1. Another Psionic Striker?
I keep seeing people say "The monk is the psionic striker, and they have to fill all the other roles". However, if you look back to PHB1, the martial power had 2 strikers (Ranger and Rogue) in the book at the time. There's nothing saying that all the roles have to be filled right away either, as a Divine Controller or Striker didn't come out until PHB2, and an Arcane Defender/Leader didn't come around until FRPG and PHB2 (and EPG, but PHB2 came out first).
So, given the way that they've done things in the past, isn't it still quite likely that there could be 2 psionic strikers in PHB3?
2. Githzeri and Githyanki as different races
Couldn't these races be put together? In MM 1 it shows them as different races, however it also shows the Longtooth and Razorclaw Shifters as different race entries as well. Is it possible that they'll just share one race slot and be called "Gith"?
Just a few things that have been in the back of my mind as I was reading, yet never seem to get addressed in any thread. If I missed something I apologize. I'm just really curious on these two points.
As far as the classes are concerned, it could go either way really. There have been talk about a new defender, but nothing has been said about it beyond that it is coming. Personally I would love to see more defenders, regardless of power source, and psionic seems like a good choice for the next one.
I'm more certain about the gith thing. Merging into one race would fly in the face of all the lore written about them in the last twenty years. (Yes, I know many will say that's never stopped WotC before). The two gith races live separately and hate each other's guts. There's never been a good reason to separate the shifter variants; razorclaw and longtooth shifters consider each other as brothers. But githzerai and githyanki are like elves and eladrin, with a healthy dose of bitter enmity thrown in.
As for monks drawing from the psionic power source, Um, what? I didn't know that and don't like it much. A psionic melee class is fine (Fist of Zuoken) but the standard monk from 3.5 was fun.
Well if monk is the striker, psion is the controller and empath is the leader then psychicwarrior will probably end up the defender. Which leaves soulknife out. So if we get 5 classes, then we only have 1 left.
I think we might get 8 classes this time. Not sure if the phb3 will include the shadow powersource but if it does we might get the assassin, shadow dancer and shadowcaster.
Paragon paths for shadow could be master of shadow or shadowblade and noctumancer. No idea about epic's, not even gonna guess.
Meh, regardless, I'm looking forward to any and all new content for 4e. Especially psionics! Which should have been atleast included with 4e eberrons release! Grrr.
I think we might get 8 classes this time. Not sure if the phb3 will include the shadow powersource but if it does we might get the assassin, shadow dancer and shadowcaster.
PHB3 is Psionics, Divine and Primal. The Assassin is going to be released as a DDI exclusive in September for the Shadow Power Source.
Merging the two races wouldn't appeal to me at all. I like that they're seperate. Besides being ripped off, how would they work out the connections to the lich queen without making it completely B rate?
They might just rewrite that, though I doubt they would. The difference between Shifters and Githyanki/Zerai is that the shifters generally get along and the two Gith races have traditionally been enemies.
2. Githzeri and Githyanki as different races
Couldn't these races be put together? In MM 1 it shows them as different races, however it also shows the Longtooth and Razorclaw Shifters as different race entries as well. Is it possible that they'll just share one race slot and be called "Gith"?
Were Elves and Drow the same race back in PHB1?
The answer is that they weren't, and just because Elves showed up in PHB1 it didn't mean we were going to see the Drow in that same book.
I think we might get 8 classes this time. Not sure if the phb3 will include the shadow powersource but if it does we might get the assassin, shadow dancer and shadowcaster.
Ummm.
There have been 8 classes in each PH so far, not sure where you got the 5 number from.
Shadow will not be in PH3, the 3 sources that will be are confirmed.
Assassin will be a DDI exclusive class this fall, and will not be printed in any book.
All that being out of the way, I don't really see any reason there has to be 2 Divine or 2 Primal classes in PH3, there could easily be 5 or 6 Psionic.
Merging into one race would fly in the face of all the lore written about them in the last twenty years. (Yes, I know many will say that's never stopped WotC before). The two gith races live separately and hate each other's guts.
Big deal. There are plenty of humans that live separately and hate each others guts too. :D
I never understood what the difference between the two Gith races were anyways other than culturally. Biologically, they seem identical... And I hate when they impose cultural norms into a race's mechanics. It's like saying the race can't exist if it doesn't have that culture.
Big deal. There are plenty of humans that live separately and hate each others guts too. :D
I never understood what the difference between the two Gith races were anyways other than culturally. Biologically, they seem identical... And I hate when they impose cultural norms into a race's mechanics. It's like saying the race can't exist if it doesn't have that culture.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Githzerai and Githyanki have as much in common with each other as Elves, Eladrin, and Drow have with each other. Like the elven races, the gith may have started out as a single race but have lived apart for thousands of years on entirely different planes of existence.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Githzerai and Githyanki have as much in common with each other as Elves, Eladrin, and Drow have with each other.
And I wouldn't have been totally opposed to the three of those getting made into a single race either. :P
But either way, I disagree. the two Gith seem much more biologically similar to one another than the Drow, Eladrin, and Elf are.
the gith may have started out as a single race but have lived apart for thousands of years on entirely different planes of existence.
That doesn't really do much to make them biologically different. Elves on Eberron and Elves in FR are also on entirely different planes and have been for untold eons, but they still have identical stats, because they're the same. I completely admit that I've not looked into it incredibly extensively, but I really don't see any difference between the Gith other than cultural ones. If you show me a picture, I won't know which its a picture of.
EDIT: Just to be clear, I'm not opposed to the idea of making them two distinct races either, and I really don't care, because neither race has ever interested me. I'm just saying that if they're going to make them two separate races, they should make it so that I can tell them apart if I've got a picture and so that culture isn't the only difference between them, because like I said, there are thousands of human cultures, but they only need one stat block, because race or species is a biological thing, not a cultural thing.
That doesn't really do much to make them biologically different. Elves on Eberron and Elves in FR are also on entirely different planes and have been for untold eons, but they still have identical stats, because they're the same. I completely admit that I've not looked into it incredibly extensively, but I really don't see any difference between the Gith other than cultural ones. If you show me a picture, I won't know which its a picture of.
Well first off comparing worlds/settings to planes is a little off. The different D&D settings are populated by the same races for the sake of product uniformity (thus creating a new setting doesn't require a huge influx of new races, instead only refluffing the cultural tropes in play). Thus while the inhabitants of different planes vary greatly, the inhabitants of different worlds will be much more similar. Also D&D settings are more like alternate realities than truly distinct worlds.
As for visual distinctions. There are definite art cues. Githzerai tend more towards green skin, while githyanki tend more toward yellow skin. The visual difference might not be as striking as elves/drow, but noticeably more distinct than elves/eladrin (who are can be virtually identical if their eyes are closed). Githyanki also tend to have noticeably sharper and more angular features as compared to the much softer and rounded features of a typical githzerai. Githyanki also tend to be much more slender and wiry (almost to the point of looking anorexic).
2. Githzeri and Githyanki as different races
Couldn't these races be put together? In MM 1 it shows them as different races, however it also shows the Longtooth and Razorclaw Shifters as different race entries as well. Is it possible that they'll just share one race slot and be called "Gith"?
No, the Shifters had one entry in the MM. Their NPC stat blocks in the back were separate, but the actual monster entry was a single one for both races, unlike the Gith.
Assuming the Yanki will be in the PHB3, which is a safe assumption, there will not be a combined entry for the two. We already have proof of that - the Githzerai are getting a PHB3 preview next month. If the two were combined as one race like the Shifters, it'd be a Gith preview, not Githzerai.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Githzerai and Githyanki have as much in common with each other as Elves, Eladrin, and Drow have with each other. Like the elven races, the gith may have started out as a single race but have lived apart for thousands of years on entirely different planes of existence.
Really? What's the difference?
They look exactly alike. A Githzerai warrior is INDISTINGUISHABLE from a Githyanki and a Githyanki wizard is INDISTINGUISHABLE from a Githzerai. You can't have 2 races that each have SEVERE limitations on the number of classes they can be.
Oh, sure some worship the Lich Queen and some do not... But some Half-Orcs grow up in Orc communities and some in human, you don't need 2 different races for that either.
So what's the difference? One likes to wear more black? Well that's no difference at all!
When you really lay it all out, there is no functional biological difference between them. No one can tell them apart, no one really expects them to display different abilities beyond what class they happen to be... it is frankly a waste of space and time to claim them to be totally different.
On the flip side, if you have a Drow Warrior, an Elf Warrior and an Eladrin Warrior, they look different enough, act different enough, would have different enough specialties and would favor different enough weapons and tactics that you can tell the difference from half a mile away.
Really? What's the difference?
They look exactly alike. A Githzerai warrior is INDISTINGUISHABLE from a Githyanki and a Githyanki wizard is INDISTINGUISHABLE from a Githzerai. You can't have 2 races that each have SEVERE limitations on the number of classes they can be.
You do realize that the class restrictions haven't existed since 2e, right? Because, well, they haven't. Any Gith can be of any class, just like any other race.
Putting them together into one entry can show the enmity between the two races who were once a single race. Which is hinted at through the latest article to include the Githyanki - Backdrop: Tu'narath. Check under Zerthimon and the Civil War on the second page of the article, this is the point where the one race became two.
You do realize that the class restrictions haven't existed since 2e, right? Because, well, they haven't. Any Gith can be of any class, just like any other race.
And do you realize that the Gith were invented BEFORE the class restrictions were released?
The whole concept of the race is that they are 1 races, but 2 cultures of the same race who are at war. Once you release the class restrictions and bring them out of a Monster Manual entry, it no longer makes any sense for them to have different stats. Whatever power you gave to one, generally the other will be expected to have equivalent abilities if they were allowed to have the same class.
All that is needed is one race called the Gith and it written in the article that there are two cultures known as the Githyanki and the Githzerai and the Githyanki are evil, serve the Lich Queen and prefer being fighters and rogues while the Githzerai are pacifists and prefer being mages and psions.
But any PC Gith by definition will be expected to NOT be evil nor a servant of the Lich Queen NOR be a total pacificist. Thus, PC Giths on general will disobey all rules set forward that strictly define Githzerai or Githyanki. The will be overhwhelmingly amorphus Giths that aren't totally aligned with one side or the other.
Unless you really think you need Githyanki and Githzerai PCs killing each other during the adventure over allegiences that neither is going to be expected to necessarily be fully committed to.
And do you realize that the Gith were invented BEFORE the class restrictions were released?
The whole concept of the race is that they are 1 races, but 2 cultures of the same race who are at war. Once you release the class restrictions and bring them out of a Monster Manual entry, it no longer makes any sense for them to have different stats. Whatever power you gave to one, generally the other will be expected to have equivalent abilities if they were allowed to have the same class.
All that is needed is one race called the Gith and it written in the article that there are two cultures known as the Githyanki and the Githzerai and the Githyanki are evil, serve the Lich Queen and prefer being fighters and rogues while the Githzerai are pacifists and prefer being mages and psions.
But any PC Gith by definition will be expected to NOT be evil nor a servant of the Lich Queen NOR be a total pacificist. Thus, PC Giths on general will disobey all rules set forward that strictly define Githzerai or Githyanki. The will be overhwhelmingly amorphus Giths that aren't totally aligned with one side or the other.
Unless you really think you need Githyanki and Githzerai PCs killing each other during the adventure over allegiences that neither is going to be expected to necessarily be fully committed to.
Wrong. Completely and utterly wrong. They still have different stats because they are different races, different cultures.
The shifters are two flavors of one race. The gith are not. Making them playable will not change that. There will be two separate entries, or there won't be 'Yanki at all. There will be no dual entry.
Wrong. Completely and utterly wrong. They still have different stats because they are different races, different cultures.
The shifters are two flavors of one race. The gith are not. Making them playable will not change that. There will be two separate entries, or there won't be 'Yanki at all. There will be no dual entry.
But the gith are two different flavors of the same race separated by time and culture. Nothing you just said explains why they cannot be the same entry, only why you think they shouldn't. Personally, I think it would be great if they were the same entry because that might mean that we get more races for our buck in PHB3. Of course, maybe I'm not grognardy enough to get worked up if Githyanki and Githzerai show up on the same page. I just don't see the big deal.
But with all the arguments about origins, I went back to look at the oldest source I have on Gith, the 1e Fiend Folio.
Interestingly, I found that in those original entries, the cultural gap between 'yanki and 'zerai is not as wide as it's later become, while the physical differences (going by the illustrations) on the other hand are much more pronounced ('yanki basically have skulls for faces while 'zerai have actual noses and stuff).
Githzerai tend more towards green skin, while githyanki tend more toward yellow skin.
Well my MM pages 129 and 131 seem to have almost identical skin tones except for perhaps some lighting differences. You can find more skin color variation that that just within the human race or within the halfling race or within the elf race or dwarf race.
The visual difference might not be as striking as elves/drow, but noticeably more distinct than elves/eladrin (who are can be virtually identical if their eyes are closed).
The art styles for Elves and Eladrin is quite different. You can immediately tell by the hair at the very least, as Eladrin always have blond hair and Elves have brown, green, or other earth tones. And as shallow of a difference that may be, even that is greater than the difference between the gith.
Githyanki also tend to have noticeably sharper and more angular features as compared to the much softer and rounded features of a typical githzerai. Githyanki also tend to be much more slender and wiry (almost to the point of looking anorexic).
Never noticed either of these. If it's supposed to be true, it hasn't made it into the artwork, and if it has, it hasn't done so to a sufficient degree where I can actually tell the two races apart.
They are not two flavors of the same race. They are two races with a shared ancestry, which is an entirely different thing, just like the Elves, Eladrin, and Drow.
No, they're not just like the Drow, Eladrin, and Elf. On the case of the Drow, Eladrin, and Elf, I can tell you many things that differ between those races, and none of them ever need to have anything at all to do with culture. I could come up with a whole new world with whole new cultures for these races and those biological differences between them would not change.
In the case of the Gith, however, I cannot distinguish them from one another any way other than culturally. They're biologically identical. What exactly is the biological difference if you say there is one? And nigh unnoticeable differences in skin tone or facial angularity are not enough to make them sufficiently visually distinguishable from one another or sufficiently different from one another to warrant a separate race. That will be entirely dependent on artist, and you can find much wider variation of those traits just within he human race, or just within the elf race or dwarf race or halfling race for that matter.
How about this, if I came up with a campaign setting where both of the Gith lived together and had the exact same culture, how would I be able to tell them apart?
The point is, it doesn't matter whether you think they should be two or one, or whether you think the elves/eladrin/drow should all be one. They are separate, and as far as WotC is concerned, shall remain separate.
They are not two flavors of the same race. They are two races with a shared ancestry, which is an entirely different thing, just like the Elves, Eladrin, and Drow. And I've already shown why we won't get them in a shared entry - the Yanki are not included in the Zerai preview for next month. If they were a shared entry, the preview would have both races. We are either going to get two separate entires, or no Yanki at all. And I find it highly unlikely that the Yanki will not be included.
Somehow I think as a raving fanboy of the Githyanki, as demonstrated by your avatar, you may be WAY too close to the source to make a reasonable and objective call on this.
Try again in explaining in DETAIL the functional difference between Githyanki and Githzerai beyond what god they worship or what colors they like to wear or what classes they favor... generally, beyond the limiting aspects of them that will mean NOTHING once you make them into a PC race.
SHOW us that there is really more difference between Githyanki and Githzerai than we'd expect to see between two individual Halflings. Because right now neither I, nor any of the other people you are arguing with, sees it-- and your attempts so far to describe the difference have failed because you'd expect two individuals of the SAME race to have more variation than you are describing the differences between the Gith. In order to maintain the differences in the way you've described them, every PC Gith of whichever type would be straight-jacketed into being a direct clone of every other individual of that type. Do you see the problem there? Do you see how that doesn't work for a PC race?
But the gith are two different flavors of the same race separated by time and culture. Nothing you just said explains why they cannot be the same entry, only why you think they shouldn't. Personally, I think it would be great if they were the same entry because that might mean that we get more races for our buck in PHB3. Of course, maybe I'm not grognardy enough to get worked up if Githyanki and Githzerai show up on the same page. I just don't see the big deal.
They are not the same race separated by time and culture. They were, but then the lich queen got involved. Even when I dig out the old first edition stuff, they are presented as two Separate races with a common ancestor as the Drow and Elves of Oerth were, going so far as to mention that 'yanki and 'zerai do not interbreed (along with orc/elf).
Culturally they share nothing in common aside from an zealous hatred of mind-flayers. To put this in context with the shifters: Shifters of all stripes (no pun meant) have a shared heritage and culture.
Somehow I think as a raving fanboy of the Githyanki, as demonstrated by your avatar, you may be WAY too close to the source to make a reasonable and objective call on this.
Somehow I think attacking someone's avatar and not their words is at best distracting, and at worst childish.
Try again in explaining in DETAIL the functional difference between Githyanki and Githzerai beyond what god they worship or what colors they like to wear or what classes they favor... generally, beyond the limiting aspects of them that will mean NOTHING once you make them into a PC race.
"Explain in detail how two dissimilar things are different without using their differences"
SHOW us that there is really more difference between Githyanki and Githzerai than we'd expect to see between two individual Halflings. Because right now neither I, nor any of the other people you are arguing with, sees it-- and your attempts so far to describe the difference have failed because you'd expect two individuals of the SAME race to have more variation than you are describing the differences between the Gith. In order to maintain the differences in the way you've described them, every PC Gith of whichever type would be straight-jacketed into being a direct clone of every other individual of that type. Do you see the problem there? Do you see how that doesn't work for a PC race?
Kay...
RP Aspect
1. Two individual halflings from the campaign world would have a shared heritage and culture that even if separated by the mass of the prime they reside in, wouldn't have schismatic difference that wouldn't result in a warrior-cult forming around one side, while a literal cult forms on the other, that occurred uncounted millennia ago on account of a far realm species enslaving them (well presuming we use the base background of halflings as presented in PHB)
2. Two individual halflings are still 'halflings' and are not seen by seers of their world as separate races (reference point: In MM1 'yanki and 'zerai have separate entries for monsters and as a NPCs).
Stat Aspect:
1. Con/Int v Dex/Wis (For comparison the Shifters were both X/Wis)
2. No shared theme on racial encounter power
3. No shared skill increases
4. only point of convergence of the two NPC writeups is +2 ini.
Ergo: While any two halflings would have +2 dex/+2 cha, +2 Acrob, +2 Stealth, can make their enemies reroll, and be small; and even any two shifters would have a 'shift' bloodied form and +2 to Wis a 'yanki and 'zerai would in fact not share anything other than +2 iniative from 'danger sense'.
Aside from which, burden of proof lies on you: What exactly leads you to think they are similar enough to be turned into one race?
Somehow I think as a raving fanboy of the Githyanki, as demonstrated by your avatar, you may be WAY too close to the source to make a reasonable and objective call on this.
Alumen did well enough dissecting your argument, but I have to comment, or should I say laugh, at this.
I chose this avatar because it looks cool. I have never played a githyanki, and I'm only a fan as far as I like them better than githzerai. Now, if you had called me an eladrin fanboy, an elf fanboy, a drow fanboy, a changeling fanboy, or even a revenant fanboy, you might have actually had a point.
Sadly, rather than have a point you instead resorted to childish strawman dismissals.
If you honestly think it's easier to tell apart elves and eladrin than yanki and zerai, then I don't know what to tell you. The physical differences are plain as day to me - they are just as easy to tell apart as the elves and eladrin.
If the differences are so obvious, please explain the obvious differences that the rest of us are all missing. But a slight variation in skin tone and feature angularity that can be much more pronounced just within other singular races isn't enough of a difference that I can tell them apart without deliberate comparison.
And any example where you ask what if they shared the exact same culture how would you tell them apart can be applied to the elves and eladrin as well.
Eladrin are blond and Elves have brown, green, or other earth tone hair colors. It's an immediate and obvious difference. It's a very shallow difference, yes, but that just goes to show that even two ridiculously similar races like Eladrin and Elf are still easily told apart.
The point is, it doesn't matter whether you think they should be two or one, or whether you think the elves/eladrin/drow should all be one. They are separate, and as far as WotC is concerned, shall remain separate.
