Do druids and rangers make the wilderness too freindly?

[Nytmare]

Bear attacks do happen, but a quick check on wikipedia for fatal bear attacks in North America resulted in 28 deaths - between 2000 and 2010. About 3 a year.

I'm not a naturalist, but I'd assume those numbers would be extremely different if you scaled them back to a point where there were only a handful of human beings, the bears natural environment hadn't been paved over, and the bears weren't hunted to near extinction.

I'd also assume that the rules change when it's predators protecting their established territory from intruders and not just animals looking for food.

 

[GhostBear]

I'm not a naturalist, but I'd assume those numbers would be extremely different if you scaled them back to a point where there were only a handful of human beings, the bears natural environment hadn't been paved over, and the bears weren't hunted to near extinction.

Except that, quite frankly, bears don't know that this has happened. They don't run kingdoms or have long historical traditions. They're born; what they have is what they have. That is their experience.

They aren't aware of what happened 50, 500, or 5,000 years ago (a lot like most people, but even more so). What happened back then didn't happen to them, they haven't experienced it, so as far as they are concerned it simply doesn't exist.

Bears are very intelligent and they DO Have very good memories of what happened when they are alive, but they don't have a way to pass down history.

They DO pass down some behaviors: A mother may call her cubs up into a tree when something dangerous approaches, and the cubs learn over time to avoid whatever that thing was. Cubs are taught where certain foods grow, how to fish, and how to open garbage cans.

It can be argued that avoidance of humans was a learned, passed down trait over thousands of years, but this isn't something that we can assume.

I'd also assume that the rules change when it's predators protecting their established territory from intruders and not just animals looking for food.

Not really. The only time they seem to be aggressive is when you get too close to their den, not when you're in their range. If this was the case, you'd find wolf packs attacking and killing everyone in a several hundred mile area - and they don't.

Hollywood will tell you that they do, but Hollywood also tells you that every time a car crashes it explodes into a mushroom cloud.

 

[Dioltach]

... bears don't know that this has happened. ... They aren't aware of what happened 50, 500, or 5,000 years ago (a lot like most people, but even more so). What happened back then didn't happen to them, they haven't experienced it, so as far as they are concerned it simply doesn't exist.

This is really funny coming from someone called GhostBear.

 

[radja]

Let's be honest - the entire system makes natural threats mostly superfluous. By 5th level, say, any natural animal becomes a speed bump as far as threats go. A grizzly bear? Yeah, 5th level party turns that into kibble without breaking a sweat. And solves their food problems for the immediate future at the same time.

Add in the magic system - create water, purify food and drink (both very low level and easily accessible ), create food and water, etc. - and overland traveling spells, and the only time the wilderness is a credible threat is to very low level parties - say 1-3.

Unless we're talking about a Lost World scenario where there are dinosaurs, the wilderness just doesn't hold that much of a threat to any group over about 4th level.

I partially disagree, there can still be credible threats to parties over lvl 3. This mainly happens when the party ventures into their territory. A river they are crossing may have a large population of hippopotami (they may look cute from a distance... but no other wild animal has more human victims than hippos. They have been known to attack boats and people without provocation, and conveniently live in groups for extra danger).

The biggest creature dangers to a party in the wilderness (at least on land) aren't predators. It's the large herbivores that move in herds. Elephants. Buffaloes. Bisons. And Hippos. Predators may get one of the party... herbivores will stamp the whole party into the ground if they get a chance.

 

[Janx]

I'm not a naturalist, but I'd assume those numbers would be extremely different if you scaled them back to a point where there were only a handful of human beings, the bears natural environment hadn't been paved over, and the bears weren't hunted to near extinction.

I'd also assume that the rules change when it's predators protecting their established territory from intruders and not just animals looking for food.

Not quite. it ain't like wolves have an alarm system around their territory. Sure, if they spot an interloper because they are in the same sector of the territory, they will monitor and MAY threaten. it's not like wolves chase out every squirrel or elk that wanders in.

and GB is spot on that animals do NOT fight to the death generally. They posture and grapple, but will break off before they get hurt. A hurt paw can cripple their ability to pursue prey. So they play chicken more than fight.

bears are a little wierd on that, once they get enraged. But even then, it's the mama bears to watch out for WHEN she has cubs. outside of that, bears don't see profit in a fight, they just posture, roar and one party leaves.

