Results 21 to 30 of 33
Thread: Elven populations
-
01-10-2003, 09:24 PM #21
At 12:06 PM 1/10/2003 +0100, irdeggman wrote:
>I generally find the at the Player`s Secrets are totally inconsistent
>with the "core rules", by "core rules" I mean the BRRB, Atlas of
>Cerialia (also inconsistancies between these two), the Tribes of the
>Heartless Wastes, Ruins of Empire, Havens of the Great Bay, Cities in the
>Sun, Rjurik Highlands, BoP, and BoM - one could even include the BoR.
The PS texts often have some glaring inconsistencies with the rest of the
published materials, but they aren`t totally inconsistent. If you can get
past the contradictions they do contain some good stuff. Many of the
extrapolations on elven culture in PSoTuarhieval, for instance, is just
fine. One has to overlook the weirdness of a human invested with the
domain, but that`s pretty easily discounted since it follows along with the
alternate scenarios used to put PCs in place of the NPCs regents originally
presented--none of which strike me as being particularly well
done. Similarly, the Baruk Azhik book has some cool descriptions of
dwarven life, good maps and adventure ideas. Lots of people hate the fact
that dwarves can eat rock and dirt as presented in that book (I kind of
like it myself) or that Grimm Graybeard turns into some sort of Obi Wan
Kenobi of the caverns, but again either of those things can be discounted
pretty easily.
>The underlying theme in these is that humans and elves, with very few
>exceptions, "hate" each other.
There`s animosity, but I don`t think it rises necessarily to the fever
pitch of outright hatred in the same way that humans feel about other
rivals. One of the things I prefer about BR over other settings is that
the differences between the races are more clearly described (depending on
how seriously one takes the biology of dwarves and such as presented in the
materials) but the "morality" of the various cultures is much more
gray. Elves are "protectors of the forests" but some of them kill
indiscriminately in doing so. Goblins are "evil" but still function pretty
well on the national level with their human neighbors. Things along those
lines.
The hatred that elves have for humans isn`t unjustified given their
ideology and more than likely certain biological factors that provided the
basis for that ideology. That hatred, however, is not necessarily more
serious than their generalized sense of racial superiority over other
species, and when it gets right down to it, they are superior. Immortal,
capable of wielding more powerful magics, Cerilian elves have racial
advantages that probably aren`t very well reflected by characters presented
with ability score numbers and character levels. Sure, elves don`t much
care for humans, but are humans much more than goblins or orogs to such
creatures? They aren`t even dwarves, which at least have the good sense to
keep their grotesque faces underground where they won`t offend the
sensibilities of elves.
>It is written that humans see half elves as changelings and they are
>shunned and only fully accepted in elven societies.
I don`t know if that`s necessarily because they are elven, though. It`s
more of an expression of human bias and xenophobia than a connection to
elven heritage. It`s not necessarily an unjustified bias either for a
couple of reasons.
One should first take into consideration the circumstances of a half-elf`s
birth. There ARE changelings in Cerilia (from Bloodspawn--possibly the
best supplemental text IMO) who do actually steal babies and replace them
with horrific simulacra (not in the sense of the D&D spell.) The idea of
giving birth to something not-human is pretty upsetting, even if it`s
something as innocuous as a half-elf. The sidhe are in many ways
associated with the horrors of the Shadow World and that`s largely because
they really are more closely linked with that land of shadow and mystery.
Second, a human female who overcame any racial issues to mate with an elf
male would be more likely to accept such a child, but I`m afraid most
half-elven children would probably not be so enunciated.... As indelicate
as this is, humans are remarkably vulnerable to being charmed from the
elvish POV and, well, if they happen to be sexy humans then all the
better. The elvish take on magic is a factor here as well. Charming a
human for reasons of seduction would likely be considered a heinous act in
human society, but to an elf, whose use of magic is part of his very
character, there isn`t much difference between being charming and charming
someone. What`s for the human to get upset about anyway? They live such
short lives. Even any possible off-spring will only be around for a
century or two. No big deal. Many half-elven children would likely be the
product of this kind of liaison. The sidhe are mystical creatures who are
not above a little of the kind of mischief that makes for maternity. The
attitude of humans for half-elves is likely the product of that rather than
a hatred towards elves.
It`s also important to note that half-elves are accepted in elven culture,
despite their human heritage. Is it strange that "children of nature" as
it is sometimes euphonized would be more accepted amongst elves who are
themselves more directly children of nature? Probably not. But a blind
hatred for humanity would certainly rub off on creatures who are themselves
half-human if it were as strong as all that.
