"Monster" orphanages and sanctuaries (Golarion)


Advice

301 to 350 of 401 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

Recently saw a quote from Orcs of Golarian in another topic, specifically that Orcs naturally go into a "murderous fury" at minor, momentary annoyances, even in the rare cases they're raised separate from Orc Culture.

I don't know if you've all gone over that before, but like, wow. That's about as bad a starting point as this project could have.


Which race should be next? Most of the ones from the first Bestiary have been covered by now.


A guy whose username is an obvious Three Billygoats Gruff reference conflates education with genocide.

Obvious troll is obvious and no more merits a serious response than a smurf post.


Though sadly there is some bad news for us from James Jacobs.


A truly Good temple to a truly Good god would still take them in on the off chance they found the 1%, probably. Sarenrae always goes for redemption before she brutally murders evildoers, after all.


Atarlost wrote:

A guy whose username is an obvious Three Billygoats Gruff reference conflates education with genocide.

Obvious troll is obvious and no more merits a serious response than a smurf post.

If you don't know that education policies forced upon conquered peoples has led to cultural genocide... you have a lot of reading to begin.


Icyshadow wrote:
Which race should be next? Most of the ones from the first Bestiary have been covered by now.

So many choices -- but I'm going to put in a vote for Changelings, who have the kernel of a fascinating backstory that has been left frustratingly incomplete. Not just any Changelings (for whom all alignments are represented with reasonable frequency before metamorphosis), but ones that have undergone metamorphosis.

d20pfsrd.com entry for Changeling (originally Bestiary 4; bolding mine) wrote:

{. . .}

Regardless of her desires, though, a changeling who has undergone the transformation cannot go back; once she becomes a hag, she remains a hag, and her mind turns as wicked as her form has turned hideous.

Got to do something about that . . . .


UnArcaneElection wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
Which race should be next? Most of the ones from the first Bestiary have been covered by now.

So many choices -- but I'm going to put in a vote for Changelings, who have the kernel of a fascinating backstory that has been left frustratingly incomplete. Not just any Changelings (for whom all alignments are represented with reasonable frequency before metamorphosis), but ones that have undergone metamorphosis.

d20pfsrd.com entry for Changeling (originally Bestiary 4; bolding mine) wrote:

{. . .}

Regardless of her desires, though, a changeling who has undergone the transformation cannot go back; once she becomes a hag, she remains a hag, and her mind turns as wicked as her form has turned hideous.

Got to do something about that . . . .

Changelings who have undergone metamorphosis aren't changelings, but hags. I don't have any real problem with that making them always evil: It's a magical procedure either chosen by them or forced upon them.

Redemption for a hag could be possible, but it's not really related to the orphanages and raising children of monsters issue.

Actual changelings do present problems, the largest of which is recognizing that they're changelings in the first place. Assuming that's done, simply raising them well and warning them of the "call", then protecting them should the hag actually come for them, would be sufficient.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

So are we actually going to design some organizations for Golarion or is this mean to be more of an abstract discussion of what might be needed to raise the children of these various and often evil aligned races?

If the former I have a few I just don't want to get off track of the general discussion going on here.


I find nothing wrong with that. Only canon ones that come to my mind are places where the Clerics of Shelyn and Sarenrae operate though.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I was thinking of more suggestions and ideas should we not have preexisting ones.

Like for example

The Jol Greenskin brigade: activated over a decade ago during Opir 8 fingers rule, the Greenskin brigade is a military outfit designed to incorporate the many Orcish orphans and refugees fleeing or left over from conflicts within the Kodar mountains into a fighting force that is both effective in defending Jol's borders against further incursions from the hills while simultaneously galvanizing these Orcish refugees into a productive force away from the rest of Jol's population. Orcs who are brought to the unit are guaranteed a full pardon from any past transgressions, food and shelter, and citizenship after 12-20 years of service. Often this work is difficult and many do not make it but amongst the brigade all are equal.

Not exactly the most noble example but it does help build on the idea of how various factions might deal with various monstrous races inside their border beyond just trying to kill them and with Opir's already tenous rule coupled with the giant problem his region has I could see him deputizing orcs into a "loyal" viking force if he thought it would help show off his might and they gave him the proper platitudes.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Icyshadow wrote:
Though sadly there is some bad news for us from James Jacobs.

Not really.

