The Military Machine, the Archeologist, and the Rebel

A viewing of some of the Indiana Jones films prompts this thought: in these films, the military machine is evil, is the enemy and can be turned against itself.

Forget the religious artefact at the centre of the film; think of many of the action scenes. Raiders of the Lost Ark (RotLA) has that business with the twin-rotored aeroplane and the chase scene with the convoy (many separate vehicles, one figurative machine). The Last Crusade (TLC) has a many-turreted tank with restricted vision - with a convoy behind it. In both cases, one man (on a horse) wreaks havoc on it.

[Of course, there are two kinds of machine in these films. The modern military device and the ancient dungeon full of traps. Both are dangerous - might we say that only one is malevolent?]

This is partly because it provides amble opportunity for peril and derring-do. But the repetition of this kind of scene gives (if you will) a little license to unpick this.

I would not think of this as technophobic, or luddite. But our hero does not fight against the villain not as liberty-loving American to Nazi or archaeologist to soldier - but as man (and horse) against machine, the perpetual spanner in the works. Which could be construed as odd. The Indiana Jones films, even if they never portray the Second World War, constantly invoke it. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (KotCS) even confirmed what I imagine everyone already conjectured: that Jones had continued to thwart Nazi occult ambitions in the Second World War - before Pearl Harbour, even.

Though, of course, we can never see this. Indiana Jones cannot take part in D-Day even if he is of the same spirit as D-Day. This would bind him too closely to a vast military machine. But just such machinery helped ensue Allied victory in the Second World War.  Clearly, of course, Jones is not a druid or an ascetic. He buys tickets on aeroplanes, he carries a revolver. There is still a friction, when one begins to think on it. The stonewalling bureaucrats at the end of RotLA hint at this; the McCarthy era G-Men in KotCS confirm it. KotCS also gets to have the cake and eat it, by having a first Act with Soviet baddies dressed as American GIs. To say nothing of the horror of an American nuclear weapons test.

Star Wars - certainly the more recent films - suffers something similar. The Rebel Alliance is talked about in terms like the French Resistance - and it certainly is a resistance movement, against a vaster tyrannical force. But when we see it in Episode Four, it brings to mind the Royal Air Force in the Battle of Britain: unquestionably on the back foot, but still with the might of a World Power behind it. We see established chains of command, radio operators and ground crew, fighter wings, rank badges, call signs - all quite explicitly military and systematic rather than the ad hoc arrangements of a resistance. To say nothing of that orchestrated, disciplined medal ceremony at the end.

Pictured: Rebellion.
[From the 1977 motion picture Star Wars, Dir. George Lucas]

I dare say there's some excellent in-universe explanation for all this. The parts of the puzzle still don't quite fit, or don't fit pleasingly.

(Incidentally, if you cannot guess the comparisons between the concept of a military machine and the Death Star, I have just made it. The arguing boardroom of generals with the Dr Strangelove table is a good touch. Further, Episode 4 ends with the inexperienced pilot in the unspecialised machine with the targeting computer off succeeding where the experienced bomber commander with the computer on fails.)

This doubles in later films. The explicitly distancing of the Resistance in Episodes Seven and Eight from the New Republic is odd; are we meant to understand by the finale of Episode Eight that a credible fighting force can be rebuilt from a platoon of soldiers onboard the Millennium Falcon? Allow me to raise the Battle of Britain comparison once more - the whole matter becomes a little risible, even if that last British platoon has Churchill, Monty, Douglas Bader, Orde Wingate, Dowding, Alan Turing, Barnes Wallis and Popski in its ranks. (The explicit condemnation of arms manufacturers should also be considered.)

[Am I complaining of a lack of realism in this tale of space wizards and funny robots? No, but, the verisimilitude of ground crews and radio operators and flight suits (rather than spandex) and so forth is part of the strength of this realised, lived-in world. I would say the same for troop numbers.]

So what is to come of all this? What are the reasons for the above phenomena? What conclusions can we draw?

It has been observed by critics before the strange distance between soldier and military in modern (frequently American or American influenced). Soldier good and sympathetic; military - especially staff officers - bad and unsympathetic. This is not simply, I should say, a party lines issue. One can imagine the heroic individualistic protagonist defying or breaking with his orders so that he may capture the villain - or summarily execute him. Indiana Jones and Star Wars have fuelled or continue to fuel this horror of organised hierarchical systems as much as Dirty Harry or Rambo, in their way.

What to blame? The Vietnam War would be a favourite candidate, but it cannot accept all the blame.  The face of warfare itself has changed; the mass troop movements, conscription and industrial output of the World Wars are not to be seen. Not that the modern Western military does not face troubles of logistics - think of the Falklands Conflict, fought on the other side of the globe by Britain. But it does not need rifles by the thousand and tanks by the score to face terrorists. The squad comes into focus, not the regiment. This dovetails with the surrogate family narratives that seem to abound in adventure flicks these days - whatever the setting. But a regiment (or something regiment-like), however familial it might be in some respects, sits directly inside larger systems and is just too large. Trying to inject the former inside the latter doesn't sit correctly.

Yet the military machine - or any vast hierarchical system - has its uses. If those bits of the world most influenced by the films and narratives here discussed ever had to fight a war en masse, there would be some very odd dynamics at play within the stories that would then be told. We will not be saved by less than a dozen amiable, snarky 'badasses' with a deep interpersonal bond, but by vast numbers of people from a variety of backgrounds and with a variety of personalities who may not even get on terribly well. Neal Stephenson's The Diamond Age puts it thusly: “It is the hardest thing in the world to make educated Westerners pull together”. The internet may have changed that, but it enables all those pulling together to pull just as much as they wish to and in the precise way they wish to. This may not necessarily be objectionable to you, but it is something to consider. 

Is there an antidote, for those than desire it? Tom Clancy novels, perhaps. But little on the big screen these days. Perhaps someone will make a 'military procedural'. But not yet. We Were Soldiers might be something to contemplate, though I can think of little that would be set in the contemporary. At any rate, I doubt there will be anything of the sort made in speculative fiction, no matter how many Star Wars spinoffs are made.




[If you want the tabletop take on it, go here and mine the archive for the follow-up posts.]

Temple and Church Generator

A series of tables designed to produce buildings that are places of worship, with a number of features - architectural, social and so forth. This is not a 'place of worship generator'; stone circles or sacred groves are out. This also rather places itself in an urban context; a town large enough to have multiple temples. A list of real world inspirations will come at the end.

This all acts as a compliment to my Religious Processions post - though it is less Roman; more London-like. Nonetheless, the two should be able to overlap. Even if you find yourself sacrificing a White Ox in the Methodist Central Hall.

Why write this? Aside from an interest in ecclesiastical architecture, it seems to me that architectural detail sometimes takes a back seat in description. This is not super detailed and doesn't require that you tell your Perpendicular from your Decorated. Nonetheless, buildings should have an impact on players, especially those built to impress (or those that cannot help but do so). Many fantasy worlds bring religion to the fore; this is doubly true if Clerics or Prophets (or Mendicants, or Dervishes, or Disciples or Pietists or what have you) are among the player characters. Further: temples, churches - the seats of so many great occasions, a focus of communal life - these should not be all cast from the same mould. Even if they are of the same faith, from the same region or as an article of faith must be built to a specific plan. Let there be variety!

Likewise, there was an intent to remove them from a 'Lean Times in Lankhmar' style religious quarter and put them in districts; within a wider context. Yes, there are Forums, Acropoli, Kremlins, Cathedral complexes and the like, but I hoped to imitate parishes and wards: teeming urban life. Prayer and holiness being no small aspect of life.

Moreover, the more details you have of a place, the better use that the GM or players can make of it. There is, naturally, a time for detail and a time for broad sketches, but one should be able to 'zoom in' on specific scenes - and will require a form of description by which to do so. Go out; practice your descriptive writing on a building sometime: could you describe well enough to hold the man features of it in someone's mind? I have linked to this interview before, but there is very real benefit in being able to describe something, even in an age when you can just find a picture of it on your magic internet brick.

I suggest there is even an appetite for this. I have no great knowledge of the Assassins's Creed series of video games, but folk certainly seemed to appreciate the possibility to get up close to and exploit Florentine churches. A different medium, doubtless, but not without impact on another. If you want another example, look to Victor Hugo and The Hunchback of Notre Dame  - a book very focussed on buildings. Or indeed, Ackroyd's Hawksmoor. The mysteries of P.D. James also tended to be fairly stuffed with architecture.

Some of the below ideas will have a social impact; others a physical one. A fountain in the square by the Church will be of interest to the hydromancer; the more church officers there are the more people there are to convince to give you the key to the Holy Water Cellar; a copper roof will have an impact for the lightning wizard whereas a lead roof may offer some protection from the magical radiation of a baleful comet.

	d10 Building Material
1	Red brick
2	Yellow brick
3	Limestone
4	Flint
5	Marble
6	Stone - dressed
7	Stone - rough
8	Stone - heavily banded
9	Decorative tiles
10	Covered in stucco

                                         

	d6 Window style
1	High and Classically proportioned
2	A riot of stained images
3	Narrow, swirling patterns
4	High set, decorative tracery
5	Low set, small windows
6	Narrow, set back arrow slits

	At least3d20 Features and scheme
	Notable Exterior Feature	Notable Interior Feature	Overall scheme
1	Clock accompanied by statues	Tall iconostasis	Gothic ‘Dome’
2	Clock, with clockwork figures	Intricate rood screen	Baroque, decorated dome
3	Circular colonnade around spire	White and gilt pillars and ceiling	Four towers, one at each corner
4	Numerous gargoyles	Whispering gallery	Very tall spire with many sides and windows
5	Flying buttresses	Numerous memorial plaques on the walls	Flat-topped tower
6	Ornamental balcony	Faded flags hang from the celing	Numerous turret-topped ribs across the roof
7	External pulpit	Ornate fan vaulting	Thick twin towers at the front
8	Flat front with rising curiliques	Hammer-beam ceiling	Ridged, pyramidal spire capped with a statue
9	Protruding turret	Intricate, well kept, wall paintings	Circular, focussing on a central platform
10	Onion dome	Wide second tier	Broad triangular pediment and columns
11	A Sacred stone is set into a wall niche	Transi tombs	Tall, square tower with a cupola
12	Rounded, barrel-vaulted roof	Simple wooden panelling	Only the tower of this church remains
13	Squat, round tower	Ornate wooden panelling	Long and low roofed, with many arches
14	Ornamental porch with caryatids	Plaques with scripture	Wide, with a large entrance underneath a great arch
15	Square tower, diamond shaped upper level and three small turrets	Crypt in imitation of pilgrimage destination	Wider than it is long
16	Long, curved scrollwork on the front	Box pews	A high, narrow arch supports a tapering spire
17	Copper/Lead roof	Stove among pews	Square, underneath a wide dome
18	Gilt statues in stone niches	Elaborate altar canopy	No tower. High, thick, buttresses
19	A series of urns decorate the roof line	Gilt and mosaic decoration	Perfectly round, with a low dome.
20	A balcony occupies the front	Elaborate lamps and symbols hanging from ceiling	Unassuming, unornamented, at a similar height to buildings around it.

	At least 2d20 for infrastructure.
	Place in Urban Infrastructure	Place in Religious infrastructure
1	Island church, right in the middle of the road	A Peculiar, outside the usual hierarchy
2	Burial place for a noble lineage	Devoted to fallen soldiers
3	Centre of worship for a specific Guild	The Seat of a Bishop/High Priest
4	Centre of worship for a society of lawyers	Shares space with another denomination
5	Attached to an infamous prison	Devoted to a foreign population in the city
6	Attached to a law court. Those condemned to death have their last service here	Attached/formerly attached to a Monastery/Convent/Nunnery/Abbey (&c.)
7	Outside the city walls	A synod or prominent committee meet here
8	Terraced among houses and shops	An Ecclesiastical court meets here
9	Attached to a barracks.	Attached to a school
10	In a rough area	Former temple of the unbeliever
11	In a prosperous area	Contains a holy relic
12	By the waterfront	Former/current parish of a radical or controversial clergyman
13	On a viaduct	Respected for the quality of it’s music and liturgy
14	The temple is close by a neighbourhood of non-believers	Former/current residence of a militant order
15	Coins are held in safety here before being inspected to ascertain their quality	Church-run hospital
16	Large Churchyard	Devoted to an obscure divine figure
17	Meeting place for intellectuals	An especially devout congregation
18	Leper chapel (or set aside for other quarantined persons)	A rather less than devout congregation
19	Close to a Market	Well-staffed with priests and lay assistants (possibly including anchorites)
20	Close to a fountain, conduit or other water supply	Definitely not well staffed with priest and lay assistants

Inspirations include: The Temple Church, Inns of Court; St Dunstan's-in-the-West, London; New St Pancras, Greater London; St Clement Danes, London; St Mary Le Strand, London; All Saints Margaret Street, London; St Mary Woolnoft, London; St George's Bloomsbury; Westminster Abbey; Westminster Cathedral; St Magnus Martyr [inexplicable splendour of white and gold]; St John's Smith Square; St James Garlickhyhte, London; St Olave Old Jewry; St Sepulchre without Newgate ['The bells of Old Bailey']; St Bride's, Fleet Street; St Peter ad Vincula, Tower of London; St George's Garrison Church, Woolwich; Methodist Central Hall, London; Quaker Friend's House, Euston Street, London; St Alphage, Greenwich; St Chad's, Shewsbury; King's College Chapel, Cambridge; Jesus College Chapel, Cambridge; St Edward's, Cambridge; The Round Church, Cambridge; Ely Cathedral; Cordoba Cathedral; St Mary's, Whitby; St Peter and St Paul's, Pickering; The Pantheon, Rome; The Jerusalemkerk, Bruges; St Anne's, Bruges; St Walburga's, Bruges. 

Go forth and investigate for yourself!

Questions for readers: Do these produce unique, interesting buildings?

Are any categories confusing?

Does this rely too heavily on the listed examples?

Is anything missing? Is anything superfluous?

Centaurs outside Eden

As the last post, design principle for Terrae Vertebrae was that initially that the races elder to humanity all balance against one another; see libertarian Dwarves, community-centric Elves. But I lacked a proper balance against Fauns and Satyrs (Caprines). I had invented them as a Gnome substitute, but since associated them with the 'Southern Influence' of C.S.Lewis's The Pilgrim's Regress (which is a blasted odd thing to grasp at for Character Alignment, but there you are).

What balances Caprines? Speculations at the time included Dvergar, Hrossa and centaurs.  Thinking about it now, a Marshwiggle would make a good contrast: deriving from Lewis, known for their gloom, enduring of the cold and ultimately, disciplined and logical (consider Puddleglum's role in the climax of The Silver Chair). [See also comments to this; the Caprine, as 'not a Gnome' is also 'not a Halfling'].

But creating a Northerner or Anti-Caprine class that slots into a putative 'Proto-Vertebrea' setting as a Prophet replacement requires a bit of mythological heft - which knocks out the Marshwiggle for this role (though by no means out of the picture altogether).

All caught up? Now, read on....

Dvergar are too similar to Dwarves. Hrossa, as Marshwiggles, lack that heft. As the title suggests, I think centaurs are the solution.

'But' says the Classically educated reader 'Centaurs are violent and savage, despite exceptions. They are unsuitable as a Regress-Northern species. Besides, they have a basis in Greek accounts of horse-borne nomads, set against the static and agrarian Greek city-states. Not quite Northern. This will not do.'

These are not unreasonable arguments against the centaur as the Anti-Caprine. However, my influences are relatively widespread.

First, consider the horse as a symbol. Yes, the wild horse is most Romantic and spectacular. But the horse as known to Western civilisation is a draught animal; hardly the lowest beast of burden, but not one let to roam free either. The horse's might and splendour is seen as something that is governed, and enhanced by being governed. Consider the uses of the horse in the Equestrian Portraits of Charles I.

Think also of the chariot and the stagecoach: horses - more than four, even - cooperating in drawing the burden across the countryside. Mention of the Chariot draws us nicely to the Allegory of the Chariot. Horse(s) and Man together are the (civilised) Human Soul. This is not the only link between the Rational and the Equine: consider Gulliver's Houynhnms - Rational to a fault and certainly inimical to humanity. Orderly and peaceable beasts, to be sure - but not altogether pleasant ones. Let us not forget that Lewis conjured the Northern as a diversion from the true course.

[A game for those of you who wish amusement: watch an episode of Star Trek and mentally replace every mention or appearance of Vulcans with Houynhnms.]

Speaking of Lewis, let us not neglect our Appendices N. Much twentieth [-first] century literature conjures the centaur as a wise teacher (every dwarf is Gimli; every centaur is Chiron). Narnia is an example; Harry Potter another.

What is more, the Northern temperament in The Pilgrim's Regress is not opposed, as such, to savagery or indulgence - even if austerity is one manifestation of it. The giant 'heroic nihilist' Savage feasts and drinks (from the skulls of his enemies, no less). Among his followers, one tribe is listed as 'Gangomani' (others being Marxomanni, Mussolimini and Swastici). Given the Northern temperament and the time of writing, the persons conjured are more likely the loyal triggermen of Capone-esque mob bosses than desperate muggers and school drop-outs. The Gangster, as conjured, is hardly teetotal or celibate - but rather indulges his passions at a given moment. Consider the stoic, cold maxim of Coppola's The Godfather: "It's not personal. It's strictly business."

So, yes, you can do a Marlon Brando impression as a centaur mob boss and not have be out of place. Moving away from such a specific genre trope, the 'work hard-play hard' culture would not be unfitting for a Regress-Northern character. Indeed, if the most Regress-Northern one can be is somewhat like Savage, the most 'centaur-esque' centaur need not be unlike the violent, rapacious classical centaur. 

Having taken you on that little journey, let's descend back to a firmer footing.  What does a Fifty-Two Pages centaur class look like?

THE CENTAUR

Size: 2

HP - d6+1+ CON +/-.

Attack Modifiers - None, initially
Mind Save 7 + WIS +/-
Speed Save 5 + DEX+/-
Body Save  7 + CON +/-

Knowledge    Notice Detail   Hear Noise   Handiwork   Stealth   Athletics
      [XX]               [ ]                        [X]              [ ]              [X]             [X]

Starts with one extra Language, and Spells: 2+INT bonus.

Level Advancement: +1 Melee, +1 Missile every Fourth Level
                                    +1 to all Saves every Odd Level
                                    +2 Spells per level

Centaur movement is as a Heavy Warhorse; that is, 15. However, climbing or anything that involves gripping with the feet is more difficult. Even a simple obstacle counts as Hard.

Spells cast as Prophet. A Centaur, as Regress-Northern belongs to "rigid systems whether sceptical or dogmatic, Aristocrats, Stoics, Pharisees, Rigorists, signed and sealed members of highly organised 'Parties'." This limits their spell choice, just as a Prophet's faith does.

Likewise, it gives them a 'sacred' weapon. There is a weapon emblematic of their creed; one they are trained or accustomed to use. To return to the Gangster-Centaur, this may merely be that Our Gang uses Baseball bats and The Gang the Next Block Over uses straight razors. (This starts to sound less like The Godfather and more like The Warriors).

Centaur encumbrance, as a dwarf, is as a STR 18 character. However, a third of these slots must be packed and unpacked by another character. (The human torso cannot turn 360 degrees.)

A Centaur can be ridden as a horse (though there may be taboos about this). However, it encumbers (as riding a horse) and may interfere with the centaur's abilities.

Much as Half-Giants, for armour to count as full-body, it must be built for a centaur. A humanoid mail-shirt (or similar cuirass) can be worn, but counts as Partial.

***

I am not an equestrian myself and have concentrated in this post more on cultural ideas than biological ones. Readers may wish to examine the SFF and Equines column from Tor Books. There are even some centaur specific posts, with this convenient diagram.

Opposites Detract and Ante-Eden Adventures

Tying into the last post on the Monastery of the Sword...

A design principle for Terrae Vertebrae was that initially that the races elder to humanity had an influence on different cultural strands of nations and states in Vertebrea. Succinctly put, contact with polytheist Dwarves drew out one set of religious impulses; contact with pantheist Elves drew out quite another. This wasn't quite carried over as fully as it might be into the full thing, but the shaped stone was re-used.

So then: Dwarves are polytheist, individualistic - libertarian even. Not unwilling to cooperate with one another, but rather self-reliant and self-driven. This notion of the Dwarf is in part a reaction from what has been before.

(No Scots accents. In writing this, it did occur to me that the dwarf of cliche might be seen as a melding of unpleasant Caledonian stereotypes: Dour Calvinistic pennypinchers and/or drunken berserkers. This needn't be the only route for Dwarves. I recall one conversation about a Renaissance Italy inspired setting in which Switzerland was an inspiration: mountains, independence, banking, heavy infantry.)

Further, there's something rather grounded about this, in terms of how it fits together. If anyone can do the whole 'pulling oneself up by the bootstraps' affair, or is able to live self-sufficnetly away from civilisation, it will be the folk who endure hardship better than humans, or are better craftsmen, or can carry greater loads. Dwarf as self-made man? If you like. 

Elves (same link as above) are panthiest and community focused. If everything is divine, everything deserves respect.  Vegetarian aside from when a beast must be culled- they can innately sense when this is acceptable. ‘Utopian’ culture [peaceful and harmonious to inhuman or impossible levels; good-place and no-place]; innate understanding and empathy for the group.  Would be confused and distressed that a human does not want to join in the games. This descends by stages into something that reaches the faintly dystopian as things get altogether Brave New World or altogether silly as things start to resemble the Flower Children of the 1960s - or an understanding thereof.

At least since Tolkien, Elves have been in touch with nature; being sensitive of the world around them and the people of it. That the keen-eyed and long-lived would become socially apt and unwilling to disrupt is not perhaps surprising - only a little less sensical than libertarian Dwarves.

Here is one set of opposing influences. Another is the Giants and the Fey.

The Fey I did not spend much time on, beyond imagining them to be out there, much of a piece with Clarke's Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell. Whimsical, otherworldly, cruel, immensely powerful but bound by codes of manners.

The Giants are described here. Vast humanoid beings, adept in the ways of the world, intensely physical. The inspiration is more Jack the Giantkiller than Jotunheim, but the Nephilim and Tim Powers had a lot to do with it.

The Giants are of the world and things physical; the Fey are of another world and things magical: appearances, illusions. A Giant is, in stories, often easily fooled: their senses, however acute, are deceived. The Fey are repelled by the things of this world: iron, notably. Even common courtesies such as being thanked; codes of obligation and respect. Rumplestiltskin even resisted having his name known. Of course, a Giant as such is altogether too much to be put into a game - hence Half-Giants. The Fey equivalent - which I never as such concived - would likely be the Changeling.

Finally, then, the Caprine. The Faun and Satyr. What are they? What do they represent? I have thought of them as wilful (not untrue) or worldly (if not in the Giant physical-power definition of the term). Neither is untrue, but neither seem enough.

A solution: they are the 'Southern' influences of C. S. Lewis's The Pilgrim's Regress discussed and more fully defined here.  Just how Southern is a matter for individual Caprines.

I never fully conceived of a Northern kindred to set against them, though less worldly Lewis creations like the Sorns did occur to me. The Pilgrim's Regress does have Northern - and deliberately non-human - Dwarves, though the term has been used already and to represent something different. But the rigid systems and rigours of Northern life do suggest a cousin of the Dwarf: the Duergar - or the Dvargir of Veins of the Earth, devoted only to Work and Blood (which is very Northern; just ask the giant Savage). Not that the Caprine-opposite would necessarily hit those extremes. Centaurs - so often portrayed in modern works as wise and stern sages - might be another alternative (perhaps they have rejected their wilder past, and thus cling to strict rules).

***

This is all very interesting, but what use is it?

Well, the balancing point of all this is Man; the neutral, the centre ground. If you will.

But let us imagine a setting - let us call it Ante-Eden or Proto-Vertebrae - before humanity is created and placed in Vertebrea. There is explictly a Creator, but a distant one. It may be the Eightfold God, but there is no Eightfold Faith - for reasons best known to the Creator, Aspects of the Godhead or such concerned

These six proposed races exist in a land (Giants Proper and the Fey in the background). Those races opposed to one another are in tension, possibly even conflict - with allaiances of convenience with the other four.

The six races can fit nicely mechanically into the classes of The 52 Pages. Dwarves and Elves are pre-existing, Caprines replace Gnomes, Half-Giants as Fighters, Changelings as Wizards. 'Northerners' (centaurs/sorns/duergar) are Prophets: limited in weapon selection - they are only trained or restricted by a code to one weapon - and limited, if skilful in choice of spells (unless heterodox wizards). Rogues rather slip to one side. If nothing else, this is an explanation for the different powers of Character Classes.

This would be sufficient by itself: adventures in a young land, full of energy and antediluvian beasts. A party of adventurers driven by contradictory impulses.

But then a legion of angels claim a patch of prime real estate and start laying out wonderful gardens. How will these protagonists respond to the coming race? The promised capstone of creation? Will they make common cause with a Miltonian Lucifer-analogue? Will they welcome the new inhabitant of the world? How disappointed will they be in humankind (as personified by Ask/Embla, Meschia/Meschiane, &c.)?

[To return to Lewis again, you may wish to read Perelandra.]

This is fertile ground - though it seems quite devoid of ruins and dungeons. Not to mention a theological mire. But fertile enough that I should like to put together a Changeling class for The 52 Pages, and to sketch out the Northerner or Anti-Caprine.