Previous Thread
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
this is an excerpt from a book written by High Priestess Gadelica.
"The wise Monk Darnelli wrote a discussion of this subject, which
I quote:
"He who thinks he may worship and honor only one of the
Immortals, And rejects all others, does so at great peril to
himself and others. For it takes all, all of the 13, even all of
the 39, to create the beam Upon which we balance. Thus though
one may devote his life to Damaris, In some instance upon his
road, he will need the bitterness of Beort To see him through.
All are revered, all must be honored, though we Choose to seek
the Favor and attention of the One we feel most close to us, In
spirit and Kind, in no way does such honor of One dishonor the
Thirty-eight."
Command:
Upon these thoughts then comes the question, well, what if I
choose to honor one and reject all others. First of all, favors
are granted in the name of the 13, and one cannot gain favor from
Botolf without the favor of Rutilor. The Immortals themselves
cannot stand alone, neither the 13 nor the 39. If one gains the
favor of Chadatru, and behaves and honors only Botolf in his
deeds, then he puts himself in the hands of the forces of chaos
with no chance of order. There is no such thing as a favorite of
chaos. All is equal there. And the forces you seek to call down
upon your enemies, may just as likely exact their price upon your
own head, indeed perhaps more conveniently so."
<<< "He who thinks he may worship and honor only one of the Immortals, And rejects all others, does so at great peril to himself and others. For it takes all, all of the 13, even all of the 39, to create the beam Upon which we balance. Thus though one may devote his life to Damaris, In some instance upon his road, he will need the bitterness of Beort To see him through. All are revered, all must be honored, though we Choose to seek the Favor and attention of the One we feel most close to us, In spirit and Kind, in no way does such honor of One dishonor the Thirty-eight." >>>
I really don't like that writing in the least. Should I consider it an imperfect presentation of what actually is? After all, if mortals can not dispense justice in a perfect manner, then how can they perfectly explain the nature of the immortals and relationship to us? But, no matter which way I look at it, that still is the most closedminded, limiting perspective in the game.
<< what if I choose to honor one and reject all others. First of all, favors are granted in the name of the 13, and one cannot gain favor from Botolf without the favor of Rutilor. >>>
The epitome of forced grayness.
<< If one gains the favor of Chadatru, and behaves and honors only Botolf in his deeds, then he puts himself in the hands of the forces of chaos with no chance of order. There is no such thing as a favorite of chaos. >>>
Interesting, so chaos is darkness? The negative aspects? It seems so does it not? Reading further.
<<< All is equal there. And the forces you seek to call down upon your enemies, may just as likely exact their price upon your own head, indeed perhaps more conveniently so." >>>
They go on to further define and refine the concept of chaos by distinctly linking it to the action involved. As in wishing forces upon your enemy, forces of specifically the negative aspect of Boltolf, but I believe can be rightly inferred to mean the whole of the negative aspects.
And now we have a controversy.
The guild leader speaks.
Lady Snow lifts her chin high and proclaims, "The Calling of the Paladin be of the most high and ancient origin. Long ago, when Men of all races strove against Chaos and Darkness, the Gods sent down grace and leadership unto those among us who were pure of heart and purpose. Those so chosen became shining beacons of leadership and courage to all around them. Each Paladin throughout the ages has been a focus for the forces of Light against Darkness."
There was chaos, and the immortals established the guild to combat chaos. Ponders. And chaos is directly linked to the negative aspects. Yet, we are told that we must honor all, no choice? Then what form does our combating of chaos take? See, why I do not like the first section as stated at the very beginning? It seems so contrary to other positions written far earlier about the game world.
So, the challenge is, provide a plausible relationship between the two pieces of written material.
Sidenote to Blasword... from Snow's speeck......
A Paladin must ever be a shining example of courtesy and honor --
Yes, it does say that.
Daython
I really don't like that writing in the least. Should I consider it an imperfect presentation of what actually is? After all, if mortals can not dispense justice in a perfect manner, then how can they perfectly explain the nature of the immortals and relationship to us? But, no matter which way I look at it, that still is the most closedminded, limiting perspective in the game.
<< what if I choose to honor one and reject all others. First of all, favors are granted in the name of the 13, and one cannot gain favor from Botolf without the favor of Rutilor. >>>
The epitome of forced grayness.
