PDA

View Full Version : 4e- Even gnomes can be sexy



Asbestos
2009-02-02, 01:02 AM
See, now, I like 4e but... well, check this previewed image of the gnome race from the PHB2

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/intheworks_0202_4.jpg

...

Edit: Is she wearing a thong and chaps?

mikeejimbo
2009-02-02, 01:26 AM
You say this like it's a bad thing!

Archpaladin Zousha
2009-02-02, 01:27 AM
Aw, they took away part of their whimsical aspect! That's what made them such a blast to play!:smallfrown:

Teron
2009-02-02, 01:39 AM
They look like shorter elves. I am underwhelmed.

Nohwl
2009-02-02, 01:42 AM
that picture has done nothing to change how much i hate gnomes.

Xefas
2009-02-02, 01:54 AM
Aw, they took away part of their whimsical aspect! That's what made them such a blast to play!:smallfrown:

I don't think you should necessarily jump to conclusions so quickly.

This is a picture of two gnomes who are presumably adventurers. They're probably gruff and serious because their job, which amounts to "go into lair of hideous monsters and ridiculously contrived traps and puzzles, and hope your teammates don't murder you once you find the treasure that may or may not be at the bottom of the dungeon" does not have a very high survival rate. The next door they open could very well have 45 Explosive Runes and a dispel magic trap attached to it, so one can't afford to be very whimsical.

Just like not all humans take after the two humans pictured in the PHB, I assume gnomes are rather diverse, and the average gnome is probably very whimsical, having been brought back to their fey roots in 4ed.

Fishy
2009-02-02, 02:33 AM
Is she wearing a thong and chaps?

Nope. That's not her skin, it's the same metal as her shoulders, bracers and the tops of her boots. She's wearing some kind of... hip armor. And a bronze corset?

Townopolis
2009-02-02, 03:13 AM
I find it odd that the male gnome, who is a bard (check the lute neck sticking up over his shoulder) is wearing what appears to be chainmail armor. I find this odd because, assuming they keep their stats, gnome bards would usually be virtue of cunning and have 16+ intelligence, giving them equal defense and superior mobility in hide armor.

OCD nitpicking aside, gnomes were always awesome. I'm a bit lukewarm on making them sexy though, as it might end up diluting some of their awesomeness.

Kind of hope they replace reactive stealth. It's cool and all, but hard to utilize with any of the classes gnomes are otherwise optimized for.

ghost_warlock
2009-02-02, 03:33 AM
4e? I take it you never saw that picture of the female gnome in Paizo's (3e-ish) Pathfinder Player's Handbook. RAWR! :smallbiggrin:


I find it odd that the male gnome, who is a bard (check the lute neck sticking up over his shoulder) is wearing what appears to be chainmail armor. I find this odd because, assuming they keep their stats, gnome bards would usually be virtue of cunning and have 16+ intelligence, giving them equal defense and superior mobility in hide armor.

Because 4e definitely has Perform (lute) as a skill only available to bards. Perish the thought of a fighter (or a member of any other class) learning to play a musical instrument...

KKL
2009-02-02, 03:50 AM
that picture has done nothing to change how much i hate gnomes.

I'm in the same boat as this guy.

Cybren
2009-02-02, 04:50 AM
This is a picture of two gnomes who are presumably adventurers. They're probably gruff and serious because their job, which amounts to "go into lair of hideous monsters and ridiculously contrived traps and puzzles, and hope your teammates don't murder you once you find the treasure that may or may not be at the bottom of the dungeon" does not have a very high survival rate. The next door they open could very well have 45 Explosive Runes and a dispel magic trap attached to it, so one can't afford to be very whimsical.

Yes everyone is super serial there's no room for happy people in dungeons! But seriously, I think there's plenty of precedent for "upbeat heroes" in the various source materials.


4e? I take it you never saw that picture of the female gnome in Paizo's (3e-ish) Pathfinder Player's Handbook. RAWR! :smallbiggrin:



Because 4e definitely has Perform (lute) as a skill only available to bards. Perish the thought of a fighter (or a member of any other class) learning to play a musical instrument...

And toting it around? Certainly the artist made sure to show the lute to tell us something about the character.

Nerd-o-rama
2009-02-02, 04:59 AM
Maybe he's a bard, but poorly optimized?

Starshade
2009-02-02, 05:33 AM
Well, that look as small elves, could have been worse, but i think the gnomes was way too little distinctive or remarkable, so maybe this is for the better.

Myou
2009-02-02, 05:41 AM
They look like shorter elves. I am underwhelmed.

This.

That gnome guy is hot, but that's what elves and half-elves are for.




My god that female is skanky....

hewhosaysfish
2009-02-04, 07:57 AM
The female seems to be remarkably confused by the dagger she's holding, like she's not sure what is or what it's for.

