastern side of the Lortmil Mountains and onward into the western Gnarley. The Kron Hills form the northern border of Celene, and the southern border of Verbobonc.

The northern region of the hills form a gnomish realm known as the Free Assembly of the Kron Hills, ruled by Urthgan the Eldest of Tulvar.

 

[pawsplay]

I distinctly remember being jealous, back when I was a Basic D&D player, that gnomes were a playable race in AD&D.

 

[Robert Ranting]

I played a gnome druid in a 3.0 one-shot who then migrated over to a new campaign (different DM, different group) which lasted for about a year. He was a child-like and whimsical character, a sort of combination Mowgli and Peter Pan, and he fancied himself a Knight in the service of Ehlonna. He was incredibly fun to roleplay, and he remains one of my favorite characters.

In a subsequent campaign, we had a Chaotic Evil gnome sorceror named Unborn. My girlfriend was in that game as well, (which is how I got to know her in the first place) and we both still tell stories about that little freak to other gamers when we get the chance.

My only truely negative experience with gnomes came from a Ravenloft campaign in which one of the PCs decided to play a Gnome sorceror with an unintelligible snooty french accent. The vocal antics aside, he was even worse than the CE Gnome from the previous campaign when it came to throwing area of effect spells into the midst of the party.

Overall, Gnomes have been a pretty significant part of my experience of D&D.

The one race that has not played any significant role in my games has been halflings. I have only ever once played in one-shot game with a halfling PC, and I found the character annoying. All of the NPC Halflings in the modules I have run or played in have been one-note con artists who can't be trusted. Gypsies, tramps, and thieves who my players always assume are guilty until proven innocent...but which turn out to be guilty anyway. Gnomes at least have the toughness of Dwarves and the magic of Elves...what do halflings have? They are sneaky, and their bonuses to saves (especially the one against fear) means they're often foolhardy and think they can get away with anything. Whether dastardly little thieves or fat and unadventurous farmers, Halflings do not have a place in my adventuring parties as they have been written.

Robert "Of Course, I Am Probably A Statistical Outlier" Ranting

 

[JohnSnow]

The real problem with gnomes is that there's no way to make them "distinctive" without returning to the days of class restrictions by race.

Gnomes were in the PHB so that there could be a spellcasting stunty race. Since halflings and dwarves were tagged with a nonmagical flavor, they couldn't be spellcasters. So, the designers gave us gnomes. Now that halflings and dwarves can be wizards, what role do gnomes have?

They overlap elves a little. They overlap dwarves a little. They overlap halflings a bit. Take gnomes out and there's a lot less overlap. Leave gnomes in, and you have to move the other races off their turf. Which part of gnomes do you want to emphasize?

 

[Henry]

I used gnomes a lot back in my 2nd edition days, but almost none in 3E. Occasionally I might play one, or have one as an NPC, but I really haven't found them to be as compelling as the little burrowing gem miners they were in 1E.

 

[w_earle_wheeler]

I've used gnomes in all of the D&D games I've ran since 2000.

As a player, about 50% of my 3.0/3.5 characters have been gnomes: a gnome wizard, a gnome barbarian, a svirfneblin monk, and a forest gnome ranger/assassin for example.

 

[Agamon]

Man, in 25 years of playing D&D, I bet I've seen over 1000 PCs. And I may be mistaken, but I think there was a gnome or two in there. Maybe three, but that's stretching it...