Magic and resource control are the great equalizers there, I think.
D&D General consideration on sapient folk having two distinct base cultures?
- Thread starter Mind of tempest
- Start date
AtomicPope
Hero
Remember, this is a world with magic and monsters so the standard high tech vs low tech doesn't apply here. What we're really talking about is culture, and at the forefront must be magic and monsters (and gods, angels, devils, et al), and how these things integrate into their society. One of the aspects I loved about Greyhawk was, considering D&D's creators and early developers built that world out of their own campaigns, it built societies that worked within the Vancian system. The Free City of Greyhawk was a trade city located near hills rich in gems and silver. Makes sense that some of the finest Wizard colleges would be there. And with lots of trade, the most powerful Thieves' Guilds would be there as well. Country folk of the Yeomanry follow the Old Ways as Druids ensure their people and crops live in harmony with nature. Plenty of examples to choose from, and a people's way of life is often tied to a Deity or a pantheon of similar Deities, or tragically to a demon, dragon, or other monster.
From very early on I saw D&D differently because of this, never really seeing a people or way as "weak" or "strong" but distinct. There was a sense that greatness rose and fell on the shoulders of great leaders and belonged to a special time and place. As a DM, I find it's much easier to show the strength and weakness of a culture through the people the PCs interact with. Think of the Lord of the Rings when they visit Rohan, and King Theoden is under the spell of Saruman and Grima Wormtongue. These are problems PCs can solve, and should solve. In this regard I've structured campaigns around the rise and fall of people, empires, and their leaders. The power vacuum begs for PCs to come in and save them. In my, now epic, campaign the PCs eventually cleared out a mining city of undead and became proper lords of the region, one of them marrying into a farming barony. They've had years IRL dealing with infernals, fey, giants, dragons, and even a few gods, and with their connections found it easy to set up Warlock colleges. Hexblades of the Raven Queen and Pact of the Chain for the Cat Lord were constructed in the two baronies. Their worlds grew with magic and power but remained essentially the same as far as their cultures (both human baronies). The PCs were the driving force behind it.
In my campaign the same goes for Elven societies, and pigeon-holing Elves makes for easy world building. High Elves have a magocracy while Wood Elves have a heirophancy. There are derivations from these themes but the nuisance is more then backstory and the culture. Are they more warlike? Are they mercantile? We can build a lot of interactive roleplaying behind these nuances. D&D is NOT a classroom. Don't create a society that PCs cannot interact with or has problems they can't solve. If you do then you're missing the point. Don't focus on creating problems or stories you players can't get involved with. If you're creating a society then tie problems to people, creatures, bad pacts/contracts, and of course monsters. The PCs are the heroes who can slay those monsters, take down those crooked organizations, remove the wicked, and right the wrongs to heal the people and the land. Even if that day isn't today, give them a perspective to know that they could do it one day.
From very early on I saw D&D differently because of this, never really seeing a people or way as "weak" or "strong" but distinct. There was a sense that greatness rose and fell on the shoulders of great leaders and belonged to a special time and place. As a DM, I find it's much easier to show the strength and weakness of a culture through the people the PCs interact with. Think of the Lord of the Rings when they visit Rohan, and King Theoden is under the spell of Saruman and Grima Wormtongue. These are problems PCs can solve, and should solve. In this regard I've structured campaigns around the rise and fall of people, empires, and their leaders. The power vacuum begs for PCs to come in and save them. In my, now epic, campaign the PCs eventually cleared out a mining city of undead and became proper lords of the region, one of them marrying into a farming barony. They've had years IRL dealing with infernals, fey, giants, dragons, and even a few gods, and with their connections found it easy to set up Warlock colleges. Hexblades of the Raven Queen and Pact of the Chain for the Cat Lord were constructed in the two baronies. Their worlds grew with magic and power but remained essentially the same as far as their cultures (both human baronies). The PCs were the driving force behind it.
In my campaign the same goes for Elven societies, and pigeon-holing Elves makes for easy world building. High Elves have a magocracy while Wood Elves have a heirophancy. There are derivations from these themes but the nuisance is more then backstory and the culture. Are they more warlike? Are they mercantile? We can build a lot of interactive roleplaying behind these nuances. D&D is NOT a classroom. Don't create a society that PCs cannot interact with or has problems they can't solve. If you do then you're missing the point. Don't focus on creating problems or stories you players can't get involved with. If you're creating a society then tie problems to people, creatures, bad pacts/contracts, and of course monsters. The PCs are the heroes who can slay those monsters, take down those crooked organizations, remove the wicked, and right the wrongs to heal the people and the land. Even if that day isn't today, give them a perspective to know that they could do it one day.
Tonguez
A suffusion of yellow
Depends on what you‘d consider Nomadic I suppose. Irl Maasai, Mongols and Romani were nomads who relatively speaking interacted fine with ‘settled‘ societies (other than prejudice).
IMC a Giants domain will cover 1000 sq miles over which the wander 100 miles per day doing various tasks, anything smaller and they start to consume the available resources. It looks nomadic to smaller races, no so much to the giant.
