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

[Hussar]

/snip

My line is that I entirely reject your framing that the PHB should only cater to what is currently cool. We're D&D players FFS - D&D may now be cooler than it's ever been but it doesn't make it cool.
/snip

Again, framing it as "currently cool" isn't really accurate either. Halflings have had a LONG time to gain sufficient traction in the game. As have gnomes. And neither have particularly done so.

I woundn't simply jump up and scream as soon as some race dropped below the threshhold. I'd actually want to have the statistics and trends. Look at what's going on over time. D&D Beyond has only been around for four years. So, if I'm being perfectly honest, it's probably not the best source. Or, rather, I wouldn't solely rely on it for a decision. Unfortunately, it's about the only source of information we have.

But, again, my point is, halflings have had decades in the game to step up. The two new races in the PHB have shown (not proven, certainly, but, at least provided some evidence) that there is a considerable demand for new races. It's not like dragonborn or tieflings are these uber races that are wowing everyone. They're pretty much bog standard stuff. Nothing particularly sets them apart from any other race in the PHB. No fantastically different powers or whatnot. Yet, the new races are absolutely dominating.

My question is why? Why are Tieflings and Dragonborn THAT popular. To the point where they are absolutely crushing it. For me, I think the answer if obvious - the only reason for the popularity of some of the PHB races is because they are in the PHB. ANY race you put in the PHB will hit that 1 in 4 tables mark. There's nothing particularly compelling or interesting about halflings - they just get played because, well, there's only so many choices in the PHB. I could replace halflings with Bullywugs and they'd be played just as often.

My preference is to shunt the bottom feeding races into the DMG and open up the space for new ideas.

I'm not really sure why that's so contentious. But, apparently it is. Apparently wanting to see the PHB actually be more relevant at the table is a bad thing.

But, yeah, this has gone around in circles long enough. I've made my point, ad nauseum and it has failed to shift any opinions, so, yeah, it's time to cut bait. I think I'll go back to lurking because this just isn't productive. ((I do want to keep reading the thread because @Dannyalcatraz makes me giggle))

 

[Oofta]

Again, framing it as "currently cool" isn't really accurate either. Halflings have had a LONG time to gain sufficient traction in the game. As have gnomes. And neither have particularly done so.

I woundn't simply jump up and scream as soon as some race dropped below the threshhold. I'd actually want to have the statistics and trends. Look at what's going on over time. D&D Beyond has only been around for four years. So, if I'm being perfectly honest, it's probably not the best source. Or, rather, I wouldn't solely rely on it for a decision. Unfortunately, it's about the only source of information we have.

But, again, my point is, halflings have had decades in the game to step up. The two new races in the PHB have shown (not proven, certainly, but, at least provided some evidence) that there is a considerable demand for new races. It's not like dragonborn or tieflings are these uber races that are wowing everyone. They're pretty much bog standard stuff. Nothing particularly sets them apart from any other race in the PHB. No fantastically different powers or whatnot. Yet, the new races are absolutely dominating.

My question is why? Why are Tieflings and Dragonborn THAT popular. To the point where they are absolutely crushing it. For me, I think the answer if obvious - the only reason for the popularity of some of the PHB races is because they are in the PHB. ANY race you put in the PHB will hit that 1 in 4 tables mark. There's nothing particularly compelling or interesting about halflings - they just get played because, well, there's only so many choices in the PHB. I could replace halflings with Bullywugs and they'd be played just as often.

My preference is to shunt the bottom feeding races into the DMG and open up the space for new ideas.

I'm not really sure why that's so contentious. But, apparently it is. Apparently wanting to see the PHB actually be more relevant at the table is a bad thing.

But, yeah, this has gone around in circles long enough. I've made my point, ad nauseum and it has failed to shift any opinions, so, yeah, it's time to cut bait. I think I'll go back to lurking because this just isn't productive. ((I do want to keep reading the thread because @Dannyalcatraz makes me giggle))

It's contentious for several reasons. First, as many people have pointed out putting them in the DMG (you used to say MM) means they basically are no longer a playable race in the vast majority of campaigns. All because you refuse to accept that 1 in 4 games has a halfling. They "lack traction" despite being in the top 10 of dozens of playable races.

