PDA

View Full Version : Friendly Cannibals



Thajocoth
2013-02-13, 04:13 PM
Let's say there's an isolated town of human/elven/half-elven (mostly half-elven) cannibals. They see it as a duty to keep themselves in good condition for when their day comes, and they usually go without much coercion (due to a lifetime of conditioning). Their culture accepts cannibalism completely, so young ones learn that it is normal, and the people even strive to eventually be tasty.

What would be an optimal age to say that people get harvested at (on their nth birthday) for spawning enough of the next generation, but still being easily edible? What crops would they likely grow to compliment their choice of meat? To maintain a constant size, how big should the town be & how big should the average family be? What sorts of things might they do to keep themselves as tasty as they can for when their final birthday comes? What else might be culturally different?

How might they react to an adventuring party who discovers this town? The town hasn't seen anyone else in enough generations that other towns & cities have become myth & legend to them. They're not outright evil, so I wouldn't have them just attack the party. I'd have them try to be friendly, but I'm thinking that some of it could come off a bit creepy. I'm really bad at specifics though.

Should I start things off with a language barrier (because of all the isolation)? Maybe just give them a difficult to understand dialect of elfcommon (like a spanglish for elvish & common)?

What do you think?

Slipperychicken
2013-02-13, 04:31 PM
Town hides its dark secret from outsiders, who would surely level the town if they found out. They act like any other town in the area, acting kind and hospitable and wishing travelers well (outsiders bring coin to their humble village, after all).

Synovia
2013-02-13, 04:40 PM
Just a note, but internal cannibalism like this tends to lead to the same sort of things as inbreeding, mostly because of prion-based diseases.

As to ages and such, people are most fertile before 30 (and even moreso in poorer nutrition). As to eating quality, thats a tough one. The more muscley you are, the tougher the meat is going to be. They'd be better off limiting the activity of people they planned on eating.

hymer
2013-02-13, 04:45 PM
The 'best' time would be after they've died on their own. This has been done by real life cannibals.
Regardless, the tribe's meat will be a minor part of their whole diet. Each person will generally be able to eat as much meat as they're made of in their life, I'm guessing about half their body weight. Suppose you take people when they're forty for humans (women are increasingly unlikely to have any more kids after that), you basically get to eat one person every forty years, but spread out, of course. And this place having elves and half-elves, it'll be even less, as they likely have less meat on them, and certainly live a lot longer.
If they actually kill people off before they get very old, they will likely have a high focus on generation turnover, and they need great focus on education to make up for that loss.
Their agriculture won't be much affected by necessity, except that they will have a higher percentage of children in ther population - people can be very useful labour well after forty.
The culture might also suffer no dissent at all. A population willing to be killed for tradition (there's no real need for the food, as noted) must be highly traditional, or religious, or whatever you find to be the reason.

Thajocoth
2013-02-13, 04:49 PM
Town hides its dark secret from outsiders, who would surely level the town if they found out. They act like any other town in the area, acting kind and hospitable and wishing travelers well (outsiders bring coin to their humble village, after all).

I'm thinking though that they're cut off and can't imagine anyone frowning on their practice. Almost like an Orange-Blue morality type thing, where two sets of moralities just don't understand one another.


Just a note, but internal cannibalism like this tends to lead to the same sort of things as inbreeding, mostly because of prion-based diseases.

As to ages and such, people are most fertile before 30 (and even moreso in poorer nutrition). As to eating quality, thats a tough one. The more muscley you are, the tougher the meat is going to be. They'd be better off limiting the activity of people they planned on eating.

I'm thinking they wouldn't eat the brains (that's pretty much how you get Kuru, the human prion disease. It's possible to get it from elsewhere, but the probability drops drastically without the brain. Cutting out the area around the sciatic nerve as well decreases the probability to negligible, but still nonzero.)

Too muscley will be tougher, yes, but too much fat will be too bland. At least for humans. Elves could be different, who knows? So they wouldn't want to bulk up like bodybuilders, but they wouldn't want to be obese either, I don't think. Any more thoughts on this?

30 sounds like a decent enough age to me for humans. On their 30th birthday, they're harvested. Is there any reason that wouldn't be a good age to pick? They can get their reproduction done before that, and they're not old yet, so their meat is probably still decent, right?


The 'best' time would be after they've died on their own. This has been done by real life cannibals.
Regardless, the tribe's meat will be a minor part of their whole diet. Each person will generally be able to eat as much meat as they're made of in their life, I'm guessing about half their body weight. Suppose you take people when they're forty for humans (women are increasingly unlikely to have any more kids after that), you basically get to eat one person every forty years, but spread out, of course. And this place having elves and half-elves, it'll be even less, as they likely have less meat on them, and certainly live a lot longer.
If they actually kill people off before they get very old, they will likely have a high focus on generation turnover, and they need great focus on education to make up for that loss.
Their agriculture won't be much affected by necessity, except that they will have a higher percentage of children in ther population - people can be very useful labour well after forty.
The culture might also suffer no dissent at all. A population willing to be killed for tradition (there's no real need for the food, as noted) must be highly traditional, or religious, or whatever you find to be the reason.

40 works too... 30-40 all makes sense to me. Perhaps since they're mostly a little more elven than pure humans, go with 40. They should still be young enough to taste good, but have plenty of opportunity to reproduce.

Since there wouldn't be as many occasions, perhaps the cannibalism would occur as a sort of village-wide festival, celebrating that person's final birthday, with the closest to that person getting their first choice of cuts and anyone else able to take what's left after if anything. Clearly then, people would not get much meat. I guess I could add pigs as a meat supplement that's more common, with the cannibalism being a rare village-wide treat.

With a whole village though, these festivals would be pretty much daily and have multiple people on platters at each one... There would just be more mouths to feed than those people can feed, so perhaps dinner is always a community-wide festival like this. This results in a tighter knit community & decreased stress since they pretty much party for a few hours after each workday. Do you see any way this might effect other customs?

I'm going with a heavy sense of tradition. From birth to slaughter, it's all they know. Other ways are not known. As for education, they'll transfer useful skills, employ kids early, and have a few legends passed down orally. Actual education quality knowledge-wise would be poor. No wizards or clerics among them.

CoffeeIncluded
2013-02-13, 05:13 PM
But why would they do this? Come on, we all know that the PC's reaction is going to be to reduce this place to a charred smear on the ground. What's the motivation?

Kane0
2013-02-13, 05:13 PM
Sounds interesting.

Id be inclined to say no to the language barrier. Maybe a choppy common because they've been isolated for a while, but still understandable.

Have the PCs arrive at one of the birthdays. It would be a big celebration in the little village, and after the majority of the revelry has died down see if they notice that the birthday-ee has disappeared as the food gets prepared.

If the party noticed nobody is over a certain age or happen across the kitchens then simply let the villagers explain themselves as if nothing were wrong, and the confusion take over as the party is subsequently horrified.

Chances are the party will think the village has been cursed or possessed or something lol.

Edit: In a smaller village, there wouldn't be enough people to eat other people on a weekly basis. It would probably be a rare event, like once every 3-4 months. Lots of focus on children as well.

I wonder if they would have a graveyard?

Thajocoth
2013-02-13, 05:18 PM
But why would they do this? Come on, we all know that the PC's reaction is going to be to reduce this place to a charred smear on the ground. What's the motivation?

Their motivation is tasty half-elven meat. Perhaps long ago there was a reason the town's founders turned to cannibalism, but that information has been long forgotten by the townsfolk. That was forever ago to them, and after so many 40-year generations... Stuff just gets lost.

One thing I'm thinking is to have a small amount of orc trickets in circulation in the town, kinda hinting at something, but if you ask anyone, their response is "What's an orc?"


Sounds interesting.

Id be inclined to say no to the language barrier. Maybe a choppy common because they've been isolated for a while, but still understandable.

Have the PCs arrive at one of the birthdays. It would be a big celebration in the little village, and after the majority of the revelry has died down see if they notice that the birthday-ee has disappeared as the food gets prepared.

If the party noticed nobody is over a certain age or happen across the kitchens then simply let the villagers explain themselves as if nothing were wrong, and the confusion take over as the party is subsequently horrified.

Chances are the party will think the village has been cursed or possessed or something lol.

Having one such festival when they arrive is a given. I was considering whether or not to have the townsfolk decide to honor the arrival of new people (Such a novelty! They didn't even know there WERE other people!), that they grant them the honor of choosing their own cuts right after the meat's immediate family members, but I'm unsure if the shock value on that is too high for the average player or not. (It wouldn't be for me...)

CoffeeIncluded
2013-02-13, 05:29 PM
Having one such festival when they arrive is a given. I was considering whether or not to have the townsfolk decide to honor the arrival of new people (Such a novelty! They didn't even know there WERE other people!), that they grant them the honor of choosing their own cuts right after the meat's immediate family members, but I'm unsure if the shock value on that is too high for the average player or not. (It wouldn't be for me...)

Fused glass. Forget a charred smear on the ground, that requires much less fire.

Thajocoth
2013-02-13, 05:39 PM
Perhaps with a LOT of research, they could piece together what no one there knows: This group descended from the "livestock" of a small orc tribe. Stockholm Syndrome took hold of the group which made things easier for the orcs. After a few generations of this, a Paladin and a few of his friends came by, saw the setup, and wiped out the orcs. They showed the humans & elves who were left (and in shock of losing their masters), some basic farming, and went on their way. One of the ideals that they tried to instill on the group was that they are their own masters. They don't need the orcs anymore. They took this a bit more literally than expected, taking the role of the orcs, and mixing the resulting cannibalism with the basic farming they were taught. Over many generations, they just forgot about the orcs.


Fused glass. Forget a charred smear on the ground, that requires much less fire.

