Druids are not Hippies!

[Slobber Monster]

To a great extent human use fo the landscape in (say) Europe has become much more productive since Mediaeval times because it became more intensive, not more extensive. True, the Cistercians are famous for having (grown extremely wealthy by having) brought unexploited land into use on a considerable scale. But on the other hand there is a landscape historian in Britain who makes a case (I'm not entirely convinced, but I'm not an agricultural economist, so I'm not really qualified to judge) that all or nearly all the land in use in England in 1930 was in use at teh time of Domesday Book (1078, IIRC).

Sure, there were forests in mediaeval England, but they were planted to grow timber, regularly logged, and fenced to keep the deer in, and pigs were masted in them. There were woods, but they were coppiced to grow wood for fuel and charcoal….

Things were no doubt different in other parts of Europe, for example in Prussia and Poland where the Deutschritters and other nobles brought in immigrant peasants to clear the forests in vast migrations that lasted two centuries. And there is nothing to say that a fantasy setting need be like England, France, or Italy rather than like, say, Lithuania. Just don't leap the the conclusion that mediaeval settings were covered in wilderness. It ain't necessarily so.

I appreciate all the information, very interesting. Don't most of the Arthurian legends depict something closer to 2nd to 6th century Britain though? That's more what I had in mind. I'm curious if that makes much of a difference - I've always had the impression that the world of those legends was much more untamed than mid-medieval Britain. Also, even by then if you look at the world as a whole there were still plenty of scary wild places left in the world known to Europeans, even if England and most of Europe were filled up.

I know plenty of people were aware of the effects of civilization on nature, and appreciate that much effort has gone into intelligent land management since the invention of agriculture and husbandry. I just expect that the attitudes have been different until recently. There's an important difference between "let's not cut down all the trees at once or we won't have any timber or deer" and "nature is precious, beautiful and spiritual, we must protect its treasures". The latter ideal has likely only had wide following since about the 18th century and the Romantics. The pragmatic view is much, much older.

In the end, it's really a matter of what fits my game world better and not an issue of historical accuracy. In a world where human civilization is perpetually teetering on the edge of destruction, and every now and then a Purple Worm pops out of the ground and eats a whole town, I expect the pragmatic view to be prevalent and the Romantic one an oddity.

 

[davidschwartznz]

There's an important difference between "let's not cut down all the trees at once or we won't have any timber or deer" and "nature is precious, beautiful and spiritual, we must protect its treasures". The latter ideal has likely only had wide following since about the 18th century and the Romantics. The pragmatic view is much, much older.

That's true. But the Druid class in D&D is based on the neo-druids of the Romantic period (an organization that, BTW, still exists), not any historical philosophy (er, more historical).

In the end, it's really a matter of what fits my game world better and not an issue of historical accuracy.

Exactly.

 

[Felix]

what people really want is a druid who isn't nature-loving,

More accurately, a druid who doesn't kill humans or other sentient creatures because they cut down a tree. The druid can love nature, but should recognize that other creatures need to use nature for their own survival.

doesn't have an animal compnaion,

Rather, someone was commenting that the hippy non-violent druid had a wolf animal companion... and that it was ironic because the player should know that the wolf had to eat somehow: the wolf had to kill to live. So much for non-violence.

doesn't summon animals, and doesn't turn into animals.

Eh? I didn't get this from the thread... must have missed that post.

What does that leave?

The celtic druidic tradition upon which the DnD druid is largely based. Druids should be close to nature, but in a mideval way, without our 21st century notion about what it means to be "close to nature".

And it also leaves scimitars.

 

[WayneLigon]

The celtic druidic tradition upon which the DnD druid is largely based. Druids should be close to nature, but in a mideval way, without our 21st century notion about what it means to be "close to nature".

Might as well just play a Cleric with the Animal and Plant Domains.

 

[KRT]

I don't know - my very favorite druid, and the best-played druid I've encountered, is Nwm from Sepulchrave's story hour. Here, from the very beginnings of Lady Despina's Virtue:

Nwm (NOOM). A 14th level human Druid whose prized item is his self- made "staff of the woodlands" capped with an "orb of storms" rescued from a blue dragon's possession. Nwm is apparently sardonic and skeptical, but secretly idealistic in a "peace, man" kind of way. A guy called Dave plays him as a cross between Timothy Leary and Oscar Wilde.

Nwm eventually does some things that are both very hippie and very druid - lots of meditation and a vow of poverty, for example.

I like the Druid that's played like a cross between Dennis Leary and Oscar Dela Hoya

 

[Agback]

I appreciate all the information, very interesting. Don't most of the Arthurian legends depict something closer to 2nd to 6th century Britain though?

