| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 01 Sep 2010 : 12:47:59
Just a quick question to those who DM (or any one that has an opinion really), what do you do with the animal life of Faerun. Ed generally use creatures that are found in almost all temperate areas of earth, such as brown bear, deer and red fox. I do think he has used the boar which is Eurasian though. Other products have used many purely American species such as raccoon, possums or plains bison. Often these are only seen in that single product; the Ecologies would be the best examples of this.
So what do you do? Mix as you feel like, use mostly species from a specific area or invent fantasy versions of different animals?
I can never really make up my mind on this. |
| 20 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 03 Sep 2010 : 18:14:08
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
On Earth this works quite well, but then there are natural niches, wandering routes or human interference helping to shape the picture. With the Realms as more or less one super continent it becomes a bit different if you don't use the gates. Of course it becomes ridiculous to try to see logical at the ecosystem of a D&D world anyway as the amount of magical predators found would destroy the whole system. A very adaptable species on earth, like the wolf, would stand no chance in the Realms. Think of the consequences that has occurred every time a species has been introduced or has wandered.
The turkeys are a good example as they share the same ecological niche as the various pheasants, black grouse, some chaises should be made. Wild pigs are not a good mix if you use many species of ground living birds in an area etc. Crocodiles would mostly rule out alligators or caimans. And don't get me started on what to do with deer or great cats. In the published Realms (and AD&D from the start)the Eurasian basis has been most common, but some products (again mainly the Ecologies) has mainly used American species. On their own both systems are OK, but when you put the two together problems arise. It becomes a bit of the kitchen sink problem.
Its also much a part of the mental image you make of a region. A mentioning of a sun bear in Calimshan would throw me of, even if there is no reason. Calimshan is not earth so why should there not be sun bears, or anteaters for that matter.
The best solution would probably be to do things like inventing the Ahega deer, the red boars of Chionthar etc. but this mostly sounds fake anyway.
Well, my take on it is to simply take advantage of natural divisions of terrain. You might find lions, cheetahs, and gazelles in the plains of one region, but a mountain range might separate them from the plains of another area, where bison and coyotes would then be the norm. Even on a large continent, animals are limited to the places they can easily reach, or migrate to if their former homse become unsafe or unlivable.
That is why Asia has such a diverse wildlife, with Eurasia having a far different ecosystem than, say, China. The animals must adapt to their surroundings, move on, or perish. I was using the Sun Bear (wich is a smaller, tropical version of a brown bear, BTW) as a good example of simply using something a bit less familiar to most players to give the setting a more exotic and less "Earth-like" feel.
On a related note regarding Deepspawn, I can certainly see them co-operating with some of the more powerful intelligent beings to further goals that might benefit both in the end. If a red dragon wants to churn out an army of drakes, and still have a ready food supply on the side while it waits for them to mature to take over a kingdom, why would it not bribe or convince a Deepspwan to help, for a take of the spoils? |
| crazedventurers |
Posted - 03 Sep 2010 : 17:25:45
And here is a missive from Ed on Spawn in Cormyr
http://oracle.wizards.com/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind0003B&L=REALMS-L&P=R29852&D=1&I=-3
Cheers
Damian |
| crazedventurers |
Posted - 03 Sep 2010 : 17:15:55
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
Yea I remember that thread.
The high adventure part gets a bit watered down when (if my memory isn't playing cruel tricks on me again) there are merchant mages controlling Deepspawns to set up monster shops and Zentharim bombing areas with Deepspawn from above to help destabilize the area. Where did I read this, was it in some of the Volo guides maybe?
The Skullport supplement has the mages selling immature spawn.
Was the Zhent bombing attack from a polyhedron clack piece? something I certainly remember as well :)
Oh a dragon here uses a captive spawn to keep her fed :)
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/wn/20020925a
Cheers
Damian |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 03 Sep 2010 : 17:10:59
Yea I remember that thread.
The high adventure part gets a bit watered down when (if my memory isn't playing cruel tricks on me again) there are merchant mages controlling Deepspawns to set up monster shops and Zentharim bombing areas with Deepspawn from above to help destabilize the area. Where did I read this, was it in some of the Volo guides maybe? |
| crazedventurers |
Posted - 03 Sep 2010 : 16:49:53
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
But with that intelligence and their abilities capturing one would be a task so dangerous and near impossible that it would be one for heroic legends, not as a method to start a business. It becomes more or less like breeding red dragons.
Exactly right Jorkens a proper heroic adventure, high risk for high rewards :)
Some interesting thoughts from SES here. The last point about their reproduction might answer some of your questions
http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2111
Cheers
Damian
|
| Jorkens |
Posted - 03 Sep 2010 : 16:28:53
But with that intelligence and their abilities capturing one would be a task so dangerous and near impossible that it would be one for heroic legends, not as a method to start a business. It becomes more or less like breeding red dragons.
If the Deepspawn were nothing more than semi-intelligent the creature might work better for me, but the genius intelligence makes them a real problem for me to actually use. Maybe there are greater and lesser deepspawn, with the lesser being semi intelligent and only able to spawn an unintelligent physical form without magic or special abilities. These are the ones used by humans, and hot the real horrors hidden somewhere in the deep.
Come to think of it, does anyone have any theories on how long the deepspawn actually live. If they have a long lifespan it makes them even worse as the variation of creatures they would then be able to spawn would be enormous. |
| crazedventurers |
Posted - 03 Sep 2010 : 11:53:01
Great questions Jorkens - ones for Ed I suspect 
However my take on them would be:
I would never assume they like their confinement but once 'ported into their enclosed cavern they can do not much more than continue to spawn. Of course we are assuming they have had a life before their confinement. If a baby is caught and put there will it know much else? (I seem to recall some spawn sellers in Skullport?)
As to why they haven't taken over the world well I would see every other intelligent creature rising up together to destroy them simply because they can constantly spew dozens of chimera's/dragons/beholders etc that are loyal to the spawn which makes them very very dangerous to everything.
I can see two very interesting camapigns here:
One: to go and capture a baby spawn and get it back to someone/thing for a ridiculous price whilst everyone else is trying to steal it from the PC's 
Two: A grand hunt to eradicate a spawn nest that has recently emerged with an army of beasts at its disposal. The hunt would bring together otherwise natural enemies that have to band together or get overwhelmed and destroyed.
Cheers
Damian |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 03 Sep 2010 : 11:36:32
quote:
Originally posted by crazedventurers
There is a very easy fix on how and why the very large predators exist in numbers with enough prey to go around for all, Ed did create the Deepspawn for this reason  .
In my realms there are enclosed caverns scattered across the realms with captive spawn in them that are churning out herbivores. The spawn caverns have a minor gate that only transport certain animal types into the wider world when one of them blunders into it as they explore the spawn home.
I am sure that in the past when Dragons and Giants ruled the realms they wrestled with exactly this issue of how to feed themselves so came up with this solution, and I am sure that the elves and dwarves and humans etc that followed them did the same on a large and small scale to feed their own growing populations.
Oh and of course we have active Gods in the Realms whose portfolios encompass growth and bounty, and who have priests to drive those tenents through. Every day someone works on encouraging growth, so multiply that by centuries of time and each small action becomes the big result of lots of animals to eat.
And for all we know rothe (as an example) can breed like rabbits with multiple births each year because the vegetation they eat is very nutrious and they don't need to spend 18 hours a day chewing the cud, giving them more time for other pursuits . If the herbivore food supply is excellent it will grow strong and robust animals that live longer, breed more and can support more of them in a smaller area (compared to real life earth equivalents).
Just my thoughts
Damian
Ah the Deepspawn. I love these creatures, but there are a couple of things i never really understood. They are super-intelligent, I cant really see them being manageable as some sort of sitting copying machine. And they are evil geniouses, what are the creatures true plans and motivations?
As for the spawns, how does the intelligent spawns function. Are they standard creatures that have a life and motivations of their own when the creature is not dominating them and what happens with them when the deepspawn dies? It is no problem as long as it is spitting out pigs and goats, but what happens the day one of them finally gets to Zeboaster and sages by the dozen are born. Will they wander around annoying everyone as his personality dictates or are the spawns more or less zombies when not given orders? And if it has total control of its spawn wouldn't each spawn make plans to get their hands at the most powerful beings they can find and start spitting out dominated chimeras by the dozens? |
| crazedventurers |
Posted - 03 Sep 2010 : 11:08:50
There is a very easy fix on how and why the very large predators exist in numbers with enough prey to go around for all, Ed did create the Deepspawn for this reason .
In my realms there are enclosed caverns scattered across the realms with captive spawn in them that are churning out herbivores. The spawn caverns have a minor gate that only transport certain animal types into the wider world when one of them blunders into it as they explore the spawn home.
I am sure that in the past when Dragons and Giants ruled the realms they wrestled with exactly this issue of how to feed themselves so came up with this solution, and I am sure that the elves and dwarves and humans etc that followed them did the same on a large and small scale to feed their own growing populations.
Oh and of course we have active Gods in the Realms whose portfolios encompass growth and bounty, and who have priests to drive those tenents through. Every day someone works on encouraging growth, so multiply that by centuries of time and each small action becomes the big result of lots of animals to eat.
And for all we know rothe (as an example) can breed like rabbits with multiple births each year because the vegetation they eat is very nutrious and they don't need to spend 18 hours a day chewing the cud, giving them more time for other pursuits . If the herbivore food supply is excellent it will grow strong and robust animals that live longer, breed more and can support more of them in a smaller area (compared to real life earth equivalents).
Just my thoughts
Damian
|
| Jorkens |
Posted - 03 Sep 2010 : 08:42:16
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Right - when I read 'boar' or 'rabbit' or 'deer', ect, in a fantasy work, and especially in the Realms, I picture an animal very similar to the earth one, but not exactly the same. Assume the author is using a term we are familiar with to describe something that is a close approximation. That's what I do.
A creature with similar attributes that fits the same eco-niche as the one named in the work. I do the same with trees and plants.
I am just making mountains out of ant hills here, but I guess it stems from my wish to push such creatures and organisms into the foreground. And I don't mean the ants. I would rather work with ideas tied to an animal with a detailed niche in the world than another dead wizard. The bear, deer, boar etc becomes a bit bland at times.
But it is interesting to hear how others have worked with this and that's the reason I started this thread.
quote:
I've also dialed-back dragons quite a bit in my worlds, be they homebrew or pre-fab like FR. I just can't accept a creature that is incredibly long-lived, smarter then most humans, insanely physically powerfully (prectically unstoppable, if it were real), magically gifted, and coated in thick armor with claws the size of swords NOT being in-charge of things. The immense areas needed to feed such titanic creatures would logically lead to very few per continent, and yet we see dozens within the same mountain range - it makes little sense to me. We also still see large amounts of game, not to mention many other intelligent creatures, occupying those same feeding grounds.
My dragons are in obscure places, not near humans or other intelligent races, and although they are more cunning then ordinary animals, they are far fromt he talking, spell-casting D&D variety. The also are normally only the size of drakes, with some unusually large specimens found in remote regions.
Oriental dragons, on the other hand, are something else entirely, and are EXTREMELY rare (like demi-powers really), and are the genetic material the smaller (garden-variety) feral dragons came from (someone having crossed the Lung with Wyverns).
This is part of my Homebrew world, which grew out of my thoughts for FR, so most of it applies to how I have run FR in the past.
That's one thing I prefer from D&D and 1st edition, the less powerful dragons. It is enough for the creature to be ten fifteen meters with neck and tail, able to kill a dozen people a day with their breath weapon and be sustained by one cow a week. And using BRP a creature like that is dangerous enough for any party.
Semi-divine or spirit dragons, more like the oriental dragons are also used, but they become more sages and guardians of knowledge found in faraway places and other worlds than standard monsters in caves. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 22:51:45
Right - when I read 'boar' or 'rabbit' or 'deer', ect, in a fantasy work, and especially in the Realms, I picture an animal very similar to the earth one, but not exactly the same. Assume the author is using a term we are familiar with to describe something that is a close approximation. That's what I do.
A creature with similar attributes that fits the same eco-niche as the one named in the work. I do the same with trees and plants.
I've also dialed-back dragons quite a bit in my worlds, be they homebrew or pre-fab like FR. I just can't accept a creature that is incredibly long-lived, smarter then most humans, insanely physically powerfully (prectically unstoppable, if it were real), magically gifted, and coated in thick armor with claws the size of swords NOT being in-charge of things. The immense areas needed to feed such titanic creatures would logically lead to very few per continent, and yet we see dozens within the same mountain range - it makes little sense to me. We also still see large amounts of game, not to mention many other intelligent creatures, occupying those same feeding grounds.
My dragons are in obscure places, not near humans or other intelligent races, and although they are more cunning then ordinary animals, they are far fromt he talking, spell-casting D&D variety. The also are normally only the size of drakes, with some unusually large specimens found in remote regions.
Oriental dragons, on the other hand, are something else entirely, and are EXTREMELY rare (like demi-powers really), and are the genetic material the smaller (garden-variety) feral dragons came from (someone having crossed the Lung with Wyverns).
This is part of my Homebrew world, which grew out of my thoughts for FR, so most of it applies to how I have run FR in the past. |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 22:25:20
On Earth this works quite well, but then there are natural niches, wandering routes or human interference helping to shape the picture. With the Realms as more or less one super continent it becomes a bit different if you don't use the gates. Of course it becomes ridiculous to try to see logical at the ecosystem of a D&D world anyway as the amount of magical predators found would destroy the whole system. A very adaptable species on earth, like the wolf, would stand no chance in the Realms. Think of the consequences that has occurred every time a species has been introduced or has wandered.
The turkeys are a good example as they share the same ecological niche as the various pheasants, black grouse, some chaises should be made. Wild pigs are not a good mix if you use many species of ground living birds in an area etc. Crocodiles would mostly rule out alligators or caimans. And don't get me started on what to do with deer or great cats. In the published Realms (and AD&D from the start)the Eurasian basis has been most common, but some products (again mainly the Ecologies) has mainly used American species. On their own both systems are OK, but when you put the two together problems arise. It becomes a bit of the kitchen sink problem.
Its also much a part of the mental image you make of a region. A mentioning of a sun bear in Calimshan would throw me of, even if there is no reason. Calimshan is not earth so why should there not be sun bears, or anteaters for that matter.
The best solution would probably be to do things like inventing the Ahega deer, the red boars of Chionthar etc. but this mostly sounds fake anyway. |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 21:52:26
Actually, I've been working on an ecology for my homebrew world, and speaking as an ametuer naturalist and nature-lover, you would be surprised what kinds of animals you can find mixing together even in the real world. Pronghorns DO indeed mix with wild donkeys out in the arrid regions of the Southwest, especially in Arizona and New Mexico, or around the Grand Canyon. Leopards range as far north as Texas, and coyotes can be found from Canada all the way to the southern end of Mexico. Bears are pretty much universal, with just a few variations in size and color from the Southern Hemisphere to the Northern, and even the idea of Northmen hunting turkeys isn't that far-fetched. The Pilgrims found turkeys as far north as Maine, and Vikings made it there long before Columbus sailed, so they could easily have seen them on their visits. So it's really just a matter of what kinds of creatures or equivalents you want to use. My advice would be to look in some good wildlife books- particularly those that have a broader scope of world-wide ecology- and find animals you like and use them. The more exotic, the better!! It's even better if you can find copies of nature magazines and books with lots of pics of the animals in any given region/climate/terrain type, so you can describe them better. (An Amhearst's Pheasant, for example, looks much different from the ones most people know, and you can use details like that to make your setting more interesting. Or try describing a Sun Bear, or a Harpy Eagle, as replacements of the more commonly seen types.) |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 21:34:37
And what about Anauroch; most of the species mentioned until now are definitely African. The animal life of an American desert is extremely different.
That leads me to another question; how about agricultural products. Most of those commonly mentioned are those grown in (if not native to) medieval Europe, would you use plants from other continents? |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 19:35:37
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
For my games, wildlife is usually taken from our own Earth species where appliacable to the climate zone. This means you'll find regulard brown/black bears in temperate/deciduous forests as but not Jaguars who live in jungle/tropical climates. Certain non-earth species (Owlbear for example) I feel can be placed in a broader area because their ecology might be different, but there are templates for that sorta stuff from older (3e/2e) material right?
The problem for me is that for example tigers and leopards are temperate also and coyotes in the Dales seems a bit wrong. There's nothing wrong with mixing it around, but northmen going after turkeys or seeing pronghorns mixing with wild donkeys becomes a bit strange to me. A mixture is the best and most logical way to go, but it doesn't seem to be a clear thread on this in the published Realms.
As I said, I can combine and mix with all other things from earth, but not animals. It seems I have a strange block there for some reason. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 13:54:59
For my games, wildlife is usually taken from our own Earth species where appliacable to the climate zone. This means you'll find regulard brown/black bears in temperate/deciduous forests as but not Jaguars who live in jungle/tropical climates. Certain non-earth species (Owlbear for example) I feel can be placed in a broader area because their ecology might be different, but there are templates for that sorta stuff from older (3e/2e) material right? |
| Quale |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 12:56:33
Use mostly species from specific areas, racoons are fine if the climate is similar in Anchorome and the North, but jackals are certainly not (including hutakaans). I like to keep things somewhat ''realistic'' and natural like in our world. I don't invent fantasy versions cause there are plenty of animals in monster books.
The weird words from Wolfe's books I think evolved from Latin. I liked the books cause of the first person's fallibility, something that 3e abandoned. |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 11:49:20
The loose description of the wildlife is one that has always annoyed me. It removes some of the basic structure when things like that is not in place. Forests and trees have been covered with specific species, but animal life has mostly been ignored.
I tried to make animal life from scratch once, but it ended up being Burroughs, which didn't fit the Realms (well, there is of course the Osquib, but that's the only one)or D&D in general. Its easy with flowers, birds etc. but animal life is very difficult for me to rewrite.
The Book of the New Sun is a great example of a completely alien feel to the world, but I seem to remember Wolfe using some earth creatures(mostly prehistoric ones), but using their Latin names. As it was the earths future it was a logical thing to do. I could be wrong about this, but I seem to remember irritating myself a bit over this as it made it a problem for me to get a mental image of them. If they are purely invented then its pure fantasy and if its a known creature you already have an image.
Still a fantastic novel (in several volumes more than a series in my opinion) and one well worth the read for most people who enjoy fantasy. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 00:24:22
I have a feeling that Ed had Realms-versions of most animals, if not all, and the 'Earthification' was something that happened by accident with the plethora of designers and writers FR has had over the years.
So, to keep it close to the canon Realms (and also to speed the game along) I mostly use Earth animals in passing descriptions, and would only use the FR-specific beasties if it was crucial to the story. So I use both, but tend toward the normal (real) animals mist often.
I am currently designing a world from scratch, and would like ALL of my creatures to be non-Earth, but to tell the truth I doubt I have enough skill to do that - it is a monumental task. What I may do is have a few common ones that take the place of things like cattle, squirrels, pets, etc.., and just ignore the rest, and fill them in as-needed.
It's been my experience as an avid reader that writers who create their worlds whole-cloth wind up with more immersive stories. Once you start introducing Earth terminology and creatures the veil of believability begins to break down.
For instance, read the rather excellent Book of the New Sun (5 books, actually) - the author not only uses his own terminology for unique things, but even creates words for common items and colors! He does all that and still doesn't manage to bog-down in unnecessary details (which is quite a trick). The world seems all the realer for it.
I need to ask Ed about my first statement - this is something I've been meaning to do for awhile now, and this topic makes it a good time to do so. |
| Sian |
Posted - 01 Sep 2010 : 16:44:07
some combo of A and C :p ... i mix from everywhere on Earth and some fantasy versions |
|
|
