The Ethics of Adventuring

[krossbow]

If this was a 3.5 game, I'd ask to join, make a char who is the last survivor of another, now destroyed plane(t) who wants only to protect his adopted world, and everytime another PC starts to angst, scream out "MY PLANE(T) IS DEAD!!!"

And maybe they got the ciggs from Gandalf?




MY PARENTS ARE DEAD!!!! (http://www.pvponline.com/my-parents-are-dead/)

[Archpaladin Zousha]

The existence of a sandwhich, for similar reasons. Not to mention the fact that no one has names that could be related. The entire naming system is off.

The entire naming system is off? There's a sandwich in there? Why did I not catch this?

[Jayngfet]

My guess: Your history class didn't spend four months on the middle ages and you arn't a DM who gives a damn about historical accuracy.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

...I'm not the DM, I'm a co-author for the campaign setting.

[Oracle_Hunter]

My guess: Your history class didn't spend four months on the middle ages and you arn't a DM who gives a damn about historical accuracy.

Dude, he is making a fantasy setting; just because John Montagu, 4th Earl of Sandwich (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Montagu,_4th_Earl_of_Sandwich) doesn't exist doesn't mean someone couldn't have figured out how to make a sandwich (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandwich#History). We are talking about worlds where dragons eat peasants on a regular basis and wizards produce gouts of flame at will.

Unless his setting is "11th Century Europe" I'd give him a bit of leniency :smalltongue:

[Jayngfet]

Reading further: Potatoes have exactly the same problem as potatos. Is there some sort of magical south America right next door?

[Kris Strife]

MY PARENTS ARE DEAD!!!! (http://www.pvponline.com/my-parents-are-dead/)

Bah, every third adventurer and their mother are orphans.

[Oracle_Hunter]

Reading further: Potatoes have exactly the same problem as potatos. Is there some sort of magical south America right next door?

Yes, yes there is.

You get to it by heading through the magical portal that the wizard just opened up. Of course, it'd just be easier to go to the Elemental Plane of Potatoes instead.

I mean, Dragonlance has "Otik's Spiced Fried Potatoes" as a regular dish, served in an inn situated in a giant tree :smalltongue:

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Dude, he is making a fantasy setting; just because John Montagu, 4th Earl of Sandwich (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Montagu,_4th_Earl_of_Sandwich) doesn't exist doesn't mean someone couldn't have figured out how to make a sandwich (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandwich#History). We are talking about worlds where dragons eat peasants on a regular basis and wizards produce gouts of flame at will.

Unless his setting is "11th Century Europe" I'd give him a bit of leniency :smalltongue:

I don't think that excuses the naming conventions. My character may be named "Sarastro of Goab," but I'm really the only one with the excuse of having come from another world.

"Mr. Big" has an excuse as well. He technically doesn't have a name, "Mr. Big" being a nickname the other characters gave him until he finds a name he likes.

The others names are "Jade," "Suzu Koto," and "Tremmie." The characters of "Falchior" and "Terazul" are no longer in the game. These are very disparate names for a group of mostly humans, with one half-elf (no longer with us) and a doppleganger. Where would names like these come from?

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Bah, every third adventurer and their mother are orphans.
Including Tremmie and Sarastro, who don't yet know that they are half-siblings whose father is still somewhere out there.

[Oracle_Hunter]

The others names are "Jade," "Suzu Koto," and "Tremmie." The characters of "Falchior" and "Terazul" are no longer in the game. These are very disparate names for a group of mostly humans, with one half-elf (no longer with us) and a doppleganger. Where would names like these come from?

Yeah, naming conventions are tough. I usually use real world analogs, but I hardly expect my players to pay too much attention; though I was pleased that in my current campaign all three actually did listen to me for a change :smallsmile:

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Reading further: Potatoes have exactly the same problem as potatos. Is there some sort of magical south America right next door?
The Shire had potatoes too.:smalltongue:

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Yeah, naming conventions are tough. I usually use real world analogs, but I hardly expect my players to pay too much attention; though I was pleased that in my current campaign all three actually did listen to me for a change :smallsmile:
So how do we deal with our situation? The more these things are pointed out to me, the more and more terrible the setting begins to look.:smallsigh:

[Kris Strife]

So how do we deal with our situation? The more these things are pointed out to me, the more and more terrible the setting begins to look.:smallsigh:

Just rename everything Bob. It worked for the smurfs and the snorks.

[Jayngfet]

Hey, everyone's early settings aren't there best. The giant himself admits to making crap settings. I'm still working out the bugs in my own worldbuilding style(since I'm torn between the desire to adhear to science and the desire to make it an over the top awesome game I usually wind up falling in the uncool unscientific middle handwaving pathetic things with "stem cells" and "nanobots" and "hormones", knowing full well it doesn't work that way). Just look over it, see the problems, and work hard. I'd be willing to help if you want to.

[Oracle_Hunter]

So how do we deal with our situation? The more these things are pointed out to me, the more and more terrible the setting begins to look.:smallsigh:

Um, you aren't the DM - you can't fix your fellow players. If possible, ask the DM (or talk with your other co-authors) about what kind of language analogs work with which in-game cultures. Then, crack open an electronic dictionary and a baby-names website and start tweaking the names to be a bit more consistent.

Considering the "Asian" theme you might as well make some sort of Far East (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FarEast) region and work it out such that the characters are somehow related to that area.

"Tremmie" is a nickname, perhaps?

Anyhoo, if you haven't done it yet, read over Rich's "The World;" (http://www.giantitp.com/articles/YPgbz2j3PckGjjviJU5.html) it is an invaluable aid in designing durable game worlds.

[krossbow]

Here's the thing: The world is up to the DM.


You could have a world with dinosaurs, you could not. You could have a highly advanced magocracy with ever burning torches for street lamps, you could have a mud spattered world with humanity on the brink.




You can't really compare a D&D universe to the past medieval/dark ages world.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Hey, everyone's early settings aren't there best. The giant himself admits to making crap settings. I'm still working out the bugs in my own worldbuilding style(since I'm torn between the desire to adhear to science and the desire to make it an over the top awesome game I usually wind up falling in the uncool unscientific middle handwaving pathetic things with "stem cells" and "nanobots" and "hormones", knowing full well it doesn't work that way). Just look over it, see the problems, and work hard. I'd be willing to help if you want to.I'd greatly appreciate it.

[chiasaur11]

If this was a 3.5 game, I'd ask to join, make a char who is the last survivor of another, now destroyed plane(t) who wants only to protect his adopted world, and everytime another PC starts to angst, scream out "MY PLANE(T) IS DEAD!!!"


Or, more fun, a Wonderella like socipath who uses "My PLANET IS DEAD!" as an excuse to avoid consequences for every heinous action.

True neutral, natch.

[Jayngfet]

Additionally, Limyaael (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ptitleidkp0hmb6z6x?from=Main.LimyaaelsFantasyRants ) can be a godsend in these situations.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Additionally, Limyaael (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ptitleidkp0hmb6z6x?from=Main.LimyaaelsFantasyRants ) can be a godsend in these situations.

I have already reccomended Limyaael to my DM (who is also my co-author). He said he didn't have time to read it.

To give you an idea of what kind of literature he likes, he's a fan of Angela Carter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angela_Carter), especially her collection of short stories, The Bloody Chamber (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bloody_Chamber).

He also likes to include stuff like puppets and gruesome stuff.

His play, The Mortician's Daughter, involves a life-sized marrionette that one character seems to believe is her dead husband, or something.

[Dacia Brabant]

Including Tremmie and Sarastro, who don't yet know that they are half-siblings whose father is still somewhere out there.

Wait, Sarastro the noble sun-themed hero and Tremmie the deceptive, knife-wielding emo girl... is Tremmie a nickname for Astrifiammante (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magic_Flute#cite_note-7) by any chance? :smallwink:

Well that could solve some of your naming conventions issue by going with an Italian basis for the part of the world they're from. And hey, why not play around with some opera references like that? Why should all fantasy be derived from just literature? Then again I don't know what your familiarity is with that art form so maybe that wouldn't come out well, but it's a thought.

Semi-pointless aside: Mozart might not have intended Sarastro and the Queen of the Night to have been ex-spouses like Ingmar Bergman's version of the opera portrays, but siblings, which I think would be more philosophically sound since they're polar opposites in every possible way.

[Dervag]

I want to know how could a lesbian character have a child.In the usual manner, I assume.


Dude, he is making a fantasy setting; just because John Montagu, 4th Earl of Sandwich (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Montagu,_4th_Earl_of_Sandwich) doesn't exist doesn't mean someone couldn't have figured out how to make a sandwich (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandwich#History). We are talking about worlds where dragons eat peasants on a regular basis and wizards produce gouts of flame at will.

Unless his setting is "11th Century Europe" I'd give him a bit of leniency :smalltongue:It strikes me as hard to believe that nobody ever thought of the sandwich in pre-John Montagu times. It's not exactly hard; all you really need is bread, a knife, and at least one edible thing that isn't bread.


Reading further: Potatoes have exactly the same problem as potatos. Is there some sort of magical south America right next door?There's nothing wrong with putting potatoes in your fantasy setting. You're not required by law to stick tocrops that grew in medieval England or whatever.

[Jayngfet]

Yes but you have to give a reason for this. Don't use potatos and sandwiches unless you have a reason to.

[Kris Strife]

Yes but you have to give a reason for this. Don't use potatos and sandwiches unless you have a reason to.

I have a perfect reason for potatoes in any campaign: Waffle House Hashbrowns.

[Stephen_E]

Quote:
Let's think for a moment about what [the Monty Haul] play style is designed to evoke. After all, Tolkien doesn't really do the "adventuring" thing; he does the "quest odyssey" thing. The Fellowship sets off to destroy the Ring. Along their way, things happen to them, and their tribulations acquire meaning in the context of the quest to destroy the Ring. What the Fellowship doesn't do is "just go out adventuring" the way many D&D adventuring parties do. So where does this adventuring come from?

I've thought about it a lot, and I think the closest parallel actually comes from "viking", and I do mean it as a verb, the way it used to be used, like in this passage from an old account.

Quote:
That's how things were for a number of years - every summer they'd go on viking expeditions and every winter they would stay at home with their families and parents. Thorold brought his parents a lot of valuable things.

To go "viking" meant to hop in your boat and pillage the village on that other island. The Vikings were just people who went viking every summer.

So why am I mentioning this? Well, think about the culture of viking. You gather fifty men and twenty horses, slap them on two boats, and sail for a week out of Norway. You get to the English coast, find a village, and what do you do? There's a village of 500 people with a church and a granary. You want riches and food, you've come all this way, and you're outnumbered 10 to 1. What do you do?

Solution: You burn the church first. When the priests and monks move out the church silver and start crying for help to put out the fire, you kill the unarmed priests and monks and lift the silver. By now the villagers are coming with pitchforks and trying to swarm you, so you run away on your horses. While they put out their burning church, a few lookouts steal enough food for the journey back, and then you all run like heck back to your boat before they find out where you've beached it.

That was the dungeon crawl as it was in real life. The Vikings didn't have actual ogres and monsters and wizards to deal with. They were just outnumbered.

Only one minor complaint with your post.

The vikings didn't run from the villigers with their pitchforks. They killed them.
Within a reasonable degree of outnumberness and high morale it doesn't matter if they have the numbers if they're an unarmoured rabble with makeshift weapons and you're a relatively organised armoured and armed group with weapons training and experiance. The rabble loses.

Stephen E

[Dervag]

Only one minor complaint with your post.

The vikings didn't run from the villigers with their pitchforks. They killed them.
Within a reasonable degree of outnumberness and high morale it doesn't matter if they have the numbers if they're an unarmoured rabble with makeshift weapons and you're a relatively organised armoured and armed group with weapons training and experiance. The rabble loses.

Stephen EThing is, some of those peasants are liable to get lucky with pitchforks, or throw a rock and give someone a concussion. In which case your good buddy Bjorn dies.

Under the circumstances, why bother getting into a fight if you don't have to? The Viking raids were hit and run operations for precisely that reason- if it was practical to avoid combat, even against inferior foes, trying was simply good sense.

Now, if the Vikings came to settle and rule your land, they might fight your peasant mob just to prove they could do it and win. But there's no percentage in doing that kind of thing for a bunch of raiders.

[Stephen_E]

Yes but you have to give a reason for this. Don't use potatos and sandwiches unless you have a reason to.

Beyond convience what reason do you need.

DnD isn't medieval europe.

I suggest you write this on the blackboard as often as need be to get the point through. It has some general simularities but these are only general.

