The Vow's flaw

[iQuestor]

I don't know what "in the very nature of the Haruchai" refers to. There is no referent for the phrase "in the very nature of."

It seems simple to me. Earthpower is a fundamental component of a Haruchai.

That being said, I'm not sure if that in and of itself makes Haruchai something other than human.

My impression is that Haruchai are as human as the people of the Land. A different race, or ethnicity if you will, of humans.

The GI is maddeningly vague on this point. SRD compares Haruchai to "ordinary humans" in several places. I think this means he considers them extraordinary humans, but unhuman is a valid possibility.

Are there any indications in the text that Haruchai aren't human?

It seemed to me I had read they were a different race than Man, perhaps in Giden Fire?

[thewormoftheworld'send]

I don't know what "in the very nature of the Haruchai" refers to. There is no referent for the phrase "in the very nature of."

It seems simple to me. Earthpower is a fundamental component of a Haruchai.

That being said, I'm not sure if that in and of itself makes Haruchai something other than human.

My impression is that Haruchai are as human as the people of the Land. A different race, or ethnicity if you will, of humans.

The GI is maddeningly vague on this point. SRD compares Haruchai to "ordinary humans" in several places. I think this means he considers them extraordinary humans, but unhuman is a valid possibility.

Are there any indications in the text that Haruchai aren't human?

No. I just don't know what it means to have Earthpower in one's "very nature," whether that nature is human or otherwise.

In terms of your question, there are the ordinary Haruchai, the Bloodguard, and finally the Ak-haru. SRD is saying that even the ordinary Haruchai are extraordinary by normal human standards, they surpass mere human-ness. The people of the Land (and I suppose Brathairealm and other such places) are given as average everyday humans. These could swear all the Oaths they want but Earthpower is not likely to respond to such as them unless their Oaths are "extravagant" enough. I take "extravagant" to have something to do with the passionate absoluteness and utter certitude with which the Vow is given. Earthpower will respond to no less.

I suppose this requires that such beings have Earthpower in their very nature, that is, innately, serving as a sort of "potential energy" to respond to such a Calling as it did with the Bloodguard Oath.

The Bloodguard Vow was flawed because no mere human flesh, not even Haruchai, is capable of sustaining its absoluteness, because humans by their very nature are flawed beings in their mortality. Swearing to serve and to protect (like Earth cops?) the Lords is not a flawed goal in and of itself. The flaw lies in requiring that one do so utterly, even to the ends of the Earth. But, much to their surprise or even chagrin, Earthpower (which doesn't understand mortal limitations) responded to the Vow in ways that surpassed even Haruchai expectations.

But that is not the only issue with the Vow. The text indicates that the Vow by implication expects too much from those it was intended to serve.
It requires that the Lords are also expected to live up to the absolute service being rendered. Absolute fidelity requires something absolute in return. The Lords, unfortunately, were not gods, they were also flawed; and thus, the Bloodguard came to learn self-doubt which eventually eroded away their Vow. First there was Kevin Landwaster, then High Lord Elena, and then even some of the Bloodguard themselves came to serve Corruption through a shard of the Illearth stone. And so the Vow came to be broken through its flaws which did not allow for mere mortal limitations.

In a way, the Bloodguard, as disdainers of magic, were hypocritical in using the magic of Earthpower to sustain their service for so many centuries, although this choice was originally forced upon them by the extravagant nature of their Oath.