Gammadoodler
Hero
I also mentioned "communicates using oral and written language". Could have also listed a shared propensity to make and use tools.. I mean you can pick whatever set of traits you like that is sufficiently descriptive to represent "humanoid". The final destination is the same. And the point was that you are choosing to follow this reductionist path with halflings as if it is only applicable for them, and I feel that is a waste of energy.So Humans and goblins are highly similiar in more than just the way of "I think" and "I have a head and two arms and two legs"
I mean, I think they are actually quite different. As are ogres which think, have a head, two arms and two legs, and forward facing eyes. Also, they are giants, not humanoid. Oh and mindflayers which think, have a head, two arms, two legs, forward facing eyes, and are corporeal. They are also not humanoid, they are abberations.
So, again, the way you went about "proving" that everything humanoid is "basically human" addresses none of the points I have ever brought up, and is very much like Plato's definition of a man. If it can also be a plucked chicken, it isn't a terribly great definition.
Yes, if you reduce things enough, lots of things look the same. The degree which you have to reduce them is why we can say that some races aren't "basically human" and some are.
Then you can show me an official depiction of dragonborn with lips? I don't need you to try and prove that massively changing the facial structure of a person alters their voice, that one is incredibly self-evident.
I'm often astounded at how many people try to act like "fantasy" means "there is no consensus, everything is made up and meaningless"
Are you trying to say something like they would use Balsa wood instead of pine? Most building materials are wood, stone and clay, and while you can make all of those thinner, they aren't "lighter materials"
Or were you thinking of materials more like the size and thickness of the shingles and boards and not in the actual quality of the materials themselves? This isn't some sort of gotcha, I'm just honestly confused by what you are trying to convey
As far as I know there have been no direct observations of Dragonborn facial tissue, bone structure, vocal apparati, etc. (Not even considering how magic might come into play). Artist's depictions of fantasy creatures are, unfortunately, not proof of their biology. I don't really disagree with you that your conclusion may be a reasonable one. But, while it could be a reasonable conclusion, it is not the only possible reasonable conclusion, and it certainly isn't a "factual" conclusion.
Fantasy is literally "made up". Worse than that as it relates to D&D, it's made up and has magic. It is 100% subjective and unmoored from the constraints of reality. There is no meaningful consensus. Hell, you posted a bunch of art for halflings and gnome with wildly different characteristics as imagined by different artists. No one is going to be proven wrong for imagining something differently than another person does. Do you really believe otherwise??
As it relates to building materials, would expect a combination of both differing materials and different usage. Stone, wood, and clay are the materials harvested for building because they are the materials that work to address normal building engineering requirements. You change those requirements, you change the population of harvestable materials. Balsa might be an extreme example, but sure, that might be one. The other piece would be things like board thicknesses as you surmised. Wooden trusses used to support a bridge are larger/thicker/heavier than the ones used to support your roof. It's the same principle, if you don't have to do as much with it, you don't have to use as much of it.
Last edited: