RPG Evolution: The Trouble with Halflings

Over the decades I've developed my campaign world to match the archetypes my players wanted to play. In all those years, nobody's ever played a halfling.

the-land-of-the-hobbits-6314749_960_720.jpg

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.

So What's the Problem?​

Halflings, derived from hobbits, have been a curious nod to Tolkien's influence on fantasy. While dwarves and elves have deep mythological roots, hobbits are more modern inventions. And their inclusion was very much a response to the adventurous life that the agrarian homebodies considered an aberration. In short, most hobbits didn't want to be adventurers, and Bilbo, Frodo, and the others were forever changed by their experiences, such that it was difficult for them to reintegrate when they returned home. You don't hear much about elves and dwarves having difficulty returning home after being adventurers, and for good reason. Tolkien was making a point about the human condition and the nature of war by using hobbits as proxies.

As a literary construct, hobbits serve a specific purpose. In The Hobbit, they are proxies for children. In The Lord of the Rings, they are proxies for farmers and other folk who were thrust into the industrialized nightmare of mass warfare. In both cases, hobbits were a positioned in contrast to the violent lifestyle of adventurers who live and die by the sword.

Which is at least in part why they're challenging to integrate into a campaign world. And yet, we have strong hobbit archetypes in Dungeons & Dragons, thanks to Dragonlance.

Kender. Kender Are the Problem​

I did know one player who loved to play kender. We never played together in a campaign, at least in part because kender are an integral part of the Dragonlance setting and we weren't playing in Dragonlance. But he would play a kender in every game he played, including in massive multiplayers like Ultima Online. And he was eye-rollingly aggravating, as he loved "borrowing" things from everyone (a trait established by Tasselhoff Burrfoot).

Part of the issue with kender is that they aren't thieves, per se, but have a child-like curiosity that causes them to "borrow" things without understanding that borrowing said things without permission is tantamount to stealing in most cultures. In essence, it results in a character who steals but doesn't admit to stealing, which can be problematic for inter-party harmony. Worse, kender have a very broad idea of what to "borrow" (which is not limited to just valuables) and have always been positioned as being offended by accusations of thievery. It sets up a scenario where either the party is very tolerant of the kender or conflict ensues. This aspect of kender has been significantly minimized in the latest draft for Unearthed Arcana.

Big Heads, Little Bodies​

The latest incarnation of halflings brings them back to the fun-loving roots. Their appearance is decidedly not "little children" or "overweight short people." Rather, they appear more like political cartoons of eras past, where exaggerated features were used as caricatures, adding further to their comical qualities. But this doesn't solve the outstanding problem that, for a game that is often about conflict, the original prototypes for halflings avoided it. They were heroes precisely because they were thrust into difficult situations and had to rise to the challenge. That requires significant work in a campaign to encourage a player to play a halfling character who would rather just stay home.

There's also the simple matter of integrating halflings into societies where they aren't necessarily living apart. Presumably, most human campaigns have farmers; dwarves and elves occupy less civilized niches, where halflings are a working class who lives right alongside the rest of humanity in plain sight. Figuring out how to accommodate them matters a lot. Do humans just treat them like children? Would halflings want to be anywhere near a larger humanoids' dwellings as a result? Or are halflings given mythical status like fey? Or are they more like inveterate pranksters and tricksters, treating them more like gnomes? And if halflings are more like gnomes, then why have gnomes?

There are opportunities to integrate halflings into a world, but they aren't quite so easy to plop down into a setting as dwarves and elves. I still haven't quite figured out how to make them work in my campaign that doesn't feel like a one-off rather than a separate species. But I did finally find a space for gnomes, which I'll discuss in another article.

Your Turn: How have you integrated halflings into your campaign world?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Michael Tresca

Michael Tresca

So why do we want to say that halflings must be uniquely and strangely brave when compared to other races just because they have advantage on the roll?
This reads as not understanding the thing as a rhetorical device.

