OOTS #1209 - The Discussion Thread

[pendell]

Are you calling Haley dumb or Neutral?

She's chaotic good-ish. If she's chaotic good, she's in the shallow end of the pool, nothing at all like the deep, unquestionable goodness of a Roy or a Durkon.

For example, I can't imagine Durkon or Roy sneak attacking an unarmed person in the shower and then killing them in cold blood, no matter how deserved it was and no matter how much of a threat they posed.

Those statements are conflicting. If he deserves to be booted out of the party, then that overcomes his track record and slack. If his track record and slack prevent him from being booted out of the party, then that means he did not deserve to be booted.

Not at all. Just because someone deserves to be terminated doesn't mean they have to be terminated. Roy has the option to show mercy. And "mercy triumphs over judgement", in some times and some places.

To paraphrase Gandalf, there are many in this world who deserve death but that doesn't necessarily mean it's a good idea to go and start dealing it out, even to someone like Gollum, who deserved death many times over. Bilbo showed mercy and gave Gollum what he did not deserve, and because of this he escaped from the Ring relatively unscathed.

Repeatedly , in the Lord of the Rings, people are punished to a far lesser extent than they deserved. Gollum was spared three times: once by Bilbo, once by Aragorn and the elves, once by Frodo. Saruman's life was spared twice, once by Gandalf and once by Frodo (in the Scouring of the Shire). Sometimes that gamble didn't pay off ; but at one extremely critical moment Frodo's mercy decided the fate of middle earth. If he had slit Gollum's throat when they first met (which was the tactically prudent thing to do, as well as deserved many times over), the Ring would not have been destroyed.

My experience in 20+ years of marriage is that a big, big part of a successful relationship is not punishing the other party to the full extent they deserve , but working instead to repair the relationship; even if this means sometimes suffering an injury and not paying it back.

I would say Roy has the right to kick Durkon out over this, but he is not obligated to kick Durkon out because of this. He's allowed, as leader, to take Durkon's previous record into account , as well as their personal friendship, and assess a less stringent penalty than a strict reading of the rules requires. The rules of any adventuring party are meant to facilitate co-operation and discipline; they are not meant to be programming instructions to be rigidly obeyed as if the party members are automatons.

I'm not going to say he should be booted out under these circumstances, and I don't think the Order would choose to kick him out after this, but I would say that something like this would be understandable grounds for dismissal in general.

Exactly. We all know Durkon won't be booted ; it's too late in the game and we need all the clerics we can get.

All of this assumes Durkon makes his saving throw and escapes alive back to the party. If not ... well, I think being imploded into bloody rags is more than sufficient punishment for practically any misdeed I could care to name.

Respectfully,

Brian P.