
kyrt-ryder |
Wow Werthead I have never read the books just watched the series it was entertaining enough. However the numerous Biblical and Starwars references I could have done without. From your description of the book it looks like the classic case of Lawful Evil posing as Chaotic Good, with a bunch of peasants gulping down whatever lies is fed to them. Well the beating and maiming of an eight year old child is an evil act. No matter what light it is presented in, unless the eight year old child was a cleverly disguised irredemable fiend from hell, Nojustification can be found for this action no matter what.
As Shadowcat said, just read the book (and try to do so with an open mind, don't go in expecting them to be evil. Remember,
People are Stupid, They'll Believe Anything, if They Want it To Be True, or Are Afraid it is True. (The wanting to be true is what applies here, I'm sure you've seen it before, people go in with expectations and then their opinions naturally shape around those expectations.)
Myself, I know I hated Violet (The 8 year old princess who kept her 6 year old slave girl locked up in a 3 foot chest at night, and beat her if she ever said anything out of order, and was about to cut that slave girl's tongue out when Richard intervened) hated her with a passion. As I said, if that was an evil act (and I myself consider it a good act. If that was evil, then so are our, admittedly rare, judges that sentence 8 year old murderers to life sentences)
As I said before, if it had been me I'd have killed her. Somebody who would do that, and feel good and just about it, is NOT somebody you can allow to assume a throne, and is NOT somebody who should be allowed to continue to impose their will on others.

Dhampir984 |

I'll be sad if my DVR didn't pick it up.
my TiVo picked up the showing last week, which was set as a 2 hour block. We thought it was 2 new episodes, instead it was the season ender and season premiere shown back to back.
I believe that this coming weekend they're showing the season premiere again as a stand alone. So if you missed last week, you should be able to score it this week.
I liked it, it was what I was looking for. We've got the same core back with Richard, Kahlan and Zeddicus. Plus a few newer additions to the core and new baddies. I liked the newest baddie.
Though I found myself screaming at several points that Richard needed a razor. The actor can't grow a full beard, so it's very scraggly and thin.

kyrt-ryder |
Celestial Healer wrote:I'll be sad if my DVR didn't pick it up.my TiVo picked up the showing last week, which was set as a 2 hour block. We thought it was 2 new episodes, instead it was the season ender and season premiere shown back to back.
I believe that this coming weekend they're showing the season premiere again as a stand alone. So if you missed last week, you should be able to score it this week.
I liked it, it was what I was looking for. We've got the same core back with Richard, Kahlan and Zeddicus. Plus a few newer additions to the core and new baddies. I liked the newest baddie.
Though I found myself screaming at several points that Richard needed a razor. The actor can't grow a full beard, so it's very scraggly and thin.
That's actually very intentional (Though I agree it is a bit too scraggly and thin, and shaving plus an artificial beard might do better) but Richard is supposed to be more of a rugged woodsman type.
Honestly he seemed too much of a 'pretty boy' to me in the beginning of the first season, though the actor has seemed to grow into the role somewhat.

![]() |

Celestial Healer wrote:I'll be sad if my DVR didn't pick it up.my TiVo picked up the showing last week, which was set as a 2 hour block. We thought it was 2 new episodes, instead it was the season ender and season premiere shown back to back.
I believe that this coming weekend they're showing the season premiere again as a stand alone. So if you missed last week, you should be able to score it this week.
I liked it, it was what I was looking for. We've got the same core back with Richard, Kahlan and Zeddicus. Plus a few newer additions to the core and new baddies. I liked the newest baddie.
Though I found myself screaming at several points that Richard needed a razor. The actor can't grow a full beard, so it's very scraggly and thin.
Yeah, I must not have programmed it right. I got a new cable box over the summer, so it doesn't have my old settings. I set it to record the new episode this week as well as the re-broadcast of the season premiere.
And I saw the bearded Richard in the commercials. Still hot.

Frostflame |
Frostflame wrote:Wow Werthead I have never read the books just watched the series it was entertaining enough. However the numerous Biblical and Starwars references I could have done without. From your description of the book it looks like the classic case of Lawful Evil posing as Chaotic Good, with a bunch of peasants gulping down whatever lies is fed to them. Well the beating and maiming of an eight year old child is an evil act. No matter what light it is presented in, unless the eight year old child was a cleverly disguised irredemable fiend from hell, Nojustification can be found for this action no matter what.
As Shadowcat said, just read the book (and try to do so with an open mind, don't go in expecting them to be evil. Remember,
People are Stupid, They'll Believe Anything, if They Want it To Be True, or Are Afraid it is True. (The wanting to be true is what applies here, I'm sure you've seen it before, people go in with expectations and then their opinions naturally shape around those expectations.)
Myself, I know I hated Violet (The 8 year old princess who kept her 6 year old slave girl locked up in a 3 foot chest at night, and beat her if she ever said anything out of order, and was about to cut that slave girl's tongue out when Richard intervened) hated her with a passion. As I said, if that was an evil act (and I myself consider it a good act. If that was evil, then so are our, admittedly rare, judges that sentence 8 year old murderers to life sentences)
As I said before, if it had been me I'd have killed her. Somebody who would do that, and feel good and just about it, is NOT somebody you can allow to assume a throne, and is NOT somebody who should be allowed to continue to impose their will on others.
No it is not a good act to cut an 8 year old tongue out no matter how spoiled and rotten the child was. It could very well be argued that the eight year old is innocent in the sense she didnt know better, but grew up with whatever role models she had. The mother if Im not mistaken is to blame for her child. A so called seeker of truth should be able to see this and seek to rehabilitate the kid instead of maiming her. And yes I find myself in disagreement with the rare judges who pass life sentences on 8 year old children

kyrt-ryder |
kyrt-ryder wrote:Frostflame wrote:Wow Werthead I have never read the books just watched the series it was entertaining enough. However the numerous Biblical and Starwars references I could have done without. From your description of the book it looks like the classic case of Lawful Evil posing as Chaotic Good, with a bunch of peasants gulping down whatever lies is fed to them. Well the beating and maiming of an eight year old child is an evil act. No matter what light it is presented in, unless the eight year old child was a cleverly disguised irredemable fiend from hell, Nojustification can be found for this action no matter what.
As Shadowcat said, just read the book (and try to do so with an open mind, don't go in expecting them to be evil. Remember,
People are Stupid, They'll Believe Anything, if They Want it To Be True, or Are Afraid it is True. (The wanting to be true is what applies here, I'm sure you've seen it before, people go in with expectations and then their opinions naturally shape around those expectations.)
Myself, I know I hated Violet (The 8 year old princess who kept her 6 year old slave girl locked up in a 3 foot chest at night, and beat her if she ever said anything out of order, and was about to cut that slave girl's tongue out when Richard intervened) hated her with a passion. As I said, if that was an evil act (and I myself consider it a good act. If that was evil, then so are our, admittedly rare, judges that sentence 8 year old murderers to life sentences)
As I said before, if it had been me I'd have killed her. Somebody who would do that, and feel good and just about it, is NOT somebody you can allow to assume a throne, and is NOT somebody who should be allowed to continue to impose their will on others.
No it is not a good act to cut an 8 year old tongue out no matter how spoiled and rotten the child was. It could very well be argued that the eight year old is innocent in the sense she didnt know better, but grew up with whatever role models she had. The mother if Im not mistaken is to blame for her child. A so called seeker of truth should be able to see this and seek to rehabilitate the kid instead of maiming her. And yes I find myself in disagreement with the rare judges who pass life sentences on 8 year old children
Like I said, please read the book. I don't want to get into a huge debate on this especially considering it's been a few years since I've read it.
But I will say this. The mother, while somewhat 'responsible' for letting her child do so, was not the rolemodel promoting that behavior. She gave Violet the slave girl to learn how to rule and be responsible for others, and the child, of her own accord, became a cruel and ruthless animal. The mother was a little cold and distant as a ruler, but didn't compare to Violet.
There's a huge alignment debate in D&D about whether or not it's evil to kill evil people. I myself believe that somebody who performs cruelty of that sort doesn't deserve to live.
Honestly, true as nails, if I were to encounter someone of that sort, someone so cold and cruel and vile, I very likely would have done worse. I wouldn't in today's world, because even rulers are held accountable in the land in which I live and they would be tried and punished by the law.
However in Richard's place, I can say without doubt that I would have executed her. Infact, if you read to the end of the story, you'll learn that he should have, and that's all the spoiler I will give.

![]() |

Also, I just checked the Wiki. Violet wasn't 8 at that time, she was around 12-13.
She could have been 95. The appropriate response if she's a monster is to ram that shiny pointy thing through her shriveled little black heart, not to punch her and mutilate her.
If someone's a monster, and you consider that offensive, then it behooves you to not *turn into a monster yourself* in dealing with them. After all, if what she did was evil, then it would be equally evil to do that to her, which means that Richard would be saying that what she did was *acceptable,* because it's exactly the sort of thing he does.
Goose or gander. Either what she did was wrong, and deserving of her being killed, in which case, Richard shouldn't be emulating her wrongdoing instead of just killing her, or what she did was fine and dandy, as Richard suggests by doing the same thing, in which case he's got no reason to punish her for doing stuff that he thinks it's okay for him to do.
There's really no middle ground here. Either beating people and cutting out their tongues is bad, or it isn't. Doesn't matter if your name is Violet or Richard. The guy has the Sword of Truth, not the Gauntlet of Beating Up Kids. If the little monster needs a good stabination, that's why the pointy bit on the end of the Sword of Truth is kept sharp.
After seeing the show, I'm mortified that I bought the first novel for a friend's daughter for Christmas. The last thing I'd want to give someone's kid for Christmas is some fantasy torture porn...
I mean where's the line? Is it okay to rape rapists, because it's only wrong when they are doing it to other people and it's sweet, sweet just desserts when it is done to them? Do we really live in a world so messed up with people so immoral and evil that there's even a *question* as to whether beating and mutilating someone (anyone, not just a young girl) is 'justified?'

kyrt-ryder |
To quote the passage:
Princess Violet glared at him. "My mother says that Confessor Kahlan will come back and that we'll have a surprise for her the next time she comes here. I just want you to know because my mother said you'll be dead by then. My mother says I get to decide what to do to her. First, I'm going to cut off her hair." Her hands were in fists, her face red. "Then I'm going to let all the guards rape her, every one! Then
I'm going to put her in the dungeon for a few years so they'll have someone to play with! Then when I get tired of hurting her, I'll have her head chopped off and put it on a pole where I can watch it rot!"
Richard actually felt sorry for the little Princess. The sadness for her came over him in a wave. At that feeling, he was surprised to feel the thing in him that had come awake rise up.
Princess Violet squeezed her eyes shut and stuck her tongue out far as she could.
It was like a red flag
The strength of the awakened power exploded through him.
When his boot came up under her jaw he could feel it shatter like a crystal goblet on a stone floor. The impact of the blow lifted the Princess into the air. Her own teeth severed her tongue before they, too, shattered. She landed on her back, a good distance away, trying to scream through the gushing blood.
Denna's eyes snapped to him. For an instant, he saw fear pass across them. Richard had no idea how he was able to what he had done, why the magic hadn't stopped him, and from the look on Denna's face, he knew he shouldn't have been able to do it.
"I warned her before," Richard said, holding Denna's glare. "Promise made. Promise kept."
So the situation is alot different from what Werthead presented. Richard, who at that time was being tortured by a Mordsith (who was letting the little beast help torture him in that very moment) was chained and kicked her, once.
He wasn't beating on a child, it was a single stroke of justice against someone who was going to do all those horrible things to the one he loved.

Dhampir984 |

Yeah, I must not have programmed it right. I got a new cable box over the summer, so it doesn't have my old settings. I set it to record the new episode this week as well as the re-broadcast of the season premiere.
And I saw the bearded Richard in the commercials. Still hot.
It happens to most of us at some point. Pretty sure this week is just the premiere replayed without last season's finale right before it.
I can't really comment on the hotness though. Richard isn't really my type at all.

kyrt-ryder |
Celestial Healer wrote:Yeah, I must not have programmed it right. I got a new cable box over the summer, so it doesn't have my old settings. I set it to record the new episode this week as well as the re-broadcast of the season premiere.
And I saw the bearded Richard in the commercials. Still hot.
It happens to most of us at some point. Pretty sure this week is just the premiere replayed without last season's finale right before it.
I can't really comment on the hotness though. Richard isn't really my type at all.
Lol, reminds me of the episode when those two thieves were using the mirror's magic to turn their bodies into copies of Richard and Kahlan, and they got locked up and the fake Richard had to distract the gay D'Harran guard while the fake Kahlan knocked him out from behind.

![]() |

So the situation is alot different from what Werthead presented. Richard, who at that time was being tortured by a Mordsith (who was letting the little beast help torture him in that very moment) was chained and kicked her, once.
What she was doing was irrelevant. What matters in this scene is that Richard didn't 'beat up a kid' or 'cut her tongue out.' He struck once and her tongue got severed by her own teeth. Unless he'd claimed earlier that he was going to cut her tongue out or something (in which case, insane), it was just one of those things that happens in a fight.
So I'm fine with the scene, as presented. The earlier description made it sound like prolonged beating, followed by deliberate mutilation. If the mutilation wasn't deliberate, then it's just hors d'combat (although the writing *suggests* that Richard had threatened her with something like that previously, 'I told you so,' which could just be some bad writing on the part of the author, making Richard look like a psycho who *intended* to mutilate her and kicked as a premeditated action, seeing her tongue as a 'red flag').
Indeed, given the Seekers role and her nature, I'm surprised he didn't stab her afterwards anyway. IMO, that's kind of what he should have done (as I mentioned in my previous post).
Thanks for clarifying it.

kyrt-ryder |
Well, the thing is, Richard had given such a promise before.
When he, Zed, and Kahlan had been at the Tameran palace before, Rachel said they should cut off Kahlan's hair (A threat to destroy her social position blah blah, attacking her authority, etc) and to deal with the attitude, Richard had drawn his sword and threatened to cut her tongue out if she insulted the mother confessor again.
Now, as far as I can tell Richard didn't sincerely intend to do so, but was rather doing what was necessary in the scene to deal with the issue, find the box of Orden that was in the palace, and get out, however when the situation arose, and came about, it was naturally commented on.

Frostflame |
To quote the passage:
** spoiler omitted **
So the situation is alot different from what Werthead presented. Richard, who at that time was being tortured by a Mordsith (who was letting the little beast help torture him in that very moment) was chained and kicked her, once.
He wasn't beating on a child, it was a single stroke of justice against someone who was going to...
That I can understand Richard was chained and being tortured. A wounded bear is extremely dangerous and a hundread times more vicious. Here it could be argued that the kid had it coming. Due to the unusual circumstances of the situation Richard isnt fully at fault. I remember the torture scene from the series little Violet wasnt in it, and the Promise Made Promise Kept line he told Denna after he delivered his killing blow to her.

Mairkurion {tm} |

Yeah, there's still moments when character logic flies out the window for the sake of plot. The Seeker orders me, the First Wizard, to undertake dangerous magic no matter what the consequences? Sure, let me jump to it without a further thought. After all, the Seeker hasn't made any bad calls heretofore...

kyrt-ryder |
Yeah, there's still moments when character logic flies out the window for the sake of plot. The Seeker orders me, the First Wizard, to undertake dangerous magic no matter what the consequences? Sure, let me jump to it without a further thought. After all, the Seeker hasn't made any bad calls heretofore...
Yeah, that was a huge flub. In the books Richard probably would asked Zed to remove one binding to test the waters and see what changed.
(Although according to later in the episode it seems it's a good thing he hadn't, since the effects of the binding activating are... shall we say permanent once they've been there long enough)

@stroVal |

Yeah, I felt like season 2 was a real step up in quality, and wondered if I was the only one.
Yep it is...and while still people will complain about everything bear in mind that: 1) it matters not if you are entertained(any form will suffice)
2) there aren't any fantasy series so its a start(House would never be if not for ER..so we need a history of fantasy series before getting complex anti-cliche plots such as in Tigana)
3) Certain cliches are not so bad..look at most role-playing games..its fun
:)
even Tolkien-oh gosh he dares?-is full of them
PS: now some might criticize the last bit so I will have you know; before you argue that : "it wasnt a cliche if he was the creator of all we know fantasy-like" that in fact he wasn't the first...maybe the best or the most famous but not the first(and I am not even referring to the folklore myths)

![]() |

One quick question for you all.
Are Confessors lawful good or lawful neutral?
Some of both (the original 'Mother Confessor,' who wanted to kill Kaylin's nephew, was definitely LN), and at least one was lawful evil, enslaving an entire village 'for their own good' and using them as cannon fodder to enforce her own will.
And it's also a training thing. The teenaged girl who was the 'only other confessor left' earlier this season was pretty darn chaotic, having grown up with no idea what her powers did, confessing people willy-nilly once she found out she could, sometimes for petulant reasons.
Being a training thing, I'd, in D&D terms, think of the power to confess as a feat that one takes at 1st level, and has no alignment requirement, but that class levels in Confessor requires a lawful alignment. Any sort of meaningful control of the ability would require Confessor training, and it seems that anyone with the power to confess, but no training, is a danger to everyone around them, accidentally confessing people left and right.
Caveat: I haven't read the books, so I'm going entirely based on what I've seen on the TV show!

![]() |

I've never liked this attitude that D&D has that your level of self-dicipline and/or training is directly related to your ethical outlook. Kahlen obviously has a high level of self control, but based on her actions I would classify her as neutral good, not lawful good. The Confessor that had confessed an entire village wasn't just evil, she also had no regard for the law (both of the village and those that supposedly prevent Confessors from doing such a thing).

Stewart Perkins |

I've never liked this attitude that D&D has that your level of self-dicipline and/or training is directly related to your ethical outlook. Kahlen obviously has a high level of self control, but based on her actions I would classify her as neutral good, not lawful good. The Confessor that had confessed an entire village wasn't just evil, she also had no regard for the law (both of the village and those that supposedly prevent Confessors from doing such a thing).
I would agree that Kahlan is by nature nuetral good. However I don't think Confessors themselves have an alignment as much as they are expected to have a lawful nuetral outlook (always law abiding, for the society and order, etc.). I think they are taught to be lawful but can develop their own motives aswell as any "soldier" who is taught to be LN.
As a side note I would treat the confessors as a race in D&D with a class or prestige class or feats or some such to represent training since they have powers by birth. That's just me.
On the topic of the "princess kick incident" He did promise do to so before, and when he did it it kinda portrays that he was so angry that he intended to kick her tongue out of her mouth so to speak. But he was being horribly tortured and his love was being threatened with the most horrid things possible by someone who meant it so no matter how old that person was, it doesn't change the fact they were going to follow through with their threat and I just can't blame him in this situation. Different circumstances however would make that a no no.

![]() |

I know that there has been a lot of interest in playing a confessor, but as a GM I am more interested in making Mord'sith characters.
Don't forget to give them a breath of life spell ability.
Mord'sith as a 10 lvl prestige class.
1 Servant to Lord Rahl, Inflict Pain +1, Agiel
2 Breath of Life 1/day
3 Resist Agiel 2/-
4 Inflict Pain +2
5 Kill with Agiel 1/day
6 Breath of Life 2/day, Resist Agiel 3/-
7 Inflict Pain +3
8 Conversion
9 Resist Agiel 4/-
10 Breath of Life 3/day, Inflict Pain +4, Kill with Agiel 2/day
Agiel: while held, an Agiel deals 1d8 nonlethal damage to its bearer per round. When used in combat, the Agiel deals 2d6 nonlethal damage per round of contact, plus an additional 1d6 nonlethal damage for each inflict pain bonus. So for example, a fourth level Mord'Sith would deal 4d6 nonlethal damage per round of contact with the Agiel. The Agiel's pain mechanic also staggers the victim for one round for every two rounds of contact after contact ceases.

![]() |

David Fryer wrote:I know that there has been a lot of interest in playing a confessor, but as a GM I am more interested in making Mord'sith characters.Don't forget to give them a breath of life spell ability.
Mord'sith as a 10 lvl prestige class.
1 Servant to Lord Rahl, Inflict Pain +1, Agiel
2 Breath of Life 1/day
3 Resist Agiel 2/-
4 Inflict Pain +2
5 Kill with Agiel 1/day
6 Breath of Life 2/day, Resist Agiel 3/-
7 Inflict Pain +3
8 Conversion
9 Resist Agiel 4/-
10 Breath of Life 3/day, Inflict Pain +4, Kill with Agiel 2/dayAgiel: while held, an Agiel deals 1d8 nonlethal damage to its bearer per round. When used in combat, the Agiel deals 2d6 nonlethal damage per round of contact, plus an additional 1d6 nonlethal damage for each inflict pain bonus. So for example, a fourth level Mord'Sith would deal 4d6 nonlethal damage per round of contact with the Agiel. The Agiel's pain mechanic also staggers the victim for one round for every two rounds of contact after contact ceases.
Good start, but what are the prerequisites?

![]() |

Right now I'm content to leave it as a juicy start. :P
I am exceptionally busy detailing a fantasy empire capital for my favorite personal Campaign, excluding The Dark Tower (not Stephen King), a city with a population of approximately 180,000 people (huge apparently by fantasy rpg standards).
What is surprising is that the method I am using to create it is working phenomenally, though it borrows rules from about 7 different sources, what before was a vague idea has become a detailed urban design.
As to the Mord'Sith, I would tie their breath of life ability to their ability to break magic so its not incredibly gamebreaking. But basically to become one, a Mord'Sith just has to be 'broken' by her new family, or 'converted'. Tortured into an alignment change to Neutral Evil.
Mord'Sith do not obey the laws of the land. They are spiritually bound to serve the current Lord Rahl by a permanent geas. While they may choose to follow a predefined stucture (the Mord'Sith hierarchy for example), it is not required of them. Lord Rahl's commands can also be directly refused if the Mord'Sith believes they are opposed to Lord Rahl's interests. Lord Rahl can force the issue, however.