Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
un·nat·u·ral
ˌənˈnaCH(ə)rəl/Submit
adjective
1. contrary to the ordinary course of nature; abnormal.
2. not existing in nature; artificial.
WTF is "cold iron", and why's it so special?
un·nat·u·ral
ˌənˈnaCH(ə)rəl/Submit
adjective
1. contrary to the ordinary course of nature; abnormal.
2. not existing in nature; artificial.
Ovinomancer
No flips for you!
You're being circular. I've asked you to define nature and you keep telling me unnatural means not in nature.
Again, define nature. For bonus points, do so in context of the fae and iron.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
nat·u·ral
ˈnaCH(ə)rəl/Submit
adjective
1.existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind.
Bonus points: Cold forged iron does not exist in or caused by nature, and is both made and caused by humankind.
Ovinomancer
No flips for you!
Okay, finally. So, the definition of natural your using is "anything not made by man." Are things made by fae then natural? Are shoes cobbled by gnomes natural while ones cobbled by man are unnatural?
The argument you put forth earlier is that iron harms fae because iron is unnatural. But, then, so is bronze, or leather. What, in the mythologies iron harmed fae come from, suggests fae are part if the natural world? What about iron makes it soecial, in tge vast realm of unnatural things man can wield?
Also, for reference, cold iron has nothing to do with forging, and cold forging is a marketing gimmick. It's a poetic reference, much like cold, hard steel isn't a special version of steel. Cold iron is just iron.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
Do they exist in or caused by nature? You seem to have forgotten that portion of it.
Why does silver harm werewolves? Why do wood stakes through the heart kill vampires? Why ask why? It's cold iron because the stories say it is.
But I provided a picture that shows cold forging still goes on!!!!!!
Ovinomancer
No flips for you!
You should read up on semi-colons a bit -- those aren't separate definitions but instead interrelated ones.
Your argument was that iron harmed fae in the stories because iron was unnatural. Pointing to other, different stories as if they illuminate your argument isn't helpful. Why doesn't iron being unnatural cause it to be anathema to fae? If your point was meant to be 'because the stories say so' then I'm confused as to why you've been so strident on the unnatural nature of iron.
Iron, btw, is natural. A sword may be unnatural under your defintion, but the iron in it, which is the operative part, is still natural. Man does not cause iron to exist.
Heh.But I provided a picture that shows cold forging still goes on!!!!!!
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
My argument has never been that iron harmed the fey. Cold forged/worked iron, yes. Just iron, no.
Artificial things are, by definition, unnatural in some sense.
But artifical things clearly exist in the world, and are produced by beings that exist in the world. Hence there is some sense in which things can exist in and as part of the world, yet not be natural.
What's the relevant sense, and where are the boundaries to be found? The most pithy treatment I know of in the D&D context is found in Gygax's AD&D books, particularly the discussin of True Neutral alignment:
Nature is "the cosmos" that is in a state of balance as a result of the interaction of its constituent elements and processes. Intelligent beings are a risk to that balance, as they bring their own goals and purposes which are not necessarily integrated into the balance of natural elements and processes. It's easy to see how this idea relates to certain real world religious and philosophical positions (eg Stoicism; some forms of Taoism and Taoist-influenced Buddhism; some strands of contemporary environmentalism). And it helps us see the difference between natural and unnatural human activity - the latter consists in purposive activity undertaken with indifference to its impact upon the balance of natural elements and processes. Building a small homestead or even village probably doesn't count; raising an army and mining the ore and then forging the arms and armour to equip them almost certainly does!
How exactly this fits into our understanding of "cold" iron and faeries I'll leave for others to work out.
But artifical things clearly exist in the world, and are produced by beings that exist in the world. Hence there is some sense in which things can exist in and as part of the world, yet not be natural.
What's the relevant sense, and where are the boundaries to be found? The most pithy treatment I know of in the D&D context is found in Gygax's AD&D books, particularly the discussin of True Neutral alignment:
The "true" neutral looks upon all other alignments as facets of the system of things. Thus, each aspect - evil and good, chaos and law - of things must be retained in balance to maintain the status quo; for things as they are cannot be improved upon except temporarily, and even then but superficially. Nature will prevail and keep things as they were meant to be, provided the "wheel" surrounding the hub of nature does not become unbalanced due to the work of unnatural forces - such as human and other intelligent creatures interfering with what is meant to be. (PHB p 33)
Absolute, or true, neutral creatures view everything which exists as an integral, necessary port or function of the entire cosmos. Each thing exists as a part of the whole, one as a check or balance to the other, with life necessary for death, happiness for suffering, good for evil, order far chaos, and vice versa. Nothing must ever become predominant or out of balance. Within this noturalistic ethos, humankind serves a role also, just as all other creatures do. They may be more or less important, but the neutral does not concern himself or herself with these considerations except where it is positively determined that the balance is threatened. (DMG p 33)
Absolute, or true, neutral creatures view everything which exists as an integral, necessary port or function of the entire cosmos. Each thing exists as a part of the whole, one as a check or balance to the other, with life necessary for death, happiness for suffering, good for evil, order far chaos, and vice versa. Nothing must ever become predominant or out of balance. Within this noturalistic ethos, humankind serves a role also, just as all other creatures do. They may be more or less important, but the neutral does not concern himself or herself with these considerations except where it is positively determined that the balance is threatened. (DMG p 33)
Nature is "the cosmos" that is in a state of balance as a result of the interaction of its constituent elements and processes. Intelligent beings are a risk to that balance, as they bring their own goals and purposes which are not necessarily integrated into the balance of natural elements and processes. It's easy to see how this idea relates to certain real world religious and philosophical positions (eg Stoicism; some forms of Taoism and Taoist-influenced Buddhism; some strands of contemporary environmentalism). And it helps us see the difference between natural and unnatural human activity - the latter consists in purposive activity undertaken with indifference to its impact upon the balance of natural elements and processes. Building a small homestead or even village probably doesn't count; raising an army and mining the ore and then forging the arms and armour to equip them almost certainly does!
How exactly this fits into our understanding of "cold" iron and faeries I'll leave for others to work out.
Ovinomancer
No flips for you!
So, then, you're not advocating a reason for how the myth started at all, but rather for something else? Okay, strange thread.
Ovinomancer
No flips for you!
Thank you for the random musings on the existence of a supernatural cause of nature that mankind is not a part of. If man's actions can act against the natural order of things, then you're assuming some supernatural shaper of such an order. It can't otherwise exist without such a will. I covered this earlier, along with the ramifications to the topic.
