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

[Zardnaar]

Sigh. Missing the point. Yes, I know that I don't have to include them. That's entirely true. And, honestly, I don't have to replace halflings in official settings. My players have already done that. So have 95% of gamers. Let's move these races over to the Monster Manual and make room for things that are ACTUALLY played. As in more than 1 in 20 players. More than 1 in 4 tables. If that means that half orcs and gnomes get the boot too? Fantastic.

Again, why are we being stuck with options that 95% of people DON'T USE?

The explained it in the 5E design process.

Races use sod all room anyway.

 

[Hussar]

The explained it in the 5E design process.

Races use sod all room anyway.

Oh, I agree. They were included because they were there in the past. Not exactly the most compelling reason to include anything.

 

[Faolyn]

No, I don't. It is just easier for you to rage at me if you think I do.

Trollness confirmed.

Yeah, my bad. I was dumb for engaging when your trollness was there on display. Goodbye.

 

[Faolyn]

Sigh. Missing the point. Yes, I know that I don't have to include them. That's entirely true. And, honestly, I don't have to replace halflings in official settings. My players have already done that. So have 95% of gamers. Let's move these races over to the Monster Manual and make room for things that are ACTUALLY played. As in more than 1 in 20 players. More than 1 in 4 tables. If that means that half orcs and gnomes get the boot too? Fantastic.

Again, why are we being stuck with options that 95% of people DON'T USE?

Because then you'd also have to get rid of all those other races that people don't use?

But seriously, does it actually hurt you that they're in the PH? If it's just that you want other, different races in the main book, then why not advocate for larger page counts with a larger chapter for races instead of getting rid of something that 5% of people like when you can and apparently have already ban it at your table.

 

[Yaarel]

The explained it in the 5E design process.

Races use sod all room anyway.

This "sod all" design space for lineages, leaves room for a free feat at level 1.

It would be cool if each lineage had the player choose one of several lineage-thematic feats at level 1. For example, an Elf might choose things like a feat for beauty, charm, and luminosity (elf shine), flight, fey magic resistance, feystep. Meanwhile, each other lineage would have its own assemblage to choose from.

If the Halfling had powerful distinctive feats to choose from, this would help it feel less like the Human.

The free feat conflicts with certain settings that come with a free feat, but perhaps even in those settings, a player could still choose a lineage feat instead at level 1.

 

[Don Durito]

This "sod all" design space for lineages, leaves room for a free feat at level 1.

It would be cool if each lineage had the player choose one of several lineage-thematic feats at level 1. For example, an Elf might choose things like a feat for beauty, charm, and luminosity (elf shine), flight, fey magic resistance, feystep. Meanwhile, each other lineage would have its own assemblage to choose from.

If the Halfling had powerful distinctive feats to choose from, this would help it feel less like the Human.

The free feat conflicts with certain settings that come with a free feat, but perhaps even in those settings, a player could still choose a lineage feat instead at level 1.

Adventures in Middle Earth does this and it's a distinct improvement. They're called cultures (rather than races - as there's several distinct human ones), and all cultures get specific feats. Including Halflings.

 

[Don Durito]

Halflings fill a niche. They're the most prominent of the little people races. I agree that folding them in with gnomes makes sense, but I'd note that none of the other little people options have passed halflings and stolen their niche. If that happened I'd be more up for removing them.

Kenku are more interesting to me than halflings but they're not exactly popular.

Goblins are another option. Goblins have not really ever got a proper write-up in 5e, but they're prominent in other games and often take the place of the halflings in settings (Iron Kingdoms and Symabaroum leap to mind). In many ways Goblins feel more modern for that reason and they have a lot of potential. I've also noted that players find it very easy to role-play goblins (although some of the most annoying characters I've seen in games have been goblins too).

But then we get to this: D&D is not a game that has playable goblins, it has halflings. That's part of its core identity. The question is, should D&D changes it's identity over time? Or should people just be more willing to play other games, if they're tired of D&D for what it is.

In any case, the way I'd prefer testing the waters here would not be replacing haflings with goblins in the PHB but rather replacing goblins with halflings in a new setting.

 

[pemerton]

I think merging halflings and gnomes would be a mistake: I don't see how it would encourage those who don't like to play those races play them; at the same time it would probably upset a good chunk of those who do like to play them.

 

[Zardnaar]

I think merging halflings and gnomes would be a mistake: I don't see how it would encourage those who don't like to play those races play them; at the same time it would probably upset a good chunk of those who do like to play them.

That's why they brought gnomes back. And will bring them back in 6E.

 

[Mind of tempest]

You already don't have to build halflings into every world. If you build your own worlds, you never have to include halflings in them. If you use official worlds, you can remove halflings and replace them with something else.


It makes them more popular than those other races, though.

depends on one of the great questions do you have a player who likes halflings? plus given they are in the player had book refusing them can get heated as without some trust removing things gets difficult.

Halflings fill a niche. They're the most prominent of the little people races. I agree that folding them in with gnomes makes sense, and I'd note that none of the other little people options have passed halflings and stolen their niche. If that happened I'd be more up for removing them.

Kenku are more interesting to me than halflings but they're not exactly popular.

Goblins are another option. Goblins have not really ever got a proper write-up in 5e, but they're prominent in other games and often take the place of the halflings in settings (Iron Kingdoms and Symabaroum leap to mind). In many ways Goblins feel more modern for that reason and they have a lot of potential. I've also noted that players find it very easy to role-play goblins (although some of the most annoying characters I've seen in games have been goblins too).

But then we get to this: D&D is not a game that has playable goblins, it has halflings. That's part of its core identity. The question is, should D&D changes it's identity over time? Or should people just be more willing to play other games, if they're tired of D&D for what it is.

In any case, the way I'd prefer testing the waters here, would not be replacing haflings with goblins in the PHB but rather replacing goblins with halflings in a new setting.

kenku have an error in their whole cursed thing that stops creativity or talking normally plus their backstory is hyper vague and could be better..
everything's core identity changes why should dnd not change?
halflings do fill a niche but they could be far better about it or a better idea could be made.