Candlekeep Forum
Candlekeep Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Members | Private Messages | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Forgotten Realms Journals
 General Forgotten Realms Chat
 Eating Intelligent Creatures
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 3

Divinity
Acolyte

USA
39 Posts

Posted - 04 Dec 2020 :  17:58:16  Show Profile Send Divinity a Private Message  Reply with Quote  Delete Topic
If this has been talked about, can someone point me to where I can find it?

I'm curious about the general, overall feeling that most people (NPCs) in the Realms would have towards eating intelligent creatures, like worgs, winter wolves, manticores, sphinxes, and other magical beasts - things that are generally intelligent enough to speak.

I read where THO, mentioned that Ed had previously written an unpublished article called "Dragon Soup" which was about recipes that used monsters for food for adventurers, but it was killed because the Dragon editor had moral qualms about eating intelligent creatures. So I assume it at least included some of the types of creatures I'd be curious about.

If there are other articles talking about this, or someone has information regarding it, I'd appreciate hearing what you have to say. Thanks!

My Faerűn Continent Map

Returnip
Learned Scribe

208 Posts

Posted - 04 Dec 2020 :  18:17:18  Show Profile Send Returnip a Private Message  Reply with Quote
The way we humans view eating others is based on empathy and objectification. This is why some people happily eat meat that is a chop packed in styrofoam and plastic, but wouldn't feel alright killing it themselves. Basically it's not the intelligence that stops us from eating other creatures. It's the killing. If we can distance ourselves from the killing, like have someone else kill the animal and prepare the meat, it is a lot easier for us humans to cook and eat it. I don't think anyone would disagree that all animals are intelligent, no matter if we understand their language or not.

On the other hand you have different fingers.
Go to Top of Page

Ayrik
Great Reader

Canada
7356 Posts

Posted - 04 Dec 2020 :  21:05:03  Show Profile Send Ayrik a Private Message  Reply with Quote
"The ability to speak does not make you intelligent."

Hungry humans are quite capable of killing anything and eating anything if there's nothing else to eat. Those humans capable of surviving, anyhow. The rest will either waste away or will themselves become food for "intelligent" monsters like orcs and trolls and worgs and dragons.

I suppose it's much like elves viewing living trees as sacred things, killing trees as defiling nature, wooden structures as akin to mausoleums ... yet they will still use wooden furniture, wooden tool handles, wooden bows, wooden harps, etc ... as long as they don't have to personally involve themselves in the process of killing.

[/Ayrik]
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
34467 Posts

Posted - 04 Dec 2020 :  22:33:27  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
There's also the angle of how someone perceives themselves, as compared to the intelligent critter on the menu. Sticking with just fantasy settings, some dragons like hanging out with humans, to the point of getting horizontal with them -- while others don't have an issue eating a couple elves as a midnight snack.

And even with similar levels of regard, there's also cultural aspects to consider -- in some cultures, it's considered a good thing to kill an enemy and then eat at least part of them. Maybe it shows your dominance, maybe it honors them by taking their strength into you.

There's also extenuating circumstances to consider. Even regular folks who would never otherwise dream of it may turn to cannibalism -- or, in fantasy settings, eating intelligent creatures of other types -- if there is no other food available and that other person/critter is the only thing between them and starvation.

In short, this question can be answered the same way so many others are: it depends.

Candlekeep Forums Moderator

Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com
-- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct

Editor and scribe for The Candlekeep Compendium

I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!

Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 04 Dec 2020 22:34:39
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Great Reader

USA
2249 Posts

Posted - 05 Dec 2020 :  08:08:12  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Acolyte Divinity,

quote:
I'm curious about the general, overall feeling that most people (NPCs) in the Realms would have towards eating intelligent creatures, like worgs, winter wolves, manticores, sphinxes, and other magical beasts - things that are generally intelligent enough to speak.


I find this to be a very interesting topic. Thanks for bringing it up! I also want to say: anything I say is not supporting or detracting from any one perspective. I am merely discussing it through the lens of different ethics. That is all.

In my view, the Forgotten Realms woefully tackles ethics. It appears to me on average to contend with ethics in a univariate way of generalizing an Epicurean perspective on Utilitarianism. Sadly, at its most micro level. The few people "doing the right thing", though their actions may be horrifically bad on a grander scale.

