# Gnomes! (HUH) What are they good for? Absolutely nothing!



## Dungeoneer (Jan 5, 2014)

Gnomes. Let's talk about gnomes. I don't get the appeal. 

First of all, what niche are they supposed to fill? They live underground and they make stuff, like dwarves. But I guess they're thinner? And more annoying? Or maybe they're just halflings that live underground. Regardless, they don't seem to have a well-defined place in the small races ecosystem. 

Is there some fantasy literature tradition they are supposed to reference? If there is I'm not familiar with it. When someone says 'gnome', I think of this guy:




That's right ladies! He's single!

Don't get me wrong, I have players that like to play gnomes. Interestingly they almost always play gnome rogues. That may be just for mechanical reasons. Although to me halfling is a perfectly good alternative.

Why do people like to play gnomes? And how did a lawn ornament get to be a core race in D&D?!?

They're the only race I have considered banning at my table. Somehow I feel like having gnomes in the game automatically makes the whole game sillier. Anyone else feel this way?


----------



## The Human Target (Jan 5, 2014)

They're a race with no real identity.

But I like them.

Silly? 

Sure.

But the game could use a good dash of silly.


----------



## LucasC (Jan 5, 2014)

I'm with you, don't have much use for gnomes.  I won' ban them, but they really don't seem to have a good place.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 5, 2014)

> Is there some fantasy literature tradition they are supposed to reference?




Well, in many mythic traditions, dwarf, elf, gnome, kobold, pixie, goblin and other terms are used somewhat interchangeably as kinds of fey creatures.  It's not until you get into late 19th and early 20th century writings that you start seeing harder distinctions.  Modern fiction and RPG writers just latched onto particular ones they liked and ran with them...or made their own.

With D&D in particular, the problem wasn't so much that gnomes couldn't have a niche, it was that the designers made an elf for every ecosystem.


----------



## the Jester (Jan 5, 2014)

Dwarves are gold-loving miners with staunch traditions of fighting.

Halflings are- well, it depends on the game. Talk about no identity! Are they hobbits, 1e style? Kender? Are they 3e style wagon-traveling Gypsie types? For the sake of argument, let's say that they fit all of these molds: basically, they're homey, but kind of rapscallions.

Gnomes are the tricksters, using illusion and enchantment to hide themselves, conceal their homes and mislead enemies. Many people who run afoul of gnomes never even know that they have done so; they "end up" stumbling upon a group of monsters or something that leads them away. Gnomes are the illuminati, working behind the scenes, controlling the money supply, manipulating political factions and religious hierarchies.


----------



## Yora (Jan 5, 2014)

Once you make gnomes non-silly and don't use dwarves in the setting, gnomes become an interesting race to populate the world. The problem with dwarves is that they are just so terribly boring and so incredibly stereotyped that nobody has any clue how to freshen them up in any way.
Dwarves are always the scotish-viking, racist, alcoholic miners. Always have been, and most probably ever will be. There are so many settings that tried new and different things with all the races, but dwarves are always 100% identical. Even Eberron, which really subverted everything with it's Orc druids, halfling barbarians riding dinosaurs, and necromantic jungle elves, still has dwarves that are the same as always.
One could argue that Dark Sun dwarves are different, but they seem to have lost every single aspect of dwarves except being a bit short and called dwarves. Is that even still a dwarf?

But once you got rid of the dwarves, there's an interesting niche to fill into which gnomes just fit in perfectly. Without being racist alcoholics.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Jan 5, 2014)

I agree that gnomes are a bit redundant in a world with dwarves and halflings.

On the other hand, they make pretty good dragon appetizers!


----------



## The Human Target (Jan 5, 2014)

To be fair, D&D is fuuuuuuuuull of redundancy.

Don't just blame gnomes.


----------



## RedGalaxy00 (Jan 5, 2014)

Gnomes, in my opinion, are suppose to represent mortal's connection to the mystical, and nature.

Now, I could be wrong, and if I am, tell me, but Gnomes are free-spirited, and are the only race who don't let fear stop them from experiencing new things, and at the end of the day, basically any and all other races will care what there neighboring nations, and races think of them, gnomes do not. To use a quote as an example... 



> Gnomes can have the same concerns and motivations as members of other  races, but just as often they are driven by passions and desires that  non-gnomes see as eccentric at best, and nonsensical at worst. A gnome  may risk his life to taste the food at a giant's table, to reach the  bottom of a pit just because it would be the lowest place he's ever  been, or to tell jokes to a dragon—and  to the gnome those goals are as worthy as researching a new spell,  gaining vast wealth, or putting down a powerful evil force.
> 
> Gnomes, in turn, are often amazed how alike other common, civilized races are. It seems stranger to a gnome that humans and elves share so many similarities than that the gnomes do not.  Indeed, gnomes often confound their allies by treating everyone who is  not a gnome as part of a single, vast non-gnome collective race.




That was gotten from the Pathfinder description for Gnome, on the d20pfsrd site. Gnomes do what they want, when they want, without care for consequences. They have deep love of art, and music, over humans. They know more of magic and nature then Elves. They understand machinery and history better then dwarves... and at the end of the day, they only want to learn more. That is what drives most to adventure, and travel. That promise of knowledge they don't yet possess.

On top of that, they are open with what they know, usually. You see, the greatest dwarf secrets are usually hidden in the deepest caverns, and mines. The most powerful of magics are kept by elves in there forest cities. But a gnomes understanding for things are usually expressed in every word they speak, though most don't understand it, because they're different.

Now, if your talking about Gnomes from a "What class fits them best"... usually something like sorcerer, alchemist, gunslinger, and druid...

Hope that helped. (FYI: Gnome = favorite race)


----------



## Quickleaf (Jan 5, 2014)

[MENTION=91777]Dungeoneer[/MENTION] What's the difference between a gnome and your momma? Yeah, I don't know either 

I had two players run gnomes in a large party; one played a trickster type bard and the other a mad scientist with a crossbow artificer. And those two archetypes capture the gist of the D&D gnome distinct from dwarves and hobbits well enough. What more do you want?


----------



## Moorcrys (Jan 5, 2014)

I would argue that halflings have just as big of a problem. They've changed more than gnomes over several editions. Ok so they're hobbits. No? Oh they're like talkative inquisitive 'acquirers' like kender. No? Oh they're wandering gypsies. No? Oh they're river folk? Where the hell did that come from? No? 

I've always gotten that gnomes are the best mix between the elves and the dwarves. And able to get along with both. Hardy and magical. Lovers of mining, gems, and also the green. Oh, and a little devious when crossed. No more ridiculous than a race that refuses to wear shoes so that foot hair is their most distinguishing feature . ;-)


----------



## Yora (Jan 5, 2014)

RedGalaxy00 said:


> Gnomes, in my opinion, are suppose to represent mortal's connection to the mystical, and nature.
> 
> Now, I could be wrong, and if I am, tell me, but Gnomes are free-spirited, and are the only race who don't let fear stop them from experiencing new things, and at the end of the day, basically any and all other races will care what there neighboring nations, and races think of them, gnomes do not. To use a quote as an example...



My "interpretation", if you want to call it that, of gnomes is as a race of Earth-druids. They are a shamanistic society led by druids, living in extended families sharing large underground homes with direct access to the surface. They are not an Underdark race, but rather stick to hills and forests, with mountain settlements being mostly mining opperations.
Their specialized trades are mining and metalworking similar to dwarves, since they are the race most used to underground constructions. (Apart from goblins, but that's a whole new issue.) But in addition, they also have strong traditions of herbalism and alchemy, which I think is an appropriate equivalent for mechanical engineering in a low-tech setting.
Generally they are honest and well meaning, but they are well aware of their physical weakness and rely heavily on stealth and deception when their survival is on the line. If possible in any way, they will never fight on battlefields not chosen by them and use mostly ambushes and retreat before the enemy can organize and properly fight back. If needed, they will retreat or surrender to fight another day, when conditions are more in their favor.

This kind of gets in the niche of halflings, but I don't have any of those either.


----------



## JRRNeiklot (Jan 5, 2014)

Gnomes have sucked since 2nd edition.  The 1e gnome kicks ass.  No ability score penalties, great save bonuses, speak with burrowing mammals, great ac against virtually every humanoid larger than an orc, and they are the only race capable of being a multiclass illusionist.  If UA is used, a cleric/illusionist is a very nasty combination.  They can also (if a fighter or thief or multiclass thereof) use a long sword one handed.  Later editions nerfed a very cool race imo.  Post 1e, the gnome has too many mechanical deficiencies to make it worth playing, regardless of the flavor involved.


----------



## (Psi)SeveredHead (Jan 6, 2014)

Dungeoneer said:


> Gnomes. Let's talk about gnomes. I don't get the appeal.
> 
> First of all, what niche are they supposed to fill? They live underground and they make stuff, like dwarves. But I guess they're thinner? And more annoying? Or maybe they're just halflings that live underground. Regardless, they don't seem to have a well-defined place in the small races ecosystem.
> 
> ...




I didn't like gnomes until Eberron. Both 4e and Pathfinder also took steps to make them "worthwhile" and serious.

They weren't in Lord of the Rings, which meant TSR and WotC had to invent hooks for them, which they were very slow in doing. They became a weird mishmash between dwarves and elves with a collection of abilities with no unifying theme (close to nature and good at illusions and good at machinery and like to prank people). FR gnomes seemed like nothing but a joke, unless R. A. Salvatore was writing about a minor character. Dragonlance gnomes seemed like a joke, period.

Currently they're close to nature, but are still distinct from elves/eladrin (in 4e and Pathfinder). The Eberron version wasn't really fey in 3.5 but they didn't lose anything going into 4e.

I doubt anyone at TSR or WotC was thinking "lawn gnomes" but probably "small spellcaster". Starting in 3e even that niche was worn away.


----------



## Minigiant (Jan 6, 2014)

To me, gnomes felt like the middleclass of the nonhuman world.  More importantly the elven world. I like them as originally mixed in elven society as the underclass. The elves did the noble and military ends of the society while the gnome did the other stuff. Then when the elves split up, the gnomes split into rock and forest and sat on the outskirts of the elven subrace they were closer in mind to.

Although in my own setting, the gnomes rule the Land of the Fey. The elves got kicked out because of their aloofness to fey matters and their obsession with their civil war and orc hatred.

Overall gnomes feel like the "take action" magical race. Elves talk and think about things too long. Dwarves are stubborn and slow to trust. You don't need years of friendship or binding contracts to get gnomes to do something. I tend to encourage dwarf and elf players to act more stereotypical and stubborn and don't do this to gnomes. Well, gnome. I only DMed 1 gnome and played with 1 gnome.


----------



## Remathilis (Jan 6, 2014)

Gnomes are interesting until they become player characters.

Gnomes SHOULD be a shy, reclusive race of miners and crafter who (unlike dwarves) use strange magic to hide from those bigger than them and are wary of humans. They craft strange magical items, brew odd potions (which sometimes have unintended side-effects), play mischievous tricks (that only they find funny) and are expert jewelers and gemcrafters. Above all, they should be aloof, reclusive, alien. Not quite an ally of humans like elves or dwarves, but no friend of evil. 

That kinda got lost when they became a PHB race, and thus familiar. Then they become illusion-casting dwarves.


----------



## GX.Sigma (Jan 6, 2014)

I think the mischievous trickster gnomes are D&D's version of the traditional elves, and the tinkering rock gnomes are D&D's version of the traditional dwarfs. D&D's Elves and Dwarves are closer to the "epic" versions (seen in Tolkien's work) which have become standard in high fantasy.

According to Tolkien's mythology, the non-human races "diminished" after the time of the Ring, eventually becoming like the diminutive creatures from folklore. So maybe a forest gnome is just a really really old Elf. Actually, D&D elves were originally shorter than humans, so maybe they were already a little bit diminished...

I suppose the same could be said for goblins (diminished versions of hobgoblins) and maybe kobolds (diminished versions of lizardfolk)? Maybe even gibberlings (diminished versions of orcs)? There's a campaign idea in here somewhere...


----------



## Dungeoneer (Jan 6, 2014)

Quickleaf said:


> @_*Dungeoneer*_ What's the difference between a gnome and your momma? Yeah, I don't know either




YOUR mother was a kender! And your grandfather smelt of elderberries! 



