AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

I got your attention on reading it, right ? Good. because I'm, really tired. I need your aid/advice on the following matter.

Lawful good paladins of Kelemvor would get a fall by using of torture ?
Clerics of Kelemvor would experience the same ? Obviously that depends on his/her alignment, right ?

The thing is I'm trying to RP my LG paladin of kelemvor to be against it. Then it leads me to the past actions of the EO order. If the leaders have allowed it, why then Gagis didn't get a fall ?

I really would like some inputs, because this thing is messing me up a bit and I don't want to crap my RP and all I've bee doing to raise back the EO again. I've been readying about Kelemvor and his dogma and it says nothing against torture. So why a LG paladin of kelemvor should get a fall if Kelemvor cares nothing about it ? Or it's just because NWN doesn't support LE or TN paladins ? That's for sure but then LG paladins of Kelemvor shouldn't just get a "free permission" to act like a paladin of Kelemvor could do, without getting a fall (considering it's a thing casted by DMs).

I thank you.

The only thing that paladins have in common is their alignment restriction. A Paladin of the Red Knight might allow the use of undead in certain cases, whereas another paladin might just smite the undead down.

I fail to see torture as an evil act, it's been used for a very, very long time by so called 'good people' sin the real world, so why should our 'realistic fantasy' environment be any different?

Richard_Edmund wrote:

I fail to see torture as an evil act

This is why the world sucks.

You know, making the mistake of taking a holy mission to extremes and receiving a fall for it would not only be interesting, but add quite a bit to a character's development. More moderate views within a church are also a source of conflict and is dependent on a character's moral compass, not what lore dictates is okay. As grave as it sounds, shifting those views on the back of a DMing ruling on the subject would be metagaming, and a break in your character's causality.

Looking for a definitive answer into what will happen if a character does x and follows y is a pretty surefire way of eliminating any dynamism or risk in the roleplay; mistakes can happen, infact, mistakes are good.

For those reasons, it would be best for your question to go unanswered. I don't mean to flame you, but really, don't be afraid to slip up on an in-character basis. Even if your paladin were to fall as a result of the mistake, nothing would come of it save a new chapter in his story.

Some/most deities reply to their clerics when asked about things such as 'Should I do this?', 'Would it be wrong to do that?'. Spell would be 'Commune', such as seen here: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/commune.htm

So that would be your IC way of finding out. The OOC side to this is that you'd need a DM if you wanted to cast the spell, and that's who you get your answers from! It's not uncommon for paladins/clerics/divine power granted classes to seek information and guidance from others within their Churches.

Thanks Gobble ! I really appreciate that !

Also Bini, I liked your concept, thanks. But perhaps the past history of the faction would be know, like if their actions resulted into a fall of holy leaders such as Gagis or Sharina (assuming they were Good). That would help my toon to learn from the past. However if they did some torture and got no fall because DMs were not informed, well then I don't think it would be fair my toon getting a fall because of the lack of OOC information, but nothing is perfect. Also, I won't comment about names, but I know some LG paladins that did some torture. Probably not oversaw by a DM. So my toon is trying to learn from the experience of people surrounding him.

Basically my toon prefers to get to know first before acting. And that PnP spell could help much and would be fair. I'm not against learning from mistakes/actions always, but that's not my toon's path.

Gobbledygook has teh best suggestion ebber. +1

I think it is also worth noting that a paladin isn't just a holy warrior sponsored by and only mindful of a single deities dogma. They're indoctrinated and beholden to a chivalric code and while the mission or duties a paladin might have differ between deities, they are always lawful good and should always behave in a way that upholds fundamental values such as compassion, courage, and honor.

alamut wrote:

However if they did some torture and got no fall because DMs were not informed, well then I don't think it would be fair my toon getting a fall because of the lack of OOC information, but nothing is perfect. Also, I won't comment about names, but I know some LG paladins that did some torture. Probably not oversaw by a DM.

If other people haven't behaved in a manner characterized by integrity, you should strive to do the opposite.

The game is set in 1381, not 2012. Some things that are frowned upon in modern society might not have been frowned upon 630 years in the past. Is it so hard to believe in realistic actions and consequence based on what era the game is set in?

1381 FR setting not 1381 Terra Firma setting.

As to falls... from my understanding DMs do not share that information with other players than the fallen one except in very, very rare cases... if a player wishes to disclose this, its completely up to them. So, there is no way you'd know if they were fallen or not unless they said something.

Torture is an evil act. As a good aligned cleric (and to an extent, as a Paladin), you are presented by your god with plenty of tools to divine the truth and learn things someone might know without destroying who they are in the process. Torture is not one of them.

As far as Kelemvor goes, he doesn't address it, sure, but you're not a cleric who gets to enjoy the 1-step rule, you're a paladin who has to be both lawful and good. I'm very surprised at the idea of an instance where a paladin tortured someone and didn't get a fall. There are so many other ways, not just lawful, but truly good.

Richard_Edmund wrote:

I fail to see torture as an evil act, it's been used for a very, very long time by so called 'good people' sin the real world, so why should our 'realistic fantasy' environment be any different?

D:

Man, I don't even know where to begin responding to that, but I will say that just because they're touted as good doesn't mean they are. Also, I have to wonder if they still have their divine spells from their good aligned deities? Can they make the most use out of their Holy Avengers?* The world may never know...

*EDIT: Well now that I think about it, the CIA probably has max ranks in Use Magic Device...

That's the point there is no LE or LN paladins. Clerics can play that sick game of using torture or not, because their alignment can go up and down, it's more flexible. Paladins just can't do that. Perhaps Paladins of Kelemvor shouldn't be allowed in certain Orders, such as the EO. Otherwise there would be a Eternal internal fight.

alamut wrote:

That's the point there is no LE or LN paladins. Clerics can play that sick game of using torture or not, because their alignment can go up and down, it's more flexible. Paladins just can't do that. Perhaps Paladins of Kelemvor shouldn't be allowed in certain Orders, such as the EO. Otherwise there would be a Eternal internal fight.

I agree with the above.

If torture was a fall-able act, the Eternal Order should have fallen long ago. Since it wasnt, I am going off the assumption that torture is simply a tool used to discern the truth in a mundane way and is in no way shape or form 'evil'. All it takes is a simple 'No' from Player A and player B can't use PnP spells whatsoever.

Richard_Edmund wrote:

If torture was a fall-able act, the Eternal Order should have fallen long ago. Since it wasnt, I am going off the assumption that torture is simply a tool used to discern the truth in a mundane way and is in no way shape or form 'evil'. All it takes is a simple 'No' from Player A and player B can't use PnP spells whatsoever.

Successful troll is successful.

torture an evil guy = you fall
kill an evil guy = you don't fall

Cerpin Taxt wrote:

torture an evil guy = you fall
kill an evil guy = you don't fall

Killing and evil guy is considered to be (relatively) merciful. Torture on the other hand is making the evil guy suffer emotionally, physically and/or mentally.

If torture is not evil, then I am failing to see a difference between say LE Banites who torture people because of their own religious beliefs and say Kelemvorites who do the same thing but are LG instead. Truth to be told I was always assuming that Amian Kelemvorites (EO) were mainly LE. Even the fear factor is included.

Last edited by Grymia on Mon, Dec 31 2012, 7:20 AM, edited 1 time in total.

The Book of Vile Darkness reads off the following acts as evil aligne:

* Lying
* Cheating
* Theft
* Betrayal
* Murder
* Vengence
* Worshipping Evil gods and Demons
* Animating the Dead or Creating Undead
* Casting Evil Spells
* Damning or Harming Souls *Torture is tangentially covered here*
* Consorting with Fiends
* Creating Evil Creatures
* Using others for personal Gain
* Greed
* Bullying and Cowing innocents
* Bringing Despair
* Tempting Others

Admittedly, this is the the most extreme of evils, from the book which warns that 'Content is intended for Mature Audiences only'. Torture, arguably is covered if you read between the lines of this:

Bullying/Cowing Innocents, bringing despair, Damning/Harming Souls also refers to torture in there.

It is an Evil, Ruddy, @*$% Act.

His Dogma actually is against the premature ending of life , and if someone'd like to quote it I'm pretty sure that Kelemvor says 'No, don't end lives before their freaking time' in more appropriate terminolgy for religion.

So what if the EO torture people? If that is a good enough reason for your Necro to go 'Maybe I shouldnt study dark necromancy..', then they're doing their job properly!

Last edited by Ravenovf on Mon, Dec 31 2012, 7:28 AM, edited 2 times in total.

In every incarnation of D&D torture has been the tool of evil or at the very least very dark neutrals. Not to be confused with intimidation gathering tactics such as, persuasion, trickery, or charm magic to gain information. Its causing someone real physical and emotional pain. At its very best its a grey area with a great many shadows.

As for the EO or Kelemvor's dogma, I've never seen anything anywhere in any cannon lore that states that Torture is encouraged or even accepted as a tool in their quest to eradicate the undead. In PnP most of the EO are paladins devoted to destroying undead. The in PnP the order normally swings closer to Good then other Kelemvorite Sects.

So, you're saying the EO should be like the Banites?

Yeah.

Dead wrote:

If torture is not evil, then I am failing to see a difference between say LE Banites who torture people because of their own religious beliefs and say Kelemvorites who do the same thing but are LG instead. Truth to be told I was always assuming that Amian Kelemvorites (EO) were mainly LE. Even the fear factor is included.

I share your opinion. OOC I have believed EO to be in a very grey area when it comes to what they do. And from IC conversation not many people speak any good of them on both sides of the fence.

Now to put my points into conversation.

Torturing a disciple of a evil aligned god or whatever bad guy you can find. Be it in the name of Kelemvor to ultimately stop evil. I do not see a problem with it. This of course is far from "typical" LG behaviour. Doomguides can supposedly by LE by doing a quick google. I do not have a official book to support it however so if this is not supported by proper lore feel free to correct me

Now, the act of torture is all but nice. I would not see it is a common practice but instead see it as "it must be done for the better". Whatever character who performs such as acts would in my mind have a lot of soul searching to do afterwards and repention.

Then again. Why would Paladins commit torture to begin with? Would they not have lesser concerned people do that for them? In past times in the real world as a reference, executioners and torture specialist where not the most like people. And those who beheaded people wore a mask for a reason.

I thought the point of the EO was to use Kelemvor's dogma and the backdrop of a knightly order to explore a more "grimdark" sort of fantasy, which Forgotten Realms typically doesn't represent. Their amoral zeal seems to have been what made them so popular.

It's also completely incompatible with paladins, which are more on the romantic end of the knightly archetype, rather than the "I want to play Warhammer on Amia" /tongue-in-cheek

serbiris wrote:

I thought the point of the EO was to use Kelemvor's dogma and the backdrop of a knightly order to explore a more "grimdark" sort of fantasy, which Forgotten Realms typically doesn't represent. Their amoral zeal seems to have been what made them so popular.

It's also completely incompatible with paladins, which are more on the romantic end of the knightly archetype, rather than the "I want to play Warhammer on Amia" /tongue-in-cheek

That's fine as long as they have the alignment to represent their RP.

I see where the paladin fits nicely into Kelemvor and the EO, but it isn't really a pretty sight so much as it is the hapless optimist struggling, but always failing to convince his superiors to use more passive means to combat the undead horde! :oops:

Bini wrote:

I see where the paladin fits nicely into Kelemvor and the EO, but it isn't really a pretty sight so much as it is the hapless optimist struggling, but always failing to convince his superiors to use more passive means to combat the undead horde! :oops:

It's rough, when you're playing a paladin.

www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Paladin wrote:

Associates: While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code.

I say Alamut totally made the right move in having his Paladin say "Well I'm outta here." as soon as he found out what they were up to.

Why is this even an OOC discussion?

Everybody will answer according to his own gut feeling about what the setting should be like. I would like to see a dark and ambiguous world, so I would obviously condone torture to some extent. Some others want black-and-white high fantasy, so they'll disagree. There's no unified vision, so it's up to individual players to defend their interpretation through RP and deal with the DMs directly.

Mind that the Amia canon consensus is that paladins can and do work within organizations that also do shady stuff. You can find examples in the Paladins of the Realms articles. They will try to distance themselves from it or discourage it, but they know their loyalty is ultimately to god and church and they won't get in the way of someone legitimately serving the will of the deity. By becoming a paladin you pledge your allegiance to the cause of god and clergy, and it shouldn't come as a surprise that the deity's will is served in many different ways. If you don't acknowledge their legitimacy, however grudgingly, how can you honorably and lawfully pledge yourself to their service? It's not like a paladin expects the entire faith to suddenly conform to his private ideals when he takes his oath. That would be narcissist and naive. That doesn't mean too close an affiliation with questionable people won't get you in trouble, though. The level of involvement and resistance is something you have to decide for yourself, and see how it goes. That said, I mostly agree with CouncilofAutumn's general sentiment, just not as absolutely: paladins have other tools and their role is specific, so they wouldn't be torturing people if they had a choice. Some will absolutely refuse, others will bend under pressure and choose the lesser evil, and still some might do it more readily - but they're treading a fine line.