<< If one gains the favor of Chadatru, and behaves and honors only Botolf in his deeds, then he puts himself in the hands of the forces of chaos with no chance of order. There is no such thing as a favorite of chaos. >>>
Interesting, so chaos is darkness? The negative aspects? It seems so does it not? Reading further.
<<< All is equal there. And the forces you seek to call down upon your enemies, may just as likely exact their price upon your own head, indeed perhaps more conveniently so." >>>
They go on to further define and refine the concept of chaos by distinctly linking it to the action involved. As in wishing forces upon your enemy, forces of specifically the negative aspect of Boltolf, but I believe can be rightly inferred to mean the whole of the negative aspects.
And now we have a controversy.
The guild leader speaks.
Lady Snow lifts her chin high and proclaims, "The Calling of the Paladin be of the most high and ancient origin. Long ago, when Men of all races strove against Chaos and Darkness, the Gods sent down grace and leadership unto those among us who were pure of heart and purpose. Those so chosen became shining beacons of leadership and courage to all around them. Each Paladin throughout the ages has been a focus for the forces of Light against Darkness."
There was chaos, and the immortals established the guild to combat chaos. Ponders. And chaos is directly linked to the negative aspects. Yet, we are told that we must honor all, no choice? Then what form does our combating of chaos take? See, why I do not like the first section as stated at the very beginning? It seems so contrary to other positions written far earlier about the game world.
So, the challenge is, provide a plausible relationship between the two pieces of written material.
Sidenote to Blasword... from Snow's speeck......
A Paladin must ever be a shining example of courtesy and honor --
Yes, it does say that.
Daython
<Sidenote to Blasword... from Snow's speeck......
A Paladin must ever be a shining example of courtesy and honor --
Yes, it does say that.
Daython >
heh. well she speaks of only "the righteous ones".
remember that as much as she is a teacher, she is also in service of a province. Even the warrior mage guilds frown upon bad conduct in the provinces.
A Paladin must ever be a shining example of courtesy and honor --
Yes, it does say that.
Daython >
heh. well she speaks of only "the righteous ones".
remember that as much as she is a teacher, she is also in service of a province. Even the warrior mage guilds frown upon bad conduct in the provinces.
<<< heh. well she speaks of only "the righteous ones".
remember that as much as she is a teacher, she is also in service of a province. Even the warrior mage guilds frown upon bad conduct in the provinces >>>
Selective accepting of writings I see. <pokes> One should not sacrifice so much to invalidate their other arguements that are based on writings of appointed mortals.
My point, I seek to find some sort of common ground we all can agree on that does pay attention to principles of accepted truths. As in how we go about accepting and validating the truth in the game world as we know it. For instance, as I stated earlier, I really dislke that passage about honoring all, but I am willing to work with it, provided we find some common ground for choosing what is correct, especially when there are, on their surface, opposing writings.
Daython
remember that as much as she is a teacher, she is also in service of a province. Even the warrior mage guilds frown upon bad conduct in the provinces >>>
Selective accepting of writings I see. <pokes> One should not sacrifice so much to invalidate their other arguements that are based on writings of appointed mortals.
My point, I seek to find some sort of common ground we all can agree on that does pay attention to principles of accepted truths. As in how we go about accepting and validating the truth in the game world as we know it. For instance, as I stated earlier, I really dislke that passage about honoring all, but I am willing to work with it, provided we find some common ground for choosing what is correct, especially when there are, on their surface, opposing writings.
Daython
Selective accepting of writings I see. <pokes> One should not sacrifice so much to invalidate their other arguements that are based on writings of appointed mortals.
According to your own logic, who defined Snow as the perfect example for all of us to follow? What in game sources can tell us that SNow is Right and whoever goes against her is wrong?
You just can't. So when you decide to pick up your model and follow it, reading the in game sources to fit your desire, you also have to accept that other folks will read the sources in some other way to fit their desires as well.
According to your own logic, who defined Snow as the perfect example for all of us to follow? What in game sources can tell us that SNow is Right and whoever goes against her is wrong?
You just can't. So when you decide to pick up your model and follow it, reading the in game sources to fit your desire, you also have to accept that other folks will read the sources in some other way to fit their desires as well.