Regarding animals therefore, I think it would be an after thought. The animals/intelligent creatures/monsters, etc., would be a means to an end, or an instrumental moral value, as Max Weber would put it.

However, if you really dug into it, I believe, you would find that the different societies, religions, etc., all of which are cultures in one manner or another, would have a different approach to it. Imagine Malar the Beastlords clergy. They are believers of instrumental morality, in the most Cyrenaically hedonistic manner possible. However, if that perpetuation of Cyrenaic hedonism went unchecked, and the satisfaction of said Malar clergy came to an end, what would that mean? I argue, it would mean that the instrumental moral goodness (within the framework of their deities ethos and dogma) would be undone by the unchecked, and lacking in foresight, hedonistic state of their ethic.

So, I think the answer really is: who are you asking, in the Realms? Malar clergy, Tuigan nomads, the middle class shopkeepers of Halruaa, etc.?

quote:
I read where THO, mentioned that Ed had previously written an unpublished article called "Dragon Soup" which was about recipes that used monsters for food for adventurers, but it was killed because the Dragon editor had moral qualms about eating intelligent creatures. So I assume it at least included some of the types of creatures I'd be curious about.


This is a perfect example of what I was mentioning. The personal ethic of the editor informed what would and would not be published. Was the editor correct? Well, ask people that agree with or disagree with his ethic.

Ethics are the framework by which we define and inform our morality/moral code. It's why politics are always so fun, and exciting. haha

Best regards,




Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

Returnip
Learned Scribe

208 Posts

Posted - 05 Dec 2020 :  11:36:49  Show Profile Send Returnip a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I once had a player in a campaign playing a young Ogre (Savage Species). He spent about half of his starting money on food - bread, cheese, a few cages with live chickens that he lugged around. He also took to cutting up every corporeal monster they killed and later fashioned them into a stew, soup or barbeque to "try new things" as he put it. He was very kind and caring and always asked the other PCs if they wanted to try some of his food. It led to some nice roleplaying and a lot of funny interaction for me as a DM when I had to describe the flavour and texture of different things.

It's a shame he never lived to grow into an adult Ogre, take the monkey grip feat and arm himself with a ballista...

On the other hand you have different fingers.

Edited by - Returnip on 05 Dec 2020 11:37:43
Go to Top of Page

Tasker Daze
Seeker

84 Posts

Posted - 05 Dec 2020 :  18:00:12  Show Profile Send Tasker Daze a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2



I find this to be a very interesting topic. Thanks for bringing it up! I also want to say: anything I say is not supporting or detracting from any one perspective. I am merely discussing it through the lens of different ethics. That is all.

In my view, the Forgotten Realms woefully tackles ethics. It appears to me on average to contend with ethics in a univariate way of generalizing an Epicurean perspective on Utilitarianism. Sadly, at its most micro level. The few people "doing the right thing", though their actions may be horrifically bad on a grander scale.

Regarding animals therefore, I think it would be an after thought. The animals/intelligent creatures/monsters, etc., would be a means to an end, or an instrumental moral value, as Max Weber would put it.

However, if you really dug into it, I believe, you would find that the different societies, religions, etc., all of which are cultures in one manner or another, would have a different approach to it. Imagine Malar the Beastlords clergy. They are believers of instrumental morality, in the most Cyrenaically hedonistic manner possible. However, if that perpetuation of Cyrenaic hedonism went unchecked, and the satisfaction of said Malar clergy came to an end, what would that mean? I argue, it would mean that the instrumental moral goodness (within the framework of their deities ethos and dogma) would be undone by the unchecked, and lacking in foresight, hedonistic state of their ethic.








Is any of this in English?

.
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Great Reader

USA
2249 Posts

Posted - 05 Dec 2020 :  18:34:00  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Acolyte Returnip,

That is awesome. I had a druid that I had kind of doing the same thing. I had him with an "allergy" to magic though, that had his on a path to discover what magics he could and could not use for fear of it killing him, potentially.

So, he was cautious with his use of magic, and felt that it had to do with him needing to be more at one with nature, so he could have insight into the right magics he could safely used. Therefore, he went around consuming all of nature he could, within reason, to try to intrinsically understand it.

