Taelinri -- The Game Mechanics [Archive]

kgauck

01-24-2008, 08:35 PM

A standard 1st level character class?

For me, elves are not wizards or druids, their spellcasters are Taelinri. Not all members of the Taelinri character class perform all of the functions of the Taelinri social class, but that's true for nobles, clerics, and other character classes that overlap with social groups. So I just merged (is mash-up more current?) wizards and druids, by keeping all of the class design (features, hit dice, skill list) of wizards, and then changing the spell list to be the druid spell list, plus almost anything with an elemental descriptor. After that there were a few tweaks left, like changing the familiar to an animal companion, adding the nature skills to the Taelinri skill list, but basically its a 20 level standard class (the only spellcasting class other than bard for elves) just like wizard.

I am prone to changing how spells work while leaving the base mechanics alone, so I prefer for elves to favor enchantment, illusion, and summoning (while humans are more enchantment, illusion, and divination). The BoM says elves don't like summoning because of free will issues, so I just change how elf summonings work from being a compulsion to an alarm sent out to allies and friends from among the animals summoned.

I wouldn`t want to ontologically comit to anything so close to 4th
edition. I would prefer to remain open at this point and see what makes sense in May.

I remain committedly uncommitted to anything inside or outside 3e, 4e
or D&D in general...

I look back on my 3.0 conversion and was really more like a 2.5 edition, a lot of what I was
doing was thinking in 2.0 and expressing myself in 3.0. Part of this was because my source material was 2.0 and my game system was 3.0, but part was I had developed so many ideas in 2.0 that I didn't want to part with yet. Later I would find 3.5 ways to get to the same end without old school mechanics. The only thing I really have left over from 2.0 now, is that every priesthood still gets its own class. Clerical domains and feat selection doesn't quite get me the difference I found so appealing in 2.0 between priesthoods. Although, if I were to write this all from scratch today, I'd go PHB II and call them class variants, and who would know?

I felt that 3.0 was much better than 2.0 and that 3.5 was so much better still, I was able to abandon almost all home rules for brown book variants (I think only my own AC system remains). Now as I list to wizards podcasts and read the boards and get my sense of 4.0 I think its even closer to how I play the game than 3.5, so I'm going into 4.0 with anticipation, not reservation.

Beruin

01-25-2008, 01:20 AM

I thought this fitted better in this thread:

The way the Taelinri are described emphasizes that they can be out-standing mages, warriors, philosophers or craftsmen, because the elves see the merit in each and every profession without distinguishing socially between blue and white collar professions so-to-speak. I for one can't really see how a playable prestige class would look like that really offers something to all basic classes. An alternative might be to develop a number of prestige classes based on a common theme, i.e. Taelinri mage, Taelinri warrior, Taelinri expert and so on.

Sounds like the bard class to me.

No, you got me wrong here I believe. The bard dabbles in a number of fields, but he is not a master in a particular field. In this regard, a Taelinir is the opposite of the bard. In my view, each Taelinir is regarded as a specialized master in a particular field, but each Taelinir can specialize in a different field. An elf might be an outstanding farmer and this would qualify him to become a Taelinir, as the elves would regard his knowledge and expertise as equally worthy of admiration as the knowledge of a master wizard or the skill of a master swordsman.
For this reason, there should be different paths available for becoming a Taelinir.
A prestige class for the farmer taelinir should allow him to continue specializing in farming, perhaps via skill focus as a bonus feat, a number of druid spells like plant growth or control weather and so on. A prestige class like this wouldn't be of much interest to a master swordsman, however, so the master swordsman needs a different prestige class I'd say.
However, both classes should still have some things in common - something like bardic knowledge would fit, abilities focused on teaching (though these might not be of that much interest to many players I guess), perhaps some cultural benefits - i.e. it's unthinkable for a Sidhelien to hurt a Taelinir, Taelinri are always received warmly and can expect a place to sleep and something to eat everywhere, etc. In this regard, taelinri indeed have similarities to the bard class and many bard abilities would fit, but I'd see specialization and mastery in a particular class or profession as a prerequisite. Something similar to the Loremaster secrets would also be fitting.

RaspK_FOG

01-25-2008, 04:30 AM

Actually, the whole "master of none" regarding the bard is absolutely ridiculous: disregarding prestige classes (which break the mold by all means), what other class is so good at performing and can actually ensnare and "buff" other classes in such a manner? While it is true that clerics are excellent at it and wizards and druids are quite competent too, that's the turf of the bard!

It's true that bards can be quite adept at anything, but that's because they dabble at anything - apart from their inspiring performancies. :)

The Taelinri is much like that, by all means: caretakers, teachers, lorekeepers, wizards and witches (in the archaic sense of the words - wise men and women)... Call it whatever you like it, but, just as with the bard, the truth is that they may put some emphasis in an aspect other than their main focus, but they still have something that they are really good at.

Combining the loremaster and Fochlucan lyrist in one way or another seems quite reasonable - have you given it any thought?

irdeggman

01-25-2008, 10:54 AM

The Book of Magecraft has some things to say about Taelinri as well, (pg 6 or so) and they seem to be wizards.

Actually it says:

BoM pg 5

“Sidhelien wixards, as beings who command mebhaighl, hold positions of respect and influence in elf communities. They serve a role in society, just as taerlinri (teachers), philosophers, artists, political leaders, military commanders, and others do.”

They are primarily teachers, who can be wizards but do not have to be.

Looking at the second ed material I just can't find anything sufficient to warrant a class (pr prestige class - or even a 2nd ed "kit").

They seem like a combination of the Celtic (see Rjurik) bards and druids. Bards - keepers of the knowledge and druids - keepers (maintainers) of the culture.

As far as 3.5 classes go the expert is the closest fit with a lot of knowledge skills. Perhaps the lore master. But both seem to be a stretch. The taelinri are less of a class as they are a "role" or "position". Something "earned" or "appointed". Maybe a single feat that grants some sociel benefits (possibly bardic knowledge ?) but just not a whole lot more.

Not every "role" in a society has its own class.

To me bards aren't quite it either.

Bards are masters of interaction (more so than any other class) but the taelinri do not strike me as being better at "interaction" than any other elf. They are respected for their knowledge and they are teachers and advisors (actually as I read it more like a councillor than an advisor).

Beruin

01-25-2008, 12:26 PM

It's true that bards can be quite adept at anything, but that's because they dabble at anything - apart from their inspiring performancies. :)

The Taelinri is much like that, by all means: caretakers, teachers, lorekeepers, wizards and witches (in the archaic sense of the words - wise men and women)... Call it whatever you like it, but, just as with the bard, the truth is that they may put some emphasis in an aspect other than their main focus, but they still have something that they are really good at.

I agree with this view, but I also think that every Taelinir should have a prior specialization - the knowledge he intends to pass on. In my view, Taelinir are a bit like 1e or 2e sages - every Taelinir teaches something different, and this is not only theoretical knowledge, but also practical experience. You're focusing on the scholarly types of Taelinri, but there should also be Taelinri who teach combat techniques and warfare.

Combining the loremaster and Fochlucan lyrist in one way or another seems quite reasonable - have you given it any thought?

For scholarly Taelinri this sounds good and it might be a good start to work on prestige classes, but as already mentioned I believe that Taelinri prestige classes should be attainable for warriors and even commoners - with maybe a few bard requirements thrown in.

RaspK_FOG

01-25-2008, 02:57 PM

Just as irdeggman said, I also am against having a specific class (even a prestige class) for their role; that's was just a suggestion on my part. It's important to see the taelinri as a role, so I finally have to side with irdeggman.

Beruin

01-26-2008, 01:42 AM

Looking at the second ed material I just can't find anything sufficient to warrant a class (pr prestige class - or even a 2nd ed "kit").
<snip>

The taelinri are less of a class as they are a "role" or "position". Something "earned" or "appointed". Maybe a single feat that grants some sociel benefits (possibly bardic knowledge ?) but just not a whole lot more.

Not every "role" in a society has its own class.

To me bards aren't quite it either.

Bards are masters of interaction (more so than any other class) but the taelinri do not strike me as being better at "interaction" than any other elf. They are respected for their knowledge and they are teachers and advisors (actually as I read it more like a councillor than an advisor).

I agree on two accounts: The amount of material on the Taelinri is brief, and there's not much to work with, though the concept is intriguing, and - second - "role" is much more important than 'class'.

Nevertheless, I found the idea of a Taelinri prestige class (or classes) too compelling to ignore. I may have come across more negative than I intended in my last post, but I really think that crossing the Fochlucan lyrist with the lorekeeper is a good start for a wizardly Taelinri.

IIRC, at least for FR there are a number of examples where an organization (though this is not really a fitting term for the Taelinri) offers several prestige classes, for instance I believe there are at least three harper classes (Harper scout, harper mage and harper paragon) and something similar could be done for the taelinri.

If we follow this road, this doesn't mean that these would need to be developed all at once. I for one, would welcome a wizardly prestige class for the Taelinri, but probably won't need a prestige class for a taelinri commoner any time soon, unless as an NPC.
However, we should give some thought to what these prestige classes have in common. This might be social benefits, maybe an aura of confidence and tranquillity, access to a number of spells or whatever. I also wouldn't count out bard-like interaction skills.
In my view, teaching has a lot to do with interaction, and if you see the taelinri as teachers, these abilities might fit very well. For instance, a good teacher should be able to fascinate his students, so this might make a very fitting ability for every Taelinir.

Lastly, could you explain the difference between a councillor and an advisor in more detail? The distinction between the two is a bit lost to me as a non-native speaker.

kgauck

01-26-2008, 04:38 AM

I think its a mistake to assume that a social role and a character class should be contiguous sets. I look at the noble class and the noble social role. The best way to portray a social role is role playing the character. Even so, sometimes you're looking for mechanics to reflect something that isn't already covered in an existing class. That's why you can have a noble class and a noble social role that are not contiguous (though nearly all noble class characters should be noble in the social sense). A Taelinri class doesn't have to be the be all and end all of the Taelinri social role. Any character played as a teacher, scholar, or philosopher might be a Taelinri.

I'm not keen on the Harper-Scout, Harper-Mage, Harper-Beautician, Harper-Blacksmith model of class design. When I ditched the paladin as a class (softly, if somone wants to play the class I won't say no) what I replaced it with was the role of paladin and a set of Paladin feats. If your character has one level of priest and one level of fighter, you can attempt to get your character recognized by your faith as a paladin. Once a ritual is performed, you can purchase paladin abilities as feats. That way if you want a smiting fighter-priest who can call a warhorse, you can without having a class limit your build too much.

The best wizard models from literature make the wizard a learned person. I have seen cases made that Merlin was a wizard, a bard, and a druid. All make sense. Its hard to make wizards into characters who know anything at all. As a single class, all they can do is cast spells. Most sensible builds use a lot of their skill points for concentration. Their high Int scores allow for a lot of extra skills, but compared a smart bard, they don't seem so learned. Most of my wizard builds today are multi-classed with the Scholar class from the Medieval Player's Handbook.

It looks like 4e will use the same kind of ability paths that d20 modern used (or something similar) and I'd love to see wizards able to be as smart as bards (where the difference is specialization vs jack of all trades) and that's where I'd be with the Taelinri. I make nobles out of noble classed characters, rogues, and fighters, priests, and wizards with a few levels of noble. If I were called upon to make a lot of Taelinri, I imagine I'd be making them out of my Taelinri class (wizard design, druid spell list), bards, and by mixing nobles and fighters with Taelinri and bard. Since I use a spell points system, getting wizard and bard levels to stack is no problem.

So even though I have a Taelinri class, you could expect me, given enough time, to create a bard/rogue and call him a Taelinri if he was a sneaky sidhe scholar.

kgauck

01-26-2008, 04:54 AM

Lastly, could you explain the difference between a councillor and an advisor in more detail? The distinction between the two is a bit lost to me as a non-native speaker.

A councillor is one who sits on a council. But I wonder if the meaing wasn't of a counselor, which is one who advises. An adviser is also one who advises. (Advisor is an alternate spelling.) Both a counselor and an adviser can have the same definitions, although counselor has a longer dictionary entry referring to specialized uses (a lawyer can be called "counselor").

The root word, counsel, means to advise, instruct, or give an opinion. Its latin root is based off of consulere, which means to seek advice.

The root word of advisor, advice, means an opinion or recommendation.

I don't think there is much of a meaningful difference in the words. But an explanation of what the original author intended can be useful for the desired meaning and what he intended to leave out of Taelinri. This is especially true if he meant and advisor who doesn't sit on councils.

geeman

01-26-2008, 08:34 AM

At 05:42 PM 1/25/2008, Beruin wrote:

>Lastly, could you explain the difference between a councillor and an
>advisor in more detail? The distinction between the two is a bit
>lost to me as a non-native speaker.

Councilor does imply a more formal, titled person than does
advisor. As Kenneth noted, there`s the council seat thing, but
lawyers are often often call counsel or counselors. Councilors
attend meetings and decide policy. Advisor is more informal, and
also implies more of a teacher position than something governmental.

Of course, in practice the difference is often pretty gray and
overlapping.... "On advice of council I am pleading the 5th Amendment...."

Gary

ryancaveney

01-27-2008, 02:46 PM

"On advice of council I am pleading the 5th Amendment...."

No, that's counSEL, not counCIL. It's used there to mean lawyer, just as Kenneth said. I would counsel that permanent councils are too formal for the Sidhelien. Instead their leaders get advice from ad hoc discussions with whomever is suitably expert on any given topic, achieving the same effect without adversely affecting their chaotic ways.

AndrewTall

01-27-2008, 09:53 PM

If you want Taelinri to be a focus from any class as long a sufficient skill has been shown I'd suggest using a feat tree with a prerequisite of say 10 skill levels, or +10 BAB, or 10 spellcasting levels, etc to represent the skill necessary.

Although non-standard you could balance the feat tree between social advantages and disadvantages if you want chunky advantages - just think about what you actually see a Taelinri doing and what you think they should not be doing and shape the feats accordingly - that way you avoid the need for a different prestige class for each base class.

So say Taelinri I: +1 reactrion modifier on interactions with elves, free board and lodging from any elf/elf-friend, will not be physically harmed by any elf/elf-friend, must spend 1 hour a week advising an elf to retain feat benefit, Taelinri II, +2 reaction mod on all interaction with elves, can request 1 favour a month from an elf, cannot ignore an honest request for advice from an elf, etc.

geeman

01-28-2008, 02:53 AM

At 06:46 AM 1/27/2008, ryancaveney wrote:

>>"On advice of council I am pleading the 5th Amendment...."
>
>No, that`s counSEL, not counCIL. It`s used there to mean lawyer,
>just as Kenneth said.

Quite right about the spelling of the word in that particular
sense. From the usage note in my dictionary:

"Council, counsel, and consul are never interchangeable, though their
meanings are related. Council and councilor refer principally to a
deliberative assembly (such as a city council or student council),
its work, and its membership. Counsel and counselor pertain chiefly
to advice and guidance in general and to a person (such as a lawyer
or camp counselor) who provides it."

Not a particularly meaningful difference in kind....

Gary

geeman

01-28-2008, 07:54 AM

OK, now that folks have had a chance to express a few ideas (kudos,
BTW, all for some interesting insights) here`s what I was thinking
for expressing Taelinri:

First, I think it`s a prestige class or, at least, that a prestige
class should be available. Yes, I do think Taelinri is a title but
there seems enough significance and importance attributed to the
Taelinri, and their characteristics special enough to warrant
treatment as a class. Taelinri are described as having to go through
"extensive training, which focuses as much on direct experience as on
study and contemplation" and that takes "many years to complete" even
"decades." Also, I don`t see it as a standard 1-20 level character
class because their role in elven society is as a sort of "elder" (I
suppose there aren`t elders in an immortal society, per se, but you
know what I mean...) and the text in PSo Tuarhievel pretty clearly
indicates that elves become Taelinri after having been one of the
standard character classes first. "It is as likely for an elven
rogue to become a taelinir as it is for a philosophical
scholar. This elite group has counted powerful mages and simple
craftsmen among its number." p19. All of that reads like a prestige
class to me.

