What Opposes Nature? [Archive] - Wizards Community

What Opposes Nature? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Praedoran
04-08-07, 07:54 PM Good vs. Evil, Law vs. Chaos, and like seem pretty straight forward.

However, what opposes Nature? Civilization? There can be such a thing as an Urban Druid, who views mankind's civilizations as just another aspect of Nature.

I've tossed around the idea, and it has to be a concept that encompasses the "Unnatural". Undead, Aberrations, and Constructs fall into the category, so it isn't something as easy as "Undeath" or "Technology".

Anyways, what are your opinions?
Tbird
04-08-07, 08:02 PM Civilization seems like a good bet. If you look at a lot of medieval stories and myths there is a dichotomy between Good and Evil and Civilization and the Wilderness. Witches and Wolves live in the deep dark woods while the town and castle is inhabited by people and shining knights.

Nature is much broader than The Wilderness tho', so depending on the flavor you want the natural world to have this might not work so well. For example, in a steampunk setting the city might take on the more savage character, being dark and dirty while nature is pure and restorative.

T
Ishmayl
04-08-07, 08:06 PM Hard to compare, since chaos and order, good and evil are just man-constructed words to describe feelings of relativity, whereas nature is actually a physical thing.
Praedoran
04-08-07, 08:15 PM Tbird, you're suggestion of how Nature is "Pure and Restorative" seems to be a good springboard for opposition.

Civilization I can't really see as Nature's opposition. After all, houses just represent a Human's nest, as simplistic in design as any Bird's nest or Ant's mound.

And Entropy doesn't really work for me because it easily contrasts against Inertia (One says objects in motion tend to stay in motion, the other suggests that Everything, eventually, comes to a halt. I can see the points of emnity between the two, but it doesn't seem like a perfect fit.
Return of the Flumph
04-08-07, 08:19 PM Aberrations.
TheDarkPrince
04-08-07, 08:25 PM If you really want to get into, then start thinking about the planes. All of the planes are natural extensions of reality. So is anything truly "unnatural"? Inevitables are constructed in Mechanus, and are an extension of the plane of law. Demons and devils are embodiments of the evil (lawful or chaotic) that is an intresnsic part of the world.

(But then again saying that evil is necessary goes into the argument of whether or not good can exist without it.)

So since there are planes where the dead walk, how are the undead unnatural? Orcus is a GOD, an embodiment of natural concepts of reality. And since his portfolio is undeath, then how is undeath unnatural?

Just some food for thought.

Cheers!! :)
Darth Syntax
04-08-07, 08:41 PM Nothing. All things that exist are inherently natural. So only the nonexistant can oppose nature, making for a rather onesided conflict.
Praedoran
04-08-07, 08:48 PM Aye. Aberrations may be the best bet. When you think about it, Abberations are perhaps the only things that exist outside the Natural Order no matter where they go.

However, they may be the poster children of Opponents against Nature, but here's something to consider:

"The Natural Aberration" Introducing a natural species to a completely new environment can lead to disasterous effects. Kudzu is perhaps the most notable Aberration to America.

Human beings have often been called out as opponents to Nature due to our tendency to make things go extinct. Extinction though, may just be a natural thing according to some.

Lets take a real world concept and analyze it: Rain Forest Burning. Why is this an opposition to Nature?
Delfedd
04-08-07, 08:58 PM Nurture.

Law vs Chaos
Good vs Evil
Brown vs the Board of education
Life vs Death
Roe vs Wade
Nature vs Nurture
Khementari
04-08-07, 09:01 PM Undeath.
jamvid
04-08-07, 09:12 PM DRUIDS

Wait. Nature?

Hmmm. after all this, I'd have to agree with others that aberrations are the closest you'd get. But what causes most aberrations (from what little I know)? Magic, arcane to be specific. Maybe (arcane) magic is averse to nature.
Praedoran
04-08-07, 09:13 PM From what I've been reading in responses, I'm starting to form the following assumption:

Nature: The concept of how things should be.

Nurture does make a logical claim against it. It is the concept of something being different from what it should be.
Araes
04-08-07, 09:28 PM In general, I agree with TheDarkPrince, the opposite of Nature is the Unnatural (its in the name), which is appropriate, since I'm agreeing with one of the most unnatural beings, Dracula.

