Halflings: An Identity Crisis

[Corinth]

This is the only publically-available WOW census data. Fortunately, it's current.

Humans and Night Elves are tied at 17% of the total population, Blood Elves are next at 14% and Undead at 11%. The other expansion race, Draenei, are at 8%. (44% of which are Shaman; as that is the only Alliance option for that class, this result isn't at all surprising. For similar reasons, Paladins are 31% of all Blood Elves. Similar results are present with regard to Druids in the Night Elf and Tauren populations.)

So yes, being pretty and potent makes a race attractive to players. Restricting class options to a given race results in an artificially-boosted population as a plurality, if not a majority, of that race's population in actual play will consist of such a class.

Amongst classes:

• Druid: Moot, as only Night Elves (Alliance) and Tauren (Horde) can choose this option they are 100% of their faction's representation.
  
• Hunter: Alliance Hunters are dominated by Night Elves at 59%, followed by Dwarves at 28% and Draenei at 13%; Horde Hunters are lead by Blood Elves at 33%, followed by Orcs at 29%, Trolls at 21% and Tauren at 17%. Night Elves are both pretty and do possess potent class-friendly racial abilities. Dwarves aren't pretty, but that +1% to Crit Chance w/ guns is potent. Draenei may be hot (if female), but their racials aren't that applicable to Hunters- no more so than any other class. Blood Elves are pretty, but their racials are melee-focused and Hunters are not. Orcs make the best Hunters for Beast Mastery, Trolls for Markmanship and Tauren for Survival- and none of them are that hot (save female trolls, and there are a lot of them).
  
• Mage: Horde Mages are dominated by Undead at 45%, followed by Blood Elves at 39% and Trolls at 17%. Alliance mages are dominated by Humans at 50%, followed by Gnomes at 36% and Draenai at 14%. Undead have a certain Uncanny Valley effect going on, and have the single best racial ability in the game. Blood Elves' racials are not useful for a Mage; they're melee-focused, and Mages aren't. Trolls have to really work to make their racials worthwhile, but it can work. Human racials aren't that good for Mages, especially after Spirit ceased to be factored into Evocate, so this is a case of many older mages sticking around. Gnomes are the best mages that the Alliance has, but cute is not not. Draenei mages aren't particularly more effective than Gnome or Human mages, so they aren't played as often.
  
• Paladin: Moot for the Horde; all Paladins must be Blood Elves. (That said, they are rather good at it.) For the Alliance, 65% of all Paladins are Human; Dwarves make up most of the rest at 18% but Draenei (where their racials actually shine here) are on the move at 16%.
  
• Priest: Alliance Priests are mostly Human (38%) and Night Elves (29%) due to good racial abilities (Human Spirit boost really comes into its own here, as Priests rely on it; Night Elves have great racial spells and Shadowmeld makes mana recovery easy to do in dangerous places.) while Dwarves and Draenei (17% each) hold on due to racial spell selection (Formerly Fear Ward, now Chastise) and application of specific racials for this or that niche within the class. (Draenei make great Holy Priests, for example.) For the Horde, it's like the Mage population: Undead (49%), Blood Elf (36%) and Troll (15%) and the reasons are mostly the same. You also see more Shadow Priests amongst the Horde due to racial abilities and spells.
  
• Rogue: For the Horde, it's Undead (45%) and Blood Elf (33%) dominating the Rogue population due to excellent class-friendly racials and prettiness; Trolls (13%) and Orcs (9%) make up the rest. For Alliance Rogues, Night Elves (44%) and Humans (31%) are the majority of the population for similar reasons, with Gnomes (19%) and Dwarves (9%) making up the rest. Pretty and potent is a winning combination.
  
• Shaman: Moot for Alliance, as Draenei are the only option. For the Horde, Tauren dominate at 42% with Orcs (33%) and Trolls (24%) coming in behind them. This, it seems, is a case of making the best of seemingly-bad options. Few racials are friendly to the class, and you really have to work to make them apply.
  
• Warlock: Horde Warlocks are dominated by Undead (49%) and Blood Elves (37%), with Orcs taking up the slack (14%). The same dynamic that works for Priests and Mages is at work here. For Alliance Warlocks, Humans dominate at 62% despite their racials being at odds somewhat with the class (Gnomes are the rest at 38%); despite Gnomes have class-friendly racials, they aren't pretty enough.
  
• Warrior: Alliance Warriors are at Human first with 41%, with Night Elves (25%), Dwarves (14%), Draenei (11%) and Gnomes (9%) following them. Horde Warriors are at Tauren (36%) and Orc (34%) dominating the population followed by Undead (24%) and Trolls (7%). (Blood Elves cannot be Warriors.)

Pretty and Potent are best. Most of the time, Pretty trumps Potent when folks have to choose but this often results in a sub-optimal character. Smart players choose to be potent; they're the ones furthest along in raid and PVP progression and thus they have greater influence due to superior system mastery that isn't represented in pure census counts. Cute is not Pretty, players do not like to waste racial abilities, and players do not like to look bad when playing.

 

[Nahat Anoj]

R&C says they have a habit of accidentally pocketing things.

Well, I missed that part. Then there's even more reason to call them kender.

 

[Dragonhelm]

I purposefully tried to keep them closer to hobbits without making them pot-belied, balding types, like they were usually portrayed in 1e/2e.

Very nice. Do these halflings have hairy feet or not?

One of my favorite halfling pics of yours is the iconic male halfling. It really has a hobbit feel in its face while not being "pot-bellied, balding types." This guy looks like he's ready for adventure.

The female is also good, but I like the male better.

 

[Leugren]

Halflings have been evolving towards their current incarnation since D&D 1st edition, long before there were kenders. The quest to define an edgier, more playable halfling can be clearly observed in the old Fineous Fingers comic strips from the earliest Dragon magazines as well as on the Jeff Dee cover of the 1980 module A1: Slave Pits of the Undercity. The halfling depicted there is lean, athletic, and apart from his furry feet, entirely indistinguishable from a 3e or 4e halfling. Even back then, many gamers balked at playing doughty, bucolic homebodies, and they began to redefine halflings as the droll little wise-acres that people so many of our games today.

 

[Klaus]

Very nice. Do these halflings have hairy feet or not?

One of my favorite halfling pics of yours is the iconic male halfling. It really has a hobbit feel in its face while not being "pot-bellied, balding types." This guy looks like he's ready for adventure.

Thanks! What I do is use the proportions of a 8-10 year-old human and then scale it down to 3-3.5 feet tall. The head, feet and hands become a bit larger. Gnomes, otoh, I tend to make with the proportions closer to a real-world "little person".

Alas, the halflings in T&T don't have specially furry feet. Some hair on the top of the foot may happen, but not to an extent beyond humans. And while they might go barefooted when in leisure or about the house, the know better than to go adventuring or travelling without shoes.

 

[LoneWolf23]

The problem there is, if you don't even bother with the furry feet, then a halfling just looks like a small human. And in that case, how can you tell the difference between a halfling and a human unless you've got an indication of scale?

 

[Leugren]

The problem there is, if you don't even bother with the furry feet, then a halfling just looks like a small human. And in that case, how can you tell the difference between a halfling and a human unless you've got an indication of scale?

They have larger heads in relation to their bodies, like an 8-10 year-old child.

 

[Leugren]

Double post.

 

[KrazyHades]

Tolkienesque hobbits are COOL

I've never liked them. They seemed too...fat and useless, or something. They just didn't seem to be real adventurers. And almost all Tolkienesque hobbits look down on adventuring and leaving the peace and quiet of home. All in all, begone with them!

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I've never liked them. They seemed too...fat and useless, or something. They just didn't seem to be real adventurers. And almost all Tolkienesque hobbits look down on adventuring and leaving the peace and quiet of home. All in all, begone with them!

So why have halflings at all?