Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Neverwinter Nights: Enhanced Edition has been announced! Visit nwn.beamdog.com to pre-order, apply for the Head Start and check for details. NWN:EE FAQ is available.
Soundtracks for BG:EE, SoD, BG2:EE, IWD:EE, PST:EE are now available in the Beamdog store.
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Questions about Paladins

245

Comments

  • BorekBorek Member Posts: 217
    To be fair we only have Viconia's word on what she was doing and it should not be forgotten that Keldorn can detect she is evil and SEE that she is a Drow. Not sure it's fair to simply label him as racist though. My only complaint about that scene is that he makes no effort to uphold the law, but again is that really an issue when it's right by the main government building and the Jail? For all we know it's perfectly legal to burn people at the stake in Athkatla.

    Also, yes, Good and Evil do matter in that world, deities gain real power based on their followers and there's a huge number of powerful entities meddling in everything to try and leverage an advantage. At some point Keldorn has to just accept that an Evil Drow Priestess of Shar is better off dead, regardless of the specific reasons being given, the fact that it's not by his own hand and requires merely not stopping an angry mob that may or may not be acting with legal authority is perfectly acceptable to Torm. Heck he could slit her throat as she slept and Torm is unlikely to do anything other than give him a high five.

    Artonajohntyl
  • Lord_TansheronLord_Tansheron Member Posts: 4,063
    Borek said:

    To be fair we only have Viconia's word on what she was doing

    We have that, and a lack of any other indication whatsoever that she was doing anything. You think some random humans could have cornered her while she was actually attacking someone or whatever? You think Viconia would think it's a good idea to sneak into an enemy city and start a ruckus?
    Borek said:

    For all we know it's perfectly legal to burn people at the stake in Athkatla.

    We have examples from this very game where Paladins go against the law in the name of righteousness (see the land dispute in Imnesvale), so obviously "it's the law" is not the strongest excuse. While I doubt it's outright LEGAL to burn people alive in Athkatla, I would assume that the law there simply doesn't look too closely when a drow is involved.
    And to be honest, "it's the law" is very close to "lawful stupid" in most scenarios. Keldorn is, after all, lawful GOOD - not lawful neutral (for whom "the law is the law is the law" is basically the description).
    Borek said:

    At some point Keldorn has to just accept that an Evil Drow Priestess of Shar is better off dead

    That I can accept, and that explains his later fight to the death with Viconia.

    It does not explain him watching perfectly happily while an unknown member of a particular race is burned alive for no (apparent) reason other than her race. If anything, it should have compelled him to intervene and find out what is going on. The default stance for good characters should be compassion, I think. Most of the other good-aligned characters basically react that way.

    Also, none of that explains why the paladins are totally cool with a large part of their city being evil. From Shadow Thieves to Cowled Wizards to corrupt nobles, it's a veritable cesspool. Yet the Order seems to be putting that aside in the name of what, politics? The greater good? Apparently they're totally fine letting evil live. Priests of Talos, an evil god of chaos? Why certainly, Mr. Paladin, come right in and get some healing here. Doesn't bother you one bit. After all, we're a powerful political force in these lands, and not a lone wanderer with the wrong color of skin. Doing "good" is so easy when it's about burning an exhausted woman in an alien land.

    And that's not even going into the whole problem of Viconia actually changing alignment to NOT evil. The possibility for redemption is not in your world view, hm, Mr. Lawful Good?

    johntyl
  • AttalusAttalus Member Posts: 148
    edited June 29



    We have examples from this very game where Paladins go against the law in the name of righteousness (see the land dispute in Imnesvale), so obviously "it's the law" is not the strongest excuse. While I doubt it's outright LEGAL to burn people alive in Athkatla, I would assume that the law there simply doesn't look too closely when a drow is involved.

    I don't doubt it at all. The fact that it is done in front of the prison indicates that it indeed is legal. But there have been lynchings near legal prisons in RL. We just don't know enough about Atkatlan jurisprudence to know. Admittedly the spectators' remarks are distasteful, but I understand that the crowds at British drawings and quartering were just as bad on occasion.
    Borek said:

    At some point Keldorn has to just accept that an Evil Drow Priestess of Shar is better off dead

    That I can accept, and that explains his later fight to the death with Viconia.

