A world without monsters.

[Rakmakallan]

Since, in my homebrew I decided to drop all supernatural elements and make magic into glorified chemistry, it was the turn of almost all monsters to kick the bucket as well. Even though I kept dragons, ogres and a few others in mundane versions, I am currently facing a slight problem in terms of lack of wilderness encounters. Goblins, orcs, giants, all now have detailed cultures and civilisations tied into the overall world history, undead, monstrous humanoids, extraplanar creatures, simply don't exist.
Is there any way I could keep some sort of traditional rpg feeling in a setting mainly fuelled by intra-humanoid political and military conflict?

[Knaight]

Monsters are largely unnecessary anyways. Humans can provide the vast majority of conflict, and that includes violent combat - moreover, variety in tools can provide the differences needed. Someone on a horse, covered head to toe in armor and touting a lance is very different from a small group with clubs, which is different than someone blending into the forest while holding a crossbow. More variety can be provided with animals. Boars, bears, the big cats, wolves, constrictor snakes, even insects can all work for purposes of danger. You don't need the ogres and dragons, and you don't need the other humanoid species.

[Daer]

Animals might be good replacement, bears, wolf packs and so on. Maybe even make it one of the plot hooks, someone has been aggravating animals to attack humans!

[Wiwaxia]

Don't have wilderness encounters. Keep the action in the city streets, or in politics, or in hot pursuit of villains. That should give you more than enough to keep a game running.

If your PC are in the wilderness, and you want to give them more than "you arrive at your destination three months later", you could create conflict via weather, natural hazards, obstacles requiring clever solutions, hunting/resource management, etc. If you really want a combat encounter, there are always bandits (which you could also tie in to resource management: kill or soundly defeat them at great risk to get their stuff, or settle for chasing them off at less risk, or surrender some of your supplies if you are overmatched).

[erikun]

What are you planning on having them do in the wilderness that would require violent encounters? I mean, I suppose you could throw in the occasional bear or wolf pack if you wanted to threaten characters.

The biggest danger in trekking in a random direction in an unknown wilderness, I'd think, would be getting lost, finding food, or ending up hurting yourself due to not knowing the terrain.

[Skaven]

You can use humans and ogres etc who have turned to banditry or whatnot, but this is part of the reason for such a diversified plethora of monsters and magic: it breaks the monotony.

If you have gone for the alchemical route you have some options still.

1, Golems and construct type creations.
2, Alchemical undead.
3, Alchemically augmented beasts.

All are viable 'weapons' if you have gone for a military conflict between species type game.

[Mastikator]

Take a lesson from real life. Bandits, murderers, thieves, warlords, all existed and still do, and are a very real threat.

[Jay R]

I recommend something to increase the number and ferocity of wild animal attacks.

A forest fire in the neighboring country will send a bunch of carnivores and scavengers into your villages. It will also destroy people's homes and famrs, upping the number of roaming bandits.

A tsunami can have the same effect.

[Dr.Epic]

If cheesy, pretentious sci-fi B-movies have taught me one thing, it's human beings are the real monsters. Also, if you cover a gas mask in paper mache and spray paint it, it can make for a monster mask.

[Morty]

The answer is rather simple - don't do wilderness encounters. It's not like they're obligatory. Your players will simply fight enemies who they have actual reasons to fight instead of random mooks jumping them from the bushes.

[hiryuu]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9GsccLoLvY

Humans are awesome. I don't know why they aren't used more often.

[Bagelson]

Humans can take on pretty much the same role, you just have to actually give a motive as to why they're out in the middle of nowhere attacking random travellers. The easiest is just to remove random encounters in the wilderness. But there could also be patrols from local warlords, there could be escaped slaves and criminals. Also, if there are places in the wilderness of importance, there's sure to be people around; important mountain passes will certainly have toll booths, there will be logging camps, mining camps and whatnot. Just generally less combat encounters.

[Shadowknight12]

As an alternative to everything that has been suggested, look up the rules on environmental effects. Thirst, starvation, extreme heat, extreme cold, poison, disease, landslides, dangerous rivers, storms, glaring sunlight, tornadoes, earthquakes, quicksand, windstorms, sandstorms, blizzards, lava, floods, avalanches, hidden crevices, mountain climbing, swamps, the almighty sea, you probably get my point by now.

Use that and your characters won't need to make a single attack roll to rue the day they stepped out of the comfort of their cities.

[Cookiemobsta]

Or just make some humanoid factions that are always hostile to the players. These don't have to be generic bandits--you could have religious fanatics, separatist terrorists, roving slavers, you name it.

[Vknight]

Mad alchemist riding a bear
A man trying to do more fantasy magic and his 'magic' has lead to animals addicted to alchemical reagents

[hewhosaysfish]

If Red Dead Redemption has taught me anything, you should be ambushed by cougars every 50 yards. Or by sneaky ninja bears if you're in bear territory.

[GolemsVoice]

It seems a little bit like you want to have your cake and eat it too, honestly.

Because:
Is there any way I could keep some sort of traditional rpg feeling in a setting mainly fuelled by intra-humanoid political and military conflict?

what IS the traditional RPG feeling? To me, it's magic, monsters etc.

But aside from that, well, what makes/made travel in the real world dangerous? Pretty much only bandits (which can still be orcs and goblins just as much as humans, because humans are civilized to and that doesn't stop them) and weather hazards.

[lt_murgen]

Overland travel is dangerous, and you never need to encounter a monster to make it so:


1) Getting lost. Thousands of people get lost each year. On modern day Earth, with GPS. Many of them die from exposure. Try orienteering without a compass, and you're in for a world of hurt.

2) Exposure. Human's are simply not designed to be in extreme heat or cold. Add in arms and armor, and heat exhaustion is a real possibility- same with hypothermia as metal is a poor insulator.

3) Overland travel. If you have paved roads, you are in good shape. But moving horses and men through uncharted territory is SLOW work- quicksand, landslides, sudden storms bringing floods, mud flats sucking you down, etc. All can pose challenges.

4) Small pests. As any hiker will tell you, ground-squirrels can destroy your food stores faster than bears. Imagine if two weeks into a 6 week trip the party awoke to find their packs infested with mice or groundsquirrels who ate / befouled all their rations.

5) Microscopic pests and disease: Water is a breeding ground for disease and disease bearing insects. Cholera, malaria, dengue fever, dystentary, etc, etc. Many plants have saps and resins which create allergic reactions. Even water from springs may be flowing through soil that is poisonous. Imagine if your "cleric" was affected with laryngitis, and unable to cast any spells with verbal components (including cure disease). Imagine if your mage was affected by poison ivy, and the intense itching made it far more difficult to cast spells (concentration checks, etc).

[gkathellar]

The answer is rather simple - don't do wilderness encounters. It's not like they're obligatory. Your players will simply fight enemies who they have actual reasons to fight instead of random mooks jumping them from the bushes.

+1 to this wise and clever man.

[Odin the Ignoble]

I've done human only and human centric campaigns before, and I tend to like them more then including a wide variety of monsters and humanoids.

I dislike most fantasy races because they tend to just lead 2 dimensional characters.

As far as wilderness encounters, aside from the elements and animals. Brigands are a good choice.

Here are a few more Wilderness ideas:

If the players hunt while on the move, have a group of armed men eventually catch up with them, and attempt to arrest them for poaching in the King/Baron/Lord's woods.

Have the players run into poachers and have to either convince them that the party won't turn them into the local Lord, or fight.

An over ambitious official and his men attack the party, because they are convinced they are highwaymen.

Have a few outposts in the area. If the players go though the outpost, they have a chance to resupply, and rest in safety, but have to pay an exorbitant toll to the local lord. If they avoid the outposts, they have to dodge patrols or be carted off for smuggling/avoiding the lawful tolls.

If there are major wars going on in the setting, have the party come across a battle/skirmish. They either have to pick a side or avoid the fight.

In the event that they void the fight, the winning side might be upset with them because they failed to help and save lives. Possibly even attacking the party or capturing them and trying them for spies.

Have the party come across a village in the process of being plundered.

The party comes across a group of dead pilgrims, and a blood trail leading into the woods. Following the trail leads to wolves/brigands/raiders/the local Apostate Lord...

There are tons of possibilities. And for the most part I like them allot more then the stereotyped, "You come across a [Random Monster]", since they help add to the setting and storyline more then a random monster/enemy that is unrelated to the plot and setting. Inserting a random monster encounter always felt like a cop out to me.

In the event that you do want to use monster or animal, you should also tend to give the players a warning. Have NPCs bring it up in conversation, things like "Are you sure you want to go that way? Young Master Stephan and his wife were mauled by a bear/attacked by wolves/killed by brigands/never seen again/found beaten into a pulp, just last week."

[Rorrik]

Also, mercenaries, paid, aligned or otherwise, are an effective way to keep the PCs occupied with people not directly affiliated with any nation. They're just following orders, maybe, though I suppose often they're turning to banditry for a little excitement and extra pay.

Cults are also fun. Depending on how deep in the wilderness they are, there could be a cult gathering that doesn't take kindly to being discovered by careless wandering adventurers.

[Raum]

Is there any way I could keep some sort of traditional rpg feeling in a setting mainly fuelled by intra-humanoid political and military conflict?Sure, many modern and historical settings accomplish it. I've always preferred human "monsters" in any case. Makes things less black and white.

[claricorp]

Having a very antagonistic kingdom/empire that is in the process of or has previously invaded where the players are, either their active troops are their, or the kingdom has been defeated and the remaining troops have fled into the wilderness, drafting bandits to their cause and causing all sorts of subtle and more blunt nefariousness.