Elven alignment

[Solmyr]

Greetings,
I've often seen it written that Rhuobhe has 'lost touch' with the elven way of life by becoming NE and thus shifting towards lawfulness from the traditional elven chaotic alignment. However:

Fhileraene and Isaelie are TN, and Rhiana of Coullabhie is LN! Also some other notable elves are non-chaotic. Have they all 'lost touch' then?

******************
Aleksei Andrievski
aka Solmyr, Archmage of the Blue Star
solmyr@kolumbus.fi
Visit the Archmage's Tower at
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Fortress/2198/index.html

[LordSchmit@aol.co]

In a message dated 9/1/98 8:57:32 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
solmyr@kolumbus.fi writes:

> Greetings,
> I've often seen it written that Rhuobhe has 'lost touch' with the elven way
> of life by becoming NE and thus shifting towards lawfulness from the
> traditional elven chaotic alignment. However:
>
> Fhileraene and Isaelie are TN, and Rhiana of Coullabhie is LN! Also some
> other notable elves are non-chaotic. Have they all 'lost touch' then?

More likely just confusion among the authors. They may not have been told that
Cerilian elves are all almost always Chaotic.

[Gary V. Foss]

LordSchmit@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 9/1/98 8:57:32 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
> solmyr@kolumbus.fi writes:
>
> > Greetings,
> > I've often seen it written that Rhuobhe has 'lost touch' with the elven way
> > of life by becoming NE and thus shifting towards lawfulness from the
> > traditional elven chaotic alignment. However:
> >
> > Fhileraene and Isaelie are TN, and Rhiana of Coullabhie is LN! Also some
> > other notable elves are non-chaotic. Have they all 'lost touch' then?
>
> More likely just confusion among the authors. They may not have been told that
> Cerilian elves are all almost always Chaotic.

I'd agree with this. Rhoubhe doesn't seem to be any more out of touch than any
other political leader. I suppose if you were going to make an analogy to modern
politicians, Rhoubhe is just a member of the extreme right politically.

I chose the right cuz they were in power before the "commoners" came along and
represent the "conservative" or traditional way of thinking, at least in elven
politics. You could just as easily make him an extremist tree-hugger, though, so
please no one take offense at my categorization.)

Some of the other rulers of elven lands would be categorized as
liberal--Tuarhieval--maybe Rhuannach is "moderate" and Sielwode "conservative."
These are matters of interpretation, however, so you could see things quite
differently.

The point is, however, that they are all members of the same "political party" and
would find themselves agreeing with one another more often than disagreeing. At
least, that's my take on it.

Gary

[James Ray]

I dunno - Ruins of Empire makes reference to his change of alignment,
towards N and E, rather than the "traditional" CN. His Card sheet from the
boxed sheet is what makes note of his departure from the "Elven" way, and
is similarly unfit to drive the humans from Cerilia.

James
- ----------
> From: Gary V. Foss
> I'd agree with this. Rhoubhe doesn't seem to be any more out of touch
than any other political leader. .

[Gary V. Foss]

James Ray wrote:

> I dunno - Ruins of Empire makes reference to his change of alignment,
> towards N and E, rather than the "traditional" CN. His Card sheet from the
> boxed sheet is what makes note of his departure from the "Elven" way, and
> is similarly unfit to drive the humans from Cerilia.

But are his views really out of line with the "elven" way? The question is
whether the characterization of him in the RoE book and his cardsheet really
makes sense. Personally, I don't think so. In fact, I think the opposite is
true, Roubhe would be very charismatic to elves, and his views would be
appealing as well to many of them. To me, Roubhe is kind of a super-elf, and
his views are simply an extension of his extra-elfishness. The "liberal" elves
are, well, less elven, aren't they? Some of them even breed with
humans! Ew! How could they not help but be less elven then Roubhe?

