The Implications of Biology in D&D

[Gentlegamer]

Monsters, IMO, should be fantastic. They shouldn't be consistent, since consistency breeds predictability.

I generally agree; however, the strongest (and reasonable) counter argument is that if monsters aren't at least somewhat "naturally biological" then the players cannot apply real world reason to interacting with them which can be problematic.

This tension is related to the literary criticism of the Balrog and Shelob vs. Orcs and Ents in Lord of the Rings; the former are pure monsters with no "ecology" to relate to, where the latter at least seem to conform to biological norms the players can relate to and base decisions on.

Sam, "Surely Orcs have to eat? They don't live on foul air and poison, do they Mr. Frodo?"
Frodo, "Yes, Orcs must eat just as we do, but such meats are not for us, Sam. We'll have to find other food in order to carry on."

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Insofar as a typical fantasy campaign doesn't typically span time such that evolution would become apparent, you are correct. However. as a DM trying to build a world, if I want it to be at least logically consistent, there's more work to do if I assume evolution is not present.

No matter what people believed in the past of our real world, the behavior of life (including human life) is and was molded by evolution. If I stipulate a world that lacks the drives of evolution, I probably need to reconsider a lot of those behaviors, and either change them, or give them a different justification.

For example, let us take a world in which there is no evolution: other than imparting the general species, the parents have little or no impact on the characteristics of the children.

This raises a huge question - why have children? In the real world, there is a drive to preserve one's own genes, but our fictional world lacks that. So, parents are investing huge amounts of time and effort in raising kids for what reason? They generally don't gain any benefit for doing so. So, would they not be better off as individuals if they didn't?

This goes deeper - Why are there families of living things that are so similar? Why does every living thing on the planet follow one of only a couple or reproductive models? Why is there biological reproduction at all? Why do creatures have a finite age, and need replacing on so regular a basis? Why aren't they just rising from the dust of the earth when populations get low?

Can these questions be answered? Yes. But the point is that I actually have to think about the answers, and their logical repercussions. Those have already been mapped out for me if I take evolution as my base assumption.

Personally I think the opposite. If there is evolution how do elves come about. In fact how do they survive and why did not the orcs win?

Now I can come up with answers to all of this also but D&D in its default settings or any published setting (that i have come across) does not survive this analysis. Neither do most fantasy novels that i have read either. If the evolution and ecology works there are issues with the economics or something else.

If you think hard enough about it you can pick holes in pretty much anything.

That aside, taking some of your points
If there is no evolution there are no inherited characteristics; not necessarily so. There can be inherited characteristics but man never becomes not-man or elf not-elf. I do not see why it follows that no evolution == no inherited characteristics.

The desire to have children is a separate from evolution. It is necessary for it to happen and it gets reinforced over time as organisms that are reluctant to have offspring tend to die out (which gets me back to elves - or at least some varieties) and we would not be having this discussion if our species was not inclined to reproduce.

However begetting offspring does not imply evolution. It could be that the world is a place where the gods now fight a proxy war after pulling back from total annihilation of everything in the Dawn War and have created these species to continue the struggle in a more contained fashion. If they all died out because they would not breed that would be damned inconvenient.

By the way in the old days children was you pension fund. If you had none then you outlook in the twilight of your years was pretty grim indeed.

The other thing I wonder is do your players actually examine your settings at this level for consistency? Is this a widespread phenomenon?



My own opinion is that the setting is the backdrop for the story that unfolds and just needs to be consistent enough for that. It is just I am really curious about the assertions made by some in this thread about requiring properly functioning ecologies and evolution in fantasy settings.

 

[Umbran]

Bad case of dmitis? You´re trying to answer questens that will as good as never be asked by players.

Maybe. That kind of depends on his players. My players - whenever they discover that something is specified, I can count on them to remember that spec, and use it, even when I've forgotten it as a quick one-off line.

Why, for example, is RW mytholocy often times more convoluted, way more fantastical and most of the times without any answers, whereas in a fantasy world, most dms feel obliged to have an near-scientific answer to anything.

Because our ancestors didn't interact with the mythology. Things could be wrong, illogical, and contradictory seven ways from Sunday, and nobody would know the difference. How a dwarf came into being didn't matter, because nobody interacted with any dwarves! Meanwhile, the PCs in my game do interact with dwarves. Some of them are dwarves. So I need answers to reasonable questions about dwarves, their society, religion, politics, and so on.

 

[Raven Crowking]

(1) While cultures have had domesticated dogs and cats for a very long time, and while some of those cultures also eat said dogs and cats, few (if any) cultures ranch dogs and cats on a large scale because of the economics involved.

(2) It doesn't matter what meat hippogriffs eat -- horses, human, or other -- one still has to supply that meat. The more hippogriffs one has, the more meat one must supply. Again, this is economics.



RC

 

[Umbran]

(2) It doesn't matter what meat hippogriffs eat -- horses, human, or other -- one still has to supply that meat. The more hippogriffs one has, the more meat one must supply. Again, this is economics.

Yes, and to tie two disparate threads together - now it matters whether dwarves can be carved out of stone or not. Getting 200 lbs of hippogriff feed from as much rock might be more economical than other available methods

 

[catsclaw227]

Yes, and to tie two disparate threads together - now it matters whether dwarves can be carved out of stone or not. Getting 200 lbs of hippogriff feed from as much rock might be more economical than other available methods

Who knew dwarves were so important to maintaining air superiority? Just remember not to name them, because then you'd have to keep it like a pet.

 

[Maldin]

You´re trying to answer questens that will as good as never be asked by players.

But that is part of MY fun as DM. Much of the "Really Big Picture" that I develop for my campaign will never be discovered by the players.

few (if any) cultures ranch dogs and cats on a large scale because of the economics involved.

That is more a function of canid and felid ecology, then anything else. Hence the derivation of the phrase "its like herding cats".
Although, if the incentive is high enough, ecology can be overcome and it can be done on a small scale (hence "fox farms" for the fur industry). But as you've stated already, supplying food for a large number of (top of the food-chain) carnivores is alot more difficult then for a large number of (bottom of the food chain) herbivores.

Denis, aka "Maldin"
Maldin's Greyhawk Maldin's Greyhawk

 

[Scribble]

Too bad these chia-dwarfs don't fly... Then we could kill two threads with one stone... HAH! Get it??? One stone!!!! Get it?!?!?! HAH!!!!

 

[LostSoul]

(2) It doesn't matter what meat hippogriffs eat -- horses, human, or other -- one still has to supply that meat. The more hippogriffs one has, the more meat one must supply. Again, this is economics.

Troll meat would seem to be readily available...

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Troll meat would seem to be readily available...

Is stomach acid sufficient to dissolve troll meat because have a troll regenerate inside one could lead to a very upset tummy.