RPG Evolution: The Trouble with Halflings

Over the decades I've developed my campaign world to match the archetypes my players wanted to play. In all those years, nobody's ever played a halfling.

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.​

So What's the Problem?​

Halflings, derived from hobbits, have been a curious nod to Tolkien's influence on fantasy. While dwarves and elves have deep mythological roots, hobbits are more modern inventions. And their inclusion was very much a response to the adventurous life that the agrarian homebodies considered an aberration. In short, most hobbits didn't want to be adventurers, and Bilbo, Frodo, and the others were forever changed by their experiences, such that it was difficult for them to reintegrate when they returned home. You don't hear much about elves and dwarves having difficulty returning home after being adventurers, and for good reason. Tolkien was making a point about the human condition and the nature of war by using hobbits as proxies.

As a literary construct, hobbits serve a specific purpose. In The Hobbit, they are proxies for children. In The Lord of the Rings, they are proxies for farmers and other folk who were thrust into the industrialized nightmare of mass warfare. In both cases, hobbits were a positioned in contrast to the violent lifestyle of adventurers who live and die by the sword.

Which is at least in part why they're challenging to integrate into a campaign world. And yet, we have strong hobbit archetypes in Dungeons & Dragons, thanks to Dragonlance.

Kender. Kender Are the Problem​

I did know one player who loved to play kender. We never played together in a campaign, at least in part because kender are an integral part of the Dragonlance setting and we weren't playing in Dragonlance. But he would play a kender in every game he played, including in massive multiplayers like Ultima Online. And he was eye-rollingly aggravating, as he loved "borrowing" things from everyone (a trait established by Tasselhoff Burrfoot).

Part of the issue with kender is that they aren't thieves, per se, but have a child-like curiosity that causes them to "borrow" things without understanding that borrowing said things without permission is tantamount to stealing in most cultures. In essence, it results in a character who steals but doesn't admit to stealing, which can be problematic for inter-party harmony. Worse, kender have a very broad idea of what to "borrow" (which is not limited to just valuables) and have always been positioned as being offended by accusations of thievery. It sets up a scenario where either the party is very tolerant of the kender or conflict ensues. This aspect of kender has been significantly minimized in the latest draft for Unearthed Arcana.

Big Heads, Little Bodies​

The latest incarnation of halflings brings them back to the fun-loving roots. Their appearance is decidedly not "little children" or "overweight short people." Rather, they appear more like political cartoons of eras past, where exaggerated features were used as caricatures, adding further to their comical qualities. But this doesn't solve the outstanding problem that, for a game that is often about conflict, the original prototypes for halflings avoided it. They were heroes precisely because they were thrust into difficult situations and had to rise to the challenge. That requires significant work in a campaign to encourage a player to play a halfling character who would rather just stay home.

There's also the simple matter of integrating halflings into societies where they aren't necessarily living apart. Presumably, most human campaigns have farmers; dwarves and elves occupy less civilized niches, where halflings are a working class who lives right alongside the rest of humanity in plain sight. Figuring out how to accommodate them matters a lot. Do humans just treat them like children? Would halflings want to be anywhere near a larger humanoids' dwellings as a result? Or are halflings given mythical status like fey? Or are they more like inveterate pranksters and tricksters, treating them more like gnomes? And if halflings are more like gnomes, then why have gnomes?

There are opportunities to integrate halflings into a world, but they aren't quite so easy to plop down into a setting as dwarves and elves. I still haven't quite figured out how to make them work in my campaign that doesn't feel like a one-off rather than a separate species. But I did finally find a space for gnomes, which I'll discuss in another article.

Your Turn: How have you integrated halflings into your campaign world?

 

[Gammadoodler]

Played through Plaguestone, not a success. Decided to give it another shot with Abomination Vaults, completely different table, dropped it at the end of book 1. Ran a One-shot for my kids, also a dud.

Overall, despite some good ideas, the system is a slog to play.

Out of curiosity all in person or any online? My game has been 100% online through Foundry which incorporates a bunch of quality of life features and automates a lot of the fiddly bits.

I suspect I would not like the system near as much without those automations.

 

[Chaosmancer]

There's only so much design space available. I don't think you need obvious supernatural capabilities to make a race unique. Take lucky as an example. You think it doesn't have much impact, but everyone at the table tends to cheer when one of our halfling PCs uses it. It comes up a lot if the player takes the feat to share their luck with everyone at the table.