Gary
************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.
-
01-12-2003, 07:55 AM #22
Gary wrote:
>>One should first take into consideration the circumstances of a half-elf`s
birth.<<
In addition to the circumstances you mentioned, there`s also the possibility that half-elves are the product of rape committed during times of war between elves and humans. The outlook of such an half-elf would probably be rather different from one born from a love relationship.
I would also like to address the "`typical` demographic breakdown of
the various populations in particular regions?"
I think it is important that we differentiate between the total population of a particular region and the `subject population` in a particular realm. For example, if we assume that Dhoesone has a population of 93% human, 3% elven, 1% halfling, maybe 2% dwarven and 1% other, does this mean that the listed demi-human population accepts the Baroness of Dhoesone as their ruler, pays taxes etc? Or do they live in remote wilderness areas without any real connection to the Barony?
In the latter case, that is if the demographic breakdown should describe the total population of a region, not the subject population of a realm, a category "monster" should perhaps be included. In effect, we would need two categories to describe the population of a region.
Dhoesone might have a subject population of 95% human, 2% elven, 1% each of half-elven and halflings and 0.5 % each of dwarves and goblins. In this thinly settled realm the total population might be something like 75% human, 7% elven, 3% other demi-humans, 5% goblins and perhaps up to 10% monster (mostly other humanoids like orogs, gnolls and whatever else you use, but also a few clans of ogres, giants, etc)
Christoph Tiemann
************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message."The empire, long divided, must unite; long united, must divide. Thus it has ever been."
- The Three Kingdoms, attributed to Luo Guanzhong, c.1330-c.1400
-
01-12-2003, 11:08 AM #23
At 04:13 AM 1/12/2003 +0100, Christoph Tiemann wrote:
>In addition to the circumstances you mentioned, there`s also the
>possibility that half-elves are the product of rape committed during times
>of war between elves and humans. The outlook of such an half-elf would
>probably be rather different from one born from a love relationship.
I`d imagine so. If it were a particularly common occurrence, though, it
wouldn`t do much to explain why half-elves are accepted in elven
communities while shunned amongst humans.
>I would also like to address the "`typical` demographic breakdown of
>the various populations in particular regions?"
>I think it is important that we differentiate between the total population
>of a particular region and the `subject population` in a particular realm.
>For example, if we assume that Dhoesone has a population of 93% human, 3%
>elven, 1% halfling, maybe 2% dwarven and 1% other, does this mean that the
>listed demi-human population accepts the Baroness of Dhoesone as their
>ruler, pays taxes etc? Or do they live in remote wilderness areas without
>any real connection to the Barony?
>
>In the latter case, that is if the demographic breakdown should describe
>the total population of a region, not the subject population of a realm, a
>category "monster" should perhaps be included. In effect, we would need
>two categories to describe the population of a region.
That`s an interesting point. Several people have gone with interpretations
of the domain rules in which the population numbers represent not the
actual population of a province but that amount of the population that is
under the control/influence of the province ruler. There are merits and
demerits to such an interpretation (just as there are good and bad aspects
of the differing POV.) Personally, I like to think of the population
levels as the actual numbers of typical, "civilized" and humanoid creatures
in a province, with the potential source level of a province representing a
similar number of natural and magical creatures that reside in the
province. For example, if level 3 represents 10,000 individuals and level
4 represents 15,000 individuals then a 3/4 province might have 10,000
humans/elves/dwarves/etc., and a "natural" population of 15,000
"non-civilized" creatures, including monsters and various creatures that
exist in a sort of extended food chain. Within those populations the
individuals would have some sort of typical spread of character levels or
HD. In a population of 1,000 humans there would be 500 of 1st level, 250
of 2nd level, 125 of 3rd, etc. "Natural" populations would just replace
character levels with hit dice. ie. Of 1,000 creatures 500 would be 1HD
creatures, 250 2HD creatures....
The thing to do then is to differentiate between "civilized" and "natural"
for the purpose of determining to which group different types of monster
belong. I would suggest that probably the simplest way to differentiate
them is by intelligence. Do they have above animal (or 3-4)
intelligence? If we were being more particular then the ability to speak
might be a better way of differentiating "civilized" from
"natural" populations.
Using a system like that we can get not only the typical spread of NPCs
that exist in a province but also the number of monsters that might exist
there. Individual creatures and exceptions will, of course, exist, but a
set of guidelines like that above can give us more of a clue as to what it
is that we`re talking about when we have a (3/4) province.
Gary
************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.
-
01-12-2003, 12:35 PM #24
- Join Date
- Apr 2002
- Location
- BR mailing list
- Posts
- 1,538
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
I see the monster population of an area as a function of the source level of
that area. In areas where there is a lot of source levels, there are a lot
of monsters. In this way, wilderness regions actually have a higher monster
population than human population.
