| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hi, friends! First and foremost, I hope you’re all having a nice day.
The infamous Hellknights are knightly orders that base themselves in the strictures of Hell as to bring absolute peace to Golarion. Each order concerns themselves with different objectives. The Order of the Scourge hunt those who hide behind perverted laws, the Order of the Rack seek to destroy unnecessary knowledge, etc. Many orders have undeniable ties to Cheliax, and especially to Cheliax’s infernal queen.
Last session, an argument ensued at the table. I had noticed that one of my players — a friend — had a very negative view of the Hellknights. Personally, I really like them, so I decided to prod.
To them, most of the order’s undeniable relationship with Thrune paints them in a very bad light. They use fear as their weapon and mercilessness is a part of the Chain, a philosophy that they follow. When I mentioned that LG Hellknights do exist, he wondered how that was even possible.
Take the famous Maidrayne Vox. She already is part of an order with potentially problematic connotations. Then, there’s also the fact that she only is Mistress of Blades! That means that she is subservient to the Lictor, who is LE.
How does that happen? When the Lictor orders Maidrayne to commit an evil act for law's sake — what happens then?
The caveat here is that the Measure, the actual laws that they are supposed to follow, are an open-ended narrative resource. That means, we don’t know what laws they actually follow. I was under the impression that these are based on Hell's, but information on the Character’s Guide is sparse. My impression from what I’ve read is that they are inspired by Hell’s stricture, specifically, and… That’s it, actually. But back to the Measure: It’s completely possible that the actual laws are Lawful Neutral in nature. That way, no matter the hierarchy, if all members are subject to the same law — If the Order of the Nail’s Lictor can’t just order torture to happen as to extract information from a target, then that changes everything. But we don’t know that!
In the end of our discussion, my friend believed that Hellknights are merely not that consistent, and they absolutely should be a LE organization, with maybe a few LN members, and mostly for very evil baddies, because that's how they make sense (to them). I think differently: I believe these open ended resources are there to not boggle down page count for otherwise very unimportant bits. I mean, imagine if Paizo actually published the entirety of the Measure! But as such, we do have to take what information is given to us, as — … wait for it — law. And the Character Guide does say that there’s a place for morality in the order… Even if they wield fear as a weapon and have this very specific interpretation of mercilessness as part of the Chain. It’s… Strange to me though, how a lawful good character be part of an organization whose plenty of orders associate themselves to Thrune, for example. Actually, are the orders independent of each other? Would a member of the Order of Torrent not be morally bothered by the actions of another more evil-leaning order?
Honestly, I’m just hoping that people will spitball interesting thoughts about hellknights. And maybe getting a 202, because I do feel something is missing. What do you think?
Bonus round: Can a Paladin be a Hellknight?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the thing about "Good" and "Hellknights" is that Good people who are interested in being Hellknights are going to gravitate to the orders whose missions are compatible with Good. Most of the main ones are out of bounds if you're invested in remaining Good (even the order of the Chain is emphatically pro-slavery) but the Order of the Pike (hunt down monsters that threaten civilized people) and the Order of the Torrent (rescue the kidnapped and bring kidnappers to justice) work.
It's possible you could be a Good person who ends up in the Order of the Chain and you skate by just by never having to confront the whole "capture runaway slaves" and "keep people in bondage" thing (say your whole thing was in bringing criminals to justice), but at the point where you have to choose whether or not to obey an order from a superior to bring an escaped slave back to captivity, you're not going to be both Lawful and Good.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Hellknights are not an organization.
They are multiple organizations and they are independent of each other. There was even a rift over those who formally aligned with House Thrune and those that refused.
Hellknights of the Pike (Monster Hunters) and Torrent (Rescue kidnapped people) are a world's difference from Rack (enforce Thrune's wants) and Pyre (book burning "traditionalists").
|
A Paladin can be a Hellknight.
The order of the godclaw is the more paradoxical one IMO.
How does your friend feel about LN deities like Abadar, who have both LG and LE Clerics and Champions ?
For that matter, what about Nethys or Gozreh or Calistria ? All of those have Good and Evil servants rubbing elbows in their churches.
