AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

Faiths and Avatars, Pg. 2

Eltryptich wrote:

Budly wrote:

Kamina wrote:

Evil has a very important place on Amia.

They act as antagonists. A lot of Evil players act as pivotal development points for the wide spectrum of players. If suddenly, everyone dropped their evil-aligned characters and focused on Neutral or Good, the server would nearly exclusively need to be DM-led at all times for any progression outside of faction RP.

I think Evil's place on Amia is good to note. The issue Evil face is knee-jerking curb-stomping. From an IC point of view this makes sense, but I am very keen to ensure that on an OOC level people aren't attempting to perma/harass evil players just to rid of them.

But explain to me why my Black Archer follower would allow people to raise a dead Drow of Vhaerun? She has 0 IC reason to allow this to happen.

Beside that, when people question evil and proclaim it is not that black and white, There dieties who clearly has alignment rules and detect evil exist. This is not something made up, the gods in some way can sense it. Also turning the table, will a evil doer give tributes to a good god of something they need? Or is only good and neutral forced to pay tribute to evil for that kind of things?

Aside from the deity thing, evil isn't burdened with the one thing that may make them raise an evil PC and that one thing is called mercy. Mercy IMO is something only a truly good person has the capacity to show. Although that doesn't absolutely mean if you're good you're required to show it.

Also on the deity issue. I think all of the nature/weather oriented deities such as Umberlee, Auril, etc. are evil deities and they demand tribute at the threat of destruction (hence why they're evil to begin with) Then you have Beshaba who will grant a person horrible fate unless she is at least placated a little. Consider such things as superstition at the very least.

Well my elf is chaotic neutral. She would show no mercy for enemies of her people. And I think Good can be "evil" to their foes at times.

I think my biggest suprise is seeing officially evil people standing out in the open, and no one reacts to it. This did not happen on my other server unless the local government for some reason supported them or allowed them inside, which was not often.

I honestly think those weather dieties should not be evil but very twisted chaotic dieties of some sort. A neutral force of nature who sink any ship, no care about whoms it is.

Budly wrote:

Commie wrote:

Yeah, a lot of deities (umberlee, cyric, auril) are powerful BECAUSE people worship them to prevent getting their shit wrecked by their domains.

I answer you but this goes to the rest of you diety talkers.

Sure, but often there is an equal god you can give to. That can do similar things but do not want to enslave you or worse.

Also in a setting perspective...Gods are only weakened if you stop giving them shit or pray to them. So it is counter productive to pray to them if you want them gone. Do not feed the hand that bites you eventually when it finds your food lacking.

Polytheism sure, but there is plenty pantheons. IN most PANTHEONS I can buy it. But most gods are not a Pantheon in DnD as far as I know. The Triad, do they even belong to a pantheon? As in the same manner as the Greek or Nordic? Hell, Tyr is even from my understanding an Aesir in Faerun. As I said, half the elven Pantheon is Drow gods now, I have never heard of the Quessir paying tribute to that half. Most races got Pantheons they pray to that makes sense. I guess Humans are the idjots who keep paying tribute to gods who hate them. A small tribe in the north paying tribute to Auril? Sure, an enormous organisation bent to a good gods knee? Paying tribute? To the Bitch Queen? Have never ever heard of this, ever. In any DnD licensed material.

"Deity talkers?"

SamTheGiantSlayer wrote:

Faiths and Avatars, Pg. 2

How many have a diety officially around here do you think? I known servers who had issues with characters being atheists even in settings where gods are known to exist.

Well you folks who bring up Diety in this discussion for some reason. To show evil is okay or something. It is 2:39 AM, getting bit blurry here.

Budly wrote:

SamTheGiantSlayer wrote:

Faiths and Avatars, Pg. 2

How many have a diety officially around here do you think? I known servers who had issues with characters being atheists even in settings where gods are known to exist.

A majority.

@ Your edited second question:

Because you were arguing that Good people would not pay lip service or offerings to other deities to appease them, and you said you had never heard of it in source books. I was showing you a crisp and clear example, straight from the source.

SamTheGiantSlayer wrote:

Budly wrote:

SamTheGiantSlayer wrote:

Faiths and Avatars, Pg. 2

How many have a diety officially around here do you think? I known servers who had issues with characters being atheists even in settings where gods are known to exist.

A majority.

That's cool.

I thought this would be helpful here. Further, concerning the Deities. First off, sailors, farmers, merchants, whatever, are not innately Good. Good is a choice and values. Most peasants and such are going to be neutral, as far as Humans go. There is nothing evil about paying respects to an evil deity that can and is known for utterly crushing ships out of existence. Said people are not clerics, so they don't have to even be near the deities alignment. A good example i suppose would be a Chaotic Evil Tiefling that has Tyr as its chosen Deity. In this instance, the worshiper is not LG or whatever, its still CE. Maybe their just invoking Tyr in the hopes that the scales of justice will be balanced.

Another example is Talona. Evil deity. Rules over disease and poisons.

Has a festival regularly (every 12 days) where people come openly to it to get healed or buy poisons to deal with 'rats'.

I'd run one of these festivals myself on Amia if I wasn't so sure I'd be curbstomped into the ground because of it.

Quote:

I think my biggest suprise is seeing officially evil people standing out in the open, and no one reacts to it. This did not happen on my other server unless the local government for some reason supported them or allowed them inside, which was not often.

I agree with this for the most part with the only exception being a place/even on neutral ground such as the Winter Claw Tournament. That place is under the control of the monks so one would expect neutrality to be enforced by them and by anyone holding an event there if they so chose. Other than that I think it's preposterous for say a known necromancer to hang out and chat in Bendir Dale. I don't even linger there long for that reason with Kelia, and she's done nothing to them.