The townsfolk have no intention of harming the party or anyone else outside their own village. If there's any Good aligned party members, wouldn't their alignment prevent such a smiting, which would clearly be an Evil act?

If that's not clear, is it possible to make that distinction clearer?

Kane0
2013-02-13, 05:59 PM
One question though.

If the village is heavily tradition based and passes down everything orally, how did they forget about generations of servitude to orcs and freedom via paladin? It seems something very hard to forget, especially with verbal tradition.

CoffeeIncluded
2013-02-13, 06:02 PM
The townsfolk have no intention of harming the party or anyone else outside their own village. If there's any Good aligned party members, wouldn't their alignment prevent such a smiting, which would clearly be an Evil act?

If that's not clear, is it possible to make that distinction clearer?

Reason would only kick in about halfway through.


Perhaps with a LOT of research, they could piece together what no one there knows: This group descended from the "livestock" of a small orc tribe. Stockholm Syndrome took hold of the group which made things easier for the orcs. After a few generations of this, a Paladin and a few of his friends came by, saw the setup, and wiped out the orcs. They showed the humans & elves who were left (and in shock of losing their masters), some basic farming, and went on their way. One of the ideals that they tried to instill on the group was that they are their own masters. They don't need the orcs anymore. They took this a bit more literally than expected, taking the role of the orcs, and mixing the resulting cannibalism with the basic farming they were taught. Over many generations, they just forgot about the orcs.


One question though.

If the village is heavily tradition based and passes down everything orally, how did they forget about generations of servitude to orcs and freedom via paladin? It seems something very hard to forget, especially with verbal tradition.

This too.

Thajocoth
2013-02-13, 06:03 PM
One question though.

If the village is heavily tradition based and passes down everything orally, how did they forget about generations of servitude to orcs and freedom via paladin? It seems something very hard to forget, especially with verbal tradition.

Are you familiar with the "Telephone Game"? It stopped being history, became mythology, then legend, then just a story... And so much of it changed over time as to no longer really be the same story. There's probably a story almost loosely based on it still passed around. Maybe I'll figure out what that could be...

mrzomby
2013-02-13, 06:14 PM
Fused glass. Forget a charred smear on the ground, that requires much less fire.

YOU'RE KILLING EACH OTHER?! HOW EVIL, I AM GOING TO KILL YOU NOW SINCE I'M GOOD.


1 thing to consider is that people don't eat 100% of a body, do they go full survival and use what they can't eat, bury it, or have some other religious practice with it?

2 If people just get eaten when they die of old age(not really gonna work with elves) it is probably a little bit easier on the players, so consider that.


3 If humans and elves are co-existing in this town, there is probably some level of class differance. If people are eaten when they die from old age, elves may be an upper class, snootier and not afraid of dying, while if they are eaten at 30-40, the elves would be absurdly younger in comparison to the humans that are eaten and the humans may get a little edge over the elves as an upper class.

Tengu_temp
2013-02-13, 06:16 PM
The townsfolk have no intention of harming the party or anyone else outside their own village. If there's any Good aligned party members, wouldn't their alignment prevent such a smiting, which would clearly be an Evil act?

Good-aligned characters will most likely try to make the town abandon its cannibal ways. If you want the PCs to respect this tradition, do what hymer says and make the villagers only eat people who are already dead from other causes.

Thajocoth
2013-02-13, 06:25 PM
How does this sound for the current version of the passed down myth?

"Long ago, people wandered the world like animals. A very smart green man by the name of Mestur realized that some of these animals were smarter than others and brought our ancestors together. Mestur was our first chief, taught the people to farm and was the first to sacrifice himself, on his 40th birthday, when the community didn't have enough food. Today, we all make this sacrifice for our community, ensuring that the village continues to survive."

So, over time, they merged the orc tribe and the Paladin into one person, turned it into a sort of creation myth, and made what was originally brutal kidnappings into a friendly gathering. They also threw in traditions that didn't happen until later and modified the term "Master" into a name. This no longer resembles what actually happened. Most of the town believe it to all be metaphor at this point, but a few believe this myth.


YOU'RE KILLING EACH OTHER?! HOW EVIL, I AM GOING TO KILL YOU NOW SINCE I'M GOOD.


1 thing to consider is that people don't eat 100% of a body, do they go full survival and use what they can't eat, bury it, or have some other religious practice with it?

2 If people just get eaten when they die of old age(not really gonna work with elves) it is probably a little bit easier on the players, so consider that.


3 If humans and elves are co-existing in this town, there is probably some level of class differance. If people are eaten when they die from old age, elves may be an upper class, snootier and not afraid of dying, while if they are eaten at 30-40, the elves would be absurdly younger in comparison to the humans that are eaten and the humans may get a little edge over the elves as an upper class.

1 - Use what they can't eat, when possible. Anything they can neither use nor eat (which is very little) is discarded as trash.

2 - I understand that, but the meat would be pretty bad and mostly unusable. I don't want to do it that way.

3 - They were originally Elves & Humans, but so much time has passed, with so many generations, that a pure human or pure elf is an occasional genetic anomaly. I'm also going with 4e's aging, where elves age the same as humans up until about 20 years old, then seem to stop aging for a long time. If they all die at 40, this puts them on a pretty even level. They wouldn't even be aware at this point that people CAN die of old age.


Good-aligned characters will most likely try to make the town abandon its cannibal ways. If you want the PCs to respect this tradition, do what hymer says and make the villagers only eat people who are already dead from other causes.

Trying to convince them to abandon their traditions is fine. Killing them all was previously mentioned & is something I'd rather avoid if possible.

CoffeeIncluded
2013-02-13, 06:37 PM
I'm just saying that if they realize what they're eating mid-meal, it's entirely likely that the reaction is going to be something like OH GOD OH GOD BURN IT CLEANSING FIRE.

Daer
2013-02-13, 06:46 PM
i find just being tasty is quite bad reason.. What if they had some religious reason? That they actually think they are honoring the dead by eating them?
Like often it was believed that eating heart of strong beast would bring hunter strength, maybe people would think that eating strong warrior would give strength, eating old person would share deads wisdom and so on. Or to keep the spirit of dead near, from drifting away to abyss.

hamishspence
2013-02-13, 06:50 PM
i find just being tasty is quite bad reason.. What if they had some religious reason? That they actually think they are honoring the dead by eating them?

That was pretty much how the village in Anne Rice's Queen of the Damned worked- then they got invaded by upset Egyptians.

Kane0
2013-02-13, 07:00 PM
I'm just saying that if they realize what they're eating mid-meal, it's entirely likely that the reaction is going to be something like OH GOD OH GOD BURN IT CLEANSING FIRE.

My most recent character would literally just shrug his shoulders and continue eating, maybe even thanking them for the meal and praising their 'waste not want not' culture. And he isn't even evil yet :smallamused:

This is a game full of strange things. If presented with a reasonable argument I could go along with the idea.

Edit:


Like often it was believed that eating heart of strong beast would bring hunter strength, maybe people would think that eating strong warrior would give strength, eating old person would share deads wisdom and so on. Or to keep the spirit of dead near, from drifting away to abyss.
Maybe you would find this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=271119) useful? Spin it in a way that the dead sustain the living in more than one way, perhaps granting them the guidance they received by consuming their ancestors.

Chilingsworth
2013-02-13, 07:01 PM
I was going to point out that half-elves don't hit middle age until 62, and aren't adults until 20 years. But, those are the SRD figures.

Regardless, forty might be alittle young. They should be old enough that their children no longer need the parent. Or, you could have the village raise its children communally, not knowing who their birth parents are.

Calmar
2013-02-13, 07:07 PM
I agree with CoffeeIncluded. A community of 'friendly cannibals' would have as big a chance to engage peacefully with most Player Characters as a community of 'friendly pedophiles' would: about zero.

Thajocoth
2013-02-13, 07:12 PM
I'm just saying that if they realize what they're eating mid-meal, it's entirely likely that the reaction is going to be something like OH GOD OH GOD BURN IT CLEANSING FIRE.

You know how a turkey baked in the oven is displayed on a table? I'm thinking it should be made real obvious before they eat any, especially to avoid that. Odds are they'd try to make the display as pretty as possible too. Cannibal cooks might be looked up to in this society almost as much as the chief (none of which are exempt to the 40 year rule).


i find just being tasty is quite bad reason.. What if they had some religious reason? That they actually think they are honoring the dead by eating them?
Like often it was believed that eating heart of strong beast would bring hunter strength, maybe people would think that eating strong warrior would give strength, eating old person would share deads wisdom and so on. Or to keep the spirit of dead near, from drifting away to abyss.

They believe it to be the best way for them to contribute to their tribe. Out of a sense of duty, they want to make their contribution as good as possible, hence being tastier.


That was pretty much how the village in Anne Rice's Queen of the Damned worked- then they got invaded by upset Egyptians.

I haven't read it... I'll probably look into it.


My most recent character would literally just shrug his shoulders and continue eating, maybe even thanking them for the meal and praising their 'waste not want not' culture. And he isn't even evil yet :smallamused:

This is a game full of strange things. If presented with a reasonable argument I could go along with the idea.

Edit: Maybe you would find this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=271119) useful?

I'll look into it, thanks.


I was going to point out that half-elves don't hit middle age until 62, and aren't adults until 20 years. But, those are the SRD figures.

Regardless, forty might be alittle young. They should be old enough that their children no longer need the parent. Or, you could have the village raise its children communally, not knowing who their birth parents are.

I was thinking... Given the shorter lifespan & low education level, they would consider people as adults early (12; earlier if they demonstrate ability to do work, reproduce or provide some form of advancement to the community). The youngest children would be raised by their parents, and if their parents both hit 40 before the child hits 12, and no aunts, uncles or older siblings or cousins were willing & able to take them in, they'd go to a central center to finish being raised.


I agree with CoffeeIncluded. A community of 'friendly cannibals' would have as big a chance to engage peacefully with most Player Characters as a community of 'friendly pedophiles' would: about zero.

I suppose when two different moral codes see one another, one is likely to see the other as reprehensible, even if it's minding it's own business. It's unfortunate. I hope people can be better than that though.

Chilingsworth
2013-02-13, 07:30 PM
Out of curiosity, just how long has this place been in complete isolation? And how large was the original population? Too long (like, say long enough for them to forget major events in their history) and/or too few original members = major inbreeding problems.

Thajocoth
2013-02-13, 07:35 PM
Out of curiosity, just how long has this place been in complete isolation? And how large was the original population? Too long (like, say long enough for them to forget major events in their history) and/or too few original members = major inbreeding problems.

I'm thinking that there was a pretty large starting number. Not as many people in the village as today, but still enough to be a full village on their own. Combining this with the higher genetic differences between humans & elves, there should be enough genetics to circulate, and no one has had to pair up with their first cousin or closer to find a mate. It's been many many generations though...

Does that sound viable?

lsfreak
2013-02-13, 07:37 PM
Just as a numbers thing, if you're going to have this be a weekly occurrence, your "village" has to have a population of nearly 1600 people if they're killed at age 30 and the village isn't literally eating itself out of existence. As a daily occurrence with an age of forty, your "village" has skyrocketed to 15,000 and rivals some of the larger medieval cities.

Thajocoth
2013-02-13, 07:42 PM
Just as a numbers thing, if you're going to have this be a weekly occurrence, your "village" has to have a population of nearly 1600 people if they're killed at age 30 and the village isn't literally eating itself out of existence. As a daily occurrence with an age of forty, your "village" has skyrocketed to 15,000 and rivals some of the larger medieval cities.

Thanks. I'll think about this detail and how to make it fit well.

EDIT: What about this? The average couple has 5-6 children. Any adult can choose to volunteer early if they wish to. If someone cannot contribute to the village another way, they will almost always volunteer. This includes not finding a mate soon enough into adulthood. Some will volunteer when they're within a few years of 40 and/or to make a particular day's meal more special, such as volunteering on the day of a loved one's wedding, giving their family first choice and such. There's still an age upper limit, but most wind up volunteering early. The five-six kids per couple average would increase the population more, but this is balanced out by those who volunteer early, thusly having fewer or no children.

Would that work for the statistics?

Calmar
2013-02-13, 08:04 PM
I suppose when two different moral codes see one another, one is likely to see the other as reprehensible, even if it's minding it's own business. It's unfortunate. I hope people can be better than that though.

The problem I see with this scenario is that it's not so much a philosophical problem to solve, as it is merely a way to confront the players with something really disgusting.

To me these guys would need to be in a situation that forces them to live that way. They need some redeeming quality to counter the grossness of their culture. If they were facing the choice between cannibalism and an even worse fate, it would make them more interesting in my eyes.

Kaveman26
2013-02-13, 08:13 PM
I agree with CoffeeIncluded. A community of 'friendly cannibals' would have as big a chance to engage peacefully with most Player Characters as a community of 'friendly pedophiles' would: about zero.

Unless said Cannibalism implied benefits to the PC's like inheriting racial bonuses or known feats/skills...in which case the PC's would be travelling town to town carrying a menu of different racial bonuses they needed to consume.

My groups would nuke it from orbit. Consensus opinion would almost surely be "no matter the reasons...cannibalism removes your right to exist"

Thajocoth
2013-02-13, 08:14 PM
The problem I see with this scenario is that it's not so much a philosophical problem to solve, as it is merely a way to confront the players with something really disgusting.

To me these guys would need to be in a situation that forces them to live that way. They need some redeeming quality to counter the grossness of their culture. If they were facing the choice between cannibalism and an even worse fate, it would make them more interesting in my eyes.

I don't see it as gross. I actually see our tradition of burial as extremely wasteful; cremation moreso. I'm curious enough that I'd try (willing) human if legal and offered (most people are curious about this, right?), and I'd prefer that as much of my body is reused when I die as possible, even if that means cannibalism for some of it (I'm clearly an organ donor, but not all parts are reusable through organ donation). I do not see cannibalism as even remotely immoral. Murder is, and I understand the link people form in their heads between the two, but I don't link those together automatically. Therefore, I don't assume that all players will be unlike myself.

My goal here is to simply have an isolated town with a completely different culture and morality, and put it in their pathway between where they were and where they're going (let's say, a really really old ancient ruin, which hasn't been visited since a Paladin brought a few friends there and never returned.) They can react to the village however they want. Avoid it, destroy it, learn about it, make friends, participate, respectfully decline to participate, amaze them with magic (something the village doesn't know exists)...

I hope it can be more than a five second footnote before getting decimated, but if that's what they decide to do, then oh well. If they decide to be nice, but don't want the half-elf, there's always the pork option.

I'm using cannibalism as a base, because it's a morality I can understand clearly enough to DM. I know it's halfway towards a Blue-Orange moral system for some people, where they just can't wrap their heads around it, but I think it really works. (I say halfway because to be fully Blue-Orange, I'd have to be unable to explain or understand it, because I'm human.)

Chilingsworth
2013-02-13, 09:29 PM
I hope it can be more than a five second footnote before getting decimated, but if that's what they decide to do, then oh well. If they decide to be nice, but don't want the half-elf, there's always the pork option.

So, in this village pork is the "kosher" option, then? :smalltongue:

For what it's worth, I agree that cannibalism isn't nessicarily evil.

Oh, also: with the way you have things set up, even if they did eat nervous system tissue I wouldn't worry about prion diseases very much: They take decades to develop in humans. If anything, they would take even longer to develop in half-elves. So, if they're eaten at 40, there's a good chance infected individuals wont have symptoms yet.

Although, that also means that detection of prion infection would be all but impossible. So, it could be rampant in the population. This could be a problem for outsiders that partake of the meat. Then again, such individuals will be adventurers, who, if anything, have even shorter average lifespans. :smallbiggrin:

Kane0
2013-02-13, 09:54 PM
I'm curious enough that I'd try (willing) human if legal and offered (most people are curious about this, right?), and I'd prefer that as much of my body is reused when I die as possible, even if that means cannibalism for some of it (I'm clearly an organ donor, but not all parts are reusable through organ donation). I do not see cannibalism as even remotely immoral.


*Reads post, initially WTF but then thinks and agrees*
... Oh my god. I could be a cannibal!

Seriously though, I'm from australia and people here have conflicting views on eating Kangaroos, which is nothing to say about the whole Halal thing. if you are confident that your group will not react really badly to the idea OOC, throw it at them head first.

Also: Maybe have the village the only safe point in the local area? So the party would be exposed to the village more than normal if they can only shop and rest there.More chances for them to really take it in and deal with it.

Alejandro
2013-02-13, 10:13 PM
It just seems to me that, if the village is advanced enough to function completely self sufficient, with no outside contact, they'd eventually decide it was easier to just grow food and raise livestock, instead of killing each other.

awa
2013-02-13, 10:52 PM
there were some real world cultures that were quite advanced in many ways who practiced cannibalism. so don't assume technology will discourage cannibalism

Chilingsworth
2013-02-14, 12:27 AM
there were some real world cultures that were quite advanced in many ways who practiced cannibalism. so don't assume technology will discourage cannibalism

Maybe not, but isolation might discourage (or at least, hinder the development of) technology.

These people arose from a bunch of humanoid slaves/cattle that were freed, taught basic agriculture, then abandoned by their savior (who probably later died in that ruin the OP mentioned and so wasn't able to check up on them later.)

EDIT: You might want to repost your edited-in statistics question. I'm guessing few people saw it.

On another note, what method do they use to slaughter their meat? I know there's a spell in ghostwalk (either 0 or 1st level) that painlessly kills a willing creature. But if the villagers have no magic, they'd have to use less humane methods.

Thajocoth
2013-02-14, 01:26 AM
EDIT: You might want to repost your edited-in statistics question. I'm guessing few people saw it.

On another note, what method do they use to slaughter their meat? I know there's a spell in ghostwalk (either 0 or 1st level) that painlessly kills a willing creature. But if the villagers have no magic, they'd have to use less humane methods.

Knives, ropes, etc... If a particular method or killer is requested, by the one dying, that's what will occur, otherwise the cook will slit their throat.

They don't have magic, so they wouldn't know that spell even exists. Throat-slitting is pretty efficient, but I can think of reasons people might choose other methods.

If death occurs in a way that doesn't result in bleeding out (choking, hanging, etc...), then the cook will slit their throat after to drain their blood. It's common to want a friendly face doing the killing. A person's mate is the most common if they have a living mate.

Reposting the question:

What about this? The average couple has 5-6 children. Any adult can choose to volunteer early if they wish to. If someone cannot contribute to the village another way, they will almost always volunteer. This includes not finding a mate soon enough into adulthood. Some will volunteer when they're within a few years of 40 and/or to make a particular day's meal more special, such as volunteering on the day of a loved one's wedding, giving their family first choice and such. There's still an age upper limit, but most wind up volunteering early. The five-six kids per couple average would increase the population more, but this is balanced out by those who volunteer early, thusly having fewer or no children.

Would that work for the statistics?And what would the population have to be for that?

Surfnerd
2013-02-14, 01:43 AM
As a player I'd assume the villager were being tricked by demons or devils. I'd definitely be suspicious of every thing after finding it out. As I progressed through reading this thread, the community began to take on a stepford wives type angle in my mind. Everyones smiling and helping each other little half elven children playing in the streets, well manicured landscaping(due to their elven heritage) neat little cottages lining well kept gravel roads.....

All and all its very unsettling. But I'd assume there was some kind of hook here. Help them be free of their evil ways?

I guess to me eating human flesh is disturbing. I couldn't eat cat or dog or probably a cow if I developed a relationship with it in life.

Synovia
2013-02-14, 01:46 AM
It just seems to me that, if the village is advanced enough to function completely self sufficient, with no outside contact, they'd eventually decide it was easier to just grow food and raise livestock, instead of killing each other.

There are plenty of cultural things we do despite their being easier alternatives.

Eating meat, for example. Its much easier to grow vegetable crops, but some of us like to eat meat.

Malrone
2013-02-14, 03:39 AM
I agree that the village needs to hold some value to the players before the big reveal. It is mandatory the party attend one of the celebrations, but perhaps not at their first visit.

Instead, why not have the party find the village when it is in a time of need? The villagers can start cautious, but curious, as new things are exciting but the unknown can be frightening. (Any player race that isn't Human/Elf would get the most of this, leaning more one way than the other depending). Once you get the party to help them (locals might not understand the "reward" mentality if they are so duty prone), make sure some good interactions get in with the locals. Make it subtle, and make the people sympathetic. The feast can be a reward for completing whatever quest. That should add quite a lot of flavor to the whole thing.

After all, if you're putting all this effort in, no reason to just hand them the twist right away.

Blacky the Blackball
2013-02-14, 05:10 AM
One twist could be that the cannibalism is for religious reasons and is accompanied by necromancy.

That is, the meat from people is ritually eaten and the bones are cleaned and then turned into skeletons which then work for the village until they fall apart through wear and tear. Socially, the skeletons are seen as "honoured ancestors" who have sacrificed themselves for the greater good, and are looked upon with fondness.

This could have started many generations ago during a time of famine, where voluntarily being turned into a skeleton once you're past breeding age not only means you are no longer a mouth to feed but it also means that you can provide food for those who are younger and healthier whilst continuing to work for the good of your village. Although it's no longer necessary, it's still done because it's tradition.

I'd have them worshipping a neutral but pragmatic death god. Obviously the exact god would depend on the setting, but someone like Wee Jas, The Raven Queen, or Kelemvor would work well.

Calmar
2013-02-14, 06:10 AM
See, this "orange-blue morality" stuff is just a rather cheap way to excuse criminal actions. Almost every criminal believes himself to be right and justified in his ways. Similarily, we need to assume our views and assumptions are (at least to some degree) the right ones in order to be able to cope with our surroundings.

If you create scenarios where cannibals, or pedophiles, or rapists, or social Darwinists, or cultists who sacrifice people, aren't acting in a wrong way, but merely have another set of morality, the players' ethics become simply useless.

What conclusions are the players and characters to draw? It's ok to devour sentient beings because these guys are cute half-elves instead of ugly gnolls with bloody fangs? Everyone can do whatever they like if they say it's their 'way of life'? Our DM wants to propagate cannibalism*?


*I thought D&D stopped to do that somewhere in the 1980s :smallbiggrin:

Malrone
2013-02-14, 06:31 AM
Not everything is an aesop, but if one is playing a more serious campaign, it should do to have your character challenged in ways that aren't just combat. This is a situation about morality and ethics, but it isn't trying to push an agenda, but can serve to ask "Is it just to enforce your morals on others?" or, yes, "Is cannibalism inherently wrong?" Ignoring the hardcoded alignment system, this is an opportunity for the characters, and players, to develop their philosophy.

Not that they will take that opportunity. The Fused Glass response defeats any quandaries, after all.

Criminal is also perhaps not the best term here, as cannibalism is perfectly legal and is encouraged in this town! I also balk at the prospect that just because this challenges a coping mechanism that it is a bad thing. Getting stabbed, and tragic backstories in general, tend to mess with coping too.

As an extra note: Depending on response, it may still be best to assure the players OOC that this isn't something designed to affect them personally, but rather for the characters. I know some fairly straight-lace folks who are downright villainous in-game, so that might ease anyone who reacts too... negatively.

Chilingsworth
2013-02-14, 06:34 AM
I know this might be a bit off topic, but there's actually a book (http://books.google.com/books/about/Friendly_Cannibals.html?id=zmV5AAAAMAAJ) that shares this thread's title.

Kelb_Panthera
2013-02-14, 06:36 AM
See, this "orange-blue morality" stuff is just a rather cheap way to excuse criminal actions. Almost every criminal believes himself to be right and justified in his ways. Similarily, we need to assume our views and assumptions are (at least to some degree) the right ones in order to be able to cope with our surroundings.

If you create scenarios where cannibals, or pedophiles, or rapists, or social Darwinists, or cultists who sacrifice people, aren't acting in a wrong way, but merely have another set of morality, the players' ethics become simply useless.

What conclusions are the players and characters to draw? It's ok to devour sentient beings because these guys are cute half-elves instead of ugly gnolls with bloody fangs? Everyone can do whatever they like if they say it's their 'way of life'? Our DM wants to propagate cannibalism*?


*I thought D&D stopped to do that somewhere in the 1980s :smallbiggrin:

Just because they're wrong doesn't mean they don't believe they're right. Whether cannibalism is okay or not in some universal sense isn't at issue.

Though as the OP has described it, it may not be evil by a strict reading of the rules. Yes they're killing one another for a ritual feeding. They're not, however, forcing one another into it. Moreover they're doing it as a twisted form of respect for the value of their lives and the lives of those they're feeding. Unless those that flee because they don't want to die are hunted down and killed anyway, this lands in a particularly gray area, even by D&D's objective moral standards.

If they were only eating those that died of natural causes, it'd be unquestionably non-evil. It's an admittedly squicky method but its still a ritual that shows respect for life in its own way.

It's not equivalent to rape or pedophilia no matter how you look at it.

The cannibalism entry in BoVD is talking about a very specific form of cannibalism, whereby the cannibals hunt down and kill unwilling, often unwitting, victims. It's the victimization that makes it evil, not the squick factor of eating the flesh of a humanoid.

Thajocoth
2013-02-14, 02:24 PM
I agree that the village needs to hold some value to the players before the big reveal.

I'll see what I can do about that... I have some trouble thinking of what a self-sufficient peaceful village without any real threats in the area would need adventurers for though.

They wouldn't know of any ruins, as they don't know anyone exists outside their town. They wouldn't have a high crime rate. No magic...

There happens to be ruins half a day's travel from them that no one has been to in a very very long time. The party has decided to go there, and that destination is really the only reason for one to cross the path of this village. There's a mountain pass that's difficult to spot for anyone not looking for it that needs to be crossed to reach the area.

I've thought about doing something with that Paladin when they get to the ruins... Like have him be undead now or something. I dunno yet.

Malrone
2013-02-14, 04:23 PM
Always remember one of the greatest tools the DM has at their disposal: Schroedinger's Gun (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SchrodingersGun). Nothing in this area is a fixed and permanent detail until the party interacts with that element. Planning is always nice, but it is always beneficial to be able to improv new and better plot.

Try not to box yourself into a hole with your planning, I suppose is the point.

Wardog
2013-02-14, 06:58 PM
2 - I understand that, but the meat would be pretty bad and mostly unusable. I don't want to do it that way.


But that's what real-life friendly cannibals did.

I don't see how a healthy person in the prime of their life could be more socially useful as food than as actually living and working in the community. Even when they get old, they will still be useful as advisors / child-carers.

Cannibalism is going to squick (most) people out, but the thing about this society that strikes me as being moraly reprehensible is that they are killing their members for no good reason. The fact that they have come to accept it just (to me) means that (an element of) their culture is evil, and they are all victims of what is effectively cultural brainwashing.

Calmar
2013-02-15, 11:21 AM
It's not equivalent to rape or pedophilia no matter how you look at it.



It is not? A culture of 'friendly pedophiles' that take care for teenagers is not unheard of (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty). Then, there is the myth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droit_du_seigneur) of the "right of the first night" which is conceivable enought to be considered fact by some people even today. These things are, of course, crap from the frame of reference of the typical 21st century person (and pretty much all gamers I know), no matter how you try to whitewash them. Just like cannibalism.

Let's take another example; the circumcision of girls. The peoples who do that, presumably, don't do it because they want to act evil. They most likely believe it's important and necessary. It's their culture. That doesn't mean that people from "Western" culture(s) (or the Northern hemisphere in general) will be happy with it.

hymer
2013-02-15, 11:32 AM
@ Calmar: The reason Kelb is right* in that sentence is that cannibalism is the eating of someone who is beyond feeling pain or even embarrasment. The other things you mention have a living target.
You have to add a whole load of beliefs to make cannibalism into an inherently bad thing. The other things cause physical and psychological pain which is immediately evident. You need certain beliefs to cover this problem, because there is someone with an immediate complaint.

Added to this are relations who may feel emotional pain, but these are cultural reactions which apply in all cases and can go either way.

*You can nitpick it easily, as it's a sweeping generalization, and these are always wrong (see what I did there?).

Kelb_Panthera
2013-02-15, 11:33 AM
It is not? A culture of 'friendly pedophiles' that take care for teenagers is not unheard of (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty). Then, there is the myth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droit_du_seigneur) of the "right of the first night" which is conceivable enought to be considered fact by some people even today. These things are, of course, crap from the frame of reference of the typical 21st century person (and pretty much all gamers I know), no matter how you try to whitewash them. Just like cannibalism.

Let's take another example; the circumcision of girls. The peoples who do that, presumably, don't do it because they want to act evil. They most likely believe it's important and necessary. It's their culture. That doesn't mean that people from "Western" culture(s) (or the Northern hemisphere in general) will be happy with it.

The difference is that the cannablism is a one time thing for the "victim." There's no living with the psychological impact, no matter how great or small it might be, after.

The right of first night myth wouldn't even necessarily constitute rape anyway. Rape is defined by a lack of consent. If the culture defines this act as a great honor for the maiden and she willingly allows it to happen, it's not rape. It may seem particularly backwards, sexist, and even a bit mysoginistic by modern standards but that doesn't make it evil.

You're also conflating pedophilia, sexual relations with physically immature children, with sexual relations with persons below the legal age of consent with your highlighting of pederasty.

Ravens_cry
2013-02-15, 12:05 PM
Well, eating apex predators as a primary source of nutrition is just darn inefficient. If you have ever read the webcomic Digger, there is a society that undergoes the much more common practise of ritualistic cannibalism, where it is done to return the strength/soul of the individual to the tribe, or,. in the case of an enemy, add that strength to their own.
The former at least would be pretty simple to play as sympathetic, if differently normal, to a lot of people.

Raimun
2013-02-15, 12:06 PM
By the way, it's not cannibalism if an elf eats a human or a halfling eats a dwarf.

Just my two copper pieces.

Ravens_cry
2013-02-15, 12:10 PM
By the way, it's not cannibalism if an elf eats a human or a halfling eats a dwarf.

Just my two copper pieces.
Elf and human might still count, considering they can breed, but mind eating mind is what most people are objecting to. If an alien species landed and started pulling out their copies of 'How to Serve Man', I'd call that ethical cannibalism, if not biological.

Raimun
2013-02-15, 12:14 PM
Elf and human might still count, considering they can breed, but mind eating mind is what most people are objecting to. If an alien species landed and started pulling out their copies of 'How to Serve Man', I'd call that ethical cannibalism, if not biological.

I'd call that terrible and unforgivable, before arming myself to war.

But not cannibalism.

Ravens_cry
2013-02-15, 12:27 PM
I'd call that terrible and unforgivable, before arming myself to war.

But not cannibalism.
But what exactly are you objecting to?
While not strictly biologically accurate, I think cannibalism is a broad enough word to cover it.

Raimun
2013-02-15, 12:41 PM
But what exactly are you objecting to?
While not strictly biologically accurate, I think cannibalism is a broad enough word to cover it.

Strictly speaking cannibalism means eating someone of your own species, right?

All bow to semantics.

hymer
2013-02-15, 12:58 PM
The etymology of 'cannibal' has to do with the Carribean. It was what you call people from there, at one time said to eat other human beings.

So it's not a very strict term. Stretching it in a fantasy world to include all known intelligent beings may not be unreasonable.

Ravens_cry
2013-02-15, 01:07 PM
Strictly speaking cannibalism means eating someone of your own species, right?

All bow to semantics.
We don't have others species on Earth that are universally recognized as people, so on Earth, when people talk about cannibalism outside of a biology textbook, they mean one intelligent specie eating one intelligent species. But on a world with many species that are obviously intelligent? What word would you use for the concept of one intelligent species eating another?

Raimun
2013-02-15, 01:20 PM
We don't have others species on Earth that are universally recognized as people, so on Earth, when people talk about cannibalism outside of a biology textbook, they mean one intelligent specie eating one intelligent species. But on a world with many species that are obviously intelligent? What word would you use for the concept of one intelligent species eating another?

A different term, whatever it would be. Perhaps it could be named after aliens who feast on other intelligent species? :smalltongue:

Eating other intelligent species is wrong too but it's a different thing from eating someone of your own species.

Also, I'm sure the word cannibalism is used to describe animals who eat their own species? Yet they're not called cannibals when they eat other animals of equal intelligence.

Friv
2013-02-15, 01:42 PM
@ Calmar: The reason Kelb is right* in that sentence is that cannibalism is the eating of someone who is beyond feeling pain or even embarrasment. The other things you mention have a living target.
You have to add a whole load of beliefs to make cannibalism into an inherently bad thing.

I would qualify "killing every person in your culture who hits middle age" to be a pretty significantly bad thing.

The cannibalism at that point would be a sideline, except for the fact that it's presented as the reason for killing people. And, given that there's no magic in play, what does happen if someone who isn't very old or infirm decides that they don't much want to die just yet, thanks all the same? The survival instinct is pretty strongly ingrained in people, I find it hard to imagine a society where everyone happily wanders off to be slaughtered without fairly serious magical compulsion being in place.

hymer
2013-02-15, 02:28 PM
I would qualify "killing every person in your culture who hits middle age" to be a pretty significantly bad thing.

As would I. I was referring to cannibalism as such, not where the body came from. As, I suspect, was Kelb. Though Calmar may have been thinking about the example the OP set up, but I didn't think so from reading him.

Kelb_Panthera
2013-02-15, 04:42 PM
As would I. I was referring to cannibalism as such, not where the body came from. As, I suspect, was Kelb. Though Calmar may have been thinking about the example the OP set up, but I didn't think so from reading him.

It's certainly not good. The higher powers would definitely take issue with the ritualized killing of everyone that reached a given age. They'd still be pressed to call it evil if the "victim" was willing though.

As I said, the dividing line between making this culture neutral or evil is whether or not those that flee to avoid this fate are hunted down to be slaughtered anyway.

If the valley is big enough, having a second settlement at the other end where those that've fled the first set up their own community could make for a very interesting dynamic. You could spin it the otherw way, a culture of vegetarians where noone is killed no matter how grievous a crime they commit. Instead they're imprisoned and maybe tortured or mutilated, depending on the severity of their crime.

This would also give you a viable source of conflict wherein the two villiages come into political conflict with one another over the valley's limited resources. The cannibals occasionally kill a forager and the vegetarians occasionally sabotage items and hunts of the cannibals.

hamishspence
2013-02-15, 04:44 PM
It's certainly not good. The higher powers would definitely take issue with the ritualized killing of everyone that reached a given age.

Seems a bit like Logan's Run in some respects.

Synovia
2013-02-15, 04:53 PM
It's certainly not good. The higher powers would definitely take issue with the ritualized killing of everyone that reached a given age. They'd still be pressed to call it evil if the "victim" was willing though.


What if there's only enough food to support the breeding population? I wouldn't call that un-good at all.

Kelb_Panthera
2013-02-15, 06:16 PM
What if there's only enough food to support the breeding population? I wouldn't call that un-good at all.

For killing to be good it has to be directed against evil. In the case you're describing it's not against evil, just against suffering. Distributing the meat as best they can is probably good, but the killing itself isn't, though it's not evil in this case either.

Calmar
2013-02-15, 06:42 PM
My opinions and arguments in this thread should be viewed against the backdrop of the OP's scenario and the actual playability of this scenario.

Of course there are differences between cannibalism, pederasty and rape. But I think it's fair to say that we (people from cultures based upon enlightenment) find these things equally repulsive and inexcusable. As might the guys and girls whose characters come across the 'friendly cannibals'.

* * *

A community of civilised beings (a status usually closely connected with elves & half-elves in fantasy) that degenerated into a society of cannibals sounds like a typical Lovecraftian scenario. But here - oh twist - the degenerated society is actually the good guys. Feels like this is just some messing with the players' basic assumptions to confuse them, on pair with "my orcs are good".

And so far they don't even have a very convincing reason to do so - only that it tastes good. Disgusting. This society of individually possibly non-evil people has degenerated to a point where everyone is conditioned to willingly accept this vile tradition. Pederasts at least had the decency to care for their underaged boytoys and give them an education.
Now take for example the Fremen in Frank Herbert's Dune: They extract all the water from the bodies of their deceased, not because it's homely to get together with the family and guzzle down some Aunt Martha, but because the hellish desert environment forces them to do so. Not disgusting.

These guys need a good reason to be cannibals. Otherwise CoffeeIncluded's prediction comes true and the settlement is a lifeless wasteland in no time.

Malrone
2013-02-16, 12:19 AM
They should probably have a 'better' reason to be cannibals. Cultural brainwashing is really the only path if the village is anywhere near successful or stable. Perhaps something of a curse? A curse that withers adults or otherwise blights the populous, so they ritualistically off themselves before it takes root in the body. Anything to justify them not even considering living to old age. Of course, the celebration feast at this point... might be a good time for the party to make a soap box Hero speech.

For now, I recommend that the "What is Cannibalism, (and how good are the different definitions )?" discussion get canned, as it's moving outside the bounds of the thread, and choking things up.

bbgenderless100
2013-02-16, 01:16 AM
Let's say there's an isolated town of human/elven/half-elven (mostly half-elven) cannibals. They see it as a duty to keep themselves in good condition for when their day comes, and they usually go without much coercion (due to a lifetime of conditioning). Their culture accepts cannibalism completely, so young ones learn that it is normal, and the people even strive to eventually be tasty.

What would be an optimal age to say that people get harvested at (on their nth birthday) for spawning enough of the next generation, but still being easily edible? What crops would they likely grow to compliment their choice of meat? To maintain a constant size, how big should the town be & how big should the average family be? What sorts of things might they do to keep themselves as tasty as they can for when their final birthday comes? What else might be culturally different?

How might they react to an adventuring party who discovers this town? The town hasn't seen anyone else in enough generations that other towns & cities have become myth & legend to them. They're not outright evil, so I wouldn't have them just attack the party. I'd have them try to be friendly, but I'm thinking that some of it could come off a bit creepy. I'm really bad at specifics though.

Should I start things off with a language barrier (because of all the isolation)? Maybe just give them a difficult to understand dialect of elfcommon (like a spanglish for elvish & common)?

What do you think?

Just go with whatever makes sense.

SowZ
2013-02-16, 02:16 AM
If you get eaten on your fortieth birthday, that is one out of 14,600 days. Meaning in a town of a thousand people, that is twice a month. Anyway, yeah, a very limited amount of food in the valley that can only sustain a certain population works. Maybe it used to be that the elders just left and died in the woods when they started to consume more than they produced. In a particularly starvation fraught season, some elders who were going to get killed anyway started sacrificing themselves as meat, since it seemed a waste.

It evolved into a cultural practice from there, very ceremonial, but still somewhat necessary. Perhaps there is only enough food for a very specific amount of people, so you can't have a child until someone else dies. So that is another reason to celebrate and feast. One or two of the young couples in the town will be permitted to have children soon!

Mighty_Chicken
2013-02-16, 07:54 AM
In the 16th century, Portuguese and Frenchmen were fighting for South America coastlines. Each country allied to an Indian nation. The two Indian nations belonged to the Tupi-Guarani etnicity; both of them were cannibals. They ate not only their loved ones after death, but also Indian or European captured enemies.


When an enemy was captured alive (rare, because Indians had big ****ing sticks that crushed people's brains out), he was kept as a prisioner. And that wasn't that bad, you know... Indians had no shame of being prisioners. They were proud of falling in battle. In the day of their sacrifice - sometimes weeks or months after the capture! - they would swear an oath that their friends would come back for vengeance, and the etternal vendettas would go on forever like that.

The indians didn't treat their prisioners bad. They gave them food, talked and joked with them, and obviously, let girls go have sex with the prisioners if they felt like it, because why the f... not?

So the cannibal rituals themselves were terrifying, because people who eat people are terrifying. But the cannibals? Nah. Regular people, just like you and me.

Kelb_Panthera
2013-02-16, 09:20 AM
My opinions and arguments in this thread should be viewed against the backdrop of the OP's scenario and the actual playability of this scenario.

Of course there are differences between cannibalism, pederasty and rape. But I think it's fair to say that we (people from cultures based upon enlightenment) find these things equally repulsive and inexcusable. As might the guys and girls whose characters come across the 'friendly cannibals'.

* * *

A community of civilised beings (a status usually closely connected with elves & half-elves in fantasy) that degenerated into a society of cannibals sounds like a typical Lovecraftian scenario. But here - oh twist - the degenerated society is actually the good guys. Feels like this is just some messing with the players' basic assumptions to confuse them, on pair with "my orcs are good".

And so far they don't even have a very convincing reason to do so - only that it tastes good. Disgusting. This society of individually possibly non-evil people has degenerated to a point where everyone is conditioned to willingly accept this vile tradition. Pederasts at least had the decency to care for their underaged boytoys and give them an education.
Now take for example the Fremen in Frank Herbert's Dune: They extract all the water from the bodies of their deceased, not because it's homely to get together with the family and guzzle down some Aunt Martha, but because the hellish desert environment forces them to do so. Not disgusting.

These guys need a good reason to be cannibals. Otherwise CoffeeIncluded's prediction comes true and the settlement is a lifeless wasteland in no time.

The highlighted sentence is where your argument falls completely to pieces; particularly the bolded parenthetical.

The presupposition that whatever culture you belong to is more right or correct than another is utterly baseless and the idea that "our" culture is one based on intellectual enlightenment, rather than spirutal enlightenment or even simple dogmatic fidelity is an equally baseless assumption.

RPG's are played all accross the world by people of many different cultures and subcultures. Assuming that anyone from outside your own culture views a particular act in the same light from a logical, spiritual, and social perspective is displaying a particular bias, at best.

Personally, I only find the idea of cannablism distasteful in that it seems pretty gross to me. I don't have any spiritual or intellectual problem with it at all and the actual eating of the flesh doesn't bother me ethically. The only part of this that strikes me as immoral is the ritualized killing of perfectly healthy adults. For context, I was raised in a small town in the southern US in the predominant faith for the region. I know and have known people that would see cannabalism in the same light that you do, however. My point being, even within a given, fairly narrow culture (mine are not known to be the most tolerant people) people can and do have different world-views.

TL;DR: your argument rests on a shaky foundation. You shouldn't automatically assume people will react to a given situation the same way you would unless you know them well enough to make that assumption.

Rion
2013-02-16, 06:16 PM
Let's take another example; the circumcision of girls. The peoples who do that, presumably, don't do it because they want to act evil. They most likely believe it's important and necessary. It's their culture. That doesn't mean that people from "Western" culture(s) (or the Northern hemisphere in general) will be happy with it.
Don't really know why you specified "of girls" when it applies to circumcision in general.

On topic: While cannibalism can be a grey area of morality and the primary topic of a discussion regarding the connections between gross and evil, killing innocents against their will, isn't. Like so many others have said, what happens to someone who doesn't want to be killed and eaten? Because if they are still killed and eaten then the practice is no longer a shade of grey, but pure black.

awa
2013-02-16, 06:36 PM
I suspect he specified female circumcision because at least in the united states it is exponentially more controversial then male circumcision.

At least according to Wikipedia female circumcision is illegal in the united states as opposed to 1/3 of men world wide being circumcised

Synovia
2013-02-16, 08:51 PM
For killing to be good it has to be directed against evil. In the case you're describing it's not against evil, just against suffering. Distributing the meat as best they can is probably good, but the killing itself isn't, though it's not evil in this case either.

They're not killing people though. The people are voluntarily going to slaughter. Its essentially suicide.

You could say the death is evil, but eating the body isn't.

SowZ
2013-02-16, 08:58 PM
Don't really know why you specified "of girls" when it applies to circumcision in general.

On topic: While cannibalism can be a grey area of morality and the primary topic of a discussion regarding the connections between gross and evil, killing innocents against their will, isn't. Like so many others have said, what happens to someone who doesn't want to be killed and eaten? Because if they are still killed and eaten then the practice is no longer a shade of grey, but pure black.

Well, circumcision of women affects orgasm much more and has higher chances of medical complications.

Zeb
2013-02-16, 09:48 PM
An interesting justification for ritualistic cannibalism beyond the culture could be the consequences of not being eaten at a certain age.

A couple of ways this could happen, perhaps there is something in the local area that prevents disease and death from old age. Seeing the problems with the entire community eventually starving or infighting over a limited food supply the elders began offering themselves up as sacrifice for the next generation. over time people tried seeking the honor of being sacrifice younger and younger until it reached the current age.

Conversely perhaps there is a disease or curse that begins afflicting those of middle age or greater and now to spare themselves the pain they offer themselves up to the village.

Perhaps truthfully or not tribe members feel that if their body isn't consumed by the tribe then it will rise as an undead abomination and attack the village. of if they die after they begin to lose their mental facilities then they will return as some kind of incorporeal undead.

These are good because the party can find a reason and that reason could be something that they could do something about. opposed to the " We are eating what?!?? Why? Well that makes no sense, lets leave/burn this gods forsaken place!"

Calmar
2013-02-17, 11:41 AM
The highlighted sentence is where your argument falls completely to pieces; particularly the bolded parenthetical.

Wrong.


The presupposition that whatever culture you belong to is more right or correct than another is utterly baseless and the idea that "our" culture is one based on intellectual enlightenment, rather than spirutal enlightenment or even simple dogmatic fidelity is an equally baseless assumption.

RPG's are played all accross the world by people of many different cultures and subcultures. Assuming that anyone from outside your own culture views a particular act in the same light from a logical, spiritual, and social perspective is displaying a particular bias, at best.
This sounds really damn smart, but what does it have to do with the actual topic at hand? You are merely fiddling with my words. Is there anyone in this thread from a culture that does not basically oppose the items I mentioned? No? Good. If there should be anyone here who believes that stuff like the circumcision of girls or the Right of the First Night are splendid things (we know superstitious Third World tribes and disproved Mediaeval lords are avid gamers and spend much time discussing their hobby on the internet), she or he may politely ignore these examples and concentrate on actual nature and purpose of my comparisons.

But I think it's fair to say that we (the guys and girls who actually participate in this forum, or in this very discussion, or the guys and girls who enjoy Thajocoth's campaign) find these things equally repulsive and inexcusable. :smalltongue:


Personally, I only find the idea of cannablism distasteful in that it seems pretty gross to me. I don't have any spiritual or intellectual problem with it at all and the actual eating of the flesh doesn't bother me ethically. The only part of this that strikes me as immoral is the ritualized killing of perfectly healthy adults. For context, I was raised in a small town in the southern US in the predominant faith for the region. I know and have known people that would see cannabalism in the same light that you do, however. My point being, even within a given, fairly narrow culture (mine are not known to be the most tolerant people) people can and do have different world-views.

Everything is nice and fine if it's somebody's culture. Their venerable way of life. - And then adventurers from a probably Western moral frame of reference come along and reduce the place to dust because the people eat their tasty neighbours.

The "friendly cannibals" still need a proper reason to do what they do (see previous posts).

awa
2013-02-17, 03:53 PM
you know it always drives me crazy when someone starts an argument with just the word wrong id say what it makes them look like but off the top of my head i cant think of anything that would be forum friendly so i would just say it is perhaps not the most polite way of starting an argument.

Since you don't seem to have been paying much attention to other posters in this tread i will point out that several people have said that as long as it's consensual it's not evil. while rape on the other hands is by definition non consensual. so the implication is you are wrong in that people from a western society would believe all such acts are equal bad as you have said becuase several posters have implied otherwise.

and if i am misinterpreting other posters i will say i personally believe that rape is worse then consensual cannibalism so your statement that all people from western societies believe something is equal wrong is verifiable false.

if i were dming such a game and the paladin killed the Cannibals for practicing their culture and not hurting anyone else he would fall and fall hard.
if they wiped out the entire village the entire party would get to write evil on there character sheets.

Thajocoth
2013-02-17, 04:40 PM
In this village, if one was opposed to dying & reached their 40th, after the inevitable guilt trips, they would be allowed to "return" to the wilds outside the village to be as an animal again. They have no idea that there are other settlements anywhere, so there's nowhere known for them to go. It's exceedingly rare that anyone would choose to leave the village instead of death, so there's 0 chance of another settlement being created. There's also no survival training. The very very few that do this generally starve for maybe a week before changing their mind & returning to the village to finish the ritual (completely redeeming them in the eyes of the other vllagers). Maybe a few have stayed away entirely and starved to death instead. The villagers would not know the fate of the exiled.