Gary

[Tim Nutting]

> > I dunno - Ruins of Empire makes reference to his change of alignment,
> > towards N and E, rather than the "traditional" CN. His Card sheet
from the
> > boxed sheet is what makes note of his departure from the "Elven" way,
and
> > is similarly unfit to drive the humans from Cerilia.
>
> But are his views really out of line with the "elven" way? The question
is
> whether the characterization of him in the RoE book and his cardsheet
really
> makes sense. Personally, I don't think so. In fact, I think the
opposite is
> true, Roubhe would be very charismatic to elves, and his views would be
> appealing as well to many of them. To me, Roubhe is kind of a
super-elf, and
> his views are simply an extension of his extra-elfishness. The
"liberal" elves
> are, well, less elven, aren't they? Some of them even breed with
> humans! Ew! How could they not help but be less elven then Roubhe?
>
> Gary

I think what the sheet says is that "...some [elves] feel..." indicating
that, like in real life, the politics are not universal beliefs.
Doubtless there will be strong elements (if not numerous ones) even in the
ghallie Sidhe camp that feel that the Elf does not represent them. There
is something to be said for an immortal that has stayed on the same goal
for over 2,000 years. That's longer than some of them have been alive.
Further aside from the alignment issue is his hatred. Elves are chaotic
and shift to extremes from moment to moment, but by and large they are a
happy people. They have conquered their own lusts for conquests, and are
not wannabe overlords.

That actually brings up one of my big problems with multi-/dual-classed
characters, especially in Birthright. Elves are immortal. While we don't
really think about it all that much, or at least I really did not, that
means that Rhuobhe and others have been around for over 10,000 years. In
that span of time a being can go very far. In fact, that ANY elf over
1,000 years could still be considered 0-level is ridiculous. It is my
contention that of all the races, the long lived ones should be the ones
to have the dual-class ability, rather than be restricted to one career
path for all time and ever and ever, amen.

I take this concept from the Lian and Dylvana of Dennis L. McKiernan's
world of Mithgar. His elves are remarkably similar to the BR elves (and
his copyrights for the early books pre-date BR). His ideas are that for
the length of time that an elf lives, there is no way that they will do
the same thing. A being grows bored of doing a thing for 500 years and
moves on to something else. In fact, one elf in his recent books said
that he found that the crafts of the earth were the only things that
really mattered over all, for politics were ephermal. A hero in one book
had been a blacksmith, armorer, scribe, herdsman, farmer, statseman,
explorer, hunter, warrior, bard.... and I got the feeling that that was
just scratching the surface.

Good Day
Tim Nutting

[DKEvermore@aol.co]

In a message dated 09-02-1998 10:54:37 AM Central Daylight Time,
zero@wiredweb.com writes:

> That actually brings up one of my big problems with multi-/dual-classed
> characters, especially in Birthright. Elves are immortal. While we don't
> really think about it all that much, or at least I really did not, that
> means that Rhuobhe and others have been around for over 10,000 years. In
> that span of time a being can go very far. In fact, that ANY elf over
> 1,000 years could still be considered 0-level is ridiculous. It is my
> contention that of all the races, the long lived ones should be the ones
> to have the dual-class ability, rather than be restricted to one career
> path for all time and ever and ever, amen.
>
I believe you have bumped into simple mechanics on this one. This limitation
has to do with AD&D game balancing mechanics--not so much the setting. My
suggestion is that if you are unsatisfied with it, perhaps you might have to
come up with ideas how to allow dual-classed elves and yet maintain game
balance..

- -DKE

[Gary V. Foss]

DKEvermore@aol.com wrote:

> I believe you have bumped into simple mechanics on this one. This limitation
> has to do with AD&D game balancing mechanics--not so much the setting. My
> suggestion is that if you are unsatisfied with it, perhaps you might have to
> come up with ideas how to allow dual-classed elves and yet maintain game
> balance..

Isn't this reliance upon game balance kind of silly, though? Doesn't it make
sense to toss it out? In Birthright characters can be inherently more powerful
than other characters based upon where they rule, what kind of holdings they
have, etc. Why not inequities based upon immortality? Immortals would simply be
better off than humans. More experience, no nasty aging effects, etc.

