|
|
Post by driver on May 3, 2008 13:48:52 GMT -6
I have a few notes on a Celtic-influenced campaign I was working on where Halflings are the various gnomes, petty-elves, minor earthbound spirits, and talking animals that pop up in the literature from time to time. So one guy's Halfling might be something like a Hobbit, another might be an animated shrub-man, and the next might be an anthropomorphic badger with a blackthorn cudgel. They're all more-or-less sidekick material, though exceptional specimens can reach Hero status.
|
|
|
|
Post by Geiger on May 26, 2008 10:37:52 GMT -6
I have a few notes on a Celtic-influenced campaign I was working on where Halflings are the various gnomes... Great minds think alike!... Well sorta. In my now defunct campaign, I merged hobbits and gnomes. Never liked gnomes as the dwarves, illusionist poor cousin and hobbits needed something more after all this years. Somehow the match works. |
|
|
|
Post by dwayanu on May 26, 2008 10:56:52 GMT -6
Excellent! "Hobbit" may actually have pre-Tolkien provenance in a similar context. Also, "hob" may come from "hobgoblin" indicating a friendly (or mischievous, but not evilly malicious) goblin. Kobolds in old tradition were helpful (usually, but not when offended!) nature/household spirits, IIRC.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2008 21:16:10 GMT -6
I think you all are giving the hobbits a poor rep. The thing you have to remember about Bilbo, Frodo, and their fellows in the late Third Age is that the hobbits had been in the Shire, protected from the outside, for 1400 years! So of course, by then, they were a soft, rustic folk. According to A Guide to Middle Earth, the Shire was founded in 1601 TA, and within a generation most of the hobbits of Middle Earth had moved to the Shire. Before that they had lived in the middle vales of the Anduin, hardly a safe or easy place to live, between Mirkwood and the Misty Mountains! Between the founding of the Shire and the events of The Hobbit there were few major events that caused the hobbits any grief; these included the Great Plague, the Battle of Greenfields, the Long Winter and the Days of Dearth, and the Fell Winter of 2911. As the Guide goes on to say, "Indeed, the Hobbits of the Shire managed to ignore the outside world for so long they almost forgot it existed... In part, this safety [after the fall of the Northern Kingdom] was due to the ceaseless protection of the Rangers."
Anyone who has any doubts in how rough-and-tumble and downright dangerous nature of the halfling need merely re-read The Scouring of the Shire in The Return of the King to see what can be done even with untrained, rustic halflings. Imagine what they were like back in the olden days, when they had to live on the edge between orcs and fouler things? Little is spoken of their lands in those days, and I imagine well it is because trespassers were not cottoned to, were eliminated with extreme prejudice, and thus none were left to tell any tales! The hobbit on the edge of civilization and outside his safe bounds is the very definition of the guerilla fighter; Bilbo, Frodo, Sam, Merry, and Pippen all showed that on their various quests. Even hobbit lore was filled with such great heroes, though much looked-down-upon in later, peaceable days.
Imagine a whole nation of halflings thus trained and ready to defend what is theirs, or even to take what they want from others? No wonder one would do what he could to please the "wee folk" when passing through their lands. Halflings have the steel core of the dwarf combined with the love of wood and meadow of the elf, with the strength and pliability of Men.
As Sharkey's Men discovered, you ignore them at your mortal peril...
