Idea for NPC cleric

[berelinde]

Yes, come to think of it, although only one is single-classed, and only one is non-elven.

 

I wonder what the association is between clerics and romance.

 

Whether or not the females get the worst is too subjective to call. I greatly prefered it to any of the ones for a male PC.

[Twani]

Bioware was thinking of the male PC, and thought it was pretty likely that you'd pick up a healer, and thus would have a romance option in your party (ignoring the fact that the male PC could just pick up Anomen or even Cernd and never touch the other three). The female PC... got Anomen because someone higher up then poor Dave decided that, leading to the fact that Anomen was basically written as an obnoxious prat and then the women got stuck with him.

 

(That being said, I don't mind Anomen. Or Aerie. Or Jaheria. The fact that Shar would have dropped Vicky long ago sometimes bothers me, but I don't mind her herself too much.)

 

And... as I make this post longer and longer... I think a LG cleric of Kelemvor would be fine. There are likely going to be things he may have trouble with in his faith depending on his character (be it the Wall of the Faithless, killing good aligned undead, mercy killings, giving comfort to evil psychopaths as they die, whatever)- but I think a good aligned character who has faith would be able to work past them.

[Kulyok]

There are likely going to be things he may have trouble with in his faith depending on his character (be it the Wall of the Faithless, killing good aligned undead, mercy killings, giving comfort to evil psychopaths as they die, whatever)- but I think a good aligned character who has faith would be able to work past them.

 

Except that he'll no longer be a good character.

[Twani]

Except that he'll no longer be a good character.

 

If that were true, there wouldn't be good aligned priests of Kelemvor- and there are.

 

It's certainly not as odd as the 'a paladin of the Mulhorandi pantheon can keep slaves without falling or having hir alignment changed' deal.

[BigRob]

There is a lot of grey area involved in good and evil. Slavery is considered to be inherently evil, but the law restricts one's freedom also, so is the law inherently evil too? Consider that in Mulhorand the king, as a god, technically owns everyone and everything, so a Mulhorandi paladin owning slaves is not actually doing any harm to the people. If they were to treat those slaves cruelly though...

 

 

And... as I make this post longer and longer... I think a LG cleric of Kelemvor would be fine. There are likely going to be things he may have trouble with in his faith depending on his character (be it the Wall of the Faithless, killing good aligned undead, mercy killings, giving comfort to evil psychopaths as they die, whatever)- but I think a good aligned character who has faith would be able to work past them.

And by the same token, a mercy killing would be considered a good act by some, and an evil act by others. We have a debate in our world about this too.

 

 

Of course, this would all depend on who's running your game.

[Elfen Lied]

Bioware was thinking of the male PC, and thought it was pretty likely that you'd pick up a healer, and thus would have a romance option in your party (ignoring the fact that the male PC could just pick up Anomen or even Cernd and never touch the other three). The female PC... got Anomen because someone higher up then poor Dave decided that, leading to the fact that Anomen was basically written as an obnoxious prat and then the women got stuck with him.

 

i always saw it like this, if your romancing one of the characters and they die the romance is over, if you have a healer in your party and they die you have to go all the way back to a temple to revive. having the romancable healers is extra incentive to kept them alive.

[Kulyok]

It's certainly not as odd as the 'a paladin of the Mulhorandi pantheon can keep slaves without falling or having hir alignment changed' deal.

 

Oh, that's funny. "Athens--oh, yes, it is such a rich town! Even the poorest of citizens has at least three slaves!" I think it was a very silly decision on the designers' part not to let a slaver paladin fall, and it is certainly something I really don't want to see in Baldur's Gate series. I wonder whether Virtue mod would make such a character fall immediately? Probably yes.

 

Kelemvor is another matter, but personally, I cannot see a good character worshipping him - he is too cruel a god, the Wall of Faithless alone proves it.

[Rabain]

If there was a mulhorand add-on for BG2 and it had slaver paladins in it that didn't fall while owning slaves I wouldn't see anything wrong with that.

 

You can't have it both ways and say that on one hand a paladin on the sword coast with slaves should fall because that's the rule and on the other hand say a rule that exists in Mulhorand saying that a slaver paladin shouldn't fall for owning slaves is wrong just because you don't like the rule.

 

Fair enough for your own game you make your own rules but you can't logically quote a rule in one campaign as a reason for another rule in another campaign (with its own ruleset) as being wrong.

 

I thought the whole point of Kelemvor moving away from LG was so that he could be more "fair" in judging the dead (both good and evil). The Wall of the Faithless, rather than proving Kelemvor is cruel, proves that being on one extreme of the alignment scale is not a good idea for a god who is meant to fairly judge all alignments. The removal of the Wall of the Faithless proves that Kelemvor now takes his proper place as an LN judge of the dead.

 

I don't see a problem with Kelemvor having an LG paladin serving him if he knows that the paladin's main focus is going to be exterminating undead who have wrongfully sought ways to cheat death. It is more likely he would find good aligned worshippers willing to hunt down undead than evil worshippers seeing as most evil people would see little benefit in actively hunting down undead. For this reason alone I would expect to see more good aligned classes (including paladins) following Kelemvor than other classes of evil/neutral alignment.

[Kulyok]

You can't have it both ways and say that on one hand a paladin on the sword coast with slaves should fall because that's the rule and on the other hand say a rule that exists in Mulhorand saying that a slaver paladin shouldn't fall for owning slaves is wrong just because you don't like the rule.

 

I'll have to quote this one. What exactly did you mean to say?

 

I am saying that, yes, owning slaves is evil, and as such, a paladin who owns slaves will automatically fall everywhere in the game of Baldur's Gate, regardless of where he comes from.

 

The Wall of the Faithless, rather than proving Kelemvor is cruel, proves that being on one extreme of the alignment scale is not a good idea for a god who is meant to fairly judge all alignments. The removal of the Wall of the Faithless proves that Kelemvor now takes his proper place as an LN judge of the dead.

 

It's the time of Baldur's Gate I and II. The Wall of the Faithless is very much in place.

 

And, as such, yes, I do think that yes, consistency should be preserved. Slavery is evil in Baldur's Gate setting - slaver paladins should fall. Good and decent people like Valygar are sent to the Wall of the Faithless - an essentially good person would not serve a god that upholds such a regime. A neutral one might.

 

It's much like punctuation, really, the way I see it. Baldur's Gate had had some horrible moments with it, but it is not a reason to release a mod of your own where it's practically absent.

[Rabain]

I would argue about slavery being evil. In most of the Sword Coast it is unlawful, but that doesn't make it evil. The slavery practised in the slums district is a bit different, it's not slavery as part of a culture, it's kidnapping and selling into slavery those who originally were not slaves.

 

I am saying that, yes, owning slaves is evil, and as such, a paladin who owns slaves will automatically fall everywhere in the game of Baldur's Gate, regardless of where he comes from.

 

Who or what makes the paladin fall for owning slaves if the god who sponsors the paladin allows it? It is only your opinion that a slave owning paladin will or should automatically fall and opinions differ.

[Kulyok]

I would argue about slavery being evil.

 

...

 

I have nothing else to say to you.

[Gabrielle]

With our modern morality we can stick our noses in the air and call slavery “evilâ€Â, but back in ancient times it was acceptable and a necessity.

[Twani]

D&D morality can be annoying. In my view, I consider slavery evil and vile- and while in ancient times it was acceptable (and perhaps neccessary- I don't want to argue about it, as I don't think I could do it without my modern morality creeping in)... it doesn't seem to be in Faerun. Quite a few Forgotten Realms countries can do it just fine. So I can't see how it can't be an evil act. And yet, a paladin of the Mulhorandi gods can do it just fine. If he came to Baldur's Gate, he would not become evil or fall. Other paladins would likely be horrified, though, and there would probably be divine problems as their dieties kept everyone from killing each other.

 

The Wall of Faithless I have less problem with (and Valygar would not end up on it, as he's a ranger). Whether by our morality it's evil or not (it is by mine, but to explain why would involve calling religions evil and would start a huge debate so I don't want to argue the point) doesn't change that in FR, it's a neutral thing. Not good, not evil, just there.

[BigRob]

D&D morality can be annoying. In my view, I consider slavery evil and vile- and while in ancient times it was acceptable (and perhaps neccessary- I don't want to argue about it, as I don't think I could do it without my modern morality creeping in)... it doesn't seem to be in Faerun. Quite a few Forgotten Realms countries can do it just fine. So I can't see how it can't be an evil act. And yet, a paladin of the Mulhorandi gods can do it just fine. If he came to Baldur's Gate, he would not become evil or fall.

But a Mulhorandi paladin might likewise be horrified by the practices involved in slavery in Amn and actively try to free slaves.

 

 

 

 

Good and decent people like Valygar are sent to the Wall of the Faithless - an essentially good person would not serve a god that upholds such a regime. A neutral one might.

 

Not to be too argumentative, but that's a very slippery slope. Mystra allows magic to be used for some truly evil purposes. Could any essentially good person serve her regime?

[Lady Fiana]

I really won't know his align until I get some more of his talks wrote out.

It will be one of the two simply because I'm goody and couldn't write evilly if I tried.

 

The Wall of the Faithless and Valygar is something I'm trying to figure out. I need more info on The Wall. I know Valygar believes in Gods he just chooses to not worship them.