As for elves dual classing, the major problem is not their long lives but their
ability scores, which are required to be pretty high according to the rules. It
is debatable how often you would have characters switching classes given those
rules.

I've argued before that most elves would be of class and level. It would take an
extreme amount of effort for them to avoid gaining experience over the centuries,
and I just don't see being level 1 as something that difficult to achieve, the
way I've seen it described in the thread about magic users in Cerilia and 1st
level wizards.

As for the ways to incorporate this into the game.... Well, things start getting
a little hairy. Should we have super elven units to reflect that the members of
it are 3-6th level fighters rather than 0? Enough mages running around to choke
Elminster? What specific things should be done to reflect the long lives of
elves?

Gary

[DKEvermore@aol.co]

In a message dated 9/2/98 5:54:30 PM, GeeMan@linkline.com writes:

>Isn't this reliance upon game balance kind of silly, though? Doesn't it
>make
>sense to toss it out? In Birthright characters can be inherently more
>powerful
>
Without a balanced game you will suddenly find almost all your players playing
only one race. It's that simple. Now, I believe AD&D can NOT be balanced
well. At least not and match Birthright's spirit quite right. It's simply
not in the system. AD&D was designed with some basic ideas about demi-humans
and humans that were changed with the Birthright setting. I feel the change
was for the better story-wise, but not in terms of the AD&D mechanics. And
I'm really only talking about the *standard* AD&D rules, not the cool Domain
stuff Birthright introduced. In terms of the AD&D system imbalance within the
Birthright setting, I'm looking for someone to prove me wrong, but I don't
think it'll happen. Personally, I dropped using AD&D to run Birthright.

Later!
DKEvermore

[Gary V. Foss]

DKEvermore@aol.com wrote:

> Without a balanced game you will suddenly find almost all your players playing
> only one race. It's that simple. Now, I believe AD&D can NOT be balanced
> well. At least not and match Birthright's spirit quite right. It's simply
> not in the system. AD&D was designed with some basic ideas about demi-humans
> and humans that were changed with the Birthright setting. I feel the change
> was for the better story-wise, but not in terms of the AD&D mechanics. And
> I'm really only talking about the *standard* AD&D rules, not the cool Domain
> stuff Birthright introduced. In terms of the AD&D system imbalance within the
> Birthright setting, I'm looking for someone to prove me wrong, but I don't
> think it'll happen. Personally, I dropped using AD&D to run Birthright.

I think you're kind of contradicting yourself here. "Without game balance all
players will play only one race" and "AD&D can NOT be balanced"? All players
don't play the same races AND the game is imbalanced. That's part of what makes
the game interesting, dealing with the imbalances and inequities inherent in the
game and among the PC races. I know people who just LOVE playing halflings. If
the relative power of those characters was the only criteria for playing the game,
nobody would play a halfling. Its the difference between a role-playing game and
a war game.

If you play other games, like some of the Superhero games, game balance is really
kind of laughable. In BR, it is similarly ridiculous. The characters have the
power of the gods in them? What could be more similar in AD&D terms to the
"superpowers" of DC Heroes or Marvel? (Trade marks excluded because I don't feel
like mucking about with them.) I mean, Rogr Aglondier's holdings are right next
to the High Mage Aelies, and the RoE book makes out like they are constantly
struggling over sources. Aelies wins. It's that simple. He's a 16th level guy.
He'd crush Aglondier like a bug and still have time to go have a snack.

In short, if you are going to play BR like a wargame, or a game of chess, then
it's over pretty quickly. Game balance doesn't really exist given the setting.
If you were going to try to put game balance in, all characters would start at 1st
level (or some other agreed upon level) they would all have the same number of
provinces and holdings, they would have no blood abilities, character races would
have no significant differences, you'd have to revise character classes to make
them more equal and ability scores would be based upon a static number rather than
rolled up with dice. Otherwise, the game is imbalanced.

And you know what? It's better imbalanced. A balanced game is boring. You might
as well play checkers.

