I'll list out some obvious ones based on Racial naming convention, mentioning the race with a similiar name style.
Shardmen -Human, Lizardmen,etc
Shardling- Halfling, Bladeling
Sharda- Deva
Shardi- Giths, Genesai
Sharder- Shifter
Sharden- Wilden
Sharded- an adjective like Goliath or Dwarf.
Shardforged- Warforged
Shardborn- Dragonborn
Outside of DnD there are other conventions:
Shardren- "Children of the Shard"
Shardian- standard suffix for dwellers of X
The Shard People- used on Tribes
Naturally we could apply these templates to Crystal, Gem, Jewel, Rock, and other related words.
Personally, I plan to steal the name Jumi from "Legend of Mana", a race of people with gems for hearts (visible on chest and removable a la Iron Man). Being a full body crystal is a lot more impressive than being murderable by the same action as changing a lightbulb.
Where has there been any confirmation on these supposed Shardminds other than this one guy who says he saw them but doesn't remember anything about them?
I think this thread is jumping the gun a bit.
Where has there been any confirmation on these supposed Shardminds other than this one guy who says he saw them but doesn't remember anything about them?
Remembers nothing about them?
I think the shardmind racial was Shard Swarm. It's burst 1 and all enemies in the burst grant you combat advantage until end of your next turn, and you then teleport 3 squares.
The Shardmind is probably +2 Int / +2 Wis. It's stats are 8 Str, 13 Con, 10 Dex, 20 Int, 18 Wis, 10 Cha at level 6. In the CB, using the Deva as a substitute, the numbers work.
I think that is a decent memory myself.
I'm going to refer to them as Talchion, from Talch, the Welsh word for "fragment" and the mineral Talc.
Of course, I change the name of EVERY race for my setting, so that's to be expected. For the first time, however, I might have to change the name of CLASSES. That's unheard of.
Calxago, rock life. Anhelorbis, breathing ring. Sengemma, sentient gem. Or Calxicarmen, stonesong.
Seriously, all the whining over names is vastly sillier than the names themselves.
I tried to search Greek too, but I couldn't find any ancient greek dictionaries online that presented the greek words in letters I can read...
Shardmind is fine enough for me. It doesn't sound like a native name, sure, but then halflings were originally the human slang for hobbits, and probably derogatory slang at that. As far as my campaigns are concerned, shardminds have a cultural name they used to refer to themselves, but the slang 'shardmind' was coined by a foreigner and found by the world at large to be much easier to remember.
That's part of what I'm hoping to capture in this thread, cultural names, etc. Think of it as a potential reference for tables that for "whatever reason" don't want to use Shardmind in or out of character.
In my game, these creatures were called "shardlings."
Disallowed.
Along with all Psionics. Never used them before, I wouldn't use'em now.
Without having seen them?
Disallowed.
Along with all Psionics. Never used them before, I wouldn't use'em now.
That seems kinda...extreme.
That seems kinda...extreme.
I agree. It's a pretty silly reaction.
That seems kinda...extreme.
I agree. It's a pretty silly reaction.
How is it any more silly than an entire campaign setting disallowing a power source?
How is it any more silly than an entire campaign setting disallowing a power source?
Because the setting doesn't disallow the power source just because it's creator doesn't like it. Also, the setting doesn't make you feel any obligation to play with it even though it's imposing limitations on you without considering your feelings, because the setting isn't your friend.
How is it any more silly than an entire campaign setting disallowing a power source?
Because the setting doesn't disallow the power source just because it's creator doesn't like it. Also, the setting doesn't make you feel any obligation to play with it even though it's imposing limitations on you without considering your feelings, because the setting isn't your friend.
Good point. Besides, it would be difficult to implement Divine in Dark Sun without refluffing it and editing damage types and calling it Elemental. By then, you might as well use a leg as a leg rather than calling a tail a leg.
How is it any more silly than an entire campaign setting disallowing a power source?
Because the setting doesn't disallow the power source just because it's creator doesn't like it. Also, the setting doesn't make you feel any obligation to play with it even though it's imposing limitations on you without considering your feelings, because the setting isn't your friend.
I'm not running Dark Sun. And other worlds don't include Psionics (yet). So No Psionics will be in My Campaign just because it will be in a new book.
You're silly for telling someone else what should be in there Campaign.
