|
Post by DM Hawk on May 10, 2008 15:03:37 GMT -5
I hope you feel better soon buddy. Looking forward to the tourney when the time is right. Be good Hawk
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Apr 29, 2008 21:47:47 GMT -5
...written on a leaf of common parchment in painstakingly precise calligraphy. The letter is sealed with the mark of the Hawkrune family and delivered by courier...
* * *
Tarsakh 29, 1372
Honorable Clerk of Court,
I am writing to request audience and assistance for archival research of certain capital transactions made in recent years in and around the Crown City. I am willing to pay for any services the Court might provide.
Please let me know if this request may be granted. I may be reached at the Wailing Wheel.
Sincerely,
Sir Kelric Hawkrune Lionar, Royal Corps of Monster Hunters, Retired
* * *
// PM sent
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Jul 15, 2007 7:03:26 GMT -5
...and Warden of the Western Marches of Cormyr*
My Lord Sthavar,
Greetings and salutations. I am writing to report to you a discovery during my most recent visit into the Western Reach. Two Purple Dragons, namely Firstsword Baril and Blade Jorik, continue to occupy the same positions on the road to Proskur that they held before the new borders of Cormyr were established, despite their current lack of jurisdiction.
When asked, the Firstsword said that he could not leave the road unguarded due to the number of bandits in the region and has independently elected to remain at his old post, in uniform, to guard the Western Reach road from bandits. I must assume the Blade has chosen to behave in the same fashion.
These men are absent without leave and are unavailable to follow the orders of their superiors or to attend duties in Cormyr Proper. They have in essence become rogue Purple Dragons. I would put the recommendation forward that these men be ordered by their direct superior to report to the Outpost north of the Bramblewood for permenant station. That Outpost is dramatically undermanned currently.
If these men feel they should be allowed to select orders to their liking from a basket, I recommend they be reminded that they serve in the Purple Dragon Army and that they may continue to do so by following orders or may yield the Purple Mantle.
We do not need loose ballistae on deck.
My thanks to his Lordship for reading this missive.
For the Crown,
Sir Kelric
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Apr 14, 2007 16:50:09 GMT -5
*Sealed and delivered to the Office of the Warden of the Western Marches in Suzail, written in painstakingly precise calligraphy*
My Lord Sthavar,
I have recently returned from a ride into the Southwest provinces to survey the Dragons stationed therein and their positions, including the new outpost along the coastal road to Redmist. I would request your consideration of the following concerns observed during my travel.
The Purple Dragons stationed between Redmist and the Proskur Border are upholding a number of positions, sometimes only with as few as one or two soldiers. I would humbly suggest that thought be given to consolidate the Dragons into one fixed position from which larger patrols might be sent forth, perhaps consisting of two to four Dragons at once. I am sincerely concerned about the safety of our Purple Dragons who are scattered in that region and I fear they may be easily taken, piecemeal, by the Crown's foes. A consolidated force would allow each man to have more support and present a more difficult target to the enemy. Perhaps the old Silver Shield Hall could be refitted for those purpose.
I believe that my second concern is equally important. While we are establishing an outpost to check foot traffic between Redmist and the Crown's holdings in the Southwest, caravan drivers still travel freely to and from the City. As Redmist is now an independent state and not holding any alliance with the sovereignty of the Crown, I feel that unchecked wagon caravans from that city are a material weakness in the security of the Realm in the Southwest. Presently, agents of Redmist may travel freely to the likes of Suzail or Shallybrook without the Crown's consent.
I sincerely encourage consideration that all wagon traffic between Cormyr and Redmist cease immediately and that all Cormyrian chartered caravan drivers be required to change their routes to completely bypass Redmist.
You have my deepest gratitude for reading the words of a concerned soldier.
Yours in service, for the Crown.
Sir Kelric, Lionar, RCMH Thunderstone
Corresponding copies of courtesy to be provided to Oversword Faril, RCMH Thunderstone, and to the unit archives.
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Apr 13, 2007 22:12:05 GMT -5
// That's great for me guys! Although if someone can do the week night but not Sunday night I'll bow out. Otherwise, its on
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Apr 12, 2007 23:58:01 GMT -5
// week nights are tough for me unfortnately. 7 PM US EST isn't something I can do. D'oh.
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Jan 30, 2007 22:08:37 GMT -5
*The following notice is posted on several Purple Dragon outposts and barracks throughout the Kingdom as well as within the War Wizard's Tower of Suzail, written in painstakingly precise calligraphy*
To those confirmed Purple Dragon Squires and War Wizard Apprentices who would serve the Realm,
Hail and well met!
