Why is Eberron being pushed so hard?

[Drifter Bob]

The term "thread killer", on the other hand, is a much later invention.

I'd hate to see it pop up 'round here, but it seems sadly inevitable.

I'm sorry, I don't mean to contribute to the thread getting killed, but I think MoogleEmpMog crossed the line, I pointed it out, and it didn't change anything. Some people take Nazis pretty seriously and I'm one of them.

DB

 

[fanboy2000]

I'm sorry, I don't mean to contribute to the thread getting killed, but I think MoogleEmpMog crossed the line, I pointed it out, and it didn't change anything. Some people take Nazis pretty seriously and I'm one of them.

DB

Don't worry Bob, this thread has been in it's death throws for a while now. Now all we need are for people to start posting things like, "This is a really big thread." Then they tell their friends, who post "Wow, this is a really big thread!"

Then the thread passes on into legend. And now when people bring up Eberron, most of the posts will be actually related to Eberron, because all the sillyness was expressed here.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

Interesting. I'm so used to people attemting to explain all but the sillyist things in fantasy away, that (untill I read your post) I forgot that the reason Shifters can shape change is magic.

If magic did exist, it would be interesting to find out how someone born with supernatural powers would think, and how their brain workd. I think it would be facinating if all the D&D humanoids were human but magic alters their physiology. And, of course, gives them their supernatural abilites.

Well, with very few exceptions, we all roleplay them as funny-looking humans, anyway. So, effectively, that's what they are.

Take Dwarves. An excerpt I just read from "Races of Stone" tries to talk about the effect of Darkvision on their culture. Sure there a few things you can say about their outlook, but think about this: No Dwarf, Ever, has been afraid of the dark. That sounds silly and trivial, but think about the reams of mythology, literature, nursery rhymes, and even therapy sessions built around dealing with fear of the dark. That's going to be a big, fat psychological difference. D&D doesn't address this in the slightest. Critters that have fear effects because of their "dark" nature are preying on a primal fear humans have, yet you never see "Dwarves are immune to this effect because they have no innate fear of the dark."

I couldn't begin to tell you how a Shifter's mind would be different because they have more limbic brain structures. Oh, I can say things like, "scent will be a viable form of communication" but we can't really wrap our heads around that one as a general rule. Example: Hamsters determine whether they want to mate with someone or something exclusively on scent from specific flank glands. The scent and the nature of scent marks left by males in the environment tells a female how healthy they are and how tough they are, because dominant males overmark less dominant ones. A lot of carnivores operate on similar systems. So I could theorize that a female shifter would tend to place a lot of emphasis on the scent of males, both for mating, and for questions of leadership and social dominance. How would that operate in a social situation among humans?

Can you imagine a player using that knowledge in a mature way that wouldn't send the table into giggles?

 

[fanboy2000]

Can you imagine a player using that knowledge in a mature way that wouldn't send the table into giggles?

I can. In fact, this is the first physical manifestation of the charisma ability score I've seen that didn't involve looks. In fact, I would imagin that shifters with low cha scores would fit into human society better because they don't mark their teritory they way a high cha shifter would. This could lead to a general perseption that shifters arn't very charismatic, but in reality all the high charisma shifter are leaders of their tribe and don't go adventuring into human society much.

Wow, this thread is really big!

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

I can. In fact, this is the first physical manifestation of the charisma ability score I've seen that didn't involve looks. In fact, I would imagin that shifters with low cha scores would fit into human society better because they don't mark their teritory they way a high cha shifter would.

Well, not all scent-marking is urine, you know. Hamster have special glands in their flanks. I believe cats have them under their jawline. When your cat rubs its head on you, you're being marked. We just don't have the equipment to detect these scents and pheromones. Downregulating olfactory and limbic structures in our brains allowed for some fancy cortical disco, but it took away a whole way of socializing for which we no longer have a context.

Hmmm... Seems to me a Shifter would be able to tell who your pets were pretty easily. Not sure how useful that is, but there you go.

 

[Drifter Bob]

environment tells a female how healthy they are and how tough they are, because dominant males overmark less dominant ones. A lot of carnivores operate on similar systems. So I could theorize that a female shifter would tend to place a lot of emphasis on the scent of males, both for mating, and for questions of leadership and social dominance. How would that operate in a social situation among humans?

