Hobbits

[Zulgyan]

The OD&D Hobbit

• They are about half the size of men (Chainmail p. 28)
  
• They are able to blend into the background (only in brush and woods), and thus make excellent scouts (Chainmail p. 29 and p. 43).
  
• They can fire a stone as far as an archer shoots (Chainmail p. 29).
  
• Their attack rate with the sling is 3/2 (Chainmail p. 29).
  
• They will have magic-resistance equal to dwarves (add four levels for saving throws) (M&M p. 8)
  
• They receive +1 in 6 chance to detect sound at doors (U&W p. 9)
  
• Their movement rate it 12" / 9" / 6" (Chainmail p. 43)
  
• Hobbits gain no benefits from charging (deduced from Chainmail p.43 - no charge speed)
  
• Hobbits are aligned with LAW (Chainmail p. 39)
  

[serendipity]

It sounded pretty good until I got to the part about hobbits being Lawful. In my opinion, Hobbits are more chaotic than lawful, though possibly that might have to do with what is considered lawful. If you follow the dictates of your society but your society honors tribalism and hedonism above formal government, does that still make you lawful?

--Sere

[Finarvyn]

On the other hand, you could argue that Hobbits are super-lawful because they hate change. They want to eat meals at the right time, don't want those darned adventures cluttering up their lives, and want to know that tomorrow is going to be a lot like today. And yesterday.

Just a thought.

[Zulgyan]

I think it is more related towards they serving the Lords of Law or the Lords of Chaos, just as in Moonrock's Elric novels.

The shire seems pretty much a lawful place to me too.

[Falconer]

I love OD&D hobbits. They definitively illustrate that the point is to recreate the worlds of literature. A “balanced” game is NOT the primary goal.

That said, I have been playing hobbits (or halfling fighters) lately whenever I have the chance to play in an OD&D (or OAD&D) game, and have found them to be very fun to play. No disadvantage at all! Granted it wasn’t “high-level” play, but even then I suspect in a long-term campaign it might be made worthwhile. Regards.

[Wothbora]

Don't read too much into the Lawful/Chaotic/Neutral of OD&D. It's more of "Who is on the side of Good and Who is on the side of Evil" rather than Chaotic behavior vs. Lawful behavior.

I, personally, look more towards the Holmes variety of throwing in Good and Evil with Lawful, Chaotic and Neutral. A nice Alignment System of Five (and someone has pointed out that the Neutral Alignment should really be called "Selfish" more than Neutral).

Why five? Because I consider myself more Chaotic Good than Lawful...

[Finarvyn]

falconer said:

I love OD&D hobbits. They definitively illustrate that the point is to recreate the worlds of literature. A “balanced” game is NOT the primary goal.

Y'know, I think people tend to forget about the whole "game balance" issue.

When it's a "fellowship against bad guys" game, it doesn't really matter if each character is exactly balanced against each other character. Frodo and Gandalf can adventure side-by-side and both can have fun, as long as there are some magical things for Gandalf to do and sneaky things for Frodo to do.

In all of my years of gaming, I've only played Hobbits a couple of times. But I've DM-ed players who ran Hobbit characters and they always seemed to have a blast with them.

[foster1941]

wothbora said:

(and someone has pointed out that the Neutral Alignment should really be called "Selfish" more than Neutral)

That "someone" was in fact Dave Arneson (see point #5)

[doc]

Contrary to how more modern gamers portray them, Hobbits are indeed Lawful. They find comfort in stability and habit, and the idea of anything that cannot be predicted (like adventuring) tends to make them feel all odd in the tummy.

It should be noted, though, that player character Hobbits tend to be the exceptions to the rule and are often considered to be the odd ducks of their settlements.

Doc

[Deleted]

I agree. It's only been in more recent times & game editions that "Hobbits" have become chaotic, itinerant adventurers for hire; the uber-majority of their species are perfectly happy living life with a simple & pragmatic approach. As a whole, they are certainly creatures of habit. And yes, "Hobbit" adventurers are most certainly the black sheep of their community, to say the least.

And on the point of playability: My better half has only ever played "Hobbits" in her gaming career (& quite convincingly, I might add)--she absolutely loves them!! I don't think she'll ever play anything else...

[Rhuvein]

oltekos said:

And on the point of playability: My better half has only ever played "Hobbits" in her gaming career (& quite convincingly, I might add)--she absolutely loves them!! I don't think she'll ever play anything else...

That's very cool. Does she play females, then? And does she play up the Tolkienesque aspect (which I would think one must, if they are playing a hobbit rather than a halfling, no?) ?

;D

[Deleted]

Oh yes, always a female. ;D And as for the tolkienesque aspect, most certainly. She just enjoys portraying the slightly demure & motherly hobbit; pipe in hand, homesick & yearning for her family, as well as the comfortable hobbit-hole she was forced to leave behind (insert reason here...).

But when the chips are down, & people she cares about are in danger, stay out of the way of Miss Drelba Prettytoes--I hear her
short-sword is lethal...

[Falconer]

rhuvein said:

That's very cool. Does she play females, then? And does she play up the Tolkienesque aspect (which I would think one must, if they are playing a hobbit rather than a halfling, no?) ?

The term “Halfling” is from Tolkien, just as much as “Hobbit” is.

I really dislike “non-Tolkienesque” Halflings. I just don’t get the point of it, I guess. We’re going to take a race that Tolkien invented and change them beyond recognition, but still call them Halflings? Why?

At least Dragonlance had the bright idea to rename them (“Kender”). But then, they’re so d**ned annoying, I’d take a fat, barefoot, British Gentlehobbit, who goes around calling everyone “queer”, any day. Regards.