NarniaMUCK

There's a host of big question marks, for me, on the Council of Eagles, and its my understanding it isn't generally detailed/developed in the game as yet, and players and staff are still working on details.

I guess the first question I should ask, before actually delving into any "is this established and if not, what should be established" type questions is whether it is okay to talk about it on the forum, or is potentially OOC reveals of information about IC groups forbidden from being mentioned or discussed somewhere anyone can see it, such as here on the forum?

I asked Emilia in-MUCK, and she said okay to discussing it publicly, so here goes my questions/ideas for the Council.

My general notion is Council Members aren't just warriors adept of wing, beak and talon, but focus their energies and their lives on thought, and being as sharp, clear and unwavering in thought and making decisions as the fiercest eagle warriors would be physically. They would know they would have to dismiss feeling or emotion to see through reason, and this can make them seem cold and political to outsiders witnessing their debates and discussions, but in truth they dig deep to arrive at the truth, and know taints of emotion.

I do imagine that for all their bravery, their strength and ferocity, that at least some few eagles might have wavered and faltered during the Endless Winter. Their sharpest cunning, their bravest attacks, their most heroic efforts to pluck Narnians from danger over the hundred years of endless winter might have waried at least some, as they could make no headway, they could not stop the Ice Queen, and for many decades there were no hints of the signs of the Prophecy coming true. I think, even for the strongest of thinkers, the feeling that nothing you do matters, that the evil one is winning could taint their thoughts, and it is with that notion that I proposed what unfortunately has become OOCly controversial (and I must hold off on posing anything further on, until word from the RP staff) that some might have suggested joining forces with her, in my thought in surrender (not thinking she's misunderstood or really nice, but just that the war had become futile and they were losing). My notion was it was a tiny minority, and -- somehow -- quelled; perhaps they were made to see reason, perhaps those individuals were exiled, or perhaps executed as traitors.

If that ultimately does not fly at all ... is any 'darkness' perhaps acceptable? In lieu, perhaps unsavory attack missions, such as perhaps a strategic decision to hunt down and kill Fenris Ulf's young pups. I think no one among the eagles would savor killing young, but knowing they would be raised to be secret police might have prompted such an ugly, desperate tactic.

I always thought that the Council of Eagles would just be a "herd" group for Eagles...like Ulfden, WInterden, Un'airekan, and all those other animal "clans".

Although my understanding of it is that there *used* to be one, a long time ago, and Skarlieth was looking to revive it. I don't know if that's changed, though, since I haven't been on the game in ages.

But since it appears that the Council is on its way to a revival, would female Eagles be allowed to take part in it? It seems that about half of the Eagle population on the MUCK are girls.

There supposedly has been one all along, but the actual Council members seem to have gone idle, and I don't have access to the eagle council group to check the board, but even upon asking, it seems it was never fully defined, so its something of a blank slate.

Unfortunately I haven't read the Narnia books, someone who has who could excerpt details about eagles would be very helpful for collaborating an idea of how the Council operates and what it does.

I would imagine that, if anything, eagles might tend to lean toward matriarchy because, among eagles, females are actually physically larger and more powerful. My personal vote would be that, in terms of opportunities such as service on the Council itself, or serving as soldiers/warriors, eagles would be non-discriminatory between the genders.

Just another quick note from a wolf...
Firstly check with wolves before deciding any back story about Fenris' family, as there is already quite a lot established, he exiled and later tried to kill his only pup, and also killed his mate. so lots of history there. Though perhaps the eagles tried to help the pup hide in its youth?

As for the 'darkness'... I'm not sure aim a fan of that idea. In many races its already present such as wolves and dwarfs... However as a whole Narnia is, as I said in my last post, quite a bit purer than our own world. And I doubt even a century, not even 3 full generations, would be able to impart that into most talking beasts. Its hard to explain to one who hasent read the books, and I would recommend them (they are short, and awesome) But talking beasts seem to have an almost supernatural ability to remember, and to hold to their faith in Aslan. In Prince Caspian, remember how the (This was in the movie too) Badger scolds the dwarfs about how they will care for the human.

"I'm a beast, I am, and a Badger what's more. We don't change. We hold on." (PC, Ch. 5)
"We don't forget. I believe in the High King Peter and the rest that reigned at Cair Paravel, as firmly as I believe in Aslan himself." (PC, Ch. 5)
"We should not have Aslan for a friend if we brought in that rabble." (PC, Ch. 6)
"I stand by Aslan. Have patience, like us beasts. The help will come. It may be even now at the door." (PC, Ch. 12)

There are several pointers to that about how the good natured beasts, are truly amazingly good ,

Just my 2 cents though

Unfortunately, I only know the movies. The wolves, and even Tumnus the faun had followed the Queen. Obviously not all wolves did, and Tumnus in the movie regretted the decision and backed out on it, which of course cost him.

First off, Tumnus isn't a Talking Beast, he's a faun - this puts them in somewhat different categories to begin with.

Secondly, Zay's got it right about the tenacity of the Beasts to cling to Aslan - Trufflehunter makes the comments Zayev quotes after centurIES - that's plural - of oppression, hiding, and no sign of Aslan, and there wasn't a prophecy that time around. The only Talking Beasts we see choosing to turn for one reason or another are depicted as rather malicious sorts to begin with, and all seem to do it for the sake of power in one form or another - a distinctly human desire.

Personally, I imagine the nigh-supernatural, as Zayev puts it, quality of the tenacity of the faith of the Beasts stems from Aslan's warning waaaaay back during the creation of Narnia, that Talking Beasts who fall back into the ways of their dumb counterparts, spurning the one who gave them the gift of speech in the first place, might find said gift revoked. As Aslan puts it, "For out of them you were taken and into them you can return. Do not so." We even see the de-speechifying of Ginger the Cat, one of the aforementioned malicious sorts, in The Last Battle.

The long and short of it is that faith, of course, stumbles and wavers and falters, but I think in most cases it wouldn't be enough for a Beast to justify defecting to the other side - not unless some more destructive sort of motive (greed, power, pride, etc.) was present.

Also echoing Zay's initial quick note. With a decade of RP behind us there's a lot already established - there's a reason we're prone to keeping things vague every now and again, it prevents us from having to retrofit everything.

I agree with zayev here (Don't look so shocked). While the movies have similarities with the books, they are also different. The Canon for measuring the stories in narniamuck need to be based out of the books and I would recommend reading them as well to have a greater understanding. Eagles I believe tend to be a more noble and majestic species and therefore would not be as inclined to have a dark side to them.

....Zayev, Nev and myself are ALL in agreement.

Anybody see a lion skin in Cauldron Pool? I get the feeling we may be in for an early Last Battle.

Then why are eagles defined in the game as Neutral, not Good aligned?