Xenos wrote:

I thought this would be helpful here. Further, concerning the Deities. First off, sailors, farmers, merchants, whatever, are not innately Good. Good is a choice and values. Most peasants and such are going to be neutral, as far as Humans go. There is nothing evil about paying respects to an evil deity that can and is known for utterly crushing ships out of existence. Said people are not clerics, so they don't have to even be near the deities alignment. A good example i suppose would be a Chaotic Evil Tiefling that has Tyr as its chosen Deity. In this instance, the worshiper is not LG or whatever, its still CE. Maybe their just invoking Tyr in the hopes that the scales of justice will be balanced.

I think some of my arguements can be backed up by reading this. It sounds as if some people in setting knows about the whole alignment thing, good vs evil, law vs chaos. Some even feel it.

Arkun wrote:

Another example is Talona. Evil deity. Rules over disease and poisons.

Has a festival regularly (every 12 days) where people come openly to it to get healed or buy poisons to deal with 'rats'.

I'd run one of these festivals myself on Amia if I wasn't so sure I'd be curbstomped into the ground because of it.

But is she just a twisted godess? This is where I think the Alignment system shows its flaws. Talona here does not sound like a psycho godess with a crazy priesthood who want to take over the local settlement and drain it in a sea of poison cause they can but a diety who give people odd ways of solving rat problems and being cured of horrible diseases. She do not sound particularly evil, nor in reality do Auril, Umberlee and others. They sound like dieties who are of a certain topic and push this. But then there is Lolth, Bane and other screwed up dieties which I never really think could be allowed to fester or deserve tributes.

Eltryptich wrote:

Quote:

I think my biggest suprise is seeing officially evil people standing out in the open, and no one reacts to it. This did not happen on my other server unless the local government for some reason supported them or allowed them inside, which was not often.

I agree with this for the most part with the only exception being a place/even on neutral ground such as the Winter Claw Tournament. That place is under the control of the monks so one would expect neutrality to be enforced by them and by anyone holding an event there if they so chose. Other than that I think it's preposterous for say a known necromancer to hang out and chat in Bendir Dale. I don't even linger there long for that reason with Kelia, and she's done nothing to them.

It is indeed a bit odd. But I presume it is also cause of a small player base that people do not want to throw to many rocks on them I guess.

Tuomas is a rare case of a being unwilling to pay even lip service to the malign powers, and in point of fact would be willing to stand against them if they tried to force their way, likely to his severe detriment.

In general, the average citizen of Faerun wouldn't entirely be untoward in doing so, but that isn't everyone really.

Quote:

Dogma: Talona’s ethos stresses that life and death are in balance, but that death is the more powerful and should be paid proper homage and respect. Life and death are balanced only because birthing and generation are so plentiful. Death is the true power, and the lesson that waits for all. lf it falls to the followers of Talona to drive home the point with the tip of a dagger, so be it.

Talona’s faithful are taught that if they respect death and the many ways the powers can deal it, that knowledge will allow them to live longer. If people think themselves invincible thanks to wealth or a swift swordarm or strong spells, the great equalizer of disease, Talona’s breath, will teach them respect and humility. Initiates to the faith are charged as follows: “Let pain be as pleasure to the faithful of Talona. She works upon you from within, and in weakness and wasting is her strength. She is forever and always with you, whomever you or the rest of the world believes in or serves. Let all living things learn respect from Talona and pay homage to her in goods and in fervent worship, and her dedicated priests will intercede for them so that Talona will not claim them—this time. Go and work in Talona’s name and let your doings be subtle or spectacular, but make them known as the will of the Mother of All Plagues.”

Talona - not evil? "Death is the true power", "disease will humble all men", etc etc.

----------------------

Quote:

Auril charges her clergy to: "Cover all the lands with ice. Quench fire wherever it is found. Let in the winds and the cold; cut down windbreaks and chop holes in walls and roofs that my breath may come in. Work darknesses to hide the cursed sun so that the chill I bring may slay. Take the life of an arctic creature only in great need, but slay others at will. Make all Faerun fear me."

Auril's clergy are commanded to revere her and sing her praises into any chill breeze or winter wind. They are to make all creatures fear or worship her and to bring down her cold power against all so that all may know her and quake before her. They are not to raise their hands against any other priest of Auril.

Auril - not evil? "Cover all lands in ice." "destroy homes so my breath may enter." "slay all others at will."

------------------------------

Quote:

Umberlee first appeared within Dungeons & Dragons as one of the deities featured in Ed Greenwood's article "Down-to-earth Divinity" in Dragon #54 (October 1981). Umberlee was introduced as the Bitch-Queen, the goddess of oceans, waves and winds at sea, and currents, a chaotic evil lesser goddess from the plane of the Abyss. The article states that Umberlee "contests the fate of ships at sea eternally with Selune", noting that in Greenwood's world, far more currents hamper coastal shipping than aid it. The article also states that Umberlee "commands the wind (which she can whip into a gale...) over the open sea, but prefers to use waves as her weapons, striking opponents within 60 feet with a wave ... She is rarely seen, preferring to set currents and winds in motion from afar, or send forth great sharks to engulf swimmers or shipwrecked sailors." Umberlee is described as one of “The Gods of Fury,” which is what these four gods are known as collectively: "Talos is served by Auril, Umberlee, and Malar." Umberlee is commonly worshipped by chaotic evil magic-users and clerics, and is placated by sailors; Greenwood notes, "If a DM is partial to variant “specialist” NPC magic-users, a worshipper of Umberlee could have water-related spells doubled in power (intensity and/or duration), and land, air, and fire-related spells halved in power."[2]

Umberlee later officially appeared as one of the major deities for the Forgotten Realms campaign setting, in the Forgotten Realms Campaign Set's "Cyclopedia of the Realms" booklet (1987)

Quote:

Temples of Umberlee are far apart and the church is not well organized, owing to Umberlee's promulgation of chaos. Under her authority, disputes are ruled in favor of the strongest individual. There are, though, shrines dedicated to her predominantly located at port cities of the Sea of Fallen Stars and at Nelanther Isles. Here travelers by sea are sure to pay their tribute to her, and the preachings of her clerics are built upon the terrible fate that will fall upon any who do not bring a sacrifice to Umberlee. Also at the shrines are clerics for hire who for a price will travel with sailors to ensure no harm is inflicted.

