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

Status
Not open for further replies.
You don't seen any contradiction there? They are pastoral farmers who have wanderlust? Bwuh? They are curious or want to protect their community but, their communities are never directly threatened by anything and never play any key role in any event, being incredibly hard to find and virtually invisible...

This isn't a contradiction?
No. Obviously. What contradiction are you seeing!?

See, you guys keep pointing to the Hobbits in LotR. But, the key point is, the hobbits in LotR were VERY much the exception. To the point where Bilbo is pretty much ostracized by his community for having an adventure. They were all far, FAR outliers to the norm. IOW, sure, PC halflings parallel the hobbits in LotR. I'd agree with that. But, the Hobbits in LotR were very much not representative of hobbits. Which is the point I just made that the description of halflings in the PHB pretty much defines everything your PC halfling will not be.
Bilbo’s ostracization Is pretty well retconned in LOTR, when multiple family lines are described as being prone to adventure.

It is also shown that Hobbits are sturdy, quite capable of enduring great hardship and bouncing back from it, and able to be quite fierce when needed. Not Merry and Pippin, Hobbits in general. The Shirefolk scour the Shire, not just the 4 protagonist Hobbits.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

The argument is not that elf and dwarf lore is better that halfling lore.

The argument is that their lore is a different standard and whether something that is treated different should still be considered iconic.

AKA:

If halfling lore is the same as gnome, tiefling, and dragonborn lore but orc lore is the same as dwarf, elf, and human lore, why are the 4 iconic races not dwarf, elf, human, orc or the iconic races expanded to all seven?

AKA
Halfling is treated as Tier 2 but stated as Tier 1. Should this be remedied.
Who cares? The only point at which this matters is in regards to what goes in a beginner’s box. How much lore would you expect to see there?
 

The problem here is that what constitutes ‘good lore’ is highly subjective. I’ve long since come to the conclusion that most of what constitutes elf and dwarf lore is just dead weight eating the game down and if held to limiting the creativity of what groups and designers can do.

I’d point at the OSR as an example here. Is it hamstrung by not having access to Moradin or Sehanine Moonbow? No it’s creatively strengthened. Half of the D&D worlds rewrite all the lore anyway.
It is largely subjective, but I hold my stance that there is a part of it that is subjective. I couldn't care less about 90% of Elven, Dwarven, Gnomish, Halfling, Orcish, Goblinoid, and other racial deities (which is why I support settings that have less deities, like Theros and my homebrew world, and also like Exandria's use of a slightly expanded Dawn War Pantheon), and I can say for a fact that the average D&D player cannot tell you the name of the Halfling god of agriculture or who the god of air from the Forgotten Realms is. Those all fit into the "filler lore" category, because they don't add anything to the game besides just more lore-baggage that the FR has to carry around with it.

If halflings have to be a core race in D&D, they should earn their place with having as good lore as the other races. Elven reincarnation is lore that inspires character concepts, as does the Duergar-Dwarf conflict, as do many other parts of the lore for those races that without, they'd be on about the same ground as halflings. Frankly, even the Gith have more inspiring lore than Halflings, and I don't want them to become a main D&D race because they're fairly niche and are supposed to be (both by appearance, mechanics (psionics), and where they live; Limbo and the Astral Plane).

Halflings should have something drawing for players and DMs to be inspired from. If a player can read the Dwarf-Duergar Conflict lore and say, "Ooh! That would be cool to create a PC around!" there should be something similar for Halflings' cultural lore. I gave examples in my previous post for possible halfling cultures that could do this (by them being enforcers of happiness, or a culture of people that forces their practices of happiness on others), and I gave other examples earlier in the thread, too (with halflings that are gluttons and pleasure-addicts). It doesn't even have to be any of those specific examples, it just has to be a drawing culture concept that inspires character ideas. The current "pastoral farmers that do nothing but farm and occasionally send nobodies to become heroes" is obviously fine, but it's not comparable in this quality to the lore of Dwarves, Elves, and lots of other official races/cultures in D&D.
 

Who cares? The only point at which this matters is in regards to what goes in a beginner’s box. How much lore would you expect to see there?
This thread is 144 pages.
We obviously care.

The whole discussion is whether halflings belong in the beginnings box over orcs or dragonborn due to how little D&D cares about the former in lore and mechanical diversity.
 


This thread is 144 pages.
We obviously care.

The whole discussion is whether halflings belong in the beginnings box over orcs or dragonborn due to how little D&D cares about the former in lore and mechanical diversity.
I don't even agree that your crux is the crux.

I think the discussion should be whether or not halflings need a baroque and convoluted history. I'm in the less is more camp. I think it's good that there's a common character race that's not fraught with extraneous crap.
 

One we get to the point that we’re talking about what subheading ( which is largely ignored by all) to put halfling under in the phb we are entering the realm of the truly trivial.
Well like I said,with over 100 pages it's obviously not that trivial to many.

Anyway... on a purely mechanical design approach halflings could not make the begginers box.

It's Dex bonus is redundant with elves and the other small races have better score speads.

STR: Orc
DEX: Elf
CON: Dwarf
INT: Gnome
WIS: ???
CHA: Dragonborn/HalfElf/Tiefling

So mechanically you'd be looking for a Wis race or going Dragonborn/Tiefling before you hit Halflings.

So Halflings would be your 7th race if your were going pure mechanics and Size was you 1st or 2nd criteria. Now if Weirdness or Gonzo or Options was your 1st or 2nd criteria, it's worse for Halflings because D&D has tons of freaky player races.
 

One we get to the point that we’re talking about what subheading ( which is largely ignored by all) to put halfling under in the phb we are entering the realm of the truly trivial.
Leave it to impassioned nerds to waste dozens of hours debating something trivial, amirite?

The subheading was how I was trying to make/prove my point; Halflings aren't an engaging/interesting fantasy race in comparison to the other fantasy races that I gave as examples. Obviously it has not accomplished the goal that I was attempting (convincing nerds with strong opinions to change their minds), but that proves that people care. You wouldn't be in this thread if you didn't care or if you didn't care about other people caring about this topic. None of us would (excluding the moderators, of course).

I want to like halflings, but I don't. If they stay as is, I want them to move into the background and one of the more popular races to fill their place as a core race (Dragonborn, Tieflings, Gnomes, or Orcs/Half-Orcs). If they do change, I want them to change in one of the ways I recommended in this thread (i.e. by making their culture engaging and inspiring). I'd be fine with the former, but happier with the latter. I suspect that most people here would be fine with either of those outcomes, too.
 

The whole discussion is whether halflings belong in the beginnings box over orcs or dragonborn due to how little D&D cares about the former in lore and mechanical diversity.

I don’t recall anyone mentioning the beginner’s box before I brought it up.

So I have a hard time seeing how that is the crux of the discussion. In any case I would think the reason to put halflings in the beginner’s box is recognisability of concept - or in other words the assumption that they can be presented without lore.

Perhaps Orcs could now fill that space, but you’d first have to get WotC to reinvent D&D orcs. Or just throw in Dragonborn and let people figure it out themselves.

I don’t care what goes into a Beginner’s Box. And I don’t see what relevance amount of lore has.
 
Last edited:

I don't even agree that your crux is the crux.

I think the discussion should be whether or not halflings need a baroque and convoluted history. I'm in the less is more camp. I think it's good that there's a common character race that's not fraught with extraneous crap.
That is the crux.

That if elves get one,then halflings should have one.
Or if halflings don'thave one then the elven one should be removed.

The whole crux is "Should halflings be different because Tolkien?"
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top