Thus there is nothing wrong with having sandwiches, potatoes or cigarettes. These don't require any special "justification".

Stephen E

[Coidzor]

Yes but you have to give a reason for this. Don't use potatos and sandwiches unless you have a reason to.

Why is this such a bone of contention? :smallconfused:

[Stephen_E]

Thing is, some of those peasants are liable to get lucky with pitchforks, or throw a rock and give someone a concussion. In which case your good buddy Bjorn dies.

Under the circumstances, why bother getting into a fight if you don't have to? The Viking raids were hit and run operations for precisely that reason- if it was practical to avoid combat, even against inferior foes, trying was simply good sense.


Yeah, they might get lucky if they fought, but they normally didn't. They ran.

Why would you fight?
1) It means you can take more time doing a good loot, including slaves.
2) It means the next time you're in the neighbourhood you won't have to fight because they remember what happened to the last lot that did that.
3) Because you're young, tough and immortal. You and your buddy aren't going to get killed by a peasant. Otherwise called testerone poisoning.:smallwink:

Stephen E

PS. It should also be noted that churchs (well abbeys to be specific) got hit because that's where most of the good wealth was.

[Jayngfet]

Then what's stopping you from using guns, or centurion armor with knights? You have to draw the line somewhere, and I find the best place to draw it is where it makes no practical difference to the game. No one will care if they can't have potatoes or sandwiches. We're talking about plants adapted to entirely different climates here, unless that's your goal overall you shouldn't mix things that don't belong. At least handwave it along the lines of "these wizards found this quick growing crop that doesn't need sunlight after a teleport mishap". Hell you could make a potato based campane. I can imagine druids not liking foreign plants, creating this conflict you can base an entire campane off of. You don't need to not use something. But if your going to base a setting off of a civilization find a reason to deviate from it.

[Jayngfet]

Yeah, they might get lucky if they fought, but they normally didn't. They ran.

Why would you fight?
1) It means you can take more time doing a good loot, including slaves.


Actually viking longships usually couldn't hold extra people. The entire point is to make it light, fast and streamlined as possible. The scary thing about vikings is that they could raid any coastal community or river community(which was a large majority, since having a constant source of freshwater that was already all in one place was important for crops).

[Stephen_E]

Actually viking longships usually couldn't hold extra people. The entire point is to make it light, fast and streamlined as possible. The scary thing about vikings is that they could raid any coastal community or river community(which was a large majority, since having a constant source of freshwater that was already all in one place was important for crops).

They weren't heavy slave raiders but they did take slaves. If they had one of their trading vessels around they could take significant slaves, and did sometimes do so.


Then what's stopping you from using guns, or centurion armor with knights? You have to draw the line somewhere, and I find the best place to draw it is where it makes no practical difference to the game.

Guns make a practical difference. A good place to draw a line.

Centurion armour with knights, potatoes and sandwiches don't.

Items that make no practical difference aren't the best place to draw the line from the point of view of a good stoy or campaign. They are the best place if you on a power trip or wanting to demonstate your knowledge of a particular RL historical period is better than someone else.

Stephen E

[Dhavaer]

Then what's stopping you from using guns, or centurion armor with knights?

Either a) nothing or b) you don't want to.

[Jayngfet]

Actually a particular crop can significantly change the way a civilization works. Potatos in particular can cause drastic changes since it means you can feed a lot more people at once and make lots of things from it. The grim struggle for life the setting tries to focus on becomes less so when one guy with a few extera spuds and a shovel can eventually feed himself, his family, and eventually the entire town. Adding in a device or crop will have ramifications. Again, don't ban potatos, just take it into account as more than a fluff thing.

Think of it this way. The potato was introduced to europe in the early sixteenth century. It's generally agreed that the middle ages ended the same century. Given a couple of decades for the crop to spread and it becomes obvious this one fist sized plant was a large factor in the decline of the feudal system.

[Shademan]

on the potato issue: in my campaign a gnome wizard experimented on a troll and turned him into a brownish, fist sized rootfruit-thingie. it was rather tasty when cooked and was easy to grow. thus the Potato was born!
(named after its creator. Potato Crudd)

see guys! its that easy. :smallbiggrin:

[Stephen_E]

Actually a particular crop can significantly change the way a civilization works. Potatos in particular can cause drastic changes since it means you can feed a lot more people at once and make lots of things from it. The grim struggle for life the setting tries to focus on becomes less so when one guy with a few extera spuds and a shovel can eventually feed himself, his family, and eventually the entire town. Adding in a device or crop will have ramifications. Again, don't ban potatos, just take it into account as more than a fluff thing.

Do you seriously play DnD games where the avaiability of potatoes affects what the PCs do?


Think of it this way. The potato was introduced to europe in the early sixteenth century. It's generally agreed that the middle ages ended the same century. Given a couple of decades for the crop to spread and it becomes obvious this one fist sized plant was a large factor in the decline of the feudal system.

Gahhhg..., please leave the fake deductive reasoning with the Intelligent Design people. Two things happening at the same time doesn't mean there's any link between the two. And even if there is a link you then have to show that it's a causal link, and which way the causal link goes.

A huge amount was going on at that time in the 16th century. Broad assertions that the potatoe was a significant factor in the ending of the middle ages without any evidence is silly.

Stephen E

[Tengu_temp]

I have already reccomended Limyaael to my DM (who is also my co-author). He said he didn't have time to read it.

To give you an idea of what kind of literature he likes, he's a fan of Angela Carter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angela_Carter), especially her collection of short stories, The Bloody Chamber (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bloody_Chamber).

He also likes to include stuff like puppets and gruesome stuff.

His play, The Mortician's Daughter, involves a life-sized marrionette that one character seems to believe is her dead husband, or something.

Tell him that if he has the time to read goth stories, he also has the time to read stuff that can make him write better and avoid traps in his works - because, seeing that he wrote a play, I assume he's an aspiring writer.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Wait, Sarastro the noble sun-themed hero and Tremmie the deceptive, knife-wielding emo girl... is Tremmie a nickname for Astrifiammante (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magic_Flute#cite_note-7) by any chance? :smallwink:

Well that could solve some of your naming conventions issue by going with an Italian basis for the part of the world they're from. And hey, why not play around with some opera references like that? Why should all fantasy be derived from just literature? Then again I don't know what your familiarity is with that art form so maybe that wouldn't come out well, but it's a thought.

Semi-pointless aside: Mozart might not have intended Sarastro and the Queen of the Night to have been ex-spouses like Ingmar Bergman's version of the opera portrays, but siblings, which I think would be more philosophically sound since they're polar opposites in every possible way.
That might work, but there's logistics to consider. Sarastro is a foreigner to the Vale. He was born in another world and wandered into the Vale by accident. Tremmie is a native. She was born and grew up in the Vale.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Then what's stopping you from using guns, or centurion armor with knights? You have to draw the line somewhere, and I find the best place to draw it is where it makes no practical difference to the game. No one will care if they can't have potatoes or sandwiches. We're talking about plants adapted to entirely different climates here, unless that's your goal overall you shouldn't mix things that don't belong. At least handwave it along the lines of "these wizards found this quick growing crop that doesn't need sunlight after a teleport mishap". Hell you could make a potato based campane. I can imagine druids not liking foreign plants, creating this conflict you can base an entire campane off of. You don't need to not use something. But if your going to base a setting off of a civilization find a reason to deviate from it.

D'oh! Our DM wants to include clockwork firearms in the game, like Fable II!

I personally disagree, but he wanted to stat them out and use them, so I couldn't argue, but as far as I can tell, none of the PCs plan on using them. I'm a sword and board type, Tremmie has a dagger she considers her only friend, Suzu uses a short sword, Big uses an axe and will later be using some sort of melee weapons attachment, and Jade uses a scythe. What's the point of having guns if they're not going to be used?!

[Oracle_Hunter]

D'oh! Our DM wants to include clockwork firearms in the game, like Fable II!

At least he didn't want Gunblades :smalltongue:

[Dacia Brabant]

Actually a particular crop can significantly change the way a civilization works. Potatos in particular can cause drastic changes since it means you can feed a lot more people at once and make lots of things from it. The grim struggle for life the setting tries to focus on becomes less so when one guy with a few extera spuds and a shovel can eventually feed himself, his family, and eventually the entire town. Adding in a device or crop will have ramifications. Again, don't ban potatos, just take it into account as more than a fluff thing.

Think of it this way. The potato was introduced to europe in the early sixteenth century. It's generally agreed that the middle ages ended the same century. Given a couple of decades for the crop to spread and it becomes obvious this one fist sized plant was a large factor in the decline of the feudal system.

Umm, what? The so-called feudal system was dying out across Europe more than a hundred years before that, with the birth of the nation-state out of the consolidated sovereign power of a king over large amounts of land and people that previously were governed by lesser nobles. Those nobles instead began to become statesemen or bureaucrats in a rough parliamentary setting where they got to voice their consent or disapproval of the king as a body, but they lacked the kind of sovereignty over their hereditary land that they'd enjoyed in previous centuries. A lot of this had to do with the results of the Hundred Years War, the decline of the Papacy and the fall of Byzantium's effects on wealth and trade in the West, and the Reformation, all long before the potato made its way to Europe.

Now if you're talking about socio-economic changes rather than political ones, okay that was important to have a reliable staple crop that could feed lots of people for less cost of labor. This probably made the Industrial Revolution a possibility because of all the manpower that was needed. But the feudal system of loose confederations of lords who administered their own lands and vassals as they saw fit while paying homage to someone bigger up the chain was old hat by the 14th century.

But really now, the potato is not something that's going to break verisimilitude in a fantasy setting. Again they're in Middle-earth fer cryin out loud.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

At least he didn't want Gunblades :smalltongue:
There is that.

The biggest problem, as I see it, is that my co-author and I have trouble saying "no" and fall in love with our stuff too easily. He always seems to want to insert his own creations into the setting, whether that's guns, a new god, or his new favorite thing, the vistani of Ravenloft. Me, I have trouble saying "no" to the stuff in the sourcebooks. As more 4e books come out, I find myself wanting to shoehorn more and more things from the books into the setting, whether that's FR paragon paths, artifacts from Open Grave or the new PHB II races that we'd previously given no consideration to.

[Tiki Snakes]

There is that.

The biggest problem, as I see it, is that my co-author and I have trouble saying "no" and fall in love with our stuff too easily. He always seems to want to insert his own creations into the setting, whether that's guns, a new god, or his new favorite thing, the vistani of Ravenloft. Me, I have trouble saying "no" to the stuff in the sourcebooks. As more 4e books come out, I find myself wanting to shoehorn more and more things from the books into the setting, whether that's FR paragon paths, artifacts from Open Grave or the new PHB II races that we'd previously given no consideration to.

Oh no, he's not trying to add his own ideas to the setting he co-authors is he? The cad!

I tease, I tease. It sounds like the inevitable way of any such sharing of setting. I don't see that this should be suprising, or really a problem. :)


Also, There are potatoes in my setting, too. Because there are potatoes growing in my world. Because they do not need to be imported from South America, on account of (unlike potatoes) South America Not Existing.

And you really can't tell me they are wrong for the Climate, because it's not your climate, it's not your potato, it's not even your laws of physics. So there.

If my players happen to want to order a potato salad sandwich, they damn well can*.

(*Except that given they are stuck in the middle of a dungeon and there isn't a decent population center anywhere near, bar a ****ty little village, they'll probably have some waiting to do!)

[horseboy]

Items that make no practical difference aren't the best place to draw the line from the point of view of a good story or campaign. They are the best place if you on a power trip or wanting to demonstrate your knowledge of a particular RL historical period is better than someone else.
I have a friend who's sense of verisimilitude is easily damaged so depending on just what it is I've found decent work arounds. The rest of the party will be asking something like: "Is the wine any good?"
"Are you kidding? It's got a screw top."
"Eau!"
"It couldn't. They didn't have the technology to create a screw on cap, let alone groove the bottle to match up."
:Facepalm: "Dude, just consider it a metaphor for just how cheap the wine is."
"Oh, okay."
Metaphors are handy like that.

[Piedmon_Sama]

The cohort of one of my players wears a visor at all times. I've described it as both an Inuit-style piece of carved bone and a pair of modern sunglasses at different times.

Nobody even bothers to notice. :sigh:

[MickJay]

on the potato issue: in my campaign a gnome wizard experimented on a troll and turned him into a brownish, fist sized rootfruit-thingie. it was rather tasty when cooked and was easy to grow. thus the Potato was born!
(named after its creator. Potato Crudd)

see guys! its that easy. :smallbiggrin:

Potatoes did not become popular, or significant, in Europe for a few centuries after they were introduced.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Oh no, he's not trying to add his own ideas to the setting he co-authors is he? The cad!