    It does not explain him watching perfectly happily while an unknown member of a particular race is burned alive for no (apparent) reason other than her race.
    You are leaving out that she would ping as "Evil" to Keldorn's Detect Evil ability.

    ThacoBell
  • karnor00karnor00 Member Posts: 647

    And that's not even going into the whole problem of Viconia actually changing alignment to NOT evil. The possibility for redemption is not in your world view, hm, Mr. Lawful Good?

    There is more than one way to be Lawful Good. Killing evil people vs trying to redeem them are two very different approaches. Yet both would fall into the category of lawful good.

    The definition of good is also a very subjective. The terrorist suicide bomber who blows up a Westerner children's school believes he is doing the right thing. Most of the rest of the world would view it as an evil act.

    Grond0
  • JidokwonJidokwon Member Posts: 264
    edited June 29
    I see that people keep saying that Keldorn used Detect Evil to sense that she was evil. He never did that in any of my games. Even if he did use it, what all does it really sense? One evil act in a person's life? Also, as has been mentioned, if paladins do justify killing on what Detect Evil senses alone, why do they turn a blind eye to all of the other evil folk that they likely have every day dealings with? I love the Forgotten Realms setting, but I've only scratched the surface of becoming familiar with it. Are there examples in any literature where paladins or even entire justice systems use Detect Evil alone to sentence suspects?

  • Grond0Grond0 Member Posts: 2,300
    Jidokwon said:

    I see that people keep saying that Keldorn used Detect Evil to sense that she was evil. He never did that in any of my games. Even if he did use it, what all does it really sense? One evil act in a person's life? Also, as has been mentioned, if paladins do justify killing on what Detect Evil senses alone, why do they turn a blind eye to all of the other evil folk that they likely have every day dealings with? I love the Forgotten Realms setting, but I've only scratched the surface of becoming familiar with it. Are there examples in any literature where paladins or even entire justice systems use Detect Evil alone to sentence suspects?

    As has been mentioned a few times good and evil in the game are not the same as in RL. Detect evil reveals an aspect of someone's alignment - which is built up over the course of time. While it can be changed, as the game shows, it's not the result of a single act (although there's an exception to that in the hell trials where the change is the result of godlike powers being applied to you).

    As @Borek said, paladins are in a difficult position in Athkatla as the actions they would probably want to take are constrained by the situation they're in. That's going to put a big strain on them, so it's no surprise that we see so many fallen paladins in the Bridge District. :D

    There's a clear example of a life and death decision being made on the basis of detect evil in BG2 - in the paladin quest (there's actually another earlier in the quest sequence, but you may not come across it depending on how you act and make dialogue choices).

    BorekThacoBellBelgarathMTH
  • batoorbatoor Member Posts: 556
    edited June 29
    I've only seen the first banter with Viconia and Keldorn and haven't used them together much, but I knew it would end badly based on what I already know..I still have trouble accepting it though, since Keldorn seems rather pragmatic in general. Especially in regards to Korgan...I haven't seen what he says about Edwin, but I know they don't fight to the death..But to then attack Viconia simply because she's a drow and she worships shar? And even cheer for the stupid peasant mob trying to lynch her? That is suspicious and probably quite racist like other people have said imo.

  • Lord_TansheronLord_Tansheron Member Posts: 4,063
    I'm lawful good. I seek out evil and destroy it, unless it happens to be institutionalized in the place where I live and make my living, safe in the comfort those institutions provide. Then I'm okay with turning a blind eye to corruption and abuse of power, because I directly benefit from it. But when I see someone who I know is evil, alone and vulnerable, I will burn them at the stake. When there's no risk to myself or my comfortable life, I'm happy to retreat to the safety of my conviction that evil must be eradicated, no questions asked. This has nothing to do with the fact that the only time this ever happens involves a member of a particularly hated race. I sense they are evil, and thus they deserve to be burned alive. I also sense hundreds of other people are evil, but somehow I do not go and kill THEM. Even thieves and murderers, alone in dark alleys. I don't even raise any objections when letting the killer of a little boy go free. That's how lawful good I am.

    No, you're right, this isn't hypocritical at all.