Best regards,







Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

sleyvas
Great Reader

USA
9896 Posts

Posted - 05 Dec 2020 :  18:38:26  Show Profile Send sleyvas a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Its kind of ironic... I'm literally exploring this topic right now with some of the stuff I'm writing up for Anchorome. I'm creating a bunch of races that aren't the "normal" thing we think of for play, but they're also not that "way out in the wind" either. Others have given you the basic answer... it depends... and "whose morals are we talking about"... but ultimately few pieces of D&D actually discuss this idea (we do see some of it with gnolls of recent, etc...)

So, the races I'm talking about including are like a spur race of verbeeg... and I see them as willing to kill and eat "deer centaurs" and "moose/deer head folk" and "bigfoots"/Alaghi, but preferring not to unless times are lean. However, if they killed say a kercpa... they would consider it just like killing a squirrel and wouldn't think two seconds about eating it. Meanwhile, the deer centaurs... they're omnivores with human torsos and thus eat what they kill, if its not humanoid... but the "moose/deer head folk"/shatjan are herbivores and won't eat meat at all. Of the kercpa/squirrelfolk, they're mostly herbivorous, but will eat insects, etc... but they'll have a "twisted by shadow" subrace called skiurid that create "lifeforce pellets" from living beings that they must consume to survive. There will be certain bearfolk races that act one way, but other bearfolk societies may act another way... and its entirely cultural, and not racial.

Alavairthae, may your skill prevail

Phillip aka Sleyvas
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Great Reader

USA
2249 Posts

Posted - 05 Dec 2020 :  18:57:39  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Seeker Tasker Daze,

quote:
Is any of this in English?


Yeah, I'll give it a shot! :)

quote:
In my view, the Forgotten Realms woefully tackles ethics. It appears to me on average to contend with ethics in a univariate way of generalizing an Epicurean perspective on Utilitarianism. Sadly, at its most micro level. The few people "doing the right thing", though their actions may be horrifically bad on a grander scale.


There are different kinds of ethics. Think of ethics as the framework that informs our decision making process for making "moral" decisions. The reason that conflict so regularly exists between beings is because they have a different method by which they derive their perception of moral behavior.

There is an ethic called hedonism. Many people are colloquially familiar with it as "do whatever you like that is pleasurable." In Cyrenaic Hedonism, that is kind of close.

A Greek named Aristippus created the ethic of Hedonism. He was from a place called Cyrene. Anyhow, the idea is to pursue immediate satisfaction, or pleasure. Pleasure should always exceed pain, by a great degree, is what is believed.

Epicurean Hedonism however adds to that by saying that there should be some degree of virtue associated with the hedonistic outlook. Otherwise, someone's pleasure, being someone else's pain, could very well achieve the opposite intent of hedonism.

Utilitarianism as an ethic is the idea that a person should pursue actions that maximize the greatest positive effect. It doesn't necessarily concern itself with the notion that what happens between points A and B are of consequence, as long as upon arriving at point B, the best, most positive outcome is assured. Think of it as a guy delivering blood to a hospital causes (3) accidents that kills (2) people. However, the delivery of the blood, on time saved (10) lives. The net (8) lives saved, ends up being better in the end, and it is deemed that the speed of the driver that caused the said (3) accidents was a necessary and acceptable outcome due to the net lives saved.

Some may take umbrage with the lost lives and determine that the choice of the driver leading to the deaths in the accident was immoral. However, that is likely because they do not share a Utilitarian ethic.

So, now, getting back to my earlier stated belief about an Epicurean perspective on Utilitarianism, it appears to me that the writers/authors of the Realms apply a generalized and sort of "fancy-free" approach to ethics. It is super narrowly focused on the adventure itself, regardless (I am speaking with broadness here as not all novels/accessories are like this of course) of the broader outcomes. So, it is a somewhat virtue-laden set of actions that the adventurers in these books undertake in order to maximize the pleasure (safety, well being, etc.) of whoever they are helping, and doing so in a manner that seeks to achieve the greatest good, regardless of the consequences between points A and B. The irony not being insignificant here. It is not uncommon at all to imagine the outcomes of adventurers looking to "help" someone or something, making things vastly worst. However, those issues are rarely tackled.