 

[Nytmare]

Except that, quite frankly, bears don't know that this has happened. They don't run kingdoms or have long historical traditions. They're born; what they have is what they have. That is their experience.

What part of my statement led you to assume that I was saying that?

You can't use stats from a time when there are a handful of bears wandering around small, mostly contained areas, where human beings spend a few hours of their lives for mostly recreational purposes and say that the same stats should apply to a time where a handful of human beings are wandering around a world that is mostly untamed wilds and the bear population is 4 or 5 times as large.

This afternoon I was at a jewelry store and I didn't eat a single cheeseburger. Oddly enough, "zero cheeseburgers" is a really bad estimation of how many cheeseburgers I ate 5 hours earlier when I was at McDonalds.

 

[Hussar]

I partially disagree, there can still be credible threats to parties over lvl 3. This mainly happens when the party ventures into their territory. A river they are crossing may have a large population of hippopotami (they may look cute from a distance... but no other wild animal has more human victims than hippos. They have been known to attack boats and people without provocation, and conveniently live in groups for extra danger).

The biggest creature dangers to a party in the wilderness (at least on land) aren't predators. It's the large herbivores that move in herds. Elephants. Buffaloes. Bisons. And Hippos. Predators may get one of the party... herbivores will stamp the whole party into the ground if they get a chance.

Fair enough I supppose. But, by and large, you don't have THAT many large herbivores wandering around. Elephants and hippos don't feature too often in many faux European settings. And, to be frank, as a DM, if I'm going to bomb the party with critters that large, they're likely going to have a breath weapon or fly or be fantastic of some sort. Attacked by wyverns just seems more fantasy to me than eaten by hippos.

I mean, sure, people were killed by bison. Of course. OTOH, people vs bison typically resulted in a lot of hamburger.

 

[Tonguez]

Fair enough I supppose. But, by and large, you don't have THAT many large herbivores wandering around. Elephants and hippos don't feature too often in many faux European settings. And, to be frank, as a DM, if I'm going to bomb the party with critters that large, they're likely going to have a breath weapon or fly or be fantastic of some sort. Attacked by wyverns just seems more fantasy to me than eaten by hippos.

I mean, sure, people were killed by bison. Of course. OTOH, people vs bison typically resulted in a lot of hamburger.

Eurasian Elk (Moose) stand up to 7 ft at the shoulder and can weigh over a ton, the Irish Elk was even bigger than that. Some Auroch Bulls were said to have reached three ton weight.

even horses can get to two ton, and a charging boar is a real danger

 

[Janx]

What part of my statement led you to assume that I was saying that?

You can't use stats from a time when there are a handful of bears wandering around small, mostly contained areas, where human beings spend a few hours of their lives for mostly recreational purposes and say that the same stats should apply to a time where a handful of human beings are wandering around a world that is mostly untamed wilds and the bear population is 4 or 5 times as large.

This afternoon I was at a jewelry store and I didn't eat a single cheeseburger. Oddly enough, "zero cheeseburgers" is a really bad estimation of how many cheeseburgers I ate 5 hours earlier when I was at McDonalds.

I think GhostBear was saying that except for the boundaries of nature/civilization, animal behavior hasn't changed much from then to now. So the way wild bears behave around people in the deep wilderness is pretty much how they behaved THEN around humans.

If there were fewer people back then, there were probably even fewer of them wandering in the deep woods to encounter or influence animal behavior.

note, I differentiate deep wilderness and the wild/civilization boundary. I think it's obvious when civilization encroaches too much, that animals adapt to digging in trash cans in the city. That happens less often when cities are smaller and there's still plenty of wilderness

 

[Nytmare]

Fair enough I supppose. But, by and large, you don't have THAT many large herbivores wandering around.

Oddly enough, I have so far been twice almost killed by elephants in my life. The first time I was chased almost a mile across the Arizona desert by an African elephant.