PDA

View Full Version : I have something I have to say about Eberron.



Pages : [1] 2

Cyclone231
2009-11-13, 12:17 AM
Sure, halflings riding dinosaurs is cool and all, but raptors are a pretty implausible selection. As far as I know, raptors are pack animals, and historically pack animals were only used as aids to hunting, not for riding. We used herd animals for riding. Halflings should probably ride triceratops or similar animals.

There, I said it.

Tavar
2009-11-13, 12:21 AM
Can you name a pack animal that is big enough for humans to ride?

AstralFire
2009-11-13, 12:23 AM
Triceratops are bad. ass. Screw raptors.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-11-13, 12:24 AM
Can you name a pack animal that is big enough for humans to ride?Lions.

And if they could be ridden, we would. They'd be faster than Bear Calvary.

Cyclone231
2009-11-13, 12:24 AM
Can you name a pack animal that is big enough for humans to ride?A Utahraptor.

Tavar
2009-11-13, 12:26 AM
One that existed at the same time recorded history/humans did? Cause otherwise, we really have no basis for comparison.

Asbestos
2009-11-13, 12:26 AM
Can you name a pack animal that is big enough for humans to ride?

Exactly. What the hell is a difference between a pack and a herd? You could just say 'Riding Predators is implausible because Humans don't ride Predators'. The answer is the same though, what domesticated predator is big enough for a human to ride?

Killer whales? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVgFBRPhMh8&feature=player_embedded#at=23)

The domesticated part is key, people don't ride Zebras for a reason...

Cyclone231
2009-11-13, 12:31 AM
People don't ride wolves and halflings wouldn't ride raptors for the same reason: they're too smart. A wolf is going to go "Oh, look, fighting. Let me just go the other way so I don't get killed." Horses, like most herd animals, are too dumb to do this, and so can be rode. Also, predators are bad choices because they're too aggressive and would be too busy trying to fight themselves.

Early humans tried all kinds of crazy crap with domestication; I believe at one point they tried getting their jaguars (?; might've been another big cat) to ride their camels with them so that the jaguar could jump off and attack. Believe me, if there was a pack animal that could be ridden, they would have done so.

Crow
2009-11-13, 12:33 AM
I always wondered why the indians didn't ride buffalo.

Seatbelt
2009-11-13, 12:43 AM
I always wondered why the indians didn't ride buffalo.

depending on who you talk to, the Indians didn't ride a lot of things because they were too busy killing them. :P

Asbestos
2009-11-13, 12:47 AM
People don't ride wolves and halflings wouldn't ride raptors for the same reason: they're too smart. A wolf is going to go "Oh, look, fighting. Let me just go the other way so I don't get killed." Horses, like most herd animals, are too dumb to do this, and so can be rode. Also, predators are bad choices because they're too aggressive and would be too busy trying to fight themselves.

Early humans tried all kinds of crazy crap with domestication; I believe at one point they tried getting their jaguars (?; might've been another big cat) to ride their camels with them so that the jaguar could jump off and attack. Believe me, if there was a pack animal that could be ridden, they would have done so.

:smallsigh:

Let's talk about domesticated Wolves AKA Dogs.
People don't ride dogs because they are too small and their backs can not support large enough loads. A sufficiently trained dog is not going to go "oh, look, fighting. let me just go the other way so I don't get killed." (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivVRYYHLqJY) Horses are NOT stupid. Untrained Horses get spooked and flee (by your definition 'smart') It takes a lot of training and a horse capable of learning to produce a war horse. Also, not just predators are aggressive creatures. (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-515508/Tournament-blood-The-sheer-horror-horse-fighting.html) Anyway, the whole aggression thing has to do training. Well trained dogs don't get into a frenzy like a shark.

Yes, people have tried to domesticate leopards (I think that's what you meant maybe? though I've never heard of such an application) and cheetahs and tigers and hyenas and etc. But they've also tried to domesticate African Elephants, Zebras, Deer, and a wide variety of other still 'wild' herd animals. Some animals just do not predispose themselves well to domestication. Lions, btw, are NOT big enough to comfortably carry a human. Their bodies are not built in a way that lends itself to supporting a large amount of weight on their backs. Actually, the early horses couldn't support a 13th century Knight either, but that's what a thousand+ years of breeding is for.

Tavar
2009-11-13, 12:52 AM
Good Stuf
I was looking for sources in order to type up something like that, but Asbestos beat me too it. I'd like to add that it's very hard to tell what animals can and cannot be domesicated. I mean, look at Domestic Asian Water Buffalo and Cape Buffalo.

BobVosh
2009-11-13, 12:52 AM
depending on who you talk to, the Indians didn't ride a lot of things because they were too busy killing them. :P

Darn animals are always too full of delicious, delicious meat. Also for the Indians: tents, tools, etc.

Are you really asking how hobbits halfings ride raptors in a setting like Eberron? A Wizard Did It is the whole setting. Obviously someone messed with raptors brains until they are trainable.

Cyclone231
2009-11-13, 12:54 AM
To use your "logic," Asbestos, consider: if the early horse could not support a 13th century knight, and the early wolf could not support a rider... why would only one develop into a domesticated riding animal? Hmm?

averagejoe
2009-11-13, 12:55 AM
I always wondered why the indians didn't ride buffalo.

Hey, buffalo will eat you!

AstralFire
2009-11-13, 12:59 AM
To use your "logic," Asbestos, consider: if the early horse could not support a 13th century knight, and the early wolf could not support a rider... why would only one develop into a domesticated riding animal? Hmm?

The horse was frequently used to pull chariots, etc, and were bred for additional strength and speed, until they could bear a rider incidentally. Then those were bred for more until they could be ridden even by men in armor.

As far as I know, dogs aren't used for transport outside of frigid areas.

Tavar
2009-11-13, 12:59 AM
To use your "logic," Asbestos, consider: if the early horse could not support a 13th century knight, and the early wolf could not support a rider... why would only one develop into a domesticated riding animal? Hmm?

Why can only one eat meat now? Hmm? Why can't Human's Fly?

Because evolution, selective breeding, and genetics only go so far. The early horse would have been smaller, yes, but not that much smaller. Unlike dogs. Now, that's as far as I know for sure, and I could be completely off base with this, but I think the following holds true as well. Horses were better built to carry weight on their back. Thus, when they get bigger, they can carry heavier weights. Dogs, however, are not built for this, and thus there is a much lower limit to what they can carry, in addition to the penalty posed by their size.

Asbestos
2009-11-13, 01:00 AM
To use your "logic," Asbestos, consider: if the early horse could not support a 13th century knight, and the early wolf could not support a rider... why would only one develop into a domesticated riding animal? Hmm?


For one reason its because Dogs are not large enough, breeding can only do so much. Get me a HORSE SIZED DOG and I'll put a person on it. Then however, I would need to start breeding a horse sized dog capable of carrying a lot of weight on its back.

chiasaur11
2009-11-13, 01:03 AM
For one reason its because Dogs are not large enough, breeding can only do so much. Get me a HORSE SIZED DOG and I'll put a person on it. Then however, I would need to start breeding a horse sized dog capable of carrying a lot of weight on its back.

Which would waste a lot of useful things dogs can do already for functions already fulfilled.

Tavar
2009-11-13, 01:06 AM
Actually, that reminds me of the General Series. It has Dogs the size of horses used for essentially the same thing (it's in the far off future after a galactic civilization has collapsed, so it's not entirely improbably). It is noted in the book that calvary is alot more dangerous, as Dogs are primarily carnivores, and, well, you can guess the rest.

Worira
2009-11-13, 01:08 AM
I always wondered why the indians didn't ride buffalo.

Because elephants were way more awesome.

Tyndmyr
2009-11-13, 01:10 AM
Can you name a pack animal that is big enough for humans to ride?

Dogs. And yes, they've been used for riding. Of course, this is mostly by children, because size is still an issue.

But yeah, your basic point that a pack animal can certainly be ridden is sound.

Asbestos
2009-11-13, 01:21 AM
To drive home the size thing...
Zorba, the largest dog known (http://www.worldslargestdog1.com/zorba.html) weighed 343 lbs. This is less than a biggish Llama (upwards of 450lbs), one of the smallest animals reasonably capable of carrying a light person some of the time. This is less than half the weight of a light riding horse and maybe a 1/3 or 1/4 of the destrier, the ancestors of modern draught horses. The largest recorded horse ever was a massive Shire (a breed that descends from the olde English war horse) which weighed over 3000lbs.

icefractal
2009-11-13, 01:33 AM
LionsFrom way back in post 3. So why is everyone arguing whether wolves are big enough to ride? Now you could say that maybe Lions are unsuited for other reasons than being a pack hunter, but you can't say there weren't any rideable pack hunting animals.

Asbestos
2009-11-13, 01:39 AM
From way back in post 3. So why is everyone arguing whether wolves are big enough to ride? Now you could say that maybe Lions are unsuited for other reasons than being a pack hunter, but you can't say there weren't any rideable pack hunting animals.

Yeah I can.
The large range for a lion is between 400 and 500lbs, again, much smaller than a light riding horse. In addition to the whole 'can't carry weight on its back' thing, a lion pretty much, at most, has a shoulder height of 4ft, about the size of the average llama (of which only the biggest can begin to maybe sometimes carry a person without a load) and again, at least a foot or more shorter than a horse.

Tavar
2009-11-13, 01:39 AM
From way back in post 3. So why is everyone arguing whether wolves are big enough to ride? Now you could say that maybe Lions are unsuited for other reasons than being a pack hunter, but you can't say there weren't any rideable pack hunting animals.


Lions, btw, are NOT big enough to comfortably carry a human. Their bodies are not built in a way that lends itself to supporting a large amount of weight on their backs. Actually, the early horses couldn't support a 13th century Knight either, but that's what a thousand+ years of breeding is for.

Reading all replies helps.

Tyndmyr
2009-11-13, 01:41 AM
He's got a point...besides, most animals are unsuitable for riding, of any particular type(mainly due to size).

If you can arbitrarily fix size, it's not all that unlikely that you'll find a couple of the type that could work. Hell, if we made insects big enough, some of those could probably be used.

Cyclone231
2009-11-13, 01:45 AM
The reason there are no pack hunters large enough to ride is because humans killed them all because they were competitors, not prey. The same would apply for halflings.

Asbestos
2009-11-13, 01:47 AM
The reason there are no pack hunters large enough to ride is because humans killed them all because they were competitors, not prey.
Indeed we have killed off all large predator species... wait, what?

The same would apply for halflings
So halflings have killed off all predators/competitors bigger than them. Right.

Cyclone231
2009-11-13, 01:50 AM
Indeed we have killed off all large predator species... wait, what?The birth and expansion of the human species coincided with a huge depopulation of megafauna. The handful of major predators (wolves and bears and such) still around exist in very small amounts, even in absolute terms. They only still exist because some people want to keep them around. If people hadn't set aside national parks and other conservation projects, they would all be dead.

Tyndmyr
2009-11-13, 01:58 AM
Uh, I suggest we steer clear of real-life extinction discussion. Likely to get political, and derail the thread. The current population levels of wolves are pretty irrelevant to if we can ride them. They're too small. If they're too small, it really doesn't matter how many exist.

In D&D settings, there are a *lot* of large predators of all sorts. This pretty much just needs to be accepted, because if you don't, the entire world changes. The presence or absence of them in real life is not terribly important to if they would exist in a fantasy world, because the rulebooks are quite clear than they do exist.

Asbestos
2009-11-13, 02:01 AM
The birth and expansion of the human species coincided with a huge depopulation of megafauna. The handful of major predators (wolves and bears and such) still around exist in very small amounts, even in absolute terms. They only still exist because some people want to keep them around. If people hadn't set aside national parks and other conservation projects, they would all be dead.

Those animals wouldn't be dead because they were our competitors, they'd be dead because humans can be bloodthirsty a-holes. Some of the last Ivory Billed Woodpeckers seen before the 1940s were shot by hunters. A large amount of climate change also occurred during the depopulation of the world's megafauna which certainly contributed, humans may have been in many cases just the final straw. Not sure about there not being a lot of predators, there's at least 200,000 brown bears alone. Certainly less predators than us humans, but no where near a 'handful'. Also, does anyone realize that a lot of the larger African animals (and bears and bison and other things) count as 'megafauna'?

Lycanthromancer
2009-11-13, 02:14 AM
I just wanted to chip in...Indians do ride water buffaloes on occasion. And Indian elephants, too. They make good draft animals.

Thajocoth
2009-11-13, 03:06 AM
Packs are strike forces. They surround, chase and kill prey with superior stealth, speed and agility. Smaller size aids this.

Herds are masses. They use their size and numbers to confuse, scare off and watch for potential predators. Larger size aids this.

Also, when the herd animals are larger than the pack animals, the packs don't need to kill as many members of the herds to stay fed.

Thurbane
2009-11-13, 03:15 AM
Sure, halflings riding dinosaurs is cool and all, but raptors are a pretty implausible selection. As far as I know, raptors are pack animals, and historically pack animals were only used as aids to hunting, not for riding. We used herd animals for riding. Halflings should probably ride triceratops or similar animals.

There, I said it.
Um, it's fantasy? Historically speaking, I'm pretty sure people didn't go around hurling lightning from their fingertips, shapechanging into animals or raising the dead...not to mention the sentient Tin Men that seem to roam the streets of Eberron. :smalltongue:

...seriously, if the biggest beef you have with Eberron is people/halflings riding inappropriate dinosaurs, then I applaud your suspension of disbelief, sir! :smallbiggrin:

Lycanthromancer
2009-11-13, 03:19 AM
They're not velociraptors anyway. Those were the size of peacocks, more or less. Or maybe chickens. They also had long stiff tails, and feathers (probably for gliding).

The halflings are riding deinonychuses. Like the ones in Jurassic Park.

Somewhere, a paleontologist cries himself to sleep, and a thousand catgirls spontaneously combust.

Thurbane
2009-11-13, 03:26 AM
They're not velociraptors anyway. Those were the size of peacocks, more or less. Or maybe chickens. They also had long stiff tails, and feathers (probably for gliding).

The halflings are riding deinonychuses. Like the ones in Jurassic Park.

Somewhere, a paleontologist cries himself to sleep, and a thousand catgirls spontaneously combust.

Indeed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCmzESXXI-Y)....

dyslexicfaser
2009-11-13, 03:29 AM
The birth and expansion of the human species coincided with a huge depopulation of megafauna. The handful of major predators (wolves and bears and such) still around exist in very small amounts, even in absolute terms. They only still exist because some people want to keep them around. If people hadn't set aside national parks and other conservation projects, they would all be dead.
If you're willing to count coyotes with wolves (not sure if they're in the genus Lupus or Canis or what), then that's not really so. In the western United States, we kill over 500,000 of them every year (we put bounties on them, and sometimes just for fun), and they're still fine. As populous as ever.



And Indian elephants, too. They make good draft animals.
If I had a trained elephant, I would probably go more the route of Hannibal than use it to carry my stuff. Just sayin'.

The_Snark
2009-11-13, 03:34 AM
Somewhere, a paleontologist cries himself to sleep, and a thousand catgirls spontaneously combust.

Paleontologists were stripped of their right to complain about scientific inaccuracy after the Bone War. To my knowledge, the edict has yet to be rescinded.
Disclaimer: that was a joke
Anyway, I think this is the first time I've seen people object to dinosaur-riding halflings on the grounds that it's unrealistic; the usual grievance is that it's silly. (It kinda is, but so what?) The lightning rail also gets singled out, for reasons that baffle me. People accept magic in a setting without blinking, people accept trains with a shrug, but magical trains are for some reason ridiculous?

kamikasei
2009-11-13, 03:40 AM
People don't ride wolves

I feel compelled to point out that, in D&D, people do ride wolves. Kobolds ride giant weasels. The OP's complaint is misdirected - it's D&D's approach to domestication and mounts in general that makes no damned sense, not Eberron's choice of dinosaur.

Zen Master
2009-11-13, 03:46 AM
They're not velociraptors anyway. Those were the size of peacocks, more or less. Or maybe chickens. They also had long stiff tails, and feathers (probably for gliding).

The halflings are riding deinonychuses. Like the ones in Jurassic Park.

Somewhere, a paleontologist cries himself to sleep, and a thousand catgirls spontaneously combust.

In actual fact, the dinosaur most often used as a halfling mount is called a Clawfoot. Of course, a Clawfoot by any other name ....

Anyways, of halflings and raptors, the former is by far the most unrealistic. If you can bend your mind to accept halflings in your gameworld, then imagining a saddle that could be strapped to a real-world anymal like a dinosaur to make it rideable shouldn't be that big a strain.

