The problem with elves take 2: A severe condemnation [merged]

[GrumpyOldMan]

Hmm

What a remarkably strange thread.

Not until *you* tell *me* why elves are not doomed, and not inferior.
Not until you explain to me how elves could be triumphant, could be winners, could rule the setting as humans so often do.
And all the while, remain distinctly elven (and you may define what elven *is*)

You say all these campaigns exist in which elves flourish. Very well. *Why* do the elves flourish in those campaigns?

Do not say: because the DM says so. It is a given that things go the way the DM wants, regardless of logic or illogic or rules or whatever.
Give me the logical - or in game, in character, in campaign, whatever - reasons the elves flourish in all those campaigns. And nevermind the DM!

I don’t understand.
First, dozens of people on this thread have given you their reasons why elves could/would flourish. You seem to have ignored them all, so far.
Second, many of your rules based arguments could apply equally to humans.
Anyway, in order to make it necessary for people to justify their positions surely you should first provide proof from the rules that elves would not flourish. I can’t find anywhere that you’ve successfully done this.
However, here's a simple answer.
They flourish because they are specialists in surviving in the regions they inhabit, like the steppe nomads, or the bedouin, or the Inuit or... (need I go on?)

 

[gizmo33]

I fully agree with the original text. As written elves would not survive in any D&D world except because of ther Lotr image of perfect beings which leads to that writers and many DMs simply say that the elves are somehow powerfull and survive despite being against any logic.

Most author's description of human societies is insufficient to prove that such societies would survive. It's simpler to assume that the details are there. The problem with the reasoning in the OP is that it appears not to even grasp the reason that real world societies exist, or the factors that make them successful, much less account for all additional factors that are possible within a fantasy world.

The biggest problem for elves are the low birth rate (which is coupled with the long life span) and their choice of terrain and nature loving society.
The first means that elves would be destroyed through attrition.

No, it actually doesn't mean that. Humans have a lower birthrate compared to mice - so obviously that fact alone is insufficient. I find the other facts that you assume in this argument to be insufficient or incorrect even for Earth, much less all possible fantasy worlds and an imaginary race like elves.

By the time a orc tribe has breed warriors, trained and equipped armor to wage war on elves, the elves have not ever recovered from the previous war yet. So slowly the elves would be overrun by shorter living races.

Orcs could be so busy eating each other and fighting for status that they'd never have time to make swords, much less put together a raiding expedition into an alien environment. You assume the most optimal political and social conditions for orcs, while doing the opposite for elves, and then somehow claim the results to be based on "logic"?

The second means that elves lack many important ressources. Ore, gold, diamonds and many other exotic materials required for spellcasting (favored class wizard, remember?) Having a lot of wizards is very expensive (money and material). That has to come from somewhere.

Even on planet Earth, in places where you can find gold and diamonds elves would do ok. Once you get to a fantasy environment, then the possible resources that elves have available to them are limitless.

And as the OP said, elves have no special abilities to compensate. They are not exceptional wizards or super forest fighters.

This is completely baseless, there's no demographic information that has been established for elves AFAICT. It's possible that all the elves in someone's campaign world are 10th level wizards. Your assuming differences in human culture are due to some biological attributes? What role does culture and society play in any particular group, like elves, being good at magic? And could that role be far more important than a +2 intelligence bonus?

 

[Derren]

Two points:
1. Where in the rules does it say that elves' birth rates are low? Page numbers please.
2. When high birth rate societies come into conflict with low birth rate societies in the real world, what tends to happen? Today, the most powerful nations on earth have amongst the lowest birth rates: Russia, China, the US, the UK, France, Japan and Germany whereas the poorest and least powerful nations have some of the highest birth rates.

1. Simple logical conclusion. Elves are humanoid and thus would follow the humanoid reproduction cycle which means single children, not to mention the time needed to raise children. That does limit the number of children they can have and the slow growth till maturity does the rest.
2. In the real world those nations tend to have a very big technological advantage, an advantage the elves do not have in D&D. Elven swords are in no way better than orc swords (or not so much better as to give them a big advantage).

1. Where do the rules say that elvish forests lack resources?
2. Even if I accepted that elvish forests lacked resources, which I do not, let's examine the rates of diamond ownership in diamond-producing societies versus the rates of diamond ownership in wealthy trading nations that produce no diamonds. What you will find is that when it comes to rare, specialized commodities, (a) no society produces all of these or even most of them (b) end-users acquire them through trade not extraction.

1. Does it say somewhere that in D&D there are trees which grow coal and iron? No? Then answer me how a D&D forest should contain more ressources than real world forests. Especially as elves do apparently not harm the enviroment its impossible for them to gather ore and many other ressources in a forest.
2. And what would the elves trade for the diamonds, not to mention all the other ressources they need? Meat, hides and wood? That are rather cheap ressources and could not support the import of large amounts of expensive ressources + generat enough additional income to finance a big wizard training program.

Huh? If they had shorter lifespans, wouldn't their reproductive rate go even lower!? If it takes elves a 700-year reproductive life to produce the number of children they do, wouldn't they produce even fewer if you chopped the length of that reproductive life?So, is the plan here just to say something over and over again with no supporting evidence whatsoever or is somebody going to be produce a statement in the RAW about elvish birth rates?

A lower total life span would mean that elves would mature faster so they could start to raise children themself much faster than they could now and that is the important thing.
And if you want raw sources, in 2 Ed. the elves had a 2 year gestation period.

No, it actually doesn't mean that. Humans have a lower birthrate compared to mice - so obviously that fact alone is insufficient. I find the other facts that you assume in this argument to be insufficient or incorrect even for Earth, much less all possible fantasy worlds and an imaginary race like elves.

SHould I really take this serious? You really want to compare mice with orcs? When mice would learn how to use assault rifles, rocket launchers and tanks then we humans would have some very big problems.
Orcs are no animals without ambitions and sentience. They are much more dangerous then a normal mouse and so it is a big problem when orcs produce much faster than you.

Orcs could be so busy eating each other and fighting for status that they'd never have time to make swords, much less put together a raiding expedition into an alien environment. You assume the most optimal political and social conditions for orcs, while doing the opposite for elves, and then somehow claim the results to be based on "logic"?

Have you forgotten that since Corellon wounded Gruumsh, elves and orcs are mortal enemies? Thinking that orcs would not attack elves is quite naive and unlogical.

Even on planet Earth, in places where you can find gold and diamonds elves would do ok. Once you get to a fantasy environment, then the possible resources that elves have available to them are limitless.

Limitless? How. Examples please. And also provide examples in which places elves would be able to get large quantities of diamonds, gold and iron without destroying the environment. Simply arguing "Its fantasy so somehow its probably possible" does not cut it. Provide examples.

This is completely baseless, there's no demographic information that has been established for elves AFAICT. It's possible that all the elves in someone's campaign world are 10th level wizards. Your assuming differences in human culture are due to some biological attributes? What role does culture and society play in any particular group, like elves, being good at magic? And could that role be far more important than a +2 intelligence bonus?

D&D has a standard demographic for all PHB races which say that 95% of the population are commoners. Likewise the city builder tables do not give elves any level advantage compared to other races. And elves do not have any bonuses for casting magic or hiding in forests.
And funny that you mention an intelligence bonus because the elves do not have any. That alone prevents them from being much better wizards than other races as the number of wizards is limited by the number of exceptional individuals with higher than normal Int and coupled with the low elven birthrate that would be quite a small number.

They flourish because they are specialists in surviving in the regions they inhabit, like the steppe nomads, or the bedouin, or the Inuit or... (need I go on?)

Where do you get this from? Elves do not have any forest related abilities. They are not more suited for a live in a forest than humans or orcs are.

 

[Slife]

Limitless? How. Examples please. And also provide examples in which places elves would be able to get large quantities of diamonds, gold and iron without destroying the environment. Simply arguing "Its fantasy so somehow its probably possible" does not cut it. Provide examples.

Gemstones tend to collect near treeroots. Selling gemstones like, garnets, corundum, and quartz is certainly possible.

Gold panning doesn't disrupt the environment at all.


Does coal have great intrinsic value? I don't really think so, so casting polymorph any object on either sticks (if you decide to classify coal as vegetable matter) or rocks to coal would work.

 

[Banshee16]

Again, the Terran nation in question has such weaponry at it's disposal, that it can destroy the entire world. This is true of one of the other great nations of that world. It may be true of several more. What meaning does birth rate have, when one can easily destroy the entire world?

Correction...said nation, and in fact, all nations together, have enough weaponry at their disposal to make our current civilization impossible to support, for a period of years......but not to destroy the entire world...only human civilization. Possibly some humans might survive in remote pockets of the world. At the very least, cockroaches, and other non-human life would likely survive.

Our planet has survived impacts from celestial objects that caused more destruction than detonating every bomb on the planet at once, and I believe the worst incident left about 7% of species to survive, and repopulate the world.

I'm not advocating those kinds of weapons, obviously...just clarifying that we're unlikely to physically explode the ball of rock that we call Earth.

Banshee

 

[Derren]

Gemstones won't earn you enough money to buy yourslef military grade materials. The yield of fold panning is very low compared to direct mining.

Using a 8th level spell to create coal is quite excessive especially as the coal wouldn't burn very well because as soon it gets burned (destroyed) it would revert back as the duration is permanent and not instant. The spell also requires Mercury which isn't to my knowledge commonly found in forests.

 

[Banshee16]

Are you conceding, then, that 1E and 2E elves are doomed, as I have debated, then?
Interesting, your point - what goes for those elves *does* go for all the other demi-human races. Perhaps even more so, than for elves (consider the poor halflings ...) So if the elves are doomed, ditto dwarves, gnomes, and halflings.
However, that's a different discussion, for a different thread. Too many variables (dwarves, for example, live underground) and this discussion is complicated enough.

I still don't think this can be conceded, because you're picking and choosing which facts you'll accept based on whether or not they support the picture you're trying to paint. It's not a valid means of discussion, because you're making your entire argument non-falsifiable.

You can't draw negatives that support your contention that elves are doomed from the same sources that also have several positive factors that explain why they're not doomed.

You reference the Arcane Age series, which is FR-specific, 2nd Ed. specific, and is entirely based on the application of elements and concepts from the Complete Book of Elves to the Forgotten Realms setting. That book covered things like 2 year elven pregnancies and very slow maturation rates, while it *also* covered things like Reverie, Manifestation, elven healing and resistance to diseases....factors which would drastically increase their ability to survive for the long periods of time indicated by their lifespans.

You can't use one piece of info from the books, without using the rest.

The idea of a 2 year pregnancy is kind of silly anyways....at least for a human sized creature. Humans give birth to incomplete children, with brains that are not fully developed, and which are completely dependent upon their parent, because the birth channel of a woman's pelvis isn't wide enough to pass the head of a child that is much older than 9 months. It really has nothing to do with lifespan, and has everything to do with brain size. Given that elves don't have an INT bonus, and don't have a larger brain, their gestation is actually likely to be pretty much similar to that of humans. In fact, I'd figure that since they're pretty much universally described as slender, and not having voluptuous builds in their females, they might need even *shorter* gestation periods, because the females have narrower hips. Of course, this is applying logic to a fantasy race....I'm really just adding it to the discussion as a matter of interest.

