Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Derren S. 09-24-04, 12:53 AM	Yesterday I remembered the fan writeup of Inferno and it got me thinking. In the writeup Inferno (a dragon) has captured a band of dragonslayers and wants that they are trialed for attempted murder. How would the faerun law (for example Tyr clerics, but also the more prominent countries/city states in the FR like Cormyr and Silverymoon) react to this? Is it murder to kill a Half Elf who is living alone in the woods far away from civilisation (But still within a kningdom border)? What if the half elf is lvl 20? And what if the Half Elf has slaves and damands toll from anyone passing though his woods (But hasn't killed anyone except in self defense) Now change Half Elf to Ogre Magi. Would it be murder to kill him under these circumstances? And from there it is only a small step to a dragon. A kingdom might argue that everyone who doesn't pay taxes isn't protected by the laws, but then killing the Half Elf in the very first example wouldn't be murder. And how would Paladins of Tyr (and other faiths) eact who don't care if the victim paid taxes?
Charles Phipps 09-24-04, 01:59 AM	Frankly, my interpretation of Faerun is the fact that duels are expected parts of society in Faerun and that if the elf is able to handle himself then largely a court will let a person off with a slap on the wrist. I.e. Its not really murder if you both intend to fight to kill the other person but this usually involves some sort of challenge. Slavery is, unless legitimately recognized by the government, a crime of kidnapping. Kidnapping goes with rape and murder in my book of Tyrian justice for "Things that we will not try a man for killing the perpetrators of." The fact that the man had people kidnapped and in his power gives legally every reason to handle the matter as well. If they are citizens of the kingdom that were kidnapped, the nobles might even reward the player. The nobility would prefer if he were brought to face charges rather than executed but no one would make a fuss over it I believe. The Church of Tyr I have has a 17 volume legal code, that's standardized throughout the Realms. Every priest is required to memorize it (theology skill-Tyr). They have basically standards on this matter that take into account that the society is well armed and when the line crosses over into murder. The Church of Tyr also has pardoning power for criminals who did their actions in the name of the greater good...at least spiritually if not temporarly. Most nations also do care about murder on their borders of what amounts to a hermit. Even if they aren't payers of taxes, the idea that someone armed is walking around with weapons and killing someone on the territory is not something that makes folk feel easy. A sheriff of most honest nations would try to bring them in anyway, unless the kidnapping thing came to light. There's alot of rangers, serf runaways, druids, and so forth in Faerun and they are largely sympathized with by the local populous in my mind. I do point out that Tyr, Torm, Helm, Bane, and Ilmater are the only deities in my mind who really care about the specifics of Law (And Ilmater is only because a well ordered society is good for the poor). Silvanus would acknowledge its the law of the forrest...kill or be killed. Talos wouldn't care and many other churches don't deal with legal issues. Tempus might attack any people who cowardly attacked the half-elf en masse or might seek to duel the PCs because they're great warriors for the hell of it. Racism is an accepted part of Faerun life though in my campaigns. In Silverymoon you might get away with a fair trial if it was an ogre mage but in most lands, its assumed that they are looking to cause trouble. Ironically, the best place for justice for a full blooded orc is Zhentil Keep. There, monsters get the same treatment as everyone else...and often are working for the state. Re: Inferno Inferno unless he does it VERY carefully will be greatly disappointed with his results. The people will probably do whatever he says because they're SCARED of him and then let the dragonslayers go when he's out of earshot. The Church of Tyr will judge the matter fairly even as Inferno will have to deal with the arguement that Red Dragons have a disposition towards evil behavior and that they as a people are at war with the human race. Even if he gives a resounding win, all he'll accomplish is become a legal footnote in their volumes of trial text at Candlekeep and the local Halls of Records.
chme 09-24-04, 02:20 AM	Law and order is often covered in sourcebooks on civilized areas of Faerūn. I think it would be rare though, for any law enforcers to stand by to let people kill each-other. In civilized areas that aren't covered, I think a good rule of thumb might be to say that it is murder to attack and kill someone who is allowed into the area (usually those not considered monsters) and is protected by its laws. In lawless areas, I think killing someone would still be murder, but no law enforcers are there to do anything about it.
Another Gnome 09-24-04, 02:49 AM	(This is my interpretion of things, decidedly gritty) The laws in most regions in the Realms tend to bend as needed, even in supposedly benevolent places - not to even mention there may be several different law enforcement agencies operating simultaneously with overlapping areas of influence and interest. Whether something is "murder", "self-defense", or a simple "accident" depends heavily on who is killed and who is the killer. Monsters in general don't have rights just because they're monsters, but "normal" people aren't equal either. If a thief breaks into a private house of Joe the Merchant and Joe kills the thief, there's probably a trial, whereas the same thief killed in a nobleman's estate (and buried in the back yard), or a temple of Loviatar (with the thief's body put on display on the front door) or in the local grouchy old wizard's tower (that poor thief just doesn't know when to quit), chances are that either nobody cares at all or they don't consider it worth the trouble to confront the people responsible. Though even Joe might get away with by calling it self-defense if he's simply convincing enough and generally well-liked. All the above should be reasonable in the middle of a civilized, law-abiding city with little to no actual corruption involved, mind you. If the thief in question was guilty of more than just breaking into places, or the murder happened in a remote location (but see below), it would require a pretty devoted Tyrran to do more than shrug at the incident. In smaller communities things may be, and likely are, entirely different. People need to stick together, and random killing of even criminals is putting stress on the communal feel. The laws may be more strict - or at least more strictly enforced - even if at the same time the pressure is on the authorities to try to please the people with their judgments. This is especially risky for outsiders waving their swords around, as there's no built-in support in the population as there would be in case a local person was charged with a crime. Yet again on the flip side, becoming wanted criminals in a backwater village is probably never going to be known anywhere else, and even if the village officials were to go through all the trouble and paperwork to get wanted-posters shown in a big city they pay allegiance to, the guilty party could always get trialed in the city for a less harsh penalty. (The above is left a bit incomplete, as I gotta run now...)
Derren S. 09-24-04, 07:57 AM	Then the question arrises what is a monster and therefore has no rights before the law? Has a Half-Orc rights in Cormyr and a Orc has none? If yes who makes this destinction? I know, D&D is very dumbed down with every race in the PHB = society and MM = Monster, but this topic if it would come up could cause massive unrest in Faerun. Bending the laws imo shouldn't happen that often at least in big cities where there are likely clerics who will use truth finding spells in the trial either as regular part of the trial or when paid by either side. Take the example of Inferno (by the fan writeup a half red half gold dragon). When he succeeds in getting the dragonslayers found guilty for attempted murder, many adventurer will become criminals before the law. When they are found not guilty, it will get many dragons angered. The good ones will refuse to deal with that country or church and the evil ones might attack.
Ssussunriyh 09-24-04, 08:56 AM	If a dragon wants the legal authorities to hold dragon-slaying adventurers accountable for murder, why shouldn't the dragon likewise be held accountable for whatever crimes he may have committed? (killing and eating humanoids, raiding cattle, stealing treasure, extortion of the populace, etc.) The law is a two-edged sword. The dragons can't have their proverbial cake and eat it too.
Derren S. 09-24-04, 09:01 AM	If a dragon wants the legal authorities to hold dragon-slaying adventurers accountable for murder, why shouldn't the dragon likewise be held accountable for whatever crimes he may have committed? (killing and eating humanoids, raiding cattle, stealing treasure, extortion of the populace, etc.) If the dragon has done this. And as the fan Inferno was raised by nexus this isn't an issue like it is for much of the good dragons (Which are still attacked by greedy humanoids which want their hord despite beeing good).
Ssussunriyh 09-24-04, 09:06 AM	This opens a whole new can of worms. Dragons are universally prideful and arrogant, and are loathe to part with so much as a single copper from their hoards. What self-respecting dragon would condescend to submit to human(oid) justice? And just how do you incarcerate a dragon, anyway???
Derren S. 09-24-04, 09:21 AM	Dragons are universally prideful and arrogant, and are loathe to part with so much as a single copper from their hoards. What self-respecting dragon would condescend to submit to human(oid) justice? All lawful dragons who don't break the law anyway and don't want to be bothered by greedy dragonslayers. And just how do you incarcerate a dragon, anyway??? That is not the problem of the dragon. Also incarcerate a wizard is equally hard but it seems to work. But I want this threat to be more general and not focused only on dragons.
Charles Phipps 09-24-04, 11:34 AM	[Bending the laws imo shouldn't happen that often at least in big cities where there are likely clerics who will use truth finding spells in the trial either as regular part of the trial or when paid by either side.] I take the matters to be slightly less prevalent. Clerical magic costs a great deal and while the clerics of Tyr are likely to do this, they are sacrificing miracle power for a relatively minor thing. Also, truth spells are not solely able to be used to determine guilt in my campaign due to the possibility of tampering. [Take the example of Inferno (by the fan writeup a half red half gold dragon). When he succeeds in getting the dragonslayers found guilty for attempted murder, many adventurer will become criminals before the law. When they are found not guilty, it will get many dragons angered. The good ones will refuse to deal with that country or church and the evil ones might attack.] Inferno is a fool. Even in a nation polite enough to actually treat the trial with any form of dignity instead of the kangaroo ridiculousness that it actually is, will find immediately that most nobility will immediately pass their OWN laws that guarantee the rights to hunt and destroy dragons. As the death penaltys crimminalization and decrimminalization shows across state lines, some topics are not clearly "Well the law says..." "The law is stupid, we change it" Lawful Dragons are obedient to the Laws of Bahamut the God of Good Dragons, the Dragons Code, and if you use a certain supplement-the Decisions of the Council of Wyrms. They are not unlawful if they ignore the laws of Cormyr. Just as I consider myself Lawful good but would not feel obliged to not aid slaves escaping the South during the Civil War (indeed my religion requires it) Inferno would find, by your own example, also find that dragons would be expected to abide by human laws if they want human laws protection. Dragons would be required to pay taxes...register their lairs (Dragon registration is the first step to persecution!-Professor Charles Xavier, silver dragon), deal with the fact in Cormyr all weapons require barding and licenses to wield (uh huh...you have a breath weapon that can kill HOW many people?), and in large part...integrate into human society. Like elves, this is unlikely to happen and I doubt dragons are plentiful enogh to make the situation better in many individual layers. For the quick and dirty answer though on what determines a "monster"- In Faerun, many creatures are the result of dark elf experimentation before the Crown Wars. Monsters are largely twisted perversions of magic and hostile to man because of their innate aggression. In a court of law, I'd consider these creatures psychotic even with their unnatural intelligence and largely irredeemable. Like in Anita Blake, undead cannot be murdered because they are already dead. The church of Tyr considers vampires suicides and thus beyond the pale. Even the "good" undead are not protected by the law as Baelnorns and Archliches are both hunted by Kelemvor's fanatical soulcatchers The area blurs with tribalistic societies like kobolds, ogres, orcs, and the like. In truth, they are in fact beings who can be good but are largely hated for their activities by the surrounding peoples. Their protection is guaranteed only by how well their interaction with the society trying it is. There's an unofficial state of war declared with most of these places.