Law and order are not intrinsically Evil.
For that matter, how about a LE Hellknight who has to obey the orders of their LG Paladin superior ?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think most Hellknights are pretty soundly LN or LE. With the severity of the laws and discipline the Hellknights ascribe to, it’s hard to be Good; I imagine those that are either root out genuine corruption within societies (if you interpret vigilante law enforcement modeled on Hell as Good) or take the fight to external, clearly-bad foes like demons and the undead. Places like the Gravelands or the Sarkoris Scar make really appealing destinations for LG Hellknights to go prove the strength of their discipline and defend civilization from chaos, as they would see it.
The Godclaw allowing Iomedeans and followers of Torag probably helps, too.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Hellknights are not an organization.
They are multiple organizations and they are independent of each other. There was even a rift over those who formally aligned with House Thrune and those that refused.
Hellknights of the Pike (Monster Hunters) and Torrent (Rescue kidnapped people) are a world's difference from Rack (enforce Thrune's wants) and Pyre (book burning "traditionalists").
I’d love something about Vidrian hunting down the last of the Order of the Coil someday. They’re awful.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I’d love something about Vidrian hunting down the last of the Order of the Coil someday. They’re awful.The Hellknights are not an organization.
They are multiple organizations and they are independent of each other. There was even a rift over those who formally aligned with House Thrune and those that refused.
Hellknights of the Pike (Monster Hunters) and Torrent (Rescue kidnapped people) are a world's difference from Rack (enforce Thrune's wants) and Pyre (book burning "traditionalists").
Ohhhh big same there.
|
|
LE tend to oppress populations. Which sows the seeds of later revolts, rebellions and revolutions.
I can easily see LG Hellknights working together and convincing their LN colleagues that leaning too much towards Evil will only breed chaos and the destruction of the Hellknight orders down the line.
Especially after the setbacks suffered by Infernal Cheliax in recent years.
They could point to the fate of Sargava and the Order of the Coil as a preview of things to come if the other orders do not steer clear of LE ideals and philosophies.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Very interesting answers here! Here's some (friendly) prodings, as to help the conversation flow.
(...) but at the point where you have to choose whether or not to obey an order from a superior to bring an escaped slave back to captivity, you're not going to be both Lawful and Good.
And I imagine that most lawful good hellknights do care more about the lawful rather than the good part, and a action here and there wouldn't automatically shift their alignement to evil. And so, the question is: How often must a Hellknight act cruelly for the sake of order?
Here's what we know of the third link of the Chain, mercilessness.
My reading of this is that, actions borne out of compassion can impair effectiveness("social progress"). In this way, torture is an acceptable form of extracting information from a criminal — if a Hellknight refuses to do that, especially on moral grounds, then he fails at being a Hellknight. Is my interpretation too liberal? Do keep in mind that I'm not an english native speaker, please! :B
The Hellknights are not an organization.
They are multiple organizations and they are independent of each other. There was even a rift over those who formally aligned with House Thrune and those that refused.
Oh, this is very interesting! Do you know where this bit about the rift is from? Are any of today's Hellknight's orders openly oposed to House Thrune?
Realistically, this is what I've always interpreted. That they are different knightly orders with the same ideology, but as they are separete entities, they may struggle against each other and disagree sometines. And it makes sense: We don't know about any Hellknight Higher Court or similar. Here's my question, though: Is this confirmed anywhere, or just incredibly heavily implied?
A Paladin can be a Hellknight.
The order of the godclaw is the more paradoxical one IMO.
How does your friend feel about LN deities like Abadar, who have both LG and LE Clerics and Champions ?
For that matter, what about Nethys or Gozreh or Calistria ? All of those have Good and Evil servants rubbing elbows in their churches.
I hadn't thought about that! It's a good point. I'll consult with them the next session. But I know that they aren't too keen on Abadar anyhow lol.
Law and order are not intrinsically Evil.
No no, of course. Ironically, my friend does strike me as someone that, hmmm... Sees themselves as Chaotic Good and, as such, tends to be wary or dismissive of the lawful aspects of the game. He jokes as dismisses Iomedae a lot, for example, though I feel plenty of people do that. :/ This could be it at play.
