Post/Author/DateTime	Post
spectralphoenix 02-08-08, 02:38 PM	Queen Aurala's listed alignment is Neutral Good (this is mentioned in several places.) However, it seems that virtually every reference to her in any of the books talks about how she's planning to sabotage this or that country or else restart the Last War and conquer Khorvaire. Has anyone else noticed this?
JulesCARV 02-08-08, 02:48 PM	Alignments in Eberron are supposed to be "fuzzy" or "grey," but often times I find that they're just incomprehensible. The Path of Light is an LN religion based on rebellion against the status quo of Dal Quor and an attempt to radically reorder the plane into one of goodness and light? The Undying Court is an NG religion that forms the basis of an isolationist, tradition-obsessed hierarchical society which seems to value its own preservation above anything else? What? Maybe the idea is to get us so confused by the whole alignment issue that we sweep it under the rug and start looking at people's motivations and attitudes outside of a 3x3 square, which might not be such a bad thing. ... but, a bunch of other people will have rationalizations for NG Aurala and say that it makes perfect sense, so if it bothers you, you could listen to them instead of me.
naturax 02-08-08, 02:50 PM	Alignment is for chumps.
spectralphoenix 02-08-08, 03:11 PM	The kalashtar always seemed a bit self-interested to me - they want to restructure the plane into goodness and light, but don't mind heading off to some other plane and bringing their enemies with them to enslave a continent or two. I agree about the Undying Court though, and that a number of alignments seem to be "off" in Eberron.
Syltorian 02-08-08, 04:54 PM	The Path of Light is an LN religion based on rebellion against the status quo of Dal Quor and an attempt to radically reorder the plane into one of goodness and light? The Path of Light I sort of get. It does not actually require you to do good. Most of its adherents sit in a monastery and meditate, believing that to be enough. The aim of the Path is good, yes; but so is the aim of the Blood of Vol, and even, in the disturbed minds of its followers, that of many a Dragon Below cult. Mind you, I agree it would make even more sense if the Path was LG, but considering it is a philosophy, not a sentient being or pantheon, it can 'require' dedication without being able to make moral decisions. ... but, a bunch of other people will have rationalizations for NG Aurala and say that it makes perfect sense, so if it bothers you, you could listen to them instead of me. Aurala is another one I never really got completely. I've seen numerous rationalizations, from explanations how she really believes her rule will be the best for Khorvaire to how her sabotaging the peace is stressed in the sources because it is an exception to her generally good behaviour. Theory One: The Sources Stress the Exceptions Queen Aurala is NG, so DMs know how to play her. However, in order to give her a full personality, the book gives you those examples which deviate from her overall NG personality. Essentially, the stat block tells you that she is a good queen, who cares about her subjects. She will not massacre a remote village because she needs to test a new weapon Arcanix has developed for her and she will be lenient and understanding when called upon for a pardon (within reason) - things you could not expect from Kaius, for example. She does not try to find ways around the clause that states warforged are free, as Karrnath and Thrane do, albeit these had more warforged than Aundair, so the Bright Realm's problem is not as big. She does not have martial law, as Karrnath does. The fluff text adds to this that she has her flaws: she means well, but is blinded by her idealism and belief that she can really bring about the Golden Age of Galifar - perhaps because the Quori or the Lords of Dust have exploited her goodness and are slowly corrupting it. ]Theory Two: Good does not equal Pacifist If every good person was a pacifist, you would have few good adventurers. They tend to go around killing things (mostly in defence, admittedly). So too the Queen of Aundair. If she does not sabotage the other countries, they will sabotage Aundair and gain the upper hand in the war everybody thinks is unavoidable: Aurala, next to being too full of herself, seeks to protect her own people by acting pre-emptively... and the fact that she has not already declared war on Thrane or the Reaches shows that she is not ready to make every sacrifice, despite the urgings of her advisers and ministers. As said before, Queen Aurala believes that it will be for the best if she rules. She believes she can bring back the Golden Age of Galifar. This may be idealistic, blinded and naive, but many good people go a bit overboard in their attempts to help. She could slip eventually, but so far, she has not. What I don't like about these theories is that there are considerable exceptions to her alignment, and some of her actions are difficult to explain away with idealism and naiveté. Aundair refused to have Cyran refuge camps. She was the prime mover behind getting the Cyrans excluded from the Thronehold Talks. It makes sense politically, and I would not call it evil - but is not a charitable action. Her agents in Thaliost do not cause Thrane so much damage as the Thaliosians, who are originally Aundairians. Plus she has given the orders for the Mourning, and made Arcanix put a Geas on Hellcow and WotC never to reveal that fact! :P
OctaviusIII 02-09-08, 03:10 PM	I think that one can be good and want to conquer the world, too. It just takes a difference of view, that the throne (not just her) be the one to rule it. In other words, she doesn't feel as though she is the only hope of Khorvaire - if she did, and she just wanted the power, that would be evil. At least, that's my impression. And besides, I think one can be more good and less good. She's probably less good than others, putting the interests of Aundair above those of other nations (or herself, for that matter).
