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.

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?

 

[Faolyn]

I'll concede this: if the PC versions can be literate then in the name of setting consistency they all can be literate.

What I won't concede is Kobold and Goblin being PC-playable in the first place.

Some fans - like me - want only the classic species to be PC-playable, returning the "nontraditional" ones to monster status.

That's fine for your table. But why should everyone else have to be limited that way?

 

[Minigiant]

OK, but if stats don't matter then why is it that every time the roll-vs-point buy-vs array debate comes up there's repeated howls along the lines of "Stats are way too important to leave to the whim of random roll".

Can't have it both ways - either they're importasnt or they're not; and if they're important then a -2 adjust on Hobbit strength will be meaningful.

The Stats don't/do matter issue is not universal. That's the core source of the problem.

The difference between 18 STR and 16 STR for carrying and lifting is usually minor. The difference between 18 STR and 16 STR in weapons combat is significant.

That's why the Orc vs Halflings strength argument go nowhere. Because if lifting it is insignificant but it can be defining in combat depending on edition.

The bolded is exactly what I'm after: that most if not all non-Human species are better suited to some classes than others; and if you want to play against type you can but it's an uphill battle.

If you want all the class options equally open, play a Human. That's what they're for

That's a valid preference. However with the size and diversity of D&D today , it is not workable as a baseline.

This is how the halflings issues starts. The parts that halflings fans are attracted to about the class has preferences no longer compatible with the base preferences of most D&D fans. So it ends up either looking or feeling out of place of the world builders doesn't do extra work to incorporate halflings more naturally In setting for the general public.

And when those same fans inevitably get bored of the nontraditional species as well, then what?

There's always more nontraditional races.

 

[Minigiant]

Eh, in that case the halfing just picks up a short sword or rapier and leans into DEX instead of Strength.

There an elf doing that too. And you can do it as a human.

That's my point. If the halflings has nothing unique, other more fantastical races will eat up it's niche and only those enamoured with it will keep caring.

 

[Lanefan]

That's fine for your table. But why should everyone else have to be limited that way?

Because otherwise what should be monsters aren't monsters any more, leading to a slow but endless loop where (A) designers come up with new forms of humanoid monsters as opponents for the PCs which leads to (B) over time those species become PC-playable and thus watered down which leads to (C) return to (A).

IMO in any design space this sort of loop is best stopped before it starts.

 

[Minigiant]

Because otherwise what should be monsters aren't monsters any more, leading to a slow but endless loop where (A) designers come up with new forms of humanoid monsters as opponents for the PCs which leads to (B) over time those species become PC-playable and thus watered down which leads to (C) return to (A).

IMO in any design space this sort of loop is best stopped before it starts.

There could be this marvelous thing where the PCs, NPCs. and enemies can be of the same race.

I mean the only humaniods I've ever in fights with in real life are humans and sewer mutants.

 

[Faolyn]

Because otherwise what should be monsters aren't monsters any more, leading to a slow but endless loop where (A) designers come up with new forms of humanoid monsters as opponents for the PCs which leads to (B) over time those species become PC-playable and thus watered down which leads to (C) return to (A).

IMO in any design space this sort of loop is best stopped before it starts.

Why is this a bad thing?

More specifically, why is it bad that "monsters aren't monsters any more"? All that means is that you, the DM, have to come up with a reason for them to be bad guys rather than just relying on them being goblins or whatever and saying "well, they're goblins so they only exist to be killed."

 

[Mecheon]

What I won't concede is Kobold and Goblin being PC-playable in the first place.

They've been PC playable as long as I've been alive. Its not a new thing. There was clearly demand for them to be playable, and its kept them showing up over time.

Plus, well, the greater RPG zeitgeist at the moment is VERY supportive of this, and D&D is nothing if not adherant to pop culture at the time. Pop culture wants playable orcs, goblins, and especially kobolds, so D&D provides. Mind, you do not want to know how many people I have seen who are way too horny for goblins

Because otherwise what should be monsters aren't monsters any more, leading to a slow but endless loop where (A) designers come up with new forms of humanoid monsters as opponents for the PCs which leads to (B) over time those species become PC-playable and thus watered down which leads to (C) return to (A).

IMO in any design space this sort of loop is best stopped before it starts.

'should be monsters' is. A statement. Because frankly I don't think anything 'should' be monsters, plus, well, if we're really talking early game they weren't necessarily designed to just be monsters given they had whole diplomacy and reaction stuff (Albeit most of the time it fell by the wayside, but the implication was always there that, hey, you could talk to a dude and maybe not fight)

Regardless, you're not only fighting the weight of D&D over time, you're fighting against the current general mood in RPG space. If folks didn't like these being playable, they wouldn't be requesting more and more

 

[James Gasik]

Plus, well, the greater RPG zeitgeist at the moment is VERY supportive of this, and D&D is nothing if not adherant to pop culture at the time. Pop culture wants playable orcs, goblins, and especially kobolds, so D&D provides. Mind, you do not want to know how many people I have seen who are way too horny for goblins

 

[CreamCloud0]

I think they should offer options for ASI, floating, fixed and fixed pros and cons, floating is just 2x+1, but can be put anywhere, fixed is the standard +2,+1/3x+1 set in predetermined stats and fixed P+C is +2,+2,-1/+2,+1,+1,-1 again in set stats, this allows for a choice of if you want the bonuses for playing to type or the benefit of having the freedom to put your stats anywhere you want them.

Part of the thing that causes issues about fixed ASI is that some are more required for certain classes/abilities/skills and that there aren’t alternative options, like there are only a small number of halfway decent finesse weapons, a halfling fighter is excluded from all the heavy weapons which are the stronger martial ones to use including the longbow, i’d rather a finesse weapon with STR 16 restriction than heavy because there’s at least a possibility of being able to use the prior as a halfling without disadvantage, I never played 4e but the choice of stat to use on saving throws which sounds like another great solution to this kind of problem, not forcing players into relying on certain stats, or they could offer alternative casting stats for classes, your WIS wizards or CON sorcerers.

More players IMO would most likely be much more agreeable to fixed ASI if they didn’t feel like they were penalised by other mechanics for not optimising.

 

[James Gasik]

More players IMO would most likely be much more agreeable to fixed ASI if they didn’t feel like they were penalised by other mechanics for not optimising.

This is really the crux of it. The game is made in such a way that having a disadvantage in one place and an advantage somewhere else doesn't always balance out.

If Bob plays a Goliath Fighter and has a 16 Strength, and my Elf Fighter has a 15, he hits more, and does a little more damage, not a big deal. But then if someone makes a Halfling Fighter and has a 13, then the gap starts becoming noticeable, and there's not a lot of opportunities to make your choice seem to be anything but a bad one; ideally, these things should balance out in some way.

For example, if Dexterity affected the hit chance of melee attacks and Strength the damage, being weaker but faster might seem advantageous to some players.

Instead the rules bend over backwards to make sure shorties have to use lower damage weapons, but then turn around and let them easily get Dexterity to damage, making Strength less important.

Which often begs the question, who really cares if you have a 20 Strength Halfling? He or she is still going to do less damage than a Goliath, who can use a heavy weapon without disadvantage. And if we're talking one-handed weapons, the game really doesn't give the longsword all that many advantages over the rapier, so Strength vs. Dexterity comes down to "initiative, which save is better, who is better at stealth, and 1 point of AC by level 8" (and encumbrance, though how much that matters is based on the game, and of course, there's something to be said about not having to lug around heavy armor).

If we're talking skills, a 15 Charisma 5% less successful than a 17, and proficiency bonus ends up larger than ability bonus anyways, never mind if Expertise is on the table.

So really, the parts of the game where a penalty to an ability score even really matters (for the most part) is when you get to spellcasting or other daily use abilities that require saving throws; if you're going to use a spell slot that requires a saving throw, naturally you're going to want to have the best save DC you can get; nothing else really requires bleeding edge optimization.