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

[Dannyalcatraz]

The most amazing thing is that this discussion somehow got 4,000 replies.
Why? It's really not that interesting a topic, really.

And yet, here you are.

 

[Yora]

Yes, and written a good number of posts myself over the weeks.

 

[Yaarel]

It is good to see the term "militia" as canon for Halfling. It means they are competent in combat, which means, they do have levels in D&D classes, which are mainly fighting styles.

Thus the concept that Halflings are powerless homebodies is false, in the sense of incomplete.

Halflings are just as combat competent as Humans are. There is little or no distinction between Halfling flavor and Human commoner flavor.

The Halfling is way too Human.

Presumably, a Halfling militia is mainly Rogue Thief with some Fighter Champion, while other class archetypes are present too.



The term "militia" can mean different things in different contexts. In a town it means the citizens of the town get together for formal combat training for the common defense of the town.

In an extended family, a clan, it means all of the adult ablebodied warriors of the clan, who have a (sacred) duty to defend or avenge the members of the clan. Different clans can be allies and train and fight together, but if and only if, there is a warrior leader who each clan trusts to keep ones own clan members safe.

For the Halfling, militia likely means clan, which may or may not ally with other clans.

This duty of a Halfling to avenge fellow members of ones extended family, shades into the mafia flavor of the Rogue.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The most amazing thing is that this discussion somehow got 4,000 replies.
Why? It's really not that interesting a topic, really.

There's currently a dragon thread that's four pages and dwarf thread that's at six. Yet this thread is over 200 pages! This is proof that halflings are easily the most interesting race in D&D by an overwhelming magnitude!

 

[Gammadoodler]

When different people with different perspectives make literally opposite claims, then trash your argument to respond to one person, while not responding to the other person who made the exact opposite claim as them... it starts to feel like they just want to trash you instead of having a good faith discussion about the situation.


I mean, if the argument is that halflings aren't being used well, and poster C makes that point. Then A attacks them for making that point, then B attacks them because halflings aren't being used well, but that has nothing to do with why C made their point.... then why aren't they addressing poster A too?

We can't address halflings being both popular and not popular, of having a militia and not having a militia, of using money and not using money. But, only us who want a change are being called out, even when people who don't want a change are making contradictory claims.

This both a fair and unfair complaint.

It really comes down to how the streams of conversation cross.

If you bring in my assumptions about halflings' disregard for coin into a conversation with another poster who has made no such contention, it's a you issue.

Similarly if I put you on blast in response you make to another poster who has accepted your position on halflings' value of gold for including that assumption it's a me problem.

At the end of the day, it's not a team sport here. People's particular sensibilities will vary and you choose who you want to engage with, and sometimes people will agree in general and disagree in particular.

For my part, I like:

• The idea of halflings eschewing a standard money economy in favor of something based somehow on story
• Broadly nomadic outgoing halflings who travel in large groups.
• Insofar as there are tucked away villages, they are hidden intentionally using let's call it "practical special effects"
• In those villages, they don't have a militia, but probably have a sheriff and some deputies, and everyone is armed and proficient with some simple ranged weapon (slings are a classic)
• The use of a wide variety of mounts with different movement abilities
• Some aspect of their interaction with their physical environment that reflects their lack of fear, maybe they have crazy treehouses traversed by rope swings and trust falls or something.

All that said, I like halflings and think that they belong in the phb, but I recognize that my personal preferences for them are not universal, and I generally don't feel it necessary to try and convince someone who generally agrees with me that their particular preferences are wrong (unless they prefer elves or Hawaiian pizza), so I don't.

I rather think others are that way too?

 

[Yaarel]

The most amazing thing is that this discussion somehow got 4,000 replies.
Why? It's really not that interesting a topic, really.

I think what makes the Halfling thread interesting is,

The Halfling is a microcosm of wider issues. Apparently, D&D tradition is evolving. The old school assumption of the core four is no longer true, or at least under doubt and scrutiny. Some players are pushing for normalizing the views of the current generation. Other players are pushing back, not wanting to lose certain traditions that continue to be valuable to them now.

Hence, 4000 posts. For the most part it is an honest discussion. One of the benefits of the discussion is a clearer understanding of what the lineages are, and of what the new possibilities are.

 

[Neonchameleon]

When different people with different perspectives make literally opposite claims, then trash your argument to respond to one person, while not responding to the other person who made the exact opposite claim as them... it starts to feel like they just want to trash you instead of having a good faith discussion about the situation.

There are very few opposite claims being made.

I mean, if the argument is that halflings aren't being used well, and poster C makes that point. Then A attacks them for making that point, then B attacks them because halflings aren't being used well, but that has nothing to do with why C made their point.... then why aren't they addressing poster A too?

Hussar made some specific claims about halflings and how they were being used. And also made the contradictory claim that halflings are being given the red carpet treatment.

I pointed this out - at this point it became Hussar's claims against Hussar's claims. In a display of motivated reasoning it has been in this thread both a problem with halflings that they don't take pride of place and that they do. At the same time.

I took @Hussar at his word. @Faolyn debunked him, pointing out that he was missing most of the halfling NPCs. Both "Your facts aren't right" and "The facts you present do not support the conclusions you claim" are legitimate rebuttals to Hussar's anti-Halfling claims.

And although halflings appear in adventures I have clarified repeatedly that their Forgotten Realms lore appears to be fairly pathetic, especially where deities are concerned. Also their Greyhawk is little better. And they do not, as far as I know, even exist in Dragonlance, being replaced by the worst race in D&D history (Kender). Even gnomes get better representation in all of Greyhawk, the Realms, and Dragonlance.

No one as far as I know has tried to defend the writing of Halflings in the Realms and no one denies that the Realms is the default setting of 5e and was of both 3.X and 2e. So despite the claims that there are contradictions there is a consistent issue here.

We can't address halflings being both popular and not popular,

What even is "popular"? Halflings have supporters that far outnumber their players (I don't think I've ever played a halfling character) because they have a deserved niche- and that support is passionate again because it's a clear niche that should be protected. Halflings are popular enough for the PHB.

The only person who seems obsessed by popularity is @Hussar who seems to want to set a numerical threshold deliberately just above the lowest mark for halflings and then use that as a stick to beat them. I don't honestly give much of a damn about popularity; I give a damn about RP niches.

of having a militia and not having a militia,

And yet my "every halfling carries a sling" works perfectly for halflings - and covers both. It is, however not the only way to do it.

of using money and not using money.

As far as I am aware the idea that halflings don't use money at all is 100% invented by you. They don't particularly value money. But that just means few of them have the ambition to become rich - instead they like in modern parlance a good work-life balance.

Can you really find someone else actually saying that they don't use money at all?

But, only us who want a change are being called out, even when people who don't want a change are making contradictory claims.

Different people are making different claims based on different grounds - or pointing out different flaws in the arguments you and Hussar are making.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Can you really find someone else actually saying that they don't use money at all?

It's a bit of a weird thing right, because, I certainly don't believe that they need money or would be likely to have much use for it because I don't believe they value it the way other races do.

I don't recall if I've explicitly tried to make the case that they definitely don't use it. I believe the farthest I've gone is that they might not.

Which may just be splitting hairs.

 

[Minigiant]

I think what makes the Halfling thread interesting is,

The Halfling is a microcosm of wider issues. Apparently, D&D tradition is evolving. The old school assumption of the core four is no longer true, or at least under doubt and scrutiny. Some players are pushing for normalizing the views of the current generation. Other players are pushing back, not wanting to lose certain traditions that continue to be valuable to them now.

Hence, 4000 posts. For the most part it is an honest discussion. One of the benefits of the discussion is a clearer understanding of what the lineages are, and of what the new possibilities are.

I think it is a case of D&D being being several decades old and the latest edition being very popular. So assumptions of settings, suspension of disbelief,and acceptance of narratives differ widely in the community now.

That and the Forgotten Realms being the default setting for many years, it sucking, and it just being a vehicle to sell splatbooks.

 

[Neonchameleon]

think what makes the Halfling thread interesting is,

The Halfling is a microcosm of wider issues. Apparently, D&D tradition is evolving. The old school assumption of the core four is no longer true, or at least under doubt and scrutiny. Some players are pushing for normalizing the views of the current generation. Other players are pushing back, not wanting to lose certain traditions that continue to be valuable to them now.

All the younger players I know in person are inclusionists who detest or have no time for the gatekeeping of old - and all the halfling-haters I know in person are over the age of 40. Also it's the younger settings from the 00s and 10s (like Eberron, the Nentir vale, and Exandria; all three seasons of Critical Role have had halfling PCs) that use halflings well and older settings from the 80s or even 70s (like Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and the Realms) that use them badly.

But superficially the move to push halflings out would seem to be rejecting tradition. It seems to me to be more circling the wagons and making an attempt to throw out the group that was unpopular back in the day. While also trying to restrict races under the guise of making space.