D&D General why do we have halflings and gnomes?

[Oofta]

False equivalency. Almost all other races get explanations for how they are protected. Dragons don't need an explanation for how they fly, because no other flying monster has an explanation for how they fly. This comparison would be valid if Griffons, Hippogriffs, and Pegasi had explanations for how they fly, but they don't.

So? That just pushes the explanation back a bit. I mean, where does magic come from? There is no explanation, it's just there. You can shuffle the explanation around, that doesn't mean there's a "real" reason for it other than "because the authors of the book said so".

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Dude, I was typing fast. I wasn't going to accuse you of an absolute. I was just not going to go back a dozen pages to read your exact words.



Group of bandits under the direction of an evil wizard who is under the control of a drow squad of spies who are fighting off a large group of undead and other monsters in a mine killed and captured townfolk and burn down some buildings in a town that was just reestablished after being completely wiped out by orcs and abandoned for 500 years.

Those same orcs (the tribe, not specifically the same orcs) are reported to be back at Wyvern's Tor or Wyvern's point, scouting out the town to attack it again.

There is a powerful banshee nearby.

Oh, and there is a second destroyed an abandoned town with a dragon, blights and either explicit Ash Zombies or just remains of ash zombies.

Does two destroyed towns with mutliple deadly threats not sound like "fraught with danger"?

I don't understand why you keep trying to convince me (or the thread in general) that my opinion is incorrect and your are by stating things over and over again or picking things apart. I have stated multiple times already we have different opinions on how the "D&D world" works and that's the fundamental difference that lends us to view halflings differently.

No amount of examples, problems, or other things you point out are going to change my opinion, nor do I feel the need to change my opinions since apparently one of the side effects of that change would be having to reinvent halfling lore I have intention of doing.

 

[Maxperson]

False equivalency. Almost all other races get explanations for how they are protected. Dragons don't need an explanation for how they fly, because no other flying monster has an explanation for how they fly. This comparison would be valid if Griffons, Hippogriffs, and Pegasi had explanations for how they fly, but they don't.

What explanations? As far as I know, not many other races are protected by their gods. They have the means to fight back, but don't have much actual protection against being attacked in the first place.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Sure, as much as the DM says, but that doesn't mean we should ignore the impact of those things just because a DM can decide that they are meaningless.

And, your assumptions about commercialism are what I keep challenging on this stance.

First off, a point I haven't raised before, but if Halflings are paying taxes to a human lord, those taxes traditionally came in the form of crops. So, if human farmers are commercial farmers, then halfling farmers would be the same. Unless you are trying to say that all humans grow crops exclusively to make as much money as possible, and nothing else, when farming was. traditionally, one of the poorest occupations of the time.

Secondly, "commercial farming" arose in the 1700's alongside the industrial revolution. It seems like an incredibly odd thing to assume as standard for all humans when we are assuming a culture and world closer to the 1300's nearly 400 years earlier.

And finally, you are presenting the idea of commercial farming as being the reason that the humans would not grow, in this specific example, Saffron. But that is backwards. The spices were the most valuable crops, they would be what is grown to the exclusion of the less valuable food crops if we were assuming a commercial farming model. You keep presenting it like humans would grow the less valuable crops because all they care about is growing the crops with the most value. That is logically inconsistent. If there existed fantasy saffron that could be grown in the region, humans would grow it, just like you are saying the halflings would.



True.

I generally consider that prestidigitation can't make a flavor that the caster hasn't tasted. I know that isn't quite RAW, but it makes sense to me that you can't make something you've never experienced. Add to that the idea that memories of flavors tend to distort, and I'd say you would have some small amount of trade even with wide-spread cantrip use to make sure that the chef can accurately recreate the flavor.

I then imagine that the idea of authenticity would take over. For those wealthy enough, the would seek out and import the "real deal" much like anyone can buy a steak, but only the wealthy tend to get 100% authentic Kobe Steaks.

It certainly would distort the trade though, and offer different incentives depending on how wide spread magic use in the kitchen was, when it came about compared to when the trade routes were established, and a few other noodly factors.




By my reckoning, your preference leaves halflings completely dissociated with the world. The worlds of DnD are worlds of danger. Even if you aren't on the border, you could have a cult summoning demons or a necromancer trying to overthrow the town and make himself the lord of the dead. Putting halflings in a space where they are completely isolated and protected from danger, to the point where they don't have a militia ready to defend their homes, seems incredible to me.

So yes, I think every village and town needs a trained militia. A few people with real weapons and real armor to defend them in the worst case scenarios. That accurately reflects how people react to dangerous situations, they think of ways to protect themselves.



See, your comparison is fundamentally flawed. I'm not talking about Natural Illusionist at all. I'm talking about the PHB write up that says gnomes are masters of illusion magic. Other people came in and began deriding that because all gnomes get as a racial ability is minor illusion, but that is like saying that Dwarves are poor blacksmiths because all they get as a racial ability is proficiency, and every blacksmith gets proficiency from the background. It ignores the associated lore.

And that is why I pressed for specifics on how halflings would hide. Not because I care about how much handwaving you are doing, but because there is nothing in the lore that provides practical skill use for halflings to hide. They are farmers and river boaters, per the PHB, which are not skill sets that lend themselves well to camoflauging an entire village. Something I think you recognized, because you immediately jumped to these villages being hid by mid-level rogues. But, even a level 12 rogue can't build a false bottom to a treasure chest if they aren't a carpenter. And if they don't have more than proficiency, then they aren't better than any other carpenter would be at the same task. So, either building a false bottom is something any carpenter can do, or you need some other explanation for why your rogue can do something extraordinary beyond their shared skills.

By my reckoning about 80% of this reply is based on your personal setting assumptions that you take to be facts..for some reason that hasn't yet been made clear.

1. How taxes are collected.
2. How much of people's income is taken in taxes.
3. Halflings pay taxes.
4. Halfling commercial interest, even so far as it exists, must exist in equal proportion as it does in other races.
5. D&D settings must mirror a particular time period's economic structures
6. There is no safe place to have a community.
7. A community cannot be made safe without force of arms.
8. Halflings shouldn't feel dissociated from the world.

There is not one of these assumptions that must be true for any given setting.

Then there are the misunderstandings or misreadings of my response and misrememberings of the discussion to date.

Prestidigitation is but one difference and a relatively small one meant to illustrate how different a D&D setting and the Ye Olde times you keep insisting should be the guiding setting principles can be.

As it relates to farming practices, It's not that the halfling would choose saffron over a less valued crop. It is the reverse. They'd be more willing to sacrifice saffron for rice, so they can have a delicious yellow rice meal, and they can make that choice without feeling like they've made a sacrifice to do so.

I initiated the comparison to gnomes' on a subrace trait level as points of extrapolation. Now as the halfling entry doesn't actually address the subraces, here we agree that halfling lore is lacking (really weird QA failure there, perhaps the halfling thieves' guild has someone in the editing room). That said, in the same way that the minor features of the gnomes, dwarves, elves, etc. are reflective of how their more talented memberd serve the community, the minor feature of the lightfoots could be interpreted as similarly reflective without breaking anything. Strangely enough the PHB even describes how they avoid conflict by avoiding notice and the most common reason for adventuring is to defend their community.

As it relates to the specifics for how the rogue can help, they build the strategy and then lead the execution, with help from the community. There may be things they can build or do directly, and there may be others where they can coach another tradesman regarding what's necessary. In either case their skill at stealth can apply.

But in either case, to you did not press me on details because you were concerned about the fit with halfling lore. I know this because neither your initial question nor your response related at all to halfling lore fit. Both were actually concerned with class capabilities, which I have addressed, now multiple times, and which you have not..even once yet.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

False equivalency. Almost all other races get explanations for how they are protected.

But they don't explain how they produce food. That's magically hand-waved. Food is more important than protection when it comes survival, since if you are not attacked you don't need protection, but there is not way to survive without food.

I guess so many D&D players have never been short of food, they forget it's necessary.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Now as the halfling entry doesn't actually address the subraces, here we agree that halfling lore is lacking.

There is forty+ years worth of halfling lore, plus the original source material. Reprinting stuff for every edition is a useless waste of paper.

 

[Gammadoodler]

There is forty+ years worth of halfling lore, plus the original source material. Reprinting stuff for every edition is a useless waste of paper.

Sure, but under that logic you toss...like the whole book. So, operating under the assumption that the book should exist, if you're going to have a halfling entry, maybe include some lore related to the mechanical differences baked into the race design.

Like, this is something that should get caught during the review of the outline, long before any detailed write-ups. No one looked at this thing and thought, "..weird how all halflings are alike, except for the specific way the rules say they're different.."

Boggles the mind.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Sure, but under that logic you toss...like the whole book. So, operating under the assumption that the book should exist, if you're going to have a halfling entry, maybe include some lore related to the mechanical differences baked into the race design.

Like, this is something that should get caught during the review of the outline, long before any detailed write-ups. No one looked at this thing and thought, "..weird how all halflings are alike, except for the specific way the rules say they're different.."

Boggles the mind.

Which book? It would be very hard to beat Concerning Hobbits for Halfling lore, But we know D&D can't reference that directly. All you need for a new edition is mechanics, the fluff can carry over and in the internet age what has been written previously is easily accessible.

 

[Minigiant]

There is forty+ years worth of halfling lore, plus the original source material. Reprinting stuff for every edition is a useless waste of paper.

Reading 40 years of out of print books should not be required to understand the basic structure of halfling society.

Thats many people's issue with the 5e PHB writeup for the class. It says halflings don't do this or that but what they do instead are in other books outside the core set.

 

[Chaosmancer]

"Fine" implies a level of greed that isn't apparent in the lore. They just want to be happy and enjoy life. They don't need Gucci boots when ordinary comfortable boots will do.

Dude, what is with you and your bizarre definition of greed?

No, "fine quality" does not imply any level of greed whatsoever, it implies a level of quality. And, while you may sell something of fine quality for money, you can also make something of fine quality because you care about what you are making, and make it to the best of your ability.

Halflings aren't some aesetic community who are going to look at a finely crafted cane and say "Well, that is just too ostentatious, a rotting stick will do just as well, who are we if not simple folk?" I don't know what your obsession with greed is, but it clearly goes beyond normal definitions if it includes "using coins" and "making fine quality goods". I didn't even say high quality, just fine.

That's a fine Red Herring that's entirely irrelevant to whether or not the race has them.

The provable fact that not all Deep Gnomes have that magic is a Red Herring that is irrelevant to whether or not all Deep Gnomes have that magic.... How about no.

No. They can only have feats if the DM engages the explicitly optional feat rule. Without the DM engaging that rule, the players can make a million alt-human PCs and not one of them will have a feat.

I see, so now it matters whether or not the DM allows feats, but it doesn't matter for the Deep Gnome Magic feat... because you say so. Classic argument "your version doesn't count, but my version does count, so you are wrong"

You can't teach innate abilities. They're...........innate. Did your mother teach you how to beat your heart or does it just beat on its own? Your heartbeat is innate. You're ability to write Strawmen here was taught to you.

And then she gave them their innate abilities through divine power. Those are not mutually exclusive things.

I read it. Teaching them how to hide =/= innate magic. Teaching them how to cast spells like wizards =/= innate magic. Teaching them how to deceive foes =/= innate magic. Granting them innate magic via divine power = innate magic.

So. It specifically says they were taught magic by this god. But, you've decided that a God teaching something that is innate is impossible, I mean what are they, a god?

Therefore, instead of excepting what the book says (a book which you still claim I haven't read, and that I must except unconditionally) you are going to make up your own version, oh, and your version is the version you read.

And then, because you make up your own version, and your version is the only version that is real, I'm wrong, because the book only says what you want it to say, and I engage in strawmen. I mean, I even offered an explanation for them being taught magic, and that magic becoming innate, something that has happened in DnD lore, where communities of high magic concentration gain innate magical powers (they are called "sorcerers" though I'm sure you'll tell me how wrong I am) which allows it to both be taught and innate. But it doesn't make me wrong, so that can't be what the book says, right? I mean, we need to use logic, except when I do it, because then the book disagrees with me and I'm wrong.

That doesn't say what you think it does. It does seem to imply that he feels Mordenkainen's is crappy. It doesn't say that he wants to limit things to the PHB only.

Dude, I flat told you it was just the first quote of his I found, and that I was not digging through the thread to educate you on what other posters have been saying. How about this, if you so badly want to prove your own absolute statement that "no one" has claimed something, how about you go and do the research. Go and pull up every post of his, and breakdown exactly what he meant and throw it in my face with your obsession with hyper-precise language that only means what you want it to mean.

You were not right about gnomes being taught their innate magic. I called you out for attributing Oofta's quote to me, and so on.

I was right. I didn't attribute the quote to you. and so on and so on.

And I will call you out for this misrepresenstation as well. I never said 0%. I said NEAR 0%. You do occasionally get it right.

Right because clearly being correct about 4 things in the last seven days would be near 0%? Oh wait, you just have no idea what I was saying, because you are obsessed with me being wrong and broke my post into smaller chunks.

Congrats, you missed my point and are misrepresenting me. Again. And you were wrong, again.

Raiders raid for wealth, dude. They want the yellow metal and jewels. The ceramic teapot will be ground underfoot while they search for actual loot.

Which shows you have clearly not read anything about goblin lairs. How about you go educate yourself then, maybe read some adventures and the like, since not all raiders are as obsessed with gold and jewels as you are.