I'm not running Dark Sun. And other worlds don't include Psionics (yet).
Bull. Sure they do.
You're silly for telling someone else what should be in there Campaign.
I'm not telling you what should be in your campaign.
How is it any more silly than an entire campaign setting disallowing a power source?
Because the setting doesn't disallow the power source just because it's creator doesn't like it. Also, the setting doesn't make you feel any obligation to play with it even though it's imposing limitations on you without considering your feelings, because the setting isn't your friend.
I'm not running Dark Sun. And other worlds don't include Psionics (yet). So No Psionics will be in My Campaign just because it will be in a new book.
You're silly for telling someone else what should be in there Campaign.
We're not telling you not to disallow Psionics. We're saying that it's a silly idea, because it'll breed resentment. It's one thing to be told by a Campaign Setting that Divine isn't allowed. You choose to play in a CS. You choose to listen to what a book tells you. It's a whole 'nother ball game to be told by a friend what you can or cannot do. What if a player really wants to play Psionics? That player will be upset towards you because of that.
I'm not saying to change your decision. I'm sure you already understand all this. I'm just saying that that's what we're saying and that we think it's a silly idea. You're silly for thinking we're silly for telling you you're silly because you're not allowing Psionics. We could go on like that forever. But that would be silly, wouldn't it now?
If not, I'm partial to The Seoid.
Not that I know much about dark sun, but how does it disallow Divine?
Maybe shardmind will be a "common" name for them, similar to how the Illithid are listed as Mind Flayers in the MM?
If not, I'm partial to The Seoid.
Not that I know much about dark sun, but how does it disallow Divine?
I can see Shardmind being to Mind Flayer as x is to Illithid. x being what you define. I like that.
We'll talk about Dark Sun elsewhere.
Maybe shardmind will be a "common" name for them, similar to how the Illithid are listed as Mind Flayers in the MM?
If not, I'm partial to The Seoid.
Not that I know much about dark sun, but how does it disallow Divine?
Contrary to popular opinion (unfortunately including WotC's), it doesn't. Divine just functions differently.
Maybe shardmind will be a "common" name for them, similar to how the Illithid are listed as Mind Flayers in the MM?
If not, I'm partial to The Seoid.
Not that I know much about dark sun, but how does it disallow Divine?
Contrary to popular opinion (unfortunately including WotC's), it doesn't. Divine just functions differently.
I was going to leave this to a different conversation, but since you HAD to bring it up again, WotC released a statement in an interview that the Divine Power Source just doesn't exist in Dark Sun. Unless you were saying WotC also thinks that the Divine Power Source doesn't exist there. You should probably check out the Elemental Power Source which should cover those "elemental" priests that existed in the past.
I was going to leave this to a different conversation, but since you HAD to bring it up again, WotC released a statement in an interview that the Divine Power Source just doesn't exist in Dark Sun. Unless you were saying WotC also thinks that the Divine Power Source doesn't exist there. You should probably check out the Elemental Power Source which should cover those "elemental" priests that existed in the past.
Uh ... no. I have in fact read all the WotC statements about Dark Sun. And I'm saying that the people in charge do not understand Dark Sun. The Divine Source, such as it was in 2e, most certainly existed in 2e Dark Sun. Just because it didn't come from the gods, does not change that fact.
The Divine Source in 4e is easily integrateble into 4e Dark Sun. That WotC has stated that as a default it's not there is utterly close-minded and pre-mature. Not to mention that we have no idea what the Elemental Source actually is, so claiming that it is or is not for a fact a suitable replacement is ridiculous and pre-mature. We don't know.
But the Divine Source for a fact is compatable with 4e Dark Sun, unless they're just going to utterly and completely cut off all access to all planes. Because the Divine Source does not have to be assoicated with gods. It can just as easily spring from the Dragon Kings and Elementals. Just like how actual Divine Characters can worship actual Primordials, which may or may not be similar to the elementals of Athas, and still get their Divine powers. The Divine Source flat out stats that a character can even get their powers from philosphy. Imagine that.
It is the one thing that is so far disappointing me about WotC's handling of 4e Dark Sun. Easily changeable, but none the less disappointing.