|
|
|
|
Post by dwayanu on May 26, 2008 21:50:30 GMT -6
... and likewise McKiernan's Warrows.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2008 22:04:05 GMT -6
... and likewise McKiernan's Warrows. Man, it's been ages since I read that book! I only read the first one, not the series. Can't remember anything about it except the kick-ass battle near the Warrow "Shire" with worgs on ice near a giant thorn wall. Hell, I don't remember if it was good or bad, really... Was the series any good? Of late I've wanted to read something Tolkienesque, and this might fit the bill... or it might not. Never really liked the Shannara stories, so those are out, though those are the classic LotR pastiche... EDIT: I've been looking around on Amazon and Wiki and other places and wow, this is a series that people either LOVE or HATE (as in "hate with the passion of a million burning suns.") And it's all based on whether one likes the idea of a Tolkien pastiche or hates the idea, though some detractors say McKiernan's writing is bad, too. I dunno what to believe... maybe I'll see if I can find the first book at the local resale bookseller cheap and try that first... |
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on May 27, 2008 11:11:54 GMT -6
I enjoyed the Iron Tower trilogy sufficiently to finish it. I was definitely troubled by its resemblance to LotR. As a side note, here is a McKiernan news group post describing how the series came to be. I forget where I first heard about the story of his writing a sequel to LotR and subsequently having to rewrite it, and write a supporting prequel. I thought I had seen that on news groups but couldn't find the post series, though I did find this post. And here is McKiernan's announcement of the Iron Tower. Frank |
|
|
|
Post by dwayanu on May 27, 2008 12:23:14 GMT -6
On McKiernan: You might find the first volume cheap at a used-book store, but what's out now (in paperback, at least) is an omnibus volume. I liked the covers on the originals better.
Back when the first two trilogies (Iron Tower and, IIRC, a prequel) were first released, I could not get into them (ditto Shannara and Belgariad). McKiernan is pretty plain (and, IIRC, was even plainer back then) about his intent. The books (like most epic fantasy and sword-and-sorcery) are "comfort food" -- something for when you get a hankering for something LotR-"ish." I find his style a bit awkward, but the stories and characters can be engaging.
I remembered the thorn wall and the icy river long after I'd forgotten whence they'd entered my mind!
===
On 4E halflings: I did something like that (making them boat-borne nomads) in one of my campaigns. That was a rare case of my actually including the wee folk -- no "Hobbits in Hyboria" for me!
One thing that bugs me about 4E, though, is how setting-specific much of the material is. I don't know whether it's Forgotten Realms or what, but there's a fair bit of geography and history -- with Proper Names -- threaded through the "rules."
Even AD&D (for all its implicit Gygaxian setting) is based on referents in a common canon of literature. To that extent, it is "generic." I'm a fan of Glorantha (as in RuneQuest), but to me D&D is not supposed to be so specifically tied.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2008 12:48:47 GMT -6
One thing that bugs me about 4E, though, is how setting-specific much of the material is. I don't know whether it's Forgotten Realms or what, but there's a fair bit of geography and history -- with Proper Names -- threaded through the "rules." Even AD&D (for all its implicit Gygaxian setting) is based on referents in a common canon of literature. To that extent, it is "generic." I'm a fan of Glorantha (as in RuneQuest), but to me D&D is not supposed to be so specifically tied. Well, one thing that Wizards is doing explicitly with the "background elements" of 4E is seeking to create, from whole cloth, the "shared experiences" of Old School gamers. They (rightly) believe that these shared experiences will strengthen the 4E gaming network. "Shared experiences" are things like dying in the Tomb of Horrors, raiding the Moathouse in The Village of Hommlet, exploring and eventually winning control of Baba Yaga's Hut, taking on the Slave Lords or the Giants, and so forth. They are trying to create, with purpose, the kind of shared experiences for new players that occured and the kind of network that developed "organically" among Old School gamers. Rather than let it happen across a dozen modules and a decade, though, they want to create it from the get-go. Back in the day everyone used all the same modules (because officially, that's all there was); today there is a LOT of choice out there, so they decided to place the "shared experiences" explicitly in the rules set, and then also include them in later adventure modules and campaign settings. It is an interesting idea; I think the newer generation that will enjoy 4E will accept it, as they accept the shared experiences pushed on them by World of Warcraft and Everquest. That is more accurately the model, I suppose. To us Old School gamers, it seems forced and almost trite, to new gamers, it's just the way it has always been... |
|
|
|
Post by dwayanu on May 27, 2008 14:00:10 GMT -6
Interesting! If players want a chance to have the classic shared experiences, they know where to look ... ;D
BTW, it's sort of funny to me how few players these days seem to attain the level of skill not to die in S1. If one has actually played a character up to level 10-14 -- especially through a representative selection of other classic modules -- it should not be regarded as "impossibly hard."
|
|
darneson
Level 3 Conjurer
Co-Creator of OD&D
Posts: 56
|
Post by darneson on May 29, 2008 21:04:55 GMT -6
The name was changed from Hobbit to Halfling due to a nasty note from the JRT estate.
