Sidhelien Spirituality

[RaspK_FOG]

Seeing as how we seem to agree on at least that one point, I thought it would be best if I did post a new topic on the matter...


The Sidhelien, as far as most Cerilian humans know, are adamant: they won't worship a god. It is interesting to note that dwarves and goblins actually do have a faith of their own that has nothing to do with human religion.

We do know that they don't worship the new gods, but we also know that they do not seem to have ever worshipped even the patrons of these gods when they were still mortals. So we can be certain that it's not a matter of the once-mortal nature of them that distanced the Sidhelien from worship.

I don't they view the gods as lesser to any extent, though: in fact, I think they simply don't see the point in worshipping them. Much like how they cannot abide to the rigidity that lawful alignments lend themselves to, so can they not have any sort of faith in a divine aspect of quite about anything.

[geeman]

At 03:57 PM 12/18/2007, RaspK_FOG wrote:

>I don`t they view the gods as lesser to any extent, though: in fact,
>I think they simply don`t see the point in worshipping them. Much
>like how they cannot abide to the rigidity that lawful alignments
>lend themselves to, so can they not have any sort of faith in a
>divine aspect of quite about anything.

I don`t think it`s even a matter of personal perspective, faith or
culture. Cerilian elves simply cannot worship the gods in the way
that humans or other Cerilian races can.

In a campaign setting that is sometimes rife with counter examples to
the game mechanics that were used and even setting materials itself,
the restriction on elven priests and temple holdings has no such
example. No Cerilian elf is described as having taken levels as a
priest nor creating temple holdings. There are temple holdings in
elven lands, but the setting materials always note that those temples
are led and address the non-elven members of a domain`s
population. Given how broad the religious aspects of the setting
are, and the fact that elven spirituality/theology is addressed in
various ways in the setting materials, the lack of actual temple
holdings or any elven characters who break the mold is particularly notable.

There are more wizards who control sources in lands controlled by
races who cannot themselves become wizards than temples in elven
lands despite the fact that clerical magical powers are described as
a major influence in the dominance of human immigrants to Cerilia
over the original elven inhabitants of the continent. Despite
millennia of this supposed conflict, no Cerilian elf appears to have
EVER tried to worship a god, of any pantheon, and got other elves to
give it a go if only for reasons of personal power and
influence. (And let`s not kid ourselves about non-elves worshipping
the gods and creating temples for reasons of personal power in a
setting designed to define such power relationships....)

So the weirdness in the original BR materials is that there`s nothing
that says a Cerilian elf absolutely cannot create a temple holding,
yet none has any. The setting materials often have "rules"
describing the limitations of races and classes, but breaks those
rules from time to time--yet did not do so in this particular
case. All that leads me to infer that the issue of religion for
Cerilian elves isn`t really a matter of choice at all, but somehow
hardwired into their very nature.

Gary

[Cargaroth]

I remember some reference to elves having spirits rather than souls. I don't remember whether this was in the original birthright material or in some of the articles written by roger Moore in old Dragon articles. If this was the case it might explain why an elf cannot be a druid or cleric, and why elves cound not create enough "prayers" to formulate a temple holding. It does not have to relate to a particular elf's respect for or personal belief in supernatural beings, but rather a part of their essential spiritual make-up.

[geeman]

At 07:59 PM 12/18/2007, Cargaroth wrote:

>I remember some reference to elves having spirits rather than souls.
>I don`t remember whether this was in the original birthright
>material or in some of the articles written by roger Moore in old
>Dragon articles.

I don`t recall reading anything explicit regarding souls/spirits that
was from any official source for BR. This particular rationale goes
back to some of the more Tolkienesque aspects of BR since JRRT`s
elves didn`t have quite the same immortal soul as humanity. The
spirit vs. soul nomenclature works perfectly well to explain that distinction.

>If this was the case it might explain why an elf cannot be a druid
>or cleric, and why elves cound not create enough "prayers" to
>formulate a temple holding. It does not have to relate to a
>particular elf`s respect for or personal belief in supernatural
>beings, but rather a part of their essential spiritual make-up.

I`ve used that as part of the rationale for not allowing elves to
justify that restriction. It`s one of those things that is sometimes
problematic in BR, though, since part of the emphasis of 3e+ was to
remove such restrictions....

Gary

[irdeggman]

Well the elven spirit vs souls arguement is one of those locked in 2nd somewhere (not BR specifically).

There are allusions to this in various aspects (2nd ed of course) pertaining to things like the difficulty in raising or ressurecting elves compared to other races and the like.

But, IMO, this has nothing to do with BR at all - considering that elves in other setting could be priests.

I generally agree with Gary on this one. There is only one text source in all of the BR material that might even have the slight appearance of being in conflict with this premise and that is in the PS of Tuarhievel, but my personnal observation of the consistency of the PS in general puts that as very low source of "rules" material for the setting.

BR Rulebook pg 12
“The Sidhelien have no deities at all (thus, Cerilian elves cannot be priests).”

BR Rulebook pg 35

“Temple holdings can be controlled by any class of regent character, but only priests who control temple holdings can cast realm spells.”

BR Rulebook pg 41
Only priest and paladin regents gain regency from temple holdings

Book of Priestcraft pg 75

Elven Investiture

“Since elven cultures have unique views on the roles of gods and priests, they do not have any priest regents to cast the investiture spell. Instead, elf regents enjoy some special rules concerning investiture and similar matters.. . .

Most elf regents (depending on the domain) do not actively select their heirs, but instead allow the land to decide when the time comes. See Land’s Choice, later in this section.”

[irdeggman]

More relevant info from 2nd ed material

Blood Spawn pg 5
When two worlds were one (sidebar)

The sages say that long ago, perhaps before humanity existed on Aebrynis, the world of Daylight and the world of Shadow were as one. The landscape of Aebrynis had not completely formed then, and the world could change according to its own rules, without rhyme or reason. A lake might form where a mountain had been, white glaciers moved over deserts, and rivers flowed through the sky. This was a time before the gods, but it ultimately resulted in their creation.

The gods, it is believed, were formed out of the land, and their natures bound them to it. Not wishing their natures to change without warning, as did the land, they began to enforce their will upon the world. Mountains, rivers, shores, and seas all took shape and stayed constant, bent to the will of the young gods.

But one god delighted in the ever-changing world and refused to bind his will and his being to the land. That god became Lord of Shadow, the god of Chaos and Change. He became Azrai.

Little is known of the gods’ earliest years in this time before humans and, perhaps, before elves. Giants walked the earth along with near-immortal beasts and other beings lost to the passage of time. It is said, however, that in the beginning Azrai alone of the gods willed change and evolution into being. If this is true, the race of humanity—as well as many of the other races now inhabiting Aebrynis—owe their existence to him.

The elements of permanence and transience—light and shadow—warred in those early days, and their battles grew so great that a rift formed between the land of Shadow and the land of Daylight. Passage between the two was still possible, even common, in those days, but soon (as gods measure time) the Shadow World and the world of Aebrynis solidified their borders. Aebrynis remained constant, only transforming in response to the actions of its inhabitants over long periods, while the Shadow World remained mutable and ever-changing.

Then came Deismaar, the destruction of the gods, and the cleaving of the world. The Shadow World became a place of fear and strange tales for those remaining on Aebrynis and now, more than fifteen hundred years later, only a scant number of people know more than a few tales of the Shadow World and its inhabitants. The Shadow World remains in flux. Halflings alone of Cerilia’s races may still pass freely between the two worlds and, since halflings fled the Shadow World in response to a terror they will not reveal, most are loathe to do so. And even a halfling would find it difficult to navigate the ever-changing land of Shadow.


Blood Spawn pg 27
Seelie Faerie ecology (discussion of the Sie)

The seelie faeries were the first children of the Shadow World. Long ago, when the waking world and the Shadow World were one, a race known as the Sie (“see”) populated the land. These creatures were beings of great magic, innate wielders of both sorcery that worked with nature (priestly spells) and sorcery that broke the rules of nature (wizardly spells). They cast their spells not by the prayer of priests or the rote memorization of human wizards, but rather the gathering of magical energies (the process yet employed by today’s elves).

The force that spilt the world into two halves was so strong that it also split the land’s inhabitants, ripping the Sie in twain. Each creature became two separate entities—a faerie (seelie) in the Shadow World and an elf (Sidhe) in Cerilia. The seelie retained control of natural magic and gained power over a new force in the Shadow World: the Seeming. The Sidhe retained control of wizardly magic and became bound to the land itself.


Note that the Sie (and now the seelie faeries) can cast priestly magic without gods. In 2nd ed (and 3.5) terms this translates into "directly from nature" and not from "a nature god".

[irdeggman]

PS of Tuarhievel pg 19

"The elves of Cerilia do not worship gods. They are aware that the gods of Deismaar existed and that new gods descended from the deities destroyed in that epic battle, but they do not pay homage to them. After their deception and betrayal by Azrai, the Sidhelien have been adamant in their refusal to worship the modern human gods."

"To the elves, spiritual development is the responsibility of the individual. The path an elf takes is a decision that only he or she can make. So strong is this belief that if an elf chooses to worship one of the human gods, so be it. The only restriction placed on such an individual is that of silence while within the elven lands."

I see this as pointing out the importance of individuality and personal development to the point of even accepting an individual elf's choice to go against the very basis of their cultural aspects. To me that is the importance of pointing this out - calling into example something that is so very clearly contrary to the absolute nature of elven culture and saying that it is all right on an individual basis. Not that this is in any way the norm.

Then there is the taelinri, whose role in elven cultures I see much like that of the druids in the Rjurik culture. Primarily that of teachers and counsellers.

"The taelinri come from all social classes and profession, with one exception: No elf who embraces the doctrines espoused by worshippers of the deities of other races may ever become a taelinir."

"The philosophy taught by the taelinri consists of three basic beliefs. First, the elves beleive they were formed as the result of the union of the four elements: earth, water, air, and fire. These elements natrually contest one another in an unending struggle for dominance. Within the elven spirit, they bring about the mood swings that characterize the elves."

Now it should be noted that this is actually untrue since the elves were formed from the split of the Sie (which could have been formed in this manner though). But this split robbed both "races" of their past heritage as only the faerie queen remembers what actually happend, being the sole Sie in existance.

"The second aspect of elven philosophy is one that most annoys other races, especially humans. The elves beleive that, as a result of the unique creation, they have a greater capacity to percieve the world around them and feel its inherent beuaty."

"Third, the taelinri help their people achieve a sense of themselves as individuals."

[RaspK_FOG]

I agree with all the above, irdeggman; which is why I want to draw your attention to the method through which they drew their powers...

The Sie are referred to as capable of drawing to them the energies of the land, whether in unison with or in contrast to it; to me, funnily enough, that pretty much asserts that the elves, whether Sie, Sidhelien, or Seelie, actually are some of the definitive spontaneous casters of the setting (which actually makes us reflect on the problems the current spontaneous spellcasting faces, but that's another story), no matter what kind of spells they cast (including, if one could say that, using the Seeming).