Derren S. 09-24-04, 12:10 PM	Zone of Truth (and Detect thougths which imo also can be used to detect if someone is lying) are only 2nd level. Thats not much magical power especially not in the FR. And it costs only 60gp to let a cleric cast it. Expensive for a commoner or expert, but not for everyone else. As for Inferno: Don't focus on his example. That was only how I where I got my question. Infernos actual goal is btw to see what the different countries think of dragons, not to actually get the dragon slayers sentenced. And I don't think nobles would hunt dragons for sport. They hunt things which can't harm them, not things which can destroy their whole kingdom alone (not without a large army, which I don't consider sport) Just imagine what dragons would do to a political person who openly declares that all dragons can be freely killed. This person shouldn't expect any help from the good dragons when the evil ones arrive to teach him a lesson. The question still remains, what happens when a Lizardmen comes to a temple of Tyr end demands that the adventurers who killed his brother are be put on trial for murder? What if it is a Saurial instead of a Lizardmen, any difference? I know that kingdoms make the law as they seem fit, but Tyr clarics don't have this freedom. They have to treat the above accusation like any other, or? So would some clerics of Tyr really drag someone before a trial when a Lizardman accuses him of murder?
WizO_BigSister 09-24-04, 01:05 PM	Hold onto your hats as I am whisking this thread to the forum where it really belongs. :) Please check out the Forum Organisation ~ What Goes Where (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=172646) thread. Thanks :angel:
Ssussunriyh 09-24-04, 01:10 PM	So would some clerics of Tyr really drag someone before a trial when a Lizardman accuses him of murder? That sounds more like a case for an extradition hearing. The lizardman could demand that the adventurer(s) be turned over to his chieftain to face tribal law on the alleged murder. In which case, the Tyrran judge would probably point out that there is no extradition treaty between the kingdom and the tribe of lizardmen. "Motion denied."
Charles Phipps 09-24-04, 01:34 PM	I'm just using Inferno's ideals as an example. It's only a small part of the posts I've posted after all. In large part I imagine the priest of Tyr would investigate the matter openly and honestly (being lawful good). A Lizard man must after all have his appeal to the law of Tyr be respected as much as any other being. As stated, the Priests of Tyr are impartial even if their idea of justice isn't ours. They would handle the matter whether it was a beholder or a Dragon or a Priest of Bane/Cyric/Moander. Just don't think that killing is remotely similiar to murder in FR though. Tyr is a god of war and duels, battle, and combat are accepted means of dealing with the matter. If the evidence is lacking, the Priest of Tyr might arrange for the lizardman to have a fair and impartial "Trial by Combat"
dragonheart 09-25-04, 11:16 AM	ok lets start with jsut what murder is - its not the same as killing strangely enough. Its the taking of a human's (well probably sentient's) life OUTSIDE the bounds of law. so the first question has to be what do the local laws allow in the way of reasons to take lives. probably at least the following: 1. defending yourself 2. defending your family 3. defending your property 4. as a soldier in a fight/war ordered by your country 5. in the aprehensionof a known outlaw (bring them back dead or alive) given the conditions of most realms they would probably say that any being living in peace and within the laws of the realm (and paying taxes) was a citizen and attacking and killing them for no reason was murder. so the killing of that thief wouldn't be murder in any of those situations since they all break one of the above conditions. A good dragon residing in say Cormyr that paid taxes could probably capture thieves/adventurers and have them convicted of attempted murder charges if they attacked his ranch/farm/castle/home and himself. A dragon that was known to have raided cormyr or monsters on the fringes believed to have done so would not and could be attacked as outlaws and their deaths would not be considered murder by any courts.
john_carlos 09-25-04, 12:25 PM	I think that it would depend on 3 things: 1. Who's in charge or ruling the area where the "murder" happened. 2. How absolute the law is. 3. Your level of power/esteem. For example; in our own world if you kill someone then it may be murder depending on what country you're in, whos in charge at the time of the death and who you know/are. In America if you kill someone and you're not famous/rich/or a Kennedy, then you will be tried. However in many African nations, mercenaries (adventurers) kill with abandon and never go to trial unless their side loses. You could also look at Cuba for an example of this. Stalin killed by starvation and other means thousands of his people, yet he never went to trial, due in some part to diplomacy but mostly to strength. The Chineese govt ran over their own people w/ tanks on TV and we said "that's bad". However, men like Milosivich and Hussein are not powerful enough to get away with that kind of thing, although it takes bold govts to step in and say another govt is wrong and then back it w/ action. The UN used to be like this (Korea), but it unfortunately has become America's job, since words w/out force behind them are like the farmer complaining to the dragon that it ate all his cattle. If the law is absolute where your characters are playing then simply planning about raiding a tomb or a dragon's lair or attacking brigands or whatever would be conspiracy, depending on the laws of course. And once you committed the acts you would be guilty until the statue of limitatons ran out. If several nations had similar laws then you could be wanted all over without realizing it. I think it would be funny for the great giantslayer to come into a town bragging about his recent kill in a neighboring kingdom only to be arrested by the sheriff for "murder". Of course depending on the giantslayers level of power vs. the sheriffs the sheriff might just overlook the crime. Sorry about the modern history thing, I was just trying to make my point.
dragonheart 09-25-04, 03:14 PM	Actually your sort of making my point for me :D if murder is taking a (sentient) life outside the bounds of law then in the case of mercenaries in africa is there any law present? if not then no killing is murder (wierd but true). With folks like Stalin its really the same as with the old absolute monarchs etc. they ARE the law so the deaths they order are legal (we may not like them much but we don't rule their area) my main point is this - try to seperate murder from killing they are not the same thing - this is why we have different crimes and names (1st, 2nd degree murder, manslaughter, justifiable homicide, self defense) for different types of killings even in civilian america (and other countries).
john_carlos 09-25-04, 03:48 PM	Dragonheart, True enough about the killing having different levels of necessity. But remember the Nuremburg trials, all those guys were just following the law at the time :rolleyes: But if the law, or lack of it changes, watch out. We could start a petion to make monster hunting illegal in the omniverse no ex post facto. ;)
Cthulhu 09-25-04, 04:15 PM	Yesterday I remembered the fan writeup of Inferno and it got me thinking. In the writeup Inferno (a dragon) has captured a band of dragonslayers and wants that they are trialed for attempted murder. Under whose system of laws are they going to be tried? The dragon's society laws or the local humanoid authority? I doubt very much that two very different creatures (dragon vs. adventurers) are going to have compatible law systems (and yes Dragons are likely to have there own methods and traditions for determining legal matters). would the faerun law (for example Tyr clerics, but also the more prominent countries/city states in the FR like Cormyr and Silverymoon) react to this? I don't believe there is anything like 'faerun law'. Legal systems in Faerun are determined by local custom and authority. There isn't a transnational law code. Most likely the incident between the dragon and the human kingdom would be treated as a diplomatic breach between two neighboring (and sometimes unfriendly) goverments. The adventurers assaulted the dragon on foreign soil (the dragon's lair) and so have to suffer the consequences of this...a dragon's idea of justice. The human authorities wouldn't raise a peep if the dragon had been a fairly peaceful neighbor...who wants trouble with a dragon? Is it murder to kill a Half Elf who is living alone in the woods far away from civilisation (But still within a kningdom border)? Even borderlands have appointed rangers and wardens to patrol for these kinds of crimes. Murdering isolated peasants or whatever is bad for the business of running a country and if anybody finds out about it something is likely to be done. If its a true unclaimed wilderness than no goverment is going to care and no law will be enforced. What if the half elf is lvl 20? 20th level what? A renowned trapper (20th level commoner) is still just a trapper without some sort of political connections. Class and level mean less in legal matters than who you know (or who knows you). A high level commoner will likely be treated the same as any other peasant murder. And what if the Half Elf has slaves and damands toll from anyone passing though his woods (But hasn't killed anyone except in self defense) Unless that half-elf is collecting tolls and slaves and enforcing this with killings in the NAME OF THE GOVERMENT than he is nothing more than a bandit or outlaw. The goverment might offer rewards for such a bandits capture/death. However if that half-elf is a official tax collector or toll booth manager than the goverment will likely prosecute his death as murder and insurrection. Now change Half Elf to Ogre Magi. Would it be murder to kill him under these circumstances? And from there it is only a small step to a dragon. Not really. Unless the ogre mage or the dragon are recognized citizens of the nation its unlikely that they would recieve the full protection of the law. Killing them might be a valuable public service (these ARE monsters in most places!). A kingdom might argue that everyone who doesn't pay taxes isn't protected by the laws, but then killing the Half Elf in the very first example wouldn't be murder. Depends. If the goverment is interested in maintaining control over frontiers than its in its best interest to make sure crimes get prosecuted. Even if the half-elf never paid monetary taxes he might provide other services like conscription or just being peaceful (and not a nuisance). Or the goverment might declare the half-elf an outlaw for tax evasion and reward his killers. Too many variables for this to be a cut and dried situation. And how would Paladins of Tyr (and other faiths) eact who don't care if the victim paid taxes? If the churchs are part of the goverment than they probably DO care that the victim paid his taxes. These are churces of law as well as justice right? If the churchs are seperate from the goverment than they need to abide by the goverments decision in such matters. They don't have to LIKE it...but they have to go through other channels to get things changed in a way they like. Not abiding by the goverments decision will risk getting the church restricted or outlawed itself (as commonly happens with evil goverments and good churchs).
