Hoooly cow I'm not going to even try to engage with all of that. I'm sorry but I'm just going to have to pick out a few bits and respond to them. Even on a day off I just can't dedicate the time required to engage with....that much point by point argumentative back and forth.
I am sorry for that, because you clearly put a lot of time into this, but...it's too much. it's either snip and reply to a few bits, or not even read it much less respond to any of it. Just the thought is giving me mild anxiety in spite of meds.
I've been having much the same reaction these posts are getting HUGE
Again,
@steeldragons can correct me if I'm wrong, but that entire post is in direct reply to posts about halflings, and is thus pretty clearly
about halflings. I don't understand how you can read the literal text you just quoted and see anything else, frankly.
Do you not see how that is my entire point? Their post was about halflings. Their post then went out of their way to set up a dichotomy. If you are against halflings, you are against all of those traits they listed. You in their own words, only see the point in playing edgelords and anime characters. Again, their EXACT words stated this unequivocally.
My entire post was that being against halflings IS NOT being against humble heroes. That setting up that dichotomy where people who don't like halflings think that being kind and fighting only to defend and being humble are not heroic traits WAS A STRAWMAN and I responded to say as much.
You keep insisting that they didn't say that and that I am strawmanning them, but you don't elaborate beyond that. You just keep saying I'm adding to their post to make them seem like they are saying things, even when I quote them directly.
You could ask them, instead of assuming the worst possible interpretation of their post and angrily replying to it in that context.
I figured by quoting and addressing their points directly I WAS inviting them to respond and clarify if I was wrong. I also know they are following this conversation, so they are clearly watching you and me argue about it. And I directly mentioned them a few times in my last post.
What more am I supposed to do? If they don't want to respond, they aren't going to respond.
I have made it super clear that my position is that "people like playing halflings and having them in the world" is all the justification that is needed. I have only talked about specific traits in refuting the notion that it could ever possibly matter in any way whether a given trait is unique to them. Halflings don't have to have detailed histories of impacting the world, or obvious character flaws, or anyting else you keep acting like a lack of matters at all. People like them because of exactly what and who they are, as written.
Okay, but this doesn't address anything. For example, whether or not halflings should still exist doesn't address whether or not they should still be as prominent. Right now, they are not only in the PHB, but they are under the "common races" section in the PHB. In the future should they still be listed like that? Or would it make more sense to have them in a later release, and move popular races like goblins and gnomes up?
Saying "they exist and should continue to exist because people like them" doesn't address this point in any way. Should their lore be expanded? Your response doesn't address that.
I'm not saying you can't hold such a narrow point of view with only the goal of preserving the existence of Halflings... but you are arguing very heatedly against me... and I've never advocated for deleting halflings. So, if your entire goal is their continued existence in the game... stop arguing with me. I'm not against your position.
Some people find that to be a problem, that halflings offer them nothing of interest. Especially when they are world-building and they feel like they have to include halflings because people expect them, but they have no interest in just having a race of people who simply... exist for the purpose of existing. Speaking from expeirence, I have struggled with figuring out why to bother pointing halflings in my games for a while, and the only reason I do is because they are supposed to be there, and people expect them.
I literally never said or implied that it is. You're on a wild tangent that I am uninterested in following you on.
Then again, I have no idea what you mean by them being fiercely loyal in a way that humans aren't. I broke down what it seemed like you were saying, and that was part of what you cut.
They don't seem to be loyal in anyway that makes sense from the way you are talking, and no more loyal than any other person in the world.
Which is wholly irrelevant to someone's post lamenting that people seem to think that halflings aren't worthy of being a core race because they don't have any of those traits.
So, to repeat what you just said. Steeldragon was lamenting the fact that people seem to think that halflings aren't worthy of being a core race because they aren't edgelords or anime characters.
And yet, no one is against Humans, Dwarfs or Elves... who are not edgelords or anime characters. You might, maybe be able to argue that Gnomes are anime characters... but since they have existed in fantasy longer than halflings I'd say you'd have to really put forth the most extreme versions of them to make them anime characters, and simply... dialing them back to a 7 or 8 is enough to change that.
So, you are making the same false assumption that they were making. That being against halflings is because we share some twisted values and dismiss certain tropes. That isn't true. We are against halflings because they have nothing to offer. List off all the "generic farm boy hero" traits you want, we can still have those without halflings. We want to have those. I like playing those sort of characters... just not as halflings. I prefer them as other races. Forest Gnomes and Humans mostly. But if halflings aren't offering anything other than a bland white sheet that we can put these generic tropes on.... why do we have them as a core race? That is the point of humans as a core race. Let's put in some of the other races. Let halflings be an uncommon race, maybe wait until a secondary release of player options to include them.
Not saying we get rid of them, just push them back and let other more interesting concepts step forward. Why is that wrong? That's what we've down with various "beast-folk" like Shifters and Tabaxi. Why is it wrong to do that with halflings?
When you stop doing this, I'll be happy to engage more fully with your arguments. When the hyperbolic strawmen come out, I tend to tune out.
Again, you're attributing an argument to me that I never made. Or perhaps you don't know that there is a difference between "not uncommon" and "every person does it"?
Maybe if you stop tuning me out and listen to what I'm trying to say, then you would have an easier time following my arguments and seeing why I am saying the things I am saying.
Hobbits are halflings. Stop trying to pretend they aren't. We all know they are the origin of the concept in fantasy. Which is the primary reason they don't show up in other fantasy, because adding them in makes it feel like you're trying to do either Tolkein or DnD, rather than your own thing.
And thank you for the longwinded equivelent of, "no, i don't understand what you're saying with those examples or how a people can be both things or why that combination of traits is compelling for a lot of people".
