THREE elven races, plus half-elves ... but they say gnomes have no niche?!

[Umbran]

The fault I see in this arguement is that it does harm something to force gnomes into the PHB1. It hurts the development of the books and designers spend valuable time trying to force them in, when not many people care. It hurts the cost of publishing the book due to the extra pages spent on it. It hurts the identity of the gnome to introduce it to the books without a proper niche, or without proper support for that niche.

If they cut the gnome, and added no other races, I might accept this point. However, the addition of the dragonborn (which are new, so they require as much or more development effort, at least as much page time, and have no popularity yet due to their previous non-existence) puts a big hole in the logic. Similarly for the tieflings, and the new elf race.

I don't think niche-ism is a strong argument. Niches are nice, especially for newer gamers, but they are hardly a requirement for a tasty race. And heck, if everyone else is shoehorned into a niche, then being the race that isn't shoehorned, that is more flexible to GM and player needs) is itself a niche

 

[ruleslawyer]

The flexible, non-shoehorned race is called "human," I believe.

FWIW, I agree with you, Umbran; however, I think that WotC's decision to leave out gnomes probably had more to do with their perceived "in-betweenness" (somewhere between dwarf in craftsmanship/bearded folk of the earth, elf in forest-wise, and halfling in short, stocky, and good-humored) coupled with the tendency of many gamers to run gnomes as a joke. Not saying I agree or disagree, but there one has it.

 

[jaer]

If they cut the gnome, and added no other races, I might accept this point. However, the addition of the dragonborn (which are new, so they require as much or more development effort, at least as much page time, and have no popularity yet due to their previous non-existence) puts a big hole in the logic.

But this is exactly what made it easier: no one had an pre-concieved notion as to what Dragonborns should be, what their flavor was, or even what they should look like. The issue with adjusting a pre-existing race is that WotC needs to appease the gnome-lovers and win over the gnome-haters.

For some reason, dragonborns came to a lot of friction (I have always been a fan of a lizard race, so I'm all for them). But it was easy for people to house rule "no dragonborn". Look at how many people are upset about the gnomes not being in it...imagine if they came out and no one liked the fluff or crunch of them. WotC would not only have a race no one liked, they would have ruined a race that was someone's favored and then there would be posts on "WotC ruined my favorite race!" and "Gnomes still suck - wtg WotC!"

It's so much easier to nail down a new race then to conceptualize and focus a time-honored race that has had little focus and even less consistency throughout it's D&D history, a race with fans that don't want to feel like their vision and usage was sudden betrayed.

 

[Driddle]

If they cut the gnome, and added no other races, I might accept this point. However, the addition of the dragonborn (which are new, so they require as much or more development effort, at least as much page time, and have no popularity yet due to their previous non-existence) puts a big hole in the logic. Similarly for the tieflings, and the new elf race.

I don't think niche-ism is a strong argument. Niches are nice, especially for newer gamers, but they are hardly a requirement for a tasty race. And heck, if everyone else is shoehorned into a niche, then being the race that isn't shoehorned, that is more flexible to GM and player needs) is itself a niche

Wednesday, Dec. 19, 3:42 p.m. Oklahoma time: I mentally embraced Umbran and squeezed the stuffings out of him.

I'm noting this on my personal blog, too. A day like this may never come again.

 

[Arkhandus]

Have they ever had an int bonus? They don't in 1e or 3.5. I agree they are mischievous but so are halflings.

In 2nd Edition, and possibly at some other point, gnomes had an Intelligence bonus and a Wisdom penalty, rather than being little more than weak-muscled dwarves as they are in 3rd Edition. *hrumph*

Dragonlance gnomes? Tinkers, so obviously, smart but not so practical/sensible. Faerunian gnomes? Well, Lantan is their nation, isn't it, and that's the nation of inventors. So I'm fairly sure that Gnomes have had the smart-but-not-as-sensible archetype far longer than Halflings have had the pseudo-kender-but-not-kender nomadic-thieving-pseudo-gypsy adventurer archetype. By at least two or three editions' worth of time. :\

Whether gnomes apply their intellects and wits to invention, or trickery, or magic, it doesn't change what the core, fairly-consistent concept of Gnomes is in D&D.

Halflings, on the other hand, have been wildly inconsistent across the editions. Not even a core conceit of halflings across the editions. Heck, they're not even half-a-man in height anymore with 4th Edition, so not even their name fits them anymore!

 

[Nahat Anoj]

Halflings, on the other hand, have been wildly inconsistent across the editions. Not even a core conceit of halflings across the editions. Heck, they're not even half-a-man in height anymore with 4th Edition, so not even their name fits them anymore!

That's why I think they should have been called kender - indeed, 3e/4e halflings are basically kender without the suck.

 

[Rechan]

I'd just like to correct a misconception.

In any case, my gnomes would be guileful, sly, and crafty. They love to understand how things work, such as complicated artifice and machines. This makes them good masterminds and manipulators, and they have a talent for misdirection and deceit (such as illusions). So political wheelers-and-dealers, con-men, underworld crimelords, tacticians, wizards, artificers, and so on would be good careers for my gnomes.

THIS is what an Eberron gnome is. They are not tinkerers. They are not goofy.

Eberron gnomes are Machivellian bastards, a bunch of subtle, scheming, cunning, conniving midgets, playing a game of "Oh, don't mind me, I'm just a court jester."

Oh sure. You meet a gnome, and he's all silly and loves illusions and acts like your uncle Tom, pointing out you have a quarter behind your ear. And while he reaches behind your ear, he's planting evidence on your person, so that when the Watch shows up at your door, they find a smudge of the duke's blood on your collar.

The Gnomes home of Zilargo has no crime, and no open police force. Why? Because of the organization known as the Trust, which works like the KBG with divinations and Hats of Disguise. And the Zilargo citizens like it that way.

That is an Eberron gnome.

 

[Lurker37]

According to that logic, WotC should have designed the 4e elves so that they live in trees and bake cookies

Uh, wha?

Please explain?

If you'd mentioned the north pole and presents, that'd make some sense, but cookies??

And I sadly must agree that most newcomers would think of garden ornaments when they think of gnomes.

As for the niche, I expect that Gnome were left out for the same reason that they left out illusionists: we'll see one when we see the other. A second possibility would be to do with the hinted -at enchanter class to come later. That could take over from the tech tinker image that WoTC want to avoid - a race of magical tinkerers.

"Now we can not only make explosions, but the survivors get polymorphed!"

 

[Rechan]

Uh, wha?

Please explain?

There is a brand of cookies in the US called "Keebler", and the commercials for Keebler Cookies all involve elves in trees, baking them. Some of the cookies are also shaped like elves.

The main spokesman is this guy:

 

[Crazy Jerome]

I was reading every post, and the answer came to me about two posts before I got to this one, which I now highlight, because it didn't get the attention it deserved:

I'd remove Eladrins and give the "magical fey race from the Feywild" niche to the gnomes. They'd be elven cousins who stayed closer to their otherworldly roots.

Bingo! That's what I'm doing IMC. Of course, that hits all the right buttons for me, in ways that might not work for other people:

1. Gets rid of a name "eladrin" and puts a solid race that my players will actually want to play with the "gnome" name.

2. Casts gnomes as magical, and somewhat amoral, even sinister, but still with the occasional flippant bits. (And even the flippant bits are serious, because the character is amoral. It's like Robin Williams playing a villian--scary in a different way than normal. What was the film where he was the murderer in Alaska?)

3. Throws the whole "science/tech" angle on gnomes completely out the window, which is fine, because it leads to the "mad scientist" stuff, and takes the sinister out of the flippant.

4. Is plausible as a way to envision gnomes that fits some mythological roots (even if selectively ignoring others).

5. Gives elves a new lease on life by removing the "magical race" thing from them, making them more like the Mirkwood elves. (Supposedly this is already happening but if eladrin walk like high elves and quack like high elves ...) If I toss out half-elves, even better. Elves are distinctive again.

And all I have to do to make this work is make eladrin short, change their name, and maybe file a few serial numbers off. Done.

The prospect of doing that has made me like 4E a lot more than many things I have seen lately. A well designed racial package that I can rename is a lot more useful than some half-baked races that happen to come packaged with names I already prefer.