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

[Plane Sailing]

Coming from a people that clashed with yours and british-origined settlers, no wonder I disliked this aspect. The 'Merry ENgland' came to me as hypocritical.

Weird.

 

[The Ubbergeek]

Weird.

I'm a quebecker... Not sure an indian or irish (except tolkien did draw much on celtic elements too) eitheir like the 'Merry England' side of this.

 

[Robbastard]

Finally, dreadlocks is a cutural thing, but it is impossible to put black people into D&D without being racist (hense why we invent races and get to be racist to them).

WTF? That has to be one of the most uninformed, ridiculous statements I've read. You're essentially saying that black people should not be portrayed whatsoever in D&D because doing so would be deemed "racist"--that's as stupid as saying blacks shouldn't be portrayed in any medium for the same reasons--be it novels, TV, comics, etc. I'm guessing you don't have any black players at your table, either. Gee, I wonder why?

 

[Satori]

I don't tend to believe that Tolkien was deliberate in his classism. I think it was something quite ingrained in him, as a privileged British academic who grew up in the first half of the 20th century.


Heh. Are you saying they don't?

Sorry, I suppose the communication medium of the interweb cannot accurately display a tongue firmly embedded within a cheek.

Ohs well.

 

[Jhulae]

I'm going to say that based on everything I've seen so far, it really seems WotC is looking back to the Rules Compendium and Mystara with 4th edition.

Mystara had 'tall' haflings like we're seeing in R&C. So, honestly, as has been said before, these tall halflings are hardly a 'new' idea.

Also, with the LotR movies being so popular, I can see WotC wanting to distance itself further from the movies to avoid law suits. It's not like there haven't been law suits against D&D in the past for halflings being so close to hobbits.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Also, with the LotR movies being so popular, I can see WotC wanting to distance itself further from the movies to avoid law suits. It's not like there haven't been law suits against D&D in the past for halflings being so close to hobbits.

I think it makes perfect sense that Wizards of the Coast would want to establish their IP as quite distinct from that of the Tolkien Estate or New Line Cinema.

 

[The Ubbergeek]

I think it makes perfect sense that Wizards of the Coast would want to establish their IP as quite distinct from that of the Tolkien Estate or New Line Cinema.

It was the reason of early TSR's changes in names and some details.

Strangely,of all inspirations of TSR,s game, the Tolkien estate was the only one to make official complaints.. am I wrong?

 

[Dragonhelm]

Mystara had 'tall' haflings like we're seeing in R&C. So, honestly, as has been said before, these tall halflings are hardly a 'new' idea.

A lot of the 4e halfling is derived from elsewhere, as sort of a "best of." But that's okay. What they're really doing right this time is delving into their personality. They have a lot more identity than they did in 3e. I can't say that this riverfolk view of them has me really excited, but I at least know who they are.

Also, with the LotR movies being so popular, I can see WotC wanting to distance itself further from the movies to avoid law suits. It's not like there haven't been law suits against D&D in the past for halflings being so close to hobbits.

I think, too, that they want to establish their own product identity. They want something distinctly theirs, not copied from somewhere else.

What we should also remember is that the 4e halfling is a baseline. How halflings are portrayed in various settings will be determined both by the setting and the individual DM. A D&D halfling may work as-is for some worlds, then become hobbits in Lord of the Rings, or dino-riders in Eberron, kender in Dragonlance, pecwae in Sovereign Stone, and so on and so forth. There is no one single halfling vision. There is a base standard, and tons of variety. So if you don't like the 4e halfling, that's okay. There are all sorts of different varieties, and the DM is free to invent his own.

 

[Hypersmurf]

WTF? That has to be one of the most uninformed, ridiculous statements I've read. You're essentially saying that black people should not be portrayed whatsoever in D&D because doing so would be deemed "racist"--that's as stupid as saying blacks shouldn't be portrayed in any medium for the same reasons--be it novels, TV, comics, etc. I'm guessing you don't have any black players at your table, either. Gee, I wonder why?

Please take note of Piratecat's earlier comment:

A preemptive warning: we're not going to tolerate any racism OR any accusations of racism. If you think there's a problem please report the post, but attempts at sly accusations or insults are going to be dealt with by a great big pegleg-sized boot. So please, don't go there.

Fair enough?

-Hyp.
(Moderator)

 

[Spatula]

It was the reason of early TSR's changes in names and some details.

Strangely,of all inspirations of TSR,s game, the Tolkien estate was the only one to make official complaints.. am I wrong?

The 1st printing of Dieties & Demigods contained the Cthulhu mythos, until Arkham (? or whoever controlled the rights to HPL's works at the time) threatened legal action. Subsequent printings had that section removed.

In Tolkien's case, all they did was rename a few things (hobbits to halflings, ents to treants), while other terms were generic enough words that there was no case there, I suppose (stone giants, rangers, etc.).