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

The jerrens, the evil halflings from 3rd Book of Vile Darkness, can be a good example of small humanoids being a true nightmare for PCs and even for the rest of evil humanoids.

The halflings aren't the type of troops you would see in a battlefield, but if they are good carpenters they can build wood forts against the raids by gnolls, giants or kaijus. They can learn to ride flying monsters or megafaun, for example mammoths. And in their homes they could create tunnels for small humanoid to escape from bigger enemies, or at least to hide.

Some times I wanted to create a halfling PC but not the classic rogue but more a swashbuckler with (warblade's) ki martial maneuvers, like a smaller version of those tree-jumping wuxia heroes from Chinese animation. One of the ki maneuvers would be a jump to attack the head of taller enemies.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


It's not a problem for WOTC.

It's a problem for Halfling fans.
Well then why talk about anything? “Linear fighters, quadratic wizards” isn’t a WotC problem, it’s a problem for fans of a different class structure. Etc etc
 

Well then why talk about anything? “Linear fighters, quadratic wizards” isn’t a WotC problem, it’s a problem for fans of a different class structure. Etc etc
There is a difference.

Halflings is not a problem for WOTC because WOTC provides other options for halflings key features.

LFQW is a problem for WOTC precisely because WOTC doesn't provide other options for fighter key features.

Halflings players own the halfling problem because halfling aspects are redundant and easily replaced.
 

There is a difference.

Halflings is not a problem for WOTC because WOTC provides other options for halflings key features.

LFQW is a problem for WOTC precisely because WOTC doesn't provide other options for fighter key features.

Halflings players own the halfling problem because halfling aspects are redundant and easily replaced.
It's not a problem for WOTC.

It's a problem for Halfling fans.
I don’t see how. Nearly every halfling fan I have spoken to is happy with halflings.

The new playtest halfling is mechanically disappointing, but it’s still lucky and brave.

Either way, they aren’t going anywhere.
 

I don’t see how. Nearly every halfling fan I have spoken to is happy with halflings.

The new playtest halfling is mechanically disappointing, but it’s still lucky and brave.

Either way, they aren’t going anywhere.
My point is that halfling fans want other people to be fans of halflings.

And other people are saying "Nah. Imma play a goblin or kobold or human".

The thread is about integrating halflings better into settings so people who aren't huge halfling fans would care about the race.
 


Nah, there's been a huge advocacy to remove the halfling as a playable race in this thread.

I don't care if you're happy with halflings; I care that there are people here who want to destroy my happiness
Well isn't that my point.

Halfling as a race isn't creating new fans of it because of its lore and mechanics.

So eventually the fandom of other nontraditional races will grow larger than it. Or already have. And then those fans would advocate to replace halfling with their preferred races.

So halfling fans have to think of ways to make the race more integrated or interesting in fantasy settings.
 

If it's rare in the world it should perforce be rare in the game, otherwise it isn't rare at all.
That's artificial rareness. You could decide that there are three wizards in the entire world and two of them are in the party. Wizards would still be rare.

And yes, in some places Centaurs might live side-along with Humans and other species; but that doesn't mean anyone half a continent away would know a Centaur from a Catoblepas. The core region of my current setting is in fact a faux-ancient-Greece but even there many don't know what a Centaur is as Centaurs only live on the islands and rarely if ever come to the mainland.
And there's absolutely no storytellers or artwork? No centaur travelers? No slave-traders who are selling a centaur captured from those island? Nobody with a menagerie of exotic peoples?

This sort of thing only works if there's absolutely no communication whatsoever.

It's a world full of different species, some of which are very rare and might only exist in one valley somewhere and many of which have little if anything to do with cultures/species not their own. Again, look at Middle Earth as an example.
Or you could look at the real world, where many people were aware of things from far-off lands. What they knew was often wrong or greatly exaggerated, but they'd at least know the stories.
 

Sure, every species can have warriors.

However, the warriors of some species are simply going to, on average, be flat-out better than the warriors of some other species, simply due to the physical advantages provided by larger size and more muscle. Put a Goliath warrior up against a Goblin warrior and, all other things being equal, in theory that Goblin better make sure his will is up to date.

It works this way if one uses the monster write-ups. To me it only follows that it should thus also work this way if the two are PCs.

But that clearly misses a few rather blatant things.

1) A human commoner is 10's in stats and 4 hp. The Kobold and Goblin commoners (if we count "Kobold" and "Goblin" statblocks as their commoners) have 5-7 hp and while they are physically weaker, they have a higher dex and they obviously use dex weapons.

Even if you go to the human guard, which ups the hp to 11 and makes them physically stronger than the goblins, if you look at the actual damage output, the goblin is deadlier (+3 to hit and +1 damage versus +4 to hit and +2 damage) and the goblin is simply FAR more likely to win the fight due to the Nimble Escape bonus action allowing them to easily hide and slip away from the human during the fight. So, even with less hp, it is very difficult to say the goblin is significantly weaker. The main advantage the human has is based solely on equipment, and there is no reason goblins can't use better equipment than their statblock gives them.

2) Even in the above example, I've demonstrated a problem. Statblocks are HIGHLY variable. Human statblocks alone swing between humans having 4 hp and 229 hp, between having 10's in all stat to having 20's in any stat. Because stronger and more skilled individuals exist, making it difficult to just lay out a single line. If that "goblin" happens to be a goblin boss, then they have 21 hp and a multiattack. If they happen to be a Booyahg Booyahg Booyahg then they have 40 hp and an at-will attack that has a +6 to hit and does an average of 11 damage. Meaning they can one-shot that human trivially.


