TeamBG.CoM

Released Mods => NPC Mods => Saerileth Romance => Topic started by: Sillara on August 15, 2005, 07:00:07 AM

Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Sillara on August 15, 2005, 07:00:07 AM
In case you ever wondered, check it out here (http://chosenofmystra.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1433).



Sillara
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Dead_Ghost on August 15, 2005, 08:49:25 AM
See, what did I said, love can blind! :D
A most interesting short chapter, Sillara! :thumbsup:
I'm not really disappointed with Edorem's failure, somehow I envisioned it would be something akin to this, after all Edorem did demonstrated, as Feanor has so eloquently showed us :wink: , a certain ammount of disregard towards the code of the Paladins due to his heart.
BTW, you have a thing with love at first sight, right? ;)
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Feanor on August 15, 2005, 09:42:03 AM
Very good chapter, Sillara ! This is an Edorem which can have all my sympathy. I would have prefered if he had destroyed Kamen and married Arlluvia, but... (sighs)  :crybaby:

     As a side comment, all your characters meet tragic ends.  :wink: You know of whom I speak...  8)

    A question : how Edorem remained a chosen of Tyr ? Don't think that I want him to become fallen, but Saerileth can lose the grace of Tyr for much less... You know what I'm talking about.  :wink:

      BTW, if my charname is an elf, he is still alive at that moment. I think I will have some business with Kamen and his bride.  :evil: Business involving some stakes...  :evil:  Where does the action takes place ? On the Prime or across the planes ?
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Veldrin on August 15, 2005, 10:15:19 AM
Man...I almost feel sorry for the twerp now.

This is a beautiful piece of writing, I wish I had the proper education to give a real proffessional review of it but since I don't I'll settle for repeating myself: This is a beautiful piece of writing.  :D

I think the suspense was maintained very well because it kept me reading nonstop until the end. Although I did see ol' Eodrem's end coming a bit sooner than he did.

Anyway, it was a good read.  :thumbsup:
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: nethrin on August 15, 2005, 09:16:12 PM
wow!  impressive bit of writing, as always, my dear.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Mightysword on August 15, 2005, 09:44:03 PM
Hum ... that's a little cruel isn't it. :crybaby:

But there is something I confuse, Saerileth is a human with the touch of the Elf right, she's still a human by nature, I got an impression this writing refers to her as an elf.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Feanor on August 16, 2005, 03:43:28 AM
One thing I still have to say : there were many clashes between those who like Edorem and those who don't. But this story does more good to Edorem than 10 pages of arguments in his favor.  :wink: (improving his image, I mean).

Quote
And I cannot blame them, for she is the loveliest maiden I have ever beheld. Rebellious memory called up a black-haired, blue-eyed lady at this thought, but with sober judgement Lord Edorem had to admit that even his long-lost love had not surpassed this maidís beauty.



      I do not concur. Saerileth rules.  :D
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Mightysword on August 16, 2005, 08:46:38 AM
Quote from: "Feanor"
One thing I still have to say : there were many clashes between those who like Edorem and those who don't. But this story does more good to Edorem than 10 pages of arguments in his favor.  :wink: (improving his image, I mean).



don't temp me  :lol:


Well, as you said, it's because this is a new situation, and what we did is argue over another situation. In fact, hearing you say so only solify my opinion, we need different judgement under difference circumstance, even for the same person ;)
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Feanor on August 17, 2005, 03:36:54 AM
Quote from: "Mightysword"
Quote from: "Feanor"
One thing I still have to say : there were many clashes between those who like Edorem and those who don't. But this story does more good to Edorem than 10 pages of arguments in his favor.  :wink: (improving his image, I mean).



don't temp me  :lol:


Well, as you said, it's because this is a new situation, and what we did is argue over another situation. In fact, hearing you say so only solify my opinion, we need different judgement under difference circumstance, even for the same person ;)


      True, but the idea was that neither the positive situation from the mod did not speak too much in his favor (at least for me), while this story did. It is not only what Edorem did, but his entire attitude. For instance, this Edorem from the story is not so full of himself and not so distant, which makes him a nicer person.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Veldrin on August 17, 2005, 09:13:42 AM
Maybe it's because loosing Saerileth to <CHARNAME> taught him a badly needed lesson in humility...
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: happypg on August 17, 2005, 12:35:13 PM
Very nice.  I like my endings "happy" but this was a good read.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Raziel on August 17, 2005, 02:06:57 PM
Quite the story Sillara :) , Even though i never liked Edorem this story makes me see him in a diffrent light, I truly feel sorry for him :-( ... Heh, Never thought id hear myself saying that. :lol:
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Lord Kain on August 17, 2005, 08:34:54 PM
That was cold, what you did to him real cold.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Feanor on August 18, 2005, 07:35:14 AM
Quote from: "Veldrin"
Maybe it's because loosing Saerileth to <CHARNAME> taught him a badly needed lesson in humility...



     How true !  :D  On the other hand, he still has a major fault : he did not free himself of his former misconceptions. In the mod, he treated Charname badly also because he was a Bhaalspawn and his wretched heritage. Now, because Arlluvia had the perfect profile of "the innocent and beautiful maid in distress", he failed to see the lie which she was. The fact that he does not see beyond appearances cost him his very life.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Veldrin on August 18, 2005, 08:18:11 AM
Quote from: "Feanor"
Quote from: "Veldrin"
Maybe it's because loosing Saerileth to <CHARNAME> taught him a badly needed lesson in humility...



     How true !  :D  On the other hand, he still has a major fault : he did not free himself of his former misconceptions. In the mod, he treated Charname badly also because he was a Bhaalspawn and his wretched heritage. Now, because Arlluvia had the perfect profile of "the innocent and beautiful maid in distress", he failed to see the lie which she was. The fact that he does not see beyond appearances cost him his very life.


True, he was a prejudiced twerp to the end. But that arrogance is so deeply rooted into Eodrem's personality that he wouldn't really be himself without it. I think learning that he wasn't the bright and shining center of the universe was about as much as Eodrem could handle in one go. Man...I'm being really mean to the deceased fictional chap.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Feanor on August 18, 2005, 08:27:52 AM
Quote from: "Veldrin"
Quote from: "Feanor"
Quote from: "Veldrin"
Maybe it's because loosing Saerileth to <CHARNAME> taught him a badly needed lesson in humility...



     How true !  :D  On the other hand, he still has a major fault : he did not free himself of his former misconceptions. In the mod, he treated Charname badly also because he was a Bhaalspawn and his wretched heritage. Now, because Arlluvia had the perfect profile of "the innocent and beautiful maid in distress", he failed to see the lie which she was. The fact that he does not see beyond appearances cost him his very life.


True, he was a prejudiced twerp to the end. But that arrogance is so deeply rooted into Eodrem's personality that he wouldn't really be himself without it. I think learning that he wasn't the bright and shining center of the universe was about as much as Eodrem could handle in one go. Man...I'm being really mean to the deceased fictional chap.


     Arrogance is not quite the proper term to describe him, in my opinion. "Easy to mislead" is better. He still could not understand that not everything that shines is gold and not everything that has roots in darkness is without value.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Mightysword on August 20, 2005, 11:17:38 PM
But this ending ... it really makes people doubt doesn't it (at least in my case). And right now my target is not Edorem, he seems ... insignificant, but the target is tear.


The question is how can something like this happens to a Chosen of Tyr? In his action, most of the time Edorem is not exactly a bad guy, and his action can be justify, he's just at the losing side of the matter.


As a chosen you would think Tyr should have some guidance and protection for him. This situtation really make one wonder if Tyr decided to forshaken his Chosen (like the kind of thing that Morag did to Aribeth in NWN), he forgot and forfeited his chosen to a cruel fate, a fate that I don't think Edorem deserves.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Dead_Ghost on August 21, 2005, 03:39:40 AM
Quote from: "Mightysword"
As a chosen you would think Tyr should have some guidance and protection for him. This situtation really make one wonder if Tyr decided to forshaken his Chosen (like the kind of thing that Morag did to Aribeth in NWN), he forgot and forfeited his chosen to a cruel fate, a fate that I don't think Edorem deserves.

Personally, I consider this as a test Tyr sent him for. A test to which Edorem failed. And, considering Feanor's statements and the Code of Paladins he showed in another thread, we can consider Edorem had failed Tyr already, during BG2 SoA and ToB :D .
Like I've said, I considered this as Edorem's final chance to redeem himself.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Feanor on August 21, 2005, 06:17:57 AM
Quote from: "Mightysword"
But this ending ... it really makes people doubt doesn't it (at least in my case). And right now my target is not Edorem, he seems ... insignificant, but the target is tear.


The question is how can something like this happens to a Chosen of Tyr? In his action, most of the time Edorem is not exactly a bad guy, and his action can be justify, he's just at the losing side of the matter.


As a chosen you would think Tyr should have some guidance and protection for him. This situtation really make one wonder if Tyr decided to forshaken his Chosen (like the kind of thing that Morag did to Aribeth in NWN), he forgot and forfeited his chosen to a cruel fate, a fate that I don't think Edorem deserves.



       I think I can try an answer.

Quote
Personally, I consider this as a test Tyr sent him for. A test to which Edorem failed.


     I do not concur. Maybe that was the whole idea : Edorem redeemed himself through death. Because his behaviour in SoA was not according to Tyr's doghma. That is bad. Very bad. Because, when someone worships a god but he fails in following his gods tenets, he will be placed among the False and Tyr can't even take him into his paradise (False depend strictly on the Lord of the Deads whim - at that moment, Kelemvor) To turn him into a proxy (as Saerileth expects from him - she says that in the mod) can't even be taken into consideration.
     Remember what happened with Aribeth in NWN. Despite all her previous exploits, she could not be forgiven for her treachery. We do not know if she was killed by the PC or executed by Lord Nasher afterwards, but in HotU we found her in Hells. And only after she endures the rightful punishment in Hell for her transgression and she is purified this way, can Tyr accept her again.
     As god of justice, Tyr considers there must be a punishment for Edorem's failure. If he dies for his duty, but because of love, then Tyr could view this as the proper punishment (the idea : love made you fail first time and through love you have been punished) and so his previous mistakes could be overlooked and his errors won't weight upon him in the afterlife.
     And, as a side comment (no offence to Saerileth) : Tyr is quite a narrow-minded god. If he thinks something is appropriate for justice, then he will do it.


      But there is an interesting paradox here. Sillara says she likes Edorem. But the fate she had imagined for him is worse than anything his enemies had desired. When people wanted to kill Edorem, they suggested ctrl+y : fast, without pain, Edorem would have been obliterated before even knowing what hit him. But, in the story, not only that Edorem was killed, but he also had his heart crushed a second time. Why did you do it, Sillara ?   :cry:
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Mightysword on August 21, 2005, 02:42:22 PM
Whatever the case, I can never agree with Tyr, and I don't care either, a god is not supposed to be "narrow-minded", Gods have so many matter at their mercy, narrow-minded is a poor excuse for a god, to be plain, a narrow-minded entity does NOT deserve to be a God.


As I said, Edorem's actions while is not good, but they're not injustice. In real life you put a person in prison when he commits a crime, you don't punish someone for just not being a good citizen. If Tyr is a god of justice, then Edorem's death is UN-JUSTICE, if this is really a Tyr's judgment, then Tyr does not deserve to be called the god of justice. Also, if he does not have mercy and sympathy on his servant, Tyr does not event deserve to be a leader  let alone a god. A general's job is not only about passing out order, but also to see the well being of his soldier, being a general does not give you the right to put people live at your whimp, even if they're under your command. Edorem is a chosen, he did not come to Tyr, Tyr CHOSE HIM. And for that, Tyr also has a certain responsibility to him, but Tyr chose to forshaken him.



Relating to the case of Aribeth, one can say Tyr appear not only a narrow-minded but also a self-serving judge. He forfeited Aribeth just as he forfeited Edorem. Sure, we know it's Morag who produces those fake dream to make Aribeth think Tyr turns his back on her, but the question is, then WHERE IS THE REAL TYR? Where is him when his servant needs him the most, does it mean that when you serve Tyr you only have to serve him, and he won't care a **** about you? In Aribeth fallen, in my eyes here are the people must took responsibility, in an order of the most responsibility to the least responsibility:


+ Tyr. Aribeth is his servant, she is HIS responsibility.
+ The people of Neverwinter.
+ Lord Nasher and Arrand Gend, also the PC.
+ Aribeth.

Yes, Aribeth, to me, just has to take the "LEAST" responsibility in her own fallen. Adding up these story together, if you ask me, Tyr is not worth Worshiping.


HOTU is just one way to explain her ending, and I think it sucks, that expack is built more like a Hack&Slash to add more stuff to the tool set rather then the normal RPG Bioware is doing. I recommend the Aribeth's Rivival mod, it makes more sense. Everyone took responsible for her fallen, because it's everyone's fault. Nasher said he won't give into the mob, Arrand Gend take a huge responsibility because after all, he's the Spy Master, he's supposed to see all of this coming. It makes more sense and the conclusion is much more justifiable then HOTU. It's a short mode, but very well done.



Aribeth and Edorem are paladin "under Tyr's guidance", their fallen are also Tyr's fallen. Like in real life, if your soldiers fail to do your assigment, as their supperior you also have to take a part of the responsibility, I don't say the soldiers is not a fault, but it's a fault that you're supposed to share. A good commander will never blame everything on his soldiers to save his own ass and to maintain his "perfection". So Tyr just want people to serves him, and when they fail he throws them out and punish them, and take no responsibility? Heck, what kind of god is that!
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Dead_Ghost on August 21, 2005, 03:36:16 PM
Quote from: "Mightysword"
Heck, what kind of god is that!

Ever heard the say Through pain comes cleansing. :D
And let the pain of Hells show them their errors, in order for them to regret and recognize their mistakes. (yes, I've put the regret first and recognition afterwards purposefully :D )
 :lol:
Just kidding.
Maybe Tyr believes he's doing the best for his Chosen that way? Give him the benefit of doubt.
...
If, for nothing else, for you to feel yourself as better than a God. :D (no pun intended)
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Feanor on August 22, 2005, 01:46:39 AM
Quote
Whatever the case, I can never agree with Tyr, and I don't care either, a god is not supposed to be "narrow-minded", Gods have so many matter at their mercy, narrow-minded is a poor excuse for a god, to be plain, a narrow-minded entity does NOT deserve to be a God.


     You missed the point. If you agree with Tyr or not is totally irellevant, I explained you why did he let this happen to Edorem. If you have a better approach, ascend. Godhood awaits you.  :D
     Also you say a god is not supposed to be a narrow-minded. Again, you put the problem wrong. How are they supposed to be is irrelevant. I also can think of many improvements for them. But they are this way. All of them. By "narrow-minded" I meant that they view the world strictly according to their portofolio. That is why Tyr will always promote justice in the Realms, while Talos will always promote destruction. The gods of AD&D are not the all-mighty deities from monotheistic religions. Think of them as the gods from the greek mithology. They were powerful beings, but not by far without faults.
     Torm was twice in such a situation : first, Gwydion (who later will become one of his chosens) was abandoned to Cyric, because, although he pretended to be a follower of Torm, he did not live according to Torm's tenets. Another (whose name I don't remember at that moment), although he died for duty, was relinquished by Torm to Kelemvor because he did not worship him. Torm was sorry, but the rule was rule. And since Tyr is Torm's superior and even more harsh than Torm when it comes to duty and justice, something like this was to be expected.


Quote
As I said, Edorem's actions while is not good, but they're not injustice. In real life you put a person in prison when he commits a crime, you don't punish someone for just not being a good citizen. If Tyr is a god of justice, then Edorem's death is UN-JUSTICE, if this is really a Tyr's judgment, then Tyr does not deserve to be called the god of justice.


       First, I want to remind you that there is much difference between today's justice and medieval justice. In Middle Ages, you could have been hanged for reasons which today would seem ridiculous.
       Second, offence to a member of the church or an ally of it (such as Charname) is punishable by prison or death, according to the gravity of the offence. You like it or not, that is the situation. In ancient Rome, for instance, any offence towards the maidens of Vesta was punishable by death.

Quote
Also, if he does not have mercy and sympathy on his servant, Tyr does not event deserve to be a leader  let alone a god. A general's job is not only about passing out order, but also to see the well being of his soldier, being a general does not give you the right to put people live at your whimp, even if they're under your command. Edorem is a chosen, he did not come to Tyr, Tyr CHOSE HIM. And for that, Tyr also has a certain responsibility to him, but Tyr chose to forshaken him.


       Tyr chose him, but Edorem failed him first. Why do you always forget this ? Yes, he has a responsibility towards his chosen, but he has a responsibility for his other paladins as well. If all will go on like nothing happened, then what the other paladins could understand from this ? That you can be lax in your duties and get away with it ? Tyr chose him, but as a Chosen you must put the interest of your god above anything else.


Quote
Relating to the case of Aribeth, one can say Tyr appear not only a narrow-minded but also a self-serving judge. He forfeited Aribeth just as he forfeited Edorem. Sure, we know it's Morag who produces those fake dream to make Aribeth think Tyr turns his back on her, but the question is, then WHERE IS THE REAL TYR? Where is him when his servant needs him the most, does it mean that when you serve Tyr you only have to serve him, and he won't care a **** about you? In Aribeth fallen, in my eyes here are the people must took responsibility, in an order of the most responsibility to the least responsibility:


      I have to make an observation : it's not only about serving a god. In AD&D, the god represent ideologies. One who serves Tyr, serves also justice.


Quote
Yes, Aribeth, to me, just has to take the "LEAST" responsibility in her own fallen. Adding up these story together, if you ask me, Tyr is not worth Worshiping.


HOTU is just one way to explain her ending, and I think it sucks, that expack is built more like a Hack&Slash to add more stuff to the tool set rather then the normal RPG Bioware is doing. I recommend the Aribeth's Rivival mod, it makes more sense. Everyone took responsible for her fallen, because it's everyone's fault. Nasher said he won't give into the mob, Arrand Gend take a huge responsibility because after all, he's the Spy Master, he's supposed to see all of this coming. It makes more sense and the conclusion is much more justifiable then HOTU. It's a short mode, but very well done.


      That does not change the facts that Aribeth betrayed her city and caused a lot of death. Following your reason, it means that, if someone puts a bomb in Empire State Building because his lover was executed by US justice, then the main responsibility is shared by the president (because he did not cancel the execution) US justice (for condemning him)and CIA (because it should have foreseen this).

Quote
Aribeth and Edorem are paladin "under Tyr's guidance", their fallen are also Tyr's fallen. Like in real life, if your soldiers fail to do your assigment, as their supperior you also have to take a part of the responsibility, I don't say the soldiers is not a fault, but it's a fault that you're supposed to share. A good commander will never blame everything on his soldiers to save his own ass and to maintain his "perfection".


       In Edorem's case, at least, I don't see how Tyr could be blamed for his failure. And if a sentry is caught sleeping, the one who goes to the Martial Court is the soldier, not the commander.

Quote
So Tyr just want people to serves him, and when they fail he throws them out and punish them, and take no responsibility? Heck, what kind of god is that!


     No. Tyr asks his servants to behave according to his tenets. For this, he will take them into his paradise and the most devoted of them could even be turned into celestials. But, if they don't, Tyr has no obligations towards them anymore. If Tyr does not mete out punishment to his servant for his transgression, the result can be chaos. Cyric can't wait to accuse him of threatening the balance. Also, since Tyr is the judge of the Gods, he must be very careful that he could not be accused of subjectivity. He may have a responsibility towards his faithfuls, but how would it sound when Cyric or Talos would suggest that Tyr ignores justice when it comes to his own servants ? They could even ask for Tyr to be judged by the Council of Greater Powers, and if the council concludes he ignores his duties and threatens balance, the result could be annihilation.

 
     BTW, here is Tyr's doghma :

Tyr appears as a noble warrior missing his right hand, lost to Kezef the Chaos Hound in proving his resilience and strength of spirit. Tyr's symbol shows his nature: justice through benevolent force and armed vigilance. He opposes all beings who deal in trickery, rule-breaking, and unjust destruction and misdeeds.

To denote his favor or the occurrence of important deeds or  decisions, Tyr frequently manifests as the echoing stroke of a gong, accompanied by an exultant wordless cord sung by unseen male voices. Tyr sometimes acts through extremely obedient, intelligent, large, and well-groomed war dogs that appear out of nowhere.

Tyrrans are sworn to uphold the law wherever they go, and to punish those wronged under the law. They are to keep complete records of their own rulings, deeds, and decisions. Through these records, a priest's errors can be corrected, his or her grasp of the laws of all lands can grow and flourish, and lawbreakers can be identified by others.

Reveal the truth, punish the guilty, right the wrong, and be always true and just in your actions. Tyrrans should always be vigilant in their observations and anticipations, seeking to see what forces and which beings intend or will cause injustices that threaten law and order in the future. They should act to prevent such challenges to justice in comming to pass. In short: Abide by the laws, and let no others break them. Mete out punishment where lawbreaking occours.


       

         BTW, I want to specify that I consider Edorem's ending extremely harsh and even cruel, but on the other hand I can understand why Tyr accepted that.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Mightysword on August 22, 2005, 08:55:02 AM
Irrelevant? That's why I said I don't care. A god is supposed to be benevolence and merciful. I already told you in the past that as a Judge, one must not only make sure the sentence is just, but also fair. Mercy and Rightiouse are 2 sides that the law MUST have. Searileth also shows the same opinion after the Kesava quest, about how can we human live if a god has no mercy, and justice without mercy can be even UNJUST.



You said about the Medival and today, while D&D is not exactly Medival, I can say that the excuse is wrong. Back in the days the Churchs has absolute power to manipulate things in Europe, they had the power, or at America during the Crucible hundreds of people were excuted because accusing witchcraft. Nowaday we don't see those anymore, does it mean the God himself change? NO. It's the people who abuse his status for their own right, a god in the 18 century is the god of the 21 century, he doesn't become more benevolent or less cruel, it's just the way people changed. God does not change, if Tyr sucks, then he always sucks regardless of the time.



Aribeth's fall caused many death, and as I said I never said it's not her fault, however, it's a fault that others are supposed to SHARE, Tyr included. She devoted to him, and where is him when she needs him the most? Aren Gend - Spy Master - how can he not see the Desther was a fake? As I said, I recommend you to try the Aribeth Revival I mod on nwnvault, it gives a more acceptable on Aribeth's case.



And you missed the point that they are under Tyr's guidance, when a student fails, it means 2 things, the student didn't study well and the teacher did a bad job. The responsibility is there to share. Tyr's business with other god and Cycric is "his" business, his servants are not responsible for that, as their master it's his responsibility to protect them. There is no justice in Edorem's death, not event a smallest potion, Tyr is blind more then just his eyes. And there is no justice if Aribeth dies, only vengeance, and justice is different then vengeance.



This piece maybe a good craft of writing, however I think it fails to illustrate the concept of a God, it favors too much on the dramatic sense while sacrify too much in the sense of logic. It is good writing but its meaning fails. If it's not that, then the only other explaination is Tyr does not deserve to be a god. And no, you can do away with the joke of "decending to godhood and such" because I'm judging a god. Remember, a good art critic is not neccessary an artist, a good football speaker does not neccessary a football player.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Feanor on August 22, 2005, 09:50:31 AM
And I say again : the gods of Forgotten Realms have flaws. Exactly like the greek gods. Personally, I was surprised at the fact that such gods could inspire so devotion as we see in Saerileth. The greeks worshipped the gods because they feared them or wanted some benefits from them, but none would have placed them above their family. Simply because there are other options as well. That's why Saerileth's statement "I would choose my god because he was my first love" is quite unbelievable. If there is a problem with Tyr, she could simply turn to Lathander, Helm, Mystra, Oghma or Chauntea, but she has only one Charname.

Quote
Irrelevant? That's why I said I don't care. I already told you in the past that as a Judge, one must not only make sure the sentence is just, but also fair. Mercy and Rightiouse are 2 sides that the law MUST have.


      I said "irrelevant", because, we like it or not, Tyr is this way. And many things are not fair. If Toril is fair, why the Zhentarim still exists ? Why the drow are not obliterated by the Seldarine ? Why Mystra allows even evil mages to access the weave ? There are many "why" which could be asked and, by comparison, Edorem's fate is quite insignificant. And, in the end, he brought this upon himself. Tyr after all gave him the strength to smite his opponents (turn undead) but if Edorem was so dumb to let himself tricked by a pretty face is his fault.

Quote
A god is supposed to be benevolence and merciful.


     Well, they aren't. Even crazy maniacs like Bane, Cyric, Lloth are gods.

Quote
And you missed the point that they are under Tyr's guidance, when a student fails, it means 2 things, the student didn't study well and the teacher did a bad job. The responsibility is there to share. , as their master it's his responsibility to protect them. There is no justice in Edorem's death, not event a smallest potion, Tyr is blind more then just his eyes. And there is no justice if Aribeth dies, only vengeance, and justice is different then vengeance.


     But, on the other hand, Tyr is not a baby-sitter. If Tyr would guide their every step, then where would lie their worth ? If by "guidance", you mean that Tyr should take them by their hand and direct every step of them, then I do not concur. Tyr grants them power, but is up to them what they do with them. If Tyr always tells them what to do, than where lies their own valor ? Why would they deserve to be taken by Tyr on Mount Celestia after death ?

