# One D&D gets gnomes close to perfect



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Aug 21, 2022)

Long-time visitors to this site might remember I've long advocated for a single unified version of gnomes as the tricky little guys who -- as a society -- can't outfight their enemies, who outnumber them and would slaughter them in a fair fight. Instead, they have to outthink them.

As someone who both DMs folks playing gnomes, has a major gnomish culture as a key part of the first half of my longest running campaign (now located on the other side of the continent from the main action, alas), and someone who's played the gnomiest gnome that ever did gnome for almost 12 years now, I like a lot of what I see in the One D&D document.



> Gnomes are magical folk created by gods of hard work, invention, trickery, and life underground. The earliest gnomes were seldom seen by other folk due to the gnomes’ secretive nature and their propensity for lairing in sylvan forests, hillside burrows, and sprawling warrens under mountains. What they lacked in size, they made up for in cleverness and cunning. They confounded predators with elaborate traps and low, narrow, labyrinthine tunnels. They also learned useful magic from gods like Garl Glittergold, Baervan Wildwanderer, and Baravar Cloakshadow, who often lived among them (usually in disguise).
> 
> Gnomes are petite folk with big eyes, pointed ears, and wistful imaginations. Harkening back to a time when their ancestors hid in tunnels and under thick forest canopies, many gnomes like the feeling of a roof over their head, even if that “roof” is nothing more than a hat.




_chef's kiss_

That's a gnome that AD&D readers who read Roger E. Moore's The Gnomish Point of View would recognize as well as those who came to gnomes in the WotC era.

Gnomish stats are very good -- advantage on Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma saving throws feels very good and very thematic -- but I don't love the lineages.



> Gnomish Lineage. You are part of a gnomish lineage that grants you supernatural abilities. Choose a lineage from the Gnomish Lineages table: Forest Gnome, the lineage of magic-filled
> forests, or Rock Gnome, the lineage of primeval mountains. You gain the benefits of that lineage.





> Forest Gnome: You know the Minor Illusion cantrip. You can also cast the Speak with Animals Spell with this trait. You can cast it with the trait a number of times equal to your Proficiency
> Bonus, and you regain all expended uses when you finish a Long Rest.* You can also use any Spell Slots you have to cast the Spell.





> Rock Gnome: You know the Mending and Prestidigitation cantrips.
> 
> In addition, you can spend 10 minutes casting Prestidigitation to create a Tiny clockwork device (AC 5, 1 HP), such as a toy, a fire starter, or a music box. Casting the Spell in this way consumes 10 GP worth of raw material (string, gears, and the like), which you provide during the casting.
> 
> ...



OK, first off, I don't buy that these are two distinct cultures (see my Unified Theory of Gnomes link above for more). But even if they are, wow, these two lineages are not even close to as good as one another. One gets two free spells that lots of spellcasters would choose anyway, and the other one gets to spend 10 gold to flavor Prestidigitation in a way that lots of DMs would just handwave as free roleplay flavoring?

Of all the little used tool proficiencies, tinkering is currently the most nebulous and useless one of all. (I have someone with the Brewing proficiency and _it has been used in play_.) Since very few people are likely wanting tinkering in its real world version in D&D ("I'd like my character to be a traveling merchant who can repair pots and pans"), why not make the rock gnome magical-mechanical effect how the tinkering proficiency works generally? It's not unbalancing -- it's not even as good as a lot of subclass ribbons.

Dump the idea of gnome lineages, make the default PHB gnome a forest gnome and either give them a free tinkering proficiency (which we're generally not doing, but it's hard to see what rock gnomes are doing as something completely uncoupled from proficiencies) or rename the Artisan background the "Gnomish Tinker" background instead, to steer folks that way, for all the gnomes from Krynn and Mystara.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 21, 2022)

The powers of both Lineages are at leastmore clear than in 2014 core.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Aug 21, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> The powers of both Lineages are at leastmore clear than in 2014 core.



Yeah, even if they don't change a word of this between now and 2024, this is a substantial upgrade to what we have today.


----------



## Tales and Chronicles (Aug 21, 2022)

I also think they should be one.

I think they should have 2 of Mending/Minor Illusion/Prestidigitation AND be able to cast through the Artisan's Tool they decide to pick ala Artificer light. 

 Then, the Speak with Animals/Plants (or rocks for the gnomes) and Invisibility-light of the Firbolg should be given to them.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 21, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Yeah, even if they don't change a word of this between now and 2024, this is a substantial upgrade to what we have today.