Now consider such a creature; isn't it almost impossible for it to relate to the concept of calling unto a deific being and gaining powers from it?

I believe that the Seelie and Sidhelien are sundered: they cannot cast the other kind of spells, whether arcane or divine, because they no longer have the capacity to draw such energies to themselves.

Now, here comes the interesting part: there is no definitive reason why the elves cannot worship a deity; the contrary, their non-reason to do so, is given. By that, I mean that the elves did not feel like worshipping deities, instead working sorcery as one with the land (when they were still just Sie instead of half themselves), and thus the idea of worshipping a deific being is absolutely alien to them. After all, if the ever-mutable land is like a mother to you, nurturing and providing and exciting and thrilling, what reason do you have to turn to some other external force that you have so little to relate to? For one thing, we don't know how the Sie were created, but the evidence shows that, unlike the dwarves, the gods might have had just an indirect role in their creation, or even none at all, both being yet another creation of the land.

[irdeggman]

I agree with all the above, irdeggman; which is why I want to draw your attention to the method through which they drew their powers...

The Sie are referred to as capable of drawing to them the energies of the land, whether in unison with or in contrast to it; to me, funnily enough, that pretty much asserts that the elves, whether Sie, Sidhelien, or Seelie, actually are some of the definitive spontaneous casters of the setting (which actually makes us reflect on the problems the current spontaneous spellcasting faces, but that's another story), no matter what kind of spells they cast (including, if one could say that, using the Seeming).

Yup it adds an entire new level to making them sorcerers (at least the primary source of sorcerers, with others having some semblance of elvne blood (even if not enough to be a half-elf).

Now consider such a creature; isn't it almost impossible for it to relate to the concept of calling unto a deific being and gaining powers from it?

Not really. The two can be distinct. It is entirely possible to have a spontaneous caster and still be quite deific, at least in my mind. I think the real crux comes from how they were created - essentially without a deity involved and thus have had no connection with deities in the worshipping context. At least that is how I see it.

I believe that the Seelie and Sidhelien are sundered: they cannot cast the other kind of spells, whether arcane or divine, because they no longer have the capacity to draw such energies to themselves.

Now I on the other hand have no problem seeing elven rangers casting divine spells as a remnant of their past with the Sie and their connection to the land. These spells are drawn from nature itself and not the meghhail of the land (which is in its essence arcane in nature).

Now, here comes the interesting part: there is no definitive reason why the elves cannot worship a deity; the contrary, their non-reason to do so, is given. By that, I mean that the elves did not feel like worshipping deities, instead working sorcery as one with the land (when they were still just Sie instead of half themselves), and thus the idea of worshipping a deific being is absolutely alien to them. After all, if the ever-mutable land is like a mother to you, nurturing and providing and exciting and thrilling, what reason do you have to turn to some other external force that you have so little to relate to? For one thing, we don't know how the Sie were created, but the evidence shows that, unlike the dwarves, the gods might have had just an indirect role in their creation, or even none at all, both being yet another creation of the land.


True - but the reason for them not worshipping was actually given in a round about manner. There are no elven deities. Hence nothing that they would inherently deify in that manner. There has never been any elven deities either, which is an important part. It is not that they evolved past worhipping deities but that it was never a part of their being at all and so is inherently at odds with what they are as a race.

[jdpb1]

Has there ever been a discussion or effective answer as to why there are no elven gods now?

There were enough humans, dwarves, gnolls, and goblins at Deismmar to ensure the creation of new gods from each species. Surely there must have been enough elves close enough to the epicenter to also absorb enough divine power to rise to godhood.

Have I missed an explanation somewhere in the source material, or was this issue merely glossed over?

Thanks
Joe

[irdeggman]

Has there ever been a discussion or effective answer as to why there are no elven gods now?

There were enough humans, dwarves, gnolls, and goblins at Deismmar to ensure the creation of new gods from each species. Surely there must have been enough elves close enough to the epicenter to also absorb enough divine power to rise to godhood.

Have I missed an explanation somewhere in the source material, or was this issue merely glossed over?

Thanks
Joe

The new gods (only human by the way) were created to replace the "old" gods and the ones who became gods were those who most exemplified the old gods - who gave up their essence in the battle.

No new demi-human gods were created at all.

The humanoid gods were always there and are not new.

[ConjurerDragon]

jdpb1 schrieb:
> This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.
> You can view the entire thread at:
> http://www.birthright.net/forums/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=4096
> jdpb1 wrote:
> Has there ever been a discussion or effective answer as to why there are no elven gods now?
>
> There were enough humans, dwarves, gnolls, and goblins at Deismmar to ensure the creation of new gods from each species. Surely there must have been enough elves close enough to the epicenter to also absorb enough divine power to rise to godhood.
>
> Have I missed an explanation somewhere in the source material, or was this issue merely glossed over?
>
Those that ascended to become the new gods were the Champions of the old
gods and during the battle not only physically but also from their
alignment closest to them.

The sidhelien started fighting for Azrai but then turned against him so
none of the sidhelien was the champion of any god.
The only exception would be Rhuobhe - but only Raisin, Bellynick and
Kristall are mentioned as champions of Azrai.

[ryancaveney]

We do know that they don't worship the new gods, but we also know that they do not seem to have ever worshipped even the patrons of these gods when they were still mortals. So we can be certain that it's not a matter of the once-mortal nature of them that distanced the Sidhelien from worship.

I don't think the second sentence necessarily follows from the first. In my personal opinion, the fact that the Sidhelien adamantly ignore both the pre- and post-Deismaar gods identically is a strong reason to suppose that both sets of gods were equally once-mortal and non-deserving of worship. The elves were there, so they should know. This is one of the ways in which immortality drastically changes society -- they don't need history books to tell them what happened thousands of years ago, because there are Sidhelien still living who have eyewitness memories of the time. What the other races consider "the distant mists of time" and have reduced to myth and legend, many of the elves consider "back when I worked at my previous job."

I don't they view the gods as lesser to any extent, though: in fact, I think they simply don't see the point in worshipping them. Much like how they cannot abide to the rigidity that lawful alignments lend themselves to, so can they not have any sort of faith in a divine aspect of quite about anything.

This is the Discworld wizard approach. Pratchett says something along the lines of, "wizards don't feel it necessary to believe in gods the way most people don't feel it necessary to believe in tables. That is, they can be useful for putting things on and you can hurt yourself if you bump into them, but no one goes around saying, ``oh, Great Table, without which we are as naught.''" I am amused by the idea, but in Cerilia I much prefer the idea that the elves are right and everyone else is wrong -- IMO, the Sidhelien don't worship gods because there aren't any gods to worship, and what's more they never worshipped any gods because there never were any gods to worship. IMC, they were there before the so-called "gods" arrived, so they know that Anduiras, Azrai, et al. were all just latecomer interlopers (albeit long-lived and very powerful ones, but not gods) who duped the credulous non-elves into worshipping them.

After all, if the ever-mutable land is like a mother to you, nurturing and providing and exciting and thrilling, what reason do you have to turn to some other external force that you have so little to relate to? For one thing, we don't know how the Sie were created, but the evidence shows that, unlike the dwarves, the gods might have had just an indirect role in their creation, or even none at all, both being yet another creation of the land.

If for some reason I were to be forced (at gunpoint?) to accept that there are gods in Cerilia who are worth worshipping (for non-elves, at least), I would fall back on this position. In fact, it's not all that far from my preferred one, in that this method also allows Sidhelien society to be *older* than the gods who created humans.


Ryan

[jdpb1]

No new demi-human gods were created at all.

The humanoid gods were always there and are not new.

Ahhhh . . . makes sense. . .

Thanks

Joe

[RaspK_FOG]

Ryan, the Blood Spawn book builds on what we already know and pretty much suggests that both were a creation of the land; in fact, it seems almost certain that the elves were somewhat late compared to the gods and dragons (i.e. according to their "power levels" and the text, it's almost certain that they appeared in the following order: the deities, short after the dragons, and the giants and elves at roughly the same time), and the goblins, dwarves and whatnot were probably created by some of the deities at roughly the same time as the giants and elves.

This notion is further backed by the fact that none of the elder gods were simply ignored by the Sie or the Sidhelien; rather, they did not draw them any (which is what I failed to convey earlier: the Sie simply never felt any "pull" from the elder gods).


Another matter that is important: I thought of writing an article on how dragons and elves would cast spells in Aebrynnis; who would be interested?

[AndrewTall]

One question that comes to my mind is the origin of the gods as much as the elves. If both are formed from the original dual-land of Aebrynis and the Shadow World and both are innately part of the magic of the world then why would the elves worship the gods? Unlike lumbering mortal humans, etc the gods are not luminous beings beyond the ken of elves, they are simply other spirits taken form - an elf would no more worship a god then we would worship an elephant, whale, etc. (Of course some primitive cultures have worshiped such beasts but that's a separate belief issue)

This was truer for the Sie than it is for modern elves, but the perception could still be for elves that the gods are simply great spirits with powerful abilities and an ability to shift between Aebrynis and the shadow World with ease. An elf could easily respect the gods power - and possibly form an alliance with a god - but the blind faith that the god is somehow 'beyond' the elf or suchlike necessary for religion would be utterly counter-intuitive to the elf since the god is so innately similar. The human sees a miracle, the elf sees a skilled manipulation of the seeming coupled with great strength - and quite possibly has the power to perform the same on a smaller scale.

Could an elven god arise? Perhaps if Rhoubhe gained sufficient strength? They might gain strength and power similar to the existing gods, but I think they would have a very different relationship to other elves than the human gods do to their followers - would an elf worship them - or merely respect them as they would a king or great wizard?

[geeman]

At 10:57 AM 12/19/2007, irdeggman wrote:

>The new gods (only human by the way) were created to replace the
>"old" gods and the ones who became gods were those who most
>exemplified the old gods - who gave up their essence in the battle.
>
>No new demi-human gods were created at all.
>
>The humanoid gods were always there and are not new.

There have been at least two new gods created since Deismaar (and
maybe more if we consider the possible demi-god status of a few
awnsheghlien) which leads me to suspect that the creation of gods,
even in a supposedly magic-rare setting BR in which the gods
supposedly have a "hands-off" approach to events, isn`t all that
difficult. The lack of elven gods is, therefore, all the more
stark. There are certainly amazingly powerful elvens, but no elf has
ever, in his already immortal life, risen to the power that other
Cerilian races have....

Gary

[RaspK_FOG]

The "newly created gods" are, actually, the offspring of two human deities [who happened to be mortal, got ascended, and then got children together (Haelyn + Nesirie = Cuiraécen; Avani + Erik = Laerme; Ruornil + Sera = Eloéle)].

As for the Sie, I beg to differ: you have a way more powerful being than them (only the Seelie Queen is comparably powerful to deific powers) that also predated them and which were very, very different by all means; while similar, the gods were more powerful than all other creatures, and certainly not "bound spirits." It is imperative to realise that these "spirits" (i.e. the gods) where more like separated in form from the land rather than bound or created.

