| AMIA ARCHIVE https://www.amiaworld.net/phpBB3/ |
|
| Kelemvor - an odd thought https://www.amiaworld.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=46377 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | brooksthegreat [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 0:34 AM ] |
| Post subject: | Kelemvor - an odd thought |
Why would a kelly cleric Raise someone? Or, for that matter, any member of the EO raise someone by scroll, or agree to be raised? An equal question would apply to souls loyal to tempus - for whom dying in battle is an honor..and sort of the point. |
|
| Author: | blackvswhite [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 0:39 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
why would a velsharoonite do it either? or a lolthite? they do because it is common courtesy and the expected OOC manners. |
|
| Author: | brooksthegreat [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 0:42 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
blackvswhite wrote: why would a velsharoonite do it either? or a lolthite?
they do because it is common courtesy and the expected OOC manners. I can get it for OOC reasons.. and it's not a question of alignment, it's purpose. A follower of tempus typically wants to die in combat so they can hang out in Warrior's Rest, no? And a Kelly's very purpose is keeping the dead, dead.. I'm looking for more.. in-character reasons to make sense of it.. heh |
|
| Author: | Selvec Darkon [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 0:49 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Because some elements of PnP rules and lore cannot be translated over to NWN without losing any form of fun, or fairness with other groups. Playing the head of the Tempurian Order, I can tell you we have had a number of players who's characters have been Perma-killed while fighting for the glory of Tempus. But I outright refuse to make members perma-kill their characters. Espically when it's not a server standard. It would make running the faction impossible on Amia, and also make it extremely unfair when other factions and worshippers of dieties can do it. Furthermore, dying in battle is not the point of being a Tempurian. Fighting with honour and skill is. If dying in battle was the point it wouldn't be one of the biggest religious orders in Faerun, and Tempus wouldn't be one of the most well known gods, nor a greater deity. As most of his worshippers would be dead as doornails. Yes when someone dies in battle they are taken to the hall of Tempus, if they are faithful of his. But it is not the point. Other gods have similar practices where they take their faithful to some place, but it is not the point for them. Finally. PvP more often than not, is usually not death, but near death. Sacrafical/Inquistion based stuff is another thing entirely, which personally I'd never engage in unless I wanted my character to be perma-killed. Dying Hunting is considered near death to from what I understand, not actual death. |
|
| Author: | brooksthegreat [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 0:53 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Selvec Darkon wrote: Because some elements of PnP rules and lore cannot be translated over to NWN without losing any form of fun, or fairness with other groups.
Playing the head of the Tempurian Order, I can tell you we have had a number of players who's characters have been Perma-killed while fighting for the glory of Tempus. But I outright refuse to make members perma-kill their characters. Espically when it's not a server standard. It would make running the faction impossible on Amia, and also make it extremely unfair when other factions and worshippers of dieties can do it. Furthermore, dying in battle is not the point of being a Tempurian. Fighting with honour and skill is. If dying in battle was the point it wouldn't be one of the biggest religious orders in Faerun, and Tempus wouldn't be one of the most well known gods, nor a greater deity. As most of his worshippers would be dead as doornails. Yes when someone dies in battle they are taken to the hall of Tempus, if they are faithful of his. But it is not the point. Other gods have similar practices where they take their faithful to some place, but it is not the point for them. Finally. PvP more often than not, is usually not death, but near death. Sacrafical/Inquistion based stuff is another thing entirely, which personally I'd never engage in unless I wanted my character to be perma-killed. Dying Hunting is considered near death to from what I understand, not actual death. Fair enough. Though, it seems I had unintentionally implied that tempusians were semi-suicidal..ha.. I had understood it previously in the "Die a good death" Valhalla sense. Sorry. |
|
| Author: | Selvec Darkon [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 0:58 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Indeed. You die a good death. But it's just one portion of the tempurian dogma. When your faced with dying, you make sure you die a good death. I'd probably go as far as to modify it slightly for NWN, rather interpretating as "When faced with death, make it a good death.". Which would mean that when you think your going to die, make them work for it, make them fight for it and never give up. But as I said, even than it's not really the point of being a Tempurian, just one aspect of it. If I could be bothered, I'd edit Amia's wiki to reflect this. But quite frankely some twit would probably edit it five minutes later to say something else. *Shrugs* I don't like that wiki at all. Gives all kinds of wrong information on Dieties on Amia. |
