D&D 4E 4E Halflings unrecognizable from Tolkien hobbits

[The Little Raven]

2. It would cause a cataclysm of nerd rage, which would be amusing to watch.

Kender have the same issue that Malkavians from Vampire had: a visible group of their players are usually sugar-addicted class-clowns that think a goofy voice and bunny slippers makes them an interesting character.

 

[Klaus]

That's good, because they're not.

In fact, in many ways, Tasslehoff is atypical of a kender. For another classic kender example, I would refer you to the freedom fighter Kronn Thistleknot, introduced in Dragonlance module DL12 way back in 1985 as a pregenerated hero.

Kender are not all Tas-clones. We've made every effort to provide, in our 3e products for DL, sufficient evidence to that end, and I can only assume that the people who are playing their kender just like Tas (or just like they think Tas is) are choosing to do so on their own, not because the rules make them.

Cheers,
Cam

I think part of the "kender = Tas" bit comes from the fact that, throughout the Chronicles (which is the main exposure to DL for most) we only see him as an example.

When I run my games for inexperienced players (which is, frankly, most of my group), I try to make every non-human as archetypical as possible. I need to build up a baseline before throwing in an oddball.

 

[IanB]

I do have a question: I wonder how many teenaged lovers of fantasy even KNOW what hobbits are? I wonder if the consumer market is so small on that point that they're not a majority? If so, it makes perfect sense to replace them with something closer to the public image of a short near-human race is, assuming the new look is it.

I'm sure all or nearly all of them have seen the LotR movies. I think you will have a hard time finding any 'teenaged lovers of fantasy' who don't see Elijah Wood when they hear the word 'hobbit.'

 

[pemerton]

Why portray "half-humans" who live in swamps and are good at Roguery by making them look black? D&D doesn't do a very good job of being multicultural in general. Depicting non-humans as a real world ethnic type is dodgy in general. Minefield!

I'm not sure how it solves the problem to present every non-human as white/European. This is a real world ethnic type, after all, at the centre of some pretty major minefields of real world history and politics.

As someone else noted above, the 1st ed MM canvasses a range of skin-tones and eye-colours for all the major non-human races, and if my memory is correct some DL material (maybe the adventures hardback?) suggested that Elven eyes have an epicanthic fold.

I don't know how Dwarves came to be Scottish. First ed D&D doesn't suggest this - it is probably the most Tolkienesque of presentations, and the appendix in LoTR suggests that Dwarvish has the sound of a Semitic language, not a Celtic one. Maybe it is because the stoic Dwarven culture comes across as Presbyterian as much as it comes across as Norse.

As for halflings, it has always been pretty clear that they have curly hair (including in LoTR). Tightening the curls enough to lead to Afro-American and African hair styles doesn't seem that big a departure from what has gone before.

 

[Nathan P. Mahney]

I thought 3e hit the perfect mix as far as halflings go. They *need* to be recognisably Tolkien, or there's no point to having them as player races at all, I feel. The problem with Tolkien hobbits is that they are naturally sedentary and just not natural adventurers - all of their flavour would be about how much they love food and the comforts of home, which isn't exactly a great motivation for carving your way through the Caves of Chaos.

3e halflings lost these traits while still presenting something vaguely recognisable to Tolkien familiarists. Changing them again to river folk is a bit weird - hobbits were mostly depicted as hating boats and such, except for those crazy fools out in Buckland. Changing the visual depictions is another step away, and there's only so far you can step away from an archetype before it just doesn't evoke that archetype anymore. The 4e designers might want to leave the Hobbit archetype behind, but I think that would be a bad thing for the game.

In my campaign I'll probably just use all three types - sedentary hobbits, the wandering kender-halflings of 3e, and the river folk of 4e. A bit of cultural diversity never hurt any game!

 

[Spatula]

Kender have the same issue that Malkavians from Vampire had: a visible group of their players are usually sugar-addicted class-clowns that think a goofy voice and bunny slippers makes them an interesting character.

http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=3967330&postcount=78

 

[Wolfspider]

http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=3967330&postcount=78

Ouch.

 

[Spatula]

I can't understand why the game should have Halflings at all, if they aren't anything at all like Tolkien's hobbits?

I agree. Having "short folk" that aren't based on any "short folk" fantasy archtypes (faeries, hobbits, pygmies, and other myths already appropriated elsewhere in D&D) removes pretty much any reason for them to exist in the game. Or given their existance, to be short. You could say the same for the dragonborn, but at least there the concept is easy to grasp (it's a dragon-man!). What is the halfling concept, un-moored from hobbits or mythology? They're short athletic humans who live on riverboats. Woo, that makes me want to play one. Why are they short? What makes them different from humans, aside from their height? You wouldn't know that 4e cleric illustration was a halfling if it was not labelled as such. Why not have human riverboat tribes? There's absolutely nothing special or even distinctive about these halflings at all.

(and despite everyone talking about this like it's something new for 4e, it really is a 3e change)

 

[Hairfoot]

Now how many teenagers get excited about the prospect of playing chubby, stay at home, dull farmers.... well thats an entirely different matter.

But if they only knew hobbits from LotR, they'd want to play brave, fit, daring hobbits who left their safe community to go adventuring, just like the characters in the films.

But then, apart from hobbit-halflings, which D&D races have been composed mainly of boring, peaceful, risk-averse people who think adventurers are abnormal and insane for leaving the comfort of home? Oh, thats right - every race, ever!

 

[Silverblade The Ench]

I don't know how Dwarves came to be Scottish.

"If it's not Scottish, it's CRAAAAAP!"

Sorry, as a "kilty", it had to be said

The Scottish connection possibly also came in because of Glaswegians being nicknamed "The Poison Dwarves" in WW2. Because of extreme poverty/hardship, most of them were very short, and sometimes a wee bit mean. You can check up on The Black Watch, Cameronians and various units/actions they fought in.

My mother's Dad was a bouncer in the Glasgow dancehalls in the 20's and 30s, at 6'1", he towered over most of the Glasgow "keelies". My Father's Dad was in the Chindits in Burma.
Both of them were rather "tough" to put it mildly (but also very kind), so I think that sort of image fits in with the D&D dwarf

And since the LOTR movies, thanks to Gimli being Scottish (as portrayed by a Welshman, lol), it's kind of stuck.

In my home brew campaign, which is sort of based on Scotland, the dwarves are a mix of Scots/Norse.

/derail off