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

[Garthanos]

So... he made a map and he gave them songs?

Contributed massively to my love of maps and mapping

 

[Cadence]

So, uhm, asking for a friend. Halfling players would roll a one on average 1/20 times they roll regularly and gets at least one one on average 39/400 times they roll two dice, right?

 

[Chaosmancer]

And again, since no other race has been specifically called out for being chefs or farmers (saying "here is a list of foods other races are known to have made" or "other races cook and farm" is not the same thing), there is plenty of indication that halflings either do it better than anyone else or are more famed for it than anyone else.

You can assume that. You can also assume that they aren't as well known for it. That it was only brought up to sell the players on their "folksy" image by making sure to remind people that hobbits were farming folk in Tolkien's work. There is no reason to go either way with it/

Or it could be pretty common. Natural 1s are not uncommon in my game. We often get one or two per session in my group. The fact is, halflings have an edge that helps them out in that situation. If they never get to use that particular trait--well, it's not like they wasted skill points or a feat on it. It's built-in.

But they chose that race, potentially hoping to use that ability. You are right, it could come up a lot if someone rolls a lot of 1's. It is completely random and out of both the players and DM's hands. And 1's don't show up very much in my games to date.

Apparently you don't.

One: Find ways to portray the luck. Think of lucky things that can happen to people, and have them happen to your halfling.

Two: Think of ways to highlight the PC's race in other ways. I gave you examples. Or, think of ways to highlight the PC without resorting to their race. Make them feel special because of their class or background or something in their backstory.

Three: Do these exact same things for every other PC. Do you go out of your way to include stone so your dwarfs can be cunning? Do you describe the weather so that wood elves can hide in the rain or mist or snow? Do you include animals and plants for your gnomes and firbolgs to talk to? Do you find things for other races to do, even when they don't have traits specifically built around these sort of things? Like, do you try to make your orcs feel like they can be as orcish as possible?

If not, then why single out the halfling?

This is something you've never answered. You insist that you have to portray halflings in a particular way, yet you've never once said if you do the same thing for anyone else, or why you think all halflings have to behave a certain way. Nor have you said why the halfling Luck has to matter. It's unlikely that you go out of your way to make an elf's Fey Heritage matter. Do you? When I've asked you these things before, you don't answer.

1) This is the question I asked later, about favoritism, so I will delay it until later and see what your response was

2) This is ignoring the problem. Yes, I do try and make sure that a player's class and background matter, but making their class matter doesn't make their race matter, so it is a bizarre answer to the question.

3)

- I've never needed to specifically include stone, because most buildings and ruins in the game are made of stone, so the dwarf can choose to activate that for themselves. I don't have a lot... actually, I've never had a dwarf player while I've DM'd, so it never came up.

-Yes, I do try and describe the weather and make sure it comes up for Wood Elves. Usually they get away by using bushes and things like that. I also don't know if I've ever had a wood elf player. But I feel like I did.

- I've never needed to specifically include animals and plants for the firbolgs and Gnomes. Instead, they have initiated that conversation by asking about those elements near them, to be utilized in a plan. Also... small beasts like mice and plants like grass are ridiculously common, not having those elements is stranger than having them

- I do try and work to have my orcs feel as orcish as possible. Though some of that revolves around homebrew and isn't universally applicable.


See, that's the thing you seem to be missing. Most of these things are incredibly easy to work into a game. I have a dwarf? I can include a false wall and the stonecunning makes the dwarf notice the fake. And they likely feel like their race mattered. Heck, they can ask me to initiate it. They can come up with a reason why their stonecunning should apply that I didn't think of before.

But Lucky? The player can't initiate anything. They just have to hope that they roll a 1. Or that I describe lucky things happening to them.

So what you're saying is that, in one game, a trait may matter a lot. And in another game, it might not matter at all.

So, to extrapolate that to halflings... in one game, a halfling PC may roll a lot of 1s and/or come across a lot of monsters that cause the frightened condition, and in another game, they might not.

You keep claiming it's possible to go for sessions or entire campaigns without ever rolling a 1, but you never seem to acknowledge that the reverse is also true, and that due to the random nature of the dice, you may get a bunch of 1s in a row.