Personally the only class skills should be gardening and cooking.
I can hear my partner at Zeitgeist games screaming now. (he he)
Dave Arneson
|
|
|
|
Post by dwayanu on May 29, 2008 21:28:03 GMT -6
MISCELLANEOUS MAGIC (Additions)
Marvelous Mulcher ...
|
|
|
|
Post by Stormcrow on Jun 2, 2008 7:34:50 GMT -6
The D&D 4th Edition manuals have been leaked to the Internet. Here's some of what the Player's Handbook has to say about halflings. (I've selected certain things.)
Average Height: 3'10"–4'2"
Average Weight: 75–85 lb.
Skill Bonuses: +2 Acrobatics, +2 Thievery
Bold: You gain a +5 racial bonus to saving throws against fear.
Nimble Reaction: You gain a +2 racial bonus to AC against opportunity attacks.
Second Chance: You can use second chance as an encounter power. [Which, they explain below, lets you force an enemy to re-roll a successful attack.]
Halflings are a small race known for their resourcefulness, quick wits, and steady nerves. They are a nomadic folk who roam waterways and marshlands. No people travel farther or see more of what happens in the world than halflings.
[...] Halflings of both genders often wear complicated hairstyles, featuring complex braiding and weaving.
[...] Halflings have life spans comperable [sic] to humans.
[...] Halflings have never built a kingdom of their own or even held much land. They don’t recognize any sort of royalty or nobility of
their own, instead looking to family elders to guide them.
[Much of the rest of the description describes hobbits relatively well, if you stretch the definition a bit. The illustration shows two very un-hobbit-like halflings.]
|
|
|
|
Post by doc on Jun 2, 2008 8:33:25 GMT -6
So the official fourth edition hobbits are..... kender??
Doc
|
|
busman
Level 6 Magician
Playing OD&D, once again. Since 2008!
Posts: 448
|
Post by busman on Jun 2, 2008 9:49:01 GMT -6
So the official fourth edition hobbits are..... kender?? Doc Makes sense, doesn't it? Aren't the Kender an already owned concept by WotC? They've finally made the full break away from the Tolkien hobbits and made them fully their own thing. |
|
|
|
Post by TheMyth on Jun 2, 2008 20:36:44 GMT -6
They're Hobbikenderlings!
Hobkens?
Kenbits?
Halfbits?
Kenderbits!?!?!?!
|
|
|
|
Post by philotomy on Jun 3, 2008 8:47:26 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Jun 3, 2008 21:00:43 GMT -6
They should just make them Kenders it is the only non-Tolkien version of a halfling I ever seen "stick" among players. Otherwise just stop trying to make them different and return to the pastoral little guys we always known.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rat Salad on Jun 12, 2008 9:02:33 GMT -6
My old barbarian character used to eat halflings. When I was eatin' on 'em I considered them "Hobbits" just like I'm sure they were intended to be in the original books. At least they got more meat on 'em than a gnome.
|
|
oldgeezer
Level 3 Conjurer
Original Blackmoor Participant
Posts: 70 
|
Post by oldgeezer on Jun 12, 2008 10:26:38 GMT -6
So put hobbits in your game.
