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

[Hussar]

/edit because I was answering line questions each at a time, then I realized that it just isn't really worth it. See the bottom.

Which is sad, because you would have an opportunity to flesh out your world with things other than what’s in the party.

Oh, my campaign worlds are disposable. I change worlds every campaign. But, again, I'm not judging your game, why are you judging mine? It's not sad to focus your campaign on what the players are interested in.

Actions speak louder than words.

Yes, the really do. But, all we have is words here. And, I'm asking politely for you to stop ascribing motives to me when I've specifically told you differently. I would refer you to the Code of Conduct for the site for a refresher if it's not clear.

It appears there are 20/21 races on D&D Beyond that are available without paying any money. If there were no favorites, but instead races were picked randomly, then any one race would be picked roughly 5% of the time.

Last data available, nearly 6% of users picked halflings.

Even if we used 5%, which you insisted on rounding 5.9% to, that would mean that halflings are picked a typical amount, that they’re as popular as any other race. It means that they are definitely not unpopular—and when you add in paid content and homebrew races, it means that halflings are actually quite popular, relatively speaking.

I'm absolutely baffled by the level of snark here. WTF? When people complained that I used 5% instead of 5.9, I REPEATEDLY used 6% because that one percent is all important. But, no, they are not as popular as any other race. Not by a long shot. They are less popular than a number of races - elves, dwarves, dragonborn and tieflings and barely more popular than gnomes or half-orcs.

To me, it sounds like your players are picking “cool” races because you aren’t providing in-depth information about the races of your world before hand.

Yeah, we're done. You insist on pretending you're sitting at my table and able to read my mind. Please do not respond to me again.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Because people actually play dwarves. Dwarves being pushed into a setting makes sense since significant numbers of people play them. Same as elves.

Dwarves are marginally more popular than halflings. Stop repeating this lie that halflings are unpopular an no one plays them. 6% when there are dozens of options available is not bad.

 

[Hussar]

People play halfllings. I know that you think around 1 in 20 characters is an unacceptably small number, but I don't see any reason to agree. What exact number is the cut-off? As I said earlier, if all PHB races are played equally (and only PHB races played) they would each be 11%. So obviously the cut-off is between 5.9 and 11%. So what exactly is it? And why should we accept it?

In any case I think settings would be better if the choices were based on thematic appropriateness and not some kind of popularity contest.

Note, I have zero problem with shunting halflings into the DMG with the other sideline races that do get played, but, not very often. I am not advocating removing them from the game. Granted, I'd probably do the same with gnomes and half-orcs too if I had my way.

But, the point I keep making all the way along is that halfling numbers are artificially inflated due to their presence in the Basic rules. If halflings were actually popular, actually being played by so many players, why is no one catering to these players? I mean,I can buy fifteen different elf supplements from any edition. Halflings couldn't even get their own race book in 2e. EVERYTHING got it's own book in 2e.

But, yeah, it's probably time for me to go back to lurking. We simply aren't going to agree on this. I look at 5% for a race, and the fact that two of the most banned races - tieflings and dragonborn, both have managed to beat that number, despite dragonborn being associated with 4e. To me that says that there is considerable desire out there for a fresh bunch in the PHB. Some new options that might actually be able to pull from humans or elves or dwarves players and actually be an option in the game that's seeing use instead of largely just taking up space pointlessly.

 

[Hussar]

Dwarves are marginally more popular than halflings. Stop repeating this lie that halflings are unpopular an no one plays them. 6% when there are dozens of options available is not bad.

6% on a single bit of statistics from 2017. A single month in 2017 to be exact. Not exactly up to date. Note, by 2020, the top 5 races are:

1. Human
2. Half-Elf
3. Dragonborn
4. Tiefling
5. Half-Orc

(from here

No actual percentages there, and, well, it's obviously an incomplete list. But, since half orc manages to jump WAYYY up on the list, and, let's be honest here, #6 is probably elf and #7 is probably dwarf, how confident are you in that 6% number? Do you really think more people play halflings now than in 2017? Or less? As a percentage of all players?

