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

The problem wth LFQW for WOTC is they can't choose a solution as each of the 5 generations of D&D players has a different preferred solution.

It's more likely groups don't have halflings than martials.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

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.

Okay.

How is that harmed by having more options to try out?

Remember, this was in response to Lanefan saying that we should be worried about the idea that other certain races are getting boring to people, because what will we do when these new races get boring. You don't play for a specific story, and that's great, but you can see how "trying out an idea" for 5 to 7 races is going to empty the things you feel like trying faster than having 60 races, right?


This isn't trying to bash anyone's creativity or anything, but if I wanted to play a game, and that game had a set of three races and three classes, I will have tried all those options far far faster than a game with 30 races and twelve classes. It is pure, basic math. Which is why the "what will we do when bored of the new races" argument doesn't hold much weight with me. Because the "Core four" are only just now starting to lost their luster after decades. The new races are only just now getting a bunch of additional attention within the last decade. We are looking at potentially 50 years, and there is no reason to think that some of the old races won't cycle back in by that point.
 

I would just remove them from the game. They're not really an essential or even significant part of any setting except for Dark Sun and possibly Eberron. They don't really contribute anything. And their characterization is all over the place.
 

I would just remove them from the game. They're not really an essential or even significant part of any setting except for Dark Sun and possibly Eberron. They don't really contribute anything. And their characterization is all over the place.

I'd be fine if they were rewritten and modernized. I will even admit, the inclusion of Stealth proficiency is a victory in that regard, because it makes them ACTUALLY naturally stealthy like everyone thought they were.

I also think the removal of the Stout Halfling is the for the better, since they were basically just half-dwarf Halflings and there is a better way to do that now.
 

I'd be fine if they were rewritten and modernized. I will even admit, the inclusion of Stealth proficiency is a victory in that regard, because it makes them ACTUALLY naturally stealthy like everyone thought they were.

I also think the removal of the Stout Halfling is the for the better, since they were basically just half-dwarf Halflings and there is a better way to do that now.
What's the better way? Level Up? Because IMO it certainly isn't the 6e way.
 

I would just remove them from the game. They're not really an essential or even significant part of any setting except for Dark Sun and possibly Eberron. They don't really contribute anything. And their characterization is all over the place.
Is any race "essential"? The version of elves and dwarves are also basically Tolkien's.

I just don't get why people are so ready to toss out something they don't personally find interesting.
 

Is any race "essential"? The version of elves and dwarves are also basically Tolkien's.

I just don't get why people are so ready to toss out something they don't personally find interesting.
Yeah. Generally not a fan of removing content. I can see re-working it under the right circumstances.
 


Conversely, elves and dwarves (and to a lesser extent gnomes) are standard fantasy fare, and predated tolkien in one form or another, whereas halflings are not and did not
To be fair, the Munchkins from Oz are pretty similar to halflings. And there are lots of myths about various "little peoples," many of which are more human-like than fey-like.
 

Is any race "essential"? The version of elves and dwarves are also basically Tolkien's.

I just don't get why people are so ready to toss out something they don't personally find interesting.

Well I’d argue that a race that is popular with players is essential. Which is why I’ve argued that gnomes and halflings shouldn’t be in the PHB. Not enough players find them interesting enough to play.

I’d rather the PHB actually reflect the game that is being played.

Note, your mistake here is that you think this is because of a dislike of halflings. That’s always been the mistaken presumption. I have no particular feelings either way about halflings because I haven’t seen one played in about fifteen years.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top