Well, they depict 5th-century Britain as imagined by a 13th-century Frenchman.

I'm not sure about landscape history before the 11th Century. Somebody upthread suggested that it didn't change much from Celtic or even pre-Celtic times, and that isn't inconsistent with the work I tried to report. The reason that fellow states 'llittle change of landscape after 1086' is not that there was a lot of change up to 1086, but because he reached his conclusion by comparing the Domesday Book land records with land use at about the time the railways wre being built. Domesday Book is the earliest comprehensive source of land-use data. To get information about land use earlier than is recorded in Domesday Book you would have to intensely study individual sites (analyse the pollen in soil cores etc.), so it would be expensive to get truly conclusive information.

One datum I can point out that illuminates land-use change in the centuries before Domesday Book is the spatial pattern of Danish place-names in that part of Britain that was occupied and settled by the Danes in the 9th century. Most of the Danish names are concentrated in marginal and reclaimed farmland, This suggests that rather than seize farms and give them Danish names (in which case you would expect the Danish names to be concentrated in the richest farmlands) the Danes kept the English names of any farms they siezed, and gave Danish names only to new farms they established by developing unused land. That suggests an expansion of cultivation in northern England about the ninth century. This may, of course, have been a re-development of land cultivated in Celtic times and abandoned under the Romans or the Angles--I don't know of any information that casts light on this question.

 

[Agback]

You must be a medievalist?

I was a D&D player first. And a technocrat by training.

Don't ever let anyone tell you that these games interfere with education!

 

[Macrovore]

A druid isn't a tree loving bunny hugger whose sole purpose is to protect the forest from dastardly loggers and trappers. A druid is someone who channels the divine power of nature, thorns, preadotrs and earthquakes inclusive. A druid doesn't care if the local village cuts down trees to build homes. He doesn't care if they hunt deer or try and elimate predators attacking the local flocks. in fact, he is as likely to aid in either nedeavor as not. he is an enigmatic, powerful figure who *knows* that Nature is the only unstoppable force in all Creation, and he wields it. He may do so to protect his clan or to offer his wisdom to a boy king, or he may do so to rule a savage land and command armies of maruading plant-people. He is a keeper of both power and knowledge, and a force unto a hurricane.

No modern attitude injected into D&D irks me more that the eco-friendly, tree hugging hippie Druid.

/rant

Read the comic Dndorks (www.dndorks.com). It offers great insight upon the problem you wish to solve (it's freakin' funny, too)

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

A druid isn't a tree loving bunny hugger whose sole purpose is to protect the forest from dastardly loggers and trappers. A druid is someone who channels the divine power of nature, thorns, preadotrs and earthquakes inclusive. A druid doesn't care if the local village cuts down trees to build homes. He doesn't care if they hunt deer or try and elimate predators attacking the local flocks. in fact, he is as likely to aid in either nedeavor as not. he is an enigmatic, powerful figure who *knows* that Nature is the only unstoppable force in all Creation, and he wields it. He may do so to protect his clan or to offer his wisdom to a boy king, or he may do so to rule a savage land and command armies of maruading plant-people. He is a keeper of both power and knowledge, and a force unto a hurricane.

No modern attitude injected into D&D irks me more that the eco-friendly, tree hugging hippie Druid.

/rant

Get a haircut, hippie!

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

One of my first characters was a druid. She was Cyndelle, a half-elven female druid.
Cyndelle drew her power directly from Nature, and Nature was her Lord, Master, Ally, and Friend.

When you messed with Nature, you messed with Cyndelle. This meant you were dead. No compromise, no argument, and no philosophizing about the matter.
Cyndelle could use poison, as a druid, and did. And you'd be amazed at what you could do with that simple sling, and that scimitar.
Come with an army? Entangle. Trees reach down and grab the army. Target practice time.
Come with high powered magic? Creeping Doom, at your feet, no save. Say goodbye!

Cyndelle believed in forests, natural beauty, animals, sunlight, moonlight, and starlight. She considered what people call Balance nowadays only rarely.
Cyndelle never had any use for cities, towns, ships, industry, or crowds of people.

Being able to turn into three forms of her choice was useful. Foes could not outrun her. Enemies could not fly away and escape. Antagonists could not burrow under the ground and hide.
Swamps, water, and mountains were no obstacle to Cyndelle. She could travel where she pleased, when she pleased.
When one could turn into critters with poison attacks, all the better.

All fine and well, until Cyndelle blundered into Ravenloft ...