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

[Chaosmancer]

But that's what was done with the elves, dwarves and orcs too...

Also, woolies sound cool.

Except no, it isn't.

Elves, Dwarves and Orcs have evolved a lot from the Tolkien. Heck, basic basic thing. Orcs are not corrupted elves. That was a Tolkienism.

Elves are not actually immortal, and are not fading from the world do to ennui. That was a Tolkienism.

Maybe you could argue dwarves still hold a lot of tolkien, but they also added a lot more in DnD. Their emnity with Giants is a DnDism. DnD dwarves really have far fewer conflicts with elves than Tolkien dwarves.

They have evolved past Tolkien, into their own niches.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Except no, it isn't.

Elves, Dwarves and Orcs have evolved a lot from the Tolkien. Heck, basic basic thing. Orcs are not corrupted elves. That was a Tolkienism.

Elves are not actually immortal, and are not fading from the world do to ennui. That was a Tolkienism.

Maybe you could argue dwarves still hold a lot of tolkien, but they also added a lot more in DnD. Their emnity with Giants is a DnDism. DnD dwarves really have far fewer conflicts with elves than Tolkien dwarves.

They have evolved past Tolkien, into their own niches.

They have been changed a bit. And so have have halflings. D&D halflings have absorbed some of the kender DNA and they're no longer just Tolkien rip-offs. Both 'brave' and 'lucky' are kender inspired traits. Whether this is a good or bad thing is a matter of opinion.

 

[Yaarel]

Distinction between non-magical and magical-but-not-mechanically is not something the game recognises.

I view the distinctions between magical and nonmagical as "implied" by stray wording in the game here and there.

The distinction also seems to be something the 5e designers are now actively thinking about.

For example, Sage advice touches on a number of things.

Something like there is a difference between ambient magic versus focused magic.

Relatedly the power sources are becoming a thing, with Arcane and Divine, and Psionic and Primal.

With regard to power sources:
• any power source can cast a spell (including psionics)
• any power source can create something that is a magical effect
• any power source can create something that is nonmagical (compare Create Water and the breath of a Dragon)

 

[Oofta]

Do halflings horde treasure? Are they known for their crafting of magical items? Dig mines deep underground? Create vast cities? Have a subrace that in the past were a primary antagonist? Do they strive to be have lasting impact on others or conquer enemy territories?

The answer to all of these is of course no. Next, how many adventure modules revolve around idyllic pastoral villages? Being the center of, or the excuse for, conflict is not the halfling niche. That doesn't mean they have no role to play in the game.

So I don't really see why "mod with major focus on [insert race]" matters.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Let's say I agree with you for a second. Point #5 "Gains no benefit from magic resistance because there is nothing in the effect's description that would include it in the type of magic that can be dispelled, anti-magiced, or resisted by magic resistance."

This right here tells me that there is a type of magic that can't be dispelled, resisted, yadda yadda.

So, a Revenant;s Vengeful Glare is magical, but it is not #magical#gamemechanictag. And so, being listed with "magical" in the text only applies if it is a type of magic that can be countered, dispelled, anti-magicked or resisted by magic resistance. However, not being listed as "magical" in the text does not mean it is not magical. Because there are types of magic that aren't tagged "magical" because they are too diffuse to interact with the game mechanics.

It’s got nothing to do with being “diffuse”, it’s a matter of being part of the game world in the same way that gravity and humans having vey dexterous grasping hands are part of the real world.

 

[Chaosmancer]

This is a really simple reading comprehension issue, so it’s the only thing I’m going to reply to from you today.

Go back and read what I replied to, read whatI replied, and don’t try to read any extra stuff into it. Because you’re now replying as if to a completely different comment than the one you’ve quoted.

So, instead of answering the question, you want me to go back and prove that I asked the question. Fine, let us do this... again.

You quoted this line from Sabathius

I (and many on this thread I suspect) don't view the different races lore as monolithic as you do. Saying halflings are happy farmers is a generality, not a baseline.

And responded with this. I'll bold the important part here

The PHB even gives us two other halfling cultures! There are city halflings and nomadic Halflings. The “classic” halfling may be hospitable but somewhat reclusive agrarians, but the thing that ties them all together is that they don’t ever build or take over the “shining city on the hill” or the “great hall full of wealth and grand history”, and they don’t have blood feuds with other cultures, so while great events effect them, they aren’t the focus of them.

I then responded with this post. Again, bolding.

Does it?

Tell me about these Nomadic halflings. How are they different from the Agrarian halflings?

Now, I'm not supposed to interpret anything, but I will point out what I meant. By "Does it?" I was responding to the idea that the PHB gives us three different cultures. Agrarian, Nomadic and city. I then specifically asked "what are the differences"

And your response was

Dude, stop. This is ridiculous.

The PHB isn’t meant to cover everything. Most people have no trouble extrapolating “General Halfling Stuff+Nomadic Traders”. It’s a pretty clean fit.

So, your first response to tell me to stop. That my question was ridiculous and the PHB isn't meant to cover everything... the PHB which in your own words "The PHB even gives us two other halfling cultures! There are city halflings and nomadic Halflings."

