LuYangShih
First Post
After reading the thread about Elven lifespans and experience here in the General RPG forums, I've decided to start another thread so that the topic isn't completely hijacked. The question is, what race, in a standard fantasy world, should rule the world, or at least the largest portion of it? Usually, Humans retain the highest position, and for good reason, but should other races conquer or hold a more significant portion of most worlds?
I figure the main contenders would be the races from the PHB, and the most common Humanoids, like Orcs and Goblins. Below is a list of advantages and disadvantages three of the races have, in my opinion. Remember this is just my point of view on the subject. This is how I see it:
Humans:
Advantages:
1. A high standing population and high birthrate makes Humans very common. They have relatively short lifespans, but long enough to master most professions and retain a semblance of organization among their communities.
2. Very adaptable. With the bonus feat and bonus skillpoints, they can probably survive well in almost any terrain and/or situation, with the exception of underground communities, thanks to the lack of even Low Light Vision. This high level of adaptibility extends to what classes they can choose, and Human populations would likely have an even distribution of Wizards, Clerics, Fighters, and so on.
Disadvantages:
None, really. The Humans seem to lack any major weaknesses that could be easily exploited by other races.
All in all:
Humans really seem to be the best world conquerers in many ways. With a base alignment of Neutral, it would be simple to sway and control large groups of Humans, which is perfect for an army of conquest. All the Humans really need is a leader, and they can field massive armies, that can be replaced quickly, and in addition have unparallelled versatility, allowing them to adapt to any situation or battle. The main disadvantage the Humans have is the lack of ability in an underground struggle, but I suppose that's why you see so few Human underground Empires.
Elves:
Advantages:
1. A long lifespan means Elves would theoretically have more experience and knowledge than the shorter lived races. They would also have more time to wage a long, protracted war, and probably wouldn't mind enacting a siege that lasted a decade or longer.
2. With the favored class of Wizard, Elves would have more arcane spellcasters to call upon in times of war, meaning they could create magical protections, move quickly over vast terrain, and execute fast hit and run attacks better than the other races.
Disadvantages:
1. While the Elves do have a long lifespan, they also have a lower standing population and birthrate than almost any other races in most standard campaign worlds. This means that every loss an Elven force takes hurts, and will take a long time to replace. This severely hampers the Elves ability to take and hold territory, as well, since occupation forces are required to keep hostile lands in check for a few years.
2. With a standard alignment of Chaotic Good, the Elves will be unlikely to do well in an organized conquest of other lands. The Elves seem to be designed much better for defense or quick raids on the enemy, rather than a war of conquest.
3. With a low Constitution, and likely less classed Warrior types, thanks to the favored class of Wizard, the Elves would doubtlessly be butchered in open conflict against other races standing armies. They are too frail, and lack the base fighting forces that would be needed to face another such army on the field.
All in all:
The Elves don't really seem like the world conquering types. They would do far better simply defending their own territories, and keeping the other races out. With centuries of time, they could easily devise defenses and magical protections that would be nigh impossible to break through without massive cost.
I could see an Elven Empire developing only if they had allies that could compensate for their lack of occupation forces and ground troops. The Elves do make excellent information gatherers, as well as raiders, so they would be an excellent complement to an actual invading army, but by themselves, they seem to lack the organization, manpower and skills that make up a succesful conquering army.
Dwarves:
Advantages:
1. A high lifespan, a medium sized population and medium sized birthrate make the Dwarves almost perfect for conquering nations. While losses hurt, they are not crippling like in the Elven armies. Thanks to the higher lifespan, they would also have the endurance and patience to see a long term war through to the end, unlike the Humans.
2. The Dwarves are rivaled only by the Humans in sheer bonuses available, and unlike the Humans, all of the Dwarves share the same bonuses. Those include a bonus when fighting Giant types, a bonus against Orcs, Stonecunning, and the bonus to saves.
This means the Dwarves will be more effecient fighters against Giants and Orcs than most armies, they will be able to build better fortresses and fortifications, and they will be able to contend with magic using enemies better than most others as well. They also have Darkvision, which means they operate almost as well in the underground as they do on the surface. Practically perfect for waging war.
3. The Dwarves have fantastic statistic adjustments for waging war. A bonus to Constitution is perfect, making their troops tougher and stronger, both in and out of combat. Dwarves could more easily make forced marches than almost any other race, and their troops are more likely to survive the battle as well.
4. With a general alignment of LG, Dwarves are naturally well organized, and would be easy to mold into an effecient army.
5. Finally, with a preferred class of Fighter, the Dwarves gain another advantage. Almost no other class is better for pure warfare, and with the high Constitution and other bonus abilities, Dwarven ground troops would be almost unstoppable.
Disadvantages:
1. Only one real disadvantage, in my mind. The Dwarves have a move speed of 20', which means they advance slower, retreat slower, and reinforce slower than the other races, in most cases. I think this is easily outweighed by the benefits they possess, but it is a stumbling block that could be capitalized on by the Dwarves enemies.
All in all:
Personally, I think if any race other than the Humans was going to rule the world, or the largest portion of it, it would be the Dwarves. They are well organized, have enough forces to occupy territory, have the patience to see through a large, long term conquest, and have almost perfect statistical adjustments for waging war and holding territory.
Anyway, that's just my opinion on the matter, but I really want to see what other people think. After all, that's only three races, and there are plenty of other approaches the three I listed above could take that I did not list.
I figure the main contenders would be the races from the PHB, and the most common Humanoids, like Orcs and Goblins. Below is a list of advantages and disadvantages three of the races have, in my opinion. Remember this is just my point of view on the subject. This is how I see it:
Humans:
Advantages:
1. A high standing population and high birthrate makes Humans very common. They have relatively short lifespans, but long enough to master most professions and retain a semblance of organization among their communities.
2. Very adaptable. With the bonus feat and bonus skillpoints, they can probably survive well in almost any terrain and/or situation, with the exception of underground communities, thanks to the lack of even Low Light Vision. This high level of adaptibility extends to what classes they can choose, and Human populations would likely have an even distribution of Wizards, Clerics, Fighters, and so on.
Disadvantages:
None, really. The Humans seem to lack any major weaknesses that could be easily exploited by other races.
All in all:
Humans really seem to be the best world conquerers in many ways. With a base alignment of Neutral, it would be simple to sway and control large groups of Humans, which is perfect for an army of conquest. All the Humans really need is a leader, and they can field massive armies, that can be replaced quickly, and in addition have unparallelled versatility, allowing them to adapt to any situation or battle. The main disadvantage the Humans have is the lack of ability in an underground struggle, but I suppose that's why you see so few Human underground Empires.
Elves:
Advantages:
1. A long lifespan means Elves would theoretically have more experience and knowledge than the shorter lived races. They would also have more time to wage a long, protracted war, and probably wouldn't mind enacting a siege that lasted a decade or longer.
2. With the favored class of Wizard, Elves would have more arcane spellcasters to call upon in times of war, meaning they could create magical protections, move quickly over vast terrain, and execute fast hit and run attacks better than the other races.
Disadvantages:
1. While the Elves do have a long lifespan, they also have a lower standing population and birthrate than almost any other races in most standard campaign worlds. This means that every loss an Elven force takes hurts, and will take a long time to replace. This severely hampers the Elves ability to take and hold territory, as well, since occupation forces are required to keep hostile lands in check for a few years.
2. With a standard alignment of Chaotic Good, the Elves will be unlikely to do well in an organized conquest of other lands. The Elves seem to be designed much better for defense or quick raids on the enemy, rather than a war of conquest.
3. With a low Constitution, and likely less classed Warrior types, thanks to the favored class of Wizard, the Elves would doubtlessly be butchered in open conflict against other races standing armies. They are too frail, and lack the base fighting forces that would be needed to face another such army on the field.
All in all:
The Elves don't really seem like the world conquering types. They would do far better simply defending their own territories, and keeping the other races out. With centuries of time, they could easily devise defenses and magical protections that would be nigh impossible to break through without massive cost.
I could see an Elven Empire developing only if they had allies that could compensate for their lack of occupation forces and ground troops. The Elves do make excellent information gatherers, as well as raiders, so they would be an excellent complement to an actual invading army, but by themselves, they seem to lack the organization, manpower and skills that make up a succesful conquering army.
Dwarves:
Advantages:
1. A high lifespan, a medium sized population and medium sized birthrate make the Dwarves almost perfect for conquering nations. While losses hurt, they are not crippling like in the Elven armies. Thanks to the higher lifespan, they would also have the endurance and patience to see a long term war through to the end, unlike the Humans.
2. The Dwarves are rivaled only by the Humans in sheer bonuses available, and unlike the Humans, all of the Dwarves share the same bonuses. Those include a bonus when fighting Giant types, a bonus against Orcs, Stonecunning, and the bonus to saves.
This means the Dwarves will be more effecient fighters against Giants and Orcs than most armies, they will be able to build better fortresses and fortifications, and they will be able to contend with magic using enemies better than most others as well. They also have Darkvision, which means they operate almost as well in the underground as they do on the surface. Practically perfect for waging war.
3. The Dwarves have fantastic statistic adjustments for waging war. A bonus to Constitution is perfect, making their troops tougher and stronger, both in and out of combat. Dwarves could more easily make forced marches than almost any other race, and their troops are more likely to survive the battle as well.
4. With a general alignment of LG, Dwarves are naturally well organized, and would be easy to mold into an effecient army.
5. Finally, with a preferred class of Fighter, the Dwarves gain another advantage. Almost no other class is better for pure warfare, and with the high Constitution and other bonus abilities, Dwarven ground troops would be almost unstoppable.
Disadvantages:
1. Only one real disadvantage, in my mind. The Dwarves have a move speed of 20', which means they advance slower, retreat slower, and reinforce slower than the other races, in most cases. I think this is easily outweighed by the benefits they possess, but it is a stumbling block that could be capitalized on by the Dwarves enemies.
All in all:
Personally, I think if any race other than the Humans was going to rule the world, or the largest portion of it, it would be the Dwarves. They are well organized, have enough forces to occupy territory, have the patience to see through a large, long term conquest, and have almost perfect statistical adjustments for waging war and holding territory.
Anyway, that's just my opinion on the matter, but I really want to see what other people think. After all, that's only three races, and there are plenty of other approaches the three I listed above could take that I did not list.