[Cargaroth]

I find it an interesting debate as to whether elves CANNOT worship a divine being, and gain the benefits thereby, or CHOOSE not to worship anyone (which brings it back to the spirits vs. souls debate). The Absolute prohibition of elven clerics and druidsi in the BR Rulebook tends to suggest the former in my mind. It makes a great deal of sense that immortal elves would choose not to worship human gods, particularly those who were once mortal, possibly even with a particular elf's lifetime. But to presume that no elf at any time within the history of thier race has ever encountered a God-like being worthy or worship seems a bit rich to me. Particularly when divine magic would have been very helpful in holding off the human invasion of the last two thousand years. Certainly the alignment restrictions of elves is an insufficient argument as there are many humans and other races with equally chaotic natures who worship and become priests quite readily (e.g. worshipers of Eloele and Sera).

Personally I tend to believe that the rule was put in place in order to create a degree of game balence as elves were the only non-blooded characters able to cast wizard spells. Also, their "faerie-like" quality adds to their mistique, unlike elves from Forgotten Realms or even Krynn who have become almost common place. As such I find the spirits vs. souls explaination neater and more easily defended, particularly if you don't want players making their characters the "exception" to the rule.

[geeman]

At 08:22 PM 12/19/2007, Cargaroth wrote:

>I find it an interesting debate as to whether elves CANNOT worship a
>divine being, and gain the benefits thereby, or CHOOSE not to
>worship anyone (which brings it back to the spirits vs. souls debate).

One bit of clarification I`d like to indulge in for a moment:
"Worship" isn`t really a descriptive enough term here in that I think
it is possible for an elf to believe in the gods, attend services,
ally him/erself with the beliefs associated with the gods, etc. but
still not be able to take that worship to the level that humans (and
others) are able to by becoming priests, and there is something about
elves themselves that prevent them from transferring the energy of
their adoration through the medium of temple holdings to create
RP. They are incapable of doing either of those things. An elf
could ally himself with believers, call himself a believer, but there
is something missing from that elf that prevents him from being able
to express that allegiance as worship in the way that other Cerilian races can.

>The Absolute prohibition of elven clerics and druidsi in the BR
>Rulebook tends to suggest the former in my mind. It makes a great
>deal of sense that immortal elves would choose not to worship human
>gods, particularly those who were once mortal, possibly even with a
>particular elf`s lifetime. But to presume that no elf at any time
>within the history of thier race has ever encountered a God-like
>being worthy or worship seems a bit rich to me.

The gods used to walk around on Aebrynis, and the elves associated
themselves with Azrai pretty closely for a while, so they definitely
have encountered them.

>Personally I tend to believe that the rule was put in place in order
>to create a degree of game balence as elves were the only
>non-blooded characters able to cast wizard spells. Also, their
>"faerie-like" quality adds to their mistique, unlike elves from
>Forgotten Realms or even Krynn who have become almost common place.
>As such I find the spirits vs. souls explaination neater and more
>easily defended, particularly if you don`t want players making their
>characters the "exception" to the rule.

There is a balance aspect of it, sure. It`s more colour than
balance, though, since they could have ignored it entirely along with
any other aspect of the racial restrictions had they wanted to go for
a more inclusive and "balanced" feel to the setting.

Gary

[irdeggman]

This is one time that I agree almost 100% with Gary {put it down on yur calendar folks to my knowledge that has pretty much never happened}

I think the same reason that elves have such a strong pull towards "individuality" and "personal freedom" is the same reason that they just can't quite get to where the other races can in "true devotion".

This is something that is "hard wired" into their very essence and was since the beginning.

[ryancaveney]

pretty much suggests that both were a creation of the land

So you're saying Anduiras was really just an ELF with lots of xp? This could be interesting... =)

[AndrewTall]

As for the Sie, I beg to differ: you have a way more powerful being than them (only the Seelie Queen is comparably powerful to deific powers) that also predated them and which were very, very different by all means; while similar, the gods were more powerful than all other creatures, and certainly not "bound spirits." It is imperative to realise that these "spirits" (i.e. the gods) where more like separated in form from the land rather than bound or created.

The Seelie Queen is the last Sie - while she may have been the strongest of the Sie as well, her strength suggests that the Sie as a people were comparable in type of power even if short in raw power (with some not being that short at all). Both gods and Sie spring from the same source (the dual world of Aebrynis and the Spirit World), both have strong innate magic, great power over the seeming, etc - I'm seeing more similarities than differences to be honest and this view explains the complete lack of interest the Sie and later elves have in worship - they know that these 'gods' are simply other spirits that draw strength from their followers and then lend some back in return rather than being some sort of 'mystical superior beings' who are worthy of absolute obedience and devotion.

This does of course also depend on how you see the gods - are they incarnate self aware beings of physical form, or immaterial spirits? Can they shift between the two perhaps needing to take physical form to focus their full power in a small area (i.e. at Deismaar) while able to act only by granting power to others while dispersed (i.e. a 'normal state in which they empower clerics)?

Personally I prefer to see the gods as having died at Deismaar and Anduiras et al simply being vaporised at ground zero; the modern priests simply tap into a faith-powered well which no longer has an incarnate awareness empowered by it. The elves therefore do not worship simply because none of the ancient gods favoured them and the 'new gods' are merely a human mis-interpretation of their own pooled power. This has the added advantage of removing the 'big brother' effect on the various priesthoods and thus encouraging ambition and deception in the ranks.

A more canon view - as expressed by others - is that elves simply cannot 'give themselves up' and utterly subjugate themselves to another - even to a god. They can admire gods, ally with them, etc but the bone-deep servitude required for worship is anathema to them due to an instinctive reliance on their sense of self, and love of personal freedom, etc. It is also possible that they follow non-personified faiths which fulfill their spiritual needs whilst rendering worship of a god unnecessary.

[RaspK_FOG]

Canonically speaking, no, the gods are not the same as any fey creature, even in Birthright; rather, a fey creature (i.e. the last and most powerful of them all, the Seelie Queen) can be of like power, but even she is not as close as one could be. For one thing, deities can grant spells, have beyond-epic powers, and more; I can understand that one's liking to religious matters can surely make him choose a diverting path, but I'd like to focus on the given material, not run a philosophical debate on the nature of deities and the religions that worship them, etc.

Birthright is close to the concept of the immortals of D&D (not D&D as a game, but D&D "1e" without the "Advanced" part; think Rules Encyclopedia), but, instead of the sponsorship of an elder power, you have blood power and the like.

Now imagine this for just a moment: as far as we know, the powers of the former gods were dispersed in the people, granting them their connection to the land; while the destruction of the non-evil human gods turned their champions into an equal number of new gods and Azrai got to give off 3 new divine powers (including the Cold Rider), there's a whole lot of people who got various bloodlines at that point; and we are talking in the dozens, if not hundreds, here! Considering how the champions-turned-gods are more powerful than both the Gorgon and the Seelie Queen, and the number of abominations and scions that roam the land, isn't it immediately apparent how much more powerful the former gods were?

[Rowan]

Whatever the explanation, it seems there is a consensus that elves cannot draw divine power from worship of the gods or use divine realm spells with temple holdings (though I have seen arguments that the temple holding "slot" could be occupied by other elven community-based creations that simply don't operate the same way or power divine realm spells).

I think it is more interesting to consider what Sidhelien Spirituality could consist of without the gods. This may go beyond the canon, but work within its constraints.

For instance, the elemental creation of the Sidhe need not be considered false; perhaps the Sie were formed from the elements plus the spirit and Seeming. The Sundering merely left the elves in Aebrynis more bound to the strict natural laws and more physical and elemental in nature than the Seelie left in the Faerie Realm.

There is a void in the canon as relates to elven death. Immortal beings would fear death tremendously if they believed it was a complete end to an existence that otherwise would continue forever, and yet, though the elves do seem to see death as more tragic and unnatural than humans do, they do not shy away from conflict.

This leads me to believe that there is an elven belief in an afterlife. Reincarnation is a possibility, but there is no hint of it anywhere in source material, and that's a belief that should have some pretty direct impacts on elven life and culture to make it distinct from that of humans.

The best I can do to reconcile the canon and not create too new a concept for the elves is that, upon death, the elven spirit finds its way back into the Faerie Realm where it seeks out its other half, the Seelie nature. The Seelie creature, presumably, can also die. It might take both immortal beings to die, then the separated halves to discover each other and reunite, to result in final passage to the afterlife (which could take many millenia, rather fitting for the elven time frame and discomfort with death).

The Sie could presumably die, too; whatever happened to them after death would seem naturally to happen to reunited Sidhe and Seelie spirits. Perhaps passage to another existence forever separated from Aebrynis and the Shadow World? After all, the cosmology does not have a clear creation or reason for the existence of Aebrynis and the Shadow World. It could bear the idea of some other level of existence or ultimate mode of creation fairly readily, as long as this didn't have an impact on living folk. It would also preclude resurrection of elves that have mended their torn spiritual natures and passed on.

Off that point but still regarding spirituality: It stands to reason that an immortal race has very strong oral tradition and very well-preserved concepts of any spiritual or creation ideas. It also seems evident that beings with such time on their hands could be very philosophical. I expect the elves have more well-developed philosophies, then, than any other race.

[irdeggman]

There is a void in the canon as relates to elven death. Immortal beings would fear death tremendously if they believed it was a complete end to an existence that otherwise would continue forever, and yet, though the elves do seem to see death as more tragic and unnatural than humans do, they do not shy away from conflict.

Now here is where I would disagree.

To me elves think that "death" is a very natural thing. But not in the same way has other races. Like everything else "death" just happens - only not from "natural causes". I think in Great Heart there was a discussion of elves just walking away from the "living world" when they felt it was "time".

So elves do not "fear" death, but do see it as "tragic" when not "willed" - since any loss of an elf diminishes the "community". But when one "chooses" death, it is honored because it was an individual choice.

This leads me to believe that there is an elven belief in an afterlife. Reincarnation is a possibility, but there is no hint of it anywhere in source material, and that's a belief that should have some pretty direct impacts on elven life and culture to make it distinct from that of humans.

Interesting, but I have a difficult time with elves "imagining" anything other than the "here and now" though. It is all tied to that hard-wired individuality thing.

The best I can do to reconcile the canon and not create too new a concept for the elves is that, upon death, the elven spirit finds its way back into the Faerie Realm where it seeks out its other half, the Seelie nature. The Seelie creature, presumably, can also die. It might take both immortal beings to die, then the separated halves to discover each other and reunite, to result in final passage to the afterlife (which could take many millenia, rather fitting for the elven time frame and discomfort with death).

Per Blood Spawn, when an elf is born a seelie faerie is too and there are allusions to something bad happening if the two halves meet. I would make a connection based on the text and their inherent parts of the same whole that if one died so did the other half.

[ryancaveney]

Immortal beings would fear death tremendously if they believed it was a complete end to an existence that otherwise would continue forever, and yet, though the elves do seem to see death as more tragic and unnatural than humans do, they do not shy away from conflict.

This is one of the reasons I think there must be some form of Sidhelien reincarnation, since otherwise their risk-aversion would be too great for them to play the role in Cerilia that I consider their due. It also influenced a hypothesis I've had that most "elves" in Cerilia, or at least nearly all of the ones encountered by humans, are in fact half-elves, who will eventually die (and are thus safer to risk), rather than immortal true elves. In any case, it certainly implies, as many posters here have concluded, that elven armies should consist almost entirely of summoned creatures, charmed captives and constructs -- the Sidhelien should never risk themselves in direct battle, unless they are so individually powerful (e.g., Rhoubhe) that battle is no longer any danger.

This leads me to believe that there is an elven belief in an afterlife. Reincarnation is a possibility, but there is no hint of it anywhere in source material, and that's a belief that should have some pretty direct impacts on elven life and culture to make it distinct from that of humans.

I think it's reasonably implied by the source material. For one thing, as I and others have said before, inherent pass without trace, walking up 45-degree slopes covered in ice with no speed penalty, agelessness, never sleeping, etc., very strongly imply that the elves are in fact nature spirits more than physical beings. Yes, they have flesh and blood, but it seems to me that they are no more killed by destruction of their physical forms than their elemental siblings are killed when the duration of the summoning spell expires. I see Sidhelien bodies as mere outward manifestations of their spirits, to which they are tied more by habit than necessity. I think that when elves' bodies are destroyed, their spirits are released to roam the elemental and material planes, with their consciousness intact. They can return after some time as new elves, as other natural/faerie creatures (treants, for example) if they prefer for a while, or as the result of elemental summoning spells. For this reason, I give elves a bonus on elemental conjuration (they're not commanding unwilling extraplanar creatures, they're asking favors from relatives who are spending a few millennia on sabbatical from Cerilia) and advise their opponents not to summon elementals, lest they change sides to join their elven kin.


Ryan

[ConjurerDragon]

irdeggman schrieb:
> This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.
> You can view the entire thread at:
> http://www.birthright.net/forums/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=4096
> irdeggman wrote:
> ------------ QUOTE ----------
>
> There is a void in the canon as relates to elven death. Immortal beings would fear death tremendously if they believed it was a complete end to an existence that otherwise would continue forever, and yet, though the elves do seem to see death as more tragic and unnatural than humans do, they do not shy away from conflict.
> -----------------------------
>
>
>
> Now here is where I would disagree.
>
> To me elves think that "death" is a very natural thing. But not in the same way has other races. Like everything else "death" just happens - only not from "natural causes". I think in Great Heart there was a discussion of elves just walking away from the "living world" when they felt it was "time".
>
> So elves do not "fear" death, but do see it as "tragic" when not "willed" - since any loss of an elf diminishes the "community". But when one "chooses" death, it is honored because it was an individual choice.
In the novel Great Heart sidhelien afterlife is very different. After
the book I listened to the song "Staiway to heaven" again, with the
picture in my mind of the stairway that the dead sidhelien warriors had
to take and shied away from to become captives in the glen where the
shadowgate opened.

[ConjurerDragon]

ryancaveney schrieb:
> This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.
> You can view the entire thread at:
> http://www.birthright.net/forums/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=4096
> ryancaveney wrote:
> ------------ QUOTE ----------
> Immortal beings would fear death tremendously if they believed it was a complete end to an existence that otherwise would continue forever, and yet, though the elves do seem to see death as more tragic and unnatural than humans do, they do not shy away from conflict.
> -----------------------------
>
> This is one of the reasons I think there must be some form of Sidhelien reincarnation, since otherwise their risk-aversion would be too great for them to play the role in Cerilia that I consider their due. It also influenced a hypothesis I`ve had that most "elves" in Cerilia, or at least nearly all of the ones encountered by humans, are in fact half-elves, who will eventually die (and are thus safer to risk), rather than immortal true elves. In any case, it certainly implies, as many posters here have concluded, that elven armies should consist almost entirely of summoned creatures, charmed captives and constructs -- the Sidhelien should never risk themselves in direct battle, unless they are so individually powerful (e.g., Rhoubhe) that battle is no longer any danger.
>
Elven sissys and cowards? That opinion I do not share. The gheallie
Sidhe is as much mounted cavalry as any human knight and the sidhelien
army units do exist.

Being immortal and even having no afterlife seems so horrible because we
can?t understand both as both mortal beings that (most of us) do believe
in some sort of afterlife. Following your conclusion the Soviet forces
or those of any atheistec state should have been very reluctant to risk
their lifes in battle because without god they had no afterlife... ;-)

[RaspK_FOG]

I totally agree with ConjurerDragon here: the whole way you concluded that they either believed in some sort of afterlife (which thus had to be true, and not just a belief) or they would be "pansies" instead seems ultimately flawed to me...

Another example includes agnostics: does being an agnostic, who simply declares that you have no specific belief and just live your life, mean that you would never risk your life? That's simply absurd. Does adding to that the probability of being nigh immortal simply make you reluctant to act? For all I know, if there's one thing coming with age, it is any of these four: defiance, self-esteem, stubborness, and wisdom. As far as I know, none of these traits point to "letting others do as they please for the sake of my skin."

Furthermore, no, there's no indication that the "elements" played any particular role in the creation of the Sie; in fact, this points out to one very, very peculiar thing about the Sidhelien, but one very well known to those who study legends and myths: since they lack any sort of knowledge of their past before the "split," it seems that the elder elves either lied to all of them, to themselves, or are no longer alive. No matter how ironic it seems, the longer-lived race of the whole world (apart from the Seelie fairies, the giants, and the dragons, all of whom are entirely anti-record-keeping, if you catch my drift) has next to no understanding of their creation.

On another note, I have to repeat myself: the following races - the original deities (question: including the humanoid ones?), dragons, giants, Sie - were created from the once in ages past one world, neither Aebrynis, nor Shadow World, neither the Seeming alone. Back then, all was as one. We don't even know whether we could even make any relevant talk about spirits at that point. As a very similar discussion on the nature of souls, are these spirits a creation or a manifestation? To impose the latter as a default, even, or that the elves have no soul simply because they do not worship some deity is, again, a peculiar and ultimately unfounded suggestion.

Does this mean that a human of our world, where the existence of natural spirits of both kinds (created and manifested) are believed in by thousands of people, who does not believe in a god must have a spirit instead of a soul? Please, do not make any sort of suggestion of a philosophical bent that not only is axiomatic, but also unfounded in its essence: the concept of this discussion is not to present every possibility, especially those to our liking; rather, we are trying to divine what we can from what we have.

I believe that it would be brilliant if we had a statement from Richard Baker, but I don't think he meant to do one of those before, and I don't know if he will now. If anyone knows how to contact him, feel free to do so.

[kgauck]

It it utterly unpersuasive to argue about what elves are or are not like on the basis of 20th century humans. Let's not use modern mortals as analogs for immortals.

[kgauck]

I see Sidhelien bodies as mere outward manifestations of their spirits, to which they are tied more by habit than necessity.

I have been doing work on then Spirit World influenced strongly by the current 3e books on the subject, Libris Mortis, &c. As such it seems that interacting across the spirit-material divide is both effort-full and requires skill. Second, its sensible to suppose that the Sidhelien are spirits cut off from the Spirit World by the presence of the Seelie. Now, this allows them to be spirits in this world, which gives them all of the limitations of spirits without the advantages, or much easier, they are spirits who obtain bodies. Possession is an obvious form of this, but its quite possible instead that the elves craft their bodies as material forms in which to manifest to function as material beings, thus suffering none of the disadvantages of being spirits while at the same time not being ties to bodies the way humans are.

For a human, death leaves you vulnerable as a spirit trapped in the material world, helpless, because the human spirit is only accustomed to functioning as a material being. As such, the forces which we would associate with religions, aid and guide human spirits to a refuge, be it a heaven or whatever, where such spirits are safe.

But sidhe spirits would have options. Craft a new body, even of another creature, but I would avoid other kinds of fey, since they are already nature spirits. Halflingd would be out as well, since they too share a common place of origin.

If this were general, then the risk of the sidhe body would be the loss of its utility, rather than its death. An elf who lost their body would have to fashion a new one, and this might be a long process that would effectively remove a PC from a campaign (same game effect as death) without actually removing the character from existence.

[geeman]

At 02:30 PM 12/22/2007, kgauck wrote:

>For a human, death leaves you vulnerable as a spirit trapped in the
>material world, helpless, because the human spirit is only
>accustomed to functioning as a material being. As such, the forces
>which we would associate with religions, aid and guide human spirits
>to a refuge, be it a heaven or whatever, where such spirits are safe.

Shall I reiterate that stuff I wrote up a couple years back about
souls traversing (possibly becoming trapped) in the SW while elven
spirits remain and are recycled into the energies of Aebrynis
itself? Seems apt to the current discussion....

Gary

[kgauck]

That sounds very appropriate, Gary.

[geeman]

OK, let's see if this works....

Here's a PDF file for a document called "Death:The Final Adventure." I went ahead and formatted it as a standard, BR supplement just for fun. Anyone who saw the supplement on BR campaign specific diseases that I compiled a while back will recognize the cover and page background graphics. Sorry about repeating them, but the skull was appropriate enough (probably more appropriate, really) to keep for this document.

There is a bunch of mythological info in this supplement. It's meant to be a sort of guideline on how to do a "final adventure" for BR characters, and includes a lot of things that could be used for adventure hooks, campaign background, etc. It seems apt for this discussion as it addresses in one section a few specifics regarding the nature of Sidhelian spirits vs the souls of mortals, and the nature of the afterlife for either.

Comments welcome.

Enjoy!
Gary

[kgauck]

When the mortal form that houses a soul perishes, its energy cannot remain in the world of light. It must pass beyond to a final destination beyond light and shadow.

I would agree the soul should pass out of the world of light, through the world of shadow, into a final destination. However, there are many stories of souls that don't or refuse to pass on. Some examples are the tormented soul, who refuses to accept its own death. I think the Spectral Scion is a species of this, the soul with unfinished business who rejects their guide to their final place to do business here. Avenge their bloodline or any other business really, that might induce a soul to stay. Another example would be the soul who misses their opportunity to get guided. I think there are two "signal flares" that are sent to the guides, one a proper burial or other preparation for death, the other, a religious ceremony for death. Either one would be sufficient to attract a guide to the dead soul, most people apply both, for insurance.

This is an exception to the rule, rather than a revision, designed to explain hauntings, and spectral scions, rather than to argue for an alternative.

Elves, would go to no alternate plane or world, but would move to the sanctums of the elves, in the deepest forests to do whatever they do.

The number and types of challenges faced by the aspirant soul varies according to that soul’s allegiances and purpose in life as well as its ultimate destination.
This is interesting, and would make for a fun adventure, though I have heretofore imagined that a spirit is guided by protector spririt, more like the introductory quote. However the dependence on the number and types of challenges might be the key to reconciling the two apparent notions, since farmers and other common folk might get get through with challenges so minor as not to cause a stir, but adventurers who had combated fundamental forces might have the greatest challenges. I can imagine that within a faith there would be tests, but these would seem to be different.

Much of what follows in D:tFA could be an alternate approach to haunting and malevolent spirits. Am I reading this right?

I have so far imagined that the spirits of the dead in this world are either drawn to complete some business (from the benign - avenge me; to the dark - I am not done summoning Azrai) or were not picked up by guides and just wander around looking for a purpose.

What I find here, suggests that the journey through the Shadow World can corrupt and torment the spirit traveler, and I suppose if the spirit were already a dark and malevolent spirit might not simply be lost, but Greater Lost, using dark skills and efforts to build a base either in the SW or in the daylight world, according to the plans and tastes of the spirit.

So this raises the final question about spirit guides. I have imagined them much more useful to the departed spirit than is provided for in D:tFA.

Now two possible reconcilliations suggest themselves, both related to the two separate purposes in the imaginings. I have been more concerned with what the societal beliefs are, what the living expect, what the temples teach. While Gary may have had some of this at work, D:tFA is an adventure. So,
1) I have described something more like what people expect, and Gary has described something more like what really happens,
2) I have described something that is most accurate for common people, and Gary has described the situation for adventurers.
3) some of both.

Part of my concern for harmonizing these two is based on eliciting more information, part because I would like to put stuff from D:tFA on the wiki.

[geeman]

At 12:41 PM 12/23/2007, kgauck wrote:

>>The number and types of challenges faced by the aspirant soul varies according to that soul`s allegiances and purpose in life as well as its ultimate destination.
>
>This is interesting, and would make for a fun adventure, though I have heretofore imagined that a spirit is guided by protector spririt, more like the introductory quote. However the dependence on the number and types of challenges might be the key to reconciling the two apparent notions, since farmers and other common folk might get get through with challenges so minor as not to cause a stir, but adventurers who had combated fundamental forces might have the greatest challenges. I can imagine that within a faith there would be tests, but these would seem to be different.
>
>Much of what follows in D:tFA could be an alternate approach to haunting and malevolent spirits. Am I reading this right?

Yep, that`s the general notion. Lesser Lost Souls can be used to explain the sheer creepiness and haunted nature of the Shadow World. When I was imagining the SW way back when it occurred to me that it might be portrayed as a silent, still and solemn place. That`s OK, but can get dull pretty quick. If PCs are surrounded by menacing souls, and of which might spring into material form and lash out at them then things get more interesting. Since Lost Souls can take on many physical forms (any living race of any Cerilian period) their appearances can be equally wide, and their mere presence can be used to explain a tortured ambiance of the SW; a tortured "sound track" of groans, moans and sickly breezes; the cold hands that pass over a character`s spine; the glowing forms of the dead that take form and then fade away, etc. Anything to make the SW more creepy.

I like campaign material to have as broad an impact as possible, and then let it be used by DMs in a more specific way at "the adventure
level" of play, so I wanted it to do things like open up a possible explanation for the origin of the Raven. The Raven might be the product of a member of the Lost who died, failed/refused to pass through the SW to his final destination, spent centuries performing horrific rites and gathering power and then finally doing the deed that returned him to the land of the living in a stolen body and with unusual (even for an awnshegh) powers. At least, in my homebrew that`s how I imagined the Raven`s true background, though it never actually came into play....

The dwarven take on Spirit Guides as saintly "Truok" is there as part of a cultural attitude within that BR race. Since BR`s dwarves are
nearly monotheistic (at least, they only directly worship Moradin and the rest of the dwarven pantheon is subsidiary) I thought it amusing to have them employ a system of hagiography that most folks familiar with such things might recognize, but with a dwarven twist. In that
context, Moradin is the Prime deity and the rest of the gods are "super saints." As we get more specific, the apotheosis of Grimm Graybeard in the Baruk Azhik PS would be viewed by dwarven people as his beatification. Of course, game mechanically he`s not a Spirit
Guide per the Death: The Final Adventure text, but his transformation would be viewed within dwarven culture as a "living saint of stone"
who can actually be called upon and will often respond. That`d help justify for the setting one of the weirder PS texts that a lot of folks have complained about (myself included.)

For other Cerilian races I included materials that hint at the role for Spirit Guides that vary based on particular cultural attitudes and ideals. The elves, for instance, as l imagine them, would view Spirit Guides in almost entirely the same way they view the gods themselves--as powerful beings to be respected for their power, but they are disconnected from elven spirituality and, thus, not part of their theology. That doesn`t mean they aren`t part of their reality, though, hence the elven word for them and the story about an elven/Spirit Guide liaison, and it is suggested that tales of such liaisons exist in several Cerilian cultures. (Choreography by Tchaikovsky, soundtrack by Wagner....)

To other Cerilian races Spirit Guides are interpreted according to their culture. Among the BR races that are inspired by some real world Germanic cultures the Spirit Guides are Valkyrie, among those who were real world Christians and Moslems they are angels, and for goblins and orogs they are devils or demons.

>I have so far imagined that the spirits of the dead in this world >are either drawn to complete some business (from the benign - avenge
me; to the dark - I am not done summoning Azrai) or were not picked >up by guides and just wander around looking for a purpose.
>
>What I find here, suggests that the journey through the Shadow World >can corrupt and torment the spirit traveler, and I suppose if the
spirit were already a dark and malevolent spirit might not simply be lost, but Greater Lost, using dark skills and efforts to build a base either in the SW or in the daylight world, according to the plans and tastes of the spirit.

Exactly. It can be used by the DM as a rationale for giving a PC (or a favored villain) another bite at the apple....

>So this raises the final question about spirit guides. I have imagined them much more useful to the departed spirit than is provided for in D:tFA.

I like to leave this up to the DM. I can see situations in which the Spirit Guide might be very involved in a soul`s journey and situations in which it would be less involved.

>Now two possible reconcilliations suggest themselves, both related to the two separate purposes in the imaginings. I have been more concerned with what the societal beliefs are, what the living expect, what the temples teach. While Gary may have had some of this at work, D:tFA is an adventure. So,
>
>1) I have described something more like what people expect, and Gary has described something more like what really happens,
>
>2) I have described something that is most accurate for common people, and Gary has described the situation for adventurers.
>
>3) some of both.

I did lay out a lot of specific material, but I tried to make it as general as I could so that DMs could take it where they like. I see several types of adventures being possible in this material, though it nominally outlines a very specific type of adventure.

>Part of my concern for harmonizing these two is based on eliciting more information, part because I would like to put stuff from D:tFA
on the wiki.

Sounds good. Feel free to use it however you like.

Gary

[Rowan]

Gary, looking forward to reading your pdf when I get the chance; on holiday, I dn't have much time to do so. Thanks for posting, though; it sounds interesting.

Some people here have some very interesting ideas about elves as nature spirits. I generally like them and like the idea of making elves extremely different from humans. However, while I don't have Great Heart or Blood Spawn, it seems to me fairly clear that, though the elves of Birthright were inspired probably most heavily by Celtic faerie and then by Tolkien, with new twists, they still have a lot of practical similarities with humans.

I haven't seen core products talking about any elven recognition of being spirits that are only temporarily and impermanently bound to bodies. They don't seem to recognize this in their personal or communal lives. So I don't think the core products perceived them as that alien, but more similar to humans, instead (certainly more unique than any other D&D elves, but still).

If they don't fear death too greatly, and talk about choosing the afterlife (per quotes here regarding Great Heart), then they obviously believe in some form of afterlife, as I suggested. This make sense, because although atheistic humans still may risk their lives freely, they know that they would eventually die, anyway, and that the meaning they find in their lives is their own (not some God-driven meaning). If elves believed they simply ceased to exist upon death, then the fact, absent violence, there would never normally be an end to their existence (unlike humans) would change their perspective on the preciousness of life.

We know elves maintain societies not too alien from that of humans, and that they aren't really afraid of combat, and, this may stem from their apparent (from Great Heart) belief in an afterlife of some kind. Good, makes sense, that's the point I was trying to make.

As for elven philosophy, again, if elven life is completely different from humans, and they don't preoccupy themselves with accumulating wealth and other things that humans do, what do they do with all their time? Remember, they're at least as if nor more intelligent than humans, on average. Surely they've found meaning in life. Finding meaning is philosophical thought. Intelligent immortals with little need to fight for day-to-day survival have tons of liesure time to think and feel. Thus it stands to reason that they have quite extensive pilosophies, though they may not be as written or dogmatic as those of humans, and they may take a centuries to develop.

[RaspK_FOG]

Thank you; for one moment there I thought the idea of running this debate on anything other than hypotheses (and I don't mean that as an insult - I just find it is off target to hypothesize on the material someone else created) was completely lost to everyone who still wanted to participate (again, no offence meant).

However, I have to present a different perspective on the matter of the afterlife. First of all, "afterlife" translates as the belief of a lively existence after our typical life. The main problem in this regard is that, by all means, Sidhelien do not have "a typical life." By all means, lacking a life span means they have next to no reason to have a concept of an afterlife (and it doesn't mean they even have an afterlife at all, since an afterlife is both a concept and a theoretically possible fact).

The problem in this argument is as follows:
IF Afraid_of_Death = FALSE THEN
Afterlife := TRUE
ELSE
Afterlife := FALSE;

It may not be evident at first, but think of this: the above clearly suggests that the concept of an afterlife arose from a fear of death; apart from a lack of scientific or any other sort of backing, this argument fails to capture the fact that people believed in their religions for uncountable aeons, in spirits and divine beings that did not even grant them an afterlife, most of the time. On the contrary, people seem to have shown a greater reverence for what is powerful and that, undoubtedly, included the main forces in a person's life: birth, death, and rebirth - in any form. The reverence of the dead is a prehistoric fact, even if the dead were not attributed with powers of the afterlife or anything like that for that matter.

A creature who is capable of dying, but not "naturally" so, not without a cause like age, is a very different creature in some aspects. Such a creature does not portray death as such a powerful aspect in its life. It sure affects them a lot more forcefully, since they do not die at some point anyway; that does not mean they would be afraid of death. While humane, they are not like humans; in more than one aspect, they are alien. But that alienation is more like that of a squirrel from a mouse, not a spirit from a human.

I also want to make another comment: some of the text given in the aforementioned PDF seems to be contrary to the source material we have. For one thing, Azrai seemed to be perfectly capable of adapting to situations that crossed his path, so all that talk about an instability seem very much presumptious. The other part that did not sit well with me was the idea of the gods blowing Azrai up instead of themselves, as far as we know: we know they sacrificed themselves, and I doubt they had to do so just to make Azrai blow up on his own; the concept of them choosing to destroy themselves so that Azrai could be destroyed seems a lot more plausible.

