2 Questions of Ethics

[masteraleph]

On Question 2- In large part, I think Ranger being good only is/was a holdover from the original conception of ranger. Keep in mind that "ranger" is typically synonomous with "Aragorn", with perhaps a bit of "Robin Hood" tossed in. Certainly, poachers, highwaymen, etc would live in the wilderness, but they're really thief classes, with perhaps some fighter mixed in- as opposed to aragorn/robin hood, who are ranger and ranger/thief respectively.

[Faceman]

Originally posted by Nerull: Actually, there was an order of fighting priests in the Catholic religion back during the Crusades. They wore armor and fought, but by their code they could not use edged weapons (rationale: needed to fight, but could not spill excessive blood). I forget the name of the order (it's been many years since that history course), but that is the order that the cleric class was originally based off of.

You are talking about the Templar Knights, I presume?
Don't wanna lay a history course on you, but if you want to know a bit more about them and have some fun too I strongly suggest you check out "Broken Sword", an action adventure much in the spirit of the old LucasArts SCUMM adventures. It deals with the legends around the Templar Kinghts.
Uh Oh, now I sound like the Loom Guy from "The Secret of Moneky Island".

[Harkoliar]

Well, Rangers have a purpose. Namely to protect the woods and woodland beings. For this they are imbued with power by a good deity. What would an evil deity expect from a Ranger? To cut down all trees? Would that still be a Ranger? Same (not exactly, but close) for Druids. However, I agree that evil gods should have their paladin-class too. It would make perfect sense. I can only guess that the lack of this is a consequence of evil being more open to change of human nature/biology. Thus a devote follower of evil would try anything to get closer to more power for his evil purpose and rather transform into a vicious beast by some sort of magic than follow a code of ethics to increase the power of his human form. Not a sufficient answer, I know, but my try of explanation.

shadow druids.. the extreme people who protect the forest for thier own benefit. thats about evil i can think of.

[Azaghal]

Nerull, I am afraid your history is indeed a bit long ago and the subject foggy During the crusades there were three major knights orders: The Templars, the Johannites (spelling in English?) and the Teutonic order. All were a mixture of military formations and health- and pilgrimcare organizations. But their members were NO priests of the catholic church, though they were living mostly according to certain monk rules and principles (chastity, personal poverty, obedience). Some of the members received lower sacraments, but - again - they were not ordained priests.
And the knights and soldiers of the orders were as (lat.) milites christi not subject to a bloodspilling prohibiton (as long as it was infidel's blood) according to medieval church laws. So there was no self restriction to certain weapons (Whatfor? A morning star or warhammer will make as awful a mess as a sword if used professionally).
The knights orders are actually the archetype of the paladin in fantasy games. "First on the battlefield, last to leave" was their motto and their valor, fighting skills, faith, selfrighteousness, pride and stubborness was infamous (at least later on).
There were actually other knights orders, for example during the Spanish reconquista, and though this is not my specialty, I am pretty sure they did not selfrestrict their use of weapons as well. Their principles and ideas were very much the same as in the crusades.

[drew_jarvie]

Yea Azaghal is right btw. And pretty damned accurate too lol.

[ 11-12-2003, 06:29 PM: Message edited by: drew_jarvie ]

[SixOfSpades]

Originally posted by Nerull: Actually, if you are playing truly random/utter chaos, you would probably add people to the party by happenstance, regardless of alignment or conflicts between members.

That would work, except that anyone who knows the game couldn't avoid (even subconsciously) choosing their path so as to bump into the NPCs they want just by "happenstance." I'd have to make a spinner that tells me which map area to go to next, and even then....do I bump into Viconia, Jan, or Kelsey?

Really challenging alternative: Grab a coin and a standard six-sided die. As soon as you have the opportunity to add an NPC, flip a coin. ... You will end up with some pretty whacked-out parties, but if you are trying to be the "epitome of chaos" then this might work for you.

Yep, that sounds pretty wacko to me! Here I go, charging into battle with 6 low-level Priests, or some such nonsense.

That's why I like 3rd edition over 2nd edition. Rangers = any alignment. Paladin is still Lawful Good, but a recent series of Dragon magazines introduced "holy warriors" of the other 8 alignments. Clerics can spend "feats" (special abilities all characters get) to add other weapons like longswords, battle axes, etc.

Ooooo! Would you, perchance, know if these are (being) implemented in Icewind Gate? I'd also like to see a Warrior that leveled up at the rate of a Ranger / Paladin, that could learn & cast the first 3 or 4 levels of Wizard spells (when not wearing armor).

Originally posted by Faceman: ....What would an evil deity expect from a Ranger? To cut down all trees? Would that still be a Ranger? Same (not exactly, but close) for Druids.

Apart from what's already been discussed....how about deliberately nurturing and protecting Evil creatures such as Wyverns and Spiders? I've forgotten his name, but there was a Black Talon Elite in BG1 doing exactly this. And Evil Rangers / Shadow Druids could be to Treants what Good Rangers / normal Druids are to the 'good' forest, or to Imnesvale. (The issue of what Stronghold an Evil Ranger could get is another can of worms altogether.)

Originally posted by Nerull: Oh, and in third edition, they changed the druid's alignment restrictions (can be LN, CN, NG, NE, or N). Thus, Jaheira would (finally) be Neutral Good (which is her alignment, despite all the talking about balance), and Faldorn would be Neutral Evil (sapping the grove's power for her own benefit).

Precisely what I had in mind for a "Loosening MOD" idea (along with things like letting Elves and Gnomes become Bards, etc). But mine would only allow Druids to be NG, TN, and NE: I see no reasoning behind LN or CN, as Druids wouldn't care one way or the other about the "laws" of the "civilized" world. Cernd should remain TN.

Originally posted by Ironbar: How did you come to be a chaotic character? If you chose that alignment then there is really nothing chaotic about it.

Just because my character's Chaotic doesn't mean *I* have to be. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 11-12-2003, 08:06 PM: Message edited by: SixOfSpades ]

[Nerull]

Originally posted by Azaghal: Nerull, I am afraid your history is indeed a bit long ago and the subject foggy During the crusades there were three major knights orders: The Templars, the Johannites (spelling in English?) and the Teutonic order. All were a mixture of military formations and health- and pilgrimcare organizations. But their members were NO priests of the catholic church, though they were living mostly according to certain monk rules and principles (chastity, personal poverty, obedience). Some of the members received lower sacraments, but - again - they were not ordained priests. And the knights and soldiers of the orders were as (lat.) milites christi not subject to a bloodspilling prohibiton (as long as it was infidel's blood) according to medieval church laws. So there was no self restriction to certain weapons (Whatfor? A morning star or warhammer will make as awful a mess as a sword if used professionally). The knights orders are actually the archetype of the paladin in fantasy games. "First on the battlefield, last to leave" was their motto and their valor, fighting skills, faith, selfrighteousness, pride and stubborness was infamous (at least later on). There were actually other knights orders, for example during the Spanish reconquista, and though this is not my specialty, I am pretty sure they did not selfrestrict their use of weapons as well. Their principles and ideas were very much the same as in the crusades.

Thank you for the correction! It is VERY foggy for me (I had the class back in my second semester of college, which was back in the 1980s), and we barely touched on the subject. I wanted to just post the part I remembered, knowing that someone would come along and either state I was on the right path or set me straight.

Oh, and Six, I stated that the coin and die roll method was challenging (more like crazy). Yes, you would end up with some crazy stuff going up against some of the nastiest encounters in the game, but how would your character know what he/she is going up against beforehand? Does he/she know that behind the door is Critter X, and he/she know that you would be better off with Character A in the party instead of Character B? When I suggested that, I was thinking more of Two-Face in the old Batman comics. That would be more something he would do.

I do not know about Icewind Gate having the class changes, but if it is translating over the 3rd edition rules to the engine, then more than likely it will (since the changes are an integral part of the classes in the new edition).

[Sir Kenyth]

Using shadowkeeper and a little self restraint, you can come up with some interesting characters. Try a druid shapeshifter, change to an elf, and keep only charm animal, summoning, and plant related (entanglement, barkskin, goodberry) spells in her/his book. Now you have a nomadic woodland elf mage who is at one with nature. You can also trade in for some mage spells if you think it fits better. No weapons allowed but a staff and no armor.

Come up with your own variants. Think up a feasable character and write it up! Try making a barbarian into Conan. Trade off some scores. Very strong and healthy with an average coordination and decent wisdom, but dumb as a rock.

Make an enchantress. A specialist mage who uses charms and mind affecting spells only. (Charm, dire charm, confusion, invisibility, etc.)

Make a storm witch. Only weather element spells. (lightning, ice storm, cone of cold, etc.)

Give special abilities as you see fit.

[ 11-18-2003, 11:55 AM: Message edited by: Sir Kenyth ]

[Dalamar Stormcrow]

Wow. This was a question about 2nd edition, and has turned into a history lesson. Sound a little like GD.

[Nerull]

My question then about the cleric is what historical counterpart was it based off of originally. I remember reading something long ago stating that the class was based on a historical order of some sort. Something like a restriction against edged weapons is pretty distinctive.