Who gives a rat's ass what WotC does or does not include?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rat Salad on Jun 12, 2008 11:14:40 GMT -6
Amen, oldgeezer: who cares. They've got everything else wrong up till now, not like one more thing would make much of a difference. Hell, I take a look at the books that are out now for kids to play and I can't make heads or tails of any of that mess! I don't like anything about 'em; they've altered the system so much it's not even the same game, and from what i've read, it's gonna be worse the next time.
|
|
scogle
Level 3 Conjurer
Posts: 69
|
Post by scogle on Jun 19, 2008 12:52:05 GMT -6
Yeah I hate what halflings are in AD&D. IMO it was the Thief class that really killed them, because they were best-suited to that class (being small and nimble and such), but it ended up radically changing the way people think of them, and now they're the "rogueish" race. That's why when I run an OD&D game, I call 'em hobbits, to remind people of the difference in the way they were conceived (not that players have to stick with stereotypes by any means, but I definitely prefer the hobbit stereotype to the halfling one). FWIW, I actually really like 4e rules; I haven't started my campaign yet (going out of town for a month soon) but it seems like they got rid of a lot of the out-of-combat rules, which is a very good thing imo and moves the game back towards its roots a bit. That said, I hate almost every piece of fluff in those books, they all sound silly and cartoonish imo  |
|
|
|
Post by codeman123 on Jul 9, 2008 20:04:45 GMT -6
well instead of removing the halfling they just removed gnomes and added dragons and tieflings as pc races... alright awesome... NOT!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2008 7:16:17 GMT -6
I agree with the OP. Hobbits it is. However, as noted I like the warrows and depending on where you travel you may meet them instead of hobbits. Other than adventurers, many of the PC races IMC are limited to certain areas. I also like Tolkien dwarves and pre-tolkien dwarves, and the same goes for elves.
|
|
|
|
Post by Random on Jul 29, 2008 8:36:55 GMT -6
Yeah I hate what halflings are in AD&D. IMO it was the Thief class that really killed them, because they were best-suited to that class (being small and nimble and such), but it ended up radically changing the way people think of them, and now they're the "rogueish" race. I thought they always had a mild "rogueish" stereotype, with Bilbo being the burglar and all that. Then again, Hobbits can be some mean little fighters when they have to be, so I'd say the non-thief stereotype should win out over the thief stereotype. |
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Jul 29, 2008 10:47:26 GMT -6
Yeah I hate what halflings are in AD&D. IMO it was the Thief class that really killed them, because they were best-suited to that class (being small and nimble and such), but it ended up radically changing the way people think of them, and now they're the "rogueish" race. I thought they always had a mild "rogueish" stereotype, with Bilbo being the burglar and all that. Then again, Hobbits can be some mean little fighters when they have to be, so I'd say the non-thief stereotype should win out over the thief stereotype. Bilbo wasn't really a burglar, though. Gandalf just said he was, so the dwarves would take him along. |
|
|
|
Post by Random on Jul 29, 2008 10:57:54 GMT -6
True, but they did call him a burglar repeatedly, and he sneaked around with his ring of invisibility.
I never pictured Bilbo much of a fighting type.
|
|
|
|
Post by Geiger on Jul 29, 2008 13:28:00 GMT -6
True, but they did call him a burglar repeatedly, and he sneaked around with his ring of invisibility. I never pictured Bilbo much of a fighting type. Remove the thief as a DnD archetype, give the fighting man the ability to act sneaky and the problem with Hobbit ceases. Thus the Hobbit just has an easier time being sneaky, compared to Men... just my two coppers ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Random on Jul 29, 2008 13:54:49 GMT -6
I'm not using thieves.
And hobbits are sneakier because of the hiding (in brush or woods) ability and because I'm making them faster.
Also they are short.
|
|
|
|
Post by blackbarn on Jul 29, 2008 15:10:34 GMT -6
I thought they always had a mild "rogueish" stereotype, with Bilbo being the burglar and all that. Then again, Hobbits can be some mean little fighters when they have to be, so I'd say the non-thief stereotype should win out over the thief stereotype. Bilbo wasn't really a burglar, though. Gandalf just said he was, so the dwarves would take him along. I'm often amazed by how many people either didn't catch this or choose to ignore it.  |
|