I tease, I tease. It sounds like the inevitable way of any such sharing of setting. I don't see that this should be suprising, or really a problem. :)


Also, There are potatoes in my setting, too. Because there are potatoes growing in my world. Because they do not need to be imported from South America, on account of (unlike potatoes) South America Not Existing.

And you really can't tell me they are wrong for the Climate, because it's not your climate, it's not your potato, it's not even your laws of physics. So there.

If my players happen to want to order a potato salad sandwich, they damn well can*.

(*Except that given they are stuck in the middle of a dungeon and there isn't a decent population center anywhere near, bar a ****ty little village, they'll probably have some waiting to do!)

You see, my main issue with it is that I've always been leery of the quality of homebrew, even if it's been PEACHed. There's just so much in the books, that trying to add made-up stuff that could have been made by anyone seems like giving the guests watered down wine during the second course, after you've given them your best wine to start with. And I feel uncomfortable with the vistani, which to me are a Ravenloft thing and a Ravenloft thing only.

Besides, we have completely different styles. He seems to prefer things like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMsLprY1JSg

While I favor things like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDVvUnhEs_g

The styles seem a tad incompatible.

[chiasaur11]

You see, my main issue with it is that I've always been leery of the quality of homebrew, even if it's been PEACHed. There's just so much in the books, that trying to add made-up stuff that could have been made by anyone seems like giving the guests watered down wine during the second course, after you've given them your best wine to start with. And I feel uncomfortable with the vistani, which to me are a Ravenloft thing and a Ravenloft thing only.

Besides, we have completely different styles. He seems to prefer things like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMsLprY1JSg

While I favor things like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDVvUnhEs_g

The styles seem a tad incompatible.

Hey, following up with the bad wine is an honored ancient tradition!

That way, everyone is too hammered to notice.

[Tiki Snakes]

I think your view of Homebrew is probably a little unnecessarily cautious. Especially in 4th ed dnd at any rate, it's practically encouraged.

If your styles really are that completely incompatible, though, why collaborate at all?

Also, charge of the Rohirrimm needs more German Sheepdogs.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I think your view of Homebrew is probably a little unnecessarily cautious. Especially in 4th ed dnd at any rate, it's practically encouraged.

If your styles really are that completely incompatible, though, why collaborate at all?

Also, charge of the Rohirrimm needs more German Sheepdogs.

I am unnecessarily cautious about almost everything. Especially downloadable content for computer games. The first time I tried that stuff it screwed up my Morrowind game, and then the second time it caused Mass Effect to stop working.

Initially this was all our DM's idea, but I fell in love with the Ten Minute Background style (linkable from my sig!) and decided to make one and show it to our DM. He thought it was absolutely superb, so he asked if I could make one for an NPC he'd made. I did so and he loved it, so I started creating NPC's to populate the main city in the setting. Finally he said, "You know, you've done such great work with these NPC's, would you like to co-author the setting with me?" I was surprised, but I liked the NPC's I'd made, so I agreed. A lot of the fluff that we now have for the setting has come from me, while the DM contributes a few new groundbreaking ideas every now and again, as well as working with the crunch. The Thornspire wouldn't have existed had I not gotten involved.

It isn't German Shepherd dogs that I'm talking about. It's the fact that our visions of fantasy are drastically different. He likes creepy, dark stories with subtle sexual undertones (in other words, Angela Carter,) while I prefer epic world-shaking stories with black and white morality and inspiring speeches before charging into battle (in other words, J.R.R. Tolkien.)

My co-author once told me this:

"Tolkien is sh*t. C.S. Lewis is a Trinity-sucking tw*t. J.K. Rowling is an insult to literature."

[Tengu_temp]

The best way you can do is wait until that guy grows out of the "if I don't like it, it's automatically total sh*t" stage. Good luck, that might take some time, probably very long. In fact, he'll probably die from cutting his wrists first.

In the meantime, think about what is the point of playing RPGs with people who like completely different stories than you.

[Tiki Snakes]

My co-author once told me this:

"Tolkien is sh*t. C.S. Lewis is a Trinity-sucking tw*t. J.K. Rowling is an insult to literature."

Fair enough. Also, the above quote is hilarious. I almost agree with the third part, I admit. ;) I also disapprove of overly black-and-white morality. It's just too convenient, but that's just me.

Oh, and there's plenty of creepiness and dark sexual tension in Tolkein.
Mostly between hobbits, though.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

The best way you can do is wait until that guy grows out of the "if I don't like it, it's automatically total sh*t" stage. Good luck, that might take some time, probably very long. In fact, he'll probably die from cutting his wrists first.

In the meantime, think about what is the point of playing RPGs with people who like completely different stories than you.

It wasn't a matter of "I don't like it, therefore it's total sh*t."

It was a matter of "They're not good writers."

But let's not talk about wrist-cutting. We've already been through that charade with him and it was not pleasant when it was brought to light. (He posed as a depressed girl for years, claiming things like being in a psych ward since Christmas and witnessing the suicide of a friend. It was all a bluff and the entire forum had been fooled.)

[Tengu_temp]

Well, Tolkien and Lewis might not be the greatest writers under the sun, but they're good at crafting worlds and they are some of the columns that support modern fantasy. Calling them sh*t is just not giving them justice.
And I still think he said that because their works aren't dark and edgy enough for him.

Seriously, why do you play with this guy? He sounds like a total drama queen and attention wh*re without any positive qualities, and not a single post in 11 pages so far is evidence on the contrary.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

He's created a brilliant setting, and one of his characters is simply the best roleplayed character in the forum, creating a beautiful love story.

That, and he's the admin of the forum.

[Oracle_Hunter]

It wasn't a matter of "I don't like it, therefore it's total sh*t."

It was a matter of "They're not good writers."

Actually... it is a matter of the former. Tolkien & Lewis are good writers, in that their writing is generally acknowledged as such. The latter is merely a justification of the former.

He could say "I do not care for the works of Tolkien & Lewis. Tolkien's works focus too much on invented languages for my taste, and I don't care for the Christian overtones in Lewis's work."

But he didn't.

In general, if you dismiss something as "sh*t" out-of-hand then you aren't thinking enough about it. And even then, unless you have extremely technical arguments (e.g. Tolkien awkwardly phrases his sentences and his plots are full of holes) then you are still making a subjective judgment about the work. It takes a while for some folks to see that, but it is true.

Also: "subtle sexual undertones?" :smalltongue:

[Tiki Snakes]

Actually, I'd go so far as to say that not only is Tolkein a dreadful writer, he's dreadful to the point of it being painful.

HOWEVER, he is such a dedicated world-builder, and crafts such a basically enthralling story, that his better works succeed in spite of him on some levels.

He can be really hard going, some times, but if you have the stamina, it can be really worth while. He's a weird case, basically. IMO.

[Zen Master]

Actually, I'd go so far as to say that not only is Tolkein a dreadful writer ......

HOWEVER, he is such a dedicated world-builder, and crafts such a basically enthralling story ......IMO.

This doesn't strike you as self-contradictory? How can he write so badly, if he crafts worlds of depth and character, and tells enthralling stories?

He is a wonderful storyteller. There are certain intellectual ideals his writing does not fulfill. Off-hand I cannot remember any good book I've read that fulfills those intellectual standards.

Never let some arbitrary collage professors theoretical ramblings get in the way of what works and is enjoyable. By all relevant measurements, Tolkien is a top-notch writer.

[Dhavaer]

This doesn't strike you as self-contradictory? How can he write so badly, if he crafts worlds of depth and character, and tells enthralling stories?

Not at all. LotR is a great story, but let down by the presentation. Tolkien is almost the opposite of C.S. Lewis in that manner; the Chronicles of Narnia are pretty terrible stories, but engagingly written.

[Tsotha-lanti]

Well, Tolkien and Lewis might not be the greatest writers under the sun, but they're good at crafting worlds and they are some of the columns that support modern fantasy. Calling them sh*t is just not giving them justice.

Fortunately, Michael Moorcock has torn them apart in detail (http://www.revolutionsf.com/article.php?id=953), as far back as 30 years ago.

[Saph]

Fortunately, Michael Moorcock has torn them apart in detail (http://www.revolutionsf.com/article.php?id=953), as far back as 30 years ago.

Goodness, what a terrible essay. It's one long rant about how everyone who doesn't share Moorcock's taste is bad and wrong. I never realised the guy was such an ideologue.

Well, I suppose that explains why I've never been able to get more than a page into any of his books.

- Saph

[Stephen_E]

Goodness, what a terrible essay. It's one long rant about how everyone who doesn't share Moorcock's taste is bad and wrong. I never realised the guy was such an ideologue.

Well, I suppose that explains why I've never been able to get more than a page into any of his books.

- Saph

To be fair Robin McKinley, Susan Cooper, ect ARE better writers than Tolkein and Lewis. And frankly many of his critisisms of Lewis and Tolkein are fair. The weakness of his essay is he mostly misses their strengths, although he does acknowledge the possibility (frankly I think it's damned near certainty without them we wouldn't have the later, superior works) that their works may've helped produce those later works that he (and I) admire so much.

Npte: I've read and enjoyed both Lewis, Tolkein, Moorcock and most of the other suthors named (indeed own many of the books) so I speak from practical knowledge, even if you may dispute my taste.

Stephen E

[Saph]

To be fair Robin McKinley, Susan Cooper, ect ARE better writers than Tolkein and Lewis.

Robin McKinley I can't remember off the top of my head, but I've read Susan Cooper's work a LOT. And while I'd say she's probably better than Tolkein, she's definitely not as good as C.S. Lewis - Lewis's books are far more compact and varied. There are sections of The Dark Is Rising series where you could cut out entire chapters without really losing anything from the story, whereas you'd have trouble taking out so much as a page from the Narnia books.

In Tolkein's case, the quality of the writing varies greatly, but the world-building is so good that it almost doesn't matter.


And frankly many of his critisisms of Lewis and Tolkein are fair.

Most of them come down to "They support a political viewpoint I don't like".

Due to family connections I've got a passing acquaintance with a few of the 60s and 70s sci-fi "old-guard", so I've had a fair bit of experience with Moorcock's circle. I honestly think that the attitude Moorcock shows in the essay is a big part of the reason science fiction got eclipsed by fantasy in the 90s. Too much ideology, not enough interest in what people actually wanted to read.

- Saph

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I agree that Tolkien's worldbuilding is spot on, and that Lewis is a tight writer. I may not have been able to read Tolkien when I was ten or twelve, but I was certainly able to read Lewis.

I suspect my DM's dislike of such writers comes more from personal taste than a judgment of their writing quality. He sent me "The Bloody Chamber" as a word document, and I found a number of the stories boring.

One of them was a retelling of Sleeping Beauty where the princess is instead a vampire living in modern France and the prince is some innocent passerby on a bicycle whom she wants to suck the blood of but finds herself unable to do so.

Another is a retelling of Little Red Riding Hood where instead of talking with the wolf in the forest and then she and her grandmother being eaten and rescued by the woodcutter, she fights the wolf and cuts off its paw and when she arrives at her grandmother's house is stunned to see her grandmother is missing a hand, so she gets the villagers to kill the witch and inherits her house.

Still another was a retelling of Beauty and the Beast, with the Beast being a tiger dressed up like a man, and instead of him turning into a human, the "Beauty" character turns into a tiger at the end.

And another was basically an embellished retelling of Bluebeard.

It was basically Grimm's Fairy Tales with slight alterations and the sexual aspects cranked up to eleven. I felt it was a chore to read, though I didn't tell my DM that.

That seems to be the crux of our differences. He likes dark fairy-tale like things with sex not being hidden and enjoys the image of the psychologically tortured heroine. I like the heroic struggle of good vs. evil, focusing on grand sweeping epics and I enjoy the image of the good kingly-leader figure, like Theoden and Aragorn. How does one reconcile such a difference?

[Quincunx]

Two words: Common enemy.

[EDIT: Sure, I could stick in some reminiscence about the vagaries of dealing with 'roleplayers' who value their 'roles' over practicality, and how to hold the moral high ground while coaxing other people to do the scut work, but learning how to manipulate people with text takes years and I haven't got enough skill with it to give more than basic lessons. Just start a war where "Join or Die" is valid--and, perhaps, choke off resurrection magic and the re-introduction of killed, yet re-skinned character concepts.

EDIT_02: What are you prepared to sacrifice about your world-view in the service of making a good story? A starting bid, if you will, so we know the size of sacrifice to ask of Gaiman-esque DM.]

