What's the point of gnomes, Veeky Forums...

What's the point of gnomes, Veeky Forums? Isn't it already kind of strange that D&D has two other core races chiefly defined by being shorter humans? What do gnomes add to the table that dwarves and halflings don't?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnomes_(book)
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

You make this thread a lot.

Gnomes are very flexible in how they can be represented, depending on the setting. While most of their traits can also be used elsewhere, Gnomes remain a potentially convenient package or place to put these archetypes if going different directions with other races.

-Alchemists
-Tinkerers
-Tricksters
-Woodland folk
-Musicians/entertainers
-Humble and wise

They're definitely in a weird spot for not really having core identifying features unique from other races, but they can still be used to good effect if your setting makes room for them.

Humans
Dwarves
Elves
Elves
Humans
Dwarves

Not attempting to dispute your point but those traits are pretty easily applied to the other main races. If I have to use them I do so in a Norse setting.

The classic D&D gnome is two things.

Firstly, it's a representative of non-Nordic myths about dwarves, or at least non-Tolkienian; I know I read a book on dwarves that described dwarf women borrowing cooking implements from humans and had a tale of a dwarf king who abducted a human woman to be his bride by turning into a thistledown and flying to her, but buggered if I can remember the title of it.

Secondly, it originally served as a way to make all-shortfolk adventuring party that still filled the iconic Fighter/Mage/Thief triad.

What do halflings bring to the table?

They're elves. They're the "Santa's little elves" kind of elves, instead of the Tolkien kind of elves.

I made a homebrew setting once where an ancient gnomish empire ruled the world with ironclads and steam-driven power armor and other technological marvels.

Food, mostly

A booster seat?

Gnomes in D&D are almost explicitly a representation of a whole lot of various short fey creatures that aren't dwarves or aren't the nonmagical tiny humans.

Hold on, let me get my post from the last time I had to explain this shit for a bunch of mythologically ignorant people.

>Gnomes as they are conceived in D&D, and even more so in PF, are basically a slight reimagination of the romanticized version of gnomes from late 19th and early 20th century literature. While Paracelsus came up with the term of gnome for a type of earth spirit (and bastardizing the latin in the process, genomos), his use of the word was quickly supplanted by the Romanticists as basically another term for short slightly ugly chthonic fairy creatures, aka goblins. This is where current ideas on Gnomes come from, with D&Ds ideas of them as chthonic fey people. The ability to talk to animals, their living in burrows and earth works, and their illusion magic mimicking the glamours of fairies, all point to being based on these old descriptions.

>In addition, much of what we think of when it comes to dwarves in myth has little to do with modern ideas of dwarves, where in some cases the D&D gnome better fits the description of these dwarves. In fact much of modern dwarves takes more from Tolkien's severe reinterpretation of old myths than from the old myths.

>Halflings are really only extent in very certain myths of literal small or tiny humans. These can be found in cultures across the world, but you have to be careful with terminology as they are sometimes referred to as dwarves or gnomes.

Gnomes bring to the table playing as a fey creature but safely and with limits. Halflings are for child sized stealth people, and dwarves which are very different looking than either of the other two, are basically tolkien's dwarves.

I agree. Gnomes are stupid. It's not really the fact that they're relatively funny shortstacks, is that the either take shit from halflings (the cozy angle) or elves (muh nature magic).
I guess there is the steampunk angle but I don't like how much it's comical - besides, it does stack with dwarves' engeneering angle.

Funny thing, the domvoi/gnomestic gnome concept is pretty interesting and I think it should be used WAY more in fantasy nowdays (oddly enough, in urban fantasy, but I digress)... but I don't see it as having too much possibilities in DND, especially considering that slavery is bad in it. So, I like gnomes, but I don't think they work.

i dare to say one could crank the nature fery angle, but as gnomes are sadly it doesn't work. My spider-sense is that you should give attention to (wood) elves in differetiating them more.

Gnomes historically in the context of D&D began as another kind of dwarf in Chainmail, statistically identical.