So as a prestige class, I`m thinking slow BAB progression, d4 hit
dice, fast willpower save progression, slow for fortitude and reflex,
and 6 skill points/level. Special abilities are still up for grabs,
and I`m not sure what prereqs the class should have either. I *was*
thinking that they should be spellcasters and doing the "+1 level of
existing spellcasting class" thing, but the more I look at it the
better I like the idea that they should have their own spell list and
progression with a focus on elemental magics. I was considering
making up an elementalist specialist mage (in the same way I like a
Nature school) but as I look at it, characters who were not
spellcasters in previous class would lose out in such an
interpretation, which seems specfically against the existing
materials. Further, as elementalists with their own spell list they
could have access to spells not on the standard wizard/sorcerer list,
which bypasses the whole "school of magic" thing.

Class skills shouldn`t be too terribly difficult to figure
out. They`ll go along the lines of the Loremaster unless there is
some reason to add or remove specific ones. A few feats lend
themselves to the idea of the Taelinri, so those might make their way
in too as either bonuses or prereqs.

Gary

kgauck

01-28-2008, 10:00 AM

Combining the loremaster and Fochlucan lyrist in one way or another seems quite reasonable - have you given it any thought?

I would imagine that this is at least the best place to start, making adjustments as we go along.

The Loremaster is as Gary has described, in terms of BAB, saves, and so forth, having only 4 skill points per level.

The Fouchlucan Lyricist (from the Complete Adventurer) has a warrior's BAB progression, both good Will and Reflex saves, d6 HD, and six skill ranks per level. This class is a bard/druid PrC granting you simultanous progression of divine and arcane spellcasting (which seems outrageous) as well as continued progression of a bard's knowledge and music abilities, as well (just for heaping on) relaxation of the druid's prohibitions. While I am intrigued by the concept, this is a good argument against PrC's. Assuming one qualified for the rigorous prereq's you'd be an idiot to proceed as only a bard or druid when you could effectivly advance as both. What is useful here is some of the thought behind the class, but little else I am afraid.

Loremaster is nice, but we want some nature flavor, some bardic flavor (spellsong, and both PrC's suggested had the Lore ability) and some of that sense that the person is an expert in some chosen field.

For this last part, being an expert, I look to one of my favorite classes, the Scholar from the Medieval Player's Handbook.

Clear Explanation: From 11th level, a scholar can explain what he knows with such clarity and enthusiasm that even the ignorant can follow it and make use of the ability. In game terms, the scholar may explain any of his skills (not just his Knowledge skills) to someone with whom he shares a language and that person may use the skill as if he had it at the same level as the scholar. This only lasts as long as the scholar is there and explaining, but a scholar may explain to one person as a free action. Explaining to two characters is a full-round action. Exclusive skills may be shared in this manner as well as skills that cannot be used untrained, as long as the scholar is explaining things. This is an extraordinary ability.

I think I might limit the language to Sidhelien, owing to its natural superiority in conveying things.

Deep Knowledge: At 12th, 15th and 18th levels, the scholar gains a deep knowledge of a single Knowledge skill. The skill must be one in which the scholar has the Skill Focus feat. Deep Knowledge replaces Skill Focus (overlaps, does not stack) and gives a bonus of +6 to the skill.

If the Taelinri were to use the same Secret system as the Loremaster, I would put Deep Knowledge in there. The Loremaster requires Skill Focus in any one knowledge skill, so this is going to be useful.

Memory Palace: From 14th level the scholar's memory is so well trained that he forgets nothing, even if he's only encountered it once and briefly. The GM must remind a player if they appear to forgotten something important, because the character has not. In addition, the character may take 20 on any Knowledge check concerned with recalling pieces of information. This is an extraordinary ability.

I mention this specifically because Ryan proposed it as a feature of the Taelinri.

I think of them more as reference librarians; they are the people who enjoy answering questions like, "The humans next door want to make another treaty. Does anyone remember how many previous ones there were and how they ended?" Most elves just say, "Badly." The taelinri are the elves who answer, "Forty-seven in the last three thousand years. In order, their outcomes were..." It's like the difference between people who just like playing catch and those who like memorizing the batting averages of minor-leaguers from ninety years ago. Mostly it's just another eccentric hobby, but occasionally it comes in useful.

Not all Knowledge checks are concerned with recalling facts. Some determine if the character posesses the knowledge. Generally I would say if the Taelinri is supposed to be an expert on the subject its a recalling question unless the knowledge in question is secret.

Instant Understanding: From 17th level, the scholar can understanad situations and writings instantly. Skill checks amde to analyze a situation may be made as a free action. The scholar does not need to study and contemplate, but understands as soon as the perception (reading, listening, seeing) is complete. This also applies to descriptions, but inaccuracies in the description, well as they say, garbage in, garbage out. This is an extraordinary ability.

Full Understanding: At 20th level, the scholar gains extraordinary insight into the world around him. When presented with a situation or theory, he understands it instantly without the need for a die roll. This understanding is complete and includes secrets. This understanding cannot easily be communicated to others, as it is an inner understanding and a product of profound insight.

A scholar who reads or hears an account of events knows only what the account entails, but can falisfy reports that contain impossible incidents.

The ability also includes the ability to penetrate illusions if the scholar was in a state of grace as a Charism, a gift of God. This might be a seperate ability without the requirement that the elf be in a state of grace.

So I propose these for consideration as the Secrets or Class Abilities for the Taelinri. I included the level the scholar got them to aid in balancing them and selecting when a Taelinri might get them.

Elton Robb produced a very nice Elementalist class for Penumbra's book, Occult Lore. The class includes a nice spell list for elementalists that is my go-to source for elemental based spellcasters.

Beruin

01-29-2008, 01:45 AM

First off, thanks for the clarification on the advisor/councillor issue.

I like where the Taelinri prestige class is heading and fully agree with Gary's introductory remarks on this subject. I don't have many of my books accessible right now, but here are a few suggestions:

Slow BAB progression, d4 hit
dice, fast willpower save progression, slow for fortitude and reflex,
and 6 skill points/level all sound good to me. Depending on the class abilities, it could be lowered to 4 skill points/level, if we see the Taelinri more as experts in a few fields than as generalists could.

Btw, I have the impression that the 'official' prestige classes tended to get more powerful from publication to publication, and the Fouchlucan Lyricist is a prime example, as Kenneth pointed out, but we need not follow this road.

For class abilities, Lore/Bardic knowledge should definitely be in.

I like Clear Explanation, but think it's quite powerful and could be abused. When applied to skills like Hide, Move Silently or Listen it could also get silly, so I'd limit it to specific skills - all craft, knowledge and profession skills would be in, and appraise, decipher script, disable device, disguise, forgery, open lock, search, survival, use magic device, and use rope also make sense. The rest I'd ditch for this ability. Basically these are the skills that take longer than a standard action and don't rely on interaction with people or a larger degree of physical fitness or agility.

Deep knowledge is very fitting and if we expand it to include craft and profession skills, the ability offers something to Taelinri experts as well, without unbalancing the ability.

Memory Palace, Instant Understanding, and Full Understanding are not something I'd include as they seem to rely heavily on GM interpretation - and this often is a problem for class abilities, I believe, though I'd like to hear when and how these abilities were used in your campaign, Kenneth.

I *was*
thinking that they should be spellcasters and doing the "+1 level of
existing spellcasting class" thing, but the more I look at it the
better I like the idea that they should have their own spell list and
progression with a focus on elemental magics.

Hhm, couldn't we do both? Unless the class has a very high level spell progression, full casters usually lose out taking a prestige class with its own spell progression, making the class unattractive. We could develop a spell list/progression for characters who previously were not spellcasters, and simply allow spellcasters to add these spells to their spell books/spells known while maintaining the +1 spellcasting level progression.
Perhaps a Secret opens up the spell progression or adds the Taelinri spells to a caster.

Regarding spells, I'm not too keen on the elemental focus if I understand you correctly - many of the spells with an elemental descriptor cause damage, and this seems too aggressive for the Taelinri to me. I'd focus more on nature-based druid spells and on divinations, with a smattering of defensive spells thrown in. For the latter, I think Sanctuary is quite fitting. "Im the untouchable Know-it-all!"

For prereqs, skill focus in any one or two knowledge, craft or profession skills would be fine and a number of ranks (10?) in any two of these skills. On the whole, the class should be attainable for a, let's say 10th lvl expert.
A special requirement should also be included, but for this we need to give some thought on how you can become a taelinir.
We could also develop a feat, Taelinri Initiate or whatever, that offers a minor benefit and serves as a prereq for the class.

I'm still toying around with the idea of a Taelinri Weaponmaster, and so far the class has little to offer for a fighter (or, to a lesser extent, a rogue), but this is not meant as critique of the class. When a Taelinri class stands, I probably look if a martial class could be developed using some of the same requirements and abilities. For class abilities, I'd review the duskblade from PHB II and the special maneuvers from the Book of Nine Swords.

geeman

01-29-2008, 02:55 AM

At 05:45 PM 1/28/2008, Beruin wrote:

>Btw, I have the impression that the `official` prestige classes tended to get more powerful from publication to publication, and the Fochlucan Lyricist is a prime example, as Kenneth pointed out, but we need not follow this road.

I think I have a tendency to make overpowered prestige classes.... At least, when I plug the class features into some sort of balancing system they seem to wind up on the high end when compared to other, standard classes. This is half accident and half by design. Philosophically, I think a prestige class should be worthy of the word "prestige" but that aside it`s difficult not to put a lot of special abilities into such classes when they are meant to portray something very significant. In fact, I was surprised nobody cried "balance!" when I wrote up the Sleep Sister prestige class.... Nobody else seems bothered by them, though.

>For class abilities, Lore/Bardic knowledge should definitely be in.
>
>I like Clear Explanation, but think it`s quite powerful and could be abused. When applied to skills like Hide, Move Silently or Listen it could also get silly, so I`d limit it to specific skills - all craft, knowledge and profession skills would be in, and appraise, decipher script, disable device, disguise, forgery, open lock, search, survival, use magic device, and use rope also make sense. The rest I`d ditch for this ability. Basically these are the skills that take longer than a standard action and don`t rely on interaction with people or a larger degree of physical fitness or agility.

I think that ability was on to something too, but for some reason not _quite_ right.... I`ll give it some thought.

>>I *was* thinking that they should be spellcasters and doing the "+1 level of existing spellcasting class" thing, but the more I look at it the better I like the idea that they should have their own spell list and progression with a focus on elemental magics.
>
> Hhm, couldn`t we do both? Unless the class has a very high level spell progression, full casters usually lose out taking a prestige class with its own spell progression, making the class unattractive. We could develop a spell list/progression for characters who previously were not spellcasters, and simply allow spellcasters to add these spells to their spell books/spells known while maintaining the +1 spellcasting level progression.

I have no problem with such a route. Have any other prestige classes done something to that effect? It matters little to me, but such things are sometimes stumbling blocks....

>Regarding spells, I`m not too keen on the elemental focus if I understand you correctly - many of the spells with an elemental descriptor cause damage, and this seems too aggressive for the Taelinri to me. I`d focus more on nature-based druid spells and on divinations, with a smattering of defensive spells thrown in. For the latter, I think Sanctuary is quite fitting. "Im the untouchable Know-it-all!"

I went through spell lists looking for appropriate elemental spells. You`re quite right about many of them being destructive, particularly those related to fire. I think the Taelinri would have access to a certain amount of that, but I left out the more obvious destructive spells while still giving them a pretty healthy list of aggressive magics. Here`s the current list:

0th level: Create Water, Obscuring Mist
1st level: Burning Hands, Fog Cloud, Magic Stone
2nd level: Gust of Wind, Heat Metal, Produce Flame, Pyrotechnics, Soften Earth and Stone, Whispering Wind, Wind Wall
3rd level: Flame Arrow, Meld Into Stone, Resist Energy *, Stone Shape, Summon Monster §, Water Breathing, Water Walk, Wind Wall
4th level: Air Walk, Control Water, Fire Shield, Fire Trap, Spike Stones, Stoneskin, Summon Monster §
5th level: Passwall, Summon Monster §, Transmute Mud to Rock, Transmute Rock to Mud, Wall of Stone
6th level: Fire Seeds, Stone Tell, Summon Monster §, Wall of Stone, Wind Walk
7th level: Statue, Summon Monster §
8th level: Earthquake, Repel Metal or Stone, Summon Monster §, Whirlwind
9th level: Elemental Swarm

* Any elemental energy can be resisted.
§ Only elemental monsters may be summoned. At third level the spell may summon a small elemental. At fourth level it can summon a mephit. At fifth level a medium-sized elemental. At sixth level it can summon a large elemental. At seventh a huge elemental can be summoned, and at eighth a greater elemental.

Several of those are debatable....

>For prereqs, skill focus in any one or two knowledge, craft or profession skills would be fine and a number of ranks (10?) in any two of these skills. On the whole, the class should be attainable for a, let`s say 10th lvl expert.

The 2e prereqs in the PSo Tuarhievel were good alignment, Int 16, Wis 17.

>A special requirement should also be included, but for this we need to give some thought on how you can become a taelinir.

Special: Only elves and half-elves can become Taelinri. :)

>We could also develop a feat, Taelinri Initiate or whatever, that offers a minor benefit and serves as a prereq for the class.

If the class winds up powerful enough that it needs to be balanced in some way then that`s one route.

Gary

kgauck

01-29-2008, 08:17 AM

Hhm, couldn't we do both? Unless the class has a very high level spell progression, full casters usually lose out taking a prestige class with its own spell progression, making the class unattractive. We could develop a spell list/progression for characters who previously were not spellcasters, and simply allow spellcasters to add these spells to their spell books/spells known while maintaining the +1 spellcasting level progression.
Perhaps a Secret opens up the spell progression or adds the Taelinri spells to a caster.

This is why I am so happy with spell-points. I started off using third party systems (Soveriegn Stone) but with the system in Unearthed Arcana (p. 153) that's what I use today. For consideration for players who use this standard spell point system, if we elected to "do the '+1 level of existing spellcasting class' thing" the character would gain twice the highest spell level he can cast minus one (minimum one point). A non spellcasting charcter would gain one spell point per level. Some consideration should be made for what spells an educator might cast. I have seen suggestions of Sanctuary, Hypnotism.

If the class had its own spell progression, then a similar progression to ranger, bard, sorcerer, or wizard might be used for this class, depending on which is most appropriate.

irdeggman

01-29-2008, 11:07 AM

I would not add a spellcasting aspec to this prestige class at all.

There is nothing in the written material to even suggest that they have any more to do with spell casting than does any other elve. So adding in a spell list or +1 spell caster type of progression seems wrong to me. A prestige class revolves around what is important to that class and what makes it different than a normal one. At best I would give some bonus feats, energy substitution being one of the option.

Everything written about them suggests that they are more teachers and historians than spell casters. Elves have quite lot of spellcasting class options already - so why muck it up with another one?

I can more readily view them as the elven equivalent of a noble (even though it is clear that anyone from a noble family is excluded from the "group").

I like they way Kenneth is going with his suggestions and that seems to fit the "role" much better.

Perhaps some energy resistance to reflect their "heritage" from the elements.

Beruin

01-29-2008, 11:33 AM

We could develop a spell list/progression for characters who previously were not spellcasters, and simply allow spellcasters to add these spells to their spell books/spells known while maintaining the +1 spellcasting level progression.[/I]

I have no problem with such a route. Have any other prestige classes done something to that effect? It matters little to me, but such things are sometimes stumbling blocks....

Not that I know of. There are a number of prestige classes like the Sublime Chord with their own spell progression that start with a high spell level, though I think this can be easily abused. There are also a number of feats, IIRC, they are called Initiate feats that add a number of spells to a casters repertoire.

The 2e prereqs in the PSo Tuarhievel were good alignment, Int 16, Wis 17.

>A special requirement should also be included, but for this we need to give some thought on how you can become a taelinir.

Special: Only elves and half-elves can become Taelinri. :)

They latter is obvious, of course, but not really what I meant. The PSo Tuarhievel also mentions extensive training and "tests of character" and the question is what these do look like. I was thinking more along the lines of "the character must be accepted by at least three other Taelinri and complete the Test of True Wisdom before he can become a Taelinir". Something like that.

The 2e requirements are quite demanding, but if we go from the associated ability boni, it would be more like Int and Wis of 14 or higher. I'm not to sure I'd use a good alignment as a prereq, I don't see much that would preclude neutral elves from becoming Taelinri.

geeman

01-29-2008, 11:49 AM

At 03:07 AM 1/29/2008, irdeggman wrote:

>There is nothing in the written material to even suggest that they
>have any more to do with spell casting than does any other elve. So
>adding in a spell list or +1 spell caster type of progression seems
>wrong to me. A prestige class revolves around what is important to
>that class and what makes it different than a normal one. At best I
>would give some bonus feats, energy substitution being one of the option.

