PDA

View Full Version : Do halflings seem out of place to anyone else?



Bohandas
2016-02-14, 03:08 AM
Halflings don't really seem to me to fit in with the rest of D&D, especially not in standard settings like Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms (they kind of work in Eberron and Dark Sun). And unlike the other races they're not derived from folklore.

In general they seem both underdeveloped and derivative, as if the "half-" in "halfling" referred not to their size but to the fact that they're only half of a concept, half of which in turn is plagiarized.

Does anyone else get this impression?

Mr. Mask
2016-02-14, 03:27 AM
Have wondered about this myself. It doesn't help that gnomes, dwarves, goblins and kobolds are already overcrowding the little person's council of races. If you use some of the lore from Tolkien, they aren't too underdeveloped. It pays to remember DnD originally did just call them hobbits and steal most of the lore.

There are ways to spice them up, and if you look at the right splat books and novels they may seem a lot more interesting. I find all DnD stuff is like that, till you do so.


It's funny you mention them being out of place, as the hobbits were considerably out of place in The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit. One of the Maiar, a heir to the throne of Gondor, son of the Steward of Gondor, the prince of Mirkwood and a noble of the dwarves. Plus, a famous burglar's nephew, two cousins who decided to come along, and his gardener. In the Hobbit, it was Gandalf and a dwarven royal along with twelve other nobles and bodyguards, plus one rich burglar from out in the country who hadn't travelled till then.

You might even say that part of the problem is that DnD tries to make them seem not out of place, when a lot of the lore was set up to do just that.

Bohandas
2016-02-14, 04:21 AM
Have wondered about this myself. It doesn't help that gnomes, dwarves, goblins and kobolds are already overcrowding the little person's council of races. If you use some of the lore from Tolkien, they aren't too underdeveloped. It pays to remember DnD originally did just call them hobbits and steal most of the lore.

There are ways to spice them up, and if you look at the right splat books and novels they may seem a lot more interesting. I find all DnD stuff is like that, till you do so.


It's funny you mention them being out of place, as the hobbits were considerably out of place in The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit. One of the Maiar, a heir to the throne of Gondor, son of the Steward of Gondor, the prince of Mirkwood and a noble of the dwarves. Plus, a famous burglar's nephew, two cousins who decided to come along, and his gardener. In the Hobbit, it was Gandalf and a dwarven royal along with twelve other nobles and bodyguards, plus one rich burglar from out in the country who hadn't travelled till then.

You might even say that part of the problem is that DnD tries to make them seem not out of place, when a lot of the lore was set up to do just that.

Plus they just came out of nowhere. They apparently weren't created by either Eru or the Valar, unlike all the other sapient races of middle-earth.

--------------

Anyway, there's also the issue that it generalized them all to being Bilbo. So they're not even just knockoffs of a race they're all knockoffs of a specific character. It's the equivalent to if all-drow-characters-are-drizzt-clones were made a canon part of the game rather than a result of lazy character creation and/or fanboyism.

Milo v3
2016-02-14, 08:24 AM
Whenever I make a setting, I always end up removing the halflings since I can never figureout what to do with them.

Âmesang
2016-02-14, 09:09 AM
I could have sworn Tolkien half-heartedly mentioned that halflings were descended from a distant branch of Men, not all that different from the Drúedain; a leftover group that effectively skipped the First and Second Age before finally crossing the Misty Mountains during the Third. Might have been somewhere in his Letters, Unfinished Tales, or The History of Middle-earth.

I miss my old books. :smallfrown:

As for the topic I have no opinion on 'em one way or another 'cause I can't recall ever seeing anyone play as a halfling, though the only Bilbo-like quality I can see in 'em is their penchants for being thieves. Though they certainly seem to be a touch fitter (http://www.larryelmore.com/core/imgs/prints/TSR-HALFLING-THIEF.jpg) than Bilbo, but I imagine an adventurer's lifestyle burns a lot of calories. :smalltongue: Otherwise, I suppose their overall simple, down-to-earth lifestyle keeps 'em quiet and hard to notice. Well, yeah, no wonder they make good thieves.

…but %&#$ kenders.

halfeye
2016-02-14, 09:50 AM
Hobbits are a humanisation of rabbits:

Live in cosy holes, have hairy feet, are cute etc. Swap "ho" for "ra" and even the names are the same. The whole thing was a setting up of Watership Down.

Bohandas
2016-02-14, 10:08 AM
Hobbits are a humanisation of rabbits:

Live in cosy holes, have hairy feet, are cute etc. Swap "ho" for "ra" and even the names are the same. The whole thing was a setting up of Watership Down.

OMG, that's brilliant!

Jay R
2016-02-14, 11:30 AM
When I started playing D&D, it included hobbits, ents, and balrogs. Hobbits made excellent original D&D Theives, and my first Thief had a name that was perfect for a thief and quintessentially hobbit-like: Robin Banks.

Halflings, treants, and balors seem out of place to me, as if they snuck in under an assumed name - which in fact they did.


You might even say that part of the problem is that DnD tries to make them seem not out of place, when a lot of the lore was set up to do just that.

That post was very well conceived and written. Thank you.


Whenever I make a setting, I always end up removing the halflings since I can never figureout what to do with them.

I still use hobbits, not halflings. They usually exist in a small community far from the main action, and most of them have no interest in adventures. Unless a player wants to play a hobbit PC, the hobbits don't have anything to do with any of the plots, and most folks don't even know they exist.

That's as true to the original as I can get.

Tiktakkat
2016-02-14, 12:26 PM
I don't like most of the background kludged up for halflings in various incarnations of D&D so I developed my own, which produced some additional, and one thoroughly quirky, concepts along the way.
Then again a lot of the variations on racial backgrounds don't appeal to me and I've tweaked them over the years as well.

In terms of place, halflings serve as the "core" thief race, contrasting with dwarves as the "core" fighter race, and elves as the "core" arcane caster race. Humans wind up the "core" divine caster class by default. That leaves gnomes as the real surplus race, with half-orcs and half-elves a pair of weird sidetracks.

hymer
2016-02-14, 12:40 PM
I could have sworn Tolkien half-heartedly mentioned that halflings were descended from a distant branch of Men, not all that different from the Drúedain; a leftover group that effectively skipped the First and Second Age before finally crossing the Misty Mountains during the Third. Might have been somewhere in his Letters, Unfinished Tales, or The History of Middle-earth.

The wikipedia entry (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobbit) notes the sources as the prologue to LotR, the Guide to Names, and one of the Letters.


It doesn't help that gnomes, dwarves, goblins and kobolds are already overcrowding the little person's council of races.

Whenever I make a setting, I always end up removing the halflings since I can never figureout what to do with them.

I usually do this to gnomes instead. I agree there are rather a lot of 'little people', but I usually find some rolling hills somewhere for the Hobbits/halflings. When there are baddies nearby (and there usually is) they tend to form a relationship with nearby allies, often dwarves, who happily provide security for food. Otherwise they live in a remote area and are rarely seen by outsiders, or inside some mighty empire happy to have them filling the bread basket, and so leaving them to (not) govern themselves.

In my current 3.5 campaign, they (called Banakil) have seemingly been wiped out by a troll invasion thousands of years back. I think there are still some around, working as farm slaves for orcs, but we've yet to see.

Darth Ultron
2016-02-14, 01:13 PM
Halflings don't really seem to me to fit in with the rest of D&D, especially not in standard settings like Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms (they kind of work in Eberron and Dark Sun). And unlike the other races they're not derived from folklore.

In general they seem both underdeveloped and derivative, as if the "half-" in "halfling" referred not to their size but to the fact that they're only half of a concept, half of which in turn is plagiarized.

Does anyone else get this impression?

No. Why would you think halflings ''don't fit''? I guess you could say halflings don't come directly form folklore, but then that is true of all D&D races. The ''goblin'' of folklore, of dozens of different folklores, does not exactly match the goblin of D&D.

Halflings fit in D&D as much as any other race, as a stand in for humans.

