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

[doctorbadwolf]

I just want Halflings out of that 'These are the top 4 races you'll have". Just, make the races alphabetical

I want everything out of that space, so I’ll eagerly agree to the alphabetical order.

Especially if we can add Goliath, Genasi, and a few other races to the PHB.

They are only that popular because they appeal to tradition.

Your insistence on this makes it hard to take seriously anything else you say.

 

[Faolyn]

Wow, now I'm "lying"? But, "among the nine most popular races" isn't spinning things? How about, in the bottom ranks of the top nine races? Since we're being all "honest" and all.

Even if halflings are in the bottom ranks of the top nine, they're still in the top nine. Out of over forty official races, at least 55 subraces (not including the Dragonmarked), and who knows how many third-party and homebrew races.

But, no, I don't think ANYTHING that sits around the 5% (oh, sorry, either 5.9% or 4.7%, since we're being all honest) mark deserves to be in the PHB. But, you apparently are an expert mind reader who thinks it's because I "hate" halflings. Yay, take a drink folks, we've got another one!

So you're saying that we should get rid of everything but humans, elves, dwarfs, half-orcs, and dragonborn. Those are the only races that should be in the PH, because they're played by more than, say, 7.5% of the people on D&DBeyond (based on the "Is Your Character Rare? and some math). That 7.5% is, of course, entirely arbitrary, since we're picking races on the merit of how many people on a particular website made characters using them.

You obviously draw your cut off line differently. That's fine. No worries. I draw mine at higher than a race that appears at about 1 in 4 tables, while the other 19 characters aren't.

So, something that can be found in 25% of D&D groups isn't enough for you? A race that is in the top 9 out of 40 races.

This is why everyone is saying you hate halflings. If you didn't, then you would realize that a race found in 25% of D&D parties, that is in the top nine races out of is a really good number. There is absolutely no reason to dismiss that as "not popular enough" unless you have already decided that nothing anyone can say or do will change your mind. Seriously, how popular do halflings have to be for you to be willing to accept them?

To me, the only reason halflings are as high as they are is because they appear in the PHB.

Sounds like a good reason to keep them in the PH.

If we moved them out and replaced them with something else, no matter what we replaced them with, they'd still hit that 5 (ish) percent mark. There's nothing special about halflings that makes them as popular as they are. They are only that popular because they appeal to tradition.

Or you could just add new races in without removing one enjoyed by 5% of the population.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Even if halflings are in the bottom ranks of the top nine, they're still in the top nine. Out of over forty official races, at least 55 subraces (not including the Dragonmarked), and who knows how many third-party and homebrew races.


So you're saying that we should get rid of everything but humans, elves, dwarfs, half-orcs, and dragonborn. Those are the only races that should be in the PH, because they're played by more than, say, 7.5% of the people on D&DBeyond (based on the "Is Your Character Rare? and some math). That 7.5% is, of course, entirely arbitrary, since we're picking races on the merit of how many people on a particular website made characters using them.


So, something that can be found in 25% of D&D groups isn't enough for you? A race that is in the top 9 out of 40 races.

This is why everyone is saying you hate halflings. If you didn't, then you would realize that a race found in 25% of D&D parties, that is in the top nine races out of is a really good number. There is absolutely no reason to dismiss that as "not popular enough" unless you have already decided that nothing anyone can say or do will change your mind. Seriously, how popular do halflings have to be for you to be willing to accept them?


Sounds like a good reason to keep them in the PH.


Or you could just add new races in without removing one enjoyed by 5% of the population.

Right like…wow dude. I like to say 100 races because so many subraces are basically a different race, like Drow and Shadar-Kai, but even if we split the difference and say 40 or 50, top 9, 5% of parties (and thus most groups who’ve played several campaigns), whatever…it literally disproves the idea that they’re unpopular or don’t have traction!

Theyre about 5% less played on ddb than elves, IIRC. Because the distribution is very even and drops gradually once you take the human outlier out of the picture.

But Halflings, who have never had a major AP focused on them, nor a big supplement my significant number of people know exists written about them, nor ever been the focus of a set of D&D novels in any major way, are in the top 9.

That is traction!

 

[Yaarel]

The number of lineages could be the same as the number of classes.

The current number of classes is about twelve. The number of classes is slightly fluid because organizing which concepts should be classes and which should be archetypes of classes has slack. I strongly want to add the Psion to core as a separate class. Likewise Warlord. Maybe Artificer. Allowing for possible splitting or lumping, lets say there are 15 core classes.

There can probably be 15 lineages in a Players Handbook. Each with distinctive cultures.

 

[lingual]

They gotta give halflings a much deserved buff for topping 5.89 percent participation. Maybe a bonus feat, +4 to any two attributes, heavy armor proficiency, a noticeably bigger font size than the other races (maybe even ALL CAPS), and move them to page 1. THE core 1 race. I gotta have more halfling.

