Gnomes not good enough for grognard

Post/Author/DateTimePost
#1

RadperT

May 27, 2015 17:14:23

I think advantage on mental magic saves embodies the essence of the AD&D gnome's "bonus to saving throws versus magic wands, staves, rods, and spells."  Taking that away from dwarves, and only letting forest gnomes talk to little animals & do a little illusion as in 3E–not bad, I wouldn't want them to be OP!  As do other posters, I believe the clockwork toy ability suits a tinker gnome–but that should open up the rock gnome niche for a classic ability–"add 1 to their dice rolls to hit opponents who are kobolds or goblins.  When being attacked by gnolls, bugbears, ogres, trolls, ogre magi, giants, and/or titans, gnome characters subtract 4 from their opponents' 'to hit' dice rolls.…"

 

<nl>

Obviously I've got the Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Players Handbook open to page 16–and a simple +1 to hit, let alone +4 to AC, isn't complicated enough for the contemporary paradigm.  But making that work isn't my job…I just want my gnome ranger to be a workable concept again!

#2

CCS

May 27, 2015 20:02:29 		So talk to your DM.
#3

lawrencehoy

May 27, 2015 21:20:08

RadperT wrote:
#4

RCanine

May 27, 2015 21:55:26

RadperT wrote:
#5

LuisCarlos17f

May 28, 2015 6:55:48

Gnomes are the D&D Tyrion Lannisters, they only need the hands of a good storyteller.  I like the gnomes exactly because they aren´t so popular, but the D&D little ugly duckling. 

 

About gameplay my opinion is they are too specialized to be stealth or illusory spellcasters. Maybe we need a pack of optional racial feats for gnomes. I remember an article from Dragon magazine where there was a gnome subrace with special racial traits to be barbarian characters. We also need variant classes to be a warrior without heavy armour, because I want to create a swashbuckler/warblade gnome with "jump" spells and anothers tricks (like illusory smoke grenades), or to be better monster trainer.  

 

 

#6

The_White_Sorcerer

May 28, 2015 7:40:59

RadperT wrote:
#7

masterfat78

May 28, 2015 10:19:12

RCanine wrote:
#8

masterfat78

May 28, 2015 10:21:14

I like gnomes, but I do agree they are munkinwise only good for a couple classes. Does every race need to be good at everything? Thats been a challenge in every edition.

(Reply to #7)

Ashrym

masterfat78 wrote:
#10

Azzy1974

May 28, 2015 10:44:31

I could definitely get behind having an alternate racial feature for rock gnomes that trades out the tinker thing. While I nothing against people having their tinker gnomes, that's primarily a Dragonlance trope and doesn't always fit all settings. Thus, an option for a more a feature that's more in keeping with the non-tinker rock gnomes of the past would be rather pleasant.

#11

ORC_Animus

May 28, 2015 10:56:06

I’ve removed content from this thread because trolling/baiting/personal attacks are violations of the Code of Conduct.

 

You can review the Code of Conduct here: http://company.wizards.com/conduct

 

Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.

 

If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the “Report Post” button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.

(Reply to #7)

pauln6

masterfat78 wrote:
#13

Lord_Ventnor

May 28, 2015 19:56:16

Azzy1974 wrote:
(Reply to #13)

Azzy1974

Lord_Ventnor wrote:
(Reply to #14)

The_White_Sorcerer

Azzy1974 wrote:
(Reply to #15)

Azzy1974

The_White_Sorcerer wrote:
#17

Farmer42

May 30, 2015 14:59:59

Azzy1974 wrote:
#18

DoctorBadWolf

Jun 01, 2015 2:59:21

Not sure what's stopping a gnome ranger. I do think that the Forest Gnome just is a Rock Gnome, which should have the Con, or have a Cha bonus and the flavor of the 3.5 Races of Stone Gnome, and the Tinker Gnome is it's own thing, called a Tinker Gnome. The Forest Gnome should be stealthy, dextrous, and have the flavor of the 4e Gnome.

