Results 11 to 20 of 33
Thread: Roads in Anuire
-
10-01-2003, 07:53 PM #11
----- Original Message -----
From: "Osprey" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 1:45 PM
> So the BA-Sielwode road is secret, but not necessarilly
> underground. It might be underground through Baruk-Azhik, [...]
I rather think the road is largely a route through natural caves, sometimes
crossing overland from cave to cave, sometimes linking caves by mined
tunnels, and then, as you say, "winding paths through a sentient forest."
Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com
-
10-01-2003, 08:19 PM #12There`s also some text about how the dwarves are loathe to mar their
mountains with roads, preferring to use waterways and that their trading
partners come to dwarven lands rather than they travel outside their
kingdom. Presumably the traders are not let very far into B-A, and handle
cartage of goods along the (underground) roads within the borders of B-A
themselves. These goods could then be handed of to their human partners in
small, underground "towns" on the borders of the provinces.
But since the Coeranys and Osoerde routes connect to Diirk's guilds, I suspect he runs those two routes at least, as well as to the borders of the Sielwode. I imagine some secret trading post where the underground road from BA emerges above the surface.
And ultimately, Diirk doesn't strike me as the typical insular dwarf...he's too savvy with foreign relations.
-
10-01-2003, 09:52 PM #13
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary" <geeman@SOFTHOME.NET>
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 2:42 PM
> The road actually is supposed to be entirely underground.
This would be a logical assumption for someone who has never seen the road,
is aware it exists, has heard that it uses tunnels, and knows that dwarves
are miners. Which makes it a supposition, not neccesarily a true statement.
> There`s also some text about how the dwarves are loathe to mar their
> mountains with roads, preferring to use waterways
This presumes that we back off the construction emphasis of dwarves, which I
am not inclined to do. Master artisans generally don`t have a hostility to
the artifcial. Like most such builder folk, I imagine they think their
construction of tunnels, walls, columns, and indeed roads, actually improve
the mountains.
Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com
-
10-01-2003, 10:51 PM #14
- Join Date
- Dec 2002
- Posts
- 94
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
With Points East Trading Guild out of Elinie having some holdings in B-A, I would think they would be willing to maintain the road in Elinie.
It would be logical that there is a trade route between B-A and Elinie, so there needs to be some sort of route.
-
10-02-2003, 11:18 AM #15
At 04:44 PM 10/1/2003 -0500, Kenneth Gauck wrote:
> > The road actually is supposed to be entirely underground.
>
>This would be a logical assumption for someone who has never seen the road,
>is aware it exists, has heard that it uses tunnels, and knows that dwarves
>are miners. Which makes it a supposition, not neccesarily a true statement.
The quote regarding the underground nature of the road from B-A to the
Sielwode comes from what reads like expository text rather than colour text
in the assets and holdings section of PSoB-A. Unlike other BR texts like
the Atlas of Cerilia, the colourful parts of that particular PS book are
pretty clearly delineated--even labelled with headings--from the expository
ones, so I don`t think that bit of text was meant to convey a mistaken
in-character narrative or ironical bias.
> > There`s also some text about how the dwarves are loathe to mar their
> > mountains with roads, preferring to use waterways
>
>This presumes that we back off the construction emphasis of dwarves, which I
>am not inclined to do. Master artisans generally don`t have a hostility to
>the artifcial. Like most such builder folk, I imagine they think their
>construction of tunnels, walls, columns, and indeed roads, actually improve
>the mountains.
We don`t have to back off their construction emphasis if we also recognize
its purpose and the broader efforts and themes of Cerilian
dwarves. Tunnels, walls and columns improve the mountains interior--and
dwarves would probably take the same satisfaction in them that human
craftsmen would--but roads would mar the mountains exterior, which is what
the dwarves are described as trying to avoid. In addition to the material
in the PSoB-A text, the Ruins of Empire entry on Baruk-Azhik: "The dwarves
have done little to mar the outer surface of the mountains--instead they
concentrate on building fortresses within."
