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

[doctorbadwolf]

Do you think it's just an oversight that around half of the fear-causing abilities say that they are magical and around half don't?

Right? Maybe the designers don't view fear as soemthing that can only be imposed magically. Also, I wish I had fact checked the claim waaaay upthread that there aren't any nonmagical fear effects in the game, but I was too busy trying to figure out why I was supposed to care about whether Gnomes and Halflings have advantage on different effects, or whatever the hell that was about.

Didn't @Faolyn make a big post showing all of the Halflings in the published products?

I know all of my worlds that have had elves and dwarves have also had halflings.

Or am I missing what kind of world you're talking about?

Don't even mention Eberron. Doesn't count because they...expanded on halflings with several distinct cultural groups that have different traditions and places in the world.

But hey, it's all about the numbers, for some reason. Not about being precise or accurate about the numbers, mind, just about referencing them a lot and congratulating oneself.

A single family in the Ten Towns? That's the "significant" world buildling that halflings are so great for? Wow. Be still my beating heart.

You...um...you know that there were like 3 or 4 other examples, right? Like...it objectively wasn't just a single family.

And, again I'M THE ONE WHO POSTED ALL OF HALFLINGS IN THE PUBLISHED PRODUCTS. Yes, I am 100% aware of EXACTLY how much halflings appear in published products.

Not sure why the screaming is necessary, but no. You are one of two people who have posted about halflings in published products. Acting like counter-examples that don't support your narrative just...didn't happen...is odd.

It's clear that WotC simply does not care about worldbuilding. It's not a priority of 5th edition at all.

I disagree, actually. I think they care about it in the same way that Doctor Who cares about it. That is, they care about telling stories in a world that promotes telling stories, not about simulationist worldbuilding, which is only one kind of worldbuilding.

Because the only thing you have ever criticized about my changes to halflings... is that it changes halflings.

This is, again, directly false. Specifics have been given. You tend to ignore them and then claim again that they haven't been given.

There is no consistency about these things within the game. Why not? Because the game does not care.

Well, I wouldn't say there is no consistency. This just isn't a case where there is any reason for all fear effects to be one way or the other.

Yes, I should totally engage in honest discussion... like asking a question... and then waiting for an answer.

Oh wait, I asked a question, then I was told to stop being ridiculous because the thing the person claimed wasn't true. Or was so self-evidently true that they couldn't be bothered to even state it. Man, I'm such a bad faith actor in expecting people to answer supposedly simply questions.



And now I get to read your "edited" PHB entry. This should be "fun" gotta just quote multiple pages of text with pictures to answer a supposedly obvious question.



Huh, I was going to read through and not comment. But this is weird. First of all, I really don't see how any of the stuff I crossed out has to do with culture. Seems like... a physical description of a halfling.

But then I find this line, so since you carefully removed anything that you could see a "Strong argument" for nomadic halflings being unable to do, I'm curious for you to tell me about these nomadic cellars.



Hmm.. weird. None of this seems to be, oh what's the word I'm looking for.. different from an agrarian Halfling community.

You know, the thing I actually asked. All of this applies to all halflings. So, when I asked "what is the difference in culture between a nomadic halfling and an agrarian halfling" how is all of this material which is identical for both of them, relevant? It would be like asking what is the difference between lemonade and Kool-Aid and being told "well, they are both fluids that are made to be drank by humans"... that isn't a difference, that's a commonality.



Huh. wonder why you left this in. Do the nomadic halflings hold land?



Huh... that is so weird. You probably noticed the bolded and purple text right? I'll be bringing that up in a bit.



So, that bolded purple text. That was every single time that they explicitly mentioned nomadic halflings. It was a total of three times. Most of which were... "and some halflings are nomads".

Now, I think I understand what the confusion is. When I asked "What is the difference between nomadic halflings and agrarian halflings?" in my post, where I was responding to your direct claim that the PHB provided three different cultures, you didn't hear me asking that question. Because that isn't the question you just answered.

The question you just answered is closer to "what are the similarities between agrarian halflings and nomadic halflings?" Which is... sort of the opposite of the question I asked. You see, a difference is when something isn't the same. And you just posted nearly the entirety of the halfling entry to tell me... they are the same.

Really, you could have saved yourself a lot of time and effort by saying "really nothing, they are basically identical" Because you did not list a single, solitary difference beyond the absolute minimum of "some halflings live on farms, others are nomads" And, you can't really call that a different culture. Heck, nothing in the right up prevents a halfling shire from being picked up, packed up and moved every few decades. There are people that have mobile villages like that for farming purposes. So, they could be identical cultures, just at two different points in time.

But, thank you for putting in the time and effort to set this up. It really does help prove my point that they didn't list any differences between the two.



No.



