Why are you surprised?

geh4th · Post by **geh4th** » Wed Jan 17, 2001 5:09 am

I have mentioned this in another thread, and seen it discussed in several topics lately:

Regarding all of these "how do I keep Keldorn and Viconia from killing each other" messages, why is anybody surprised? Keldorn IS a Paladin, after all....do you not think he would go out of his way to kill Viconia?
Even more than that, he is a INQUISITOR, "dedicated to the elimination of evil spellcasters".

If anything, it seems to me the game designers were too lax on NPC interactions here. Keldorn should IMMEDIATELY force the player to choose one way or the other when dealing with either Vic or Edwin, if not simply attacking the outright. On the other hand, I see Korgan a bit differently: while evil, he is just a greedy, self-serving bastard and does not appear to be promoting the interests of an evil god, nor using magic to summon demons and such....

This is just standard roleplaying of a paladin, and an inquisitor in particular. Tell me your PnP GM would allow any paladin and an evil cleric to coexist in the same party......

------------------
"If you prefer, you could say EXPERT treasure hunter!"
--Gandalf the Grey, the Hobbit

Cloud · Post by **Cloud** » Wed Jan 17, 2001 5:01 pm

I agree that they are too leniant on npc alignments. Keldorn should kill viconia immediatly, or make the pc choose between him and her. Also i think minsc should do a similar thing with edwin. I have never had good and evil people in the same party so i didnt know that they kiled each other and stuff if the reputation gets too high, i think i will have a party of minsc, edwin, keldorn and viconia, let my rep get to 20 and see them all kill each other

why does it have to wait until a party rep gets to 20 or 2 before npcs leave, surely they should leave earlier.

geh4th · Post by **geh4th** » Thu Jan 18, 2001 3:04 am

I see two distinct situations here.

1) Keldorn versus either Viconia or Edwin: This should have nothing to do with party reputation. Keldorn's expressed purpose in life is to hunt down and destroy evil spellcasters, and thus he should immediately attack and try to kill either one of them. This would also apply to any protagonist Paladin, but especially Inquisitors. Paladins are notorious for their lack of interest in negotiating with an enemy. (right, Weasel???)

2) Any other "dislike" interaction, such as Minsc versus Edwin: There are several of these cases, where problems fester over time. Minsc as a Ranger (kind of...) is not under the professional requirement to hunt and kill evil humans, just "defend humanity from monsters" (specifically his enemy). This case is a personal dislike, not a professional one.

This makes more sense, because it seems to be based on a difference in outlook. In this case, Minsc clashes with Edwin and the two are irreconcilable (does this one even have anything to do with reputation, or will they ALWAYS end up attacking each other??)

Another example is the interaction between Aerie and Korgan. Diametrically opposed alignments, and Korgan hates what he sees as "wimpy do-gooder female elves" (Just about everything dwarves hate all rolled up into one package....I base this on what I have seen of his outlook, please do not come after me, those of you who must defend the honor of Aerie......) The end result is a "he goes or I go" ultimatum from Aerie.

I have seen Korgan say lots of insulting things to Nalia, as well, but I did not have him long enough to see if there would be a confrontation. Anyone?...Bueller?...anyone?

Again, this is all purely from a "common sense" approach of looking at the way some characters, due to alignment, personality or profession, SHOULD have problems getting along. IMHO, the game is much too lenient on the Keldorn situation; it handles the other ones better.

Everyone may play the game however they want within the game rules, but if you are really trying to reflect the personalities (role-playing) of these NPC's, you should NEVER have Keldorn in a group with either Viconia or Edwin.

------------------
"If you prefer, you could say EXPERT treasure hunter!"
--Gandalf the Grey, the Hobbit

Weasel · Post by **Weasel** » Thu Jan 18, 2001 3:12 am

Right you are HAHAHAHA

------------------
Yes my name is Weasel , but that doesn't mean I sleep with them.

Rail · Post by **Rail** » Thu Jan 18, 2001 3:12 am

I agree with you geh4th. I do think, however, that the relationship with Korgan and Keldorn is one that would fester over time. No paladin would *ever* travel with Viconia, and no inquisitor would stay with Edwin. However, Korgan, as you pointed out, in not a promoter of evil. I can see how Keldorn might put up with Korgan for a while, but eventually they would clash as well.

I must have played too much PNP for this.

geh4th · Post by **geh4th** » Thu Jan 18, 2001 3:48 am

Agreed regarding Korgan. Despite his alignment, As I said above I see him as a greedy self-server and nothing more. He just cares about himself. As an Undead Hunter, I thought about whether it would be "right" for us to take on Korgan for the Book of Kaza quest; I decided it was appropriate despite the alignment conflict, because A) there was going to be some undead-cleansing involved, and B) despite his alignment, Korgan had been wronged by his former associates (it seems). On top of that, we needed the money to spring Imoen, and the dead really have no use for it any more......

With this protagonist I will not even CONSIDER taking on Edwin or Viconia. I will kill them when I meet them (If it is not damaging to my reputation, e.g. within the law.)Barbecued Drow, anyone??

------------------
"If you prefer, you could say EXPERT treasure hunter!"
--Gandalf the Grey, the Hobbit

Rail · Post by **Rail** » Thu Jan 18, 2001 4:11 am

I love these discussions about the ethics of paladins.

I think you could rationalize Korgan for a while for the reasons you stated, but eventually, they would have to part ways or come to blows.

I think it interesting, though, that many have commented about having paladins and thieves in the same group. With these characters, I think a paladin could easily travel with any of the thieves in the game. Well..., untill spellhold. Then he may run into problems with one.

geh4th · Post by **geh4th** » Thu Jan 18, 2001 4:30 am

That is because none of the NPC thieves are evil, either in actions or alignment. Imoen and Nalia are just naughty girls who snuck around when they were supposed to be doing something else, gaining skills that later left behind (dualling to mage)....Jan is an inventor, I think of him more as a professional locksmith than anything else...and Yoshimo, ahhh......well, he has his good points as well as his bad. True neutral indeed, but not evil.

IMO, Paladins would have no problems with any of these 4 people. It's not the profession, it's the behavior.

As far as Korgan is concerned, I think you are right....the longer together, any Paladin and Korgan would tend to "differ in opinion".....there would eventually be a confrontation....

------------------
"If you prefer, you could say EXPERT treasure hunter!"
--Gandalf the Grey, the Hobbit

geh4th · Post by **geh4th** » Thu Jan 18, 2001 6:14 am

What a waste, what a pity......

Walking through the government district, what do I happen upon (my protagonist is a paladin) but a Drow female about to be burned at the stake. While appalled at the barbarism of such an act, she WAS a Drow, after all....but to be sure she was not another Drizzt, I cast "Detect Evil"; yes, indeed she WAS still evil.

Such is justice in the world; those who do evil must surely pay for it in the end. We passed on, allowing the people to continue their grisly task.......

------------------
"If you prefer, you could say EXPERT treasure hunter!"
--Gandalf the Grey, the Hobbit

Gurt · Post by **Gurt** » Thu Jan 18, 2001 7:04 am

I disagree with what's being said. What you have to remember is that just because an NPC belongs to a particular character class, it doesn't make them a caricature.

Inquisitors would judge evil spell casters not by alignment but by their deeds. Evil alignment represents selfishness, self interest, putting the one before the many. Are you telling me that Paladins automatically attack selfish people on sight?!

It is a common failing in PnP D&D to treat Paladins in this two dimensional way that you're describing and I for one am glad that Black Isle had the intelligence to treat their NPCs with a bit more respect.

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Thu Jan 18, 2001 7:56 am

I think you have to distinguish between a "realistic" paladin and one of those paladins that fall out of the Complete Paladin's Handbook (I own too many of these books).

I had a big problem with those "cookie cutter" paladins they had written up in that book. They were all 2 dimensional (as mentioned above) evil seekers that don't think. These guys would never make it through the drow city in BG2.

Since we're discussing good vs. evil, also look at law vs. chaos. I picture a paladin (PC or NPC) getting irritated with Jan as well for his chaotic behavior (does he ever tell the truth?).

In the Viconia example, if the burning was a formal trial and execution by the local government, then I can understand any paladin letting her burn (my PC would). However, it's not. It is a lynch mob who grabbed a drow out of the crowd and decided to burn her for the "crimes of her race". This is a chaotic act condemned by any paladin. I see no harm in releasing her (I assume there would also be some harsh dialog off-screen about mending her evil ways, etc). However, she would not travel with my character (assuming I'm playing a paladin or intend to group with a paladin NPC).

In a recent PnP adventure I played (the co-DM was running this one), he put my Paladin in a situation in which he had to cooperate with a dark knight (a.k.a. Anti-Paladin, but not quite the same). My character was attempting to free some hostages from an evil warlord who had attacked an innocent village (gotta love these low level adventures). The dark knight didn't care about the hostages, but he had a score to settle with the warlord. They travelled together for this one adventure. While they hated each other for what the other stood for, they respected one another. At the end of the adventure, he gave my character the typical speech of "I'm honor bound not to kill you right now, but next time we meet it's a duel to the death...blah blah blah".

Point is that BI has given Keldorn some leeway in cooperating with Viconia. They assume that either he or Viconia are in the party temporarily and it's for the "greater good". The longer they stay together, the angrier he becomes about it until he hits his boiling point.

