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.

the-land-of-the-hobbits-6314749_960_720.jpg

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?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Michael Tresca

Michael Tresca

So, since this is all true, halflings are not braver than other races. They can't be, because the frightened condition which is a game effect with specific rules that override player agency, is the ONLY thing that the halfing ability interacts with. And since the frightened condition has no bearing on whether or not someone is brave, this mechanical ability of the halflings also has no bearing on whether or not someone is brave.
OK, let me try this a different way.

Within the world of the game, halflings are considered to be braver than other races because they can face down terrifying things (i.e., things that cause the Frightened condition) far more easily than anyone else can.

Why is this? Because nobody in the game world knows the difference between being afraid and being Frightened, because nobody in the game has read the PHB. And that is why halflings are braver than anyone else. Nobody in the game world has the meta-knowledge that we players have.

So, since you can't have plot contrivances as mechanics in a game (at least not in a game designed in the way Dungeons and Dragons is designed) then supernatural luck is out of place. Halflings are repeatedly stated, by players, by DMs, and by the sourcebooks themselves to be supernaturally lucky. In the video I posted before Mearls talks about how a kingdom couldn't invade a halfling village, because the cartographer 20 years ago made a mistake and didn't mark where the village was on a map. This is, from the creative lead of the design of the game, how halfling luck works. It is a plot contrivance. It is literally the ability to alter the narrative to suit them, not actively, but passively.
Yes, and this is something that affected NPCs. Unless the PCs were the cartographer, there is nothing wrong with saying that halfling luck manifested itself by a mismarked map. Because this is an NPC thing, it means that it doesn't have to affect the PCs in any way, shape, or form beyond being able to reroll 1s.

There is also nothing wrong with saying that this is an example of the world counting the hits and ignoring the misses and chalking up this saved village to halfling luck and never even knowing that there were fifty other halfling villages that got destroyed in various ways.

And so, I have put forth, that since it is bad game design to have a race that has "plot contrivance" as a racial power, that we should move away from it. Because it is doing us no favors, and instead, putting a burden on the DM to include plot contrivances when dealing with halflings, otherwise they are violating the "halfling fantasy".
Except that pretty much every race has plot contrivance as a racial power (or racial limitation). Why are humans the most common race? Because the game designers said so. Why aren't most elves super-high-leveled fighter/mages? Because the game designers said so. Why are halflings lucky? Because the game designers said so.

And because nobody actually expects that halfling PCs are going to be able to pull out amazing moments of supernatural luck.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


I guess they mean the halflings really aren't willing to face higher risks but they aren't shocked by the fear easily, they are more ready to reaction fastly before a menace. Maybe it is thanks their faith, their hope to be helped by the Heaven, or at least a glorious fate in the afterlife if their sacrifice was worth.
 

@Hussar I find it pretty sus that 5% is deemed "failure that no one plays" yet a bit over 7% is "very popular." This really doesn't seem like an unbiased assessment to me. Elves and humans with their over 20% are "very popular," I'd place both dragonborn with their 7,2% and halflings with their 4,7% to the same tier of "somewhat popular" where they are alongside with most of the PHB races, such as dwarves at 6.6%. Placing the dividing line in middle of this group so that you can declare the one you like to be a smashing success and one you dislike to be an abject failure is very transparent and is not going to convince anyone.
 

@Hussar I find it pretty sus that 5% is deemed "failure that no one plays" yet a bit over 7% is "very popular." This really doesn't seem like an unbiased assessment to me. Elves and humans with their over 20% are "very popular," I'd place both dragonborn with their 7,2% and halflings with their 4,7% to the same tier of "somewhat popular" where they are alongside with most of the PHB races, such as dwarves at 6.6%. Placing the dividing line in middle of this group so that you can declare the one you like to be a smashing success and one you dislike to be an abject failure is very transparent and is not going to convince anyone.
When ballparking these kinds of ratios, I love the curve of magnitude. (Like the golden ratio, but metric base 10.) It is great for relative ranking.

Rounding the numbers of the magnitudes:
100
79
63
50
40
32
25
20 human, elf
16
13
10
7.9
6.3 dragonborn, dwarf
5.0
4.0 halfling
3.2
2.5
2.0
1.6
1.3
1.0
 

You're missing my point.

When I pointed out the last time that halflings do not look like this:

3784b32ff52263e3d1fc6b3168031bb0.png


((An image I'd point out that several people in this thread held up as an excellent example of a halfling))

and have not looked like that for over twenty years, I got absolutely dogpiled for hating on halflings. My point is, nobody actually cares about what halflings actually are in the PHB. They only play the halflings that exist in their mind canon. Which means that any argument over what halflings are in the game has to first get over the hurdle of people's mind canon where people absolutely cannot let go of their own idiosyncratic image of what halflings are in the game and what halflings actually mean to gamers in general. Which is, largely, very little.
I enjoy playing halflings and I have two in my current campaign. Most people simply don't care about the art. Pick just about any race and you can find art I'm not going to like or that don't fit the current image for just about any species. The image you show isn't from a WOTC publication, it's like showing a picture of a Keebler elf to show how far elves are from the description.

I don't care for the art style of halflings in the PHB, but I also think the image of the elf on guard in the PHB is terrible. Occasional bad art has nothing to do with the race as presented by rules and lore.
 

My point is, nobody actually cares about what halflings actually are in the PHB. They only play the halflings that exist in their mind canon.
To a large extent, I feel as though this is true for all the races in D&D. Especially humans! But seriously, for the most part, I feel as though most players could swap their fighter's race from human to elf, halfling, or gnome and they'd pretty much all be played the same way.
 

Um... isn't "where they come from" a creation myth? Or do you literally mean "they live in the mountains" because that doesn't count for what we were talking about.

And yeah, it is really bizarre that the Goliaths seem to have no contact with religion. Especially considering they are part of the Forgotten Realms. That seems more like it was an oversight than a choice.
Considering the person I specifically replied to has used where a race lives and creation myths as separate ideas, yes, I was replying to them
 

That may be true, but there are also players who dive into the lore of another race, to create "lore-friendly" names, figure out where their people live, and try to inject some of that culture into their play.

At least, I've seen it happen.

But with humans, their culture is usually so generic, just some variation of real-world human cultures, that, at least in my experience, human PC's are just regular people.

Only a few settings have given us unique enough Human cultures embraced by players to make characters that really stand out.

The argument is that Halflings are in the same boat, or that their "culture" is just Tolkien, but at least in D&D, I rarely see anyone playing Bilbo Baggins.

It's far more common to see a cunning thief raised on the streets or a doughty warrior who tackles things several times their size on a regular basis, punishing anyone who makes the mistake of underestimating them!
 

Me? I just wish people would actually take the argument at face value instead of ascribing all sorts of motives and assumptions to what I'm saying. All I said was that the least popular two races be removed from the PHB and shunted to a different book, in favor of two new options which hopefully would gain more traction with gamers.

Good advice...perhaps you should learn to follow it?
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top