In the post you link, he's talking about the current state of the world, not some inevitable nature of the universe type thing. The vast majority of Orcs are certainly Evil, but the vast majority was also raised in Orcish culture. Change the latter and you can change the former.


^Awesome.


Wow. I forget this thread for six months and things get nasty. Still hoping for uplifting orphanage fluff in the future!


(Somehow I missed this before.)

Icyshadow wrote:
I find nothing wrong with that. Only canon ones that come to my mind are places where the Clerics of Shelyn and Sarenrae operate though.

Reportedly, in Wrath of the Righteous, Desna is at least experimentally into this as well. Although not all of the Good deities seem to be into this, and even the ones that try to be don't seem to get very good efficiency with it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
UnArcaneElection wrote:

(Somehow I missed this before.)

Icyshadow wrote:
I find nothing wrong with that. Only canon ones that come to my mind are places where the Clerics of Shelyn and Sarenrae operate though.

Reportedly, in Wrath of the Righteous, Desna is at least experimentally into this as well. Although not all of the Good deities seem to be into this, and even the ones that try to be don't seem to get very good efficiency with it.

Which is actually kind of understandable -- after all it's one thing to sit here all and talk about how it would be accomplished...

it's another thing entirely to actually spend years of your life trying to do it and not mess it up.

Add to this the complexity of not really having a full grasp on the physiology, psychology, and initial culture of the creatures in question plus the worker's own cultural bias and unspoken assumptions and it's hairy. I mean just look at some of the various issues we have had on this planet with just one species... now you got how many and the other such baggage we have plus the rest of the pathfinder world too?

Hard times.

While I'm all about it and think it's great I also realize that the success rates are not likely to be phenomenal especially when first starting up.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Best monster orphanage actually prison, evil rules holding captive polymorphed good potential allies.

Silver Crusade

What about dragon hatchilngs that one finds?


Mordo the Spaz - Forum Troll wrote:
Best monster orphanage actually prison, evil rules holding captive polymorphed good potential allies.

This is a disturbingly plausible hypothesis . . . .


It might be kinda cool to get some aberrations, like mimics. Mimics aren't strictly "evil", and are indicated to kill more as just a side effect of their "Extreme Performance Art". And 'cause they're hungry, but yeah.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

"I only eat people if I'm hungry, don't smite me bro!"


DominusMegadeus wrote:
"I only eat people if I'm hungry, don't smite me bro!"

Meh, cannibalism in extreme need might be a plausible excuse for neutrality. It's not like the dungeon ecosystem is a vast and fully stocked one I guess.

If nothing else it would be funny in game.


Mikaze wrote:

Medusa

Recommended Deities: Shelyn, Sarenrae, Abadar, Irori
Recommended Environment: Urban/Urban-accessable

Medusas present an interesting mixture of easily relatable human mindsets and highly dangerous supernatural abilities. Recent research, bolstered by actual medusa scholars and subjects alike, have determined that the fell reputation of this unusual monogendered race is primarily a result of society's general rejection and persecution rather than any inborn "bad nature".

Providing a stable, caring environment for a medusa from a young age curbs most of the negative behavior attributed to the race entirely. However, special care must be taken due to the deadly nature of their cursed gaze. Any caretakers should wear glasses or goggles with smoked glass, preferably the latter to prevent accidental sidelong glances. Medusas themselves should be acclimated from an early age with wearing these items as well, as it is key to their functionality in the outside world.

A special note on goggles: A small design that allows for a maximum amount of expressiveness to remain visible is suggested. Eye-to-eye contact is an element of nonverbal communication that is sadly sacrificed in most medusa/non-medusa relationships. Any small measure of facial expressiveness that can be shared helps alleviate that loss.

It should also be noted that capable individuals with sight-related handicaps can prove highly valuable in the rearing of a medusa. The value of a non-obscured face should not be underestimated in the development of familial bonds. Medusas can also benefit from learning how to cope without eyesight, which may prove critical later in life. It is also notable that adult medusas in turn make excellent caretakers for the blind.

Protective gloves are suggested for any caretakers dealing with particularly young medusas until they have learned to better control the emotions that may drive their serpentine hair to hostility. Some suggest resuming this practice or continuing...

Not having finished reading the thread, I apologize if this isn't a unique idea, but consider this: With above average intelligence, and significant personal dexterity and charisma, would not these being make ideal musicians or stage performers? Playing music behind a curtain or at a distance to preserve the safety of their patrons and fans. The many small snakes on their heads could perhaps be used to play a newly developed instrument, a combination woodwind/harp device perhaps?