Anonymouswizard
2016-02-14, 02:03 PM
Anyway, there's also the issue that it generalized them all to being Bilbo. So they're not even just knockoffs of a race they're all knockoffs of a specific character. It's the equivalent to if all-drow-characters-are-drizzt-clones were made a canon part of the game rather than a result of lazy character creation and/or fanboyism.

Not like there's any jokes about that anywhere (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0044.html).

Personally, for me it really depends on the setting. In Birthright halflings come from what seems to be the realm of the undead. This causes them to be the only race with innate (limited) magical abilities, and also seems to make immitive, letting them blend into other cultures. This means they are only race to not have Bloodlines (unless they were given one by a blooded member of another race, in theory), which makes them interesting, but they do feel a bit out of place.

Bohandas
2016-02-14, 03:49 PM
Halflings, treants, and balors seem out of place to me, as if they snuck in under an assumed name - which in fact they did.

The treants and balors don't seem as jarringly to me though; they've got the right combination of interesting and generic to fit in. Tree creatures fit in well with things like dryads and other fey, wood element creatures, and so forth. And the balors look like generic demons except for the whip, and their behavior is more informed by their tanar'ri-ness than their tolkienian origins. They've basically only gotten their names from tolkien, and those have, at least, been tweaked. "Halfling" on the other hand is a term taken directly from tolkien, and D&D's halflings have neither a compelling backstory nor a clear niche that they occupy from which a backstory can be filled in.

Jay R
2016-02-14, 03:58 PM
I ran a game (and may get back to it) with no gnomes, halflings, dwarves, pixies, elves, etc., but with the Fair Folk (from Lloyd Alexander's Prydain Chronicles) taking their place.

In fact, they are not replacing either dwarves or elves, although that's what the players have heard. The dwarves were all lost in a genocidal war with giants a few hundred years ago. They still exist, but are all enslaved by the giants. Nobody outside the Giant caverns knows this. The plan was for the PCs to get wind of this someday, and set out to free them (if they so chose).

Elves will be introduced from outside eventually. But they will not be D&D elves. They will be the elves from Terry Pratchett's Discworld novel Lords and Ladies.


Elves are wonderful. They provoke wonder.
Elves are marvellous. They cause marvels.
Elves are fantastic. They create fantasies.
Elves are glamorous. They project glamour.
Elves are enchanting. They weave enchantment.
Elves are terrific. They beget terror.
The thing about words is that meanings can twist just like a snake, and if you want to find snakes look for them behind words that have changed their meaning.
No one ever said elves are nice.
Elves are bad.

Arutema
2016-02-14, 06:00 PM
Whenever I make a setting, I always end up removing the halflings since I can never figureout what to do with them.

I did almost the opposite with the setting I'm working on. The fluff on halflings so often amounts to "small humans". I wanted to reserve humans for the antagonist race, so halflings took over from humans as the "vanilla" race.

BWR
2016-02-14, 06:17 PM
Mystaran halflings are basically LOTR hobbits in appearance (though maybe a tad less rotund) and culture but they have some differences. They are excellent sailors and feared pirates, their rowdy teen years involve burning, looting and pillaging (they are encouraged to do this in neighboring kingdoms where they won't bother other hin) and they have innate magic cancelling abilities. Fierce warriors when the need to be (having been enslaved by both orcs and dwarves before fighting off the yoke of oppression) and the wonderful community of Moon Hill, where powerful adventurers retire for some peace and quiet. They are also keepers of Blackflame, a mystic sort of negative fire which can be used for a variety of useful and powerful things.

Mystaran gnomes are basically Tinker gnomes, only slightly less demented and with a higher success rate.

kraftcheese
2016-02-14, 07:03 PM
I quite like the bioengineering progenitor race that Dark Sun's halflings were, and that they've subsequently split into scattered tribes of cannibals and raiders (or warped into humans, elves, dwarves, etc by their own design to better survive the world after cataclysm).

Milo v3
2016-02-14, 07:27 PM
I did almost the opposite with the setting I'm working on. The fluff on halflings so often amounts to "small humans". I wanted to reserve humans for the antagonist race, so halflings took over from humans as the "vanilla" race.

I wish it amounted to "Small humans" rather than "Small humans with super luck and uses sling shots for no reason" in 3.P... would make reflavouring easier.

Anonymouswizard
2016-02-14, 07:51 PM
Okay, it's not the original intention, but why don't we make some new fluff for halflings. It'll be better, with blackjack, hookers, and blackjack playing hookers (in every reading of that phrase). I'd start, but I really have no ideas.

Keltest
2016-02-14, 08:18 PM
I wish it amounted to "Small humans" rather than "Small humans with super luck and uses sling shots for no reason" in 3.P... would make reflavouring easier.

Actually, it makes sense that they would use slings. As you get shorter, bows become harder to use effectively, while just about anyone with the ability to throw can use a sling or hurl a stone. And slings are dangerous.

A Halfling wouldn't be able to wield a proper longbow, for example, and they would have difficulty reloading a heavy crossbow. Short bows are just as viable as slings, but stones are readily available and cheaper to boot.

Milo v3
2016-02-14, 08:22 PM
Actually, it makes sense that they would use slings. As you get shorter, bows become harder to use effectively, while just about anyone with the ability to throw can use a sling or hurl a stone. And slings are dangerous.

A Halfling wouldn't be able to wield a proper longbow, for example, and they would have difficulty reloading a heavy crossbow. Short bows are just as viable as slings, but stones are readily available and cheaper to boot.
Personally, I find that any weapon familiarity racial trait harms reflavouring.

Also, even if it makes sense for halflings to use slings it doesn't make sense for them All to use slings.

Keltest
2016-02-14, 08:37 PM
Personally, I find that any weapon familiarity racial trait harms reflavouring.

Also, even if it makes sense for halflings to use slings it doesn't make sense for them All to use slings.

Well I don't know about you, but when I DM, I don't compel every member of a species to carry at least one of every weapon they are capable of using with them at all times. A Halfling with a sling is going to be (slightly) better than an equally trained human with a sling. That doesn't mean all halflings use slings or that all halflings are even good with slings.

Talar
2016-02-14, 08:38 PM
I tend to get rid of gnomes cause I just don't really like them. And my halflings tend to be like gypsies.

Milo v3
2016-02-14, 09:27 PM
Well I don't know about you, but when I DM, I don't compel every member of a species to carry at least one of every weapon they are capable of using with them at all times. A Halfling with a sling is going to be (slightly) better than an equally trained human with a sling. That doesn't mean all halflings use slings or that all halflings are even good with slings.

All halflings have a bonus with slings. Objective fact, regardless of culture or backstory of the halfling. I don't like that. I hoped that at least in pathfinder with their alternate racial traits you'd be able to swap it out for something else... but no, all halflings have sling stuff.

Keltest
2016-02-14, 09:39 PM
All halflings have a bonus with slings. Objective fact, regardless of culture or backstory of the halfling. I don't like that. I hoped that at least in pathfinder with their alternate racial traits you'd be able to swap it out for something else... but no, all halflings have sling stuff.

Maybe their body structures just lend themselves to the effective use of slings?

Humans are really good at throwing things even relative to other animals physically capable of throwing. Its not that far of a stretch to imagine a species that is even better at it than we are.

Mr. Mask
2016-02-14, 09:47 PM
Personally, I find that any weapon familiarity racial trait harms reflavouring.

Also, even if it makes sense for halflings to use slings it doesn't make sense for them All to use slings. I figured they were just meant to be like the Balearic slingers. Or that they're just biologically suited to being accurate pitchers. Not quite sure what the best way for the latter is.

If you give them eyes keen at tracking movement and reacting to it, like some frogs and insect catching birds, then paired with their rather immobile stubby nature, the obvious result is to throw or shoot things at prey such as birds and rabbits. This would make them technically just as good with a bow, but the mentioned problems of height and short limbs would make slings one of the best options.

Jay R
2016-02-14, 10:28 PM
Okay, it's not the original intention, but why don't we make some new fluff for halflings.

Because the only reason we ever played one is because we want to play a hobbit. Re-fluffing them to be anything other than hobbits eliminates the only reason that they exist at all.