I was going to leave this to a different conversation, but since you HAD to bring it up again, WotC released a statement in an interview that the Divine Power Source just doesn't exist in Dark Sun. Unless you were saying WotC also thinks that the Divine Power Source doesn't exist there. You should probably check out the Elemental Power Source which should cover those "elemental" priests that existed in the past.
Uh ... no. I have in fact read all the WotC statements about Dark Sun. And I'm saying that the people in charge do not understand Dark Sun. The Divine Source, such as it was in 2e, most certainly existed in 2e Dark Sun. Just because it didn't come from the gods, does not change that fact.
The Divine Source in 4e is easily integrateble into 4e Dark Sun. That WotC has stated that as a default it's not there is utterly close-minded and pre-mature. Not to mention that we have no idea what the Elemental Source actually is, so claiming that it is or is not for a fact a suitable replacement is ridiculous and pre-mature. We don't know.
But the Divine Source for a fact is compatable with 4e Dark Sun, unless they're just going to utterly and completely cut off all access to all planes. Because the Divine Source does not have to be assoicated with gods. It can just as easily spring from the Dragon Kings and Elementals. Just like how actual Divine Characters can worship actual Primordials, which may or may not be similar to the elementals of Athas, and still get their Divine powers. The Divine Source flat out stats that a character can even get their powers from philosphy. Imagine that.
It is the one thing that is so far disappointing me about WotC's handling of 4e Dark Sun. Easily changeable, but none the less disappointing.
Sorry, I'm sure such an well-known member of this forum as you would read up on everything WotC says, and I didn't mean to insinuate that you weren't savant about it.
But I DON'T want to get into this argument about the nature of Divine Power again. Especially not in a topic devoted to the Shardmind. If you want to debate what Divine is, or whether it should be in 4e Dark Sun even though WotC said it isn't, or not, then make a new topic. The last one really frustrated me though, and I'm really tired of arguing about it.
Let's get back to topic on Shardmind and it's name, shall we?
Sorry, I'm sure such an well-known member of this forum as you would read up on everything WotC says, and I didn't mean to insinuate that you weren't savant about it.
But I DON'T want to get into this argument about the nature of Divine Power again. Especially not in a topic devoted to the Shardmind. If you want to debate what Divine is, or whether it should be in 4e Dark Sun even though WotC said it isn't, or not, then make a new topic. The last one really frustrated me though, and I'm really tired of arguing about it.
Let's get back to topic on Shardmind and it's name, shall we?
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you were implying anything specific, or to be so snippy. I have a mild medical condition that when it strikes, causes persistant vertigo and/or nausea, and I get ... very irritable.
As for the Shardmind ... eh. I think the name is fine. Frankly, if there were any 4e PC race I'd rename, I'd rename the Eladrin to Sidhe. But that's just me.
I think that this race is the evolution (as Deva from Aasimar) of Maenads, so Maenads...
Maenads were crystal people in past editions? I always associatiated the word with wild woman followers of the Roman/Greek God Baccus/don't feel like spelling.
I think that this race is the evolution (as Deva from Aasimar) of Maenads, so Maenads...
Maenads were crystal people in past editions? I always associatiated the word with wild woman followers of the Roman/Greek God Baccus/don't feel like spelling.
Maenad is the Greek word for the Roman Bacchae (or rather, the other way around), but in D&D terms, Maenad has been something completely different. I'm actually glad they dropped the Maenad name, if this is a development from that race, because one of the things 4e is doing is reassociating terms and names with elements closer to mythic forms (i.e., Gnomes being more like the small, trickster fey like Robin "Puck" Goodfellow).
I think that this race is the evolution (as Deva from Aasimar) of Maenads, so Maenads...
Maenads were crystal people in past editions?
They think people who look like Twilight's vampires with wyrding modules.
Psionic expanded handbook.
PD: WHY NOT ELANS???
PD: WHY NOT ELANS???
Honestly, while I did like the concept of the Elan, I never thought that it was very appropriate as a PC race. It was always more like a template really. They were just humans who went through some ritual, and they even look indistinguishable humans, which just goes back to the problem of having twenty races that are just humans but with pointy ears (only worse, because Elan don't even have the pointy ears). I'd love a race with the Aberrant Origin, but it really seems like that would be the only new thing that the Elan would bring to the table without a major overhaul on their nature and origin, like an Aasimar => Deva level of overhaul.
PD: WHY NOT ELANS???
Honestly, while I did like the concept of the Elan, I never thought that it was very appropriate as a PC race. It was always more like a template really. They were just humans who went through some ritual, and they even look indistinguishable humans, which just goes back to the problem of having twenty races that are just humans but with pointy ears (only worse, because Elan don't even have the pointy ears). I'd love a race with the Aberrant Origin, but it really seems like that would be the only new thing that the Elan would bring to the table without a major overhaul on their nature and origin, like an Aasimar => Deva level of overhaul.
Agreed. There's a reason Vistani, Dhampyr, and Spellscarred are templates. Elan would fit into that category as well. Vistani could possibly be made a race, but then I have trouble figuring out what they'd archetypally look like, other than human BUT DIFFERENT!
I already have trouble with Kalashtar because they look identical to humans, though they have an alien mindset. Really, you could almost say that Kalashtar can cover your Elan, but otherwise it should be a template, or even maybe a class concept. An Aberrant Power Source might be something in the distant future after Psionic and Shadow and Elemental, and that might be a class concept (bind an aberrant being into yourself to gain power). But I'm not seeing it as a race.
If the fluff says they used to be X, but use a ritual to give themselves immortality via bodies of living crystal then I think we're golden.
The think I keep having to bring up with elan being feats is the matter of scale. Becoming an Elan completely redefined you. You weren't a human with upgrades, you were a creature who used to be a human.
It's like saying a butterfly is an enhanced caterpillar.
The Dhampyr may be a template, but the Revenant is not.
Their fluff may give a solid reason why they are called Shardminds, or even give alternate names for them. Warforged are called warforged because they were forged for war. If they weren't, they'd be called something different.
beyond that, we'll likely either call them by their names, or by some local in-game slang.
Warforged are called warforged because they were forged for war. If they weren't, they'd be called something different.
How many wars could a warforged forge if a warforged could forge wars?
Warforged are called warforged because they were forged for war. If they weren't, they'd be called something different.
How many wars could a warforged forge if a warforged could forge wars?
And how many minds could a shardmind shard if a shardmind could shard minds?
If he's a psionic class? Lots.
Presumably, if he's a Battlemind, he could Battle them too before Sharding them.
I think I'll call them "silly".
Ding! We have a winner!!
So, the Dromite is out for this waste of pages?
WotC said they developed quite a story for Shardminds. I think I'll trust them.
At least not until I take a closer look at phb3 and decide whether or not I need to make some fluff changes. From what I've seen/heard of them so far, no.
Ding! We have a winner!!
So, the Dromite is out for this waste of pages?
No the Dromite is not out for Shardminds, which you know absolutely nothing about, so calling them a waste is completly childish of you. The Dromite was never even in consideration.
Ding! We have a winner!!
So, the Dromite is out for this waste of pages?
No the Dromite is not out for Shardminds, which you know absolutely nothing about, so calling them a waste is completly childish of you. The Dromite was never even in consideration.
I doubt the dromite was never considered, but like you said, we know nothing about the Shardmind, so calling them a waste is a little harsh. I, on the other hand, am worried that they will be linked closely to psionics (pardon me if I don't believe one iota of WotC saying Githzerai are the most psionic of the PHB3 races). I hate psionics(have since 2e) so if they are a pretty psionic race, they will be worthless to me.
I'll calll them "not appearing in my campaign world".
At least not until I take a closer look at phb3 and decide whether or not I need to make some fluff changes. From what I've seen/heard of them so far, no.
"I won't allow them in my campaign world in the future because I know nothing about them right now because they don't exist yet."
. . . What?
Ding! We have a winner!!
So, the Dromite is out for this waste of pages?
No the Dromite is not out for Shardminds, which you know absolutely nothing about, so calling them a waste is completly childish of you. The Dromite was never even in consideration.
I doubt the dromite was never considered, but like you said, we know nothing about the Shardmind, so calling them a waste is a little harsh. I, on the other hand, am worried that they will be linked closely to psionics (pardon me if I don't believe one iota of WotC saying Githzerai are the most psionic of the PHB3 races). I hate psionics(have since 2e) so if they are a pretty psionic race, they will be worthless to me.
Shardminds are also IMMORTAL Constructs, which means they'll probably play into divine flavour very well too. This is supported by making them optimal Invokers and Avengers, and making them advantaged Clerics.
In fact, assuming that Int/Wis is their only ability score combination, they're really good at more Divine classes than at Psionic classes.
Int/Wis is good for Telekinetic Psions. Wisdom is also a rider for one build for each of the other three Psionic classes, but they don't have the primary for any of the classes but Psion, making Psion the only real Psionic class they're advantaged at.
Sounds like they're more Divine than Psionic.
They're also good as Artificers, Bards, and Shamans, as a side note.
You know "Shard" is another name for Crystal Meth... So therefore a Shardmind must be a Methhead.
Bwahahaha!
The concept of an immortal construct fits very well into one area of my homebrew, and I was thinking of just remaning the race "Shards"... Now I'm going to reconsider and think of something different.
However, in my homebrew they are going to be the masterminds behind the overthrowing of an entire culture that was overly reliant on magical artifice and construct servitor races. They are also a cousin race to the Warforged.
First the lifespan of Elves were shortened, now we have an immortal race? Are they going to start taking one another's head off next? "There can only be one."
I am reminded of a character in the FR comic that had a character's life essance put into a golem's body. This is what the Shardmind looks like, a golem like character. Why not put the Warforged in the PHB2 instead of this?
Immortal? Really?
First the lifespan of Elves were shortened, now we have an immortal race? Are they going to start taking one another's head off next? "There can only be one."
So, why aren't you having the same problem with Warforged and Deva? Those two races are immortal as well.
Not that it really matters, except in the fluff sense. Unlike previous editions, there aren't any hard and fast rules for aging that I have seen (unless they are in DMG2, which I haven't gotten around to yet). Your players should have achieved their epic destinies long before they would have died of old age, or even crossed into the next age category. My players' characters have been adventuring together for approximately a year of game time and they have just finished Heroic tier. Since I am embroiling them in a war for Paragon tier, I fully expect them to cross over to Epic tier in less than a year's game time.
Age is meaningless in 4E.
I am reminded of a character in the FR comic that had a character's life essance put into a golem's body. This is what the Shardmind looks like, a golem like character. Why not put the Warforged in the PHB2 instead of this?
Because the Warforged was already planned to be printed in the Eberron Player's Guide when they were laying out the PHB2. It is a balanced PC race, also featured in the Monster Manual. The inclusion of the Warforged in the Monster Manual, as opposed to the Eberron Campaign Guide, means that they aren't exclusive to Eberron any more, but now part of the generic Points of Light setting. If you choose to not allow Warforged PCs based solely on the fact that they are in the EPG rather than a PHB, that's on you.
Since Shardminds are constructs, like the Warforged, they may have similar origins. While Warforged are built for physical tasks (STR / CON), the Shardminds seem to be designed for more cerebral tasks (INT / WIS). Maybe the construction process is similar, maybe not. We won't know until the previews for PHB3 later this month (one of the first three previews should be the Shardmind).
Immortal? Really?
First the lifespan of Elves were shortened, now we have an immortal race? Are they going to start taking one another's head off next? "There can only be one."
I am reminded of a character in the FR comic that had a character's life essance put into a golem's body. This is what the Shardmind looks like, a golem like character. Why not put the Warforged in the PHB2 instead of this?
You really don't actually play DnD, do you? Because you sure do seem to have absolutely no knowledge of anything DnD related from the past 12 months. Others have already posted why.
So, why aren't you having the same problem with Warforged and Deva? Those two races are immortal as well.
And not just them - Revenents, Shadar-Kai (or at least they have longer life-spans than any other race with a life span), and anyone taking any of a couple dozen or more EDs are all immortal.
I think that the 4th edition Warforged is a good compromise from the 3.5 "living construct" rules.
My point is that this Shardmind looks to be a variation of the Warforged, or a Golem like character. We already have this, why do it again when there are other races that can be used (like the Dromite)?
My players have been looking toward the future with the hybrid rules that are gonna be in this book, but why cut down on the races (4) and classes (6) and then include this throw away race?
The name, Shardmind, is what is throwing me at the moment. Makes me think of either a stone/crystal person or a floating brain that throws shards.
If Wizards is desperite for something new in every book, then why have a Warforged clone with different stats?
*shock & horror*
The only exception would be if I want to build on the fluff for campaign specific reasons and create (as some have already mentioned) a cultural name for the race and use Shardmind as slang term used by the other races.
~Bizkit
My players have been looking toward the future with the hybrid rules that are gonna be in this book, but why cut down on the races (4) and classes (6) and then include this throw away race?
If Wizards is desperate for something new in every book, then why have a Thri-kreen clone with different stats?
My point is that this Dromite looks to be a variation of the Thri-kreen, or an Insect like character. We already have this, why do it again when there are other races that can be used (like the Shardmind)?
My players have been looking toward the future with the hybrid rules that are gonna be in this book, but why cut down on the races (4) and classes (6) and then include this throw away race?
If Wizards is desperate for something new in every book, then why have a Thri-kreen clone with different stats?
Shardmind looks like an Immortal Warforged with slight psionic leanings.
It's no different.
That said, I like both.
Just to be clear, I didn't like the Deva that much, and in 3.5, the Warforged was overpowered.
I think that the 4th edition Warforged is a good compromise from the 3.5 "living construct" rules.
My point is that this Shardmind looks to be a variation of the Warforged, or a Golem like character. We already have this, why do it again when there are other races that can be used (like the Dromite)?
My players have been looking toward the future with the hybrid rules that are gonna be in this book, but why cut down on the races (4) and classes (6) and then include this throw away race?
The name, Shardmind, is what is throwing me at the moment. Makes me think of either a stone/crystal person or a floating brain that throws shards.
If Wizards is desperite for something new in every book, then why have a Warforged clone with different stats?
Because WoTC isn't catering to just the wants, desires or needs of any one type of player. Wizards probably feels that this race will have traction and/or fill some sort of niche.
I know the Shardmind will have a place in my game world.
Just to be clear, I didn't like the Deva that much, and in 3.5, the Warforged was overpowered.
I think that the 4th edition Warforged is a good compromise from the 3.5 "living construct" rules.
The balance for warforged came in the fluff, they were like emancipated slaves in Eberron, and a good DM would play that up to balance out mechanical edges. IMO
Maybe they are the Psiforged, cousins to the warforged. could make sense, but i'm sure they will be good fun none the less.
I think post PH1 Wizards balanced races well, and did some nice retconing for the PH1 races that needed a leg up.
Shardmind looks like an Immortal Warforged with slight psionic leanings.
It's no different.
That said, I like both.
*coughparodycough*
Shardmind looks like an Immortal Warforged with slight psionic leanings.
It's no different.
That said, I like both.
I don't know if you didn't catch it, or what, but I was trying to point out the complete lack of logic in thaX's post. Shardminds are as much like Warforged as Dromites are like Thri-kreen - ie, the only similarities between the two are they're both constructs/insects, and that's it. And I don't even know if that's true of the Shardmind.
To put it another way, thaX's post was saying the equivalent of, "why should we have dwarves, when we already have humans?"
*coughparodycough*
Thank you.
My point is that this Dromite looks to be a variation of the Thri-kreen, or an Insect like character. We already have this, why do it again when there are other races that can be used (like the Shardmind)?
My players have been looking toward the future with the hybrid rules that are gonna be in this book, but why cut down on the races (4) and classes (6) and then include this throw away race?
If Wizards is desperate for something new in every book, then why have a Thri-kreen clone with different stats?
If the Shardmind art didn't look like a crystallized window store mannequin, breasts and all, I might agree. ;)
Shardmind looks like an Immortal Warforged with slight psionic leanings.
It's no different.
That said, I like both.
I don't know if you didn't catch it, or what, but I was trying to point out the complete lack of logic in thaX's post. Shardminds are as much like Warforged as Dromites are like Thri-kreen - ie, the only similarities between the two are they're both constructs/insects, and that's it. And I don't even know if that's true of the Shardmind.
To put it another way, thaX's post was saying the equivalent of, "why should we have dwarves, when we already have humans?"
*coughparodycough*
Thank you.
Woops! Darn it, now I made you go and explain the joke. That's no fun. I'm sorry.
In any case, I'll trust WotC to make the different enough, and if they ever made Dromites, I'd trust those to be different enough too.
EDIT: Oh... Shardminds... I thought that said Battleminds. Oops.
If one of my characters runs into one, I'll probably call him 'sir'.
You know, about half the time, that'll get you slapped. Check for a pair of nodules on the front beforehand.
