Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Elessar Lespin 11-17-05, 04:05 AM	Okay I have a dilemna which I need a little help untangling. An party has an Exalted character and a character who seems destined to become the main villain of the campaign. The villainous character betrays the party outright, thus showing himself for what he truly is. The party goes through major hell attempting to track down this villain and stop him from accomplishing his evil schemes. They begin to fight him when suddenly the villain 'surrenders' or feigns it in any case. Does the Exalted character, having already been personally betrayed by this villainous character, have no choice other than to show unreasoning mercy and extend his hand in grace to aid his fallen brother? Or does he smite the evil that has shown what it is capable of time and again? What if he extends mercy and is betrayed a second time? Does he continue to repeat the pattern? Because this strikes me as rather idiotic. I am of the train of thought that being good does not necessitate being stupid. Many of the genuinely 'good' people I know in real life are extremely pious and meek but sly at the same time. Often being good entails being even more observant and wily than those who are evil. Evil has few handicaps. But enough ranting. I need opinions. Those who have read the Exalted Deeds handbook will probably have a little more to say on this matter. Thanks in advance for all your thoughts...
erbmjw 11-17-05, 08:00 AM	True good is more ruthless than evil because it will sacrifice itself for its goals. If the exalted character has seen repeated great evil and betrayal come from this villianous character for a considerable period then the EC should choose to sacrifice themeselves{ie it may be against the law but it would still be valid as a religious descion} and kill the villian. It is better to be wrong and seek redemption for this act, then to allow a great evil to survive unless the Exalted character can immdiately ensure 1) total control over the villianous character and in short order{days maybe single digit weeks} 2) true redemption for the villianous character One important question Exalted Character - obviously high wis - does the EC have high or normal int as well? if yes - might have allowed the villian to live once, if they had not commited so many evil acts - with the Exalted character trying to redeem the villian - but first sign of return to evil - dead villian. Since this villian has been chased for a long time - dead villian it is! if no - stupid enough {very low int - I'd say a -2 or lower on the int bonus} to allow a former friend who is now a villian to survive after the considerable period of evil activity? Have the EC punished by there deity for being stupid! Long term evil activity, preceded by inter party betrayal, and then followed by surrender leads to death for the villian by the exalted character's hand - he/she may allow the villian a few moments to pray for redeemption/forgiveness but then it's SMITE EVIL!
JulesCARV 11-17-05, 10:32 AM	I suppose there's no way, in the circumstances, that they can take all of the villain's weapons and spell components, tie him with a rope, and throw him in a 7x7 cell? I suppose his arcane magic, cunning, or whatever would allow him to escape anything like that if he wanted to?
Morka 11-17-05, 10:58 AM	Feinting to surrender is a Bluff check, that can be contered by a Sense Motive check. At worse, an intelligent hero would ask why he should believe the villain.
Archangel_Arcanis 11-17-05, 02:16 PM	i agree with the above. atempt to redeam them first but they must contained even before that so rather than extend the hand toss some manicles at them and tell them to put them on. If the exalted is cleric or palodine detect evil, if he claims to want to repent. Remember mercy is not killing him out right but that doesn't mean he can not be brought to justice for his crimes. Flesh to stone works well here i promice if he fails he won't give any trouble until he is fixed and that would be at his trial or in a temple where they are better equiped to handle an evil scoundrel. ps. love that pic of Raistlin.
therosx 11-18-05, 09:06 AM	I played an excalted dwarf cleric a few years ago, and there's lots of alternate ways an excalted character can deal with a villian. The easy fix is to capture him and turn him over to the proper athoritites, if your high level and not sure the local government can handle it, use plane shift and take the villian to your worlds god of justice. Drop him off and leave it in your DM's hands. It's my opinion, from both playing an excalted character and DM'ing for one, that acting as good as possable, even if it seems your acting stupid is the best way to be excalted. Max out your deplomacy to get people seeing things your way. I can't tell you how many random encounter monsters i've taken in as henchmen just to rehabilitate them. Your DM should help you out and not screw you over. If he does? then don't play an excalted character in that Dm's campaign.
MistWolf 11-22-05, 07:26 PM	A man one with god will do god's will. One way to roleplay this situation is to commune with your god. Simply ask "Is it your will that this man be slain?" I'm not familiar enough with the mechanics of this aspect of the game, but it seems to me that a world so steeped in Good vs Evil and populated by so many representatives of gods that depend on those gods for abilities and spells, they should be able to commune with those higher powers for guidance. A guy has to know what his boss wants. It may be better that this one man be slain than to allow his continued existence to pervert others. It may be that the deity of your character has further use for this evil man. This gives you a certain advantage: If you seek guidance from your god (this means you are dealing with the DM), you cannot be made any less in that gods' (DM's) view for following his commands
erbmjw 11-23-05, 06:01 AM	Sorry MistWolf but I gotta disagree, especially on something this important - no simple out using the rules against the roleplaying. From a roleplaying and rules aspect I could see the deity{GM} givening the EC a test response ... "You are one of my chosen. Why do you approach me with this issue? Are you not willing to make this desicion on your own?" If the EC says - yes I wil make the desicion - no help is necessary my lord/lady - then the DM{deity} should give him the benifit of the doubt no matter what the EC does. IF the EC still wants help in anyway after the question - GM{deity} - kills/disappears/redeems the villain and then smacks the EC with a major quest of attonement. After all the EC is supposed to be a more direct representative of the deity than regular characters ... ""You have failed me most greivously. To redeem the trust and powers I had granted you, you must now learn to trust yourself."