Quote
Tyr's business with other god and Cycric is "his" business, his servants are not responsible for that


      No, it is. Because Tyr must apply the law to all : from Cyric to the last peasant from Faerun. He can't have preferences. If Tyr forgives Edorem, Cyric could tell him :
Cyric : "Is it forbidden for your servants to mistreat your mortal allies ?"
Tyr : "Yes".
Cyric : "Has Edorem done such a thing ?"
Tyr : "Yes."
Cyric : "Were there any consequences ?"
Tyr : "No."
Cyric : "And now you want to judge me, you whose own servants don't uphold your laws ? Fuck you !"
If there were no consequences for Edorem's actions, then the result would be dire : it means that every other paladins could do what Edorem did without any retribution.

Quote
There is no justice in Edorem's death, not event a smallest potion, Tyr is blind more then just his eyes.


     Tyr is the blind god. But, really, if he wants mercy, Edorem should damn Tyr and go to Ilmater instead. As God of Suffering, Ilmater would surely understand him.

Quote
And there is no justice if Aribeth dies, only vengeance, and justice is different then vengeance.


       I'm stunned. So, in your opinion, it's ok if person x gathers an army and nearly destroys an entire city because something bad happened to his lover ? So, what you say is Aribeth could tell the judge "please, it was not my fault, Tyr, Nasher, Aarin and people of Neverwinter are to blame ; I know I killed some thousands people and brought war on the Sword Coast, but it was not my fault, really."

Quote
There is no justice in Edorem's death, not event a smallest potion, Tyr is blind more then just his eyes


     I'll give you an example. In 339 BC, the roman consul Titus Manlius Torquatus has commanded his troops not to engage the enemy. There was one soldier who disobeyed : he answered the taunts of an enemy and killed him in single-handed combat. Torquatus ordered the soldier's execution : he was cruel, but the military discipline had been broken. And another detail : the soldier was Torquatus' son. It was fair ? No. It was merciful ? No. But was the military law broken ? Yes. The young man was executed on the spot.

Quote
This piece maybe a good craft of writing, however I think it fails to illustrate the concept of a God, it favors too much on the dramatic sense while sacrify too much in the sense of logic. It is good writing but its meaning fails. If it's not that, then the only other explaination is Tyr does not deserve to be a god. And no, you can do away with the joke of "decending to godhood and such" because I'm judging a god. Remember, a good art critic is not neccessary an artist, a good football speaker does not neccessary a football player.


       You seem to forget who are the gods in Faerun : Cyric the Prince of Lies, Talos the Destroyer, Bane the Tyrant, Lloth the Spider Queen, Beshaba the Maid of Misfortune, Umberlee the Bitch Queen and so on. Really, if you expect the gods of Forgotten Realms to be a kind of Jesus Christ, you are wrong. They are not this way.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Mightysword on August 22, 2005, 10:33:58 AM
Quote
      I'm stunned. So, in your opinion, it's ok if person x gathers an army and nearly destroys an entire city because something bad happened to his lover ? So, what you say is Aribeth could tell the judge "please, it was not my fault, Tyr, Nasher, Aarin and people of Neverwinter are to blame ; I know I killed some thousands people and brought war on the Sword Coast, but it was not my fault, really."



You should not be. Aribeth's path is just vengeance upon vengeance. Remember Fenthick was not a bad person, he's misguided. He believed in Desther because he thinks Desther is up for a better good. But in him, the people of Neverwinter see the mean of their vengeance, then in them, Aribeth sees the mean of their vengeance, so now the people will take vengeance upon her again? Tell be, in that painful circle, can you see who is really at fault and there is someone really is innocent? And did I ever said Aribeth is totally innocent of all charge? I did not didn't I? And I think it's a little bit sarcastic when you use the term babysitting, a commander must see to the good being and safety of his soldier, but that's responsibility of a leader, not babysitting.


And again (you keep missing this), the point is not to BLAME, but to SHARE the responsibility, it's wrong for people to blame EVERYTHING on Aribeth, neither she can BLAME everything on others. It's S-H-A-R-E. With sharing it will come understanding, from understanding it will come sympathy, from sympathy peace may come. While blaming will only continues the circle of vengeance, Neverwinter blamed Fenthick for their suffer to make Aribeth suffer, Aribeth blame Neverwinter for her suffer just to cause more suffer, so at the end, tell me, who is the one that can be benifit from that circle? And in that circle, point me out an element of justice, or there are only selfishness and vengeance?


Again, you can try the Aribeth Rivival mod, it exlpained the situation better then me. And yes, in that mod Aribeth did  have to stand a trail by the lords, the soldier and the people of NWN. YOu can see what I mean. Not only that, she has to learn to forgive herself.




Quote
      You seem to forget who are the gods in Faerun : Cyric the Prince of Lies, Talos the Destroyer, Bane the Tyrant, Lloth the Spider Queen, Beshaba the Maid of Misfortune, Umberlee the Bitch Queen and so on. Really, if you expect the gods of Forgotten Realms to be a kind of Jesus Christ, you are wrong. They are not this way.



No, that's just one way to give another excuse, I can remind you that beside Jesus, we also have Satan. There are always good and bad god. And we are talking about Tyr, one that is supposed to be a good god, so counter by the symbol of the bad god won't make sense.



To some decree, I prefer the Greek god Mythology. There are sense and logic among them. The Myth Gods act and think like a normal person, they just simply have power. They act on their own accord, to their own personality, in their action, there is wrong and there is right. They do it, they know it wrong, but they still do it, but they give no excuse to say they're right, it's just something they want to do, the Greek Gods have passion, and they admit they can be right or wrong. While in most religous, including the D&D universe, Gods is viewed as supreme entities, as perfection, to them, they can not never be wrong no matter how wrong it actually is, there will be always excuses for their action, they can never be wrong. HA! It's because of that very reason I call Tyr is just a selfserving jerk. To judge another one must know how to judge oneself first.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Lord Kain on August 22, 2005, 01:18:20 PM
Edorem is guilty of being a jerk to the PC, thats it. HE IS HUMAN after all. Really other then being a jerk what did he do wrong?
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Feanor on August 23, 2005, 07:54:41 AM
First, I have the impression we are speaking past each other. We started from the question "Why did tyr desert his chosen". And there are more possible explanations :
1. I agree with you that his fate was cruel and undeserved. But I prefer to look for another explanation for tyr's attitude than calling him a selfserving jerk. I consider that tyr felt there was need for a punishment in Edorem's case. In AD&D, tyr plays the role of the harsh and unforgiving judge. His ideas about justice don't imply fairness as well. His main principle is "the guilty must be punished". So, if tyr considered Edorem guilty of acting against the paladinic discipline, it can be easily explained why did he abandoned Edorem. He was sorry for him, but if he considered it was his duty to justice to punish Edorem, then I can easily imagine why he did it. And, as a side note, tyr is quite stiff-necked in such matters and he sees things in black and white. For instance, what if Tyr considered that forgiving Edorem completely would imply that he approves his deeds ?
      On the other hand, I want to add something : the gods of Forgotten Realms have power. They don't have freedom. Read that carefully, Mightysword. Examples : Oghma was forced to give Cyric access to his libraries to look for some old sorceries. He held no sympathy for Cyric and he would have prefer yric never to find what he looked for, but he had no choice, because knowledge must remain neutral. That is his nature.
      So, if Kesevar and Edorem are judged by tyr, what can they say in their defense ? Kesevar : "It is true that I spilled blood in the halls of judgement, but I had to protect an innocent life. There was no choice." Edorem : "It is true that I acted against the discipline of the paladins, but I was driven by jealousy". Which of the excuses holds credit ? While Tyr could give *sympathy* to Edorem, I don't think he would forgive him. It is against his nature.

2. Tyr is a self-serving jerk who does not deserve to be a god. (Still, in such a case, there are others who should be drive out of the pantheon first)

      You choose what explanation you prefer.

Quote
You should not be. Aribeth's path is just vengeance upon vengeance. Remember Fenthick was not a bad person, he's misguided. He believed in Desther because he thinks Desther is up for a better good. But in him, the people of Neverwinter see the mean of their vengeance, then in them, Aribeth sees the mean of their vengeance, so now the people will take vengeance upon her again? Tell be, in that painful circle, can you see who is really at fault and there is someone really is innocent? And did I ever said Aribeth is totally innocent of all charge? I did not didn't I? And I think it's a little bit sarcastic when you use the term babysitting, a commander must see to the good being and safety of his soldier, but that's responsibility of a leader, not babysitting.


And again (you keep missing this), the point is not to BLAME, but to SHARE the responsibility, it's wrong for people to blame EVERYTHING on Aribeth, neither she can BLAME everything on others. It's S-H-A-R-E. With sharing it will come understanding, from understanding it will come sympathy, from sympathy peace may come. While blaming will only continues the circle of vengeance, Neverwinter blamed Fenthick for their suffer to make Aribeth suffer, Aribeth blame Neverwinter for her suffer just to cause more suffer, so at the end, tell me, who is the one that can be benifit from that circle? And in that circle, point me out an element of justice, or there are only selfishness and vengeance?


      I don't miss this. But we are not discussing about moral responsibilities. It's about punishment. What I told you about Aribeth is not where blame goes, but why do you meet her in Hells and not on Mount Celestia, where she should have been.
      On the other hand, if we are discussing if her punishment was just or not, I want to call your attention upon the fact that such an argument (she shares the responsibility with others) will never be taken into consideration by any court, Tyr included. If she was practically pushed on this path of betrayal, I agree, but she still goes to the guillotine (or in Hells if she was killed in battle). Law does not has excuses in case of personal traumas. On the other hand, Tyr must always be just in his actions. If he forgives a criminal, then it means he is unjust towards those who died at the edge of Aribeth's blade. True that se was driven by vengeance, but I don't think she murdered only those responsible of Fenthick's death.
      On the other hand, don't imagine that Tyr will excuse the others. First of all, we do not know what was the law in Neverwinter. If Nasher acted against the law by executing Fenthick (and I think he did), he will have his own problems with Tyr.



Quote
While in most religous, including the D&D universe, Gods is viewed as supreme entities, as perfection, to them, they can not never be wrong no matter how wrong it actually is, there will be always excuses for their action, they can never be wrong. HA! It's because of that very reason I call Tyr is just a selfserving jerk. To judge another one must know how to judge oneself first


     No. In D&D universe, gods are not viewed at all as perfection. Not even the good ones. If you expect this from a  D&D god, you will be dissapointed. After all, in an universe where mortal can become gods (Bane, Bhaal, Myrkul, Azuth, Mystra, Kelemvor, Cyric, Torm, Shevarash), how could gods be perfect ?

      On the other hand, you should not think that Edorem's death is so cruel. After all, he would just return to Mount Celestia. More cruel is the fact that he had his heart crushed a second time, but to this Tyr could have done nothing.


Quote
Edorem is guilty of being a jerk to the PC, thats it. HE IS HUMAN after all. Really other then being a jerk what did he do wrong?


      See my example about Torquatus. Practically, his deed caused no harm. But because he acted against the military discipline he was executed without mercy. On the other hand, Edorem is a chosen of a god. Individual in such special station must submit to draconic rules. I emphasize this : DRACONIC RULES. For instance : any templar knight who flee from the enemy while the Beausant was flying or without permission of the Marshall was immediately expelled from the order. o this we can use your own words : they are humans, after all. True. But they were still kicked out of the order. For Tyr it matters not that Edorem was a jerk to the PC. It matters that he acted against the paladinic code and discipline. And also I outline this : you ask what he did wrong. Well, you ask this because you think as a person from 21-th century. In a medieval world, offences against honor are as serious as an attempt against someone's life.

       But one thing I remind you : this is Tyr's point of view, not mine. When I said what could happen to Edorem (before Sillara posted her story), I thought only of losing his chosen and paladin status.

      And one other matter :  A paladin by the name of Miltiades, was condemned by Tyr to exist as an undead knight for his resorting to dishonorable assassination tactics to kill his enemy, Zarl. Unlike the death knights mentioned above, though, Miltiades retained his sense of good, and fought by the sides of good heroes, helping to defeat the forces of Bane. He was eventually restored to life by Tyr, after helping the heroes destroy a pool of darkness and a pool of twilight.
      It did not mattered that Miltiades maybe had good reasons to hate Zarl. Maybe the man murdered his family (in fact, I don't know what Zarl did to upset Miltiades so much, but I am in the process of finding out). But what Zarl did was of little significance. For his deed, Miltiades was punished with undeath (much worse than Edorem). But because he find the strength to endure his fate (and how easy would have been for him to lay all the blame on Tyr and give into evil completely ! ), he was redeemed and rewarded.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Mightysword on August 23, 2005, 09:25:28 AM
Quote
. I agree with you that his fate was cruel and undeserved



There, you said it yourself. A sentence that is undeserved serves no justice. So what is the god of justice if he is injustice in his own judgment? No matter what he thinks, want, under whatever circumstances, justice must prevail. Sometime a sentence can be harsh, sometime a sentence can be mercy, but they're ok as long as the convict is derserved the sentence, thus justice is served. However, even if a sentence is not harsh, yet the convict is not deserved the sentence, then there is no justice. So what're you trying to defend, Edorem fails, but obviously Tyr also fails his duty.