I do suspect, based on some wording here and in the Feats, that we will see Artificers in this PHB. I wouldn't even be surprised if the September packet is just Artificers. Positioning Gnomes as the archetypal Artificers.in the PHB us a major role upgrade.


----------



## Twiggly the Gnome (Aug 21, 2022)

I'm pretty happy with the Forest Gnome implementation, if they also got _Fade Away _I'd say it was perfect.

Rock Gnomes getting Mending and their contraptions having any Prestidigitation effect was a house rule we've had a long time. I'd agree they need a little something extra. Maybe a long rest use of Fabricate?

I'd personally be fine with the Forest Gnome being * the* Gnome and the tinker stuff being offloaded to a background, but I think WotC wants to accommodate the folks that want a strait up Dragonlance or World of Warcraft style Gnome.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Aug 21, 2022)

Twiggly the Gnome said:


> I'd personally be fine with the Forest Gnome being * the* Gnome and the tinker stuff being offloaded to a background, but I think WotC wants to accommodate the folks that want a strait up Dragonlance or World of Warcraft style Gnome.



Yeah, I think you're right about wanting to accommodate those two interests. Rock gnome needs something more than they've got, though.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 21, 2022)

Twiggly the Gnome said:


> I'm pretty happy with the Forest Gnome implementation, if they also got _Fade Away _I'd say it was perfect.
> 
> Rock Gnomes getting Mending and their contraptions having any Prestidigitation effect was a house rule we've had a long time. I'd agree they need a little something extra. Maybe a long rest use of Fabricate?
> 
> I'd personally be fine with the Forest Gnome being * the* Gnome and the tinker stuff being offloaded to a background, but I think WotC wants to accommodate the folks that want a strait up Dragonlance or World of Warcraft style Gnome.



I feel like that might be better served with entirely seperate Race options, as with the Deep Gnome or all the Elves in Monsters of the Multiverse. Give the two a bit more of a different structure.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan (Aug 21, 2022)

I was going to do a joke rant about how Gnomes are already perfect, and it's heresy to suggest that they're "_close_ to perfect", but decided against it. 

I agree. I really like the changes to Gnomes here. I personally would like Svirfneblin to be in the PHB (especially because with this new format of "subraces", it really wouldn't take much space to print them), but otherwise I think they're pretty much good. Changing Rock Gnome's Tinkering into magic at least fixes the whole issue with putting cultural traits into racial mechanics, but I'm not sure how I feel about their current tinkering ability besides that.


----------



## Tonguez (Aug 21, 2022)

I still want my gnomes tiny, and able to get full cover in plain sight


----------



## Aldarc (Aug 21, 2022)

Twiggly the Gnome said:


> I'd personally be fine with the Forest Gnome being * the* Gnome and the tinker stuff being offloaded to a background, but *I think WotC wants to accommodate the folks that want a strait up Dragonlance or World of Warcraft style Gnome.*



The tinker gnomes came from Dragonlance, by designer Jeff Grubb in particular. 

_Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness_ (1995) introduced tinker gnomes to Azeroth. The Warcraft creative team was into D&D and Warhammer, and you can see the influences all over the place. 

Incidentally, both Richard Knaak (Dragonlance novelist) and Jeff Grubb (creator of Dragonlance's tinker gnomes) have written novels for Warcraft, both having written their first novels for the Warcraft universe in 2001: _Day of the Dragon_ and _The Last Guardian_, respectively. 

Jeff Grubb also was a story and lore developer for Guild Wars starting with _Nightfall_ (the 3rd expansion), and the Asura he developed in _Guild Wars: Eye of the North_ and _Guild Wars 2_ have a lot of conceptual overlap with tinker gnomes as well.


----------



## Yaarel (Aug 21, 2022)

Tales and Chronicles said:


> I also think they should be one.
> 
> I think they should have 2 of Mending/Minor Illusion/Prestidigitation AND be able to cast through the Artisan's Tool they decide to pick ala Artificer light.
> 
> Then, the Speak with Animals/Plants (or rocks for the gnomes) and Invisibility-light of the Firbolg should be given to them.



Change the Speak With Animals spell into a cantrip instead.

Then, the gnome can choose two from: Minor Illusion, Prestidigitation, Mending, and Speak With Animal. Additionally, the gnome can cast these cantrips thru a gadget.

