Realm Spell Saving Throws

[RaspK_FOG]

That part about the Shadow World was an error of mine; in fact, I realise I got the whole matter mixed up with the whole idea behind the Shadow World.

In any case, on our topic: the Sidhelien, just like irdeggman said, dislike the use of Conjuration, since it pretty much drops things out of nowhere (whereas Illusion creates an unreal presence and Transmutation only changes what already is there, and commonly for a miniscule amount of time, unless you actually want to harm it, so it is more like bending than breaking nature, and in a minimal way due to its miniscule, I repeat, time frame compared to elven perspective), and Evocation, but it actually forces things out of thin air, on one hand, and, on the other hand, because it can be extremely destructive. I don't believe that any elf on Cerilia would ever object to the use of Magic Missile: it affects only d20-perspective-creatures (i.e. no normal trees), does so in an explicit manner, and is quite subtle (it pretty much flungs one or more bolts of pure force in the way of physics instead of a piercing missile).

Necromancy... The wording "death magics" is a bit arguable, I'll give you that. However, Necromancy, as presented in D&D, IS the ability to tamper with what energizes life and death and nothing more.

[gazza666]

(sigh)

It's not that I object to what I term "setting fluff", as such. I feel quite free to ignore that.

However, this is a genuine case where these setting elements are harmful to game balance. Elves are already being disadvantaged in many ways within the setting of Birthright: they can't have temples, can't be clerics or druids, and suffer a net penalty to social interactions with just about every other civilised race. The only thing that they are good at to balance all of this is arcane magic - and according to this, they pretty much suck at that, as well. (Yes, I'm exaggerating slightly, but only to a point).

I hear all the "but that's the way the setting is!" arguments. That's all well and good, but fundamentally, if something in the setting makes the game less fun, it is definitely worth considering changing it. The only benefit - and I use that term rather liberally - to arbitrarily closing off an entire school of magic and limiting two others in what seem to be ill-defined ways is to give the elven attitude to magic "character". But the overall effect of this change would be to discourage some players from playing elven wizards at all, to start several at-the-table "discussions" about whether Conjuration Spell X or Evocation Spell Y was in line with the (badly defined, it seems) elven "philosophy" towards magic (consuming valuable game time at the very least).

I'm just not convinced that it's at all worth the cost - the benefit is really one to appreciated only aesthetically. And it doesn't make a heck of a lot of logical sense either, as I argued previously: the core nature-defending class in the game has numerous summoning spells (and even a class feature linked to spontaneously casting them), several powerful evocation spells, and even necromantic death magic (aka Finger of Death). Clearly druids don't have a problem with these spells, and I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that druids know nature at least as well as elves do.

OK, so maybe it's just arcane versions of these spells that are a problem? That doesn't entirely work either, since the sanctioned variant essentially adds in many druid spells to the arcane spell lists of elves - including the dreaded conjuration/summoning spell type (Shambler).

I have no problem with the idea that elves revere nature and don't like doing nasty things to it (though of course there's absolutely nothing about that idea that is remotely original; cf Tolkien). I even accept that you could - if you were determined - make a reasonable argument that the vast majority of necromancy spells were (to some extent) against this philosophy. But there's nothing natural about any type of magic - by definition - and it certainly seems that a more reasonable attitude (given that elves clearly accept the use of magic) would be to judge it by the results, not the school it happened to belong to. There are transmutation spells that are certainly usable in ways that violate the idea of nature (and some of them - Stone to Flesh, Polymorph Any Object, Awaken - are permanent or even instantaneous in duration). There are necromancy spells that don't - assuming that druids don't immediately lose all spellcasting ability if they dare cast Finger of Death.

Is game balance such an anti-setting idea that it is OK to arbitrarily break it for purposes of "flavour"?

It's only fair that if you take something away, you give something back. True, there are several druid spells added to the list of elven wizards or sorcerers, but this is an optional variant rather than a core assumption, and in any case it would appear that some of these spells violate the chapter 3 guidelines on "spells that elves don't cast", to say nothing of the fact that they don't really fill the role of the spells that are being removed. Transport via Plants is of only theoretical interest to a class with Teleport on the spell list (I assume that all Conjuration/Teleportation effects have the same Shadow World inaccuracy); this is not to say that all of these spells suck (Entangle is a solid spell, Barkskin allows elven wizards to make Amulets of Natural Armour; there are other goodies there) but that they hardly make up for losing what chapter 3 implies elves should lose.

I have only respect for those who crafted the setting and those responsible for its conversion to 3rd edition; it is clearly a work of love and it shows. But that doesn't mean that I must be blinded to what seem - to me - to be fairly nasty mechanical flaws. Nobody has yet addressed the mechanical implication of this - the responses have been of the "read this chapter" or "that's the way it is in this setting" type. I'm not disputing any of that - it's not relevant to the argument I'm making here.

My argument is purely mechanical, and it is this: following this suggestion imposes a crippling limitation on elven sorcerers and a serious limitation on elven wizards [because sorcerers lose a lot of low level utility evocation spells, and both sorcerers and wizards have their spell list reduced by about 20-40% with no compensation]; in addition, exactly what is supposed to be restricted is poorly defined [chapter 3 implies it is all conjuration and evocation spells; there seems to be some dispute that only flashy evocation and summoning conjuration spells are restricted despite the sanctioned variant whereby Shambler is added to the spell list - which is it?]; finally, the reasons for these restrictions do not seem to serve their intended goal [if the goal is "don't bugger up nature", then I submit this is at best only poorly correlated with the school of magic being used]. The way it was in 2nd edition, or the way that the original designer wrote about it, is not relevant; to the extent that these are important (and they are, I do not dispute that), they should still be flexible enough to avoid penalty.

I realise that arguments about rules divorced from setting offend some people as being "rules-lawyery" and "roll-playing". Certainly one can always change whatever they wish in their own campaign (I strongly suspect that my DM will concur that these restrictions are not in effect). But that doesn't mean that rules are worthless, or that the careful balance that 3rd edition was supposed to create should be violated in what seems an entirely unnecessary manner.

If these sorts of restrictions have to stay, what about making it a little more explicit? At present the elves look sort of stupid for all this avoidance of certain schools of magic because there is no mechanical effect to blasting half your enemies with fireball, casting Wail of the Banshee at the others all the while being served grapes by your Lesser Planar Bound servants. The Dark Sun rules for defiling would seem to be a fit here - have necromancy, evocation, and conjuration spells actually damage nature (not necessarily to Athasian extents, but it's a decent start). That way the argument about game balance fades, as human wizards suffer to an extent as well (even if they don't particularly care about nature, farmers won't like their crops to fail because an archmage decided to throw a Finger of Death nearby). I'm not sure that this sort of thing is entirely appropriate for Cerilia - magic doesn't seem to be as unnatural - but if nothing like this happens (ie there is no visible effect on the natural environment - which appears to currently be the case) then it's at worst purely a philosophical ideal. And elves, with their love of freedom, would surely allow for philosophical differences, would they not?

[Vicente]

Hi,

long time since I last posted here. I don´t know how is the 3rd Edition BRCS worded, but saying that the elves loose schools for nothing is far from right (I´m talking in a second edition viewpoint, maybe I´m mistaken. This is how things were in 2nd edition, if unblooded humans can be wizards and sorcerers in 3e, instead of only Magicians, do not read this post )

Elves are the only ones able to cast arcane magic. Other races only can if they are blooded beings. Being elf is much more usual than being a blooded wizard or sorcerer. So even with evocation/conjuration/necromancy elves have a very big advantage over most beings in the world.

Of course they lose some nice spells, but well, not anything a player that know his stuff can´t live without. If your mages are the arcane-artillery types (magic missile, fireball, and all other mass evocation spells), they´ll be a little lost, but that´s the problem of the player, not of the setting.

Compared to not be able to cast any spell, not being able to cast those 3 lists is not a problem at all.

Greetings,

Vicente

[Fizz]

Birthright was designed as a rare-magic world. This isn't Faerun where magic is so common every other person can cast spells.

The rules and setting are designed and balanced with this in mind. Elves don't get priestly magic, but they're the only race that can cast true magic (without being blooded). Even with restrictions on the schools of conjuration and necromancy, a wizard has much more magic potential than a magician.

You've stated before that you just want to take the rules and ignore the setting, at least the parts you dislike. But the two are one in the same. You can't expect that you can just pick and choose your pieces and not have repurcussions.


-Fizz

[irdeggman]

Birthright is the setting.

The rules (BRCS or 2nd ed rules) are means of capturing the setting.

They don't work the other way around.

If you are talking about how the "rules" themselves don't balance then it is most likely because the complete setting is not being used.

If you are asking specific question on the rules expect answers that are geared from the setting aspect.

If you don't understand or like the setting then of course a good hunk of the "rules" will not work in your vision of how to run the game.

I don't see how the two can be put together though - sorry.

The rules of the BRCS were intimately tied to the setting and were designed to reflect it, in fact that was one of the core philosphies of putting together the BRCS. Check the pinned thread above for links to the threads talking about that.

Now if you want to ask how can I incorporate XXX (part of the rules) into my game when I don't want to use (YYY) part of the rules? Then that puts things into a different persepective and belongs in the other thread (Royal Library).

[RaspK_FOG]

Well, anyone can do whatever he wants at his table, but I always find important to point out any and all differentiation from the norm, especially to players; I still feel cheated for having to roll Climb checks after having my character search around for live spiders and bitumen, the material components of Spider Climb, or suddenly being told that mithral in another campaign had the ability to draw on magic when found in large quantities, thus rendering all magical items to inactive magical items... Limitations are fine as long as the player is aware of them to some extent!

Thus, in Birthright, those with a connection to the land (dragons, elves and half-elves) can draw on the mebhaighal without having to have the power of the gods flowing through them; however, the Sidhelien disdain (that is, they prefer not to have anything to do with) heavy-handed Evocation and Conjuration spells, whereas they generally abhor the use of Necromancy. In that regard, it is important to check up on the way most of these spells operate.

Note, for example, that there generally are NO planar-travel spells in Birthright, unless you want to tamper with the Shadow World, which is exactly the nature of this plane's transitional plane (in fact, Aebrynis lacks both an Ethereal and a Shadow plane, both touching on the metaphorical borders of the Shadow World in terms of thematics, but none is an extention to the rest; in fact, the cosmological placement of the Prime Material plane of Aebrynis is set apart from most of the rest of the multiverse, quite an enigma not unlike Ravenloft, while still allowing intratravel with the Inner and Outer planes; finally, even the Astral plane is a bit at odds with Aebrynis).

Likewise, Necromancy generally does not suit, for the most part, the way elves think. Note that this is generally adjudicated, meaning that most elves may consider the outcome quite as important as the use of the magic involved and speak none of it. However, some uses of necromancy are at such great odds with Sidhelien society (like Implosion, had it been available to them, what with no clerics at large) that their use is viewed with the utmost contempt. Vampiric Touch and Wail of the Banshee also probably are good examples, mainly because they grants their user some of the most dreaded powers of some of the most dreaded of all undead on Aebrynis.

[gazza666]

(Has anyone else not been able to access the site for the last couple of days?)

OK, to summarise the responses - let me know if this isn't a fair summary; I'm not trying to portray a caricature here - the issue of game balance is considered secondary to the requirements of the setting; thus, since the setting demands that elves have these restrictions, they have them.

The one response that does not seem to fit here is Vicente's observation that non-elves cannot become wizards or sorcerers unless they are regents. That's a completely fair point, worth further examination. If we're talking about the type of campaign I'm playing in (and have run in the past), the PCs are all regents, so this restriction does not exist. If we're talking about a more traditional adventuring party, assuming that one can have elves in a party that does not contain only elves - which is possibly unusual in and of itself, but probably not substantially more so than a party that has a half orc member in a more traditional D&D setting - then the restriction is a blanket one on effectively all wizards and sorcerers except outcast elves - perhaps, like the type of elf that would join a party of humans...

In other words, if the game is about scions, then there are no race restrictions on wizards or sorcerers. If the game is not about scions, then we're probably looking at an outcast anyway.

But let's abandon this line of thought for a moment.

In a previous thread, I brought up the idea that racial alignments are mechanically unsound in 3rd edition. This was not an idea that faced exactly universal approval; let us assume for the moment that no elf ever performs a lawful act - that as a race they are psychologically incapable of acting in such a fashion (whether by choice or by restriction is immaterial).

