Honestly, how often have you used gnomes?

[HeinorNY]

"Honestly, how often have you used gnomes?"

Everyday, they watch my front yard so no street dogs poop on it.

 

[Lord Fyre]

Gnomes need to be included!

If for no other reason then . . .

. . . without gnomes, what will the rest of us do with our free time?

 

[Arnwyn]

It is sensible. Regardless, the point stands: The only reason gnomes are being excluded is because of subjective judgments.

Thus, you misuse the word "only". (Or risk the answer to the point being: "Well, duh.")

Being curious: Where is this market research? Does it even exist?

But that's what I'm curious about. I'm highly skeptical of any such "market research" on gnomes even existing, much less being accurate in any meaningful way.

 

[Michael Silverbane]

I use gnomes pretty regularly... as both a player and a DM. They figured fairly prominently in a Spelljammer game that I ran for about a dozen years, where I used them to offset the dark mood of the campaign's very dark primary plot arc. And, more recently, I started a new campaign the day before the 4dventure countdown began where gnomes are the very personification of nature, and also feature quite prominently as both allies and antagonists.

Gnomes will certainly be included in the Monster Manual, and presented as a playable race... So I am not particularly upset by their absence from the Player's Handbook.

Later
silver

 

[ruleslawyer]

Forgive my pedantry, but it isn't logical. It is sensible.

It's both, actually. If reasoning from a set of facts to a rationally justified conclusion is logic (which, to some extent, it is), then deciding to axe gnomes because more people will buy the book and play the game is in fact not only the sensible, but also the logical thing to do, ne c'est pas?

Regardless, the point stands: The only reason gnomes are being excluded is because of subjective judgments. Being curious: Where is this market research? Does it even exist?

"Subjective judgments" are what potential players' or book buyers' feelings about gnomes might be. WotC's decision not to include is not "subjective," it's strategy keyed to objective purposes and decision-making criteria.

But yeah: I'm full of hot air here. My statements all assume that the market research in question actually exists (simply because it would have been moronic, IMO, not to poll a target audience before including or discarding game elements like this). If WotC dropped gnomes "just because," then you're clearly correct!

 

[Abstraction]

Aren't they a one-note joke in Dragonlance?

I have worked very hard in my campaign to give gnomes a real, serious role that spans large portions of the world. I carved out a niche for them that other races didn't fill. I would love to strangle whoever thought it would be a good idea for "tinker gnomes". I finally have a group that I don't have to beat about the head to get them to understand that gnomes should not be played as incompetent, suicidal pseudoscientests or group-destroying pathological tricksters.

 

[Cam Banks]

I have worked very hard in my campaign to give gnomes a real, serious role that spans large portions of the world. I carved out a niche for them that other races didn't fill. I would love to strangle whoever thought it would be a good idea for "tinker gnomes".

That would be Jeff Grubb, although many people built upon the initial concept of gnomes as mad engineers instead of being little tricksy people who talk to badgers.

Whoever it was who imported them into Mystara may also be responsible for broadening their influence in other worlds, too.

Cheers,
Cam

 

[Abstraction]

It seems as if they made gnomes as annoying as possible in order to justify the cut. Those bastards!

 

[AWizardInDallas]

The real issue isn't whether you use gnomes in your campaign or not. Everyone's opinion and use cases are going to vary widely. The real issue is do you want someone else to make this decision for you or would you rather be making the decision of what races to include or exclude yourself? The same goes for classes or any other component of the game for that matter.

Also, the changes WoTC made to gnomes for 3E are horrible, though done in the art work mostly. That has been a huge contributing factor in the obsfucation of the gnomish identity. Just off the top of my head though:

1. D&D gnomes have large noses with an accompanying keen sense of smell (making them excellent alchemists - WoTC even retained this detail in the 3E rules, though the art doesn't reflect it).
2. They love gemstones for their intrinsic beauty rather than their monetary value.
3. They love pranks, jokes and general mischief (making them great, imaginative illusionists and tying them in with their faerie roots) and are far more jovial and companionable than dwarves.
4. They are defenders of forests and animals (faerie roots again) and in some worlds are inventors, tinkerers and builders. (Dragonlance did an excellent job with gnomes.)
5. They value family and clan and can be wickedly mean in defending both.
6. Evil gnomes are rare and particularly vicious.

Nothing the "designers" do will change the way I see gnomes nor would I cut them from a generic campaign. I have the benefit of having played in prior editions while newer players may not know gnomes this way because of the changes made to 3E.

Dragon Magazine once featured a series of point-of-view articles for each race. Most of these (not half-orc or half-elf) have been reprinted in Best of Dragon #3. They are highly recommend reading for understanding what makes each race really tick.

 

[Cam Banks]

It seems as if they made gnomes as annoying as possible in order to justify the cut. Those bastards!

You know, I had come up with the idea of a certain branch of gnomes in Dragonlance (on a a fan-created continent) as being social engineers, rather than mechanical ones. I called them "talker gnomes." Every court in every kingdom had a gnome whose job it was to help spin the politics and act as an advisor to the king, prince, or whatever. Gnome society was all about playing this Great Game, out-doing each other. Eventually, they were all going to up and leave the humans, dwarves, elves, ogres, etc to their own devices and set up their perfect society somewhere else, having established the groundrules from thousands of years of tweaking other people's.

Then Eberron came out with something very much like this and I was both pleased and frustrated that somebody else had had such a similar idea.

Cheers,
Cam