The question, however, is why should that be an emphasis of dwarves? It
needs to be pointed out that Cerilian dwarves are not adverse to
interacting with other races, they just don`t want them in their
homes. Dwarves are described as being perfectly happy to travel abroad
trading goods or working as mercenaries. They just don`t want others
traipsing about their own domain, mingling with their communities, learning
their secrets or vulnerabilities, and they`re willing to do things like try
to keep the exterior of their mountains as pristine (and inhospitable) as
possible in order prevent others from visiting. Hence, dwarves want to
handle their trade with outsiders outside their domain as much as possible,
and thus their emphasis on underground life and travel.
Avoiding changes to the exterior of their mountainous demesne is a specific
emphasis of the Cerilian dwarven outlook, not only for reasons involving
their stewardship of the mountains--which may or may not actually even be a
major aspect of their thinking--but due to their generally insular
nature. Roads not only mar the mountainside, but most of them lead to a
door, which opens up to a cave, which leads to a city, and that invites
visitors. Where dwarves in other settings might not have a problem with
castles and other above ground construction, the dwarves in those settings
are described as being more interested in interaction with other races on
their own ground--or are, at least, not as carefully described in this
regard as Cerilian dwarves are.
So the big picture here is that when it comes to a construction emphasis
there`s a LOT more work that has to go on for people to live
underground--particularly if there`s going to be a system of underground
roads over several thousand square miles of land--while keeping the surface
area unmarked. It actually gives dwarves a much more serious construction
emphasis than any other race of Cerilia, or any other race in D&D that I
can think of... even ones based on entirely subterranean species like the
drow or kuo-toa. Those races are not as concerned with surface indications
of their underground realms, and that would require much less effort,
attention to detail and skill to conceal on their part.
Gary
-
10-02-2003, 03:21 PM #16
- Join Date
- Jan 2002
- Location
- Germany
- Posts
- 883
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Bjørn Eian Sørgjerd schrieb:
>Secert underground road? You`re kidding right? Just as the author of
>Greatheart was kidding about the underground paths in Markazor?
>
>
Why kidding? Moria from Lord of the Rings through which Mithrandir leads
the companions, or the Hall of Kings through which Allanon leads his
would be fine examples for extensive underground complexes through which
the dwarves could travel.
And as a goblin of Markazor I would rather tunnel my way secretly into
any of the neighbouring forests instead of moving adjacent to their
border on the ground where the elves certainly make a pincushion out of
anything that closes within range of a longbow ;-)
bye
Michael
-
10-02-2003, 04:31 PM #17The question, however, is why should that be an emphasis of dwarves? It
needs to be pointed out that Cerilian dwarves are not adverse to
interacting with other races, they just don`t want them in their
homes. Dwarves are described as being perfectly happy to travel abroad
trading goods or working as mercenaries. They just don`t want others
traipsing about their own domain, mingling with their communities, learning
their secrets or vulnerabilities, and they`re willing to do things like try
to keep the exterior of their mountains as pristine (and inhospitable) as
possible in order prevent others from visiting. Hence, dwarves want to
handle their trade with outsiders outside their domain as much as possible,
and thus their emphasis on underground life and travel.
I imagine the dwarves keeping trading posts on their borders to make this possible.
However, how do we explain all the foreign guilds within the heart of Baruk-Azhik? Those are human-run guilds (like Points East). Do they work only through proxy, or are certain humans allowed within but sworn to secrecy after gaining the trust of the dwarves?
I've always been in favor of Diirk working to change this and gain a monopoly in B-A, but I can't change what's laid out in RoE.
-
10-02-2003, 05:20 PM #18
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary" <geeman@SOFTHOME.NET>
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 5:56 AM
> The quote regarding the underground nature of the road from B-A to the
> Sielwode comes from what reads like expository text rather than colour
text
Its all color text because the players have read it and I`m gonna change
half of it. I`m willing to save the appearances of the PS by explainaing
why its wrong. Either way, no statement in the PS is reliable. So either
the PS is full of errors or its full of fallible observations. Because I
provide a theory for interpreting the PS, players still have a way to
interpret the PS even though they know not to expect literal truth.
Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com
-
10-02-2003, 07:16 PM #19
At 11:53 AM 10/2/2003 -0500, Kenneth Gauck wrote:
> > The quote regarding the underground nature of the road from B-A to the
> > Sielwode comes from what reads like expository text rather than colour text
>
>Its all color text because the players have read it and I`m gonna change
>half of it. I`m willing to save the appearances of the PS by explainaing
>why its wrong. Either way, no statement in the PS is reliable. So either
>the PS is full of errors or its full of fallible observations. Because I
>provide a theory for interpreting the PS, players still have a way to
>interpret the PS even though they know not to expect literal truth.
Of course it`s always that case that you have control over what is colour
text for the purpose of your sessions, and can tell players that none of
the material in the PS texts (or any of the texts, really) is literally
true in any way--that it`s all colour text. The point here, however, is
not how you decide to use the original materials in your homebrew. It`s
whether the writers meant some a particular bit of text to be somehow
inaccurate because its based on a character`s perspective or some campaign
theme, as is done fairly regularly in the original BR materials. For most
of the BR colour commentary there are a simple, obvious cues that it is
in-character or otherwise hazy in regards to truth value.
In this particular case, it`s pretty clearly meant as literal text, so for
the sake of this discussion--what roads exist in Anuire--it is very strong
evidence that the roads in B-A really are meant to be underground. Of
course, one can discard that in a homebrew, or describe it as commentary
rather than factual if one had some reason for doing so. In the absence of
some extended campaign theme, however, I don`t think it`s very strong as
colour commentary since it doesn`t really seem to convey much colour for
dwarves to all _think_ their roads are underground when they`re not
really. There are more significant themes of dwarven character that
support it being factual (as outlined in the previous post.) It would also
be a rather strange thing to spring on a player whose PC lived or even
ruled B-A for him to somehow not know that roads actually were aboveground
despite that bit of text, so even defining it as colour commentary isn`t
very useful since it would fall in either in the "Common Dwarven Knowledge"
or "Fairly Quickly Noticeable" columns. It would work better as colour
commentary for human (or other non-dwarf) adventurers travelling through
B-A to think all dwarven roads were underground if one really wanted to
emphasize the alien nature of Cerilian dwarves. Again, I think there are
campaign themes and aspects of Cerilian dwarves that make it stronger as
literal truth rather than colour.
One could even extend the thinking regarding dwarves not wanting to show
the locations of their cities by having them build roads that looked like
natural, unworked stone. That doesn`t really address their concerns
regarding an invading army and the fortification of their realm, but it
does follow along with both their construction and craftsmanship efforts
while still meshing with their desire for secrecy.
Personally, I don`t think it`s very reasonable that dwarven roads would be
entirely, absolutely, 100% underground. It makes sense that there might be
the occasional stretch above ground--but probably still not particularly
accessible to non-dwarves. That is, the above ground portions of dwarven
roads might be analogous to above ground bridges or fjords--places where an
underground passage would be less practical than a short walk in the open
air. Where a road runs into a canyon, for instance, it might be sensible
to have a short crossing throught that canyon rather than dig a tunnel in a
loop around it. If we compare to a modern, human highway through a rocky
terrain, in some places its more sensible to tunnel rather than to build a
road around the curvature of the earth. Likewise, an underground dwarven
road probably would run into the occasional area where a short stretch
might go above ground for similar reasons.
A smidge of above ground travel here and there is a little different,
however, from saying that the statement that their roads are underground is
somehow colour text. Rather it would strike me as being more like the
exception that proved the rule.
Gary
-
10-02-2003, 09:21 PM #20
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary" <geeman@SOFTHOME.NET>
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 1:36 PM
> The point here, however, is not how you decide to use the original
> materials in your homebrew.
No, the point is when developing new ideas derived from the original
materials what weight should be given to the fact that something was
printed. My argument is that little weight should be given to it. Its
evidence, it might point to a direction, but its not the last word.
Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks