kumquatq3 Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 http://pc.ign.com/articles/734/734019p1.html
DemonKing Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 Great...an annoying, slightly nutty gnome. Just what I wanted.
Deraldin Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 (edited) Great...an annoying, slightly nutty gnome. Just what I wanted. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Is Tiax back from the dead?! EDIT: Darn, it's not Tiax. Edited September 22, 2006 by Deraldin
Darque Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 <_< I know which NPC will be my first victim.
J.E. Sawyer Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 Personally, I don't find Grobnar annoying. He is a nutty gnome, but he's usually pretty amusing. Also, he is awesome, Buff Master of the Fifth Dimension. twitter tyme
Llyranor Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 NWN2's implementation of bards is pretty awesome. It sounds very powerful at first, but when you look into it, it's really just splitting NWN1's single bard song into multiple parts, as well as including some PnPesque songs. I'm already planning on making my PC a bard, so Grobnar might not be getting much attention anyway, particularly not if he brings up bloody Deekin. That freaking kobold just conjures up murderous rage. I'll be giving him a cameo in my mod, as a head on a stick. (Approved by Fio, so feel free to use it)
Judge Hades Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 Yes, but why is it every gnome we can have in the party tend to be a nutter of some sort. I mean it is getting ridiculous. We have Tiax, Quayle, Jan Janson, and the such. Every single gnome that is in a DnD game that can join the party is "nutty." Nutty gnomes are bleh.
J.E. Sawyer Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 Yes, but why is it every gnome we can have in the party tend to be a nutter of some sort. Don't ask me; I just work here. twitter tyme
Pop Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 (edited) Now people, isn't it a little premature to dismiss this gnome character? In D&D, gnomes are to nutty as dwarves are to surly. It's a racial archetype. It's a D&D staple. Lighten the **** up, I say. Chaotic neutral characters are often annoying, that's how they're played, but that doesn't mean they can't be compelling in their own right. Personally, I think it's cool that you can have a construct in your party. Is it a developed character, or a pure-fighting henchman? I wonder how you'd be able to communicate with a golem. The D&D PnP usually had the ones with personalities go berserk (confined spirits and all that) Edited September 22, 2006 by Pop Join me, and we shall make Production Beards a reality!
Atreides Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 Blade Golem + Sand in party = win! Spreading beauty with my katana.
Llyranor Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 Vhailor cameo! (Approved by Fio, so feel free to use it)
Tigranes Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 Avellon writing for the win. Really, it doesn't matter what these 'snippets' sound like, and we of all people should know better. Because if I cared about the snippets then I'd say the first 2 companions that join you are the most boring and stupid ones Avellone has ever made. So.. Let's Play: Icewind Dale Ironman (Complete) Let's Play: Icewind Dale II Ironman (Complete) Let's Play: Divinity II (Complete) Let's Play: Baldur's Gate Trilogy Ironman - BG1 (Complete) Let's Play: Baldur's Gate Trilogy Ironman - BG2 (In Progress)
kumquatq3 Posted September 22, 2006 Author Posted September 22, 2006 Blade Golem + Sand in party = win! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It's carth in the Blade Golem suit
Volourn Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 The elf Sand sounds very neato. That says a lot since I';m not the biggest fan of elves. The gnome, as Hades bring up, is not only a boring cliche but has been done to death in the BIO/BIS style D&D games (most noteably BIO, of course). Not to mention the lame hint about a 'kobold bard'. NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!! The golem sounds... like a golem. *yawn* Is it even gonna have a personality 'cause if so golems with personalities was done in HOTU (not to mention other games). Still, as Tigranes points out, these ar ejust snippets. Can't really judge a character's value on just one or two paragraphs. And, finally,... LOL @ Mr. Sawyer! :D DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
Gorth Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 I miss my tame golem from IWD2 :'( “He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein
kirottu Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 (edited) Can I replace that blade golem Edited September 22, 2006 by kirottu This post is not to be enjoyed, discussed, or referenced on company time.
Atreides Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 It's carth in the Blade Golem suit <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Emo golem would be new. Spreading beauty with my katana.
mkreku Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 Isn't the reason we're seeing repeating character types in every D&D game, a flaw within the D&D system and not the games themselves? I mean, the D&D rules might not be the most versatile and flexible rules to play by.. Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish!