Thurbane
2009-11-13, 03:59 AM
I would say that riding velociraptors are far from the silliest mount in D&D...I mean, for crying out loud, the Arms and Equipment Guide has rules for riding a Gelatinous Cube! :smalleek:

https://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/RulesComp_Gallery/110241.jpg

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/rodragon_gallery/94133.jpg

GallóglachMaxim
2009-11-13, 04:30 AM
A large amount of climate change also occurred during the depopulation of the world's megafauna which certainly contributed, humans may have been in many cases just the final straw.

Horses (relevant to the conversation on the previous page) were very nearly extinct for exactly that reason before being domesticated, so in some cases humans turned around the natural process. Of course that's not quite in line with the discussion of species which can be ridden, since horses were domesticated for food, people only started riding them as part of their secondary product revolution.

Aldrakan
2009-11-13, 04:32 AM
I would say that riding velociraptors are far from the silliest mount in D&D...I mean, for crying out loud, the Arms and Equipment Guide has rules for riding a Gelatinous Cube! :smalleek:

https://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/RulesComp_Gallery/110241.jpg

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/rodragon_gallery/94133.jpg

Is that a medusa riding a gorgon? Because that's awesome. The Gorgon Medusa (cavalry brigade).

Seatbelt
2009-11-13, 04:58 AM
The reason there are no pack hunters large enough to ride is because humans killed them all because they were competitors, not prey. The same would apply for halflings.

I think we should first kill all the halflings.

hamishspence
2009-11-13, 05:03 AM
Is that a medusa riding a gorgon? Because that's awesome. The Gorgon Medusa (cavalry brigade).

Yes- it was in Dragon Magazine, and reappeared as a pic in Rules Compendium.

Eberron was published prior to the 3.5 errata that brought Deinonychus and "Megaraptor" from Large and Huge, down to Medium and Large respectively.

This may be why clawfoots (clawfeet? :smallbiggrin:) are described as Velociraptors in the Eberron Campaign setting, when listing the "real world names" next to the Eberron names.

It is possible to ride bipeds- but the riders tend to sit further back, over the hind legs- as per ostrich riding.

I can see a 30 pound halfling riding on a 160 pound deinonychus- in a fashion similar to a child riding an ostrich, but probably not on anything smaller.

Also- the "Dromaeosaurs are pack hunters" theory is being disputed- some people think they may have been more like Komodo dragons- congregate at prey, bigger ones cannibalizing smaller ones: hence the occasional group fossilization.

As for halflings themselves- there were the "real hobbit" news reports when very small humanoids were discovered- I'm not sure if they were confirmed to be humans with an illness, a small variant of Homo erectus, or if the debate is still going on.

EDIT: I've checked- while it is still disputed, the weight of evidence in favour of it being a real species, is piling up.

It's also a little taller and heavier than a halfling, but not by much- the figures given were about 55 pounds in weight and just over 3 ft tall.

Seatbelt
2009-11-13, 06:27 AM
Its an example of drift. There are species of tiny woolly mammoths that got stranded on an island. Animals that get stuck on islands tend to get smaller because its adaptive to need fewer resources. If I remember correctly Homo Florensis is perfectly to scale with the other Homos running around at the time. Its just little.

hamishspence
2009-11-13, 07:39 AM
At the moment, this is the predominant conclusion- there are still a few people who think they are ordinary humans with a disease of some kind- but not many.

Animals on an island shrinking is one possibility- but another is growing to great size- the Komodo dragon, or Aepyornis. Several large-ish island areas have produced very big predators and herbivores. New Zealand, for example, with Moas, and Haast's Eagle.

On "dinosaur sizes that make the most sense" there is a thread here:

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=118434

My view was:
Velociraptor works best as Small
Deinonychus works best as Medium
Utahraptor works best as Large
Tyrannosaurus works best as Huge

SilverClawShift
2009-11-13, 08:41 AM
We're talking about a game where riding giant zombie bats is a viable (even DESIREABLE) option. A little suspension of disbelief is needed most times.

AslanCross
2009-11-13, 09:07 AM
I would say that riding velociraptors are far from the silliest mount in D&D...I mean, for crying out loud, the Arms and Equipment Guide has rules for riding a Gelatinous Cube! :smalleek:


Said rules consisted of wearing a special amulet that encased the rider in a sphere of force. The rider banged on the insides of the sphere while embedded in the MIDDLE of the sphere. The vibrations caused the gelatinous cube to move in that direction. :smallbiggrin:




We're talking about a game where riding giant zombie bats is a viable (even DESIREABLE) option. A little suspension of disbelief is needed most times.

This. I find this entire discussion a bit too nitpicky, honestly.

hamishspence
2009-11-13, 09:11 AM
Its not really needed that much with respect to Small halflings riding Medium bipedal creatures- it doesn't seem all that "implausible"

The real suspension of disbelief things, with respect to prehistoric animals, include the idea that a T-rex can swallow a medium-sized creature, such as a person, whole, without biting them into itty-bitty chunks first. Its skull is just not built for that.

Or, a pteranodon taking off with a 200+ pound load on its back.

Next to these, halfling deinonychus-riders looks quite reasonable :smallbiggrin:

bosssmiley
2009-11-13, 10:26 AM
Sure, halflings riding dinosaurs is cool and all, but raptors are a pretty implausible selection. As far as I know, raptors are pack animals, and historically pack animals were only used as aids to hunting, not for riding. We used herd animals for riding. Halflings should probably ride triceratops or similar animals.

Already been done. Champions of Mystara for 2E had a culture of triceratops-riding, treant-worshipping pygmies living in a hidden jungle kingdom. Eberron just copypasta'd them. :smalltongue:


One that existed at the same time recorded history/humans did? Cause otherwise, we really have no basis for comparison.

(prehistoric) Dire wolves. Died off in the last great American megafauna extinction, about the time humans turned up. :smallconfused:

hamishspence
2009-11-13, 11:04 AM
Not big enough to ride- unless you are very small.

Dire wolves were only fractionally bigger than modern ones. And, if anything, slightly shorter in the leg- just more heavily built, with slightly sturdier bones and jaws.

Roderick_BR
2009-11-13, 11:32 AM
Sure, halflings riding dinosaurs is cool and all, but raptors are a pretty implausible selection. As far as I know, raptors are pack animals, and historically pack animals were only used as aids to hunting, not for riding. We used herd animals for riding. Halflings should probably ride triceratops or similar animals.

There, I said it.
Correct me if I'm wrong, since I'm quoting Wikipedia, but:
"Many ungulate species are traditional pack animals, including elephants, camels, the yak, reindeer, goats, water buffalo and llama, and many of the domesticated Equidae (horse family)."
Historically, we hide elephants, camels, yaks, llamas, and horses (don't know about reindeers, goats and water buffalos). What's wrong with halflings riding raptors then?

Ormagoden
2009-11-13, 11:36 AM
Are you honestly complaining about realism in Eberron? That's laughable.

AstralFire
2009-11-13, 11:51 AM
I personally got the sense the topic was a tongue-in-cheek complaint, like, "I know this is silly but I want to say it anyway."

hamishspence
2009-11-13, 12:07 PM
possibly.

problems with suspension of disbelief can come into play when something that is not fantasical, something mundane, is represented very badly.

20 pound greatswords, in 3.0, for example.

Vizzerdrix
2009-11-13, 12:07 PM
Okay, lets face facts. If dinos still lived, we would have domesticated them all for riding. All of them.

Honestly, we don't/have never used carnivores for mounts for one reason: Food. To keep any meat eating mount fed properly is going to take alot of additional animals. And all of THEM would need to be fed too. Best to cut out the middle man and just ride plant eaters.

Now as for Halflings, I'm willing to bet they keep some dinos like cattle. That is alot of extra meat to just have sitting around. Best to use it to feed a smarter more aggressive mount. Something that can function in groups and is big enough to ride so the handlers can keep up.

$0.02

Eldan
2009-11-13, 12:08 PM
:smallsigh:

Let's talk about domesticated Wolves AKA Dogs.
People don't ride dogs because they are too small and their backs can not support large enough loads. A sufficiently trained dog is not going to go "oh, look, fighting. let me just go the other way so I don't get killed." (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivVRYYHLqJY) Horses are NOT stupid. Untrained Horses get spooked and flee (by your definition 'smart') It takes a lot of training and a horse capable of learning to produce a war horse. Also, not just predators are aggressive creatures. (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-515508/Tournament-blood-The-sheer-horror-horse-fighting.html) Anyway, the whole aggression thing has to do training. Well trained dogs don't get into a frenzy like a shark.
.


Actually, there's at least one breed of swiss dogs which was used to pull carts and, sometimes, was also ridden by children on the way to the market, if some old pictures are to be believed. Those things are frickin' huge. We had one, it weighed 80 kilos.

hamishspence
2009-11-13, 12:11 PM
Now as for Halflings, I'm willing to bet they keep some dinos like cattle. That is alot of extra meat to just have sitting around. Best to use it to feed a smarter more aggressive mount. Something that can function in groups and is big enough to ride so the handlers can keep up.

Sounds likely. They also have a non-predatory riding dinosaur- the fastieth- which is another biped.

They managed to get the size wrong on the choice of real dinosaur it was supposed to represent- same as with the clawfoot. Othnelia, which is what they are supposed to be- was pretty tiny- smaller even than a velociraptor.

Theodoric
2009-11-13, 12:14 PM
Somehow, I keep getting annoyed at the name 'raptors'. Raptor = bird of prey, not dromaeosaurid, but I guess that's only of quinternary importance.

AstralFire
2009-11-13, 12:15 PM
Ah, I was wondering what came after tertiary and quaternary. Thank you.

Sleepingbear
2009-11-13, 12:26 PM
I think we should first kill all the halflings.

+1

I just plain don't like 'em. (With the exception of Belkar. He's fun to watch but I wouldn't want to play with him).

Vizzerdrix
2009-11-13, 12:29 PM
I think we should first kill all the halflings elves.

Oh hi I fixed this for you ^_^

wykydtron
2009-11-13, 12:37 PM
They're not velociraptors anyway. Those were the size of peacocks, more or less. Or maybe chickens. They also had long stiff tails, and feathers (probably for gliding).

The halflings are riding deinonychuses. Like the ones in Jurassic Park.

Somewhere, a paleontologist cries himself to sleep, and a thousand catgirls spontaneously combust.

Can someone explain this catgirl thing to me? I keep seeing it and I can't figure it out.

hamishspence
2009-11-13, 12:39 PM
Its a meme, that goes "Every time someone invokes science when talking about a fantasy game, a catgirl dies"

AstralFire
2009-11-13, 12:44 PM
As I dislike them, I find it a great excuse to talk about science.

wykydtron
2009-11-13, 12:45 PM
Ah, thanks, haha.

Lycanthromancer
2009-11-13, 12:57 PM
The real suspension of disbelief things, with respect to prehistoric animals, include the idea that a T-rex can swallow a medium-sized creature, such as a person, whole, without biting them into itty-bitty chunks first. Its skull is just not built for that.From what I've read, t-rex ate in a manner similar to crocodiles; they tore chunks off of bigger prey (and probably carrion) and gulped them down. They were physically incapable of chewing, and simply swallowed smaller carcasses whole.

hamishspence
2009-11-13, 01:02 PM
Their teeth were sturdy enough to crush bone- and a lot of bone fragments were found in a very large coprolite attributed to T.rex.

How small is small enough to swallow whole, without ripping it to bits first?

I'd say the idea of a normal-sized person going down that throat without being pulled apart first seems a bit iffy.

As for the carrion issue- while one would not expect a tyrannosaur to turn up its nose at it, there is some evidence that it did hunt actively- partially healed tyrannosaur bite marks on bones, for example.

Lycanthromancer
2009-11-13, 01:05 PM
Their teeth were sturdy enough to crush bone- and a lot of bone fragments were found in a very large coprolite attributed to T.rex.

How small is small enough to swallow whole, without ripping it to bits first?

I'd say the idea of a normal-sized person going down that throat without being pulled apart first seems a bit iffy.Depends on the maximum diameter the t-rex throat was capable of expanding to. The esophagus dilates whenever the animal swallows, just like with humans.

How big was the t-rex esophagus? No one knows; it's soft tissue, which doesn't exactly fossilize well.

Also, crocodilians do eat bones they've sheared off with those teeth of theirs...

hamishspence
2009-11-13, 01:07 PM
the important bit isn't the throat- its the back of the skull.

Creatures that specialize in swallowing large prey whole, such as snakes, have a skull that can disarticulate.

Tyrannosaur skull joints were very robust- suggesting it couldn't expand its jaws in the way a snake, or tylosaurine mosasaurs, could

Lycanthromancer
2009-11-13, 01:11 PM
the important bit isn't the throat- its the back of the skull.

Creatures that specialize in swallowing large prey whole, such as snakes, have a skull that can disarticulate.

Tyrannosaur skull joints were very robust- suggesting it couldn't expand its jaws in the way a snake, or tylosaurine mosasaurs, couldI'm not sure about this one. Just what are the dimensions on the average adult t-rex lower jaw?

CasESenSITItiVE
2009-11-13, 01:13 PM
don't you think it's wierd that you went all the way to Eberron to complain about halflings riding pack animals, when halflings riding riding dogs are right from the original 3.5 phb?

hamishspence
2009-11-13, 01:16 PM
I'm not sure about this one. Just what are the dimensions on the average adult t-rex lower jaw?

We know that Sue and Stan had skulls about 55 inches long- I'm not sure how one would work out the maximum size of prey that can pass though those jaws.

But I do know, that there do not appear to be any of the adaptations of a creature that specializes in swallowing large things whole.

Even in the Jurassic Park movie, where the Tyrannosaurus is slightly larger than Sue, it still rips things like goats, or Genarro, up first.

Cyclone231
2009-11-13, 02:48 PM
don't you think it's wierd that you went all the way to Eberron to complain about halflings riding pack animals, when halflings riding riding dogs are right from the original 3.5 phb?

I think riding dogs in core were bred in areas colonized by humans, not halfling-heavy areas. On the other hand, the halflings in Eberron live in the same area as the raptors.

Tavar
2009-11-13, 03:03 PM
I think riding dogs in core were bred in areas colonized by humans, not halfling-heavy areas. On the other hand, the halflings in Eberron live in the same area as the raptors.

:smallconfused:

So, the races that can/could use them don't create the riding dogs. Instead, races that can't and couldn't do? I'm sorry, what?

Doc Roc
2009-11-13, 03:08 PM
So.... Lightning Trains. Talking Robots. A completely bizarre cosmology.*
And you're upset by raptor riding?
I got nothing.












*I personally am quite fond of Eberron, to clarify.

Ormagoden
2009-11-13, 03:11 PM
http://www.dinoriders.com/MainPageDR.html
Insert epic song here!

hamishspence
2009-11-13, 03:14 PM
So.... Lightning Trains. Talking Robots. A completely bizarre cosmology.*
And you're upset by raptor riding?

The idea of predatory avialans being put to harness doesn't bother me- a bit like a combination of training a bird of prey and training an ostrich.

The idea of a 30 pound halfling riding a supposedly Medium 33 pound dinosaur, however- not a good idea.

I prefer that Clawfoots be considered a creature similar in size and weight to Deinonychus.

Woodsman
2009-11-13, 03:19 PM
I really don't get the whole "magic trains" bit.

Airships I can deal with. FF really pulls it off, to give an example. But trains, I draw the line at. I really don't like the idea of the new Zelda game because of the trains (sure, maybe a bit exaggerated, but it doesn't click with me).

Cyclone231
2009-11-13, 03:22 PM
:smallconfused:

So, the races that can/could use them don't create the riding dogs. Instead, races that can't and couldn't do? I'm sorry, what?Humans domesticated dogs, and then produced "riding dogs" from that stock. Smaller wolves are not a sufficient threat to humans that we kill them all. Large raptors are a serious threat to halflings, on the other hand.

Tavar
2009-11-13, 03:23 PM
I really don't get the whole "magic trains" bit.

Airships I can deal with. FF really pulls it off, to give an example. But trains, I draw the line at. I really don't like the idea of the new Zelda game because of the trains (sure, maybe a bit exaggerated, but it doesn't click with me).

I've never quite understood this. What makes a train hard to comprehend? In fact, I'd say a train makes more sense than an airship: it's essentially the same idea as a wagon, except your engine is strong enough to pull many carts, and you're even more confined to your route than a wagon is.

hamishspence
2009-11-13, 03:26 PM
yes- it would be a bit like Flores Man domesticating dire wolves- something of a challenge.

Though if deinonychosaurs were more scavenging than predatory, as some recent theories suggest, it might be a little more workable.

And in a setting with druids, taming might be easier than it would in reality.

Fluffles
2009-11-13, 04:37 PM
For one reason its because Dogs are not large enough, breeding can only do so much. Get me a HORSE SIZED DOG and I'll put a person on it. Then however, I would need to start breeding a horse sized dog capable of carrying a lot of weight on its back.

There are some Mastiffs the size of horses.