Anything which wouldn't naturally occur in nature is the opposite of Nature. Really, what it comes down to is the extent to which you think nature's grasp reaches. If everything that man could create is also natural, since it is begat from a creature that grew out of nature, then the only things which are unnatural are those things beyond the scope of man (usually beyond our current scope, which implies magic).

However, if you think unnatural extends to anything which disturbs the "natural order" which has existed for millenia, then nearly everything of the modern world is "unnatural". The only true nature would be man interacting as a beast with little rational thought, and the inability to conceive of the difference between nature and unnatural.

Neither of these concepts are really "opposing" nature though, that would imply that they are somehow in conflict. Since nature is an abstract concept, if what is currently unnatural were to completely subsume the natural, then it would become the "natural" and the definition would change. Nature is elastic and can't really oppose anything.
AdventChild
04-08-07, 10:50 PM Good vs. Evil, Law vs. Chaos, and like seem pretty straight forward.

However, what opposes Nature? Civilization? There can be such a thing as an Urban Druid, who views mankind's civilizations as just another aspect of Nature.

I've tossed around the idea, and it has to be a concept that encompasses the "Unnatural". Undead, Aberrations, and Constructs fall into the category, so it isn't something as easy as "Undeath" or "Technology".

Anyways, what are your opinions?

There is an Urban Druid in dragon magazine 317.
Delfedd
04-08-07, 10:52 PM Yes.

That's why there is such thing as an urban druid.
TheDarkPrince
04-08-07, 11:31 PM Since all things are natural to this reality, then you could have things from the far realm, or a pocket dimension, or some random dimension that isn't connected to any of the planes.
Dan Hemmens
04-09-07, 10:49 AM Artifice.
Praedoran
04-09-07, 11:21 AM I'm going to have to run on the definition that Nature is an environment, with an order that sustains it. This can be an Undead, Urban, Elemental, or Animal environment. They are all natural, an environment, each with an order that sustains it. Constructs and Undead display a disruption to natural order, but are perhaps more adverse to Chaos and Life respectively. Aberrations show perhaps, the most disruptive presence to Nature.

Nature encourages change, fosters strength by culling weakness, but it does not take very well to sudden change. It does exist everywhere and encompasses everything, but it does not exist homogeneously. Plants and Animals displaced wreak havoc upon the natural world. Human beings wreak havoc upon the natural world with pollution, deforestation, over hunting, and the like.

Nature is a very powerful concept, but it lacks defense. I'm hesitant to use the word "Corruption", but as of right now, I've lack of a better word. Corruption implies something sinister, whereas Spontaneous Evolution, a helpful change to the survival of a species would disrupt nature, but imply something good as well.
rbingham2000
04-09-07, 11:39 AM Hmmm. after all this, I'd have to agree with others that aberrations are the closest you'd get. But what causes most aberrations (from what little I know)? Magic, arcane to be specific. Maybe (arcane) magic is averse to nature.
I don't know about you, but that would be an excellent worldview for a villainous archdruid.

Undead and aberrations would seem to me to be the prime threats to the natural order from a druidic standpoint. They have no place in the grand scheme of nature, and need to be destroyed so that the natural order can flourish again. But then again, the evil druid villain would say the same thing concerning arcane spellcasters or even civilization in general.
The White Sorcerer
04-09-07, 06:54 PM What opposes nature? Mankind.
Glak
04-10-07, 06:30 PM I'd definitely go with magic. For most of history science has been closely associated with nature, not against.
johnhansen
04-10-07, 11:58 PM Nature is neutral. Generally neutral to the point of not even making moral choices. Nothing in the D&D verse that I know of is the opposite of nature but almost everything is not nature, so everything that destroys nature or it's neutralness opposes it.
Praedoran
04-11-07, 09:50 AM "The epic struggle of Good, vs... Neutral." Zap Branningan

Magic, Nature, Aberration, Undead, Constructs, and Man. Many see the opposing concept to Nature as something Evil. Subversion of environment, Corruption of the Mind and Flesh, Defiance of natural death, and False imitation of life.

However, it isn't always Evil (it's just dominantly Evil). Many see it as their right, that man is entitled to rule over all he sees. Some seek quick evolution because of a drive for perfection. Nurture is the opposition to Nature, but in a good way.

Magic has a school that might ring out as a good concept: Transmutation. I ran a Thesaurus on it, tell me what you guys think about:

Nature vs. Distortion (doesn't give me too many connotations over it's Good or Evil aspects)
Prator_the_Legendary
04-11-07, 05:15 PM Hmmmm... The Far Realms and everything that comes from there.

Think about it. Nature encompasses all of reality. All the elements in balance, functioning according to a set of laws that are universally consistent, albeit complicated, is what Nature truly is.

Therefore, the opposite of nature should be outside of reality, where the elements are not balanced when they are clearly in view, do not function according to any laws we can understand, and nothing is consistent anywhere. That's the Far Realms for you. The fact that many of the best-known abberations come from the Far Realms should be proof of that.

So, the opposite of OUR Nature is the ALIEN Nature. Obviously, some kind of xenocidal crusade is in order...
steenan
04-11-07, 05:48 PM Purpose and Will.

It is worth remembering, though, that not everything that a thinking creature does truely is an act of will and is driven by purpose. Even for most bright and enlightened people most actions are dictated by simple instincts. Our mating habits or ways of acquiring food may be a little more complicated than animals', but that's the only difference and it does not matter here.

Thus, both civilisation and magic may be called opposite to nature. But only when they are conscious way of changing the world, to give it the shape we envision, to build something new. In most practical cases, use of a car, a gun or a Suggestion spell is in no way different from what happens in the natural world - because the question is not "how is it done?", but "why?"

What I percieve as most opposed to nature is, IRL, philosophy and religion, and in D&D, outer planes as a whole. They are BUILD OF PURPOSE, after all; good, evil, law and chaos, the basic "elements" of thought and motivation, are the building matter of outer planes.

Some aberrations may be seen as opposing nature, exactly the same way as some humans. Most may not - they follow their instinct as strong as any animal, and having more cunning mind or more powerful abilities doesn't change anything. The same goes for undead.

(of course, it is how I percieve this, I'm not trying to force my viewpoint on anybody)
Xavon
04-11-07, 09:40 PM Corruption. Decay and the transformation into the unnatural both fall under that heading.
77IM
04-12-07, 04:18 PM I've always felt nature worked well as part of a three-way alignment scheme:

Nature vs. Technology vs. Magic

There's no reason why every alignment axis has to be purely binary, and I think a three-way scheme is much more interesting.

-- 77IM
FntsyWlkr
04-12-07, 04:24 PM What opposes nature? Mankind.

I go along with this.

As well as the comment "nature vs nurture."

Anything natural comes into existance by withour our input (trees, babies, lava, oxygen) whereas things that are unnatural are generated here on earth (cars, cities, clothes)

For example the undead. They don't occur unless a third party (the necormancer) creates them.

There was not such thing as "articificial" until humans invented it.
Danarchy84
04-13-07, 10:09 AM I had an interesting idea for a non-D&D world that basically had 6 opposing elements: fire-water, earth-air, and nature-technology. I had one race representing each element too.

Fire = salamander
Water = melusine
Earth = gnome
Air = sylph
Nature = dryad
Technology = human

Sadly I could never think of anything to do with said setting.
Thought
04-13-07, 10:57 AM Nihilism (or, perhaps more pragmatically, lovecraftian morals).

Nature’s most basic law is that things exist. Therefore, its opposite would be that things don't exist. Death is natural because (in DnD terms) the soul continues to exist in a different state. However the ceasing of things to exist?

Nihilism couldn't have its own plane of existence, but possibly it might be represented by the nothingness between planes (where one can't even exist, nor travel through as there isn't even empty space to hold matter). There couldn't be creatures that are inherently nihilistic, however there could be cultures and creatures that believe in nihilism, that existence should end. Such things would be perfectly happy to eradicate themselves, but will only find fulfillment in ending all that is, and indeed the idea of "is."

Hard to compare, since chaos and order, good and evil are just man-constructed words to describe feelings of relativity, whereas nature is actually a physical thing.

