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

[Gammadoodler]

Are you perhaps confused because I seperated "individual player character" from "race of people"?

That is likely, since I said nothing about individual PCs.

 

[lingual]

Yeah, we should go over to all those people who want to remove halflings from the game and tell them to stop.

looks into an empty room

Huh, they seem to have all left on their own. Your halflings are safe from being removed from the game. Now we can focus on improving on their lore in the game.

The suggestions to remove them from future iterations of the PHB effectively does remove them from a lot of games.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Nonmagical fear can be RAW. For example, if I allow Intimidate to frighten a beast away, the DM is supposed to interpret and decide how to use skills. Different DMs have different styles, but this is RAW.

Sure, but I wouldn’t allow it in reverse, allowing either a beast or another PC to frighten a PC away.

 

[Yaarel]

Sure, but I wouldn’t allow it in reverse, allowing either a beast or another PC to frighten a PC away.

If there were useful mechanics for social reactions, sorta like adding Fear to the Ideal and Flaw section of the character sheet, I would be into using Persuasion to charm and Intimidation to frighten the player characters.

Heh, of course, I myself would abuse this with the most obscure unlikely-to-encounter Fear possible. So, not exactly this, but something like this.

Charm almost works to play on someones Ideal, while Frighten almost works to play on someones Flaw. But not quite.

 

[Cadence]

RE - "How characters feel"

DM: "Something happens to <character name's> arm."

Player: "What was it? Do I feel anything?"

DM: "I can't tell you what your character feels, you tell me."

Player: "How can I do that if I don't know what it is? I look, what do I see?"

DM: "Two puncture marks about 1/4 inch in diameter and an inch apart?"

Player: "Does it hurt!?!?"

DM: "Does it? Roll a con save please."

Player: "You're scaring me!"

DM: "That's all you. What was the roll?"

 

[Oofta]

And yet I never said that they make poor PCs or that they make poor "PHB fodder" the things Sabathius actually said.

And I don't know why you would capitolize the "I". Do you think I want to make them the most important thing in the game... never made that claim. Do I want them to be more than wall paper in the world that never really matters? Yes, I'd like that.

A purpose would help that. It isn't neccessary, but Faolyn did try and tell me they are already Lorekeepers, and I find the idea appealing along with their traveling and tying them more tightly to bards, which ties into their love of stories. It is a nice little expansion of things they have.

I also have no idea why you want to keep harping on "persuasive isn't likeable". Halflings are already supposedly the people that get along with everyone, that can act as bridges between various people. Why not expand that into a more common role where they do that more often? The historical figure of Jigonhsaseh is a perfect example of the kind of diplomacy I could see halflings engaging in, and it wouldn't change much about them that you claim to like... except that every single halfling wouldn't be an unimportant everyman that everyone overlooks. Some of them would have done something to earn them respect of their peers. People would appreciate their strengths.


Maybe that is the core of our disagreement. I don't see how it is more interesting to have every halfling in the world content with what they have. They have essentially reached a state of perfect being as a race, none of them are unhappy or feel any need to improve the world. I'd rather take their kindness, appreciation for little things, and all that and have it actively working in the world to improve it, rather than sitting in a field of flowers watching butterflies.

Also, since this is the second post in a row responding to me saying that I did not make arguments I made... do you maybe wonder why so many of my posts include me defending myself?

Diplomats are not just passive messengers, at times they need to force compromise. There's a difference between likeable and persuasive. There are times when a diplomat needs to take the hard stands and say "no" to people that aren't used to hearing that word. But just as important it pushed them to the front and center of politics and world affairs. It's the opposite of their current niche. As far as lore keepers go, enjoying stories and having a verbal history is not the same as being interested in the politics and goings-on of the outer world. Halflings may not be complete isolationists like many of the races in D&D, but again making them lore keepers for world events goes pretty contrary to their country bumpkin appeal.

Halflings being content with what they have is part of what sets them apart from the other races. They're happy and content because they don't care about the rat race. If the Jones's have a bigger house or fancy furniture, you're happy for them but there is no drive to keep up with them.

That may not work for you, and that's fine. You don't use a other races from the PHB either. They do work for me, it seems to work just fine for a whole heck of a lot of people and you can't please everyone.

 

[Faolyn]

Sure, but I wouldn’t allow it in reverse, allowing either a beast or another PC to frighten a PC away.

I wouldn't allow one PC to frighten another PC away without that PC's permission. But I might allow it if the beast were some sort of megafauna, like a charging elephant.

 

[Chaosmancer]

My earlier example of a big intimidation role by an NPC momentarily stopping the party seems a bit different to me than another player saying you wet your pants in terror and the DM just letting it go by. :: shrugs ::

Technically, the Frightened condition doesn't have one wetting their pants either. If a magical effect gives someone the "Frightened" condition it just gives them disadvantage on Ability Checks and Attack rolls, and can't willingly move closer to the source of its fear. You could stand there yelling really brave insults and shooting at the BBEG in defiance.

Sure, you can. But again, I don't see any value in doing so. If I wanted to momentarily stop the party with an NPC, I would just describe what they did and what they said, and ask them what they were doing.

Having the NPC make a threat alone is enough to get the player's questioning what they should do and might delay them, I don't need to roll a die and force the players to stop because of utilizing a social skill to manipulate their behavior.

Again, another example of this would be having a merchant role persuasion and me just telling the party that they really want to accept the quest he is offering. Even if I don't force them to accept it, by telling them that they want to, I am imposing my will and my desires on their characters. And I see no value in doing that in this manner.

Do I use charm magic or domination magic? Yes. That is different, because once the player is free from the magical influence, they are free to react however they see fit. The entire point of that magic is that the person is not doing what they would otherwise want to do, or feeling what they would otherwise feel.

 

[Chaosmancer]

My daughter has a debilitating fear of stinging insects. If a wasp gets too close to her, she freaks out. If the wasp flies away she feels better.

I feel empathy for your daughter's phobia.

The decision of whether or not my character has ‎Daemonophobia is my own. Also, "the wasp flies away" doesn't indicate to me that she is suddenly less scared like a lightswitch went off when it gets a certain distance away, but rather that it leaving the area makes her feel more at ease. She would never, I assume, decide to go charging a wasp's nest with the desire to enact vengeance upon them. Her fear is real, even if she isn't near a wasp. But a PC who is affected by a Pit Fiend's aura... doesn't have that fear at any other point. Unless the player decides they do.

I'm saying that in the real world, people often don't have the autonomy to "decide" their own emotional state. Fear is a physiological response. It is not always rational and the triggers are not always predictable.

Neither is love. I also don't have any rules for enforcing non-magical love on people. Or for telling people they feel happy. What makes fear any different?

That's a non sequitur and I don't really even understand the point you are trying to make. A baseball bat can cause unconsciousness in a similar way that a revolting image, or terrifying enemy (or a poison or drug... I guess?) can cause incapacitating fear. It is physiological.

The point is, you as the DM do not get to decide what my player is afraid of. You do not get to decide what enemies I find terrifying. Just like you don't get to decide my backstory, which is also something that people in the real world can't decide. Physiological isn't enough of a justification for taking away the ability of the player to decide their emotional reaction.

 

[Chaosmancer]

That is likely, since I said nothing about individual PCs.

But, the thing that you seemingly were baffled by was my telling Sabathius that I never said that halflings make poor PCs. PCs are individuals by definition.