The Fall of Fairhaven (Inactive)

Game Master Jubal Breakbottle

Too bad Dien, I like your posts. It'd be fun to play with you. Sure you don't have another character idea?

This post attempts to summarize the answers of asked and perceived questions. If I've missed a question, please re-ask it.

Hello I would like to know if we are allowed item crafting.

Devan, The Samaritans are a very interesting premise. It brings everyone together under common goals without limiting the individualism of each PC with a staunch code of behavior.

Devan, The Samaritans are a very interesting premise. It brings everyone together under common goals without limiting the individualism of each PC with a staunch code of behavior.

Glad you like it :)

To be honest I was inspired by the structure of the motorcycle club in Sons of Anarchy. Gotta love anarcho-syndicalist organizations. :P

Also Devan is an Andoran patriot, so he's all into freedom of choice and such.

Big Sons fan here! That season finale was shocking!

I can tell you've read Joe Abercrombie's The First Law series by reading your backstory Shenkt. I always liked Logen Ninefingers.

Edit:The finale was pretty wild.

Hey Kagehiro, I reworked my background up to the point where I'd want to introduce a connection with your character. I'm thinking he'd be the first person I recruited in Korvosa for Steed's Samaritans.

How does this sound for an adventuring group?

Steed’s Samaritans

Founded by Devan Steed six years ago in Korvosa after the death of his family, Steed’s Samaritans is an adventuring group that focuses on helping those plagued by monsters or supernatural threats. They will accept any work that falls into those fields in exchange for food and lodging (though if the person is in dire need, Steed has often been known to pressure them to work completely for free). They are willing to do other work, but charge a retainer for these more mundane services (guard work, escorting merchants, etc). The group is a democracy, with each member having an equal say in which jobs are accepted or passed over. Accepting a job requires a majority vote. Entry of new members or removal of existing ones requires a unanimous vote. Otherwise membership is for life. All wealth acquired by the Samaritans is split as equally as possible between them. Most of them were driven into the life by some kind of personal tragedy in their pasts. There are two requirements for membership. The first is that they must be unattached (no marriages outside the Samaritans and no kids). The second that they must be willing to die to help a perfect stranger. Usually potential new members serve a trial period as prospects before they are voted in. Like many adventuring crews, the Samaritans spend much of their time traveling while looking for work. They’ve done jobs all over Varisia and bordering countries in western Avistan.

I like the idea!

It certainly works with Tassira's background so far: considering she basically severed all ties to her family (which, frankly, was an overreaction, but hey, 8 Wisdom) it could easily allow her to have a surrogate family until she can work up the nerve to go back and apologize.

Add that to the plot hook Jubal mentioned (earthquake investigation): considering Tassira's ranks in Knowledge (Geography), she could've been hired for this job because of her expertise.

Submitting Kiana. Yes, non standard race, asked earlier, never got a response from the GM. So formalizing it again.

Kiana's a bit prickly, but she's a loyal friend once made.

For the idea of the Samaritans, she'd end up being the oversight and counterbalance, ensuring that the group didn't go after things just because of appearances (something that is a big deal for her). Also making sure that the group understands that monsters sometimes (often) come in pretty packages with human miens.

I wasn't planning on having Han Shuo be as LG as membership for the Samaritans would entail; though he'll help others in need, I doubt he'd put his life on the line for a complete stranger. In addition, he'd be highly devoted to the church of Irori, which would mean attachment outside the Samaritans. His primary drive, a desire to spread knowledge and improve himself, doesn't seem like it would mesh with a philanthropic monster-hunting group; though the two don't exactly contradict, he wouldn't gain much through such an association.

Of course, if everyone but me likes the idea of the Samaritans I could rework my character's personality.

The Samaritans sound like an incredibly LG group that would only accept rare members. While Kienyach would join an organization with their goals, their level of devotion is far beyond what he would be willing to give.

I can tell you've read Joe Abercrombie's The First Law series by reading your backstory Shenkt. I always liked Logen Ninefingers.

Edit:The finale was pretty wild.

You are correct! LOL!

I do think the complete stranger part needs to be altered. I can understand trying to help people, but to just lay down your life sounds incredibly LG. Lucas would lay his life down for a friend, but a complete stranger is pushing it.

I agree. The general idea of the Samaritans is okay, but dying for a complete stranger is not something Tassira would really do.

