In all the time I've been playing, this is the first time I've heard that second part, and it makes the first make more sense. And coincides along the lines of things I've said (ie, "Yes, if there are no herbs growing technically a few spots will finally start sprouting from a single one after awhile ... that's not enough to be a practicing herbalist, though, so you really have to take care of them, guard and replant.")

Or, in the less-nice version: "Yes, sure ... you can harvest all the herbs around to nothing, but once you do don't expect to be harvesting any more. Oh, you needed that antidote to stop from dying? Too bad we didn't have any of the herbs needed to make it because you were so focused on getting what you wanted at the time instead of cultivating for the future. "



I'm sure the statement wasn't meant to be applicable only to herbs, either, but that's a decent enough focus to be concerned with.

Herbs is what started it with Auseklis, actually. There was a whole uproar about overharvesting, if I recall, and Auseklis smacked it down.

And the Soulless being part of nature is not subjective. Dynara and Magnora were nature. They were creation and destruction. Dynara created, Magnora destroyed behind her. The Soulless were created, by Dynara, but were essentially embodiments of destruction, where as the Star Gods were the embodiment of creation.. and they did create, but broke the natural cycle when they splintered and when the mortal races locked the Soulless away.

Creation and Destruction, Life and Death, is as natural as you can get. To say that is subjective is.. well.. completely ignorant.

As for the fact that squirrels dominate and destroy the environment..they dig holes into trees and devour seeds. How is that not bending their environment to suit their needs? The destruction is not widescale, but its there. People just seem to think "Aww, its an animal, its a part of nature!" only, in the case of Lusternia, its not. The animals were created by the Elder Gods. The laptop I'm using right now is not considered "natural" because it was created. So, by the same logic, that squirrel isn't natural either in terms of Lusternian mythos. Only those things created by Dynara would be.

Oh, and as for the "if I plant a seed, would that make the tree not natural" bit, it depends, did you genetically engineer the seed to grow bigger and stronger than everything around it using methods other than selective breeding? If so, then no, that tree would not be natural.

The fae may be the spirits of nature, but they are not nature itself. They are the result of Elder God tinkering. And yes, if the fae are a part of nature, then them helping create something unnatural would clearly demonstrate that nature can change and adapt.. oh wait...nature is supposed to do that, isn't it?

It is subjective and is dependent on your definition of nature.



You'll note that I said the Soulless were not natural. Nowhere did I say that creation and destruction were not natural.



Again, wholly dependent on your definition of nature.

It could actually be argued that the Soulless are 100% natural... or EVERYTHING is unnatural.

They were made by the same force that made everything else, but they ate other creation due to having no soul.

This is actually exactly what I'm trying to point out. People are claiming certain things are factual when in fact they are entirely subjective.

From the Cambridge dictionary:

Yes, and I can change the definition of Soulless to mean "people I don't like" but that doesn't make it so.

Anarias.. I've always had a lot of respect for you.. but you are being seriously anal. Everything is subjective to a degree, but that doesn't make it a rational cop-out.

By all rights, the law of gravity is subjective, because its not based on fact, because there are circumstances which do not act accordingly. But if we required solid unbeatable fact for everything, then we'd have nothing to stand upon.

Its subjective that something is poisonous even, because some people are resistant. Does that mean they can't claim it as a fact that the substance is toxic? I mean, hey, one out of a thousand people can shrug it off, so its clearly not a fact that it can kill. Its subjective, really. Let's just start handing it out to kids as part of a nutritional school lunch, since we anyone who says its bad for them is clearly just bias.

Your argument seriously reminds of the one a tobacco company might use. "Do cigarettes cause cancer? Well, your Honor, that's subjective really. Whose to say they wouldn't have gotten it anyway? Maybe its just that the people most likely to get cancer just happen to be the most likely to smoke, and that's why the figures show what they show. We'll never know unless we can go back in time and stop a smoker who we know dies of lung cancer from smoking and see if they still get it! But, since we can't do that.. and you ask me do cigarettes cause cancer? I have to say that its subjective."

Sounds idiotic, doesn't it?

I think people are confusing real-life philosophies on Nature with what Nature means in Lusternian terms. Just like the term 'angelic' has a much more specific meaning here than it does in reality, so too is our definition of Nature, by necessity, much more limited in scope.

In real life, EVERYTHING is Nature. We are, the metropolis is, the flood is, the farms are, etc. Anything that exists is a component in the natural world, and there's no creationist mumbo-jumbo (at least factually speaking) that needs to be incorporated into its meaning.

In Lusternia, I view 'Nature' (as referenced by the communes) to be that which is spiritually tied to the Ethereal plane. Regardless of who created it or where it started, Nature encompasses the living world of the physical plane that remains in tune with that deeper awareness and guiding force.

When you use the term 'natural', you seem to use the real-world meaning of 'not created by sentient beings', but in Lusternia all forces are personified by sentient beings, even Creation itself. So while the Great Trees may not be real-world natural, and even the communes themselves or the world as a whole is not real-world natural, they are a part of Nature.

To argue otherwise is to misuse semantics in order to obfuscate the inherent rationality of Serenwilde's purpose. We don't really care too much who created what, we do care what is in tune with Nature (ethereal/fae) and what is not. If we seek to destroy parts of the physical world which are in tune with Nature for our own selfish benefit, we become the ignorant savages that the cities supposedly to view us as.

This is not about squirrels digging a home in a tree, or sustaining themselves by predatory behaviour in a food chain, both of which are decay and death integrated into the natural cycle of life and necessary for many creatures' survival. This is about imposing a Druid's will upon the entire cycle so as to shift it forcibly from a balanced state, altering and suppressing what was there in order to facilitate some minor mortal conflict. Something completely abhorrent and antithetical to Hartstone's beliefs.

That is a problem, although as someone wiser reminded me, the forums tend to make you think that it is more widespread and serious than it really is.

So if you wish to define Nature as you see it in Lusternia differently, go ahead. But that won't change the fact that this message and the survey change introduces inconsistencies and flaws, and while I doubt anyone will seriously capitalize on it, it is there nonetheless.

I'll be honest, I had completely forgotten about this topic until just now and I've forgotten what the issue was.

What prompted me to post initially was Daganev's post wherein he elaborated on what healing the Basin meant. He claimed what he was saying was factual, it was not, I posted such and while doing so swept up other statements I found to be subjective too.

In any case, Fallen, I realise that the lines I quoted of yours are just nitpicking. I just didn't think I'd be taken so seriously.


Edit - And Elryn's post above mine pretty much sums up my beliefs too.

You talk about Ethereal and fae.. but only the forests have ethereal reflections. There is no ethereal reflection of the Oleanvir Valley, or the Inner Sea, or the Southern Mountains.

So how is it an inconsistency that those areas would rebel against such a flood of Ethereal presence?

If you raise an Ethereal forest, you are not destroying what's below. You are not even removing it temporarily. You still have to swim in forested water locations, and you can still bond to rock in a forested mountain location. So what's the issue? If you removed any of the natural aspects of the terrain, I could understand your bitching... but Druids don't do that--you only add characteristics that can be easily released.

You aren't supressing anything. You aren't destroying anything. You simply can't be happy unless you have something to bitch about. You do it constantly, Elryn. Seriously. Its a game. Take a step back and go get laid, or something. Christ

Sounds like you need to relax a little, and take a deep breath.

My concern remember is that the new change to survey coupled with the trueground message implies ethereal forest -does- now change the environment. I don't really like this, and I think it could be improved. You seem to have different opinions on what you think Ethereal/Nature is, and that's fine... but I'd rather the game messages be as interpretable as possible, which I don't think this one is.

Also, I think the term 'bitching' is such a cop out. I play this game because it is challenging mentally, and because I enjoy debating the philosophical and fantasy concepts both from a certain perspective (Elryn) and from my own. Yes, I could simply 'play the game' and bash/playact or whatever, paying little or no attention to any of the complexities of the wider RP environment, but that is what I really like about Lusternia.

It has enough depth and realism to allow these discussions on 'what is Nature', 'why do Hartstone exist', 'what is morally right and wrong to my people'. It is a tribute to Estarra and her team that these threads are possible and are argued as fervently as they are, and I think the balance between skill/mechanic suggestion/complaint/quote threads and RP suggestion/complaint/quote threads is a good indication of the quality and consistency of the game world.

I suggested what I believe is an improvement to the game experience, a very minor one at that, and tried to justify why I think that way. If you cannot look at the situation calmly and rationally (and I lapse out of both myself occassionally), then it is advisable to take a break from the forums and perhaps game for a while. Don't mistake passion for angry, flippant 'whining'.

Glomdoring and the Wyrd are also connected spiritually to the Ethereal plane. I'm not sure if Elryn recognizes them as natural or not, but your statement above means they are.

Also, Fallen has a point. Only forests are reflected on Ethereal (which I would love to see changed, actually. Add a body of water, add some valleys, etc.) and are therefore not natural by your definition.

Just because we cannot walk outside the mountain range that encircles the Basin does not mean there is no land there.

We can only travel to the Ethereal reflections of the two forest communes (note the other forest in the physical Basin is not on Ethereal either, and thus unnatural by your definition), but that does not mean that Ethereal is purely forest. I also tend to think of it more as a 'spirit world' than as a direct translation (as in every physical location has an ethereal location).

Forest just happens to be the medium through which we can most connect to the Ethereal magics, and thus it is what we travel through and connect to. There are fae spirits in the oceans and lakes, even though these superficially have no direct ethereal translation.

Actually, in etherglom there is water you have to swim through.

And there's water in Faethorn.

However, there's a water nymph in Serenwilde's lake, which has no Ethereal reflection, and there's no reflection of the Inner Sea for kelpies to manifest in.

(This is assuming you're taking the direct translation line, of course)

If they have ethereal reflections that we simply can't get to, connecting them with forest seems counter to what we should be doing, in that we're linking non-forest areas to the wrong element.

Until someone figures out a way to mesh it all together and not have something break, I'll just continue viewing our forests as tools we use to accomplish our goals, nothing more, nothing less.

has anyone thought that the reason for the forests to have Ethereal mirrors is because, they have a nexus? I mean, if you go by Aetherspace, Only Etherglom and Etherwilde have red stormy like environments(edit: Dimensional shifts) around their docks, if we compared them by the other Off-prime docks. It could mean that they were not there and they were suddenly created by, I dunno, us? Maybe the moment we use the Fae and create a Nexus, a mirror is created in Ethereal

Tsuki's always gone by the idea that the forests (and Ethereal, since the two are almost like reflections of each other. Faethorn is Faethorn, though) are pretty much the "heart" of all "Nature" ... and that Nature includes pretty much everything not mortal-made (forest, valleys, hills, beach, mountains, water, swamp, etc. Even Elemental, Cosmic, and Astral. Not urban or roads, though. ). Being the "heart" of Nature, the forests/Ethereal may be first to be affected/infected significantly by things, and the first to be cured. Both the infection and/or cure can spread out from the forest to the rest of Nature. Venturing into the outer planes is like opening the path for infections, or weakening the defenses by adding pathways through. Faethorn archways aren't as fully an "opening" as the nexuses are, another reason why mortal-made things aren't good. (I also found that part of the histories interesting ... Kethuru's Taint came down from Astral, Cosmic, Elemental ... Prime, spread, Gloriana, up to Ethereal. Didn't come down from Elemental through the archway into Faethorn. )

Going by that, Tsuki can view the Wyrd as a mutation of the Taint infection and still a concern. Gloms, if they agree with the general idea, can look at the Wyrd as a cure of the Taint infection.

Edit: Oh, and cities can look at it as it doesn't matter to make gates in defensive walls, if (to use a castle/fortress analogy) by doing so you'll access something you need to do something back at home (making gates through the walls to access a water supply to irrigate the vegetable garden back home). Communes think the small kitchen well is just fine for irrigation, even if the water has to be used sparingly and rationed.