> I had two players run gnomes in a large party; one played a trickster type bard and the other a mad scientist with a crossbow artificer. And those two archetypes capture the gist of the D&D gnome distinct from dwarves and hobbits well enough. What more do you want?




See, to me 'trickster bard' and 'mad scientists' are character types. They're not an entire race. 

Are ALL gnomes trickster bards and mad scientists? Because that would make for one doomed race.

I feel like I could envision what a dwarven town or a halfling village would look like. But a group of gnomes living together? No idea. I have no sense of them as a society.

When I pick up a setting book and turn to the short sidebar on gnomes, I never see anything about their everyday lives or their history. Do gnomes revere an ancient hero gnome? Did the gnome army march out to join the great war? How many lands does the gnomish emperor rule?

When was the last time a party stumbled upon an ancient ruin only to discover it must have been constructed by gnomes? I'll bet it doesn't happen often!

Other races get a back story, a history, a description of their culture. And then it's, "Oh! and there's gnomes. They're quirky and wacky! Hooray!"


----------



## JRRNeiklot (Jan 6, 2014)

Where did this "trickster" crap come from anyway?  I don't remember that before 3e, though I barely played 2nd edition.


----------



## Dungeoneer (Jan 6, 2014)

Moorcrys said:


> I would argue that halflings have just as big of a problem. They've changed more than gnomes over several editions. Ok so they're hobbits. No? Oh they're like talkative inquisitive 'acquirers' like kender. No? Oh they're wandering gypsies. No? Oh they're river folk? Where the hell did that come from? No?




Eh, all of those except the wandering gypsies are already in Tolkien. Bilbo Baggins was a fast-talking burglar, Smeagol was one of the river folk. I think 'halfling' stretches far enough to cover all those definitions. Which is why it's a legitimate race.



JRRNeiklot said:


> Gnomes have sucked since 2nd edition.  The 1e gnome kicks ass.  No ability score penalties, great save bonuses, speak with burrowing mammals, great ac against virtually every humanoid larger than an orc, and they are the only race capable of being a multiclass illusionist.  If UA is used, a cleric/illusionist is a very nasty combination.  They can also (if a fighter or thief or multiclass thereof) use a long sword one handed.  Later editions nerfed a very cool race imo.  Post 1e, the gnome has too many mechanical deficiencies to make it worth playing, regardless of the flavor involved.




That's interesting, I did not know that. Although I'm trying to visualize exactly how a gnome would use a long sword one-handed. Were they much larger in 1e?!?



Minigiant said:


> Although in my own setting, the gnomes rule the Land of the Fey. The elves got kicked out because of their aloofness to fey matters and their obsession with their civil war and orc hatred.




Hey at least you HAVE a back-story for your gnomes!


----------



## Dungeoneer (Jan 6, 2014)

(Psi)SeveredHead said:


> I didn't like gnomes until Eberron. Both 4e and Pathfinder also took steps to make them "worthwhile" and serious.
> 
> They weren't in Lord of the Rings, which meant TSR and WotC had to invent hooks for them, which they were very slow in doing. They became a weird mishmash between dwarves and elves with a collection of abilities with no unifying theme (close to nature and good at illusions and good at machinery and like to prank people). FR gnomes seemed like nothing but a joke, unless R. A. Salvatore was writing about a minor character. Dragonlance gnomes seemed like a joke, period.
> 
> ...




Yeah I'm not really knocking them mechanically. I'm most familiar with the 4e lawn ornament, er, gnome, which could turn invisible for a turn at first level. Not too shabby, but that's not what bugs me about 'em.

Like you said, they're a mish-mash of traits that elves/dwarves/halflings aren't using at the moment.


----------



## JRRNeiklot (Jan 6, 2014)

Dungeoneer said:


> That's interesting, I did not know that. Although I'm trying to visualize exactly how a gnome would use a long sword one-handed. Were they much larger in 1e?!?




Nope.  3'9" is max height for a gnome.  Gnomes and dwarves can use any one handed weapon as long as it is not longer than they are tall, due to their stockiness.  Base height for a gnome is 42 inches, plus or minus 1-3 inches.  A long sword is 42 inches long, so as long as you don't roll badly for height, you can use a long sword.


----------



## Dungeoneer (Jan 6, 2014)

JRRNeiklot said:


> Nope.  3'9" is max height for a gnome.  Gnomes and dwarves can use any one handed weapon as long as it is not longer than they are tall, due to their stockiness.  Base height for a gnome is 42 inches, plus or minus 1-3 inches.  A long sword is 42 inches long, so as long as you don't roll badly for height, you can use a long sword.



So in 1e, gnomes and dwarves could use oversize weapons... because they were fat?!?

*boggles*


----------



## Nellisir (Jan 6, 2014)

Oh joy. Is it that time already?  Pardon me while I reprint my post from the last "what's the point to gnomes" thread....

Here's a slightly more exhaustive rundown of gnomes in my campaign. I feel these are true to the spirit of gnomes as presented in most of D&D, but have their own identity separate from elves, dwarves, and halflings.

Gnomes live in the wild border lands, in hills and moors and woodlands. They are highly valued by adventurers and other who sojourn into the wild places, for a gnomish village is often the closest and safest refuge to a dungeon or ruin. In the summer months most gnomes live in small family steadings, or warrens, scattered throughout their domain, and in the winter they gather in large winterhalls dug below the roots of the deep forest. The winterhalls are where gnomes keep their records, libraries, and schools, and the most accomplished gnomish spellcasters remain in residence here throughout the year.

Gnomes are independent, preferring their own rulers to those of other races, and both adaptable and militant when necessary, able to field short-bow and hand-axe wielding guerrilla fighters as well as companies of crossbowmen and pikemen. Their proficiency in digging and tunneling allows them to quickly seed a battlefield with pits, spikes, ditches, and ramparts, as well as sap fortifications and enemy emplacements.

They are clever, careful, and cunning, fond of puzzles, riddles, and esoteric lore. They consider themselves guardians of knowledge the other races have forgotten, and are driven by a sometimes almost pathological need to "know more". In a well-balanced gnome (and most are) this drive manifests itself as a constant curiosity and inquiry into the world, and is lightened by a childlike sense of levity and joy. They do not hoard knowledge, but seek experience for its own sake. Gnomes who become bards or minstrels do so to travel and interact with people, and satisfy their curiosity in that way.

It is not difficult, however, for a gnome to become consumed by their thirst for knowledge. This doesn't usually manifest as cackling, handwringing evil so much as a cold amorality; nothing matters except their obsession. Some, like the spriggan or fhmor, manifest this through greed or hoarding; others with intricate deceptions and manipulations. The svartneblin are among these; gnomes that have become so obsessed with deception that their cities contain illusions so deep not even they know what is real, and where interaction between two individuals is so rare and so clouded they kidnap human children to serve them and supplement their numbers, returning and abandoning them to the upper world when they reach adulthood, prematurely wizened and bent, with senses honed by years in a glamoured underworld, and utterly overwhelmed in the sunlight. 

Metagame notes:


I haven't used halflings in my campaigns for years, finding them unheroic and frankly rather boring. I'm reconsidering that decision, but halflings would be rebranded as domovii and described as something like "humanity's familiars", a quasi-fey race that lives in symbosis with humans. In any case, I see the similarities between halflings and gnomes as pretty much height and nothing else.
Gnomes fill some pretty classic fairy-tale roles that aren't filled by the "big four".
I find tinker gnomes grating. Really, really, grating.
Kender are twits*. Gnomes aren't twits. They are curious, even recklessly curious, but they're not fearless, they're not stupid, and they have a plan.
Gnomes as fey is fine, but it's not enough to just say that they are fey. What does that mean? How does "being fey" manifest?
I find it both amusing and depressing that so many people accuse gnomes of being weak imitations of elves and dwarves, as if not being copied from Middle-Earth somehow makes them less original.

Read more: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?333017-Bring-Back-Gnomes!/page4#ixzz2pa1EH0oJ

*I mean this in the very nicest way.


----------



## JRRNeiklot (Jan 6, 2014)

Stocky does not mean fat.  Today's baseball players follow a similar logic.  Mark Mcgwire used a bigger heavier bat than derek Jeter.  Babe Ruth, who was a tiny man by today's standards, was reported to have used a 54 0z bat.  Derek Jeter uses a 32 oz bat.  Guess which one is/was taller?


----------



## the Jester (Jan 6, 2014)

JRRNeiklot said:


> Where did this "trickster" crap come from anyway?  I don't remember that before 3e, though I barely played 2nd edition.





I think it actually started in 1e, in Roger E. Moore's Point of View articles. I could be misremembering, but the 1e DDG says of Garl Glittergold, "...there is another side to Garl than that of the witty adventurer who collapsed the Kobold King's cavern.... Garl is a grim and determined war leader who outthinks as well as outfights his opponents." I suspect Moore riffed off of that.


----------



## Minigiant (Jan 6, 2014)

Dungeoneer said:


> Hey at least you HAVE a back-story for your gnomes!




That was mostly the player's fault.

The elves left in the Fey Lands were just figureheads and skill-less nobles standing over the rock gnome industrial and forest agricultural complex that ran fey economy.

The PCs just failed a quest to protect the Royal Palace from being burned down by drow and their Underdark allies. The gnomes official took over after the PCs failed as the elves were blamed for hiring them.


----------



## billd91 (Jan 6, 2014)

the Jester said:


> I think it actually started in 1e, in Roger E. Moore's Point of View articles. I could be misremembering, but the 1e DDG says of Garl Glittergold, "...there is another side to Garl than that of the witty adventurer who collapsed the Kobold King's cavern.... Garl is a grim and determined war leader who outthinks as well as outfights his opponents." I suspect Moore riffed off of that.




That sounds about right to me because I don't recall much on gnomes being tricksters before Moore's POV article (great set of articles, by the way). 

As far as what the gnome's niche is - to provide a magical counterpart to dwarves fighters and halfling thieves.


----------



## Moorcrys (Jan 6, 2014)

They're also the only demi-human race  in 1st edition that could be illusionists. And the only race that could be a multiclass illusionist/thief. I think that's what the trickster idea grew out of.


----------



## Ryujin (Jan 6, 2014)

Without Gnomes, the whole bloody world would be barefoot. 

One of the problems with races like Gnomes not having a 'niche' is that so many people seem to think that every race has to be in every world. Cut back on the fauna a bit and you can slot Gnomes in pretty easily. If you must throw everything into the mix perhaps consider them to be 'Forest Dwarves', or something similar. Maybe consider them to be Forest Sprites. 

There's always a way to make them fit, if you want to, but it's easier if you don't have the whole bloody zoo traipsing around your campaign.


----------



## Minigiant (Jan 6, 2014)

billd91 said:


> As far as what the gnome's niche is - to provide a magical counterpart to dwarves fighters and halfling thieves.




Yeah, I believe certain point and a few editions later, the races really fell into niches.

Dwarves were fighters, fighter/X, or warrior types of other classes.
Halflings were theives, fighter/theives, thief/X, or a thievy version of other classes.
Elves were bow mages, sword mages, bow or sword fighters, fighter/mages, fighter/mage/thieves, or a bow, sword or magic user of other classes.
Gnomes were illusionist, trickster rogues, or a trickster version of another classes.
Humans were anything.

You could excape your role but people had an expectation of you on first sight.


----------



## Stormonu (Jan 6, 2014)

Prior to 3E, gnomes were the short race that could use magic.  Dwarves were very antimagic and hobbits/halflings had no care/aptitude for it.  When 3E opened up "all races/all classes", gnomes found themselves without an identity.

Perhaps if D&D had stood with dwarves being somewhat antimagical and given gnomes an advantage with magic (and halflings being middling spellcasters), they might still have their niche.  However, with the opening of all classes to all races, gnomes just became a blur of dwarves and halflings.

In the games I've run, I have never had a player attempt a dwarven wizard, bard or sorcerer - but I've seen several gnomish versions.  I've been able to give gnomes a distinctiveness, and I think the spellcasting angle has been one reason for it (roleplaying another).


----------



## RedGalaxy00 (Jan 6, 2014)

Well, this topic has kind of turned into "What are Gnomes, compared to everything else?" Which is a rather excellent question, but to properly answer that, you do have to answer what the other races are first... So, without creating a mile and half long post, here are what I think the core races are, and how they are compared to Gnomes.

-Humans: Humans are by far the simplest of the races. They are usually everywhere, and they can do just about anything. They range greatly, and have no truly determined draw-back. (Humans, to me are usually boring, and I only use if I can't pick a good race for the character...)

-Half-Elves: Out-siders, not really belonging anywhere, and yet, somehow finding a place amongst one kin or the other, usually hiding themselves, and there mixed heritage.

-Half-Orcs: Despised by most, Half-Orcs that are raised by orcs rise in the ranks, and usually take over there tribe due to higher intellect and wisdom. Half-Orcs in civilized society vary almost as much as humans, though they seem to want their end goal just a bit more then the average human, as if trying to prove something. (I like Half-Orc Paladins a lot.)

-Elves: Known to be tree dwelling, and magic loving, elves are usually thought to be generally pompous, and arrogant, though this isn't really the case. It has more to do with the fact that because they out live the other races, they can't seem to bring themselves to care much about affairs of other people, unless it affects them in some way.

-Dwarves: Commonly thought of as drunken miners by the outside world, because they live in caverns older then the oldest forests, and the fact that they love a good ale as much as a shiny gem, Dwarves are actually deep thinkers, and great craftsmen, spending there days working on ways to surpass magic with technology, mainly because they don't find the arcane arts to be backward thinking, compared to the possibilities of science.

-Halflings: When pictured, Halflings are thought of as pipe-smoking hill dwellers, who eat to much, or city scrounging thieves, trying to get that last bit of copper from your purse. However, what they all have in common is there sense of loyalty, and family. Without a doubt in my mind, Halflings always picture home. Every move and thought they make is to better both themselves, and their family waiting for them back home.

-Gnomes: Now these pesky little guys are thought to be strange. They are odder then the "uncaring" elves, or the science loving dwarves. They live in jungles, hills, forests, and mountains, anywhere they can easily tuck themselves away, so they can remain hidden from the world at large, because to them, politics don't matter. Wars are pointless. They care more for the enjoyment live brings, over destruction. This is why, to an outsider, they may appear as tricksters, or pranksters, because really, they're just looking to have fun with the boring 'big folks'. 

Now, while gnomes do live in moderate seclusion from the world around them, they are an insanely curious bunch. Maybe not curious enough ignore fear, or common-sense (entirely), but they will be willing, more often then not, to do something that they haven't done before for one of two reasons, the knowledge gained from having that experience under their belt, or just to say they've done it.

Now, gnomes as a whole, seem to be shoe horned into tinker, druid, or illusionist, but to be perfectly honest, I find the gnome is best fitted as a bard, or a cleric (usually to a neutral god of nature), or the ever despised (or at least to me, they seem to be despised) sorcerer. (If your in pathfinder, any bloodline will work, honestly.)

(I hope I didn't ramble on to much, but anyways, yeah... I guess that's my second cent worth of my two-cents worth.)


----------



## Quickleaf (Jan 6, 2014)

Dungeoneer said:


> YOUR mother was a kender! And your grandfather smelt of elderberries!



Don't make me roll on the random kender pickpocket table!

But as to your point that gnomes aren't expansive enough a concept to account for an entire society - mushroom farming, man!



> When I pick up a setting book and turn to the short sidebar on gnomes, I never see anything about their everyday lives or their history. Do gnomes revere an ancient hero gnome?



Garl Glittergold. Hero turned gnomish deity because of his legendary tricksiness.



> Did the gnome army march out to join the great war?



A. If they did, did anyone see them?
B. If they did, which of their allies will regret it most?



> How many lands does the gnomish emperor rule?



From the dank mushroom fens that border formorian lands to the grassy knolls at the edge of the emerald forest where peasants fear to tred.



> When was the last time a party stumbled upon an ancient ruin only to discover it must have been constructed by gnomes? I'll bet it doesn't happen often!



Blingdenstone? The 'D' series?



> Other races get a back story, a history, a description of their culture. And then it's, "Oh! and there's gnomes. They're quirky and wacky! Hooray!"



Shouldn't it be: here is their backstory, history, culture, and...oh yes...they're quirky and wacky!


----------



## Ryujin (Jan 6, 2014)

RedGalaxy00 said:


> Well, this topic has kind of turned into "What are Gnomes, compared to everything else?" Which is a rather excellent question, but to properly answer that, you do have to answer what the other races are first... So, without creating a mile and half long post, here are what I think the core races are, and how they are compared to Gnomes.
> 
> -Humans: Humans are by far the simplest of the races. They are usually everywhere, and they can do just about anything. They range greatly, and have no truly determined draw-back. (Humans, to me are usually boring, and I only use if I can't pick a good race for the character...)
> 
> ...




If there's one thing that comes to mind, while reading this, it's that the races should be thought of by their cultures, rather than the meta idea that each is better at some specific class/combination than the others are.


----------



## Li Shenron (Jan 6, 2014)

I think two of the most common gnome race concepts are "gnomes as magical trickster good feys" and "gnomes as tech tinkerers".

Personally, I feel that the first concept works better for NPC rather than PC, and the second one is good if you want a more tech-oriented setting with primitive machines, like they have in WoW, but not if you want a more classical medieval basis.

Ergo, I'm not a huge fan of gnomes... Certainly it's a problem to have such different concepts to cover with the same race. Probably the best approach in 5e is to have separate subraces, so they can still be hugely different, but keep the same name.


----------



## TerraDave (Jan 6, 2014)

Small _magical_ feyish people that live underground is pretty common in folklore.  There could be several takers for that spot...but in AD&D, as others have pointed out, gnomes were the only player race that fit it.


----------



## saskganesh (Jan 6, 2014)

I love gnomes.

IMG, their hilly "kingdom" sits bestride a new trade route, which they are happily exploiting. They love gems, making magic, trading, inventions and mischief. They are a race full of eccentrics, are usually "Good" (though watch out for the Redcaps and their giant weasel pets) and live for centuries. They are shrewd diplomats. They are great comic relief. They are excellent sages. Many are good engineers. Some of them are dangerous thieves. Some are also good bankers. 

The current patron of the party is an old gnome alchemist, who is a key figure in a semi-secret adventuring organisation.

I think they work well for my game because the elves are asleep or evil, the dwarves are in the North and the hobbits are placidly hidden away (and hopefully they will stay there). They pretty much fill The Demihuman Niche in the current campaign area.


----------



## Dungeoneer (Jan 6, 2014)

Quickleaf said:


> Don't make me roll on the random kender pickpocket table!
> 
> But as to your point that gnomes aren't expansive enough a concept to account for an entire society - mushroom farming, man!




Great, so now I've injected hippy Disney into my game. 



> A. If they did, did anyone see them?
> B. If they did, which of their allies will regret it most?




I dunno... the allies with the biggest gardens?




> From the dank mushroom fens that border formorian lands to the grassy knolls at the edge of the emerald forest where peasants fear to tred.




Wait I thought they lived underground. Now I'm confused.

Follow up question: who makes the gnomes all their pointy hats?!?


----------



## Dungeoneer (Jan 6, 2014)

*My crazy gnome theory*

OK, you all ready to hear my crazy theory about gnomes? Of course you are. Here it is: gnomes aren't really a race. _Gnomes are two sub-races._

The first gnomes are a sub-race of dwarves with an emphasis on mechanical prowess and tinkering. They still live underground but beards are optional. Call them 'tinker dwarves'.

The second gnomish sub-race are actually a sub-race of elves. They're mischievous and their small size means they prefer evasive tactics to direct combat. They live in the forest near their larger kin. They're 'little elves'. 

There you go. Two separate sub-races... although perhaps they share a common gegnome.


----------



## tuxgeo (Jan 6, 2014)

Dungeoneer said:


> OK, you all ready to hear my crazy theory about gnomes? Of course you are. Here it is: gnomes aren't really a race. _Gnomes are two sub-races._
> 
> The first gnomes are a sub-race of dwarves with an emphasis on mechanical prowess and tinkering. They still live underground but beards are optional. Call them 'tinker dwarves'.
> 
> ...




_Two_ sub-races? How about three or four or five or six? 

We already have the "glammer-gnomes" (illusionists) and "tinker-gnomes" (artificers). In addition, weren't there some "whisper-gnomes" at one point? (And even "deeper-gnomes" in the form of the svirfneblin?) 

And what about the "flatter-gnomes," who specialize in flattery, and who tend to become bards? What about them, eh? 
(Alright, I made up those guys. . . .)


----------



## Ryujin (Jan 6, 2014)

tuxgeo said:


> _Two_ sub-races? How about three or four or five or six?
> 
> We already have the "glammer-gnomes" (illusionists) and "tinker-gnomes" (artificers). In addition, weren't there some "whisper-gnomes" at one point? (And even "deeper-gnomes" in the form of the svirfneblin?)
> 
> ...




Or perhaps you have a race of beings who are dilettantes, by nature. They like having hobbies. Some tinker with machines. Others tinker with magic. Still more like to learn and tell stories, sing, and/or play musical instruments. They are so gifted, or simply monomaniacal, that they tend to excel on the fields in which they 'dabble.'

One race. No sub species. And the result is an interesting society. For example the baker, down the street, happens to entertain on weekends by putting on illusionary 'puppet shows.'


----------



## Herobizkit (Jan 7, 2014)

I hate gnomes with the passionate fire of a thousand suns.

But if I *HAD* to include them in a campaign, I would add them explicitly in a Feywild or Sylvan setting...

... and they would be Tiny instead of Small ...

And they would be Smurfs.


----------



## delericho (Jan 7, 2014)

the Jester said:


> Gnomes are the tricksters, using illusion and enchantment to hide themselves, conceal their homes and mislead enemies.




This.


----------



## exile (Jan 7, 2014)

Did any of you ever watch David the Gnome on Nickelodeon?


----------



## DMZ2112 (Jan 7, 2014)

I tend to think of the core D&D races and classes as elemental.  Dwarves are a fire race and gnomes are an earth race.  That has gone a long way toward differentiating them in my mind.  I have more trouble with halflings, honestly, which is not to say I don't love halflings -- they are just very much a human subrace.


----------



## Dungeoneer (Jan 7, 2014)

DMZ2112 said:


> I tend to think of the core D&D races and classes as elemental.  Dwarves are a fire race and gnomes are an earth race.  That has gone a long way toward differentiating them in my mind.  I have more trouble with halflings, honestly, which is not to say I don't love halflings -- they are just very much a human subrace.




Dwarves are fire?? Wha-?


----------



## DMZ2112 (Jan 8, 2014)

Dungeoneer said:


> Dwarves are fire?? Wha-?




The forge?  Magma?  Molten metal?  I'm not saying it's for everyone, just that gnomes don't have to be skinny dwarves if you don't want them to be.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 8, 2014)

See also, Azer.


----------



## steeldragons (Jan 8, 2014)

I hate to jump on the "trickster" bandwagon, but...*JUMP.* 

They are not only this, of course. But it is the simplest way to generalize them...like 'Dwarves live in mountains and are smiths and miners. Elves live in forests and are archers and magicky folks. Halfings live in fields/rolling pastoral hills and fields...they are, if you will, cultivated nature and, more from their size than any prediliction  to villainy, make natural rogues. So gnomes are the hills and woods that are not cultivated. See the traditional ability to speak to burrowing mammals or the "Gnomes" book depictions of them living with/in the woods and being friends/speaking to the animals thereof. "

They are no more niche or narrow than any other demihuman race. I have never seen or understood the attitude that are "redundant" or "skinny dwarves."


----------



## (Psi)SeveredHead (Jan 8, 2014)

steeldragons said:


> So gnomes are the hills and woods that are not cultivated.




So, just like elves? Not hills, but hills aren't usually very prominent.

Because gnomes weren't in LotR, they have to work _harder_ to establish a niche, and they generally haven't.

Mind you, Eberron and afterward, after several decades, gnomes have finally been given an identity. Being denizens of the untamed woods just tells us they're feyborn.


----------



## the Jester (Jan 8, 2014)

After some thought:

You know who I blame for the gnomes' generally low standing in D&D? Douglas Niles.

Why? Because he's the designer who couldn't be bothered to figure out enough about gnomish culture and traits to give them the 2e Complete Book they deserved. Instead, he shoved halflings and gnomes together into one book- and a crappy one at that. That 2e "brown book" line spawned a great deal of the current lore on the major D&D races. Niles' intellectual and creative laziness, inability to understand the gnomish point of view, unwillingness to take the time to seriously differentiate them from halflings, lack of ambition or whatever it was that made him decide to put the square and round pegs together in the same square hole did a tremendous disservice to gnomes and gnome-fans, one that seemingly reverberates to this day.


----------



## technoextreme (Jan 8, 2014)

Dungeoneer said:


> Is there some fantasy literature tradition they are supposed to reference? If there is I'm not familiar with it. When someone says 'gnome', I think of this guy:



From a literature perspective the original incarnation of them has more to do with the history of science and toxicology than it does with fantasy literature.  They are basically earth elementals.


----------



## steeldragons (Jan 8, 2014)

(Psi)SeveredHead said:


> So, just like elves? Not hills, but hills aren't usually very prominent.
> 
> Because gnomes weren't in LotR, they have to work _harder_ to establish a niche, and they generally haven't.
> 
> Mind you, Eberron and afterward, after several decades, gnomes have finally been given an identity. Being denizens of the untamed woods just tells us they're feyborn.




Well, exactly. They are not a LotR race. But they are prominent throughout many cultures' folklore and, as others have mentioned, "gnome" was often used interchangeably with "elf, dwarf, fairy." I think this real world association works more in their favor than "not in LotR" works against them. 

In 1e and BECM/B-X, when gnomes came on the scene, there was no such thing as "feyborn." That has nothing to do with their indentity. And, even if you want to subscribe to the concept that they are creatures from/of Faerie, they were never only that. 

Just as a point of personal contention, before Eberron, Dragonlance made gnomes into the mad tinkerers that has given way to Eberron's artificers or today's _presumption_ that, as a race, they are mechanically/builder/tinker inclined. In the age when any gnome you encountered could be assumed to be an illusionist/thief, Dragonlance/Krynn said "Nope, they're not about magic at all, that wanna build these steam-powered/mechincal monstrosities." So, no. I reject the assertion that Eberron gave them a separate identity. It simply built off of what was introduced in Dragonlance.


----------



## Dungeoneer (Jan 8, 2014)

the Jester said:


> After some thought:
> 
> You know who I blame for the gnomes' generally low standing in D&D? Douglas Niles.
> 
> Why? Because he's the designer who couldn't be bothered to figure out enough about gnomish culture and traits to give them the 2e Complete Book they deserved. Instead, he shoved halflings and gnomes together into one book- and a crappy one at that. That 2e "brown book" line spawned a great deal of the current lore on the major D&D races. Niles' intellectual and creative laziness, inability to understand the gnomish point of view, unwillingness to take the time to seriously differentiate them from halflings, lack of ambition or whatever it was that made him decide to put the square and round pegs together in the same square hole did a tremendous disservice to gnomes and gnome-fans, one that seemingly reverberates to this day.




Hmm. Would you say that Niles relegated them to a _gnome man's land_? 

I am enjoying how many people are saying "Well obviously, gnomes are X" and then giving a different answer for X. Apparently there's no clear consensus on what gnomes are all about _even among people who like gnomes._

Jester, you may be right about Niles and the gnomes. But every designer has elements of the lore they are less enthusiastic about. The thing is, that just leaves the door open for some other designer to jump in and reinvent the gnome. But apparently no one ever has, at least not in a way that has resonated with the general population.


----------



## DMZ2112 (Jan 8, 2014)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> See also, Azer.




Azer just make my point.  They're elemental dwarves, and where are they?  Not the plane of Earth.


----------



## Tovec (Jan 8, 2014)

DMZ2112 said:


> Azer just make my point.  They're elemental dwarves, and where are they?  Not the plane of Earth.




I thought gargoyles also held a place as "elemental dwarves" and are certainly stone/earth and not fire. Plus after doing some research I can tell you that gnomes have been associated with fire in many distinct writings (my favourite being Narnia). I'm not saying your analogy is wrong, just merely limited or incomplete - not everyone agrees with you on this. It isn't terrible either, just doesn't entirely work for myself and others. Mind you, I do have my own (specific) versions for both haflings and gnomes and nothing said in this thread has shifted them in any way.


----------



## DMZ2112 (Jan 8, 2014)

Tovec said:


> I thought gargoyles also held a place as "elemental dwarves" and are certainly stone/earth and not fire.




That's... new to me.



> Plus after doing some research I can tell you that gnomes have been associated with fire in many distinct writings (my favourite being Narnia). I'm not saying your analogy is wrong, just merely limited or incomplete - not everyone agrees with you on this. It isn't terrible either, just doesn't entirely work for myself and others. Mind you, I do have my own (specific) versions for both haflings and gnomes and nothing said in this thread has shifted them in any way.




My point is only that gnomes don't have to be interchangeable with dwarves.  How that is achieved is obviously up to the individual dungeon master.  If I was defending my personal idea, it's only because the arguments against it were [REDACTED] and I'm a sucker for people being wrong on the internet.

My homebrew D&D4 setting actually lumped gnomes in with /elves/ in the same way that halflings were lumped in with humans.  Dwarves were lumped in with goliaths.  Totally unrelated.  There's any one of a thousand ways to make gnomes unique.

Saying gnomes are redundant is just silly.  Elves and humans have a lot of common traits, too, and the anti-elf lobby is a small one.


----------



## (Psi)SeveredHead (Jan 8, 2014)

steeldragons said:


> Well, exactly. They are not a LotR race. But they are prominent throughout many cultures' folklore and, as others have mentioned, "gnome" was often used interchangeably with "elf, dwarf, fairy." I think this real world association works more in their favor than "not in LotR" works against them.




Being used interchangeable with elf, dwarf, etc, does not help make them distinct.

Real world association doesn't do them much good. Plenty of D&D creatures are based on real-world tales and yet haven't drawn much "traction" in the game. Those in more familiar sources (LotR being one of those, but not the only one) have more traction and show up more.

When was the last time I saw a hieracosphinx in the game? Or an androsphinx? That's just taking up space in the Monster Manual.



> Just as a point of personal contention, before Eberron, Dragonlance made gnomes into the mad tinkerers that has given way to Eberron's artificers or today's _presumption_ that, as a race, they are mechanically/builder/tinker inclined. In the age when any gnome you encountered could be assumed to be an illusionist/thief, Dragonlance/Krynn said "Nope, they're not about magic at all, that wanna build these steam-powered/mechincal monstrosities." So, no. I reject the assertion that Eberron gave them a separate identity. It simply built off of what was introduced in Dragonlance.




Eberron gnomes aren't tinkers at all and have nothing to do with Dragonlance gnomes. See here: https://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ebds/20041129a

They're not tinkers, which are unpopular and (unintentionally?) comedic. They're not tricksters or pranksters. They're more like the KGB. Whoever laughs at them? Maybe the KGB might have pulled a "prank" on someone such as switching all your furniture for pink-colored replacements, but that's more of a "I can get in your house and do whatever I want; stop doing X or next time we'll do it while you sleep" message. So not really a funny, unserious prank at all.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 9, 2014)

technoextreme said:


> From a literature perspective the original incarnation of them has more to do with the history of science and toxicology than it does with fantasy literature.  They are basically earth elementals.




And, in fact, that is strongly implied by their literary origins.  From the Wikipdia entry on "Gnomes":



> The word comes from Renaissance Latin gnomus, which first appears in the works of 16th century Swiss alchemist Paracelsus. He is perhaps deriving the term from Latin gēnomos (itself representing a Greek γη-νομος, literally "earth-dweller"). In this case, the omission of the ē is, as the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) calls it, a blunder. Alternatively, the term may be an original invention of Paracelsus.
> Paracelsus uses Gnomi as a synonym of Pygmæi,[3] and classifies them as earth elementals. He describes them as two spans high, very reluctant to interact with humans, and able to move through solid earth as easily as humans move through air.[4][5]
> The chthonic, or earth-dwelling, spirit has precedents in numerous ancient and medieval mythologies, often guarding mines and precious underground treasures, notably in the Germanic dwarves and the Greek Chalybes, Telchines or Dactyls.[2]


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jan 9, 2014)

Blowing the dust off my post the last time this topic came up:

Gnomes are the equivalent of magical rabbits. They are smaller and weaker than almost everyone else (except for kobolds, whom they compete for living space with -- no one ever remembers that kobolds also live in dark forests per the RAW). EVERYONE can wipe them out if they want to, so gnomes, like rabbits, have learned to hide.

They're not illusionists because they're into Zen Buddhism, as Races of Stone tried to explain. They're illusionists because, if they're not, the local orc tribe will dig them all up and eat them during the next lunar eclipse.

And they're not illusionists in the cold, dry way that D&D magic is often portrayed. It permeates every aspect of their society. They learn tricks to hide their settlements, with secret doors and traps all over the place (albeit less cruel than the ones the kobolds use). They tell tall tales about the size of their settlements and nations, concealing the fact that the local "king of the gnomes" rules over four families living beneath a single meadow. They use false names and disguises when dealing with outsiders, to effectively increase their numbers. They lie and trick everyone they meet to see how easy they are to fool -- because they have to fool them to survive. Garl Glittergold isn't some Harlequin-style fool, he's El-ahrairah, the rabbit trickster hero from Watership Down. Some of them might even tell the world they're halflings because, you know, they're short and smart-alec and who really checks what race the short guy is?

They speak with animals because even the elves don't worry if a ground squirrel is watching them move through the forest, little realizing that the ground squirrel will pop into a gnome burrow for a treat later on, and tell the gnomes all about the band of elves marching single file through the woods.

They play with clockworks to bolster their numbers and master technology as an outgrowth in their trap-making expertise.

They trade in precious gems to buy the things they need to survive, and they call themselves "forest gnomes" who know nothing about mines and such when they're talking to those that might figure a gnome burrow full of gems will be easy to rob.

There's one race of gnomes. They're just not foolish enough to show a single face to the world.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 9, 2014)

> Some of them might even tell the world they're halflings because, you know, they're short and smart-alec...






Because of this, my next gnome PC will wear flesh-colored boots with fur on them, and will obtain a bag of holding as soon as possible, devoted entirely to concealing/producing food, anywhere, anytime.


----------



## MJS (Jan 9, 2014)

Gnomes invented the internet.


----------



## steeldragons (Jan 9, 2014)

Gnomish Types

  Joe Every-gnome
  This gnome is the twinkle-eyed craftsman or miner with a spring in his  step and a smile on his face. He might be a fighter…he might be a  rogue…he might be both and an illusionist to boot…but he’s not going to  tell you. He probably has a pick-axe or hammer on his shoulder, but  you’d better bet there’s a knife somewhere too…to whittle on his lunch  break, of course. He could ask for a hunk of cheese or a bite of bread  to exchange for this small dull copper bracelet. Yes or no, you’ll get a  friendly flip of his brightly colored cap as he passes by on his way to  his workshop or mine in his equally brightly colored (though probably  not matching) stylish curly-toed shoes. Hey, where’s your coin purse?  Hey! Where’d he go?!

  The Gnome Fighter
  This adventuresome forest gnome is not as strong as her dwarven  counterpart, but twice as nimble and probably more intelligent. She  makes up for her lack of strength with maneuverability and strategy.  Lighter studded leather armor, a small shield and use of reach weapons  like her spear-ax and sling, combined with her racial abilities and  knack for trickery make her as real a threat as any dwarf with a hammer.  Of course, a short sword is necessary when in close quarters. When not  wandering, she is likely to spend time as one of the warren guards. It  would not be unusual for her to be multi-classed fighter/thief to better  be able to spot and deal with the traps and locks often encountered in  adventuring. Besides, being stealthy is part of her nature.  

  The Gnome Illusionist
  Among gnomes, those that primarily use magic are highly revered.  Though many gnomes enjoy practicing magic, there are few that make it  their life. This gnome is likely to be (or come from) a position of some  authority from his warren. If he is a wanderer/adventurer, he is  certainly a magician of some skill being able to dare the dangers of the  world with only his arcane arts to protect him. He definitely has a  magical item or two to help him in his pursuits. A wand or amulet, maybe  a ring or some other trinkets that he asserts has mystical properties.  Though he may appear befuddled or inept (by comparison to other wizards)  he is still highly intelligent and as the old gnomish saying goes, “The  size of one’s spell is in no way proportionate to the size of one’s  stature.” A little gnomish ingenuity coupled with his sorcery make him a  formidable opponent…and who knows? Beneath his robes might be some  leather armor and a short sword that he just happened to find in his  travels. He almost certainly has a dagger, stashed somewhere, should his  magic fail…but that never happens, of course.

  The Gnome Rogue
  As with rogues of all races, he can be anything and with a race that  seems (to outsiders) to be all rogues, he is particularly dangerous. He  is a thief, an acrobat, an assassin, a con-man, a treasure-hunter, or a  bard, perhaps. Who can say? Even in the bright garish garments that his  kind prefers, he can be impossible to locate. Though carrying a  dwarvish-made crossbow, having “just returned for a hunting expedition  in the far off (insert name here) mountains”, and with a dirk hanging on  his belt, it is still difficult to determine what his specialty is. He  is a gentleman of the first order and a scoundrel of the highest rank.  There isn’t a trap he hasn’t seen, a lock he hasn’t picked….or a pocket  for that matter. His charming tales are the stuff of legend and he has a  show-stopping singing voice as well. He is an expert jeweler,  appraiser, merchant, antiques dealer, poet, linguist, monster-hunter,  treasure-seeker, trap-springer, and assorted other less honorable  pursuits. You’ll be happy to count him among your company for his  expertise…in whatever…while he’ll happily make off with your gold.

  The Gnome Trickster
  One of the most popular multi-classes with gnomes is a  thief-illusionist. She is happy to help you with whatever small magic  she can, not having time to really study magic intently because she  needs time to get her hair just right. She’ll pick a lock here or there,  “…daddy was a locksmith”…scale the wall or get into that tight crevice,  but you’d better watch your back when it comes time to divvy up the  loot, because everything she does for you, she does for her. With a  smile and a stab of her slender dagger she’ll make her cut to get your  cut. If she likes you or isn’t feeling like drawing attention, maybe a  sleep spell so she can quietly slip away. Her magic is all geared around  playing tricks to get what she wants. If she has any magic items, you  won’t know it until she uses them on you. She plays the damsel in  distress every chance she gets and will try to flirt her way out of  anything…unbelievable that humans still fall for that.


Read more: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?295185-Racial-Archetypes-Elf-amp-Dwarf#ixzz2prtDsa3G

​


----------



## MJS (Jan 9, 2014)

Gnomes watch you when you put your pants on.


----------



## TarionzCousin (Jan 10, 2014)

Just say "Gno" to "Gnomes."


----------



## Dungeoneer (Jan 10, 2014)

TarionzCousin said:


> Just say "Gno" to "Gnomes."



Sadly, it seems all roads lead to gnome.


----------



## Dungeoneer (Jan 10, 2014)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Blowing the dust off my post the last time this topic came up:
> 
> <snip>
> 
> And they're not illusionists in the cold, dry way that D&D magic is often portrayed. It permeates every aspect of their society. They learn tricks to hide their settlements, with secret doors and traps all over the place (albeit less cruel than the ones the kobolds use). They tell tall tales about the size of their settlements and nations, concealing the fact that the local "king of the gnomes" rules over four families living beneath a single meadow. They use false names and disguises when dealing with outsiders, to effectively increase their numbers. They lie and trick everyone they meet to see how easy they are to fool -- because they have to fool them to survive. Garl Glittergold isn't some Harlequin-style fool, he's El-ahrairah, the rabbit trickster hero from Watership Down. Some of them might even tell the world they're halflings because, you know, they're short and smart-alec and who really checks what race the short guy is?




This is actually the first write-up of gnomes I've ever seen that made them sound interesting to me. An entire society based on illusions! I like it.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jan 10, 2014)

Dungeoneer said:


> This is actually the first write-up of gnomes I've ever seen that made them sound interesting to me. An entire society based on illusions! I like it.



Thanks! I've been playing a gnome illusionist (who works as an unconventional detective in Ptolus, of all things) since 2007 and while the rest of the group trusts his motives, they know that they can't take anything he says at face value. (Not to mention the fact that he's sometimes dealt with the rest of them through illusions and aliases, due to paranoia after the team was previously infiltrated by a changeling working for one of the city's crime syndicates.)

Illusions-as-a-cultural-defense-mechanism works pretty well as a universal theory of gnomes for me.


----------



## RedGalaxy00 (Jan 11, 2014)

Ryujin said:


> If there's one thing that comes to mind, while reading this, it's that the races should be thought of by their cultures, rather than the meta idea that each is better at some specific class/combination than the others are.




Well, that's the way they should be looked at. D&D isn't a min/max game. It's a story telling game, as are basically all RPGs, of every type, from Table-top games to Video games. So, why fill out a sheet of paper that basically will be nothing more then a sword, or a spell? I mean, that seems a bit of a waste to me. There's a reason those pieces of paper we all hold dear are called "character sheets" after all.

Which is another reason I love Gnomes. The possibilities when it comes to good/great characters that can be made from them. Well, all races can be made into great characters, be they simple and easy to understand, or complex with many layers (like shrek!). I just find that Gnomes, for me at least, bring out the best possible characters. From the simple and loveable, to the dark, and misunderstood. They could be Bat-man, or Joker... or even Mr. Myxlplyx. (man, that's a hard name to say.) It's just a damn shame that people will shoe-horn a race into a particular role, without giving them the proper attention they desire and require. (Best to stop here, otherwise I'll run through my rant on Orcs, and how I feel they are often misrepresented in most fantasy games, and stories, but you can blame "The Elder Scrolls" for that one, and how awesome they are in Morrowind, Oblivion, and Skyrim. Before that, they were just enemies to kill...)


----------



## Ryujin (Jan 13, 2014)

RedGalaxy00 said:


> Well, that's the way they should be looked at. D&D isn't a min/max game. It's a story telling game, as are basically all RPGs, of every type, from Table-top games to Video games. So, why fill out a sheet of paper that basically will be nothing more then a sword, or a spell? I mean, that seems a bit of a waste to me. There's a reason those pieces of paper we all hold dear are called "character sheets" after all.
> 
> Which is another reason I love Gnomes. The possibilities when it comes to good/great characters that can be made from them. Well, all races can be made into great characters, be they simple and easy to understand, or complex with many layers (like shrek!). I just find that Gnomes, for me at least, bring out the best possible characters. From the simple and loveable, to the dark, and misunderstood. They could be Bat-man, or Joker... or even Mr. Myxlplyx. (man, that's a hard name to say.) It's just a damn shame that people will shoe-horn a race into a particular role, without giving them the proper attention they desire and require. (Best to stop here, otherwise I'll run through my rant on Orcs, and how I feel they are often misrepresented in most fantasy games, and stories, but you can blame "The Elder Scrolls" for that one, and how awesome they are in Morrowind, Oblivion, and Skyrim. Before that, they were just enemies to kill...)




Unfortunately too many people seem to still try and 'win' role playing games, so min/maxing is alive and well. Whatever my character, I have a back story to justify the build. Most of the other players in my group just seem to think about their characters as a collection of things that kill stuff up real good. I've never played a Gnome, but only because I haven't yet thought up a good back story.

As to the Orcs thing, I think that the folks over at Zombie Orpheus Entertainment are doing a good job of changing the paradigm too. One of the major characters, and love interest of the bard girl who is chronicling the heroes' story, in JourneyQuest, is an intelligent and driven Orc sergeant who is contrasted against an idiotic knight who thinks, if the word think can be applied, in very narrow terms. I'm thinking of the, "Die evil races!" scene here. Matt Vancil has also written an English to Orcish dictionary. Mine is on the way


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 13, 2014)

Dungeoneer said:


> This is actually the first write-up of gnomes I've ever seen that made them sound interesting to me. An entire society based on illusions! I like it.





Whizbang generally does a damn good job of being the standard bearer for meaningful gnomish cultures around here.  He can be depended upon for raising it high.











...well, at least 4' up or so.


----------



## Dwimmerlied (Jan 13, 2014)

the Jester said:


> Gnomes are the tricksters, using illusion and enchantment to hide themselves, conceal their homes and mislead enemies. Many people who run afoul of gnomes never even know that they have done so; they "end up" stumbling upon a group of monsters or something that leads them away.




Perfect. I particularly like mysterious and elusive for my gnomes; maybe somewhat feytouched in the way elves can be. Where enchantment and high magic defines the spirit of elves, illusion defines the soul of the gnome. Dwarves are warlike and grim. Elves are high and terrible. Halflings are omnipresent happy-go-lucky itinerants with their fingers in all the pies. Gnomes are humble, gentle and forgotten.


----------



## Dwimmerlied (Jan 13, 2014)

Dungeoneer said:


> Are ALL gnomes trickster bards and mad scientists?




Nope! But not all dwarves are axe-wielding warriors. There's just enough of them to give some sort of definition.!



Dungeoneer said:


> I feel like I could envision what a dwarven town or a halfling village would look like. But a group of gnomes living together? No idea. I have no sense of them as a society.
> 
> When I pick up a setting book and turn to the short sidebar on gnomes, I never see anything about their everyday lives or their history. Do gnomes revere an ancient hero gnome? Did the gnome army march out to join the great war? How many lands does the gnomish emperor rule?
> 
> When was the last time a party stumbled upon an ancient ruin only to discover it must have been constructed by gnomes? I'll bet it doesn't happen often!




Gnomes live in shallow burrow communities under hills in isolated woodland or forested areas. They tend to have a racial genius for mineralogy (particularly precious gemstones), and mining, and so this industry is often central to their economy, which also frequently bring them into conflict with kobolds. This ages long conflict has bred an animosity rarely directed toward any other living creature. Their talents for mining and acquisition of precious stones could conceivably ground them in the outside world as part of sought-after trade agreements, but it is also likely that the shy race keeps their secret techniques and wealth hidden from the greed and ambitions of the outside world.

They rarely maintain any sort of military, though rangers and scouts are looked towards for matters of defence, mustering and leading skirmish bands against their enemies. These units are adaptable for woodland skirmish or tunnel strikes and are arguably the best of the common races at melting back away into their terrain after a strike. Where elves show their ruthlessness when dealing with enemies, gnomes almost always opt to steer their enemies away.

Leadership is frequently by council of elders or by some revered and ancient wiseman/woman. Druids often take these roles, which works for them because gnomes don't need iron-fisted dictation but prefer to have their community matters guided by deep wisdom. Other druids of the community fulfil the spiritual needs of the communities, often maintaining sacred green glades in the woods nearby, or holy grottoes adorned with mineral rich pools and strange crystal structures or half-formed gemstone obelisks carved with mystic runes below gnome burrow villages.

Illusion is as much a part of gnome life as enchantment is for elves. Many gnomes have a deep fascination with illusion magic, and often further, with the profound contemplation of deception in general. Perhaps this has given them their fey character, or perhaps their fey character has informed the interest in deception. Who knows?

As for dungeon culture I've actually done this before, and it was the most fun dungeon I've ever myself crafted; Although no one remembers the old gnome name for my ruins, those who mention it these days refer to it as Grendelmyr. Once set by an idyllic floodplain wood, it has since become a ruin rotting away in a fetid marsh. The rooms of my dungeon were circular, and I ignored the concept that a gnome would only ever build a cramped environment. Above the hill sat the remains of a mummified treant haunted by will-o-wisps, once revered by the gnome residents now some blighted weed whose roots penetrated throughout the dungeon, grasping and ripping at any it could reach. Some doors were completely blocked off by root masses which had to be fought through for access.

Nothing says gnome like illusion, and it wasn't a stretch to realise for flavour and grounding, my dungeon would need to be defined, to some degree, by this magic. Still active effects lingered, some having been corrupted over time in unpredictable ways. The new denizens even learned to work with some of them, producing dangerous encounters. Further, I had it that the tragic end to the gnome's occupancy and the weakening of the walls of reality by so much illusion produced spontaneously-appearing portals to the plane of shadow, so the dungeon became a shifting and unpredictable thing. I don't know, but if this wasn't stamped with gnome-niche all over, then you must be right...

The gnomes don't need to be large and terrible movers and shaker to have a "thing"; in fact their niche is characterized significantly by their racial humbleness and role as the forgotten folk.


----------



## Dwimmerlied (Jan 13, 2014)

Oh, and inasmuch as language really can, in my opinion give life to a race, my inspiration for gnome language is welsh. It works really, really well!  I hope that doesn't come across as racist!


----------



## Lwaxy (Jan 13, 2014)

Dungeoneer said:


> When someone says 'gnome', I think of this guy:




In our parts of the world, they are called dwarfs, not gnomes, which seems more appropriate to me. I couldn't stop laughing when I first found out in English they are supposed to be gnomes...  I don't think dwarfs are good for nothing though.


----------



## Dungeoneer (Jan 14, 2014)

Lwaxy said:


> In our parts of the world, they are called dwarfs, not gnomes, which seems more appropriate to me. I couldn't stop laughing when I first found out in English they are supposed to be gnomes...  I don't think dwarfs are good for nothing though.




So what do you call the short, bearded men who live underground??


----------



## Umbran (Jan 14, 2014)

Dungeoneer said:


> Gnomes. Let's talk about gnomes. I don't get the appeal.
> 
> First of all, what niche are they supposed to fill? They live underground and they make stuff, like dwarves. But I guess they're thinner? And more annoying? Or maybe they're just halflings that live underground. Regardless, they don't seem to have a well-defined place in the small races ecosystem.




Well, if you view the world with Dwarves and Halflings as the fixed points of small races, then yes, you may think gnomes are superfluous.  But I personally find that to be rather assuming the conclusion of the debate.

Dwarves - well, they're dwarves.  They fight, like gold, and have honor and all that.

Halflings were originally homebodies.  While you could have an adventurer, that character was considered to be quite exceptional within their home community.  The archetypes were Bilbo Baggins and Samwise Gamgee - guys who were rather of the opinion that adventures were dirty and messy things, and rather concerned for where "elevenses" were coming from.  Originally, halflings are a contrast to the standard guts and glory adventurer.

Gnomes, meanwhile, are the ones full of energy and inquisitiveness.  These guys were the real tricksters, the inquisitiveness and magic of small folk.  

Then the stupid kender came along - in Dragonlance, you couldn't use something too much like an original halfling - too many Tolkien connections to allow a novel to fly.  So they became manically and implausibly overwritten tricksters.  By handing the trickster role to the world's equivalent of halflings, they had to do something else with Dragonlance gnomes.  So, the gnomes became manically and implausibly overwritten mechanists, dropping all of the fey and magical overtones of the originals.  This is where perceptions of gnomes wen awry, in my opinion.  

Pretend Dragonlance connotations of the races of gnomes and halflings/kender didn't exist, and gnomes make more sense, in my humble opinion.


----------



## Ryujin (Jan 14, 2014)

Dungeoneer said:


> So what do you call the short, bearded men who live underground??




Welshmen, apparently.


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jan 14, 2014)

RedGalaxy00 said:


> Well, that's the way they should be looked at. D&D isn't a min/max game.




Yarp.




RedGalaxy00 said:


> It's a story telling game, as are basically all RPGs, of every type, from Table-top games to Video games.




You mean, if they kept practicing hard every day? No. 



Ryujin said:


> Unfortunately too many people seem to still try and 'win' role playing games, so min/maxing is alive and well. Whatever my character, I have a back story to justify the build. Most of the other players in my group just seem to think about their characters as a collection of things that kill stuff up real good. I've never played a Gnome, but only because I haven't yet thought up a good back story.




Its a GAME. Of course you try to win. Its got nothing to do with min/maxing because players were trying to win before min/maxing was even possible.


----------



## Umbran (Jan 14, 2014)

ExploderWizard said:


> Its a GAME. Of course you try to win. Its got nothing to do with min/maxing because players were trying to win before min/maxing was even possible.




So long as there are rules, and choices that can be made in character creation, min/maxing is possible.


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jan 14, 2014)

Umbran said:


> So long as there are rules, and choices that can be made in character creation, min/maxing is possible.




Of course if you happen to roll a high WIS and choose cleric as a class that is primitive min/maxing granted.

In any system though, one can play to win via decisions made outside of character creation. Playing to win is not antithetical to roleplaying, especially if "winning" is simply surviving until the next adventure.


----------



## Umbran (Jan 14, 2014)

ExploderWizard said:


> In any system though, one can play to win via decisions made outside of character creation. Playing to win is not antithetical to roleplaying, especially if "winning" is simply surviving until the next adventure.




That's the thing - playing to "win" depends upon having a defined win condition.  Unlike, say, chess, RPGs don't have a single, well-stated win condition.  Playing to meet a player-defined win condition is not antithetical to roleplaying, so long as the player goal is in line with the stated characters goals and role.  

I have, on occasion, seen a mismatch - where the player played entirely against character in order to "win" (leading one paladin to do rather unpaladin-like things, and a very angry player who didn't understand that this would have repercussions, and ultimately lead to character death, rather than "winning".)


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jan 14, 2014)

Umbran said:


> That's the thing - playing to "win" depends upon having a defined win condition. Unlike, say, chess, RPGs don't have a single, well-stated win condition. Playing to meet a player-defined win condition is not antithetical to roleplaying, so long as the player goal is in line with the stated characters goals and role.
> 
> I have, on occasion, seen a mismatch - where the player played entirely against character in order to "win" (leading one paladin to do rather unpaladin-like things, and a very angry player who didn't understand that this would have repercussions, and ultimately lead to character death, rather than "winning".)




I think it would be fair to say that the player in question chose.........poorly.


----------



## Ryujin (Jan 14, 2014)

Umbran said:


> So long as there are rules, and choices that can be made in character creation, min/maxing is possible.




And in a "co-operative role playing game", winning is Pyrrhic


----------



## the Jester (Jan 14, 2014)

Ryujin said:


> And in a "co-operative role playing game", winning is Pyrrhic




Not necessarily; sometimes you _all_ win.


----------



## Yora (Jan 14, 2014)

Umbran said:


> Well, if you view the world with Dwarves and Halflings as the fixed points of small races, then yes, you may think gnomes are superfluous.  But I personally find that to be rather assuming the conclusion of the debate.



I enjoy gnomes greatly as a race that has some elements of dwarves and gnomes, but doesn't come with all the baggage that is attached to those two. As a halfling, everyone is kind of expecting a funny relief character thief with some degree of kleptomania or eating disorders, and as a dwarf a character can always only be dwarf. There is only a single dwarf character in fiction, which has made thousands of appearances in different settings and media. But it's always the identical character.

There's one exception in the Hobbit movie, which is a short guy of thin build with no beard, who is not a miner or racist with an axe or hammer and doesn't show permanent grouchyness, greed, or drunkeness.
In short, he doesn't have even the slightest resemblance to a dwarf in any way. But if you called him a gnome, he might pass quite well.


----------



## RedGalaxy00 (Jan 14, 2014)

ExplodingWizard said:
			
		

> RedGalaxy00 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Maybe it's just me, but this doesn't make any sense to me... I'm not sure what Practicing hard has to do with the point of that sentence.

RPGs have always been, and will always be used best when telling a story. Whether it's something silly like "Who stole Mrs. Hedge's Pie?", to "Why did the god's give up on there mortal subjects, and walk away from it all?" If you want to use a game to tell those stories, I'm positive that Role-Playing Game is just the best way to go about it, 99% of the time, at least to me.

But either way, that isn't the subject of the topic at hand... and I'm pretty sure I've made my point on the subject quite clear... but just in case.

Gnomes =


----------



## Dungeoneer (Jan 14, 2014)

RedGalaxy00 said:


> Gnomes =




Sorry. Gnomes = .


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jan 14, 2014)

Yora said:


> There is only a single dwarf character in fiction, which has made thousands of appearances in different settings and media. But it's always the identical character.



I advise you to check out Dragon Age 2. The most popular character in that game is a beardless dwarf Lothario. He's the subject of an impressive amount of sexy fan art on Tumblr and Deviant Art.


----------



## gamerprinter (Jan 14, 2014)

While I have nothing against gnomes, as well as no particular need/want for dwarves or halflings, thus gnomes don't overlap other diminuitive races domains - I generally don't use all the standard races of the game (I never play standard D&D worlds).

That said, for folklore purposes, gnomes never existed in folklore. Gnomes first came into conception by Alchemists to describe the Earth Element. Gnomes = earth, Salamanders = fire, Sylphs = air and Neriads = water. These were representations of the elements, and not borrowed folklore concepts brought into alchemy. There were no folklore beliefs in gnomes as some kind of fey beings ever in human historical beliefs. With the found and exposed alchemical tomes in existence, the gnome was discovered in them, and then entered the literary world. Gnomes have been considered as fey like beings only during the late 19th century forward. Compared to most fantasy monsters that are based on folklore, gnomes are an anomaly.

Really though, I have several diminuitive races in my various worlds, but generally there are no dwarves, elves, half-elves, nor halflings in any D&D/PF game I play, so if I used gnomes (which I don't) they wouldn't be stepping on another races niche.


----------



## Ryujin (Jan 14, 2014)

the Jester said:


> Not necessarily; sometimes you _all_ win.




Rather ironically, generally when no single person _tries _to 'win'.


----------



## Cadence (Jan 15, 2014)

First Gnome (of two) that I ever played filled the niche of being a vaguely effective missile weapon when hurled by the drow with gauntlets of ogre power (the gnome-flinger maneuver). That was over 25 years ago and I remember nothing else about him except that it wasn't an underdark game.

Second started in an underdark game.  He filled the niche of sneaky illusionist who could put up really inflammatory anti-drow graffiti. He also created a flaming-shadow-magic armor spell (he had a whole series of increasingly improved spells planned - Mapple's Mighty something or other armor spells).  I remember that he almost wanted to switch over to something like a paladin -- but he became profoundly disappointed in that campaign world's divine-cosmology, even though (iirc) it got him resurrected once.  That one was almost 20 years ago, and so not many other details there either.

I suppose the halfling could fill the role of flingee, but the drow might find them even more distasteful to touch than the gnome.  The gnome seems to be pretty good for sneaky illusionist in ways that the halfling and dwarf wouldn't.


----------



## Manbearcat (Jan 15, 2014)

I'm not sure what they're good for.  I've GMed an outrageous number of hours, for an outrageous number of players on various systems.  Sum total of gnomes played in all that time with all of those players: 1.  Ridiculous number of Elves and Humans.  Half-elves and Dwarves come in next at a fairly decent clip.  Couple stray Half-Orcs and Halflings here and there.  3 players who strictly liked to play "monstrous" PCs; Tieflings, Half-Dragons, Satyrs, Githzerais, Minotaurs, Muls, Thri-Kreen.  

Only 1 sad little gnome.  From what I recall, he was good for dying without fanfare.


----------



## Herobizkit (Jan 16, 2014)

In my 25 years of playing D&D, in all the groups I've run and played with, there were a sum total of three gnomes I call.

One was made by me as an 1e NPC gnome Illusionist/Thief who also happened to roll well on the Psionics chart.  Never saw play.

One of my 1e players would make a Svirfneblin any time of the other players made a Drow.  This happened a lot, but both players kept re-making the same characters over and over, so that still counts as one in my book.

One was made by a friend of mine in 2e.  I don't even remember what his class was, but I do know he loved the Arquebus and terrorized a village with the moniker "The Masked Halfling".  It's possible that this character also had a Hat of Disguise... and may not have been a gnome at all. :3


----------



## Grandvizier (Jun 28, 2014)

*Gnomes Get Much More Interesting when you realise they arent nice*

Gnomes in my world were feared by most other radces. The magic of illusion combined with a p3nchant for laying traps,and a total lack of care for any race that isn,t a gnome makes them dangerius. Dwarves are brash and relatively predictable, halflings do everything fornfun. Gnmes are unpredictable clever little sods that do whats best for gnmes wuth no real thought of the consequence for ithers. The laws of the gnomes relate to gnomes, no one lse.


----------



## Dungeoneer (Jun 28, 2014)

Grandvizier said:


> Gnomes in my world were feared by most other radces. The magic of illusion combined with a p3nchant for laying traps,and a total lack of care for any race that isn,t a gnome makes them dangerius. Dwarves are brash and relatively predictable, halflings do everything fornfun. Gnmes are unpredictable clever little sods that do whats best for gnmes wuth no real thought of the consequence for ithers. The laws of the gnomes relate to gnomes, no one lse.



This may be my new favorite post ever.


----------



## Holy Bovine (Jun 28, 2014)

Don't like gnomes and they are banned from any and all games I DM.


Oddly I have never, ever had a player want to play one.


----------



## FireLance (Jun 28, 2014)

In one of my homebrew campaign worlds, gnomes were aligned with the element/concept of shadow, in line with their affinity for illusion magic.  Based on this, I decided that gnomes would be guerrilla-ninja-assassins.


----------



## Olfan (Jun 28, 2014)

Sad to see all this gnome hate. I love me some gnomes and have seen them in play many times. Dragonborn however, ugh, talk about a Mary Sue race. I've banned those guys from anything ever.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jun 28, 2014)

Olfan said:


> Sad to see all this gnome hate. I love me some gnomes and have seen them in play many times. Dragonborn however, ugh, talk about a Mary Sue race. I've banned those guys from anything ever.




Do you mean 3E Dragonborn, or 4E ones? They're totally different. The 3E ones, you could make a case for using the phrase "Mary Sue", because whilst it's technically misuse, being "part dragon" is a very common trait amongst "Mary Sue"-ish characters in fiction (esp. fan-fiction, of course), and they got chunky bonuses from the template and so on. They were certainly favoured by players who liked to be the most special of special snowflakes and to lord it over the other PCs.

4E Dragonborn, however, are no better than any other PC race, aren't "part dragon" in the same sense (if at all), and don't have any kind of particularly romantic backstory or the like. There's no way they can be considered "Mary Sue"-ish. Totally different origin and appearance.

As for Gnomes, I've tried to use them, but I've never found anything that they were better used for than some other small race with a bit more character. They have this illusionist thing going on, but it seems vaguely inappropriate and Elves make for better "Forest Tricksters", thematically and style-wise. They have this "mechanic" thing going on, but that doesn't fit non-Steampunk settings, and in Steampunk ones, any race could be a mechanic. Further, as they're non-hostile, generally, they can't even be used as "trapmasters" or the like (Kobolds or whatever are used instead).

I did get some mileage out of the really scary-looking 4E versions, at least. Svirfneblin or however it's spelled, those guys I kind of like. They are sufficiently bizarre and creepy as to justify their existence.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 28, 2014)

Ruin Explorer said:


> As for Gnomes, I've tried to use them, but I've never found anything that they were better used for than some other small race with a bit more character.
> They have this illusionist thing going on, but it seems vaguely inappropriate




In the same paragraph you complain about them not having character, but then complain about their character?



> and Elves make for better "Forest Tricksters", thematically and style-wise.




Tolkien-style (meaning, by extension D&D) elves are in no way, shape, or form thematically tricksterish.  They are far too self-conscious and self-important and *serious* to be decent tricksters.  Individuals may always vary, I know, but the culture presented?  Not trickster.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jun 28, 2014)

Umbran said:


> In the same paragraph you complain about them not having character, but then complain about their character?




No, the issue is that they have no character. They don't have a "Forest Trickster" character, but they randomly have illusion spells. Sometimes people assert, without building them up, that they are, but it doesn't match with the culture they have described (such as it is) or anything else about them.



Umbran said:


> Tolkien-style (meaning, by extension D&D) elves are in no way, shape, or form thematically tricksterish.  They are far too self-conscious and self-important and *serious* to be decent tricksters.  Individuals may always vary, I know, but the culture presented?  Not trickster.




Tolkien-style Elves are not D&D's Elves, so I must disagree with your "by extension", nor the Elves of most RPGs, though. Tolkien's Elves are tall, immortal, superhuman beings. Superior beings. D&D's Elves are largely forest-dwelling, short, light, lithe, agile, and whilst they're long-lived, it's often implied that they're not immortal. They're not "superior beings" in the same way at all. Thinking about it, though, even Tolkien's Wood Elves are kind of deceptive/illusion-y. Remember all the stuff with the Wood Elf party? I think it was in the Hobbit but I may be misremembering and it was in LotR, but there was definitely stuff going on there that was classic illusion/deception/trickster elf. By trickster I mean more Loki than some grovelling con-artist, to be clear. Convincing some petty mortal to dance for you is trickster, y'know.

Many D&D Elf cultures contain a significant "trickster" element, too, from all over. Taladas has a particularly well-rendered "Forest Trickster" Elf type with the Huldrefolk, who are frankly, more Elf-y than most Elves.

Further, Elves in mythology, even the big, pretty ones, are very often tricksters/deceivers. They're constantly lying to people, abducting people, causing time to pass at funny rates and so on.


----------



## amerigoV (Jun 29, 2014)

Ruin Explorer said:


> Thinking about it, though, even Tolkien's Wood Elves are kind of deceptive/illusion-y. Remember all the stuff with the Wood Elf party? I think it was in the Hobbit but I may be misremembering and it was in LotR, but there was definitely stuff going on there that was classic illusion/deception/trickster elf. By trickster I mean more Loki than some grovelling con-artist, to be clear. Convincing some petty mortal to dance for you is trickster, y'know.




Twas in the Hobbit (but it did not make it to the movie(s)).


----------



## Jester David (Jun 29, 2014)

And elves are small little folk a foot tall. 
Dwarves are little antisocial men that turn to stone in the sun.


----------



## Morlock (Jun 29, 2014)

Dungeoneer said:


> Gnomes. Let's talk about gnomes. I don't get the appeal.
> 
> First of all, what niche are they supposed to fill? They live underground and they make stuff, like dwarves. But I guess they're thinner? And more annoying? Or maybe they're just halflings that live underground. Regardless, they don't seem to have a well-defined place in the small races ecosystem.
> 
> ...




I've always hated gnomes. Then came the Tinker Gnomes, and I hated them even more (I've never been much on Steampunk in my D&D and Tinker Gnomes & the like are the gateway drug for Steampunk in D&D, so there's another layer of vitriol, right there).

Recently I happened to look through Friend & Foe: The Gnomes & Kobolds of Tellene (Kingdoms of Kalamar) and saw the illustration on page 10. Lots of cognitive dissonance. They look _cool_. They look more like halflings, but they're armored up like dwarves. But they have an elvish aesthetic and mien, and no beards. It's almost like they just carved out their own niche in my imagination right there on the spot. I could see them played as a well-equipped, well-trained race with a Napoleon complex (little guys are usually scrappers).

So, I still hate the traditional gnomes, but _those_ gnomes have earned themselves a spot. I'm not going to start writing up gnome characters, or anything. But I'll be okay with gnomes in a setting from now on, because I'll just rewrite them to be like the gnomes in that illustration. 

They still kinda suffer from the "furries" thing, IMO; better for a side campaign/adventure where everyone's furries/little folk/etc.

Yes, I'm an artist and very visually-oriented. In fact I'm a total whore for good art. Kudos to Keith DeCesare.



> Do you mean 3E Dragonborn, or 4E ones?




I give both the bum's rush. Draconians own the niche for me. Elmore's illustrations have a lot to do with that (told you, I'm a whore for good art).


----------



## Lwaxy (Jun 29, 2014)

Gnomes have no character? *insert long laughing break* 

Gnomes have more character than the overused elves will ever have. 

I don't dislike elves either


----------



## Dungeoneer (Jun 29, 2014)

*A Theory of Gnome Evolution*

So I've been re-reading this thread with, I'll be honest, a great deal of amusement. The truth is that I find the gnome to be inherently ridiculous. I"m not saying that he truly _is_ ridiculous, but that's how I automatically perceive him, and judging by this thread I'm not alone in that prejudice. I think gnome defenders would be wise to take into account how many people perceive their favorite race when employing them. The gnome comes with baggage, that much is clear.

That said, there is a serious, historical side to this discussion. What quirk of happenstance made this oddball fellow with very few antecedents in fantasy literature part of the D&D canon? Based on several of the contributors to this thread (@JRRNeiklot, @_*the Jester*_, @_*Quickleaf*_, @_*steeldragons*_, @_*Umbran*_), a trip to Wikipedia, and a brief scan of some old PHBs I give you this:
*
THE EVOLUTION OF THE GNOME IN DUNGEONS & DRAGONS*

1974 - The gnome makes his first appearance in the original edition of D&D.

1975 - The gnome shows up in the Blackmoor supplement. 

1977 - The gnome makes his first appearance in the Monster Manual. Gnomes are described (and illustrated) as smaller 'cousins of the dwarves', complete with beards and armor. They can see in the dark, they are described as 'resistant to poison and magic' and they are miners who live in clans. In short, they have nothing in common with the modern day gnome.

1978 - Gnomes appear in the first Player's Handbook as a playable race. They are just as described in the Monster Manual and they can take Illusionist as a class.

1980 - Gnomes get their own god, Garl Glittergold, in the Deities and Demigods cyclopedia.

1982 - Gnomes are detailed exhaustively (including their drinking habits!) by Roger Moore in Dragon Magazine #61. Moore describes gnomes as differing from dwarves in that they also enjoy the above-ground world. Gnomes are also associated with jokes and trickery, although confusingly they are also said to be usually aligned with Lawful Good. Moore also hints at an interest in crafts, which will shortly become an important feature of this race! 

1987 - Gnomes appear in Dragonlance Adventures substantially reworked as 'Tinker Gnomes', a brown, clever race which are the ancestors of both dwarves and kender. This seems to be the first appearance of the tradition of gnomes having long names.

1989 - The second edition of AD&D is released, and the PHB contains gnomes, closely based on Roger E. Moore's version. Various monster manuals introduce several gnomish sub-races.

1993 - The _Complete Book of Gnomes_ is _so _complete that it also contains halflings. The two races are described as sharing a diminutive size, and affinity for larger races and the ability to 'disappear into the woodwork' when threatened. This book treats gnomes as more 'fey' than the dwarves (who are still their cousins) as they enjoy a good stroll above ground in the moonlight. 

2000 - D&D 3rd Edition changes the gnome's favored class from illusionist to bard and opens up spellcasting to all races. The PHB says that 'gnomes are welcome everywhere as technicians, alchemists and inventors', implying that the 'tinker gnome' archetype has taken preference.

2008 - D&D Fourth Edition is released, but gnomes appear only in the Monster Manual. They will have to wait for the second PHB for their playable race write-up.

2009 - The PHB2 contains gnomes, as promised. They are now definitively associated with the Feywild, a major component of 4e lore. They are a race of magical tricksters, and their ability to turn magically invisible is now explicit. They appear to have lost their beards.

2014 - Gnomes will appear in 5e... but what form will they take?

*THERE'S NO PLACE LIKE GNOME *

As you can see from the above timeline, gnomes have taken quite a convoluted journey to their present form. They started life as, well, basically dwarves with a knack for illusions. At some point they started picking up a mischievous trickster flavor that differentiated them from their 'cousins'. They also took a detour into the Dragonlance 'tinker gnome', which honestly seems to describe another race entirely. 

3e attempted to unify the divergent strands of gnome-dentity. But apparently this only produced a confusing grab-bag of characteristics that didn't resonate, as the gnome was demoted to the PHB2 for 4e. At least in 4e the gnome found a clear niche as a fey creature with some nice abilities to boot. Along the way the gnome changed physically, too. He shrank, lost weight, and trimmed his beard to the point where he was often portrayed as beardless.

In some ways, it seems as though the gnome has been constantly losing his ecological niche. Originally the gnome fulfilled a role as dwarven illusionist. Somehow this evolved into a sideline in trickery and mischief. When Dragonlance arrived, it had no use for this notion of the gnome, thanks to the Kender, so he was reworked entirely as a tinkerer. 

Nonetheless, the trickster gnome who was kin to dwarves stuck around until at least 2e, although by that time he had trouble making a case for why he wasn't a halfling. In 3e the gnome attempted to reinvent himself as a wacky bard. When that didn't work out, he left this plane entirely to try his luck as a dangerous fey. However, assuming that Fifth Edition doesn't feature a fully-developed Feywild, the poor gnome will be forced to reinvent himself yet again!

As I write this, what really strikes me about the gnome is his adaptability. He's a survivor, a remnant of a race that has been driven from their homes time and time again. 

So, I humbly suggest that the next incarnation of the gnome embrace this idea: the gnomes are a wandering people, making their homes wherever they can and adapting to survive, whether that be as underground miners, wandering bards, crafty illusionists or eccentric tinkers.  Gnomes change themselves to suit their circumstances, even shaving off their beards and wearing boots with lifts if it helps them blend in. 

The gnome realizes that this makes him a bit ridiculous, but hey, he wouldn't have made it this far if he hadn't held onto his sense of humor!

Strangely, I think that reimagining the gnome as a race without a niche would in fact provide him the niche he has sought for so long.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Jun 30, 2014)

Dungeoneer said:


> 3e attempted to unify the divergent strands of gnome-dentity. But apparently this only produced a confusing grab-bag of characteristics that didn't resonate, as the gnome was demoted to the PHB2 for 4e.




Part of that is because even 3E couldn't make up its mind about gnomes.  In 3.0 their favored class was illusionist (remember Nebin?); in 3.5 it became bard.



> So, I humbly suggest that the next incarnation of the gnome embrace this idea: the gnomes are a wandering people, making their homes wherever they can and adapting to survive, whether that be as underground miners, wandering bards, crafty illusionists or eccentric tinkers.




Can Yiddish gnomes be a thing? 'Cause I could totally see that.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jun 30, 2014)

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Can Yiddish gnomes be a thing? 'Cause I could totally see that.




That's actually not meshuggeneh, though the goyim might need a cheat sheet like this website for the "gnomenclature"...

http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Glossary/Yiddish_Words/yiddish_words.html


----------



## evileeyore (Jun 30, 2014)

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Can Yiddish gnomes be a thing? 'Cause I could totally see that.



Dwarves in my fantasy games are always basically Yiddish (with a minor variation).

My Gnomes are always cthonic murder fairies.  My Redcaps are Gnomes who've taken over abandoned forts or homesteads.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 30, 2014)

Dungeoneer said:


> The truth is that I find the gnome to be inherently ridiculous.




Yes.  But no more than anyone else.  You see, the gnome has enough of a sense of humor to recognize his innate absurdity - something dwarves and elves can't manage.



> That said, there is a serious, historical side to this discussion....
> 
> THE EVOLUTION OF THE GNOME IN DUNGEONS & DRAGONS[/B]
> 
> ...




Whoa, there, partner!  You missed a major bit a couple steps back.  1980 - Deities and Demigods.  Garl Glittergold - Greater god, leader of the gnomish pantheon, is a trickster.  This, and the rest of the pantheon, establish much of the character of the intended culture.


----------



## TarionzCousin (Jun 30, 2014)

I don't like a playable race to be defined too narrowly. In my games, gnomes are more akin to Eberron's version: clever, learned, and dedicated to doing their work behind the scenes--but I'm open to anything my players want to do.

So far, in over 20 years of gaming, I haven't had one player choose to be a gnome.


----------



## Hussar (Jun 30, 2014)

I had a player some years ago who made a short race charismatic bard.  And then made it a kobold...  

When I asked her why she didn't go with gnome, she honestly said it never even occurred to her.  

In an earlier campaign, we'd been playing Scarred Lands for nearly two years before anyone noticed that there are no gnomes in Scarred lands (until you get to another continent anyway).  

It was at that point I realised that gnomes really weren't speaking to anyone I played with.


----------



## billd91 (Jun 30, 2014)

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Part of that is because even 3E couldn't make up its mind about gnomes.  In 3.0 their favored class was illusionist (remember Nebin?); in 3.5 it became bard.




One of 3.5's many mistakes, if you ask me. 3.5 made some important fixes but feature creep led to a lot more changes that were utterly unnecessary - like this one.


----------



## HobbitFan (Jun 30, 2014)

I've never had any problem with gnomes in my D&D games.  My brother proudly played an illusionist back in the 1E/2E days and he played one in 3E/3.5.  That was all in the Forgotten Realms.  And I used gnomes all the time alongside dwarves and halflings and we never got the three races mixed up or confused.  The idea that gnomes have no racial identity is an exaggeration and misunderstanding of things.  

Back when I played my very first D&D campaign set in Middle-Earth we had gnomes there too.  Look up Petty Dwarves in Tolkien lore and you'll see how we made it work.  

There's a lot of variety there in the sub-races and other cultures.  Deep Gnomes (which 1 of you mentioned in thread previous) and the Tinker Gnomes (also mentioned before) are very different takes on Gnomes that give you a pretty broad range when taken with the default D&D gnome.

If someone doesn't like gnomes, that's their opinion.  They shouldn't dog on other people's choice to play and enjoy playing gnomes.


----------



## zoroaster100 (Jun 30, 2014)

I think gnomes do have a place in the D&D world distinct from dwarves or halflings.  In a lot of recent campaign settings and aventures they've been defined as either little fey beings who are magical and quirky, or as tinkerers.  Either vision of them tends to show them as an odd bunch, often quirky and surprising, sometimes funny, sometimes dangerous, sometimes mysterious and secretive, sometimes all of the above.  They can be the player's chance to play a faery tale fey being with magic and connection to tricky magic, more so than an elf.  They can be the Illuminati of the world, presenting a false comic face to other races while having a clever and mysterious spy network and secret plans to influence the course of history from behind the scenes.  They can be the source of magic-tech in the world.  I've had players play gnomes in my campaigns, including one player who loves playing gnomes all the time, and does a great job creating interesting gnome characters.  We played a third edition campaign from first to 20th level in which he played a female gnome wizard/thief/arcane trickster to great effect, both roleplay-wise and in terms of contributions to the group's success.


----------



## hatecraft (Jun 30, 2014)

I'm not a fan of gnomes.  They're either stereotyped quirky little inventors or quirky little dudes who hang out with badgers.  It just seems like it's extra difficult to make a complex gnome character--or at least I haven't seen one.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 30, 2014)

hatecraft said:


> I'm not a fan of gnomes.  They're either stereotyped quirky little inventors or quirky little dudes who hang out with badgers.




And dwarves are not stereotyped staid little dudes with axes?


----------



## the Jester (Jun 30, 2014)

Umbran said:


> Whoa, there, partner!  You missed a major bit a couple steps back.  1980 - Deities and Demigods.  Garl Glittergold - Greater god, leader of the gnomish pantheon, is a trickster.  This, and the rest of the pantheon, establish much of the character of the intended culture.




And don't forget the Gnomish Point of View article by Roger E. Moore, published in Dragon back in the day. That series of articles was amongst the best expansion of D&D races' cultures that we've ever seen, up to and including the one on humanoids.


----------



## Dungeoneer (Jul 1, 2014)

Umbran said:


> Whoa, there, partner!  You missed a major bit a couple steps back.  1980 - Deities and Demigods.  Garl Glittergold - Greater god, leader of the gnomish pantheon, is a trickster.  This, and the rest of the pantheon, establish much of the character of the intended culture.






the Jester said:


> And don't forget the Gnomish Point of View article by Roger E. Moore, published in Dragon back in the day. That series of articles was amongst the best expansion of D&D races' cultures that we've ever seen, up to and including the one on humanoids.




Hey, I am by no means setting myself up as an expert on all things gnome! I was mostly going off stuff people had mentioned in this thread + wikipedia.

I will do an edit soon and incorporate Deities and Demigods and the Dragon article. Thanks for the suggestions!


----------



## the Jester (Jul 1, 2014)

Dungeoneer said:


> Hey, I am by no means setting myself up as an expert on all things gnome! I was mostly going off stuff people had mentioned in this thread + wikipedia.
> 
> I will do an edit soon and incorporate Deities and Demigods and the Dragon article. Thanks for the suggestions!




No problem. 

I'd add that the very fact that gnomes were the only nonhumans able to become illusionists in the PH also argues for a trickstery bent.


----------



## Anastrace (Jul 1, 2014)

Dungeoneer said:


> Gnomes. Let's talk about gnomes. I don't get the appeal.
> 
> First of all, what niche are they supposed to fill? They live underground and they make stuff, like dwarves. But I guess they're thinner? And more annoying? Or maybe they're just halflings that live underground. Regardless, they don't seem to have a well-defined place in the small races ecosystem.
> 
> ...




So when I think gnome, I uh..think of David the Gnome. So that's what I ran my campaign with. Gnomes were fey creatures living in the woods with their allies the elves. They were close to nature, tricksters, and skilled with magic. They were druids and illusionists mainly, and used their nature magic to help the elves sculpt their homes into the living trees of Silverwood.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 11, 2014)

They're dangerous!



> 3. DIO LOST A THUMB TO A GARDEN GNOME
> In 2003, Dio was working in his yard, trying to place a large garden gnome on a slope. The gnome toppled over and crushed the metal vocalist’s hand, taking off the tip of his thumb. Dio later recalled that his first thought was, “How on earth am I going to make my devil horn sign now?!” Being a badass, he collected the disembodied appendage, took it inside, washed it off, and then headed to the emergency room, where–to the relief of metal horns-enthusiasts everywhere–it was reattached.
> 
> http://www.revolvermag.com/news/top-5-most-outrageous-facts-about-ronnie-james-dio.html


----------



## Quickleaf (Jul 11, 2014)

Hussar said:


> I had a player some years ago who made a short race charismatic bard.  And then made it a kobold...
> 
> When I asked her why she didn't go with gnome, she honestly said it never even occurred to her.
> 
> ...






hatecraft said:


> I'm not a fan of gnomes.  They're either stereotyped quirky little inventors or quirky little dudes who hang out with badgers.  It just seems like it's extra difficult to make a complex gnome character--or at least I haven't seen one.




Anecdotal counterpoint...

My campaign had 2 gnome PCs at one point! 

One was a stereotypical tinker, but an exceedingly well played and entertaining sterotype. Certainly nearly got the party killed once or twice 

The other was a bard who blended the "trickster gnome" stereotype successfully with a very deep character and spiritual ideals. Again, a very well played character who also served as the party's leader. Had a memorable "bard off" with a rival bard and great verbal sparring with Prince John equivalent.


----------



## am181d (Jul 11, 2014)

Gnomes are the closest you get to playing faeries in the core rules.


----------



## Hussar (Jul 11, 2014)

Quickleaf said:


> Anecdotal counterpoint...
> 
> My campaign had 2 gnome PCs at one point!
> 
> ...




But how many campaigns have you run over the years?  That was always my point. Even those of is who have seen gnomes played, it's usually like you say- one player or one campaign. If you started a new game tomorrow, what are the odds that one of your players would play a gnome?


----------



## Umbran (Jul 11, 2014)

Quickleaf said:


> My campaign had 2 gnome PCs at one point!




Double gnomage can be trouble.  We had a situation some time ago.  Two gnomes (one a svirfneblin illusionist, the other a standard gnome fighter/thief).

The two characters did *not* get along.  The illusionist was neutral with an evil bent, the other was chaotic good.  But, they would not violate the brotherhood of gnomes to take each other on directly.  So they chose champions - the party barbarian and ranger.  The gnomes would prank each others' champions, who had no clue what was going on.  We carried on for two months of weekly sessions like that, until the big'uns finally figured it out and made us stop...


----------



## Dungeoneer (Jul 11, 2014)

Hussar said:


> But how many campaigns have you run over the years?  That was always my point. Even those of is who have seen gnomes played, it's usually like you say- one player or one campaign. If you started a new game tomorrow, what are the odds that one of your players would play a gnome?



Slim to gnome, I'd say!


----------



## Quickleaf (Jul 11, 2014)

Hussar said:


> But how many campaigns have you run over the years?  That was always my point. Even those of is who have seen gnomes played, it's usually like you say- one player or one campaign. If you started a new game tomorrow, what are the odds that one of your players would play a gnome?




I have only run 5 campaigns successfully.

Campaign 1 (Planescape) = players (2), no gnomes
Campaign 2 (Al-Qadim) = players (5), gnomes (1)
Campaign 3 (homebrew) = players (5), no gnomes
Campaign 4 (homebrew) = players (7), gnomes (2)
Campaign 5 (homebrew, interrupted) = players (4-6), no gnomes

Based on that limited experience, the odds may be (eye-balling)...

There's a 8% chance that at least one player will run a gnome in a party of 5.


----------



## Mercule (Jul 11, 2014)

As currently portrayed, gnomes are pretty worthless. The only PC race that sucks more are halflings. (Man, I hate them.)

If you played 1E, gnomes were cool.


----------



## Lwaxy (Jul 12, 2014)

Pardon me, but gnomes are so cool and versatile that I have had to restrict my last PF table crew to 2 gnomes.


----------



## Dungeoneer (Jul 15, 2014)

I have updated my *EVOLUTION OF THE GNOME* timeline to include Deities and Demigods and Roger E. Moore's all-important write-up in Dragon #61:



Dungeoneer said:


> *THE EVOLUTION OF THE GNOME IN DUNGEONS & DRAGONS*
> 
> 1974 - The gnome makes his first appearance in the original edition of D&D.
> 
> ...


----------