Tassira is more pragmatic than that.

Hack would do so for the notoriety.

Too bad Dien, I like your posts. It'd be fun to play with you. Sure you don't have another character idea?

Aw, shucks. I'll mull over a rogue and toss in. I'm at my local PFS right now, so it'll be a couple hours.

Recruitment will close noon Eastern Time on Friday, December 20th. I reserve the right to pre-select additional players with whom I have played and close recruitment early.

CURRENT STATUS

Pre-selected

I would like to vote to change it away from dying for a complete stranger.

I think that should be situational.

Kiana might die to protect children.
Kiana might die to protect other Strix.

Kiana would not die to protect a bandit.
Kiana would not die to protect a strange human.
Kiana would not die to protect a priest who proclaimed her a demon.

I think that it may be a bit premature for the applicants to be weighing in for a change in what Devan has put forth as a preliminary summary of the Samaritans. I would imagine that here would be time for such discussion after the selections have been made?

I'm sure Devan would consider your comments about the Samaritans.

And yes, the summary of the Samaritans will be finalized with character backgrounds after recruitment closes selecting the player characters.

cheers

Well, if he's putting it forward now, Shenkt, and asked for thoughts, why would you want to rebuke people who actually, you know, gave him feedback? Whether we are picked or not, if he wants to put it forward pre-selection, and get feedback, wouldn't it be rude to ignore his request?

Sure...go ahead. I just think there is a difference between feedback and suggesting a vote when none of us have any standing as of yet. I meant no offense, and it was certainly not a rebuke, nor directed solely at you.

Just remember, 'I'd like to vote' is also a turn of phrase, or at least it is where I come from. Also others like this...

My two cents worth...
My vote says...
Survey Says....
My Dog says...

People aren't actually giving 2 pennys, and they didn't take a survey either. :) And I don't even have a dog, much less a talking one.. :)

Not really offended, just pointing out that he did ask for feedback...

NP...

Okay, here's Dien's second submission. Much happier with this one. Sorry for the take-backsies. Fighter/Rogue multi.

Eh Jubal I am pulling out. Thanks for offering to DM.

I added that bit about dying for a stranger because of something DM Breakbottle said earlier in response to one of my questions.

WesternWolf777 wrote:

What's the theme of the module? What kind of enemies will we be fighting? Does it just assume we're wandering along and then X happens?

You're heroes. You find people in trouble and do the right thing.

Varied enemies.

Yes, "it just assume(s you)'re wandering along and then X happens"

cheers

It sounds like the module assumes the PCs will "do the right thing" as part of the adventure hook. Beyond that, the Samaritans are not LG. Devan is not LG and I hate LG.

The intent of be willing to die for a complete stranger is, if you come across someone who clearly needs help that you won't just pass them by, you will help them whether or not they can reward you. It's not "die for anyone at any time", that's foolish and ridiculous.

So rather than being very LG it's more like very any of the three goods. A character with purely mercenary/selfish motivations doesn't seem like it will fit this adventure well, or at least, they will have less reason to get involved.

Sound right DM?

Willing to die for a complete stranger and die for anyone at any time is essentially the same thing. I consider myself a fairly good person, and if I was walking down the street I would help somebody if they needed it. I would do anything from helping them cross the street to carry their groceries to perform CPR and carry them on my back to the hospital. However, if somebody twenty feet to my right pulls a gun and attempts to shoot somebody twenty feet to my left (implying I cannot disable the gunman or push the target out of the way), I am much more likely to dive out of the way then take a bullet for them. If it was my sister or my best friend there's every chance I would step up and die for them, but a complete stranger? That takes a really special kind of person to be willing to do that. Not saying it's impossible or weird, just very rare.

With that in mind, perhaps a better way of phrasing it would be:

"Must be willing to help complete strangers even if no reward is forthcoming."

I think Tassira's is closer.

Even LN can live with that. It doesn't require Good, just someone with a code. For example, someone who is good will go out of their way to help people, even if they got themselves into trouble through foolishness.

A LN person with the right code of honor would absolutely risk their lives to help children (who are rarely really responsible for trouble they are in), or someone who was in trouble through no fault of their own. "A necromancer is going to use children in a ritual to extend his own life and kill them? Most assuredly, I will assist." or "You are being driven off your land by the baron, who's faked the paperwork to 'prove' your father sold it before he died? Yes, I would help with that."

But not being good, they might not risk themselves for someone who got themselves into trouble, even if it furthered evil's aims. "OH, you made a pact with a devil? And now you want help getting out of it? Maybe you should have thought of that before you made a pact with a devil." or "Oh, you want my help getting your wife's jewelry back from your mistress? Who stole it when you had a tryst in your home? No, I think you have made your own bed, now go lie in it."

Tassira, your clairvoyance is appreciated, well spoken.

Kienyach - I don't know, I see it more as do unto others. If someone pulled a gun on me, you bet I'd want a passerby to help me. If I saw someone pull a gun on a stranger in real life I would try to help them. Maybe that makes me weird, but I'm just a normal person. I remember reading a story about this 15 year old kid who stabbed like 30-40 people in a train station when I was living in Germany and being disgusted that no one did anything to stop him.

These characters aren't normal people either. They are essentially minor superheroes who could take out an entire small town's police force by themselves with little or no issues. See this article for a calibration of the power level of a third level character compared to "normal people".

If they don't help people who need it, that's just selfish. Neutral at best.

Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit.

Good implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.

Evil implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.

People who are neutral with respect to good and evil have compunctions against killing the innocent, but may lack the commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others.

You're putting forth a neutral view point as good. The Samaritans are a good organization. Neutral characters would need another motivation for joining/traveling with them besides membership.

Tassira, your clairvoyance is appreciated, well spoken.

*blushes*

"Oh, it was nothing, really..."

With regards to the gun on the street, someone who's LN could also step in to help, but it would be because of other beliefs than good. Unlawful to murder people, they are against chaotic instances.

My point being that LN and LG/NG are often times doing the same things for different reasons. To me, it's more important the results, than the motivations.

Where I could see them coming into conflict would be the following situation :

A widow with 3 children can't pay her mortgage, so the owner of the house gets' them evicted.

LG : "I do not like this, it is a bad way to treat the widow. I will try to talk the owner into working something out, or try to find a place for her to stay where she can afford the house."

NG : "That is no way to treat a widow! There's got to be something we can do! I bet that awful owner is doing something wrong, let's find out what it is and make him let the widow live there!"

CG : "That's no way to treat a widow! I bet if I have a long talk with that owner, I can 'convince' him it's healthier to have good karma!"

LN : "That's the law, it's a shame for the woman and her kids. It'll contribute to crime if they're left on the street. I'll show here where the Crown Charity office is, and make sure she and the kids get there. "

LG and LN did similar things, but for different reasons.

I think there is a reason the GM said 'Good or Lawful'.

Sound right DM?

Wow. An alignment debate in my recruitment thread.

To fit well in the module, characters must adhere to my alignment requirements: "must be either a Good or Lawful alignment."

My first reaction to the Samaritans description was that I thought they needed to be Good. Since this is an acceptable subset of my alignment requirements, I was OK with it.

Please keep in mind that the group description will be finalized AFTER player character selection. However, it's probably better to have this discussion now rather than later to ensure the selected characters fit well together quickly and obviously without any player forced to stretch beyond their selected character concept.

cheers

As pointed out, the intent was never to die for everyone you meet. Nor is that consistent with the tone of the rest of the organization's write up. The organization came into being based on someone losing everything to some unspeakable evil. When you've got nothing, you've got nothing to lose. That feeds directly into the clause about not being married or having kids. Chasing monsters in itself is risking death. The Samaritans just do it to protect innocents rather than for want of riches and glory.

That is my understanding, at least.

I'll check out your background tonight, Devan. I haven't sat down and worked out Thondrir's history entirely. I can say that his brush with Korvosa's things that go bump was during his stint as a Pathfinder. An entire detachment of Pathfinders in the area were slaughtered in their safehouse by some creature. Thought of having them slain by vampires, but that's been overdone. Will pore through some creatures and come up with something more interesting.

Not to jump onto the bandwagon of alignment issues, but for me one of the hang-ups in the original discussion is the fact that there is a distinction between 'willing to die for someone else' and 'willing to risk yourself for someone else'.

As is pointed out, the heroes are more-than-ordinary people. They are more competent, tougher, and have a greater chance of survival than a level 1 commoner in any given situation, regardless of the class of the hero in question.