Of course it is true. But, unlike with our cantrip, a halfling can't choose to make Lucky matter. It is entirely out of their hands. That is a rather big difference. And, if it is coming up continously, then it isn't an issue, the issue comes up if it doesn't happen often enough.

Yes, luck is fickle like that. It's a known thing. I'm sure halflings are aware of that, too. That's why the books list them as superstitious instead of simply relying on luck entirely.

So, it is entirely fickle whether or not the person who is playing a race known for unusually good luck, to the point that it is measurable by outsiders, expeirences any particularly good luck?

Well, that is basically how luck always works, so why does that inspire in the player the feeling of being particularly lucky?

But that's also an if. I don't throw monsters or plots at people just because I know a character has a resistance to something in that plot. That would be pretty stupid. Instead, I use plots and monsters that are relevant and interesting.

I think being able to have a player showcase their abilities is relevant and interesting.

No duh. But being superstitious means that you have the (false) belief that you can control the luck by engaging in certain rituals and, at the same time, ignoring when it doesn't work (postdiction). You keep wanting to know how to portray halflings; well, here you go: one of your halfling NPCs has a lucky rabbit's foot. When they succeed on whatever, they credit the foot. On rare occasions (when they roll a 1, reroll, and succeed), the luck actually works. Is it because of the foot? Well, does your world have a deity of luck you can call up and ask?

And how is that any different than an elf with a lucky rabbits foot? Or a dwarf with a lucky rabbits foot? Or a Troll with a lucky rabbits foot.

And you've basically shown why superstitions don't work to make a halfling feel lucky. Because halfling luck is truly bent to make it better than average. And superstitions are false beliefs. A halfling who believes they are unusually lucky is not supposed to be engaging in a false belief, they are supposed to be RIGHT. It shouldn't be a question.

Except there aren't really any problems with either Lucky or Brave. There are problems with you being unwilling to portray it. And Nimbleness is super-easy to portray outside of combat. There's a crowded marketplace? Lots of people crowding the bar? A bunch of people blocking the view? Doesn't bother the halfling.

You can even extrapolate it to include non-people obstacles. There's a ton of stuff blocking the route the halfling wants to go? You can either let them get around that stuff, or give them advantage on an Acrobatics check to do so because they're so Nimble.

No, the second paragraph isn't RAW. So what?

For something that is a me problem you sure seem to be unable to say anything valuable to prove how I'm so far off base. And sure, if I want to have every place crowded... funny though, I've had very crowded bars before. It never bothered the players. In factm moving through a large crowd has never once been something any player has ever struggled with in a way that being able to ignore that crowd would have felt like something special.

Sure, I can homebrew things to make it matter more. Must be why I'm such a trash tier DM, I should just homebrew new rules to cover every problem.

So what? PCs are individuals. You've said you're against racial alignments, right? So you shouldn't have a problem understanding that not every halfling is going to be lower-case brave in the face of danger.

Also, and once again, upper-case Brave is a specific trait that only refers to the frightened condition. A not-brave halfling is still going to have the Brave trait and be less affected by dragons and beholders and ghosts (oh my) while at the same time being really scared of going down the dark tunnel. This is perfectly fine.

Tabaxi have the trait Feline Agility. If someone wants to play one but decide that their PC has a peg leg that reduces their speed, are you going to forbid that because they wouldn't be playing their racial portrayal?

I would tell them that having a peg leg doesn't need to reduce their speed at all. If they insist that they want a speed penalty anyways, I'm not going to fight them over it.

But, way to completely miss the point. If playing the cowardly halfling is meant to explicitly be a dark mirror of the halfling bravery... and I never portray halfling bravery then that character is not living up to the potential the player wanted. So, we end up right back at the question I asked. The one you can't answer except by raging at me that I shouldn't control players and that they will figure it out on their own.

How do you portray halflings as unusually brave, if everyone in the party can choose to act unusually brave?

Then one of two things should occur:

(1) You can talk to your player about how to make the character more enjoyable. Perhaps you can replace Lucky and/or Brave with a different trait of equal power, importance, and interest that fits the character better. If you haven't already, you can look at the halfling gifts in the Level Up playtest for inspiration.

(2) The player can make a new character or retcon their halfling into a gnome or goblin.

