| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Cbad285
Learned Scribe
161 Posts |
 Posted - 19 Jun 2018 : 06:01:17
|
After discovering a dead child and a dead woman who was obviously tortured three individuals enter a room finding four men playing cards. The men are taken into custody and detained. Soon after bloody rags are found in the room belonging to a woman and child. It is at first thought the men are responsible for the murders. However the men deny the accusations and show no signs of struggle via the woman fighting off her attackers. A knight and a lord in company deduce they should take the men prisoner and have them stand trial. A priest set on ridding the area of evil, decides that the men should be put to death. The priest then kills one of the men. The knight and lord attempt to stop the priest in order to preserve the rule of law. The priest demands that anyone who is in liege with these evil people must me guilty by association and that it is better for all if the men are put to death now.
The classes and races involved are a human paladin of torm. A dwarven priest, a human fighter and an elven thief. There is a tiefling mage as well but he doesnt care either way...
***edit for clarification***
The question is 'What are the rules or laws concerning those involved. How should the paladin react. Do these actions play negatively on a lawful good priest of clangeddin.
Let me know if you need more details.
|
"Beware the Dream Fever!" |
Edited by - Cbad285 on 20 Jun 2018 11:06:01
|
|
|
LordofBones
Master of Realmslore
1536 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2018 : 06:13:21
|
So, uh, what exactly do you want us to say?
The knight and the lord are in the right here. The priest has arbitrarily decided the men are evil and deserve death, without a trial or witnesses. The priest should be detained for murder. |
 |
|
|
Icelander
Master of Realmslore
1864 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2018 : 14:20:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by LordofBones
So, uh, what exactly do you want us to say?
The knight and the lord are in the right here. The priest has arbitrarily decided the men are evil and deserve death, without a trial or witnesses. The priest should be detained for murder.
Rather depends on where the alleged crimes took place.
If there is a legally constituted authority with accepted jurisdiction over the area, then there is some rule of law to preserve. If this took place in an area with competing claims to authority or outside any acknowledged jurisdiction, there may be no legitimate law to appeal to.
In that case, the priest might be able to claim a right to deal out summary judgement, depending on the doctrines of his church, the degree of acceptance it enjoys as a source of justice and the status of the priest. Note that any priest who was legitimately expected to dispense justice in the absence of other authority would probably have clear orders to that effect and most adults would be aware of the possibility that such priests might dispense justice.
Note that an assumption of any kind of right to a fair trial, let alone a presumption of innocence, is a historical aberration confined to a part of the world and a very short period of time. In most human societies, only political elites have meaningful rights and only in a vanishingly small window of time and space have such right included even a semblence of freedom from arbitrary judgement by men with swords.
Expecting any such right to hold true in a lawless warzone would be unrealistically Utopian even in a society as obsessed with individual rights as modern Western liberal democracies. In societies lacking the obscene wealth and leisure that modern technology has created, that degree of strong, omnipresent government simply isn't possible.
Even in societies founded on the same principles as ours, such as 19th century USA, it was practically ackowledged in such lawless frontier zones as pre-state Dakotas that respected people in good standing in the community could act to execute 'road agents' and other dangerous individuals, based on little more than their word it had been necessary, without facing legal sanction later on.
So, the knight and the lord might be in the right, but they may also just disagree with the priest on how a decision about guilt or innocence should be reached. Of course, if the lord in question is a local lord, his view is probably the one that counts. |
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Forgotten Realms fans, please sign a petition to re-release the FR Interactive Atlas
|
|
|
|
Cyrinishad
Learned Scribe
300 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2018 : 17:11:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cbad285
So for clarification the classes and races involved are a human paladin of torm. A dwarven priest, a human fighter and an elven thief. There is a tiefling mage as well but he doesnt care either way...
Let me know if you need more details.
So... yeah... If they're at least 3rd level, why haven't they used "Zone of Truth" to quickly & bloodlessly determine the guilt or innocence of the detained men?... and if they're at least 5th level, why haven't they used "Speak with Dead" to determine the identity of the torturer/murderer?...
If the Dwarven Cleric has these spells and decided to skip it and start arbitrarily executing people... I'd be inclined to think that the priest set on "ridding the area of evil" is ironically a likely source of the "evil".