This means that approximately 50% of elves are chaotic. Chaotic is defined as revering personal freedom; to quote Star Trek 3, "The needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many".

So who exactly is banding together and persecuting those of their brethren that choose to dabble in necromancy, evocation, and conjuration spells? The sort of oppressive regime that hunts down outcasts is very much a lawful idea - lawful evil, to be specific. Granted individual elves may just decide that they don't like such practices, but the term "outcast" implies that it is society as a whole that punishes them.

The way I see it, if elves value freedom so much, then they shouldn't be so proscriptive of what their wizards are allowed to do. If elves do impose such restrictions, then they clearly have lawful intentions at least some of the time.

In the end, I'm really just trying to point out that I think this restriction on elves is unbalanced and unnecessary. From a setting perspective, if elves don't like hurting nature, then that should be the restriction: don't cast any spells that hurt nature, regardless of the school. If it's because the mere act of casting certain types of spells hurts nature, then exactly how does this happen? Do trees get destroyed? Does the barrier of the Shadow World become thinner, letting possibly hostile beings into the world? Does it damage the source potential?

If Magic Missile is allowed, is Fireball? If Shambler is allowed, is Summon Monster N?

I'm sure that many of you "just know" the answers to these questions - but I really don't. And for all the obvious uninterest in the setting that I have, consider that novices that download the PDF have nothing more than that to base their decisions upon. Whether or not I agree with the restrictions - it's pretty clear where I stand on that, I suspect - they lack sufficient clarity. I still have absolutely no idea what evocation spells or conjuration spells are allowed. Assuming I wanted to run a "setting compatible" game of Birthright, what do I tell the player who wants to play an elven sorcerer or wizard?

I'm not expecting an exhaustive list of all spells that are banned or acceptable - but a general idea and some examples would be nice.

[Fizz]

So who exactly is banding together and persecuting those of their brethren that choose to dabble in necromancy, evocation, and conjuration spells? The sort of oppressive regime that hunts down outcasts is very much a lawful idea - lawful evil, to be specific. Granted individual elves may just decide that they don't like such practices, but the term "outcast" implies that it is society as a whole that punishes them.

I don't think anyone said elves `hunt necromancers down'. They're just ostracized. An elf can go practice necromancy- he just won't be allowed to do it in an elven forest. And not because the `government says so', but because individual elves will oppose it.

Elves are creatures of nature. Heck, in 3E terms they could quite easily have the monster type of Fey. They more than revere nature, they essentially are a part of nature.

The way I see it, if elves value freedom so much, then they shouldn't be so proscriptive of what their wizards are allowed to do. If elves do impose such restrictions, then they clearly have lawful intentions at least some of the time.

By that logic, the elves never would have gone to war with the humans thousands of years ago. Even with the humans destroying the forests, the elves would not have gone to war, because stopping the humans would be `imposing a restriction'.

By this logic, no chaotic being can ever interfere with any other being ever.

From a setting perspective, if elves don't like hurting nature, then that should be the restriction: don't cast any spells that hurt nature, regardless of the school.

Well, that's true. Most elves won't cast any spell that hurts nature. But some schools are more damaging to either nature or their own nature for various reasons.

I'm not expecting an exhaustive list of all spells that are banned or acceptable - but a general idea and some examples would be nice.

There's no one `elven spell list'. But if you keep in mind their chaotic nature (belief in free will) and that they're linked to the natural world, you can get a good idea of what types of spells would be appropriate. Hopefully the summary below will help.

Being creatures of nature, necromancy spells are totally repugnant to elves. It's a complete perversion of their very being. Necromancy to an elf is like a water elemental on the plane of fire.

Conjuration itself isn't bad, but the sub-type of Summoning conflicts with the elven nature of free will. So it's not liked either, but not as seriously so as necromancy, and can be practiced without worry. Consider it a `shady' school.

Evocation is not well liked, because it's too overt and obvious use of maebhaigl for most elves. But it's not a shunned school or anything. This is mostly just a non-preference among elves.