Umberlee is the terror of sailors and coastal dwellers across the world. She breaks agreements on a whim and takes great pleasure in watching others drown. Umberlee is also known as The Bitch Queen

Umberlee - not evil? Drowns people at whim, extorts money for safe passage, actively kills people for worshipping the wrong god, and is "The terror of sailors and coastal dwellings across the world."

-------------------

Make no mistake - while their servants may occasionally take on seemingly benevolent tasks for society in order to appease their gods and bring them respect and fear, the icons themselves are absolutely evil.

Budly wrote:

Commie wrote:

Yeah, a lot of deities (umberlee, cyric, auril) are powerful BECAUSE people worship them to prevent getting their shit wrecked by their domains.

I answer you but this goes to the rest of you diety talkers.

Sure, but often there is an equal god you can give to. That can do similar things but do not want to enslave you or worse.

Also in a setting perspective...Gods are only weakened if you stop giving them shit or pray to them. So it is counter productive to pray to them if you want them gone. Do not feed the hand that bites you eventually when it finds your food lacking.

Polytheism sure, but there is plenty pantheons. IN most PANTHEONS I can buy it. But most gods are not a Pantheon in DnD as far as I know. The Triad, do they even belong to a pantheon? As in the same manner as the Greek or Nordic? Hell, Tyr is even from my understanding an Aesir in Faerun. As I said, half the elven Pantheon is Drow gods now, I have never heard of the Quessir paying tribute to that half. Most races got Pantheons they pray to that makes sense. I guess Humans are the idjots who keep paying tribute to gods who hate them. A small tribe in the north paying tribute to Auril? Sure, an enormous organisation bent to a good gods knee? Paying tribute? To the Bitch Queen? Have never ever heard of this, ever. In any DnD licensed material.

Seems Lawful Good Prospective, not every ones a Holy Paladin. When in another Gods Backyard, unless you want eyes on you you pay homage. That's the adventurers way.

As far as Gods represented...Amia is a small part of the Realms. So the islands different races worship or lack there of has no effect on what the Gods standings are.

Even Velsharrans do benevolent things like offer healing services purely to bring in tithes or funding for the church, they dont tell their patients that they worship the undead god of lichdom, of course.

Tormak has the right of it. Talona is not good, but people give her praise and tribute to avoid horrible disease and death.

On Amia, this really doesn't work. If you tried to openly give praise to one of the evil gods, more likely than not you'll end up being on a list and shunned, because on Amia that kind of open praise is more thought of as you being an absolute worshipper of that divine alone.

We have a few open evil players and I think more power to them for doing it, because that kind of open evil gets people playing together, but it really also encourages the mob mentality, which is pretty awful.

Like I said prior, I'd run a talona festival, but I know it'd get smushed rather swiftly, even if they're healing. After all, Talona is evil and goodies are in their full right to stop Talona getting a foothold, especially if they are a paladin.

Playing a evil Druid has been a lot of fun and is pretty interesting, but I know that in character I need to be low key otherwise I will be smushed. Especially as I am not near 30 and not geared to defend myself. Playing evil on Amia can be rather rough, but rewarding as long as everyone is above board OOC.

Thing is, the only normal common city on Amia is Cordor. Kohlingen is the "Holy City" where the peasants likely don't praise evil gods because their all likely more inclined to be Triad Zealots. Exaggerating a bit, but my understanding was more that Kohlingen was a Fortress Temple that grew into a city, where as Cordor is a more neutral port that does what it needs to survive day to day. So its likely you would find people in Cordor paying respects to whatever gods they needed to, to survive the year.

The other races are not included into this, as they have their own pantheons and are more racially inclined/restricted. Humans have true freedom to do whatever. Elves are 90% CG, or close to it (CN/NG) and i expect follow their own racial deity for a given matter, rather than pay services out of fear. Same with Halflings and Dwarves, all these races are much more inclined to good, as far as the NPCs are concerned, and wont likely, id think, honor evil deities out of fear. So that kind of explains why having an event every 12 days where people praise Talona wont really work, or why Umbralle does not see a great deal of praise, because these are human deities, and Amia is populated by fanatics, and none humans.

Many interesting points.

But I wonder if Auril, Bitch Queen Umberlee and Talona really is evil, they to me sound more like forces of nature. I have also studied theology at university and I think just out of a viewpoint of Christianity that the set in stone Evil vs Good is from that and our view point of the old Pantheons have been corrupted in the modern era by these view points. Is Loke really evil? Or Hel? Is Oden really perfect himself? Is Hades evil? Or is he just the keeper of the souls of the damned? In an alignment system with "Only" 9 view points they are evil cause these three godessess...ironic!

Bring Harsh winter, stormy seas and disease. But all of them are powers in nature itself aswell and as we know it, nature is supposed to be a neutral force right? A tweak to their alignment would maybe bring in a more accepted yet "im annoyed" with this kind of thinking.

There is plenty of gods who just are pure evil and want to destroy things if they cannot conquer it. If you can please them with gifts they do sound just like the fury of the wind or nature, they are the element they portray. Atleast, this is how it could be seen.

And how do Talos and Umberlee work? These two seem to end up in each others portfolio in parts. Can you gift Umberlee to keep storms away and piss on the altar of Talos or similar?

Also why the Bitch Queen? Do she like dogs? :lol:

Last edited by Xenos on Mon, Feb 27 2017, 12:45 PM, edited 1 time in total.

People seem to have a hard time reading these days so let me highlight and make it bigger for you. Evil is very simple to define. While i understand how you might consider them to be nature deities, and indeed they are, it is their disrespect for life that makes them evil.

Budly wrote:

And how do Talos and Umberlee work? These two seem to end up in each others portfolio in parts. Can you gift Umberlee to keep storms away and piss on the altar of Talos or similar?

