|
Maybe its due in part to continually catering to a minority. If D&D seeks to keep the minority happy without looking at the attitudes and preferences of its broader audience then it will continue to shrink.Just because gnomes have been in the game for a while is not reason enough to keep them. And just because some people like them does not mean that enough people like them.No, but by the same token, if [u]any[/u] people like them, and they [u]have[/u] been in the game for a while (a while being since AD&D, at least, so like 30 years), then why take them out? They're not broken, like races that have come along since, they fill an important niche in a lot of games. So why irritate a percentage of an ever-shrinking market?
I don't know. It just seems careless.
Who says that gamers that like gnomes (or at least don't want to see them eliminated or held in limbo as a PC race) are a minority? I don't think anyone ,including WotC, can say definitively that hardly anyone likes gnomes so eliminating them as a PC race is no big deal.
Well, I'm in the eliminating them is silly camp but I do think you'd be hard pressed to present any evidence that they are not last in terms of popularity. I'm pretty sure even half orcs are more often played than gnomes (though it could be half orcs are last and gnomes second to last).
The basic problem is that gnomes aren't a Tolkein race, so there is no built in concept of what they are ingrained in most players. And most world designers have either ignored them or made them into comic relief.
Gnomes have a lot of very interesting abilities and possibilities. But the DM has to work to bring it out, whereas the players usually inflict their views of the Tolkein races on the DM right way.
Funny, I don't really recall any Dragonborn or Tieflings in LotR either... maybe you have another edition than I? :-)
Okay, so we say that gnomes isn't a popular race (I still find that hard to believe with all the gnome characters I've seen all over the internet). That's no reason to leave out a much more popular class like the druid.Oh they didn't have time to fully develop it to be in sync with the new rules? Guess they should have spent some of the time they spent on the l33t new races on the druid then...
I was really digging some of the new mechanics, but the whole "gotta catch/collect 'em all" attitude towards successive PHBs really soured the whole thing for me.
People don't want a discussion, they want a blistering pithy rebuke that they can quote in their sig.
Can I quote this is my sig?
The gnome was funny. The Tief' was a little too "90s antihero/Baroness" for me. Overall, I liked it.
|
|
I know that the bit was supposed to be comedic, but did anyone notice how non-heroic the tiefling warlock was portrayed? She was basically a psychopath. There is nothing heroic about her. She killed and innocent gnome plus the announcer for a measley bag of gold and kicked the pet badger for good measure. Is this what they expect their new target audience to want? Let's forget about pesky little things like morality, right and wrong, etc. I wonder is this is one reason alignment is getting taken out. It might get in the way of the WOW kids being able to roxxor. It's become let's sell our soul for power and wantonly slay anything we see, instead of heroes trying to save the village or barony from an evil menace. Is this what the game is becoming? It seems sad to me.
Reflection of a violent society. Where I live about three weeks ago, I overheard a women yelling at her kid at the top of her lungs for not fighting back, she screamed "I've told you time and time again to punch, kick or bite anyone who gives you Sh!t, now get in the house your grounded!. The boy is like 10 years old. sad.
but the whole "gotta catch/collect 'em all" attitude towards successive PHBs really soured the whole thing for me.
Exactly, once Phb 4 is released it will be time for a new edition.
I know that the bit was supposed to be comedic, but did anyone notice how non-heroic the tiefling warlock was portrayed? She was basically a psychopath. There is nothing heroic about her. She killed and innocent gnome plus the announcer for a measley bag of gold and kicked the pet badger for good measure. Is this what they expect their new target audience to want? Let's forget about pesky little things like morality, right and wrong, etc. I wonder is this is one reason alignment is getting taken out. It might get in the way of the WOW kids being able to roxxor. It's become let's sell our soul for power and wantonly slay anything we see, instead of heroes trying to save the village or barony from an evil menace. Is this what the game is becoming? It seems sad to me.
Kill everything and take their stuff. Sounds familiar.
Ever read KoDT?
Yes. Funny.
I personally found the skit fairly funny.
Reading into it a little more on the second viewing of it and I was only really disappointed that the gnome got a layer... that means that the layout of the new monster books is likely to be like the later MMs that have come out... wasted space... too bad.
(in full disclosure, I have DM'd far more games with Tieflings than with gnomes).
Sean Mahoney
|
|
Ever read KoDT?
Yes. Funny.
Yup. Satire.
Nothing sad about it.
I've read KODT, and I thought that it was funny. The gamers on KODT were so over the top that you couldn't take them seriously. You just had to laugh at them. This bit was a bit more casual in it's portrayal of violence. One minute, the tiefling is chatting with the announcer, and the next the announcer and gnome are ashes with the badger flying out of the window. Maybe I'm just reading too much into it, but that's how I took it.
I know that the bit was supposed to be comedic, but did anyone notice how non-heroic the tiefling warlock was portrayed? She was basically a psychopath. There is nothing heroic about her. She killed and innocent gnome plus the announcer for a measley bag of gold and kicked the pet badger for good measure. Is this what they expect their new target audience to want? Let's forget about pesky little things like morality, right and wrong, etc. I wonder is this is one reason alignment is getting taken out. It might get in the way of the WOW kids being able to roxxor. It's become let's sell our soul for power and wantonly slay anything we see, instead of heroes trying to save the village or barony from an evil menace. Is this what the game is becoming? It seems sad to me.
This is what I've been trying to tell you all...
|
The video sucked. Does anyone at that sick company even play dungeons and dragons? WTF?
Iconics, schmyconics! That company is through. There is no such thing as official content anymore! WOTC is no longer the sovereign leaders of our game anymore!. It is not us who are old-school...it is they who are grade-school!!!
What is this crap they call a teaser video? What is this shi! they pass for marketing. We need a company with integrity to preserve the "soul" of dungeons and dragons.
LONG LIVE 3P
|
The video sucked. Does anyone at that sick company even play dungeons and dragons? WTF?
Iconics, schmyconics! That company is through. There is no such thing as official content anymore! WOTC is no longer the sovereign leaders of our game anymore!. It is not us who are old-school...it is they who are grade-school!!!
What is this crap they call a teaser video? What is this shi! they pass for marketing. We need a company with integrity to preserve the "soul" of dungeons and dragons.
LONG LIVE 3P
Dude - who pissed in you corn flakes?
Oh, wait ...
|
|
Tiefling kills Gnome and moderator and kicks the badger?
Yeah, this is fun!
Ancient Pacts with demonic entities that turns a race into Tieflings?
This is soo kewl!
Pacts with mostly evil supranatural entities that power ones magic?
Kewl too!
BUT BEWARE OF THE HALF-ORC!
THIS IS NOTHING FOR THE D&D 4th EDITION TARGET GROUP!
DEMONIC EVIL and RANDOM VIOLENCE is OK, but please nothing that involves SEX!
(the above was meant ironic)
|
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
Tiefling kills Gnome and moderator and kicks the badger?
Yeah, this is fun!
Ancient Pacts with demonic entities that turns a race into Tieflings?
This is soo kewl!
Pacts with mostly evil supranatural entities that power ones magic?
Kewl too!
BUT BEWARE OF THE HALF-ORC!
THIS IS NOTHING FOR THE D&D 4th EDITION TARGET GROUP!
DEMONIC EVIL and RANDOM VIOLENCE is OK, but please nothing that involves SEX!(the above was meant ironic)
Wait till Pat Robertson gets ahold of that video...
Saw the video and have to disagree with all you people who say that the jokes are bad, or boring.
Truth is, there where no jokes in that video.
|
|
"Favored Class... no we CAN'T go with a subclass... Let's see... BARD!" WTF?!?!
Yeah, they're a bunch of songsters and songstresses, sure...
Yanno who should have Favored Class: Bard? Elves. Not bad at fighting, but avoiding heavy armor, pretty decent spellcasters, big on the arts and socially graceful. Elves are totally Bards. What race has a special cadre of warrior / spellcasters called 'Bladesingers' that incorporate dance routines into their swordplay? Was that Gnomes? Not so much.
Instead they gave Elves FC: Wizard. 'Cause that's exactly what Elves are known for, sitting around in dusty libraries reading books and spending long painstaking hours of meticulous rote memorization and engaging in arcane alchemical research in structured heirarchical wizards guilds with lots of bubbling beakers and flasks...
IMO, the ideal Gnome Favored Class would be the Beguiler from PHBII.
Then again, I don't like the Favored Class concept anyway, nor the multiclassing exp rules. I particularly dislike when classes have specific multiclassing rules (Paladins and Monks) or alignment restrictions (Barbarians, Bards, Paladins, Monks, Druids, Warlocks).
If someone wants to be a Chaotic drunken master style Monk? Cool. If someone wants to channel his anger into a tightly focused Rage, and yet be Lawful? Also cool. If somebody wants to have a few levels of Barbarian *and* Monk? Way cool, even if technically illegal.
Set, you should be happy since favored class, alignment, and multi-class restrictions are gone in 4e.
Sorry, I meant alignment restrictions on classes.
Heh. Did anyone else notice that they didn't bleep out the Tiefling sayhing she would be a "kick-ass warlock," but they did censor her when she went "No sh!t" at the gnome?
I think people are being overly sensitive regarding 4E. I thought the video was amusing, and I liked the new look for the gnome. Too long have they been the dwarves' little brothers. I don't want to play a lawn-totem, I want to play a little person other than a halfling.
I've been reading Wizards Presents: Races and Classes and it seems like they haven't kicked the gnome or half-orc to the curb, they are working on making their niche in the world stronger. If I have to wait a little longer, so be it. I have no disagreements about adding Tieflings into the core rules; in my experience they have been much more popular with my players than gnomes ever have been. As for dragon-born, heck why not add something new?
The "gotta catch them all" regarding the rulebooks was in 3x as well: how many Monster Manuals were released? How about the first splat books, and then updates in the "Complete xxx" series? At least by the sounds of it the PH2, PH3 etc. will have something to look forward to by everyone, not just people who only play the one class. It's good from both a marketing and a player's point of view in my opinion.
Heh. Did anyone else notice that they didn't bleep out the Tiefling sayhing she would be a "kick-ass warlock," but they did censor her when she went "No sh!t" at the gnome?
Personally, I think the use of profanity was both inappropriate and irresponsible given that WotC is trying to attract a younger, more mainstream audience.
Bad move on their part. Again.
I have a name for this. Lowbrow.
Makes me think back on the vocabulary that DnD taught me when I grew up playing it.
|
|
Heh. Did anyone else notice that they didn't bleep out the Tiefling sayhing she would be a "kick-ass warlock," but they did censor her when she went "No sh!t" at the gnome?Personally, I think the use of profanity was both inappropriate and irresponsible given that WotC is trying to attract a younger, more mainstream audience.
Bad move on their part. Again.
I agree. I went around and around with the WotC fanboys at the WotC boards about the bleeped out F-bomb of the beholder cartoon. As you would expect, I didn't get very far there. They seem to really be trying to hard to get the younger kids to play. What other product uses profanity to try to attract a younger audience? None that I know of.
|
|
I didn't think of that one. It still doesn't mean it's a good thing. Besides I don't think that profanity in rap (I will not stoop to calling it music)is about attracting a younger crowd. It's just part of the whole hip-hop/street culture that the music comes from. Anyway, we are getting way off topic here.
|
I know that the bit was supposed to be comedic, but did anyone notice how non-heroic the tiefling warlock was portrayed? She was basically a psychopath. There is nothing heroic about her. She killed and innocent gnome plus the announcer for a measley bag of gold and kicked the pet badger for good measure. Is this what they expect their new target audience to want? Let's forget about pesky little things like morality, right and wrong, etc. I wonder is this is one reason alignment is getting taken out. It might get in the way of the WOW kids being able to roxxor. It's become let's sell our soul for power and wantonly slay anything we see, instead of heroes trying to save the village or barony from an evil menace. Is this what the game is becoming? It seems sad to me.
This, I have to admit, is one of the things that has me most on edge about 4e. It seems like the game is being pushed away from truly noble & good heroes being viable characters. We've got the dread necromancer, warlock, binder, shadowcaster, and beguiler for classes, tieflings, tanarukk, hellbred, fey'ri, drow, and necropolitans on the race side of things, and prestige classes like blood magus, mindbender, corrupt avenger, tainted scholar, dread witch, hellfire warlock, and pale master (just to name a few of the more obvious ones) on the prestige class front, all available to PCs. Why? What's the fascination with evil methods and means? I can appreciate the tarnished hero idea, but a lot of the content released today seems to actively encourage sociopathy.
|
|
"Favored Class... no we CAN'T go with a subclass... Let's see... BARD!" WTF?!?!
Yeah, they're a bunch of songsters and songstresses, sure...Yanno who should have Favored Class: Bard? Elves. Not bad at fighting, but avoiding heavy armor, pretty decent spellcasters, big on the arts and socially graceful. Elves are totally Bards. What race has a special cadre of warrior / spellcasters called 'Bladesingers' that incorporate dance routines into their swordplay? Was that Gnomes? Not so much.
Instead they gave Elves FC: Wizard. 'Cause that's exactly what Elves are known for, sitting around in dusty libraries reading books and spending long painstaking hours of meticulous rote memorization and engaging in arcane alchemical research in structured heirarchical wizards guilds with lots of bubbling beakers and flasks...
IMO, the ideal Gnome Favored Class would be the Beguiler from PHBII.
I have to say, you've hit it squarely on the head. I never gave it much thought before, but your logic is quite compelling.
What other product uses profanity to try to attract a younger audience? None that I know of.
Rap music. ;P
Ouch!
...No wonder the fiend-chick killed him.
The end was funny :)
I can appreciate the tarnished hero idea, but a lot of the content released today seems to actively encourage sociopathy.
I sort of agree here... while I loved Savage Tide for its epic plot, interesting locations, roleplaying encounters, and so on, I was really disappointed that there was no endgame option to just "be the good guys". In order to win, you had to team up with Orcus, Iggwilv, etc. I started a post about this, and James Jacobs said that basically "that's how it was written."
I don't have any problems with that, (or with Dr. Jacobs, long may he reign!) but I did mind that there wasn't even a sidebar on "playing the good team" or "what if your class loses all its abilities just for being present during encounter 26C?"
I don't like that (while cool) the game (or perhaps gamers) seems to be moving away from being "good" (Conan wasn't nice to a lot of people, but he did do the 'right' thing, at least by his own code of honour) rather than 'whatever you want' (the "Richard" from Looking for Group option).
I really hope that that's not what 4e is pushing, or at least allowing, because that spoils the game for me.
I can appreciate the tarnished hero idea, but a lot of the content released today seems to actively encourage sociopathy.I sort of agree here... while I loved Savage Tide for its epic plot, interesting locations, roleplaying encounters, and so on, I was really disappointed that there was no endgame option to just "be the good guys". In order to win, you had to team up with Orcus, Iggwilv, etc. I started a post about this, and James Jacobs said that basically "that's how it was written."
I don't have any problems with that, (or with Dr. Jacobs, long may he reign!) but I did mind that there wasn't even a sidebar on "playing the good team" or "what if your class loses all its abilities just for being present during encounter 26C?"
I don't like that (while cool) the game (or perhaps gamers) seems to be moving away from being "good" (Conan wasn't nice to a lot of people, but he did do the 'right' thing, at least by his own code of honour) rather than 'whatever you want' (the "Richard" from Looking for Group option).
I really hope that that's not what 4e is pushing, or at least allowing, because that spoils the game for me.
Okay, normally this is where I would chime in with my usual comments about the ethical decay of Paizo and WotC, but I promised myself recently that I wouldn't get sucked into another rant about 4e and the downward spiral of these things. But boy, am I tempted...
|
|
I can appreciate the tarnished hero idea, but a lot of the content released today seems to actively encourage sociopathy.I sort of agree here... while I loved Savage Tide for its epic plot, interesting locations, roleplaying encounters, and so on, I was really disappointed that there was no endgame option to just "be the good guys". In order to win, you had to team up with Orcus, Iggwilv, etc. I started a post about this, and James Jacobs said that basically "that's how it was written."
I don't have any problems with that, (or with Dr. Jacobs, long may he reign!) but I did mind that there wasn't even a sidebar on "playing the good team" or "what if your class loses all its abilities just for being present during encounter 26C?"
I don't like that (while cool) the game (or perhaps gamers) seems to be moving away from being "good" (Conan wasn't nice to a lot of people, but he did do the 'right' thing, at least by his own code of honour) rather than 'whatever you want' (the "Richard" from Looking for Group option).
I really hope that that's not what 4e is pushing, or at least allowing, because that spoils the game for me.
From what little I've seen, Savage tide is all chaos vs. chaos. Why in the world can't the PCs get help from, say Raziel, Kharaash, Pistis Sophia, Domiel, etc. (they used Gwynharwyf, so BoED was definitelyon the table), or the Inevitables, or even Asmodeus, for that matter? Why only other demon lords and one eladrin? If you're going after chaotic evil, why not get lawful good (and lawful neutral) on your side? Is that explained? I just skimmed bits of the savage tide; I didn't read all the articles thoroughly and don't have all the issues it was in.