-Fizz

[gazza666]

I don't think anyone said elves `hunt necromancers down'. They're just ostracized. An elf can go practice necromancy- he just won't be allowed to do it in an elven forest. And not because the 'government says so', but because individual elves will oppose it.

Perhaps I'm confusing things a bit. It says in chapter 3 that elves who practice necromancy are ostracised, but then goes on to say that elves hunt down those who damage nature - I may be assuming a connection between these two that does not exist. Fair enough.

Elves are creatures of nature. Heck, in 3E terms they could quite easily have the monster type of Fey. They more than revere nature, they essentially are a part of nature.

Arguably, so are druids. Fair? Druids have a few necromancy spells on their list, including death magic.

Now, obviously it can be argued that elves are even more in tune with nature than druids. I won't dispute that directly, but rather I'd ask a more general question: are elves unique amongst nature lovers in abhorring necromancy? Would a centaur druid, for example, have a similar prohibition? How about a nymph?

If it is the case that necromancy is something that fey-like creatures abhor - which sounds like what you're suggesting here - would it be so terrible if (say) fey creatures got something like a +2 DC to all their enchantment school spells?

Understand that it is not the idea of removing spells I object to per se - it is the lack of compensation. If you take something away, you should give something back. I can't believe that there's no mechanic you could implement to compensate for this that wouldn't violate the setting - there must be some middle ground here.

By that logic, the elves never would have gone to war with the humans thousands of years ago. Even with the humans destroying the forests, the elves would not have gone to war, because stopping the humans would be 'imposing a restriction'.

Hmm.

One of the reasons I don't use alignments in my campaign is because everybody has a different idea about what they are.

But it sounds in this case that you're arguing chaotic good means "do whatever you like as long as it doesn't interfere with others" - a perfectly reasonable definition; I'll get behind that.

Unfortunately, this therefore begs the question: what harm does necromancy (et al) do? The way it is expressed at the moment it looks like purely a personal preference - and coming down on someone's non-harmful different beliefs is definitely not the sort of thing that falls under a chaotic alignment. I'm cool with the idea that elves would oppose necromancy if it is harmful to others (the same way they went to war with humans, and so forth); I'm just not clear on what harm it does. It surely has to be more than "I don't like it" in order for a chaotic being to shun another for using it.

To use a real world example here: let us assume, for the moment, that the use of marijuana is completely non-harmful to others. (Whether or not you believe that is an interesting side argument, but not relevant for the purposes of this discussion). I can see a lawful person crusading to have it banned despite this, but I would say that individuals who personally didn't like the idea of the drug and yet opposed it's ban would be classically chaotic (probably chaotic good).

On the other hand, the most chaotic good hippy in the real world isn't going to protest that murder should be acceptable.

The analogy is this: it looks to me that practicing necromancy is like taking marijuana - distasteful, but not harmful. But for elves to be opposed to it implies that it is harmful, and it is known to be harmful. So what harm does it do?

Well, that's true. Most elves won't cast any spell that hurts nature. But some schools are more damaging to either nature or their own nature for various reasons.

And that's the point: I want to know what damage they do, so that I can understand those reasons.

I fail to see how Blindness/Deafness harms nature. It's tricky to see that Finger of Death does (assuming you aren't using it on a treant or something). Wall of Force doesn't seem to make Tinkerbell die.

Certainly I can see that virtually any use of Animate Dead would be an affront to nature. So might using Burning Hands to burn down a forest, or Control Weather to impose a drought. But I would say that Animate Dead is bad because it creates undead (which are non-natural) rather than because it's necromantic; I would also argue that despite the fact that Burning Hands and Control Weather are transmutation, they are still bad if used in that fashion.

Being creatures of nature, necromancy spells are totally repugnant to elves. It's a complete perversion of their very being. Necromancy to an elf is like a water elemental on the plane of fire.

Even spells like Blindness/Deafness? Not all necromantic spells are death magic; not all necromantic spells are evil. And frankly, I could totally get behind a concept such as "elves don't cast spells with the death descriptor" or even "elves don't cast spells with an alignment descriptor". Both of these seem to fit; alignments are "unnatural" (animals don't have them), and snuffing out someone's life force sounds pretty unnatural as well.