Fewer lineages, with more versatility, is my hope for ODD design.


----------



## Tales and Chronicles (Aug 21, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> Change the Speak With Animals spell into a cantrip instead.



I would prefer if the ability to speak to animals and rocks was not a spell, just a supernatural ability for the magically inclined fey race. 

*Fey Ancestry. *
You have advantage on saving throws and ability tests you make to resist or notice illusion spells.

*Small-Folk Nimbleness. *
You can move through the space of any creature that is of a size larger than yours and you can move through and stop in a space large enough for a Tiny creature. 

*Hidden Steps.*
As a bonus action, you can magically turn invisible until the start of your next turn or until you attack, make a damage roll, or force someone to make a saving throw. You can use this trait a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus, and you regain all expended uses when you finish a long rest.

*Speech of Earth and Beast.*
You have the ability to communicate in a limited manner with Beasts and stone creatures. You can speak Terran and Sylvan. If a beast do not have a language, they can understand the meaning of your words, though you have no special ability to understand them in return. You have advantage on all Charisma checks you make to influence them.

*Hard-Working.*
You know the Prestidigitation and Mending cantrips and you gain proficiency in an Artisan's Tool of your choice. You can cast those spells using the chosen tools as a spell focus. When you take a long rest, you can spend at least six hours in an intense focused state working with the tools you are proficient with. In this state, you appear absent-minded, but it doesn't render you unconscious, and you can see and hear as normal.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Aug 21, 2022)

Aldarc said:


> Jeff Grubb also was a story and lore developer for Guild Wars starting with _Nightfall_ (the 3rd expansion), and the Asura he developed in _Guild Wars: Eye of the North_ and _Guild Wars 2_ have a lot of conceptual overlap with tinker gnomes as well.



Man that explains a lot, because Grubb is also keen on Kender (to the point of inflicting one on the FR!), and Asuras have personalities which seem to combine many of the worst traits of Tinker Gnome and Kender - huge amounts of egotism combined with child-like whimsy and faux-vulnerability is pretty goddamn irritating. I knew I hated them for a reason!


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Aug 21, 2022)

Tales and Chronicles said:


> I would prefer if the ability to speak to animals and rocks was not a spell, just a supernatural ability for the magically inclined fey race.
> 
> *Fey Ancestry. *
> You have advantage on saving throws and ability tests you make to resist or notice illusion spells.
> ...



I like this but I'd suggest do not redefine Fey Ancestry without changing the name, this actively unhelpful and actively causes misunderstandings/confusions. Fey Ancestry is used in quite a lot of races, and it always means the same thing post-MotM (correct me if I'm wrong).


----------



## Twiggly the Gnome (Aug 21, 2022)

Tales and Chronicles said:


> *Fey Ancestry. *
> You have advantage on saving throws and ability tests you make to resist or notice illusion spells.



Would this replace _Gnome Cunning_? If so, that would be a major nerf, for no appreciable gain.


----------



## Tales and Chronicles (Aug 21, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> I like this but I'd suggest do not redefine Fey Ancestry without changing the name, this actively unhelpful and actively causes misunderstandings/confusions. Fey Ancestry is used in quite a lot of races, and it always means the same thing post-MotM (correct me if I'm wrong).





Twiggly the Gnome said:


> Would this replace _Gnome Cunning_? If so, that would be a major nerf, for no appreciable gain.



This was the idea, yeah. I preferred it to Cunning because it affected ability checks rather than just saves, since Illusion often use Intelligence check to resist o spot illusion magic. 

I could make it advantage on Int/Wis/Cha saves and ability check to resist and spot illusion and enchantment magic? 

The school restriction is because I find it weird that the cunning mind of the Gnome, often associated with their taste for beguiling magic, make's them better at resisting things like being slowed, eyebite, banishment etc. It would still make it cover most of the mind-affecting spells while removing the weird ones, IMO. 

As for the name, I'm not keen on ''Gnome Cunning'', I'm looking for something that sounds a little more supernatural and related to their Feywild origin.


----------



## Haplo781 (Aug 21, 2022)

Just convert 4e gnome as closely as possible.


----------



## Aldarc (Aug 21, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> Man that explains a lot, because Grubb is also keen on Kender (to the point of inflicting one on the FR!), and Asuras have personalities which seem to combine many of the worst traits of Tinker Gnome and Kender - huge amounts of egotism combined with child-like whimsy and faux-vulnerability is pretty goddamn irritating. I knew I hated them for a reason!



