Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
THREE elven races, plus half-elves ... but they say gnomes have no niche?!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Kaffis" data-source="post: 3949516" data-attributes="member: 10305"><p>That would be true, if you weren't trying to build mechanical bonuses based on the culture and image of the race into the race's stats.</p><p></p><p>You can overlook this with humans because the mechanical bonus for humans is "they are really diverse and adaptable." Thus, they have room for a barbaric culture here, and a technological culture there, and get racial feats and abilities that let you take whatever you want.</p><p></p><p>When you declare that a race is not merely adaptable, but <em>inherently</em> magical, or not merely adaptable, but <em>intrinsically</em> connected to nature, you don't have the luxury of saying "well, some cultures run with that, others don't." If something is core to your very being, it will affect all of your subcultures' racial identities. So, take a 3.x edition elf. Now, tell me, sir, why the ranger (and elven rangers are a deeply ingrained and very iconic archetype amongst D&D and fantasy of all kinds, so they should be sensibly represented) doesn't practice arcane magic, because he's innately connected to magic. That's like a dwarf who eschews stonework and metalcraft, it makes no sense and dilutes the character of the race as a whole. And now, turn ye to the elven wizard who builds his majestic and graceful tower... out of stone. Why? Isn't it a scar upon the forest?</p><p></p><p>There's plenty of call for dividing the race to account for the different archetypes that D&D is meant to draw upon and account for.</p><p></p><p>Gnomes have their niche, too, to be sure. However, it's a matter of popularity when it comes to what you make core as a playable race with PHB real estate. It's not a matter of "Are X and Y more compelling than Z? Okay, let's put X and Y in the PHB instead of Z." It's "Will players use and demand X and Y more than Z? Okay, then we need to make sure they're accessible to them." And having distinct, focussed, and differentiated X's and Y's is far preferable than making a clumsy, less-cohesive, and disjointed amalgamation, XY.</p><p></p><p>I mean, how would you feel if we combined the halfling and the gnome? After all, who's to say that some cultures of gnomelings don't just like to farm, steal, and make boats, and other cultures like to practice magic and invent things? Isn't that what you just said about the merged elf?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Kaffis, post: 3949516, member: 10305"] That would be true, if you weren't trying to build mechanical bonuses based on the culture and image of the race into the race's stats. You can overlook this with humans because the mechanical bonus for humans is "they are really diverse and adaptable." Thus, they have room for a barbaric culture here, and a technological culture there, and get racial feats and abilities that let you take whatever you want. When you declare that a race is not merely adaptable, but [i]inherently[/i] magical, or not merely adaptable, but [i]intrinsically[/i] connected to nature, you don't have the luxury of saying "well, some cultures run with that, others don't." If something is core to your very being, it will affect all of your subcultures' racial identities. So, take a 3.x edition elf. Now, tell me, sir, why the ranger (and elven rangers are a deeply ingrained and very iconic archetype amongst D&D and fantasy of all kinds, so they should be sensibly represented) doesn't practice arcane magic, because he's innately connected to magic. That's like a dwarf who eschews stonework and metalcraft, it makes no sense and dilutes the character of the race as a whole. And now, turn ye to the elven wizard who builds his majestic and graceful tower... out of stone. Why? Isn't it a scar upon the forest? There's plenty of call for dividing the race to account for the different archetypes that D&D is meant to draw upon and account for. Gnomes have their niche, too, to be sure. However, it's a matter of popularity when it comes to what you make core as a playable race with PHB real estate. It's not a matter of "Are X and Y more compelling than Z? Okay, let's put X and Y in the PHB instead of Z." It's "Will players use and demand X and Y more than Z? Okay, then we need to make sure they're accessible to them." And having distinct, focussed, and differentiated X's and Y's is far preferable than making a clumsy, less-cohesive, and disjointed amalgamation, XY. I mean, how would you feel if we combined the halfling and the gnome? After all, who's to say that some cultures of gnomelings don't just like to farm, steal, and make boats, and other cultures like to practice magic and invent things? Isn't that what you just said about the merged elf? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
THREE elven races, plus half-elves ... but they say gnomes have no niche?!
Top