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="fusangite" data-source="post: 1907685" data-attributes="member: 7240">Tonguez,I think you need to clarify a few things before I can comment on your model:(a) what aspects of a creature are capable of adapting (ie. changing) physically, mentally and socially? (Socially is an important question because of the way chaotic alignments seem to function as a disability under the system.)(b) are creatures created by the god(s) they worship or is the creation of species done by particular gods with responsibility for more than one species?(c) if survival factors are contingent upon the environment, aren't gods of particular plants or animals going to have a kind of secondary jurisdiction over the survival of creatures that depend on them?(d) do the deities of non-sentient life recognize the life forms they patronize as lower in the hierarchy than sentient creatures?(e) if different creator gods have different agendas, how is their relative success determined?In Aristotelian physics, the system I apply most frequently to fill gaps in natural philosophy that the rules do not, there is no environmental adaptation. Because there is one god who favours humankind in a sacred natural order, the production of a particular ecological feature like the Nile River is predetermined based on the anticipated needs of the creatures dependent upon it. Because every object has a purpose, what the object does is comprehended in terms of fulfillment of said purpose. Now this can be adapted (indeed was designed for) a hierarchical polytheistic system -- but it doesn't work for a polytheistic system without a clear order of precedence. If there is no single universal order, this physics does not work. If you substitute an essentially ecological order, which you seem to be proposing, there is a real problem: not only must the humans make sense ecologically, the whole D&D system must make sense ecologically. Why would kobolds continue to exist? They are not as well-designed as goblins and hobgoblins and occupy the same ecological niche. Now, if there is a divine order in which kobolds are supposed to live and the created world actively facilitates this, that is one thing but if creation is just a big design competition amongst the gods, why don't some gods just lose?It seems to me that the only way to make your system work is to consign kobolds to some Galapagos-esque environment where there are no other subterranean monstrous humanoids competing to occupy the same niche. So, my first reaction to your idea is yes, it could work but in a widely dispersed low-magic, low-tech archipelago. I see that you essentially acknowledge that in your proposal when it comes to elven sub-races but this is when you suggest a species adapted to multiple niches; a very different problem arises when you have multiple species adapted to a single niche.</blockquote>

Verification