[ryancaveney]

Elven sissys and cowards? That opinion I do not share.

In my view, it has nothing to do with cowardice. It's that they will *never* die unless they manage to get themselves killed -- unlike humans, who can only influence how they die, not whether they die -- so the risk/reward calculation is very different. They are also very smart, so they will realize this. I would much rather hear them called sissies than stupid, though I do not think they are either. IMO, it takes much more courage for a Sidhe to undertake an equal risk of death, because the scale of the possible loss is so much greater.

The gheallie Sidhe is as much mounted cavalry as any human knight and the sidhelien army units do exist.

I've been saying for a decade that the gheallie Sidhe is my single favorite feature of Cerilia. Huzzah for elves who hunt humans! However, when I try to interpret the values of the warcards in terms of the statistics of individual unit members, together with idea of elves who are inherently magical and immortal (and thus, I think, extremely skilled at whatever they do), there is a huge mismatch. I think the numbers are much more consistent with units of nonelves led by just two or three Sidhelien. 200 true elves on a battlefield would have enough magical firepower to annihilate any human army in the first round of combat.

(most of us) do believe in some sort of afterlife. Following your conclusion the Soviet forces or those of any atheistec state should have been very reluctant to risk their lifes in battle because without god they had no afterlife... ;-)

I myself am an atheist in real life, as well as an enthusiastic fan of birthright elves. It is one of the reasons I am so strongly attached to the idea that in Cerilia, the elves don't worship gods because they are *correct* that in fact there are no gods to worship. However, it would be foolish to deny that in a sociological sense, peoples' actions are strongly influenced by the kind of afterlife in which they believe. Whether the average Soviet soldier actually held the religious beliefs that his political officer thought he should is an interesting, but ultimately irrelevant, question. The way to link it back to birthright and, more importantly, a way to understand the Sidhelien, is to ask this: what are you willing to die for? If elves and humans answer that question identically, then the game world is much less interesting than it should be.

Real-world heroic fiction (and, indeed, philosophy) often considers the idea of "dying well". A human's only alternative to dying well is dying poorly -- death can never be avoided. A Sidhelien's alternative is never dying at all -- death is easy to avoid if they try. It seems ludicrous to suggest that this significant a difference in condition will not induce a similarly significant difference in behavior.

[RaspK_FOG]

To me, it has become obvious by all means that people forget that an elf, unlike what we want to think, does not think like a human. An elf feels much greater affront at an imaginary slight; such pride and wrath is a mortal failing in humans, but a simple aspect of the folkloric Good Folk.

Did the elves of Tolkien throw themselves with wild abandon just because they knew the Halls of Mandos waited for them? No; in fact, they charged headlong in any circumstance despite the Halls of Mandos, as if "death" was of no consequence or substance anyway - not because the Halls held sweet lethe for them, but with a blazing passion for whatever they did.

Did the Sidhe of Celtic legend ever think for a moment the possibility of death, even though it's entirely possible for them to die from violence? Did the Elf Knight pause to consider that Lady Isabel might be his undoing, or any of the other six ladies he killed before she fell him?

Spirits, beautiful, majestic... Intelligence and wisdom are two very different things, and people forget that, no matter how willy the fey have always been, only some of them were ever wiser than mortal men. That even some fools made a mistake in the presence of faery creatures is of little bearing, since such stories only show the folly of those who think can fool others. Most Sidhelien are as wild as Sidhe and Alfar and more of European legend, not contemplating sages. There's no greater disservice to their image than putting them on a pedestal.

Look at Players' Secrets of Tuarhievel: do they not show reluctance to work for their realm instead of themselves at that point?



Also note that the elves of all legends are masters of their arts, but they rarely develop their skills as fast as humans (not because of being slow to learn, but because of being fickle, since they are immortal). I.e. a human would master his swordsmanship at 30, and then start deteriorating, whereas an elf would take some 350 years to reach his skill, but would retain it indefinitely. Believe it or not, this makes quite enough sense, but it is almost impossible to explain in game terms without putting a Sidhelien character at a disadvantage or a weird balance of bonuses and penalties.

For example, a solution in 2e could be to award Sidhelien characters only 75% the XP they would normally receive, or 50% if they multiclass. I have no idea how you could do so in a 3e campaign. But that's highly debatable.

[geeman]

At 02:09 PM 12/24/2007, you wrote:

>I also want to make another comment: some of the text given in the
>aforementioned PDF seems to be contrary to the source material we
>have. For one thing, Azrai seemed to be perfectly capable of
>adapting to situations that crossed his path, so all that talk about
>an instability seem very much presumptious.

Azrai wasn`t so adaptable that he didn`t blow up just like the rest
of the gods at that battle, and maybe it`s just me but exploding when
one doesn`t want to explode strikes me as being a pretty good
definition of "instability" for our purposes.... The text here is
speculative in the first place because the idea that he controlled
forces in the SW in a way similar to post-Deismaar source holdings is
an extrapolation too. I don`t think that contradicts the existing
material. I wasn`t trying to intimate that such a system would be
unstable inherently, just that it is a possible explanation not only
for his power but for the "exploding gods" phenomenon.

> The other part that did not sit well with me was the idea of the
> gods blowing Azrai up instead of themselves, as far as we know: we
> know they sacrificed themselves, and I doubt they had to do so just
> to make Azrai blow up on his own; the concept of them choosing to
> destroy themselves so that Azrai could be destroyed seems a lot more plausible.

If I`m right about the text you`re referring to it says that there is
"a concurring theory [that] the Shadow Lord was unable to completely
control the forces that he tampered with and that it was this lack of
mastery the gods who opposed him at Deismaar exploited to create the
explosion in which they sacrificed themselves and destroyed Azrai in
the process."

The gods still explode in that text. At least, I didn`t intend to
change the nature of the explosion there. Rather, explain one
possible way it happened. Was it another section you are referring to?

Gary

[RaspK_FOG]

The original deities of Cerilia were far more powerful than Haelyn and the rest; I don't see why they could not simply will themselves to detonate... In fact, what seems more plausible from what I read is that they did that in exactly such a manner (e.g. all six grabbing hold of him at once) that he couldn't escape exactly because he wouldn't anticipate something like that.

The thing is, why come up with a completely new theory (since there is no definitive backing to what you suggest) rather than leave things vague and be done with it? What begs such definitive detail that even possible nontruths (campaign-wise) are better than a story of few details?

[ryancaveney]

Did the elves of Tolkien throw themselves with wild abandon just because they knew the Halls of Mandos waited for them? No; in fact, they charged headlong in any circumstance despite the Halls of Mandos, as if "death" was of no consequence or substance anyway - not because the Halls held sweet lethe for them, but with a blazing passion for whatever they did.

Ah, but to the Eldar, the Halls of Mandos are merely a waiting room with a revolving door! JRRT's letters explicitly state that the Glorfindel who died fighting a Balrog in Gondolin was the *same* Glorfindel who met Frodo crossing the Bruinen, more than 6,000 years later. Consider page 378 of _The Peoples of Middle-Earth_ (The History of Middle-Earth, Volume XII): "The Elves were destined to be by nature 'immortal', within the unknown limits of the life of the Earth as a habitable realm, and their disembodiment was a grievous thing. It was the duty, therefore, of the Valar to restore them, if they were slain, to incarnate life... When they were re-embodied they could remain in Valinor, or return to Middle-Earth if their home had been there."

That is, it is the nature of elves to be resurrected just as it is for them to be passionate. They are threads of the same grand tapestry. In any case, I don't see why you get so upset that I think Sidhelien return to life naturally. If you don't like it, fine, but I don't have to agree with you any more than you have to agree with me. I think Birthright was designed with enough canon to give it structure and style, but leaving lots of room for individual DM's to fill in lots of things in their own way. In order to have a fully detailed BR campaign, DMs simply must make up some stuff for themselves, so the range of things spanned by campaigns of equal canon adherence is very large indeed. Heck, they violate their own canon right from the start, within the original boxed set: Rulebook p. 11 says only Anuireans and Khinasi may ever be paladins, but Ruins of Empire p. 74 profiles a Vos paladin.

When I first fell in love with the idea of Cerilia's Sidhelien, literally the only "canon" I had to go on was pages 6 and 7 of the BR Rulebook, the Rhuobhe card, and the three elven domains in RoE. That leaves an awful lot of details to fill in, so it is natural that different people did it differently. When PSoTuarhievel came out, I had to retrofit it into the large amount of cosmology I had already created from hints, allusions, and stealing from other sources. =) The idea of Savane Mhoried sitting on the Thorn Throne immediately struck me, as it did almost everyone else here, as utter nonsense, but I did like the historical timeline (at least up until the birth of Fhileraene). Its first entry is, "Unknown: Elves spring from the union of earth, water, fire and air." I no longer remember exactly when or how I decided they were in fact still elementals, but it was a long time ago, and I like the idea so much that I am unlikely to give it up now, but feel free to ignore it as you wish.

What I am adamant about is that a campaign in which Sidhelien are literally elemental nature spirits who reincarnate easily is just as true and valid and canon a version of BR as a campaign in which they aren't, don't or both. The original materials leave plenty of room open to have it go either way, or do something else entirely, just as long as they look like elves, hunt humans and don't have priests.

[ConjurerDragon]

ryancaveney schrieb:
> This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.
> You can view the entire thread at:
> http://www.birthright.net/forums/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=4096
> ryancaveney wrote:
> ...
> What I am adamant about is that a campaign in which Sidhelien are literally elemental nature spirits who reincarnate easily is just as true and valid and canon a version of BR as a campaign in which they aren`t, don`t or both. The original materials leave plenty of room open to have it go either way, or do something else entirely, just as long as they look like elves, hunt humans and don`t have priests.
>
If they "reincarnate easily" then the problem arises both in the novels
(in Greatheart the sidhelien mourn the loss of even small numbers of
sidhelien as a grieveous blow) and that sidhelien realms are declining
even after Deismaar. Reincarnating might be a possible option - but it
should not be easily nor without any loss.

[RaspK_FOG]

You may be forgetting that Tolkien changed a lot of his material - in other passages the above is subjected to change, and the official line is that the spirit may be restored, but not as the same individual; more of a reincarnation than a restoration, that is. Also note that the only two such instances are Glorfindel and Olorin, the latter being a very, very special case and not an elf by any means. Finally, Tolkien gave the clue that the Eldar would be remade along with the world, whereas the fate of humans was unknown, again something that differed from texts of other times.

And I am not trying to say you are wrong; rather I do not find it productive to suggest that something which is biased (and again, these are your words) from personal preference to come in on a discussion relating to what the given material is and what we can deduce from it. I can accept a mistaken contradiction produced by an editing error such as the above, since it's a mistake; to dub this reason enough to allow similar contradiction and extrapolation on our part is a strawman fallacy.