<<< According to your own logic, who defined Snow as the perfect example for all of us to follow? What in game sources can tell us that SNow is Right and whoever goes against her is wrong? >>>
Huh? I merely pointed out that Blasword essentially invalidates the statements of guild leaders by calling them imperfect mortals, but then wishes the writings of some mortal cleric to be taken as the definitive word of the immortals
<<< You just can't. So when you decide to pick up your model and follow it, reading the in game sources to fit your desire, you also have to accept that other folks will read the sources in some other way to fit their desires as well. >>>
I believe I stated that I am willing to work with the in game sources to achieve the truth of the issue as best as can be done. A source is open, to a point, to interpretation. But the effort should always be to determine exactly what they meant when they wrote it. This is no different than when you write a post, you feel someone has misinterperted your words, so you seek to further clarify. The difficulty here is we can not question the writer to further clarify what they wrote. Therefore, we must strive to know as much as we can of the writer and what influenced them in order to achieve the understanding of the exact meaning of the writing.
Daython
Huh? I merely pointed out that Blasword essentially invalidates the statements of guild leaders by calling them imperfect mortals, but then wishes the writings of some mortal cleric to be taken as the definitive word of the immortals
<<< You just can't. So when you decide to pick up your model and follow it, reading the in game sources to fit your desire, you also have to accept that other folks will read the sources in some other way to fit their desires as well. >>>
I believe I stated that I am willing to work with the in game sources to achieve the truth of the issue as best as can be done. A source is open, to a point, to interpretation. But the effort should always be to determine exactly what they meant when they wrote it. This is no different than when you write a post, you feel someone has misinterperted your words, so you seek to further clarify. The difficulty here is we can not question the writer to further clarify what they wrote. Therefore, we must strive to know as much as we can of the writer and what influenced them in order to achieve the understanding of the exact meaning of the writing.
Daython
I believe I stated that I am willing to work with the in game sources to achieve the truth of the issue as best as can be done. A source is open, to a point, to interpretation. But the effort should
always be to determine exactly what they meant when they wrote it. This is no different than when you write a post, you feel someone has misinterperted your words, so you seek to further
clarify. The difficulty here is we can not question the writer to further clarify what they wrote. Therefore, we must strive to know as much as we can of the writer and what influenced them in
order to achieve the understanding of the exact meaning of the writing.
I disagree with this part.
I don't think kwnowing who the writer was or what he did or what kind of pants he wore would help you understand any better what he wrote. Truth has no owner and doesn't come with titles, coins or anything. Knowing the autor would be a nice way to prove anyone's point , since you could always interpret his/hers actions in the way you want them to be. When someone writes something it comes down to you want to believe it or not. If you don't want to believe it, or think it's wrong, you can take two steps. One is saying the autor is a fool, the other is try to find reasons to back your side up and deny the other side. But when it comes to this kind of thing, there are no facts. Only opinions. Snow said something about them Gods, Darius said something else, the Monk at the temple said something else...and so on...unless the gods themselves come down and tell you what is the truth (and you believe it, since you could always disagree with them Gods too) you won't ever be able to prove anything.
<<< I don't think kwnowing who the writer was or what he did or what kind of pants he wore would help you understand any better what he wrote. Truth has no owner and doesn't come with titles, coins or anything. Knowing the autor would be a nice way to prove anyone's point , since you could always interpret his/hers actions in the way you want them to be. >>>
Dude, you are confusing and muddling two seperate issues entirely. There is the issue of understanding what an author meant when they wrote what they wrote. Then there is the issue of whether it is true or not. Two very distinct and seperate issues.
Why do you presume that we are free to interpret an authors writings the way we wish to interpret them? I do not care for it when people do that with what I write. And I do take pains to clarify exactly what I meant when I wrote it. And the truth of all that is, that those who know me best have the most insight into what I mean when I write.
The point is you must adhere to some basic principle of textual criticism to even argue the points presented. Without this agreement debate is futile. For then it truly would be up to each person's personal whim. Which is exactly the point I am making. It should never be up to a person's personal whim.
