0 Ma - Flight From The Shadow

[Arjan]

Yesterday i was reading about the pre deismaar Vos race.

The Vos used to be deviners and illusionists folowing Reynir, and switched sides to Azrai.

but WHEN did they switch? I found pieces of text where the five tribes (page 4 Atlas of Cerilia) clustered in the northern portion of aduria before they fled to Cerilia. Does this mean they were still that mystical race?

IMO In combination with the 3 maps on the back of the Atlas (occupation of cerilia) i think they were still. But i cant find any references.

any idea?

Arjan

[Mark_Aurel]

When they wound up in the cold frozen North, and found out that their best shot at enjoying a warmer climate, better food, and lots of captured concubines was to join in with that nice old dude dressed in black who just wanted some help redecorating the continent a bit in return.

[Arjan]

Originally posted by Mark_Aurel@Aug 18 2003, 07:05 PM
When they wound up in the cold frozen North, and found out that their best shot at enjoying a warmer climate, better food, and lots of captured concubines was to join in with that nice old dude dressed in black who just wanted some help redecorating the continent a bit in return.
they were illusionists! they could make an illusion of the snow to make it look like grass etc..

hehe
so you say. yes they were still devivers/illusionists when they fled to cerilia.

they sought the truth in magic..
Has any one thought about their way of life back then?

Arjan

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----

From: "Arjan" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 12:53 PM





> The Vos used to be deviners and illusionists folowing Reynir, and

> switched sides to Azrai.but WHEN did they switch?



I would date this event to somewhere just prior to Diesmaar. Ruornil, the

Vos champion of Vorynn was still fighting for the soul of his people, and

had a following of spellcasters. Whether it was during the generation fo

Ruornil or the previous generation is open for speculation. I don`t think

that the corrpution of the Vos was a fait accompli in Ruornil`s time.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[hazard]

Vos where NOT followers of reynir. They followed Vorryn .I thing Vos where closet of humans to use true magic. It is all-sad in players chronicle. Ancient history page 4. It even says that “many of THE LOST –the ancient wizards – and servent of azrai –sprang from adurian vos.Mighty in magic …bla bla” (they where WIZARDS and NON-BLODED)it is not sad that they where devivers or illusionists. Zoloskaya is still highly magical domain. Regent “Uvna (Farzeb)” or more correct “Srebrni sluga” – Silver Servant. She is wizard too (15 level) I think it is clear that Vos where capable of costing at least 6 level of true magic and that they where assimilate throw centuries(until Deismaar). But not ALL&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;. Almost whole Zoloskaya warship Liron (Lirovka is she)The Waning moon.
??? Why everybody thinks that Vos are stupid barbarians ???

[Mark_Aurel]

Vos where NOT followers of reynir. They followed Vorryn .I thing Vos where closet of humans to use true magic. It is all-sad in players chronicle. Ancient history page 4. It even says that “many of THE LOST –the ancient wizards – and servent of azrai –sprang from adurian vos.Mighty in magic …bla bla” (they where WIZARDS and NON-BLODED)it is not sad that they where devivers or illusionists. Zoloskaya is still highly magical domain. Regent “Uvna (Farzeb)” or more correct “Srebrni sluga” – Silver Servant. She is wizard too (15 level) I think it is clear that Vos where capable of costing at least 6 level of true magic and that they where assimilate throw centuries(until Deismaar). But not ALL&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;. Almost whole Zoloskaya warship Liron (Lirovka is she)The Waning moon.
??? Why everybody thinks that Vos are stupid barbarians ???

Well, they *did* get a -1 penalty on Intelligence in 2e. That said, I don&#39;t think anyone thinks Vos are stupid - though they can certainly be barbaric, being a barbarian doesn&#39;t imply stupidity in the least. Conan was quite a clever fellow (apart from in the movie). It&#39;s just primarily that the Vos have changed from being a fairly peaceful people who revered magic to being the most warlike and backwards of the human nations (again, Vos are noted as being Dark Ages, while the others are Middle Ages or Renaissance). I don&#39;t think anyone is stupid just because they&#39;re forced into a situation like that, however.

[Krow]

Well, they *did* get a -1 penalty on Intelligence in 2e. That said, I don&#39;t think anyone thinks Vos are stupid - though they can certainly be barbaric, being a barbarian doesn&#39;t imply stupidity in the least. Conan was quite a clever fellow (apart from in the movie).

Well, barbarians are the only class that isn&#39;t automatically literate, and I think literacy is a rather defining trait. Although, just because a barbarian cannot read or write does not mean they cannot be intellectual on another level.
As for Conan, contrary to the title "Conan the Barbarian" he more resembled a fighter/rogue in my opinion.

[Osprey]

Well, barbarians are the only class that isn&#39;t automatically literate, and I think literacy is a rather defining trait. Although, just because a barbarian cannot read or write does not mean they cannot be intellectual on another level.

Oooh...you think literacy=intelligence? Boy, do I beg to differ&#33;

Being a student of the Celts (specifically the pre-literate ones), I can tell you that their learned ones were impressively smart. Welsh bards sometimes spent as much as 20 years or more in training and memorization of history, songs, poems, law, etc. to achieve their full status in society.

Literacy is simply a sign of a society that places a value on the written word. Many very intelligent societies simply disdained the written word, often because it gave universal access to privelaged information that was regarded as exclusive, even sacred knowledge. In other words, this was a reflection of the culture&#39;s social values, not their intellectual capabilities.

Intelligence is raw intellectual ability, NOT a level of knowledge. Literate cultures would tend to have more average knowledge per person, but wouldn&#39;t necessarilly be smarter. That would depend on the culture&#39;s emphasis on the use of the mind versus the body (or spirit).

Well, enough said.

Osprey

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----

From: "Osprey" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 3:40 PM





> Literacy is simply a sign of a society that places a value on the written

word.



Actually I would say that literacy is a function of social complexity.

Literacy is a necessary pre-condition for a bureaucracy. The Celts, in your

example, were only becoming urban during the period of Roman contact, long

after contact with the Greeks, who were literate well before contact with

the Celts. The Celts engaged in trade with the Greeks, and their culture

was influenced by that trade, but it did not include adopting or imitating

Greek writing because there was no need for such record keeping.



AFAIC, among the Vos and Rjurik there is no bureaucracy associated with most

law and temple holdings, but is most prevelent among the guilder class.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[Osprey]

Actually I would say that literacy is a function of social complexity.
Literacy is a necessary pre-condition for a bureaucracy. The Celts, in your
example, were only becoming urban during the period of Roman contact, long
after contact with the Greeks, who were literate well before contact with
the Celts. The Celts engaged in trade with the Greeks, and their culture
was influenced by that trade, but it did not include adopting or imitating
Greek writing because there was no need for such record keeping.

Actually, the Celt traders did use and imitate Greek writing in trade, but it was prohibited from being used outside of that area.
I should say that this is based on what I learned from professors of Celtic Studies at the University of Aberdeen (UK) about 5 years ago. And this is what they believe to be the case. I trust their expertise and dedication to weeding out the fluff and nonsense. But it&#39;s hard to be certain about anything from a 2000+ year-old oral culture. :ph34r:

It&#39;s also been hypothesized that oghams were inspired by and developed from Greek script.



AFAIC, among the Vos and Rjurik there is no bureaucracy associated with most
law and temple holdings, but is most prevelent among the guilder class.
Kenneth Gauck

which actually ends up agreeing nicely with the historical reality: writing was useful for trade and settling arguments / record keeping between literate and non-literate cultures. Why would a Khinasi merchant trust the word and memory of a Vos trader? Better to have it in writing if trade is to exist at all&#33;

Osprey

[Krow]

Literacy is simply a sign of a society that places a value on the written word. Many very intelligent societies simply disdained the written word, often because it gave universal access to privelaged information that was regarded as exclusive, even sacred knowledge. In other words, this was a reflection of the culture&#39;s social values, not their intellectual capabilities.

Intelligence is raw intellectual ability, NOT a level of knowledge. Literate cultures would tend to have more average knowledge per person, but wouldn&#39;t necessarilly be smarter. That would depend on the culture&#39;s emphasis on the use of the mind versus the body (or spirit).

