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 3e and especially 4e halfling inched noticeable away from hobbits and kenders to me.

Or more accurately, it felt like the whole race defaulted to ninja versions of Bilbo and Frodo instead of those types being the weirdos who left to adventure. 5e revert back to classic halflings but just had a large "Ninja Baggins Potential" in populations.
That....isn't a meaningful difference, though. It's a matter of whether Tooks or Proudfoots are more common in the populace.

4e tried too hard to give every race a culture, but mechanically they're still just stealthy lucky little guys. 3e IIRC only had the luck thing in fluff, and 5e tried to put stealth into one type of halfling, but they're all about as different as the subraces of halfling in 5e are from eachother.

edit: and the playtest halfling has proficiency in stealth, which is boring, but at least more to the point, and halfling stealthiness is literally as old as The Hobbit.

regardless, any changes will be within the scope of the last 20 years of halflings.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

That....isn't a meaningful difference, though. It's a matter of whether Tooks or Proudfoots are more common in the populace.

4e tried too hard to give every race a culture, but mechanically they're still just stealthy lucky little guys. 3e IIRC only had the luck thing in fluff, and 5e tried to put stealth into one type of halfling, but they're all about as different as the subraces of halfling in 5e are from eachother.

edit: and the playtest halfling has proficiency in stealth, which is boring, but at least more to the point, and halfling stealthiness is literally as old as The Hobbit.

regardless, any changes will be within the scope of the last 20 years of halflings.

Welll 3e nd 4e went heavy on the Tookishness and OneD&D is moving to a high percentage of it. It even cuts out the stout subrace. Halflings is heavily leaning to being more tan 50% Bilbo and most players go further.
 

Welll 3e nd 4e went heavy on the Tookishness and OneD&D is moving to a high percentage of it. It even cuts out the stout subrace. Halflings is heavily leaning to being more tan 50% Bilbo and most players go further.
Okay.

You seem to see that as a problem, and I don’t. I’m sure we can just move on at this point.

Again, a thread about how to get more of what you want from Halflinngs, I’ll happily participate. Heck, I did a whole thread spinning off from this one back when this one was fresh. I’d necro it, but man that first page has a lot of weird ideas like 7ft tall halflings being the new core or whatever.
 

that's not really the argument.

The argument is that rolled stat characters are virtually always higher value than point buy. The only reason to use die rolling is to have overpowered characters with no weaknesses. The proof of this is nearly all die rolled characters have higher stats than point buy ones, to the point where, at least in 3e, a point buy character was considered unplayable by die rollers.
My wife loves random rolls, to the point where she won't accept point buy as the baseline in campaign. On the other hand, she's the only completely honest die-roller I know.
 


Also just..

Look, the "traditional" races are (if you remove half-species) are: Elf, Dwarf, Human, Halfling, Gnome. You can add Half-Elf and Half-Orc if you want, but there is your list. That gets us between 5 and 7 options

Add in Non-traditional races? Already published in DnD we are looking at nearly 60 options. It is far far far harder to get bored with that many options than it is with the base "traditional" races. Especially since, the traditional races have the added problem of not being novel. If I want a story of an elven mage, I probably don't even have to play one, I can find multiple books featuring elven mages as the main character. But a Changeling Barbarian? Okay, that hasn't been done very often.
I don't play a character to live out the story I have planned for them. I play one to try out an idea and see what happens.
 

that's not really the argument.

The argument is that rolled stat characters are virtually always higher value than point buy. The only reason to use die rolling is to have overpowered characters with no weaknesses. The proof of this is nearly all die rolled characters have higher stats than point buy ones, to the point where, at least in 3e, a point buy character was considered unplayable by die rollers.
Yeah, sure. Tell us why we don’t like die rolling rather than listen to us.
 

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.
I'm not sure LFQW is a problem for WotC. They don't seem to address it much, at least not effectively.
 



Remove ads

Remove ads

Top