Gnomes and Halflings: Why?

[toapat]

One question about DnD and RPGs in general i dont understand is, Why in the same universe do Gnomes and Halflings exist?

What purpose do they serve really before being given their extreme neiches, such as how in Eberron Halflings are Noble Savages who ride dinosaurs, while Gnomes are Phones. Alternatively theres Tinker Gnomes and Kender from Dragonlance.

But, in general what logic has them existing in the core rules together. what mythology are they pulling from differently.

[~xFellWardenx~]

Halflings are like Hobbits from Lord of the Rings, Gnomes are fae from Germanic mythology who... Well, did a lot of things, because old mythology is almost never at all consistent. But they usually tinkered around with and either improved or screwed up other people's technology to help or troll them respectively. They also stole things and could in some renditions fly.

Halflings are... Short people with a penchant to disappear from your sight if something else catches your attention for a second? *shrug*

[AdmiralCheez]

Different flavors I would guess. Probably same reason there are ten thousand different kinds of elf.

[toapat]

Different flavors I would guess. Probably same reason there are ten thousand different kinds of elf.

Well, Elf lore is natively a little too niche for them to not have as many flavors of elf as there are icecream.

I just dont get why there needs to be 2 flavors of mamalian shortfolk, of which one is typically relegated to the pool of "Why does this exist?"

[LibraryOgre]

Gnomes are the people of the hills and forest rills. While elves build great civilizations, gnomes live hidden lives in networks of communities, out of sight of the humans and beneath the notice of the elves. The elves reach for the stars; gnomes build stairs.

Halflings, however, are the people of the valley and the river bottom. Though most are not fond of swimming, they fish and farm the land, turning over the good earth and bringing forth its bounty. Humans build empires, flourishing and flowering, but, like flowers, collapsing into ruin for a season before they build anew. Halflings, however, seldom change.

In short? Halflings are the race of peasant humans who never make an impact on the greater world, save in rare instances. Gnomes are the elves who do the same.

[~xFellWardenx~]

So being smaller makes them the same? How the heck does that work? Humans being there doesn't mean orcs shouldn't exist, zombies existing doesn't negate the value of skeletons... Actually, that's not even right. More properly, it's almost implying something like "since there are bats, there shouldn't be birds." Aside from their size and method of reproduction, they're very different.

Gnomes are stocky and technological, really more like dwarves than halflings. Gnomes are beings who thrive on experimentation and sensual experiences, with deep senses of community and a strongly bound extended family relationship, almost like a civilized fusion of wolf packs and housecats.

Halflings are like a courageous combination of mice and dogs. They slink through the dark, they take things when it's necessary, and they're vigilant and jumpy, yet despite their nomadic lifestyle and somewhat rogueish tendencies, they are, as a general rule for the species (with exceptions, as in all things) fiercely loyal and structured in lifestyle.

Where gnomes satisfy their base urges and are innately, instinctively curious to unimaginable levels and experiment both scientifically, emotionally, and in relationship regards for the sake of the experimentation and the rush, the halflings as a general racial rule focus on those skills which are practical, they are loyal and determined, and they trust to what they know works.

Some of it seems cultural more than anything, though in terms of mechanics and fluff it is literal racial instinct for them to be like this the same way cats, dogs, or mice fit into certain stereotypes. But it's bound to look that way when the authors don't want to alienate players, eh?

The two races serve two entirely different niches, even in standard D&D. They aren't just "the two small races."

[veti]

For the same reason as there are dozens and dozens of supplements statting out new races and classes, but not a single one that removes them:

D&D is a kitchen sink. It's easy (and profitable - you can always sell more supplements) for the creators to throw more stuff in, so why bother to be selective?

Being selective is the DM's job. I don't think I've ever played in a campaign that actually had gnomes.

[toapat]

*snip*

Humans invalidate their own existence because they serve primarily as a conceptual anchor on any setting they are in where the protagonists are humanoids.

otherwise im trying to avoid this debate because while i have my own personal oppinions, i want to see other people's logic

[jedipotter]

One question about DnD and RPGs in general i dont understand is, Why in the same universe do Gnomes and Halflings exist?

They did not for a long, long time.

Halflings, aka Hobbits, have been in D&D from the start. 0E, 1E, 2E and D&D all had halflings as Player Character races. But not gnomes. Gnomes were a race from the Monster Manual. Eventually gnomes were added as an optional race, but they never made it into the Players Handbook.

Dragonlance added gnomes as race you could use, and gave us the 'crazy inventor gnome'. Gnomes turned out to be fairly popular.

So then 3E comes along.....and puts gnomes in as a core race along with halflings. So now it is normal to think of gnomes as a player character race, and not just some ''other'' race.

[russdm]

For the Royalties. There is a nodwick comic about how the Halflings made both gnomes and dwarves up (I think that they were halflings) as a way to earn more money.

Aside from joking, the only reason I can think of is that D&D had them in originally and no edition has bothered to get rid of them. Some settings have dropped one of the races, dark sun has no gnomes, and most will change them.

To be honest, With halflings and Dwarves and Elves, I can't see any reason to have gnomes as they don't fit in anywhere. The only unique thing Gnomes get is their ability to talk to burrowing animals. The other stuff is in the hands of one of the other three and there is nearly no plausible justification.

We don't need thousands of different elven races when they are just usually copies with some different fluff. We don't need another short race that has a whole shtick of jokes.

Edit: I would love to go back to having Gnomes only in the MM as a non-playable race. It would be nice and relaxing.

[veti]

Halflings, aka Hobbits, have been in D&D from the start. 0E, 1E, 2E and D&D all had halflings as Player Character races. But not gnomes.

Incorrect. Gnomes were included in the 1e and 2e Player's Handbooks as a playable race. In 1e, they were the only non-human race allowed to play Illusionists.

[Mr. Mask]

The main problem is that gnomes don't seem that interesting. You can make them crazy inventors, but that just ruins the immersion which still makes them less interesting. Without the crazy inventor angle, they're basically lesser dwarves and halflings to lesser extents.

[Ravens_cry]

It should also be noted that gnomes and halflings were once more separate. Halflings were ersatz Hobbits, tubby little homebodies who didn't like adventures unless forced and hated to be late for dinner, breakfast, lunch, tea, second breakfast and any other meal you care to name or invent,.

[toapat]

It should also be noted that gnomes and halflings were once more separate. Halflings were ersatz Hobbits, tubby little homebodies who didn't like adventures unless forced and hated to be late for dinner, breakfast, lunch, tea, second breakfast and any other meal you care to name or invent,.

arent they that again in 5th? or did people hate that enough that they changed that?

[LibraryOgre]

The main problem is that gnomes don't seem that interesting. You can make them crazy inventors, but that just ruins the immersion which still makes them less interesting. Without the crazy inventor angle, they're basically lesser dwarves and halflings to lesser extents.

I think one of the real problems is that TSR failed to embrace a lot of what made gnomes interesting, preferring to leave them as "cousins to dwarves".

[EvilJames]

OD&D and 4th ed were the only editions without gnomes as standards. I'm not sure how being little tinkerers/inventors breaks immersion but they are mostly known as industrious pranksters and tricksters. Halflings are more pastoral they make good reluctant heroes at least that was their purpose before 3rd ed. If you are just used to 3rd then I guess I can see where you are coming from. Halflings ended up being more tricksy and sneaky in 3rd, stepping on the gnomes toes a lot.

[Coidzor]

Well, Elf lore is natively a little too niche for them to not have as many flavors of elf as there are icecream.

I just dont get why there needs to be 2 flavors of mamalian shortfolk, of which one is typically relegated to the pool of "Why does this exist?"

Halflings are shortfolk, Gnomes are just another of the myriad flavors of elf. You're welcome.

[Ravens_cry]

arent they that again in 5th? or did people hate that enough that they changed that?

Can't say, I am more Pathfinder cult member player

[BWR]

The main problem is that gnomes don't seem that interesting. You can make them crazy inventors, but that just ruins the immersion which still makes them less interesting. Without the crazy inventor angle, they're basically lesser dwarves and halflings to lesser extents.

How does that ruin immersion?

[Coidzor]

How does that ruin immersion?

Having an entire race of Inventors is at odds with settings that are in a Medieval(ish) Stasis?

[Rhynn]

OD&D and 4th ed were the only editions without gnomes as standards.

You mean OD&D (including all supplements), Basic, B/X, BECM/Cyclopedia, and 4E.

There might have been a Dragon Magazine from before 1E came out that has playable gnomes, though.


Anyway, there's plenty of easy ways to differentiate gnomes from dwarves and elves:

• They live underground, like dwarves...
• ... but they're experts at magic, like elves...
• ... and they're great at disappearing, like halflings.
• They're gnomes, which starts the same as gnosis, so they're knowledgeable and studious; the greatest sages are gnomes.
• Maybe they're experts at numbers and figures, and make great merchants, bankers, and the like (as in Arcanum, Eberron, Harry Potter...); maybe the Medicis and Fuggers of your setting are gnomes.
• Maybe they're inventors; if your setting features full plate armor, it should also have room for firearms, cannons, bombs, movable type, and many contraptions and inventions (and the only reason those would "break immersion" more than plate armor and two-handed swords would be ignorance of history; full plate came around after Leonardo Da Vinci was born).