You know, I would have said the exact opposite.
sabrewolf
04-21-07, 01:42 AM "This is hardly an easy one..."

I guess that firstly you should ask what is nature, what defines it to begin with. Then you´d have your oposition.

But a hollow comment with a question on top is hardly helpfull, aye? :P So let´s see what oozes off my mind, shall we?

Nature Vs Mankind (civilization)
That can encompass aspects of both Good X Evil and Law X Chaos. Aspects, mind you.

- Nature can be a vibrant place, full of live, with balance and all. On such a place, Civilization (and Mankind) as a blind gathering of resources, with fast, chaotic growth can opose it. Cities on that world would be dark and sinister, with dense dark air like if on the midst of a industial burst, with machines eating away the green land so new factories can grow. ("steampunk" can fit well here)

-Nature can, on the other paw, be a dark and sinister place, where predators lurk and death can come quickly to the unwary. A land for the unknown. On this world civilization would be nifty and orderly. - like Heroes of might and magic´s Heaven city - Buldings are cleanly built, cities have very little chaos, heores walk with clean and shinny armour...

Life Vs Death
Nature can be a sinonym of life itself, of all that is born and grows (and one day, dies). Here nature would be vibrant and, obviously, full of life. It´s oposition would be death.. or rather, undeath - Warcraft 3´s undead legion pictures this aspect of death very well. - Here aberrations would most likely be either neutral or off-axis - meaning, they come from elsewhere and oposes nothing (or everything).

Ballance Vs Corruption
Here nature is like on the first paragraph, but it´s not civilization that oposes it. Instead, "Corruption" opposes it. It´d lack a known face to mankind, and/or to all except those that walk the path of nature (druids, etc). It mocks nature defiling it and creating a twisted version of it, but completely off the natural order. Here the dead walk - and Undeath is a reflection of corruption (and necromancers become agents of it, "evil to the core") - aberrations and the like take the place of normal creatures and one touched by such corruption is slowly twisted from inside out, though never dieing because of it... An aspect of the Wyrm (Vs Gaia in Werewolf), or Mononoke Hime´s Tatarigami are good images for this one... Here, Civilization could carry some of the taint (willingly or unknowingly) and help it´s spread, but otherwise remain mostly neutral.

Strong Oposition Vs Mild Oposition
More of a side note really. The oposition of Nature Vs "Something" can be a strong one, where it´s all clear and dramatic. Like the Light of Celestia Vs the Darkness of the Abyss/Hell, both sides are well definite and the grey area is too thin (neutral, here remains mostly off-battle).. Or the oposition can be softened, more subtle, with a wider grey area. Here the oposition would be clear only when seen cross the boundary line, off the grey zones (civilization?): Only on the white (green?) zones you can see the darkness beyound.
Take mind that such "mild" oposition can be fruit of a light interference of both aspects on this world: like Celestis and the Abyss, there´d be a plane of Nature, all green and stuff; and a plane of.. whatever oposes it.... Or in City Vs the Wild, you´d be on one side or te other, with the "battling" grey zones being thin and not very notticed.
Or it can be a really softened oposition, rather Disney-eske. The oposition wouldn´t mean the end of nature (like good allways prevails over evil) and would hardly be the end of life, although it can still be dangerous and frightening.

Hmm... that was.. enlightening to talk about.. Hope it is of use for you, Praedoran.
TheDarkLord
04-21-07, 02:58 AM What opposes nature? Mankind.
That's funny :rolleyes:.

Seriously, Nature opposes Nature. Ever heard of the circle of life? Nature in itself is in both ways Like the Yin and the Yang. Kill or be Killed. Machiavellian principles of "Might makes Right" are proven in nature day in and day out.

Nature is both beautiful and brutal at the same time. The Niagra waterfalls are a beautiful thing, but get caught in it's current and you will likely die, not to mention it is constantly eroding away the earths surface and dumping valuable minerals and soil into the ocean.

Nature also destroy's itself. Earthquakes, hurricanes, tornado's, Volcanic eruptions all do it's best to halt the furtherance of nature. Ever seen elephants trample baby lions? Watch the discovery channel sometime.