Nothing explicitly states that they are spellcasters, but their
primary ability scores are intelligence and wisdom, which are the
abilities more commonly associated with spells, and they are
consistently referred to as elementalists, which is primarily
expressed through magic in D&D. Even rangers and paladins get
spells, and their relationship to those spells isn`t nearly as
specifically outlined as is the Taelinri relationship to
elementalism. Also, classes that have been used to describe
characters who are "sages" or "loremasters" have consistently been
portrayed in the game as spellcasters since 1e. Lastly, the Taelinri
occupy the role of priests in their society, and even mundane BR
human priests have magic. On the whole, it`s tough for me to swallow
that the wisest of the wise in a fundamentally magical culture/race
who take on several roles--all of which are spellcasters in less
magical human society--would not themselves be spellcasters.

I`m still working out exactly how to portray that spellcasting
thematically, but they are surely spellcasters.

>I can more readily view them as the elven equivalent of a noble
>(even though it is clear that anyone from a noble family is excluded
>from the "group").

The elves already have direct equivalents to nobles, so there`s no
real need to have an analog to that.... How do you see them as
nobles in spite of the text that specifically says they are not?

Gary

irdeggman

01-29-2008, 01:09 PM

The elves already have direct equivalents to nobles, so there`s no
real need to have an analog to that.... How do you see them as
nobles in spite of the text that specifically says they are not?

Gary

Because of the influence and morale effects.

Both appear to be a part of the Taelinri structure.

irdeggman

01-29-2008, 01:29 PM

Nothing explicitly states that they are spellcasters, but their
primary ability scores are intelligence and wisdom, which are the
abilities more commonly associated with spells,

Guilders also had an Int and Wis score prerequisite (albeit lower) so it can very much so reflect knowledge and application issues.

and they are
consistently referred to as elementalists,

No they aren't.

They are referred to teaching the elemental nature of the elves and how this affects their personalities.

It also goes on to say that each of the 4 elements (earth, water, air and fire) have a dominant influence in each elf. The Taelinir seek to teach them "balance".

Now it would make more sense to devote a school to each element and have "experts" within the Taelinir on that aspect of elvinity and work towards that.

But first we must define what each element best represents and then go from there.

The core of the Taelinir is based on how the elements affect the elves.

I see them much more as elven psychiatrists then as spell casters.

I mean it is just a logical to say that all elven fighters get a +1 caster level too since that is part of their very nature.

It is a stretch in my mind to "force" them to be spell casters.

Heck in the way 3.5 has gone I would change them to being more Cha based then Int and Wis, although all three are pretty much equally important to their role.

irdeggman

01-29-2008, 02:52 PM

IMO it seems like the Taelinri might best be captured via a series of heritage feats (like those in Complete Arcane and Compete Mage).

Elemental based (one for each) that grants some spell-like abilities.

There could be a Taelinri grand master of each elemental aspect where the feat must be taught (actually the nature and how to control it - just reflected via feat).

Perhaps half-elves could take 1 feat but no more to reflect how their heritage is outpoured.

A Pr Class could have a prerequisite of at least 3 of the feats and some high ranks in Knowledge - elven history or nature.

The Pr Class could grant the remaining elemental heritage feat and then start granting energy synergies.

I like some of the things Kenneth proposed as additional abilities.

If the power-gamers insert enough pressure then allow every other level to add +1 level to any previous class (with regard to class abilities, spells and the like) - this keeps it balanced with the aspect than "any" class can lead to being a Taelinri.

Just some thoughts here.

The Jedi master model might serve as decent basis - with the different force feats (not the Saga version but the WotC 1st or revised version).

geeman

01-30-2008, 04:48 AM

At 05:29 AM 1/29/2008, irdeggman wrote:

>Guilders also had an Int and Wis score prerequisite (albeit lower)
>so it can very much so reflect knowledge and application issues.

Yes, other classes also use Int and Wis as prereqs, but aren`t
spellcasters. When taken in combination with the remaining factors,
though, it pretty well makes them spellcasters.

>>...they are consistently referred to as elementalists,
>
>No they aren`t.

Oh, they`re elementalists.... No, it never uses the word
"elementalist" directly to describe the Taelinri. I suppose for some
reason we might want to differentiate between an "elementalist" and
"one who preaches the elemental origins of their race and has based
their life upon elemental philosophy as the focus of their world
view" but that strikes me as a rather weak quibble, so I`m going with
"elementalist" as a descriptor of both their philosophy and their
spellcasting ability.

>They are referred to teaching the elemental nature of the elves and
>how this affects their personalities.
>
>It also goes on to say that each of the 4 elements (earth, water,
>air and fire) have a dominant influence in each elf. The Taelinir
>seek to teach them "balance".
>
>Now it would make more sense to devote a school to each element and
>have "experts" within the Taelinir on that aspect of elvinity and
>work towards that.
>
>But first we must define what each element best represents and then
>go from there.
>
>The core of the Taelinir is based on how the elements affect the elves.

I don`t think we need go into an in-depth treatment of what each
element represents in order to describe the Taelinri as a character
class. There might be some material that relates those relationships
in a character class write-up, but very few write-ups go into much
detail about that kind of thing. What material we need can be pretty
easily based on historical alchemical treatises. I have a paper that
describes this info pretty well already, and it shouldn`t be too
difficult to relate to BR since much of D&D`s cosmos is already tied to it.

The Taelinri are a very small group, and since their emphasis is
balance between the elements, I don`t think its necessary to make up
whole schools that focus on one element over another, or Taelinir who
focus on one element to lead such schools. There might be those who
are more knowledgeable about one aspect of the elements over another,
but I don`t think it follows that there must be experts within that
group on each particular element.

That said, how would you portray the Taelinri expertise in each element?

>I see them much more as elven psychiatrists then as spell casters.

Jung is noted for pointing out that alchemists were the first
psychiatrists.... The PSo Tuarhievel text, however, pretty neatly
spells their relationship to elven society out, though. They occupy
the role of priests and loremasters (often a combined concept in
human society) amongst the elves. Priests occasionally do the work
we associate with psychiatrists, but their role as "therapists"
should not be ignored. By and large, though, the game ignores such
abilities, or they are at best handled by access to a skill and maybe
a feat/special ability bonus to a few particular skills. That seems
pretty easily incorporated into a character class description.

>I mean it is just a logical to say that all elven fighters get a +1
>caster level too since that is part of their very nature.
>
>It is a stretch in my mind to "force" them to be spell casters.

Sorry, but I`m not seeing your logic there.... The Taelinri aren`t
any more connected to magic than fighters? The comparison between
fighters and the sagacious philosophers of a magical race/culture who
preach a world view associated with magic strikes me as untenably
weak. If anything, I find your insistence that they are not magic
users to be an attempt to "force" them into a rather strange
combination of noble-psychiatrist-elemental specialists. I`m not
seeing much material to justify any of those extrapolations, and
quite a bit of explicit text that says the opposite. Both in terms
of game mechanics and theme, there are simpler and more direct
methods than that interpretation.

>Heck in the way 3.5 has gone I would change them to being more Cha
>based then Int and Wis, although all three are pretty much equally
>important to their role.

They could be, but again the text describes them in very different
terms. They are consistently referred to was "wise" and "insightful"
or words to that effect rather than terms associated with
charisma. Since they`re taking on the role of priests in elven
culture, though, their relationship to Cha might be more like that of
clerics who use it for a lot of their skills and powers, but not
necessarily for their spellcasting. Elven culture already has bards,
so there`s not a lot of need to directly overlap into the role those
characters play. There is room for more than one charisma based
class in elven society, but I don`t think this is it.

>>How do you see them as nobles in spite of the text that
>>specifically says they are not?
>
>Because of the influence and morale effects.
>
>Both appear to be a part of the Taelinri structure.

Bards and priests are influential and affect morale, but aren`t
"nobles" in any particular sense. The nature of Taelinri influence
and affects on morale are closer to the human priesthood than that of
nobility. At least, that`s the import of the text. The Taelinri are
described in ways that are more similar to the BoP than the
BoR.... The differences between the Taelinri and the common concept
of nobility strike me as being pretty obvious. Nobles are (usually)
born into their role; the Taelinri come from all social classes, and
only enter the ranks of their profession after years of dedicated
study having already had some earlier career. Nobles can be of any
alignment; the Taelinri must be good. Nobles lead people; Taelinri
are teachers (which is undoubtedly influential, but not
leadership.) Those are only a few of the superficial differences;
others are just as obvious and telling.

Gary

irdeggman

01-30-2008, 12:12 PM

>>...they are consistently referred to as elementalists,
>
>No they aren`t.

Oh, they`re elementalists.... No, it never uses the word
"elementalist" directly to describe the Taelinri. I suppose for some
reason we might want to differentiate between an "elementalist" and
"one who preaches the elemental origins of their race and has based
their life upon elemental philosophy as the focus of their world
view" but that strikes me as a rather weak quibble, so I`m going with
"elementalist" as a descriptor of both their philosophy and their
spellcasting ability.
Gary

Technically by this manner of using references - elves are elementalists and it has nothing to do with the class they have.

There is a huge difference.

The text (PS and Blood Spawn) talks about elves as coming from the elements with no distinction for a specific class.

So a better fit is some sort of spell-like abilities that any elf can acess with the right amount of "training". Training that is best handled by a class dedicated to training - wait that sound just like the one we are talking about right?

And what type of class is best suited for "teaching" - the expert NPC class.

irdeggman

01-30-2008, 12:18 PM

Bards and priests are influential and affect morale, but aren`t
"nobles" in any particular sense. The nature of Taelinri influence
and affects on morale are closer to the human priesthood than that of
nobility. At least, that`s the import of the text. The Taelinri are
described in ways that are more similar to the BoP than the
BoR.... The differences between the Taelinri and the common concept
of nobility strike me as being pretty obvious. Nobles are (usually)
born into their role; the Taelinri come from all social classes, and
only enter the ranks of their profession after years of dedicated
study having already had some earlier career. Nobles can be of any
alignment; the Taelinri must be good. Nobles lead people; Taelinri
are teachers (which is undoubtedly influential, but not
leadership.) Those are only a few of the superficial differences;
others are just as obvious and telling.

Gary

Actually the Taelinri's role in society almost perfectly fits that of the Rjurick bard and druid (see Rjurik Highlands) - minus the spell casting aspects.

They are "respected", "honored", trusted with the knowledge and history of the race, etc.

geeman

01-30-2008, 03:03 PM

At 04:18 AM 1/30/2008, irdeggman wrote:

>Technically by this manner of using references - elves are
>elementalists and it has nothing to do with the class they have.
>
>There is a huge difference.

If you play Monopoly it doesn`t make you a capitalist. If you
package, market and sell copies of the game, on the other hand, then
you might get some levels in a business based character class.

Most elves might believe they come from the meeting of the elements,
but only the Taelinri preach that doctrine (that we know of.) Simply
believing you are derived from the four elements doesn`t make you an
elementalist any more than believing you are rich makes your bank
account swell (despite texts written by the "Think and Grow Rich"
types.) You actually have to dedicate time and effort to the
process, and what you dedicate time and effort to is best portrayed
through character class in D&D. Even if we cast the term
"elementalist" so broadly as to include anyone who believes in the
four elements as the basis of existence (in which case we`d have to
include most of the Western world for several thousand years) that
doesn`t mean everyone who holds those beliefs are dedicating their
time and effort to them in such a way as to represent levels in a
character class.

All the races of Cerilia are religious in one way or another, but
relatively few of them are priests. Even if all elves are
elementalists (small E) that doesn`t make them Elementalists.

>The text (PS and Blood Spawn) talks about elves as coming from the
>elements with no distinction for a specific class.
>
>So a better fit is some sort of spell-like abilities that any elf
>can acess with the right amount of "training". Training that is
>best handled by a class dedicated to training - wait that sound just
>like the one we are talking about right?

The text describing the process of becoming a Taelinir definitely
does not make it sound like the kind of thing any elf can do.... Why
give a magical race spell-like abilities rather than actual
spells? What`s the objection to the setting`s definitive
spellcasters having a prestige class that has spellcasting?

>And what type of class is best suited for "teaching" - the expert NPC class.

If teaching were their only role then I`d have no problem with an NPC
expert class being used to portray them. Their role is described in
ways that explicitly go beyond simple teaching, though, so the NPC
class in insufficient.

>Actually the Taelinri`s role in society almost perfectly fits that
>of the Rjurick bard and druid (see Rjurik Highlands) - minus the
>spell casting aspects.
>
>They are "respected", "honored", trusted with the knowledge and
>history of the race, etc.

Rjurik bards are in many ways more Celtic what with that culture`s
druidic influence, so I`d be cautious with drawing the comparison too
broadly. Culturally, the Sidhe are, for lack of a better term,
godless Celts. Or, perhaps more accurately, they are the embodiment
of the faerie "godlings" of that culture`s mythology. The Taelinri
are loremasters and teachers, so there`s definitely some cross-over
between the thematic roles of the Rjurik bards and the Taelinri, but
since all human bards are derivative of the elven ones I think you`ve
got the comparison back to front. It should go: Rjurik bards perform
some of the things done by Taelinri in elven lands.

The lion`s share of the text describing Taelinri falls under the
title "Culture and Religion" not "Art and Entertainment" indicating
they are meant to be more priestly than bardic. Elves already have
bards, and Rjurik (all human) bards use them as a prototype, so if
the Taelinri are like bards then they`d have to be a sort of
super-bard. I`m not particularly averse to such a description, but
it`s a bad idea to ignore the explicit text that says:

"They are not priests, but in some ways serve a similar function."

That`s pretty definitive. Do they have bardic functions? Sure. Are
the better compared to Rjurik bards then human priests? Very
unlikely. The texts never draw such a comparison, despite ample
opportunity. Aside from being treated as "honored guests" in a way
that does parallel that of the Rjurik attitude towards bards, and
their role as loremasters the comparison starts to slow pretty quickly.

Gary

irdeggman

01-30-2008, 04:35 PM

irdeggman

01-30-2008, 04:41 PM

Here's a question.

Why must the Taelinri be of "Good" alignment (per 2nd ed rules)?

This doesn't seem to make sense if they are all about preaching the "balance" of the elemental nature of elves.

It seems to me that a more consistent alignment for them would be true neutral. It is allowed by the 2nd ed rules (they tend not to be "lawful") and it seems to fit their role a whole lot better than what was written before.

irdeggman

01-30-2008, 04:49 PM

The text describing the process of becoming a Taelinir definitely
does not make it sound like the kind of thing any elf can do.... Why
give a magical race spell-like abilities rather than actual
spells? What`s the objection to the setting`s definitive
spellcasters having a prestige class that has spellcasting?
Gary

But the text is very clear that:

"The taelinri come from all social classes and professions, with one exception: no elf who embraces the doctrines espoused by worshippers of the deities of other races may ever become a taelinir. It is as likely for an elven rogue to become a taelinir as it is for a philosophical scholar. This elite groupd has counted powerful mages and simple craftsmen among its number."

geeman

01-30-2008, 05:19 PM

At 08:35 AM 1/30/2008, irdeggman wrote:

>So an elven philospher (since that is what we are talking about)
>must be a spellcaster?
>
>That is the comparison and extrapolation being made.

It certainly is. (Extrapolation has taken a beating in the BR
community recently....) In this case, there`s going to have to be
some comparison and extrapolation since we didn`t have prestige
classes in 2e, and the materials that we do have are incomplete.

>Making them spellcasters pretty much follows the path that a
>spellcaster makes for a better Taelinri than anyone else which is
>what your logic is in essence doing.

Do you mean a spellcaster in his previous profession? I`ve abandoned
the "+1 level of existing class" in favor of their own spell lists,
so a rogue or "craftsman" who became a Taelinri would not be
penalized by losing spells.

>I`m going to work up some sort of elemental heritage feat
>progression to see if I can capture where I`m coming from. Using a
>feat progression allows any class to qualify equally - which is very
>much what the 2nd ed text states.