I don't mind asura. I enjoy them more than WoW's tinker gnomes, which feels far more played up for laughs.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Aug 21, 2022)

Aldarc said:


> I don't mind asura. I enjoy them more than WoW's tinker gnomes, which feels far more played up for laughs.



Yeah WoW's tinker gnomes are basically straight-up imported from Dragonlance, just significantly higher-tech, and like, if they make tech off-screen it works, but if they make it on-screen, it goes wrong.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Aug 26, 2022)

Tales and Chronicles said:


> This was the idea, yeah. I preferred it to Cunning because it affected ability checks rather than just saves, since Illusion often use Intelligence check to resist o spot illusion magic.




I wpuld be surprised if illusions won't be ended with an int saving throw instead of an investigation check.
Ilthough I really found the idea neat, it has a similar problem to the old grapple: skills can by far outmatch the DC by having expertise and easier boosts.
Also with the switch from investigation to perception when you search for traps and secret doors, if you play by the rules, the existence of the illusion if given away anyway.


----------



## Chaosmancer (Aug 26, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> OK, first off, I don't buy that these are two distinct cultures (see my Unified Theory of Gnomes link above for more). But even if they are, wow, these two lineages are not even close to as good as one another. One gets two free spells that lots of spellcasters would choose anyway, and the other one gets to spend 10 gold to flavor Prestidigitation in a way that lots of DMs would just handwave as free roleplay flavoring?
> 
> Of all the little used tool proficiencies, tinkering is currently the most nebulous and useless one of all. (I have someone with the Brewing proficiency and _it has been used in play_.) Since very few people are likely wanting tinkering in its real world version in D&D ("I'd like my character to be a traveling merchant who can repair pots and pans"), why not make the rock gnome magical-mechanical effect how the tinkering proficiency works generally? It's not unbalancing -- it's not even as good as a lot of subclass ribbons.
> 
> Dump the idea of gnome lineages, make the default PHB gnome a forest gnome and either give them a free tinkering proficiency (which we're generally not doing, but it's hard to see what rock gnomes are doing as something completely uncoupled from proficiencies) or rename the Artisan background the "Gnomish Tinker" background instead, to steer folks that way, for all the gnomes from Krynn and Mystara.




I definitely enjoyed the over-arching version of the gnome lore, and the main stats are good. But I think I agree that the lineages aren't my favorite. 

I don't mind that the Forest gnome gets Speak with Animals instead of just talking to them, but I don't think it should be prof mod per day. This feels far more like it should be at-will. But it does allow them to speak to bigger animals, which allows for some fun village/town building. 

The Rock Gnome getting two cantrips instead is a bit weird. I think the power of the feature is hard to figure out. The flavor bothered me at first, but I'm coming to enjoy it. I think they are valuing it higher because it allows some casting to be done by other characters, but I don't think off-set prestidigitation is really the same value here. 

I also find it interesting to look at the Multiverse version of Deep Gnomes, now that we know that is compatible. They get their magical spells, which are very powerful, improved darkvision, the resistances, and their camoflague ability is now advantage on any stealth check prof-mod per day. 

Looking at that, then back at standard gnomes.... the standards could be raised a little without too much fuss I think.


----------



## HaroldTheHobbit (Aug 26, 2022)

Raising our gnome overlords to a fluff and mechanical standard that befits their majestic greatness is both necessary and urgent!


----------



## Marandahir (Sep 1, 2022)

I like both Forest Gnomes and Rock Gnomes.

And I see how they are one unified people, too.

But I also see how Rock Gnomes are really just Dwarves that chose size small, and Forest Gnomes are really just Elves that chose size small, but instead of including that size class option in the Dwarf and Elf sections, they created a separate unified section. Similarly, Halflings are just Humans that chose size small. 

But you don't want to otherize any player by saying in order to be size small, you have to be a magical non-human person. So Humans now can be size small, whereas if you say you want to play a keebler or christmas elf, the DM says, okay but you're not actually an elf, you're a gnome.

Halfling had this weird identity crisis where the Stout was kinda Half-Dwarf, Half-Halfling, and the Lightfoot was kinda Half-Elf, Half-Halfling (This dates back to Tolkien where Stoors are more Human-like, Harfoots are more Dwarf-like, and Fallowhides are more Elf-like). Like, D&D knows what a Human is, what an Elf is, what a Dwarf is, and what an Orc is. But the other peoples all had a version that was kinda elf like and kinda dwarf like or else kinda human like and kinda orc like (say, Hobgoblin vs Bugbear, with Goblins being kinda Halfling or Gnome like). 