When D&D came around, and there was a thing called Race as Class, Gnomes filled in this position of blending elves and dwarves mechanically.

Since then, they've been constantly iterated on, to the popularized tinker gnomes, to they more magical fay gnomes. They've now been grandfathered into the game.

This reduction of an argument doesn't really work because you're stripping out the connotations.

Dwarves are the people who drink and mine a lot. Humans historically have done that too. Does that make dwarves less special?

Gnomes, Dwarves, and Elves, have these mythopeic underpinnings to them. A gnome is understood to be a sort earthy but not in a dwarfin way, and magical but not in an elfin way. As shown from different iterations of gnomes, their earthy types could be the straight up mechanical and almost scifi gnomes that are unlike the blue collar dwarf miners. Or their magic types could be tricky illusionists of the forest that speak to the smalll beasts, unlike the arcane and druidic noble elves.

Personally, I hate the tolkienesque racial distinctions.

Fairie should be the race of various nature spirits, and amongst them are dryads, salamanders, gnomes, sylphs, so forth and so on. Not just a bunch of humanoids, but outsiders.

Also, tolkien dwarves are insufferable, and hobbit/haflings are unnecessary.

Gnomes can take all of those tropes and put them together. Have a small child who is beastly strong, into mining and playing in the mud, and obtaining money, who also doesn't make a sound when he moves, is into playing tricks and telling jokes, and loves drinking, but can't well. He is a spirit of earth as well (Which just means tied to a rock, or a pick-axe, or something earthy.)

Now give him a beard. Gnome.

And that is IMO way better than Gimli clone 1 million.
A gnome is a dwarf , is a halfling ,is a faerie, is an earth spirit.

Combine all 3 together, and throw earth genasi in there for good measure, and now you don't have to have 100,000 little sub races of little people.
Just one that has ALL the flavor.
Like they originally did.

That's gnomes in general. Paracelsus invented them as earth elementals, they absorbed characteristics from there from being identified with older mythologies with underground people, then they kind of surged at the same time fairy started to mean ethereal bug girl, developing as a direct opposite to that like a comic book nemesis. They were Bizarro pixies since Victoria.

Dwarves are short and fighty, halflings are short and crafty, gnomes are short and magical.

>Does that make dwarves less special?
Yes. If that's what dwarves are in your setting, then they're not special.

Clearly dwarves aren't just that. The point is that you can have something be a defining trait of one race while still being present in others.

I like Gnomes being associated with soil, while dwarves are associated with stone and elves with trees.

In my setting? Gnomes have nothing in common with halflings except stature. Halflings are semi-nomadic gypsies content to let the world pass by without making any real impact on it themselves.

The big difference between gnomes and dwarves is that dwarves are traditionalists, whereas gnomes are innovative. Dwarves are lagging behind on the changes in technology that are occurring in my world - gunpowder, clockwork, and the like. They actively consider such to be nonsense. When faced with a problem, a dwarf would rather find a solution that has worked in the past and will only attempt to create something new after having exhausted all other options. They are also just generally, actively opposed to change.

Gnomes, by contrast, are at the forefront of technological innovation, rivaled only by humans and kobolds. They invented gunpowder, and though they didn't weaponize it at first, once humans and kobolds did gnomes quickly caught on and even made improvements (humans invented canons and hand canons, kobolds created matchlocks, gnomes figured out flintlocks). Gnomes are also experts at clockwork and other such tinkering. When faced with a problem, a gnome will poke and test it, trying to find a new solution first unless a previous one is obviously applicable.

(My dwarves are basically meant to be pre-Ivan the Terrible Russia, whereas my gnomes could be likened to Renaissance Italy)

God, I hate faggots likes you, OP. My GM thinks the same thing, but just replaced them with kobolds. And not even the dragon kind: the hairy earth spirit kind.

I'm sorry that I like gnomes and think they're physically and and culturally distinct enough from halflings and dwarves (which aren't even that short). Now, bugger off.