Of course, the monster population of a source-7 province is less than the
human population of a level 7 province. Monster neen noor very little
civilian population to form the basis of an economy. But IMC a source-7
province can muster 7 units of monster "militia" - in every way superior to
human militia, and sometimes as strong as an Undead Legion or such.
I include ogres, gnolls and lizard men in the "monster" population, as well
as primitve tribal groups of goblins and even humans or halflings. The
important thing here is that these people are not a part of a civlized
economy of land exploitation. Orogs and shadow world halflings are not
monsters in this sense - IMC they live in the Shadow World and raid from
there.
Note that this leaves elven provinces with a sizeable population of
monsters - just the way I like it.
Also note that these monsters are generally very unorganized - colonizing
such a province is unlikely to encounter any organized resistance, or
fighting more than one such nit of monsters at a time. Only if there is some
organizing force (usually an awishleighn) will these monsters muster for
battle. But just knowing they are there will give the players a pause.
Source holdings that are "wild" and unclaimed have more agressive monsters,
while those held by source regents tent to be calmer and live more
remotely - so land regents have a need for sourceholders to keep their
monster populations calm.
__________________________________________________ ___
Gratis e-mail resten av livet på www.yahoo.se/mail
Busenkelt!
************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.NOTE: Messages posted by Birthright-L are automatically inserted posts originating from the mailing list linked to the forum.
-
01-12-2003, 07:01 PM #25
- Join Date
- Mar 2002
- Location
- limerick, ireland
- Posts
- 30
- Downloads
- 5
- Uploads
- 0
i see the population as those included as members of the state,weather they want to or not. take dhoesone for example , some of the elven populations their might for the most part remain apart from human society with only a handfull of rangers and possibly the realms rulers knowing much about them ,yet they would still be counted amongst the populace. equally a pacified goblin tribe which openly resides in an area might be counted.
at the same time there could be elves who completley shun contact with all outsiders and are for the most part uncounted as would meny monsters,hidden dwarf halls or humanoid camps.
human brigands ,pirates would not be counted or in some places nomadic tribes.
i cant really see a scribe going into a bandit camp and saying " excuse me terribly blackbeard, but im doing a population census and we wanted to know whow many cuthroats,rapists and thieves dwell hear and could you give me an ethnic brakedown of that number"Satanta
-
01-13-2003, 01:21 AM #26
Gary wrote:
>>Several people have gone with interpretations
of the domain rules in which the population numbers represent not the
actual population of a province but that amount of the population that is
under the control/influence of the province ruler.<<
Well, I do not like this interpretation, as this implies that every province is in a sense already settled to the max. population possible and this strains my sense of logic.
However, I`m really taken by the idea to associate monster population with source levels. I`m not yet sure if this method is viable in all cases. For example, it would produce an unsettled - by civilization plains province with an agreeable climate that would be only thinly populated by monsters, while an inhospitable mountain province would hold a very large monster population.
In some cases, this perfect. I guess I will apply this ruling for the Spiderfell. It would really give Spidey something to work on.
Would-be invaders beware!
Christoph
************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message."The empire, long divided, must unite; long united, must divide. Thus it has ever been."
- The Three Kingdoms, attributed to Luo Guanzhong, c.1330-c.1400
-
01-13-2003, 09:26 AM #27
At 01:22 AM 1/13/2003 +0100, Christoph Tiemann wrote:
> >>Several people have gone with interpretations
>of the domain rules in which the population numbers represent not the
>actual population of a province but that amount of the population that is
>under the control/influence of the province ruler.<<
>
>Well, I do not like this interpretation, as this implies that every
>province is in a sense already settled to the max. population possible and
>this strains my sense of logic.
Yeah, it`s not my favorite rationale either, but it does have certain
strengths, mostly regarding the speed with which population levels can rise
and fall given the Rule/Contest actions. The opposing position (that
population levels represent the actual number of civilians in a province)
means that one has to come up with some rationalization for so many people
suddenly appearing in a province or disappearing when those provinces are
ruled or contested.
I`m starting to think there may be some sort of middle ground between the
two positions in which populations would exist in various provinces up to a
certain level, with another action required to raise the "potential
population level" of a province after it is maxed out. The exact mechanics
are something I`ll need to work out, but it`s something I`ve been mulling over.
>However, I`m really taken by the idea to associate monster population with
>source levels. I`m not yet sure if this method is viable in all cases. For
>example, it would produce an unsettled - by civilization plains province
>with an agreeable climate that would be only thinly populated by monsters,
>while an inhospitable mountain province would hold a very large monster
>population.
>
>In some cases, this perfect. I guess I will apply this ruling for the
>Spiderfell. It would really give Spidey something to work on.
