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


log in or register to remove this ad

I absolutely have not. I've frequently said that PC halflings often act different than their race in many ways. And the lore says "rarely". Meaning that there aresituations where halfling would rise out of the comfort of being background players and act on the world.
Rarely doesn't mean "that only halfling in the world that happens to be a PC."

You know how couple means two and a few means three? Well, by this one source, rarely means about 20%. And in AD&D, a creature with a frequency of rare meant about 11% (for use in encounter tables). I'm not saying that either of these are exactly correct, but it's universally understood that rare means "more than a 1-4 times."

But those situations are rare.

I wasn't talking about other races but
Apologies; I confused you with @Mind of tempest. Who also hasn't answered that question.
 

"They rarely build kingdoms of their own or even hold much land beyond their quiet shires. They typically don’t recognize any sort of halfling nobility or royalty, instead looking to family elders to guide them."

to

"They rarely build underworld kingdoms of their own or even hold much underworld land beyond their quiet undershires. They typically don’t recognize any sort of halfling underworld nobility or underworld royalty, instead looking to underworld family elders to guide them in the underworld."
Crime bosses are not royalty or nobility.

Nothing in the paragraph you keep quoting says that halflings wouldn’t run important and powerful organizations of any kind.
 

More is more. We're comparing pie charts here.

This seems like a fundamental misunderstanding of my point. This is like saying that compared to a person with $100 someone with $1,000 and someone with $3.5 trillion are basically the same. No, more isn't just more. There are degrees of "more"

What do your Dwarves do when there is a conflict between their divine duty to craft, and counseling a friend through relationship difficulties?

Why is that a conflict? Dwarves aren't slaves who never do anything else but craft. They can take a break to talk to someone. Maybe they'd wait until they quenched the steel or something, which would see rude to a non-dwarf but a dwarf would totally get that. And most dwarves live with other dwarves, so they rarely have to learn about how non-dwarves would react.

Of course, there is also the complete possibility of working and talking! Something that is 100% possible.

What do they do when there is a choice between opening a new mithril mine shaft and building a theater?

Why is this a choice? Is something wrong with the old theater? Does it have to be now and not in a year or two, which for dwarves with hundreds of years of life isn't that long.

What about halflings choosing between a new tavern or a new theater? What decision do they make?

When they are choosing a profession, would they rather be a blacksmith or a social worker?

Well... first of all, social workers don't exist in DnD. I suppose they could, but most societies in DnD aren't advanced enough to have government employees whose job is to make sure other people are taken care of. The closest you tend to get is a priest.

And, if we consider priests.... a dwarven priest is a blasksmith, so that's not even a choice. They are the same thing.

You can go through this same set of questions with each race substituting in say magic-type stuff for elves, and anything else-type stuff for humans.

At an individual level, sure some, maybe even most Elves, Dwarves, and Humans will make the "people-first" choice, but for halflings it will be a lot more.

But these aren't "people first" choices. Or if they are, they seem utterly contrived. Dwarves have theaters, and having theaters doesn't mean you can't have mines. They aren't in competition. Talking to your friends doesn't mean you can't also have important work you do. Social Workers don't even exist in DnD, its the clergy, and clergy people can do more than just social work.

It doesn't make them angels. You could make the argument that putting people first in this way is short-sighted and ignores the possible benefits of technology or magic or abstract economic growth. You can also make the argument that by focusing so completely in their own communities, they are failing the broader world around them.

It's just a different way of allocating resources.

Why does caring about people mean you are ignoring technology or magic? Do you think Social Workers in our world cannot use technology? Of course they can. They in fact even develop technology for social work. Again, you make no sense to me. Nothing you are saying computes. Somehow halflings are the only ones who build theaters, because art and history isn't important to anyone else, but they also always stop to help a friend... which anyone else would do... and maybe they aren't perfect because economic growth is a thing, despite theaters being you know... economic and encouraging economic growth.

And at the end of the day, it still comes back to the same insane idea. Halflings are just nicer than everyone else. They just care more about other people than everyone else. Which... is kind of a gross way to make them "unique" because again... morality isn't a racial trait. Being nice and kind and caring about other people isn't a racial trait.
 


Sure, there are exceptions

But the 5e lore says halflings don't have kings and nobles. That would include knows and nobles of the underworld. Therefore you wouldn't except halflings to be dons and crimeboss or having empires unless the setting is heavy on subverting tropes like Dark Sun or Eberron.
You're making a False Equivalence here. A mafia Don =/= Noble. A mafia Don = CEO of crime business. Made man = other chief under the CEO. Nothing in the lore implies that halflings can't or won't run businesses.
 

