• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

What is THE iconic Gnome Class?

What is the iconic Gnome Class?



log in or register to remove this ad

Gnome Quixote

First Post
Tinker, definitely. There wasn't much about Dragonlance I liked, but I really dug the tinker gnomes. Second choice would probably be beguiler. Definitely not bard. I don't quite understand what they were trying to accomplish, there.

Oddly enough, though, I always tend to lean towards clerics, myself. My current gnome is a cleric/rogue working towards the Divine Trickster prestige class on Rich Burlew's site. I guess I just enjoy playing against type.
 

InVinoVeritas

Adventurer
I love gnomes. They're my favorite race. They make the best arcane spellcasters in the game, in my opinion.

Illusionists are good, but why stop there? A gnome Conjurer or Evoker can be sneaky and flashy, too. I'm another Wizard/Rogue/Arcane Trickster type, myself, but in the end, it's all about the magic. In my campaign, I stick to the 3.0 gnome, and use Wizard(any) as their preferred class. Elves get Sorcerer.

Of course, Druids and Sorcerers are also good for gnomes. All things considered, they're really versatile. I think their biggest failing is that their niche is not well-defined (side effect of versatility) and they've got a lot of unsexy and uncool stereotypes attached to them. They need their own Lidda. (It certainly ain't Gimble--although there is something cool about Nebin.)
 

FireLance

Legend
Bard, then beguiler, then illusionist. I think artificer fits in more with dwarves and their talent for crafting. Of course, this is based on a racial concept for gnomes that I developed in 2e. I posted the following on another messageboard recently:

I agree that gnomes suffer from the lack of a real niche. It doesn't help that the D&D idea gnome encompasses such varying concepts as the woodsy forest gnome and the Krynnish tinker gnome. I think that the Eberron "reinvention" of gnomes as dealers in information and secrets is a step in the right direction, but it doesn't go far enough, in my view.

Back in 2e, I decided to create a world where each of the races were aligned with a specific element, and had attributes and philosophies related to the themes associated with that element. For gnomes, I picked the "element" of Shadow. The gnomes in that world were thus very different from the regular gnomes found elsewhere. They were tricksters: sly, cunning, devious and manipulative. They were natural spies and rogues, good at stealth and at ferreting out secrets and information. They had a special connection with dreams, nightmares, emotions and the subconscious parts of the mind, and were experts at evoking feelings of all sorts in others: positive ones such as joy, happiness and laughter, as well as darker one such as fear, rage and despair. They had a special knack for illusion and emotion-affecting spells. Given that I had this idea about gnomes at the back of my mind, I was quite happy with the 3.5 move of making bard their favored class. Of course, now that it is out, I think beguiler would make a excellent favored class, too.

Of course, this version of gnome now treads too much on halfling territory. But that can be changed as well. :D
 


Felix

Explorer
Frankly, I think Illusionist and Beguiler are one and the same when it comes to archetypes. An archetype has nothing to do with the mechanics of the class, merely the feel of what the mechancis are trying to capture. Both beguilers and illusionists try to capture the idea of a manipulative, tricksy, spell weaving, physical-combat eschewing character.

So, both of those.

And I suppose Bard could work too, if it weren't for the whole Perform aspect of the Bard: I think tricksy Gnomes would rather stay out of the limelight.
 

Nyaricus

First Post
Felix said:
Frankly, I think Illusionist and Beguiler are one and the same when it comes to archetypes. An archetype has nothing to do with the mechanics of the class, merely the feel of what the mechancis are trying to capture. Both beguilers and illusionists try to capture the idea of a manipulative, tricksy, spell weaving, physical-combat eschewing character.

So, both of those.
But we aren't talking archetypes, we're talking iconic gnome classes - that is, crunch and not fluff.

Good point though, just not the point I was trying to make :)
 


Nyeshet

First Post
I didn't vote, mostly because I do not like the current representation of the gnome race. In my opinion it should more closely reflect legends - and thus likely should have a Level Adjustment. It should be Tiny sized, move as if Medium sized (30 ft), Wild Empathy equivalent to Druid of similar HD, and perhaps a few spell like abilities - such as Pass without Trace, Speak with Animal, Expeditous Retreat, Feather Fall, Prestidigitation, maybe even Water Walk 1/day while running - that is to say nature and movement based spells.

Of course, my view of the gnome was strongly influenced by the whole "David the Gnome" series (or whatever it was called) from back with Nickelodeon was starting up and still showed cartoons such as Padington Bear, Curious George, etc. (How far they have fallen . . . .) The little man, swift and sure in movement, able to communicate with the fox or bird for an even swifter ride somewhere, helping out the forest, its inhabitants, and the nicer nearby humans (albeit rarely, as I recall, were the nearby humans involved in any of the happenings in the show).

From this perspective, the Gnome should likely be an LA +1 or even +2 race, and its favored class should be Druid - or perhaps a modified version of Ranger (Familiar Environment, etc). Of course the Druid class also needs some adjusting, but that goes without need of saying.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top