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.

[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 derived.

It would be ideal if we had full mythologies to use as guides for priests and blooded characters to borrow from, but what we do have is Diesmaar and little else. Making it more useful for adventures and characters to emulate seems good.

[RaspK_FOG]

In all honesty, a lot could be said about what could and could not be supplemented: I miss the feeling of a complete list of holidays and fasting and what not would ever be deemed proper with most deities (some few in some settings have such guides, but most of them have nothing other than: "he or she has one major event then - priests pray at dawn").

[ryancaveney]

In all honesty... I miss the feeling of a complete list of holidays and fasting and what not

This is *precisely* what I have been trying to say. The official information we have to go on is a garment so threadbare that we as campaign-building DMs simply must embroider so much extra onto it (both to keep our NPCs from looking naked, and to keep the whole thing from just falling apart) that each individual's results can be totally contradictory to everyone else's, even though we all started with identical materials.


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?

Because in order to be happy with even imagining the running of a campaign, I simply must have answers in my own mind to all these questions, even though I currently have no players to ask them of me. I derive much of my gaming pleasure from worrying about such details, even when I'm a player in someone else's campaign. So do lots of other people around here, given the flood of specific information pouring from the pens of people like Gary and Kenneth. I don't agree with everything they have to say, but even things to which I am adamantly opposed help me conceptualize the game world as I prefer to see it, because disagreeing with other people's details helps me decide which ones I really do like best. It's only glossing over missing details that annoys me. =)

To me, leaving things vague is a complete non-starter for anything I can't ignore entirely. The fact that I have noticed something not definitively detailed begs plenty loud enough for me. Non-truths are a risk I accept to achieve my goal of generating more truths, because there just aren't enough truths to go around without making some up. I am delighted to hunt down non-truths and expunge them when encountered, but what counts as truth vs. non-truth in BR is not nearly as clear-cut as you seem to think.


You may be forgetting that Tolkien changed a lot of his material - in other passages the above is subjected to change... I am not trying to say you are wrong; rather I do not find it productive to suggest that something which is biased from personal preference to come in on a discussion relating to what the given material is and what we can deduce from it.

I'm not forgetting that at all; in fact, it's part of the reason I mentioned Teodor Profiev. Tolkien created his mythology over the course of sixty years or more. As you correctly point out, as he did so, he repeatedly changed his mind -- but it all came from him, so it's all canon, even when it disagrees with itself. The problem vexed him, and he wrote about his own frustrations with the difficulty of revising his own earlier works when he felt trapped by them. Others may disagree with me on this, but I personally don't accept that what he thought in 1972 is *necessarily* more authoritative than what he thought in 1942, or vice-versa. I prefer to see the issue as I think he (at least in part) did himself, as a historian. When there exist multiple records of a single event, they usually disagree with each other in at least some details, and almost certainly in the intepretation of what happened. Which is the truth? We cannot know for sure, and different people will weigh the same evidence in different ways, and come to different conclusions. When that happens, the disagreements themselves are the most illuminating part, because they help us figure out what we think for ourselves, and expose us to more ideas than we would have come up with in isolation.

I point to the Vos paladin not as an excuse for going wild, but as a cautionary note on the inconsistent quality of what passes for Birthright canon. It had multiple authors, so they may not even themselves have always agreed on what was true, or even realized they disagreed. Whatever the reason for his publication, his mere existence presents a problem for every BR DM. Is he really an editing error, or was he intentionally included for some reason at which we can only guess? Since he contradicts the rules, what is to be done with him? If the rule trumps him, is he deleted or is he merely changed to a dual-classed fighter/priest? If he trumps the rule, is he a rare exception or a common one? If a rare exception, how many others are allowed, and under what conditions? I can imagine a dozen different solutions quite easily, and I'm sure others here could come up with many more. The point is that the existence of contradictions within the canon makes it the DM's job to *interpret* the contradictory sources and decide what the underlying truth "really is" within his or her own campaign. This goes for rules perhaps even more than setting details -- does a trade route need a guild holding at both ends, or just one? Competing justifications have been found within a single paragraph! In the end, each DM must make a firm decision one way or the other to enable the game to be played at all; but whichever way you go, you're still playing Birthright. Which way seems better is a matter of personal taste as much as anything else.

I have always tried to say that since the official material we have to go on is so often inconsistent or incomplete, it is part of the essential job description of a BR DM to engage in "discussion relating to what the given material is and what we can deduce from it" with other practitioners of the discipline. That's exactly why this list exists. However, I do not think it is even in principle possible to do that without being heavily influenced by our own idiosyncratic biases and personal preferences. The best we can do is honestly identify them, explore how they influence our thinking, and listen to others with an open mind.


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.

What is the difference? How can one offer a plausible resolution without proposing a possible underlying truth? You must have some idea of the underlying truth in order to form any opinion of which resolutions are plausible and which are not.


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

As I see it, there is exactly one "hard fact" on the entire topic of Sidhelien spirituality: they don't have priests because they don't worship gods. That's all we know for sure. I don't see how there is anything more to be said on the topic without suggesting theories about why that is so. Therefore, I see your complaints about my and others' comments as saying, "please stop discussing what I want to talk about," which confuses me. I know my own "the so-called gods were really just dragons" theory is considered by many to be totally different, but I don't see it that way at all. I can explain everything we know in the published setting books based on it, so there simply is no factual way to decide whether my theory is more or less correct than another which also does so, due to the scarcity of available evidence with which to be inconsistent.

Any DM with a penchant for filling in the gaps (even one much less extreme than my own) must take on only parts of the whole campaign world at a time, and develop rough-and-ready guidelines for making quick decisions. Here's mine: the elves are right. Whatever the topic in question is, whatever the Sidhelien think about it is correct. Of course, that's not my only or my final answer to any question, but it is the starting point I use to frame my construction, and I find it very useful in fleshing out an interesting and satisfying Cerilia from the rough sketches that were published for us. Therefore, my train of thought back in 1997 went like this: the elves don't worship gods is a fact; I'd like to come up with a way for them to be objectively correct in that belief, if I can; therefore, let's suppose that there really aren't any gods to worship, nor were there ever. If I do that, can I still explain Deismaar, bloodlines, priestly magic, etc.? Yes, and here's how...; what's more, the result of making that explanation adds more predictive elements to my underlying theory of how the world really works, which I can then use to help me make still more decisions about campaign world details of interest. It's a perfect example of exactly the kind of world-building I most like to do.


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

This is the reason I still come back here after all these years and all the times I have left for a while. That is precisely the way I have always used this list, and wanted others to use it. It's what I said I wanted back when the idea of a 3e conversion first came up: I don't want one official way to do anything, I want a menu of as many options as we can come up with for everyone to pick and choose from as they like. And I got what I wanted before the people who wanted an official document did, because the discussion that preceded the document was itself the end product I was after. The way I pay back all the people from whom I have stolen ideas over the years is to encourage others to adapt mine, or in rejecting mine come up with more answers on their own. Thank you, Rowan! May you find fertile hunting grounds here.

[RaspK_FOG]

Seeing now at last where you come from, I accept that as a most viable position; please do continue and I apologise for my insistence.

Note, this could be greatly helped if an inclusion of all such theories and hypotheses are explained at least partly in a variation of the original post or something along these lines (i.e. close to the top and/or near the bottom), where anyone can take a look at them and where you can easily revised them.

I am all for such options, and theorising in-universe is very good, I think; I wonder if we could settle down at some point and devise more such material (e.g. complete catalogs for fasting, etc.) - I would also appreciate it if you checked up my entry on the various age categories of Cerilian dragons. :)

[geeman]

At 07:40 AM 12/27/2007, RaspK_FOG wrote:

>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?

Debate is good, if for no other reason than it helps one refine one`s
own arguments, so by all means continue presenting your ideas and
arguments as you feel inclined. I can`t say I`ll always agree, but I
do hope you`ll get something out of my disagreement just as I expect
to get something out of yours. I`d not presume to tell anyone what
to do (unless I have to step in as the BR-l moderator--which I hasn`t
been necessary in ages....) The only advice or suggestion I`d give
on what you should do is this: Once you`ve learned or got everything
you think you can from a subject THEN let it drop....

Gary

[irdeggman]

Gary, can you provide me a BR source for the following statement from your pdf (which is well written, by the way).




The Sidhe are known to have controlled sources and various items of power before the Battle of Deismaar,

I don't readily recall any such reference, but I could be wrong.

There is text that specifically states that an elf must be blooded to cast realm magic, even though they can cast greater magic without a bloodline.

BoM pg 5
"Still fewer possess the bloodlines that allow them to cast realm magic."

[geeman]

Here are some musings about BR elves and fear of death:

When it comes to the psychology of BR elves, I think we should be very careful with human comparisons because doing so runs the danger
of anthropomorphism or even IMO theanthropism (attributing human qualities to the divine.) Of course, the Sidhe are not gods in the D&D sense or even common sense, but they are immortal spiritual beings whose nature appears to prohibit them from worshipping gods in the way that mortal can, and who seem nonplussed by the gods as anything other than very powerful beings. Thinking about the Sidhe as "gods" in the most minor sense gives us possibly the best way of thinking about their attitude towards death.

As such, the Sidhe are far more "alien" and otherworldly than elves portrayed in other D&D settings. In most settings the demi-human
races are pretty clearly human analogs. Sure, they are different "races" but can`t we all think of real world human cultures that pretty closely mirror those races? Most D&D elves are long-lived hippy ectomorphs with pointy ears and a strange penchant for green garments. They`re just missing the bongs and tie-dye.

The Sidhe, however, are fundamentally different from humans. Yes, the Sidhe and humanity can interbreed, and the Sidhe accept half-elves amongst them, but one of the reasons I personally like to differentiate between mortal "souls" and elven "spirits" is that "spirit" really implies something otherworldly. The Sidhe are tied to the material world in a way that those with a soul are not. Their psychology isn`t just alien, it`s extrinsic in that they are tied to nature. Death to elves represents part of their continuum in the natural order. It`s not necessarily something to fear in and of itself. Oh, one should avoid death--not to do so would be unnatural--but fearing death to the Sidhe would be like the cloud fearing lightning.

I didn`t include much of this in the PDF I posted, but there is a comparison to be made between the Sidhe and some materials presented
in the description of the Lost Soul. I do think BR elves reincarnate, and their spirits are tied to the Prime Material plane of Aebrynis in a way that is similar to the way a soul is "trapped" in the SW. To the Sidhe, death is like the temporary destruction of a Lost Soul. Their spiritual energies are temporarily dispersed, but they will reconstitute in more or less their original form sooner or later. Such an experience is not necessarily pleasant or unpleasant for them, but a fear of death if it exists at all would be somewhere low on the list of emotions they might experience at such a time. More likely they would simply resent death--and the person who brought it about, particularly if it were a mortal.... Maybe they`ll think about joining the GS next time around.

Even if one does not think the Sidhe reincarnate, though, one can still see how they might think by considering them in this way. Death to them means simply mingling their energies with nature. They return to the "continuity" of the spiritual world, if you will.

Gary

[geeman]

At 05:29 PM 12/27/2007, irdeggman wrote:

>Gary, can you provide me a BR source for the following statement
>from your pdf (which is well written, by the way).

Thanks.

>>The Sidhe are known to have controlled sources and various items of
>>power before the Battle of Deismaar,

It never actually says sources directly, but in the BoM p26 there is
info on elves using "ancient ley lines" before Deismaar and that
those ley lines have been found to be connected to modern source
holdings. It says they didn`t create those ley lines, and it does
not say specifically that such "ancient ley lines" must be attached
to sources, but at some point a ley line has to be attached to a
source or to a ley line that is itself linked to a source, so from
the existence of ancient ley lines alone I infer the existence of
ancient sources. Plus, it says ancient ley lines were employed so
there must have been ancient sources since without a source a ley
line isn`t much good for anything.