Cool. I look forward to seeing it, and unless you object I might use
some of that material in a prestige class as special abilities. I`m
pretty well sold on the idea that it is a prestige class, but if what
you come up with fits and works better it could well change my mind.

>Why must the Taelinri be of "Good" alignment (per 2nd ed rules)?
>
>This doesn`t seem to make sense if they are all about preaching the
>"balance" of the elemental nature of elves.
>
>It seems to me that a more consistent alignment for them would be
>true neutral. It is allowed by the 2nd ed rules (they tend not to be
>"lawful") and it seems to fit their role a whole lot better than
>what was written before.

It`s an interesting question. The Taelinri would certainly seem to
be "unelven" in this regard.... The elements are neutral or even
evil in the standard D&D pantheon, and various elemental creatures
(genies) have a pretty standard range of alignment when it comes to
law and chaos. As elves themselves it seems odd that they would have
some sort of alignment requirement that takes them away from typical elves.

I suspect the idea there was for them to represent a force of
unification and diplomacy within elven communities, and to do that
they have to be "giving" and selfless, which are traits almost always
associated with the good alignments. "Teaching" is often seen as a
positive, nurturing process, so that might be part of what they had
in mind. The Taelinri are "life affirming" in many ways, even if the
lives they seem to affirm are most often elves rather than other
races.... In many ways the Taelinri have withdrawn from elven life,
and that retreat gives them a different perspective than the standard elf.

Here`s a follow-up question: Do the Taelinri support the actions of
the Gheallie sidhe? Do they favor the rule of Roubhe Manslayer?

Gary

geeman

01-30-2008, 05:19 PM

At 08:49 AM 1/30/2008, you wrote:

>But the text is very clear that:
>
>"The taelinri come from all social classes and professions, with one
>exception: no elf who embraces the doctrines espoused by worshippers
>of the deities of other races may ever become a taelinir. It is as
>likely for an elven rogue to become a taelinir as it is for a
>philosophical scholar. This elite groupd has counted powerful mages
>and simple craftsmen among its number."

Ah, OK, I`m pretty sure you`re talking about the "+1 level of
existing spellcasting class" thing here. I was going to do that, but
as you note they can come from any class, so those who are rogues or
whatever would lose out on spellcasting should the "+1 level" method
be used to portray their magics. Instead, the prestige class I`m
using has its own 1-4 level spells per day and their own spell list
that emphasizes elemental magics and things that are geared towards
their role as teachers and loremasters.

Gary

ConjurerDragon

01-30-2008, 06:15 PM

Gary schrieb:
> At 08:35 AM 1/30/2008, irdeggman wrote:
>
> ...
> Here`s a follow-up question: Do the Taelinri support the actions of
> the Gheallie sidhe? Do they favor the rule of Roubhe Manslayer?
The first can be both - if the Taelinri are good peacekeepers who teach
that all should live together then no. But if they teach only the
sidhelien view of the world then certainly they can embrace the concept
of the gheallie sidhe.

The latter no. Rhuobhe has strayed too far from the elven path having
embraced his hatred for humans and his crusade against humanity. The 2E
card of Rhuobhe had him Neutral Evil while elves are chaotic -
effectively he is no longer a sidhelien regarding his way of life and
point of view.

kgauck

01-30-2008, 07:14 PM

And what type of class is best suited for "teaching" - the expert NPC class.

Class and function are not identical sets. You can acquire a broad set of skills from a variety of classes. If we're talking about Knowledge skills, then, for example, bards don't aquire any fewer skills than the expert. Rogue gives you eight skills, and includes all the profession and craft skills, plus Knowledge Local, and all of the interaction skills. Any one of these makes for a good teacher. Its how you play the character.

I agree that there are noble type qualities as well, and building a taelinri out of a noble would make plenty of sense (especially as I use specific features to identify rank, title, and these could be swaped or dropped).

But being able to build a character one way doesn't preclude building the character another way.

As I responded early on, I think that 4e will change how we would approach this. Irdeggman mentioned heritage feats, which work out very much like the talent trees which seem to feature in the new design. I certainly prefer the idea that we get rid of a class for every variation (a scout talent tree which rogues, rangers, or anyone who qualifies takes, instead of a seperate class), but as long as we are examining the problem from a 3.5 perspective, we know how to make classes, and don't have design principles for talent trees, or basic classes that have other abilities taken out to make room for them.

Sure, in 4e, lets make a Taelrnri talent tree and expect bards, experts, rogues, and even fighters who qualify, to take the talent tree in place of whatever about any of those classes makes us shy away from them as ideal.

But I can hardly complain because prior to getting a set of classes designed for talent trees, and design notes for making talent trees, we're making a class.

If you really like expert, then make taelinri out of experts (I would use bards, because the singing and Lore, and magic don't strike me as inappropriate) and call this class some kind of taelinri spellcaster varient.

Personally I think all elves are spellcasters. (see my comments on the sidhelien economics) So as far as 3.5 goes, all my elf builds would have some amount spellcasting.

ShadowMoon

01-30-2008, 08:21 PM

IMO; Taelinri should be defined by Feats and Social Rank...

PS: I use feat mechanics for Nobles as well...

ryancaveney

01-30-2008, 10:25 PM

Why must the Taelinri be of "Good" alignment (per 2nd ed rules)?
This doesn't seem to make sense if they are all about preaching the "balance" of the elemental nature of elves. It seems to me that a more consistent alignment for them would be true neutral. It is allowed by the 2nd ed rules (they tend not to be "lawful") and it seems to fit their role a whole lot better than what was written before.

I agree. On the whole, I avoid the alignment system entirely as I think it is more misleading than it's worth; but assuming for the moment we are going to keep it, I definitely think "must be good" counts as an error in the PSoT, given the context of everything else we know about the Sidhelien.

Here`s a follow-up question: Do the Taelinri support the actions of
the Gheallie sidhe? Do they favor the rule of Roubhe Manslayer?

I think the biggest problem with the idea of requirements for becoming a taelinir is that it implies there is some kind of organization to which they belong, and which determines whether applicants qualify. I think that is far too close to central planning for the Sidhelien to tolerate, much less have invented on their own. I think the requirements for becoming a taelinir are much more akin to becoming a best-selling novelist than becoming a board-certified surgeon: you don't have to pass a test, you just have to acquire a group of people who like to hear what you say. If there is any kind of organization, there should be multiple competing ones with shifting membership -- an exponent of Socrates one decade, a Cynic the next, and a Pythagorean the one after. The only true requirement is that you spend time trying to share your philosophical ideas with others, making a good-faith effort at providing sound advice. As a result, I tend to think the title "taelinir" is merely a term of respect accorded anyone who acquires a philosophical following, rather than indication of membership in a particular club.

Therefore, I think the answer to the question of what the taelinri as a group teach about any given topic is that there is no single group -- some are opposed, some are in favor, some are undecided, and some have decided they don't care. In particular, I think the Manslayer himself is counted by most elves as a taelinir, in the sense that he is the living embodiment of a particular philosophical school (i.e., the Gheallie Sidhe) among them. At the very least, he has clearly made a hobby of memorizing and teaching the history of Sidhelien interaction with the humans. His own view of it for his own ends, surely, but that's true of every historian, especially those who write for public consumption. Even those who deeply oppose his views acknowledge that his views and those who agree with him play an important part in any philosophical debate elves may have about history, politics or ethics. He's also a powerful wizard, so he may also have popular ideas on the nature of magic and the Shadow World (where I personally think he spends most of his time).

geeman

01-31-2008, 12:30 AM

At 02:25 PM 1/30/2008, ryancaveney wrote:

>I think the requirements for becoming a taelinir are much more akin
>to becoming a best-selling novelist than becoming a board-certified
>surgeon: you don`t have to pass a test, you just have to acquire a
>group of people who like to hear what you say.

Actually, it would seem there are tests of some sort. "[S]ome have
studied for decades, only to discover that they are still not ready
for the tests of character necessary to accept themselves and to be
accepted by others as taelinri." That`s pretty vague, but it does
specifically say they are tested, and that the testing occurs after
an "extensive" course of study. It is the outcome of that testing
that makes them Taelinri--or makes them "accepted" as Taelinri.

The existence of testing and a course of study does imply some sort
of organization, even if a minimal one. To me the "accept
themselves" part makes it sound like the more granola college
professors who do that "grade yourself" thing, but it could just as
easily be an expression of elven individuality as much as anything else.

>If there is any kind of organization, there should be multiple
>competing ones with shifting membership -- an exponent of Socrates
>one decade, a Cynic the next, and a Pythagorean the one after. The
>only true requirement is that you spend time trying to share your
>philosophical ideas with others, making a good-faith effort at
>providing sound advice. As a result, I tend to think the title
>"taelinir" is merely a term of respect accorded anyone who acquires
>a philosophical following, rather than indication of membership in a
>particular club.

The Taelinri are philosophers, and the Sidhe are certainly a
shifting, chaotic group, but it doesn`t appear that people enter and
leave the Taelinri. If they did, what would be the point of
forsaking noble title and inheritance? They are also described as
preaching particular doctrine. That doctrine is pretty wide ranging,
but it`s not shifting about from one philosophical group to another,
so "Taelinri" does not appear to simply be another word for
philosopher. They are a subset of philosophers who already have a doctrine.

Gary

kgauck

01-31-2008, 04:01 AM

"Test" doesn't have to mean anything more than get up and speak on your preferred subject for some length of time and make a point. Acceptance by others might mean nothing more than, "yeah that was interesting."

I think that this notion of a test might mean that a Taelinri are expected to know the issues in a field of study (what have others said) rather than just giving your own opinion, and demonstrate that in a public forum. But I also think we should think about this in an ancient Greek, Roman, or Hebrew context. A speaker comes before some assembly and is recognized or not by his peers as a philosopher, prophet, or wise teacher.

I think "extensive course of study" is a poor construction. "Many years of study" would be better, since it doesn't imply a set curriculum.

ryancaveney

01-31-2008, 04:02 AM

Actually, it would seem there are tests of some sort.

Yeah, and Savane Mhoried the human is Queen of Tuarhievel. =)

That doctrine is pretty wide ranging, but it`s not shifting about from one philosophical group to another, so "Taelinri" does not appear to simply be another word for philosopher. They are a subset of philosophers who already have a doctrine.

If they are that specific, then I find them a much less interesting topic for discussion, and certainly don't think they deserve any game mechanics unless all competing philosophical schools also do.

ryancaveney

01-31-2008, 04:08 AM

A speaker comes before some assembly and is recognized or not by his peers as a philosopher, prophet, or wise teacher. I think "extensive course of study" is a poor construction. "Many years of study" would be better, since it doesn't imply a set curriculum.

Exactly. You just have to be well-versed enough in your chosen subject matter that you feel confident another self-proclaimed expert in the field won't be able to make you look dumb by making a historical reference you don't understand. That is, anyone can call himself a philosopher if he wants to, but if you don't know the difference between Descartes and Kant (or worse, have never even heard of one of them), no one will take you seriously after you let slip that lack of important knowledge.

geeman

01-31-2008, 04:23 PM

At 08:01 PM 1/30/2008, kgauck wrote:

>I think "extensive course of study" is a poor construction. "Many
>years of study" would be better, since it doesn`t imply a set curriculum.

The philosophy taught by the elves is spelled out in a nice, neat 1,
2, 3 fashion.... That doesn`t mean a "set curriculum" but it does
indicate there is some sort of course of study.

Gary

Beruin

02-01-2008, 12:03 AM

"Test" doesn't have to mean anything more than get up and speak on your preferred subject for some length of time and make a point. Acceptance by others might mean nothing more than, "yeah that was interesting."

I think that this notion of a test might mean that a Taelinri are expected to know the issues in a field of study (what have others said) rather than just giving your own opinion, and demonstrate that in a public forum.

Actually, the PSo Tuarhievel speaks of "Tests of character" and this seems to imply a bit more than simply proving your expertise and eloquence with regard to your field of study.

kgauck

02-01-2008, 12:19 AM

Beruin

02-01-2008, 12:27 AM

irdeggman

02-01-2008, 12:40 AM

Beruin

02-01-2008, 01:34 AM

Yeah, but tests of character for a chaotic society? What does that look like? In lawful societies character means someone who is lawful by nature, its in their character (as opposed to someone who only is lawful in behavior). But for chaotics, what does bad character look like? Aside from adopting ideas that are non-Sidhe (which would make a bad Taelinri anyway) what is barred? I tend to think that the chaotic nature of the elves resulted in Ryan's description that there is no approved body of thought, that its a "let a million flowers bloom" situation. Or as the Vulcans say, IDIC. Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations.

I don't really know, I just have a vague notion linking the taelinri tests to the tests of high sorcery in Dragonlance, but that's about it.

I tend to think the title "taelinir" is merely a term of respect accorded anyone who acquires a philosophical following, rather than indication of membership in a particular club.

Therefore, I think the answer to the question of what the taelinri as a group teach about any given topic is that there is no single group -- some are opposed, some are in favor, some are undecided, and some have decided they don't care.

I agree with you both that the taelinri don't have to have a unified view on any given topic and even if they share the common view that all elves should "balance the four elements", this doesn't make much of a doctrine imho, it's more like a basic assumption that may be interpreted differently by each taelinir.
However, I don't think that this precludes them from forming a very 'particular club'. Historians do this all the time - forming tight-knit organizations where each and every member fundamentally disagrees with each other member.
And the BR community often seems to function very similar ;) - as long as other views are respected, this kind of club functions very well.

With regard to Rhuobhe and the Gheallie Sidhe, many differing views are possible among the taelinri. Also, this issue is only of minor importance to them, as it basically deals with the question how the elves should interact with another race, in this case the humans. In my view, race relations are not a main point of interest for the taelinri in general, so this question would not cause major disagreements. Some taelinri want to leave the humans alone, some believe they can be enlightened (i.e. made more elven), some think they need to be exterminated. After all, they're just humans - no reason to bust each other's head in over them. The taelinri probably also don't agree on how the goblins should be treated - and that's basically the same question.

I initially really liked Ryan's idea that Rhuobhe is a taelinir - it makes some sense, and then he would have to advise any elf who requests it - this could lead to a very interesting interaction with my elven player. However, Rhuobhe is a ruler - can he still be a taelinir?

kgauck

02-01-2008, 01:48 AM

I finally worked up my "proposed" heritage feat concept.

I like it. It also answers the question, what does it mean to pass the character test? It must mean you are mercurial in the way you describe, at once phlegmatic, sanguine, choleric, and melancholic. You have associated them in a way that is different from the four humors, but make plenty of sense on their own.

Lord Rahvin

02-01-2008, 01:48 AM

I think the "chaotic" nature of the society is already stressed by having relatively relaxed barriers to social class. The very fact that elven craftsmen (or rogues?) can ascend to this prestigious position with the support of their peers suggest a lack of structure and order that Anuieans would count on in theirt feudal culture.

What else but utter chaos could it be when the son of a baker rise to such a rank.?

I don`t think its necessary to say the elves don`t have colleges, and ceremonies, and political castes or rules and governance in these areas.

In my head, elven society is markedly chaotic by their freedoms and the stress that is placed on individualism and expression.

Consequently, the process to becoming a taelinri is something akin to what you would expect of a fantasy samurai. They mus know their trade, in addition to being expert poets, musicians, herbalists, acrobats, and all things elven. This would probably involve a long apprenticeship (perhaps by several masters - as the student decides who he can learn from best), constant and unending challenges from other taelinri, and probably some sort of communal evaluation.

i don`t imagine there to be a set curriculum - the student has to win over the evaluators and display prowess at every question and challenge presented. Its likely he won`t even know what subject he is being tested on beforehand, and may pass (or fail) a test without realizing he is taking it.

I kind of like it. Maybe everything in elven society should be this way. To call yourself a scout for example, you must find five scouts and win their approval.

-Lord Rahvin

ryancaveney

02-01-2008, 02:10 AM

I finally worked up my "proposed" heritage feat concept. ... What do you think?

Excellent! I love it. This is great stuff.

It also neatly answers the question about the Gheallie Sidhe. The taelinir tells the seeker of advice, "It is the nature of most elves to be sometimes aggressive, and the nature of some elves to be usually aggressive. It is the nature of humans to be less perceptive about the truth of the world than we are, and so make mistakes which mar it. Therefore, it is perfectly reasonable for some elves to decide to get rid of the humans who are spoiling their view. As for whether you should join it yourself, let us talk together a while and see which course best fits your own nature at this moment."

ryancaveney

02-01-2008, 02:30 AM

I initially really liked Ryan's idea that Rhuobhe is a taelinir - it makes some sense, and then he would have to advise any elf who requests it - this could lead to a very interesting interaction with my elven player. However, Rhuobhe is a ruler - can he still be a taelinir?