You&#39;ll have to forgive my bias view on this. I was a language major in college, so my beliefs may be a bit different than yours. I can&#39;t say that I know much of the Celtics or Welch Bards in training for 20 years, but I can make an assumption that the bards were not the everyday folk. There are many stories, traditions, histories and directions for some feats that I&#39;m sure had gotten lost over the years. I use this as an example: My great-grandmother taught me how to prepare the best salad dressing I&#39;d ever had, from scratch. But, it was never written down. Over the years, I&#39;ve forgotten how to make it, even though I had made it a few times. In fact, I can&#39;t remember more than a couple of the ingredients, let alone the quatities. Sure, this is not comparable to everyday, life-or-death survival, but it can serve as an example.
Also, as I stated, I do not believe a single person necessarily to be less intelligent due to illiteracy. Einstein, due to dislexia, was unable to read in his native language until he was 8; agreeably, one of the greatest minds of history. However, on a whole, if a people cannot convey information to later generation, and thus to the generations after, much of their culture is lost. So, I guess it does make them "disadvantaged" in respect to other civilizations.
This is rather a side note, but I guess it could be applicable if you were to exchange reading/writing for speaking/understanding spoken language:
I&#39;ve always believed that a man could be the most intelligent the world has ever known; he could find a cure for cancer and all other killing diseases without struggle, he could find a way for all war to end.....or anything you would like to see possible in the world... But if he cannot find a way to spread this information, what good does it do?

Well, in the end, I&#39;m sure we&#39;ll all have our different opinions, few of which are directly related to the original post. In my opinion, barbarians could not be "stupid" and survive as a culture as a whole. Intelligence comes in many forms. Survival for day to day occurances being one of them. I don&#39;t know about all of you, but if I was stuck out in the woods with no tools and no chance to escape it, I would be dead within a month or two. But, the chance of a barbarian to pass down information from a previous generation, to the generation after, and that generation to the generation after and so on, in things other than daily survival would be difficult without written text.

[Osprey]

You&#39;ll have to forgive my bias view on this. I was a language major in college, so my beliefs may be a bit different than yours. I can&#39;t say that I know much of the Celtics or Welch Bards in training for 20 years, but I can make an assumption that the bards were not the everyday folk. There are many stories, traditions, histories and directions for some feats that I&#39;m sure had gotten lost over the years. I use this as an example: My great-grandmother taught me how to prepare the best salad dressing I&#39;d ever had, from scratch. But, it was never written down. Over the years, I&#39;ve forgotten how to make it, even though I had made it a few times. In fact, I can&#39;t remember more than a couple of the ingredients, let alone the quatities. Sure, this is not comparable to everyday, life-or-death survival, but it can serve as an example.
Also, as I stated, I do not believe a single person necessarily to be less intelligent due to illiteracy. Einstein, due to dislexia, was unable to read in his native language until he was 8; agreeably, one of the greatest minds of history. However, on a whole, if a people cannot convey information to later generation, and thus to the generations after, much of their culture is lost. So, I guess it does make them "disadvantaged" in respect to other civilizations.

Well, my own bias obviously lies on the other side: I was a Folklore major in undergrad, with a focus on Celtic Studies and oral traditions (particularly storytelling :), compliments of the University of Aberdeen&#39;s Celtic Studies department for my junior year of college. The rest of the major was a smattering of world history (Russia, Japan and China, bits of elsewhere), religion, and anthropology.

What I&#39;ve come to appreciate about oral (non-literate) cultures is that they DID survive with intact cultures and technological / intellectual advancements for a thousand years or more. What that means is that they could pass down intact bodies of knowledge and learning from one generation to the next. The point at which much of this culture was lost was when the civilizations themselves were overrun by folks like the Romans, who proceeeded to erode and eventually absorb the Celtic cultures.

What kind of intelligence is required for such an oral tradition? 2 things: good listening skills, and an excellent memory. Is it any wonder that bards would be preeminent in such a society? They&#39;re best at the skills that everyone needs to a certain extent, and they become the major repositories of the accumulated lore and learning of the culture. Especially all of the less-essential bits of lore and history that don&#39;t have an everyday use. I can only imagine what a bard&#39;s mind was like, but I can assure you it was impressive in these ways.

Thus, where a literate culture loses out is in its ability to listen carefully, remember accurately, and then tell without deviation this information. That&#39;s why bards did require years and years of training. They had to get every last bit perfect - deviation from history meant history was changed or lost.

So literacy certainly has its advantages - particularly in its ability to store and record more information than in an oral tradition. Yet necessity breeds culture, and as such I wonder if literate minds aren&#39;t in fact lazier in the sense of not being able to remember and recall info, let alone even hear it accurately in the first place.