Mr. Mask
2016-02-14, 10:46 PM
Agreed. I don't really get it when people refluff hobbits into cannibals or the like. They just become a pygmy native stereotype by that point, divorced from Hobbitness. I would say it would be worth considering expanding on the lore as presented, if it would be helpful.

DnD has made an effort to do that for example with hobbits living in human cities, making them pickpockets and thieves. Some of that seems plausible, hobbits out of their element may become rather strange to hobbits in the Shire, particularly in a bad neighbourhood.

Or you could talk about the Shire as a nation and its relationship to various powers and histories and politics, and how it developed. You could potentially have a group of hobbits that became very different from their Shire kin to contrast and add more depth.

Marlowe
2016-02-14, 10:51 PM
I'm a little hazy how Gnomes came to be split off from Dwarves, or how Kobolds came to be a completely separate race when they're just "Goblins" in German.

Milo v3
2016-02-14, 10:55 PM
They just become a pygmy native stereotype by that point, divorced from Hobbitness.
I actually prefer that to hobbits.

goto124
2016-02-15, 01:06 AM
Why do halflings have hairy feet?

Milo v3
2016-02-15, 01:09 AM
Why do halflings have hairy feet?

Because hobbits have hairy feet.

Mr. Mask
2016-02-15, 01:42 AM
You know, I was going to add "why do humans have hairy feet?", but these random tirades rarely make for worthy discussion.


On the note of what makes hobbits hobbits, they're kind of like the typical main character being taken out of their small world into the big one, you might say. Their nature could make for some interesting systems of warfare, but it's hard to work out what sort of cultural traits you want to emphasize or add. Would the hobbits ever build cities? It doesn't seem in their nature. And they can probably support a much larger population just off farming the same space of land. Perhaps this'd produce a lot of layabouts, as a few workers can support a lot of people, but then hobbits sounded lax enough that they may just not work hard enough to support much more than their own population. And they eat so much, it makes me wonder if they just snarf down what extra food gets produced. Communist hobbits would be very different indeed.

With their skill with working things that grow, this makes me wonder if they'd be good at healing barren land. If so, you may see some hobbit communities popping up at the edge of human settlements, where they bought bad land cheap and then made it into rich soil over time. This could in turn lead to jealous human farmers and hobbits wanting greater citizenship in the community. And complaints that hobbits tend to be numerous but do less work, so giving them full citizenship wouldn't be fair to humans, and so on.

Hobbits may thrive in certain jobs, and so end up with communities there. Stuff like accounting where size or strength has no benefit. But that seems so unsuitable to them, that they may find some of their children being apathetic and unsuited to the work, and so a number of them might become thieves, drunkards, vagabonds and tricksters. A hobbit beggar only need a little coin to be able to eat and drink, and a sly one could eat and drink to excess.

Now, hobbits aren't particularly strong in martial pursuits, which could lead to them having problems in a violent world. If there's a riot where they start killing hobbits, or if an enemy arm is coming and they're thrown outside the walls of the city because they're considered not useful in defending it, or hobbits shirking their military duty or found lacking when it's time to take arms and form a militia to the irritation of other races. Some hobbits could really break this stereotype, being a great scout and a frightening shot with a sling or bow. Hobbits are shown to be tough sorts, so when you came to fight them they'd likely put up what fight they could. But while they might struggle bitterly, the results are liable to be sad for them.

What about attempts to unify the hobbits? They seem independent and not too keen on union, so attempts to form a hobbit state will probably mainly fall on death ears, with hobbits complaining about the silly politicians thinking of such unnecessary things. But even as small life as the hobbits seem, perhaps a few massacres and attacks and murders and mistrials would change their minds? Places like the Shire may never take interest in such a union, but you may get a hobbit's council campaigning for their rights in the areas where hobbit communities are common. That being said, they're too mixed in with other groups probably to really form a state, and even the political party would have shaky foundations, but you may see them doing something or other, negotiating with some cities or powers. Not always to good effect, some towns may take offence to being told what to do by a bunch of hobbits, and act out against them. You could potentially see this dramatize into a situation where hobbit-only towns and the like are formed, with their own militias and vows to protect hobbits (who they can't protect, and end up not protecting, commonly). These villages would probably not be too hostile, maybe a bit rude and terse to strangers (more so than the Shire), but they would likely be ready to put up a stiff fight when trouble came (and would end up allying with nearby towns and villages due to the inadequacies of their numbers). Villages that did well in battle would find more sway in their rights in the area related to humans and such.


To me, this sounds interesting, and all it takes isn't really changing hobbits but thinking about how they might interact with a DnD style world.

Bohandas
2016-02-15, 02:10 AM
Whenever I make a setting, I always end up removing the halflings since I can never figureout what to do with them.

I agree that this is probably the best course of action.

Mr. Mask
2016-02-15, 02:18 AM
I just realized the amusing irony that at this point, your forum title is Halfling in the Playground.

Anonymouswizard
2016-02-15, 02:29 AM
Agreed. I don't really get it when people refluff hobbits into cannibals or the like. They just become a pygmy native stereotype by that point, divorced from Hobbitness. I would say it would be worth considering expanding on the lore as presented, if it would be helpful.

DnD has made an effort to do that for example with hobbits living in human cities, making them pickpockets and thieves. Some of that seems plausible, hobbits out of their element may become rather strange to hobbits in the Shire, particularly in a bad neighbourhood.

So, slightly more moral Kender? At least they understand that stealing is wrong.

Personally, I just want the fluff to not focus on Bilbo-hobbits and also have the Samwise-hobbits, the Brave short men and woman willing to pick up a sword and defend their friends to the last breath. Sam is my idea of a halfling paladin, down to resisting the evil artefact because he legitimately doesn't want what it twists his wishes into ('I'll give you power!' 'I don't want power.' 'I'll give you women!' 'But I'm only interested in one woman.' 'I'll give you her!' 'But I want her to like me for me.' 'What the **** do you want?' 'A garden?' 'I'll give you a massive garden! The biggest you've ever seen!' 'But then I wouldn't be able tend it with my own hands.')

Mr. Mask
2016-02-15, 03:07 AM
Hadn't mentioned this, but hobbits who were treated well by other groups would probably start to see them as friends worth fighting for, and could be relied on to stand with you till the last. It'd probably be rare for hobbits to abandon their lands and friends, though in bad cases you would probably get some hobbit refugees (still not a lot compared to their populations and ability to slip away).

gtwucla
2016-02-15, 03:45 AM
Yes, and all the other little people seem out of place as far as civilizations go. Seems to me it doesn't matter whether other races like each other or not, because at some point or another that race isn't always going to lay its life on the line for the every other powerful group that wants to rape and pillage the place for all its resources and land, citing the Macedonians, Romans, Huns, Mongols, British, French, Prussians, Nazis, Russians, Morgoth, the Dark One, Rainacorns, and every other expansionist a&&hole to have ever existed.

The Insanity
2016-02-15, 04:58 AM
In my setting's main area - the kingdom/empire - halflings and gnomes form the majority of the societies working force. You'll see them working as physical laborers, shopkeepers, servants, waiters, etc., basically jobs that most people don't like or want to do.

Jay R
2016-02-15, 09:53 AM
I'm a little hazy how Gnomes came to be split off from Dwarves, or how Kobolds came to be a completely separate race when they're just "Goblins" in German.

Because Gygax and Arneson just dumped pretty much every name they could find into the original D&D, whether it made sense or not.

The description of kobolds started with the words "Treat these monsters as if they were Goblins except that ...." The only differences were AC, hit points, and damage.

They became something other than slightly modified goblins in AD&D.

Âmesang
2016-02-15, 11:42 AM
'I'll give you power!' 'I don't want power.' 'I'll give you women!' 'But I'm only interested in one woman.' 'I'll give you her!' 'But I want her to like me for me.' 'What the **** do you want?' 'A garden?' 'I'll give you a massive garden! The biggest you've ever seen!' 'But then I wouldn't be able tend it with my own hands.'
'I'll give you more hands!'