Gary

[DKEvermore@aol.co]

In a message dated 9/2/98 7:33:16 PM, GeeMan@linkline.com writes:

>And you know what? It's better imbalanced. A balanced game is boring.
> You might
>as well play checkers.
>
An imbalanced game is like a game of Axis & Allies. Unless you limit (i.e.
change the rules) one country and you have competent players, your outcome
will always be the same.

At least in a game of "checkers", given equal skill you won't necessarily know
the outcome.

If you are giving one PC an advantage over another, then a player is going to
feel useless in more situations. This is not "interesting". It's the
imbalanced game that is "boring".

And by the way, you took my statements out of context. I said that AD&D was
more or less balanced within itself, but when you change the races, as
Birthright does, then you change the balance of the game. Unless you come up
with an alternate way of balancing it. And that is what I'm _still_ waiting
for an answer to (regarding dual-classing elves).

Mind you I can not argue the logic of having elves dual-class. In this I
actually agree. I'm really not trying to start an argument, I'm honestly
asking for input as to what can be done to balance elves as a PC race if given
the power to dual-class like humans.

- -DKE

[Gary V. Foss]

DKEvermore@aol.com wrote:

> An imbalanced game is like a game of Axis & Allies. Unless you limit (i.e.
> change the rules) one country and you have competent players, your outcome
> will always be the same.
>
> At least in a game of "checkers", given equal skill you won't necessarily know
> the outcome.

I don't think the game imbalance of BR is quite as drastic as that. I mean, if
the game were imbalanced wouldn't the conclusion already be a foregone
conclusion? Besides, people play the game with the imbalances intact. That's
what makes it interesting.

> If you are giving one PC an advantage over another, then a player is going to
> feel useless in more situations. This is not "interesting". It's the
> imbalanced game that is "boring".

> And by the way, you took my statements out of context. I said that AD&D was
> more or less balanced within itself, but when you change the races, as
> Birthright does, then you change the balance of the game. Unless you come up
> with an alternate way of balancing it. And that is what I'm _still_ waiting
> for an answer to (regarding dual-classing elves).

How did I take your comments out of context? I put your whole message at the top
of mine....

> Mind you I can not argue the logic of having elves dual-class. In this I
> actually agree. I'm really not trying to start an argument, I'm honestly
> asking for input as to what can be done to balance elves as a PC race if given
> the power to dual-class like humans.

How about making humans able to multi-class like elves? Or making elves unable to
multi-class? Or making both options open to either race?

Gary

[DKEvermore@aol.co]

In a message dated 09-03-1998 2:03:28 AM Central Daylight Time,
GeeMan@linkline.com writes:

> I don't think the game imbalance of BR is quite as drastic as that. I mean,
> if
> the game were imbalanced wouldn't the conclusion already be a foregone
> conclusion? Besides, people play the game with the imbalances intact.
That'
> s
> what makes it interesting.

Exactly. It was an drastic example, just like your checkers example. That's
why I posted it.

>
> > Mind you I can not argue the logic of having elves dual-class. In this I
> > actually agree. I'm really not trying to start an argument, I'm honestly
> > asking for input as to what can be done to balance elves as a PC race if
> given
> > the power to dual-class like humans.
>
> How about making humans able to multi-class like elves? Or making elves
> unable to
> multi-class? Or making both options open to either race?

Okay, why do you think humans should be able to multiclass? I don't think
either of the above are good solutions, because then you're going to through
out of whack dwarf and halfling and half elf characters. You'd have to change
the multi- and dual-class rules for all those races! It'd be better (and
simpler) to limit the elves.


- -DKE

[Gary V. Foss]

DKEvermore@aol.com wrote:

> Okay, why do you think humans should be able to multiclass? I don't think
> either of the above are good solutions, because then you're going to through
> out of whack dwarf and halfling and half elf characters. You'd have to change
> the multi- and dual-class rules for all those races! It'd be better (and
> simpler) to limit the elves.

