Candlekeep Forum
Candlekeep Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Members | Private Messages | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Forgotten Realms Journals
 General Forgotten Realms Chat
 Paladins and flirting?
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 3

Diffan
Great Reader

USA
4015 Posts

Posted - 29 Oct 2020 :  20:33:39  Show Profile Send Diffan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2

Senior Scribe keftiu,

quote:
...in 5e, each Paladin Oath has a list of Tenets they must abide by, and I don't thiiiink any demand celibacy? My favorite is that the Oath of the Crown (a Paladin in service to a state or ruler) has no Tenet for honesty ;p


So in 5e, all paladins must take that Oath?

Best regards,



They take "an" Oath. Oath of the Crown is just one option they can choose (and probably the one I too like the most). The Player's Handbook offers three options: Oath of Devotion (your classic LG-Chivalrous Knight), Oath of the Ancients (a "green knight" Nature-y paladin that adheres to more Natural laws), and Oath of Vengeance (5e's -IMO- poor attempt at making an Avenger class from 4E) that's plays more like the 3.5's Gray Guard and has a looser restriction with either being Lawful or Good.

There's also Oath of Redemption, Oath of Conquest, and Oath of Glory. I'm sure I'm forgetting some too. Basically this tailors your Channel Divinity into two distinct options, your Oath Spells (free spells added to your spells-known list), and some additional features as you level.

4E Realms = Great Taste, Less Filling.

"If WotC were to put out a box of free money, people would still complain how it was folded."
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Master of Realmslore

USA
1739 Posts

Posted - 29 Oct 2020 :  22:10:39  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Great Reader Diffan,

quote:
They take "an" Oath.


Ah, I see. Well, good on them for moving the train forward a bit, but it seems like they have a ways to go before they get that to the station I want to get off at. ;)

Best regards,


Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

Azar
Learned Scribe

103 Posts

Posted - 29 Oct 2020 :  22:31:27  Show Profile Send Azar a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2

Master Rupert,

quote:
There was a knightly code presented in the old FRA... From pages 2 and 3 of that resource, in the section under "Cavaliers":


Ahh, that is from the golden oldies for sure! I remember the good ole days with that material! :)

quote:
The knightly code, as recognized in the Realms, is as follows, rated from most generally important to those of lesser (but still critical) import.
  • Defend any responsibility given, even unto death
  • A knight's word is his law
  • Show courage in all things
  • Show honor to those above one's station
  • Earn respect from those below one's station
  • Leadership is the responsibility of the high-born and the fit
  • Battle is the test of worth (this is rated higher by those knights who strongly venerate Tempus)
  • Be courteous to all women (or all men, depending on the sex of the former cavalier)
  • Bring death to those who raise their weapons against a knight or those entrusted into the knight's protection
  • Choose death before dishonor



I love this kind of stuff. I am going to dig into it a bit here since it is always interesting.

Now, I would love to get your opinion Master Rupert (as well as anyone else that wants to chip in):

1) "Defend any responsibility given, even unto death." Now, predicated upon the knightly virtues, I don't see anything there that is up for much debate, ethically.

2) "A knight's word is his law." Now, before I can go to far into this, Master Rupert, which one of the following do you feel is more accurate to that statement in interpreting it:

a) A knight's word [word = a promise, or statement of guarantee] is his law, or in other words, "A knight's word is his promise to keep", or...
b) A knight's word [word = a unit of language, a.k.a. a unit of expression in a sentence], "A knight's word is his command as law".

3) "Show courage in all things." Presupposed on those virtues, no argument there.

4) "Show honor to those above one's station." Based on the virtues, is it anyone of any station above yours? What system defines the station such that you would show honor to that person?

5) "Earn respect from those below one's station." Predicated on the virtues, nothing to dig into there.

6) "Leadership is the responsibility of the high-born and the fit." So, as long as a person is high-born and in physically fit (or mentally fit, or both), then they are good to go? If it is about mental fitness, how is that adjudicated in the Realms?

7) "Battle is the test of worth." In modern day Great Britain, people like Sir Patrick Stewart can become Knight's as thespians. Do you feel that Sune would be right to have knight's who are thespians, or should knighthood only be reserved for those willing to be violent? Can a person who venerates Eldath, become a Knight of Eldath?

8) "Be courteous to all women (or all men, depending on the sex of the former cavilier)." Why is this a knightly code?

9) "Bring death to those who raise their weapons against a knight or those entrusted to a knight's protection." If you could be a knight of Eldath, would you be compelled to kill that person who raised a weapon against you? Does it mean any form of attack results in death, or just deadly intention?

10) "Choose death before dishonor." Based on the virtues, I can see that.

Great post Master Rupert!

Best regards,








I sense a trap...that which is known as the "Paladin Trap".

Stand with anybody that stands right. Stand with him while he is right and part with him when he goes wrong.
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Master of Realmslore

USA
1739 Posts

Posted - 29 Oct 2020 :  22:40:46  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Seeker Azar,

Twenty-five years ago, perhaps. I run to deep in the mire of ethics (sometimes it is a mire, sometimes is a beach) and its applications to the paladin issue.

Ohhhh....

I was just discussing with Great Reader Darden about David Hume in another scroll, a British empiricist philosopher from the late 18th century and how some of his ideas are relevant to ethical issues in the realm. One of his "famous" (if you read logic modeling and argumentative treatise) treatise is on "The Problem of Induction." I think we could mix this up a bit...

"The Problem of Paladins: a Treatise on DM's Tricking them into Sidequests", lol.

What do you think? I may be on track to overshadowing the great David Hume! ;)

Best regards,




Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

bloodtide_the_red
Learned Scribe

USA
118 Posts

Posted - 30 Oct 2020 :  04:40:12  Show Profile  Visit bloodtide_the_red's Homepage Send bloodtide_the_red a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Well...

2) This is A. A 'knight' is not 'the law' like Judge Dread. "law" here is in the classic way of "I do what I say".

4)This one needs some type of social structure to be based against. Though it would be vague. In general it would mean rulers. Though mostly the knight is free to make the call.

6)Much like real life this just sounds nice. It's more then common for many rulers to be crazy. So this gets a bit more "not be too crazy, in public". Also "fit" does not have to mean "health" , you also have "having the right qualifications; qualifying".

7)A modern knight is just a nice title, a historic knight is ready to use 'action', though maybe not "violence". Worshipers of Eldath can still defend themselves and others with violence. You can also "battle" in many ways other then pure murderhobo violence.

8)Filler? Because it fits the knight idea?