[geeman]

At 01:43 AM 12/25/2007, RaspK_FOG wrote:

>I don`t see why they could not simply will themselves to detonate... In fact, what seems more plausible from what I read is that they did that in exactly such a manner (e.g. all six grabbing hold of him at once) that he couldn`t escape exactly because he wouldn`t anticipate something like that.

I don`t think gods can do a sort of explosive "final strike" at will. At least, I`ve never heard of such a thing in any other mythology before, and in the context of the BR background I don`t think it makes a lot of sense. If the gods could will themselves to detonate (kind of an odd, 20th century tactic, really...) Azrai would have had the same ability, woudn`t he? Presumably, he`d know that both he the other gods could blow themselves up at will, and that such an explosion could kill him, so it`d have been pretty foolish of him to enter into open and direct battle with them at Deismaar.

There could be any number of explanations for the actual explosion at Deismaar, and those presented are just one set. However, I find the
idea that the gods are self-destroying bombs that can destroy themselves at will and that they used this ability to jump on Azrai at Deismaar in a dogpile of detonating divinities less significant than the idea that they may have found a way to exploit a weakness in his power or that the will in the SW that is the equivalent of the Land`s Choice in the world of light rebelled against his manipulations to be more interesting.

>The thing is, why come up with a completely new theory (since there is no definitive backing to what you suggest) rather than leave things vague and be done with it? What begs such definitive detail that even possible nontruths (campaign-wise) are better than a story of few details?

The ideas expressed are described as speculative, scholarly debate, and in some ways they contend with one another, so while I find them
more plausible than the idea of "divine suicide bombers" expressed above, they aren`t meant to be definitive. They are in the same flavour as the elven speculation about their own elemental origins, the POV biases in the Atlas or several other speculative materials in the BR documents. In fact, such speculative material is a standard of the setting....

As for why having it in there at all, for the most part it`s there to address issues having to do with the nature of the SW. In fact, the whole opening section of that text is meant as an introduction to the balancing of energies and the role of death in the BR cosmology. The
death of mortals and journey of the soul is justified by the connection of the SW to the death of the gods. Death as a final adventure is pretty conceptual, so the introduction is there to give the idea some verisimilitude, and tie it into campaign specific background material. Some discussion of the role of death in the BR pantheon is necessary as an explanation for a few BR specific issues like the fact that there is no god of death, the role of the split between light and shadow, and how those things relate to the fundamental background events of the setting. So from a thematic sense, the idea is to express death in the setting`s most grandiose and fundamental terms and then tie that to the specifics of death as a final journey (adventure) to be conducted by the DM with as much rationale as possible.

Could the material exist without it? Sure. Would it be as believable? ...

Gary

[RaspK_FOG]

I can more readily accept that (and I am accustomed to material being "in universe" and speculative, but I am not too fond of it in adventures), but you seem to have misunderstood my words (or that I mispoke, at least): I did not mean that they had some sort of "ability" that allowed them to go off; rather, that it was within their power to unmake themselves and release all of that energy, thus killing Azrai. My point is that this is as much possible as any other similar solution, and Azrai would certainly not anticipate them practically dragging him along to extinction.

As a friend once said: "Very few people can ever expect others to kill themselves in order to kill another."

[ConjurerDragon]

Gary schrieb:
> At 01:43 AM 12/25/2007, RaspK_FOG wrote:
>
>> I don`t see why they could not simply will themselves to detonate... In fact, what seems more plausible from what I read is that they did that in exactly such a manner (e.g. all six grabbing hold of him at once) that he couldn`t escape exactly because he wouldn`t anticipate something like that.
>
> I don`t think gods can do a sort of explosive "final strike" at will. At least, I`ve never heard of such a thing in any other mythology before, and in the context of the BR background I don`t think it makes a lot of sense. If the gods could will themselves to detonate (kind of an odd, 20th century tactic, really...) Azrai would have had the same ability, woudn`t he? Presumably, he`d know that both he the other gods could blow themselves up at will, and that such an explosion could kill him, so it`d have been pretty foolish of him to enter into open and direct battle with them at Deismaar.

The final strike reminds me of some wizard staff which could explode as a last resort. I don´t remember the exact D&D book.

About Azrai: Not necessarily. Azrai was the god of evil and corruption. The god of selfishness. It could perhaps never have come across his mind that some other (immortal) being would sacrifice it´s own existence to destroy it´s enemy. And certainly not that all other human gods together became Kamikaze to nuke him. And to conclude that Azrai must have the same power as the others (perhaps only the others together and not alone) just because he also has been a god is not a given. Gods share some powers but some are different from god to god.

[geeman]

At 10:37 AM 12/25/2007, RaspK_FOG wrote:

>I did not mean that they had some sort of "ability" that allowed them to go off; rather, that it was within their power to unmake themselves and release all of that energy, thus killing Azrai.

I`m not getting the distinction between an ability and "within their power" but it strikes me as being a pretty thin distinction anyway, so
whether it`s one or the other doesn`t seem to me to make much of a difference.

So, if the question is still, "why bother including such material?" then my answer would be that I find the idea that it was within the power
of the gods to destroy themselves in a massive explosion, and it was within Azrai`s power too, yet he failed to anticipate or believe that they would do such a thing less satisfying than other possibilities like those expressed in the Death: The Final Adventure document. At least, I find that explanation less inspirational for adventures and creature write ups for the purposes of that document.

Michael Romes wrote:

>The final strike reminds me of some wizard staff which could explode as a last resort. I don´t remember the exact D&D book.

The last resort strike has been a feature of a few D&D staves going back to 1e.

>About Azrai: Not necessarily. Azrai was the god >of evil and corruption. The god of selfishness. It could perhaps never have come across his mind that some other (immortal) being would sacrifice it´s own existence to destroy it´s enemy. And certainly not that all other human gods together became Kamikaze to nuke him. And to conclude that Azrai must have the same power as the others (perhaps only the others together and not alone) just because he also has been a god is not a given. Gods share some powers but some are different from god to god.

It`s possible. Personally, I have more trouble with the idea that Azrai would not have anticipated such a thing than the gods somehow
exploiting a weakness of his or coming up with something entirely new. As an explanation for background material for a fantasy setting that works better than simple hubris.

Gary

[Rowan]

While there are certainly other possibilities, geeman, it is pretty standard mythological fare for an evil god or being to not anticipate selflessness to be his undoing. Even if Azrai could have destroyed himself, he certainly would never have done so, as it is against his selfish nature.

As to the elves, I have suggested the belief in some form of life after the physical death of their bodies. Rasp's? logical construction of my argument is, I think, errant, because belief in an afterlife does not necessarily follow fear of death. Instead, fear of death would be a possible and likely result of the belief or reality that life ends utterly at death. As ryan points out, the stakes are much higher for elves, so this equation would weigh more heavily upon them, passionate or not.

I love making the Sidhelien of Birthright very rich and different from humans, but I resist making them too alien, because they become unplayable from a game sense. Too-flighty, impassioned, rash, extremely-individualistic elves cannot be played at the realm level. There would simply be no realm cohesion, no such thing as acting in concert at the ruler's wishes. Remember, the Sidhelien of Aebrynis are less chaotic than the Seelie, and the Seelie seem to have some form of kingdom as well.

Much of Tolkein's thought was inspired by angels, so his re-incarnation is more in that sense. That might work for Sidhelien, over a long period of time (outside normal game time frames).

[AndrewTall]

Reincarnation would not necessarily make the elves any less afraid of dying than humans, if the elves reform their body from the natural world about them what happens if the forest is destroyed and the mebhaighl they need destroyed by planting crops and building roads? If they form a body from the seeming of the shadow world (another obvious medium for those who see elves as spirits) then the spirit could be overcome by the chaos of the realm before it could reform a body making all but the strongest willed cautious - and what happens now that Azrai has corrupted the Spirit World? A modern elf might have fear of contamination by the twisted energies of the Shadow Realm making them afraid to die outside of areas equating to the few remaining bright 'spirit world' areas or fear that their spirit could be captured by the Lost.

That said I would expect that aware of how truly empty life is without challenge and joy elves would rather charge into battle and live a day as a lion than endure untold centuries of slavery or privation.

I'd note that in my opinion fear of death requires only awareness of self, and awareness of the ability to die - I don't see an elf as valuing their life more or less than a human would value theirs simply because they expect to have more of it than a human does - from reading accounts by some people wounded/ill/elderly etc it is clear that every day can be deeply precious, indeed that life can be all the more cherished for its expected brevity. Also while elves know that old age and disease won't kill them, a brief look at various timelines indicates that practically elves only live a few centuries - unless their rulers are noted for their short lifespans compared to their peers.

[kgauck]

I think it was David Hume (though it could have been Samuel Johnson) who said that its not death than men fear, but the death blow.

[geeman]

At 09:21 AM 12/26/2007, Rowan wrote:

>While there are certainly other possibilities, geeman, it is pretty
>standard mythological fare for an evil god or being to not
>anticipate selflessness to be his undoing. Even if Azrai could have
>destroyed himself, he certainly would never have done so, as it is
>against his selfish nature.

It`s possible (again.) But my point (in answer to the original
question, which was why the alternate explanation existed in the
document at all) is that such an interpretation doesn`t particularly
inspire any adventure possibilities, nor does it segue/introduce a
document detailing the relationship between life and death for the
purposes of a BR supplement detailing the adventure possibilities of
such background material. Azrai was either enormously powerful and
just as enormously foolish or enormously powerful with a fatal flaw
that was exploited by the other gods. The latter is, IMO, more
interesting, refined and useful. Azrai is still arrogant and unable
to anticipate the selflessness of the other gods in such an
interpretation, but his arrogance and stupidity aren`t painted in
such broad strokes. That is, he`s still arrogant enough to ignore
the possibility that the gods will sacrifice themselves, but the
possibility of that happening is more remote.

It`s like the Death Star. Where I want a little womp rat sized flaw
that one has to get to after much difficulty, the alternative
explanation is more of a giant back door left hanging wide open....

Gary

[RaspK_FOG]

Your opinion is not flawed, but your perspective of it seems to me to be so: such a flaw is anything but minute when put against the power of Azrai, much unlike the "womp rat sized" exhaust port of the Death Star; furthermore, the probability of exploiting such a flaw in case the opposing side knows of it and any prepared resistance, all of them are widely different in your two examples: the theory you put down and the Star Wars scenario.

For one thing, I don't believe that Azrai has such a flaw; being foolish and being stupid are two very different things, and arrogance always lays another issue on top. If such a flaw existed, I don't think you would have left it open to exploitation. Finally, what I want to make clear (since you seem to have missed it) is that the above statement of mine (gods go *kaboom!* --> Azrai goes 8p) is more of a counterargument: anyone could hypothesize anything. The thing is, would it ever be so probable that the scholars of Aebrynis would make such a conclusion? I find it highly unlikely, and largely unneeded, even. Your supplement could do even without it, but do as you may.

[kgauck]

I find Gary's explanation much easier to build other background upon than the alternative.