<<< you can take two steps. One is saying the autor is a fool, the other is try to find reasons to back your side up and deny the other side. >>>>
No other choice at all? What if they are partially right and it can be proved from other sources? It never really is that black and white.
The point is to try to find some definitive source from which to argue the points. We have not been able to find a consensus opinion on what that definitive source is. In my opinion the guild charter as spoken by the leaders should be our definitive source for our purpose and code of conduct. Why? Simply because these are the things my character agreed to do and be when accepting a position of training within the guild. Should these things be refined over time? Perhaps, but it does not take away or diminish the impact of what my character agreed to be as a Paladin.
The task then becomes one of understanding exactly what the guild leaders mean, meant, when they state their speech. Is it true we were established by the immortals? If so, are the reasons given the accurate reasons? If so, what is meant by chaos and darkness? What does it mean to be the last light if darkness should ever conquer?
To be honest, the only position I can justify at the moment, based on the two writings quoted here, one Blasword posted on the immortals, and one I posted on the guild leaders speech, is this. The chaos forces were too powerful, they were winning, the immortals established the Paladin guild as the "balancing" force on the side of order. It is fairly simple and straight forward.
Now, if you seek not to base your interpretations on the in game sources available to you, but just on what you "feel", well, quite simply we have no basis of discussion to even begin the debate.
Daython
Dude, you are confusing and muddling two seperate issues entirely. There is the issue of understanding what an author meant when they wrote what they wrote. Then there is the issue of whether it is true or not. Two very distinct and seperate issues.
Why do you presume that we are free to interpret an authors writings the way we wish to interpret them? I do not care for it when people do that with what I write. And I do take pains to clarify exactly what I meant when I wrote it. And the truth of all that is, that those who know me best have the most insight into what I mean when I write.
The point is you must adhere to some basic principle of textual criticism to even argue the points presented. Without this agreement debate is futile. For then it truly would be up to each person's personal whim. Which is exactly the point I am making. It should never be up to a person's personal whim.
<<< you can take two steps. One is saying the autor is a fool, the other is try to find reasons to back your side up and deny the other side. >>>>
No other choice at all? What if they are partially right and it can be proved from other sources? It never really is that black and white.
The point is to try to find some definitive source from which to argue the points. We have not been able to find a consensus opinion on what that definitive source is. In my opinion the guild charter as spoken by the leaders should be our definitive source for our purpose and code of conduct. Why? Simply because these are the things my character agreed to do and be when accepting a position of training within the guild. Should these things be refined over time? Perhaps, but it does not take away or diminish the impact of what my character agreed to be as a Paladin.
The task then becomes one of understanding exactly what the guild leaders mean, meant, when they state their speech. Is it true we were established by the immortals? If so, are the reasons given the accurate reasons? If so, what is meant by chaos and darkness? What does it mean to be the last light if darkness should ever conquer?
To be honest, the only position I can justify at the moment, based on the two writings quoted here, one Blasword posted on the immortals, and one I posted on the guild leaders speech, is this. The chaos forces were too powerful, they were winning, the immortals established the Paladin guild as the "balancing" force on the side of order. It is fairly simple and straight forward.
Now, if you seek not to base your interpretations on the in game sources available to you, but just on what you "feel", well, quite simply we have no basis of discussion to even begin the debate.
Daython
Woah boy... this topic is hard on the eyes.
Anyhow, for further definition of what the 'Darkness' is considered, visit the 'Temple of Darkness' in Shard. Roam the 'Hall of Agony', 'Hall of Vengeance', 'Hall of Death', and 'Hall of Madness'! Take in the sites of alcoves dedicated to the negative aspects of the thirteen, decorated with such lovely things as hordes of black widows and dead bodies! Then, you can head out Shard's South gate, find the semi-hidden trail, and walk through the arches in the volcano... The black marble ones to be exact.
For further definition of 'Light', visit the 'Temple of Light' also in Shard and see the 'Contemplation Garden' and fountains. Visit alcoves to the positive aspects of the thirteen! Then, head to where the arches are but take the white ones this time.