I really like what 4E did to gnomes which is basically make them PTSD-riddled innawoods refugees from the Feywild that escaped their fomorian masters using guilde, illusions, and trickery. Honestly, they're basically just an entire short race dedicated to being Finns.

>What's the point of gnomes, Veeky Forums?

I like Dwarves. They're all just Dwarves.

Dwarves live in the mountain, Gnomes live in the woods on the mountain, and Halflings live in the valley, beyond the woods, on the mountain, but they are all Dwarves.

underrated post

Gnomes will cobble my shoes if I feed them porridge.

...

I had a crafter Rogue Gnome who I got permission to take expertise in leatherworking craft skill.

I literally did this. I would fix someone's shit if they fed me. Since everybody used light armour, and the GM is big on wear and tear of armour and clothes (which is fucking annoying), I got a ton of meals from the party in exchange of me fixing their armours and shoes.

I'd argue the reverse: halflings don't bring anything to the table that gnomes don't and are only there because Tolkien mentioned them. Gnomes have a more prominent place in European folklore but Tolkien didn't mention them.

I'll keep saying it: Fantasy needs to move out of Tolkien's basement. Tolkien is a fantasy icon because he did research, not because he copied earlier authors.

All I know is FR's best characters are gnomes
>grobnar gnomehands
>jan jansen

I love the streotypical toomuchtalkingforhisowngoodtypeofgnomes can't have enough of them and I wish we seen them more.

To make Gnome Barbarians wielding dual handaxes and take half damage from weapons and have amazing saves from spells.

Same as Kendar. They act as a filter for That Guys.

Why is it that people will accept any number of creatures taller than humans, but the moment you have more than two that are shorter they turn into raving idiots?

They deserve the same horrible and painful fate that the halflings deserve.

I prefer to have "gnomes" simply be a subculture of halflings, and not even called gnomes. Instead, I reserve that name for earth elemental spirits comparable to salamanders, sylphs, and undines as far as their magicalness and power level.

>gnome players just want to play short dudes with stupid hats
>gnome players doing their "gnome voice"
>its just a shitty welsh accent
>garden gnomes started in Germany

Probably the most shameful thing Germany is known for. :(

So, query, if you had to play in a game with gnomes featuring prominently, which would you prefer?

Krynnish Tinker Gnomes (motormouthed divinely cursed bungling inventors)?

4e/Feywild Gnomes (escaped fey slaves who use illusions to hide from their magical giant captors)?

Golarion Gnomes (chaotic fey folk who seek out constant stimulation or else they "bleach" and die a painful death)?

Warcraft already cracked this conundrum honestly

Personally, I would rank my preferences Feywild Gnomes, Golarion Gnomes, No Gnomes, Krynnish Tinker Gnomes.

4e's Feywild gnomes were the first gnomes to actually be interesting to me, Golarion gnomes are too Kender-like for my tastes, and Krynnish Tinker Gnomes need to die in an eruption of Mount Nevermind caused by their stupidity .

They're a folklore accurate depiction of dwarfs, for those who don't want the entire race to be made up of movie Gimli.

I like gnomes as actual garden gnome looking guys, rather than little weird fey children. I usually have them as a subrace of dwarf, or a race that fills both roles of absent dwarfs and halflings. I like them when they're jolly and wise, but not lolrandumb wizards or steampunk mechanics.

Well if I'm running a campaign with niche races like Dwarves then the Dwarves are going to be the only ones doing the mining because they're built for it. I can understand your point, I just don't agree with it. Besides that, those descriptions aren't relevant to the settings I make

Gnomes represent a different type of Elves, the Seelie Courts and shoemakers.

I don't think we need orcs, orges, and trolls any more than we need dwarves, gnomes, and halflings.

A disgustingly large capacity for magic. They are the elves of the small people world.

Feywild gnomes, no contest. Golarion gnomes do not work well a PCs and I hate tinker anything. That's a personality type not an entire fucking race.