skrap-san 02-09-08, 07:50 PM	As pointed out by others above me, she sees herself as the only "worthy" heir to the throne, the only one with the moral, character and willpower to not succumb to the corruption that the power of throne represents. And that is not evil, it might be shortsighted and a bit naive, but it's still morally good. She does it because it is right by her own standards, and she tries to do it the proper way, with honor and dignity, but she has to resort to shadow activities just to stay in the game. So I would say she fits Neutral Good very well. Sorry for repeating what others have pointed out, and I hope it helped a bit.
Hellcow 02-10-08, 01:22 AM	Others have pretty much stated what I would say. Aurala's alignment gives you a rough sense of how she conducts herself when you are uncertain. But first and foremost, she is queen of Aundair. Her greatest interest is the good of the Aundairian people. Someone of good alignment isn't automatically Mother Teresa, any more than someone of evil alignmnet is immediately Hannibal Lecter. It's true that Aundair refused to have Cyran refugee camps. And because she's a good person, it's possible that Aurala herself had misgivings about this. But the Queen isn't the only hand on the rudder of the nation. I would imagine that her advisors warned her that taking in refugees would be a strain and destabilizing force on the nation... and that she decided to put the good of Aundair ahead of a charity towards a former enemy. Likewise, the fact that Aurala is both good and pursuing war tells you that she truly believes that her rule would be the best thing for the people of Khorvaire (and certainly the people of Aundair). Because she's a good leader, I would expect her to oppose torture, the massacre of innocents, and similar acts (though these could still occur, because she isn't personally overseeing every army). But she beleives that just war is possible, that war can bring about a greater good. You could argue that this is naive, but we've never said she isn't naive. My thing is to quickly set Aurala, who wants war, against Kaius, who wants peace. Aurala is the warmonger, but as a good individual, there are actions she simply won't condone - things like torture. Kaius, as an evil individual, is prepared to do absolutely anything to achieve his goals. Torture? No problem. Heck, he's the kind of guy who might ship his own grandson off to a lightless cell in an inescapable prison if he felt it was necessary. He will engage in acts of brutality that Aurala would never consider, and do it without flinching. So his goals may actually serve the GREATER good - peace across Khorvaire - but he will personally engage in evil acts to acheive these goals. Aurala's goals may result in strife and death, and she's certainly put the interests of her citizens above those of the Cyrans. But on a personal level, she is not cruel. She wouldn't stand for the institution of martial law or the Code of Kaius in her kingdom. She believes that war IS the right course of action, and she believes that she can fight a just war. The problem comes when her agents in the field don't share that idealism. Meanwhile, turning to religion, the vital thing to remember is that the alignment of the power source does NOT indicate the "alignment of the religion". The majority of followers of the Path of Light are, in fact, Lawful Good. However, the "Path of Light" itself is a neutral force. The Kalashtar seek to bring il-Yannah about, but right now, il-Yannah doesn't exist; their religion is a philosophical practice which leads them towards it. And the force that empowers them - again, which is NOT il-Yannah - is a neutral force, probably the most abstract of any of the religions. Likewise, depending on the path you take, the Blood of Vol can actually be a very alrtuistic religion, encouraging strong community bonds and a struggle to save all mortals from death and suffering. A cleric can be good just as easily as he can be evil. However, it's still the case that the power on which they draw has a negative charge (which is, after all, one of the primary game effects of divine alignment), and that they rebuke undead instead of turning them... while the Undying Court, despite its isolationist attitude and the fact that its priests are more likely to be neutral than good, has an inherently positive charge, and its priests turn undead instead of rebuking them. The alignment of a religion is traditionally the alignment of the deity, and in Eberron we don't know if the gods exist. Unlike other settings, the alignment of the cleric doesn't have to match that of his "god". So what a divine alignment tells you is a cleric's bias towards channeling positive or negative energy, how he interacts with undead, and how he interacts with spells that detect divine auras. But the fact of the matter is that most followers of the neutral Path of Light are LG, while most followers of the Undying Court are LN. But whether he's good, neutral, or evil, a cleric of the Undying Court is still a channel for the same light of Irian that empowers the Deathless... while the noble kalashtar who struggles to reach il-Yannah is drawing more on his own mental discipline than on any benevolent deity. So to boil down an unnecessarily long post, alingment in Eberron doesn't mean the same thing that it does in other settings. Aurala's good alignment tells you that in her personal life, she will try to avoid cruel actions and to do what's good for her people... but her greater goals can still have a tragic impact she has naively ignored. And the alignment of religions isn't as important as the goals of those religions or the actions of their followers. If every good person was a pacifist, you would have few good adventurers. They tend to go around killing things. QFT. Aurala believes that war WILL serve the greater good. What her alignment does is to give you an idea of how she would personally conduct such a war - which would be very different from the path Kaius would take.