I know this deviates a lot from the original thread, but I feel this kind of knowledge is very useful for any RPG world designer when concieving their cultures and just what does make a "barbarian" culture.

If Anuireans are the Romans of Cerilia, then calling the Vos barbarians is appropriate. But never would I consider them stupid, and I would certainly give them their own, culturally-justified views of the self-important Anuireans, the sunburnt Khinasi, etc.

Osprey

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----

From: "Osprey" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 12:04 PM





> Actually, the Celt traders did use and imitate Greek writing in

trade, but it was prohibited from being used outside of that area.



We are talking about a very small number of Hellinized Celts in the Rhone

valley. This did not become a broad Celt trait, say in the way that the

Greeks adapted Phonecian writing, or the Italians immitated Greek writing.

In BR, this is like the Rjurik Barbarian who spends time in Anuire and

learns to read. After all, "the Rjurik peoples adopted the Anuirean

alphabet." Like the Rjurik, the Celts broadly adopted writing under the

Romans.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[Osprey]

We are talking about a very small number of Hellinized Celts in the Rhone
valley. This did not become a broad Celt trait, say in the way that the
Greeks adapted Phonecian writing, or the Italians immitated Greek writing.
In BR, this is like the Rjurik Barbarian who spends time in Anuire and
learns to read. After all, "the Rjurik peoples adopted the Anuirean
alphabet." Like the Rjurik, the Celts broadly adopted writing under the
Romans.

Kenneth Gauck

Yes, but unlike the Rjurik, the Celts you speak of were conquered by the Romans and absorbed into their Empire.

Norse literacy was likewise limited to a privelaged few until the arrival of Christianity. I would be interested to know how exactly the Anuireans did introduce literacy and other cultural elements into Rjurik society: by all accounts a stubborn and isolationist people.

I&#39;m only going on the original box set material here, though, so perhaps more on this subject was published in some supplement or another.

Osprey

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----

From: "Osprey" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 9:55 PM



> Yes, but unlike the Rjurik, the Celts you speak of were conquered

> by the Romans and absorbed into their Empire.

>

> I`m only going on the original box set material here, though, so perhaps

> more on this subject was published in some supplement or another.



According to The Rjurik Highlands, Roele himself led the invasion of Rjurik

lands in 15 HC, and by 25 HC had obtained submission of all of the Rjurik

realms. The revolt against Anuirean suzentry burst forth in 1030 HC. I

think the Romans more thoroughly Romanized the Gauls, but the Anuireans had

longer for their influence to diffuse northward.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[ConjurerDragon]

Kenneth Gauck schrieb:



>----- Original Message -----

>From: "Osprey" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

>Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 9:55 PM

>

>>Yes, but unlike the Rjurik, the Celts you speak of were conquered

>>by the Romans and absorbed into their Empire.

>>

>> I`m only going on the original box set material here, though, so perhaps

>>more on this subject was published in some supplement or another.

>>

>>

>

>According to The Rjurik Highlands, Roele himself led the invasion of Rjurik

>lands in 15 HC, and by 25 HC had obtained submission of all of the Rjurik

>realms. The revolt against Anuirean suzentry burst forth in 1030 HC. I

>think the Romans more thoroughly Romanized the Gauls, but the Anuireans had

>longer for their influence to diffuse northward.

>Kenneth Gauck

>kgauck@mchsi.com

>

>

? The Rjurik defeated the Anuireans and Roele in 15 HC and he used

diplomacy at 25 HC to get them into the empire... p. 7 Rjurik Highlands...

"to join the empire as equals" does not sound like being conquered...

bye

Michael

[ryancaveney]

On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, Krow wrote:



> I do not believe a single person necessarily

> to be less intelligent due to illiteracy.



There is a vast difference between individual people being illiterate

and entire societies being illiterate.



Obviously, if you have never been exposed to writing -- indeed, if your

language has no written form at all -- no matter how smart you are, you

just can`t learn to read and write. If you are sufficiently imaginative

you might *invent* writing, but that is a really big step.



If, as in medieval societies and thus probably in Cerilia (which is

another small rule change to basic 3e which I think the BRCS should make:

only wizards and aristocrats should be literate as a class feature, and

not even them in Vosgaard), literacy exists but is rare because it isn`t

deemed necessary to most people, so they are never taught how to read or

write. Even if they are properly instructed, there isn`t much written

material for them to read, anyway. There may have been lots of brilliant

peasants, but they`re *peasants*, so why bother?



