Roads in Anuire

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by geeman@Oct 2 2003, 06:18 AM
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.


Gary

I tend to have a different view of Cerilian dwarves. I see them as more insuler, of course there is always an exception to every rule (Diirk).

References to why (or why not) Cerilian dwarves are isolationists.

BRRB
Dwarves (pg 5) – “Cerilian dwarves usually adhere to a friendly neutrality; thus, they are on good terms with most other races, including the elves. They’re masterful craftsmen and traders; dwarven caravans roam from Anuire to Vos laden with their goods. Dwarven arms and armor are the best in Cerilia, and it is not uncommon to see dwarves selling their services as mercenaries.” {This is the only reference to Cerilian dwarves frequently roaming the lands trading, most of the other references imply (or state) that the dwarves prefer to have others bring goods to them.}

Atlas of Cerilia
Dwarves - “This is part of the reason that they prefer not to deal with outsiders – visitors distract the sentries.”

Ruins of the Empire
Baruk-Azhik – Regent – “He acts friendly to proven friends of the dwarven cause and supports his people’s ventures enthusiastically, but finds little reason to seek companions outside his own race. He does not disdain humans, but he wants them to prove their worth before he trusts them with any task or treasure of value.”
Trade Goods – “However, dwarven goods leave the kingdom only infrequently, as the dwarves tend to trade only among themselves.”

Player’s Secrets of Baruk-Azhik
See timeline 530 “5 provinces of Baruk-Azhik seal their doors to the outside world”
(p 12) under culture “Because dwarves are insular in nature and never dwell outside their own realms, humans have had no real opportunities to learn their ways. Furthermore, human visitors to the dwarven realms are exceedingly rare; it would be safe to speculate that half the dwarven cities in Cerilia have never known a human footfall.”
{While I don’t go with using the Player’s Secrets books as any sort of canon, this section is consistent with other sources’ description of dwarven behavior.}

Havens of the Great Bay
Daikhar Zhigun
“Less insular than their brethren to the east, the dwarves of Daikhar Zhigun still view outsiders warily.”
The Overlook
The Dwarven Realm – “They welcome trade with other realms, but only a little at a time and after much negotiation.”

Rjurik Highlands
Khurin-Azur
“Though trade contacts with the outside world are limited, a trickle of goods drifts in and out of the dwarven fortress.”
Allies – “The dwarves, victims of the stubborn pride that is the bane of their race, have no allies in the world.”
Tjorgrim Stonesoul – “Unlike most other dwarves, Tjorgrim has grown more tolerant of outsiders as he has aged. The decline of his people is unmistakable evidence, as far as the Stonelord is concerned, that the dwarves cannot continue to exist in isolation, and that human dominion over Cerilia is an unpleasant but unchangeable fact.”

Legend of the Hero-Kings
Dwarven Steel – many references to “isolationism” This also points out that Diirk is the point of contact between BA and the outside world.

[Osprey]

Trade Goods – “However, dwarven goods leave the kingdom only infrequently, as the dwarves tend to trade only among themselves.”

I found this incosistent with the text following that passage, which mentions a large number of trade routes for such arelatively small realm. It seemed pretty contradictory.

Player’s Secrets of Baruk-Azhik
See timeline 530 “5 provinces of Baruk-Azhik seal their doors to the outside world”
(p 12) under culture “Because dwarves are insular in nature and never dwell outside their own realms, humans have had no real opportunities to learn their ways. Furthermore, human visitors to the dwarven realms are exceedingly rare; it would be safe to speculate that half the dwarven cities in Cerilia have never known a human footfall.”
{While I don’t go with using the Player’s Secrets books as any sort of canon, this section is consistent with other sources’ description of dwarven behavior.}

I think it's a more extreme position than the other statements, a seeming exaggeration of general tendencies implied in previous publications.

I do agree with your statement concerning Diirk. He seems to play a vital role as liasion between dwarves and humans, and has built his guild's wealth and power as a result.

-Osprey

[Eosin the Red]

Roads in Anuire:



Alrighty, while the question of BA still hangs in the air, there are other areas that need addressing.



Does anybody know of any reference that would indicate a road through Medoere and into Diemed? If one did remain, it would seem to me that it would go through Moonstrike Pass.