Hussar
Legend
Oooo, I LOVE this idea. You could split the difference as well - some dwarven clans strip mine, while others dig a bit deeper. Or, clans might switch back and forth depending on what it is they are mining. Add in the notion that dwarves would need some SERIOUS horse power to move from point to point (heh, sorry about the pun) and you could add all sorts of fantasy critters. Dwarves use Purple Worms to travel between locations, riding them Fremen style, maybe.
------------
Actually, when you think about it, most of the races in the PHB are presented as sedentary. Humans build cities. Dwarves build underground cities. Elves hang about in whatever forest they started in. The notion of nomadic lifestyles isn't really baked into the game at all. Would make a fascinating approach to a game world when, instead of everyone being these Faux English peasants a la Tolkien, you pushed all the cultures to be nomadic. Maybe any group that settles too long attracts something very big and bad that will come a knocking - Tarrasques for example. If you don't move on every so often (that period of time being a primary role for the various clergy to decide), very bad things happen.
Oooo, I likies.
Only that being nomadic puts a hard limit on technological development which would include many items standard to D&D.Oooo, I LOVE this idea. You could split the difference as well - some dwarven clans strip mine, while others dig a bit deeper. Or, clans might switch back and forth depending on what it is they are mining. Add in the notion that dwarves would need some SERIOUS horse power to move from point to point (heh, sorry about the pun) and you could add all sorts of fantasy critters. Dwarves use Purple Worms to travel between locations, riding them Fremen style, maybe.
------------
Actually, when you think about it, most of the races in the PHB are presented as sedentary. Humans build cities. Dwarves build underground cities. Elves hang about in whatever forest they started in. The notion of nomadic lifestyles isn't really baked into the game at all. Would make a fascinating approach to a game world when, instead of everyone being these Faux English peasants a la Tolkien, you pushed all the cultures to be nomadic. Maybe any group that settles too long attracts something very big and bad that will come a knocking - Tarrasques for example. If you don't move on every so often (that period of time being a primary role for the various clergy to decide), very bad things happen.
Oooo, I likies.
Redwizard007
Adventurer
That really depends on how nomadic a culture is. Do they move every week, month, century? My dwarf example wouldn't have any issues with technology. You could also have magic take the place of some tech. Bonus points if the spells exist for players to use. There is also the opportunity to have nomadic cultures constantly (and temporarily) integrate with more settled ones as they travel. I could see wagons or riverboats of halflings or gnomes pulling this off.
Isn't it the 3 cultures.
The main culture
The breakaway culture
The dark culture
The main culture
The breakaway culture
The dark culture
- Dwarf
- Main- Mountain
- Breakaway- Hill
- Dark- Duergar
- Elf
- Main- High
- Breakaway- Wood
- Dark- Drow
- Gnome
- Main- Forest
- Breakaway- Rock
- Dark- Deep
- Halfling
- Main- Lightfoot
- Breakaway- Stout
- Dark- Ghostwise
- Human
- Main- Medieval/Feudal
- Breakaway- Renaissance/Rebirth
- Dark- Pre-Medieval/Barbaric/Dark
- Orc
- Main- Warhammer Orc
- Breakaway- Warcraft Orc
- Dark- Tolkien Orc
Remathilis
Legend
The Innistrad Plane Shift article tried something like this. In Innistrad, there are no other non-monster races but human so they tried to spice things up by dividing humanity into four "subraces" depending solely on Province of origin.
Gavony (the largest and most urban province) was a base human: +1 all ability scores.
Kessig (rural forest-folk and farmers) got +1 Wis/Dex, Survival, and the equivilant of the Fleet feat.
Nephalia (costal region of sailors and fishers) get +1 Int/Cha and any four skills (akin to bonus skill and the Skilled feat)
Stensia (dark mountain area overrun by vampires) gets +1 Str/Con, the intimate skill, and Tough (+2 hp/level).
It should be obvious that the latter three are just variant humans with choices pre-picked. And they are absolutely obsolete in a post-Tasha world. But it gives an idea of what a "subrace" built on cultures rather than biology could look like.
Gavony (the largest and most urban province) was a base human: +1 all ability scores.
Kessig (rural forest-folk and farmers) got +1 Wis/Dex, Survival, and the equivilant of the Fleet feat.
Nephalia (costal region of sailors and fishers) get +1 Int/Cha and any four skills (akin to bonus skill and the Skilled feat)
Stensia (dark mountain area overrun by vampires) gets +1 Str/Con, the intimate skill, and Tough (+2 hp/level).
It should be obvious that the latter three are just variant humans with choices pre-picked. And they are absolutely obsolete in a post-Tasha world. But it gives an idea of what a "subrace" built on cultures rather than biology could look like.
Redwizard007
Adventurer
Didn't Forgotten Realms do something in 3.5 with regional feats? Pathfinder had some distinct cultural groups of humans as well. Its not exactly what you are talking about, but it might be a good place to look for ideas that have already been printed.
Similar Threads