Another point to bring up:


+ In Aribeth case, her fallen is complex. She suffer from the lost of her betro, she feels she's betrayed by the people she worked so hard for, she feels that her friends abandone her, and under foul magic she thinks her god turns his back on her. Her soul and heart are twisted, her fallen is understandable. The Aribeth who protected NWN and the Aribeth who attacked NWN to some decree, are 2 difference person.



+ Now look at Edorem's fallen. It's clear to us now that's it has been always his personality. He is not someone born with a trait suitable a paladin, left alone a Chosen. Why Tyr chose him? Edorem with his personality is destined to fail his paladinhood, the only question is how fast and which way, he's never meant to be a paladin. His fallen is a result of his superioty (Tyr) place a responsibility that he can not handle. His fallen is just a point in the middle of the path, trace it back to the source, what is the reason of his fallen. He falls because he is choses to be something he's not meant to be. This is Tyr's fault, he made a bad choice, and now punishing Edorem for whatever reason is just a way to blame his own mistake upon his chosen.



THink about this situation: a commander decide to send a marine on a commandos taks, and the marine fails. So, who should take most of the fault, the commander, or the marine? Will the commander have the gut to accept his mistake in choosing the wrong person for the wrong mission, or will he be so self-respect that he will let the marine takes all the responsibility and discipline in order for him to maintain his good image?



Edorem fails because he can not live up to his code, but remember there is also the matter of who choosing him for the task the beginning. But I guess a self serving god like Tyr will never have the gut to step up and accept his mistake, if Edorem fails, it's all Edorem's fault isn't it.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Dead_Ghost on August 23, 2005, 09:37:40 AM
Merely a question: why do you say that Edorem was never fit to be a Chosen? We know how he died, not how he was born or how he was educated. Just as a possibility, but, before SoA, Edorem could've been a true Paladin. Someone worthy of being Chosen. Then the matters of heart blinded him. So what? That can happen to anybody.
Unless I'm missing something, of course. :)
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Lord Kain on August 23, 2005, 11:20:45 AM
Quote from: "Dead_Ghost"
Merely a question: why do you say that Edorem was never fit to be a Chosen? We know how he died, not how he was born or how he was educated. Just as a possibility, but, before SoA, Edorem could've been a true Paladin. Someone worthy of being Chosen. Then the matters of heart blinded him. So what? That can happen to anybody.
Unless I'm missing something, of course. :)


Exactly a paladin is not required to like someone, he even apologizes to the PC for his harsh actions (and in the case of removing charisma enchanting items to find the PC is still charming) he apologizes for that.

You talk about how he should be fallen or no longer chosen after his actions. NOW tell me exactly give me the PRIME AND EXACT example of what he did.

He's guily of being a jerk and over jealous about protecting Saerileth once she makes it clear she loves the PC. HE LEAVES. He doesn't make a big fuss or a fight like Haer'Dalis.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Mightysword on August 23, 2005, 11:56:53 AM
Quote from: "Dead_Ghost"
Merely a question: why do you say that Edorem was never fit to be a Chosen? We know how he died, not how he was born or how he was educated. Just as a possibility, but, before SoA, Edorem could've been a true Paladin. Someone worthy of being Chosen. Then the matters of heart blinded him. So what? That can happen to anybody.
Unless I'm missing something, of course. :)


It's more or less directed at Feanor, since he will understand what I'm talking about, it's a matter of a 10 pages debate up to that point  :P


The point is the Edorem who became a Paladin and the Edorem who fails the code is one and the same. It didn't take much for Edorem to fail his Paladinhood. Unlike Aribeth who had undergo a series of hardship to be twisted into another person.


The quiality of the choice is pretty clear, Tyr picked a good choice for Searileth but a poor choice for Edorem. Because remember even though Searileth loves the PC with a passion, and a much stronger passion then Edorem can ever love her, she's still true to her code and her god, during SOA if you somehow offend Tyr or her belief, she kicks your ass goodbye. Edorem however, is too easy to be sway so it can be presumed it's his nature (and I can provide evidence that Edorem is pretty selfish in the matter, a trait that a Paladin is not supposed to have).

Now the question is, should Tyr step up and assume a potion of his responsibility in Edorem's fallen, or should he remain so self-respect.



Quote from: "Lord Kain"

Exactly a paladin is not required to like someone, he even apologizes to the PC for his harsh actions (and in the case of removing charisma enchanting items to find the PC is still charming) he apologizes for that.

You talk about how he should be fallen or no longer chosen after his actions. NOW tell me exactly give me the PRIME AND EXACT example of what he did.

He's guily of being a jerk and over jealous about protecting Saerileth once she makes it clear she loves the PC. HE LEAVES. He doesn't make a big fuss or a fight like Haer'Dalis.



Exactly, however from our discussion Feanor is basing his idea on Edorem as a whole, he's judging Edorem with 2 sitatuation combined together. There are 2 possibilities Edorem could act in SOA, he wouldl act as a honorable noble if you choose the Possitive answer, however, if you choose the negative answer then Edorem is really a heartless moron. For me I prefer to seperate 2 situations for 2 judgements, but Feanor prefer to judge it base on what you can say Edorem's nature.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Feanor on August 24, 2005, 03:18:38 AM
Quote
There, you said it yourself. A sentence that is undeserved serves no justice. So what is the god of justice if he is injustice in his own judgment? No matter what he thinks, want, under whatever circumstances, justice must prevail. Sometime a sentence can be harsh, sometime a sentence can be mercy, but they're ok as long as the convict is derserved the sentence, thus justice is served. However, even if a sentence is not harsh, yet the convict is not deserved the sentence, then there is no justice. So what're you trying to defend, Edorem fails, but obviously Tyr also fails his duty.


      I forgot to add something : is undeserved in my opinion. While I may not agree with Tyr's attitude, I prefer to seek for a more in-depth explanation than "Tyr is an idiot". While I consider harsh, Tyr may disagree and his opinion is the one who matters since he judges Edorem. For instance, in some arab countries, thieves have their hands cut : I consider that too harsh but that is their law and it is not up to me to decide.
      I don't think Tyr failed in his duty because his duty is not to promote mercy. Maybe you have this opinion about him because of Saerileth, but Saerileth is a little bit naive in regard to Tyr. Think of it this way : it was a test of Edorem's capabilities, like Tyr putting him in a ring against a balor and saying to him : prove your valor by slaying this fiend ; I gave you enough powers and I can do nothing more. But, instead of a test of courage, it was a test of wisdom : since he mistreated Charname because he was a Bhaalspawn, Tyr wanted to see if Edorem is capable to see the serpent hidden behind a flowering face. Well, he was not. And, if Tyr let Edorem die, that is not a big deal : greater powers can restore mortals to life anytime if they wish so. More cruel was Edorem's humiliation, but there was nothing Tyr could do about this.

Quote
+ In Aribeth case, her fallen is complex. She suffer from the lost of her betro, she feels she's betrayed by the people she worked so hard for, she feels that her friends abandone her, and under foul magic she thinks her god turns his back on her. Her soul and heart are twisted, her fallen is understandable. The Aribeth who protected NWN and the Aribeth who attacked NWN to some decree, are 2 difference person


      I agree. If you want to cry over her fate, I will. But she still goes to the gallows, together with lord Nasher (since he is guilty as well of applying justice wrongly).

Quote
+ Now look at Edorem's fallen. It's clear to us now that's it has been always his personality. He is not someone born with a trait suitable a paladin, left alone a Chosen. Why Tyr chose him? Edorem with his personality is destined to fail his paladinhood, the only question is how fast and which way, he's never meant to be a paladin. His fallen is a result of his superioty (Tyr) place a responsibility that he can not handle. His fallen is just a point in the middle of the path, trace it back to the source, what is the reason of his fallen. He falls because he is choses to be something he's not meant to be. This is Tyr's fault, he made a bad choice, and now punishing Edorem for whatever reason is just a way to blame his own mistake upon his chosen.


     Why would you think so ? Remember that Saerileth was chosen by Tyr when she was only 5, when her personality was not defined yet. If Edorem was picked also at young age, the situation would be the same. Second, people can change for worse or for better. The gods cannot foresee this. I already told you about Sammaster, who was a Chosen of Mystra, but, instead of taking a path similar to Elminster, he has fallen for evil and founded the Cult of the Dragon. Since Mystra, which is a goddess more powerful than Tyr, was incapable of preventing Sammaster's fall and the disaster which he caused, how Tyr could have done what you ask from him ? My answer was that Edorem maybe was indeed suited to be a chosen when he was picked (meaning that he behaved according to Tyr's tenets at that time), but he failed in the most tough trial of his life. Now, maybe he realized that, but Tyr felt it was his duty to justice to apply a punishment to Edorem. (Maybe Edorem is a kind of Anakin Skywalker  :D )


Quote
THink about this situation: a commander decide to send a marine on a commandos taks, and the marine fails. So, who should take most of the fault, the commander, or the marine? Will the commander have the gut to accept his mistake in choosing the wrong person for the wrong mission, or will he be so self-respect that he will let the marine takes all the responsibility and discipline in order for him to maintain his good image?


      You forgot to say one thing, which is very important : if the marine failed because his mission required him to disarm some bombs and he had no proper knowledge it about it, then it is the commander's fault. If the marine failed because instead of focusing on his mission he quarelled with a comrade, then it is the marine's fault.
      And I want to say something : the gods of Forgotten Realms can be duped. They don't know everything.

Quote
Edorem fails because he can not live up to his code, but remember there is also the matter of who choosing him for the task the beginning. But I guess a self serving god like Tyr will never have the gut to step up and accept his mistake, if Edorem fails, it's all Edorem's fault isn't it.


     In this case, I advise you not to speak your opinion about Tyr to Saerileth.  :D
     But I call Edorem's fate undeserved not because he died. After all, very few paladins die in their beds. If he had died heroicly, in Feanor or Fingolfin's style, I would not have had problems it. But his fate is cruel for 2 reasons :
1. He has his dreams crushed a second time.
2. He died like a fool, backstabbed by the woman he fell in love with.
     So, I ask you, what Tyr could have done ?
     Second, what was Tyr's mistake ? That he picked Edorem to be his chosen ?
     As I said, I dont't agree with what happened to Edorem, but on the other hand I was expecting Tyr to apply some punishment to him. Maybe that was the test : Tyr let Edorem to fare alone because he wanted to give him another chance to prove he is capable of being a chosen. Another test of heart, to say so. And Edorem failed again (this time by being simply dumb).

Quote
Exactly a paladin is not required to like someone, he even apologizes to the PC for his harsh actions (and in the case of removing charisma enchanting items to find the PC is still charming) he apologizes for that.

You talk about how he should be fallen or no longer chosen after his actions. NOW tell me exactly give me the PRIME AND EXACT example of what he did.

He's guily of being a jerk and over jealous about protecting Saerileth once she makes it clear she loves the PC. HE LEAVES. He doesn't make a big fuss or a fight like Haer'Dalis.


      Well, there is a problem here. It also depends on the course which he taken. In Sillara's story, we do not know how he behaved when he was rejected. Since the ending is so cruel, I assume the worst.
      But since you asked me the prime and exact example of what he did. There are some.

1. Look one of them : one of the main tenets of Tyr's faith is "always be true and just in your actions". Do you remember that Edorem himself says "I have accused you unjustly". And not even this is the main problem : what would piss off Tyr in this situation (and I guarantee you that he *will* be upset) is the fact that Edorem was driven in his accusation by jealousy. The fact that he apologized to Charname for this does not matter too much. Lathander would overlook this, but Tyr unlikely.

2. A paladin is not required to like someone, but he is required to treat every good person with respect. This is for all paladins. The law does not make exceptions in cases of personal enmities or love rivalries. Even more, a paladin who lays false accusation on or even simply offends a character who is carrying out a task for the paladin's god risks execution. For the next reasons : first, it is simply forbidden to mistreat an ally of your god, and second, it is considered that the paladin endangers a holy quest.