|
| Author: | TormakSaber [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 1:11 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
To actually answer the question ICly, which is what should have been done first and not this silly "OOC courtesy/OOC rules" junk... Kelemvorites are all about death... at the being's appointed natural time. Some Kelemvorites might not, of course, on your basis, but some might as well, in some cases, seeing perhaps the murder of a child as an affront to their life potential and raise them as a nod that their life was cut unnaturally short. A Tempuran might be raised because while they died in battle, it is very likely there is a more important battle that they needed to go fight (and maybe die) in. There's also deaths not due to battle. Velsharans are indeed more likely to simply animate them as undead but living subjects ae just as useful as undead ones for doing some things. And turning things into undead often loses much of the prowess the being had during life. Simply animating a dead wizard as a skeleton, for example, is wasteful. The resultant skeleton can do none of the wizard's magic, and has lost all its level progression and abilities. A skeleton of a powerful warrior is undoubtedly less powerful than the original warrior was just by virtue of how applying the skeletal template works. MAss raised undead win via quantity, not Quality. Powerful undead also require very high level spells or rituals to create. Living members are just useful to have. The same logic applies to Lolthites. You can't very well spread your goddess' word if everyone that spreads her word is dead. Sometimes you gotta get the really good ones back on their feet. |
|
| Author: | Gunz [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 3:30 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
brooksthegreat wrote: And a Kelly's very purpose is keeping the dead, dead.. I'm looking for more.. in-character reasons to make sense of it.. heh That's a very simplistic way of looking at a Kelemorite, actually. A loyal Kelemvorite's job isn't as simple as that. Kelemvor says that the dead are to die at their appointed time and no sooner. So there are plenty of reasons why a Kelemvorite would raise someone or accept a raise themselves. Of course, it's entirely logical and believable for other Kelemvorites to never raise and never accept a raise if they should die. It's a very basic and overly simplistic approach to Kelemvors dogma, but it's valid none the less. It's a a matter of interpretation. TormakSaber wrote: A Tempuran might be raised because while they died in battle, it is very likely there is a more important battle that they needed to go fight (and maybe die) in. There's also deaths not due to battle.
Yep. Also, who's to say they deem it honorable to die in a battle they feel is not an honorable battle, but a battle against cowards? That's plenty good reason to not stay dead. Velsharan on the other hand, these guys are all about undeath, sure. But there's nothing in Velsharoons dogma that says "cheating death" is a crime. Hell, I would think a Velsharan would want to come back so they can continue their work and study of the undead. Perhaps even to continue their work toward their own undeath; lichdom, vampirism, etc. Point is, there's plenty of reason for these guys to want to come back from the dead and/or bring others back from the dead. Things aren't always so black and white in faith. Of course, there would certainly be people that take everything literally and view all things black and white. It's all possible, no one is "right" necessarily. |
|
| Author: | O'Raghailligh [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 6:20 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Tormak hit the nail right on the head. |
|
| Author: | Herra Tutteri [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 8:02 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
TormakSaber wrote: Kelemvorites are all about death... at the being's appointed natural time. Some Kelemvorites might not, of course, on your basis, but some might as well, in some cases, seeing perhaps the murder of a child as an affront to their life potential and raise them as a nod that their life was cut unnaturally short..
Exactly this. It's even in Kelly's dogma to make sure no one dies before their appointed time. |
|
| Author: | TormakSaber [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 8:25 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
You could make an argument that no mortal should be so presumtuous as to assume whose life has been cut short and when since it could have been in elemvor's plan for them to die then, but yeah. |
|
| Author: | brooksthegreat [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 9:01 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
TormakSaber wrote: You could make an argument that no mortal should be so presumtuous as to assume whose life has been cut short and when since it could have been in elemvor's plan for them to die then, but yeah.
That crossed my mind, but I thought it was better left alone. I was given enough of a plausible RP explanation. I'm happy. Danke. |
|
| Author: | A Majestic Dwarf [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 11:35 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
TormakSaber wrote: You could make an argument that no mortal should be so presumtuous as to assume whose life has been cut short and when since it could have been in elemvor's plan for them to die then, but yeah.
At which point the Raise dead from the Cleric of Kelemvor shouldn't work, seems simple enough to me. |
|
| Author: | Yurell [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 11:37 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Aurora wrote: TormakSaber wrote: You could make an argument that no mortal should be so presumtuous as to assume whose life has been cut short and when since it could have been in elemvor's plan for them to die then, but yeah. At which point the Raise dead from the Cleric of Kelemvor shouldn't work, seems simple enough to me. Ah, but does the god grant the spells on a purely individual casting basis, paying attention to every spell cast by every follower, or does he grant the spells to the priest during their time of prayer, and leave them to do what they will? |
|
| Author: | IronAngel [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 11:40 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well, I reckon you'd always need some kind of tacit consent from both the cleric's god and the target's god if you're going to bring back a soul from their realm. No idea, but it makes sense considering you're not allowed to steal souls from other gods. Most of the time, it doesn't make sense. You can give plausible excuses, but they're just that. That's why I prefer to RP Raise as a powerful revival spell: it restores functions to your organs and smashed body, but it'll only work if your soul still lingers and hasn't passed onto the afterlife. If you've died a long time ago, it requires more in-depth RP. |
|
| Author: | Galenson [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 11:41 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Or you could just accept that a raise is a standard expected and embraced by the Amian playerbase. |
|
| Author: | Khylaria [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 13:21 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
The question was about in-character reasonings, not "OOC courtesies" or whatever OOC standards the Amian playerbase might hold. As far as -why- raises might be granted.... When someone dies, their soul goes to the Fugue Plane to await an escort from the plane of whatever deity they follow to come retrieve their soul and take them "home". It's perfectly plausible that when the Raise Dead, Resurrection, or True Resurrection is cast that these "soul couriers" had not arrived to escort the dearly departed's soul to its final resting place. At that point, it becomes the soul's choice on whether or not they want to return to life, or if they'd rather remain where they are to be taken to their home in the afterlife. Sometimes the soul wants to return to life, and so the spell is successful. Other times, either the soul declines, or has already been taken into its deity's embrace and wants to remain there, so the spell fails. Simple as that. It doesn't always have to boil down to "So-and-so deity wants you to live again." It's not -always- about the wills and whims of the gods. |
|
| Author: | Yurell [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 13:39 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Plus I don't think the efficiency of Kelemvor's service is particularly well known - are you seen five minutes after death, or five years? |
|
| Author: | Wyjyn [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 13:47 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
I would say a simpler argument would be that Kelemvor's natural time coincides with when it is 'right'. Old guy dying in his bed, right. Guy being stabbed to death in his sleep, wrong. It could make for some interesting RP though concerning death in battle and matyrdom. Should someone who has matyred themself be granted a second chance so that the power of the matyr is reduced? Honestly, this is really more IC stuff overall to my mind. |
|
| Author: | Herra Tutteri [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 14:00 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
TormakSaber wrote: You could make an argument that no mortal should be so presumtuous as to assume whose life has been cut short and when since it could have been in elemvor's plan for them to die then, but yeah.
