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

I do find this indistinct. We were comparing universal ancestry traits (i.e. traits shared by all members of the ancestry).

By way of comparison, elves in 5e also have the size difference with halflings, but get Fey Ancestry, training in Perception, they trance rather than sleep, and Darkvision. Halflings get Lucky, Halfling Nimbleness, Brave and the slightly lower walking speed.

But let’s include subraces/heritages. Your heritage in PF2 grants you one additional trait. In 5e, a Wood elf would get Wood elf Weapon Training, Fleet of Foot and Mask of the Wild. Lightfoots just get Naturally Stealthy.

However, that ignores the fact that 5e racial traits tend to be “bigger” than PF2 ancestry feats. Fey Ancestry is the equivalent of 2 or 3 PF2 feats, and if you want to keep using Elf Weapons at higher levels, you need both Elf Weapon Familiarity and Elf Weapon Expertise.


Except Dwarves don’t have a bonus to Int, and also aren’t natively proficient in Dwarf Lore, nor are Halflings in Halflings Lore, nor any race proficient in the lore of its people.
Fey Ancestry is a direct analogue to Bravery and features a less honest title. Trance is 98% a ribbon ability, kind of like Halfling Nimbleness. So we're down to Darkvision and Perception training vs. Lucky. I'd agree the elf package is stronger, but not dramatically so.

Including subraces, Wood Elves get Weapon training (which is only relevant if you plan to use weapons, and managed to pick a class that doesn't give you proficiency in those weapons, so only rogues, monks and weird gish builds need apply), Fleet of foot (probably the strongest benefit), and Mask of the Wild (which seems similar to Naturally Stealthy but keys off of mechanical conditions I can't recall ever seeing in play). This is vs. Naturally Stealthy. I'd again agree that the elf package is stronger, but again, not dramatically so.

Separately, I disagree regarding the "size" of racial traits vs. PF2e feats. Fey Ancestry gives some protection against charm, specifically. There are a wide variety of feats that can give protections against all mental effects or all emotion effects. Also, in general, ancestry feats get stronger throughout character progression, sometimes dramatically so.

The only times you'd want to spend additional feats to continue to use Elven Weapons at higher levels are in instances where you somehow have chosen a class that doesn't grant critical specialization and/or somehow grants particular weapon proficiencies without including your chosen elf weapon. Not getting crit spec can happen, but not that frequently among the weapon martial classes. The weapon advancement thing pretty much never happens for martial classes. The fault in PF2e for these is content bloat rather than the incorporation of feat taxes.

Regarding Lore, sure. But most all PF2e characters are proficient in the lore for their background (e.g alcohol lore, warfare lore, tanning lore, etc) almost like the lore they know about is the stuff they were doing. And the feat they might use to become trained in the lore of their people also includes multiple incremental skill proficiencies. But in any case, it's not like there is racial lore knowledge granted to 5e characters at all.

Coming out of this discussion, the thing I'm curious about is how much practical experience you have with PF2e? It has faults, as I've mentioned, but the things you're highlighting seem to include misunderstandings that would have gotten ironed out between rulebook reading and character creation/live play. Could just be table/player variation?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Halflings make really good paladins esp. nature but not so much vengeance.

They may have wanted a quiet life but then something happens and they rise to the challenge and find their calling to protect others like they protected their community.

Halflings fit in D&D they just need something to kick them in the butt to get adventuring.

My latest commander deck in MtG features one. (Although I need to rethink what the enchantments are to make it fit D&D).

1657736982401.png
 

A lot of "problems" related to Halflings is the number of races / ancestries that share similar size / abilities etc. They are not unique or special. Out of curiosity does everyone use all the available races / ancestries in their setting / game? How many people use their own homebrew races / ancestries? Finally, how many people have multiple races / ancestries filling the same basic niche?
 

As probably the biggest proponent of this, I would point out that this is VERY inaccurate. As in not even remotely right.

What was ACTUALLY suggested (and I believe I suggested it again here) was that halflings get bumped to the Monster Manual or a section of the DMG, similar to where we find Eladrin now. All the rules are kept. Nothing is lost, nor would you have to "buy a splat book to play them". However, that would open up space in the PHB for a couple of new races to see if they can gain more traction than the two "also rans" of D&D. My personal picks would be an anthropomorphic template race - something that lets you pick an animal and select a couple of traits that fit with that animal - and probably Warforged since Warforged seem to be a very popular option and fill one hell of a lot more interesting niche than either gnomes or halflings.

And for that, I got absolutely dog piled on and told that I hate halflings and gnomes and the only reason I would think this is because I hate gamers. :erm: It was rather bizarre to be frank.
While I agree on having something like an anthro race (or, let's face it: tabaxi), goblins, or warforged in the PHB, what would be gained by relegating halflings and/or gnomes to the DMG or MM? The only possible benefit would be keeping the page count the same. But is that really a problem? I don't think people would mind if the PHB was a bit bigger (the Adventurer's Guide for Level Up is over 650 pages long, but that book contains cultures, destinies, maneuvers, strongholds, downtime activities, crafting, synergy feats, and a bunch of other things that almost certainly won't be in D&D 5.5 or 6e, or at least not in the PHB). And a bigger PHB is hardly a problem in a world of digital resources.

In 5e, the eladrin were used as a guide on how to make your own race. They weren't stuck in the DMG as being an unpopular choice.
 

While I agree on having something like an anthro race (or, let's face it: tabaxi), goblins, or warforged in the PHB, what would be gained by relegating halflings and/or gnomes to the DMG or MM? The only possible benefit would be keeping the page count the same. But is that really a problem? I don't think people would mind if the PHB was a bit bigger (the Adventurer's Guide for Level Up is over 650 pages long, but that book contains cultures, destinies, maneuvers, strongholds, downtime activities, crafting, synergy feats, and a bunch of other things that almost certainly won't be in D&D 5.5 or 6e, or at least not in the PHB). And a bigger PHB is hardly a problem in a world of digital resources.

In 5e, the eladrin were used as a guide on how to make your own race. They weren't stuck in the DMG as being an unpopular choice.
It is more something else could take the small race slot they both fight over and free up another slot for a new race.
 

Dragonborn breath fire.
Tiefling have infernal magic
Goliaths lift like ogres
Genasi have elemental resistances and features
Aaracroka fly

"Halflings reroll if they roll very bad"
They're also Brave (and a lot of monsters inflict the frightened condition) and Nimble. And, depending on the subrace, are Stealthy (Lightfoot), poison-resistant (Stout), innately magical and have no problems with difficult terrain (Lotusden), or telepathic (Ghostwise). And then there's the dragonmarked halflings.
 


Except that there's no "small race slot." They could add a third Small race without problem.
it would have to compete with the classic two and we do not know how willing they are to add more pages hence the slot.
plus fourth most common race is a significant thing to be given halflings low relevance in most settings.
 


A lot of "problems" related to Halflings is the number of races / ancestries that share similar size / abilities etc. They are not unique or special. Out of curiosity does everyone use all the available races / ancestries in their setting / game? How many people use their own homebrew races / ancestries? Finally, how many people have multiple races / ancestries filling the same basic niche?
Theoretically I allow everything and try to fit in as much as possible. But I only worry about the races the players actually choose to play - the rest are just nebulously “around.”
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top