For that matter, how about a LE Hellknight who has to obey the orders of their LG Paladin superior ?
I dunno. I mean, this does bring us back to the Measure and the Chain, right? How do them incentivize the Hellknights to act? Can a lawful good Hellknight not commit an evil action for the sake of order? I don't want to keep using the same example but I'm sleepy and it's the only one that occurs to me, so, say that for example:
A Lictor from the Order of the Torrent is faced with a dilema. A Cult of Norgorber has been kindapping people for the last two weeks, and their investigations point to a old norgorberite ritual of mass sacrifices that will occur in the next week, so time is short. They've managed to capture one of the cultists, but they aren't talking. There's magical protections that hide their mind from intruders that the Order can't pierce in place right now. But they're there, present, lucid, and physically responsive.
There's still alternatives. There's still nooks to be searched, spellcasters in town to be consulted, etc. Wouldn't the precept of mercilessness stop the Hellknight of not being "practical" here, and making the Lictor proceed with ordering an "interrogation" to be made?
The question about a Lawful Good character acting under a Lawful Evil was more about the blind eye argument, that they could skate through the fringes of the order, not actually performing evil actions. In these cases, that doesn't seem quite possible, right? Or does it?
entire post
I imagine that's the case, too, but I like to think there's some good in the bad guys. What? Yes, I like bad boys, sue me!
Jokes apart, here's an interesting tidbit: Most positions of power in the more problematic orders are actually filled in by lawful neutral people, not evil! (Or at least that's what I gathered from scouring around the wiki).
Also, for someone wondering what that good might look like, I'd suggest keeping in mind the adage that good does not mean nice, and also the idea of "scared straight" turned up to eleven, or maybe twelve.
While I certainly agree that good characters don't have to be nice and can lean into being more firm or stoic or whatever, there should be a difference between that and turning a blind eye to what your order is known to do, no?
Also, second bonus round, for comparison's sake: Can a Tyrant be a Hellknight?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Hellknights are horrible people who band together for strength under the pretension of 'Law' and 'Order'. Because they conveniently only obey their 'Measure & Chain' they get to ignore any law of the land at their whim and force their beliefs on anyone they want through violence.
And they'll come to your place and do it for money. Then maybe kill you because you failed to uphold some standard they set you to.
This does not make them different from a lot of adventurers in many respects.
Sorry, but I'm not quite getting your point, I think. Is that that plenty of adventurers may behave the same way that Hellknights do and, therefore, adventurers should be considered bad as well; or are you genuinely demonizing the orders?
Spicy Alignment Hot Take:
Well... Yeah. It is convenient, because I'm trying to illustrate my point. :P It is meant to be presented as a creative exercise, not a player dilema — to be able to understand more correctly the nature of the Hellknights, and how to present them in campaigns.
I do apologize if that wasn't correctly implied. In fact, I'll rephrase the example to something more specific and with less room for extrapolation: If the most practical solution to a problem at hand that would align with the order's interests involves cruelty — would a Hellknight be bad at hellknighting for seeking an alternative, moral solution? If yes, why; if no, why?
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don’t know what book specifically had it listed but it’s probably on the wiki, it’s not some secret or implied, there was the Chelaxian civil war where you had Orders against each other and then after Thrune demanded obedience and The Rack jumped at the chance and the other Orders went “nah”.
As for torture, it’s neither moral nor efficient. If you torture someone, you’re torturing them to torture, not to get info out of them, that’s a pretense. It’s evil. You can be ruthless and evil and avoid torturing, for many reasons. Sloppy, giving in to baser desires, not-efficient, time wasting, impeding an investigation.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, it's worth noting that, irl at least, torture is not an effective means of obtaining useful intelligence. The psychological aspects are in fact more likely to deteriorate the victim's ability to recall accurate information, much less the reliability of that information. On the other hand, the primary effectiveness of torture is about population control and suppressing dissidence, so it is small wonder why some or even most hellknight orders consider it a viable technique. In fact, on Golarion they are probably among those responsible for spreading the 'must torture for the greater good' propeganda.