Simply, Umberlee serves in the Deities of Fury under Talos, its leader. He creates the storms, she does not need them to make a rough sea. "Talos was close with Auril, had a flirtatious rivalry with Umberlee and a grudging alliance with Malar, who would kill him if he could."

Quote:

Also why the Bitch Queen? Do she like dogs

Because she strands, drowns, and slays men women and children at sea at her whim.

That makes her evil, btw.

Xenos wrote:

People seem to have a hard time reading these days so let me highlight and make it bigger for you. Evil is very simple to define. While i understand how you might consider them to be nature deities, and indeed they are, it is their disrespect for life that makes them evil.

Budly wrote:

And how do Talos and Umberlee work? These two seem to end up in each others portfolio in parts. Can you gift Umberlee to keep storms away and piss on the altar of Talos or similar?

Simply, Umberlee serves in the Deities of Fury under Talos, its leader. He creates the storms, she does not need them to make a rough sea. "Talos was close with Auril, had a flirtatious rivalry with Umberlee and a grudging alliance with Malar, who would kill him if he could."

Yes I get what you want to say, but also remember that im not a native speaker of English. I think a good diety can have disrespect for life too. The life of the unwanted. Maybe not particularly in this setting or in DnDs ruleset. But it do exist settings with the "Good" gods wanting to purge the world from life cause it has gone out of control.

Thanks for the explanation on Talos and Umberlee.

TormakSaber wrote:

Quote:

Also why the Bitch Queen? Do she like dogs

Because she strands, drowns, and slays men women and children at sea at her whim.

That makes her evil, btw.

It make her evil. But im speculating outside the box that these dieties would probably not be seen as evil. Thor would bring storms and such to the sea when he did not want people to go somewhere or punish them. It did not make him evil in the eyes of followers. Is there any form of harsh punishment from good dieties in DnD? I really hope that good is not the old school cliché where Good only pat you on the head and evil smashes your skull in for looking funnily at them kind of good and evil gods. My DnD lore is a bit rusty at the moment cause I haven't played in Faerun much of late, mostly Ravenloft and in PnP it been homebrews.

Queen bitch of the universe. Umberlee is a fantastic example of why chars respect their setting. If you expanded that mentality to every place evil gods had power it'd be a better atmosphere

OpenTheRift wrote:

Queen bitch of the universe. Umberlee is a fantastic example of why chars respect their setting. If you expanded that mentality to every place evil gods had power it'd be a better atmosphere

Do this mean Carol in Walking Dead would be a diety in DnD? :lol:

In the real world, yes, i would say any deity you have to pay sacrifice to or face death is evil. Many of the deities we are speaking of in DnD remind of me of various Pagan spirits or deities. Sacrifice your prize goat each season, or face a poor harvest kinda stuff. Where as a good deity would command you to share in the bounty when you had excess.

Good Deities do punish, but by how we define good, it is not in their nature to kill someone for failure because Respect for Life. A prime example of this would be Corellon and the Seldarine's punishment of Lolth, her allies, and the Dark Elves. For the failures they were not put to death, but rather cast out, and branded that their true nature may never go undetected, thus the black skin.

Not sure Budly my walking deaf lore is low!

On the note of evil deities and openness to interpretation you can look at supported alignments of gods. Again touching Umberlee you can be NE, CE, CN and she will give you divine powers. Now each of these chars has a whole box of variety in play style.

Another example would be the red Knight who supports a range from LG, LN, LE, TN granting divine power to the whole spectrum. You can be an ordained paladin, or blackguard of her, and that's not even touching how you can find intricacies in the alignments offered. I always think of the movie a few good men with the red Knight. You want that LE Colonel on your wall, he keeps you safe. Mercy and kindness isn't what you give to people who threaten your nation. So while evil, he is essential.

These in mind I feel DND has left the door wide open for people to make and explore deeply the alignments and gods.

Xenos wrote:

In the real world, yes, i would say any deity you have to pay sacrifice to or face death is evil. Many of the deities we are speaking of in DnD remind of me of various Pagan spirits or deities. Sacrifice your prize goat each season, or face a poor harvest kinda stuff. Where as a good deity would command you to share in the bounty when you had excess.

Good Deities do punish, but by how we define good, it is not in their nature to kill someone for failure because Respect for Life. A prime example of this would be Corellon and the Seldarine's punishment of Lolth, her allies, and the Dark Elves. For the failures they were not put to death, but rather cast out, and branded that their true nature may never go undetected, thus the black skin.

Out of a Nordic perspective, I think we would not see our old gods as evil, maybe Loke. There is even "blot" today growing as a religious thing in the Aesir faith again and they do sacrifices in shape of animals. To me, they are not evil, but more human than the Abrahamite god. They much like us act on emotions and opinion. Much more "real" gods in that manner. No offense to any Christians

Also would it not be evil to doom a whole people to a hell in the Underdark? With this system...there must have been some good and neutral "Dhaerow".

OpenTheRift wrote:

Not sure Budly my walking deaf lore is low!

On the note of evil deities and openness to interpretation you can look at supported alignments of gods. Again touching Umberlee you can be NE, CE, CN and she will give you divine powers. Now each of these chars has a whole box of variety in play style.

Another example would be the red Knight who supports a range from LG, LN, LE, TN granting divine power to the whole spectrum. You can be an ordained paladin, or blackguard of her, and that's not even touching how you can find intricacies in the alignments offered. I always think of the movie a few good men with the red Knight. You want that LE Colonel on your wall, he keeps you safe. Mercy and kindness isn't what you give to people who threaten your nation. So while evil, he is essential.

These in mind I feel DND has left the door wide open for people to make and explore deeply the alignments and gods.

Carol is a killer! And a lady of vengeance and acts with determination!

I find the alignment system bit flawed, you need to think outside the box in mmy opinion, like with this LE colonel. Not sure he would be evil but very keen on protecting his people and hard to earn trust from. IT is a interesting viewpoint!

Xenos wrote:

People seem to have a hard time reading these days so let me highlight and make it bigger for you. Evil is very simple to define. While i understand how you might consider them to be nature deities, and indeed they are, it is their disrespect for life that makes them evil.

So if someone wants someone dead just because they are evil, wouldn't that make them evil themselves, as they don't have the "respect for life" due to opting for a death sentance/murder right off the bat?

With a few exceptions, good hearted folks have a glaring weakness (strength) and that is as have said before mercy. This is exactly the reason most good guys do not go on crusades to stamp out evil across the world. Number one it's an impossible task and number two they would have to cave to the evil inside to do it, thus becoming evil themselves. That's why neutral is way more common than either good or evil.

Eltryptich wrote:

With a few exceptions, good hearted folks have a glaring weakness (strength) and that is as have said before mercy. This is exactly the reason most good guys do not go on crusades to stamp out evil across the world. Number one it's an impossible task and number two they would have to cave to the evil inside to do it, thus becoming evil themselves. That's why neutral is way more common than either good or evil.

In theory I 100% agree, in practice I see a lot of good that probably shouldn't get to hold onto the alignment. Good, and Evil both require work towards their spectrum, neutral is just something you are inadvertently when not taking action. The good character has to help, has to sacrifice a part of him/herself to give others a chance. And evil has to take.

If thats the concensus on evil then I gotta get Pitt changed to neutral.

Food for thought:

I've largely heard the excuse, when I've asked:

"You can get fallen for not taking the proper action against someone"

If this is a possibility, maybe it should be revisited? I don't think murdering anyone, even evil shifts you more in favor with your god, but eh, that's just me?

In my opinion it is a good dead to slay evil if you can, a chaotic good to me would not hesitate to end the life of a killer protected by the law to stop him from spreading more pain and evil around him.

How are you being good, by murdering someone who you suspect of doing wrong?

Isn't that just CN?

I always envisioned "good" being reserved for those who are actually trying to HELP people, not just justify a murder. Ilmater's 3 sects illustrate this point.

Heck, even back in the day when there was feudal law, the punishment for a crime was not just 'death'. There was some perverse justice system, and that's a construct by people who have no religious or moral obligation.

Killing people shouldn't 'swing' you towards good, ever, imo. If you defended a baby by killing someone, then HELPING the baby is the action that swinged you good. NOT the killing.

Commie wrote:

Xenos wrote:

People seem to have a hard time reading these days so let me highlight and make it bigger for you. Evil is very simple to define. While i understand how you might consider them to be nature deities, and indeed they are, it is their disrespect for life that makes them evil.

So if someone wants someone dead just because they are evil, wouldn't that make them evil themselves, as they don't have the "respect for life" due to opting for a death sentance/murder right off the bat?

No. Killing is not a moral issue in Forgotten Realms. It's an action. Something one does. A tenant of good is to combat evil and prevent its spread. Killing evil beings or creatures does that very well. Death is more along the lines of the chaos and law spectrum. Murder is the act of unlawful killing. So in a chaotic society, good can kill evil and evil can kill good however they please, a lawful society on the other hand, has rules to make sure it isn't going to work that way.

I'd simplify it as this:
Would a paladin fall for killing a Banite in Cordor? No.
Would a paladin get arrested for killing a Banite in Cordor? Yes. (or rather he should)

Budly wrote:

In my opinion it is a good dead to slay evil if you can, a chaotic good to me would not hesitate to end the life of a killer protected by the law to stop him from spreading more pain and evil around him.

And so you fall towards evil yourself, since you've taken evil means to justify your own desires for justice with murder. Sounds CN to me indeed. And oh! According to your logic; since you've started killing people, it means people can see it as a good deed to kill you. An eye for an eye baby

Last edited by Mrlala on Mon, Feb 27 2017, 20:06 PM, edited 1 time in total.

Quote:

I'd simplify it as this:
Would a paladin fall for killing a Banite in Cordor? No.
Would a paladin get arrested for killing a Banite in Cordor? Yes. (or rather he should)

No no no! I quote my paragon paladin Michael Carpenter here;
“It's one of the things that makes us different than they are, Harry. The blood on their hands does not make it right to bloody my own. My choices are measured against my own soul. Not against the stains on theirs.”

You fight for their sake to as well as yours, you fight to free them for their evil. See if you can make them renounce their evil ways. And don't just murder them for the sake of the easy way is the way... You lazy pally..

Budly wrote:

In my opinion it is a good dead to slay evil if you can, a chaotic good to me would not hesitate to end the life of a killer protected by the law to stop him from spreading more pain and evil around him.

Yeah that's not "good" that's CN.

Great, so the conclusion is that Good is a bunch of idiots that cannot be pre-emptive or let people continue to murder things over and over in a corrupt justice system. Good to know I have to play my good characters like really stupid people. Not even chaotic good may pull the vigilante justice. DnD sure is fun.

Akhlys wrote:

Commie wrote:

Xenos wrote:

People seem to have a hard time reading these days so let me highlight and make it bigger for you. Evil is very simple to define. While i understand how you might consider them to be nature deities, and indeed they are, it is their disrespect for life that makes them evil.

So if someone wants someone dead just because they are evil, wouldn't that make them evil themselves, as they don't have the "respect for life" due to opting for a death sentance/murder right off the bat?

No. Killing is not a moral issue in Forgotten Realms. It's an action. Something one does. A tenant of good is to combat evil and prevent its spread. Killing evil beings or creatures does that very well. Death is more along the lines of the chaos and law spectrum. Murder is the act of unlawful killing. So in a chaotic society, good can kill evil and evil can kill good however they please, a lawful society on the other hand, has rules to make sure it isn't going to work that way.

I'd simplify it as this:
Would a paladin fall for killing a Banite in Cordor? No.
Would a paladin get arrested for killing a Banite in Cordor? Yes. (or rather he should)

For once I see a post that I can agree upon from you, lol

RaveN wrote:

How are you being good, by murdering someone who you suspect of doing wrong?

Isn't that just CN?

I always envisioned "good" being reserved for those who are actually trying to HELP people, not just justify a murder. Ilmater's 3 sects illustrate this point.

Heck, even back in the day when there was feudal law, the punishment for a crime was not just 'death'. There was some perverse justice system, and that's a construct by people who have no religious or moral obligation.

Killing people shouldn't 'swing' you towards good, ever, imo. If you defended a baby by killing someone, then HELPING the baby is the action that swinged you good. NOT the killing.

I think the issue with all this alignment stuff is that it's mostly subjective. If you're dealing with a baby eating, dog kicking mad man who takes pleasure from butchering innocent people on the side of the road, there could be an argument made that not killing that person when/if you have a chance is a borderline evil act because by not doing so you ensure that they'll continue to hurt and kill others.

Just like you could make an argument that watching someone being beaten or murdered and doing nothing to intervene is an evil act.

In some cases, inaction is action.

IMO, you could also make the case that some acts that are considered hard evil in D&D(like entering a contract with a devil) could be considered 'good' in some cases, depending on the circumstances around which the pact was entered.

For instance, if someone was attempting to save a dying loved one from illness and, after trying every other option, was presented with the chance to save that loved one in exchange for their own soul upon death... Wouldn't that be a selfless 'good' act?

Mrlala wrote:

Quote:

I'd simplify it as this:
Would a paladin fall for killing a Banite in Cordor? No.
Would a paladin get arrested for killing a Banite in Cordor? Yes. (or rather he should)

No no no! I quote my paragon paladin Michael Carpenter here;
“It's one of the things that makes us different than they are, Harry. The blood on their hands does not make it right to bloody my own. My choices are measured against my own soul. Not against the stains on theirs.”

You fight for their sake to as well as yours, you fight to free them for their evil. See if you can make them renounce their evil ways. And don't just murder them for the sake of the easy way is the way... You lazy pally..

Postmodern mindset applied to a pragmatic setting. There are objective evils and goods. They fight and kill each other. Your paladin doesn't have to kill evil things, but depending on which god he worships that's going to be directly in opposition of the dogma (Ilmater is an exception). The paladin's code also goes against this (you have detect/smite evil for a reason). You don't free them from their 'evil,' that is their path. A perfectly legitimate one for them to follow. The gods know this. Clerics and priests know this. Evil people do evil shit and it's fine to get rid of them. This isn't a Protestant Christian setting, with one god, who controls all morality where redemption through absolution of sin and born-again Tormatars are a thing and where things like the Ten Commandments have been mistranslated. It is more akin to God and Satan being on equal footing, each with their own heaven, but a shared hell.

Do a bunch of evil things -> go to evil heaven.
Do a bunch of good things -> go to good heaven.

Be evil but help out good things -> go to hell (the wall, actual hell, the abyss, the grey wastes, etc).
Be good but help out evil things -> go to hell.

Paladin's Code
A paladin’s code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.

Ilmater
Help all who hurt, no matter who they are. The truly holy take on the suffering of others. If you suffer in his name, Ilmater is there to support you. Stick to your cause if it is right, whatever the pain or peril. There is no shame in a meaningful death. Stand up to all tyrants, and allow no injustice to go unchallenged. Emphasize the spiritual nature of life over the existence of the material body.

Torm
Salvation may be found through service. Every failure of duty diminishes Torm and every success adds to his luster. Strive to maintain law and order. Obey your masters with alert judgement and anticipation. Stand ever alert against corruption. Strike quickly and forcefully against rot in the hearts of mortals. Brings painful, quick death to traitors. Question unjust laws by suggesting improvements or alternatives, not additional laws. Your fourfold duties are to faith, family, masters, and all good beings of Faerun.

Tyr
Reveal the truth, punish the guilty, right the wrong, and always be true and just in your actions. Uphold the law wherever you go and punish those who do wrong under the law. Keep a record of your own rulings, deeds, and decisions, for through this your errors can be corrected, your grasp on the laws of all lands will flourish, and your ability to identify lawbreakers will expand. Be vigilant in your observations and anticipations so you may detect those who plan injustices before their actions threaten law and order. Deliver vengeance to the guilty for those who cannot do it themselves.

Krin wrote:

RaveN wrote:

How are you being good, by murdering someone who you suspect of doing wrong?

Isn't that just CN?

I always envisioned "good" being reserved for those who are actually trying to HELP people, not just justify a murder. Ilmater's 3 sects illustrate this point.

Heck, even back in the day when there was feudal law, the punishment for a crime was not just 'death'. There was some perverse justice system, and that's a construct by people who have no religious or moral obligation.

Killing people shouldn't 'swing' you towards good, ever, imo. If you defended a baby by killing someone, then HELPING the baby is the action that swinged you good. NOT the killing.

I think the issue with all this alignment stuff is that it's mostly subjective. If you're dealing with a baby eating, dog kicking mad man who takes pleasure from butchering innocent people on the side of the road, there could be an argument made that not killing that person when/if you have a chance is a borderline evil act because by not doing so you ensure that they'll continue to hurt and kill others.

Just like you could make an argument that watching someone being beaten or murdered and doing nothing to intervene is an evil act.

In some cases, inaction is action.

IMO, you could also make the case that some acts that are considered hard evil in D&D(like entering a contract with a devil) could be considered 'good' in some cases, depending on the circumstances around which the pact was entered.

For instance, if someone was attempting to save a dying loved one from illness and, after trying every other option, was presented with the chance to save that loved one in exchange for their own soul upon death... Wouldn't that be a selfless 'good' act?

Siege of Dragonspear epxansion for BG got a few scenarios in the story like this...not to spoil it but I can answer in PMs if someone want to know them or discuss them. But there is some cases there which would be evil but good, or good but evil or selfish by good characters on paper.