9)You can be a knight paladin of Eldath, the ruler of Irebador Brom, for decades was one. And her dogma says they can use violence to defend. And this is protection equals death. If you attack, you die.
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Master of Realmslore

USA
1739 Posts

Posted - 30 Oct 2020 :  06:53:42  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Learned Scribe bloodtide_the_red,

quote:
2) This is A. A 'knight' is not 'the law' like Judge Dread. "law" here is in the classic way of "I do what I say".


I agree with that, though, interestingly enough, a devout follower of Tyr gets a little jammed up here if they were, let's say, a Triadic Knight.

quote:
Clergy of Tyr are sworn to uphold the law wherever they go, and to punish those wronged under the law. They are to keep complete records of their own rulings, deeds, and decisions. Through these records, a priest’s errors can be corrected, his or her grasp of the laws of all lands can grow and flourish, and lawbreakers can be identified by others. No known injustice done by a Tyrran priest must go unbalanced. Priests of Tyr should also always be vigilant in their observations and anticipations, seeking to see what forces and which beings intend or will cause injustices and threaten law and order in the future. They should then act to prevent such challenges to justice in coming to pass. In short: Abide by the laws, and let no others break them. Mete out punishment where lawbreaking occurs. (Faiths & Avatars, 2nd Ed., p170)


Of particular note there is: "Clergy of Tyr are sworn to uphold the law wherever they go,..." (Faiths & Avatars, 2nd Ed., p170)

So, let's say your Triadic Knight Steve is bringing the good word of Tyr, Torm, and Ilmater to... Dhaztanar, Semphar, and he hails from... Cormyr.

Steve arrives in Dhaztanar, known for its "...strict adherence to the Muhjari Laws of Purity" (The Horde Campaign, p164) and Steve is told that "Non-Muhjari priests are forbidden to practice or display the symbols of their faith." (The Horde Campaign, p164)

How does Steve the Triadic Knight deal with that situation? He is a knight, so he would adhere to the knightly virtue of "honoring" those of higher station, such as Caliph Abu Bakr, by adhering to the strict Laws of Purty, and giving away his holy symbol/divine focus? Would he honor and follow the Laws of Purity and not practice his non-Muhjari faith while in Semphar, i.e. pray for spells, cast spells?

The challenge with that interesting faith based issue, when combined with the Triad, is that. I personally find this kind of quandary an absolutely awesome and fun thing to try and puzzle through. I'd love to hear your thoughts on it.

quote:
4)This one needs some type of social structure to be based against. Though it would be vague. In general it would mean rulers. Though mostly the knight is free to make the call.


I was really thinking of the Caliph Abu Bakr as an example. Point of reference above.

quote:
6)Much like real life this just sounds nice. It's more then common for many rulers to be crazy. So this gets a bit more "not be too crazy, in public". Also "fit" does not have to mean "health" , you also have "having the right qualifications; qualifying".


This was a fantastic point about being "fit" for office essentially. I didn't consider it from that angle. Thanks for pointing that out! :)

quote:
7)A modern knight is just a nice title, a historic knight is ready to use 'action', though maybe not "violence". Worshipers of Eldath can still defend themselves and others with violence. You can also "battle" in many ways other then pure murderhobo violence.


Fair enough. I can appreciate that. I wanted again to see if you might have a different perspective.

quote:
8)Filler? Because it fits the knight idea?


Yeah, I think this fits with what Master Rupert said was a "romantic" version of a knight, and I get that. What if it is a Zhent knight, who isn't all that "romantic"?

quote:
9)You can be a knight paladin of Eldath, the ruler of Irebador Brom, for decades was one. And her dogma says they can use violence to defend. And this is protection equals death. If you attack, you die.



That is awesome lore. I never realized that Lord Bron was a paladin and priest of Eldath. Awesome! Thanks for sharing that.

Best regards,



Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

LordofBones
Master of Realmslore

1261 Posts

Posted - 30 Oct 2020 :  12:37:24  Show Profile Send LordofBones a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I'm relatively certain that most deities really wouldn't care what their paladins do in their free time as long as it doesn't conflict with their ethos.

I mean, it could even be a running gag, like the famous "no no no, i said slay the dragon, not lay the dragon" bard.
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Master of Realmslore

USA
1739 Posts

Posted - 30 Oct 2020 :  15:04:14  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Master Lord of Bones,

quote:
I'm relatively certain that most deities really wouldn't care what their paladins do in their free time as long as it doesn't conflict with their ethos.


I do agree to a point there. I am curious about your views on another follow up question I had above if you're interested?

quote:

quote:
2) This is A. A 'knight' is not 'the law' like Judge Dread. "law" here is in the classic way of "I do what I say".


I agree with that, though, interestingly enough, a devout follower of Tyr gets a little jammed up here if they were, let's say, a Triadic Knight.

quote:
Clergy of Tyr are sworn to uphold the law wherever they go, and to punish those wronged under the law. They are to keep complete records of their own rulings, deeds, and decisions. Through these records, a priest’s errors can be corrected, his or her grasp of the laws of all lands can grow and flourish, and lawbreakers can be identified by others. No known injustice done by a Tyrran priest must go unbalanced. Priests of Tyr should also always be vigilant in their observations and anticipations, seeking to see what forces and which beings intend or will cause injustices and threaten law and order in the future. They should then act to prevent such challenges to justice in coming to pass. In short: Abide by the laws, and let no others break them. Mete out punishment where lawbreaking occurs. (Faiths & Avatars, 2nd Ed., p170)


Of particular note there is: "Clergy of Tyr are sworn to uphold the law wherever they go,..." (Faiths & Avatars, 2nd Ed., p170)

So, let's say your Triadic Knight Steve is bringing the good word of Tyr, Torm, and Ilmater to... Dhaztanar, Semphar, and he hails from... Cormyr.

Steve arrives in Dhaztanar, known for its "...strict adherence to the Muhjari Laws of Purity" (The Horde Campaign, p164) and Steve is told that "Non-Muhjari priests are forbidden to practice or display the symbols of their faith." (The Horde Campaign, p164)

How does Steve the Triadic Knight deal with that situation? He is a knight, so he would adhere to the knightly virtue of "honoring" those of higher station, such as Caliph Abu Bakr, by adhering to the strict Laws of Purty, and giving away his holy symbol/divine focus? Would he honor and follow the Laws of Purity and not practice his non-Muhjari faith while in Semphar, i.e. pray for spells, cast spells?

The challenge with that interesting faith based issue, when combined with the Triad, is that. I personally find this kind of quandary an absolutely awesome and fun thing to try and puzzle through. I'd love to hear your thoughts on it.



Best regards,



Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

Azar
Learned Scribe

103 Posts

Posted - 30 Oct 2020 :  21:03:45  Show Profile Send Azar a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2

Seeker Azar,

Twenty-five years ago, perhaps. I run to deep in the mire of ethics (sometimes it is a mire, sometimes is a beach) and its applications to the paladin issue.

Ohhhh....

I was just discussing with Great Reader Darden about David Hume in another scroll, a British empiricist philosopher from the late 18th century and how some of his ideas are relevant to ethical issues in the realm. One of his "famous" (if you read logic modeling and argumentative treatise) treatise is on "The Problem of Induction." I think we could mix this up a bit...

"The Problem of Paladins: a Treatise on DM's Tricking them into Sidequests", lol.

What do you think? I may be on track to overshadowing the great David Hume! ;)

Best regards,







What I was driving at is the fact that Paladins have been manipulated into facing moral Morton's Forks (i.e., a "no-win" moral scenario) by diabolical Dungeon Masters for as long as our hobby has featured the Paladin class. Now, if you read enough Dungeons & Dragons horror stories, you will find that the popular argument is that a Code of Conduct with many requirements is vulnerable to petty and deliberate misinterpretations that quickly lead to a fallen Paladin. However - in practice (mostly as a spectating player, I'll grant you) - I have found that broad philosophies are just as open to DM-desired exploitation. Anyone looking to pervert a champion of justice can be infinitely creative; the only difference between individuals is how deftly each one is able mask their true intentions.

Stand with anybody that stands right. Stand with him while he is right and part with him when he goes wrong.
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Master of Realmslore

USA
1739 Posts

Posted - 31 Oct 2020 :  00:28:16  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Seeker Azar,

quote:
What I was driving at is the fact that Paladins have been manipulated into facing moral Morton's Forks (i.e., a "no-win" moral scenario) by diabolical Dungeon Masters for as long as our hobby has featured the Paladin class.


Well, you are of course correct there. It's great to see you enjoy some of the same material I do as well. In the clearest sense I created a false dilemma as I wanted to start the conversation up; however, I argue there is another option (depending on religious interpretation as a caveat here). If X = Muhjari, and ~X = non-Muhjari, and Y = a subset of X (Muhjari) that is Tyr is the embodiment of Hakiyah [with roots from Zakhara], one might find that the Triadic Knight does have that third option to the avoid the moral quandary by explaining Tyr is merely a different aspect of Muhjari (assuming that is true, and for the moment I am predicated on Tyrran dogma and the dogma of Hakiay). Effectively a religious composition of functions if you will.

quote:
Now, if you read enough Dungeons & Dragons horror stories, you will find that the popular argument is that a Code of Conduct with many requirements is vulnerable to petty and deliberate misinterpretations that quickly lead to a fallen Paladin.


The petty and deliberate misinterpretations is the heart of the argument here. I feel (of course, opinion here) that a DM should be nothing more than a storyteller, and should find the most disinterested way to adjudicate rules as possible. It's so trite to rig something like a fallen paladin due to a lack of storytelling prowess: it's lazy and distasteful. Though, rather than address this twice, I feel I address it reasonably well below in my culprit response.

quote:
However - in practice (mostly as a spectating player, I'll grant you) - I have found that broad philosophies are just as open to DM-desired exploitation. Anyone looking to pervert a champion of justice can be infinitely creative; the only difference between individuals is how deftly each one is able mask their true intentions.


I do not dispute the two premises, "However - in practice (mostly as a spectating player, I'll grant you) - I have found that broad philosophies are just as open to DM-desired exploitation." and "Anyone looking to pervert a champion of justice can be infinitely creative." However, the conclusion is itself, and ironically so, a bifurcative fallacy with a superset of Y.

The assumption is that all individuals are committing to the exploitation [the only difference... is how deftly one is able to mask...]. So, the apriori presupposition everyone is committing to masking an exploitation is the necessary predicate. I don't agree with that. It sounds like you have a solid understanding of logic, ethics, and storytelling. If you do, and with your awareness, the option is for you to not choose to exploit and avoid deftly masking anything. I like to think I do (damn I try my ass off at least!) too.

I feel the culprit in the situation you are discussing, is one of several things: a) DM incapacity, b) hubris, c) arrogance, d) DM unpreparedness, e) pre-determined outcomes.

Anyhow, heady stuff. As always, I could be mistaken somewhere in my argument. If so, please tear it to pieces. I do love a good argument, and learning something! :)

Best regards,





Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

LordofBones
Master of Realmslore

1261 Posts

Posted - 31 Oct 2020 :  01:53:12  Show Profile Send LordofBones a Private Message  Reply with Quote
As a paladin, Steve would be obligated to follow the laws of the land as long as they do not transgress against Good. Here's the important part; paladins are Lawful Good in that they abide by a strict ethos, a respect for duty and order, and an overwhelming love and respect for Good itself.

So yes, Steve would not openly show his faith. He would protest at injustice and try to arrange for a fair and unbiased legal process, but the law isn't innately unfair or unjust, and the Triad is hardly an unreasonable set of deities. Meditating in some quiet corner is probably good enough for them, and as far as the issue of spellcasting is concerned, it probably concerns clerics more than paladins.

Jim the Paladin of Tyranny might have other opinions, though.
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Master of Realmslore

USA
1739 Posts

Posted - 31 Oct 2020 :  02:30:30  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Master LordofBones,

quote:
As a paladin, Steve would be obligated to follow the laws of the land as long as they do not transgress against Good.


Who's good? Caliph Abu Bakr's good? King Azouz IV's? Tyr, God of Justice?

The Laws of Purity in Semphar define good differently than the Laws of Cormyr. Tyr doesn't define good so much as he does look at the process to determine truth, in accordance with his dogma. So, if the analysis is boiled down only to the notion of good, does that necessarily preempt the consideration of the paladin's god in this equation, since Tyr doesn't consider goodness, only law? By continuation, if that supposition is correct that I just hypothetically made, does that mean that Tyr knowingly and willingly accepts his cancellation in certain lands, such as Semphar, due to the Laws of Purity?

quote:
Here's the important part; paladins are Lawful Good in that they abide by a strict ethos, a respect for duty and order, and an overwhelming love and respect for Good itself.


Well, the ethos part may be correct, assuming you mean that ethos and dogma are being colloquially equated. Assuming that they are in your argument, I would say that is correct, and here is why:

Dogma/Ethos of Tyr:

Novices of Tyr are charged to: “Reveal the truth, punish the guilty, right the wrong, and be always true and just in your actions.” Tyr and his followers are devoted to the cause of justice, to the righting of wrongs and the deliverance of just vengeance. This is not necessarily equality or fairness, as some make the maimed god out to represent, but rather the discovery of truth and the punishment of the guilty. Tyrrans tend to be stiff-necked about theology and to see matters in black and white terms. Clergy of Tyr are sworn to uphold the law wherever they go, and to punish those wronged under the law. They are to keep complete records of their own rulings, deeds, and decisions. Through these records, a priest’s errors can be corrected, his or her grasp of the laws of all lands can grow and flourish, and lawbreakers can be identified by others. No known injustice done by a Tyrran priest must go unbalanced. Priests of Tyr should also always be vigilant in their observations and anticipations, seeking to see what forces and which beings intend or will cause injustices and threaten law and order in the future. They should then act to prevent such challenges to justice in coming to pass. In short: Abide by the laws, and let no others break them. Mete out punishment where lawbreaking occurs.

