PDA

View Full Version : What races are good with ships and the sea in a traditional fantasy setting?



Myth27
2018-09-21, 02:57 PM
What’s the stereotypical seafaring race in fantasy? I cannot think of one. I am referring to air breathing land people not tritons and similar.

Lapak
2018-09-21, 03:01 PM
What’s the stereotypical seafaring race in fantasy? I cannot think of one. I am referring to air breathing land people not tritons and similar.Humans. Seriously.

In settings modeling Tolkien really closely, elves, but otherwise in stereotypical fantasy settings humans tend to be the major seafarers.

Mutazoia
2018-09-21, 09:48 PM
Sea Elves.

Technically any "Aquatic" race (that can breath above water).

LordEntrails
2018-09-21, 09:58 PM
Elves, Humans and Minotaurs.
Not Dwarves or Gnomes.

Mutazoia
2018-09-21, 10:07 PM
Elves, Humans and Minotaurs.
Not Dwarves or Gnomes.

Hey now....Dwarves make great anchors.....

Thrudd
2018-09-21, 10:12 PM
There is no such thing as a "traditional fantasy setting". In default D&D, I'd say it's humans more than any other. I wouldn't consider Aquatic races as sea-farers.

Celestia
2018-09-22, 12:10 AM
Humans and elves seem to be the most common. It's weird, though, you'd think gnomes would be more common with their whole technology angle. I can see gnomes making magitech ironclads being a thing. Why isn't that a thing?

Greymane
2018-09-22, 12:52 PM
Humans and elves seem to be the most common. It's weird, though, you'd think gnomes would be more common with their whole technology angle. I can see gnomes making magitech ironclads being a thing. Why isn't that a thing?

Obviously, we have to make it a thing. I'm brewing up a little setting where the dwarves have a vast trading empire much akin to Victorian England. Guess which race just became the engineers behind their floating fortress battle barges? :smallamused:

Xuc Xac
2018-09-22, 01:30 PM
Humans and elves seem to be the most common. It's weird, though, you'd think gnomes would be more common with their whole technology angle. I can see gnomes making magitech ironclads being a thing. Why isn't that a thing?

There's a reason you never see gnomes at sea.

Submarines.

redwizard007
2018-09-22, 01:35 PM
Humans and elves seem to be the most common. It's weird, though, you'd think gnomes would be more common with their whole technology angle. I can see gnomes making magitech ironclads being a thing. Why isn't that a thing?

I really feel like that IS a thing, but I can't think of a single example outside homebrew. Now, airships are a different matter all together.

Nifft
2018-09-22, 01:42 PM
Dwarves wearing stone-forged full plate, except the stone is pumice.

awa
2018-09-22, 06:10 PM
now I've seen minotaur as sailors in dragon lance but are their any other examples of this being the case.

Otherwise yhea humans and elves

Celestia
2018-09-22, 06:43 PM
There's a reason you never see gnomes at sea.

Submarines.
I feel like gnomes would be the kind of people who'd put a screen door on a sub and then never figure out why it doesn't work. :smalltongue:

BeerMug Paladin
2018-09-22, 11:47 PM
I always thought that lizardfolk would make good sailors in D&D. A race that is naturally adapted to live in swamps and marshes and have bonuses to reflect that. Seems like it should translate to sailing being their thing, but settings don't seem to take that route. Then again, most non-pc races tend to be flavored to exist within one narrow environment and never leave that particular domain. Although you could always refluff the monster entry as turtlefolk. Let's be clear, though. They're pirates!

I think it's most typical to have humans be the predominant sailors. I think it's because of the establishment of hats for the various races, rather than humans being particularly sea-oriented. Dwarves live in mountains/underground, elves live in the forests/jungles, gnomes invent things and live in big cities, halflings exist at the margins of society and don't make waves (ha-ha) and orcs are barbarians who live where no other race lives. Humans do everything else. So humans get to do all the stuff that isn't narrowly focused.

I feel like gnomes would be the kind of people who'd put a screen door on a sub and then never figure out why it doesn't work. :smalltongue:

I love this.

NorthernPhoenix
2018-09-23, 12:24 AM
As others have mentioned, humans are surprisingly the best at this in most fantasy settings.

1of3
2018-09-23, 02:43 AM
In traditional fantasy there is nothing but humans for protagonists.

Otherwise.. Catpeople. Obivously.

Satinavian
2018-09-23, 03:36 AM
As already mentioned often enough : Elves.

All other races i have only seen in one setting each as particularly adept with ships, if we exclude those that live in the water.

Amd yes, that includes humans. Wlile there are quite a lot of costal human dominated maritime civilisations in diction, i can't remember an instance where this is bound to the humans as race.

Knaight
2018-09-23, 04:14 AM
On humans being the best with ships, and this repeatedly being referred to as surprising - look at just how many people live on coasts. Massive port cities are a historical norm, where their precise size has varied highly but the tendency towards port cities to be much bigger is near constant. Meanwhile most of the cities that aren't port cities follow rivers, which are often more than big enough to see boats and even ships. One of the major pieces of infrastructure developed by several different civilizations all over the world is canal systems, to transport goods and people by boat.

That this ends up as a common thing in "generic" fantasy settings is hardly surprising.

hamishspence
2018-09-23, 06:45 AM
Humans and elves seem to be the most common. It's weird, though, you'd think gnomes would be more common with their whole technology angle. I can see gnomes making magitech ironclads being a thing. Why isn't that a thing?

Dwarven ironclads is a thing in Warhammer. For that matter, it's a thing in D&D - the Arms & Equipment Guide has "Ironclad" (developed and rowed by dwarves) as one of the sample ships.

LibraryOgre
2018-09-23, 08:14 AM
now I've seen minotaur as sailors in dragon lance but are their any other examples of this being the case.


On the other hand, how many settings have minotaurs as a major race? Dragonlance is really the only one I can think of.

What keeps popping to mind for me is Joel Rosenberg's "The Road to Ehvenhor", where the dwarf Ahira Bandylegs is knocked off the boat. Since dwarves are pretty much all muscle, he sinks like a stone... and climbs up the anchor chain to kill the bad guys.

NorthernPhoenix
2018-09-23, 08:45 AM
On humans being the best with ships, and this repeatedly being referred to as surprising - look at just how many people live on coasts. Massive port cities are a historical norm, where their precise size has varied highly but the tendency towards port cities to be much bigger is near constant. Meanwhile most of the cities that aren't port cities follow rivers, which are often more than big enough to see boats and even ships. One of the major pieces of infrastructure developed by several different civilizations all over the world is canal systems, to transport goods and people by boat.

That this ends up as a common thing in "generic" fantasy settings is hardly surprising.

Not that I mind, but it is amusing that Humans generally pull ahead also in settings with actual aquatic/amphibious races, who are usually assumed to just swim everywhere. Obviously boats are hard for mer-people, but races like sea elves and Triton should probably get on that, to use a DnD example. Same with the Naga in Warcraft and so on.

Spore
2018-09-23, 08:51 AM
If you consider Magic's plane of Ixalan, then vampires. I mean who doesn't remind themselves of conquistador vampires when you imagine a sail ship?

But yes, seafaring is often tied to humans because we are usually the least traditionalistic race around, innovating all around. Shorter-lived races often have a good navy too, like orcs or goblins. That is if their culture is organised enough to plan large voyages. On the flipside, often a plethora of exotic monstrous races stand for the indigenous tribes that also have something resembling a navy.

hamishspence
2018-09-23, 08:55 AM
Not that I mind, but it is amusing that Humans generally pull ahead also in settings with actual aquatic/amphibious races, who are usually assumed to just swim everywhere. Obviously boats are hard for mer-people, but races like sea elves and Triton should probably get on that, to use a DnD example.

In Douglas Niles's The Coral Kingdom, Sahaugin have their own underwater boats - "mantas" - which are rowed.

The Jack
2018-09-23, 09:20 AM
The problem with ironclads is that they're so above and beyond wooden ships that you'd have to ask yourself why the humans didn't adopt them but the gnomes/dwarves did.
Humans are the only race known for vast trading networks, so they're going to be the most invested in ship technology.
I think hobbits would be great on ships though: they take up little room, meaning more cargo, more guns, and they could build their ships in ways that make the big folks struggle with (tiny hallways)

The best would be Hobgoblins. They're organized and Disciplined, and they don't lack craftsmen. They aren't as mercantile, but might make it up in martial bent. They've got several advantages over humans: a strong lean towards Lawful alignment, dark-vision, and they're good to supplement their crews with slaves, other goblinoids, monsters and mercenaries. Bugbears and goblins would make great night raiders and the later are a great way to save space on a ship.

hamishspence
2018-09-23, 10:09 AM
The problem with ironclads is that they're so above and beyond wooden ships that you'd have to ask yourself why the humans didn't adopt them but the gnomes/dwarves did.

