So, we're starting the Mummy's Path adventures. The first book involves raiding tombs in Wati's necropolis. One of the player's is a lawful good dwarven cleric of Torag.
How would a character of this alignment and deity justify pillaging ancient tombs for profit and gain?
The Pharaoh has made dungeon-delving inside the pyramids legal so that adventurers can bring back items of legitimate value and/or cultural significance. As long as said LG dwarven cleric isn't actively desecrating mummies (Y'know, doing bad things to them; providing they aren't undead, of course) and breaking crap just for the fun of it, it's very easy to reconcile as a legitimate business venture to help Osirion recover some of their lost heritage. Dwarves particularly have a habit of only burying their dead with one or two personal items, and letting others (Typically within their family) use the rest. Use it or lose it, basically.
Then again, if someone has to retroactively ask themselves about how a character would reconcile their actions after starting the adventure, maybe they're not playing the right character.
So, we're starting the Mummy's Path adventures. The first book involves raiding tombs in Wati's necropolis. One of the player's is a lawful good dwarven cleric of Torag.
...
It does not involve raiding tombs; it involves exploring and searching tombs that have been opened up by the legitimate government for the purpose of recovering bits of history and relics (so long as the tombs are not desecrated).
...
How would a character of this alignment and deity justify pillaging ancient tombs for profit and gain?
They could not justify pillaging ancient tombs for profit and gain. Further, they would refuse to participate in any such endeavor, even going so far as to lecture those on the legality and morality of the act.
However, they would be part of an expedition to explore ancient tombs to recover artifacts and uncover bits of history. They could sell (for a fair price) or donate the artifacts to the appropriate people, and they would turn over any bits of history that they found to the appropriate people (and the character's church/temple). They could also be part of a funded expedition to explore the tombs (for their church or other appropriate organization).
As always, just my two coppers...
-Doomn
I was thinking along the same lines too. We can always find a way to justify our actions. What's right? What's wrong? Sometimes it's a matter of perspective.
In this particular case he's rationalizing his actions as a minor offense that should lead to accomplishing his mission. One of the other characters is a gunslinger. The cleric's mission from the church is to find out more about this new technology (blackpowder and firearms) and it's potential impact on the world and Torag's followers. Gunpowder and firearms are new in this game I'm running and very little is known about it/them.
Desecrating a tomb is different from exploring one, so far as I can tell.
It also seems that the Adventure Path has made it clear you are not there to take the stuff for yourself.
There is no reason to think that people of the Lawful Good alignment, would have any more qualms about raiding tombs, than anyone else of any other alignment.
-Nearyn
The Dead have no rights to property that the Living have need of. The Dead have no rights at all, save to rest in peace.
Tell that to the necromancers who keep bringing them back...
|
So, we're starting the Mummy's Path adventures. The first book involves raiding tombs in Wati's necropolis. One of the player's is a lawful good dwarven cleric of Torag.
How would a character of this alignment and deity justify pillaging ancient tombs for profit and gain?
A core tenet of lawfulness is "I know what's better for you than you know it, yourself".
A lawful good osirionologist might rationalize tomb plundering as "saving the relics from actual tomb robbers... IT BELONGS IN A MUSEUM!!! Hey, if I'm paid for my efforts to better the world's knowledge and appreciation of what was in the tomb (it's not like Wati needs any of that anymore, anyway) all the better, right? That way I can keep going on improving things!"
Point of Perspective: a modern day Catholic priest (hopefully a great example of a Lawful Good cleric) goes into a Native American burial mound and removes ancient valuables and ancient artifacts and relics. Some he donates to the local museum but some others, that he thinks might be of personal use or just wants it, he keeps for himself. (There is a scarab shield in the tomb in this module that the dwarven cleric in question would most likely really like.)
Is the simple act of removing items to place in a museum desecration? Is keeping items for himself right or wrong? I would think the Catholic priest would be considered wrong in both instances by the standards of today's society.