        And I also add what Tyr says about himself (very important if you want to understand his actions) :

"I am not the god of fairness. I am the God of Justice, and that is a very different thing." - Tyr (Crucible )


Quote
The quiality of the choice is pretty clear, Tyr picked a good choice for Searileth but a poor choice for Edorem. Because remember even though Searileth loves the PC with a passion, and a much stronger passion then Edorem can ever love her, she's still true to her code and her god, during SOA if you somehow offend Tyr or her belief, she kicks your ass goodbye. Edorem however, is too easy to be sway so it can be presumed it's his nature (and I can provide evidence that Edorem is pretty selfish in the matter, a trait that a Paladin is not supposed to have).


       Personally, I don't give so much credit to Tyr. Gods in Forgotten Realms can make mistakes, as they are not perfect. But if a chosen fails in his duties, then I think the fault belongs to him, not to the god. It is the chosen's heart and will who proved to be weak. In Sammaster's case - he is the perfect example of a fallen chosen - the guilt belongs to Sammaster, not to Mystra, and Lathander was just in destroying him. My opinion, at least.

Quote
It's more or less directed at Feanor, since he will understand what I'm talking about, it's a matter of a 10 pages debate up to that point  


The point is the Edorem who became a Paladin and the Edorem who fails the code is one and the same. It didn't take much for Edorem to fail his Paladinhood. Unlike Aribeth who had undergo a series of hardship to be twisted into another person.


    Yes, I know. But there is a difference : the noble Edorem and the selfish Edorem are the same because they appear at the same moment and in the same circumstances. I consider that the noble Edorem just did not have the opportunity to behave poorly. On the other hand, Edorem from the story seems to be different than the one from the mod and it is normal to be so, there are 200 years since then. Maybe Edorem who was picked by Tyr (10 or 100 years before, it does not matter) was indeed a good choice. Or maybe Tyr was ignorant to this part of Edorem. You get the idea : "you don't know if someone is valiant until he is sent to battle". On the other hand, I can't say if he was worthy or not when he was picked by Tyr simply because I don't have the data. If he was chosen 100 years ago, then in 100 years people can change a lot.


       BTW, I found out what was Zarl about :

Miltiades was a paladin of Tyr in a city called Turell (or something like Turell), and was so brave that other tyrians gave him a magical helm, th Holy shield of Tyr and a runic sword to fight evils.
Turell stood near Phlan, and Miltiades was stewart and guardian of the city.
Zarl was a warrior-mage who besieged the city for over a year; during the siege Miltiades fought bravely and seek a face-to-face with Zarl, who refused every time.
When the city was near to fall Miltiades seek to take Zarl with stealth in his camp, and in the battle Zarl was killed, but also Miltiades fall to his enemy's men.
After the death of Miltiades Turell was leveled by Zarl's men.
Zarl's spirit remained near Miltiade's tomb, and the paladin was turned into an undead knight for his deed.
Tyr raised the knight to fight Bane's power near Phlan, so he can be granted eternal peace.


         If you ask me, Miltiades fate was even more unfair than Edorem's. After all, Zarl was evil. But are paladins compelled to deny such tricks ? Are. Did Miltiades broke the paladin's code by this ? He did. Although Tyr had even more reasons to forgive Miltiades, the hammer of justice hit him without mercy.



        Also, something to say to MightySword : you remember that I said I don't ascend because I don't trust the power of Bhaal. I tell you why : because, if Charname ascends, he will assume Bhaal's former portofolio, murder, and become the patron of assassins. Also, as a god, Charname will have power, but he will have much less freedom in his choice than even a mere mortal. I strongly suspect that an ascended Charname will be compelled to act according to his portofolio and he will end corrupted. After all, why do you think all your good companions advise you to deny the taint ?
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Mightysword on August 24, 2005, 09:54:07 AM
Quote from: "Feanor"


     Why would you think so ? Remember that Saerileth was chosen by Tyr when she was only 5, when her personality was not defined yet. If Edorem was picked also at young age, the situation would be the same. Second, people can change for worse or for better. The gods cannot foresee this. I already told you about Sammaster, who was a Chosen of Mystra, but, instead of taking a path similar to Elminster, he has fallen for evil and founded the Cult of the Dragon. Since Mystra, which is a goddess more powerful than Tyr, was incapable of preventing Sammaster's fall and the disaster which he caused, how Tyr could have done what you ask from him ? My answer was that Edorem maybe was indeed suited to be a chosen when he was picked (meaning that he behaved according to Tyr's tenets at that time), but he failed in the most tough trial of his life. Now, maybe he realized that, but Tyr felt it was his duty to justice to apply a punishment to Edorem. (Maybe Edorem is a kind of Anakin Skywalker  :D )





Why would I think so? Because I think Tyr doesn't choose his chosen by random. He chooses someone for a station, and that station comes with responsibility, choosing someone underserve will endanger the effectiness of that station, of that person, and the people under the influence of that station. Like when choosing a guard, you have to choose a competent, if not, the guard himself will be at risk and the people or things that the guard is supposed to guard will also be at risk.


The main point is Edorem is soooo easily to be swayed in the matter, unlike Aribeth, or well, even Anakin, he fails so easily which clearly imply that he's not meant to be for that station. Aribeth and Anakin fails when they're twisted, when they no longer have "control", Edorem fails because simply he want to fail. So the final logic is: Tyr makes a bad choice, and he should assumb a potion of responsibility.

Quote


      You forgot to say one thing, which is very important : if the marine failed because his mission required him to disarm some bombs and he had no proper knowledge it about it, then it is the commander's fault. If the marine failed because instead of focusing on his mission he quarelled with a comrade, then it is the marine's fault.



I think the situation is an explanation enough. A marine and a Commandos level task. We know that not every mission can be classisfied as a Commandos task, does it really need another explanation?

Quote

      And I want to say something : the gods of Forgotten Realms can be duped. They don't know everything.




So? That means they can make mistake, however, will they accept that mistake? That's what counts. Saying they make a mistake doesn't help when they won't accept that mistake, what is the point if they always blame their mistake on their servant?






Quote

     In this case, I advise you not to speak your opinion about Tyr to Saerileth.  :D
     But I call Edorem's fate undeserved not because he died. After all, very few paladins die in their beds. If he had died heroicly, in Feanor or Fingolfin's style, I would not have had problems it. But his fate is cruel for 2 reasons :
1. He has his dreams crushed a second time.
2. He died like a fool, backstabbed by the woman he fell in love with.
     So, I ask you, what Tyr could have done ?
     Second, what was Tyr's mistake ? That he picked Edorem to be his chosen ?
     As I said, I dont't agree with what happened to Edorem, but on the other hand I was expecting Tyr to apply some punishment to him. Maybe that was the test : Tyr let Edorem to fare alone because he wanted to give him another chance to prove he is capable of being a chosen. Another test of heart, to say so. And Edorem failed again (this time by being simply dumb).




Does his action deserve death? Did he commit some kind of crime? Did he do something that deserve punishment? Tyr wants to punish him but for what, and even for a reason then what kind of punishment it should be. Fallen is not a crime, it's a failure, that's why fallen Paladin becomes a fighter, not executed. A test you say? A test that will kill the subject in the process. Uhmm ... tell me, is Tyr a god or a tyrant? I have seen the test of courage of many kind, however failure does not deserve death, if the subject is doom to failure usually the superior will try to bail him out, not letting him to rot!!



Quote

        Also, something to say to MightySword : you remember that I said I don't ascend because I don't trust the power of Bhaal. I tell you why : because, if Charname ascends, he will assume Bhaal's former portofolio, murder, and become the patron of assassins. Also, as a god, Charname will have power, but he will have much less freedom in his choice than even a mere mortal. I strongly suspect that an ascended Charname will be compelled to act according to his portofolio and he will end corrupted. After all, why do you think all your good companions advise you to deny the taint ?



All? Heh, the only one I can remember that advise you to stay away is Nalia, Keldon - no, Imoen - No, Anomen - No, Aerie - No. Plus what you suspect doesn't change the fact. In the Epilogue if you're a good character it clearly say that you use the power for goodness and strike fear into the heart of the evil across the realm. Power is merely a tool, there is no such thing as a portofolio, the more powerful the tool is the easier it can be corrupted, but that doesn't mean it MUST be corrupted, as long as one has the will to subdue it.


There is something that people usually assump, but there is always room for exeception. You're right to assume that Bhaal's power will lead to corrupted, but it can be difference, like everyone is right to presume that Drow is evil, however they are exception. At the end, it's the people who wield the tool, not the tool itself that decides the matter.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Lord Kain on August 24, 2005, 11:34:20 AM
bhaal's portfolio is death, not murder. Bhaal simply chose the murderious aspect of death
Death should not be confused with portfolio of The Dead.

Bhaals power is tainted because of bhaals actions not because it happends to be death. Death comes to all beings even gods.
Kelemvor took the portfoilo of the dead from cyric which had before come from Myrkul and he's not evil.

You can have a good god of death. A god who brings death to those who do evil. Or a god who protects people from premature death.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Undertaker on August 24, 2005, 12:01:02 PM
I have just read that chapter. :)  :thumbsup:
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Feanor on August 25, 2005, 08:26:34 AM
Quote
Why would I think so? Because I think Tyr doesn't choose his chosen by random. He chooses someone for a station, and that station comes with responsibility, choosing someone underserve will endanger the effectiness of that station, of that person, and the people under the influence of that station. Like when choosing a guard, you have to choose a competent, if not, the guard himself will be at risk and the people or things that the guard is supposed to guard will also be at risk.


        True, but : if that one failed not because of some technical disabilities, but because of himself, who is to blame ? What you said about choosing a guard is very true, but you should also define the term "competent". If the commander chose a guard whose skills with the sword were not enough to keep the enemy at bay, then the commander is to blame. But if the guard failed because a pretty girl persuaded him to give her the key of the prison, I don't think the commander is to blame.


Quote
So? That means they can make mistake, however, will they accept that mistake? That's what counts. Saying they make a mistake doesn't help when they won't accept that mistake, what is the point if they always blame their mistake on their servant?


        By mistake, you refer to the fact that Tyr chose poorly, to the fact that he did not support his paladins in need or to the fact that he punished or allowed them to be punished.
        And, in Aribeth's case, Tyr could have done nothing after her betrayal. If Aribeth was killed in battle or executed afterwards, she goes straight to hell simply because any dead person goes straight to that plane which befits his alignment. Aribeth became lawful evil, so when she died it was inevitable to end up in Baator and Tyr could have done nothing about it.
    And saying "they should accept their mistake", do you imply that Tyr should have stroke Kamen down (in Edorem's case) and obliterate Morag's army ? The statement is quite vague. What Tyr should have done ?

Quote
Does his action deserve death? Did he commit some kind of crime? Did he do something that deserve punishment? Tyr wants to punish him but for what, and even for a reason then what kind of punishment it should be. . A test you say? A test that will kill the subject in the process. Uhmm ... tell me, is Tyr a god or a tyrant? I have seen the test of courage of many kind, however failure does not deserve death, if the subject is doom to failure usually the superior will try to bail him out, not letting him to rot!!


     First of all, it was not Tyr the one who guided Arlluvia's blade. Tyr can be blamed for the fact that he did not interfered directly, but Edorem died first because of his own stupidity. And many times failure is indeed punished by death. Mightysword, I have the impression that you neglect the fact that US laws are not Tyr's laws as well. Maybe you did not consider his action deserved death. Neither do I, but Tyr has another opinion (and for this, you don't need to know too much about him, just to make a comparison between Miltiades and Edorem ; surely you did not expect that a god who punished so harshly a knight for violating his ethos - although, practically, he did nothing wrong - to completely overlook Edorem's deeds). And, BTW, to your examples about the guard and the marine I can reply with another one : during the cold war, a lot of soviet spies were discovered by the FBI. Every time the ones put to prison were the spies, not the ones who hired them. If I accept your reasoning, it would mean that a part of guilt falls on those who hired them, because they did not realize they can be bribed. That is what you say : that a part of the responsibility belongs to Tyr, because he did not realize Edorem acts upon his feelings, not upon his wisdom.


Quote
Fallen is not a crime, it's a failure, that's why fallen Paladin becomes a fighter, not executed


     You are in error. The law of Order of the Radiant Heart : "A member who violates his vow to the order, or commits an act heinous enough to cost him his paladinhood, is beheaded. Should the member flee, the order hunts him down." (quote from the paladin's handbook) If the paladin is affiliated to a lawful good organisation, then he will be harshly punished. A fallen paladin becames a fighter if he has no such affiliation.

Quote
In the Epilogue if you're a good character it clearly say that you use the power for goodness and strike fear into the heart of the evil across the realm. Power is merely a tool, there is no such thing as a portofolio, the more powerful the tool is the easier it can be corrupted, but that doesn't mean it MUST be corrupted, as long as one has the will to subdue it.


     I would hardly take BG's epilogues as good references... And why do you think I asked you once what do you know about Forgotten Realms universe ? Because the games are full of inconsistencies.

Quote
Power is merely a tool, there is no such thing as a portofolio, the more powerful the tool is the easier it can be corrupted, but that doesn't mean it MUST be corrupted, as long as one has the will to subdue it.


        What ??? "There is no such thing as a portofolio" ? Uhmm... Mightysword, you just blow up the entire ideology of the faiths of Forgotten Realms...

Quote
the more powerful the tool is the easier it can be corrupted, but that doesn't mean it MUST be corrupted, as long as one has the will to subdue it.



        There is no such will, Mightysword. Do you remember what I told you, that a god in Forgotten Realms is more limited in his choices ? Because a mortal can change for the better, a god cannot. A god views his duties only through the eyes of his domains. When a mortal ascends, it is not only a matter of an individual which is granted a lot of power, the mortal practically will merge with his portofolio (meaning that he will start acting according to their portofolio). It happens, and no strong will can prevent that. There is only one solution : to emphasize the positive aspects of your domain. Or this, or you end up like Bhaal. But the problem remains : with a portofolio like death, you cannot act always good. Death goes to good people as well as to evil ones. In the best case, you will end up neutral. Second, the duty of the gods is not to do good, but to promote the tenets of their domains. If, somehow, a god manages to ignore this (which is impossible, but let's suppose this), then that god risks to be annihilated by the Council of the Greater Powers. When Cyric was suspected to be lax in his duties of spreading strife and hatred (which, BTW, would have been a good thing), then he was very close to be obliterated and he was freed of charges only when the greater powers concluded that he remained as wicked as he always was.



       
Quote
At the end, it's the people who wield the tool, not the tool itself that decides the matter.


       It is far more than a tool. If you view godhood as a kind of mighty device to be wielded by someone as he wishes, then you are right. But it is not this way.

Quote
Bhaals power is tainted because of bhaals actions not because it happends to be death. Death comes to all beings even gods.
Kelemvor took the portfoilo of the dead from cyric which had before come from Myrkul and he's not evil.


        Well, there is a major difference between Kelemvor and Charname, which makes Charname's situation even more complex. Kelemvor's ascension to godhood is mainly Cyric's fault. Cyric wanted to find Kelemvor's soul and his endeavours made the inhabitants of the Realm of the Deads put their faith in him. When Kelemvor was freed from his imprisonment, he managed to overthrow Cyric and he ascended because of their faith (and they demanded from him justice and fair trials, being fed up with Cyric's tyranny). But Charname has the essence of Bhaal in him. When he won't be a mortal anymore, what will remain ? Also, when the news about a heir to Bhaal's throne spread, who shall become his worshippers ? If he starts to be worshipped by evil-doers, then this combination (dominion over death + evil worshippers + essence of Bhaal) is explosive.

Quote
Kelemvor took the portfoilo of the dead from cyric which had before come from Myrkul and he's not evil.


       He is lawful neutral, while in life he was good. He still had an alignment change. And you forgot one thing : while he cannot be labeled as evil, Kelemvor has dominion over the Wall of the Faithless. There, the faithless suffer worse any criminal, although many of them do not deserve such a fate. That despite of the fact that Kelemvor is not evil. For instance, if Charname had become Lord of the Dead, he would have had to pin Valygar's soul on the wall of the faithless, no matter how good the PC was.
      And, BTW, in Prince of Lies and Crucible, you can see how Mystra and Kelemvor are slowly stripped off of their humanity.

Quote
You can have a good god of death. A god who brings death to those who do evil. Or a god who protects people from premature death.


      You can't. First of all, if the PC becomes Lord of Death, then he cannot have such preferences for the same reasons why Mystra is not allowed to deny to evil spellcaster the use of magic, although her alignment is neutral good.


      BTW, we do not know what happened with Edorem after his death. Aribeth ended in Hells because, by turning into a blackguard, her alignment shifted to lawful evil and her soul could not have entered Mount Celestia. In Edorem's case, if he was still lawful good, then he was probably taken by Tyr into his heaven (there is still the problem if Edorem could be placed among the False, but I don't think so).
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Lord Kain on August 25, 2005, 01:57:40 PM
At anyrate taking bhaals divine essense doesn't mean he takes his portfolio. Infact the PC can created a hole new portfolio.

" Through friends and enemies, you have conquered your heritage, turning shadow to light, and now the infernal power of Bhaal no longer holds sway"

I guess you could call it redemption. For the PC is one who could fight againts his evil heritage. He could have a chuch dedicaded on the dogma to fight for good reguardless of your past or heritage.

The good PC could simply let Cyric keep the portfolio of death and find his own nitch among the powers.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Mightysword on August 25, 2005, 03:01:24 PM
Quote from: "Feanor"

        True, but : if that one failed not because of some technical disabilities, but because of himself, who is to blame ? What you said about choosing a guard is very true, but you should also define the term "competent". If the commander chose a guard whose skills with the sword were not enough to keep the enemy at bay, then the commander is to blame. But if the guard failed because a pretty girl persuaded him to give her the key of the prison, I don't think the commander is to blame.



Again, that's not the point, it's called twisting the situation. A commandos level task meaning a task that required special level of training, and knowlege (sabotage, epionage, inflitrate ...etc...), in short, is complex. One can NOT expect a marine with regular training to actual complete those job. I really don't understand all your reasoning with the pretty girl ...etc... they are not fix, it's just like trying twisting the situation into a very "un-normal" cirscumstance to favor one side of an argument. When taking into a fact for debating it is supposed to be a neutral case.



Quote

        By mistake, you refer to the fact that Tyr chose poorly, to the fact that he did not support his paladins in need or to the fact that he punished or allowed them to be punished.
        And, in Aribeth's case, Tyr could have done nothing after her betrayal. If Aribeth was killed in battle or executed afterwards, she goes straight to hell simply because any dead person goes straight to that plane which befits his alignment. Aribeth became lawful evil, so when she died it was inevitable to end up in Baator and Tyr could have done nothing about it.
    And saying "they should accept their mistake", do you imply that Tyr should have stroke Kamen down (in Edorem's case) and obliterate Morag's army ? The statement is quite vague. What Tyr should have done ?





I never said Tyr made a poor choice about Aribeth. I said he should have done something at the moment she needs him the most, but I never said Aribeth was a "poor choice". Edorem, however, was. I already said there are 2 Ariebth, the one who protect and the one who destroy NW. Her fallen is a result of a twisted process. Tyr could have done something to prevent it, but it's not his fault not forseen such a thing, in Edorem case, there is only one Edorem, and Tyr was supposed to pick a more approriate choice for his chosen. Aribeth's fallen is unpredictable, Edorem's fallen is inevitable.



Quote

     First of all, it was not Tyr the one who guided Arlluvia's blade. Tyr can be blamed for the fact that he did not interfered directly, but Edorem died first because of his own stupidity. And many times failure is indeed punished by death. Mightysword, I have the impression that you neglect the fact that US laws are not Tyr's laws as well. Maybe you did not consider his action deserved death. Neither do I, but Tyr has another opinion (and for this, you don't need to know too much about him, just to make a comparison between Miltiades and Edorem ; surely you did not expect that a god who punished so harshly a knight for violating his ethos - although, practically, he did nothing wrong - to completely overlook Edorem's deeds). And, BTW, to your examples about the guard and the marine I can reply with another one : during the cold war, a lot of soviet spies were discovered by the FBI. Every time the ones put to prison were the spies, not the ones who hired them. If I accept your reasoning, it would mean that a part of guilt falls on those who hired them, because they did not realize they can be bribed. That is what you say : that a part of the responsibility belongs to Tyr, because he did not realize Edorem acts upon his feelings, not upon his wisdom.



haha my friends, you're quite mistaking in your example about FBI and Soviet. The fact is the responsiblity indeed rests on the shoulders of the Soviet's leaders. There are more then just meet the eyes. The fact that so many Russian's agents failed to the bribe because they failed to support their agents. The Russian army have been always in a crisis, soldiers don't get paid, officers can not make a living with their salary. The fact is that not even the agents become double agent, a LOT of KGB's top secret information (KGB is the Soviet's equivalent to US's CIA) were also "sold" to America by Russians spies, officiers selling their medal to earn some money, high rank general selling weapon to the black market, that's the whole picture my friend.

 In this case it's not matter of a poor choice on the agents, but it's more like you're sending your soldiers into battle without any logistic support. A good or a bad soldier doesn't really a matter if they're sent into the field un-equiped, it is nature for them to fail.


Tyr picked someone who doesn't have a will to begin with, in the case of the Soviet's agent, it doesn't matter they pick someone with a will or not, because simply they don't provide a mean.



Quote

     You are in error. The law of Order of the Radiant Heart : "A member who violates his vow to the order, or commits an act heinous enough to cost him his paladinhood, is beheaded. Should the member flee, the order hunts him down." (quote from the paladin's handbook) If the paladin is affiliated to a lawful good organisation, then he will be harshly punished. A fallen paladin becames a fighter if he has no such affiliation.


That's the code of the Order of the Radiant Heart, they're an organization. Tyr is not. Even more then that, Edorem is a chosen, and Tyr is a god of justice.




Quote

     I would hardly take BG's epilogues as good references... And why do you think I asked you once what do you know about Forgotten Realms universe ? Because the games are full of inconsistencies.


And yet it was one of the most successful D&D game, are you saying your own idea will hold more value?


Quote

        What ??? "There is no such thing as a portofolio" ? Uhmm... Mightysword, you just blow up the entire ideology of the faiths of Forgotten Realms...


No, you take it as a wrong way. The portofolio means that the PC can not become a godness of love, or life, he will always be a god of death. However, there is no such thing to "dictate" how he should use that power. Death does not mean evil, death does not mean bad if it comes at the right time and the right situation. There is no such thing that forces the PC will have to go and kill everyone. Bhaal was an evil god, he did it because he wanted and he has the desire to kill, his power only makes he do it easier.



Quote

        There is no such will, Mightysword. Do you remember what I told you, that a god in Forgotten Realms is more limited in his choices ? Because a mortal can change for the better, a god cannot. A god views his duties only through the eyes of his domains. When a mortal ascends, it is not only a matter of an individual which is granted a lot of power, the mortal practically will merge with his portofolio (meaning that he will start acting according to their portofolio). It happens, and no strong will can prevent that. There is only one solution : to emphasize the positive aspects of your domain. Or this, or you end up like Bhaal. But the problem remains : with a portofolio like death, you cannot act always good. Death goes to good people as well as to evil ones. In the best case, you will end up neutral. Second, the duty of the gods is not to do good, but to promote the tenets of their domains. If, somehow, a god manages to ignore this (which is impossible, but let's suppose this), then that god risks to be annihilated by the Council of the Greater Powers. When Cyric was suspected to be lax in his duties of spreading strife and hatred (which, BTW, would have been a good thing), then he was very close to be obliterated and he was freed of charges only when the greater powers concluded that he remained as wicked as he always was.



See above.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Feanor on August 26, 2005, 05:48:18 AM
Quote
Again, that's not the point, it's called twisting the situation. A commandos level task meaning a task that required special level of training, and knowlege (sabotage, epionage, inflitrate ...etc...), in short, is complex. One can NOT expect a marine with regular training to actual complete those job. I really don't understand all your reasoning with the pretty girl ...etc... they are not fix, it's just like trying twisting the situation into a very "un-normal" cirscumstance to favor one side of an argument. When taking into a fact for debating it is supposed to be a neutral case.


      My point was : it was not a physical inability which led Edorem on this path. It was his incapacity to keep his emotions at bay and this is not the responsibility of Tyr. As a man, he is allowed his feelings, but as a chosen he must act on his wisdom. Too many times he lets his emotions cloud his judgement and that is why I said that Tyr should have dismissed him.

Quote
I never said Tyr made a poor choice about Aribeth. I said he should have done something at the moment she needs him the most, but I never said Aribeth was a "poor choice". Edorem, however, was. I already said there are 2 Ariebth, the one who protect and the one who destroy NW. Her fallen is a result of a twisted process. Tyr could have done something to prevent it, but it's not his fault not forseen such a thing


       But, as I understand, you said that Tyr is self-serving because he allowed Aribeth to be punished. *Before* her betrayal I perfectly agree with you that Tyr could have tried to guide Aribeth out of her misery. Well, for some reason (he could not or he did not want to, we do not know), he did not do it. But, AFTER the betrayal, there was no way Tyr could have forgiven her. As I said, her alignment was lawful evil and every lawful evil person goes to Baator. This is a law above the will of the gods. There are 2 parts in our debate : before and after the betrayal. I had the impression that you suggested (if I am wrong, please correct me) Aribeth could have been forgiven of her punishment in Hells. Which could not have happened.