You're making a False Equivalence here. A mafia Don =/= Noble. A mafia Don = CEO of crime business. Made man = other chief under the CEO. Nothing in the lore implies that halflings can't or won't run businesses.
Yep. Not only that, “rarely” literally means sometimes, just not frequently. So…why wouldn’t some of those exceptions be exactly the matronly halfling assassin who starts a criminal empire and shadow network for mysterious reasons, the street kid who earns a name and through cleverness and daring and luck rises to become the heir to the head of the city’s most powerful criminal organization?
 

Yep. Not only that, “rarely” literally means sometimes, just not frequently. So…why wouldn’t some of those exceptions be exactly the matronly halfling assassin who starts a criminal empire and shadow network for mysterious reasons, the street kid who earns a name and through cleverness and daring and luck rises to become the heir to the head of the city’s most powerful criminal organization?
It doesn't even say rarely. It says that they typically don't recognize nobility or kings, which just means usually, which means more often than not. If 4 out of 10 halfling populations have nobility and kings, they typically do not have nobility and kings.
 

This seems like a fundamental misunderstanding of my point. This is like saying that compared to a person with $100 someone with $1,000 and someone with $3.5 trillion are basically the same. No, more isn't just more. There are degrees of "more"



Why is that a conflict? Dwarves aren't slaves who never do anything else but craft. They can take a break to talk to someone. Maybe they'd wait until they quenched the steel or something, which would see rude to a non-dwarf but a dwarf would totally get that. And most dwarves live with other dwarves, so they rarely have to learn about how non-dwarves would react.

Of course, there is also the complete possibility of working and talking! Something that is 100% possible.



Why is this a choice? Is something wrong with the old theater? Does it have to be now and not in a year or two, which for dwarves with hundreds of years of life isn't that long.

What about halflings choosing between a new tavern or a new theater? What decision do they make?



Well... first of all, social workers don't exist in DnD. I suppose they could, but most societies in DnD aren't advanced enough to have government employees whose job is to make sure other people are taken care of. The closest you tend to get is a priest.

And, if we consider priests.... a dwarven priest is a blasksmith, so that's not even a choice. They are the same thing.



But these aren't "people first" choices. Or if they are, they seem utterly contrived. Dwarves have theaters, and having theaters doesn't mean you can't have mines. They aren't in competition. Talking to your friends doesn't mean you can't also have important work you do. Social Workers don't even exist in DnD, its the clergy, and clergy people can do more than just social work.



Why does caring about people mean you are ignoring technology or magic? Do you think Social Workers in our world cannot use technology? Of course they can. They in fact even develop technology for social work. Again, you make no sense to me. Nothing you are saying computes. Somehow halflings are the only ones who build theaters, because art and history isn't important to anyone else, but they also always stop to help a friend... which anyone else would do... and maybe they aren't perfect because economic growth is a thing, despite theaters being you know... economic and encouraging economic growth.

And at the end of the day, it still comes back to the same insane idea. Halflings are just nicer than everyone else. They just care more about other people than everyone else. Which... is kind of a gross way to make them "unique" because again... morality isn't a racial trait. Being nice and kind and caring about other people isn't a racial trait.

So what you're getting to is that your Dwarves have unlimited time, resources and attention. There is no circumstance in which they would have any priorities which compete, no time where a sacrifice must be made...

..and nicer, more people-focused halflings are unvelievable??

It's basic economics man. When you run out of resources, you have to stop making or buying stuff. If you do not have time to do something, you cannot do it. If you invest your attention in one thing, you are not investing it in another..This is how resource allocation has worked kind of everywhere since kind of always.

In that light, Dwarves are going to prooritize hammers and helmets. Halflings are going to prioritize bread and circuses. Dwarves can still have circuses and halflings can still have hammers. But those circuses and hammers will be fewer and worse.

As far as niceness/morality being a racial trait, call it cultural instead (which honestly just makes sense considering things like racial weapon proficiencies). You don't think it's reasonable for the people in one culture to be nicer on average than people in another?

Not that long ago you pointed toward a Southern/Midwestern mindset coloring how you view your fantasy characters likely behaviors. Why would you think geography would have any bearing on your personal worldview? Do you think its substantially different than what I'm suggesting for halflings (which BTW, is consistent with what is printed in the PHB).
 
Last edited:

What about halflings choosing between a new tavern or a new theater? What decision do they make?
Easy - they do both! They build the new theater and then put the new tavern in it, so you can have a drink while watching the show. :)
Well... first of all, social workers don't exist in DnD. I suppose they could, but most societies in DnD aren't advanced enough to have government employees whose job is to make sure other people are taken care of. The closest you tend to get is a priest.

And, if we consider priests.... a dwarven priest is a blasksmith, so that's not even a choice. They are the same thing.
This assumes the only Dwarven deity is Moradin (who among other things is their god of smithing), which hasn't been the case since 1e. A Dwarf could be a priest to a Dwarven deity and yet still not know a smith's hammer from a shoehorn.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top