• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

The Tielfling and The Gnome: On the Set of 4th edition

HeavenShallBurn said:
I could just be overly critical, but that seemed a deliberate dig at gnome supporters.
I'm not a gnome supporter (well, I'd perfer gnomes over halflings, but I'd prefer tieflings over either), but to me the gnome seemed to completely steal the show from the tiefling.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


For what it's worth, I love the teefling's huge horns and I love the new gnome design. And the badger. Who's my minion? Who's my ickle widdle minion?
 

Irda Ranger said:
It just seemed like they made him ridiculous and slightly retarded sounding. It's funny when it's one person (like half of Steve Martin's movies, which are hilarious)...
The disagreement about what is funny is suddenly made all-too-clear.
 

Goken100 said:
The disagreement about what is funny is suddenly made all-too-clear.
I wasn't referring to anything made since 1990, if that makes a difference. But tastes can differ; I'm sure if we compared an exhaustive list of "funny" movies there would be several on yours I would have to show "polite tolerance" for. :)




I knew I would get crap for those comments. I expected it.

But I do want to ask: why are we expected to empathize with "totally imaginary" characters like Hamlet or Othello, but not someone's Gnome character? Are the Shakespearean characters somehow more worthy? Does the fact that the Gnome had bug-eyes somehow make him so inhuman that he is worthy of death and ridicule? How many people here would feel bad to see an "imaginary character" they liked (whether Optimus Prime, Bart Simpson, or whoever) killed and robbed? Are you saying it wouldn't bother you even a little?

Maybe not. I have met a depressingly large number of humans who only care when its someone they know (or only themselves) that's hurt.

I don't take D&D any more seriously than any other game (little), but "people" (whether real people I meet on the street or cartoon people) deserve better than that. I can't help but feel bad for them if they are mistreated. And I have to wonder about the people who made the cartoon, or laughed at it: what's funny about someone being killed? what was funny when the tiefling kicked the badger? do you laugh when you see stray dogs run over in the street?

ha ha
 

Irda Ranger said:
I wasn't referring to anything made since 1990, if that makes a difference. But tastes can differ; I'm sure if we compared an exhaustive list of "funny" movies there would be several on yours I would have to show "polite tolerance" for. :)
Hehe, ya you're right of course, I was just kiddin'. Also right about pre-90 Steve Martin; who doesn't love The Three Amigos!?

Irda Ranger said:
I knew I would get crap for those comments. I expected it.

But I do want to ask: why are we expected to empathize with "totally imaginary" characters like Hamlet or Othello, but not someone's Gnome character? Are the Shakespearean characters somehow more worthy? Does the fact that the Gnome had bug-eyes somehow make him so inhuman that he is worthy of death and ridicule? How many people here would feel bad to see an "imaginary character" they liked (whether Optimus Prime, Bart Simpson, or whoever) killed and robbed? Are you saying it wouldn't bother you even a little?

Maybe not. I have met a depressingly large number of humans who only care when its someone they know (or only themselves) that's hurt.

I don't take D&D any more seriously than any other game (little), but "people" (whether real people I meet on the street or cartoon people) deserve better than that. I can't help but feel bad for them if they are mistreated. And I have to wonder about the people who made the cartoon, or laughed at it: what's funny about someone being killed? what was funny when the tiefling kicked the badger? do you laugh when you see stray dogs run over in the street?

ha ha
I'm actually also with you on this one; I generally don't enjoy "haha that character sucks" humour either. A glaring example is crotch-pain humour; that's just not cricket! In this case, I thought the cartoon was funny, but not hilarious. At least no crotches were harmed in its making!
 

kerrybrn said:
Wow... did you call that right. And on top of it all... she booted his badger!!!
Those 4e tieflings really are nasty :]

I'm booting my badger right now IYKWIMAITYD.

Irda Ranger said:
I never laugh when the joke is predicated on someone else's pain. It's called empathy.

Good lord. That excludes the better part of all humor, and certainly the better part of the best humor.

That's what the laugh is-- an empathic release.
 

Scott_Rouse said:
iagree.gif


That's The Rouse :p


Awwww yeaaah boooyeeee!

I'm so happy that caught traction.

All hail The Rouse!

PS- That vid had me rolling. My GF was a might perplexed.

Keep those video shorts coming!
 

epochrpg said:
I don't like the way that the Tiefling's horns are so friggin' huge. I thought they said "most tieflings can pass for human"-- but all the pics I've seen of them they have bigger horns than a bison.
cape_buffalo_1.jpg

-Bigger you say?? And I am an Cape Buffalo! Moooooooo!
 

That was a cool and funny cartoon :cool:

But it also shows us how monstrous the Players are and how "normal" the real monsters can be ;)
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top