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

[Chaosmancer]

Good. Problem solved.


Eberron is just as official.

Buy books that have stuff you like, don't buy books that don't. Not difficult.

And how does a new player who picks up the PHB supposed to know Eberron has more interesting haflings that they need to go online to research? Because, I'll let you know, the Talenta Halflings are not well detailed either. IT is certainly different and interesting, but they aren't a focus point of the 5e book at all.

What if they like halflings, but don't like the Mourning or the Dragonmarks, and so they don't want Eberron, then what? Should they buy it anyways because we don't believe WoTC should make better generic hafling lore?

This is not a "we did it once in one side product, therefore our main product is fine" type of situation.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

And how does a new player who picks up the PHB supposed to know Eberron has more interesting haflings that they need to go online to research? Because, I'll let you know, the Talenta Halflings are not well detailed either. IT is certainly different and interesting, but they aren't a focus point of the 5e book at all.

What if they like halflings, but don't like the Mourning or the Dragonmarks, and so they don't want Eberron, then what? Should they buy it anyways because we don't believe WoTC should make better generic hafling lore?

This is not a "we did it once in one side product, therefore our main product is fine" type of situation.

I don't know, what if I don't like PHB dwarves but I like Dark Sun dwarves? How is that any different? (Besides Dark Sun not being officially supported currently.)

 

[Chaosmancer]

That assumes you know the lore of the other planes since it's not in the PHB and there's not really a ton in MM. Which tends to be fairly campaign setting specific. The book doesn't distinguish the mortal half of tieflings, I've never seen anything other than tieflings born to humans. Probably one of the things I'd change, make it more like the lineages from the Ravenloft book.

Dragonborn, based on the lore we're given shouldn't even be adventurers.

There is quite a lot of Fiend Lore and Genie Lore in the MM. There is also more in the DMG.

But by "parent race" I meant elf, dwarf, or human. And I agree, most tieflings are human with infernal blood. Which means their lore is tied to human lore, that's why the plane-touched races don't have or need super in-depth lore. They have lore already, just by looking between the plane and who their mortal parent is.

And nothing about Dragonborn lore tells me that they shouldn't be adventurers. What makes you say that?

 

[Chaosmancer]

I don't know, what if I don't like PHB dwarves but I like Dark Sun dwarves? How is that any different? (Besides Dark Sun not being officially supported currently.)

In a different thread we could talk about ways to improve Dwarven Lore. I'm not really sure how to do so without drastically changing a few worlds, but there are certainly aspects of Dwarven Lore that need a rewrite or a second look

 

[Crimson Longinus]

In a different thread we could talk about ways to improve Dwarven Lore. I'm not really sure how to do so without drastically changing a few worlds, but there are certainly aspects of Dwarven Lore that need a rewrite or a second look

'Need' is a strong word. You certainly could rewrite them. But a lot of people seem to like them as they are.

And this is kinda the issue with trying to improve something, appeal of which you don't get in the first place. Like if I'd try to 'improve' dwarves, there is a good chance that I'd accidentally make them unappealing to the people who currently like them.

 

[Bolares]

I'll start by saying I didn't have the time to read all 100+ pages, but I'd say its important to define what is "good lore" for an ancestry... Do they need to have extensive history and prolific (past or present) nations or kingdoms? One thing I've always liked about the vanilla halflig is the lack of all that. Just a peacefull people who is happy to live their calm lives, with some adventures that get out of that space.

 

[Bardic Dave]

I'll start by saying I didn't have the time to read all 100+ pages, but I'd say its important to define what is "good lore" for an ancestry... Do they need to have extensive history and prolific (past or present) nations or kingdoms? One thing I've always liked about the vanilla halflig is the lack of all that. Just a peacefull people who is happy to live their calm lives, with some adventures that get out of that space.

Agreed! You’re about the twentieth person in this thread to say something like this, but the badwrongfun crew have really dug their heels in!

“You can like them if you want, but just know that there’s a big problem with them that needs to be addressed! You see Halfling lore is ‘bad’, precisely for the reasons you erroneously believe it to be ‘good’. This must be addressed! And if addressing the problem transforms them into something you don’t like, oh well!”

 

[carkl3000]

Yes, anyone can add new lore to the game. Or remove lore. Therefore you could remove complex lore and revert them back. That is a non-argument. It works both ways.

But, a lot of DMs and tables don't end up adding to the lore. They want to run the lore provided by the company they are buying the material from, and right now WoTC is not providing the same level of material for halflings as they are other races. But, they laud halflings as being one of the four most important races in the game.

And personally, while I could go and change their lore and all that, that doesn't help move the game forward for the next person who buys a PHB. It doesn't help me get anything interesting from the company that I could add or twist for my own purposes.

Well, then we can add that a lot of people think that adding layers of background information would make halfling lore worse. I think it's good that they don't have kingdoms, or a formal role in the broader society, or whatever else. They just do what they need to do to survive in the background.

Despite their simplicity, there's a lot of space there to create a rich and interesting character. Adding complexity to their racial history makes it a different kind of space. No matter how superficially different you make it from all the other histories of all the other races, it makes the space more similar to all the other character races than it was before you started tinkering with it, and therefore detracts from the game by removing what I think is a valuable niche for character creation.

 

[Bolares]

I'd also say... D&D could grow out of "Racial Cultures" by now. Eberron is an exception, where wich nation you are form tells us more about you culturally than your ancestry. I'd like to see multiple cultures based on different aspects of the same ancestry, more cultures that grow of mixing ancestrys, cosmopolitan cultures.... I'm quite tired of "This is the elf nation, those are the dwarf clans, that is the dragonborn empire".

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

But silver is common. Unless you mean, weakness to silvered weapons is/shouldn't be common. In that case, devils and at least some other shapechangers are also damage by silvered weapons.

Lycanthropes are rare and powerful, so their weakness should be relatively common.

Iron and other ferrous metals, though, are orders of magnitude more common than silver. That’s why one is a precious metal used in currency and jewelry, and the others are used to make all kinds of items for the masses.

While Fey are also relatively rare, playable PC race Fey would be relatively common. If their weakness were as common as horseshoes and nails, they’d be virtually unusable.

So “cold iron” has to be something rarer than regular iron, yet still something that could be available to people under certain circumstances.