Nyeshet
First Post
Why call them 'halflings' in the first place?
3.5e increased dwarves to short human normal height. Now in 4e gnomes are dropped and 'halflings' have been increased to short human normal height.
Really, there are no more short races - not in the sense of fantastically short. Get a human on the (extreme) short side of the height scale, an elf, a dwarf, and a halfling - they are all about the same height!
Halflings were supposedly called such because they are half the height of an average human, but now they are at best maybe 3/4 - 4/5s the height of an average human. Have them trading with a group of pygmies (in the literal sense of the African tribe whose average height is 4 to 5 ft, not in the sense of just another word for short) and (based on height alone) you would not be able to tell them apart. They would not stand out as being exceptionally short at all.
So why call them 'halflings' in the first place?
I understand that they increased the height due to concerns that it was unrealistic to believe that a group of 3.5 ft tall humanoids could - on strength / size alone - have a chance of overcoming an average sized adult human, but then I would not expect them to use strength or even melee attacks to deal with creatures that much larger than them - no more so than I would expect average sized adult humans to deal with Ogres or Hill Giants only in melee. When dealing with a creature that much larger than oneself, I would expect ranged attacks and groups of 3-5 against one. And if 3-5 halflings (3.5e sized) were to use ranged attacks against an average sized human, I would expect them to have a fair chance of winning, even if the rules were adjusted to more accurately take into account the disadvantages they *should* have from their lack of height (such as a greater than only -2 penalty to Str, for starters).
Sorry for seeming to rant a bit, but this change to halflings - and the reasons they gave for it - has become a bit of a pet peeve of mine.
3.5e increased dwarves to short human normal height. Now in 4e gnomes are dropped and 'halflings' have been increased to short human normal height.
Really, there are no more short races - not in the sense of fantastically short. Get a human on the (extreme) short side of the height scale, an elf, a dwarf, and a halfling - they are all about the same height!
Halflings were supposedly called such because they are half the height of an average human, but now they are at best maybe 3/4 - 4/5s the height of an average human. Have them trading with a group of pygmies (in the literal sense of the African tribe whose average height is 4 to 5 ft, not in the sense of just another word for short) and (based on height alone) you would not be able to tell them apart. They would not stand out as being exceptionally short at all.
So why call them 'halflings' in the first place?
I understand that they increased the height due to concerns that it was unrealistic to believe that a group of 3.5 ft tall humanoids could - on strength / size alone - have a chance of overcoming an average sized adult human, but then I would not expect them to use strength or even melee attacks to deal with creatures that much larger than them - no more so than I would expect average sized adult humans to deal with Ogres or Hill Giants only in melee. When dealing with a creature that much larger than oneself, I would expect ranged attacks and groups of 3-5 against one. And if 3-5 halflings (3.5e sized) were to use ranged attacks against an average sized human, I would expect them to have a fair chance of winning, even if the rules were adjusted to more accurately take into account the disadvantages they *should* have from their lack of height (such as a greater than only -2 penalty to Str, for starters).
Sorry for seeming to rant a bit, but this change to halflings - and the reasons they gave for it - has become a bit of a pet peeve of mine.