Perhaps Azrai had attempted to lure the other gods into a direct battle several times.

Perhaps Vorynn uncovered the secret of Azrai's vulnerability allowing the gods to pretend to get sucked in at Deismaar.

The alternative is a psychology of dieties, and that isn't something I know much about.

[RaspK_FOG]

I don't know if you don't see what I mean to present, if I am too bad at presenting it, or if you simply refuse to see what I mean...

My earlier example was not a proposition as to what actually happened; it was just an argument, meaning to show that to try and explain the situation lacks two things: accountability and credibility; i.e. you can take it or leave it, but it still remains an assumption in the end. All we know is that all 7 gods did get destroyed in, from, or producing a giant explosion - the rest is history.

Mind you, I would very much like to remake Birthright at some point so as to make it more up to the task of what seems evidently in contradiction with itself, yet I don't mean to do that just now.

[kgauck]

An authoritative account, with accountability and credibility is worth less than an account that lends itself to better stories, adventures, and player hooks.

[Rowan]

I agree, Kgauck, and I think the Wiki, properly used, could be a great way to really develop alternatives that further explain and flesh out the BR setting, either in reconciliation with the canon, or minor departure/revision of the canon.

What I mean is, for all those GMs out there like myself with many ideas but little time, it would be great to have a rich collection of well-developed and well-organized alternatives to harvest for games.

This thread, for instance, has given several possibilities for elven life/afterlife that are very interesting and possible within the canon or with only minor revisions:

1. Elves = elemental spirits, reforming their bodies upon death (this begs a very interesting game mechanic)
2. Reincarnation not under the elf's control
3. Voluntary death and entrance into an Otherworld
4. Death and eventual reunion with the Seelie side before passage to an Otherworld
5. Death of either the Sidhe or the Seelie results in ultimate death, passing on, or eventual reincarnation of the two

What have I missed? Some of those aren't mutually exclusive, but all could use some game mechanics and some description about how this both impacts culture and setting and game play at the PC and Realm level.

[RaspK_FOG]

Again, I am not against such articles; but the above suggestions have been made mostly as proposals of the "truth" they hold behind the setting rather than as a plausible resolution of any number of issues. And, Kenneth, again I did not mean to point out something along the lines of anyone here not being an authority or whatever, just that I am trying to run a discussion that is based more on given fact rather than possibilities. I am very much interested in theories and argumentation, but not when I want to discuss hard facts and how they relate to each other, at least on the first layer of this discussion - as far as I know, we have not even set all of the groundwork, since some of us want to express their opinion on a totally different worldview (e.g. the "gods" never were true deities).

What you might have spent your time a lot more constructively with would be to make an article for the site; note that the wiki is not currently available for such material, as far as I understand - if I am mistaken, please feel free to use it by all means.

[geeman]

At 05:09 PM 12/26/2007, RaspK_FOG wrote:

>Your opinion is not flawed, but your perspective of it seems to me to be so: such a flaw is anything but minute when put against the
power of Azrai, much unlike the "womp rat sized" exhaust port of the Death Star; furthermore, the probability of exploiting such a flaw
in case the opposing side knows of it and any prepared resistance, all of them are widely different in your two examples: the theory you put down and the Star Wars scenario.

Let`s look at it from the writing standpoint for a moment: Let`s start with the assumption that Azrai`s demise at Deismaar is expressed in the broadest possible terms. As the most powerful of the gods, he knew that he had the ability to destroy himself explosively at any moment, and he knows that any god can do the same. Despite that knowledge he ran headlong into a face-to-face conflict with the other gods at Deismaar without taking any measures to prevent them from performing a last strike when it became clear they were going to lose the battle and, presumably, their influence in the setting. Here`s the test: Write a BR supplement that uses that assumption as its basis. What does such a concept inspire? What adventure level ideas are suggested by that version of Azrai`s arrogance and foolishness? If you can come up with BR materials based on such an idea then I`d be happy to see it.

>For one thing, I don`t believe that Azrai has such a flaw; being foolish and being stupid are two very different things, and arrogance always lays another issue on top. If such a flaw existed, I don`t think you would have left it open to exploitation.

Sorry, but I`m not following your logic here. If the explosion at Deismaar were the result of the gods or some force in the SW exploiting a flaw in the also hypothetical power base of Azrai through that plane then he wouldn`t have been stupid or foolish enough to leave such a flaw there in the first place? Isn`t it your position that he was so arrogant that he simply ignored their already existing ability to destroy themselves and him along with them?

>Finally, what I want to make clear (since you seem to have missed it) is that the above statement of mine (gods go *kaboom!* --> Azrai goes 8p) is more of a counterargument: anyone could hypothesize anything. The thing is, would it ever be so probable that the
scholars of Aebrynis would make such a conclusion?

I think they would. It`s a rather odd extrapolation, I grant you, but I made it just sitting around in my house musing on the topic, so I don`t think it`s that weird for someone who might dedicate more of their actual life and personal studies to the subject....

I have a sort of pedantry/academia fetish. I like the idea (and see it has highly probable) that in a setting like Cerilia the nature of good/evil as embodied in the gods and the planes themselves, the way that bloodline "scientifically" functions, the philosophical basis of the afterlife and the connections between them all would be matters of scholarly investigation, debate and even experimentation. Not in an entirely modern sense of experimentation, but in a way that would be parallel to the transition between the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, which several of the BR cultures are at. There should be BR equivalents of the Venerable Bede, Alcuin and Bonaventure. This is certainly an oft ignored aspect of many D&D settings, and I find that lack... well, lacking. Such characters are, in the long run, better motivation for adventures and gaming than rescuing the princess from the tower or otherwise slaying the dragon. At least, they provide rationales for a broader range of adventure and campaign ideas.

But they aren`t everyone`s cup of tea, I suppose.... More`s the pity.

>I find it highly unlikely, and largely unneeded, even. Your >supplement could do even without it, but do as you may.

It`s colour commentary, and as such should be taken as speculative and easily ignored, so you needn`t bother with it at all if you don`t
want. I think the supplement is better with it for the reasons I`ve described, but it shouldn`t be taken as anything more than a segue into the meat of the text, so in all honesty I think you`re reading more into it than it merits. It`s not meant to be a rewrite of the existing materials, and even if it were it doesn`t contradict anything directly other than itself in a couple places.

Gary

[AndrewTall]

<snip>just that I am trying to run a discussion that is based more on given fact rather than possibilities. I am very much interested in theories and argumentation, but not when I want to discuss hard facts and how they relate to each other, at least on the first layer of this discussion

A big problem is that facts are few and far between on the origins of species and the nature of gods in particular, with some canon being vague, a 'local's interpretation' or the like. This can be seen negatively as promoting confusion or positively as encouraging DM-chosen campaigns, or more readily as a bit of a pain! Although it certainly does give us something to talk about!

as far as I know, we have not even set all of the groundwork, since some of us want to express their opinion on a totally different worldview (e.g. the "gods" never were true deities).

That would be me I guess - and perhaps the issue is more that I disagree on what a deity is - or that I see the transition from a minor spirit such as a pixie to a major spirit such as a god as being one of a continuum rather than a series of discrete and distinctly different states.

My tuppence on the death of the gods at Deismaar is that possibly the death of one god - or even two or three - would not have caused the destruction of any other god nearby, but that the death of so many in a short space of time in a single physical location could have had a significant effect on the local reality - several places note the vast energy released when the evanescence (sp?) is breached, perhaps when Azrai killed so many of the other gods the death of such powerful spirits (or whatever you want to call them) tore the barrier between Cerilia and the Spirit World - a barrier incidentally which Azrai very much wanted to breach.

In that case Azrai may have wanted to fight a number of the gods at once, either to breach the evanescence and merge the two planes (for example if he assumed that he could survive the merger but needed some such great event as a trigger to merge the planes) or could have wanted to draw the other gods into a fight confident that he could win and not realising the effect that their deaths would have.

note that the wiki is not currently available for such material, as far as I understand - if I am mistaken, please feel free to use it by all means.

The wiki is available for anything which is not offensive to readers, or derogatory to WOTC i.e. anything which would endanger the existance of the wiki / br.net.

When putting up pages the convention is to put a banner to indicate the type of page in question so that users can see whether a page is canon or a non-contentious extrapoloation thereof or a page which requires a little more caution in use. Having no banner indicates that the page has nothing contentious, or that anything contentious is clearly marked as 'some sages say', 'theories include', etc to make clear that the comment is not necessarily in accordance with canon.

'Observation' banners indicate that the page contains something that may not accord with canon, or represents a non-neutral viewpoint without copious disclaimers.

Fanfic is another banner to basically say 'be warned, this is my stuff and may not fit your campaign'.

Username pages almost by definition are non-canon and some omit other banners. I encourage people to use colour banners for campaign specific stuff, house rules, etc - see the wiki 101 or read the bottom section of the main page of the wiki which shows index pages for the main areas of fan-generated pages and notes the banner colour for each.

Ideally anything that anyone made for their BR campaign should be able to go on the wiki and be shared with everyone else - if we restricted the wiki to 'stuff the mods like only' or 'strict canon only' it would useful perhaps as a reference tool but otherwise would be a dead document.

[RaspK_FOG]

Gary, I repeat that I am not attacking your opinion on the matter; nor did I try to do with any of the other people discussing this topic. I tried to present a counter, by merely pointing out that there can be a number of differing opinions and anyone can hold on to them, especially scholars of the age you mention, with unimaginable fervor, just like some scientists of our days do even when their theories seem flawed to the eyes of others (I am indeed referring to rather modern scientists, not implying anything).

I am anything but annoyed at everyone's ideas, but I find bringing them, in this discussion... largely offsetting, which is my only argument against them. From an entirely hypothetical and literary standpoint, I believe they are interesting; from a player standpoint, I am not sure I would entirely appreciate them, but I would certainly not find them unlikely. If I did not insist on making this matter crystal clear is so that we stop, if I am correct, something which is rather irrelevant to the topic I tried to bring to the fore, that is, the true aspects of the spirituality of the Sidhelien.

Hence, there are two choices left: we either drop the original discussion completely and devote ourselves to the intrinsic possibilities, or we can drop all the argumentation over an example off the top my head and be constructive with what little we have. What would you have me do?

[kgauck]

Kenneth, again I did not mean to point out something along the lines of anyone here not being an authority or whatever, just that I am trying to run a discussion that is based more on given fact rather than possibilities.

The authority I was referring to were such facts. Things may be unambiguous in the setting but actually close off good adventuring possibilities. For instance, I like the idea that players might reenact some divine drama, even Deismaar. If the gods are paragons of conduct, their strategies and actions should provide a useful guide to characters in the setting. So, an event that lends itself to adventuring is great. Events that rely on divine reasoning that doesn't make sense to mortals is not a guide to followers to emulate.

The same goes for bloodlines, since I hold that a blooded character has tendencies to emulate the old god from whom their spark of divinity is d