Because nobody ever likes to use those they think are pathetic and weak?

Just about every quest in Magnagora revolves around making 'pathetic and weak' creatures or people have a use. Beggars, Merian Spectres, Furrikin farmers, dead dwarves, Sick puppies, caged animals.. etc.

Right, Rowena uses them, only by draining their essence from them for Mother Night, nothing more.

Isn't Rowenna more of the Druid and Brennan the Wiccan though?

No, Rowena is the Wiccan, Brennan the Druid. I think it is very difficult to stablish some sort of relation between Glomdoring and the fae. The only way I see this completely possible is if the fae were in fact were enslaved to do what the wiccans commanded. Or you could say there could be some evil fae willing to work for the wiccans, but this isn't good because Rowena seems to have killed all the fae she could get her hands on.

It could be something wierd were Rowena starts corrupting Fae.

Although Banshees are more loyal to Mother Night than they are to Mother Moon, at least in old Celtic/Gaelic legends.

Hmm.

And I can just as equally say that if you can't see on an OOC level how the Glomdoring is physical proof that the Taint corrupts and ruins nature, it is impossible for you to say your OOC feelings are not affecting your OOC judgements.

Shouting "biased!" and ignoring any logical argument might be easy, but it just isn't sound.

No matter how we feel about or want things to be oocly, we still need to justify our opinions via Lusternia's world, not despite it.

Edit: Note that there is an inherent personal judgement on your part in the first place to say that Glomdoring's 'nature' is perfectly fine and healthy, just as equally as there is an inherent personal judgement on my part by assuming that Glomdoring's 'nature' isn't perfectly fine and healthy. (Well, almost equally.) Sometimes we need to take a step back and look at why we take great pains to point out certain faults in others.

You should talk to Auseklis. Or Erion. Although you'ld not believe the latter, despite he's just repeating what Auseklis is telling him.

Glomdoring is just Nature using Taint for self-betterment, as is anything Tainted. It's a catalyst. Auseklis simply views it as a change, and Nature still flourishes. I don't see bushes getting up in the Serenwilde and attacking people, or the dirt itself wandering about. I don't even see the grass fighting back.

Sounds to me like the Glomdoring is, on a purely forest-forest basis, stronger.

Meh, Elryn has never followed Auseklis' teachings at all.

Pfft, Light-hugger.

Heh, nope. Just not interested in the wanderer/hunter perspective.

He knows a liiiiiiittle more of Nature than you. Just a little.

Ah, but more than Lisaera?

Yes.

He's infinitely wiser than Lisaera.

You see, his beard is sentient, and contains a second brain.

It's also detachable.

And water-proof.

And it has wheels, so if he gets lost, he can send it back to civilisation to get help.

Awesome.

I loved the initial way Auseklis directed our commune, especially making sure we didn't fall into the 'we protect ALL nature, EVEN WEEDS!!!' mentality... but then he sort of disappeared from Elryn's perspective. (I know he's been active in the background, of course.)

I've never had the slightest bit of interest in going to talk with him, though, especially after hearing how indifferent he was to flood/taint. Part of the problem is probably that I been turned off by all the similar wanderer/hunter/etc gods in other IRE games. There's certain basic achetypal gods that are pretty much equivalent in every incarnation, ie the hunter god, the kindly goddess, the perversely evil god, the chaotic, insanely evil goddess (who I suspect is already in Lusternia) and so on.

LISAERA!!

Um, no.

Psssh. You know you plan to ascend, Erion. You're just not aware Estarra's going to give you a shapely figure.

Oh dear god no. I couldn't take being a god. I'd be all, "bloody morts." *squish!* Or, I'd start setting people's equipment to randomly light the room on fire, a la hajamin. I'd just never turn it off.