God, I'm mad at Wizards.

[Counterspin]

Gnomes got bumped to the MM based on numbers. I still can't understand why anyone cares that they've moved a book over on the bookshelf.

[horseboy]

Gnomes got bumped to the MM based on numbers. I still can't understand why anyone cares that they've moved a book over on the bookshelf.

The problem I see with it is that it encourages meta gaming. After all it's pretty much done to get more players to buy more books (as opposed to just the DM needing a copy, everybody now does) And of course, while the player's grubby little noses are in the book, they're of course going to read more/most of it, thereby pretty much kiboshing any "grace period" a DM might have in surprising players with monsters he didn't have to build from scratch.

[Farmer42]

But player's will need the MM if they have any kind of summoning anyway. The reason I bought the MM, and subsequently MMII, was because I was interested in conjurers. And gods forbid a player wants to know about mounts. The MM is a perfectly valid player resource.

[SoD]

But player's will need the MM if they have any kind of summoning anyway. The reason I bought the MM, and subsequently MMII, was because I was interested in conjurers. And gods forbid a player wants to know about mounts. The MM is a perfectly valid player resource.

Correction, some parts of the MM are a perfectly valid player resource. Other parts, are not. When will the player need to know the weaknesses of the Derro? When will the player need to know the damage reduction of the Rakshasha? When will the player need to know how many, on average, hit points a basic wyrmling red dragon has? Answer: quite often they will need to know these. However...the need to find out for themselves. Some parts of the MM are off limits. And they don't really need to know the stats for the things they summon, they'll need to know the basics about them, but most of the stuff is going to be for the DM. When summoning a large sized shark, you're going to need to know: a: what it is, b: what it does, c: what it's good at, and d: what it's not.

Large shark.

A: what is it? It's a large shark, roughly the size of a horse.
B: What does it do? It swims, eats, and bites.
C: What is it good at? Swimming, eating, biting.
D: What is it not good at? Surviving on land, flying, poetry.

None of which is numbers, the player doesn't need to know it's HD, its BAB, or anything like that. That's for the DM.

[Farmer42]

So what does a group with a rotating DM do? Is one poor schmuck stuck as DM the whole time? The problem in your logic is the assumption that the players aren't responsible enough to not metagame. And if they aren't, why then aren't you busting out the +5 vorpal chair of bad player smiting that every DM comes equipped with?

[LibraryOgre]

..Erm... NFG?

FNG... Frickin' New Guy.

[Deepblue706]

Yeah, I'm a little disappointed about Gnomes getting booted out of the front-row...I always enjoyed having loads of pint-sized superscientists hiding in mountains, secluded from the world. That's how I usually had them go in homebrew campaigns, anyway.

Eccentric tinker gnomes gave me excuses to throw my favorite steampunk and retrofuture concepts into my quasi-late-medieval period games, which would serve as an effective tool for both humor and "jazzin' it up". There's nothing like having what essentially amounts to Merlin, Conan, Musashi and Odysseus wander into a Detroit filled with little-people, whose advanced culture could have easily dominated the planet, if the nation's leaders were not preoccupied with countless domestic challenges, like determining their people's "Most Favorite Color", or wiping out the Rampant Owl Infestations. Then there's the gnomish mob, and plenty of unorganized crime on the side - I probably shouldn't say more than that.

And, when they finally get back to discussing war, it's usually no more than "What kind of flame decales should we put on our armored death machines?"

And even if this isn't true with the world canon, I can still have my gnomes say it is, because they like screwing with people.

But I guess, that was the pinnacle of gnomes - and WotC can't support what is supposed to be a "cool" game with stupid gnomes. This is precisely why the Tiefling - a "cool" race - is getting bumped into center-stage. You see, WotC has never been out to be novel, creative or any other word that I would choose to denote something different in a positive light. They've never been out to make their games internally consistent, or mentally stimulating in any sense. They're out to be "cool", and that is damn well what they're going to keep on doing. The sooner we can accept that WotC is nothing short of pure evil (and "coolness"), the happier we can all be.

