Miscellaneous stuff

[Corwin]

That sounds about right. Any implications for me?

[Anastasia]

Nothing immediately relevant. With two fey PCs, we'll likely touch on fey business IC.

[Ebiris]

Yeah, I'm independent.

[Anastasia]

Homebrew over on the rules and setting board has a new ranger ACF. It's based around Eldath, a lesser power of springs, peace and pacifism.  I don't think it's useful to any of you, though it skews good aligned, so it's worth mentioning.

[Anastasia]

Deep code commentary time. Neph's first since he posted first. Isn't he lucky?

A Knight and Paladin of Bahamut must be of lawful good or better alignment.

You can probably just say your character's name instead of knight and paladin of Bahamut. It's meant to be individualized.

Also, lawful good or better alignment is redundant, as the alignment extremes are meant to be inclusive already. You can be an LG paladin or any extreme variant without penalty.

Neither of these is terribly important.

He must strive to oppose evil, but take special steps to place the evil of Tiamat, evil dragons, or those that specifically aid those groups at a higher priority.

Okay, so this defines your priorities. Evil in general so you're a crusader, but Tiamat and her spawn get bumped to the front of the line. What happens if you don't do that? Say you choose to run after some of Umberlee's troublemakers instead of stopping a priest of Tiamat from ransacking a town. What then? Is not doing this meant to be a code violation (and I presume so if it's part of your code), and what scale of this would constitute that, if so?

As a Dragonborn as well, this requires that while there can be times for reflection and relaxation, one must never dawdle for too long or else lose sight of the goals laid out by Bahamut.

So basically you're meant to be focused. Rest and reflection is okay, but you shouldn't be overly idle. In other words, resist the sin of sloth in favor of industry.

Above this, as a Knight of Bahamut, one must never violate the Knight's Code knowingly.

You mean the canon knight's code? Does anything above and beyond the penalties in the knight's code occur if you do?

There is one caveat to this -- Bahamut makes exceptions for acts such as lying to protect good individuals. If atonement is necessary, Bahamut or his agents will make this known.

Okay. Is this meant to be a last resort or more of a standard operating procedure sort of deal?

Specifically banned behavior: Any evil or worse acts. Anything that violates the Knight's code. Knowingly aiding or abetting evil creatures or even neutral creatures that aid Tiamat.

Okay, straightforward enough there.

[Anastasia]

Inari must be of any good alignment.

Okay, straightforward enough.

She must strive to oppose evil, particularly those who corrupt nature.

What do you mean by corrupt nature? Do you mean like pollution, forestry and all the stuff that comes from civilization? Or do you mean more magical things, such as literally corrupting nature and how nature works? Something else?

It's not a gigantic deal here, but it's the sort of thing that I'd like clarified, so we're on the same page.

The exploitation of nature should be opposed but allowances can be made for survival's sake.

Okay, straightforward there.

Corrupting or warping nature is the worst blasphemy.

Okay, that's fine (pending clarification above) and sets your priorities.

Shelter and succour must be given to those who have need and come in good faith. A good trick or deception is to be lauded, but not if it is made for cruelty's sake - the best trick is one that teaches a valuable lesson.

So those sound like typical fey traits, something Afina might say. Makes sense.

If Inari becomes any non-good alignment she will no longer be considered a living goddess and may become a trickster spirit or a monster.

(Either of those would necessitate a radical change to her build and probably NPC her)

Straightforward again.

[Anastasia]

Annerose must be of any good alignment. In any situation where a choice exists between the right and the easy thing to do, she is expected to choose correctly.

Now I'm pretty sure you mean that by choosing correctly, that she chooses the right thing to do over the easy thing to do. Still, clarification of that would be good.

The goal she is to aspire to is to help the common man; if that requires direct confrontation with evil, then so be it. But she is to seek out people to help rather than enemies to fight.

Okay, so this sets your priorities. Fighting evil is all well and good, but your real mission is to get through to the common people and get them to step up. She's less focused on war and more focused on nurturing, you'd say?

The Golden Flame has many messages, paramount amongst which are propagating the concept of unity and the importance of proper mastery of one's talents.

So self improvement is another virtue, as well as unity?

Annerose is not expected to convert the people to the Golden Flame's worship.

Why is that? Both from an IC and OOC standpoint, I'm curious. Is it more of a message stands on its own merits sort of thing, like the next line suggests?

It is enough that its message is spread to benefit others in their daily lives.

Again, more focus on self improvement and spreading the message.

Of particular interest to Annerose are the following capital offenses, which she must eradicate to the best of her ability:
-slavery of self-aware beings
-sacrifice of self-aware beings
-torture of self-aware beings in all its forms

This is good and sets your priorities directly. I like it.

No god should demand such sacrifices, and no mortal law should infringe upon a person's freedom or visit cruelty upon them. Annerose must not abide such things when she comes across them, and has to make a serious attempt to stop them.

The main thing I'd like to add to the end of this is what constitutes a code violation. You talk about what she should do, which is good, but it should also cover what precisely goes over the line into a violation. I have a decent sense of this (all of you did good on this point), but a bit of codification would help.

[Anastasia]

One extra post on religion and PCs.

Athear follows Bahamut.

Annerose follows the Golden Flame/Seira.

Inari follows herself*.

I find the potential connections interesting. Annerose doesn't focus on any of the draconic aspects of the Golden Flame, though there's a natural synergy with Athear.It's up to them if that comes up at all, since it's Cor's call on how he chooses to manifest the draconic part (which is the obvious possible connection). Inari follows herself, which possibly connects to Annerose and her chaotic, freedom loving nature.

The one I don't see a lot of connections to are Inari and Athear. There's not a lot to connect Bahamut and the fey, so that particular interaction should be the most unpredictable. I'm curious to how it'll work out.


* Which is technically following the Seelie Court and the rulers of it, but that's a lot of background setting information that isn't really important. Basically independent fey rarely follow a deity or power, with Crystal in B3 being a notable exception and the one exception noted to happen with any regularity. Long story short, fey tend to worship nature/take that roll, which eventually winds back to the rulers of the fey, be it the Seelie or Unseelie Corut. This has been your random and probably unneeded worldbuilding for the day.

[Anastasia]

Oh yes, one more thing. We've done this in previous games and I think it would be neat in this one. If y'all wanna change your forum avatars to something appropriate to your characters, that would be really neat. It's not mandatory or anything, just a suggestion. If you don't want to do it, no big deal.

The pit fiend I use is my generic DM avatar. I might change it to something more suitable to this campaign in due time. Devils aren't going to play much of a role short of the PCs dragging them into things,

(Cor, do you have the one you used for Jaela? Likewise, do you have the one you used for Veseyra, Eb?)

[Nephrite]

He must strive to oppose evil, but take special steps to place the evil of Tiamat, evil dragons, or those that specifically aid those groups at a higher priority.

Okay, so this defines your priorities. Evil in general so you're a crusader, but Tiamat and her spawn get bumped to the front of the line. What happens if you don't do that? Say you choose to run after some of Umberlee's troublemakers instead of stopping a priest of Tiamat from ransacking a town. What then? Is not doing this meant to be a code violation (and I presume so if it's part of your code), and what scale of this would constitute that, if so?

I would probably add something like 'If there is a choice between pursuing a creature of Tiamat and another evil creature, the creature of Tiamat should take precedent according to this code. However, if the Dragonborn chooses to pursue the other evil, he must do so with the understanding that atonement will be necessary. Bahamut will determine what punishment is appropriate for failing to prioritize Tiamat.

I'm not really sure if there's something Bahamut specifically says anywhere about that sort of behavior though.

Above this, as a Knight of Bahamut, one must never violate the Knight's Code knowingly.

You mean the canon knight's code? Does anything above and beyond the penalties in the knight's code occur if you do?

I wouldn't think so. If you want I can think of something.

There is one caveat to this -- Bahamut makes exceptions for acts such as lying to protect good individuals. If atonement is necessary, Bahamut or his agents will make this known.

Okay. Is this meant to be a last resort or more of a standard operating procedure sort of deal?

I'd say it's more of a last resort. It's something that, in theory, shouldn't come up that often. I want him to have to make difficult choices about staying Exalted and if that means spending time atoning or praying for it then that's okay.

[Corwin]

Annerose must be of any good alignment. In any situation where a choice exists between the right and the easy thing to do, she is expected to choose correctly.

Now I'm pretty sure you mean that by choosing correctly, that she chooses the right thing to do over the easy thing to do. Still, clarification of that would be good.

Yeah, it's pretty clear. Right over easy.

The goal she is to aspire to is to help the common man; if that requires direct confrontation with evil, then so be it. But she is to seek out people to help rather than enemies to fight.

Okay, so this sets your priorities. Fighting evil is all well and good, but your real mission is to get through to the common people and get them to step up. She's less focused on war and more focused on nurturing, you'd say?

Such is the intent. Naturally, this being D&D, she'll be very good at fighting.

The Golden Flame has many messages, paramount amongst which are propagating the concept of unity and the importance of proper mastery of one's talents.

So self improvement is another virtue, as well as unity?

Annerose is picking two components of the Golden Flame's message she considers the most important, and decides to focus on them even if it means neglecting others.

Annerose is not expected to convert the people to the Golden Flame's worship.

Why is that? Both from an IC and OOC standpoint, I'm curious. Is it more of a message stands on its own merits sort of thing, like the next line suggests?

Some of that. Some of it is prioritizing. By being inclusive you reach more people, and by believing the message is very needed to help save people it's your best choice of helping the most people.

No god should demand such sacrifices, and no mortal law should infringe upon a person's freedom or visit cruelty upon them. Annerose must not abide such things when she comes across them, and has to make a serious attempt to stop them.

The main thing I'd like to add to the end of this is what constitutes a code violation. You talk about what she should do, which is good, but it should also cover what precisely goes over the line into a violation. I have a decent sense of this (all of you did good on this point), but a bit of codification would help.

A direct violation would be not trying. An indirect one could be trying so badly she should've known better.

Say a man is about be be lashed in the town square. If she comes across it, or hears about it in advance and has reasonable expectations of getting there, she should try and stop it.

It could be by force of arms, by guile, by bribery, by offering to take his place, by appealing to a sense of decency, by starting a riot... any means that aren't evil like taking the mayor's daughter hostage, for example.

Failing to actually rescue the man wouldn't be a code violation, if an earnest attempt to prevent it had been made.

[Anastasia]

I would probably add something like 'If there is a choice between pursuing a creature of Tiamat and another evil creature, the creature of Tiamat should take precedent according to this code. However, if the Dragonborn chooses to pursue the other evil, he must do so with the understanding that atonement will be necessary. Bahamut will determine what punishment is appropriate for failing to prioritize Tiamat.

Okay.

I'm not really sure if there's something Bahamut specifically says anywhere about that sort of behavior though.

Page 151 of Races of the Dragon has more information on Bahamut.

I wouldn't think so. If you want I can think of something.

No, that's fine, the knight's code is sufficient there. Though ideally this is meant to replace existing codes.

I'd say it's more of a last resort. It's something that, in theory, shouldn't come up that often. I want him to have to make difficult choices about staying Exalted and if that means spending time atoning or praying for it then that's okay.

Okay then.

[Anastasia]

Such is the intent. Naturally, this being D&D, she'll be very good at fighting.

Naturally. It's tough not being able to throw some strength around in D&D.

Annerose is picking two components of the Golden Flame's message she considers the most important, and decides to focus on them even if it means neglecting others.

Okay, that's more than fair enough. Not every worshiper embodies all or even most of the aspects of a deity.

Some of that. Some of it is prioritizing. By being inclusive you reach more people, and by believing the message is very needed to help save people it's your best choice of helping the most people.

A direct violation would be not trying. An indirect one could be trying so badly she should've known better.

Say a man is about be be lashed in the town square. If she comes across it, or hears about it in advance and has reasonable expectations of getting there, she should try and stop it.

It could be by force of arms, by guile, by bribery, by offering to take his place, by appealing to a sense of decency, by starting a riot... any means that aren't evil like taking the mayor's daughter hostage, for example.

Failing to actually rescue the man wouldn't be a code violation, if an earnest attempt to prevent it had been made.

Okay, that makes sense.

[Nephrite]

I reworded some of it and used a passage from Races of the Dragon since I think that clarifies things.

Athear must be of lawful good alignment. He must strive to oppose evil, but take special steps to place the evil of Tiamat, evil dragons, or those that specifically aid those groups at a higher priority. Whenever they have a reasonable opportunity to do so, followers of Bahamut act to thwart Tiamat or her minions. If Athear chooses to pursue another form of evil and this results in the escape or otherwise pushing off of following the minion of Tiamat, atonement is necessary; Bahamut is the final arbiter of whether this action requires punishment.

As a Dragonborn as well, this requires that while there can be times for reflection and relaxation, one must never dawdle for too long or else lose sight of the goals laid out by Bahamut. Above this, as a Knight of Bahamut, Athear must never violate the Knight's Code knowingly.

There is one caveat to this -- Bahamut makes exceptions for acts such as lying to protect good individuals. If atonement is necessary, Bahamut or his agents will make this known. 

Specifically banned behavior: Any evil or worse acts. Anything that violates the Knight's code. Knowingly aiding or abetting evil creatures or even neutral creatures that aid Tiamat.

[Ebiris]

What do you mean by corrupt nature? Do you mean like pollution, forestry and all the stuff that comes from civilization? Or do you mean more magical things, such as literally corrupting nature and how nature works? Something else?

It's not a gigantic deal here, but it's the sort of thing that I'd like clarified, so we're on the same page.

The exploitation of nature should be opposed but allowances can be made for survival's sake.

Okay, straightforward there.

Corrupting or warping nature is the worst blasphemy.

Okay, that's fine (pending clarification above) and sets your priorities.

The idea is that making mutants and shit is corrupting. Splicing animals together, turning a herbivore into a carnivore (and vice versa), adding evil (corruption implies a negative tone) templates to animals/plants or using say natural sites of great magical potential for evil rituals. All that falls under the general heading of corruption.

Exploitation is shit like farming/lumber/mining. If a city needs wood for construction/heat, needs arable or grazing land to eat, that's cool with Inari. People gotta live. But logging a whole forest to build some fuckoff fortress? Damming a river to assist in a siege? That's right out.