Lappy9000
2009-02-04, 07:34 PM
Well, that look as small elves, could have been worse, but i think the gnomes was way too little distinctive or remarkable, so maybe this is for the better....so making them look like small elves makes them more distinctive?

LibraryOgre
2009-02-04, 07:54 PM
Well, that look as small elves, could have been worse, but i think the gnomes was way too little distinctive or remarkable, so maybe this is for the better.

Gnomes were distinctive in 1st and 2nd edition. Physically, they resembled slender dwarves, with smaller beards, darker skin (tending towards shades of brown), lighter hair (tending towards blondes and whites), and light eyes (though dark eyes weren't terribly uncommon). They also had impressively-sized noses, of which they were quite proud.

As of 3e, the gnose got down-sized, the skin color ran the gamut, and they became "short elves with beards" in the artwork.

Of course, this is the edition that shaved all the dwarven women, so I'm not surprised.

Panda-s1
2009-02-05, 12:58 AM
Because 4e definitely has Perform (lute) as a skill only available to bards. Perish the thought of a fighter (or a member of any other class) learning to play a musical instrument...

Yeah, 'cause you totally need a skill to play an instrument in D&D. Perish the thought of a character knowing how to play an instrument 'cause the player said so.

*ponders whether or not mentioning 4e bards don't need to play an instrument to use their spells will make the poster flip*

*also contemplates reminding him that 3.x (or Pathfinder) fighters don't have perform as a class skill*

Ellisthion
2009-02-05, 01:14 AM
But... 3.5 already had the perfect gnome!

http://images.google.com.au/url?source=imgres&ct=img&q=http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/re_Gimble72.jpg&usg=AFQjCNEu7LQAudeMKBOrChNVT4xoCUOwiA

Tengu_temp
2009-02-05, 01:33 AM
Yeah, 'cause you totally need a skill to play an instrument in D&D. Perish the thought of a character knowing how to play an instrument 'cause the player said so.

*ponders whether or not mentioning 4e bards don't need to play an instrument to use their spells will make the poster flip*

*also contemplates reminding him that 3.x (or Pathfinder) fighters don't have perform as a class skill*

Your sarcasm detector is broken.

Ravens_cry
2009-02-05, 01:34 AM
I always thought the female gnome in D&D 3.5 was pretty.

Asbestos
2009-02-05, 01:39 AM
But... 3.5 already had the perfect gnome!

http://images.google.com.au/url?source=imgres&ct=img&q=http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/re_Gimble72.jpg&usg=AFQjCNEu7LQAudeMKBOrChNVT4xoCUOwiA

Yeah, he is a good gnome, but he really just seems like a short dude with pointy ears about to impale his hand.

I like the pitch black eye quality of the new gnome, makes them seem more alien, more fantastical than David the Gnome could ever be. The old gnomes would sell you beets and pick your pocket. The new gnomes seem like they'd steal your kidneys. They just appear to be more fey, in the traditional, almost malicious sense to me.

Also, I like how they don't look like kids, sure that female is short, but she doesn't have the creepily child-like quality of the Pathfinder gnome, who looks like she's auditioning for Lazy Town. (no offense to the dude that said 'rawr' about that gnome)

@whoever said that thing about her questioning the dagger: Dude! Awesome. I now imagine her 'listening' to the dagger as it tells her to plunge it into the back of the man in front of her. "Yes, dagger..." God, I need to stop PWI.

Myou
2009-02-05, 03:43 AM
Is this a dagger I see before me?!

Draz74
2009-02-05, 03:44 AM
I can't believe I'm saying this, as I got as annoyed as anyone else by the inane repetitions of "4e is an MMO!!!!!11111" posts in days of yore, but ...

That picture looks disturbingly like a screenshot from an MMO.

Which immediately turns me off towards everything 4e-Gnome-related. Forever.

bosssmiley
2009-02-05, 08:29 AM
See, now, I like 4e but... well, check this previewed image of the gnome race from the PHB2

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/intheworks_0202_4.jpg

Oh great. Now we have 4 (or should that be 3 1/2?) races of pointy-eared magical metrosexuals instead of a second (unnecessary) Dwarf race. :smallannoyed:

"Hey Ma. Guess what. I'm a hipster." -- WOTC's 4E Gnome, in interview

charl
2009-02-05, 08:52 AM
Wow...

Those gnomes do not look anything like I would have imagined. "Going back to the fey roots"? No way. They look like characters from WoW, and the girl looks like a stripper.

Asbestos
2009-02-05, 09:04 AM
Wow...

Those gnomes do not look anything like I would have imagined. "Going back to the fey roots"? No way. They look like characters from WoW, and the girl looks like a stripper.

@You and the other guy that said the MMO thing: I'm looking for it and reaaaaly not seeing it. I think you guys are really stretching it on this one.

