New PrCs and Avlis PrCs

DarknessFallsLight · Post by **DarknessFallsLight** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 10:06 am

Finally got back to playing Hala and upon gaining a lvl I noticed that all the Holy PrCs from Avlis were on the selection as well as a few other Holy Warrior PrCs were choosable.

For the Avlis PrCs are these choosable from Hala? I am sure there would be some IC reason for this seeing how all gods can be worshipped from Ysgard but holy warrior? I would imagine that would be different.

As for the two other holy warrior PrCs what are the prereqs on those ones and backround for them?

~DFL

NWDuneAuron · Post by **NWDuneAuron** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 11:30 am

The Paladin of Jaletar etc are Catara classes.

The Holy Warrior PrCs for other worlds are not choosable on Hala. If you want a Avenger of Dru'el or something, start an Avlis PC and get it there. They only show up on the levelup screen because they need to be in the Universalhak, which all worlds use, for people with such classes to be able to travel around CoPaP without corrupting their bics and crashing servers.

slave_of_emotions · Post by **slave_of_emotions** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 11:50 am

One of those PrCs is funky.... a CG paladin hunter.... sounds to me like ranger as they all were CG.

DarknessFallsLight · Post by **DarknessFallsLight** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 3:28 pm

Supposed to be sort of a ranger/paladin I guess. Sounded cool but axes are so mid centuary. Swords never go out of style

slave_of_emotions · Post by **slave_of_emotions** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 4:37 pm

well i make a ranger, worship a CG deity, take what ever they hunt as racial enemy and dual wield axes with same result.

T'Holoth Shadowborn · Post by **T'Holoth Shadowborn** » Sun Oct 02, 2005 8:52 pm

A 'good' character that hunts other good characters?
cheese please

DarknessFallsLight · Post by **DarknessFallsLight** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 7:30 am

T'Holoth Shadowborn wrote:A 'good' character that hunts other good characters?
milk derivative product please

Why not? They got evil peeps that hunt other evils

Sable · Post by **Sable** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 8:16 am

DarknessFallsLight wrote:
T'Holoth Shadowborn wrote:A 'good' character that hunts other good characters?
milk derivative product please
Why not? They got evil peeps that hunt other evils

yes, that is the nature of evil. "Beware when fighting monsters..." and all that.

CG holy warriors should fight oppressive law, ie tyrants and dictators - Lawful Evil in other words (not that big a surprise as LE is their opposite alignment). Whilst CG and LG might disagree at a fundimental level, anyone that views LG as oppressive law has obviously never read the alignment description and is blindly venting their own personal dislike of a class/alignment in an ill concieved and "cheesy" fashion.

NWDuneAuron · Post by **NWDuneAuron** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 10:55 am

CG and LG have just as much reason to fight as CG and CE.

Sable · Post by **Sable** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 1:44 pm

since I can't imagine a single person here accepting that a Paladin should crusade against those of the CG alignment because they are as far away from their own alignment as LE, then I don't see why they would accept CG opposed to LG.

CE is the focal point of the crusade of a paladin because it is their opposite alignment. Therefore, by the same logic, the focal point of a CG characters opposition is LE. Couple that with the fact that it is against the very tenants of good to "hunt" good (therefore in doing so, such a group can no longer be counted as good) and you have an impossible/tenuous concept.

Sorry, but this just throws the concept of heroic fantisy out of the window and ends up with something that boarders on gamesmanship and childish nonsense (imo of course

)

T'Holoth Shadowborn · Post by **T'Holoth Shadowborn** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 2:18 pm

Couple that with the fact that it is against the very tenants of good to "hunt" good (therefore in doing so, such a group can no longer be counted as good) and you have an impossible/tenuous concept.

I agree with Sable 100%.

