Halflings: An Identity Crisis

[EATherrian]

I agree wholeheartedly with the OP here. I know there are many who don't like the traditional halfling or many of the traditional fantasy tropes, but I enjoy them. My halflings are always going to be hobbits. I like hobbits and if I'm running the world that's how it's going to work. I think that WotC should have ditched halflings if they disliked their concept so much and come up with something they enjoy more.

 

[Lurks-no-More]

D&D is not LotR; RPGs are not books; and things which work for one may not work with the other.

Hobbits are rustic homebodies who shun the world outside the borders of their own lands, and generally speaking avoid anything remotely resembling adventures. They work very well in LotR, because a) they're an idealized representation of the British countryside and its people, and b) they provide a recognizable group of viewpoint characters, much closer to the reader than the Men of Middle-Earth; Bilbo, Frodo & co. are all very unusual hobbits.

In D&D, if you want halfling adventurers to be more common and less at odds with their race than good-aligned drow wandering on the surface, hobbits don't work. Making them family-oriented, opportunistic and both interested in creature comforts and curious, prone to travel or living in safe places among other peoples, you suddenly have a race that you can plausibly see providing numerous small, roguish adventurers.

 

[JA_Reave]

Yet in the primary works which were published in his lifetime (excluding the Silmarillion), Tolkien chose hobbits as the main protagonists and focal point of the stories. Honestly, without The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings, would there really be that much interest in The Silmarillion or any of the various manuscripts which Tolkien himself may or may not have even wanted published (Lost Tales etc) ?

Which means, at best they were a contrivance for that purpose. DnD had halflings because the Lord of the Rings had halflings. On their own, they are a very uninspiring trope of fantasy. DnD would have done well to leave them out unless they could truly find a way to weave them into the world in the same way humans, elves, and orcs are.

-JAR

 

[Ruin Explorer]

You do market research on people, not books, and I'll bet my biscuit that the changes to the race slate are the result of that.

Yep.

I'm really impressed by the level of difficulty some people are having with this apparently deceptively simple concept. Market research is conducted by, y'know, asking your target audience stuff, and/or monitoring their reactions to stuff.

I mean, if people wanted to play Tolkien-style Hobbits, does one believe they're somehow not going to come up in fantasy RPG-related market research? Eh? What?

Either way, Tolkien-esque Hobbit-Halflings are out, and will have been for two editions now.

You know what I wonder is, how many, exactly of the "Hobbit-boosters" routinely play Hobbits/Halflings? Or even play D&D as a player routinely at all? Because I know plenty of people who like Hobbits in the novels, and not a damn one of them has ever shown any interest in play a Hobbit-style creature in an RPG. I'm not saying it doesn't happen. I'm saying it's a rare enough desire, in 2007/8, that it doesn't warrant reverting a race to that.

I notice, too, that not a single race has, afaik, changed to be MORE LotR-like, only less.

 

[Lurks-no-More]

I notice, too, that not a single race has, afaik, changed to be MORE LotR-like, only less.

I think you could make a fairly good case of elves and eladrin being, collectively, closer to Tolkien's elves than the D&D elves of earlier editions, but that depends a lot on how you look at them.

 

[Aloïsius]

You know what I wonder is, how many, exactly of the "Hobbit-boosters" routinely play Hobbits/Halflings? Or even play D&D as a player routinely at all? Because I know plenty of people who like Hobbits in the novels, and not a damn one of them has ever shown any interest in play a Hobbit-style creature in an RPG. I'm not saying it doesn't happen. I'm saying it's a rare enough desire, in 2007/8, that it doesn't warrant reverting a race to that.

I know a few people who like to play hobbits : think about the rogue in D&D 2, the movie. Cynical little fellow with a twisted sens of humor, but without much combat prowess. The inoccuous looking assassin type ("yes, I'm a famed chef ! Do you want to taste my secret recipe ?").

However, I personaly dislike hobbits in RPG. In a dungeon, they look like a cow in an aquarium, or a book in a frying pan.