Dogma/Ethos of Cyrrollalee

Be generous in friendship, and welcome all friends in your home. Earn the trust of your neighbors and repay them with kindness. Guard fiercely the burrows in which you and your friends dwell, and keep a benignly watchful eye on the home of your neighbor. Never betray the trust of your host, break an oath, or violate the sanctity of another's home. Busy hands make a happy home, and things crafted with love will serve you and others well.


Now, when you compare the ethos', you can see minimal comparisons (I am assuming you will see the same thing, but correct me if I am wrong that these are two mostly different ethos). However, they are both lawful good deities. How strict can the ethos/dogma be, when they are mostly not a like, and the thing connecting these two deities is an alignment which doesn't appear to bridge the gap between those two ethos?

quote:
So yes, Steve would not openly show his faith.


I would think he would based on my argument above, but let me know if you disagree! :)

quote:
He would protest at injustice and try to arrange for a fair and unbiased legal process, but the law isn't innately unfair or unjust, and the Triad is hardly an unreasonable set of deities. Meditating in some quiet corner is probably good enough for them, and as far as the issue of spellcasting is concerned, it probably concerns clerics more than paladins.


I don't know if protest would violate the Laws of Purity or not. I couldn't find anything in there concrete.

As to
quote:
...the Triad is hardly an unreasonable set of deities
, I don't know about that. Ask the Zhentarim if they think they are reasonable, or if Jhaamdath if they think the intervention by way of the Procession of Justice was reasonable. I bet they would have a different perspective, which I think is the point at the center of this discussion. What is reasonable?

quote:
Jim the Paladin of Tyranny might have other opinions, though.


hahaha...I agree with that. Especially if he is a paladin of.... Mask? ;)

Best regards,



Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

bloodtide_the_red
Learned Scribe

USA
118 Posts

Posted - 31 Oct 2020 :  04:54:14  Show Profile  Visit bloodtide_the_red's Homepage Send bloodtide_the_red a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I would point out that in no way does a knight of Tyr blindly follow like a zombie all random laws they encounter in all random lands. In Ed Greenwood Presents - Elminster's Forgetten Realms pg.174 is a whole Tyr section. And it clearly says "Follow all just laws and work to get unjust laws changed. Be good and fair always, exposing corruption and remaining steadfast and firm. Where jaws fail, law keepers are corrupt, or rulers are cruel, capricious, or unfair, be the wise and even hand of justice. "

We don't get many examples in print, but the Realms are full of non good places with tons of non good laws: a folower of Tyr has to follow none of them. If Triadic Knight Steve goes to a drow land he is not "forced" to follow their evil laws.

And to "Non-Muhjari priests are forbidden to practice or display the symbols of their faith" is not a good just law. No follower of Tyr would so blindly follow a law that said "you are forbidden to practice the worship of Tyr". (and if the person was forbidden to follow the worship of Tyr, then they would not be able to follow the 'laws' anyway. )

"upholding" a law is not "blindly following any law".

Oh, also that Muhjari deity likes and is an ally of Bane and Torm. Ahem, Bane?
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Master of Realmslore

USA
1739 Posts

Posted - 31 Oct 2020 :  05:21:00  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Learned Scribe bloodtide_the_red,

A fine evening to you good sir!

quote:
I would point out that in no way does a knight of Tyr blindly follow like a zombie all random laws they encounter in all random lands. In Ed Greenwood Presents - Elminster's Forgetten Realms pg.174 is a whole Tyr section. And it clearly says "Follow all just laws and work to get unjust laws changed. Be good and fair always, exposing corruption and remaining steadfast and firm. Where jaws fail, law keepers are corrupt, or rulers are cruel, capricious, or unfair, be the wise and even hand of justice."


A great quote and quite apropos for sure. What is the rubric for what is and what is not just though? That is the real question here. For example, an excerpt from the dogma of Tyr from my earlier post:
quote:
Tyr and his followers are devoted to the cause of justice, to the righting of wrongs and the deliverance of just vengeance. This is not necessarily equality or fairness, as some make the maimed god out to represent, but rather the discovery of truth and the punishment of the guilty.


A serious problem from Elminster's Forgotten Realms is the conflict that arises between the statements, "Be good and fair always,..." and "This is not necessarily equality or fairness,..." My point is that if there is even inconsistency within the dogma of the church, how is a Just suppose to determine whether the Caliph himself is unjust, and what would happen in that situation? The Caliph after all is an autocrat, he could just whimsically have that Just slain on the spot for failing to adhere to the Laws of Purity.

This is not necessarily equality or fairness. What is equality and fairness predicated upon? By the writings from Elminster's Forgotten Realms, it would appear that the implicit outcome is that "justness" is the crux of the evaluative process. Is the ethical analysis of "just" through the lends of divine command, or perhaps a utilitarian ethic, mayhaps something else? If it one of those, or another, does that apply everywhere when applying justice in a "just" manner, or only in Cormyr and Sembia, because when you get to Semphar and Ulgarth, it doesn't fly?

I by the way don't ask these questions with the intention of calling you out or anything. I absolutely love digging into this material and trying to figure it out. It's complex, difficult, and fun to discuss.

quote:
We don't get many examples in print, but the Realms are full of non good places with tons of non good laws: a folower of Tyr has to follow none of them. If Triadic Knight Steve goes to a drow land he is not "forced" to follow their evil laws.


That appears to be directly contradicted from the dogma of Tyr though from Faiths and Avatars, 2nd Ed., p.170 where it is written that,
quote:
Clergy of Tyr are sworn to uphold the law wherever they go, and to punish those wronged under the law.


So, if a "follower of Tyr has to follow none of them... and is not "forced" to follow their evil laws", then why does Tyr command all clergy, i.e. clerics, paladins, and others, to swear to "...uphold the law wherever they go, and to punish those wronged under the law."?

quote:
And to "Non-Muhjari priests are forbidden to practice or display the symbols of their faith" is not a good just law.


The deity Muhjari feels its good. The Caliph also feels it is good. How can there be a deity and a Caliph having a uniformly different definition of good?

quote:
No follower of Tyr would so blindly follow a law that said "you are forbidden to practice the worship of Tyr". (and if the person was forbidden to follow the worship of Tyr, then they would not be able to follow the 'laws' anyway.)


