|
Post by Daos on Mar 9, 2006 18:10:49 GMT -8
Again, it's never really come up. It often takes years to reach such high levels. In the longest game I was ever in, my character only made it to level 5. In the longest game I ever ran, the players never went beyond 6th level. And I am very generous with XP. We started this game at level 4, and still the party is under level 5 after 17 sessions (except Nari--she reached level 6, but then Biz dropped).
|
|
Airellian
Elite
Sunny Greenhaven
Posts: 1,284
|
Post by Airellian on May 11, 2006 19:25:07 GMT -8
I don't really have a favorite race. I prefer to play humans, not for any particular reason. Anything new or strange might catch my eye as well.
I dislike elves, though they used to be my favorite. Specifically, I dislike elf subraces. The sheer number of them and their rationalization. There must be vastly more human races than any amount of elves, but many see fit to give them special abilities, etc, simply because they live in the mountains or near the sea or underground. Actually, I dislike any subraces.
|
|
|
Post by Daos on May 11, 2006 20:03:55 GMT -8
Amtar has some sub-races. Elves have four (I tossed sea elves), dwarves have four and halflings have four. Every other playable race is limited to one.
I mostly only used them because I wanted Amtar to be semi-genetic. My other worlds won't have sub-races.
|
|
|
Post by Daos on Sept 19, 2006 13:47:06 GMT -8
You know, several months ago, I removed all level limits from all races in my campaign. And I don't think anybody even noticed. Har, har.
|
|
Airellian
Elite
Sunny Greenhaven
Posts: 1,284
|
Post by Airellian on Jan 21, 2007 8:07:16 GMT -8
If you wanted it to be semi-genetic, then shouldn't it be the other way around? I mean... Humans are found in every climate in the world, but they're not noticeably different from one another. Humans aren't noticeably smarter (or dexterous, or healthier, or wiser, etc.) in one region than humans in another region. The only explanation I would accept would be that some magical quality affected the race. But, just because elves move to the mountains doesn't mean that they become different.
Then, again, I suppose I should consider neanderthals. But they're a species apart from humans. Anyway, I digress.
|
|
|
Post by Daos on Jan 21, 2007 10:49:28 GMT -8
Wow, I never noticed before. That is a nine month old typo. I meant to say 'generic' not 'genetic.' Haha.
|
|
|
Post by Daos on Apr 12, 2007 17:32:42 GMT -8
I wanted to ask something about Gnomes. Partly because of my work on Cradle, but also curiosity in general.
Although my player roster has changed a lot over the years, generally there has been a dislike (at worst) or indifference (at best) toward gnomes.
In fact, funny story. The other day I asked Heather to rank the six Core Races in order she would be willing to play them, and gnomes came last. I asked her to then add Half-Orrcs to the equation, and Gnomes still came last. That's right, folks. Heather would sooner play a Half-Orc than a Gnome. (Those of you who know her well realize how crazy that sounds).
It's not just my campaign, though. In all the campaigns I've participated in, there's never been a Gnome PC. In KC, LH, and the old Lost Souls chat, I can't recall ever seeing a single gnome (except my own gnome PC in Lost Souls). Furthermore, I cannot think of a single gnome hero in a single D&D based novel, regardless of setting.
So...gnomes. In your own opinions, what makes them so unappealing?
|
|
Airellian
Elite
Sunny Greenhaven
Posts: 1,284
|
Post by Airellian on Apr 12, 2007 18:07:32 GMT -8
First off, KC? LH? Dragonlance gnomes are tinker gnomes, wholly different from regular gnomes. Secondly, the only race I have an aversion to playing is elves, but only because I feel that AD&D elves are a perversion of the elves Tolkien created. I'd play any race if the right concept appealed to me, even gnomes.
|
|
|
Post by Daos on Apr 12, 2007 18:15:07 GMT -8
I'm talking about any kind of gnomes. Rock gnomes, tinker gnomes, thinker gnomes, deep gnomes, forest gnomes, chaos gnomes, ice gnomes, whisper gnomes--any kind.
The truth is, nowadays when people think of gnomes they are more likely to think of Tinkers than Rock Gnomes. Dragonlance's vision of gnomekind spread beyond to Spelljammer and other realms, and that vision was then officially adopted by 3E (much like how halflings in 3E now resemble kender in both appearance and personality now).
|
|
Airellian
Elite
Sunny Greenhaven
Posts: 1,284
|
Post by Airellian on Apr 12, 2007 18:17:27 GMT -8
Uh... Have you taken a good look at 3e gnomes? I'd say they're nothing like tinker gnomes at all. Unless you think 3e gnomes speak really fast, build unruly inventions, and do all the other things that made tinker gnomes tinker gnomes.
|
|
|
Post by Daos on Apr 12, 2007 18:24:36 GMT -8
I'm not speaking mechanically, but in terms of settings. And I don't mean they're exactly the same, anymore than 3E halflings are identical to kender. Just that many similarities were adopted. Very few people still associate gnomes as anything other than engineers.
But that's neither here nor there. Regardless of how gnomes are depicted, they are never popular in any setting. In Dragonlance and Spelljammer, they are at best, comic relief. In FR, Greyhawk, and Eberron they are generally ignored outright, at least in comparison to other races. Whether they are crazy tinkers, serious engineers, bards, illusionists, shy forest folk or outgoing pranksters...gnomes are generally never taken serious or well-liked.
Not to say people outright hate gnomes (although many do). But it seems like in comparison to the other playable races, most people would choose something else over gnomes. This has been my observation, anyway.
|
|
Airellian
Elite
Sunny Greenhaven
Posts: 1,284
|
Post by Airellian on Apr 12, 2007 18:46:51 GMT -8
Uh, I wasn't speaking mechanically, either. Now, whether they've been relegated to a status of comedy relief or outright ignored is not really the fault of the player. It's really the campaign setting's fault.
However, if you want to make gnomes more appealing, then you should consider your own three factors: Concept, Flavor, Mechanics was it? I don't really want to get into other campaign settings because it would be pretty pointless. So, I'll speak to yours, specifically, Amtarian gnomes.
Was there any real compelling reason to play gnomes? They're pretty much universally maligned aren't they? Almost on the same level as the drow. They had to frequently disguise themselves with illusions or mundane means in order not to be harrassed. They may not be attacked on sight, but that's still a big hassle to have to go through, wouldn't you say?
I suppose gnomes did have Tek. Though, honestly, I'm not too familiar with that, so I can't address that. I had other points I wanted to address, as well, but I think I'll just leave it here.
|
|
|
Post by Daos on Apr 12, 2007 19:01:11 GMT -8
What? I never said the fault lay with the player. I never assigned 'fault' at all. I'm merely trying to understand what makes them unappealing to so many. In the same way that elves seem universally loved in most games. I don't necessarily believe there is one defining factor that applies to everyone (if this were so it seems like it would have been remedied by now). I assume there are as many different reasons as there are types of players. Maybe it's the way they look. Maybe it's the way they act. Maybe it's the mechanical aspects. I figure if I can narrow down the most common reasons, I can try and avoid them when I make Cradle.
When I created Amtarian Gnomes I didn't consider the Three Factors, nor did I think of balance or the player's viewpoint or anything else. I just kind of dove in. I found the idea of Rock Gnomes kind of boring, so I modeled them more after Tinkers. But I didn't want them to be comic relief, so I designed them to be more serious--to allow their inventions to work. But a part of me was afraid that my players would all embrace technology over magic, so I made them maligned in hopes of preventing this. In hind-sight, it was unneccessary, as I've never really had a player who preferred guns over swords or lasers over magic.
I don't think gnomes being pariahs on my world had much to do with it. I mean, you even compared them to Drow and they are immensely popular. Generally the races that are feared or disliked by the general populace prove to be the most popular because it lends a sort of 'rebel' aspect to them.
No, I'm fairly sure that even if gnomes were well-liked on Amtar, they still would prove to be unpopular. I'm just not sure why people don't like them. Some outright hate them. I commonly see campaign games where gnomes are either extinct (wiped out by another race) or simply non-existant (and the actual statement that proclaims gnomes are not playable are usually quite passionate).
|
|
Airellian
Elite
Sunny Greenhaven
Posts: 1,284
|
Post by Airellian on Apr 12, 2007 19:04:41 GMT -8
Well, the drow have all those extra powers. Is there something comparable for the gnomes? And I suppose there's the Drizzt factor to consider. I don't think a serious gnome protagonist has ever been written.
|
|
|
Post by Daos on Apr 12, 2007 19:14:05 GMT -8
There's that. And no, there has never been a serious gnome protagonist that I know of. I can list examples of famous characters of just about any other race, but not gnomes.
Dwarves: Gimli, Brunor Battlehammer, Flint Fireforge Halflings: Bilbo Baggins, Regis Rumblebelly, Tasslehoff Burrfoot (not actually a halfling, but still even kender have heroes!) Elves: Drizzt Do'Urden, Laurana, Gilthanas, Legolas
I know that Core gnomes are not popular and I know tinker/engineer gnomes aren't popular, so I'm probably going to revise them altogether in Cradle. I'm just not sure yet how. I was hoping I might get some insight from my players (past and present) on why, at least when compared to elves, dwarves, and halflings, gnomes always come in last place.
|
|