Like "ancient ley lines" the "ancient sources" were probably not
created by the elves, but discovered and employed by them. The
ancient ley lines (and any ancient sources that they might/must be
attached to) are part of that whole Land`s Choice thing....

Gary

[geeman]

Follow Up:

"Ancient Sources" are probably what is being described on p24 of the
BoM under the Caerbhaighlien section. Again, it doesn`t specifically
say those sources existed before Deismaar, but they are/were
presumably the sources that were attached to the "ancient sources"
described later. As sources described in "ancient texts" they are a
pretty good candidate for pre-Deismaar sources.

On p25 the commentary/intro text describes elves being able to employ
mebhaighl (source energy) before Deismaar, which "disrupted the
mebhaighl" the elves had been using.

Gary

[kgauck]

The Talinie PS describes much the same thing from a bronze age Trautha who established ley lines and built stone constructs at the locations of the present day sources. The PS doesn't say the elves used the sources, but they built monuments there and used ley lines. What are the use of ley lines without sources?

At the very least, ancient sidhe use of sources, even if in some primitive under-developed way, is stronly implied.

[AndrewTall]

I'd note on the ancient ley-lines and sources point that even if the elves did use them, this doesn't necessarily mean that the ancient elves were whomping out the realm magic - even modern elves seem to avoid most realm magic.

Much as with tighmaevril, the purpose seen by the humans of Cerilia and the purpose intended by the elves can be two very different things (from recollection Tighmaevril either pre-dated Deismaar or its bloodline effect was discovered long after forging).

I can see the elves using sources to aid the flow of mebhaighl from places that were 'lush' to places that were 'arid' (this concept arises from my take on mebhaighl as generated by plant life rather than deep within Cerilia) or towards areas where the shadow world was near to Cerilia to strengthen the planar barriers between the two planes.

That said I would not expect that the elves could have gained/retained regency without bloodlines (aside from use of the optional rules) and I expect that they would have had to substitute some sort of ritual to allow any use of the source/ley lines.

[geeman]

At 02:58 AM 12/28/2007, AndrewTall wrote:

>I`d note on the ancient ley-lines and sources point that even if the
>elves did use them, this doesn`t necessarily mean that the ancient
>elves were whomping out the realm magic - even modern elves seem to
>avoid most realm magic.

Yes, it`s hard to imagine pre-Deismaar elves using realm magic more
often than post-Deismaar elves do.... In the absence of bloodlines,
I think there must have been some sort of way of ruling the
equivalents of provinces and holdings, but that system must have
operated at a much slower pace than it does in the domain rules
presented in BR. Instead of actions happening on a monthly (domain
round) basis, they would happen on a seasonal (domain turn) or maybe
even annual basis. Such a timeline would be more believable in
regards to things like the speed of population increases....

The rest of the domain system need not necessarily have looked much
like the existing domain rules, but there could be things comparable
to RP to power realm spells and the "ancient ley lines" and sources
they imply would be present in some sort of incarnation. The BoM
does intimate that the nature of ancient ley lines was changed or
disrupted by Deismaar in some ways, and that elves had to relearn a
few things, so I would speculate that means things operated
differently, but in a way that was similar enough to remain
recognizable after the battle.

Gary

[irdeggman]

Thanks for the info.

Something I must have "disgarded" as not fitting in with everything else written - especially since the only "documented" use of ley lines is for connecting sources to cast realm spells.

This makes me think that there must have been "planned" some more information on the elves beyound the PS (which I tend to place on the lowest rung of reliability as regards to source cannon due to the tremendous amounts of inconsistencies contained therein.).

Now "knowing" where sources (and ley lines) are located is something clearly within the ability of even the non-blooded elf due to their strong tie to the land (BoM pg 16).

Seems that there should be some other use for ley lines other than merely casting realm spells that would better fit the "history" - perhaps as a means of "travel" {a super highway system if you will} since the elves (in the novels) could cover great distances "magically" through the forest.

I could also see the elves locating (and preserving) the sources present and this is reflected in how they "construct" their residences.

The text under the ancient ley lines also only says "used" by elves it does not say "controlled" and goes on to say that no one can "claim or control" them because they belong to the land itself and "not elven elves can affect them".

[irdeggman]

At 02:58 AM 12/28/2007, AndrewTall wrote:

>I`d note on the ancient ley-lines and sources point that even if the
>elves did use them, this doesn`t necessarily mean that the ancient
>elves were whomping out the realm magic - even modern elves seem to
>avoid most realm magic.

Yes, it`s hard to imagine pre-Deismaar elves using realm magic more
often than post-Deismaar elves do.... In the absence of bloodlines,
I think there must have been some sort of way of ruling the
equivalents of provinces and holdings, but that system must have
operated at a much slower pace than it does in the domain rules
presented in BR. Instead of actions happening on a monthly (domain
round) basis, they would happen on a seasonal (domain turn) or maybe
even annual basis. Such a timeline would be more believable in
regards to things like the speed of population increases....

The rest of the domain system need not necessarily have looked much
like the existing domain rules, but there could be things comparable
to RP to power realm spells and the "ancient ley lines" and sources
they imply would be present in some sort of incarnation. The BoM
does intimate that the nature of ancient ley lines was changed or
disrupted by Deismaar in some ways, and that elves had to relearn a
few things, so I would speculate that means things operated
differently, but in a way that was similar enough to remain
recognizable after the battle.

Gary

Interesting - but I have trouble with elves beign able to cast realm spells before Deismaar at all.

If that was at all possible, even with their disposition towards not using realm magic at all they still would have had access to to realm magic during the many "wars" that they fought.

And despite the fact that they did not have "priestly" magic a single elf (like say Roubhe or any other member of the "hunt") could have (and most assuredly would have) cast realm spells to repel the "invaders".

Realm magic is more powerful than any non-realm magic equivalent so the elves would have "won" the war since a single realm wizard, even operating at a slower pace, would most assuredly have defeated entire armies with a single spell.

No IMO in order to preserve the "history" of the the setting it is important to make sure that elves could not cast realm magic prior to Deismaar. I am thinking that there should be other (non-realm magic) uses for ley lines though.

[geeman]

At 06:19 AM 12/28/2007, irdeggman wrote:

>No IMO in order to preserve the "history" of the the setting it is
>important to make sure that elves could not cast realm magic prior
>to Deismaar. I am thinking that there should be other (non-realm
>magic) uses for ley lines though.

The rationale for the elves losing in their conflict with humanity is
contentious in a lot of ways, and adding the possibility of them
using arcane realm spells even at a much slower pace does make it
even more problematic. But I think the problem stems more from their
immortality and universal access to arcane magic in the first place
than it does from realm levels of play....

There`s not a lot of source material to indicate this because the BoP
deals mostly with post-Deismaar issues, but if that text went into
the "ancient" gods in the way the BoM discusses "ancient" sources and
ley lines then we`d probably have info indicating that just as there
were elves who could cast the equivalent of realm spells before
Deismaar, human priests had their own equivalent through their
pre-Deismaar versions of temple holdings, so the basic conflict of
arcane v. divine magics remains more or less the same.

Gary

[ryancaveney]

sidhelien realms are declining even after Deismaar. Reincarnating might be a possible option - but it should not be easily nor without any loss.

It all depends on how you define "easily" -- perhaps the process does indeed accomplish complete, lossless, one-for-one replacement of all apparent deaths, but it takes two thousand years. In that case, all those who "died" at Deismaar will be back again, just as good as new and as powerful as the day of the battle, but not for another 476 years. On the time scale of people who are capable of living for millions of years, that might seem easy enough. Maybe that's what the elves are waiting for before beginning the reconquest.

[Rowan]

Thanks, Ryan!

Your suggestion of reincarnation after 2,000 years is really along the lines of what I was thinking, though perhaps with dimmed memories and rusty skills, as well. It would be similar to ideas in the Witchcraft/Armageddon setting (and many other fantasy settings) suggesting that the soul is immortal, but can be "unraveled" or "untethered" to varying degrees, requiring eons to reform properly. The time length works for a game, and also would explain some things about elven society. Your suggestion about potential resurgence and reconquest also fits with my views that the elves could recover. After all, biologically, immortal beings, even giving birth just every century or so, can manage pretty significant population growth rates.

[Cilwan]

Thanks, Ryan!

Your suggestion of reincarnation after 2,000 years is really along the lines of what I was thinking, though perhaps with dimmed memories and rusty skills, as well. It would be similar to ideas in the Witchcraft/Armageddon setting (and many other fantasy settings) suggesting that the soul is immortal, but can be "unraveled" or "untethered" to varying degrees, requiring eons to reform properly. The time length works for a game, and also would explain some things about elven society. Your suggestion about potential resurgence and reconquest also fits with my views that the elves could recover. After all, biologically, immortal beings, even giving birth just every century or so, can manage pretty significant population growth rates.

Compared to their death rate? Remember that the elves are surrounded by humans and monsters that are to varying degrees hostile. 1000 births every 100 years doesn't help much if 2000 are killed in the same amount of time.

As for how they might be dying:

Raids/Small border wars over resources.... such as wood.
Accidents/Natural disasters: Even experienced rangers get killed in cave-ins, landslides, lightening strikes and so on.

[ConjurerDragon]

Cilwan 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
> Cilwan wrote:
> ------------ QUOTE ----------
> ...
> Compared to their death rate? Remember that the elves are surrounded by humans and monsters that are to varying degrees hostile. 1000 births every 100 years doesn`t help much if 2000 are killed in the same amount of time.
> As for how they might be dying:
> Raids/Small border wars over resources.... such as wood.
> Accidents/Natural disasters: Even experienced rangers get killed in cave-ins, landslides, lightening strikes and so on.
>
It is not only the immortality (except a violent death) of sidhelien.
According to the race description they suffer from no natural diseases.
Considering that the human population of the americas was decimated by
diseases and that Europe itself lost a third of it?s entire population
to just the black death (Pest?), more than in even major wars, they have
no need to reproduce anywhere as fast as the other races.
If childbedfever (Wochenbettfieber?) is included and all the illnesses
and diseases that humans have suffered before medicine became a science
sidhelien would be at an advantage even if they would have only 1 child
for every 12 human childs (of which more than half won?t become adults
due to diseases)

I would also argue against using accidents/natural disasters as a reason
that more sidhelien die than are born - after all in Birthright even a
human ranger would be hard pressed to match even a sidhelien non-rangers
"Nature Stride"

[Cilwan]

Cilwan 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
> Cilwan wrote:
> ------------ QUOTE ----------
> ...
> Compared to their death rate? Remember that the elves are surrounded by >humans and monsters that are to varying degrees hostile. 1000 births >every 100 years doesn`t help much if 2000 are killed in the same amount of >time.
> As for how they might be dying:
> Raids/Small border wars over resources.... such as wood.
> Accidents/Natural disasters: Even experienced rangers get killed in cave->ins, landslides, lightening strikes and so on.
>
It is not only the immortality (except a violent death) of sidhelien.
According to the race description they suffer from no natural diseases.
Considering that the human population of the americas was decimated by
diseases and that Europe itself lost a third of it?s entire population
to just the black death (Pest?), more than in even major wars, they have
no need to reproduce anywhere as fast as the other races.
If childbedfever (Wochenbettfieber?) is included and all the illnesses
and diseases that humans have suffered before medicine became a science
sidhelien would be at an advantage even if they would have only 1 child
for every 12 human childs (of which more than half won?t become adults
due to diseases)

I would also argue against using accidents/natural disasters as a reason
that more sidhelien die than are born - after all in Birthright even a
human ranger would be hard pressed to match even a sidhelien non-rangers
"Nature Stride"

I knew about the lack of disease already and chose my examples because of it. As for accidents & natural disasters not killing elves at all.... I don't agree. Elves are chaotic by nature so are prone to whims. Some of those whims will drive them into dangerous situations (that they *know* are dangerous). Odds are that eventual some will die as a result.

Which is not to say that accidents/natural disasters would be the only/main cause of elven numbers decreasing. Rather it would be all of the factors I listed and more.