D&D ones sound more like iron has just been attached to a more regular ship chassis. They're rowed by oars, for one thing.

redwizard007
2018-09-23, 10:30 AM
Not that I mind, but it is amusing that Humans generally pull ahead also in settings with actual aquatic/amphibious races, who are usually assumed to just swim everywhere. Obviously boats are hard for mer-people, but races like sea elves and Triton should probably get on that, to use a DnD example. Same with the Naga in Warcraft and so on.

Also related to the Lizardfolk in another post.

If one looks at the development of ship building, the why of aquatic races not excelling becomes fairly obvious. When your natural movement greatly surpasses the capability of primitive seacraft it is quite unlikely that you stick with a suboptimal option long enough to develop better technology. Why use logs to improve buoyancy when you don't need to fear being dragged under the waves? Why craft dugouts when you can carry your gear in a net? Why develop canoes to travel in a small group when you can just swim alongside one another.

Now, this doesn't preclude aquatic races from adopting alien tech, or being integrated into alien shipping culture on some level or the possibility of developing watercraft for long journeys or as recreation, but there we get into campaign specifics.

DeTess
2018-09-23, 10:41 AM
If you consider Magic's plane of Ixalan, then vampires. I mean who doesn't remind themselves of conquistador vampires when you imagine a sail ship?

Given the fact that hey repeatedly got their undead asses kicked by a dorky gorgon and a human amnesiac, I wouldn't consider them to be good with ships :P

When I think 'generic fantasy sailors', I'd imagine humans, 'low' elves and/or some kind of monkey-like humanoid (like the Hadozee race in Stormwrack(3.5e supplement)).

Spore
2018-09-23, 01:21 PM
Given the fact that hey repeatedly got their undead asses kicked by a dorky gorgon and a human amnesiac, I wouldn't consider them to be good with ships :P

I think you forgot the part about them being master assassin and infiltrator and archmage respectively.

LordEntrails
2018-09-23, 02:01 PM
Hey now....Dwarves make great anchors.....
And gnomes make great bobbers, for fishing. But neither one is very good for actually sailing :)

I like the lizardman idea, it makes sense to me, but never seen it.

Vampires? Yea, no. Doesn't running water kill vampires? Don't most vampire myths put vampires and water about as far apart as possible? I mean it's not like they show a vampire taking a cruise ship to North America, rather they go as luggage or in a shipping container.

stack
2018-09-23, 03:14 PM
Golarion has halfling be fairly common on ships, if I recall. They take up less space and eat less food. Tolkein's hobbits are rather disinclined to sail, generally.

Tanarii
2018-09-23, 03:50 PM
Halflings, if you count D&D as a "traditional fantasy setting". At this point after more than 50 years, I think it counts. Halflings as pirates was a big thing in BECMI's Known World / Mystara setting in particular.

shawnhcorey
2018-09-23, 06:02 PM
Not that I mind, but it is amusing that Humans generally pull ahead also in settings with actual aquatic/amphibious races, who are usually assumed to just swim everywhere. Obviously boats are hard for mer-people, but races like sea elves and Triton should probably get on that, to use a DnD example. Same with the Naga in Warcraft and so on.


In Douglas Niles's The Coral Kingdom, Sahaugin have their own underwater boats - "mantas" - which are rowed.

Underwater races would develop two types of ships: those towed by larger animals like whale sharks, and those with sails above the waves but with the hull below water.

Celestia
2018-09-23, 06:22 PM
Also related to the Lizardfolk in another post.

If one looks at the development of ship building, the why of aquatic races not excelling becomes fairly obvious. When your natural movement greatly surpasses the capability of primitive seacraft it is quite unlikely that you stick with a suboptimal option long enough to develop better technology. Why use logs to improve buoyancy when you don't need to fear being dragged under the waves? Why craft dugouts when you can carry your gear in a net? Why develop canoes to travel in a small group when you can just swim alongside one another.

Now, this doesn't preclude aquatic races from adopting alien tech, or being integrated into alien shipping culture on some level or the possibility of developing watercraft for long journeys or as recreation, but there we get into campaign.
Wagons typically move slower that people run (or even walk), yet we've still used them for thousands of years. Even if boats are slower than aquatic races can swim, they'll still be invented for transporting goods.


