D&D General Humanoids...and world demographics


log in or register to remove this ad


I'd say for my homebrew its 75-90% human.

Elves, Dwarves and Goblinoids (Goblin, Hobgoblin, Bugbear, Orc, Gnoll) are the next biggest groups, I'd say between 3%-5% each.

Lesser humanoids from there would be Animalfolk, Halflings, Lizardfolk, Dragonborn and Gnomes at 1% each or less.

Humanoids beyond that comprise probably less than 1%.

But, when it comes to PCs, it's probably 10% human and 90% everything else.
 



I hate having actual numbers, too limiting. I always like the old quote which I'll paraphrase here: "there are always exactly enough elves left for them to matter, but still be a dying race."
I do something similar rather than defining actual numbers. On rare occasions it somewhat matters like when I ran a mass battle for my group, but actual demographic information I like to use a system taken from Matt Colville and define how likely you are to meet a certain race. He used the following descriptions:

Dominant. Can be found anywhere in any district of the steading, basically runs the steading.
Minority. Can also be found in any district of the steading but they have less political power.
Enclave. Can be found in a single district/neighbourhood and tend to stick there. Individuals might be found outside the district but if you want to speak to them, you go to where they tend to stay.
Group. Really small perhaps fewer than 12. A delegation from a nation might be a group.
Individuals. You might find these throughout the steading but you don't necessarily find them in large groups. They are not part of any native subculture.
Singular. Literally only a single creature such as a single beholder leading a thieves guild.

My small town of Draven's Watch is like the following.
Dominant. Humans (It's a human settlement)
Minority. Dwarves (Many dwarves hired as miners)
Individuals. Half-elves, halflings, elves, half-orcs
Singular. Genasi (Old Man MacGuffin is an Air Genasi), Dragonborn (Caliban Stormclash), orc

Towards the end of the campaign arc, orcs probably would have gone from singular (wife of a farmer) to individuals (alliance with the local orc tribe in fighting off an invasion force).
 

I do something similar rather than defining actual numbers. On rare occasions it somewhat matters like when I ran a mass battle for my group, but actual demographic information I like to use a system taken from Matt Colville and define how likely you are to meet a certain race. He used the following descriptions:

Dominant. Can be found anywhere in any district of the steading, basically runs the steading.
Minority. Can also be found in any district of the steading but they have less political power.
Enclave. Can be found in a single district/neighbourhood and tend to stick there. Individuals might be found outside the district but if you want to speak to them, you go to where they tend to stay.
Group. Really small perhaps fewer than 12. A delegation from a nation might be a group.
Individuals. You might find these throughout the steading but you don't necessarily find them in large groups. They are not part of any native subculture.
Singular. Literally only a single creature such as a single beholder leading a thieves guild.

My small town of Draven's Watch is like the following.
Dominant. Humans (It's a human settlement)
Minority. Dwarves (Many dwarves hired as miners)
Individuals. Half-elves, halflings, elves, half-orcs
Singular. Genasi (Old Man MacGuffin is an Air Genasi), Dragonborn (Caliban Stormclash), orc

Towards the end of the campaign arc, orcs probably would have gone from singular (wife of a farmer) to individuals (alliance with the local orc tribe in fighting off an invasion force).
Good way to break it down. Definitely will use this
 

This seems to be the way of things nowadays. Between four games I'm playing in or DMing there are two humans.
I cannot remember last time I played a human. My father always plays one and my brother is 50/50. Last one in my group is my son who I cannot recall playing any humans except his first character when he was like 8 years old.
 

I do something similar rather than defining actual numbers. On rare occasions it somewhat matters like when I ran a mass battle for my group, but actual demographic information I like to use a system taken from Matt Colville and define how likely you are to meet a certain race. He used the following descriptions:

Dominant. Can be found anywhere in any district of the steading, basically runs the steading.
Minority. Can also be found in any district of the steading but they have less political power.
Enclave. Can be found in a single district/neighbourhood and tend to stick there. Individuals might be found outside the district but if you want to speak to them, you go to where they tend to stay.
Group. Really small perhaps fewer than 12. A delegation from a nation might be a group.
Individuals. You might find these throughout the steading but you don't necessarily find them in large groups. They are not part of any native subculture.
Singular. Literally only a single creature such as a single beholder leading a thieves guild.

My small town of Draven's Watch is like the following.
Dominant. Humans (It's a human settlement)
Minority. Dwarves (Many dwarves hired as miners)
Individuals. Half-elves, halflings, elves, half-orcs
Singular. Genasi (Old Man MacGuffin is an Air Genasi), Dragonborn (Caliban Stormclash), orc

Towards the end of the campaign arc, orcs probably would have gone from singular (wife of a farmer) to individuals (alliance with the local orc tribe in fighting off an invasion force).
Good way to break it down. Definitely will use this
Ditto. I can see this as a useful way in a city/town write-up. You could (if you want) even include estimated population size, for example, 15000 or something and then not worry too much about specific beyond that.

Nice concept.
 

Demography is dangerous, because it leads straight into economics, and that way madness lies.

In the classical period, 90% of the population were farmers: so, to balance your fantasy-Rome of a million inhabitants, now you need nine million peasants involved in feeding it. If you have an orc army besieging the provinces, or a magical plague leaping between villages, then for every nine hundred anonymous farmers that you wipe out for the sake of spectacle, you're also going to lose a hundred dwarven weaponsmiths, noble courtiers, and other notables back in the metropolis. By the medieval period agriculture is better (with only maybe 60% of the population required as farmers), but that still means almost twice as many people growing crops as support to allow specialized labor like blacksmiths, enchanters, hirelings, and other colorful NPCs.

Now, you might say, I don't actually need that many farmers; we have magic! But then your population is going to rise precipitously to match the food supply, and disease will rise with those numbers. What, you have magic for medical care, too? Okay, but now you'll have vast numbers of urban poor (as happened in Rome, too, when slaves "magically" reduced labor needs), who don't have the education or resources to be anything other than a subsistence farmer. Once you start implementing standardized, state-based education, based on popular taxation, to produce legions of workers fit for manufacturing or other middle-class professions, you don't have anything that looks very medieval any more.

It's an awfully dangerous rabbit hole. It must be that critter from Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
 

Trending content

Remove ads

Top