The changes to gnomes in 3.5e

[Raven Crowking]

Hey, what do you expect? You're talking to the guy who, just last month, was actually able, entirely in-character during a game, to utter the phrase, "Please don't squeeze the shaman."

lol

My love for your punning has no bounds.


RC

P.S.: Oh yeah, I guess I should say something about gnomes. Gnomes using bard as their favored class? It actually makes sense to me. But, I also side firmly with Akrasia in that the forest gnome is by far a superior race in terms of flavor.

 

[Darklone]

I do like the gnome changes overall. But I liked bards all the time.

For druid gnomes and other stuff: Check out the Kalamar rock, forest and deep gnomes. And kobolds

 

[johnsemlak]

I do like the gnome changes overall. But I liked bards all the time.

For druid gnomes and other stuff: Check out the Kalamar rock, forest and deep gnomes. And kobolds

Hey, Darklone, can you shed any light on what kind of option are in that book?

 

[FireLance]

I have to admit, I'm predisposed to like changing the gnome's favored class to bard because I was already doing that IMC. I'd never really liked the idea of giving a sub-class as a favored class anyway. In any case, my mental equation has been gnomes = tricksters rather than gnomes = illusionists. Bard is an even better class for a trickster since they actually get Bluff as a class skill now.

In any case, I've always felt that the bard class, along with the Barbarian and the Druid suffer from a lot of pigeonholing because of the baggage associated with their names. A barbarian need not be uncivilized. A druid need not be based on the Celtic tradition. And a bard doesn't have to be wandering minstrels. Just to make my point, I once created a bard who was more of an academic professor than a suave scoundrel. She had ranks in all Knowledge skills and Perform (Oratory), and inspired courage not by breaking out into song in the middle of combat, but by giving a precise, detailed and technical lecture about the creatures the party was facing and the best way to defeat them.

So, gnomes as academic professor-type "bards" with a sense of fun? Suits me fine.

 

[Vocenoctum]

Not really. An Illusionist's strength relies on his spellcasting ability. Thus, if he multiclasses, he's going to take a bigger hit than a bard, whose strength lies in being diverse. He has his songs, his impressive list of skills, his (average) combat abilities, and then his spells.

Right, but if the main thing that makes gnomes prefered bards is their illusion spells, they have the same limitations.
Without favored class: illusionist, they can't just dabble in illusions, they can only dabble in the Dabbler Class.
Double Dabbling is just bad!

Personally, I prefer 3.5 Gnomes as Bards, but it's still not perfect. IMC I gave Gnomes a favored class of Wizard, dropped their nature-y background, and turned them more into magical inventors (not tinkers). Elves got a FC of druid and the other races mostly stayed the same.

In one campaign, I made gnomes the iconic psionic race, with favored class: Psion. Really though, I think the Racial Sub Levels are a better way to show racial "favored classes", rather then the actual FC mechanic.
And, for elves, I always thought Ranger was more iconic then Wizard, but dunno.

I could see the gnome filling the role of either the wizard or the nature-loving druid, but... bard is kind of strange (even though it fits, conceptually) and illusionist is FAR too limiting for a favored class.

I wouldn't change the FC just because "illusionist is too limited" but that was the main complaint I used to hear. Broadening it to Wizard is fine (or heck, even sorcerer, which is more natural talent...) but Bard seems odd.

 

[Pants]

Right, but if the main thing that makes gnomes prefered bards is their illusion spells, they have the same limitations.
Without favored class: illusionist, they can't just dabble in illusions, they can only dabble in the Dabbler Class.
Double Dabbling is just bad!

Actually, I think they got Bard because of their combined trickster, illusionist, and all-around likable guy archetypes.

I wouldn't change the FC just because "illusionist is too limited" but that was the main complaint I used to hear. Broadening it to Wizard is fine (or heck, even sorcerer, which is more natural talent...) but Bard seems odd.

Yeah, I'd prefer Wizard over both Bard and Illusionist. Elves seem more like Sorcerers or Druids to me anyways...

 

[Conaill]

And of course, it would have thrown all semblance of balance completely out of the water to give the Gnome "Favored Class: Bard or Illusionist"!

:\ (we really do need a "rolleyes" smilie...)

 

[Ferret]

I like the 3.5 gnome, it's been my idea of gnomes in general fantasy since I can remember. The changes are liked, along with the change to bard. Illusion, even if it was part of there 'culture' is too restrictive of a class, it would have been a kin to making Half-orc only take strength based combat feats, or elves can only take the archery choice if they become rangers. I have similiar feeling about the innate spells, but not so gravely. Bard I think is a good choice. I can put my finger on any particular reason though.

Oh, and I liked the oversized noses (but not to big).

 

[Biohazard]

A barbarian need not be uncivilized.

Uh, dude, you're wrong there. A barbarian, by *any* definition, is one who is apart from civilization.

 

[Gez]

A barbarian, by its original definition, is one who is not Greek.