Akhlys wrote:

Commie wrote:

Xenos wrote:

People seem to have a hard time reading these days so let me highlight and make it bigger for you. Evil is very simple to define. While i understand how you might consider them to be nature deities, and indeed they are, it is their disrespect for life that makes them evil.

So if someone wants someone dead just because they are evil, wouldn't that make them evil themselves, as they don't have the "respect for life" due to opting for a death sentance/murder right off the bat?

No. Killing is not a moral issue in Forgotten Realms. It's an action. Something one does. A tenant of good is to combat evil and prevent its spread. Killing evil beings or creatures does that very well. Death is more along the lines of the chaos and law spectrum. Murder is the act of unlawful killing. So in a chaotic society, good can kill evil and evil can kill good however they please, a lawful society on the other hand, has rules to make sure it isn't going to work that way.

I'd simplify it as this:
Would a paladin fall for killing a Banite in Cordor? No.
Would a paladin get arrested for killing a Banite in Cordor? Yes. (or rather he should)

I would argue on that and it also depends on the paladin. A paladin should also not engage in a fight that would potentially endanger others unless the subject is already endangering others, or the presence of an entity is harming, defiling already by nature (demon, devil, undead...or in the case of certain cities, races: goblin, orc, drow etc.).

Pretty much this. Killing evil is not evil, in fat, it is good. Especially if you offered an evil person a chance to repent (in the case of a paladin, it is a must) and they denied it, or circumstances got to the point when there was no place for such offer (in the case of a paladin it applies to foes that cannot be changed pe: undead, demon, devil, aberration, beyond lvl 10 palemaster, heavy chromatic DD).

Also mind that despite what DnD sourcebooks say at this point FR overrides it and we are using that setting. In FR neutral does exist but it is also more leaning towards good because they know that the evil folks will eventually cause trouble. Even with neutral alignment, true neutrality rarely has the ground to exist in the FR.

Remember what Keldorn says in BG2 when he is arguing with Jahiera:

Lord Keldorn Firecam wrote:

Gray? Gray is not a color; it is the blurring of another. A symbol of indecision.

Krin wrote:

I think the issue with all this alignment stuff is that it's mostly subjective. If you're dealing with a baby eating, dog kicking mad man who takes pleasure from butchering innocent people on the side of the road, there could be an argument made that not killing that person when/if you have a chance is a borderline evil act because by not doing so you ensure that they'll continue to hurt and kill others.

Just like you could make an argument that watching someone being beaten or murdered and doing nothing to intervene is an evil act.

In some cases, inaction is action.

IMO, you could also make the case that some acts that are considered hard evil in D&D(like entering a contract with a devil) could be considered 'good' in some cases, depending on the circumstances around which the pact was entered.

For instance, if someone was attempting to save a dying loved one from illness and, after trying every other option, was presented with the chance to save that loved one in exchange for their own soul upon death... Wouldn't that be a selfless 'good' act?

Budly

Everyone has their RP standards and beliefs. You are very passionate about yours.
Shoving your "suggestings" onto people who not of asked for them came come out terribly. Not saying what your intentions are. It just looks like someone trying to be elitist, tell others they are wrong for RPing their car (no matter how silly it may seem to you), is a crappy thing to do.

Good evil, and neutral, they arne't going to work as they do in reality. Hell, Amia is a strange magical place for misfits and freaks, pretty odd by DnD Faerun stands. Just gotta try to roll with things. Play your char how you see fit.

Look I've felt this way on the way some people play theirs characters and what, for example, what I sued to mock people for as "everyone playing a Drizzt' good elf. I opened my mind, STOPPED JUDGING, spent time IC and OOC, no hard feelings, had a good time. Even if there I don't full agree with, it's the way they play, it's their char, and they aren't breaking any rules. I've seen RP all around I'ved loved, some was okay, some I hated, some I thought was absolutely dumb and frustrating, Amia is that nice mixed bag of crazy. Embrace it

I see good vs evil stuff I think is dumb. As someone else mentioned, Good group conflicts with small evil group. Now half the good and half the NEUTRAL factions are joining in for a big WTFPWN LULZ. Legal, but not how you want to see it go down 99% of the time. ALmost accidentally happend to me when my char was told grealy overaggerated enemy numbers. Shit happens, ya move on

Start letting stuff go, drop the ego a bit, and stop acting above everyone else. I don't care what degrees in college you have. Should be about having fun, if you aren't having fun, make a chance, do something different, play something completely new.

I'm pretty sure ALL of us have had frustrations about some asrepect, rule, lore regarding Amia. Stating your opinion I have no problem with. Telling people they are wrong for RPing their char is a bit much.
If you don't like what you see, you have the option of getting in the role you want and showing us lesser roleplayers how to truly do it..

Sorry, that last part was rude, but you get what I'm saying. The point remains. Give your forum opinion, but instead of causing contention judging people, just get in there and try to RP and lead by example. Best think you can really try. And all these responses aren't hate on Budly day,I'm pretty sure a large part of us want you to have a smooth, fun enjoyable time here.

DarkAngelGirl wrote:

Budly

Everyone has their RP standards and beliefs. You are very passionate about yours.
Shoving your "suggestings" onto people who not of asked for them came come out terribly. Not saying what your intentions are. It just looks like someone trying to be elitist, tell others they are wrong for RPing their car (no matter how silly it may seem to you), is a crappy thing to do.

Good evil, and neutral, they arne't going to work as they do in reality. Hell, Amia is a strange magical place for misfits and freaks, pretty odd by DnD Faerun stands. Just gotta try to roll with things. Play your char how you see fit.

Look I've felt this way on the way some people play theirs characters and what, for example, what I sued to mock people for as "everyone playing a Drizzt' good elf. I opened my mind, STOPPED JUDGING, spent time IC and OOC, no hard feelings, had a good time. Even if there I don't full agree with, it's the way they play, it's their char, and they aren't breaking any rules. I've seen RP all around I'ved loved, some was okay, some I hated, some I thought was absolutely dumb and frustrating, Amia is that nice mixed bag of crazy. Embrace it

I see good vs evil stuff I think is dumb. As someone else mentioned, Good group conflicts with small evil group. Now half the good and half the NEUTRAL factions are joining in for a big WTFPWN LULZ. Legal, but not how you want to see it go down 99% of the time. ALmost accidentally happend to me when my char was told grealy overaggerated enemy numbers. Shit happens, ya move on

Start letting stuff go, drop the ego a bit, and stop acting above everyone else. I don't care what degrees in college you have. Should be about having fun, if you aren't having fun, make a chance, do something different, play something completely new.

I'm pretty sure ALL of us have had frustrations about some asrepect, rule, lore regarding Amia. Stating your opinion I have no problem with. Telling people they are wrong for RPing their char is a bit much.
If you don't like what you see, you have the option of getting in the role you want and showing us lesser roleplayers how to truly do it..

Sorry, that last part was rude, but you get what I'm saying. The point remains. Give your forum opinion, but instead of causing contention judging people, just get in there and try to RP and lead by example. Best think you can really try. And all these responses aren't hate on Budly day,I'm pretty sure a large part of us want you to have a smooth, fun enjoyable time here.

That is how you read this? I question how people RP?

Ladies and gents,

As Angel has said. We are all people trying to enjoying ourselves in the community. Be respectful to my evil characters and I will return the favor. If you are willing to bend and be flexible so will I.

Insta PvPing and dragging stuff into OOC is not the way. The best way to approach evil players is to strike an understanding and figure out a form of communication that works for you guys. Most evil players have the shit situation on the server, and know it. Most evil players just want to stir the pot and make conflict/fun for the rest of the server. Please respect that choice those players have made and if anything encourage them, because they generate context, drama, and interesting plots for the other side of the alignment spectrum.

Maverick00053 wrote:

Ladies and gents,

As Angel has said. We are all people trying to enjoying ourselves in the community. Be respectful to my evil characters and I will return the favor. If you are willing to bend and be flexible so will I.

Insta PvPing and dragging stuff into OOC is not the way. The best way to approach evil players is to strike an understanding and figure out a form of communication that works for you guys. Most evil players have the shit situation on the server, and know it. Most evil players just want to stir the pot and make conflict/fun for the rest of the server. Please respect that choice those players have made and if anything encourage them, because they generate context, drama, and interesting plots for the other side of the alignment spectrum.

Stiring the pot can be really tedious aswell at times. I still do not know why evil players are suprised they get hunted for things they stirr in good or neutral areas. But yes, you're right with that we all are players.

Lutra wrote:

Krin wrote:

I think the issue with all this alignment stuff is that it's mostly subjective. If you're dealing with a baby eating, dog kicking mad man who takes pleasure from butchering innocent people on the side of the road, there could be an argument made that not killing that person when/if you have a chance is a borderline evil act because by not doing so you ensure that they'll continue to hurt and kill others.

Just like you could make an argument that watching someone being beaten or murdered and doing nothing to intervene is an evil act.

In some cases, inaction is action.

IMO, you could also make the case that some acts that are considered hard evil in D&D(like entering a contract with a devil) could be considered 'good' in some cases, depending on the circumstances around which the pact was entered.

For instance, if someone was attempting to save a dying loved one from illness and, after trying every other option, was presented with the chance to save that loved one in exchange for their own soul upon death... Wouldn't that be a selfless 'good' act?

How are good and evil not subjective in a setting with multiple existing gods each pushing their own versions of morality on their worshipers?

There are objective goods and evils in D&D, but I don't think it makes sense for the existence of objective good and evil to cancel out the possibility of subjective good and evil.

I'm not super lore savvy or anything, so I could be talking totally out of my rear end here. But unless there is a list of actions with 'Good' or 'Evil' marked by them for reference somewhere, I don't see how what is moral or immoral could be anything but subjective in D&D.

Budly wrote:

I still do not know why evil players are suprised they get hunted for things they stirr in good or neutral areas.

What?

I think the 'problem' of Evil in Amia has a lot to do with the fact that we can't force long term consequences on each other. I ran into this problem a lot on another server I played on for a few years that had cities built specifically for Good, Evil, and Neutral character types. My character was the leader of the 'Good' city and this was a constant headache. This was an 'adult' server and there was a never ending faction war going on that led to characters being taken prisoner, gruesome torture, slavery, etc. all the time.

How does a 'good' character respond to blatant, unapologetic evil without forcing permadeath on another player?

I tried everything from 'rehabilitation RP' to long term imprisonment(which comes with its own set of issues), maiming to take the 'evil' character out of the fight for a while, victim's choice punishments, etc. etc. etc.

But eventually it always came back to... "This character is so evil, it makes no sense IC to do anything BUT execute them."

So I found myself dancing around that logic constantly and having my own character bend backwards to avoid it.

That can be pretty frustrating for the 'good guys'. But it's also important to remember that the 'bad guys' play a major role in creating the conflict around which the stories of other characters are played out. So having half the server jump into full-on 'burn the witch' mob mode on them whenever they try to do something can be really frustrating for them too.

This has always been an issue and, honestly, I don't see a way to make it not an issue. It wouldn't be right to force permadeath on other players when many people have spent years developing their characters, but you can't blame the good guys for wanting to zerg rush evil doers whenever they do something terrible.

So I think the best we can all do is follow the two commandments, remember that this game is supposed to be fun, and keep on keeping on.

You bring out a clever post.

Thing is when you poked the hornets nest one to many times, there need to be the next tier of punishment. Is there such a thing?

Budly wrote:

You bring out a clever post.

Thing is when you poked the hornets nest one to many times, there need to be the next tier of punishment. Is there such a thing?

That's tough. If good characters can punish evil characters with long term consequences or permadeath, why can't evil characters do the same to good characters?

"Evil" discussion.

Who is online