1 elven birth per 12 human births? Interesting numbers. Either seems really high or quite low depending on what you are comparing it to. I mean two realms of equal populations or are you comparing the two races?

[kgauck]

As for how they might be dying:
Raids/Small border wars over resources.... such as wood.
Accidents/Natural disasters: Even experienced rangers get killed in cave-ins, landslides, lightening strikes and so on.

What of they fight their small border wars of whatever nature with something other than their persons, such as summonings, charms, illusions, and auxillieries? These events might nearly never cause the death of a true elf.

Elves are supposed to be chaotic in alignment, and perhaps even whimsical, but are they so moved by whimsy as to over-ride their better judgement in terms of their intelligence which is also considerable, and their wisdom, which must be significant owing to their longevity?

Accidents are disproportinatly an issue for the young. Being centuries old must considerably reduce the accident rate, as well as the fact that you could eliminate all accidents from consideration caused by decreptitude.

[geeman]

We don`t know the mortality rate of elves. Sure, they are "ever
young" and that makes them more difficult to kill in a D&D sense
because given the game mechanics they are more likely to have
encounters, even if they try to avoid them, of the type that will
garner them XP. Once a character gets over the point where he might
die from the average "accident" then his life expectancy goes
up. However, if we`re going to ignore certain crass game mechanical
issues (and so much of the setting does, so why not?) then there are
some factors we should consider:

First, I don`t particularly get the feeling that elves are very
concerned with things like safety. The Rjurik are the more
fatalistic of the Cerilian races, but the Sidhe would very likely be
fate-oriented as part of their basic, natural attitude. After all,
if there is no true death--if elves just reincarnate--then they might
have little fear of death as has been suspected, so things like
living at the tops of trees without guardrails makes perfect
sense. After all, it`s the view that matters.

Also, we should take into consideration that Cerilian elves are a
more violent lot than other elves are in other settings, and I don`t
just mean in dealing with other races. They is a mutual hatred of
humanity, but consider that the BR setting is drawn as much from
Tolkien`s concept of elves (more so, IMO) than Gygax`s, and in
Tolkien`s mythology elves were not above conflict with other elves
for things like greed, jealousy, power, etc. Maybe they don`t engage
in such activities at quite the frenetic pace of mortals, but
violence is in their nature, so violent death is an important factor
in their death rate.

Another problem for elves is the simple ennui of immortality. It`s
been premised in various fantasy/sci-fi/horror text that not every
being has the stamina for immortality in the sense that they simply
lose the will to live. Amongst Cerilian elves, I doubt this would
quite take on the form that has been used by Anne Rice. I don`t see
the Sidhe as suicidal or having to engage in some sort of rebirthing
ritual. But it is possible imagine them "losing the will to fight"
so hard, and allowing themselves to fall rather than carry
on. Again, if elves reincarnate then it`s possible such that a
life-death-rebirth and rejuvination process is part of their
spiritual life cycle. Where Tolkien`s elves had to sail off to the
Undying Lands, Cerilian elves must "die" and return.

Regardless of such extra-game-mechanical ideas, there are weird
accidents of game mechanics that can explain the situation. After
all, even a goblin gets a critical hit in once in a
while. Eventually, the dice are going to catch up to anybody, and
just like in Vegas eventually the house wins....

Gary

[geeman]

A couple other notes about Tolkien`s elves that might (or might not)
apply for our purposes:

1. Tolkien`s elves could die of grief or similar extreme emotional
distress. This can be both brought about by circumstance, or through
an act of will. For example, Tolkien decided at one point that elves
who were raped or somehow forced to have sex simply died by
"rejecting bodily life" though this contradicts various stories and
earlier writings (in a very Birthright sort of way) in which various
elves are "forced to wife" or otherwise sexually coerced.

In Birthright, this has a kind of interesting dichotomy in that elves
are described as having magics, abilities and powers that are
reminiscent of certain myths in which mortals are seduced by various
types of fae. A comparison that also existed in Tolkien, but not
quite writ so loudly as it is in BR. The Sidhe might very well,
then, be able to "do unto others" but not the other way round.

2. Elves can starve or die of thirst. Though it`s harder to starve
an elf than a man because apparently elves require less nourishment
and are able to draw the sustenance that they do need from the
environment more easily than can mortals, it is possible for them to
be starved to death in, for example, a dungeon, so it stands to
reason they could starve or die of thirst in extreme environments.

3. Tolkien`s elves are ever young, but the period of their
procreation is relatively short. They wed as young adults and
generally have a small number of children (though there are
exceptions) and then lose interest in sex and having more children in
favor of "many other urges of body and of mind which their nature
urges them to fulfil [sic]." So, after a brief period (a century or
two) of sexual reproduction that produces a small number of children
often seperated by as much as a century.

I think this makes a lot of sense for BR elves too, and I`m sure
those so inclined could attribute it as much to biological reasons as
spiritual ones.

4. Tolkien`s elves married once and for life. Again, he broke his
own rules once or twice on this one, but generally speaking the
marriage and procreating were synonymous concepts for Tolkien`s
elves, and there was only one lifemate for such things. However,
since the period procreative productivity was relatively short (given
immortality) the idea children from later unions is relatively taken care of.

In a purely BR sense we should also consider that in many ways the
Sidhe are tied to the forests of Cerilia in ways that other races are
not. They may simply require the presence or proximity of the trees
themselves to be sustained. It seems to me implied in a couple of
places in the BR materials that the decline of the elves is at least
on some way related to the deforestation of the continent, and that
trees have more than a simple cultural or biological component in
their lives. The next logical step in that association is that the
forests are to the elves what A tree is to A dryad. The connection
is not so specific or direct as it is with a dryad, but just as
cutting down a tree will kill the dryad, cutting down a forest will
kill the Sidhe. Proportionate numbers of deforested provinces could
represent losses in the Sidhe population. I`ve always considered
this the real story behind the Sidhe decline and rise of the human
nations of Cerilia.

Gary

[Rowan]

Reincarnation, whether in an Eastern sense or a Spirit/embodiment sense, would have a significant impact on elven readiness to risk their lives, I think. I tend to think that if it happens, they must lose at least some of their memories and skills.

As for population growth issues, I'll have to dig up my population biology formulae some time. The primary cause of mortality for humans has always been natural death (due to old age, disease, famine), except in the most extreme of catastrophes and when viewed over short time periods. In fact, even in times of terribl oue war, violent death still tends to be much lower than the mortality to those factors. Therefore, elves that are not really susceptible to anything but violent death (including violent accidents) are going to suffer very little mortality every year on the population scale. I think deaths to accidents and natural disasters would tend to be far less than among human populations, and for humans those numbers are normally pretty low, proportionate to the population.

I also have never gotten the impression that elves are engaged in constant warfare; the Gorgon has apparently only invaded Tuarhievel once, and has Anuire since Roele had many invasions?

I agree, Geeman, that the Sidhe are more heavily based upon Tolkien than other D&D elves, but they may be even more heavily influenced by Celtic fae myths. I would, then, hesitate to limit their reproductive potential to short time periods; I believe even the BR canon would suggest that old elves still have children. It may depend much upon their passions. Still, I always figured elves may have quite large families and have strong, extended familial bonds. Immortal beings with low mortality and infrequent but unlimited reproductive potential can manage pretty significant population growth despite having, say, 1 birth per 1000 elves each year.

I'll also note that I think BR (and D&D in general) tends to grossly underestimate populations, especially of demihumans. Cerilia probably still has well over a million elves. If it's as large a continent as Western Europe, it could easily have a total population of over 50 million (corresponding to perhaps 13th century Europe). If it's Renaissance period we're talking about and Cerilia is only as large as France, it could still have over 50 million people, if my memory serves me right.

Back to the forum topic, I think we have stumbled upon an important point. Sidhelien spirituality is likely to be affected by what happens when they die, and these two themes are likely to influence significantly what hopes the elves have of reversing their decline.

[irdeggman]

I also have never gotten the impression that elves are engaged in constant warfare; the Gorgon has apparently only invaded Tuarhievel once, and has Anuire since Roele had many invasions?


You need to define "constant". For an immortal race they have been pretty much in a "constant" state of war.

They have been at war with almost every humanoid race on Cerilia at one time or another.

All human cultures (even the Rjurik), the dwarves, and they even enslaved the goblins after their "war".

At Deismaar by siding against Azrai's forces they were then at "war" with the remaining humanoid races engaged - while all of the other "wars" were pre-Deismaar.

[geeman]

At 09:26 PM 1/1/2008, Rowan wrote:

>I agree, Geeman, that the Sidhe are more heavily based upon Tolkien
>than other D&D elves, but they may be even more heavily influenced
>by Celtic fae myths. I would, then, hesitate to limit their
>reproductive potential to short time periods; I believe even the BR
>canon would suggest that old elves still have children.

I can`t think of any BR canon on the subject, so if you could find
such a reference it`d be great. Perhapse there some reference to
Celtic fae myths that you`re thinking of here? Is there a reference
to that mythology that limits when they have children?

>It may depend much upon their passions. Still, I always figured
>elves may have quite large families and have strong, extended
>familial bonds. Immortal beings with low mortality and infrequent
>but unlimited reproductive potential can manage pretty significant
>population growth despite having, say, 1 birth per 1000 elves each year.

I like the idea that elves have a relatively short reproductive life
because it strikes me as awkward to have siblings that might be
separated by a millennium.... Plus, it does address the issue of
shrinking populations pretty directly. There`s something that just
strikes me as "un-elven" to have such characters engaged in lifelong
(immortal) procreation.... Conceptually, the ideas seem to conflict.

>I`ll also note that I think BR (and D&D in general) tends to grossly
>underestimate populations, especially of demihumans. Cerilia
>probably still has well over a million elves. If it`s as large a
>continent as Western Europe, it could easily have a total population
>of over 50 million (corresponding to perhaps 13th century
>Europe). If it`s Renaissance period we`re talking about and Cerilia
>is only as large as France, it could still have over 50 million
>people, if my memory serves me right.

People have estimated around 25-50 million in the past. The actual
population numbers from the domain descriptions only account for
about 5 million (if memory serves) which is extremely low. Various
rationales for that difference have been proposed.

In general, Cerilia is at about the medieval level of technology,
though the Brecht in particular are at a sort of late medieval/early
Renaissance tech level. However, game mechanically there are almost
no substantian rules for how tech level influences a culture. At
least, not in regards to things like population level.

In regards to the elves, though, we`re in something of a bind since
their tech level is particularly hard to pin down. In some ways they
are very advanced, in others extraordinarily backward....

Gary

[kgauck]

France had a population of 20 million more or less since Roman times. It was the carrying capacity of the country under an iron age regime. After the Renaissance, with the rise of scientific agriculture, France climbs to 30 million by the end of the 18th century. France remained, even then, in a constant state of hunger.

Ryan has calculated the whole population of Cerilia at 50 million. I don't recall his figure for Anuire, but I'm guessing its in the 15 millions.

[Rowan]

By "constant" warfare I meant more than just the occasional border skirmish. It seems that serious elven wars occur less than once a century on average.

And geeman, a short period of reproductivity could make for an even faster rate of growth than elves who have children once a century or so for most of their lives. I believe there are examples of elves and even regents who have had several children either young or when 5 centuries or more old. I haven't bothered to look things up yet because I think there are many here with a much better recollection of the texts than me. But there is some elven queen outside of Anuire who has several children to the same human man, thus showing the potential for great fertility.

I can put the math up here if people want to see, but by my calculations, elven population growth can only be negated and result in by constant (near-annual) mid-level war or occasional (every few decades) terrible wars at least equal in scale and proportional impact to the population of WWII. Either that or catastrophic events like the War of Shadow and Deismaar. I expect that elven populations have been steadily recovering since then. One of the things I've never quite liked about concepts of elves is that none have ventured to break the pattern established by Tolkien of elven decline. It's become cliched.