...and why do I keep seeing scrolls about Paladins of Torm failing to uphold their Oaths? |
To know, is to know that you know nothing. That is the meaning of true knowledge. -Socrates
Don't cry because it's over. Smile because it happened. -Dr. Seuss |
Edited by - Cyrinishad on 19 Jun 2018 17:13:54 |
|
|
|
Icelander
Master of Realmslore
1864 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2018 : 21:53:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cyrinishad
So... yeah... If they're at least 3rd level, why haven't they used "Zone of Truth" to quickly & bloodlessly determine the guilt or innocence of the detained men?... and if they're at least 5th level, why haven't they used "Speak with Dead" to determine the identity of the torturer/murderer?...
Probably because few PCs (and most likely, few enough NPCs unless they are extremely selfless) prepare such spells when engaged in armed conflict in dangerous areas.
If the PCs were doing this close to a civilized center of power, with a lord and his men-at-arms, or some other form of authority, available within easy reach, then I'm prepared to condemn them as ignorant and brutal savages.
But just as few soldiers in the real world have carried forensic kits instead of more stuff that could help them carry out their missions and survive the experience, such as armour, weapons and ammunition, I don't expect many adventurers to prioritise forensic spells over life-saving protection, offence and support spells.
quote:
Originally posted by Cyrinishad
If the Dwarven Cleric has these spells and decided to skip it and start arbitrarily executing people... I'd be inclined to think that the priest set on "ridding the area of evil" is ironically a likely source of the "evil".
The most likely scenario is that he had the option of preparing them, but stopping for a day to ensure that there was no possibility of error before dealing out summary justice might have risked the lives of his fellow adventurers and whatever task they were on.
Besides, while it might make the priest who casts the spells feel better about the guilt or innocence of men he tries, many jurisdictions will probably not consider these spells evidence. After all, all they tell a third party is that the priest in question says that someone lies.
To any outside observer, there is scant difference between slaughtering men because the situation is such that they look guilty and doing so because a magical effect that no one else can check or falsify says they are lying.
quote:
Originally posted by Cyrinishad
...and why do I keep seeing scrolls about Paladins of Torm failing to uphold their Oaths?
Because unless they live in a cartoon world, living by a strict code of conduct demanding selfless adherence to inconvenient principles is an almost certain death sentence. Not all players prove willing sacrifices.
Paladins are admired because they are paragons, who embody principles that many people consider right, but usually do not have the courage or conviction to live by. This is not expected to be a sensible life choice with good retirement benefits. It's meant to be a short life and a glorious one, a shining example for others.
Practical heroes should look elsewhere for career paths. |
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Forgotten Realms fans, please sign a petition to re-release the FR Interactive Atlas
|
|
|
|
Cbad285
Learned Scribe
161 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2018 : 10:57:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by LordofBones
So, uh, what exactly do you want us to say?
So I first off. What I was looking for was a general reaction to the event and how the actions of the paladin and priest might affect them. Specifically the paladins oath and whether or not the priest would suffer any ill affects. Also considering the dwarf is lawful good. But definitely I should have specified my reason for posting. My bad.
On another note. Icelander hit the nail on the head. And pretty efficiently I might add. As for the situational modifiers here, the event took place in a mining town, within the local manor that has been overtaken by mercenaries. The group is restoring the local authority and operating with those permissions as well as their own ties to churches and larger authorities. But though they're in a semi civilized area, the building they are in has been occupied by undead and other nasties. So to say they're under duress is reasonable. The priest has never used zone of truth and being he's a priest of clangeddin he may have limited spells. Or he may just not care. Idk. But he is definitely 3rd level.
Also, though I made a shabby posting. This has been very helpful. |
"Beware the Dream Fever!" |
Edited by - Cbad285 on 20 Jun 2018 11:08:16 |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11827 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2018 : 20:53:43
|
On the part about people not using Zone of Truth as an absolute for a courtroom, I would point out the case of Fibrious Nix, in which a Leiran priestess used illusion magics to POSE as a priest of Tyr in a courtroom in Neverwinter (one Wyreth Doncastle) and then cast Zone of Truth and then promptly lie about the results. It was only through the actions of Lady Jillian Doncastle, the infamous Waterdhavian detective, and her father-in-law, the infamous bounty hunter Sleyvas, that the kidnapping of her children and brother was discovered.
Of course, Fibrious Nix was found to explode in the middle of the courtroom in a vast swathe of blood, having given Sleyvas' granddaughter a black eye in forcing her into a wagon, not to mention the tearing of her Lurue doll. The bounty hunter himself dared anyone in the courtroom to "come at me, fools, if you think I don't have the right to protect my family" and was then heard to mutter than in his own homeland HE made the laws as they needed to be for the circumstances, as any intelligent red wizard should, "not some pompous ass who feels he has to spend his days researching the rulings of predecessors". One would have thought that this occurrence would have stopped people from kidnapping the children of Jillian Doncastle, but much to their own dismay, criminals don't often learn from the mistakes of others. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36803 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2018 : 21:22:17
|
Honestly, I'd think that spells revealing falsehoods would be common in important legal matters -- and those casting them would be people that were highly trusted and had a record of service.
After all, if you're going to rule it out because the priest might be lying, then you've got to rule out having any witnesses at all, or even having anyone speak or present evidence, because they, too, might be lying.
But a priest known to serve a good deity, who'd been working with the locals for years, and had an impeccable record in such things? Yeah, he'd be trusted to cast a spell to reveal falsehoods. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11827 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2018 : 22:05:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Honestly, I'd think that spells revealing falsehoods would be common in important legal matters -- and those casting them would be people that were highly trusted and had a record of service.
After all, if you're going to rule it out because the priest might be lying, then you've got to rule out having any witnesses at all, or even having anyone speak or present evidence, because they, too, might be lying.
But a priest known to serve a good deity, who'd been working with the locals for years, and had an impeccable record in such things? Yeah, he'd be trusted to cast a spell to reveal falsehoods.
I have no doubt that they would be. I just point out that in a world of doppelgangers, lamia, rakshasa, Leiran priests, illusionists, spells to supplant other spells which divine truth, spells to modify memory, spells to intimidate witnesses with "voices in their head" while they sit on the stand, ... skepticism will still be something prevalent. After all, the "star witness" on a trial can easily be eaten and replaced by someone who will state the facts as someone "needs" them to be, and that someone may just replace the current court priest as well. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Icelander
Master of Realmslore
1864 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jun 2018 : 01:07:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Honestly, I'd think that spells revealing falsehoods would be common in important legal matters -- and those casting them would be people that were highly trusted and had a record of service.
After all, if you're going to rule it out because the priest might be lying, then you've got to rule out having any witnesses at all, or even having anyone speak or present evidence, because they, too, might be lying.
But a priest known to serve a good deity, who'd been working with the locals for years, and had an impeccable record in such things? Yeah, he'd be trusted to cast a spell to reveal falsehoods.
Note that from the perspective of an outsider, this amounts to your word counting for nothing and the testimony of a respected local person, who was not present at the events being attested, but who claims who have divine insight into your veracity, being what determines your guilt or innocence.
It's difficult to imagine anything less egalitarian, impartial or fair. To anyone who shares the religious views of the priest and accepts his word as divinely inspired, it may serve as an ideal of perfect justice.
To anyone else, it's trial by theocratic whimsy. The priest may be casting a spell that determines truth and untruth, but he may also just be praying for divine insight and convinced he receives it.
I don't see how lie detection by divinely granted magic is obviously superior to real world 'lie detectors', such as polygraphs, which are inadmissible evidence in any courtroom with a pretence to professionalism.
It's true that there are people, including some quite senior law enforcement officers (and government officials who make policy and regulations), who believe that they are very effective and can determine when someone is lying. It's just that in reality, the operator consciously or subconsciously decides whether to believe the witness and this is the largest single factor in what the machine shows.
In light of the fact that not even replicable scientific measurements of 'truth' can be proven to be free enough of bias to have evidentiary value, how would you ever prove that a priest telling everyone that his god says someone is lying was actual objective evidence, not subjective judgment?
I recognise that that as a matter of practicality, most pre-modern trials in the real world didn't offer substantially more fairness or impartiality for a stranger without influence on trial, but at the very least, any society making even a token claim to welcoming foreign traders of different creeds should attempt to give their proceedings at least a patina of apparent impartiality.
Theocratic governments might well rely on priests as judges of the truth of testimony, but on balance, any government wishing to appear fair, even to strangers, will probably avoid it. At most, people could elect to undergo testing with a priest of a faith of their choice and that worthy's opinion could be treated as an amicus curiae brief. |
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Forgotten Realms fans, please sign a petition to re-release the FR Interactive Atlas
|
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36803 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jun 2018 : 03:44:43
|
No matter how you cut it, it's going to be one person's word against another person's word.
And even without magic, an outsider could readily feel he was not getting treated fairly by locals.
And I don't think it's reasonable to compare the word of a deity like Tyr to polygraphs. One simply measures a physical response -- the other is a deity dedicated to justice. If you can't trust the god of justice to be truthful in the pursuit of justice, then there's no one, mortal or immortal, that can be trusted.
Besides, I wasn't addressing any particular scenario. I was saying that a truth-seeking method that was known to be accurate is going to be desired.
The very existence of polygraphs proves that people want to be able to know whether or not someone is lying. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Demzer
Senior Scribe
877 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jun 2018 : 09:37:26
|
Again, the discussion is veering on the divine, so tiring these days.
All these elucubrations on fairness and comparisons with the real world are well and good but miss completely the point. In Faerun deities exist that are widely accepted and respected as gods of justice, guardianship and impartial judges. Clerics of Tyr, Torm, Helm and Osiris are routinely used in many countries as aides to the secular arms of justice and nobody ever dreams of questioning their judgement because the deities are real and stand for ideals that are needed in a court.
In other places the truth-finding abilities of arcane casters are used and widely accepted (the War Wizards of Cormyr, the Order of Watchful Magists and Protectors and so on) and nobody questions them with any success even if they don't have the backing of a real deity.
Any discussion about fairness is moot because what is considered fair in one country is not in another and there are no international laws to appeal to or anyone that cares anyway. If you are in Cormyr you get judged by Cormyrean standards, in Thay you are judged by Thayvian standards and that's it. To my knowledge there is no internationally recognized "habeas corpus" principle in Faerun, so whatever.
Regarding the original topic of this discussion, unless this mining town is on the verge of civil war or in the middle of daily fights I would say that the cleric has gone against the law (represented by the knight and the lord) and is guilty of murder because the supposed criminals were already in custody. Furthermore, being the cleric in question a cleric of Clangeddin, even employing truth-finding spells would be useless unless this is a dwarven community and even then Clangeddin is not the right god for the job so many would at least be disappointed at this clear breach of century old traditions.
Even if the situation in the town is more similar to a war zone then a peaceful community, if the secular arms of the law (knight and lord) decided to apprehend the criminals instead of dispensing justice on the spot then the cleric has gone against the law by acting on his own impulse.
Regarding any consequences these are obviously up to you but if this is a "first trangression" case then both cleric and paladin may receive dreams and visions pushing them to atone in some way (the first because he is a murderer, the second because his guardianship of the prisoners was clearly lacking). But the first thing they all (even the others in the group) should face is the distrust and building anger of the locals that have seen these strangers arrive and put to death one of them without any justification.
If there is a building full of undead and other nasties and the cleric is supposedly set on ridding the place of evil, people will question why does he dishonors himself by killing helpless prisoners instead of tackling the true evil of the land. Is he a coward? An impostor? Is this what dwarves do nowadays? Are these the ethos of Clangeddin? And why do the others do nothing? Is anyone safe with these new "sheriffs" in town? At least the undeads stick to the manor [only valid if the undeads do], but how can anyone be safe from the murder-hobos that roam the streets claiming to be "the law"?
People will start to whisper in the taverns and the streets and just walking around may start to be very uncomfortable. Also being on the bad side of the local population may have strong consequences on any future action the characters take and make restoring order even more difficult. |
Edited by - Demzer on 21 Jun 2018 09:38:50 |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11827 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jun 2018 : 13:50:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by Demzer
Again, the discussion is veering on the divine, so tiring these days.
All these elucubrations on fairness and comparisons with the real world are well and good but miss completely the point. In Faerun deities exist that are widely accepted and respected as gods of justice, guardianship and impartial judges. Clerics of Tyr, Torm, Helm and Osiris are routinely used in many countries as aides to the secular arms of justice and nobody ever dreams of questioning their judgement because the deities are real and stand for ideals that are needed in a court.
