Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mal Malenkirk" data-source="post: 4145549" data-attributes="member: 834">Because the big, bad, evil things isn't a monolithic empire and because the settlement's defense are good enough to turn away raiders.From the point of view of gnolls, humans are no more an intrinsically tempting target than hobgoblins, orcs or kobolds.  They're raiders and they'll attack the most vulnerable communities they can find and avoid the walled ones or those within strinking distance of an armed force.  If humans are strong enough not to be the most tempting target, than the 'Monsters' will remember that just because they are in the 'Monster Manual' doesn't mean they can only make a living by attacking PC races.If you are going to play PoL theory to the hilt, than no, Hamlets make no sense.  You'd get city states and small village villages and reinforced farms (built for three or more families) within striking distance of the states armed forces.  Sometime you'll get villages and farms built justa bit too far from the city state by daring souls.  It's human nature to try.   But inevitably these will be razed or they will successfully force/convince the city state to build nearby forts to extend the reach of its armed force.  Statu quo is impossible.Of course, you can play with less rampaging monsters in the countryside.  But if you assume that there are really roving band of giants and gnolls, that orc barbarians try to push back civilization, that wild drakes dive on lone humans just like hawks dive on rabbits...  Then no.  No hamlets.</blockquote>

Verification