    Jidokwon
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 3,801
    @Lord_Tansheron again, there is no indication that Viconia's burning was not lawful. Being lawful good means that even if you hold good as more important (which I do) the law is still a necessary consideration. Should Keldorn jump in and rescue every evil being that is executed in the court and prison district in the city? Or is only unacceptable because Viconia is a drow? And what exactly is Keldorn supposed to do alone against the evil institution's in the city? Eradicate the temple of Talos and then watch the city burn under a very real god's wrath? March into the Shadow Thief guild hall and slaughter everyone without a court hearing? Try to arrest every single one of them without being killed? And what he succeeds? Now he has just instigated a war between Amn and all the thief guilds, who will retaliate. How much more deaths and destruction would be caused because you seem to think Keldorn can't actually be good unless he instigates some kind of cowboy justice with all disregard for the consequences. Keldorn is pragmatic, and can see the further reaching consequences for the city he has spent his life protecting.

    BelgarathMTHAttalusFoxter
  • Lord_TansheronLord_Tansheron Member Posts: 4,063
    ThacoBell said:

    again, there is no indication that Viconia's burning was not lawful. Being lawful good means that even if you hold good as more important (which I do) the law is still a necessary consideration. Should Keldorn jump in and rescue every evil being that is executed in the court and prison district in the city?

    There is a difference between execution and lynching. And even if there wasn't, a truly righteous paladin would feel obligated to make sure the law and the good were both being served - as the paladins do when it comes to another situation in which the two don't overlap (see the dispute in Imnesvale). The Order is clear that they side with what is right, even if it means going against the law.
    If Keldorn just assumes that a mob burning is simply following the due course of the law, then he's at BEST ignorant, and at worst complicit. "Oh she's a drow, and she's evil, so I'm sure this angry mob of people with no discernible official in sight is just a legal execution" is a terrible excuse for anyone, but it's a condemnation for a paladin.
    ThacoBell said:

    Or is only unacceptable because Viconia is a drow?

    Isn't this turning my argument around? With Viconia, Keldorn is all for swift and final judgment. With all the other evil people you meet, the murderers, thieves, and whatnot, he never as much as raises his voice. Lynis, who murdered a little boy? Keldorn is perfectly fine with letting him run away, even though he could be killed on the spot without anyone batting an eye. The scores of fences, thieves, and assassins you meet in dark corners, any of which you could easily kill without a hitch? Keldorn may express his disappointment at you buying their fenced goods, but apparently his "evil detector" isn't enough to warrant a lethal response in that case.
    So you can see how it might look suspicious that the ONLY time Keldorn is totally happy with no-questions-asked judgment also happens to involve a particularly hated race.
    ThacoBell said:

    And what exactly is Keldorn supposed to do alone against the evil institution's in the city?

    SOMETHING. Anything. Just not sit there and ignore the problems, while displaying ostensible righteousness against helpless victims and reaping the benefits of cooperating with evil. How can this be a paladin thing to do?
    Trying hard to avoid Godwin's law, but there do exist examples of this problem IRL. And complicity is never the right answer.
    ThacoBell said:

    How much more deaths and destruction would be caused because you seem to think Keldorn can't actually be good unless he instigates some kind of cowboy justice with all disregard for the consequences. Keldorn is pragmatic, and can see the further reaching consequences for the city he has spent his life protecting.

    That's my point. Keldorn makes compromises. That's fine. But that's also hypocritical. You can't justify killing Viconia because "worshipers of evil must die", and at the same time happily cooperate with other worshipers of evil to maintain your status quo. You can't have it both ways, and if you think so, then you're a hypocrite. If his only reason for wanting her dead is her being evil, he would have to show the same judgment against other worshipers of evil. He doesn't. So clearly evil alone is not enough of an argument, which means that there are other things to consider. Yet somehow all the other circumstances are carefully weighed when it comes to Keldorn's life in the order, but are not even questioned one bit when it comes to a mob burning.

    I'm not saying Keldorn SHOULD go on a righteous rampage. I'm just saying that you can't call anyone truly "good" if they willingly cooperate with evil and corruption, and make compromises whenever it's convenient for them while happily ignoring all other factors when it comes to cases like Viconia.

