PDA

View Full Version : Evolution in D&D



Altair_the_Vexed
2007-01-10, 11:46 AM
Evolutionary science tells us that humans are evolved from an ape species. On the real Earth, we're the only sentient life-form, so we don't need to think about what any other evolutionary track might produce, or might lead to some other species.
But in D&D, we have elves, dwarves, halflings, gnomes, goblins, orcs.... all manner of highly sentient beings. Some of these are clearly purely magical in origins, but others are far meatier, more visceral.

So - what did halflings evolve from?

My suggestions are:
Some sort of lapine Proto-rabbit => Halfings
Some sort of felid Proto-cat => Elves
Other (non-pre-human) apes => goblinoids

er...

Yes, it might be a silly concept, but what do you think might be the evolutionary ancestors of your favourite species..?

Deus Mortus
2007-01-10, 11:48 AM
Well seeing how there are actually gods in D&D (by which I mean active ones, let's not get on with the religion discussion), I would pretty much say that there probably isn't much of an evolution and am more in favor of variosu deity's getting a bit drunk or playing a prank...

Skyserpent
2007-01-10, 11:49 AM
I don't think there IS evolution in D&D... I think it was more of a... "ZAP" and the gods said "let there be people!" and thus, it was so. And all was good, until one god announced "Let there be Weapons Magic and XP!"

Yuki Akuma
2007-01-10, 11:50 AM
Halflings are made from pixies, humans, elves, dwarves and orcs.

...No, seriously.

Closet_Skeleton
2007-01-10, 11:50 AM
I always wondered how the Carion Crawler description can mention genetic modification. At least I remember it doing so somewhere.

pestilenceawaits
2007-01-10, 11:56 AM
I played around one time with a evolution based fantasy alternate earth homebrew world. Orcs were the equivalent of Neanderthals, elves were actually evolved proto-humans who were exposed to mutagenic magic for too long. Halflings were proto-humans who very early developed agriculture and lived in a predator free environment so they needed less strength. Dwarves were off shoots of the Neanderthal orcs who began cave dwelling and moved underground and gnomes are offshoots of dwarves exposed to magic and changed.

Telonius
2007-01-10, 11:59 AM
Halflings - a group of elves that was somehow isolated on an island. They gradually lessened in size, remaining as nimble as normal elves, but growing hardier (no con penalty) as they struggled to survive.

Premier
2007-01-10, 11:59 AM
On the real Earth, we're the only sentient life-form,

No, we're the only sapient life form. Sentience is a much wider term and includes pretty much all animals.

As for gods and evolution (keeping it strictly in the topic of D&D worlds), the two are not mutually exclusive. Evolution doesn't describe how life or the world came to be in the first place; it only describes how existing life changes over time. There's no reason why a bunch of fantasy gods couldn't have kickstarted the world, then let evolution take its course developing the species that exist at the "present" time of the game.

silvermesh
2007-01-10, 12:11 PM
To say that the fact that gods are real in D&D precludes evolution is oversimplifying, I think. If you check out the old school 2e Draconomicon, it went into great detail on the evolution of dragons. I would consider dragons to be the oldest race about. Every race will have it's own creation stories about how their favorite god made them, and their least favorite god made all the other races out of the leftover parts. This is how cultures work, and though they may believe it, it doesn't have to be true for the fantasy to still exist.

as far as humanoid races evolving... I think it's silly to assume that they would be THAT far from humans, evolutionarily. anything humanoid is humanoid. they're basically all related. to look at our own evolution, there were actually hundreds of "humanoid" races to come about, ours was simply the only one that made it. most prominently, you can look at the neanderthal. To me, Neanderthal is very much like the D&D dwarf. he is shorter than human, stockier, big-nosed, and prefers to live in one cave, rather than roam and hunt. this is what led to their downfall, but in D&D the dwarves had some outside force bringing food to them, or found a source of food within the caves. halflings would be a race that evolved on a small island(s). islands are ecologies where it is more useful for mammals to be smaller, and need less food. The smaller you are, the more likely you are to survive, so the more likely you are to pass on your traits, thus halflings are born(they found remnants of a "hobbit"-like race quite recently here on earth).
In my world, the basic humanoids all evolved from one species, goblinoids being another seperate but similar family, and the odds and ends like lizardfolk are explained on their own. elves and orcs, in my ultimate scheme are not a seperate race from humans, but rather the result of certain magical events on certain tribes of early humans.
gnomes I'm having a difficult time with. I can't say whether gnomes are like the "island" version of dwarves, or whether they're simply a crossbreed between dwarves and halflings(which would lead to some odd discussions as to why that would work to produce a fertile race).

gnomes are an enigma.

kailin
2007-01-10, 12:12 PM
No, we're the only sapient life form. Sentience is a much wider term and includes pretty much all animals.

Please do elaborate.

The very broadest dictionary definition of sentience includes beings without consciousness, but the accepted meaning of the word excludes nonintelligent minds. Sapient merely means wise. What did you mean?

Saph
2007-01-10, 12:14 PM
I always thought of D&D creature creation as a sort of competition between the gods.

"Lo! I have created humans!"
"Psht, they're just a rip-off of my elves."
"Well, look at my orcs! They'll crush both your humans and your elves, just watch!"
"Why do you have to make everything bipedal? Centaurs are faster and stronger."
"If you want strength, what about my giants?"
"All of your creations are pale imitations of my dragons."
"Oh really? You want to get serious? Fine. Deepspawn. Now I'll just clone everything you make and send it against you."

etc . . .

- Saph

Altair_the_Vexed
2007-01-10, 12:22 PM
Hey, everyone I know that when you have gods that walk about the place smitin', you can pretty well throw evolution out - I was just sort of saying "What if?" and thought it might be cool to think about where these crazy species came from.

Also, yes, thanks - I still make that "sapient" / "sentient" error. But you knew what I meant, yeah?

There are WAY too many sapient species in a normal D&D game to make a straight comparison with the Real World. I mean, we have six playable races in the PHB alone!

I like the idea of orcs and/or goblins coming from various early hominid branches. It seems right. Goblinoids in D&D aren't the goblins of folklore, really - they're not magical enough. They represent the social / narrative niche of "frightening savages". D&D tends to have a relatively rosy outlook on the fey that goblinoids might otherwise be lumped in with (I say tends 'cause there are a good few Unseelie Fey in published D&D books). If we imagine our extremely ancient ancestors co-existing with Neanderthals, we can easily imagine them being seen as monstrous (though there's no evidence to suggest that we did - aside from our modern fear of outsiders).

