Songwitch

i thoroughly enjoyed reading this more than any lore page or culture post (except absolutism of course n.n) edit: forced PK for IRP selfmade human printers or we ride at dawn is my verdict

no Kani compatibility, no upvote 😒

Tanayem aen Tarem, one of the few oldest Lye’naeran alive, came into possession of one of this missive’s copies; when her keen, elvish eyes first noticed a tattered paper, the ground and mud had laid claim to it … and seemed filthy, ‘no more than a comercial flyer perhaps’ the elf thought. Something in her made her kneel, stretch a hand outward, and grasp the missive. A quick pan-over almost forced her hand and she was one flick of the wrist away from letting it marinate in wet soil forever, until she noticed, recognized, and widened her eyes at - liken to full-moons - the names of her cousin and his wife! It would, however, take far more than the equally fallacious tongue of the Warlock who wrote this for her to believe such claims; Tanayem had to prod and probe herself…

A strange thing, to witness from afar when Word always reaches yonder and beyond … even to those like us who keep apart from the quarrels of druidic circles and their patrons. I have heard whispers carried along in the Wind, of death and rot and decay, and though the full Truth eludes the sieves of my knowing, something compels me and mine to breathe and speak - if only once - to you, children of Irrin: the Wilds object of your faith long since Old Gladewynn are trembling, and you with them. My Blood remembers the centuries of persecution and tribulations by your ancestors, how our foremothers were cast down and would still never bow or bend, thus I will not pretend grief for your fallen but neither shall I answer with the cruelty that was never spared us. So, hear my words and know that they are true: if you stay blinded, you will burn with the demi-gods you claim to love and revere. But we will never burn, because we are the daughters and sons of the first river, Water itself! Remember what your ancestors once knew before they abandoned Malin’s Mandate and the Aspects claimed their devotion, and know why Lye’naeran call you oathbreakers: it is not them, or the Mani, that makes us who we are; it is us. Us. Acaelan’s Breath filled us all long before any pagan deity wandered our sacred groves and laid claim … what you seek in them was never theirs to grant. The Light shines through you, that is the Truth. Anchor yourselves, cousins, no longer to patrons that so easily fall from grace for anything born within this world may yet be twisted within it, and stand as what you were made to be: heirs to the first covenant sung at the dawn of our making, by our Maker. You are not vassals, or vessels, to middle powers that can and will crumble eventually. The Creator remains even when all other things have passed and been forgotten. So, return to your roots, place your faith in the only power older and greater than the Messengers you name gods, and our sanctuaries may open in welcoming. Do not mistake this for mockery or revenge … bitterness would be an easy answer after what ‘We, the Devout Folk’ have endured at the behest of those who thought themselves keepers of balance, and yet we feel no satisfaction in your demise. Let the Hand of Fate fall on your executioners and take back that which nature itself does not wish them to hold; every age births deceivers and while I shan’t chase nor denounce their proclamations, you - lost Alderfolk - can find in us, the very few yours scorned in yore, the means to survive. The conditions are made clear: remember God and in His remembrance eternity is assured. LYE’NAERAN OF OLD MALINOR

Latra receives the invitation and surprised, that anyone would lend such to a woman like her, a mere curator and fashion amateur, looks out the window to draw in a breath of fresh air. There she let the wind blow, caress her hair, face, then in a blink whirled around to walk across the room ... the woman stopped before a chalkboard and wrote down the event's date, eager to attend!