Ormur
2009-11-13, 04:37 PM
Dogs are so thoroughly domesticated that I don't think it would be hard breeding them for riding, we're just to big to fit on them. With halflings on the other hand you'd have an incentive. Dogs were the earliest domesticated animal and have loyalty and recognition of human body language bred into them, other pack animals don't have that. Also they're carnivores so it's probably more expensive to keep them fed than ponies.

Woodsman
2009-11-13, 04:50 PM
I've never quite understood this. What makes a train hard to comprehend? In fact, I'd say a train makes more sense than an airship: it's essentially the same idea as a wagon, except your engine is strong enough to pull many carts, and you're even more confined to your route than a wagon is.

The train feels more "Industrial Revolution" era to me than an airship does. A simple balloon or blimp works the best for me, which is basically a bag of lighter-than-air gas.

Asbestos
2009-11-13, 05:03 PM
There are some Mastiffs the size of horses.

Maybe the size of those little freakish dwarf horses they have at kiddie parties, but as I said earlier in the thread (with links!) the biggest recorded dog was an English Mastiff that weighed in at just under 350lbs. That is not remotely close to the size of a horse, a pony, or a camel. Its even less than a large llama. Dogs are NOT as big as horses. If they did exist, maybe we could ride them or something or need to carry around snow shovel sized pooper scoopers.

hamishspence
2009-11-13, 05:27 PM
Yup.

The smallest recorded pony was something like 60 pounds in weight.

a 350 pound mastiff is still more a Medium creature than a Large one (Large size normally starts around 500 pounds with a few rare exceptions)

Hence, a normal sized man riding on a dog is unfeasible (poor dog!)

The smallest Large canid in the game is the Winter Wolf at 450 pounds.

The Gilded Duke
2009-11-13, 05:31 PM
Now I need to design an encounter with a group of Halflings Riding a Battle Titan.

The_Snark
2009-11-13, 06:09 PM
The train feels more "Industrial Revolution" era to me than an airship does. A simple balloon or blimp works the best for me, which is basically a bag of lighter-than-air gas.

True, but then Eberron is an industrial setting. Your typical D&D fantasy setting is vaguely medieval, plus magic. Eberron is post-WWI plus magic. They've had an industrial revolution; since magic is a convenient power source, they use it in place of coal or steam. It has its disadvantages—it's a lot harder to mass-produce, for one thing—but that's beside the point.

Settings such as the Forgotten Realms take a feudal/medieval approach to magic: it's something possessed by individuals, who are generally powerful in their society—from a mage-king to a village healer, magic-users stand apart. It's something that's passed on through apprenticeship. Eberron takes an industrial approach: it's something that can be mass-produced and used for the betterment of society. Or for profit, or war, or whatever—but the mage is not the central figure here; he's just the manufacturer.

In this context, magic trains fit in just fine.

Jade_Tarem
2009-11-13, 06:15 PM
The train feels more "Industrial Revolution" era to me than an airship does. A simple balloon or blimp works the best for me, which is basically a bag of lighter-than-air gas.

I'm pretty sure the whole point of Eberron was to give an industrial revolution feel - only it's the magic revolution. Somewhere in Eberron's history, everyone suddenly had the epiphany, "Oh! We don't have to stay at the same arbitrary level of societal development for the next ten thousand years. Let's start applying magic in ways that make sense!"

Edit: Gah, ninja'd in classic fashon!

AslanCross
2009-11-13, 06:19 PM
The train feels more "Industrial Revolution" era to me than an airship does. A simple balloon or blimp works the best for me, which is basically a bag of lighter-than-air gas.

Eberron's airships are more than just dirigibles--they're kind of sci-fi craft with repulsorlifts and rocket engines, except powered by magic.

Magic of Eberron does qualify that they weren't really going for a traditional medieval fantasy setting anyway. It's sort of a partially-industrialized Renaissance setting. While they do have magic made useful for the commoners, this magic is still the trade of highly-skilled arcane artisans and guilds. The trains are a very useful novelty, but they cost so much to build that in parts where the tracks were destroyed, they still can't fix them. (Granted that those tracks do pass through the Mournland.)

Cyclone231
2009-11-13, 06:22 PM
I'm pretty sure the whole point of Eberron was to give an industrial revolution feel - only it's the magic revolution. Somewhere in Eberron's history, everyone suddenly had the epiphany, "Oh! We don't have to stay at the same arbitrary level of societal development for the next ten thousand years. Let's start applying magic in ways that make sense!"

Edit: Gah, ninja'd in classic fashon!Don't be silly, there's no development in Eberron at anything close to a real world pace.

Tavar
2009-11-13, 06:24 PM
Don't be silly, there's no development in Eberron at anything close to a real world pace.

Why do you say that?

Cyclone231
2009-11-13, 06:29 PM
Why do you say that?The Kingdom of Galifar was around for like a thousand years and was apparently pretty technologically similar to the modern era. The only time the dates of technological developments are given (IIRC), it is "During the Last War." They were a technologically stagnant society which sat around for the better part of a millenium and then built some war machines for the big rumble.

Tavar
2009-11-13, 06:35 PM
So, Ancient China? Or India?

Lycanthromancer
2009-11-13, 06:58 PM
Hence, a normal sized man riding on a dog is unfeasible (poor dog!)Is that where werewolves come from?

Just sayin'. :smalleek:

Cyclone231
2009-11-13, 08:05 PM
So, Ancient China? Or India?A) Neither of those nations was industrial.
B) Neither managed to maintain political stability for over nine hundred years.

Thurbane
2009-11-13, 08:07 PM
Humans domesticated dogs, and then produced "riding dogs" from that stock. Smaller wolves are not a sufficient threat to humans that we kill them all. Large raptors are a serious threat to halflings, on the other hand.
Oh, and Elephants aren't a threat to humans? It seems the core of your problem is you basically don't like halflings domesticating anything. Why would humans domesticate riding dogs that are too small for them to ride, anyway?

Cyclone231
2009-11-13, 08:25 PM
Oh, and Elephants aren't a threat to humans? It seems the core of your problem is you basically don't like halflings domesticating anything.Elephants are not a serious threat to humans; they aren't rival predators, or predators at all. An elephant might be a threat to humans, but as a group they are not competitors, but prey.

Halflings are an inferior species.

Lycanthromancer
2009-11-13, 08:26 PM
Elephants are not a serious threat to humans; they aren't rival predators, or predators at all. An elephant might be a threat to humans, but as a group they are not competitors, but prey.

Halflings are an inferior species.Just try to use that logic against the kobolds.

Tavar
2009-11-13, 08:27 PM
Halflings are an inferior species.
:smallconfused:

I'm just going to say that your argument seems to be based on unfounded premises.

Thurbane
2009-11-13, 08:32 PM
Halflings are an inferior species.
Well, there's the crux, isn't it...halflings shouldn't have nice things. http://www.tarmassia.it/muro/emo/smiley-org-rolleyes.gif

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-11-13, 08:42 PM
It's actually a fairly easy process inD&D to get a predatory mount. Vampiric Fiendish(or Celestial) Horse.

Cyclone231
2009-11-13, 08:47 PM
It's actually a fairly easy process inD&D to get a predatory mount. Vampiric Fiendish(or Celestial) Horse.
Fiendish and Celestial creatures don't need to be tamed, since they have human-like intelligence (Int 3+).

The_Snark
2009-11-13, 08:50 PM
The Kingdom of Galifar was around for like a thousand years and was apparently pretty technologically similar to the modern era. The only time the dates of technological developments are given (IIRC), it is "During the Last War." They were a technologically stagnant society which sat around for the better part of a millenium and then built some war machines for the big rumble.

Er. Today, Eberron is a semi-industrialized society. When Galifar started establishing his kingdom a thousand years ago, Khorvaire was a mostly feudal society: no lightning rail, no City of Towers, no international dragonmarked trade guilds. Therefore, nothing developed during that time?

Just because it isn't talked about doesn't mean nothing happened during that thousand years. Sadly, "Historical and Sociological Developments of the Ancient Kingdoms" is not very high on WotC's list of sourcebooks they'd like to publish, and the existing chapters tend to deal with the exciting bits of history—wars and the fall of empires, not when the first elemental airships were produced. They're sources for an adventuring game, after all—historical details like that don't come up very often, and they've got limited space.

Jade_Tarem
2009-11-13, 09:07 PM
The Kingdom of Galifar was around for like a thousand years and was apparently pretty technologically similar to the modern era. The only time the dates of technological developments are given (IIRC), it is "During the Last War." They were a technologically stagnant society which sat around for the better part of a millenium and then built some war machines for the big rumble.

*twitch*

6000 B.C. - Humans have just started smelting copper, and it is the raddest thing ever.

2000 B.C. - Humans have become pretty darn good at smelting copper. Some people are going a little nuts now, combining it with tin and what have you to produce *gasp* bronze. Humans are thoroughly convinced that witchcraft is responsible for the common cold, and that tall, shiny people live on Mount Olympus and occasionally disguise themselves as animals to come down here and have wild monkey sex with hot mortals. The Incan Empire invents freeze drying as a way to preserve their food, not realizing that they'll be wiped out by Europeans who will then re-invent freeze drying and take all the credit for it - in the 1940's.

1150 B.C. - Humans have now taken to smelting Iron, a metal that makes copper tools and weapons look like toys. Meanwhile, in India and parts of China, people are making steel and laughing at those idiots who think iron is cutting edge technology.

450 B.C. - Democritus dubbs the smallest real unit of matter the "atom." People assume he's speaking about highbrow philosophy, because really, trying to apply this designation to anything scientific would just be goofy.

300 B.C. - Everyone who isn't using at least iron weapons or importing steel from the east is considered laughably obsolite. Aristotle is considered "new wave." Cutting edge advances in medical research reveal that the human body is made of four kinds of "bile," and that all diseases result from an imbalance of these "biles." The Deus Ex Machina literary concept is invented, and roundly decried as a cheap writing cop-out by the same people who explained the creation of spiders as the result of a deific tantrum.

44 B.C. - Julius Ceasar utters the famous line, "Screw the rules, I'm crazy popular right now."

500 A.D. - Pretty much everyone can make steel now, except for those in the Americas. They've used obsidian for their cutting purposes for a while - the fact that a grown man wielding an obsidian macama can cut all the way through a horse in one hit was probably part of the reason they decided not to mess with it. Cutting edge advancements in medical research reveal that witchcraft is responsible for the common cold.

That's 6,500 years to go from copper to steel, which is something people forget when they pull it off in half an hour while playing Age of Empires, and virtually no change in the state of medicine. Contrast this with the fact that we landed on the moon 68 years after figuring out how heavier than air flight works. The space program was almost entirely driven by the Cold War, and war is where the modern computer era got its start too. We were a relatively technologically stagnant society for eight thousand years, and then we built some war machines for the big rumble.

Eberron doesn't represent a modern pace of technological change, but the real world has taken its sweet time to produce new marvels in the past. For instance, naming all of the major, world shaking changes between 450 A.D. and 1450 A.D. (the Dark Ages, from the fall of the Roman Empire to the dawn of the Renaissance) will produce surprisingly few results. That's what the War is in Eberron - the Dark Ages. Now they're going through a magical Renaissance/Industrial Rev.

averagejoe
2009-11-13, 09:29 PM
6000 B.C. - Humans have just started smelting copper, and it is the raddest thing ever.

I still think that copper is the raddest thing ever. Then again, the Romans totally overthrew me, so what do I know.

Also remember that, unlike technical advancements, magical advancements are things that relatively few people are able to make, i.e. you have to be a magic user. Plus you have to sacrifice precious, precious XP's to make/repair magic items, which is a more significant personal investment than time or money.

Asbestos
2009-11-14, 11:47 AM
Halflings are an inferior species.

Please explain this. Halfings are significantly better at using thrown weapons than humans, more dextrous, and have similar intelligence, it would seem that were we to equate ancient Eberron to ancient Earth we'd have an early Homo sapien vs Homo neanderthalis situation with humans being the Neanderthals.

Duos Greanleef
2009-11-14, 12:58 PM
What's so wrong with accepting the fact that this is a fantastic setting.
In fantastic settings (i.e. ANYTHING D&D related) fantastic things happen.
Little people ride fast dinosaurs with teeth.
Big metal men are created from a forge and imbued with sentience.
An entire continent cannot be properly mapped and no to parties will reach the same destination in the same amount of time.
Enormous, warm-blooded, flying reptiles have created a civilization on another, very reclusive continent, based on some prophecy.
A collection of Far Realm beings bred with monks to create an entirely new race.
Society and science has produced modes of mobility powered by elemental beings.
...
This is all just in Eberron alone. Do I really have to get into D&D as a whole? What about RPGs as a whole? What about fiction as a whole?
...
*feels slightly bad for ranting a little bit*
The point that I guess I'm trying to get at is this: We (our characters and their respective worlds) exist for the purpose of the story. Without the story, we are worthless. Without us, the story is worthless. If the story can be made cooler by Halflings riding raptors, then so be it I say. I agree that logic and reason hold a certain place in fantastic settings, but I also believe that this role is dramatically diminished simply by the fact that it is indeed fantastic in nature. Are we really so calloused in our gaming that we can't use our imaginations for something even as SUPER cool as anybody riding a dinosaur? (http://img.yawoot.com/c17306a724eee6d713da1d7589d4fbf7.jpg)

Cyclone231
2009-11-14, 02:45 PM
Little people ride fast dinosaurs with teeth.Implausible, illogical crap.

Big metal men are created from a forge and imbued with sentience.Perfectly plausible magic, and a more interesting use than most.

An entire continent cannot be properly mapped and no to parties will reach the same destination in the same amount of time.Really? I thought Xen'Drik was unmapped because the people in Khorvaire didn't really care that much about exploration like the historical Europeans did at the equivalent point in their history.

Enormous, warm-blooded, flying reptiles have created a civilization on another, very reclusive continent, based on some prophecy.Honestly, it probably makes more sense for dragons to be warm-blooded, since we already know that they have a method of producing internal heat. Prophecies are a fine and ancient tradition of magic, dating back millenia.

A collection of Far Realm beings bred with monks to create an entirely new race.Interspecies breeding is a bit questionable for most, but I'm pretty sure Far Realm critters are based on a full acceptance that their biology won't make sense.

Society and science has produced modes of mobility powered by elemental beings.Okay? So? They harness magical creatures for magical power. I can do that in Werewolf: the Forsaken too, if I bind a spirit to a fetish.

The point that I guess I'm trying to get at is this: We (our characters and their respective worlds) exist for the purpose of the story. Without the story, we are worthless. Without us, the story is worthless. If the story can be made cooler by Halflings riding raptors, then so be it I say. I agree that logic and reason hold a certain place in fantastic settings, but I also believe that this role is dramatically diminished simply by the fact that it is indeed fantastic in nature. Are we really so calloused in our gaming that we can't use our imaginations for something even as SUPER cool as anybody riding a dinosaur? (http://img.yawoot.com/c17306a724eee6d713da1d7589d4fbf7.jpg)I prefer my settings to be cohesive wholes, full of well-defined creatures which make internal sense. If the dinosaurs were magical, or the halflings were (as a SPECIES), I would be fine with it. But they expect me to accept this crap on its face, and it is simply insulting.

Ecalsneerg
2009-11-14, 02:51 PM
If halfings taming dinosaurs is illogical, I'd like to introduce you to guano and some hand gestures creating fire...

It's worth noting that while many aspects of Eberron are designed to make sense (lots of minor magic items are hella common), equal amounts are based on action movies and the like (often both at the same time). Real purpose of magitek trains? To fight on top of! Wands are common magic items? To shoot people with 'guns'! Golems as disposable troops? Terminator! Yeah, some logic is involved. But Eberron is explicitly written to let you play 'action movie' D&D.

Cyclone231
2009-11-14, 03:00 PM
If halfings taming dinosaurs is illogical, I'd like to introduce you to guano and some hand gestures creating fire...
That's called magic. It fits within the rules of the setting.

Ecalsneerg
2009-11-14, 03:04 PM
And yet improbably uses of Handle Animal doesn't fit into the setting? "Tame dinosaur. Ride it." makes a lot more sense than "Become spellcaster, spank reality silly." The former has restrictions on it. The latter has so much less.

Cyclone231
2009-11-14, 03:30 PM
And yet improbably uses of Handle Animal doesn't fit into the setting? "Tame dinosaur. Ride it." makes a lot more sense than "Become spellcaster, spank reality silly." The former has restrictions on it. The latter has so much less.
In Eberron and most other D&D settings, we are asked to assume that the world obeys a set of rules very similar to ours, except for "these" rules, which applies to things like magic and surviving dinosaurs. We assume that gravity is about the same, that humans still have the same organs in the same places (for that matter, we extend this franchise to most humanoids), and that people feel the same emotions. We do not, however, extend this assumption to a very particular set of features: magic. However, animal domestication has nothing to do with magic.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-11-14, 04:18 PM
In Eberron and most other D&D settings, we are asked to assume that the world obeys a set of rules very similar to ours, except for "these" rules, which applies to things like magic and surviving dinosaurs. We assume that gravity is about the same, that humans still have the same organs in the same places (for that matter, we extend this franchise to most humanoids), and that people feel the same emotions. We do not, however, extend this assumption to a very particular set of features: magic. However, animal domestication has nothing to do with magic.Actually, it does. Speak With Animals, Wild Empathy, Animal Companions, Awaken, there are a lot of magical or semi-magical ways of making animals more likely to obey you. That seems like magic affecting domestication just fine.

Cyclone231
2009-11-14, 04:43 PM
Actually, it does. Speak With Animals, Wild Empathy, Animal Companions, Awaken, there are a lot of magical or semi-magical ways of making animals more likely to obey you. That seems like magic affecting domestication just fine.Uh, those spells don't domesticate a species, they produce a temporary magical effect on ONE animal.

RS14
2009-11-14, 04:47 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, since I'm quoting Wikipedia, but:
"Many ungulate species are traditional pack animals, including elephants, camels, the yak, reindeer, goats, water buffalo and llama, and many of the domesticated Equidae (horse family)."
Historically, we hide elephants, camels, yaks, llamas, and horses (don't know about reindeers, goats and water buffalos). What's wrong with halflings riding raptors then?

Pack animals, in the sense that Wikipedia is using it, refers to animals domesticated to carry burdens. Pack animals, as Cyclone is using it, are what Wikipedia refers to as "Pack Hunters;" creatures that hunt in packs.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-11-14, 04:48 PM
Uh, those spells don't domesticate a species, they produce a temporary magical effect on ONE animal.How many animals do you need to start a breeding program, though?

Bayar
2009-11-14, 04:52 PM
The train feels more "Industrial Revolution" era to me than an airship does. A simple balloon or blimp works the best for me, which is basically a bag of lighter-than-air gas.

Are you implying that airships became commonplace before the industrial revolution ?


The Kingdom of Galifar was around for like a thousand years and was apparently pretty technologically similar to the modern era. The only time the dates of technological developments are given (IIRC), it is "During the Last War." They were a technologically stagnant society which sat around for the better part of a millenium and then built some war machines for the big rumble.

Well, wars usually help in development of newer technology. Like the nazis coming up with infrared sniper scopes, allies developing better radar...hell the fighter planes evolved radically between the 2 last ward. And yet, you claim that magically binding an air elemetal in a Khyber dragonshard and sticking all that in a hull, putting it on conductor stones and letting one of those guys with a Dragonmark of passage drive it wont be feasible in a fantasy setting ? Or that Eberron airships were developed during the last war (about 100 years) and deployed for service near the end of the world is not simmilar to real life. Yeah, whatever you say.


Halflings are an inferior species.

Oh, look at us humans, we are the best race ! Lets hate all the other races because they are not humans ! We are smarter than them because we are humans ! They cant tame their own animals !


Implausible, illogical crap.

Well, taming dinosaurs is that, but using magic to tame them like, say, charm monster or wild empathy is perfectly within the rules ?


Really? I thought Xen'Drik was unmapped because the people in Khorvaire didn't really care that much about exploration like the historical Europeans did at the equivalent point in their history.

They actually care, Xen'drik is the source of the creation forges, Schemas, and all sorts of wacky eldritch machines. Giants were really advanced magical-wise, until they got pwn'd by dragons.


I prefer my settings to be cohesive wholes, full of well-defined creatures which make internal sense. If the dinosaurs were magical, or the halflings were (as a SPECIES), I would be fine with it. But they expect me to accept this crap on its face, and it is simply insulting.

*facepalm* GELATINOUS CUBES. Dont make sense at all. But you are ok with them. Dolgrims, which are 2 goblins squashed together, dont make any sense. You claim that halflings riding dinosaurs is bull****. What the hell are these 2 then ?


Uh, those spells don't domesticate a species, they produce a temporary magical effect on ONE animal.

Wild empathy a raptor per week. Have at least 1/10 of halfling population do that. For about 1000-2000 years. Domesticated dinosaurs.

Inyssius Tor
2009-11-14, 05:02 PM
Implausible, illogical crap.

Why is that? Spell it out for me.


Halflings are an inferior species.

Oh, really? Why do you claim that?


I'm not going to claim that the entire setting is illogical, mind you. I think that, given a couple of specific assumptions, it's actually all fairly consistent.

Tiki Snakes
2009-11-14, 05:13 PM
'Claw-Feet'/Raptors are like bipedal, scaley(and/or feathery) wolves. They are smart, hunt in packs, and are pretty dangerous.

Early Humans, despite being biologically inferior in almost every way to the other species of human, managed to domesticate Wolves, (Or vica versa) to their mutual benefit. They became an excellent hunting tool, and are probably the main reason why we survived and thrived in place of the other tribes of man. So to speak.

I don't see a huge leap from Humans domesticating wolves to Halflings taming the scaley equivalent. The only major difference is, due to size disparity, it is appropriate and beneficial for Halflings to Ride their new hunting partners, rather than run along-side.

Thurbane
2009-11-14, 05:55 PM
Actually, it does. Speak With Animals, Wild Empathy, Animal Companions, Awaken, there are a lot of magical or semi-magical ways of making animals more likely to obey you. That seems like magic affecting domestication just fine.
I totally agree with this. With magical assistance, and/or heroic use of the Handle Animal skill, the Halflings could have been using a selective breeding program for generations to breed less aggressive/less pack minded/more controllable dinos.

Humans did this with wolves in the real world, without the assistance of magic. A sustained program of selective breeding can radically change the traits of a species over a period of generations.

Cyclone231
2009-11-14, 06:54 PM
*facepalm* GELATINOUS CUBES. Dont make sense at all. But you are ok with them. Dolgrims, which are 2 goblins squashed together, dont make any sense. You claim that halflings riding dinosaurs is bull****. What the hell are these 2 then ?Dolgrims are aberrations. Gelatinous cubes were made by some crazy wizard. They both make sense in a magical sense.

Wild empathy a raptor per week. Have at least 1/10 of halfling population do that. For about 1000-2000 years. Domesticated dinosaurs.
Wild Empathy makes that particular dinosaur empathetic. It has no long term ability to change dinosaur behavior on the genetic level, just as Diplomacy doesn't make people's children like you no matter how many times you use it.

Jade_Tarem
2009-11-14, 07:05 PM
If the dinosaurs were magical, or the halflings were (as a SPECIES), I would be fine with it.

The dinosaurs are magical. Their magic is that they're magical for the purposes of being domesticated magically. Happy now?

Cyclone231
2009-11-14, 07:09 PM
The dinosaurs are magical. Their magic is that they're magical for the purposes of being domesticated magically. Happy now?

Um, they're never mentioned as being magical in any of the source books I've read. Have you got one that does list them as having magical attributes?

Jade_Tarem
2009-11-14, 07:18 PM
It's a super-special errata that they're planning to make. The magical WotC fairy told me so.

ShadowFighter15
2009-11-14, 07:23 PM
Wild Empathy makes that particular dinosaur empathetic. It has no long term ability to change dinosaur behavior on the genetic level, just as Diplomacy doesn't make people's children like you no matter how many times you use it.

Perhaps, but you tame two dinos with Wild Empathy or whatever and you can hand-raise the kids; getting them used to being around and handled by halflings. Is it that hard to follow?

Cyclone231
2009-11-14, 07:25 PM
Perhaps, but you tame two dinos with Wild Empathy or whatever and you can hand-raise the kids; getting them used to being around and handled by halflings. Is it that hard to follow?
"Raising the animal" is not how domestication works, happy to help.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-11-14, 07:40 PM
"Raising the animal" is not how domestication works, happy to help.What is the issue you have with this? Pack hunters can't be domesticated? Wolves. Raptors can't be trained? Wild Empathy. Non-riding animals can't be bred to be ridden? Horses. Animals can't be bred out of their difficult traits and into the ones the breeder wants? Darwin.

I'm just trying to figure out where the sticking point is.

AshDesert
2009-11-14, 07:48 PM
"Raising the animal" is not how domestication works, happy to help.

Your right, you have to raise multiple generations of the animal, and specifically breed them for their friendliness towards humans. Congratulations after a few generations (depending on the intelligence and willingness of the species in question), you have a domesticated animal. Now, granted, this isn't going to work with all species of animals, but if you assume that wolves and Clawfeet have a similar intelligence level, and humans and halflings have a similar intelligence level, then I see no reason why the halflings couldn't have domesticated Clawfeet.

So, now that the halflings have domesticated Clawfeet as hunting partners, but they aren't even close to fast enough to keep up with them when running, and they're much smaller than the Clawfeet, so why not ride on top of them. It would seem like the next logical step to me.

But, I guess there really isn't much of a point arguing this, as you're willing to accept hexapodal, fire-breathing, warm-blooded reptiles, but not that halflings could have possibly tamed an animal for which a relationship would be mutually beneficial.

Cyclone231
2009-11-14, 07:54 PM
What is the issue you have with this? Pack hunters can't be domesticated? Wolves. Raptors can't be trained? Wild Empathy. Non-riding animals can't be bred to be ridden? Horses. Animals can't be bred out of their difficult traits and into the ones the breeder wants? Darwin.

I'm just trying to figure out where the sticking point is.

People don't ride wolves. People don't ride any pack hunters. They're built wrong, and the ones which are big enough to be ridden get inevitably killed because they're megafauna and that's what humans (and humanoids) do to local megafauna that competes with them.

Alteran
2009-11-14, 07:59 PM
They're built wrong, and the ones which are big enough to be ridden get inevitably killed because they're megafauna and that's what humans (and humanoids) do to local megafauna that competes with them.

We do? What species of megafauna have we killed off in the past?

Furthermore, I don't think we've ever killed off any species because they competed with us. If they compete with us, then they're a formidable challenge to us. This means that it would be very difficult to eliminate them, especially if we're talking about destroying an entire species. The closest we've gotten to doing that is with the Neanderthals, and that was more a case of them being out-competed.

We've driven many different species to extinction, but I don't think we've ever done it because they competed with us.

Cyclone231
2009-11-14, 08:08 PM
We do? What species of megafauna have we killed off in the past?

Furthermore, I don't think we've ever killed off any species because they competed with us. If they compete with us, then they're a formidable challenge to us. This means that it would be very difficult to eliminate them, especially if we're talking about destroying an entire species. The closest we've gotten to doing that is with the Neanderthals, and that was more a case of them being out-competed.

We've driven many different species to extinction, but I don't think we've ever done it because they competed with us.

Dire wolves? Neanderthals?

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-11-14, 08:09 PM
People don't ride wolves. People don't ride any pack hunters. They're built wrong, and the ones which are big enough to be ridden get inevitably killed because they're megafauna and that's what humans (and humanoids) do to local megafauna that competes with them.Humans domesticate them first, then Halflings ride them. After all, you don't seem to object to Riding Dogs.

kamikasei
2009-11-14, 08:11 PM
But they expect me to accept this crap on its face, and it is simply insulting.

How about goblins riding wolves?

Cyclone231
2009-11-14, 08:19 PM
How about goblins riding wolves?
Aren't they buddies with Wargs, who are intelligent wolves?

Alteran
2009-11-14, 08:24 PM
Dire wolves? Neanderthals?

I already mentioned Neanderthals. We didn't kill them off because they were competing with us, we actually didn't kill them off directly. We just out-competed them. We took their land and food sources, but there was no systematic extermination of them. Violent conflicts obviously arose between the two groups, but those weren't enough to eliminate them. They died because they needed the exact same things as we did, but we were better at getting them.

However, the Cro-Magnon (human) and Neanderthal relationship was obviously more complicated than that. The possibility of a genocide of sorts has not been ruled out, even if it's not the prevailing theory. Even if it turns out to be true, I would hesitate to classify it as the elimination of a competing animal species. They were extremely similar to us, to the extent that I might sooner consider it a racial issue. They were more distinct than the different races of humans, but they were remarkably similar in the most important ways.

Dire wolves were not killed by humans. We may have been one factor that lead to their death, but we did not kill them off. We weren't even the main factor. The main cause was the extinction of the ice age mammals who were ill-suited to life in warmer climates, as these species were the main sources of food for the dire wolves. We may have sped up their demise to a degree by killing some of the other animals that they could eat, but in the end they just weren't suited to living in a post-ice age world.

While we don't exterminate competing fauna, of course many of them will die as a result of competition. This is because we both require the same resources (putting us in competition), and we're better at getting those resources than they are. We get the resources instead, and the other species that require them eventually dies out. Violent interaction is almost inevitable, but not even close to the amount that would be required to eliminate the entirety of a species. Humans have, rarely, eliminated entire species by force (Great Auk, sort of), but we've never done this with a species that can seriously compete with us. It would be unnecessary, dangerous, and incredibly difficult.

Tiki Snakes
2009-11-14, 08:34 PM
Plus, two facts;
Halflings are not human.

From a Halfling point of view, there is a LOT of Mega-Fauna, inclidng normal wolves, claw-feet, Displacer-Beasts, Dragons, Humans, Elves, Dwarves, Orcs, Cats,
etc.

Are you really claiming that the halflings should have killed all of these competing predators off already?

kamikasei
2009-11-14, 08:34 PM
Aren't they buddies with Wargs, who are intelligent wolves?

Yes, but I don't believe they're supposed to only ride wargs and not normal wolves. Besides, intelligence isn't the issue. You were saying that raptors, as pack hunters, would be physiologically ill-suited to being ridden, yet wolves, as pack hunters, are used as mounts in D&D, and not simply in Eberron. So your nit isn't with Eberron specifically, but with the fact that D&D as a system treats all kinds of creatures as suitable mounts when they shouldn't really work.

Why is your ire reserved for the Talenta halflings, and not for Belkar's riding dog or Hinjo's Argent?

Fhaolan
2009-11-14, 08:34 PM
Dire wolves? Neanderthals?

Dire wolves are not technically megafauna, given that a dire wolf was not significantly larger than a modern grey wolf. In fact they were smaller than the largest modern breeds of dog are currently. The idea that a dire wolf is 5' tall at the shoulder and whatnot is utter fantasy. They did, however, die off along with a number of creatures that are classified as North American Megafauna at the end of the Pleistocene period and the beginning of the Holocene period. According to current research this was likely due not to the arrival of humans accross the land bridge but the arrival of grey wolves just before, who outcompeted the dire wolf as they were faster, more efficient, more aggressive, and if brain mass is any indication (only vaguely, but it's all we got), more intelligent. This pattern is repeated for most of the Megafauna in the region as they were outcompeted by more aggressive niche-equivalents that were coming from Eurasia. This had happened before, when North America and South America landbridge formed (still there), and where the marsupial South American large animals (such as the sparassodonts) were outcompeted by the placedentals/eutheria from North America.

There is a theory (currently unsubstatiated, but I know the people who are working on the DNA research at this moment), that the Neanderthals were not completely killed off, but absorbed into the human gene pool. Which, combined with modern psychological research, points to one of the things implied in D&D. That humans will try it on with anything. :smallcool:

The_Snark
2009-11-14, 08:38 PM
People don't ride wolves. People don't ride any pack hunters. They're built wrong...

But halflings weigh, on average, 30 lbs. You're right that wolves and most other fast, predatory animals aren't built to carry much weight, but as somebody pointed out, children can ride dogs.

I'm still not quite getting where your "dinosaurs are impossible to domesticate" point comes from. A quick and probably slapdash read-through provides me with "magical domestication doesn't work", "hunting animals can't be domesticated", and "halflings are an inferior species". The first one is dubious and kind of beside the point, the second is untrue, and the third... uh, yeah.

Can you sum up your argument? Why can't halflings domesticate dinosaurs?

Also:

Real purpose of magitek trains? To fight on top of!

Thank you for mentioning this important point, which I neglected to mention. The trains make sense in the setting, but this is the reason why the designers felt they should be there.

Cyclone231
2009-11-14, 08:39 PM
But halflings weigh, on average, 30 lbs. You're right that wolves and most other fast, predatory animals aren't built to carry much weight, but as somebody pointed out, children can ride dogs.

I'm still not quite getting where your "dinosaurs are impossible to domesticate" point comes from. A quick and probably slapdash read-through provides me with "magical domestication doesn't work", "hunting animals can't be domesticated", and "halflings are an inferior species". The first one is dubious and kind of beside the point, the second is untrue, and the third... uh, yeah.

Can you sum up your argument? Why can't halflings domesticate dinosaurs?Uh, halflings totally can domesticate dinosaurs. But they can't domesticate pack hunting dinosaurs and then ride on top of them.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-11-14, 08:41 PM
Uh, halflings totally can domesticate dinosaurs. But they can't domesticate pack hunting dinosaurs and then ride on top of them.Wolves are a pack hunting predator. They were domesticated(dogs). And then Halflings started to ride on them.

Cyclone231
2009-11-14, 08:44 PM
Wolves are a pack hunting predator. They were domesticated(dogs). And then Halflings started to ride on them.
Presumably halflings were not the ones who originally domesticated wolves. I already said this, jeez.

The_Snark
2009-11-14, 08:47 PM
Uh, halflings totally can domesticate dinosaurs. But they can't domesticate pack hunting dinosaurs and then ride on top of them.
Ah, that's a fairer point. But I'm not so sure—dromeosaurids might be unsuited to bearing a rider, but halflings are pretty light. They're unlikely to have the stamina to carry a rider for very long, but I gather that they use different dinosaurs for general travel, like Triceratops, and only break out the raptors when hunting or raiding.

It probably isn't totally realistic, but we can tolerate it for much the same reasons we tolerate people riding gryffons (which logically shouldn't be able to take off alone, much less with a rider).

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-11-14, 08:50 PM
Presumably halflings were not the ones who originally domesticated wolves. I already said this, jeez.Are you sure it was Halflings that originally domesticated them? It could have been humans or elves, and the halflings just got it from them.

Cyclone231
2009-11-14, 08:51 PM
It probably isn't totally realistic, but we can tolerate it for much the same reasons we tolerate people riding gryffons (which logically shouldn't be able to take off alone, much less with a rider).
Gryffons are magic. Dromeosaurids aren't.

The_Snark
2009-11-14, 08:59 PM
Gryffons are magic. Dromeosaurids aren't.

I've never gotten the feeling that there's anything magical about them barring their origins, but if you insist on a mundane example, dire bats. For that matter, giant insects and spiders, which go a step further by being too large to even breathe properly.

Tiki Snakes
2009-11-14, 09:02 PM
Presumably halflings were not the ones who originally domesticated wolves. I already said this, jeez.

Goblins are quite capable of taking Wolves, (not Dogs, not domesticated animals, WOLVES) and treating them as a valid riding animal.

In what way are halflings deficient so that similar feats are beyond them?

Cyclone231
2009-11-14, 09:04 PM
I've never gotten the feeling that there's anything magical about them barring their origins, but if you insist on a mundane example, dire bats. For that matter, giant insects and spiders, which go a step further by being too large to even breathe properly.Okay, those are also unrealistic. Your point being?

Goblins are quite capable of taking Wolves, (not Dogs, not domesticated animals, WOLVES) and treating them as a valid riding animal.

In what way are halflings deficient so that similar feats are beyond them? The strategic alliance with Wargs grants the goblins a clear method of "domesticating" wolves; their Warg buddies tell the wolves what to do, since Wargs are just intelligent wolves. Simple.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-11-14, 09:06 PM
Okay, those are also unrealistic. Your point being?Why object to the Raptors, then?
The strategic alliance with Wargs grants the goblins a clear method of "domesticating" wolves; their Warg buddies tell the wolves what to do, since Wargs are just intelligent wolves. Simple.Wargs are no more able to communicate with wolves than we are. Speak With Animals is far better for that.

Tiki Snakes
2009-11-14, 09:07 PM
Okay, those are also unrealistic. Your point being?
The strategic alliance with Wargs grants the goblins a clear method of "domesticating" wolves; their Warg buddies tell the wolves what to do, since Wargs are just intelligent wolves. Simple.

Halfling Druid awakens a dominant Raptor, problem solved, then?

The_Snark
2009-11-14, 09:08 PM
Okay, those are also unrealistic. Your point being?

D&D contains silly and unrealistic things, but they're there because some people like them enough to ignore it.

Which is not too far off what your original post said, but hey, we got an excuse to post for 5-odd pages.

kamikasei
2009-11-14, 09:28 PM
The strategic alliance with Wargs grants the goblins a clear method of "domesticating" wolves; their Warg buddies tell the wolves what to do, since Wargs are just intelligent wolves. Simple.

So the only objection to "domesticating" wolves is the difficulty in training and controlling them, not the difficulty of getting them to actually bear a rider because of their pack-hunter-oriented anatomy? So by the same logic a halfling should be perfectly capable of having a raptor bear him as a mount, just that the raptor might not be willing to do so, rather than incapable of carrying the weight?

I just want to get this point clearly answered.

Cyclone231
2009-11-14, 09:31 PM
So the only objection to "domesticating" wolves is the difficulty in training and controlling them, not the difficulty of getting them to actually bear a rider because of their pack-hunter-oriented anatomy? So by the same logic a halfling should be perfectly capable of having a raptor bear him as a mount, just that the raptor might not be willing to do so, rather than incapable of carrying the weight?

I just want to get this point clearly answered.

For small creatures like halflings and goblins, I do not find it difficult to imagine they could ride these creatures, but that they would/could domesticate them.

kamikasei
2009-11-14, 09:35 PM
Actually, looking back, I was being unfair. The argument about physical ability to support a rider was coming from other posters, not you. My apologies.

That said, I still don't see why you bring this up as an issue for raptors in Eberron but not the host of other implausible mounts throughout D&D. This is something that the system just doesn't give a crap about modeling with anything resembling realism, and it's not a detail that many people really care about in setting design anyway.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-11-14, 09:36 PM
For small creatures like halflings and goblins, I do not find it difficult to imagine they could ride these creatures, but that they would/could domesticate them.AGAIN:
Are you sure it was Halflings that originally domesticated them? It could have been humans or elves, and the halflings just got it from them.

Please stop ignoring this point.

Cyclone231
2009-11-14, 09:40 PM
AGAIN:

Please stop ignoring this point.I am reasonably certain that humans never seriously encroached on the halfling/dinosaur territory in Eberron, so that's not really possible.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-11-14, 09:47 PM
I am reasonably certain that humans never seriously encroached on the halfling/dinosaur territory in Eberron, so that's not really possible.Any of the races could have. Even halflings hiring trainers. This was a thousand years ago, so it wouldn't surprise me if the original race stopped using them at some point.

The_Snark
2009-11-14, 09:51 PM
Uh, halflings totally can domesticate dinosaurs. But they can't domesticate pack hunting dinosaurs and then ride on top of them.

For small creatures like halflings and goblins, I do not find it difficult to imagine they could ride these creatures, but that they would/could domesticate them.

*blink* Whahey?

That contradiction aside, I'm not really seeing that the humanoid's size has such a huge impact on whether an animal can be domesticated. It might make it a little bit harder to capture and discipline the animals, but probably not impossible.

sofawall
2009-11-14, 09:54 PM
*blink* Whahey?

That contradiction aside, I'm not really seeing that the humanoid's size has such a huge impact on whether an animal can be domesticated. It might make it a little bit harder to capture and discipline the animals, but probably not impossible.

"The size of dinosaur does not matter, but instead whether it is a pack animal."

I suspect the above is what was meant?

Tiki Snakes
2009-11-14, 09:59 PM
So, either Dogs are unrealistic because you can't domesticate Pack Hunters, or Elephant Riding is a myth, because you cannot domesticate creatures bigger than you?

Jade_Tarem
2009-11-14, 10:12 PM
I'm not sure, I think his original point was that you can't ride pack hunters.

I do wonder, though, why it's so hard to believe that in the distant past, a halfling named Frodo Baggins found a magic ring, and that ring granted him three wishes. His first wish was to be a main character in an epic fantasy. His second was to survive said epic fantasy, and that his third wish was to allow the halflings of Eberron to domesticate and ride any dinosaur they wanted to.

I mean, that would fix everything. And it's so easy - all you have to do is believe that something like that happened, but apparently if the rulebook of a game that is entirely about creativity and imagination doesn't explicity state something in text, it can't happen.

Cyclone231
2009-11-14, 10:18 PM
A species of pack hunters which are large enough for halflings to ride are also too large and too dangerous for halflings to domesticate. A species of pack hunters which halflings could domesticate would have to be much smaller.

Thurbane
2009-11-14, 10:27 PM
Folks, I think it's safe to assume that no amount of logic will persuade Cyclone that Halflings could domestic pack dinosaurs and use them for riding. He has used his own circular logic and tactical ignoring of facts as presented to come to this conclusion.

I can't help but feel we're all feeding a troll. :smallredface:

The_Snark
2009-11-14, 10:57 PM
A species of pack hunters which are large enough for halflings to ride are also too large and too dangerous for halflings to domesticate. A species of pack hunters which halflings could domesticate would have to be much smaller.

You seem to be assuming that because humans didn't domesticate pack hunters large enough for them to ride, it is impossible to do so. I don't think you can conclude this, because there aren't any pack animals large enough for us to ride.

There are pack hunters larger than wolves, but not many; lions and orcas are the only ones that spring to mind. Orcas were not domesticated for obvious reasons. Lions were not domesticated because they're cats, and cats do not domesticate very well. Bears, most big cats, and most other big predators you could name are solitary, and solitary animals also don't domesticate well.

Dromeosaurs were (probably) pack animals, and therefore used to recognizing social structures; they were also (probably) pretty smart, as dinosaurs go. The only tricky factor is that they're capable of feeding on halflings, but ditto with wolves and humans, and we managed it.

Halflings could take a velociraptor captive, with a bit of effort. A solitary captive velociraptor is not going to lash out at a bunch of halflings, because it is not stupid; they then have the opportunity to start taming it, and if you can tame one... Eventually, you have a breeding population, and can train them from hatching.

Humans did not domesticate wolves by being larger and stronger than them, they did so because they were more intelligent. Size is tangential—it's an asset, but it's not everything.

Exarch
2009-11-14, 10:58 PM
I think I'm going to agree with Cyclone on this. The thing about domesticated riding animals in real life is that they are all herbivores. Riding animals have to be significantly larger than what they're carrying, and if it's a predator that has to choose between carrying something small that it can eat or going through the work of carrying it to find something to eat then having to split the meal...I think the carnivore is going to go for the easier target, especially considering that's what they do when attempting to find prey from herd animals.

Now, goblins were brought up with riding wolves. In most DnD settings, they're shown to have a lower regard for individual life. In that sense, what do they care if a few goblins get killed while attempting to train wolves? They're also probably more likely, as creatures that are generally considered evil, to use tactics that make the wolves obey the goblins out of fear.

Alteran
2009-11-14, 11:09 PM
A species of pack hunters which are large enough for halflings to ride are also too large and too dangerous for halflings to domesticate. A species of pack hunters which halflings could domesticate would have to be much smaller.

What, so elephants aren't dangerous? They're not carnivores, but they can still be extremely aggressive. And when an elephant gets aggressive, people die. They are very dangerous animals, and they were still domesticated.


I think I'm going to agree with Cyclone on this. The thing about domesticated riding animals in real life is that they are all herbivores. Riding animals have to be significantly larger than what they're carrying, and if it's a predator that has to choose between carrying something small that it can eat or going through the work of carrying it to find something to eat then having to split the meal...I think the carnivore is going to go for the easier target, especially considering that's what they do when attempting to find prey from herd animals.



All domesticated riding animals were herbivores. This proves nothing, because the only animals large enough to be ridden by humans are herbivores. However, the fact that carnivores have been domesticated makes it hard for me to believe that theory. The fact that they're not being ridden makes little difference here. They don't attack humans, they do what they're told, and then they get fed. Whether their food is meat or plants makes little difference. Potential for domestication (for riding or other purposes) has very little to do with diet, it's more about intelligence and general temperament.

Ormur
2009-11-14, 11:20 PM
Small intelligent Halflings with tools and weapons have massive advantages over beasts, even carnivores that can eat them. If there was a carnivore of sufficient size and temperament to be domesticated it could probably be done. Sure it would be dangerous but I'm also sure that domesticating wild wolves was no easy task. That there aren't any large carnivores that can be domesticated doesn't mean it couldn't happen. Dinosaurs are extinct and most mammalian megafauna was exterminated by stone age hunters, maybe among them was a large pack animal we could have ridden.

It goes both ways, there are also plenty of herbivorous herd animals that can't be domesticated, like Zebras and Bison.

Edit: Even if Dogs are a special case, you can just say the Eberron dinosaurs are so too. Or maybe they were domesticated by humans first.

Exarch
2009-11-14, 11:21 PM
All domesticated riding animals were herbivores. This proves nothing, because the only animals large enough to be ridden by humans are herbivores. However, the fact that carnivores have been domesticated makes it hard for me to believe that theory. The fact that they're not being ridden makes little difference here. They don't attack humans, they do what they're told, and then they get fed. Whether their food is meat or plants makes little difference. Potential for domestication (for riding or other purposes) has very little to do with diet, it's more about intelligence and general temperament.

Yes, and the only carnivores that we've had any wide spread success in domesticating have been canines. Canines are not some three times our size, as is the case of halflings and their dinosaur mounts. Sigfried and Roy, as well as the two guys that raised and released the lion, are pretty much outliers in the common theme of things. Snakes aren't so much domesticated as they're docile when fed and as long as we keep them fed, they won't go after the baby. It's still recommended that your snake does not get around your baby however.

Domesticating large herbivores is easier because they aren't going to be looking at their riders and handlers as a source of food, which a large carnivore will. We can give herbivores part of what we cultivate, and they're usually pretty happy to do menial brute work as long as they're fed. And even then they're pretty dangerous, such as with elephants.

Exarch
2009-11-14, 11:26 PM
Small intelligent Halflings with tools and weapons have massive advantages over beasts, even carnivores that can eat them. If there was a carnivore of sufficient size and temperament to be domesticated it could probably be done. Sure it would be dangerous but I'm also sure that domesticating wild wolves was no easy task. That there aren't any large carnivores that can be domesticated doesn't mean it couldn't happen. Dinosaurs are extinct and most mammalian megafauna was exterminated by stone age hunters, maybe among them was a large pack animal we could have ridden.

It goes both ways, there are also plenty of herbivorous herd animals that can't be domesticated, like Zebras and Bison.

The thing about halflings with weapons and their raptor mounts is that raptors are pack animals and significantly larger than the halfling. Actually, not even just significantly larger, they weigh multiple times the halfling. They stand quite a bit higher. Sure, a halfling can have a sword and shield and armor...but when a beast can fit your head in his mount, to say nothing about being able to crush you just by jumping on top of you, it doesn't really mean all that much. At bes, the halflings would form up defend against the raptors and may kill them with reach and missile weapons, but those tactics are not the same as domestication.

sonofzeal
2009-11-14, 11:27 PM
What, fundamentally is the difference between Halflings riding "Riding Dogs" (something most of us accept for point of fact), and riding dinosaurs? Granted the latter is more lethal if training is done poorly, but your average large dog is already fully capable of killing a human, let alone a halfling.

Humans domesticated wolves, which became dogs, yes? Despite the fact that a wolf can fairly easily kill a man if it wants to and isn't prevented somehow? So what's the big deal with Halflings and Dinosaurs, in a world where there's all sorts of magical protections the Halflings could use to help (Speak With Animals, Charm Animals, Wild Empathy, Awaken, Dominate Monster, etc)

Alteran
2009-11-14, 11:31 PM
Yes, and the only carnivores that we've had any wide spread success in domesticating have been canines. Canines are not some three times our size, as is the case of halflings and their dinosaur mounts. Sigfried and Roy, as well as the two guys that raised and released the lion, are pretty much outliers in the common theme of things. Snakes aren't so much domesticated as they're docile when fed and as long as we keep them fed, they won't go after the baby. It's still recommended that your snake does not get around your baby however.

Domesticating large herbivores is easier because they aren't going to be looking at their riders and handlers as a source of food, which a large carnivore will. We can give herbivores part of what we cultivate, and they're usually pretty happy to do menial brute work as long as they're fed. And even then they're pretty dangerous, such as with elephants.

Have we tried domesticated most carnivores? I'm not saying it can be done, but I don't think we've put in a lot of effort. At the very least, it would be dangerous at first.

Also, we really can't assume anything about the psychology of these creatures. They are at least somewhat based off of real creatures, but not ones that we've had any direct experience with. They're not even similar to creatures that we've had direct experience with, all of their closer relatives went extinct at the same time. In reality I'd be surprised if the equivalent creatures could be domesticated, but I can deal with it in the context of D&D. In a world with literal gods, magic, and dragons, somewhat more intelligent and trainable dinosaurs don't even begin to stretch my suspension of disbelief.

sonofzeal
2009-11-14, 11:33 PM
Also: Halflings aren't the only D&D humanoids who ride dinosaurs (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/mmiii_gallery/82982.jpg). And this time, it's not even campaign-specific! Can't blame this one on Eberron!

Jade_Tarem
2009-11-14, 11:36 PM
Have we tried domesticated most carnivores? I'm not saying it can be done, but I don't think we've put in a lot of effort. At the very least, it would be dangerous at first.

Also, we really can't assume anything about the psychology of these creatures. They are at least somewhat based off of real creatures, but not ones that we've had any direct experience with. They're not even similar to creatures that we've had direct experience with, all of their closer relatives went extinct at the same time. In reality I'd be surprised if the equivalent creatures could be domesticated, but I can deal with it in the context of D&D. In a world with literal gods, magic, and dragons, somewhat more intelligent and trainable dinosaurs don't even begin to stretch my suspension of disbelief.

And therein is the problem. I'm sorry to put it so harshly, but I just think the core of the problem is a crippling lack of imagination. Those who have a problem with halflings domesticating this fictional dinosaur in this fictional universe are simply incapable of imagining that maybe it can be done, and then filling in the details themselves.

Or maybe they can imagine it, but now they've invested six pages worth of effort into arguing with people about it, and quitting now would be like admitting that it was a silly thing to get wound up about, so here we are. I'm inclined to believe this second one, since the core of the opposing argument has been reduced to HALFLINGS CAN'T DO IT I CAN'T HEAR YOU LALALALALALALALALA.

Pyron
2009-11-14, 11:36 PM
Also: Halflings aren't the only D&D humanoids who ride dinosaurs (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/mmiii_gallery/82982.jpg). And this time, it's not even campaign-specific! Can't blame this one on Eberron!

Is that a purple dinosaur?

sonofzeal
2009-11-14, 11:40 PM
Is that a purple dinosaur?
It may well be!

AslanCross
2009-11-14, 11:50 PM
Is that a purple dinosaur?

A genetically-engineered purple dinosaur bred for battle, no less.

Cyclone231
2009-11-15, 12:07 AM
And therein is the problem. I'm sorry to put it so harshly, but I just think the core of the problem is a crippling lack of imagination. Those who have a problem with halflings domesticating this fictional dinosaur in this fictional universe are simply incapable of imagining that maybe it can be done, and then filling in the details themselves.That's because it cannot. It is physically impossible. Your disagreement only shows your own lack of knowledge on the subject of animal domestication.

I'm inclined to believe this second one, since the core of the opposing argument has been reduced to HALFLINGS CAN'T DO IT I CAN'T HEAR YOU LALALALALALALALALA.Halflings are an inferior species. :smallannoyed:

They lack the character and intellect of humans which would allow them to tame animals. They are thieving savages and cowards.

Inyssius Tor
2009-11-15, 12:09 AM
Halflings are an inferior species. :smallannoyed:

They lack the character and intellect of humans which would allow them to tame animals. They are thieving savages and cowards.







...








...







... what?

Exarch
2009-11-15, 12:10 AM
Have we tried domesticated most carnivores? I'm not saying it can be done, but I don't think we've put in a lot of effort. At the very least, it would be dangerous at first.

Also, we really can't assume anything about the psychology of these creatures. They are at least somewhat based off of real creatures, but not ones that we've had any direct experience with. They're not even similar to creatures that we've had direct experience with, all of their closer relatives went extinct at the same time. In reality I'd be surprised if the equivalent creatures could be domesticated, but I can deal with it in the context of D&D. In a world with literal gods, magic, and dragons, somewhat more intelligent and trainable dinosaurs don't even begin to stretch my suspension of disbelief.

I'd be surprised if humanity didn't come across an animal that we didn't try to domesticate, if only because it'd be cool to do so. And then I'm sure we gave up on it because it was unsuccessful.

The Eberron book states that this little critter is a cousin to the Megaraptor and other sized one, and it states that even after being domesticated they retain their predatory instincts.

I can see the argument about gods and wizards and dragons, that's suspension of disbelief. But when there's a creature that's supposed to be a real creature from our world, it should act accordingly. That's what the MM tells to do with the megaraptor and smaller cousin, so why wouldn't it be true with the smallest cousin?

Truth be told, it's part of the Eberron lore and that's how I play it. I don't even think about it when playing in that setting, and if I did I'd inclined to say that A Wizard Did It and be done with it. Doesn't prevent me from raising issue on the internet.


And therein is the problem. I'm sorry to put it so harshly, but I just think the core of the problem is a crippling lack of imagination. Those who have a problem with halflings domesticating this fictional dinosaur in this fictional universe are simply incapable of imagining that maybe it can be done, and then filling in the details themselves.

Or maybe they can imagine it, but now they've invested six pages worth of effort into arguing with people about it, and quitting now would be like admitting that it was a silly thing to get wound up about, so here we are. I'm inclined to believe this second one, since the core of the opposing argument has been reduced to HALFLINGS CAN'T DO IT I CAN'T HEAR YOU LALALALALALALALALA.

Thank you for saying that people who disagree with you are unimaginative, because that's completely the only way that it can be. Never mind that creatures based on real creatures should act accordingly.

Inyssius Tor
2009-11-15, 12:20 AM
I'd be surprised if humanity didn't come across an animal that we didn't try to domesticate, if only because it'd be cool to do so. And then I'm sure we gave up on it because it was unsuccessful.

Indeed. In the millennia after the Great Leap Forward, humans have attempted to domesticate every single animal extant today. It turns out a number of distinct criteria all need to be satisfied for the domestication of a species to be possible; and, as such (barring those which we couldn't even try to domesticate until we had submarines, which are better), the animals we have domesticated are the animals which can be domesticated.

(They need to be herbivorous or omnivorous, because in reality apex predators are a bitch to feed--although in D&D this is not the case, for whatever reason, and so this criterion does not apply. They need to breed in captivity--cheetahs literally cannot mate without a three-day chase sequence in the wild, after which they usually fail to come back to their trainers. They need to live in herds with stable social hierarchies that don't depend on regularly trying to maul the guy at the top--for obvious reasons. They need to not freak out and run away when something odd happens--gazelles will kick you in the teeth and vanish if you do so much as look at them funny. And lastly they need to not be utter bastards--we've never domesticated zebras, for instance, because they're just complete douchebags.)

For more on domesticated animal viability, and many other factors involved in the rise of civilization, check out Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel. It is a very good book.

Cyclone231
2009-11-15, 12:22 AM
... what?
Halflings are cowardly,

They survive in a world full of larger creatures by avoiding notice or, barring that, avoiding offense.
thieving

However, the halflings' ignorance of others' laws and their loose definitions of personal property lured many into criminal activity.
savages.

Halfling tribes still roam the Talenta Plains, using the great reptiles of that land as mounts, quarry, and herd stock.

The_Snark
2009-11-15, 12:30 AM
Exarch: As I mentioned earlier, intelligence and the pack mentality are important to domestication. Things like snakes, tigers, and most large predators are not pack animals; they don't usually have any concept of something that they shouldn't eat. Social animals like wolves and Eberron's raptors do, and if they can be conditioned to accept other creatures as members of their pack—such as by raising them from birth/hatching—then it doesn't matter that they could eat a halfling, because they won't (unless starved or abused).

And when you throw in things like Wild Empathy and Speak With Animals, this becomes significantly easier.

Cyclone: Uh. Yeah, I think we're done here.

Jade_Tarem
2009-11-15, 12:37 AM
Thank you for saying that people who disagree with you are unimaginative, because that's completely the only way that it can be.

Yes, that's exactly what I said, except completely different. If you will kindly re-examine that post, you'll find that I figured that anyone who was completely unwilling or unable to modify and expand on the basic material presented to them - knowing that doing so was a big draw of the game - was unimaginative. The fact that this is such an incredibly minor issue just strengthens my point.


Never mind that creatures based on real creatures should act accordingly.

Oh please.

Tell you what. Do me a favor. Go out and pick a fight with a housecat. Any housecat. I don't really care what kind. Tell me how close it came to killing you. Would you say that you would die in about 75% of fights with cute fluffy kittens?

Because in DnD, you would.

Yes, go into the Monster Manual and examine the average cat, and compare to the stats and hit points of the average 1st level commoner. Not only will a cat win the majority of any fights with said commoner, but will occasionally kill him in under six seconds. It's really quite hilarious.

You want creatures modeled after real world animals to act accordingly? Then make them act accordingly. You should know by now that DnD is not hugely accurate in terms of simulating real life. For the love of little green apples, you have 100% creative control of any game you play using these materials, how hard can it be to mentally insert the part where halflings found a way to domesticate these things - or to simply say that halflings didn't domesticate dinosaurs and can't ride them?

Inyssius Tor
2009-11-15, 12:45 AM
Indeed. In the millennia after the Great Leap Forward, humans have attempted to domesticate every single animal extant today. It turns out a number of distinct criteria all need to be satisfied for the domestication of a species to be possible; and, as such (barring those which we couldn't even try to domesticate until we had submarines, which are better), the animals we have domesticated are the animals which can be domesticated.

(They need to be herbivorous or omnivorous, because in reality apex predators are a bitch to feed--although in D&D this is not the case, for whatever reason, and so this criterion does not apply. They need to breed in captivity--cheetahs literally cannot mate without a three-day chase sequence in the wild, after which they usually fail to come back to their trainers. They need to live in herds with stable social hierarchies that don't depend on regularly trying to maul the guy at the top--for obvious reasons. They need to not freak out and run away when something odd happens--gazelles will kick you in the teeth and vanish if you do so much as look at them funny. And lastly they need to not be utter bastards--we've never domesticated zebras, for instance, because they're just complete douchebags.)

For more on domesticated animal viability, and many other factors involved in the rise of civilization, check out Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel. It is a very good book.

Note, though, that none of the criteria mentioned in Jared Diamond's excellent book really disqualify velociraptors. They definitely satisfied several of them; they could satisfy several more depending on authorial fiat; and the remaining one (carnivorous apex predators are rare and hard to feed) simply doesn't apply to anyone in D&D.

EDIT: Of course there could be other criteria, like "giant apex predators will just eat you", that have never really come up on Earth after the Great Leap Forward (and before that, we weren't terribly interested in domestication).

Cyclone231
2009-11-15, 12:46 AM
Cyclone: Uh. Yeah, I think we're done here.Look, it's just RAW. Halflings are thieving, cowardly barbarians. I'm sorry that you're offended or whatever by my direct quotes from core D&D and Eberron books.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-11-15, 12:50 AM
Look, it's just RAW. Halflings are thieving, cowardly barbarians. I'm sorry that you're offended or whatever by my direct quotes from core D&D and Eberron books.Check out the 3.5 MMI fluff for goblins and elves. They are listed with the exact same tactics, but one group are clever, opportunistic, and attempt to preserve their numbers, while the other is cowardly ambushers who won't take a fair fight. The racist fluff is useless.

Cyclone231
2009-11-15, 12:53 AM
Check out the 3.5 MMI fluff for goblins and elves. They are listed with the exact same tactics, but one group are clever, opportunistic, and attempt to preserve their numbers, while the other is cowardly ambushers who won't take a fair fight. The racist fluff is useless.Halflings aren't "bad guy" humanoids though.

The_Snark
2009-11-15, 01:01 AM
Selective quotation and willful ignorance of anything that doesn't support the position you like—such as the halfling racial bonus against fear—does irritate me a little, yes. At this point, you've convinced me that you're not really interested in having an honest debate, just in being argumentative, and I don't really enjoy that. If I'm not enjoying myself, there's no real point in my continuing here.

Cyclone231
2009-11-15, 01:01 AM
Yeah, most of us stopped trying to make sense of it a few pages back! :smalltongue:

-img-So because I disagree with you, I'm a troll? Look, I'm not saying you have to run them that way in your campaign. You know, rule zero and all that - if you don't like the flavor, you're free to change it. But I am saying that, by the RAW, halflings in Eberron are thieving cowardly savages.

I'm sorry if my saying so makes you angry or defensive. I don't mean to attack you or anything, but halflings in Eberron lack the sort of characteristics (courage, intellect, self-reliance) that allowed early humans to domesticate wolves.

ETA: "Resisting fear" and "cowardice" are two very different things. I'm sure a halfling whose life was in danger would be able to react rationally and put together a good escape plan. But halflings go out of their way to avoid these sorts of situations.

Thurbane
2009-11-15, 01:09 AM
No, you're not a troll because you disagree with me. People disagree with me here all the time, and I very rarely level an accusation of trollery (?) at them.

What makes me suspect that you are a troll is your ability to selectively ignore facts that people have been presenting as counterpoints to your assertions, and your fallback position "Well halflings suxx0rz so they couldn't do it!". You are also using selective half-truths and facts quoted out of context to back up your assertions. Several people in this thread have presented well thought out arguments against your assertions which you have selectively ignored or only responded to in part.

In short, you don't actually seem to want to debate anything - the whole point of this thread seems to be for you to vent your displeasure at one piece of minutiae in the Eberron Campaign setting, and fishing for people to agree with you, while summarily dismissing any opposing viewpoints without giving them any credence no matter what factual support they have.

At this point, I withdraw from the thread, and leave you to shake your fist in the air at the writers of the ECS. Enjoy. :smalltongue:

Cyclone231
2009-11-15, 01:11 AM
Several people in this thread have presented well thought out arguments against your assertions which you have selectively ignored or only responded to in part.There's lots of posts in this thread, so I'm not going to respond to all of them. Nor am I going to carefully dissect a large post. Jeez, is laziness trolling now?

Ridureyu
2009-11-15, 01:12 AM
Some people like Eberron, some don't. Likewise, people have differing views on Dragonlance and Forgotten Realms. It's a matter of personal preference. I personally love a lot of the noir/urban fantasy themes in Eberron, and if I were working for WOTC, I would be writing a whole bunch of detective novels set in Sharn. However, that's not for everybody. Enjoy what you like, and have fun.








(uhhhhhh.... anybody want to read a 60-page short story done on a lark over eight days? I have no clue what to do with the thing now.)

chiasaur11
2009-11-15, 01:17 AM
Some people like Eberron, some don't. Likewise, people have differing views on Dragonlance and Forgotten Realms. It's a matter of personal preference. I personally love a lot of the noir/urban fantasy themes in Eberron, and if I were working for WOTC, I would be writing a whole bunch of detective novels set in Sharn. However, that's not for everybody. Enjoy what you like, and have fun.








(uhhhhhh.... anybody want to read a 60-page short story done on a lark over eight days? I have no clue what to do with the thing now.)

What's it about?

I mean, if'n it's about The Winslow fighting Master Chief, well...

Who am I kidding. The sounds great.

hotel_papa
2009-11-15, 01:20 AM
Better than TV, this.

I love Eberron, find it to be an exciting, flavorful campaign setting. Even had a halfling dinosaur rider once. Wasn't too overpowered, mechanically and even fit nicely into a five foot square. Logical? Don't remember caring. It is a world where boats fly, robots fought zombies, both zealously representing soveriegn nations and the only two people who can bring you back from the dead are an oak tree and a nine year old black girl. Who the hell cares if it makes sense? Everyone had fun. Playing the game. Which consists of dice and make believe for ages 12 and up. And not necessarily a course in the history of pre historical animal husbandry.

I love you guys.
Never change.

Ridureyu
2009-11-15, 01:21 AM
What's it about?

I mean, if'n it's about The Winslow fighting Master Chief, well...

Who am I kidding. The sounds great.


Noir homage, mostly. Murder mystery, mentions a lot of planar stuff (particularly Dolurrh/Shadowfell), and has a little hook that might involve other settings. Technically 4th Edition, but that really only comes into play in a couple of things, since 4E Eberron is almost the same as 3E.



...and dangit. We need Winslow vs. Master Chief.

Worira
2009-11-15, 01:24 AM
Of course, halflings in Eberron don't try to avoid notice or offense, and are in fact noted as being brave and bold, with a strong warrior culture. And of course disregard of human laws has absolutely nothing to do with ability to domesticate animals, and really doesn't reflect on their moral character anyway. And, strangely enough, the fact that they live a nomadic lifestyle and rely heavily on domesticating animals does not, in fact, make them less capable of domesticating animals.

But hey, none of that matters, because halflings are an inferior species!

Cyclone231
2009-11-15, 01:29 AM
Of course, halflings in Eberron don't try to avoid notice or offense, and are in fact noted as being brave and bold, with a strong warrior culture.Quotes, please? I know that this was true to some extent in 3E, but 4E isn't 3E.

And of course disregard of human laws has absolutely nothing to do with ability to domesticate animals, and really doesn't reflect on their moral character anyway.It shows a lack of self-reliance.

And, strangely enough, the fact that they live a nomadic lifestyle and rely heavily on domesticating animals does not, in fact, make them less capable of domesticating animals.
All halfling "civilization," in spite of their close proximity and relations to civilized, sedentary communities, is still just a bunch savage hunter-gatherers. That implies a lack of intelligence.

Ridureyu
2009-11-15, 01:30 AM
Yeah, I mean, it's not like there was ever a group of nomadic people who were particularly well-known for horsemanship, or anything.

Cyclone231
2009-11-15, 01:34 AM
Yeah, I mean, it's not like there was ever a group of nomadic people who were particularly well-known for horsemanship, or anything.In humans, nomadic societies do not live in close contact with industrial ones. It is just that simple.

sonofzeal
2009-11-15, 01:35 AM
Quotes, please? I know that this was true to some extent in 3E, but 4E isn't 3E.
If it was true of 3E Eberron, one should assume it's true of 4e Eberron until other information suggests otherwise.


All halfling "civilization," in spite of their close proximity and relations to civilized, sedentary communities, is still just a bunch savage hunter-gatherers. That implies a lack of intelligence.
And yet they don't have an intelligence penalty. There's all sorts of reasons they could be what they are, dino-riding included. Let's go with... powerful druidic orders (call them "shamans") influencing tribal decisions, providing "boons" like magically-trained dinosaurs and other druidy things, but who guide the tribe away from ecologically harmful stuff like mining and cities.

Ridureyu
2009-11-15, 01:35 AM
Right. We never had a nomadic ethnic group known for their horsemanship who basically conquered the known world, and yet were still seen as "savages." Never happened.

Acanous
2009-11-15, 01:35 AM
One thing that's kind of bugging me;
Who says magical traits aren't passed to progeny?

If, for instance, a druid casts Enlarge Animal on a mated pair of Jaguars, then casts Perminancy on them.. Are the cubs also going to be enlarged?

It would make sense, wouldn't it?

So if that magic could pass down through the generations (Possibly leading to such things as giant insects >.>) then why not have certain lingering effects from halfling druid spells used over the course of thousands of years to domesticate these large-sized raptors for riding?

(Which alludes to the example above)

sonofzeal
2009-11-15, 01:43 AM
One thing that's kind of bugging me;
Who says magical traits aren't passed to progeny?

If, for instance, a druid casts Enlarge Animal on a mated pair of Jaguars, then casts Perminancy on them.. Are the cubs also going to be enlarged?

It would make sense, wouldn't it?

So if that magic could pass down through the generations (Possibly leading to such things as giant insects >.>) then why not have certain lingering effects from halfling druid spells used over the course of thousands of years to domesticate these large-sized raptors for riding?

(Which alludes to the example above)
Also, a 6th level Druid (or multiple lower level ones) can keep a creature Charm'd 24/7 without difficulty or metamagic. With metamagic, that goes down to a 4th level one, or a 3rd if you can reliably predict when it'll be asleep. Training a Charm'd animal should be pretty easy.

Cyclone231
2009-11-15, 01:43 AM
Right. We never had a nomadic ethnic group known for their horsemanship who basically conquered the known world, and yet were still seen as "savages." Never happened.Western civilization was not anywhere near the level of modern Eberron when the Mongols did their thing. 13th century eastern Europe is not 19th century western Europe

Ridureyu
2009-11-15, 01:45 AM
And that would be why the Talenta halflings haven't conquered the whole world.

Fhaolan
2009-11-15, 01:47 AM
Personally, domesticating that particular dinosaur for load-carrying/hauling is fairly unlikely in my mind due to it's bipedal stance. Bipeds (and semi-bipeds like bears) tend to be relatively poor load-carriers due to bone structures.

Pretty much *anything* can be domesticated if enough effort and time is put into it. It's just not worth the hassle in most cases. Horses, dogs, oxen, camels, llamas, elephants and even the food/fiber animals like cows, pigs, goats, rabbits, etc. pretty much cover all the bases. Why go about domesticating difficult animals when you've got easier ones already done?

Mind you, one of the Orc cultures in my campaign makes a big deal out of training unusual animals. It's a mark of status with them if you come riding in on a Dire Tiger or something like. Doesn't have to be an apex predator, it just has to be unusual. It's one of the points of trade they have. (In my campaign, there are no 'just go kill them' races. They all maintain some kind of trade relations with their neighbours, unless they are currently at war with them. Or are far enough away that trade wouldn't make sense.)

Ridureyu
2009-11-15, 01:49 AM
Of course, we are also having a major argument about a really picky little thing. It's kind of funny, really.

Fhaolan
2009-11-15, 01:58 AM
Western civilization was not anywhere near the level of modern Eberron when the Mongols did their thing. 13th century eastern Europe is not 19th century western Europe

Just as a thought:

There is another culture who are renound horsebreeders and trainers, who are generally considered cowardly, thieving, barbaric, and are nomadic. And who not only existed in 19th century western Europe, but exist today in the 21st century all across the world, still retaining a great deal of their original culture. They were persecuted for being inferior pretty much everywhere they went, but they survived.

In fact, my mother's side of the family has ties to them, so I figure I've got at least *some* of their blood.

The Travellers, also known as the Romani or Gypsies.

I'm not saying that this is a perfect match, but never underestimate people based on the propaganda against them.

Exarch
2009-11-15, 02:04 AM
Yes, that's exactly what I said, except completely different. If you will kindly re-examine that post, you'll find that I figured that anyone who was completely unwilling or unable to modify and expand on the basic material presented to them - knowing that doing so was a big draw of the game - was unimaginative. The fact that this is such an incredibly minor issue just strengthens my point.

Pretty sure that you did say it was a lack of imagination. "And therein is the problem. I'm sorry to put it so harshly, but I just think the core of the problem is a crippling lack of imagination. Those who have a problem with halflings domesticating this fictional dinosaur in this fictional universe are simply incapable of imagining that maybe it can be done, and then filling in the details themselves." is the actual quote. You are explicitly citing lack of imagination.

And yes, druids and rangers would be needed to facilitate this. However, especially in Ebberon, high level characters are exceedingly rare. Isn't one of the big bads a level 10-12 fighter? PC-class characters themselves are very rare, otherwise adventurers wouldn't be rare. For there to be enough druids and rangers of sufficient ability to allow for every halfling tribe to ride dinosaurs...I'm not so sure.



Oh please.

Tell you what. Do me a favor. Go out and pick a fight with a housecat. Any housecat. I don't really care what kind. Tell me how close it came to killing you. Would you say that you would die in about 75% of fights with cute fluffy kittens?

Because in DnD, you would.

Yes, go into the Monster Manual and examine the average cat, and compare to the stats and hit points of the average 1st level commoner. Not only will a cat win the majority of any fights with said commoner, but will occasionally kill him in under six seconds. It's really quite hilarious.

You want creatures modeled after real world animals to act accordingly? Then make them act accordingly. You should know by now that DnD is not hugely accurate in terms of simulating real life. For the love of little green apples, you have 100% creative control of any game you play using these materials, how hard can it be to mentally insert the part where halflings found a way to domesticate these things - or to simply say that halflings didn't domesticate dinosaurs and can't ride them?

Thing about that house cat thing is to just grapple the poor thing. On your advise, I spooked my cat and then chased after it. She's a speedy little bugger, but I managed to grab onto her and she had no chance to go anywhere, hence the -12 grapple mod.

Like you've said, DnD doesn't model real life perfectly. However, creatures are more than just a stat block. That becomes the DM's responsibility and hopefully he or she takes it serious enough to not have house cats maim commoners left and right since that's not in their nature. Now, if your feel asleep next to a cat and the DM ruled that it slept on your face and you suffocated? Bad luck for you. :smallbiggrin:

Jade_Tarem
2009-11-15, 02:15 AM
Pretty sure that you did say it was a lack of imagination. "And therein is the problem. I'm sorry to put it so harshly, but I just think the core of the problem is a crippling lack of imagination. Those who have a problem with halflings domesticating this fictional dinosaur in this fictional universe are simply incapable of imagining that maybe it can be done, and then filling in the details themselves." is the actual quote. You are explicitly citing lack of imagination.

I will spell this out for you.

What I said:

People who absolutely cannot modify the written material...

What you said I said:

Everyone who disagrees with me...

My last rebuttal there was about you putting words in my proverbial mouth. Any questions?


And yes, druids and rangers would be needed to facilitate this. However, especially in Ebberon, high level characters are exceedingly rare. Isn't one of the big bads a level 10-12 fighter? PC-class characters themselves are very rare, otherwise adventurers wouldn't be rare. For there to be enough druids and rangers of sufficient ability to allow for every halfling tribe to ride dinosaurs...I'm not so sure.

I don't really know what to write here to get the point across. I said nothing about druids, rangers, levels, or numbers of tribes vs. available animal trainers. I'm not even sure why you brought this up. So I'm going to whittle this down to the very core of why you shouldn't care.

It's a fantasy pen and paper game. You can make it anything you want. If you are somehow unsatisfied with this ridiculously insignificant detail, then change it to your liking. I could understand if you thought the class balance was out of whack or that a series of magic items was overpowered, but a random bit of fluff about halflings and dinosaurs will take you maybe half a second to change.


Thing about that house cat thing is to just grapple the poor thing. On your advise, I spooked my cat and then chased after it. She's a speedy little bugger, but I managed to grab onto her and she had no chance to go anywhere, hence the -12 grapple mod.

Holy bejeepers. I was joking. Also, in DnD, your cat wouldn't have forgotten to make an AOO, and you'd still possibly be dead.


Like you've said, DnD doesn't model real life perfectly. However, creatures are more than just a stat block. That becomes the DM's responsibility and hopefully he or she takes it serious enough to not have house cats maim commoners left and right since that's not in their nature. Now, if your feel asleep next to a cat and the DM ruled that it slept on your face and you suffocated? Bad luck for you. :smallbiggrin:

I'm glad we agree... although cat-induced suffocation is generally not a good way to kill a character. However, if you're ready to acknowledge that the DM has creative control of the game, why can't he fix your raptor problem?

Lycanthromancer
2009-11-15, 02:21 AM
Now, if your feel asleep next to a cat and the DM ruled that it slept on your face and you suffocated? Bad luck for you. :smallbiggrin:I've had that happen in real life.

I'm lucky I survived. :smalleek:

The New Bruceski
2009-11-15, 02:34 AM
I've had that happen in real life.

I'm lucky I survived. :smalleek:

Mine has learned how to turn off my CPAP machine. If I didn't need it to breathe at night my psych interests would find that fascinating.

Lycanthromancer
2009-11-15, 02:36 AM
Mine has learned how to turn off my CPAP machine. If I didn't need it to breathe at night my psych interests would find that fascinating.Passive-aggressive much?

Leon
2009-11-15, 02:51 AM
Sure, halflings riding dinosaurs is cool and all, but raptors are a pretty implausible selection. As far as I know, raptors are pack animals, and historically pack animals were only used as aids to hunting, not for riding. We used herd animals for riding. Halflings should probably ride triceratops or similar animals.

There, I said it.

And?
Fantasymagictraindragonskyscrapercityetc

You have a beef with what the small tribal folk got for mounts.

Rainbownaga
2009-11-15, 03:09 AM
How about this:

Humans can tame raptors in real life.

Halflings should have no problem taming "raptors" in a fantasy setting.

(also the internal logic of d&d magic is considerably overrated)

Yahzi
2009-11-15, 03:43 AM
It's just not worth the hassle
Exactly. The reason we never domesticated large meat-eaters is because it's not worth it. Even the one carnivore we did domesticate, we turned into an omnivore (how much of your average bag of dog food is meat?).

Halflings, on the other hand, live in a world where giants (i.e normal people) attack them. Having a 6 ft tall meat-eating predator might totally be worth the cost of feeding the dang thing in that case.

All medieval Europe had to kill was other human beings. A horse is plenty good enough for that. If they had faced Hill Giants, they might well have domesticated/bred war-lions.

Myrmex
2009-11-15, 03:55 AM
People don't ride wolves. People don't ride any pack hunters. They're built wrong, and the ones which are big enough to be ridden get inevitably killed because they're megafauna and that's what humans (and humanoids) do to local megafauna that competes with them.

Fixed that for you.

Acanous
2009-11-15, 04:36 AM
War Lions. That's epic awesome.

Ok, next time I take the (now lv 9) party back into the orc infested swamp, that lv 3 Orc Rogue will have a wand of Charm Monster and a pack of large jungle cats to compliment the wand of Magic Missile...

sonofzeal
2009-11-15, 04:50 AM
War Lions. That's epic awesome.

Ok, next time I take the (now lv 9) party back into the orc infested swamp, that lv 3 Orc Rogue will have a wand of Charm Monster and a pack of large jungle cats to compliment the wand of Magic Missile...
Charm Animal. Way cheaper that way. If you're not worried about gold (npc and all), could toss some craaaaazy metamagic shennanigans on there or whatever. :P

Acanous
2009-11-15, 05:35 AM
Charm Animal makes more sense. Propably just say it's got 32 charges left on it by the time the PC's get there (in case they grab it as loot)

I dunno tho. 32 CR 1/2 Orcs, a CR 4 Orc Rogue and some Panthers might be a bit much for a lv 9 party.

sonofzeal
2009-11-15, 05:43 AM
Charm Animal makes more sense. Propably just say it's got 32 charges left on it by the time the PC's get there (in case they grab it as loot)

I dunno tho. 32 CR 1/2 Orcs, a CR 4 Orc Rogue and some Panthers might be a bit much for a lv 9 party.
Depends. If they all have good AC (say, 24+, entirely reasonable by that level), then they'll pwn it. If they have good AoE stuff (Fireball, etc), then they'll pwn it. If they're missing both of those, well, they might have trouble.

Bayar
2009-11-15, 06:26 AM
Just as a thought:

In fact, my mother's side of the family has ties to them, so I figure I've got at least *some* of their blood.

The Travellers, also known as the Romani or Gypsies.

I'm not saying that this is a perfect match, but never underestimate people based on the propaganda against them.

I would respectfully ask you to ask your mother is she knows what the differencr between a "romanian" and a "rroma" is. Because I am romanian, but not a rroma.

Now, back on topic:

If you want realism, play real life. That game is hard. If you want loot and XP, play D&D:

http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff15/bayar_m2003/1255514774342.gif

And for those people that are paranoid about their cat out to get them:

http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff15/bayar_m2003/1256757285472.jpg

Acanous
2009-11-15, 06:37 AM
I've actually found Fireball to be one of my favorite spells as a DM. when faced with a non-standard encounter (IE: They are ambushed, swindled, or fighting in the dark) players will either be leery of using it, or will do so with gusto- causing friendly fire or potentially burning through thier AoE Repitoire on what ammounts to a minor annoyance.

Then there's the Roleplay aspect. If the encounter was a group of thieves in a marketplace, you just caused collateral damage, and are in trouble with the law. (And propably disliked by the populace, to boot)
in a forest, you not only gave away your presence, but may have angered any nearby Druids, Dryads, or Fey.

tossing a low level band of Orcs in a swamp onto the alter of PC AoE doom is a great way to start an adventure XD

BobVosh
2009-11-15, 06:55 AM
Thing about that house cat thing is to just grapple the poor thing. On your advise, I spooked my cat and then chased after it. She's a speedy little bugger, but I managed to grab onto her and she had no chance to go anywhere, hence the -12 grapple mod.

I just can't help but think of you chasing after the whole time thinking "My run speed is greater than yours, little one. Then you grab it with one hand, with the other you roll 2D20. One is yours, one is his. You take account your -20(grappling with one arm), it has -12 (cat). Good roll, you got it!


Holy bejeepers. I was joking. Also, in DnD, your cat wouldn't have forgotten to make an AOO, and you'd still possibly be dead.

How do you know he didn't take HS wrestling and has imp grapple as a feat therefore? :P

Also tiny cats can't take an AOO. At least I don't think they can, even on a grapple. No reach.

Inyssius Tor
2009-11-15, 11:28 AM
I would respectfully ask you to ask your mother is she knows what the differencr between a "romanian" and a "rroma" is. Because I am romanian, but not a rroma.

Fhaolan didn't say "Romanian", which in English usage refers to people who are from Romania. He said "Romani", which in English usage refers to the Travellers.

Fhaolan
2009-11-15, 11:40 AM
Exactly. The reason we never domesticated large meat-eaters is because it's not worth it. Even the one carnivore we did domesticate, we turned into an omnivore (how much of your average bag of dog food is meat?).


Technically... okay, technically this is a bit confusing and I have trouble sorting it out in my own mind... technically canids are omnivores to begin with, despite the fact they're in the Carnivora order, they just lean more heavily to carnivore than ursids. Foxes, wolves, etc. eat berries, dig for tubers, and the like in the wild. They *prefer* meat, but are capable of eating other things. Felinids are more purely carnivore and have trouble digesting non-meat products.


I would respectfully ask you to ask your mother is she knows what the differencr between a "romanian" and a "rroma" is. Because I am romanian, but not a rroma.

I used the currently more common spelling as an attempt for clarity, but yes, she means the Rroma. (For your personal information, the double r spelling only seems to happen in Romania itself. Probably to differentiate.) The particular tribe is Kååle, who roam Wales, mostly. Granddad was apparantly part Kååle. Grandma was Irish, and was part Pavee (which is not Romani, but has a very similar culture), they made a big deal of having that kind of thing in common. Now, knowing my grandparents, it's possible they were making that up. I have no real way to prove any of it. :smallcool:

Yahzi
2009-11-15, 01:08 PM
canids are omnivores to begin with, despite the fact they're in the Carnivora order
I did not know that.

Well, then, back to the original answer: A wizard did it!

:smallbiggrin:

Bayar
2009-11-15, 03:56 PM
Fhaolan didn't say "Romanian", which in English usage refers to people who are from Romania. He said "Romani", which in English usage refers to the Travellers.

Learning new things every day (well, night over here, but whatever).

Tavar
2009-11-15, 04:07 PM
Wow, being anything but human really sucks in your world. Dwarves are xenophobic shut-ins obsessed with wealth and so lawabiding that Miko would feel a bit constrained. Half-orcs are stupid, easily swayed, and can only be used for brute strength. Elves are flighty, untrustworthy, and so arrogant that no one else can stand them. And I haven't even left the PHB.

Zonack
2009-11-15, 04:12 PM
Sure, halflings riding dinosaurs is cool and all, but raptors are a pretty implausible selection. As far as I know, raptors are pack animals, and historically pack animals were only used as aids to hunting, not for riding. We used herd animals for riding. Halflings should probably ride triceratops or similar animals.

There, I said it.
{scrubbed}

Myrmex
2009-11-15, 06:07 PM
I agree that, with the OP's set of premises, it would be unlikely for humans to turn social predators into riding animals.

I think these are his assumptions:
1. There are roughly 2 million years of co-evolution between the humanoids & the predators
2. The 10 to 30 thousand year domestication process is unaided by supernatural events.
3. Handle Animal doesn't exist.

None of those really apply to the D&D world. Yolanndar the Mighty was told by his goddess, when the world was still young, to seek out the Mother of All Raptors, and wrestler her to the ground. After that, halflings would have dominion over her and all her offspring. And so he went and wrestled her, handled animal her, and now halflings get to ride raptors.

Or the 500,000 other ways you could domesticate dinosaurs when there's magic, gods, and an open-ended level system at play.

Cyclone231
2009-11-15, 06:19 PM
None of those really apply to the D&D world. Yolanndar the Mighty was told by his goddess, when the world was still young, to seek out the Mother of All Raptors, and wrestler her to the ground. After that, halflings would have dominion over her and all her offspring. And so he went and wrestled her, handled animal her, and now halflings get to ride raptors.

Or the 500,000 other ways you could domesticate dinosaurs when there's magic, gods, and an open-ended level system at play.
The Eberron gods are a pure fiction, even in-universe.

Foryn Gilnith
2009-11-15, 06:20 PM
3. Handle Animal doesn't exist.

That's a real biggy. Handle Animal in D&D is uber. Even in a lower-leveled world like Eberron there are still easily enough bonuses to enable domestication of whatever the heck you want.

Myrmex
2009-11-15, 06:20 PM
The statement that you can't domesticate & ride predatory social animals, categorically, is false. There's nothing endemic to social predators that would prohibit us from domesticating them for riding. The problem is the vagaries of history- it's mostly accidental that there are no predators left of the proper size, build, or temperament for RL humans to ride.


The Eberron gods are a pure fiction, even in-universe.

Alright, so a hero of old beat up the proto-raptor, and now his people have dominion over them.

Solaris
2009-11-15, 06:24 PM
Look, it's just RAW. Halflings are thieving, cowardly barbarians. I'm sorry that you're offended or whatever by my direct quotes from core D&D and Eberron books.

Except for the fact that it's pretty clear the Talenta halflings aren't ordinary halflings, culturally speaking. Even then, you're getting creative with your interpretations. Me? I'm a small guy in real life. Nobody calls me a coward because I don't go looking for trouble. You wanna quote the PHB to support them being cowards? I can do the same to support my position.

Personality: Halflings prefer trouble to boredom. They are notoriously curious. Relying on their ability to survive or escape danger, they demonstrate a daring that many larger people can't match.
Thieving? ... Yeah, you got me there. Oh, wait.

Depending on the clan, halflings might be reliable, hard-working (if clannish) citizens, or they might be thieves just waiting for the opportunity to make a big score and disappear in the dead of night.
So it goes both ways.
Savages? Not the PHB halflings (who're the non-Talenta kind, in Eberron)!

Relations: Halflings try to get along with everyone else. They are adept at fitting into a community of humans, dwarves, elves, or gnomes and making themselves valuable and welcome.
Yeah. Less savage, more... urban. They may be a people inflicted with wanderlust, but that's not the same thing at all. While they, in Eberron, are descended from the halflings of the Talenta Plain they are culturally as distinct from them as the elves of Aerenal, Khorvaire, and the Valenar are from each other. In Eberron, all members of a race are not carbon-copies of one another.

Now for the Talenta halflings. You call them cowardly, thieving, and savage.
Cowardly?

With the coming of the humans and the rise of the Five Nations, the halflings found their territory shrinking as human settlements encroached on the wide-open plains. At times, the halflings attempted to hold their position and drive the humans away, and a number of bloody battles punctuate the shared history of the two races.
Standing off armies of giants? Yep, cowards to the core.

Warriors by nature, the halflings are unencumbered by material possessions, able to strike camp quickly and move to avoid enemies or stalk prey.

Thieving? It's not even mentioned in the write-up for the Talenta halflings. Going by the PHB entry, I'm gonna go with "Some are, some aren't". Going by the other statements in the ECS, I'm gonna go with "They aren't." Matter of fact, the Talenta halflings seem a whole lot more self-reliant than you give them credit for.

Savages?

Far from savages, they are tactically brilliant, using every skill they developed as hunters to enhance their capacity for war. Even with this penchant for battle, the halflings have never been overtly hostile.
They are tribal, yes, but then again often enough elves are as well. Or humans. I see nothing in the text quoted or any of the other text to indicate they are savage barbarians. Uncivilized, perhaps, but not savages.
[/rant]


Speaking of culture, and your comments implying a lack of civilization means an intelligence deficit... Why? Why do you make the assumption that the Talenta halflings are where they are because they're stupid, and not because it works for them? Necessity is the mother of invention, not boredom. The Talenta can exist as they are without fancy technological advancements, so they don't come up with fancy technological advancements.

To dip into the real world for some examples, Europeans were faced with a realm where hunter-gatherer didn't work as well as agriculture. They didn't switch over to agriculture because someone said, "Hey, let's go farm this stuff so we can invent all kinds of nifty things!" They switched over because it provided for a more steady food supply. The Plains Indians, on the other hand, didn't go agricultural because they had all dem buffalo to chase. I remember seeing the quote from an African tribesman of a hunter-gatherer society (you must forgive the lack of proper nouns, it was a while ago) in response to the question of why he didn't embrace agriculture: "Why should I grow the food, when there is so much fruit growing on the trees?"

The predominant mount among the Talenta halflings is the fastieth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaellynasaura), which is certainly not an apex predator. I understand from your first post that your problem was not the dinosaurs per se, but their choice of dinosaurs. I agree - they ought to make it more clear that the clawfoot dinosaurs are war mounts, in lesser numbers and quite possibly domesticated later than the fastieths. Now obviously both of these animals in the game are larger than their real-world equivalents (and my mind is still boggled as to why they picked an Antarctic dinosaur to be the fastieth), but as other people have stated, humans bred horses to be larger and stronger than the original food animals they were. It is quite possible that the fastieths started off as food animals, like the horse, then were bred for size and strength once the Talenta realized they could ride 'em and/or bigger fastieths meant more food. A similar process had to have taken place with the clawfeet. While I agree with it being unlikely, I do disagree with the domestication of a pack-hunting predator being completely out of the question. After all, in many ecosystems wolves and humans competed for the position of apex predator before humans started domesticating wolves. A similar path of "Can't beat 'em, so join 'em" may well have taken place on the Talenta Plain. That seems the most reasonable assumption based on the evidence given.

JonestheSpy
2009-11-15, 06:50 PM
I haven't read everything on this endless thread, but it seems folks have forgotten one classic of fantasy RPG's by way of Tolkien that no one ever seemed to question: goblin wolf-riders.

If goblins can have wolf-mounted cavlary, I don't see why halflings can't ride raptors (though Triceratopses would be cooler).

Myrmex
2009-11-15, 06:57 PM
I haven't read everything on this endless thread, but it seems folks have forgotten one classic of fantasy RPG's by way of Tolkien that no one ever seemed to question: goblin wolf-riders.

If goblins can have wolf-mounted cavlary, I don't see why halflings can't ride raptors (though Triceratopses would be cooler).

Already addressed: Wargs have a non-animal int score, and thus can be negotiated with.

Tiki Snakes
2009-11-15, 07:09 PM
Already addressed: Wargs have a non-animal int score, and thus can be negotiated with.

Though Wolf Riding is the accepted standard, not Wargs. Some Goblins also ride Wargs, but that is not the same thing.

ALSO Wargs have no way of domesticating Wolves either. :smallwink:

Cyclone231
2009-11-15, 07:25 PM
Though Wolf Riding is the accepted standard, not Wargs. Some Goblins also ride Wargs, but that is not the same thing.

ALSO Wargs have no way of domesticating Wolves either. :smallwink:

I think an intelligent wolf would know a thing or two about getting an unintelligent one in line, and could teach the Goblins how.

Lycanthromancer
2009-11-15, 07:39 PM
I think an intelligent wolf would know a thing or two about getting an unintelligent one in line, and could teach the Goblins how.As as been mentioned, awaken one.

Gan The Grey
2009-11-15, 09:34 PM
Cyclone, I ask that you respectfully respond to Solaris' well thought-out response on page 8. I believe it addresses and answers every problem you have with halflings riding dinosaurs. You have been accused of trolling because you apparently ignore certain points and evidence in order to perpetuate an unsubstantiated point-of-view. If this is not the case, I would like to see what you have to say in response to Solaris.

Cyclone231
2009-11-15, 10:18 PM
Except for the fact that it's pretty clear the Talenta halflings aren't ordinary halflings, culturally speaking. Even then, you're getting creative with your interpretations. Me? I'm a small guy in real life. Nobody calls me a coward because I don't go looking for trouble. You wanna quote the PHB to support them being cowards? I can do the same to support my position.

Thieving? ... Yeah, you got me there. Oh, wait.

So it goes both ways.
Savages? Not the PHB halflings (who're the non-Talenta kind, in Eberron)!

Yeah. Less savage, more... urban. They may be a people inflicted with wanderlust, but that's not the same thing at all. While they, in Eberron, are descended from the halflings of the Talenta Plain they are culturally as distinct from them as the elves of Aerenal, Khorvaire, and the Valenar are from each other. In Eberron, all members of a race are not carbon-copies of one another.

Now for the Talenta halflings. You call them cowardly, thieving, and savage.
Cowardly?

Standing off armies of giants? Yep, cowards to the core.


Thieving? It's not even mentioned in the write-up for the Talenta halflings. Going by the PHB entry, I'm gonna go with "Some are, some aren't". Going by the other statements in the ECS, I'm gonna go with "They aren't." Matter of fact, the Talenta halflings seem a whole lot more self-reliant than you give them credit for.

Savages?

They are tribal, yes, but then again often enough elves are as well. Or humans. I see nothing in the text quoted or any of the other text to indicate they are savage barbarians. Uncivilized, perhaps, but not savages.
[/rant]All your quotes are from 3E. 4E has changed all that.

Speaking of culture, and your comments implying a lack of civilization means an intelligence deficit... Why? Why do you make the assumption that the Talenta halflings are where they are because they're stupid, and not because it works for them? Necessity is the mother of invention, not boredom. The Talenta can exist as they are without fancy technological advancements, so they don't come up with fancy technological advancements. Uh, actually, this is incorrect. The heavy rate of technological advance that has occurred in the modern west is pretty much 100% a consequence of its large middle class. Boredom is the mother of invention, since it means you have time to innovate rather than run away from utahraptors.

To dip into the real world for some examples, Europeans were faced with a realm where hunter-gatherer didn't work as well as agriculture. They didn't switch over to agriculture because someone said, "Hey, let's go farm this stuff so we can invent all kinds of nifty things!" They switched over because it provided for a more steady food supply. The Plains Indians, on the other hand, didn't go agricultural because they had all dem buffalo to chase. I remember seeing the quote from an African tribesman of a hunter-gatherer society (you must forgive the lack of proper nouns, it was a while ago) in response to the question of why he didn't embrace agriculture: "Why should I grow the food, when there is so much fruit growing on the trees?"Historical tribes lived in all the countries which are now agrarian. African tribesmen remained so because there wasn't much arable land and until less than a couple centuries ago they had never encountered agrarian societies.

The predominant mount among the Talenta halflings is the fastieth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaellynasaura), which is certainly not an apex predator. I understand from your first post that your problem was not the dinosaurs per se, but their choice of dinosaurs. I agree - they ought to make it more clear that the clawfoot dinosaurs are war mounts, in lesser numbers and quite possibly domesticated later than the fastieths. Now obviously both of these animals in the game are larger than their real-world equivalents (and my mind is still boggled as to why they picked an Antarctic dinosaur to be the fastieth), but as other people have stated, humans bred horses to be larger and stronger than the original food animals they were. It is quite possible that the fastieths started off as food animals, like the horse, then were bred for size and strength once the Talenta realized they could ride 'em and/or bigger fastieths meant more food. A similar process had to have taken place with the clawfeet. While I agree with it being unlikely, I do disagree with the domestication of a pack-hunting predator being completely out of the question. After all, in many ecosystems wolves and humans competed for the position of apex predator before humans started domesticating wolves. A similar path of "Can't beat 'em, so join 'em" may well have taken place on the Talenta Plain. That seems the most reasonable assumption based on the evidence given.I dunno, raising carnivores for food is kind of dumb. I mean, plant-eating animals already eat a whole lot, and carnivores have to eat even more (effectively). Did hunter-gatherers even raise animals for eating at all?

Foryn Gilnith
2009-11-15, 10:32 PM
All your quotes are from 3E. 4E has changed all that.

Could you provide citations, then? Text support would be very useful.



I dunno, raising carnivores for food is kind of dumb. I mean, plant-eating animals already eat a whole lot, and carnivores have to eat even more (effectively). Did hunter-gatherers even raise animals for eating at all?

Fastieths are herbivores if the internet isn't lying to me. And the clawfoots could be seen as analogous to RL dogs.

Myrmex
2009-11-15, 10:36 PM
Uh, actually, this is incorrect. The heavy rate of technological advance that has occurred in the modern west is pretty much 100% a consequence of its large middle class. Boredom is the mother of invention, since it means you have time to innovate rather than run away from utahraptors.

I'd say the rate of innovation is due to high levels of specialization and modern investigatory methods. You would be surprised how incredibly well adapted a given primitive culture is to their environment. In fact, it's hunter-gatherer societies that spend most of their day in leisure, not agrarian ones. Living in a society where everything you get is dependent on what other people make, grow or mine for you is hard work. A different kind of hard work, but cortisone levels are higher in your average middle class american than a south american tribesman.


Historical tribes lived in all the countries which are now agrarian. African tribesmen remained so because there wasn't much arable land and until less than a couple centuries ago they had never encountered agrarian societies.

Hunter-gatherers are always marginalized when agrarian societies show up, since germs, metal, high population density, and specialists will really mess up your day. Hunter-gatherer societies only persist when they're not on desirable land.

The distribution of agrarian and hunter-gatherer societies is largely historical. As you say, it's hard to do agriculture in a tropical rainforest.


I dunno, raising carnivores for food is kind of dumb. I mean, plant-eating animals already eat a whole lot, and carnivores have to eat even more (effectively). Did hunter-gatherers even raise animals for eating at all?

The fastieth is not carnivorous. Also, depending on what sort of meat you can put into your carnivore, it could make a lot of sense. Fish farming, for instance, converts small, bony inedible fish into salmon.

Hunter-gatherers did raise animals for eating, which turned them into pastoralists. Historical pastorialists would be the vikings, israelites, or mongols.

Ormur
2009-11-15, 10:37 PM
I've never played Eberron so I have never read the material on the halflings there but are they supposed to be hunter-gatherers? If they have mounts and live on a plain it would make much more sense for them to be pastorialists, managing herds of herbivores for food plus the mounts. It's the most sensible land use for areas that aren't suitable for pre-modern agriculture, like the plains of Central Asia where the Mongols roamed. Those areas on Earth weren't fully brought into industrialized civilization until the end of the 19th century.

Myrmex
2009-11-15, 10:41 PM
I've never played Eberron so I have never read the material on the halflings there but are they supposed to be hunter-gatherers? If they have mounts and live on a plain it would make much more sense for them to be pastorialists, managing herds of herbivores for food plus the mounts. It's the most sensible land use for areas that aren't suitable for pre-modern agriculture, like the plains of Central Asia where the Mongols roamed. Those areas on Earth weren't fully brought into industrialized civilization until the end of the 19th century.

Some parts still aren't. Large parts of central asia still have pastoralists riding caribou and living in skin tents.