As for the fae basis of the Sidhe, I'd put it on their mercurial, nature-spirit tendencies, capacity for evil (Tolkien's elves were mostly inherently good, though they could be forbidding and isolationist), and the gheallie Sidhe (which is based directly on the Wild Hunt of Celtic lore). Of course, Tolkien drew from this tradition as well, but the main difference I see is that BR elves are darker and more connected to the Faerie (as in the Sie and their Faerie counterparts) than in Tolkien's tales.

[AndrewTall]

One possibility for reproduction could be that elves only procreate when in what they consider 'true unions'. If the elf is not with 'their soulmate' then they don't have children - simple as that. That would have the side-effect discourage children by older elves (since they are more likely to have lost their spouse and finding a second soul-mate would be very difficult) but permit the odd exception.

A counter to that argument would however be the elven passionate nature - elves in BR are not by nature a people to have mild likings for others, and while I can see them being very causal about sex - and seeing it as recreational rather than procreational in the main. If procreation is linked to passion then procreation should not be uncommon unless the passion needs to endure for a prolonged period. The choice incidentally will have a significant impact on the presence of half-elves, unless you permit assimilation methods of engendering half elves.

I'd note that sexual fidelity in species tends to be linked to lifestyle, if elven mortality is minimal than fidelity could be a survival characteristic with sequential ties being extremely rare, since promiscuity as a survival characteristic is necessary mainly in species where forming sequential pair-bonds is needed to avoid prolonged isolation and consequential 'wastage of genes'.

[geeman]

At 10:46 AM 1/2/2008, Rowan wrote:

>And geeman, a short period of reproductivity could make for an even
>faster rate of growth than elves who have children once a century or
>so for most of their lives.

I favor the short reproductive period as much for its thematic
emphasis as anything else. Sure, if one tweaked the numbers around
elves who have a procreative life of about a century might very well
have more children then those who have an "average" of 1 child per
century. Conceivably (pun intended) they could have dozens without
pushing reality too far if they are as likely as other races to procreate.

But if I didn`t already mention this, the elven birthrate should be
about flat no matter which way one looks at it. That is, if they
have a relatively short period of 100 years in which they have
children and 1-3 children per union on average. If they remain
productive throughout their lives then then their fertility should be
such that only 1-3 children are likely in whatever one thinks is the
most likely "average" age of a Cerilian elf before he meets his
demise in some way. To me that makes the most sense given the
background material that puts Cerilian elves in decline since the
arrival of humans on the continent. After all, if elves have a short
reproductive period then the numbers are still pretty bad for them--1
child every 40-80 years or so) but if they can reproduce through
their entire lives then that might be 400-800 years, which seems a
bit much to me.

>I believe there are examples of elves and even regents who have had
>several children either young or when 5 centuries or more old. I
>haven`t bothered to look things up yet because I think there are
>many here with a much better recollection of the texts than me. But
>there is some elven queen outside of Anuire who has several children
>to the same human man, thus showing the potential for great fertility.

Or that it is the human/elf combination that creates that potential....

I think it is Treucht you`re referring there, though I can`t be sure
from the info given. Half-elven regent of that land and ehrshegh
momma with, IIRC, something of a deadbeat elven dad.

Can anyone think of examples from the BR materials that would support
either contention here? I`m not coming up with any off the top of my head....

>I can put the math up here if people want to see, but by my
>calculations, elven population growth can only be negated and result
>in by constant (near-annual) mid-level war or occasional (every few
>decades) terrible wars at least equal in scale and proportional
>impact to the population of WWII.

I`d like to see those numbers if you have a chance.

>Either that or catastrophic events like the War of Shadow and
>Deismaar. I expect that elven populations have been steadily
>recovering since then.

Most of the BR canon indicates they`ve been in a fairly steady
decline before and after Deismaar.

>As for the fae basis of the Sidhe, I`d put it on their mercurial,
>nature-spirit tendencies, capacity for evil (Tolkien`s elves were
>mostly inherently good, though they could be forbidding and
>isolationist), and the gheallie Sidhe (which is based directly on
>the Wild Hunt of Celtic lore).

There is a comparison to be made between the WH and the GS, but I
think it`s a bit oblique. We have a much more direct version of the
Wild Hunt (which is as much Germanic as Celtic) in the SW, and that
one is pretty much cribbed from existing versions of that
myth.... The WH is about abject subjugation to a sort of ecstatic
mob bloodlust while the GS exists in various
incarnations/philosophies and is more calculated.

Gary

[Rowan]

I'll clean up my spreadsheet and get it to you. I was assuming a Total Fertility Rate of only 2 children per elven couple when I considered your version of a short reproductive period. Again, the key here is that elves don't die off naturally. That makes a monumental difference in population biology, whether they keep reproducing or not, and ensures that only massive violence can prevent the elves from growing in population.

Where in the canon is there indication of declining populations? Could the decline merely be like Anuire's decline--the decline of elven strength and civilization? I believe that may indeed be declining or have declined, but there is still the possibility of elven renewal. The very existence of elven PC realms and lack of restrictions on ruling elven provinces indicates the possibility of elven renewal should remain open.

[AndrewTall]

Re: elven decline.

As far as I am aware most comment in canon on elven decline compares their current strength to that in pre-Deismaar times, indeed pre-human settlement. Since Deismaar I'm not aware of any significant elven decline noted (not that that says much) - indeed aside from the Raven's assault on Cwmb Bhein and Tuarheviel's loss of Sideath I'm not aware of any decline in modern Cerilian times - Tuar Annwyn is in fact noted as growing.

Add elven isolation to the natural human bias of most of canon and 'elven decline' may simply be a folk myth that masks growing elven strength within their own borders - I'd note that the elves can probably double their population without needing to expand their territory given the low population levels noted in canon and if elves aren't trying to expand their lands they would be unlikely to be seen as growing by local humans.

An idle thought following on from an earlier post, if elven reproduction is impacted by their state of mind, they could have effectively stopped reproducing while grieving over Deismaar, and only started reproducing in numbers relatively recently - allowing DM's to include an abrupt elven expansion drive into their campaign without risking causality issues.

[Lee]

An idle thought following on from an earlier post, if elven reproduction is impacted by their state of mind, they could have effectively stopped reproducing while grieving over Deismaar, and only started reproducing in numbers relatively recently - allowing DM's to include an abrupt elven expansion drive into their campaign without risking causality issues.

It could also be affected by the human reduction of natural places? I wonder if elves living in provinces that have had their source potential reduced might be less fertile? Just a wild thought.

[geeman]

At 07:17 AM 1/3/2008, Rowan wrote:

>I`ll clean up my spreadsheet and get it to you. I was assuming a
>Total Fertility Rate of only 2 children per elven couple when I
>considered your version of a short reproductive period. Again, the
>key here is that elves don`t die off naturally. That makes a
>monumental difference in population biology, whether they keep
>reproducing or not, and ensures that only massive violence can
>prevent the elves from growing in population.

Cool. Thanks in advance.

>Where in the canon is there indication of declining
>populations? Could the decline merely be like Anuire`s decline--the
>decline of elven strength and civilization?

Some of the most extensive material on elven decline is in the PSo
Tuarhieval sourcebook. The material in there doesn`t necessarily say
flat out that population levels have declined (BR materials rarely do
things so clearly) but it discusses a continual decline of the elves
in terms of death and destruction. Where once "the forest reached
from sea to sea and the elves were the undisputed masters of all the
land" they have been continually pushed back into smaller and smaller
regions--and the population levels of those provinces aren`t very
high. For instance, Tuarhieval recently lost Sideath and the rest of
the text spends a good amount of time talking about elven decline/glory days.

Pretty much all the descriptions of the elven domains describe their
decline in one way or another:

Isaelie knows "humans will eventually turn their gazes toward the
Sielwode. The elves won`t be able to resist them for long." RoE 69.

"Now the elves of the Sielwode are few and insular, those of the
Grovnekevic have all but died out, and the Lamia sits in the midst of
the once-great Rhuannadaraight." HotGB 35.

Rhuannach`s elves are "surrounded" and "hard-pressed to defend their
beloved forests...." CotS 45.

Lluabraight is a "remnant of the great and powerful elven kingdoms
that once thrived in this region." RH 57 and that elven realm has
recently lost two provinces. 58.

>I believe that may indeed be declining or have declined, but there
>is still the possibility of elven renewal. The very existence of
>elven PC realms and lack of restrictions on ruling elven provinces
>indicates the possibility of elven renewal should remain open.

Oh, I`m 100% with you on that. In fact, I argued quite a while ago
(and still would make the argument) that given the situation as
presented in the D&D/BR materials Cerilian elves would dominate and
be nigh unstoppable. Their immortality simply overpowers issues
having to do with birthrate because immortality makes for nearly
unstoppable level progression, meaning the entire population is
likely to be levelled up in a way that only a very small number of
mortals attain. Even with play at the domain level, high level elven
characters can be devastatingly powerful. I`ll set a wizard or two
with a couple of appropriate wands up against a unit of knights any
day. Charging knights look funny all smashed up Keystone Kop style
against a Wall of Force.... The argument that divine magics
overpower arcane ones strikes me as being entirely rhetorical and
dogmatic, and the idea that it is human procreation rates that makes
their population numbers higher strikes me as inadequate given that
we have other Cerilian races (gnolls, goblins, etc.) that breed
faster than humans, yet are not assumed to have a similar effect on the elves.

The "decline of the elves" is in many ways thematic rather than born
out by the actual materials. That said, theme is more important than
either background material or game mechanics, so supporting the idea
(at least in the beginning of a campaign) is a good thing, so I think
the decline should exist, but is best explained with rationales that
include those already in the background material, and expand upon
them. That`s why I like suggesting that the "real" reason behind
elven decline is the deforestation that human population engages in
when they expand. Other Cerilian races pretty well leave the trees
alone. Goblins, orogs and even gnolls pretty much leave the trees
alone. Only humans start stripping terrain.

Still, I`ve always liked the idea of a BR campaign based on the idea
of an "elven comeback."

Gary

[Rowan]

I think humanoid races are a threat because of their constant aggression and the difficulty of eradicating such fast-spawning creatures. Humans, however, are more of a threat when they unite in vast numbers and with great order and focus, bringing to bear huge, well-equipped armies supported by both arcane and divine magic. That said, I don't think elves are much threatened by anything less than the union of several powerful human realms, such as during the time of Anuirean Empire.

I am unsure how goblins could drive elves out of their forests, but for vast numbers, such things as demonic summonings, and general sneakiness.

I also think that elven province levels don't reflect populations the same way as humans. Elves accept government less readily than humans, suggesting that there are greater ungoverned populations than in most human lands. Elves are also less productive than humans, and, since province levels are more a measure of productivity than population, I would expect many more elves to live in a province of a given level than humans. Thus, a level 2 elven province might contain an elven population subjecting itself to rule equal to a level 4 province, but just be less productive, and a population aloof from the kingdom equivalent to another 1-4 province levels.

By this reasoning, I don't think elven provinces should have any restrictions on Ruling them, and their populations could be quite large even at current province levels. Elven decline is as much elven retreat as anything, and, now that their realms are (possibly) becoming more crowded, they could see that the time to reclaim what was lost has come. Even though the forests may have declined, after all, most of the Aelvinnwode remains under the control of non-elven peoples, as does the Erebannien. These could be resettled and consolidated if an elven resurgence took place during the absence of Anuirean unity.

[Beruin]

I also think that elven province levels don't reflect populations the same way as humans. Elves accept government less readily than humans, suggesting that there are greater ungoverned populations than in most human lands. Elves are also less productive than humans, and, since province levels are more a measure of productivity than population, I would expect many more elves to live in a province of a given level than humans. Thus, a level 2 elven province might contain an elven population subjecting itself to rule equal to a level 4 province, but just be less productive, and a population aloof from the kingdom equivalent to another 1-4 province levels.


I don't really buy the productivity argument. I'd agree that elves are slow producers, but their products are by far of higher quality. An elven artisan might only produce one piece for every ten pieces a human craftsman churns out, but his work will easily be worth ten times the price. In terms of revenue therefore, it evens out in the end.
OTOH, I can't really see an elven ruler taxing his subjects like a human king would, so we should perhaps think on how an elven realm would get its money. Voluntary contributions?