Sure we could, but we won't. |
|
| Author: | Gravemaskin [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 15:48 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Herra Tutteri wrote: TormakSaber wrote: You could make an argument that no mortal should be so presumtuous as to assume whose life has been cut short and when since it could have been in elemvor's plan for them to die then, but yeah. Sure we could, but we won't. RPly say that the spell would have failed to be cast, if Kelemvor wanted them to die at that time. Since as a cleric, it's from him you get your spells. Bonkering up his plans = fallen or failed spell. It's always what I've done when my kelemvorite raised someone. Did a short IC prayer/petition for kelemvor to bring the person back, if they were taken before their time before casting the spell. Works fine IC, for me at least. |
|
| Author: | Merrien [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 15:50 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Gravemaskin wrote: Herra Tutteri wrote: TormakSaber wrote: You could make an argument that no mortal should be so presumtuous as to assume whose life has been cut short and when since it could have been in elemvor's plan for them to die then, but yeah. Sure we could, but we won't. RPly say that the spell would have failed to be cast, if Kelemvor wanted them to die at that time. Since as a cleric, it's from him you get your spells. Bonkering up his plans = fallen or failed spell. It's always what I've done when my kelemvorite raised someone. Did a short IC prayer/petition for kelemvor to bring the person back, if they were taken before their time before casting the spell. Works fine IC, for me at least. Thumbs up to this. Seems very reasonable. |
|
| Author: | Herra Tutteri [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 16:19 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Merrien wrote: Gravemaskin wrote: Herra Tutteri wrote: TormakSaber wrote: You could make an argument that no mortal should be so presumtuous as to assume whose life has been cut short and when since it could have been in elemvor's plan for them to die then, but yeah. Sure we could, but we won't. RPly say that the spell would have failed to be cast, if Kelemvor wanted them to die at that time. Since as a cleric, it's from him you get your spells. Bonkering up his plans = fallen or failed spell. It's always what I've done when my kelemvorite raised someone. Did a short IC prayer/petition for kelemvor to bring the person back, if they were taken before their time before casting the spell. Works fine IC, for me at least. Thumbs up to this. Seems very reasonable. Sure it does. It's the Kellies who're talking now. |
|
| Author: | TormakSaber [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 22:36 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Just because you play Kelemvorites doesn't make you any higher in this conversation. Don't be "That guy". |
|
| Author: | Pony [ Fri, Mar 26 2010, 23:42 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think you should take Tutteri's comments with a pinch of salt. Dont be that guy. |
|
| Author: | Herra Tutteri [ Sat, Mar 27 2010, 7:40 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Tormie, Tormie... All this time and you still can't read between my obscure lines? |
|
| Author: | Dakotaen [ Sat, Mar 27 2010, 7:45 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well it was a one-liner. |
|
| Author: | Selvec Darkon [ Sat, Mar 27 2010, 7:55 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Thats Herra for you. Quick in and quick out, leaving you totally unsatisfied. |
|
| Author: | Herra Tutteri [ Sat, Mar 27 2010, 9:59 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
You're asking for it, aren't you? |
|
| Author: | Selvec Darkon [ Sat, Mar 27 2010, 10:01 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Eh, go for it. Your comments tend to go in one ear and out the other, least till you say something that leaves you open to insult. |
|
| Author: | Herra Tutteri [ Sat, Mar 27 2010, 12:17 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
I haven't even begun yet! Even though Yurell is a silly git and no one reads his posts, I'm not him. I'm more awesome. That is, if you were going to compare us due to "not reading your posts". |
|
| Author: | Yurell [ Sat, Mar 27 2010, 12:50 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Herra Tutteri wrote: Even though Yurell is a silly git and no one reads his posts, I'm not him.
I have empirical evidence to show that they do >.> |
|
| Author: | Herra Tutteri [ Sat, Mar 27 2010, 13:06 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yurell wrote: Herra Tutteri wrote: Even though Yurell is a silly git and no one reads his posts, I'm not him. I have empirical evidence to show that they do >.> Pffffft! No one else except for me even read this post, so why do you suspect they'd even read your proof! |
|
| Author: | brooksthegreat [ Sun, Mar 28 2010, 0:35 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Ooo. People are still talking in here.. hah. Yay! It's okay. I'd read Yurell's proof. |
|
| Author: | Pony [ Sun, Mar 28 2010, 0:40 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
brooksthegreat wrote: Ooo. People are still talking in here.. hah. Yay!
It's okay. I'd read Yurell's proof. You silly silly person. |
|
| Author: | brooksthegreat [ Sun, Mar 28 2010, 0:57 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Phearnun wrote: brooksthegreat wrote: Ooo. People are still talking in here.. hah. Yay! It's okay. I'd read Yurell's proof. You silly silly person. ..sigh.. I know.. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|