Quote
haha my friends, you're quite mistaking in your example about FBI and Soviet. The fact is the responsiblity indeed rests on the shoulders of the Soviet's leaders. There are more then just meet the eyes. The fact that so many Russian's agents failed to the bribe because they failed to support their agents. The Russian army have been always in a crisis, soldiers don't get paid, officers can not make a living with their salary. The fact is that not even the agents become double agent, a LOT of KGB's top secret information (KGB is the Soviet's equivalent to US's CIA) were also "sold" to America by Russians spies, officiers selling their medal to earn some money, high rank general selling weapon to the black market, that's the whole picture my friend.


    I am quite a loss what you say, so I use an example to be more clear : Kim Philby was one of the most famous agents of KGB, infiltrated in the Intelligence Service, who defected in USSR in 1963. My point is : is Philby had not managed to flee and he had been sent to jail, then the only one responsible for his fate is himself, not the boss of Intelligence Service. The same in the case of any paladin : if the paladin falls, then he is the one responsible for the punishment which will be delivered on him, not his deity. The fact that the god did not help him does not represent an excuse.

Quote
That's the code of the Order of the Radiant Heart, they're an organization. Tyr is not. Even more then that, Edorem is a chosen, and Tyr is a god of justice.


       We started from your statement "a fallen paladin is not executed, he just becomes a fighter". You were not refering to Edorem.  :P  And, if you do refer to him, I remind you that he is a member of the Church of Tyr.

Quote
And yet it was one of the most successful D&D game, are you saying your own idea will hold more value?


     It's not my own idea, is knowledge.  :P  But I will give you some samples why I generally prefer to consult a second source before accepting something from BG2. Often Bioware has great problems with logic :
- after you kill Yaga-shura, Charname's mother tells him of his birth. She says "In the Time of Troubles my lord of murder came and whisper into my ear that I was to carry one of the children..." But BG1 says the PC is 20 years old in 1368 DR and Time of Troubles occured in 1358 DR, when the PC was already 10 years old, according to Bioware's own statement. Bioware shot himself in the leg ;
- in BG1, Gorion tells you that Bhaal forced himself upon the PC's mother. In ToB, we found out that she accepted her fate willingly.
- The game implies that Bhaal has used an avatar to conceive the PC. In such a case, none of the races you can play in the game would not have been available. The PC would have been a kind of tiefling.
- The cowled wizards are not the one who enforce the laws against magic in Athkatla. In fact, they are an illegal organisation who favor the use of magic. Also, it makes no sense why the Cowled Wizards can detect the use of magic only on the streets of the city.
- Bhaal did not have his realm in the Abyss, but in Gehenna.

      Just some samples.


Quote
No, you take it as a wrong way. The portofolio means that the PC can not become a godness of love, or life, he will always be a god of death. However, there is no such thing to "dictate" how he should use that power. Death does not mean evil, death does not mean bad if it comes at the right time and the right situation. There is no such thing that forces the PC will have to go and kill everyone. Bhaal was an evil god, he did it because he wanted and he has the desire to kill, his power only makes he do it easier.


      First, can I know on what do you rely your claim ? Because I have the impression you see godhood as you prefer it to be. My sources are the Avatar's Series, Faith&Avatars and Powers&Pantheons.
       What you miss is that the portofolio has a strong influence upon the god's mindset. I started a discussion about gods' freedom of choice at Candlekeep as well. I quote some opinions :




"If we go by the personality/psychological descriptioons of the gods form the post-Avatar series books (Prince of Lies and Crucible), I would have to say that it is impossible for a deity to go against their own protfolio. As an example, I will cite Mystra's revelation of 'looking through her fellow deities' eyes'. As is seen in this scene, each god percieves the world around them in a light that reflects their own portfolio. Mystra saw the meeting of deities as a spell lab, while Tyr views it as a courtroom, etc.

This demonstrates a decidedly single-minded view of the cosmos. Remember, while some of these deities were once mortal, they are no longer so. They are the embodiments of the portfolio they hold sway over. This goes a long way to explaining why a good deity like Lathander would try to destroy the world leading to the Dawn Cataclysm. It was what he is. You could even say that once the idea was presented to him, whether by another deity or from his own imaginings, he had no choice but to act on it, feeling that this was what he had to do to continue filling his role. This is why Ao did not destroy him for his actions, and why Torm was resored to life after his destruction in the Avatar Trilogy - Ao will not punish a deity for doing their job, regardless of the effects it has.

So, in the examples given, Torm would be incapable of lying. He cannot even conceive of telling a lie, it's just not there for him. A blind-spot, if you will. This is not to say that he cannot conceive of others telling lies. He fully expects some to do so, like Cyric.

Cyric cannot behave honorably, unless it is to some dastardly end. A truly altruistic motive is just as beyond him as a lie is to Torm.

Tyr cannot be unjust. He can only see others being unjust, to which he must respond by bringing justice, just as you or I feel the need to draw a breath once the last one was expelled. It's cause and effect.

Tempus cannot promote peace. If peace is a result of battle, it means nothing to him. He sees the battle, and when it ends he goes on to the next battle. Repurcussions of the battles mean nothing to him, unless it leads to more battle."





"Each portfolio is most likely slowly but surely altering the individual that owns it. How quickly this happens depends upon the will power of the individual, but I would imagine that a paladin who gained the portfolio of murder would slowly, but surely decay into becoming a black guard. "





 "I think it depends on how long the god has been a god, and if they were ever mortal in the first place. I think the longer they have their portfolio, the more it is "part" of them. Dispite this, I think the actions of other gods and even the influence of powerful situations or relics might be able to snap them out of their thinking long enough for them to do some things that are "out of character." Heck, several of them did things that were out of character during the Time of Troubles."





"I'd say they can, but it would be exceedingly unlikely. It may go against Torm's nature to tell a lie, for example, but that doesn't mean he's incapable of doing so. Of course, it might be damaging to his portfolio to do so..."





"We saw it in the avatar trilogy where Midnight where given the form of Mystra and the following portfolios and in the following books centered on Cyric. The trial against cyric also dealed with the question of whether Midnight/Mystra and Kelemvor acted against their divine duties. They confessed to that and showed that a god has the ability to do so... But as well as all of us are capable of murder and other horrible crimes it is as far from the nature of most of us as anything can be... I think that it is even more unlikely that a gods would act against their divine obligations. But they are capable of doing so...

I also think, as mentioned above that it becomes more dificult for a god to do so the longer they hold their place in the pantheon... They duties becomes a bigger part of them the longer they are deities. They rise to the occation..."




      As you can see, only recently ascended deities can act against his tenets and not for long. And assuming godhood is not a 10-years job, is for eternity. Much longer you are a god, the more you merge with your ideology. The difference can be seen in a comparison Mystra-Torm. Both are formal mortals, but Mystra is a goddess only for 10 years while Torm has already more than 1500 years. The result is that Torm is dominated completely by his portofolio, Mystra tries to retain something of her former mortal conscience. And she fails in the end.



        And, in regard to Edorem's fate :
"if he shows mercy to the paladin, who is suppose to be upholding justice, how much mercy is he showing the innocent. I don't even think this is stiff neck, but just being lawful good. Punishment doesn't mean death or dismemberment either, but the paladin should definately loose his powers. "

"I think Tyr would strip the paladin of his special abilities until he had atoned for his actions"




Quote
At anyrate taking bhaals divine essense doesn't mean he takes his portfolio. Infact the PC can created a hole new portfolio.

" Through friends and enemies, you have conquered your heritage, turning shadow to light, and now the infernal power of Bhaal no longer holds sway"

I guess you could call it redemption. For the PC is one who could fight againts his evil heritage. He could have a chuch dedicaded on the dogma to fight for good reguardless of your past or heritage.

The good PC could simply let Cyric keep the portfolio of death and find his own nitch among the powers.


      Gods can't create their own portofolios. It would result into chaos. All the ascended mortals (Bhaal, Bane, Myrkul, Mystra, Midnight, Cyric, Kelemvor, Azuth) took already existant portofolios. Charname could avoid taking death only if a good power agrees to sponsor him and relinquish to him a part of his domains. Unfortunately, Charname does not have such sponsorship. I think only Ao could create new portofolios, but I'm not very sure of this.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: nethrin on August 26, 2005, 05:56:20 AM
who's reading this debate besides the two guys engaging in it?
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Undertaker on August 26, 2005, 06:00:27 AM
Quote from: "nethrin"
who's reading this debate besides the two guys engaging in it?



I do :P
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Feanor on August 26, 2005, 06:07:50 AM
But, in regard to what you said, that death is not only evil, there is a problem. A portofolio like death is both positive and negative. There is death is deliverance from suffering, death as punishment, death as a part of a natural cycle, but also violent death, death as murder, ritual death, death as a slaughter. The problem is : Charname would be the only god of death in the Realms so he has to promote both aspects. And it is far more easy to emphasize the negative aspect of such a domain. Suffering can be also viewed as a bad portofolio. But Ilmater is the god of suffering and he is not evil because there already is Loviatar, who takes care of the negative side of suffering.
      But let's suppose Charname becomes a good god. Torm is considered one of the most lawful and good gods of the Realms. How he behaved in an interesting situation (this is to enlight MightySword why I said gods are dominated by their portofolios). Gwydion, a worshipper of Torm, is tricked by Cyric into a suicidal attack against a giant. He dies for Torm and goes to the Realm of the Deads, where Cyric wants to place him among the false. Torm steps in and he offers to take Gwydion into his realm, on Mount Celestia. Cyric asks him to prove that he could shelter Gwydion. At that moment, Torm demands from Gwydion to read the words inscribed on his gauntlets (the words for duty and loyalty in every language, which every follower of Torm must be able to read for gaining access into Torm's paradise). Since Gwydion did not live according to Torm's tenets, he was not capable to read the words and Torm could not take him into his realm, abandoning him into Cyric's grasp. That despite of the fact Torm is lawful good and Gwydion died in Torm's name.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Dead_Ghost on August 26, 2005, 06:10:59 AM
Quote from: "nethrin"
who's reading this debate besides the two guys engaging in it?

I'm reading it too, learning a bit more about the human mind. :D
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Lord Kain on August 26, 2005, 06:21:16 AM
Quote from: "Feanor"
[
      Gods can't create their own portofolios. It would result into chaos. All the ascended mortals (Bhaal, Bane, Myrkul, Mystra, Midnight, Cyric, Kelemvor, Azuth) took already existant portofolios. Charname could avoid taking death only if a good power agrees to sponsor him and relinquish to him a part of his domains. Unfortunately, Charname does not have such sponsorship. I think only Ao could create new portofolios, but I'm not very sure of this.


He has The Solar at his side. An as i've come to understand it that Solar is of great cosmic importance.
The portfolios are nitchs the gods carve out for themselves. Its there tool for worshipers, power
Ao wanted the hole bhaalspawn saga to play out with out the gods geting involved. I'd like to think the scope was beyond weakening Cyric.

If the PC finds a nitch that hasn't been occupied I don't see why Ao would stop the PC.
Bhaal's essense is taken care of, and this new deity doesn't infringe directly upon any of the older deities portfolios. The balance among the powers isn't upset.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Feanor on August 26, 2005, 06:46:38 AM
Quote from: "Lord Kain"


He has The Solar at his side. An as i've come to understand it that Solar is of great cosmic importance.
The portfolios are nitchs the gods carve out for themselves. Its there tool for worshipers, power
Ao wanted the hole bhaalspawn saga to play out with out the gods geting involved. I'd like to think the scope was beyond weakening Cyric.

If the PC finds a nitch that hasn't been occupied I don't see why Ao would stop the PC.
Bhaal's essense is taken care of, and this new deity doesn't infringe directly upon any of the older deities portfolios. The balance among the powers isn't upset.


       I asked this question at candlekeep as well. Answers received :


"A mortal rising to godhood, yes, this happened before with examples such as Midnight, Cyric and Kelemvor and Finder. But it is unheard of that they can create their own portfolios, for I doubt Ao would allow that to happen. So far, mortals that rise to godhood normally assume the portfolios held by their predecessors anyway such as example, Midnight assuming Mystra portfolio of magic and Cyric assuming the portfolio of the dead Lord of Murder.


"If was allowed to mortals create their own portfolios when they ascend to divinity, so Ao will have to permit that the formal gods create his own portfolios, too, and it will became a whole mess. And the god, generally, is the embodiment of his porftolio, so I think dificult to one god "create" a new portfolio to himself..."

"As former mortals, Mystra, Kelemvor, and Cyric probably retain some of their free-will. But as time passes they would begin to lose this."


"True, but maybe accelerated for Mystra(Midnight) if she manages to defeat Shar and assume control of the Shadow Weave, she may lose whatever last vestiges of her own "mortal" parts instantly."


