What's the big deal about gnomes not being in the PHB? **Edited for adversarial tone*

[I'm A Banana]

I think we're talking "fantasy iconic" here. I've never seen anyone play a Keebler elf. (Anyone who did would be treated as if they're playing a kender, gnome or other annoying comical race.)

We weren't, but we can. Specifically, I was responding to an argument from pop culture that said the most recognizable gnomes are Travelocity's roaming gnome, david the gnome, etc. Using that same argument, elves bake cookies and make toys, while gnomes travel the world and work nature magic.

If we're talking "fantasy iconic," the most iconic gnomes I know of outside of D&D are generally treated as earth-elemental type creatures similar to dwarves, but smaller and closer to primal "earth-magic" than the dwarves are. If a dwarf works metal and lives in a clan, the gnome slides through the earth like a fish and conjures gems and stones from nothing, while being born out of "gnome eggs" that resemble geodes.

The most iconic elves I know of outside of D&D would be the super-powered, near-divine, "everything works out for us and we always look stylish" uber-elf of Tolkein and his related rip-offs.

Neither would be very valid as a player race in D&D, IMO.

 

[Jraynack]

I find removing certain races out of player's hands gives them a bit more mystique and interesting. I ran a campaign years ago where everybody had to play humans until other races were introduced to them.

I had them explore elf and dwarf ruins as they eventually got a feel for their old, disappearing culture.

The first time they realized an old wise woman was actually an elf covered with illusion, they were like "Whoa! - An elf!"

That kind of reaction you can't buy. I think this is a good move for gnomes - in a sense rediscover their roots.

 

[Betote]

I like the concepts of both the tinker/illusionist gnome and the earth gnome. And, if Elves are now Elves (for the "forest folk with bows") and Eladrin (for the "magical high society"), i don't see any reason why gnomes shouldn't get this same treatment, apart from the "elf guys/chicks are hawt" thing.

And it's always better to have things you won't use than to not have things you'd like to use. OK, many people won't use gnomes but, what about the minority who would like to do it? This is something that annoys me of the 4E previews I've seen so far: it seems like they're removing the less popular options or postponing them for a future release. Now I know I won't want to play 4E until PHBII, because until then I won't be able to be a bard or a druid.

That's, IMO, the main disadvantage of 4E when it comes out: it will be a game with infinitely less options than 3.x, which, for a game that relies mainly on imagination and creativity (as RPGs always claim to be), is a clear handicap.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Probably the same that anyone playing a warmage/elemental savant will look like: he won't have an immediate means to translate that into 4e.

Good thing mine got was eaten at the end of the Age of Worms and now I don't have to worry about it. All hail acid damage!

DS

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The most iconic elves I know of outside of D&D would be the super-powered, near-divine, "everything works out for us and we always look stylish" uber-elf of Tolkein and his related rip-offs.

If you look pre-JRRT, a more common "iconic" elf was found in fairytales or the stories of writers like Shakespeare: a fey who lived in a place called Underhill (that was outside of normal time and space), was beautiful in a kind of cruel way, may or may not have had certain unusual nature-related features (green skin, flowers for hair), may or may not have had wings, and liked to play tricks on humans- especially those who had offended them in some way- up to and including kidnapping with the occasional swap of a Changeling child.

And the thing is, they could easily be transformed into PC races by having them not gain most of their innate magical ability until later levels, like Drow (esp. under a racial advancement system like is found in Savage Species or Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed/Arcana Evolved).

 

[just__al]

New Coke resulted in a lot more cash-in of Coke Classic, so it very well could have been an intentional marketing ploy to get people to buy more Coke Classic.

I'm pretty sure New Coke existed just to take everybody's attention away from the fact that they stopped making coke with sugar and switched to High Fructrose Corn Surup

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I like the concepts of both the tinker/illusionist gnome and the earth gnome. And, if Elves are now Elves (for the "forest folk with bows") and Eladrin (for the "magical high society"), i don't see any reason why gnomes shouldn't get this same treatment, apart from the "elf guys/chicks are hawt" thing.

And it's always better to have things you won't use than to not have things you'd like to use. OK, many people won't use gnomes but, what about the minority who would like to do it? This is something that annoys me of the 4E previews I've seen so far: it seems like they're removing the less popular options or postponing them for a future release. Now I know I won't want to play 4E until PHBII, because until then I won't be able to be a bard or a druid.

That's, IMO, the main disadvantage of 4E when it comes out: it will be a game with infinitely less options than 3.x, which, for a game that relies mainly on imagination and creativity (as RPGs always claim to be), is a clear handicap.

Well, for the mean time, you got the Warlord and the Dragonborn as totally new toy, and Tiefling and Warlock as relatively new toys to play with. (or as options you ignore)

Otherwise, I think that's the drawback of every new edition - the options will always be less in the beginning. There is little that the designers can do about it.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Could be worse:

What's your beef with Hypersmurf?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

New Coke was one of those things that had unintentional results.

Pepsi was recording ever increasing sales. According to market research, Coke thought it was losing market share to Pepsi because Pepsi had a sweeter flavor.

Coke reasoned that New Coke, similar in sweetness to Pepsi, would be the remedy to that slipping market share.

Coke's mistakes were:

1) Taking "Classic Coke" off the market. Like the current "Burger King Freakout" commercials suggest, for some, the flavor they want is Coke, not Pepsi.

2) Not recognizing that a large portion of the increases in Pepsi sales weren't actually slips in market share, but were instead due to an increase in the overall size of the market due to the immense size of Generation Y (equivalent to the Baby Boomers) and their younger palates favoring sweeter drinks.

However, after a while, they brought back Classic Coke and even moved up a couple of ticks in market share.