• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

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.

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

Mind of tempest

(he/him)advocate for 5e psionics
Which would be relevant were most tables only using the SRD as their source material. The sales figures of the core books would suggest this is not the case. :)

Which seems odd, given that every time they do a setting survey Birthright seems to get a fair bit of support.

4.7% of all characters being Halflings isn't exactly no-one.

I completely agree with dropping some species off the PC-playable list - there's a few dozen too many as it stands right now - but Halflings (as Hobbits) would survive that process were I in charge.
your right on the first one.

every setting gets some support do we have the figures to tell if it even matters?

why should halfing get to be a phb small race? goblins are more popular, kobolds have something going on, halflings are more likely to function on pure luck mechanics and the fact they are in the phb, take them out the book drop them in supplements and remove the busted luck stuff and they would drop like a stone in the number of players as they are pure mechanical gimmick.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Moreover, there are prehistoric humans who are the same average size as halflings.
Yes, Homo Floresiensis are colloquially often called "Hobbits."

I'm sure if fantasy world had evolution, genetics and related taxonomy, halflings, dwarves, goliaths, and probably elves orcs and many others would be part of genus Homo, and thus technically humans. But the game is written by Homo Sapiens for Homo Sapiens, living in a world where there are no other species of Homo, and the world "human" is usually used to refer to Homo Sapiens. So I'm not sure that this is really a problem... 🤷
 

No, it really isn't. I'm using the numbers that everyone is looking at. 1 in 20 characters. That means that 95% of characters made AREN'T halflings.
So what? 95% of characters aren't of any one race! Fiveish percent is decent for non-human, non-elf species. Dwarves are around that too.

If I was going to get rid of both and not replace them, sure, I'd agree with you. But, I have repeatedly stated that I would replace them with stuff that fills a similar niche - an anthropomorphic race with small size fits the bill pretty well. And Warforged certainly cover the gnome techno niche.
Those are not similar niches! Kobolds are not acceptable halfling replacements, and warforged most definitely are not acceptable gnome replacements!

But, by the same token, if elves and half-elves were scraping the bottom of the barrel? Yup, you bet I would eject them.
But if say 4% played each it would actually be 8% that want to play elfy things. How the species are divided is pretty much arbitrary, so you can't just stare the popularity of each variant in isolation. In newer books they seem to be doing away with subraces, so we have things like Astral Elves (or something) so in future where elves are further subdivided your logic would indeed lead to eliminating them all!

Why are we keeping stuff that no one actually plays? And, yes, less than 5% is no-one.
In a game with over forty species it is not.

It's crazy to me to keep trying to make something popular when it has obviously failed to gain any popularity over forty years of the game. Halflings and gnomes have had their chance. Let's get some fresh ideas into the game.

It is crazy to me have a bizarre vendetta against imaginary little people and twist statistics concoct arbitrary mathematical requirements to justify getting rid of them.
 

Cadence

Legend
Supporter
Heh, actually I did. The 5e Players handbook has halflings be shorter than I remembered, from 2' 9" to about 3' 3". Notably, the highest human height is about 6' 4", which seems short for an upper limit. Likewise, the lower limit of 4' 10" is too tall, and implies that reallife pygmy ethnicities who can be much shorter are not "humans". Humanity includes its rarer members. The rules need to reflect this, and now do, when a player can choose whatever bodytype one wants for ones character.

The highest human height in the table is 6'4". That's the table with only 19 different human heights in it that is explicitly designed to give the players something to use if they don't want to just pick their height. It doesn't say that that's the range they actually take - which seems clear from the description of humans where it says they can be "well over 6' tall". (It should certainly be criticized for not using similar language on the other end of the distribution where the "barely 5'" is clearly exclusionary).

One website gives the the 5th percentile of heights for women in the US/Europe from 1998-2003 as 4'11" and the 95th percentile for men as 6'2", for example. A random table containing only 19 values that spreads out to just past the 5th and 95th percentiles doesn't feel that far off. It would be better to use a table catching the rest of the world population - but a group comprising 0.00625% of the worlds population at one tail of the height distribution, for example, won't appear at all unless one uses a much finer grain.

If the complaint is that it misses some of humanity with descriptors that would be statistical extrema, then does the given range need to go from 21.5in (54.6cm) a to 8' 11" (2.7m) and 4.7lb (2.13kg) up to 1,400 lbs (635kg). If the goal is to describe the entire range of humanity (which we certainly should allow the players to partake in!!), should the given descriptions and random tables mention that humanity certainly includes those with tails (at least 40 cases), conjoined twins (1 in 200k), those with ovotestes (1 in 20k), and those with polydactyly (1 in 1k), etc... Where are you drawing your line as to which parts of human variability should be included and excluded from the default descriptions? How many pages do we get for describing humans?

If the complaint is that overlapping distributions make things the same species, then I assume hill and stone giants are human as well, with fire, ice, cloud, and storm ones being genasi or something if we find some other group in the middle in some setting?
 
Last edited:

Oofta

Legend
"Common races?" You mean "listed out of alphabetical order in the PHB"? That's so not going to be a thing in the next edition of the PHB. It's just going to be Lineages - here are some examples and rules for inventing your own.

Maybe you missed the sidebar in the PHB (or I'm missing something).

UNCOMMON RACES
The dragonborn and the rest of the races in this chapter are uncommon. They don’t exist in every world of D&D, and even where they are found, they are less widespread than dwarves, elves, halflings, and humans.​
 

Maybe you missed the sidebar in the PHB (or I'm missing something).

UNCOMMON RACES
The dragonborn and the rest of the races in this chapter are uncommon. They don’t exist in every world of D&D, and even where they are found, they are less widespread than dwarves, elves, halflings, and humans.​
That's the old PHB. It won't be in the 2024 version.

(Not that anyone pays attention to that stuff anyway, player characters are inherently uncommon.)
 

Cadence

Legend
Supporter
That's the old PHB. It won't be in the 2024 version.

(Not that anyone pays attention to that stuff anyway, player characters are inherently uncommon.)

"Old" is the strangest spelling for current I've ever seen :)

The ability for DMs to toggle certain races/classes/pantheons on and off and produce a reformatted, arranged, indexed PDF rulebook to go with their campaign would be the dream.
 
Last edited:



Oofta

Legend
What's this thread about then? Building a time machine to go back in time to remove halflings from the "current" PHB?

In theory, the Monster Manual is "current" too, but the stat blocks in it are no longer consistent with WotC standard.
They've changed the format a bit. Whether all monsters follow MotM from now on probably depends on feedback they receive.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top