But somehow, 1D&D was able to unify Halfling into their own people. But Gnomes are still caught in this limnal space between Dwarves and Elves as their littler variation. Which is weird because Dwarf also means little person in common parlance, so really Dwarves should be able to be small, not one of the only PHB lineages that CAN'T choose Small.

The lack of Ability Score bumps should give room for the two lineages to be merged. Let Forest and Rock be cultures. Svirfs can be different in the way Duergar and Drow are, and by removing Rock Gnomes as separate from Forest Gnomes, you end up with Svirfneblin contrasting more with Gnomes in general.


----------



## kunadam (Sep 6, 2022)

Marandahir said:


> But I also see how Rock Gnomes are really just Dwarves that chose size small, and Forest Gnomes are really just Elves that chose size small, but instead of including that size class option in the Dwarf and Elf sections, they created a separate unified section. Similarly, Halflings are just Humans that chose size small.



Spoken from my heart. I just do not feel what is a gnome.

In some sense I have the same problem with hobbits/halflings, but at least they had the clear role of being commoners and plum farmers. Over the editions, they have become more kenderish.

Dragonlance tinker gnomes are at least unique. So I do not mind rock gnomes going in that direction. But forest gnomes still feel like short elves.


----------



## Marandahir (Sep 6, 2022)

kunadam said:


> Spoken from my heart. I just do not feel what is a gnome.
> 
> In some sense I have the same problem with hobbits/halflings, but at least they had the clear role of being commoners and plum farmers. Over the editions, they have become more kenderish.
> 
> Dragonlance tinker gnomes are at least unique. So I do not mind rock gnomes going in that direction. But forest gnomes still feel like short elves.



I feel like a big issue with Halflings is that they swing between sedentary Hobbits, itinerant stereotypes of Romani people, Kender, Athasian cannibals, and Forest Gnomes with the serial numbers filed off. 

“The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power” depicts itinerant Harfoots (one culture of Proto-Hobbits) in much the way a lot of D&D games treat Forest Gnomes. I’ve also seen it argued that while Sam should be statted as a Stout Halfling and Pippin as a Lightfoot Halfing, Frodo should be treated as a Gnome. 

The line between Gnome and Halfling has always been very vague bc they’re representing the little people. I always liked Gnomes as the Fey variation of either Dwarfes or Halflings (with Elves as the fey Humans and Firbolgs as the Fey Goliaths), but now Fairies exist as a small fey lineage! I’d almost put Firbolgs and Gnomes in this third category of natury but not Fey people, in 5e at least…


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Sep 6, 2022)

Marandahir said:


> I feel like a big issue with Halflings is that they swing between sedentary Hobbits, itinerant stereotypes of Romani people, Kender, Athasian cannibals, and Forest Gnomes with the serial numbers filed off.



It's the sign of trying to please people who post "I don't get halflings/gnomes" threads. TSR and WotC have always had the somewhat bizarre notion that every race needs to work for every player. (The people who create those threads often have a similar view.)

Here's the thing: I really don't give a crap about elves. Rings of Power earns a lot of points with me for making elfy elfishness compelling to me for the first time since middle school. But I am well aware that other people _adore_ elves and have no need or desire to post threads demanding they be taken out of the PHB or be completely reworked in a way that will please me but alienate the existing elf-lovers.

Why halflings and gnomes have to be remade to please people who -- spoiler alert -- still won't play them anyway has always been a mystery to me. What 4E did to halflings and gnomes were among the reasons I noped out of that edition.


Marandahir said:


> The line between Gnome and Halfling has always been very vague bc they’re representing the little people.



Halflings are fantasy (in every sense) English peasants. They occupy a totally different conceptual space than gnomes, who are the magical little people.


----------



## Mephista (Sep 6, 2022)

I once did some digging into where gnomes came from. The D&D version anyways. And I read that, when they were concieving of the gnome, the writers wanted to make a new jack-of-all-trade race, but in a different way from humans.  So, smol and tricksy-stealthy, like halflings. Likes digging and crafting and shiny gemstones like dwarves. And magical likes the elves. Thus were the gnomes born. 

Heh. Or that's what I read anyways; grain of salt and all that.   And its what I did with my gnomes in my campaign - half-elf meets halfling-dwarf parents.


----------



## Doc_Klueless (Sep 6, 2022)

Marandahir said:


> I feel like a big issue with Halflings is that ...



If they make halflings lose the giant head-tiny footedness, I'll be first in line for 1D&D (only partially a joke).


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Sep 6, 2022)

Doc_Klueless said:


> If they make halflings lose the giant head-tiny footedness, I'll be first in line for 1D&D (only partially a joke).



Ugh. I should have included that in the playtest survey. Just draw them as halflings with shoes, folks. Everyone will be fine.


----------



## Kobold Stew (Sep 6, 2022)

I agree with those who think the lineages for gnomes are not needed. 

*Darkvision* is inevitable, but not needed.
*Gnomish Cunning *is powerful, and central/definitional to the race.

Instead of Gnomish Lineage as written, I would suggest:

all gnomes get the Speak with Animals castings
gnomes can choose between minor illusion, prestidigitation, or mending.
lose the clockwork device


----------



## Doc_Klueless (Sep 6, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Ugh. I should have included that in the playtest survey. Just draw them as halflings with shoes, folks. Everyone will be fine.



Haha. I did add it in mine though I called them Bobble-headed, needle-foot halflings who would fall over if left standing.


----------



## Mind of tempest (Sep 6, 2022)

Doc_Klueless said:


> If they make halflings lose the giant head-tiny footedness, I'll be first in line for 1D&D (only partially a joke).



I do not even like halflings but better art would make dealing with them better.


----------



## Marandahir (Sep 6, 2022)

Doc_Klueless said:


> Haha. I did add it in mine though I called them Bobble-headed, needle-foot halflings who would fall over if left standing.



How would you distinguish in art Halflings wearing shoes from Gnomes from Dwarves from Humans?


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan (Sep 6, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Halflings are fantasy (in every sense) English peasants. They occupy a totally different conceptual space than gnomes, who are the magical little people.



I personally like that Humans can be Small or Medium in OneD&D, but that does leave a weird design space with Halflings, which came from Hobbits and basically had the definition of "3-foot tall English peasants" . . . which isn't a great niche for a player race, especially in a game where Humans can be just as short as halflings.


----------



## Doc_Klueless (Sep 6, 2022)

Marandahir said:


> How would you distinguish in art Halflings wearing shoes from Gnomes from Dwarves from Humans?



Them eating Second Breakfast? 

Actually, I'm not sure. But what they came up with was an abomination. Hell, no halfling would ever be born as there is no way in hell that head is coming out between those tiny hips.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Sep 7, 2022)

Marandahir said:


> How would you distinguish in art Halflings wearing shoes from Gnomes from Dwarves from Humans?



How do you distinguish human cultures in illustrations? Cultural clothing choices and hair styles.

I'd also have halfings be beardless, chubbier, have curly hair and broader frames. They have round ears and dress like English peasants.

Gnomes would have pointed ears, would typically grow involved facial hair (every beard and mustache contest winner are modeling for gnome character are) and be more like tiny elves than tiny humans, in build, other than their little pot bellies. And I'd shamelessly go with Nordic gnome art, as popularized by the art of Rien Poortvliet.


----------



## Marandahir (Sep 7, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> How do you distinguish human cultures in illustrations? Cultural clothing choices and hair styles.
> 
> I'd also have halfings be beardless, chubbier, have curly hair and broader frames. They have round ears and dress like English peasants.
> 
> Gnomes would have pointed ears, would typically grow involved facial hair (every beard and mustache contest winner are modeling for gnome character are) and be more like tiny elves than tiny humans, in build, other than their little pot bellies. And I'd shamelessly go with Nordic gnome art, as popularized by the art of Rien Poortvliet.



Halflings ≠ Human Cultures, though. 

If we want Halflings to be their own lineage its own mechanics, it should look different from any other lineage…


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Sep 7, 2022)

Marandahir said:


> Halflings ≠ Human Cultures, though.
> 
> If we want Halflings to be their own lineage its own mechanics, it should look different from any other lineage…



Every nonhuman race has clothes based on humanity. I was suggesting a starting point for halflings, not an end-point.

Just as dwarves have their pseudo-Nordic (by way of Wagner) aesthetic that then gets made more angular and with more of a focus on metal, carvings and braids, and elves take the clothes of English archers and flowing Medieval English clothing but then incorporate leaves and trees, I'd probably have the halfling aesthetic focus on handicrafts, agriculture motifs, wagon wheels, etc.