Now Gnomes... They have some of all races' traits, and are the most inherently magical of all the PHB species. I've copped out on this one, with a Pratchettism: Gnomes are the result of sapient lifeforms' lingering unconmscious desire and expectation for there to be a magical race. They spontaneously came into existence because they should exist.

But what do Elves evolve from to make them biologically compatible with humans?

silvermesh
2007-01-10, 12:29 PM
Please do elaborate.

The very broadest dictionary definition of sentience includes beings without consciousness, but the accepted meaning of the word excludes nonintelligent minds. Sapient merely means wise. What did you mean?

sentience has little to do with intelligence. sentience is the ability to sense: perception, the ability to see, hear, feel, and smell.
basically sentient means "awake" or conscious. sapience is your ability to discern, judgement. This is something that of all the life on earth, only humans have. most creatures can see, only one can ask itself "why do I see?"

that said, in many ways, to say a mind is "awake" is to say that it is intelligent. meditation is about reaching a higher consciousness. so, sentience can be used to imply a higher intelligence, though this is not always the case. To say "sentience" cannot be used in this form is just mincing words for the sake of causing argument. For many years, sentience has been the word used to imply a human beings understanding of the world as opposed to "lesser beings. This is an archaic use of the word from a time when animals weren't even thought to even see the world the same way we do. A time when humans weren't animals. the words use carries on, having dropped the implications it brings. I think everyone present was aware of how the word sentience was being used in that post. There was no need to clarify.

Saph
2007-01-10, 12:30 PM
But what do Elves evolve from to make them biologically compatible with humans?

They didn't. :P They just happened to be created by two divine sets that got on better than any of the others. Sort of like the children of two families who live next to each other growing up together and eventually getting married . . .

- Saph

(PS - Tolkien, Eru Iluvatar, Firstborn, Lastborn, and so on and so on. You probably know the story already.)

silvermesh
2007-01-10, 12:41 PM
But what do Elves evolve from to make them biologically compatible with humans?

In the world according to me... humans.

elves are humans imbued with the essence of dragons blood. this gives them magical prowess, and a long lifespan. this closeness to the very lifesblood of magic draws from their bodies and makes them more frail.

edit: of course in my world dragons aren't just running around marauding farmhouses. theres only a few left, and they're basically gods.

Telonius
2007-01-10, 12:45 PM
Hmm, Gnomes. Could just be a genetic mutation from dwarves. Or some weird dwarf/kobold pairing, something odd like that.

Fax Celestis
2007-01-10, 12:51 PM
There's no reason why a bunch of fantasy gods couldn't have kickstarted the world, then let evolution take its course developing the species that exist at the "present" time of the game.

Oooh! Maybe they're playing a sort of "god game", where they all set up their "pieces" (life forms, terrain, et al) at the beginning of time and push play. At the end of a set duration (three or four or ninety million years), the god whose followers have the most subjugation of the planet wins.

Ethdred
2007-01-10, 12:54 PM
I think Saph and Altair's posts sum up my thoughts - there is no evolution because the gods did it - because that's what gods do. You could extend that to mean that everyone is involved in some sort of competition which is an extension of divine feuding. Also, I think that it means there is no change - every species stays as it is, separate and unchanging, except for certain allowed cross-breedings (and even then, all human-elf crossbreeds or whatever are always the same). The 'genetic code' always reproduces perfectly. Which means that yes, some god somewhere did think 'Hey, why don't I make a creature that looks a bit like an owl but has the strength of a bear?'

I did once extrapolate from this to posit that D&D worlds are always basically binary constructions, which explains why the CR system tends towards monsters appearing in multiples of two.

JadedDM
2007-01-10, 12:59 PM
I generally find it best not to mix science with high fantasy.

I mean, from a physics point of view, there's no way dragons should be able to fly.

And from an evolutionary standpoint, it's extremely unlikely that so many intelligent races could evolve alongside each other. The competition for resources would see to that. That's why there are no more neanderthals.

So the idea that 'the gods did it' is usually used because it's simpler. I promise, if you were to run a typical D&D campaign with evolution, it would either be very inaccurate or very, very boring.

Captain van der Decken
2007-01-10, 01:04 PM
Some sort of felid Proto-cat => Elves

So Elves are a race of cat-like people who evolved from cats?

They're gone, buddy. But look at the bright side -- they're gone, buddy!



elves are humans imbued with the essence of dragons blood. this gives them magical prowess, and a long lifespan. this closeness to the very lifesblood of magic draws from their bodies and makes them more frail.

edit: of course in my world dragons aren't just running around marauding farmhouses. theres only a few left, and they're basically gods.

:smalltongue: Sounds a bit like Eragon.

Okay, sorry if you found that offensive.

Thomas
2007-01-10, 01:16 PM
What, halflings evolve from? You're crazy. Everyone knows all the other races evolved from halflings in the Green Age.

There's no evolution in D&D. Races were created by gods, appeared from other realms, etc.


:smalltongue: Sounds a bit like Eragon.

What, did someone mention the plot of Star Wars?

MrNexx
2007-01-10, 01:27 PM
Oooh! Maybe they're playing a sort of "god game", where they all set up their "pieces" (life forms, terrain, et al) at the beginning of time and push play. At the end of a set duration (three or four or ninety million years), the god whose followers have the most subjugation of the planet wins.

Hmmm... and there's another god who wants to "win" so he's giving his followers some artificial pushes... meddling in their biology, making them more than they should be at this point in their development...

Premier
2007-01-10, 01:34 PM
Please do elaborate.

The very broadest dictionary definition of sentience includes beings without consciousness, but the accepted meaning of the word excludes nonintelligent minds. Sapient merely means wise. What did you mean?

Sapient means "wise" in the common use of the word, but I'm using a narrower, more technical definition in this context. Since we ARE having a discussion about the matter that will possibly get into rather technical aspects, I daresay it's important to make sure that everyone's on the same page.

In this sense, "sentience" simply means the ability to perceive the world - in the animal kingdom, it's usually through vision, hearing, smell, taste, touch, etc.. "Sapience", however, refers to the ability of abstract thought, which - at least according to our present knowledge - only us humans really have.