…and that immediately made me picture Samwise with multiple arms. :smalltongue: ♫ "Spider-Sam, Spider-Sam! Does whatever a hobbit can!" ♫

"And that's for my old Gaffer!"

Airk
2016-02-16, 02:20 PM
They're definitely no more out of place than Gnomes. :P

The problem with Halflings though, is that they used to be Hobbits, and then they went "Crap; We're putting ourselves in serious lawsuit territory if we keep doing this. We need to make them NOT HOBBITS!" and so they filed off all the serial numbers, and were left with a race that didn't really have any distinguishing traits left. The exact same thing would have happened if you'd do it to dwarves, or elves, or orcs, or whatever, back in the day. (All of these ideas are now too firmly entrenched)

AMFV
2016-02-16, 02:35 PM
I always try to do different things with Halflings. I've had them as Mafiosos in one setting (they have an affinity for crime, and are typically family oriented to the extreme). I mean that sort of thing makes sense. They're obsessively loyal, and they're willing to break the laws, what else might they be willing to do to preserve their families.

Sam113097
2016-02-16, 04:39 PM
I feel like gnomes and hobbits halflings fill the same niche in most settings. They are both small, mischievous, typically isolated, and often live inside of hills. Because of this, I prefer gnomes over halflings because they are a common fairy-tale creature, not an obvious rip-off of Tolkien. Elves and dwarves exist in folklore outside of Tolkien's works, but hobbits are his creation, and the don't fit in many fantasy settings.

halfeye
2016-02-16, 05:05 PM
Elves and dwarves exist in folklore outside of Tolkien's works.
Yeah, except they are totally random from one story to another, dwarves are always short but that's the only constant.

Mephit
2016-02-16, 05:24 PM
More relevant than folklore is that Dwarves and Elves have been more present in derivative fantasy works.

I've seen dwarves and elves in books and video games aplenty. Halflings in non-Tolkien works? (Except for D&D) I have a hard time thinking of one, personally - but that might just be me.

Dwarves and Elves, in their stoney and woodsey incarnations have been accepted into the fantasy canon, halflings/hobbits have not. The same thing with gnomes, which is why someone else in this thread cuts gnomes instead of halflings because they have to fight for the small race spot. Halflings probably have a harder time because their flavor in D&D, at least in 3E kind of sucks.

I wholeheartedly agree that their (standard, fantasy canon) position in the world should be Tolkienesque: Isolated and hidden from most other races and conflicts. But if they are why bother having them as a standard player race?

cobaltstarfire
2016-02-16, 06:05 PM
The only game I ever ran that wasn't human only had it such that the halflings were half human-half dwarves, and Gnomes were half human-half elves, they went on to become two sub-races within a single race. This happened a very long time ago though (The dwarves who are extinct have been nearly or completely forgotten by most). The different races didn't intermingle very much during the time of the campaign either so there weren't any humans or elves giving birth to gnomes or halflings.

Gnomes and Halflings lived together in a hilly city where its citizens lived both on the surface and deep underground. It had more/slightly better technology than Human or Elvin lands, and was very pastoral. A great wyrm metallic dragon watched over them all fondly. (I can't remember what color it was, probably copper or brass, he was there before them watching over something else but he's happy looking over them too). I had only really come up with a small area of the world, but any halflings or gnomes who weren't tied to that city or its surrounding lands were wanderers, adventurers, or merchants.


This campaign had ditched most humanoid races though, there were only Human-like ones (Elves, Humans, Dwarves (extinct), and their mixed blood decedents) and the much rarer and often nastier Reptile-like ones (Dragons, Kobolds, Lizardfolk), with the rest of anything else being animals, or magical animals which were produced by wizards of old.

In terms of official settings, I don't think halflings are any more out of place than the dozens upon dozens of intelligent humanoids running around in any particular campaign setting.

Though the one I came up with is a product of my feeling that there are far too many races. I did what I did based on the races my players had chosen, then cut things down from there. (I can't remember if I was going to do that before hand, or got the idea after player creation, but I think it's a nice way to have a race restricted world, without restricting what races the players can choose)

goto124
2016-02-17, 01:17 AM
I've always wondered: in a fantasy world with dwarves, gnomes, and halflings, what is it like to be a human with dwarfism?

Sam113097
2016-02-17, 01:54 AM
Yeah, except they are totally random from one story to another, dwarves are always short but that's the only constant.

Here's the thing: elves, gnomes, and dwarves have all appeared in a wide variety of traditional folklore and fantasy literature. Their exact traits vary from source to source, but they're all creatures from folklore. Hobbits, on the other hand, were created by one author. Anytime you hear hobbit (or halfling, which is another name for hobbits used in LotR, and I don't know how D&D gets away with using it), you immediately think of Lord of the Rings, because that's where the race was invented. Elves, dwarves and gnomes all have a variety of fairy tales and myths that can be drawn from for inspiration for their races. Halflings are just associated too much with their original setting, Middle Earth, and it keeps them from fitting in with other settings.


I've always wondered: in a fantasy world with dwarves, gnomes, and halflings, what is it like to be a human with dwarfism?
People would probably think that you were just a halfling, dwarf, or gnome on first glance.

Kami2awa
2016-02-17, 03:07 AM
I've always wondered: in a fantasy world with dwarves, gnomes, and halflings, what is it like to be a human with dwarfism?

How about a dwarf with dwarfism?

Logosloki
2016-02-17, 07:18 AM
I feel like gnomes and hobbits halflings fill the same niche in most settings. They are both small, mischievous, typically isolated, and often live inside of hills. Because of this, I prefer gnomes over halflings because they are a common fairy-tale creature, not an obvious rip-off of Tolkien. Elves and dwarves exist in folklore outside of Tolkien's works, but hobbits are his creation, and the don't fit in many fantasy settings.

When to include Gnomes vs Hobbits is more a regional choice. Gnomes are your mountainous/underground choice whereas Hobbits are your Forest/Plains choice. Halflings are a choice you make when you are emphasising elves whilst gnomes are when you are emphasising dwarves.

As to my take on Halflings, I have tentatively pencilled them in as the Half-dwarf for a setting bible I am writing. I know that Athas has its Mul but Muls feel to me to be very setting specific.

Prime32
2016-02-17, 09:32 AM
Halflings don't really seem to me to fit in with the rest of D&D, especially not in standard settings like Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms (they kind of work in Eberron and Dark Sun). And unlike the other races they're not derived from folklore.

In general they seem both underdeveloped and derivative, as if the "half-" in "halfling" referred not to their size but to the fact that they're only half of a concept, half of which in turn is plagiarized.

Does anyone else get this impression?IIRC Gygax didn't want halflings in D&D because they would make it seem like a LotR-type world when it was intended to be something very different (for a start: LotR had vague magic, dealt with Good vs Evil where the ideal was for Good to win, and was implied to take place in the distant past before Man became dominant; D&D had obvious magic, dealt with Order vs Chaos where the ideal was for neither to win, and was implied to take place in the distant future after Man has started to fade). They only got stats because his players were massive LotR fanboys.

Telonius
2016-02-17, 10:41 AM
Here's how I generally divide up the small races.

Goblins: Chaotic, less-developed tribes, typically organized in small villages. Not much technology. Traditionally hunted for XP. Settlements in remote areas; possible to burn them down.
Kobolds: Lawful dragon-descended (and paranoid) society famed for traps. Also traditionally hunted for XP out in the open. Attempting to storm their underground lair will result in a Tucker-esque slaughter.
Gnomes: Generally chaotic underground society famous for tinkering and random explosions. Will do anything FOR SCIENCE! or for laughs. Tend to be excellent craftsmen with a penchant for tapping into forces they really shouldn't be messing with.
Halflings: Hobbit expies. Most individuals are farmers or Roma-like wanderers. Society is generally split between neutral and chaotic, with some (farmers/wanderers) who want to just be left alone and others (thieves' guild) with a strong chaotic streak. (Add dinosaurs if in Eberron).
Kender: Hunted to extinction by all other races. When a protest was lodged with St. Cuthbert, the response was, "They had it coming."