One of the interesting things to come from WotC recently in their endeavors to address equity issues in their discussions surrounding races, i.e. Drow, and alignment, i.e. Drow are evil almost always, is that it necessarily breaks down the wall of absolute alignment (as it should be) and looks at the notion that it is ethics that lead to moral/immoral decisions/actions.

quote:
However, if you really dug into it, I believe, you would find that the different societies, religions, etc., all of which are cultures in one manner or another, would have a different approach to it. Imagine Malar the Beastlords clergy. They are believers of instrumental morality, in the most Cyrenaically hedonistic manner possible. However, if that perpetuation of Cyrenaic hedonism went unchecked, and the satisfaction of said Malar clergy came to an end, what would that mean? I argue, it would mean that the instrumental moral goodness (within the framework of their deities ethos and dogma) would be undone by the unchecked, and lacking in foresight, hedonistic state of their ethic.


As to this point, Malar followers/clergy are focused on the bestial, savage hunt. They find it pleasurable, and that it maximizes their positive outcomes by bringing about slaughter in the name of the Beastlord. So, we can see that what they find to be moral, is at odds with what others find to be moral. The difference isn't really absolute good vs. evil. It's a choice. The ethical framework, i.e. the dogma and ethos, of Malar is what informs his followers as to what is good or evil. Interestingly enough, Malarites are not suppose to kill the pregnant or young. Something I am sure most people agree with them on and deem to be a "good" idea. However, the rest of Malar's dogma/ethos is not good. Sort of a conundrum, from certain ethical points of consideration.

Best regards,







Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

Divinity
Acolyte

USA
39 Posts

Posted - 10 Dec 2020 :  19:10:48  Show Profile Send Divinity a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Alright, so it seems it totally depends on the context. I'll give more context.

Let's say that war and regional battles have left an area of Cormyr in a famine. Fields have been trampled and destroyed and men to work the fields are in short supply. With winter coming and food already scarce, adventurers are turning to hunting monsters and less common food supplies for more ways to provide food. So there is a threat of food shortage which, in theory, would drive people to be less picky. However, they're city-dwelling folk who may not otherwise be used to unusual feasts like that.

I suppose as long as the answer isn't "They wouldn't eat that ever", a famine is a good reason to accept that people will need to eat what's provided or starve.

My Faerűn Continent Map
Go to Top of Page

Returnip
Learned Scribe

208 Posts

Posted - 10 Dec 2020 :  19:32:33  Show Profile Send Returnip a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Divinity

Alright, so it seems it totally depends on the context. I'll give more context.

Let's say that war and regional battles have left an area of Cormyr in a famine. Fields have been trampled and destroyed and men to work the fields are in short supply. With winter coming and food already scarce, adventurers are turning to hunting monsters and less common food supplies for more ways to provide food. So there is a threat of food shortage which, in theory, would drive people to be less picky. However, they're city-dwelling folk who may not otherwise be used to unusual feasts like that.

I suppose as long as the answer isn't "They wouldn't eat that ever", a famine is a good reason to accept that people will need to eat what's provided or starve.



You're spot on. Famine is famine. People can't afford to be picky and they learn that quickly under such circumstances, or they die.

I would like to add, however, that if the food is running out, and especially the veggies and grains, then animals migrate. So there will be fewer monsters to hunt. This is because of the food chain, and if there's no vegetables and grains there is no food for the plant eaters which are the main course of the carnivores. What happens in countries struck by severe food shortage is people figure out other things to eat. In some parts of africa they make bread from flies. In Scandinavia there were huge problems with the harvests in 1867 which resulted in famine. That in turn led to people emigrating to the USA. What people did here in Scandinavia to try and survive was to mix ground down tree bark into the flour and make what's called "bark bread".

Historically what made the population boom up here was when people started to till the soil and grow crops. Before that a lot fewer people could be sustained by a given area of land. Hunting has never been a good way to combat famine. It's just not sustainable. So if you want to work famine into your game I recommend coming up with other stuff that people can eat to fill their bellies, and more than anything else, migration. Huge amounts of people, starving, walking with their possessions, to what they hope is a land where there is food.