But this game is set in a fantasy, so it could be articulated that this behavior and morality is normal and has popular acceptance. But, the module is clear that the Church of Pharasma is against this activity but is following the decrees of the Ruby Prince. And the Ruby Prince's motives are to stimulate commerce and trade ($$$ Everything in life is about $$$).
Point of Perspective: a modern day Catholic priest (hopefully a great example of a Lawful Good cleric) goes into a Native American burial mound and removes ancient valuables and ancient artifacts and relics. Some he donates to the local museum but some others, that he thinks might be of personal use or just wants it, he keeps for himself.
Is the simple act of removing items to place in a museum desecration? Is keeping items for himself right or wrong? I would think the Catholic priest would be considered wrong in both instances by the standards of today's society.
If the relevant religious and state authorities agreed that it was both legal and moral to do, there should be no problem. Which is exactly the case in this AP, albeit not often the case in reality. Having qualms is one thing, but Pharasmins are managing this process rather than opting out, so they can hardly squawk if people participate in the process.
|
1st: Take one of the Campaign Traits.
2nd: The Necropolis in Wati isn't like a graveyard or ancient burial ground. (I'm currently playing through book 2 atm, no spoilers for you, though). It's part of the city that just... died, and nobody really remembers why. So it's not a tomb, or crypt, or anything like that. It's just a dead part of the city. Your dwarf could be a Pahmet, the ancient ones that at one point served the great Pharaohs of old. He might have come to Wati for the sole purpose of slaying the undead abominations in the Necropolis. Maybe he's a "forgemaster" of Torag, and sees the preservation and restoration of ancient arms and armor as a means of glorifying Torag, so a huge city full of ancient stuff is just ripe for his magic touch.
3rd: Also, maybe it's just me, but the Pharasmans seem to be fine with the whole thing. They have a very strict set of rules for you to follow regarding "desecration", so as long as you play up the Lawful aspect of your character (like I did my neutral good character), you should be fine.
The Pharaoh has made dungeon-delving inside the pyramids legal so that adventurers can bring back items of legitimate value and/or cultural significance. As long as said LG dwarven cleric isn't actively desecrating mummies (Y'know, doing bad things to them; providing they aren't undead, of course) and breaking crap just for the fun of it, it's very easy to reconcile as a legitimate business venture to help Osirion recover some of their lost heritage. Dwarves particularly have a habit of only burying their dead with one or two personal items, and letting others (Typically within their family) use the rest. Use it or lose it, basically.
Then again, if someone has to retroactively ask themselves about how a character would reconcile their actions after starting the adventure, maybe they're not playing the right character.
Awesomely, it's only a DC 10 to know local laws. :)
Well, I have been playing Mummy's Mask for a couple of months and hope you have as much fun as I am.
On the LG tomb raiding, given what is actually going on, it does make sense. [No details- spoilers omitted]. But I must say tomb raiding does seem to be something a LG cleric would not be undertaking.
|
|
He can insure the dead dead are treated with respect rather than just tossed about willy-nilly. The undead dead, that's probably a different story, but he should be glad to get rid of them, Torag does love protecting people and places. The dead undead dead, I guess he could treat them (or what's left after they've been redeaded) with respect too.
|
|
But, the module is clear that the Church of Pharasma is against this activity but is following the decrees of the Ruby Prince. And the Ruby Prince's motives are to stimulate commerce and trade ($$$ Everything in life is about $$$).
I'm currently playing through this, but I don't think there are any spoilers below if you've read the player's guide.
1) Pharasma is the goddess of not only death but also rebirth. So if retrieving wealth and knowledge from the Necropolis helps the city and the nation economically its being put to better use than as funerary goods. As such you're allowed to retrieve everything but the dead you find, which should be left in a respectful state. Beyond that do as little damage to the site as possible (which is also good archaeology)
2) The Pharasmans are pretty much the defacto government in Wati and are responsible for the safety of it's citizens. Pharasma also loathes the undead, which the necropolis has plenty of. If you can make the city safer and kill a bunch of undead by sending volunteers (adventuring groups) in without risking your resources you've secured a great benefit.