Druid submission rules

41 posts / 0 new
Last post
Frendh's picture
Offline
Joined: Nov 12 2004
Druid submission rules

I kind of broke this one from day 1.

Quote:
2.I understand and agree to the rules of achieving these objectives.


I used copper bullets for my sling. I thought, "I'll use these until I can find some stone bullets". But I have not found any so far. Then the sickle, are there any stone sickles?


Later on I will most likely just use a scimitar. But it is not something I want to use in the early stage of his adventuring life.


Shiokara's picture
Offline
AeridiniteArageniteVoraxian
Joined: Apr 6 2009

Not sure what the official say on this is, but I can tell you that stone tools and weapons (for the most part) don't exist in-game. I think the one that I did see drop was a stone dagger that had a -1 modifier on it, so they're not very practical. As with some Wemic submissions I have seen (a race that doesn't use much beyond stone), though, I think most just RP that the weapon is made from stone. I can't comment more on the sickle, though, sorry.

Most druids I have seen go either the scimitar route or the short staff route for melee. Short staves work well because they are wood, and their bludgeoning damage type works well for slaying those unnatural undead aberrations. Additionally, silver enhancements work on a blunt weapon, but not for slashing weapons because the enhancement's damage bonus counts as slashing (the two don't seem to stack). Since you can use a wooden tower shield with either, it can provide you with some much-needed AC (especially if you're a sporting leathers to match lore instead of the mechanically given medium armors). A Walking Stick of the Hierophant is a great find for a starting druid since it's essentially a +1 modified short staff.

Copper bullets are, as far as I can tell, ok to use. Just RP that you're using stones. If you're not ok with that, you could make the argument that the bullets are a negligible interference. After all it's the wearing of metal that interferes with one's connection to nature.

miltonyorkcastle's picture
Offline
GamemasterWriting Team Member
Joined: Feb 3 2005

Thank you, Frendh, for coming forward with this. Shiokara is right on, and we have addressed the issues surrounding the lesser uses of metal (like for bullets) in past threads. They can be RP'd as stone, since we don't have any mechanical way to compensate.


Thanks from:
IceDragonDuvessa's picture
Offline
DruidGamemasterKatian
Joined: Oct 27 2004

There are also wooden clubs in game that you can use if you don't care for the sickle/scimitar options. Rhizome once explained it to me like this: a sickle was ok because you could use it to harvest and groom the land if that makes you feel better about things.


Thanks from:
Offline
Layonara AdministratorDruidFolianiteGamemasterLucinditeWriting Team MemberXeenite
Joined: Oct 1 2004

To add...


Sickle, dagger and Scimitar are traditionally ceremonial "weapons" for a druid. Ideally, we'd have Ironwood for the scimitar and obsidian for the dagger and sickles....but we don't. These are all OK to use as-is without worrying about oaths and connections and things.


Frendh's picture
Offline
Joined: Nov 12 2004

Okay. I think adding some kind of comment in druid information would help. "If any of the allowed weapons can't be found in a metal free form use the metal weapon mechanically but Roleplay as if it was made of a proper substitute." or some such.


Thanks from:
miltonyorkcastle's picture
Offline
GamemasterWriting Team Member
Joined: Feb 3 2005

I added a small note to help with the confusion.


Admins, please review and make sure the statement is accurate and adequate.


[LORE]Druid Information[/LORE]


Guardian 452's picture
Offline
DoranditeDruidFolianiteKithairieniteVoraxian
Joined: Jan 18 2004

I'd reccomend playing around with the weapon appearance. I bet one will look more stone or wooden... I even saw you could turn some clubs into a fish LOL!


Like the team has said when you are limited by what is avail. just have to make do.


Hellblazer's picture
Offline
Az'attanFolianiteMistitePrunillianToraniteVoraxian
Joined: May 14 2006

Quote:
I added a small note to help with the confusion.


Admins, please review and make sure the statement is accurate and adequate.


[LORE]Druid Information[/LORE]


Should add scimitar in that, since you already said sickles and slings.


Offline
Layonara AdministratorDruidFolianiteGamemasterLucinditeWriting Team MemberXeenite
Joined: Oct 1 2004

Guardian 452 wrote:
Like the team has said when you are limited by what is avail. just have to make do.


Correct, and this has always been the case.


Really, Bioware's implementation of the Druid class is much more permissive than 3rd Ed. rules, but we work with what we have.


Offline
Layonara AdministratorDruidFolianiteGamemasterLucinditeWriting Team MemberXeenite
Joined: Oct 1 2004

miltonyorkcastle wrote:
I added a small note to help with the confusion.


Admins, please review and make sure the statement is accurate and adequate.


[lore]Druid Information[/lore]


Looks fine, milt. Thanks.


Frendh's picture
Offline
Joined: Nov 12 2004

Not counting armor, shields and weapons am I allowed to fudge with the other items? Like, making a adamantium helm look like a hood or saying my rings are made of carved bone?


edit: I can pretty much guess the answer to my next question, but I want to make sure. Of the craftable shields are the wooden shields the only allowed ones for druids? They are crummy and barely worth using for me. AC bonus only for certain type of damages is no good and fire vulnerability(!!!).


I have only been wearing the spell component necklace so far. But I am thinking about buying some rings. Then there is the helmet of armor quest.


miltonyorkcastle's picture
Offline
GamemasterWriting Team Member
Joined: Feb 3 2005

Non-metal headgear exists IG, and as a druid, that's what should be used, if anything. The same goes for the shields, again because it is available IG, and a druid would not use the refined metal shields.


We don't really have non-metal ring options, so I'd fit that in the same category as the non-metal bullets- you can RP the rings are made of enchanted grass braids or some such if you'd like.


Completing the helm of armor quest really doesn't make sense for druids. For one thing, the helm(s) grants mage armor and barkskin, and the druid can already cast barskskin, and ultimately get a better AC bonus from his/her casting as opposed to the helm's. Second, a druid would find it to be utter ridiculousness to go around collecting (and don't even talk about making) fabricated weapons to support the protection of civilization.


Much like choosing to play the other divine classes, or playing one of the 'evil' races, you sacrifice some things (such as the ability to complete certain static quests) to gain the other benefits of the class/race.


Aerimor's picture
Offline
ToraniteAngels Guild MemberDruid
Joined: Mar 8 2008

I always role played that my druid's jewelry was made from wrought metals. Metal after all is found naturally. It's the unnatural firing and working of the metal that 'removes' it from its natural state, in my opinion. After all a lot of working of metal is to remove its impurities. Those "impurities" are natural and instead of being culled, should be embraced.


The crude more natural look of wrought jewelry to me seemed rather fitting for a druid.