They’re brave because they are described as such. The Brave trait then represents that by making them meaningfully less likely to be frightened. It’s that simple.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

So.... being accused of regicide when you didn't do it isn't catastrophically unlucky? See, kind of weird to think about luck only applying when you actively are doing a thing. That's not how luck works.
Sorry, I misunderstood. I didn't realize you were moving the goalposts she set up from the race to an individual and thought the catastrophe was the king being killed. Sure, an individual might be present and accused. How is that a catastrophe to the halfling race?
You want to quibble over the math, a halfling is X% less likely to fail because they can re-roll 1's.
Luck is luck. You don't have to be lucky half the time to be lucky.
I'm pointing out the practical reality. If you could succeed on a roll of 2 or better, you generally don't roll the dice. Most rolls that actually matter require you to roll at least an 8 or higher. So if a halfling and non-halfling both roll a 2, they both had bad luck.
Well, no. Failing isn't the same as bad luck. Bad luck is failure plus more. Rolling a 2 for a death save is failure. Rolling a 1 and missing two saves is bad luck. It worse than a normal failure. Your human fails that 1 time in 20. My halfling fails it 1 time in 400, because I'm luckier than you are.
And again, no. Halflings are not narratively more lucky, they are some random % more lucky when they take actions that involve rolling the d20. They otherwise are exactly as lucky as everyone else.
This translates into, "Halflings aren't luckier than other people in the narrative, they are just luckier than other people narrative." Those rolls are for actions that happen in the narrative, which halflings will objectively make more often due to their good luck. So yes, other than being luckier than everyone else, they are exactly as lucky as everyone else.
If the DM never describes a lucky thing happening to a halfling...
Then the DM is acting in bad faith and deliberately ruining part of the halfling's story. Bad DMs are bad, yes. Bad DMs don't make halflings as a game race unlucky in the narrative. They can only ruin their own games.
Exactly. So, saying "Halfings are the race that is Brave" is flatly wrong. Because every adventurer, no matter their race, is brave. Again, I don't care that mechanically halflings are X% less likely to succumb to magical fear, because falling to magically induced fear DOESN'T change the fact that you are brave. So it becomes a meaningless distinction, a statement of "Everyone is brave, but sometimes halflings are more brave than normal" which... I could say about any class with Wisdom save proficiency.
Adventurers are not a race, so it doesn't matter if every PC is brave or not. It can have no bearing on the fact that halflings as a race are braver than any other race that also does not have some sort of bravery mechanic to support it.

There are also levels of bravery. One can be braver than another. So even if adventurers are brave. A halfling will almost always be braver. That halfling PC will have the adventurer bravery you mention, plus will make more saves and spend less time cowering than the others due to the racial ability.
I know nobody has said that. I said it to prove a point. The point being, if falling under a magical fear effect and still fighting means you are brave, then halflings aren't uniquely brave. They are just statistically less likely to be affected by a mechanical condition. Because we can't define bravery as succeeding on saving throws against fear effects. If succeeding on a saving throw means you are brave, then failing means you aren't, and the ranger is not brave. But, we know narratively that that doesn't work. Being frightened and still fighting = being brave.
Braver. Not brave. Braver. That have a racial bravery that isn't matched by any other race.
So, the DM not twisting the story and giving the halfling special attention and special nods makes them a Bad Faith DM.
How is narrating what happens "twisting the story and giving the halfling special attention?" That's literally the DM's job. The halfling has an ability that is in fact in the narrative and if the DM doesn't narrate it, he's acting in as much bad faith as if I declared I'm trying to climb a wall and he said, "No you aren't."

From page 6 of the PHB

"3. The DM narrates the results of the adventurers' actions. Describing the results often leads to another decision point, which brings the flow of the game right back to step 1."

So the halfling declares an action to climb the wall and rolls a 1. Halfling luck kicks in and he re-rolls and gets a 17. Success! The result of that action is, "The halfling gets lucky and climbs the wall." The DM is obligated by RAW to narrate that. There's no "twisting" going on. There's no "giving the halfling special attention" going on. It's simply how the game is played and the DM refusing to do that is acting in bad faith.
Wow. That is certainly a way to look at the world. "The Dm didn't really emphasize how my character is special, they are a Bad DM who isn't acting in Good Faith."

Are you sure you want that to be your position?
It's not my position.
 




To me, the only problem here is that Sea Elves are yet another elf subrace. If there were just two non-elf races with similar aquaman themes, I wouldn’t be bothered.

Fair enough, but at least I think this helps highlight why the issue exists.

This is why, for me, I've been adopting a position of consolidating the races, not mechanically at least, but narratively. So, Goliath and Firbolg are related and both "giant-kin".

The one that gives me the biggest headache is trying to do a "Beast Folk" race because it would include

Aaracrockra (Bird)
Kenku (different Bird)
Owlin (third different Bird)
Harengon
Leonin (Cat)
Tabaxi (different cat)
Lizardfolk?
Loxodon
Minotaurs
Shifters (Which include thick hided creatures like bulls and elephants, Cats, Wolves and dogs, and then a generic catch all)
Tortle?

And I think I missed at least two others. And trying to work them all under a single umbrella is hard.
 


Fair enough, but at least I think this helps highlight why the issue exists.

This is why, for me, I've been adopting a position of consolidating the races, not mechanically at least, but narratively. So, Goliath and Firbolg are related and both "giant-kin".

The one that gives me the biggest headache is trying to do a "Beast Folk" race because it would include

Aaracrockra (Bird)
Kenku (different Bird)
Owlin (third different Bird)
Harengon
Leonin (Cat)
Tabaxi (different cat)
Lizardfolk?
Loxodon
Minotaurs
Shifters (Which include thick hided creatures like bulls and elephants, Cats, Wolves and dogs, and then a generic catch all)
Tortle?

And I think I missed at least two others. And trying to work them all under a single umbrella is hard.
If I were to try and create a beastfolk race I'd ditch all of those races above and just make one Beastfolk race. The player gets to choose which type he wants to be. I'd also ditch birds, since those are not beasts.

From there I'd figure out racial bonuses based on the beast selected. If they take lion as their type of beast, well lions are majestic and agile, so +2 Cha, +1 Dex. If elephant, well they are huge and strong, and they never forget, so +2 Str, +1 Int. And so on.

For racial abilities some generic Beast Senses which gives a bonus to perception or maybe advantage on perception checks, darkvision as a catchall since many animals can see in the dark and that could easily bleed over into a racial ability.

It would take some work, but I don't think it would be hard unless you're trying to keep all the beastial races both separate and under the same umbrella. Merge them.
 

I expect some of the repetition here may be a result of having the eminently reasonable position that the dm does not need to specifically tie all of your successes and failures to the feature that allowed it. Further, the failure to mention the feature does not negate that feature.

I'd conceded the change to racial stat mods at the very beginning of this exchange and have continued to take note of it. The point, such as it was, is the way in which the traditional racial ability bonuss were used to reflect those races' capabilities, including stealth, as of when those races were designed and released. Sure, Tasha's wipes the slate clean, but it doesn't change the original design process.

I've also noted that class plays a bigger part of a character's capabilities than their race selection (in point of fact it's right there in the message you've replied to).

You'd conceded it, then brought it back up to try and support your position. And you agree that class plays a bigger role, yet you insist on arguing with me, when that is my main point.

shrug Really confusing me here why you are pushing forth ideas you don't seem to agree with.

But it's the same way with pretty much every racial feature. A mountain dwarf monk getting medium armor proficiency didn't make them a warrior, but it is a reflection of a mountain dwarf's martial tradition..even if the character never uses it.

Having your character lean away from the roles which their racial features would support does not negate the traditions/traits those features were intended to reflect.

Actually, this is a perfect example of what I am talking about.

If someone came up to me and said "Dwarves are the race that wear armor" I would respond to them exactly as I have been responding to "halflings are the stealthy race"

First I would point out that it is not all dwarves, just like it is not all halflings that are particularly stealthy.
Then I would point out that your class determines your armor wearing ability, just as your class determines how stealthy you are.
Finally, I would point out that there are other races that get armor proficiency and therefore even if I conceded the previous two points, it still wouldn't make them "particularly dwarvish" to wear armor. Just while if I accept +2 dex = stealthy that doesn't make being stealthy "particularly halfling"


Am I denying that Mountain dwarves have a trait that allows them to wear armor? No. In fact, that has nothing to do with my points at all.
 

Fair enough, but at least I think this helps highlight why the issue exists.

This is why, for me, I've been adopting a position of consolidating the races, not mechanically at least, but narratively. So, Goliath and Firbolg are related and both "giant-kin".

The one that gives me the biggest headache is trying to do a "Beast Folk" race because it would include

Aaracrockra (Bird)
Kenku (different Bird)
Owlin (third different Bird)
Harengon
Leonin (Cat)
Tabaxi (different cat)
Lizardfolk?
Loxodon
Minotaurs
Shifters (Which include thick hided creatures like bulls and elephants, Cats, Wolves and dogs, and then a generic catch all)
Tortle?

And I think I missed at least two others. And trying to work them all under a single umbrella is hard.
If you want players to be able to play nearly any animal as beastfolk, you need a freeform build-you-own-beast setup. Like, "pick 3 features off the following list:"

I think it's quite doable, although you end up with low-flavor races (kenku are just bird people). Short of that, you need a number of separate races, probably a dozen or more.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top