DnD Ecology:Second Tier Predators

[jgbrowning]

I was wondering in a 'DnD world' where 'monsters' like say Gryphons occupy the top predator status what happens to all the second tier predators like Lions and Wolves etc.

In other words if you have a particular territory in which the Wilderbeast are killed and eaten by a mated pair of Gryphons do Lions etc still exist?

Are they merely scavengers (ie occupy a new niche) or do they go extinct?

(we'll assume Dragons in this scenario are abberant and only rarely impact the ecosystem)

I thought it was an interesting enough question to write a book about it. A Magical Society: Ecology and Cultures will be coming out around March/April of next year. Till then I'll just give a few $0.02. Oh.. and I should have a cover example within a week!

I think that the second tier predators (really the third tier predators with the monsters more than likely being 4-6 tier) as you've described them would either co-exist with minimal contact (there's enough prey for everyone) or have lesser numbers with slight contact (prey is minimal but sufficient) or be in strong competition with frequent contact (prey is not really sufficient and kill conflicts are common).

I've got a lot more than that, but it'll have to wait.


joe b.

 

[Hand of Evil]

Don't forget that in the real world most predators DO NOT see humans as food, we have not been hunted and stalked for quite some time but in a fantasy world A LOT of monsters do see the races as food.

I think a DM has to watch how many creatures he puts in a game.

 

[jgbrowning]

Don't forget that in the real world most predators DO NOT see humans as food, we have not been hunted and stalked for quite some time but in a fantasy world A LOT of monsters do see the races as food.

I think a DM has to watch how many creatures he puts in a game.

Also I think DMs need to consider the benefit to return ratio for hunters. I'd recommend that whenever most unintelligent (and many intelligent) creatures get under 1/2 hp, they should flee. It's not worth the energy- just like lions give up a chase if they don't get it within around 200 yards.

I think intelligent creatures should do so because If they're evil, they most definitely don't want to be weakened. This is the main reason why the leaders let the grunts get hurt first...

joe b.

 

[frankthedm]

There is a rule where when an organism ingests food, it can extract about 10% of the energy in that food. This means that it takes roughly 2000 lbs of deer to make 200 lbs of Mountain Lion.

In my campaign world, I changed that to be about 16%. Thus, plants and other producers get more energy from the sun. This means there are more plants per given area. Then, more plants mean more herbivores can be there to eat it but each herbivore needs to eat less food to survive, since it gets more from each mouthful than their earthly versions. Then, predators not only have more to eat, they themselves can survive on less, thus, more predators. So what do gryphons and dragons eat? Predators of course. Why settle for wildebeast when you can dine on Dire Bear?

Simple calcualtions work like this;
1.6 times the energy in the land via producers
1.6 times the primary consumers due to eating less vegetation each.
1.6 times the predators due to eating less meat.
That leaves 4 times as many predators given the same amount of vegetation compared to earth biology.

Same here, but i didn't do the math. Much like the Terratories of Stephen King and Peter Straub in "the Talisman" there is just more 'life force' to my game world. The food tastes better & fills you better, the air is fresher than earth's ever was and a wound that would kill a man over here just might be survivable.

 

[Nifft]

Since I'm such a big Bio geek I always wondered about things like this myself.
The way I "fixed" the problem was to adjust the fundamental forces in the world

Likewise, but without all that math-stuff.

I just say "it's magic", and that's that.

-- N