[Rowan]

Beruin, I agree with your point when it comes to guilds and trade routes. However, province income is from taxation, and, especially for more isolated elven realms, isn't gold so much as cash value resources like foodstuffs, cloth, military items. If taxation is used to cover domain action costs and mustering and providing for armies, I think it would need to be in the form of these other resources.

I doubt elves mass produce weaponry, for instance, though it is likely all masterwork, and they don't farm great stretches of land. So as far as province income is concerned, I do think they are less productive individually than humans (and the quality of those goods doesn't really matter at this level), though how much so is hard to quantify.

[kgauck]

However, province income is from taxation.

What is taxation but a cut from the labor of those who work? Who is taxed, what is taxed, and where is it taxed? These questions could have any answers. You can tax movement of people in the form of tolls, or goods in the form of tariffs, you can tax activities by use of fees. You can tax people, wealth, objects, almost anything you want. Province income can look like or be whatever you want. It can be identical to guild profits, temple incomes, or something entirely different.

Generally medieval taxes were non-monetary requirements for service. If you were a worker, you worked for the tax, if you were a warrior, you fought for your tax. Labor taxes are, one can reason, one of the more significant taxes for both elves and men.

The standard Anuirean calandar has 8 days a week. You can always calculate 12.5% by requiring one day of work (or service) per week. Or there are 48 weeks, so 48 days works out to the same figure. That way you can put the days together and raise armies that serve as a tax for 48 days, and require pay after that. If you want more or less as a tax rate, you can add days of labor or recognize holidays.

[Rowan]

Labor could be a "tax" for the elves, but again, I doubt elves would tax this to the extent that humans do, so their effective "productivity" would be less. That is, more elves population-wise would be needed to generate the same taxation "income" that an equivalent number of humans would bring.

"What is taxation but a cut from the labor of those who work?"

My point was that, while the fewer elven goods might be more valuable, they typically aren't traded in great numbers. Therefore the serviceable output of their goods is no greater. You're not taxing the gold an elf gets from his higher quality product, because he's not getting gold for it, typically. In this way, you can't take a "cut" from the value of the product. That's why I made the distinction between guilds/trade routes and province income.

This is all just opinion based on the flavor of the game to try to get a grasp on elven populations. I think it just gives some weight to the idea that elven populations could actually be just fine and pretty high, despite and irreflective of low province levels. Certainly there are still far fewer elves than humans, but I'm quite skeptical of the occasional reference I've seen in various places of the BR fanworld that there may only be a few thousand or even just a few tens of thousands of elves left.

[kgauck]

Taxes as coin is a modern thing. Most taxes in the middle ages were in kind. So our excellent elf craftsmen would be producing super-valuable goods for the whole of elf-kind. Marvelous swords, a few magic items, magnificent armor, upkeep of the thorn throne, the crystal palace, diplomacy with the forest itself, all of these could be products of elf labor rendered as a service to all of elf kind, in the name of the person of the ruler if you like.

To touch on Beruin's comment that, "I can't really see an elven ruler taxing his subjects like a human king would," I would point to conjectural or small scale political experiments writ large. Human government requires an amount of coersion, and in the background of all human states is the leviathan (Hobbes). Elf realms may be entirely non-coersive, as certain libertarians or anarchists imagine. The reason these political forms don't work for humans on a large scale is that humans don't easily form vast cooperative enterprises based on ideology. We lack ideological agreement, so attempts to gain ideological agreement turn coercive. It turns out its less coercive to get behavioral participation than it is to reach into the hearts and minds of men and impose ideological agreement. Western society came to this conclusion at the end of the Reformation as attempts to force conversion ended and governments began to grope towards tolerance.

Elves however, might already have ideological agreement, and so lack the need for a lawful disposition (of either the people or the state) to achieve large scale cooperation. Further, since a natural unity of action is stronger than a coerced unity, it could be weakened in other ways if the DM wants with room still to produce similar game effects as a coerced human population.

Its a truism that one enthusiastic group member produces far more than dozens (or some versions say 99) apathetic group members, so its quite possible that a smaller number of elves, enthusiastically doing what strikes them as best for elf-kind is far more effective than dozens or a hundred humans apathetically performing coerced duties directed by a single, lawful vision of the domain.

Even if you find such idealism ridiculous in human terms (and the experience with revolutionary communism and statist fascism strongly leads to that conclusion) there is no reason to argue that such could not work for elves. That elves have a different enough approach to community and realizing the good, either through a much longer experience of what is right and good or some better sense of the natural law.

[AndrewTall]

One point to note regarding production is not merely quality but durability. Much of human production will simply go to maintaining survival, replacing broken tools, etc. The elves are more likely to build to last, they may take 10 times as long to make shoes, tools, etc but if the shoes then last 50 times as long the elves are in fact 5 times as productive as their human counterparts...

Elves may also have many 'maintenance' productivity needs met by their mystical nature - as noted in previous threads elves may have very little need for crops, houses, etc meaning that the majority of production benefits society rather tan being absorbed to maintain it - allowing greater effective production than humans despite only a fractional of the actual output.

On the elven decline point this raises an interested aspect of elven philosophy. Increasingly aware in my dotage that winters of my youth were better (lots of clean crisp snow, none of this slushy rubbish) summers finer (long glorious days of sunshine) and so on; it may be that the older elves - those who pre-date human arrival in Cerilia- will never consider themselves as anything other than beleaguered - why barely a tree stands where once the ancient groves of Daulton stood proud!

As a result not only may the humans assume that the elves are in decline (as the elves don't war to claim land they are clearly weak) but the elves may also do so - since they remember far greater times. At some point in such a scenario inevitably younger elves who compare their modern strength to that post-Deismaar and see themselves as strong may predominate elven culture with potentially interesting times for all.

[geeman]

At 09:28 PM 1/3/2008, Rowan wrote:

>I am unsure how goblins could drive elves out of their forests, but for vast numbers, such things as demonic summonings, and general sneakiness.

They couldn`t, but for the same reasons that humans probably couldn`t be the dominate race on Cerilia if one were trying to portray the conflict between divine vs. arcane magics and/or birthrate vs. immortality. As a group goblins have the same advantages that supposedly (or are assumed to) give humanity an edge over elves: access to divine magics and population. In fact, when it comes to population numbers they are generally given a higher birthrate than humans, and with the exception of the Imperial City occupy the highest populated province in Cerilia. Essentially, the argument presented in the colour text of the BR materials is that divine magic allowed humanity to gain its foothold and begin pressing the elves back into ever smaller forest domains. However, EVERY Cerilian race that existed on the continent before human immigration had the same ability, so the commentary doesn`t really hold up.

>I also think that elven province levels don`t reflect populations the same way as humans. Elves accept government less readily than humans, suggesting that there are greater ungoverned populations than in most human lands. Elves are also less productive than humans, and, since province levels are more a measure of productivity than population, I would expect many more elves to live in a province of a given level than humans. Thus, a level 2 elven province might contain an elven population subjecting itself to rule equal to a level 4 province, but just be less productive, and a population aloof from the kingdom equivalent to another 1-4 province levels.

>By this reasoning, I don`t think elven provinces should have any restrictions on Ruling them, and their populations could be quite large even at current province levels. Elven decline is as much elven retreat as anything, and, now that their realms are (possibly) becoming more crowded, they could see that the time to reclaim what was lost has come. Even though the forests may have declined, after all, most of the Aelvinnwode remains under the control of non-elven peoples, as does the Erebannien. These could be resettled and consolidated if an elven resurgence took place during the absence of Anuirean unity.

Population levels are often problematic when trying to portray actual numbers. However they are interpreted (as productivity, actual population, technological differences, or any number of other influences folks have suggested) the materials we have pretty clearly show elves in decline compared to other Cerilian races. You`ll get no argument from me regarding the interpretation of population levels being made up of things other than raw numbers--I`ve argued in favor of large numbers of unaccounted for population numbers in Cerilia and I favor a much looser definition of what is represented by those actual numbers--but my point was that it`s hard to refute that Cerilian elves are *meant* to be in decline as they are represented by the population numbers. We don`t have any pre-Deismaar numbers to compare, but since they are described as having control over areas that spanned the continent, it`s pretty clear they`ve lost an awful lot of ground. Its hard to divorce that loss of real estate from a similar loss of actual population. People aren`t often displaced without a loss of numbers.... The only historical examples I can think of represent pretty small groups, and there are far more examples of the opposite. Far fewer people than is represented even by the rather low population numbers of Cerilian elves.

Gary

[Gman]

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

The assumption that cerilian elves cannot be priests cannot necessarily be made from rhe first part of this statement - just that the Sidhelien do not follow deities - and that they would not follow a regent that was a priest. I would think elvish lands (and in the magical sense of being empowered by the land) as well as the Sidhelien people would reject anyone who was so outlandish as to be a follower of human gods (or even have too many human friendly tendancies in some parts) but this would not stop a rogue following a god.

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.. . . As above.

The matter of how divine magic is actually cast also came up in discussions - my understanding is that the god grants the magic power to the worshiper - as opposed to wizard and sorcery or even Psionics - It doesn't seem like the worshiper needs to have any innate abilities - just to be accepted by a god who then empowers them with the spells. If a god chooses to accept an elf as a follower they can become a priest.

Thoughts?

[geeman]

At 09:33 PM 1/10/2008, Gman wrote:

>The assumption that cerilian elves cannot be priests cannot
>necessarily be made from rhe first part of this statement - just
>that the Sidhelien do not follow deities - and that they would not
>follow a regent that was a priest. I would think elvish lands (and
>in the magical sense of being empowered by the land) as well as the
>Sidhelien people would reject anyone who was so outlandish as to be
>a follower of human gods (or even have too many human friendly
>tendancies in some parts) but this would not stop a rogue following a god.

If an elf were to follow a god, though, I think the reaction amongst
his/er fellow elves would be predictably unpredictable. That is,
elves are in many ways an embodiment of the chaotic ideal, so where
some elves might seek to throw the elf out of the community, others
might react even more violently. Some might even be swayed by the
ideas expressed. Most would probably simply view that individual as
hopelessly and irretrievably insane; he would be someone who should
be pitied, and maybe taken care of in one way another for his own
good and the good of those with whom he comes into contact.

>The matter of how divine magic is actually cast also came up in
>discussions - my understanding is that the god grants the magic
>power to the worshiper - as opposed to wizard and sorcery or even
>Psionics - It doesn`t seem like the worshiper needs to have any
>innate abilities - just to be accepted by a god who then empowers
>them with the spells. If a god chooses to accept an elf as a
>follower they can become a priest.

As I`ve mentioned before in this thread, I think a Cerilian elf could
"follow" a human (or any) god, but s/he couldn`t "worship" that god
in the way that humans (or other mortal races) can. It`s simply
outside the capacity of their "spirit" the same way that other races
are simply prevented from taking levels as a wizard unless they have
a bloodline.

In essence, I don`t think even a god could make a priest out of a
Cerilian elf even if S/He wanted to because those magics and
abilities simply can`t take root in the elf`s body and spirit. In
order to have an elven priest the fundamental nature of that
character would have to change, and once that change takes place then
the character is no longer truly Sidhelien. If such a creature were
created it could look like an elf, have many of the same basic
abilities as an elf, but would lose the ability to take levels as a
wizard without a bloodline, might be very long lived, but would no
longer be immortal, and would probably be vulnerable to disease. In
short, such a unelf would be, for all intents and purposes, human (or
more likely a half-elf....)

Gary

[ryancaveney]

First, I don`t particularly get the feeling that elves are very concerned with things like safety.