[KIDS]

Hmmmm... I do agree with the fact that a certain amount of hypocrisy exists in their reasoning, but really, from what I know:

a) gnomes were always the least played race or very close to it
and
b) the technological aspect and humor relief aspect both existed long long long long long long long before WoW, do I dare say since gnomes were introduced (when was it, 1st or 2nd edition).

Now the point is: I am glad to see the gnomes gone from main spotlight (not from game) even if it kills a few ok character concepts, but in my mind gnomes were always a race with a big FAIL scribbled on them. Instead of quirky, wandering nature spirits with unusual connections with the world, they turned into something with no niche, no purpose, no role and no flavor besides wise-cracking sidekicks. So yeah, I'm not mad at Wizards even if they bring Warforged into a standard game...

[Athaniar]

How can someone mistake a tiefling for a draenei? Ever seen a blue tiefling? How can someone even mistake a tiefling for an eredar? Ever seen a tiefling with a tentacle beard and a klingon forehead?

Plus, they don't even have a similiar backstory.

What? This thread was about gnomes?

My solution: make the gnomes more unique compared to WoW, not remove them. I sure hope that they are more unique when they appear in the MM.

[LibraryOgre]

b) the technological aspect and humor relief aspect both existed long long long long long long long before WoW, do I dare say since gnomes were introduced (when was it, 1st or 2nd edition).

Neither is true. The gnomes of Greyhawk were fairly stout fighters, noted, IIRC, for their friendship with the rangers and werebears (who were often the same people) of Gnarley Forest (and wherever else they may be). Similarly, the gnomes of the Forgotten Realms were known for their relative stealth... they simply didn't interact with others, except on their own terms.

They didn't have a particular technological bent until the release of Dragonlance, and the advent of the Tinker gnome. That's when they moved from "people who enjoyed a good joke" to "comic relief", as well. As much as I've enjoyed the Dragonlance saga, you can really trace most of the decline of the gnomish species to that series.

[Kurald Galain]

This is the problem with 4e. A good portion of the mechanics are done nicely IMO, but the fluff is just absurd.

QFT.

They're essentially making the assumption that every fantasy world would be better off with intelligent iron golems, and noble savage lizardmen.

Of course, compatibility with existing settings and worlds isn't exactly high on their list of priorities. Because it doesn't sell as much.

[Gorbash]

Yes, but you're no Half-Orc.
One parent was a victim of rape, the other a horrible monster. Your existance would serve as a constant reminder of the remaining parents rape, and as such they'd despise you. Living on the streets, detested by all...

Well, the same description could be applied to Tieflings, too... At least, the old tieflings, not this mumbo jumbo... Sure, some devils/demons could just lure the human into mating, or maybe some zealots willingly did it, but it doesn't mean the rapes weren't involved... The only difference is, as I see it, that people usually hate orcs/half orcs and fear Tieflings (who would want to mess with an offspring of a devil?), and for the same reason hate them too, but this is just more cooler :D

[Jimp]

Large shark.
*snip*
D: What is it not good at? Surviving on land, flying, poetry.

Damn, now I want to play an awakened Shark poet wizard. He will fly around and use illusions to illustrate his poems and stories. He will craft his own wonderous item to allow him to breathe the air.

[Rutee]

Correction, some parts of the MM are a perfectly valid player resource. Other parts, are not. When will the player need to know the weaknesses of the Derro? When will the player need to know the damage reduction of the Rakshasha? When will the player need to know how many, on average, hit points a basic wyrmling red dragon has? Answer: quite often they will need to know these. However...the need to find out for themselves. Some parts of the MM are off limits. And they don't really need to know the stats for the things they summon, they'll need to know the basics about them, but most of the stuff is going to be for the DM. When summoning a large sized shark, you're going to need to know: a: what it is, b: what it does, c: what it's good at, and d: what it's not.

Large shark.

A: what is it? It's a large shark, roughly the size of a horse.
B: What does it do? It swims, eats, and bites.
C: What is it good at? Swimming, eating, biting.
D: What is it not good at? Surviving on land, flying, poetry.

None of which is numbers, the player doesn't need to know it's HD, its BAB, or anything like that. That's for the DM.

Correction: The DM may not NEED it, but it'll help the DM for the player to handle the legwork.

[SoD]

That is true, but there's a large difference in a player looking through a book to help the DM and that book being part of the players resources for the session.

[SimperingToad]

It does make me wonder if someone at Wizards read a little bit of mythology where Gnomes were treated as representations of the element of Earth, just as Salamanders were of the element of Fire, and Sylphs were of the element of Air. If so, then the move to MM makes more sense.

The reason that orcs and other 'greenskins' were not originally playable races was that EGG designed the game to be centered around humans. Some might recall that in 1E, there were Humans, Demi-Humans (i.e. elves, gnomes, dwarves, halflings, plus 1/2 elves and 1/2 orcs), and all other approximately man-sized bipeds were called humanoids (and thus, were tossed as a collective unit into the MM). 3.xE has blurred those distinctions, and 4E seems to be fanning the flames.

I would have to say go back to the 1E for the basics, but do a 3E and put rules in the DMG to make other races available as PCs as an option.

On the 'angsty races taking over the game because of all the angsty teenagers we want to attract to the game' issue: most at some point in their lives registers on the angst-o-meter (ever hear of a mid-life-crisis?). Does everyone else fail to understand you, or do you fail to understand them?

[Grey Paladin]

Yes, it's the easy stereotype but at the same time it's perfectly acceptable to have, happy, well adjusted adventurers.

What mentally stable, happy, person would sign up for a job with a mortality rate of 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 99999999% ?

[SimperingToad]

The same person that buys a powerball ticket expecting to win the whole enchilada.

[Lycar]

What mentally stable, happy, person would sign up for a job with a mortality rate of 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 99999999% ?

Meh, if you sign up fpr life you already have a 100% mortality rate.
Might as well make it exciting while it lasts.

Lycar

[Grey Paladin]

The same person that buys a powerball ticket expecting to win the whole enchilada.

I admit defeat, you are Supreme.

[SimperingToad]

Meh, if you sign up fpr life you already have a 100% mortality rate.
Might as well make it exciting while it lasts.

Lycar

In agreement, but I don't recall signing anything. Does this mean I'll live forever? Or, am I really undead?

Does anyone know where one can find that mythological 'new lease on life'? And does it come with a money-back guarantee?

Regards,
theToad

[Yahzi]

The story should revolve around the PCs, but the PCs shouldn't be innately better than the NPCs, that runs like a video game.

QFT.

I guess some people want to play in a game world where there are two sets of rules - one for them, and one for everybody else. Me, I find the very idea disturbing and creepy.

How could my victory over the NPCs ever mean anything if I start cheating from the get-go?

D&D has always presented the NPCs as scenery - it has always treated "commoners" as no different than descriptions of wall-hangings. D&D has always enforced a moral system that defines the "players" as the object of morality, and robs every other entity in the game of moral significance.

I thought they were getting better. From the sounds of it, they seem to be getting worse.

[Sebastian]

Didn't they dump support for Half Elves/Orcs? And, hm. I need to reread Eberron, sure, but weren't Warforged.. not outcasts?

In eberron? In Eberron warforgeds are costructs built to fight in a war, their only purpose of life, their only reason to be, was to fight and follow their superior's orders, but now the war is over,the law consider them "free citizen", but people don't like them because they see them like weapons and many of them (warforged) have no idea what to do with this newfound (and in many case never searched, or wanted) "freedom". To make things worse in warforged relations with others there is a warforged, called "the lord of blades" that preach the superiority of warforged over "fleshies" and the birth of a warforged nation (in the Mournland) and the destruction and/or enslavement of fleshies everywhere. Oh, yes and they don't need food or water or sleep, many persons are afraid they would take away their jobs because they can work for almost nothing. Generaly speaking people don't love them.

Is it outcast enough for you? :)

In stardard D&D, I'm not sure, but if a magicla construct build from some crazy wizard (becuase all wizard are crazy) is not exactly something a average human peasant want to become buddy-buddy with, expecially in a pool of light setting where magic should be rare, and weird, and scary to common people (unless it came from PCs of course. Magic from PC is perfectly fine and acceptable, even in the more supertitious and isolated village)

And who says gnomes are cool have never seen Zilargo.

[SimperingToad]

QFT.

I guess some people want to play in a game world where there are two sets of rules - one for them, and one for everybody else. Me, I find the very idea disturbing and creepy.

How could my victory over the NPCs ever mean anything if I start cheating from the get-go?

Agreed.

D&D has always presented the NPCs as scenery - it has always treated "commoners" as no different than descriptions of wall-hangings. D&D has always enforced a moral system that defines the "players" as the object of morality, and robs every other entity in the game of moral significance.

I've considered NPCs more along the lines of a walk-on movie role. Appear. Say a few lines. Disappear. They're a plot device, but by no means static.

Maybe I'm just misunderstanding the intent, but morality being defined by the players? Not to turn this into an alignment thread, but I'm just not getting that one at all.

Regards,
theToad

[LibraryOgre]

What mentally stable, happy, person would sign up for a job with a mortality rate of 99.999[...]% ?

I've got a wonderful poster... can't find a convenient on-line source of it now, that shows the cartoon of the two guys from the 1st edition DMG dressed up in Mouskateer ears and fake noses, with the caption "Audacity: Because prudent men wouldn't be here in the first place."

[VanBuren]

QFT.

I guess some people want to play in a game world where there are two sets of rules - one for them, and one for everybody else. Me, I find the very idea disturbing and creepy.

How could my victory over the NPCs ever mean anything if I start cheating from the get-go?

D&D has always presented the NPCs as scenery - it has always treated "commoners" as no different than descriptions of wall-hangings. D&D has always enforced a moral system that defines the "players" as the object of morality, and robs every other entity in the game of moral significance.

I thought they were getting better. From the sounds of it, they seem to be getting worse.

I think you're misunderstanding it, though. They're not trying to reduce the importance of NPCs. That has been, and shall remain the domain of the DM. What they are trying to do however, is to liberate the restraints of the system from the DM. And it makes no sense not to.

The rules that govern the PCs has one significant purpose: to give them a balance of power versus the environment (to varying degrees of success). If left to their own devices, many players would end up twinking out an uber-character that could kill Ao, maybe not through a conscious attempt but game-breaking nonetheless.

Yet you have the same rules governing NPCs... why? They aren't being balanced against the world, but against the PCs. This way, the DM doesn't have to bother with classes and leveling procedures, but can simply give the NPC what he needs to fulfill his role in the story as far as HP, skills, feats and spellcasting.

So the NPC doesn't have Wizard levels? Does that mean he's not a Wizard? Only if it means that Miko wasn't a Samurai because she didn't have Samurai levels.

[Jack Zander]

That that makes no logical sense. If all the NPCs in the world can have sweet spell casting templates, why can't the PCs? Surely there must be a mentor somewhere who can teach them how they got their powers. It just takes believability out of the game, and makes it feel much more like a video game where things are "balanced" against each other too well. DnD isn't supposed to model a video game. It's supposed to model real life, and in real life people can be far superior or far worse at fighting based on how they are trained, not based on how many templates they have.

[VanBuren]

That that makes no logical sense. If all the NPCs in the world can have sweet spell casting templates, why can't the PCs? Surely there must be a mentor somewhere who can teach them how they got their powers. It just takes believability out of the game, and makes it feel much more like a video game where things are "balanced" against each other too well. DnD isn't supposed to model a video game. It's supposed to model real life, and in real life people can be far superior or far worse at fighting based on how they are trained, not based on how many templates they have.

Mechanics =/= RP. Incidentally, which part of DnD mirrors real life? Is it the spells, the goblins, the Monks, or the enchanted swords?

[Moral Wiz]

Incidentally, which part of DnD mirrors real life? Is it the spells, the goblins, the Monks, or the enchanted swords?

You know that that was not the intended meaning. Internal consistency is vital. That is the assumption that whilst the laws of physics can be mugged, striped of all meaning, and made to work the gutter for any passing mage,(Yeah, Pratchett ref. So sue me ) anyone can do that (in theory). There's nothing that really makes two wizards different; except for training, wealth, and minor variants based on career choice. They still use the same system.

At least, they did.

[LibraryOgre]

Mechanics =/= RP. Incidentally, which part of DnD mirrors real life? Is it the spells, the goblins, the Monks, or the enchanted swords?

I believe what he is referring to is more a sense of verisimilitude, not necessarily "real life" as in how we live today.