[✗] [Addition] Soul Tree Classification and Healing

[Gallic 1051]

In other words, "[Addition] please let a few arguments end"

 

Classifying as Fae:

Alright, what are fae, as far as we've seen so far on the Server? Magical creatures that are inherently connected to the wilds by the very essence of their being, that derive power from the forces of nature, that are part plant either by association or literally, that regrow when they die, that are harmed in varying degrees by taint, and that have a connection to the Aspects again inherent to their being. They seem to be a single, branching classification of being, like the race "Orc" is despite there being several vastly different genealogies. Or in simpler terms; Fae is a catch-all term for nature-y magical creatures.

 

Good lord, Dryads count, apparently- Nothing against Dryads, mind. I like Dryads, and I like that they count.

 

A Tree Lord is a magical creature that is inherently connected to the wilds by the very essence of their being, that derive-... You get it. However, it has been argued in both the past and recent times that they do not count as fae by virtue of it being an ascension from one form to another, rather than a naturally-born state of being. (Digress for a moment to look again to Dryads.) It has also been argued that they do count, because they fit every criteria for fae, and almost none for being a descendant. All that really remains is their soul, and judging by the fact that Soul Tree'd humans no longer die of old age, that's likely altered as well. Thus, confusion and arguments are created when one or two call themselves Fae either IC or OOC, and fun is not had.

 

This seems minor but you'd be shocked to find the hours of arguments that would be saved just by having an official stance.

 

TL;DR: Arguing that they are fae.

 

Proposal:

The ritual that binds a Druid's soul to the earth also carries such great change that, when they awaken from their first sleep, they are reborn with different metaphysics entirely. A new state of being. The Aspects have accepted them as one of their children; They are one of the fae, a magical creature inherently linked to nature.

 

Being healed by Blight Healing:

Next is a debate that seems to change intermittently between various players and Druid LMs: Whether Tree Lords are effected by Blight Healing or not. At the moment, I believe the stance is 'no', however there's still a lot of contention among folks because there's no official answer that can be passed around.

 

Alright, so, as it is now, Tree Lords cannot be magically healed period, as far as I know. Not by monks, clerics, or (I believe) ascended. They have weird tree bodies that don't count as applicable targets for the magic for many reasons that aren't being debated here. And further, alchemy and plain ol' mundane healing are weird for them sometimes. But, such is the cost of having a disposable body. It doesn't matter much if you can just regrow next spring anyway.

 

The problem arises when some people- Even some LMs in the past- believe that Tree Lords can be magically healed by Blight Healing specifically, on account of their unique connection and being 100% literal nature making them an applicable target for the magic... Which would mean that while, like any other tree, they cannot be directly or significantly healed by magic meant for descendants, they can be healed by magic meant for nature, which is notably less common and much more specialized. Blight Healing, according to some, would work like Monk Healing for them.

 

It's an interesting flavor, probably about as fun as doing weird tree stuff with a wound and a lot more fun than just dying so you can completely regenerate. Ents (citation needed) and Spriggans, too, can be healed by Blight Healing, for other examples of tree-people being healed by it. It also serves as a counterbalance to the fact that those creatures can be corrupted and hurt by the same forces that taint a land-- Something seldom roleplayed for Soul Trees, but something that is indeed possible and has occured multiple times in the past. However, despite that, it's never clear if we are effected by the other side of that force, Blight Healing. The other tree-people can, so why can't we?

 

TL;DR: Arguing that they should be effected Blight Healing.

 

Proposal:

With their new state of being comes several costs; The scorn of magical healing arts being one. Their bodies, being projections of the wild and pure Druidic constructs, are alien to most magics, even benign, and thus normally unhealable. However, there is at least one notable exception to this rule: Blight Healing. Being so inherently tied to the wilds now, the essence that serves to heal forests and lands now serves to heal them as well.

 

There were more points but I cut them out. You're welcome.

[Aesopian 1080]

tree lords sound badly like something to do with weed 

[Sky 0]

The term 'fae' is an odd one, and if you wish to refer to yourself as one go ahead but it's not needed to be labeled them all as a whole. As for blight healing, that is already how soul trees are healed, because clerics and other 'healer class' people are unable to do anything to our bodies.

[Gladuos 857]

I support this lore. +1

And contrary to what Sky is saying there has been no real answer to these points, and if there has been, they have been conflicting and undecided. These proposals are being written down as to clarify, and make an official, concrete, statement... Or to at least come to a conclusive one through discussion as a result of these proposals, I'm sure.

 

And yes, they should by all rights be fey if dryads are worthy of the label. I'd say they fit the same trope of being connected to a tree and yet go even further by literally becoming said tree.

[Gallic 1051]

1 minute ago, Sky said:

As for blight healing, that is already how soul trees are healed,

SEE? This is what I mean. Thing is, there's been LM confirmation for that not being the case, as well as confirmation for it being the case.

[Sky 0]

3 minutes ago, Gladuos said:

I support this lore. +1

And contrary to what Sky is saying there has been no real answer to these points, and if there has been, they have been conflicting and undecided. These proposals are being written down as to clarify, and make an official, concrete, statement... Or to at least come to a conclusive one through discussion as a result of these proposals, I'm sure.

 

1 minute ago, TheCritsyBear said:

SEE? This is what I mean. Thing is, there's been LM confirmation for that not being the case, as well as confirmation for it being the case.

 

You shouldn't ask an LM that doesn't know anything about soul trees. Corvoo unfortunately is inactive, and I am unsure if Delmodan knows much about soul trees. However when Corvoo handed me my soul tree he said that since we are living wood, only blight healing actually repairs us, and to be fair that makes sense.

[Jistuma 1995]

Thing is, blight healing does not heal people, it restores damaged plantations and land. Saying it heals a tree lord is bypassing one of it's redlines and shouldn't be allowed. They already fully heal themselves if a wound is not deadly.

[Gladuos 857]

3 minutes ago, Sky said:

You shouldn't ask an LM that doesn't know anything about soul trees. Corvoo unfortunately is inactive, and I am unsure if Delmodan knows much about soul trees. However when Corvoo handed me my soul tree he said that since we are living wood, only blight healing actually repairs us, and to be fair that makes sense.

 

I've actually asked Corvoo and he's given me an opposing response to such. It seems that after asking someone who knows anything, they come to change their mind again and again! This would basically put a nail in it.

[Avacyn 1706]

this is dedication and i admire that

[Sky 0]

1 minute ago, Jistuma said:

Thing is, blight healing does not heal people, it restores damaged plantations and land. Saying it heals a tree lord is bypassing one of it's redlines and shouldn't be allowed. They already fully heal themselves if a wound is not deadly.

That's not how it works, soul trees for one aren't people they are plants, wood, nature. As well as the fact that soul trees don't have a self-restoration ability.

[Aesopian 1080]

honestly this changes nothing. the relative power level of the druids is the same and all this makes different is the flavor. like from strawberry to cherry. 

 

it would be cool if you could heal the druid's body with regular druidic healing magic, but if you cast blight healing on their soul tree, it heals their body as well. so say if a druid is in tahn and their soul tree is in ceru and their arm gets chopped off, some other druid can blight heal the soul tree belonging to the wounded druid and their arm suddenly reconstitutes

 

that'd be really OP but it'd be cool and shiny at least 

[Jistuma 1995]

Just now, Sky said:

That's not how it works, soul trees for one aren't people they are plants, wood, nature. As well as the fact that soul trees don't have a self-restoration ability.

Pretty sure they did, maybe I forgot. Either wya, 'they are plants' doesn't change the fact that they are still people. Blight healing's redline should unclude all characters. If it isn't said in the lore of either blight healing or tree lord, then by all standards, it's not allowed (yet at least).

[Sky 0]

1 minute ago, Jistuma said:

Pretty sure they did, maybe I forgot. Either wya, 'they are plants' doesn't change the fact that they are still people. Blight healing's redline should unclude all characters. If it isn't said in the lore of either blight healing or tree lord, then by all standards, it's not allowed (yet at least).

They aren't people though, because clerics cannot heal them and neither can paladins or ascended, they are literally plant-matter, or more correctly, tree-matter. Their bodies, organs, everything is made out of wood and as such, it makes sense for blight healing to be able to heal wood. It's a redline to not be able to heal normal flesh and blood people, but soul trees aren't flesh and blood people. It's a rare occurance and is a genuinely interesting addition, no need to piss all over it simply because it's a well known fact that you have a raging hate-boner towards the druids.

[Matheus 525]

Didn't like the obscure existence of soul trees. Glad someone's making an effort to shed some light on it.

 

+1

6 minutes ago, Jistuma said:

Pretty sure they did, maybe I forgot. Either wya, 'they are plants' doesn't change the fact that they are still people. Blight healing's redline should unclude all characters. If it isn't said in the lore of either blight healing or tree lord, then by all standards, it's not allowed (yet at least).

Why not look at this matter from a more scientific angle? If blight healing is capable of mending plant tissue, what makes these "soul-trees" an exception to the rule?

 

To me, it seems like barring its basic concept from going to work for this particular case would be no less than jarring, Jist.

[Gladuos 857]

Whether they have been able to be blight healed in the past or not is irrelevant, this proposal is saying that they should be able to as an exception and to make up for their inability to be healed in most other cases already.