I'm not saying I care. I don't care, I really don't. I'll never play either of them anyways because they're lame. Don't know about everybody else, but what WotC is going to do isn't really a concern of mine, it's not why I'm in this discussion. I'm just saying what I think they should do and what i think would be logical for them to do.
"Explain in detail how two dissimilar things are different without using their differences"
And that's exactly the point!!!
Read what he said again for a second:
"Try again in explaining in DETAIL the functional difference between Githyanki and Githzerai beyond what god they worship or what colors they like to wear or what classes they favor..."
The underlined are all cultural differences, not biological ones, and your mockery of the above point goes exactly to show that you can't point out any significant differences between them that aren't cultural. If those are "their differences" that you refer to, then you admit there's no biological difference and that they're only dissimilar because of those cultural differences.
What exactly leads you to think they are similar enough to be turned into one race?
Because I can't tell you a single difference between them that isn't cultural. I have no idea what the biological difference is. Shown art, I cannot tell them apart. Your pointing out that their stat blocks are very difference doesn't mean a single thing other than the fact that they had to impose cultural norms into the stat blocks in order to make them seem more different, which in and of itself is a mistake. Regardless of the mechanics they give them in the end, they will still conceptually be the same unless they really decide to give both races a makeover or overhaul.
If the differences are so obvious, please explain the obvious differences that the rest of us are all missing. But a slight variation in skin tone and feature angularity that can be much more pronounced just within other singular races isn't enough of a difference that I can tell them apart without deliberate comparison.
Eladrin are blond and Elves have brown, green, or other earth tone hair colors. It's an immediate and obvious difference. It's a very shallow difference, yes, but that just goes to show that even two ridiculously similar races like Eladrin and Elf are still easily told apart.
I'm leaving these two quotes Directly toned together to demonstrate the profound dichotomy of what you seek for Githyanki and 'zerai.
Skin tone variation and feature angularity is actually More than Eladrin and Elf have in difference. Let alone the fact that Eladrin and Elf share more racial features in common than 'yanki and 'zerai (+2 Dex, both in the Feywild).
Githyanki (using older information which may now be inaccurate once they are released for 4E where information for 4E is not available)-
1. Tend to black or dark eyes
2. Live in the Astral Sea
3. Militarstic and Xenophobic in nature.
Githezari (Same as above)
1. Tend to grey eyes
2. Live in Elemental Chaos
3. Monastic.
So lets compare eladrin and elf
Eladrin
1. Tend to nordic coloring
2. Live in Feywild and the Prime
3. Withdrawn socially
Elf
1. Tend to Celtic coloring
2. Livein Feywild and the Prime
3. Nature's Defenders
So um, see how the Eladrin and Elf have more in common than the 'yanki and the 'zerai?
I'm not saying I care. I don't care, I really don't. I'll never play either of them anyways because they're lame. Don't know about everybody else, but what WotC is going to do isn't really a concern of mine, it's not why I'm in this discussion. I'm just saying what I think they should do and what i think would be logical for them to do.
"I don't care, but am arguing it anyway."
And that's exactly the point!!!
Read what he said again for a second:
"Try again in explaining in DETAIL the functional difference between Githyanki and Githzerai beyond what god they worship or what colors they like to wear or what classes they favor..."
The functional difference is:
ONE LIVES IN THE ASTRAL SEA
ONE LIVES IN ELEMENTAL CHAOS
That coupled with the fact that for Millenia they haven't been together, makes the races seperate. More so than elves and Eladrin, more so than Elves and Half-Elves.
The underlined are all cultural differences, not biological ones, and your mockery of the above point goes exactly to show that you can't point out any significant differences between them that aren't cultural. If those are "their differences" that you refer to, then you admit there's no biological difference and that they're only dissimilar because of those cultural differences.
My mockery of the point is that its not a point. The PHB even states that Eladrin run the gamut of human kind in coloring, just they Tend to be fair complected. We haven't seen the physical description for either Gith, so drawing a conclusion on a handful (ie: Six) drawings in a monster manual is hardly a sensible basis.
Because I can't tell you a single difference between them that isn't cultural. I have no idea what the biological difference is. Shown art, I cannot tell them apart. Your pointing out that their stat blocks are very difference doesn't mean a single thing other than the fact that they had to impose cultural norms into the stat blocks in order to make them seem more different, which in and of itself is a mistake. Regardless of the mechanics they give them in the end, they will still conceptually be the same unless they really decide to give both races a makeover or overhaul.
Yes the racial encounter ability, is clearly Cultural. All young Yanki are Clearly Culturally able to make things fly. that makes sense, while culturally all 'zerai know how to harden their bodies to damage that has to be cultural not biological...
Oh wait.
Both are descended from the Forerunners, both owe homage to Gith for their freedom. But how they were changed by the mind flayers is Wildly different. That you can't see it, isn't a fault of mine nor Celtics indeed the differences have been there for a Long time. There mere fact they reside on wholly different planes gives credence for them to deserve separate racial write ups. Let alone the fact the majority of a racial flavor text is about its 'culture'
They killed 90% of the elven subraces... why not merge the gith subraces at the same time? Aside from a few Racial feats, there is now no difference between a Wild elf and a Sylvian elf... even though one is a raving barbarian who lives on the plains, and the other is a patient forest hunter.
Because uh, there is more difference with races who live on entirely different planes from one another than two essentially 'wilderness' elven subraces who presence was a hold over from the elf-fetish of 2E.
The underlined are all cultural differences, not biological ones, and your mockery of the above point goes exactly to show that you can't point out any significant differences between them that aren't cultural. If those are "their differences" that you refer to, then you admit there's no biological difference and that they're only dissimilar because of those cultural differences.
Because I can't tell you a single difference between them that isn't cultural. I have no idea what the biological difference is. Shown art, I cannot tell them apart. Your pointing out that their stat blocks are very difference doesn't mean a single thing other than the fact that they had to impose cultural norms into the stat blocks in order to make them seem more different, which in and of itself is a mistake. Regardless of the mechanics they give them in the end, they will still conceptually be the same unless they really decide to give both races a makeover or overhaul.
wow, I could have sworn you were just given a biological difference in...
Stat Aspect:
1. Con/Int v Dex/Wis (For comparison the Shifters were both X/Wis)
2. No shared theme on racial encounter power
3. No shared skill increases
4. only point of convergence of the two NPC writeups is +2 ini.
Ergo: While any two halflings would have +2 dex/+2 cha, +2 Acrob, +2 Stealth, can make their enemies reroll, and be small; and even any two shifters would have a 'shift' bloodied form and +2 to Wis a 'yanki and 'zerai would in fact not share anything other than +2 iniative from 'danger sense'.
Aside from which, burden of proof lies on you: What exactly leads you to think they are similar enough to be turned into one race?
how are these things not biological. They give differing stat bonuses, differing abilities, and skill differences...proving that their biological makeup is different. Look at the difference between the eladrin and the drow. These two are considered different races, but they are from similar origins, seperated in history that changed their makeup. The Gith did the same thing: one went to the Elemental Chaos, the other to the Astral Sea. These different planes naturally change the creatures within. The same type of changes happened to the Gith that happened to the Eladrin, Elves, and the Drow. Just because their hair/eye color didn't change much doesn't prove anything concerning their difference if race.
The Elves are descendants of the Eladrin, but have rejected basically everything that defines the Eldarin. They are small, athletic and most notably grubby in comparison. They live in the forests, but are hardly reclusive and xenophobic as demonstrated by the overwhelming number of Half-Elves one stumbles upon in every single city. They have darker skin and hair and eyes that tend toward autumnal colors. They tend to dress in animal hides and do battle with bow from the trees in an ambush.
The Drow live several miles underground where there is no light. Their eyes have adjusted to the lack of light and bodies to the confines of the caverns. They dress in black leather and dark silk. Their skin is shadowy, as are their demeanors. They worship a spider queen which is noted in how some of them are transformed into half-spiders. They live in a strictly matriarchal society and deal with outsiders in a lethal, cutthroat method. They are roguish and cruel, and for lack of a better word... monsters.
Githyanki and Githzerai look exactly the same. They have exactly the same features, exactly the same manner of dress. Their difference in approach to outsiders is so minute as to hardly be worth mentioning. Differences in their stats and abilities within the Monster Manual are, quite frankly, a STRETCH to say the least. No where within their racial write-ups otherwise nor within any history of this race are we to be led to believe that one of the races inantely demonstrates one of these powers that is totally beyond the comprehension of the other nor visa-versa. In other words-- the powers that they give are powers we'd expect BOTH of them to have or NEITHER. Their powers were chosen because they seemed remotely in-character for "Giths" in general rather than being clearly associated with one or the other.
Because other than the vague notion that one favors certain classes because it is peaceful and the other favors other because it is warlike, there is no real difference. Both have always been the "psionic" races and now that the psion rules are out and clearly favor one over the other, it really makes no sense.
Skin tone variation and feature angularity is actually More than Eladrin and Elf have in difference.
If these supposed differences in skin tone and feature angularity were more dramatic, say dramatic enough to actually be noticeable and distinguishable even if I'm not deliberately comparing in order to find out which race it is, then you may have a point.
Let alone the fact that Eladrin and Elf share more racial features in common than 'yanki and 'zerai (+2 Dex, both in the Feywild).
I'm not concerned with the racial feature, and I've already said so and why. I'm speaking only about the design concepts behind the two races.
Githyanki (using older information which may now be inaccurate once they are released for 4E where information for 4E is not available)-
1. Tend to black or dark eyes
2. Live in the Astral Sea
3. Militarstic and Xenophobic in nature.
Githezari (Same as above)
1. Tend to grey eyes
2. Live in Elemental Chaos
3. Monastic.
2 and 3 in both of the above are irrelevant because they are not biological. They are cultural and incidental and will change from setting to setting. The only relevant difference you've listed is eye color.
So lets compare eladrin and elf
Eladrin
1. Tend to nordic coloring
2. Live in Feywild and the Prime
3. Withdrawn socially
Elf
1. Tend to Celtic coloring
2. Livein Feywild and the Prime
3. Nature's Defenders
Again, 2 and 3 are irrelevant.
So um, see how the Eladrin and Elf have more in common than the 'yanki and the 'zerai?
No. The changes you listen amount to skin and hair color for the Eladrin/Elf and eye color for the Gith.
"I don't care, but am arguing it anyway."
Problem being? I may not care, but that doesn't stop me from being right.
The functional difference is:
ONE LIVES IN THE ASTRAL SEA
ONE LIVES IN ELEMENTAL CHAOS
Yes, and that is not enough of a functional difference. That's location. That is not a biological aspect of the race. If you've got a human that lives in France and then one who lives in India and then one who lives in Brazil, they're all human and all use the same mechanics. If you've got a Halfling that lives in Eberron and one that lives in FR and one that lives in Spelljammer and one that lives in En'Gha, they're all the same mechanics despite having drastically different cultures and living on drastically different planes.
That coupled with the fact that for Millenia they haven't been together, makes the races seperate.
Right, the only difference is time and space. if you remove that space and put them together, you'll find no actual biological difference. That's the entire point of what I'm saying.
We haven't seen the physical description for either Gith, so drawing a conclusion on a handful (ie: Six) drawings in a monster manual is hardly a sensible basis.
It's a completely sensible basis. That and information from previous editions are all that we have to go on, and I've already said that if they give them races some makeover or overhaul such that they actually become appreciably different, then I'd be fine with that.
Yes the racial encounter ability, is clearly Cultural. All young Yanki are Clearly Culturally able to make things fly. that makes sense, while culturally all 'zerai know how to harden their bodies to damage that has to be cultural not biological...
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. In their desire to make them mechanically different when there is no need to, they've unnecessarily made up different stuff to give each race, including two different racial powers. Heck, just look at the Gith stats in 3.5. Did they get the same powers as they get now? No. That just proves that these racial powers are not essential to their racial concept, just something that they were given so that they'd have something. That doesn't stop them from being the same conceptually.
There mere fact they reside on wholly different planes gives credence for them to deserve separate racial write ups.
I'll say it again to make sure it sinks in. That's location. That is not a biological aspect of the race. If you've got a human that lives in France and then one who lives in India and then one who lives in Brazil, they're all human and all use the same mechanics. If you've got a Halfling that lives in Eberron and one that lives in FR and one that lives in Spelljammer and one that lives in En'Gha, they're all the same mechanics despite having drastically different cultures and living on drastically different planes.
wow, I could have sworn you were just given a biological difference in...
No. Those are racial stats. I'm not referring just to mechanics. I'm also referring to concepts. It doesn't matter if the mechanics are different if the concepts aren't different enough to actually warrant them.
Just because their hair/eye color didn't change much doesn't prove anything concerning their difference if race.
No, you're definitely right. That's the same reason that Eladrin and Elf can get away with being different races, because although the visual similarities only go so far, there are also other differences that aren't cultural that actually make them very different. If only the two Gith had such a difference, they could get away with it.
One is a place where people live on big rocks that you can't get from one to the other without dying unless you teleport.
One is a place where people live on big rocks that you can't get from one to the other without falling for the rest of your life unless you teleport.
Which one is which? Does it make a difference?
Both cases require you to live on a small rocky, dead island and to never leave unless you have some sort of warp gate to the next island.
What is the fundamental difference between the Astral Sea and the Elemental Chaos anyway?
One is a place where people live on big rocks that you can't get from one to the other without dying unless you teleport.
One is a place where people live on big rocks that you can't get from one to the other without falling for the rest of your life unless you teleport.
Which one is which? Does it make a difference?
Both cases require you to live on a small rocky, dead island and to never leave unless you have some sort of warp gate to the next island.
The Astral Sea is the embodiment of pure permenance and thoughts. The Elemental Chaos is pure change and the essence of all matter. There is a very large difference between the two of them. Oh and you can traverse both the Elemental Chaos and Astral Sea on foot without dieing......of course that is a stupid idea in the Astral as it takes forever but it is still entirely possible. You do not die instantly in the Elemental Chaos and you do not fall forever in the Astral.2 and 3 in both of the above are irrelevant because they are not biological. They are cultural and incidental and will change from setting to setting. The only relevant difference you've listed is eye color.
You keep trying to say cultural difference don't matter, yet that could hardly be further from the truth. If for no other reason than page count. It seems to me that most of the folks in favor of having the races fused are arguing so to reduce page count, yet more space is given to each races fluff than their actual mechanics. Shifters worked as one race because they only have one culture, the gith have two very distinct cultures and would need about as much space as two races to cover them in a respectable level of detail.
Yes, and that is not enough of a functional difference. That's location. That is not a biological aspect of the race. If you've got a human that lives in France and then one who lives in India and then one who lives in Brazil, they're all human and all use the same mechanics.
Yet if you have a human whose ancestors moved to the shadowfell as part of a deal with the Raven Queen you get shada-kai. Drow exist because a group of elves/eladrin chose to follow Lolth and were exiled to the underdark. Githyanky migrated to the Astral Sea where they swore loyalty to the Lich Queen. Maybe it's just me but, I seem to be noticing a pattern
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. In their desire to make them mechanically different when there is no need to, they've unnecessarily made up different stuff to give each race, including two different racial powers. Heck, just look at the Gith stats in 3.5. Did they get the same powers as they get now? No. That just proves that these racial powers are not essential to their racial concept, just something that they were given so that they'd have something. That doesn't stop them from being the same conceptually.
The same could be said for most 4E races. Many of them have qualities that while inspired by previous editions are in fact new abilities created for the the current edition.
No. Those are racial stats. I'm not referring just to mechanics. I'm also referring to concepts. It doesn't matter if the mechanics are different if the concepts aren't different enough to actually warrant them.
Except the concepts are different. The two races have always been conceived as separate and distinct. More over they have remained separate and distinct in each edition. They look similar as a nod to there common ancestry, but the divergence is berried so far in the past that those visual similarities are all there is (it's not at all uncommon for the fluff to specifically mention that they can't interbreed, if that's not a biological difference than I don't know what is).
You keep trying to say cultural difference don't matter, yet that could hardly be further from the truth. If for no other reason than page count. It seems to me that most of the folks in favor of having the races fused are arguing so to reduce page count, yet more space is given to each races fluff than their actual mechanics. Shifters worked as one race because they only have one culture, the gith have two very distinct cultures and would need about as much space as two races to cover them in a respectable level of detail.
This is a good point. In the sake of fairness, though, I don't think many people are arguing in favor of having the races fused, only that they wouldn't mind if they were and don't see why they can't. Semantics? Maybe. I admit that I just like the idea of getting an extra race out of the deal.
You keep trying to say cultural difference don't matter, yet that could hardly be further from the truth.
No, what I keep trying to say is that cultural differences don't matter as far as racial mechanics are concerned.
It seems to me that most of the folks in favor of having the races fused are arguing so to reduce page count...
Who? Because I know I don't care...
the gith have two very distinct cultures and would need about as much space as two races to cover them in a respectable level of detail.
You really think so? One couldn't simply mention both cultures in the same amount of space usually allotted? It doesn't seem that difficult to me, especially when the cultural differences are so simple and straightforward that lengthy explanation is unnecessary.
Maybe it's just me but, I seem to be noticing a pattern
It's just you. The other races you mentioned actually became different biologically and not just culturally. The Gith didn't appreciably change.
The same could be said for most 4E races. Many of them have qualities that while inspired by previous editions are in fact new abilities created for the the current edition.
Yeah. The key is they don't need to give a race mechanics in order for it to be conceptually different from another race, and so saying that two races are only different because they're given different mechanics is entirely missing the point. The mechanics are not the primary concern. The mechanics are only incidental.
Except the concepts are different.
Yes, culturally.
The two races have always been conceived as separate and distinct. More over they have remained separate and distinct in each edition.
Except that in previous editions it was always acceptable to give slightly different cultures of the same race whole new mechanics. That's how we ended up with 50 elves. Things change.
They look similar as a nod to there common ancestry, but the divergence is berried so far in the past that those visual similarities are all there is
Then what appreciable non-cultural differences are there?
(it's not at all uncommon for the fluff to specifically mention that they can't interbreed, if that's not a biological difference than I don't know what is).
That there for a reason? Or did they just feel like they needed a better excuse to make them two separate races? Because it sounds like the latter, because they do...
In the sake of fairness, though, I don't think many people are arguing in favor of having the races fused, only that they wouldn't mind if they were and don't see why they can't.
Pretty much, yeah.
Likely not, however, in the Design and Develpment article on Psionics the devs stated that they were waiting until PHB3 before they started throwing in more complicated classes that worked outside the normal structure. So there seems to be the possibily that there may be something new for those power sources.
No, what I keep trying to say is that cultural differences don't matter as far as racial mechanics are concerned.
Then stop focusing on the cultures. The gith races look the same to you because you choose to see them for their similarities rather than their differences. They are mechanically different not just because of culture but because they truly diverged in the distant past. They retain a superficial visual similarity, but that's it. Our own natural world is full of animal species that look the same but are genetically distinct.
Who? Because I know I don't care...
For someone who claims not to care, you sure seem to have have a strong opinion.
Yeah. The key is they don't need to give a race mechanics in order for it to be conceptually different from another race, and so saying that two races are only different because they're given different mechanics is entirely missing the point. The mechanics are not the primary concern. The mechanics are only incidental.
Some were saying the exact same thing about elves and eladrin before release of 4E, some still do. I've heard folks prattle on the same arguments you have against the gith in regards to elves and eladrin, dismissing all the flavor and mechanic differences as just being two flavors of the same concept.
But Gith, as far as I know, are a race entirely of D&D that has never gained any real immitators or traction outside of D&D. If you put them as two seperate races, not many people would know the difference and even a lot of those who did know wouldn't care.
For the most part everyone would just look in the books and see two copies of the same race, one of which is expected to be evil. Furthermore, once you started assigning abilities and feats, suddenly you'd be limiting what each would be capable of a lot more than if you simply made Gith powers and feats.
No, what I keep trying to say is that cultural differences don't matter as far as racial mechanics are concerned.
No. Those are racial stats. I'm not referring just to mechanics. I'm also referring to concepts. It doesn't matter if the mechanics are different if the concepts aren't different enough to actually warrant them.
Ok so maybe you don't get the difference in the concepts, 'cause the only other option is hypocrisy and I honestly respect you CC too much believe that.
Githyanki's Concept - mind based warriors who worship a lich, and are cult like in their behavior, whom can travel the planes with relative ease.
Githezari's concept - Bastions of order in chaotic fields, creating true chaos, as without random spots of order chaos is not truly chaotic.
The Gith prefix also belongs to a third described NPC group most common in the former Spelljammer area the Gith Pirates. While being brief there is a unifying theme to the Giths (much like there is to Dragons, Fey et cetera): What humans become when forced into desperate situations.
I agree. I say merge Githyanki and Githzerai! Who cares for grognard complaints? 4e is about making things simpler, and not being constrained by holy cows of old! I vote for a single Gith race! Culture should be flavour, rather than mechanics!
The amusing thing about this statement? None of the people supporting separate races are grognards ...
And separate Gith are simpler.
And for a race comparison: Elves and Eladrin (again because *gasp* the comparison is accurate) vs Shifters
Elves and Eladrin (and Drow) are separated from each other both thousands and thousands of years of divergent evolution. In every edition of DnD they have been separate.
Shifters have never been separate. In both 3e and 4e fluff, they have always been one race with minor differences. They are perhaps the absolute worst example to use in an attempt to champion combining the Gith, because they have nothing in common.
And again, the entire point is moot. People can argue for combining the Gith all they want - it's not happening unless you homebrew it. WotC is either going to have two separate races in the PHB3, or Zerai only. The Zerai preview next month and the Yanki city article this month proves it.
The Elf/Eladrin/Drow argument boils down to the same thing really, but I think a better one is the Genasi/Tiefling/Human argument. All three are descended (at least variably so based on various Genasi fluff) from the same base race (humans), but have been radically changed by their environment. For the tieflings it was demonic blood, not the location admittedly. But the origin for the Genasi in many settings is usually as humans warped either by mad mages, or by exposure to the extremes of the elements. Eberron's Genasi are the best example of this.
The Gith work exactly the same. Cosmetically they can be as distinct as WotC want them to be, after all elves and eladrin were no where near as distinct before 4E (and they DID exist before 4E, just not so obviously, at least in FR).
Also, I'm not entirely sure of the timeline, and it will be campaign setting specific and probably undefined as yet for PoL, but the Gith have been separated for thousands and thousands of years. At least as long as the elves. That's plenty of time for biological changes.
Now the only cultural similarities between Githzerai and Githyanki despite their same ancestry is, that both of the are rather dour and somewhat mistrusting of other races.
But there's major differences between them.
1. Githzerai tend to be more monastic (something they emphasized in 3e) and less materialistic than Githyanki. It makes them generally more reflective and introspective as a race.
2. Githzerai are more open and trusting of other races, while they may be reclusive as a race, they are willing to trust non-Githzerai. They get farther in non-Gith society than their Githyanki cousins do, and are more willing to adopt other cultures than Githyanki are. One of Sigil's faction leaders (Factol Karan) was a Githzerai after all.
3. Githyanki are militaristic and expansionists, the Githzerai are not.
4. Githyanki society is tightly controlled and has quite a restrictive caste system. There's less of a caste system with Githzerai, they don't have names for their castes and there's certainly more social mobility and equality between Githzerai, even if you factor in King Zaerith (who seems to have disappeared since 3e).
5. Githyanki favour baroque and gothic designs in their architecture and armour. Githzerai are in comparision far more utilitarian and simple in their designs.
6. Githyanki are quite organized, they can field armies and bring a lot of resources to their goals, they are lawful evil after all. Githzerai are generally only capable of small scale organization, as they are generally Chaotic Neutral/Unaligned. One notable example is that while Githyanki have their fleets of ships and armies to use against the Illithids, the Githzerai only tend to manage small groups against Illithids, Rrakkma Bands as they call them against the Illithids, where they employ more guerrilla like tactics.
7. Defiance against Githyanki rulers means death. Defiance against Githzerai rulers, generally means exile and living in other places like Sigil.
8. Everyone hates the Githyanki: they already have Githzerai and Illithids as enemies, and the Psurlons want to wipe them out, and just about every adventuring party know they're trouble and tries to stop them. And while everyone doesn't necessarily like the Githzerai, they don't have any big enemies outside the Illithids and Githyanki. They may clash with the Slaadi often as they share the same plane, but neither do the Githzerai or the Slaad have any major enmity between them. And you don't have pesky adventurers trying to stop the Githzerai all the time.
Then stop focusing on the cultures.
That's exactly what I'm trying to get everybody else to stop doing.
The gith races look the same to you because you choose to see them for their similarities rather than their differences.
No, they look the same to me because the differences are so minor as to be inappreciable. I see the differences, but I also see that they're too minor to matter among the mass of similarities.
They retain a superficial visual similarity, but that's it. Our own natural world is full of animal species that look the same but are genetically distinct.
And I can't tell those animals apart either. What's your point? Just because something annoying exists in the real world doesn't mean we need to or should put it in D&D.
For someone who claims not to care, you sure seem to have have a strong opinion.
I was talking about your idea that reducing page count is my goal.
Besides, I have strong opinions about a lot of things I don't care about. Not caring doesn't stop me from being right. :P
Ok so maybe you don't get the difference in the concepts, 'cause the only other option is hypocrisy and I honestly respect you CC too much believe that.
A) I get the differences in concept. I just don't think there are enough of them, because I still can't tell them apart.
B) What about what I said sounds hypocritical to you? Taken out of context, I can sort of see how you might think those two quotes are contradictory, but really, they're not.
Githyanki's Concept - mind based warriors who worship a lich, and are cult like in their behavior, whom can travel the planes with relative ease.
Githezari's concept - Bastions of order in chaotic fields, creating true chaos, as without random spots of order chaos is not truly chaotic.
And most of what you just listed is cultural, which is my problem. If the only significant conceptual differences between them are cultural in nature, then having two different races is unnecessary.
And for a race comparison: Elves and Eladrin (again because *gasp* the comparison is accurate)
Again, the comparison is not accurate because (A) I can tell the Eladrin and Elf apart both physically and visually but (B) I can't tell the two Gith cultures apart physically or visually.
The Astral Sea/Elemental Chaos argument is for me the most compelling reason why they are separate races. It's not just a matter of locations...
Yes, it is. Unless those locations actually changes them to really make them different, location doesn't matter. That's why an Elf living in the desert is the same as an Elf living in jungle. Their environments have not actually changed them, so they use the same mechanics.
This would undoubtably lead to sharp changes in the biology of the two peoples that would make them distinct enough to be a different races.
If it had led to sharp changes in biology and I could actually tell these guys apart, I wouldn't be here, would I? :P
That's plenty of time for biological changes.
Too bad it didn't happen then, huh? :P
KoboldAvenger... I totally missed the point of that list you just made. I'm pretty sure everybody understands that the cultures are different.
But you know, there's really a very simple solution to all this:
Make the two Gith races look more different.
Really, that's all they would need to do. Just make it so that when presented artwork, I can tell what I'm looking at without need for exhaustive deliberate comparison. Problem solved.
Yes, it is. Unless those locations actually changes them to really make them different, location doesn't matter. That's why an Elf living in the desert is the same as an Elf living in jungle. Their environments have not actually changed them, so they use the same mechanics.
Seriously, you need to stop trying to use this comparison. There is a huge difference between two races living on the same world in different climates separated by little more than a dozen generations; and two races that live in radically distinct planes of existence isolated from each other for thousands of generations.
But you know, there's really a very simple solution to all this:
Make the two Gith races look more different.
Really, that's all they would need to do. Just make it so that when presented artwork, I can tell what I'm looking at without need for exhaustive deliberate comparison. Problem solved.
The two gith races have skin color, eye color, hair color, and body build as distinguishing visual characteristics. Those are the same distinctions that exist between the elven races. Heck, cover up the ears and most elves could pass for human. Halfings are discernible from humans by little more than height, so artwork with no scale cues can usually pass for either.
Perhaps more importantly though, why do you keep insisting that two races have to look different in order to be different?
There is a huge difference between two races living on the same world in different climates separated by little more than a dozen generations; and two races that live in radically distinct planes of existence isolated from each other for thousands of generations.
No, there should be a big difference between those two comparisons, but in the case of the Gith, there doesn't seem to be a difference at all. Bottom line is that despite this massive separation, I still can't tell them apart.
The two gith races have skin color, eye color, hair color, and body build as distinguishing visual characteristics.
And as I've already pointed out, their differences in these areas are so minute as to be inappreciable. You get a more appreciable difference between two difference members of the same race.
Those are the same distinctions that exist between the elven races.
Yes, but they're more pronounced in the elven races, pronounced enough that I can actually tell them apart.
Heck, cover up the ears and most elves could pass for human. Halfings are discernible from humans by little more than height, so artwork with no scale cues can usually pass for either.
Yes, hide the physical differences and you won't be able to tell them apart. What's your point? That doesn't relate to the Gith. In the case of the two Gith cultures, there are no appreciable physical differences to hide or display.
Perhaps more importantly though, why do you keep insisting that two races have to look different in order to be different?
Because if I can't tell them apart, if I can't tell one from the other, then they're not as different as they think they are.
Because if I can't tell them apart, if I can't tell one from the other, then they're not as different as they think they are.
Yes they are. Gith share visually similar characteristics, but that is where the similarity ends. The two races have completely different physical, mental, and supernatural capabilities. They might look like the same factor models, but under the hood they have entirely different engines.
Gith share visually similar characteristics, but that is where the similarity ends. The two races have completely different physical, mental, and supernatural capabilities.
Like what? And more importantly, if I still can't tell them apart, why should I care?
Like what? And more importantly, if I still can't tell them apart, why should I care?
Entirely different innate stat bonuses and different racial traits (save an overlapping initiative bonus). These differences aren't just arbitrary, they represent a conscious decision made by WotC to present two distinct races.
The two gith races share a superficial visual similarity because they share a common ancestry, but that is all they share. They diverged from each other hundreds (maybe thousands) of generations ago, and now share nothing but the most superficial visual characteristics. Why do you insist on judging them solely by their external appearance?
Why do you insist on judging them solely by their external appearance?
Because unless their external appearance is different, I can't tell them apart. For two races that are supposed to be so extremely different, they're almost identical, and that bugs me.
You know what also has superficial visual similarities? Eladrin and Elf. But they're different enough that I can still tell them apart. All I'm saying is I'd like if they would either make the two Gith cultures the same race, which is exactly how they look, or switch it up and give two supposedly different races different appearances so that they can actually be told apart.
Because unless their external appearance is different, I can't tell them apart. For two races that are supposed to be so extremely different, they're almost identical, and that bugs me.
Understandilbe, though maybe you should consider looking at it as a feature rater than a bug.
You know what also has superficial visual similarities? Eladrin and Elf.
Kalashtar and humans look even more alike than that. Half-Ocs and shifters (while note using their racial power) also look rather similar.
Other than their eyes, eladrin and elves are virtually identical. Some hair and skin tones are more common in one than the other, but they both can run about the same range. Close their eyes and take away their distinctive clothing styles and what's left looks mostly he same.
Also, as I've said before there are notable distinctions between the two variety of gith. Skin color being the most obvious; art work and even minis agree, zerai have greenish skin tones while yanki have yellowish skin tones.
Once upon a time I didn't know much about the gith and back than I had trouble telling them apart, but it was only because I didn't bother to try. Now that I've taken just a minimal amount of effort, the distinctions are clear and I have little difficulty distinguishing them, unless the artwork in question is intentionally trying to make it difficult to do so (such as one being disguised as the other).
Understandilbe, though maybe you should consider looking at it as a feature rater than a bug.
Well it's a stupid feature, and I think that it should die. :P
Well it's a stupid feature, and I think that it should die. :P
Now you're just being silly, or petty, but I'll choose to take the more positive outlook.
I'm not really sure what else there is to add here though. Really, I think what it's come down to is that some people are just attached to the idea of them being two separate races and some people just aren't. Meh, c'est la vie. :P
Humans live in both the Elemental Chaos and Astral Sea and probably have different cultures.
Does that make them suitable for different racial entries? No. Why should it for the gith?
Do these humans have very distinct mental powers (in EVERY edition of the game, not just the 4E MM) caused by their different environments and magical warping?
It's D&D. Drow aren't elves because they lived in a magical environment that changed them. Gith aren't human/human-like because they were magically twisted by the mindflayers, and githyanki aren't githzerai because one race devoted itself to a lich with an experimental bent and too much free time and the other decided to try to shape pure chaos with their minds.
When you get right down to it, the people who want to play as one gith or the other care about the differences, and the people who wouldn't anyway, don't. In my opinion, this should mean that people who want to play as githyanki and githzerai should get those races, and the people who don't want them anyway should not get a Gith race that they wouldn't play anyway.
I agree that the art should do a better job of emphasizing their differences, but there currently exists approximately one image of each race in 4E so it's a bit of a moot complaint. Wizards has done an excellent job up to this point making each of the races visually distinct in art. I see no reason why they would cease in PHB3.
Merging the two races wouldn't appeal to me at all. I like that they're seperate. Besides being ripped off, how would they work out the connections to the lich queen without making it completely B rate?
I don't think the Giths will be merged in PHB3 -- in fact, I don't think the githyanki will make into that book.
The githyanki just recently got spotlighted with the Backdrop: Tu'narath article in Dragon, so I think that's a little condolence gift to those who really wanted them as PCs soon. Until there's a series of novels based around Gr'izzt MacGithson, the renegade githyanki who hates the lich-queen and starts following the gods and helping people in need (the the help of his trusting sidekick Muckwilliguppin the intellect devourer), I don't think they're going to play up the misunderstood, loner hero githyanki much.