The reason taelinri and rulers are usually different people is that taelinri give advice, and rulers need advice; neither job leaves the spare time to do the other job simultaneously. The question becomes, does Rhuobhe take time out of his busy day to answer the questions of anyone who seeks his counsel? If he calls himself a taelinir but turns people away, that would be an excellent in-culture reason for his social ostracism. On the other hand, maybe the fact that he chooses to spend all his time dispensing advice is the main reason his realm's borders haven't changed in 1500 years.

I think the best way to treat him is probably as either an honorary partial taelinir or a semi-retired one -- a visiting lecturer or emeritus, not a full professor. He is the acknowledged paramount expert on the history of human-Sidhe relations, and he is always happy to give others advice on that matter, and probably military ones as well, but he has time to be a ruler because he is not a full-time taelinir. Perhaps he once was, but after Deismaar decided he needed to do something else instead. Surely there are other elves around who once were taelinri, but mostly don't do that anymore -- the chief individuators of such a mercurial people are certainly not all going to keep the same job forever.

I heartily encourage your player to walk up to the Manslayer and request his advice! I think he will try his best to make time to help if he can -- for I think more than any other Sidhe, he feels a personal responsibility to do what is best for his entire race, and that (and the monomania about humans) is what the others find so un-elflike.

Beruin

02-01-2008, 03:16 AM

I finally worked up my "proposed" heritage feat concept.

Here it is.

It should be noted that it would require a character to be 12th level (at the earliest) to qualify for being a Taelinri.

What do you think?

The feats are worked out nicely and seem very balanced, kudos, great work. As feats reflecting the elemental heritage of the Sidhelien I'll probably use them.

As the sole mechanics for the taelinri, I'm not convinced though. I still see a prestige class as more appropriate. Also, you're emphasizing the elementalism side of things, while I would focus more on the keeper of lore aspects.

I don't know what Gary will work out, but if we adopt the concept of 'Secrets' from the loremaster class, these could be developed to handle spellcasting but also offer something for rogues and warriors, so that not every taelinri would automatically be a spellcaster.

From my view as DM, the possibilty of adding "+1 level of existing spellcasting class" at least as an option is a must. The player of the elven mage in my group has expressed her desire to become a taelinir one day, but I know she'd be very reluctant to join a PrC that stunts her spell progression.
I don't really see this as 'power gaming', as she is ususally more of a character actor in my view (as defined by this (http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/gaming/BreakdownOfRPGPlayers.html) analysis) and plays a single-class wizard and this is probably the only PrC she adopts - because she likes the theme, not the powers. But spells are her bread and butter, and that's a valid reason for a mage character I think.

My campaign aside, I think of something like this:

Secret of Magic: The Taelinir expands his understanding of the laws governing the flow of mebhaighl. If he wasn't a spellcaster previously, he gains the ability to cast a small number of arcane spells, which are drawn from the taelinir spell list. A taelinir must choose and prepare her spells in advance. The taelinir from now on progresses in spellcasting as shown on the taelinir spellcasting table [ This would have to be developed , probably similar to other minor spellcasters like rangers, paladins or assasins] and the level this secret is chosen counts as his first spellcasting level.
If the taelinir already is a spellcaster he now gains "+1 level of existing spellcasting class" each time he gains another taelinir level. He can add the all spells from the taelinir spell list to his spellbook or spells known, provided his caster level is sufficient to cast these spells.

In my view, the taelinir spell list should include some nature-oriented spells, some defensive and utility spells amd perhaps some minor divinations. Elementalist spells, greater divinations or whatever you deem appropriate could be added by taking additional secrets. These secrets could also function similar to cleric domains, i.e. adding a particular benefit and a number of spells to the taelinir's repertoire.

irdeggman

02-01-2008, 11:06 AM

From my view as DM, the possibilty of adding "+1 level of existing spellcasting class" at least as an option is a must. The player of the elven mage in my group has expressed her desire to become a taelinir one day, but I know she'd be very reluctant to join a PrC that stunts her spell progression.

I don't really see this as 'power gaming', as she is ususally more of a character actor in my view (as defined by this (http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/gaming/BreakdownOfRPGPlayers.html)analysis) and plays a single-class wizard and this is probably the only PrC she adopts - because she likes the theme, not the powers. But spells are her bread and butter, and that's a valid reason for a mage character I think.

Yeah but that is pretty much the single arguement players of spellcsters (myself included) use. They don't want to give up something in order to gain something else, unfortuneatly it is a "form" of power gaming (even if not taken to the extreme).

In my view, the taelinir spell list should include some nature-oriented spells, some defensive and utility spells amd perhaps some minor divinations. Elementalist spells, greater divinations or whatever you deem appropriate could be added by taking additional secrets. These secrets could also function similar to cleric domains, i.e. adding a particular benefit and a number of spells to the taelinir's repertoire.

Where in the 2nd ed material does it give the impression that the taelinir are spellcasters?

I find the arguement that they have a high Int and Wis score prerequisite totally inadequate.

The fact that all elves are prone to being spellcasters has nothing to do with this group.

They do not even "teach" magic - so requiring a knowledge of magic or an ability to cast spells just doesn't seem right to me.

Those who feel that all elves should be spell caster should instead go the fey type route. {I am not one of them, but this logical path makes more sense to me than the other.} That is make it a racial ability to use a set amount of spells as spell-like abilities instead. There are several races with that already built into the mechanic. Gnomes, drow, aasimar, etc.

Why spell-like abilities instead of spell caster levels?

Spell-like abilities reflect a more inherent, natural ability to be tied to the magical essence. The only core class that comes closs is the sorcerer, which works real well - but to have all elves be sorcerers just seems very wrong canan-wise.

This allows the flow of the 2nd ed material to continue.

irdeggman

02-01-2008, 11:22 AM

I like it. It also answers the question, what does it mean to pass the character test? It must mean you are mercurial in the way you describe, at once phlegmatic, sanguine, choleric, and melancholic. You have associated them in a way that is different from the four humors, but make plenty of sense on their own.

Thanks.

I went to a whole bunch of different "sources" to find things that I could use as a comparison:

Complete Arcane
Complete Mage (mostly corresponded to the Fey/Fiendish Heritage feat chains)
Expanded Psionics (psi-crystal "personalities")
Complete Psionic - Host feats*
Races of Eberron - Atavist Prestige Class*

* - I found a tremendous similarity in how the elemental nature can be matched to the Kalashtar's duo-spirit nature.

I think there are few ways it could be done differently and still follow the "logic pattern".

I bounced back and forth between the +2 racial bonus to skill checks and just giving the skill as a class skill.

I also toyed with allowing the base heritage feat to give some 0-level spell-like abilities (something like any combination up to 3/day), but thought that might make it too powerful and broad.

The spells (SRD only) I first listed were (I was having a real difficult time coming up with a "balanced" list that fit the "themes"):

Air: Guidance, Message, Prestidigitation, Mending
Earth: Detect Poison, Virtue, Acid Splash, Resistance
Fire: Dancing Lights, Flare, Light, Open/Close, Mage Hand
Water: Ray of Frost, Lullaby, Purify Food and Drink

geeman

02-01-2008, 05:55 PM

At 07:16 PM 1/31/2008, Beruin wrote:

>As the sole mechanics for the taelinri, I`m not convinced though. I
>still see a prestige class as more appropriate. Also, you`re
>emphasizing the elementalism side of things, while I would focus
>more on the keeper of lore aspects.

I`m liking these feats or something like them as the result of
Taelinri teaching, but not necessarily the thing that makes one
Taelinri. That is, they`d be prereqs for a Taelinri prestige class,
or learning them would be the process of "testing" that is described
in the PSo Tuarhieval book, and just your average elf might want to
learn these same techniques and go study with a Taelinir for a time.

The PSo text also goes to a lot of trouble suggesting that the
Taelinri emphasis is on balance for ALL elves, not just
themselves. As such, I think a general set of feats that influenced
all four elements rather than a series that did them one at a time
would fit better.

To reflect the full range of Taelinri roles, however, there needs to
be a couple more feats or requirements to reflect their roles as
Loremasters, teachers, philsophers and quasi-priests. As a general
rule, something that can take decades of study and then STILL fail
doesn`t sound like a few feats. It`s bigger than that. In fact, it
goes pretty well with the definition of a prestige class.

Gary

kgauck

02-01-2008, 08:13 PM

As a general rule, something that can take decades of study and then STILL fail doesn`t sound like a few feats. It`s bigger than that. In fact, it goes pretty well with the definition of a prestige class.
Some PrC's involve a transformation at 10th level, where you slowly gain attribuites of a thing, and then at 10th level you become that thing (or at least your kind changes). I could see that a Taelinri might become Fey or something, and that effectively, not all characters take all 10 levels because they don't want to change their kind.

That's what came to mind when I read this last line.

Thelandrin

02-02-2008, 02:10 AM

Rowan

02-02-2008, 07:06 AM

I haven't read the whole thread yet, just the first three pages and last one, but I don't really agonize about the Taelinri. I think the role can easily be slipped into by elves who assume the classes of bards, wizard/druids, or nobles (elven nobles are really just non-spellcasting generalists who'd probably eventually take levels in spellcasting classes). Any of those can be specialized or augmented by the proper skill and feat selections to create the teacher-specialists of the Taelinri. If a PrC must be chosen, then yes, the Fochluchan Lyrist and Loremaster are the most appropriate, but I think those are just normal PrC's that elves may often take regardless of Taelinri status.

What's been more interesting to me is what tweaks to existing classes are more flavorful for elves. For instance, to me elven spellcasters either use the Bard base or the Wizard. Wizards would be the focused casters, dropping most Necro and Evo spells and instead being able to choose from the whole Druid list, ditching the familiar (an artifact more of humans, I think), folding in the Ranger skill list, and giving 4-6skill points per level. I also hate vancian magic, so while I'd make the elves learn their spells, they'd be spontaneous casters.

The bard base is almost perfect for most elves. I might add a few skills, let them learn more spells and from the Druid or at least Ranger list, too, and substitute bonus feats in place of all the Perform things above Fascinate. Since elves usually have more levels than humans (typically 3 higher?), the elven bard base class makes elves seem like they're good enough at everything to best most human specialists: the clever 8th level bard can whoop a 5th level fighter or wizard.

Tweaking either of those classes seems to me to better fit both the elven flavor in general and the Taelinri role specifically. Just thoguht I'd toss my thoughts on the pile!

AndrewTall

02-03-2008, 06:06 PM

I really like the elemental heritage feats, Irdegg, but I don't think that Rhuobhe could possibly be a taelinir, Ryan, if one of the main prerequisites is compassion, tolerance, acceptance and so forth. Rhuobhe isn't even particularly tolerant of other Elves and keeps his own son chained up beneath his tower.

I wonder if Rhuobhe is a former Taelinir - a teacher who became so consumed by their own viewpoint they became consumed by it, thinking that those who disagree with them are innocent fools/dupes/un-elven. As a result elves could be reluctant to approach Rhuobhe - they know the advice they will get before they ask it and also that their viewpoint will be scorned or disregarded unless it coincides fully with his.

I note regarding Rhuobhe incidentally that I don't necessarily see him as evil at heart per se, grief-stricken yes, but no more evil than someone who sees their child/parent etc brutally murdered by a mugger and lashes back without thought for the hopes and dreams of the mugger... If elves 'live in the now' and Rhoobhe has yet to accept that the current 'now' and the 'now' of the pre-Deismaar elf:human wars are separate, then his actions make much more sense. To him 'current events' stretches back 2 millennia, the thousands of dead friends, relatives etc are remembered and grieved over every time he closes his eyes, and humans - and for that matter goblins - are incapable of grace so mere savages - and you cannot live in peace with a rabid dog.

That said he is clearly prone to extreme violence - look at comments of Ruovor the bull, the green man, the elves caged and hung from his windows, his 'son' in the Sword and Crown adventure - one who argues with Rhuobhe clearly should pray that they can run fast! That said a certain priestess of Nesirie sounded like she touched a chord of memory / mercy in his soul indicating that he is capable of remembering a time when elves could afford mercy and to look about the world with eyes of hope and laughter albeit only when faced with someone very special.

geeman

02-03-2008, 06:45 PM

At 10:06 AM 2/3/2008, AndrewTall wrote:

>I wonder if Rhuobhe is a former Taelinir - a teacher who became so
>consumed by their own viewpoint they became consumed by it, thinking
>that those who disagree with them are innocent fools/dupes/un-elven.

Now that`s awful interesting....

After looking at this stuff for a while now, I think the doctrine and
ideals of the Taelinri can be broken up into three primary and three
secondary components. The three primary aspects of Taelinri doctrine
are the ones outlined in the PSo Tuarhievel text; the elemental
origins of elves, the superiority of elves in perceiving beauty, and
an adoration of individuality. The secondary aspects of the Taelinri
might be summarized by the PSo text that says they must have
"understanding, compassion, and vision." As such they are
respectively loremasters, "priests" and the people who "reflection on
what the future may bring."

Of those characteristics, Rhuobhe definitely has the individuality
aspect down, and he also appears to be more interested in the future
than the "normal" elf. He doesn`t seem particularly interested in
elven origins, or in elementalism, but is definitely convinced of
elven and his own superiority. Compassion? Hmm. I don`t know about
that one. It could go either way....

As someone who leads, he seems to have turned away from the aspect of
the Taelinri that renounces such things. It doesn`t say specifically
that a Taelinir can`t renounce his noble inheritance and then later
take on leadership roles, but that seems like a bit of a legalistic
loophole sort of argument that the Sidhe would consider the "human"
way of wriggling out of things.... At least, it seems to me that was
a flavourful way of saying "Taelinri can`t become BR regents."

Personally, I`m thinking that it would make a lot of sense for
Rhuobhe to have been one of those elves who studied for years to
become a Taelinir, but found himself unready and eventually turned to
another path. At least, that is a nice bit of background detail for
him that`d make a lot of sense and give some depth to his character.

It does, however, beg a question.... Once a Taelinir is one always a
Taelinir? Could an elf turn away from this profession, claim his
noble heritage, become a regent and rule? How would that be handled
game mechanically? Would that be akin to a paladin losing his specific powers?

Gary

irdeggman

02-03-2008, 10:34 PM

I wonder if Rhuobhe is a former Taelinir - a teacher who became so consumed by their own viewpoint they became consumed by it, thinking that those who disagree with them are innocent fools/dupes/un-elven. As a result elves could be reluctant to approach Rhuobhe - they know the advice they will get before they ask it and also that their viewpoint will be scorned or disregarded unless it coincides fully with his.

I was thinking along those lines myself.

Having him be the "master" of the fire elemtnatl heritage, but having gone a little too far in embracing that heritage.

It was one of the things I though about when I mentioned seeking the 1 elemental master (for each elementsal heritage) to learn from on the path to being a Taelinir. Having to go through Rhoubhe himself makes things real interesting, and somewhat logical in a mechanics standpoint.

ryancaveney

02-05-2008, 10:36 PM

I note regarding Rhuobhe incidentally that I don't necessarily see him as evil at heart per se, grief-stricken yes, but no more evil than someone who sees their child/parent etc brutally murdered by a mugger and lashes back without thought for the hopes and dreams of the mugger...

Aha! Rhoubhe is Batman. Much becomes clear.

Quite seriously, I agree with Andrew. Humans universally view him as evil, but termites have the same view of the Orkin man. Elves I think are much less opposed to him than the more human-centered published materials would have us believe. In particular, I think many of those who have lost loved ones cheer him on, even if they don't participate personally in the Gheallie Sidhe.

Rowan

02-05-2008, 11:14 PM

Whether Rhuobhe is motivated by grief and anger or by sadism doesn't really matter much. He's evil either way, because commits evil acts, even against elves. His Azrai blood would certainly strengthen the claim that there is a part of him that relishes the evil he commits; I believe he IS at least a bit of a sadist.

Still, it doesn't matter what your motivations are. If men, women, and children are innocent and have a right to live, then slaughtering them mercilessly and desiring their slaughter and being glad of it is certainly evil both intrinsically and intentionally.