On the other hand you have different fingers.
Go to Top of Page

TheIriaeban
Senior Scribe

USA
563 Posts

Posted - 10 Dec 2020 :  21:01:56  Show Profile Send TheIriaeban a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Divinity

Alright, so it seems it totally depends on the context. I'll give more context.

Let's say that war and regional battles have left an area of Cormyr in a famine. Fields have been trampled and destroyed and men to work the fields are in short supply. With winter coming and food already scarce, adventurers are turning to hunting monsters and less common food supplies for more ways to provide food. So there is a threat of food shortage which, in theory, would drive people to be less picky. However, they're city-dwelling folk who may not otherwise be used to unusual feasts like that.

I suppose as long as the answer isn't "They wouldn't eat that ever", a famine is a good reason to accept that people will need to eat what's provided or starve.



Another point to think about is that the Church of Chauntea would see that as an emergency situation and would show up in force to help mitigate the damage and famine. There was very bad flooding along the Chionthar in 491 (actually, there were VERY heavy rains possibly all over the place that entire year so there was very likely flooding elsewhere-- Lands of Intrigue: Book 2 page 21) that destroyed crops and killed livestock. The Chaunteans showed up to help and that is why there is a temple to Chauntea in Iriaebor.

"Iriaebor is a fine city. So what if you can have violence between merchant groups break out at any moment. Not every city can offer dinner AND a show."

My FR writeups - http://www.mediafire.com/folder/um3liz6tqsf5n/Documents
Go to Top of Page

Archmage of Nowhere
Seeker

USA
64 Posts

Posted - 10 Dec 2020 :  21:09:09  Show Profile Send Archmage of Nowhere a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Interestingly enough the types of creatures typically ok with eating anything or are opportunistic are associated with nature, and that behavior just a function of survival. However most things that enjoy the flesh of sentient creatures are associated with an evil rather than anything natural, even if those tastes are naturally occurring. Even though different cultures in the realms have different views, I definitely feel they have set an evil undertone or shorthand if the people in question enjoy the flesh of sentient creatures rather than partake strictly for utilitarian needs established by the world’s biology. Ogres, trolls, dragons, goblins, orcs, etc all come to mind as those who enjoy or may go out of their way to eat sentient creatures where as I have trouble of thinking of a single good aligned creature that will go out of its way to eat any sentient being.

Now how that effects the behavior of the individual NPC sort of stems from context as has been said earlier posts. In the specific example given in Cormyr I would expect the people to be hurt by the act and express it in one of two ways.

Willful Ignorance – generally the people know where the food is coming from but don’t talk about it, don’t ask questions and generally keep it as far from their minds as possible. They may even manage to convince themselves that no such thing is happening. Such places would be business as usual in a war stricken country in the midst of a famine, until the subject is brought up.

Hostile and Defensive – They may be in a state of constant frustration, agitation, or defensive in general due to the mental stress of it. They are acting out because in their minds are trying to reconcile their acts with their beliefs. Cormyr’s culture is associated with the qualities of good, eating a sentient creature is at its best neutral and it’s most common within the evil sphere of things in the setting. So it would be common to see the symptoms of that stress manifest often as agitated or erratic behavior even if the stress is coming from subconscious beliefs.

I guess there could be a third, complete indifference, but I would reserve that for characters who are so low on the social totem pole given the context as they don’t care at all about Cormyr culture or beliefs and are totally focused on survival.
Go to Top of Page

Ayrik
Great Reader

Canada
7356 Posts

Posted - 10 Dec 2020 :  22:09:11  Show Profile Send Ayrik a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Archmage of Nowhere

Interestingly enough the types of creatures typically ok with eating anything or are opportunistic are associated with nature, and that behavior just a function of survival. However most things that enjoy the flesh of sentient creatures are associated with an evil rather than anything natural ...
Dragons eat people. Even good-aligned metallics aren't above gobbling up annoyances who dare invade their lairs, although they might restrict their diet to "evil" people.

Giants eat people. Giants have always eaten people. And they're always hungry.

Drow sometimes eat people. Apparently they consider halflings a particular delicacy.


