Goblin Squad Member
|
Now, something that has got me more than a few emails and letters is my comments about a 'Heinous Only' settlement I used as an example.
Rather than Fighters, Clerics, Wizards and Rogues, I used (as a joke) Blackguards, Cultists, Necromancers and Assassins, where Necromancy was legal, Slavery was commonplace and the Goodly were told to get out.
How do you guys think such a scenario would work out?
Obvious ground rules would be:
No attacking each other, unless you are defending your livelihood or property from a thief, or Fullskucker the Incompetent, who has had a few too many beers and is trying to make off with one of your goats again.
Career Bandits are hands-off, so long as they don't get uppity and attack OUR merchants.
Merchants are hands-off unless they have good alignments or are actively agitating against the status quo.
I wonder how 'Slavery' will play out? Are we talking a low-maintenance form of NPC 'Helpers'? Will Slavers/Hirelings be able to handle the menial jobs such as Farming, cutting down trees and cleaning?
How complex will our orders to the Undead Minions of Necromancers and Cultists be? Can we give them patrol routes and then log off, trusting in the Derp Brigade to patrol that sector as directed until A) we log back on and give them commands or B) Jerklord the Doucheadin runs up and smites them into dust ... again.
I'm quite interested to hear your thoughts on this, my fellow players, as a strong settlement, where everyone had the Heinous Flag, would be an interesting wrinkle for other players to deal with.
Do you turn a blind eye, so long as you're personally unmolested by this Love-Child of Geb and Thay, do you strive to break their hold on the land, even if their presence is holding the local Goblinoids and other Monsters at bay, or do you try to open trade and dialogue with them?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A hive of scum and villainy I hope basically they are low on rep, chaotic and evil etc is the bottom of the barrel - which I think would translate to as these people rubbing shoulders and "peace" is based on either "show of force" or mutual dealing under the treat of "anything goes" - Basically everything is skating on thin-ice at all times and sometimes players randomly kill each other or dispute and kill each other: Namely such anarchic places are run by ruling through fear of loss or preying on the weak and unwary - the social scales are no measure of how to deal with your fellow other than they might turn a knife on you if you don't first if there's a sudden opportunity for profit or an opening for weakness.
When the social scales are at rock bottom, then you expect actions > words and those actions to be based on force not "code".
By contrast the players who max rep/alignment and the layer of social knowledge that is meta but still relevant above and additional to the game scales of sociability, then you know you can rely on them.
In the middle there's going to be hopefully all sorts of variations where all is not as it seems and where organised tyrants gather "the weak-willed but power hungry" to their banners etc etc. :)
To get back to the OP somewhat: Unofficial official rules of the settlement will be needed for any semblance of control eg "any player who does not pay the toll will be KOS", any arguments to be taken to the town square for a 1v1 and entertainment of the populace" etc. In fact I'm wondering if all settlements with casual clothes will mean players leave their arms at the gates or not...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We may have 'peace-knots' enforced on all weapons, which will cause 'arming' yourself to take several seconds or longer.
Spellcasters might be forced to wear special gloves which slow down their spellcasting in turn.
Of course, long-time residents and trusted 'Heroes' might be able to waive such treatment, depending upon their alignment and the 'trust' the settlement and it's people have in them.
But honestly? A Heinous Settlement appeals to me. A place for the Villains, regardless of alignment or creed, to sit down, have a pint, brag about their achievements and talk dirty with the bar wench ... which is what all the good guys do.
Ironicly, I think the whole 'everyone can kill everyone at any time' would have two probable outcomes.
1) Absolute anarchy until the Strongest Faction can assert their rules and prove they can and will take on all comers and still come out on top.
2) Peace. Almost no crime whatsoever, because everyone is free to kill you stone cold dead and take your stuff if you so much as lift a single pea out of the farmer's stall.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Exactly, I think there is more potential for emergent 'norms of conduct' in such places even if that means watching your back every step! A lot of potential for powerful characters to pick on weaker characters and for skillful pvp players to find all the pvp they could wish for. If there was a "bow emote" I could imagine the ruler of such a place decreeing a law that all bow/show obeisance to said dignitary if their paths cross the ruling retinue's or otherwise face being KOS etc.
A scenario where it is "everything goes" BETWEEN members and/or on the territory of the Settlement is CE (or CN).
Heinous is not necessarily CE. LE is certainly appropriate for slavers, right?
Necromancy/Undead are not particularly C or L, leaving it a wash.
So the Alignment for this settlement should probably be NE.
I don't see why it should have a lack of normal laws vs. murder, including against 'Good' characters per se.
More likely, this Settlement would be on bad terms with many other settlements anyways.
If there is to be an exclusion of murder laws, I would say it would be members of settlements that do not have a non-aggression/safe travel pact with this settlement. That could include TN or CN settlements with Good members, after all. Regardless of alignment of a character, whether or not another settlement is at least on 'neutral'/non-aggressive terms with this Settlement seems the best basis to exclude characters from 'protection' of murder laws. Functionally, murder laws would apply to local citizens and members of settlements that are specifically white-listed... i.e. a pure power (Evil) basis. The LE Heinous members would appreciate having SOME laws to 'enforce', right? I can't really think of other laws that are needed, although perhaps the Settlement Leaders would be empowered to just declare anybody they want criminals (besides other Settlement Leaders)?
Overall, since the alignment focus isn't particularly Chaos focused per se, I think TRYING to have a not horrible Reputation would be the goal, but it would probably be on the low side of things overall. And it seemed like the concept was that every member was Heinous, but if Necromancy and Slavery are the only means for that, I don't really think it's plausible for every 'class'/role and every in-game 'job'/niche to qualify for Heinous, some jobs just won't involve things that really trigger Heinous. Everybody would be Evil, though.
Probably this Settlement will best survive in the neighborhood of a bunch of CE, or at least CN settlements, maybe NE as well, possibly ones that also have Heinous members amongst themselves (if that is not a big focus for them). Beyond those neighbors, TN are probably the most viable, TN Settlements' niche is dealing with both Good and Evil and if you can make a profitable trade relationship, all the better. Even the non-Heinous enjoy the cheap prices from undead/slave labor... Also, even TN characters could join a NE settlement, so most of the neighbors could join in the settlement (perhaps when their own settlement goes into decline or looses a war, as CN/CE settlements are prone to do). indeed, besides CN settlements, most of said neighbor settlements (including TN) could join a future nation encompassing multiple settlements (when that game mechanic opens up).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Yes, I'm hoping Reputation is sort of like changing gears: You may still be in an evil-chaotic settlement, but if they somehow all have high Reputation, it completely changes expectations and standards of conduct subsequently ie you can rely on evil-chaotic being E-C and sticking to a predictable reaction-action in known contexts.
Note: E-C as easy to choose extreme/corner case to describe with brevity.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Not only would it work, and should work, but it will need to work.
Anyone RPing an Evil character is likely to pick up the Heinous tag at some point, and some may never lose it. There needs to be system of suitably accommodating settlements to relieve them of their gold in the old-fashioned, trading, manner.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Isn't Shadow Haven already proposed as such a settlement. Or is that defunct now?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The reputation system should reasonably work out equitably for whatever alignment so long as the characters belonging thereto gift one another reputation just as every other alignment. As a sandbox the whole deal will fall apart if its expression turns out to be inequitable. It might be tricky working out exactly what is entailed in gaining rep in a heinous locale, but it is going to be necessary, it seems to me.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Isn't Shadow Haven already proposed as such a settlement. Or is that defunct now?
Ravening is no longer active on the PFO Forums, but I don't think he was the only member of The Seventh Veil who was interested in pursuing that. We'll see...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Isn't Shadow Haven already proposed as such a settlement. Or is that defunct now?Ravening is no longer active on the PFO Forums, but I don't think he was the only member of The Seventh Veil who was interested in pursuing that. We'll see...
Very true. You'll never hear from that Bozo again! While I would love to pursue the Shadow Haven concept. I can't see me having the time to do so, without getting a divorce first :P
I had envisaged Shadow-Haven starting out as an Inn (the Black Cauldron) that catered to Bandits, Necromancers, Assassins, Cultist and other neer-do-wells. And eventually building up to a settlement. Shadow-Haven was going to be less focused on conquering terriory than on providing a safe haven for all. I think the concept could work, you just need someone who can put the time and effort into it.
Anyone RPing an Evil character is likely to pick up the Heinous tag at some point, and some may never lose it.
Uh... how does a non-Slaving non-Undead Creating Evil Character have inevitable issues with the Heinous Flag?