One of the things I`ve been considering is redefining the source and
potential source levels of a province to make them reflect this kind of
thing. At present only source levels are related to the natural aspect of
provinces (while three holdings are based on population level) and I`d like
to expand that a bit by splitting sources up into two different types of
holdings. Sources would still exist (for the purpose of arcane magic realm
spells) and would work pretty much as they do now--representing the magical
energy derived from the unspoiled aspect of a province--but there would
also be a "wilderness" holding that represented something similar to the
population levels but with, of course, animals, monsters, and various
"natural" creatures taking the place of civilians. A holding like that
would more aptly describe the kind of role that druids and rangers might
have in a province without taking away the role of arcane magic for
wizards/sorcerers.
With a revised population level system the source/wilderness/potential
source levels of a province might work the same way. ie. Sources and/or
Wilderness holdings could be raised to a certain level based on the terrain
type of the province and raised above that after another domain action
increases that aspect of the province. The effort made to raise a province
above that normally available for it`s terrain would represent more
elaborate natural environments; most obviously a sylvan forest of an elven
kingdom, but one could also imagine more elaborate natural environments,
husbanded by various other types of creatures. Carefully manicured
mountains of dwarven populations, protected and guarded lands of itinerant
Rjurik. Things like that.
Gary
************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.
-
01-13-2003, 04:35 PM #28
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Virginia Beach, Virginia
- Posts
- 3,945
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
How would you deferentiate between mountains and forests, which both have very high source levels but would definitely have different kinds of monster populations? Mountains generally have fewer, at least on the surface which is what affects the source level.
Duane Eggert
-
01-13-2003, 08:47 PM #29
- Join Date
- Apr 2002
- Location
- BR mailing list
- Posts
- 1,538
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Are you asking me? I don`t really care - these monsters are under DM
control, and I am at liberty to do whatever I want with them. One war card
per source level is just a general guideline.
/Carl
----- Original Message -----
From: "irdeggman" <brnetboard@TUARHIEVEL.ORG>
To: <BIRTHRIGHT-L@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM>
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 5:35 PM
Subject: Re: Elven populations [2#1197]
> This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.
> You can view the entire thread at:
http://www.birthright.net/read.php?TID=1197
>
> irdeggman wrote:
> How would you deferentiate between mountains and forests, which both have
very high source levels but would definitely have different kinds of monster
populations? Mountains generally have fewer, at least on the surface which
is what affects the source level.
>
>
************************************************** **************************
> The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
> Birthright-l Archives:
http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
> To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
> with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.
>
__________________________________________________ ___
Gratis e-mail resten av livet på www.yahoo.se/mail
Busenkelt!
************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.NOTE: Messages posted by Birthright-L are automatically inserted posts originating from the mailing list linked to the forum.
-
01-14-2003, 01:11 PM #30
- Join Date
- Aug 2002
- Location
- Canterbury, UK
- Posts
- 10
- Downloads
- 19
- Uploads
- 0
Hiya guys & ladies.:)
Just struck with a 'little' thought.
How about take the source potential of a province & substract the province level this will give you a number ranging from 9 to -5 (ish). Lump 0 & negatives together for the mo & take your nice positive integer as a guidline as to monster populations in an area.
It makes sense to me that civilized areas will clear away creatures/people that they find disturbing or dangerous. Elves/Humans & Dwarves aren't likely to want hostile mountain Giants, manticores or other strange beasts in their living spaces so they will most likely have killed or chased any populations of such away.
You can also have fun playing with the definition of what is a monster. In a human province, part of the 'monster' population may be elves. Whilst in an elven region I don't see them cutting down dryad trees whilst humans may be more prone to doing so (we can be nice. but logging interests often get in the way ;).
Getting back to the 0 to negative numbers, GMs will always have wandering encounters. Whether they be social, human or monster. This means that there would be no established population of monsters in the province, but you might have a family of orogs moving to the surface for hunting & foraging for a short while. The Spider may have sent a group of his minions to get him strawberries in winter. Beware Avan's gardener...
<warning, spin off thought>
On a different topic, someone mentionned earlier that only surface features really affected the source potential of a province. I don't agree.
How about caverns of wonder? I mean if the caverns of helm's deep held a dwarf in awe with their beauty, surely they'd make a great focus for a source.
Of course we could always start allowing for subteranean provinces. The orogs must have a few. & the idea allows for some really cool variations on the dwarven realms. Mur Kilad with 4 provinces sounds much more impressive that with only two. Knowing the dwarves the surface provinces of their realms would probably only have ratings of 0, 1 or 2. Whilst their subteranean ones might reach the heady heights of 6 or even 8.
I'm looking forward to what you people think.
Be gentle.
:P
meme
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks