• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

RPG Evolution: The Trouble with Halflings

Over the decades I've developed my campaign world to match the archetypes my players wanted to play. In all those years, nobody's ever played a halfling.

Over the decades I've developed my campaign world to match the archetypes my players wanted to play. In all those years, nobody's ever played a halfling.

the-land-of-the-hobbits-6314749_960_720.jpg

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.

So What's the Problem?​

Halflings, derived from hobbits, have been a curious nod to Tolkien's influence on fantasy. While dwarves and elves have deep mythological roots, hobbits are more modern inventions. And their inclusion was very much a response to the adventurous life that the agrarian homebodies considered an aberration. In short, most hobbits didn't want to be adventurers, and Bilbo, Frodo, and the others were forever changed by their experiences, such that it was difficult for them to reintegrate when they returned home. You don't hear much about elves and dwarves having difficulty returning home after being adventurers, and for good reason. Tolkien was making a point about the human condition and the nature of war by using hobbits as proxies.

As a literary construct, hobbits serve a specific purpose. In The Hobbit, they are proxies for children. In The Lord of the Rings, they are proxies for farmers and other folk who were thrust into the industrialized nightmare of mass warfare. In both cases, hobbits were a positioned in contrast to the violent lifestyle of adventurers who live and die by the sword.

Which is at least in part why they're challenging to integrate into a campaign world. And yet, we have strong hobbit archetypes in Dungeons & Dragons, thanks to Dragonlance.

Kender. Kender Are the Problem​

I did know one player who loved to play kender. We never played together in a campaign, at least in part because kender are an integral part of the Dragonlance setting and we weren't playing in Dragonlance. But he would play a kender in every game he played, including in massive multiplayers like Ultima Online. And he was eye-rollingly aggravating, as he loved "borrowing" things from everyone (a trait established by Tasselhoff Burrfoot).

Part of the issue with kender is that they aren't thieves, per se, but have a child-like curiosity that causes them to "borrow" things without understanding that borrowing said things without permission is tantamount to stealing in most cultures. In essence, it results in a character who steals but doesn't admit to stealing, which can be problematic for inter-party harmony. Worse, kender have a very broad idea of what to "borrow" (which is not limited to just valuables) and have always been positioned as being offended by accusations of thievery. It sets up a scenario where either the party is very tolerant of the kender or conflict ensues. This aspect of kender has been significantly minimized in the latest draft for Unearthed Arcana.

Big Heads, Little Bodies​

The latest incarnation of halflings brings them back to the fun-loving roots. Their appearance is decidedly not "little children" or "overweight short people." Rather, they appear more like political cartoons of eras past, where exaggerated features were used as caricatures, adding further to their comical qualities. But this doesn't solve the outstanding problem that, for a game that is often about conflict, the original prototypes for halflings avoided it. They were heroes precisely because they were thrust into difficult situations and had to rise to the challenge. That requires significant work in a campaign to encourage a player to play a halfling character who would rather just stay home.

There's also the simple matter of integrating halflings into societies where they aren't necessarily living apart. Presumably, most human campaigns have farmers; dwarves and elves occupy less civilized niches, where halflings are a working class who lives right alongside the rest of humanity in plain sight. Figuring out how to accommodate them matters a lot. Do humans just treat them like children? Would halflings want to be anywhere near a larger humanoids' dwellings as a result? Or are halflings given mythical status like fey? Or are they more like inveterate pranksters and tricksters, treating them more like gnomes? And if halflings are more like gnomes, then why have gnomes?

There are opportunities to integrate halflings into a world, but they aren't quite so easy to plop down into a setting as dwarves and elves. I still haven't quite figured out how to make them work in my campaign that doesn't feel like a one-off rather than a separate species. But I did finally find a space for gnomes, which I'll discuss in another article.

Your Turn: How have you integrated halflings into your campaign world?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Michael Tresca

Michael Tresca

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
These are pretty terrible reasons.

Which is why ASIs shouldn't be race-based in the first place.
What else do you base them on? ASI's are intended to reflect what the character intrinsically is - what it has going for it and what it doesn't - before it ever thinks about adventuring
Because tradition, back when races were limited to what classes they could take.
Yeah, OK, I'll concede that one. :)
In your world, not mine. Heck, my friends and I just did some worldbuilding and in that world, humans are a recently-added, invasive species. Elves are the baseline in that world.
Cool! So then, if Elves are the baseline default, what are the ASI's for Humans?

And if the answer is "there aren't any", then what's the intrinsic physical difference between the two other than cosmetic appearance and how is that reflected mechanically across the entirety of the two species?

And before you say "PCs are extraordinary so blanket species adjustments shoulsn't apply to them", I'll just point out that's a pointless argument with me as I see PCs as being representative members of their species, only with a serious dash of bravery/foolhardiness tacked on. :)
Feeling something isn't the same as having a stat penalty to it.
Indeed; which is the point I was trying to make when someone said they'd feel smarter if they walked into a room full of Goblins.

In either case, I'm not the one with the penalty or bonus, they are.; as I'm a Human and thus represent the baseline. NASA scientists (or ancient Hobgoblins in my setting, who were very high-tech) might as well have a +2 Int bonus while Goblins have a -[big number] Int penalty.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Mind of tempest

(he/him)advocate for 5e psionics
What else do you base them on? ASI's are intended to reflect what the character intrinsically is - what it has going for it and what it doesn't - before it ever thinks about adventuring
I do not disagree that there should be a similarity between the pc race in both types of stat block but honestly, asi is the worse way as it is dull and I trie of blind tradition give me limitation that go somewhere.
Cool! So then, if Elves are the baseline default, what are the ASI's for Humans?

And if the answer is "there aren't any", then what's the intrinsic physical difference between the two other than cosmetic appearance and how is that reflected mechanically across the entirety of the two species?
stat wise there never should be elves never really wear built to be balanced they were a non-fallen humanity whose differences were never based on stats but more on magic and what they could do and how they existed, from elves point of view our flaws is being short-lived and brutal they likely think of use as less evil orcs.

In either case, I'm not the one with the penalty or bonus, they are.; as I'm a Human and thus represent the baseline. NASA scientists (or ancient Hobgoblins in my setting, who were very high-tech) might as well have a +2 Int bonus while Goblins have a -[big number] Int penalty.
you do not need something to be stats to feel it people have to belive much the same with out any stats, secondly, what makes a goblin stupid why should it where is stupid in the concept?
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
you do not need something to be stats to feel it people have to belive much the same with out any stats, secondly, what makes a goblin stupid why should it where is stupid in the concept?
Using the typical "monster" Goblin as an example here (IMO Goblins shouldn't be PC-playable):

Goblins are good with their hands and can build things. They, along with most living creatures*, have an inherent sense of self preservation. And yet for some reason they have yet to invent or adopt technology and-or ideas that would allow them to build solid defensible shelters such as castles, nor have they yet been able to grasp arcane casting which would help greatly with such endeavours. Why?

I'll leave determination of the answer up to you.

* - adventurers, of course, being a notable exception here. :)
 

Faolyn

(she/her)
What else do you base them on? ASI's are intended to reflect what the character intrinsically is - what it has going for it and what it doesn't - before it ever thinks about adventuring
Free-floating. Level Up attaches them to background, +1 fixed, +1 floating. I've seen people say to attach them to class as well, which also makes sense.

Yeah, OK, I'll concede that one. :)

Cool! So then, if Elves are the baseline default, what are the ASI's for Humans?
Wherever they choose to put the +2/+1, or, in Level Up what their background says.

And if the answer is "there aren't any", then what's the intrinsic physical difference between the two other than cosmetic appearance and how is that reflected mechanically across the entirety of the two species?
See all those traits that each race has? See how dwarfs get Dwarf Resilience and Stonecunning and elves get Fey Ancestry and Trance?

Those things.

Which actually are useful and interesting in play. If you have a 15 Dexterity, how often has it ever mattered whether you got it by rolling the dice/assigning points or because of your race. And how often has it actually mattered that you rolled a 15 but your teammate rolled a 13 and added 2 because of their race? You both have a 15 in the same stat.

In the 30-odd years I've been gaming and the three editions I've played with, it hasn't mattered to me even once. Has it mattered to you?

Of course, it barely matters unless everyone starts with the exact same stats and they're only different because of race. If one person is a dwarf with Dex 18 and another person is an elf with Dex 13 after the racial ASI, then it certainly seems silly to say that elves are more dexterous than dwarfs are.

In D&D, variant humans get a skill and a feat. In D&DOne, they also get free Inspiration. In Level Up, humans get a skill, can add an expertise die to a roll 1/rest, and get to pick a human heritage gift.

And before you say "PCs are extraordinary so blanket species adjustments shoulsn't apply to them", I'll just point out that's a pointless argument with me as I see PCs as being representative members of their species, only with a serious dash of bravery/foolhardiness tacked on. :)
So, extraordinary. If ordinary people don't have that level of bravery/foolhardiness, then PCs are extraordinary because they do.

Extraordinary =/= super-powered. Extraordinary = very unusual and special.

Indeed; which is the point I was trying to make when someone said they'd feel smarter if they walked into a room full of Goblins.
"Feel" smarter is not the same as having a +2 Intelligence.

In either case, I'm not the one with the penalty or bonus, they are.; as I'm a Human and thus represent the baseline.
If you're in a room with a bunch of goblins, they are the baseline. It literally doesn't matter if these are the only goblins in the world and everyone else in existence is a human.

NASA scientists (or ancient Hobgoblins in my setting, who were very high-tech) might as well have a +2 Int bonus while Goblins have a -[big number] Int penalty.
Last I checked, all NASA scientists are human.
 




Chaosmancer

Legend
Either you have some grounding and basis of a species identity or you don't. If everyone just makes everything up with no starting point I don't see the point. Just give up on the idea of predefined races and have build-a-race system with different options.

Having defined races with defined characteristics gives me a starting point, a basis to build from. It doesn't totally identify any individual whether PC or NPC of course, that's not the point. But it gives the game concepts grounding something people can identify with across DMs and campaigns even when, especially when, that grounding is deviated from.

Or just say the heck with it and hand out the rubber masks and have generic bland sameness for every species.

Most DMs (and players) simply don't have the skills to do much better than what we already have and they shouldn't have to.

You know what Oofta, you convinced me. We do need a starting point. So, what if we did something like this.

Height: 4 -5 ft tall
Lifespan: 350 years
Darkvision: 60 ft
Dwarven Resilience: Advantage on Poison saves, Resistance to Poison damage
Dwarven Toughness: Your hp max increases by +1 now and every time you level
Forgewise: You have proficiency with two of the following Artisan Tools: Jeweler’s Tools, Mason’s Tools, Smith’s Tools, or Tinker’s Tools.
Stonecunning: prof times per day, you can gain Tremorsense out to 60 ft for 10 minutes while on stone surfaces.

Wait. We do need some lore. They live underground, they are clannish and have a deep respect for tradition.



Okay, now we have a starting point, a basis to build from, right?
 

Oofta

Legend
You know what Oofta, you convinced me. We do need a starting point. So, what if we did something like this.

Height: 4 -5 ft tall
Lifespan: 350 years
Darkvision: 60 ft
Dwarven Resilience: Advantage on Poison saves, Resistance to Poison damage
Dwarven Toughness: Your hp max increases by +1 now and every time you level
Forgewise: You have proficiency with two of the following Artisan Tools: Jeweler’s Tools, Mason’s Tools, Smith’s Tools, or Tinker’s Tools.
Stonecunning: prof times per day, you can gain Tremorsense out to 60 ft for 10 minutes while on stone surfaces.

Wait. We do need some lore. They live underground, they are clannish and have a deep respect for tradition.



Okay, now we have a starting point, a basis to build from, right?
That is one option. I think tremorsense will either be amazing or practically pointless depending on campaign. Other than that, I still prefer have ability score modifiers at the race level because it gives typical species member a default so if my dwarf is below average strength but extremely dextrous it stands out as being odd, not just "Oh, gee, another dextrous character" followed by a yawn.

Since you can make the +2/+1 whatever you want no matter what you choose I'd just make it part of ability score generation or get rid of it entirely. Oh, and I still like the split between mountain and hill dwarves. Why is it that only elves get a dozen different subspecies but other races don't?

P.S. If your going to disagree with me and paste in the playtest version just say you're doing it. :rolleyes:
 

Chaosmancer

Legend
The probems come - every damn time! - when players insist on strong AND tough AND nimble AND smart AND attractive and won't accept any corresponding drawbacks or penalties in order to get just two of those.

YEAH! I mean it isn't like rolling dice can possibly lead to someone rolling 18, 17, 15, 13, 12, 10 (the array I rolled on my first attempt, instead of having to do ten or so arrays) which would allow a character who is all those things. That is a very powerful array. Even if you wanted to do a +2/+1 and a -2/-1 I could end up with 16, 16, 15, 14, 14, 10 which is very much being strong AND tough AND nimble AND smart AND attractive and I STILL took those penalties for no reason.

So, if this is so easily possible, how can it possibly be a problem to not want those negatives? They don't really prevent this after all.

Because it's a Halfling.

Because it's a Dwarf.

Because it's a Gnome.

Humans are the baseline, and all others are compared to them.

So... no reason at all. Therefore changing that doesn't harm their concept in any way at all.

And you're also conveniently forgetting (pre-floating ASIs):

Why are Halflings more capable of nimbly running along balance beams than humans?
Why are Dwarves more resiilent than humans when it comes to taking damage?

Halfings are not more capable of nimbly running along a balance beam than humans. They are actually equal in that task.

Dwarves are more resilient to damage because they have a trait that gives them more hp.

No, but if Goblins were the baseline instead of Humans all Humans would have a pretty good strength bonus.

Would they? I don't think so.

Again, Elves aren't the baseline. You might not get a dex penalty but odds are high you'll still be among the clumsiest in the room.

Same as if real-world me was to walk into a room full of NASA rocket scientists. I wouldn't in fact be any less intelligent than I was outside but I'd sure as hell feel like I was. :)

See, that last sentence? That's the ENTIRE point. Your intelligence doesn't actually change. And the numbers on the sheets are the objective measure. Sure, we all understand that humans are the baseline, but that doesn't make the numbers less objective.

And, again, if you look at humans AS the baseline (in 5e which I know you don't play) then look at what that means, it is utterly ridiculous to try and claim that as a reason for any bonuses or penalties at all.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top