I still waffle on a road through Brosengae to Taeghas...Most of this road would need to be paid for by Taeghas and Avanil and I would not see this being considered a stirling idea given EM`s hunger for the province of Brosen. The frequently stormy wesrtern coast does make naval trade routes less attractive.



Trade Routes in Talinie also raise some questions - it seems almost impossible to make money off of those routes but it is managed somehow? What Trade Roads should be present? Does the Road travelling north from Boeruine turn east into Lindholme?



Randy~Eosin

[kgauck]

My view was to divide dwarves politically at home between the isolationists

and the human friendly (and also those who sought a special relationship

between Sielwode and Baruk-Azhik). This conviniently explains all the

quotes (because they apply to different segments of the dwarven body

politic) and it sets up fruitful game play in political disagreement. It

also demonstrates the utility of the notion that all text be regarded as

subjective, not objective.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[geeman]

At 03:52 PM 10/2/2003 -0500, Kenneth Gauck wrote:



> > 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.



It`s not the last word, but it is not the fact that something was printed

that determines its truth value in campaign material. More important is

the manner in which it was written to determining the weight it should be

given. The text in question was expository, not colour commentary and is,

therefore, more credible than you`re suggesting. Where we might take

something in the Atlas of Cerilia with a grain of salt because it was

written from the POV of an Anuirean noble, or the obviously colourful

introductory text under "An Address by Wulfram Wainier" in the PSoB-A, the

text in question is not of that type, so we needn`t add any salt.



One can certainly debate how realistic, how smart, reasonable, etc. that

text might be, but whether it was actually intended to mean what it says is

pretty clear. Aside from it being expository, it`s also supported by text

from other sources in the campaign material. Both Ruins of Empire and the

Rulebook have statements that would support the concept, which helps

substantiate it. Its also supported by ancillary information about the

attitudes of Cerilian dwarves, their motivations and culture.



Is there anything in the published materials to indicate it isn`t true?



Gary

[geeman]

At 06:31 PM 10/2/2003 +0200, Osprey wrote:



> 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?



Probably the most logical solution is that once the goods reach the

borders, dwarves take over the transportation of the goods. Those dwarves

might nominally work for the guild, but they remain loyal to B-A and thus

don`t reveal any secrets about the dwarven nature to outsiders.



> 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.



Sure you could, but even if you`re loathe to, you could time advance a year

or ten into the campaign`s timeline and play with B-A`s guilds

"nationalized" into the state....



Gary

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----

From: "Gary" <geeman@SOFTHOME.NET>

Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 5:26 PM





> More important is the manner in which it was written to determining

> the weight it should be given.



Not when its all so questionable that reason requires that a huge portion of

it abandon. What you say would make sense if the text made sense.



> The text in question was expository, not colour commentary and is,

> therefore, more credible than you`re suggesting.



I can tell the difference, I`m not daft. My problem is that the so-called

expository text is an incredible as quotes from Bob the drunken sailor.

Hence, I can`t give greater credance to the intended expository as I do to

the intended color. So, (he says to the wall) I advocate regarding all of

the text as color.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[geeman]

At 06:59 PM 10/2/2003 -0500, Kenneth Gauck wrote:



> > More important is the manner in which it was written to determining

> > the weight it should be given.

>

>Not when its all so questionable that reason requires that a huge portion of

>it abandon. What you say would make sense if the text made sense.



Well, you`re the only one who has suggested that there`s more to abandon

than keep in the PS books. Most of the material in those texts is simple

elaboration, and doesn`t really rise to the level of needing to be

abandoned IMO. There are certainly things in various PS`s that I don`t

like, but I still say that the PS texts are by and large solid. I even

think they contain fewer problems per page than just about any other of the

BR materials. There`s no chapter dedicated to battlespells, no strange new

garradalaighs, the things that are vague are more likely intentionally so

(because they are meant to be read by both player and DM.) The numbers

presented--though unrealistic--at least follow some sort of logic. They

don`t introduce anything as strange as a 3x5 battlemap for the very weird

warcard system. The goofy aspects of the PS texts aren`t any goofier than

the occasional paragraphs on lesser er-/awnsheghlien in Blood Enemies, and

they don`t tend to do things like omit a whole set of wizard levels for

primary characters and spawn massive debate on that character`s actual

stats (though BE is otherwise a pretty solid piece of work.) The maps

aren`t earth shattering, but they compare favorably to most other D&D

products of the time, and in a few cases are superior to newer D20

products. The BR adventures are generally much more problematic than any

of the PS texts what with the appearance of monkey gods and extraplanar

travellers--with the exception of the LotHK which is IMO the best of all BR

products.