Maryring
2007-01-10, 01:35 PM
In regards with animals, they have apparently finally been given both sapience and sentinence, so to speak. Recent research show that animals indeed do have emotions and feelings, and don't do things solely on instinct. Ravens slide in the snow because the game is fun, not because it teaches them balance. Mice choose their cheese by taste, and not by nourishment. The real question that still haven't been asked is "do they wonder about the meaning of life", and that... is pretty hard to answer since we can't speak with them. But yeah, from what I've read, any animal with a spine (generally speaking) is considered both Sentient and Sapient.

Fax Celestis
2007-01-10, 01:37 PM
Hmmm... and there's another god who wants to "win" so he's giving his followers some artificial pushes... meddling in their biology, making them more than they should be at this point in their development...

...which is cheating on a terribly grand scale. But it's okay, because he's a trickster god. Unfortunately, he's an evil trickster god, and his minions are going to destroy everything. Queue PCs. PCs enter Stage Left, singing, dancing, and terribly unaware.

Except for the CN cleric of the trickster deity, who is all too aware and isn't sure that it's a good thing (or entirely comfortable with the idea of reality as a game--at least, a game that he can't cheat at).

Xerillum
2007-01-10, 01:37 PM
Hey, stop! I'll sue you! La La la la la la la la!

JaronK
2007-01-10, 01:40 PM
On sentience: Dogs can learn basic language, mastering at least 20 words, and can count effectively. Very useful for Search and Rescue dogs, who can run up to a collapsed house and, with barks and hand signals, indicate "three alive in here, at least one badly injured. Hurry." Octopusses are all kinds of intelligent too.

We're just the top of the pack.

On evolution and creation: In D&D, the Gods made the races. Also, Wizards make races. So do some other powerful sources. D&D is a great example of what the world would be like if there were a bunch of creators: a lot of things that aren't actually related, but are thematically very similar (like Legendary Apes and those weird 6 armed ape things). It's what happens when someone says "ooh, cats are cool, I bet I can make a cat-human-thing!" Bam! Catfolk.

As such, a lot of things look related, but are structurally totally different (see: manta ray, aboleth). Also, you will see two completely unrelated critters with one right in between, because one creator was inspired by two things (see: octopus, mindflayer, human).

It's actually a wonderful example of how earth would be if there really was a creator that just bamfed everything into existance (or if a few did it).

That said, creation and evolution are not mutually exclusive... in fact some critters in D&D specifically mention it. Magebreed Horses, for example, are just well bred horses, and controlled breeding implies that standard evolutionary forces are all in place. They're just not the only factor in a world with many creator gods, and there's the added bonus that creation vs. evolution debates on D&D worlds are exceptionally easy to resolve.

"My god created the world"

"No, it evolved!"

"Hey god, did you create the world"

"NO MORTAL, BUT I DID CREATE THE GNOMES. THEN ARCTIC GNOMES EVOLVED."

"..."

"Okay, fine, your god created the gnomes. But there's evolution too!

JaronK

Fax Celestis
2007-01-10, 01:43 PM
"Excuse me, sir Ao. Did you make all and everything the way it is now, or did it evolve?"

"YES."

"Good answer. I'll go cower in fear now."

Hyrael
2007-01-10, 01:45 PM
No, we're the only sapient life form. Sentience is a much wider term and includes pretty much all animals.

As for gods and evolution (keeping it strictly in the topic of D&D worlds), the two are not mutually exclusive. Evolution doesn't describe how life or the world came to be in the first place; it only describes how existing life changes over time. There's no reason why a bunch of fantasy gods couldn't have kickstarted the world, then let evolution take its course developing the species that exist at the "present" time of the game.

I'm a biology major at UWGB, and I've read lots of books by Jack Cohen, and alot of Sci-fi and fantasy, So I think I can safely say that I have a rank or two in the What the Hell I'm Talking About skill.

I dislike ID in all it's forms, even as a fiction. In most of the primordial accounts of D&D worlds (the ones in the feindish codex books), the gods were rather suprised to find life on the material plane. finally, they had something to kiss their ineffable rears and do their bidding.

I think evolution can be easily applied to D&D. The common races are all hominids. Goblinoids are the result of a completely different primate lineage (someone once suggested Baboons). And of course Magical influences are everywhere(thats how dragons fly and breathe fire. their intrinsic magic alters reality on a local level just enough for them to be possible). Elves are a lineage that split off early from early humans, likely due to manipulation of some kind (the elven gods). But, their long life spans precluded extensive genetic drift, so they are still able to interbreed with humans. Orcs are likewise a split-off, but they are natural. they split off after the elves, and drifted further due to their normal lifespans, allowing them to interbreed with contemporery humans (a certain ammount of mixing has always been going on, further preventing drift. Probably, all humans have a little bit of orc, and all orcs have a bit of human) but not with the older elf lineage. Halflings were a very early hominid branch, as were dwarves, though they themselves are not related.

Other sentient races are exactly what they look like. Gnolls are smart bipedal hyenas (hyenas are already pretty smart, and they have the complex social structure that fosters mental growth). Shauahgin are some sort of strange lieage of fish that has no parallel in our world (juding by their fully developed limbs, I'm guessing that they were a partially-terrestrial species that went back to the water. they cant be related to sharks. Its a common thing to happen. Dolphins, Seals, Iguanas, snakes, Icthyosaurs and their ilk, all terrestrial species that went back to the water where their ancestors lived. Living on land is hard, and requires a strong heart, real limb girdles, and other features. once you have these, you can kick fish ass. only sharks and squid/octopi can compete with previously terrestrial lineages. Shaugin just didnt spend as much time as usual on land before heading back.)

As for all the multitudes of monsters and races that exist, I could go on and on. some are obviously Manifestations of Ideals (outsiders) or created creatures (do I really have to explain how owlbears might have evolved. It says so rihgt in their description that they're the result of magical experimentation.)

Magic makes the world go round, but no creature uses more of it than they have to.

Edit: I would also like to endorse JaronK's above post as well. It comes from a person who is much less arrogant and full of himself than I am. His stance is probably the correct one.

NullAshton
2007-01-10, 01:46 PM
"Excuse me, sir Ao. Did you make all and everything the way it is now, or did it evolve?"

"YES."

"Good answer. I'll go cower in fear now."

...I shall use my signature fu on that! If you don't mind you being in a signature that is.

MrNexx
2007-01-10, 01:51 PM
Elves are a lineage that split off early from early humans, likely due to manipulation of some kind (the elven gods). But, their long life spans precluded extensive genetic drift, so they are still able to interbreed with humans. Orcs are likewise a split-off, but they are natural. they split off after the elves, and drifted further due to their normal lifespans, allowing them to interbreed with contemporery humans (a certain ammount of mixing has always been going on, further preventing drift. Probably, all humans have a little bit of orc, and all orcs have a bit of human) but not with the older elf lineage. Halflings were a very early hominid branch, as were dwarves, though they themselves are not related.


But Orcs quite clearly arrived in Faerun through a gate on the southeast shore of the Sea of Fallen Stars, and the Elves arrived a couple hundred thousand years earlier, in several waves, likewise through gates.

Evolution falls apart when you include, as canon, aliens.

Fax Celestis
2007-01-10, 01:54 PM
But Orcs quite clearly arrived in Faerun through a gate on the southeast shore of the Sea of Fallen Stars, and the Elves arrived a couple hundred thousand years earlier, in several waves, likewise through gates.

Evolution falls apart when you include, as canon, aliens.

At least it's more explicable than ZOMG HAFLBREEDZ.

And Ashton? Go right ahead.

Piedmon_Sama
2007-01-10, 03:49 PM
Evolutionary science tells us that humans are evolved from an ape species. On the real Earth, we're the only sentient life-form, so we don't need to think about what any other evolutionary track might produce, or might lead to some other species.
But in D&D, we have elves, dwarves, halflings, gnomes, goblins, orcs.... all manner of highly sentient beings. Some of these are clearly purely magical in origins, but others are far meatier, more visceral.

So - what did halflings evolve from?

My suggestions are:
Some sort of lapine Proto-rabbit => Halfings
Some sort of felid Proto-cat => Elves
Other (non-pre-human) apes => goblinoids

er...

Yes, it might be a silly concept, but what do you think might be the evolutionary ancestors of your favourite species..?

There's no way a creature that lives to be almost 1,000 and rarely breeds is from feline stock. Elves would be more like humanoid tortoises if you wanted to go that route. You might think that +2 Dex and -2 Con stat adjusts go against that logic, but I would liken them to serpents. They have quick reflexes, but a slow, sluggish metabolism---I might even suggest that Elves spend most of their very long lives sleeping.

Of course, Elves with scales is probably not what most worldbuilders are after. Honestly there's no way you can scientifically justify Elves and Dwarves, so I go with the backstory that they were created by Gods. With shorter lived races--humans, orcs and halflings---it's much easier. Halflings are humanlike enough that I decided (for my campaign world) they are drawn from the same stock but adapted specifically to live in large metropoli. Hey, they're small, they fit easily in tight spaces and they're excellent climbers, Halflings are pretty much perfect for urban living.

Orcs are often given pig-like attributes such as tusks, snouts and ears so in my campaign I derived them from the suidae family. Orcs are very boar-like: cunning (though not typically as cunning as humans), independant (almost always chaotically-aligned) and cruel (boars will attack you just for fun. Seriously.) I don't have Orcs as evil per se, but they don't have the same intrinsic drive for community that humans have. Humans tend to cooperate, orcs tend to dominate (or accept domination until they can get out from under it).

Well, that was probably more information than you cared to hear, sorry. It's hard for me not to go on about my precious setting at the slightest provocation. Anyway, I think that bringing Natural Law into the D&D setting can be interesting provided you have it work with the absurd magic crap and not against, and if you understand the basic ideas well enough....

Dervag
2007-01-10, 04:17 PM
D&D tends to have a relatively rosy outlook on the fey that goblinoids might otherwise be lumped in with (I say tends 'cause there are a good few Unseelie Fey in published D&D books).My mother said I never should/play with the fairies in the wood
and that sort of thing?


If we imagine our extremely ancient ancestors co-existing with Neanderthals, we can easily imagine them being seen as monstrous (though there's no evidence to suggest that we did - aside from our modern fear of outsiders).Maybe experiences with Neanderthals were the origin of human myths about nonhuman sapient species.


I generally find it best not to mix science with high fantasy.Well, evolution will exist with or without 'scientific' explanations. Evolution is even more fundamental than gravity, when you get right down to it- you can deduce the existence of evolution logically from first principles about the nature of organisms, rather than having to observe it in nature. As long as things reproduce, and as long as the offspring resemble their ancestors, there will be evolution. Magic can cause evolutionary changes just like anything else. However, evolution as a main driver for the origin of species can easily go right out the window in a fantasy environment.


And from an evolutionary standpoint, it's extremely unlikely that so many intelligent races could evolve alongside each other. The competition for resources would see to that. That's why there are no more neanderthals.This is true only assuming that the intelligent species don't excel in radically different environments.

For instance, there are lots of different species of felines; there can even be multiple feline species in the same habitat. But they don't compete for the same resources, so they coexist. You can do the same thing with hominids.


In regards with animals, they have apparently finally been given both sapience and sentinence, so to speak...But yeah, from what I've read, any animal with a spine (generally speaking) is considered both Sentient and Sapient.Then we need a new word for what people normally use 'sentient' and 'sapient' to mean. Care to nominate a replacement?

Maryring
2007-01-10, 04:39 PM
Humanoid.

No really. The best way to describe something that makes humans unique should have its roots in the word human. Since Sentience and Sapience has been handed out to animals, I suggest... Humanlike. Plain and Simple "Humanlike". Unless you have a better suggestion.

JadedDM
2007-01-10, 04:54 PM
Well, evolution will exist with or without 'scientific' explanations. Evolution is even more fundamental than gravity, when you get right down to it- you can deduce the existence of evolution logically from first principles about the nature of organisms, rather than having to observe it in nature. As long as things reproduce, and as long as the offspring resemble their ancestors, there will be evolution. Magic can cause evolutionary changes just like anything else. However, evolution as a main driver for the origin of species can easily go right out the window in a fantasy environment.

I'm saying in a high fantasy game, it doesn't matter. The laws of science are broken routinely. For instance, the moon need not be a giant rock held aloft by gravity. It could be a god, a flat disk, a giant eye, or a magical creature. The stars really could be pinpoints of light as opposed to massive and far off orbs of burning gas. Perhaps all life did spring forth immediately by whim of deities. It depends on the setting, of course, but there is no rule that the laws of science MUST apply to D&D games. In most cases, that's just not feasible.

I mean, Spelljammer wouldn't be nearly as interesting and fun, in my opinion, if it actually obeyed the laws of science.

Altair_the_Vexed
2007-01-10, 05:02 PM
Um...

Yes, yes, I know that in most D&D games, we can assume that the gods did everything and just ignore the question...

:biggrin:

...but I did ask - WHAT DID THE SAPIENT RACES EVOLVE FROM IF THEY WEREN'T JUST CREATED 'AS IS' BY THE GODS?

EDIT: Actually, I'm not being fair. Lots of people have posted here with sensible evolutionary possibilities and debate and left out "the gods" - or mentioned them in reference to the idea that they might still be involved in an evolutionary process. I like the "Sim City" / "Theme Park" idea!

Anyway, it's only a bit of fun and idle debate.

Matthew
2007-01-10, 05:18 PM
"Excuse me, sir Ao. Did you make all and everything the way it is now, or did it evolve?"

"YES."

"Good answer. I'll go cower in fear now."

*laughs* Both funny and true.

Jayabalard
2007-01-10, 05:23 PM
In regards with animals, they have apparently finally been given both sapience and sentinence, so to speak. Recent research show that animals indeed do have emotions and feelings, and don't do things solely on instinct. Ravens slide in the snow because the game is fun, not because it teaches them balance. Mice choose their cheese by taste, and not by nourishment. The real question that still haven't been asked is "do they wonder about the meaning of life", and that... is pretty hard to answer since we can't speak with them. But yeah, from what I've read, any animal with a spine (generally speaking) is considered both Sentient and Sapient.sorry, they don't build fires, and whether they really "talk" is debatable, so they don't pass the talk-and-build-a-fire test. Not sapient, but sentient.

warmachine
2007-01-10, 05:59 PM
Evolution is impossible in the AD&D world because it requires natural selection and that doesn't happen. Or at least it doesn't happen for vermin. In particular, the Piercers, which are mollusks shaped like stalactites and drop from cave roofs. Once they drop, they have no attack capabilities whatsoever and move slowly. If the colony fails to kill the target, they are dead meat. Considering lots of animals have lots of hit points, too many attacks would end in major losses to the colony. That's if sufficent numbers of animals entered deep into a barren cave system in the first place. Piercers should not survive as a species.

Yes, I know it's only a game.

Dark
2007-01-10, 06:15 PM
It's not uncommon for a species to evolve into separate 'robust' (big, strong) and 'gracile' (small, nimble) forms, which eventually become different species. This happened with a lot of apes and monkeys, and it started to happen with humans before one breed wiped out all the others.

This could have happened with dwarves (robust) and gnomes (gracile), for example, if they had a common ancestor. Human-elf also fits this pattern, as does human-halfling. Orc-elf fits it even better, but don't tell either of them that :smallbiggrin:

It seems much more likely that all the humanoid races evolved from a common stock than that they evolved from different ancestral beings. They're just too similar. Well, not ALL the humanoid races. Lizardfolk probably evolved from something else :)

Yuki Akuma
2007-01-10, 06:18 PM
sorry, they don't build fires, and whether they really "talk" is debatable, so they don't pass the talk-and-build-a-fire test. Not sapient, but sentient.

Let's talk dolphins, then. They can't build fires, obviously, so does that automatically make them non-sapient? :smallconfused:

Brauron
2007-01-10, 06:55 PM
I designed a campaign setting once, and never really used it, but in it...

Dwarfs evolved from humans -- my world involved humanity fighting constantly against a reptilian humanoid empire, which used Troglodyte sappers against human kingdoms, and over the generations whole underground cities developed in which men and women lived while defending the underground from Trogs, and over the generations they became more squat and powerfully built.

Elves developed from humans in a different way -- experimentation by wizards resulted in the creation of a magically-gifted, long-lived race. Thus instead of being an old race my elves were a young race, and some of the first elves were still alive.

Gnomes were the result of interbreeding between elves and dwarfs.

There were no halflings in my setting.

Orcs, Goblins, Ogres and Trolls had been created by manipulation and selective breeding by the reptilian humanoid empire (which was caste-based, at the bottom were Troglodytes, above them Lizard-Folk, above them Serpent-men from the d20 Call of Cthulhu book, and the ruling caste was Serpent-men to which I'd applied the Half-Dragon Template) to create armies. The reptilian humanoids bred very slowly, females laying a clutch of eggs every ten years or so, and from each clutch maybe a single hatchling would reach adulthood, so in order to wage war against the humans, alchemy/sorcery was employed, producing from Lizard-folk and Troglodyte stock the Orcs and Goblins, respectively. They bred quickly, followed orders, and the reptilian humanoids didn't care in the slightest how many of them died. Battle tactics were simply, "throw orcs/goblins at the humans, wave after wave, whittling down the human defenses." Trolls were bred from orcs as a race of oversized berserkers, to smash through human battle-lines. Ogres were developed to provide ranged support -- armed with Large repeating crossbows, the bolts of which had been smeared with a venom the Ogres produced themselves.

Just my two cents, based on a campaign setting I abandoned...

Turcano
2007-01-10, 08:08 PM
If you're looking at D&D races from an evolutionary perspective, you kind of need to have humanoid (read: PHB and probably goblinoid) races as descending from a common ancestor. I would give a phylogeny something like this:



HCA
____/\___
________/\______ \
/\ \ \
/ \ / \ \
/ \ /\ \ \
/\ /\ /\ \ \ \
/ \ / \ / \ \ \ \
Hu Ha D Gn Go Ho B O E
(Key: Hu=human, Ha=halfling, D=dwarf, Gn=gnome, Go=goblin, Ho=hobgoblin, B=bugbear, O=orc, E=elf, HCA=humanoid common ancestor)

Reptilian humanoids, gnolls, and monstrous humanoids are the result of convergent evolution.

Edit: Does anyone know how to keep this from stretching the post? Thanks, Fax.

Fax Celestis
2007-01-10, 08:14 PM
If you're looking at D&D races from an evolutionary perspective, you kind of need to have humanoid (read: PHB and probably goblinoid) races as descending from a common ancestor. I would give a phylogeny something like this:



HCA
____/\___
________/\______ \
/\ \ \
/ \ / \ \
/ \ /\ \ \
/\ /\ /\ \ \ \
/ \ / \ / \ \ \ \
Hu Ha D Gn Go Ho B O E(Key: Hu=human, Ha=halfling, D=dwarf, Gn=gnome, Go=goblin, Ho=hobgoblin, B=bugbear, O=orc, E=elf, HCA=humanoid common ancestor)

Reptilian humanoids, gnolls, and monstrous humanoids are the result of convergent evolution.

Edit: Does anyone know how to keep this from stretching the post?

Not bad for ASCII. And use {spoiler} instead of {code}

mikeejimbo
2007-01-10, 09:54 PM
Wait, humans can't be the only sapient creature. After all, we're only the third smartest. (After mice and dolphins, of course.)

Mike_G
2007-01-10, 11:01 PM
I don't think there IS evolution in D&D... I think it was more of a... "ZAP" and the gods said "let there be people!" and thus, it was so. And all was good, until one god announced "Let there be Weapons Magic and XP!"

There is always evolution. Individuals with better traits will survive and breed, and those with less beneficial ones won't. Species change over time based on selective breeding.

Maybe the gods scuplted the first Elves and Humans, etc from pure magic, but once they started breeding, the stronger, faster, smarter, more attractive ones got more action, and had more descendants and the race evolved.

Norsesmithy
2007-01-10, 11:04 PM
In my setting, Elves were uplifted from (proto)human stock by their dark gods, Dwarves were blended from humans and giants, and reduced in stature to facilitate working as mining slaves to the OgreMagi that did it, Halflings and humans evolved, but in diferent locations, they are closely related, but the humans evolved in an area with of relative surplus of resources, and halflings came from an area with relative resource scarcity, Gnomes were made from elves and halflings by a halfling wizard that attained godhood (Garl Glittergold). At the approximately CroMagon stage the Elves rounded up most of the humans (the only sapient race they had yet met), and forced them into slavery. The Humans that hadn't been rounded up thad tended to live in more difficult terrain that promoted physical ability over mental ability, one stem turning into Orcs, another turnign into goblinoids. The Goblinoids then followed the human/halfling divide, making goblins and hobgolins, bugbears and ogres.

So my setting has both.

oriong
2007-01-10, 11:06 PM
Well, that's only sort of true.

There DOESN'T have to always be evolution. For example the gods could have built elves so that they are literally like they are in the D+D book: A few random facors of height, weight and gender, along with a distribution of ability scores based off of a combination of random factors at birt, and the environment and upbringing, none of which are actually inheritable (except traits such as hair and eye color which are evolutionarily negligible on humanoids).

Obviously not necessarily saying that's how it is, but nothing says that evolution works in D+D except on the very, very largest scale (if a race is unfit it is likely to go extinct because other races will kill it), nothing says it has to occur on the genetic/heriditary level.

Mike_G
2007-01-10, 11:15 PM
Well, that's only sort of true.

There DOESN'T have to always be evolution. For example the gods could have built elves so that they are literally like they are in the D+D book: A few random facors of height, weight and gender, along with a distribution of ability scores based off of a combination of random factors at birt, and the environment and upbringing, none of which are actually inheritable (except traits such as hair and eye color which are evolutionarily negligible on humanoids).

Obviously not necessarily saying that's how it is, but nothing says that evolution works in D+D except on the very, very largest scale (if a race is unfit it is likely to go extinct because other races will kill it), nothing says it has to occur on the genetic/heriditary level.

All species change through breeding. Some members will not breed and their traits will be lost, some will breed more or have stronger, healthier children or be better able to look after those children. Generally, the more favorable traits for survival are those considered more attractive in a mate. hat's how natural selection works. It's pretty hard to keep it from working, unless you insist that people breed with unsucessful members of the species.

If a race dwells underground, the members with better darkvision will be more sucessful, thus more attractive as mates, better providers for their young, more young will survive, and they will become dominant.

Evolution explains the subraces very well. Isolated groups of Elves, or Dwarves or whatever adapted to a new environment, gained or lost abilities that were more or less important, and over many, many generations, became an identifiable race.

Aquatic Elves, Wood Elves and Wild Elves all descending form a common ancestor, but each group adapting to its particular situation by breeding to favorable traits makes perfect sense, even if Corellion or whoever actually created the first Elves.

Golthur
2007-01-10, 11:20 PM
Oooh! Maybe they're playing a sort of "god game", where they all set up their "pieces" (life forms, terrain, et al) at the beginning of time and push play. At the end of a set duration (three or four or ninety million years), the god whose followers have the most subjugation of the planet wins.
Hmm... Reminds me of Fred Saberhagen, except, y'know, not with biology. :smile:

oriong
2007-01-10, 11:28 PM
All species change through breeding. Some members will not breed and their traits will be lost, some will breed more or have stronger, healthier children or be better able to look after those children. Generally, the more favorable traits for survival are those considered more attractive in a mate. hat's how natural selection works. It's pretty hard to keep it from working, unless you insist that people breed with unsucessful members of the species.

This is the essentially wrong assumption.

All REAL species change through breeding. Nothing says this is true in Fantasy Universe X. The assumption that fantasy universes follow genetics and evolution is just as flawed as assuming that a sci-fi universe will obey the laws of relativity and thermodynamics.



Evolution explains the subraces very well. Isolated groups of Elves, or Dwarves or whatever adapted to a new environment, gained or lost abilities that were more or less important, and over many, many generations, became an identifiable race.

Indeed, you're correct. From a general perspective D+D looks like it could have a very loose evolutionary system. If examined too closely it would clearly fall apart from the fact that it's 'science' is pretty much non-existant and the idea of a species flew out the window the moment the word 'half-' was used as a prefix in the PHB.

Indeed, D+D has, if not genetics, something like heridity: you've got tons of creatures who recieve traits from their ancestors and their parents.

However, my point was simply that evolution is not a prerequisite (beyond the very 'zoomed out' stuff I talked about in my last post). For example, those subraces might not have come from any parent race, rather all elven races were created together and exist unchanged except from the whim of the gods/wizards/etc (which is actually how it works in several campaign settings). There's no reason why it must exist in every game world, or apply to every race in said world.

Devils_Advocate
2007-01-11, 01:12 AM
Mike G, what oriong is proposing is a scenario in which there is no heredity, so that e.g. a child of two parents with strong darkvision isn't any more likely to have stong darkvision himself than a child of two parents with weak darkvision. There are no genes and hence no genetics, and the gods just hand out traits as they see fit.

There's not really any reason to presuppose that gods would decide to make traits heritable other than the usual assumption that things work like they do in the real world unless otherwise indicated. Granted, a world where children don't look especially like their parents would be... weird.

Children would still tend to wind up similar to their parents due to growing up in a similar environment, though. So traits would still be passed down that way, they just wouldn't be things you're born with. So there would still be natural selection; memetics rather than genetics.

(If you wanted to get really nuts, you could make a world where children don't even inherit their parents' race, and you're as likely to give birth to an orc as an elf or a human.)

oriong
2007-01-11, 01:41 AM
right, you would still have natural selection on the social and economic level: those groups which have a more sucessful strategy for interaction and survival thrive, while those with a less sucessful one falter. But obviously it doesn't have anything to do with species (especially in in a multi-intelligent species world like D+D) except insofar that the species may be more or less suited to a given strategy (like orcs would be unsuited to a magically focused society, etc.).

Interestingly enough if gods interfere enough they could create a sort of natural selection even if heriditery doesn't exist: natural selection based on who has the most generous gods or whoever is most willing to ask the dieties for intervention.

Maryring
2007-01-11, 01:44 AM
sorry, they don't build fires, and whether they really "talk" is debatable, so they don't pass the talk-and-build-a-fire test. Not sapient, but sentient.
That test is old and outdated. There is a big difference between being sapient, and being able to do things humans can do. Humans are practically the only species capable of building fires. The only others who can are certain primates, but then they first need a reason to build fires. And talking is no longer debated among most species. Carnivorous pack animals, like Dog and Wolf have a language. Heck, there are even those who have training in communicating with wolves. Even felines, who are usually loners, appear to have some sort of language, even though they don't need it because they live their lives alone. Or Dolphines. They talk, they laugh, they play, they apparently have an IQ far over 50. Or what about monkeys. They've actually invented several things that we humans now use, such as the (concept) of the umbrella and toilet paper.

Bears With Lasers
2007-01-11, 01:52 AM
D&D is more likely to have Lamarckian evolution than Darwinian. It'd explain a lot.

Turcano
2007-01-11, 02:12 AM
If a race dwells underground, the members with better darkvision will be more sucessful, thus more attractive as mates, better providers for their young, more young will survive, and they will become dominant.

Don't forget negative selection; creatures with poor darkvision would have a tendency to bump into things, which includes things like ropers.


D&D is more likely to have Lamarckian evolution than Darwinian. It'd explain a lot.

You mean all the chimeric creatures and the fact that sapient species tend to have roughly humanoid body plans for no apparent reason?

Dark
2007-01-11, 06:06 AM
You could even have a world where heredity works along family lines, regardless of biological ancestry. So the adopted son of a dwarf is as likely to develop darkvision as a real dwarf is.

This fits well with the "raised by..." rationale that is sometimes used for half- templates.

Ethdred
2007-01-11, 06:49 AM
Mike G, what oriong is proposing is a scenario in which there is no heredity, so that e.g. a child of two parents with strong darkvision isn't any more likely to have stong darkvision himself than a child of two parents with weak darkvision. There are no genes and hence no genetics, and the gods just hand out traits as they see fit.)

And what is 'strong' or 'weak' darkvision? Everyone in the race has 60' (or 30' or whatever) darkvision - no-one has 59' or 61' so there is no advantage to anyone. Yes, some members will have an 18 STR or a 17 STR, but no-one can have a 17.00000001 STR, and evolution, in our world, works on very small changes between generations that slowly accumulate to become significant.

Like I said earlier, the D&D world is binary, so evolution, in the 'real world' sense cannot happen, since it is the ultimate fuzzy logic.

Leush
2007-01-11, 08:14 AM
I'd say that magic and gods, can be replaced by genetic engeneering and technology (not today's technology, but a few hundred years down the line). Personally I'd say that evolution can potentially have a place in d&d. I'd also say that a lot of the exotic races are probably "made" by gods.

If divine intervention is so severe in a system with no feature x that it it mimics feature x closely, then feature x still exists by any other name, furthermore the chance is that the mechanism by which the divine intervention replaces the process is identical to the original process.

In short it's basically saying. "There is no thermodynamics or evolution or genes in this world, there is Mermodynamics and Magilution and Maenes."

Okay, I know it's poorly explained, but I'm lazy, and you probably get the picture anyway.


Also, I'd think that elves, orcs and humans are very closely related, and are one species. Halflings would also be part of this species if they weren't barred from breeding by mechanical seperation. Although this makes things difficult: Did things evolve from apes or pixies? Hmm. Let me think. Ok, I have an idea. Elves evolved from Fey. Orcs were created from elves. Humans evolved from apes or orcs. Gnomes evolved from Fey seperately, and then dwarves evolved from gnomes.

Okay I get something like this.

...................................Gods
....................................|
...................................Fey-____________
.....................................|............ .........|
.................................Elves--\ .........Gnomes
..................................... |....Halflings......|
.....................Humans<-?-Orcs...........Dwarves

My goodness, that's seriously screwed up.

Deus Mortus
2007-01-11, 08:22 AM
I'd switch dwarves and gnomes around and make halflings a crossbreed of elves/gnomes...

Altair_the_Vexed
2007-01-11, 08:24 AM
And what is 'strong' or 'weak' darkvision? Everyone in the race has 60' (or 30' or whatever) darkvision - no-one has 59' or 61' so there is no advantage to anyone. Yes, some members will have an 18 STR or a 17 STR, but no-one can have a 17.00000001 STR, and evolution, in our world, works on very small changes between generations that slowly accumulate to become significant.

Like I said earlier, the D&D world is binary, so evolution, in the 'real world' sense cannot happen, since it is the ultimate fuzzy logic.

Yes, and all distances in D&D are measured in 5 foot sections. Must that mean that there are no objects that are any fraction of 5 feet in any dimension..?

The mechanics are a reflection of the world, not the world itself. When we use d20 system to run d20 modern, are we really suggesting that the rules are a truly accurate portayal of the world? Of course not - they're tools to ensure fairness and simplicity.
So the D&D rules may show no racial variance on some abilities, but that does not mean that there is none.

Ethdred
2007-01-11, 12:38 PM
Yes, and all distances in D&D are measured in 5 foot sections. Must that mean that there are no objects that are any fraction of 5 feet in any dimension..?

The mechanics are a reflection of the world, not the world itself. When we use d20 system to run d20 modern, are we really suggesting that the rules are a truly accurate portayal of the world? Of course not - they're tools to ensure fairness and simplicity.
So the D&D rules may show no racial variance on some abilities, but that does not mean that there is none.


Erm, yes it does, I would argue. To take a slightly more sensible example, why is it that all half-elves inherit the same characteristics from their parents?

But I'm in danger of taking this too seriously so I'll stop

Turcano
2007-01-11, 01:15 PM
Evolution is impossible in the AD&D world because it requires natural selection and that doesn't happen. Or at least it doesn't happen for vermin. In particular, the Piercers, which are mollusks shaped like stalactites and drop from cave roofs. Once they drop, they have no attack capabilities whatsoever and move slowly. If the colony fails to kill the target, they are dead meat. Considering lots of animals have lots of hit points, too many attacks would end in major losses to the colony. That's if sufficent numbers of animals entered deep into a barren cave system in the first place. Piercers should not survive as a species.

Yes, I know it's only a game.

That's why they evolved into darkmantles. :smallwink:

Leush
2007-01-11, 01:53 PM
Deus Mortus: You see, gnomes I thought are more closely related to fey than dwarves (spell like abilities, generally thought to be magical, bard favoured class, mythology.)

You see I'm not happy with the halfligns there, perhaps they evolved through gnomes rather than elves. Or maybe you had halflings, then gnomes then dwarves. Hmmm.

AtomicKitKat
2007-01-11, 02:47 PM
The real question is: Do/Did the Gods make creatures in their own image, or do they just appear to their followers as the followers see themselves(ie, the Galactus effect)?

Hyrael: Ahh, Hyenas. The bi-mammarial carnivores with the parturition-splitting gender-ambiguous appearance. ;) There has to be some advantage for Sahuagins to keep their bipedal blueprint though. That or they haven't spent nearly as long back in the ocean as the Cetaceans and Icthyosaurs. Kuo-toa probably evolved from some kind of salamander(the slick amphibian kind, not the fire-breathing ones). Bullywugs and Sivs from kind of Batrachian(I've wanted to use that word since I saw it in Taltos 10 years ago! ^^). Serpent Kingdoms lists the various "Creator Gods" of some of the more unusual races(The froggy-creators left for Limbo and turned into Slaad, for example).

Mike_G
2007-01-11, 03:17 PM
And what is 'strong' or 'weak' darkvision? Everyone in the race has 60' (or 30' or whatever) darkvision - no-one has 59' or 61' so there is no advantage to anyone. Yes, some members will have an 18 STR or a 17 STR, but no-one can have a 17.00000001 STR, and evolution, in our world, works on very small changes between generations that slowly accumulate to become significant.

Like I said earlier, the D&D world is binary, so evolution, in the 'real world' sense cannot happen, since it is the ultimate fuzzy logic.

The D&D mechanics are binary, since the smallest useful difference is +1 on a D20. Doesn't mean that the world is, just the mechanical repsresnation is. That doesn't mean that the 3-18 stastistic range is a "whole number only" range, just that values get "rounded" to a whole number for sake of the mechanic. Do you think that when your character receives a bonus ability point for leveling that it represents the accumulation of gradual training and improvement or a sudden "pop" as the size of your biceps increases 5% in the picosecond between being 3rd level and being 4th?

There are ranges and differences within a given race not covered by game mechanics.

First, game mechanics deal mostly with PC and those likely to interecat with them. The population at large would have people with good hear, poor hearing, keen eyesight, nearsightedness, etc. All differences in the acuity of senses cannot be boiled down to the Wis bonus.

This isn't worth making into a game mechanic, but yes, clearly there would be some nearsighted Drow whose Darkvision was less acute than others. We don't have rules for every tiny differcence between individuals, since most differences are too small to provide a +1 on a D20, and therefore of no cosequence to the simulation of combat and skill checks.

Jayabalard
2007-01-11, 05:59 PM
Pesonally, I'm not a fan of evololution tied to fantasy race; but I can see how some would mix intelligent design with evolution if you want.

kind of a sketch of the backstory I use from memory

Dwarves were (according to thier legends) shaped/evoked out of stone/earth and created in the image of thier creator. They have only a certain number of cities and very rarely form communities away from those cities, so they don't have genetically diverse groups. They aren't very susceptable to mutation and they don't have a high childbirth rate, so they havn't evolved much (other than the gnomes).

Gnomes were an offshoot a particular dwarven clan and they were seperated from the cities of the dwarves for thousands of years; they were exposed to some magic phenomenom where they lived that caused them to change significantly over a short period of time. Perhaps they have mixed blood with some sort of fey. They have since spread out from that community and noone, especially the gnomes and dwaves, considers them to just be "different dwarves"

Dwaves tend toward lawful, gnomes toward chaotic

Similarily, elves were created in the image of thier creator. Elves have learned a certain amount of control over nature and thier bodies, so they don't have as many genetic defects to pass on to thier children like many other creatures do, nor are they particularily susceptable to mutation. That control coupled with thier low birthrates means that they don't really evolve either unless they choose to. The earliest elves had more control than the current ones, and some of them are what became various other fey races; but there has been very little if any change to elves as they are for thousands of years.

Orcs were created by taking elves and twisting them dark magic until they were no longer recognizable as even related to lelves. They have a fast birthrate, and are susceptable to mutation, so all of the goblinoids and maybe even othe creatures are probably descended from those first orcs.

Humans; perhaps they evolved up as they did on earth through the primates; perhaps thier evolution was influeced by some gods or perhaps it was by chance; perhaps they were just created as they are. Perhaps they're from another world (even our earth) transported there by magic. Or whatever. There are lots of legends, and I refuse to pick one (mostly since I have both highly religious and atheist players in my campaign)

I don't have a backstory for halflings; they're so easygoing that they don't even have legends about it; they may or may not be descended from men.