Monday, January 30, 2012

Design Decisions: Gnomes and Halflings

So, I'll just get this out of the way upfront, but I hate the "small" races in D&D - gnomes and halflings.

Okay, if you're still here, I'll explain a little bit.  There's really no rational reason for it, any more than there is any good reason for someone to prefer playing wizards or to hate druids.  Some things are truths. "Star Trek: Wrath of Khan" is the best of the original cast movies, followed closely by "Star Trek: The Voyage Home." "Empire Strikes Back" is the best of the three "Star Wars" movies (because, of course, there are only three).  There is only one "Highlander" movie. These are absolute truths that can't be argued with.

With gnomes and halflings, when I say that they suck and I don't like using them, I get that that's just an opinion and I don't begrudge people who like them.

I know exactly where my loathing of the small races began, but I'll start at the beginning.  In terms of fantasy literature (and not mythology, like Norse dwarfs and elves and such), my first exposure to the idea of the small races was The Hobbit in 5th grade, around 1981 or so.  Of course, there's really only one Hobbit in the book, but the book isn't about him being small as much as it is more about the idea of someone leaving a more simple life and being exposed to a bigger, more complex world, and figuring out his place in that world.

This was all well and good and I liked The Hobbit a lot as a kid, and even enjoyed the Rankin-Bass animated version that came out later.  A couple of years later, in 7th grade, I began reading the Lord of the Rings (which sadly, I didn't actually ever finish until about 18 years later, just before the first of the three movies came out, but that's another story).  Hobbits are, of course, more involved in this story and a good deal of the action actually does revolve around the idea that they are small and therefore people might tend to underestimate them.  Even though I never finished the books until later, back in 1983 when I started them I already had a pretty good idea of the story and I understood the role that the Hobbits as a small race played in the narrative.

And then it happened.  In 1983, a little movie called "The Return of the Jedi" was released, and it remains to this day, hands down, my least favorite of the three Star Wars films.  By a wide margin.  Almost to the point that, say, if there were any other Star Wars movies made, I might like some of them better than ROTJ. Why all this anger toward Episode VI?  One word.

Ewoks.

Ewoks destroyed Star Wars for me. Now, I get that six years of my life had gone by between the first Star Wars movie back in 1977 and the last one in 1983.  I was nearly twice as old as I had been when the first movie came out, so those six years represented a significantly long period of time in my life. So, I was older - a teenager, in fact, and I don't think the Ewoks were supposed to appeal to me.

But it was worse than that.  All of the seriousness, the darkness, the hopelessness of the Rebellion... all of those themes that were so well done in Empire were, in my mind, just completely undone by a bunch of Teddy Ruxpin wanna-bes running around in janky-looking, matted fur suits with molded, inexpressive faces and singing stupid songs.

Lucas really took the theme of the smaller, primitive race of people overcoming bigger people with technology and drove it home with a hammer. It seemed to me to be kind of a rip-off of one of the themes from the Lord of the Rings, and more important, the Ewoks were just dumb. Not cute.  Not funny. Dumb. Stupid and out-of-place.

Not too long after that, another Lucas film called "Willow" came out, and featured as a main theme a race of small, somewhat primitive people, and a sort of reluctant champion who rises to heights greater than any of his kin to become the hero that saves the entire land from the Big Bad Evil Guy.


Um... sound familiar?  It's no surprise that I hated that movie, too, despite some somewhat funny parts featuring a young Val Kilmer in the Han Solo role. 


All round the time that these movies came out, I was getting more and more involved in AD&D and I remember reading the race sections in the Player's Handbook and not really getting why there were both gnomes AND halflings.  I got why halflings were in there - they were an homage (if not outright copying) of the hobbits in LOTR. And I was fine with that, even though I personally never wanted to play one, because they came from some of the source material for the background of the game. But gnomes?  I didn't get it.  I still kind of don't.  Gnomes just stray way too far from the early Sword & Sorcery influences of the game. Even Elf and Dwarf characters stretch the bar a little much, but given their prevalence in LOTR, can be forgiven. But gnomes just seem... "cute."  I never got the niche they were supposed to fill.