Underwater races would develop two types of ships: those towed by larger animals like whale sharks, and those with sails above the waves but with the hull below water.
Underwater vessels would require detailed knowledge of density and precise mathematics to be viable. I don't think any race in a pseudo-medieval world would be able to build them.

Xuc Xac
2018-09-23, 06:55 PM
I always thought that lizardfolk would make good sailors in D&D. A race that is naturally adapted to live in swamps and marshes and have bonuses to reflect that. Seems like it should translate to sailing being their thing, but settings don't seem to take that route.

"Swamps and marshes" doesn't really mix well with "sailing". I can see swamp dwellers having a lot of river boat expertise though.

Actual sailing would be more suited to a group that has experience with open water and steady winds.

BeerMug Paladin
2018-09-23, 08:33 PM
If one looks at the development of ship building, the why of aquatic races not excelling becomes fairly obvious. When your natural movement greatly surpasses the capability of primitive seacraft it is quite unlikely that you stick with a suboptimal option long enough to develop better technology. Why use logs to improve buoyancy when you don't need to fear being dragged under the waves? Why craft dugouts when you can carry your gear in a net? Why develop canoes to travel in a small group when you can just swim alongside one another.
Boats provide shelter over open water (traveling across deep ocean is way different than traveling along a coastline), and would allow seafaring critters to travel safely through sea environments not typical for their ancestral living conditions. Helping them hide from any predators in the wider world too.

I've given some thought to a primarily sea-based fantasy race before, and I've considered that such a species should utilize boat technology for the mobile shelter it can provide them. Their ancestral native environment is coral reef, so anywhere where coral does not grow (northern climes, polluted water, deep ocean) is all area they are not suited to live or travel within. They need artificial structures to transport themselves safely between suitable living environments, or to trade.

It would also apply if a seawater-only race had a need to travel up a freshwater river. If the species is awkward-moving on land, they might still find ship travel along a river more palatable than land-based movement, even if they breathe air just fine.

Nifft
2018-09-23, 09:41 PM
Boats provide shelter over open water (traveling across deep ocean is way different than traveling along a coastline), and would allow seafaring critters to travel safely through sea environments not typical for their ancestral living conditions. Helping them hide from any predators in the wider world too.

I've given some thought to a primarily sea-based fantasy race before, and I've considered that such a species should utilize boat technology for the mobile shelter it can provide them. Their ancestral native environment is coral reef, so anywhere where coral does not grow (northern climes, polluted water, deep ocean) is all area they are not suited to live or travel within. They need artificial structures to transport themselves safely between suitable living environments, or to trade.

It would also apply if a seawater-only race had a need to travel up a freshwater river. If the species is awkward-moving on land, they might still find ship travel along a river more palatable than land-based movement, even if they breathe air just fine.

Thinking about warm-water dwellers building "underwater shelter" for travel in colder climes has me thinking they'd invent a steamboat rather early.

From there, a Lizardman Industrial Revolution is just a short hop away.

eru001
2018-09-23, 09:52 PM
I've always found it odd that given how dwarves are often presented as short vikings, they very rarely are seafarers. I'd love to see a world where dwarven longships are feared along every helpless elven coast. They could raid the elven monastery at Lindasfae.

BeerMug Paladin
2018-09-24, 12:58 AM
Thinking about warm-water dwellers building "underwater shelter" for travel in colder climes has me thinking they'd invent a steamboat rather early.

From there, a Lizardman Industrial Revolution is just a short hop away.

There's a couple of benefits to traveling through cold waters above them instead of within them. First of all, it's easier to insulate (air doesn't absorb heat from your body as quickly as water) and secondarily you've got a source of power to tap into (the wind) while somewhat mitigating the influence of oceanic currents. (I have no idea to the extent of this latter benefit.)

There's also the secondary benefit of being able to have a mixed-species crew include some land-based species to help out around the ship. The more accommodating you are to the various potential crewmembers, the bigger pool of talent you have to take advantage of.

Speculating about underwater technologies is a bit harder to contemplate for the fact that since there's little practical human applications for such technology, we don't have a history of thousands of years of engineers trying to make something which would be practically useful to a race with a given set of aquatic-focused features. In a speculative fiction setting, those people and this time would likely exist, and their solutions would likely be far more clever than only a few people thinking for a few minutes (or hours) could achieve. Even though we're all brilliant and creative here.

Of course, as with all fictions, you only have to convince the audience you have of your presentation, so you don't really have to anticipate everything possible to wind up with something compelling. Rule of Cool also sometimes applies. Crocodile pirates!

That said, commentary on the steam boats. Early steam boats (seem to have) adapted technology pioneered to help pump water out of mines. Something that an aquatic-based race would have little need to do or see little benefit from. I should clarify that a distinction as simple as able to breathe water instead of able to hold their breath for long periods of time matters quite a bit. But it seems to me that lizardfolk classically live in swamp lands and would not likely have many mines built in that sort of environment. While a purely sea-based folk would have all their mines already fully underwater. So if either were to develop that technology, it would have to be invented in some other way.

I could probably ramble on and on about this speculative topic for a while, but I think I'll spare the thread any more derailing than I've already given it. I just wanted to say that I don't really picture the same progression happening.

Satinavian
2018-09-24, 02:23 AM
Wagons typically move slower that people run (or even walk), yet we've still used them for thousands of years. Even if boats are slower than aquatic races can swim, they'll still be invented for transporting goods.That is exactly what i like to do with aquatic people. Ships/boats to transport goods and maybe for long range journeys to use the wind powerand the low aerodanymic resistance. Those two reasons are also why i have most ships be faster then the aquatic people themself.

shawnhcorey
2018-09-24, 06:35 AM
Underwater vessels would require detailed knowledge of density and precise mathematics to be viable. I don't think any race in a pseudo-medieval world would be able to build them.

True, one would need per-medieval, pre-Roman mathematics to do it, like the Antikythera Mechanism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythera_mechanism).

The Jack
2018-09-24, 06:50 AM
I've always found it odd that given how dwarves are often presented as short vikings, they very rarely are seafarers. I'd love to see a world where dwarven longships are feared along every helpless elven coast. They could raid the elven monastery at Lindasfae.

Dwarves are largely drawn from 'viking' mythology, where they lived under mountains and such. I imagine from the perspective of the 'viking' peoples, there was a point made that dwarves didn't brave the seas while humans did.

Eldan
2018-09-24, 07:45 AM
Warhammer goes the Tolkien route and gives it to the elves too, both Light and Dark.

CharonsHelper
2018-09-24, 08:16 AM
Warhammer goes the Tolkien route and gives it to the elves too, both Light and Dark.

Yeah - I know that there is a big thing about dark elf corsairs. I believe that they're even a specific unit. (TWF infantry with hand crossbows.)

But in standard fantasy - humans kind of make sense. Older species commonly are more settled and less likely to do tons of traveling about. Plus, when you live 600+ years, risking the dangers of a storm at sea seems like a worse decision.

The Jack
2018-09-24, 09:34 AM
I kinda liked the moarmer from TES
Transparent Sea elves with fish drawn chariots and (unless i'm confusing them with sloads, which definetly do this) raise coral islands.

I think, also, the -only humans are good at sail- comes from a narrative point of view, where, because of the fiction it's more exciting for relatable human protagonists to journey into strange and exotic lands and meet alien cultures, whilst if every other race was as adventerous and mercantile as we were they wouldn't be a mystery.

Lapak
2018-09-24, 09:38 AM
True, one would need per-medieval, pre-Roman mathematics to do it, like the Antikythera Mechanism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythera_mechanism).I also think Celestia is underestimating the advantages of being native to an underwater environment in developing submarines. Not only do they not have to deal with problems that surface-dwellers do (air, pressure) but whatever practical engineering and experience they already had would be geared towards these issues already.

awa
2018-09-24, 10:18 AM
of course depending on how aquatic the race is lack of trees and metal might make ship building extremely difficult.

shawnhcorey
2018-09-24, 10:36 AM
of course depending on how aquatic the race is lack of trees and metal might make ship building extremely difficult.

Trees end up in oceans all the time. Curiosity could make underwater people play around with them until they find something useful to do with them.

TIPOT
2018-09-24, 10:44 AM
Aren't half-elves with their propensity to travel, exploration and trade also a good fit? Other than that full elves and minotaurs are sometimes seen that way.

awa
2018-09-24, 12:16 PM
Trees end up in oceans all the time. Curiosity could make underwater people play around with them until they find something useful to do with them.

boat making is actually fairly complicated, and turning trees into boats underwater is going to be hard. Think about it even just trying work a tree in the water would be really complicated. With no easy fire you have no metal so that means stone tools which knocks out advanced work right their. You also cant use axes so the work is going to be a lot harder.

You are limited to simple chance for the availability of wood both in type and quality, which would basically limit you to small haphazard constructions.

This is a lot of work for something that only minimal benefits you.

So I would more expect sea folk working with boats only if they have significant trade with land dwellers.

Nifft
2018-09-24, 12:21 PM
So I would more expect sea folk working with boats only if they have significant trade with land dwellers.

... or if your people can function well enough outside the water to do the work there.

Like sea elves, with their hour-per-Con-point air tolerance.

redwizard007
2018-09-24, 12:41 PM
... or if your people can function well enough outside the water to do the work there.

Like sea elves, with their hour-per-Con-point air tolerance.

It's still unlikely they would develop the technology independently. Much more likely that these amphibious races would be inspired by landbound races and adapt technologies suited to their needs, or adapt their own culture to basically a symbiotic relationship with landlubbers.

shawnhcorey
2018-09-24, 12:59 PM
boat making is actually fairly complicated, and turning trees into boats underwater is going to be hard. Think about it even just trying work a tree in the water would be really complicated. With no easy fire you have no metal so that means stone tools which knocks out advanced work right their. You also cant use axes so the work is going to be a lot harder.

They would develop their own, different ways of shaping wood, such as chisels made from shark's teeth, or glue instead of nails.

Nifft
2018-09-24, 01:01 PM
They would develop their own, different ways of shaping wood, such as chisels made from shark's teeth, or glue instead of nails.

They might even grow their hulls, using living plants which don't exactly seal out water, but rather tend to float upon it sufficiently to provide dry space for cargo / passengers and enclosed-but-underwater wet living quarters for the crew.

oudeis
2018-09-24, 01:34 PM
Underwater craft have much higher frictional resistance than surface vessels and need correspondingly more powerful/efficient means of propulsion. I think it more likely we'd see caravans of whales- or even better,whale sharks- for large-scale cargo transportation. They would be fitted with something like a carriage harness engineered to allow free movement of the tail, and goods would be enclosed in a streamlined pod to minimize drag. Another idea would be to create vast buoyant floats like balloons, made of hundreds of fish flotation bladders. Transportation is handled by attaching the cargo to the float and releasing it into a charted current.

awa
2018-09-24, 02:27 PM
They would develop their own, different ways of shaping wood, such as chisels made from shark's teeth, or glue instead of nails.

Yeah but all of these methods are vastly inferior to the land dwellers methods (so much so that I'm not sure they would work at all on earth) for a much smaller benefit. I mean sure you could build a setting where this is the case but you could build a setting where prairie dogs are the dominate naval power it doesn't mean its likely.

Jay R
2018-09-24, 04:23 PM
I can see gnomes making magitech ironclads being a thing. Why isn't that a thing?

Because gnomes started out as earth elementals. That's how Paracelsus used them in the Renaissance. They are mostly underground.

Getting back to the original question, the one of the classic fairy story patterns is the ordinary human traveling to a far land peopled by extraordinary beings. So the ones who've traveled are the humans, and seafarers are pretty much by definition travelers.

Celestia
2018-09-24, 04:41 PM
Because gnomes started out as earth elementals. That's how Paracelsus used them in the Renaissance. They are mostly underground.
Yeah, but then Dragonlance turned them into mad inventors, and by now, they've been warped so much that most people don't even remember that they were originally earth elementals. And in the end, does their origin even matter? Kobolds, in Germanic myth, were little fairy people who lived in people's homes and helped them with their household chores. (Alternatively, they also haunted mines.) That doesn't seem important to their current image as aggressive, trap-building lizard people who possibly have a connection to dragons.

Nifft
2018-09-24, 05:00 PM
Yeah, but then Dragonlance turned them into mad inventors, and by now, they've been warped so much that most people don't even remember that they were originally earth elementals.

"We pulled iron from the earth and hammered it into gears. Is it any surprise that the spirits of the earth became gear-heads?"

Celestia
2018-09-24, 05:10 PM
"We pulled iron from the earth and hammered it into gears. Is it any surprise that the spirits of the earth became gear-heads?"
What I mean is that they started it. Of course, memetic mutation altered the concept further so that gnomes eventually became this (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0964.html).

Kami2awa
2018-09-26, 06:20 AM
If you don't want it to be humans, I strongly suggest elves. I know everyone finds them overused these days but sailing requires being good at constructing things out of wood, understanding natural and highly chaotic forces, high agility, and a fascination with the stars. These seem like things elves should be good at.