No apologies for Rhuobhe, people. He is what he is. Just as we don't let a serial killer free because his daddy abused him as a kid, no matter how personally hurt Rhuobhe is, his actions are still evil, and I have no problem with keeping them so in the game.

While other elves probably agree that humans have yet to make amends for their actions and those of their ancestors against the Sidhe, I think most ARE repulsed by the glee with which Rhuobhe snuffs out the lives of innocents. The Sidhe would at least see humans on a level with animals, the senseless slaughter of which they surely find atrocious. Further I think the elves do have a sense of justice, not wishing death upon those not worthy of it until they do something to warrant it.

ryancaveney

02-06-2008, 03:54 AM

If men, women, and children are innocent and have a right to live, then slaughtering them mercilessly and desiring their slaughter and being glad of it is certainly evil both intrinsically and intentionally.

Elves are a different species from humans. To the elves, the humans are not innocent -- many here have theorized that human agriculture actually directly harms the elves -- and have no right to live. To many of the elves, eradicating humans from the planet is no different from human exterminators killing the termites eating their houses, and there is no more wrong with desiring and being glad of the slaughter than there is in the exterminator whistling while he works. This isn't humans killing each other; at worst, it's humans killing whales. I think that's the real debate among the elves: are the humans an important part of the environment, or a pest trying to destroy your home? I do not think Rhoubhe is evil -- nor do I think the Gheallie Sidhe is evil -- and I do not think he is nearly as shunned by other elves as the human version of the tales would have us believe. I don't think he kills or imprisons other elves, which is the only thing the other elves would consider a crime; humans just tell each other those stories because he's already considered evil in their minds and they find it comforting to (falsely!) imagine that his viewpoint is rare among the Sidhelien. Anything he does to humans it at worst an unpleasant hobby, like pulling wings off flies; many elves, however, are very glad he does what they agree should be done but don't want to spend their time doing themselves.

The Sidhe would at least see humans on a level with animals, the senseless slaughter of which they surely find atrocious. Further I think the elves do have a sense of justice, not wishing death upon those not worthy of it until they do something to warrant it.

It's not senseless, because the humans have done plenty to warrant it. I can't imagine any elf who's been paying any attention at all to the last two thousand years not having realized by now that the humans must either be destroyed (or turned into manageable half-elves) or they will eventually destroy the elves. I think the Sidhe do intervene in nature, and do take sides in struggles in the natural world: humans are a species which cause immense harm to all other living creatures for no apparent reason other than malice or sheer carelessness, so the elves will eradicate the humans for the sake of the species they prefer, just as they would have acted to stop Dutch Elm disease or other organisms which kill trees.

Rowan

02-06-2008, 04:45 AM

You can of course take that approach in your campaign and advocate it, but Ryan, it's far from canon and requires much revision.

Canon repeatedly indicates an early elven recognition of and friendship with the humans. They obviously see them as another sentient species with more worth than the goblins, and certainly see them as much more than termites or mere pests with no souls or sentience.

Further, canon clearly states that Rhuobhe kills other elves (witnessed events) and rules them with an iron fist--a very unelven thing stemming more from the Azrai blood you seem to be discounting when you make him out to be just a normal elf. Canon also has most elves being fairly goodly folk as far as their respect for life. I dislike the tendency to stray from that because it gets even farther from the Tolkien roots of Cerilian elves, and also feeds into this recent tendency (in the past decade or so) to make D&D into a more villainous game, following the pattern of White Wolf's World of Darkness with a growing fascination with evil and a major reduction in the moral uprightness of heroes that used to be the basis of D&D.

On absolute grounds, though, unless humans truly are beings without worth or right to live, Rhoubhe's form of slaughter and genocide is evil. Why make apologies for it? Surely he and some elves will try to justify it, as people try to justify all evil, but that doesn't make it good instead of evil.

kgauck

02-06-2008, 05:33 AM

Let's imagine, for the sake of argument, that humans are like wolves, and elves are the people.

Canon repeatedly indicates an early elven recognition of and friendship with the humans.
When people in Cerilia first encountered wolves they saw their nobility and skill and embraced the pack. Then they got bit.

They obviously see them as another sentient species with more worth than the goblins, and certainly see them as much more than termites or mere pests with no souls or sentience.

Goblins are pretty well regarded by the setting, so for the wolves to be worth no more than goblins is still pretty good, as far as that goes. I think neither a soul (which elves do not possess) and sentience (are they Stoics?) are not the test for elves. Their impact on the natural world, and perhaps even on the flow of mebhaighl is what matters. If goblins, wolves, rabbits, and other creatures over hunt, destroy ecosystems, render the land barren and reduce the supply of mebhaighl, then they are like locusts who destroy crops, rabbits who eat McGregor's garden, the wolf in the hen-house, the mice in the grain stores, and so on.

Further, canon clearly states that Rhuobhe kills other elves (witnessed events) and rules them with an iron fist
As far as how governance is described, there are so many descriptions of rulers which are cartoonish, I can't take any of them seriously. In a game about rulers and rulership, I think the description of these things should be a lot better. Its like making a game about pirates in which you seriously wonder if the authors have ever seen water, let alone been sailing.

a very unelven thing stemming more from the Azrai blood you seem to be discounting when you make him out to be just a normal elf.
I think Rhuobhe is more like a cult leader, with all the fervent devotion to the ideology that that implies. I think his followers are cult members, absolutely dedicated to the master. He doesn't rule them so much as he makes crazy pronouncements and his members step on one another to get their first. Rhoubhe should be charming, persuasive, charismatic in the normal sense, an obvious visionary, and a little disturbing. Perhaps, after a while, a lot disturbing. But his people regard him as the alpha and omega of what matters.

Canon also has most elves being fairly goodly folk as far as their respect for life.
I dislike the tendency to stray from that because it gets even farther from the Tolkien roots of Cerilian elves
I don't think Cerilian elves are Toklienesque, I think they are Celtic (and Arthurian, which is, as far as elves go more a matter of emphasis than difference). I think the description of the elves is part Celtic elf, part Celtic resistance to Saxon invaders, part Amerindian resistance to Europeans. This is what I get from reading the source materials.

[This] also feeds into this recent tendency (in the past decade or so) to make D&D into a more villainous game, following the pattern of White Wolf's World of Darkness with a growing fascination with evil and a major reduction in the moral uprightness of heroes that used to be the basis of D&D.
I think Cerilian elves were made dark and disturbing from the start. Genocidal and malevolent from the get go. These are not the good guys in any world where the humans are the race a reader identifies with. If humans are regarded as distopian, dirty, and corrupt, then the elves can be admirable and heroic. Not both at the same time.

On absolute grounds, though, unless humans truly are beings without worth or right to live, Rhoubhe's form of slaughter and genocide is evil. Why make apologies for it? Surely he and some elves will try to justify it, as people try to justify all evil, but that doesn't make it good instead of evil.
I think as far as elves are concerned, humans truly are beings without worth or right to live. The question up for debate among the elves is, is it more effective to co-opt some and kill the rest, or kill them all.

If a wolf (men) is killing the cattle (mebhaighl), shouldn't the rancher (elves) kill the wolf to save the cattle?

Rowan

02-06-2008, 06:34 AM

And yet, despite the odd, incongruous persistence of forest in Thurazor, the goblins seem to be depicted as much more destructive than humans. Humans have preserved the Erebannien and much of the Aelvinnwode. I just don't see them as as vile as you are making out. Especially considering that Tuarhievel is listed as a Good realm and seems to have relatively little problem with humans and indeed friendship with them, and the more foreboding Sielwode is still Neutral and Isaelie is said to not bear them ill will.

Not much that I can remember reading seems to even make elves seem to care much about stewarding mebhaigl, natural resources, or even the forests, unless you create any of those roles for them in your own campaign apart from and in addition to the canon books. Rather, the elves seem to care less about these things than the Rjurik and druids do. Surely by your standards they'd actually like the Rjurik, then?

kgauck

02-06-2008, 07:28 AM

Rather, the elves seem to care less about these things than the Rjurik and druids do. Surely by your standards they'd actually like the Rjurik, then?
The Rjurik are portrayed as anti-Rjurik, in the final analysis. They almost seem gripped by self-loathing.

ConjurerDragon

02-06-2008, 06:49 PM

Rowan 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=4126
> Rowan wrote:
> And yet, despite the odd, incongruous persistence of forest in Thurazor, the goblins seem to be depicted as much more destructive than humans.
Depicted - by anuireans? If I remember that right the 2E Atlas is
written from the subjective point of view of an Anuirean Chamberlain. So
it is limited in it?s objectiveness, self-centered view and limited by
what the character writing the atlas knows.

> Humans have preserved the Erebannien and much of the Aelvinnwode.
That is very subjecive - the Erebannien and the Aelvinnwode were once
one. Alamie was completely forested and the forests stretched to the
mouth of the Maesil. So yes, they did preserve some forest (after
cutting down more than half in the empire) but for how long? If the
human population grows the forests will grow thinner and thinner.

> I just don`t see them as as vile as you are making out. Especially considering that Tuarhievel is listed as a Good realm and seems to have relatively little problem with humans and indeed friendship with them, and the more foreboding Sielwode is still Neutral and Isaelie is said to not bear them ill will.
>
A PC can be good while he slaughters monsters in the hundreds. A
sidhelien realm can be good if all it ever would do is to take back
those lands that they held in the lifetime of the living sidhelien.
Which would be all of Anuire.

> Not much that I can remember reading seems to even make elves seem to care much about stewarding mebhaigl, natural resources, or even the forests, unless you create any of those roles for them in your own campaign apart from and in addition to the canon books. Rather, the elves seem to care less about these things than the Rjurik and druids do. Surely by your standards they`d actually like the Rjurik, then?
>
The Rjuven were the last of the human tribes to wage war against the
sidhelien because they follow a dogma that from all human tribes is
closest to the sidhelien view - and yet they still had their war.

Rowan

02-06-2008, 08:22 PM

You really want to make goblins out to be better than humans? Sure sounds like it goes against BR orthodoxy and D&D in general. Another dark vision of the world likely arising from player or GM self-loathing of humans that I personally would have no interest in playing in...

What's with all of this revisionism, people? Sure, do it in your own campaigns, but don't claim the canon supports it.

Where did you get that the Erebannien was part of the Aelvinnwode, or that the forest was so extensive? Sure it has been cut back, but when the humans came to Cerilia, the elves willingly gave them the plains, presumably a large portion of Anuire.

I'm not arguing against elves wanting to retake their lands. I'm arguing that by and large, they're not into genocide. Though they may have fought with the Rjurik, they'd be more favorably inclined to them than the other human tribes, and thus would be even less likely to desire to wipe them out.

geeman

02-06-2008, 09:00 PM

At 12:22 PM 2/6/2008, Rowan wrote:

>You really want to make goblins out to be better than humans? Sure
>sounds like it goes against BR orthodoxy and D&D in
>general. Another dark vision of the world likely arising from
>player or GM self-loathing of humans that I personally would have no
>interest in playing in...
>
>What`s with all of this revisionism, people? Sure, do it in your
>own campaigns, but don`t claim the canon supports it.

We can`t claim canon supports it even if it`s canon.... Hmm. Now,
that`s a whole new standard that`s going to be pretty tough to beat....

Specifically, take a look at the write up for Thurazor if you`re
looking for materials about how goblins treat their natural
environment in contrast to humans.

>Where did you get that the Erebannien was part of the Aelvinnwode,
>or that the forest was so extensive?

It`s in the canon.

Gary

kgauck

02-06-2008, 10:51 PM

Humans have preserved the Erebannien and much of the Aelvinnwode.
I think the Erebannien is protected by the High Mage Aelies and Cole and Cale Alwier. Not by humans.

The Aelvinnwode doesn't support the source levels it would if it were Sidhelien. The PS of Talinie is all about the destruction of the forest and how offensive and terrible it its. Torele Anviras was sent back from elf lands to Talinie to prevent a war between Tuarhievel and Talinie over their abuse of the Aelvinwode. Cariele is rapaciousness personified. The Ruins of Empire says they've been brutal to nature, but could care less because its profitable. I suspect Boeruine would be more interested in developing its forest lands if they weren't so vulnerable to Rhuobhe. If you take the heavy handed enviromentalism that in the BR materials, I don't think you can say the humans have protected any forest.

I think there is a traditional fantasy meme about how civilization, or Christianity, or science comes along and the old ways of magic die out. Birthright pits civilization against magic. What's good for humans is hard on nature. I tend to find some of this over the top, so I regard it as elf propaganda. People can and should expand and exploit nature to their advantage.

Of course the elves, being the original owners of the land, being so harmonious with nature that they don't disturb its ability to pool sources, find this all very objectionable. Perhaps they even see humans as the genocidal monsters (the same way a radical environmentalist might hate human development and blame it on various extinctions).

I'm not arguing against elves wanting to retake their lands. I'm arguing that by and large, they're not into genocide.
Well, I don't know for sure how they take back their lands without doing something awful to the humans. They really have to kill them all, co-opt them and change their basic nature (elves as Borg), or enslave them in order to re-establish the natural order and restore the sources. I don't think elves just want the title to their land back, they want it the way it was, and that means no humans, changed humans, or humans who forcibly obey elves. I just don't see how they can get along and play nice. The setting pits them on opposite sides of the civilization-magic problem.

Lord Rahvin

02-06-2008, 11:02 PM

>It`s in the canon.
>
>Gary

What kind of ansurd argument is that?! Look just because some "author" wrote some text in an official "book" that has inspired years of gameplay and a small but loyal fanbase, doesn`t mean I can`t have my epic-level gnome anti-paladin.

If you want to use some "canon" stuff in your own homebrew game, that`s fine, but don`t you dare suggest such radical nonsense for our fan-made product of temporary officiality.

Gnome anti-paladins of Anuire, unite! HUZZZAH!!!

-Lord Rahvin

The B...

Rowan

02-06-2008, 11:28 PM

I'm not familiar with the Player's Secrets. As I remember, though, in the recently-hashed-out hierarchy of canon materials, PS's fall pretty low. If we are going to abide by any standard of canon and use the canon hierarchy, we should be explicit about when we wish to depart from canon material with major new fan-based contradictions/revisions, or when we are trying to explain the canon further.

I understood most of our discussions to be trying to further expand upon the original existing material in a somewhat rigorous, academic fashion. That approach precludes radical departure from the original game setting without being explicit about the fan-based nature of the departure.

As for the Erebannien, High Mage Aelies and ilk haven't been around as long as the forest. It was protected by Imperial decree under one of the last Roeles, if I remember correctly.

ryancaveney

02-06-2008, 11:53 PM

On absolute grounds, though, unless humans truly are beings without worth or right to live, Rhoubhe's form of slaughter and genocide is evil. Why make apologies for it? Surely he and some elves will try to justify it, as people try to justify all evil, but that doesn't make it good instead of evil.

As far as the elves are concerned, the humans ARE truly beings without worth or right to live, so by your own syllogism the slaughter is not evil. I think it's very simple: the elves are in favor of whatever increases the source potential of provinces. Therefore, they are against plains and in favor of forests, so they are against human settlement. I also am quite sure that my view is better supported by canon than yours, as Kenneth, Gary and Michael have pointed out.

I think Cerilian elves were made dark and disturbing from the start. Genocidal and malevolent from the get go. These are not the good guys in any world where the humans are the race a reader identifies with. If humans are regarded as distopian, dirty, and corrupt, then the elves can be admirable and heroic. Not both at the same time. If a wolf (men) is killing the cattle (mebhaighl), shouldn't the rancher (elves) kill the wolf to save the cattle?

Exactly so! The fact that so many Cerilian elves hate and hunt humans is precisely what I like most about the setting. I would like it even better if the Gheallie Sidhe were universal, but it's already pretty strong in standard canon. In Cerilia, as opposed to every other D&D game world ever created, I would never even consider trying to run elves and non-elves in the same adventuring party, unless the non-elves were NPC slaves of the elves. That violent darkness is the most refreshing aspect of the Sidhelien. I sympathize strongly with their viewpoint; my favorite campaign to envision is the Sidhelien total eradication of all humans on the continent, in part because it is so very different from the hippie peacenik conventions of non-Cerilian D&D elves.

Sorontar

02-07-2008, 12:12 AM

Okay, the problem here seems to be people trying to work out what is the underlying elven opinion about humans (and other races). I ask people to look at the human races. Brecht have a different culture to Rjurik to Basaji etc. Why can't elves do likewise?

What I am trying to get to is: In the "canon" material, does it clearly identify whether *all* elven cultures hunt and hate humans, or just some elven cultures like that of the Manslayer?

Sorontar

ryancaveney

02-07-2008, 12:24 AM

What I am trying to get to is: In the "canon" material, does it clearly identify whether *all* elven cultures hunt and hate humans, or just some elven cultures like that of the Manslayer?

Most elven cultures hunt and hate humans. Sielwode, for example, is very anti-human. Tuarhievel is ruled by a pro-human (or one who pretends to be), but there is a strong anti-human element among the people and the cause fo a major split between the nobles.

kgauck

02-07-2008, 01:21 AM

I think that every Elf realm we have discusses the problem of the man-haters and the man-tolerators. The presence of both factions in basically all realms (perhaps no tolerators in Rhuobhe and no, or few, haters in Rheulgard (? the mixed realm)) suggests how universal this problem is.

Rowan

02-07-2008, 04:32 AM

As far as the elves are concerned, the humans ARE truly beings without worth or right to live, so by your own syllogism the slaughter is not evil.

You might have missed that I'm referring to an absolute morality. I'm not some silly relativist in real life nor in my fantasy games, for fantasy is traditionally a genre acknowledging the absolute existence of Truth, Good, and Evil, and I'll not betray that which is the very heritage and provence of fantasy as the Myth, Legend, and moral story of our day. Fantasy is so successful as a genre because it appeals to and does not shy away from our instinctive roots in and knowledge of Truth, Good, and Evil.

As for how extensive human hatred is in the canon, it seems pretty clear to me from the core sources that while there is a streak of Rhuobhe sympathizers in every elven culture, most elves have shunned him. Instead, Tuarhievel allows human guilders and makes friends with humans--not just the current Prince Fhileraene, but his father as well, and both reigns had more than a majority of support it would seem. Further, the Sielwode is not as anti-human as here suggested. Isaelie may have fits of rage, but it is said that she holds no ill will towards humans, and her lieutenant is a bit friendlier than that. Then we've got elves serving in Tuornen and living among humans in the Erebannien. No, I think elves are in the process of getting over humans, just as people and cultures who lose wars and loved ones gradually deal with their grief and anger and move on--or turn it to destruction (like the relatively fewer elves who join with Rhuobhe).

geeman

02-07-2008, 05:20 AM

At 04:12 PM 2/6/2008, Sorontar wrote:

>What I am trying to get to is: In the "canon" material, does it
>clearly identify whether *all* elven cultures hunt and hate humans,
>or just some elven cultures like that of the Manslayer?

Well, you`re right there. I quickly realized when writing up the
chapter for Secrets of the Sidhe that the GS have to be treated on a
case by case basis for each elven domain. The attitudes towards the
GS vary quite a bit and there are few generalities to be made about
them. In fact, I`d argue that they vary so much that there isn`t
really A geallie Sidhe at all. It`s a more of an idea, maybe what we
might want to characterize as a movement, than an organization.

Gary

ConjurerDragon

02-07-2008, 04:30 PM

> Sorontar wrote:
> Okay, the problem here seems to be people trying to work out what is the underlying elven opinion about humans (and other races). I ask people to look at the human races. Brecht have a different culture to Rjurik to Basaji etc. Why can`t elves do likewise?
> What I am trying to get to is: In the "canon" material, does it clearly identify whether *all* elven cultures hunt and hate humans, or just some elven cultures like that of the Manslayer?
> Sorontar

Unlike the human races the sidhelien actually once were a united culture
and realm under the elven court. So the differences between the
sidhelien culture of the sidhlelien realms should be minimal - after all
it?s only 1 generation ago that all of Aebrynnis were one elven realm ;-)

ConjurerDragon

02-07-2008, 05:17 PM

> Rowan wrote:
> You really want to make goblins out to be better than humans? Sure sounds like it goes against BR orthodoxy and D&D in general.

BR orthodoxy or at least the atlas in 2E was written from an anuirean viewpoint. No wonder that a member of a race does not see it himself as the evil invader commiting genocide on the sidhelien.

And goblins are better than normal D&D goblins, because in BR they have at least 3 *relatively* stable and rather large realms and are not
simply wandering monsters. They have diplomatic contacts and trade with their neighbours so a large improvement in being civilized compared to the standard D&D goblin.

> Another dark vision of the world likely arising from player or GM self-loathing of humans that I personally would have no interest in playing in...
>

Player or GM self-loathing? Mmmh, do you realize how that sounds? To use your style of arguing to describe your game then - "Another
pretty coloured version of the world likely arising from player or GM ego and their unwillingness to overcome in a roleplayinggame what they
are in real life. Even unable to play a game where *just in the game* humans are not the center of the universe, the shining knights and the bearers of light and pretty flowers."

> ...
> Where did you get that the Erebannien was part of the Aelvinnwode, or that the forest was so extensive? Sure it has been cut back, but when the humans came to Cerilia, the elves willingly gave them the plains, presumably a large portion of Anuire.
>

I can?t cite you all the passages of text scattered across the published BR material, but just one source I have at hand. The rhuobhe Manslayer cardboard: "... When Rhuobhe Manslayer (pronounced Rove) was a young elf, whiling his time away in the southern Aelvinnwode ***on the banks of the River Maesil (in the land now known as Ghoere)***, the human tribes began migrating to Cerilia...."

So the Aelvinnwode stretched across from where it ends now over the whole of the Duchy of Alamie (including tuornen) just to the river Maesil.

> I`m not arguing against elves wanting to retake their lands. I`m arguing that by and large, they`re not into genocide. Though they may have fought with the Rjurik, they`d be more favorably inclined to them than the other human tribes, and thus would be even less likely to desire to wipe them out.

Ah - you?re right. The elves are certainly NOT into genonide. The sidhelien are noble spirits of the forests. Protectors of nature. The
original inhabitants of all the lands where now humans live in Aebrynnis. They certainly would nobly offer any human (despite the human crimes and genocidal tendencys) a choice: Leave *our* land and go back to Aduria, change and live in peace with nature - or die.

But see - the problem is the humans in BR *are* into genocide. The imperial Anuireans exterminated the former population of Talinie to the
last elf (those stonebuilding elves) and destroyed any elven presence between where they landed at the shore and what is currently left of the sidhelien realms. And if those maniacal warmongers would not bicker over the imperial throne and be united they certainly would kill off the remaining non-human realms.

Rowan

02-07-2008, 08:22 PM

AndrewTall

02-08-2008, 10:45 PM

Let me first address this mistaken idea that all canon material is from a human perspective. It's not. Only the Atlas is, and that's pretty impartial when you read it, having been supposedly written by Caliedhe Dosiere, and matching up well with the DM-specific material in Ruins of Empire and the main book.

The question often raised is how a human author can write from anything other than a human perspective. I'd see all PS's in particular as having been written from a fairly strong perspective (generally that of the local rulers) with all the setting sourcebooks being written from a local perspective (i.e. each romanticising the cultures ideals and overlooking their flaws) to one degree or another.

My personal view is that the elves have mixed views on humans, some see the races potential (exemplified by rare folk such as Torele) and see the current fascination with industry, massive cities, etc as a phase humans are going through; others see the destructive ability of goblins (proven over many millennia incapable of true understanding) combined with a more disciplined focus that makes them dangerous, others probably don't think about humans at all. I see the gheallie sidhe as falling into the second category - they <know> that humans by their nature are destructive and unable to co-exist peacefully. The bulk probably fall into the last camp - with an elven approach to individuality meaning that they will at least initially judge humans as individuals.

That said PS Tuornen is quite clear that boys go collecting water in severe peril near Rhoubhe border, although he is noted as raiding fairly rarely (possibly simply as he sees no point in killing peasants since it simply spares another peasant from starving to death they all breed so fast). I'd see vicous tricks, 'shaming' attacks and attacks against tools, etc as more common than actual raids to kill - particularly of children - for most elves who do feel the need to act against humans.

The other core books are clearly written from a DM-information perspective. They are intended to be the standard for the setting. If you want to stray from it, that's fine, but don't pretend that something inconsistent with RoE and the rule book is supposed to be the standard position for Birthright!

I'd see them as very strongly written from the player perspective - aside from the Vos which carefully split the player and DM sections.

It's been 2 generations since Deismaar (from the Atlas, and the fact that Rhuobhe is Fhileraene's great-grandfather; he was Ibelcoris's grandfather). While there are certainly some elves still alive from before humans came, Rhuobhe seems to have few peers still alive from his generation--I can think of none mentioned in the texts. Most elves alive were most likely born after Deismaar.

Well, very few individuals of any race are mentioned. Rhoubhe's three hundred are all noted as his peers at Deismaar, I can't see why less violent elves would have died off more swiftly, look at Cwmb Bheinn which simply warded for the 1500 years without any border issues at all. I'd expect that most elves are thus pre-Deismaar - one reason for why the elves are so slow to change.

Oh, and I don't think humans are interested in genocide in general either. They merely want to increase their land. Elf-hating extremists are even less common among humans as human-hating extremists are among elves.

I'd expect that humans are far more prone to looking around at their surroundings than the rather introspective elves - meaning they likely think about elves more than elves think about humans. The elves are noted in the Rjuvik sourcebook as not even noticing the Rjurik until the Rjurik were fairly widespread. Add in Human clerics preaching against the elves (wizards! Allies of Azrai! Godless Heathens!) and humans seeing the elven forests as empty lands to be claimed by whoever wills it (unless the elves have some claim to their lands under imperial law/etc) and the desire to increase the humans land will inevitably lead to conflict on all borders - and only a strong border will turn them back.

That said I don't see many of the races as deeply into genocide - any race with a true desire for genocide will struggle to survive long term as the attitude leads to very final wars, basically unless both sides in a conflict can agree peace terms that are survivable the war simply doesn't stop until both are exhausted or one is annihilated.

I'd strongly expect given the spread of the empire that after Deismaar the elves and humans reached some sort of truce, that the Anuirean empire - for whatever reason - chose to recognise elven (and for that matter dwarven) sovereignty over their lands (otherwise traffic with the Rjuvik and Khinasi would have been pretty hard) and that this peace would have involved at least some diplomatic exchange over a prolonged period. Basically leading the bulk of the people on both sides to 'move on' from the existing mutual hatred. That said the empire didn't clear the spiderfell, or Thurazor either...

Rowan

02-08-2008, 11:44 PM

The question often raised is how a human author can write from anything other than a human perspective. I'd see all PS's in particular as having been written from a fairly strong perspective (generally that of the local rulers) with all the setting sourcebooks being written from a local perspective (i.e. each romanticising the cultures ideals and overlooking their flaws) to one degree or another.
...
I'd see them as very strongly written from the player perspective - aside from the Vos which carefully split the player and DM sections.

I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say. If you are claiming that the main rulebooks are biased because the writers were human, I'd say there's no point in any of what we're discussing because none of us are elves and they're not real anyway.

The main rulebooks were written AS rulebooks--to be the standard, to represent the base unbiased situation of Birthright. Even if the Ruins of Empire entries as supposed to be focused on local opinion (I don't see much variation in their tone and presentation, so I don't really agree with that line of reasoning), keep in mind that the Tuarhievel and Sielwode entries would then seem to indicate the local perspective of those peoples, and those perspectives are less anti-human and less alien than some here are suggesting.

I don't have the Player's Secrets books, but I consider them lower on the list of BR standards than Ruins of Empire and the original boxed set, as do, I think, most people here, having accepted a hierarchy of canonicity. They seem to be more "optional" even than the rest of the system (and yes, all RPG's are optional, but Core books tend to be the more solid starting point upon which all players and GM's tend to agree unless they make explicit changes).

I don't disagree with what you've said about elves elsewhere in your article, except that while Rhuobhe's 300 companions may be pre-Deismaar, if his realm is 4-5000+, and if 2 generations have passed since Deismaar, I think that still indicates that most elves are post-Deismaar. Perhaps 30% are pre-Deismaar still, which is a huge minority, but the generational difference alone suggests that less than a third are pre-Deismaar. I tend to think that less than 10% are pre-Deismaar, personally, many having died during that time and many in conflict since. I don't think most elves, ever since the goblin rebellions, expect to live many thousands of years.

AndrewTall

02-10-2008, 12:02 AM

I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say. If you are claiming that the main rulebooks are biased because the writers were human, I'd say there's no point in any of what we're discussing because none of us are elves and they're not real anyway.

More that the level of detail provided in books with limited space inevitably led to short cuts, and that when we fill out the blanks and create a richer, more detailed world those short cuts can cause issues. For example I'd strongly disagree with the concept of feudal nobility being functional in an elven setting of quasi-immortals - yet several sources describe elven 'nobles' - that could however easily be a feudal human view of how the elves 'must' organise themselves since that is the only social scenario the observing humans really know. (Much like the idea of romany kings)

The main rulebooks were written AS rulebooks--to be the standard, to represent the base unbiased situation of Birthright. Even if the Ruins of Empire entries as supposed to be focused on local opinion (I don't see much variation in their tone and presentation, so I don't really agree with that line of reasoning), keep in mind that the Tuarhievel and Sielwode entries would then seem to indicate the local perspective of those peoples, and those perspectives are less anti-human and less alien than some here are suggesting.

Well, by my reckoning we have 1 rulebook, and a number of sourcebooks, the latter being aimed at both players and DM's to give flavour to the campaign. While enjoying them very much the political realism is perhaps slightly less probable than I, and others would like (although I think I am the only one concerned about failures in evolutionary theory in the generation of race archtypes and gods, the economic impact of magic and so on and the non-recognition of thermodynamics in the magic system)

I'd see all the RoE entries as written from an Anuirean viewpoint to one degree or another in the sense that an honest upper-middle class Anuirean would consider is a 'proper' assessment of his realm - although a non-Anuirean, peasant, guildsman, etc might well disagree about the prevalence of honour and justice that they see in the realm. Similarly the other sourcebooks would gloss over things that the 'goodly' folk of the various realms would rather not discuss - going aviking, clan warfare and rivalry amongst the Rjurik, the 'face' as opposed to 'honour' side to Sayim, etc. I don't like a game to be as 'grey' as some but I do like to have some grey - both to show the PC's how easy it would be to slip and give NPC's interesting flaws.

I don't have the Player's Secrets books, but I consider them lower on the list of BR standards than Ruins of Empire and the original boxed set, as do, I think, most people here, having accepted a hierarchy of canonicity. They seem to be more "optional" even than the rest of the system (and yes, all RPG's are optional, but Core books tend to be the more solid starting point upon which all players and GM's tend to agree unless they make explicit changes).

I agree, the PS's vary tremendously with PSoT at one end and, say, Stjordvik at the other. They are in general fairly reasonable reads though and worth the cost of the download.

I don't disagree with what you've said about elves elsewhere in your article, except that while Rhuobhe's 300 companions may be pre-Deismaar, if his realm is 4-5000+, and if 2 generations have passed since Deismaar, I think that still indicates that most elves are post-Deismaar. Perhaps 30% are pre-Deismaar still, which is a huge minority, but the generational difference alone suggests that less than a third are pre-Deismaar. I tend to think that less than 10% are pre-Deismaar, personally, many having died during that time and many in conflict since. I don't think most elves, ever since the goblin rebellions, expect to live many thousands of years.

The realm description simply describes his companions as having been with him since Deismaar and as others have noted appears to suggest that his L2 province only has a tiny population...

My thoughts on lifespan are that elven mortality is trivial barring war - and several realms ward almost constantly making war unknown. Cwmb Bheinn for example did not have significant contact with the outside world between Deismar and the Raven's re-emergence, indicating that nearly every elf alive at Deismaar should still be alive - similarly with Innishiere. Given the low populations of those realms that indicates a very low birth-rate in the elves and thus primarily an elderly population - if only 1/3 are pre-Deismaar then unless 90% of the elven population died in the wars against humanity the elven woods should be seething - remember that they held 5-10 times as much land before the human migration, and if 90%+ of the elves died then surely Rhoubhe's attitude would be the norm with the rest mainly broken to submission / denial - not the position I see where most elves do not have strong feelings about humans. Tuarheviel I'd note is described as one of the most open elven realms, the Sielwode as closed - only Llua and Tuar Annwyn are described as really hostile to humans (rhuobhe aside of course).

