So, you are right that I should apply the same standards. Where you are wrong is that you think I am not. Dwarves are the best miners, and we've been told that, and it is reinforced consistently. Elves are good at "woodsy stuff" but there is a really strong argument that they aren't the best at it, and high elves have nothing to make them "woodsy" at all. So, it is an element of them, but I wouldn't say they are the best. Halflings cook and farm... but so do a lot of other races, and there is no indication that halflings do it better than anyone else.
And again, since no other race has been specifically called out for being chefs or farmers (saying "here is a list of foods other races are known to have made" or "other races cook and farm" is not the same thing), there is plenty of indication that halflings either do it better than anyone else or are more famed for it than anyone else.
Still decently rare. And then you have to account for things like the prominence of the help action for skill checks, and the fact that even if they roll a 1, if they then fail the same anyways, the ability had no effect. So, I'd say you are easily looking at the ability being useful between 2% and 3% of the time.
That's pretty rare. It could be a single roll for an entire campaign.
Or it could be pretty common. Natural 1s are not uncommon in my game. We often get one or two per session in my group. The fact is, halflings have an edge that helps them out in that situation. If they never get to use that particular trait--well, it's not like they wasted skill points or a feat on it. It's built-in.
And to help portray that luck I should... not do anything. Ignore it. Find other traits to highlight. And yet, when I first mentioned that I had trouble making halfling luck show up in the game and matter, you berated me for being a terrible GM? Don't I understand even the most basic and simple things?
Apparently you don't.
One: Find ways to portray the luck. Think of lucky things that can happen to people, and have them happen to your halfling.
Two: Think of ways to highlight the PC's race in other ways. I gave you examples. Or, think of ways to highlight the PC without resorting to their race. Make them feel special because of their class or background or something in their backstory.
Three: Do these exact same things for every other PC. Do you go out of your way to include stone so your dwarfs can be cunning? Do you describe the weather so that wood elves can hide in the rain or mist or snow? Do you include animals and plants for your gnomes and firbolgs to talk to? Do you find things for other races to do, even when they don't have traits specifically built around these sort of things? Like, do you try to make your orcs feel like they can be as orcish as possible?
If not, then why single out the halfling?
This is something you've never answered. You insist that you have to portray halflings in a particular way, yet you've never once said if you do the same thing for anyone else, or why you think all halflings have to behave a certain way. Nor have you said
why the halfling Luck has to matter. It's unlikely that you go out of your way to make an elf's Fey Heritage matter. Do you? When I've asked you these things before, you don't answer.
And yet, every time you give advice on how to do it... it is either foisting it off to be the player's problem, or something that I considered, but rejected because it either felt too forced, or not enough for something that is supposed to be so defining.
Because each and every time, you are asking how
you can portray the
player's character.
Amusingly, I also just made a Levisutus Tiefling, Artificer though. Only been a single session of the game, but that infernal magic has been front and center, almost more than my artificing. I also took Infernal constitution (DM is a pathfinder guy, so he let us have a free lv 1 feat) and I have resistance to fire, cold and poison. The resistances haven't come up directly yet (single session) but it was pretty easy for us to say that my ability to resist extreme temperatures and toxic substances played into my ability to artifice. If the DM wanted to help me show my fire resistance, then it is as easy as putting something on fire that one of us has to get. Which, is made even easier since one of my fellow players decided to be a Wildfire Druid, and there is a whole thing invovling a slash and burn plot that I could see playing into my character's strengths.
So what you're saying is that, in one game, a trait may matter a lot. And in another game, it might not matter at all.
So, to extrapolate that to halflings... in one game, a halfling PC may roll a lot of 1s and/or come across a lot of monsters that cause the frightened condition, and in another game, they might not.
You keep claiming it's possible to go for sessions or entire campaigns without ever rolling a 1, but you never seem to acknowledge that the reverse is also true, and that due to the random nature of the dice, you may get a bunch of 1s in a row.
Part of why it coming up rarely is worse for lucky though, is because it is random.
Yes, luck is fickle like that. It's a known thing. I'm sure halflings are aware of that, too. That's why the books list them as superstitious instead of simply relying on luck entirely.
Fire Resistance applies every single time I am exposed to fire.
But that's also an if. I don't throw monsters or plots at people just because I know a character has a
resistance to something in that plot. That would be pretty stupid. Instead, I use plots and monsters that are relevant and interesting.