 

[outsider]

WotC seems to have decided to stop focusing their game on what was "cool" to fantasy fans 30 years ago, and start focusing on what is "cool" to fantasy fans right now. It's about time really.

Very few people see gnomes as "cool" anymore, and thus they are rarely played. Halflings aren't a whole lot better, but apparently enough people like them that WotC decided it was worth taking a shot at making them more interesting. I wouldn't be surprised to see them out of the PHB in 5th edition though. Dwarves and Elves have never stopped being cool, so their spot is safe. It's safe to say that alot of people will think Tieflings and Dragonborn are cool, so WotC is probably making a good decision throwing them in.

 

[EATherrian]

D&D is not LotR; RPGs are not books; and things which work for one may not work with the other.

Hobbits are rustic homebodies who shun the world outside the borders of their own lands, and generally speaking avoid anything remotely resembling adventures. They work very well in LotR, because a) they're an idealized representation of the British countryside and its people, and b) they provide a recognizable group of viewpoint characters, much closer to the reader than the Men of Middle-Earth; Bilbo, Frodo & co. are all very unusual hobbits.

In D&D, if you want halfling adventurers to be more common and less at odds with their race than good-aligned drow wandering on the surface, hobbits don't work. Making them family-oriented, opportunistic and both interested in creature comforts and curious, prone to travel or living in safe places among other peoples, you suddenly have a race that you can plausibly see providing numerous small, roguish adventurers.

Well, since MERP is gone, D&D is the closest thing someone wanting to play LOTR would have. As to the rarity of halfling adventurers, I'd imagine that adventurers make up the clear minority of all the races. I really doubt that even in the POL settings that the adventurers outnumber the shop keepers, farmers, laborers etc. So why just pick on halfling culture. As to playing, I have not played a halfling since 2nd edition because I don't like where the character concept has gone. I have had people play halflings in the worlds I run, where they are more hobbit inspired. All in all, this is just a matter of taste and we can just house-rule things to conform to our desires.

 

[Toryx]

So what? Those hobbits were non-combatants.

1) That doesn't mean that ALL hobbits are non-combatants.

2) Combat isn't the end-all-be-all of roleplay.

The primary hobbit characters in the books were extraordinary as it was. Very few hobbits, as Tolkien imagined it, were even willing to leave their homes, much less fight.

I agree completely with your second point, but I was arguing why WotC don't use Tolkien hobbits. The majority of D&D groups in my experience, sadly, have considered combat to be the most enjoyable part of the game. WotC seems to agree, considering how little they've focused on non-combative aspects of the D&D game over the years.

Groups who love their Halfling rogues or mounted warriors would beg to differ.

That's fine, but D&D halfling rogues and mounted warriors are not Tolkien hobbits, which is my primary point, nor could they be and remain hobbits. My post was directed at those who can't understand why D&D doesn't stick to the Tolkien version of hobbits. Perhaps I should have been more clear about that.

 

[TheSeer]

What's with halflings?

A brief history which I'm sure everyone is aware of:

AD&D 1e and 2e: Halflings are basically Middle-Earth Hobbits, hairy feet and all. There is nothing wrong with this in my opinion, and they made some of the best thieves in the game due to their racial bonuses/abilities.

D&D 3e: Halflings morph into l33t mini ninja warriors which are almost non-distinguishable from humans save for height.

D&D 4e: They are now nomadic river gypsies who specialize in animal training.

What is going on here... and why did WoTC feel the need to change them so drastically from their original iteration? Tolkienesque hobbits are COOL... why ruin a good thing? Character's like Salvatore's Regis "Rumblebelly" must be having a serious identity crisis (he began life as a classic "hobbit")

The dwarves and elves remain close to the Tolkien archetype... so why the drastic change in halflings?

Actually, you hit the nail on the head. They WERE too close to the Tolkien archtype, so much that the Tolkien estate got mad and threatened legal action:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halfling

This in turn lead to TSR and WoTC moving halflings further and futher away from hobbits.