@bosssmiley: That has always been the tragic position of gnomes, stuck between elf-like and dwarf-like.

Btw, someone took some pictures of the PHB 2 pregren characters from DDXP and it seems that gnomes start with Ghost Sound as a racial encounter power, that and a +5 to saves against illusions is what separates them from the gnome in the MM.

Dacia Brabant
2009-02-05, 11:11 AM
They don't look anything like WoW Gnomes, but they do look like Blood Elves with smaller ears, so that's reason enough to dislike them. :smalltongue:

Oh well, at least they're not Dragonlance Gnomes.

KnightDisciple
2009-02-05, 11:28 AM
I play WoW, and I'm not seeing much direct resemblance, either to WoW gnomes or WoW Belfs.

I had a post earlier that got eaten by forum troubles, but basically, I think they're trying to go for a more savage Fae aspect, which I applaud. Someone pointed out the eyes; I think that's one of the first things you can notice.

These gnomes aren't necessarily nice, cuddly little tricksters. They might be out to eat your face, or something.

Part of what they seem to be doing here is widening the difference between gnomes and halflings, without having one of them be the size of a newborn human or something (that would be like WoW gnomes, incidentally).

If they're sticking with Gnomes being innately illusion-y, maybe they'll have connection to the Shadowfell as well as the Feywild?

charl
2009-02-05, 11:49 AM
Well, I've actually never played WoW, just seen the occasional screenshots, but the general look is very modern MMO-like in my opinion.

I miss the old days when heroes looked like heroes and female armour covered more than 1/5 of the body.

LoopyZebra
2009-02-05, 12:11 PM
These gnomes look nothing like gnomes from any MMO, much less WoW.

For example, a WoW gnome:
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/wowwiki/images/f/f4/K._Lee_Smallfry.jpg

And the armor (on either gnome) looks much different from anything MMOlike. I'm having trouble finding screenshots of current armor from WoW, but suffice it to say, this is nowhere near as ridiculous, and at the same time, looks much cooler. I would even say that the female gnome's armor covers more than most female characters in MMO or 3.5 art (which is generally true of all 4th edition art).

And as looking heroic, I would say that both look far more heroic than gnomes in just about any other source I can think of. I normally try to ignore gnomes; these look like something that might be worth playing.

Ravens_cry
2009-02-05, 12:46 PM
I miss the old days when heroes looked like heroes and female armour covered more than 1/5 of the body.
When was this? Seriously, I must have missed it. I have seen some modern stuff specifically drawn this way, and an old ad in a Dragons issue where the man and woman were wearing approximately the same amount of clothing. But for the most part, this here be what ye call 'the norm'.

KnightDisciple
2009-02-05, 01:09 PM
"Very modern MMO-like" says zilch, because modern MMO's have no central art style. Some are like WoW, with admittedly cartoonish dimensions, while others go for more realistic looks. So I guess if you mean "modern MMO" in the "looks at least somewhat realistic, not really cartoony at all", then sure. But that's not really saying much.

Also, "I miss the old days when heroes looked like heroes and female armour covered more than 1/5 of the body."
Wait, what? Red Sonja, anyone? I mean, seriously. I don't feel like it, but I'm sure we can dig up lots of chainmail bikini pics from back in the 70s and before.
Really, that gnome gal in the first post picture is doing pretty well. Only part of her arms, a bit of her belly, and of course her head are exposed. What at first glance looks like bare hips, is actually a bronze-colored patch; it looks to be the same or similar material as the shoulders and forearms. This is actually pretty modest, comparatively speaking.

THAC0
2009-02-05, 02:19 PM
That... is so not my gnome. :smalleek:

My gnome regularly rolls in dirt, dead leaves, and bat guano though. :smallcool:

Hzurr
2009-02-05, 03:22 PM
I miss the old days when heroes looked like heroes and female armour covered more than 1/5 of the body.

Er...I'm not sure what days you're referring too. Go back and look at female characters in 2nd ed books. D&D females are actually wearing progressively more clothing from edition to edition.

Which is actually kindof weird...

charl
2009-02-05, 03:53 PM
Er...I'm not sure what days you're referring too. Go back and look at female characters in 2nd ed books. D&D females are actually wearing progressively more clothing from edition to edition.

Which is actually kindof weird...

I'm talking basic here, as well as some of the Swedish RPGs I grew up with. Though of course my memory might be distorted a bit from nostalgia, but I recently looked through my old basic book and the (admittedly few) female characters depicted had quite a realistic amount of armour and clothing. They still managed to look pretty hot though, but I may just be a sucker for a woman that can throw a fireball or call upon ancient gods to smite evildoers.

LibraryOgre
2009-02-05, 04:30 PM
Er...I'm not sure what days you're referring too. Go back and look at female characters in 2nd ed books. D&D females are actually wearing progressively more clothing from edition to edition.

