Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DMZ2112" data-source="post: 6363767" data-attributes="member: 78752">Said I'd do it.&nbsp; Did it.&nbsp; Ball's in his court.&nbsp; <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/paranoid.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":uhoh:" title="Paranoid&nbsp; &nbsp; :uhoh:" data-shortname=":uhoh:" />Agreed.&nbsp; You either have a rule, or you don't.&nbsp; The existence of the barbarian ability means there's no rule.Page 172 doesn't depict a halfling, it depicts a gnome.&nbsp; Ears.And I'm not convinced the small female on page 176 is not also a gnome.&nbsp; Gnomes also have large heads, but they don't have creepy tiny hands and they look like convincing fae creatures.&nbsp; If gnomes, and female gnomes in particular, were not /virtually unheard of/ in D&amp;D art outside of niche Dragonlance products, I would have no reason to think page 176 depicts a halfling.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DMZ2112, post: 6363767, member: 78752"] Said I'd do it. Did it. Ball's in his court. :uhoh: Agreed. You either have a rule, or you don't. The existence of the barbarian ability means there's no rule. Page 172 doesn't depict a halfling, it depicts a gnome. Ears. And I'm not convinced the small female on page 176 is not also a gnome. Gnomes also have large heads, but they don't have creepy tiny hands and they look like convincing fae creatures. If gnomes, and female gnomes in particular, were not /virtually unheard of/ in D&D art outside of niche Dragonlance products, I would have no reason to think page 176 depicts a halfling. [/QUOTE]

Verification