Grudge barbarians of the new earth

These attitudes should never be considered restrictions on what classes players may choose, regardless of their characters' race, nor are they a prescription that demands player characters think or act a certain way toward members of a class described as being highly favored (or highly disfavored) by members of their race. As always, players are the ones in charge of their own characters. These attitudes instead describe the common attitudes of typical NPC members of their race and the values and attitudes their characters may have been raised with. Characters can learn these typical attitudes about their class with a DC 10 Knowledge (local) check (DC 5 for attitudes of their own race).

Most likely Maximinus was of Thraco-Roman origin (believed so by Herodian in his writings). [4] According to the notoriously unreliable Augustan History ( Historia Augusta ), he was born in Thrace or Moesia to a Gothic father and an Alanic mother, [5] an Iranian people of the Scythian-Sarmatian branch; however, the supposed parentage is highly unlikely, as the presence of the Goths in the Danubian area is first attested after the beginning of the Crisis of the Third Century. British historian Ronald Syme , writing that "the word 'Gothia' should have sufficed for condemnation" of the passage in the Augustan History , felt that the burden of evidence from Herodian , Syncellus and elsewhere pointed to Maximinus having been born in Moesia . [6] The references to his "Gothic" ancestry might refer to a Thracian Getae origin (the two populations were often confused by later writers, most notably by Jordanes in his Getica ), as suggested by the paragraphs describing how "he was singularly beloved by the Getae, moreover, as if he were one of themselves" and how he spoke "almost pure Thracian". [7]

With the exception of the saga-like Secret History of the Mongols (1240?), only non-Mongol sources provide near-contemporary information about the life of Genghis Khan. Almost all writers, even those who were in the Mongol service, have dwelt on the enormous destruction wrought by the Mongol invasions. One Arab historian openly expressed his horror at the recollection of them. Beyond the reach of the Mongols and relying on second-hand information, the 13th-century chronicler Matthew Paris called them a “detestable nation of Satan that poured out like devils from Tartarus so that they are rightly called Tartars.” He was making a play on words with the classical word Tartarus (Hell) and the ancient tribal name of Tatar borne by some of the nomads, but his account catches the terror that the Mongols evoked. As the founder of the Mongol nation, the organizer of the Mongol armies, and the genius behind their campaigns, Genghis Khan must share the reputation of his people, even though his generals were frequently operating on their own, far from direct supervision. Nevertheless, it would be mistaken to see the Mongol campaigns as haphazard incursions by bands of marauding savages. Nor is it true, as some have supposed, that these campaigns were somehow brought about by a progressive desiccation of Inner Asia that compelled the nomads to look for new pastures. Nor, again, were the Mongol invasions a unique event. Genghis Khan was neither the first nor the last nomadic conqueror to burst out of the steppe and terrorize the settled periphery of Eurasia. His campaigns were merely larger in scale, more successful, and more lasting in effect than those of other leaders. They impinged more violently upon those sedentary peoples who had the habit of recording events in writing, and they affected a greater part of the Eurasian continent and a variety of different societies.

Grudge Barbarians Of The New EarthGrudge Barbarians Of The New EarthGrudge Barbarians Of The New EarthGrudge Barbarians Of The New Earth