FROM THE CELOSIAN COURTS’ MASTER OF ARTIFACTS, I M P E R I A L M A T E R I A L C U L T U R E GENERAL ARTIFACTOLOGY •─────────────────•𖥠•─────────────────• •─────────────────•𖥠•─────────────────• W R I T T E N B Y L A T R A R O C A S O L A N O P U B L I S H E D B Y T H E N O R T H E R N G E O G R A P H I C A L S O C I E T Y O N T H E 7 T H O F T H E G R A N D H A R V E S T , 2 0 7 1 •─────────────────•𖥠•─────────────────• IMPERIAL MATERIAL CULTURE AN INTRODUCTION INTO THE STUDY OF ARTIFACTS AFTER MUCH DELIBERATION, it has been decided that publishing this course, although primarily Imperial in nature, will help art and history amateurs as well as inexperienced curators attain a general understanding of how objects acquire, sustain, and transmit authority within - and beyond - the Empire of Man. What lies here is a syllabus originally intended to be privately taught to the Wards of the Celosian Courts, structured across three modules that move from defining what distinguishes an artifact from an ordinary object, to examining how provenance, succession, and institutional power shape meaning, and finally to understanding how behavior and handling reinforces (or desestabilizes) that same meaning. DISCLAIMER: This document was originally created as an internal reference text for Imperial students, and was not initially written for a global audience. While the language utilized is Empire-centric, it is my hope that the knowledge within will be useful in a broader context. The Imperial focus of this document is not intended to be representative of the Northern Geographical Society’s values, and has been left as-is for the sake of authenticity. ON SIGNIFICANCE WHAT MAKES AN OBJECT MATTER The purpose of this lesson is to establish a foundational distinction: not all objects are equal in meaning, and not all objects that survive are artifacts. Before one can study Imperial material culture, you must understand why certain things are preserved, restricted, and/or revered while others pass unnoticed through daily life. First, an object, in its most basic sense, is anything shaped, owned or used by human hands. Most objects exist to serve a function; they are created, employed, worn, handled, and eventually discarded or replaced (rarely repaired). Their value, then, lies primarily in use, and their loss is inconsequential beyond immediate inconvenience or personal sentiment. An artifact, by contrast, is an object that has ceased to be defined by its function alone. It has acquired meaning beyond itself, meaning that persists even when the object is no longer useful, wearable or even operable. What distinguishes an artifact, thus, is not craftsmanship, expense or rarity; it is significance. And significance arises when an object becomes tied to events, authority, memory, continuity... An artifact matters because it anchors narratives, legitimizes claims, and connects the present to a recognized past. Once an object reaches this state, it is no longer interchangeable, and its loss would constitute something more than inconvenience: erasure. In other words, an object becomes an artifact at the moment when it can no longer be replaced without consequence, and this difference is clearly relational. The same object may exist as mundane in one context and as an artifact in another; this transition depends on association, not material. An object remains mundane when: its value lies primarily in function; its replacement would not alter historical understanding; and its meaning is private, limited or transient. It however becomes an artifact when: it is linked to authority, collective memory or institutional continuity; its history matters as much as its existence; and its handling, placement or interpretation becomes regulated. Therefore, artifacts demand care because they are charged, they carry accumulated meaning that ought to be preserved and controlled, at times. CRAFTED AND SYMBOLIC VALUES At this stage, it is essential to distinguish between the two forms of value that are often confused when working with either objects or artifacts. On one hand, crafted value refers to the qualities inherent in an object´s making (the skill of an artisan, the refinement of materials, the expense of production...). It is visible and measurable. It can be replicated, improved upon or surpassed. On the other, symbolic value arises from use, context and recognition. It is not embedded in the object itself but in what the object represents, and as such it cannot be manufactured on demand for it accumulates through time, association, and acknowledgment by institutions or communities. For example, an object may possess high crafted value and little symbolic value. Conversely, an artifact may be materially plain while symbolically irreplaceable, and confusing the two leads to superficial judgments and in some contexts serious error. Within our Imperial court, the ability to recognize symbolic value is a form of literacy, a tool for governance because it, too, relies on symbols, and artifacts are among those. AGE, USE AND ASSOCIATION Furthermore, having established the distinction between object and artifact, there is another misconception that often follows... that age alone confers importance, and that use diminishes value. Both assumptions are false, and both obscure how material culture actually operates within our Imperial systems. An object may be ancient, yes, and yet meaningless to historical understanding if it lacks association, context, consequence or any type of recognition. Conversely, an object of recent origin may already function as an artifact if it is tied to foundational events, authority, transition... The Empire itself contains numerous examples of objects whose symbolic weight was immediate rather than gradual, one of these being the small golden tiara attributed to the former Imperial princess Livia Caseonia; her disownment gave that object enough significance to elevate it to the status of artifact. Age becomes meaningful only when it intersects with: continuity (links multiple periods together); authority (legitimizes or embodies power); and memory (preserves an event, decision or rupture). Without these, it remains a neutral condition and never a qualifying one. But then, if age does not define significance, what does? One of the most decisive factors is association, which is often reinforced through use. Contrary to common intuition, use does not necessarily erode an object's importance; in many cases, it is precisely what produces significance. Objects can gain meaning through repeated presence in rituals, governance, inheritance, daily practice tied to authority... Through such repetition, they cease to be neutral. Association operates on several levels: personal association (linking an object to a specific individual of note); institutional association (binding it to a court, office or legal function); or event-based association (where the object becomes inseparable from a historical moment), among others. Once an object accrues these associations, its meaning no longer belongs to the individual user/owner and instead becomes shared, regulated, and preserved. It is also worth noting that at a certain threshold, continued use may threaten than reinforce significance; excessive handling can introduce physical degradation, normalize what should remain exceptional or even undermine the object's symbolic gravity. This is why artifacts are often withdrawn from ordinary circulation once their meaning has solidified, because their authority depends on both what they represent and on how rarely and deliberately they are encountered. Thus, the transition from object to artifact often culminates in restricted use, because its meaning has become too dense to risk dilution. Ultimately, taken together, age, use, and association reveal a central principle of what we are studying, of Imperial material culture: significance is cumulative and rarely inherent. Artifacts are not born; they are made through repetition, recognition, regulation... and their value lies not in what they are but in what has gathered around them. ON HISTORY AND AUTHORITY EMPIRE OF OLD AND EMPIRE OF NEW The purpose of this lesson is to move from what an artifact is to where it comes from and why it carries authority. Having established that significance is relational rather than inherent, we now turn to the structures, the foundations, that produce, recognize, and transform that same significance over time. In other words, this lesson is about the narratives attached to objects and artifacts as much as both of these themselves. Within Imperial material culture, the distinction between the Empire of Old and our Empire of New goes beyond chronology… it is symbolic, too. The Empire of Old refers to the prior Imperial formations whose authority has long since collapsed, fragmented or transformed, while the Empire of New refers to the current sociopolitical body that claims continuity and legacy with that past while simultaneously redefining itself. Artifacts inherited from the Empire of Old are often burdened with excess meaning; they may embody legitimacy, grievance, nostalgia, rupture… all at once, so their authority is retrospective because it derives from what they once represented and from how they survived their empire’s dissolution. As such, they are rarely neutral. For example, an old piece of regalia may be revered, contested or deliberately suppressed depending on whether it supports or undermines our New Empire’s claims and values. By contrast, artifacts of the Empire of New are often in the process of becoming… their significance is not fully settled and in many cases is actively being constructed. Objects associated with coronations, new offices, reformed institutions or even foundational moments may acquire symbolic weight rapidly, even if they lack age. As such, their authority is prospective rather than retrospective; they matter because they are meant to endure, to be remembered, and to anchor renewed continuity going forward. This distinction matters because it shapes how artifacts themselves are treated. Objects from the Old Empire are frequently conserved as ‘evidence’, whereas objects of the New Empire are curated as instruments. One preserves memory and the other produces it. PROVENANCE - WHERE ARTIFACTS COME FROM The term provenance refers to the documented origin, custody, and transmission of an object, and it answers not only where an artifact comes from but how it arrived here and under what authority it changed hands. Without it, without provenance, an object’s meaning is unstable (and with it, even a modest object may carry considerable symbolic weight). Artifacts may originate in several ways: institutional origin, such as items commissioned by Imperial offices, courts, or religious authorities (royal ornaments, for example); personal origin, where an object becomes significant through its association with a specific individual of note; event-based origin, when an otherwise mundane object becomes inseparable from a decisive moment; and recovered origin, where objects from the Empire of Old are excavated, seized, inherited, or reclaimed, and recontextualized. In the Empire of Old, provenance often fractures, meaning that records are lost, custody is or has been interrupted, and thus meaning itself becomes contested. An object may pass through many hands, accruing competing interpretations. And in the Empire of New, provenance is frequently formalized with urgency, i.e. inventories are compiled, archives established, narratives fixed precisely to prevent ambiguity… Therefore, provenance is something more than descriptive. It is an act of control, for to establish provenance is to assert authority over interpretation, and to deny it is to weaken an object’s claim to significance. WHO DECIDES SIGNIFICANCE So, then, who decides significance? Well, it is never decided by the object alone. It is conferred through recognition, as you may remember from the first module, and recognition itself is exercised by power. In Imperial contexts, significance is most often determined by institutions: the Celosian Courts, the Imperial Crown, the Holy Mother Church of the True Faith, and other legal bodies or sanctioned scholarly offices like the apolitical Northern Geographical Society. These entities decide which objects are preserved, displayed, restricted, destroyed… You name it. Their decisions are reinforced through decrees, ritual use, documentation, and of course physical placement. However, authority is not absolute, and significance could also emerge from collective memory, popular reverence or even persistent tradition, sometimes in tension with official narratives. In other words, an object dismissed by these entities may still function as an artifact within a community, while an officially sanctioned artifact may fail to command genuine recognition. This is why disputes over artifacts are rarely about materials themselves; they are about legitimacy, because to control an artifact’s meaning is to control the story it tells and, by extension, the past it represents. WHAT CHANGES AN OBJECT’S MEANING OVER TIME And with all that, one essential question remains. What is it that changes an object’s meaning over time? We know significance is not fixed at the moment it is recognized, that meaning can shift as contexts change, authorities rise or fall, and narratives are rewritten. Let us highlight a few forces that alter an object’s meaning: political transition, such as regime change, succession, reform…; reinterpretation, where new scholarship or ideology reframes an object’s role; displacement, when an object is removed from its original setting; and silence or revival, where an object falls out of use and later returns with altered significance. For example, an artifact once associated with unity may come to symbolize oppression; and in other cases, an object once mundane may later be revered as something foundational. Importantly, loss of function does not imply loss of meaning and sometimes it is precisely when an object is no longer used that its symbolic weight intensifies. This is why artifacts must be studied diachronically rather than statically, because to understand what an artifact is, one must understand what it has been and what it is being made to mean now. ON CUSTODY AND HANDLING WHAT HANDLING REALLY MEANS This is the last lesson and its purpose is to tie everything together: in the first module we established what an artifact is and in the second we explored where authority and meaning come from. This third module is meant to address how we behave in the presence of artifacts, of significance. Within Imperial material culture, to handle and to care for an artifact is to arbitrate its interpretation, authority and meaning. Therefore, artifact regulation is not just about physical fragility as much as it is about preserving hierarchies and controlling narratives and symbolic gravity. So, what is handling really? It is commonly misunderstood as physical contact when, in truth, it encompasses four dimensions: physical contact itself; spatial proximity; interpretative framing; and ceremonial use. On the other hand, to lift an artifact without authorization is an obvious violation, but misidentifying it, to joke in its presence or make a mockery of its meaning; these are forms of mishandling. Handling, therefore, is also relational because through it one acknowledges that artifacts carry accumulated meaning and that such meaning can be reinforced (or diluted) through behavior. There are objects in daily life that may be grasped and touched without thought… artifacts are not among them, for even when physically robust, their symbolic value demands control and restraint. Improper handling risks both damage to the artifact and erosion of the structure or narrative it supports. PHYSICAL HANDLING PROTOCOLS As to who may touch what and when, in Imperial contexts access is stratified. This means that the right to touch an artifact is barely on curiosity or proximity and more so on authorization, and that authorization may derive from: office (Emperor, Crown Royals, Court Officials and other appointed custodians); function (restoration, archival work, ceremonial preparation); and ritual necessity (coronation, legal affirmations, etc.). Outside these conditions contact is absolutely restricted. There are also temporal conditions. Certain artifacts may be handled only at specific intervals (anniversaries, ceremonies, rites of passage or succession) while remaining withdrawn from public view at all other times. Their rarity of contact sustains their gravity because constant exposure would normalize it, and normalization diminishes meaning. Gloves, supervised environments, documentation of movement and transport, and witnessed transfer itself may appear as bureaucratic excess but prove vital as they formalize accountability and reinforce the seriousness of custody over an artifact. STORAGE, DISPLAY, AND CONCEALMENT Artifacts are stored because controlled preservation (specific conditions of light, humidity, containment, and, of course, restricted access) ensure their physical survival, but also because their storage also signals that their authority does not depend on visibility or exposure. Some artifacts maintain cultural power precisely because they are rarely seen. Display, by contrast, is declarative. It is meant to make a statement about what the artifact is chosen to foreground; when an artifact is placed in a hall, treasury, gallery… it is also being positioned within a specific narrative. Display frames meaning through: placement height and orientation; accompanying text or inscriptions; spatial relation to other artifacts; and context of ceremonies or audiences. Improper display can and will distort significance, however, as for example an artifact of solemn authority displayed as a bejewelled ornament would lose weight… whereas one contextualized with precision would gain further “clarity”. Furthermore, concealment is sometimes necessary to strategically regulate those artifacts whose extreme visibility could destabilize, provoke dispute, complicate succession... Because not every artifact must be visible to remain operative within our collective memory; some function as latent, passive, authority (acknowledged but withheld and controlled). LANGUAGE AND COURTLY COMPORTMENT The final dimension of handling is linguistic and behavioral, the words used around an artifact shape perception and as such to refer to Imperial regalia as simply an “ornament” diminishes it. It must be referred to as a “symbol”, so as to clarify its function. Thus language must be extremely precise, measured and appropriate to each context. Courtly comportment itself requires formal titles where applicable, avoidance of casual/dismissive phrasing, recognition of institutional ownership and a clear distinction between opinion and (documented) fact, FOR speech itself is a form of contact, and flippancy erodes as surely as careless touch. Posture, tone, silence… They also communicate acknowledgment and recognition. Therefore and to conclude, if the first modules taught us that artifacts are defined by accumulating meaning and that such meaning is structured through authority and provenance, then this last module teaches that artifacts must be handled in ways that preserve the very systems and cultures that made them significant. In Imperial material culture, discipline around artifacts goes above and beyond aesthetic refinement, it is a necessity, and the Celosian Courts, for example, do not regulate access because artifacts are delicate, but because meaning itself is. And meaning, once diluted, is far more difficult to restore than gold trinkets or woven silks. •─────────────────•𖥠•─────────────────• SIGNED, Her Ladyship, DOÑA LATRA ROCASOLANO, ARTIFACT CURATOR @Songwitch Hija Legítima de Cantacuervos, Master of Imperial Artifacts of the Celosian Courts, Historian & Fashion Revisionist of the Northern Geographical Society Her Ladyship, DAME MANON YVAINE VON VOLKRICH, SUPERVISOR @esotericas Dame of Arts, Lady of Deguise, Baroness of Guise and Distrugestadt, President of the Northern Geographical Society P U B L I S H E D U N D E R T H E A U T H O R I T Y O F T H E N G S “ A D T E R R A S N O V A S ” THE VIEWS AND INFORMATION CONTAINED WITHIN THIS DOCUMENT ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF ITS AUTHOR(S). THE NORTHERN GEOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY IS NOT RESPONSIBLE OR LIABLE FOR ANY CONTENTS. •─────────────────•𖥠•─────────────────•

