Dragonborn Race

[Failedlegend]

seriously, Halflings and Gnomes are almost identical in appearance. They both look like short, skinny elves.

Thats like saying humans, elves and tieflings look the same

[Zachski]

Thats like saying humans, elves and tieflings look the same

Okay then, which one's depicting gnomes and which one is depicting halflings?

[Failedlegend]

Gnomes: In general are shorter, have very sqaureish flat faces, legs/arms/hands/feet are short and thick, big bulbous noses, very rounded ears

http://fc08.deviantart.net/fs70/f/20...lo-d54z8yj.jpg
http://fc08.deviantart.net/fs71/f/20...ta-d5jc4w5.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_CiARj4w8LE...600/Gnomes.jpg

Halflings: In general have long noses, triangular faces with their skull area jutting out the back a bit, their legs,etc. are thin and long, pointy ears.

http://gandalara.files.wordpress.com...ing-thief1.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-xJmTvILtzo...slehoffxr9.png
http://www.alexisalvarez.org/RPG/sof...0f%20smile.jpg

[Zachski]

That's what I expected gnomes to look like, Failedlegend, in all honesty.

When I actually saw D&D 3.5 gnomes, I was surprised and more than a little disappointed.

By the way, the answer to the pictures I posted is that the lone kender on the top is a gnome, and the two kender on the bottom are halflings.

Both of those are official Eberron works.

[Failedlegend]

That's what I expected gnomes to look like, Failedlegend, in all honesty.

When I actually saw D&D 3.5 gnomes, I was surprised and more than a little disappointed.

By the way, the answer to the pictures I posted is that the lone kender on the top is a gnome, and the two kender on the bottom are halflings.

Both of those are official Eberron works.

Heh, I thought the second pic was some bad fan art...it's not as bad as the 5e halflings though :P

[Uska]

I'm sorry, did Uska just call playing an evil character "munchkin cheese"?

I'm starting to think he doesn't know what "munchkin" or "cheese" are. Sounds more like he just doesn't like anyone roleplaying anything he doesn't like.



You do realize my post was in jest, right? ;D

But seriously, Halflings and Gnomes are almost identical in appearance. They both look like short, skinny elves.

Meanwhile, in Pathfinder at least, Gnomes still look identical to D&D halflings, just with technicolor hair. Though the halflings in Pathfinder actually look like proper hobbits.

No munchkin players are the ones who usually want to play evil the munchkin cheese is the dragonborn and similar races. and once again there is no real role playing in any mmo. and less in ddo then some others and that is sad. Lucky for me I got my RP fix in our pnp game tonight playing civilians in a aliens universe game.

[The_Human_Cypher]

Gnomes: In general are shorter, have very sqaureish flat faces, legs/arms/hands/feet are short and thick, big bulbous noses, very rounded ears

http://fc08.deviantart.net/fs70/f/20...lo-d54z8yj.jpg
http://fc08.deviantart.net/fs71/f/20...ta-d5jc4w5.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_CiARj4w8LE...600/Gnomes.jpg

Halflings: In general have long noses, triangular faces with their skull area jutting out the back a bit, their legs,etc. are thin and long, pointy ears.

http://gandalara.files.wordpress.com...ing-thief1.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-xJmTvILtzo...slehoffxr9.png
http://www.alexisalvarez.org/RPG/sof...0f%20smile.jpg

Gnomes are something like a cross between a dwarf and a halfing in appearance.

[Zachski]

No munchkin players are the ones who usually want to play evil

What the heck is munchkin about THAT?

Do you even know what munchkin means?

[Uska]

What the heck is munchkin about THAT?

Do you even know what munchkin means?

Yes playing evil isn't munchkin in itself but most people who want to play evil in pnp or here are asking for the munchkin stuff notice I said most. There wasn't a single splat book released for 3.5 or 4E that wasn't munchkin some were a lot worse than others

[Violith]

I gotta admit, I Dont know what munchkin means... never heard of that phrase before you overkilled it within this thread, I've honestly had to look it up to see what the actual term is...

Munchkin is how one should refer to someone who tries to win a role-playing game. It can be expressed, displayed, or seen in an aggressively competitive style of play. For example, getting the most enemies killed or the most loot taken, all without any thoughts about roleplaying, a storyline, fairness, logic and, the most importantly, other players' fun.

now, I can see where you get the whole min/max thing, and your hate for that... honestly, Im not much of a min/maxer but rather build the builds I like, flavor or otherwise. Im sure if I look at all of my characters, I probably do have a few who maybe considered min/maxed, most likely my spellcasters as they are usually DC based, so really the only way to make them viable thoughout endgame is to min/max them, but the majority would probably considered flavor builds. I dont see how liking unique things, be it races, abilities, or whatever, as being munchkin.

I fail to see how any part of dnd is munchkin When the very term refers to the person playing it. It has absolutely nothing to do with exactly what race or class, or abilities they are playing with, but rather how they are playing.

I can see how it'd get annoying with people playing like that however unlike pnp there is little to no roleplaying. The logic and storyline are all set through the game system and the only way to play/enjoy it is by playing... and you do that by killing stuff or getting loot. now... players dont have to kill most enemies and get the most loot, and for the most part... people dont care about stuff like that. I honestly dont care if I get top kills or most loot, and I dont really know anyone who does actually care about such things. So your version of munchkin doesnt coincide with what the actual term stands for...

so, we already surmised that you believe everything is munchkin. your version of munchkin is

they want to,look cool(they won't) and they want to minmax ie munchkin.

Which, if you include everyones opinion on every race/class, from core or splat books, That will include Everything in dnd. There is not a race or class that isnt able to be min/maxed, or that someone in the world doesnt think looks, or plays, cool. so the only way to not be munchin by you, is if you completely disregard every stat and appearance from all races and classes and items, remove all special abilities, and merely just roleplay, and then only do so with what you accept. Then maybe... if its lucky, it wont be munchkin.


so, ignoring the whole your version of munchkin. If you dont like it, What exactly do you have against it exactly? keep in mind that this doesnt necessarily have any effect on you. If you dont like it then fine, no one is forcing you to buy or play it. But, To add more parts of a game you enjoy to help build its marketbase to keep it around longer,... I fail to see why anyone would be against adding stuff, if its done right, that' other people would enjoy any buy.

[Zachski]

Yes playing evil isn't munchkin in itself but most people who want to play evil in pnp or here are asking for the munchkin stuff notice I said most. There wasn't a single splat book released for 3.5 or 4E that wasn't munchkin some were a lot worse than others

All of the core races are easily more munchkin than dragonborn.

And Aasimar is FAR cheesier than dragonborn.

And the psionic classes you want added to the game? PURE cheese and munchkin.

Does none of the above make sense?

That's because it's BS.

Violith has quite fairly proven that only players can be munchkin, not races or classes.

And considering your vicious hatred of dragonborn which would turn anyone who plays it away from you and towards a better DM, I doubt you know enough dragonborn players to be able to make a judgment on their munchkin status or not.

So, ergo, you cannot prove that 99% of dragonborn players are munchkin, same with 99% of evil alignment players. In fact, evil campaigns are some of the best campaigns out there, and an evil character creates many interesting roleplaying opportunities with a good party - so long as there isn't a Paladin whose code of conduct prevents him from adventuring with an evil character.

By the way, since you can't prove that dragonborn/evil players are munchkins, I have nothing to disprove. I don't need to prove the opposite, because I don't have the burden of proof. Ergo, start making actual arguments for a change that have actual facts to back them up.

[Uska]

All of the core races are easily more munchkin than dragonborn.

And Aasimar is FAR cheesier than dragonborn.

And the psionic classes you want added to the game? PURE cheese and munchkin.

Does none of the above make sense?

That's because it's BS.

Violith has quite fairly proven that only players can be munchkin, not races or classes.

And considering your vicious hatred of dragonborn which would turn anyone who plays it away from you and towards a better DM, I doubt you know enough dragonborn players to be able to make a judgment on their munchkin status or not.

So, ergo, you cannot prove that 99% of dragonborn players are munchkin, same with 99% of evil alignment players. In fact, evil campaigns are some of the best campaigns out there, and an evil character creates many interesting roleplaying opportunities with a good party - so long as there isn't a Paladin whose code of conduct prevents him from adventuring with an evil character.

By the way, since you can't prove that dragonborn/evil players are munchkins, I have nothing to disprove. I don't need to prove the opposite, because I don't have the burden of proof. Ergo, start making actual arguments for a change that have actual facts to back them up.

Pure hyperbole evil campaigns are the worst we are supposed to be heroes not the bad guys.

[Failedlegend]

Pure hyperbole evil campaigns are the worst we are supposed to be heroes not the bad guys.

So i'm guessing you've never played Shadowrun than

[dunklezhan]

So i'm guessing you've never played Shadowrun than

Terms like good and evil do not apply to that nefarious activity. Not that I would know of course.

[Zachski]

Pure hyperbole evil campaigns are the worst we are supposed to be heroes not the bad guys.

A lot of successful and well-loved DMs and their players would heavily disagree with you - evil campaigns can be a load of fun.

[Uska]

So i'm guessing you've never played Shadowrun than

Yes and it's not my cup of tea and we aren't playing shadow run are we.

[Zachski]

Yes and it's not my cup of tea and we aren't playing shadow run are we.

Point being that evil campaigns in PnP games can and will be successful if you want them to be.

Not to mention you aren't playing as heroes in D&D. You're playing as adventurers. And not all adventurers are goodly knights and jolly bards. Some are vicious assassins and greedy brigands.

[Braegan]

Point being that evil campaigns in PnP games can and will be successful if you want them to be.

Not to mention you aren't playing as heroes in D&D. You're playing as adventurers. And not all adventurers are goodly knights and jolly bards. Some are vicious assassins and greedy brigands.

As best said by one of my friends during a play session of pnp:

"We break into homes, damage goods, kill all that we see. The only difference between us and a band of thugs is that we're on an *adventure!*"

Was said in jest but, meh I feel we can all lighten up a bit.

[Zachski]

As best said by one of my friends during a play session of pnp:

"We break into homes, damage goods, kill all that we see. The only difference between us and a band of thugs is that we're on an *adventure!*"

Was said in jest but, meh I feel we can all lighten up a bit.

Exactly.

Then again I feel the best evil campaigns are the ones that are light-hearted and full of black-comedy.

Like the Overlord games.

[Uska]

Point being that evil campaigns in PnP games can and will be successful if you want them to be.

Not to mention you aren't playing as heroes in D&D. You're playing as adventurers. And not all adventurers are goodly knights and jolly bards. Some are vicious assassins and greedy brigands.

Well most games I have played in for the last 30 years the players have been heroes out to save their country or world. I will admit that before that we were the looters and pillagers of dungeons but we out grew that in the early 80's and none of the groups i have played with for the last 20 allowed evil characters, we had some players want to and either they gave up on the idea or they found a new group and I have played with a lot groups in that time frame some long term some short since they were at cons or the like but altogether a lot of people in several states


And I still say your sig is wrong if your truly old school you wouldn't be asking for dragonborn or not wanting gnomes since one is and one for sure isn't old school