And like I said, at my table it was "Wait, sweet I have re-roll!" followed by "Aaaand, I failed. Okay." and everyone forgot about it from then on.

And also, what you are describing is AT THE TABLE it does nothing for the game world, or the narrative. Again, unless a DM goes out of their way to describe lucky things happening to the halfling, they are no luckier than any other character. And you shouldn't need a feat to make your race feel like it matters.

Brave? That primarily applies to standing up against a threat from something bigger and badder, which for halflings is most things.

No it doesn't? Brave does absolutely nothing to help a halfling stand up to goliath, giants, bugbears, hobgoblins, gnolls, humans ect ect ect.

In fact, a halfling and a human facing a giant are again equally as brave, unless you want to say the halfling is braver because they are smaller.... and that logic would apply equally well to any goblins, kobolds, or gnomes in the party.

 

[Chaosmancer]

So in one case a mechanic isn't a trait because it is a mechanic. In another a trait isn't a trait because you've never seen it operate effectively as a mechanic. Heads you win tails I lose I guess.

Even if I saw it effectively as a mechanic, that still doesn't change the rest of the narrative. I've seen people take the lucky feat. They didn't feel any "luckier" than any other player. They could just re-roll the dice. That isn't luck, that's a metagame manipulation of the game engine. Because in the narrative... they were still incredibly UNLUCKY. And in fact, the reason they took the feat is they have notoriously bad dice luck and were trying to counter-act that... and it still didn't work.

And in the third, yes stealthiness is something frequently attributed to elves despite not all subraces getting a specific stealth ability. This is likely due to the fact, that like halflings, their racial ASI bump was to dex..which governs stealth (Others where this is true, goblin, kobold, kenku..but perhaps they aren't classically stealthy either). Wood elves and lightfoots are the "even stealthier" versions of stealthy races. Not really sure why this is controversial.

So... if getting a dex bump makes them stealthy, not only does that no longer apply, but it also used to apply SEVENTEEN other races, including humans and warforged who could get bumps to Dexterity under the old rules.

So, are we going to sit here and say that Warforged are defined by being particularly stealthy? Somehow, I doubt that.

So, again, "is stealthy" is not a racially defining feature. It is a class or character feature.

 

[Faolyn]

And like I said, at my table it was "Wait, sweet I have re-roll!" followed by "Aaaand, I failed. Okay." and everyone forgot about it from then on.

And also, what you are describing is AT THE TABLE it does nothing for the game world, or the narrative. Again, unless a DM goes out of their way to describe lucky things happening to the halfling, they are no luckier than any other character. And you shouldn't need a feat to make your race feel like it matters.

This again?

They're lucky because having something truly catastrophic happen to them is incredibly rare. This is because they reroll nat 1s, which many tables still have as something extra-bad. Heck, I've had players give themselves critical failures when rolling a 1, even when I told them they didn't have to.

If you want them to be luckier than that, then as a DM, narrate lucky but not game-altering events. If you're the player, do the same. "I steal an apple" <rolls well enough on Sleight of Hand to do so> "What luck! I got a perfectly-shaped apple with no blemishes!"

No it doesn't? Brave does absolutely nothing to help a halfling stand up to goliath, giants, bugbears, hobgoblins, gnolls, humans ect ect ect.

In fact, a halfling and a human facing a giant are again equally as brave, unless you want to say the halfling is braver because they are smaller.... and that logic would apply equally well to any goblins, kobolds, or gnomes in the party.

But it does help them stand up to dragons, beholders, satyrs, blackguards, cloakers, androsphinxes, a whole bunch of undead, many demons, devils, and yugoloths and even arch fiends. It also protects them from several spells and spell-like abilities.

The Brave trait protects them from the frightened condition. It doesn't prevent them from being intimidated.

 

[Maxperson]

That is because you are taking the effect of the ability and using it as proof of the narrative, which cannot exist without that ability. And in fact, you are literally saying "both are brave but in different ways" Which also applies to the fighter who made their save and ISN'T debilitated by fear.

So, now we have a character who is brave for fighting despite the fear.
We have a character who is brave for not being afraid against something scary

And we have a character who is brave because they will roll twice and take the better result, which may leave them to be brave by fighting on despite the fear or brave because they are not afraid against something scary

Which.... is exactly like the first two? Halflings don't create a third type of bravery. They just have a dice mechanic. And there are a lot of dice mechanics that can help with saves against fear.

