In what I had in mind there would be no "invited to take an extended vacation", it would be "exiled on pain of death", and that's if you were nice enough to not get the death sentence. Either way, you get a show trial so they can publicly disgrace you.
Well I used that whole thing to point out that the FF themselves sand the harshest edges off real medieval justice, and they could easily be a whole lot worse than they are portrayed in-game.
Come on. Level 3 FF wizard could apprehend most of bandits forces via combo mirror image + sleep, with no need to use lethal force. Then they can cast charm person to interrogate bandit, making tortures obsolete. Even 1st level wizard could use armor and sleep, then charm person to do that. So comparing FF to medieval justice is pretty ridiculous, and seems to be weak excuse for FF barbarism. They have means to be the most humanitarian justice force you can imagine, but no, let's kill those bandits who surrender to us, and then kill a drow with no trial! Corwin isn't stupid, right? Her intelligence is 12, so she must be aware how FF works, considering she is an officer, no. So her attitude towards CHARNAME seems to be pretty hypocritical... unless she genuinely believes that there is no need for law to represent some moral standard - and that would make her pretty repulsive, awful person, a woman willing to do any order, from kicking puppies to throwing old ladies to the river. ...And I gotta admit - that wouldn't be that much of an issue in the world of Baldur's Gate. As I said, almost everybody seems to be insanely trigger-happy in those games. You approach Lauriel with Reputation lower than 6? Prepare for combat. You don't like the idea of coming back to Candlekeep? Enjoy being murdered on sight - by freaking duke. There is insane gnome in your party? Too bad, Phandalyn will kill him, you, and everyone in your party, even if you spend entire game helping orphans and have 17 reputation. Is there any prophecy about Phandalyn or Lauriel, or what? Because the only difference between them and CHARNAME is efficiency, really. And what level Phandalyn is, 5? It means he had to spend some time killing people, unless he grinded all that experience points on undead - but given his eagerness to kill living, I doubt that. So "you are progeny of Lord of Murder" is pretty lame excuse in my books. CHARNAME doesn't act much different than any other character in game, he/she is just more successful due to Powerword: reload. So it's pretty sloppy writing to make an issue of being a killer in a game where every major problem is resolved via killing. And one other thing that came to my mind: Scar and Eltan have no problem with CHARNAME killing every single doppelganger in Merchant Guild. They don't protest against killing Zhalimar and his party (who do not actively hunt CHARNAME, just attack on sight - which is pretty common reaction in Baldur's Gate). They won't say "you sir, are too violent, we'll find other adventurers to deal with Iron Throne, off with you!". And suddenly after Sarevok's death violent ways of CHARNAME are being a problem? I mean, I'm fine with dukes being cynical, cold bastards, who make CHARNAME basically a scapegoat, but defending them and saying that they have legitimate reasons to cast CHARNAME away is pretty stupid. They should express their concern after CHARNAME killed everyone in bandits camp. But I guess they needed someone to their dirty work, eh? So there is no "examining CHARNAME's deeds from different point of view", but display of hipocrysy or sloppy writing. Take your pick.
"They might not even extend that much courtesy to adventurers, because the term for people who made money fighting that weren't employed by a lord in the real Middle Ages was "highwaymen", and they were outlaws who were killed on sight and hated by nearly everyone."
Robin Hood
Also missing the fact that the FF are a mercenary company, not "the authorities" by any modern accepted definition of the word. They answer to their paymasters, not the state, not the King.
It's quite feasible that an alternative mercenary company, called the "Freezing Foot" existed that had equal status and equal jurisdiction within their sphere of influence who, "kicked butts for evil".
And they could still say "I am the law".
And if the Flaming Fist got a better offer, a more lucrative deal offered by an opposing force, against the Dukes of BG. What mechanism is there to stop them taking it? Where does that leave Corwin? She's merely an employee, a mercenary.
In fact had charname had an interest in politics, they could have taken over BG, removed the Dukes and set themselves up as ruler. And if they were a LG Paladin, might well be welcomed with open arms by the populance who had got sick of all the crime/corruption operating in BG over the years.
Sarevok's plan is to set himself up as a false "hero/savior of BG", it nearly worked. Well what if you were a true savior?
The Sword Coast is quite blatantly and obviously based on northwestern Europe (especially England, because the entire high fantasy tradition the Forgotten Realms draw from is very, very English). Therefore, northwestern Europe, and England in particular, from around AD 1000-1450 is the appropriate comparison for the Sword Coast.
Very English except for one thing. It's not a kingdom, very important distinction.
Middle Ages, the King was annointed by God. It's from that that the power structures flow.
BG doesn't have that background, but you are using the concept of that ultimate authority to support the idea of the FF/Dukes as being "the authorities".
Comments
So comparing FF to medieval justice is pretty ridiculous, and seems to be weak excuse for FF barbarism. They have means to be the most humanitarian justice force you can imagine, but no, let's kill those bandits who surrender to us, and then kill a drow with no trial!
Corwin isn't stupid, right? Her intelligence is 12, so she must be aware how FF works, considering she is an officer, no. So her attitude towards CHARNAME seems to be pretty hypocritical... unless she genuinely believes that there is no need for law to represent some moral standard - and that would make her pretty repulsive, awful person, a woman willing to do any order, from kicking puppies to throwing old ladies to the river.
...And I gotta admit - that wouldn't be that much of an issue in the world of Baldur's Gate. As I said, almost everybody seems to be insanely trigger-happy in those games. You approach Lauriel with Reputation lower than 6? Prepare for combat. You don't like the idea of coming back to Candlekeep? Enjoy being murdered on sight - by freaking duke. There is insane gnome in your party? Too bad, Phandalyn will kill him, you, and everyone in your party, even if you spend entire game helping orphans and have 17 reputation. Is there any prophecy about Phandalyn or Lauriel, or what? Because the only difference between them and CHARNAME is efficiency, really. And what level Phandalyn is, 5? It means he had to spend some time killing people, unless he grinded all that experience points on undead - but given his eagerness to kill living, I doubt that.
So "you are progeny of Lord of Murder" is pretty lame excuse in my books. CHARNAME doesn't act much different than any other character in game, he/she is just more successful due to Powerword: reload. So it's pretty sloppy writing to make an issue of being a killer in a game where every major problem is resolved via killing.
And one other thing that came to my mind: Scar and Eltan have no problem with CHARNAME killing every single doppelganger in Merchant Guild. They don't protest against killing Zhalimar and his party (who do not actively hunt CHARNAME, just attack on sight - which is pretty common reaction in Baldur's Gate). They won't say "you sir, are too violent, we'll find other adventurers to deal with Iron Throne, off with you!". And suddenly after Sarevok's death violent ways of CHARNAME are being a problem? I mean, I'm fine with dukes being cynical, cold bastards, who make CHARNAME basically a scapegoat, but defending them and saying that they have legitimate reasons to cast CHARNAME away is pretty stupid. They should express their concern after CHARNAME killed everyone in bandits camp.
But I guess they needed someone to their dirty work, eh?
So there is no "examining CHARNAME's deeds from different point of view", but display of hipocrysy or sloppy writing. Take your pick.
Robin Hood
Also missing the fact that the FF are a mercenary company, not "the authorities" by any modern accepted definition of the word.
They answer to their paymasters, not the state, not the King.
It's quite feasible that an alternative mercenary company, called the "Freezing Foot" existed that had equal status and equal jurisdiction within their sphere of influence who,
"kicked butts for evil".
And they could still say "I am the law".
And if the Flaming Fist got a better offer, a more lucrative deal offered by an opposing force, against the Dukes of BG.
What mechanism is there to stop them taking it?
Where does that leave Corwin?
She's merely an employee, a mercenary.
In fact had charname had an interest in politics, they could have taken over BG, removed the Dukes and set themselves up as ruler.
And if they were a LG Paladin, might well be welcomed with open arms by the populance who had got sick of all the crime/corruption operating in BG over the years.
Sarevok's plan is to set himself up as a false "hero/savior of BG", it nearly worked.
Well what if you were a true savior?
It's not a kingdom, very important distinction.
Middle Ages, the King was annointed by God. It's from that that the power structures flow.
BG doesn't have that background, but you are using the concept of that ultimate authority to support the idea of the FF/Dukes as being "the authorities".
Quite simply, they are not.