      So, the option of the PC creating his own portofolio is excluded from the start. Also, the PC to find a niche that has not been occupied is very unlikely. Because a domain attracts worshippers and that means more power. The gods are in a continuous pursuit for more power. If a domain is free for the taking, a lot of gods would seize the opportunity at that moment and try to take it. Heck, they even try to steal their own portofolios from each other, so a domain would have a lot of claimers in the very moment it becomes free. If the PC takes a good portofolio, then it means it will take some of the power and worshippers of the god which first owned that domain. Which would piss him off a lot. Also, gods can't take a domain which they don't have a claim on : by claim, I mean they either killed or defeated the previous owner, other they were granted that domain freely by the owner or are somehow related to that god. Xvim got tyranny as son of Bane, Kelemvor defeated Cyric in battle, Cyric killed Bhaal and Myrkul and so on. The PC can't simply go to Torm and say : "Hey, give loyalty to me."
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Lord Kain on August 26, 2005, 07:28:06 AM
"And the god, generally, is the embodiment of his portfolio"

Right there is a line I can use. The good bhaal spawn PC IS the embodiment of the portfolio of redemption. He was the spawn of bhaal one of the most evil deities ever to grace the realms. Dispite having more taint then any of his siblings he defeated the evil with in and rose to become a being of good.

A good PC is the embodiment of the portfolio of redemption. Even more so if they converted Sarevok to Chaotic Good. So in the PC's case redemption would be created at his/her birth of divinity.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Mightysword on August 26, 2005, 09:26:09 AM
Since it's too long too quote:

-----> About the marine:

- What I meant is that you're using un-normal condition that unlikely to be taken into account to "twisted" the argument into one side of favor. This is a situation that is a lot like when the PC with Jaheira is taken to the Harper's HQ in BGII. It's as simple as ability level, a Commando has a difficult level of 10 while the Marine only has a level 5 training, which is insufficient for the task. Under normal circumstance the Marine is bounded to failure.

- It's a matter of logic comparision, in order to determine a situation it's presumely they have a same base of effort. That means the Commando did his best and the Marine did his best, the Marine just doesn't have enough knowledge. It's like when you compare a Mig-29 and a F-15, in order to say which one is better in a real combat situation, it's automatically presumely they will have 2 pilots of the same caliber, at the same state of mind and will output the same level of performance. And I think this is supposed to be obvious. Of course, you don't ask some question like "Is one of the pilot drunk?" or "Is one of them bored at flying?"


-------> About the example:

- A fact is a fact. Double agent and side turning is not a new business. It happenned, since there is nothing as absolute. However, on the high level of the station, the chance of failure or betrayal must be reduced to minimum. However, back in the cold war due to the crisis this kind of things happen TOO often to be acceptable. Spies becomes double agents are too many.

- About Edorem's choice, I don't say a chosen is not someone who can not fail. However, they should have some ability to withstand challenger (since I think during our PM conversation you always say Chosen and Paladin are supposed to be exceptional individual), Edorem should only fail under extreme circumstance. No, he fails so easily, as you already put it, he fails like an idiot. This makes one doubts Tyr's wisdom about his choice. Again, the problem is not because Edorem fails, but because he fails like an idiot.



-----> about Aribeth:

- Uhm .... I think I answered your question whether "Tyr made a bad choice about Aribeth". And the answer is no. That's all, and I explained it. Aribeth's fallen is not Tyr's fault in the matter of choice, the Aribeth who fails him is not the Aribeth he chose. However, the Edorem who fails him IS the Edorem he chose.



-----> about the Porfolito:


- your example about Tomb is not really an example about Porfolio IMO. It's more like the limited of the "station". A station comes with 2 things, it gives one power, but it also limited one's action.

- Your example about Tomb is more like the Keseva's case. If Ganshuin denied the truth or you can not find him for example. Keseva will be found guilty and punished, no matter his reason is.

- Or in real life, we know that the court not always pass the right judgement, and sometime the one have money can buy their way out. This leading to sometime a person take the matter into their own hand. They may executed the convict in the name of juctice, and justice that was blinded by money, however, they step out of their station, it doesn't matter of what motive, they are punished.

- Or you can think like a King, his position gives him power, but it also put certain restriction on the King's action.

- The example is more like a stalemate IMO.
 
- To me, all of the gods in D&D serves their station because they desire the nature of the station. Bhaal desires to kill, Tyr desires justice ...etc... I never see a God in D&D who had an opposite nature to the nature of his station. Say, like a Bhaal who does not want to kill but have to do the killing. If a lawful Good Paladin takes the Bhaal's power, there will be a contradiction. The father of all gods makes sure each god does not step out of his station and invade area that are not under their juridiction, that's as far as a Porfolio goes. AKA the power of Bhaal can not be used like that of a god of life. However, I doubt that the porfolio define the dark or light side of the power, that's up to the god of the station. Remember the Solar said that : she is only here to prepare you for Aluando's prophecy, how this prophecy will exactly turn out are even unknow to the god.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Feanor on August 27, 2005, 03:13:22 AM
Quote from: "Lord Kain"
"And the god, generally, is the embodiment of his portfolio"

Right there is a line I can use. The good bhaal spawn PC IS the embodiment of the portfolio of redemption. He was the spawn of bhaal one of the most evil deities ever to grace the realms. Dispite having more taint then any of his siblings he defeated the evil with in and rose to become a being of good.

A good PC is the embodiment of the portfolio of redemption. Even more so if they converted Sarevok to Chaotic Good. So in the PC's case redemption would be created at his/her birth of divinity.



       Smart one, Lord Kain.  :D If PC is granted the portofolio of redemption, that is very correct. But only IF. If Charname becomes god of redemption, then he will be a good god. But for this to happen, you need a divine sponsor. When a mortal ascends and has no claim over any portofolio, he needs a divine sponsor (a greater power) who may have developed a suitable role for the new godling and he will give to his pupil an aspect of his portofolio. Examples :
- Azuth who is the god of mages was sponsored by Mystra ;
- Red Knight by Tempus ;
- Velsharoon by Talos and Azuth ;
- Torm by Tyr.
      When you ascend, there are only the next solution : either you are sponsored by your deity, which gives you an aspect of his portofolio ; either you take the portofolio of a god who was defeated/killed by you or who has relinquished to you his portofolio (under threat or because he was tricked to do so).
      A god cannot simply take what portofolio wishes or create a new one : if it had been possible, then why Bane, Bhaal and Myrkul took the great risk of going against Jergal, who was a greater power at the time and he could have obliterated them in a blink. Also, Xvim, when he ascended, took a part of Cyric's portofolios. Cyric himself had to kill Leira to take her portofolio : if he could have taken a new one, why he would have risked so much by attacking another deity ? Or why Mask wastes his time scheming to take "intrigue" from Cyric instead of taking a new one ? Why Liira did not want to give Waukeen her portofolio back and she was so pissed off when she was forced to submit ? There are a lot of clues that indicates it's not so easy to assume a portofolio.
       But, indeed, Redemption is a good possibility, I will have to look into this and see if it can be taken from somewhere (as redemption can be considered an aspect of Lathander's portofolio Renewal), because Charname could not simply walk in and snatch a part of Lathander's domain. Anyway, Redemption could be a better solution that the one with "Charname could resist the taint".

Quote
- To me, all of the gods in D&D serves their station because they desire the nature of the station. Bhaal desires to kill, Tyr desires justice ...etc... I never see a God in D&D who had an opposite nature to the nature of his station. Say, like a Bhaal who does not want to kill but have to do the killing. If a lawful Good Paladin takes the Bhaal's power, there will be a contradiction. The father of all gods makes sure each god does not step out of his station and invade area that are not under their juridiction, that's as far as a Porfolio goes. AKA the power of Bhaal can not be used like that of a god of life. However, I doubt that the porfolio define the dark or light side of the power, that's up to the god of the station.


      That's the whole problem. The portofolio guides a god's actions, not viceversa, because his mindset will stick in time on the tenets of his domain. And maybe "corrupted" was not such a better word. "Altered" is more fitting. But when I say that a new god will be twisted by his portofolio, don't imagine that it will happen over night. It could be faster or slower, but it cannot be stopped. It could take even centuries, but it will happen. Kelemvor's alignment was chaotic good in life, now is lawful neutral. Mystra was neutral good, but she is slipping slowly towards true neutral. Cyric was neutral evil, now he is chaotic evil.


     And, since the debate was started from Mightysword's question "where was Tyr when Edorem needed him", I have to add that, when a charactes does not act according to the principles of his deity, the god stops answering his prayers.
     When Tyr let Edorem meet his end, it was not something good or bad, it was simply something which he had to do.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Mightysword on August 27, 2005, 07:19:37 AM
Quote from: "Feanor"

     And, since the debate was started from Mightysword's question "where was Tyr when Edorem needed him", I have to add that, when a charactes does not act according to the principles of his deity, the god stops answering his prayers.
     When Tyr let Edorem meet his end, it was not something good or bad, it was simply something which he had to do.


That still leaves one question open about Tyr's choice on Ederom.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Lord Kain on August 27, 2005, 12:04:40 PM
Of course we don't know what Ao himself intended.
I thought up the PC be coming a god of redemption because it appears to fit a good aligned PC. And there is no god of redemption in faerun.

Maybe the PC isn't creating redemption he's just taking on a portfolio that previously no god has held or perhaps even knew about. Ao held the portfolio tight because no deity fit that portfolio.

Should a good bhaalspawn take the lord of murders divine essense then he can fill a perviously empty


The closest thing to god of redemption in faerun is Eilistraee. The good drow goddess.


Just because no god has the portfolio doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Or let us say portfolios are created by mortals. And there prayers. So when the good PC takes on the divine essense because they embody redemption they can hear the voice of those people. Thus he/she didn't create redemption it was always there no other god could fill that postion.
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Feanor on August 28, 2005, 05:57:35 AM
Quote from: "Mightysword"
Quote from: "Feanor"

     And, since the debate was started from Mightysword's question "where was Tyr when Edorem needed him", I have to add that, when a charactes does not act according to the principles of his deity, the god stops answering his prayers.
     When Tyr let Edorem meet his end, it was not something good or bad, it was simply something which he had to do.


That still leaves one question open about Tyr's choice on Ederom.


      Tyr is the blind god.  :D

      But, now seriously, Tyr cannot know if a mortal is suitable for the task. A god could know the deeds or alignment of mortals, but they cannot know their future course : such knowledge is beyond their sight because the powers of the gods of Forgotten Realms are indeed great, but not unlimited. There are many cases when gods made fatal mistakes which led even to their own demise. For instance, Mystryl, the first goddess of magic, was not capable to foresee what Karsus will try to do and allowed the use of heavy magic - and the result was that Karsus endangered the Weave itself and destroyed the entire Netheril empire. Only after this, Mystra, Mystryl's successor, stripped the spells above of level 10 from the use of mortals. If Mystryl was not capable to foresee such a cataclysm, how could Tyr have foreseen Edorem's failure which, on a larger scale, is totally insignificant ?
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: Feanor on August 28, 2005, 06:40:15 AM
Quote from: "Lord Kain"



Or let us say portfolios are created by mortals. And there prayers. So when the good PC takes on the divine essense because they embody redemption they can hear the voice of those people. Thus he/she didn't create redemption it was always there no other god could fill that postion.


     Portofolios created by mortals ?  :?  Never heard of this... Do you have any source for that ? (Since you said "let us say", I suppose it is only your opinion...).
    But, if Charname wants to become the god of Redemption, he will have to strike a deal with Lathander or Ilmater, or else his days as a god will be short.


Quote
Of course we don't know what Ao himself intended.
I thought up the PC be coming a god of redemption because it appears to fit a good aligned PC. And there is no god of redemption in faerun.
Maybe the PC isn't creating redemption he's just taking on a portfolio that previously no god has held or perhaps even knew about. Ao held the portfolio tight because no deity fit that portfolio.


      Indeed. I must look if such a position was ever held by a god of Faerun. But about "no deity fit that portofolio", I would disagree : Lathander or Ilmater could have easily fit into this role. Especially Ilmater.

Quote
Just because no god has the portfolio doesn't mean it doesn't exist.


     It's complicated. First of all, we know the number of portofolios is limited. There are 2 clues which speak in favor of this theory :
1. The portofolios were written on the Tablets of Fate ; while the Tablets themselves held no power (despite of the contrary belief of the gods), this is a clue that the number of portofolios is finite ;
2. If there were free portofolios, the other gods won't lust so much after each other's propriety. When the Circle of Greater Powers took into consideration the idea of destroying Cyric and share his domains among themselves, Talos and Mask started salivating.


     BTW, since you insist so much, I assume you really want godhood...  :D
Title: Whatever happened to Edorem, he who loved Saerileth?
Post by: argan on August 28, 2005, 07:58:53 AM
Nice. Very well-written. :)