Which is actually kindof weird...

Depends entirely on the picture and the art direction. I can bring several hundred examples on Sunday.

d13
2009-02-06, 12:10 AM
The female seems to be remarkably confused by the dagger she's holding, like she's not sure what is or what it's for.

The fact that she's holding a rod (or a staff, I can't get the picture xD) in her other hand kind of makes the wizard~ish picture of: "Hey! I can cast spells! Why the hell would I need one of these?!"

Talya
2009-02-06, 12:46 AM
WoW has far better gnomes than either 3.5 or 4e.

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/wowwiki/images/thumb/b/bf/GnomeFemale.jpg/180px-GnomeFemale.jpg

Archpaladin Zousha
2009-02-06, 12:59 AM
I don't want gnomes to have sex appeal! I want them to be whimsical and folksy, so they look that much more badass when doing things. It's nothing special when a sexy character, male or female, does something badass. When an odd or unusual character does something badass, EVERYONE notices. Besides gnomes have lost everything that made them the hobbit replacements after the halflings underwent their change to avoid being sued.

Townopolis
2009-02-06, 01:44 AM
Yeah, I'm really cooling down to these new gnomes. Sexy is not a good direction for this race IMO. It doesn't help that I fully expect a load of angst to accompany the new look. I don't want gnomes to be all "Well, I used to be cheerful and enjoy the simple pleasures in life, like friends and elaborate pranks, but then reavers showed up and did what Zoe said they do in that episode of Firefly. Anyway, since then I've taken to sticking eyeshadow directly in my eyes and spouting bad poetry while stabbing people with this knife... which speaks to me... in the words of my dead baby sister."

Gnomes should be cheerful. It's ok if you unsure whether or not they'll eat your face off, just as long as you're pretty sure they'd do so with a big, goofy grin on their face.

And they should look the part too. I liked the gnose. I also liked it when they were just a little deformed. Big heads, big ears, and big noses all helped define them in peoples' minds. Sexy gnomes are unnecessary, up with slightly wrong-looking, cheery-but-possibly-sinister feylings.

Inyssius Tor
2009-02-06, 02:07 AM
Note: they're not actually going with grimdark gnomes. Not even a little bit. They had written up some gnomes with a nice heaping load of grimdark and bitterness and so forth... but then they looked at them and went, "naaaah." So they decided to go with whimsical.


In late 2006, the world design team for 4th Edition discussed gnomes and came up with a story we were pretty enamored with. It gave them a dark past as ally-slaves to the fomorians, a new look that had more in common with the ugly but good-hearted fairy folk you see in folklore than with any past representation of gnomes in D&D, and a new social role as itinerant tinkers. In other words, it swam seriously upstream from the cute and funny gnomes of past editions of D&D and of World of Warcraft. When Bill received and reviewed that team's world guide, he had this to say about gnomes:

"Gnomes, while still in discussion, might just embrace the funny and cute and come up with something playable that allows people to imagine gnomes in ways they certainly seem to want to. We should stop trying to swim upstream to create a cool, dark, heroic gnome and instead turn our powers to making a cool, funny, heroic gnome."

Townopolis
2009-02-06, 02:20 AM
Well, that's certainly good to hear. Although...

ugly but good-hearted fairy folk you see in folklore
Would have been pretty cool.

KKL
2009-02-06, 02:26 AM
WoW has far better gnomes than either 3.5 or 4e.

WoW gnomes are also terrible.

Panda-s1
2009-02-06, 02:50 AM
The fact that she's holding a rod (or a staff, I can't get the picture xD) in her other hand kind of makes the wizard~ish picture of: "Hey! I can cast spells! Why the hell would I need one of these?!"

Or maybe she's a sorcerer, since they can use both as implements.

bosssmiley
2009-02-06, 08:16 AM
That... is so not my gnome. :smalleek:

My gnome regularly rolls in dirt, dead leaves, and bat guano though. :smallcool:

I think you may have mixed up gnome and dog there... :smallconfused:

Then again they're both excitable hairy slobbering things that like to sniff people's crotches.

Hzurr
2009-02-06, 12:02 PM
Depends entirely on the picture and the art direction. I can bring several hundred examples on Sunday.

Actually, I think the only 2nd ed books I've ever seen were the ones that you have, so that's what I'm basing my opinion on.

Talya
2009-02-06, 03:00 PM
WoW gnomes are also terrible.

I love WoW gnomes.

Hmm. With the exception of humans, all the WoW races are either "utterly unplayable" or "awesome" for me. Orcs, Blood Elves, Gnomes, Night Elves and Draenei fit into the "awesome" category. Undead, Taurens, Trolls, and dwarves fit into the "Utterly unplayable" category. While humans are just sorta there.