Conjuration itself isn't bad, but the sub-type of Summoning conflicts with the elven nature of free will. So it's not liked either, but not as seriously so as necromancy, and can be practiced without worry. Consider it a `shady' school.

The issue here is one of consistency - the sanctioned variant adds Shambler to the elven arcane spell list. In any case, I assume what applies to Summoning would apply even more to Calling spells.

To be frank, the loss of the Summoning school isn't really much of a problem to most wizards, as the Summon Monster series of spells are not particularly potent. Calling spells mean that you miss out on Gate, but many DMs (myself included) ban that spell completely anyway due to its tremendous potential for abuse.

If other conjuration spells (healing, creation, teleportation) are OK, then great. This is exactly the sort of answer I'm looking for - it would seem that the inclusion of Shambler is incorrect, in this case.

Evocation is not well liked, because it's too overt and obvious use of maebhaigl for most elves. But it's not a shunned school or anything. This is mostly just a non-preference among elves.

OK, so using evocation is more a sort of "Oh look, what a loser" rather than anything more serious. That's cool too.

This is the sort of thing I was after - thank you. I think, under the circumstances, that I am still of the opinion that elves are getting mechanically screwed over here, but I also think this can be rectified. Something like a bonus to enchantment/charm spell DCs (which would be in keeping with their fey-like nature) would probably go some way towards alleviating this. It does mean that virtually all elven wizards would become specialists, of course, but that's not a terrible side effect.

It might also help to have some specific social penalties applied to elves that break these rules. Would it be enough to simply apply the usual -4/+4 that they get with other races to elves as well, or should it go further than that?

[irdeggman]

OK, to summarise the responses - let me know if this isn't a fair summary; I'm not trying to portray a caricature here - the issue of game balance is considered secondary to the requirements of the setting; thus, since the setting demands that elves have these restrictions, they have them.

As pointed out this is incorrect.

Check out the "other" things that Cerilian elves get:

As pointed out they don't need to be scions in order to cast greater magic (i.e., non-magician/bard type).

Timeless: Gifted with near immortality, elves do not suffer the ravages of time and are thus immune to aging attacks and normal (but not supernatural) disease. An adult elf’s age has no effect on her physical or mental ability scores. Because of this, modify the random starting age and aging effects’ tables in the Player’s Handbook to remove mention of starting age or aging (years have no meaning to an ageless race) effects for Cerilian elves.

Nature Stride: Elves may move through natural thorns, overgrown areas, heavy snow, soft sand, a treacherous mountain or similar natural terrain at their normal movement rate and without suffering damage or penalty.

Automatic Language: Sidhelien. Bonus Languages: Any.

Favored Class: Any one arcane spell casting class.


These are all things that the "standard" D&D elf does not get. You are focusing on a single aspect and using that as the basis for "balance" and not viewing the overall picture. Much of this probably comes from how you are inserting the BRCS rules into your own game.

The one response that does not seem to fit here is Vicente's observation that non-elves cannot become wizards or sorcerers unless they are regents. That's a completely fair point, worth further examination. If we're talking about the type of campaign I'm playing in (and have run in the past), the PCs are all regents, so this restriction does not exist.

Focusing on a single aspect of gameplay will remove some "balance" aspects and really nothing can be done in the basic rules to cover all of these things. The most dramatic example of focusing on a single aspect is when a group primarily uses only Domain level of play. Many of the regent feats in Chap 1 become overly powerful since the players will ignore adventure level feats and take them instead.

As far as adventuring regents, well the section in Chap 2 "For the DM: Playing a Great or True Bloodline" is suposed to serve as a warning and guideline for what it entails to be a regent. Basically regents should be spending most of their time ruling and not adventuring, but in reality (that is most actual game play) regents spend a lot of their time adventuring.

I brought up the idea that racial alignments are mechanically unsound in 3rd edition. This was not an idea that faced exactly universal approval; let us assume for the moment that no elf ever performs a lawful act - that as a race they are psychologically incapable of acting in such a fashion (whether by choice or by restriction is immaterial).

From the SRD:

LAW VS. CHAOS

Lawful characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short of their duties.

Chaotic characters follow their consciences, resent being told what to do, favor new ideas over tradition, and do what they promise if they feel like it.

