Kiss of Darkness: OOC: Part 1--A Hint of Shadow

[Rystil Arden]

[SBLOCK=NLF]Ah, the warehouse thing. I thought that was a case of you hedging strongly towards Lawful. It was clearly not a Non-Good or Evil act to enter the warehouse. Chaotic? Absolutely. But she's Neutral Good. I was (and still am a bit) perplexed that she thought it was an evil act--perhaps you're something approaching Lawful Good in real life so you sometimes conflate the two?

It was also pretty much the only case in the adventure so far of the Exalted thing getting in the way (imo perhaps unnecessarily). There was some fun Exalted and VoP tension that was purely roleplaying at other points, such as at the inn. Actually, the only other rough edge, in my opinion, was with the pentagram, and even then I was definitely still okay with it because she eventually did let him out--Dhistan is definitely not the nicest guy, but an Exalted character wouldn't leave anyone to be sacrificed to the Abyss (and Rhaka didn't leave him, so it was okay). Of all the groups that have played through that scene (three now), Rhaka actually waited far longer than Good or even just Neutral-aligned characters to let the prisoner out--of course, that may just be a caution born of Rhaka understanding that her perception and Wisdom sometimes outpace her understanding.[/SBLOCK]

 

[Nonlethal Force]

[Sblock=RA]I suppose I can see it that way, although I'll admit I don't buy it at all. To enter the warehouse, Val had to flat out lie to convince the locksmith to gain entry. They went into a place that was intentionally locked to keep people out - without any great reason to think of something going on inside besides Kinjon's nose! They had hunches ... but that was all at the best. I don't see how going into the warehouse was "good" at all. Yes, the ends justified the means and the elf was rescued. Good came out of it, of course. But the act of entering the warehouse was certainly not a good act! If we start applying an ends-justifies-the-means approach to good vs. evil then al the characters arel going to join Miko from OotS before too long!

Call me wrong - and if so then we clearly have a difference of opinion - but an exalted character should not be all that interested in lying, breaking-and-entering, and tresspassing. perhaps a good character might be able to get away with it, but not an exalted one!

In the end, though, I think your latest post has simply convinced me that we are simply going to disagree at more than we agree. You have already confessed that some of my play with Rhaka leaves you perplexed. Unfortunately, perplexion has also been my attitude to much of this game. We've rammed heads for a good part of the game and I haven't particularily enjoyed most of it. Of the characters in the game, the only ones I find particularily exciting to interact with is Baeleth. (And the woman at the inn that the party left behind, of course.)

I'll not leave the game and leave you in a lurch when I have no good reason. But your latest post convinced me that it's time that I at least offer. If you want to advertise for three new recruits and drop Rhaka I'll go more than willingly. I haven't enjoyed the game for a while, and I think my posting habits reflect that. I feel like in the KoD environment I am always antagonistic and I don't want to be that way as a person. I want gaming to be fun and enjoyable for all involved. It simply isn't that way for me here. {I have a feeling that most of it is the conflict of Rhaka and not necessarily personal between you and me, just so you know}

To be fair to Unleashed, I am posting an Sblock for him so that he is aware of this. You are certainly welcome (and even invited) to read it as well.[/Sblock]

[Sblock=Unleashed]I am writing this Sblock for your benefit, although I have invited RA to read it.

I want you to know that I've offered to leave KoD. Some of the actions that I have had Rhaka do perplex RA because we have a difference in understanding regarding exalted. I must admit that more often than not I am perplexed by this campaign and its definition of good. I haven't enjoyed the story arc for a while, and I think my posting habits here reflect that. At several times when the game has stalled I've had to force myself to ocassionally be the one to bump the thread when really I was pleased to see it stalled. [And you have bumped more often than I, although hopefully more willingly.]

Anyway, I did not say I was leaving, only that I have offered to leave. In other words, I will continue to play Rhaka (or another character) for the sake of keeping the story going. However, I extended the invitation to RA to recruit for three new players and let Rhaka go. If there are three people out there who would like to play in this story under RA, I would rather give them the opportunity than take a spot that they could have.

EDIT: Just to be clear, my discomfort is with the understanding of good/exalted, not with RA personally. I have also offered to stay and play a non-exalted character if you would desire the game to continue.[/Sblock]

 

[Rystil Arden]

[SBLOCK=NLF]Admittedly, entering the warehouse itself, like eating lunch or having a conversation, was an act that wasn't aligned with any alignment, neither good nor non-good. Even an exalted character does many things each day that aren't explictly good (but they often lead to Good acts later on--eating lets the exalted character be nourished).

Lying is not an evil act, though--and Val actually managed to get them in with far less trouble than the other groups (they broke in through the windows--I could see how if Rhaka did that, she'd definitely want to at the very least repair the windows). Imagine a Chaotic Good Exalted character--that sort of character would definitely lie, right? All that being said, out of character I actually have a strict personal moral code to never say something that is not true, so it's not that I think lying is the right thing to do in the real world--just that it isn't non-good in D&D, it is fundamentally Chaotic.

All that aside--that doesn't mean I don't want you in the game. If you want to leave, that's a different story, as I also don't want to keep you here against your will. Honestly, if you want to leave though, I'm probably best just indefinitely halting this game unless Bront and Keia come back--this short adventure series wouldn't be cohesive at all for a group that was 75-80% made up of people who missed the first part--I might as well just start over. I won't be upset if I have to do this, though, if the players weren't having fun in the first place

[/SBLOCK]

 

[Nonlethal Force]

[Sblock=RA]If I were to stay, it would be because Unleashed desires to continue the game. I respect Unleashed enough that if he were to say that he was having fun and would like to see the game continue, I would stay. If you say that you will shut the game down if I leave and Unleashed would like to keep playing Baeleth, then I will certainly stay. And I won't be a grumpy player, either, fwiw.

I took most of the afternoon to get away (my wife wanted to go shopping and Barnes and Noble anyway ...) and I did a bit of thinking. If Unleashed does want to stay, though, I think it would be best to come up with a new character. Something that totally takes me off of the good/evil axis. It seems to me that you and I have the greatest disagreement along what is good or evil. You and I don't seem to disagree much on what is lawful/chaotic. So I guess what I am saying is something easy like an LN fighter type. (I don't know what Baeleth is, so I don't know if it would clash) At this point if I were to stay and truly try to make it work I'd rather play something that is straight up and straight forward. Something simple like a fighter. [Or even a rogue variant fighter from UA if we need something with skills] I just think that if Unleashed wants to continue that it be best if we get away from exalted definately and good as well. Like I said, I don't have any person conflicts with you, per se ... just that we understand "good vs evil" differently. [And no, I would not expect a chaotic good character to lie. But that can be put behind us.]

I honestly don't also see why the game couldn't continue with a fairly new cast, although you are the DM. From the player's perspective ... so far the only major thiings that seem to be happening is that some sacrifices were discovered and there's something about a new cult. An irritating elf was discovered, but he'll irritate just about anyone whether they are new or not. I don't see why a new group of players couldn't be brought on through Elenia and told "this is what's up ... go with Baeleth and do whatever is necessary." But as I originally said, you are the DM. You know what's coming up and how important it is that the same characters who just completed that task continue on ahead. From my perspective as a player, it doesn't seem that important.[/Sblock]

 

[Rystil Arden]

[SBLOCK=NLF]Wow, actually I think you and I may have a fundamental disconnect on Law and Chaos as well because now I'm certain you conflate Law and Good. I assumed for granted that everyone would agree that a Chaotic Good character would lie (in fact, for proof that this is the canonical stance from Wizards, see the Chaotic Good Beguiler example in PHII where they lie and manipulate people to help lead to happiness and better lives for all--not that what Wizards thinks matters, per se). In the end, though, it doesn't really matter to our ability to play the game (though you may even actually want to play an Exalted Paladin because it seems like your idea of Chaotic Good would be able to stay as a Paladin in my game without a problem). It's usually the GMs who are more stringent with alignments than the players that cause problems (frex if I was in your game with a Chaotic Good character who lied constantly and you zapped me to Chaotic Neutral, that would make me sad), but when the players have stauncher stricter views, this is easily overcome by playing a stauncher, stricter character In that sense, Rhaka may be the right direction, almost perfect even. All of her actions (and your characterisation of Good in these SBLOCKs, which is interesting by the way and I'm happy to continue discussing) have been pretty-much 100% perfectly in line with a Lawful Good Exalted character. It's just that she's a Neutral Good Exalted character.

Interesting question (and I think I know the answer you'll give to this one): If you were forced to pick and all other things being equal, which would you say is more Good--a Lawful Good character or a Neutral Good character.[/SBLOCK]

 

[Nonlethal Force]

[Sblock=RA]For the record, note that I edited Unleashed's Sblock above earlier after my previous post. I didn't change the original post, simply added the two lines at the end.

In answer to your question, I would say that NG is the purest good because it is the most flexible good. It can be comfortable in both law and chaos although admittedly never truly comfortable in the extreme of others.

I also came to a new understanding. I definately do not define good in my personal life along the lines of D&D. I think their version of Good it often boils down to "respector of life" while their version of evil boils down to "taker of life." (Or for lack of a better term ... "disrespector of life) With that understanding, I can understand how at WotC a chaotic good could be comfortable with lying, although I fundamantally disagree.

ASIDE: However, I would still place lying in the evil camp because lying to someone is ultimately a sign that you disrespect their life. A liar does not think them worthy enough to need to be honest to them. Thus, because of your willingness to lie to them you are saying in your mind that they are less of a person. That is a disrespect of life. I would consider manipulation an evil act for the same reason. If you are willing to manipulate someone, you are showing disrespect for their life, priorities, and right to think for themselves. You disrespect them. You take away the value of their life. You may not kill them physically ... well, enough of that I suppose. (You is used in the general, not specific, here.)

As for me switching Good/Law ... perhaps. However ... I honestly think you would not have a problem in my games because I essentially ignore alignment (unless you can't stand that - at which point I'd drive you berserk). People role-play what they want and as long as they stay true In-Character I don't get upset at whatever alignment that In-Character alignment is. I've never knocked any player from one alignment to another. In that regard, you may hate my games, because I honestly don't know what alignments any of my players are. I know they put it on the character sheet, but beyond looking at it at character submission I simply don't care about it enough to know. So long as they don't make a big deal about it, I don't either.

Let's see. What else. For the record, I hate the write-up about the Beguiler class. But you and I have been down that road in the past. You love the fluff of the Beguiler and hate the fluff of the Duskblade. (I don't know what you think about either of the classes.) I dislike the Beguiler and am okay with the Duskblade. Maybe I simply have a personal hatred of the way D&D defines alignments, then. If so, I'm okay with that the game can be fun without agreeing with WotC about alignments.

As for where to go ... I'm happy continuing these discussions. Like I've said, though, Rhaka has not been good. Perhaps it is the disconnect over the alignment and the VoP combined ... but whatever it is this game has been a struggle. Not because you aren't an interesting DM. It just seems like Rhaka is always going away from the direction of the game. So, if the game has to progress I have to put Rhaka in a box and capitulate. And that's just frustrating. If I played a more vanilla "okay, I'll go kill things" or "I don't care what we do so long as it's adventure" I wouldn't have to worry about it so much. Either way, Rhaks is neither of those things. {And don't take that to mean a low-INT character, either.}
[/Sblock]

 

[unleashed]

Thanks for the thought Nonlethal, but I'm happy enough to put the game on hiatus until some of the original players return or do whatever else Rystil is happy with, if you don't wish to continue. I was really enjoying all the interpersonal exchanges between the characters, especially Verra and Baeleth, but that effectively ended a while ago, and with all the original characters gone Baeleth would likely change into a different person. While it might be fun to have Baeleth head in another direction, I don't know if I want to do that right now.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

Well, to be honest I don't wish to continue with Rhaka. She's much too complex of a character to play when RA and I have discrepency about Good/Exalted. I'll sit back and wait for RA to think about where he wants to go with everything else that we've discussed.

 

[Bront]

On a side note, has anyone even heard from Keia?

 

[unleashed]

No, but then Keia and I don't/didn't communicate much outside the games we were in.