Feint Whispers Chapter #3: Unearthing the Past party stats and ooc

[Tokiwong]

Oh, and just to let everybody know, this chapter is an experiment. If you don't like the entire urban, episodic thing, please let me know. I'm not so tied to it that I will not change pace to meet your interests. Though this chapter should get more conventional soon enough.

I think the game rocks

 

[KaintheSeeker]

Yeah defintiely gives the chance to pick out the difference between the characters.

 

[Mirth]

There is nothing inherently evil with endorsing slavery, it supports the system of laws that we as charcters live in. If it was the law and I wa sa paladiin, i would see nothing wrong with supporting it, it is the law. As far as the child, he was a thief, and from Jericho's culture thieves/criminals are dealt with harshly and quickly, it keeps the amount of crooks, low... if you lose a hand... would you really want to steal again?

First of all, I want to stress that I don't want this to boil down to a OOC firefight. This will be all that I have to say on the subject. I've played my share of evil characters in my day as both a DM and a player. I'm not arguing this as a RL point, but as an in-game point. Here goes:

I wouldn't have a problem if these laws and ways of life had been established in the background of the game beforehand, instead of being dropped into the game with the expectation that all of the characters were aware of it and accepted it as "the way things are." But slavery wasn't mentioned until the beginning of this chapter of the game.

Also, if Jericho's culture (which we as players don't know much about, aside from a couple of sentences of background, but I'm assuming our characters would know about) is based on RL practices of middle eastern and eastern cultures that have strict punishments for theft (such as the loss of their right hand or public beatings), then I would find fault with Jericho's act. In those RL cultures, the thief would be imprisoned first and then subjected to a public punishment (even death) after deliberation. But no one would find the indiscriminate murder of a child to be suitable or acceptable punishment for such an offense. And none of the law who enacted a punishment against the guilty would be so non-chalant and unfeeling about meting out said punishment. The way it was handled in-game smacks of evil to me, with no excuse for culture making Jericho's callous dismissal of his act any less so. This is so much conjecture on my part though, because we have been given only the sketchiest details about the campaign world.

If that's the way it has got to be, so be it. Tarowyn will act accordingly.

And I do believe this discussion belongs OOC. And I am enjoying the game quite a bit.

Not in agreement but not confused anymore,

Jay

 

[Tokiwong]

In those RL cultures, the thief would be imprisoned first and then subjected to a public punishment (even death) after deliberation. But no one would find the indiscriminate murder of a child to be suitable or acceptable punishment for such an offense. And none of the law who enacted a punishment against the guilty would be so non-chalant and unfeeling about meting out said punishment.

I can see your point Mirthcard, but those societies many times do not have jails or holding areas... judgement was swift, and handled quickly. You were guilty you got caught no need to deliberate, get the punishment done, there are no lawyers, ni just cause, you are guilty till proven innocent. Jericho didn't mean to kill the kid, but he got a critical strike.. something the DM did not mention... he does not go around killing youths, but the kid was a crook, and he tried to cut Whitney with a lucky strike he could have done her in with one hit... possibly... the kid knew what he was doing... he didn't have to come armed...

Life was cheap in the odlen days.. not trying to be mean.. but the kid is of ill consequence, he was not providing a service to the community and is only making a burden... if you can't carry your weight or get caught, then be prepared to face the consequences... and now I am done...

 

[Krug]

I'm enjoying the game, though sometimes more than one post a day is too much for me to keep up.

As for the 'punishment', it is a bit harsh. But Jericho was trying to subdue wasn't he?

 

[Tokiwong]

I'm enjoying the game, though sometimes more than one post a day is too much for me to keep up.

As for the 'punishment', it is a bit harsh. But Jericho was trying to subdue wasn't he?

I was, I got a critical

 

[Mirth]

I'll try to make this as succint as possible so that we can get on with the game.

Killing a child WITHOUT REMORSE is an EVIL act in D&D. No matter the justification. No matter the cultural background. That's why we have an alignment system in the game.

We can solve this issue in-game. If Jericho thinks that it is okay to "punish" this child by the law of HIS land, then he should be okay with THIS land using its law to "punish" him (doled out by Sir Whiteclove, I would expect). However, Jericho seems to know what the laws of HIS land are. I'm at a disadvantage here, because I have no idea what the laws of Tarowyn's land are.

But ultimately I don't care. Let's just get on with the game. Tarowyn's role will change to fit the tenor as I now understand it.

 

[Tokiwong]

I don't know.. that seems to cut and dry to me... without remorse? People were considered men at the age of 13, dependent on the culture, though that seems a child to us, that is very much a man in that age, and the alignment system is a guideline.. just seems too cut and dry to me.

Good and Evil... is based on cultural upbringing. You have to take into consideration culture, when you begin to classify what is good and evil. Their have been some brutal cultures that I am sure have produced quite the amount of Good people...

I think the arguement is weak... but I see where you are coming from Mirthcard...

 

[Tokiwong]

Lets just game... we have different views here... so lets not see them get exacerbated...

 

[Mirth]

I don't know.. that seems to cut and dry to me... without remorse? People were considered men at the age of 13, dependent on the culture, though that seems a child to us, that is very much a man in that age, and the alignment system is a guideline.. just seems too cut and dry to me.

Good and Evil... is based on cultural upbringing. You have to take into consideration culture, when you begin to classify what is good and evil. Their have been some brutal cultures that I am sure have produced quite the amount of Good people...

I think the arguement is weak... but I see where you are coming from Mirthcard...

I'll pick this apart a little bit, but I'm growing quickly bored of it.

Twice in the game, the thief was described by jasamcarl as "a boy" and twice as "a youth" NOT as "a young man", so in the game that point of your argument falls apart.

As for being too cut and dry, the alignment system is a guideline - a cut and dry one. There is Good. There is Evil. There is Law. There is Chaos. There is Neutrality. Pretty cut and dry, if you ask me. RL isn't like that by any means, but D&D certainly is. If it still is too cut and dry for you, I would suggest changing Jericho to a Chaotic Neutral character.

If you want to bring culture into the alignment debate, then any Evil act can be justified. Hitler felt the Jews were Evil and, in his eyes, ridding the Earth of that Evil was justified. He certainly felt no remorse about his actions. He believed himself to be a Christian (the swastika, his main symbol, was a cross) and that he was doing the work of God. In his culture, those who followed him believed this as well. Using your argument, how would you classify his alignment in D&D terms? If you want to join a similar debate about Torquemada, have a look at this thread:

http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?threadid=30158

I think you're the one with the weak argument. But I still love you, man

We'll have to agree to disagree,

Jay