And you are misunderstanding my point again. Yes, people can be more than one thing. That is obvious. But, you brought up Merry specifically, and I was pointing out that even among Hobbits Merry is kind of unique. Merry and Pippin are the only two hobbits we ever really see go to war. And I don't remember what Pippin was doing during that war, I think he was mostly in the castle dealing with the regent. Making Merry the only hobbit in the entire story to be on the frontlines of a war. Not a skirmish in the shire. An actual battle for a city with massive armies on every side. Using Merry as an example of what Hobbits are is very misleading, because no other hobbit is like him.
On to the second point... maybe an example would work. Do DnD elves see the world as a flat plain? LoTR elves do. And are DnD elves and LoTR elves the same race of people.... No. They aren't. They are different. If I asked for an example of a DnD elf, and you started talking about Legolas running over top of the snow, I'd have to tell you that DnD elves can't do that.
In LoTR Aargorn is noted to have elven blood, to the point where it affects him. That would make him a half-elf in DnD. And yet, when talking about Half-Elves... we don't talk about Aaragorn or Elrond.
So, when I ask about halflings, and everyone responds with "well the hobbits" we have a problem. We don't do that for any other race in DnD. Every single other race we can talk about in the context of DnD alone. Maybe not humans, but they are kind of a unique case since everyone on the planet is human. Halflings are the only ones that when we try and talk about them, people start talking about Hobbits and JRR Tolkien.
They've never moved past their origin. They've never evolved. They are stagnant and locked into this eternal place where for whatever reason, they are not allowed to become their own thing and must always pay homage to Tolkien. And yes, that is hyperbole if you want to point out that there are two notable exceptions to this. One which is only a half-exception, but I'm talking about the PHB and generic halfling lore, not the specific setting versions that went out of their way to change just about every single race.
This whole line of argument is based on the false premise that a core race needs to have obvious flaws and the like in order to deserve it's place in the core.
Is that truly a flawed premise? If I wrote a character in a novel who had no flaws... did I write a good character? No.
The point I was making is that halflings are idyllic. Their entire point seems to be that they are too good for this flawed world, but also humble and down to earth so they don't end up looking down on humans. They are ideals. They take all of our best qualities, and none of our worst. Which... makes it really hard for them to be anything other than flat when world-building. And they end up occupying the same spaces as humans. Which just makes them... better humans but short.
Which again, that is hard to work with. That is hard to make into anything that a player can explore or dig their teeth into.
None of that follows. An extreme faction having some traction in a community doesnt mean that most of the community doesn't view them as radical or at least worrisome and misguided. And where are you getting "potentially defining their entire culture for generations to come."?
From the concept that if you are playing a campaign that focuses on this issue, then the entire point would be that if Uldra succeeds the Talenta halflings will become more insular and fight to keep out outsiders. That's the point of her existing. For that plot potential.
If it was just that she's a sliver who is raging against the tide of halfling charity and good will and can do nothing except be a terrorist that everyone dislikes.... then there is no point in her being prominent.
Okay, I don't care. The fact that hobbits are part of the history of halflings isn't a mark against halflings, and the idea that it is is just patently absurd nonsense you're making up because you don't like halflings and want to win an internet argument.
And elves dwarves and orcs don't come from Tolkein! Of course we don't talk about tolkein as much when discussing them, although I will note that because orcs are mostly defined in their fantasy fiction origin by Tolkein, Tolkein is brought up in literally every single thread that becomes about orcs that I have ever seen, here or elsewhere. Because of course it does, because that's their origin! LOL what completely nonsense it is to suggest it should be otherwise!
I'm going abandon this argument with you after this post. The mods have made it clear over time that criticising someone's behavior in a thread is only tolerated if it is brief and not repeated, and I don't think I can go another round ignoring certain things.
But in those threads about orcs, people also talk about Gruumsh, and Obould Many-Arrows, and DnD Orc Lore.
Where is the DnD halfling Lore? When I ask for DnD halfling lore... I get told about JRR Tolkien Hobbit Lore. That is the problem. That is what I am saying is a mark against halflings, is that no where in this entire thread has anyone every tried to defend halflings. They have tried to defend hobbits.
And, yes, you can say halflings = hobbits. But the problem is, hobbits don't work in DnD. Their entire reason for existing, every narrative theme they embodied in Tolkien's work, doesn't impact the right way with DnD. And so their origin is also their endpoint, they haven't done anything with generic halfling lore.... and people are saying, "hey, if we are never doing anything with this... why is it still so prominent?"
And I think that is a fair question, but in asking it all I get from the other side is accusations and derision. Which doesn't speak well to their ability to actually defend their argument.
In your later post you go on at length about how halflings work because they are simple folk with no ambitions, but I think you keep missing the point. That is a character trait. That is an individual character story. They guy or girl forced into adventure, who comes home to their sleepy hometown and lives out their days in peace is a specfic character story.
And that doesn't help us with world-building. I played a Wood Elf ranger who was the survivor of a bandit attack, taught by their aunt, and who was adventuring because we were adventurers, but who would have been perfectly fine becoming a small town sheriff and leading a peaceful life once things had calmed down. He wasn't a king. He wasn't a leader of men. He just... wanted to help people not live in fear, and he had been trained as a very good hunter, so he went and hunted bandits and monsters.
I can play that simple character with anything. But, when I build out the world. When I look to "who are elves in the wider world" I have a lot to pull on. I can look to their origins, their religion, their place in the larger world and see how they affect it. With haflings... you can't. They don't have an origin. They don't have a place in the world other than "they live in small communities near humans". They don't really have much of anything written about their religion or gods. Their language is basically non-existent, it never comes up anywhere. They are nearly impossible to do anything with on a world building level, except have them exist in small communities among humans and basically share human culture.
