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

[Faolyn]

Would make a very easy justification for putting Potions of Healing in the standard equipment list.

Shame that in 40 years of the game, no one has ever actually done any of this.

Since they've never actually said what the ingredients for healing potions are, they could very easily be made of healing honey.

 

[Chaosmancer]

They only give those descriptions for the four "common races", and humans and halflings are the only short-lived ones, right?

Yes, I'm just not sure why people want to dismiss the literal in-world evidence of similarty by trying to hide it behind empathy.

"You know how you feel when you don't get second lunch or have to defend the village instead of working on the garden? Now imagine your brain made you skip second lunch and gardening like every other day!"

pfft, that could work, but I think it would take someone explaining that to them, not something they would come by naturally.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Or at least one halfling feels kinship with some humans. It's a pretty weak bit of text to make sweeping generalizations based on.

Text that is literally a sweeping generalization of the race written in the first person is weak evidence for a sweeping generalization.... sure, that is how we should view this literal text meant to show how the general relationship of halflings and humans are.

Assuming you are right about halflings and empathy (though if swear I'd seen something explicit to the contrary), what you are describing would be a race that differs significantly from human beings (and wouldn't even know that they are different).

Differs significantly in a the realm of mental health, but I'm not sure how many PCs are accurately portraying the mental health struggles they would normally have in the IRL situation.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Text that is literally a sweeping generalization of the race written in the first person is weak evidence for a sweeping generalization.... sure, that is how we should view this literal text meant to show how the general relationship of halflings and humans are.



Differs significantly in a the realm of mental health, but I'm not sure how many PCs are accurately portraying the mental health struggles they would normally have in the IRL situation.

Yep. Text used to illustrate how races view themselves in relation to others is not good evidence for objective comparisons of actual similarity.

You could literally sub in any race for that text. If it'd been written about dragonborn, would you be trying to make the case that halflings are basically dragonborn?

This new casting of halflings as very human friendly sociopaths is an interesting spin.

 

[bedir than]

Humans think Dwarves are human, as do Elves

Dwarves. “They’re stout folk, stalwart friends, and true to their word. Their greed for gold is their downfall, though.”
Dwarves. “Dwarves are dull, clumsy oafs. But what they lack in humor, sophistication, and manners, they make up in valor. And I must admit, their best smiths produce art that approaches elven quality.”

 

[Vaalingrade]

I just hope that everyone who hopes all these intelligent hominids with very little physiological difference from humans take a sudden right turn into xenofiction never complain about 'verisimilitude' in a fantasy world.

Actually, I hope everyone stops that so I can have fun, interesting fantasy again, but especially the people for whom these idea are contradictory.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Yep. Text used to illustrate how races view themselves in relation to others is not good evidence for objective comparisons of actual similarity.

You could literally sub in any race for that text. If it'd been written about dragonborn, would you be trying to make the case that halflings are basically dragonborn?

It isn't about dragonborn though. It is about halflings and humans. The fact is, they didn't sub in Dragonborn.

So...
1) hobbits were directly related to men.
2) The first two sentences about halflings states "Halflings are a fictional race found in some fantasy novels and games. They are often depicted as similar to humans except about half as tall, and are not quite as stocky as the similarly-sized dwarves"
3) And according to other posters, earlier editions directly related them as well.

And then 5e has them saying they are similar.

Therefore, saying they are similar doesn't seem like a huge stretch.

This new casting of halflings as very human friendly sociopaths is an interesting spin.

Just a passing thought. Obviously it doesn't say anything about it in the PHB.

 

[Gammadoodler]

It isn't about dragonborn though. It is about halflings and humans. The fact is, they didn't sub in Dragonborn.

So...
1) hobbits were directly related to men.
2) The first two sentences about halflings states "Halflings are a fictional race found in some fantasy novels and games. They are often depicted as similar to humans except about half as tall, and are not quite as stocky as the similarly-sized dwarves"
3) And according to other posters, earlier editions directly related them as well.

And then 5e has them saying they are similar.

Therefore, saying they are similar doesn't seem like a huge stretch.



Just a passing thought. Obviously it doesn't say anything about it in the PHB.

So what you are saying is that, since the quote supports an argument you are making, it's strong persuasive evidence, but if it hadn't been, it'd just be flavor text like every other equivalent entry in the PHB.

Sure, sounds like good faith to me.

And I don't really have an issue with folks who say halflings are similar to humans. I do think that they are, broadly, more different from humans than most all the medium-sized humanoids.

In either case, the position, for which the quote was used, was not that halflings are similar to humans. It was that they are the same.

 

[Don Durito]

My observation of halfling PCs is that people tend to play them in a way which is tonally distinct from humans.

I'm not sure how relevant lore is to all this (and really I think lore is a fandom fixation, not a practical game issue anyway). My observation has been in actual play halflings are much more distinct from humans than elves generally are.

Elves might have reams of really boring lore which you could actually read through if you have a bout of insomnia, but in games they are almost always played as humans that happen to have pointy ears and meditate instead of sleeping.

You might point to how elves are different to humans in the lore, but those are just words on paper. I very rarely see that lore translate meaningfully to anything that informs characterisation in play. The fact that your PC is 3ft tall and the size of a small child informs play in a much more concrete way.

As far as easily recognisable in play I would probably put Dwarves at the top followed by goblins, and then perhaps, gnomes, halforcs and halflings.

Tieflings, Genasi, elves and Half-elves (anything "human but cooler") tend to in play just be humans with cool powers.

And this really the basic structural purpose of races, a kind of broad rough strokes hook for play and differentiation.

Worldbuilding is really not the purpose of them. Worldbuilding with nuanced distinct societies is much easier without them.

Edit: A lot of people seem to be saying they don't know what to do with halflings. This seems to be from a GM's perspective. I've never seen players have that problem. (Of course if you do you just choose something else, but plenty of players over the years have known what to do with them). The PC races are not, and have never been there for GMs. Even Gygax supposedly didn't really want them, but he put them in for his players.

So if your problem as a GM is how to make a coherent world with the options before you, then you just have to do what GMs have been doing since the 70s. Solve your problems yourself. The game doesn't care. It puzzles me that people see these inconsistencies as problems rather than opportunites - I always though that the fun of worldbuilding in D&D was rationalising these things and coming up with your own takes and solutions.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I'm just popping in to link this post of mine from the (+) Halfling thread:

D&D 5E - (+) Halfling Appreciation and Development Thread

Should they get proficiency and better damage with slings? If I were to rewrite halflings, I might give them magic stone as a racial cantrip.

www.enworld.org

If that's what halflings are like, I can get behind that. If the 5.5e/6e PHB does something like that, I would be completely on board with that.

What do the people that disliked the possibility of making Halflings be part of Humans think about this? What about the people who agreed that halflings should be changed? Does this work for both of you? If not, why?