Seems to me that a lot of these are duplicates. I don't really see the difference between satrapy and feudalism, for instance, nor that between dictatorship, autocracy, and monarchy; e.g., often one finds "autocracy" or "monarchy" defined in terms of the other. Plus, several (like matriarchy/patriarchy, kleptocracy, etc.) are more like modifiers on some other system rather than systems in their own right: you could have matriarchal monarchy (queendom) or patriarchal oligarchy (council of elders) or kleptocratic republic (late-era Roman Republic).
And like...what does "hierarchy" even mean? Every system where you have at least one defined leadership position by definition has a hierarchy.
As a result, I'm going to trim down the list a bit, and make some clarifications. Kleptocracy, meritocracy, matriarchy, and patriarchy are removed; any society can have these elements (though I admit it pains me to have to remove meritocracy). Feudalism and confederacy are relationships between distinct political bodies, and thus are not included, but both are likely to form. Feudalism generally from a single society absorbing multiple other states, while confederacy from multiple near-equal societies choosing to work together. I will note societies inclined to each by (F) and (C). Certain particularly
relevant categories which act as modifiers are kept, with clarification based on which government "base" is used, e.g. gerontocracy and magocracy are distinctive enough to warrant reference.
Clarified definitions: "Dictatorship" is non-hereditary, centralized autocracy; "monarchy" is hereditary, centralized autocracy; "hierarchy" is non-hereditary, decentralized autocracy; "satrapy" is hereditary, decentralized autocracy.
| Government | Race |
|---|
| Bureaucracy | Tieflings: The perfect blend of precise legalese and corrupt sprawl, a Byzantine bureaucracy suits them well. (F) |
| Democracy | Halflings: Their free spirits and garrulous nature incline them toward hashing out problems communally. (C) |
| Dictatorship | Hobgoblins: Their (in)famous discipline, efficiency, and cruelty reflects centralized control and meritocratic succession. (F) |
| Gerontocracy | Dwarves: Usually oligarchic. The wisdom of elders is trusted over untested, "radical" trial-and-error. (C) |
| Hierarchy | Minotaur: Kinda inverse bureaucrats; chaos confined by structure. Think "herding" behavior following a leader. (F) |
| Magocracy | Elves: Usually bureaucratic/technocratic. Demonstrated expertise in a field is the best filter for useful results. (C) |
| Militocracy | Orcs: Usually tribal. Might makes right: if you are not strong enough to hold your position, you don't deserve it. (F) |
| Monarchy | Humans: Historically our most common form of government. We instinctively stratify our societies, for good and ill. (Both) |
| Oligarchy | Gnomes: With their eccentricities and often solitary nature, leaving decisions to the few who "care" is easy. (C) |
| Plutocracy | Genasi: Leaning oligarchic. The inclination toward opulence and ostentation among genies is shared by their kin. (F) |
| Republic | Dragonborn: Independent but socially-minded, with clan-chosen representation for group decision-making. (C) |
| Satrapy | Lizardfolk: Many chieftains leading their bloodline-clans, of whom one is nominal head, first among equals. (F) |
| Theocracy | Aasimar: Their innate connection to divine beings leans toward shared structures of belief. (C) |
Interestingly, I seem to have unintentionally re-created the Moorcockian "law/chaos" divide with my feudal-vs-confederate labels. Tieflings, hobgoblins, minotaurs, orcs, (some) humans, genasi, and lizardfolk form a faction of non-equal feudal overlordships, while halflings, dwarves, elves, (some) humans, gnomes, dragonborn, and aasimar form a faction of implicitly equal (but probably not practically equal) partners in a confederate/alliance-type union. Which one counts as "lawful" vs "chaotic" is likely a matter of debate!
