D&D 5E The Fate of the Smol

[Marandahir]

Small characters can move through spaces of Large creatures. That's a benefit that is weighed against the two handed and versatile weapon issues.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Possibility that 3.5 did that. I know in 3.0/3.5 small races got an AC bonus against Larger creatures and what not IIRC.

Yeah, Small in 3e was +1 AC, +1 attack, +4 Hide

Then 3.5 came in with Small weapon sizes, which required you to step your dice down by a dice type or suffer s -4 The Designers Want to Punish You For Doing This penalty EVERYTHNG in 3e had because 3.5 was about ruining everything in 3e (alchemy, spontaneous metamagic, buffing dwarves) for no reason.

But did 2e penalize you for being small?

 

[James Gasik]

It did. You could only use a weapon of your size in one hand, and a weapon larger than your size in two hands. So, for example, a Human (Size M) can wield a longsword (size M) in one hand, and a greatsword (size L) in two. By the same token, a Halfling (Size S) can wield a short sword (size S) in one hand, and a longsword (size M) in two.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Ah.

So hitting halflings who don't want to he Bilbo The Burglar with a stick is just tradition.

 

[James Gasik]

For the most part, yes. 2e Halflings had some advantages that didn't involve Thievery, but it was what they were best at. For example, they had a bonus on magic saves based on their Constitution score (a trait shared, with some variations, with Dwarves and Gnomes). But 2e was a time of great niche protection, so most races were good at one or two things, and that was that. Not all races could be all classes, and not all classes could be multiclassed (though later books started to open up options in some interesting ways- Planescape's Aasimars could be Ranger/Mages, and the Complete Bard's Handbook allowed some Bard kits to multiclass, despite the fact that Kits were originally intended for single-classed characters, and Bards were not normally a multiclass option). In 2e, you generally played a race because you liked it- some were better than others, but optimization mostly took a back seat to "this is a cool idea".

 

[Crimson Longinus]

It is indeed really unfortunate who size matters less and less. I love small species, but I dislike how the game mechanics do not really recognise the difference properly. It is definitely my biggest disbelief suspensor stressor in the species homogenisation that's going on.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The biggest problem I see is that people want to control how other people make their characters. The fact that the player, and not the game or the DM is forcing them to play their character in a way that appeals to the game designers or the DM is somehow a bad thing.

Then why have races and classes at all? Why you want limit my desire to play a winged halfling or plate-wearing monk? Why not just have some freeform character building system that lets you mix and match mechanics and assign any flavour you like?

 

[Hussar]

Then why have races and classes at all? Why you want limit my desire to play a winged halfling or plate-wearing monk? Why not just have some freeform character building system that lets you mix and match mechanics and assign any flavour you like?

Because this is D&D and folks would lose their minds if WotC even hinted at this sort of system?

But, again, I DON'T want to limit your desire to play a winged halfling. That's the point. Why are you insisting that other people MUST play halflings a specific way? If you want your halfling to be weaker, then simply make a weaker halfling. If I want a stronger (or weaker halfling) why do I need WotC's permission to do so?

IOW, play your own character. Stop worrying about how other people play their characters. There is absolutely nothing stopping you from making a 1e traditional halfling in 5e. All you have to do is cap strength at about 14, and never use the dash action. Poof, instant 1e halfling.

But, apparently that's not good enough for people. It's not good enough that you can CHOOSE to play that. Apparently the only true answer is to force all players to conform to a specific vision that caters to your preferences, and everyone else can go hang.

So, explain to me why I must play a weak halfling if I don't want to. How is it better that I'm forced to conform to your vision of the game?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Because this is D&D and folks would lose their minds if WotC even hinted at this sort of system?

But, again, I DON'T want to limit your desire to play a winged halfling. That's the point. Why are you insisting that other people MUST play halflings a specific way? If you want your halfling to be weaker, then simply make a weaker halfling. If I want a stronger (or weaker halfling) why do I need WotC's permission to do so?

IOW, play your own character. Stop worrying about how other people play their characters. There is absolutely nothing stopping you from making a 1e traditional halfling in 5e. All you have to do is cap strength at about 14, and never use the dash action. Poof, instant 1e halfling.

But, apparently that's not good enough for people. It's not good enough that you can CHOOSE to play that. Apparently the only true answer is to force all players to conform to a specific vision that caters to your preferences, and everyone else can go hang.

So, explain to me why I must play a weak halfling if I don't want to. How is it better that I'm forced to conform to your vision of the game?

Because a tabletop RPG is not solo activity. It is not just about your character, it is about the reality they inhabit, and the other characters are part of that. So if I don't want to play in a setting with superhalflings, you playing such affects my experience.

And more fundamentally when we get down to the game design principles, either the splats mean something, define something about the reality, or they have no reason to exist. D&D is splat based game, if I don't want the splats to limit things I will play some other game (and I often have.)

 

[Hussar]

Because a tabletop RPG is not solo activity. It is not just about your character, it is about the reality they inhabit, and the other characters are part of that. So if I don't want to play in a setting with superhalflings, you playing such affects my experience.

And more fundamentally when we get down to the game design principles, either the splats mean something, define something about the reality, or they have no reason to exist. D&D is splat based game, if I don't want the splats to limit things I will play some other game (and I often have.)

So, your enjoyment of the hobby requires that everyone at the table follows your preferences? Not only that, but, people who don't even play at your table must follow your preferences too?

You must absolutely hate public games.

We're just not going to agree on this. I do not have any sympathy really for people whose enjoyment of the game requires them to force others to play in a particular way. I fully endorse the design principle that leaves it up to the table to sort this kind of thing out. You want halflings to be realistic (or at least believable to you, whatever that line actually is)? Fair enough. Find a group of like minded players and have at it. Knock yourself out.

Me? I refuse to force my preferences onto other groups, particularly groups I will never actually meet. If someone wants fifteen foot tall halfings? Fantastic. Someone wants to have halflings with hairy feet? Sure, that hasn't existed in D&D for over twenty years, but, cool, go for it. Someone wants halflings to be limited to 6th level fighters? Totally great.

But, when someone wants to tell me how I should play my character? When you're not even present at my table? Yeah, not happening.