You are trying to revamp an entire race here based on the desires of a person who doesn't actually exist and who is complaining about a problem that exists entirely in your head.

I can't help but laugh. This is so ridiculous. Your answer to a player coming to you with the idea that they aren't portraying their traits in a satisfactory manner, the thing you berated and dragged me through the mud for being a terrible DM for not being able to do, is to either remove the abilities or have them make their character a different race.

Man, I really should go back to DM school, I never would have thought the answer to a character feeling like their halfling wasn't brave enough to match the image in their head was to tell them to roll up a goblin instead.

(1) Talk to the other players and find out what they would find fair and unfair. Also, remember, and remind the players as well, that most other races have built in magic, damage resistances, and/or combat bonuses, and halflings don't. And since Lucky is, as you say, occurs only one time in twenty, if that, then the halfling Luck can manifest in other ways and not be OP.

(2) Make it copper pieces instead of gold. Make it interesting things that don't have a mechanical benefit. Like, somebody ordered one pie but got two and decides to give one to the halfling because it would go bad before they could eat them both. Or the halfling managed to avoid the mud puddle through sheer luck while another character (or NPC) got mud all over their shoes and pants. If the characters (not players) decide to flip a coin or draw straws for whatever reason, then the halfling's player gets the result they want. Make it a entire random table of little, interesting things that could happen.

(3) Make it interesting things that do have a mechanical benefit, but only as a direct result of the PC actually doing something. Say you have a halfling pickpocket. Then--once--have this occur to them:

View attachment 138928

Even if they person they stole from doesn't look rich enough to have a bag of diamonds. Of course, that can open the door to other plots, like the owner of the contents of the purse tracking the halfling down with a gang of guards in tow. As halflings know, luck is fickle.

(4) Have planned events occur as normal, but credit them to the halfling. The PCs want an audience with the mayor. You had already decided they were going to get that meeting. Tell the PCs that the mayor had been really busy but a prior meeting got canceled so now she has time to see the PCs. Must be that halfling luck! Or, as I previously suggested, if you already know that the bad guy's attack is going to miss, say it's because of a bit of luck instead of just a bad roll.

(And please, don't reply by saying these are too situational. That's the point.)

Or, you need to give the players a clue as to the story. Welp, halfling manages to overhear some people talking about it.

(5) Roll on this table of lucky things or have the lucky event occur only once per session or adventure instead of "constantly."

So, you really aren't adding anything that I hadn't considered. Talk to my players, quantum ogre smoke screens, and try to just have good things happen to the player.

Well, that's not fair. I do like the idea of if they ever flipped a coin the halfling player can decide it. Of course, the problem is that if that ever did happen... it was because the players had a disagreement and giving one player the ability to just decide for everyone else isn't really going to go over well.

But, at least in a round-a-bout way you are saying you think it would be fine to just give halflings randomly good things. Though some of your examples are so bizarrely out-of-place. I don't think I've ever had a player get covered in mud unless it was something like getting slammed by an ogre in a swamp.

And you did say once per session is where you would draw the line. I think that is pretty often, but I think that's why you put the once per adventure, if they are still in the same area two sessions in a row it might feel too forced to make it happen again.


Honestly though, this discussion and the point on the other races being able to choose when their things happen. I think I'd be for giving halflings "luck points" and then letting them spend one in town for something randomly good happening. It gives the player more control. Which I think is important for these types of abilities. Might be too powerful, but honestly I don't care what you think about that. It would likely just be you insulting me again.

Or maybe, just maybe, you should actually consider what people are telling you instead of instantly dismissing it.

I have given you advice. Instead of saying "well, I don't know how that would work, can you explain it, also, here's idea I just had," you've said "no, that doesn't work at all, the end." You're not "struggling with something nuanced." You're flat-out refusing to accept or even consider any answers or ideas given to you. If I'm getting short with you, it's because I'm really, really tired of that. Seriously, if you're going to just ignore everything I suggest, then don't bother replying to me.

And thus, here's some homework. Number 2 above? Interesting things that don't have a mechanical benefit? Try to think of five such things. You don't need to actually reply with them here; I don't need to see your work. But try to think of them. Because if you ever actually get a halfling in your game, you're going to want to have some ideas prepared, since you insist on having Lucky portrayed as something other than just a mechanical benefit.

You just can't accept that I might be thinking about these things, can you? I just posted my first suggestion, and to be honest I really considered not saying anything. Because I suspect you are going to blow up at me about how "if you were just going to change it why did you waste my time" or something like that.

See, when you start off a conversation attacking and insulting someone, it doesn't make them willing to open up to you about ideas, because logically, you are just going to attack and insult them. And so many of your suggestions have been so far off base from the points I'm actually struggling with. You keep accusing me of not reading and not thinking, then you post things that have no bearing on the actual point.

So what you're saying here is that it's utterly pointless to try to depict the Lucky trait, and thus proving my point that you are refusing to accept advice or ideas.

So maybe what you need to do is not bother to portray the Lucky trait. Or actually take some advice. Or do it and see if the other players are OK about it.

You know, do you actually think about the scenarios I put forth? Or do you just dismiss them because I'm such an idiot DM? I am refusing to take advice because I pointed a problem with your advice? I should just do it anyways and see if it doesn't cause problems?

Yeah, that's one way to learn if something is going to cause hard feelings, just do it and see what happens. Or just ignore the problem entirely. Which is something you've suggested a few times, which is weird considering how many insults you've thrown at me for having trouble with this.

Well, you missed the major thing, which is players play their characters. You seem to have a problem remembering that.

No, I don't. It is just easier for you to rage at me if you think I do.

Earlier, you talked about the person who you think wanted to play a halfling just for that +2 Dex. While I'm sure there are people who want to play halflings because their Lucky and Brave, I think most people either do it for that Dex bonus, because they want to play a short Everyman, or because they want to go against the halfling tropes.

Maybe, but as a DM I shouldn't limit my consideration to the players who are easier to run for. And playing against a trope is hard if the trope doesn't exist in the world. It is like rolling an imaginary boulder up a hill, you just look silly and it feels wrong.

Yes, so? Unless they're a halfling, they can be as brave as they want, but they still don't have advantage on saves against being frightened. Unless they're a member of a class or have another ability that gives them that trait.


Let me see if I understand you: You have an NPC halfling who is both cowardly and brave, or possibly just cowardly but has the Brave trait, and a genasi sorcerer who is generically brave, and... what point are you trying to make here? And why is this NPC halfling so important again?

If you want to show the halfling NPC is brave, you can have them run into battle against the monster, or try to convince the PCs to travel into the Dark And Scary Location (or into the bar filled with heavily armed, armored, and scary people who are drunk and angry) because it'll be cool, or be the first to walk on the rickety, swaying bridge. Mind you, it's entirely possible that the players will then immediately decide that the halfling is an idiot or possibly luring them into a trap, but oh well. Them's the breaks.

The PC wants to play a cowardly halfling, because halflings are brave.

Instead of just saying "halflings are brave" I should show it, basic rules of storytelling, show don't tell.

To show halflings are brave, while the PC Halfling is a coward... then I need an NPC (unless I'm fortunate to have two halflings in the party)

However, how am I showing the halfling NPC is particularly brave if I have some random PC (Genasi Sorcerer. Aasimar Warlock, who cares) who is also incredibly brave. Who in fact, is in the party and contrasting the halflings cowardliness on a regular basis? Have a commoner halfling run into battle beside the PCs? A good way to show them being stupidly brave, sure, but it also gets them killed. Maybe I make them an adventurer... but then they can handle themselves and it isn't brave, it is just what the party does. Maybe the talk them into going somewhere dark and scary, but same issue. If the halfling doesn't go with them, it isn't any different than any other quest. If they are a commoner, they seem like they are an idiot with a death wish. If they are an adventurer... they aren't anything special.

Now, maybe if I portray most other halflings like they are idiots with a death wish, then that is going to help the PC... but then is makes the entire race seem like idiots. And that doesn't seem quite right.

Now, I'm sure this is all me just dismissing your advice because I refuse to think for myself and I should just have the halfling player roll up a goblin instead, but this feels like it is a really delicate balancing act to have them act like an adventurer without being an adventurer or coming across as suicidal.

Almost as if you're just making stuff up right now, since you had repeatedly said that you would have to make PC halflings act in certain ways so they can be Brave or Lucky, or that you would have to make non-halflings act cowardly or unlucky.

I said those things would be problems, yes. You took that to mean I was going around taking player agency away, despite the fact that I was presenting that as a bad thing.

Try to learn the difference between roleplaying and mechanics.

An orc barbarian can be super-brave and still not be good at protecting their mind from magical attacks that would inflict the frightened condition on them.

Which is why I had to ask what you were trying to say, because you seemed to be equating non-magical fear with wisdom saves. By putting forth the brave cleric as "probably fine"

So basically, you're willing to actually change the rules because otherwise, you might have to accept that there are a couple of times where halflings get a bonus to their saves but gnomes don't.

Or... I've never played those adventures and have no idea how those abilities supposedly work. A dex save to avoid fear could be because or magic, or because of a smoke bomb full of poisons. I don't know, so I can't agree with it.

Yes, so that you could "prove" that gnomes are just as resistant to fear as halflings are.

Wrong. It was to preserve player agency.

Except that this is a very specific case involving a very specific condition. You could easily say that a dragon's roar involves infrasound or a dragon's scent includes fear-causing pheromones and thus has the same effect as magical mind-control (which also takes away their emotional reactions, by the way). And no matter the origins, you can say that it affects their biological processes--the trembling hands and quickened heart beat interfering with combat that I mentioned ages ago--but not their mental or emotional processes.

There's a huge difference between something like this--which allows for both an initial saving throw and another one at the end of every turn--and the DM saying "no, sorry, you're actually feeling <emotion>." The former is a game mechanic that's been around since the start in one form or another. The latter is bad DMing.

You really want to go out of your way to make dragon fear non-magical, so that gnomes aren't resistant to it, don't you? If it is scent based then there are dozens of problems with how it would work. Starting with how being within 120
ft six seconds is enough to induce fear, but walking through their lair they have been in for 100 years isn't. Scents linger after all.

The infrasound might work, except that the dragon isn't roaring. The player just has to be aware of the dragon. And succeeding on a mental save (Not a con save like you would for a physical ability) makes you immune. Not aware of any mind of matter that makes you immune to infrasound.

But I know, I know. I'm just dismissing you without thinking about anything you are saying whatsoever.

Because--as I already said--they aren't Brave, they're Magic Resistant.

If may have much the same effect, but the cause is different.

Funny you skipped the grung thing being poison.

But, you aren't accepting the premise. 99% of all fear effects are magical. I don't use homebrew rules, and other than chemically induced fear (which half of all halflings are resistant to do to dwarf blood giving them resistance to poison) there is no example of a non-magical fear in the game as I see it (meaning I'm not aware of how specific adventure module creatures work) that would apply. So, halfling resistance to fear is mostly just... magical resistance.

Or there is supposed to be something else. Something about how they roleplay, which is where the above problems were. With the Halfling NPC.

 

[Chaosmancer]

This is nonsense.

The problem is that there are two D&D races sitting in very related thematic spaces. The first is the halfling, the second the gnome. One of these has a longer tradition in D&D, a clearer thematic identity, and is by D&D beyond more popular. The other is the gnome.

Gnomes normally happen in settings like Harry Potter where part of the point is to emphasise how magical everything is (and gnomes can have unfortunate anti-semitic implications as in Harry Potter having a race of small hook-nosed gold-obsessed people who control the banking system). And yes I know that they are called Goblins in the Harry Potter setting. Gnomes in the Harry Potter setting are a foot tall. In Pratchett's Discworld the only gnome I can think of, Buggy Swires, is 6" tall. Even D&D doesn't know what a gnome is in D&D.

The thing is that "halflings" tells me a lot about halflings. It tells me they are dimninutive but on a human scale. It tells me that they are seen as a non-threat, and even answer to the name "halfling" (my theory for "Dwarves" is the race name came first in D&D).

I'm sorry... what? How do gnomes have any implications if they are called goblins. Harry Potter gnomes were basically feral mole people that infested wizard yards. What possible reason do you have to claim that goblins are gnomes and therefore have bad implications?

And, you seem to forget that Gnomes appear in Warcraft, and are quite popular. That version of the short scientist also appears in... dozens of minor fantasy novels. Seriously, any time a short person shows up in a webcomic, book or game I'd give 75% odds that they are closer to gnomes than anything else. Unless they are explicitly a goblin. And, the truth is "gnomes" are going to be around long after halflings are forgotten. They have deep ties into folklore and culture. They are a bit all over the place because they are an old idea. Just like Goblins.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Magical world-building in a universe not our own? Guess Conan and C.S. Lewis don't count? Funnily enough, looking more into George MacDonald who I mentioned to Oofta... He was the one to be created with creating the first fantasy world in 1858 with his novel Phantastes.

Wikipedia actually credits him as a massive influence on Tolkien and Lewis.

Mythic beings with cultures, emotions and motives? Dude, have you read fairy tales? Pretty much all old folklore included that. Like, how else were brownies and leprechauns to get enraged at people for breaking the rules if they didn't have emotions and cultures?

I can't even give credit to Tolkien for the idea of a fantastical language, though I will give him credit that he actually made a language instead of referencing it, but the idea of "secret languages" for the fantastical people is ancient.


So... he made a map and he gave them songs? I can give him that. But how big of an impact do those elements truly have on modern fantasy writing? And while maybe we can give him credit for being popular, It certainly seems that crediting him with inventing these ideas is waaay off base

The obtuse refusal to admit that anyone but you has a point is making this tiresome.

We are no longer interacting.

 

[pemerton]

Make it interesting things that don't have a mechanical benefit. Like, somebody ordered one pie but got two and decides to give one to the halfling because it would go bad before they could eat them both. Or the halfling managed to avoid the mud puddle through sheer luck while another character (or NPC) got mud all over their shoes and pants. If the characters (not players) decide to flip a coin or draw straws for whatever reason, then the halfling's player gets the result they want. Make it a entire random table of little, interesting things that could happen.

(3) Make it interesting things that do have a mechanical benefit, but only as a direct result of the PC actually doing something. Say you have a halfling pickpocket. Then--once--have this occur to them:

View attachment 138928

Even if they person they stole from doesn't look rich enough to have a bag of diamonds.

I don't see that it's a strong argument for the viability of a race whose thing is being lucky that the GM can contrive the fiction so as to present them as lucky. That seems like a case of the tail wagging the dog.

 

[Hussar]

Your argument sounded popularity based. If you hadn't stuck to it, then the answer would have felt revealing to me (as opposed to obfuscating).

Relegation like in UK Football/Soccer?

I'm not quite sure about the UK Football reference. Know nothing about it.

Yes, it's 100% popularity based. An idea that has been in the game for FIFTY YEARS has never gained any real popularity. Two races that have been in the game for less than 20 are both more popular and considerably more popular. So, yeah, drop the stuff that few people play in favor of stuff that actually gains traction. Don't drop it from the game entirely. Sure. Put them in the Monster Manual for those that want them. Cool beans. But as one of the four most popular PC races? Seriously?

 

[Hussar]

You already don't have to build halflings into every world. If you build your own worlds, you never have to include halflings in them. If you use official worlds, you can remove halflings and replace them with something else.


It makes them more popular than those other races, though.

Sigh. Missing the point. Yes, I know that I don't have to include them. That's entirely true. And, honestly, I don't have to replace halflings in official settings. My players have already done that. So have 95% of gamers. Let's move these races over to the Monster Manual and make room for things that are ACTUALLY played. As in more than 1 in 20 players. More than 1 in 4 tables. If that means that half orcs and gnomes get the boot too? Fantastic.

Again, why are we being stuck with options that 95% of people DON'T USE?

 

[Zardnaar]

Something I suggested in another thread was that in campaigns set in far antiquity halflings might be masters of the plains and cavalry as horses were too small for other races to ride, being limited to chariots.

Maybe in your world horses never got larger and halflings still fill that niche?

I've had mine ride raptors crossed with Darksun cannibalism.

 

[Hussar]

Personally I'd like to see gnomes folded in as a subgroup of halflings with a defined relationship. It would do good things for both.

• You wouldn't have each race taking up half the archetype of the other
• It would turn the two of them into one normally popular race.
• You'd be able to add nuance to the two if you bothered to say when someone was called a gnome and someone a halfling
• It would keep both around

And the "what about X" is not smoke and mirrors when the only reason people are having conversations about halflings this way is that the gnomes are taking up half the variety within the archetype.

I could quite live with this.