Given that the elves appear to have survived against the goblins without being pushed back until the humans arrived I'd take the view that the goblins were never a significant threat to the elves - large bands could be readily avoided and in turn avoided the major elven cities, smaller bands exterminated without real issue (or need for a king...) it was only the humans who were able to push the elves back into the surviving enclaves that seriously weakened the race.

That said my view is contradicted directly by the details of elven rulers in a few sources (mostly PSoT) which indicate brief reigns of only a few centuries for most rulers. I maintain however that if most elves were dying after only a few centuries (the equivalent of early 20's by human standards) then I'd expect a major social impact on the race - and far more changes to them since Deismaar.

Rowan

02-11-2008, 05:08 AM

Just one point I'd like to make about the elven populations. If two generations have passed since Deismaar, and even if elves only produce 1 offspring per couple, then the simple notation of a "generation" would indicate almost a 50% increase in population. Unless very few elves are in the reproducing generation and elves are then having offspring as seldom as once in a lifetime or once every 1,000 years (in which case there are virtually no elf brother-sister relationships), elven populations with low mortality would still be mostly made up of post-Deismaar elves, and those populations could grow pretty significantly over that period of time.

I believe that in order to keep elven population in check and still have reasonable rates of reproduction, elven mortality must be high enough that elves can be said to have an average life expectancy. I tend to think that life expectancy is about 1,000 years (arbitrary, but the numbers could be built to support different average life expectancies). That would mean that some elves would die before that, and others might still be 10,000 years old. I think Sidhe Brelachiem's 14,000 year reign is an anomaly, because that kind of lifespan in the context of almost any reproduction will just overwhelm humans eventually because of exponential growth.

ryancaveney

02-12-2008, 11:41 PM

I believe that in order to keep elven population in check and still have reasonable rates of reproduction, elven mortality must be high enough that elves can be said to have an average life expectancy.

I like really low elven mortality, and like average lifespans exceeding tens of thousands of years. That is one reason I have enthusiastically adopted Kenneth's suggestion that elves reproduce magically rather than physically, with the modification that what produces more elves is not existing elves, but rather existing concentrations of mebhaighl, which do not increase directly with elven populations. This gives a nicely constant number of "births" per unit time, without any of the complications of exponential growth, and keeps populations relatively constant without needing high death rates.

Rowan

02-12-2008, 11:52 PM

If no sexual reproduction occurs, are there any family relationships? How do half-elves come about? Why male and female elves?

Why don't elves spring up from all provinces with source potential of 1 or higher? Does it make a difference if those source potentials are tapped or untapped? What about caerbheglien?

Like I've said before, the idea of alien elves are intriguing--I have created one setting where they are extraordinarily alien--but I generally don't go too far afield in Birthright because it seems to me that so much would need to be changed in the setting to accomodate it--that's what my questions are directed at. I might be willing to do that in a house game with players who aren't so familiar with BR, but not a PBEM.

ryancaveney

02-13-2008, 12:20 AM

If no sexual reproduction occurs, are there any family relationships?

Yes. Love and sex and property-sharing partnerships still occur, but children do not result. This makes elven culture actually rather easier to handle, because it means you don't have to deal with siblings separated by thousands of years in age, or the problem of inheritance in a society where almost no property-owner ever dies.

How do half-elves come about?

The first ones were made magically. New ones come from either that procedure, sexual reproduction involving an existing half-elf, or magical conversion of humans or other species.

Why male and female elves?

Because most other species, trees included, have two sexes.

Why don't elves spring up from all provinces with source potential of 1 or higher?

Because you need a greater density to make an elf -- perhaps you need a 7 or higher. Someone (Lord Rahvin?) suggested that low source potentials cause the formation of half-elven spirits, which are then born into human or other non-elven bodies as changelings.

Does it make a difference if those source potentials are tapped or untapped?

Certainly no problem if tapped by an elf. I haven't bothered to decide what happens if a non-elf controls so strong a source, because I can't really see it happening in practice.

What about caerbheglien?

I think those should definitely be spawning all sorts of faerie creatures. There's no reason the bigger ones shouldn't generate full-blown Sidhelien.

I generally don't go too far afield in Birthright because it seems to me that so much would need to be changed in the setting to accomodate it

I ended up with all my wacky notions about elves because I wanted to avoid changing the setting! I think all the stuff it does tell us (immortality in particular, especially when coupled with an absence of overpopulation) cries out for changes in game metaphysics to explain how the backstory could possibly be true.

Rowan

02-13-2008, 02:04 AM

What interests me is that there are so many different absolute moralities which have been advocated over the years.

Different levels of knowledge, understanding, or theories about one absolute morality.

I never claimed that all people are attracted to fantasy because of its moral components (though even the atheistic author of the Golden Compass was). I only stated that a huge variety of experts and authors have recognized that these traits exist strongly in fantasy and are a major reason for fantasy's huge growth and mass appeal.

As much as I'd love to get into the debate with you about absolute morality and ethics, this isn't really the forum for it. Suffice it to say that your characterization of moral philosophy seems to me to have suffered from poor teachers, insufficient investigation, or just denial. Even faith for many if not most people stems from a serious and ruthless logical, rational search for truth. Moral philosophy certainly does--heck, utilitarianism explicitly removes the judgment of the "good" of an action until viewing its consequences.

As for the elves, I think you're missing some serious game implications.

I questioned sexual reproduction and family relationships because with spontaneous generation of elves, there are no parent-child, sibling, or wider relationships. There is no evolutionary purpose for sex or the sexes; male/female sexes exist throughout much of nature because they rely on sexual reproduction. The sexes do not exist apart from sexual reproduction in nature--and there are great numbers of species that don't have sexes in nature, so why should the elves have sexes if they don't reproduce sexually? It would be a major departure from their closeness to nature and the "natural order."

Because you need a greater density to make an elf -- perhaps you need a 7 or higher.
If this is so, the implication that follows is that elves have no use for terrain other than forests, mountains, and swamps. If they care about the propagation their species (at least in similar fashion to all natural species), they'd probably try just as much to push dwarves from the mountains for their influence on mebhaigl as push humans out of the forests. Further, they'd have no problem letting the humans have all of the other terrain types, needing only to defend their forests--which as several of us have shown in the Battle Elves thread, they can do quite handily.

It is quite possible for humans to control sources of level 7 or higher, especially if they reduce the province level. Would elves go on crusade against these humans? Would any province of level 7 or higher start spontaneously generating an elven population? If those elves are formed as adults and outside of families or community in these isolated locales, how do they learn anything? Might they end up being "raised" by humans or other sentient creatures, thereby becoming impressioned by their traits and culture?

geeman

02-13-2008, 03:18 AM

I have no problem with the inclusion of magic in the process of elven
reproduction. In fact, that seems to make a lot of sense to me given
their theme in the setting. However, I don`t think the process
should be entirely magical, or even so magical as to make it
unrecognizable as being fundamentally biological if viewed by someone
without magical powers. Nothing in the passion of the elves, their
clearly physical relationships with humans, and their role in the
natural environment leads me to suspect their reproduction should be
the equivalent of magical test tube babies. Rather, I`d borrow a bit
of irdeggman`s thinking on elves (albeit he often means in
drastically different areas) and suggest that the Sidhe reproduce
only in a magical environment rather than through some sort of
magical process. It`s something in the land itself. That fits
better into the theme of their decline, because as the magical
environment is destroyed so is their ability to reproduce.

Gary

kgauck

02-13-2008, 05:44 AM

I generally don't go too far afield in Birthright because it seems to me that so much would need to be changed in the setting to accomodate it--that's what my questions are directed at. I might be willing to do that in a house game with players who aren't so familiar with BR, but not a PBEM.

I ended up with all my wacky notions about elves because I wanted to avoid changing the setting! I think all the stuff it does tell us (immortality in particular, especially when coupled with an absence of overpopulation) cries out for changes in game metaphysics to explain how the backstory could possibly be true.

I think this problem is caused because many of us fill in the gaps (missing information) with normal assumptions (they are like us) rather than fantastic information.

If you fill in the gaps with normal assumptions, they you have to tend to regarding some of the text as mere color, because if you do the reverse, and say how to do I explain some of these passages in light of the rest of the text, you are drawn to filling in the blanks with fantastic explanations about how all of these things match. This is because the passages in question, elven immortality, their magical natures, their stunning beauty, the experiences of men with elves, fantastic answers are more sensible than the normal assumptions.

ryancaveney

02-13-2008, 03:22 PM

Different levels of knowledge, understanding, or theories about one absolute morality.

Not in any empirically accessible sense. Different levels of understanding about one absolute truth is definitely the case for physics (in which case the underlying truth is inherently probabilistic anyway) and the other natural sciences, but not for anything involving human society. The problem is fundamentally one of measurement. If we took all the 4873 registered members of our website and tried to arrange them in order of increasing height, it wouldn't matter whether our ruler was marked in feet, meters, cubits, picas, or anything else -- the individual numbers would be different, but in a highly systematic fashion (e.g., there are always 2.54 centimeters to the inch), and the end result would always be the same. Every person would always find themselves taller than the same group of people, and shorter than the same other group of people. This is not true for morality because no large, randomly-chosen group of people will give you consistent answers about which acts are better or worse than which other ones. There will be common themes, and majority agreement on some large differences, but there will be no consistent pattern in the ordering of small details, which is where all interesting ethical decisions lie. In fact, the answers any particular person gives you tells you more about the person than it does about the actions you have asked them to order -- there is no independent calibration for the moral compass. The problem is that you cannot judge which acts are more or less moral than others unless you already have a morality to judge them with! There is no escape from this essential logical circularity; you can assume morality into existence, but you cannot construct it from more basic elements which are not equally unsupported assumptions. You can assert that a particular moral code is your personally preferred one, but there is no objective reason to pick any one of them in favor of any other as the global standard of measurement.

Moral philosophy certainly does--heck, utilitarianism explicitly removes the judgment of the "good" of an action until viewing its consequences.

But I already said you can't judge the relative goodness of the consequences either, unless you already have some preexisting standard of goodness!

(Lack of sexual reproduction) would be a major departure from their closeness to nature and the "natural order."

Eternal youth is already a bigger departure from actual biology. So is the fact that they Pass Without Trace -- tracking them isn't just difficult, it is literally impossible. The spell description says they don't leave scent or footprints; complete physical nontrackability, as explicitly provided by the spell, further requires that they don't bend blades of grass when stepping on them or leave clothing fibers on thorns or even shed hair. Furthermore, "an elf can travel over heavy snow, soft sand, or a treacherous mountainside as easily as a human walks across a smooth wooden floor." Therefore, it is quite clear to me and many others that they are in fact not biological creatures at all, but rather a kind of spirit which feels some responsibility to watch over some of those creatures which are biological, and to appear to be biological in order to better relate to their charges.

Further, they'd have no problem letting the humans have all of the other terrain types, needing only to defend their forests--which as several of us have shown in the Battle Elves thread, they can do quite handily.

Far more of Cerilia was once forested than it is now. What the elves want to do, in my opinion, is reclaim the lands the humans have stolen, and replant the forests which once grew there.

It is quite possible for humans to control sources of level 7 or higher, especially if they reduce the province level. Would elves go on crusade against these humans?

Yes, absolutely.

Would any province of level 7 or higher start spontaneously generating an elven population?

I am presently inclined to think so.

If those elves are formed as adults and outside of families or community in these isolated locales, how do they learn anything? Might they end up being "raised" by humans or other sentient creatures, thereby becoming impressioned by their traits and culture?

I have yet to work out all the implications of the idea I only adopted a few weeks ago as the solution to a host of other difficulties, so this is a very useful line of inquiry. I don't yet know how to answer the first question, except that I know I want it to be such that the answer to the second question is a definite no.

Rowan

02-13-2008, 06:11 PM

Ryan, if elves are so alien and spiritual, why not have no sexes? Again, sexes don't make sense, except as some extremely superficial mimicry of part of the natural order--more a mockery, since the mimicry would serve no purpose, while nature's traits tend to be ordered to a purpose.

What I struggle with in your reasoning is that if the elves are so apart from nature and operate in ways contrary to it, how does their incarnation and behavior in things like sex and so forth not mock nature?

As for elves wanting to retake land and replant forests, why again would elves be genocidal? It looks like more of a situation of natural competition among species. Currently the humans have outcompeted the elves. The elves wish to adapt and reverse the trend, but that doesn't require extermination. It's just normal competition.

ryancaveney

02-13-2008, 08:51 PM

Ryan, if elves are so alien and spiritual, why not have no sexes? As for elves wanting to retake land and replant forests, why again would elves be genocidal?

In both cases, the answer is the same -- I think they have more fun that way. They don't need to have sex or annihilate humanity, but I think they will enjoy themselves more if they do, and as far as I can tell, the purpose of being an elf is to enjoy yourself.

Rowan

02-13-2008, 09:09 PM

Rhuobhe and ilk certainly seem more angry than happy.

So elves exist in two sexes just so they can have sexual pleasure? Did they determine that, or did it just happen that way? If it's that arbitrary, why can they feel pain--I'm sure they'd be happier without it.

I just don't see intelligent, immortal elves being nearly that shallow and simplistic. Sounds no better than satyrs, nor fulfills any better purpose in the game world.

geeman

02-14-2008, 12:30 AM

At 10:11 AM 2/13/2008, Rowan wrote:

>As for elves wanting to retake land and replant forests, why again
>would elves be genocidal? It looks like more of a situation of
>natural competition among species.

One man`s natural selection is another man`s psychotic
genocide.... Most people involved in genocide rationalize their
actions with language that is a perversion of fundamental biological
processes. Conversely, a lot of folks seem to have difficulty using
the G word, no matter how applicable it might be. It is the elven
ideal for them to dominate Cerilia. Humans might exist on the
fringes of this elven utopia once they`re sufficiently weeded down,
but that is the stated goal of many Cerilian elves.

That said, there is one important distinction that needs to be
addressed: The elves have not yet engaged in a genocide. They aspire
to it, but they haven`t yet got around to it. One of the perils of
being an immortal racist is that it gives one the impression that
there is plenty of time, and if there`s one thing we know about the
Sidhe its that they have a very strange sense of priority. Killing
off humanity is for most elves less important than their pleasures.

There`s a quote I`m fond of that comes from Mussolini. When he was
asked by a reporter if it was difficult to rule the Italian people
the Duke turned to the man and responded, "Difficult? No.... It`s
pointless." Fascism was a kind of fad it Italy. Great
speeches. Nice black shirts. Big rallies. Pride and big
dreams. Those things are all well and good, but when it comes to
actually doing something about it the Italian commitment just wasn`t
like that of other people`s. They seemed to know beforehand that
fascism is facile, but fettuccini is forever. Only in Italy could
someone call himself a fascist and adopt as a slogan "Me ne frego"
which (politely) means "I don`t care." Maybe this has something to
do with Italy having been a superpower at one time in the ancient
past. I`ll not speculate overmuch on that other than to say such a
comparison between the Italians and the Sidhelien is apt in that way too.

Just for the sake of clarity, if my comments here sound critical of
the Italian people believe me I consider these comments to be the
height of praise. It`s one thing to hear a leader say "Italy will
rule the world!" and cheer. It`s another to actually do something
about it. After all, there are fine wines and good meals to be
eaten. Those who pick bullets over bread are fools of the highest order.

So here it is: The elves are slackers. They do have organizations
that kill, but they are a relative minority, there is a lot of lip
service. Some elves are undoubtably serious in their efforts, and
those elves are certainly dangerous.... Italians make some of the
deadliest guns in the world, and nobody doubts the threat of a
Barrette unless he`s very, very stupid. But because their efforts do
not amount to a systemic pogrom of death and destruction that spans
and entire cultural group, so they have to be recognized as not a
truly genocidal people. Genocide requires a sort of
single-mindedness and determination that seems to be lacking in the Sidhe.

The gheallie Sidhe might eventually rise to the level of a genocidal
movement, but only one nation (Rhoubhe) seems to actually plan for
such a thing, and elves might follow along, but somehow I doubt
it. It`s not really in their character to move with/to such a
purpose. They`ll dominate certainly, but utterly destroy? Even when
they seem to have had the opportunity to do that in the past they`ve let it go.

Gary