I will say what I've said a hundred times, though: it's a logical fallacy to assume a certain category of acts to be good or evil a priori. That's because acts don't fall into categories naturally, they're put there. The difference of murder, execution and accidentally causing someone's death is in the minds of the people evaluating the act. The natural laws of the universe don't fix the meaning of words or the extension of categories. The constitution of reality doesn't posit some necessary connection between jadeite and nephrite, but it's human interest and interpretation that labels them both jade. That very obvious logical point is all we need to defend the uniqueness of every particular instance: every case deserves to be evaluated individually, and there's nothing you could say in advance to condemn it. So whatever precedents there may be, whatever rules of thumb, you are always in the position of justifying your unique action in the eyes of the gods, the DMs, and in your own mind. It's as much a responsibility as it is a freedom: you can't hide behind precedents and ideals. You can seem to follow all the rules of good conduct and still do the wrong thing, and it's you who answers for it.

Either way, Alamut: you shouldn't worry too much about what other people think. When in doubt, let DMs know what your character is doing and what his motivations are. Explain it to them and defend your interpretation with your role-playing. Our opinions are really quite irrelevant, because there is (and will be) no simple, policy-like answer established here. You don't need our approval, you only need to convince yourself, the other characters around your character, and possibly the DMs if they take an interest. Nothing I wrote above should affect how your character behaves in any way.

IronAngel wrote:

Why is this even an OOC discussion?

I thought this was funny once I saw the wall of text under it. If you had ended the post here, I'd be like "Yeah, this guy believes what he just said." But I know you like OOC discussion like I like OOC discussion, so... here we go...

IronAngel wrote:

Mind that the Amia canon consensus is that paladins can and do work within organizations that also do shady stuff. You can find examples in the Paladins of the Realms articles. They will try to distance themselves from it or discourage it, but they know their loyalty is ultimately to god and church and they won't get in the way of someone legitimately serving the will of the deity. By becoming a paladin you pledge your allegiance to the cause of god and clergy, and it shouldn't come as a surprise that the deity's will is served in many different ways. If you don't acknowledge their legitimacy, however grudgingly, how can you honorably and lawfully pledge yourself to their service? It's not like a paladin expects the entire faith to suddenly conform to his private ideals when he takes his oath. That would be narcissist and naive. That doesn't mean too close an affiliation with questionable people won't get you in trouble, though. The level of involvement and resistance is something you have to decide for yourself, and see how it goes.

Paladins can and should defy wrongdoing wherever they find it, not just where it's convenient to (or overlook it when it's inconvenient to bring it up, as in the case of their own clergy). Paladins serve the causes of law and good, and if their god makes overtures towards committing evil acts, they should attempt to distance themselves from that god just as they would any mortal being. They worship gods because they believe that said god sets the right example and they want to be like that god. Kelemvor has Paladins, in my opinion, because there are aspects of Kelemvor's faith that are quite congruous with a Paladin's code, but there's no way a Paladin should just pretend it didn't happen that way if the Kelemvorite faithful tell them they have to torture someone to get information. The Paladin should be the first person in the room saying "I don't think this is noble or just, and there has to be another way."

You literally said "but they know their loyalty is ultimately to god and church and they won't get in the way of someone legitimately serving the will of the deity". I'm quoting this for later. This is absolutely not true. Even if a paladin gets their spells from a god, if another follower of that god convinces them to look the other way when an evil act is performed in their presence, that they could have done something about, they are done. It's not about whether the god gives you your power at that point, it's that the game system itself says you have two masters, and you have to appease both of them to have any Paladin powers whatsoever. The moment you condone an evil act for any reason, regardless of justification, you're fallen until you properly atone. It doesn't matter if your god asked you to do it or not.

People think playing Paladins is rough because it's heavily restrictive. I think they're fantastic for that exact same reason - they represent an unswerving idealism that's necessary in a grim, dark world full of greys. It's more difficult, more rewarding, and sometimes even ends up with situations where you realize you're going to have to do something impossible and no one else is going to back you on it. Extremely high levels of role play, that, and something to aspire to. Which is the point of the class - to set an amazingly high standard.

IronAngel wrote:

I will say what I've said a hundred times, though: it's a logical fallacy to assume a certain category of acts to be good or evil a priori. That's because acts don't fall into categories naturally, they're put there. The difference of murder, execution and accidentally causing someone's death is in the minds of the people evaluating the act. The natural laws of the universe don't fix the meaning of words or the extension of categories. The constitution of reality doesn't posit some necessary connection between jadeite and nephrite, but it's human interest and interpretation that labels them both jade. That very obvious logical point is all we need to defend the uniqueness of every particular instance: every case deserves to be evaluated individually, and there's nothing you could say in advance to condemn it. So whatever precedents there may be, whatever rules of thumb, you are always in the position of justifying your unique action in the eyes of the gods, the DMs, and in your own mind. It's as much a responsibility as it is a freedom: you can't hide behind precedents and ideals. You can seem to follow all the rules of good conduct and still do the wrong thing, and it's you who answers for it.

This isn't really saying a whole lot of anything, other than a strawman to defeat the argument that Paladins who don't actually do evil acts shouldn't be fallen. Only nobody was arguing against that... so...

Unless you're saying that there's no clear definition for what constitutes an evil act, thereby providing carte blanche for deities to decide what qualifies as an evil act as far as their paladins are concerned? That's just silly. Kelemvorite, Lathandrite, Tyrran or Garl Glittergold-ish, if you force yourself on someone without their consent (or on a child who will be scarred emotionally by the experience and couldn't have given meaningful consent anyway), you're Fallen.

It doesn't matter what the laws are where you live, it doesn't matter if nobody's looking, it doesn't matter if all your bros said you should like, totally do it, man. You're done. And that's just one example. If you murder someone for your own gain (big or small), you're done. If you lie to a commoner about whether or not you paid for a scone. Done. If you cheat at a card game. Done. If you look the other way when someone genuinely needs your help. Done.

A good person could stay good and still do a few of these things (especially the little lies and the cheating, other minor evils, etc). But they aren't gaining the benefits of being a Paladin. And they aren't representing what a Paladin represents. Unswerving, unflinching, humble and pure loyalty to Law and Good. Evil isn't always the monster you fight. 99% of the time it's the little choices you make that build up over time and bury you in bad karma. Paladins refuse to make the tally.

IronAngel wrote:

Nothing I wrote above should affect how your character behaves in any way.

You just wrote an entire block o' text asking him to consider all of it. Haha. Of course it has the potential to affect how his character acts. You're attempting to change his mind on how his character should act (which is just fine!). I'm just saying this is a little silly.

What I mean by the part about categories is primarily this: general claims such as "murder is evil" or "lying is evil" don't concern anything in the real world. Everything that happens is just meaningless movement of subatomic particles. Something is given moral value only once it's defined and put into words. This is pretty undeniable, right? Further, how you define a single "act" is pretty arbitrary. Every act is made up of smaller acts, right down to movements ofthe most miniscule particles, right? So ultimately, the choice of which act to evaluate is one of perspective. Is the act to be evaluated the swinging of your arm, the intentional hitting of someone with a sword, the killing of them, or the killing a person to stop a devastating war? Surely they can all be acts. And it's also agreed that the sum of your smaller acts can be Good or Evil despite the Good, Evil, or indifferent aspects that make up the larger act. So it's always up to individual judgement how to deal with a specific case.

What that means for us is that I can simply say "You don't know that" if you try to prematurely apply judgement based on some rule of thumb. Ultimately, it justifies the good DM practice of making no categorical statements beforehand, but rather looking at each case in its unique context and evaluating all the factors.

I want to influence your opinions on what is acceptable on Amia, what is true and reasonable in the setting, and how you should OOCly react to other people playing things different than you do. I do not want to affect how Alamut's PC acts (though presumably, there is some connection between his opinions and his PC's behaviour). The concept of metagaming presupposes such a distinction, so I didn't think it would be contested.

Eh, this is a messy post and I'm in the middle of something else, sorry!

I like Dark Fantasy.
I've also had a character whom was tortured by members of the EO. And really enjoyed it. And would go along with it again despite my views.

But I can't help that feel that in this realm and the Alignment settings the game is based upon and the degree in which a Paladin is held to the highest levels of sworn vows I think torture should be classified as evil.

If a Paladin can torture for the "Greater Good", Whats to stop him from Summoning Undead for the "Greater Good". Where is the Line? If both Good and Evil use the same methods, who is good and who is evil?

Surely torture is crossing the line it and would warrant a fall in Traditional D&D settings.

I don't think paladins can torture and get away with it. I think there is no answer to that question. There are only answers about specific paladins and specific instances. There is no line to cross. The line is drawn separately for every decision or every paladin. The paladin's conviction is not an abstraction, and neither are the real, visceral situations he finds himself in. Without more information on specifics, I couldn't make an educated answer. There's no comprehensible alternative, the common idea is just a misunderstanding.

tl;dr: It's not up to your or me to decide here, OOC, what's acceptable and what's not.

When the DM team deliberated on the conflict between Core D&D Paladins and Forgotten Realms, due to which problems might arise between allegiance to deity and duty to alignment, it was pretty much agreed that loyalty to deity is at least as important, if not moreso. FR trumps generic lore, after all. That's the premiss upon which the Amiacanon Paladins of the Realms articles have been written. You can play a paladin more concerned with alignment than god, but the opposite is possible (and in my opinion, more true to the setting). That's not under question, the lore clearly cites examples of paladins tolerating necromancy or evil clerics insofar as loyalty to church demands it. It was the DM decision to end that debate for good, first made years ago when the articles were written and reviewed and again recently, when they were posted into R&L. What you want to do with that information in your RP is another matter, of course. Paladins may and do disagree IC, but the OOC acceptability of such an interpretation shouldn't be in question anymore.

I think it's fruitful to recognize this fundamental conflict of loyalties and the fact the paladin class is not a good, consistent concept. Many game designers and authors over the years have added their ideas to the cluster, and you won't find a single, coherent interpretation. It's probably the most frequently debated issue in D&D. That's why we should acknowledge the legitimacy of different views. Because it's dead obvious none of us can defend our preference flawlessly. If we could, everyone would have been convinced years ago and there would be no disagreement.

Take the fact that some paladins have acted contrary to your PC's convictions and not Fallen as an opportunity to explore faith and duty and to stir up conflict, not as an OOC burden to "make sense" of. Because I can assure you, between the dozens of DMs and scores of players to deal with paladins in Amia's history, you will not find a consistent answer.

Below are the Paladin Codes that directly affect alamut's character, though they say nothing -directly- about torture they do say to do things that would be counter to torture torture

Amian Paladin Code wrote:

I. Devote yourself to life. If there is anyway to prevent death and preserve life, it is the way of the Paladin.
II. Judge not others. By Judging others, you yourself will be judged.
III. Honor your words and live by them. Your Oath is as true as these laws.
IV. Help others live a full life, and harm not the harmless.
V. Help those in misfortune, for gold is valueless next to life.
VI. Heal the sick and wounded who ask for assistance. Those whom you have deathlessly defeated remain your responsibility.
VII. Abandon all greed, hatred, and evil feelings towards others. These close the mind to truth and engender a hatred for life.
VIII. Pay homage to life by living freely and allowing others to do the same.
IX. Respect those who would teach you and ask nothing of those you teach.
X. Respect the laws of mortals, but remember always your fealty is to the laws of your faith.
XI. Pledge your life, soul, and word to your faith. Never should you worship another and never should your faith falter.
XII. Not pride, humility. Not greed, generosity. Not envy, Love. Not wrath, kindness. Not lust, temperance. Not gluttony, moderation. Not sloth, zeal. Never evil, always good. Bring light to the darkness and you shall always be counted among your faith's blessed.
XIII. Wear the symbol of your faith with honor love and devotion. Never rape, steal or murder.
XIV. Take only what you need, give only what you can.
XV. The undead deserve only their rest. Destroy them without hesitation.

Scriptum Eternus Candela wrote:

Kelemvor's Paladin Code
I. Devote yourself to life and death, and help others die with dignity at their appointed time and no sooner.
II. Speak only the truth and honor your words and live by them. Your utterings are to be always true.
III. You are to only act as an agent of lord Kelemvor and enforce his laws, not those of another faith or mortal law.
IV. Respect the laws of mortals, but remember always that your fealty is to the laws of your Faith.
V. Pledge your life, soul and word to the Lord. Never should you worship another and never should your faith falter.
VI. Not pride but humility. Not greed but generosity. Not envy but love. Not lust but temperance. Not gluttony but moderation. Not sloth but zeal. Not tyranny but justice.
VII. Be a candle of light in the darkness and show others the glory of the lord.
VIII. Always wear the symbol of your faith, and do so with honor, love and devotion, for you are a servant of the Lord, and your acts reflect upon the Church and His Glory.
IX. The Undead deserve only their rest. Destroy them without hesitation, and punish those who would dare to create them.
X. Protect the innocents from those who would spread false teachings or devote themselves to the arts of heresy and blasphemy.

Various Dogmas of Kelemvor that are supported by the Eternal Order:

Quote:

-------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Dogma of the Church of Kelemvor, Tower of Skulls
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Recognize that death is part of life. It is not an ending but a beginning, not a punishment but a necessity. Death is an orderly process without deceit, concealment, and randomness. Help others die with dignity at their appointed time and no sooner. Speak against those that would artificially prolong their life beyond natural limits, such as the undead. Do honor to the dead, for their strivings in life brought Faerûn to where it is now. Forgetting them is to forget where we are now, and why. Let no human in all Faerûn die a natural death without one of Kelemvor's clerics at her side.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. The Sacred Order of Saint Elizabeth, Chapter of the Eternal Order
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Recognize that death is part of life. It is not an ending but a beginning, not a punishment but a necessity. Death is an orderly process without deceit, concealment, and randomness. Protect others, so that they may die with dignity at their appointed time and no sooner. Honor the dead. Recognize that the flood of corruption will not seize without the actions of the righteous. The lord will welcome the souls of the truly faithful, but before your end of days, the jealous Legions of the Night will seek to drag down his chosen people. To protect Kelemvor's innocent flock from the Legions of the Night - be they monster or mere tempster - they must be ruthlessly destroyed by example of St. Elizabeth.

Last edited by Guardian on Mon, Dec 31 2012, 13:08 PM, edited 1 time in total.

This thread has to be a hidden joke of some kind.

Because frankly I do not believe we are seriously debating if paladins are allowed to torture someone and if torturing someone is an evil act. If we are, then something is very, very wrong.

NinjaClarinet wrote:

Richard_Edmund wrote:

I fail to see torture as an evil act

This is why the world sucks.

You've nailed it here, Ninja.

Is there seriously a discussion on my character regarding what alignment she should have had because her involvment with torture? A character who has been dead for over two years? We have numerous DMs look over our shoulder back in the day. There was a context of story, and not everything revolved around torture or burning people. The EO back then was very different from that post-mortum-Sharina. I can not help but feel this discussion is somewhat idiotic, as it approaches what was very cool roleplay over several years in an ooc manner by players who were not involved in it. So please, deal with it ic, and have your character attempt to understand it through rp instead of a forum discussion.

To give a few pointers, if you choose to look for an ic awnser, explore the lore of what Kelemvor does to faithless and false. It might give you a few pointers on why Kelemvor might not be so hard on his faithful using torture. If your character wants to learn why Gagis and Sharina seem to have never fallen, look into what their involvment with the practice actually was, and look into why they are heros of their faith to those who they worked with and the majority of those who came after. You can try to uncover actual cases where torture was allegedly used and try to find out who allegedly practiced such.

There are still many characters who were around in those times, whom you can ask about. There are also many rumors circulating that might be not too close to the truth. Look into what the context of culture was at the time, as it is unlikely the extremes of the order formed in a vacuum. You can look into why the church allegedly had jergalites burned, or the time they allegedly tortured a paladin.

IC is the route you should take, not what people who joined 2009+ think ooc. This can be great rp for you, do not waste the chance with a silly forum discussion instead. If your character feels his faith has become corrupt, then perhaps he should investigate, and you have to live with the consequences of your characters decision. It is entirely possible others of the faith might not wish you to digging around or dragging the names of prestigious characters through the dirt. But disturb some dead people and dig around in the dark history of the chapter. Perhaps *gasp* it is like with the Ilmaterites, who have a branch of their faith who are extremists and evil, and who actually gain their powers unknowingly from Cyric! Is Gagis not a celestial but a disguised demon perhaps? Who knows?

Oh, and perhaps look into what the EO did to 'turncoats' in the past before you go digging around. :wink:

Perhaps using the past of the order as an example was silly. I've been trying to rebuild the history, but doing the lack of posts or old members hanging around kind of make it a bit hard, but you absolutely have the point. That's something I'll try, along with others, to improve it properly.

However the main question here, that was promptly answered by others directly or indirectly, was: can paladins use of torture ? Apologize if I gave the idea I was poking the past actions of the Order. Because I didn't mean to and you know I'm trying my best to raise it back.

Also, IMHO, if you're going to use RP allowed torture on someone, please take some photos or check first if there is a DM around to oversee your actions. Because if a paladin that use IC torture and don't get anything close to a fall, that would affect the concept of others regarding the deity. "Well if my fellow brother didn't get the consequences of that action, that means Kelemvor granted it?" So my paladin could get crazy and probably a fall because he would lost his mind. It wouldn't be a burden to RP that, kind of like it. However, the other one would walk away intact and probably would continue on doing that (like a kid that was not properly educated ) until someone "bust" him (like the life teaching us by the worst manner). Again this is just an example.

It's completely understandable DMs wouldn't post here. It's a matter of RP and it has been said that to me about my posts regarding paladins of Kelemvor I made in the past. But I would like just an answer regarding this question for the future RPs:

Is that ok if a victim of a conceded torture take a photos of the RP and post it to a DM, for the sake of the RP only, so the DM could apply the proper punishment if there is one? But of course he wouldn't have to answer the victim's post about the matter.

Well feel free (DMs) to answer that of not before locking the post. The food for thought will remain, though. It has served his purpose (in my case, but I hope to others too). I thank you all.

I would like to point out that the Eternal Order is just a faction of Kelemvor. They do not represent all Kelemvorites. My LG cleric remains in the EO (barely, they almost got kicked out but only because they spoke out against torture and it was not taken well by the leaders, heh). The RP was interesting, edge-of-the-seat and I enjoyed it.

I would also like to point out that just because the DM's/diety doesn't give a fall widget doesn't mean you have to assume that the charcter is totally accepted by the diety.

There are other reasons for the character to not get the fall widget.
* Maybe the diety wants them to figure out that torture is not the answer on their own
* Maybe the diety is planning a comeuppance
* Maybe the diety wants your character to lead by example
* Maybe no DM was around to witness and so can't very well give the fall
* And my favorite, maybe the character is not getting power from the diety you think they are, bwaa ha ha!

So what it comes down to for me is this:

1. I send off a PM about the incident witnessed by my character.
2. I come up with a plausable reason my character can accept.
3. My character does what they think is appropriate, no matter if the Pally/Cleric gets a fall or not.

Hope this helped a little, Alamut. Your Kelly is great and can lead by example.

A paladin is a PALADIN is a PALADIN. LG is is still LG at the end of the day no matter what god you worship and the EO is an order comprised mostly of Paladins. If any order of Kelemvor should be opposed to physical torture it would be the EO. You can like your dark fantasy and Grimdark chars all you like but no matter how you cut it Lawful Good is Lawful GOOD that is the rules if you don't like it then fall from grace or stand by your principles like a real hero.

I really hoped I would not have to make this post, because it degrades the ic. But I did expect it to come to this, given the nature of the topic. I did not witness one paladin of the eo torture in all my time. This is why I stated I find players who know not what their talking about pretend they do idiotic. This EO is also a branch that has become very differnt from the rest through a long time of ic developments, so again you do not know what you are talking about.

I would like a dm to lock this topic, as this is like meta gaming. Find out the stuff ic, and respond ic. If you do not know the truth because a faction may have been slandered or prefers to remain mysterious, don't ruin it with the ooc.

I didn't bother reading anything beyond the first post because this is the only one that matters (and because this discussion has come up countless times):

Torture is evil. Paladins are paragons of good. If you torture people you're going to be hit with a fall.
There aren't LN/LE paladins, and Kelemvor (and other gods that allow evil worshippers) grant paladins their powers on the same general principal: paladins are paragons of good and will further the gods aims in a goodly fashion.

If you have tortured with your paladin, Allamut, you should ask a DM next time you see one to give you a fall.

This is D&D, not real life. There are no shades of grey.

That's all folks!

I'm tired, but I have to post it

Who is online