Can you imagine a player using that knowledge in a mature way that wouldn't send the table into giggles?

actually, I saw a piece on the Discovery channel the other day about how humans make the same judgemnts based on pheremones, only without knowing it. One of the things they did in this study was look at incest, normally brothers and sisters don't like each others smell, those prone to incest were the same ones who reacted positively to the smell, supposedly.

DB

 

[fanboy2000]

Well, not all scent-marking is urine, you know. Hamster have special glands in their flanks. I believe cats have them under their jawline. When your cat rubs its head on you, you're being marked. We just don't have the equipment to detect these scents and pheromones. Downregulating olfactory and limbic structures in our brains allowed for some fancy cortical disco, but it took away a whole way of socializing for which we no longer have a context.

Hmmm... Seems to me a Shifter would be able to tell who your pets were pretty easily. Not sure how useful that is, but there you go.

I learn something new everyday.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

actually, I saw a piece on the Discovery channel the other day about how humans make the same judgemnts based on pheremones, only without knowing it. One of the things they did in this study was look at incest, normally brothers and sisters don't like each others smell, those prone to incest were the same ones who reacted positively to the smell, supposedly.

I'm not familiar with that work, though olfactory stuff isn't my speciality. I do know that pheromone work in humans is really, really iffy. Our vomeronasal organ is just this side of vestigial. However, there are some interesting things. Women in the most fertile part of their menstrual cycle are more attracted to the odors of young, symmetrical (read: "consistently healthy") men. When they're not in that part of their cycle, they seem to be attracted at random (or at least, on something no one has coded for). So our scents are at least providing some information, much of it immunohistory and genetic information.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Take Dwarves. An excerpt I just read from "Races of Stone" tries to talk about the effect of Darkvision on their culture. Sure there a few things you can say about their outlook, but think about this: No Dwarf, Ever, has been afraid of the dark. That sounds silly and trivial, but think about the reams of mythology, literature, nursery rhymes, and even therapy sessions built around dealing with fear of the dark. That's going to be a big, fat psychological difference. D&D doesn't address this in the slightest. Critters that have fear effects because of their "dark" nature are preying on a primal fear humans have, yet you never see "Dwarves are immune to this effect because they have no innate fear of the dark."

Wow. That's one of the coolest concepts I've heard in a long time.

Take that to its logical conclusion. Dwarven culture has no concept of true darkness, or fear thereof. Thus, dwarves are not frightened by darkness--but, a dwarf would be driven to an absolute hysterical panic by a darkness spell, because it's a completely foreign experience.

Geez. I'm already thinking of dwarves in a way I never have before. I would love to see a book that dwelt with all the major races on a cultural/psychological/societal level, taking this sort of thing into account. I don't know if it would sell, but I'd sure as hell be willing to buy it. (Or even write parts of it.)

Kudos on an absolutely brilliant concept.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

I'm trolling?

In any case, there isn't an ideological connection between the intensely secular, extremely anti-Christian Nazi party and its anti-Semitic activities and Christian anti-Semitism (I prefer to be precise and not use this term, which implies ethnic rather than religiously-grounded hatred, but...).

Was there a ready ground for Nazi anti-Semitism because German Protestantism carries a strong anti-Judaic undercurrent? Presumably.

Does that make Nazi anti-Semitism ideologically connected? Not necessarily.

Both extremely religious Quakers and many extremely irreligious internationalists abhor military action of any sort. One does so on religious grounds, the other on secular grounds. They agree on the result. One might even be inclined to support the other to achieve the same result. They do not, however, have any ideological connection beyond their objective.

Now, in the post-war years, a convergence of ethnic and religious anti-Semitism seems to have occurred. It's seen in European and American fringe groups and, much more noticeably, in the Islamic world. The combination doesn't really make much sense, but fanatics rarely do. It has certainly caused much harm, although thankfully not, to date, as much as purely secular anti-Semitism did.

Keep in mind that I never said anything in defense of religious anti-Semitism; my objective here was to clarify definitions. Nor, to be sure, would I deny the role of religion in 20th-century Western life (although its role in Western Europe has been in decline since before WW1).

Keep in mind also that I've studied WW2 and the period leading up to it principally as they relate to WW1. As such, I won't pretend to be an expert on the average's German citizen's opinions in the 1930s. Certainly Germany's intellectual community, one of the hotbeds of Nazism in the '30s, found it appealing more for its secular, eugenicist elements and its connection to Wagner and Nietzsche.

And BTW... this thread is really long, huh?