Drakron Du´Dark · Post by **Drakron Du´Dark** » Thu Jan 18, 2001 8:02 am

I like to point out that Viconia is a cleric of shar, a evil godess of loss and the dark but the ones that are trying to burn her are folowers of Bashaba, a evil godess of Bad luck, Viconia is evil in aligment but so far she have done nothing that is wrong or evil.Rescue her is something a paladin have no problem to do, since there way no reason to burn her.
About Edwin and Minsc, the reason is very simple, Edwin is a red wizard from Tray and Tray is always trying to invade the land were Minsc is from. Also Minsc was the protector of the wich(that is the term for female spellcasters there and also a kit) Dynaheir, someone that Edwin was trying to kill back in BGI.
Some will just get in another people nerves(Amomen vs Jan).
------------------
"He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not became a monster... when you gaze long into the abyss the abyss gazes into you..."
Friedrich Nietzsche

[This message has been edited by Drakron Du´Dark (edited 01-18-2001).]

KN · Post by KN » Thu Jan 18, 2001 8:49 am

I think Vic is due for an alignment change. It seems she has done evil in the past but is ready to change her ways. I respect her for not going on a killing spree with the way all the surface dweller bible thumpers persecute her because of her race.

------------------
"Four thousand throats may be cut in one night, by a running man."
- Klingon Crewman "Day of the Dove"

geh4th · Post by **geh4th** » Thu Jan 18, 2001 9:46 am

Gurt, if you are referring to anything I have said, I want to point out that I did not say that a paladin must attact anyone who is evil on sight. What I did say is that a paladin (and especially an inquisitor) would NEVER tolerate being in a party with an evil spellcaster in my opinion, not even for the greater good. I believe it would be an ethical impossibility, a paradox. Maybe if he was told to get along with the evil one by his God, but short of that.....

All of you have made valid points for the sake of discussion.

Regarding the "lynch mob" acting Chaotically: I agree that it is unlawful for this mob to be allowed to continue, but we are not given a choice to intervene for the purpose of bringing the Drow to the proper legal or religious authorities. You can only either ignore the event or intervene with the objective of releasing what in the end is still an evil spellcaster. The reputation hit if you do the latter is enough to tell anyone that this is (in the opinion of the design team) not an good thing for anyone concerned with such things (as all paladins would be.)

Gotta go for now, work calls.....good discusssion, folks....

------------------
"If you prefer, you could say EXPERT treasure hunter!"
--Gandalf the Grey, the Hobbit

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Thu Jan 18, 2001 10:06 am

geh4th, you do have a valid point about the inquisitor kit attacking on sight any evil faith.

However, using the same logic, the same inquistor should march straight into the temple of Talos and execute all the evil priests inside (although it is more amusing to see that priest of Talos squirm when that woman tells him the girl next to her is his daughter).

In addition, Drakon mentioned that Viconia is being burned by representatives of an evil rival faith. Technically, your inquisitor should let Viconia burn and then execute the executioners.

However, as all DMs will tell you, PCs will always be the exception to the rule. I belive that while a PC Inquisitor would view what was going on as an opportunity to eliminate evil, the PC is valid with the choice of either to free her or burn her.

On a side note: Do you get a reputation hit when you free Viconia? I know you get the 2 point hit if she's in your party, but I didn't notice a 1 point hit if I freed her from the stake.

KN · Post by KN » Thu Jan 18, 2001 10:18 am

I only took a hit when she joined

------------------
"Four thousand throats may be cut in one night, by a running man."
- Klingon Crewman "Day of the Dove"

geh4th · Post by **geh4th** » Fri Jan 19, 2001 3:19 am

I guess marching into the church of Talos and executing the priests would be a very attractive thought to most inquisitors, but the bottom line is that it would be rather unlawful. Gotta work within the system or your own church takes the dreaded PR hit, you know....this might be a good tactic for a hypothetical order of Chaotic good paladins who don't give a rat's arse about the law..."I AM the LAW!!!!"

I will concede the point about rescuing Viconia. I think burning at the stake is a fate even Inquisitors would not wish on their enemies; after all, Viconia *might* be grateful after a rescue, and "repent"; more likely, though, the Inquisitor would simply save her from one fate with the intention of subjecting her to another (the punishment of the order, whatever form that may take against evil spellcasters.) Regardless, in this example, that is beyond the scope of the situation; free her and be done with the issue.

Taking her into your party, either AS a paladin, or with one present (Keldorn) is what I personally feel would be totally unreasonable. I think Viconia herself would actually be too wise to even ask to join in the first place, knowing what would eventually happen (not to say she cannot take care of herself if/when it does...) The Paladins, on the other hand, would simply say "Are you kidding?"

------------------
"If you prefer, you could say EXPERT treasure hunter!"
--Gandalf the Grey, the Hobbit