It was a big hurdle for me to grasp that a good character can't/shouldn't aim to kill other people.
Why can't my paladin want to just kill evil. Took the influence of other role players and reading the book of exaulted deeds to see it from the proper perspective IMHO.
Theres a difference between destroying evil and killing evil. One need not kill an evil wizard to destroy him.
By the heroic fantasy deffinition of good, a good character doesn't try to kill other characters- good or evil. Defeat them yes but out right kill them as a goal, no. Of course theres always bending of the rules. Like a CG ranger hunting giants who prey on travllers. Or a dwarf who hunts the evil clan of orcs that threatens his kingdom. In the end defeating the bad guy often turns out to killing them but I guess it's in the wording.
A chaotic good character hunting a lawful good? thats a really big piece of cheese to swallow.

NWDuneAuron · Post by **NWDuneAuron** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 2:19 pm

LG and CG can and should come into conflict and kick the crap out of each other as often as LE/LG and CE/CG. Accept this and move on with your lives.

Sable · Post by **Sable** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 2:26 pm

Simply put, I can not and will not accept that.

You are of course free to run your world as you see fit, but as a player I will have no part in that aspect nor will I agree it is correct.

That said, I have no problems with agreeing to disagree.

...got used to everyone else being wrong a long time ago...

T'Holoth Shadowborn · Post by **T'Holoth Shadowborn** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 3:05 pm

I'm sure they would disagree a lot and even 'come to blows' but thats not the argument here.

Were talking about the chaotic good alignment hunting and killing people of the lawful good alignment and thats not how 'good' is portrayed in the DnD fantasy setting.

VIpAcT · Post by **VIpAcT** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 3:54 pm

I will have to agree with T'Holoth and Sable. While CGs and LGs may come to blows every once in a while because some sort of miscommunication or organiational conflict (like a war between two nations), it is entirely a different thing than holding a class that is devoted to the idea.

There are optional rules for the game, but under the main rules, I believe this cannot happen. Its just like having a ranger who has their own race as a favored race -- then they are evil. The violence rules on good aligned characters allows them to proceed without if they have a "just cause", which means is directed against evil. (paraphrased from the Book of Exulted Deeds)

This is meant in the absolute sense, not in a subjective manner. There may be some leway in some situations, but when it comes to having a class devoted to the killing of good characters, it definitely crosses that line.

Quoting the next sentence in that manual: "It is certainly possible a good nation to declare war upon another good nation, but fighting in such a conflict is not a good act."

Post by **Arkon** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 4:14 pm

The point being made is that while yes, a CG character that specifically hunts down only LG characters is a cheese character, yes. BUT!!! A CG character who believes that an LG way of doing things is wrong and works to eradicate that way of doing things is perfectly concievable. LG and CG have different ways of looking at things. Always have, always will. The CG person is going to look at a situation and decide, what is the easiest way to fix this situation for the greater good, and is going to work towards that regardless of what methods have to be accomplished in order to achieve this.

A LG character will look at a situation and say, what is the best way to do this that complies with my sects way of thinking? That is the ONLY way they will do it, and they will fight tooth and nail against anyone who tries to tell them or do otherwise. LG does not compromise their ideals for any reason. This is where the conflict between LG and CG comes into play, this is why they fight, and this is why typically in a PnP DnD session, CG and LG have an EXTREMELY difficult time staying partied together.

The CG person is going to do it the way they believe is the easiest way to accomplish the overall goal, LG will not do this unless it complies 100% with their sects way of thinking. Period. Take, for instance, a current IG situation that has arisen. A LG Golden Dragons Egg was corrupted, thus causing the offspring to be corrupted. The LG Golden Mother was distraught and the LG Celestial Sect agreed to save this offspring at all costs and return it to its mother. A method to do just that was found. Now, when push came to shove, and the time came to face that dragon, the LE hater of Dragons worked to convince his group that the only way to deal with the dragon was to kill it. The chaotic members of the party (both good and evil) decided this was the easiest course of action at the time and agreed. The LG Member of the group did little to nothing to try and dissuade the group from this course of action, and in fact aided in killing the dragon. The LG person went completely out of their alignment by performing these actions as it went against their groups ideals about it, and against their word to the Golden Dragon that every chance would be taken to save the baby.

Now, had this situation been handled as the alignment tree says it should have been handled, that LG character should have done one of a few things.
A) Left the party and the situation completely.
B) Left the party and work against the party to stop them from killing the Dragon.
C) Fight Tooth and nail to convince the group that there was another way to handle the situation without killing the dragon.
D) Try to convince the dragon himself that he was not evil and bring him back to his true nature.

This could very well have caused a fight within the group between even the CG and LG persons in the party, much less everyone else, because the CG person saw that removing the dragon was the easiest way to work for the greater good in the situation instead of wasting the time needed to find another way to deal with the dragon.

The Point is. LG Doesn't Bend. They have their way of thinking and that is the way it is. They may tolerate other people's way of thinking, but they will likely never agree with or agree to it unless it goes along with their own way of thinking. Lawful follows the specifics of their orders ways of thinking without fail. Should they ever fail to do so, most likley their order would kick them, and if they are a paladin, then they would be forced to Atone before their god would even consider allowing them to regain their paladinhood, and even then the chances are slim that that would happen.

T'Holoth Shadowborn · Post by **T'Holoth Shadowborn** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 4:56 pm

Good post arkon. Don't 100% agree but good post

I still feel alignments are guidelines and not set in stone.
A paladin is a very bad example because they are an extreme situation. Their zealots. Other Lawful Good people should find a paladin "too good".
I've read in the Dungeon masters handbook that a lawful good merchant will still take advantage of a dumb buyer.

I don't think being lawful good means you must follow every and all rules, period. Belongng to a LG organization is a different monster. In your post you assume that a lawful good character is going to belong to a 'sect' or organization and the chaotic good character doesn't have that assumption (or it doesnt across as having such)
How I play it, lawful characters are socieity based "for the greater good of the city/country/server" and chaotic characters center more on themselves and their immediate company. A CG character might see a LG city as evil because the CG character doesnt like to be told he can't hunt deer between certain months, even though that rule is in place by the lawful good community to help preserve the deer population.

Heres a question about alignment and how we relate to it.
Take the marval character 'The Punisher' for example.
A lawful good cop who has his family killed and now doesnt give a shit about the law and murderers criminals. What alignment would he be?

Sable · Post by **Sable** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 5:00 pm

think you're being too easy on the CG. The C in CG does not allow the character to step out of the G. That is closer to the mark of NG.

imo, the better method for illustrating the differences between CG and LG (or just C and L) is at a very simplistic level. "Passion" and "Logic". In the old cliche, a lawful person is ruled by their head, a chaotic person is ruled by their heart.
An LG does what it feels is best for the greater good and is guided by a codified set of (logical) rules. A CG does what it feels is best for the greater good and is guided purely by what they feel (passion), they may easily step outside of the codified rules of the LG, but never outside of those boundaries of what is “Good”.

A note on the above, as detailed in the description of the alignments (avlis has a good piece on this part) LG recognises that interpretation is needed on any codified set of laws, for without it those laws can easily be perverted and twisted by evil and so betray their original spirit. Obviously, how rigidly one sticks to the letter of the law is a character concept thing and on somewhat of a sliding scale (within obvious boundaries).

A caveat to this however (and a purely personal one at that). I have long enjoyed the image that this becomes less the case as we step out into the outer planes and the celestials themselves. To keep with the fantasy image of doing deals with outer planar beings (demons and the like) I like to imagine that such creatures are bound to the "laws" at a far more intrinsic level. They almost do not have a choice about the laws they follow (be they good, evil, chaotic or lawful) – this goes somewhat along the lines of the concept of free will and it only being granted to prime material beings (the biblical precept of humans being granted free will whilst angels are bound by the will of god).
But with that entirely too in depth insight into the character of Sulavan, I’ll leave this here as it’s a topic that can go around in circles all day.

edited to clarify a few points. Appologies if this throws anyone off.

Sable · Post by **Sable** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 5:09 pm

Heres a question about alignment and how we relate to it.
Take the marval character 'The Punisher' for example.
A lawful good cop who has his family killed and now doesnt give a shit about the law and murderers criminals. What alignment would he be?

a question I have gone over in the past. Batman, as in the Dark Knight portrayal of him, rather than the camp 50's series, would be classified somewhere around the NG - CG mark. He works for the greater good but lives by his own personal code which he sticks to with an obsessive passion (Chaotic). However, he still tries to work with one foot loosly within the system. So I'd fall on the NG option.
The punisher steps well out of the established system and so stays firmly within the chaotic framework. However, he also does not allow for reabilitation or the concepts of mercy. Therefore, I'd place him in the CN camp. (passionately abides by his own personal code without referance to established lawful systems and without leanings of good or evil).

Druid523 · Post by **Druid523** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 9:39 pm

Sable wrote:Therefore, I'd place him in the CN camp. (passionately abides by his own personal code without referance to established lawful systems and without leanings of good or evil).

I always thought that Lawful meant that they consistently abide by a set of laws or rules or tenants. Those working in a governmental setting would abide by that government's set of rules. But what about someone who wanders around without ties to any one place? That person would abide by their own set of rules, (their own personal or moral code perhaps). They wouldn't waver from this code regardless of the situation. That's what it means to be Lawful versus Chaotic (where Chaotic means shifting their personal code as the situation changes and as they see fit).

-Scel

dodici · Post by **dodici** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 2:20 am

I'm not used to post any comments usually but since the LG is one of my builds and he is going to have a major changes in his life i will spend some words... and comments on why he did what he did... and look forward for any advise for future RPing situations

1) the LE hater of Dragons worked to convince his group that the only way to deal with the dragon was to kill it

the LG knows any member of the group as a friend, and he is used to trust any friend's words without question... that's his first wrong doing but he does it now and will do in again in the future

2) The LG Member of the group did little to nothing to try and dissuade the group from this course of action

*laughs* that's a different matter... bad my slow typo and my bad english... in any events i'm used to stay silence and watch... but for that i can complain only myslef

3) and in fact aided in killing the dragon

Esareth were near to get a powerful sword that will doom all hala if he ever gets it, what will the LG have to do in a situation like that?... spend time to save to the dragon soul or passes throught him and stop Esareth to get the sword... save one to doom all hala? so he helped to kill the dragon...

4) why the LG pushed the death dragon body to the lava...

In a different event and different DMs but a similar situations, the LG did the same to save the dragon death body to be looted by the others or for any future corruption as beeing used to create golems or dracoliches... and that choice was made with the DMs as the best one... but this time he was punished for his action...

Any DM has his view of a situation or an action and for a player is not always easy to look forward what is best to do with the different ones, i can make right with a DM but doing bad with another one... so if in some key situations, i know is not at all easy, if DMs can give a player an advise on which is the right action to do can help a lot

Thanks

Sable · Post by **Sable** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 8:34 am

Druid523 wrote:
Sable wrote:Therefore, I'd place him in the CN camp. (passionately abides by his own personal code without referance to established lawful systems and without leanings of good or evil).
I always thought that Lawful meant that they consistently abide by a set of laws or rules or tenants. Those working in a governmental setting would abide by that government's set of rules. But what about someone who wanders around without ties to any one place? That person would abide by their own set of rules, (their own personal or moral code perhaps). They wouldn't waver from this code regardless of the situation. That's what it means to be Lawful versus Chaotic (where Chaotic means shifting their personal code as the situation changes and as they see fit).

-Scel

Everyone has personal beliefs. Chaotic cannot mean that you do not have them, it isn’t the free ticket to not have a character. This is in the same way that Lawful is not a free ticket to play a shallow 2D character that is purely the sum of the “laws” they follow. How strongly one sticks by their personal beliefs is a function of will power and strength of personality (Wisdom and Charisma in D&D terms).
For me, Chaotic or Lawful indicates "where" that person draws their view point from. The best RL example I can offer is that of Scientists and Artists. Think about the nature of Art students and Science students at school, this for me, is the easiest way of pointing out the main personality differences between lawful and chaotic characters.
nb. Please don't go jumping in with obscure exceptions thinking that this disproves the theory. There are exceptions to every rule, but when talking in general terms you have to accept general assumptions. The majority is what is of interest here, not the exception

NWDuneAuron · Post by **NWDuneAuron** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 8:44 am

dodici wrote:I'm not used to post any comments usually but since the LG is one of my builds and he is going to have a major changes in his life i will spend some words... and comments on why he did what he did... and look forward for any advise for future RPing situations

1) the LE hater of Dragons worked to convince his group that the only way to deal with the dragon was to kill it

the LG knows any member of the group as a friend, and he is used to trust any friend's words without question... that's his first wrong doing but he does it now and will do in again in the future

2) The LG Member of the group did little to nothing to try and dissuade the group from this course of action

*laughs* that's a different matter... bad my slow typo and my bad english... in any events i'm used to stay silence and watch... but for that i can complain only myslef

3) and in fact aided in killing the dragon

Esareth were near to get a powerful sword that will doom all hala if he ever gets it, what will the LG have to do in a situation like that?... spend time to save to the dragon soul or passes throught him and stop Esareth to get the sword... save one to doom all hala? so he helped to kill the dragon...

4) why the LG pushed the death dragon body to the lava...

In a different event and different DMs but a similar situations, the LG did the same to save the dragon death body to be looted by the others or for any future corruption as beeing used to create golems or dracoliches... and that choice was made with the DMs as the best one... but this time he was punished for his action...

Any DM has his view of a situation or an action and for a player is not always easy to look forward what is best to do with the different ones, i can make right with a DM but doing bad with another one... so if in some key situations, i know is not at all easy, if DMs can give a player an advise on which is the right action to do can help a lot

Thanks

It should be noted that more work on the part of the Good forces in this plot could've saved the dragon pretty easily. Initiative, people!

.

micah ormane · Post by **micah ormane** » Sun Oct 09, 2005 5:28 pm

T'Holoth Shadowborn wrote:A 'good' character that hunts other good characters?
milk derivative product please

Cheese is a character that knows anything about the alignment system. If a character has a good reason to hunt another, alignment doesn't matter so long as it is adhered to properly. If a character hunts another character as a result of a player metagaming alignment, that is what is cheesy. Not the hunt itself.

Chaotic Good is just as far from Lawful Good on the alignment axis as Lawful evil is from Lawful good. There are times when they may work together, but they are not going to see eye to eye about everything (hell, about most things). A simple way of defining law vs. chaos abstractly is this:

The morality scale (good vs. evil) is about why you do things.

The ethos scale (Law vs. chaos) is about how you do things.

There can be ALOT of conflict when you're two steps away on either of these two axes. This conflict could lead to one character hunting another. If a chaotic character sees a lawful (even lawful good) character as being particularly oppressive, remember that it is feasible in the CG character's eyes that this oppression is synonymous with evil. This could even be so if the lawful character was being rigid and strict for a 'good' ideal. That could warrant a CG character intervening and attacking or fighting or hunting a LG character.

No good character, however, should hunt people just to hunt people. The whole concept of good in DnD is that good tries to help, not hurt, and fights when they have to to get something done. But they do not fight more than they have to, and they are conscious of what their actions might have on the bystanders. And just as a LE character uses the law for their gain, and a LG character uses law to promote well being, a CG character may see law or lawfulness (when warranted through proper RP) as evil in its own right.

apandapion · Post by **apandapion** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 1:43 am

If you all are discussing a Catera prestige class, keep in mind that there is a conflict on Catera between those who worship gods and those who refuse to, and that there are good people on both sides. Probably even LG people on both sides.

Ah, Catera. I wish I still had time to play there.