If we are looking purely at combat stats, it doesn't matter if they don't have a high strength. It hasn't mattered for a long time. Hell, it doesn't even matter if they both decide to pick the fighter class, because the Goblin can go dex fighter and frankly will be evenly matched with the Goliath who went strength fighter, all other things being equal.


If it's rare in the world it should perforce be rare in the game, otherwise it isn't rare at all.

That isn't how that works. When discussing player choices they get to pick (assuming 6 players) 6 things that will be in the game. Are elves rare? Maybe they are, but the if the party has an elf the chance of an elf being in the party is 100%, even if they never meet another elf ever again. It doesn't matter if they are rare or common in the world, it matters what you encounter. Clerics and Sorcerers are supposedly incredibly rare in the worlds of DnD, but I've seen more clerics and sorcerers than I care to count. Because it isn't rare for a player to choose that class.

To try and put it another way. The Minotaur in the original source material wasn't just rare, they were utterly unique. There was only a single one in the entire world. The chances of encountering them would be astronomically low from a pure statistical point of view. How common are minotaur's in fantasy? Pretty common actually, they show up a lot. Because everyone knows about them.

And frankly, if you say that someone has to roll a 1d100 and get above a 90% to be allowed to play a sorcerer, do you know what the majority of tables will do? Just play the sorcerer anyways. You can't arbitrarily gate things like that. It doesn't work. They tried it with the stat prereqs for classes, and all it did was have people assign those stats as their minimum possible values and play those characters anyways.

Die rolls should gate many things. It's the only way of consistently enforcing a gradient of commonality between outright chooseable and banned.

No, no they shouldn't. The idea of having to roll a random number to determine if I'm allowed to play certain classes is insane. The community would reject those rules out of hand.

To some extent, yes. I look at Middle Earth as an example here, where anyone more than a few hundred miles from The Shire only knows of Hobbits as legends if that; and the oldest species on the planet hasn't heard of them at all! Further, species tend to live in their own mono-cultural enclaves, with minimal interaction other than trade. That's what makes the town of Bree so unusual: two species share the town.

And yet when Elrond calls a council on short notice, humans, elves, and dwarves all know where Rivendell is and get there with no difficulty. A few decades ago by the time of that meeting, the Battle of the Five Armies happened, where orcs, men, dwarves, and elves all fought outside of Laketown. A town that now has a thriving dwarven kingdom right beside it.

Gondor and Rohan fight orcs nearly constantly, at least commonly enough that when the Fellowship reaches them, they aren't freaking out about something they had no idea existed suddenly attacking them.

So, is Bree really unusual? I think it would be harder to name a place in the LoTR series that DOESN'T have multiple species interacting. It is actually pretty dang common.

And yes, in some places Centaurs might live side-along with Humans and other species; but that doesn't mean anyone half a continent away would know a Centaur from a Catoblepas. The core region of my current setting is in fact a faux-ancient-Greece but even there many don't know what a Centaur is as Centaurs only live on the islands and rarely if ever come to the mainland.

But you have immediately CAUSED them to be isolated. "They all live on this island and rarely come to the mainland", yeah, of course they aren't going to be as well known away from the coasts. And this is the issue I was getting at. You can't really have it so that EVERY fantasy race that isn't halfing, dwarf, or elf is living on islands they never leave, or in a valley they never leave, or in a swamp they never leave, or in an isolated forest they never leave.

It gets utterly samey and boring to have everyone be isolationists who never leave their lands and therefore no one knows about them. You have to mix it up, because anything sentient is going to be driven by desires, and those desires are going to find them searching for things.

It's a world full of different species, some of which are very rare and might only exist in one valley somewhere and many of which have little if anything to do with cultures/species not their own. Again, look at Middle Earth as an example.

In my setting, Gibbering Mouthers are a good example of this: they live in one small area just west of the core region (and just north of the Centaurs' islands) and have never been seen anywhere else. Describe one to a Viking just arrived from the far north and she'd think you were nuts.

Middle Earth has

Humans
Elves
Dwarves
Hobbits
Orcs/Goblins
Sentient Spiders
Trolls
Sentient Eagles
Giants
Ents
Dragons

That's Eleven species?


Even a bog standard DnD world has

Humans
Elves
Dwarves
Halflings
Orcs
Goblins
Hobgoblins
Bugbears
Gnolls
Ogres
Trolls
Giants
Sentient Spider
Sentient Eagles
Sentient Elk
Treants
Lizardfolk
Merfolk
Sahaguin
Dragons
Kobolds
Gnomes
Aboleth
Mind Flayers
Medusa
Minotaur
Centaur
Beholders
Bullywug
Koa-Toa
Yuan-ti
Naga
Ettin
Cyclops
Doppelganger/Changelings
Dryad
Gith
Grell
Grimlocks
Hags
Harpies
Jackalwere
Lamia
Kenku
Kraken
Manticore
Merrow
Myconid
Oni
Otyugh
Pixies
Sprites
Quagoth
Satyr
Thri-Kreen
Troglodytes
Unicorn
Yeti

That is 58 sentient species, and I skipped a lot of them, and also didn't talk about anything NON-Sentient. That is over 5 times more than Tolkiens Middle Earth. And again, this is the problem, You say "this is just like Middle-Earth" but you don't seem to realize that Middle Earth is far smaller and emptier than a DnD world. It just simply doesn't have the same number of things going on. So you can't make them the same without heavily cutting vast swathes of DnD.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top