Airk
2016-02-17, 10:56 AM
Here's the thing: elves, gnomes, and dwarves have all appeared in a wide variety of traditional folklore and fantasy literature. Their exact traits vary from source to source, but they're all creatures from folklore. Hobbits, on the other hand, were created by one author. Anytime you hear hobbit (or halfling, which is another name for hobbits used in LotR, and I don't know how D&D gets away with using it), you immediately think of Lord of the Rings, because that's where the race was invented. Elves, dwarves and gnomes all have a variety of fairy tales and myths that can be drawn from for inspiration for their races. Halflings are just associated too much with their original setting, Middle Earth, and it keeps them from fitting in with other settings.


This seems a little inconsistent. On the one hand, you are saying "It's fine to use these other races, because even though there is zero folkloric consistency in what they are, at least their names appear in folklore" and on the other hand you seem to be saying "Even though there are tons and tons of folkloric examples of 'little people' of various sorts, since they aren't specifically referred to as "halflings" they don't count"?

It seems to me that characteristics are more important than names, rather than the reverse.

Joe the Rat
2016-02-17, 11:17 AM
They fit as well as anything else shoehorned in because of "In the Core Rules" or "Insanely Popular." So it comes down to how well you do fitting in the lore, and how well you do at saying "no" to things that just don't fit. If you're dealing with the existing lore of settings... does anyone bother with explaining where humans came from? Because that's always a big question mark. If you're making your own... make them fit, or leave them out, as you like.

Sam113097
2016-02-17, 11:26 AM
This seems a little inconsistent. On the one hand, you are saying "It's fine to use these other races, because even though there is zero folkloric consistency in what they are, at least their names appear in folklore" and on the other hand you seem to be saying "Even though there are tons and tons of folkloric examples of 'little people' of various sorts, since they aren't specifically referred to as "halflings" they don't count"?

It seems to me that characteristics are more important than names, rather than the reverse.

My point is that elves, dwarves, and gnomes all existed in folklore before Tolkien as forms of fairy-tale "little people", while hobbits are a distinct creation of Tolkien

Jay R
2016-02-17, 12:12 PM
I've always wondered: in a fantasy world with dwarves, gnomes, and halflings, what is it like to be a human with dwarfism?

I suspect that the original story of Snow White was actually about seven humans with dwarfism, who lived alone in the forest because they were outcasts.

But back to your question: It's possible that, except for the poor and outcast, they would simple be healed.

But in a D&D world, I think it's crucial to realize that there is a great proliferation of half-elves, half-orcs, half ogres, half-dragons, etc. People might be more likely to assume it's another species cross than some kind of disease or condition of a pure human.

CharonsHelper
2016-02-17, 12:30 PM
I think of them not having their own society per say, but are instead in a symbiotic relationship with humans. I always put NPCs of them in as tailors and other professions for which their size isn't a significant disadvantage. Plus - since they eat less (even with 5 meals/day) and needing smaller living spaces, they can charge less for the same work. Yay symbiotic relationship!

Keltest
2016-02-17, 12:47 PM
My point is that elves, dwarves, and gnomes all existed in folklore before Tolkien as forms of fairy-tale "little people", while hobbits are a distinct creation of Tolkien

Most of the races as they appear in Tolkien's works are like that. Elves and Dwarves appear in a lot of works, but the only thing most versions have in common is the name. You wont look at the little shoe-making elves and see anything of the Noldor in them, for example.

Segev
2016-02-17, 12:50 PM
I've never used this, but one could make halflings' name make more sense by giving them something weird that explains both their seeming lack-of-place and their tendency to appear all over in settings. Make them what happens when any two humanoid races produce offspring.

Half-elves and half-orcs don't exist, in this version of things. Human/Elf kids are halflings. Orc/Dwarf kids are halflings. Gnome/goblin kids are halflings. They may bear some minor distinguishing marks of their parents (fairer or darker skin, more or less hirsuit), but it's still a hard guess what their parental makeup is; they all look like halflings. Nobody's sure why, or what it means about the relationships of the races.

Possibly, halflings could be totally sterile, like mules. This would lend credence to the various humanoid races being actually different species.

Or maybe they can only breed with things that create half-templates, making those who want families a bit...adventurous. "Mom, Dad, I'm going on an adventure to hope I can find a nice dragon to marry."

halfeye
2016-02-17, 01:11 PM
My point is that elves, dwarves, and gnomes all existed in folklore before Tolkien as forms of fairy-tale "little people", while hobbits are a distinct creation of Tolkien
Existed? the names existed, but there's no unity about what the names mean, except for dwarves being short.

Elves? Rowling's Elves are small and subservient, Tolkeins are proud and tall. Folklore was just as inconsistent.

Mith
2016-02-17, 01:54 PM
I think you can make halflings fit in your setting. In mine, I just tied them closer to other established races.

I have halflings, gnomes, and goblins as being closer to different tribes then races, with the gnomes ending up with closer ties with the Dwarves, Goblins forming their own society and Hobgoblins and Bugbears arising from the Goblin tribes over time, and Halflings being a wandering folk akin to the Gypsies. Kolbolds are descended from goblin tribes that bred with Dragons. As the Human Empire rose, Halflings were still nomadic, but they took over trade and entertainment as well, with the occasional Gnome that had decided to wander instead of living in Gnomish territories.

However, there was a growing distrust of Halflings as they were attributed with stealing from people, which grew into a full persecution. This was the result of the Kender, a tribe of halflings that instinctively steal anything of interest, and it happened to be one of the largest bloodlines among the halflings, with a kender popping up in a non-kender family if there was a Kender ancestor 5 generations previous. In response to the growing threat of extermination as the result of a tribe, the Halfling community purged themselves of the kender bloodlines, and then sought sanctuary with the Elves. Nowdays, Halflings live in a small territory within Elven lands. While they benefit from the Elven lands, Halflings have also perfected Golem making, and their borders are also patrolled by golem forces. Gnomes went on to derive half of the formula for making Warforged, with Dwarven crafting used to make them a reality.

Sam113097
2016-02-17, 01:57 PM
Existed? the names existed, but there's no unity about what the names mean, except for dwarves being short.

Elves? Rowling's Elves are small and subservient, Tolkeins are proud and tall. Folklore was just as inconsistent.

It's really the name that matters, not the appearance. I'm trying to emphasize that the names existed, even if the creatures they were attached to changed from story to story. My point is that you could easily rename halflings as gnomes, which both eliminates the Tolkien connection and is a name closer in its origin to elf and dwarf, because all 3 are from fairy-tales.

halfeye
2016-02-17, 03:05 PM
It's really the name that matters, not the appearance.

Eh?


'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'

To me it seems that a name whose object is infinitely variable describes everything and nothing.

Sam113097
2016-02-17, 03:25 PM
To me it seems that a name whose object is infinitely variable describes everything and nothing.
I don't think the word gnome or halfling is infinitely variable.
I guess I'm having trouble wording my responses clearly. All I'm trying to say is that "gnome" makes more sense as a name for a race of "little people" in fantastic settings because it is derived from folklore like "elf" and "dwarf", and isn't linked to Tolkien

Airk
2016-02-17, 04:24 PM
I don't think the word gnome or halfling is infinitely variable.
I guess I'm having trouble wording my responses clearly. All I'm trying to say is that "gnome" makes more sense as a name for a race of "little people" in fantastic settings because it is derived from folklore like "elf" and "dwarf", and isn't linked to Tolkien

Depending on your definition of "folklore" you're actually incorrect, "gnome" is also pretty recent and doesn't contain a lot of context.

Sam113097
2016-02-17, 04:43 PM
Depending on your definition of "folklore" you're actually incorrect, "gnome" is also pretty recent and doesn't contain a lot of context.

The term "gnome" originated during the Renaissance, and I wouldn't consider the 1500s recent by any means, especially compared to the 1930s for "hobbit".

Airk
2016-02-17, 05:09 PM
The term "gnome" originated during the Renaissance, and I wouldn't consider the 1500s recent by any means, especially compared to the 1930s for "hobbit".

Since you're clearly reading Wikipedia, it seems to me that it was a word invented by someone in the 1500s and that they then can't cite another appearance of the word until 1700 or so. We're not dealing with what I would consider "Traditional folklore" at all at that point.

Telonius
2016-02-18, 06:43 AM
Since you're clearly reading Wikipedia, it seems to me that it was a word invented by someone in the 1500s and that they then can't cite another appearance of the word until 1700 or so. We're not dealing with what I would consider "Traditional folklore" at all at that point.

I guess that's a matter of perspective. 1500 is over 500 years ago. Just after Columbus's voyage. The only buildings that were standing on our territory at the time (that are still there) were built by Native Americans. In Europe, the earliest versions of "William Tell" (that we know about) had just been written down 30 years ago. Don Quixote did not exist. Shakespeare (one of him, anyway) would be born in about 60 years.

1700 was a few years before Ben Franklin was born. The French and Spanish still had colonies. Detriot, New Orleans, Richmond, and Baltimore did not exist. Neither did the entire colony of Georgia. None of the tall tales (Pecos Bill, Mike Fink, Paul Bunyan, John Henry) were around. Over in Europe, Hans Christian Anderson wouldn't be born for another hundred years. The Grimm Brothers wouldn't be around for 150.

For me, 1500 is pretty solidly in the realm of Traditional Folklore. 1700, starting to inch out of it. 1800 or so is about the cutoff.

hymer
2016-02-18, 10:20 AM
I've heard it said that people in the New World think that a hundred years is a long time, while Europeans think that a hundred miles is a long way.

Elderand
2016-02-18, 10:25 AM
Indeed, as an european I can tell you this, we do have relatively recent folklore but for any sort of mythological creature if it doesn't date back to the middle ages or earlier it's not going to be considered old while traveling 50 miles is enough to end up several towns over.

wumpus
2016-02-18, 10:39 AM
I guess a lot of it comes down to your feelings about Drizzit. Per lore, he is a unique social misfit that plays completely opposite to type. The catch is that old school halflings (1e and BX at least had to switch to "halfling", but kept the descriptions as "hobbit" as possible) would have to be at least as much against type (i.e. Bilbo).

New school halflings allow PCs to remain halflings. It also allows the halfling societies to look vaguely like what you would expect from halfling expectation from generations of halfling PC characters. I'd still like to allow the existence of "old school halflings" (i.e. called "hobbits" anywhere Tolkien Enterprises isn't likely to sue), but I can't see them as the default anymore.

Mr. Mask
2016-02-18, 10:50 AM
Weren't some hobbit families like the Tooks noted to have been adventurous? That plus having five hobbit adventurers across the two books seems to speak some of them are worthy for adventure. The other hobbits also put up a pretty good fight when their homes were threatened. Drizzt meanwhile was suggested to be one of the few good Drow in the whole Underdark, his father being one of the few others.

cobaltstarfire
2016-02-18, 11:16 AM
Weren't some hobbit families like the Tooks noted to have been adventurous? That plus having five hobbit adventurers across the two books seems to speak some of them are worthy for adventure. The other hobbits also put up a pretty good fight when their homes were threatened. Drizzt meanwhile was suggested to be one of the few good Drow in the whole Underdark, his father being one of the few others.

I can't remember which hobbit family it is, but those who were more adventurous were also considered to be rather strange to most other hobbits.

Though it is true that they apparently rise to the occasion just fine, but the society in general isn't really the adventurous sort.

hymer
2016-02-18, 11:55 AM
I can't remember which hobbit family it is, but those who were more adventurous were also considered to be rather strange to most other hobbits.

Bilbo's adventurous side is referred to as the Took in him (his mother was Belladonna Took) and the Tookish blood alluded to as adventurous several times. But the Brandybucks, too, were seen as adventurous in their way. They settled beyond the Brandywine River near The Old Forest, which they sometimes enter when they feel like it. They also use boats regularly, and they are among the more common Shire visitors to Bree. All terribly adventurous and less than respectable! And of course, Merry (Brandybuck) and Pippin (Took) are positively singing with the idea of going off to adventure, though they didn't seem so interested in going on their own. They were going to follow their beloved friend and cousin Frodo.

Thinker
2016-02-18, 12:12 PM
I guess that's a matter of perspective. 1500 is over 500 years ago. Just after Columbus's voyage. The only buildings that were standing on our territory at the time (that are still there) were built by Native Americans. In Europe, the earliest versions of "William Tell" (that we know about) had just been written down 30 years ago. Don Quixote did not exist. Shakespeare (one of him, anyway) would be born in about 60 years.

1700 was a few years before Ben Franklin was born. The French and Spanish still had colonies. Detriot, New Orleans, Richmond, and Baltimore did not exist. Neither did the entire colony of Georgia. None of the tall tales (Pecos Bill, Mike Fink, Paul Bunyan, John Henry) were around. Over in Europe, Hans Christian Anderson wouldn't be born for another hundred years. The Grimm Brothers wouldn't be around for 150.

For me, 1500 is pretty solidly in the realm of Traditional Folklore. 1700, starting to inch out of it. 1800 or so is about the cutoff.

As far as I can tell, gnomes in folklore are referred to in about the same way as dwarfs. There are no stories where they are distinct from dwarfs and, even in the 19th century, were used to refer to a specific type of dwarf (red-capped, bearded, hanging out in gardens). Then again, dwarfs weren't all that dwarf-like - about the only thing anyone could agree on was that they were short, magical, and related to the earth in some way (and even that last one was open to a lot of interpretation).

Hawkstar
2016-02-19, 02:40 PM
In my sci-fi campaign, halflings are nothing more than the result of the Human G-nome project, designed to dramatically reduce human mass to be more efficient in exploring and colonizing space by reducing spacefaring vessel mass - not only by reducing the mass of the crew without reducing capability, but also allowing for less 'wasted space', more compact design, and fewer life-support resources. Additional benefits included dramatically increased lifespan, improved muscle efficiency (Lower gross power than a full-sized humans, but more pound-for-pound power), and durability.

They're perfectly suited to colonizing alien hobbitats.

Segev
2016-02-19, 03:03 PM
They're perfectly suited to colonizing alien hobbitats.

Well played, good sir.

Mr. Mask
2016-02-19, 09:34 PM
You have to be careful about reducing mass. That could also reduce radiation resistance which is currently a hot topic in regards to manned trips to Mars. You might be able to maintain resistance, somehow.

Keltest
2016-02-19, 09:40 PM
You have to be careful about reducing mass. That could also reduce radiation resistance which is currently a hot topic in regards to manned trips to Mars. You might be able to maintain resistance, somehow.

A healthy diet of lead would do the trick.

Mr. Mask
2016-02-19, 09:44 PM
Ball bearings on rice.

Hawkstar
2016-02-19, 10:08 PM
Actually, I admit that I stole the joke (http://www.irregularwebcomic.net/1496.html). But it's a fun joke to steal.

goto124
2016-02-20, 01:11 AM
Human G-nome project

https://31.media.tumblr.com/dce34a4fe10b0e864e0379d2d29b894a/tumblr_inline_nbt0js25uz1qfkjm4.gif

Darth Ultron
2016-02-20, 02:32 PM
I don't think the word gnome or halfling is infinitely variable.
I guess I'm having trouble wording my responses clearly. All I'm trying to say is that "gnome" makes more sense as a name for a race of "little people" in fantastic settings because it is derived from folklore like "elf" and "dwarf", and isn't linked to Tolkien

For ''halflings'' like all races in fantasy/sci-if are just a safe politically correct replacement for human races.

Halflings are short and fat and lazy. They don't like to work or adventure. Halfings live communally in big families. They are not very book smart. And most of all halfings are thieves and rogues and criminals.

So what human race would you pick for halflings? Wait..don't answer, as the answer is not politically correct. So instead we say ''halfling'' and as that race is not real, it is all ok.

And you can do the same for any fantasy/sci-fi race....

MintyNinja
2016-02-20, 07:30 PM
In my own setting I've had the rise of Humans and Halflings to be intertwined in their prehistory. Flashing forward to modern times, the Halflings are most often found in Human society as equals, yet often preferring homesteader life to urban sprawl.

The one major exception is the halfling city Riverton, built on the one bridge spanning the largest river in the land. As a bastion of neutrality and mercantile strength, these halflings command deference to all that wish to cross. No other race is allowed into the city proper and each side will have traveler's inns for visiting tall folks.

Gnomes, on the other hand... I don't know yet. Probably a large group exiled from the Feywild or something...

Logosloki
2016-02-20, 08:44 PM
For ''halflings'' like all races in fantasy/sci-if are just a safe politically correct replacement for human races.

Halflings are short and fat and lazy. They don't like to work or adventure. Halfings live communally in big families. They are not very book smart. And most of all halfings are thieves and rogues and criminals.

So what human race would you pick for halflings? Wait..don't answer, as the answer is not politically correct. So instead we say ''halfling'' and as that race is not real, it is all ok.

And you can do the same for any fantasy/sci-fi race....

Pre-Renaissance Western Europe? Because to me Halflings in Fantasy are like the Ferengi of Star Trek. Halflings (aside from the more modern roaming thieves, cutthroats and general roguish archetypes) evoke imagery a simpler time - an eclectic mix of early 20th century rural childhood (the good bits) and the smaller agarian societies post feudalism. The Ferengi on the other hand are firmly an idealised version of the 90s Manhattan Yuppie, brimming with optimism and filled with the dog eat dog ideology.

Halflings are what is believed to be what humanity was, Ferengi (at the time) are what some believed humanity would become.

kraftcheese
2016-02-20, 08:48 PM
Pre-Renaissance Western Europe? Because to me Halflings in Fantasy are like the Ferengi of Star Trek. Halflings (aside from the more modern roaming thieves, cutthroats and general roguish archetypes) evoke imagery a simpler time - an eclectic mix of early 20th century rural childhood (the good bits) and the smaller agarian societies post feudalism. The Ferengi on the other hand are firmly an idealised version of the 90s Manhattan Yuppie, brimming with optimism and filled with the dog eat dog ideology.

Halflings are what is believed to be what humanity was, Ferengi (at the time) are what some believed humanity would become.

Aren't the Ferengi just economic libertarians?

Donnadogsoth
2016-02-20, 08:51 PM
Halflings don't really seem to me to fit in with the rest of D&D, especially not in standard settings like Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms (they kind of work in Eberron and Dark Sun). And unlike the other races they're not derived from folklore.

In general they seem both underdeveloped and derivative, as if the "half-" in "halfling" referred not to their size but to the fact that they're only half of a concept, half of which in turn is plagiarized.

Does anyone else get this impression?

I think if I include halflings in my game, I see no reason not to include quarterlings, eightlings, sixteenthlings, and even those pesky thirtysecondthlings.

Hawkstar
2016-02-20, 09:30 PM
I think if I include halflings in my game, I see no reason not to include quarterlings, eightlings, sixteenthlings, and even those pesky thirtysecondthlings.What's your tolerance for sixtyfourthlings?

Donnadogsoth
2016-02-20, 09:37 PM
What's your tolerance for sixtyfourthlings?

The real problems arise when they become inhalable.

A_Dinosaur
2016-02-21, 01:03 PM
I'll throw my hat into the ring to say that I have a fondness for halflings for their somewhat muddled lore, is a good excuse to their out there old and bring in your own with a race that is actually going to see some play. In my current game they are a remnant of a much larger Empire that was conquered by the -definitely not Roman- human Empire of old. Now that are split into two nations residing on arid islands, one being a blend of Arabic and Egyptian culture and the other being formed from a slave uprising ala the mamaluks. They have a strong place in the archipelago as the older and wealthier economies, and a religion completely separate from the rest of the islands.

Use their doing lore as an excuse to make awesome lore!

Segev
2016-02-21, 03:57 PM
For ''halflings'' like all races in fantasy/sci-if are just a safe politically correct replacement for human races.

Halflings are short and fat and lazy. They don't like to work or adventure. Halfings live communally in big families. They are not very book smart. And most of all halfings are thieves and rogues and criminals.

So what human race would you pick for halflings? Wait..don't answer, as the answer is not politically correct. So instead we say ''halfling'' and as that race is not real, it is all ok.

And you can do the same for any fantasy/sci-fi race.......what the devil halflings are you referring to?

Tolkien's hobbits were industrious and hard-working farmers and craftsmen who were homages to the "common" rural life of English idyll. They weren't adventurous, but they weren't lazy. They actually have a lot in common with boggans and certain brands of elf (as in "and the shoemaker"), loving simple work and keeping neat homes. They do like their comforts, and they eat a lot, but that's not laziness.

D&D 3e tried to pull something of the kender into them, making them nomadic and lithe rather than sedentary and fat, making them more adventurous as a rule.

Hobbits weren't thieves; Gandalf wanted one as his burglar because they're good at being unnoticed, not because they were known for it. Halflings are thieves because Bilbo was a "burglar," and evolved to be more dexterous as they became more lithe, leading to the stereotype. But "fat and lazy" didn't describe that version.


Aren't the Ferengi just economic libertarians?
Ferengi are a communist's idea of what capitalism is. Ferengi culture would never, every survive without strong centralized government enforcing some pretty insane rules, clearly designed to empower the government officials in charge of deciding who gets to be wealthy (as evidenced by the power of the various auditors and the Grand Nagus with whom Quark had to deal).

Absent legal action to prevent it, a human capitalist could become fabulously successful in Ferengi society by simply competing with them. NOT charging his customers for the simplest of customer services would get him so much repeat business from Ferengi "exploiting" his "foolishness" that he'd be exploited into being the biggest provider of his product in the region.

Clistenes
2016-02-21, 05:51 PM
I think halflings work well as part of the background. If human commoners can survive somehow, so can halflings.

They don't work so well as heroes of villains, unless you are doing the sneaky, lying route, but even then it is hard on the suspension of disbelief when they start killing ogres.

I think the halfling's main problem is that they are sort of a schizophrenic concept: they are hobbits, (archetypical honest, loyal, hardworking, merry farmers who love their home and farms), and they are kenders (pathologically lying, kleptomaniac but good-hearted and candid nomads with Atention Deficit Personality Disorder), and they also are a race of silver-tongued, sneaky, dishonest, lying archetypical thieves and conmen... They are too many different things, and too many of those are contradictory to each other.

I usually go for taking apart the halflings who live in their own isolated communties, who are more hobbit-like, while the ones who live among humans tend to be street-savvy, silver-tongued merchants and artisans, and often a bit sneaky (it's a matter of survival; they have to adapt or die), but none are archetypical farmer-hobbits or archetypical thieves and conmen... they are just people, small people who adapt to their enviroment.

Keltest
2016-02-21, 06:02 PM
I think halflings work well as part of the background. If human commoners can survive somehow, so can halflings.

They don't work so well as heroes of villains, unless you are doing the sneaky, lying route, but even then it is hard on the suspension of disbelief when they start killing ogres.

I think the halfling's main problem is that they are sort of a schizophrenic concept: they are hobbits, (archetypical honest, loyal, hardworking, merry farmers who love their home and farms), and they are kenders (pathologically lying, kleptomaniac but good-hearted and candid nomads with Atention Deficit Personality Disorder), and they also are a race of silver-tongued, sneaky, dishonest, lying archetypical thieves and conmen... They are too many different things, and too many of those are contradictory to each other.

I usually go for taking apart the halflings who live in their own isolated communties, who are more hobbit-like, while the ones who live among humans tend to be street-savvy, silver-tongued merchants and artisans, and often a bit sneaky (it's a matter of survival; they have to adapt or die), but none are archetypical farmer-hobbits or archetypical thieves and conmen... they are just people, small people who adapt to their enviroment.

Frankly, I think any race is going to look a bit odd if its composed of nothing but walking stereotypes. Theres nothing wrong with giving a race more depth than that.

Aedilred
2016-02-21, 08:45 PM
For me, the odd one out has always been gnomes. Halflings don't always fit perfectly, by any means, and they often present problems for world-building, but at least I generally remember that halflings exist and make allowances for them. Gnomes I tend to forget are even a thing unless someone else introduces them.

I should probably mention that I came to D&D relatively late in my fantasy experience. I started out with The Lord of the Rings and Warhammer, then moved through a couple of relatively human-centric authors like David Gemmell and David Eddings before my first "proper" contact with D&D with Baldur's Gate and the Dragonlance novels. By that time, while elves, dwarves and halflings were all relatively well-established in my mind as fantasy archetypes, I had yet to really encounter gnomes as anything other than garden ornaments.

And really, BG and Dragonlance didn't do a lot to change that. There were gnomes in there, but in BG while the game was crawling with humans, elves and half-elves, the only two gnome playable NPCs appeared relatively late in the game and weren't particularly interesting (or effective) compared to most of the other characters. In Dragonlance, while I don't remember the books well, I seem to remember the gnomes featured fairly briefly and appeared relatively late in the day, in a kind of wacky setting that seemed divorced from everything else.

It's not just been me, either. I've never seen anyone play a gnome character in any D&D game I've been in, nor had anyone ask, and I don't even recall any gnome NPCs, certainly of any significance. At least in the fantasy circles I've moved in, nobody has seemed to know what do do with gnomes and tends to forget about them altogether.

Given that I have a tendency to cull humanoid races anyway, and prefer fewer to more, gnomes are generally the first to go, partly because even when it's pointed out to me I can't really see what niche they fill that isn't already filled by one of the other humanoid races. Half-orcs would probably be next on the list, but it would depend on what I was trying to do. After that, though, I probably would come to halflings, and I do often struggle to implement halflings on the occasions that I try, and even if they do technically exist somewhere I try not to draw attention to them. But in the case of halflings it would be a definite decision on my part to leave them out, whereas with gnomes I'd have to be talked into putting them in.

kraftcheese
2016-02-21, 10:00 PM
For me, the odd one out has always been gnomes. Halflings don't always fit perfectly, by any means, and they often present problems for world-building, but at least I generally remember that halflings exist and make allowances for them. Gnomes I tend to forget are even a thing unless someone else introduces them.

I should probably mention that I came to D&D relatively late in my fantasy experience. I started out with The Lord of the Rings and Warhammer, then moved through a couple of relatively human-centric authors like David Gemmell and David Eddings before my first "proper" contact with D&D with Baldur's Gate and the Dragonlance novels. By that time, while elves, dwarves and halflings were all relatively well-established in my mind as fantasy archetypes, I had yet to really encounter gnomes as anything other than garden ornaments.

And really, BG and Dragonlance didn't do a lot to change that. There were gnomes in there, but in BG while the game was crawling with humans, elves and half-elves, the only two gnome playable NPCs appeared relatively late in the game and weren't particularly interesting (or effective) compared to most of the other characters. In Dragonlance, while I don't remember the books well, I seem to remember the gnomes featured fairly briefly and appeared relatively late in the day, in a kind of wacky setting that seemed divorced from everything else.

It's not just been me, either. I've never seen anyone play a gnome character in any D&D game I've been in, nor had anyone ask, and I don't even recall any gnome NPCs, certainly of any significance. At least in the fantasy circles I've moved in, nobody has seemed to know what do do with gnomes and tends to forget about them altogether.

Given that I have a tendency to cull humanoid races anyway, and prefer fewer to more, gnomes are generally the first to go, partly because even when it's pointed out to me I can't really see what niche they fill that isn't already filled by one of the other humanoid races. Half-orcs would probably be next on the list, but it would depend on what I was trying to do. After that, though, I probably would come to halflings, and I do often struggle to implement halflings on the occasions that I try, and even if they do technically exist somewhere I try not to draw attention to them. But in the case of halflings it would be a definite decision on my part to leave them out, whereas with gnomes I'd have to be talked into putting them in.

I absolutely agree; I feel like gnomes have a bit too much overlap with halflings (small, peaceful humans) and dwarves (small, underground humans) and I've never really seen a setting where they "fit".

Darth Ultron
2016-02-21, 10:55 PM
...what the devil halflings are you referring to?



The default D&D ones, not the special snowflake hobbits by Tolkien.

JoeJ
2016-02-21, 11:01 PM
The default D&D ones, not the special snowflake hobbits by Tolkien.

Wow. Where to start? You do realize that the race was invented by Tolkien, right? His hobbits were the prototype; the D&D ones came later and were deliberate imitations. They were even called "hobbits" at first, until the Tolkien estate made them change it.

Mr. Mask
2016-02-22, 12:05 AM
The reason they were made to change it was even funnier. They started to sue someone who was using something like elves or other elements that were somehow related to things in dungeons and dragons. The Tolkien estate was annoyed by this, and so sued DnD for all their flagrant copyright infringement which they previously ignored. DnD had to timidly rename all their copyrighted creatures, and maybe change their lore a bit. Ents became Treants, hobbits became halflings, etc..

Milo v3
2016-02-22, 01:43 AM
The default D&D ones, not the special snowflake hobbits by Tolkien.
That's.... a strange definition of special snowflake.

Segev
2016-02-22, 02:04 AM
The default D&D ones, not the special snowflake hobbits by Tolkien.


That's.... a strange definition of special snowflake.


Wow. Where to start? You do realize that the race was invented by Tolkien, right? His hobbits were the prototype; the D&D ones came later and were deliberate imitations. They were even called "hobbits" at first, until the Tolkien estate made them change it.

No, no. I really want to hear this one. :smallamused: Please, tell me how the Tolkien Hobbits are "special snowflakes."



And then, if you've got time and interest afterwards, please respond to the rest of my post, detailing how hobbit-style halflings came to have the traits they did, and how those evolved into kender-influenced halflings-as-lithe-nomads. And finally, please explain again how there is a real-world racial stereotype endemic to them from start to end. Since that's what I made the post to refute.

But first, please, please explain the "special snowflake" thing, because I'm really not seeing it and expect it to be an entertaining read.

JoeJ
2016-02-22, 02:18 AM
That's.... a strange definition of special snowflake.

That was Darth Ultron who posted that, not me.

Clistenes
2016-02-22, 06:49 AM
I absolutely agree; I feel like gnomes have a bit too much overlap with halflings (small, peaceful humans) and dwarves (small, underground humans) and I've never really seen a setting where they "fit".

The gnomes have their own niche: They are technological and magical. dwarves have a hard, norse-like style, halflings are mundane, relying on skill and stealth. gnomes rely on study and intellectual work.

Like halflings, they have a hard time being credible villains or heroes, but as a player I prefer them to halflings... gnomes are magical, and your size doens't matter when you are a full caster.

What I hate is when they try to make them a race of comic relief characters and make them all practical jokers or mad geniuses with OCPD... I HATE that as much as I hate kenders.

hymer
2016-02-22, 07:23 AM
Like halflings, [gnomes] have a hard time being credible villains or heroes

I intend to give it a shot in a campaign currently on the drawing board. I intend rock gnomes to be the best alchemists around, so they make poisons and various drugs that get you hooked, and make a wreck of peoples' lives for monetary gain.

http://orig01.deviantart.net/1e45/f/2009/071/6/9/misery_gnome_by_gworeth.jpg

Hawkstar
2016-02-22, 08:16 AM
The only real-world racial stereotype I give halflings is '70's inner-city black people, as presented by classic blaxploitation films.

Bohandas
2016-03-04, 06:00 PM
This seems a little inconsistent. On the one hand, you are saying "It's fine to use these other races, because even though there is zero folkloric consistency in what they are, at least their names appear in folklore" and on the other hand you seem to be saying "Even though there are tons and tons of folkloric examples of 'little people' of various sorts, since they aren't specifically referred to as "halflings" they don't count"?

It seems to me that characteristics are more important than names, rather than the reverse.
The thing is that halflings, at least in 2e and earlier, are completely out of Tolkien. It's equivalent to if they took the Toclafane from Dr.Who and made them a standard human subrace. 3e+ halflings are like if they did this, but then changed them, but still kept the derivative name.