There are plenty of races less popular than halflings. You don't personally find halflings interesting so ignore all the people who do think they fill an interesting niche. Is it the most popular trope out there? No. It doesn't need to be. But to me and a lot of people they have a very different appeal than the other races. It doesn't matter if you don't get it.

But, yes, they're "wasting" a whole 3 pages (roughly 0.9%) of the PHB on halflings. Get rid of the organization between common and uncommon races in the PHB? No complaint from me. I'd probably reword the phrasing in the introduction of races to be more along the lines of the DM and setting determining what races are available. Sort alphabetically and done.

But no. You don't find them interesting so shuffle them off to the back closet and then claim that a minor monstrous humanoid race would be just as popular with nothing to back it up. Then post hundreds of times and wonder why you get pushback.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

do you think that the reasons that @Cadence listed for why halflings are interesting are wrong?

Of course not. What a bizarre question.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Yes, but, you REPEATEDLY stated, along with @doctorbadwolf, that tradition has nothing to do with halfling popularity. Yet, when someone talks about how they like halflings because of tradition, you let it pass without comment. After all, what was the purpose of your anecdote about the new player and telling me how halflings are such a fantastic race for new players if not a rejection that tradition plays a role in the popularity of halflings?

You…don’t understand the difference between “some people like the thing because it reminds them of old things they also like” and “the thing is only liked because tradition”?

seriously?

 

[Gammadoodler]

Except that accepting pay for work is the base state. A lack of positive evidence that they take money as payment for work or goods means you default to the base state. And the evidence you have provided is that they don't value expensive items.

And, actually, in the game itself, there is evidence that they value money.

1) Halflings prefer the rogue class, which is classically a thief, and values money.
2) Halfling NPCs (when they rarely appear) are running businesses, such as inns and shops, where people pay money.

Something as warping as "they don't money" would have been directly mentioned, in a game where "I will pay you money to do this dangerous thing" is the default game state, and halflings are expected to be a part of that exchange.

It's not just a lack of positive evidence for the base state though. There is the presence of contrary evidence to the base state.

A rogue steals valuable items. Value is in the eye of the beholder. And I doubt the pricing models and accounting structure for halfling businesses is included in the NPC info.

The point is that, even assuming they use money there is plenty of reason to believe that the market for halfling goods and services is verrrrry different from other races.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Again, framing it as "currently cool" isn't really accurate either. Halflings have had a LONG time to gain sufficient traction in the game. As have gnomes. And neither have particularly done so.

I woundn't simply jump up and scream as soon as some race dropped below the threshhold. I'd actually want to have the statistics and trends.

Once again your claims do not match your words. Halflings were at 6% in the 2017 data. Comfortably above your 5% threshold. They are at 4.7% in the 2019 data or slightly below your arbitrary 5% threshold. We don't know how much of this is skew or how much is natural variance - but you are jumping up and down screaming about 5% based on one single datapoint.

But, again, my point is, halflings have had decades in the game to step up. The two new races in the PHB have shown (not proven, certainly, but, at least provided some evidence) that there is a considerable demand for new races.

They've also both had a track record going back at least to the 90s in some form or another. One of my friends was playing a half-dragon PC in the 90s, and Tieflings were from memory introduced in Planescape. 3.X had multiple different ways of playing a part-dragon before 4e put them both into the PHB. What they have shown is that there is a considerable demand for those races.

And halflings don't need to step up any further than they have.

It's not like dragonborn or tieflings are these uber races that are wowing everyone. They're pretty much bog standard stuff. Nothing particularly sets them apart from any other race in the PHB. No fantastically different powers or whatnot. Yet, the new races are absolutely dominating.

They look good and they are fun concepts. Someone with demonic ancestry suits everything from pizza cutter PCs (all edge, no point) to exotic pretties to outcasts to lbgt allegories. And dragons? The name is Dungeons & Dragons. Someone mentioned in the thread on dragons that the two bestselling groups of titles were those about dragons and those about demons. And stunningly we find that the two PC races that are utterly dominating are the one that's a humanoid dragon and one that's got demonic ancestry.

That two races in line with the two best selling type of D&D supplements are dominating doesn't mean that there's a large unmet desire for frog-people PCs or the like. Or even angel-people; aasimar were never as popular as tieflings.

So dragonborn and tieflings went through a process of more than a decade of pushing their way to the top of the pack - and were rewarded for it in 4e. I think that Genasi may be about where Tieflings were 15 years ago - and will probably make it into the PHB next time, and something will happen round orcs, half-orcs, and goliaths.

But I can't see another breakthrough race on the horizon. Eberron tried, adding Shifters, Warforged, and Changelings - but they all seem to have lost traction. Aaracroka certainly aren't; they should by rights be running neck and neck with genasi and shifters based on the source.

My question is why? Why are Tieflings and Dragonborn THAT popular. To the point where they are absolutely crushing it. For me, I think the answer if obvious - the only reason for the popularity of some of the PHB races is because they are in the PHB. ANY race you put in the PHB will hit that 1 in 4 tables mark.

Yes of course. Which is why gnomes are. Right. Gotcha. Oh wait - there is proof positive that not any race will hit that mark because one doesn't.

There's nothing particularly compelling or interesting about halflings - they just get played because, well, there's only so many choices in the PHB.

This is as far as I am aware utter nonsense. People do not play races at random and few people play enough campaigns to have played every single race at least once.

There is something compelling about halflings and why they are the best race going to make certain types of PC. That you do not personally see it is entirely on you.

I could replace halflings with Bullywugs and they'd be played just as often.

This is so far as I can tell pure invention.

My preference is to shunt the bottom feeding races into the DMG and open up the space for new ideas.

Why do you think races belong in the DMG at all? Variant aasimar are in there as the example of creating a race.

I'm not really sure why that's so contentious. But, apparently it is. Apparently wanting to see the PHB actually be more relevant at the table is a bad thing.

100% of the practical suggestions you have made have been to make the PHB less relevant on the table by removing options with nothing offered to replace them. And your only idea of something good to add seems to be "I guess they must exist so we'll just throw something against the wall and see what sticks, promoting it to the big leagues without making sure it's ready first".

If you had an actual vision of what would be good that would be one thing. But as it is all you are doing is trying to take away something people like while offering nothing.

 

[Cadence]

I'm going to disagree here. Shock.

This is 100% an appeal to tradition and nothing else. Heck, even look at the lists of why people like halflings - Tolkien appears right there at the top of the list, as well as pointing to Moldvay Basic (the BEST version of D&D mind you), an edition that hasn't been in print for thirty years. And, no, they don't help players tell a different sort of story. They help players tell ONE story. The same story over and over and over again that was first told almost a hundred years ago now that they probably read in elementary school when they first got into the genre.

Now, I know there is zero chance of finding this one out, but, I wonder if there is an overlap between age and liking halflings. If there is any connection between when someone got into the hobby and their preference for maintaining halflings in the PHB. I know, that's just idle speculation.

I got @'d a few times about my list and so am replying to the general idea here.

For clarification, I didn't say Moldvay was the best, I said it was pretty boss (as in really good or very well done or classic or near the top - as opposed to, say, describing it as GOAT).

I like turkey at Thanksgiving, standing rib roast and grasshopper pie at Christmas, fireworks on the 4th of July, hand cranked homemade ice cream, going with my son to the state fair every year to get funnel cakes, taking our annual family vacation to the same spot, read my son Narnia, LotR, and Earthsea, taught him to play D&D, and I like Hobbits in my D&D.

I'm also great with trying out new side dishes at Thanksgiving, with the addition of duck and cheesecake to the Christmas menu, will eat store bought for regular consumption, sorry elephant ears is the wrong answer - you've got me on this one, visiting new places when up there, got him to give Percy Jackson a try and he devoured them, he discovered Minecraft all on his own and is a fanatic, and I wonder if there is a connection between liking one's comfort food and stability and liking the race that likes those things.

 

[lingual]

Maybe it's time to agree to disagree.

There is no chance they remove halflings from the (future) PHB. But maybe they'll add a distinctive subrace like nomads who are expert traders and get the mounted combatant feat, persuasion, and insight.

What is the record for longest thread?

 

[Gammadoodler]

Maybe it's time to agree to disagree.

There is no chance they remove halflings from the (future) PHB. But maybe they'll add a distinctive subrace like nomads who are expert traders and get the mounted combatant feat, persuasion, and insight.

What is the record for longest thread?

Oh we're not close to that...

That Happy Hagrid something something thread has been going forever.

 

[FrozenNorth]

So here we see that you haven't read the posts of other people who don't want halflings in the PH. OK.

Isn’t @Hussar the only poster who is arguing that they shouldn’t be in the PHB?