I agree that from the POV of their human neighbors, they certainly seem that way, I don't think that's necessarily how the Sidhelien themselves feel. I think they seem that way to humans because many things that are very dangerous to humans are not really dangerous to elves at all. On the filp side, perhaps those few things that elves are concerned about are dangerous to the elves but aren't even noticed by humans -- e.g., IMO, going to a province with too low a source level is physically damaging to the elves, but poses no threat to any other species.


so things like living at the tops of trees without guardrails makes perfect sense. After all, it`s the view that matters.

You don't need guardrails if everyone can cast Feather Fall. =) Magic is as natural to the Sidhelien as breathing; therefore, I think their entire society is built upon the expectation of its pervasive use.


violence is in their nature, so violent death is an important factor in their death rate.

This didn't come out quite right -- we already know that they can *only* die of violence, so their death rate equals their violent deaths per unit time. Presumably you meant to distinguish between accidental death and murder, but the Sidhelien strike me as really hard to kill. Actually, tying this back into your comment on lack of concern for safety, I suspect that perhaps the leading cause of death is hubris: they are almost always perfectly safe when doing things which would be suicidally reckless for the average human, but that's because they have lots more magic power and levels than the average human. They only run into trouble when they get so used to being able to trivially squash whatever gets in their way that they get careless and stop looking for whether this human is the one-in-a-million situation which actually presents a threat. This is, in part, a version of your Vegas comment.


Another problem for elves is the simple ennui of immortality.

I disagree. Yes, I concur with the standard trope that *humans* aren't psychologically suited for immortality, but then humans aren't naturally immortal. The Sidhelien are, so they ought to be inherently psychologically suited for the infinite lifespan they naturally have.


it is possible imagine them "losing the will to fight" so hard, and allowing themselves to fall rather than carry on.

I don't think losing the will to carry on the struggle is the same thing as losing the will to live. After a few thousand years of fighting the goblins, maybe they take a few thousand years off to be trees, but I sincerely doubt they ever let themselves be slain.

[ryancaveney]

2. Elves can starve or die of thirst. Though it`s harder to starve an elf than a man because apparently elves require less nourishment and are able to draw the sustenance that they do need from the
environment more easily than can mortals, it is possible for them to be starved to death in, for example, a dungeon, so it stands to reason they could starve or die of thirst in extreme environments.

I have recommended before the idea that Sidhelien actually derive most of their nourishment from mebhiaghl. I think they starve to death in provinces with source potential zero even if they eat food constantly, but they never need to eat or drink at all when in provinces with source potential nine. This was inspired by my desires to make explicit their intimate ties to magic, explain their immortality in an in-game physics sense, and have their society completly lack peasants. Tying fertility to source potential is a natural part of this idea, but that won't limit their birthrate at all, since elves in their home forests have easy access to the highest source potentials in Cerilia.


3. Tolkien`s elves are ever young, but the period of their procreation is relatively short. They wed as young adults and generally have a small number of children (though there are exceptions) and then lose interest in sex

Thus spake the Catholic professor of linguistics born in Victorian England. ;) I think elves in whatever world have lots of sex (I don't really see how you can qualify as an embodiment of nature unless you do), but have very few children (since otherwise immortality very quickly leads to overpopulation). The early in life thing doesn't strike me as consistent with his published works, either -- Arwen and her brothers were born in the early centuries of the Third Age, but her father and his brother were born in the closing years of the First Age, more than 3,400 years before; Arwen herself is about 2,800 when she becomes a mother. And they're *half*-elves! I don't think elves having siblings who are 6,000 years apart is at all unlikely, and their society ought to accept that as perfectly normal.


4. Tolkien`s elves married once and for life. Again, he broke his own rules once or twice on this one, but generally speaking the marriage and procreating were synonymous concepts for Tolkien`s elves, and there was only one lifemate for such things.

It's that Victorian Catholic thing again. =) I doubt the highly fickle Cerilian elves ever get married at all, and if they do it certainly isn't for life. It probably looks like marriage for life to humans and goblins, but the immortal Sidhelien may very well think of living together for fifty years as the equivalent of humans hooking up for a weekend.


just as cutting down a tree will kill the dryad, cutting down a forest will kill the Sidhe. Proportionate numbers of deforested provinces could represent losses in the Sidhe population.

I heartily endorse this view myself, but there is a problem with using it to explain elven decline: they know it too, so they will take steps to prevent it. The Sidhelien warred with the goblins two thousand years before the first humans came to Cerilia, so they would certainly have realized at the time that this was a problem, and been ready when the humans came. Yes, if you could somehow cut down all the trees, it would probably kill all the elves -- but in practice, the elves will come to defend the trees, so you will have to kill them first anyway before you can cut down the forest.

[Magnus Argent]

Cerilian elves have no inherent inability to worship gods. Cerilia simply lacks gods who inspire faith and devotion in its elven population.

[Gman]

Hmm did the Elves "worship" Azrai in the war of the shadow. They certainly were his "Followers".
(just another reason to dislike gods in any case) - It just seems to me that the ability to worship gods is in any sentient being - I can understand all cerlian elves having a strong distain for the worship of gods but I can't read this as spiritual incapacity to worship a god and receive priests powers.

Also most elves would think of a elvish priest as a human loving affront to their way of life and a follower of the powers that caused their fall from power; a loser who wants to personally repeat the fall of Azrai; displaying a complete lack of respect for their culture etc. but can't see why they wouldn't have the ability for it if some jerk maverick wants to be rejected by the entire elvish population.

They certainly have the ability to absorb "divine essence" in the form of blood powers (but I guess so do rocks and swords.)

[ryancaveney]

I think deaths to accidents and natural disasters would tend to be far less than among human populations, and for humans those numbers are normally pretty low, proportionate to the population.

Yup! Among humans, accidental death is overwhelmingly a phenomenon of young males engaged in provisioning activities (e.g., bitten by snake while hunting deer) or showing off to impress young females. Once Sidhelien reached roughly the same level of mental maturity as a thirty-year-old human (which I think happens when they're about thirty, just like with humans, if not a bit earlier), their accidental death rate would fall way off -- and unlike humans, it would not pick up again once they got old, because they don't ever get physically infirm. They are also much less subject to accidental death because they are completely immune to all natural diseases -- no matter how badly they're wounded, they can't ever get gangrene. Add pervasive magic to this, and the accidental death rate drops to near zero after toddlerhood.


I believe even the BR canon would suggest that old elves still have children.

Fhilerwyn was Prince of Tuarhievel for 858 years before the birth of his son, Fhileraene. He was already a prominent general at that time, and he was clearly blooded, so he was very likely at Deismaar, 436 years before he became Prince. Therefore, the only birthdates we have for any Cerilian Sidhelien (admittedly, from the deservedly-maligned Player's Secrets of Tuarhievel) indicate pretty strongly that Fhilerwyn was at least 1,300 years old before his son was born. He was also married for the last 270 years of that, but I stand by my earlier remark that I think Sidhelien marriage is very rare, and never permanent.


I always figured elves may have quite large families and have strong, extended familial bonds.

I've often wondered about this. In the 18,000 years since Sidhe Braelachheim started the Golden Age of elven culture, how many generations have there been? How many before that did elves first spring into being from the union of the elements? Elves may have the concept "sixth cousin" from studying the other species, but have there ever actually been any elves in practice who were that distantly related? If multiple different elven strains separately coalesced from the elements (as I suspect), how many elves aren't related to each other *at all* (in contrast to humans, and indeed every species that actually evolved from earlier ones, which can all be traced back to a single primordial individual)?


I'll also note that I think BR (and D&D in general) tends to grossly underestimate populations, especially of demihumans. Cerilia probably still has well over a million elves. If it's as large a continent as Western Europe, it could easily have a total population of over 50 million (corresponding to perhaps 13th century Europe). If it's Renaissance period we're talking about and Cerilia is only as large as France, it could still have over 50 million people, if my memory serves me right.

Oh yeah! This is a favorite topic of mine (Gary's and Kenneth's, too). The canon BR figure is 7.2 million on the whole continent, including all sentient species. Officially, the largest group is Anuireans (1.8 million), followed closely by the Brecht (1.7 million), then Khinasi (970,000), Vos (820,000), Goblins (530,000), Sidhelien (500,000), Rjurik (410,000), Dwarves (170,000), Gnolls (130,000), Orogs (96,000), Halflings (94,000) and Masetians (37,000, all in the Serpent's Realm). This is calculated by adding up the squares of all the province levels on the continent to obtain population in thousands, as Kenneth suggested many years ago as an elegant and extremely close fit to the table on pages 33 to 34 of the original rulebook. For purposes of this calculation, I counted level zero provinces as 1/2 before squaring, giving 250 people each.

However, this is obviously nonsense. =) Based on 14th-century France, since Anuire is "more than 350,000 square miles" (Ruins of Empire p. 3), Anuire alone should have more than 36 million people (which probably includes some goblins, elves and dwarves, but is still a good benchmark). Therefore, multiplying the figures in the paragraph above by a factor of ten is the bare minimum adjustment, and multiplying by twenty is very realistic -- that gives a reasonable estimate of about ten million elves on the continent. I'd like to get into the population discussion more deeply, but I'll take that to another thread, which I probably won't start until next weekend.

[geeman]

At 07:41 PM 1/13/2008, Magnus Argent wrote:

>Cerilian elves have no inherent inability to worship gods. Cerilia
>simply lacks gods who inspire faith and devotion in its elven population.

They did manage to "follow" Azrai, though there`s no evidence they
actually "worshipped" him in the sense that you`re suggesting. Bear
in mind that Azrai isn`t nearly so similar to the Sidhelien POV as
Erik/Reynir or even Ruornil/Vorynn, and the idea that the Sidhe would
not worship and become priests of either of those gods strikes me as
very dubious, particularly when considered in light of existing BR
materials such as the Church of Treucht.

In fact, I find the suggesting that none of the gods are apt for the
Sidhe pretty difficult to support. Aside from the most obvious
(Erik) and the only slightly less obvious (Ruornil) there are other
aspects of the Cerilian gods worshipped by humans would be a good fit
for elves if they had the ability to worship them. Laerme`s aspect
as the goddess of beauty and art seems apt. Sera`s chaotic aspect as
the goddess of luck also would be attractive to the similarly chaotic
elves. And let`s not forget that Avani is the patroness of
magic--surely that`d appeal to the only Cerilian race capable of
casting arcane magic as part of their basic nature.

In the past folks have sometimes argued that the Sidhe should be
allowed to be druids as that role most closely resembles their own
attitudes towards nature. I don`t ascribe to that opinion, but it
should be noted that the abstract concept of "Nature" as a mystical
force that druids can focus upon is embodied in the BR concept of the
Land`s Choice, so if it were possible for them to be druids, the
Sidhe would be even more likely than elves in other settings since
their "god" is palpable and directly influences things as part of
their inheritance structure. Rangers appear to still gain their
powers from this relationship. We should also bear in mind that
there are priests that appear to still be dedicated to Azrai despite
his death 1,500 years ago, and there are priests in a temple
structure dedicated to the Serpent, so becoming a priest in BR is in
some ways easier than in other settings. Priests (or priestly
powers) are derived from dedication to something dead, abstract or
even not a god appear to be possible in BR--yet the Sidhe have none of that.

Aside from the fact that it expressly says the Sidhe cannot become
priests, there are NO exceptions to that rule in any of the published
materials. There are exceptions to even more directly states rules
in the published materials all the time.

However, if you can find some sort of support for your suggestion
that they can become priests but just choose not to then I`d be
interested to hear it....

Gary

[kgauck]

Aside from the fact that it expressly says the Sidhe cannot become priests, there are NO exceptions to that rule in any of the published materials. There are exceptions to even more directly states rules in the published materials all the time.

Given the frequency of exceptions to other kinds of rules, the complete absence of exceptions really does seem to be telling.

I'm prefectly content with the idea that their constitution which allows for the natural use of arcane magic does so in a way that cuts them off from divine magic. Whether this is a game balance issue, a result of the split of seelie and sidhe, or a side effect of mebhiaghl's nurishment, you can pick and choose the explaination, but it does seem incontravertable based on the official materials.

