Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
Voting is open
This whole conversation started because you laid out a certain possible outcome and discussed its implications. In that discussion, you considered only the effects of that scenario on Mathilde's reputation. I just felt the need to also add the effects on Abelhelm's reputation. It's fair to not care about that, or to think it's not our responsibility, but I don't think it's some complicated second order effect: if it is believed two people had a relationship, the immediate people implicated are those two people.
You seem to forget that we are talking to a colleague not a hostile interregator. Hell we tell about our grief Stark will probably feel obligated to defend that point against anybody that would try to smear Mathilde and Abel out of courtesy. We go with other options and people try to smear Abel then Starke won't have a reason to act.

He is here asking about how he should defend our reputation because we are on the same side and he trust us. I would like to extend trust back and say Grief.

Or Skaven but that is just pure fun.
 
You seem to forget that we are talking to a colleague not a hostile interregator. Hell we tell about our grief Stark will probably feel obligated to defend that point against anybody that would try to smear Mathilde and Abel out of courtesy. We go with other options and people try to smear Abel then Starke won't have a reason to act.
Again, DragonParadox was talking about a worst case scenario where people do use this to say Mathilde and Abel were romantically involved. I agree that it's not a likely outcome and I said as much, all I was saying was that if it does happen then the effects on Abel's reputation should be considered.
 
Again, DragonParadox was talking about a worst case scenario where people do use this to say Mathilde and Abel were romantically involved. I agree that it's not a likely outcome and I said as much, all I was saying was that if it does happen then the effects on Abel's reputation should be considered.
If it happens it won't be because we said to Starke. I don't think he is a rumer monger for one. My point is if there is such rumour already floating about, us talking to Starke now means Starke will feel obligated to defend it.

So if you are concerned about Abels reputation already Grief is way to go. If you don't think Abel have such rumours already it won't start here either way.
 
If it happens it won't be because we said to Starke. I don't think he is a rumer monger for one. My point is if there is such rumour already floating about, us talking to Starke now means Starke will feel obligated to defend it.

So if you are concerned about Abels reputation already Grief is way to go. If you don't think Abel have such rumours already it won't start here either way.
Look, I was responding to a post that talked about the possible consequences of rumors regarding Mathilde and Abelhelm's relationship. The post didn't bring up the effects on Abel's reputation, so I brought that up. I said that if you are going to talk about those rumors, you should also mention Abel. That's it, that's all I was saying. I wasn't saying that such a rumor is likely, or that it is a likely result of voting Grief - I actually said the opposite.
 
So I wanted to make an effortpost about Kindreds and the worldbuilding that goes behind them and a lot of the neat things I liked about 6th Edition Wood Elves going into them, and how that might affect the worldbuilding of the Eonir. Even if they are a different culture and society, they still have kindreds, and having examples of other kindreds to compare to can give an idea of what a Kindred looks like.

But then I realised that that wasn't necessary because the wiki already did my job for me, and it's pretty solid. Fully sourced, accurate, concise and uses sources with a decent level of canonicity to the quest. I recommend you guys check it out if you're interested in Kindreds.

I'll be honest and say that I don't think Boney should make custom Kindreds for the Eonir even if it would make sense since they're a different culture. It's a lot of work for little gain. I wouldn't mind if the Asrai Kindreds were ported over to Eonir with some changes here and there (for example, not having the Wild Rider Kindred because that's more of an Orion thing, and possibly replacing it with an Asuryan Kindred that uses some sort of transformation of the Asur rune to represent them). Or maybe we never really get a focus on Kindreds. Anyways, this is just food for thought.
 
Last edited:
This has probably been discussed, but i wonder if this was actually an attempted attack on us, (I preemptively blame Marienburg).

It's been years, but someone actively looking to sabotage our reputation probably had a hard time getting anything out of the Karak, so that leaves our old contacts in Stirland.
 
Adhoc vote count started by Night_stalker on Dec 14, 2021 at 12:22 PM, finished with 484 posts and 152 votes.
 
[X] Skaven

It's not even wrong, the Thread was definitely planning in that direction at the time. Mathilde wasn't though, I don't think.
 
A lovely update.
Something I think is important for writers to keep in mind with writing in historical and fantasy settings is that people with all of these 'modern' diagnoses still existed, they just didn't have any sort of help in dealing with them and had to figure out their own ways to interface with a society that wasn't built for them.
I agree with the spirit of this statement, but I think it's also worth bearing in mind that modern peoples living in modern cities are in a, from the perspective of evolutionary psychology, totally alien environment. You have no instinctual priming on how to cope with a crush of people so far in excess of what humans are actually wired for (see: Dunbar's number). From a less psychological perspective, it's fundamentally the same mechanism with rising cancer rates; it's not just a matter of more accurate diagnoses and longer lifespans (though it is that, too), it's the presence of potentially harmful, artificial carcinogens and radionuclides which mammals have undergone essentially zero selective pressure to adapt features which allow them to safely filter them out (See: lead crime hypothesis). I could ramble for a long time on the nitty gritty, but my point is that it's very likely that as human society has moved further and further away from the environment which ancient humans existed in, and were shaped by, that atypicalities of both the mind and body will become more common, at least barring some kind of treatment. Though, given the abundance of uh, easily accessible trauma in the Empire, things probably more than balance out.
 
A lovely update.

I agree with the spirit of this statement, but I think it's also worth bearing in mind that modern peoples living in modern cities are in a, from the perspective of evolutionary psychology, totally alien environment. You have no instinctual priming on how to cope with a crush of people so far in excess of what humans are actually wired for (see: Dunbar's number). From a less psychological perspective, it's fundamentally the same mechanism with rising cancer rates; it's not just a matter of more accurate diagnoses and longer lifespans (though it is that, too), it's the presence of potentially harmful, artificial carcinogens and radionuclides which mammals have undergone essentially zero selective pressure to adapt features which allow them to safely filter them out (See: lead crime hypothesis). I could ramble for a long time on the nitty gritty, but my point is that it's very likely that as human society has moved further and further away from the environment which ancient humans existed in, and were shaped by, that atypicalities of both the mind and body will become more common, at least barring some kind of treatment. Though, given the abundance of uh, easily accessible trauma in the Empire, things probably more than balance out.

Well, sure, but evolutionary pressure over the mere 10,000 years or so we've had cities isn't enough to drive selection really- any changes in humans we've seen since then are almost certainly driven by sexual preferences rather than elimination of the less fit. Means there's no consistent impetus behind the stuff evopsych tries to explain. (Poorly, IMHO.)

Goblins are really stupid, but they do come up with a good idea every now and then. 4 dwarf sized gronties carrying a platform is about as impractical a mount you can bring into combat.

It occurred to me in a kinda weird dream last night that this is functionally the same as a spider: eight legs and a central platform (thorax) to work from. Better, I suppose, because the legs are modular and can independently fight back.
 
Well, sure, but evolutionary pressure over the mere 10,000 years or so we've had cities isn't enough to drive selection really- any changes in humans we've seen since then are almost certainly driven by sexual preferences rather than elimination of the less fit. Means there's no consistent impetus behind the stuff evopsych tries to explain. (Poorly, IMHO.)
I mean, that's my point.

Cities haven't meaningfully driven evolution, but humans are equipped to deal with very different pressures than those that cities and modern life in general exert, and so problems often arise when the people living in them are exposed to stressors that they don't have any instinctual priming on how to deal with.
 
Well, sure, but evolutionary pressure over the mere 10,000 years or so we've had cities isn't enough to drive selection really- any changes in humans we've seen since then are almost certainly driven by sexual preferences rather than elimination of the less fit. Means there's no consistent impetus behind the stuff evopsych tries to explain. (Poorly, IMHO.)
I think you misunderstood. The point of the post is that it's been too short for evolutionary adaptation to cities. But that means that cities and modern life in general is something we're not adapted to. This means that modern life causes problems we where either issues aren't handled because they didn't occur before (problems because of too much sitting, for example) or even turns beneficial adaptions into problems (people getting extremely fat). And it's reasonable, though harder to prove, that the same goes for mental problems. I think it's pretty widely acknowledged that Facebook is bad for people, as an example. Or the way mechanisms for finding consensus can turn into echo chambers when you're not in a small group where you can't avoid the other members who have a different view.

I'm sceptical of evopsych explanations, because evolution doesn't tell stories, and there's a large random and arbitrary component. But I fully believe that evolution shapes our psychology, just in sufficently complicated ways that it's very hard to nail down explanations for anything more complicated than "hunger kills you so we're compelled to find food".
 
Last edited:
It occurred to me in a kinda weird dream last night that this is functionally the same as a spider: eight legs and a central platform (thorax) to work from. Better, I suppose, because the legs are modular and can independently fight back.
Wrong thread, snorri is one over. Also if it's good enough for thorek it's good enough for snorri.
 
A lovely update.

I agree with the spirit of this statement, but I think it's also worth bearing in mind that modern peoples living in modern cities are in a, from the perspective of evolutionary psychology, totally alien environment. You have no instinctual priming on how to cope with a crush of people so far in excess of what humans are actually wired for (see: Dunbar's number). From a less psychological perspective, it's fundamentally the same mechanism with rising cancer rates; it's not just a matter of more accurate diagnoses and longer lifespans (though it is that, too), it's the presence of potentially harmful, artificial carcinogens and radionuclides which mammals have undergone essentially zero selective pressure to adapt features which allow them to safely filter them out (See: lead crime hypothesis). I could ramble for a long time on the nitty gritty, but my point is that it's very likely that as human society has moved further and further away from the environment which ancient humans existed in, and were shaped by, that atypicalities of both the mind and body will become more common, at least barring some kind of treatment. Though, given the abundance of uh, easily accessible trauma in the Empire, things probably more than balance out.

Yeah I think I remember reading something about this specifically for Autism. It's went something like while living as a Medieval peasant would've sucked, it doesnt necessarily suck more for Autistic people than non-Autists/theyd be equal in the hazards of peasant life. A lot of triggers, such as bright lights, too much noise from people, certain smells, etc etc - - just wouldnt exist back then. And a lot of typical, repetative farm tasks--churning butter all day as an example--would be pretty mentally satisfying for a bunch of autistic people.

Though in this specific case, Elrisse is in one of the most metropolitan and thus crowded areas around, and who knows how all the ambient magical fuckery about Altdorf (see Boney's comments re no one being able to map the streets) would affect anyone with processing issues. Huh. Now I'm thinking about Boney's world building bit about Ghur encouraging people to seek out nature more. It's reads like it encourages people with issues that make city life (crowds, activity, etc) difficult to find something more suited for their own natures.
 
This has probably been discussed, but i wonder if this was actually an attempted attack on us, (I preemptively blame Marienburg).

It's been years, but someone actively looking to sabotage our reputation probably had a hard time getting anything out of the Karak, so that leaves our old contacts in Stirland.
"Mathilde Weber! I am a Director of Marienburg, and I am your first evil ex-nemesis!"

"I'm pretty sure that's Wizard Chic actually."

"You will pay for your insolence!"
 
"Mathilde Weber! I am a Director of Marienburg, and I am your first evil ex-nemesis!"

"I'm pretty sure that's Wizard Chic actually."

"You will pay for your insolence!"
... The idea that we have a nemesis in Marienburg which we never even noticed feels hilarious to me.

God, thinking about it. We might actually have a nemesis in Marienburg but the hochlander is just blocking all their shenangins and hasn't found it important enough to tell us.
And so we show up in Marienburg for something and find some trade prince or something blocking our path and going "I knew you would come for me personally! But I will never give up! YOU HEAR ME?! NEEEEEEVVEEEEEER!"
and Mathilde is like... "who are you?"
 
Voting is open
Back
Top