If you want to go with simply the core books, even in 2nd Ed. you *can* establish that they have level limits....though even the DMG allowed those to be bypassed if the elf paid twice the XP required for each level (option rule, DMG, 2nd Ed.). But as of the PHB, nothing said that they could only have 2 children per hundred years, or that it takes X amount of time to raise them. In fact, in 2nd Ed. there is precedent for the fact that elves are adult (physically and mentally) far before 100+5d6 years. Laurana and Gilthanas were both adults, though likely equivalent of 17-19 year old humans, when they were aged around 60-80. And there was no discussion of how long they'd been physically/mentally adult....so they could have been like that for 40 years for all we know. All that was really defined is that sociologically, as accepted within their civilization, they weren't considered adults under the law until 100 or so. However, even in RL, in many areas, children aren't considered adults until 18 or 21, though physically and mentally, they're probably ready around 17.

Banshee

 

[Banshee16]

2. And what would the elves trade for the diamonds, not to mention all the other ressources they need? Meat, hides and wood? That are rather cheap ressources and could not support the import of large amounts of expensive ressources + generat enough additional income to finance a big wizard training program.

The supply of meat, hides, and wood, was one of the primary economic motivators behind the colonization of North America (especially Canada).

In a pre-industrial world, they had *immense* value, because they were so much more scarce in Europe, in some cases.

Why would it be any different in a D&D world?

Banshee

 

[Sejs]

Not until *you* tell *me* why elves are not doomed, and not inferior.
Not until you explain to me how elves could be triumphant, could be winners, could rule the setting as humans so often do.
And all the while, remain distinctly elven (and you may define what elven *is*)

You say all these campaigns exist in which elves flourish. Very well. *Why* do the elves flourish in those campaigns?

Do not say: because the DM says so. It is a given that things go the way the DM wants, regardless of logic or illogic or rules or whatever.
Give me the logical - or in game, in character, in campaign, whatever - reasons the elves flourish in all those campaigns. And nevermind the DM!

This whole exercise just feels like it's going to be whipped around, turned on its head, and used as proof positive, aha-you-said-it-yourself, that elves are fully justified as being the sublime perfect and eternal masters of all.

The harder you push back the less inclined we get try to convince you.

 

[fusangite]

Gemstones won't earn you enough money to buy yourslef military grade materials.

Really? Because I'm looking at page 55 of the DMG right now and it says you're dead wrong.

Using a 8th level spell to create coal is quite excessive especially as the coal wouldn't burn very well because as soon it gets burned (destroyed) it would revert back as the duration is permanent and not instant.

Why would anybody use coal for anything. It's not the industrial revolution. Medieval and ancient industry was powered by charcoal, not coal, a resource it is going to be very tough for you to argue the elves are short of.

1. Where in the rules does it say that elves' birth rates are low? Page numbers please.

1. Simple logical conclusion. Elves are humanoid and thus would follow the humanoid reproduction cycle which means single children, not to mention the time needed to raise children. That does limit the number of children they can have and the slow growth till maturity does the rest.

Huh? You have just argued that humanoids all have equally low birth rates. Now, if you want to argue that all humanoids are doomed, that's great. But that would be a different position than Edena's.

2. In the real world those nations tend to have a very big technological advantage, an advantage the elves do not have in D&D. Elven swords are in no way better than orc swords (or not so much better as to give them a big advantage).

Believe it or not, most of the weapons used to win wars could be made by any society provided it had the capacity to train soldiers in their use and either the money to buy them or the manufacturing capacity to make them. As Iran and North Korea have demonstrated, the capacity to build even the most sophisticated and deadly military devices exists in all nations; it is just a question of whether you have the economic power, labour discipline and education required to produce them on a scale necessary to win.

But this is beside the point. The mechanics of item creation feats clearly demonstrate that the average elvish wizard can produce far more magic items in his life than a human wizard can because the length of time needed to create items is the same regardless of the life expectancy of a wizard. Thus, when an elf is educated to do a highly specialized job, this education pays off to a much greater degree because the working life of the elf is so much longer even though the training time and costs are the same or lower.

1. Does it say somewhere that in D&D there are trees which grow coal and iron?

I have to go now but, before I resume later, I just have to ask: why is the belief that elves are doomed packaged with the erroneous belief that pre-moderns used coal?