Another point is that the balance of Good (Light) and Evil (Dark) are not neccesarilly an eye for an eye. Traditionally, in all forms of media, the forces of the Darkness are vast but common. Such as the hordes of monsters, undeads, and evil NPCs in DR. Then you get another horde of 'balanced' individuals, such as the other NPCs. Finally, the forces of the Light are few and elite. There you have paladins, other PCs, and even a few NPCs (look at the Elven-Human War and pay attention to the romance of the couple. Then look at Lanival). To introduce such a thing as an Anti-Paladin, Knight of Darkness, etc greatly hinders this basic balance.
And if you really want to be a servant of the Dark aspects, join the cleric's guild and strap on some plate. Now go sacrifice a few children. That is, unless it is the paladin skill sets that concern you.
Anyhow, for further definition of what the 'Darkness' is considered, visit the 'Temple of Darkness' in Shard. Roam the 'Hall of Agony', 'Hall of Vengeance', 'Hall of Death', and 'Hall of Madness'! Take in the sites of alcoves dedicated to the negative aspects of the thirteen, decorated with such lovely things as hordes of black widows and dead bodies! Then, you can head out Shard's South gate, find the semi-hidden trail, and walk through the arches in the volcano... The black marble ones to be exact.
For further definition of 'Light', visit the 'Temple of Light' also in Shard and see the 'Contemplation Garden' and fountains. Visit alcoves to the positive aspects of the thirteen! Then, head to where the arches are but take the white ones this time.
Another point is that the balance of Good (Light) and Evil (Dark) are not neccesarilly an eye for an eye. Traditionally, in all forms of media, the forces of the Darkness are vast but common. Such as the hordes of monsters, undeads, and evil NPCs in DR. Then you get another horde of 'balanced' individuals, such as the other NPCs. Finally, the forces of the Light are few and elite. There you have paladins, other PCs, and even a few NPCs (look at the Elven-Human War and pay attention to the romance of the couple. Then look at Lanival). To introduce such a thing as an Anti-Paladin, Knight of Darkness, etc greatly hinders this basic balance.
And if you really want to be a servant of the Dark aspects, join the cleric's guild and strap on some plate. Now go sacrifice a few children. That is, unless it is the paladin skill sets that concern you.
<Another point is that the balance of Good (Light) and Evil (Dark)>
you seem to miss one of the arguments: "does being dark mean being evil?"
<Traditionally, in all forms of media, the
forces of the Darkness are vast but common. Such as the hordes of monsters,
undeads, and evil NPCs in DR. >
you see, i dont see the general monster as being evil. I dont see trolls or s'lai or seordmaors etc as being evil. I see undead as being evil, although not the end-all beat-all of evil. Goblins i wouldnt immediately label as evil, however they are "heathens" (they believe in their own god D-longnamesomething).
you seem to miss one of the arguments: "does being dark mean being evil?"
<Traditionally, in all forms of media, the
forces of the Darkness are vast but common. Such as the hordes of monsters,
undeads, and evil NPCs in DR. >
you see, i dont see the general monster as being evil. I dont see trolls or s'lai or seordmaors etc as being evil. I see undead as being evil, although not the end-all beat-all of evil. Goblins i wouldnt immediately label as evil, however they are "heathens" (they believe in their own god D-longnamesomething).
<To introduce such a thing as an Anti-Paladin, Knight of Darkness,
etc greatly hinders this basic balance.>
this is not about anti-paladins, the existance of anti-paladins, or even being anti-paladins. I am of the opinion that you really need to stop looking at words in simple black and white.
etc greatly hinders this basic balance.>
this is not about anti-paladins, the existance of anti-paladins, or even being anti-paladins. I am of the opinion that you really need to stop looking at words in simple black and white.
Alright then, cut out that one sentence and read the rest of my post. Especially the part about the 'Temple of Darkness'.
How many monsters follows the beliefs advocated by the dark aspects of the Thirteen? Hence they are on that side and why paladins can blow them away with full immunity.
People were asking for IG definition of what the Darkness is, well, there you have it. An entire temple.
How many monsters follows the beliefs advocated by the dark aspects of the Thirteen? Hence they are on that side and why paladins can blow them away with full immunity.
People were asking for IG definition of what the Darkness is, well, there you have it. An entire temple.
<How many monsters follows the beliefs advocated by the dark aspects of the
Thirteen? Hence they are on that side and why paladins can blow them away with
full immunity.>
monsters monsters monsters, is that all you see?
so your argument is based on the fact that you can kill members of the eleven races without reprecussion if they are critters such as foodpads etc. tell me, what about those thieves Phelim patronizes? oh, and how about the fact that you could fight Provincial Guards without any soul hit when they came in (in invasion style, but still as themselves, during the l'karm event).
oh, i can also kill antelope without reprecussions, and bison, and dare i say, bear?
Thirteen? Hence they are on that side and why paladins can blow them away with
full immunity.>
monsters monsters monsters, is that all you see?
so your argument is based on the fact that you can kill members of the eleven races without reprecussion if they are critters such as foodpads etc. tell me, what about those thieves Phelim patronizes? oh, and how about the fact that you could fight Provincial Guards without any soul hit when they came in (in invasion style, but still as themselves, during the l'karm event).
oh, i can also kill antelope without reprecussions, and bison, and dare i say, bear?
No, I am talking about the definition of a paladin on the Simultronics Information page, what happens when you ask a guildleader about a paladin, what the paladin GMs have installed as the paladin ethos and restrictions, and various abilities we are given. Our spells? Tend to involve light in some way, especially Smite Foe. What about the entire Glyph of Light quest and the glyph itself? Lots of Light. Soulstate? If I remember correctly, 'pristine luminence' is the best. Not black.
And if you were to have a servant of the Dark aspects, then it would have to be a servant submerged in the elements detailed in the Temple of Darkness in Shard. Heck, you need a torch to navigate the area. No where do I see room for such things in a paladin. Such things are the antithesis of the Light.
And if you were to have a servant of the Dark aspects, then it would have to be a servant submerged in the elements detailed in the Temple of Darkness in Shard. Heck, you need a torch to navigate the area. No where do I see room for such things in a paladin. Such things are the antithesis of the Light.
<No, I am talking about the definition of a paladin on the Simultronics
Information page, what happens when you ask a guildleader about a paladin,
what the paladin GMs have installed as the paladin ethos and restrictions, and
various abilities we are given. Our spells? Tend to involve light in some way,
especially Smite Foe. What about the entire Glyph of Light quest and the glyph
itself? Lots of Light. Soulstate? If I remember correctly, 'pristine
luminence' is the best. Not black.
And if you were to have a servant of the Dark aspects, then it would have to
be a servant submerged in the elements detailed in the Temple of Darkness in
Shard. Heck, you need a torch to navigate the area. No where do I see room for
such things in a paladin. Such things are the antithesis of the Light. >
lets just say that your idea is right. now would you tell me how to go about portraying Phelim as a light god in your world of ideas.
Information page, what happens when you ask a guildleader about a paladin,
what the paladin GMs have installed as the paladin ethos and restrictions, and
various abilities we are given. Our spells? Tend to involve light in some way,
especially Smite Foe. What about the entire Glyph of Light quest and the glyph
itself? Lots of Light. Soulstate? If I remember correctly, 'pristine
luminence' is the best. Not black.
And if you were to have a servant of the Dark aspects, then it would have to
be a servant submerged in the elements detailed in the Temple of Darkness in
Shard. Heck, you need a torch to navigate the area. No where do I see room for
such things in a paladin. Such things are the antithesis of the Light. >
lets just say that your idea is right. now would you tell me how to go about portraying Phelim as a light god in your world of ideas.
Nice posts Draconian, I haven't had the time to run through those places to further my point yet. I have been stuck in just finding some way to agree upon terminology with people here.
So, the challenge still remains. Those that wish to be a paladin following a negative aspect immortal, how do you do so and remain a paladin?
As has been pointed out, we are not necessarily a champion of any particular god, we are more chartered to protect the existence of the populace. To bring order where there is chaos. To lead by example on the path of order.
Daython
So, the challenge still remains. Those that wish to be a paladin following a negative aspect immortal, how do you do so and remain a paladin?
As has been pointed out, we are not necessarily a champion of any particular god, we are more chartered to protect the existence of the populace. To bring order where there is chaos. To lead by example on the path of order.
Daython
First of all, Phelim is the god of good dreams which are very peaceful, kind, and soothing things. Next, to coincide with the Light theme, it was Phelim who illuminated the night sky with the stars and four moons. What more, Phelim is the patron of rightful vengeance. What is Justice if not rightful vengeance? Someone steals, murders, harms another and you avenge those wrongs by throwing the criminal in jail. Phelim is also the patron of any honor amongst thieves or assassins, meaning people who generally try to help other people but they do not neccesarily see eye to eye with the Law. This is also demonstrated by Phelim's approach to the World Dragon, where he ambushed it as opposed to meeting it in open combat. Justice and the Law can be two entirely different entities. Phelim upholds his word above all things, being very honest and trustworthy. 'A promise from Phelim is a promise unbroken.'
There you have it. Phelim, a Light aspect of the Immortals. Not neccesarily a lawful one but definitely not Dark, like Dergati.
There you have it. Phelim, a Light aspect of the Immortals. Not neccesarily a lawful one but definitely not Dark, like Dergati.
<As has been pointed out, we are not necessarily a champion of any particular
god, we are more chartered to protect the existence of the populace. To bring
order where there is chaos. To lead by example on the path of order.>
so through your argument, paladins are essentially "town guards" that can choose whether or not they want to be paid for it by a certain province.
god, we are more chartered to protect the existence of the populace. To bring
order where there is chaos. To lead by example on the path of order.>
so through your argument, paladins are essentially "town guards" that can choose whether or not they want to be paid for it by a certain province.
a thief is a thief, honorable or not. by advocating honorable thieves, he advocates the existance of thieves, just as Botolf advocates the thief guild.
<This is also demonstrated by
Phelim's approach to the World Dragon, where he ambushed it as opposed to
meeting it in open combat. >
yet paladins cannot ambush at all. wouldnt this make Phelim the antithesis of paladins based on your ideas?
A paladin is still a paladin whether he follows a light god, a dark god, a neutral god, or all of em. following Phelim does not allow the paladin to ambush, thus it does not change the paladin in any way. the same should apply to the dark gods...any gods.
<This is also demonstrated by
Phelim's approach to the World Dragon, where he ambushed it as opposed to
meeting it in open combat. >
yet paladins cannot ambush at all. wouldnt this make Phelim the antithesis of paladins based on your ideas?
A paladin is still a paladin whether he follows a light god, a dark god, a neutral god, or all of em. following Phelim does not allow the paladin to ambush, thus it does not change the paladin in any way. the same should apply to the dark gods...any gods.
Max... This nitpicking of posts is getting very old, very fast. I am getting the feeling that certain members in our ranks joined the paladin guild for the power as opposed to the ideal. Now they are trying to find ways to skirt around the rules.
We are not town guards. Town guards belong to a singular province and city. A paladin, however, is free to roam about Elanthia righting wrongs, succoring the public, addressing grievances, and beating back the tide of Darkness. Unfortunately, whenever you take something and make it available to the general public with ease (walk into the guild and type: join), it tends to lose its mysticism. Just how many mortals do the Immortals deem worthy to be paladins? Instead, you must have a guild to train upcoming paladins, which in essence waters down the beliefs, which may cause certain people to feel disenchanted.
That is what happens when something that was divine becomes a secular organization.
Meanwhile, my paladin is hoping he will one day be worthy of being a True Paladin of the Old Code. In the meanwhile, he is utilizing the secular system to its full potential to further the ideals of paladinhood.
As for Phelim being antithesis to a paladin... what did you pull that one out of? Phelim is still Light, just not lawful. He is more a nuetral entity when it comes between Law and Chaos, he just helps people which is Light. A paladin can not work with a non-paladin? My paladin himself has prayed to Phelim when his wife was being plagued by Dergati.
We are not town guards. Town guards belong to a singular province and city. A paladin, however, is free to roam about Elanthia righting wrongs, succoring the public, addressing grievances, and beating back the tide of Darkness. Unfortunately, whenever you take something and make it available to the general public with ease (walk into the guild and type: join), it tends to lose its mysticism. Just how many mortals do the Immortals deem worthy to be paladins? Instead, you must have a guild to train upcoming paladins, which in essence waters down the beliefs, which may cause certain people to feel disenchanted.
That is what happens when something that was divine becomes a secular organization.