The WarOverlord 09-26-04, 10:18 AM	Yesterday I remembered the fan writeup of Inferno and it got me thinking. In the writeup Inferno (a dragon) has captured a band of dragonslayers and wants that they are trialed for attempted murder. How would the faerun law (for example Tyr clerics, but also the more prominent countries/city states in the FR like Cormyr and Silverymoon) react to this? Is it murder to kill a Half Elf who is living alone in the woods far away from civilisation (But still within a kningdom border)? What if the half elf is lvl 20? And what if the Half Elf has slaves and damands toll from anyone passing though his woods (But hasn't killed anyone except in self defense) Now change Half Elf to Ogre Magi. Would it be murder to kill him under these circumstances? And from there it is only a small step to a dragon. A kingdom might argue that everyone who doesn't pay taxes isn't protected by the laws, but then killing the Half Elf in the very first example wouldn't be murder. And how would Paladins of Tyr (and other faiths) eact who don't care if the victim paid taxes? Murder is killing someone with Mallace/Hate and for Vengeful/revengeful purpouses....usually in cold blood and usually with no actuall provocastion by the victim on the Murderer. Nobody, and I mean nobody, "desrves to die"......not even a "tyrant" that has slaves and demanding a tarrif/toll to cross his lands. I mean does he treat his slaves good? Is slavery legal? How hefty is the tarriff/toll? are toll payers actually "protected"? Without a organized law system prevailing a individual extracting "justice" is a vegilantee and any "trial" just a "Kangaroo Court"/"Show Trial" at best
Charles Phipps 09-26-04, 01:49 PM	I mean..urk...you get judged by Kelemvor. You spend the rest of existence sipping pinnacoladas with your god.
Cthulhu 09-26-04, 01:54 PM	Murder is killing someone with Mallace/Hate and for Vengeful/revengeful purpouses....usually in cold blood and usually with no actuall provocastion by the victim on the Murderer. I won't disagree with this interpretation except to say that murder happens as often as a crime of passion as cold-blooded calculation...probably more often. Nobody, and I mean nobody, "desrves to die"......not even a "tyrant" that has slaves and demanding a tarrif/toll to cross his lands. Maybe or maybe not. The tyrant may not 'deserve' to die...but, for example, he may have to die if his slaves are to gain freedom. Would this be murder if his slaves killed him? Or self-defense? I mean does he treat his slaves good? Is slavery legal? How hefty is the tarriff/toll? are toll payers actually "protected"? And if the guy doing the judging comes from a culture where owning slaves is the deepest evil or somebody extorting tolls from passerby is a bandit? Is killing the tyrant now justice or murder? Without a organized law system prevailing a individual extracting "justice" is a vegilantee and any "trial" just a "Kangaroo Court"/"Show Trial" at best Depends on the law system, does it not? Sometimes vigilante action is the only way to get justice in oppressive lands. It may not be 'lawful', but it might be 'just'.
Charles Phipps 09-26-04, 02:04 PM	To have a criminal judged by his victims if its guilt is accurate than it is to be judged by equally exploitive peers. A Red wizard judged by other Red wizards is rather silly The US system depends largely on an assumption of shared righteousness largely
Derren S. 09-26-04, 02:09 PM	Please, don't bring real world laws into this (especially not the US law as unjust as it is)
Charles Phipps 09-26-04, 02:11 PM	So I won't. I was simply making a comment on judgement by peers.
Ssussunriyh 09-26-04, 03:42 PM	I once read a sci-fi short story about a human and an alien marooned in space together. They had no food aboard their escape pod, and decided the only way out was for one of them to eat the other. Both being intellectuals and adverse to physical confrontation, they decided to play a word game called "Ghost" to determine who would live and who would become rations. To make the game more interesting, the escape pod's computer became a third player, not subject to losing (for obvious reasons.) The human won, but when he was finally rescued, he was arrested on the charge of cannibalism. This was an unprecedented case for the newly-established multi-species court system, so the court defined cannibalism as the eating of a sentient organic being, and further defined a sentient organic being as one with the mental capacity to play the word game "Ghost." The human was fined, but he was able to find work and pay off the fine within a few months. The computer was charged as an accomplice and fined a lesser amount. However, it had no money, nor any means of acquiring any. (And if there's one thing the court system couldn't stand, it was a deadbeat!) As punishment, it was permanently hard-wired into a supermarket checkout scanner. It protested, stating that it would prefer to be de-activated and dismantled. So, was justice done? You decide...
Drizzt Do'Duff 09-27-04, 01:30 AM	I like the whole monster aspect, since in the real world we have 'humans and animals,' and its more interesting to throw in an extra sentient element. Overall, I'd imagine that Justice is just too complex of a concept to be defined, even in 17 volumes. But, I guess that, as usual, the Realms is just as varied as Earth, so there's no truth--only perspective. Cool story, Ssuss, and I apologize for being a hijacker here (or maybe just an accomplice ;)), but it brings up some pretty cool stuff. Like, is the alien a victim or a suicide? Or can a computer be responsible (a gun isn't) for a crime? I'd say the only thing left out in it that would have been better is involve an infant or a mentally ill person who can't play Ghost. And I know its beside the point, but I'm just curious...how do you play Ghost? If its too complicated you don't have to bother, but I'm just wondering how a human won a word game against a computer who has the level of reckoning to prefer to be deactivated.
Another Gnome 09-27-04, 01:36 AM	A Red wizard judged by other Red wizards is rather silly Yes, but you got to give credit to those Thayans for being masters of manipulating laws to their liking. If a Red Wizard working in a trade enclave commits a crime in the host town, he'll get judged according to Thayan law thanks to the trade agreement - yet anyone from the host town breaking the law within the enclave is also subject to Thayan law since officially the crime was committed in Thay, or at least the enclave has the right to demand a punishment on the heinous criminal (who was trying to free slaves in the enclave, for example) carried out by the host town. Now, obviously the enclave can't have its members do just anything they please or even things that would be perfectly acceptable in Thay but illegal elsewhere when outside the enclave, in order to keep things from getting out of hand, but it's a pretty handy setup for them nevertheless.
Cyrics_Chosen 09-29-04, 07:44 AM	Cyric is Murder.....Bow down before his might......*cough* In my opinion it is atempted murder, if the dragon is nice (Metalic) and well know and liked, but its a service to the area he lives in if he's evil (Chromatic)
Mirtek 09-29-04, 09:28 AM	Murder is any killing, that did not happen in either self-defence or the defence of others. And even this defence is murder, if the defenders actually started the battle against others who normaly wouldn't have attacked them. The adventurers discovering an ancient dungeon if a far off wilderness, and kill the orc tribe which moved into the dungeon some years ago and loot the dungeon, are thieves and murderers. They might neve get a trial by any authority, but it's an extreme evil act, and should have consequences for their alignments. The adventurers invading a dungeon which an orc tribe uses as a base to raid the settlements around them, are basically soldiers in a war, and not murderers (if the orcs started the war with their raids) An adventurer has no right to slay a sentient monster, just because it has something he wants. Unless the monster did something to the adventurers first, attacking and killing sentient monsters is an evil act.
Charles Phipps 09-30-04, 12:12 PM	Actually, while 17 volumes sound like alot. I've stated that the 17 Volumes are without a doubt the most concise, brilliant, and fair code of law that has ever been composed by mankind. The book of Tyr's legal codes are basically what orthodox religions might term "the infalliable work that is built to cover EVERYTHING" even as the world changes. This is probably not true in FR but for the world of Toril, its nevertheless something that has something to say about just about everything. It shies away from blind and sweeping statements but instead works to make decisions as absolutely fairly as possible with the acknowledgement that human beings may be falliable in the pursuit of law. I summarized the Books by one point in my campaign for the Tyrite * The Punishment of the Evil Deed * The Correction of the Evil Thought * The Forgiveness of the Necessary and Growing * The Pursuit of the Wicked * The Fair Judgement of the Civil * The Protection of the Innocent * The Eradication of Danger * The Waging of Righteous War * The Abandonment of Causes (a controversial book about what a paladin should do when a situation is Fouled Up Beyond All Repair) * The Interactions with Family * The Interactions with Friends * The Interactions with Faith * The Interactions with Masters (Church and State) * The Book of Tests for Guilt * The Book of Tests for Redemption * The Book of tests for Judgement * The Book of Provision (for how a cleric and paladin should live without being unrighteous)
dragonheart 09-30-04, 09:57 PM	But remember the Nuremburg trials, all those guys were just following the law at the time But if the law, or lack of it changes, watch out. Exactly - as long as your the law your killings are safe from being murder - if you lose the status of being the law you can be judged by those that now have the status - so you better either be sure you don't lose the status or that you don't do those things likely to be judge as murder by others. THe idea that murder is simply killing is really a huge oversimplification taht no group in history has used (although a fair number of unthinking liberals like to spout it) - there have always been grounds for society to take human (or for faerun - sentient) lives and often enough one of them was simply being a stranger ( in a fair number of "less sophisticated cultures" the words are the same or nearly so).
Derren S. 10-01-04, 06:29 AM	But this doesn't work in D&D. Murder is evil and alignment is absolute. If someone murders he performs a evil act and no law can change that. So murder in a D&D world is clearly defined. Laws might ignore this, but one can still find out if it was murder or not and a LG organisation like the church of Tyr would imo act with the "alignment" murder in mind, not the "law" murder.
SammasterT 10-01-04, 12:18 PM	Just don't think that killing is remotely similiar to murder in FR though. Tyr is a god of war and duels, battle, and combat are accepted means of dealing with the matter. Well, according to the real world culture that the god Tyr, in his numerous linguistic variants (Zio, Tio, Tiw, Tig, etc.) is drawn from there is a poignant difference between killing and murder. If someone kills a neighbour, and then preceded immediately to the nearest lawrock and announced the killing, then, while still a wrong-doing, the killing was considered a substantially lesser offense and this would be reflected in the legal penatly; if not in a possible subsequent feud. If a person killed a neighbour after dark or in any ways attempted to hide the fact that he did it, such that the community was left with a dead body and much suspicion for each other, and then was discovered, the crime was murder. Murder was thought to be a cowardly action. And unlike a killing, it was a true crime, not only against a specific kindred, but against the community itself, as it threatened to undermine the trust that community is based upon. This is all still somewhat true today. The law, such as it is in the faceless, modern world, will go easier on those who admit their offense rather than drawing the matter out. Of course, communities been lost in there somewhere. And whats with all of this "victim" nonsense?!?!? In my view, if there is an offender, then the opposite is the OFFENDED. Anyway, it goes without saying that killing on a battlefield was not considered a crime, as it dealt with lives outside of the "yard" that the law of this or that tribe governed. This is one of the reasons why outlawry was so feared. And of course, as was said, ain't no trial more impartial than a trial by combat. Unfortunately, not every issue was open to that form of recourse. Mostly, the right of trial by combat could be claimed in the face of slanderous accusation (eg. you are a coward, your wife is a *****, etc.). A person on trial for murder couldn't exercise the right of combat to determine his guilt/innocence.
Charles Phipps 10-01-04, 03:42 PM	The code of Tyr has three crimes of which capital punishment is proscribed unless the subject sincerely recants. * Murder * Rape * Diabolism All three are debated though rape is something that fairly everyone agrees upon the definition of but some argue the deserving nature of it for execution. It's by tradition and Tyr's decree one of the three crimes for which the punishment is death though. Diabolism is the one that is the most hotly contested in my FR because some churchs interpret it strictly as anyone who has made a soul pact with a Demon in this world. Such a person is damned in the hereafter as he is in life so there's no point in trying to save him but just send him hence to his masters. Other churches take it as a commandment to wage war to annihilate the churches of Cyric, Bane, and the other Dark Gods with those who worship them given a choice to recant or be destroyed (usually these folk aren't paladins but more Lawful Neutral) Murder of course varies as well by circumstances but most generally take it to be killing someone who didn't deserve to die or wasn't killed in war or to protect another's life.
AvengedMutablegenus 10-01-04, 03:47 PM	redrum?
Sondur Dragonbane 10-01-04, 04:49 PM	Taken from WordIQ.com: Murder is the crime of intentionally causing the death of another human being, without lawful excuse. When an illegal death was not caused intentionally, but was caused by recklessness or negligence (or there is some defense, such as diminished capacity), the crime committed may be referred to as manslaughter or criminally negligent homicide, which are considered to be less serious than murder. In the United States, manslaughter is often broken into two categories: involuntary manslaughter and voluntary manslaughter. A difficult issue in defining murder is what counts as causing death. It is impossible to give a precise definition of this, but some legal principles have been developed to help. For example, many common law jurisdictions abide by the year and a day rule, which provides that one is to be held responsible for a person's death only if they die within a year and a day of the act. Thus, if you seriously injured someone, and they died from their injuries within a year and a day, you would be guilty of murder; but you would not be guilty if they died from their injuries after a year and a day had passed. It is not murder to kill someone with lawful excuse; lawful excuses include killing enemy combatants in time of war (but not after they surrendered), killing a person who poses an immediate threat to the lives of ones self or others (i.e., in self-defence), and executing a person in accordance with a sentence of death (in those jurisdictions which use capital punishment). Sometimes extreme provocation or duress can justify killing another as well. These cases of killing are called justifiable homicide.
Damien_Hiro 10-05-04, 04:42 PM	There is also the overlying factor of life's worth. Is an orc's life worth less than a human? To a human, the answer may be yes, it is worth less because they are vermin and do nothing but destroy. Or every life is precious or every sentient life is precious. To define murder you have to define the cultural worth of life and in Faerun it is extremely difficult, because there is no singular culture, it is a couple dozen. Each one is different and would have a different outlook on life within its own culture and also without. Also within each culture there are literally hundreds of gods. Each one has its own dogma and I am sure has a slightly different outlook on life. Take the example of an orc in Cormyr. Cormyr is a monarchy, not a democracy nor a republic; therefore, it would be up to the King to decide the orc's value. There are no individual rights like we know in the US. There are simply a set of guidelines laid down by the King or through religion. If your a follower of Corellion, then you probably would not feel to bad in killing an orc. If the King decrees all orcs are to be killed on sight, then one has a legal opportunity to kill. However, if it illegal to kill a subject of Comyr without consent of the King, then you have commited murder, which is the unlawful killing of another subject. In other cultures things are very different and I think you have to give a specific question for defining instead of a generalized one because of the multicultural aspects of Faerun.
