D&D General My Problem(s) With Halflings, and How To Create Engaging/Interesting Fantasy Races

[Vaalingrade]

If your best argument against some part of D&D is "This is in D&D for no better reason than it's a traditional part of D&D", you have successfully made an absolute, ironclad, and unassailable argument for keeping it.

We know what happens to D&D when you approach it with the view of making every element positively justify its inclusion, and changing it until it did so. It was called Fourth Edition.

Not seeing the downside.

 

[Yaarel]

Like in lord of the rings halfling are suited for the accidental adventurer niche.
“I should have stay home” is their credo, but push to their limit they can be resourceful.
Useful for antiheroic, underdog character and thematic.

That sounds exactly like an "everyman", who is by definition a normal Human.

 

[Mercurius]

The point I've been trying to make is that it's a flaw for some and a feature for others. I don't believe either approach is superior, and I kind of feel like you're saying that one of them is.

No. I am saying that seeing it as a flaw is a misperception of it being a feature. Nonhumans are more thematic and less diverse than humans--that's just the nature of the beast.

Or let me put it another way. Dark Sun is more thematic than FR, but more limited. Is that a flaw of Dark Sun? No, it is a feature. People play Dark Sun because they want its unique vibe and qualities; similarly with playing nonhumans. Think of them as "thematic people."

If one considers the limited/thematic nature of nonhumans to be a flaw, the obvious solution is to not play nonhumans. Just play humans, then you don't have to deal with the specific qualities of a nonhuman. Just as if you find Dark Sun limiting, play something more general/kitchen sink like the Forgotten Realms.

 

[ccs]

It is a valid point for Halflings as they're mostly in because "We got sued by TSR back in the day so we filed the serial numbers off of hobbits

No, Tolkien* sued TSR over them using the term Hobbit.
Much later WoTC bought TSR & thus inherited the D&D term 1/2ling.

* Well, the Tolkien estate actually as the man himself was dead by the time D&D was being sold....

 

[Steampunkette]

I largely agree with the OP on this one. A lot of the time we put "Traditional" fantasy creatures into settings where they don't actually tell a story of any kind.

Hobbits were important to the Lord of the Rings because their simple nature and focus on country community values was something Jolkien Rolkien Rolkien Tolkien wanted to make core to his setting as the "Right way" to live. All the kings and knights, the elves and orcs, represent the bigger problems the world has had, and may fight against, so that the tiny good and simple life can be protected.

And even when it gets involved in the war, when Saruman conquers the Shire, it is rebuilt just as it was. Simple. Loving. Comfortable.

RR wanted their innocence to be the thing that succeeds in the end. All the swords of ancient kings, the elvish lords, the dwarven heirs, none of them destroyed the ring. Just the innocent boys from the Shire.

But for most settings? That's not -really- a story to carry forward. And humans can take that role for the purposes of a community or society the players return to after fighting the evil.

Some settings try to make them a part of the narrative, which is -great-. The Talenta Halflings of Eberron have a -sincere- reason to live as dinosaur riders. Dark Sun's Cannibal Halflings of the Forest Ridge as heirs to a fallen world. Things like that.

But Ravenloft? What purpose do they -really- serve in that setting?

As player characters, y'know... Whatever? But like... As -part- of Ravenloft, what are they?

Same thing with pretty much every setting. Halflings and gnomes both face that issue, while Elves, Orcs, and Dwarves are almost always written deeply into the settings of our worlds. Sometimes specifically as a subversion of tropes, like Jungle Dwarves and City Elves.

But Gnomes, Halflings, Dragonborn... Goliaths and Tabaxi and everything else are often footnotes or barely developed player-only races that don't or only very rarely come up within the story otherwise.

I think that is a disservice to the race, which lacks a role, to the player, who lacks a narrative community, and to the setting itself.

 

[Yaarel]

I have already said this many times, but I'll say it again. I like both halflings and gnomes a lot, but I don't think they need to be two separate species; they're very similar and having them separate pigeonholes possible niches too much. Just have one gnomeling species that can be various things.

Fey Elves = Eladrin
Fey Halflings = Gnomes

 

[Minigiant]

I largely agree with the OP on this one. A lot of the time we put "Traditional" fantasy creatures into settings where they don't actually tell a story of any kind.

Hobbits were important to the Lord of the Rings because their simple nature and focus on country community values was something Jolkien Rolkien Rolkien Tolkien wanted to make core to his setting as the "Right way" to live. All the kings and knights, the elves and orcs, represent the bigger problems the world has had, and may fight against, so that the tiny good and simple life can be protected.

And even when it gets involved in the war, when Saruman conquers the Shire, it is rebuilt just as it was. Simple. Loving. Comfortable.

RR wanted their innocence to be the thing that succeeds in the end. All the swords of ancient kings, the elvish lords, the dwarven heirs, none of them destroyed the ring. Just the innocent boys from the Shire.

But for most settings? That's not -really- a story to carry forward. And humans can take that role for the purposes of a community or society the players return to after fighting the evil.

I think this is the key issue for Halflings.

Tolkien created a niche for Hobbits. Hobbits were in a narrative place, humans did not occupy. Hobbits basically were humans but since there were no humans in that spot, there wasn't a problem.

However in D&D, humans are not barred from this role and are often there. So now the hobbits turned halflings lack a point and have little uniqueness.

Gnomes had the same problem with dwarves and elves. However since there was no LOTR nostalgia, TSR and WOTC were able to shift gnomes into their own unique story niche.

 

[Mecheon]

No, Tolkien* sued TSR over them using the term Hobbit.
Much later WoTC bought TSR & thus inherited the D&D term 1/2ling.

Y'know what I meant, I just word-vomitted and didn't pick it up

 

[Yaarel]

I love this concept of elves. They're more like the original Nordic concept.

Mod Edit: Sorry, but we had to remove the image as NSFW. ~Umbran

LOL! Yeah, thats about right.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Dwarven Resilience, Darkvision, etc. Sure, humans can be miners and smiths, but the point of dwarves is that they were created to fulfill that niche (by Tolkien, the D&D game designers, and the in-lore gods in lots of worlds). They have a niche, and IMO, justify their existence in that. Halflings don't fulfill their niche as well as dwarves do, IMO.

Darkvision, innate spellcasting, damage resistances/immunities, powerful build, magic resistance/gnomish cunning, Small size, flying/climbing/swimming speeds, age ranges, Deathless/Constructed Nature, etc, etc, etc. I could go on and on. If you don't want just mechanical things, how about things like this:

• You were made out of metal to serve as war-slaves (Warforged).
• You're part animal (Centaur, Satyr)
• You're an anthropomorphic animal (Tabaxi, Leonin, Owlfolk, Aarakocra, Lizardolk, Rabbitfolk, Locathah, etc)
• You're half-(insert otherworldly/monstrous creature), and it changed your physical nature and granted you magical powers (Dhampir, Tiefling, Aasimar, Genasi, Hexblood, Kalashtar, etc)
• You came back to life, but not really (Reborn)
• You're half-(insert other race) (Half-Elf, Half-Orc, Mul, etc)

Be master tinkers/illusion-masters, not connected to Corellon, be curious and antisocial instead of haughty and xenophobic, etc.

So, as this relates to your OP, is it fair to say you find more value in having 10+ animal/human hybrid choices or 3+ different half this and half that's (that are distinctly different than the this or that) but cannot find one redeeming thing about halflings to put them on the "good enough to keep" list?