It is common enough for people (in general) to do something because it's the way it was always done. That's a lot of it for them. They also don't view themselves as much different from animals. They're made of meat, have the same organs, etc... The isolated culture is pretty much frozen here.

Calmar
2013-02-17, 04:55 PM
you know it always drives me crazy when someone starts an argument with just the word wrong id say what it makes them look like but off the top of my head i cant think of anything that would be forum friendly so i would just say it is perhaps not the most polite way of starting an argument.
Now that's interesting. I don't think this one word caused any harm to anyone not freely willing to feel troubled by it. See, that's the way we argue in my tribe. Yet still it causes you offence. Seems I'm a bit like the friendly cannibals. - Glad you agree with my basic viewpoint, though. :smalltongue:


Since you don't seem to have been paying much attention to other posters in this tread i will point out that several people have said that as long as it's consensual it's not evil. while rape on the other hands is by definition non consensual. so the implication is you are wrong in that people from a western society would believe all such acts are equal bad as you have said becuase several posters have implied otherwise.
Yeah, some have implied so. Others have opinions closer to mine.
And don't get stuck on the rape thing. I used that example to illustrate my opposition towards the orange-blue morality thing. Unfortunately Kelb_Panthera decided to turn it into a little separate discussion and I made the mistake to go along for a while.



See, this "orange-blue morality" stuff is just a rather cheap way to excuse criminal actions. Almost every criminal believes himself to be right and justified in his ways. Similarily, we need to assume our views and assumptions are (at least to some degree) the right ones in order to be able to cope with our surroundings.

If you create scenarios where cannibals, or pedophiles, or rapists, or social Darwinists, or cultists who sacrifice people, aren't acting in a wrong way, but merely have another set of morality, the players' ethics become simply useless.


Besides, I've never said a word about 'evil' in terms of game mechanics. What I'm talking about is that the scenario of friendly cannibals without a convincing reason for cannibalism is not going to work very well in my eyes.


and if i am misinterpreting other posters i will say i personally believe that rape is worse then consensual cannibalism so your statement that all people from western societies believe something is equal wrong is verifiable false.
What you're referring to is not a statement, it's my opinion. If my guts are wrong and the Northern hemisphere is equally willing to tolerate either of those things I mentioned, then so be it.


if i were dming such a game and the paladin killed the Cannibals for practicing their culture and not hurting anyone else he would fall and fall hard.
if they wiped out the entire village the entire party would get to write evil on there character sheets.

So player characters should only allowed to interfere in the strange activities of factions within their homeland? Better stay at home, adventurers. :smallwink:

awa
2013-02-17, 05:02 PM
first its not the word its the way you used it as if his entire argument was beneath contempt.
If i agreed with your view point i would need to murderer you for doing something i found offensive so it's good thing i don't agree with you.
Cannibalism is less evil then mass murderer.

Wardog
2013-02-18, 03:55 PM
In this village, if one was opposed to dying & reached their 40th, after the inevitable guilt trips, they would be allowed to "return" to the wilds outside the village to be as an animal again. They have no idea that there are other settlements anywhere, so there's nowhere known for them to go. It's exceedingly rare that anyone would choose to leave the village instead of death, so there's 0 chance of another settlement being created. There's also no survival training. The very very few that do this generally starve for maybe a week before changing their mind & returning to the village to finish the ritual (completely redeeming them in the eyes of the other vllagers). Maybe a few have stayed away entirely and starved to death instead. The villagers would not know the fate of the exiled.

But... why?

That sounds like a very, very unrealistic scenario.

How can people in a tiny, isolated village in the wilderness not have enough survival skills to leave the village?

How can such a tiny, isolated community exist for generations without suffering from massive inbreeding-related problems? The cannibal community would have to either be large enough not to suffer from inbreeding (in which case there are bound to be people who would rebel against the culture, and enough of them to either cause problems or to have a reasonable chance of forming a breakaway community). Or it would have to be not completely isolated, in whiche case teh entier scenario breaks down.

And how/why will (as near as matters) everyone who reaches 40 be guilted into commiting suicide/letting themselves be killed? The instinct to not die is a very strong one. It is not reasonable for most healthy people to just give up that way. This would seem to imply some major social pressure/brainwashing, which would make the claim that it is "consensual" to be very dubious.


If you want to have friendly cannibals, I think you would be much better making them like real-life friendly cannibals. Make eating the dead part of the funeral customs for celebrating the life of the deceased. Maybe have eating a slain enemy a way to honour that enemy's fighting spirit. But apart from that, make them act like ordinary people, who wouldn't kill anyone except in the situations or for the reasons that anyone else in the campaign would. (And just to be on the safe side, make sure that your players know that they are entering cannibal territory before they meet them, and make sure the cinnibals are presented as friendly and open about what they are before the players get too entangled with them. That way you should avoid a panicked "Oh my! We've been lured into a village full of cannibals! Quick - fight our way out before they realise we realise what they are!" moment).

Synovia
2013-02-18, 04:23 PM
But... why?
How can such a tiny, isolated community exist for generations without suffering from massive inbreeding-related problems? The cannibal community would have to either be large enough not to suffer from inbreeding (in which case there are bound to be people who would rebel against the culture, and enough of them to either cause problems or to have a reasonable chance of forming a breakaway community). Or it would have to be not completely isolated, in whiche case teh entier scenario breaks down..

I would agree with you that the society needs to be larger if they're going to be isolated.

That being said, there's cannibals on this planet to this day. Societies in the pacific islands. Etc.

There were societies that practiced internal human sacrifice for thousands of years.

"Because this is what we do and what we do is what is right" is a very strong motivator. "Because the high priest tells us this is what god wants" is another very strong one.

it doesn't have to be rational.

Kyberwulf
2013-02-19, 12:51 PM
For some reason, I just can't wrap my mind around this concept. I don't understand How this Village could have survived for any amount of time if no one has any basic survival skills.

I don't quite understand the landscape that would lead to this kind of scenario. Is it Desert, Jungle, Mountain Snowy field. One would think they would have tried to leave the area, unless stopped by some natural barrier. Like an impassable Mountain range, or on an Island. Also, are there NO other forms of Livestock at all? I assume the whole area doesn't really sustain vegetation or other means of Sustenance.

Also, if the Pcs show up. I think the inhabitants would be rather Xenophobic. Seeing how they haven't ever seen another creature ever. (I am assuming?)

Synovia
2013-02-19, 12:54 PM
For some reason, I just can't wrap my mind around this concept. I don't understand How this Village could have survived for any amount of time if no one has any basic survival skills.

I don't quite understand the landscape that would lead to this kind of scenario. Is it Desert, Jungle, Mountain Snowy field. One would think they would have tried to leave the area, unless stopped by some natural barrier. Like an impassable Mountain range, or on an Island. Also, are there NO other forms of Livestock at all? I assume the whole area doesn't really sustain vegetation or other means of Sustenance.

Also, if the Pcs show up. I think the inhabitants would be rather Xenophobic. Seeing how they haven't ever seen another creature ever. (I am assuming?)
The cannibalism isn't for sustenance, its for religious reasons. They DO have livestock and farming.

Kelb_Panthera
2013-02-19, 02:09 PM
They're not killing people though. The people are voluntarily going to slaughter. Its essentially suicide.

You could say the death is evil, but eating the body isn't.
I agree in principle. It's not suicide unless it's actually suicide though. Even if they are literally killing themselves it's out of necessity more than altruism; not evil, but not good either.

Wrong.What a clever retort.:smallsigh:

I didn't say you were outright wrong, just not necessarily right. Obviously, some people will agree with you. That doesn't mean that all people will or that you should assume that anyone you don't know will.



This sounds really damn smart, but what does it have to do with the actual topic at hand?It relates to the OP's topic because the moral ambiguity of the situation is the point. If everyone felt as you do, then this -would- be pointless. The thing of it is that -not- everyone agrees with you. I've just laid out why.
You are merely fiddling with my words. Is there anyone in this thread from a culture that does not basically oppose the items I mentioned? No? Good. If there should be anyone here who believes that stuff like the circumcision of girls or the Right of the First Night are splendid things (we know superstitious Third World tribes and disproved Mediaeval lords are avid gamers and spend much time discussing their hobby on the internet), she or he may politely ignore these examples and concentrate on actual nature and purpose of my comparisons.While I doubt anyone sees these things as good, there may well be people on this thread that don't see them as necessarily evil. There are probably at least a few that give all but rape and murder no moral weight at all. You're assuming that everyone shares your moral and ethical viewpoints when it's a verifiable fact that there are people on this forum from all around the world, many of whom will view the world from a -very- different angle.


But I think it's fair to say that we (the guys and girls who actually participate in this forum, or in this very discussion, or the guys and girls who enjoy Thajocoth's campaign) find these things equally repulsive and inexcusable. :smalltongue:Then you're proven wrong. I'm a guy that participates on this forum and I've just stated unequivocally that I disagree with you. I can also see that I'm not the only one. You're entitled to your opinion but pushing it on others as undeniable truth is, at best, annoying.




Everything is nice and fine if it's somebody's culture. Their venerable way of life. - And then adventurers from a probably Western moral frame of reference come along and reduce the place to dust because the people eat their tasty neighbours. The underlined is what I'm talking about with baseless assumptions. There are members of this forum based based in the middle east, and eastern asia. You're essentially saying that they're wrong for believing differently than you if they disagree with your views even though they were raised in a culture with different moral and ethical standards.


The "friendly cannibals" still need a proper reason to do what they do (see previous posts).

They have a proper reason; it's what their culture has expected and cherished for generations. You don't just get to say, "Ack! They're different! They must be killed with fire immediately!"

Kyberwulf
2013-02-19, 02:11 PM
Because it's religious makes even less sense to me.

I see lots of things that don't make sense. How can you say this isn't wrong. They have no choice. When they reach the age of eaten, they have the choice of.. get you throat slit, sit on the spit, and let us all eat you.... versus.. Get kicked out of the Village, into what I am assuming is a very inhospitable world around them and dying out there.

Also, on the subject of no survival skills. There are no Predators or other creatures that come out of the wilds and raid or just ransack this community?

Also what god are they worshiping that requires you to eat people that turn 40. This makes no sense, seeing how gods in D&D derive there power from how many people worship them.

Also whatever religion they are following isn't going to work. Unless The clergy are exempt. Most religions start as a way of gaining power over the masses. How are you going to keep and maintaining that power if your grand poohbah changes every 10 years.

Also, I don't think it's rational to say, in 40 generations, NO ONE ever left the village to explore. That no group of people migrated out of that place to look for someplace better. That NO people exiled didn't survive, and don't harbor some resentment for getting kicked out. Schisms happen.

awa
2013-02-19, 03:11 PM
survival skills is a relative thing
A hypothetical example the skills to survive a meadow and some cleared farms is very different then whats needed to survive a malaria infested swamp full of vicious aquatic predators. so maybe someone leaves the village and survives against all odds he has no reason to return and would be unlikely to survive the journey if he tried.

since the vast majority of people believe this is a good thing to do the number of people who try are few and because few who do survive there are never enough to create any kind of society.

religion in d&d does not necessarily mean god what with clerics of an ideal people could essentially invent their own religion out of half remembered tale and there just general culture. we honor our ancestor by doing this thats all it needs.

Synovia
2013-02-19, 03:16 PM
Because it's religious makes even less sense to me.

I see lots of things that don't make sense. How can you say this isn't wrong. They have no choice. When they reach the age of eaten, they have the choice of.. get you throat slit, sit on the spit, and let us all eat you.... versus.. Get kicked out of the Village, into what I am assuming is a very inhospitable world around them and dying out there.

The Aztecs sacrificed and ate their own citizens for thousands of years, and it was considered an honor by many to be the one sacrificed.

Belief is a very powerful thing.

Kyberwulf
2013-02-19, 03:49 PM
Yeah, they also used a lot of slaves too. The gods they worshiped where particularly brutal also. They enforced the sacrifices most times also. They used extremely violent methods to ensure people where sacrificed.

The point is they weren't doing it cause people taste yummy, or that they wanted to do it. It was decreed by their religion to do so.

Magnema
2013-02-19, 04:35 PM
A possible reason for general acceptance of dying in this manner: perhaps (either in legend or in fact), one person once did not sacrifice himself after 40. Purely by coincidence, he suffered a horrible death shortly thereafter, and so the people choose to die in this honorable way rather than in other more painful ways.

Incidentally, this could produce an entirely unintentional cultural shift if some of the PCs (in this case, probably non-human ones) were older than 40, and therefore this legend were proven false for the locals.

Also, a few other comments: Firstly, I agree that cannibalism is not inherently wrong, if repulsive to many of our modern sensibilities, as well as that, were it socially acceptable/legal, I would be willing to try other (willing) human beings. Secondly, religion makes people do dumb things - look to all the Christians who died in the Crusades in order to get into heaven. Self-preservation is not always the most important instinct when discussing religion.

awa
2013-02-19, 04:56 PM
completely ignoring any references to Aztec religion for forum reasons
I have to point out that the aztec empire was less then thousand years old by the time of it's destruction much less thousands of years.

Now other groups some of whom predated the aztecs also ate human flesh in that region but i have no idea if they were around 2000+ years before the Spanish.

Synovia
2013-02-19, 05:46 PM
Yeah, they also used a lot of slaves too. The gods they worshiped where particularly brutal also. They enforced the sacrifices most times also. They used extremely violent methods to ensure people where sacrificed.

The point is they weren't doing it cause people taste yummy, or that they wanted to do it. It was decreed by their religion to do so.

Nobody is suggesting that they do it "because its yummy". Or because they "want to"

Kyberwulf
2013-02-19, 06:04 PM
OP did, he says people strive to be tasty... and the grow crops to compliment the fest they have at the shindigs..

Vizzerdrix
2013-02-19, 08:20 PM
I could see some sort of regenerative magic being used to sustain meat production thru out the year.

Thajocoth
2013-02-19, 10:32 PM
Because it's religious makes even less sense to me.

I see lots of things that don't make sense. How can you say this isn't wrong. They have no choice. When they reach the age of eaten, they have the choice of.. get you throat slit, sit on the spit, and let us all eat you.... versus.. Get kicked out of the Village, into what I am assuming is a very inhospitable world around them and dying out there.

Also, on the subject of no survival skills. There are no Predators or other creatures that come out of the wilds and raid or just ransack this community?

Also what god are they worshiping that requires you to eat people that turn 40. This makes no sense, seeing how gods in D&D derive there power from how many people worship them.

Also whatever religion they are following isn't going to work. Unless The clergy are exempt. Most religions start as a way of gaining power over the masses. How are you going to keep and maintaining that power if your grand poohbah changes every 10 years.

Also, I don't think it's rational to say, in 40 generations, NO ONE ever left the village to explore. That no group of people migrated out of that place to look for someplace better. That NO people exiled didn't survive, and don't harbor some resentment for getting kicked out. Schisms happen.

No predators. A bit of a valley, I'm thinking... There are passes through the mountains, but you'd have to look to find them. At the intersection of two crossing mountain ranges, it's at the widest point, so it's not an obvious choice to try to cross the ranges there & there are no precious metals or anything, just rock, mostly. In the middle is this valley. They believe that this is all that exists. On the far end of the valley is a hidden underground ruins entrance though, and the last to seek it out was the Paladin and his pals. It's simply been forgotten.

There are some smaller creatures they don't eat, like mice & whatever. Very small ecosystem. They don't think there's anything out there to look for. Also, there's no god. Religion would be a new concept to them.


OP did, he says people strive to be tasty... and the grow crops to compliment the fest they have at the shindigs..

No, reverse that. They strive to be tastier because they know they will be eaten & that's a positive trait in their society.

Synovia
2013-02-20, 08:58 AM
OP did, he says people strive to be tasty... and the grow crops to compliment the fest they have at the shindigs..

Saying people strive to be tasty doesn't mean that the system is there to provide tasty meat. The reason people are being sacrificed is religious. They're striving to be the most productive sacrifice for that same reason.

Alejandro
2013-02-20, 09:47 AM
It just makes me wonder, if this place is so absolutely hidden away and inaccessible, how did anyone ever start living there in the first place? I mean, if they literally believe this is the entire world, then it must be basically impossible to get there (which is highly unlikely in our world, much less one with flying magic and teleports.)

awa
2013-02-20, 10:14 AM
that assumes high level magic is common
in the real world there are a number of societies that were very isolated for a very long time.

Teleport would honestly make it harder to find such isolated groups because people would just go directly to there destinations and skip the overland trk

Reltzik
2013-02-20, 10:58 AM
Perhaps there's a curse on the community. Everyone turns into ghouls once they reach middle age. So they have to be killed before then. And then, once killed, funerary rites include the consumption of the dead, so that they again become one with the community. Of course, this has been going on for so long that the exact threat has been forgotten, and it's seen as the curse of the gods or some whatnot.

.... of course, if someone TELLS them that ghouls come from cannibalism (at least in some source materials)... well, that person is obviously an evil infidel and, for the good of the community, must be silenced.

Synovia
2013-02-20, 11:04 AM
It just makes me wonder, if this place is so absolutely hidden away and inaccessible, how did anyone ever start living there in the first place? I mean, if they literally believe this is the entire world, then it must be basically impossible to get there (which is highly unlikely in our world, much less one with flying magic and teleports.)

There are tribes in south america and the pacific islands, today, who still have not had contact with modern human society.

The idea isn't far fetched at all.

Wardog
2013-02-21, 05:00 PM
There are tribes in south america and the pacific islands, today, who still have not had contact with modern human society.

The idea isn't far fetched at all.

They haven't had contact with "modern" (Western) society, but my understanding is that they generally do have contact with /are know by neighbouring native peoples.

awa
2013-02-21, 11:45 PM
keep in mind though your typical d&d setting has vastly more impressive barriers to travel then the real world.

Think crossing a desert or mountain range is tough try it when it's got a territorial dragon in it. when would not be surprising for there to be large blank spots on most maps with just a doddle saying here be monsters.

Randel
2013-02-21, 11:51 PM
Idea:

Suppose at one point the tribe came into contact with a powerful dragon (or other monster) who demanded tribute from them in the form of cattle, gold, or people. Said tribe didn't have access to gold and either didn't have cattle or the tribute would have wiped out the whole herd.

So, some brave souls stepped up to offer themselves to the dragon to spare the tribe. They were accepted by the dragon and honored by the tribe.

Eventually, it turned into a "celebration" to get on the dragons good side, with a big feast of human and animal meat with drinks and other foods. The tribe themselves started to partake at some point and the dragon was impressed enough to do stuff for them like kill any threats to his "flock".

Then something happened to the dragon and they haven't heard from him in ages. But they keep the ceremonial feast in their tradition in case the dragon ever returns.

Thajocoth
2013-02-26, 04:17 PM
Thank you all for your help. With various questions & suggestions, this went from a little idea with no real details to a fleshed out (purposeful pun) region that I can insert into a game when I feel like it. I know now what I do & don't want it to be. You've all been helpful in this process.

:smallbiggrin: