Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nonlethal Force" data-source="post: 2937926" data-attributes="member: 35788">Psionics is popular with the right crowd here.  There are many who are insanely loyal to psionics - like me.  I just didn't see your original post, sorry.I have no problems with a thrallherd in a good party.  Here's how I approach it, though ... because if you view the Thrallherd as you outlined it above you should have problems with it in a normal good party!In a Good Party:1.Do you mind it when the social rogue or the bard uses diplomacy to allow them to get past?  Probably not, so long as the access does not cause them to do anything that violates their goodness.  2. Do you mind it when the cleric or paladin uses their church to get them access to certain divine powers or protection?  Probably not if it isn't abused.  3. Do you mind when a spellcaster takes Leadership feat just so they can have a meatshield before them?  Probably not, so long as they care for their meatshield and have a good relationship and not just put him out there to soak damage with no appreciation.I could go on, but this is enough to illustrate my point.  Very few actions are inherently good or bad.  [Even killing can be acceptable if done in self-defense or for a legitimate hunt where the meat is used to nourish the human body and not merely "tossed out" and the rack is kept]  It is the people who are good or bad and what makes an action good or bad is how the action is handled by the person.As a Thrallherd, there will be those who feel compelled to follow you.  That part is a function of the class and unless you wish to go against the flavor text is a part of the class.  An evil Thrallherd smiles on his dominion and uses the people.  But a good thrallherd pauses in his adventuring to explain that it was his psionic/psychic powers and his use of them in a good way that brought these people to him.  The good Thrallherd does not glory in the creation of followers who are compelled to come but rather focuses on the fact that the mental bond of goodness is taking effect between people.  The fact that the thralls are here is a reason to celebrate since they can begin to work unified together in good!Now, some people might say that is real close to "brainwashing."  Again, if the good Thrallherd uses their thralls without explaining their actions, teaching them, including them in the master plan of good ... then yes it is an abuse of power.  But if the good Thrallherd takes the time to explain themselves and include the people in the master plan without abusing their status as thralls - then it is fine.All good leaders have thralls.  Everyone in the world wants to follow something or someone.  We all have the capacity to follow a person/ideal blindly.  That is neither good nor bad.  What is good or bad is if it becomes abused by the person/ideal being supported.  For a purely ideological stance, that is the difference between Ghandi and Hitler.  [There are many other differences ... but ideologically speaking ...] While both of them had people who flocked to them and followed them in many cases blindly, Hitler abused the following and Ghandi stopped and took the time to explain what was happening and held himself accountable to ensure that the standard of "good" was maintained.  When dealing with Thralls, responsibility must always come back to the leader.  Ghandi knew that and embraced it.  Hitler knew it and abused it.Edit: Any good leader of a social cause could legitimately be classed out as a Thrallherd.  Just because a person is a good social mover does not make them immune to blind followers.  It may even make them more succeptible.  The trick is to have the strength of character to always hold up the good standard and make sure that none of those who are following you are abused in the process.</blockquote>

Verification