In other places the truth-finding abilities of arcane casters are used and widely accepted (the War Wizards of Cormyr, the Order of Watchful Magists and Protectors and so on) and nobody questions them with any success even if they don't have the backing of a real deity.
Any discussion about fairness is moot because what is considered fair in one country is not in another and there are no international laws to appeal to or anyone that cares anyway. If you are in Cormyr you get judged by Cormyrean standards, in Thay you are judged by Thayvian standards and that's it. To my knowledge there is no internationally recognized "habeas corpus" principle in Faerun, so whatever.
Regarding the original topic of this discussion, unless this mining town is on the verge of civil war or in the middle of daily fights I would say that the cleric has gone against the law (represented by the knight and the lord) and is guilty of murder because the supposed criminals were already in custody. Furthermore, being the cleric in question a cleric of Clangeddin, even employing truth-finding spells would be useless unless this is a dwarven community and even then Clangeddin is not the right god for the job so many would at least be disappointed at this clear breach of century old traditions.
Even if the situation in the town is more similar to a war zone then a peaceful community, if the secular arms of the law (knight and lord) decided to apprehend the criminals instead of dispensing justice on the spot then the cleric has gone against the law by acting on his own impulse.
Regarding any consequences these are obviously up to you but if this is a "first trangression" case then both cleric and paladin may receive dreams and visions pushing them to atone in some way (the first because he is a murderer, the second because his guardianship of the prisoners was clearly lacking). But the first thing they all (even the others in the group) should face is the distrust and building anger of the locals that have seen these strangers arrive and put to death one of them without any justification.
If there is a building full of undead and other nasties and the cleric is supposedly set on ridding the place of evil, people will question why does he dishonors himself by killing helpless prisoners instead of tackling the true evil of the land. Is he a coward? An impostor? Is this what dwarves do nowadays? Are these the ethos of Clangeddin? And why do the others do nothing? Is anyone safe with these new "sheriffs" in town? At least the undeads stick to the manor [only valid if the undeads do], but how can anyone be safe from the murder-hobos that roam the streets claiming to be "the law"?
People will start to whisper in the taverns and the streets and just walking around may start to be very uncomfortable. Also being on the bad side of the local population may have strong consequences on any future action the characters take and make restoring order even more difficult.
Well said Demzer... and exactly what I was trying to portray in my role-playing episode. Thayans, such as Sleyvas, think that the idea of having intellectuals (i.e. respected red wizards, who have apparently survived by being wily and cunning enough to survive and "see things more clearly because of their intellect") serve as judge, jury, and sometimes executioner is the right way (of course, its the red wizards that think this and they bully others into making it so). What one red wizard adheres to will not be a standard others do (there may even be red wizards that work with clerics to determine truth in matters). Still, that's THEIR style of justice.
In Mulhorand, I can DEFINITELY see the priests using Zones of Truth and/or other divinely guided spellcraft in seeking justice, and questioning the divine guidance of the gods will be heavily frowned upon.... so you'd better have facts up front before making accusations against the church, or you may be put on trial for treasonous acts against the government. That's THEIR style of justice.
The problems that will arise is that the people in the realms don't STAY in one region for the most part. As I pointed out in my little story above, when Sleyvas finds out that Fibrious Nix (the Leiran Priest) kidnapped his daughter-in-law's brother and his grandchildren in order to free a comrade by falsifying court "evidence".... his thought process isn't to tell the authorities. Why? Because as a Thayan, he's thinking the authorities have already been infiltrated once. Who knows how many other layers of infiltration have occurred? So, as any "respectable" Thayan would do, he takes the matters in hand and kills the offender in as bloody and scary a fashion as possible (this is done so visibly in order to possibly scare compatriots into revealing themselves... or at least partly so, the other reason being he wants to discourage people endangering his grandchildren in the future).
This of course comes down to exactly what you say... the town will see these actions as a "murder hobo" who is enacting his on view of justice in their territory... and they're right. The problem being, this individual HAS performed justice, so some of them will look at his actions as honorable if "uncivilized". It will spark debate of ends justifying means in certain situations, as well as the question of "how can we stop this in the future". Some may demand that bounty hunters be hired to "bring him to justice", and when those end up dead, the Thayan will claim "self defense". This will spark debate.
