Pathfinder 1E What race would you choose to dominate a setting.

[Madnick]

Greetings,

I am a member of a team developing a Pathfinder-compatible living campaign setting. We plan to involve the community a lot in the setting’s evolution, so this is a first attempt to see what you guys think about dominant races. I ‘ll try to elaborate a little on the options:

• Humans: Similar to most popular epic fantasy settings, this is straight-forward. Humans are versatile, resilient and adaptive. They normally make a top candidate for the dominant race spot.

• A demihuman common race: I have heard many people wonder why elves have not ever bothered in any setting to take over the world, being the wisest, strongest in magic and all. But one might have a distinctive approach; why not another demihuman race? Unusual fluff / world lore can often improve the role playing experience so perhaps one might like the idea of imperialist Halflings! If you vote this option, I‘d love to see a comment on how exactly you see it happen.

• All common races equally dominant: All races have more or less equal power. Each uses its resources. Domination changes between kingdoms, but often strange schemes are attempted to maintain balance; councils with members so distinctive that one might argue they can not agree on the simplest of matters. Political intrigue at its best.

• One savage humanoid race: The savage race (orcs? ogres?) has been long suppressed... Now, they rule and it is in chaos and disorder. They kill innocents just for the sake of killing. Humanoids plan rebellions (smaller or larger), but can they work together remaining undetected and how? With these ones, it doesn’t take much; one wrong move and you are dead. For no apparent reason.

• A monster race: In Darksun it’s dragons. In Greek cosmogony, it’s titans. What other race has the intelligence to dominate the world? Could it be the undead? In any case, common races live in deep fear. They are only safe in small safe havens.

• Post apocalyptic – anarchy (no dominant race): No stereotypes, no order! Every person can only be judged by the character’s guts feeling and perhaps rumors he might have heard. In time, any race, tribe or order might dominate the setting

 

[Blackbrrd]

I first voted for Humans, but when I think about it, Post apocalyptic sounds much more interesting. My current campaign is human dominated, but it's been done a hundred times already.

 

[DMZ2112]

If you were asking me about a book, or even a private campaign setting, I would probably have answered differently, but in a living setting where you have little to no control over what's going on at individual tables I think a world demographically divided between the common races is the only way to go. Nothing else is generic enough for broad appeal.

 

[hafrogman]

I voted for one savage species, but not "... Now, they rule and it is in chaos and disorder." Because the savage races include the wonderfully lawful Hobgoblins. Evil, but organized. Imperial legions, global conquest, slave pits and chain gangs building a new world.

 

[gamerprinter]

Honestly it depends upon the campaign and storyline. Typical settings I play, humans are the dominant race, however, any of the poll options could serve as the primary race or racial condition depending upon the campaign itself. For example, I ran a campaign where ancient evil and elemental forces caused the return of an ice age with a winter hag as the queen and the rise of the ogres as the dominant race in the winter lands.

Edit: I'd say the option where all sentient races are equally dominant, never applies in games I play.

 

[Yora]

In my campaign, elves and lizardfolk have been the big fish for the last 2000 years, but now humans have made it to a pretty impressive third place in the last centuries.

 

[Ramaster]

By Pathfinder rules, the strongest of the common races is probably the human, with the extra feat and the extra skill point. BUT, the race with the greatest Race Point count is the dwarf. If you think about them, they are quite effective.

Their cities are built around mountains, so they have access to a lot of wealth, they have a bonus to CON, a very powerful +2 on all saves vs magic, a lot of great racial equipment and move just as fast as elves or human in medium and heavy armor (meaning that their armies have no penalties in this regard). All this, coupled with their lawful nature and long clan-based tradition, makes them good candidates for global domination.

 

[gamerprinter]

Because all the worlds I play in are home-brew creations, you'll never find a dwarf, elf, gnome, halfling, or half-orc in any of them. So even if human isn't the dominant race, it will be some other race that I've included in the world, but not dwarf, elf, gnome, halfling or half-orc... I avoid vanilla settings and standard races at all costs.

 

[Vegepygmy]

I voted for one savage species, but not "... Now, they rule and it is in chaos and disorder." Because the savage races include the wonderfully lawful Hobgoblins. Evil, but organized. Imperial legions, global conquest, slave pits and chain gangs building a new world.

Yep, that would be my actual vote. (But I voted Humans, since this wasn't an option.) What I think would really be a fun change of pace would be to have a "savage" race like hobgoblins or lizardfolk or something be the dominant culture, a la Planet of the Apes.

 

[Madnick]

I have to admit i am surprised by the results so far.I was convinced that due to the fact most of the settings out there had Human domination stereotypically people would prefer an alternative bases.The results so far prove that the reason all those setting have human domination is that people prefer it over the alternatives.

As far as the people that would pick Savage species but not with the default approach to a savage race (chaotic instead of lawful) thanks for your input.That is why i prefer an explanation with the vote so we can have a clearer image of is your likes and dislikes.

Keep them coming i am interested in seeing if the analogy can be turned.