Whither the gnome?

[The Shadow]

If you can already have a dwarf illusionist, what is purpose of dwarf-like gnomes?

You can have a dwarf illusionist, yes. But most worlds are not going to have an entire dwarven culture built around illusion.

I'm quite fond of the 1e Unearthed Arcana gnome. Light-hearted tricksters with good hearts. I played a couple of these back in the day, and they were tremendous fun! One was a cleric/illusionist, the other a thief/illusionist.

 

[Dice4Hire]

I guess there is an appetite for the traditional rock gnome as well, which surprises me. I figured that since dwarves can now be wizards and bards and what not (and racial restrictions will not come back in), that the "like dwarves but magical" would have pretty much been made redundant.

If you can already have a dwarf illusionist, what is purpose of dwarf-like gnomes?

Adventurers tend to be the exception, not the norm, so this is not a problem.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

All of the above. Gnomes have always had a pretty unified vision, IMO.

 

[Obryn]

Monsters. With lairs. And minions!

-O

(raaaawr)

 

[ComradeGnull]

Eberron gnomes.

I considered that as an option, but ultimately decided they were mostly 3e gnomes with a slightly more elaborated and specific culture. Were there other differences I'm forgetting, other than their creepy secret police and mark of scribing?

 

[TwinBahamut]

I'd like it of gnomes were either ignored completely or were returned to their roots. D&D should just use gnomes in the oldest use of the word: elemental creatures of earth. They should exist alongside undines, salamanders, and sylphs as common elemental creatures. It's just about the one role for gnomes that only they can really fill that well.

The only widely-seen alternative to the earth elemental version is the tinker gnome (as seen in many D&D settings and WoW), and I'd rather not use that one.

 

[Cobalt Meridian]

Personally I think Gnomes should be a "core" race again, replacing the Tolkein-abomination that is the Halfling race. Not too bothered which variety although the Pathfinder style got my vote (narrowly above the 4e variety).

 

[TrippyHippy]

I could live without the Gnomes.

As far as Races go, I'd like to see the core races being strictly Tolkien (Elf, Dwarf, Halfling, Human). Maybe include a playable Orc.

For expansion books, alternative Races could be given, but it would be nice to see them presented collectively. That is, rather than just creating a hodgepodge of lots of individual Races, they get delivered in sets that detail the relationships that each have with each other too.

I could see a set of races, for example, based upon anthropomorphised creatures (Lion people, Wolf people, Hawkmen, etc).

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

In every edition, it's always interesting how people who don't play gnomes seem so eager to crap on the race for those who do. Even elves, which Gygax knows, 2E tried to salt the earth on, don't get treated this way by their non-fans. See: Every discussion of gnomes in the pre-4E threads.

If you don't like gnomes, that's great. Please skip the "leave this race out" rhetoric, though: All PHB1 classes and races are going to be in the 5E PHB1. It's an option some of us like and will use. (I'm in my fifth year of playing an ass-kicking gnome illusionist/police detective in a Ptolus game.)

 

[ferratus]

All of the above. Gnomes have always had a pretty unified vision, IMO.

See I think that what you are describing there in your unified theory of gnomes could all fit under the dwelvish magical gnome variant. Illusion magic has always been compatible with fairy magic.

I think tinker gnomes are a bit more extreme than traps turned into swiss clockworks though. Tinker gnomes are full-on steampunk fantasy. I can certainly see traps and clockworks as being the genesis of the split between the two subraces, but I can't see tinker gnomes and rock/forest gnomes existing in the same warren.