Gromnir Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 Yes, but why is it every gnome we can have in the party tend to be a nutter of some sort. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Don't ask me; I just work here. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> play a gnome straight and it is gonna seem nutty anyway. play a gnome fighter all grim and serious? sure, you can do that, but chances are that people not take you serious. play a gnome mage steeped in dark powers and it kinda comes off like you is trying too hard to be different. gnomes is comical. other than elves, gnomes is the least likely choice for Gromnir to rp in a pnp session... though we almost always gots at least one in a crpg party. d&d gnomes got some nice benefits. other races? a halfling paladin? sure, makes sense as long as you not go over-the top with it. heck, we has had lots o' fun with the halfling barbarians too. half-elves? depends. the slightly too-pretty loner on the edge o' human and elf society? lame. even so, is lots o' different half-elf characters that works. half-orc and dwarf and humans all gots wide variation, but somehow gnomes just seems silly to Gromnir. is not that we don't like gnomes... is just that they is inherently silly, and Gromnir tends to be more subtle (or at least less cliche) with our comical characters. play the assassin gnome who acts the clown but is really a diabolical power broker? still comes off as goofy. HA! Good Fun! "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) "Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)
Volourn Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 "Isn't the reason we're seeing repeating character types in every D&D game, a flaw within the D&D system and not the games themselves? I mean, the D&D rules might not be the most versatile and flexible rules to play by.." No. This is wrong. You can have all sorts of characters in D&D espicially personality wise. It has nothing to do with stats or rules or whatever. Haha Grom! DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
Pop Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 Isn't the reason we're seeing repeating character types in every D&D game, a flaw within the D&D system and not the games themselves? I mean, the D&D rules might not be the most versatile and flexible rules to play by.. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It's not impossible to play a dandy dwarf, or a dirty, cursing elf who wants to slash and burn every forest he sees (elves make good sailors, I've found) It's just that people don't do those things, because roleplaying more often than not follows archetypes. Part of this comes from Tolkien, and part of it has to do with D&D's alignment system and the way races are set up to (mostly) adhere to certain alignments. Dwarves are lawful good, elves are chaotic good, orcs are chaotic evil, and humans falling all across the spectrum. This helps convey a good/evil duality and general uniform nature to the game world. Gnomes are well established as being chaotic neutral. Fantasy is awash in archetypes. Hence so many noble rogues and honor-bound dwarves. Gnomes are chaotic and short on wisdom, so more often than not you get Jerry Lewis absent-minded professors when you get gnomes. Join me, and we shall make Production Beards a reality!
Gromnir Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 am thinking that the name not help. gnome. go ahead, say, "gnome." is funny. g-nome. nome. is a kooky word, like, "mukluk," or "goulash," or pretty much any australian colloquialism. just picture tight-arsed sawyer saying "gnomes are boss." that not makes you smile? HA! Good Fun! "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) "Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)
Tigranes Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 'fantasy' is not awash with archetypes, its just that in everything we do our very cognitive processes create archetypes. History has tons of archetypes, so does science fiction, sitcoms, etc. Tolkien isn't to blame - what was he supposed to do, make sure every single generic scheme he created has a blatant and contrasting exception? (which he did, really.) It should be even easier in fantasy to break the archetype because of the inherent flexibility of background. That said, someone well steeped in fantasy 'lore' of contemporary entertainment will find it difficult to 'step out'. Members of this forum, and Avellone are no exceptions. Let's Play: Icewind Dale Ironman (Complete) Let's Play: Icewind Dale II Ironman (Complete) Let's Play: Divinity II (Complete) Let's Play: Baldur's Gate Trilogy Ironman - BG1 (Complete) Let's Play: Baldur's Gate Trilogy Ironman - BG2 (In Progress)
Judge Hades Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 (edited) Isn't the reason we're seeing repeating character types in every D&D game, a flaw within the D&D system and not the games themselves? I mean, the D&D rules might not be the most versatile and flexible rules to play by.. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> WRONG! I have played a wide variety of characters and personalities in d20 System. From a machinist Halfling to a Necromancer/Assassin, and as a DM I have create a wide variety of NPCs such as Dedric (a rogue/noble who caused strife through key assassinations), Visceris (a half god and exiled Seldarine who destroyed his homeworld), Kevlone (a vampire centaur and former druid, he's my favorite), Tippi (a halfling rogue gone ghoul who caused the party no end of trouble), and Nemesi (A dark fey, a Sith, from Ravenloft) whose primary weapon was an obsidian gythka. You can make as varied as characters that your imagination can take you with d20. Edited September 22, 2006 by Judge Hades
Kaftan Barlast Posted September 22, 2006 Posted September 22, 2006 The problems are not the rules(even if they are restricting) but the Forgotten Realms as a setting. It's a world that came to be by stacking fantasy clich DISCLAIMER: Do not take what I write seriously unless it is clearly and in no uncertain terms, declared by me to be meant in a serious and non-humoristic manner. If there is no clear indication, asume the post is written in jest. This notification is meant very seriously and its purpouse is to avoid misunderstandings and the consequences thereof. Furthermore; I can not be held accountable for anything I write on these forums since the idea of taking serious responsability for my unserious actions, is an oxymoron in itself. Important: as the following sentence contains many naughty words I warn you not to read it under any circumstances; botty, knickers, wee, erogenous zone, psychiatrist, clitoris, stockings, bosom, poetry reading, dentist, fellatio and the department of agriculture. "I suppose outright stupidity and complete lack of taste could also be considered points of view. "
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now