I hearby request your presence at the end of the coming tenday to participate in a patrol to both serve the interest of the Realm and to further your training in pursuit of the Crown's calling. On the march we shall also discuss any questions you may have concerning your service of the Realm.
Attending this patrol is voluntary, but it is intended to provide opportunity for you to better know your peers and those beside whom you seek to serve.
Squires and Apprentices who seek to join this patrol shall gather within the Purple Dragon Barracks in Suzail at the appointed time below. Those reporting to join this patrol should be well provisioned and prepared to endure a long march.
For the Crown, Realm, and Folk,
Kelric Hawkrune, Sword Major, Royal Corps of Monster Hunters
ooc This is an improv player driven RP event/adventure for PDK squires and apprentices presently scheduled for this coming Saturday, Feb 3rd, from 11 AM CST until completion. Hope to see you there!
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on May 29, 2006 20:08:02 GMT -5
Courtesy Copy to Battlemaster Sthavar of Suzail
I bid you greetings. I am writing to inform you briefly of the character and deeds of an individul soon to be scrutinized in trial in your court.
The individual in question is the elven woman named Cortiana Calaudra. While the subject of my writing does not alter any facts pertaining to her trail, it is my hope to illuminate the quality of her character through her valor witnessed in the defense of Redmist.
Cortiana fought by my side against the humanoids and giants that conducted the siege and she sustained serious wounds in the fray. Despite these injuries, Cortiana agreed to travel alone from Redmist to Suzail to alert the capital of Redmist's plight.
It is my understanding that after Cortiana braved the dangerous journey to Suzail that she was brought into the presence of Battlemaster Sthavar himself and reinforcements were sent to Redmist in all haste.
Battlemaster Sthavar, on Cortiana's word, traveled to Redmist with the elven woman and a War Wizard, ahead of the column by virtue of magic, and took command of the city's defense.
Battlemaster Sthavar spoke well of Cortiana and thanked her for her contribution on Redmist's behalf and I echo his sentiment.
I humbly request that Miss Calaudra's valor and contribution be considered when her nature and character are scrutinized in trial. My thanks for your time and consideration.
May Justice Prevail.
Kelric Hawkrune, Sword Major, Royal Corps of Monster Hunters
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Jan 28, 2007 20:42:10 GMT -5
*Deilvered by courier to the Temple of the Defenders in Suzail, written in painstakingly precise calligraphy*
Lady Arneseph of Torm,
Once again I bid you greetings and once again I write you in need. I have in my possession a vile substance and I seek aid in its proper disposal.
I look to you for aid yet again in recollection of the taint you purified long ago.
Should you be willing, please send word to the War Wizard's Tower in Suzail and it shall reach me.
Many thanks to you,
Kelric Hawkrune, Sword Major, Royal Corps of Monster Hunters
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Apr 29, 2006 14:05:51 GMT -5
*Delivered by courier to the Temple of the Defenders in Suzail, written in painstakingly precise calligraphy*
Warm greetings to you from the hamlet of Isinhold. I would like to first thank you again for the heroic and selfless deed you performed in our town several months ago, during the dark days of Redmist. I do not know if contact has been maintained, but the accursed woman you delivered through your wisdom and faith in Torm, Shivata Targrayen, has gone on and become a Knight of the Purple Dragons. As First Sword Targrayen serves her duty, your benevolence will contnue to bear fruit for the good of the Realm and her folk.
Secondly, I am writing on behalf of another who may also be in such need. It is my belief that your faith and wisdom may be the remedy needed should my fear be proven true. While I pray to Tempus daily that I am mistaken, I would be less if I did not act in vigilence before it is too late. I humbly seek an audience with you to discuss this concern and ask your counsel.
In thanks for the good will that you have shown the folk of Isinhold, my home, I ask that you call upon me for service should your temple ever have need.
I eagerly await your reply. My current residence is the Regal Griffon Inn of Isinhold.
In Service to the Realm,
Kelric Hawkrune, Squire of Sword Major Aelrik, Royal Corps of Monster Hunters
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Dec 23, 2007 16:43:22 GMT -5
That is a good point, SCJ. To answer a question with a question, why is the Malarite faith tolerated while other evil faiths aren't in the Cormyr context? Is it because the Malarite faith isn't as political as the others? Do they keep a lower profile? They are a much smaller faith. The faiths of Bane, Cyric, etc. weren't outlawed from the day Cormyr was formed, were they? (Some of them didn't exist 1200 years ago or so). Some time during the span of Cormyr's history, those faiths crossed a line that put them on the list. Bane and Cyric are both Greater Powers while Malar is a Lesser Power (I think). Malar's faith is smaller and less known, not having the reputation and as visible a history as the others. Folk at large perceive Bane and Cyric as a greater evil/threat by far and these faiths have crossed a line in Cormyr. The WRA may have been the best fit for FRC to meet the needs of the players in an OOC sense. My points have been that it wasn't a good roleplay fit in context of the campaign setting and that good aligned PC's shouldn't be viewed as rolepaying their alignment poorly by violating the WRA. Hawk PS - I know of good aligned characters that are intolerant of the faith of Malar in Cormyr. No one has accused the good aligned for RPing their characters poorly for violating the Accord or even disagreeing ICly with the Accord. What they were being accused of is coming up with the very thin excuse of "he/she is evil so I have a right to kill him/her". The arguments you've brought up, again, are just semantics. You've brought up that in context the Steel Regent wouldn't put up with what's gone on. Well guess what? The crew had decided that she will put up with it. For the community as a whole this was the best path that could be chosen. This wasn't a fly by night decision. It wasn't something that was decided lightly, either. The crew talked for weeks on the best way to not only curtail the rampant PvP, but also the problem that those playing evil PCs were heavily constricted in what they could do. Was the sourcebook material taken into consideration? Yes. Please don't make like the crew is just tossing the book out. I don't know how many different ways I can say this, but the sourcebooks are a guideline. They are also written with the idea that it would be a tighter controlled PnP situation where you only have one DM and the minimal amount of players who pretty much get along. This is not the case for FRC or any other multiplayer environment like it. The flexibility I mentioned wasn't just pertaining to one DM, but the community as a whole. The mentality that we should run things here exactly like a Pen and Paper game is out of the question, it's just not possible. People need to get their heads out of the proverbial PnP box and think outside of it, otherwise you'll never enjoy the game. As it's been said many a times on these forums to people who keep beating a dead horse: If you don't like it, then find another place to play. Thanks for the discussion, SCJ. We've both made our points. We'll just have to agree to disagree. Hawk
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Dec 23, 2007 12:03:27 GMT -5
I agree with you that a DM needs to be flexible. But there is a difference between being flexible and doing something that's completely out of context for the campaign setting. Page 43 of the Forgotten Realms: Faiths and Pantheon source book: " MalarAlignment: Chaotic Evil" "Malar is a primordial, savage diety who revels in the hunt and the blood of the kill." "In civilized settings, the church of Malar is widely loathed, for it's members -- often evil lycanthropes -- are some of the most dangerous threats to the safety of the local populace." "Outsiders sometimes differentiate between 'Hunts,' as Malarite bands are known, that operate openly and those that stalk the night. Some realms, such as Cormyr, legally recognize the former as having dominion over hunting while considering the latter to be little more then dangerous predators to be driven off or slain." From pages 113 of the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting source book under the city information for Suzail: "Tymora's is the most prominent temple, though shrines to Lliira, Oghma, Malar, Milil, Tempus, and Waukeen are also found here." If you want to talk context there are a half a dozen examples that can be pointed to in the sourcebooks. By your reasoning Cormyr should be kicking the Malarites out and declaring them evil as well. But due to political machinations by the nobles and the dead king himself, the Malarite temple and it's faith are allowed and tolerated. Maybe not liked, but tolerated. The exact same thing can be said for the Western Reaches Accord. It's a political machination that allows those of evil faiths to be able to wander Cormyrian lands. By that same vein, those of good faiths are allowed to enter the Western Reaches, they've always been allowed to enter, but this evens it across the board. Again, this allowance was made so that those of those evil faiths were not just stuck twiddling their thumbs in Redmist with nothing to do and no where to go. Being bored means not having fun. For many, being able to travel and explore or even just dungeon delve with the characters they want to play is fun. Having that cut away from them because of overriding and server shaking events isn't fair to them, especially when they never asked for such events. Arguing semantics of the situation solves nothing. Just turns things into a pissing contest. If anyone has a solution to the "problem" then, please, by all means, give it to the crew. I'm sure they'd like to hear it. But keep in mind it has to be a solution that allows things to be both fun and fair to all players of all alignments. It needs to not come at the expense at a handful of players or even a group of player's fun. It has to be something the members of the DM crew are able to run their quests in. That is a good point, SCJ. To answer a question with a question, why is the Malarite faith tolerated while other evil faiths aren't in the Cormyr context? Is it because the Malarite faith isn't as political as the others? Do they keep a lower profile? They are a much smaller faith. The faiths of Bane, Cyric, etc. weren't outlawed from the day Cormyr was formed, were they? (Some of them didn't exist 1200 years ago or so). Some time during the span of Cormyr's history, those faiths crossed a line that put them on the list. Bane and Cyric are both Greater Powers while Malar is a Lesser Power (I think). Malar's faith is smaller and less known, not having the reputation and as visible a history as the others. Folk at large perceive Bane and Cyric as a greater evil/threat by far and these faiths have crossed a line in Cormyr. The WRA may have been the best fit for FRC to meet the needs of the players in an OOC sense. My points have been that it wasn't a good roleplay fit in context of the campaign setting and that good aligned PC's shouldn't be viewed as rolepaying their alignment poorly by violating the WRA. Hawk PS - I know of good aligned characters that are intolerant of the faith of Malar in Cormyr.
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Dec 23, 2007 11:36:14 GMT -5
Thanks for the feedback SCJ. I agree with you that a DM needs to be flexible. But there is a difference between being flexible and doing something that's completely out of context for the campaign setting. The only issue I personally have with the WRA is the open religious protection provision extending into Cormyr. Neutral ground having a permissivness for all faiths...I can see that in rp context as Isinhold's choice to keep from being the target of one side or the other, given the dangerous situation the town found itself in. The WRA extending that right to the faiths mentioned into Cormyr itself does go over the top. It is a card the Steel Regent wouldn't play. You are right. Instead of making this mod in Cormyr we should have built half of the areas outside of Cormyr so that both alignments would have areas that were theirs to roam freely in. FRC 2 needs to wait until we have as many quests and lands for evil as it has for good. Why do you believe this? Just allowing them to walk about makes you evil if you allow it? Their very existence is now a sign that you are not good? I'll go a step further and have them walking about preaching their religion. Are you evil if you don't shut them up? If you follow them preaching your faith opposing their preaching with your own sermons are you not doing good? Must you prevent them from preaching to do good yourself? Look to what you can do to be good not what you have to keep them from doing. Good needs to be able to act good and evil needs to be able to act evil also. There is to much of an all or nothing thought process going on. I just don't believe that every priest of Bane, Cyric or Shar that you see (no matter what they are doing) has to be locked up or killed (those are the only ways to prevent someone from walking about) in order for you to be good. I believe good has more options than that. I think we should keep in mind that these faiths are very extreme in themselves and are well known Faerun-wide for what they have done. They have also been well known enemies of Cormyr. A Banite, Cyricist, or Sharran would not be allowed to preach openly in Cormyr under the current leadership.
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Dec 23, 2007 11:26:27 GMT -5
In response to DM Richard You're right, it is expansionism of Thay not the establishment of a new state altogether. (at least one word in 'Free City State of Redmist' is window dressing ). Is rebellion evil? I think it depends on the context. If a group of demi-humans and sympathetic humans rebelled against Hillsfar's iron grip government and staged a successful coups that brought an end to the arena bloodsport it would be a good action. The action is good because of the reason why it is being done and intended outcome: End of tyrrany, end of murder of demi-humans, etc. What I'm debating is rebellion as we've experienced it in game on FRC. I could have been more clear. In the real world, things are much more complex. Luckily in the context of a PW gaming world it's a lot more simple. If a group stages a rebellion in a city belonging to a LG Kingdom, through deceit and abuse riles the commoners into a mob, opens slave trade, and establishes a powerbase to hatch plots to further weaken the LG Kingdom and claim her citizens, would the rebellion be merely unlawful? Or would it be evil as well? It was a rebellion for evil purposes with an evil outcome. Therefore good aligned characters would naturally be opposed and want to prevent this expansionism from continuing. I've posted additional thoughts on the WRA in response to SCJ above. About the Redmist Event and the WRA being two different things - what I was saying was that the establishment of the WRA was independent of the evil victory in Redmist. If the WRA never happened (or had been limited to establishing neutral ground), evil would still have the Redmist victory. I want to be clear - I'm not against evil having victories. Evil characters should have events just as good or neutral characters do. If the event doesn't mean the apocolypse, evil characters should have every bit as much chance of winning as good characters, based on their initiative and action, as should good characters. Evil characters should be able to have events against good npcs too, where good PCs aren't represented, just like the goodies do. Extreme actions and the good alignment... In the D&D context: Average Joe Good Guy hopes for the best, hopes to redeem evil (probably the greatest victory for the good alignment), practices mercy, defends others, heals, etc. This doens't mean that good is naive or can't be vigilent. Good also crusades and rights wrongs. While there are saintly good notions like pacifism, in the D&D context good opposes evil. Good alignment doens't mean being passive. They don't merely sit around towns with Colgate smiles waiting for evil to make the first move. Good can be vigilant too. Lathanderite clerics seek out and destroy undead, for example. Tormtar actively pursue action against Bane and Cyric. A good aligned ranger stalking a goblin hunting party may well strike them as they bed town for the day before they raid the village at nightfall. In the case of extreme actions, they can happen in the context of good. They are the last resort, warranted only under extreme circumstances. Such actions will take a toll on a good character and should leave a long lasting imprint on that character's roleplay. He or she might lose the Colgate smile. This concept does exist in the D&D universe. Think about the Celestial Paragon Raziel and the PRC Slayer of Domiel. How does one know if such an extreme action is still good? It depends on the context - what did the character know or believe? What was the character's motive (personal or selfless?)? Is the outcome for the greater good? These things are subjective. As was stated earlier - one who hunts monsters can become one himself/herself. This is the risk a good aligned character takes when extreme actions become an easy choice. Hawk
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Dec 23, 2007 10:07:07 GMT -5
As I had tried to explain to several people in the past, the Western Reaches Accord was brought about due to the OOC circumstance of the rampant PvP that was happening. It had nothing to do with "evil" winning. It had nothing to do with any favoritism toward evil (which is pretty much what some people are implying). It had mostly to do with the DMs losing control and not having fun because of the PvP situation. It also had to do with some players not being able to travel outside of the Redmist area without being immediately hunted. Since players such as Grozer had their characters tossed into a situation by a DM and then that DM left the crew, it was up to the rest of us to patch things over the best we could. The Western Reaches Accord was the best we could come up with. Had we turned those lands back over to the Crown or left the loophole of having them arrested due to their religion, then none of the "evil" PCs would have had a place to go to. They couldn't gather, they couldn't be safe, and ultimately they would stop having fun. People seriously need to step back, stop making the automatic assumption that the evil PCs have favoritism on the server, and stop seeing FRC as a simple PnP game or "campaign" game. The multiplayer environment of a persistent world is a different game all together. You can't keep hammering the "it's not canon" rule to FRC or any server for that matter. You also can't keep placing your own nearly impossible standards to a community and expect them to meet it just because you don't like the way things are done. FRC needs to be a constantly flowing and changing environment in order to compensate for the fact that you don't have just five consistent characters playing. You have twenty to thirty at any given time and it's never the same twenty to thirty every day. Different styles of play and different DMs to cater to those styles are also a factor that needs to be considered. Again, the sourcebooks are a guideline. If the community needs to go off canon in order for things to be both fun and fair then that's what needs to happen. The server and the members of it's community need to be flexible, not rigid. Thanks for the feedback SCJ. I agree with you that a DM needs to be flexible. But there is a difference between being flexible and doing something that's completely out of context for the campaign setting. The only issue I personally have with the WRA is the open religious protection provision extending into Cormyr. Neutral ground having a permissivness for all faiths...I can see that in rp context as Isinhold's choice to keep from being the target of one side or the other, given the dangerous situation the town found itself in. The WRA extending that right to the faiths mentioned into Cormyr itself does go over the top. It is a card the Steel Regent wouldn't play. As I said below it is in place in FRC and the player base has roleplayed it's existence (it has sparked a lot of RP). Characters of good alignment are presented with a moral issue when it comes to the WRA. While it is unfortunately lawful to permit a priest of Bane, Cyric, or Shar to walk around Cormyr openly, it is not good to do so. Especially when such characters have well established reputations (high priest, captain of the guard, abducter and torturer, etc). To refer to something I said earlier, such characters need to be smart and careful in the context of Cormyr, not blatant. A certain Banite lieutenant did it that way successfully for a long time, for example. If characters with well established reputations for being followers of dark faiths that have long opposed Cormyr and vice versa can openly walk about Cormyr under the WRA, please let there be no suggestion that good aligned characters are roleplaying poorly by violating the WRA. In some cases, I think it may actually be poor roleplay for them if they abide by the WRA. I personally don't think what I'm talking about is a 'nearly impossible standard'. Thanks again for the feedback. Hawk
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Dec 22, 2007 16:00:59 GMT -5
Hi DM Richard, I don't think the two examples you're referecing are the same. The rebellion of Redmist (and previously Arabel) was not just a matter of being lawful vs chaotic. It included treason, manipulation, deceit, murder, alliance with evil powers firmly opposed to the good sovereignty of Cormyr.. Treason is bigger than breaking a law. The WRA is a new law that goes against the Cormyrian mindset, the historic spirit of Cormyr, and the precedents set by the Obarskyr rule. Most Cormyrians would be unsettled by that law and question where the kingdom was headed. I don't think treason/establishing an evil foreign power on Cormyr's doorstep and violating the WRA are comparable. The SD quest shouldn't count as a victory for good and a loss for evil. I'm pretty sure those who fought on the SD side were coerced to do so in character / or were deceived. The SD quest wasn't about good vs. evil. It was about the survival of everyone. No one was safe in the end, not even the ones fighting alongside the SD. The Redmist plot and the WRA are two separate events, though they happened in short order. One established an evil powerbase independent of Cormyr rule. The other established a neutral territory and allowed freedom from religious persecution in Cormyr and Redmist. The problem detail that tips the scales on the WRA is the freedom from religious persecution. For certain faiths in Cormyr that is out of character. On the OOC point if a loss for one evil character occurs that still doesn't make it a victory for 'good' does it? Redmist is still an independent city in the hands of evil powers. I'm not challenging what Redmist has become or saying that should change, I'm saying it shouldn't be considered a 'win' for 'good' if player characters lose influence there. Is it the chicken or the egg? Does the alignment cause the actions or do the actions cause the alignment? I think the answer is both. Neutral is indifferent to good and evil and will protect their own interests. Good and evil are opposed and their alignments will dictate actions that cause friction. Can they go too far and suffer alignment shift? Yes. Are some extreme actions justified for the cause of good? Yes. Should they have a solid roleplay basis when/if they happen? Yes. Yes, there are a lot more choices than 'do nothing' or 'pvp' and I don't think I implied otherwise. It's probably true that there are good characters that RP in a neutral fashion. If they RP'd their good side more, I think we'd see more friction.
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Dec 22, 2007 12:28:13 GMT -5
I've been absent for a whole day. D'oh! Shotgun approach.
As far as good and evil victories in DM plots go -
The SD Plot wasn't so much a struggle between good and evil as it was against survival and annihilation. Good and evil allied in several cases to bring an end to the SD. While some evil characters sided with the SD, others didn't. The ending of that plot was really a victory for just about everyone, wasn't it? This really isn't a good example to use in the arguement b/c if the SD had won FRC as we know it would be over.
Who really wanted that? I don't think this one counts on the good vs evil scoreboard.
Redmist, for example, was an evil victory with consequences that were significant, but not apocalyptic.
"Good" and "Evil" should both have a fair shot of winning the competition in non-linear plots of a smaller scale where the consequences are there but don't mean the 'end of the world.' By fair I mean the outcome should be based mostly on what the player characters do to achieve victory in the context of the plot, without bias from on high.
Good and evil should be able to compete fairly against one another and in DM plots, so long as the outcome is something the server can live with. To me, this means players have the responsiblity to keep things within the context of RP, not metagaming, adhering to FRC's rules, and the spirit of having fun. To me this also means the DMs should be unbiased towards good or evil or individual PCs.
Does the evil camp have a disadvantage in terms of being outnumbered by good PCs? Yes, they do, and it should be expected. Cormyr is a good aligned kingdom. Evil player characters need to be smart and careful. Players of evil characters should know they're signing up for a challenge because of the context of the campaing setting.
Is there evil in Cormyr? Yes. Many of the noble houses harbor evil. Then there are the Fire Knives, the Zhentarim, etc...but they work from the shadows hatching plots, not often out in the open. What happens when evil/teason against the Crown is exposed? Ask the Bleths and the Cormaerils. They were banished and some were executed. In the context of Cormyr, evil is subtle, plotting, and usually careful when it acts. There are consequences for getting caught.
It is out of character for blatent evil to not be challenged in Cormyr. What is blatant evil in Cormyr? Treason against the Crown (this would include assisting the rebellion of a Cormyrian city), the use of undead is blatant evil (sorry necros it is not something tolerated in the context of Cormyr), the faiths of Bane, Cyric, Shar, etc. It is out of character (and silly) for a known priest of any of these faiths to be allowed to walk freely in Suzail or at large in Cormyr. The reverse should be true in Redmist, even if there are flower gardens planted on the surface.
The Western Reach Accord was a concession and in a sense an evil victory. If you weigh the gains and losses incurred by good and evil, evil came out ahead. In the context of the campaign setting, I think the establishment of the WRA is out of character for the Steel Regent and Cormyr and not the best RP. It is in place however and it is the law on FRC, so lawful characters should be pressed to abide. Violating it is a chaotic, but not necessarily an evil, act.
A good point was raised - a good aligned character who does nothing in the presence of a well known evil character/threat is behaving more in a neutral fashion, and thus not roleplaying his or her character's alignment. Some roleplay should happen based on the friction. It may or may not be a confrontation. The confrontation may or may not lead to PVP.
When PVP gets out of control it cheapens the roleplay.
Opposing factions do not automatically have license to kill on sight or instant pvp, but it may occasionally occur in the right roleplay circumstance. Hopefully any roleplay presented in a pvp confrontation is not just "You are evil. Die!" Think about how lame it would sound if a priest of Cyric attacked a paladin and said, "You are good. Die!" Evils out there -- thank you for not doing that!
Instead of making 'good' or 'evil' the reason for confrontation, think about specific reasons why a particular character is 'good' or 'evil' (i.e. opposed) to yours. Use these reasons in the roleplay of a confrontation. If you can leave out the words 'good' or 'evil' the roleplay is much more realisitc.
It is not necessarily 'evil' for good to take the initiative and strike first. It has to be considered in the context of what the characters know, believe, and their motivation.
I hope the above helps to keep the pendulum of the issues closer to the middle.
I think the best recipe is to have fun, try to be true/consistent with your character, and try play him or her accordingly in the roleplay context of the campaign.
Try not to grief another player and if you feel that you have been the target of grief please speak up. If the other party won't listen, the issue needs to be brought discretely to a DM.
Thanks for reading and happy gaming everyone.
Hawk
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Dec 20, 2007 0:55:22 GMT -5
It really is kind of funny.. when I was playing.. it seemed the good guys started more PVP then the evil guys did by far. As a player of a good aligned character I can say that this has not been my experience, even while playing a Purple Dragon for a long time. Most (but not all) of the PVP I've had or observed has been a result of opposing faction characters confronting my character in a way that really didn't leave another choice. The most intense period of pvp I've seen resulted from a well known character leaving a good aligned faction and going to play for the other team. The evil faction instigated a heavy dose of PVP for a couple of weeks (as did the good factions, but I think to a lesser extent). That time had more pvp than I've seen before or since. From my view it had gone to cheese. Again, this is my personal experience and my shared experience involving the characters my own has spent the most time with. Too much pvp of any sort becomes cheesy and meaningless. At the same time it is a part of this server and has a place in a persistent world where opposing factions exist. "All things in moderation" comes to mind.
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Sept 17, 2007 21:47:37 GMT -5
I'm going to set aside all the IC/Lawful/Chaotic argument of this subject and address what seems to be the most negative aspect of what you're getting at Slothfulcat. You are not having fun with that aspect of being part of the PDK to the point of not wanting to play your character. This is not good. I would like to bring something to everyone's attention specifically about the PDK. When it was originally started as a guild, it's intent was not to become a PC police force. The PDK guild was basically supposed to be like Delta Force. A core unit of Purple Dragon Knights and War Wizards that would go anywhere the Crown needed them to or go to where the trouble was. They had no specific area they were stationed in, nor did they have "jurisdiction" over any area. They were called "The Monster Hunters" for that very reason. Go to where the monsters or threat to Cormyr was and deal with it. They were not originally meant to be a police force to where they get burdened with the responsibility of having to basically see to a jay walker. That's what the NPC guards are for. Somewhere along the way, though, that got very much lost. Suddenly the PDK guild was no longer a guild and simply an extension of the DM function of guards arresting or fining PCs for breaking the law. It's my opinion that the PDK guild should have never gotten the function to be able to (and thus are suddenly obligated to) jail and fine other PCs. It is not a fun function for players to have to deal with and typically ends up leading to one grievance issue or another between players. If the PDK could be reverted back to the way they were supposed to be then that will free up those PCs to see to more adventuresome pursuits. For IC argument sake you can easily have it that the Crown dictates that those in the "Monster Hunters" unit are not obligated to seeing to the daily ins and outs of guard duty seeing that they are busy with the greater safety of the Kingdom as a whole. And... that is my two cents on the matter. There are other things I could add that pertain to it, but I'd rather not ramble. To give a little history from the actual Forgotten Realms campaign setting: The RCMH is an FR Canon Purple Dragon Unit. Their base is in Thunderstone and their purpose is to police the monsters of the Hullack. They are elite and they know it. They have a less than shining reputation for throwing their weight around Thunderstone, having drunken brawls, and being immune to the consequences. Oversword "Commander Faril" governs Thunderstone for the Crown and holds the town under martial law. At least, before the Ghazneth war. Nice unit to join More history in FRC terms, the Crown decided to mend Commander Faril's ways and temporarily gave the Overswordship of the RCMH to a certain paladin of Mystra. It became the PC guild that inherited the remnants of the Silver Shields. The RCMH was supposed to be the Purple Dragon's special forces, taking on missions that regular Purple Dragons couldn't (keep in mind that NPC soldiers are usually between levels 1 and 5...often of the Warrior class, not even fighters in PNP D&D). They have permission to roam the realm at large to pursue these missions and to patrol as needed. When they enter another town, they are technically entering another Dragon unit's jurisdiction. They are allowed to leave small matters to the locals and expected to help out when there is real trouble. While this is discretionary to the PDK PCs, the intent was not to have PDK PCs abusing power over others simply because they have it. However, the PDK PCs have the power to lay down the law where needed. (That being said, a PD or WW who abuses their power makes for good RP of its own...which should be fine so long as that character's player is willing to accept consequences). I've tried to play my character by the motto "choose your battles" and to make sure a confrontation is worthwhile. PDK PCs need to keep in mind that there is another player behind the 'offending' PC who is trying to have fun. We shouldn't sweat the small stuff and we shouldn't overlook the big stuff. Now, that being said, adventurers are powerful people and often beyond the skills and power of the local Purple Dragon force (sans War Wizards). When adventurers push the limits of the law beyond the little things, the PDK PCs need to act. Again, this is discretionary, but one can use the laws and penalties as a guide. If something results in a small fine, a PDK PC should probably ignore it, unless he or she has a specific reason otherwise. If the penalty involves larger fines and jail time, the PDK PC should get involved if 'on the scene' and may request or act on a warrant if the crime is bad enough. Local PD forces would normally welcome RCMH assistance, especially dealing with dangerous adventurers. Other side of the coin, no one is twisting PDK PC arms to be the nickle and dime cop. Don't sweat the small stuff and I think a happy balance will be struck. As for the big stuff, there should be friction. That's one of the purposes of having factions, after all. PCs breaking the law need to be smart about it. If they get caught, they should expect consequences, whether by PDK PCs, good aligned adventurers, or the DMs playing PD/WW NPCs. From a long time PDKer, from the old days, that's my two. Thanks for reading
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Aug 4, 2007 6:57:08 GMT -5
*Fails Will save*
I gotta say it...
Boobies! ;D
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Jun 25, 2007 23:54:24 GMT -5
My advice: Don't change anything! Zaebros is a wonderful character just the way he is. I have so many classic memories. Thank you for sharing the creative spark you have through him. Now, if he could just pick a color for his robes and stick with it
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Jan 26, 2008 7:57:34 GMT -5
But I think its important to realize that just because you dont approach someone, get in their face and draw a weapon doesnt mean you didnt initiate PvP. If your PC is plotting, planning or working to undermine/destroy/kill (you get the picture) another PC, you are initiating potential PvP. I agree 100%.
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Jan 24, 2007 0:55:36 GMT -5
Entori knows everything....shoot he probably even knows the secret to Donald Trump's hair despite being on another world... In an episode of The Apprentice (before it went to cheese), The Donald got caught in a gust of wind that screwed up his hair even more...but it didn't fly off his head! He then claimed it was real. The editors saw fit to include that in the episode. Take that as you will... On the Shadow Weave and other things (faiths, dragons, demons, etc) - quite a few characters have spouted off intricate details even at level one. Usually a turn off for me. I don't care what your background is, no level one PC knows everything about everything. That being said, I think it's ok if a character has a specific, narrow area of expertise beyond common knowledge if their intelligence and lore are strong at the beginning. However, that knowledge should be far from any sort of mastery. My character may have learned more than the average fighter type might about some of these lofty things because of experiences had in game. I'll allow him to partake in a few 'lofty' conversations but usually from an uncertain point of view or to clarify a point here or there. Or at least I try to. Heh. Background details are fine to shape the beginnng of your character. Roleplayed experiences in the game should define where and how he or she expands the depth and horizon of the character's awareness. Mordenkainen's WHAT?!
|
|