D&D 5E What is the appeal of the weird fantasy races?

[Charlaquin]

Let's pretend I didn't type out a list that clearly showed I was wrong at a glance. Please?

You weren’t wrong, you just forgot that the PHB separates the races into two categories.

 

[Charlaquin]

Saying halflings are built like chimps would be more effective an argument if they were in fact built like chimps. Their proportions seem pretty human like, making them child-like (or like real life people with dwarfism).

Is Peter Dinklage a great actor? Sure. Is he able to outbox 6'4" behemoths? Not sure.

They aren’t built like humans or chimps. They are built like halflings, which are built in such a way that they are not notably weaker than humans despite being about half as tall on average. Chimps are just pointed to as an example of a case where strength is not directly proportional to size.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

That’s because in the PHB they are broken up between common (dwarf, elf, halfling, human) and uncommon (dragonborn, gnome, half-elf, half-orc, tiefling). Each subset of races is listed alphabetically .

Finally it makes sense!

 

[Minigiant]

Arguably supported in the text, though exceptions to this trend are common enough that the text considers them worth pointing out, and it’s safe to assume adventuring halflings will be among such exceptions.

Well all adventurers are exceptions.
My argument is that D&D's description of halflings as basically curious hobbits mean even fewer of them would be halflings.
If 0.5% of humans are adventurers, <0.5% of halflings are.

The idea that halfling adventurers don’t act but watch in amusement is not supported by the text.

It describes halflings as being curious and going places but not actually doing anything.

As a general trend, sure. They are more likely to adventure out of curiosity, wanderlust, or bonds of friendship with their fellow adventurers, rather than desire for conquest. I fail to see how this is a problem, unless your D&D is pure colonialist wish fulfillment, rather than heroic questing.

Because it cut out some of the main hooks to be an adventurer. A halfling adventurer is not a little wierld or kinda weird. Because if they aren't driven by massive curiousity or home defence, they are being very unhalflingy by description.

Where on earth do you get this idea from?

D&D's anti small people bias in weapons combat.

Sure. Is that a problem?

yet another limitation that must be broken.

This is the greatest leap of logic I've seen on this site in months.

It literally says that halflings adventure for several reasons, including curiosity and wanderlust. As described, a halfling adventurer would delve into a dungeon because it looks awful interesting in there, and "who knows if any creature with a language has been down there in the last few hundred years! Anything could be down there!"

Why are you trying to twist the text of the game to make a false point about halflings? Just approach the topic as it is.

Again I'm not saying halfling adventurers don't exist nor does it make no sense.
I'm saying as a race, the race is not described like people who would adventurer nor is it mechanically built for it.
So even a reason like curiosity or wanderlust sounds like an excuse to include it in the book as a common race as a PC option with subclasses as every halfling adventurer is not just an adventurer, they are are all Halfling Drizzt..

 

[Gammadoodler]

Well all adventurers are exceptions.
My argument is that D&D's description of halflings as basically curious hobbits mean even fewer of them would be halflings.
If 0.5% of humans are adventurers, <0.5% of halflings are.


It describes halflings as being curious and going places but not actually doing anything.


Because it cut out some of the main hooks to be an adventurer. A halfling adventurer is not a little wierld or kinda weird. Because if they aren't driven by massive curiousity or home defence, they are being very unhalflingy by description.


D&D's anti small people bias in weapons combat.


yet another limitation that must be broken.

Again I'm not saying halfling adventurers don't exist nor does it make no sense.
I'm saying as a race, the race is not described like people who would adventurer nor is it mechanically built for it.
So even a reason like curiosity or wanderlust sounds like an excuse to include it in the book as a common race as a PC option with subclasses as every halfling adventurer is not just an adventurer, they are are all Halfling Drizzt..

I think you could reasonably reach the same conclusion reading the descriptions of elves and dwarves.

Dwarves are all about clans and tradition. They don't like boats. What kind of adventurer would avoid a boat? Clearly there can't be a lot of dwarven adventurers.

Elves are often more amused than excited. They retreat rather than fight for their homes. What kind of adventurer would retreat from their homes?

I think you're getting out what you're putting in

 

[Dausuul]

I mean, they weren't exactly useless from the jump in the books. It's one of my few real gripes with the movies.

Disagree about Shelob, though. What happened is hardly outside the realm of luck and courage and Sam not being blinded while Shelob was.

She wasn't blind. Sam didn't pull out the Phial till the very end (at which point he used its Channel Divinity ability to Turn Spider, and that was that). Sam delivered multiple serious wounds with nothing but a pair of shortswords.

If he'd had the Phial in hand the whole time, and didn't rely on Shelob deciding for no very good reason to sit on him right after he slashed her from below, it'd be more credible IMO.

 

[Maxperson]

It's a false point.

Halflings adventurers wouldn't be any rarer than human adventurers.

There's really nothing to say that. They could be more, less or equal to the number of humans. My feeling is that since humans tend to be more numerous and tend as a race to be adventurous, that there are probably more human adventurers. That's just my feeling on it, though.

 

[Maxperson]

Let's pretend I didn't type out a list that clearly showed I was wrong at a glance. Please?

LOL And I didn't even question it. I was like, "I'm sure he can tell alphabetical order. I'm going to click like and move on."

 

[Maxperson]

Saying halflings are built like chimps would be more effective an argument if they were in fact built like chimps. Their proportions seem pretty human like, making them child-like (or like real life people with dwarfism).

Is Peter Dinklage a great actor? Sure. Is he able to outbox 6'4" behemoths? Not sure.

You can't tell a book by it's cover. Trying to compare a real world human with dwarfism to a fantasy halfling race doesn't do much. They could have special muscles that don't look any different from the outside, but act very differently with regard to how strong the race is.

 

[Gammadoodler]

With my dual degrees in imaginary sociology and fantasy cultural anthropology, I can say with 95% certainty, that halfling adventurers make up on average half the volume of the average human adventurer.