| Author |
 Topic  |
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11690 Posts |
 Posted - 30 Aug 2020 : 19:42:14
|
I'm curious about what people's takes are on something, and by this, I'd like to hear a complete answer (more on that in a second). I'm going to roughly divide up the realms into different "types" of governmental entities. Let's take that first and let's call them
"Good" Lawful Countries: By this I'm meaning a country that's relatively organized, has nobility, is widespread enough to be a country, and generally is considered "good". I'm picturing here Cormyr, reformed Tethyr, and pre-spellplague Impiltur and to a lesser degree Damara. Other places may fit this mold.
"Good" Magocracies: Countries that are mainly ruled for the sake of supporting a magic class that would generally be thought of as "not evil". Here I'm picturing Nimbral, Halruaa, and to a lesser degree Rashemen (Rashemen is kind of its own unique thing).
"Mercantile" Countries: These would be countries whose focus is business or technology at their core (so Amn, Lantan, Sembia, Durpar, etc...).
Wild, Wild Western Heartland City States: This would be pretty much any small to large city state throughout the realms, but mainly the western heartlands and the Vast come to mind. In this, I would not count tyrannical places, just "goodly" cultures.
"Mild to outright evil city states and governments": Any place that you look at and go "that place just ain't right, but it would likely exist". So, Calimshan, Thay, Unther, to a degree Mulhorand, Dambrath, Zhentil Keep and anywhere else on the moonsea, Vaasa, etc...
"Good" humanoid cultures: Pretty much elven, dwarven, halfling, etc... cultures that don't have many humans in them
So, given these "rough" criteria, here's the scenario:
Some kind of not overly powerful generally evil savage humanoids (goblins, orcs, ogres, gnolls, kobolds) attack this culture for whatever reason. Things happen. Half of them surrender and plead for mercy. The other half is dead. What short and long term happens to these savage humanoids in any of the above cultures (except the evil one, as I know what generally happens there... either they're killed or enslaved) in YOUR realms. If you can list your views for a certain group (i.e. the merchants react X way) that's kind of what I'm looking for. Again, I'm also wanting to hear long term (i.e. if they take them prisoner, what do they do with them?), because I see this as a believable issue and I'd like to hear what people think is the "answer".
|
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
Zeromaru X
Great Reader
Colombia
2442 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2020 : 19:58:20
|
It depends on the culture and its history, really. You may call Cormyr "good", but I can't see the Cormyrians sparing any goblins, giving their history with them.
Now, in my Realms, the good countries and mercantile powers will have policies like confinement and social labour, conscripting the defeated people into their army and sent it to watch the borders, or into the laboring force for a certain period of time, etc. After this, they will reclaim their freedom, with a warning that a second time there will be no mercy (there is no "Lawful Stupid" in my Realms). However, this is tge ideal case. There will be times that an outright massacre would happen when the defeated savages do not yield.
As for the evil countries, they will behave like they do in canon. I'm not wasting my time to make stuff already well done in the canon materials. |
Instead of seeking change, you prefer a void, merciless abyss of a world... |
Edited by - Zeromaru X on 30 Aug 2020 20:00:45 |
 |
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7968 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2020 : 20:53:22
|
"Good" seems to have different definitions for the demihuman races.
The scenario is "evil" humanoids (goblins, orcs, ogres, gnolls, kobolds) attack this culture for whatever reason, things happen, half of them surrender and plead for mercy.
The elves then exterminate the orcs. The dwarfs then exterminate the orcs. The halflings then run away, if they haven't already. It's already millennia past the point where the "evil" humanoids don't bother to surrender because they already know (their shamans and gods teach that) the "good" humans/demihumans will simply slaughter them wholesale once they've been attacked. While the "good" races already know (their history has shown many times that) the "evil" humanoids have no honor and no intent of keeping their oaths, they'll say or do anything to stay alive now just so they can come back later with malice and violence.
Remember that many of the "good" folks of "civilized" cities will gather militias, militaries, and mercenaries for monster hunting expeditions. They'll basically send an army to attack and exterminate the orcs, goblins, gnolls, etc.
They won't expect any mercy if their targets capture them alive.
They obviously have no regard for these creatures as "people" protected by law. Human laws don't apply to animals and monsters. |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 30 Aug 2020 20:59:19 |
|
|
|
TheIriaeban
Master of Realmslore
USA
1289 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2020 : 21:36:24
|
You didn't state a time period for this as attitudes change over time given the history of the area. If you go post-Zhentarim Interregnum in Iriaebor, you are going to have different factions pushing for different things. Bron allowed the rank and file Zhentarim to be sent back to the Darkhold (assuming they would be killed but there was no guarantee). That upset quite a few people so if this takes place after that, there would be a VERY large push to just eliminate the rest of the enemy forces. Certainly, if the forces contained more than just a smattering of kobolds, the gnomes of the city would be pushing for their elimination with the dwarves more than happy to help if not take the lead on it whether or not there were kobolds present in numbers. Also, a vast majority of the merchant companies have their own security forces so if the enemies were to remain outside the city for any length of time, I can see several of them grouping their forces together to take the decision out of Bron's hands. Plus, you have the Black Talon Mercenary Company based in Iriaebor. They could easily be hired to eliminate the rest, Bron's possible compassion be damned. The Knights of the Shield, Men of the Basilisk, and Harpers would very likely fall into this category, as well.
The other side would have The Silent Hall pushing for peace and the "rehabilitation" of the remaining individuals. Joining them would be the folks that think having a "slave labor" force available to the city could be used to benefit them personally. They would couch it in things like "working off the damage and deaths they caused in their attack" but that would just be a smoke screen. The Zhentarim and Night Parade would very likely be for this as well since it would help destabilize the city. Moonstars would be for rehabilitation as part of their long term goal of peaceful coexistence.
Staying out of this would probably be the Moontower and the Temple of Chauntea. Depending if it is late enough for the Temple of Waukeen to be back, they would likely stay out of it as well (they may tend to look towards mercy since the rehabilitated forces would become more customers for trading). |
"Iriaebor is a fine city. So what if you can have violence between merchant groups break out at any moment. Not every city can offer dinner AND a show."
My FR writeups - http://www.mediafire.com/folder/um3liz6tqsf5n/Documents
|
|
|
|
keftiu
Senior Scribe
656 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2020 : 21:57:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
"Good" seems to have different definitions for the demihuman races.
The scenario is "evil" humanoids (goblins, orcs, ogres, gnolls, kobolds) attack this culture for whatever reason, things happen, half of them surrender and plead for mercy.
The elves then exterminate the orcs. The dwarfs then exterminate the orcs. The halflings then run away, if they haven't already. It's already millennia past the point where the "evil" humanoids don't bother to surrender because they already know (their shamans and gods teach that) the "good" humans/demihumans will simply slaughter them wholesale once they've been attacked. While the "good" races already know (their history has shown many times that) the "evil" humanoids have no honor and no intent of keeping their oaths, they'll say or do anything to stay alive now just so they can come back later with malice and violence.
Remember that many of the "good" folks of "civilized" cities will gather militias, militaries, and mercenaries for monster hunting expeditions. They'll basically send an army to attack and exterminate the orcs, goblins, gnolls, etc.
They won't expect any mercy if their targets capture them alive.
They obviously have no regard for these creatures as "people" protected by law. Human laws don't apply to animals and monsters.
You’ve made a stellar case for why people think D&D’s foundation of racist violence is too deeply entrenched to try and salvage it. |
4e fangirl. Here to queer up the Realms. |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11690 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2020 : 22:15:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
"Good" seems to have different definitions for the demihuman races.
The scenario is "evil" humanoids (goblins, orcs, ogres, gnolls, kobolds) attack this culture for whatever reason, things happen, half of them surrender and plead for mercy.
The elves then exterminate the orcs. The dwarfs then exterminate the orcs. The halflings then run away, if they haven't already. It's already millennia past the point where the "evil" humanoids don't bother to surrender because they already know (their shamans and gods teach that) the "good" humans/demihumans will simply slaughter them wholesale once they've been attacked. While the "good" races already know (their history has shown many times that) the "evil" humanoids have no honor and no intent of keeping their oaths, they'll say or do anything to stay alive now just so they can come back later with malice and violence.
Remember that many of the "good" folks of "civilized" cities will gather militias, militaries, and mercenaries for monster hunting expeditions. They'll basically send an army to attack and exterminate the orcs, goblins, gnolls, etc.
They won't expect any mercy if their targets capture them alive.
They obviously have no regard for these creatures as "people" protected by law. Human laws don't apply to animals and monsters.
You’ve made a stellar case for why people think D&D’s foundation of racist violence is too deeply entrenched to try and salvage it.
I'd be interested to hear what you personally think is the answer here. I specifically asked it because I see a lot of people who have certain assumptions that realmsian society would be like our own if not better for how they treat people, and this is a basic test of a typical scenario that might occur. I'd like to hear what people believe would be the repercussions of certain scenarios as well. In other words, details. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11690 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2020 : 22:24:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Zeromaru X
It depends on the culture and its history, really. You may call Cormyr "good", but I can't see the Cormyrians sparing any goblins, giving their history with them.
Now, in my Realms, the good countries and mercantile powers will have policies like confinement and social labour, conscripting the defeated people into their army and sent it to watch the borders, or into the laboring force for a certain period of time, etc. After this, they will reclaim their freedom, with a warning that a second time there will be no mercy (there is no "Lawful Stupid" in my Realms). However, this is tge ideal case. There will be times that an outright massacre would happen when the defeated savages do not yield.
As for the evil countries, they will behave like they do in canon. I'm not wasting my time to make stuff already well done in the canon materials.
Wouldn't you be worried about filling your own fortresses on your border with former enemies and arming them? I personally can't see conscripting them into the military (in the case of savage humanoids that is). Or would you do something on your fringes to make sure that these individuals aren't in your most protected places and ready to betray them?
I can definitely see the conscripted labour force. Just curious on that though, WHAT types of labour do you see these types of beings being used for. I ask that because it is a little different than our own world in that these beings are visibly different in both look and let's call it "nature". A lot of them might have serious issues just conforming to regular society.
If they ended up having issues with these being as conscripted labour (i.e. they're just not fitting in with society, they're scaring kids, they're unintentionally breaking things and endangering people because they're not used to society, etc...), what do you see the goodly communities doing with them next? |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11690 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2020 : 22:57:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by TheIriaeban
You didn't state a time period for this as attitudes change over time given the history of the area. If you go post-Zhentarim Interregnum in Iriaebor, you are going to have different factions pushing for different things. Bron allowed the rank and file Zhentarim to be sent back to the Darkhold (assuming they would be killed but there was no guarantee). That upset quite a few people so if this takes place after that, there would be a VERY large push to just eliminate the rest of the enemy forces. Certainly, if the forces contained more than just a smattering of kobolds, the gnomes of the city would be pushing for their elimination with the dwarves more than happy to help if not take the lead on it whether or not there were kobolds present in numbers. Also, a vast majority of the merchant companies have their own security forces so if the enemies were to remain outside the city for any length of time, I can see several of them grouping their forces together to take the decision out of Bron's hands. Plus, you have the Black Talon Mercenary Company based in Iriaebor. They could easily be hired to eliminate the rest, Bron's possible compassion be damned. The Knights of the Shield, Men of the Basilisk, and Harpers would very likely fall into this category, as well.
The other side would have The Silent Hall pushing for peace and the "rehabilitation" of the remaining individuals. Joining them would be the folks that think having a "slave labor" force available to the city could be used to benefit them personally. They would couch it in things like "working off the damage and deaths they caused in their attack" but that would just be a smoke screen. The Zhentarim and Night Parade would very likely be for this as well since it would help destabilize the city. Moonstars would be for rehabilitation as part of their long term goal of peaceful coexistence.
Staying out of this would probably be the Moontower and the Temple of Chauntea. Depending if it is late enough for the Temple of Waukeen to be back, they would likely stay out of it as well (they may tend to look towards mercy since the rehabilitated forces would become more customers for trading).
This I find to be a well thought out response for a specific city, but I think you got a little too far ahead (and part of that falls on me). Basically, you're bringing in all these factions to decide what needs to happen, but in this case all these factions just "aren't there" when the surrendering would happen. I guess maybe we should also give something like some numbers as well to give a rough idea of the size of this. Why don't we say it was a raid of ... how about 50... and now 25 of them are dead and 25 of them (whatever kind of savage humanoid fits the area/story/whatever) just surrendered to the city's military/militia/watch patrol. Let's also say that the "good guys" outnumber them maybe 2 to 1, so that they also aren't feeling threatened. What will the ... let's call him "captain" or "sergeant" for this to make things easier... DO with these humanoids?
I find it very interesting though how after whatever sentence happens you see various different factions lobbying to the government of Iriaebor for what to do with these individuals. I can see that happening, and it might end up turning into bribes because different factions want the laborers. Controlling corruption could be a problem in certain places (I especially see this as a problem in the more mercantile cultures). |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
TheIriaeban
Master of Realmslore
USA
1289 Posts |
Posted - 31 Aug 2020 : 00:29:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
quote:
Originally posted by TheIriaeban
You didn't state a time period for this as attitudes change over time given the history of the area. If you go post-Zhentarim Interregnum in Iriaebor, you are going to have different factions pushing for different things. Bron allowed the rank and file Zhentarim to be sent back to the Darkhold (assuming they would be killed but there was no guarantee). That upset quite a few people so if this takes place after that, there would be a VERY large push to just eliminate the rest of the enemy forces. Certainly, if the forces contained more than just a smattering of kobolds, the gnomes of the city would be pushing for their elimination with the dwarves more than happy to help if not take the lead on it whether or not there were kobolds present in numbers. Also, a vast majority of the merchant companies have their own security forces so if the enemies were to remain outside the city for any length of time, I can see several of them grouping their forces together to take the decision out of Bron's hands. Plus, you have the Black Talon Mercenary Company based in Iriaebor. They could easily be hired to eliminate the rest, Bron's possible compassion be damned. The Knights of the Shield, Men of the Basilisk, and Harpers would very likely fall into this category, as well.
The other side would have The Silent Hall pushing for peace and the "rehabilitation" of the remaining individuals. Joining them would be the folks that think having a "slave labor" force available to the city could be used to benefit them personally. They would couch it in things like "working off the damage and deaths they caused in their attack" but that would just be a smoke screen. The Zhentarim and Night Parade would very likely be for this as well since it would help destabilize the city. Moonstars would be for rehabilitation as part of their long term goal of peaceful coexistence.
Staying out of this would probably be the Moontower and the Temple of Chauntea. Depending if it is late enough for the Temple of Waukeen to be back, they would likely stay out of it as well (they may tend to look towards mercy since the rehabilitated forces would become more customers for trading).
This I find to be a well thought out response for a specific city, but I think you got a little too far ahead (and part of that falls on me). Basically, you're bringing in all these factions to decide what needs to happen, but in this case all these factions just "aren't there" when the surrendering would happen. I guess maybe we should also give something like some numbers as well to give a rough idea of the size of this. Why don't we say it was a raid of ... how about 50... and now 25 of them are dead and 25 of them (whatever kind of savage humanoid fits the area/story/whatever) just surrendered to the city's military/militia/watch patrol. Let's also say that the "good guys" outnumber them maybe 2 to 1, so that they also aren't feeling threatened. What will the ... let's call him "captain" or "sergeant" for this to make things easier... DO with these humanoids?
I find it very interesting though how after whatever sentence happens you see various different factions lobbying to the government of Iriaebor for what to do with these individuals. I can see that happening, and it might end up turning into bribes because different factions want the laborers. Controlling corruption could be a problem in certain places (I especially see this as a problem in the more mercantile cultures).
For your scenario to work, basically the humanoids would have to be surrounded because if they surrender one at a time, I can see the warrior they are fighting just run 'em through so they can move on to either engage the next guy or help one of his guys.
Now, if they were able to get into the city and the fight ends there, I can see that number getting captured and then the political games happen to determine their fate. For sure, they would be interrogated to see how they got in (50 humanoids should not be able to get in a well established, guarded city without something underhanded happening).
If this is outside the city, then I can easily see that they are all killed and their heads stuck on poles to warn the next group of humanoids that get the idea to attack to really think it over (and as revenge for killing their friends and compatriots). |
"Iriaebor is a fine city. So what if you can have violence between merchant groups break out at any moment. Not every city can offer dinner AND a show."
My FR writeups - http://www.mediafire.com/folder/um3liz6tqsf5n/Documents
|
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11690 Posts |
Posted - 31 Aug 2020 : 03:44:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by TheIriaeban
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
quote:
Originally posted by TheIriaeban
You didn't state a time period for this as attitudes change over time given the history of the area. If you go post-Zhentarim Interregnum in Iriaebor, you are going to have different factions pushing for different things. Bron allowed the rank and file Zhentarim to be sent back to the Darkhold (assuming they would be killed but there was no guarantee). That upset quite a few people so if this takes place after that, there would be a VERY large push to just eliminate the rest of the enemy forces. Certainly, if the forces contained more than just a smattering of kobolds, the gnomes of the city would be pushing for their elimination with the dwarves more than happy to help if not take the lead on it whether or not there were kobolds present in numbers. Also, a vast majority of the merchant companies have their own security forces so if the enemies were to remain outside the city for any length of time, I can see several of them grouping their forces together to take the decision out of Bron's hands. Plus, you have the Black Talon Mercenary Company based in Iriaebor. They could easily be hired to eliminate the rest, Bron's possible compassion be damned. The Knights of the Shield, Men of the Basilisk, and Harpers would very likely fall into this category, as well.
The other side would have The Silent Hall pushing for peace and the "rehabilitation" of the remaining individuals. Joining them would be the folks that think having a "slave labor" force available to the city could be used to benefit them personally. They would couch it in things like "working off the damage and deaths they caused in their attack" but that would just be a smoke screen. The Zhentarim and Night Parade would very likely be for this as well since it would help destabilize the city. Moonstars would be for rehabilitation as part of their long term goal of peaceful coexistence.
Staying out of this would probably be the Moontower and the Temple of Chauntea. Depending if it is late enough for the Temple of Waukeen to be back, they would likely stay out of it as well (they may tend to look towards mercy since the rehabilitated forces would become more customers for trading).
This I find to be a well thought out response for a specific city, but I think you got a little too far ahead (and part of that falls on me). Basically, you're bringing in all these factions to decide what needs to happen, but in this case all these factions just "aren't there" when the surrendering would happen. I guess maybe we should also give something like some numbers as well to give a rough idea of the size of this. Why don't we say it was a raid of ... how about 50... and now 25 of them are dead and 25 of them (whatever kind of savage humanoid fits the area/story/whatever) just surrendered to the city's military/militia/watch patrol. Let's also say that the "good guys" outnumber them maybe 2 to 1, so that they also aren't feeling threatened. What will the ... let's call him "captain" or "sergeant" for this to make things easier... DO with these humanoids?
I find it very interesting though how after whatever sentence happens you see various different factions lobbying to the government of Iriaebor for what to do with these individuals. I can see that happening, and it might end up turning into bribes because different factions want the laborers. Controlling corruption could be a problem in certain places (I especially see this as a problem in the more mercantile cultures).
For your scenario to work, basically the humanoids would have to be surrounded because if they surrender one at a time, I can see the warrior they are fighting just run 'em through so they can move on to either engage the next guy or help one of his guys.
Now, if they were able to get into the city and the fight ends there, I can see that number getting captured and then the political games happen to determine their fate. For sure, they would be interrogated to see how they got in (50 humanoids should not be able to get in a well established, guarded city without something underhanded happening).
If this is outside the city, then I can easily see that they are all killed and their heads stuck on poles to warn the next group of humanoids that get the idea to attack to really think it over (and as revenge for killing their friends and compatriots).
Pretty much thinking outside the city. Basically bandit gang type scenario that maybe gets hunted down after they did something to make the city angry. Or if not bandit gang, hungry creatures that have been waylaying merchants/travellers and eating them, abusing women, etc... (note, I did say savage humanoids). I didn't have any kind of exact scenario in mind, other than "somewhat large number of generally considered evil humanoids surrender when they realize they're going to die if they don't and something has to be done with them". |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Zeromaru X
Great Reader
Colombia
2442 Posts |
Posted - 31 Aug 2020 : 04:17:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
Wouldn't you be worried about filling your own fortresses on your border with former enemies and arming them? I personally can't see conscripting them into the military (in the case of savage humanoids that is). Or would you do something on your fringes to make sure that these individuals aren't in your most protected places and ready to betray them?
I can definitely see the conscripted labour force. Just curious on that though, WHAT types of labour do you see these types of beings being used for. I ask that because it is a little different than our own world in that these beings are visibly different in both look and let's call it "nature". A lot of them might have serious issues just conforming to regular society.
If they ended up having issues with these being as conscripted labour (i.e. they're just not fitting in with society, they're scaring kids, they're unintentionally breaking things and endangering people because they're not used to society, etc...), what do you see the goodly communities doing with them next?
For the conscription part, yes, it'll be dangerous. Guess they'll be part of already established forces of the kingdom, under strict vigilance and such. As for the labour part, working in mines or the farms. That kind of stuff. Under strict vigilance, of course.
But this is just the ideal scenario. Things seldom work that way in real life. We have "good" Cormyr and its concentration camp in Wheloon... |
Instead of seeking change, you prefer a void, merciless abyss of a world... |
|
|
|
bloodtide_the_red
Learned Scribe
USA
297 Posts |
Posted - 31 Aug 2020 : 05:46:59
|
Well complicated question and your "types" of places are just too vague. Anyway:
1.A typically Good or Neutral place, with a good dose of Lawfulness, AND having a basic non aggressive society would be happy to accept the surrender...maybe disarm the humanoids a bit, and send them away. As soon as the humanoids are over the first hill, they simply "don't exist anymore" to the place. This covers a lot of places like Amn, Sembia, Tethyr, Thesk, Turmish, Iriaebor, Procampur, Neverwinter and Waterdeep and about half the gnome and halfling places.
2.A typical Hard Life Frontier place, of any alignment won't accept or acknowledge anything like a surrender. They will ruthlessly slaughter every single monster they can: it's not over until the ground is full of dead bodies and blood and they drink over it. This covers the bulk of just about all dwarven places and gold elf places, plus Luskan, Mardbar, Sunbardar, Loudwater, and the whole northern Moonsea(Phaln, Theinta, Melvaunt,).
3.Any aggressive place is also going to go for the full slaughter. They simply love having the excise to kill. Plenty of dwarf and elf lands fall here, plus places like Hillsfar, Mulmaster, Clashmain, Rashmen and Baldur's Gate(especially the Flaming fist).
4.A typical lawful good ish place that "cares" about it's land and people is going to want reparations. Money would work for some, though most likely to would be hard forced labor(but not cruel) to clear land or build up defenses. And then they would be let go. Cormyr falls here, as could Sembia, Argoland, Tantras, Raven's Bluff and the other half of the gnome and halfling places.
5.Any evil place will simply outright enslave the surrendered humanoids. Zhential Keep, Uther, Murolrund, Thay, Dambrath and most drow places.
6.Any heavy magical place might do one of the above, but with a magic twist. Maybe charming the monsters to do no harm. Putting them to sleep, changing them into animals, or stone, or teleport them away. Silverymoon, Nimbral, and Hallaura, plus a couple elf places. Silverymoon might go for a peace binding oath to charm them into not attacking anyone for a year, while elves might go for polymorph them into trees to replace a destroyed forest.
Though all the above might change based on the time period, both by the politics of the land and local events. Plus there are tons of local things to consider: Cormyr is likely to slaughter goblins endlessly, as well as most elves would do drow, and dwarves would duegar. |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7968 Posts |
Posted - 31 Aug 2020 : 06:05:00
|
"Good" and "Evil" are real things in the Realms. An "evil" creature is dependably, predictably evil. Themes of redemption are reserved for Important Characters, not for monsters and redshirts.
What if instead of humanoid monsters (orcs, goblins, gnolls) we were talking about humanoid fiends (demons) ... if they were the aggressors and they later surrendered, begging for mercy ... how would you respond? You would know beyond any doubt that these fiends would simply attack you again. Or that they would attack someone else. They're fiends, they can't be "reformed" or "rehabilitated', they'll never become sheep and they'll never become angels just because they promised to be nice. They'd attack you again the moment they gained an advantage and/or you gained a disadvantage. You'd never be able to secure your own safety from them without guarding and policing or subjugating them, imposing martial law and occupation, and they'd be seething and plotting with open or hidden malice towards you the entire time.
Orcs are not as "Evil" as fiends. But they are "evil" nonetheless. Maybe RAS thinks orcs are just misunderstood creatures who deserve the same basic respect and dignity everyone else gets - and he might be right as long as those orcs remain "civilized". But I think the moment an orc hoard rushes your city walls with murder in their eyes they have already demonstrated their inhumanity and must be treated as the monsters they are. And I think the same would apply to humans if they were also known to be "evil" (like Zhent or Thayan invaders). Just as elves apply the same standard to "evil" drow. You know that if you surrender to them then you'll be punished, tortured, brutalized, abused, enslaved, and exploited in the worst possible ways - you'd be "lucky" if they just killed you quickly instead of taking some amusement - so why should you handle their surrender to you on gentle and "civilized" terms? |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 31 Aug 2020 06:18:58 |
|
|
|
Omenborn
Acolyte
Germany
16 Posts |
Posted - 31 Aug 2020 : 12:37:28
|
Heres what would happen if this "Evil" Humanoids invade the "Realm" that the Party around my Mage has carved themselves out of where was formerly the Shaar.
Official the Head of State is our Paladin of Tyr but the real Power that holds the Realm together is my Mage (current Mage Drake former Lvl 41 Human Invoker in 2ed).
They would have the choice of working for the "good" of our Realm or Dying by the Sword.
If they choose to work for the "good" of our Realm then they would need to use an Helm of Opposit Alligment (of which we have several) and then they are welcome in the ever growing Population of our Realm and work at the best of their abilitys happily for the rest of their life and even get paid for working for us.
So our Paladin cant complain that we deploy "evil" creature or use "slaves"...........
|
Some Adventure for Gold,
others for Fame,
ME i just like to KILL THING |
|
|
|
LordofBones
Master of Realmslore
1477 Posts |
Posted - 31 Aug 2020 : 14:35:19
|
| I think a paladin would find what's essentially a portable brainwashing device to be somewhat objectionable. |
|
|
|
Zeromaru X
Great Reader
Colombia
2442 Posts |
Posted - 31 Aug 2020 : 16:30:57
|
Well, "good" is not nice. If such a device can be used to spare a lot of lives, I can see even the most lawful good paladin finding merit there.
Obviously, I talk from the lenses of 4e's alignment. I know that in earlier editions, "Good" was written with G of "goofy". |
Instead of seeking change, you prefer a void, merciless abyss of a world... |
Edited by - Zeromaru X on 31 Aug 2020 16:31:29 |
|
|
|
Seethyr
Master of Realmslore
USA
1151 Posts |
Posted - 31 Aug 2020 : 16:47:39
|
| So, I really appreciate the old alignment system of “sometimes, never, always, etc.”. That made it easier to determine how my own characters would treat the savage races and monsters and thusly how I’d think “good” societies should as well. |
Follow the Maztica (Aztec/Maya) and Anchorome (Indigenous North America) Campaigns on DMsGuild!
The Maztica Campaign
The Anchorome Campaign |
|
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4211 Posts |
Posted - 31 Aug 2020 : 21:53:55
|
I think Ayrik nailed it on the head...but I'm going to put it a bit more into how I think on it too. Understand I come from AD&D 1e with my thinking.
Law, Chaos, Good, Evil, Neutrality...all of these things are not abstract ideas; but literal forces in the D&D universe.
A Chaotic Evil creature is a literal representative agent of active forces in the D&D Multiverse. Rarely if ever will such a one be capable of being "reformed" because there are PUNISHMENTS for doing so. A literal loss of support from cosmic forces (level loss) while your NEW alignment takes time to "build trust" with you and begin to support you.
So lets say the group is a raiding band of Orcs. In my version of the game these are Lawful Evil enslavers and man-eaters. They will attack others to enslave them and eat them...they are a form of disease that afflicts Good Societies.
A society doesn't attempt to "reform Covid-19" but instead tries to eradicate it. A paladin swinging his sword onto the necks of foes is not an evil act, he is a Vaccine. The moral quandary of what to do with "orc children" is not an issue: they are growing germs that need to be eradicated.
The idea put forth by the OP isn't a bad one at all...lots of games get into the "moral" stuff. But in my realms:
Good societies will eliminate invading evil societies to ensure the safety of their people. Not because Good people are having to do "evil things" but because Good is MEANT to combat and destroy Evil. They are diametrically opposed forces like matter meeting anti-matter.
So on the face, the Evil creatures would only offer "surrender" if they thought it would buy them an edge. They would only do something like that to try and later destroy the Good that they so basically in their core NEED to destroy. In effect, they would know better than to try and surrender because they would know that the Good Guys would kill them. Instead they would try to win free of the situation, regather their strength, and try at a later time to destroy/enslave/devour the Good Guys.
For their part, the Good Guys would eliminate the evil ones on the spot and would not feel remorse for doing so. It isn't "wrong" to kill an evil foe because the evil foe is an agent of a force that wishes to eliminate your own people down to the last man, woman and child.
Evil cultures fighting evil cultures may be different in that the victorious evil force would want to find a way to exploit those they are fighting against. But even here, Chaotic Evil individuals and Lawful Evil individuals might seek the elimination of each other to the last fighting man...so again, it comes to the "live to fight another day" where one side tries to get away instead of surrender.
All this comes down to the Alignment Forces of the D&D Multi-Verse. It just is the way things were intended for the game to avoid these moral quandaries. It relieves the players from these difficult decisions and makes it ok for their Good Aligned characters to be heroes that vanquish monsters.
Because that is what it was intended to be: Heroes protecting other good people from monsters. Orcs, goblins, kobolds and their ilk are not intended to be redeemed or "saved" but instead to be destroyed so that the alignment forces they represent do not destroy the Good Guys. |
The Old Grey Box and AD&D for me! |
|
|
|
deserk
Learned Scribe
Norway
237 Posts |
Posted - 31 Aug 2020 : 21:54:55
|
| Disregarding the ethical dimension, it would pragmatic for many "good"-oriented human/humanoid nations to not always choose to outright slay monstrous prisoners. Say an army of human nation have captured the son of an orc chieftain of a notable clan. Why simply kill him when he could be more valuable alive? You could coerce that clan to stop their aggressions and to start acting to your benefit. Many orcs may not care for the fate of their family members, especially after a humiliating defeat, but an orc chieftain with few sons would begin to care. So this prisoner's life could ensure peace between the nations. Also, if the orc chieftain shows utter indifference to the fate of his child, the human nobility could sponsor this captive orc and fund him with the means to attack his own clan and usurp his place within it. After that they most likely have an allied orc clan, that could ravage the countryside of rival nations or act as useful mercenaries. |
|
|
|
Seethyr
Master of Realmslore
USA
1151 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2020 : 01:06:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dalor Darden
I think Ayrik nailed it on the head...but I'm going to put it a bit more into how I think on it too. Understand I come from AD&D 1e with my thinking.
Law, Chaos, Good, Evil, Neutrality...all of these things are not abstract ideas; but literal forces in the D&D universe.
A Chaotic Evil creature is a literal representative agent of active forces in the D&D Multiverse. Rarely if ever will such a one be capable of being "reformed" because there are PUNISHMENTS for doing so. A literal loss of support from cosmic forces (level loss) while your NEW alignment takes time to "build trust" with you and begin to support you.
So lets say the group is a raiding band of Orcs. In my version of the game these are Lawful Evil enslavers and man-eaters. They will attack others to enslave them and eat them...they are a form of disease that afflicts Good Societies.
A society doesn't attempt to "reform Covid-19" but instead tries to eradicate it. A paladin swinging his sword onto the necks of foes is not an evil act, he is a Vaccine. The moral quandary of what to do with "orc children" is not an issue: they are growing germs that need to be eradicated.
The idea put forth by the OP isn't a bad one at all...lots of games get into the "moral" stuff. But in my realms:
Good societies will eliminate invading evil societies to ensure the safety of their people. Not because Good people are having to do "evil things" but because Good is MEANT to combat and destroy Evil. They are diametrically opposed forces like matter meeting anti-matter.
So on the face, the Evil creatures would only offer "surrender" if they thought it would buy them an edge. They would only do something like that to try and later destroy the Good that they so basically in their core NEED to destroy. In effect, they would know better than to try and surrender because they would know that the Good Guys would kill them. Instead they would try to win free of the situation, regather their strength, and try at a later time to destroy/enslave/devour the Good Guys.
For their part, the Good Guys would eliminate the evil ones on the spot and would not feel remorse for doing so. It isn't "wrong" to kill an evil foe because the evil foe is an agent of a force that wishes to eliminate your own people down to the last man, woman and child.
Evil cultures fighting evil cultures may be different in that the victorious evil force would want to find a way to exploit those they are fighting against. But even here, Chaotic Evil individuals and Lawful Evil individuals might seek the elimination of each other to the last fighting man...so again, it comes to the "live to fight another day" where one side tries to get away instead of surrender.
All this comes down to the Alignment Forces of the D&D Multi-Verse. It just is the way things were intended for the game to avoid these moral quandaries. It relieves the players from these difficult decisions and makes it ok for their Good Aligned characters to be heroes that vanquish monsters.
Because that is what it was intended to be: Heroes protecting other good people from monsters. Orcs, goblins, kobolds and their ilk are not intended to be redeemed or "saved" but instead to be destroyed so that the alignment forces they represent do not destroy the Good Guys.
I do love the simplicity this adds to the game, but I feel like it hurts the story. Many of the best stories involve moral conflict in one part or another. I think this is what makes the Drizzt stories so popular. How many characters has Salvatore put on a redemption arc? In truth, I’m not disagreeing with you, I just don’t think it should be all the time.
I know it’s a ridiculously overused trope but I like the redeemed drow, orc or even dragon. |
Follow the Maztica (Aztec/Maya) and Anchorome (Indigenous North America) Campaigns on DMsGuild!
The Maztica Campaign
The Anchorome Campaign |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7968 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2020 : 02:13:39
|
Alignment is a game mechanic. For a game which (nominally) involves good vs evil, heroes vs villains, heroes vs monsters, heroes vs dungeons & dragons.
Alignment is not as readily useful in stories and novels. It's actually counterproductive, too abstracted and oversimplified, it reduces free will and morals and ethics (along with their opposite values) to a limited selected of package-deal categories.
D&D has always been intended "for all ages" but has also tended to place emphasis on the "young" audiences. Audiences who tend to be quite intelligent but are also unworldly, inexperienced, and (to state it in game terms) lacking in "Wisdom" abilities - they just haven't yet been alive long enough to accumulate the sophistications of older audiences. So I think the game alignment system is something players must eventually outgrow sort of like training wheels on a bicycle. Strict canon stuff from the monster manuals and Realmslore will always comply with the basic alignment system. Deeper themes and penetrating examples which posit greater moral and ethical challenges (and bend or break or completely twist normal alignment constraints) can be found in some of the published stuff but these require you've grown experienced (and "Wise") enough to properly perceive and understand what the authors have hidden beneath the obvious. |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 01 Sep 2020 02:18:03 |
|
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4211 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2020 : 03:12:47
|
I agree totally that deeper meaning must be had in the context of novels and perhaps even lore for the setting. But to allow too many complexities into the game aspect of it can really bog down play on several levels.
I have always admired the deeper things of the novels; but I also try to keep such complex things out of my games because I run games mainly for my kids. I don't want them feeling depressed because their paladin killed an orc that whimpered... |
The Old Grey Box and AD&D for me! |
|
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 21 Sep 2020 : 07:02:48
|
Great Reader Ayrik,
I have to very strongly disagree with this notion that good and evil are dependably, predictably, good or evil. Let me point you to my arguments on the psychopath/sociopath Khelben Arunsun, or The Emerald Enclave.