I would not insert myself between a gunman and someone else because I have no training or competence to deal with that. I'm a small female with minimal ability to survive things like system shock or large-scale blood loss. I like to think that I would try to help (assuming I did not just freeze up due to a crisis situation), probably by urging people to seek shelter and whipping out my cell phone to call the authorities, but my odds of survival if I directly intervened with the gunman are.... extremely low, just as bad as the hypothetical victim's here if not worse.

On the other hand, if Tris sees an orc threatening a helpless villager, she knows without a shadow of a doubt that her odds of surviving the conflict are better than the villager's. Because she's a trained warrior who's been taught how to fight, who knows how to manage her own stress reactions and adrenaline, who knows what it's like to have her own life threatened and can handle herself in that situation.

By those terms, even an average level 1 PC is more akin to something like 'cop', 'soldier', or 'EMT' than the average person, just because they have the training to be more useful than a completely normal Joe. And most cops/soldiers/etc would, I think, choose to intervene in a situation of violence that was erupting around them.

Put another way: if you asked me right now to voluntarily die, so that a total stranger on the other side of the street who had some terminal disease, would live by my sacrifice... I'd have a pretty hard time seeing myself agreeing to that. If, on the other hand, you said that that person needed medical treatment and I could increase their odds of survival by administering medicine to them-- but that I would stand a chance of possible infection and death if I were to do so-- I like to think that I would try to help them, because it'd be the moral thing to do.

TL;DR: There's a difference between being 'willing to die' at any time for someone else, and being willing to risk death, imo, when you know you have better odds of survival than the other person.

Or maybe I'm just being too picky regarding hairsplitting semantics.

I don't mind if it's a good only game. If that's the case, I'll probably bow out. Not because I don't play good, I do. I'm just playing several good characters in RL, and a couple online, and I'd like a change of pace.

*shrug*

If you're going with Devan's group as is, then there's not much debate possible. :)

As pointed out, the intent was never to die for everyone you meet. Nor is that consistent with the tone of the rest of the organization's write up. The organization came into being based on someone losing everything to some unspeakable evil. When you've got nothing, you've got nothing to lose. That feeds directly into the clause about not being married or having kids. Chasing monsters in itself is risking death. The Samaritans just do it to protect innocents rather than for want of riches and glory.

That is my understanding, at least.

I'll check out your background tonight, Devan. I haven't sat down and worked out Thondrir's history entirely. I can say that his brush with Korvosa's things that go bump was during his stint as a Pathfinder. An entire detachment of Pathfinders in the area were slaughtered in their safehouse by some creature. Thought of having them slain by vampires, but that's been overdone. Will pore through some creatures and come up with something more interesting.

Okay, sounds good.

Not to jump onto the bandwagon of alignment issues, but for me one of the hang-ups in the original discussion is the fact that there is a distinction between 'willing to die for someone else' and 'willing to risk yourself for someone else'.

As is pointed out, the heroes are more-than-ordinary people. They are more competent, tougher, and have a greater chance of survival than a level 1 commoner in any given situation, regardless of the class of the hero in question.

I would not insert myself between a gunman and someone else because I have no training or competence to deal with that. I'm a small female with minimal ability to survive things like system shock or large-scale blood loss. I like to think that I would try to help (assuming I did not just freeze up due to a crisis situation), probably by urging people to seek shelter and whipping out my cell phone to call the authorities, but my odds of survival if I directly intervened with the gunman are.... extremely low, just as bad as the hypothetical victim's here if not worse.

On the other hand, if Tris sees an orc threatening a helpless villager, she knows without a shadow of a doubt that her odds of surviving the conflict are better than the villager's. Because she's a trained warrior who's been taught how to fight, who knows how to manage her own stress reactions and adrenaline, who knows what it's like to have her own life threatened and can handle herself in that situation.

By those terms, even an average level 1 PC is more akin to something like 'cop', 'soldier', or 'EMT' than the average person, just because they have the training to be more useful than a completely normal Joe. And most cops/soldiers/etc would, I think, choose to intervene in a situation of violence that was erupting around them.

Put another way: if you asked me right now to voluntarily die, so that a total stranger on the other side of the street who had some terminal disease, would live by my sacrifice... I'd have a pretty hard...

Well I'm a very large man in real life, I could probably severely injure someone with a single blow if I really wanted to. Guess I don't know what its like to not be a very large man, it would definitely change my perspective to be a small woman. :P

TL;DR: There's a difference between being 'willing to die' at any time for someone else, and being willing to risk death, imo, when you know you have better odds of survival than the other person.

I think this is what Kiana would be like. Someone who is good is going to help no matter what. A lawful neutral like Kiana would help if there was a chance of helping, and would risk herself, but would not commit to suicide for someone she doesn't know, without a good reason (children, defending another strix, defending a friend).

@Devan. There is no "helping them", no grey area here. It's either you die, or that random stranger dies. It isn't helping them, it's dying so they can live. Any decent person would say they would help their fellow man, but are you really willing to say you would die for a stranger to live?

Also, I was speaking purely from a moral standpoint. If, in my gunman scenario, instead of a civilian I was a trained soldier wearing body armor or I was Wolverine, yes I would step into harms way.

I think the hair splitting is a good idea. Willing to die or willing to risk death are massively different things. Yes, my character would fight against a goblin horde descending on an innocent village of people. No, he would not suck poison out of some guys leg to save their life at the expense of his own. He would go on a quest, fight monsters, and spend time and effort, but he wouldn't lay down his life for a stranger. A comrade? Perhaps. A complete stranger? I doubt it.

If you want to make a character like that, by all means. It will be fun RP and a good character. But I don't want to be part of the five member eight wisdom party of paladins. Well, with this character anyways. In hindsight that sounds hilarious.

hmmm interesting concept here.

How about someone who's lost his own will to live but is afraid to take his own life. Taking on unneccesary risk and yet unwilling to allow someone else to suffer what he has gone through? Lived through a family's death, friends and tasted failure?

Would all these fine? I'll submit a char with all the above it's ok and this is still open.

Willing to die and willing to risk death are the same exact thing in my book. If you intervene in a potentially dangerous situation you might die, meaning you were willing to die when you stepped in.

Lets not get caught up in semantics. Devan is not looking for suicide paladins, he's looking for people willing to work to help others and make a difference in the world (ie. good people). There's no initiation test of "Hey see that homeless guy over there, he needs your blood. Go stand by him and slit your throat" or whatever.

He's looking for Samaritans, not fanatics. The word comes from the biblical parable. From Wikipedia "a traveller (who may or may not be Jewish[1]) is beaten, robbed, and left half dead along the road. First a priest and then a Levite come by, but both avoid the man. Finally, a Samaritan comes by. Samaritans and Jews generally despised each other, but the Samaritan helps the injured man."

So in Golarion a half-orc (or another member of a somewhat despised race) is beated, robbed and left half dead along the road. If your character would stop to help them, they are Samaritan material. That's all. No suicidal ridiculous goodness need be read into that single sentence that everyone is fixating on.

Ah, With all the previous posts, I was getting that impression.

I stand corrected. I'll look for the Character generation rules and post one up in say an hour or so.

Well I (and a few others) disagree with you. If you simply reworded it to "put your life at risk for a complete stranger" then I would understand. In my book, there is a large difference between risking your life and giving your life. If somebody on the street was getting shot at and I was a gun carrier, I would pull my gun and shoot, drawing attention to myself and risking my life to help them. But if I was approached by a stranger who said he needed a heart transplant or he would die, I would refuse him.

The only problem I see is, that you don't actually have to be Good to be the Good Samaritan from the parable.

Kiana would likely stop and help the person, but would likely do so for vastly different reasons.

1) Gather information on who attacked them. It could save her or her comrades.
2) A dead body on the side of the road is a health hazard.
3) As long as the person is not a criminal, then that is someone who owes her a favor in the future, and you never know when you might need a local's knowledge or a place to crash, etc.

Again, same effect, the beat up person get's first aid and help into town. But vastly different mindset and reasons.

@Kiana. What, a criminal's favor is worth less? They're probably willing to do more for you :P

Kiana doesn't trust criminals. They are, by their nature, untrustworthy.

Plus they usually end up in a bad end, so the likelyhood of their being alive to commence with the repaying of a debt is low.

EDIT: Of course, her idea of what a Criminal is may not be the same as a law officers. :) It may be legal to hunt Strix for a bounty, but she'd consider any bounty hunters who did murderers, and thus criminals.