@kennyr @Diogen @Tristan (I can't remember the exact IGN, my first ever mentor in Vaelya...) @BobBox @Pompilidae @squakhawk mreow @luv @Rig @Nectorist @PolarLoLs me pocket figura

EXPEDITION REPORT ON ADRIAN MURDER CASE •─────────────────•𖥠•─────────────────• •─────────────────•𖥠•─────────────────• W R I T T E N B Y L A T R A R O C A S O L A N O P U B L I S H E D B Y T H E N O R T H E R N G E O G R A P H I C A L S O C I E T Y O N T H E 10TH O F T H E A M B E R C O L D , 2 0 6 9 •─────────────────•𖥠•─────────────────• A DROWNED FOLLY EXPEDITION REPORT ON ADRIAN MURDER CASE IN THE YEAR 20xx OR 237 OF THE SECOND AGE, during a formal meeting of the Northern Geographical Society's Expedition Corps, I - along many other members - were invited to investigate a reported murder in the territory of Adria, vassal of the country of Idunia. This invitation was lent to us by the local Sheriff, who postulated that the victim was one of two brothers who wandered the oaken woods near the outskirts of Adria and failed to return with the other. The following Society members integrated the inquiry, headed of course by the mentioned sheriff: Dame Manon Yvaine von Distrugere (President and Chief of Research), Icroth, Soren, Bimble, Vir, Lorinthia, Klink and Ruby. I attended solely in the capacity of scribe, tasked as such with the recordkeeping of the proceedings, observations, irregularities and conclusions of the investigation as it unfolded in real time. What began as - we thought - a woodland homicide ended up, over the course of the day, expanding into a complicated case involving riddles, concealed mechanisms and maritime relics, all at Heinrik Heights' Mining Camp. — INVESTIGATION COMMENCED OFF-ROAD, where the two brothers entered the adrian woods and only one came out, beyond the slope leading toward the Stefan Euler Memorial Bridge ... where our party was guided into the treeline toward what seemed an off-grid campsite. The first cluster of dwellings was modest, meager houses and timber structures that despite their humility appeared to be maintained and well-kept. Chickens wandered freely, their coops nearby, pecking at the earth; nothing bore signs of abandonment or violence. "We venture forth", declared the local Sheriff, and we advanced towards the second portion of the campsite, far wider and open, with structures more dispersed. Before one faraway dwelling I noticed a wooden sign that read: "HELP NEEDED - Contact Larxina!". Plain lettering and message, though to me, it felt slightly incongruous. It was then, in the same treeline surrounding this second section, that the tenor of our investigation saw itself shift; two burial sites were discovered, shallow and recent for the soil had not yet fully settled. President Manon, Soren and the Sheriff gravitated toward the incline over the hill in the direction of Heinrik Heights' Mining Camp, but before reaching the rise, Vir - scouting behind - confirmed a third burial site. The entire party halted and regrouped, proceeding only toward the entrance of the mining camp when all were accounted for ... there, at its mouth, our bravest pushed forward, noticing upon first descent multiple crates scattered among three or more excavated pits. A small rivulet ran through the old quarry and fed into a sizable pond further ahead, a certain murkiness to its water, and the air grew heavy ... the stench of rot struck us all. Bimble was first to identify a peculiarity: a keyhole carved between the rocks of one quarry wall, the one closest to the shaft by which we descended. At nearly the same moment Klink located a black sarcophagus embedded deep within the stone, all the way across, and it was sealed shut, deteriorated but somehow intact. We surveyed the surrounding rockface more closely before anything else, and what appeared to be a single keyhole revealed itself to be three, aligned within the old quarry wall, then the coffin itself, whose blackstone surface held three stanzas. "First of currents, I cradle the silent tide. Where the waters part and the river's mouth opens wide. Let me rest where the journey begins". "I linger where shadows blend with light. High among branches neither first nor last in sight. Place me where the twilight waits". "The final blaze, where shaft exhales. Perched aloft where men once climbed, atop the scaffold trails. Stand me last, and crown the hall with fire". Klink immediately drew the connection between the three stanzas and the three keyholes carved into the quarry stonewall, and Vir proposed that the first riddle referred to a water source. At this moment Bimble noticed something gleaming at the top of the ravine from which the murky water flowed and poured downward. Upon retrieval it was revealed to be the jagged fragment of a blue coral and its mere presence was alarming for coral is tropical, a thing of the sea, not of inland quarries. One last stanza was revealed unto us, painted in dried blood, once a consensus was reached about inserting this piece of coral into any of the keyholes: "The shaft whispers in anger, waters twist and rise. The colors know their order, and heed the wise. Place them as they sleep, or feel sorrow's surprise". Thus, Klink attempted to insert it into the first keyhole, rotating it several times before angling it roughly fortive-five degrees - it slid into place with resistance. A 'click' echoed through. The earth groaned, briefly at least. Vir then turned his attention to the second riddle and scanned the treetops, and high within the ravine canopy, something sparkled from the cup of a languid branch extended outward, toward the sky. His first attempt to retrieve it failed, prompting him and the group to craft a makeshift net from paradisian field rope, net that would be affixed to the tip of his spear, and with a sharp thrust, a lavender fragment of bubble coral dislodged and plopped down on Bimble's hat without harm. The third and last fragment was soon spotted by Icroth, caught amidst the wooden scaffolding above the shaft roof ... a fiery red one. While some of us theorized the interpretation of the word 'twilight' in the second riddle to mean the middle position (i.e. the second keyhole), Icroth moved to claim his clue and eventually Bimble inserted the violet coral into one of the keyholes, in the central section of the quarry wall. Another series of clicks followed, the earth trembling once more, and the putrid air grew stronger. Concerned for the party's safety, Klink proposed that we distance ourselves before the last key is inserted; that we did, and before Icroth fitted it into the keyhole, a rope was secured around his waist as precaution - to yank him away and out of danger. Upon the final insertion, all three fragments began rotating at once until they pointed one to the other. Now the earth cried, and dust and flecks of mica rained down on us all along the quarry's walls. Silence came after, then a grinding hiss followed. "It's open!", Vir called out, for the black sarcophagus had been unsealed. Icroth unwound the rope from his waist as the party advanced, whatever lay within that stone-case announced itself by smell ... one rancid, thick and unmistakably putrified. When the lid, ajar, was forced aside, a corpse was revealed dressed in the garb of a seafarer: tricorne hat, long coat and broad bet set with maritime fittings. The attire alone was enough to tell he was a Shipmaster. Pondering befell us until ... the corpse stirred! From the water and stone around us rose a strange miasma, and from it three drowned VODNIKS, bloated and slick with decay, dragging themselves upright from the pond's edge. At that same moment, the Shipmaster animated fully, also undead and with cutlass in hand! Vir moved to strike first, cutting into one of the rising three and leaving Icroth the opening needed to thrust his blade through the creature’s back. The second foul thing lunged toward Ruby with open maws, ready to bite down, and the third one slashed across Klink’s back, as too did the Shipmaster swing against Vir’s behind - his armor cushioning the blow. Finding no purchase in Ruby, the second VODNIK broke toward Soren and the Sheriff attempted an interception; he carved a chunk from its head but it advanced nonetheless. Nearby, Vir drove his spear forward once again to fell his foe as it desperately swiped for his helm and made it rattle. The third VODNIK stood his ground, fashioning a shield from a soaked plank of wood torn from the bridge below. Icroth confronted the Shipmaster directly and both grappled each other in close quarters, with stones being thrown at them by Klink, while Soren took down his assailant only to now struggle to free himself from the sucking mud of the stream. With a swift thrust, the Sheriff pierced the bridge-bound Drowned in its cranium, killing it where it stood and collapsing therefore onto Bimble, who was briefly crushed beneath that sodden mess until Klink rushed to his aide. Soren, after repeated effort, ultimately freed himself. And Icroth? He still grappled fiercely with the Shipmaster, enduring a violent headbutt until the Sheriff - once again - moved to assist, and in a combined effort, drove the undead down and back to his resting place. It seemed the end, silence fell until it broke by the trickle of the camp’s rivulet … until a porcelain canister rolled from within the Shipmaster’s coat, within it a tattered map - the same one referenced by the victim’s brother - upon which another riddle and a chart. INVESTIGATION SWIFTLY CONCLUDED to return with haste to the Society’s headquarters and tend to the injured! •─────────────────•𖥠•─────────────────• Her Ladyship, DOÑA LATRA ROCASOLANO, EXPEDITION SCRIBE @Songwitch Hija Legítima de Cantacuervos, Master of Imperial Artifacts of the Celosian Courts, Historian & Fashion Revisionist of the Northern Geographical Society Her Ladyship, DAME MANON YVAINE VON VOLKRICH, SUPERVISOR @esotericas Dame of Arts, Lady of Deguise, Baroness of Guise and Distrugestadt, President of the Northern Geographical Society P U B L I S H E D U N D E R T H E A U T H O R I T Y O F T H E N G S “ A D T E R R A S N O V A S ” THE VIEWS AND INFORMATION CONTAINED WITHIN THIS DOCUMENT ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF ITS AUTHOR(S). THE NORTHERN GEOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY IS NOT RESPONSIBLE OR LIABLE FOR ANY CONTENTS. •─────────────────•𖥠•─────────────────•