You're basically describing the Chelaxians/Hellknights.
Except I don't believe they have any particular affinity for Undead Creation, or differing mores on that topic.
The Hellknight faction in fact includes plenty of LN types, while the concept here is all-Evil (including CE)and in fact the Golarion setting Hellknights include LG types and PALADINS, not to mention all the Chelish who are Neutral, Good, or even Chaotic.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You're basically describing the Chelaxians/Hellknights.Except I don't believe they have any particular affinity for Undead Creation, or differing mores on that topic.
The Hellknight faction in fact includes plenty of LN types, while the concept here is all-Evil (including CE)
and in fact the Golarion setting Hellknights include LG types and PALADINS, not to mention all the Chelish who are Neutral, Good, or even Chaotic.
They claim to be all about the law, not the evil, but they also claim to have their devil worship and summoning under control. They're full of it, and if Asmodeus wasn't getting exactly what he wants out of them, they'd be history. There are other alignments in Cheliax, but the chaotic and good live in hiding or get crushed.
If you want a ravening horde, CE is fine, but if you want a society that actually functions beyond the reach of its strongest member, you need either people who don't want to screw each other over (good) or enforceable rules that keep people from getting away with doing so (law).Evil isn't about wearing a lot of black and being rude, it's about setting your own desires above everything else. Others are just there to be used.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you want a ravening horde, CE is fine, but if you want a society that actually functions beyond the reach of its strongest member, you need either people who don't want to screw each other over (good) or enforceable rules that keep people from getting away with doing so (law).
Evil isn't about wearing a lot of black and being rude, it's about setting your own desires above everything else. Others are just there to be used.
I generally agree with this, and in *most* circumstances I think that CE groups would never get much larger than a large bandit band.
But on-topic, I think that the OP's heinous settlement works and could be strong, especially if it tends towards LE.
But expanding on the idea of evil groups, I'd suggest that normal alignments have to evolve in this section of the River Kingdoms. When people don't stay dead, it means that even as a CE you don't kill everyone in your way - because they'll just come back. So maybe you get along with that shifty bandit and his grave-robber sidekick. Because you might need them someday, and better to have them as an ally than killing each other in a feud for the next 50 years. The paladins though - they're never going to be your friends.
Killing people doesn't solve problems like it did back in the day, before you came to this swamp.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A CE nation COULD work, it would just take a leader that everyone else fears so they wouldn't fight TOO much. There would still be some mild internal fighting. Just think of Menzoberranzan from the R.A Salvatore books. Are the drow there not CE? yet they have a functioning "settlement" that lasts for centuries. All you have to do is get a NE Company, have them be the main "council" of said settlement, and post the settlement as a CE (one step of alignment). Then have that main council be strong enough, and actually organized enough to be able to handle the rest of the settlement, And rule the settlement with FEAR! :D
They claim to be all about the law, not the evil, but they also claim to have their devil worship and summoning under control. They're full of it, and if Asmodeus wasn't getting exactly what he wants out of them, they'd be history. There are other alignments in Cheliax, but the chaotic and good live in hiding or get crushed.
Again, there are Good Hellknights that don't worship Asmodeus and aren't 'crushed' in Cheliax. Likewise for non-worshippers of Asmodeus, Good, Neutral, or Evil, Lawful or Chaotic. House of Thrune and Church of Asmodeus root out challenges to their POWER, but that doesn't mean everybody must be Asmodeans or die. Lawful Good Hellknights do exist as a matter of fact, and somehow reconcile themselves with the law of the land, after all. And to the topic at hand, Chelish, Asmodean or not, are not particularly inclined to harness the Undead, nor are 'Cultists' front and center in official approval. They may well be Heinous, but not exactly as described here.
re: CE, Even if it was CE, it could still have laws, in fact how Settlements operate, delegating power to specific individuals, is also an aspect of law. Now, nobody may care about the ALIGNMENT repurcussions of breaking laws, but if lawbreakers are kicked out of the settlement or positions of power, then they will probably largely comply with the laws. It seems whenever alignment is discussed, something like CE is only understood in THE most extreme sense, rather in sense of 'being past the line separating CE from NE/CN'. The settlement as described seems fully compatable with LE Heinous types, so NE is probably the best Settlement alignment... No surprise for being described as "a Settlement for Evil" period.
Almost no crime whatsoever, because everyone is free to kill you stone cold dead and take your stuff if you so much as lift a single pea out of the farmer's stall.
Honestly, this is how I expect every settlement of every alignment to work. If you commit a crime, you will be open game for Alignment Repurcussion-free killing, and that's what will happen unless you can get out in time (are powerful enough, etc). Other types of punishments like jail aren't really viable in this game, and 'killing' is of course a temporary thing in this game anyways. Welcome to D&D :-)
|
I think that idea would be very interesting. As a person of strong Cheliaxian ties and supports the government system, I would like to see how slavery would work in the new system. As far as Necromancy I would think that they would probably put the same order/commands as the NPC class slaves that you could buy/create. It also talks about founding kingdoms and our own factions. So I wonder if guilds/clans are a factor or factions already in Pathfinder. I have not found any information out there so far about what the game will have. If anyone has anything please let me know. thanks.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
there are Good Hellknights ... Lawful Good Hellknights do exist
[citation needed]
somehow reconcile themselves with the law of the land...
Doing along with the law of the land when it tends towards evil means they won't remain good for long. "Just following orders" doesn't absolve you of much in the real world, and it certainly won't keep you from turning evil in a world where alignments represent objective states based on your actions, not your intent or circumstance.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A CE nation COULD work, it would just take a leader that everyone else fears so they wouldn't fight TOO much. There would still be some mild internal fighting. Just think of Menzoberranzan from the R.A Salvatore books. Are the drow there not CE? yet they have a functioning "settlement" that lasts for centuries. All you have to do is get a NE Company, have them be the main "council" of said settlement, and post the settlement as a CE (one step of alignment). Then have that main council be strong enough, and actually organized enough to be able to handle the rest of the settlement, And rule the settlement with FEAR! :D
I can see two problems right away.
1: A settlement of "real" chaotics would not be big on laws. If anything goes, then it would be quickly looted and burnt by it's own inhabitants. That is unless they kept themselves under control to keep the place viable.
2: I can see a leader with "real" charisma leading it, possibly. Strength is pointless as death is mostly meaningless. Kinda seems like it would be a "trying to herd cats" situation. Long term cooperation within the membership would have to be the standard. Not really a chaotic trait, but who knows?
there are Good Hellknights ... Lawful Good Hellknights do exist[citation needed]
The third Council of Thieves installment details a bunch of Hellknight Orders.
Amongst them, the Orders of the Godclaw, Pyre, Nail, and Scourge have LG leaders. (Godclaw having a Paladin)James Jacobs himself has affirmed that Paladin Hellknights do exist, even if Hellknights are predominantly LN.
The Hellknights are their own entity, often times in conflict with the House of Thrune.
Many Orders have little or no presense in Cheliax itself, even though that is where the concept started.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I can see two problems right away.1: A settlement of "real" chaotics would not be big on laws. If anything goes, then it would be quickly looted and burnt by it's own inhabitants. That is unless they kept themselves under control to keep the place viable.
If we were talking about chaotic evil barbarian berserks, necromancers, rapists, psychotic cannibals etc. then they would indeed probably be very tough to control.
As a possibility in PFO I see no problem since there will be players controlling the characters. Find enough people who want to put in the time and effort to create and maintain a prosperous settlement and it will be possible no matter what their characters' alignments are.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
. Find enough people who want to put in the time and effort to create and maintain a prosperous settlement and it will be possible no matter what their characters' alignments are.
This is the point! The players' desires to do something will always trump the hard set rules of alignment found in PFRPG. The Gods in PFO are the players. Since there is no way for the alignment system to completely track every player action, player actions can predominantly violate the constructs of the alignment system without change.
You can say your settlement is CE but it is run by players who are themselves LN. They role play their characters as CE, but they run their settlement (meta gamed) as if it is lawful neutral. The only way for GW to try to restrict this is to limit the number and types of laws that a CE settlement can put in place for itself.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You can say your settlement is CE but it is run by players who are themselves LN. They role play their characters as CE, but they run their settlement (meta gamed) as if it is lawful neutral. The only way for GW to try to restrict this is to limit the number and types of laws that a CE settlement can put in place for itself.
Absolutely agree, if GW want to punish CE settlements that is how they could try and do it. I don't see why they should though. There is nothing wrong in my opinion of players wanting to play chaotic evil, as long as they do it well.
I hope alignment and reputation will work the way they I interpret them to be meant to so that I can rightfully spit on the lawful good character with rock-bottom reputation but if I see a CE char with really high rep I will know that its a damn good player and someone I can likely have meaningful interactions with. (exaggeration but you get the idea I hope)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Wurner and Bluddwolf That is right and how it would probably go. See I define Chaotic Evil as a very good definition of a psychopath. All of the behaviors fit CE pretty well. Can a person really play a character that way? Probably not, but it would be interesting to see well played alignments.
For instance, some people see LG as rigid in belief and intolerant/zealot. I see them as good guys with a desire to follow good laws. Possibly strict but always caring.
I also plan to look at rep first and alignment second. Rep would be that single limiter to my interaction far above alignment.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For instance, some people see LG as rigid in belief and intolerant/zealot. I see them as good guys with a desire to follow good laws. Possibly strict but always caring.
The difficulty in playing LG, especially as a government, is that they are often played as being vengeful hunters of what they perceive as evil. Rarely do they suggest opportunities for atonement, they usually look to eradicate evil by the edge of a sword.
Chaotic Evil is equally difficult because players have a difficult time functioning without rules and in a radically evil mindset, which is actually a good thing in a RL sense.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For instance, some people see LG as rigid in belief and intolerant/zealot. I see them as good guys with a desire to follow good laws. Possibly strict but always caring.
The difficulty in playing LG, especially as a government, is that they are often played as being vengeful hunters of what they perceive as evil. Rarely do they suggest opportunities for atonement, they usually look to eradicate evil by the edge of a sword.
Chaotic Evil is equally difficult because players have a difficult time functioning without rules and in a radically evil mindset, which is actually a good thing in a RL sense.
Very true. No disagreement there. Perhaps "playstyle" interpretations of alignment roles and written definitions of alignments are too difficult to match in-game play situations. I am somewhat of the belief that CE play should be extremely evil and unpredictable.
I suppose that my view may be too narrow for realistic expectations.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Perhaps "playstyle" interpretations of alignment roles and written definitions of alignments are too difficult to match in-game play situations. ... I suppose that my view may be too narrow for realistic expectations.
As to LG as vengeful hunters of evil: there was a Kane story (by Karl Edward Wagner) where some "paladin" was pursuing Kane, who he viewed as a personification of evil. The depths that the paladin went to to reach Kane... I think the moral was that vengeful and good don't go together well.
As to CE: I played in an evil campaign once; our GM would constantly challenge us if we were slipping. I mean, do you let the peasant go after "questioning", or do you murder him because you can get away with it? "Play your character, dude. You're evil - explain why you'll let him go."
I'm looking forward to GW's implementation of alignment. And player adaptations to a hard rule set, rather than a GM who can be negotiated with regarding moral codes.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
there are Good Hellknights ... Lawful Good Hellknights do exist[citation needed]The third Council of Thieves installment details a bunch of Hellknight Orders.
Amongst them, the Orders of the Godclaw, Pyre, Nail, and Scourge have LG leaders. (Godclaw having a Paladin)
James Jacobs himself has affirmed that Paladin Hellknights do exist, even if Hellknights are predominantly LN.
The Hellknights are their own entity, often times in conflict with the House of Thrune.
Many Orders have little or no presense in Cheliax itself, even though that is where the concept started.
Fair enough.
What would be the vision statement of an association that includes all types of evil, yet remain unified and coherent? I can see how the LE end of the spectrum could function, but the CE end would need a huge power imbalance in which weaker members are toadies simply because that's the only real option. Player association and character alignments can differ, but at that point you're basically saying "no, it doesn't work... unless we ignore narrative and game the system".
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Keovar The vision statement is something like: In order to conduct our affairs unmolested by outsiders, the necromancer lords make a pact of mutual defense and establish the settlement of _____, to allow the safe settlement of like minded persons.
The necromancer lords of course are LE, and will generally recruit characters with LE alignment to leadership roles. The settlement is nominally NE. There *is* an imbalance of power between the LE lords and the LE and CE plebs. With much of the work done by slaves, the citizenry focuses on trade, accumulation of magical power, and military/banditry endeavors. Up-and-coming CE types are encouraged to join the multiple elite regiments which are the shock troops of the army. (Multiple regiments so the lords can keep the regiments at each others throats).