No, if you throw something then it is going to fall to the ground. It has a limited distance. Can you tell me the distance at which fear no longer affects you? I know many people were afraid of things thousands of miles away. Can't throw a dagger that far.

Climbing, jumping, and swimming? Well, that can go on forever... except that a round is why those numbers exist, and a round is a unit of time. A speed is a function of distance over time, ergo you need a distance. Does fear have a speed limit that you feel is applicable?

Vision in low light depends on the source, but I think you get my point. So, why am I focused on fear that only exists within 20 ft of a creature and disappears within six seconds or less if you are ever more than 20ft from it? Because that demonstrates a way that this ability works that natural fear doesn't.

Like, you make a whole thing of "striking out" stuff about physical descriptions and clothing (clothing is part of culture, btw), when I literally said I was leaving in anything that didn't contradict nomadic halflings. The whole point was that the entire writeup supports nomadic halflings.

You acted like nomadic halflings were unsupported in the PHB. They provably are not. "Oh but what about cellars! Gotcha!" except no, you're either being aggressively obtuse, or disingenuous, here. You really can't imagine parallel to a cellar in a wagon or on a boat? Ya ever been on a boat?

 

[JiffyPopTart]

So... did you actually read the Sage Advice post? Here is the important bit.

"In D&D, the first type of magic is part of nature. It is no more dispellable than the wind. A monster like a dragon exists because of that magic-enhanced nature. The second type of magic is what the rules are concerned about. When a rule refers to something being magical, it’s referring to that second type."

That second type being, for reference "the concentrated magical energy that is contained in a magic item or channeled to create a spell or other focused magical effect"

So, dragons are magical, they exist because of their magic-enhanced nature. However they do not use "game tag magical" abilities that are concentrated magical energy used in items, spells or "other effects"

So, a dragon's fear... is magical. It just isn't concentrated magical energy. Which makes sense, it is an aura. Which is diffused. Same with a Pit Fiend. Magical, just not "#magical#gametag"

So on this sidebar I'm kinda with @Chaosmancer. Almost everything that isn't "in real life" gets lumped into the useless descriptor of magic in 5e. It pretty much makes the term magic useless and muddies the waters.

That being said...I have no problem making an NPC Barbarian King have an intimidate power that works on PCs, but that is a function of an ability I gave that character specifically, not just him rolling a high roll.

One interesting creature related to this discussion is the cloaker. It has the mirror image ability clearly called out as magic, but it's fear causing moan is not. So I'd treat the former as dispellable/antimagicable and the latter not.

 

[Don Durito]

So on this sidebar I'm kinda with @Chaosmancer. Almost everything that isn't "in real life" gets lumped into the useless descriptor of magic in 5e. It pretty much makes the term magic useless and muddies the waters.

That being said...I have no problem making an NPC Barbarian King have an intimidate power that works on PCs, but that is a function of an ability I gave that character specifically, not just him rolling a high roll.

One interesting creature related to this discussion is the cloaker. It has the mirror image ability clearly called out as magic, but it's fear causing moan is not. So I'd treat the former as dispellable/antimagicable and the latter not.

As I pointed out earlier, Battlemaster Fighters can grant fear with Menacing Attack which is clearly not intended to be magical in any fictional sense.

And it interacts with effects that are specifically magical like the Paladin of Conquest's Aura. The game is simply not interested in a hard line of demarcation here.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I'd expect nomadic halflings to be much more likely to spend wealth early, or buy things that are easier to transport but have similar value.

I mean, then just say that.

Instead of being intentionally pedantic. If you're that irritated, maybe say that, instead of continuing the interaction that is so irritating you.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Actually, I'll be honest, it was more of a cheap point because I'm getting irritated. Obviously it was just a copy/paste mistake.

Here is the actual issue with the idea though, nomads generally have limited storage space. I know I will be called to task for stating something as a fact, but houses (especially those with multiple levels) tend to be bigger than wagons or boats. Yes, houseboats are a thing, but you run into a lot of potential issues trying to steer a house down a river I'd imagine. So, they would be storing their wealth that they supposedly hide... alongside everything else. There just isn't the type of space to store away riches humbly when you are constantly on the move. And if you are just storing them and carrying them because... why?

How often has someone like "Jimmy Football" thrown away their trophy when moving, because transporting it is more of a hassle than it is worth to put back in a memory box and store it away for another few decades? I'd expect nomadic halflings to be much more likely to spend wealth early, or buy things that are easier to transport but have similar value.

I used the trophy example instead of gold or jewels because I interpret the treasure line not as literal money/wealth but instead something important to them.

So they might have a cameo of a loved one kept tucked in a shirt versus a portrait hung over the fireplace.

I just think it's interesting we have vastly different interpretations on it. I don't see it as a reference to a physical space or monetary wealth but instead more of a frame of mind...very opposite of dwarves who will carve a loved ones face the size of a mountain for everyone to see....

