D&D 5E (2014) [5e] QL's Al-Qadim Game
- Thread starter Quickleaf
- Start date
Quickleaf
Legend
Well, in Zakhara the gods don't have alignment correspondences, so there can be Lawful Evil followers of Hakiyah, Goddess of Truth right alongside LG, NG, CG, N, and so forth. Hakiyah advocates the calm methodical examination of the truth. An evil schemer could use the truth (e.g. as an information broker) to bring down his rivals, while remaining legally scrupulous himself, despite the suffering left in his wake. I could see a coldly analytical, "just the facts please" approach that doesn't take into account motive; so damning the firefighter who fails to rescue someone despite his good motives, that sort of extreme. I mean, Hakiyah does have holy slayers (The Soft Whisper), and even if they're more neutrally-inclined, there are likely Lawful Evil types among them.
Ancalagon
Dusty Dragon
Well, it's not just about being "evil" - Vampires are undead (so a violation of the natural order of things) and often prey on others to survive. I don't know how well that would fit in the world view of Zakhara and the Lawgiver... but you know the setting far more than I do.
Quickleaf
Legend
I was saying something, but it seems to have slipped my mind. Huh. Funny.
I like posing dilemmas. Matthew Colville has a nice quote: "The DM's job isn't to answer the players' questions, it's to solve their answers."
Ancalagon
Dusty Dragon
But I don't even know if there is a dilemma! Maybe the Zakharan attitude towards undeath is very casual? I could see it either way...
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using EN World mobile app
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using EN World mobile app
Quickleaf
Legend
The AQ books, reading between the lines generally assert that "Anyone can be Enlightened, but that doesn't mean they're good-aligned...except for those nasty yakfolk (yikkaria), and undead, and demons, of course. Of course." Generally, the treatment is inconsistent across the AQ adventures – for example, there's an evil fortress *loaded* with evil savage orcs, hobgoblins, hill giants, and so forth...whereas in the core AQ boxed set there are reef giants pulling fishing nets and ogre astrologers. There's even an adventure with a good lich, but many more adventures with wicked ghuls (and ghouls). The impression I get is that 500 years ago there were a lot more monsters in the traditional humanoid monster sense, and that they've been "receiving the word of the Loregiver" trickle down over many many years. So some tribes are still monstrous savages, while other tribes are integrated into Enlightened Zakharan society...and everything in between.
Me personally as DM? I'm never going to tell you what your PCs think is right or wrong. I just present the situation and you can decide how to investigate and whose treasure to murder-steal.
Last edited:
Roll initiative and let the dice sort them out.
What? No?
For what it's worth, after reading what Quickleaf wrote, Husam would judge the waterbearer and the Vizier on their actions and not kill them on sight. Husam would be interested in knowing how the waterbearer kept himself fed and whether or not he's controlling these people. If he is preying on them or taking advantage, Husam would oppose him. If he's feeding off cattle or the people are voluntarily giving him blood, then no crime exists to be punished.
What? No?
For what it's worth, after reading what Quickleaf wrote, Husam would judge the waterbearer and the Vizier on their actions and not kill them on sight. Husam would be interested in knowing how the waterbearer kept himself fed and whether or not he's controlling these people. If he is preying on them or taking advantage, Husam would oppose him. If he's feeding off cattle or the people are voluntarily giving him blood, then no crime exists to be punished.
