Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ComradeGnull" data-source="post: 5988184" data-attributes="member: 6685694">Not sure how to get real numbers, but I can think of some relative population considerations.I think there are a couple things to consider:1) how good is the race at question at growing, hunting, or gathering food?2) how fertile is the land they occupy?3) What is their breeding/replacement rate?So Elves, for instance, have good sustainable agricultural techniques, but probably occupy forests that are better at growing berries and nuts than large-scale crops.  They also have a relatively low breeding/replacement rate.Humans are everywhere, have middling agriculture techniques, but a fast replacement rate.  Just by virtue of the range of types of land they occupy, their population could be quite high.Dwarves occupy poor land (mountains, caves, etc.), have a low breeding rate, and probably get a crop yield that is about equal with humans, for a lower overall population.Goblins occupy crappy land, have no agricultural techniques to speak of, but have very high breeding and replacement rates.  Since they are small and can eat nearly anything, however, anywhere where a more civilized race lives they can take a cut, as well as occupying wastelands that nearly no one else would live in.  As with humans, the pure range of terrain they can occupy gives them pretty big numbers.Hobgoblins are probably rarer than goblins, but still pretty numerous- they need more food to survive because they are human-sized, but rely primarily on raiding and slaves for food.  They are organized, however, which gives them an edge.Kobolds occupy the same ecological niche as goblins as near as I can tell.  Competition between the two would probably be the limiting factor- in places where goblins have hobgoblin, bugbear, or ogre allies to fight for them, kobolds are a minority.  In places where kobolds have hitched their wagon to a dragon's lair or something, the kobolds are top dog (-faced lizardman).  Kobolds might do some small-scale cultivation of myconids or other subterranean food stuffs.Orcs are very similar to hobgoblins, but more poorly organized.  I would expect that in any area where both species lived, hobgoblins would outnumber orcs.  This makes orcish hordes hard to raise, but you could situate them in a very, very large territory as a way to make that possible.  I would think that orcs would live similarly to stone-age tribes, existing primarily in unsettled areas where game is plentiful and there is little need for settled agriculture.  They would be the purest hunter-gatherers of the humanoid races- goblins hunt and gather when they can't scavenge or steal, hobgoblins do it when they can't raid or get slaves to do it, and kobolds scavenge for preference and supplement it with limited growing and trapping.</blockquote>

Verification