One could argue, that in the blind eyes of judgement of Tyr, that not worshipping Tyr within Semphar's sovereign territory, the paladin is in fact being most devout to the dogma/ethos of Tyr.

quote:
"upholding" a law is not "blindly following any law".


I agree with that, for sure. If that same Triadic Knight, Steve, found himself in Dambrath, and was told that since he is a Triadic Knight and the punishment for this child having stolen something was to be summarily executed, would that Triadic Knight do it? No. Clearly. So, while that is an obvious situation being a bit hyperbolic, it begs the question of where is the line, who is putting the line there, and is the line in the same place, for everyone in the Realms?

quote:
Oh, also that Muhjari deity likes and is an ally of Bane and Torm. Ahem, Bane?


I'm unaware of the affiliation between Muhjari and Bane. That is very interesting. Where did you find that at? :)

Best regards,





Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

LordofBones
Master of Realmslore

1261 Posts

Posted - 31 Oct 2020 :  09:44:53  Show Profile Send LordofBones a Private Message  Reply with Quote
The Zhentarim are literally Evil Inc. Their bosses are Wizard Giovanni and bootleg Sauron. I think asking a Zhent whether the Triad are reasonable is sort of like asking Morgoth if he overreacted to Iluvatar wagging the proverbial fatherly finger at him.
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Master of Realmslore

USA
1739 Posts

Posted - 31 Oct 2020 :  15:42:45  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Master LordofBones,

I see where my miscommunication facilitated your response, I believe.

I use a relative alignment system, so good and evil are not fixed. There is no absolute good or evil, except in very specific ways. I could go into how I do that if you're interested, but I don't think that is particularly relevant, as much as the alignment system I use being non-fixed.

Sorry for not clarifying that.

Best regards,





Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

Ayrik
Great Reader

Canada
7303 Posts

Posted - 31 Oct 2020 :  17:01:43  Show Profile Send Ayrik a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I prefer more absolute alignment systems. Good and Evil (and Law and Chaos) are fundamental building blocks of the D&D cosmos. Or at least the typical incarnation of the D&D cosmos and the array of Outer Planes structured around it.

Beings like Celestials and Fiends are made of this stuff. For them to act contrary to their essential natures is unthinkable, even suicidal. An angel weakens and perishes after embracing Evil acts. A devil loses all power and stature (and is quickly slain by others of his kind) after embracing Good acts.

Primes on Material Planes aren't as restricted by alignment. Ordinary men on ordinary worlds can do whatever they please. There may be consequences (imposed by others) but the choice is still a choice. People can strive to be virtuous paragons or they can devolve into depraved murderers. Most stumble through a middle path without much commitment to passionate extremes.

But a paladin is one who has chosen to be a virtuous paragon. An example of the finest and noblest traits. Unwavering and unfaltering in his faith. The paladin has chosen to champion an extraordinary calling, not to follow the ordinary path of ordinary men.

In return for the paladin's faith and service he is given supernatural abilities - superhuman traits and feats, granted powers, divine spells. These are miraculous manifestations of Good, provided by a higher being in a higher plane. A being which demands endless Good (to oppose endless Evil). So the paladin must remain vigilant of Good vs Evil, not only in the cosmic sense but also in the inner recesses of his own ordinary human soul. So I don't think a paladin would willingly tolerate "relative" or "mixed" alignments to govern his calling, he holds himself and his peers to higher standards. To do otherwise is to insult both his purpose and the source of his supernatural powers. He might recognize moral shades of grey, concepts like the "greater/greatest good" etc - and he might find himself constrained or troubled by them - but he will always seek a path to achieve his goals without compromising his beliefs, finding that path is itself his foremost goal.

Cosmic Good vs Evil aren't as prevalent as ordinary good vs evil in the Realms. But the presence of paladins, priests, and gods representing (and manipulating) this cosmic balance is undeniably very real in the Realms. At least for the paladin himself.

I don't think flirting, carousing, seduction, romance, love, and lust have any part of this cosmic struggle. Unless they are tools of Good or Evil the paladin encounters.

(Although experienced D&D players tread carefully around a common axiom: any sexually attractive NPCs they encounter are invariably a trap, a monster, or a DM's pet.)

[/Ayrik]

Edited by - Ayrik on 31 Oct 2020 17:18:25
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Master of Realmslore

USA
1739 Posts

Posted - 31 Oct 2020 :  20:09:00  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Great Reader Ayrik,

quote:
I prefer more absolute alignment systems. Good and Evil (and Law and Chaos) are fundamental building blocks of the D&D cosmos. Or at least the typical incarnation of the D&D cosmos and the array of Outer Planes structured around it.


I can certainly appreciate that perspective. It is the by the book approach to D&D. I chose to change the system with how I've historically interpreted wars, cultures, etc. Certainly nothing wrong with sticking to the way it is defined in the core books though! :)

quote:
Beings like Celestials and Fiends are made of this stuff. For them to act contrary to their essential natures is unthinkable, even suicidal.


I do agree with this. I have mortals play by different rules that being made of the very essence of good and evil.

quote:
An angel weakens and perishes after embracing Evil acts. A devil loses all power and stature (and is quickly slain by others of his kind) after embracing Good acts.


Sounds about right. Agreed.

quote:
Primes on Material Planes aren't as restricted by alignment. Ordinary men on ordinary worlds can do whatever they please. There may be consequences (imposed by others) but the choice is still a choice. People can strive to be virtuous paragons or they can devolve into depraved murderers. Most stumble through a middle path without much commitment to passionate extremes.


Agreed, and that is why I use a relative alignment system. Celestial beings may have that innate sense of goodness as they are infused by it, but the difference for the mortal is that they may justify it, as they are not themselves infused with that essential being of good as opposed to evil, which is why I felt it was relevant to the example given. Both people involved are mortals.

quote:
But a paladin is one who has chosen to be a virtuous paragon. An example of the finest and noblest traits. Unwavering and unfaltering in his faith. The paladin has chosen to champion an extraordinary calling, not to follow the ordinary path of ordinary men.


This is where I disagree. Being "unwavering and unfaltering" is not the story of mortals in my opinion. There are endless stories that dictate as much. Heck, that is why when a person dies and they go to the Fugue plane, their soul is still being argued over by demons, devils, and others trying to pry that soul away from the Exarch/Seneschal showing up to retrieve the soul back to the deities plane. The Blood War is all about the currency of souls.

quote:
In return for the paladin's faith and service he is given supernatural abilities - superhuman traits and feats, granted powers, divine spells. These are miraculous manifestations of Good, provided by a higher being in a higher plane. A being which demands endless Good (to oppose endless Evil). So the paladin must remain vigilant of Good vs Evil, not only in the cosmic sense but also in the inner recesses of his own ordinary human soul. So I don't think a paladin would willingly tolerate "relative" or "mixed" alignments to govern his calling, he holds himself and his peers to higher standards. To do otherwise is to insult both his purpose and the source of his supernatural powers. He might recognize moral shades of grey, concepts like the "greater/greatest good" etc - and he might find himself constrained or troubled by them - but he will always seek a path to achieve his goals without compromising his beliefs, finding that path is itself his foremost goal.


