D&D General My Problem(s) With Halflings, and How To Create Engaging/Interesting Fantasy Races

[Crimson Longinus]

The whole point of playing a halfling is they don't matter. People choose them because they don't want to be associated with war, imperialism and aggression.

Yes! This! Halflings not having grand histories or great organisations is a feature, not a bug! If you make halflings 'important' in the grand scale, then they lose their halflingness!

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Just to add to @Chaosmancer's point, all you have to do is look in the DMG for race specific magic items. That right there gives more lore to dwarves and elves. Do halflings even have a race specific magic item in the DMG?

Or, think of it this way. Dwarf = Axe. Elf = Bow. Halfling = ? It took Dragonlance to give them a hoopak and that hasn't even managed to make it's way into mainstream D&D.

Again, it all comes down to archetypes. Halflings just don't have the traction that other races have.

JFC. This is really scarping the bottom of the barrel. Elves have such great lore because Boots of Elven kind!

 

[FrozenNorth]

I'm not against anything. There's really not much lore in the players handbook anyways. If someone wants to add lore or make them cannibals, go for it!

I think it's a bit nitpicky to complain about a race being in a core book and at the same time agreeing that they should be in a subsequent book. Like who cares?

I think that if people are willing to argue over it for 60 pages, it is pretty obvious that both those who love halflings and those who dislike halfling lore DO care.

Specifically, a couple of reasons for why this matters have been advanced:

• new settings tend to incorporate the core races, but are less strict about incorporating Volo or MToF races. This might be an issue for players or DMs who want to play in those settings;
• races in the PHB are the only ones that are available for free on many digital tool sets: this also skews evaluation of their popularity;

I would add a third item:
- other D&D products do not use the full complement of races, but tend to include the core races. For instance, despite tieflings, genasi and dragonborn being more popular than halflings, Betrayal at Baldur’s Gate only has humans, elves, dwarves, halflings and half-orcs as playable characters.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Except that the half-elf and half-orc should be ways to modify other races (why not a half-elf, half-orc?). What are the 6th and 7th most commonly-played races? Include those.

I will say that half-lineages can be tough to do right. PF2 has half-elves and half-orcs as an add-on to your main race, and the only difference between a half-orc and a human is that the half-orc has darkvision.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I think that if people are willing to argue over it for 60 pages, it is pretty obvious that both those who love halflings and those who dislike halfling lore DO care.

Specifically, a couple of reasons for why this matters have been advanced:

• new settings tend to incorporate the core races, but are less strict about incorporating Volo or MToF races. This might be an issue for players or DMs who want to play in those settings;
• races in the PHB are the only ones that are available for free on many digital tool sets: this also skews evaluation of their popularity;

I would add a third item:
- other D&D products do not use the full complement of races, but tend to include the core races. For instance, despite tieflings, genasi and dragonborn being more popular than halflings, Betrayal at Baldur’s Gate only has humans, elves, dwarves, halflings and half-orcs as playable characters.

Generally I would be in favour getting rid of the concept of 'core races' as in species that will always be included in any setting. I feel that just is a far too limiting idea. And this is different from just changing what the 'core races' are, as in that case we would just be switching the set we're stuck with and it would be just as limiting. Every setting should have the species that most make sense for that setting, be that halflings, elves, warforged, genasi or something specifically made just for that setting.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Dwarves are deep and multi-dimensional. They have axes, beer, beards and gold

But I think I get it now. This argument is not really about D&D the game, it's about D&D the fandom and canon. No wonder I wasn't getting it.

And tradition. And piety. And worship of ancestors. And a connection with the mountains and stone. And stubborness.

 

[Yora]

D&D has long been much too bloated. Bless Eberron's efforts, but Monster Manuals and also the PHB should be seen as collections of options settings can pick from, instead of a complete catalog of the default setting.

I really appreciate what Dark Sun did, having it's completely separate bestiaries and using the default races in name only.

 

[FrozenNorth]

JFC. This is really scarping the bottom of the barrel. Elves have such great lore because Boots of Elven kind!

Except it’s true. The fact that the DMG contains Boots of Elvenkind, Elven cloaks, Oathbows and Moonblades tells you something about elves.

It tells you about the sort of tactics, skills they value. It can add also tell you about their lore, like with the Oathbow and Moonblade.

 

[jayoungr]

The love of simple things matters to the inner lives of the Hobbit protagonists, but - by default - that sort of inner life doesn't feature prominently in D&D play, does it?

That depends heavily on the group and the player.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Except it’s true. The fact that the DMG contains Boots of Elvenkind, Elven cloaks, Oathbows and Moonblades tells you something about elves.

It tells you about the sort of tactics, skills they value. It can add also tell you about their lore, like with the Oathbow and Moonblade.

It tells you that the creators are willing to provide them with incremental mechanical support, beyond what is published in the PHB.

The bog standard PHB elf has proficiencies in various martial weapons, perception and some stealth bonuses or latent magic. These items are adding nothing to that formula that wasn't already there.

Edit: on further consideration, for these items the lore contribution could be considered to be that elves are magic crafters. Perhaps this is true, but there is little mechanical support for such a contention, and the whole lore justification for it appears to be "well they can live a really long time, so of course they can be really good crafters" But given how much of crafting is predicated on the accumulation of knowledge and practices built up over years by a collection of artisans, and given how elven lore emphasizes that elven independence and their willingness to chase their passions, I don't believe elven culture would develop the institutions that would support prolonged crafting expertise. I think it's much more likely you have occasional experts and a whole lot of "I'm figuring out my own way" garbage.

Basically elves are gonna be busy admiring good craftsmanship, maybe painting portraits of it or writing songs about it.. Meanwhile your dwarves and gnomes establishing guilds, writing instruction manuals, etc. so that their accomplishments can be repeated and built upon by their successors.