So, all of these years later, when I finally was getting my world ready to start my long-running World of Samoth campaign, I decided to eliminate gnomes and halflings from the playable races.  In their place, I did allow goblins, but I even changed those from small to medium-size (they're around the same height as dwarves in my world). I just can't get past my prejudice against the small races.


I did have one player right at the very beginning who really wanted to play a halfling rogue, but I had to explain to him that I don't have halflings in my world so he simply switched his character to an elf and that was that.  It hasn't come up since, and I don't think my world lacks depth because of my omission. 


What about everyone else? I suspect I'm in the minority here, but I'd love to hear people's thoughts on why they do, or don't, like (or use) gnomes and halflings in their games.

10 comments:

  1. The issue of acceptable player races causes a conflict in my mind. I want to allow the player's the freedom to pick whatever they want to play. I like the idea that a player can take a well established template, such as a halfling, and everyone at the table has a common "language" about knowing how a halfling will act (or not act). But when I started up our 4E campaign, those new races... oooof! I could not do it. I eliminated Dragonborn, Eldarin, and Tiefling as choices.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hear you - I'm much the same. I like the idea of the "common language" races because it makes it easy for new people to join the campaign. But, I also like to tweak the races to fit into my overall campaign world idea, so they're never quite like they're portrayed in the rule books.

      One thing that I've disliked is when WotC has decided to add new races to their rulebooks, they somehow feel this need to try to shoe-horn them into existing campaign worlds. So, when they introduced Dragonborn, they write this whole section on "Dragonborn in the Forgotten Realms" so a DM can integrate them into that world, even though they have never existed in that world since it was conceptualized way back when.

      I'm fine having rules for new races, but I don't think they should be in the core rulebooks, and I don't think that they should try to convince you that you can use a Dragonborn as a playable race in the Forgotten Realms any more than you should play a Thri-Kreen in Greyhawk or a half-Sun Elf were-leopard in Dragonlance.

      Delete
    2. Oh! And I think the whole "Eladrin" versus "Elves" thing was just utter stupidity. They're elves. Some have stayed more true to their roots, while others have integrated a little more with the rest of society. It's a cultural thing, not a game mechanical thing. Done.

      Delete
  2. I HATE GNOMES! They are really redundant, aren't they? I mean, you have halflings, why do you need another tiny race? Blech. But I have a soft spot for halflings! SAVE FRODO!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are doing it WRONG! You are banished from my blog! No blog for you! Come back one year!

      Delete
  3. My Gnomes sort of assume the traditional Dwarf role, because the Dwarves and Elves are the same species (Dwarves male-Elves female).

    Halflings is the term for all the anthropomorphized animals that are two-four feet tall, talk, wear clothes, etc. (e.g. Reepicheep, Puss n Boots).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Now this, I like a lot. Very cool - especially the halfling idea. I originally did try to work halflings into my world by calling them the Sidhe Ffolke and they were going to have some slight animal traits, but I just couldn't figure out their role in the ecology so I dropped them.

      Delete
    2. I had originally planned to do the elves as Sidhe trapped in the mundane world when the Veil fell, with Half-Elves as their way around the vulnerability to iron. But the Elf/Dwarf dichotomy idea was better. Plus it increases the Hot Elf Chick count by a factor of 2...

      Delete
  4. In my Garnia campaign, currently being reworked, but having been in existence since I was in 7th grade, I long ago eliminated Gnomes, but Halfling made the cut just because I had the box of official AD&D Halflings miniatures from Grenadier's "Gold Box" series. I am in favor of cutting them now and it's one of the hotly debated topics among the current and former players and the development team; it seems I am the only one that really cares to let them go as an outdated Tolkien-ism, a few people don't care one way or the other, and a bunch of people really want to keep them, despite only having had two people ever play Halflings in 30 years.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I love that part of your rationale for keeping halflings was that you owned the miniatures. Very cool! Thanks for dropping by and commenting.

      Delete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...