• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

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

Status
Not open for further replies.

log in or register to remove this ad


Halflings are still very much in the top 10 out of over a hundred races. Even if we went by current popularity, they’d still be in the PHB. 🤷‍♂️
It was 9 out of the 12 races that are free to create on D&DBeyond in 2017. I’m not sure it is a meaningful conparison to compare a race that is free to play with one you have to pay for.
 


Levistus's_Leviathan

5e Freelancer
If we're adding races to the next PHB, I'd like to put my vote in for satyr, which fits in a wide variety of games -- it wouldn't have been out of place back in 1974, as well as more eclectic modern games -- and is a race I think everyone "gets" immediately.
I'm in favor of this. Satyrs are a classic fantasy race. I am actually quite surprised that they weren't a core race in the most popular fantasy TTRPG in the world (D&D) and Halflings are. Everyone knows what Satyrs are, and though most people know Hobbits, Satyrs feel like a better fit for D&D than Halflings do.

Also, didn't 4e make Minotaurs be more important than they were in previous editions? I don't want to say that it made them a "core race", but they were a bit more important than they had been before, IIRC. I would be fine with bringing back that, too.
 

Mind of tempest

(he/him)advocate for 5e psionics
I'm in favor of this. Satyrs are a classic fantasy race. I am actually quite surprised that they weren't a core race in the most popular fantasy TTRPG in the world (D&D) and Halflings are. Everyone knows what Satyrs are, and though most people know Hobbits, Satyrs feel like a better fit for D&D than Halflings do.

Also, didn't 4e make Minotaurs be more important than they were in previous editions? I don't want to say that it made them a "core race", but they were a bit more important than they had been before, IIRC. I would be fine with bringing back that, too.
minotaurs before a certain point were just one of monsters, not a race, but they are fairly prominent these days but that likely has to do with wow.
 


Faolyn

(she/her)
I'm in favor of this. Satyrs are a classic fantasy race. I am actually quite surprised that they weren't a core race in the most popular fantasy TTRPG in the world (D&D) and Halflings are. Everyone knows what Satyrs are, and though most people know Hobbits, Satyrs feel like a better fit for D&D than Halflings do.
Satyrs have the mythology of being drunken rape monsters. Even if you tone that down a lot to just saying they like a good time, there's always going to be that unpleasant association.

Plus, all satyrs are male, unless you decide to go against the myth (which has become more common as of recent years). While I wouldn't put it past the creators to have no problem including a male-only race, that leads to other issues. One of which is, if you have all-male satyrs, then you kind of have to have all-female nymphs (perhaps using the common trope of saying they're a single species). But even if you ignore the bit about nymphs being tied to a specific tree, stretch of water, etc. (which would make adventuring difficult at best), the myths have them as being blindingly beautiful--which almost certainly would go very, very wrong in early days D&D--and eminently have-sex-with-able (consent not always included, on either side of the equation).
 

Levistus's_Leviathan

5e Freelancer
Satyrs have the mythology of being drunken rape monsters. Even if you tone that down a lot to just saying they like a good time, there's always going to be that unpleasant association.
As do Centaurs, but not as much drunken as kidnapping rapists. That doesn't stop fantasy from using them all the time, just ignoring that part of their origin.
Plus, all satyrs are male, unless you decide to go against the myth (which has become more common as of recent years). While I wouldn't put it past the creators to have no problem including a male-only race, that leads to other issues. One of which is, if you have all-male satyrs, then you kind of have to have all-female nymphs (perhaps using the common trope of saying they're a single species). But even if you ignore the bit about nymphs being tied to a specific tree, stretch of water, etc. (which would make adventuring difficult at best), the myths have them as being blindingly beautiful--which almost certainly would go very, very wrong in early days D&D--and eminently have-sex-with-able (consent not always included, on either side of the equation).
In Mythic Odysseys of Theros, there are both Female Satyrs and Male Nymphs. I don't see this as a huge problem, as Centaurs have also had a "Male-Only Species" thing for a long time (even though it wasn't even true to the mythical origins of Centaurs), but there are female centaurs in plenty of fantasy works (Harry Potter, Narnia, D&D, etc).
 

Faolyn

(she/her)
As do Centaurs, but not as much drunken as kidnapping rapists. That doesn't stop fantasy from using them all the time, just ignoring that part of their origin.

In Mythic Odysseys of Theros, there are both Female Satyrs and Male Nymphs. I don't see this as a huge problem, as Centaurs have also had a "Male-Only Species" thing for a long time (even though it wasn't even true to the mythical origins of Centaurs), but there are female centaurs in plenty of fantasy works (Harry Potter, Narnia, D&D, etc).
Right, but I have a hard time imagining them doing so for the first iterations of the game in the 70s.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top