Regardless the point of your example was, "What if a paladin hellknight were placed in a situation where maintaining order required performing an evil act?"
I suspect the answer to this is that one of the knight's two careers ends with their decision. The first most important tenant of the paladin's code is do no evil (murder and torture both explicitly called out). I think it would be safe to conclude that either such moral dilemmas or paladins are less common in the hellknight orders than we've been discussing. I don't know the Hellknight anathema off the top of my head, but if there is no room to toe the line, such moral dilemmas must restrict paladins from roles in the organization where they are common, or else restrict those who fulfill such roles from pursuing the path of the paladin, short of a grey guard scenario.
As for Tyrants... I think it would be easier for them to secure positions within the Hellknights, but like the paladin would have to avoid any order which practices cruelty in the name of law, the tyrant would need to avoid any order which practices humanitarian aid. This seems much easier but also we don't know the actual experience of the Hellknights on the ground.
On the other hand, the tyrant's commandment toward supplanting leadership they consider unworthy may fly in actual Hell, but it seems like the Hellknights might take a more inspired-by approach with their insistence on unquestioning hierarchy. It is hypothetically possible that a tyrant may chafe under a commander that they consider an inferior, but who holds legitimate authority within the order. If that tyrant can't get promoted out from under their command soon enough, it is entirely possible they may fall. That would be something.
Hypothetically the Paladin ordered to do evil could do their job badly enough that they do not manage to accomplish the evil act so ordered.
Like if you're ordered to capture a runaway slave to return them to captivity, if the slave were to escape beyond your reach you would repercussions for failure (this is probably within the purview of what the Reckoning is for) but you wouldn't necessarily fail to be lawful. Of course, if you're doing a bad job on purpose you're treading very close to that line.
I imagine Hellknights are sent to accomplish something that they fail to accomplish not infrequently, since "we're going to demand you do this thing even though it might be impossible" seems in keeping with their ethos.
I don’t know what book specifically had it listed but it’s probably on the wiki, it’s not some secret or implied, there was the Chelaxian civil war where you had Orders against each other and then after Thrune demanded obedience and The Rack jumped at the chance and the other Orders went “nah”.
Hmmm, I see, I see. I vaguely remember that some order was hunted down by the Order of the Scourge after the Chelaxian civil war, and I presumed by that, that "in-fighting" can in fact occur, but I was still under the impression that more orders other than The Rack worked closely with Thrune.
As for torture, it’s neither moral nor efficient. If you torture someone, you’re torturing them to torture, not to get info out of them, that’s a pretense. It’s evil. You can be ruthless and evil and avoid torturing, for many reasons. Sloppy, giving in to baser desires, not-efficient, time wasting, impeding an investigation.
While I very much agree with you — and in fact, in the favour of your argument, I recall a bit in the Character's Guide that talk Hellknights using the order to be gratuitously evil being severely punished — I always presumed that some orders do use these sort of methods. Is that a misconception of mine?
|
|
Paladins would find it pretty easy to kill a devil and so become a Hellknight, thanks to Good damage.
Any LE officer who forces a Hellknight paladin to either resign or fall is a damn fool as they are losing a most efficient weapon in the fight against demons and the like (again thanks to Good damage).
Efficient use of your resources means ordering them to do what they excel at. Doing otherwise is a waste of their abilities and weakens their motivation and their loyalty.
If, for whatever reason, you need a torturer, you call the LE person. Not the LG one.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Paladins would find it pretty easy to kill a devil and so become a Hellknight, thanks to Good damage.
Any LE officer who forces a Hellknight paladin to either resign or fall is a damn fool as they are losing a most efficient weapon in the fight against demons and the like (again thanks to Good damage).
Efficient use of your resources means ordering them to do what they excel at. Doing otherwise is a waste of their abilities and weakens their motivation and their loyalty.
If, for whatever reason, you need a torturer, you call the LE person. Not the LG one.
That is ruthlessly efficient... I like that. The question was in part for paladin commanders, but I think a point being reached here is that paladins don't do well with having much authority in the order, or at least in most of the orders.
---
As an aside, it bears consideration (particularly since I just learned this myself) that one of the most significant texts in the order is a speech given by their founder--a paladin of Aroden who renounced his faith--decrying mortal authorities' failure to prosecute the demonic Path of Grace cult among the upper echelons of society. He didn't start the organization with the idea that hell seemed like a nice society, but rather indignation toward demonic corruption perverting his own society--the respect for and obsession with the structure of Hell came later.
Mind you, the influence from Hell has obviously grown to dominate the organization given that their home country also later turned diabolic, but I wanted to show that there was not nothing for a prospective paladin Hellknight to latch onto. Hunting down and rooting out demonic cults is a very paladin thing to do, provided they can avoid harming too many innocents on the way to the actual corruption.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Efficient use of your resources means ordering them to do what they excel at. Doing otherwise is a waste of their abilities and weakens their motivation and their loyalty.
If, for whatever reason, you need a torturer, you call the LE person. Not the LG one.
I imagine the Paladin in question could even cite Hell's example here. If Hell needs a contract negotiated, they send a Phistophilus, if they need a torturer they send an Osyluth, if they need a jailer they send a Hamatula, if they need a barricade stormed they send a Barbazus. Sending any one of these devils to do something that one of the other devils is better suited for is a waste of resources and even worse- inefficient.
Oh wow, I have to say — I really like the bit about efficiency. It makes tons of sense, too, and something very to be expected from Hellknight orders. Even the most amoral of knights should recognize the utility of a Paladin. Sure, using a hammer for a drill's job might work if you're handy enough, but the tool will be worse for wear — and eventually, it will break. And what will you have? Nothing but a broken hammer. That's not effecient, nor smart. It doesn't lead anywhere useful or practical.
We can extrapolate from that, too. Creating an enviroment where a very useful resource cannot exist seems very self-sabotaging, no?
Ironically, I'm beginning to think that a Tyrant is not quite the best fit for a Hellknight, either. It can work, but there's a certain arrogance that the Tyrant requires that makes it a little impractical for a Hellknight to hellknight. I can see, maybe, a hellknight high in the hierarchy becoming a tyrant, but starting from 0? Considering someone higher in the hierarchy "lesser" than you can surely be a big problem for the tyrant. But they could work if they're ironically more compliant, I guess!
For those that unaware, the videogame Pathfinder: Kingmaker has showcases a short appearance for one of the orders. What do you guys think about that representation? There, they do come off as the silliest of baddies, in my opinion. In a very impractical way I guess, in retrospect.
Bonus round: Can a Paladin be a Hellknight?
Didn't read through everything, but this definitely caught my eye.
The answer, believe it or not is yes! Paladins absolutely can be Hellknights, but it is a difficult line to ride because Hellknights are typically more focused on law than good, which could lead to complications.
However, there is a canonical example, one of the orders of Hellknights was even founded by a paladin (though I forget details beyond that).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Owlcat’s writing leaves me incredibly cold, but I think the Hellknights are WotR are killer. They make perfect sense in the context of what a mess the fight against the Worldwound has become by that point, and do plenty more than just mustache-twirling.
Killing allied wounded in their introduction was silly shock value on Owlcat’s part, but everything that comes after from Regill feels remarkably reasonable.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
By RAW in 2E, a Paladin Champion should be Good before they are Lawful. If a Paladin tortures someone, they fall. If a Paladin is ordered by a superior to torture someone and they don't, the paladin does not fall.
You follow a code of conduct, beginning with tenets shared by all champions of an alignment (such as good), and continuing with tenets of your cause. Deities often add additional strictures (for instance, Torag’s champions can’t show mercy to enemies of their people, making it almost impossible for them to follow the redeemer cause). Tenets are listed in order of importance, starting with the most important. If a situation places two tenets in conflict, you aren’t in a no-win situation; instead, follow the more important tenet. For instance, as a paladin, if an evil king asked you if you’re hiding refugees so he could execute them, you could lie to him, since the tenet against lying is less important than preventing harm to innocents. Trying to subvert your code by creating a situation that forces a higher tenet to override a lower tenet (for example, promising not to respect authorities and then, to keep your word, disrespecting authorities) is a violation of the champion code.
Per tenet #1, "You must never perform acts anathema to your deity or willingly commit an evil act, such as murder, torture, or the casting of an evil spell." That outweighs tenet #4 "You must respect the lawful authority of legitimate leadership wherever you go, and follow its laws."
A paladin hellknight avoids doing evil stuff, defends the innocent, acts with honor, and obeys authority in that exact order.
IMHO, Champions of any alignment don't make the best Hellknights. The former uphold Good (or Evil) before Law or Chaos and the latter are all about Law.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I dunno, I think a Paladin of the Godclaw could do just fine, especially if they emphasize the pantheon’s focus on strategy over policing or mundane law. Hellknight military advisors are a sound investment, even if you don’t always listen to them.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A paladin hellknight avoids doing evil stuff, defends the innocent, acts with honor, and obeys authority in that exact order.
IMHO, Champions of any alignment don't make the best Hellknights. The former uphold Good (or Evil) before Law or Chaos and the latter are all about Law.
Yeah, I think the point is that if a Hellknight chooses to disobey authority in order to protect the innocent, behave honorably, and avoid doing evil stuff they're eventually going to be drummed out of the Hellknights or at least severely sanctioned.
The Hellknights are a "Law over Good" and also "Law over Evil" organization. Paladins are directly positioned as "Law and Good, but Good over Law" so it's an iffy fit, but not an impossible one.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Even the Order of the Scourge, LN mostly, definitely seem a little closer to the side of good - being anti corruption, they mostly take out organized crime, which is generally not good (of course, sometimes that can involve seditious organizations, but you pick your battles). Their lictor, per LO: Legends, is even investigating Abrogail Thrune for corruption!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think that the thing that redeems Hellknights the most in my eyes is the "embrace obsolescence" maxim they have. Theoretically, they're all working to create a world in which they are no longer needed, and will then give up their positions (and thus their
power). This definitely seems like a LG thing to do, and even more seems like something a LE character would NOT do.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Something else that should probably be noted is that the origin of the Hellknights as an organization is a tragic one; the story of Daidan Rhul, an Arodenite who renounced his faith after a cult of demon worshipers murdered his wife and convinced his son to commit suicide.
The term "Hellknight" originally was a derogatory name slung at Rhul and his followers, who essentially formed a vigilante group to weed the cult out, especially since it had embedded itself in Cheliax's nobility. Rhul just took the insult and turned it into a badge of honor, and that ended up getting him pardoned and knighted as a result. Almost everything that makes the Hellknights what they are; the paranoia that EVERYONE'S guilty of something, the belief that compassion only feeds disorder, even the Order of the Rack's hatred of printing presses (the cultist who murdered Rhul's wife ran a printing shop and used it to disseminate cult literature to the populace), can be traced back to Rhul's anger and grief at his family's destruction.
This doesn't excuse all the evil they've done, far from it, but I think it shows that for all the Hellknights profess to being about calculating, rational order, above Hell's pointless cruelty and Heaven's soft-hearted flexibility, they are mortal and behind all the rationalizations they tell themselves and others, many of them are driven by intense emotion and anger at an all-too chaotic world that's hurt them and the people they care about.
|
|
I think it's important to remember that order and the system are of utmost importance to Lawful people, because these are what will help them get what they want, whether it's power, satisfaction, stability, health, protection of the innocents ...
And Chaos threatens all this. The Lawful person wholeheartedly believes that, if there is chaos and disruption of order, the goals that are important to them just cannot be attained.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be honest, I think a Tyrant might have even more trouble as a Hellknight than a Paladin would, since the Tenets of Evil place a premium on "selfishness" that is sort of inimical to a "maximally lawful" approach. A Hellknight *should* put "order" over themselves regularly in a way that is not selfish.
A Paladin can at least thread the needle and find themselves in a situation where "LAW" is compatible with protecting the innocent, being honorable, etc.
|
|
It's also telling that the Hellknights are also positioned as the arbiters of determining when that promise has been fulfilled. "Sorry, we can't disband, our lawful utopia isn't quite lawful enough yet. Should be soon though, we swear."I think that the thing that redeems Hellknights the most in my eyes is the "embrace obsolescence" maxim they have. Theoretically, they're all working to create a world in which they are no longer needed, and will then give up their positions (and thus their
power). This definitely seems like a LG thing to do, and even more seems like something a LE character would NOT do.Its easy to promise anything if the threshold for that promise is never going to happen.
There is no reality where the Hellknights achieve their Lawful utopia of oppression. Its just a nice talking point for their pamphlets.
Making a promise that you don't have to keep because its conditions will never arrive is exceptionally LE.
Much as I like LG Hellknights as a character concept, I'd say you're right on the money; after all, Rhul didn't disband the original Hellknights once they took down the Path of Grace. Rhul felt his methodology, his organization, was still needed, that others would step in to the Path of Grace's place and become a new insidious threat to society. And I'd say overall, that sense of paranoia has stayed with the Hellknights regardless of their leanings towards good or evil. There will ALWAYS be another threat, so there must ALWAYS be Hellknights to expose and fight it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
On the one hand, I fully agree that a LE group would totally try and hold power after losing their reason for having power. But a LN group would not, and the Hellknights are canonically majority LN. And even if the LE orders didn’t disband when they’re supposed to, the Orders have shown that they’re more than willing to police their own. More Orders have been destroyed/disbanded by other Hellknights than by outside forces.
Of course, the point that that’s an unattainable goal and thus would never come into play is extremely valid and does render the whole thing moot.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So this thread made me peruse my copy of Path of the Hellknight, and one thing that jumped out at me was reading what kinds of people are likely to join each order. Over half of them are people who joined due to some sort of trauma incident (former slave, family killed by riots, harmed by some cult, etc).
A significant portion of Hellknights seem to be suffering from mental health issues that are almost certainly not being treated (or rather, being self-treated in a sub-optimal manner). Which would probably explain some things…
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's enough material supporting either interpretation. It's up to the GM of your story to decide whether they support the "All Hellknights are required to be lawful" or "All Hellknights are required to be lawful evil" perspective.
GM's are like the Central Processing Unit of a Tabletop RPG. Unless they're there to sort out the logic of it all, it simply exists in a state of quantum superposition where all the possibilities and hooks laid out in the sourcebooks exist independently.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I'm going with what the Raven Black said.
LE only Hellknights really aren't supported by the lore.
But LE Hellknights probably have an easier time hiding in plain sight and doing some of the acts the orders are dedicated too without finding themselves in challenging moral position.
|
|
I think that the thing that redeems Hellknights the most in my eyes is the "embrace obsolescence" maxim they have. Theoretically, they're all working to create a world in which they are no longer needed, and will then give up their positions (and thus their
power). This definitely seems like a LG thing to do, and even more seems like something a LE character would NOT do.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0379786/characters/nm0252230
Capt. Malcolm Reynolds : I don't murder children.
The Operative : I do. If I have to.
Capt. Malcolm Reynolds : Why? Do you even know why they sent you?
The Operative : It's not my place to ask. I believe in something greater than myself. A better world. A world without sin.
Capt. Malcolm Reynolds : So me and mine gotta lay down and die... so you can live in your better world?
The Operative : I'm not going to live there. There's no place for me there... any more than there is for you. Malcolm... I'm a monster. What I do is evil. I have no illusions about it, but it must be done.
I don't see this as Lawful Good.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is also the Pathfinder Tales novel Hellknight, which I would really hope would deal with Hellknights, but I haven't read it yet so I can't comment on it.
It is a really good book I think, and definitely goes into the psychology of a Hellknight. Liane Merciel is a wonderful writer.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is also the Pathfinder Tales novel Hellknight, which I would really hope would deal with Hellknights, but I haven't read it yet so I can't comment on it.It is a really good book I think, and definitely goes into the psychology of a Hellknight. Liane Merciel is a wonderful writer.
I can vouch for this, Hellknight is a good read.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is an Inspector General of the police in the french movie The red circle who has the perfect mindset for a Hellknight.
"There are no innocents. People are guilty. They are born innocent, but it does not last."
"Never forget : all are guilty.
- Even policemen ?
- Everyone."