Meanwhile, my paladin is hoping he will one day be worthy of being a True Paladin of the Old Code. In the meanwhile, he is utilizing the secular system to its full potential to further the ideals of paladinhood.
As for Phelim being antithesis to a paladin... what did you pull that one out of? Phelim is still Light, just not lawful. He is more a nuetral entity when it comes between Law and Chaos, he just helps people which is Light. A paladin can not work with a non-paladin? My paladin himself has prayed to Phelim when his wife was being plagued by Dergati.
<<< so through your argument, paladins are essentially "town guards" that can choose whether or not they want to be paid for it by a certain province. >>>>
Nope, that is only one small aspect of how the role is played out. Though I would love to see the Bounty system brought live.
I view the role more as leading by example of how you live. Defeating evil and undead whereever possible. Leading in combat to help your companions fight to their fullest extent. Teaching folks how to better defend themselves in combat. Offering assistance as a mediator to settle disputes. Opposing those things which are unjust, even if it is from the current provincial rulers. Which is a very touchy issue and should be approached with much caution and due consideration.
Will I kill someone for stealing? Yes, it is possible, if they have shown themselves having no desire to make any form of redemption. I at least try to give them a chance to repent of their deeds and make it right. Regardless, when they are dead, they are now in the hands of their immortal .
Daython
Nope, that is only one small aspect of how the role is played out. Though I would love to see the Bounty system brought live.
I view the role more as leading by example of how you live. Defeating evil and undead whereever possible. Leading in combat to help your companions fight to their fullest extent. Teaching folks how to better defend themselves in combat. Offering assistance as a mediator to settle disputes. Opposing those things which are unjust, even if it is from the current provincial rulers. Which is a very touchy issue and should be approached with much caution and due consideration.
Will I kill someone for stealing? Yes, it is possible, if they have shown themselves having no desire to make any form of redemption. I at least try to give them a chance to repent of their deeds and make it right. Regardless, when they are dead, they are now in the hands of their immortal .
Daython
<The power that is a circlr 50-70+ paladin compared to a circle 1-20 barb,
cleric, warrior mage, or ranger. I know it is a deciding factor for a lot of
people. Very few want to start over. >
if you are insinuating that i just dont want to start over, then you are wrong. i've been with this guild since beta ended and i've had plenty of time to change guilds. I stick with this guild because of RP, not because of the the so called power you say i have.
cleric, warrior mage, or ranger. I know it is a deciding factor for a lot of
people. Very few want to start over. >
if you are insinuating that i just dont want to start over, then you are wrong. i've been with this guild since beta ended and i've had plenty of time to change guilds. I stick with this guild because of RP, not because of the the so called power you say i have.
>So, the challenge still remains. Those that wish to be a paladin following a negative aspect immortal, how do you do so and remain a paladin?
I have never thought the pallie guild was very condusive to following anything but the light gods. Yer, as I said in some other post, Holy Warriors, but restricted to the light side of things. I don't mean to say there aren't dark paladins. There are, they just suffer all sorts of penalties, live on the fringe of the guild and have to be exceptionally good roleplayers to get by.
-Gheist
I have never thought the pallie guild was very condusive to following anything but the light gods. Yer, as I said in some other post, Holy Warriors, but restricted to the light side of things. I don't mean to say there aren't dark paladins. There are, they just suffer all sorts of penalties, live on the fringe of the guild and have to be exceptionally good roleplayers to get by.
-Gheist
The RP that you are so desperately trying to reverse entirely? The conflict between Light and Dark is a foundation of the guild and can not be removed without us losing our identities as paladins. I would expect someone from Beta to know something as simplistic as that. What more, why are you trying to rewrite the guild now instead of when it was first proposed/implemented? You had plenty of time to do that as well.
<What more, why are you trying to
rewrite the guild now instead of when it was first proposed/implemented? You
had plenty of time to do that as well. >
i'm not trying to rewrite anything, this is a simple discussion on what already is. this discussion has existed in many different threads on the paladin boards way before you even got aboard.
rewrite the guild now instead of when it was first proposed/implemented? You
had plenty of time to do that as well. >
i'm not trying to rewrite anything, this is a simple discussion on what already is. this discussion has existed in many different threads on the paladin boards way before you even got aboard.