> > The text in question was expository, not colour commentary and is,

> > therefore, more credible than you`re suggesting.

>

>I can tell the difference, I`m not daft. My problem is that the so-called

>expository text is an incredible as quotes from Bob the drunken sailor.



If you were more specific about what was so incredible about it then maybe

your point would be clearer. What is so unbelievable about the underground

roads for B-A`s dwarves?



Gary

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----

From: "Gary" <geeman@SOFTHOME.NET>

Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 8:39 PM





> Well, you`re the only one who has suggested that there`s more to

> abandon than keep in the PS books.



I didn`t realize I was supposed to be speaking for a constituancy.



> If you were more specific about what was so incredible about it then maybe

> your point would be clearer. What is so unbelievable about the

underground

> roads for B-A`s dwarves?



The idea that they are permenent underground dwellers (and so would build

permement underground roads) is at work here, and we just went over that.

Underground roads are especially vulnerable to attack by anyone with spells

of the earth descriptor, and many of these have an area effect. While such

an investment is certainly not beyond the dwarves, given their ill

propensity to travel about, its not worth the investment. What makes more

sense given that dwarves exist at the plane of the surface, but operate just

beneath that plane, rather than just above it, given that they don`t want to

create vulnerabilities by creating targets for orogs or spellcasters (let

alone orog spellcasters), and that they would not likely make the investment

in such a road tunnel. What makes more sense is a known path which winds

through natural caves and rough places such that others would never even

recognize it as a road, especially when it is so little traveled.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by geeman@Oct 2 2003, 09:02 PM
Well, you`re the only one who has suggested that there`s more to abandon

than keep in the PS books. Most of the material in those texts is simple

elaboration, and doesn`t really rise to the level of needing to be

abandoned IMO. There are certainly things in various PS`s that I don`t

like, but I still say that the PS texts are by and large solid. I even

think they contain fewer problems per page than just about any other of the

BR materials. There`s no chapter dedicated to battlespells, no strange new

garradalaighs, the things that are vague are more likely intentionally so

(because they are meant to be read by both player and DM.) The numbers

presented--though unrealistic--at least follow some sort of logic. They

don`t introduce anything as strange as a 3x5 battlemap for the very weird

warcard system. The goofy aspects of the PS texts aren`t any goofier than

the occasional paragraphs on lesser er-/awnsheghlien in Blood Enemies, and

they don`t tend to do things like omit a whole set of wizard levels for

primary characters and spawn massive debate on that character`s actual

stats (though BE is otherwise a pretty solid piece of work.) The maps

aren`t earth shattering, but they compare favorably to most other D&D

products of the time, and in a few cases are superior to newer D20

products. The BR adventures are generally much more problematic than any

of the PS texts what with the appearance of monkey gods and extraplanar

travellers--with the exception of the LotHK which is IMO the best of all BR

products.



Gary

I for one also think that the PS (as a whole) are mostly nothing but color text. I find that they tend (again there are always exceptions) to be more internally and externally inconsistent than the other major products (Expansions, BoM, BoP), note that Blood Enemies is one of the worst for consistancy and editorials. For one the Roesone PS (the first one published) has statements referring to half elves being common in the land. This is in absolute contradiction to the core rules which describe human and half-elf interactions. Taking into account that Roesone was formed on lands that were once covered by the old forests (Erebannian) and are now plains - it doesn&#39;t make any sense why the relationship between the two races should be very good at all in the Southern Coast regions.

I tend to pick up nuggets from the PS and view them more along the lines of the way I look at the novels, good for color and filler but not meant as a source for rules and mechanics. There is a difference between describing regional holdings, units, etc. and who does what or how things relate to each other. IMO the former can be interpreted as expounding on the core rules (Ruins of Empire, Cities in the Sun, etc.) for domains.