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

[Chaosmancer]

One billion times yes! I am playing a PC, not the entire race!

I never said you were trying to play the entire race, but if you are just going to accept any concept as long as it "makes a good PC" then there is literally nothing off the table. The love child of Starscream and Fluttershy would make a good PC. A Giant-Blooded, Half Hell Drake, Half Vampire makes a good PC. President John F. Kennedy makes a good PC.

That isn't a standard, it is an aggressive lack of a standard. After all, it is impossible to ever define, include, or exclude any concept from "making a good PC". I don't want to tell people how to have fun, but I do recognize a lot of people in the this discussion for halflings are people from previous discussions who were also for curated worlds and tighter mythologies. Who would often say "there is no place for X in my world." I'm willing to argue for the inclusion of most things as one-offs, though the more absurd obviously the less serious it makes the entire game, but I do respect the effort it takes to do build a world and make it work. Tolkien didn't add Hobbits just because he felt like it, there was a purpose.

And enthusiastically saying that any possible concept is acceptable as long as it "makes a good PC" is the far opposite of that approach, It is the approach of things like GURPS or RIFTS were there is no binding thread between the various groups, factions, and races. They exist because they exist and therefore anything is possible and it doesn't feel weighted or realisitic. It is just a mash-up.

 

[Chaosmancer]

It suddenly occurred to me that the problem people seem to have with halflings is that they aren't sufficiently "Otherized". Other races have traits that make them stand out from humans (very long lifespans for elves, poison resistance for dwarves, being some kind of humanoid animal for a number of other races, etc).

Halflings are pretty much just small humans in comparison.

Yes, that is something we have brought up. Repeatedly. We then get told that every race can be replaced with humans, so it doesn't matter and if we think halflings are too human then we should just remove every race from the game.

They only really have their luck and their personality. Neither of which can carry them outside of the shadows of humanity to make them something other than just... short humans.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Okay but... every race makes good PCs. That is such a low bar to clear I didn't realize it wasn't just the floor.

I can only assume that you have never heard of Kender. It's a bar that has a number of times not been cleared.

Mod Edit: Image removed for language. ~Umbran

And basically what you are telling me is that you reject the entirety of the idea of narrative roles

No I'm not. I reject the necessity of narrative roles. There should be some narrative roles involved in any given campaign - and plenty of things that have basically nothing to do with the central narratives because they are just trying to get on in the world.

Also, I have to disagree with halflings somehow being especially non-magical. They have magical luck.

[Citation needed] that it's explicitly magical. Can you show me anywhere it says that halflings lose their luck when they step into an anti-magic field?

Lucky isn't the same as magical.

They are explicitly magical in the most powerful way possible (in the lore), so none of what you are saying makes sense to me.

And this is why I'm not rebutting you fully. You've said that if I don't think that everything needs to have a narrative role I reject the idea of narrative roles - which is a massive leap that amounts to the fallacy of the excluded middle. You've then managed to, out of nowhere, pull an idea that luck must be magic - especially when the halfling's luck is in practice the avoidance of bad luck. And that's so far in this post.

These are both assumptions you've made - and are IME far from the default. To fully engage with you would take figuring out every single unexamined assumption you are making because you seem unable to understand that people might have different views to you.

Darksun halflings are anything except "meek". They literally ruled the planet before the other races even existed.

They are small, easily overlooked, and forgotten. By Dark Sun standards they are meek.

I'm not saying your interpretation is necessarily wrong, just that it is literally the first time anyone has referenced that biblical idea in regards to Dark Sun.

Once more you seem to assume that the way you see things is the only way to see things. I would be completely stunned if that was literally the first time anyone had referenced that idea. It's just the first time they've referenced it to you.

"the lack of tools as a defining characteristic"

Basically, Tool Proficiencies don't matter.

sigh

If I'd meant tool proficiencies I'd have said it. I have no idea where this started.

It is funny you talk about me listening about other people's perspectives, when it seems you are so ready to dismiss mine. I have no idea why you would find my evidence uncompelling, and I can't change my opinions or see any issues with my logic if no one is willing to discuss them.

I was willing to discuss things with you at the start of this thread and did so. And one of my personality flaws is that I keep talking long after I should have given up - I've found it about as productive with you as beating my head against a wall.

This isn't the first post in which you've made a blatant strawman of someone's position and then been extremely persistent about it despite people trying to engage with you. It's also not the first one in which you said you found things incomprehensible when I found them obvious. The last one I remember was when you somehow came to the conclusion that a race emphasising certain traits was the only way to experience those traits and reiterated it for multiple posts back here (and you'll note that my summary was liked by both the people whose position you were strawmanning). Multiple attempts to point out to you that you were making a strawman and those words didn't mean what you claimed failed.

This is why I'm finding engagement with your arguments to be a waste of time - I have no idea what either you are going to heavily misinterpret or assume to be the only possibility when it isn't. I'm still reading because some of what you write is interesting. You have a very clear worldview and you are neither insulting nor posting things that I've seen a hundred times over, which makes for interesting reading. But I find some of it interesting reading precisely because it is unusual. Unfortunately you have a track record of assuming that it is the only way and no other way makes sense even when multiple people are trying to correct you on fundamental issues, and at this point there's no point in my engaging with you. I'm posting this in the hope that you can take a step back and try to examine your own assumptions and engagement. You've enough to say I'd really rather not add you to my ignore list.

 

[Yora]

Oh, that old classic image.

 

[Chaosmancer]

To recap:

• Thematically strong and inspiring enough to draw some people in - some people are definitely drawn in including me
• Mechanically decent without being overwhelmingly strong. - definitely qualify
• Distinctive enough to not appear redundant. - they'd be that without the gnomes.
• Not being excessively obnoxious to put people off - this has to be worse than a meh. Kender and some versions of kenku and full on Krynn tinker gnomes and krynn gulley dwarves are obnoxious enough to spoil other peoples' play experience. Meanwhile half-orcs and drow have strong racist overtones seen by many.

So halflings are on 3.5 out of 4 for being a good race with the 5e gnomes being the only thing preventing them going 4/4.

1) Then every race counts. Because they all draw in some people. Gnomes, Kenku, Hengeyokai, everything draws in some people. Their theme seems to be "I'm not special and I'm short" and that isn't thematically strong, it is thematically blank.

2) Agree

3) "They wouldn't be redundant if there wasn't this other race", and Gnomes are not made redundant by halflings. So, that seems to be a one-way street there. Not a good sign

4) Okay, so the very first thing you listed off is a halfling subrace. Not a good start. And, halflings can be excessively obnoxious. Look up at the description from Warlock! that Dustyboots posted "Diminutive and slight, yet full of heart, halflings are the most accepted race in the Kingdom besides humans. In part this is because humans have difficulty seeing a Halfling as anything other than a child. As a result, halflings tend to act like children - they are impulsive, quick to tantrums if they don't get their way but also quick to forget past slights.

Halflings are quiet and can move silently when they want to, and often go unnoticed by bigger folk. However, some people struggle to take them seriously. "

And that element of being a child is right there in DnD lore too. It is hidden, but it can be easily brought out. And there Mary Sueism is pretty strong, with them living nearly perfect, ideal lives in nearly perfect ideal communities, where everyone is best friends and it ends up being more pleasant than Mayberry and more bucolic than pastoral poem.

And that can drive someone right up a wall.


So, two that are uncontested, and one of those seems to be basically "isn't universally hated"

 

[Gammadoodler]

Yes, that is something we have brought up. Repeatedly. We then get told that every race can be replaced with humans, so it doesn't matter and if we think halflings are too human then we should just remove every race from the game.

They only really have their luck and their personality. Neither of which can carry them outside of the shadows of humanity to make them something other than just... short humans.

So all they really have to separate themselves from humans are their physical differences, personality/cultural differences, and differing distinct mechanical attributes?

Yes, if you all you do is dismiss those few minor things, it does get hard to distinguish them from humans.

It's a completely different ballgame when we consider the dwarves without their mechanical, physical, and personality differences.

Strip away all that and you still have..Umm..You still have..uhh.. tradition?

 

[Neonchameleon]

4E ended up having way more fluff than people realize by the end. The first few books were disappointingly sparse, but an enormous amount of content ended up being published in the span of a few short years (both because the books themselves increasingly added flavor due to early criticism and because of monthly Dragon and Dungeon Magazines).

It honestly had way more fluff than people realise right from the start. The much maligned Monster Manual told me more than any other monster manual ever has about social organisation of D&D monsters. First by having multiple types of each race so we can see how e.g. a stereotypical human wizard is different from an elf or goblin one, and second with the suggested encounter groups also providing social organisation and relationships between e.g. different races. The 4e Monster Manual 1 therefore does more for me than even the 2e Monstrous Manual.

 

[Garthanos]

It honestly had way more fluff than people realise right from the start. The much maligned Monster Manual told me more than any other monster manual ever has about social organisation of D&D monsters. First by having multiple types of each race so we can see how e.g. a stereotypical human wizard is different from an elf or goblin one, and second with the suggested encounter groups also providing social organisation and relationships between e.g. different races. The 4e Monster Manual 1 therefore does more for me than even the 2e Monstrous Manual.

All side bay side readings I have seen show 4e either matched or beat the amount of real information about creatures in earlier editions I have no idea tbh.

 

[Bardic Dave]

1) Then every race counts. Because they all draw in some people. Gnomes, Kenku, Hengeyokai, everything draws in some people. Their theme seems to be "I'm not special and I'm short" and that isn't thematically strong, it is thematically blank.

2) Agree

3) "They wouldn't be redundant if there wasn't this other race", and Gnomes are not made redundant by halflings. So, that seems to be a one-way street there. Not a good sign

4) Okay, so the very first thing you listed off is a halfling subrace. Not a good start. And, halflings can be excessively obnoxious. Look up at the description from Warlock! that Dustyboots posted "Diminutive and slight, yet full of heart, halflings are the most accepted race in the Kingdom besides humans. In part this is because humans have difficulty seeing a Halfling as anything other than a child. As a result, halflings tend to act like children - they are impulsive, quick to tantrums if they don't get their way but also quick to forget past slights.

Halflings are quiet and can move silently when they want to, and often go unnoticed by bigger folk. However, some people struggle to take them seriously. "

And that element of being a child is right there in DnD lore too. It is hidden, but it can be easily brought out. And there Mary Sueism is pretty strong, with them living nearly perfect, ideal lives in nearly perfect ideal communities, where everyone is best friends and it ends up being more pleasant than Mayberry and more bucolic than pastoral poem.

And that can drive someone right up a wall.


So, two that are uncontested, and one of those seems to be basically "isn't universally hated"

EDIT: I’m gonna leave my post up, because I think it articulates a particular perspective reasonably well, but on reflection it’s not a very good response to the post to which I am replying. I apologize if I’ve misrepresented your position at all.

——-

You’ve got plenty of examples of people who like halflings as-is for a variety of reasons, many of which are at odds with your contention that they’re nothing but “short humans”. You just repeatedly saying it’s so doesn’t make it the objective truth. Clearly, that’s how you perceive them and you don’t care for them, and that’s fine. It seems halflings cater to gamers who aren’t you; perhaps you should just accept that. Why don’t you let others have their badwrongfun and just not play halflings (or remove them from your world if you’re the DM)?

Or is it because you desperately want to like halflings and feel let down? If that’s the case, why not write some lore that appeals to you then and inject it into the next character/world you create? Plenty of people have done it, including published settings (e.g. Eberron).

Enough people like halflings to put the lie to the idea there’s something fundamentally wrong with them. I’m glad they’re not more “interesting”. I’m glad they cater to LOTR nostalgia. I like that they’re similar to humans in many respects, but just different enough for my tastes. I like halflings a lot. They’re my second favourite PC race, after humans. And yes, my reasons for this preference are entirely thematic and have nothing to do with min/maxing, as I’ve outlined in a prior post.

These ideas about establishing particular “standards” for what constitutes a “good” PC race honestly just strike me as somewhat arbitrary gate keeping.

 

[Neonchameleon]

All side bay side readings I have seen show 4e either matched or beat the amount of real information about creatures in earlier editions I have no idea tbh.

The 2e Monstrous Manual did things that the 4e one didn't. For example here's the 2e section on goblins.

Habitat/Society: Humans would consider the caves and underground dwellings of goblins to be dank and dismal. Those few tribes that live above ground are found in ruins, and are only active at night or on very dark, cloudy days. They use no form of sanitation, and their lairs have a foul stench. Goblins seem to be somewhat resistant to the diseases that breed in such filth.​

They live a communal life, sharing large common areas for eating and sleeping. Only leaders have separate living spaces. All their possessions are carried with them. Property of the tribe is kept with the chief and sub-chiefs. Most of their goods are stolen, although they do manufacture their own garments and leather goods. The concept of privacy is largely foreign to goblins.​

A typical goblin tribe has 40-400 (4d10 x 10) adult male warriors. For every 40 goblins there will be a leader and his 4 assistants, each having 1 Hit Die (7 hit points). For every 200 goblins there will be a sub-chief and 2-8 (2d4) bodyguards, each of which has 1+1 Hit Dice (8 hit points), is Armor Class 5, and armed with a battle axe. The tribe has a single goblin chief and 2-8 (2d4) bodyguards each of 2 Hit Dice, Armor Class 4, and armed with two weapons.​

There is a 25% chance that 10% of their force will be mounted upon huge worgs, and have another 10-40 (1d4x10) unmounted worgs with them. There is a 60% chance that the lair is guarded by 5-30 (5d6) such wolves, and a 20% chance of 2-12 (2d6) bugbears. Goblin shamans are rare, but have been known to reach 7th level. Their spheres include: Divination, Healing (reversed), Protection, and Sun (reversed).​

In addition to the males, there will be adult females equal to 60% of their number and children equal to the total number of adults in the lair. Neither will fight in battles.​

A goblin tribe has an exact pecking order; each member knows who is above him and who is below him. They fight amongst themselves constantly to move up this social ladder.​

They often take slaves for both food and labor. The tribe will have slaves of several races numbering 10-40% of the size of the tribe. Slaves are always kept shackled, and are staked to a common chain when sleeping.​

Goblins hate most other humanoids, gnomes and dwarves in particular, and work to exterminate them whenever possible.​

​

Ecology: Goblins live only 50 years or so. They do not need to eat much, but will kill just for the pleasure of it. They eat any creature from rats and snakes to humans. In lean times they will eat carrion. Goblins usually spoil their habitat, driving game from it and depleting the area of all resources. They are decent miners, able to note new or unusual construction in an underground area 25% of the time, and any habitat will soon be expanded by a maze-like network of tunnels.​

Now I consider most of that to be aggressively bad in many ways; for example it only talks about a typical goblin tribe and makes all goblins tribal and claims all goblins use no sanitation. It's ... stereotypical. But it also does some very significant things that I don't think any other MM actually does.