Kreistor2 02-10-08, 08:30 AM	Some people think that starting a war is evil. That there is no valid justification for the resulting death. There is, however, in DnD no indication that starting a war is evil. This is entirely a personal opinion. Since the DnD alignment description does not include this belief, then characters designed under that alignment system will be good, despite starting wars. DnD does not agree with that opinion, and therefore it will violate your personal belief in what is good and evil.
spectralphoenix 02-11-08, 07:13 PM	I wasn't saying that fighting in general or starting a war in particular was always evil, just that Aurala's war in particular seems to stem from self-interest. However, I guess I understand the idea that she's doing it because she's naive (not to mention hubristic) enough to believe her ruling Khorvaire really would be for the best.
Gurv 02-11-08, 09:04 PM	Of course she thinks that a kingdom ruled by her would be best. Most people would assume that their own ideas are just that. But given the options, it can be hard to disagree with her. If you had to pick one of the remaining monarchs to take the seat of Thronehold, which would you go with? Even someone who doesn't know what we know about Kaius can still see that his kind of peace would be totalitarian and repressive. Queen Diani isn't even properly in charge of Thrane. King Boranel is awesome in his own right, but he is getting old without any worthy heirs; rumors of doing away with the monarchy are floating around. Queen Aurala was born to live under the assumption that someone should be ruling over the Kingdom of Galifar, and that that someone should be a descendant of Galifar I. That's just the way things are supposed to be, by the Host. And given the lmited choices, isn't it obvious why it would have to be her?
Hellcow 02-12-08, 03:29 AM	I wasn't saying that fighting in general or starting a war in particular was always evil, just that Aurala's war in particular seems to stem from self-interest. To me, the issue here is that if you want to highlight Aurala's good side, you should play it up in the way in which she treats her subjects. Yes, she didn't help the Cyran refugees, but as I said before they were former enemies who suffered the consequences of that defiance, and harboring them could stretch national resources and otherwise threaten her own people. And IMO, Aurala truly loves her people. If she becomes the Queen of Galifar, she will extend that benevolence to ALL of her new subjects - but until that day, she must fight to reach that goal. She will not accept the same level of civilian or military brutality that you see in Karrnath during war or peace. Within her kingdom, she supports the Code of Galifar. But she does not accept the rights of rebels - and in her opinion, that's what the people of other nations are. She believes that she is the rightful, destined queen - and as a result, the people of Thrane, Cyre, Karrnath, and Breland are traitors to the ideals of Galifar. She will show mercy once she sits on her throne. But she will not sit by while (in her eyes) Kaius tarnishes the ideals of Galifar with his Code of Kaius, while Thrane is under the rule of a theocracy instead of the blood of Galifar, while Breland allows the anti-monarchy movement to thrive. She is a loving mother, but her children have gone far astray - and she must get this house in order. So again, she believes that war IS the just course of action and the necessary course of action, the only way to restore Galifar and to usher in another thousand years of prosperity. Assuming you want her to be good, the key is to emphasize that in her personal behavior - to have people see that when they meet her, she IS gentle, kind, and empathetic, especially when dealing with her own people. But she is also a queen, holding the destiny of nations in her hands, and she believes that it is her DUTY to restore Galifar - both for the good of Aundair and ultimately, all of the people of Khorvaire.
skrap-san 02-12-08, 01:16 PM	The problem with Hellcow is that he gives me so much inspirations and so many elements for my sessions that I don't know where to put it all...
eehamburg 02-12-08, 02:10 PM	The problem with Hellcow is that he gives me so much inspirations and so many elements for my sessions that I don't know where to put it all... Makes you want to tap into the Eberron imagination within his mind ... doesn't it? kind of read his mind .... right?
Ashlock 02-12-08, 03:11 PM	Good description, Keith. I've already been a big Kaius fan (despite being evil, he's quite a tragic figure), and I love the notion that an evil vampire king craves peace. I think Aurala is in excellent contrast. I think I appreciate her a little more now, too.
Elton74 02-17-08, 05:18 PM	I run Queen Aurala as some sort godchild of Queen Elisabeth the First. This means that I can protray her as some kind of (b)itch, since most of my adventures are set in Breland. The Brellish don't trust her, and see her as some kind of bewitched person. After all, honey just oozes from her tongue when she negotiates (I also design for Birthright). As for Kaius, I run him as a tired old Caracalla. He does awful things to maintain order in Karrnath, yet he fights for peace. Something that his grand nephew, the king of Breland, also wanted. That is part of the reason why they exchanged their son and daughter. As for Sarlona, I run Riedra as the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. I see a lot of Communism in how Riedra is run. The only difference is that Riedrans aren't doing anything to break the power of Dal Quor. The Quori manipulate the people of Riedra so perfectly that only adventurers from the outside of Riedra have a chance of breaking their power. Maybe the Riedran government is actually Fascist or at least Feudalism run wild. In any case, it's a real police state. Most of the people in a Riedran village are farmers. I bet they don't know what year it is, or anything beyond basic Arithmetic. Yet the Inspired are seen as good and righteous because they bring stability and security to the people. If they had Television, they'd all be praising the Leader, and T.V. programs would be spreading internal propaganda on how they are the best nation in a world of Chaos and Terror (Khorvaire and Aerenal are examples). Until a group of adventurers blow up the Leader's palace and steal his nose (okay, that's from Sleeper).
Smug 02-17-08, 07:47 PM	If they had Television, they'd all be praising the Leader, and T.V. programs would be spreading internal propaganda on how they are the best nation in a world of Chaos and Terror. I don't know if you've read Secrets of Sarlona, but if you've got it, reread the "Everyday Psionics" sidebar. Riedra may not have television, but it's got something that's arguably even better for spreading propaganda over an extended period of time - telepathic broadcasting. During the day, they can broadcast messages directly into your mind; and when you sleep, you have state-sanctioned dreams crafted by Quori masters of propaganda. There's no escaping it (unless you hook up with the rebel group that's perfected the technique of free-dreaming), and as a result, Riedrans don't even dream of freedom. Television hits the eyes and ears - but the Inspired can broadcast directly to your mind.
Elton74 02-17-08, 11:15 PM	That's what I mean by "perfect Police State." What a horrible thing to do. I wouldn't want to live there.
Smug 02-18-08, 02:17 PM	I wouldn't want to live there. I think that was the goal. ;) If it truly was a utopia, there would be much reason to sympathize with the kalashtar, after all!
Syltorian 02-18-08, 02:49 PM	I wouldn't want to live there. Horrible, but very effective. If you had been born in the Union of Riedra, you would not want to live anywhere else, and you would be deeply hostile to anyone who wants to 'help' and 'free' you. Unless you are one of the exceedingly rare members of the resistance, in which case the Inspired will be glad to fullfill your wishes, and you will most likely not live there for very long.