Hand Wrought Jewelry products, buy Hand Wrought Jewelry products from alibaba.com


Hand Wrought Jewelry products, buy Hand Wrought Jewelry products from alibaba.com


Hand Wrought Jewelry products, buy Hand Wrought Jewelry products from alibaba.com


Thanks from:
Frendh's picture
Offline
Joined: Nov 12 2004

Quote:
Completing the helm of armor quest really doesn't make sense for druids. .
Knowing the reward is meta gaming I think, I do not remember them telling you before what you will get. I could be wrong it was a really long time ago since I did the quest.


It makes sense to me if you have a character who likes to help out.


Quote:
Second, a druid would find it to be utter ridiculousness to go around collecting (and don't even talk about making) fabricated weapons to support the protection of civilization.


Maybe your and many other druids have beliefs like that, but I reread the lore on druids and I could not find any mention of it. I agree it would be ridiculous to collect said weapons for druids.


Until that changes my druid will not be conservative like your druid. He realizes that kicking people back into the stone ages will not be helpful. He is allowed to use a scimitar for a reason.


What are the general ways for druids to cook food? Roasting on sticks and in leaves. But do they use stone pots for boiling?


Rowana's picture
Offline
Layonara AdministratorGamemasterKatianWriting Team MemberXeenite
Joined: Mar 16 2006

Hey there,

I try not to dive into these too often because I can get rather wordy and I don't usually have a lot of time to do the posts justice, but here goes.

Frendh wrote:
Knowing the reward is meta gaming I think, I do not remember them telling you before what you will get. I could be wrong it was a really long time ago since I did the quest.

Knowing the reward that's been handed out countless times to people around you is not metagaming. Perhaps you don't know anyone who's done the quest, fine. I don't think doing the quest itself for any reason whatsoever has any bearing on metagaming. If you have a character who's a jerk and never helps people out, well he can still do the quest because he wants that cool helm reward that's rumored to be given out. Metagaming really doesn't come into the factor at all. It might be different if there were not a billion (exaggerated for dramatic purposes) copies of the helm floating around and even getting sold from time to time. Now how this relates to druids, read on...

Frendh wrote:
It makes sense to me if you have a character who likes to help out.

What doesn't make sense about this isn't that someone might want to help out the good ol' trooper, it's that a -druid- would even be remotely interested in:

1) touching worked metal who's mere presence on their person can disrupt their connection with nature,
2) assist those individuals/groups that harvest and use Nature without giving back,
3) assist those individuals/groups who harvest and use Nature for the purpose of making war (which disrupts the balance),
4) assist those individuals/groups who think druids and all their ilk are a bizarre and eccentric at best and a danger to the population at worst,
5) assisting individuals/groups who are spreading out into the wilds, cutting them out and gutting them for their own selfish and frivolous needs.

All of these are common opinions of druids toward civilization (Though not a complete list). Not every druid holds all of those perspectives, but most of them usually hold one or two of them. If someone doesn't hold at least a little of these opinions as a druid, they probably aren't -actually- a druid and Nature doesn't -actually- want to grant them any powers for it's protection and theirs.

Frendh wrote:
Maybe your and many other druids have beliefs like that, but I reread the lore on druids and I could not find any mention of it. I agree it would be ridiculous to collect said weapons for druids.

For the above reasons, the druids would seriously frown on and perhaps penalize a member of theirs who was working with the town for completely frivolous or disruptive needs. It has been long on this server held that druids would have nothing to do with this item anyway.

Frendh wrote:
Until that changes my druid will not be conservative like your druid. He realizes that kicking people back into the stone ages will not be helpful. He is allowed to use a scimitar for a reason.

I'm not sure where you get your assumption that other druids think they should be kicking people back into the stone ages, but you are wrong about the conservative nature of druids. Druids are literally conservative by nature. (That could be a trippy little poem with a little work.) There are a good number of druids who wish to work with civilizations and want to find a happy balance between the ever expanding Humans, the digging ever deeper Dwarves, etc, etc, etc. Not all druids feel that way. Some teach animals tactics to kill humanoids on site. Others will actually go head to head with those civilized places when given half a chance. Others stay out of it all together unless the 'civilized' people try to come in and encroach on their protected areas. However one aspect remains utterly true. Druids, by nature, are there to protect and nurture Nature. Nature is an entity that is alive and grants people with certain inclinations toward 'It' miraculous abilities like changing into natural shapes, covering one's self in bark, camouflaging one's self in most surroundings and heck, even being able to nearly universally understand an animal's mind through reading it's body language and such. Anything that separates a druid from those given abilities and extra sensories is probably beyond 'taboo' for them. It is possibly as drastic as a little death. It is certainly the same as cutting the divinely inspired off from their deity.

Frendh wrote:
What are the general ways for druids to cook food? Roasting on sticks and in leaves. But do they use stone pots for boiling?

Ah, now this question is always fun to answer. Usually we don't like to draw in too much real life examples because this is a fantasy world that is drastically different from our own in the larger ways. However, visual help may be assistive here so I'm going to throw in some links for the interested. (Forward apologies for any pop-ups. I have a good blocker so it's hard to tell sometimes if there is any.)

Stone pots would be rather heavy given the nomadic nature of druids. But what about it's cousin, the clay pot? What about pit cooking? Hawai'ian Luau's are pretty famous for the central feasting prep even today. This wiki entry on the Comanche people has a great walk through on their food prep. I'm sure if the Comanche's magic came from the land itself, the trade with the Spanish for metal tools wouldn't have changed their ways. What about other tools then? What do they clean with? Well the cleaning whisk can be used for everything from baking stone to a clay pot and even teeth! (It's typically used for woks, but that doesn't help us much in this dialog, just mentioning for full disclosure) Wooden spoons and forks aren't to big a deal, chopping blocks either. All of these and other useful tools could be made in spades from a storm felled tree. I really could go on and on about tools like this (okay one more, the mortar and pestle is pretty classic tool made of natural materials) but I won't.... Native/Nature oriented people use all sorts of things to make cool stuff even today, without using metal at all. Some people dig in and do it traditional ways and others just find new ways of doing the same thing. (And no, the 'drill' mentioned here is not the power tools sort, which you'll see if you dig deeper in.)

The point is, humans of the real world lived for ages without worked metal. Now add in a healthy dose of magic, both the Al'Noth sort and the Natury sort and you have yourself a plethora of ways to circumvent the need for this worked metal stuff. Layo is first and for most about the RP of things. We give a pretty good leeway on items because we are bound by a limited space for customized items and limited expression of what we can represent mechanically. What we are not limited by is the ways in which we can RP a character within the bounds of the lore. What the responses above were saying, “Yeah, you can fudge things a little to make your character reasonably playable but don't get too lost in the mechanics.” We don't run this world to make the biggest, baddest druid with the best AC and range of abilities. We do this for the RP of it all and getting drown in the mechanics really takes away from the amazing parts of what makes Layonara.

One last note, as was mentioned in one of the posts linked above. Ed doesn't care for scimitar wielding druids but he allows it because of mechanics issues.

EdTheKet wrote:

And as for scimitars, the folks in DnD should never have allowed druids to use those if you ask me J The same argument I used for metal weapons applies to scimitars as well, but then we’d be a bit too restrictive, so we didn’t.

I wouldn't go around flaunting the use of the weapon as some kind of proof that it's alright to use metal. This team has been known to clear up those kinds of misconceptions by simply removing the source all together.

~row

Offline
Layonara AdministratorDruidFolianiteGamemasterLucinditeWriting Team MemberXeenite
Joined: Oct 1 2004

Rowana wrote:
One last note, as was mentioned in one of the posts linked above. Ed doesn't care for scimitar wielding druids but he allows it because of mechanics issues.


I feel the same way about elven druids being able to use bows, but alas...


Frendh's picture
Offline
Joined: Nov 12 2004

Thanks Rowana. It was informative. Cooking part was good.

Quote:
I wouldn't go around flaunting the use of the weapon as some kind of proof that it's alright to use metal. This team has been known to clear up those kinds of misconceptions by simply removing the source all together.

~row


I did not mean that it is okay for druids to use any metals. But according to the current lore the Druid society is aware of that metal is needed because it is superior in some ways for combat.

Quote:
For the above reasons, the druids would seriously frown on and perhaps penalize a member of theirs who was working with the town for completely frivolous or disruptive needs. It has been long on this server held that druids would have nothing to do with this item anyway.

What town? Llast? Haven? Is either town known as an enemy of nature? I have not heard of it so my druid cannot act as being aware of it. As far as in game is concerned, whether the weapons go to help a town who tries to have a balance with nature or a town that is a complete enemy of nature it is all speculation on my part.

Unless I have a list to check against I am going to assume that towns are generally not complete exploiters of nature.

Quote:

I'm not sure where you get your assumption that other druids think they should be kicking people back into the stone ages, but you are wrong about the conservative nature of druids. Druids are literally conservative by nature.
I was trying to say that taking away people's metal would be like kicking them back to the stone ages.

You also misunderstand the quote. I differentiate between "conservative" and "conservative like that". In this case, "Conservative like your druid is about metal and weapons".

Change is a big part of nature. Nature changes all the time without the involvement of sentient beings. Is it wrong for my druid to have accepted this? Accepting change is the opposite of being conservative.

Here is the quote I commented on:

Quote:
Second, a druid would find it to be utter ridiculousness to go around collecting (and don't even talk about making) fabricated weapons to support the protection of civilization.

Civilization needs the metal weapons and tools. Nature needs part of civilization to help fend off the other parts of civilization who wants to exploit nature to the extremes or even burn it to the ground. I do not find it "utterly ridiculous" to help out allies or at least the enemy of my enemy.

Quote:
1) touching worked metal who's mere presence on their person can disrupt their connection with nature,

I handle coins on a daily basis and ICly buy and sell things using coins. I assumed carrying metal weapons for a few minutes would not matter that much. You have to breath to live, but you can hold your breath for a minute or two if you want to dive under water.

Now this leads to loot, are no druids looting metal things to sell/trade or carry for companions?

miltonyorkcastle's picture
Offline
GamemasterWriting Team Member
Joined: Feb 3 2005

Quote:
What town? Llast? Haven? Is either town known as an enemy of nature? I have not heard of it so my druid cannot act as being aware of it. As far as in game is concerned, whether the weapons go to help a town who tries to have a balance with nature or a town that is a complete enemy of nature it is all speculation on my part.

Unless I have a list to check against I am going to assume that towns are generally not complete exploiters of nature.

A small farming village (read: a couple hundred people at most) is not likely to take much from nature, but a city like Fort Llast (and pretty much any town with a population in the thousands) is going to, by default, take what it needs from nature at will. So a druid's assumption should be the other way around: If a city exists, it should be assumed that the city is exploiting nature in some way, unless it is known that the city makes a special effort to work with nature (such as Sadinia of Voltrex).

Quote:
I handle coins on a daily basis and ICly buy and sell things using coins. I assumed carrying metal weapons for a few minutes would not matter that much. You have to breath to live, but you can hold your breath for a minute or two if you want to dive under water.

Now this leads to loot, are no druids looting metal things to sell/trade or carry for companions?

A druid would have little use for coins. Aside from the 'metal' aspect, a druid doesn't need anything a coin can buy. Nature provides everything a druid needs. Druids have no use for looting because they don't need loot. They don't need (or want, for that matter) houses, fancy gear, or lots of money. I don't know why a druid would even bother with a bank account. Banks are functions of civilization, and you only need a bank if you plan to hoard metal (in the form of coins). That isn't very druidic. Still, a druid might hoard metal and collect things that civilization appreciates to be used as a means to convince the 'civilized' people to respect nature (using it to buy land reserves, etc.)- paying them off, essentially. That is a much more liberal approach, of course, and for the most part, as Row points out, a druid is just about the most conservative type of creature you will ever meet. A great many druids would just as soon put the literal boot to civilized society rather than cut a deal with it.

lonnarin's picture
Offline
GamemasterXeenitePrunillianDruidDoranditeToranite
Joined: Oct 8 2004

Quote:
I feel the same way about elven druids being able to use bows, but alas...

I don't know what reason bows would even remotely be an issue. A stick with a silk string is NOT metal or processed in any form. If we're going according to the dogma and reasoning given for the restrictions then the only reason to disallow bows is because D&D Pen and Paper didn't see fit to give it to them as a weapon proficiency.

And nature provides everything a druid needs to loot because all of those monsters and people and beasties out there are part of nature. Even the humans are nature. The little coins in their bags are like the honey gathered by bees and the dung rolled by beetles, the acorns hoarded by squirrels. Sure little balls of rolled dung aren't useful to any of us, but when bartering with the dung beetle, they are like gold; Useless to them on a personal level, but useful to trade in order to manipulate the silly civilized people who hoarde shiny things like greedy ravens.