That's a lot more than what differentiates generic halflings and dwarves from humans, really.

The question "why does a ruleset include redundant things" is silly. Because you might prefer one of those things over another, of course. The real question is, why would your setting have more than two of elves, gnomes, dwarves, and halflings? If you can't answer that, then don't have more than two of them.

Having an entire race of Inventors is at odds with settings that are in a Medieval(ish) Stasis?

Why assume stasis? The Forgotten Realms doesn't, even - around 1350 DR, the gnomes of Lantan have introduced smoke-powder and weapon using it to the world. Even if campaign material assumes a stasis, that's so it doesn't have to be changed substantially; your campaign world should still have development and invention. Unless your campaign runs 100+ years, you're not going to have to worry about this in practice.

Also: maybe most of the inventions don't work too well. The amount of things in the real world that were invented long (hundreds and hundreds of years, in many cases!) before they were really put to use or became widespread is huge.

In the real world, the age of plowing fields by hand or oxen and fighting with swords, spears, bows, shields, and armor lasted for around 4500 years.

[Yora]

Well, Elf lore is natively a little too niche for them to not have as many flavors of elf as there are icecream.

I just dont get why there needs to be 2 flavors of mamalian shortfolk, of which one is typically relegated to the pool of "Why does this exist?"

Me neither, so that's why there are no halflings in my setting. (Also no dwarves, because they are stupid and gnomes can do mining just as well.)

The main problem is that gnomes don't seem that interesting. You can make them crazy inventors, but that just ruins the immersion which still makes them less interesting. Without the crazy inventor angle, they're basically lesser dwarves and halflings to lesser extents.

Which is a good thing, because both dwarves and halflings have long ago become nothing but parodies of themselves. Even Eberron tried to turn everything on its heads, but dwarves where the only race who stayed just the same as they always are.
With gnomes, you can have short, cave-dwelling humanoids that actually are different from what you get all the time.

[mythmonster2]

Me neither, so that's why there are no halflings in my setting. (Also no dwarves, because they are stupid and gnomes can do mining just as well.)

I prefer to go the opposite way, with halflings but no gnomes. Dwarves can easily take over any inventor stuff from the gnomes.

[Yora]

Yes, gnome and halfling are mostly interchangeable. But I wanted to get rid of dwarves as well, and the few good things about them could much better be integrated into gnomes, so that's what I went with.

[Mr. Mask]

Hall: An interesting culture would certainly help. However, for the race to be interesting, you need interesting racial aspects. An interesting culture could work just as well for humans or kobolds, unless it relates to the race's biology or social niche closely.


Yora: I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean.

Dwarves often are parodied as creatures that subsist entirely on beer, have Scottish accents for no particular reason, have height complexes, and are super greedy. People tend to use parodies of the dwarves rather than write them as actual dwarves, because writing dwarves seriously is hard (writing anything seriously is hard--so is writing a good parody).

But, I'm not sure what that has to do with gnomes. I don't think people who can't write non-parody dwarves will do much better with gnomes.

[Rhynn]

Yora: I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean.

It's a hipster-y over-thinking complex: "Oh, I can't use this, it's so overdone and silly in other things so it's ruined for my thing."

It doesn't make sense to me; how someone else somewhere else portrays elves or dwarves or gnomes or dragons or orcs has nothing to do with how I portray and use them in any one of my settings.

[BWR]

RC didn't have gnomes in it, but they were introduced later.

Having an entire race of Inventors is at odds with settings that are in a Medieval(ish) Stasis?

That's assuming there is supposed to be stasis. Some worlds actually show progress or at least change. FR, as Rhynn pointed out, and Mystara. Also, some people might be reluctant to adopt new stuff. If the inventors are highly secretive and generally peaceful, there will be less opportunity to see the effectiveness of technology on the battlefield, and less reason for others to adopt it. Not to mention magic is better in just about every way, so we should all have Eberron/Tippyverse style worlds instead of any technology. That's the reason it hasn't spread much in Mystara. In Mystara, the gnometech stuff is basically another form of magic (you have skills called Fantasy Physics and Fantasy Engineering, which basically work along the principle of 'red makes it go faster'), and it isn't restricted to gnomes though gnomes are the most common practitioners.

Other reasons the stuff hasn't spread: in DL their inventions are so haphazard and unsafe that no one in their right mind would want to use them, and they tend to stick to Mt Nevermind, so their innovations don't really spread. Who wants a steam powered catapult that can just as easily blow up in your face as damage the fort you're aiming at?

