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


log in or register to remove this ad

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
Dragons are (usually) the enemy. Those who serve Dragons are thus also (usually) the enemy. And Kobolds in general are pretty nasty little things to begin with. (in case it's not obvious, I quite happily subscribe to the idea of species having baked-in alignment tendencies; and Kobolds in my game trend pretty sharply toward Evil)

Also, what would otherwise be the point of Gates of Firestorm Peak?
 

Dragons are (usually) the enemy. Those who serve Dragons are thus also (usually) the enemy. And Kobolds in general are pretty nasty little things to begin with. (in case it's not obvious, I quite happily subscribe to the idea of species having baked-in alignment tendencies; and Kobolds in my game trend pretty sharply toward Evil)
I'd say that it is the people who want to attack kobolds just due their species that are evil in this scenario. But that's fine, dragons are rich, and the adventurers gotta eat, so murdering some kobolds and dragons for loot makes sense. 🤷

Also, what would otherwise be the point of Gates of Firestorm Peak?
I don't know what that is.
 


Mind of tempest

(he/him)advocate for 5e psionics
You are correct--for perhaps 6e. But as goblins and kobolds are written now (or rather, as they were last written about in Volo's), they generally more bad guys than neutral or good guys.
time change have you not been looking?
Likewise, good dragons are rarely shown as the rulers of anything, while evil dragons are not uncommonly shown as tyrannical dictators with armies of evil marauders. And this will likely be the case as long as alignments are still used. Even if alignment is continued to be downgraded to only "typically" something, most gamers are still going to treat them as being pretty evil. Especially if 6e writes about them the way they were written about in Volo's, where they basically had few or no redeeming features.
why is it the forces of good are reactive, always just sitting in apathy the great flaw of all good guys?
people will kill anything if the fight is winnable and the loot good.
While I can't speak for Wildemount or Ravnica because it's been a long time since I've read those books, in Eberron, which famously says any creature can be any alignment, the goblin nation of Darguun is still a pretty evil place--it's the only place where slavery is legal, for instance, and it treats their slaves "like cattle."
you act as if everywhere in ebberon is not a dystopia it is dungeon punk and like all punk genres were born of cyberpunk which is just techno hell.
Dragons are (usually) the enemy. Those who serve Dragons are thus also (usually) the enemy. And Kobolds in general are pretty nasty little things to begin with. (in case it's not obvious, I quite happily subscribe to the idea of species having baked-in alignment tendencies; and Kobolds in my game trend pretty sharply toward Evil)

Also, what would otherwise be the point of Gates of Firestorm Peak?
what makes them evil as they usually are just sat in abandoned mines being odd?
 

Mind of tempest

(he/him)advocate for 5e psionics
Isn't that exactly the sort of nation - boatloads of Kobolds ruled by Dragons - PC adventurers are on principle supposed to go to war against?
given that if you remove dragons and kobolds from it I have described most nations in the great histories of both our world and most fictional ones, logically no as no one is so stupid to declare war on everyone.
 

Faolyn

(she/her)
time change have you not been looking?
Err, yes. I have. They're changing, but it's not like what's been written already has changed.

why is it the forces of good are reactive, always just sitting in apathy the great flaw of all good guys?
people will kill anything if the fight is winnable and the loot good.
Generally, Good tries to make things better for everyone so nobody turns to evil in the first place. But how are you going to be proactive for Good in a way that (a) is interesting to the party, and (b) doesn't devolve into killing things because they looked like they might do something evil (which isn't Good)?
 

Mind of tempest

(he/him)advocate for 5e psionics
Err, yes. I have. They're changing, but it's not like what's been written already has changed.


Generally, Good tries to make things better for everyone so nobody turns to evil in the first place. But how are you going to be proactive for Good in a way that (a) is interesting to the party, and (b) doesn't devolve into killing things because they looked like they might do something evil (which isn't Good)?
it need not always be relevant to the party but I hate to be a lone candle as those are so easy to snuff out, background stuff is needed always.

if killing is evil by the laws of flesh all life is guilty of the gravest crimes.
 


Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
Most people nowadays would determine if the dragon was ruling them well and, if not, kill the dragon and free the kobolds.

Folks love kobolds, they’re seen as the most underdog of underdogs
Kobolds really took up that "underdog with secret power".

Every kobold is a secret genius, an inventor prodigy, a leader waiting for an army, or has the heart of a dragon.

C'mon NPC kobolds just happen to die before hitting their potential.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top