My druid Grovel likes to jingle the bags at little peasants, make them dance, get on all fours and bark like a dog before tossing it to them and watching them bite and claw for it. But to say that gold is totally usefless to a druid in the great scheme of things is silly. Druids may be conservative, but they are not blindingly ignorant enough to totally turn their backs on the concepts of barter/trade. If their intelligence is above a 3, they will trade gold to attain their ends. Even if they hate the nasty processed metals, better to stick it back in the pockets of the defilers in exchange for items of REAL worth than to let it sit around in the forrest, rusting and getting stuck in the throats of badgers. If only to get rid of the processed metals, coins and weapons littering the woos, they will trade them back to the cities. Loot is like litter, cities are like junk yards. Toss that trash where it belongs.

Offline
Layonara AdministratorDruidFolianiteGamemasterLucinditeWriting Team MemberXeenite
Joined: Oct 1 2004

@Frendh...

Respectfully, splitting semantic and mechanical hairs about coins and loot and things will not help this discussion. It has been covered multiple times (linked in previous posts and many threads on the forums) that there are some concessions we make for mechanics because there is simply no way around them. Several members of the team have offered a lore-supported view of the questions you have. They have been correct in terms of Layonara's lore for druids. All the points raised are valid. It is not this team's fault that they are in conflict with your interpretation of the druid class. In my opinion, stretching druidic concepts to encompass mechanical issues really doesn't help anyone.

Yes, the game has no alternatives to using gold pieces. Yes, the game lets you loot items (but you don't have to do so), but those are just mechanics we can't readily control....nor should we.

So please try and understand what is being said here. The Helmet of Armor is a refined metal object. A Druid has no place wearing such a thing. Making it look like a cloth hood doesn't make it any less metal. Buying refined metal objects (i.e. weapons) in trade for another refined metal object really does not fit the druidic ethos in the opinion of the team and it is something of a stretch, in our opinion, to rationalize doing so.

That said, druids are a diverse bunch and they take a varied approach to protecting and preserving Nature, from the cooperative to the aggressive. In my personal opinion, your stated philosophy in this thread would be a fringe belief at best among Druids and would even be potentially scorned by at least some of them. Continuing on with the mindset of supplying weapons to towns so they could use them to protect against a common enemy might eventually lead to a loss of powers over the long term.

If you are looking for a way to get some sort of "approval" for your Druid to do these quests, you'll not get it from us in this thread. We have responded to your questions with the accepted and approved lore for Druids. It cannot be helped, by us, if they diverge from your views of Druids or how you might rationalize seeking an item like the Helmet of Armor.

Rowana's picture
Offline
Layonara AdministratorGamemasterKatianWriting Team MemberXeenite
Joined: Mar 16 2006

Frendh wrote:

I did not mean that it is okay for druids to use any metals. But according to the current lore the Druid society is aware of that metal is needed because it is superior in some ways for combat.

Could you point me to that lore posting? I did a quick search on the places I was aware of druid lore existing and I did not find such a statement. This is important because if it is stated the way you are interpreting it, it's a false statement about druid society.

Frendh wrote:
What town? Llast? Haven? Is either town known as an enemy of nature? I have not heard of it so my druid cannot act as being aware of it. As far as in game is concerned, whether the weapons go to help a town who tries to have a balance with nature or a town that is a complete enemy of nature it is all speculation on my part.

Unless I have a list to check against I am going to assume that towns are generally not complete exploiters of nature.

There are a few towns that live in harmony with nature. There are a few towns that do better than that, they live with nature. The vast majority, don't. I don't have a full list to offer, that would be more something that Ed would have to provide and I'm certain he doesn't have time to do so. Off the top of my head, I can tell you that Krandor has a Katian mayor and so it's probably at least 'living in harmony' status. I'm pretty sure none of the other actual towns on Mistone qualify (again, Ed would have to confirm.) It's better to run with 'if it's a city or a town, it is harming nature.'

What's more, every time a farmer goes out and clears new land for his farm, that is also harmful to nature. Every year that passes brings hundreds of animals slaughtered for the tanneries in various towns. Every year that passes brings hundreds of pounds of metal torn from Nature's breast and smelted through industrial means. Every year that passes brings less and less of nature unless 'population' is in a recession like it was during the dark ages.

This comes down to one of those common sense things. Think about what a town is, what the population of a town does. A town, by virtue of it's presence and when not living at least 'in harmony with Nature,' exploits and harms nature. Not all people value material advancement. Not all people value transformation and taming of wild places as betterment. This is particularly true of druids.

Frendh wrote:
I was trying to say that taking away people's metal would be like kicking them back to the stone ages.

Alright, but, it's not. Not in the eyes of the druids. It would be "Kicking them back into living -properly- and in tune with nature."

Frendh wrote:
You also misunderstand the quote. I differentiate between "conservative" and "conservative like that". In this case, "Conservative like your druid is about metal and weapons".

I don't really misunderstand. I stand by my statement as it was given in the context it was meant.

Frendh wrote:
Change is a big part of nature. Nature changes all the time without the involvement of sentient beings. Is it wrong for my druid to have accepted this? Accepting change is the opposite of being conservative.

Change is a part of nature, yes. Accepting change is perfectly fine, and not going ape over every civilization he finds because of the abuses he finds there, is fine. Supporting those nasty, stinky, sprawling, wasteful, manipulating edifices made to the enslavement of Nature, not so much. Accepting the ways of those who abuse, ignore and exploit nature, again, is not something -any- druid would do.

Frendh wrote:
Civilization needs the metal weapons and tools. Nature needs part of civilization to help fend off the other parts of civilization who wants to exploit nature to the extremes or even burn it to the ground. I do not find it "utterly ridiculous" to help out allies or at least the enemy of my enemy.

This is where a great many people go astray. Civilization does not -need- metal weapons and tools. As pretty much any druid and they will tell you that Civilization does not need a great many things that it takes and uses. Druids themselves find any number of ways to reduce the advantage of metal weaponry for their foes.

Frendh wrote:
I handle coins on a daily basis and ICly buy and sell things using coins. I assumed carrying metal weapons for a few minutes would not matter that much. You have to breath to live, but you can hold your breath for a minute or two if you want to dive under water.

Presuming one did not metagame knowing the list and they went and got each item requested one at a time as the quest sets you up for, the actual time that would/could pass IG/IC would not be a few minutes. It would be more like, several hours of running to and fro playing fetch. This does not include the time period that one might be working towards slaughtering things (also not happiness) in order to have the amount of true to complete the task.

Frendh wrote:
Now this leads to loot, are no druids looting metal things to sell/trade or carry for companions?

Why would they want to do that again? What Milty says about this is exactly correct.

~row

Frendh's picture
Offline
Joined: Nov 12 2004

Quote:

A druid would have little use for coins. Aside from the 'metal' aspect, a druid doesn't need anything a coin can buy. Nature provides everything a druid needs. Druids have no use for looting because they don't need loot. They don't need (or want, for that matter) houses, fancy gear, or lots of money. I don't know why a druid would even bother with a bank account.

If there is a druid player here who follows all that I really would like you to chime in here.

You are saying "A druid". Do you mean all druids, some, or most druids?

Is this your personal opinion or is this how it is? "If you play a druid do this or don't play druid at all.".

_My_ druid needs coin else I cannot get the fancy gear to avoid dying from a failed empathy attempt or a couple of angry stink beetles. _My_ druid needs the bank because without the bank my druid would not have the coin needed to buy earlier mentioned gear. And to aquire large parts of the need coin _my_ druid needs to loot.

Seeing as I have met druids with fancy gear and coin I can say that has been broken for a long while.

Offline
Layonara AdministratorDruidFolianiteGamemasterLucinditeWriting Team MemberXeenite
Joined: Oct 1 2004

lonnarin wrote:
I don't know what reason bows would even remotely be an issue. A stick with a silk string is NOT metal or processed in any form. If We're going according to the dogma and reasoning given for the restrictions then the only reason to disallow bows is because D&D Pen and Paper didn't see fit to give it to them as a weapon proficiency.

This is a complete side-bar, and of course I am not going to tell anyone here their elven Druid cannot use a bow, but it is exactly the reason that D&D mechanics does not give it to them (and explains why) that I do not care for this little "feature" of NWN. Leanthar agrees with me on this issue as a personal philosophy, but he ultimately decided to allow it because of NWN mechanics.

So don't worry. We're not taking bows away from elven Druids. I'm just stating a personal preference.

Offline
Layonara AdministratorDruidFolianiteGamemasterLucinditeWriting Team MemberXeenite
Joined: Oct 1 2004

Frendh wrote:
If there is a druid player here who follows all that I really would like you to chime in here.


*chimes in* My Druid has a total of 950 gold in the bank, and to be honest, I can't even tell you why. He only "buys" from skilled craftsmen who will respect nature and does not engage in full-scale slaughter. He would prefer to barter or trade rather than pay in gold, and he would prefer to supply his own materials (i.e. hides from culling the sick or aged from herds/packs as is Nature's way or wood through foraging) rather than just buy something already made and who knows how it was obtained or if the remainder of the animal was left to rot or whatever.


He also does not engage in wasteful crafting activities. Cooking and Tinkering (the latter I think was to make something out of clay) is the extent of it, and again, these are things that Nature provides and are renewable and not wasteful.


Like I said above, there are some mechanical necessities to using gold pieces, but accumulating wealth and excess gear does not fit well into the druidic philosophy.


Quote:
Seeing as I have met druids with fancy gear and coin I can say that has been broken for a long while.
"That" has not been broken by the team. These are player behaviors, and if they asked us, they'd get similar answers to what you're getting.


miltonyorkcastle's picture
Offline
GamemasterWriting Team Member
Joined: Feb 3 2005

Quote:
Seeing as I have met druids with fancy gear and coin I can say that has been broken for a long while.


A druid can gain "fancy gear" via other means besides coin, of course. And there are in fact druids that have managed to collect a large quantity of coins, only to turn around and donate the coin to nature/conservation-related ends.


I did say druids would have 'little use' for coins, rather than 'no use.' I also said druids don't need coins, though it may prove useful to use them now and again (as suggested by lonnarin).


There is one main thing to keep in mind when playing a druid: Do your actions do more to support the increase of nature and the decrease of civilization, or do they do more to support the civilization you seek to minimize?


Quote:
Is this your personal opinion or is this how it is? "If you play a druid do this or don't play druid at all.".


Bringing all creatures back to a more natural way of living, decreasing the size and impact of civilization, and avoiding as much as possible those things that represent civilization (such as refined metal and unnatural structures) are 'how it is' for druids. That is not my personal opinion; that is how druids are defined in Layonara.


We (as representatives of Layonara) make concessions due to game mechanics, old DnD conventions, and also to allow varied RP and interpretation to a degree. But if your druid isn't working hard toward those things mentioned above, a druid he is not.


For the record, these discussions are useful as reference points and aid toward the understanding of RP standards on Layonara, so I'm glad you asked the questions you did, Frendh.


Thanks from:
Frendh's picture
Offline
Joined: Nov 12 2004

(there have been a couple of posts made while I was writing this so this post might seem off in some places. I have tried to edit it appropiately.)


Quote:
It is not this team's fault that they are in conflict with your interpretation of the druid class. In my opinion, stretching druidic concepts to encompass mechanical issues really doesn't help anyone.


I realize it is not your fault that I do not understand. That is why I am asking questions so I do not get a "We have been observing you and you are not playing your druid correctly and your submission will be revoked".


I am not going to ask anyone to spend more time on this unless they really want to.


I have been using lore to read up on druids. I thought that was enough. I have already read the linked posts but I have not looked through the forums for old topics about druids.


But if you think I covet the Helmet of Armor, you are wrong. The only character I have who owns helmet of armor II does not use it. He has 8 or so barkskin amulets. I think one of my sorcerers has the helmet of armor 1.


What I wanted was the xp reward. And maybe money if I had traded the helm.


Quote:
splitting semantic and mechanical hairs about coins and loot and things will not help this discussion.


I meant this discussion to be about everything that druids are and are not allowed to do. So I find the answers to coin and loot very helpful.


I think it is important to be clear about what things you are allowed to do mechanically but should be RPed as something else and the things you are not allowed to do at all.


To me many things are quite vague. For instance, the part about coins and fancy gear was a big surprise. Maybe you do not realize it but what milty said was really confusing to me because the druids have I played with have taken part of coin and loot items like the rest of us.


I just assumed I am allowed the fancy gear as long as it conforms with the rules set by the hierarchy. Because I brought up the thing about jewelry before and I was given an Okay.


I think adding to the druid information would not be amiss, for instance adding links to relevant threads at the bottom of the druid information page would help. Like the two Rowana linked.


Quote:
Could you point me to that lore posting? I did a quick search on the places I was aware of druid lore existing and I did not find such a statement. This is important because if it is stated the way you are interpreting it, it's a false statement about druid society.

It was poorly worded on my part. I should have said hierarchy.


5.In part of keeping the balance of nature the hierarchy realizes that a druid may need to fight creatures that are resistant to their normal blunt style weapons. As such the hierarchy has determined that the use of a scimitar should be allowed for the protection of a druid. This is the only processed and refined weapon that is allowed to be used by a druid.


Dorganath wrote:
*chimes in*


Thanks :-)


I am greatful for the detailed information I got here since I want to do it right the first time around.


Aphel's picture
Offline
Angels Guild MemberFolianiteLucinditeToranite
Joined: Aug 15 2011

I do not wish to derail this, nor am I having a druid character. I still would like to address a few things:

Quote:
A druid can gain "fancy gear" via other means besides coin, of course. And there are in fact druids that have managed to collect a large quantity of coins, only to turn around and donate the coin to nature/conservation-related ends.

I did say druids would have 'little use' for coins, rather than 'no use.' I also said druids don't need coins, though it may prove useful to use them now and again (as suggested by lonnarin).

Coins are an abstractum. True are not. You can earn coins by selling things at the pawn-shop, or even by getting it from other players - these coins could be favours or reputation which enable your character to do things. If you are using the bank OOCly (you cannot lose favours or reputation simply because you die - that is another abstractum of the rules) as a druid, this should be fine.
I like to think of my rogue's meager wealth as following: He has some true to buy things, and those are on his bank account ICly. The smaller rest of his coins reflect a certain amount of favors or reputation he has with a few traders/trader syndicates - Things like "Hey, I have a few surplus bandages for you" or "Just got a crate of arrows. You need some?".

I don't see why any druid character shouldn't handle her or his coins in the same way (since we don't have a mechanically implemented favor/reputation system with NPCs) with a particular stress on the reputation/favor part.

Quote:
There is one main thing to keep in mind when playing a druid: Do your actions do more to support the increase of nature and the decrease of civilization, or do they do more to support the civilization you seek to minimize?

Bringing all creatures back to a more natural way of living, decreasing the size and impact of civilization, and avoiding as much as possible those things that represent civilization (such as refined metal and unnatural structures) are 'how it is' for druids. That is not my personal opinion; that is how druids are defined in Layonara.

What is "civilisation"? What is "a more natural way of living"? I'm not adressing you alone, milton, but the others, too. What are these things you talk about?
All humanoid and playable races in this game are social animals, and quite good at building civilisations. Just because you have a pool of techniques that helps your group of people survive does not imply you consume the things around you mindlessly and don't care about the fallout. Civilisation is the house build on the four cornerstones: Science (Gathering and refining of knowledge - you can have the scientific method without spoiling a whole river), Culture (History, Tales, Social classes, Music, Myths/Spirituality, Ehtics, Philosophy), Economy (Resource distribution system, nothing more and nothing less), and Politics (Leadership, Morale, Law/Social order).

TL;DR version: civilisation != ruthless exploitation
Druids does not have to be asocial and anit-knowledge(knowledgegathering). I would suspect that quite the opposite is the case with most of them, given how they organize themselves.

Quote:
We (as representatives of Layonara) make concessions due to game mechanics, old DnD conventions, and also to allow varied RP and interpretation to a degree. But if your druid isn't working hard toward those things mentioned above, a druid he is not.

I had my collisions with the mechanics, too (Why should deers even attack something with a strange scent? Why do falcons or owls bother a character when he is just walking around (given there was no placeable for a nest or something similar)). How can a druid player know what another player is up to when her or his character is shooting deers in the forrest, chopping down all trees or collecting all herbs in a single area? You can't unless you rp it. Even better, before creating a conflict there that is none, one could ask with /t - and clear things up.

I hope I made sense and it helped a bit,
~Aphel

Edit: Favour/reputation system might be possible mechanic-wise: keep track off different faction values (e.g. "Followers of the Longstrider"), assign associated factions to every character (distinguishing between allied, neutral and hostile). If a shop with an npc is opened, the npc gives the pc an amount of coins according to his reputation. If more coins are needed, pc can call a favour and gain more coins. Favours are to be earned as Quest items and of different extent (minor, small, normal, huge, epic) or via RP/GM quests. Should be tradeable but loose their value slightly every time they are given to another pc.

RollinsCat's picture
Offline
Angels Guild MemberIlsarianToranite
Joined: Oct 22 2009

Just a suggestion, as I'm sympathetic to the gear discussion: if you want gear and to develop your character's place in the world, consider a quest development series. You can grow your connection to nature with gm guidance and maybe earn something analogous to the man-made gear coin buys in the process.


Thanks from:
gilshem ironstone's picture
Offline
DoranditeGrannochianIlsarianToranite
Joined: Apr 24 2006

Quote:
What is "civilisation"? What is "a more natural way of living"? I'm not adressing you alone, milton, but the others, too. What are these things you talk about?
All humanoid and playable races in this game are social animals, and quite good at building civilisations. Just because you have a pool of techniques that helps your group of people survive does not imply you consume the things around you mindlessly and don't care about the fallout. Civilisation is the house build on the four cornerstones: Science (Gathering and refining of knowledge - you can have the scientific method without spoiling a whole river), Culture (History, Tales, Social classes, Music, Myths/Spirituality, Ehtics, Philosophy), Economy (Resource distribution system, nothing more and nothing less), and Politics (Leadership, Morale, Law/Social order).

TL;DR version: civilisation != ruthless exploitation
Druids does not have to be asocial and anit-knowledge(knowledgegathering). I would suspect that quite the opposite is the case with most of them, given how they organize themselves.

Your assessment of civilization is a very abstract one that ignores some of the practical realities associated with urban living. For example, the resource distribution system often follows this path: a way of gaining wealth through resources is identified, resources are pulled from the earth by industry, they are processed by manufacturers, they are sold to consumers, they are discarded. Very often in urban life, and this is readily evident by not only modern life but also by a cursory inspection of the history of cities, the impact on ecological balance is completely ignored.

Now, if the civilization instead followed a model where they identified the most efficient way to satisfy their needs to survive, used only the resources needed to satisfy those needs, made an effort to replenish the resources taken, you might have something a druid would enjoy. However, seeing as Nature is rarely a partner in civilizations distribution of resources, you have a lot of angry druids.

So really it is not civilization that a druid is opposed to, but more the lack of respect for nature and its part in the lives of all. Or so I see it at least.

Offline
Layonara AdministratorDruidFolianiteGamemasterLucinditeWriting Team MemberXeenite
Joined: Oct 1 2004

Everyone....

Let's all step back a bit and apply a healthy helping of common sense to this issue overall.

And also, I want to state that this thread will not turn into a specific listing of all things Druids can and can't do. Yes, there are vague things. Yes, there are hard mechanics that we can't do anything about. Yes, there are necessities because of those mechanics.

What has been said by the team so far in this thread are answers based on lore with side notes due to mechanical necessities and limits. Please read them in the spirit in which they are offered and do not try to microscopically examine and dissect every one. I am well aware of how well anyone can rationalize one thing or the other based on a broad or narrow interpretation of one thing or the other.

