Quote from: Shipyard Locked;736777Sometimes it just looks like the designers are struggling not to accept as core the most vivid and influential interpretation of gnomes to date - tinker gnomes. A lot of other fantasy game settings have just given in to the tinker gnome concept because it's so iconic and easy to play, so the fact that the game that invented the concept is resiting it comes off as rather odd.

Well, to me, this is the most vivid and influential interpretation of gnomes



The bestselling books by Wil Hyugen

I mean, sure, it wasn't Harry Potter or LOTR, but they were extremely popular books for about 5-6 years.

Quote from: JeremyR;736779Well, to me, this is the most vivid and influential interpretation of gnomes



The bestselling books by Wil Hyugen

I mean, sure, it wasn't Harry Potter or LOTR, but they were extremely popular books for about 5-6 years.

Right here.  Any description of gnomes that does not feel at home in the garden is actually describing something else and calling it a gnome.

Quote from: Old One Eye;736781Right here.  Any description of gnomes that does not feel at home in the garden is actually describing something else and calling it a gnome.

But you do recognize that it can feel a little redundant with the themes of some of the other races?

Also, the modern fantasy notion of elves doesn't match many classic folk interpretations of elves, but I would argue the modern one is more generally iconic and useful.

Quote from: LibraryLass;736749More specifically they're high/grey elves as distinct from wood/wild elves. Which works for me, especially with the flavor they gave them.

Just get rid of the teleport ability.  It fucks up so many settings.

Quote from: Piestrio;736564I didn't like Dragonborn until someone pointed out that they were basically D&D Klingons.

I like playing the Proud Warrior Race Guy, and I did play a Dragonborn Paladin which was quite a bit of fun, but really, they're a fairly weak implementation of the archetype. There's very little to tell 4e's dragonborn apart from the other races other than "warlike humanoid dragons." There was some vague fluff about the Arkhosian Empire that we more or less ran with when we played, but it never really did come alive to me.

A few modern CRPGs have been reskinning Orcs as more sympathetic, player character material, and have done a fine job of selling them as a playable Proud Warrior Race. WoW and Elder Scrolls spring to mind (in fact, I just realized I'm currently playing an Orc in both). I think they did a mighty fine job of it; WoW in particular has had plenty of opportunity from day one to get across a specific visual identity to its races; starting areas and, later on, settlements for each races, all carry a distinct look, as do voice-acting mannerisms, greetings and of course the game text. Elder Scrolls doesn't go that far but they do make a big deal of getting across each race's backstory and standing within the Empire.

Incidentally, this is why I like Talislanta's oodles of races; they don't really get 10,000 word backgrounds and White Wolfesque first-person histories, but the game does a fantastic job of presenting a distinct visual identity for each, both in the art and in the text.

I think that having a lot of races is nice in a toolbox sort of way.  Dragon born may work in some places, hobgoblins in others.  

But the huge selection of races confuses players.  But adding a source for the odd "cross dimensional" character is good if it improves overall fun.

Plus I may be the only one, but I really like the elf/eldarin split.  It is a popular race that is now themed the way a player wants.  And it is so much better than sub-races.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;736777Sometimes it just looks like the designers are struggling not to accept as core the most vivid and influential interpretation of gnomes to date - tinker gnomes. A lot of other fantasy game settings have just given in to the tinker gnome concept because it's so iconic and easy to play, so the fact that the game that invented the concept is resiting it comes off as rather odd.

I wouldn't surprise me if that was a conscious choice, I recall a fair amount of animosity to the tinker-gnome archetype in the waning days of 3e. I'm still iffy on it myself-- they tend to be annoying jokes more than actual characters.

Quote from: Dog Quixote;736877Just get rid of the teleport ability.  It fucks up so many settings.

How do you figure?

Quote from: LibraryLass;736993I wouldn't surprise me if that was a conscious choice, I recall a fair amount of animosity to the tinker-gnome archetype in the waning days of 3e. I'm still iffy on it myself-- they tend to be annoying jokes more than actual characters.

But we could argue that the standard dwarf archetype is a joke as well, certainly in the wake of Gimli's portrayal in the LotR movies refreshing the stereotypes.

The thing is, I run D&D for newbies a lot, and this colors my criterion for races. The newbies I've run into really appear to benefit from clear cut races with a few obvious cool hooks. Elves and dwarves really work, while the more traditional 3e-and-down gnomes never get played (I suspect because of their wishy-washy redundancy)... but the tinker gnome does. People come to D&D expecting the sort of gnomes they've encountered in World of Warcraft and other fantasy games. I don't feel like dissuading them if that's what gives them a strong framework to grow from.

QuoteA few modern CRPGs have been reskinning Orcs as more sympathetic, player character material, and have done a fine job of selling them as a playable Proud Warrior Race. WoW and Elder Scrolls spring to mind (in fact, I just realized I'm currently playing an Orc in both). I think they did a mighty fine job of it; WoW in particular has had plenty of opportunity from day one to get across a specific visual identity to its races; starting areas and, later on, settlements for each races, all carry a distinct look, as do voice-acting mannerisms, greetings and of course the game text.

This is a good observation, but the dragonborn do have a flavor distinction over orcs - they pull off the noble/majestic/dignified part of the noble-warrior-race shtick more naturally. Orcs can be reflavored in many ways, but most people expect "crude and savage" to be in there somewhere.

Quote from: JeremyR;736779Well, to me, this is the most vivid and influential interpretation of gnomes



The bestselling books by Wil Hyugen

I mean, sure, it wasn't Harry Potter or LOTR, but they were extremely popular books for about 5-6 years.

Those books were popular when they came out in the 70s too. Our library had the whole set. They were advertised on TV! And they got one or two cartoons on top of that. That and the faerie series were great stuff.

Quote from: LibraryLass;736993I wouldn't surprise me if that was a conscious choice, I recall a fair amount of animosity to the tinker-gnome archetype in the waning days of 3e. I'm still iffy on it myself-- they tend to be annoying jokes more than actual characters.

That is probably why tinker gnomes phased out of D&D. Joke race. That and they are a Dragonlance specific race untill Spelljammer. And there might be copyrights interfering. Never know.

But mostly its the fact they are a joke race.

Quote from: Marleycat;736757That pretty much covers it for me. Except I have no clue about Shardminds.

Shardminds I guess fall into the category of Warforged; living construct maybe?

They would feel out of place in many settings but perhaps only because we don't have any real history of using them before.

The 4E rationale for not going with tinker gnomes:

  "DRAGONLANCE presented an iconic image of the gnome, but the concept of tinker gnomes and their crazy machines has now been thoroughly used by games such as World of Warcraft, and many D&D players dislike the technological element that version of the gnome brings to the game."--Wizards Presents: Races and Classes, 51

  So the tinker gnome was shot down for being ... too WoW-like and too far removed from traditional D&D. Sort of goes against the dominant narrative on 4E.

Count me among those who disliked the technological implications of tinker gnomes. Clockworks and other intricate machines are not found in my D&D settings.

I fully support adding new races to settings IF they enhance the setting, make sense in the setting and benefit the campaign by adding variety, freshness, etc.

For me, only certain settings can support the kitchen sink "all races / classes are here" concept. I have trouble with the kumbaya aspect that suddenly a whole load of very different races can suddenly co-exist without justifications that make sense in the fantasy world.

A strong world setting can support any species/culture. Just include the ones who make sense for your world. I've always liked the Dragonborn/Tieflings. I've seen one the current Alpha playtest packet (not public) for D&D Next and they're both in, with full stats, so you can work from that.