I suspect "cannibalism" of sentients might sometimes serve cultural, religious, spiritual, or magical meanings which aren't intrinsically evil. Consuming the flesh (blood, brain, heart or other organ) of a worthy opponent to steal his attributes. Consuming the flesh of ancestors or elders or heroes to achieve continuity, to commune with them, to perhaps borrow their strength and wisdom in times of need. Consuming the flesh of a fallen enemy as a gesture of respect or as a gesture of disdain. All sorts of reasons which don't involve nutrition and which don't involve evil. And then there's all sorts of predators (like vampires) who have no choice but to consume living people to sustain themselves, sometimes they have tragically evil origins yet they refuse to submit themselves to becoming evil.

[/Ayrik]

Edited by - Ayrik on 10 Dec 2020 22:11:02
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Great Reader

USA
2249 Posts

Posted - 11 Dec 2020 :  03:05:59  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Acolyte Divinity,

Good evening to you good sir! :)

quote:
Alright, so it seems it totally depends on the context. I'll give more context.

Let's say that war and regional battles have left an area of Cormyr in a famine. Fields have been trampled and destroyed and men to work the fields are in short supply. With winter coming and food already scarce, adventurers are turning to hunting monsters and less common food supplies for more ways to provide food. So there is a threat of food shortage which, in theory, would drive people to be less picky. However, they're city-dwelling folk who may not otherwise be used to unusual feasts like that.

I suppose as long as the answer isn't "They wouldn't eat that ever", a famine is a good reason to accept that people will need to eat what's provided or starve.


The answer is certainly yes that they would. Hunger is a motivating factor, especially where children are concerned. Food chains though as mentioned by other scribes herein are the reality of things. If an element of the chain is running short or gets destroyed, it quickly destroys the others.

Best regards,





Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Great Reader

USA
2249 Posts

Posted - 11 Dec 2020 :  03:09:24  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Senior Scribe TheIriaeban,

quote:
Another point to think about is that the Church of Chauntea would see that as an emergency situation and would show up in force to help mitigate the damage and famine.


That is likely true, but not in a vacuum. I would imagine that the clergy of Silvanus, Malar, and perhaps even Eldath, may have something to say about that. Famine is a normal process of eradicating excess, and to bring balance back to things. Those Chauntean's may be running to the rescue, only to find a scythe on their necks, or a Malarites claws in their bellies.

As I close, I realize as well that followers of Talona would likely even push for such a famine to reach fruition. It brings plague and disease with it.

Best regards,




Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

TheIriaeban
Senior Scribe

USA
563 Posts

Posted - 11 Dec 2020 :  15:28:08  Show Profile Send TheIriaeban a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2

Senior Scribe TheIriaeban,

quote:
Another point to think about is that the Church of Chauntea would see that as an emergency situation and would show up in force to help mitigate the damage and famine.


That is likely true, but not in a vacuum. I would imagine that the clergy of Silvanus, Malar, and perhaps even Eldath, may have something to say about that. Famine is a normal process of eradicating excess, and to bring balance back to things. Those Chauntean's may be running to the rescue, only to find a scythe on their necks, or a Malarites claws in their bellies.

As I close, I realize as well that followers of Talona would likely even push for such a famine to reach fruition. It brings plague and disease with it.

Best regards,







The given cause of the famine was war and not a result of a natural process so Silvanus would very likely not hinder the Chaunteans. He may even assist so that the people of the area don't wipe out all the animals there just to get something to eat. Malar might but there isn't much glory in killing rabbits so that is kinda iffy in my mind. Talona MIGHT interfere so that people pray to her more to end it but famine isn't directly part of her portfolio so I am not really sure.

Another thought occurred to me is that Tempuran forces may show up if the fields were destroyed intentionally. That is needless destruction and he doesn't like that. It is also possible that they would show up to protect the Chaunteans while they try to get the area back to normal since it was war that caused the damage.

"Iriaebor is a fine city. So what if you can have violence between merchant groups break out at any moment. Not every city can offer dinner AND a show."

My FR writeups - http://www.mediafire.com/folder/um3liz6tqsf5n/Documents
Go to Top of Page

Returnip
Learned Scribe

208 Posts

Posted - 11 Dec 2020 :  17:53:29  Show Profile Send Returnip a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by TheIriaeban

quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2

Senior Scribe TheIriaeban,

quote:
Another point to think about is that the Church of Chauntea would see that as an emergency situation and would show up in force to help mitigate the damage and famine.


That is likely true, but not in a vacuum. I would imagine that the clergy of Silvanus, Malar, and perhaps even Eldath, may have something to say about that. Famine is a normal process of eradicating excess, and to bring balance back to things. Those Chauntean's may be running to the rescue, only to find a scythe on their necks, or a Malarites claws in their bellies.

As I close, I realize as well that followers of Talona would likely even push for such a famine to reach fruition. It brings plague and disease with it.

Best regards,







The given cause of the famine was war and not a result of a natural process so Silvanus would very likely not hinder the Chaunteans. He may even assist so that the people of the area don't wipe out all the animals there just to get something to eat. Malar might but there isn't much glory in killing rabbits so that is kinda iffy in my mind. Talona MIGHT interfere so that people pray to her more to end it but famine isn't directly part of her portfolio so I am not really sure.

Another thought occurred to me is that Tempuran forces may show up if the fields were destroyed intentionally. That is needless destruction and he doesn't like that. It is also possible that they would show up to protect the Chaunteans while they try to get the area back to normal since it was war that caused the damage.



Druids of Silvanus and others may show up to teach people about other things growing in the forest that you can eat, like roots, wild cabbage, herbs and so on, to help them find food while still existing in harmony with nature (in extension this is to prevent the starving people from overhunting and such things, but the druids doesn't have to say that outright). Just a thought.

EDIT: I'd still like to push for working with the catastrophic effects of famine to create a unique setting however. When the crops fail, herbivores migrate, the carnivores will follow them be they intelligent or not. When famine strikes people lose energy because of lack of food. That means hunting and killing is a lot harder if not impossible. The only realistic way of hunting of the few animals that may still be around is trapping. And intelligent creatures are much less likely to step in a trap, which is something we see a lot in the real world.

If you want to build an atmosphere around it I would recommend considering the following things. People who starve migrate in the hopes of finding new land that can feed them. In this process they have to leave their old and weak behind, and they're likely to lose more people on the way. Those lost during the journey are buried beside the road if at all, or just left there on the road side to fend for themselves. Large amounts of people traveling together means diseases run rampant. If it's cold people are also more likely to freeze to death. And so on and so forth. This is what happens even when the famine is the result of war. The people who migrate are not only on the run from famine. They're also on the run from war.

This can be a great setting to make the players feel hopelessness, terror, sadness and all sorts of feelings if you play your cards right. A sort of reality horror.

Good luck.

On the other hand you have different fingers.

Edited by - Returnip on 11 Dec 2020 19:02:11
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Great Reader

USA
2249 Posts

Posted - 11 Dec 2020 :  23:23:13  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Senior Scribe TheIriaeban,

quote:
The given cause of the famine was war and not a result of a natural process so Silvanus would very likely not hinder the Chaunteans.


I am going to respectfully disagree here, as
quote:
The worst in our nature coexists with the best, and so it will ever be. Like Wilson, Pinker believes that evolutionary forces have shaped human nature into a complex amalgam of the bestial and heroic, the compassionate and pitiless. (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/edward-o-wilsons-new-take-on-human-nature-160810520/)


So, even if you take Dr. Pinker or Dr. Wilson's view that government, and other entities/organizations can help tame the natural impulses of war in us, the Forgotten Realms is not at that state as described in the article presented above. Therefore, I stand by my conclusion that war is in fact, natural.

quote:
He may even assist so that the people of the area don't wipe out all the animals there just to get something to eat.


Look at the work of the Emerald Enclave, who I argue, have done impossibly horrible things in the name of maintaining the balance. It is in canon lore that the Enclave members receive their spells from Silvanus (at least those that worship Silvanus), even when doing things that others may consider evil, but the ethos/dogma/moral code of Silvanus followers does not view it as evil. So, I could totally see Enclave members, as well as others, coming in to support the prevention of assistance of those clergy of Chauntea, in order to hold up the natural consequences of war. I argue that war is the natural clean up of overabundance in population, to bring things back into balance.

quote:
Malar might but there isn't much glory in killing rabbits so that is kinda iffy in my mind.


What better a way to help bring along nature's glory for Malar, than to have his followers massacre/slaughter the remnants of the military, as well as those helping to set the countryside back to its formally "civilized" place? Malar wants the jungle, the wild kingdom, and he wants his followers to rule it with horrid, rampant, unbridled but natural violence. I think his followers would be all over that like white on rice.

quote:
Talona MIGHT interfere so that people pray to her more to end it but famine isn't directly part of her portfolio so I am not really sure.


When bodies decompose, rot, and become infected, those bodies become the vessels of pestilence. It even says in here entry in the Faiths and Pantheons book, page 107, that,
quote:
Festivals are held every 12 days and are open to nondevotees, where such visitors are encouraged to pray and give offerings to Talona to spare themselves or loved ones from death, disease, wasting, illnesses, and the like.


It seems there is a very good reason for Talona and her followers to be involved in that kind of a situation.

quote:
Another thought occurred to me is that Tempuran forces may show up if the fields were destroyed intentionally. That is needless destruction and he doesn't like that.


Again, I am going to respectfully disagree here. War is not needless to the god of destruction, and the muddied soil of the battlefield is certainly no needless destruction. The ground regrows. Perfectly normal.

quote:
It is also possible that they would show up to protect the Chaunteans while they try to get the area back to normal since it was war that caused the damage.


The God of War makes no excuses for the needful damage from war. I think Tempus would be ambivalent to the damage, it being needful, and let the Chaunteans do what they do.

Best regards,








Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

Azar
Learned Scribe

184 Posts

Posted - 17 Dec 2020 :  14:20:58  Show Profile Send Azar a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I had to giggle. "Tempuran" takes on a different meaning in a thread about food.

By the way, there's a comedic manga (i.e., Japanese comic) that deals with dungeon-delving adventurers killing, cooking and eating all manner of fantastic beings (some of which are mainstays of the fantasy genre): Delicious in Dungeon.

Stand with anybody that stands right. Stand with him while he is right and part with him when he goes wrong.
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Great Reader

USA
2249 Posts

Posted - 17 Dec 2020 :  22:04:32  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Learned Scribe Azar,

That is pretty good. I didn't even think about it in the food sense of it. haha

Best regards,






Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore

1750 Posts

Posted - 18 Dec 2020 :  12:09:25  Show Profile Send The Arcanamach a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I think it mostly will come down to how people regard the creature in question. Here in the West, we don't eat dogs and cats. We see them as part of our families and doing so is a cultural taboo. In other areas of the world they are dinner.

So, might an adventurer eat sphinx meat? I think some would because they haven't internalized the idea that it's a 'person' or otherwise taboo to consume. Still others would ask what the hell they're doing eating from a being that had higher thoughts and emotions.

And since we're on the topic, here's an interesting video: https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=123847119402509

I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one.
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Great Reader

USA
2249 Posts

Posted - 19 Dec 2020 :  07:10:33  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Master Arcanamach,

quote:
I think it mostly will come down to how people regard the creature in question. Still others would ask what the hell they're doing eating from a being that had higher thoughts and emotions.


True, and interestingly enough, I think that is the quintessential and colloquial reference to ethics. Why is it ethical, and thus moral, in one place to eat them, and in others not? Certain cultural beliefs, etc. are establishing a positive or negative norm.

Best regards,




Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

Azar
Learned Scribe

184 Posts

Posted - 19 Dec 2020 :  07:40:24  Show Profile Send Azar a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2



Why is it ethical, and thus moral,


Ethics do not stem from morals?

Stand with anybody that stands right. Stand with him while he is right and part with him when he goes wrong.
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Great Reader

USA
2249 Posts

Posted - 19 Dec 2020 :  07:47:20  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Learned Scribe Azar,

quote:
Ethics do not stem from morals?


Correct. Ethics do not stem from morals. Ethics are the structured system(s) that allow for the evaluation of actions, to be moral or immoral.

For example, consider a couple of ethical forms of consequentialism: Cyrenaic Hedonism and Utilitarianism. Both are consequentialist in nature; however, one is worried about immediate, maximum pleasure for the self, whereas the other is concerned with the greatest and best outcome for the most at once. Knowing those to be the "rules" if you will, allows you to evaluate any actions taken as moral or not. Hence people disagreeing so vociferously on things, and often not realizing it.

Best regards,




Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 3 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Candlekeep Forum © 1999-2021 Candlekeep.com Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000