|
|
|
Dwagin
|
 Posted: Fri, Aug 06 2010, 15:24 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Location: The Land of Nod
|
Level is a constraint in what your character is capable of. It is NOT a constraint on roleplay. Your character can say, or act however he wants (OOC and IC rules/laws withstanding). You can not say your character did something it is incapable of or requires DM permission however. Thus level is a constraint on a wizard wanting to cast rank 9 spells, a bard's performance. A rogue cracking an epic trap etc, so on, so forth. Quote: I'm saying that roleplay between 3's and 30's is dictated by level in some cases. It's been said on this thread in reply to my own posts that some players will actually avoid RPing if possible, with lower levels, because of how lower levels are played. It dictates the power level difference and consequences of that in some ways.. if the level 30 decides to flex because the level 3 is out of line.. RP Happens. Conesquences not 'constraints'. Sorry if you don't like that answer, that is the reality of the situation. Quote: I am saying that a low level character, on the opinion of some people who have replied to my posts on this thread, does not deserve the same credibility as a high level character - regardless of roleplay including background. Depends on what you wish the credibility to be, explain more. There's a ECL4 PC, whose death would devastate one of my ECL30's.
_________________
Dwagin [Duh-wa-GIN] N. - 1a. Small and cute thingum, particularly fond of four legged scaled creatures of the metalic and chromatic varieties.
-Extraordinarily ordinary in the mostest of ways.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Colapops
|
Posted: Fri, Aug 06 2010, 15:25 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Feb 2008
Location: Keep your distance.
|
|
Roleplaying is dumb. Kill all nerds.
_________________ The origin of storms.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Uberuce
|
Posted: Fri, Aug 06 2010, 17:02 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Location: Near the bar.
|
Goblin wrote: It's been said on this thread in reply to my own posts that some players will actually avoid RPing if possible, with lower levels, because of how lower levels are played. Is that in reference to me? If so, it might be an idea to bear in mind that in forum debates, what the other person said is still written in their posts, and when you make something up that is more convenient to your argument and then claim they said it, the rest of the people reading will see this. Quote: I am saying that level is not a constraint on roleplay - until level becomes a constraint on roleplay through PVP. Level is a constraint on the plausibility of any roleplay that is based on your character's ability to accomplish physical or magical tasks. It doesn't become a constraint through PvP; that is merely one of the three ways that demonstrates this fact, the other two being PvM and PvDungeonMaster. If your character cannot do a thing, and his or her roleplay/backstory says he or she can, then the fault lies with the story and roleplay.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logicality
|
Posted: Fri, Aug 06 2010, 17:19 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Location: The Otherworld
|
|
Player characters can and should act however their player feels they would act. This applies at level 3 and level 30, and it's not bad roleplay for a level 30 character to end a level 3 nuisance.
However, on that note, I have seen characters that have waited until high levels to be utter douchebags. That's unfortunate. The players of these characters typically aren't cognitively gifted, however, and it's fairly easy to trick them if you're clever enough. One of my best roleplay experiences came from tricking a lame necromancer that killed my party members into allowing me to give them a proper burial.
_________________
"A somebody was once a nobody who wanted to and did." - Anonymous
|
|
|
|
|
|
Glyph
|
Posted: Fri, Aug 06 2010, 17:30 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 10 Jun 2010
|
|
well, upon more pvp at least i've learned how to RP being a low level bad ass, don't stay down XD.
you can GR me all you like but that doesn't mean I -have- to give in to your dark wishes. or remain dead unless specified that I am utterly pwnt.
shame I should still run in most cases, the tables will turn soon enough, and force isn't my only trick.
(my main issue is not being given time to type something RPly such as *cuts rope* before they decide to kill you and specify your dead, thats not RP thats just ganking. grapple is a good idea =) i'm trying to re-learn all the counter rolls and such, time to get back into the pnp side of things.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ego680
|
Posted: Fri, Aug 06 2010, 21:23 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Jul 2008
Location: Flying Battery Zone
|
Dwagin wrote:
.. if the level 30 decides to flex because the level 3 is out of line.. RP Happens.
What?! So as an epic level character, if I decide I don't agree with something a lower level character said, I am allowed to murder him? That's preposterous. The root of the problem is twofold: 1) People don't want to lose. Why should the epic level mage make a counter roll to a Lowbie's grapple (that he could very well fail) when he can simply hostile and toss out a hellball instead? That is not good RP, and it's not justifiable RP, it's simply an unwillingness to lose a scenario. 2) People do not take death anywhere near seriously enough IC. Just because somebody can be raised does not mean the experience isn't traumatic and horrifying. Basically when a lowbie says something you don't like Don't: Murder him for no reason other than you didn't like his tone. Do: Rough him up a bit, noboby said you couldn't beat him senseless, but the line between a bar fight and murder is a -very- large one. basically my point is, don't think that because you're an epic level you have the god given right to kill anyone of a lower level who you disagree with in game. It happens to often, it's never rewarding, and IT'S NOT GOOD RP!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dwagin
|
Posted: Fri, Aug 06 2010, 22:32 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Location: The Land of Nod
|
Ego680 wrote: Dwagin wrote:
.. if the level 30 decides to flex because the level 3 is out of line.. RP Happens.
What?! So as an epic level character, if I decide I don't agree with something a lower level character said, I am allowed to murder him? That's preposterous. The root of the problem is twofold: 1) People don't want to lose. Why should the epic level mage make a counter roll to a Lowbie's grapple (that he could very well fail) when he can simply hostile and toss out a hellball instead? That is not good RP, and it's not justifiable RP, it's simply an unwillingness to lose a scenario. 2) People do not take death anywhere near seriously enough IC. Just because somebody can be raised does not mean the experience isn't traumatic and horrifying. Basically when a lowbie says something you don't like Don't: Murder him for no reason other than you didn't like his tone. Do: Rough him up a bit, noboby said you couldn't beat him senseless, but the line between a bar fight and murder is a -very- large one. basically my point is, don't think that because you're an epic level you have the god given right to kill anyone of a lower level who you disagree with in game. It happens to often, it's never rewarding, and IT'S NOT GOOD RP! You have to hit with a touch attack before you attempt a grapple, and it provokes an AoO which if it hits (A mage very well may hit a lowbie with a staff swat depending how meek they are) the grapple attempt fails. I remove lowbie and epic from the considerations. Because its completely irrelevant to reactions... And, there are PC's that will murder for insults just like what happens IRL even today. Duels were done over insults. I have several characters which don't care or would just insult back. I don't care about anything that is said/done IC, OOCly. Its not me disliking what went on, it's my PC. Example: A guy ticks Rras-rarri off by calling him an insult. He is given an IC out (Usually a shut up, or take it back, apologize, or give me a gem/coin something to show you're sorry.. or given a chance to run away. ) If they don't take it. He will likely smash, claw, or otherwise maim, and possibly kill, and continue rending after death, depending how serious the insult was. Example 2: Ry'll, my elf. He's more likely to just engage in banter back and forth, insulting, if it comes to violence from the other guy? So be it. But usually regardless of level he will chew back and forth, and usually not hurt someone, unless its a threat against elven-kind, or a known evil race. Quote: 2) People do not take death anywhere near seriously enough IC. Just because somebody can be raised does not mean the experience isn't traumatic and horrifying. I would say its more to deal with feeling pain.
_________________
Dwagin [Duh-wa-GIN] N. - 1a. Small and cute thingum, particularly fond of four legged scaled creatures of the metalic and chromatic varieties.
-Extraordinarily ordinary in the mostest of ways.
|
|
|
|
|
|
BrainSplitter
|
Posted: Fri, Aug 06 2010, 23:40 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Apr 2005
Location: Victoria, Australia
|
Ego680 wrote: Basically when a lowbie says something you don't like Don't: Murder him for no reason other than you didn't like his tone. Do: Rough him up a bit, noboby said you couldn't beat him senseless, but the line between a bar fight and murder is a -very- large one.
basically my point is, don't think that because you're an epic level you have the god given right to kill anyone of a lower level who you disagree with in game. It happens to often, it's never rewarding, and IT'S NOT GOOD RP! Metagaming is bad, M'kay? The definition of Metagaming is rationalizing a character's actions not off of its own in character behaviours, knowledge, or personality; but by out of character player considerations. How a character reacts in their severity is just as much puerly in character, legitimate, and full roleplay as the other character who fails to take the escape route, decides to be tough, determined, and-or reckless. If anyone mouths off to an either extremely evil creature (Lolthite Drow), or an extremely violent creature (Chromatic Dragon Disciples), irrespective of level, you can't honestly expect them to alter their reply based soley on OOC Constraints. If a character (because the player is not the character) decides to antagonize Earylduil (the character), for example, irrespective of whether Earylduil thinks (and thus the thoughts appropriate for that individual character) he can beat them or not - he'll likely give them one chance to quieten, or leave, as that's the sort of overly violent, and impatient character he is. The Character is not the Player, and beyond what is covered in the rules, everyone should be striving to remain completely in character. There are many people in the world who are violent by nature, it's simply that in a high magic setting like Forgotten Realms and Amia, it's not only a higher density; but easier to justify by a culprit. Whether due to race, deity, alignment, history or 'right'. This is the same world where every character above level 15 has most likely killed more than a few bandits that they could have easily avoided. Murder, while unpleasant, isn't as excessively taboo as it is in the real world - because it's a common occurance in lands where there are strange absolutes that can be called upon to justify the action.
_________________
Mostly Retired
|
|
|
|
|
|
davis114
|
Posted: Fri, Aug 06 2010, 23:51 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Dec 2007
|
|
Lowbie saunters up to Sunny and mouths off.
Sunny mouths off back, they part ways, everything's peachy.
Lowbie saunters up to Crunch and mouths off.
Lowbie dies. Violently.
Endstory.
_________________  MoshingChris wrote: Dude makes like a drunk even when he's sober.
|
|
|
|
|
|
ainjyll
|
Posted: Fri, Aug 06 2010, 23:56 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Location: wilmington, nc
|
Ego680 wrote: What?! So as an epic level character, if I decide I don't agree with something a lower level character said, I am allowed to murder him? That's preposterous. The root of the problem is twofold: 1) People don't want to lose. Why should the epic level mage make a counter roll to a Lowbie's grapple (that he could very well fail) when he can simply hostile and toss out a hellball instead? That is not good RP, and it's not justifiable RP, it's simply an unwillingness to lose a scenario.
2) People do not take death anywhere near seriously enough IC. Just because somebody can be raised does not mean the experience isn't traumatic and horrifying.
Basically when a lowbie says something you don't like Don't: Murder him for no reason other than you didn't like his tone. Do: Rough him up a bit, noboby said you couldn't beat him senseless, but the line between a bar fight and murder is a -very- large one.
basically my point is, don't think that because you're an epic level you have the god given right to kill anyone of a lower level who you disagree with in game. It happens to often, it's never rewarding, and IT'S NOT GOOD RP! Every single day of existence of this planet, human beings lose their lives because they said something that someone else didn't like. Humans kill people for stupid things and even though we're RP'ing different races, we're all still human at the core and react accordingly. You say that people don't want to lose. Well, I agree. But complaining about what the big bad epic did to your innocent level 3 sounds awfully like a person who didn't like the outcome and the fact that they "lost". You also say that people don't take death seriously enough. Yet another fact I agree with... completely, wholeheartedly and without constraint. If people did, then this whole discussion wouldn't have to happen. The 3 who's either too mouthy or doesn't take the OOC out given to them would either not be as mouthy or would take the out. All the senseless PvP that occurs over minor insults would probably be non-existent, the insults swept under the rug and forgotten. Yet, it is a sad fact that the majority of people will refuse to accept the viability of negative impacts upon their character unless they're forced and that just isn't really an option on a server this large and diverse. I do like the idea that I've seen implemented on other servers where you are given an option at character creation to give your character X lives. Period. Once those lives are up, the character is dead. In exchange for the limit on lives, the character gets a boost to XP. If these lives counted towards PvP as well as PvE, then I think we'd see a lot less senseless PvP, people would think.... "Damn.... I died 7 times so far with this character. That means I have 3 lives left.... is this really worth possibly losing another life over?" (Assuming 10 lives total for the option in that particular example.) It is, of course, an option and not forced and perhaps DC's could be spent on extra lives and DM's could credit back lives if it was shown that PvP rules were broken. _________________  "I once took the high road and it took me straight to hell and I stood there all by myself." -Hank III
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logicality
|
Posted: Sat, Aug 07 2010, 1:08 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Location: The Otherworld
|
|
That would be great if it weren't already pretty easy to level on Amia.
I saw that implemented on Arelith and I thought, "Hey, cool", but then immediately wondered whether one loses a life upon dying or upon respawning. It's an important difference.
_________________
"A somebody was once a nobody who wanted to and did." - Anonymous
|
|
|
|
|
|
Glyph
|
Posted: Sat, Aug 07 2010, 1:15 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 10 Jun 2010
|
|
the problem with roughing them up is you end up instant killing them, especially dev critters they kill (nearly) anything. also you ain't surviving any sort of mage at lower levels unless they stand still and pity you. I don't particularly like the alternative either (emoting the battle >_>) so I guess think about why you'd go for -them- and if you are justified in doing so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
ainjyll
|
Posted: Sat, Aug 07 2010, 1:28 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Location: wilmington, nc
|
Glyph wrote: the problem with roughing them up is you end up instant killing them, especially dev critters they kill (nearly) anything. also you ain't surviving any sort of mage at lower levels unless they stand still and pity you. I don't particularly like the alternative either (emoting the battle >_>) so I guess think about why you'd go for -them- and if you are justified in doing so. Winner declares whether it's a kill or a knock out. So, just because the dice fire off a Dev Crit on you doesn't mean that you're dead. You have to wait to see what the one that Dev'd you says. Mechanically speaking, yes, you're dead. IC'ly speaking, you're not til they say you are. _________________ "I once took the high road and it took me straight to hell and I stood there all by myself." -Hank III
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ego680
|
Posted: Sat, Aug 07 2010, 3:17 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Jul 2008
Location: Flying Battery Zone
|
BrainSplitter wrote:
Metagaming is bad, M'kay?
I never said you should metagame, and I do understand that there are in fact characters that would kill you for speaking out of turn, that's completely acceptable -if- it's consistent with how the character acts the rest of the time. I think the example of the "Evil uncaring badguy" isn't an accurate portrayal of what actually happens. I see paladins and other "goodly types" violate this all the damn time. Sure they rationalize it later with "he must have been evil" or what have you, but I have a hard time buying one of these people committing random acts of murder because they disapprove of a conversation. Also as far as a roughing up goes, nobody said you couldn't go the dice roll route.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TormakSaber
|
Posted: Sat, Aug 07 2010, 6:56 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere
|
Logicality wrote: That would be great if it weren't already pretty easy to level on Amia.
I saw that implemented on Arelith and I thought, "Hey, cool", but then immediately wondered whether one loses a life upon dying or upon respawning. It's an important difference. Upon death. Any death. Any death whatsoever for any reason at all.
_________________
Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds
Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jyro X
|
Posted: Sat, Aug 07 2010, 10:00 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 04 Dec 2009
Location: North Carolina (EST/GMT -5)
|
Logicality wrote: That would be great if it weren't already pretty easy to level on Amia. It would be great if this was an actual fact and not some opinion subject to relativity. I've been on Amia since December of last year and I have one max level character, and I worked hard to get him to that status. Much harder than I actually would have liked to work. You could call that laziness. I call it difficulty. It's easier, in my opinion, to level in the OC's. And that's what I base leveling difficulty off of. I haven't played on a ton of RP or "hardcore" servers and to be honest, I have no interest in it if it's anymore difficult than Amia's module that is balanced around power-builders and power-gamers. My point is simply this: What you call easy, while a lot of people might agree with you, some won't. And it's demeaning to those who don't (namely, me). You can call me sensitive or what-have-you, but I don't appreciate, personally, the elitist attitude towards leveling and character-building that this server has and to be honest, it has given me a very bad stigma about even logging on or trying to level a character now. Sorry to dive off-topic and rant, but that kinda struck a nerve. And nothing against you personally Logicality. It's just a sentiment I've seen repeatedly and it's like nails on a chalkboard in my head. _________________  
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stormsorrow
|
Posted: Sat, Aug 07 2010, 11:01 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 25 Jul 2010
|
Jyro X wrote: Logicality wrote: That would be great if it weren't already pretty easy to level on Amia. It would be great if this was an actual fact and not some opinion subject to relativity. I've been on Amia since December of last year and I have one max level character, and I worked hard to get him to that status. Much harder than I actually would have liked to work. You could call that laziness. I call it difficulty. It's easier, in my opinion, to level in the OC's. And that's what I base leveling difficulty off of. I haven't played on a ton of RP or "hardcore" servers and to be honest, I have no interest in it if it's anymore difficult than Amia's module that is balanced around power-builders and power-gamers. My point is simply this: What you call easy, while a lot of people might agree with you, some won't. And it's demeaning to those who don't (namely, me). You can call me sensitive or what-have-you, but I don't appreciate, personally, the elitist attitude towards leveling and character-building that this server has and to be honest, it has given me a very bad stigma about even logging on or trying to level a character now. Sorry to dive off-topic and rant, but that kinda struck a nerve. And nothing against you personally Logicality. It's just a sentiment I've seen repeatedly and it's like nails on a chalkboard in my head. I know that this post wasn't to me, but I've been coming and going for a few years now. My login has changed yes, but that's to keep my friends from Local Vault bugging me consistently when I don't want to be bothered. I've gotten to level 10 within a week and that's with RPing. I remember when Amia didn't have A and B, when the job system wasn't there, and when the Book of Transmutation wasn't there. It was a lot harder back then. To some it's easy, to some it's hard. Nowdays I have a level 22 I'm proud of and I've actually been refusing to party with hunting so much because I want to enjoy how all my character's personalities develop. I don't feel that Amia's balanced on power-builds or power-gamers. Local Vaults are. I've stated it a few times, everyone in Local Vault is 99% of the time level 40 with 120+ AC, 50/- Resistances, 100+ spell slots, SR monks, Dev Crit that always hits, 30-40 minimum saves, not to mention Spell DC's don't matter cause of the high saves and you're waiting literally 2 minutes minimum unless your lucky for your opponent to roll a 1. Amia is a breath of fresh air from the constant strain. I don't have to worry about PvP builds so much being the fact that Difficulty Class matters here. Even at 30 epic. Traditionally through table top campaign settings, you're lucky to even get to epic being that it could take weeks or months depending on how often you have sessions and how long they are. I feel that Amia's pretty balanced in that aspect which I enjoy that. It's not easy or hard for me. It's the game itself. I find challenges everywhere. Even at epic level 40's and those that actually don't cap at level 40 in PnP, there are always challenges. For instance if you're playing a level 35 epic cleric in a tabletop session and you're playing a campaign where Atropus (Planet Born Dead, End of all Campaigns) shows up, you're generally screwed if you can't beat the Aspect of Atropus which I'd quote everything, but my post is already like a book, so here's a link. Click me!Basically it's called the Planet Born Dead because the signs of it coming, undead spawns are more and more frequent until the entire planet is filled with undead. Before Atropus engulfs the planet/plane it sends down it's Aspect. It has True Seeing at will, it has epic feats, and it can pretty much take a chunk out of your 400 max HP with items along with undead beating you down at the same time as it's summons. Yeah, it's not in Amia, but I don't see anything in Amia as easy or hard. I find it both at times. It's all how you really look at it. Yes I've played a campaign where there was Atropus, and no. We didn't win.  Edit: Even though the link of the Open Source says the whole site is 4.0 based, Atropus comes from Elder Evils 3E. I have the book myself. _________________ Created by Jadyn
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yossarin
|
Posted: Sat, Aug 07 2010, 14:44 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 23 Jan 2006
|
Ego680 wrote: Don't: Murder him for no reason other than you didn't like his tone. Do: Rough him up a bit, noboby said you couldn't beat him senseless, but the line between a bar fight and murder is a -very- large one.
basically my point is, don't think that because you're an epic level you have the god given right to kill anyone of a lower level who you disagree with in game. It happens to often, it's never rewarding, and IT'S NOT GOOD RP! Or it doesn't happen enough, it is very rewarding to me, and I make it great RP. Because you (the person who PvPs me) do not determine whether it is good RP. I do. I make it good RP, whether you play along or not. That's how it is for me, and how it should be for everyone, since this whole thread is about telling other people how roleplay should be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
P Three
|
Posted: Sat, Aug 07 2010, 15:58 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 18 Dec 2008
|
|
Sorry, buckos. If you had come up to Imperceptor Katsumi and talked smack, either she would have killed you or she would have pointed you out to someone that would have. Why? Because she was Banite, and she was evil, and that's what evil people DO. It didn't matter if you were Level 1 or Tyr Himself, there would be death for backtalking.
Now, mind you, when she was level 3 herself, talking [censored] to, say....Nathano (I love you, dad)...got her in a /heapton/ of crap. But it was fun for all of us because of what was going on. Just because you have bravado doesn't mean you need to be a moron about /when/ to use it.
Flipside. Being as 90% of the god-awful-number of chars I have are lowbies...Not every lvl 30 needs to pound an innocent lvl 3 Druid into mulch. I'm just /saying/.
_________________ Bobo_Underhill wrote: Ley lines, y'all. Just let me go wrangle up my cowboy boots and lasso us up some magic.
Yee-haw! Aly'dra Zau'ana: Priestessish Of EilistraeeDanika Nefzen: Druid of the EarthmotherDelia Am'Anodel: Paladin of Torm
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dark Immolation
|
Posted: Sat, Aug 07 2010, 17:26 PM |
|
|
Developer
Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Location: The downeaster "Alexa"
|
|
My very few sentiments on this thread so far:
Amia is a land of equal opportunity ass-whooping. Lv 2 or Lv 30, your actions may bring about physical conflict, and if your PC does not have the juice to handle it, then what happens will happen. Character levels are OoC. Ability and aptness are not. No one should or likely will show OoC bias because of your CL in terms of hostile interactions between PC's. To quote Mrs. Incredible from The Incredibles:
"Remember the bad guys, on those shows you used to watch on Saturday mornings? Well, these guys are not like those guys. They won't exercise restraint because you're children. They will kill you if they get the chance. Do not give them that chance."
Amia is not an Anime. You do not necessarily encounter PC adversaries in an order of increasing power. No guaranteed order of "I fight this slightly stronger bad guy, and I get stronger, and I fight this slightly stronger bad guy and I get stronger...". In other words, for you Star Wars nerds:
You may very well take your first step outside of your house on Tatooine and find yourself face to face with Darth Vader.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Glyph
|
Posted: Sat, Aug 07 2010, 17:31 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 10 Jun 2010
|
|
we all know darth vader only killed obi wan cause he let him >_>
also regarding higher levels, there is always the "find more higher level people" by hiring or genuinly getting sympathy if your being hunted, etc, there seams to be many many ways about it all. a shapechange scroll or two wouldn't hurt either XD might hurt them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mobile_Svensk
|
Posted: Sat, Aug 07 2010, 19:16 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 21 Jul 2005
Location: Awarded most Confused Git of 2014!
|
Dark Immolation wrote: My very few sentiments on this thread so far:
Amia is a land of equal opportunity ass-whooping. Lv 2 or Lv 30, your actions may bring about physical conflict, and if your PC does not have the juice to handle it, then what happens will happen. Character levels are OoC. Ability and aptness are not. No one should or likely will show OoC bias because of your CL in terms of hostile interactions between PC's. To quote Mrs. Incredible from The Incredibles:
"Remember the bad guys, on those shows you used to watch on Saturday mornings? Well, these guys are not like those guys. They won't exercise restraint because you're children. They will kill you if they get the chance. Do not give them that chance."
Amia is not an Anime. You do not necessarily encounter PC adversaries in an order of increasing power. No guaranteed order of "I fight this slightly stronger bad guy, and I get stronger, and I fight this slightly stronger bad guy and I get stronger...". In other words, for you Star Wars nerds:
You may very well take your first step outside of your house on Tatooine and find yourself face to face with Darth Vader. Character levels are IC, as far as i know.
_________________
Amia Minecraft Server Ip: vps1602.directvps.nl
NWN Damage Calculator: http://www.afterlifeguild.org/Thott/dnd/
NWN Build Calculator: http://nwvault.ign.com/View.php?view=Other.Detail&id=856
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dwagin
|
Posted: Sat, Aug 07 2010, 19:22 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Location: The Land of Nod
|
|
Character levels are a mechanic which statistically condenses IC power/proficiency into palatable game system terms.
_________________
Dwagin [Duh-wa-GIN] N. - 1a. Small and cute thingum, particularly fond of four legged scaled creatures of the metalic and chromatic varieties.
-Extraordinarily ordinary in the mostest of ways.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mobile_Svensk
|
Posted: Sat, Aug 07 2010, 19:28 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 21 Jul 2005
Location: Awarded most Confused Git of 2014!
|
|
In other words - IC?
_________________
Amia Minecraft Server Ip: vps1602.directvps.nl
NWN Damage Calculator: http://www.afterlifeguild.org/Thott/dnd/
NWN Build Calculator: http://nwvault.ign.com/View.php?view=Other.Detail&id=856
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dark Immolation
|
Posted: Sat, Aug 07 2010, 20:03 PM |
|
|
Developer
Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Location: The downeaster "Alexa"
|
|
No.
If you go "I am a lv 5 fighter" IC, I, most RPers, and any DM is going to cringe. They are not IC. The results of them are IC. I.E.
You gain access to 3rd circle spells at lv 5 wizard. But you are not IC "a level 5 wizard". You are a wizard with access to 3rd circle spells. Or for instance you gain Empty Body at lv 18 monk. But again, IC, you are not a "lv 18 monk", you are a monk that has achieved the Empty Body technique.
And the "I have X seasons" thing IC makes me want to puke. Again, a completely OoC concept. There exists no such measurement IC. There simply isn't a "measurement" of a PC IC beyond their abilities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colapops
|
Posted: Sat, Aug 07 2010, 20:36 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Feb 2008
Location: Keep your distance.
|
|
According to Faerun's Bureau of Adventurers and Explorers, I, Arkady, am a rank 29 adventurer.
_________________ The origin of storms.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Glyph
|
Posted: Sat, Aug 07 2010, 20:49 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 10 Jun 2010
|
|
quoting first edition, there are three teirs of adventurer, each class has their own names, "thief" at the time...was padfoot, apprentice and master, or something. of course your not gunna walk up to the knight of the realm and say "i'm joe the padfoot, i've come to steal your wallet", nor should a paladin call himself an unearned title, its down to RP.
also you could be level 40 for all I care regarding glyph, tempus knights don't back down or give up or become stamped on without a fight XD (which is partly where my "GR me all you like" argument came from, though I think realisticaly you'd need a decent cleric at that point. or a circle of them.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Uberuce
|
Posted: Sat, Aug 07 2010, 21:22 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Location: Near the bar.
|
Very_Svensk wrote: In other words - IC? The game engine is Amia's physics, and since Amia is in pre-Enlightenment times, awaiting its Newton, no-one knows enough about the physics of Amia ICly to describe them as we do. People in Amia still know that there is a huge difference in fighting prowess among adventurers and monsters, even if they can't describe it mathematically, in much the same way that you don't need to know the Theory of Relativity to know that jumping off a cliff is really fatal. The best place for highlighting this is gone now, but Minmir Bridge in the old days used to gank people all the time because the ogres there were so much tougher than the Shekat spiders in the zone south. It was also the thoroughfare for anyone wanting to go from Cordor to Winya or Kohlingen before the cart/ferry system, so you'd often run across it as an epic and bump into a group of lowbies either dying, fleeing or dead. Being an epic, you'd plough right through them in Great Cleave chains or Wail-pwns or simple DPS, and then you'd have that weird conversation where they're in the middle of a warzone fighting tooth and nail for survival, and you are just strolling to the shops. Werid, but inescapably IC. They'd really struggled, you'd really not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
ainjyll
|
Posted: Sat, Aug 07 2010, 22:47 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Location: wilmington, nc
|
AxlLeigh wrote: Sorry, buckos. If you had come up to Imperceptor Katsumi and talked smack, either she would have killed you or she would have pointed you out to someone that would have. Why? Because she was Banite, and she was evil, and that's what evil people DO. It didn't matter if you were Level 1 or Tyr Himself, there would be death for backtalking. That's what your evil people do. Not all evil people are like that. Just last night, for instance, my baddie ran like the little girl she is and played the damsel in distress card to get out of a situation where she p.o.'d someone who possibly could have kicked her butt. It was wonderful RP and I had a blast. I've noticed a trend in both sides of the discussion here. It seems to boil down to one thing. Consistency. _________________ "I once took the high road and it took me straight to hell and I stood there all by myself." -Hank III
|
|
|
|
|
|
P Three
|
Posted: Sun, Aug 08 2010, 0:54 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 18 Dec 2008
|
|
Or the lack thereof.
What I meant was "That is what is acceptable "Evil people" behaviour" in that...You prooooobably shouldn't see the leader of, say, the Cyricists running away from a threat.
Well, THEM you might, but you know...
it's Vay.
<3
_________________ Bobo_Underhill wrote: Ley lines, y'all. Just let me go wrangle up my cowboy boots and lasso us up some magic.
Yee-haw! Aly'dra Zau'ana: Priestessish Of EilistraeeDanika Nefzen: Druid of the EarthmotherDelia Am'Anodel: Paladin of Torm
|
|
|
|
|
|
HellScourge
|
Posted: Sun, Aug 08 2010, 7:11 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Jan 2007
Location: GMT+1
|
Uberuce wrote: The best place for highlighting this is gone now, but Minmir Bridge in the old days used to gank people all the time because the ogres there were so much tougher than the Shekat spiders in the zone south. It was also the thoroughfare for anyone wanting to go from Cordor to Winya or Kohlingen before the cart/ferry system, so you'd often run across it as an epic and bump into a group of lowbies either dying, fleeing or dead. Being an epic, you'd plough right through them in Great Cleave chains or Wail-pwns or simple DPS, and then you'd have that weird conversation where they're in the middle of a warzone fighting tooth and nail for survival, and you are just strolling to the shops. Werid, but inescapably IC. They'd really struggled, you'd really not. Sounds so awesome! Squee! Just imagine all that RP that could come from this! _________________ "Most assume that all the followers of Lathander are great morning people. They're very wrong." "I think we are the only group where AD&D stands for Attention Deficit Disorder." TeroSNS wrote: Hello Everyone [...] I like tentacles [...] 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Glyph
|
Posted: Tue, Aug 10 2010, 19:04 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 10 Jun 2010
|
|
without pointing out names, I think the idea of fining someone is much more devestating than walking out of town and decapitating them in one hit. just too many powergamers here, and you can't deny it if you wanted to.
*plans his dev crit hunter AA elf XD*
|
|
|
|
|
|
HellScourge
|
Posted: Tue, Aug 10 2010, 19:07 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Jan 2007
Location: GMT+1
|
AxlLeigh wrote: Or the lack thereof.
What I meant was "That is what is acceptable "Evil people" behaviour" in that...You prooooobably shouldn't see the leader of, say, the Cyricists running away from a threat.
He shouldn't.. he might as well think it would be better to run, but he got the prestige to uphold  Glyph wrote: without pointing out names, I think the idea of fining someone is much more devestating than walking out of town and decapitating them in one hit. just too many powergamers here, and you can't deny it if you wanted to.
I am sorry.. but.. how is that in any way related to this topic? O.o _________________ "Most assume that all the followers of Lathander are great morning people. They're very wrong." "I think we are the only group where AD&D stands for Attention Deficit Disorder." TeroSNS wrote: Hello Everyone [...] I like tentacles [...]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Glyph
|
Posted: Tue, Aug 10 2010, 19:09 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 10 Jun 2010
|
|
I gave up trying to argue that evil people would perform evil actions a few days ago. decided to look at the lawful side of things, and its relevant because i've seen too many paladin types find a reason to gank instead of resolve.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TormakSaber
|
Posted: Tue, Aug 10 2010, 20:06 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere
|
|
You're angry because a Paladin wants to kill an evil person for doing evil things?
Right...
_________________
Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds
Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham
|
|
|
|
|
|
Glyph
|
Posted: Tue, Aug 10 2010, 20:17 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 10 Jun 2010
|
|
no just the ones that arn't necromancers, I saw much better RP yesterday as far as lawful goes, than i've relatively seen in the past. "your disturbing the peace i'm kill you" is a little extreme and evil unless you happen to be lawful evil.
also i'm not oocly angry anymore tormak about anything really i finding my zen calm again =) no worries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
P Three
|
Posted: Wed, Aug 11 2010, 5:58 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 18 Dec 2008
|
|
Gods damn it, Tormak, stop making sense.
Also: Sending issue resolved.
_________________ Bobo_Underhill wrote: Ley lines, y'all. Just let me go wrangle up my cowboy boots and lasso us up some magic.
Yee-haw! Aly'dra Zau'ana: Priestessish Of EilistraeeDanika Nefzen: Druid of the EarthmotherDelia Am'Anodel: Paladin of Torm
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stormsorrow
|
Posted: Wed, Aug 11 2010, 6:24 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 25 Jul 2010
|
Anyone of Lawful Good alignment shouldn't kill unless they need to. It depends on the scenario. If it's a pickpocket and the thief didn't hurt the person, the Paladin killing the thief is extreme per DnD/NwN alignment. Lawful Good alignment wrote: Characters of this alignment believe that orderly, strong society with a well-organized government can work to make life better for the majority of the people. To ensure the quality of life, laws must be created and obeyed. When people respect the laws and try to help one another, society as a whole prospers. Therefore, lawful good characters strive for those things that will bring the greatest benefit to the most people and cause the least harm. An honest and hardworking serf, a kindly and wise king, or a stern but forthright minister of justice are all examples of lawful good people.
A lawful good character acts as a good person is expected or required to act. She tells the truth, keeps her word, helps those in need, and speaks out against injustice. A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished. They combine a commitment to oppose evil with the discipline to fight relentlessly. They tell the truth, keep their word, help those in need, and speak out against injustice. A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished. Some feel that lawful good is the best alignment one can be because it combines honor and compassion.
Same goes for Lawful Evil. Lawful Evil alignment wrote: A lawful evil villain methodically takes what he wants within the limits of his code of conduct without regard for whom it hurts. He cares about tradition, loyalty, and order but not about freedom, dignity, or life. He plays by the rules but without mercy or compassion. He is comfortable in a hierarchy and would like to rule, but is willing to serve. He condemns others not according to their actions but according to race, religion, homeland, or social rank. He is loath to break laws or promises.
This reluctance comes partly from his nature and partly because he depends on order to protect himself from those who oppose him on moral grounds. Some lawful evil villains have particular taboos, such as not killing in cold blood (but having underlings do it) or not letting children come to harm (if it can be helped). They imagine that these compunctions put them above unprincipled villains.
Some lawful evil people and creatures commit themselves to evil with a zeal like that of a crusader committed to good. Beyond being willing to hurt others for their own ends (meaning they don't attack unless attacked), they take pleasure in spreading evil as an end unto itself. They may also see doing evil as part of a duty to an evil deity or master. I've seen people RP LE characters that are just "I'm evil *Kills*" when it's not really their alignment. I'm not angry/ranting about how people RP their alignments, merely just putting this out there for reference of what these alignments state. _________________ Created by Jadyn
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Wed, Aug 11 2010, 6:48 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
|
I'm sorry, but those are caricatures of how alignments work. The way they are employed in game is a lot more shades-of-grey.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dark Immolation
|
Posted: Wed, Aug 11 2010, 6:52 AM |
|
|
Developer
Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Location: The downeaster "Alexa"
|
Stormsorrow wrote: Anyone of Lawful Good alignment shouldn't kill unless they need to. It depends on the scenario. That right there can come into contradiction easily. The scenario includes the character involved, and generalizing a character's action to their alignment ain't how it goes. There's no definable thing to say when they "need" to kill. All LG really entails is you have a distinct order about your ways(social or internal) and making a conscious effort to further "axial good". By axial good, I mean the semi-clearly defined "good" actions and causes often set upon in the FR setting. In other words, you can be LG and ruthless, merciless, iron-fisted just fine. Just as long as you're those things to the right people at the right time. There could be a ruler of a city, follower of Tyr, where the penalty for any infraction of the law is immediate death. It's an order and it's set upon an axial good, anti-crime. Or it could be the tyrran's own order or creed to repay any infraction with such violence(arguably a flawed one, but nonetheless). There as well could be an illmatari LG that is relentlessly...passive. And would never kill. So again, alignment rarely if ever is a rigid predetermination of a character's actions, so much as a descriptor of the process behind them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stormsorrow
|
Posted: Wed, Aug 11 2010, 6:56 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 25 Jul 2010
|
Dark Immolation wrote: Stormsorrow wrote: Anyone of Lawful Good alignment shouldn't kill unless they need to. It depends on the scenario. That right there can come into contradiction easily. The scenario includes the character involved, and generalizing a character's action to their alignment ain't how it goes. There's no definable thing to say when they "need" to kill. All LG really entails is you have a distinct order about your ways(social or internal) and making a conscious effort to further "axial good". By axial good, I mean the semi-clearly defined "good" actions and causes often set upon in the FR setting. In other words, you can be LG and ruthless, merciless, iron-fisted just fine. Just as long as you're those things to the right people at the right time. There could be a ruler of a city, follower of Tyr, where the penalty for any infraction of the law is immediate death. It's an order and it's set upon an axial good, anti-crime. Or it could be the tyrran's own order or creed to repay any infraction with such violence(arguably a flawed one, but nonetheless). There as well could be an illmatari LG that is relentlessly...passive. And would never kill. So again, alignment rarely if ever is a rigid predetermination of a character's actions, so much as a descriptor of the process behind them. Not really a contradiction when depending. It's generally up to what if's, which are trivial, but some of these things still happen. When I say depending on scenario, it depends what class, race, etc. For instance, if I see a Chaotic Evil, Red Chromatic Dragon in a tavern cuddling with a Lawful Good Paladin or say a Lawful Good, Silver Metallic Dragon... Yeah, it's generally an eyebrow quirk for me. It happens, but it should rarely happen. Which is the point. There's a guideline on the alignments. _________________ Created by Jadyn
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dark Immolation
|
Posted: Wed, Aug 11 2010, 7:02 AM |
|
|
Developer
Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Location: The downeaster "Alexa"
|
|
What I was pointing out is you said someone who is LG should never kill unless it's "needed".
And what I'm saying is that inhibition to kill does not necessarily go hand-in-hand with LG. One is not directly contingent on the other for alignment's sake alone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Uberuce
|
Posted: Wed, Aug 11 2010, 7:06 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Location: Near the bar.
|
Stormsorrow wrote: Anyone of Lawful Good alignment shouldn't kill unless they need to. It depends on the scenario. If it's a pickpocket and the thief didn't hurt the person, the Paladin killing the thief is extreme per DnD/NwN alignment. Lawful Good alignment wrote: A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished. A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished. I like the way you said it twice. The problem you have is that you're using modern moral standards, whereas badass Paladin players are going oldschool where they had thr death penalty for everything. From Wikipedia, so treat with appropriate caution: Sir Samuel Romilly, speaking to the House of Commons on capital punishment in 1810, declared that "…(there is) no country on the face of the earth in which there [have] been so many different offences according to law to be punished with death as in England." Known as the "Bloody Code", at its height the criminal law included some 220 crimes punishable by death, including "being in the company of Gypsies for one month", "strong evidence of malice in a child aged 7–14 years of age" and "blacking the face or using a disguise whilst committing a crime". Many of these offences had been introduced to protect the property of the wealthy classes that emerged during the first half of the 18th century, a notable example being the Black Act of 1723, which created 50 capital offences for various acts of theft and poaching.You're both wrong, and you're both right. Paladins should both be stern and uphold the deth penalty and be be merciful and forgiving. That's one of the many reason I don't play the class. Can't be arsed with debates based on moral relativism even when I'm in the mood for academic arguments, let alone when I'm just trynig to pwn or piss about RPing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stormsorrow
|
Posted: Wed, Aug 11 2010, 7:09 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 25 Jul 2010
|
Dark Immolation wrote: What I was pointing out is you said someone who is LG should never kill unless it's "needed".
And what I'm saying is that inhibition to kill does not necessarily go hand-in-hand with LG. One is not directly contingent on the other for alignment's sake alone. Needed to kill for LG is generally by someone intentional harm/death/mass death, which goes by that guideline. And I made a few edits to the previous post to help better my point. I'm not saying that LG SHOULDN'T kill, but they generally don't kill unless the action warrants it. I.E. Murder/Attempted murder and the like. For picking a pocket and no one gets hurt and it's nowhere in the town's laws, that doesn't warrant death from a guard imo. But I don't pickpocket. *Shrug* I don't think police would kill someone for starting a bar fight. And I agree with you Uberuce, however usually when I see a Paladin necking with a Baatezu or a Tana'ri... I'm generally quirking a brow. I don't get all huffy or angry about it since it's their characters and I move on being it's none of my business ICly or OOCly as it should be. All I'm saying is that there should be more consideration on the trivial matters when playing certain classes with alignments. My main point is there's more to the cosmology of good and evil then definitive lines. That's why I play mostly Neutral characters, I have a few good, and a few evil... But the point to the whole matter is this, how and what a civilization deems as evil. I can understand if say it was written in Cordor on the actual law tablets that a thief gets shanked, now if the thief killed someone or was trying to kill someone rather than just pickpocketing, that I can understand. But if it's just a pickpocket and no one was harmed, why not throw him in a cell? _________________ Created by Jadyn
Last edited by Stormsorrow on Wed, Aug 11 2010, 7:28 AM, edited 2 times in total.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dark Immolation
|
Posted: Wed, Aug 11 2010, 7:12 AM |
|
|
Developer
Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Location: The downeaster "Alexa"
|
|
To clarify, I was not talking about paladins at all. Simply the Lawful Good alignment, not exclusive to the horrible realm of paladin philosophy.
It is completely possible to have merciless, bloodthirsty and draconian Lawful Good characters. Again, it's to what and to whom.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stormsorrow
|
Posted: Wed, Aug 11 2010, 7:23 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 25 Jul 2010
|
Dark Immolation wrote:
It is completely possible to have merciless, bloodthirsty and draconian Lawful Good characters. Again, it's to what and to whom.
Right, but what the specific example I was talking about is between a Chaotic Evil Red and a Lawful Good Silver. For me if I had either of those races with the corresponding alignments, I wouldn't even be mingling with them as soon as my character found out. They would have been "You're a what?!" and they would be generally disgusted. Unless I'm playing the Chaotic Evil Red and it's trying to persuade the LG Silver. Then I can see that, but without that instance, it's really iffy in my mind. Edit: I'm not saying for people to not change their RP for my opinion, but I'm simply affirming Glyph's question. Why would a Paladin in Cordor kill a pickpocketer (if it was indeed in Cordor. If it was in Klem, I can understand a little even though it says a thief will lose their hand) if all he did was pick someone's pocket? Edit 2: And I know that it's a grey area when talking about the cosmology between good and evil, however I'm not disagreeing either. _________________ Created by Jadyn
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dark Immolation
|
Posted: Wed, Aug 11 2010, 7:38 AM |
|
|
Developer
Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Location: The downeaster "Alexa"
|
Stormsorrow wrote: Why would a Paladin in Cordor kill a pickpocketer (if it was indeed in Cordor) if all he did was pick someone's pocket? His God's dogma calls for it. The creed of his Order calls for it. His own dogmatic sensibility(sense of justice) calls for it. His reasoning or judgement leads him to believe it is the correct action to take. His personality leads him to that end. The list goes on and on. Again, you cannot generalize anything about LG, especially, especially paladins. Some paladins will obey the city's law, however lenient, ridiculous, or even inanely cruel it is. Others would relent, and wait to handle the situation outside of the city's jurisdiction. Some paladins will forgo the city's law without second thought, as some other personal or divine law supercedes. Some would disobey the city's law for the very sake of supporting their god's law over a city's rules. And yet they are all LG. Ruce is right, you're assuming that Lawful Good and/or paladinhood constitutes a standard of reciprocation that's just not there across the board.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stormsorrow
|
Posted: Wed, Aug 11 2010, 7:47 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 25 Jul 2010
|
Dark Immolation wrote: Stormsorrow wrote: Why would a Paladin in Cordor kill a pickpocketer (if it was indeed in Cordor) if all he did was pick someone's pocket? His God's dogma calls for it. The creed of his Order calls for it. His own dogmatic sensibility(sense of justice) calls for it. His reasoning or judgement leads him to believe it is the correct action to take. His personality leads him to that end. The list goes on and on. Again, you cannot generalize anything about LG, especially, especially paladins. Some paladins will obey the city's law, however lenient, ridiculous, inanely cruel it is. Others would relent, and wait to handle the situation outside of the city's jurisdiction. Some paladins will forgo the city's law without second thought, as some other personal or divine law supercedes. Some would disobey the city's law for the very sake of supporting their god's law over a city's rules. And yet they are all LG. Ruce is right, you're assuming that Lawful Good and/or paladinhood constitutes a standard of reciprocation that's just not there across the board. Not entirely, no. I've not seen one Dogma or Creed within the FR setting from all the supplements I have that state that a Paladin puts a pickpocket to death when the cities laws doesn't punish that crime by death. Can you be specific which Dogma? As for the paladinhood constituting to a standard of reciprocation, there's a very fine line between the cosmology of good and evil. I agree with some extend, but in the main principle of the matter of asking the question is why should the Paladin get away with unlawfully killing someone when they don't abide by the city law itself? I can see if it was a low level verses a higher level and the higher level just killed him, but RP wise, it doesn't make a bit of sense. Edit: Furthermore I'm not generalizing, merely playing devil's advocate in the sense that some of the things in this topic just doesn't make a lick of sense by the actions of the unwarranted death regardless if he was a Paladin that has a Dogma that I'm either unaware of or never heard of before in all the supplements I've read. If the killer is a guard and he got away with it, why? I'm not angry or generalizing, merely trying to understand why it's advocated. From what Paladin's I've seen in PnP, Local Vault, or the other Server Vaults, I've not once seen them act in that way. _________________ Created by Jadyn
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dark Immolation
|
Posted: Wed, Aug 11 2010, 8:00 AM |
|
|
Developer
Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Location: The downeaster "Alexa"
|
...You're asking the same question and I've already given the reasons. You can't really be given specifics, because it all comes down to intepritation of the god's dogma. You'd be hard pressed to find many examples in FR where a god says to his paladins "Whenever X happens, do Y. Always. No exceptions." Rather, the dogma gives an ideal that the paladin is to work upon. The god may say "To those that take from others, take from them something of the like." One paladin may interpret is "an eye for an eye". You steal, I take something from you. You break something of someone else's, I break something of yours. Another paladin of the same god, may very well take it to mean something else completely. You stole from this man's shop, his livelihood, I shall take away from you your livelihood as a thief, your hands. You took from this man's possessions, his pocket, I take from you your possessions: jewelry, teeth, fingers, bones, maybe even life. Quote: why should the Paladin get away with unlawfully killing someone when they don't abide by the city law itself? Quote: His God's dogma calls for it.
The creed of his Order calls for it.
His own dogmatic sensibility(sense of justice) calls for it.
His reasoning or judgement leads him to believe it is the correct action to take.
His personality leads him to that end.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stormsorrow
|
Posted: Wed, Aug 11 2010, 8:06 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 25 Jul 2010
|
Dark Immolation wrote: ...You're asking the same question and I've already given the reasons.
You can't really be given specifics, because it all comes down to intepritation of the god's dogma. I'm asking which faith would allow such and why would the Paladin go unpunished by the cities laws. I could see if he was an extremist, but why still go unpunished by the laws of Cordor? It just doesn't make sense, not to mention it makes characters ICly think that the law is just corrupt as the evil that they claim to fight against. _________________ Created by Jadyn
|
|
|
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 78 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Login