Mystral
2018-09-26, 06:38 AM
What’s the stereotypical seafaring race in fantasy? I cannot think of one. I am referring to air breathing land people not tritons and similar.

Depending on the setting, Humans or Elves.

redwizard007
2018-09-26, 06:42 AM
If you don't want it to be humans, I strongly suggest elves. I know everyone finds them overused these days but sailing requires being good at constructing things out of wood, understanding natural and highly chaotic forces, high agility, and a fascination with the stars. These seem like things elves should be good at.

It also requires the harvesting of a TON of lumber. That might be a sticking point for some elves.

Goaty14
2018-09-26, 06:56 AM
Anthropomorphic Baboons tend to be good sailors.

Lapak
2018-09-26, 07:29 AM
You have a great opportunity for world building in a game by filling in the gap here. A humanoid race with an affinity for woodwork, or wind-working, or who have an inherent ability to navigate... that last one makes me envision this race becoming the dominant traders in the world, with everyone else having to hire a MarinerRace pilot in order to safely navigate offshore. (Or kidnap/compel one, risking the animosity of the world's only navigators forever.)

Would navigation aids like sextants and accurate timepieces come along sooner, later, or not at all in a world where everyone knows that only the Mariners can understand and survive the ocean?

awa
2018-09-26, 07:31 AM
Anthropomorphic Baboons tend to be good sailors.

I'm not certain I can think of any examples of anthro baboons in traditional fantasy settings. Only in anthro specific setting and even then they are normally just barbarian bad guys. So was this a reference to something?

I mean if were just going by animal here I'm not certain there a good fit most monkeys/apes dont like the water and baboons are not even big time climbers at least in relation to other monkeys. If were going with anthro creatures already minks are better they are good swimmers and climbers.

Rats now then I think about it are even better they are also good swimmers and climbers and they already have an association with ships.

In a more traditional fantasy setting you could use orcs, because while humans are the default choice for explorers orcs are iconic raiders and their strength would make them good at rowing, swimming and climbing.

hamishspence
2018-09-26, 07:38 AM
I'm not certain I can think of any examples of anthro baboons in traditional fantasy settings. Only in anthro specific setting and even then they are normally just barbarian bad guys. So was this a reference to something?

Possibly to hadozee "deck apes" from Stormwrack. I think they were originally created for Spelljammer, before 3e.

Komatik
2018-09-26, 07:42 AM
Vampire, clearly.

awa
2018-09-26, 07:50 AM
Possibly to hadozee "deck apes" from Stormwrack. I think they were originally created for Spelljammer, before 3e.

yeah I thought about that to but those dont look like baboons and besides baboon are monkeys not apes.

Celestia
2018-09-26, 02:48 PM
You have a great opportunity for world building in a game by filling in the gap here. A humanoid race with an affinity for woodwork, or wind-working, or who have an inherent ability to navigate... that last one makes me envision this race becoming the dominant traders in the world, with everyone else having to hire a MarinerRace pilot in order to safely navigate offshore. (Or kidnap/compel one, risking the animosity of the world's only navigators forever.)

Would navigation aids like sextants and accurate timepieces come along sooner, later, or not at all in a world where everyone knows that only the Mariners can understand and survive the ocean?
It depends. If they realistically leverage thismonopoly to build a trading empire, then the other races are probably going to do everything in their power to try breaking into the market and getting their share. Can't let another race have all that wealth and power unchallenged.


yeah I thought about that to but those dont look like baboons and besides baboon are monkeys not apes.
Apes are just a subsection of monkeys, anyways.

awa
2018-09-26, 03:02 PM
Apes are just a subsection of monkeys, anyways.

I dont think that is right, I'm pretty sure that apes are their own thing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ape

halfeye
2018-09-26, 03:59 PM
I dont think that is right, I'm pretty sure that apes are their own thing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ape

Nope.

Your own link says:


They are the sister group of the Old World monkeys, together forming the catarrhine clade.

Which, since new world monkeys are still monkeys, makes apes a type of monkey.

However, baboons are not a type of ape.

Celestia
2018-09-26, 05:51 PM
I dont think that is right, I'm pretty sure that apes are their own thing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ape
No matter how much something evolves, it never stops being what it is. Foxes didn't just evolve from canines; they still are canines. Birds didn't just evolve from dinosaurs; they still are dinosaurs. Apes didn't just evolve from monkeys; we still are monkeys.