Well, I've never really worried about this before.... It's just that the rules on
class, multi-classing and dual-classing came up and it occurs to me that the way
they are set up doesn't really make much sense. I don't know what the
justification is for having only demi-humans multi-class or allowing only humans
to dual-class. Why the difference? I don't really see how it makes the game more
balanced, or how it makes it more realistic, or how it is justified given the
characteristics of AD&D races.

Don't get me wrong. I haven't allowed dual-classed elves or multi-classed humans
in my own campaigns. I hadn't really dedicated much thought to it, but now that I
do, it doesn't make much sense.

I also don't think the dual-classing rules make much sense either. Once you drop
one profession you cannot learn anything more about it ever again? And you can't
use the skills you learned before until you become similarly skilled in your new
profession? The justification for this ruling doesn't make much sense to me.
Your character has to dedicate himself to his new profession or he won't "learn"
the proper way of doing things. How would a multi-class character ever learn
then?

Say you're a lawyer who has passed the BAR but before you begin your career you
decide to become a doctor, so you drop your briefs and start studying anatomy.
(Sorry, couldn't resist the underwear joke.) In an AD&D world after you pass your
residency and start practicing you could start acting like a lawyer again, right?
Why couldn't you decide to drop your doctoring, go back to law and start gaining
experience in that profession again? Why couldn't you be a lawyer-doctor? (I
actually know one of these guys in real life, so it's not impossible.)

The only solution I can see is to eleminate multi- or dual-classing, or to make
either an option for any race in the game (one or the other not both! No
Fighter/Priests who later decide to become Thief/Mages!) Either that or you just
drop this whole class system entirely and go with a skill based gaming system
instead.

Gary

[Darryl Willis]

> Say you're a lawyer who has passed the BAR but before you begin your
career you
> decide to become a doctor, so you drop your briefs and start studying
anatomy.
> (Sorry, couldn't resist the underwear joke.) In an AD&D world after you
pass your
> residency and start practicing you could start acting like a lawyer
again, right?
> Why couldn't you decide to drop your doctoring, go back to law and start
gaining
> experience in that profession again? Why couldn't you be a
lawyer-doctor? (I
> actually know one of these guys in real life, so it's not impossible.)

Ohmigosh....we're not {gasp} discussing the REALISM of the AD&D game here,
are we? It's not supposed to be realistic! Fantasy...that's the whole
style of gaming. Making it realistic would make it boring. Putting that
aside, though, what's the introduction to the DMG say? If you don't like a
rule, change it. That's all you need to do. Change it. I personally
don't wanna screw around with it, under the assumption that in 9 years,
since '89, the 2nd edition of AD&D should be pretty well playtested. Being
a revision of, obviously, the 1st edition game, which has been around since
before God, it's had some time to iron out imbalances. I say, let 'em
print the game. If I don't like somethin', I'm changin' it.

Sorry for ranting...

- -Darryl
darryl42@gate.net

[BenandAmy]

Is everyone forgetting that elves can't make use of temple holdings or
the potential income to be derived from them?
That's a big disadvantage. I think it balances out just fine.

[Tim Nutting]

> Without a balanced game you will suddenly find almost all your players
playing
> only one race. It's that simple.

I would submit that this depends upon the playing group and the amount of
control the DM exercises over player character creation. In my game it is a
clear sight that singly elves are quite superior to humans, but I only have 1/4
demi-human composition in my party. By and large most of my players WANT to
play humans, regardless.

>Now, I believe AD&D can NOT be balanced
> well. At least not and match Birthright's spirit quite right. It's simply
> not in the system. AD&D was designed with some basic ideas about demi-humans
> and humans that were changed with the Birthright setting. I feel the change
> was for the better story-wise, but not in terms of the AD&D mechanics. And
> I'm really only talking about the *standard* AD&D rules, not the cool Domain
> stuff Birthright introduced. In terms of the AD&D system imbalance within
the
> Birthright setting, I'm looking for someone to prove me wrong, but I don't
> think it'll happen. Personally, I dropped using AD&D to run Birthright.
>
> Later!
> DKEvermore

What do you use?

Tim Nutting