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

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm not even sure what you mean by that. How is any of that inherently cartoonish?

Also, you're moving the goalposts; I was responding to your claim that there is only one possible character concept for halfling PCs.
an endless set of blandly pleasant shires, I want some depth to them, not nesasserly darkness but something more than just a rip-off.
So long as it's not changed in such a way that makes halflings aggressive imperialists interested in world politics.

The real problem isn't halflings, it's humans. In 5e D&D humans are adventurous, outgoing and versatile. THAT IS NOT ME. 5e does a very poor job in accurately representing humans.
I believe 5e humans are all over the map in personality, also if you crave no adventure why play an adventure game?
I do not feel halflings would work as aggressive imperialists, maybe one as a joke character.
They're prefer to find peaceful solutions. Clearly that's only something that can be found in happy-happy kids' shows.
luck bends to accommodate them I want them to feel like they work in the world as if we are to have them they must not feel incongruous.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

No, that's just me saying it's what I would have liked, if it didn't look like Jack Vance, who was hardly the current reading even in 1974.
I read some Vance about a Dozen years later than running into D&D and ummm not thinking the spell casters did his ideas justice even so
Yeah it’s also pretty weird to me that so many folks think that having a dozen intelligent peoples in the same region would make people more bigoted, somehow? “Yeah that lizard in clothes with a guitar is definitely a monster, not a people. I mean, my neighbor is a dwarf and my uncle married an elf, and the best locksmith in the region is a gnome, and the halfling peddler comes once a season, but the blue lizard guy is super scary and not at all just a guy
The more cosmopolitan a setting the more cosmopolitan a setting behaves and the more blasé individuals get about differences.
 

No, I meant the point that all I care about are violent races that conquer people. You know, the actual accusation that you leveled at me.

Or the accusation that I just want to delete halflings and make them grimdark, when that is also wrong and not my position.

You know... the things I have directly proven you wrong on, but you want to focus on anything but that
I never said that you dismissed halflings because they aren't violent. I didn't attribute my general impression to any poster. However, the issue people seem to have is that halflings have no kingdoms and would rather just live a peaceful life while enjoying the comforts of home and somehow this is a bad thing. They may be a couch potato race, but to me that just makes the %0.1 percent that go adventuring more interesting.

I have no idea what your issue with halflings is. Other than the false "they have no lore" and for some reason you think lucky should mean they never fail and brave means ... I don't know. Obviously rerolling the first 1 and advantage on saves isn't enough. They have as much or more written lore as most other races. They don't have magical items associated with combat, but apparently that's not an issue for you.

The vast majority of your posts are playing victim (like this one) or saying you've already proven why they're bad by stating that they are. Me? I like playing them. I have 2 in my current campaign.
 

an endless set of blandly pleasant shires, I want some depth to them, not nesasserly darkness but something more than just a rip-off.
Who says they're all blandly pleasant?

I do not feel halflings would work as aggressive imperialists, maybe one as a joke character.
I had a halfling cultist of Vecna take over a town. He was not a joke.

luck bends to accommodate them I want them to feel like they work in the world as if we are to have them they must not feel incongruous.
Luck does not "bend to accommodate them". They're just lucky. In practical terms, they have situational advantage.
 

I never said that you dismissed halflings because they aren't violent. I didn't attribute my general impression to any poster. However, the issue people seem to have is that halflings have no kingdoms and would rather just live a peaceful life while enjoying the comforts of home and somehow this is a bad thing. They may be a couch potato race, but to me that just makes the %0.1 percent that go adventuring more interesting.

I have no idea what your issue with halflings is. Other than the false "they have no lore" and for some reason you think lucky should mean they never fail and brave means ... I don't know. Obviously rerolling the first 1 and advantage on saves isn't enough. They have as much or more written lore as most other races. They don't have magical items associated with combat, but apparently that's not an issue for you.

The vast majority of your posts are playing victim (like this one) or saying you've already proven why they're bad by stating that they are. Me? I like playing them. I have 2 in my current campaign.
their lack of nations is odd not in the sense of lack of imperialism but the lack of everyone else stealing their land or eating them, one can not be a species of couch potato and farm in a place with ten-ton monsters who are hungry.

their lore is bare-bones in everywhere that is the default which should not be the case as why would you have a thing just dumped in your setting and do nothing with it?
Who says they're all blandly pleasant?


I had a halfling cultist of Vecna take over a town. He was not a joke.


Luck does not "bend to accommodate them". They're just lucky. In practical terms, they have situational advantage.
it is an abstraction from what is written no tales of artist or poets just simple folk, only simple folk and not portrayed as bad guys so add in the lack of definition of what else they care about they end up as well bland.

did him being a halfling matter in the slightest or could he have been any race without any changes? your answer can explain a great deal.

I am not talking about their mechanic but what little lore they go in mtof as that explain how the ogres have not eaten them all yet.
 


Even if you don't like them, they're only one of the three options presented. There are also the halflings who live among other races and the nomadic ones who travel in wagon caravans or on the river. (I just said this in the post you responded to, which frankly is kind of frustrating.)
the ones in human land seem to just become humans who happen to be small and we have even less lore on the nomads, what I ask for is more and inspiring lore things to pick at and work with as halflings are not common in fantasy and rare have much lore to work with so I can't use other settings to inspire them.
 

the ones in human land seem to just become humans who happen to be small and we have even less lore on the nomads
We have enough to know that halfling society is not "an endless set of blandly pleasant shires," which is what you claimed.

what I ask for is more and inspiring lore things to pick at and work with
It's not WotC's responsibility if you're not inspired by what they give you. No setting is ever going to chime for every single reader/player/DM.

And it's okay if you're not inspired by halflings as presented in the book. In fact, I'd be shocked if any given person didn't find some character/setting option in the PHB to be "meh" for them.
 
Last edited:

their lack of nations is odd not in the sense of lack of imperialism but the lack of everyone else stealing their land or eating them, one can not be a species of couch potato and farm in a place with ten-ton monsters who are hungry.

their lore is bare-bones in everywhere that is the default which should not be the case as why would you have a thing just dumped in your setting and do nothing with it?
Umm, all intelligent creatures in your world are cannibals? Why would they need to be worried about being eaten by, say humans? Or are you assuming that every campaign world is monster world where every surviving race is in a daily struggle for survival? If so ... how do commoners grow food?

In a world with up to a hundred or so races, not all of them can have kingdoms. Many races don't have kingdoms. Aarokocra form colonies made of one large open roofed nest, Firbolgs live in isolated tribes, Goliaths are reclusive mountain dwellers, Tabaxi live in a distant homeland in small tribes just to name a few.

As far as their lore being "bare bones", again they have just as much or more lore as every other race. You just don't like it.
 

their lack of nations is odd not in the sense of lack of imperialism but the lack of everyone else stealing their land or eating them, one can not be a species of couch potato and farm in a place with ten-ton monsters who are hungry.
MTF goes into detail about how they defend themselves against monsters.

their lore is bare-bones in everywhere that is the default which should not be the case as why would you have a thing just dumped in your setting and do nothing with it?
So do something with it. Do the books need to spell out every little detail for you?

it is an abstraction from what is written no tales of artist or poets just simple folk, only simple folk and not portrayed as bad guys so add in the lack of definition of what else they care about they end up as well bland.
And again, the books do go into detail about their storytelling. And since halflings are commonly thought of as rogues, you can easily see them as bad guys to one degree or another.

did him being a halfling matter in the slightest or could he have been any race without any changes? your answer can explain a great deal.
Well, yes. For starters, three of my players are playing halflings. It was important to them that this guy was corrupting their people.

Halflings, in my world, are also one of the more civilized people--humans, orcs, and elves only have tiny tribal-style villages at most, often built around ruins, whereas halflings have towns (the setting is a world-forest, centered around a giant river, that actively fights against anything larger than a town). Only dwarfs and gnomes (who basically are one people) have larger civilizations. The only changes to halflings are that they control a lot of the boat traffic and mint coins (unlike other surface races, which engage in barter or use hacksilver or weigh the metal; dwarfs also mint coins).

This also meant that if the cultist had an uninterrupted hold on the town--which he almost did; he was a charismatic preacher promising eternal life to supplicants and was performing various miracles for them--he'd be in a decent position to spread out to other halfling towns and take them over as well.

I should reiterate that the halflings are, for the most part, the same as you get out of the PH: we were introducing a new player to D&D and as the only official settings I know well enough to run well are Ravenloft and Planescape (neither of which are new-player friendly) and I love world-building, I whipped up a super-simple world based on some ideas I had floating around in my head. I didn't want to make any radical changes to confuse the new person. Then the rest of the players (sadly, the new person had to leave for non-gaming reasons) liked the world and their characters enough to continue playing in the setting.

I am not talking about their mechanic but what little lore they go in mtof as that explain how the ogres have not eaten them all yet.
They most likely have a militia of sorts. They have a god of defense (Arvoreen), after all. Also, they're villages are notoriously well-hidden, so dumb ogres might not be able to find them.

Also, people keep pointing out that halflings tend to live among humans or near human cities, so they probably are protected by human or multi-racial patrols designed to keep such threats away from civilized lands.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top