“Law” implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can include close-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, judgmentalness, and a lack of adaptability. Those who consciously promote lawfulness say that only lawful behavior creates a society in which people can depend on each other and make the right decisions in full confidence that others will act as they should.

“Chaos” implies freedom, adaptability, and flexibility. On the downside, chaos can include recklessness, resentment toward legitimate authority, arbitrary actions, and irresponsibility. Those who promote chaotic behavior say that only unfettered personal freedom allows people to express themselves fully and lets society benefit from the potential that its individuals have within them.

Someone who is neutral with respect to law and chaos has a normal respect for authority and feels neither a compulsion to obey nor a compulsion to rebel. She is honest but can be tempted into lying or deceiving others.

Devotion to law or chaos may be a conscious choice, but more often it is a personality trait that is recognized rather than being chosen. Neutrality on the lawful–chaotic axis is usually simply a middle state, a state of not feeling compelled toward one side or the other. Some few such neutrals, however, espouse neutrality as superior to law or chaos, regarding each as an extreme with its own blind spots and drawbacks.
.

Here is a link to a very good article on the WotC site that talks about lawful and chaotic alignment:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sg/20050325a

I think a lot of your issues with this arise from your house-rules (i.e., own game) and as you pointed out later you don't use alignments.

So who exactly is banding together and persecuting those of their brethren that choose to dabble in necromancy, evocation, and conjuration spells? The sort of oppressive regime that hunts down outcasts is very much a lawful idea - lawful evil, to be specific. Granted individual elves may just decide that they don't like such practices, but the term "outcast" implies that it is society as a whole that punishes them.

The way I see it, if elves value freedom so much, then they shouldn't be so proscriptive of what their wizards are allowed to do.

I think you have misread the information, again. Later discussion points that out too.

Anyway here is the information from the BRCS:

Some schools of magic are in disfavor for a particular region and thus training in spells of disfavored schools is difficult to come by. Mages practicing the magic of shunned schools are often themselves shunned by other mages and ostracized by their people.

Elves favor the schools of enchantment and illusion as these magics cause the least disruption to the natural flow of mebhaighl. Elves are particularly fond of spells that bring them closer to nature. Sidhelien spellcasters favor spells that allow them to vanquish foes or accomplish a feat without risking any damage to nature.

Elves disfavor the schools of evocation and conjuration, particularly distaining spells that create an overt force of mebhaighl into the environment. This disfavor does not extend to transmutations spells, which are considered to be a bending – not a breaking – of natural laws.

Elves shun the school of necromancy absolutely. An elf who even dabbles in death magics faces the censure of his peers and risks ostracism from the community. Elves practice great caution when casting spells that could harm nature. Elves have been known to hunt down spellcasters, including other elves, who have ruined nature with their carelessness.

In the end, I'm really just trying to point out that I think this restriction on elves is unbalanced and unnecessary. From a setting perspective, if elves don't like hurting nature, then that should be the restriction: don't cast any spells that hurt nature, regardless of the school. If it's because the mere act of casting certain types of spells hurts nature, then exactly how does this happen?

If Magic Missile is allowed, is Fireball? If Shambler is allowed, is Summon Monster N?

Whether or not I agree with the restrictions - it's pretty clear where I stand on that, I suspect - they lack sufficient clarity. I still have absolutely no idea what evocation spells or conjuration spells are allowed. Assuming I wanted to run a "setting compatible" game of Birthright, what do I tell the player who wants to play an elven sorcerer or wizard?

I'm not expecting an exhaustive list of all spells that are banned or acceptable - but a general idea and some examples would be nice.

Each spell is different.

The "reason" that elves disfavor the conjuration and evocation schools is because they "force" changes in the world or the "force" something to appear (most notably the summoning subschool, although all except the healing subschool have aspects that put them close to "forcing" changes - hence they need to be watched and not routinely used (i.e., the "disfavored schools")

As far as necromancy goes:

From the SRD:

Necromancy

Necromancy spells manipulate the power of death, unlife, and the life force. Spells involving undead creatures make up a large part of this school.

All spells of that school affect the life force - and that is something that elves have tremendous trouble with.