What should be the most common race? Or should I split it between few?
I have a concept of the world, should be similar to a world with humans, just without them. Other than that I have no clue how to continue the demographics.
Agreeing with the others. The choice is totally arbitrary.
In a vacuum, elves and dwarves are the obvious choice, but you might get more satisfaction from asking "Why are there so few humans now?"
If the world has become more feral, then maybe Orcs are becoming dominant. If there was a great war between the upper and lower planes, then maybe Tiefling and Aasimar are entering a golden age.
Demographics can also vary wildly from country to country and continent to continent. Even if Humans are less common globally, you can still find cities and nations where they are the majority.
As a rule of thumb: Shorter lifespans tend to correspond to greater reproductive rates. In times of peace, rabbits outnumber the wolves. In times of strife, wolves decimate the rabbits. When things get weird, weird things thrive.
Elves and dwarves would probably be up there. It’s all up to you. Or you could go with the shorter lived races as they tend to multiply more. The longer lived elves and dwarves might not procreate as quickly since they live so long.
In my very limited experience, I would say that getting caught up in percentages might cause you disappointment when introducing PCs to your campaign. If you're planning a novel, that's a bit different.
Tolkien (and then son) published tons of background to explain the races of Middle Earth after the books were written. If you're trying to decide on this at this point, maybe narrowing down your focus to a specific realm for now would help? Background could be filled in after a general idea of what the PCs are interested in?
It could be anything, but I'd advise making elves, dwarves, and halflings the most common races, since they're the most well-established in fantasy and have the most varied culture. In my one setting based on old Ireland, halflings were by far the most common race, with humans a recent arrival from the Continent, and dwarves and elves being rare (other races didn't even exist). I think they were a good choice for #1 because they tend to get along with everyone and love building communities, which makes for a societal structure not unlike a human one. (It's also worth noting that the rules say the DM can disallow any races they want because they're rare or don't exist, but strongly advises keeping these three, as they're considered "common" by default.)
It could be anything, but I'd advise making elves, dwarves, and halflings the most common races, since they're the most well-established in fantasy and have the most varied culture. In my one setting based on old Ireland, halflings were by far the most common race, with humans a recent arrival from the Continent, and dwarves and elves being rare (other races didn't even exist). I think they were a good choice for #1 because they tend to get along with everyone and love building communities, which makes for a societal structure not unlike a human one. (It's also worth noting that the rules say the DM can disallow any races they want because they're rare or don't exist, but strongly advises keeping these three, as they're considered "common" by default.)
Yes, that makes sense, for basic storytelling archetypes. To go back to the Tolkien reference, halflings/hobbits were like an ideal of British country life. In most fantasy rpg/stories humans are the 'norm', and it's hard to avoid a 'norm' that other races are balanced against. Without antagonists / other points of view there's no tension!
Even in a campaign with no humans... every race/culture will vary in superiority and population percentage constantly. Like cultures in earth's history. (What did the Roman's ever do for us?... and then 1000 years of the Dark Ages)
What should be the most common race? Or should I split it between few?
I have a concept of the world, should be similar to a world with humans, just without them. Other than that I have no clue how to continue the demographics.
It's not impossible, but I think it would warrant some kind of explanation why tabaxi make up less than 1% of the population while half-tabaxi make up 8%.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
It's not impossible, but I think it would warrant some kind of explanation why tabaxi make up less than 1% of the population while half-tabaxi make up 8%.
The pure tabaxies are now nearly extinct in my universe, got a lore for that, when some civilized and came to the cities, they mated with elves. Also orcs raped a lot of elves, and after a war, the orcs were nearly extinct too. Now half orcs are not treated well in society (xenophobia).
I thought of this myself awhile back (years, not months or weeks). Like the others said, don't get caught up with the percentages. What might be better is distribution by area/region or ecological type. Eg who is in the forests, hills, mountains, plainlands, rivers, etc? Will you have more elves and dwarves occupying plainlands? Will your world have more forests as no humans to cut down forests?
What impact is there with no humans? Will you have more monstrous humanoids? If not, why not?
So some serious thought about the type of world you want to have and how this will affect your game play.
There are two predominant questions you need to answer that will lead to the answer.
What "races" are going to exist? Approximately when did they migrate to this area?
It seems the shorter lived the race, the more they tend to procreate. Humans live comparably short lives in the fantasy lineup. Therefore in many settings it makes sense they would occupy large areas to feed their large populations. But without humans, who else would do this?
But races that have only migrated here recently would not have realized enough time to establish their "stable" populations. So a race like Orc might be much smaller than their normal anticipated number because they haven't spread to their stable population yet.
You see similar things in nature. The smaller the critter, the more numerous it usually is when you are in its usual biome. This appears to be a factor of the food tree where predators tend to be larger and fewer. But if the animals with extremely long lives multiplied at rapid rates then the world would be overrun with their kind and nature would 'correct" the balance.
So if the populations of your world have been around for a long time, then the shorter lived agrarian races would be more numerous. Non-agrarian species would be limited by nature and the food supply. Good luck.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
...It seems the shorter lived the race, the more they tend to procreate.
...The smaller the critter, the more numerous it usually is when you are in its usual biome. ... if the animals with extremely long lives multiplied at rapid rates then the world would be overrun with their kind and nature would 'correct" the balance.
So if the populations of your world have been around for a long time, then the shorter lived agrarian races would be more numerous. Non-agrarian species would be limited by nature and the food supply. Good luck.
Good points. It just occurred to me that the shorter-lived 'breeder' populations also tend to be more warlike or have other 'lemming-like' qualities? Curiosity for Tabaxis, wars and in-fighting for humans and orcs... my theory falls apart when it comes to Drow. Or maybe that's why they're rare, they cull their own population rather well.
A half-rabbit race would do pretty well according to this theory (rabbids?). But then overpopulation would turn any race more warlike to fight over food sources and territory. Even cute little bunny people. (Killer Rabbit of Caerbannog?)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
What should be the most common race? Or should I split it between few?
I have a concept of the world, should be similar to a world with humans, just without them. Other than that I have no clue how to continue the demographics.
I know in Toril, humans are about 60%.
Edit: I made a concept: (in percentage)
Elf: 17
Half elf half orc: 10
Half tabaxi half elf: 8
Tiefling: 12
Halfling: 10
Dwarf: 14
Gnome: 5
Yuan ti pureblood: 4
Goblin: 5
Goliath: <1
Triton: 2
Tabaxi: <1
Genasi: <1
Dragonborn: 2
Lizardfolk: 3
Aasimar: <1
Orc: <1
Other mixed races: 5
Other races: 2
You are totally into DM Fiat when you are asking about demographics like that.
In my world, first came the Dragons.
Then the Elves and Dwarves simultaneously.
The lesser species followed after that, at various times.
Your history can be your own, if you are homebrewing the continent.
Is it just Toril but no humans? If so, Elves and Dwarves tend to be pretty common races as well so they could be the most populous races.
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Characters for Tenebris Sine Fine
RoughCoronet's Greater Wills
Agreeing with the others. The choice is totally arbitrary.
In a vacuum, elves and dwarves are the obvious choice, but you might get more satisfaction from asking "Why are there so few humans now?"
If the world has become more feral, then maybe Orcs are becoming dominant. If there was a great war between the upper and lower planes, then maybe Tiefling and Aasimar are entering a golden age.
Demographics can also vary wildly from country to country and continent to continent. Even if Humans are less common globally, you can still find cities and nations where they are the majority.
As a rule of thumb: Shorter lifespans tend to correspond to greater reproductive rates. In times of peace, rabbits outnumber the wolves. In times of strife, wolves decimate the rabbits. When things get weird, weird things thrive.
Elves and dwarves would probably be up there. It’s all up to you. Or you could go with the shorter lived races as they tend to multiply more. The longer lived elves and dwarves might not procreate as quickly since they live so long.
It’s your world, develop it however you like
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
In my very limited experience, I would say that getting caught up in percentages might cause you disappointment when introducing PCs to your campaign. If you're planning a novel, that's a bit different.
Tolkien (and then son) published tons of background to explain the races of Middle Earth after the books were written. If you're trying to decide on this at this point, maybe narrowing down your focus to a specific realm for now would help? Background could be filled in after a general idea of what the PCs are interested in?
It could be anything, but I'd advise making elves, dwarves, and halflings the most common races, since they're the most well-established in fantasy and have the most varied culture. In my one setting based on old Ireland, halflings were by far the most common race, with humans a recent arrival from the Continent, and dwarves and elves being rare (other races didn't even exist). I think they were a good choice for #1 because they tend to get along with everyone and love building communities, which makes for a societal structure not unlike a human one. (It's also worth noting that the rules say the DM can disallow any races they want because they're rare or don't exist, but strongly advises keeping these three, as they're considered "common" by default.)
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
Yes, that makes sense, for basic storytelling archetypes. To go back to the Tolkien reference, halflings/hobbits were like an ideal of British country life. In most fantasy rpg/stories humans are the 'norm', and it's hard to avoid a 'norm' that other races are balanced against. Without antagonists / other points of view there's no tension!
Even in a campaign with no humans... every race/culture will vary in superiority and population percentage constantly. Like cultures in earth's history. (What did the Roman's ever do for us?... and then 1000 years of the Dark Ages)
It's not impossible, but I think it would warrant some kind of explanation why tabaxi make up less than 1% of the population while half-tabaxi make up 8%.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
96% Goliath
3% Hobgoblin
1% Loxodon
This is the correct distribution. You're welcome.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
The pure tabaxies are now nearly extinct in my universe, got a lore for that, when some civilized and came to the cities, they mated with elves. Also orcs raped a lot of elves, and after a war, the orcs were nearly extinct too. Now half orcs are not treated well in society (xenophobia).
Thanks haha!
20% Elf
20% Dwarf
20% L. Celestial (aasimar stats)
20% L. Devil (tiefling stats)
6% human
3% Tiefling V. (half elf stats but thaumaturgy cantrip instead of fey ancestry)
3% Half elf V. (Half elf stats but dex instead of cha)
3% Aasimar V. (half elf stats but wis instead of cha and healing hands instead of fey ancestry)
3% Half dwarf (half elf stats but con instead of cha and stonecunning instead of fey ancestry)
1% halfling
0.3% dragonborn
0.7% other
(Yeah I know it has humans but they are a minority)
I thought of this myself awhile back (years, not months or weeks). Like the others said, don't get caught up with the percentages. What might be better is distribution by area/region or ecological type. Eg who is in the forests, hills, mountains, plainlands, rivers, etc? Will you have more elves and dwarves occupying plainlands? Will your world have more forests as no humans to cut down forests?
What impact is there with no humans? Will you have more monstrous humanoids? If not, why not?
So some serious thought about the type of world you want to have and how this will affect your game play.
There are two predominant questions you need to answer that will lead to the answer.
What "races" are going to exist? Approximately when did they migrate to this area?
It seems the shorter lived the race, the more they tend to procreate. Humans live comparably short lives in the fantasy lineup. Therefore in many settings it makes sense they would occupy large areas to feed their large populations. But without humans, who else would do this?
But races that have only migrated here recently would not have realized enough time to establish their "stable" populations. So a race like Orc might be much smaller than their normal anticipated number because they haven't spread to their stable population yet.
You see similar things in nature. The smaller the critter, the more numerous it usually is when you are in its usual biome. This appears to be a factor of the food tree where predators tend to be larger and fewer. But if the animals with extremely long lives multiplied at rapid rates then the world would be overrun with their kind and nature would 'correct" the balance.
So if the populations of your world have been around for a long time, then the shorter lived agrarian races would be more numerous. Non-agrarian species would be limited by nature and the food supply. Good luck.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
Good points. It just occurred to me that the shorter-lived 'breeder' populations also tend to be more warlike or have other 'lemming-like' qualities? Curiosity for Tabaxis, wars and in-fighting for humans and orcs... my theory falls apart when it comes to Drow. Or maybe that's why they're rare, they cull their own population rather well.
A half-rabbit race would do pretty well according to this theory (rabbids?). But then overpopulation would turn any race more warlike to fight over food sources and territory. Even cute little bunny people. (Killer Rabbit of Caerbannog?)