----------



## Mind of tempest (Sep 7, 2022)

Levistus's_Leviathan said:


> I personally like that Humans can be Small or Medium in OneD&D, but that does leave a weird design space with Halflings, which came from Hobbits and basically had the definition of "3-foot tall English peasants" . . . which isn't a great niche for a player race, especially in a game where Humans can be just as short as halflings.



yeah have the massive discussions I see the need for small races but haflings need to be really looked at to survive.


Marandahir said:


> Halflings ≠ Human Cultures, though.
> 
> If we want Halflings to be their own lineage its own mechanics, it should look different from any other lineage…



but how do you do that without messing up what people like about halflings?


----------



## Marandahir (Sep 8, 2022)

Levistus's_Leviathan said:


> I personally like that Humans can be Small or Medium in OneD&D, but that does leave a weird design space with Halflings, which came from Hobbits and basically had the definition of "3-foot tall English peasants" . . . which isn't a great niche for a player race, especially in a game where Humans can be just as short as halflings.



This is the crux of the issue.

IMO, Magical luck should be the basis of the Halfling story - “Lucky” is their big thing.

This points us that Halflings should lean into Leprauchaun-esque ideas without being reduced to anti-Irish stereotypes (and they probably shouldn’t have Irish accents or Celtic-inspired warriors lest they end up confused with LR-film style Always-Scottish Dwarves).

This tells me we should be looking wider at the House/Farmstead spirit archetype from fairy tales and folklore - as opposed to the related miner spirits or forest spirits that Gnomes seem to represent.

That then says to me that Gnomes and Halflings might really be just a single lineage with three sublineages, or else they should be three different peoples (and could be accompanied by little water people as well). This would suggest instead perhaps just letting Elves and Dwarves and other lineages also be small and say that gnomes are a type of small dwarf or elf, and Halflings are a culture of small humans (much as they were supposed to be in LR as part of the Human race…)


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan (Sep 8, 2022)

Marandahir said:


> This is the crux of the issue.
> 
> IMO, Magical luck should be the basis of the Halfling story - “Lucky” is their big thing.
> 
> ...



Making Halflings Leprechaun-esque is interesting and could be a good idea. What other similar luck-based creatures from other mythologies/folklore could this version of Halflings take inspiration from?

(Side Note: I'm kind of amazed that Leprechauns haven't been updated to 5e yet. It seems like they would have been perfect for The Wild Beyond the Witchlight. There are quite a few popular monsters from folklore that don't have official stats in 5e yet, like the Thunderbird, Leprechaun, Greek Lamias, and the World Serpent.)


----------



## Marandahir (Sep 8, 2022)

Levistus's_Leviathan said:


> Making Halflings Leprechaun-esque is interesting and could be a good idea. What other similar luck-based creatures from other mythologies/folklore could this version of Halflings take inspiration from?
> 
> (Side Note: I'm kind of amazed that Leprechauns haven't been updated to 5e yet. It seems like they would have been perfect for The Wild Beyond the Witchlight. There are quite a few popular monsters from folklore that don't have official stats in 5e yet, like the Thunderbird, Leprechaun, Greek Lamias, and the World Serpent.)



Tomte/Tonttu/Nisse/Nis Puck, Lutin/Jardinain/Garden Gnome, the little hairy-faced people of various First Nations stories, Brownies, Hobs (from hence Hobbit derives), Domovoy, Husvaettr (literally, House-spirit, as opposed to the nature spirit Landvaetter or the Alfar Elves or Dvergr dwarves), Agathodaemon, Pooka/Puck/Bwga/Pwca/Bwbachod/Pookie/Boggart/Bugbear,Kabouter, Pixie/Piskie, Lares, the Yule Lads, Jack-o-Bowl, Cofgodas/Kofewalt, Penates, Trasgu, Anito/Anitu/Diwata, the Gasin/Gashin Gods, Zashiki-warashi/Zashiki-bōzu, Makuragaeshi, Akashaguma, Akagantaa, Kijimuna, Bunagaya, the list goes on…


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Sep 8, 2022)

Maybe let's move the "gnomes and halflings are terrible" to one of the existing threads on that topic?


----------



## Mind of tempest (Sep 8, 2022)

Marandahir said:


> This is the crux of the issue.
> 
> IMO, Magical luck should be the basis of the Halfling story - “Lucky” is their big thing.
> 
> ...



