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

[Chaosmancer]

I'm just popping in to link this post of mine from the (+) Halfling thread:

D&D 5E - (+) Halfling Appreciation and Development Thread

Should they get proficiency and better damage with slings? If I were to rewrite halflings, I might give them magic stone as a racial cantrip.

www.enworld.org

If that's what halflings are like, I can get behind that. If the 5.5e/6e PHB does something like that, I would be completely on board with that.

What do the people that disliked the possibility of making Halflings be part of Humans think about this? What about the people who agreed that halflings should be changed? Does this work for both of you? If not, why?

I like a lot of this a lot.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Nah, he likes honey. Just not the critters that make it. I definitely plan on start including regional healing potions along these lines next time we play this game (we rotate DMs so my turns not for a while).

You could keep the pollinator angle by having them use Butterflies, and then have the halflings actually doing the work to produce honey.

Or change it to ants. They don't make honey, but I do know that some ants do produce sweet fluids to feed young and the queens, so it could be adapted.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I believe the quotes from earlier editions have all of the demi-humans very closely related (especially gnomes and dwarves). As such, quotes showing two of them being similar shouldn't be a surprise.

Sure, but I was thinking I remembered a poster saying that in 1e Halflings were directly descended from humans.

Also, I think the gnome+dwarf angle is something that is hurting gnomes to this day with some posters. I can never get over people describing gnomes as looking like dwarves, because that has just never been a thing in the games I've played or the stories I read. I know it used to be, but I feel like that was a negative thing that I'm glad the game changed.

 

[Gammadoodler]

1) I never said that if it hadn't it would be flavor text. I have no idea where you are getting that argument from.

2) No, it wasn't used to say they are the same, to go back to the original post.



Which was then was followed by a "prove it, quote the PHB". And, just to make sure there is as little misunderstanding as possible, a definition

"having the same characteristics or qualities as; similar to."

If you wanted to say that a Granny Smith apple was identical to a Red Delicious, you'd say "Granny Smith Apples are the same as Red Delicious Apples". If you wanted to say they were similiar, but not the same, you would say "Granny Smith Apples are like Red Delicious Apples" .

See, this is why this conversation has been so painful and circuitous. Because you never respond to the actual point. you make things up that you think we said, and respond to that. Again and again and again and again and again. And then we have to back track and prove, no, we really didn't say that. To which you dismiss it and continue acting like you have our arguments correct.

1. Not "flavor text".."just flavor text".. reflecting that it is a weak bit of text from which to make an argument..which is what I said..and which you disagreed with..or something.

2. Wow you went up to the original post..and then didn't read the context..here it us..

Again, they're definitely not d&D humans.

The Players Handbook itself says the Halfling is like a Human commoner.

So.. @Yaarel 's response just a non sequitur then? Cool.

The remainder of your post is a sweeping general complaint which is broadly inaccurate and unnecessary. If it's painful for you to respond, you can just not do it, as I have has to do with several of our exchanges in this thread.

 

[Yaarel]

So.. @Yaarel 's response just a non sequitur then? Cool.

The remainder of your post is a sweeping general complaint which is broadly inaccurate and unnecessary. If it's painful for you to respond, you can just not do it, as I have has to do with several of our exchanges in this thread.

Your post comes across as a strange mischaracterization.



I am participating in this thread because I am enjoying the discussion.

Your post suggests that you find this thread painful? I feel for you.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Your post comes across as a strange mischaracterization.



I am participating in this thread because I am enjoying the discussion.

Your post suggests that you find this thread painful? I feel for you.

I may be mistaken, but I suspect you are missing some of the context to this point.

If that's not the case, please feel free to correct me.

 

[Yaarel]

I may be mistaken, but I suspect you are missing some of the context to this point.

If that's not the case, please feel free to correct me.

You are incorrect. I have read, and understand, every post in this thread. Wow! Every one of almost 4,600 posts!



Some people like the Halfling. The heart wants what it wants.

I personally feel the Halfling has appealing qualities.

At the same time, I find some difficulties relating to the Halfling.

My main concern, is it feels like a Human. If the Human is Small, or if the Halfling is Medium − and add a positive mental outlook and childlike appreciation of the world − it would be difficult to say that these are separate species.

I and other forumers point out that the other Tolkien races are also very Human, like the Elf and the Dwarf. I also want these races to be more clearly less human. But I still view the Halfling as quantitatively the most difficult.

 

[Hussar]

Yep. Text used to illustrate how races view themselves in relation to others is not good evidence for objective comparisons of actual similarity.

You could literally sub in any race for that text. If it'd been written about dragonborn, would you be trying to make the case that halflings are basically dragonborn?

This new casting of halflings as very human friendly sociopaths is an interesting spin.

Really?

The race that critics constantly point to as the prime example of the "Star Wars Cantina" problem in D&D?

The race that DM after DM claim would be attacked on sight in their setting for being too different.

That race? That's the one you want to say you could substitute for being similar to humans?

The race that's described as distinctly martial could be then described as human commoners and there'd be no contradiction in your view?

I'd LOVE to see that in the PHB. The sound of bursting blood vessels and people having absolute melt downs would be heard around the world.

 

[Gammadoodler]

My main concern, is it feels like a Human. If the Human is Small, or if the Halfling is Medium − and add a positive mental outlook and childlike appreciation of the world − it would be difficult to say that these are separate species.

Yes, if you take away all the ways they are different, they're basically the same.

It'd be like if you gave elves a human lifespan, or increased the normal lifespan of a human.

It's a pointless exercise.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Really?

The race that critics constantly point to as the prime example of the "Star Wars Cantina" problem in D&D?

The race that DM after DM claim would be attacked on sight in their setting for being too different.

That race? That's the one you want to say you could substitute for being similar to humans?

The race that's described as distinctly martial could be then described as human commoners and there'd be no contradiction in your view?

I'd LOVE to see that in the PHB. The sound of bursting blood vessels and people having absolute melt downs would be heard around the world.

Go back.. reread the conversation, and try again. Because your reply has nothing to do withit