I feel you've proven the point on relative alignment though. Let's review.

You just said a moment ago that
quote:
An angel weakens and perishes after embracing Evil acts. A devil loses all power and stature (and is quickly slain by others of his kind) after embracing Good acts.
. If absolute morality was the case with mortals, the exact same consequence would occur to them as it does for the celestials, demons, etc. However, mortals don't, that's why they don't die immediately upon such acts.

quote:
Cosmic Good vs Evil aren't as prevalent as ordinary good vs evil in the Realms. But the presence of paladins, priests, and gods representing (and manipulating) this cosmic balance is undeniably very real in the Realms. At least for the paladin himself.


I get what you are saying, but the fact is, per your point above, there are very real tangible, life and death realities for celestials and demons/devils acting in an opposite way. Since it doesn't happen for the mortals, we can see that the same system does not apply. That's why it is such a big deal when mortals change faith, change alignment, etc. That potential is yet one more soul in the currency of the Blood War.

quote:
I don't think flirting, carousing, seduction, romance, love, and lust have any part of this cosmic struggle. Unless they are tools of Good or Evil the paladin encounters.


I agree here. This is an old rendition of Britannic sensibilities that are countered by the acknowledgement of other ethics that define what morality is.

Best regards,




Edit: I edited my horrible syntax. lol My apologies Great Reader Ayrik. That was horrible to read for me!

Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring

Edited by - cpthero2 on 01 Nov 2020 22:03:16
Go to Top of Page

Ayrik
Great Reader

Canada
7303 Posts

Posted - 31 Oct 2020 :  23:51:32  Show Profile Send Ayrik a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Long story short, I was trying to illustrate how a paladin holds himself to standards of Good which don't apply to most mortals. He has taken a step towards emulating a Good-aligned celestial - he is rewarded for success (special paladin powers, plus he just spreads Goodness if nothing else), he is punished for failure (atonement, redemption, etc) and risks becoming a fallen paladin, a fate which (to him) is worse than mere death. He is, at least in a metaphorically symbolic sense, a sort of physical avatar of the Good power he serves. I consider a true paladin unwavering and unfaltering because (even though he must confront his temptations and he must learn from his mistakes and he must take little breaks now and then) he has dedicated his whole existence to promoting the Good and destroying the Evil. This is an expression of fundamental cosmic alignments, paladins are not common mortals.

Your counterarguments about the Fugue are interesting, I hadn't considered them from that perspective. I'd always assumed that fiends are relentless, tenacious, and tireless in their efforts to drag souls screaming into the Nine Hells. They want to corrupt Good souls, they want to cultivate Evil souls, they generally don't care much because any souls they claim can be useful. If they can procure soul victims before a godly proxy shows up to escort these souls into the afterlife then it's really seems more a commentary about broken Fugue (or broken cosmos) than about broken paladins.

And of course these fiends primarily obtain souls which are otherwise destined to be stuffed into the Wall. They may have been Faithless in life but they certainly can't deny the truth they see revealed (too late for them) in death. It's a cruel choice ... but I could understand these unfortunates preferring an afterlife of eternal damnation (with some possibility of promotion through the ranks of the damned) instead of an half-eternal afterlife of mindless suffering while they dissolve into a meaningless monument and final oblivion.

[/Ayrik]

Edited by - Ayrik on 01 Nov 2020 00:05:33
Go to Top of Page

bloodtide_the_red
Learned Scribe

USA
118 Posts

Posted - 01 Nov 2020 :  03:18:18  Show Profile  Visit bloodtide_the_red's Homepage Send bloodtide_the_red a Private Message  Reply with Quote
A cleric or paladin of Tyr must be Lawful Good, so not to get too deep in alignments they can't do evil acts...ever. Even if they wander into a land with evil laws. Say Triadic Knight Steve is playing catch with boy Bob...and when Bob goes to catch the ball he falls through a fence and tramples/crushes from special flowers. The law keepers rush over and say "it is instant death to disturb special flowers, Triadic Knight Steve, as you were witness to the act, the LAW says you must kill this boy immediately. So does Lawful Good Triadic Knight Steve draw his weapon and slaughter the innocent young boy and just say to himself "yuck yuck, I'm following the law"?

I will say NO. If Tyr was that type of deity, he would be Neutral, not lawful good.

It's tricky as we only have a couple paragraphs for a whole religion....and in a "real Realms" Tyr would have at least one Bible, and a couple hundred years of documentation.

And it's also tricky as we get the "real world" problem. Just about all the printed information about Tyr really only covers Tyr in the Heartland of the Realms: AKA the 20th/21st century USA/Canada of the Realms. The laws of say Waterdeep and Croymr are impossibly amazingly modern and are nothing like Europe laws from say 1200 to 1400. AND that just covers North America and Europe....the WHOLE rest of the world has radically different laws, even in modern times...and often way more different in the past too.

And the Realms takes this up to 11. Say Triadic Knight Steve goes to the Drow city of Gark'red'Varn, where it is LEGAL to kill innocent helpless defenseless people on a whim. So...does Triadic Knight Steve become a murderhobo and slaughter at will because it's the law? How about an elven or dragon place where the law says "humans are not people they are animals."...so does Triadic Knight Steve treat all humans there as animals?

And yes, Triadic Knight Steve would judge a law that said "they can't worship Tyr" as unjust. Though sure he could pretend to "renounce" Tyr and "pretend" to act like a secular person...and then just randomly in a non religious way, ahem, "just do what a Tyr follower would do in this exact same situation in another land."
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Master of Realmslore

USA
1739 Posts

Posted - 01 Nov 2020 :  22:23:01  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Great Reader Ayrik,

quote:
Long story short, I was trying to illustrate how a paladin holds himself to standards of Good which don't apply to most mortals. He has taken a step towards emulating a Good-aligned celestial - he is rewarded for success (special paladin powers, plus he just spreads Goodness if nothing else), he is punished for failure (atonement, redemption, etc) and risks becoming a fallen paladin, a fate which (to him) is worse than mere death.