 

In fact, I might just make a Forest Gnome for my games, at some point.

 

 

#19

LuisCarlos17f

Jun 01, 2015 5:43:55

Types of gnomes:

 

The standar illusionist

 

The rogue, or the bard, or a stealth-magic hybrid class (factotum, beguiler, spellthief..)

 

The artificier

 

The forest gnome with an animal companion or another monster pet. 

 

The swarsbuckler with some magic trick like boots with jump spell (hexblade?)

 

The steampunk tinker/gadgeteer  

 

 

What if a UA article about gnome "subraces", optional list of alternative racial traits? There was an article from Dragon Magazine where racial traits could be replaced with others for barbarian or rangers classes, even a barbarian gnome was possible.

 

#20

RCanine

Jun 01, 2015 9:01:12

LuisCarlos17f wrote:
(Reply to #18)

MrHotter

DoctorBadWolf wrote:
#22

ChrisCarlson

Jun 01, 2015 9:39:07

MrHotter wrote:
(Reply to #22)

MrHotter

ChrisCarlson wrote:
#24

Zardnaar

Jun 01, 2015 12:21:25

MrHotter wrote:
#25

ChrisCarlson

Jun 01, 2015 13:50:59

MrHotter wrote:
(Reply to #21)

DoctorBadWolf

MrHotter wrote:
#27

Zardnaar

Jun 01, 2015 15:27:51

DoctorBadWolf wrote:
(Reply to #27)

DoctorBadWolf

Zardnaar wrote:
#29

Zardnaar

Jun 01, 2015 15:54:05

DoctorBadWolf wrote:
#30

RCanine

Jun 01, 2015 21:16:51

Zardnaar wrote:
#31

Zardnaar

Jun 02, 2015 0:25:10

RCanine wrote:
#32

RCanine

Jun 02, 2015 0:55:33

Zardnaar wrote:
#33

LuisCarlos17f

Jun 02, 2015 13:59:13

My suggestion for abilitie scores.

 

First Option:  +2 A or + 2 B

 

Second Option: +2 A, +2B, -2 C. 

#34

ChrisCarlson

Jun 02, 2015 7:27:10

DoctorBadWolf wrote:
(Reply to #18)

Azzy1974

DoctorBadWolf wrote:
(Reply to #29)

DoctorBadWolf

Zardnaar wrote:
#37

ChrisCarlson

Jun 04, 2015 6:19:41

DoctorBadWolf wrote:
#38

Mommy_was_an_Orc

Jun 04, 2015 7:50:16

RCanine wrote:
#39

DoctorBadWolf

Jun 04, 2015 23:42:42

In 3.5, and arguably in 4e, that difference actually impacted how good your character was at doing their job, in a noticable manner.

 

It does not in 5e. It's not noticable at low levels, and it gets less and less so as you level.

#40

Mommy_was_an_Orc

Jun 05, 2015 6:22:03

DoctorBadWolf wrote:
#41

DoctorBadWolf

Jun 07, 2015 1:39:54

A -1/+1 difference only matters if one of the following is true:

 

a) The basic scale of accuracy vs defense in the game has a wide enough band and/or scales up at a fast enough rate that falling behind or surging ahead has signifigent momentum. ie, the difference scales into greater and greater difference as you level, and the game math expects more accuracy in order to hit defenses.

 

2) the difference is noticable in play, next to a character who does not have that bonus or penalty.

 

 

In either case, even if we agree that it's about the same in any edition, the point stands that all bonuses penalizes less than a combination of bonus and penalty.

 

A matched race/class vs not is a less important question when all races have bonuses only, because the difference is +1vsnot, instead of +1vs-1.

(Reply to #41)

FrogReaver

DoctorBadWolf wrote:
(Reply to #42)

DoctorBadWolf

FrogReaver wrote:
#44

LuisCarlos17f

Jun 13, 2015 8:46:59

Tywin Lannister wrote:
(Reply to #44)

Azzy1974

LuisCarlos17f wrote: