Racial Evolution of Races

[GreatWyrmGold]

Maybe for you. Personally i intentionally seek out things that are radically different from reality because that's the point of Fantasy fiction, it's different, it's strange, it's not real.

For me at least, saying some race, species, breed, or what have you has a second-class caste isn't an attempt to push some nonexistent agenda, it's just an attempt to explore a different world and culture without needing to actually be in a situation where such a thing would exist.

Oh, for...I've made it bloody clear that I'm not accusing you of being racist, that you're just writing a world that maps to racist thought patterns. I really don't want to get into a flame war about why this matters, but if that's what it takes to stop you from putting words into my gods-darned mouth...that's another matter.

A problem with exploring the same themes about differences between groups as racists which shouldn't be too controversial is that it's not interesting. It's been done to death already by blatant racists, well-meaning liberals, and everyone in between. Exploring "What if one group of people was inherently superior to another?" through fantasy is at least as old as Tolkien, and whether it's older or not has more to do with how you define "fantasy" than how deep you look for examples.

And you know what? There's not actually that much to explore. If one group is just plain superior to another, people in that group are just plain superior. If one group is better at X but worse at Y, then members of that group make good X's and bad Y's. Inherent differences are boring, partly because they are (by nature) inevitable, and partly because they are arbitrary. Whether they're something you can overcome with enough effort an insurmountable disadvantage is up to the author, and there's not much you can say with "Orcs can be good wizards if they try hard enough, because that's how I wrote the orcs."

For most people, referring to orcs elves and humans as different Races is just an easier way to say "They are not the same" then "Species". it's not some eugenics scheme or whatever it is you're thinking of, it's just better wordplay. exact same reason why Pokemon are referred to as having there Gender be male or female rather then their Sex, which would be more technically accurate. Gender is just the more comfortable way of saying the information in that context.

Well, also the fact that "gender" and "sex" were used interchangeably much more often back when the early generations were localized, since transgender people weren't something most people were cognizant of. But that's irrelevant to your point and mine.

There are two possible interpretations of "It's not some eugenics scheme". The first (and easier to debunk) is that orcs breeding with humans to increase the collective intelligence of their community isn't eugenics, which...it literally is. If this is actually your point, I apologize and will address it later, but I'm only bringing this possibility up because of my chronic autopedantry.

The second is that you're saying "The terminology used to describe different genetically-distinct groups within D&D worlds is not indicative of racist beliefs". Which...no duh. Remember when I said that "it's not racist, per se, but it makes your setting sound more like how racists describe the world"? Do you see how I started the segment with "It's not racist" and emphasized "sound," as if I was trying to make it abundantly clear that I wasn't attacking anyone's character but rather criticizing the end result of their work? Because that's exactly what I was doing.

In the end, only audience remains. It doesn't matter if a story about orcs breeding with human women to produce children of superior intellect was written out of a genuine curiosity about what a world with orcs and humans might look like or out of a desire to write a story about the Untermensch plotting to steal or defile everything good about the Ubermensch's society; the end result is the same, a story which mirrors distinctly racist stories in our culture's collective consciousness. You might as well argue that "ironically" terrible prose is somehow distinct from plain old bad writing.

Once the author puts down the pen, they are dead, and only the text remains. Make sure it's a good text.

Also, pro tip: Notice how this part of the discussion revolves around orcs and humans interbreeding, causing gene flow between the two groups. This is common among fantasy races. Sometimes the children are sterile, but they usually aren't. Orcs and humans aren't distinct species, they're subspecies. And you know what a mildly archaic synonym for "subspecies" is? Race. (To say nothing of attempts to categorize humanity into distinct subspecies, because...well, most of the attempts tend to be more racist than scientific, and apparently talking about the racist-sounding elements of a story is accusing someone of being Hitler.)

you're the one making things about Dominant-race superiority and other icky stuff. not us.

I'm not the one who said that humans are genetically more intelligent than orcs and proposed that orcs use eugenics to take advantage of this. Which is, incidentally, not the only reason one genetically-distinct group can have different mental performance than another. There's plenty of environmental or cultural reasons that could explain a lower e.g. Intelligence score...and since those can be more flexible and less arbitrary than inherent origins of such difference, they open themselves to more storytelling options than "All orcs are X".

Also, the whole "race has literally always been part of fantasy races" thing. If I was trying to get into this, I'd be starting with "fictional things are never just fictional things," but I'm trying to get out of it, so I'll settle for a Tolkien quote (haven't read the article, it was just the first non-Wikipedia source of the "(to Europeans) least lovely Mongol" quote I Googled).

-snip-

I'm sick of disagreeing with people, so I'll just say: Preach it! Evolution is not dependent on the specific conditions of our planet! Magic does not let you arbitrarily discard real-world science in a world which largely functions like our own!

[ZeroGear]

@Dervag
You're exactly spot-on when it comes to the planar systems.
I'm kinda building this world from scratch, and am drawing heavy influence from the planar system of Eberron. Case in point, the planes of Fire, Water, Earth, and Air have the most direct impact on the world, as their orbit causes the seasons to change, however there are many other planes out there in much more eccentric or lengthy orbits.
For example, my setting will have a plane similar to the Beastlands, a wild and primal place where everything is more savage and chaotic than the material world. In theory (which I'm kinda considering doing as it's the perfect explanation) when that plane is closest to the material, life seems to become more rough. Species seem to develop in more muscular forms, with many more dire animals emerging than normal.
Imagine this is the time where the strongest rules, and races such as Wild Elves, Orcs, Neanderthal, Bugbears, Lizardmen, and Gnolls were the norm.
I know it's not a perfect explanation, but it's one that's believable enough to work.

@GreatWyrmGold
I understand what you're getting at, and will take your opinion into consideration, but you really need to back off on this one.
Please understand, this IS a fantasy setting, and, quite frankly, while Eugenics doesn't fly in the world we live in, nor is it a belief that anyone should support, the beings of the world I'm building ARE genetically different.
Maybe not to a large degree, but and Orc is as different from an Human as a Terrier is from a Dingo. Yes, they probably share some ancestry, but in the end they are different species.
And quite frankly, your language is not something I'm willing to tolerate. No one on this thread wrote about Eugenics, and it probably didn't cross anyone's mind until You brought it up. And I will not let a thread I made be the platform for preaching of any kind, wether intended or not.
You're free to continue to express your opinion on this thread as long as it's relevant to the topic at hand, but please refrain from bringing in real-world issues. There are other threads related to such topics.

[Dervag]

My advice: Don't make different races different species. Make different races just...different races, if that. The biological and cultural differences between native Americans and European colonists were historically more than enough for the latter to justify treating the former worse than orcs and humans treat each other in most settings.

I'd say that cultural differences, e.g. worshiping Grummsh instead of Pelor (or whoever the default orc/human gods are in Faerun), would be enough to justify the hostility (and, over the short term*, maintain culturally-enforced reproductive barriers), and point to the Crusades as an example...

...except that neither side of the Crusades was actually a unified army representing their culture, because it turns out you don't really need cultural differences to justify the kind of raiding and periodic warfare that typifies orc-human relations in most settings. In fact, even a unified cause isn't always enough to justify not fighting your nominal allies! (The Crusades were a mess, guys. The Crusaders picked fights with the Byzantines when they weren't crossing a river fast enough.)

There's also the fact that emphasizing the biological differences between different D&D races...well...it's not racist, per se, but it makes your setting sound more like how racists describe the world. I don't want to get into an argument about how fiction representing a given worldview (intentionally or not) affects the audience's worldview, so I'll leave it at "Doesn't that make you feel kinda icky?"

The big problem is that D&D is a very stat-heavy game, and people want to build characters with stats.

It's hard to break out of that mindset of "elves are quick and clever and delicate, and dwarves are tough and gruff, and orcs are... uh... giant thug-men...*, and this impacts my play choices because I want to play a quick, clever, delicate character!"

*(Orcs really get the ****ty end of the stick here)
________________________________

If I were just doing backstory for a setting, I'd honestly seriously consider going with your idea- the functional differences between humanoid species tend to be pretty minimal unless the species in question are visibly very different on the level of bulk anatomy or biochemistry, probably to the extent of not being able to interbreed and reliably produce fertile hybrids.

But that's awkward when you try to mesh it with the pressure to create backstory for a mechanics-heavy roleplaying game, which is why some of the YIKES stuff in D&D has persisted well into the 21st century.

Maybe for you. Personally i intentionally seek out things that are radically different from reality because that's the point of Fantasy fiction, it's different, it's strange, it's not real.

Except that our choices of what to say about deliberately-constructed 'not real' worlds still mirror our own ideas about how reality works. And the comfort zone we deliberately craft for ourselves.

There's a relationship between what we choose, not only to imagine, but to propagate to others and to play with ourselves for years at a time... And what we actually believe and accept and what our values are.

For me at least, saying some race, species, breed, or what have you has a second-class caste isn't an attempt to push some nonexistent agenda, it's just an attempt to explore a different world and culture without needing to actually be in a situation where such a thing would exist.

Except that the idea that this logically would 'exist' is itself an idea rooted in assumptions that we make.

Like, what exactly is passing through the mind of these orcs. They're supposedly "making" half-orcs (strongly implied that this is big brutish orc males forcing sex upon human females) because they're "weaker but smarter and useful" and the society is sterilizing them and... like... whut. This is a level of deliberate, society-wide eugenics that strongly implies a few things:

1) That the orcs are borderline totalitarian in their cultural attitudes towards 'racial hygiene.' That's... actually very rare in real life. Our concept of racial boundaries is fairly new, as are laws against 'miscegenation.' Most societies throughout history just didn't have the concept, nor did such a concept benefit them, so these orcs having it makes them very strange. OUR society has it because Europeans and Americans built entire social orders around hierarchies of power that defined black/brown people as slaves or colonial subjects and then needed to justify a power structure in which, effectively, every single white person was categorically different/better/separate from every single black/brown person. Without that kind of global intercontinental imperial dominance or racial slave-based economy, such firm conceptions do not emerge.

2) That the orcs KNOW they are the 'strong, stupid' species and actively embrace this. This is the kind of thing that seems psychologically unlikely, unless you write orcs as "inferior subhumans who know they are inferior and embrace this definition to the point of feeling inadequate and fearful around their betters." Which is not a headspace decent people with a healthy worldview want to spend a lot of time floating around in because of how deeply bull****ty it is and how much it can warp perspectives.

For most people, referring to orcs elves and humans as different Races is just an easier way to say "They are not the same" then "Species". it's not some eugenics scheme or whatever it is you're thinking of, it's just better wordplay. exact same reason why Pokemon are referred to as having there Gender be male or female rather then their Sex, which would be more technically accurate. Gender is just the more comfortable way of saying the information in that context.

The thing is, "race" isn't really a more comfortable way of saying "species" on a sentence-by-sentence basis.

If anything, it's less comfortable. Well, unless you've deliberately staked out ground on the hill of "people worrying about racism are crazy/foolish/part-of-a-conspiracy and I will have none of it." And that's not a hill I want to take my stand on because it's a hill where a lot of terrible people have buried the bones of a lot of good people.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Alright. Normally, I quote people who disagree with me and deconstruct their arguments point-by-point, but that seems like a recipe for frustration, especially since multiple people are disagreeing with me in similar ways. So instead I'll break down the posts into individual ideas, and respond to each of those. If you feel I'm ignoring or misrepresenting one of your points, please point that out to me so I can respond properly.

Also, I'll be posting links to various videos and essays and whatnot on the internet written by people far better at arguing this kind of thing than me. I'll try to summarize what's important to my point about it. For instance:

"Racial coding is inherently part of fantasy races, whether that's intentional or not. Lindsay Ellis's video on Bright has a good explanation of this."

I'm not going to demand that you watch/read every single link I post or surrender to my superior set of references, but...I'd appreciate if you at least glanced at ones supporting points you take umbrage with.

1. "Nobody was thinking about race/eugenics/whatever until you came in."

Yes, I know. That's the problem.

There's an anecdote in one of Hello Future Me's videos that I wanted to link, but I couldn't find it in the one I thought it was in, so I'll have to paraphrase it and you'll have to trust that this isn't just a ridiculous hypothetical I made up.

He describes a story he wrote when he was young and dumber, which he wanted to be a pro-multiculturalism story where the protagonist had to learn from a foreign culture in order to handle the problem facing his own culture. He also made the protagonist of the story a person of color, because that also seemed inclusive.
So he wrote a story where a POC can't save his homeland until white people teach him how to. He didn't intend t, but he basically wrote a White Savior narrative from the perspective of a native.

As I said: In the end, only audience remains. It doesn't matter what your intent is, whether you meant to parrot racist themes or not. What matters is what you write. That's why you need to think these things through.

Why? I mean, assuming you don't care whether your work is indistinguishable from KKK crap, which seems like enough reason to me but maybe it's not to you.

Cultivation theory.

Spoiler

Show

To keep it brief: Cultivation theory suggests that the media we consume affects us. For instance, there's a study which suggests that Harry Potter fans are less sympathetic to racist beliefs than people who haven't read/watched the series. (If anyone happens to know the title or have a link or something, I'd appreciate it. I thought I had a link somewhere in my bookmarks but I can't find it and it's a useful study to have for this kind of thing.)

Without getting too deep into the weeds, the theory is not that kids reading about Harry Potter fighting Voldemort consciously recognized the books as proof that racism is wrong, but rather that empathising with characters in an oppressed minority and seeing their oppressors framed as wrong (in both the "villainous" and "incorrect" sense) influenced their ability to sympathise with real-world oppressed minorities and how they viewed comparable ideologies in the real world. (Boy was that a run-on sentence.)

Imagine if Harry Potter was not a half-blood raised in secret as a Muggle who fought pureblood supremacists, but rather the scion of two dead pureblood houses raised in secret to protect him from the mudblood elites who seek to destroy wizarding society. Do you think the effects would be the same, even if basically everything else about the series was unchanged?

And here's the kicker. Imagine if JK Rowling wrote Bizzarro Potter unironically. He's not the scion of mage fascists, he's the non-monarchical equivalent of a Rightful Prince who needs to take the throne from these nasty bad guys. Do you think Rowling's intent would change her hypothetical story's effect on the reader?

But Rowling didn't write Bizzarro Potter. She thought about the implications of what she wrote (if not as thoroughly as she could have, e.g. how Fenrir Greyback interacts with the queer subtext around Lupin). She didn't accidentally write a story about the genetically righteous were restored to power and put the powerless back in their place. She wrote a story about bloodline purists who sought to oppress those they considered inferior, and a child sympathetic to the "inferiors" who restored equality to the land after they briefly installed their corrupt leader.

2. "But races are that genetically distinct in this world! That's just the truth in this world!"

This world you wrote.

I'm sure there are some of you who already have a response ready as soon as I say "Thermian argument". I'm not sure any of those responses will actually be relevant, because the Thermian Argument is all about irrelevant arguments.

I say that writing as though orcs are genetically inferior to humans is bad. You reply that orcs really are genetically inferior to humans. They're different species, it makes sense, blah blah. You haven't really addressed my points when you say this, any more than "Hurting people is wrong" is a counterargument to "Policy X will hurt people". It's an argument in an entirely different playing field.

"Orcs and humans are actually different species" is not a counterargument to "Orcs shouldn't be portrayed as genetically inferior". It can be part of a counterargument, supporting a core point that's actually relevant to what I was arguing...but I'm pretty sure it's going to be some variation of "it's not actually the same as the real-world situation, so you can't apply the same rules". Ergo:

2.5. Some variation of "it's not actually the same as the real-world situation, so you can't apply the same rules"

Animal Farm is not an allegory for the Soviet Union's rise and fall from grace. The animals and the farmers aren't different classes, they're different species. How could you possibly read them as being equivalent?

Okay, that's an extreme example. But the point still stands; people can and will draw connections between thematically parallel situations, regardless of Watsonian differences. This isn't always so blatant and conscious as in outright allegory. To quote Lindsay Ellis, "an alien is never really just an alien."

3. "Orcs breeding with humans isn't eugenics."

Quick Googled definition: "The study of how to arrange reproduction within a human population to increase the occurrence of heritable characteristics regarded as desirable," followed by historical notes. Now, unless you want to go all pedant and argue that orcs aren't a human population, it should be obvious that breeding with humans with the specific intent to make half-orcs due to their desirable intelligence is literally eugenics.

It doesn't matter that it wasn't intended as eugenic. It's still literally eugenics.

4. "D&D is a stat-heavy game, and races need stat bonuses/penalties."

Point A: Why? Backgrounds don't. Are you saying that farmers aren't stronger and hardier than musicians and clerks?

Point B: My issue is not with the mere fact that orcs have penalties to intelligence. It's with how those penalties are justified in-universe. The core rulebooks don't take a stance on the issue, and while that's not ideal, it's the core rulebook for Dungeons and Dragons, not Epidemics and Educators, so I'm fine with it just leaving it at "orcs are less good at Intelligencey stuff".

That changes if you have orcs breeding with humans specifically to get half-orcs for their superior intelligence and creativity. If you write that, you are explicitly saying that orcs are genetically dumber than humans.

Either address these sorts of things, e.g. by implying that orcs are only "less intelligent" than humans because they don't have access to the same resources and educational systems as humans, or just don't have aspects of your setting/story rely on why orcs have a lower Intelligence score than humans.

5. "Don't bring in real-world issues."

That's impossible.

People like to imagine that fantasy can be a canvas free from all the biases of the real world, living in its own little dimension. It isn't. Even putting aside the unconscious biases that both author and audience bring to the table, even putting aside the history of authors deliberately including real-world issues and having their work incorporated into the greater pantheon of fantasy tropes (remember the "least lovely Mongols" quote?)...that's just not how fiction works.

Fiction cannot be created without an author. That author cannot create anything separate from the cultural context they were raised in, or the one they were writing in. That's just not how people work.
Fiction cannot have meaning without an audience. That audience cannot understand anything separate from their own upbringing and current context. That, too, is just not how people work.
Just because the author metaphorically dies when they lay their pen down doesn't mean they can be equally dead while writing the piece, and it certainly doesn't mean the audience can be dead for the entire performance.

Why do some characters resonate with us, while others feel flat and artificial? Why do some conflicts feel organic, inevitable, tragic, and others phoned-in or arbitrary? Hell, why does anyone care about logical consistency in stories? Why is verisimilitude a desirable quality in a fantasy story? Because the story only has meaning relative to our own experiences...and those experiences can only provide meaning in context.

I could nitpick, pointing to individual posts where real-world issues were brought in. From demographic shifts and romantic preferences to the very concepts of race and evolution, every post in this thread brings in real-world issues, because fantasy has no meaning without reality.

The difference is that you thought my real-world issues were being brought in to call you racist, and that makes you uncomfortable in a way that r-strategists and suspension of disbelief don't.

[ZeroGear]

SNIP

Ok, NO. I'm going to stop you before point one.
Your posts are not relevant to the topic being discussed. This is a discussion on how sentient beings would develop in in a timeline to a fantasy world that I'm building. Please DO NOT bring Eugenics into this discussion.
As stated before, you are welcome to stay if you wish to contribute ideas how one form of Genetically Distinct Sentient Inhabitant of a Fantasy World changes and developed into a different form, but you are NOT going to start crytisizing people on their language.
If you don't like the terms we're using, then feel free to leave. No one is forcing you to argue your point, and quite frankly, it's not a point that's welcome in THIS discussion.
Thank you kindly.

[Draconi Redfir]

Right, so in hopes of getting this topic back on topic, here's a "family Tree" of the nine major races i planned on using in a probably-never-going-to-happen campaign. i don't know if it will help or not, but hopefully it will, or at least give you some ideas.

Spoiler

Show

So, in this particular Tree, Goblinoids, Humanoids, and what i'm calling Dwarvenoids all stem from a single ancestor that branched off multiple times through the ages.

the earliest offshoot lead to the Goblinoids, who kept their more primate-like features longer then the rest of the Tree. this then split into two as one group became taller, while one remained shorter, with the shorter branch eventually becoming Goblins. The Taller branch eventually separated as well, some keeping their fur, and some loosing it (among other changes of course) becoming Bugbears and Hobgbolins respectively.

Dwarvenoids and Humanoids have a much closer common ancestor, only splitting off when one group left the treetops for one reason or another, following a similar evolution path into what we ourselves followed to become humans. At some point during that evolution, a branch broke off and began adapting to harsher environments to become Orcs. more recently Something (and i'm still not 100% sure) caused another split on the Human/elf common ancestor, leading some to become longer-lived (but not immortal / thousands-of-years) Elves, while the other branch followed a path more like our own to become Humans.

The fact that Humans, Orcs, and Elves are all fairly closely related when compared to the other kingdoms is how i personally justify Half-orcs and Half-elves being possible, while you'll almost never see a half-dwarf.

the Dwarvenoid line is a bit more interesting. When the branch that split from the Humanoid ancestors finally leaves the Trees, they remain relatively short and stubby where the Humanoids grew taller. Some of those short, stubby Dwarvenoids began living more and more underground to become Dwarves.

Where the real fun bit happens is where Gnomes originate. In this world, Magic is linked to the soul, and grows stronger with age. So at some point, primitive tribes waged battle in an isolated valley, one particular combatant using a sharpened stone that at some point attuned to it's wielder and became magical, a little less then your basic +1 weapon. This user then used that weapon to kill an enemy atop a rock, cracking the stone weapon, and leaving it buried into the stone where the enemy lay dead. For whatever reason, the weapon was abandoned. and because of the crack, the magic inside of it began to slowly leak out into the Valley around it. At some point around this time, some members of the Gnome/Halfling common ancestors moved into this valley while it was safe, remaining there for thousands of years as the magic from the weapon aged and grew more and more powerful. This eventually created a valley filled to the brim with a potent magical aura, something that normal creatures can't live in without being torn apart. But because the ancient Gnomes moved in while there was almost no magical aura in the valley, they were able to adapt to the slowly growing magical aura, eventually becoming Gnomes. All this born from the single question of "How can i have Gnomes in a low-magic setting without outer planes?" and working with the rules of "Magic ages like a fine wine" and "Magic is connected to the soul".

The ancestors that didn't move into this valley. eventually became what are now Halflings.


In terms of geography, i'm mainly picturing one primary continent with a chain of islands not too far away. the Dwarvenoids and the Gnomish Valley primarily inhabit the northern regions, while the Goblinoids inhabit the southern. the wide open areas of the continent allow each group to spread out and live entire lifetimes without seeing one another by pure chance. The Humanoids on the other hand live on the Islands, likely one or more Peninsulas that broke off the primary continent and drifted away carrying them along for the ride. Because of the water barrier between the Elves, Humans and Orcs, they don't have easy times interacting with one another either, allowing them to diversify in their own ways without intermixing and re-merging the species.

[Firest Kathon]

Disclaimer: I'm sorry if this idea has been been brought up before, I just cross-read the thread and may have missed it.

An idea why other humanoid races still exists besides humans could be that there is no human species. Instead, "human" is a term given to cross-breeds of different races. If the cross-breeding is relatively recent, they will still show traits of their parent race(s) (half-*, genasi, ...), but further cross-breeding will just muddle the traits into the general human "race".

In world terms, that would explain the lack of a genetical magic code in them (I think you said this at some point). In mechanical terms, this is also a nice explanation for the human race boni (bonus to any one stat, more skills, bonus feat). Changes to pre-humans* (e.g. neanderthals) could be explained by an influx of cross-breeds with a new species (maybe whatever was prevalent in the respective age).

* Talking about the setting here, not real life!

[ZeroGear]

i don't know if it will help or not, but hopefully it will, or at least give you some ideas.

Definitely! Probably not going to copy your chard exactly, and I know it's going to end up a lot more complex than your image, yet this is exactly the kind of idea that I'm looking for!

Disclaimer: I'm sorry if this idea has been been brought up before, I just cross-read the thread and may have missed it.

An idea why other humanoid races still exists besides humans could be that there is no human species. Instead, "human" is a term given to cross-breeds of different races. If the cross-breeding is relatively recent, they will still show traits of their parent race(s) (half-*, genasi, ...), but further cross-breeding will just muddle the traits into the general human "race".

In world terms, that would explain the lack of a genetical magic code in them (I think you said this at some point). In mechanical terms, this is also a nice explanation for the human race boni (bonus to any one stat, more skills, bonus feat). Changes to pre-humans* (e.g. neanderthals) could be explained by an influx of cross-breeds with a new species (maybe whatever was prevalent in the respective age).

* Talking about the setting here, not real life!

It hasn't been brought up, but it's a point that I've been thinking about.
The only real consideration is that while "humans" could easily be a race that comes about as the result of combining genres from at least Halflings, Dwarves, and Elves (There is a myth in a 3.5 Races of Destiny setting that plays off this idea), I'd kinda rather come up with an alternative to this first.
I'm not against it, and it would make a lot f sense, but it kinda is a bit of a boring route to take, and I feel like there are more interesting avenues that could be tapped first.

[Draconi Redfir]

Definitely! Probably not going to copy your chard exactly, and I know it's going to end up a lot more complex than your image, yet this is exactly the kind of idea that I'm looking for!

Sweet, glad i could be of help then!

[Jay R]

I don't think Anonymouswizard and I disagree nearly as much as he thinks we do. He just thinks I hold a simplistic, one-dimensional position that is not supported by my words.

Blargh, *because magic* is the worst excuse ever for dropping an idea.

Fortunately, I never said anything as simplistic and one-dimensional as "*because magic*".

There is a very simple test for determining if I have written something. If you block-copied it from my post, with relevant context, then I wrote it. But if you had to type it in yourself because those words are not found anywhere in what I wrote, then I did not write it.

In this case, I gave several reasons modern laws of biology do not inherently work in a D&D world. Some of them involve magic, but some do not. Owlbears are not inherently magical, but they demonstrate that taxonomic divisions in our world are not preserved in D&D. Giants are not inherently magic, but they really show that the cube-square law in our universe does not apply. Certainly some examples I gave are inherently magic (like dragons), but I never said or implied anything as over-simplistic as "*because magic*"

More importantly, I gave a clear specific reason for dropping the idea, and it wasn't "*because magic*". I will give it again:

But mainly, don’t ask questions about the origins of the species that cannot help your game, and can hurt it.

Please do not claim again that my reason was anything other than a desire to not hurt the game.

Evolution is a set of rules that boil down to 'random mutations happen, the least fit for the environment tend to die out'.