I few things to hash out here.
1) Being superstitious =/= being lucky. A player could certain play their character as superstitious and not feel like their character has particularly good or bad luck. In fact, a character feeling lucky or not is 100% out of the players hands without the Lucky feat. We are playing a dice game. Luck is very apparent when it matters.
No duh. But being superstitious means that you have the (false) belief that you can control the luck by engaging in certain rituals and, at the same time, ignoring when it doesn't work (
postdiction). You keep wanting to know how to portray halflings; well, here you go: one of your halfling NPCs has a lucky rabbit's foot. When they succeed on whatever, they credit the foot. On rare occasions (when they roll a 1, reroll, and succeed), the luck actually works. Is it because of the foot? Well, does your world have a deity of luck you can call up and ask?
2) Out of all of the halfling abilities, we really have three that are baseline halfling. Lucky. Brave. Nimbleness. And there are problems portraying both Lucky and Brave. And Nimbleness is really difficult to show outside of combat, unless you constantly have your characters fighting through large crowds. Compare to the elf who doesn't get charmed... They still have their weapon training, they still have their superior senses (though that can be hard to show) they still have their trance. There is still a lot that they can show, even without Charm Resistance.
Except there aren't really any problems with either Lucky or Brave. There are problems with
you being unwilling to portray it. And Nimbleness is
super-easy to portray outside of combat. There's a crowded marketplace? Lots of people crowding the bar? A bunch of people blocking the view? Doesn't bother the halfling.
You can even extrapolate it to include non-people obstacles. There's a ton of stuff blocking the route the halfling wants to go? You can either let them get around that stuff, or give them advantage on an Acrobatics check to do so because they're so Nimble.
No, the second paragraph isn't RAW. So what?
3) Players being allowed to play their own characters and make their own reactions is part of the issue with portraying something like Brave. Because there is more than one player at the table. And, it seems like in the case of Brave, it really pushes you to play a specific personality to come up. Which isn't good, if the player wants to play a different personality. Which they should completely do, but that then cuts into their racial portrayal, in a way that the majority of other races don't do.
So what? PCs are individuals. You've said you're against racial alignments, right? So you shouldn't have a problem understanding that not every halfling is going to be lower-case brave in the face of danger.
Also, and once again, upper-case Brave is a specific trait that only refers to the frightened condition. A not-brave halfling is still going to have the Brave trait and be less affected by dragons and beholders and ghosts (oh my) while at the same time being really scared of going down the dark tunnel. This is perfectly fine.
Tabaxi have the trait Feline Agility. If someone wants to play one but decide that their PC has a peg leg that reduces their speed, are you going to forbid that because they wouldn't be playing their racial portrayal?
4) If the player doesn't care, then it doesn't matter. But what if the player does care, but everything they are doing doesn't feel like enough? What if they are playing a bold, fearless superstitious halfling and come to me and say "Hey. DM, I'm doing all these things, but it still doesn't feel like my halfling is particularly brave or lucky like they are supposed to be." What am I supposed to do? How do I help them portray their character? You said this was basic and easy, and yet despite all your derision, you have yet to give me anything more than "describe things better and have the player roleplay their character."
Then one of two things should occur:
(1) You can talk to your player about how to make the character more enjoyable. Perhaps you can replace Lucky and/or Brave with a different trait of equal power, importance, and interest that fits the character better. If you haven't already, you can look at the halfling gifts in the Level Up playtest for inspiration.
(2) The player can make a new character or retcon their halfling into a gnome or goblin.
You are trying to revamp an entire race here based on the desires of a person who doesn't actually exist and who is complaining about a problem that exists entirely in your head.
And yeah, if they are constantly finding gold pieces, or having other random good things happen to them, which makes narrative sense because they are lucky, would that be likely to annoy players who feel like that could be favoritism? I'm not sure, it is a discussion I was hoping to have about this issue, but never could have.
(1) Talk to the other players and find out what they would find fair and unfair. Also, remember, and remind the players as well, that most other races have built in magic, damage resistances, and/or combat bonuses, and halflings
don't. And since Lucky is, as you say, occurs only one time in twenty, if that, then the halfling Luck can manifest in other ways and not be OP.