There was a book published in 1976 purporting to be a guide to gnomes as if they really existed. The guy basically created an entire gazetteer about them. It was sold to non-gaming audiences and was a huge hit. 1e and 2e incorporated them into the game for fan demand. By the time 3 came around the gnome scene was dead so they pulled them. If you are on Veeky Forums you will probably really enjoy that book, and its pdf can be found online. This is the book I'm talking about: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnomes_(book)

>By the time 3 came around the gnome scene was dead so they pulled them

You need to check your 3rd Edition Player's Handbook again, because gnomes are right in it in the races section. In 3.5, the iconic bard was a gnome named Gimble; in 3.0 a gnome was one of two iconic wizards (specifically an illusionist named Nebin). And gnomes are very important to Eberron.

It was 4e that pulled them and half-orcs, so that it could instead push dragonborn and draenei.

Gnomes and half-orcs were part of core in 4e, delayed until PHB2 along with several expected classes for the sake of reinforcing the idea that "everything is core" (i.e. selling more books)

How is that character in your image not a halfling? Aren't gnomes supposed to be stubby? There really is no reason to have them.

>draenei
That's the wrong game entirely m8

I imagine he's making joke about 4e tieflings being draenei ripoffs. I still liked them.

>Dragonborn exist because furries were upset you couldn't be a dragon in Dungeons & Dragons
I'm upset that I can't be a dungeon, where is my Dungeonborn race?

Gnomes are fine but halflings should be replaced by Kobolds.

It's really sad that Blizzard gained enough influence to be able to force the properties it ripped off to rip it off right back. Their design sensibilities as a company are absolutely atrocious. Love Tieflings, though.

Except once again, furries don't like them because no tails and imbalanced human/anthro qualities.

Furries go draconian, half dragon, lizardfolk, or kobold.

Kobolds are a crime against nature

Found the halfling

And yet they're still more popular than gnomes

Lizardfolk and kobolds are based. I like the concept of dragonborn but I think they look terrible. A lot of official D&D art makes the subjects look crappy, though--not due to a lack of skill, but because of bad aesthetic sense.

Found the lizardfucker

You say that like it's a bad thing.

No Tails and plantigrade feet are bad qualities with a head that huge and monstrous.

Halflings are mundane
Gnomes come from they Fey

It’s like the human/elf distinction

So why do we have two sets of humans and elves, demarcated by size? It's very silly.

These are the warped minds that advocate for kobolds

Technically plantigrade feet are the best choice for anything with human posture and as heavy/heavier than us, and a tail would be useless if balancing is not a major concern.

#noteverykoboldfag

I play Orcs. I don’t know. Kill em all for all I care. I was just pointing out Halflings are to Humans as Gnomes are to Elves

>Half-Orcs are only above Gnomes
Fuck. I get to be semi-unique at least

I thought being unique was a bad thing on Veeky Forums

While "best" I doubt digitigrade would be too terrible for a humanoid considering theropods rested all their weight on two legs.

Pointed ears are useless, they're still neat. So are tails.

If gnomes are the elves of short people, who are the dwarves of tall people?

>By the time 3 came around the gnome scene was dead, so they pulled them in 4.
Anyway, check out the book, the illustrations alone are amazing, let alone the fine detail touch on the lore. I'll never forget reading it that first time, mostly because of the topless gnome female about halfway in.

I'd guess dwarves.

So dwarves are the connecting factor between the tall and short races?

Are they the main characters?

I usually portray gnomes as borderline nature spirits (to the point where it's questionable that they should really be playable), compared to halflings which are just very rural short people. I really hate "tinker" gnomes with a passion though
mechanically they're the very sneaky race, but fluff wise they're mostly just the innocent one that finds a way to get by just about anywhere. I think it's a good thing for the atmosphere if every race doesn't have some ancient magic legacy or collapsed empire

Yes.

Only if you’re a furry or elf

Theropods had a horizontal posture, which distributed weight differently, lessening the forces on the leg joints when in motion.

