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

[Crimson Longinus]

Probably not solely by popularity, but popularity should be one/the most important factor.

I feel there should be a good selection of very different things so that there is a good chance that there's something for everyone. So if there is limited space, I wouldn't include things that are very similar to each other. For that reason I can see argument for removing halflings or gnomes from a limited line up, but you can't remove both. Similarly you could remove elves or half-elves, but not both.

 

[Hussar]

I am wary of things that tell the players how their characters should feel as well, so in that sense I get you. I just don't get how it would matter in this instance in practice. Like if the GM describes upon encountering the pit fiend how it is most horrifying thing your character has ever seen and how primal fear fills your hearth, how would this being magical or non-magical affect the description at all, and how would you or the character even know which it is?

Would you be equally comfortable with the DM telling you that the orc threatening your character fills your heart with primal fear? Note, being afraid is one thing. The Frightened condition, with it's game effects, is not simply being afraid. It is a mind controlling effect that forces the player to perform (or prevents him from taking) certain actions. This goes beyond simply, "You're really scared", which, again, is something a lot of players would have a serious issue with, and enters into the realm of the DM taking over player characters.

Magical effects are accepted as a means of doing this since it is literally mind control. Fair enough. No one bitches when their character does something because of a magical effect. But, an orc threatens your character and you are forced to move away at top speed and can take no other actions simply because the DM rolled a good Intimidate check (with a DC that was also set by the DM, since Intimidate is not an opposed check). Or, your character must be friendly to that same orc simply because I "succeeded" on a persuasion check?

Yeah, I'm thinking a lot of players are not going to pat the DM on the back for that ruling.

 

[Hussar]

I feel there should be a good selection of very differnt things so that there is a good chance that there's something for everyone. So if there is limited space, I wouldn't include things that are very similar to each other. For that reason I can see argument for removing halflings or gnomes from a limited line up, but you can't remove both. Similarly you could remove elves or half-elves, but not both.

I have to admit, someone upthread talked about folding gnomes and halflings into a single race. I thought that was a fairly decent solution. Gnomes and halflings share enough points that you could just have a few subraces and call it a day.

 

[Cadence]

I have to admit, someone upthread talked about folding gnomes and halflings into a single race. I thought that was a fairly decent solution. Gnomes and halflings share enough points that you could just have a few subraces and call it a day.

How does the level of similarity between gnomes and halflings compare to the level of similarity between humans and half-elves, or do genasi and tieflings? (Especially in a post Tasha world?).

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Would you be equally comfortable with the DM telling you that the orc threatening your character fills your heart with primal fear? Note, being afraid is one thing. The Frightened condition, with it's game effects, is not simply being afraid. It is a mind controlling effect that forces the player to perform (or prevents him from taking) certain actions. This goes beyond simply, "You're really scared", which, again, is something a lot of players would have a serious issue with, and enters into the realm of the DM taking over player characters.

Magical effects are accepted as a means of doing this since it is literally mind control. Fair enough. No one bitches when their character does something because of a magical effect. But, an orc threatens your character and you are forced to move away at top speed and can take no other actions simply because the DM rolled a good Intimidate check (with a DC that was also set by the DM, since Intimidate is not an opposed check). Or, your character must be friendly to that same orc simply because I "succeeded" on a persuasion check?

Yeah, I'm thinking a lot of players are not going to pat the DM on the back for that ruling.

I mean if the orc is a statted berserker or battle master (and NPCs can have class levels) they absolutely can do that. It is rare and powerful ability, not every scrub can do it. But yeah, some powerful orc champion or warlord might.

Now could mere intimidation check do it? Perhaps in theory for a brief moment in certain favourable circumstances but it's up to the GM how they run the skills. Personally I wouldn't use social skills against player characters that way. If the NPC has good persuasion or intimidation I might just tell the players 'he seems trustworthy' or 'she is rather scary' and let the players decide what to do with that information.

But yes, there are mechanics in the game that can inflight frightened on PCs and some of them definitely don't seem to be magical (like battle master's manoeuvre.) The limiting factor here is not magic, it is that such abilities are rare. If half the enemies had such it would be super jarring an annoying completely irrespective what the fictional explanation for the power was.

 

[Zubatcarteira]

I'm not really sure how this relates to halflings at all, but if the NPC has an ability like:

Mighty Presence: As an action, the monster can choose a character withing 30 feet and make an Intimidation check contested by the target's Insight check. If the monster wins, the target is frightened.

Would that be fine? Is the issue that there isn't an ability that spells it out? Or that it isn't magic? Would it be okay if it said "the target is magically frightened" instead?

 

[Minigiant]

Probably not solely by popularity, but popularity should be one/the most important factor.

Popularity should be important but redundancy and diversity should be taken in consideration.

Having a dozen Dex races because DEX is OP in 5e would be bad. Similar ly to a lesser extent flooding it with races from one source.

 

[Cadence]

Popularity should be important but redundancy and diversity should be taken in consideration.

Having a dozen Dex races because DEX is OP in 5e would be bad. Similar ly to a lesser extent flooding it with races from one source.

Is the Dex race thing going to be a non-issue in this post Tasha world? I wonder what that will do to the popularity of some of the races (are some getting a lot of love in big part due to the ASI?).

 

[Vaalingrade]

What I think the 'halfling bad' folks are missing is that the thing they dislike (totally not vehemently hate with the fury of 150 forum pages, oh no) about halflings is what everyone that likes halflings actually likes about them and making them 'cooler' or 'better' or whatever to you is ruining them for us.

 

[Cadence]

I wonder if there are any surveys on popularity of the races by age. For the youngest playing cohort, there are lots of choices for wish fulfillment of being big, but not lots for playing someone who is relatably small in a world of bigger people. (The recommended age on the Essentials kit is 12+, so maybe it would be awkward for WotC to survey down to 10?).