A couple examples:
Mechanically a Druid can carry and use gold pieces. Mechanically it's necessary for some things. In an RP sense, it is not something that most Druids would seek or care to carry beyond a particular necessity. Druids do not generally seek wealth for the sake of wealth.

Mechanically a Druid can go out and kill animals and other natural creatures for CNR. In an RP sense, a Druid might hunt as a predator would to thin the herd or to cull out the weak and the sick, but at the same time, that Druid would also take a conservationist approach and use as much of the dead animal as possible (whether RPed or what is allowed mechanically). Justifying regularly slaughtering animals or insects or whatever as "thinning the population" (and subsequently collecting their CNR) because they respawn every so many minutes (and must therefore be overpopulated) is not a very Druidic mindset; it's metagaming mechanics.

Now, I'm not going to list a whole lot of things to do/not do for Druids. The fact is, they're a diverse bunch, and there's more than one "right" way to play a Druid. That said, and to repeat myself, a Druid who supports civilization with the tools and trappings of civilization is going to be a very, very fringe mindset within the druidic community. Taken to an extreme or carried on too long, it can result in at least a temporary loss of powers.

We really don't particularly want to remove anyone's powers. I'm not trying to be heavy-handed. At the same time, we want people who play here to respect our house rules. It's no different than if you went to someone's house. Most people would respect the rules of your host, such as not putting muddy shoes on the furniture.

So use some common sense. The expectations of druids are spelled out pretty well. This thread started with a good question about bullets, and I believe it was answered well. Further discussions of related issues have started to descend into argument and debate. That won't help anyone.

So try to apply some thought to things that are rooted in mechanics and use your best creativity and good judgment to figure out a way to RP the issues (or RP around them) in a way that fits neatly within the description we have posted for the class. At the very least, try not to conflict with it.

Thanks from:
Offline
Layonara AdministratorDruidFolianiteGamemasterLucinditeWriting Team MemberXeenite
Joined: Oct 1 2004

RollinsCat wrote:
Just a suggestion, as I'm sympathetic to the gear discussion: if you want gear and to develop your character's place in the world, consider a quest development series. You can grow your connection to nature with gm guidance and maybe earn something analogous to the man-made gear coin buys in the process.


It should be stated that "gear" is not a valid goal for CDQs for any class. One should not expect to ask for and attain gear or other equipment through the course of one or more CDQs. There are plenty of IC ways to RP attaining equipment. I mentioned a few above when I described my Druid character's attitudes.


Thanks from:
Aphel's picture
Offline
Angels Guild MemberFolianiteLucinditeToranite
Joined: Aug 15 2011

Quote:
Your assessment of civilization is a very abstract one that ignores some of the practical realities associated with urban living. For example, the resource distribution system often follows this path: a way of gaining wealth through resources is identified, resources are pulled from the earth by industry, they are processed by manufacturers, they are sold to consumers, they are discarded. Very often in urban life, and this is readily evident by not only modern life but also by a cursory inspection of the history of cities, the impact on ecological balance is completely ignored.


I agree that it is very abstract. I am quite sure I worded my argument wrongly and in a confusing manner. I will try to explain, if I fail, I blame it on the language barrier.


The expression of "civilisation" as it was used was very unelegant and sloppy in terms that it was a try to describe a phenomenon diametrical opposed to "nature".

As far as I understand it, you told me that my abstract statement about was wrong, because an existing expression of the abstractum was opposed to what I concluded: that civilisation is something a druid would not be opposed to. She or he can be opposed to a certain expression of civilisation, but never be opposed to the abstractum of civilisation as such.

If you add natural numbers, the result is always a natural number. That doesn't mean 2 = 5.


I just tried to establish a better definition to avoid that statements are made in this thread that would be just plain wrong.


I meant the same as you, just expressed myself differently and hopefully, more accurately.


My main concern was, that if this distinction would not be made (between abstractum and expression), many druids might slide down the evil axis in the end.


Thanks from:
Rowana's picture
Offline
Layonara AdministratorGamemasterKatianWriting Team MemberXeenite
Joined: Mar 16 2006

Humans, dwarves, halflings, elves, all races are expanding into the wilds. They are cutting down trees, they are clearing out wild fields and they are cutting into hillsides/mountain all in the name of expansion. The druid vs. expansionists is a philosophy issue that is part of the this world. Ex. Perhaps the gradual expansion of less then a Statute mile per year is conservative for the city of Ft. Llast, but to the druids expansion should move to a near stand still if not stop all together until the people of Llast can figure out how to live in harmony rather than just gobbling up the wild places of the world. There are some of these things charted on the timeline in lore where wars have broken out, illustrating how deep these tensions go.

The reality is that people pick up and go out and make farm steads all the time. Just look at all the applications that have been approved and you see that the histories of the 1% of the population that turn into adventurers will back that up! With the world so large and the population relatively small compaired to present day Earth, that's a lot of places waiting to be explored or exploited.

@Aphel- Your own view point is likely similar to some of the ones that might be represented in game world but it still clashes with the held beliefs of the druids (as a collective). And let's not forget the Dark Druids who believe all civilization (what it represents) is evil and will crush it if given a chance.

@All: People should remember that the druids are not a channel for some hidden dissension about what a civilization is or should be. The druid order, generally speaking, has a particular world view about how people should live. Nature (with a capitol N) agrees and supports those with this world view. Kuhl -also- has a world view on how people should live. So does Corath and so does Aeridin. These are all different world views with potential clashes. We're not going to alter the world view of druid organizations to make game play less interesting or more easy going. The goal of the world situation here was to make it an interesting and deep place to navigate and explore. In this world, extremism is rewarded with miracles and the resulting battles about who exactly is correct are epic. That's part of the fantasy here and that's how a good majority of the people who linger here like it. The name of the game is RP and we support that RP so long as it stays within the boundaries set up. We try to, as Dorganath mentioned, allow for a lot of leeway for players to have their creativity but there are some points at which creativity goes too far and becomes either a misconception of what things are or simply not the way the world works. Heck we've had a Corathite Ranger, I think that speaks pretty well of our flexibility. *winks*

Word to the wise. If you do have an RP mechanism in place such as Aphel's favors etc, you better chart it somewhere visible to the GM team like a P/CDT. Otherwise, it's just people carrying coin to the GM team. I don't mean to be harsh but we cannot be on 24/7 to pick up these facts and we cannot read minds. (Not to mention there's quite a bit more of you then there are of us and that compounds the issue of 'noticing' things.) We really need this stuff to be logged somewhere so that we can all be on the same page as your character. Not to say yours isn't charted already Aphel, but be sure to have that log handy when it comes into question at a quest or something later. It is a nice RP tool and should be interesting if it comes up somewhere but again, to save everyone a little heartburn, make sure you have some kind of tracking of use.

~row

Thanks from:
gilshem ironstone's picture
Offline
DoranditeGrannochianIlsarianToranite
Joined: Apr 24 2006

Quote:
I agree that it is very abstract. I am quite sure I worded my argument wrongly and in a confusing manner. I will try to explain, if I fail, I blame it on the language barrier.


The expression of "civilisation" as it was used was very unelegant and sloppy in terms that it was a try to describe a phenomenon diametrical opposed to "nature".

As far as I understand it, you told me that my abstract statement about was wrong, because an existing expression of the abstractum was opposed to what I concluded: that civilisation is something a druid would not be opposed to. She or he can be opposed to a certain expression of civilisation, but never be opposed to the abstractum of civilisation as such.

If you add natural numbers, the result is always a natural number. That doesn't mean 2 = 5.


I don't think you are wrong, I just thought that some practical application of the idea could help. Maybe I helped confuse things. I hope not.


Aphel wrote:
I just tried to establish a better definition to avoid that statements are made in this thread that would be just plain wrong.


I meant the same as you, just expressed myself differently and hopefully, more accurately.


My main concern was, that if this distinction would not be made (between abstractum and expression), many druids might slide down the evil axis in the end.


There are evil druids for sure.


Aphel's picture
Offline
Angels Guild MemberFolianiteLucinditeToranite
Joined: Aug 15 2011

Quote:
Your own view point is likely similar to some of the ones that might be represented in game world but it still clashes with the held beliefs of the druids (as a collective). And let's not forget the Dark Druids who believe all civilization (what it represents) is evil and will crush it if given a chance.

I agree with you Rowana, yet want to clearify something. I didn't want to meddle with how the druid order thinks about civilisation, or say that this view is wrong or right.
My intention was to sensibilize the discussion towards the word "civilisation". miltonyorkcastle stated that

Quote:
Bringing all creatures back to a more natural way of living, decreasing the size and impact of civilization, and avoiding as much as possible those things that represent civilization (such as refined metal and unnatural structures) are 'how it is' for druids. That is not my personal opinion; that is how druids are defined in Layonara.

However, in a strict sense civilisation is not represented by refined metal and unnatural structures. I apologize for nit-picking. I tried to make my point, and I'm sure I didn't get it across.
Druids are defined by setting and rule how they oppose a certain expression of civilisation, not simply civilisation alone. They could however oppose civilisation alltogether, fight it, leave it be and so on - that is a matter of roleplay and character building/definition. The mechanical/setting restriction just makes them opposing to a certain expression of civilisation. Not more, not less. And it is still quite possible that druids create a civilisation with a high level of technique - different in the expression of course, but the abstractum and underlying principles remain the same (see the example with the natural numbers).

I thought I could help to avoid over-simplifications, as it appears, quite the opposite is the case. I apologize.

miltonyorkcastle's picture
Offline
GamemasterWriting Team Member
Joined: Feb 3 2005

Quote:
What is "civilisation"? What is "a more natural way of living"? I'm not adressing you alone, milton, but the others, too. What are these things you talk about?


A very valid question, and in this case, "civilization" is used to refer to the exact thing Gilshem expresses regarding humanity's expansion throughout the ages, with society and civilization being two different things, of course. "Civilization" as we refer to it here has everything to do with a society mastering, exploiting, and enslaving a natural habitat to the point that the natural surroundings are dramatically, or worse, irreparably altered. While an ant colony is in fact social, it does not have the same destructive and wasteful conquering of the natural world as a humanoid civilization does, and if it did, the druids would step in with that ant society just as they do with humanoid societies that "civilize" the natural world.


Aphel's picture
Offline
Angels Guild MemberFolianiteLucinditeToranite
Joined: Aug 15 2011

Oh. I take everything back then and apologize. I was under the impression that you are using it as a buzzword. Since every society is part of a civilisation, it's quite impossible to be against it at all - if there are enough druid circles around, they form a civilisation, too. Or all Wildelf tribes, for example.


miltonyorkcastle's picture
Offline
GamemasterWriting Team Member
Joined: Feb 3 2005

Quote:
Since every society is part of a civilisation


I disagree with the above sentiment, as a society can exist without the refinement typically associated with civilization. That said, we are certainly now splitting hairs over the definition of the words in use (though an understanding of terms is important when communicating), and I do think you understand the gist of what has been stated above regarding druidic beliefs.


For reference, my understanding and use of the words "society" and "civilization" come from Webster's definitions:


Society - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Civilization - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary


Aphel's picture
Offline
Angels Guild MemberFolianiteLucinditeToranite
Joined: Aug 15 2011

Yes, we're starting to split hairs. I'm not sure, tho. My final argument is:

If you're using the definition of 1a of Webster's, and the druids are against that, they simply cannot survive. Without the development of technology (And I stress Niven's and Clarke's Laws here) and some sort of possibility to pass it on, the druids will dwindle in numbers in a few decades and stop to exist eventually.


Offline
Joined: May 30 2010

Sorry, for bumping an old debate but just came across this, read through it and thought I'd share my opinion on a few things discussed here. Namely society, civilization, druids using gold and use of bows.

society: Both from my opinion and a possible summery of the Webster definition that Milt linked to. A society is a grouping of people (or even creatures) who come together with the same (or relative) ideas and/or goals.

civilization: To say civilization is the mastering, exploiting, and enslaving a natural habitat is going a little to far in my opinion and not all civilization is about expansion. There have been and still are today various civilizations that work with and even cultivate nature. These civilizations are often known as tribes, be them Indians, barbarian or what ever. Though many upstart nobles never really consider such people as civilized. In addition and I may be summarizing the Webster definition wrong but a civilization is how a group of people (or creatures) choose to live there lives.

Druids with gold: In a way, druids do not need gold at all. Not even in Layo and there is a way that a druid can get what he or she needs from another person without the use of gold. Long before there was a thing called currency (money, gold ect.) there was a thing known as... trading. (rather surprised no one has mentioned this) Perhaps some of you have done this with your frinds for things of there's that you wanted in exchange for things of yours that they wanted? Perhaps some of you still do. That I would imagine would be the best way for any druid to deal with bartering. Additionally, with the term "gold pieces" who's to say there not but chunks of golden rocks? After all that is what unprocessed gold is. Pure gold ore... with all its natural impurities.

Druids with bows: I don't really see how a druid would have any problem using a bow nor a composite bow (compound bows use metal cables and pulleys) The only problem a druid might have with using a bow would be the metal tipped arrows, so only wood and stone arrowheads for druid archers.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or register to post comments