Which, you know, is a bit confusing. How does the PHB not cover the thing you said the PHB covers? I then.. went over the order of events. Sabathius's post, my question, your responses, and came to the conclusion that there was not a new halfling culture introduced in the PHB. Just that they claimed that Nomad halflings exist, and that we are supposed to just go forward from there. They did not provide any differences.

You then posted your giant post... in which you showed all of the similarities between agrarian halflings and nomadic halflings. Which, to repeat myself, for the fourth time, did not answer my question. The question you called ridiculous that I have repeated to be clear each time I have responded to you.

How are they different from the Agrarian halflings?

So, which part is the reading comprehension problem? My question is very clear. Your responses have been quite clear. They just are not addressing the question.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Okay this one, too, because same issue. The thing you quote right after saying this…is not saying that.

I literally highlighted the line. I made it EXTRA large so you could see it. So please, tell me how you can possible interpret "the affront is that they are the only race that believes in peace, tranquility, joy, happiness." to mean that they are not in fact the only race to believe in peace, tranquility, joy and happiness?

Is it the words "only race"? Maybe "believes"? Is there some secret code involved here or maybe a computer bug showing something different between our screens? Because I don't understand how you can possibly interpret this any other way.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It definitely seems that the reason people play them more than tabaxi and aasimar is that in the sole poll comparing play usages, you had to pay to play aasimar and tabaxi.*

*That, and halflings were one of the 4 races included in the basic set, despite tieflings and dragonborn being more popular.

I doubt it makes much of a difference. Being in the phb probably makes a difference, but pretty much every time they’ve been asked and answered, the DDB folks have said that the stats don’t change much at all when only looking at people who have unlocked content.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

So, instead of answering the question, you want me to go back and prove that I asked the question. Fine, let us do this... again.

You quoted this line from Sabathius



And responded with this. I'll bold the important part here



I then responded with this post. Again, bolding.



Now, I'm not supposed to interpret anything, but I will point out what I meant. By "Does it?" I was responding to the idea that the PHB gives us three different cultures. Agrarian, Nomadic and city. I then specifically asked "what are the differences"

And your response was



So, your first response to tell me to stop. That my question was ridiculous and the PHB isn't meant to cover everything... the PHB which in your own words "The PHB even gives us two other halfling cultures! There are city halflings and nomadic Halflings."

Which, you know, is a bit confusing. How does the PHB not cover the thing you said the PHB covers? I then.. went over the order of events. Sabathius's post, my question, your responses, and came to the conclusion that there was not a new halfling culture introduced in the PHB. Just that they claimed that Nomad halflings exist, and that we are supposed to just go forward from there. They did not provide any differences.

You then posted your giant post... in which you showed all of the similarities between agrarian halflings and nomadic halflings. Which, to repeat myself, for the fourth time, did not answer my question. The question you called ridiculous that I have repeated to be clear each time I have responded to you.

How are they different from the Agrarian halflings?

So, which part is the reading comprehension problem? My question is very clear. Your responses have been quite clear. They just are not addressing the question.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




I literally highlighted the line. I made it EXTRA large so you could see it. So please, tell me how you can possible interpret "the affront is that they are the only race that believes in peace, tranquility, joy, happiness." to mean that they are not in fact the only race to believe in peace, tranquility, joy and happiness?

Is it the words "only race"? Maybe "believes"? Is there some secret code involved here or maybe a computer bug showing something different between our screens? Because I don't understand how you can possibly interpret this any other way.

Yeah, you are not reading what I’m posting. Or what others post. You’re just quoting people and then saying random stuff to support your arguments.

You underlined some text. Yes. I read it. It doesn’t say wha you think it says.

 

[Chaosmancer]

The fact you keep harping on this is just hilarious. Nomadic people, in the actual really real world, keep things that aren’t strictly practical. Halflings are less prone to this, but when they do hold onto soemthing, they aren’t prone to showing it off. That is it, that’s the whole point. You keep trying to make it about some other crap that it isn’t about.

I never said that nomadic people don't keep things that aren't strictly practical. You would do a lot better in this discussion if you stopped attributing arguments to me that I am not making. You lash out at some imagined point then I have to fight back to even get back to where I started.

The issue is HOW MUCH would they hold onto? Would they hide away and not "show off" fancy clothes they have, or would they wear them and get practical use out of them instead of having a storage box of clothes they never wear in the wagon. An agrarian halfling can get away with that, because they have more space and need to transport less, so they might end up treating items differently because of different practical concerns.

 

[Chaosmancer]

This is pointless. Distinction between non-magical and magical-but-not-mechanically is not something the game recognises. It is classification that exist only in your head. And if it makes more sense for you to think things that way, sure, go ahead. But people in an inherently magical world probably wouldn't see things that way. The rain is probably cause by some sort of elemental spirits or whatnot in an fantasy world so is rain magical? To people in magical world magic is just a natural part of the world.

And a distinction pointed out by Jeremy Crawford in the Sage advice used to try and prove that a Pit Fiends fear aura is 100% non-magical fear.

Magical but not mechanical is EXACTLY what he was calling out, and applies to the issue.