An assertion isn't an argument.
It isn't just contradiction either.
Which is again, not stated in the playtest document anywhere. Beyond this, where does it say that adventuring halflings will be taken aside for 'racial weapon training'? How on earth would that work - are adventuring halflings segregated from their own population at an early age, in order for them to be trained up? How do they know which ones will choose to go adventuring? Silly argument.
Home is sometimes the place for adventures, such as when Goblins attack. I would assume that most halflings are taught the arts of self defense in their own martial tradition, just like it was common for people of all medieval societies to learn self defense and fighting techniques. Just because we've largely forgotten our western martial arts traditions, doesn't mean they didn't exist.
Plus, you are acting like if I say "the late medieval swiss were effective on the battlefield through their mastery of infantry tactics using pikes and halberds, you are acting like I'm saying every 80 year old matronly goatherd was a master of the awl pike. Saying that the English were known for their skill with longbow, the swiss were known for their skill with the pike, the French for their heavy calvary, the Genoese for their crossbowmen etc. is no more or less absurd than saying that halflings are known for their skill with slings and daggers.
Which misses the point. How would a Halfling Wizard become more proficient at causing damage with a dagger than a Human Wizard?
Because an adventuring halfling wizard has training in halfling maritial arts related to daggers and slings.
A) Englishmen were conscripted to provide the means to serve the King in times of war. They weren't trained in anything, and essentially were easy kills in any armies that were raised. They weren't a warrior class.
I'll let the knights at Agincourt and Crecy know, I'm sure they'll agree.
Those who fought were indeed the elite warrior class that often won battles. But everyone fought just like everyone prayed, even if they weren't professionals at it.
3) None of this pertains to what is described as a "Peaceful" Race of Halflings.
Why not? How do you think peace is gained in a world like dungeons and dragons? By sprinkling posies around and asking pretty please don't trample my crops? Every race in the D&D universe has stats because every race fights.
No you haven't. You've provided reactions to my comments and weak arguments that don't ring true.
Whereas you're simply being obstinate in the face far greater opposition. That might be a clue that you're being unreasonable.
Earlier in the thread it was being argued that D&D Halflings weren't the same as Tolkien Hobbits.
So they didn't know their Tolkien very well, but the traditional D&D bonus that halflings get to slings and thrown weapons does indeed come from Tolkien.
Now that has come full circle. The bonus doesn't come from Tolkien, and in the case of Short Swords and Daggers it is patently obvious that none of the Hobbits in Lord of the Rings have had any formal training in warfare or weapon use.
Well, except for the archers sent to aid the king of Arnor (perhaps you want shortbows instead of daggers?). Also Bullroarer Took. And half a dozen other examples in the Shire's past if you read the appendix. Sure, the Shire largely forgot their martial traditions because they were in a prolonged period of peace, but they rediscovered them in a hurry when they had to oust the socialist Sharkey.
Listen, you want racial abilities to respresent nothing but biological things. Whether they have darkvision, how heavy they are etc. But a lot of us want cultural touches to racial abilities as well. Dwarves being able to detect stonework is not a biological thing, as presumably they are taught this. High Elves knowing spells regardless of their class, Wood Elves knowing how to get along in the woods, and so forth are all taught rather than innate. They are no more or less absurd than a halfling tradition of fighting with slings and daggers.