    And there's plenty of things Keldorn could do to maintain his righteousness without it ending in a massacre. Resign from an Order he knows is complicit in the city's corruption. There is no shortage of evil in the world that he could go fight without compromising his righteousness and without causing massive carnage. But of course then he wouldn't have a nice estate and a room at the Order, and all the prestige and convenience that comes with it.

    I'm not saying that isn't what most people do, realistically. Compromises are everywhere. That's not the issue. This issue is rationalization, and pretending you are still a paragon of righteousness. Because you're not. That doesn't make you evil, but it does make you less good than you think you are. And if you keep using your ideals as an excuse while turning a blind eye to your compromises - well then, as I keep saying, you're a hypocrite. And most people are, don't get me wrong. But that's not what I imagine a paladin to be.

  • BorekBorek Member Posts: 217
    He's a Paladin of Torm, so Duty is what drives him, he essentially does what the Order tells him to do. Based on the snippets from the various Cleric and Paladin quests (and even Dorn's quest) it is clear that the City politics are extremely complicated and frequently result in highly dubious compromises. For example the Talos Cleric quests involve killing people and actively indulging in judicial corruption. The Paladin quests do involve killing someone after using detect evil, but it is worth noting that this person is an outsider, the Fallen paladins are dealt with but i would consider them to definitely fall under the jurisdiction of the Order.

    I will also point out that strolling around slaughtering people that are either caught doing bad things or detect as Evil is most definitely not classed as Lawful and only qualifies as Good if it is clear that they will continue to cause significant death and destruction. Even knowing that the legal system in the city is corrupt, it does not justify assigning oneself as judge, jury and executioner just because you happen to be able to detect Evil x times per day.

    Obviously being in an adventuring party does modify the situation somewhat, but it definitely seems that the power balance is important to keeping the city from tearing itself apart. The cowled wizards seem happy that none of the factions present in the city gain enough power to challenge them. The end result is an uneasy peace, loads of corruption and individuals who are at the extremes of the alignment spectrum (LG and CE) having the unpleasant reality of having to restrain themselves quite severely and very regularly.

    Now yes, the order does get involved in the land dispute in Imnesvale, but the Baron and his cronies assume you will be corrupt and side with them, plus the Order was ASKED to mediate. Even in such a matter that was quite a distance from the City they appear to be pretty passive with their approach.

    I surmise that the trio of Good Deities recognize that Athkatla and the surrounding area is so rife with non-Lawful organisations and powerful factions that they are simply unable to impose their ideals due to retaliation from the opposition resulting in them being wiped out and/or such fallout from the resulting fighting that it would be counter-productive.

    An adventuring party led by a God-child is both small enough and potent enough to act with impunity for the most part. No one should think that this in any way equates to "normal" though, pretty much anyone else who started throwing around their weight would just be slaughtered or judged and sentenced to Spellhold by the Cowlies. If a non-partied keldorn decided to start throwing his Holy wrath about against the Cowlies for example, they'd just kidnap his family via magic or out-right slaughter him claiming he was casting spells in public.

    BelgarathMTHThacoBell
  • Grond0Grond0 Member Posts: 2,300
    edited June 30

    And even if there wasn't, a truly righteous paladin would feel obligated to make sure the law and the good were both being served - as the paladins do when it comes to another situation in which the two don't overlap (see the dispute in Imnesvale). The Order is clear that they side with what is right, even if it means going against the law.

    @Lord_Tansheron the dispute in Innesvale is not an example where the law and good are both being served. In that particular case you get most XP for a resolution where good is served at the expense of law. However, law being served at the expense of good is also a possible resolution and doesn't break the paladin quest line.

    Your view seems to be that a paladin can never compromise with evil - even if both your god and your Order tell you to (this seems more like a modern view of good and evil as opposed to "good is what my god says it is"). I can see that is a possible interpretation of the class, but I think it's too harsh - effectively it would mean paladins could never be part of a large, settled community and I don't think that's consistent with the game world.

    In relation to Keldorn your view is that he has to choose between being lawful and good in the matter of Viconia's killing. Even if that were the case, as others have said, he does have compelling reasons in her case to choose a 'good' resolution, i.e. killing her - she is a priestess of a god directly antagonistic to his. However, it's not that clear that he needs to make such a choice in the first place. The fact that the killing is taking place in the most lawful area of the city, using equipment (posts) apparently designed for the purpose suggests to me that this type of killing is not unique. We don't know how Viconia ended up there, but given that the guards are not interfering it's certainly a possible interpretation that she was lawfully condemned to death.

