Common people's view of Plants

[Ghost]

How does commoners feel about plants in Zalanthas?  

In Frank Herbert's Dune series, common fremen would rather chop the tress down for the trees spending approximately ten times as much water than an average person.  It was the ecologist (I dont remember his name) that stopped them. Yet fremen still hated trees, for everytime they walk nearby a tree, they were dreaming ten peoples death of dehydration.

Come to the terms of Zalanthas.  There are no ecologists, there are sorcerer kings.  An Allanakki commoner might not dare to pick a leaf from Tektolness plants, but in the wilderness, they can do as they please.  So why do we have agafari or baobab grooves within 4-5 leagues to the Tuluk walls, what is to stop the Tuluki VNPC populace from chopping down the nearby trees?

Or would they rather try to make Zalanthas a "Green Planet"?

[Callisto]

We don't have sorcerer kings? When did this happen?

[Ghost]

Did I say we dont have sorcerer kings?  No I said we dont have ecologists.  And I said common people does not touch to the plants in the city, because they fear Sorcerer kings, but what about outside?

[JollyGreenGiant]

This is an interesting topic, with a few things to consider.  Plantlife represents a number of different things to different people.  To a defiler, plants are batteries.  To the Tuluki, trees, in particular, are a vital part of the economy.  To many rangers, plantlife represents the difference between dying of hunger/thirst and survival.  Also, since plantlife in Zalanthas has adapted to survival without rain, it seems to me that your average commoner isn't going to realize how much water a tree uses.  They might, however, have a fear of trees, or at least what lives in the trees.

[Anonymous]

Who says Zalanthans have made the connection that plants need moisture?  They'd be more likely to make some logical conclusion (based on the lack of visible water sources for plants to draw on) that plants eat sand.

[Pantoufle]

Who says Zalanthans have made the connection that plants need moisture? They'd be more likely to make some logical conclusion (based on the lack of visible water sources for plants to draw on) that plants eat sand.

I don't think it's rocket science to determine that plants require water in order to thrive.  In every city-state there are slaves who can be seen watering the potted foliage day in and day out.  I suspect that because of the scarcity of water on Zalanthas, even the most ignorant will realize that plantlife requires water for sustenance.

[SpyGuy]

1) I think commoners might resent excessive use of plantlife in the cities, it takes alot of -visible- water to keep those things going.  In the wild however, water isnt in any visible source (in most cases) and commoners find many uses for those plants.

2)  We're not nearly as dry as Dune, even down in the deep south.  The fremen survived by siphoning water from dead corpses, recycling the moisture released from their mouth and urine, and countless other methods.  Zalanthians by comparison are water rich, indeed most commoners can be water careless (release it into the atmosphere) and still survive if only on a sustenance level.

3)  Plantlife on Zalanthias represents nature, on Dune it was something completely foreign.  Nearly all plants had been shipped from offworld and to the fremen were like foreign invaders.  D-elves are the closest I see to fremen and they for the most part love nature and the environment.  Its just a different world out there.

Good topic though...ahh the first book of Dune...

[Bestatte]

Maybe some commoners who have traveled or heard stories from people who have traveled, would see it this way:

Desert = No Trees.
Desert = icky nasty unpleasant

therefore: No Trees = icky nasty unpleasant.

And as a result of the conclusion they would be glad the trees are there and be careful not to strip the forests bare, or risk turning the lush greenness (comparatively speaking) into a desert.

[Quo]

Those who travelled the wild will have noticed that barren landscape gets rather unpleasant to inhabit.
Plantlife supports animal life supports human life.
Even "unpleasant" stingy underbrush will hide the odd little critter, and, even if its too small to provide real shelter, will dampen the effect of the ever-present sand and grit blowing around.
Add to that that the plants, managing to draw on water ressources the traveller cannot tap can even supply him with water through their fruits or otherwise.

The difference between barren dunes or flats and areas showing some (or even more) growth should be obvious to them.

In cities, a poor commoners view might be entirely different, as mentioned before. I can imagine the luxurious growth of plantlife the nobility might nourish in their gardens (I'm afraid my knowledge of cities is limited) to nourish ill feelings, especially if they're thirsty and have to buy their water at high rates. A commoner would probably not see the beneficial effect on the city micro-climate, but rather compare his thirst to the thriving plants bloom, and feel that the water should have been his instead.

[Callisto]

Did I say we dont have sorcerer kings?

You're right.

My fault for posting at almost 4 am, heh.

Zalanthas seem to be very aware of how limited resources are, and are less prone to destroying them for no reason. The lack of education would go a long way in making them ignorant to the water issue as well.

[Trenidor]

2)  We're not nearly as dry as Dune, even down in the deep south.  The fremen survived by siphoning water from dead corpses, recycling the moisture released from their mouth and urine, and countless other methods.  Zalanthians by comparison are water rich, indeed most commoners can be water careless (release it into the atmosphere) and still survive if only on a sustenance level.

Picture Zalanthas more as the center Saudi Arabia than Dune.

Zalanthan plants can grow off a low humidity, I'm guess that Zanthas doesnt get more than 15% humidty, but they can still live off of it.

My theory about this is that their leaves have himidity trapping pores on them. Seeds have these too that will cause them to, only they also have a sack given from their parents of enough water to grow to the size that they have a leaf to gather their own moisture.

The only thing wrong with my theory is that in large clusters (forests for example) the moisture would be taken rather quickly and those plants that didn't get much would die off. I can't say that there is anything wrong with that. Perhaps there are thick pockets of humidity where there are large clusters of plants.

Edit** I left out what I was about to explain:
When someone releases water into the environment, they essentually better the living invironment because it will eventually evaporate and flow over to the clusters of plants. The plants also have a connection to underground water sources, which reverse from the leaves, and instead the photosynthesis process allows them to deposit water into the ground where it flows to the wells and other water sources in the city and outside.
Then Humanoids can fill up, drink, pee, and it flows to the plants and repeats.

[Agent_137]

Then Humanoids can fill up, drink, pee, and it flows to the plants and repeats.

Am i the only one that finds nature fascinating?

[Trenidor]

alright, check this out:




There's a pic of what it's somewhat like...

the waterskin drops water. The tree obsorbes the evaporated humidity. The tree deposits it in an underground channel to the well. Then the waterskin can be refilled and fall on the ground where it evaporates the water again. There is also a trail of water that sinks in the sand to the underground chanels of water from the waterskin.

Hey...it's a fantasy world....so shoot me!

[ashjpd]

Hey Trenidor, I don't see the pic, dude.

[spawnloser]

Geocities doesn't allow outside linking.  You'll have to take the link for the picture (" http://www.geocities.com/kyle_oakeson/Zwatercycle.jpg ") and go there directly.  Maybe even type it in or the like.

[Vettrock]

That doesn't work either....

[Carnage]

I don't think people would really see plants as 'living' things in the sense we view them, as much as seeing them as things that just grow. For example, a tree could be along the lines of a rock that can grow. I also don't think they'd understand that trees reproduce as much as the earth just grows a new one.