Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JiffyPopTart" data-source="post: 8190119" data-attributes="member: 4881">A1:  Yes, I 100% agree that monsters exist in 99.9% of every D&D game ever played.  We can probably put that to bed as I doubt anyone disagrees.A2:  Here you are skipping ahead.  We can't dismiss halflings using luck to avoid bandits and orcs as a poor explanation...when a world may not have halflings encounter bandits and orcs regularly.  They do not in my world, as they live in places that are peaceful* that are mostly immune for "raiding smart bands of creatures".This leaves us with the fauna of the area that they live in.  I will grant you that the area most likely could contain wolves/bears/tigers and other beasts from the Monster Manual.  As far as how the halflings deal with these beasts...I don't see why it has to be different than any other races village ability to deal with them.  In general having a house makes you immune to most beast encounters.  A grizzly shows up at your doorstep so you go inside, shut the door, and wait for it to go away.  In general beasts are there to find food, and perhaps the halflings have to worry about their goats and chickens getting eaten, but that isn't anything that hasn't been being done since animals were first domesticated thousands and thousands of year ago.  One family with some torches and a sling (or thrown rocks) is almost always more than enough to drive off beasts.B1:  I'm not exactly sure what you are saying the halflings as described are (or are not) doing that conflicts with free-will and interacts with cultural stasis.  If I had to ascribe a single label for them in the lore it would be CONTENT.  They don't feel the need to build monuments, dominate neighbors, establish legacies, or other such aspirations for power.  If they get to live a long life on the farm eating rhubarb pies and swapping tales with passers by, that is their best life.  I do think that assigning a single label to any fantasy race is much too basic, and leaves MUCH to be desire, however its a simple background on which to build any individual campaign.  But I don't think this relates to what you were speaking to.B2: As I didn't understand B1, I can't add much here.At the end of the day, as eloquently summed up earlier, Side A believes halfling lore as presented in 5e is either too simplistic OR not feasable.  Side B believes its either completely fine, or good enough to get by.  I haven't seen one person on this thread arguing there isn't an opportunity for MORE halfling lore.  All I have seen is back and forth arguments on what "makes sense in D&D" which is a very personal bar to set as each campaign has very different expectations, play styles, and GM styles.  People get entrenched in their views, dig their heels in, and then get so caught up in "winning" they lose track of the fact this is just a discussion of styles in the first place...there is no right opinion.So, to restate again my personal opinion from the top.There is nothing about the halfling lore as presented that is troublesome for D&D.  It is a simplistic description of a group of beings who are content with their lives as they have been, and find places to live that they are left alone to pursue that life.  In my campaign there is a place that allows that lifestyle to work, and I don't have to resort to hiding villages, paths, rangers, magical plants, magical luck, or the powers of the gods to make it happen.  There are peaceful areas.  The halflings settled there.  They are safe from monsters.  They defend themselves against the local fauna.  They entertain peaceful visitors.  They trade with those visitors and occasionally with the nearest "big city", and when something rare truly threatens the entire village they seek help from those friendly towards them, who are most likely under threat from that same force.</blockquote>

Verification