It is only in very recent portions of modern times that some societies

have made a concerted effort to teach *every single person* to read, and

printed text has become ubiquitous. Only in those circumstances can you

draw *any* conclusions about intelligence from how much difficulty a

person has learning to read, and as you rightly point out, even then there

are learning disabilities and other confounding factors to deal with.



> In my opinion, barbarians could not be "stupid" and survive as a

> culture as a whole.



Agreed. Which is why I have taken pains to try to point out that knowing

that a *culture* is illiterate tells you *nothing* about the intelligence

of its members relative to members of literate ones. That said, however,

I have no problem with the Int penalty for the Vos, or any of the other

human subtype ability score modifications of the original rules. In fact,

I very much like them. Thus *it just so happens by coincidence* that in

Cerilia, the human group with the highest percentage of barbarians and

total lack of literacy also happens to be slightly stupider than the

others, but these things are not in any way *necessarily* related. Is

that a satisfactory resolution of the issue?



> Intelligence comes in many forms. Survival for day to day occurances

> being one of them. I don`t know about all of you, but if I was stuck

> out in the woods with no tools and no chance to escape it, I would be

> dead within a month or two.



That`s because raw smarts aren`t the only thing you need: training is

important, too. In D&D terms, someone with Int 8 but 10 ranks in Craft

(Trapmaking) would be significantly better (10 - 1 = +9) at snaring small

animals for food than someone with Int 18 but no ranks (0 + 4 = +4); of

course, someone who has *both* is better than either (10 + 4 = +14). If

you were of average (even fairly low) intelligence, but you`d been

learning wilderness survival skills from your tribe mates since you could

walk, you wouldn`t have much trouble at all. Oral tradition is somewhat

unreliable, yes, but it`s much better than having to reinvent on your own

in just a couple of weeks (or days!) all the accumulated knowledge of many

generations. Where intelligence gets into all of this is that the smarter

members of the "barbarian" culture will generally be the ones who remember

and can effectively use more of the lore they are taught (in D&D terms,

even though Survival is not an Int-based skill, people with high Int have

many more skill points to spend on buying ranks in it), and will also

probably be the ones who discover new tricks to teach to others.





Ryan Caveney

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----

From: "Michael Romes" <Archmage@T-ONLINE.DE>

Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 4:19 AM





> ? The Rjurik defeated the Anuireans and Roele in 15 HC and he used

> diplomacy at 25 HC to get them into the empire... p. 7 Rjurik Highlands...

> "to join the empire as equals" does not sound like being conquered...



I said that Roele obtained submission. I spaketh not of conquest. Roele

established a herrshaft over the Rjurik. Its exact nature remains unclear,

but it seems clear that the Emperor was master of the whole.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[Ksaturn]

Intelligence is a loaded word... in D&D abilities terms it is merely your memory and logical/mathematical capabilities... Wisdom is also loaded down with cultural/emotional ties and varients <_< ... and again in D&D terms is your Perception, Faith/confidence, and Cunning( <- &#33;???&#33;... o i get it&#33;... common sense... survival... right...) Experience is a whole other boatload as mentioned before.

asto the flight from the shadow.... :unsure: it seems... what he said... uh... just before Deismarr. :unsure: maybe? :blink:

[fiftyone]

The -1 Intelligence bit is most likely from the fact Belenik and Kriesha work to promote War and Strength, might over mind. It reads in one of the books something like they [Belenik and Kriesha] don&#39;t want the Vos to go back to thier magical heritage, thinking they may turn to Rournil or simply devote themselves solely to the pursuit of magic.

The entire Vos settling Cerilia is awkward. It reads the majority of Vos battled for Azrai against the tribes of Aduria in Aduria and Cerilia. I don&#39;t know if this was only in the War of the Shadow, or in the Aduria case also in the Flight from the Shadow.

Perhaps it happened twice, once 500 years before Desimar before or during the Flight from the Shadow and a second time as Azrai was planting the seeds for the War of the Shadow with the minority good aligned Vos doing the settling of Cerilia. The Diviners/Illusionists were no longer that just prior to Desimar (it reads one century in the timeline from the downloads) and almost all of the Good Aligned Vos died like the Masetians.

Im starting to confuse myself now. ^_^

ramble, ramble, ramble...