    BelgarathMTHThacoBellAttalus
  • ArtonaArtona Member Posts: 748
    edited June 30
    With all the other evil people you meet, the murderers, thieves, and whatnot, he never as much as raises his voice. Lynis, who murdered a little boy?


    I think it's a matter of priesthood. Lynis, Korgan and Edwin aren't motivate by scoring a point for Team Evil. They are motivated by their ambition, greed, bloodlust, whatever - meanwhile, Viconia serves evil deity, and one of big players of Team Evil. Her job is to basically score points for her Team. Edwin and Korgan will probably do so as well, but unintentionally, without specific effort to do so.
    I'm not saying it's perfect, the most reasonable or the most insightful view of the world, but I can see why it makes sense for Keldorn to be much hostile more towards Viconia than Korgan.

    Also, none of that explains why the paladins are totally cool with a large part of their city being evil. From Shadow Thieves to Cowled Wizards to corrupt nobles, it's a veritable cesspool. Yet the Order seems to be putting that aside in the name of what, politics?


    Probably, yeah, and I assume Keldorn sworn some oath of obiedence to his Order (I'm not sure if it's explicity said in game, but I think Radiant Heart is similar enough to real-world knightly orders to make analogy, especially given the fact that paladins are Lawful). So when his superiors want to make nice with Shadow Thieves, he obides, because doing so is less evil than going rogue. Once again - not necessarly choice I would make, but sensible for conservative, strict veteran.

    The possibility for redemption is not in your world view, hm, Mr. Lawful Good?


    Good doesn't have to be nice.

    Grond0BelgarathMTHThacoBellDreadKhan
  • ArunsunArunsun Member Posts: 1,349
    Good and Evil are rather hard to define.
    Our common definition of good in 2017 is not necessarily applicable to the forgotten realms. It wasn't always applicable to our own world. How many wars were fought with two camps saying good was on their side? Just about all of them. And yet by our current standards good was on neither's side.

    Thus there's more than kind of good.
    Keldorn is the "Lawful Stupid" kind of good. He has a moral code, one that tells him drows are Evil until proven otherwise (and Viconia never proves otherwise. All she does is proving she's not a ruthless killer. Not quite enough to qualify her as a good person, moreover when she worships Shar, an important member of "Team Evil" like Artona said, and an enemy to Torm. Viconia is evil, plain and simple. ), and he carries this code out to the letter.
    But when I play a good character without impersonating a very specific character, I tend to play him with our 2017 westerner definition of good. Meaning, tolerance, open-mindedness, presumption of innocence... And I guess it fits the fact the Bhaalspawn was educated by Gorion, a Harper, in a great library. That's a different, more modern kind of good. But yes, when I play a Paladin, I won't want Viconia in my team. I will save her because she gets attacked due to her race (and both times it's only her race - not her recent crimes- that causes the persecution), but then I will bid her farewell with the idea that right now I haven't seen her doing anything evil, but that if I do I wouldn't have any qualms exacting justice on her. A lawful good guy that follows the ways of a Paladin isn't compatible with Viconia, if only because he strives to deserve the best possible reputation, to get people to trust him, and people in the realms won't be likely to trust a guy who befriends with drows. The Realms are much more prejudiced than our world.
    What I just said is true for a Paladin mostly, and a lawful good something else could be compatible with Viconia, but a Paladin is supposed to be the model, the very example of the definition of good in the Realms. That's the essence of the class.

    So yeah I don't find it shocking that Keldorn and Viconia should fight, because Viconia's behavior is that of an evil character. Not that she doesn't have her reasons, or that she is a butcher or anything like that, but she's still evil, and from what I remember Keldorn grumbles when you accept her but doesn't outright fight her, it takes some time, time during which he judges her not to match his expectations.

    BelgarathMTHThacoBellAttalus
  • BelgarathMTHBelgarathMTH Member Posts: 4,463

    ThacoBell said:

    You say this, yet evil and good are both quantifiable in this universe. She pings evil to his detection ability, and guess what, she is. Its not like IRL where good and evil are concepts as opposed to measurable forces.

    I'm not disputing this. It's the miracle exemption we can grant the setting.

    The problem is that it's handled hypocritically. The world of BG is FULL of evil people, and yet they aren't simply rounded up and burnt at the stake, despite plenty of paladins around to "ping" them. Which means they obviously don't just go around killing everyone who registers as "evil". Heck they have a fully functioning legal system, with laws, prisons, and everything. Yet somehow it is okay to see a drow, and then just burn her alive at the stake without trial or a second thought, despite her not actually having DONE anything to offend? For no reason other than her race? THAT is the hypocrisy.

    And it should be noted that characters like Aerie do in fact have a problem with this, despite her being very much subject to racial bias against drow.
    The Drow as a people and an orgainzed government constantly raid and make war against human settlements. Race isn't really the issue. They are military enemies in an ongoing war. Viconia is captured and sentenced to execution because she is an enemy of the city-state and has no business being there. The government of Amn, and Keldorn, can reasonably assume she is a spy, since she is caught hiding her identity and sneaking about.

    ArtonaThacoBellDreadKhan
  • Lord_TansheronLord_Tansheron Member Posts: 4,063
    edited June 30

    The Drow as a people and an orgainzed government constantly raid and make war against human settlements. Race isn't really the issue. They are military enemies in an ongoing war. Viconia is captured and sentenced to execution because she is an enemy of the city-state and has no business being there. The government of Amn, and Keldorn, can reasonably assume she is a spy, since she is caught hiding her identity and sneaking about.

    Isn't that pretty much the definition of racism?

  • SouplesseSouplesse Member Posts: 72
    edited June 30
    What do you do when you play a pally and you meet Viconia in bg1?
    Of course you save her from the soldier but after?
    You cannot take her in your team coz she's evil.
    You cannot say go away because she's a drow coz this is racism!
    And don't take her in you're team because she is too weak is not a very LG reaction..

  • Lord_TansheronLord_Tansheron Member Posts: 4,063
    tbone1 said:


    Isn't that pretty much the definition of racism?

    No. Killing a Drow because she's a Drow would be. Killing a Drow who is caught hiding and skulking, and who happens to be a cleric of a deity like Shar, when the Drow are at war does not strike me as racist because there it is based on behavior, the individual's declared allegiance with Shar, and the Drow being at war.

    You are literally talking about being at war WITH A RACE, and say it's not racism. Viconia is an outcast, she has no ties with any official drow faction, warring or otherwise. And since when is "hiding and skulking" a crime, let alone one punishable by death? Clearly the deciding factor was what race she is, not what she did - and that, quite literally, is racism.

  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 3,801
    To go back to Keldorn's acceptance of some evil characters and not others:

    1.Lynis. I can't speak for this one, don't I've ever had Keldorn in my party for that quest.

    2. Korgan. What does Korgan actually DO that's evil? All we get of his character at first is a joy for combat, some innuendos, and a distaste for child slavery. There is the murder of part of his previous party, but that devolves into a "he said, she said" situation and we get no evidence of who started that fight. Korgan never turns on the party, so evidence points to him not starting the trouble. Aside from pinging evil, his actions could easily be construed as neutral. Korgan and Keldorn's personalities and actions never really come into much conflict.
    3. Edwin. Pings evil, yup, red wizard, yup. Seems pretty cut and dry that Keldorn should take exemption. But what does Edwin do that is dangerously evil? He mumbles to himself. I mean, who takes him seriously?


    Now Keldorn is NOT RIGHT IN EVERYTHING HE DOES. Again, he is a deconstruction of the shining, knight. He struggles very hard with law vs. good as is shown very clearly in his personal quest. His political ties prevent him from acting against a lot of the evil in the city. He lets some things slide wisely, other things he lets slide that he shouldn't, the reverse also happens. He is jaded, conflicted human being that tries his best, but fails almost as often as he succeeds. That why I love this character, he is seriously flawed but he tries so hard to be the best he can. On that note: screw Viconia, only Dorn and Hexxat manage to more evil than her, Keldorn is fully justified in hating her.

    ArtonaFoxter
  • karnor00karnor00 Member Posts: 647

    tbone1 said:


    Isn't that pretty much the definition of racism?

    No. Killing a Drow because she's a Drow would be. Killing a Drow who is caught hiding and skulking, and who happens to be a cleric of a deity like Shar, when the Drow are at war does not strike me as racist because there it is based on behavior, the individual's declared allegiance with Shar, and the Drow being at war.

    You are literally talking about being at war WITH A RACE, and say it's not racism. Viconia is an outcast, she has no ties with any official drow faction, warring or otherwise. And since when is "hiding and skulking" a crime, let alone one punishable by death? Clearly the deciding factor was what race she is, not what she did - and that, quite literally, is racism.
    You're trying to apply a 21st century western justice system, and our views of right vs wrong, to what is basically a late medieval civilisation in Amn.

    And you're also applying very recent real world views about racism to those societies.

    The USA had segregation as part of law until as recently as about 50 years ago. Does that mean the USA was an evil country until then?

    What about slavery which was legal in most countries had until about 200 years ago. Were all civilisations evil until that time?

    Or have we just changed our views on good and evil since then? No doubt future generations will disapprove of some of the things we accept today.

    So, in the city of Amn, it probably is a crime to be a drow hiding in the city. And the city probably believes it is doing the right thing with the execution. And therefore Keldorn can still be lawful good by not preventing it.

    Grond0BelgarathMTHBalrog99
  • Lord_TansheronLord_Tansheron Member Posts: 4,063
    I give up. This is going nowhere.

    "Being a drow is a crime here, but it's not racism" are you kidding me. And after it was pointed out multiple times that good/evil are actual concrete forces rather than subjective value systems in this setting, people argue with how views of good/evil change over time?

    Let's just agree that this is pointless to discuss further.

  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 3,801

    I give up. This is going nowhere.

    "Being a drow is a crime here, but it's not racism" are you kidding me. And after it was pointed out multiple times that good/evil are actual concrete forces rather than subjective value systems in this setting, people argue with how views of good/evil change over time?

    Let's just agree that this is pointless to discuss further.

    You're combing the arguments of different people here, no one said such a statement. The racism comment still completely ignores the fact that KELDORN DOES NOT ATTACK VICONIA BECAUSE OF HER RACE. Ergo, it could not possibly be racism.

  • fatelessfateless Member Posts: 330
    ThacoBell said:

    To go back to Keldorn's acceptance of some evil characters and not others:

    2. Korgan. What does Korgan actually DO that's evil? All we get of his character at first is a joy for combat, some innuendos, and a distaste for child slavery. There is the murder of part of his previous party, but that devolves into a "he said, she said" situation and we get no evidence of who started that fight. Korgan never turns on the party, so evidence points to him not starting the trouble. Aside from pinging evil, his actions could easily be construed as neutral. Korgan and Keldorn's personalities and actions never really come into much conflict.
    3. Edwin. Pings evil, yup, red wizard, yup. Seems pretty cut and dry that Keldorn should take exemption. But what does Edwin do that is dangerously evil? He mumbles to himself. I mean, who takes him seriously?

    Starting with Korgan. If you do follow his story fully through to the meeting on top of the one Inn. You actually do find out Korgan had a big part in starting it and you can take part in killing the rest of his old party yet Keldorn doesn't even make a comment for it that I remember. There's also the fact that in some of his bragging he doesn't actually mind sharing evil acts that he has done. Which again. Keldorn does not strike him down for and they even come to mutual respect. Despite Korgan being evil.

    3. Edwin. Evil and a Red Wizard. A known Insideously evil organization of Wizards. There is no exemption for Keldorn to be making here. Specially when just about every other red wizard encounter in the game is either an attempt on your party or an attempt to do some form of evil magic.


    Just like there is lawful Stupid. There is Stupid Evil, Korgan borders on Stupid Evil. Doing evil because it's "the evil thing to do". While he's toned down Korgan has more than a few instances of "let's do this because it sounds like the evil thing to do."

    Edwin's humbling himself is done by a man who is smart and clearly knows how to worm his way around to get things done. and ignore doing that in situations where he feels he doesn't have to. Edwin being Lawful Evil means he knows how to play within the rules but it makes him no less evil. It means he makes the rules work for him to do that evil as much as possible. The only possible savior for Edwin from Keldorn would be if Keldorn needs that aspect of broken laws to go after people. But that would mean that Korgan should suffer greatly at Keldorn's hands at some point.

    When it comes to Viconia however. Keldorn starts hating on her from first sight. As has been pointed out in this thread. Basically one of the first things out of his mouth to her often enough is basically to snear at her and mention her race, not her god, and not a general dislike for her as a person. if you take the time to talk to the Jailor for the Jail they are next to as I recall he makes a remark of he wasn't about to try and stop the crowd from what they wanted to do. Suggesting that it wasn't exactly a legal lynching. Vastly common in historical mob mentalities and lynchings being done near official judicial locations. On top of that you find out he's had a bad history with Drow in his younger years where he's lost people in his charge due to fights with them. he has a few different comments that border on disliking drow with Viconia herself before he finally attacks her. And he never does give an actual explanation why he does attack her. The only thing out of place about his behavior about Drow is actually his saying good things about and too Drizzt.

    There is also the fact that he knows nothing about her beliefs or the situation going on when you come across her and he's in the party. He immediately jumps in on it being only right to burn Viconia. he doesn't even have time to actually use his evil detection abilities. The game may make it a quick button press for us but it actually takes a period of concentration that would likely have been deemed boring in a video game. So all he has to go on is the fact that she's an elf and the colour of her skin when he speaks against her in that first meeting scene. Detect Evil is not an always on power or it would drive every Paladin in Athlatka quickly insane, much like Ravenloft does to all Paladins.

  • AttalusAttalus Member Posts: 148
    I think it would be quite in character for Keldorn to see an execution in front of what sounds like a fanatical mob but, as pointed out by others, in front of the official prison; and, as I noted earlier, plenty of illegal lynchings were carried out on the premises of legal jails (see the attempted lynching of Tom, a Black man, by the rednecks in To Kill a Mockingbird, prevented by Atticus Finch, an LG character if ever I heard of one) and use his (Keldorn's) Detect Evil power to make sure no injustice was being done. And, as I pointed out earlier also (and others, too) Keldorn welcomes alliance with Drizzt Do'Urden and his merry party against Bodhi.

    ThacoBell
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 3,801
    @fateless We don't "learn" that Korgan murdered members of his former party, they claim murder and Korgan claims they drew their weapons first. LIke I said before its a he said she said situation. You don't really learn the depth of Korgan's bloodlust until his ToB epilogue.

    And yes Keldorn does know Viconia's deity at the very least, she invokes Shar's name to curse the group gathered around her. Note that you can also take Keldorn into Ust Natha with no difficulties, even when given very practical reasons to murder Solaufein with no visible repercussions, Keldorn does not recommend killing him. So Keldorn hating Viconia is the actual exception. Keldorn does not hate drow, he hates Viconia.

  • fatelessfateless Member Posts: 330
    A polytheist won't invoke one gods name and one god only. That's a creation of modern religion. A polytheist will either somewhat follow all the gods loosely or favour one god while still giving at least a bit of attention to the others. Using a god like Shar to shout a cursing epithet does not pick one out as a follower of Shar automatically. Shar is an Elven Goddess over things like the night and the underdark. Fitting for any elf let alone somebody like Viconia to curse somebody in the name of over say Talos, Umberlee, Helm, Or Torm which are more human gods.

    Keldorn as I recall is also one that will occasionally make one of those quick spoken lines about how he'd wipe out Ust'Natha if he thought he could.

    https://youtu.be/zfA4pvkYNVI?t=137 This is Keldorn speaking against Viconia for being a Drow and calling her a demon. No mention of being a Sharite. The only talk about Shar between them is brought up by Viconia herself and it's to say that Shar is given a worse reputation than she deserves and keldorn gets fairly nasty in his words back to her. while his words aren't technically all wrong about the Goddess. They are spoken more like it's just another reason to hate Viconia. Not his Primary reason.

    In Fact, just about every time he addresses her or speaks out about her it is with the word Drow and he is never nice in the way that he says the word Drow. Not anything of a religious bent.

    Skatan
Sign In or Register to comment.