 

[JiffyPopTart]

As I pointed out earlier, Battlemaster Fighters can grant fear with Menacing Attack which is clearly not intended to be magical in any fictional sense.

And it interacts with effects that are specifically magical like the Paladin of Conquest's Aura. The game is simply not interested in a hard line of demarcation here.

If it works on a cube of Jell-O it's gotta have some sort of pizzaz behind it.

It's as magical as a monk punching faster is, which is to say it's not but in 5e it can be because "magic" explains all the gaps in logic like how it works on an ooze or how a shield protects a halfling from a storm giants warhammer.

 

[Don Durito]

If it works on a cube of Jell-O it's gotta have some sort of pizzaz behind it.

It's as magical as a monk punching faster is, which is to say it's not but in 5e it can be because "magic" explains all the gaps in logic like how it works on an ooze or how a shield protects a halfling from a storm giants warhammer.

No it's magical in that instance because you decide it's magical in order to explain fictional inconsistencies.

But if you are saying it's magical becauase it has to be magical, then that's you adding your own particular world building take onto the rules for the sake of consistency. One could just as easily say that in this world for some bizarre reason cubes of Jell-O are capable of being intimidated. Or you could rule that the effect in this case is not actually fright, but a response to pain and imminent threat that is best represented in the rules by using the rules for fear.

As I keep saying: the game doesn't care. The only thing the game cares about is that it's a fear effect and there are rules for fear. The rules don't even actually require that the Fear effect is accompanied by the fictional condition of being frightened. All they require is that when X happens, Y effect follows.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

There were also statements that halflings were the only race in the world to be kind.

No, there weren't.

Here is the actual issue with the idea though, nomads generally have limited storage space. I know I will be called to task for stating something as a fact, but houses (especially those with multiple levels) tend to be bigger than wagons or boats. Yes, houseboats are a thing, but you run into a lot of potential issues trying to steer a house down a river I'd imagine. So, they would be storing their wealth that they supposedly hide... alongside everything else. There just isn't the type of space to store away riches humbly when you are constantly on the move. And if you are just storing them and carrying them because... why?

How often has someone like "Jimmy Football" thrown away their trophy when moving, because transporting it is more of a hassle than it is worth to put back in a memory box and store it away for another few decades? I'd expect nomadic halflings to be much more likely to spend wealth early, or buy things that are easier to transport but have similar value.

To miss a point so badly...it's truly something.

That isn't at all what the cellar thing is about, nor is it an answer to what they asked you. Their wealth isn't on display. They don't stick the amulet of pure mithral given to them by the Elf Queen when they defeated the Black Dragon Nuraltharaxithilis The Unkind on the front of their wagon or riverboat, it's in a chest, belowdeck. They don't show off the sword forged by dragonsbreath and the skill of the legendary dwarven smith, or buy a fancy scabbard for it, it's just in a leather scabbard their dad made them right next to their travel cheese knife.

I used the trophy example instead of gold or jewels because I interpret the treasure line not as literal money/wealth but instead something important to them.

So they might have a cameo of a loved one kept tucked in a shirt versus a portrait hung over the fireplace.

I just think it's interesting we have vastly different interpretations on it. I don't see it as a reference to a physical space or monetary wealth but instead more of a frame of mind...very opposite of dwarves who will carve a loved ones face the size of a mountain for everyone to see....

Exactly! And this speaks directly and meaningfully to what makes halflings interesting and fun to play, as well as to why they are not at the center of major events.

The cellar line isn't about actual literal cellars. It's about not feeling any need to display wealth or trophies or in general "leave a legacy" for the world to remember. Halflings know that their family will remember them, that if they did a cool thing their great grandkids will hear the story someday, and that's more than enough. The fact that said story might eventually end up being a story about Brandobaris is just a fun part of life. Humans, Dwarves, Elves, they need history to remember them. Their Halfling friends probably don't grok why on earth anyone would care about such a thing.

We can add to Halflings all day, make up new cultures and the like, but the core of what makes many of us enjoy playing them, the reason they survived the first couple iterations of the game to even become a legacy element of the game, the reason more people play them than play 90% of published races for 5e, is exactly the above.

 

[Hussar]

Does it say anywhere in the rules that persuasion checks and intimidate checks aren't magical? Are the high level Bard and Barbarians abilities in them? Maybe it's a grey area since it doesn't say.

Yes. It's grey because it doesn't say.

 

[Hussar]

Wait a minute, are you saying dungeons are often under ground!?!?!

Wow, that's your takeaway?

No, what I'm asking is, where is the halfling equivalent adventure? Where is the single, solitary adventure where halflings are the focus? Fifty years of the hobby and I'll bet, without googling it, you can't name a single halfling focused adventure.