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I'm talking about the two of us as co-creators of a world, not as players.

[Thane of Fife]

That seems to be the crux of our differences. He likes dark fairy-tale like things with sex not being hidden and enjoys the image of the psychologically tortured heroine. I like the heroic struggle of good vs. evil, focusing on grand sweeping epics and I enjoy the image of the good kingly-leader figure, like Theoden and Aragorn. How does one reconcile such a difference?

Hmm. Have you looked at Warhammer? It's got all that stuff in it - the clash of armies, mighty heroes fighting for or against Chaos, and yet still has relatively ordinary people fighting witches and Chaos cults. It's not quite what either of you want, but it has elements of both.

Without compromises, though, those styles seem fairly incompatible. Fairytale and Epic are almost complete opposites.

Completely incidentally, if you like epics, and since I know you like paladins, you might enjoy The Deed of Paksenarrion (http://www.amazon.com/Deed-Paksenarrion-Novel-Elizabeth-Moon/dp/0671721046/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1237467190&sr=8-1). I'd highly recommend it.

[Tsotha-lanti]

Without compromises, though, those styles seem fairly incompatible. Fairytale and Epic are almost complete opposites.

Hardly. Traditional Celtic myth covers both fairly handily (on one hand you've got swan princes, on the other you've got the tragedy of the Sons of Usnach, epic heroes all...), as does Arthuriana. So I guess that's Pendragon or any FRPG with a Celtic setting. Actually, Pendragon can cover that too...

Fortunately, Pendragon is also one of the better FRPGs.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Hmm. Have you looked at Warhammer? It's got all that stuff in it - the clash of armies, mighty heroes fighting for or against Chaos, and yet still has relatively ordinary people fighting witches and Chaos cults. It's not quite what either of you want, but it has elements of both.
On the forum where we play, we're both part of a Warhammer roleplay as well. I play a Bretonnian knight who shook off his family curse of madness with the aid of the Lady of the Lake and now struggles with his former bestial nature as he seeks redemption, while he plays that character's cousin, a young Bretonnian woman who'd been sent to the Empire to learn how to use her magic, but on her way home was captured by the Skaven and imprisoned in their warrens as a slave, developed Stockholm Syndrome and is now a spy for them in her father's court.

And the characters are falling in love.

As for the setting we're designing though, that's 4e D&D.

[Thane of Fife]

You can hit them both in a setting, but not really at the same time. Fairytales tend to focus on the individual hero or heroine and his/her personal goals, whereas epics generally require large consequences.

But in the grand scheme of things, I suppose you're right.

EDIT:

@Zousha:
I know you're using 4e, I was just pointing at Warhammer as an idea on how to mix them.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Hardly. Traditional Celtic myth covers both fairly handily (on one hand you've got swan princes, on the other you've got the tragedy of the Sons of Usnach, epic heroes all...), as does Arthuriana. So I guess that's Pendragon or any FRPG with a Celtic setting. Actually, Pendragon can cover that too...

Fortunately, Pendragon is also one of the better FRPGs.
FRPGs? I don't think we're planning on changing the game we're using, which is 4e D&D, but I'll look into this Pendragon.

[kamikasei]

That seems to be the crux of our differences. He likes dark fairy-tale like things with sex not being hidden and enjoys the image of the psychologically tortured heroine. I like the heroic struggle of good vs. evil, focusing on grand sweeping epics and I enjoy the image of the good kingly-leader figure, like Theoden and Aragorn. How does one reconcile such a difference?

There is good and there is evil. Evil can wear a fair face, while good is often rough or ugly. Those who struggle heroically against evil often must also struggle against their own evils - or to keep the will to fight on against setbacks. The struggle is sweeping and epic, but there are ambiguous parties and there are those who do evil on a small and personal scale - unseelie fey, dark sorcerers, the simply cruel and petty.

If he wants the entire setting to be a dark fairytale, you have a problem. If he simply wants it to contain dark fairytales, that's easily accomodated, unless you in turn are determined that everything be sunshine and light (or purest, blackest, clearest evil).

[Khanderas]

Completely incidentally, if you like epics, and since I know you like paladins, you might enjoy The Deed of Paksenarrion (http://www.amazon.com/Deed-Paksenarrion-Novel-Elizabeth-Moon/dp/0671721046/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1237467190&sr=8-1). I'd highly recommend it.
I second that recommendation. Though paladins are not that prominent, atleast not in the first book. Then again it did give me my first picture of how a practical and inpiring paladin should be.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

There is good and there is evil. Evil can wear a fair face, while good is often rough or ugly. Those who struggle heroically against evil often must also struggle against their own evils - or to keep the will to fight on against setbacks. The struggle is sweeping and epic, but there are ambiguous parties and there are those who do evil on a small and personal scale - unseelie fey, dark sorcerers, the simply cruel and petty.

If he wants the entire setting to be a dark fairytale, you have a problem. If he simply wants it to contain dark fairytales, that's easily accomodated, unless you in turn are determined that everything be sunshine and light (or purest, blackest, clearest evil).
I knew pretty much from the beginning that this world wasn't going to be sunshine and light. I made my character to BE the sunshine and light.

And there is some purest, blackest, clearest evil in the form of the undead cavorting underground and the psycho nature cult that wants to destroy all the Vale's cities. I just don't know how dark fairy-talish we need to make things to accomodate his wants as well. I feel like, as I become more and more involved, I'm pushing out what he wants in the setting, and I want a balance between our ideas, not mine dominating his or vice versa.

[kamikasei]

I knew pretty much from the beginning that this world wasn't going to be sunshine and light. I made my character to BE the sunshine and light.

And there is some purest, blackest, clearest evil in the form of the undead cavorting underground and the psycho nature cult that wants to destroy all the Vale's cities.

What I mean is that you should be able to accomodate psychologically tortured heroines and dark fairytales unless you require that all things be either sunshine and light or blackest evil.


I just don't know how dark fairy-talish we need to make things to accomodate his wants as well. I feel like, as I become more and more involved, I'm pushing out what he wants in the setting, and I want a balance between our ideas, not mine dominating his or vice versa.

I agree with Thane of Fife; the stuff he wants works better on the smaller and more personal scale, while the grand themes and sweeping epic conflicts work better as part of the large-scale construction. I wouldn't try to build his stuff in to the world itself (how could you?), but include places and factions where it can be hooked on, and then make it part of a campaign rather than the setting.

[Stephen_E]

Robin McKinley I can't remember off the top of my head, but I've read Susan Cooper's work a LOT. And while I'd say she's probably better than Tolkein, she's definitely not as good as C.S. Lewis - Lewis's books are far more compact and varied. There are sections of The Dark Is Rising series where you could cut out entire chapters without really losing anything from the story, whereas you'd have trouble taking out so much as a page from the Narnia books.

In Tolkein's case, the quality of the writing varies greatly, but the world-building is so good that it almost doesn't matter.



Most of them come down to "They support a political viewpoint I don't like".

- Saph

Have you ever read Lewis's World's series, Dire! Narnia was the best stuff he ever wrote, and yes it's good.

While clearly Moorcock hates the politics, and I suspect in Lewis's case he's not to hot on the religous aspects, he is correct in that the politics are implicit throghout much of the books, particuly Lewis. Lewis was a propagandist, a self admited one. Fortunately he was a reasonably subtle one in Narnia, at least compared to someone like John Ringo. "A Boy and his Horse" was one of the less subtle Narnia books in it's anti-islam message.

Personally I suspect the eclipsing of SF by fantasy in the 80's and 90's has more to do with other features, a boost in anti-science culture, and it been easier to write middling decent fantasy than SF (SF you have to do a decent job on the science as well as everything else). The great stuff is hard no matter what the mileu.:smallwink:

Stephen E

[Narmoth]

You know, there's nothing wrong with combining epics with more gritty realism. Or have antiheroes in heroic battles.
Like last time our group was asked to rescue the world, and we answer "how much will you pay?"

[Tengu_temp]

You know, there's nothing wrong with combining epics with more gritty realism. Or have antiheroes in heroic battles.


Actually, there is - it's very hard to make a game satisfying for both players who like idealistic stories, and those who prefer cynical ones.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

What I mean is that you should be able to accomodate psychologically tortured heroines and dark fairytales unless you require that all things be either sunshine and light or blackest evil.
I knew that that either sunshine and light or blackest evil stuff wasn't gonna fly when our DM pitched the setting, before I started to co-author with him.

I agree with Thane of Fife; the stuff he wants works better on the smaller and more personal scale, while the grand themes and sweeping epic conflicts work better as part of the large-scale construction. I wouldn't try to build his stuff in to the world itself (how could you?), but include places and factions where it can be hooked on, and then make it part of a campaign rather than the setting.
I suppose that's true. I've pitched a villain idea to him that's basically like this:

The guy's like a lich, except he doesn't bottle up his soul in a phylactery. Instead, he constantly replaces his failing and dying organs with fresh replacements from slain victims, and he covers his scarred skin with skin from his victims like a suit (sort of like Buffalo Bill in Silence of the Lambs, or an unholy fusion of Amber Sweet and her brother Pavi in Repo! The Genetic Opera.) He wanders the Vale with a large wagon containing pure, concentrated "evil" or whatever, and when he meets caravans or finds a village, he invites them to see his "Nightmare Carnival" which is an experience akin to the Paraphenalia Wagon in Halloween is Grinch Night. During the disturbing phantasmagoria which he inflicts on people for his own demented pleasure, he kidnaps unsuspecting people and either kills them, using their organs and skin to sustain himself, or sexually violating them and leaving them broken and weeping after it's over. And then he vanishes, seemingly without a trace, only to appear somewhere else and start the whole shebang over again.

To be honest, I'm not certain how receptive my DM is to this idea, since he was drunk when I first pitched it to him, and he hasn't come to the forums to talk for a few days.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

What? Did I scare everyone off?:smallconfused:

[Oracle_Hunter]

What? Did I scare everyone off?:smallconfused:


:confused:

What did you want to discuss further? Seems like most things are wrapped up nicely.

[Jayngfet]

I'd reply, but you and me resolved all the issues listed over PM.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

:confused:

What did you want to discuss further? Seems like most things are wrapped up nicely.

Well, the villain idea I had. I'm not sure if perhaps I went a little overboard in the disturbing department.

[Oracle_Hunter]

Sounds like it'd be up your DM's alley.

Is he supposed to be a BBEG? To be honest, he sounds like a "sideshow" villain; more of a force of nature rather than someone with a plot.

[Nightson]

The sexual assault thing seems sort of weird for the villain. It gave me a "throw in a puppy kicking too" vibe.

[chiasaur11]

Yeah. Just makes him petty.

I mean, oddly, it makes him less scary. He's no longer a mysterious evil, he's now just kinda creepy.

The bad kind.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Yeah, I'm thinking of taking that part out too. The only reason I put it in there was because, if I remember correctly, the character of Pavi Largo in Repo! The Genetic Opera, in addition to wearing womens' faces like masks and being disturbingly effeminate, was also a bisexual rapist.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Sounds like it'd be up your DM's alley.

Is he supposed to be a BBEG? To be honest, he sounds like a "sideshow" villain; more of a force of nature rather than someone with a plot.

Exactly. He's a recurring villain the PC's would run into likely late Heroic, early Paragon tier, and he'd always have them fight monsters and mess with their heads before dissapearing before they could take a swing at him.

[Nightson]

Yeah, I'm thinking of taking that part out too. The only reason I put it in there was because, if I remember correctly, the character of Pavi Largo in Repo! The Genetic Opera, in addition to wearing womens' faces like masks and being disturbingly effeminate, was also a bisexual rapist.

I think that makes sense for his character, his pathos sounds like it relates to sex/gender, whereas organ harvesting, just not that sexy.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Whose pathos are you talking about? Pavi's or my villain's?

[Narmoth]

Exactly. He's a recurring villain the PC's would run into likely late Heroic, early Paragon tier, and he'd always have them fight monsters and mess with their heads before dissapearing before they could take a swing at him.

Good for you that it's a pbp-game. I'd kill my dm for not letting med figth the villain if he appeared.
It's much better to have a recurring villain that you can't take because of diplomatic immunity than because of deus ex machina

[Oracle_Hunter]

Good for you that it's a pbp-game. I'd kill my dm for not letting med figth the villain if he appeared.
It's much better to have a recurring villain that you can't take because of diplomatic immunity than because of deus ex machina

Nah, you can easily do this right. Instead of seeing the villain, you hear stories about him. Eventually, you start running into "things" he leaves behind - undead abominations mostly. He's long gone by the time the PCs show up, but they should start getting an understanding for the guy.

Eventually, when you're ready to have a confrontation you can have the PCs hear about a bounty placed on the BBEG by some king. Make sure the PCs had just left a town that had been visited by the BBEG (they had to clean up the mess); the PCs should backtrack to the town they left and see if they can find out where the BBEG went.

But yeah, don't pull the "you can't touch this" villain shtick. Your PCs will eventually just ignore the guy since they know they can't hurt him. Even if your Paladin insists on taking him on, the other PCs will argue (rightly) that you can't do anything to stop him, so why risk their lives needlessly?

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Nah, you can easily do this right. Instead of seeing the villain, you hear stories about him. Eventually, you start running into "things" he leaves behind - undead abominations mostly. He's long gone by the time the PCs show up, but they should start getting an understanding for the guy.

Eventually, when you're ready to have a confrontation you can have the PCs hear about a bounty placed on the BBEG by some king. Make sure the PCs had just left a town that had been visited by the BBEG (they had to clean up the mess); the PCs should backtrack to the town they left and see if they can find out where the BBEG went.

But yeah, don't pull the "you can't touch this" villain shtick. Your PCs will eventually just ignore the guy since they know they can't hurt him. Even if your Paladin insists on taking him on, the other PCs will argue (rightly) that you can't do anything to stop him, so why risk their lives needlessly?

First off, he's more like a miniboss than a BBEG. Our encounters with him'd be more like a sidequest than part of our main quest. Secondly, he'd probably pull the deus-ex-machina thing only once or twice, and eventually the PC's would corner him and end him once and for all.

[Oracle_Hunter]

First off, he's more like a miniboss than a BBEG. Our encounters with him'd be more like a sidequest than part of our main quest. Secondly, he'd probably pull the deus-ex-machina thing only once or twice, and eventually the PC's would corner him and end him once and for all.

Once or twice is too many. Players get pissed off quickly when a DM pulls some obvious Deus Ex Machina crap - avoid it if at all possible. Far better to keep him on the edges of the story than to have him "poof" for no good reason.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Once or twice is too many. Players get pissed off quickly when a DM pulls some obvious Deus Ex Machina crap - avoid it if at all possible. Far better to keep him on the edges of the story than to have him "poof" for no good reason.

I don't plan on having him "poof." I plan on having him be all, "So you figured it out eh? Well, see how you deal with this!" and summons some sort of big bruiser. Then, while the PC's are fighting it, he's all "Runawayrunawayrunaway!!" Kind of like General Grievous at the beginning of Revenge of the Sith. Talks tough, but when the going actually gets tough, he gets going.

[Oracle_Hunter]

I don't plan on having him "poof." I plan on having him be all, "So you figured it out eh? Well, see how you deal with this!" and summons some sort of big bruiser. Then, while the PC's are fighting it, he's all "Runawayrunawayrunaway!!" Kind of like General Grievous at the beginning of Revenge of the Sith. Talks tough, but when the going actually gets tough, he gets going.

Well... be forewarned that your PCs are going to try to dodge the bruiser and nail down the BBEG. It always happens.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I see. Well if they kill him then they'll kill him.

[Jayngfet]

I'd reccomend keeping this guys crimes simple. He kills to achieve his goals and to keep himself alive. He doesn't get any pleasure out of it but he won't hate to do it. If you get in his way he'll murder you and step over your corpse but he won't go out of his way to kill random passerby. Don't overdo it.

[Oracle_Hunter]

I'd reccomend keeping this guys crimes simple. He kills to achieve his goals and to keep himself alive. He doesn't get any pleasure out of it but he won't hate to do it. If you get in his way he'll murder you and step over your corpse but he won't go out of his way to kill random passerby. Don't overdo it.

I'd disagree. Think about his party - if they were any more dramatic, they'd be playing Vampire :smalltongue:

I think the DM and the other players will get a big kick out of some more Dark Perversion elements, particularly if you run this guy as a shadowy figure rather than "someone to kill."

But if you really just want to do the "watch me run" thing, then don't bother with the other elements. He'll be dead too quickly for anyone to care about 'em.

[Dervag]

I have a friend who's sense of verisimilitude is easily damaged so depending on just what it is I've found decent work arounds. The rest of the party will be asking something like: "Is the wine any good?"
"Are you kidding? It's got a screw top."
"Eau!"
"It couldn't. They didn't have the technology to create a screw on cap, let alone groove the bottle to match up."
:Facepalm: "Dude, just consider it a metaphor for just how cheap the wine is."
"Oh, okay."
Metaphors are handy like that.The other way to interpret this is: "The wine is completely undrinkable. The reason it's undrinkable is because some idiot decided to try and make a screw top for the wine bottle by hand. And they did a lousy job of it, so now the %&#$ cap won't come off. I'm not even sure how they got it on in the first place. But the only way to get the wine out of this bottle is with a hammer and chisel. Find some wine bottled by a sane person instead."
_____


Then what's stopping you from using guns, or centurion armor with knights? You have to draw the line somewhere, and I find the best place to draw it is where it makes no practical difference to the game.I find that the best place to draw the line is wherever it pleases the line-drawer best. Centurion armor is designed for infantry and isn't suitable for cavalry, but there's really no reason why knights in shining armor shouldn't go up against blocks of foot soldiers in lorica segmentata. Likewise, there's no self-evident reason you can't have guns in your fantasy setting. There are aesthetic issues, but those are subjective.

Nobody has the right to tell anyone else that it is objectively incorrect to do these things, as long as the person doing it knows that they are doing it.

Real history only contained about half a dozen to a dozen major templates for us to base a fantasy civilization off of if we restrict ourselves to the post-classical, pre-Renaissance world. If we want to be even slightly imaginative, we're going to have to invent new elements to inject into those templates, or mix and match between templates.
________


I have already reccomended Limyaael to my DM (who is also my co-author). He said he didn't have time to read it.If he has time to make up Tortured Baroque Fanciful Heroines, and doesn't have time to read someone who takes a good look at said heroines and applies a dose of common sense, he's scheduling his time badly.

This fellow needs to get some fresh air and perspective.
______


Actually, I'd go so far as to say that not only is Tolkein a dreadful writer, he's dreadful to the point of it being painful.

HOWEVER, he is such a dedicated world-builder, and crafts such a basically enthralling story, that his better works succeed in spite of him on some levels.

He can be really hard going, some times, but if you have the stamina, it can be really worth while. He's a weird case, basically. IMO.If Tolkein were a truly bad writer, he would not be able to present his setting effectively. This is a common problem with authors (see a large random sample of fanfic for example). If you start with a basically sound concept for how to create an interesting world or improve on an existing one, but aren't a competent writer and storyteller, things fall apart in a hurry. Your characters lose plausible motivations, you get hopelessly distracted talking about one thing at another's expense, and in general your original idea gets trampled.

Now, it may be that Tolkein is bad at prose writing by the standards of established authors. Or at least of established authors with best-selling novels to their names. But compared to the general population, Tolkein is an excellent writer. The Lord of the Rings compares very well to the kind of unpublishable dreck most people would come up with. Probably including a lot of the students-with-delusions-of-grandeur who think that Tolkein is crap.
_____


I see. Well if they kill him then they'll kill him.That works. The key is that you don't want to create a villain who has the DM acting as his guardian angel. That places the DM in direct opposition to the players (the PCs are trying to kill the bad guy, and the DM is doing whatever it takes to stop them). The DM will win, and the players are rightly annoyed that the DM set up this target for them only to yank it out from under their noses at the last minute.

But if you set the villain up as a coward with half a dozen escape plans for every situation in the story, then it can work. Instead of being miracles pulled out of your... hat, the villain's escapes become the main challenge the heroes need to overcome. They need to find a way to trap the bad guy in his lair, or to cut off his lines of retreat. Outthinking him becomes a key part of the battle plan.

The most important thing to remember is that almost any situation the PCs face should represent some kind of a challenge. The challenge may be a physical combat, or a social encounter, or a "duel of the planners" in which victory goes to the person who thought things through. Having overcome the challenge, the PCs earn a reward. Failure to overcome the challenge, or to correctly identify the type of challenge (treating a battle as a social encounter or vice versa) will cost them.

But the PCs should always have a realistic way of overcoming the challenge. They should not have to guess at the correct solution from an infinite range of options. They should not be faced with what seem to be challenges they can overcome, but actually aren't (the person they're trying to persuade is automatically immune to magic Diplomacy checks and all rational arguments). Nor should they be faced with situations where even if they overcome the challenge, the DM moves the goalposts and denies them the prize.

Of course, any given challenge may be beyond the PC's ability to handle at the moment, but it should be possible to predict when this is going to happen. And it should normally be linked to something the PCs could realistically have done, but that they failed to do: If they had brought a ranged weapon the flying enemy would not have beaten them so easily, if they had done some research on the villain they would have known to Dimensional Anchor him before killing his blocker, and so on.

[Jack_Simth]

Once or twice is too many. Players get pissed off quickly when a DM pulls some obvious Deus Ex Machina crap - avoid it if at all possible. Far better to keep him on the edges of the story than to have him "poof" for no good reason.
They get really upset at villians who run away ... pretty much period. Doesn't matter if he rolled initiative and used his first action to cast Teleport - players don't really like it when a villian simply won't stand and fight.

Although if you pull that two or three times, then arrange for a timeframe when there's a reason why he can't do that....

[Archpaladin Zousha]

If Tolkein were a truly bad writer, he would not be able to present his setting effectively. This is a common problem with authors (see a large random sample of fanfic for example). If you start with a basically sound concept for how to create an interesting world or improve on an existing one, but aren't a competent writer and storyteller, things fall apart in a hurry. Your characters lose plausible motivations, you get hopelessly distracted talking about one thing at another's expense, and in general your original idea gets trampled.

Now, it may be that Tolkein is bad at prose writing by the standards of established authors. Or at least of established authors with best-selling novels to their names. But compared to the general population, Tolkein is an excellent writer. The Lord of the Rings compares very well to the kind of unpublishable dreck most people would come up with. Probably including a lot of the students-with-delusions-of-grandeur who think that Tolkein is crap.
Also students-with-delusions-of-grandeur who think that Tolkien is GOD!, like myself. :smallfrown:

That works. The key is that you don't want to create a villain who has the DM acting as his guardian angel. That places the DM in direct opposition to the players (the PCs are trying to kill the bad guy, and the DM is doing whatever it takes to stop them). The DM will win, and the players are rightly annoyed that the DM set up this target for them only to yank it out from under their noses at the last minute.

But if you set the villain up as a coward with half a dozen escape plans for every situation in the story, then it can work. Instead of being miracles pulled out of your... hat, the villain's escapes become the main challenge the heroes need to overcome. They need to find a way to trap the bad guy in his lair, or to cut off his lines of retreat. Outthinking him becomes a key part of the battle plan.

The most important thing to remember is that almost any situation the PCs face should represent some kind of a challenge. The challenge may be a physical combat, or a social encounter, or a "duel of the planners" in which victory goes to the person who thought things through. Having overcome the challenge, the PCs earn a reward. Failure to overcome the challenge, or to correctly identify the type of challenge (treating a battle as a social encounter or vice versa) will cost them.

But the PCs should always have a realistic way of overcoming the challenge. They should not have to guess at the correct solution from an infinite range of options. They should not be faced with what seem to be challenges they can overcome, but actually aren't (the person they're trying to persuade is automatically immune to magic Diplomacy checks and all rational arguments). Nor should they be faced with situations where even if they overcome the challenge, the DM moves the goalposts and denies them the prize.

Of course, any given challenge may be beyond the PC's ability to handle at the moment, but it should be possible to predict when this is going to happen. And it should normally be linked to something the PCs could realistically have done, but that they failed to do: If they had brought a ranged weapon the flying enemy would not have beaten them so easily, if they had done some research on the villain they would have known to Dimensional Anchor him before killing his blocker, and so on.
This. This is what I'm talking about. The PCs can't just walk up to him and stab him. They have to out-trick the trickster and when they finally do track him down, he goes down in maybe one or two hits tops. The idea is that once you figure out all his tricks, see through all his illusions and ignore his bullsh*t, he's all talk and no guts.

To quote Bruce Wayne: "Joker's vain and likes to talk. He'll try to distract you, but don't listen. Block it out and power on through."

That's sort of how their final encounter with him'd go, or something.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I think my character's finally manned up.

The cleric told him he'd never understand her because he's a guy and she's a girl (making my character touch her crotch for some reason,) capping it off with this statement:

"You are an annoying childish moronic little git and should avoid my kind at all costs, and never speak of my past again unless you want your tongue shoved up your ass. Comprehende?"