Khelben Arunsun:
http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=22542&SearchTerms=khelben,teleological
The Emerald Enclave:
http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4591&SearchTerms=khelben,teleological
What Is Evil:
http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=23029&SearchTerms=khelben,teleological
I have an extensive background in studying ethical modeling, and also for utilizing that ethical modeling in determining how one can assess actions to be moral/immoral by examining those actions through different ethical models.
Once you get an idea as to what the ethic of a country, a people, an individual, you can better understand their justifications for certain actions.
For example, and I will keep this very limited due to requests by Master Rupert in the past: ask the Muslims and Christians during the Crusades who was evil, and well, you'd get them both saying the other side. My point in making that statement is to demonstrate that alignment, and rigidity of morality through monolithic ethics is simple mindedness. To be clear, I am not saying you are simple minded Great Reader Ayrik. Rather, I am only pointing out that most people I've met during my life look through the tacit manner by which they have arrived at their ethic at any one point in time in their life, and often fail to have the scope and scale of thought to realize it is predicated on the microcosm of their cultural teachings. To question such beliefs is to question the very nature of all decisions that have come before, and most people cannot bear the idea that if they were to assess their life through another lens, that lens may bear out that they are evil. Hence, the uncomfortable reality of the issue.
I will simply summarize, very briefly below, the links I have above.
- Khelben Arunsun is outrageously evil, and in my honest opinion, an awful person. Truly a scumbag of the highest order. I feel I lay out a very convincing ethical argument for that in the teleological argument link above.
- The Emerald Enclave is one of the only groups/organizations in the Realms that has evidence of their genocidal actions. The organization is simply a horror show of evil. The arguments that the occasional "good" that they do is so overwhelmed by the bad that they do that they make Bane look like a Boy Scout. Horribly evil organization.
- The "What is Evil" discussion has me laying out in response, the different kinds of common ethical models that one could evaluate a moral code by.
Best regards,
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 21 Sep 2020 : 07:08:30
|
Great Reader sleyvas,
I just responded to Great Reader Ayrik. I thought those responses relevant in order before answering the questions about government, and was curious if you might be persuaded to check out those links I provided, as I feel they strike at the very epicenter of the government question you are asking here?
Best regards,
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11690 Posts |
Posted - 21 Sep 2020 : 13:04:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2
Great Reader sleyvas,
I just responded to Great Reader Ayrik. I thought those responses relevant in order before answering the questions about government, and was curious if you might be persuaded to check out those links I provided, as I feel they strike at the very epicenter of the government question you are asking here?
Best regards,
I'll say first that I think Ayrik's thoughts weren't horrible, and I felt he put some level of thought to them (moreso than some others in fact). However, yes, this is exactly the thought process I was looking at. Its kind of disturbed me lately that I see everything being labeled with almost these "plastic" definitions of good and evil that are colored by the lenses of our modern (and sometimes very recent as well) political and ethical ideas. The idea that I have is that they think the realms should adhere to the same ideas, but honestly, I feel it can't. A lot of what's "accepted" in our world is based on the structure of our world and the luxuries allowed to it based on technology, freedoms, and safeties that exist here because things like magic, non-human but intelligent races, etc... don't exist. At the same time, I don't think that the realms would be exceptionally uniform either (because its described as being very fractious). One way I describe it may be kind of simple, but I think it gets the point across... in our world, your neighbor isn't likely to kill you, take all your belongings, and eat your body for sustenance... and still consider that not an evil act. Yet, I don't see that being anything wrong to gnoll, goblinkin, orc, giant, minotaur, or any other of dozens of non-human cultures. As a result, I see laws, ethics, social mores, what's acceptable, etc.. being "different" based on where you live in the realms, how safe it is to live there, etc...
Also, I personally love that you see Khelben as such a problem, because honestly, I like the man, but I see him in a similar vein. His paranoia and willingness to step over the line make him both a great hero, but also an awful villain. His actions with Manshoon are more than a bit evil (and some might say that they generated more evil in the world than good). In that other thread though, I'd like to add one answer. Why hasn't his Chosen status been revoked? Because honestly, I don't think Mystra CAN. I think just like real life, its very easy to GIVE power, but its very hard to TAKE IT BACK. Why can't Mystra do it? My personal view on the gods is that they're powerful, but not ALL POWERFUL, and that extends to Ao as well. I don't necessarily want to see gods being taken on by mortals left and right, but at the same time, I also don't see it being an impossibility. Someone at the power levels of Elminster, Tam, Larloch, the Simbul, etc... can possibly go toe to toe with some lesser gods and stand a viable chance of winning (moreso if they bring along a group of friends of similar power level).
I'll also point out that one of the things that I've liked about the trilogy based on the Thayan Civil War was that they gave a very human view of some of the people there. By that I mean so many people want to see the red wizards as "snidely whiplash" characters who are evil caricatures. I'll agree that some of them are that depraved. However, I'll bet that 95% of them are just wizards who want to study magic, want the freedom to study what they want without religion getting in the way, and maybe they have a fierce national pride in how civilized they are compare to what they see in many places (which their view of "civilized" and someone else's view of "civilized" may be two totally different definitions. The other 5% (sizable) are depraved screwups though, which is why the country has a bad name. One of the fun things I used to do with that was actually having infighting within the country wherein one red wizard might simply see the need to eliminate what he sees as a threat to the welfare of the country in another red wizard who is a sociopath. However, the "sociopath" was more powerful, and so "the bounty hunter Sleyvas" was called in to discreetly hunt the individual. Sometimes this went the wrong direction though, because Sleyvas wasn't exactly the shining example of studying who was hiring him and their motives (one of the reasons I have him as such a proponent of the red knight now is because he is so focused on magical "tactics". Not what's morally/ethically right. He's so focused on "winning" that he sometimes forgets to think about "should I win".
This comes into cold clarity for him though when anything involves family.). |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
Edited by - sleyvas on 21 Sep 2020 13:39:21 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 21 Sep 2020 : 16:08:21
|
| Mystra can't take her power back, but she could revoke it and send Azuth to reclaim her power. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11690 Posts |
Posted - 21 Sep 2020 : 17:02:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Mystra can't take her power back, but she could revoke it and send Azuth to reclaim her power.
In said instance, just to play devil's advocate, do you feel self assured that Elminster or one of the seven sisters might not come to Khelben's aid against even Azuth? I personally don't (hell, I have not a single doubt that Laeral would stand by her man after the crown of horns). I can see them thinking "he made a mistake, we all have to be allowed to make a mistake without our power being taken away". I can also see some of them thinking "And I like you Midnight, but you aren't really Mystra and I'm older and more wise than you are". Again, I come from the concept that these chosen CAN give a god a run for their money, and especially if they join up, they can be an even more credible threat.
To add further to this, what's the reason Azuth would listen? Because let's face it.... Khelben didn't do anything "wrong" in the observance of spreading the belief and use of magic. If Azuth shows up and challenges him, whose to say that Ao wouldn't strip both Mystra AND Azuth of their seats at the table (or at least punish them and protect the mortals). Hell, Ao might tell Lok... I mean Cyric... over to give out Mystra's truename and give them aid.
Ironically, as a bit of a sidebar, I'm just now coming to realize too that, with new stories added on old... we now have it that ONE Chosen of Mystra (Khelben) acted against ANOTHER Chosen of Mystra (for weren't we later told in a novel that Manshoon was given a portion of Mystra's power somehow or other....) with the Scepter of the Sorcerer Kings. Ironically as well, we later see another supposed Chosen of Mystra chopping off Manshoon's arm.
Also, and I never thought about this like this, but its almost like that ritual that basically "split up Manshoon's soul" could kind of be an act by a a certain god in the form of a rose. Hmmm, IF Manshoon DID hold a "divine spark" of Mystra and then his soul is split amongst multiple entities, does that create dozens of divine sparks? |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
Edited by - sleyvas on 21 Sep 2020 17:38:56 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 21 Sep 2020 : 20:22:02
|
Khelben didn't act against another Chosen of Mystra with the Scepter -- he gave it to Fzoul.
And I don't recall Manshoon being a Chosen, anyway.
It must also be noted that Khelben's deal with Fzoul prevented the Zhents from expanding west for more than 27 YEARS. This would have protected hundreds of thousands of people, if not millions, for an entire generation.
It also must be noted that the deities of the Harpers continued to extend their blessings to Khelben's group -- which makes it obvious that at the worst, they considered his actions to be a lesser evil, compared to what he accomplished. And given the way Khelben played the game, we may not have seen yet what all he accomplished with this. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 21 Sep 2020 : 21:16:05
|
Great Reader sleyvas,
I want to say I appreciate you mentioning the following in your response to me:
quote:
I'll say first that I think Ayrik's thoughts weren't horrible, and I felt he put some level of thought to them (moreso than some others in fact).
I read that and clearly, and quickly, understood that the intent of my response came across very wrong. I sent Great Reader Ayrik a private message for being rude (though I did not intend it, I think it was and thus my apology to him). I don't like obscurity though, and that is why I wanted to own up to it here too: so, thank you. As to the rest of your response to me:
quote:
Its kind of disturbed me lately that I see everything being labeled with almost these "plastic" definitions of good and evil that are colored by the lenses of our modern (and sometimes very recent as well) political and ethical ideas.
I could not agree with you more if I found a magical means by which to do so! The problem is that, only the surface level of different types of culture are ever touched upon when deriving cultural norms, etc. in places such as Thay, Chessenta, The Dalelands, the Great Rift with gold dwarves, Luiren, Dambrath, etc. It is always a point of flavor on your way to kill and take treasure. Don't get me wrong, if that is your game, that is your game, and go have fun! :) However, if you've hit a point where you, as you stated you are, are seeing the flaws in the simpleness of described behavior, culture, lifestyles, values, morality (some of that is redundant, but I am putting it out there to be painstakingly clear in addressing the range of it all), then I agree you should explore a method by which to get to that depth of storytelling through behavior that will make you happy. I've been doing it now for a solid ten years on this ethics front, and it has really improved the storytelling component of my campaigns tremendously.
quote:
The idea that I have is that they think the realms should adhere to the same ideas, but honestly, I feel it can't. A lot of what's "accepted" in our world is based on the structure of our world and the luxuries allowed to it based on technology, freedoms, and safeties that exist here because things like magic, non-human but intelligent races, etc... don't exist.
Oh, you are so correct here. To use a modern example in our world, why do we see some governments responding with literal religious legal rulings, other nations using a hybrid of multiple systems of jurisprudence, and others use a common law approach? The ethics pushed through each system are quite different.
The Forgotten Realms has only on a surface level of different legal ethics for example between nations. However, when you juxtapose Thay against Halruaa, both of which are magocracies, [yes, Halruaa is defined as a magocratic oligarchy, but when you look at the implicit, and at times explicit, form of rulership Szass Tam put upon the other Red Wizards, it behaved as a magocratic oligarchy as well], you can quickly ascertain that though their systems of government are the same for all intents and purposes, the cultural realities of how it plays out is worlds apart. The reason that is the case is simple:
The ethic of those nations is such that you get different results.
Though, let me demonstrate how with fact based evidence.
Thay utilizes slavery. Slavery, obviously a horrific existence is justified by the Thayan's: the ends justify the means. This is called a utilitarian ethic, and in Thay's case, it utilizes something specifically called rule utilitarianism. Thayan rulers justify the use of slaves upon several viewpoints: a) they view the people whom are slaves as less worthy, less functional, and therefore, meant to be in the situation in which they found themselves. Very tyrannical, and no doubt why Bane was/is so popular in Thay, though Kossuth is the most followed deity.; b) liberties as are often understood in Western philosophy here on Earth are rarely ever a reality in the Realms when you dig into a nation, and of course didn't exist in medieval society here in the real world as we know them now days. It's expensive, and doesn't play well to the economic and political goals of the elite.; c) slavery personifies weakness. The strong rule, while the slaves languish in a horrid existence (this isn't glorifying it, just accepting that as fact, which is why it is so horrible). The most powerful in Thay are at the top, with the weak at the bottom. Visibly, this solidifies that "the truth" of their system of governance.
When looking at Halruaa on the other hand, Halruaa has over (400) council elders that effectively operate as a senate. The body deliberates, and votes on what to do, with the netyarch acting as the executive. Though they don't explicitly acknowledge a "veto" power, it appears to imply, but like England with the monarch and parliament, that the netyarch does have such a power. Local government elects mayors, whereas in Thay, tharchions are appointed. The greater degree of democracy that exists in Halruaa, when juxtaposed against Thay, demonstrates a more deontological ethic than a utilitarian one.
quote:
At the same time, I don't think that the realms would be exceptionally uniform either (because its described as being very fractious).
Stated and answered directly above.
quote:
One way I describe it may be kind of simple, but I think it gets the point across... in our world, your neighbor isn't likely to kill you, take all your belongings, and eat your body for sustenance... and still consider that not an evil act. Yet, I don't see that being anything wrong to gnoll, goblinkin, orc, giant, minotaur, or any other of dozens of non-human cultures. As a result, I see laws, ethics, social mores, what's acceptable, etc.. being "different" based on where you live in the realms, how safe it is to live there, etc...
You are of course, correct again. The reasoning behind this is that in Western philosophy (I am only utilizing western since I am from here, it is not to imply others do or do not differ in such a manner), such behavior would be considered ruthless selfishness (in the evolutionary ethics consideration) in a socially Darwinistic way. Is that right? Depends on your ethic. Followers of Malar would be divine command theory utilitarianists. Think on that for a minute! lol
quote:
Also, I personally love that you see Khelben as such a problem, because honestly, I like the man, but I see him in a similar vein.
I thank you for that. I believe you may be the first person to demonstrate a true understanding of my argument thus far, and at least contemplated the value of said argument in possibly having validity to it. Often I feel, people become attached to the hero concept of The Blackstaff, without digging deeper and realizing for the good he has done, the bad far outweighs it.
quote:
Why hasn't his Chosen status been revoked? Because honestly, I don't think Mystra CAN.
I get what you're putting down, but I have to disagree here. Look at what happened when Lathander's avatar appeared, and Sammaster tried to put his daddy fighting underoo's on....
Yeah.......that got a little messy, in like .00001 seconds. Though, to Sammaster's credit, he did get one shot in, creating Lathander's Tear. If Lathander wrecked Sammaster like the 3rd grade chump he was, I am pretty sure that Mystra could just cut off Elminster and the others from the Weave, and then paddle them back to the farm like children.
quote:
I'll also point out that one of the things that I've liked about the trilogy based on the Thayan Civil War was that they gave a very human view of some of the people there. By that I mean so many people want to see the red wizards as "snidely whiplash" characters who are evil caricatures. I'll agree that some of them are that depraved. However, I'll bet that 95% of them are just wizards who want to study magic, want the freedom to study what they want without religion getting in the way, and maybe they have a fierce national pride in how civilized they are compare to what they see in many places (which their view of "civilized" and someone else's view of "civilized" may be two totally different definitions. The other 5% (sizable) are depraved screwups though, which is why the country has a bad name.
Man, quoting that entire portion as it was fantastic! This makes me think of Iran's government. The people of Iran are great. It's the government that has the problems, and the people within the government, at least based on my ethic that is! ;) haha
I really appreciate your well thought out response sir! I look forward to your response!
Best regards,
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 21 Sep 2020 : 22:23:19
|
Master Rupert,
quote:
Khelben didn't act against another Chosen of Mystra with the Scepter -- he gave it to Fzoul.
You are correct about that. However, I really feel this is splitting hairs when an asteroid is coming to destroy the planet.
Khelben stole the artifact, and like the thief and co-conspirator of mass murder criminal he was, tried to justify his actions based on the future bad "thingymobober." I honestly think a hedge wizard could have done better divinations if that was the extent of his reading the future. He then gave the scepter it to his mortal enemy of the Zhentarim, Fzoul. If arguing through implication that he didn't act against a Chosen of Mystra somehow means the act of giving the scepter to Fzoul is not bad, or not as bad, is a non-argument, implied or not. The fact of the matter is, The Blackstaff gave a strategic nuke to Fzoul and Fzoul used it. All of the bad stuff quoted in our first debate, regarding the consequences, I will paste again here below for posterity:
- Westgate has a Manshoon clone takeover causing massive problems, with murders, theft, and outright control of the city taken away
- Manshoon clones start gathering up magic items from stores that "...rivaled those of the Blackstaff and Lady Hope Alustriel." (Cloak and Dagger, p16)
- "Lastly, the largest impact on the Realms is the sudden and rapid increase in deaths and destruction among those wielders of Art." (Cloak and Dagger, p11)
- Fzoul becomes even more powerful and becomes the Chosen of Iyachtu Xvim
- "Kythorn 27: Panic ensues in the crowded market of Silverymoon as some young foolish apprentice yells out "It's Mad Manshoon!" and points at a visiting mage..." Four people and the innocent diviner die in the fight [see above about death and destruction]
- "Fzoul Chembryl pulls together new allies among the Zhentarim...effectively conquer most of the Moonsea." This is in complete violation of the 10,000 day agreement, saying no expansion would occur east of the Thunderpeaks...this is east of the Thunderpeaks.
- "Midsummer: At an impromptu MageFair just across from the River Chionthar..." three Manshoon clones fight, catching innocents in the mix leaving at least (19) innocent wizards dead (Cloak and Dagger, p18)
- "Marpenoth: Xvimlar forces arrive at Bezantur in Thay to spread the Xvimlar faith and ally that temple securely to Fzoul's vision."
quote:
And I don't recall Manshoon being a Chosen, anyway.
Ed sort of disagrees with from 29 Oct 2014 [https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/manshoon-manyfaced]:
quote:
There came a time, chronicled in the Sage of Shadowdale trilogy, when Manshoon was given a direct and public command by Mystra to work with Elminster, in furthering her causes. In effect, she treated him as one of her Chosen.
So, one could argue that because he didn't have the powers of a chosen, he wasn't chosen; however, I think we both know that is a non-argument as well. Mystra herself treated him as chosen. Good enough for me from Ed. If you're going to argue that she is ethical by keeping The Blackstaff's chosen powers going as you did in your final argument below, then it's illogical to argue that her effectively treating Manshoon as chosen is not the case. That would simply defy any sensible rationale whatsoever.
quote:
It must also be noted that Khelben's deal with Fzoul prevented the Zhents from expanding west for more than 27 YEARS. This would have protected hundreds of thousands of people, if not millions, for an entire generation.
Woulduh, coulduh, shoulduh.....unfortunately that didn't happen. Sadly, and I know we're all shocked by this development, but Fzoul lied. The Zhentarim a mere 4.5 years later, on Kythorn the 10th, 1374 DR, did go west of the Thunderpeaks with violence: on multiple occasions no less.
quote:
Kythorn 10: Dabron’s caravan leaves Hluthvar, heading for Irieabor. The Tyrant of the Moonsea issues a proclamation in which he claims that all trade in the “instruments of tyranny” is the sole province of the church of Bane. This is widely interpreted as a move by the Zhentarim to seize control of the weapons and arms trade in the Heartlands at the expense of the Iron Throne.
Well, that's not good.
quote:
Kythorn 17: Dabron’s caravan is attacked by Zhentilar troops while crossing the Bridge of Fallen Men. The Black Network’s troops are driven off at a heavy cost.
If that wasn't bad enough up above, this next one must really sting for Elminster (and probably would for The Blackstaff if he were still living):
quote:
Nightal 16: In the early morning hours, the Zhentarim army led by Scyllua Darkhope overruns Shadowdale with the aid of the Church of Shar and House Dhuurniv. The Army of Myth Drannor is unable to respond as Zhentarim brigades to the east launch simultaneous attacks on several key elf fortifications.
Shadowdale is west of the Thunderpeaks.
quote:
It also must be noted that the deities of the Harpers continued to extend their blessings to Khelben's group -- which makes it obvious that at the worst, they considered his actions to be a lesser evil, compared to what he accomplished. And given the way Khelben played the game, we may not have seen yet what all he accomplished with this.
Just because the gods kept chosen powers in play, only serves to make my point that the deities themselves are incredibly unethical, short of being utilitarianists that is. Now, if people are of the persuasion that that kind of ethic produces a good moral code, then so be it. There are plenty of people that do live by that kind of ethic. I personally don't agree with it, but, to each their own. :)
Mater Rupert, as always, thank you for the debate. I always appreciate your argumentative vigor, sharp wit, and dedication to the lore of the Realms!
Best regards as always,
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11690 Posts |
Posted - 22 Sep 2020 : 02:37:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Khelben didn't act against another Chosen of Mystra with the Scepter -- he gave it to Fzoul.
And I don't recall Manshoon being a Chosen, anyway.
It must also be noted that Khelben's deal with Fzoul prevented the Zhents from expanding west for more than 27 YEARS. This would have protected hundreds of thousands of people, if not millions, for an entire generation.
It also must be noted that the deities of the Harpers continued to extend their blessings to Khelben's group -- which makes it obvious that at the worst, they considered his actions to be a lesser evil, compared to what he accomplished. And given the way Khelben played the game, we may not have seen yet what all he accomplished with this.
The Chosen thing came in one of Ed's novels revolving around the sundering. I forget the exact storyline of it. EDIT: And I see cpthero2 just quoted it above. Better arguments than mine.
On the rest, it can all be viewed through the lens of the beholder. Essentially the zhents not expanding westward just means they stay out of the hair of other power groups in my view. It may not accomplish anything. Meanwhile, multiple Manshoons get created. I don't hate Khelben, but I can understand the argument put forth by someone who says he did wrong. Essentially, I'm saying "the world is gray and not black and white", which is kind of why I started this thread... I didn't start it with something as complex as Khelben's actions mind you... I started it with something a lot more simple hoping we could delve the differences with various cultures... but as with a lot of things, its hard to keep us all on point (and I'm as bad about that as anyone else). |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
Edited by - sleyvas on 22 Sep 2020 03:07:22 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Law & Order regard surrendering savage humanoid
