There is at least an other non-evil Drow I know of. I am sure Zaknafein do'Urrden isn't evil (altough i'm not sure if he's good, however)

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Barb:
Okay, Is their seriously a holy flamethrower or is that a joke?<hr></blockquote>

It is only usable by Paladins, and does damage based upon the alignment of the blastee: good creatures suffer no damage, neutral-aligned suffer 4d4 per blast, LE and NE suffer 6d6, and CE suffers 8d8 per blast. It has 5 att/r., weighs 30 pounds, and thus requires a 16 str. to wield. In addition, if a Paladin who is using it ever becomes fallen, the flamethrower wille explode, inflicting a double-strength Flame Strike upon the offending former Paladin.

Strangely enough, nobody wants to buy it....

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by lord_gabriel:
There is at least an other non-evil Drow I know of. I am sure Zaknafein do'Urrden isn't evil (altough i'm not sure if he's good, however)<hr></blockquote>

Zaknafein was Chaotic Neutral, as Drizzt stated in the Dark Elf Trilogy, he wasn't evil, but didn't have the moral strength to break away from the evil drow society completely. But House Do'Urden were really the only ones who knew of this fault, and they only toloerated him while he was the greatest swordmaster in Menzoberranzen, as soon as Drizzt surpassed him he was sacrificed to Lloth for his indescretions

Ummm... no. A flamethrower is not exactly a medieval style weapon is it. He was being completely facetious.

As to the Paladin Question. Law does not mediate the actions of Good. Good and Evil are absolutes, Law and Chaos are relative to the person in question. What it boils down to is this: A Paladin must do what is good and right in ANY situation, regardless of the laws of the land, that is the code of Honor and Chivalry. The Lawful alignment designation is limiting to a paladin's ability to make judgement on merit, and forces the character to follow the laws.

For example, because of his good side, a Paladin would never strike down an unarmed foe. Due to his lawful nature however, he must obey the commands of his church or lord. To me, this is counter-intuitive, because churches routinely commit acts that are less than lawful and frequently bordering on evil (the church of Lathander authorizing the use of deadly force to get back a ring...) and also runs counter to a Paladin's code. If a Paladin does the Dawn ring quest, he is not playing within the Lawful Good alignment.

I used to play the Quest for Glory series (Sierra) and played the bonus class of the Paladin. He was a hero who's powers increased based on his "Honor" which increased for doing good deeds, and decreased for taking sneaky or underhanded options, like stealing or killing out of hand. I think this describes a Paladin's role much better, and a Paladin should not be bound by laws, otherwise his ability to fulfill his obligations to Good are compromised.

Hey, Gary Gygax created the character as a lawful good critter, and he meant it that way. That doesnt'mean that you can't disagree regarding ethics if you have a more neutral outlook, even while you agree on morals (as you certainly do if you believe that good cannot exist without evil: Keldorn and Anomen would certainly disagree!) If you don't like that, you can always create a holy warrior of neutral good... though I suspect that you'd wind up with a less-woodsy ranger.

Is a quest a spoiler? What's the netiquette on that?

So the church of Lathander authorizes deadly force, in order to keep one of their sacred relics from being misused and twisted by Talos: when they know full well that horrible things will be perpetrated with said ring? What's evil about that? It would be different if it had merely been stolen by Joe Blow to pawn it, but that's clearly not what's at work in the quest...

A church asks a paladin to use "evil" methods for a good cause. To a true Paladin, this would taint the goal and not make it worthy.

That is the contradiction. Much like a Christian Knight during the crusades, he was fighting for his God, but of course pillaging the countryside and salting the fields. A Paladin cannot condone evil methods for a good end.

Plus, if a ring can do all that damage, why wouldn't you keep it? I have a feeling that its more a symbol, like the Cross, rather than some all-powerful ring of Godly might...

And Gary Gygax may have envisioned it one way, but look at 3rd Edition rules. Streamlined, more open and variable. The evolution of thought with regards to the D&D system points to my argument against the "lawful" nature of a Paladin as valid.

no i doubt that zakzafein was anything BUT good.he allowed himself to be sacrificed in order to save the life of his son.the father died for the percieved sins of the son.he just lacked the strength of will to break with the drow of his city.

Kaleban, I think that you and I should probably just agree to disagree, because we obviously aren't going to convince each other of anything. Personally, I find the 3rd edition to be a massive disappointment: I'd much rather play "basic" than 3rd, by a long shot.

Fair enough... ;)

Honestly, I haven't played much 3rd Edition, but I have heard mixed reviews, and Pool of Radiance was AWFUL!

Keldorn looks like a dirty old man in rusty armor. I don't trust him. After all, he IS an "inquisitor" and we all know what happened way back when in Spain... right?

I just bought Mel Brooks' "History of the World, Part I" the other day, and I nearly die from laughing every time I watch the Inquisition musical scene.

I don't use keldorn either, in fact i don't even like plaidins, they all seem too good and if wanted a good fighter then i would use a fighter. Plus vicconia's too good to be in a party with people like keldorn.