Ehtiar 02-19-08, 11:05 AM	Ah but it's that vitally important question.. : You live a life free from want for food, shelter.. you are provided with a community that cares for you. Your children are safe and protected from monsters. Life is secure. Is that not a utopia? What would it be worth to live there? Then someone from outside comes and tells you that you are not free, that freedom means you would have to struggle for food, that you couldn't be certain of providing a safe life for your children, and that other "free" people could take advantage of you. They highlight what life is like in Khorvaire.. a hundred years of war, intrigue, theives guilds, homlessness and famine... Would you say that being "free" is worth that existence? :cool:
aelryinth 02-19-08, 03:26 PM	My reply would be along the lines of "The Qu'ori are doing to my people what they did to your ancestors. Getting us to kill one another, so that they may step in, and you trade your freedoms away from those who made your ancestors slaughter one another. I would die free rather then live as a slave to those who conquered me." There is nothing as ironic as a slave who thinks he is free, and who places the ring about his own neck, and hands the one who forged them the chain and key with a smile. ====Aelryinth
Smug 02-19-08, 05:00 PM	My reply would be along the lines of "The Qu'ori are doing to my people what they did to your ancestors. Getting us to kill one another, so that they may step in, and you trade your freedoms away from those who made your ancestors slaughter one another." Reallistically, if you lived in Khorvaire and lacked this magic book that tells us all the secrets of the world, would you actually draw this conclusion or expect someone else to believe it? The Sundering lasted for over two hundred years, and worked precisely because it took advantage of pre-existing ambitions and prejudices. IMO, the Riedran or Syrk historian - or even the Morgrave historian who's studied the period - would say "What are you talking about? The problems began with the aggressive, expansionist culture of Nulakhesh, with the schemes of the Yuan-ti in Syrkarn and the vile ambitions of the mystic theurges of Ohr Kaluun, with the racial hostility between the ogre magi of Bornunan and the humans of the surrounding nations, and the exposure of the Shulassakar bloodlines in Khalesh. Are you suggesting that the Inspired actually created the yuan-ti or Shulassakar, or taught the wizards of Ohr Kaluun their dark magicks? These are the things that brought the kingdoms to war." The Inspired set the avalanche in motion by throwing a rock at just the right place - by giving a Nulakhesh general dreams of glory that pushed him over the edge, by planting suspicions about the hidden Shulassakar, by leading the war-wizards of Ohr Kaluun to sources of power or the like. But using the avalanche analogy, they didn't create the inherent instability, they just gave it the push that set the collapse in motion, and they spent two centuries on the process. Sure, if you've got a buddy who's a kalashtar, he might have convinced you that the Inspired were responsible. But just on the surface, do you expect that statement to hold much weight with a stranger - especially a Riedran? Looking to the map of history, the Sundering seems to be the logical result of ambition and aggression - just as the Last War appears to be based on the quarrels of five siblings. Perhaps Jarot's paranoia, Thalin's dreams of a kingdom of the Silver Flame, Kaius' ambitions, and Wroann's desire for change could all be laid at the feet of the Quori. Or perhaps they WERE just paranoid, zealous, or ambitious people... which is what makes it so easy for the Quori to scapegoat them in the future. Their actions weren't bizarre or inexplicable; they were human. "I would die free rather then live as a slave to those who conquered me." The issue as I see it is that the Riedran wouldn't understand how you can consider him to be a slave. In his worldview, he lives in a paradise. He has everything he wants. The horror is that this is because the quori have shaped his dreams from birth to define his desires and wants, so he's incapable of actually understanding the concept of freedom you place such great value on. Instead, he pities you for being adrift and alone in a world filled with chaos, violence, and crime. It's not just ironic, it's horrifying; the issue is that control of dreams allows you to control expectations and ambitions. The modern people of Riedra haven't handed the keys to their chains to the Inspired; their ancestors did that over a thousand years ago. Instead, they've been raised in a society where "Keys" and "Chains" aren't even in their vocabulary. They have no referents for the concepts you take for granted. Of course, speaking of it being better to die free, that might be a question to put to the hundreds of thousands who did die in the Last War. Was a serf conscripted in the Last War really better off than his Riedran counterpart? If the king ordered him to fight, did he have a choice? If he lived in Shadukar, did this supposed freedom compensate him for his terrible loss? In comparing the socieities, I think there's something to be said for looking at the commoner in Khorvaire - instead of comparing the Riedran peasant to the Brelish adventurer. In Karrnath, the warlords are expected to rule through fear and force. Most Karrns take pride in the strength of their leaders and the discipline and order of their nation. But would you want to live as a serf under the Code of Kaius? They each have their own unique flaws (Zilargo, anyone?), but I wouldn't call any of the nations of Khorvaire utopias.
Ehtiar 02-24-08, 07:56 AM	Not to mention, it's easy to decide for yourself that it is better to die free then live as a slave... But can you so easily make the same decision for your wife? your children? "It is better for my five year old daughter who doesn't understand this to die trying.... to struggle with the rest of the family for food.. to live surrounded by nasty people who might kidnap her...." The arguments can be made both ways, and while deciding for yourself can at times be easy, when it's effecting those you love and care for... The choice between seeing them brutalised and starved.. or "enslaved, fed and secure".... After all, look at how many of the vaunted "freedoms" americans are willing to discuss dropping in the name of national security :D