Of course the ability is proof of the narrative, and vice versa. Because that's how lore and mechanics work. Medusa has the narrative turn things to stone, and a matching mechanic of turn things to stone. Dragons have the narrative can fly and have breath a weapon, and matching mechanics of can fly and have a breath weapon.

With halflings there is a racial ability of bravery. That means that as a race, halflings are braver than humans, even if a human fighter succeeds in making his save. These are not multiple kinds of bravery. There is only one kind of bravery. Being brave. Halflings just have a supporting mechanic so that the race as a whole can be braver.

Nor does it matter if there are other mechanics than can help with saves vs. fear. Entire races don't have those. Halflings do.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Even if I saw it effectively as a mechanic, that still doesn't change the rest of the narrative. I've seen people take the lucky feat. They didn't feel any "luckier" than any other player. They could just re-roll the dice. That isn't luck, that's a metagame manipulation of the game engine. Because in the narrative... they were still incredibly UNLUCKY. And in fact, the reason they took the feat is they have notoriously bad dice luck and were trying to counter-act that... and it still didn't work.



So... if getting a dex bump makes them stealthy, not only does that no longer apply, but it also used to apply SEVENTEEN other races, including humans and warforged who could get bumps to Dexterity under the old rules.

So, are we going to sit here and say that Warforged are defined by being particularly stealthy? Somehow, I doubt that.

So, again, "is stealthy" is not a racially defining feature. It is a class or character feature.

By that logic, dwarves are no sturdier against toxins, and gnomes have no magical resistance. They just have access to metagame manipulation of the game engine. Perhaps there is a point where we can accept that some connection exists between such manipulations and the traits they portray?

We can also realize that if the die rolls are spectacularly unlucky, they will negate most features from any source. If you can't roll above a 5 ever, most features that give advantage or proficiency will be ineffective. That does not mean those features did not exist. It is silly to suggest otherwise.

I realize I should have been more specific with.respect to the Dex bump. Specifically that the dex bump (+2), by itself impacts the modifier. I'd assumed that might be apparent by virtue of the other races referenced (ones which have the +2 which, not coincidentally, are also associated with stealth), but I see I was mistaken in this assumption. I hope this clarifies my position.

 

[Maxperson]

And like I said, at my table it was "Wait, sweet I have re-roll!" followed by "Aaaand, I failed. Okay." and everyone forgot about it from then on.

And also, what you are describing is AT THE TABLE it does nothing for the game world, or the narrative. Again, unless a DM goes out of their way to describe lucky things happening to the halfling, they are no luckier than any other character. And you shouldn't need a feat to make your race feel like it matters.

Some of those extra rolls will be successes and if the DM is doing his job, those successes will be described in a way that makes it a lucky success. Halflings are in fact lucky in the game world due to the racial ability unless the DM messes it up, and if he does it isn't the fault of the game or race.

 

[Maxperson]

Even if I saw it effectively as a mechanic, that still doesn't change the rest of the narrative. I've seen people take the lucky feat. They didn't feel any "luckier" than any other player. They could just re-roll the dice. That isn't luck, that's a metagame manipulation of the game engine. Because in the narrative... they were still incredibly UNLUCKY. And in fact, the reason they took the feat is they have notoriously bad dice luck and were trying to counter-act that... and it still didn't work.

Let's say the race is orc and the PC fails 20 rolls. Well that PC failed 20 rolls which in the fiction is 20 failed whatevers. Now let's say the race is halfling and the PC fails 20 rolls, and gets to re-roll 2 of them, succeeding once. That PC failed 19 rolls which in the fiction is 19 failed whatevers. He was objectively luckier than the orc would have been in the fiction. It's not just metagame manipulation.

So... if getting a dex bump makes them stealthy, not only does that no longer apply, but it also used to apply SEVENTEEN other races, including humans and warforged who could get bumps to Dexterity under the old rules.

So, are we going to sit here and say that Warforged are defined by being particularly stealthy? Somehow, I doubt that.

So, again, "is stealthy" is not a racially defining feature. It is a class or character feature.

Halflings as a race are not stealthy. They are nimble. The lightfoot subrace is stealthy, and they have a racial stealth ability that humans and warforged do not have.

 

[Charlaquin]

If you want them to be luckier than that, then as a DM, narrate lucky but not game-altering events. If you're the player, do the same. "I steal an apple" <rolls well enough on Sleight of Hand to do so> "What luck! I got a perfectly-shaped apple with no blemishes!"

This is not going to go over well at most tables.

 

[Maxperson]

This is not going to go over well at most tables.

Why not?