|
Post by Nevajas on Feb 18, 2007 0:19:04 GMT -5
There's a notice posted on every gate of this town that familiars and companion animals and summoned creatures of a dangerous nature aren't allowed within the walls. Today a woman's raven familiar was killed right outside of the inn by someone taking the law into his own hands, with several others standing by prepared to do the same. She wasn't warned, she wasn't asked to dismiss it and guards weren't called until after the fact. The sad part is that this wasn't a predatory animal or an unnatural creature, yet she wasn't given the chance to defend it before some overzealous, bloodthirsty man enacted his own interpretations of the law. Birds are welcomed to fly in and out of Isenhold as they wish, why should a raven familiar be any different? And why are people being allowed to take the law into their own hands simply to satisfy some immature bloodlust?
-Dubhan
|
|
|
Post by catmage on Feb 18, 2007 0:57:11 GMT -5
*Tacked right under the message*
Because the law is the law, and because familiars are not "normal" animals. They carry the magic of their owners, and might just have unnatural powers given to them. A raven can become a killer, or be the hidden form of an imp. If the greater mages of the kingdom can consent to it, then so to can the rabble. It is not taking the law into your own hands, it's doing your duty.
-Ailren
|
|
|
Post by Nevajas on Feb 18, 2007 11:22:12 GMT -5
The exact wording of the law is as follows: There are to be no pets, familiars, animal companions or conjured creatures of a carnivorous or dangerous nature within the palisades of the village.
If this applied to all such creatures, why include "of a carnivorous or dangerous nature" in the wording? Simply put, this is a subjectively worded law. It should be rewritten for clarity if its enforcement is the duty of impulsive civilians and adventurers. As it stands, it is not a blanket statement and I feel enforcement should be left the guards and the Purple Dragons. And I would love to hear one of their opinions.
-Dubhan
|
|
|
Post by catmage on Feb 18, 2007 16:46:49 GMT -5
*Another response tacked*
-Well boy-o, take it up with the knights themselves. I've had four different knights say in no uncertain terms that it's allright to kill ravens, pixies, panthers, hawks, and every other creature people have claimed "were harmless" or "are under protection by the law". The only animals that have a safe time is, house cats, domestic dogs, and livestock. All the others are fair game. You want familiar freedom, go join the Thayans, and who knows when they'll revise their rules. -
|
|
|
Post by soulfien on Feb 18, 2007 19:14:46 GMT -5
Enforcing the law yourself is nothing short of bloodlust as I see it. I find it disheartening that there are some who have not learned this yet. I don't speak condescendingly, mind you as I have been guilty of this... to a point. The creature was monsterous in nature and I allowed it to startle me. That did not excuse my guilt nor does a posted law excuse the guilt of whoever it was that slew a mage's familliar. We shant use the laws to satisfy our lust for combat. We have town officials whom we can go to if something demands their attention.
I have learned not to take the law into my own hands. I hope everyone else can as well.
--Garistan
|
|
|
Post by catmage on Feb 18, 2007 22:55:26 GMT -5
Look kiddys, as Sir Callen has said before when you whiney beast cuddlers have raised these snits, an adventurer slaying a familiar is doing the law the favor of killing it before they need to bother with it. This isn't vigilante justice like killing a tiefling before it's commited a crime. A familiar in town is a crime in itself, as has been said time and again. Quit your whining and just accept that the law lets people kill them. If it's that tough on you, there's no law against leaving the country.
|
|
arcadiadragon
New Member
the world does not revolve around me, I revolve around the world
Posts: 47
|
Post by arcadiadragon on Feb 19, 2007 0:05:27 GMT -5
*looks at the notice*......heh no wonder the new faces have been dissapearing,...probaly think we are totalitarian lot here in cormyr...
|
|
|
Post by ShadowCatJen on Feb 19, 2007 0:17:23 GMT -5
*passing by right along with Chrys, also looks at the back and forth bickering parchments*
*looks at Chrys* Maybe Ailren should join tha War Wizards? Seems 'e enjoys takin' tha law inta 'is own 'ands..... when it suits 'im. *snorts and bit and moves off*
|
|
|
Post by Booze Hound on Feb 19, 2007 2:58:27 GMT -5
*Vind walks into the Regal covered in grime, looking like he has been in the wilds for ages. He notices Ailren's mark and his remarks and smirks to himself, then digs out a bit of coal and writes something in big black over Ailren's latest notice*
The Crown also doesn't punish you for killing dragons and their kin, anyone looking to make a name for themselves as dragon slayers, I could give locations of where to find a few.*
*He marks it with his bow and wolf sign, snickers, buys an ale and heads back out*
|
|
|
Post by catmage on Feb 19, 2007 5:55:17 GMT -5
The Crown may not punish you, but the dragons themselves will. Anyone who's spent enough time in Isinhold can confirm this. Attacking a dragon leads to more bloodshed then any fallen familiar can inspire. King Azoun learned this, and so has his battered kingdom. Even if you win, those around you shall suffer.
|
|
|
Post by SlothfulCat on Feb 19, 2007 16:42:11 GMT -5
*a magically replicated copy of the first note heads the page tacked up with the others* There's a notice posted on every gate of this town that familiars and companion animals and summoned creatures of a dangerous nature aren't allowed within the walls. Today a woman's raven familiar was killed right outside of the inn by someone taking the law into his own hands, with several others standing by prepared to do the same. She wasn't warned, she wasn't asked to dismiss it and guards weren't called until after the fact. The sad part is that this wasn't a predatory animal or an unnatural creature, yet she wasn't given the chance to defend it before some overzealous, bloodthirsty man enacted his own interpretations of the law. Birds are welcomed to fly in and out of Isenhold as they wish, why should a raven familiar be any different? And why are people being allowed to take the law into their own hands simply to satisfy some immature bloodlust? -Dubhan Everyday people in this land; Adventurers, Soldiers, Farmers, Lords, and merchantguards alike take the law into their own hands on the roads in the face of orc and other monstrous ambushes in addition to fending off attacks by brigands. To say that the simple enforcement of the law by citizens at need when time is a pressing factor is attributed to a bloodlust belittles all the protectors and orderkeepers of this realm. To answer the difference between ordinary domestic animals such as cows, cats, and dogs in comparison to magely familiars such as ravens: Some urchin's favorite curr cannot be possesed by the urchin and used to spy on delicate conversations held between city officials. The woman's raven can. As well familiars of any sort are inheritantly dangerous and unpredictable creatures; incapable in their lust to protect their masters from reliably distinguishing strong feelings of perhaps hatred or dislike from true violence intending people. This means they might say, randomly attack a pregnaunt woman who doesnt like way a mageling is dressed. Beyond this, caravans and merchants arrive and leave in every town daily. Pulling their wagons are large numbers of draft animals who could easily become paniced and stampede at the sight of say a panther walking down the road, or the magical cries of a bat. Simply put, no reason for having a familar about in the townships of this kingdom other than your immediate self defense can be constituted as outweighing the possible dangers of having said creatures in the streets and taverns with you. Remember sir, this is not some loose collection of city-states or democracy like Alaghon of Turmish. This is a monarchy. The laws of the Crown are absolute and while the courts may be merciful this is the Crown's land and by being within it you subject yourself to the will of the Crown. Aria Blake - Apprentice War Wizard of Cormyr.
|
|
Driderman
Old School
Off-topic conversationalist extraordinaire!
Posts: 357
|
Post by Driderman on Feb 19, 2007 17:59:58 GMT -5
*Scrawled in an ackward writing on a dirty, slightly bloodspattered piece of parchment*
That means if i see a wizard with an animal im allowed to kill it, right?
|
|
|
Post by soulfien on Feb 20, 2007 19:40:59 GMT -5
*reads the new notes and shakes his head, pulling out quill and parchment*
It's truely sad indeed when a Tiefling gets more sympathy than a crow. Woe to the indavidual who fears the crow more than the wizardress
--Garistan
*walks away wiping his hands of this debate of parchments*
|
|
Driderman
Old School
Off-topic conversationalist extraordinaire!
Posts: 357
|
Post by Driderman on Feb 21, 2007 8:14:33 GMT -5
OOC'ly: I'd like to know how exactly it is that you discern the difference between a familiar and say a normal animal...? It's not like they're wearing signs or nametags or something that tells you it's a magical being and not an ordinary specimen of its race
|
|
|
Post by DM Richard (Retired) on Feb 21, 2007 11:09:15 GMT -5
OOC: I don't believe there is a way to tell a familiar from a nonfamiliar.
|
|
|
Post by rpchallenged on Feb 21, 2007 11:51:18 GMT -5
//ooc
Which brings up the question; If they never spoke with the woman in question and she gave no emotes or verbal indication that it was her familiar, how did they know it was a familiar at all? It should have appeared to be a normal raven just flying around in town. Other then the floaty text giving it a name there's no way to know, and that would be metagaming.
Did I miss something here?
// end ooc
|
|
|
Post by thogrimur on Feb 21, 2007 13:24:14 GMT -5
//ooc Which brings up the question; If they never spoke with the woman in question and she gave no emotes or verbal indication that it was her familiar, how did they know it was a familiar at all? It should have appeared to be a normal raven just flying around in town. Other then the floaty text giving it a name there's no way to know, and that would be metagaming. Did I miss something here? // end ooc I'd say that would be metagaming yes. I can hardly imagine that unless the bird was acting unusual in some fashion that it would be seen as anything other than an ordinary bird. I know when I was playing my mage I had my raven familiar around town alot...the worst that came of it was people would RP throwing rocks at it...nobody ever actually attacked it. (well...not in town anyway) Indeed, alot of folks would stop and toss it tidbits of food and sit around talking at it. Of course this was a few months back, so I dunno...maybe the local birds have become more fiercesome in thier nature since then heh. Heh - I remember when I had it fly over Ailren and had it crap on his shoes. Ah, good times. I do think the reason most folks didn't stress on my raven familiar much was that for the hovering, floating 'meta-name' I simply put 'Raven', thus it was not OOC distinguishable as a familiar. *shrug*
|
|
|
Post by thogrimur on Feb 21, 2007 13:32:58 GMT -5
Or maybe I just got lucky heh, who knows.
|
|
|
Post by ShadowCatJen on Feb 21, 2007 13:34:30 GMT -5
// Just so folks know, this is currently being discussed by the team. Please continue to give your comments on the matter.
Thank You, SCJen
|
|
|
Post by Quadhund/Greenhouse on Feb 21, 2007 13:50:18 GMT -5
This thread degraded into an OOC discussion so it warranted moving. Please continue to discuss here at will, but as DM SC Jenn said, we are discussing it.
|
|
|
Post by catmage on Feb 21, 2007 16:17:40 GMT -5
Well, the raven had exited the inn in the wake of the character. I would think it odd that a raven had gone indoors. And the person who killed the familiar actually seemed tp have a reason different from the one Ailren has stated for killing them.
|
|
|
Post by soulfien on Feb 21, 2007 23:10:21 GMT -5
so all animals who follow wizards are familiars?
Of course, we can't just limit them to the ones Bioware has set. For instance, that little kitten in Isinhold. If a druid or ranger uses animal empathy on it and has it follow them around town as they feed it and play with it, is it considered an animal companion and slaughtered? Or is that something to be overlooked as cats are protected by law? Well, you see my point, I hope.
Not all pets are considered magical and I HIGHLY doubt the run of the mill dope of a sword-slinger will know a familiar as a being of magical power. Fighters don't know about that stuff automatically..
|
|
|
Post by catmage on Feb 22, 2007 1:20:04 GMT -5
There are obviously animals that would not be considered as potential familiars. But it might not matter what is or isn't scripted in by Bioware. With Ailren, he kills anything that might possibly be a familiar or animal companion but isn't a cat, strictly out of the belief that, if it's just a wild beast, no one can really complain, and if it is a familiar, then the other person was breaking the law. If it's just some pet, then "That's the risk of leaving an animal unattended". Keep your bird on your shoulder or on a perch, leave your bat out of town when there are vampire scares, and keep your toad weasel or bunny in your pocket.
|
|
Xerah
New Member
Posts: 54
|
Post by Xerah on Feb 22, 2007 18:23:22 GMT -5
I'd imagine that there is a lot of animals in town when you consider there is a forest near by. NWN can't script birds flying overhead or deer wandering in from the town pushing into to the forest and still create a playable PW. It's the same idea that all of the farm land, 10 000 (or whatever it is) people living in the town aren't in the mod etc. I hate seeing familiars in town but I find it even more annoying having people go kill them just because they can.
|
|
|
Post by moulinous on Feb 22, 2007 20:30:22 GMT -5
Did i miss the sourcebook material that said these animals could not come to town? just asking...kinda like the peace bond is it just assummed? serious question too as i did not look....oh, and as those are not the only animals/things you can have for a familliar if i remember right....wernt they expanded quite a bit? in one of those tomes of magic or something?
|
|
|
Post by catmage on Feb 22, 2007 22:27:48 GMT -5
Every so often a few creatures are added to the list for Improved Familiar, and on rarer occasions, the standard familiars receive new friends. However, the only ones of those I've seen noted are creatures that are likely going to be killed or squished. FRCS adds hairy spider, lizard, and octopus. Improved familiars also tend to be creatures you aren't going to find hanging around towns, except perhaps the Lynx in Races of Faerun, and that has the potential to be passed off as a house cat.
As for the reason they don't come into town, there are signs in Isinhold that warn against bringing dangerous beasts into town. At some point it grew to include people seemingly being able to kill ravens as well, perhaps the most benign and natural looking familiars. I generally take a little time before killing ravens, in case their owner emotes trying to pass it off as a normal animal flying through town, but if it's hovering in their wake or doing something a normal raven wouldn't do (from Ailren's perspective), then I treat them like a pixie or a panther and kill them.
|
|
|
Post by soulfien on Feb 22, 2007 22:46:11 GMT -5
ravens can hover? Hmm.... thought humming birds were the only ones who could do that.
Let's not confuse game mechanics here. Hawks are tamable and are more common pets than crows.
But then, of course, hawks are animal companions and are as such slain on sight by Ailren.
I'd imagine that a raven "hovering" behind a wizard would actually be perched on his shoulder. Would you actually take a sword, staff, sling, bow, spell, etc... and smite the creature off the wizard's shoulder? Or his gloved arm in the case of a hawk?
Even slaughtering someone's wolf (not a dire wolf, but a normal one) would be a rather grotesque act in itself. In this world of fantasy a wolf would be a very common pet for even a fighter.
Still sounds like bloodshed to me, Ailren. Casting firebolt on a bird perched on one's shoulder would make for a convincing argument for self-defence.
|
|
|
Post by catmage on Feb 22, 2007 23:05:35 GMT -5
Doesn't matter if it's wicked or not, what matters is that as long as Ailren knows he can get away with it legally, he will. And wolves are not civilized pets. A wolf is still a wild animal, and the signs in town clearly say no "pets, familiars or summoned creatures of a carnivorous or dangerous nature". And I am aware that a raven can't hover in the literal sense. If a person wants to say a bird is on their shoulder, they don't need to summon it, or if they do, then they can take the five seconds it would require to emote "Bird is perched on shoulder"
|
|
|
Post by moulinous on Feb 22, 2007 23:20:23 GMT -5
well, two things i see right off the bat...why have i not set up a zoo kennel to petsit these animals and charge some gold to watch them for these people? and two, a pixie as a familiar is a living fey being...akin to elves and such. Killing one, though a famialiar mechanics wise, would also be murder since killing a hin is. Sprites and pixies are magical creatures of the forest and just as elves, considered intelligent life, unlike a beast like a raven, cat or dog. Even a fairie dragon really is just a fancy lizard accoring to laws. Pixies and sprites use tools, have two arms, two legs, and all that other crap...just some food for thought...
|
|
|
Post by soulfien on Feb 22, 2007 23:22:01 GMT -5
I don't know a single player who will emote that each time a new person walks up and if they do then they won't be able to if someone comes up behind them. Besides, assuming a bird is perched is what the sane person will automatically assume when seeing a bird "hovering" so there isn't any need to emote it. Edit:.. k, seems this has been clearly debated to death now at least to me.. I won't speak for anyone else. All that remains is for the DM's decision on how the law will react to the killings, I suppose
|
|