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

[JiffyPopTart]

So the best approach to avoid the thread being shut down is to tone down baseless accusations on both sides.

Toning down baseless accusations to have a mature debate instead of an argument clinic. By Jove you just might be onto something!

 

[Faolyn]

Which is stupid as there would be less to eat and harder to preserve.

People like to complain in this thread that "halflings don't even have their own lands! They live with humans!" Are you really saying that there wouldn't be human patrols watching out for raiding bands? Or that halfings can't fund patrols and protectors themselves?

So a halfling is only 5% better at stealth than a human. And the "well halflings are all ninja" logic falls apart.

Yes, and? Same goes with every other race. Are you going to condemn tieflings for being only 5% more persuasive than humans?

Their bonus is literally just a +1.
That's worse than base proficiency.

Do you really think that no NPC halfling is going to also have proficiency in Stealth?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The big danger IMO is orcs burning the fields. But some plants burn more easily than others.

According to an elementary school teacher of mine who grew up on an alfalfa farm, marijuana often grows alongside that crop. When harvest time came, the alfalfa would be bundled separately from the weed, and the latter would be hauled off by the Feds to be burned in a massive incinerator…getting everyone downwind stoned with a bad case of the munchies.

Imagine, if you will, Halflings farmers deliberately interspersing other such plants in their cultivated fields.

Orcs raid, burn the crops, get stoned, and get set upon while flying. This happens enough time, the Orcs stop raiding that village.

(This is also a partial explanation for 2nd breakfast…)

 

[Faolyn]

According to an elementary school teacher of mine who grew up on an alfalfa farm, marijuana often grows alongside that crop. When harvest time came, the alfalfa would be bundled separately from the weed, and the latter would be hauled off by the Feds to be burned in a massive incinerator…getting everyone downwind stoned with a bad case of the munchies.

Imagine, if you will, Halflings farmers deliberately interspersing other such plants in their cultivated fields.

Only this is D&D, so they'd intersperse a strain of the yellow musk creeper that was cultivated to ignore halflings.

 

[Hussar]

This is a total non-answer. Because no matter what number we show you, you will continue to say that halflings aren't quite there. You have accepted that halflings are in the top nine races, out of 40+ official races and 55+ subraces, and an unknown but very large number of 3pp/homebrew races. But then you moved the goalposts and started claiming that any race (you mentioned bullywugs, IIRC) would be "that popular" if it were in the PH, despite absolutely no reason to believe that would be true.

Why do you keep referencing the number of sub-races? The only reason that halflings are in the top 9 is if you combine the sub-races. Split them out and suddenly halflings aren't even in the top 10 anymore. I was recently taken very much to task for pointing out that when you combine dwarves and elves into single races, they jump way up, back into the top 5. But, we're supposed to always combine halflings when talking about races. But, my reasoning why "any race" would be just as popular is quite simple- dragonborn and tieflings. Two races with nothing especially outstanding about them, no long history, no hugely famous authors to point to for inspiration, no movies - are both significantly more popular than halflings and a number of other PHB races.

It was pointed out to me repeatedly that if all things were equal, then all the races would be about 8 or 9%. Even with humans dominating, there's still room for about 8% being the average. ((Sorry if I'm misremembering the exact numbers, I'm sure someone will correct me, if my numbers are inaccurate, simply chalk it up to a mistake and not deliberate). To me, the fact that despite halflings having every possible advantage you could have to make a race popular and popularly played, they never have been. They've always been the tacked on race that just sort of sits in the PHB.

Likewise, I showed you how many halflings were in the adventures and you moved those goalposts, claiming that they were just there and not really an important part of the story, despite the fact that in all of those fourteen adventures they performed the same functions as every other NPC and in several of those adventures were said to live in the area in decently large numbers.

Hang on. Since we're being all "honest" and all. There are several adventures in those 14 adventures, which have zero halflings. So, how are they performing the same function? And yes, they are just "there" and almost never serve any real function to the adventure. You could yoink every reference of halfling out of most of the adventures and nothing would change.

So yes, it is about you refusing to accept the simple fact that halflings are popular enough. Maybe they're not popular enough for your tastes, but they're popular enough for D&D in general. And no, I don't believe you are telling the truth when you claim there's a threshold where you would accept them. Your actions have shown on multiple occasions that you simply don't want halflings in the PH, that halflings are not to your taste, and nothing will ever change your mind and let you admit you were wrong. Heck, it took me and one other person calling you out, twice I believe, before you would admit that you were wrong and I had actually gone through fourteen adventures and not just focused on one, like you claimed.

No, I do not accept that. They are not popular enough. They should be MORE popular. Has nothing to do with my "tastes" and thankyouverymuch for implying, yet again, that the only reason I'm arguing this is because I don't like halflings. Drink up boys, got another one. I feel that any option in the PHB that has achieved such mediocre results, despite trying for 40 years or more, shouldn't be in the PHB. I'm using the 5% mark because, well, that seems like a pretty decent line. I'm not wedded to it, to be certain. But, again, I'll ask you too - what would be a poor showing? Gnomes don't even crack the top 10 anymore. I'll bet dollars to donuts that if we go another 4 years, halflings won't either. So, if we drop down to 2%, say, and it stays there for significant amounts of time, would that be an acceptable point to suggest that we punt them into the DMG and add a new idea? 1%? How small of a minority of players do we have to get before it's not a good idea to have it in the PHB?

 

[JiffyPopTart]

You do know to many, that explanation sounds ridiculous within the context of D&D logic.

That's partially why this thread exists.

Speaking personally, my natural defense system in High School was 100% "keep quiet, unobtrusive, and if engaged be extra friendly".

 

[JiffyPopTart]

We are at this point starting to enter into a 1 for 1 re-hash of the last halfling thread

I'm waiting for peppercorns to pop up....that was my favorite digression.

 

[Hussar]

From what you've said here and elsewhere you've implied that by definition halflings are therefore irrelevant because it is impossible for halflings to be played more than halflings are.

I'm fairly sure you don't think you mean that - but the 5% threshold you set looks as if it was set after you looked up statistics for halflings and found them just under that

Fair enough. I'm not absolutely wedded to 5%. Personally, I think a core option that appears once in every 4 tables is a pretty meagre showing, but, okay, what's an acceptable number? 2% 1% Falling out of top 10? The fact that two non-PHB races have now overtaken gnomes in the top 10 and are nipping at the heels of halflings is pretty indicative that there's a fair demand for new ideas.

And I look at them and say that's a distortion.

Wasn't it you who dug up the lack of lore in the Realms on halflings and Yolanda? Wasn't it you who dug up just how little they are used in adventures in practice? Lip service has been paid to giving them advantages - but when it comes down to it neither TSR nor WotC have ever really cared about halflings, and especially not in the biggest setting around. Even gnomes have a much better deity in the Realms than halflings do. For that matter gnomes have an actual pantheon of eight deities in the Realms - and yes the halflings have six, but I don't believe the gnomes have ever had the indignity of having their deity demoted to an aspect of someone else - and left with a new chief deity almost entirely lacking in lore other than this event. And back in the greyhawk days the Gnomes had far more lore and detail than Halflings.

Fair enough as well. I mostly agree with this. If they are going to be in the PHB, do something with them. Granted, according to @Faolyn, I was 100% wrong about 5e and that halfings have a HUGE presence in the game, playing strong roles in adventures and supplements. And still only barely managing to get played by a tiny fraction of the player base. Sorry, but, yes, I do consider 5(ish) per cent and falling to be a pretty small fraction.

So, sure, either use them or lose them. But, apparently, according to @Faolyn, they ARE being used. And used very often. So, maybe, you should take this point up with them and get back to me. Which is it? Are they being used a lot and are well represented or are they used very little. It makes it pretty hard to have a discussion when you folks are saying opposite things, claiming both are true and then complaining when I agree with the other person.

Or possibly it's time to give them an actual chance rather than simply saying they are there and that they are common, and stopping there the way the default setting for D&D does.

Short changed, overlooked, and ignored - and still trucking along despite getting mere lip service. It's probably time to actively let halflings have a swing at the bat rather than just send them out into the deep outfield and then complain when they don't hit home runs. The archetype is solid - but nothing's been done with them by TSR or WotC (Eberron being an honourable exception).

So, which is it? @Faolyn? You JUST stated, in like the post or two above @Neonchameleon's here that I was 100% wrong for saying exactly what @Neonchameleon is saying here. Could you two kinda sort things out and get back to me? I'd like to be able to answer a single point rather than two completely contradictory points that are both claimed as true.

 

[Faolyn]

Why do you keep referencing the number of sub-races? The only reason that halflings are in the top 9 is if you combine the sub-races. Split them out and suddenly halflings aren't even in the top 10 anymore.

I reference the number of sub-races to show you how many different options there are. There are around 100 canon racial options Of those, halflings are in the top 9. They are literally in the 90th percentile for races.

dragonborn and tieflings. Two races with nothing especially outstanding about them, no long history, no hugely famous authors to point to for inspiration, no movies - are both significantly more popular than halflings and a number of other PHB races.

I've answered this several times.

First, tieflings do have a long history, in Planescape. I realize that they've been reduced to canonically being created only by Asmodeus, but nearly every person I've ever seen or heard commenting on tieflings prefers the original Planescape version--even those people who are too young to have every played in Planescape when it first came out seem to prefer the original tieflings. This isn't an in-game lore history, but it's a history of extreme coolness in the game. Tieflings, secondly, also have the cool edginess factor to them. It's not at all surprising that they are popular.

And dragonborn are literally dragon-born. Or at least, great-nth-grandchild of a dragon, and you could change their lore to say that sometimes the fetus in a dragon's egg forms into a couple of infant dragonborn instead of a single dragon wyrmling and not change anything in their lore. Regardless, being a dragon is cool, and until something better comes along, they are the next best thing to playing a dragon. Again, it's not at all surprising they're popular.

Halflings, the small, stoic, sneaky, everyman people of the world, are also popular, even if they're not traditionally cool. Because their small, stoic, sneaky, everyman selves fill a purpose in D&D the way no other race really can. They're the anti-hipster people, and that's just fine.

Hang on. Since we're being all "honest" and all. There are several adventures in those 14 adventures, which have zero halflings. So, how are they performing the same function? And yes, they are just "there" and almost never serve any real function to the adventure. You could yoink every reference of halfling out of most of the adventures and nothing would change.

Keep moving! I can still see the goalposts!

You could also yoink every reference of an elf, dwarf, tiefling, dragonborn, or anything else out of the adventure and replace them with human and nothing would change. Especially not now in 5e where you can give NPCs any traits you want instead of making them exactly like PCs.

You don't like halflings. You don't think they're popular enough. That's fine. You can think whatever you like. Your opinion does not match reality or have anything to do with what WotC will put in the next edition.

 

[Faolyn]

So, which is it? @Faolyn? You JUST stated, in like the post or two above @Neonchameleon's here that I was 100% wrong for saying exactly what @Neonchameleon is saying here. Could you two kinda sort things out and get back to me? I'd like to be able to answer a single point rather than two completely contradictory points that are both claimed as true.

Neonchameleon said tht halflings deserve to have their lore strengthened. You are saying they should be relegated to the DMG. Those are complete opposites.