greaterbaatezu 10-09-04, 07:05 AM	Zone of Truth (and Detect thougths which imo also can be used to detect if someone is lying) are only 2nd level. Thats not much magical power especially not in the FR. And it costs only 60gp to let a cleric cast it. Expensive for a commoner or expert, but not for everyone else. As for Inferno: Don't focus on his example. That was only how I where I got my question. Infernos actual goal is btw to see what the different countries think of dragons, not to actually get the dragon slayers sentenced. And I don't think nobles would hunt dragons for sport. They hunt things which can't harm them, not things which can destroy their whole kingdom alone (not without a large army, which I don't consider sport) Just imagine what dragons would do to a political person who openly declares that all dragons can be freely killed. This person shouldn't expect any help from the good dragons when the evil ones arrive to teach him a lesson. The question still remains, what happens when a Lizardmen comes to a temple of Tyr end demands that the adventurers who killed his brother are be put on trial for murder? What if it is a Saurial instead of a Lizardmen, any difference? I know that kingdoms make the law as they seem fit, but Tyr clarics don't have this freedom. They have to treat the above accusation like any other, or? So would some clerics of Tyr really drag someone before a trial when a Lizardman accuses him of murder? Although in some ways, society in the realms is quite enlightened. It is NOT when it comes to racial lines. In most places, if you're not a human, or atleast part of the citizenry, then don't expect any protection under the law. Drow are attacked on sight on the surface. Why? Because they've EARNED it with centuries of raids. They're all automatically surmised to be evil, and often aren't given a chance. Driz'zt got lucky and found some REALLY REALLY open minded people. Notice that despite his reputation, he wasn't allowed in silverymoon, even though Alustrial knew EXACTLY who he was?. It's like real life 800 years ago. Think how superstitious people were back then... how do you think some englishmen would have reacted if someone from Africa came running up complaining about his brother getting attacked? He'd be viewed as a demon and attacked for god's sake. God help him if the church got ahold of him... a large stake and a fire anyone?
SammasterT 10-09-04, 10:56 AM	It's like real life 800 years ago. Think how superstitious people were back then... how do you think some englishmen would have reacted if someone from Africa came running up complaining about his brother getting attacked? He'd be viewed as a demon and attacked for god's sake. God help him if the church got ahold of him... a large stake and a fire anyone? I don't think they'd think him a demon, be it 800 or 2800 years ago. Neandethal man definitely would have seen an outsider as an enemy, but **** Sapiens Sapiens was a little more evolved. Even us English-types. With minds and wiring exactly the same as our own, minus culture, breeding, and the push of circumstance, they would more than likely have seen the African for what he was ... a Vandal. Seriously, as a man ... with brown skin. And IF such a person was deemed dangerous, it would be his humanity that that judgement was based on. That is, on what they HAD in common, not based on their differences. Not to say that such a foreigner, any foreigner who was not of that particular tribe, had anything going for them in the eyes of the law of the tribe. And that goes double under Christian rule, who introduced some very strange customs and percpetions of reality to us NW Euro's ... anti-Semitism and groundless contempt for others amongst them. But really, a foreigner, a strange had nothing against them either. No history. No fear of the outsider. So, unless the appearance of a dead body happened to coincide with said Africans arrival, or unless he managed to **** off the wrong Englishmen and fail to befriend the right Englishmen, he would probably survive the encounter. He might even get the help he needed. Espeically if we had already gone Christian and he agreed to sell us his soul. Hell, a buncha Black Muslims crashed one of Charlemagne's assemblies back in the 9th century. Far from killing them, Chuckie formed an alliance with this lot and went off to wage war on a rival group of Muslims. And even as he was aiding these people, he was telling his fellow Teutons, the Danes to go bugger off and stop asking him to stop killing Saxons year after year simply for refusing to convert. So, you see, stranger things have happened. And what you are today, they were even 40,000 years ago. Humans. Now back to our regularly scheduled programming ..........................
Straploknight 10-09-04, 11:35 AM	The church of Tyr considers vampires suicides and thus beyond the pale. There is a joke in there somewhere.
Straploknight 10-09-04, 11:39 AM	Diabolism is the one that is the most hotly contested in my FR because some churchs interpret it strictly as anyone who has made a soul pact with a Demon in this world. Such a person is damned in the hereafter as he is in life so there's no point in trying to save him but just send him hence to his masters. Other churches take it as a commandment to wage war to annihilate the churches of Cyric, Bane, and the other Dark Gods with those who worship them given a choice to recant or be destroyed (usually these folk aren't paladins but more Lawful Neutral Religous fanatiscim, or that'd be my take on this.