In the end, I see justice in the realms as an ever evolving process, especially given that "technology" in the form of spellcraft will continually change what "can" be done (and probably more effectively than we can within our own society). Then what "can" be done will be weighed against "what is feasible for the community versus what good can this magic be used for elsewhere". For instance, does it make sense for a cleric to use all his spell slots on a daily basis to serve a court, or does it serve the community better for him to go down to the local medical clinic and cast curing spells on individuals who have routinely broken limbs or who have caught some disease/sickness? Similar things can be said for arcane spellcasters in similar situations (should they be in the courtroom trying individuals OR in the streets catching them OR out in the countryside killing magical threats that would never get a trial OR on some construction site helping to build something to make the community better).
|
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Cyrinishad
Learned Scribe
300 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jun 2018 : 14:51:08
|
Thank you, Demzer & Sleyvas, for reinforcing my point... and, as always, Cyric stands ready to accept the souls of murder-hobos that claim to be Lawful Good. |
To know, is to know that you know nothing. That is the meaning of true knowledge. -Socrates
Don't cry because it's over. Smile because it happened. -Dr. Seuss |
|
|
|
LordofBones
Master of Realmslore
1536 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jun 2018 : 17:46:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
In the end, I see justice in the realms as an ever evolving process, especially given that "technology" in the form of spellcraft will continually change what "can" be done (and probably more effectively than we can within our own society). Then what "can" be done will be weighed against "what is feasible for the community versus what good can this magic be used for elsewhere". For instance, does it make sense for a cleric to use all his spell slots on a daily basis to serve a court, or does it serve the community better for him to go down to the local medical clinic and cast curing spells on individuals who have routinely broken limbs or who have caught some disease/sickness? Similar things can be said for arcane spellcasters in similar situations (should they be in the courtroom trying individuals OR in the streets catching them OR out in the countryside killing magical threats that would never get a trial OR on some construction site helping to build something to make the community better).
For the priest, it would depend on his god. A cleric of Tyr is obliged to give everyone a fair trial and ensure justice is meted out according to the law, and is not really obligated to spend his time playing medic. I mean, he could, but Tyr's not going to twist his arm.
An arcane spellcaster does whatever he feels like doing according to his alignment. |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11827 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2018 : 03:20:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by LordofBones
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
In the end, I see justice in the realms as an ever evolving process, especially given that "technology" in the form of spellcraft will continually change what "can" be done (and probably more effectively than we can within our own society). Then what "can" be done will be weighed against "what is feasible for the community versus what good can this magic be used for elsewhere". For instance, does it make sense for a cleric to use all his spell slots on a daily basis to serve a court, or does it serve the community better for him to go down to the local medical clinic and cast curing spells on individuals who have routinely broken limbs or who have caught some disease/sickness? Similar things can be said for arcane spellcasters in similar situations (should they be in the courtroom trying individuals OR in the streets catching them OR out in the countryside killing magical threats that would never get a trial OR on some construction site helping to build something to make the community better).
For the priest, it would depend on his god. A cleric of Tyr is obliged to give everyone a fair trial and ensure justice is meted out according to the law, and is not really obligated to spend his time playing medic. I mean, he could, but Tyr's not going to twist his arm.
An arcane spellcaster does whatever he feels like doing according to his alignment.
Yes, but just because a cleric of Tyr WANTS to do nothing but serve in court doesn't mean the community will support him at it. By support, I'm meaning literal support by the way. He may end up having to sell his services for exceptionally cheap if not free, and in the end he has to eat, pay his lodging, and upkeep himself. So, in the end, the church of Tyr just may have to pack up and move from certain areas simply because there's not enough demand. It all depends on the area. In some areas, the church of Tyr may turn to gain favor with the locals by performing as a medic or providing some other service, and in so doing make them less likely to want to see a temple of Tyr closing its doors (because lets face it, most communities can't support temples to every god, so in order for some new god to move in... another might have to go... even allied gods may compete for temples). Then again, some temples may be wholly funded by the priests themselves, as the adventuring clerics kill and take treasure from the surrounding territory, but in these instances as well, said clerics will not necessarily be available for the court's leisure, as they must periodically murder some creature and take its goods.
|
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
Edited by - sleyvas on 22 Jun 2018 03:26:25 |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Knights, code of conduct and executions