 

[Don Durito]

Personally I think it's time they renamed humans to make the connection between humans and halflings clear.

Call them either "wholelings" or maybe just "lings"

 

[Neonchameleon]

Ok, having complained repeatedly about other people not taking me at my word, I'd be foolish not to take you at yours. So, for you, it's 100% not an appeal to tradition.

So, with that in mind, you must obviously disagree with several of the things @Cadence posted. After all (bold mine to note the appeals to tradition:

If you are going to take me at my word then not blatantly strawmanning it would be nice.

Me: This argument (that people can use them in certain ways right now) is 100% not an appeal to tradition - it's an appeal to what people can do right now
You: Other argument is an appeal to tradition.

Is it possible to make an argument for halflings that is an appeal to tradition? Yes. Is it possible to make an argument that isn't? Also yes. Was the argument in question an appeal to tradition? No - despite you initially claiming in the post I was replying to that a specific argument was 100% an appeal to tradition.

Does quoting arguments that are appeals to tradition somehow change arguments that aren't appeals to tradition into arguments that are appeals to tradition? No.

So, can you now take @Cadence to task for talking about the appeal of tradition in halflings? After all, you are dead set on insisting that the popularity of halflings has nothing whatsoever to do with tradition and he is very strongly contradicting you.

There is a car. Some people like it because it's red. Some people like it because it is fast. Some people like it because it has a lot of legroom. Some people like it because it is electric. I like it because it has a lot of leg room and because it's electric, and it's nice that it's fast. I simply don't care about the colour. People are allowed to like the colour.

One would wonder why you are so set on "proving" me wrong, yet allow others who directly contradict your points slide.

One would wonder why you are so set on "proving" me wrong without actually finding direct contradictions. People are allowed to like the colour of the car and to make arguments about the colour of the car. It is, for me, a non-factor.

It is also interesting that you would posrep a post you so strongly disagree with.

Because it takes one click to thumbs up, it takes several to click laugh and I'm, sometimes lazy. It was a reasonably funny post that was deliberately tongue in cheek. As the exact nature of my approval matters so much to you I've changed it to "laughed with". (I also don't have any problem at all with tieflings and dragonborn despite that post).

After all, there's nothing about halflings that are supposed to appeal to tradition, yet, in a post that is full of appeals to tradition, you took the time to give it a thumbs up.

Again, I don't care about tradition. I care what people like and use in the 21st century.

But when I say that the reason halflings are as popular as they are is because of tradition, I'm completely wrong.

I'll admit to a certain degree of confusion here.

Once more. Some people like a given people like a given car because it is red. Some because it has a lot of leg room. Some because it's fast. Some because it's electric. When you claim that 100% of the reason people like it is because it's red you're simply wrong. When you quote arguments about how fast the car goes and claim that it's 100% about the car being red (and it was you who brought in the 100% thing) you're completely wrong - even if people traditionally paint sportscars red.

The only reason for confusion I can see is if you think that all people who disagree with you share a hivemind and that, despite everything presented in this thread, people can only have one reason for liking something.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I know I have been wanting to play a version of Marvel’s Wolverine using a halfling for 30+ years, but never found the right campaign.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I know I have been wanting to play a version of Marvel’s Wolverine using a halfling for 30+ years, but never found the right campaign.

In 5e you can even have your halfling grow claws with the beast path berserker.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Wow, now I'm "lying"?

So how would you characterise a person saying that their stance is supported by data when it is blatantly clear that this is factually not the case and at this point they must know it?

But, "among the nine most popular races" isn't spinning things? How about, in the bottom ranks of the top nine races? Since we're being all "honest" and all.

Do you know what being at 'bottom ranks of nine most popular require?' Being among the nine most popular.

But, no, I don't think ANYTHING that sits around the 5% (oh, sorry, either 5.9% or 4.7%, since we're being all honest) mark deserves to be in the PHB. But, you apparently are an expert mind reader who thinks it's because I "hate" halflings. Yay, take a drink folks, we've got another one!

So you want there to be less races in PHB overall. Because this is what this means. And you have not said before that you wan there tro be less races in PHB overall.

You obviously draw your cut off line differently. That's fine. No worries. I draw mine at higher than a race that appears at about 1 in 4 tables, while the other 19 characters aren't. To me, the only reason halflings are as high as they are is because they appear in the PHB. If we moved them out and replaced them with something else, no matter what we replaced them with, they'd still hit that 5 (ish) percent mark. There's nothing special about halflings that makes them as popular as they are. They are only that popular because they appeal to tradition.

But there is no more popular race to replace them with. All races that are more popular than halflings are already in the PHB. That's the facts.