D&D General what is a hill dwarf?

[Shiroiken]

In earlier editions, the biggest difference was cosmetic. I recall Hill Dwarf was the "default" dwarf, just like the High Elf was the default elf, with the others added later. The Mountain Dwarf was bigger, averaging half a foot taller, but I don't remember the specifics on skin, hair, and eye color differences. I'll have to dig up my old 1E books and see.

 

[Andvari]

It may depend on the setting, but in the Forgotten Realms, the physical differences are that hill dwarves are shorter and broader than mountain dwarves, and they each have a different variety of hair and eye colours.

There are also many attitude, cultural and historical differences. There is a lot of information on the Forgotten Realms wiki to read, if you are interested.

 

[WarDriveWorley]

From 2e's Complete book of Dwarves:

"Hill dwarves live in areas of rolling hills.

Their strongholds are primarily located underground, though they frequently have outposts on the surface. A typical hill dwarf stands 4 feet tall and weighs about 150 pounds. He is stocky and muscular. His skin is a deep tan or light brown in color and he has ruddy cheeks and bright eyes, His hair could be black, gray, or brown. He favors dark, somber, earth-toned clothes, and wears little jewelry.

Hill dwarves are the most common dwarves. They have adapted well to life above and below ground. They claim that they have always lived in the hills, but they may have migrated there either by traveling above ground, or via underground passages. If by surface travel, they are probably descended from mountain dwarves.

The alignment of the hill dwarves is usually lawful good, but there is no reason they cannot be of another alignment. So long as the
majority remain lawful good, strongholds of chaotic, neutral, or evil dwarves will not unbalance a campaign and will give it more flavor and variety."

That's literally all the info they're given as backstory. They're slightly smaller than mountain dwarves, but same exact stats so everything is cosmetic.

Ironically they're listed as the most "common dwarf" but everyone portrays mountain dwarves as the baseline.

I know later editions also tried to paint them as more "gregarious and welcoming" dwarves (comparatively) with 5e giving the subraces actual differences, but overall other than their aesthetic there's not much to differentiate the two.

 

[Fanaelialae]

then why make a stat block for it?

I am now wondering if fundamentally dwarves only really have one archetype going for them?

It's D&D. There's a stat block for virtually everything. Including over a dozen varieties of elf.

 

[Dioltach]

It's D&D. There's a stat block for virtually everything. Including over a dozen varieties of elf.

Like pasta in Italy, or grilled meat in Greece. No-one else knows the difference.

Actually, leaning into the whole "dwarves are miners" shtick, logically mountain dwarves would use mine shafts, and hill dwarves probably open pits. Not sure how this changes them.

 

[Scott Christian]

More seriously: I'm with you here. I get that there's supposed to be a distinction, but frankly I've never understood why being a mountain dwarf makes you stronger and teaches you to wear armor, while being a hill dwarf makes you wiser and increases your total HP.

I am going with mountain dwarves being miners, hence the old trope, swinging a pickaxe all day makes you strong. They mine metal, and are smiths, so they learn to wear armor to protect the surface from invasion and how to scout the lower levels of the Underdark.

As for hill dwarves, they are wiser because they have a lot more contact with the outside world. They cover a lot more distance, learn above ground crafting skills as well as those in the hole, and are in contact with nature's beasts: donkeys, ox, etc. As for hit points, I kind of chalked it up to them being more inclined to deal with the elements.

Then, of course, there could just be genetic differences as well.

Obviously, none of this is canon. That said, I am sure a dozen or so posters could give you various reasons, all of which are just as leak proof. But none of those are as sound as any of the other sub-races. It's a great thing. It's fantasy. You can come up with your own reason.

 

[Mind of tempest]

isn't this a common case of "Tolkien did it like this, so AD&D did it like this, so now we're stuck with it"?

how did he do it?

In earlier editions, the biggest difference was cosmetic. I recall Hill Dwarf was the "default" dwarf, just like the High Elf was the default elf, with the others added later. The Mountain Dwarf was bigger, averaging half a foot taller, but I don't remember the specifics on skin, hair, and eye color differences. I'll have to dig up my old 1E books and see.

then why have it? did human ethnicities have different stats?

It may depend on the setting, but in the Forgotten Realms, the physical differences are that hill dwarves are shorter and broader than mountain dwarves, and they each have a different variety of hair and eye colours.

There are also many attitude, cultural and historical differences. There is a lot of information on the Forgotten Realms wiki to read, if you are interested.

I am aware of that it is just why do we need a separate stat block for that?

From 2e's Complete book of Dwarves:

"Hill dwarves live in areas of rolling hills.

Their strongholds are primarily located underground, though they frequently have outposts on the surface. A typical hill dwarf stands 4 feet tall and weighs about 150 pounds. He is stocky and muscular. His skin is a deep tan or light brown in color and he has ruddy cheeks and bright eyes, His hair could be black, gray, or brown. He favors dark, somber, earth-toned clothes, and wears little jewelry.

Hill dwarves are the most common dwarves. They have adapted well to life above and below ground. They claim that they have always lived in the hills, but they may have migrated there either by traveling above ground, or via underground passages. If by surface travel, they are probably descended from mountain dwarves.

The alignment of the hill dwarves is usually lawful good, but there is no reason they cannot be of another alignment. So long as the
majority remain lawful good, strongholds of chaotic, neutral, or evil dwarves will not unbalance a campaign and will give it more flavor and variety."

That's literally all the info they're given as backstory. They're slightly smaller than mountain dwarves, but same exact stats so everything is cosmetic.

Ironically they're listed as the most "common dwarf" but everyone portrays mountain dwarves as the baseline.

I know later editions also tried to paint them as more "gregarious and welcoming" dwarves (comparatively) with 5e giving the subraces actual differences, but overall other than their aesthetic there's not much to differentiate the two.

man people are unimaginative with their dwarves.

It's D&D. There's a stat block for virtually everything. Including over a dozen varieties of elf.

true but at least some of those had large differences like the sea or winged elves or they have been smashed together as the grey and high elves have been.

 

[Fanaelialae]

true but at least some of those had large differences like the sea or winged elves or they have been smashed together as the grey and high elves have been.

Plenty of elves have fairly minimal differences.

High elf - love magic; like nature; very haughty; somewhat isolationist

Wood elf - love nature; like magic; very isolationist; somewhat haughty

 

[WarDriveWorley]

man people are unimaginative with their dwarves.

They really are which is a shame.

 

[Zardnaar]

They really are which is a shame.

Aye laddie.