Druids are not Hippies!

To add one other druidic sect to Henry's Eberron list (which only gets a few blurbs in the ECS so is easy to miss or forget)

Greensingers: A small chaotic sect that engages in revelry and has strong ties with the fey.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Let’s not forget that many scholars believe that druids performed human as well as animal sacrifices to appease the gods. Doesn’t sound like hippies to me.

However, most of our information about druids, other then from archaeological finds, came from biased Roman literature, just as sniffles pointed out.

A good book to read “The Druids” by Stuart Piggott ISBN 0-500-27363-4. It covers many aspects of the ancient druids, even having a chapter titled “The Problems and the Sources” and “The Roman Image”. ;)
 

jgbrowning said:
There were conservation inititives in the Middle Ages once they realized that they really needed wood and they were cutting down a aweful lot of it. And when you consider their transportation networks, getting wood from other places was a lot more hassle/expense than simply making sure wood was more available locally.

Here's a good read: http://users.ox.ac.uk/~jouhs/hilary2004/wilsond01.pdf

Multi-Use Management of the Medieval Anglo-Norman Forest.

joe b.

Thanks for that link. That was one of the cooler things I've read on the web.
 
Last edited:

Brother MacLaren said:
Beyond Mesopotamia, there wasn't a lot of fertile land in which to expand (unless you wanted to invade Egypt), and the people between the rivers were quite aware of the effects of soil salination. So, there were policies to deal with it in most kingdoms -- mandating crop rotation and leaving fields fallow one year out of three IIRC.

However, when the authorities needed more tax revenue (war, new palace, really hot princess to impress, etc.), they'd waive that one-year-in-three rule. Over time, the rule was waived more and more, and eventually there weren't enough fallow periods to preserve the soil. Population crash ensued, so the late kingdoms (1st Milennium BC) had populations less than half that of the middle kingdoms.

Caring about whether your people starve and therefore revolt does *not* make you an ecologically minded leadership, nor does knowing how things happen make your society similarly enlightened. Things things really don't have anything o do with one another, at least in the context of the eco-terrorist or tree-hugger druid.
 


jdrakeh said:
[Addendum: Incidentally, does complaining about modern sensibilities being imposed upon on a non-historical game strike anybody esle as odd?]

Jut becaue it is not a historical sim doesn't mean modern sensibilities fit the milieu. I just don't think the faddish, politically correct kind of eco-love that makes us feel all warm and fuzzy inside for recycling our newspapers fits in adventure fantasy. I mean, does the stereotypical 1980s Wall Street Shark have a place in a Star Trek federation game. (Someone is *so* going to answer 'yes'...)
 

Reynard said:
I mean, does the stereotypical 1980s Wall Street Shark have a place in a Star Trek federation game. (Someone is *so* going to answer 'yes'...)

Aside from the Ferengi, who were a (unintensional) joke?
 

Felix said:
Nature doesn't play nice with nature, though...

My thoughts exactly. Nature left to its own devices does not exist in a state of harmony. The fox doesn't live in harmony with the rabbit -- they live in balance. When rabbits do as rabbits do and there's a population upsurge, it means that the fox is better fed and their numbers increase as well. A lack of rabbits leads to fewer foxes. Balance, not harmony.

What I find extremely funny is the vegan tree-hugging hippie druid sporting a wolf companion. What's it eat? :p

-tRR
 

*smiles* This is why I like SL druids. Cause most of them (except Denevites) will pretty much kill/maim and hurt clerics AND druids, just because they believe it's the right thing to do. Even the good ones! ;)
 


Remove ads

Top