I am fairly certain the race made to be merry England being cast as a well-known Irish spirit is not going to end mixing Tolkien fanatics and nationalism would be new but not a good idea.

the problem with halfling is by nature they were never supposed to be a major people in the setting even in the lendendarium they are mostly off to the side doing their own thing.


----------



## Marandahir (Sep 8, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Maybe let's move the "gnomes and halflings are terrible" to one of the existing threads on that topic?



Fair. I hadn’t seen them and was reacting directly to comments in this thread but I can see how it’s a bit derailed from the topic at hand!

Ultimately I feel like Gnomes are close to perfect as is too - and removing sublineages would help get them over the finish line and also distinguish from Halflings and Elves and Dwarves more… I’d just want to be sure any Gnome changes don’t push them into the same territory changes to Halflings are pushing since they need to give space for Small Humans, too!


----------



## masshysteria (Sep 8, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> What 4E did to halflings and gnomes were among the reasons I noped out of that edition.



Interesting, I like most of your gnome ideas so far. Was there something in particular that put a bad taste in your mouth? I appreciated how halflings and gnomes felt very different from one another and the other races in 4th edition. And who can forget they gave us this guy: 
I was actually hoping the new gnome would be inspired more by the 4E gnome. Some of the more interesting parts:


> Player's Handbook 2 (4th Edition) Gnomes
> 
> Gnomes are smaller even than halflings, rarely exceeding 4 feet in height. Apart from their size, they resemble elves or eladrin, with pointed ears and chiseled facial features such as high cheekbones and sharp jaws. They have a more wild look than eladrin do, though, particularly in the hair that sprouts from their heads in random directions. Some male gnomes sprout tufts of hair from their chins, but they otherwise lack body hair.... Their hair can be virtually any color, from stark white to blond and various shades of brown to autumnal orange or green. Their eyes are glittering black orbs.
> 
> ...


----------



## Marandahir (Sep 8, 2022)

masshysteria said:


> Interesting, I like most of your gnome ideas so far. Was there something in particular that put a bad taste in your mouth? I appreciated how halflings and gnomes felt very different from one another and the other races in 4th edition. And who can forget they gave us this guy.
> 
> I was actually hoping the new gnome would be inspired more by the 4E gnome. Some of the more interesting parts:



I LOVE the 4E Gnome. It was definitely more Forest Gnome than Rock Gnome, though. Both Svirfneblin and Tinker Gnome were statted as alternate lineages in latter 4E products. 5E Rock Gnome shares a lot of similarity with the 4Essentials Tinker Gnome, as do the Svirfs with each other (save the fact that 4Essentials Svirfs were a Str/Con lineage a la Goliaths, Orcs, and some Dwarves).


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Sep 8, 2022)

masshysteria said:


> Interesting, I like most of your gnome ideas so far. Was there something in particular that put a bad taste in your mouth? I appreciated how halflings and gnomes felt very different from one another and the other races in 4th edition. And who can forget they gave us this guy:
> I was actually hoping the new gnome would be inspired more by the 4E gnome. Some of the more interesting parts:



I agree that having gnomes and halflings differentiated from one another is doable and generally a good thing.

I think -- and I suspect the architects of 5E agree on this -- that while introducing new ideas and new flavors to existing player character races and classes is great and expands their appeal, cutting away non-problematic parts of them turns away existing fans in favor of finding new ones.

4E halflings in particular -- dreadlocked nomadic boat people -- are such a striking change from even the 3E halflings that it's hard to see how someone (like me!) who likes halflings and both plays them and has run all-halfling games would feel like what I liked before still existed. The 1D&D halflings in contrast bring together all flavors of existing halflings -- including 4E! -- and make them all part of the same package.

I think 4E gnomes are mostly fine -- I find the 4E cartoons charming -- but they're still a sharp break from the past and, by taking them out of the PHB, WotC back then was sending a clear message about which players they were worried about and which they weren't. (It's also essentially impossible to play a traditional illusionist in 4E, as illusion magic just flavors existing types of 4E spells, rather than being the freeform magic that requires a lot of adjudication and negotiation with a DM to make work.)

4E was very good at being the particular game they wanted to make. I know a ton of computer game makers who adore it from a design standpoint. That said, I'm a lot more interested in killing sacred cows when they're mechanical cruft and not when they eliminate broad swaths of past lore where the only problem is that the designer didn't like them. Make additive changes in those cases, not subtractive.


----------