Medusa bagpipes? :)

As their deadly gaze extends only to 30 feet, they could easily perform in a public venue that had a stage and theatre seating... as long as the people in attendance knew the risks, mark out the danger zone around the stage... What melodies could they produce by singing not only with their own voices, but accompanying themselves with the hissing of a dozen snakes as well? I imagine music both beautiful and otherworldly. It is a shame these beings have been maligned by the "good" races for so long...

Their gaze attack I think is generated by their humanoid eyes, perhaps not their snake hair... if this is the case, blinding them is not needed! Simply a stylish mask or silken blindfold... It may even become an affectation for the Medusa, glittery bejewelled masks in public, a slender blindfold for more "private" affairs... These are not hideous monsters, they are beautiful women with the ability to petrify with a look, it isn't their fault.


Trinite wrote:

Neothelids

Recommended Deities: Desna, Erastil

Recommended Environment: Remote, rural monastery/temple or village, with connection to large subterranean environment.

Okay, so Neothelids.

Due to their immense lifespans and low reproductive rates, it is very unlikely that one will find more than one lone immature neothelid to attempt to raise. Even if multiple neothelids are found together, it is a good idea to separate them so as to reduce the potential danger if they revert to their natural tendencies.

Presuming that they grow to adulthood in a roughly similar manner to other creatures but at a much slower rate, there should be a relatively long period during which a neothelid will be open to moral formation.

This means that raising a neothelid will require either a very long-lived caretaker, or else an organization of many individuals committed to cultivating the neothelid's potential over the long-term. A relatively large organization is probably better, given the need for plenty of livestock to sustain the neothelid's nutritional needs.

It will also need a great deal of space in which to live, and it will likely need to be hidden from the general populace, at least until it becomes capable of demonstrating its trustworthiness and value though some dramatic good deeds. The best option is a large subterranean environment, which will also feel more comfortable to the neothelid than being forced to live above ground. Under no circumstances should this be a cave connected to the darklands. If the young neothelid's kin discover its location and come for it, it will mean certain disaster.

The organization raising a neothelid will need to be led by a very strong-willed and intelligent individual, who is capable of resisting the neothelid's powerful mental abilities. It is also best if this individual has potent mental powers of their own, so that they can model for the neothelid how one may use those powers for good and resist the tendency to control others to...

Could not these rough beasts (once shown the path towards good) help in the rehabilitation of the Ogres and Half Ogres? A neothelids powers would allow it to at least calm them, and with the proper supervision, allow for rapid socialization of otherwise difficult races... Between "Detect Thoughts", "Charm Monster" and "Suggestion", they have a powerful array of tools to aid in the... um... domestication... of more difficult races. :D

Basically, Ogres and Half Ogres pretty much need to be treated like what they are: genetically disadvantaged monsters who can't help themselves. Religious ideas and words alone won't help them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
UnArcaneElection wrote:
Bob Bob Bob wrote:

{. . .}

If they're all pure unfiltered evil then you kill it (if you let it live it's a danger to society), if they're just people with different skin and tusks then you need to save it (as it's just an innocent life). There's no real middle-ground for a baby on this, culture can change the extremes but as a baby it's only one or the other. {. . .}

Not necessarily -- they might be strongly biased towards one kind of behavior or another (including those that turn out Evil), but if you put in extra effort you might be able to overcome this, the point being that you would have to put in more effort than with babies of different origin. You might find disagreements between various people upon how much effort is too much to be affordable, even when still theoretically possible. Potentially you might even be able to redeem a Fiend (canonically, it does happen on really rare occasions), but most people draw the line well short of that. Not saying that's the way it should be, bit it is what it is.

I would argue that those who need saving most are those who have fallen farthest. Now, Demons and such don't have children, so that's out, but without resorting to metagame information, characters (if good) should at least think about trying to save/reform ANY youngling, as long as they have the capacity for thought! Is the baby black dragon to blame for it's parents transgressions? No. People talk to Kobold redemption because it is easy... what of the Paladin who devotes his adventuring career to saving the bastard offspring of the fiends he destroys? Imagine, in a kingdom beset by infernal invasion, a Paladin wandering the land, killing the evil outsiders, but also looking for the progeny of rape. The unwanted half-fiends. They are evil, the book says so, but the Paladin CHARACTER would have no idea of "evil descriptors" and should try to help these blameless children. Some people are coming in to this thread from a rules perspective, and that makes me sad, because this is more of RP thing...

Awesome thread by the way, has kept me interested for two days of on and off reading so far. :D


alexd1976 wrote:
I would argue that those who need saving most are those who have fallen farthest. Now, Demons and such don't have children, so that's out, but without resorting to metagame information, characters (if good) should at least think about trying to save/reform ANY youngling, as long as they have the capacity for thought! Is the baby black dragon to blame for it's parents transgressions?

Dragons fall into a different category, both from humanoids and from evil outsiders. Dragons have young, but those young appear to be independent and quite capable from near birth. They're not paying for their parent's transgressions, they're quite capable of committing their own - on a smaller scale, but that's a matter of power not moral culpability. Wyrmling dragons make good BBEGs for low level adventures. They're smart, dangerous and can pretty easily get a tribe of kobolds or something for minions.

It's a bit of stretch to think that even wyrmlings need to be treated as innocents despite their own actions, just because they're technically young. Much less, for example, a CR 11, 40 year old, juvenile red dragon.


DM Under The Bridge wrote:
Atarlost wrote:

A guy whose username is an obvious Three Billygoats Gruff reference conflates education with genocide.

Obvious troll is obvious and no more merits a serious response than a smurf post.

If you don't know that education policies forced upon conquered peoples has led to cultural genocide... you have a lot of reading to begin.

So don't save babies? Not sure what message you are trying to convey here...

I find the concept of saving the lives of helpless younglings to be commendable. Showing mercy is not evil. Saving lives is not evil.

The approach I would take would not be to isolate and train these blameless children, it would be to make a LARGE building, open and beautiful, with gardens and classrooms, open to the public, a place of learning, a place of art and craft, training and love. Put ALL the orphans together there, allow them to mingle. Gently teach them that violence is not the only way. Let the children become part of the society by allowing them to pick their own path. If a minotaur child decides to be a Bard, help him learn the lute. If a Kobold child wants to become a raging Barbarian, train them. Impart upon them the values you seek to uphold, do not force them to be good, ALLOW them to show that they ARE good. Children are blameless, humans have as much capacity for evil as Orcs do, by the rules...

Would you argue that a human necromancer is less evil than a half-orc necromancer? That's pretty racist. ;)


thejeff wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:
I would argue that those who need saving most are those who have fallen farthest. Now, Demons and such don't have children, so that's out, but without resorting to metagame information, characters (if good) should at least think about trying to save/reform ANY youngling, as long as they have the capacity for thought! Is the baby black dragon to blame for it's parents transgressions?

Dragons fall into a different category, both from humanoids and from evil outsiders. Dragons have young, but those young appear to be independent and quite capable from near birth. They're not paying for their parent's transgressions, they're quite capable of committing their own - on a smaller scale, but that's a matter of power not moral culpability. Wyrmling dragons make good BBEGs for low level adventures. They're smart, dangerous and can pretty easily get a tribe of kobolds or something for minions.

It's a bit of stretch to think that even wyrmlings need to be treated as innocents despite their own actions, just because they're technically young. Much less, for example, a CR 11, 40 year old, juvenile red dragon.

Fair enough. I often forget just how capable even a hatchling is. They are born being able to speak, fly, breath acid etc...

Still, imagine raising one to be good. What an awesome ally that would make. :D


alexd1976 wrote:
DM Under The Bridge wrote:
If you don't know that education policies forced upon conquered peoples has led to cultural genocide... you have a lot of reading to begin.

So don't save babies? Not sure what message you are trying to convey here...

I find the concept of saving the lives of helpless younglings to be commendable. Showing mercy is not evil. Saving lives is not evil.

The approach I would take would not be to isolate and train these blameless children, it would be to make a LARGE building, open and beautiful, with gardens and classrooms, open to the public, a place of learning, a place of art and craft, training and love. Put ALL the orphans together there, allow them to mingle. Gently teach them that violence is not the only way. Let the children become part of the society by allowing them to pick their own path. If a minotaur child decides to be a Bard, help him learn the lute. If a Kobold child wants to become a raging Barbarian, train them. Impart upon them the values you seek to uphold, do not force them to be good, ALLOW them to show that they ARE good. Children are blameless, humans have as much capacity for evil as Orcs do, by the rules...

Would you argue that a human necromancer is less evil than a half-orc necromancer? That's pretty racist. ;)

1) It depends on whether you're finding the babies when you're forced to kill their parents by circumstance or whether you're killing the parents because they're orcs and need to be wiped out so you can teach their children a better way to live.

One is making the best of a bad situation, the other is damn creepy. And a solid real world parallel - though it was more common among enlightened types to just take the kids without killing the parents.

2) It really does depend on how the GM is treating the various races and which one's you're allowing in. Some of the larger ones have serious intelligence/Wisdom penalties and strength boosts - making them very dangerous and hard to teach. Even orcs have a strong tendency to uncontrolled fits of rage. That's not evil, but it still makes it hard for them to integrate into other societies. Can some overcome it? Sure. Would the overwhelming majority, if raised well? That's a question for your GM. If it's only a few exceptions and most such orphan cases don't turn out well, then your orphanage program is going to have problems.
These creatures aren't humans with funny shaped heads. They are and should be biologically distinct. They should have different wiring, different instincts and different default behaviors. Otherwise we might as well just have humans.

On larger scale, I think there's a conflict between the mechanics and theoretical considerations that say they all have free will and it's just culture that makes different races behave differently and the presentation of the various races which shows that behavior as nearly universal to a race. If it really was just cultural, then you'd have distinctly different cultures, much like humans do. A broad spectrum of cultures, not just one template for each humanoid. You'd also see them living in societies with other races, assimilated into the local culture. Not everywhere, but in some areas at least.
Without something of that, you're presenting Orcs as always CE monsters, but claiming they're not. It's no surprise there's some cognitive dissonance.


alexd1976 wrote:
thejeff wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:
I would argue that those who need saving most are those who have fallen farthest. Now, Demons and such don't have children, so that's out, but without resorting to metagame information, characters (if good) should at least think about trying to save/reform ANY youngling, as long as they have the capacity for thought! Is the baby black dragon to blame for it's parents transgressions?

Dragons fall into a different category, both from humanoids and from evil outsiders. Dragons have young, but those young appear to be independent and quite capable from near birth. They're not paying for their parent's transgressions, they're quite capable of committing their own - on a smaller scale, but that's a matter of power not moral culpability. Wyrmling dragons make good BBEGs for low level adventures. They're smart, dangerous and can pretty easily get a tribe of kobolds or something for minions.

It's a bit of stretch to think that even wyrmlings need to be treated as innocents despite their own actions, just because they're technically young. Much less, for example, a CR 11, 40 year old, juvenile red dragon.

Fair enough. I often forget just how capable even a hatchling is. They are born being able to speak, fly, breath acid etc...

Still, imagine raising one to be good. What an awesome ally that would make. :D

Something of a generational project though - at least for humans. Definitely out of the scope of most campaigns. If you're rocketing from 1st level to 15+ in couple of years, your wyrmling that you've been teaching from your early days might have made it to Very young, but won't be surviving any fights that threaten you.


I suppose the next question after "How do you raise them?" is "What happens to Golarion now that you've done this?" Imagine this isn't a new thing, that it's been happening a while. What then?


SilvercatMoonpaw wrote:
I suppose the next question after "How do you raise them?" is "What happens to Golarion now that you've done this?" Imagine this isn't a new thing, that it's been happening a while. What then?

Yeah, that's the thing. If this isn't a new idea that all the supposedly Good people have been ignoring for millennia, then either it just isn't working or Golarion should really look a lot different than it does.

It's a clash between game logic where the humanoid races are designed to be enemies for the PCs to fight and setting logic, where they really should be sapient beings capable of moral choices and thus not just be enemies for the PCs to fight.
I think trying to have it both ways is a mistake. If you want them to be more realistic creatures capable of moral choices, you really need to show that in game, not just state it out of game and then have them be evil on stage. Have some humanoid NPCs in towns. Have some peaceful orcish settlements. Something.


thejeff wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:
I would argue that those who need saving most are those who have fallen farthest. Now, Demons and such don't have children, so that's out, but without resorting to metagame information, characters (if good) should at least think about trying to save/reform ANY youngling, as long as they have the capacity for thought! Is the baby black dragon to blame for it's parents transgressions?

Dragons fall into a different category, both from humanoids and from evil outsiders. Dragons have young, but those young appear to be independent and quite capable from near birth. They're not paying for their parent's transgressions, they're quite capable of committing their own - on a smaller scale, but that's a matter of power not moral culpability. Wyrmling dragons make good BBEGs for low level adventures. They're smart, dangerous and can pretty easily get a tribe of kobolds or something for minions.

It's a bit of stretch to think that even wyrmlings need to be treated as innocents despite their own actions, just because they're technically young. Much less, for example, a CR 11, 40 year old, juvenile red dragon.

Yeah that's why I did wyverns for my dragonish write up. Going with a full blown dragon considering the age categories and so on was just too much for what I wanted to write.

And interesting thought though would be if different dragons matured at different rates than other dragons did. For example if white dragons 'matured' quicker than say gold dragons.

Liberty's Edge

thejeff wrote:
SilvercatMoonpaw wrote:
I suppose the next question after "How do you raise them?" is "What happens to Golarion now that you've done this?" Imagine this isn't a new thing, that it's been happening a while. What then?

Yeah, that's the thing. If this isn't a new idea that all the supposedly Good people have been ignoring for millennia, then either it just isn't working or Golarion should really look a lot different than it does.

It's a clash between game logic where the humanoid races are designed to be enemies for the PCs to fight and setting logic, where they really should be sapient beings capable of moral choices and thus not just be enemies for the PCs to fight.
I think trying to have it both ways is a mistake. If you want them to be more realistic creatures capable of moral choices, you really need to show that in game, not just state it out of game and then have them be evil on stage. Have some humanoid NPCs in towns. Have some peaceful orcish settlements. Something.

I actually resolved this particular lgical conflict rather easily much earlier in this very thread.

In short, very rarely does a group small enough to all be Good aligned kill an entire tribe's combatants...and if everyone's not Good, odds of atrocities are really extremely high in this kind of war. So...it hasn't cropped up very often historically.

Plus, usually there are noncombatants to take care of the children, and people who kill them will usually kill the children, too...in which case, there's no need for orphanages.


Abraham spalding wrote:
thejeff wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:
I would argue that those who need saving most are those who have fallen farthest. Now, Demons and such don't have children, so that's out, but without resorting to metagame information, characters (if good) should at least think about trying to save/reform ANY youngling, as long as they have the capacity for thought! Is the baby black dragon to blame for it's parents transgressions?

Dragons fall into a different category, both from humanoids and from evil outsiders. Dragons have young, but those young appear to be independent and quite capable from near birth. They're not paying for their parent's transgressions, they're quite capable of committing their own - on a smaller scale, but that's a matter of power not moral culpability. Wyrmling dragons make good BBEGs for low level adventures. They're smart, dangerous and can pretty easily get a tribe of kobolds or something for minions.

It's a bit of stretch to think that even wyrmlings need to be treated as innocents despite their own actions, just because they're technically young. Much less, for example, a CR 11, 40 year old, juvenile red dragon.

Yeah that's why I did wyverns for my dragonish write up. Going with a full blown dragon considering the age categories and so on was just too much for what I wanted to write.

And interesting thought though would be if different dragons matured at different rates than other dragons did. For example if white dragons 'matured' quicker than say gold dragons.

But even without the length of the age categories, the very youngest seem quite independent. Dragons are never helpless innocents in the way a human child is.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
thejeff wrote:
SilvercatMoonpaw wrote:
I suppose the next question after "How do you raise them?" is "What happens to Golarion now that you've done this?" Imagine this isn't a new thing, that it's been happening a while. What then?

Yeah, that's the thing. If this isn't a new idea that all the supposedly Good people have been ignoring for millennia, then either it just isn't working or Golarion should really look a lot different than it does.

It's a clash between game logic where the humanoid races are designed to be enemies for the PCs to fight and setting logic, where they really should be sapient beings capable of moral choices and thus not just be enemies for the PCs to fight.
I think trying to have it both ways is a mistake. If you want them to be more realistic creatures capable of moral choices, you really need to show that in game, not just state it out of game and then have them be evil on stage. Have some humanoid NPCs in towns. Have some peaceful orcish settlements. Something.

I actually resolved this particular lgical conflict rather easily much earlier in this very thread.

In short, very rarely does a group small enough to all be Good aligned kill an entire tribe's combatants...and if everyone's not Good, odds of atrocities are really extremely high in this kind of war. So...it hasn't cropped up very often historically.

Plus, usually there are noncombatants to take care of the children, and people who kill them will usually kill the children, too...in which case, there's no need for orphanages.

Which is basically my approach to the whole thing in game: As a GM don't set up contrived situations where you have to slaughter ever last adult in a town and you don't have to worry about dealing with the helpless kids.

But it still doesn't answer the larger question: Even without orphanages, if all the humanoid (and even other monster) races really do have free will and can make moral choices then there would be different cultures among them, some of which wouldn't be evil. I'm not willing to concede a race that is entirely evil, but only for cultural reasons.

Liberty's Edge

thejeff wrote:
Which is basically my approach to the whole thing in game: As a GM don't set up contrived situations where you have to slaughter ever last adult in a town and you don't have to worry about dealing with the helpless kids.

Agreed. :)

thejeff wrote:
But it still doesn't answer the larger question: Even without orphanages, if all the humanoid (and even other monster) races really do have free will and can make moral choices then there would be different cultures among them, some of which wouldn't be evil. I'm not willing to concede a race that is entirely evil, but only for cultural reasons.

Agreed again (at least partially, see below), but we have examples of non-evil members of a wide variety of races, just not a whole lot of them. There are indications of Orcs in the Mwangi Expanse being non-Evil, plus some tribes in the Darklands, plus isolated individuals, just only a few of them.

And so on and so forth for other races.

Also, as the premise of this thread indicates (primarily by the inclusion of special orphanages and unique needs), there's several indications that it's not entirely cultural. Some races have built in tendencies that tend to lead them to some degree in the direction of Evil. It's not insurmountable, but it's there.


alexd1976 wrote:
{. . .} They are evil, the book says so, but the Paladin CHARACTER would have no idea of "evil descriptors" and should try to help these blameless children. {. . .}

Actually, Paladins and others with knowledge of religion and planar affairs probably WOULD know of alignment descriptors, although probably by a more flavorful name. They have to get their instruction about how to deal with these things somehow . . . .

* * * * * * * *

One thing to keep in mind about why Golarion does not show much effect of people having already run monster orphanages (apart from social change of any sort occurring at a glacial pace on Golarion in general, apart from the occasional revolution or conquest) is that powerful forces are already working against such projects. Apart from monsters who would think ill of their children being taught Good, think about how Asmodeus and his Chelaxian satraps would view such projects (other than those working under their direction). They need the threat of monsters as part of their toolbox for keeping the lower classes in line, and thus would see the idea of redeeming the monsters in ways other than those working for them as being downright dangerous.


Asmodeus would be mostly okay with it if you were raising Lawful Orc babies, or at least wouldn't directly interfere. I think he raises war-orphans himself if I remember my lore right. A pillar of the community, that guy. Without him, it'd be a bloody, screaming mess.

He'd make sure of that. :)


thejeff wrote:
Abraham spalding wrote:
thejeff wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:
I would argue that those who need saving most are those who have fallen farthest. Now, Demons and such don't have children, so that's out, but without resorting to metagame information, characters (if good) should at least think about trying to save/reform ANY youngling, as long as they have the capacity for thought! Is the baby black dragon to blame for it's parents transgressions?

Dragons fall into a different category, both from humanoids and from evil outsiders. Dragons have young, but those young appear to be independent and quite capable from near birth. They're not paying for their parent's transgressions, they're quite capable of committing their own - on a smaller scale, but that's a matter of power not moral culpability. Wyrmling dragons make good BBEGs for low level adventures. They're smart, dangerous and can pretty easily get a tribe of kobolds or something for minions.

It's a bit of stretch to think that even wyrmlings need to be treated as innocents despite their own actions, just because they're technically young. Much less, for example, a CR 11, 40 year old, juvenile red dragon.

Yeah that's why I did wyverns for my dragonish write up. Going with a full blown dragon considering the age categories and so on was just too much for what I wanted to write.

And interesting thought though would be if different dragons matured at different rates than other dragons did. For example if white dragons 'matured' quicker than say gold dragons.

But even without the length of the age categories, the very youngest seem quite independent. Dragons are never helpless innocents in the way a human child is.

Yeah dragons tend to be more like cats -- get them past that initial spot and they are probably going to be alright.


Abraham spalding wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Abraham spalding wrote:
thejeff wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:
I would argue that those who need saving most are those who have fallen farthest. Now, Demons and such don't have children, so that's out, but without resorting to metagame information, characters (if good) should at least think about trying to save/reform ANY youngling, as long as they have the capacity for thought! Is the baby black dragon to blame for it's parents transgressions?

Dragons fall into a different category, both from humanoids and from evil outsiders. Dragons have young, but those young appear to be independent and quite capable from near birth. They're not paying for their parent's transgressions, they're quite capable of committing their own - on a smaller scale, but that's a matter of power not moral culpability. Wyrmling dragons make good BBEGs for low level adventures. They're smart, dangerous and can pretty easily get a tribe of kobolds or something for minions.

It's a bit of stretch to think that even wyrmlings need to be treated as innocents despite their own actions, just because they're technically young. Much less, for example, a CR 11, 40 year old, juvenile red dragon.

Yeah that's why I did wyverns for my dragonish write up. Going with a full blown dragon considering the age categories and so on was just too much for what I wanted to write.

And interesting thought though would be if different dragons matured at different rates than other dragons did. For example if white dragons 'matured' quicker than say gold dragons.

But even without the length of the age categories, the very youngest seem quite independent. Dragons are never helpless innocents in the way a human child is.
Yeah dragons tend to be more like cats -- get them past that initial spot and they are probably going to be alright.

I'm not sure what you mean.

Though the idea of baby dragons being like baby kittens, adorable, blind and helpless for the first few weeks has its appeal, I think of them born as predators - ready to fly away and start hunting within hours of hatching.


DominusMegadeus wrote:

Asmodeus would be mostly okay with it if you were raising Lawful Orc babies, or at least wouldn't directly interfere. I think he raises war-orphans himself if I remember my lore right. A pillar of the community, that guy. Without him, it'd be a bloody, screaming mess.

He'd make sure of that. :)

Well, that's what I mean. It's okay (and practiced) in his service, but not otherwise.


DM Under The Bridge wrote:
If you don't know that education policies forced upon conquered peoples has led to cultural genocide... you have a lot of reading to begin.

There's no such thing as cultural genocide. Cultures aren't people. You can't possibly compare changing or superseding a primitive culture to actually massacring people.

Superstition kills real people dead by blocking progress that saves real lives. Next to that a loss of culture is less worthy of tears than the demise of Betamax.


Atarlost wrote:
DM Under The Bridge wrote:
If you don't know that education policies forced upon conquered peoples has led to cultural genocide... you have a lot of reading to begin.

There's no such thing as cultural genocide. Cultures aren't people. You can't possibly compare changing or superseding a primitive culture to actually massacring people.

Superstition kills real people dead by blocking progress that saves real lives. Next to that a loss of culture is less worthy of tears than the demise of Betamax.

That's the spirit! Forced reeducation of all the children of primitive peoples into our superior culture.

You do know that we're not just talking about cultural change through contact with a technologically superior culture - which has of itself cost many lives, right? We're talking actual real world examples of forcibly taking children from their families to "properly" educate them. Generally to be second class citizens at best, since cultures willing to do this kind of thing aren't usually very good at treating others equally.


Atarlost wrote:
primitive

Ohhhhhhh boy.

Grand Lodge

DominusMegadeus wrote:
Atarlost wrote:
primitive
Ohhhhhhh boy.

Oh no! One word, bolded quotes! The humanity!


Asphesteros wrote:

Paladins and others able to detect evil should figure prominently in all these schemes.

If I were running such a school, end of term exams would be standing up the class to a good hard detect evil-ing. Those that pass get to advance to the next grade, those that fail get left back. Graduation ceremony is passing muster on a detect good.

But Detect Evil doesn't see anything under 5HD if it isn't a subtyped outsider, undead, o cleric/antipaladin, and I don't think that a 18yo has already 5 class levels most of the time


Primitive doesn't mean of less value. Sophisticated does not mean of more value. These descriptors do not assign value in and of themselves.


Mind Flayers.
I suggest aversion training to attempt to inculcate the idea that a person's brain is there own, not a delicacy.
Additives that make brains taste disgusting is recomended, along with firm and consistent discipline on this issue.


^That might have bad side-effects upon the people whose brains got laced with additives.

301 to 350 of 401 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / "Monster" orphanages and sanctuaries (Golarion) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.