|
I was just saying that "jungle-dwelling cannibal halflings" seems to have become a trope unto itself; probably because of pop-culture depictions of Pygmies.
Somewhat ironic, since real-world 'pygmies' mey be themselves victims of cannibalization.
I suspect it has more to do with getting halflings as violently away from their pastoral bumpkin-ish Hobbit roots as possible in attempt to make them more 'original' or to 'take them and make them my own' for a setting.
In addition to the anthropophagic, territorial and xenophobic halflings of Dark Sun, halflings were one of the two races Monte Cook decided to tinker with in the Book of Vile Darkness, since, unlike dwarves, who already had evil twins in the duergar, and elves, who have evil twins in the drow, halflings tend to come across as 'mostly harmless.'
Their child-like appearance might also have something to do with it. Just as South Park capitalizes on the dissonant feelings provoked by what appears to be children swearing up a storm and acting outrageously, and various horror movies have 'scary children' as a 'surprise' image, evil cannibal halflings come with a built in shock value.
|
I want Fantasy Egypt. I want the romance of the desert and the Nile. I want the Egyptian aesthetics. I want the fashions that range from "bald common folk in loincloths" to "My golden crown is actually an honor-bound phoenix/couatl bodyguard, your argument is irrelevent." I want the basic feel of their society. I want the god-kings. I want the Ma'at. I want the people.
There was one of the Forgotten Realm Supplements that concentrated on Unther and Mulhorand. Essentially Sumer and Egypt. You might find material there to use.
If you played the last expac of Cataclysm, you'd have loved Uldum.
To clarify, I mean living cultures to explore in the PnP RPG format. From what I've seen of Mulhorand, it seemed sort of plugged in rather than weaved into the setting. Osirion fits in more organically, and is much more integrated into the setting rather than left off to the side. It feels like a part of Golarion rather than a part of Earth plugged into the map, basically.
I'll have to look into Uldum, though I don't play WoW(speaking of orc cultures that actually got close to what I'm looking for...)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
** spoiler omitted **
* Not really.
Frankly, I love the fact that an Osirion godking is one of the few people - ever - to actually become a god. I thought that was kind of clever, really.
EDIT: by the way, Mikaze, do you have links to any of those images of Aroden you mentioned, or could you point out anything that I could look for?
And he was one of the ones to do it without the Starstone!
(though admittedly, it's the Pharaoh of Songs and Kahotep, Pharaoh of Tomorrow that really caught my imagination)
On that Aroden art, there's a small portrait in Inner Sea Magic, along with a TON of portraits for other high-level magic users throughout Golarion, both past and present. A lot of that art had never been seen before in non-cropped format, like the Jatembe portrait, but I think the Aroden image might possibly be from Humans of Golarion? I'm honestly not sure(and not near my books).
(Nex has got that Garundi/Ororo Munroe hair going)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To clarify, I mean living cultures to explore in the PnP RPG format. From what I've seen of Mulhorand, it seemed sort of plugged in rather than weaved into the setting. Osirion fits in more organically, and is much more integrated into the setting rather than left off to the side. It feels like a part of Golarion rather than a part of Earth plugged into the map, basically.
See, that's where we differ. I feel like Osirion is just plugged in. Unther and Mulhorand fit FR, because Toril always was somewhat of a planar crossroads. Those were supposed to be actual Egyptians and Babylonians dragged there by a native civilization. I have no problems with that.
Given that Earth is supposed to be out in the Pathfinder verse, I find it very hard to believe that two civilizations developed along lines so similar, especially because the only ties to Earth are the Great Old Ones and Baba Yaga (who also is part of the FR). The existence of Osirion as it is cannot be explained.
I look at it this way (having debated such issues before at the WotC boards and the Candlekeep forum): There are a bunch of deities. They like to think of themselves as gods, but true gods are sevral tiers above them (what we folk of the modern world think of when we think 'god'). The truth is that deities are just pumped-up mortals - they've discovered some trick (touched a starstone, got lifted-up by another deity, etc) and now they've achieved a new level of power. Its the ultimate template.
So we have this afterlife/Heaven/Hell place where all these guys (and gals) like to hangout, and out of sheer boredom they play 'the great game', using mortals as pawns. Part of the game is to try and control new spheres (worlds), so they are always trying to emigrate followers onto these worlds, by one method or another (there are other ways, but thats the most straight-forward).
So lets take a priest of Ptah - one of the most widely-known of the gods (because he is a Spelljammer deity as well). these priest travel all around the cosmos, either Spelljamming, Planeswalking, or whatever, and they bring with them their 'holy book'. they have many copies of this book, and they always leave a few behind (especially for primitive folk on new worlds). On some of these worlds, the worship of these gods catches on, and they become active in that sphere, slowly influencing the cultures that revere them. That is key.
Its not that there are so many Egypt-like cultures that just so happen to worship Egyptian gods (in the case of FR), but that these cultures are nurtured by these pantheons, and formed into something very similar from world to world. If you look at it that the gods came first, THEN the culture, its fairly easy to see how we get so much cultural pollination throughout the universe. Somewhere there was a 'first' culture that worshiped these deities, and that would be the 'true' one. they may be long gone, for all we know, and all that remain are their gods, trying to rebuild what was lost.
On some worlds the deities take on aliases, and if only part of the pantheon emigrates then other, local deities fill some spots (who also may or may not take on the aliases of those other, non-present deities). In some cases, the pantheon dies-off (or is slowly killed-off by local pantheons), but the cultures endures, and worships those local gods, either under a new name or an alias of the gods that 'died' in that sphere. This is what I think happened in Osirion; they probably had one or two Pharaonic deities, or maybe just a crashed spelljammer or some marooned Planeswalkers who taught them all about Egyptian culture. Those gods are either long gone, or never were, but the culture remains.
|
I don't think that first line is meant to be taken too seriously. In fact I'm not sure why it's there at all, unless it's a placeholder for a future Modern game perhaps?
Given that Earth is supposed to be out in the Pathfinder verse, I find it very hard to believe that two civilizations developed along lines so similar, especially because the only ties to Earth are the Great Old Ones and Baba Yaga (who also is part of the FR). The existence of Osirion as it is cannot be explained.
|
|
Rasputin Must Die!I don't think that first line is meant to be taken too seriously. In fact I'm not sure why it's there at all, unless it's a placeholder for a future Modern game perhaps?
Given that Earth is supposed to be out in the Pathfinder verse, I find it very hard to believe that two civilizations developed along lines so similar, especially because the only ties to Earth are the Great Old Ones and Baba Yaga (who also is part of the FR). The existence of Osirion as it is cannot be explained.
That + Where Does Little Cthulhu Sleep?
|
Contributor
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
To clarify, I mean living cultures to explore in the PnP RPG format. From what I've seen of Mulhorand, it seemed sort of plugged in rather than weaved into the setting. Osirion fits in more organically, and is much more integrated into the setting rather than left off to the side. It feels like a part of Golarion rather than a part of Earth plugged into the map, basically.
See, that's where we differ. I feel like Osirion is just plugged in. Unther and Mulhorand fit FR, because Toril always was somewhat of a planar crossroads. Those were supposed to be actual Egyptians and Babylonians dragged there by a native civilization. I have no problems with that.
Given that Earth is supposed to be out in the Pathfinder verse, I find it very hard to believe that two civilizations developed along lines so similar, especially because the only ties to Earth are the Great Old Ones and Baba Yaga (who also is part of the FR). The existence of Osirion as it is cannot be explained.
...read Wake of the Watcher, p.66, and you'll see that the Dark Pharaoh, linked to the prehistory of Egypt, also visited Osirion.
...
So, a bit like Stargate without the Stargates? Might work.
...So, a bit like Stargate without the Stargates? Might work.
There are the Elf gates, lots of stuff that both dimension hop and come from outerspace, and spaceships.
I sure that James has read Erich von Däniken's Chariots of the Gods if you want to add that level of complexity (and kooky pseudo science).
Elves are planet hopping aliens, the Gnomes are also from elsewhere, cultures can be carried.
Building pyramids is not uncommon for humanity, similar structures have been built in totally unrelated regions on earth.
Yep Osirion and Egypt are similar because both were heavily influenced in the beginning by Nyarlathotep. Both cultures also evolved in similar environments, which also increases similarity.
As for Osirion as an add on, I think some of the material, especially Lost Kingdoms, does a pretty good job integrating Osirion into greater Golarion history.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yep Osirion and Egypt are similar because both were heavily influenced in the beginning by Nyarlathotep. Both cultures also evolved in similar environments, which also increases similarity.
This may seem a bit ranty, but as an Egyptophile I'd really hate it if Osirion went down that road.
Basically the two most irritating directions Osirion(or any Egypt analogue) could be taken these days is either the Ancient Aliens route or Lovecraft, for similar reasons.
It's just frustrating to see Ancient Egypt co-opted in multiple venues by Lovecraft*. A great, rich civilization of humanity winds up owing it's greatness to some cosmic horror? I'd rather let Osirion flourish without shackling it to the legacy of a xenophobe whose racism makes Robert E Howard come across as egalitarian and who equated interracial relationships with the vilest of horrors.
*And unfortunately this problem has only gotten worse recently with Lovecraft going memetic over the Internet. Want to do anything with fantastic sea life, especially cephalopods? Lovecraft down your throat. Space? Lovecraft down your throat. Ancient Egypt? Lovecraft. I know Lovecraft is well loved by a lot of folks, but can't we have those themes completely free of Lovecraft's shadow from time to time?
Even the relatively more benign Ancient Aliens approach really grates, because just like the prevalent attitudes in speculative fiction during Lovecraft's time, where white writers seemed eager to attribute the major accomplishments of other cultures(particularly those of dark-skinned people) to some imagined third party(all too often light-skinned at that), it severely sells short the accomplishments of those people. It was like they couldn't bare the thought of some Other culture doing anything of note comparable to that of their ancestors. But these days we should be well beyond that sort of thinking, but unfortunately fantasy is still inheriting much of the racist attitudes found in the old pulps.
I really really don't like that crazy-haired Ancient Aliens guy.
And it winds up going back to racism again. I'm not saying Nyarlathotep couldn't be involved with Osirion's history in some way, but I'd hate it if they owed what they were and what they are to some malevolent cosmic horror. Especially with one of the major themes of the country being their recent and ongoing reclaiming of their old culture and former greatness. I'd rather not see that saddled with some reveal lurking in the shadows about "this culture developed according to our specifications, bwahaha".
And geez this post does sound negative, but I really do worry about yet another theme I love getting thrown under the Lovecraft bus.
Personal headcanon: While some pharoahs did treat with the Dominion of the Black(namely the Four Pharaohs of Ascension), other Pharaohs worked to successfully cast them out(Kahotep, Pharaoh of Tomorrow). And while some might find structures on alien worlds similar to the Osirioni style, it's not a case of Osirioni being influenced by aliens. Those are landmarks left on alien worlds by the Osirioni working with other alien races native to the solar system to push the Dominion back.
|
Contributor
|
Yep Osirion and Egypt are similar because both were heavily influenced in the beginning by Nyarlathotep. Both cultures also evolved in similar environments, which also increases similarity.
This may seem a bit ranty, but as an Egyptophile I'd really hate it if Osirion went down that road.
Basically the two most irritating directions Osirion(or any Egypt analogue) could be taken these days is either the Ancient Aliens route or Lovecraft, for similar reasons.
It's just frustrating to see Ancient Egypt co-opted in multiple venues by Lovecraft*. A great, rich civilization of humanity winds up owing it's greatness to some cosmic horror? I'd rather let Osirion flourish without shackling it to the legacy of a xenophobe whose racism makes Robert E Howard come across as egalitarian and who equated interracial relationships with the vilest of horrors.
*And unfortunately this problem has only gotten worse recently with Lovecraft going memetic over the Internet. Want to do anything with fantastic sea life, especially cephalopods? Lovecraft down your throat. Space? Lovecraft down your throat. Ancient Egypt? Lovecraft. I know Lovecraft is well loved by a lot of folks, but can't we have those themes completely free of Lovecraft's shadow from time to time?
Even the relatively more benign Ancient Aliens approach really grates, because just like the prevalent attitudes in speculative fiction during Lovecraft's time, where white writers seemed eager to attribute the major accomplishments of other cultures(particularly those of dark-skinned people) to some imagined third party(all too often light-skinned at that), it severely sells short the accomplishments of those people. It was like they couldn't bare the thought of some Other culture doing anything of note comparable to that of their ancestors. But these days we should be well beyond that sort of thinking, but unfortunately fantasy is still inheriting much of the racist attitudes found in...
Yeah, I can see that. Of course, alternately, Nethys could have come from Earth. The trouble is, of course, that Osirion partly exists to be pulp Egypt as much or more than it is real Egypt. And pulp Egypt has always had associations with things like aliens, mummies, eldritch gods with animal heads, and bizarre plagues sent down from heaven.
Despite the fact it sounds kinda FR, there are clear links between Earth and Golarion. Links that cannot be accidental, despite their distance in space. I suspect we're going to learn more in the next AP.|
|
Yeah, I can see that. Of course, alternately, Nethys could have come from Earth.
That I could roll with without missing a beat. :)
Yeah, I guess it comes down to different thresholds for the baggage inherited from the pulps. Generally Pathfinder has been good about keeping the good while shedding the bad. It's just that some tropes stick out as particular sore spots, and some cultures have really suffered for it in fantasy representations.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like the Lovecraftian elements in Osirion :(
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like the Lovecraftian elements in Osirion :(
I'm just speaking for myself there. :) I was actually worried that post came across as too negative and killjoy-ish.
I'm not really against Lovecrarftian elements lurking in the shadows in Osirion. It's just the idea of that country either turning into despair-porn or having the entire culture compromised by Lovecraft at the root level/origin point/owing-their-aesthetics/culture-to-Nyarlathotep that has me worried.
EDIT: to clarify
I actually like them as well, however I don't see a difference between the existence of Lovcraftian elements and the awesome of super-powered reality-altering Cthulu-punching Golarion(+) magic-stuff.
Cthulu: beaten by a big boat. (Though it drove a bunch of people insane).
Most any 20th lvl Wizard: greater than the biggest boat ever (especially if said wizard has mythic tiers).
Ergo: most any 20th lvl Wizard (especially with Mythic tiers) can beat Cthulu. (Though it might drive a bunch of people insane*.)
I think the extremely advanced power of magic in Golarion is more than enough to take on elements like Nyarlathotep and Cthulu and not really worry too much about it without diminishing the threat or horror of certain Lovecraftian elements. I think we really can have it both ways - we've just got to redefine what it is, exactly, that we're talking about. Much like the famed Calibrating Your Expectations article a while back, I think we're conflating different elements of the Lovecraftian universe as equal... when they're not.
I think really we fail to realize the actual amount of power we're dealing with, which leads to bizarre oneupsmanship (on both sides). Cthulu is, ultimately, kind of a weaker of the Lovecraftian things. Nyarlathotep too. And, while the latter certainly has nefarious designs (and I, for one, can fully accept that he's the origin of Egyptian style), that doesn't mean that all his plans come out the way he plans. For a perfect example of why all that planning might completely fail big time, take a look at Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem. Something on the order of a power similar to (and probably even greater than) Nyarlathotep manipulated events for nearly two millennia, but in the end all its plans came to naught because of the interference of another Ancient (or whatever they were called)... one who was already dead... and a bunch of mere mortals. There are non-evil Outer Gods in Pathfinder lore (in fact, I consider Mantorok from the game to be something akin to a Yog-Sothoth expy or avatar-like thing, similar to 'Umr at-Tawil).
Ultimately all that stuff that the Ancients did? It created the basis for cultures that endured those eons and ultimately produced creatures that fought back and won. Even and especially when they tried to stop them or destroy them!
Thus, I think you can have it both ways. Yeah, Osirion originated from monstrous elements from beyond, but you know what I think their response is?
"Screw those guys. We're awesome, and our heritage is awesome, and we take what they gave us and are going to make something awesome, no matter what they say. Their time is done: we may be using our heritage and proud of it, but we're not insane cultists of evil beyond the stars. We take all the good from what we were given and throw out all the bad."
Kind of like a tiefling sorcerer with the Infernal bloodline who's chaotic good. Yeah, there's awful back there in that history, but he's taking his heritage pumping it up to the max, and making a good thing out of it and redefining the world for the better while doing so. Suck on them apples, hell. (Oh, and when I do inevitably summon you guys, just so you know: it's going to be to destroy you utterly and make the omniverse a better place.)
I can kind of see Osirion doing the same thing, regardless of their history or where their culture originated.
*
Tolkien was pretty emphatic about dwarven greed. In The Hobbit, especially, there's a thin line between most of the dwarves and the dragon.What is interesting here is that a lot of the most negative ones are things I was never aware of until the interwebs: writers just don't put them in stories or settings.
Notably, dwarven pychosis was something I only saw as a one-off character in a single novel, and that guy was seen as dangerously weird.
The greed was exacerbated and magnified by a ring of power.... As the Rings of the elves were the only ones that Sauron did not have a hand in making.
The "dragon-sickness" and the dwarves' focus on their gold was all there in the first edition of The Hobbit, before Tolkien retconned and republished it to make Bilbo's magic invisibility ring into the One Ring. Heck, in the first edition, Gollum is upset that he can't find his ring not because he's possessive of it, but because he wants to abide by the rules of the riddle contest and give it to Bilbo as his prize, making Gollum less greedy than Tolkien's dwarves were from Day ONne. :-)
|
The "dragon-sickness" and the dwarves' focus on their gold was all there in the first edition of The Hobbit, before Tolkien retconned and republished it to make Bilbo's magic invisibility ring into the One Ring. Heck, in the first edition, Gollum is upset that he can't find his ring not because he's possessive of it, but because he wants to abide by the rules of the riddle contest and give it to Bilbo as his prize, making Gollum less greedy than Tolkien's dwarves were from Day ONne. :-)Tolkien was pretty emphatic about dwarven greed. In The Hobbit, especially, there's a thin line between most of the dwarves and the dragon.What is interesting here is that a lot of the most negative ones are things I was never aware of until the interwebs: writers just don't put them in stories or settings.
Notably, dwarven pychosis was something I only saw as a one-off character in a single novel, and that guy was seen as dangerously weird.
The greed was exacerbated and magnified by a ring of power.... As the Rings of the elves were the only ones that Sauron did not have a hand in making.
I think he is referring to the dwarf ring of power owned by Thorin ancestor.
I think he is referring to the dwarf ring of power owned by Thorin ancestor.The "dragon-sickness" and the dwarves' focus on their gold was all there in the first edition of The Hobbit, before Tolkien retconned and republished it to make Bilbo's magic invisibility ring into the One Ring. Heck, in the first edition, Gollum is upset that he can't find his ring not because he's possessive of it, but because he wants to abide by the rules of the riddle contest and give it to Bilbo as his prize, making Gollum less greedy than Tolkien's dwarves were from Day ONne. :-)Tolkien was pretty emphatic about dwarven greed. In The Hobbit, especially, there's a thin line between most of the dwarves and the dragon.What is interesting here is that a lot of the most negative ones are things I was never aware of until the interwebs: writers just don't put them in stories or settings.
Notably, dwarven pychosis was something I only saw as a one-off character in a single novel, and that guy was seen as dangerously weird.
The greed was exacerbated and magnified by a ring of power.... As the Rings of the elves were the only ones that Sauron did not have a hand in making.
Also in the Second Age Sauron gave the Seven to various Dwarf-lords (though the Dwarves of Moria maintained a tradition that the ring given to Durin III came directly from the Elven smiths).[6] Gandalf mentions a rumour that the seven hoards of the dwarves began each with a single golden ring. The main power of the Seven on their wearers was to excite their sense of avarice, and the Dwarves used their rings to increase their treasure. The wearers did not become invisible, did not get extended life-spans, nor succumb directly to Sauron's control – though he could still influence them to anger and greed.[1]
Over the years, Sauron recovered three rings from the Dwarves, the last from Thráin II during his final captivity in Dol Guldur some years before the beginning of The Hobbit. The remaining four, according to Gandalf, were destroyed by dragons.[7]Until the Council of Elrond, the Dwarves did not know that Thráin had held the ring of Durin's line and had lost it to Sauron. They thought instead that it might have been lost when Thrór was killed by Azog in Moria.[4] One of the motivations for Balin's doomed expedition to Moria was the possibility of recovering the ring. Sauron's messenger attempted to bribe the Dwarves of Erebor for news of Bilbo (the last known bearer of the One) with the promise of the return of the remaining three of the Seven.
As for greed and genocide let's talk about Feanor and the Silmarils.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
One thing I enjoyed about Stargate was that the Go'uld were established early on to have adopted their trapings from the ancient (not Ancients) people of earth. The Egyptians didn't worship Ra because he was an ancient alien, they worshiped the snake because he showed up with weapons and god like powers and they figured he was Ra. (And, I'd assume, he got 'mythology 101' from his host.)
Since Golarion seems to have the original 'Forgotten Realms vibe'* going for it, it would make sense that there are parallels, but they end with the presence of magic and other races. (How many races have creator myths attached to a deity in Golarion anyway?)
So maybe the ancient Egyptians came to Golarion, or vice versa. They exchanged culture, theology, and went their seperate ways. Contact was lost** and that's why the similar, but not quite, vibe exists.
Aside: under this theory, is it 'racist' to assume that Osiron influnced Egypt and not the other way around? Or is it racist to assume that the loss of contact between the two worlds led to the end of large African nations like exist in Garundi?
*
**
Thats why I look at it this way - there really is not a 'Cthulhu Mythos' or an 'Egyptian/Pharaonic pantheon'. They are all part & parcel of the same universe, which is full of these incredibly powerful, godlike beings we call deities. The pantheons are just 'local clubs' where like-minded deities hangout. Think of them as ghettoes' in a racially diverse afterlife plane. That doesn't mean they don't move-about and mingle with all the others (its a very 'Planescape' way of thinking about things).
It could be that there is only 2-5 gods of any one pantheon, and the rest are just local deities that take on the personas of the rest of the pantheon. It could even be that there is only one (the head of the pantheon) and wherever that being goes he has an entourage of local powers take the place of his missing pantheon (which is kinda creepy, because it makes all those 'High Gods' a bit insane). This actually works very well in the case of the Cthulhu Mythos because there are only handful of 'gods' that are present throughout all works about them. Beings that only appear in or two books could very well be a local deity thats just hopped on the 'chaos bandwagon' (Rovagug comes to mind here).
And yes, my way of thinking is similar to Stargate, except that the 'false gods' are real gods (except that I don't consider deities 'real gods', so we are back to the beginning). In my homebrewed FR setting I say that that culture originated with the Imaskari, and Archwizards (Artificers) became the first Pharaonic deities. They spread their culture to other worlds (they are known to have seeded many worlds and also taken slaves from them - they were big on planes-walking). I even have it where the Suel of Greyhawk were one of their colonies (they were actually the Baklunish).
Each pantheon began on one world, and spread outward from there. All or some of those original pantheons may be dead, and other deities have taken their place (which is why you see name-changes a lot in mythology, especially when moving from culture to culture like Greece and Rome). Now, hundreds of thousands (millions?) of years later almost no-one knows who originated where, because the deities and cultures have become so widespread. The only ones who might know are the elder gods - deities from the beginning of mortal reckoning - and very few of them are still around. The Lovecraftian entities would qualify... except they are not deities. They are something else entirely... they existed before this universe began (which is why they consider this universe an abomination).
So sticking a little Cthulhu or Chariots of the Gods into the mix doesn't hurt our concept of an 'Egypt-like' culture, it merely reinforces it. You can't say each formed in a vacuum and they are so amazingly alike, because that defies logic. If it makes you feel any better, somewhere 'out there' there are entire planets with that culture - worlds where the Pharonic pantheon has won-out over the others. It doesn't lessen them - it makes them greater, because the culture itself becomes multi-spheric in nature.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Old thin pencil-mustachioed British dude, "I say. These pyramids are truly a marvel of engineering. Even I am at a loss to say how they were constructed!"
Old heavyset mutton-chopped British dude, "Harrumph! Surely these coolie savages, or their animal-headed-god-worshipping darkie ancestors, couldn't have built them. All *our* embarassing pagan savage ancestors built was Stonehenge..."
Old thin pencil-mustachioed British dude, "Obviously, they had alien help. White alien help, at that, old boy!"
Old heavyset mutton-chopped British dude, "Right-o! The indisputable cutting-keen logic of Occam's razor! Intervention by extraterrestrial intelligences would be the simplest and most elegant solution to the existentially distressing notion that some primitives once built something more impressive than we ever did!"
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
See, I entirely get why it's all "aliens giving cool stuff = racist" argument... but I've never actually seen it that way, probably at least in part because I've been exposed to the whole "Stonehenge = created by aliens" just as much as "Pyramids = created by aliens".
If anything, given those two theories, it was my impression the Egyptians did far more with their alien gifts than the British. This argument can also be made for the Maya, Aztec, Hindu, or any other culture you want that has the whole "aliens totally did this 'cause it'd be impossible otherwise!".
Mostly, I just took it as, "Hey, humans can't do squat without alien help." rather than "<Race that is different from us> obviously can't do squat without alien help."
I mean, it's worth noting, that at least in Golarion, the greatest human "race" and civilization on all of existence came about entirely through alien meddling: the Azlanti by way of Aboleth. And, while the Azlanti might be somewhat dark in some cases, I know that a number of them were pale... so I'd give it something of a wash, racially-speaking. The god of humanity (and human culture) ascended... because of an alien space-rock. And depending on how you define "alien", there's the civilizations that only exist because of the outsiders' influence (which includes one of the only truly good countries in Tian Xia - which exists pretty much only because of the "alien" DNA that aasimars contain).
I think he is referring to the dwarf ring of power owned by Thorin ancestor.
The "dragon-sickness" and the dwarves' focus on their gold was all there in the first edition of The Hobbit, before Tolkien retconned and republished it to make Bilbo's magic invisibility ring into the One Ring. Heck, in the first edition, Gollum is upset that he can't find his ring not because he's possessive of it, but because he wants to abide by the rules of the riddle contest and give it to Bilbo as his prize, making Gollum less greedy than Tolkien's dwarves were from Day ONne. :-)
Yes, but I suggest you reread what I wrote. :-) The rings of power concept didn't exist when Tolkien wrote The Hobbit -- he made the dwarves plenty greedy and gold-obsessed on their own. Later, after he began work on The Lord of the Rings, he edited and republished The Hobbit with the One Ring retconned in. The seven dwarf rings aren't mentioned, and in fact didn't exist conceptually when Tolkien first created his dwarves.
|
Contributor
|
Yes, but I suggest you reread what I wrote. :-) The rings of power concept didn't exist when Tolkien wrote The Hobbit -- he made the dwarves plenty greedy and gold-obsessed on their own. Later, after he began work on The Lord of the Rings, he edited and republished The Hobbit with the One Ring retconned in. The seven dwarf rings aren't mentioned, and in fact didn't exist conceptually when Tolkien first created his dwarves.I think he is referring to the dwarf ring of power owned by Thorin ancestor.
The "dragon-sickness" and the dwarves' focus on their gold was all there in the first edition of The Hobbit, before Tolkien retconned and republished it to make Bilbo's magic invisibility ring into the One Ring. Heck, in the first edition, Gollum is upset that he can't find his ring not because he's possessive of it, but because he wants to abide by the rules of the riddle contest and give it to Bilbo as his prize, making Gollum less greedy than Tolkien's dwarves were from Day ONne. :-)
...And what did exist conceptually was the story of the Nauglamir, and the murder of Thingol. The Nauglamir was of course derived from the earthier story of Freya's necklace in Norse legend. Throughout the Silmarillion's development the dwarves change from evil and greedy to something more ambiguous and ultimately as good or evil as humans.
What's interesting (and explored a little in Rateliff's History of the Hobbit is that the geography of the Hobbit is an adaptation of the geography of Beleriand. Thingol and the Elven King were originally the same; the Taur nu Fuin ("forest under shadow") was the original of Mirkwood; the tower of the Necromancer in Wilderland's forest was originally the tower of Sauron in Taur nu Fuin (Tol in Gaurhoth). (I think Himring might be identified with the Lonely Mountain, originally, but I have no evidence). The fact that Wilderland borrowed so heavily from the Silmarillion's geography, yet contradicted it, helped to create the LotR. It seems that the Necromancer and Sauron were always the same.In any case, the dwarves of Tolkien have always been laid low by greed. It's European tradition. By the time he wrote LotR, it was more philosophically important to dwell on real human greed (hence Boromir) rather than on dwarves as symbols of greed. Gimli never seems particularly greedy, at least to me, hence the exception becomes the rule in gaming...
|
Contributor
|
OTOH, after the battle and all, they do give Bilbo his share and IIRC spread a good deal of gold around besides. Not quite "will murder for a copper". It may have had more to do with dragon-sickness than with greedy dwarves.Yes, but I suggest you reread what I wrote. :-) The rings of power concept didn't exist when Tolkien wrote The Hobbit -- he made the dwarves plenty greedy and gold-obsessed on their own. Later, after he began work on The Lord of the Rings, he edited and republished The Hobbit with the One Ring retconned in. The seven dwarf rings aren't mentioned, and in fact didn't exist conceptually when Tolkien first created his dwarves.I think he is referring to the dwarf ring of power owned by Thorin ancestor.
The "dragon-sickness" and the dwarves' focus on their gold was all there in the first edition of The Hobbit, before Tolkien retconned and republished it to make Bilbo's magic invisibility ring into the One Ring. Heck, in the first edition, Gollum is upset that he can't find his ring not because he's possessive of it, but because he wants to abide by the rules of the riddle contest and give it to Bilbo as his prize, making Gollum less greedy than Tolkien's dwarves were from Day ONne. :-)
Well, that's keeping their word. Also important to dwarves... Plus they had a hard lesson in what happens when you don't share in the Battle of Five Armies. Bilbo helped out a little by how he handled the Arkenstone. I don't think they would have broken their contract with Bilbo, but they certainly were willing to turn aside Bard's rightful claim to a small portion.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
the tower of the Necromancer in Wilderland's forest was originally the tower of Sauron in Taur nu Fuin (Tol in Gaurhoth).
I remember reading somewhere years ago that 'the Necromancer' in the Hobbit was the same figure that later evolved into Sauron, in the trilogy, which is quite the 'power creep.'
"Wait, the nigh all-powerful protagonist of these three books is the same schmuck who got his butt kicked in a single sentence off-panel by Gandalf and the 'council of white wizards?' Guess he took a level in badass in between books!"
|
|
When Blizzard gave it's egyptian expy Uldum treatment, it was more like Indiana Jones meets the legacy of Marvel's Space Gods, with Brann Bronzebeard filling in for the Sean Connery role, with the pyramids hosting ancient Titan artifacts.
Uldum was a great zone. Very Indiana-Jones-ish, down to the goblin 'nazi explorers.' I loved it!
On the other hand, Stygia, the 'fantasy Egypt' of the Age of Conan MMO, was deadly dull. As someone who bought the game to play a Tempest of Set (which would obviously spend a fair amount of time in Stygia), I was displeased.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mostly, I just took it as, "Hey, humans can't do squat without alien help." rather than "<Race that is different from us> obviously can't do squat without alien help."
Honestly, I find this attitude almost as offensive. It seems to be a very popular fallacy to assume that people who used simpler technology were somehow not as "smart" as modern day human beings. Instead of taking ancient marvels of engineering as evidence to the contrary, people are willing the jump the ludicrous conclusion that some kind of super-advanced aliens came down and built a bunch of stuff (out of locally available materials and seemingly using locally available tools), before leaving without a trace.
Why is it so hard to believe that people in the past were every bit as smart as we are today? That every generation has had its Aristotles and its Einsteins... and its Imhoteps, for that matter? Frankly, people living in the distant past had a lot of time on their hands, and a lot less options as to what to do with it; and if you need proof that really bored people can accomplish amazing things to keep themselves busy, take a look at... well... most of the Internet, really. :p
I don't actually believe that, just to throw that out there. :)
However, please note, that I am not claiming that modern humans are more "smart" or "intelligent" than ancient humans (though evolutionary thought* might disagree), but rather that we're the result of everything that's gone before.
Look at it this way: how long did it take us (humanity) to come up with a functional house computer? At the very least 6,000 years... but mostly that's because we needed an infrastructure to do so. On the other hand, within the few decades since computers became a 'thing' we're now walking with things in the palm of our hands that are more powerful than the first computers the size of rooms. The very nature of our life has been revolutionized by this one concept, and it has done so exceedingly rapidly. The internet is a global tool that requires computers (and their required electrical infrastructure, which requires a certain manufacture infrastructure, which requires etc) to run.
Our infrastructures took a long, long time to get up and running because... well... it just did. Famine, war, plague, bad luck, dumb rulers, dumb people, all sorts of things just kept hitting the big 'ol "reset" button on any technological progress we might have made.
But where we are now is standing on the backs of giants. We do the remarkable things we can now rather exclusively because of the stuff that was handed to us.
And that particular view is just applying a slightly different spin on the same thing: humans were capable of reaching the marvelous 'heights' they were because they were handed stuff to work with in the first place. It doesn't matter where that step came from, the step had to be there for them to get higher.
Again, I'm not saying it's the "correct" interpretation, but there's certainly no reason to make it out to be "modern v. ancient". It's more along the lines of saying "humanity is what it is" (though the definitions of what it is, understandably, vary between people).
EDIT: "Standing on the shoulders of giants" indeed. It doesn't matter the era or the people - the idea, at least, is that we're all where we are simply because someone else helped us get here.
* At some point, evolutionary thought demands that we are actually more intelligent (in many ways) than our ancestors.** It just depends on how far back you go (and we may be less intelligent than some ancestors). As someone who's not an evolutionist myself, however, I don't ascribe to this theory. But it's a thing that's there, nonetheless.
** Similarly, at some point, evolutionary thought demands that our ancestors aren't "human", either. There's evidence that even relatively recent sets of ancestors of all ethnic groups have undergone (comparatively) 'substantial' (micro)-mutation... so, you know, you've got to draw the line somewhere. That 'somewhere' is mostly arbitrary, though (the whole "mitochondrial eve" notwithstanding). In Pathfinder logic, there are races that are just inherently more intelligent and/or more wise (and more charismatic/anything else) than others. That's not 'prejudice' as it exists in our modern world, and thus, to a certain extent, we need to sidestep certain preconceived real-world notions when dealing with said creatures.
Actually evolutionary thought makes no suggestions or anything that Humans (Homo sapiens) today are "smarter" than humans 6,000 (or 10,000, or 50,000) years ago.
Old thin pencil-mustachioed British dude, "I say. These pyramids are truly a marvel of engineering. Even I am at a loss to say how they were constructed!"
Old heavyset mutton-chopped British dude, "Harrumph! Surely these coolie savages, or their animal-headed-god-worshipping darkie ancestors, couldn't have built them. All *our* embarassing pagan savage ancestors built was Stonehenge..."
Old thin pencil-mustachioed British dude, "Obviously, they had alien help. White alien help, at that, old boy!"
Old heavyset mutton-chopped British dude, "Right-o! The indisputable cutting-keen logic of Occam's razor! Intervention by extraterrestrial intelligences would be the simplest and most elegant solution to the existentially distressing notion that some primitives once built something more impressive than we ever did!"
Piltdown man, dude, Piltdown man.
|
|
I don't disagree, actually. However, despite the seeming absurdity of this statement, it's a lot easier to build a pyramid than a personal computer. A PC may not be as big, but its incredibly complex, and requires whole industries to already exist that produce the kind of components you need to put such a complex machine together. Building a pyramid or a henge "just" requires you to cut and move rocks. It might require a fairly advanced understanding of the mathematics of engineering, but nothing that human beings aren't capable of working out longhand.
As for "evolutionary thought," one must understand that the human species only started building megalithic structures somewhere in the neighborhood of, at most, 10,000 years ago. Heck, archaeological evidence of "behavioral modernity" (art, evidence of ritual or religious practices, a proliferation of different tool types and styles) only appeared about 50,000 years ago. The oldest anatomically modern human remains are around 200,000 years old.
For comparison, the first stone tools found to date appear about 2.6 million years ago in association with Australopithicus ghari, while the first major refinement of that tool set didn't appear until about 1 million years later in the hands of Homo erectus, and the first evidence of the controlled use of fire doesn't appear until another million years after that. As you can see, 200,000 years isn't a very long time at all in an evolutionary sense, and 10,000 years is, of course, another order of magnitude shorter. While evolutionary forces have continued to act on our gene pool and will continue to do so in the future, they simply haven't had enough time to make us a whole lot different than our ancestors living at the dawn of the Neolithic Revolution.
Edit: Ack! I've been ninja'd... still, hopefully these numbers give some perspective on the issue. Our distant ancestors certainly couldn't do all the things we can do today in terms of technological and social complexity, but the people who built the pyramids were actually our *very recent* ancestors.
|
|
Well, not all megalithic structures are as precisely cut and fitted as you suggest, especially not the ones they were making 10,000 years ago, but you do make a valid point. Sometimes these things aren't as difficult to put together as they look at first glance, however. I seem to recall, for example, that when some researchers went to Easter Island to try and figure out how the famous Moai had been put in place, they found that the statues had actually been cut in a way that made them relatively easy to move by sort of rocking them back and forth along their curved backsides.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Screw those guys. We're awesome, and our heritage is awesome, and we take what they gave us and are going to make something awesome, no matter what they say. Their time is done: we may be using our heritage and proud of it, but we're not insane cultists of evil beyond the stars. We take all the good from what we were given and throw out all the bad."
I could get behind that to a point, but really I just can't get past the notion of every aspect of Osirion and Ancient Egypt's shared culture having Nyralathotep DNA.
Diff'rent strokes in the end, I guess. :) Different thresholds for "how much is too much" for certain themes and all that.
I did just realize something that makes me feel a lot better about Osirion/PF's-Ancient-Egypt-On-PF-Earth though, and I'm kicking myself for not realizing it sooner:
Which goddess in the Pathfinderverse is associated with perhaps the most iconic symbol from Ancient Egypt?
:D
(I have to admit, I've wanted artwork of Ancient Egypt-styled angels/celestials for a long time)
|
|
It's not just cutting and moving rocks. It's cutting and moving huge rocks that no one in the last thousand years would have even tried to move by hand. And cutting them to great precision, so they fit without mortar. It's not something so trivial, that you'd have to think people in the past were stupid not to have been able to do.
On a planetary scale there has been almost always someone moving and cutting those bit rocks and moving them with human or animal powered tools. Simply during the middle ages it wasn't done in Europe.
Most of the Great Wall of China was build in the 14th century, the Moai were made between 1250 and 1500, Chicen Itza was mostly built between the IX and XII century.
Which goddess in the Pathfinderverse is associated with perhaps the most iconic symbol from Ancient Egypt?
Sarenrae? Her symbol is similar to a hank.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think you meant the ankh, Diego.
But thanks for making me imagine the face of Hank Hill on some Cleric's Holy Symbol. XD
Hahahah! That's... hilarious (and, I'm betting, auto-correct at work)!
(For the record, though slightly less hilarious, I was envisioning a handkerchief.)
Bear in mind that when a lot of the crazy ideas about the megalithic structures were first popular, it wasn't just that we thought they were too dumb to know how to build them, it's that we couldn't figure out how they did it. People in the Middle Ages didn't know how to do it. People more recently didn't see how it could have been done without modern equipment.
It's not just cutting and moving rocks. It's cutting and moving huge rocks that no one in the last thousand years would have even tried to move by hand. And cutting them to great precision, so they fit without mortar. It's not something so trivial, that you'd have to think people in the past were stupid not to have been able to do.
This was more or less the point I was dancing around.
I actually agree... however, as there was no qualifier on "ancient people", I thought I'd mention.
Further, our concepts of evolutionary thought, how it works, how long we've been around, etc have changed as well. A large number of clocks have seemed to be pushing human dates back ever-earlier, and we've found ever-earlier evidences of humanity.
(In fact, from what I've seen, read, and understand, our brains haven't even caught up with our rapid advances in tech, yet. We're kind of slow on the uptake, here.)
My point was simply this: we owe all of what we have to those who have come before, directly or indirectly. We can't claim superiority (or direct inferiority). We can only claim to be human.
In Pathfinder... there is the ability to claim superiority or inferiority, and it's kind of written into the rules and due directly to alien meddling. But by that point, you're talking about things far beyond the scope of our own world. :)
Saying that primitive man wasn't as smart as us is a fallacy born from our perceptions.
Its not that they built stuff back then that we, ourselves would have trouble doing today, its that they DID do it with extremely primitive technology, and STILL manged to do them.
Could we build a pyramid? Sure. Just bring in some cranes, bulldozers, etc. A few engineers and some highly sophisticated surveying equipment, some orbital geological data to test the strata for possible foundation failure, etc, etc. Then we start building, with thousands of highly-payed professionals, and lots of unions involved. The project has cost overruns in the billions, and it takes twice as long to complete as planned. Then when it is almost finished we find out some contractor cheated and bribed an inspector, and we have low-grade concrete. The project gets scrubbed, we spend another billion taking it all down, and no-one discusses it ever again.
Yay! for modern man. Aren't we so friggin' clever? Much smarter then those 'ignorant savages' who built such things with a rock and a stick. They were just big dummy-heads!
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I thought this thread was going to be about the stereotypes held by the inhabitants of Golarion, like:
All kobolds are cowardly
All goblins are stupid little freaks
All humans are delicious (that's a steretype held by goblins and kobolds)
Oh well...
Well, there are plenty of those, too. Let me see...
Kelishites are backstabbing warmongers and shifty traders.
Taldans are delusional, arrogant fops.
Chelaxians are like Taldans, but untrustworthy and evil to boot.
Nidalese are basically Chelaxians who are into hard core BDSM. Well... more into hard core BDSM, anyway.
Andorens are obnoxious idealists and meddlers.
Varisians are ignorant, superstitious con men and thieves.
Shoanti are violent brutes and savages.
Kellids are... um... also violent brutes and savages.
Ulfen are violent brutes and savages with boats. They smell bad, too, but at least they understand the value of a gold piece.
Garundi are traditionalists living in the past, anachronisms in the modern world who are obsessed with old ruins and death.
Mwangi are violent brutes and savages, but less well armed than Kellids or Ulfen.
Tians are obsessed with complex codes of honor and exotic aesthetic traditions. They come bearing wonderful trade goods, but they're easily offended and difficult to deal with.
Vudrans are decadent and mystical, and are mostly genie-conjuring wizards, acrobatic martial artists, or priests to one of their thousand deities.
...I think that more or less covers the in-setting stereotypes of the various human ethnicities in the Inner sea... let me know if I missed any big ones.