You skipped several steps, including genetic recombination of DNA to carry heritable traits to the offspring. And our understanding of DNA makes it impossible for different species to interbreed, as they do in D&D. In short, evolution will be different in a world in which the laws and environment are different.

I really don't see how the presence of magic changes that unless it changes:

1. How traits are passed from parents to their offspring.
2. How new traits enter a population (random mutation or breeding with other populations that produce viable fertile offspring).
3. The environmental pressures on a population.
4. A creature's fertility.
5. Some other things I'm not sure about because I'm not actually a biologist.

Don't be silly. Magic can change the environment faster than evolution changes the gene pool. Specifically, travel through planes means that many creatures exist in environments that their forebears – even their parents – never experienced. Spells like "awaken intelligence", "plant growth", "baleful polymorph" and others do in fact change how creatures get traits, and there is no clear answer to whether they breed true. The fact of inter-species, and even inter-clade, breeding is a huge change to fertility. So you are absolutely correct that:

Now there's a lot magic can do to change the specifics of evolution, ...

And once you've accepted that, you no longer need to eliminate orcs just to make your evolution work. Thanks for supporting my main point. I really don't think we have much disagreement.

Now there's nothing wrong with throwing out evolution entirely, ...

Again, I never suggested "throwing out evolution entirely". I specifically wrote, "I assume that evolution is much faster, that some species are created by gods, that different species can interbreed, and that nobody in my world has developed a working theory of evolution anyway." I'm not saying evolution won't happen -- just that it doesn't necessarily have to happen the way it does on earth. Inter-clade breeding alone probably means that DNA isn't involved, and whatever replaces it is very different in effect.

... but if you want to include it then there's nothing wrong with actually putting in some effort to make it work.

If it helps the game, and if it doesn't hurt the game. In this case, he's considering getting rid of orcs, not because it will help the game, but just because of an evolutionary theory. There has been no consideration of whether this decision is good for the game. That's the approach I'm arguing against.

The number one consideration should be what's good for the game. If the OP doesn't want orcs, no problem. But if he wants orcs, then he shouldn't dump them, just invent an ecological niche where they are better off than humans. This can be as easy as making them nocturnal, or cave dwellers. But the decision should be made based on what's good for the game.

Again, I don't think Anonymouswizard and I disagree nearly as much as he thinks we do.

In 45 years of role-playing, I've never heard a single player say, during or after a melee with orcs, "This is no fun. Orcs should have been eliminated by natural selection."

The orcs are attacking. Don’t theorize; fight back!

[ZeroGear]

I
The number one consideration should be what's good for the game. If the OP doesn't want orcs, no problem. But if he wants orcs, then he shouldn't dump them, just invent an ecological niche where they are better off than humans. This can be as easy as making them nocturnal, or cave dwellers. But the decision should be made based on what's good for the game.

I think you’ve hit on a very important point here, and it’s definitely something I might need to clear up:
See, I don’t mind the idea of Orcs, it’s just that they don’t really “fit” in the setting I’m building for that given era.
The whole reason I came up with this was because I wanted to actually build a setting where you could pick an era and say “here’s what things were like at this point” and have it feel very different than picking a different era entirely.
This goes back to my other thread (see first post for link) in that I had this idea that if the ancient ruins of the world were created by giants, then it would make more sense for me to let the players chose giants as their race and scale to world to their size.
The working idea for my world is that after the giants civilization collapses, smaller races full the niches that were left and develop accordingly.
Thanks to a lot of the feedback from this thread, I’m thinking that the age after the giants everything is more primal and brutish, and hardier races such as muscular wild elves, orcs, bugbears, Neanderthal, and lizardfolk would be the norm.
Later, as the planes shift, these beings would change into new forms that had a higher focus on intellect with a much more complex culture developing in the process.

Heck, the big reason I started this train of thought is because almost every entry for Orcs describes them as living in squalor, among other things, and seemed as though they would be outpaced by any other civilization.
As such, it made more sense to me to find a way for them to exist in the timeline instead of cutting two races entirely.
I’m sorry if that led to any misunderstandings about my intent.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Ok, NO. I'm going to stop you before point one.
Your posts are not relevant to the topic being discussed. This is a discussion on how sentient beings would develop in in a timeline to a fantasy world that I'm building. Please DO NOT bring Eugenics into this discussion.
As stated before, you are welcome to stay if you wish to contribute ideas how one form of Genetically Distinct Sentient Inhabitant of a Fantasy World changes and developed into a different form, but you are NOT going to start crytisizing people on their language.
If you don't like the terms we're using, then feel free to leave. No one is forcing you to argue your point, and quite frankly, it's not a point that's welcome in THIS discussion.
Thank you kindly.

You do not get to assert that none of my points are relevant to this thread without actually addressing any of them. You also don't get to blame me for bringing eugenics into the discussion when I'm not the one who said:

Half-Orcs could even be intentionally created for their intelligence and wit

At the very least, you need to address my point explaining why that's eugenics before you say I'm the one who introduced it to the discussion.


I'm not trying to be an *******, here. I'm just pissed that you're dismissing my points out of hand and going on to do the same crap.


And for the record, I'm not criticizing you on your language. I'm criticizing you on your ideas. Claiming that you can write "Genetically Distinct Sentient Inhabitant of a Fantasy World" without even considering the baggage from genetically distinct sentient inhabitants of the real world (without accidentally writing something horrifying once that baggage comes crashing in) is staggeringly idealistic, even without considering how the GDSI of the real world shaped every aspect of fantasy GDSI's.

[Jay R]

I think you’ve hit on a very important point here, and it’s definitely something I might need to clear up:
See, I don’t mind the idea of Orcs, it’s just that they don’t really “fit” in the setting I’m building for that given era.
The whole reason I came up with this was because I wanted to actually build a setting where you could pick an era and say “here’s what things were like at this point” and have it feel very different than picking a different era entirely.
This goes back to my other thread (see first post for link) in that I had this idea that if the ancient ruins of the world were created by giants, then it would make more sense for me to let the players chose giants as their race and scale to world to their size.
The working idea for my world is that after the giants civilization collapses, smaller races full the niches that were left and develop accordingly.

I understand. In a recent D&D session, my party found the ancient ruins of a hill giant village, including a tomb for the great hero who slew a T. Rex.

[That's why I suggested not changing the rules in your earlier thread. I'd rather play a giant-sized giant against a full-sized T.Rex than a human-sized "giant" fighting a small, wimpy T.Rex. I think the flavor would be more fun. "Will it feel like the PCs are giants fighting real dinosaurs, or will it feel like they're humans against shrunken dinosaurs? If they are playing giants, don't change the rules to make the giants feel ordinary. Let them be giants, and send them worthy challenges for giants. "]

Thanks to a lot of the feedback from this thread, I’m thinking that the age after the giants everything is more primal and brutish, and hardier races such as muscular wild elves, orcs, bugbears, Neanderthal, and lizardfolk would be the norm.
Later, as the planes shift, these beings would change into new forms that had a higher focus on intellect with a much more complex culture developing in the process.

Sure. And just as the feel of the dominant races will change, the feel of the marginalized races will change. That's doesn't mean there won't be any marginalized races.

Heck, the big reason I started this train of thought is because almost every entry for Orcs describes them as living in squalor, among other things, and seemed as though they would be outpaced by any other civilization.

Probably true. As the more civilized races advance, so would they, staying a little behind them. Or maybe they would become the dominant race for awhile, maybe in the transition between the primal and civilized era. Afterwards, they would fall behind again.

As such, it made more sense to me to find a way for them to exist in the timeline instead of cutting two races entirely.

That makes sense. I see them as raiders -- basically parasites on a larger, more developed civilization. [This idea comes from Tolkien, more or less. His orcs didn't like being part of a large conquering army. They just wanted to be in a small raiding group.] Like hyenas, they will always be overshadowed by a larger group, but also like hyenas, they will always do well as long as there is a larger group doing better to raid from.

The modern orcs could fit in, if you want them to. They are an underclass, living in caves or villages away from town. Perhaps some of them live in town, where great strength makes them useful for some hard labor.

Tribes who aren't as civilized as the rest have existed forever, but based on the time period, they might be more like Ostrogoths, Vandals, Huns, or Cossacks. For the fantasy flavor, they could be like Tokien's Pukel-men, Rowling's giants, Gilgamesh's Enkidu, Burroughs's Tharks, or others in different fantasy works.

Another idea: the human word "orc", like the Greek word "βάρβαρος" (barbarian), could just mean people who don't speak our language. In different eras, the enemies called orcs could be dwarves, goblins, elves, ogres, or even just different tribes of humans.

If you don't want them, just drop them; there's nothing wrong with that. But do it for the game; you can always adjust your history to justify anything you want to use.

I’m sorry if that led to any misunderstandings about my intent.

No problem. The ability to go over the same ground again and again until we iron out what each of us means is how internet discussions work at their best.

[Draconi Redfir]

this is not a thread about eugenics. it has NEVER been a thread about eugenics. can we please stop talking about eugenics?

Literally the only reason i said half-orcs could maybe be intentionally created was because i was trying to come up with interesting or at least plausible ideas for how and why orcs were still around in the modern age and what their lifestyle may be like. i also said they could be living in mountains or serving as viking-like raiders. don't see you whining about those now do we?

holy hell man it's FAKE. it's FICTION. it's SPECULATIVE. None of this is real so can you PLEASE calm down!? Holy ****ing hell man it was a stinking IDEA that was being thrown out into the wind! something to think about or consider or throw away like yesterdays news, that's really all it ever was or ever has been!

And before we get into it, YOU'RE the one who said

and given how orcs generally "create" half-orcs, you've got some lovely black brute imagery in there, too.

which is something i NEVER alluded too. you jumped onto that assumption for yourself. For all we know this hypothetical very-fake-and-not-real clan of orcs is on good trade relations with at least one human settlement and has political or romantic relationships between them all the time. That's the point, it's a fake, vague as heck idea for interpretation and consideration before discarding.

If you want to push the blame on who started all this, then i'm sorry, but that is squarely on you. the rest of us read it for what it was, a random idea thrown at the wall among many others to see what sticks. you just decided to get all twisted up about it because you needed something to complain about and this just flipped a switch in your brain or something. Now please, with all due respect, calm yourself down, we are DONE with this discussion, and if you really want to flip your tits about it, go make your own thor-blasted thread. this one is off-limits.

[daryen]

As stated before, you are welcome to stay if you wish to contribute ideas how one form of Genetically Distinct Sentient Inhabitant of a Fantasy World changes and developed into a different form, but you are NOT going to start crytisizing people on their language.

If you are going to use real-world terms like above, you get to deal with their real-world ramifications. If orcs are genetically different to humans, there can be no half-orcs. At which point the complaints evaporate.

If however, there ARE half-orcs, the orcs are, fundamentally humans. At that point, you can call selective breeding whatever you want, but it is what it is.

So, why not skip the whole half-orc minefield, which already has been done to death anyway, and figure out how orcs evolved within their own genetics to be something new? Why not just have them figure out that the old ways aren't working anymore and they figure out new ways?

[jdizzlean]

The Mod Life Crisis: Please return to the discussion at hand and discontinue anything along the lines of a eugenics discussion. Please discuss things politely.

[ZeroGear]

So, why not skip the whole half-orc minefield, which already has been done to death anyway, and figure out how orcs evolved within their own genetics to be something new? Why not just have them figure out that the old ways aren't working anymore and they figure out new ways?

I have no problem with that, and it's probably what I'm going to end up doing. This means I'll just re-flavor Half-Orcs as Orckin (credit to Lvl 2 Expert for that one), and remove Half-Elves (since they're kinda not really needed).

Now I have to pose the question:
Should I keep the "elemental" races (Oread, Undine, Ifrit, Slyph, Assimar, and Tiefling) as they are, or re-flavor them as beings that became what they are due to their environment being unusually close to naturally occurring planar portals?
Mostly asking because I'm heavily considering just removing "Half-" templated races altogether (Helf-Elemental, Half-Celestial, Half-Fiend, etc).
On the one hand, it would tie in better with the theme that the elemental planes influence the development of life on the material plane.
On the other hand, creatures with the ability to shapeshift (such as Dragons, Outsiders, and Aberrations) need to be taken into account. (Much as I hate glossing over explanations with "because magic", spells and spell-like abilities that allow transformations really complicate explanations).

[Draconi Redfir]

Should I keep the "elemental" races (Oread, Undine, Ifrit, Slyph, Assimar, and Tiefling) as they are, or re-flavor them as beings that became what they are due to their environment being unusually close to naturally occurring planar portals?

some creatures such as Fetchlings and Shadowbeasts kind of go through what you're suggesting here. some humans / other animals got stuck on the plane of a show, managed to survive and have kids, and after a few generations and some assistance from the magical environment and energies of the plane, adapted to it.

Perhaps your unines and ifrits could be similar situations. Undines were a population of humans that got stuck on or settled near your world's equivalent to the plane of water, their evolution accelerated by the magic and energies that poured out of it. on normal-earth, it'd take millions of years for humans to become anything like an Undine. in a magical world, it may only take a hundred generations or so, as the magical energies attune to and mutate every new generation to better suit it's environment.

kind of like... rather then humans having a random chance to be better suited to the environment, the environment itself is directing the population's evolution... Intelligent design minus the intelligence, via evolution.

my best advice for dragons: just remove the shape-shifting. if you need a shape-shifting dragon, have it be caused by an item or something. Dragons themselves are just naturally in their Draconic state 24/7. (i was never a fan of intelligent shape-shifting dragons. i may be biased :P)

[daryen]

Now I have to pose the question:
Should I keep the "elemental" races (Oread, Undine, Ifrit, Slyph, Assimar, and Tiefling) as they are, or re-flavor them as beings that became what they are due to their environment being unusually close to naturally occurring planar portals?
Mostly asking because I'm heavily considering just removing "Half-" templated races altogether (Helf-Elemental, Half-Celestial, Half-Fiend, etc).
On the one hand, it would tie in better with the theme that the elemental planes influence the development of life on the material plane.
On the other hand, creatures with the ability to shapeshift (such as Dragons, Outsiders, and Aberrations) need to be taken into account. (Much as I hate glossing over explanations with "because magic", spells and spell-like abilities that allow transformations really complicate explanations).

In the case of Outsiders, there doesn't need to be any "breeding" going on. Tieflings in particular are noted as having been "polluted" from the lower planes, but that doesn't mean it has to be through offspring with those Outsiders. Simply having one of your ancestors with a tainted/compromised soul is enough to cause a Tiefling to appear. The same could happen with any of the outsiders.

For a Sylph, maybe one of your ancestors did too much with air elements, thereby changing their very nature. Maybe a group of humans spent too much time on the elemental plane of air (like Fetchlings on the plane of Shadow) and their descendants are now Sylphs.

So, with Outsiders, you get a whole new set of options. Plus, this all ends up simply being "what happens" rather than "selective" and intentional.

As for shapeshifters, I just don't see it. If shapeshifting makes you physically into that creature, you are then that creature and any offspring you make are simply that creature regardless of what you "really" are. If, however, you are always what you really are and are just wearing the other creature's form, then you can't have any offspring with those other creatures. So, if you have a dragon shapeshifted into an actual human having a child with a human, you get a human that likely gets to have a draconic origin to their sorcerous power, not a half-dragon.

Honestly, if you want to inject actual genetics into your world, all half-species pretty much has to stop. You can be "tainted" or modified by magic or outsider-ness, but you can't mix actual species. The only way to get a half-species (e.g. owlbear) is from particularly awful magic users doing particularly awful things, not through the "normal course of events". So having a half-dragon half-human means that a nasty magic user did horrific things to some dragons and humans to produce an abomination, not that a dragon and a human got frisky.

EDIT: As for dragonkin, they'd just be reptilian humaniods with draconic traits. They would simply be their own species that may or may not have any common ancestors with dragons.

[ZeroGear]

kind of like... rather then humans having a random chance to be better suited to the environment, the environment itself is directing the population's evolution... Intelligent design minus the intelligence, via evolution.

You've pretty much hit the nail on the head with this. While the concept didn't start out this way, I've pretty much settled on the idea that the biggest influence on the creatures of the material planes is the "gravitational pull" of the other planes on the ambient magic of the realm.
Simply put, and I think it's been mentioned before, the world I'm building follows an oratory planar alignment where the outer planes orbit around the material plane like moons around a planet.
Additionally, one of the themes I love using is that each of the elemental planes causes the seasons to change: Summer comes when the plane of Fire is Waxing and leaves when it's waning, Fall follows as the plane of Earth waxes and wanes, Winter comes and goes with the plane of Water, and Spring relies on the plane of Air.
On top of this, there are other planes that have more eccentric or longer orbits, measured in hundreds of years, and depending on their alignment have a different effect on the ecosystem.
More to the point, magic and nature are two parts of the same whole, and both following a set of rules that can be understood in their context, and these rules are what dictate the formation and development of life on the material plane.

As for dragonkin, they'd just be reptilian humaniods with draconic traits. They would simply be their own species that may or may not have any common ancestors with dragons.

So... I'm going to put fourth a strange idea, and I really would like to know if it's something that the average player would find acceptable:
While "modern" dragons (Chromatic and Metallic True Dragons) are far more powerful and intelligent than their ancestors were, it's very feasible that their progenitors were much shorter lived and branched several times, thus creating offshoots such as Wyverns, drakes, and eventually pseudo-dragons. One of these branches may have lost the ability the fly, becoming a small humanoid species that learned to scavenge and use tools on its own, eventually becoming what we think of as a Kobold.
During the Age of Giants, these little creatures lived at the heels of the giants, just as the other humanoid proton-races did, scavenging scraps until the fall of the Giant civilization.
As the planar alignments shifted, Kobolds changed in much the same way as other races did: becoming larger, bulkier, with more muscles and adaptations to suit their new swampy habitat, becoming lizard folk as a result.
As the ages wore on and the flow of ambient magic changed once again, this race began to refine itself, inventing a more complex culture and developing a more compact form that the modern inhabitants recognize as a Dragonborn.

In short, just as I proposed the change from Goblin to Bugbear to Hobgoblin, I'm also proposing the change of Kobold to Lizardman to Dragonborn. What do you all think? Feasible, or am I talking crazy?

[Draconi Redfir]

kobold > lizardfolk > Dragonborn sounds like it's make sense for the most part. can't really think of any reason why it wouldn't.

Considering Dragonfolk have a lot of scale colour variations, i'm imagining Lizardfolk and kobolds were very colourful too.

[ZeroGear]

I don’t see why not.
And, bit of a technicality as I’m not sure where I should fit them in, would Naga develop from Kobolds, Lizardfolk, or emerge from a separate branch?
Kinda want to make sentient reptiles related, but nagas are kinda an oddball here.

[Draconi Redfir]

i could probably see Naga as either a branch-off or cousin from lizardfolk, just focusing in more snake-like things rather then lizard-like. Might be a good place to include some magic intervention, a wizard spell that went horribly wrong and turned an entire village into snake-people maybe.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

If naga are related to reptilian humanoids at all (as opposed to being part of an entirely separate "really big magical snake" group with couatls and boalisks and such), it's probably by way of yuan-ti, as they're a single (albeit very diverse) race containing humanoid, ophidioid, and hybrid "subraces"--both yuan-ti and naga are considered to be part of the "serpentfolk" family in FR, after all, and yuan-ti halfbloods are quite similar to dragonborn (the 3e version, anyway, not the 5e version which are closer to draconians) in a "cosmetically draconoid/reptiloid but structurally humanoid" kind of way.

[ZeroGear]

You're hitting on a very interesting point that, since I'm not overly familiar with the FR setting, hadn't been considered.
Now I'm thinking that when Kobolds were running around as the ancestors of lizardfolk, they were also living in the same era Couatls, which would end up being the ancestors of the Naga (who emerged in the same era as the Lizadfolk), and then became the Yuan-Ti.

The more we discuss this, the more I'm pulling together a complete picture of the early era I'm building. As it stands, the picture pained here feels like there's a divide when it comes to intelligent life in the Age of Giants:
You have the Giant races, who dominated the world and built civilizations of which ruins are found hundreds of years later, and then you have the smaller lifeforms, ancestors to most "modern" races. Here I'm imagining something akin to a small halfling-like being whose path splits into several different outcomes:
One prance remains on the surface, eventually becoming Wild Elves, Neanderthal, Orcs, and proto-halflings; the other group begins living underground, becoming Sweifelbein and Druegdar.
Similarly, Couatls, along with ancient dragons, dominate the lands and war with giants, as the little Kobolds scavenge and compete with their goblin and pre-halfling contemporaries at the heels of the larger races.

How does this sound so far?

Big Edit:
this is me just now finding out that I can't use Yuan-Ti since they're not in Pathfinder. That being said, there are Serpentfolk, whom I can use as a suitable stand-in.
In this case, It could easily go from Couatl to Naga to Serpentfolk to Lizardfolk.

[D&D_Fan]

What time period is it set in and how advanced is society?

In futuristic settings like in the Wayfarers series by Becky Chambers people are able to change the nature of their genes. In settings like the continent of Faerûn in the Forgotten Realms based off of 14th (I think) century Europe with magic, the only ways to change your genetics permanently are reincarnate and wish. To change time the only ways are through wish, time stop, and time ravage all 9th level spells. Even today on 21st century earth it is possible to tweak genetics slightly, and breed animals to be more useful to humans.

[ZeroGear]

What time period is it set in and how advanced is society?

I'm kinda glad you asked that, because the answer is kinda complicated.
In the timeline I'm building, the level of the civilization will vary based on what era it's in and what the dominant races are.
The most ancient civilization, Dragons, though intelligent didn't create any structure more complicated than a shaped stone cavern. Instead they carved their knowledge onto shed scales or into the walls of their homes.
During the Age of Giants, I'm picturing the giant civilizations to be about iron-age or early steel-age level of civilized. This is mostly me picturing the ancient giants as having a nordic-like culture that built vast structures out of petrified trees or an aztec-like culture carved great houses out of mountains. During this time, the "little" races ran around and scavenged, barely above the level of stone-age hunter-gatherers.
After the "Grand Fall" when the ancient civilizations of the Giants crumble, the descendants of the giant races regress into a much more primitive culture. Meanwhile, more brutish and savage races develop, and the Age of Walking Ice begins. Here, the tribes of Wild Elves, Bugbears, Orcs, Neanderthal, Bruskers (proto-halflings), Lizardfolk and Nagas compete in the cold and unfeeling wastes while Duergar and Svirfneblin hollow out caves beneath the surface.
The first real bronze age level civilizations don't emerge until the Age of Waking Green, which sees the emergence of Humans, High Elves, Halflings, Gnomes, Orckin, Serpetfolk, Dragonborn, Dwarves, and Hobgoblins as full races, with a few Giant-descended races coming into their own.
From here, the race composition doesn't really change that much in the Age of Twin Moons, aside from some Elves making an exodus underground after an event known as the Sunder, and becoming the race later known as Drow. During this time, cultures generally advance to about iron-age level (equivalent to ancient Greece in our own history).
This is followed by the Age of Elements, which is approximately equivalent to our own Middle Ages, which marks a far more widespread occurrence of elemental races such as Slyphs, Assimar, Tieflings, Oreads, Ifits, and Undine within existing cultures.
Finally, we reach the Age of Glyphs, which is roughly equivalent to the modern Industrial revolution, and races are pretty much set from here.

This is pretty much a rough outline of what I'm planning on fleshing out, and I haven't accounted for several factors, such as shifting landmasses and individual cultures on faraway islands or civilizations in unlikely places such as deserts or rainforests.
Was this insightful, and do you have any suggestions?

[PairO'Dice Lost]

As it stands, the picture pained here feels like there's a divide when it comes to intelligent life in the Age of Giants:
You have the Giant races, who dominated the world and built civilizations of which ruins are found hundreds of years later, and then you have the smaller lifeforms, ancestors to most "modern" races. [...]
Similarly, Couatls, along with ancient dragons, dominate the lands and war with giants, as the little Kobolds scavenge and compete with their goblin and pre-halfling contemporaries at the heels of the larger races.

The most ancient civilization, Dragons, though intelligent didn't create any structure more complicated than a shaped stone cavern. Instead they carved their knowledge onto shed scales or into the walls of their homes.
During the Age of Giants, I'm picturing the giant civilizations to be about iron-age or early steel-age level of civilized. This is mostly me picturing the ancient giants as having a nordic-like culture that built vast structures out of petrified trees or an aztec-like culture carved great houses out of mountains. During this time, the "little" races ran around and scavenged, barely above the level of stone-age hunter-gatherers.
After the "Grand Fall" when the ancient civilizations of the Giants crumble, the descendants of the giant races regress into a much more primitive culture. Meanwhile, more brutish and savage races develop, and the Age of Walking Ice begins. Here, the tribes of Wild Elves, Bugbears, Orcs, Neanderthal, Bruskers (proto-halflings), Lizardfolk and Nagas compete in the cold and unfeeling wastes while Duergar and Svirfneblin hollow out caves beneath the surface.

This sounds pretty similar to the Age of Giants in Eberron, in that the giants had an advanced civilization while the smaller races were still primitive, the dragons constantly warred with the giants (eventually wiping them out), and after the giants' fall they regressed to a primitive state as the smaller races advanced. I'd definitely recommend reading through Secrets of Xen'drik for flavor inspiration, if you haven't already.

[ZeroGear]

This sounds pretty similar to the Age of Giants in Eberron, in that the giants had an advanced civilization while the smaller races were still primitive, the dragons constantly warred with the giants (eventually wiping them out), and after the giants' fall they regressed to a primitive state as the smaller races advanced. I'd definitely recommend reading through Secrets of Xen'drik for flavor inspiration, if you haven't already.

It’s definitely part of the inspiration for the setting I’m building. Eberron is the first real setting I immersed myself in, and it’s what made me consider giants as an ancient civilization to begin with.
The other half of the idea is that everything was much bigger in the past. As much as I enjoy inserting logic into fantasy (when it makes sense), it’s always important to remember that these worlds do have their own rules. In this case, the development of life does parallel that of our world, but it’s not quite the same as sapient species emerged much earlier than in reality.
As such, if other lifeforms, such as dinosaurs, were larger in the far past, then any humanoid races that existed at the same time would naturally be the same size, with a few being small scavengers that lived off the “crumbs” of the dominant giants.