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

No one forgets my centaur is a centaur. The elves are only elfin when a racial feature gets applied (so for the high elf, never, for the sea elves, in the water)
I am now picturing a pair of centaurs, one who never remembers to duck going inside, and another who just dumps about anywhere like a horse.

I'm hoping neither of those is why :-). Why does your centaur stick out?
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Well, let's see, how could I have gotten that idea? What did you say two posts ago?

"Chaosmancer, please understand that fear and the Frightened condition are different things.

A character who is afraid of something can move towards the source of their fear. This is being brave.

A character who is subjected to the Frightened condition can't move towards the source of their fear. This isn't being brave or being not brave or being cowardly; it's being under the effects of a game condition that has its own rules that supersede player agency
."

Hmmm, so in this post, which again was just two posts ago, you said that fear and frightened condition are different. Moving towards fear is what makes someone brave, and that the frightened condition doesn't involve being brave or not being brave. And notably, I agreed with you.

Now, what did you say in your last post?

"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.
"

Well, wait a minute. In this post, which was your response immediately after the text I posted above, you say that halflings are considered brave because they overcome the frightened condition. But didn't you say "This isn't being brave or being not brave or being cowardly; it's being under the effects of a game condition that has its own rules that supersede player agency." So, how are halflings brave for doing a thing that you said isn't about being brave?

I mean, I must be trolling you right? That's the only way you contradticting yourself and me calling you on it can be explained, is if I am a malicious actor. You said things I agreed with, then undercut those things by trying to hide in the narrative where the mechanics that you said don't matter can't be seen. I called you on it. You can't have it both ways. Either we as players are told halflings are brave because of how they interact with the frightened condition, and therefore the frightened condition becomes an arbiter of bravery, or it doesn't and being told they are brave makes no sense, because their ability can't make them brave. You can't have it both ways.



My god, you seriously never read a single thing I post, do you?

Here's a refresher course











Honestly, you caught me Faolyn! What a devastating blow to my argument that halfling luck would disrupt the game and be a bad rule to point out that halfling luck would disrupt the game and be a bad rule. How could I not have seen it in the multiple times I said the exact same thing! This changes everything, I mean, if the narrative properly presented would be detrimental to the game then someone might suggest that narrative is problematic and should be changed! Luckily, you were here to point out my exact argument to me. Again!!

So, this is the point where I accuse you of trolling me, right? Of maliciously misconstruing my points? Or maybe you plan on telling me that my arguments don't mean what I think they mean.
This exchange is getting far too acrimonious to the point of parody. @Chaosmancer and @Faolyn please refrain from responding to each other further in this thread. Thanks.
 


Lineages are the soft replacement for races, and at the current count WotC have published 40 (after I did a recount). 3 in VGR, 3 In FToD, 1 in Strixhaven and 33 in Monsters of the Multiverse (reprinting 2 from WBtW).
Lineages, by RAW, are the 3 in VGR. it's the only reference to lineages, and these are the only templates to overlay on a previous racial choice.

Any assumed changes to the core presentation of race in the core books towards lineages is unsupported
 

I am now picturing a pair of centaurs, one who never remembers to duck going inside, and another who just dumps about anywhere like a horse.

I'm hoping neither of those is why :). Why does your centaur stick out?
Her size is often a factor (she’s a rune knight which helps) even in really basic situations like “where does she sleep?” And the fact that climbing is more difficult is mentioned often even though it doesn’t actually hinder her in any meaningful way.

Basically her non-humanoid shape is discussed because it would affect so many minor things.

The other races in that game that are constantly mentioned are the warforged and the mousefolk.
 

So, why not try something new? If it fail? It fails. It very well might fail. But, insisting on keeping material that has failed for fifty years to gain any real traction in the hobby, or, at least, I feel that it has never gained any real traction, isn't going to suddenly succeed next year or the year after that. No. It's just going to sit at the bottom of the list, year after year after year, only appearing because WotC doesn't dare to change it because they'll get absolutely pilloried for it.
The bolded statement, I think, is where you're losing your audience. :)

Hobbits/Halflings haven't failed. Sure they're not Elves or Humans (the top tier), but they're still holding their own in the second tier in the now-very-crowded field of playable species. And this is in spite of the WotC era designers doing them no favours whatsoever.

A little more love from the 3e-4e-5e designers and they might even be top-tier by now.
 

The halflings are perfect for the trope of fantasy friendly little nPCs but as PC race/lineage are too typecasted into rogues and other possible stealth classes. And when there is an abuse of a trope this becomes more boring than an episode of Spiderman in the middle of the dessert. Even gnomes have got a better flexibility because they can be rogues, but also good illusionists, bards or artificers.

My suggestion is to add the option of variant subraces, where some racial trait can be replaced with other for other clclasses.
 

The halflings are perfect for the trope of fantasy friendly little nPCs but as PC race/lineage are too typecasted into rogues and other possible stealth classes. And when there is an abuse of a trope this becomes more boring than an episode of Spiderman in the middle of the dessert. Even gnomes have got a better flexibility because they can be rogues, but also good illusionists, bards or artificers.

My suggestion is to add the option of variant subraces, where some racial trait can be replaced with other for other clclasses.
the problem is changing the halfling loses the things people like about the halfling it is a paradox.
 

The halflings are perfect for the trope of fantasy friendly little nPCs but as PC race/lineage are too typecasted into rogues and other possible stealth classes. And when there is an abuse of a trope this becomes more boring than an episode of Spiderman in the middle of the dessert. Even gnomes have got a better flexibility because they can be rogues, but also good illusionists, bards or artificers.

My suggestion is to add the option of variant subraces, where some racial trait can be replaced with other for other clclasses.
I'm not sure what the basis is for either the assessment of typecasting for halflings or the flexibility of gnomes.

It's also a bit of a strange thing to go "and other stealth classes" as if that doesn't..like.. actually include other classes (Ranger and Shadow Monk come to mind).

Lastly it's strange to cast gnomes as bards. Gnomes aren't traditionally charismatic, do not have any socially relevant racial features, and don't seem to have any particular interest in other people from a lore perspective. Halflings are a way better fit for bards than gnomes are.

Which would put us at Rogues (and other stealth classes like Rangers and some monks) and Bards for halflings vs. Rogues, Illusionists (and presumably other wizards) and Artificers for gnomes. Seems balanced to me.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top