Orcs.

Kek, this made me laugh out loud user

Goblins are to orcs as halflings are to humans as gnomes are to elves. Every race has a mutant midget variant. Dwarves are missing their human-sized counterparts.

How does one acquire knowledge like this and be able to apply it to hypothetical situations?

Dwarves aren't actually midgets. They're just shorter than humans

Huh. I really wouldn't have imagined fighters and rogues would both be markedly more commonly played than wizards.

So what's missing is the doubly short dwarf counterpart?

You need to think and plan to be a wizard. Spellbooks are a pain to both understand and memorize. Most people just want to hit things.

Annoyance

Now if they were classic gnomes, of the Earth elemental variety, that might actually be of interest.

...

Gnomes? Proportionally gnomes seem to be closer to dwarves than elves. Squat, swarthy, bearded etc. The mini equivalent for elves could be faeries

The chart includes multiclassing and it's easier to dip into martials than casters.

I like gnomes more than halflings for the halfling role, to be honest, and it makes me laugh that a straight-up Tolkein-specific race is somehow more legitimate to some people than the mythical one like what the elves and dwarves he made were based on.

Gnomes are Paracelsus' idea tough. It's true that they kinda accumulated ideas from fairies and domestic goblins and whatnot, but it's a very, very modern conoction.
In a sense, "fairy" gnomes aren't that older than "tinker" gnomes.

Any anons got these "Guide to Gnomes" books? I've heard of them, since they inspired The World of David the Gnome, but I've never seen them.

No, gnomes and half-orcs were pulled from the first PHB 1 because they'd been poorly fluffed and/or statted for the last couple of editions and WoTC wanted to give them decent identities instead of just including them for the sake of the Grandfather Clause. And it worked; 4e Gnomes and Half-Orcs had far better crunch and fluff.

Likewise, the only 3e PHB 1 classes left out of the 4e version were the Sorcerer (which was, A: a 3e invention, and B: always just a wizard with a weirder spellcasting mechanic), and and the Bard (which people had resoundingly derided as either too silly or too weak in the past edition.

Again, both got a huge buff and really worked as their own thing in 4e.

Fun fact: Draenei were made by ripping off D&D in the first place - they're basically a Mystaran race called Diaboli, except changed from inter-planar refugees into inter-planetary refugees.

>Any anons got these "Guide to Gnomes" books? I've heard of them, since they inspired The World of David the Gnome, but I've never seen them.

On paper, in another language, and not here.

Funfacts:

>between a third and an half of second book is GNOME ENGENEERING. Seriously. It's pretty awesome tough, really give you a feeling "ah, I see, this might work for 15 cm persons".

>while the books should be read by any fantasy reader, gnomes there have elevated mary-sueism to an art and beyond. I honestly don't know where to find something on that level, they're so incredibly "better than you" that you can't even hate them. Kirito, the Noldor, whatever, they can't compete.

>surprinsingly small "magic", actually how it's treated might be interesting for urban fantasy fags (the actual execption is the dreams but I won't spoiler)

>gnomes are basically the ultimate intelligence agency, there is a fucking gnome that was a buddy to Napoleon, one wonders if Teddy Roosevelt had a gnome friend

>Likewise, the only 3e PHB 1 classes left out of the 4e version were the Sorcerer (which was, A: a 3e invention, and B: always just a wizard with a weirder spellcasting mechanic), and and the Bard (which people had resoundingly derided as either too silly or too weak in the past edition.
And monk, leading to the PHB3 psionic monk, my personal favorite interpretation

>Again, both got a huge buff and really worked as their own thing in 4e.
Well, 4e is considered a failure so...

Dwarves are warrior short-men
Halflings are rogue short-men
It's pretty obviously you need a magical short-men race to complete the pattern.
The real question is big-men
You got orcs for warrior big-men
You elves for wizard big-men
What are the big-men for rogues?

Napoleon actually did claim to have a supernatural adviser whose description was evocative of a gnome.