Here was my response:

"Because I have a conscience? Because I have a sense of responsibility? I'm not some kid who left home thinking life was all sunshine and rainbows. I'm an adult. I know that there's suffering. But I'm going to do everything in my power to minimize that suffering. I know that you've been hurt, but brooding over that hurt only makes it worse. I realize that now. Crying over Mela's death won't bring her back, but making sure that no one dies like her if I can help it? That I can do! Keeping secrets and trusting no one will only drive people away from you. We're all going to have to trust each other if we want to be able to stand two minutes with each other, let alone survive a fight!"

Does that sound a little less spineless?

The cleric's response feels a little biting though.

"Truth, understanding, friendship, and a gold piece will get you a hooker and a reality check, both of witch you need desperately."

While I know my character's likely to be insulted, he DOES need to get laid. I play too many virgins already.

[Jayngfet]

A whole GP? Expensive whore:smalltongue:.


Seriously though, that's a really good start.

[Narmoth]

A whole GP? Expensive whore:smalltongue:.

Seriously though, that's a really good start.

Hey, my character in Shademans campaign pays up to 200 gp for a whore. Of course, he rents the room as well, and he, being a fallen paladin, gives most of the money to the girl, not the pimp, but still... :smallwink:

I think the Book of Erotic Adventure (not really a great buy) price them from 1 gold to about 30 or something

[Archpaladin Zousha]

A whole GP? Expensive whore:smalltongue:.


Seriously though, that's a really good start.

Thanks, Jayngfet. :smallsmile:

[Jayngfet]

Hey, my character in Shademans campaign pays up to 200 gp for a whore. Of course, he rents the room as well, and he, being a fallen paladin, gives most of the money to the girl, not the pimp, but still... :smallwink:

I think the Book of Erotic Adventure (not really a great buy) price them from 1 gold to about 30 or something

But cityscape put whores as lower class citizens, who make roughly 2gp a month.

Wait, Gygax made a table for this sort of thing. Anyone have it?

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Would it even be respectable for a paladin to buy the services of a whore? I know you can't fall in 4e, but it'd be a tad...awkward...for a loyal servant of Pelor to be getting it on with a cheap hooker, wouldn't it?

[The Neoclassic]

Would it even be respectable for a paladin to buy the services of a whore? I know you can't fall in 4e, but it'd be a tad...awkward...for a loyal servant of Pelor to be getting it on with a cheap hooker, wouldn't it?

I'd say it would depend on how he treats her, his motivations, and the code of his deity (Pelor in this instance). Some people of course think that sex outside of marriage is an automatically chaotic or nongood act, but that's up to DM whim or player interpretation I suppose. :smallyuk:

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Well, here's Pelor's code (according to the PHB):


Alleviate suffering wherever you find it.
Bring Pelor's light into places of darknes, showing kindness, mercy, and compassion.
Be watchful against evil.


Prostitutes suffer greatly, don't they? All those diseases, people wanting rough or kinky sex and being beaten by their pimps and stuff? Wouldn't that make Pelor opposed to prostitution?

[Asbestos]

Well, here's Pelor's code (according to the PHB):


Alleviate suffering wherever you find it.
Bring Pelor's light into places of darknes, showing kindness, mercy, and compassion.
Be watchful against evil.


Prostitutes suffer greatly, don't they? All those diseases, people wanting rough or kinky sex and being beaten by their pimps and stuff? Wouldn't that make Pelor opposed to prostitution?

He would be opposed to say, the sex trade in South East Asia, but I doubt he'd be opposed to the more regulated prostitution found in the Netherlands.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Could you perhaps elaborate? I don't understand, since I live in a nation where prostitution of any kind is considered Bad with a capital B.

[The Neoclassic]

In other words, if a woman willingly enters the sex trade, is not abused, and allowed to use protection, then there isn't any clear violation of Pelor's code. However, if the situation the prostitute is in causes suffering for her (such as she was forced into it) then it is of course not good to solicit her services.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

...Women willingly enter the sex trade?:smallconfused:

[Tiki Snakes]

...Women willingly enter the sex trade?:smallconfused:

Yes. It is the oldest profession on earth after all, and for some women it is a very profitable one indeed. Note, not only is prostitution regulated and legal in (amsterdam at least), there are also certain areas in the USA where this is also true. See - the 'World Famous' Bunny Ranch in Nevada.

It's a confusing and complicated world out there.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

...I've been watching too much Law and Order: SVU. :smallredface:

[The Neoclassic]

...Women willingly enter the sex trade?:smallconfused:

Yup. I mean, there's all sorts of jobs where we can't understand why other people would do them. If it's a relatively safe and well-paying occupation, it makes sense that there would be at least a few people willing to enter it.

[Asbestos]

...Women willingly enter the sex trade?:smallconfused:

Indeed, sometimes people willingly give it up for cash, some people can do pretty well at it apparently (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,480037,00.html).

The link is to foxnews because its the first place I could find in Google that looked the least shady, article is about that girl that's auctioning off a night with her via the internet.

Now, it is certainly sleazy... but does it go against Pelor? Not at all.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I suppose I should have expected it in this day and age. Most of my knowledge of prostitution involves Victorian England, where it was only impovershed women who had all kinds of nasty diseases and worked from payment to payment, never having enough to eat either for themselves or for their kids, and taking opium (as a medicene) like it was candy and pouring laudanum (another form of opium) down their kids' throats so they could sleep. Everything I learned about the sex trade, I learned from Charles Dickens, E.M. Forster, D.H. Lawrence and John Fowles.

[Tsotha-lanti]

Yes. It is the oldest profession on earth after all, and for some women it is a very profitable one indeed. Note, not only is prostitution regulated and legal in (amsterdam at least), there are also certain areas in the USA where this is also true. See - the 'World Famous' Bunny Ranch in Nevada.

And all of Germany. Not that that means it's morally or politically conflict-free, or that there's no crime associated with it, but slavery is a separate if related issue.

Here in Finland, I believe it's illegal to offer sex services in public, and pimping/buying sex services from a victim of pimping is illegal (and actually punished), but other than that, neither selling sex or buying sex is illegal, to my knowledge.

And yeah, prostitutes, male or female, can make precisely as much as they can get people to pay - whether that's tuppence or John's head...

If there's no abuse, coercion, and the like involved, there shouldn't be real D&D Good-Evil axis alignment issues with prostitution. (Naturally, it's safer when it's legal, and even safer when it's not generally seen as immoral.) Lawful-alignment issues can ensue depending on the laws a character adheres to, and specific deities can certainly opposite or endorse it. Heck, Faerûn's Sune (CG) basically seems intended to offer "charity prostitution," or temple prostitutes for donations (no wonder, considering Ed Greenwood is Ed Greenwood!).

It all depends on how medieval or fantastic your setting is. If women are chattel, prostitution will be dangerous for them because they can be treated any way men want. If there's a strong religious intolerance of sex in general, it will be even more dangerous, because people will be badly disposed towards prostitutes. Combining the two into a realistic misogynistic sex-negative soup produces an environment where Ripper types slaughter prostitutes on the streets and no one really gives a damn.

If, however, women have the same rights as men, and there's either no religious condemnation, or even religious approval, prostitutes may be quite safe, respected, and even wealthy, perhaps similarly to personal trainers today - or at least professional entertainers. (But not birthday clowns. Everyone hates them.)

[Nightson]

http://www.jstor.org/pss/3704494 for medieval english prostitutes

[FoE]

It would be fair to say that the majority of prostitutes enter the trade as a result of drug addiction, poverty, etc. But yes, there are women who willingly enter the trade without co-ercion or necessity.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I see. I suppose that'll run on a case by case basis then. My character might not need the hooker anyway. My DM and I have been talking and he seems interested in a romance between our characters, my character being the rock that she can rely on for emotional stability and his character being the world-wise mentor that he can learn just what this brave new world is like. The rogue wants to get into the rogue/warlock's pants, yes, but the rogue/warlock thinks the rogue is too unstable for a romantic relationship.

And My DM's explained his dislike of Tolkien:


But I like Lord of the Rings too: that cavalry charge provokes a lot of strong emotion in me, for example. And the entire trilogy easily goes down as my favourite fantasy films of all time.


Tolkien is ****. He's long-winded and over-descrptive, and loves telling us about his world more than telling the story. But the films stripped all that crap out and made way for fantasy awesomeness.

And realized that while we have diverging tastes, we do have something very important in common. We both love Mass Effect.

[FoE]

I would agree with your friend, actually. Oh, I love the story of Lord of the Rings, but I never cared for the books.

[The Minx]

But I like Lord of the Rings too: that cavalry charge provokes a lot of strong emotion in me, for example. And the entire trilogy easily goes down as my favourite fantasy films of all time.

Tolkien is ****. He's long-winded and over-descrptive, and loves telling us about his world more than telling the story. But the films stripped all that crap out and made way for fantasy awesomeness.

Interesting, since I thought the movies really didn't cut back on the scenery for the sake of scenery and they weren't exactly fast paced. As for me, I like the description heavy books. I don't mind slow paced writing (I don't know, perhaps because I read it fast), and find such a style sometimes more compelling and interesting than "hasty" texts. :smallwink:

[Dacia Brabant]

Interesting, since I thought the movies really didn't cut back on the scenery for the sake of scenery and they weren't exactly fast paced. As for me, I like the description heavy books. I don't mind slow paced writing (I don't know, perhaps because I read it fast), and find such a style sometimes more compelling and interesting than "hasty" texts. :smallwink:

Words taken out of my mouth. :smallsmile:

And you know all that cinematographic style Peter Jackson used mostly came from the descriptiveness of the books, right? It wasn't all just finding pretty places in New Zealand to shoot, he had to have an idea of what the composition should look like in the shot, direction provided by his idea of the world he got from reading the books. And certainly that goes for the matte paintings and models. Of course I don't necessarily think he got it right every time though, but he did make extensive use of his source material for this.


Heck, Faerûn's Sune (CG) basically seems intended to offer "charity prostitution," or temple prostitutes for donations (no wonder, considering Ed Greenwood is Ed Greenwood!).

I think it's Sharess who does that, being the goddess of brothels basically. And while Ed Greenwood is a goof like that, temple prostitution was a common thing in many parts of the ancient world, especially in the Levant, Corinth and South America. Not saying that fits a stylized European high fantasy world like Faerun, but, well, Sharess is also Bast and that's a Near Eastern deity. (Of course the fact that there are Egyptians and Sumerians in the Forgotten Realms is a problem.)

As for the topic in general, it really depends on what social class the prostitutes are regarded as belonging to. Many older cultures have had courtesans who live lavishly and even could become freewomen or citizens, manage their businesses and generally do well for themselves. Commoners had a hard go of it though, even where it was a legitimately practiced trade.

(I only know about this stuff because I have a character who was supposed to be sold by her relatives as a hetaera, a Greek courtesan, and I had to do the research for the background. Really! :smallwink: )

[Yahzi]

The first one is the idea of objective morals.
Morals are an evolutionary strategy for cooperative species. As such, they are as objective as wings, feathers, or lungs.

Now it is true there are no absolute morals - that is, moral statements divorced from biology - but that's just because moral statements are biological statements. We love our kids because not loving our kids would put an end to our species pretty dang quick. Fish, on the other hand, who produce thousands of offspring, are understandably not as attached to any individual one.

Actually, there is one moral statement that is universal: the principal of fairness. Even mindflayers will understand that they should not smack people in the back of the head if they themselves don't want to be smacked in the back of the head. Of course, the mindflayers don't care that they are being unfair - which is what makes them evil.


The second is the idea that whole societies - instead of individuals - can be categorized along these very general terms.
Well, social institutions can support or decrease fairness, so one could say that a culture that kept slaves was more evil than one that didn't.


And the third one is the idea that a person's morality is static and more or less only changes under stress or through major traumas.
Ya, you're dead right about this one. Consider clerics - they have to have a fixed alignment for their entire lives. And yet they have to have a high wisdom. How does no moral growth and very wisego together?

[Yahzi]

Catch: How is "person" defined
Actually, it's pretty easy. A person is any entity that can ask what a person is.

Moral agency is the ability to understand and implement fairness. If, like a giant monstrous scorpion, you can't imagine being someone else and how unpleasant it would be to be eaten, then you are amoral - without morality. On the other hand, if, like a mindflayer, you know perfectly well how unpleasant it is and simply don't care because its not you being eaten, then you are evil.

[Narmoth]

Would it even be respectable for a paladin to buy the services of a whore? I know you can't fall in 4e, but it'd be a tad...awkward...for a loyal servant of Pelor to be getting it on with a cheap hooker, wouldn't it?

Fallen paladin. Note the fallen part.
Playing in a pseudomedieval campaign where things are assumed to be as in medieval Europe (you know, the homogenous place/time), you'd assume that most prostitutes don't have a great life.
That he buys them is one of my way to rp that he's not living up to the paladin code

[Dervag]

Also students-with-delusions-of-grandeur who think that Tolkien is GOD!, like myself. :smallfrown:Yeah, but people who think Tolkein is good at least know a good thing when they see it. People who despise Tolkein have a harder time saying the same. And it's difficult to be a good author who despises most other good authors. Most of the techniques of good writing are already common practice among good writers, after all.


This. This is what I'm talking about. The PCs can't just walk up to him and stab him. They have to out-trick the trickster and when they finally do track him down, he goes down in maybe one or two hits tops. The idea is that once you figure out all his tricks, see through all his illusions and ignore his bullsh*t, he's all talk and no guts.Great, but you have to make it explicit. Introduce him through NPCs who tried to fight him and had him fade away on them. Or something. The PCs shouldn't go in expecting a standard dungeon crawl battle in which they face the boss in a sealed chamber at the end of the dungeon, to kill or be killed. Then the bad guy's escape plans become another challenge to overcome, not a way of cheating the heroes out of their victory.


To quote Bruce Wayne: "Joker's vain and likes to talk. He'll try to distract you, but don't listen. Block it out and power on through."

That's sort of how their final encounter with him'd go, or something.Of course, it turned out that McGinnis had a much better way to deal with the Joker- mock the mocker.

McGinnis: ...The real reason you kept coming back was you never got a laugh out of the old man.
Joker: I'm not hearing this...
McGinnis: Get a clue, clowny! He's got no sense of humor! He wouldn't know a good joke if it bit him in the cape... not that you ever had a good joke.

Take that as a lesson- give your villains more than one weakness, and be flexible when the heroes think of different ways to exploit them.
_____


Does that sound a little less spineless?

The cleric's response feels a little biting though.

"Truth, understanding, friendship, and a gold piece will get you a hooker and a reality check, both of which you need desperately."

While I know my character's likely to be insulted...Frankly, the cleric is lashing out wildly here. I almost expected her next line to be "neener neener."

I feel like you're on the right track in terms of character development. On the other hand...

People who protest "I'm an adult" are often the ones whose actions are most likely to create doubt as to whether they really are. Since your paladin as portrayed isn't fully adult (yet?) in his reactions to events, that makes more sense than it might otherwise.

As an evolving character, one who is moving from moral youth through moral adolescence and into moral maturity, your paladin makes a lot of sense. Note that "moral maturity" doesn't mean "weepy angsty amoral oh-so-antiheroic drama queen." Rather the opposite, if anything.

My suggestion is to see how this character reacts to the fact that the people around him seem to be a bunch of amoral oh-so-antiheroic drama queens. That bit about trust at the end of the paladin's rant is an example of what I'm talking about. Let the paladin grow up in a way that the other characters haven't.

Next time, don't make the paladin the one who escalates matters into a hysterical screaming match. If the others start one (which, given past performance, they might very well), make a point of how futile this kind of thing can be:

"If you won't help them because it's against your religion, say so. If you won't help them because you think it's a waste of time, say so. But for the love of the gods, don't use what happened to you as an excuse for trying to make the rest of the world as miserable as you are! Get on with your life!"

The words "pitiful" and "pathetic" come to mind when I try to describe that sort of behavior, in the sense of both "inspiring pity" and "inspiring contempt."
____


Would it even be respectable for a paladin to buy the services of a whore? I know you can't fall in 4e, but it'd be a tad...awkward...for a loyal servant of Pelor to be getting it on with a cheap hooker, wouldn't it?Depends on the culture, the details of her life, and probably half a dozen other factors. At a guess, the answer is likely to be "no." On the other hand, paladins are typically charismatic and physically fit, so they really shouldn't have any trouble finding voluntary bedmates when you think about it.
____


And all of Germany. Not that that means it's morally or politically conflict-free, or that there's no crime associated with it, but slavery is a separate if related issue.Yeah. It's got moral issues stacked three deep all over it, but in societies where prostitution is regulated to prevent abuses, being a customer doesn't have to be an obvious intrinsic evil in the sense that, say, armed robbery is.

And then, if we're talking about fictional worlds other than our own, we've got a whole range of examples you just don't see in modern society. Consider the temple prostitutes of the Middle East, who were around up until the classical period.
____


Morals are an evolutionary strategy for cooperative species. As such, they are as objective as wings, feathers, or lungs.

Now it is true there are no absolute morals - that is, moral statements divorced from biology - but that's just because moral statements are biological statements.Debatable. There are plenty of sources for moral philosophy that exist outside of biology. It may be pro-survival and rewarded by evolution to act morally, but that doesn't mean that those are the only reasons to act morally.


Ya, you're dead right about this one. Consider clerics - they have to have a fixed alignment for their entire lives. And yet they have to have a high wisdom. How does no moral growth and very wisego together?It's quite possible to experience growth without a corresponding alignment change. Some people who have great wisdom (understanding of how the world works, that sort of thing) just keep getting more cynical, or more generous, or more dadaist, as life goes on.

[The Neoclassic]

Now it is true there are no absolute morals - that is, moral statements divorced from biology - but that's just because moral statements are biological statements.

While this is (arguably, depending on your beliefs) true in real life, D&D has some degree of absolute morality. Otherwise, the alignment system would be entirely subjective, which it isn't. Good and evil are cosmological forces, not just cultural or biological norms. Of course, moral codes of different societies, as well as what they consider right/wrong or acceptable/unacceptable, are certainly not absolute.

[hamishspence]

EN world had a very (very, very) long thread, starting with a story about a paladin who was a bit like this- "immoral, but not evil" you could say.

Context-sensitive acts are common in D&D, but non-context sensitive ones, "always evil" "always lawful" etc, are few, and mostly in Fiendish Codex 2, under the names "Corrupt act" and "Obesiant act"

Torture is most obvious example- listed in Fiendish Codex 2.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Fallen paladin. Note the fallen part.
Playing in a pseudomedieval campaign where things are assumed to be as in medieval Europe (you know, the homogenous place/time), you'd assume that most prostitutes don't have a great life.
That he buys them is one of my way to rp that he's not living up to the paladin code
Yeah but Narmoth, I said in that post you're quoting that in 4e, paladins do not fall. My character isn't going to lose his powers for doing bad things, though he'll likely feel guilty about them.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Yeah, but people who think Tolkein is good at least know a good thing when they see it. People who despise Tolkein have a harder time saying the same. And it's difficult to be a good author who despises most other good authors. Most of the techniques of good writing are already common practice among good writers, after all.
As I've said, he thinks Tolkien's a poor writer, and that Angela Carter is better than him.

I haven't said this to his face yet, but I feel Angela Carter is too much like a copycat. Sure Tolkien begged, borrowed and stole from everything he knew. Mythology, history and stuff. The longer my Tolkien class goes on, the more I realize just how much of LotR comes from Beowulf alone. Carter takes the basic fairytales and changes a few elements to make it seem ostensibly different, but the same at the core. And in addition to that, there's too much of an emphasis on the sexual aspects of it. Yes, I get that sex is a perfectly normal part of human existence, and people shouldn't be ashamed of it a la the Victorians, but for crying out loud don't go the opposite extreme and flaunt it in my face! That takes all the magic out of it.

Great, but you have to make it explicit. Introduce him through NPCs who tried to fight him and had him fade away on them. Or something. The PCs shouldn't go in expecting a standard dungeon crawl battle in which they face the boss in a sealed chamber at the end of the dungeon, to kill or be killed. Then the bad guy's escape plans become another challenge to overcome, not a way of cheating the heroes out of their victory.
My DM agrees with this. Build him up as a mystery, so when the curtain finally does get pulled, the PC's are left feeling, "That's it?" instead of "F yew DM!"

Of course, it turned out that McGinnis had a much better way to deal with the Joker- mock the mocker.

McGinnis: ...The real reason you kept coming back was you never got a laugh out of the old man.
Joker: I'm not hearing this...
McGinnis: Get a clue, clowny! He's got no sense of humor! He wouldn't know a good joke if it bit him in the cape... not that you ever had a good joke.

Take that as a lesson- give your villains more than one weakness, and be flexible when the heroes think of different ways to exploit them.
I looked up the scene in question, and I found it to be awesome. I think something like that might work on the villain as well. He likes to think of himself as a force of nature. Like our setting's homebrew god, Avock, is the master of dreams, he styles himself as the master of nightmares, when in fact he's more a stage magician and a parasite, dazzling people with tricks and surviving by leeching off of others. To the heroes, who'd by this point be movers and shakers in the Vale, and who might well become forces of nature in their own right, the villain by all rights should come off as pathetic.


Frankly, the cleric is lashing out wildly here. I almost expected her next line to be "neener neener."

I feel like you're on the right track in terms of character development. On the other hand...

People who protest "I'm an adult" are often the ones whose actions are most likely to create doubt as to whether they really are. Since your paladin as portrayed isn't fully adult (yet?) in his reactions to events, that makes more sense than it might otherwise.

As an evolving character, one who is moving from moral youth through moral adolescence and into moral maturity, your paladin makes a lot of sense. Note that "moral maturity" doesn't mean "weepy angsty amoral oh-so-antiheroic drama queen." Rather the opposite, if anything.

My suggestion is to see how this character reacts to the fact that the people around him seem to be a bunch of amoral oh-so-antiheroic drama queens. That bit about trust at the end of the paladin's rant is an example of what I'm talking about. Let the paladin grow up in a way that the other characters haven't.

Next time, don't make the paladin the one who escalates matters into a hysterical screaming match. If the others start one (which, given past performance, they might very well), make a point of how futile this kind of thing can be:

"If you won't help them because it's against your religion, say so. If you won't help them because you think it's a waste of time, say so. But for the love of the gods, don't use what happened to you as an excuse for trying to make the rest of the world as miserable as you are! Get on with your life!"

The words "pitiful" and "pathetic" come to mind when I try to describe that sort of behavior, in the sense of both "inspiring pity" and "inspiring contempt."
I'd probably have said something along those lines had the rogue not said "The two of you need to shut the f*ck up!"

The whole bit about becoming mature, both emotionally and morally, is what I had in mind when I created my character.

Depends on the culture, the details of her life, and probably half a dozen other factors. At a guess, the answer is likely to be "no." On the other hand, paladins are typically charismatic and physically fit, so they really shouldn't have any trouble finding voluntary bedmates when you think about it.
That's an interesting angle. I wonder if maybe I can talk with my DM about my paladin learning that he has fangirls! :smallbiggrin:

Yeah. It's got moral issues stacked three deep all over it, but in societies where prostitution is regulated to prevent abuses, being a customer doesn't have to be an obvious intrinsic evil in the sense that, say, armed robbery is.

And then, if we're talking about fictional worlds other than our own, we've got a whole range of examples you just don't see in modern society. Consider the temple prostitutes of the Middle East, who were around up until the classical period.
For some reason now I'm imagining temple prostitutes of Ioun who service customers like the ladies at the Brothel of Slaking Intellectual Lusts from Planescape: Torment.

[Dervag]

As I've said, he thinks Tolkien's a poor writer, and that Angela Carter is better than him.I am unfamiliar with the works of Angela Carter, and see no reason not to remain so. But this strikes me as a poor reflection on your friend's judgement.


I'd probably have said something along those lines had the rogue not said "The two of you need to shut the f*ck up!"Also a reasonable reaction. I see nothing wrong with that.


For some reason now I'm imagining temple prostitutes of Ioun who service customers like the ladies at the Brothel of Slaking Intellectual Lusts from Planescape: Torment.One word:

Cowabunga.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I am unfamiliar with the works of Angela Carter, and see no reason not to remain so. But this strikes me as a poor reflection on your friend's judgement.

This is from the forum we frequent, when he reccomended Carter's works.


This is by Angela Carter, a fantastic British author with a vicious, sexual streak a mile wide. A collection of short stories, based on fairy tales: The Bloody Chamber (http://www.angelfire.com/crazy4/lesadoreyl/carter_bloody_chamber.html)

[Dervag]

So far, nothing I've heard gives me any desire to become more familiar with the works of Angela Carter than I already am; I truly do not think I would like them.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I'm sorry, I must have misunderstood you. :smallredface:

[Agrippa]

That's an interesting angle. I wonder if maybe I can talk with my DM about my paladin learning that he has fangirls! :smallbiggrin:

Sort of like Roland/Orlando from the Legends or Charlemagne. His moral purity, heroics and good looks attracted hundreds of female admires, among whom he slept with at least a dozen. The number of bastard children he had was probably staggering. After he died all the women in the Holy Roman Empire mourned him for weeks on end. He's one of the primary inspirations for the paladin class.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

That's awesome!

But...how can a shining example of moral purity not find sleeping with his female admirers and siring bastard children okay?

What would Pelor say about that sort of thing?

I mean, sure I could be willing to care and provide for all my bastard children, but I'm planning a romance with another PC, and that might get awkward.

Though the PC in question IS going to become the sentience of the local plant-life, animating it to destroy every living thing in the area. Maybe my paladin sleeps with his female admirers to try and fill the void she leaves? It'd be interesting for me to play a character who sleeps around, since I think only one or two of my characters ever actually got laid.

[Agrippa]

I really don't think that Pelor would be upset. Nor would Kord, Hieronisous or any Good aligned or Good leaning D&D deity I can think of. They'd certainly be upset if you promised yourself to one woman and slept around anyway. You're a paladin, a shining, holy example of all secular and some religous vitures. You are not a paragon of celebacy.

You are also not a cad and are responsible for the wellbeing and education of any children you father as well as the wellbeing of their mothers. You are morally obligated to help provide for your girlfriends and their children and be their for them when possible and needed.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I'd only start the "sleeping around" after my one true love has died. It's more soul-searching than looking for a thrill. And he would do everything in his power to make sure that his "family" is cared for and provided for. What would his kids be though? He's a half-elf. Aren't they sterile, like mules?

[Jayngfet]

Way I see it siring children you're openly rarely(but still will) visit might be better in the long run. You really couldn't be with anyone regularly when your character is traveling the world risking his life to fight evil.

[Nightson]

That's awesome!

But...how can a shining example of moral purity not find sleeping with his female admirers and siring bastard children okay?

What would Pelor say about that sort of thing?


Honesty is what's important. Be upfront with any sort of groupie about what it is if you just want a quick lay. If a child results then care for it. Be honest, be kind, take responsibility. That's how you go about it being morally good.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

How do you say to a girl "I know you think I'm a paragon of virtue and I'm totally hot, but I'm only going to have sex with you maybe once or twice and visit from time to time to check on you and any kids we might have" without getting slapped in the face?

[Jayngfet]

How do you say to a girl "I know you think I'm a paragon of virtue and I'm totally hot, but I'm only going to have sex with you maybe once or twice and visit from time to time to check on you and any kids we might have" without getting slapped in the face?

With more than +2 charisma you can say it any way you like.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I have a +4, and that's just at level 2. :smallwink:

[Nightson]

How do you say to a girl "I know you think I'm a paragon of virtue and I'm totally hot, but I'm only going to have sex with you maybe once or twice and visit from time to time to check on you and any kids we might have" without getting slapped in the face?

"I'm leaving in X time" is a pretty clear statement of what you're looking for in a relationship. And potential children are something that you generally don't have to discuss upon first meeting.

And most groupies or admirers aren't looking for a long term relationship by default.

[Oracle_Hunter]

With more than +2 charisma you can say it any way you like.

Finally, a use for Astral Speech! :smalltongue:

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I just use Astral Speech for the cosmetic effects. It impressed the rogue/warlock's player. :smalltongue:

[Agrippa]

I'd only start the "sleeping around" after my one true love has died. It's more soul-searching than looking for a thrill. And he would do everything in his power to make sure that his "family" is cared for and provided for. What would his kids be though? He's a half-elf. Aren't they sterile, like mules?

Half-elves aren't sterile. At least I don't think they are.

[The Neoclassic]

Half-elves aren't sterile. At least I don't think they are.

Depends on the setting, biology, and DM fiat (is that the right word?).

[Quincunx]

And contraception. Don't forget contraception. Destroying the connection between sex and birth also destroys the certainty of female pain from sex, and the tender sensibilites of Zousha wouldn't allow him to inflict future pain upon his woman (or women). And remember, a gentleman rests his weight upon his elbows.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Did medieval Europe have contraceptives?

[Oracle_Hunter]

Did medieval Europe have contraceptives?

No (well not reliable ones).

But a fantasy world might have, say, Protection Scrolls (http://www.dominic-deegan.com/view.php?date=2005-09-10) :smalltongue:

[Archpaladin Zousha]

No (well not reliable ones).

But a fantasy world might have, say, Protection Scrolls (http://www.dominic-deegan.com/view.php?date=2005-09-10) :smalltongue:

Why the smalltongue?

I want my character to have kids. He's gonna be a god-king one day. He needs some sort of heir to run the place when Pelor calls him to serve in Hestavar at his side.

[The Neoclassic]

Why the smalltongue?

I want my character to have kids. He's gonna be a god-king one day. He needs some sort of heir to run the place when Pelor calls him to serve in Hestavar at his side.

Then find some loving consort (or wife) to have children with? Sounds more fitting than a prostitute for the situation. Shouldn't be too hard to find one, if you're charming and you can find someone who's OK with your adventuring lifestyle.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Then find some loving consort (or wife) to have children with? Sounds more fitting than a prostitute for the situation. Shouldn't be too hard to find one, if you're charming and you can find someone who's OK with your adventuring lifestyle.

I believe I said earlier that I was dropping the prostitute idea. Why pay for sex when you have legions of female admirers who think you're both awesome and sexy?

[Oracle_Hunter]

Why the smalltongue?

Oh, because it's from Dominic Deegan, a comic with an embarrassing amount of Magitek and a lazy (if not incoherent) magic system.

It's also the best Snark Bait on the 'net :smallbiggrin:

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Oh, because it's from Dominic Deegan, a comic with an embarrassing amount of Magitek and a lazy (if not incoherent) magic system.

It's also the best Snark Bait on the 'net :smallbiggrin:

To be honest, I've never really understood what's wrong with it. It's just a webcomic, like Order of the Stick or Girl Genius.

[The Neoclassic]

Why pay for sex when you have legions of female admirers who think you're both awesome and sexy?

Because female admirers might get clingy afterwards? :smallwink:

[Archpaladin Zousha]

...Which is why I said my character'd be willing to take care of any accidental children he has, as well as their mothers. Make sure they're provided and cared for while he's off adventuring, stopping by to visit whenever he can.

[Oracle_Hunter]

Why the smalltongue?

Oh, because it's from Dominic Deegan, a comic with an embarrassing amount of Magitek and a lazy (if not incoherent) magic system.

It's also the best Snark Bait on the 'net :smallbiggrin:

[Thane of Fife]

Out of curiosity, Zousha, have you and/or your DM read Dracula?

I ask because it's got the dark, sexual themes while still being about a clash between good and ultimate evil.

It's also well-written, IMO.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I don't know if my DM has read Dracula or not. The closest I've ever come to the Dracula story was through a graphic novel, a ballet and a parody movie, in that order. I've never had the time nor the patience to read the book itself.

[The Neoclassic]

The closest I've ever come to the Dracula story was through a graphic novel, a ballet and a parody movie, in that order. I've never had the time nor the patience to read the book itself.

I really recommend you read it. I don't think the book really requires much patience (especially not if you've read Tolkein, seriously), and I found it a rather engaging and enjoyable novel.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I really recommend you read it. I don't think the book really requires much patience (especially not if you've read Tolkein, seriously), and I found it a rather engaging and enjoyable novel.

That is true. I believe I was in seventh or eighth grade when I tried reading Dracula last time.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Speaking of vampires, we're about to encounter Narmoth's new vampire PC. Already we're debating who's going to actually deal the death blow. Since I'm a paladin of Pelor, and we have two Raven Queen worshipers in the party, a vampire isn't gonna last long. I'm just glad Narmoth is cool with the character dying, and says if that's the case he'll just make a new one.

The only reason he's playing a vampire anyway is to poke fun at the "emo girl" characters in the group. :smallamused:

[The Neoclassic]

The only reason he's playing a vampire anyway is to poke fun at the "emo girl" characters in the group. :smallamused:

I approve. I hope he only wears black and that nobody understands him or his unique struggles. :smallcool:

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I do too. His character's probably going to die after one Radiant Delirium to the face, but at least the character will go out with a bang!

[Narmoth]

The only reason he's playing a vampire anyway is to poke fun at the "emo girl" characters in the group. :smallamused:

Not quite, I'm playing it to show that any clisheed background, with lots of "emo-stuff" and "issues" can stil be played as fun for everyone in the group if you use it as a tool to make more roleplaying, not to block other characters roleplaying with "No. It says so in my background" (especially if no-one have read that background)
Also, I'm not, ever, am going to join a game just to make fun of one or several fo the players. I joined because there were some interesting roleplaying to be had if the players were nudged the right way.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Okay, so I misinterpreted you. I'm sorry that I'm blasting him with light before we even get a chance to talk. I don't know if it was gonna work anyway. A vampire working side-by-side with three people whose gods have a holy mandate to destroy undead? It's like mixin' oil and water.

[Narmoth]

Okay, so I misinterpreted you. I'm sorry that I'm blasting him with light before we even get a chance to talk. I don't know if it was gonna work anyway. A vampire working side-by-side with three people whose gods have a holy mandate to destroy undead? It's like mixin' oil and water.

Well, who's fault is it that they don't get that chance?

[Archpaladin Zousha]

...Ours. :smallsigh:

[Jayngfet]

I'm not going to say not to but sometimes you have to do something slightly out of character for the good of the group. Recently I played a character sworn to hunt down demons who met a part demon PC who looked more or less like the BBEG's dragon, only more or less defensless. Normally he would have attacked first and asked questions later but it would have both broken the flow of the plot and stopped us from getting to the real action.

[Oracle_Hunter]

I'm not going to say not to but sometimes you have to do something slightly out of character for the good of the group. Recently I played a character sworn to hunt down demons who met a part demon PC who looked more or less like the BBEG's dragon, only more or less defensless. Normally he would have attacked first and asked questions later but it would have both broken the flow of the plot and stopped us from getting to the real action.

Well... there are limits. If 2 disciples of the Raven Queen (motto: We make undead, dead) and a Paladin of Pelor (motto: There are no undead under the Sun) refuse to destroy an undead, they're basically violating their creeds; their Gods would not be happy. Unless it would be suicidal to attack the undead, I don't think they'd hesitate for a second.

In your case it was a (presumably) personal oath and if you're deciding to feel sympathetic then you're free to do so. After all, you're only responsible to yourself.

[Tiki Snakes]

Oil and Water don't, afaik, spontainiously combust when mixed, though. They just go all swirly.

Drac could always be devoted to, or in some way created by the Raven Queen, if all else fails. She's a Goddess. If she wants a Vampire, she gets a Vampire. Being the God of Death, she really does have the perogative to make her own 'undead' if that's what amuses/serves her. As long as you aren't directly descended from Orcus's schemes, or Vecna's, then there's every possibility that you could co-exist with the two raven-clerics, at least.

[Narmoth]

It was actually a paladin bait. Expecting that the paladin would require further proof of evil than simply being a vampire, I planned to make for an interesting role play, where the different players would have to argument for a decision on killing him, keeping him prisoner or let him free based on their characters beliefs and alignment.
They decided they'd rather toast him with radiant power than talk, and being a fan of free-form rather than railroads, I'm okay with that.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Oil and Water don't, afaik, spontainiously combust when mixed, though. They just go all swirly.

Drac could always be devoted to, or in some way created by the Raven Queen, if all else fails. She's a Goddess. If she wants a Vampire, she gets a Vampire. Being the God of Death, she really does have the perogative to make her own 'undead' if that's what amuses/serves her. As long as you aren't directly descended from Orcus's schemes, or Vecna's, then there's every possibility that you could co-exist with the two raven-clerics, at least.
What I meant was that oil and water do not mix.

I know the Raven Queen tolerates Kas's small kingdom of vampires in the Shadowfell, but only because he provides her with valuable information on the movements of Orcus and Vecna. I figured that Darksteel would pounce on the opportunity to be a douche though.

[Oracle_Hunter]

I know the Raven Queen tolerates Kas's small kingdom of vampires in the Shadowfell, but only because he provides her with valuable information on the movements of Orcus and Vecna. I figured that Darksteel would pounce on the opportunity to be a douche though.

Huh, I didn't know that. I guess there is an argument for followers of the Raven Queen to leave some undead alone.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Yes, it's either in the Shadowfell chapter of Manual of the Planes or somewhere in Open Grave. My paladin's giving the vampire a chance, but I suspect the Raven Queen worshipers (which include my character's potential romantic interest) are going to pounce on that. The doppleganger cleric already has enough reasons to hate him.