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

[Gammadoodler]

Cultural differences that most settings explicitly tell us doesn't exist. And in the settings they do exist in, they are completely unlike the generic lore

Personality traits which aren't universal, and also any race can have. So, they shouldn't be relying on every single halfling being friendly and kind. Those are individual traits.

Being short is not exactly something that can't be accomplished by human biology. And if you just have a short human, they are still a human.

And while they are mechanically distinct "brave and lucky" is really hard to make work as being something super distinctive, since bravery is another individual character trait and lucky is... generally also a trait, though one that is harder to define. But still, it isn't like lucky humans, elves, dwarves, gnomes, ect don't exist.


So, yeah. If the biggest difference between the kind and friendly human who is brave and lucky and the halfling is a foot and a half of height... then it seems like they have some pretty minor differences.

I get it. You've dismissed these differences. It's an exercise that works equally well on most races.

"Except for all the ways they're different, they're basically the same."

You do you.

 

[Krachek]

Those long thread hide something beyond the case of dissatisfaction about halfling.
There is more text here than all the lore on halfling in DnD!
And the debate still go on.
3 little page in the PHB, and the awful status of common race for adventurers fuel all this thread.
Note that philosophers and theologians debate for centuries on even smaller text, this thread is quite impressive on its own.
Certainly a lot of emotion and desire fuel this thread so long.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Not really.

You have the fact that dwarves appear more often and sometimes far, far more often in every single WotC module produced to date. IOW, if I play a dwarf character in a WotC adventure, I'm pretty much guaranteed that there will be something in that module that relates directly to my character. And, often a lot of somethings. Whereas if I play a halfling (or a dragonborn for that matter), I might as well not exist as far as anything in the module is concerned. It's very likely that in the entire year long campaign that it takes to complete one of those big WotC modules, that, unless the DM adds it in, nothing in that module will relate directly to my character race choice.

One would hope that future WotC modules will actually start to build on the less used races that have become rather popular, like tieflings and dragonborn, so that the same thing will happen for those players.

Ultimately I agree with most of this, but it's not a property of the race.

It's the same issue as you get with monks and magic items in 5e.

It's one thing to say "Nothing has been done". It's another to say "Nothing can be done"

 

[Hussar]

Ultimately I agree with most of this, but it's not a property of the race.

It's the same issue as you get with monks and magic items in 5e.

It's one thing to say "Nothing has been done". It's another to say "Nothing can be done"

Magic items? Those are pretty common in WotC modules. As in key to a LOT of the modules as well. It's not like WotC modules are shy about giving out magic items.

Monks? Yeah, I'm straining to think of a good example of monks in the modules. To be fair though, Candlekeep Mysteries has an entire adventure devoted to monks - The Book of Inner Alchemy - so, they're not completely absent. And, Princes of the Apocalypse has 19 mentions of the word monk, including a monastery location which uses monks as the main antagonist, so, again, they're still miles ahead of halflings.

 

[Don Durito]

Obviously halfling monks have gained a mastery of ninjutsu so complete that no one even knows they exist.

Which obviously means that secretly they control the world.

 

[Bardic Dave]

I think the biggest thing is that it seems the majority of people's presentations of halflings... aren't very different. For example, many people have said they like them because "they are just folk". Well.... that doesn't make them different from humans in any way.

Another one I've seen a lot is "they are small, non-magical, overlooked and therefore no expects them to be strong" which, again, other than the small bit could fit a human farmer. And, they aren't explicitly non-magical in terms of not having clerics and wizards. They just don't have innate magic. So it seems like it is artificially limiting halflings to be just... the farmboy who is ready to go on the an adventure.

So, I really haven't seen any common depictions that step out of that shadow.


Also, I want to say that I am in no way gatekeeping. I have never once said someone is bad or wrong for liking halflings. I've said their arguments aren't sufficient, but nothing more than that. In fact, I'm fine with them being in the books, and I am wanting them to continue being in DnD. I just want them to grow beyond where they are. It is fine that people like them because they are hobbits. But some people don't like them... because they are nothing but hobbits. Let them expand a bit, let hobbit halflings be a subrace, or an option, but give us something that isn't that for the rest of the people.

Right, and what I’m trying to communicate is that it’s ok if you don’t get it and if you don’t think they’re different enough. I don’t get dragonborn; they just aren’t for me. 5E FR Halflings just aren’t for you it would seem.

I also think you’re overlooking a plethora of other settings (e.g. Eberron, Golarion), older products, and 3pp that HAVE done different and interesting things with Halflings that could help you break free of your Halfling malaise. That stuff is out there, you just have to go looking for it.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Magic items? Those are pretty common in WotC modules. As in key to a LOT of the modules as well. It's not like WotC modules are shy about giving out magic items.

Monks? Yeah, I'm straining to think of a good example of monks in the modules. To be fair though, Candlekeep Mysteries has an entire adventure devoted to monks - The Book of Inner Alchemy - so, they're not completely absent. And, Princes of the Apocalypse has 19 mentions of the word monk, including a monastery location which uses monks as the main antagonist, so, again, they're still miles ahead of halflings.

Sorry that was worded poorly..magic items for monks.

 

[Hussar]

Right, and what I’m trying to communicate is that it’s ok if you don’t get it and if you don’t think they’re different enough. I don’t get dragonborn; they just aren’t for me. 5E FR Halflings just aren’t for you it would seem.

I also think you’re overlooking a plethora of other settings (e.g. Eberron, Golarion), older products, and 3pp that HAVE done different and interesting things with Halflings that could help you break free of your Halfling malaise. That stuff is out there, you just have to go looking for it.

See, this right here is why this thread has gone around in circles over and over again.

It's not about how I or @Chaosmancer or anyone else feel about halflings. That's not the issue. That has never been the issue. Because, if you flip it around, you're basically saying, "Well, I like halflings, therefore that's enough justification to keep them in the PHB." Really? Do you actually feel this way? Is that at all accurate?

Presumably not.

It's never been, "Well, I don't like halflings, so they should be changed". It's always been, "Halflings have pretty much zero traction. Despite 50 years in the game, they have extremely little presence in the game, unlike the other 3 "main" races." Heck, they have less presence in the game than many of the newer races. They aren't being utilized in the game. Like, barely at all.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I'm not aware of anyone having invented sunglasses in DnD no.

Glassmaking is common in FR and most other D&D settings (check out those potion bottles). It's easier to make tinted/smoked glass than it is to make clear glass. You would mount them into leather to make goggles, rather than using a wire frame.

Even if the character doesn't have access to alchemist's supplies and leatherworkers tools, there is an even simpler technological solution to light sensitivity. Tie strips of muslin cloth around your eyes. The holes in the fabric are enough to enable you to see (try it at home) whilst significantly reducing the amount of light entering your eyes.

Really, light sensitivity is a non-issue (unless the DM wants to overrule logic - it doesn't work because I say so, so there!). Only flash gits like Jarlaxe use magic.

I would put the decline in popularity of drow down to the loss of magic resistance and no longer being seen as cool and edgy, rather than light sensitivity, which I expect will shortly disappear from the game.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Glassmaking is common in FR and most other D&D settings (check out those potion bottles). It's easier to make tinted/smoked glass than it is to make clear glass. You would mount them into leather to make goggles, rather than using a wire frame.

Even if the character doesn't have access to alchemist's supplies and leatherworkers tools, there is an even simpler technological solution to light sensitivity. Tie strips of muslin cloth around your eyes. The holes in the fabric are enough to enable you to see (try it at home) whilst significantly reducing the amount of light entering your eyes.

Really, light sensitivity is a non-issue (unless the DM wants to overrule logic - it doesn't work because I say so, so there!). Only flash gits like Jarlaxe use magic.

I would put the decline in popularity of drow down to the loss of magic resistance and no longer being seen as cool and edgy, rather than light sensitivity, which I expect will shortly disappear from the game.

it does logically make drow super weak to flashbangs so it could make fights ten times crazier.