I wouldn't be too quick to stand on that 6% hill. According to the 2019 stats, that number is down to (3.4%+1.3%) 4.7% of D&D Beyond characters. Compared to Dwarves 6.6%. So, do you still think that 6% is rock solid?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

6% on a single bit of statistics from 2017. A single month in 2017 to be exact. Not exactly up to date. Note, by 2020, the top 5 races are:

1. Human
2. Half-Elf
3. Dragonborn
4. Tiefling
5. Half-Orc

(from here

No actual percentages there, and, well, it's obviously an incomplete list. But, since half orc manages to jump WAYYY up on the list, and, let's be honest here, #6 is probably elf and #7 is probably dwarf, how confident are you in that 6% number? Do you really think more people play halflings now than in 2017? Or less? As a percentage of all players?

I wouldn't be too quick to stand on that 6% hill. According to the 2019 stats, that number is down to (3.4%+1.3%) 4.7% of D&D Beyond characters. Compared to Dwarves 6.6%. So, do you still think that 6% is rock solid?

It was you who have been waving these numbers around like they were a big deal. They're of course just isolated snapshots and will change over time and are of questionable representativeness to begin with (not everyone uses D&D Beyond for example.) So no, I wouldn't put much stock in them. In fact, the the numbers change so much in such short period of time tells me that they're far too volatile to make any far reaching conclusions. What is popular today may not be tomorrow and vice versa. I'd imagine things like what races popular D&D streamers like Critical Role people play can easily affect the numbers (expect to see more fauns.) But I am not the one who has been screaming about the popularity of halflings like it was some some universally recognised fact.

 

[Hussar]

2% over 2 years is "so much"?

And, again, "screaming"? Why the hostility? I'm accused of ranting, screaming, and various other things. I didn't realize that having a differing opinion was quite so threatening. We disagree, sure, but, I'm not accusing you of screaming or ranting, so, why are you accusing me of the same?

My point has always been the same. Halflings, despite having every possible advantage you could give them, barely scratch the surface as a playable race. They scrape the bottom of the barrel of any PHB race and have always done so. They have never been a very popular race in the game, despite being there the whole time.

Maybe, just maybe, it might be a good idea to give a few new ideas a try. The last time we let two new races into the PHB, they turned out to be massively popular and have remained so for years. Just as a thought, maybe we could try that a few more times and see if we couldn't catch lightning in a bottle again.

Or am I ranting here? Could you please point me to the language I'm using to rant and scream? Apparently, I'm just very out of control and it would be very helpful if others could give me a pointer or two on communicating less aggressively.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

My point has always been the same. Halflings, despite having every possible advantage you could give them, barely scratch the surface as a playable race. They scrape the bottom of the barrel of any PHB race and have always done so. They have never been a very popular race in the game, despite being there the whole time.

Yes, it is very clear that this is your take. You have repeated it over and over and over and over. You still have no evidence to back it up though and this is not the impression of the situation many other people have.

 

[Minigiant]

I don't even want Halflings remove or moved.

I just would like their interracial relationships tightened, inter-pantheon relationships tightened, a few examples of halfling magic items, and their position in the base PH to be a lot less nebulous.

You know,treat Halfling like a race that fits in the game and not copyright free Hobbits. Because hobbits don't fit in D&D.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I just would like their interracial relationships tightened, inter-pantheon relationships tightened,

In what setting? This is setting stuff.

a few examples of halfling magic items,

Sure. I've never needed such, but certainly adding them would be perfectly fine.

and their position in the base PH to be a lot less nebulous.

What does that mean?

 

[Minigiant]

In what setting? This is setting stuff.

Most of the settings WOTC have pushed in 5e.

Really only in Eberron, Dark Sun, and Points of Light are halflings in the mix of whole event and not a background race.

What does that mean?

I mean there is cloud of vagueness over halfling's position in many settings because it is copypasted from LOTR without the parts of the LOTR to make it logical.

There's no Sauron or One Ring in D&D. So Halflings being corruption resistant, lucky, plucky brave, souls who do jack squat and are had to tempt doesn't really fit in D&D.

It's like porting Anakin Skywalker into D&D without the Force.

Anakin: I should have known the Jedi were plotting to take over!
Drizzt: What the heck is the Jedi?!