If you really wanted to get a juxtaposition with DnD nature, I suggest using what is considered a "Far Realm Nature" and use animal like aberrations and whatnot.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Praedoran 04-08-07, 07:54 PM	Good vs. Evil, Law vs. Chaos, and like seem pretty straight forward. However, what opposes Nature? Civilization? There can be such a thing as an Urban Druid, who views mankind's civilizations as just another aspect of Nature. I've tossed around the idea, and it has to be a concept that encompasses the "Unnatural". Undead, Aberrations, and Constructs fall into the category, so it isn't something as easy as "Undeath" or "Technology". Anyways, what are your opinions?
Tbird 04-08-07, 08:02 PM	Civilization seems like a good bet. If you look at a lot of medieval stories and myths there is a dichotomy between Good and Evil and Civilization and the Wilderness. Witches and Wolves live in the deep dark woods while the town and castle is inhabited by people and shining knights. Nature is much broader than The Wilderness tho', so depending on the flavor you want the natural world to have this might not work so well. For example, in a steampunk setting the city might take on the more savage character, being dark and dirty while nature is pure and restorative. T
Ishmayl 04-08-07, 08:06 PM	Hard to compare, since chaos and order, good and evil are just man-constructed words to describe feelings of relativity, whereas nature is actually a physical thing.
Praedoran 04-08-07, 08:15 PM	Tbird, you're suggestion of how Nature is "Pure and Restorative" seems to be a good springboard for opposition. Civilization I can't really see as Nature's opposition. After all, houses just represent a Human's nest, as simplistic in design as any Bird's nest or Ant's mound. And Entropy doesn't really work for me because it easily contrasts against Inertia (One says objects in motion tend to stay in motion, the other suggests that Everything, eventually, comes to a halt. I can see the points of emnity between the two, but it doesn't seem like a perfect fit.
Return of the Flumph 04-08-07, 08:19 PM	Aberrations.
TheDarkPrince 04-08-07, 08:25 PM	If you really want to get into, then start thinking about the planes. All of the planes are natural extensions of reality. So is anything truly "unnatural"? Inevitables are constructed in Mechanus, and are an extension of the plane of law. Demons and devils are embodiments of the evil (lawful or chaotic) that is an intresnsic part of the world. (But then again saying that evil is necessary goes into the argument of whether or not good can exist without it.) So since there are planes where the dead walk, how are the undead unnatural? Orcus is a GOD, an embodiment of natural concepts of reality. And since his portfolio is undeath, then how is undeath unnatural? Just some food for thought. Cheers!! :)
Darth Syntax 04-08-07, 08:41 PM	Nothing. All things that exist are inherently natural. So only the nonexistant can oppose nature, making for a rather onesided conflict.
Praedoran 04-08-07, 08:48 PM	Aye. Aberrations may be the best bet. When you think about it, Abberations are perhaps the only things that exist outside the Natural Order no matter where they go. However, they may be the poster children of Opponents against Nature, but here's something to consider: "The Natural Aberration" Introducing a natural species to a completely new environment can lead to disasterous effects. Kudzu is perhaps the most notable Aberration to America. Human beings have often been called out as opponents to Nature due to our tendency to make things go extinct. Extinction though, may just be a natural thing according to some. Lets take a real world concept and analyze it: Rain Forest Burning. Why is this an opposition to Nature?
Delfedd 04-08-07, 08:58 PM	Nurture. Law vs Chaos Good vs Evil Brown vs the Board of education Life vs Death Roe vs Wade Nature vs Nurture
Khementari 04-08-07, 09:01 PM	Undeath.
jamvid 04-08-07, 09:12 PM	DRUIDS Wait. Nature? Hmmm. after all this, I'd have to agree with others that aberrations are the closest you'd get. But what causes most aberrations (from what little I know)? Magic, arcane to be specific. Maybe (arcane) magic is averse to nature.
Praedoran 04-08-07, 09:13 PM	From what I've been reading in responses, I'm starting to form the following assumption: Nature: The concept of how things should be. Nurture does make a logical claim against it. It is the concept of something being different from what it should be.
Araes 04-08-07, 09:28 PM	In general, I agree with TheDarkPrince, the opposite of Nature is the Unnatural (its in the name), which is appropriate, since I'm agreeing with one of the most unnatural beings, Dracula. Anything which wouldn't naturally occur in nature is the opposite of Nature. Really, what it comes down to is the extent to which you think nature's grasp reaches. If everything that man could create is also natural, since it is begat from a creature that grew out of nature, then the only things which are unnatural are those things beyond the scope of man (usually beyond our current scope, which implies magic). However, if you think unnatural extends to anything which disturbs the "natural order" which has existed for millenia, then nearly everything of the modern world is "unnatural". The only true nature would be man interacting as a beast with little rational thought, and the inability to conceive of the difference between nature and unnatural. Neither of these concepts are really "opposing" nature though, that would imply that they are somehow in conflict. Since nature is an abstract concept, if what is currently unnatural were to completely subsume the natural, then it would become the "natural" and the definition would change. Nature is elastic and can't really oppose anything.
AdventChild 04-08-07, 10:50 PM	Good vs. Evil, Law vs. Chaos, and like seem pretty straight forward. However, what opposes Nature? Civilization? There can be such a thing as an Urban Druid, who views mankind's civilizations as just another aspect of Nature. I've tossed around the idea, and it has to be a concept that encompasses the "Unnatural". Undead, Aberrations, and Constructs fall into the category, so it isn't something as easy as "Undeath" or "Technology". Anyways, what are your opinions? There is an Urban Druid in dragon magazine 317.
Delfedd 04-08-07, 10:52 PM	Yes. That's why there is such thing as an urban druid.
TheDarkPrince 04-08-07, 11:31 PM	Since all things are natural to this reality, then you could have things from the far realm, or a pocket dimension, or some random dimension that isn't connected to any of the planes.
Dan Hemmens 04-09-07, 10:49 AM	Artifice.
Praedoran 04-09-07, 11:21 AM	I'm going to have to run on the definition that Nature is an environment, with an order that sustains it. This can be an Undead, Urban, Elemental, or Animal environment. They are all natural, an environment, each with an order that sustains it. Constructs and Undead display a disruption to natural order, but are perhaps more adverse to Chaos and Life respectively. Aberrations show perhaps, the most disruptive presence to Nature. Nature encourages change, fosters strength by culling weakness, but it does not take very well to sudden change. It does exist everywhere and encompasses everything, but it does not exist homogeneously. Plants and Animals displaced wreak havoc upon the natural world. Human beings wreak havoc upon the natural world with pollution, deforestation, over hunting, and the like. Nature is a very powerful concept, but it lacks defense. I'm hesitant to use the word "Corruption", but as of right now, I've lack of a better word. Corruption implies something sinister, whereas Spontaneous Evolution, a helpful change to the survival of a species would disrupt nature, but imply something good as well.
rbingham2000 04-09-07, 11:39 AM	Hmmm. after all this, I'd have to agree with others that aberrations are the closest you'd get. But what causes most aberrations (from what little I know)? Magic, arcane to be specific. Maybe (arcane) magic is averse to nature. I don't know about you, but that would be an excellent worldview for a villainous archdruid. Undead and aberrations would seem to me to be the prime threats to the natural order from a druidic standpoint. They have no place in the grand scheme of nature, and need to be destroyed so that the natural order can flourish again. But then again, the evil druid villain would say the same thing concerning arcane spellcasters or even civilization in general.
The White Sorcerer 04-09-07, 06:54 PM	What opposes nature? Mankind.
Glak 04-10-07, 06:30 PM	I'd definitely go with magic. For most of history science has been closely associated with nature, not against.
johnhansen 04-10-07, 11:58 PM	Nature is neutral. Generally neutral to the point of not even making moral choices. Nothing in the D&D verse that I know of is the opposite of nature but almost everything is not nature, so everything that destroys nature or it's neutralness opposes it.
Praedoran 04-11-07, 09:50 AM	"The epic struggle of Good, vs... Neutral." Zap Branningan Magic, Nature, Aberration, Undead, Constructs, and Man. Many see the opposing concept to Nature as something Evil. Subversion of environment, Corruption of the Mind and Flesh, Defiance of natural death, and False imitation of life. However, it isn't always Evil (it's just dominantly Evil). Many see it as their right, that man is entitled to rule over all he sees. Some seek quick evolution because of a drive for perfection. Nurture is the opposition to Nature, but in a good way. Magic has a school that might ring out as a good concept: Transmutation. I ran a Thesaurus on it, tell me what you guys think about: Nature vs. Distortion (doesn't give me too many connotations over it's Good or Evil aspects)
Prator_the_Legendary 04-11-07, 05:15 PM	Hmmmm... The Far Realms and everything that comes from there. Think about it. Nature encompasses all of reality. All the elements in balance, functioning according to a set of laws that are universally consistent, albeit complicated, is what Nature truly is. Therefore, the opposite of nature should be outside of reality, where the elements are not balanced when they are clearly in view, do not function according to any laws we can understand, and nothing is consistent anywhere. That's the Far Realms for you. The fact that many of the best-known abberations come from the Far Realms should be proof of that. So, the opposite of OUR Nature is the ALIEN Nature. Obviously, some kind of xenocidal crusade is in order...
steenan 04-11-07, 05:48 PM	Purpose and Will. It is worth remembering, though, that not everything that a thinking creature does truely is an act of will and is driven by purpose. Even for most bright and enlightened people most actions are dictated by simple instincts. Our mating habits or ways of acquiring food may be a little more complicated than animals', but that's the only difference and it does not matter here. Thus, both civilisation and magic may be called opposite to nature. But only when they are conscious way of changing the world, to give it the shape we envision, to build something new. In most practical cases, use of a car, a gun or a Suggestion spell is in no way different from what happens in the natural world - because the question is not "how is it done?", but "why?" What I percieve as most opposed to nature is, IRL, philosophy and religion, and in D&D, outer planes as a whole. They are BUILD OF PURPOSE, after all; good, evil, law and chaos, the basic "elements" of thought and motivation, are the building matter of outer planes. Some aberrations may be seen as opposing nature, exactly the same way as some humans. Most may not - they follow their instinct as strong as any animal, and having more cunning mind or more powerful abilities doesn't change anything. The same goes for undead. (of course, it is how I percieve this, I'm not trying to force my viewpoint on anybody)
Xavon 04-11-07, 09:40 PM	Corruption. Decay and the transformation into the unnatural both fall under that heading.
77IM 04-12-07, 04:18 PM	I've always felt nature worked well as part of a three-way alignment scheme: Nature vs. Technology vs. Magic There's no reason why every alignment axis has to be purely binary, and I think a three-way scheme is much more interesting. -- 77IM
FntsyWlkr 04-12-07, 04:24 PM	What opposes nature? Mankind. I go along with this. As well as the comment "nature vs nurture." Anything natural comes into existance by withour our input (trees, babies, lava, oxygen) whereas things that are unnatural are generated here on earth (cars, cities, clothes) For example the undead. They don't occur unless a third party (the necormancer) creates them. There was not such thing as "articificial" until humans invented it.
Danarchy84 04-13-07, 10:09 AM	I had an interesting idea for a non-D&D world that basically had 6 opposing elements: fire-water, earth-air, and nature-technology. I had one race representing each element too. Fire = salamander Water = melusine Earth = gnome Air = sylph Nature = dryad Technology = human Sadly I could never think of anything to do with said setting.
Thought 04-13-07, 10:57 AM	Nihilism (or, perhaps more pragmatically, lovecraftian morals). Nature’s most basic law is that things exist. Therefore, its opposite would be that things don't exist. Death is natural because (in DnD terms) the soul continues to exist in a different state. However the ceasing of things to exist? Nihilism couldn't have its own plane of existence, but possibly it might be represented by the nothingness between planes (where one can't even exist, nor travel through as there isn't even empty space to hold matter). There couldn't be creatures that are inherently nihilistic, however there could be cultures and creatures that believe in nihilism, that existence should end. Such things would be perfectly happy to eradicate themselves, but will only find fulfillment in ending all that is, and indeed the idea of "is." Hard to compare, since chaos and order, good and evil are just man-constructed words to describe feelings of relativity, whereas nature is actually a physical thing. You know, I would have said the exact opposite.
sabrewolf 04-21-07, 01:42 AM	"This is hardly an easy one..." I guess that firstly you should ask what is nature, what defines it to begin with. Then you´d have your oposition. But a hollow comment with a question on top is hardly helpfull, aye? :P So let´s see what oozes off my mind, shall we? Nature Vs Mankind (civilization) That can encompass aspects of both Good X Evil and Law X Chaos. Aspects, mind you. - Nature can be a vibrant place, full of live, with balance and all. On such a place, Civilization (and Mankind) as a blind gathering of resources, with fast, chaotic growth can opose it. Cities on that world would be dark and sinister, with dense dark air like if on the midst of a industial burst, with machines eating away the green land so new factories can grow. ("steampunk" can fit well here) -Nature can, on the other paw, be a dark and sinister place, where predators lurk and death can come quickly to the unwary. A land for the unknown. On this world civilization would be nifty and orderly. - like Heroes of might and magic´s Heaven city - Buldings are cleanly built, cities have very little chaos, heores walk with clean and shinny armour... Life Vs Death Nature can be a sinonym of life itself, of all that is born and grows (and one day, dies). Here nature would be vibrant and, obviously, full of life. It´s oposition would be death.. or rather, undeath - Warcraft 3´s undead legion pictures this aspect of death very well. - Here aberrations would most likely be either neutral or off-axis - meaning, they come from elsewhere and oposes nothing (or everything). Ballance Vs Corruption Here nature is like on the first paragraph, but it´s not civilization that oposes it. Instead, "Corruption" opposes it. It´d lack a known face to mankind, and/or to all except those that walk the path of nature (druids, etc). It mocks nature defiling it and creating a twisted version of it, but completely off the natural order. Here the dead walk - and Undeath is a reflection of corruption (and necromancers become agents of it, "evil to the core") - aberrations and the like take the place of normal creatures and one touched by such corruption is slowly twisted from inside out, though never dieing because of it... An aspect of the Wyrm (Vs Gaia in Werewolf), or Mononoke Hime´s Tatarigami are good images for this one... Here, Civilization could carry some of the taint (willingly or unknowingly) and help it´s spread, but otherwise remain mostly neutral. Strong Oposition Vs Mild Oposition More of a side note really. The oposition of Nature Vs "Something" can be a strong one, where it´s all clear and dramatic. Like the Light of Celestia Vs the Darkness of the Abyss/Hell, both sides are well definite and the grey area is too thin (neutral, here remains mostly off-battle).. Or the oposition can be softened, more subtle, with a wider grey area. Here the oposition would be clear only when seen cross the boundary line, off the grey zones (civilization?): Only on the white (green?) zones you can see the darkness beyound. Take mind that such "mild" oposition can be fruit of a light interference of both aspects on this world: like Celestis and the Abyss, there´d be a plane of Nature, all green and stuff; and a plane of.. whatever oposes it.... Or in City Vs the Wild, you´d be on one side or te other, with the "battling" grey zones being thin and not very notticed. Or it can be a really softened oposition, rather Disney-eske. The oposition wouldn´t mean the end of nature (like good allways prevails over evil) and would hardly be the end of life, although it can still be dangerous and frightening. Hmm... that was.. enlightening to talk about.. Hope it is of use for you, Praedoran.
TheDarkLord 04-21-07, 02:58 AM	What opposes nature? Mankind. That's funny :rolleyes:. Seriously, Nature opposes Nature. Ever heard of the circle of life? Nature in itself is in both ways Like the Yin and the Yang. Kill or be Killed. Machiavellian principles of "Might makes Right" are proven in nature day in and day out. Nature is both beautiful and brutal at the same time. The Niagra waterfalls are a beautiful thing, but get caught in it's current and you will likely die, not to mention it is constantly eroding away the earths surface and dumping valuable minerals and soil into the ocean. Nature also destroy's itself. Earthquakes, hurricanes, tornado's, Volcanic eruptions all do it's best to halt the furtherance of nature. Ever seen elephants trample baby lions? Watch the discovery channel sometime. If you really wanted to get a juxtaposition with DnD nature, I suggest using what is considered a "Far Realm Nature" and use animal like aberrations and whatnot.