The Forge of War

[Vocenoctum]

It's also canon that the shifters were killed because Lycanthropes pointed the templars that way. "Clever lycanthropes fanned the puritans' paranoia toward the shifters, and these mistrustful folk massacred hundreds of shifters before someone could prove to them that shifters did not carry the curse." That is a direct quote from the Dragonshard on that subject. They were not that much misguided by their own beliefs, though they were inclined to be misguided by their enemies. That probably doesn't matter to the killed shifters, but most of the Templars would probably be horrified once they found out how they had been had.

The lycanthropes fanned the puritans paranoia, but that paranoia was already there. D&D is a game, and Eberron a setting, where direct action against evil is encouraged, but that doesn't mean that the Silver Flame has the right to judge anybody inherently. They decided that lycanthropic infections needed a purge of everything they could reach and they did it.

Most of the Templars would do as you've done here, be horrified true, and totally shift blame so it was someone elses fault that they did evil.

I'm sure killing foreigners that were potential spies and heretics during a time of war can also be conveniently blamed on someone else.

So, killing the lycanthrope is not going to lose the Flame a soul, he cannot join it anyway. Killing a human, however, is similar as taking a virtuous templar's sword away. It weakens the position of the Flame, it weakens the defenses of the world against evil.

It's obvious that church doctrine is an ever evolving idea, and that not all ideas are universal truths since the start. It's also obvious that there IS a Dark Voice in the flame, and that sometimes it works to undermine the faith in subtle ways. I always figured the church taking over Thrane was due to a conspiracy (like Tir na nOg in Shadowrun) where they discredited the nobility in order to accentuate their capabilities and assume control.

 

[Syltorian]

I"m waiting for Forge of War to arrive, so I'm not sure how far the section goes, but it seems that you're accepting the current Silver Flame doctrine as if it's a universal truth.

I am, more or less. The Church of the Silver Flame is not only Lawful (thus more rigid), it is also a force that manages to communicate with mortals. There may be some variations depending on the Keeper and the Diet, and some evolution, but the basic tenets should stay the same. Individuals and splinter sects might have different ideas, but the Silver Flame itself? And the people it communicates with most directly (i.e. the Keeper)?

While now "convert or die" is not used, I don't find it unbelievable that at various points in the past, flare ups have occured based on all manner of human traits.

No, it's not unbelievable that this may have occurred. Actually, it's pretty much certain that it did occur from time to time, in isolated cases. What I find it a bit more unbelievable is that the Church itself would have authorised, supported and encouraged such activity.

The lycanthropes fanned the puritans paranoia, but that paranoia was already there.

True. But the little push towards lashing out at the shifters, rather than only true lycanthropes needed the evil weres to push them there. In general, I'm not saying that there were not individual Puritans who got the idea by themselves.

Also, the paranoia itself had been created by the lycanthropes, who began spreading through the Reaches and Aundair. Before that, people had not had much contact with lycanthropes. Sure, they existed, but few people would be coming in contact with them.

D&D is a game, and Eberron a setting, where direct action against evil is encouraged, but that doesn't mean that the Silver Flame has the right to judge anybody inherently. They decided that lycanthropic infections needed a purge of everything they could reach and they did it.

Again I agree in principle. But the Flame doesn't judge most people: that's the point. Human evil should not be met by the sword, but by understanding. The lycanthropes, carrying a new strain of the curse, were a threat, massacring hundreds and thousands of people. They came to help the beleaguered Aundairians, not to enforce their own vision of what is good.

Most of the Templars would do as you've done here, be horrified true, and totally shift blame so it was someone elses fault that they did evil.

It helps that in this case, they were right.

Actually, I don't want to say that it wasn't evil to kill shifters, or that the templars would hold themselves guilt-free. But your average templar doesn't want to be evil. So I believe that if he is given proof of his errors (and isn't called Miko Myazaki), he is going to try to atone. Sincerely.

The fiercest of the Puritans might not, but they gained their faith when they saw the templars waging war against the lycanthropes that had invaded their regions, and saw the Flame as much more aggressive. Keith has been pretty clear about that: perceptions of the Flame in Thrane and Aundair are pretty different. The hard-liners are mostly Aundarians, not Thranes. Keith has tried to solve the problem by saying that the creation of the Church-state caused a massive influx from foreign hard-liners, who caused the chaos, and I'm very interested on that idea. It introduces a very interesting element into the episode, apart from conciliating the various views of the Flame.

I'm sure killing foreigners that were potential spies and heretics during a time of war can also be conveniently blamed on someone else.

Killing foreigners because they might be potential spies? That would make more sense, but again: why is this focusing on Thrane? Why didn't it happen in Cyre (who was betrayed by everyone else, and would have had a very good reason to hate them), or in Karrnath (who put efficiency above morals, in general)?

It's the link to the Church that I don't like, and even there, it's the fact that this is presented as an officially condoned, even encouraged action. Besides, by this account, the Thranes do not blame it on anyone. They don't seem to see it's evil.

It's obvious that church doctrine is an ever evolving idea, and that not all ideas are universal truths since the start.

Sure. After all, lycanthropes aren't persecuted anymore quite the same they were before. They aren't held incurable anymore. But there are some fundamental truth that are pretty difficult to shake. Holding a mass-purge of non-supernatural people is still against the tenets. Even if it happens in isolated locations (and I have no problem with that), it shouldn't be considered normal. And that's what, according to FW, it was.

It's also obvious that there IS a Dark Voice in the flame, and that sometimes it works to undermine the faith in subtle ways. I always figured the church taking over Thrane was due to a conspiracy (like Tir na nOg in Shadowrun) where they discredited the nobility in order to accentuate their capabilities and assume control.

There is the Dark Voice, and it could have influenced some of the uprisings. I'll concede that without any argument. But influencing the Keeper and the entire Diet of Cardinals to get them to encourage such behaviour? Again, my problem is not with the fact that such atrocities happened, it's with the idea that they were the general rule for nearly all of the war, except for the last ten years or so.

Regarding the take-over: apperently, the Church was rather surprised by the offer, which might explain why it took them a while to restore order. Of course, the Church might have been involved. Perhaps the Church didn't know anything, but spies from Aundair and Breland tried to stir up a civil war. There is no clear answer, in true Eberron tradition.

So, in summary: I'm not against Silver-Flame committed atrocities appearing in the history. But I don't agree with them being commonplace.

 

[Vocenoctum]

I am, more or less. The Church of the Silver Flame is not only Lawful (thus more rigid), it is also a force that manages to communicate with mortals. There may be some variations depending on the Keeper and the Diet, and some evolution, but the basic tenets should stay the same. Individuals and splinter sects might have different ideas, but the Silver Flame itself? And the people it communicates with most directly (i.e. the Keeper)?

While the majority of the Silver Flame (itself, not the faith) is LG, it really doesn't dominate in every day life so much that it's opinions are directly relatable in most cases. Also, it depends on the actual Keeper and the influences around it.

No, it's not unbelievable that this may have occurred. Actually, it's pretty much certain that it did occur from time to time, in isolated cases. What I find it a bit more unbelievable is that the Church itself would have authorised, supported and encouraged such activity.

Right, without reading the actual text it's hard to judge how widespread and how long it lasted. I agree that it seems unlikely for the Silver Flame to lynch unbelievers all across the land for a decade, but it also seems quite easy to see it sweeping out and taking a year to reverse, then possibly continueing on in isolated cases.

True. But the little push towards lashing out at the shifters, rather than only true lycanthropes needed the evil weres to push them there. In general, I'm not saying that there were not individual Puritans who got the idea by themselves.

I have to disagree here. The lycanthropes may have pointed towards individual shifters here and there (i.e. Bob the Werewolf might throw some hunters at a shifter village to escape), but for it to be official church doctrine would require more than simply some shifters used as camoflouge.

I think it's a matter of the Keeper being isolated from day to day events, but also that it sometimes takes time for the Flame to actually notice what the Keeper is doing, especially if the Dark Voice is involved.

I don't want the Church of the Silver Flame to be a morally corrupt organization or anything, but I do want the church made up of humans that are fallible, rather than using the Silver Flame itself as something of a Phylactery of Faithfulness, if that makes sense.

It helps that in this case, they were right.

Actually, I don't want to say that it wasn't evil to kill shifters, or that the templars would hold themselves guilt-free. But your average templar doesn't want to be evil. So I believe that if he is given proof of his errors (and isn't called Miko Myazaki), he is going to try to atone. Sincerely.

I agree, in principle, but with the addition that the burden of proof is not always on the accuser with the Church of the Silver Flame. It would vary based on individuals. Some would look at a shifter and obviously think it's a lycanthrope until (somehow) proven otherwise, while others would make the disctinction between infectious or not.

Keith has been pretty clear about that: perceptions of the Flame in Thrane and Aundair are pretty different. The hard-liners are mostly Aundarians, not Thranes. Keith has tried to solve the problem by saying that the creation of the Church-state caused a massive influx from foreign hard-liners, who caused the chaos, and I'm very interested on that idea. It introduces a very interesting element into the episode, apart from conciliating the various views of the Flame.

While I like Keith Bakers work and opinions in general, it IS worth noting that his is not always the actual way the world goes. WotC controls it, and might use or discard any of it at will.

Killing foreigners because they might be potential spies? That would make more sense, but again: why is this focusing on Thrane? Why didn't it happen in Cyre (who was betrayed by everyone else, and would have had a very good reason to hate them), or in Karrnath (who put efficiency above morals, in general)?

There is no doubt that Karrnath imprisoned and/or killed folks suspected of spying. The Emerald Claw certainly took out Enemies of the Faith. Cyre too I'd say, and Breland's Dark Lanterns have a lot of discretionary power. I think the Dark Lanterns are like the worst theories of the CIA/KGB type agencies and limited only by themselves...

All that said, none of it is noteworthy with "normal" folks I think. Atrocities happened everywhere, but were only noted for Thrane since they are usually not the types.

Aside from the fact the debate about the matter is many many more words than the description of the events, eh?

So, in summary: I'm not against Silver-Flame committed atrocities appearing in the history. But I don't agree with them being commonplace.

Agreed, I think it unlikely to be everywhere for a long time period. I can see a brief (couple years) of all over Thrane (particularly after some atrocity or another) or long lasting in specific areas, but certainly not regular for Thrane over decades.

 

[Vocenoctum]

There is the Dark Voice, and it could have influenced some of the uprisings. I'll concede that without any argument. But influencing the Keeper and the entire Diet of Cardinals to get them to encourage such behaviour?

In my current campaign, Krozen killed several high rankers and Jaela narrowly escaped (with amnesia). He then created evidence of it being a fey assault and easily pushed the crusaders out to try to assault various fairy lords, in order to keep them out of Flamekeep and hopefully kill off lots of them. The players found Jaela, didn't know who she was, and escorted her around until finally restoring her memory (and freeing the demon below the Whispering Rock in the process, to be destroyed).

Krozen controls the church and nation, Jaela is rallying those she can trust (paladins and such) to try to resist, and Diani is rallying nobility to back Jaela and return herself to rulership. The players have traveled through time and are now trying to head off a servant of Krozen before he gets an artifact that might let him free the Rajah (who I have named Verjigorm).

It's easy enough for me to consider the lyncanthropic purge, and even "kill unbeliever foreigners" as regular human advancement (it's easier to have war heroes when you have a war!) and distraction from more important matters...

 

[SecondTime]

Then it should say so. What the text mentions is that they attacked their neighbours because they were "impious". That's a step down from "heretics", which is a step down from actually dealing with supernatural forces. There is one single instance where the Silver Flame saw actual supernatural evil in anyone but Karrnath's undead (when Breland tried to traffic with a Marilith), and that reaction I accept. The rest of the atrocities are clearly pointed out to be because the victim is accused of simple impiety.

Impious behavior could easily be considered more serious in times of war. What if it indicates disloyalty to Thrane? What if it indicates demonic interference? In which case, purging such impious elements could rationalized as a 'means' to the noble ends of the church. Again, there are a thousand rationalizations, and the book does not need to waste space outlining them all. spell them out, and has already stated multiple radical factions with their own rationalizations were probably. It is also simply possible that the Thranes did were simply being human and forgetting about their faith in the context of a specific upheaval.

For some people to go crazy? Sure. But for the state to condone, and, until fairly late, actively encourage such behaviour? And why only in Thrane? Karrnath, with its martial law and ideas of supremacy, is not recorded to have acted in this way. Neither is Cyre, though they were betrayed by everyone else. The thing is that, while very nation committed war-crimes, Thrane is the only one which consistently acts that way with full government support and encouragement.

Really? Where in the book does it say this? Isn't it simply more likely the case that Thrane's transgressions are cited more because they are notable. Besides which, Thrane was not just in a state of war but was undergoing regime change. The lack of order and inevitable political controversies are bound to lead to increased violence all other things being equal.

It's the way Thrane is presented at the moment that is a caricature.

A caricature of an evil theocracy pretending hypocritically to be good. There is hardly any of the cliche elements missing. They didn't do anything good at all: they just went over the top with inquisitions, crusades, massacres and generally running amok. Nothing balances it: Thrane is presented as pure and utter black, with no redeeming quality.

I don't think anyone would have a problem with Thrane occasionally committing war-time atrocities. I do not want a pure-white view of them. I accept there will have been isolated incidents, and some communities or generals being overzealous. Bombarding Rekkenmark? No problem with that, even if the Keeper hadn't apologised (the only time he did). Even the occasional, localised purge of foreigners would not be impossible. Such actions are reasonable, if regrettable, possibilities in the context.

But Thrane acts that way on a continuous basis. The only exception is when archons from Savarath get in the way. The presentation of Thrane is simply unbalanced. It's that of unadulterated theocracy-gone-crazy. It's pure darkness. If the fiend in the Flame had taken over, there would be no difference (except less hypocrisy). In other words, Thrane is already a caricature.



They may not always strictly function according to such values, but they do not consistently go against them either. There is no sign at all of the commonly accepted values as generally associated with the Silver Flame, not a single recorded incident in 100 years, except when outside influence forces them to restrain themselves.

That's the point, really. Thrane's behaviour is consistent. It shows commonly accepted values which it follows strictly, by the reading of the text. And which apparently involve burning everyone who doesn't go to their Churches at least once a day.

Again, these things happening occasionally, under the stress of the war, in the power vacuum and uncertainty of a regime change? Sure. No problem with that. But that's not, unfortunately, how it is presented. Thrane, in the end (and read the description of the Thrane character in Five Nations, for instance), should be mostly good. Good people can make errors, and do terrible things. But not as what amounts to common practice.

All those of us who are angry at this treatment want is a balanced view of Thrane, like we get for all the other nations. The Thranes are not all-good. But they are not, in general, villains either.

The view is balanced by the text in 5 nations and faiths of eberron which goes to pains to stress that most people in Thrane attempt to act in accordance with faith and tend to be tolerant. Of course, as I've states MULTIPLE TIMES, what actions are consistent with dogma are not always easy to decipher when one looks at particular circumstances. The reason why the excesses are emphasized in source books is because they are interesting given Thrane repuation for being good. It's about drama. Try to understand....

 

[Mouseferatu]

May I humbly make a request?

Is there any possibility that the Silver Flame discussion could move over into its own thread? It's a valid and interesting topic, absolutely, but it's either unrelated to (when talking about the Purge), or referring to only a tiny portion of (when talking about the Convulsion), Forge of War. I'm a little concerned that people who want to discuss the book in general are going to see the heavy discussions of the Flame and be scared off. (As it is, just about every thread I've seen on this book, on every forum, has focused on this one issue.)

Thanks.

 

[Crothian]

Does the book discuss technological and magical advances that occurred during the war and how they made a difference?

 

[Vocenoctum]

May I humbly make a request?

<snip>

Thanks.

Just figured I'd mention, it went the other way. Rather than split off the Flame topic, someone started a post about the rest of the book with a note to not talk about the Flame there.

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=199378

 

[Tzarevitch]

Does the book discuss technological and magical advances that occurred during the war and how they made a difference?

Yes, but not in great detail as a separate topic. It tends to mention advances in the context of the battle in which they appeared (usually anyway). Occasionally they show up elsewhere in the book. There is however a section on the warforged.

Tzarevitch

 

[Syltorian]

May I humbly make a request?

Is there any possibility that the Silver Flame discussion could move over into its own thread? It's a valid and interesting topic, absolutely, but it's either unrelated to (when talking about the Purge), or referring to only a tiny portion of (when talking about the Convulsion), Forge of War. I'm a little concerned that people who want to discuss the book in general are going to see the heavy discussions of the Flame and be scared off. (As it is, just about every thread I've seen on this book, on every forum, has focused on this one issue.)

Thanks.

My apologies. I did not want to give a bad impression of the book, though I certainly see how I achieved that effect. Let me say here, then, that by and large, the book is great, and does take most of the previous material into account.

It gives great flavour to many of the kings and queens which we so far only knew by their names in the Five Nations tables (I really like the treatment of Dannel and Wrogar, btw). It has also excellent battle descriptions and those small events which make the setting so great (love the Thunder Rider halflings in 942).