[Yora]

Dwarves often are parodied as creatures that subsist entirely on beer, have Scottish accents for no particular reason, have height complexes, and are super greedy. People tend to use parodies of the dwarves rather than write them as actual dwarves, because writing dwarves seriously is hard (writing anything seriously is hard--so is writing a good parody).

I think with dwarves we got the situation that they don't have any traits that havn't been turned into a parody.
The "serious" version of dwarves is a greedy bearded miner and smith who is always dour and passively hostile to any outsiders. Which still isn't much different than the silly greedy bearded miner and smith who is always drunk and actively hostile to any outsiders.
Take away their beards, beer, or mining, and there isn't really much left.

Gnomes have a lot more traits, of which almost all are optional and non really mandatory. As long as there's a good number of them, it's still recognizable as a gnome.
Gnomes live in hills, mountains, or forests, are good with mining, are skilled in engineering and alchemy, have a knack for illusion magic, feel a bond of kinship with forest animals, tend to be on good term with woodland spirits, like gemstones, are scholars, welcome strangers, value happiness, love jokes, and have keen senses. You probably never find all of these traits in the same version of gnomes, but you can freely pick some of them, add some others, and it will still be gnomes.
I do know one attempt to make dwarves different, and that's Dark Sun. Dark Sun dwarves are short and tough, and that's about all they have retained of the common dwarven traits. But is that still a dwarf?

[HighWater]

Other reasons the stuff hasn't spread: in DL their inventions are so haphazard and unsafe that no one in their right mind would want to use them, and they tend to stick to Mt Nevermind, so their innovations don't really spread. Who wants a steam powered catapult that can just as easily blow up in your face as damage the fort you're aiming at?

That's not far away from the early medieval cannons, which went kablooie often enough to stay the heck away from them, unless it was your job to operate them. (They were also incredibly slow and not very effective.)

Most battlefield-technology that goes past bows is very sensitive to mishaps, and those mishaps can be devastating to the owning side. Even simple bowstring loses effectiveness quickly in damp weather (this is one of the reasons why real-world archers kept their bows unstrung until right before battle, another is that keeping a bow strung 24/7 ruïns the spring in the string and in the wood). A snapped bowstaff is a mild inconvenience, a snapped arm on a balista or catapult can be deadly for the operator, a pressure-cannon that ruptures is lethal for standers-by and a live bomb is just an accident waiting to happen. They are also incredibly expensive. Not all technological development is immediatly an improvement, nor is any immediate improvement a good path for long-term results. (Compare waterclocks with mechanical clocks, waterclocks were much more accurate at a much earlier t, but what kind are we using today? Mechanical clocks, perhaps infused with some atom-technology.)

In a setting that's strongly permeated with magic, hard technology would still arise, but progress would be much slower as few would invest in building something that's both much more dangerous for the user and way less effective. For all intents and purposes, technology in a magic world should be infused with magic, rather than a stand-alone concept.
If you still want "real world" tech-progression, you need some crazy tinkerers to fan that flame, hence tinker-gnomes!

More on topic:
Gnomes and Halflings are different. You get more than one "short" race, because it reduces the conspicuous notion that all humanoid races are basically humans with one or two aspects blown out of proportion: Dwarves are angry drunk human miners. Elves are lofty, tree-hugging "one with nature" long-livers. Orks are angry evil disorganised humans. Gnomes are short humans, oh and magical tricksters/tech-tinkerers. Halflings are short humans, and lazy unless very strongly motivated (such as when their clan is under threat).
Of course, all these humanoids are still strictly human, because we don't really know anything else and it's pretty much impossible to invent something that isn't based on something(s) you already know or slightly altered/meshed together. Human fantasy is very limited, this makes all fantasy-humans, in the end, somewhat alike. Gnomes and halflings are not the same though and being unable to give each of them their own little place in your story is not necessarely the fault of the writers who dreamed them up. It's just that you can populate your world with tens, maybe hundreds of "unique" humanoids, with the end-result being that none of them are unique, and that any of their roles could still be covered by... well, humans really. Selecting a "dirty dozen" that are fully distinct and fleshed out is a useful technique, but in that case generally the halfling or the gnome get the boot for being "too much like something else".

[Eric Tolle]

People are missing the fundamental reason gnomes were put in the game: they were the short magic using race. Dwarves and halflings were anti-magical, so if you wanted to play something based on the legends of magical little people, you had to pay a gnome.

Now post 3E, you can make a spellcaster from any race, but the fundamental notion is there- dwarves and halflings as races are non-magical; gnomes are magical (also, accidentally 3rd edition gnomes made the best wizards and druids).