I should clarify here too that I have paladins in the Realms I run as available to any god. The are more the "taking action in the field folk" than priests. I have paladins of Mask, Cyric, Sune, Shar, Tyr, etc. Since that is the case, they are not necessarily or mandatorily paragons of good. They are the elite of the faith that may have different mechanical outcomes, i.e. paladins of Mask are priest/rogue hybrids with their own template, including special abilities, etc., since they are trying to be epitome of action in the field in representing Mask, for example. There are some cases where a paladin of Mask is merely a rogue, with special abilities, etc.

quote:
He is, at least in a metaphorically symbolic sense, a sort of physical avatar of the Good power he serves. I consider a true paladin unwavering and unfaltering because (even though he must confront his temptations and he must learn from his mistakes and he must take little breaks now and then) he has dedicated his whole existence to promoting the Good and destroying the Evil. This is an expression of fundamental cosmic alignments, paladins are not common mortals.


I agree that a true paladin is unwavering and unfaltering in their beliefs, I just don't limit the beliefs. Since I don't use a cosmic good v. evil as it relates to mortals, the it is relative. Hence, the Fugue Plane example.

quote:
Your counterarguments about the Fugue are interesting, I hadn't considered them from that perspective. I'd always assumed that fiends are relentless, tenacious, and tireless in their efforts to drag souls screaming into the Nine Hells. They want to corrupt Good souls, they want to cultivate Evil souls, they generally don't care much because any souls they claim can be useful. If they can procure soul victims before a godly proxy shows up to escort these souls into the afterlife then it's really seems more a commentary about broken Fugue (or broken cosmos) than about broken paladins.


I see the fugue plane as a truthism about the universe. I see it as a peek through the veil to see the truth, which has been hidden by the gods until "after that mysterious trip beyond." I see it as the gods have been using mortals in a way to convince them to see their perspective on things so that when they die, they get the soul, and keep it from the Blood War to fuel their demonic and devilish opponents.

When people come back from the Fugue Plane in my campaigns, it is a real experience. They realize that absolute good and evil isn't a mortal thing, it is a thing of those beyond, i.e. the gods, devils, demons, and other immortal powers that are vying for the only thing that is itself a currency, and is not set in stone: the souls of mortals. Otherwise, why would those powers fight so very hard for them and try to corrupt them.

Devil and demons are actually born of corrupted souls. Here is an excerpt from the FRCS 3rd Ed. (sorry for the long quote, but relevant):

quote:
The Baatezu Within the Fugue Plane lurk small enclaves of baatezu. By agreement with Kelemvor, the god of the dead, they cannot harm or trick the waiting souls. However, the devils are allowed to explain to the souls that they are dead and awaiting the arrival of a divine messenger to take them back to their deity's realm. At this point, the devils attempt to bargain with souls. The baatezu want souls that they can use to create lemures (the lowest sort of devil), which over time are transformed into more powerful devils in the service of the Nine Hells. While this probably isn't appealing to most souls, those who are pledged to evil deities or fear what punishments they may suffer in their respective deity's realm might jump at the opportunity to escape that fate. After all, in the hells you certainly know where you stand and have the opportunity for promotion, with the remote possibility of advancing to the level of a pit fiend. As a servant of an evil deity, you are always at that deity's whim and have no guarantee of being anything other than an expendable, insignificant slave. In exchange for consigning themselves to the Nine Hells, souls may be offered early promotions from lemure to another form of devil, material riches for friends or family in Faerun, or the execution of devilish attacks on their still-living enemies on their behalf. Especially powerful souls may bargain for automatic transformation into something other than a lemure. The success rate of the baatezu is low, but given the number of beings that die each day across Faerun, even a small portion of that number results in enough of a gain for the hells that it's worth the fiends' time.


So, since good and evil for mortals I argue isn't fixed, that is why we see the behavior of forces on the Fugue Plane, and in other places.

quote:
And of course these fiends primarily obtain souls which are otherwise destined to be stuffed into the Wall.


That isn't actually the case as per the FRCS 3rd Ed.:

quote:
However, the devils are allowed to explain to the souls that they are dead and awaiting the arrival of a divine messenger to take them back to their deity's realm. At this point, the devils attempt to bargain with souls.


The clear point there is that Lord Kelemvor is compelling the devils, demons, etc. (whoever/whatever) that shows up to make deals must disclose the truth, which as you see above, includes indicating that a "divine messenger" is coming to take the soul. Sure, that could be a divine messenger for the Wall, but clearly not all, otherwise it would say, "The Faithless."

quote:
They may have been Faithless in life but they certainly can't deny the truth they see revealed (too late for them) in death. It's a cruel choice ... but I could understand these unfortunates preferring an afterlife of eternal damnation (with some possibility of promotion through the ranks of the damned) instead of an half-eternal afterlife of mindless suffering while they dissolve into a meaningless monument and final oblivion.


As per above, I think that quote from the FRCS 3rd Ed. (pg.259-260) clarifies.

This is why I see it all as one big half-lie. Souls being tricked in life that there are certain absolutes, which there are... for certain beings: not mortals. Once they get there, Lord Kelemvor compels the truth from beings making bargains. The reason is obvious why: those souls matter a whole lot to all of the stakeholders, i.e. deities, demons, devils.

Best regards,




Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

LordofBones
Master of Realmslore

1261 Posts

Posted - 02 Nov 2020 :  11:01:02  Show Profile Send LordofBones a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Outside of the Faerunian pantheon, souls default to the plane most aligned to them. The Wall of the Faithless is purely a Forgotten Realms thing. Of course, any spellcaster with a planeshift spell can pretty much tell you the same thing, and Kelemvor explicitly has a deal going on with the baatezu against the tanar'ri.

In the Great Wheel, the fiends probably wouldn't give a hoot given that Baator receives LE souls by default. The Fugue Plane is just a demiplane where the Faerunian pantheon's dead congregate, a sort of processing office under the command of the pantheon's death god. Kelemvor's realm proper, the Crystal Spire, is in Oinos, Hades.
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Master of Realmslore

USA
1739 Posts

Posted - 02 Nov 2020 :  20:32:18  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Master Lord of Bones,

quote:
Outside of the Faerunian pantheon, souls default to the plane most aligned to them. The Wall of the Faithless is purely a Forgotten Realms thing.


That very well may be the case (I'm not disputing it, as I am just ignorant as to whether that is the case or not myself).

quote:
Of course, any spellcaster with a planeshift spell can pretty much tell you the same thing,...


I am assuming you are referring to the Planar Fork by that statement?

quote:
...and Kelemvor explicitly has a deal going on with the baatezu against the tanar'ri.