(2) Make it copper pieces instead of gold. Make it interesting things that don't have a mechanical benefit. Like, somebody ordered one pie but got two and decides to give one to the halfling because it would go bad before they could eat them both. Or the halfling managed to avoid the mud puddle through sheer luck while another character (or NPC) got mud all over their shoes and pants. If the characters (not players) decide to flip a coin or draw straws for whatever reason, then the halfling's player gets the result they want. Make it a entire random table of little, interesting things that could happen.
(3) Make it interesting things that
do have a mechanical benefit, but only as a direct result of the PC actually doing something. Say you have a halfling pickpocket. Then--
once--have this occur to them:
Even if they person they stole from doesn't look rich enough to have a bag of diamonds. Of course, that can open the door to other plots, like the owner of the contents of the purse tracking the halfling down with a gang of guards in tow. As halflings know, luck is fickle.
(4) Have planned events occur as normal, but credit them to the halfling. The PCs want an audience with the mayor. You had already decided they were going to get that meeting. Tell the PCs that the mayor had been really busy but a prior meeting got canceled so now she has time to see the PCs. Must be that halfling luck! Or, as I previously suggested, if you already know that the bad guy's attack is going to miss, say it's because of a bit of luck instead of just a bad roll.
(And please, don't reply by saying these are too situational. That's the point.)
Or, you need to give the players a clue as to the story. Welp, halfling manages to overhear some people talking about it.
(5) Roll on this table of lucky things or have the lucky event occur
only once per session or adventure instead of "constantly."
Or maybe, you shouldn't have started off accusing people of lacking skills just because they have been struggling with something that seems to be more nuanced than you have considered.
Or maybe, just maybe, you should actually consider what people are telling you instead of instantly dismissing it.
I have given you advice. Instead of saying "well, I don't know how
that would work, can you explain it, also, here's idea I just had," you've said "no, that doesn't work at all, the end." You're not "struggling with something nuanced." You're flat-out refusing to accept or even consider any answers or ideas given to you. If I'm getting short with you, it's because I'm really, really tired of that. Seriously, if you're going to just ignore everything I suggest, then don't bother replying to me.
And thus, here's some homework. Number 2 above? Interesting things that don't have a mechanical benefit? Try to think of five such things. You don't need to actually reply with them here; I don't need to see your work. But try to
think of them. Because if you ever actually get a halfling in your game, you're going to want to have some ideas prepared, since you insist on having Lucky portrayed as something other than just a mechanical benefit.
And then if the same type of thing happens to another player who rolls a 1, maybe even on the same trap... then that terrible fate I described isn't what happens. So, wouldn't that make it obvious I only described it as being worse so that the halfling player could feel more impressive? That would ruin immersion, and might even make it pointless.
So what you're saying
here is that it's utterly pointless to try to depict the Lucky trait, and thus proving my point that you are refusing to accept advice or ideas.
So maybe what you need to do is
not bother to portray the Lucky trait. Or actually take some advice. Or do it and see if the other players are OK about it.
Yep.
Players play the game, and the DM runs the game.
Do you want a dissertation on the seperation of powers, or would that just lead to you nitpicking to prove how I'm a terrible DM?
Well, you missed the major thing, which is
players play their characters. You seem to have a problem remembering that.
If a player chose that race, it is a fair assumption that they want to feel lucky or brave.
Earlier, you talked about the person who you think wanted to play a halfling just for that +2 Dex. While I'm sure there are people who want to play halflings because their Lucky and Brave, I think most people either do it for that Dex bonus, because they want to play a short Everyman, or because they want to go against the halfling tropes.
except, look at that, I am right back where I started, because if there is say a Barbarian, or a fighter or a bard or a sorcerer or a paladin or a rogue or a monk or ranger (ect ect ect) of any race who wants to be a brave character, then they are going to act brave too.
Yes, so? Unless they're a halfling, they can be as brave as they want, but they still don't have advantage on saves against being frightened. Unless they're a member of a class or have another ability that gives them that trait.
So then, any NPC halfling I have who is acting brave, to help highlight the cowardly halfling playing against type... is overshadowed by the fact that the halfling is adventuring with a Genasi Sorcerer who is brave and is just as brave as that NPC. So, did I help them with their theming or not?
Let me see if I understand you: You have an NPC halfling who is both cowardly and brave, or possibly just cowardly but has the Brave trait, and a genasi sorcerer who is generically brave, and... what point are you trying to make here? And why is this NPC halfling so important again?
If you want to show the halfling NPC is brave, you can have them run into battle against the monster, or try to convince the PCs to travel into the Dark And Scary Location (or into the bar filled with heavily armed, armored, and scary people who are drunk and angry) because it'll be cool, or be the first to walk on the rickety, swaying bridge. Mind you, it's entirely possible that the players will then immediately decide that the halfling is an idiot or possibly luring them into a trap, but oh well. Them's the breaks.
OH! And notice how I never once said I was forcing anyone to roleplay their character, and in fact it is the freedom to roleplay as they like that makes this particular issue so thorny? Almost as if you are wrong about every single thing you say about me?
Almost as if you're just making stuff up right now, since you had repeatedly said that you would have to make PC halflings act in certain ways so they can be Brave or Lucky, or that you would have to make non-halflings act cowardly or unlucky.
Sure, but how do you demonstrate the races bravery if not through individuals? Just tell people? Or do I have to have a large population of halflings attacked and then they stand up to fight... hopefully at early levels since most commoners die in droves if facing anything resembling a challenge.
The latter is a good way to do it. You can also have them stand up to authority figures as well, without fighting them. Or have them be the only ones willing to enter the Creepy Swamp.
Uh huh. You know it is amusing that I started this conversation talking about halflings ability only resisting magical fear, and how that made it seem like they weren't the brave race people said they were. And how, since there are a lot of tropes about brave commoners, it is hard for halflings to seem unusually brave.
And now we are right back to that same point. Almost as though I knew what I was talking about back then.
Sigh... you really are just making stuff up now. You know, I'm really sick of having to repeat myself in every single post.
Hold up? Are you trying to dictate how a player should be roleplaying their character? Or just acknowleding that magical fear is different from fear? Because if you are trying to say that Brave Orcish Barbarians only make sense if they have wisdom saves... you are kind of insultingly wrong.
Try to learn the difference between roleplaying and mechanics.
An orc barbarian can be super-brave and still not be good at protecting their mind from magical attacks that would inflict the frightened condition on them.
So, the only one of those that you listed that I would agree with are the Grung. I'm not actually familiar with what happens in the adventure for saltmarsh, never played it. Or tomb of annihiliation.
So basically, you're willing to actually change the rules because otherwise, you might have to accept that there are a couple of times where halflings get a bonus to their saves but gnomes don't.
But the Grung, I could give you. Because that is a drug. There is also, unless I decide to homebrew, no "mundane fear" effects. And, lets go back to something. You have accused me... what eight times? Fourteen? Of trying to control my player's emotional reactions. And I specifically pointed out that of course the Dragon's fear aura HAS to be magical. Do you remember why I said that?
Yes, so that you could "prove" that gnomes are just as resistant to fear as halflings are.
Because if it is non-magical, then I am taking away my player's control of their emotional reactions. And that, is a bad thing.
Except that this is a very specific case involving a very specific condition. You could easily say that a dragon's roar involves infrasound or a dragon's scent includes fear-causing pheromones and thus has the same effect as magical mind-control (which
also takes away their emotional reactions, by the way).
And no matter the origins, you can say that it affects their biological processes--the trembling hands and quickened heart beat interfering with combat that I mentioned ages ago--but not their mental or emotional processes.
There's a huge difference between something like this--which allows for both an initial saving throw and another one at the end of every turn--and the DM saying "no, sorry, you're actually feeling <emotion>." The former is a game mechanic that's been around since the start in one form or another. The
latter is bad DMing.
So, if 99% of all fear abilities are magical mental saves, and of the very few examples you can give that give a different sort of save, half of the halflings who might get played are resistant because of poison, not because of fear, then why aren't gnomes as brave as halflings?
Because--as I already said--they aren't Brave, they're Magic Resistant.
If may have much the same effect, but the
cause is different.
This is the issue I've been struggling with. The one you dismissed as me just being a naughty word DM who doesn't understand that players control their characters. Of course, you could have realized that sooner if you had been interested in discussing instead of just attacking me.
Look, I have already explained this to you a dozen times or more. I am really, really tired of repeating myself. Either actually accept my advice and change your tune to expanding upon the given options, or don't bother replying, because I have no interesting in going over it again.