[ryancaveney]

However, if you can find some sort of support for your suggestion that they can become priests but just choose not to then I`d be interested to hear it.

Actually, I think the arguments you make *are* the support of his suggestion.

I agree that many of the ideals of which the gods are patrons are vitally important to the Sidhelien, but I sincerely doubt they care at all about (or at least have any positive opinion of) any of the current generation of human gods. There are elves alive who are much older than Erik, Ruornil, Avani, et al., may well have known them personally, were on the battlefield just 1524 years ago when they died, and a few may in fact have killed those human champions themselves. If they did worship anybody, it would be the old gods (Reynir, Vorynn, Basaia, et al.), or some other set entirely (Manwe and Varda, Corellon and Sehanine, or whatever) rather than the new ones (who they view basically as Sid and Nancy -- or Kurt and Courtney for you youngsters out there).

As you rightly say, priestly powers can be drawn from almost anything, with no need to have an active deity. Furthermore, many of the spells priests can cast are identical to the ones wizards can; this is especially true if you use 3e as a game system. There's certainly nothing that stops wizards from claiming to be priests and priests claiming to be wizards (I think this is what most of the wizards in Vosgaard and Rjurik do), and the commons can't reliably tell the difference. This has always very strongly implied to me that there is no essential difference between "arcane" and "divine" magic, particularly from the POV of the one species whose members don't need a bloodline to cast true magic. At the very least, it explicitly states that you can have priestly powers even if the thing you profess to worship can't answer your prayers, or in fact doesn't exist at all. Also, most of the people who worship in a temple aren't priests, they're the congregation. Anyone can sing hymns and make sacrifices to anything they want, which is what constitutes "worship" in my book, but that is entirely independent of whether they can cast Cure Disease. Therefore, the "because" in the rulebook should be an "and" -- worshipping gods and having the character class priest are independent concepts, and the elves have neither.

Therefore, I think elves manifestly can worship gods, in the sense of having parties where the guest of honor is imaginary, but they choose not to because they know there's no point. They can get plenty of magic without saying dead humans are nifty, and they don't like humans, especially the ones who led the fight against them at Deismaar, so I think elves view Haelyn cultists the way modern Americans would view Charles Manson cultists: dangerous lunatics who can be trusted only to betray and murder your family.

My own feeling is that the best way to model this in terms of character classes is to say that the people called druids (i.e., people who lead worship services to Erik) have the class called priest or cleric, with the specification that they worship Erik rather than Avani or the others (much like clerics of Obad-Hai in 3e Greyhawk); on the other hand, the class called druid (i.e., those people who get their magical powers directly from nature) is by far a better description of the Sidhelien than is doing research in libraries with wierd formulas from strange books and alchemical apparatus (the traditional style of the people with the wizard class). Therefore, I say elves don't have levels in PHB wizard, they have levels in PHB druid -- but in the game world, other people in Cerilia call elves wizards and call Erik's priests druids (which I grant is confusing, but I think is the best way to make sense of the setting and the rules at the same time). In my own 3e game, I just make the PHB druid the elven racial class, which no non-elves can access, and I give Erik's worship-leaders the PHB cleric class, with domains Plant, Animal and Earth. My 2e mechanic is more complicated to explain, but basically works the same way. I think "druid" is the name of a social role, not a character class, just as I think of the word "paladin".

The Sidhelien are plugged into nature's magic (mebhaighl) far more deeply than any other creature (garradalaighs aside), and thematically shouldn't be studying spellbooks in dusty indoor laboratories, so I think the setting of Cerilia is measurably enhanced if we make their primary character class the one PHB calls druid rather than the one PHB calls wizard. They choose not to worship gods because they know they don't need to -- they can get their powers either way -- and worshipping the same dead humans who killed your uncle is the height of bad taste.

[Rowan]

Elves couldn't have worshipped Azrai because they didn't know who/what he was until Deismaar; when they learned of that deception, most changed sides.


I agree that the Druid spell list is highly appropriate for elves, but I disagree that elves shouldn't be anything like traditional arcane spellcasters. They're not as wild and nature-focused as fey in the canon; that's why the Seelie are different. Instead, they build fixed structures (all those elven towers and ruins referred to frequently), forge kingdoms and have nobility of some kind. Again, they seem more like Tolkien's elves than like fey.

That would allow for elven wizards. I solve the problem by letting elves be wizards who have access to the entire druid spell list (also demonstrating that they have greater knowledge of spells--more spells overall--than any other race), but only access to anti-undead necromancy, and social restrictions limiting Evocation spells and even to some extent Summoning spells to rare occasions.

I've never liked the Sorcerer class, personally, and felt that, while it talks about instinctive magic, it's way too restrictive for elves--not enough spells known for them to be "masters of magic." I also hate spell preparation (hoping they fix that by dumping the "Vancian" magic system in 4e). So I just let elves cast any spells known spontaneously (I actually use a system like spell points, but you could still use slots), or give them Spell Mastery at every level and let them cast those spells spontaneously.

As for favored class, I say it's Bard. I figure that the versatility of the Bard, the spell selection, focus on song, Lore, etc. is so fitting to the elf that most elves (even "commoners") are Bards of some level.

Just my solutions.

[Thelandrin]

So, spontaneous wizards with druid spells? That class'll be easy to design :)

I designed a quick feat to allow an Elf to become a druid without worshipping Erik and without getting regency from temples, but that was the extent of my manipulations.

[kgauck]

If we're talking spell lists, then sure, I agree that elves are druids, and I call them taelinri. I've we're talking class features than I disagree, because of all the druid class features, they are either totally inappropriate for elves, or the elves have them as racial features. Certainly some of these could be taelinri class features and everyone has enough taelinri levels to gave them, but that only goes so far.

The core druid class feature aside from spellcasting and the sidhe-like ones, is wildshape, and this is all over the Rjurik cultural stuff, and absent from the elves.

Rather I prefer a taelinri class that is like a wizard class (mostly metamagic feats) with a druid and elemental spell list, and the elves have the racial features of nature stride, and so on.

Of course taelinri spend their time around source manifestations, and advising sidhe lords, teaching the young, and not in labratories, libraries, or such scholarly stuff.

[geeman]

At 11:15 AM 1/14/2008, kgauck wrote:

>If we`re talking spell lists, then sure, I agree that elves are
>druids, and I call them taelinri. I`ve we`re talking class features
>than I disagree, because of all the druid class features, they are
>either totally inappropriate for elves, or the elves have them as
>racial features. [snip]
>...
>The core druid class feature aside from spellcasting and the
>sidhe-like ones, is wildshape, and this is all over the Rjurik
>cultural stuff, and absent from the elves.

Agreed. The D&D druid character class isn`t appropriate for the
Sidhe for several reasons, not the least of which is their class
features. There are certain commonalities in the way they both
fetishize nature, but on the whole the druid form is so... well,
human. I like to extend the character classes into new and sometimes
divergent ways. For instance, I`ve argued in the past that there
should be paladin character classes for just about all of the
Cerilian gods. But I`d not argue that there should be Sidhelien
paladins.... Aside from the fact that I see the difference between
druids and priests of Erik to be significant (if somewhat difficult
to grasp from a game mechanical POV) the Sidhe are IMO simply meant
not to have the capacity to worship in that way.

>Rather I prefer a taelinri class that is like a wizard class (mostly
>metamagic feats) with a druid and elemental spell list, and the
>elves have the racial features of nature stride, and so on.
>
>Of course taelinri spend their time around source manifestations,
>and advising sidhe lords, teaching the young, and not in
>labratories, libraries, or such scholarly stuff.

The Taelinri are a good equivalent in Sidhelien culture for the
priests of Erik in Rjurik lands or, for that matter, priests in
general amongst the elves. They are described as having a similar
role. Their simple existence is also a pretty good argument against
Sidhelien priests because if there could be/were such a thing as
elves who could cast divine magics then they`d likely replace the
Taelinri pretty quickly given the actual roles of those classes game
mechanically and from the POV of the setting`s background dynamics.

What kinds of feats and spell list do you use to portray the taelinri?

Gary

[Rowan]

I agree that druid class features don't work for Sidhe. That's why I limit to just adding the druid spell list to the wizard list. No RP from temples or anything like that either.

Between these wizards, rangers, and bards, you've got a pretty magical elven society.

[geeman]

At 05:19 AM 1/14/2008, ryancaveney wrote:

>I agree that many of the ideals of which the gods are patrons are
>vitally important to the Sidhelien, but I sincerely doubt they care
>at all about (or at least have any positive opinion of) any of the
>current generation of human gods. There are elves alive who are
>much older than Erik, Ruornil, Avani, et al., may well have known
>them personally, were on the battlefield just 1524 years ago when
>they died, and a few may in fact have killed those human champions
>themselves. If they did worship anybody, it would be the old gods
>(Reynir, Vorynn, Basaia, et al.), or some other set entirely (Manwe
>and Varda, Corellon and Sehanine, or whatever) rather than the new
>ones (who they view basically as Sid and Nancy -- or Kurt and
>Courtney for you youngsters out there).

I would agree that the elves attitude towards the new gods would be
influenced by Sidhelien immortality. They would look upon them as
"newcomers" as it were. But I don`t think that attitude is
substantially different from their attitude towards the old gods, who
were "contemporaries" more than "gods" and that it isn`t really an
attitude per se so much as it is a fundamental inability. We don`t
have reams of material on the antebellum period of Cerilia, but there
is a good amount of text that addresses this pretty directly, and
there are no examples of historical Sidhelien priests either, and as
was noted if they could have worshipped the gods in the way that
humans can (by becoming priests) then wouldn`t that have at least
occurred when they started following Azrai by the thousands? There`s
no description of them worshipping ANY of the old gods. In fact,
that inability is described as being the cause of their decline.

There is some suggestion that the Sidhe are interested in an abstract
force of Nature, and that could take the role of some old, old
gods. But, again, there`s no suggestion that they worship that force
of nature in the way that humans worship the gods. Even as they rely
on the mystical Land`s Choice as part of their inheritance structure,
they do not worship it in any sense. Of course, one could homebrew a
sort of abstract godly concept and use that as the basis for elves
employing divine magics and having access to a druid character class,
but that strikes me as a direct contradiction of one of the few
actually hard and fast rules in the Birthright setting....

Gary

[geeman]

At 10:04 AM 1/14/2008, Thelandrin wrote:

>So, spontaneous wizards with druid spells? That class`ll be easy to design :)

I made them specialty wizards that focused on a Nature school of
magic and had a few different class skills geared towards a
teacher/scholar emphasis. There is a list of spells in that school
somewhere in the archives if you`re interested. Its fairly simple,
employs existing BR dynamics and some of the standard 3e mechanics,
so all in all I found it a pretty elegant solution. However, the
existence of a Nature school of magic was quite contentious, so be
aware that the materials are nestled in the midst of one of the
occasional BR debates and that if you use such a method some folks
might not like it much....

>I designed a quick feat to allow an Elf to become a druid without
>worshipping Erik and without getting regency from temples, but that
>was the extent of my manipulations.

Personally, I really don`t like the idea of Sidhelien druids in
BR. It strikes me as being on the same level as other "D&D
intrusions" into the setting that folks have wanted to include in the
past like Cerilian gnomes, or a ninja character class. But I would
be interested in your feat write up. How did it go?

Gary

[Thelandrin]

It's in my house rules on the wiki: http://www.birthright.net/brwiki/index.php/User:Thelandrin/House_Rules_Thelandrin. It's not a terribly good feat, I'll admit, but it served its purpose at the time I wrote it. It could probably be improved, but I think that someone else's input would be preferable.

As an alternative to wild shape, you could always use the elemental aspects mentioned in Unearthed Arcana instead of animal transformation. That would still keep with the elemental theme and, when you alter druids to channel the mebhaighl instead of worshipping Erik and allow them to use sources rather than temples, would present a suitably Sidhelien nature guardian. You could also swap out the druid's Nature's Stride for the Endurance feat (identical to Ranger 3) if you were worried about duplication of racial abilities.