I may be missing something here, but Kelemvor's Agreement was an agreement with the Baatezu true, but not against the tanar'ri. The implication of the agreement was that Lord Kelemvor wanted order in the City of Judgement, and knew he could get that with Baatezu, and not from Tanari'ri, so he made a deal with the devil, if you will. ;) The tanar'ri just make raids here and there and Lord Kelemvor takes action as needed. Though, if you have another source that refers to that deal as being specific to targeting the tanar'ri, I would love to check that out. I am only going off of the FRCS, 3rd edition. I just don't feel by not making a deal with one, you are against them. You're just not making a deal. They could at any time I would imagine.

quote:
In the Great Wheel, the fiends probably wouldn't give a hoot given that Baator receives LE souls by default. The Fugue Plane is just a demiplane where the Faerunian pantheon's dead congregate, a sort of processing office under the command of the pantheon's death god. Kelemvor's realm proper, the Crystal Spire, is in Oinos, Hades.


I conditionally agree with this understanding that the Great Wheel was used in 2nd Edition but is
quote:
...3rd edition, the Forgotten Realms cosmology was retconned, with the World Tree cosmology replacing the Great Wheel.
quote:
The Crystal Spire, formerly known as the Bone Castle,[1] was the joint divine realm of Kelemvor and Jergal.[3][5] It was located in the City of the Dead in the Oinos layer of Hades according to the Great Wheel cosmology,[1][2][6] and in the City of Judgment in the Fugue Plane according to the World Tree and World Axis cosmologies.[3][4][5][7] (FRW: https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Crystal_Spire
quote:
They are formed into a living wall around the City of Strife—Kelemvor, the new lord of the dead, may soon rename it—in the realm of the dead in Oinos in the Gray Waste and left there until they dissolve. (Faiths and Avatars, 2nd Ed., p3)


So, going forward with 3rd, 4th, and 5th, it was World Axis or World Tree, both of which had the Fugue Plane as it's own plane, per citations below:
quote:

quote:
Home Plane: Fugue Plane (Faiths and Pantheons, 3rd Ed. p33)


quote:
The City of Judgment
The shared realm of Kelemvor, Lord of the Dead, and Jergal, Scribe of the Doomed, comprises a portion of the Fugue Plane. This realm, called the Crystal Spire, stands in the center of the region known as the City of Judgment. (FRCS, 3rd Ed. p260)


quote:
The Crystal Spire, a tower of glittering transparent rock, watches over the City of Judgment, a gray
metropolis of the dead, in the otherwise flat and featureless Fugue Plane. From the Crystal Spire, Kelemvor and his seneschal, Jergal, judge the dead. (4th Ed. FRCG, p63)


[quote]Most humans believe the souls of the recently deceased are spirited away to the Fugue Plane, where they wander the great City of Judgment, often unaware they are dead. (SCAG, p20) / It's said that when a soul waits on the Fugue Plane for a deity to take it to its appropriate afterlife, devils approach the soul·and offer it a chance at power and immortal pleasures. (SCAG, p25)


So, it just appears to be a matter of which edition you are playing in.

If you are playing with the Great Wheel cosmology, you would have those souls bound for the Fugue Plane abiding by the reality of Hades.

If you are playing with the World Tree or World Axis, then you I argue based on my previous argument, that the souls are indeed not committed, as they could change allegiance with a deal made with the Baatezu. The fact that the soul can make a choice, means they are not predetermined to go to a location as per the Great Wheel.

Best regards,





Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

Azar
Learned Scribe

103 Posts

Posted - 04 Nov 2020 :  15:17:53  Show Profile Send Azar a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2

The assumption is that all individuals are committing to the exploitation [the only difference... is how deftly one is able to mask...]. So, the apriori presupposition everyone is committing to masking an exploitation is the necessary predicate. I don't agree with that. It sounds like you have a solid understanding of logic, ethics, and storytelling. If you do, and with your awareness, the option is for you to not choose to exploit and avoid deftly masking anything. I like to think I do (damn I try my ass off at least!) too.

I feel the culprit in the situation you are discussing, is one of several things: a) DM incapacity, b) hubris, c) arrogance, d) DM unpreparedness, e) pre-determined outcomes.

Anyhow, heady stuff. As always, I could be mistaken somewhere in my argument. If so, please tear it to pieces. I do love a good argument, and learning something! :)

Best regards,








Allow me to dispel what I believe to be the heart of this miscommunication.

I am well aware that is is possible for a DM to engineer a scenario that is ultimately entrapping and ham-fisted in its execution...without being a consciously sadistic individual. There is no shortage of amateur Dungeon Masters. Hell, there are Dungeon Masters that are generally competent yet blind to their weaknesses in any number of areas; the ability to craft interesting moral dilemmas that aren't designed to punish the player is far from a universal skill. Though we are all parents to many mistakes, it is the mark of the mature individual to recognize and learn from these mistakes in order to reduce future propagation.

Problematically, some DMs run with a gaming group that doesn't push back against their brand of bad DMing for so long that they end up feeling confused when a new group takes umbrage with their practices. It is a simple fact that we're less likely to engage in self-correction when the people around us fail to provide constructive criticism.

Stand with anybody that stands right. Stand with him while he is right and part with him when he goes wrong.
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Master of Realmslore

USA
1739 Posts

Posted - 04 Nov 2020 :  17:46:56  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Seeker Azar,

quote:
the ability to craft interesting moral dilemmas that aren't designed to punish the player is far from a universal skill. Though we are all parents to many mistakes, it is the mark of the mature individual to recognize and learn from these mistakes in order to reduce future propagation.


That is a valid argument, and I concur. I appreciate that insight. My assumption was predicated on the efficacy of a DM being held constant, which obviously does not make sense, as I sadly have to admit, that philosophical/ethical/moral elements of a campaign are likely, on average, a footnote in the campaign.

quote:
Problematically, some DMs run with a gaming group that doesn't push back against their brand of bad DMing for so long that they end up feeling confused when a new group takes umbrage with their practices. It is a simple fact that we're less likely to engage in self-correction when the people around us fail to provide constructive criticism.

ah superbiae particeps meus es tu

Yes, you are very correct there for sure. Hubris is a nasty creature that seeks to always jump from one shoulder to the other while never being seen. A valid point again regarding constructive criticism. I've found that while people love to argue, they make it so personal regarding the idea they could be wrong that rarely can people contemplate admitting being incorrect.

I read an article a couple of years ago or so (I was researching hubris as curiosity after I saw someone behaving low brow one day) by Roy Lewicki, Beth Polin and Robert Lount called, An Exploration of the Structure of Effective Apologies (06 April 2016 https://doi.org/10.1111/ncmr.12073) {*I love having a WorldCat account*}, and it was very fascinating. The idea of, and acceptance of image repair after a mistake can be so devastating to people that it is argued that the damage it can cause facilitates extreme anger response as a defense mechanism. It was a good read.

As always, I appreciate the input, clarification, and correction. You made a sound argument.

Best regards,




Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 3 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Candlekeep Forum © 1999-2020 Candlekeep.com Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000