Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Vaalingrade" data-source="post: 8195924" data-attributes="member: 82524">The humans as presented in D&D are a lot like the ones presented in LoTR. They aren't us so much as they are mythic figures of destiny; ambitious and infinitely adaptable at a moment's notice. The greatest heroes and the worst villains. Which is fine, but it's nice to have actual people too. People who jus want to live their lives and be happy and need to be roused to heroism rather than always launching headlong at the call.That's not a mismatch of the setting, it's adding back something that was lost when all humans became Arnold when sometimes you want to play Bruce Willis. Jungle cannibals don't really match the dying desert world setting. They're really just there to make DS more Conan. And then the metaplot... arg.And both normal and afflicted kender were largely (and I'd say correctly) seen as both defining and damning features of DL.I will grant you that being nebulously awful was totally on brand for the BoVD.Has any of that changed in 5e? And I ask this knowing that in a second there's a big reveal that I feel like makes all the pieces fall into place...Ooooh. This is an old school gamer thing.I honestly know nothing about OSR culture and all that. I feel like we could have saved a billion pages if you'd just said OSR Halflings because that's not how halflings have been for like decades, dude. 5e art aside, they're not really jokes. They're in fact the icons of the only class that's balanced and playable across all three of the most recent editions. I mean, maybe Tabaxi might supplant them at some point, but that's because the internet loves cats.I don't think that howling and gnashing of teeth ever called halflings 'silly'. It's more about demanding that the muscly races always be stronger than halflings because... BECAUSE. But that whole thing is an issue with how D&D thinks strength is the primary component in being a good melee fighter.</blockquote>

Verification