MistWolf 11-24-05, 12:16 AM	That's why I began the post with "A man one with god will do god's will." One who is close to his god will be honored by his god for making the best decision possible under the circumstances. The "simple out" in this case is an evil character playing the "I know you won't kill a defenseless man" card. If this was the DM, then the DM is the one takling the cheap way out. However, as I understand it, it's a player. I'm not trying to make digs on the DM. The gods in D&D are often petty and jealous. Most want their paragons to consult them. They want to be worshipped. Prayers for guidance are part of that worship. The gods expect that- they need that. It's not fair, or good role-playing, to have the character cut off from communication from his deity, then punish him for making a decision. A religious person faced with this deep dilemna will pray, make sacrifices and seek guidance and when an answer comes, they'll want confirmation. "But Lord, shall I kill a defenseless man?" "It is better that one man die than an entire nation dwindle in disbelief." It would be an ungrateful deity of a good alignment that told a worshipper "You have failed me most greivously" when seeking guidance in a matter of this importance. Then again, you could always take the DM aside & tell him "Look, this character is really annoying and I know if we let him free he'll just go back to burning villages. Please, have my deity command my character to smite off his head. What kind of pizza did you want me to bring to the next session?"
MistWolf 11-24-05, 12:21 AM	Computer error. Please delete
erbmjw 11-24-05, 05:38 AM	Mistwolf, I don't mean to offend, so if I have; my apologies. Please note - I said if he only asks for help once then the GM should give the characters choice the benifit of the doubt - ie the God would support what the Exaclted Character chooses to do. It seems to me that it is a fairly weak character that at high level needs to ask - "Excuse me {insert deity's title & name here} but should I smite this long term bastion of evil deeds we have been chasing for a long time?" I would endorse that question for a low level character or a just defeated new{to the characters} evil NPC - but these guys have been after this high level evil NPC for quite a while. *** It would be an ungrateful deity of a good alignment that told a worshipper "You have failed me most greivously" when seeking guidance in a matter of this importance Actually it would be a failure in that the exalted character does not put enough faith in his deity and trust in his own thoughts and beleifs. EC : "I don't want to make this difficult desicion so I will pass the buck". The Deity's response should be to deal with the situation as presented and then to deal with the character's lack of belief/trust in himself - ie If your deity believes in you enough to make you exalted why don't you trust yourself? To not trust yourself and your beliefs when a Deity is trusting you and your beliefs should be considered a greivous failure for an exalted character. This is not so for a low level cleric or simple worshiper - they should be allowed to worry about trusting themselves in these situations. *** And as a final note - almost every action of this player character should count as a form of worship, after all they are "exalted"!
Good Agnostic 11-25-05, 06:10 PM	I think the answer is "reasoned mercy." The villian is treated to subdual damage and then taken into custody and shackled. Now, I'm going to assume by exalted you mean "really Lawful Good." The LG would take the villian to the local court. In a feudal system, this would be the local lord's chamber. THe local jurisdiction would try the villian, find him guilty, and hang him. Unless he was a noble, then he might get the dignity of the executioners axe. Unless he was royalty, werein he would serve a life sentence in the tower or dungeon. In general, when the BBEG plays the surrender card, always do 2 things: sense motive check and detect evil.
Murr-Quan Lord #2 11-27-05, 03:44 PM	One thing to keep in mind is that in D&D, if you want to know what your god wants you to do you can cast Divination. ^.^ What sort of literary support is there for this kind of thing? In comic books and the like, superheroes regularly haul bad guys into jail knowing they'll just escape. Perhaps they believe some higher principle would be violated by their doing otherwise? In high-fantasy literature, on the other hand, the bad guy is often irredeemably evil and exists only to be destroyed. Letting an Uruk-hai live, for instance, will only result in death to innocent people. Putting this into a story context could help one make sense of the discussion. You could also ask the player what his moral code says about it, if you haven't already.
Pyritefoolsgold 11-28-05, 02:58 AM	It really comes down to two things. First, how powerful is your sense of justice? If you believe very much in the idea of justice, and have overwhelming evidence that the villain has comitted crimes worthy of death, then you may execute him in the most humane way possible. If justice isn't really the issue, then you must ask if the chance of this person being redeemed is worth the risk he poses to innocent people if he is not. If it is not, then you may kill him to protect his future victims from him. This is why we let the kid with the knife repent, because he has high chance of redemption vs. low risk to others, but we kill Hitler without a second thought.
Leap_UK 11-28-05, 03:00 PM	Mercy should be the rule as good, but that does not mean it cannot be avoided as an exception to the rule. A person who habitually lacks mercy is not good but a good person is not required to be merciful all the time, just most of it, as to have a dearth of mercy is to have a dearth of hope and good is rooted in hope. So occasionally a realistic withdrawal of mercy is perfectly acceptable in a good persons behaviour. It would pain them to act so but it is not by anymeans an absolute wrong to not show mercy sometime.
MistWolf 12-02-05, 11:31 PM	Mistwolf, I don't mean to offend, so if I have; my apologies. No offense taken, no apologies necessary. Ask yourself this: If the character never communes with his deity, how does he know what the deity wants? The deity is the ultimate guiding power. Not consulting is like traveling without a map or compass. Player has doubts, let him role play those doubts by having the character communing with his deity for guidance (I tend to post with a strong "voice" at times. I'm still praying for guidance in my life too :) )