[Magnus Argent]

At 07:41 PM 1/13/2008, Magnus Argent wrote:

>Cerilian elves have no inherent inability to worship gods. Cerilia
>simply lacks gods who inspire faith and devotion in its elven population.

I find the suggesting that none of the gods are apt for the
Sidhe pretty difficult to support. Aside from the most obvious
(Erik) and the only slightly less obvious (Ruornil) there are other
aspects of the Cerilian gods worshipped by humans would be a good fit
for elves if they had the ability to worship them. Laerme`s aspect
as the goddess of beauty and art seems apt. Sera`s chaotic aspect as
the goddess of luck also would be attractive to the similarly chaotic
elves. And let`s not forget that Avani is the patroness of
magic--surely that`d appeal to the only Cerilian race capable of
casting arcane magic as part of their basic nature.

.
.

Aside from the fact that it expressly says the Sidhe cannot become
priests, there are NO exceptions to that rule in any of the published
materials. There are exceptions to even more directly states rules
in the published materials all the time.

.
.

However, if you can find some sort of support for your suggestion that they can become priests but just choose not to then I`d be interested to hear it....

I think I am relying on the same rule you are: Boxed Set -> BR Rulebook -> Character Classes (p12). The section that describes the priest class explicitly states that the lack of elven priests is due to a lack of elven deities:

"The Sidhelien have no deities at all (thus, Cerilian elves cannot be priests)."

The above seems to imply that if elven deities existed, elven priests would exist as well. This is the basis of my first assertion: that there is no inherent inability to worship among Cerilian elves. Again, the rules don't say they lack the ability to worship, it states they lack deities to worship.

As to my second assertion -- that Cerilia lacks deities that inspire the elven population to faith and worship -- not only is it a logical extrapolation of my first assertion but the history of the setting firmly supports it as well.

In short, when humanity first came to Cerilia, they sided with the elves and dwarves against the goblins and orogs. After they won that war, the winning side divided the land amongst themselves: the dwarves got the mountain regions, elves were to reside in the forests, and the plains were given to the humans. But after only a few short centuries of peace, humans betrayed the elves by invading their forests.

And they did so with the blessing of their gods.

Of the gods who came to Cerilia with the humans, only one offered elves any sympathy: Azrai. He came to them and offered them justice and retribution, tricking them into fighting on his side in the War of Shadow. Only at the end of the war did the elves realize Azrai's promises were nothing but lies.

History shows that elves have been betrayed time and again by humans and their gods. That's why they created the gheallie sidhe. That's why elven realms tend to close their borders to humans. And that's why I made the assertion that Cerilia lacks deities who inspire faith and worship among the elven population.

-

Now, having said that.. the Battle at Mount Deismaar was 1500 years ago. Although there are many elves alive who remember that event, there are also elves who were born in the past few centuries. These younger elves didn't experience those betrayals first-hand. Life as it is today is all the current generation knows. It is conceivable that a young elf might be enticed to become a follower of Erik or Ruornil or Laerme.

I do agree with the notion of 'exceptions to the rule'. Especially when that exception is a player character or an NPC created by a DM for a campaign storyline.

[kgauck]

The above seems to imply that if elven deities existed, elven priests would exist as well.

Your argument seems to rest on the principle that if things were different, they would be different. Which is true, but not very interesting. As things are, could elves have divine spells to cast (which is the backbone of the priest class)? Putting aside the question of changing the setting, is the absence of elven gods a coincidence? Or is this bit of text just one in a long line of sloppy lines that can't be the reliable basis of an exegetical reading of the rules because it conflicts with other parts of the rules?

It would seem like if it were possible someone would have done it by now, and we have no evidence of that, despite plenty of exceptions to other rules. Gary's argument just seems stronger. There are plenty of opportunities for it to happen, the rules are filled with contradictions, yet this principle is never violated. Sure, it could be a coincidence. Perhaps if an elf diety revealed himself we would know for sure. But without that, the sidhe-seelie split and the division of arcane and divine that happens there seems to provide a clear exaplantion of why we never see that execption. Its just not possible.

Its not so starkly obvious that another reading is impossible, but the evidence is much stronger for the argument that elves are incapable of divine magic.

[geeman]

>The above seems to imply that if elven deities existed, elven
>priests would exist as well.

I`d agree that that one statement does imply exactly that. However,
it`s not the only source material that describes this situation, and
we are remiss to use the implication of one sentence and ignore the
direct statements made elsewhere, especially since this particular
implication can turn in so many ways:

In regards to the implications of that one statement, though, I would
ask why aren`t there any elven gods in the first place? They just
aren`t there for no reason? The gods of other Cerilian non-human
species are just `ported into the setting from the standard D&D
pantheons. We have Moradin and In some cases they are treated
slightly differently, but the simple fact of the matter is that if
Cerilian elves were meant to worship gods, they`d have gods. Even if
they weren`t able to become priests but could still "follow" gods (to
use that term in the way I`ve been suggesting for the sake of
clarity) then they could still have gods. There are plenty of gods
in various pantheons dedicated to abstract concepts like love and
nature and magic that would be appropriate for elves to follow--just
as they could follow the human gods who represent those things--but
there is a total absence of elven deities.

This is, of course, to a large extent meant to balance the thematic
role of elves as having access to arcane magic as opposed to divine
magic, but the profundity of that change is significant. I`ll not go
into any details about the whole theological "does believe create the
gods or do the gods create belief" thing, because it`s not all that
enlightening and I`ve already penned some thoughts about elven
psychology recently, but instead I`ll leave this bit off with this
thought: every other Cerilian species who have existed for less time
in the setting than the Sidhe have either developed gods or quickly
found that capacity. Not so for the elves despite several examples
and thousands of years to practise such belief.

Also, consider the Sie, the Seelie and the Unseelie. We know from
Bloodspawn that in ancient times the elves were able to cast divine
spells in a way that is comparable, if thematically a bit different,
to the 2e abstract religious manner of spell memorization using
"nature" as their focus, and it says in that text explicitly that the
ancient Seelie the capacity to cast divine magics was literally
ripped from those who became the Sidhe. (The Faeire Queen still has
wizard levels, but she lived in the time before the split, so the
exact nature of her magic is unclear.) The Unseelie are undead who
have definite clerical powers, also in contrast with the Sidhe.

Gary

[ryancaveney]

If we're talking class features than I disagree, because of all the druid class features, they are either totally inappropriate for elves, or the elves have them as racial features. Certainly some of these could be taelinri class features and everyone has enough taelinri levels to gave them, but that only goes so far.

Nature Sense, Woodland Stride, Trackless Step, Resist Nature's Lure, Venom Immunity and Timeless Body are all obviously elven racial traits. Animal Companion and A Thousand Faces are also very appropriate. I consider the fact that every single druid class feature except Wild Shape makes an excellent elven racial trait to be a good argument for adding Wild Shape to the list of elven racial traits. This is especially true since people with lots of druid class levels can transform into elementals -- and in Cerilia, that is very appropriate for elves, and only elves should be capable of that. Therefore, IMC, every single elf in Cerilia has half their levels in a slightly-modified PHB druid class, as an inherent part of being an elf.


on the whole the druid form is so... well, human.

I don't see it that way at all. Instead, to me, human druids have always seemed merely wannabe elves.


there are no examples of historical Sidhelien priests either, and as was noted if they could have worshipped the gods in the way that humans can (by becoming priests) then wouldn`t that have at least occurred when they started following Azrai by the thousands?

Not as far as I'm concerned. They don't need to be priests to cast powerful magic, so the only reason to become one is if it seems like fun. Their committment to freedom from authority is so absolute that worshipping any being but themselves counts as a kind of moral suicide. IMO, they have nothing but contempt for those who seek power through subordination to the will of another -- which is precisely what gaining priest levels, especially pre-Deismaar, is all about. Having Azrai as a useful but never trusted temporary ally is nothing remotely like paying homage to him, or even believing he's a god at all.


the existence of a Nature school of magic was quite contentious

I still think most of that acrimony was caused simply by an overly narrow interpretation of the word "school". If we'd just said from the start that it's supposed to be another "descriptor", like Mind-Affecting, Lawful and Sonic, rather than another "school" like Conjuration and Necromancy, there'd have been much less useless bloviating. =) I can see no possible objection to making a list of the sort of spells that elves like to cast.


Personally, I really don`t like the idea of Sidhelien druids in BR. It strikes me as being on the same level as other "D&D intrusions" into the setting

Really? I can't think of any class which has ever seemed more appropriate to any race in any setting than thinking of the 3e PHB "druid" class as a convenient container for the inherent powers of the Sidhelien. I'd rather have Vos who couldn't be barbarians than elves who couldn't be druids -- as long as the term "druid" is used exactly as I have used it above, meaning the character class which consists of primary spellcasters who get their funky powers from being part of nature. I'd rather Cerilia have whole realms full of ninja gnomes with laser guns than Sidhelien who wouldn't rather kill themselves than worship a god.

In a way, then, I suppose I always have believed that elves inherently couldn't be priests, but I never thought of expressing it that way. The way you've phrased and supported "fundamental inability" strikes me as meaning they don't have the right adapter to plug into the godly wall socket, but some of them would like to. What I think is that the inherent psychology of elves renders them incapable of *wanting* to do so, irrespective of whether they would be able to if they did want to. I think they could get spells from gods if they wanted to, but the very concept of wanting to is wholly alien to what it means to be a Sidhe.

[ryancaveney]

why aren`t there any elven gods in the first place? ... Even if they weren`t able to become priests but could still "follow" gods (to use that term in the way I`ve been suggesting for the sake of clarity) then they could still have gods.

Which is exactly why I think the explanation for why they don't have gods cannot be that they don't have access to the priest class, which is what your descriptions of fundamental inability imply to me. They have to not even have invented the idea of gods because they just didn't want to, where "didn't want to" is so overwhelmingly strong that it counts as "completely psychologically unable to." It's the concept of "following" that they have to be incapable of, not the act of having priest levels, or they would have prayer meetings even without gaining extra spells from them.


Also, consider the Sie, the Seelie and the Unseelie. We know from Bloodspawn that... the capacity to cast divine magics was literally ripped from those who became the Sidhe... The Unseelie are undead who have definite clerical powers, also in contrast with the Sidhe.

I knew I stopped reading Bloodspawn partway through many years ago, but I had forgotten why I stopped. Thank you for reminding me. Such a split in their natures is ridiculous to me: I think the Sie, Sidhe, Seelie and Unseelie are all just different names for the same people, who always were and still are complicated and inconstant. I think Sidhe is the only one they've ever used themselves, and the other names are just misspellings and misinterpretations by confused outsiders. In particular, I think the one and only difference between the "nice" Seelie and the "mean" Unseelie is that they are names humans give *to the same elf* depending on whether he tortures you to death that day or not.

[kgauck]

I'd rather Cerilia have whole realms full of ninja gnomes with laser guns than Sidhelien who wouldn't rather kill themselves than worship a god.
This isn't too bad really, as long as they don't have jet packs. That would be crossing the line.

[irdeggman]

I knew I stopped reading Bloodspawn partway through many years ago, but I had forgotten why I stopped. Thank you for reminding me. Such a split in their natures is ridiculous to me: I think the Sie, Sidhe, Seelie and Unseelie are all just different names for the same people, who always were and still are complicated and inconstant. I think Sidhe is the only one they've ever used themselves, and the other names are just misspellings and misinterpretations by confused outsiders. In particular, I think the one and only difference between the "nice" Seelie and the "mean" Unseelie is that they are names humans give *to the same elf* depending on whether he tortures you to death that day or not.


And yet it goes a real long way towards explaining a lot of things about the elven nature.

I find it perfectly logical that the eixistance of the Sie and the split when the worlds "split" places the Sidhe and Seelie (via the Sie) as so strongly tied to the "world" that this "split" had to happen.

I especially like the part where only the queen "remembers" what happend, again a dramatic effect of the sudden "split".