Knaight
2018-09-26, 06:06 PM
No matter how much something evolves, it never stops being what it is. Foxes didn't just evolve from canines; they still are canines. Birds didn't just evolve from dinosaurs; they still are dinosaurs. Apes didn't just evolve from monkeys; we still are monkeys.

Multicellular organisms didn't just evolve from single celled organisms, they still are single celled organisms. Eukaryotes didn't just evolve from prokaryotes, they still are prokaryotes. Single celled organisms didn't just evolve from pre-cellular replicating molecules, they still are pre-cellular replicating molecules.

Celestia
2018-09-26, 06:20 PM
Multicellular organisms didn't just evolve from single celled organisms, they still are single celled organisms. Eukaryotes didn't just evolve from prokaryotes, they still are prokaryotes. Single celled organisms didn't just evolve from pre-cellular replicating molecules, they still are pre-cellular replicating molecules.
Eukaryotes are basically just prokaryotes with a nucleus, so pretty much, yeah.

Multicellular, single celled, and replicating molecules are not taxonomic terms making these statements utter nonsense. Also, evolution does not deal with the origin of life, so the last statement is even more specious.

halfeye
2018-09-26, 06:44 PM
No matter how much something evolves, it never stops being what it is. Foxes didn't just evolve from canines; they still are canines. Birds didn't just evolve from dinosaurs; they still are dinosaurs. Apes didn't just evolve from monkeys; we still are monkeys.

That is a very silly idea. Are we fish? I really think not. Foxes are still canines because it wasn't that long ago, and they haven't changed that much. Birds and dinosaurs is debatable, it may be that some dinosaurs were birds, in effect, but certainly some others weren't. Whales notoriously aren't fish.

awa
2018-09-26, 06:49 PM
No matter how much something evolves, it never stops being what it is. Foxes didn't just evolve from canines; they still are canines. Birds didn't just evolve from dinosaurs; they still are dinosaurs. Apes didn't just evolve from monkeys; we still are monkeys.

I disagree with that and Wikipedia agrees with me for whatever that's worth
underline mine
"There are two major types of monkey: New World monkeys (platyrrhines) from South and Central America and Old World monkeys (catarrhines of the superfamily Cercopithecoidea) from Africa and Asia. Apes (hominoids)—consisting of gibbons, orangutans, gorillas, chimpanzees, and humans—are also catarrhines but are classically distinguished from monkeys.[3][4][5][6] (Tailless monkeys may be called "apes", incorrectly according to modern usage; thus the tailless Barbary macaque is sometimes called the "Barbary ape".) Simians and tarsiers emerged within haplorrhines some 60 million years ago. New World monkeys and catarrhine monkeys emerged within the simians some 35 million years ago. Old World monkeys and Hominoidea emerged within the catarrhine monkeys some 25 million years ago. Extinct basal simians such as Aegyptopithecus or Parapithecus [35-32 million years ago] are also considered monkeys by primatologists. "

Also I looked up sister group and it means they are related but it does not mean they are the same. so the fact that they are a sister group with a type of monkey does not make them monkeys.

Nifft
2018-09-26, 07:00 PM
No matter how much something evolves, it never stops being what it is. Foxes didn't just evolve from canines; they still are canines. Birds didn't just evolve from dinosaurs; they still are dinosaurs. Apes didn't just evolve from monkeys; we still are monkeys.

If your version of "evolves" means that things aren't allowed to change into other different things, then your version of "evolves" seems rather ineffectual -- especially compared to the mainstream version, in which things totally do change into other different things.

Knaight
2018-09-26, 07:01 PM
Multicellular, single celled, and replicating molecules are not taxonomic terms making these statements utter nonsense. Also, evolution does not deal with the origin of life, so the last statement is even more specious.

Life is a fuzzy phrase, and those self replicating molecules qualify under some definitions. More to the point, they're capable of mutation, self replication, and being affected by selection pressures. As for multicellular and single celled not being taxonomic terms, so what? They're still clear biological terms, and multicellular organisms still all evolved from single celled common ancestors. It's a clear example of a dramatic novel mutation that breaks with your statement.

No amount of divergence or change will move something out of a particular clade (though HGT and other weirdness can screw up cladistics as a tool for some organisms), but that's not remotely the same thing as "No matter how much something evolves, it never stops being what it is", which is at best a deepity and at worst carrying water for arguments that evolution only happens within the parameters of kinds, which were themselves not products of evolution.